HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1996/08/20
Tuesday, August 20, 1996
6:00 p.m.
"I declare ynder penalty of perjury that 1 am
employed by the Cit.y of Chu!a Vista in the
Office of the City Ci3r': an':i t:'~,i ! P)s:~:I
th',s Agen'-'~""I"o"I"^ en .:-''"~ P"I!"" '1 1':-""'1 ".j .-,_1\-
..!ir.' ~'II ~ \,.,..., dh.. "".... h;.-d. ~""'_<" ~.,\,:
the Public ' rvic 5 Su:~JinJ rmd ut City Ha~; 011
DATED.' /6, 'l. SIGNED ~~~ !'
Regular Meetm~ f the City of Chula ista Ci y Conncil
Council Chamhers
Puhlic Services Building
REVISED
CALL TO ORDER
1.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmemhers Alevy _, Moot _, Padilla _' Rindone _' and
Mayor Horton _<
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
June 25. 1996 (Special Joint Meeting of the City
Council/Redevelopment Agency), June 25, 1996 (Adjourned Regular
Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency), and June
25, 1996 (Joint Meeting of the City Council/Planning Commission)
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Overview of the 1996 Summer School Program By lIector Ornelas, Chula Vista Jr. High
School Principal, and Reco~nition of the Environmental En~ineerin~ Student", - Kareen
Burger, Angelina Parker, Thomas Shoots, Amanda Linn, David Cooper, Kristine Kyle, Ollin
Lopez-Navarro, Karine Velasquez, Julie Burger, Salvauor Cano, Jesus AI~iandre, Rommyna
Magno.
b. Oath of Office:
John Cochran, term to expire June 30, 1999 - Parks and Recreation Commission;
Diana Rude, term to expire June 30, 2000 - Parks amI Recreation Commission; and
Loren Tarantino, term to expire June 30, 2000 - Growth Management Oversight Committee.
* * * * *'
Effective ,4pril1, 1994, there have been new amendmenls to Ihe Brown Acl. The City Council must now
reconvene into open session to report any final actions taken in closed session and to adjourn the meeting.
Because of Ihe cost involved, there will be no I'ideolaping of Ihe recom'ened porlioa of Ihe meeling. Howel'cr,
final actions reporled will be recorded in Ihe minllles H'hich will be /II'ailable inlhe City Clerk's Office.
*****
CONSENT CALENDAR
(!rems 5 rhrollgh 8)
The slaff recommendations regarding Ihe following ilems lisled IInder Ihe ConsCf/1 Calendar will be enacled by
the Council by one motion wilhoul discllssion IInless a Councilmelllber, a lIIember of Ihe public or Cily slaff
requests that the item be pulled for disCllssion, If YOII wish 10 speak on one of Ihese ilems, please fill oul a
"Request to Speak Foml" /II'ai/able in Ihe lobby and slIbmil it 10 Ihe Ci(v Clerk prior 10 Ihe meeling. (Complete
the green fonn to speak in fm.or of the staff recommendation; complete the pink foml to speak in opposition to
the slaff recommendalion.) Ilems Plllled frolll Ihe Conselll Calelldar will be discussed afler Board and
Commission Recommendalions and Action /Iellls. Ilellls plllled by Ihe public will be Ihe first ilems of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter from the Acting City Attorney staling that the City Council did not meet in Closed
Session on 8/13/96. It is recommended thai the ktter be received aod tiled.
(
Agenda
-2-
August 20, 1996
6, RESOLUTION 18412 APPROVING A ME~IORANDUM OF UNDERSTAND WITH THE SAN
DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN SAME - The Port District is
proposing to enter into a MOU with the I11cmher cities as a furtherance of their
I:ommitment to al10cate $9 million annually from fiscal year 1994/95 through
fiscal year 2001/02 to fund the tiddands pf(~iects approved as part of the Port
District's Capital Improvements Program. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Community Development)
7, RESOLUTION 18413 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND PACIFIC SOUTHWEST BIOLOGICAL SERVICES
FOR CREATION OF WETLAND HABITAT - Pacific Southwest Biological
Services designed a grading plan for a I Q-acre site to he vegetated in accordance
with a Mitigation Plan for hiological impacts associated with construction of
Phase I Road improvements to Gtay Valley Road. The grading plan has resulted
in undesirahle hahitat comlitions. The agrel:'ment adJresses corrective action to
he taken hy Pacific Southwest Biological Services. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Community Development)
8. RESOLUTION 18414 ACCEPTING $30,000 IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, TOBACCO
CONTROL SECTION AND AMENDING THE FY 1996/97 BUDGET TO
APPROPRIATE $30,000 TO THE COMMUNITY TOBACCO
EDUCATION GRANT BUDGET - On 1/17/95, Council approved a twenty-
four month grant from the California Department of Health Services, Tohacco
Control Se.ction for $120,000. The intent of this report is to discuss the
progress of the grant program and request acceptance hy the City of the $30,000
in grant funds for the final six months of the pro.iect. (Director of Parks &
Recreation)
* * * EN!) OF CO,'\'.%'Nf CAI./:'N/JMl * * *
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been adl'ertised 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 Fonll" OI'ai/able in the lobby alld submit it to the City
Clerk prior /0 the meeting, (Complete the greell fonll to 'peak ;11 fOl'or of the staff recommendation; complere
the pink fonn to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to J;..e minutes per
individual,
PUBLIC HEARING
ZAV-96-12; APPEAL OF PLANNING COM~1ISSION 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 AL TBAUM - ThIS
is an appeal from the Planning Commission's denial of a request for a variance
to al10w the construction of a rooftop sign to 42 feet in height for the
commercial building 10cakd at 396 "E" Stred, within the C-T Thoroughfare
Commercial zone. The C-T zone. limits the he:ight of rooftop signs to 35 fed
ahove grade. Staff recommends item be continued to 9/17/96. (Director of
Planning) Continued I'rom the meeting or 7/9/96,
9.
,_J
Agenda
10.
PUBLIC HEARING
11.
PUBLIC HEARING
-3-
August 20, 1996
PCA-96-06: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO TilE
MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE A PROCESS FOR DETERMINATION
OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGE LICENSING - In 1995, the City Council arrroved a Resolution
delegating temporary authority to the Chief of Police to make determinations as
to whether ct"rtain types of akoholic ht'verage lict"nses should he granted, in
situations where there is already an over concentration of licenses hased on
specitied criteria. This report provides for the pemlanent processing of such
applications. Staff recommends item he continued to 9/10/96. (Director of
Planning)
CONSIDERING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
FORMERL Y KNOWN AS INDUSTRIAL BOULEV ARD - The owner of the
property adjacent to a 0.61 acre parcel of land formerly known as Industrial
Boulevard, abo formerly used as a Park ami Ride Lot hy Caltrans, has
requested that the City va\..'ate the parcel. In order to process the vacation,
Coum:il must fIrst conduct a puhllc heanng in accon.lance with the California
Streets anu Highways Code. Staff reL'ommends approval of the resolution.
(Director of Puolic Works)
RESOLUTION 18415 ORDERING TilE VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY FORMERLY
KNOWN AS INDUSTRIAL BOULE V ARD NORTII OF "L" STREET TO
CERTAIN CONDITIONS
12.
PUBLIC HEARING
13.
PUBLIC HEARING
A.
ORDINANCE 2680
B.
ORDINANCE 2687
CONSIDERING TilE OTA Y RANCII REORGANIZATION NUMBER I
CONSISTING OF ANNEXING PORTIONS OF TilE OT A Y RANCH TO
TilE CITY, DETACIIING THE OTA Y LANDFILL FROM TilE CITY
AND DETACIIING TERRITORY FROM TIlE RURAL FlRE
PROTECTION DISTRICT - In August 1995, Council authoTlzed the tilll1g of
a reorganization application with LAFCO for the Otay Ranch Reorganization
Numher 1. The propose.d reorganization would annex the majority of the Otay
Valley Parcel, tht: Mary Patrick Birch Est.ite Ranch House and the Inverted "L"
area to the City. The reorganization was filed with LAFCO on 4/8/96. On
7/1/96, LAFCO approved the reorganization, designated the City as the
comlucting authority and authorized Council to conduct the proceeding to
complete the reorganization procc:ss. Staff recommends item he continued to
9/10/96. (Special Planning Projects Manager, Ot<1Y Ranch) Item t'Cmtinued
['rom the meetin~ 0['8/13/96.
ADOPTING OTA Y RANCII PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENTS - Staff recommends Council place the onJinances on first
reading. (Deputy City Manager Krempl) Continued from the meetin~ of
8/13/96.
ADOPTING TilE PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF CIIULA VISTA AND SN~1B, LTD" JEWELS
OF CHARITY, AND STEVEN AND MARY BIRCH FOUNDATION
(second readin~ and adontion) - Staff recommends that Council not adopt the
ordinance. (Deputy City Manager Krempl) Related item: not a Dart of the
Duhlic hearin1!.
ADOPTING THE PRE-ANNEXATIOI'\ DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN TIlE CITY OF CIIIILA VISTA AND JEWELS OF CHARITY
(tlrst readin~) (Deruty City Manager Krel11rl)
3
Agenda
-4-
August 20, 1996
C. ORDINANCE 2688 ADOPTING TilE PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND SNMB, LTD. (tirst
readinl')
D. ORDINANCE 2689 ADOPTING THE PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOP~fENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF CIlliLA VISTA AND STEPHEN AND MARY
BIRCH FOUNDATION (tirst readine)
14. PUBLIC HEARING ADOPTING OTAY RANCH PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT WITI! BALDWIN BUILDERS - The purpose of this item is
to present a development agreement with Baldwin Builders. On 6/25/96. the
Planning Commission and Counl~il considered a series of development
agreements with Village Properties, United Enterprises, Greg Smith. and the
Foundation. (The Foundation agreement was suhsequently split into three
separate agreements). The remaining party who is a property owner of a portion
of the Gtay Ranch property is Baldwin BuilJers, which is the truske for the
hankruptcy. Staff n:'coll1mends Council place the Ordinance on first reading.
(Deputy City Man"ger)
A. ORDINANCE 2690 ADOPTING OTA Y RANCH PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND TIlE
BALDWIN BUILDERS (first readine)
IS.A. RESOLUTION ]8416 APPROVING THE RESOURCE CONVEYANCE PLAN FOR THE OTA Y
RANCII SPA I - (This is a related item. hut does not reo..ire a Duhlic
hearin1!.)
B. RESOLUTION 18417 APPROVING TIlE INDE~INrFlCAT10N AGREEMENT BETWEEN
VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AND TIlE CITY OF CHULA VISTA - (This
is a related item. hut does not re{lUire a Duhlic hearin1!l.
C. PUBLIC HEARING PCS-96-04; CONSIDERATION OF TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
FOR TIlE OTAY RANCH SPA ONE, CHULA VISTA TRACT 96-04,
GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD
BETWEEN PASEO RANCHERO AND THE FUTURE SR-125
ALlGN~fENT - Recertitication of FEIR 95-01 and Addendum and reapproval
of the Stakl11cnt of OVt'rriuing Consideration and Mitigation Monitoring
Program. Arprov~ the Tt'.ntative Map for Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista
Tract 96~04, in acconJanl.:e with the Findings of Fact and suhject to the
Conditions of Approval. Staff recommends aprroval of the resolution. (Otay
Ranch Spl'ocial Planning Projects Manager) Continued from the meetinJ: of
8/6/96.
D. RESOLUTION ]8398 APPROVING A REVISED TENTAT]VE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
PORTIONS OF OTA Y RANCII SPA ONE, CIruLA VISTA TRACT 96-04,
AND ~1AKING TilE NECESSARY FINDINGS, ADOPTING TIlE
SECOND ADDENDUM TO AND RECERTIFYING FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL I~IPACT REPORT FEIR 95-0] (SOl #95021012)
AND READOPTING TilE STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS AND TIlE MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM FOR TilE FEIR, AND DENYING APPROVAL
OF ALTERNATIVE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP PROPOSALS
I)
Agenda
-5-
August 20. 1996
ORAL COM~llINICATlONS
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 disCl/ssion. (State law, however, generally
prohibits the City Council from taking action on any issues not included all the posted agenda.) /fyou wish to
address the Council on such a subject, please complele the yellow IIRequesf /0 Speak Under OraL Communications
Form" available in the labby 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 actioll. Your time is limited to three
minutes per speaker.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which ital'C been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissiolls and/or Commiltees.
None suhmitted.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this sectioll of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial disCl/ssions and deliberations by
the Council, staff, or members of the general public. 77le items will be considered individually by the Council
and staff recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alternatil'e. 77lOse who wish to speak, please
fill out a "Request to Speak" fonn m'ai/able in the lobby aud submil il to Ihe City Clerk prior to the meeting.
Public comments are limited to fi>-e minutes.
16. RESOLUTION 18418 ADOPTING MUNICIPAL POLLUTION PREVENTION POLICY,
RECOMMENDATIONS AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES TO
REDUCE TilE USE OF TOXIC ~IATERIALS IN TilE CITY'S
OPERATIONS AS IDENTIFIED IN TillS POLICY - The Environmental
Health Coalition (EHC) and the City worked jointly on a multi-year Municipal
Pollution Prevention project. The rn~ject was funded by a $30,000 grant to
EHC from the Jesse Smith Nuyes FoundatIOn. The goals of the rn~ject were to:
(I) audit the use of toxic produl'ts ]n th~ City's puhlic places and work areas;
(2) reduce the ust' of toxic m:-\terials used in City operations; and (3) create a
Illodd for other ('iti~s to follow. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Environmental Rt'soun:e Manager).
17.A. RESOLUTION 18419 ACCEPTING PROPOSALS AND AWARDING CONTRACTS FOR
POLICE INITIATED TOWING AND STORAGE SERVICES TO
ANTIIONY'S TOWING, SOUTH BAY TOWING, PAXTON'S TOWING,
AZ ~IETRO TOWING, AND J. C. TOWING - On 317195, Council
authorized Police Dt'partment statf to design a competitive process to select
providers of P{)li~'e initiated TowIng anti Impound Services. Proposals were
accepted on 6/30/95. with twelve providc'Ts responding, The process useu was
designed to improve the tow se.rvil..'es provided to consumers and the City while
enhancing Geno;:':ral Fund revenUes through the implementation of a referral fee
paid hy tow companies under contract with the City. Staff recolllmends
approval of the resolutions, (Chief of Police)
B. RESOLUTION 18420 AMENDING TilE POLICE INITIATED TOWING SERVICE RATE
SCHEDULE AND IMPLEMENTING A REFERRAL FEE.
I,
Agenda
-6-
August 20, 1996
18.
REPORT
REGARDING PROPOSED MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AT THE MTDB "H" STREET TROLLEY
STATION - On 7/1/96, the Planning Department received a request from
Edward F. Wagner leJr a letter of support for a proposed live story, lOS-unit
multiple family residential devdopment rrc~ject planneu to he constmcted ahove
the existing parking lot at the Metropolitan Transit Development Board's
(MTDB) "H" Street Trolley Station. The requested letter of surport is intended
to be included with Mr. Wagner's lonnal project proposal to MTDB. Staff
recommends Council authorize the Director of Planning to forward a letter to
Mr. Wagner and MTDB providing comments regarding the development
proposal. (Director of Planning)
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 BlISINESS
19. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
b. Report on additional Assistant City Manager position,
c. Report on California Population Change 1/1/96.
d. ClP Expenditures in Western Chula Vista.
20. MAYOR'S REPORTIS)
a. Ratification of appointments:
Walter L. Fisher, Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee;
Dr. Barry Russell, Cultural Arts Commission;
Leo Kelly. Commission on Aging; and
Fred Dufresne, Housing Advisory Commission.
b. RESOLUTION 18423 TAKING A POSITION TO OPPOSE AB 956, WHICH IS NOT
ADDRESSED IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM AND
THEREFORE REQUIRES DIRECT COUNCIL ACTION - The
City's 1995/96 Legislative Program was amended by Council on
12/12/95. Although this program was int~nc1ed to provide
comprehensive direction to the Legislative Committee on City's
legislative priorities, there are <..:ertain issues which are reserved for
direct action hy Council. The Legislative Committee recommends
approval of the resolution,
21. COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session uml them:e to) the Regular City Council Meeting on Septemher 10,
1996 at 6:00 p.m.
A joint meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency will he held immediately following the City Council
meeting, in the City Council Chamhers.
i,--'
Agenda
-7-
August 20, 1996
*****
CLOSED SESSION
Unless the City AI/arney, the City Manager or Ihe City COllncil slales otherwise atlhis lime, Ihe Council will
discuss and deliberate on the following items of bllsilless which are pennilled by law 10 be Ihe sllbject of a closed
session discussion, and which the Council is ad..ised shollld be discllssed in closed session 10 best proleclthe
interests of the City. The Council is reqllired by 1011' 10 relllrn 10 open sessioll, isslle any reporls of final action
taken in closed session, and the voles laken. /lolI'fI'er, dlle 10 Ihe Iypicallenglh of time taken lip by closed
sessions, the videotaping will be tenninaled at this poinl in order 10 sal'e cosls so Ihallhe COllncil's relllrn from
closed session, reports of final action taken, and a(ljollTf/menl willnol be videolaped. NfI'erlheless, the report
of final action taken will be recorded in Ihe minllles which wi/l be aI'ailable in Ihe City Clerk's Office.
22. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING:
a. Existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9
. Christopher YS. the City of Chula Vista.
b. Anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Sedinn 54956.9,
. Metro sewer issues.
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RELEASE - PlII'su:ml to Gon'rnnwnt Code Sedion 54957
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR. Pursuant to Government Code Sedion 54957.6
. Agency negotiator: John Goss or designe,t;' for CYEA. WCE, POA. IAFF, Executive
Management. MicJ-Managt'l11t'nt, and Unrepresented.
Employee organization: Chula Vista Employee;.; A",sociatio!l (CVEA) and Western Council of
Engineers (WCE), Police Officers Association (POA) and International Assm:iation of Fire
Fighters (lAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management. Mid-Management. and Unrepresented.
23. REPORT OF' ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
*****
v,
/
~~~
~~
~~~~
-:....-~......
ClW Of
CHUlA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY A TIORNEY
Date:
August 14, 1996
To:
The Honorable Mayor and City council~,
Ann Y. Moore, Acting City Attorney 0
From:
Re:
Report Regarding Actions Taken in Closed Session
for the Meeting of 8/13/96
The Acting City Attorney hereby reports that the city Council did
not meet in Closed Session on August 13, 1996.
AYM: 19k
C:\lt\clossess.no
6"~ "I
276 FOURTH AVENUE. CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 691-5037 . FAX (619) 585-5612
r)i....IUI~~P<pJI
COUNCil AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 08/20/96
t
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution J 11''11;'" Approving a Memorandum of Understanding
Between the San Diego Unified Port District and the City of Chula Vista and
Authorizing the Mayor to Sign Same
Community Development Director U}-tfl ~
SUBMITTED 8Y:
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager
(f '
, /"
/ \ v
~/ ,J
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No_J
BACKGROUND:
The Port District entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City of San Diego
concerning funding for the expansion of the San Diego Convention Center. At the same time, the
Port District recognized and committed to the expenditure of approximately $63 million for
tidelands capital improvement projects to be completed over seven years in the member cities of
National City, Imperial Beach, Coronado and Chula Vista. The Port District is proposing to enter
into a MOU with the member cities as a furtherance of their commitment to allocate $9 million
annually from FY 94-95 through FY 2001-02 to fund the tidelands projects approved as part of
the Port District's Capital Improvements Program (CIP).
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council adopt the resolution approving a MOU with the Unified
Port District.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Port District has agreed to contribute, on an annual basis, $4.5 million for a period of twenty
years to the City of San Diego to help finance the expansion of the San Diego Convention Center.
The Port District also agreed to reimburse the City of San Diego for certain consulting costs up to
$4.5 million per year. However, these payments will be reimbursed from proceeds from proposed
sale of bonds, or deducted from future annual payments.
Concurrently, the Port District wishes to enter into MOUs with the other member cities concerning
their commitment to fund tidelands capital improvement projects. The Port District is committing
$9 million annually for seven years (a total of $63 million) to fund these projects in the cities of
National City, Imperial Beach, Coronado and Chula Vista as approved in the Port District's CIP,
originally dated April 26, 1994, and later amended. The other member cities have been requested
to execute similar agreements.
The Port District's CIP in the City of Chula Vista includes the following projects:
Nautical Activity Center
Nature Interpretive Center Seawater System
Realign Access Channel
Marian Parkway Realignment
Extension of H Street
Property Acquisition
~"I
Page 2, Item _
Meeting Date 08/20/96
The City may, in the future, request changes to any projects or their time schedule, or may
propose a different project than those shown. Any changes will not affect the level of reserves
set aside for CIP projects or the $9 million annual set aside for the seven (7) fiscal years.
In the event the Port District determines to change or in any way increase its obligations to the
City of San Diego beyond the present $4.5 million annual contribution, including the Port District's
present right of reimbursement, the written documents between the Port District and the City of
San Diego or any other party, shall expressly provide that prior to any obligation or increase in any
annual contribution becoming legally effective or due and payable, the Board shall first set aside
the annual $9 million for the projects as provided pursuant to Paragraph 2 of the MOU with the
City of Chula Vista. Then, at its absolute discretion, the Port District may determine the amount,
if any, of available funds to pay any such increase.
FISCAL IMPACT: A complete listing of projects and funding appears on Attachment A. Funding
for the City over the seven year period totals $16.44 million. This represents 26% of the total
$63 million in Port District funding for the four member cities (other than San Diego). Funding for
Chula Vista in FY 95-96 will total $3.6 million, primarily in property acquisition expense for the
Bayfront properties.
Although the Port is committing $9 million annually for the member cities, the CIP is subject to
review and revision as may be required by changing schedules and priorities, as well as the annual
availability of revenues. There is no guarantee that all of the funds will be disbursed in any given
year or carried over if not disbursed.
(FK) M:\HOME\CQMMDEV\STAFF.REP\08-20-96\PORTMDU.113 [August 15, 1996 (3:08pm)]
t..;J.
RESOLUTION NO. 1'-'11.2.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED
PORT DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN SAME
WHEREAS, the Port District entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) with the City of San Diego concerning funding
for the expansion of the San Diego Convention center; and
. WHEREAS, at the same time, the Port District recognized
and committed to the expenditure of approximately $63 million for
tidelands capital improvement projects to be completed over seven
years in the member cities of National city, Imperial Beach,
Coronado and Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, the Port District is proposing to enter into a
MOU with the member cities as a furtherance of their commitment to
allocate $9 million annually from FY 94-95 through FY 2001-02 to
fund the tidelands projects approved as part of the Port District's
Capital Improvements Program (CIP).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby approve a Memorandum of
Understanding between San Diego Unified Port District and the City
of Chula Vista, 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
Memorandum of Understanding for and on behalf of the City of Chula
vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
chris Salomone, Director of
Community Development
c~ ~1 h"L&~
Ann Y. Moore, Acting city
Attorney
C:\rs\port..ou
t" J
I
00
w
I- ;n
en
U en
a:
Lt) w
III >-
0 2 :;
0 .,
N W 0
2 c:
I '0
(9 >- "
'"
~ ~ <C
0 III en
en
a: I
I I- :;;
I- ~ "
CD 0 >-
"
0) 00 u
0) 0 0
~ ~
00 z
a: ~
~ I-
w U
>- a:
-' I-
~ 00
U 0
00
L.L. W
I
I-
~ Z
~ w
a: w
(9 :s:
0 I-
a: w
c... III
I- ~
Z 0 0
w ~ 0
~ Q
w w ~
> I ~
0 I- 0
, a: Z. 0
c... ...
2 0 en
en
W
-' Z .5
~ ~ 0
l- I- .!!
11: z ..
~ E
0 ..,
U U 0
w
I- 00
U ~
a: 00
I-
00 I-
0 U
w
I- ...,
a: 0
0 a:
c... c...
0 c...
w U
L.L. L.L.
Z 0
~ >-
0 a:
~
(9 2
w
0 2
z =>
00
~
00
>
c:
0
'';:;
0
CD
00
0 0 r- 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 <C en 0 0 .... N N 0 '" 0 oo '"
0 ~ .,.. - - N "! N .,. - - '" N
<D N "' ~ M "' N
0
0
0
'"
Iii I' 0 0 r- 0 0 oo "' 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 <C en 0 0 <C .,. N 0 "' 0 oo "'
0 - .,. ~ ~ N "'. N .,. - - "' N
<D N N - '" "' N
.illi;;!
~"}::OIk
,nB!rv
'"
N
.,.
0 0 N 0 '"
<C '" 0 '" N
<C r- - ~ ...
-
0 0 0 0 '"
0 ... 0 0 N
en. r- r- <C ...
- N
'" 0 0 '" '"
0 0 '" ~ N
... r- 0 "'. .,.
'" ~
. 0 0 0 '" 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 "' 0
Iii 0 N 0 en oo ... - N 0 ... 0 - 0
en - r- N '" ~ N - - N ...
:,,::::::~:::::;:::~:;::::
1'1 0 '" '" r- 0 '" '" 0 0 0 0
... .,. en N N '" 0 r- - '"
'" - N r- - - -
N
~f..W r- oo
r-
>- c: >-
. .. 0 0 "0 c: 0
>- ~ .., C ~ 0 c:
>< ~ U5 ';; .g
1:: 0> ~ .. " " Q; ..
I " :;; c: C ~ " U " c:
C. 0. .. en E .. "m c: < ~ " ..
U c: X u
0 ~ .. CJ ~ " c. .= .. .. 0
0:. .. .5 " <; > " .J:: .. 0. W ...J
" :;; "0 > E E 0 a: " U N
>- c: c: .., <;. u .. " " -
~ ::J ::; .. " .!! "' 0 0: ~ -
>< 0 1:; '.5 c:
U >< ~ <;. 0 c: 0 0
>- ?: ~ u .. >- U 0 " :;; 0 "
:! .. c: 0. :;; en " u :! ~ > 0
c: '" U " 0 .., ~ u 0:: "0 -0: "0
0 0 E 0 ~ .. ~ .. -0: 0
5 .., .. :;; .s :;; N U5 .. 5 " .s c: c:
~ " c. " c. ~ .. U5 <; 0> W
';; ~ 0 u " .. c: "0 .5 " I- 0
c: c. 0: " .~ .. ~
:::.~:::H~:::~~::::: .. '5 " .g Q; .. " a ~ .J:: .2 c. .. <;, .E .5 ::; 'E "
f~~i@lli~: :; "" .~ > C. 0. .. :;; a; E " :; :;; ~
.J:: U .. " " .. " 0 " " .J:: C. 0> U .. ~
-0: (3 ~ 0:: u :::J ::J ::; Z :x: en
u Z 0 a: .. Z en - 0- I- a:
~:~:::N~~:;:;:;:~;:; U U
::;:;:;::::::::::<8::x~: U U U U U U U u
:mxwwn CJ CJ CJ ::; CJ U CJ CJ CJ u ::; CJ u
,Iii '" 0 <C '" <C CJ r- r- ~ CJ r- ... CJ
0 ... N oo 0 - - 0 0 '" en - -
0 N 0 N 0 N N 0 N N - N '"
:; ~ - :; 0 - - ~ N N
0 U U U > > - u u ~
u u z Z u '" z u u '" z z '"
,-4
N
~
en
'"
'"
.-<
'"
N
'-
Q)
.D
E
Q)
+'
C.
Q)
V)
c::
o
c.
o
..c::
V>
-""
'-
o
3
'"
+'
'"
""0
'-
'"
o
co
Q)
..c::
+'
>,
.D
""0
Q)
+'
C.
o
""0
""
L!)
o
o
N
I
(!)
=>
o
a:
:r:
I-
<0
0'>
0'>
~
(J)
w
I-
U
,a:
w
CD
:2:
w
~
>-
~
CD
:r:
l-
=>
o
(J)
o
z
~
I-
U
a:
I-
(J)
o
w
:r:
I-
Z
w
w
3:
I-
w
CD
=>
o
~
(J)
a:
~
w
>-
...J
~'
U
(J)
LL.
~
~
a:
CJ
o
a:
0..
I-
Z
w
:2:
w
>
o
a:
0..
:2:
w
:r:
I-
Z
o
w
Z
~
I"-
Z
o
U
(J)
~
(J)
I-
U
w
...,
o
a:
0..
0..
U
LL.
o
>-
a:
~
:2:
:2:
=>
(J)
...J
~
I-
0..
~
U
I-
U
a:
I-
(J)
o
I-
a:
o
0..
o
W
LL.
Z
=>
o
CJ
w
o
z
~
(J)
>
c
o
"'"
<>
Q)
(J)
'"
'"
'"
>{'!:::
~ ~I;i!~t~i:t
..
c
'5>
"
en
CD
'"
'"
~~f!i1!~fl!i
Mp!!
~
"
>
..
"
..
!f
NWFiB
~;~[i
':;ri:Ji'!'!::::~
o
o
g
i2
.!!!
o
c
...
'"
'"
,5
..
"
0;
E
'.,
..
w
.::.:.:<.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:
iJ!I~!rIJJ:
Wi'iiitj
~
,~1=~,*: ::
li~
;::::~:~:~~;,?:~;::~;
II
0,
o
.. ...
o
'"
'"
'"
-
N
....
"':.
'"
-
o
'"
'"
'"
o
CD
'"
M
o
'"
N
'"
'"
'"
...
'"
'"
...
-:
-
N
'"
,..
'"
,..
,;
"
..
u.
U
::E
...
'"
-
-
U
Z
o
CD
'"
'"
o
CD
ex>
'"
o
N
q
-
o
...
'"
N
o
o
'"
~
..
"
..
U
Z-
:~
"
<(
..
"
"g
'"
Z
U
CJ
'"
o
o
>
U
CD
-
-
CD
-
...
o
-
N
-
.><
~
"-
..
"
c
"
C
."
C
..
0.
X
w
U
CJ
o
N
N
-
'"
o
....
,..
o
....
....
'"
N
'"
'"
N
N
o
N
"
"
E
c
,!!,
..
"
a:
>
'"
~
.><~
~ "
.. "
"- ~
"'en
c
";:: C)
'"
:;<9>
U
CJ
o
-
o
-
>
U
o '"
'" ~
'" '"
o '"
'" -
'" '"
'"
,..
'"
N
...
o
'"
"
"
:!
OJ
'"
,; ..
> "
<( "
.. E
." "
C >
" 0
~a.
i= E
..
">
w'"
,;U
c 0
="'0
" '"
~ c
o 0
.t: ~
'" 0
0.0
.. ~
~ '"
.9- G)
a:z
U
CJ
CD
-
N
-
U
Z
~.,f'
o
'"
...
'"
CD
.,;
c
..
1'1
..., .,;
'"
5 "
- >
.. ~
c.><
",,,-
en (tI
>.5:
.. ~
~ ..
,,<;:
" .
U:u>
U
CJ
'"
o
-
o
U
o
'"
-
o
'"
-
o
....
o
ex>
U
CJ
N
o
o
>
U
o
o
ex>
o
o
ex>
o
o
-
o
N
CD
o
ex>
,;
>
<(
E
..
0.
.
."
C
!
"
~
en
U
CJ
'"
N
o
en
o
.,.
-
o
.,.
-
'"
N
'"
o
-
o
-
."
C
..
en
.t:
:; "
N"
C
"
.. >
c<(
.2>> U)
"''''
" c
:;:::~
- "
~:!2
f-f-
U
CJ
ex>
-
'"
-
U
Z
'"
.,.
...
'"
...
...
o
o
...
'"
.,.
f-
::E
U
z
.2
E
.!!
..
>
'"
>
."
OJ
"
"
'"
U
::E
...
'"
o
U
z
o
'"
N
'"
N
'"
o
'"
N
...
"':.
'"
o
o
...
o
'"
N
ex>
'"
-
~
'u
..
u.
'"
c
:;;
~
"-
.t:
"
'"
"
en
U
CJ
'"
o
-
'"
o
'"
o
'"
o
'"
Q.
o
-.;
>
"
."
" C
a: '"
~o:
"S :u
.. ';;;
ens
::E
5
.D"
~ "
J: E
."
C
"
o
< >
~ ..
-.;'"
en 0
c g>
:gB
c; c
..
c.'"
o
"Q)-5
> "
" 0
c'"
U
CJ
'"
-
N
U
Z
U
CJ
,..
N
N
'"
o
o
'"
o
o
'"
o
'"
...
o
'"
co
en
'"
'"
.....
.
<.D
N
....
0)
-0
E
0)
+-'
C-
O)
(/)
'"
o
C-
o
..,
V>
-'"
....
o
3:
Cd
+-'
Cd
-0
....
Cd
o
c::>
0)
..,
+-'
>,
-0
-0
0)
+-'
C-
o
-0
'"
.
i
oo
w 0 0 0 0 0
I- "' N "' "' "'
on ..,.
U '" '" '"
'"
a:
w
L!) aJ >-
0 ~ "5
0 ...,
N w ~ :::o.{:
~ c :,0::::::
I "6> ,j:)",'
CJ >- ~ \S:I:
'"
::> <1: co :::3~~:\:
0 aJ '" 0 0 0 0 0
'" N on "' on
a: J: ~ ..,. :::J':o;;:':::::
J: N ":':'~'::'
l- ii; '" :::&:1:
I- ::> ~
>-
CD 0 "i6
m oo "
m CI ~
~ ~
(/) z
a: <1:
<1: I-
w U
>- a:
....J I-
<1: oo
U CI
oo
u. w
J:
I-
~ Z ,.".;.".;.,
<1: w 0 0 :'-Vf,::':
0 "' ~,
a: w o.
CD 3: ::':~;.;
N ':::ca:;~"
0 I-
a: w <It?"
Il. aJ 0 jjj",
on ..~::'.
I- ::> ..,. :::~~:r
Z 0 0 ::;~~;:
W ~ 0 ?6t:
~ 8 :.:.m ..,.
W w 1? :::~/:
> J: "',"'''>:':'
.!!! :::'ittK:
0 l- e ;:.~;~::
a: z '" Lt)
oj '"
Il. ..,. 0 '"
~ CI '" 0 :!:Im ......
'" "i
w .:::~:}-
....J Z oS; :"~::;:: '"
<1: <1: ~ N
l- I- ~ 0 ~IJ s-
Il. Z .. .... OJ
<1: 0 .g ~ .0
U ~ E
U w ,.:.:.".:.:." OJ
I- -I-'
U oo 0 0 :;'~::::-: C.
<1: on on :~II!: OJ
a: .... V1
l- (/) c:
oo I- 0
U :::;;~::;:;f
CI W -,:;.;000:::::: c.
I- -, :~:~ill 0
0 .c:
a: qffif '"
0 a: :;; ,:;. y -""
Il. b .. s-
Il. l,: > '" Q. .s:: 11* 0
Il. <( E ~
CI .. 0 3
U 0 C ." a: ~ ~ "',..-.
w ~ 0 c '" .. 11i1
~ .. '5 .. '"
u. u. ~1t~:3tThf~: ~ "" .. Q; ~ C ." !!
0 ii; '5 > .. .. ~ -I-'
Z ~ ." .. ~ !J) !J) '"
[111\'1 .. J: .. U .. "; ;@ur
'" .
::> >- '0 !J) .. :;; J: -0
<5 ~ MME
a: in :;; ~ ii: . s-
O <1: C ii: "i6 .. - II '"
CD .s:: c ~ a: c 0
~ ~ .. co C 0 0
w 11111111 ..,. x ~ ~ in ~ c ""
'" u E " u ~ 0
~ UJ oS u oS ~ "..
CI C ." ~ ~ c OJ
::> .. .. ~ u ~ " .c:
Z oo ." ~ C ;; "> c "<:; ~ -I-'
~ 0 0 .. 0 .. x :@@M
<1: UMHHk Q. u 0: ,= U u u. UJ .3
(/) IIIIII
> u u u
c:> u c:> u CJ. -0
C 0 c:> '" c:> co OJ
0 II 0 - - '" -I-'
"'" ..,. '" '" 0 '" c.
u U '" - ..,. - 0
Q) - u > -0
oo Z co Z IIJ U <I:
~ - .
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RECITALS:
A. The San Diego Unified Port District (Port District) and The City of San Diego
entered into a Memorandum of Understanding concerning the expansion of the
San Diego Convention Center.
B. The Port District has agreed to contribute on an annual basis 4.5 Million Dollars
for a period of Twenty (20) Years or for the life of the debt obligations created
to finance that expansion, whichever is the shorter period.
C. The Port District has also agreed to reimburse The City of San Diego for certain
consultant and associated planning and design contract costs associated with the
expansion at a rate not to exceed 4.5 Million Dollars per year, however, the Port
District will be reimbursed for those costs either out of proceeds of the proposed
sale of bonds or will deduct those costs from the amount the Port District is to
contribute as provided in Recital B, above.
D. At the time the decision was made to contribute the 4.5 Million Dollars in annual
payments, the Board of Port Commissioners (Board) recognized and committed
to the expenditure of approximately 63 Million Dollars for tidelands capital
improvement program projects scheduled to be completed over the next Seven (7)
Years (9 Million Dollars per year) and located within the City limits of the Port
t--?
1
District member Cities of National City, Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and
Coronado. This Memorandum of Understanding is in furtherance of that
commitment to encumber annually 9 Million Dollars for Seven (7) consecutive
fiscal year periods for construction of said projects as shown in the San Diego
Unified Port District Tidelands Capital Improvement Program adopted by the
Board on April 26, 1994.
E. The Capital Improvement Program Ad Hoc Committee of the Board reported to
the Board and recommended adoption of a Tidelands Capital Improvement
Program, including setting aside 9 Million Dollars annually for the projects
referred to in Recital D, above, and an annual contribution for expansion of the
San Diego Convention Center which under no circumstances shall exceed 4.5
Million Dollars annually.
F. The Board approved the Ad Hoc Committee's report and recommendations on
April 26, 1994, and later authorized the Memorandum of Understanding with
The City of San Diego dated June 21, 1994, concerning expansion of the San
Diego Convention Center.
NOW, THEREFORE, Port District and the City of Chula Vista (City) agree:
1. The Port District shall annually set aside as restrictive reserves 9 Million
Dollars for a period of Seven (7) consecutive Fiscal Years commencing with
the Fiscal Year 1995, which begins July 1, 1994, and concludes June 30,
1995. The parties acknowledge that 9 Million Dollars has been so set aside
and encumbered for the Fiscal Year 1995.
~.,r
2
2. The 9 Million Dollars set aside annually shall be expended for Port District
projects to be completed in the Port District members cities of National
City, Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and Coronado, as shown in the
Tidelands Capital Improvement Program (CIP) adopted by the Board on
April 26, 1994, and as may be revised or replaced by any subsequently
adopted CIP from time to time, for the Fiscal Years of 1995 thorough
2001. A summary of the present proposed CIP expenditures is attached
hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference made a part hereof.
3. City may in the future, for projects shown in the CIP which are located
in the limits of City, request changes to any such projects or their time
schedule or may propose a different project than those so shown, and no
such change or different project shall affect the level of reserves set aside
for CIP projects or the 9 Million Dollar annual set aside for the said Seven
(7) Fiscal Years.
4. In the event the Port District determines to change or in any way increase
its obligations to The City of San Diego beyond the present 4.5 Million
Dollar annual contribution as particularly provided in the Memorandum
of Understanding between those parties, including the Port District's
present right of reimbursement, the written documents between the Port
District and The City of San Diego or any other party, shall expressly
3
~~,
I /
provide that prior to any such obligation or increase in any annual
contribution becoming legally effective or due and payable, the Board shall
first set aside the annual 9 Million Dollars for the projects as provided for
and in accordance with Paragraph 2, above, and then at its absolute
discretion determine in accordance with Port District policy and practices
the amount, if any, of available funds to pay any such increase and the
amount so determined shall be used and shall be payment in full of such
mcrease.
5. Notwithstanding any other provision in this MOU, the 9 Million Dollar
annual set-aside may be changed or otherwise expended from time to time
if the Board makes a finding that because of an emergency or fiscal crisis
there is a need for all or part of these funds to be expended for the repair,
operation, maintenance or development of Port District infrastructures
critical and paramount to the operation of the Port District.
6. This Memorandum of Understanding is made for the benefit of the Port
District and City only and not for the benefit of any third party. There
are no other parties to this Memorandum of Understanding, express or
4
~'l~
implied, direct, indirect or ostensible. The Port District and City agree
and state that it is not their intent to create any third party beneficiaries
to this Memorandum of Understanding for any purpose.
DATED:
, 1995.
JOSEPH D. PATELLO
PORT ATTORNEY
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
By
Port Director
CITY ATTORNEY
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By
By
City Manger
~'II
5
jU:~ 2 2 1994
01'-15-'1t\t
<C',;['\"I.\',',rtI""i.l/il//00/
o:"''':',~',i', <t
Q : I 0
C ,
\ '" I_~....Q-!:!
~b '.... \0
"'OR'" \)
Port of San Diego
<lnd Lindhergh Field Air TerminCl!
161 YI 686-62110 . P.O. Box 488. San Diego, California 42112 0488
21 June 1995
Mr. John D. Goss
City Manager
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
;J;i ~
Dear Mr. ~:
Re: Memorandum of Understanding
At its meeting of June 20, 1995, the Board of Port Commissioners authorized the
District to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with each of the South
Bay Cities. Enclosed are two bound copies of the MOU, together with an extra copy.
After authorization by the City Council, please have the two bound copies executed on
behalf of your City and return both copies to me. After they have been executed on
behalf of the District and documented, a fully executed original will be returned for
your files.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
~-D. PATELLa
PORT ATTORNEY
JDP:sw
enclosure
t.../~
.
,..-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
11''11:1
RESOLUTION Authorizing Execution of Agreement Between City of
Chula Vista and Pacific Southwest Biological Services for Creation of
Wetland Habitat
Community Development Director ~-+n t S
I JII~ / \.
REVIEWED BY: City Manager U kJ )v" (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No.X..!
BACKGROUND: The City and Pacific Southwest Biological Services (PSBS) had an agreement for
PSBS to design a grading, planting and irrigation plan for an approximately 1 Q-acre City-owned
property for the purposes of satisfying wetland mitigation requirements for streambed impacts
incurred as a part of the Otay Valley Road Phase I improvements project. The grading plan
designed by PSBS resulted in excess surface expressions of groundwater, rendering the site
unsuitable for the desired habitat. PSBS has agreed to correct the conditions on the site by
regrading, reinstalling irrigation and replanting the site in conformance with the original plan. The
subject agreement sets forth responsibilities of PSBS in completion of this work. The City, in
exchange would pay outstanding invoices to PSBS for their work.
Item
Meeting Date 08/20/96
?
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve the resolution authorizing the execution of an
agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Pacific Southwest Biological Services for creation
of wetland habitat.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
Wetland impacts resulting from Otay Valley Road Phase J road improvements required the City to
enter into a Streambed Alteration Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game.
That Agreement relied upon a mitigation plan prepared by PSBS, which included a grading plan for
a parcel of land purchased by the City specifically to mitigate the road construction impacts. That
grading plan called for topographic contours that were below the water table. The City included
the grading plan in the construction specifications for the road improvements_ The contractor
graded the site in conformance with the grading plan and the resulting condition was ground
surface elevations over a majority of the site that are below groundwater levels, rendering the site
unsuitable for creation of the specific type of habitat required by the Fish and Game agreement.
Because of the defects in the grading plan that have hindered the City's ability to deliver a
completed mitigation site to the Department of Fish and Game, payment of monies due to PSBS
for other work related to Otay Valley Road improvements, in an amount of $36,924, has been
withheld.
PSBS has indicated their willingness to correct the problem by regrading the site, reinstalling the
irrigation system and replanting the site, all at their own cost. Because the remediation of the
grading condition requires import of soil and because the validity of the Fish and Game agreement
requires conformance to a specific planting plan, staff has prepared an Agreement which sets forth
7-/
-J I
Page 2. Item _
Meeting Date 08/20/96
responsibilities of PSBS in preparing the site in a manner which will satisfy the requirements of the
Department of Fish and Game. The Agreement will also facilitate PSBS's ability to remove excess
soil and debris on Parcel 1 of the Auto Park for use at the mitigation site.
The City obligations outlined in the agreement include payment of outstanding fees incurred by
PSBS. The actual design fees for the Phase I improvements have already been paid to PSBS. The
fees which are currently being withheld are related to emergency services performed at the
authorization of staff to avoid delays, and subsequent potential delay damages claimed by the
contractor. in the Phase I improvements related to habitat permit issues. This work was
authorized outside of the original contract because delays and costs associated with amending the
contract would have been impractical in light of the need to complete the road improvements and
not delay the opening of the Auto Park any further. The specific work performed by PSBS beyond
their original scope of services included monitoring of construction activities to ensure that the
contractor's work complied with all conditions of the streambed alteration agreement, and six
other environmental permits through the California Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The need for these services was
immediate and critical to maintaining the validity of the permits and keeping the road construction
schedule on target with the opening of the Auto Park. The funds for these services were included
in subsequent appropriations for the street widening project and are currently available for this
purpose.
FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of the Agreement will allow PSBS to satisfy the conditions under
which the City would pay $36,924 in outstanding fees; funds for which are available in the Otay
Valley Road Street Widening account.
(JM) M:\HOME\COMMDEV\STAFF.REP\08-20-96\ovr-psbs [August 14, 1996 (5:02pm)]
7--1.
~
RESOLUTION
/8''1/:3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND PACIFIC SOUTHWEST BIOLOGICAL SERVICES FOR CREATION OF
WETLAND HABITAT
WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista and Pacific Southwest
Biological Services (PSBS) had an agreement for PSBS to design a
grading, irrigation and planting plan for an approximately 10-acre
site to be used as mitigation for wetland impacts associated with
Phase 1 Otay Valley Road improvements; and
WHEREAS, the grading plan designed by PSBS was not effective
iri achieving the appropriate topography to support the desired
habitat; and
WHEREAS, PSBS has agreed to remediate the grading and replace
the irrigation and vegetation of the site in conformance with the
original plans; and
WHEREAS, in exchange, the City has agreed to pay PSBS $36,924
of previously appropriated funds subject to the terms of an
Agreement for Creation of Wetland Habitat.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby find, determine, resolve and order
as follows:
1. The city Council hereby approves an Agreement for
Creation of Wetland Habitat ("Agreement"), in accordance
with the terms and conditions presented, in a final form
to be approved by the City Attorney.
2. The City Manager, or his designee, is authorized to
execute the Agreement and take all necessary measures to
implement same.
3. A copy of the Agreement shall be kept on file with the
City Clerk as Document No.
PRESENTED BY:
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Chris Salomone
community Development Director
M:\shared\COMMDEV\OVR-PSBS. RES
7~
~(?
AGREEMENT FOR CREATION OF WETLAND HABITAT
This AGREEMENT FOR CREATION OF WETLAND HABITAT ("Agreement")
is entered into effective as of August 20, 1996 ("Effective Date")
by and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a chartered municipal
co.rporation ( "City") and PACIFIC SOUTHWEST BIOLOGICAL SERVICES, a
California corporation ("PSBS") with reference to the following
facts:
A. On or about June 25, 1992 City and the California
Department of Fish and Game ("Fish and Game") entered into that
certain Streambed Alteration Agreement executed March 3, 1993; the
agreement was amended on December 20, 1993, November 16, 1994 and
December 13, 1995. The Streambed Alteration Agreement was required
by Fish and Game pursuant to California Fish and Game Code section
1601 in order to compensate for the loss of wetland habitat
resulting from the City's widening of Otay Valley Road. A copy of
the Streambed Alteration Agreement, as amended, is attached hereto
as Exhibit A.
B. Pursuant to the Streambed Alteration Agreement, the City
is obligated to acquire, improve as a wetland habitat, and dedicate
a conservation easement in certain real property comprised of
approximately ten undeveloped acres located south of Otay Valley
Road in the City of Chula vista (the "Wetland Mitigation Parcel") .
The Wetland Mitigation Parcel is more particularly described on
Exhibit B attached hereto.
C. On or about the effective date of the Streambed
Alteration Agreement, City and PSBS entered into an agreement
pursuant to which PSBS was obligated to design a grading, planting
and irrigation plan ("Wetland Habitat Design Work") for the
development of a sustainable wetland habitat on the Wetland
Mitigation Parcel in accordance with the requirements of the
Streambed Alteration Agreement.
D. PSBS's Wetland Habitat Design Work was defective in that
it resulted in grading contours lower than groundwater elevations.
This resulted in the creation of a habitat which was unsuitable for
purposes of satisfying City's obligations under the Streambed
Alteration Agreement.
E. PSBS is legally obligated to correct the problems caused
by the defect in its Wetland Habitat Design Work and has agreed to
do so on the terms and conditions set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, the
mutual covenants contained herein, and other good and valuable
consideration, the parties hereby agree as follows:
1. Scope of Work. PSBS, or City approved subcontractors
thereof, shall perform all work ("Work") necessary to improve the
1
Wetland Mitigation Parcel to a graded, irrigated, and planted
condition consistent with the requirements set forth in the
Streambed Alteration Agreement. The design and specifications for
the Work are more particularly described on Exhibit C attached
hereto. In the event of any conflict between the requirements for
the Work contained in the Streambed Alteration Agreement and those
set forth in Exhibit C, the requirements in the Streambed
Alteration Agreement shall govern. subject to City's payment
obligations hereunder, all Work shall be done at PSBS's sole cost
and expense.
2. Compliance with Standard Specifications for Public Works
Construction. All Work shall be conducted in compliance with the
Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (1991),
commonly referred to as the "Green Book", as amended by the San
Diego Regional Supplemental Amendments, 1992 supplements, Chula
vista Standard Special Provisions, 1992 Regional Standard Drawings
(1992) and the Chula vista Construction Standards (1992). Copies
of these documents are available at the city for review by PSBS or
its designee. PSBS acknowledges and agrees that it is familiar
with these requirements. In the event of any conflict between the
requirements for the Work contained in section 1 of this Agreement
and those set forth in this Section, the requirements in section 1
of this Agreement shall govern.
3. Commencement and Completion of Work. The Work shall be
commenced no later than September 20, 1996 and shall be completed
by no later than December 20, 1996.
4. Obliqation to obtain Clean Fill. In addition to its
other obligations hereunder, PSBS will be solely responsible for
insuring that any fill installed at the site shall be free of any
and all hazardous materials in violation of any and all hazardous
materials laws.
5. Indemnity. PSBS shall indemnify, protect, defend and
hold harmless the city, its councilmembers, officers, employees,
agents and representatives from and against any and all
liabilities, losses, damages, claims and costs (including
attorneys' fees and court costs) arising from the performance of
its work hereunder, including, without limitation, any such claims
arising from the installation of fill at the site which is
contaminated with hazardous materials.
6. Pavment.
a. city shall pay PSBS one installment of $10,000 upon
(a) timely completion of all required fill and grading work, (b)
City's acceptance of such work, and (c) City's receipt and approval
of mechanic's lien releases related to such work.
2
b. City shall PSBS a second installment of $10,000 upon
(a) timely completion of all required irrigation and planting work,
(b) city's acceptance of such work, and (c) City's receipt and
approval of mechanic's lien releases related to such work.
c. city shall pay PSBS a final installment of $16,894
upon (a) timely completion of all remaining work comprising the
Work, if any, (b) city's acceptance of such work, (c) City's
receipt and approval of mechanic's lien releases related to such
work, and Cd) the final acceptance by Fish and Game, or its
designee of the improved wetland Mitigation Parcel in satisfaction
of city's corresponding obligations under the Fish and Game
Agreement.
7. prevailinq Waqe. Due to the fact that the Work to be
performed by PSBS hereunder is in satisfaction of PSBS's
obligations under its non-Prevailing wage Wetland Habitat Design
Work contract, the city did not solicit bids for the Work, and is
not requiring that prevailing wages be paid in accordance with
California Labor Code section 1773; however, PSBS acknowledges and
agrees that PSBS is solely responsible for complying with any and
all applicable prevailing wage laws.
8. General Provisions.
a. Attornevs Fees. In the event of a dispute between
the parties with respect to this Agreement, unless otherwise agreed
by the parties in writing, the prevailing party in any arbitration,
mediation or legal proceeding shall be entitled to recover from the
other such prevailing party's reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.
b. Authoritv: Bindinq Aqreement. Each individual
executing this Agreement on behalf of PSBS represents and warrants
that he/she is duly authorized to execute and deliver, and has the
power to execute and deliver, this Agreement on behalf of PSBS,
that the transaction contemplated hereby has been duly authorized
by all requisite actions on the part of PSBS, that no other
consents of any party shall be necessary to the consummation
hereof, that this Agreement does not violate any existing law or
any existing or pending agreement to which PSBS is subject, and
that all the provisions of this Agreement shall be valid, legally
binding obligations of and enforceable against the PSBS in
accordance with their terms.
c. Entire Aqreement. This Agreement, together with all
exhibits attached hereto'and other agreements expressly referred to
herein, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with
respect to the subject matter hereof. All prior or contemporaneous
agreements, understandings, representations, warranties and
statements, oral or written, are superseded.
3
d. Survival of Indemnities and Warranties. All
indemnities, warranties and representations provided by PSBS
hereunder shall survive PSBS's completion of the Work hereunder or
the earlier termination hereof.
e. Further Assurances. PSBS and city hereby covenant
that each will, at any time and from time to time upon request by
the other party hereto execute and deliver such further documents
and do such further acts as may be reasonably requested to fully
effectuate the purpose of this Agreement.
f. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence of
each provision of this Agreement.
g. Exhibi ts. Any exhibits referred to herein are
attached hereto and hereby incorporated herein by this reference.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereby enter into this
Agreement effective as of the date first written above.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PACIFIC SOUTHWEST BIOLOGICAL
SERVICES
By:
S~irley Horton, Mayor
Its:
[Print Name and Title]
ATTEST
city Clerk
Approved as to form by
Acting City Attorney
4
EXHIBIT A
Streambed Alteration Aqreement
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
330 Gcdden Shore, Suit.e 50
Long Beach, California 90802
NQ~iflcatioD No.5-416-92
Page J of -2-
AGREEMENT REGARDING PROPOSED STREAM OR LAKE ALTERATION
THIS AGREHIENT, ent.ered int.o between t.he St.at.e e,f Calife,rnia, Department of
Fish and Game, hereinafter called the Department, and John Goss of City of
Chula Vist,a , 8t,at.e: of California, hereinaft.er called the OI=~r.at.or, is a8
follows:
WHEREAS,pursuant to Section 1600 of California Fish and Game Code, the
01=~rator, on t.he Z5t.ll day of June, 1992., notified the Depart.ment. t.hat. they
intend t(> divert or obstruct the natural flQ'w' of, or change the bed, channel,
or 'bank c)f, or u~;e mat.er-ial froIn t.he ~;t.ream1::~d< 5} of I t.he fcd lC'\rJln9 \rJat.er-{ 5}:
Otay River- San Diego County, CalifoI~ni3_1 Sectlcm 24 ToW'nship ~ Range
l!L.-
WHEREAS, the Department., (represented by Terri Dickerson has made an inspect,ion
of ~;ubjec;t, area on t,he 14t,h day of Julv , 1992, and) ha~; det.ermined t,hat,
:3uch opero.tione: may substantially adver5ely affect existing fish and ""ildlife
r-eSCfur-c:e:s including: least. Bell '5 vir-eo. yJillo'W flvcat,cher'. velltf\r,1-breEl::;t.ed
-chat. other sonabirds. raotors. earets. \rIaterfol.tll. lizards. t",o-5trioed aarter
snake. t.reefr-oc~~,-.....:!;:9acb.: and all i:wuat,ic: r'e::,Cfurc:e5 and 'Wildlife ln t.he area.
THEREFORE, the Depal'tment hereby propose~ ,measures to protect fish and
\r.Iild!ife r'esour-ces dur-ing t.he Oper-at.orls \r.Iork. The O}:~rat.or her'e-by agrees t,o
accept the follo",ing measures/conditions 0.5 part of the proposed ",ark.
If t,he Operat.or j S 'Wclrk changes from t.hat. st.at,ed in t,he not,i ficat,ion a,peei fied
above, this Agreement is no longer valid and a new notification shall be
su'bmit.ted t.o t.he De;par.t.ment. of Fish and GaIl1e. Failure t.o comply 'Wit.h t.he
provisions of this Agreement and lJith other per'tinent code sect,ions, including
but, not. liII1it.ed to Fish and Game CClde Sect,ions 5Ei50, 5652, 5937, and 5948, Hiay
result in prosecution.
Nothing in this Agreement authorizes the Operator to trespass on any land or
pr-clpert.y, nor does 1 t, roe! ieve t,he Oper'ot.or of responsibi 1 i t,y for corupl i ance
\,lith applicable federal, state, or local lalJs or ordinances. A consl...lffimated
Agreement. does nc!t, const.it,ute De}:1CIrt.ment. clf Fi::;h and Game endor.t;:;eHJent, of t,rJe
proposed operat.ion, or assure the Department. I '3 concurrence 1# i th permi t,s
r'eqe>ired frow c,t.her' agencies. b
T is A reement becomes effective 15 1993 I#ith the De. rtment's
si nat.ure and t.erminat.es 15 1994 for' ro -ec:t, cone,t.r'-lct.ion on! Thi:=;
Actreement shall remain in effect for that time necessary to e;atisfv the
t.erms/condit.ions of t,his- Aareement..
.
Page L of L
STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION NUMBER: 5-416-92
1. The fed lowing pr-c,visic,ns c:on~;t.it.l1t.e tor-Ie limit. of activities El9reed t.o and
resolved by this Agreement. Tr~ signing of this Agreement does not imply that the
Operat,c1r' is precluded fr'cllfI doing crt.her act,ivit.ies at. t.}-!e:" sit.e. HO\\l'ever, act,ivit.ies
not specifically agreed t.o and resolved by this: Agreement :shall be subject to
separate not,i fleat.ion pursuant t:CI Fish and Game Code Sect,ions 1600 et, seq. I"~
">'lop.<<!- v~",i.r~ -fAvm 3 +0 'to .J-u:f) ~ , w-{Y'ot-1rt'- U
2. (The Operator proposes to alter the stream to wIden Otay Valley Road to)12S'feet,
ph.1s~a 20-fc'clt. \I.Iide con~;t.r1x;t.ion corTidc,r, :permanent.ly inJ1=lBc:t.ing 3.0 ac:r-es of ~
streambed and temporarily impacting an additional 1.1 acres of stream, in Chula
Vi:>t,a.
3. The agreed work includes activities associated with No.2 above. The project
area IS locat.ed in the Ot8Y River in ~n Die<;Jo Ccn.mt.y. Specific 'Wor.k areas and
mi tigation measures are described on/ in the plams: and documents submi tted by the
O}:erat.or., including "Ot.ay Valley Rc,od Widening Concept.ual Rest.orat.ion PlanH,
prepared by Pacific Sout.h'West. Biological Services, Inc., dated February 8, 1990, and
shall 1:~ implement.ed a~; pro}:lOsed unless dir.ect.ed different.ly by t.his agreement..
4. The Qperat.or shall mit.igate t.he 1.1 acres of tjemporary impacts and the 3.0 acres
clf }:~rmanent. impact.e; by c;reat.ing 1.1 acre::; c1n-sit.e and 6.0 acre~; off-sit.e of
riparian habitat.
5. The off-sit.e mitigation shall be installed concurrent ",ith or preceding the
roaq'Way 'Widenlng project, const.ruct.iOfJ.
6. The Operat,or shall have a qualified biologist onsit.e daily during flagging of
const,rt1ct.iclrJ area, and dur.ing any impacts t.o veget.at.ion 'eg. clearing and grubbing)
to ensure no impact,s occur to the adjacent vireo habi t,at..
I. 8i 1 t. set.t.l ing basins shall 1:~ loc:at.ed 8'Way,., fr'om t.he ~;tr-eaUJ clr lake' t.o }:JT.event.
di5colored, silt-bearing water from reaching the stream during any flo~ regime.
6. The Operat.c'r 5hall have a qualified biologist.-on sit.e t.'Wice weekly froDJ ~1arch 1
to September 1 to survey for least Bellts vireo and ",illo", flycatcher. If an active
nest. is 'Wit.hin 60 Db ,nclise t.hreshold) at.. any t.ime, no 'Wor'y, shall clcc:ur unt.il t.he
young are fledged.
9. The Operator shall not, remove veget.at.ion ~it.hln the st.ream from t1arch 15 to July
15 t.o avoid impact.s t.o ot.her nest,ing blT"cb.
10. Disturbatlce or removal of vegetat.lon shall not. exceed t.he limit.s described in
t.he in t.his a~lT"eement.. The di::;t,urbed ,pc)r.t.iclns of any st,r'eam c:hannel 'Wit,hln t,he high
IIldter mark of t.he stream or lake shall be rest.ored to t.heir Ql~iginal condition.
11. Rest.orat.ion shall lnclude t.he reveget.at.ic,n of st.r-ipped or exposed area::,,; \I.Iit.h
vegetation native to the area.
12. Structures/associated materials not designed to withstand high seasonal flows
shall be remclved t.o 8r-eBS above t,he rJi9h \I.Iat,er mark before flows occur.
Page 3 of ~
STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION NUMBER:
5-416-92
13. Equipment. shall not. be operat.ed In \I1et,t~ed area~; \ including but. not, limit.ed t.o
p)nded, flo~ing, or ~etland areas).
When ,,",ork in a flo,,",ing st.ream i~ unavclida:ble, t.he ent.ir'e st,ream flo,,", shall be
diverted around the ~ork area by a barrier, temporary culvert, ne~ channel, or other
means approved by the Depart.ment.. Locat.ion of the upst.r'eam and do'Wnstream diversion
points shall be approved by t.he Department. Corv3truction of the barrier, and/or the
ne,,", channel shall noruJally 'begin it"! t.re do,,",nst.ream ar-ea and continue in an up8t.r'eam
direction, and the flo~ shall be diverted only ~hen construction of the diversion is
completed. Channel 'bank or barrier cClnst,ruct.ion shed 1 'be adequat.e to prevent.
seepage into or from the ",ark area.. Channel bank5. or ba.rrien:.~ sh.a11 not be made of
eart,h or ot.her' substances subject, to erosion unless first. enclosed by sheet pilin9,
rOCK riprap, or other protective material. The enclosure and the supportive
mater'ial shall l::~ removed when t.he ""clrk i5 cCllIJple.t.e.d and removal 5haIl nClr'mally
proceed from dOlJlnstream in an upstream direction.
811 t. set,t.1 in<;1 1:::iBsin~; shed 1 l:e locat.ed o'Way from t.he st,r-eam or laJ.\e too prevent.
discolored, silt-bearing water from reaching the st,ream or lake dlJ.ring any flo....
re91IlI~.
If silt. cat,chment basin/s is/are used, t.he basin/s shall be construc:::ted across the
st.ream iIflUJediat.ely dOwTJst.reaw clf t.he pr-ojec:t, slt.e. Cat,CrlIfJent, basins ~J-Iall l::~
construc:ted of materials ....hich are free from mud and silt. Upon-' completion of the
proje.ct., all 1:::iBsin mat.erials alon9 'Wit.h tor'le tor-ap,r::ed sediment.s: shall be renjClved fr-om
t.h~ stream in such a manner that said removal 5ha11 not introduced sediment to the
st.r"eam .
14. Preparation shall be made so that runoff from steep, erodible surfaces ....ill be
di vert.ed int,o st,able ar'eas wi t.h 1 i t.t,le er'oslon }')c)t.ent.lal. Fr-equent, wat.er- checKs
shall be placed on dirt roads, cat tracks, or' "<9ther ....ork trails t.o control ero:=:lon.
15. Wat.er cont.ainin9 mud, silt, clr ot.her pollut,ant.~; frcmJ aggregat.e washing or ot.her
activities shall not. be allowed to enter a lake or flo\tling st.t~eam or placed in
locat,ions t.hat. may be subjec:t.ed t,o hi9h ~t.C1rm f10'Ws,
16. The Operator $hall use tem~~rary construction fencing/flagging to identify the
agreed limit.~; of dist.urbance 'Wit-hin t.he st.reamr
17. In order to determine if the revegetat,ion techniques used have been successful
any plant, 5f:~cie5 r-equir-ed t.ha.t. are list.ed l:~lcl'W shall achieve t.he minimum gro'Wth at.
the end of three and five years. I f the minim1.Jffi growth is not achieved then the
Of-~rat.or' ~;hall be re5pC1n~;ible for t,aKln9 t,he appropriat,e c:or-rec:t.ive measures a~;
determined by Department. representative5. The Operator shall be 1~espon5ible f01- any
co~;t. occurred dur i ng t.he reveget.a t, i on or in subsequent. correct. i ve mea ~.ure5 .
Plant.ing cent.ers shall 'be: between 6 to 10 feet. for l,oi'il10....s; r.;et'.lleen 20 to 25 feet,
for sycaIfjore~;.
10.
t,he
All planting shall be done
'Wint.er rainy season, or' t,he
rJet~een October 1 and April 30 to
Oper-at.or shall irr i9at.e t.o ensure
take advantage of
5l~rvival.
. ..
Page ~ of 5
STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION NUMBER:
5-416-92
19. All plant.ing shall have a minimulII clf 80% :=:;urvival t.he first. year and 100%
survival thereafter and/or shall attain 75% cover after 3 years and 90% cover after
5 year-e; for t.he 1 i fe of t.he project. I f the 8\..U"'V i va 1 and ce,ver' requi r'ement.s have
not been met, the Operator is responsible for replacement planting to achieve these
requirement.s. Replacement. plant.s shall be mC1nit.ctred 'With t.r.e same survival and
gro~th requirements for 5 years after planting.
20. An annual report. shall 'be submit.t,ed t.o t.he Depart.ment. by Jan. 1 clf each year-
for 5 years after planting. This report shall include the survival, % cover, and
height, of bot.h t,ree and shrub species. The muuber by species of plant,s replaced, an
overview c)f the revegetation effort., and the met.hod 1.l5ed t.o assess these paramet.ers
shall 81$0 'be inc:l'udecl. P)-JOt.os fr'clm designat,ed phot.o stat.ic'os shall be inc:luded.
21. Ra~ cement/concrete or ~ashing" the,-eof, asphal t, paint 0" other coating
mat.erial, oi lor' ot.her }:t€:t.role\'UfJ prc,duc:t.e., Clr any ot.her e.ubst.anc:es vhich could 1:~
hazardm..\$: t.o aquatic life, resulting fl~Om. project rela.ted activitie6, shall be
prevent.ed frciUl c:ont.Elminat.ing t.he ::.oi I and/or ent,ering t.he vat.ers clf t.he st,at.e. Any
of these materials, placed within or where they may enter a stream or lake, by
Oper'at.or or Bny par-t.y 'Working under c:ont.raet., or \o.Ii.t.h t.he :permi::.sic,n clf t,he
Operator, $hall be remov~d immediately.
22. Staging/st.orage areas fC'T equipment. and mater'ial::: shall 1:::te loc:at.ed clut.side ()f
the st'I~eaff1.
23. The Operator shall submit copies of the bonds for ,the amount of complete
r'estorat,ion t.o t.he Depar.t.nrent. pric'T" t.o init,iat.icln clf cClnstruction act.ivit,ies.
24. A lNildlife conservation easement shall be recorded on the property to protect
exi::.t.ing fish and 'Wildlife r'esourc:es in per}:~tuit.y. The ea::.eUJent. shall 1:~ in favor
of the Department or it,s designated agent and ..shall be recorded lNithiri one year of
signing t.hie; agreement.. An clffer' of dedic:at.ion shall be made 'Wit,hin 90 day~; of
signing t,his agreement.. The form and content of the easement shall be approved by
t.he Depart,ment.'s legal advisor::. pr'ior t.o it,::; execut.ion. The legal advisor'5 can tiC:
contacted at (916, 654-3821.
25. No debris, soil, silt, sand, bark, slash, saW'dust, rubbish, cement or concret.e
or 'WB5hing::- t,hereof, cli 1 or I:~t.role\.~UI produc:t.3 or ot,her' clrganic: or eart.hen mat.erial
from any logging, construction, or aS50ciated activity of ",hatever natlJre shall be
allo'Wed t.o ent.er int.cl or' plac:ed \o.Iher'e it. may 'be 'WElshed by rainfall or r'unoff int.o,
!Jaters of the Stat,e. When opero'ations are completed, 03.ny excess mat.erials or debris
~3hall be removed from t,he \o.Iork area. No rubc.Il::.h Bhall (~ depc'51t.ed 'Wit.hin 1:10 feet.
of the high ",ater mark of any stream or lake.
26. The Ol:~r'at.or' shall comply 'Wlt.h all lit.t.er and pollut.ion 10.\0.15. All c:ont.ract.or!::'1
subcontractors and employeee;: shall also obey these laws and it shall r-Je the
r'et:,pone.ibilit.y of t.he operat.oT' t,o en::.ure compliance.
27. No equipment maint,enance shall be done lNit,hin or near any stream channel or
lake marglrt 'INhere pet.rclletIDJ pr'ciC~\.~c:t,5 or ot.h~r :poll ut,;:mt,::. froIIl t.he equipment. may
ent.er t.hese al'eas under any floW'.
".'
Page ~ of ~
STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION NUMBER: 5-416-92
28.. The O}:terat.or shall provide 8 copy of this Agreement, to all contractor-s,
subcontractors, and project supervisors. Copies of the Agreement shall be readily
available at work sit.es ~t ell times during periods of act.ive ,",ork crnd JlJU~t. 'be
presented to any Department personnel, or personnel from another agency upon demand.
29, The Oper-at,or shall JK1t,ify t.rse: Depart.ment., in wr'it.ing, at least. Jive (5) days
prior to initiation of construction (project) activities and at least five (5) days
prior to completion of construction (project) activit.ies. Not.ificat.ion shall be
sent to the Department at 330 Golden Shore, Ste 50, Long Beach, CA 90802, Attn: ES.
30. The Depart.ment. reser-ve8 t.he r-ight. t.o s\.1spend andlclf"" revoke t.hi s Agr'eement. if
the Department determines that the circumstances warrant. The circumstance5 that
could r"equir-e a reevaluat,lc'n include, but. ar'e not limit.ed t.o, the fClllowing:
6. Failure to comply ~ith the terms/conditions of this Agreement.
b. The informat.ion provided by t.he OJ:~rat,c'r in support. of t.J-Je
Notification is determined by the Department to be incomplete, or inaccurate.
c:. When ne'W inforroatic)n l:~cclffJee. avai lable t.o t.he De}:lCIrt.JIJent.
represent.ative{s) that ....,as not kno\tln ....,hen pI~eparing the original
t,errus/condit.ioTle. of t.his Agreement..
d. The project as described in the Not.ification/Agreement has
changed, or' condit.ions affect,ing fi~:h and \IIlldllfe r'eE;OUrce~; change.
CONCURRENCE
{Operatorls name)
California Dept. ?f Fish and Game
~. ,
U >>;j;(~ :J--JJ-i3
{si;r ture) {dat.e)
i~~~E!~~~~___~1~L'B_
{5ignat.ure) (date)
Department of Fish and Game
330 Golden Shore Ste. 50
Long Beach, Calif. 90802
THE RESOURCES AGENCY
Attn: Joe Monaco
John Goss
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
,~3T
. ib'J- 'if
@",rr; ,~ '"
'V 'Z' ~
, ff DEe 1993 ;
':"I "- Receiv d ...
; N WJ"lInunity D e Q:)
, - De evel"Pnlfnt <0
" '" PirtJnent ,..
10.... I:)
~!!:\ ~
0<, 1."
.!?.r / r'l.
-- ....19LS~'t1\.u
December 20, 1993
Dear Mr. Goss:
We have reviewed your request to amend and extend our Agreement 5-416-92 for
the Otav River, in San Dieao, County.
Pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq. this letter, when
countersigned by you, amends our agreement as follows.
a. Phase 1 and Phase 2, with 1.1 acres of temporary impacts to the stream and
3.0 acres of permanent impacts to the stream are addressed in the original .,y~
Agreement. Phase 3 shall also be included under this amendment. Phase 1, 2 ,~~L-rv
and 3b are for Otay Valley Road widening and upgrades and are to be completed(' I ~1')
by the City of Chula Vista. Phase 3a is for the Otay Valley Road Bridge ~ zB ~~
)[ 6e'~ replacement and is to be completed by the County of San Diego.
b. Phase 3 impacts an additional 0.31 acres of stream temporarily and 0.39
acres of stream permanently. An additional approximate 0.2 acres of stream is
the location of the destroyed bridge and future replacement bridge.
c. Specific work areas and mitigation measures are described on/in the plans
and documents submitted by the Operator, including '''Biological Assessment for
Endangered Species on the Otay Valley Road Widening Project", prepared by
Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc., dated September 27, 1993, and
shall be implemented as proposed unless directed differently by this
Agreement.
d. The City of Chula Vista shall replace all temporary impacts with 1.41
acres high-quality habitat on-site.
e. The City of Chula Vista shall mitigate the permanent impacts of 3.39 acres
(3.09 acres vireo habitat and 0.3 acres marsh) by the creation, restoration
and enhancement of 12.36 acres of vireo-quality habitat and 0.3 acres of
marsh, on a site along the Otay River, in general proximity to the impact
area, on parcels owned by, and being acquired by, the City of Chula Vista.
The site is currently degraded upland habitat.
f. All mitigation shall be installed by April 30, 1995.
g. The wetland creation, restoration and enhancement shall be implemented as
described in the Federal Biological Opinion Least Bell's Vireo Mitigation
Measures, dated November 4, 1993.
h. All terms and conditions under the Federal Biological Opinion by the Fish
and Wildlife Service, dated November 4, 1993, shall be enforceable by the
Department under this Agreement. However, the conditions of the Federal
Biological Opinion shall not supersede this Agreement and amendment.
i. The City of Chula Vista accepts all responsibilities and liabilities for
all Phases of this project - 1, 2, 3a and 3b, including: all mitigation;
compliance with all the conditions of Agreement 5-416-92; and compliance with
all the conditions of this amendment.
Page 1 of 3
j. The County of San Diego, who is constructing Phase 3a for the City of
Chula Vista, shall be provided a copy of this Agreement and amendment. The
City shall ensure that the County complies with all terms and conditions of
this Agreement and ~endment. copies of the Agreement and amendment shall be
readily available at work sites at all times during periods of active work and
must be presented to any Department personnel, or personnel from another
agency upon demand.
k. All project engineers, project inspectors, and contractors and sub-
contractors shall be provided with a copy of this Agreement and amendment, and
shall abide by the terms and conditions of this Agreement and amendment.
1. If the Operator or any of the individuals mentioned above violatp. any of
the terms or conditions of this Agreement and amendment, all work shall
terminate immediately and shall not proceed until the Department has taken all
of its legal actions.
m. It is understood that Phase 3a (the County's bridge) may commence prior to
the issuance of the Endangered Species Management Take Permit, since no take
of vireos/vireo habitat shall occur with this Phase of the project. No other
Phases shall begin until the Endangered Species Management Take Permit has
been issued.
It is also understood that Phase 1 (the City's road widening and upgrades from
the 80S freeway to the transition just past Nirvana Road) is in progress under
Agreement 5-416-92, and may continue, provided The Operator complies with all
conditions of the Agreement and this amendment.
n. No construction activity (except for fine grading with a D4 grader,
backhoe, and/or skiploader; utilities placement; roadway surfacing; placement
of drain boxes; curbs and gutters; fencing; guardrails; striping; lighting;
landscaping; and irrigation) shall occur within 750 feet of an occupied least
Bell's vireo nest. Those excepted activities listed above, or other
activities approved in writinq by the Department, may occur within proximity
to occupied habitats provided they are limited to daylight working hours after
11:00 AM.
o. Monitoring by a qualified biologist approved by the Department shall be
done during the construction period to ensure compliance with the above
conditions. Regular monitoring of vireos shall be conducted as a part of the
work. Should behavioral patterns of identified vireo pairs (monitored a
minimum of three times per week) exhibit stress or reactions to the project's
work, work believed to be causing behavioral changes shall cease immediately
and further timing restrictions and/or work restrictions shall be coordinated
with the Department prior to resuming work.
p. The mitigation site of 12.66 acres (both restoration and enhancement
areas) shall be protected for fish and wildlife use in perpetuity. A wildlife
conservation easement shall be recorded on the property, as described in 5-
416-92. Any actions contrary to the purpose of the site shall be subject to
DFG approval.
q. No native vegetation shall be cleared, grubbed, or otherwise impacted from
February 1 to September 1. Any non-native vegetation to be cleared, grubbed,
or otherwise impacted from February 1 to September 1 shall be surveyed prior
to impacts by a qualified biologist for nesting birds. The biologist shall
submit all field notes to the Department prior to impacts. If any nesting
birds are found, no work shall occur.
r. A cowbird trapping program shall be conducted within the subject reach of
the river valley for a period of 5 years as a part of the on-going mitigation
site establishment maintenance. The trapping program shall run from April
through July and shall include the maintenance and use of no fewer than eight
traps.
Page 2 of 3
.
s. The Operator may remove silt and debris from the culverts once annually
for maintenance between September 15 and October 15. No impacts to the on-
site mitigation areas shall occur.
t. Permanent fencing shall be placed along the roadway (in the road buffer
zone which is to be seeded with native species, but that is not considered
part of the mitigation site, and outside all mitigation areas) after
construction is completed, in order to protect the roadside habitat from
future impacts from foot traffic, vehicular traffic and trash dumping.
u. NO weed abatement, road maintenance or other activities shall take place
within the stream and/or within native habitat, unless such an activity is
first approved by the Department.
v. The Department requires notification equivalent to that provided to the
USFWS, including timely notice of noncompliance, take, and other periodic
reports. The Department contact person shall be Mr. Curt Taucher,
Environmental Services Supervisor, Department of Fish and Game, 330 Golden
Shore, Ste 50, Long Beach, California 90802.
w. A performance bond for project implementation (eg. habitat enhancement,
revegetation, maintenance and monitoring) that specifically references this
agreement, shall be submitted to the Department for approval prior to
initiation of construction activities for Phases 2 and 3b. The performance
bond surety shall be an "admitted" carrier and all transactions shall be
governed by the Bond and Undertaking Law (CCP SS995.010 -996.510). The
performance bond shall stipulate that in the event of a default, the
Department shall be entitled to relief in the form of cash only. Should any
legal action be necessary to enforce or interpret the terms of the performance
bond, the Department, as a prevailing party, shall be entitled to collect
reasonable attorney's fees from the losing party. The performance bond may be
subject to partial reduction upon completion and acceptance of certain work by
the Department.
This amount shall be based on a cost estimate which shall be submitted to the
Department for approval within 30 days of signing this amendment.
This letter also extends the period during
authorized by the agreement may continue.
agreement is Anril 30. 1995.
Be advised that all terms of Agreement 5-416-92 remain in force throughout the
new term of the agreement. A copy of said agreement AND THIS AMENDMENT AND
EXTENSION LETTER must be kept on site and be shown upon request to Department
personnel during all periods of work.
which activities otherwise
The new termination date of the
Two copies of this letter are being sent to you. PLEASE RETURN ONE SIGNED
ORIGINAL to the Department of Fish and Game, at 330 Golden Shore, Suite 50,
Long Beach, CA 90802.
If you have further questions, please contact me at (714) 363-7538.
CONCURRENCE:
;(=y~
Terri Dickerson
,? Environmental Specialist III
i ,:~f)J-
" I
~~D. Goss, City Manager
(2-21-)J
DATE.
Page 3 of 3
Department of Fish and Game
330 Golden Shore Ste. 50
Long Beach, Calif. 90802
THE RESOURCES AGENCY
Attn: Joe Monaco
John Goss
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
November 16, 1994
Dear Mr. GOBS:
We have reviewed your request to amend and extend our Agreement 5-416-92 for the
Otav River, in San Dieqo, County.
Pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq. this letter, when countersigned
by you, amends our Agreement, executed March 3, 1993 and an amendment to the
Agreement, executed December 21, 1993 as follows.
a. Phase 1 and Phase 2, with 1.1 acres of temporary impacts to the stream and 3.0
acres of permanent impacts to the stream are addressed in the original Agreement.
Phase 3 shall also be included under this amendment. Phase 1, 2 and 3b are for Otay
Valley Road widening and upgrades and are to be completed by the City of Chula
Vista. Phase 3a is for the Otay Valley Road Bridge (28' x 82') replacement and is
to be completed by the ~ounty of San Diego.
b. Phase 3 impacts an additional 0.31 acres of stream temporarily and 0.39 acres of
stream permanently. An additional approximate 0.2 acres of stream is the location
of the destroyed bridge and future replacement bridge.
c. Specific work areas and mitigation measures are d~scribed on/in the plans and
documents submitted by the Operator, including "Biological Assessment for Endangered
Species on the Otay Valley Road Widening Project", prepared by Pacific Southwest
Biological Services, Inc., dated September 27, 1993, and shall be implemented as
proposed unless directed differently by this Agreement.
d. The City of Chula Vista shall replace all temporary impacts with 1.41 acres
high-quality habitat on-site.
-----
e. The City of Chula Vista shall mitigate the permanent impacts of 3.39 acres (3.09
acres vireo habitat and 0.3 acres marsh) by the creation, restoration and
enhancement of 12.36 acres of vireo-quality habitat and 0.3 acres of marsh, on a
site along the Otay River, in general proximity to the impact area, on parcels owned
by, and being acquired by, the City of Chula Vista. The site is currently degraded
upland habitat.
f. All mitigation shall be installed no later than November 30, 1995.
g. The wetland creation, restoration and enhancement shall be implemented as
described in the Federal Biological Opinion Least Bell's Vireo Mitigation Measures,
dated November 4, 1993.
h. All terms and conditions under the Federal Biological Opinion by the Fish and
Wildlife Service, dated November 4, 1993, shall be enforceable by the Department
under this Agreement. However, the conditions of the Federal Biological Opinion
shall not supersede this Agreement and amendment.
i. The City of Chula Vista accepts all responsibilities and liabilities for all
Phases of this yroject - 1, 2, 3a and 3b, including: all mitigation; compliance
with all the conditions of Agreement 5-416-92; and compliance with all the
conditions of this amendment.
Page 1 of 3
.-
j. The County of San Diego, who is constructing Phase 3a for the City of Chula
Vista, shall be provided a copy of this Agreement and amendment. The City shall
ensure that the County complies with all terms and conditions of this Agreement and
amendment. Copies of the Agreement and amendment shall be readily available at work
sites at all times during periods of active work and must be presented to any
Department personnel, or personnel from another agency upon demand.
k. All project engineers, project inspectors, and contractors and sub-contractors
shall be provided with a copy of this Agreement and amendment, and shall abide by
the terms and conditions of this Agreement and amendment.
1. If the Operator or any of the individuals mentioned above violate any of the
terms or conditions of this Agreement and amendment, all work shall terminate
immediately and shall not proceed until the Department has taken all of its legal
actions.
m. It is understood that Phase 3a (the County's bridge) may commence prior to the
issuance of the Endangered Species Management Take Permit, since no take of
vireos/vireo habitat shall occur with this Phase of the project. No other Phases
shall begin until the Endangered Species Management Take Permit has been issued.
It is also understood that Phase 1 (the City's road widening and upgrades from the
805 freeway to the transition just past Nirvana Road) is in progress under Agreement
5-416-92, and may continue, provided The Operator complies with all conditions of
the Agreement and this amendment.
n. No construction activity (except for fine grading with a D4 grader, backhoe,
and/or skiploader; utilities placement; roadway surfacing; placement of drain boxes;
curbs and gutters; fencing; guardrails; striping; lighting; landscaping; and
irrigation) shall occur within 750 feet of an occupied least Bell's vireo nest.
Those excepted activities listed above, or other activities approved in writinq by
the Department, may occur within proximity to occupied habitats provided they are
limited to daylight working hours after 11:00 AM.
o. Monitoring by a qualified biologist approved by the Department shall be done
during the construction period to ensure compliance with the above conditions.
Regular monitoring of vireos shall be conducted as a part of the work. Should
behavioral patterns of identified vireo pairs (monitored a minimum of three times
per week) exhibit stress or reactions to the project's work, work believed to be
causing behavioral changes shall cease immediately and further timing restrictions
and/or work restrictions shall be coordinated with the Department pr~or to resuming
work.
p. The mitigation site of 12.66 acres (both restoration and enhancement areas)
shall be protected for fish and wildlife use in perpetuity. A wildlife conservation
easement shall be recorded on the property, as described in 5-416-92. Any actions
contrary to the purpose of the site shall be subject to DFG approval.
q. No native vegetation shall be cleared, grubbed, or otherwise impacted from
February 1 to September 1. Any non-native vegetation to be cleared, grubbed, or
otherwise impacted from February 1 to September 1 shall be surveyed prior to impacts
by a qualified biologist for nesting birds. The biologist shall submit all field
notes to the Department prior to impacts. If any nesting birds are found, no work
shall occur.
r. A cowbird trapping program shall be conducted within the subject reach of the
river valley for a period of 5 years as a part of the on-going mitigation site
establishment maintenance. The trapping program shall run from April through July
and shall include the maintenance and use of no fewer than eight traps.
s. The Operator may remove silt and debris from the culverts once annually for
maintenance between September 15 and October 15. No impacts to the on-site
mitigation areas shall occur.
Page 2 of 3
.
.
.
t. Permanent fencing shall be placed along the roadway (in the road buffer zone
which is to be seeded with native species, but that is not considered part of the
mitigation site, and outside all mitigation areas) after construction is completed,
in order to protect the roadside habitat from future impacts from foot traffic,
vehicular traffic and trash dumping.
U. No weed abatement, road maintenance or other activities shall take place within
the stream and/or within native habitat, unless such an activity is first approved
by the Department.
v. The Department requires notification equivalent to that provided to the USFWS,
including timely notice of noncompliance, take, and other periodic reports. The
Department contact person shall be Mr. Curt Taucher, Environmental Services
Supervisor, Department of Fish and Game, 330 Golden Shore, Ste 50, Long Beach,
California 90802.
w. A performance bond or letter of credit for project implementation (eg. habitat
enhancement, revegetation, maintenance and monitoring) that specifically references
this agreement and provided as part of the CESA MOU, shall be submitted to the
Department for approval prior to initiation of construction activities for Phases 2
and 3b. The performance bond surety shall be an "admitted" carrier and all
transactions shall be governed by the Bond and Undertaking Law (CCP ~~995.010 _
996.510). The performance bond shall stipulate that in the event of a default, the
Department shall be entitled to relief in the form of cash only. Should any legal
action be necessary to enforce or interpret the terms of the performance bond, the
Department, as a prevailing party, shall be entitled to collect reasonable
attorney's fees from the losing party. The performance bond may be subject to
partial reduction upon completion and acceptance of certain work by the Department.
This amount shall be based on a cost estimate which shall be submitted to the
Department for approval within 30 days of signing this amendment.
x. A wildlife conservation easement shall be recorded on the property to protect
existing fish and wildlife resources in perpetuity. The easement shall be in favor
of the Department or its designated agent and shall be recorded within one year of
signing this agreement. An offer of dedication shall. be made no later than November
30, 1995. The form and content of the easement shall be approved by the
Department's Environmental Services Headquarters prior to its execution. They can
be contacted at (916) 653-4875.
This letter also extends the
the agreement may continue.
30. 1995.
period during which activities otherwis~ authorized by
The new termination date of the agreement is November
Be advised that all terms of Agreement 5-416-92 remain in force throughout the new
term of the agreement. A copy of said agreement AND THIS AMENDMENT AND EXTENSION
LETTER must be kept on site and be shown upon request to Department personnel during
all periods of work.
Two copies of this letter are being sent to you. PLEASE RETURN ONE SIGNED ORIGINAL
to the Department of Fish and Game, at 330 Golden Shore, Suite 50, Long Beach, CA
90802.
If you have further questions, please contact me at (714) 363-7538.
CONCURRENCE:
~=~
Terri Dickerson
Environmental Specialist III
~
DATE)(. 2. 1- ~'lr
Page 3 of 3
--...-
II- ."
Department of Fish and Game
330 Golden Shore Ste. 50
Long Beach, Calif. 90802
THE RESOURCES AGENCY
Attn: Joe Monaco
John Goss
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
DEC I 5 f995
December 13, 1995
Dear Mr. Goss:
We have reviewed your request to amend and extend our Agreement 5-416-92 for the
Otav River, in San Dieqo, County.
This amendment and extension is not valid until the fee of $595.50 is received by
the Department.
As previously described:
Phase 1 and Phase 2, with 1.1 acres of temporary impacts to the stream and 3.0 acres
of permanent impacts to the stream are addressed in the original Agreement. Phase 3
was included under a previous amendment. Phase 1, 2 and 3b are for Otay Valley Road
widening and upgrades and are to be completed by the City of Chula Vista. Phase 3a
is for the Otay Valley Road Bridge (28' x 82') replacement and is to be completed by
the County of San Diego.
Phase 3 impacts an additional 0.31 acres of stream temporarily and 0.39 acres of
stream permanently. An additional approximate 0.2 acres of stream is the location
of the destroyed bridge and future replacement bridge.
The City of Chula Vista shall replace all temporary impacts with 1.41 acres high-
quality habitat on-site.
Pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq. this letter, when countersigned
by you, amends our Agreement, executed March 3, 1993 and an amendment to the
Agreement, executed December 21, 1993, and an amendment executed November 16, 1994,
as follows.
c. Specific work areas and mitigation measures are described on/in the plans and
documents submitted by the Operator, including IIBiological Assessment for Endangered
Species on the Otay Valley Road Widening Project", prepared by Pacific Southwest
Biological Services, Inc., dated September 27, 1993, and shall be implemented as
proposed unless directed differently by this Agreement.
It is possible that one portion of the proposed mitigation, a 6.46 acre site, will
be relocated to another site. Any such revisions to the mitigation plan shall be
submitted for Department review and approval no later than May 31, 1996.
e. The City of Chula Vista shall mitigate the permanent impacts of 3.39 acres (3.09
acres vireo habitat and 0.3 acres marsh) by the creation, restoration and
enhancement of 12.36 acres of vireo-quality habitat and 0.3 acres of marsh, on a
site{s) along the Otay River, in general proximity to the impact area, on parcels
owned by, and being acquired by, the City of Chula Vista. The site{s) are currently
degraded wetland and upland habitats.
f. All mitigation shall be installed no later than February 28, 1997.
Page I of 2
,-- "
.
.
x. A wildlife conservation easement shall be recorded on the property to protect
existing fish and wildlife resources in perpetuity. The easement shall be in favor
of the Department or its designated agent and shall be recorded within one year of
signing this agreement. An offer of dedication shall be made no later than November
30, 1996. The form and content of the easement shall be approved by the
Department's Environmental Services Headquarters prior to its execution. They can
be contacted at (916) 653-4875.
y. The Operator may remove three mounds of soil blocking three culverts to cut a
trench and improve drainage, impacting an additional: 250 ft2 of stream (mulefat
scrub); 150 ft' baccharis scrub; and another 150 ft' of unvegetated stream
(roadway). The contours shall be gently sloping (approximately 3':1) and it shall be
designed so as not to create future erosion problems. The Operator shall not remove
any vegetation from February 1 to September 1. The Operator shall mitigate as
described in the letter from Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc., dated
November 22, 1995, and shall revegetate the first two locations with the wetland
hydroseed mix described.
As stated previously:
i. The City of Chula Vista accepts all responsibilities and liabilities for all
Phases of this project - I, 2, 3a and 3b, including: all mitigation; compliance
with all the conditions of Agreement 5-416-92; and compliance with all the
conditions of this amendment.
j. The County of San Diego, who is constructing Phase 3a for the City of Chula
Vista, shall be provided a copy of this Agreement and amendment. The City shall
ensure that the County complies with all te~s and conditions of this Agreement and
amendment. Copies of the Agreement and amendment shall be readily available at work
sites at all times during periods of active work and must be presented to any
Department personnel, or personnel from another agency upon demand.
k. All project engineers, project inspectors, and contractors and sub-contractors
shall be provided with a copy of this Agreement and amendment, and shall abide by
the terms and conditions of this Agreement and amendment.
p. The mitigation site of 12.66 acres (both restoration and enhancement areas)
shall be protected for fish and wildlife use in perpetuity. A wildlife conservation
easement shall be recorded on the property, as described in 5-41~-92. Any actions
contrary to the purpose of the site shall be subject to DFG approval.
This letter also extends the
the agreement may continue.
30, 1996.
period during which activities otherwise authorized by
The new termination date of the agreement is November
Be advised that all terms of Agreement 5-416-92, and all terms of previous
amendments, remain in force throughout the new term of the agreement. A copy of
said agreement AND THIS AMENDMENT AND EXTENSION LETTER must be kept on site and be
shown upon request to Department personnel during all periods of work.
TwO copies of this letter are being sent to you. PLEASE RETURN ONE SIGNED ORIGINAL
to the Department of Fish and Game, at 330 Golden Shore, Suite 50, Long Beach, CA
90802.
If you have further questions, please contact me at (714) 363-7538.
CONCURRENCE:
)Sin:~, .
,/1;A,'v.-, U'-<:~
Terri Dickerson
Environmental Specialist III
"
DATE:J/3/q6
, ,
Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT B
Wetland Mitiqation Parcel
ORDER NO. 1048023-7
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL 1:
THAT PORTION OF LOT 2 OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 18 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST,
SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 2, 165 FEET WEST OF THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT; THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF
SAID LOT, 660 FEET; THENCE AT RIGHT ANGLES NORTH 660 FEET; THENCE AT
RIGHT ANGLES EAST 660 FEET TO A POINT 165 FEET WEST OF THE EAST LINE
OF LOT 2; THENCE SOUTH 660 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING
10 ACRES.
PARCEL 2:
AN EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF WAY FOR ROAD PURPOSES OVER, UNDER, ALONG AND
ACROSS" THAT PORTION OF LOT 2 IN SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 18 SOUTH, RANGE
1 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT "THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ABOVE DESCRIBED 10 ACRE TRACT;
THENCE NORTH ON A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 165 FEET WEST OF THE EAST
LINE OF SAID LOT 2 TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT; THENCE WEST ALONG
THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 2, 10 FEET; THENCE AT RIGHT ANGLES SOUTH
AND PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 2, TO THE NORTH LINE OF
SAID 10 ACRE TRACT; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID 10 ACRE
TRACT, 10 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PAGE 5
"
s.
'0\
-A.
-:Y
~
'A
c='
'.
.
ii i;i ~ ~
~. . ~. :
~~ ~~ ~
.: ~~ ~
~ a~ ~
j1!iIi ~
i ~~:
; ~u
;;; Q~ ~
~ ;~ I
~ !
'~f;\.'-:::~'~::'4,Tt~~ ~,'~'
~--------------------------------i
' \
I \
I Z . ,___,
, I
' ,
I ,
I L_--l
I ,
' ,
I ~~ I
I ,i ! T
I VIOl \ I
i !~ uu_u_nJ t
! ~~ \uu_u n : 1-
I VI \ ~:; I I:f
' \ lilt, I g
f-----------------~~\-------:!--,-lj
~~ i, t~
~~ ' !
I, ! Ii ~
>_______;;,__'_m, , I' II
I II -- · ..,"-~ .' ;;
~;I i~ ~ g f ~5
~~I ~ ~ ~ ~~
"i . =~___ - -====ui' ~ ~
;>. -. 00'00'00--[ '.1.21 HL.~'"
h'1. APN 844-0......-.....
. ~d! WAlKER SCOTT
r
o
(")
>
," :::I
~ ~
3:
>
"U
\
).,f, ilT.
, :J' ~ ~.
.J'"' I:"
'1"( t: ';
j :~, .
ill (
.{,; I
i"- I
i'. r
..: ~' ~. . I
j ,-..,
i i~ I'
) :~ t
".J
,~ I
<>~;t ,
~ ~, ,.
;I~ >: } it' '
r ii' I ')
-" ( , t
~:~ 1./ r
O~~. I, )
~,. 0 ' ,
d"'; r:
;'J~lt \ :
\0 il-, i, I
j1!~ t :
\ !,', 1
)
-----I---~--
------
I ./. II
"
;? .
-----"71---
-------
-----;,-~--!~--
.' j,i
I il
/.' .I i ;.:
n / )
------...,
I :
I
1
1
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
,
I
I
,
I
,
.
,I I
\ \, J.
.\ \ I:i
, .,
I
. "
\'{
,,,
, ;.
, I
, '\1'.
. ' '{, '-.
r,: J"\".
\~',,-'
/"j,
, '"
,
,
,
,
,
,
\0/ ,i
~\:
.~ \ :
~ :
~ .,
. .. ''''''" ....\. '
\ , " " ,.. ~ ,
., ,(:"1" ,
i: i' \ :
H:, i' '" ,:
' '\ i' , '. \ '
.j'" "'I". .,
' ,.: " \ ;' ., \ "
J 1i i j
I Hi! , ( " ':
: ': I' "'-" 1'\
' I' , .. ., '.
f 1>, ., '
j " ,. I ,
", i' '.,
,,'\: I, \ \ c ~, .
'~~,\ \ I ii, '..,... . Ju_m_
: i \, · . . -c_ '" '.' ~ .-''''~.~''._m___mm____'--
,\- I . , _ _, . _ .. ,,. f- ___-'- ..."'___.,.__ '''~a -' _
' . ',- ~ .....-.- - - -:. ---~-\,.",-:-",~, -\ --- '] n' "'n.'", i1..~ ~ '
'~~- - .,.- - ,-... ------ ---,-,;-,i"''''.,.,';' ,,,~~,,,..,..,;: 'J/. I '\ ., t. .,,,' \. .. -,II. .
.,,;., ~---..--.---~--- (" . " . "i" I r \ ~,.q, ". ---.
r -- -~ ,;.\, . , .' I... .' ". .i . . ,v, _. "___
' , v.r'. '... '" t.... "".. "., '~ '&
' .,~,. n'~' - , "'" '"
'"'JJJ."V''' '" ',( !"""";_"_' ;1M
' I _. ...."-~ ,_ >~
..,~I , ,~ v ,}_,r' "' . )' '; I I ./ .., Z '"
./. .,. I , ,I , I"~ - ~"re
' !I
,
/
/
/
/
'f
0,)-,,1'
, C',
",,\
\
(-
~~
.
'-"\
"
-
)i /
~~( /.'
"
'0
.-\
0&
"
,
!
\
,L,
\
i
,
\
"
..
,
"
- -_.-\~ -
r-----------------------------~
I }~!~ iio i=- 1
I ~v; ~~ -4-411' z~ I
I ~i ~~ ~~E EE I
.. ~E :;;:;;; 00 I
...,~ ~~ 2102: ZZ I
I O~ .... -CD "V I
~ ~ IJI~ ~~ 0 I
!n '.,11>> C;~ ~ I
.. : ~~ ~~ ~ I
~ EE ;:; I I
~ Z I
I
I
I
CDi'" >00..,.1
-< ,:;- ~ U) ~~g I
ON ':D~ ",_t"I
-j -. O~ ::tH-V\
ffiVl~ Xn V'I:;VI
;01"'1", Sl!m -po
~~2I ~O ~,..,
~~ ~O ...rn
-j'''' 0'"
,-'" ?< o~
_%I -1%
~ ~~...
.- ..,
~ ~~
-< .-
~ :;;~
> -<~
o ~i
~t
-<
'"
-<
!
=
I
""'-
'3'"
h7
I-x
I
x
I
I
I
I
L________________________
a>
~>
N ....
.
------
;,. fr::-;---O,:-:7O= r-----=;---::----r.:--------~--;-----m-;:f--~--.-------,---n-------,------------------o-----___ j
~ r "\ /;; c.__. ,1:,\~'! ,; ,t, ~- V ·
; ! "'j m-. \.....:IJ!)i!.! ~'./<i '.'. - :f-
).'. ,\, ,_ - ,."'''':' '. f _1-
{J1 !; :~ i [( ~-.. ~. ,~;;:" , , , ., '.;' ,'l.;.~ ,""s.""'\.. '\..~,,:,., '" "" ",,'; '~
.... _ ) " i I XX~ ~~~~~);." ",.;.;.,);. 'f' ", . ." f; .'<I,M.O<'" , ,.,~, :::t ..>.":.,, ' f "~ '~~ ,
r-rN ~,f i:~.",:- "~,,,>,':y , , .... .: .,.. ,.., "....~....,
,~- .".):"1 ''''\..,.~. ~-.. "N (/, ~f~".!,',: ". ., . " ,,' ~.,,'-; J
-, ~ ,f. ~ .-t", f' " '\ .:l
~ . ..... I' i -0, (-'-~ ~ ,~~' ';"i'."<. ~.' ~~,:::."'..,.." '\' '..~t~;;:' 'r'. ",' , ,t ,~, ," t,' " "~ :
~ , ;" ..." ,"" o" _ l-f_.' , -i' ,,:r, , ',..' " J.. t , '
~\,r f ~:': ',~'{' ~.J~>~,:.<,::;~:' ,T," )0'~;~ \ &... "~~1~'-7' t t,' s,'~ 1
,,' '. i ~,' I .~ ", ''',i:'; t<~~\.f' '" , ' , ~,' . ." , 'I, ", ,., , 0". "'" :
". t. . ","" . '.~ '.i' ,,~',''''''' ~. l""~'
,{ .t!~ti ~ ,t;~ :;.~. < ,. --. ",' ~. '-x:..; ,";J ~ ~~ ~ ,~' ,-uJ
.....J,. '. :: [K:," ,J .' jj,l ," ". )<;-.." ~>i. .. l"!, , ", ... I'b'~ ~. ~ ~ .' ... ...'!.qIf','
'~:,1.} ! \ if'\: '~J" 't" . t..;,. ~-:;,F 'rJ" . '6J.'..' .." ~~.. ..,. J. ,.;:...;: i
~i.?~: 'i t "4-- 't' f!,I~, ,'~.- 'I t f t f f "'f +1+ ... J,
il,tf. i "....\ ,~\ :+o''' .( ,t~, -, ~A-..." .~~. t, . ,
'I t. ,i. '''' (<\ ", '",. '. ~:',t,.t )' ~ ~, ,.AI , '-' .' I'. ,:, ,,'
I I," ~ t.,'.I -'.'i' ~ ,_ 't " \ '{1 t '" , , ~
Ii l 'T' ".i:'t /.- "" 't' ," ,f'" ,.... t-. i " .... t:
"I" f' ! : ,lor;; , " f ~'7'. ,~'> "\" -., ,. +l ,....' ;~
_I:> ~ . I q t, t !"v_, F'f J ' r; "~.,.,'. ....t .f ~'I t ~
;Ii! ( i, . '.'. f O*'j+J. .r"'" #t..., ~.' ", ,'." V
'. : II ~ f.! .'" '.i:~ ! ' ~ ,.{" " ,,~~} 'If' ,'~ ~ ~-::. ., 1..1 I
lir~ i ~:!.~.,', '/,}-," .(':J~ '~I<,' :~J, - ~(:, ".~\i.1
a>
~> )
~ '-" . 'v'.\{.r A: \ ~':4 ' : I~ '.' J, ~~? ~. JI. '<=.:.l ! r J\I ~r: ~ I ;-:, :. I f~, '~~. .?f--,:." ;
-: ,\', .!., I' .i\:N';'~ +_, >.('. i ,', ' ""~ .1 ~'~I, ~" i" _. . tf, ~'\';.: " ---............ a
- . . ~ '. ',,~, Ii' '. ".'.,~ , 'CJ, ,
~ ",,',.1, .'p~~. , \1 ' ".,,' , '
~ . ~. ~;::'ij:;'" ,~ ' ...~: , ~t1<t:,j: J ~:4t~ .~~,~ ~~ 'f', !,' )~'~: '-+;: +: ~', 'i~~,:; t,.'~~.(~ ,J
.' ,'.1 " - ,,' 0" i'.' . -: ", 'i " ,." .. \' ;...' '-' , '
. :L1 i' ~ .' 1,'.Y.' :'" ' ,~~,.~
'j:~::\ ;\ f t r.. Lf . ~<~ (7\ f f~, f\ !~L,.;~lf~ ''f Y;t .~t"f
~.I ,( : " .. ..... ~ \ ~ ",J. . ~ t ~.' / t t 1+
J:: i' '~, ..... ,,- ". ",T",,/~ , '~ " - f' .
,~ :~ t ' ~~ \ ,r .~ '<....... ;:- "'~ 'C t ",.. ,. , ,1\,',. ':~.,.~". '... ~..... ,
,) ( t. ., r' ~ ,', , " .. , . ,," ~ " , ~ ,\t ~ ' , i(ii;.
'liJ :'}~, .~} ,~~:o:\ ;r':~1,J~}\~f' .1: I~,
,,'U " "~. _I+'''~, \, ,', . I.t:~ 'iii" ..
\1', " ,'I. ' :,~, r,. '~~ '- .,"'f ~l\ "8~D~ a> ~
. i: ~ · " . .. · _ .. .~ .~ -' :~.'t.~ ~ ~
~-~~--~--~---~~----------~;~i-----\~~+~:~~~--~ ~--------~-
I 1;",-'. " , , .... ~ '''_ ro ---~...' / . '1. ',~, , -----~------
~---n"'..".'_""'-----I---.....----:-.._-------------"'-- ~:.--- -~N7:--~---":'~-}.:.---~.,...---r~-- --~-~-~...~ .....- '. ,. --------------~.----------------.
I ,,': 1'\ ..: . ......-,'t" ,. ':::":~ '::~:.\)!,' I I .~i" ' ,
'.'~ ^',"",...l......-....'-,,4.............-,,;~-,: ,,' I ~."--~;:.-. --:~>~.'~- -_..j:J.;.\~"..jJ~JD:.!i I r.V<.r" , , I,~' r~..i;:~
,', '("":':.1"(~,,......-,.?,~';';""'-'~~(.'~ ... .!,.:,~::;::~....-......."~~~_.-....;,--",. ..-,..,,; ~t-' !;~~ '\ "!M'~~'"~,,-,,
. i (F~ :"., ilJ;t..::=;-~~:.----..in~:...,~;; " "i\I!!U;i.~'.....,.
% ~ N VI _ a> ~ .~ ~~: I,'
t:t ~ n ~p - .
~ 3
-
:D
:D
-
I:)
~
-4
-
o
z
"
I'"
~
Z
U1
...., >
-
, 0
A
~
'"
:;
..
.
'"
a>
CD >
N <I)
.
:0;
..
~
~
~
.
,
,
,
,
,
:
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
:
,
,
:
,
,
:
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
r...;
.
A
..
~
~~f'~
~\
. c
, ~
o n
. ,
~...
...,<!'...
.
ill
I
'PH
hhf
:;1 I
~. . ~ i Tr ii,', ~~I~ ~ i if r.iT~ .
i I1II
liittl!r, III ' 'f! t II ~ fill" 'j f f If I flllllll"llfi
i It!111 It I
I i, Ilf1tl1h I hili; I . I I '(1 }IIIJPI lit
I
r ~ ' j r .
I I I ~
'.J-I .
.
!
} i 3 ' I Q ! Ii i . i I : Ii I i ' I t . ~ t ~ I !
, ; I I' i ~ ; ~ ~ ' , , ~ ~ ' t
I . I
.
J ;;1 ..1 I I ;llq: ; .
\ II I I I I I I i I I i I I i i Iii ' , Ii Inn . r .
1 1 11 f 1 f
i H .. 111 I I I I
t - - ~ ~ . . . . . . . . - . - ,. . . . I~ I~ I~ . . . . -
.
I . . , , . ~ ; ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ; ~ ' , , , , ~ ; ~ ; ~ ' . ~ ' .
!'> to . . .
I r
if ~ ~ nnn nil nnnnlJ f [ f I fJ I .... f i i Iff II f f f f Iff I
.
I H H If II I{ 'I' II'PPPI I I t J I I n f I t JJlB HI
. 'I' I I I IIIII ! ' f
If II II
1
~ t It
.~ "II
..... ~ ,fl,
"'n z -
~.
2.. ..
z. Z
D", ~
'"
.
z :II
D CI
..'"
1:1: ,
;'" ,
..z
oj
i
~
6
II
.
~
.!!I
~
~
I!
, ,'I
" ~ :;.
'~ ,(
',:
",
" jl ".
,. ~:i
)>, < i:.
Z I,. ...r-'~'
...'-~'~'!~~,~.~:, j
-"''''~''''~ '
Z ;fJ:'~ ~ f' /
_:!; ,r" '_.?
~ '-"", 'e'
~', I. , II
, I"
" :~i::;t '11 ~.
,.. :~ I: -,j (.",
J> ~:~ !~~,
Z ,')~;Ul, i~ ~
.:tl~ ~ :~ i
~~~!~I Ii i
'J ]' 'f '
\jt
\ i, ~
i I~
'II :(
I:j il
II!, J :\. I ;
1:(1 ( : j l' i
"\\'. \ ~
",I.') 'I
'!""~1i~:,'~i\ ':'
I . 'r ~, :;$
I \ .~}.
I) -,
j"fi'
I :j): ~~t .~ ..
~ :t <,
Ii :jH
~ I i~ :
II" ,
:\. i~ [
, ,(I
! '.:: ' I '
\ \ i ~ ;' ~. ~ 1:
\ \':., ~' \\ i:. "',' , . "'.
\ ,~ ' .~
\ '\' \ i '
'I i 'l,'~ '" ) ': :"':',.
,
I . i'l
: ' t ..\'.fA h' ~::
: l +' .""~... -.,..,--. , J
\, . .t":___~___\~=___ ___ .f_'~:..~:::=:_'___.~.j __.__::~.:T - ___~'.. .-.;.-~';"17.~, . ';'1" .'"':"-..:a.-.:.--'\-:----1~i-------...l.-~-.,~~..,.--
, '..' --~~)~, ..r " '\' .....rv.~.....".~..;;...;,:-.-:..~""';.;~--.,/"...u-r----.-.-.----.. ...A.-----'\-.-~.-----.'f------.-.-..------.-.---~7. ~.-~...-...
\ : i ,,> ii '1,,,,,,,,'" ,/ /'~ ~ .~.:,;;:=::, '~,I I . 6) '" '", ',' ~ ,"- .' -
_ _ ~~'~f::~~~"':'-~~>. ,/ I.._...._.~-:;/' "--... . ._.,/~..,~ f >~~,) ~ ,r ~,'<r">\'~'''' :~.: ''''~~~f':... .' . ~ ~.: .,:.,.' .
., <i - '_'~'~n7<VV"-'-'-71 \ ! .;f""'~~ ._____" ----:: "J,',":? II \.... "-,- -~i"~ --, ~ ,," -
~ 0 :.-' ( J; [J!-'" ,-- ~ - ",-,::;,::-:"""",,'q-' j'-~--=,- -,,', ,j""~---:';-" -
C' t: :' /, ,; (-;f""~,--::::::=-=-- ..' ____;;........~. (-.~)...'~... '. ~'\...~I\ \ \.~~....L_. ..
o~.. t' '." I ..",,-- ",,' ~-' .....' -.".-. ,I--! \ ~,.~.~
~ ~
.(.)'ilt' )'t" ,j ~:;,
0;) ~', '-;
1- -~-----j(--- ______;__"______u__u:..._u m_um,;uum__ _"nn_ __um ,,-- _n__ -- -- "u_uu__u_
" j ,
<, , ' ;
~', \ c- i'
\ '''I l Iii
< ~ P, \ { '. ! ". t.
:~ :,:" \ "
i" "
.';,-;- ,~ ,,---- -~'-
j\\,i \ 1
~
,
,
,
:\'
,
,
,
,
"
,
,
,
:l .~
,+..",..
:
:!
:
,
,
,
.' j'
"1
"
':~. ,1\ \".
.",,, .
,\1:-"" i,\
'I,.." .
" ,
"",,:
1
! :"
,
, '
/.:
\.
, '
\ ~ ,
i
,
, ~.
, ,
~J
I'
I
\ "'\' ....
.'.' ,) fl' i' ~
. ...
"
-' '
r. n.
, r \
?WI '"
~ c'
..
~ :
..
;.;,
,
,
,
,
"
,,)1
..
.
'I.,
"
"
,'I
\ ; i
\\,1:
,
,
, ,
, ,
"
,
/' "
0,;
~
,
.
~
~
~ .
.
I
>
)>
c
~
~
(5 ~~~~~~ ~ ~~ ~
(")
0 ;I~~ ; ; ! I " II I' : vI
z I Ii ~ . ~ ~ ~. e ~
-I
:D
0 i~in ~ I i~:r;i
~F
-m
i:D S! ~ i!~! I~ i
i
. ~~h . I
n ~ j
>
"
.
~I I ~
i 0j$@!E1t> I:
..
I ~
I
~~~~~~~~~~
~~S~~~~"'~~
." ~!:!mzi!=m ;D~'"
m~~~~!!!~/58
~~c:m ~g!...~~ ..
Z 2J-1m ~
... <im < ~~!:1
~~ ~ ~J;;~
~p-;" m;!l m ~'" i
&i ~
~~~~ ~~ ~ /5
m
Q"QQ Q"
~~~~ ~~ I
U~~ ff "Immmz~"::e:;;
..,. ......lit" ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~~~ JJ
ir!ir!ir!~i~~~
mmuu o~ :>:::>:: m~l:l:- Ut JJ
",m U ~~~~w~i~~ G>
i~
I~ !UPI I )>
~~ JJ ~~~ ~S.; ~ -I
~ II di 5J~ ~-,:J-g m C
000 (J) ... 0
m~ JJ "''''''' ~
m, ~~~ Z
. - ~'* ~ G)'
.
U '" m
;;:;;;;;. .. )> i!=i!=i!= m
'" 0
~~i~lgH \!!~ ; -I I c
I ~.. 0
~~~ ~~I n z "'C
~i f .. ~
~ p) - :I:
H I m
~ ~ ,~ m z
~ "'''' )>
! @ -I
r; 0 r
r m
m ~~ii~~~~~~ G)
G) m
$$ ~ m ~~8!:!~~~~~g z
Z 1$ .. ~ (J) 1.;2 ~ ~ ~ . 0
0 ~~~fii ~~~~
iJ m" "!P!!;::j<
!U "'i1!~w i~fgJ~
~I '" :t-'-<<m
8~~0i1!
I" ... ~2 S~~~i I
~
E~ r;;
~ ..
...
U ~
-- .. ~
~~ ~
~
c;;
~~~~~
.... ... - ... ...
- ... - ... ....
~ (II art art art
..
~
..
;; ;9"Y "1"\"""'''''
..
~
UU~!!I~~~~~~~I
~~I~ ~~~I~~~~~
~ ~~~~>>;dlni
I ~~ ~;~II!i
a E::I
e e
c
3:
~
:I: .
~Iq>~~~ <36<3 ee
. . . . ,
, P I ~ ., I~ u ill
~ Ii II n ,. II ~a ... ~ .
., ..
r 8) i~ -I
I ~'i I ~ ~ h ~ ~
~ ;1 I
1
I
m
~
i
r.
.. i i ~ ; f. .,.~ ~ ~y ~
i~~~i!,e~~~~~i~~~~~~~le~~
= ;~!ili ~~~~i~ii~~i~~~~~~~
~ ~;5U~ ~-!-ld~~~~E!~i ~ ~
i!1ii~ ~ e S 3rnli-S~' <
~ ~ jii ~ ~ J9~ B ~i ~
..
e 66eee
ell i ~d P 5
m
~ I -~ I I J ~
~ i. · ~
! q I
~
z
m m I;) G>~ 66e
:%j
~ ;i ilU !~ H
~ il 8 ~ J~ I !
z I i ii, II 'I
C)
. ~ " .. """'1
U~ii;nlln ! ;
i
Q ! ~h}i " ~
~ I ' Ijl..! !
~ I i ~lt
Iii
~
~
.,,'t't
!:
z
m
:%j
i
~i~i
lid
~1iI"'!
~~~
,I ~
~ ~
i j
!
i
~
I
. i . .~ .. .~.~ t ~~ ~
i~~iB,gE!~~j~~~~il!I~!~
I~III ~IJliiiiili!~I~~1
~~i~ $i i~ii~~ ~~.. ~
~&i ~~ i! - ~i ~
= ; ~ i ;
j~~ ii~.1 iJEtlli ~ ~ ~~i
HI ~H!i U~I QI ~ PUi
q~ !Pi eo~iQ ; s!~~i
in a.i~i U~pi ,. !~;
.q Id~ i~I;~~; ~ ~~~
II! I~!i II!i!!i I II~
.~~ h~~ a~dgP ~I; I
.. ~pa ~niad Q
II i~ij IH~IU I! ~
~~ ~d~ PI~H~ I
~~ ~~~! a~ U~
. ~!lN .' e'l
n ~~n ~~H~i
~ ~ ~ i
. Iii p ip ~
; III Ii hi ~
~;! !! IIi
11111i~
I; !~ i;1
Ii ~I e~
~ i I Ii
~ I ~ n
HI; .. ~$:J
."'.'m. .
; ;;:~;:;:;; ~ ~i
!Iii iJ~ II P ~ II III II: liB i
~!j; P ~i ~I i h ~ .1 ~I~ ja~a
I~q d j~ ~I ~ II ~ I~ ;.~ ~~p
u!~ i~!; I; I ~ I lilH IUi
!i~. ;; II! ii ~ II i~ q J~~I
!!l1 B II il I ! I ! Ii 1m
~~ i u P III ~ I ~ d P~.<.
IU~ B 51 ~! I ! i ! n Hi ,f'
i; Dn; ri!}; I i I 1111;; tIE II~ ~ itl~ ~ 1~ : ~ ~ ~ N " " " "
. . . ;. . . .
s. "tiN ~. .. I U J~ ~~ n il~ !;-u II; q
i I.t is.!! I; 1; ; ; 'i Iii,; I Ii, ,,: i Iii; I ; i i
~i I~I ~lliH
Ii! I' T !Q.~~;.
~~ .. I lat I i8 .. ~ If I i l( n I I r I i I en~ Id1i
ift :;jJH i~J!i 1 J ~ ~il~.! ~~ f[ s. ~ f.. I; ~ I
~~ .11 if ~i . i .. if. is. I . l C! Q ~ ~~.: i~q
h 1~ ~1 iU ' Ii I I i I)-Ii I !! Ii! !~I . I . U ! ~ In ~ I" ~. .
· f ~ " ! ~; ~~. ~ ~I~i~
.! ~ i.r I jh
~~. ~J t tH if . :mq
H ~i~ "dlf IIi I! 1 lIlt, I! I~! II! I < ; ~ ~ 1 .~ in ~;:; i.h
n h~ t~t f ~ . d MD I ~U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~
I.l}IrJ.~t IiI" It i ~r ~ I ~ n;i
.' H- ~i ~ J r I !t"i 11 i !i} J ~ I: i; P~i
!i.~. .::.i! 5" a" ~1 Ii ~ .In
~~ jit IUii ! I! I t 1t~i I~ 1~ f~. I I ... en ,. ~ ;
. b ~ = q~ Qq~
,11- -. }"~' ~
ii':g j..,. ; i J J i !~!; !: ~t III ! f ~ "
g t. f'lP J ~ P i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ . ."
l Hi ~h B ~ . a n ~~h
!i' ' ! Ii' I' ' 1111ill}' tit. {Ill. Ifill. ; , i!:II;!:' ' ii' !Illt' ' ii' II;I!' t~!!I!lli' liE filE I!II' ;
[i~ ~ 1~1: w .. '- i ill! If.' 4tlf ~ I If i tJllitUl: If II It Ii IIill l-<Ilil~ il !h~ lihl ~
:1 !II i i i 1111m: I!!l tth Ilil~ 11t!lil!!U 'ii It!i!! II WI',.! 1IIIIui!'1 II th I',II!
h .~~ f l~nUn Jh Ihl sflU . & hI h I HI &. H II: ui ihi h Ih ! f
.... ~-...
lHE = {HiE = I!E JE !PHE fHE If!E ~'iIE = f1ur ~ IE liE ~ lIE IE !U~ ~ li~E !ll~ ~ 'r ~ ~ fiE U~ ~ IE
!I.~] j I ~ i ,i I If. i ~ I I .i .& t h.;;1.
I~ . tH 11 i~UU ! !i '11,. t':t ~iI -I~ 'I IJf!111 I ii I~ i Uti 1ft hh Ii ~ 1~1 IIi 1
\"-'!! . t't h't!1 I ft I rl i'i I lul I I i} "I t!h :i! lU~ i; IJt jl: ~
.I"'~ .'i& .J! fS I II il ill J. is- Islitl I i I~ II. III {,Ii' ...1 i~ h ~I.. ~
~ ! i '"Iii II j1 r n} &f[ i i]l I Ii i I ~It ..I I.. Ii . II .1 ..
q I . Ii; l{ii . r' ! If IJ II'. 1"1. iai !iiil _ h Sl I ill ~iL .iU i~ gi I i
i..H !.~n JI I II s I J. hi .fh 111.1 & d I I Id 1u.~I,"'n if h i ~
11111 ii .. :..
hi r
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: B
Meeting Date: 08/20/96
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution I ~' II/AccePting $30,000 in Grant Funds from the State of
California Department of Health Services, Tobacco Control Section and
Amending the FY ] 996/97 Budget to appropriate $30,000 to the Community
Tobacco Education Grant Budget
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of Parks and Recreation>;tU !1f
(
City Manager \) ,-/\~.
o '
1//
(4/5ths Vote:
Yes..x No_)
REVIEWED BY:
On January] 7, ]995, Council approved a $]20,000 24-month grant from the California Department of
Health Services, Tobacco Control Section. $30,000 was appropriated for the first six months of the
program (January - June 1995). Authorization was also given by the Council to execute Service
Provider Sub-Contracts with a provision for extensions through the life of the grant based on
satisfactory performance and funding availability.
The State of California authorized the second installment of the grant, in the amount of $60,000, for
FY 1995-]996 and now has authorized the third installment, in the amount of $30,000, for FY 1996-
1997. The intent of this report is to discuss the progress of the grant program and request the
acceptance by the City of the $30,000 in grant funds for the final six months of the project.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution amending the FY ]996/97 budget
and appropriating 30,000 to the Community Tobacco Education Grant budget.
DISCUSSION:
Background: ]n November 1988, California voters approved the Tobacco Tax and Health Protection
Act of 1988 (Proposition 99), which added a 25 cent tax to each pack of cigarettes sold in the state.
These additional tobacco taxes are earmarked for tobacco-related research, health education and
promotion, and health care. Enabling legislation for Proposition 99 during the past five years has
provided legislative authority for programs administered by the Tobacco Control Section (TCS) of the
California Department of Health Services to:
I. Conduct health education interventions and behavior change programs at the state level, in the
community, and other non-school settings;
2. Apply the most current research and findings; and
3. Give priority to programs that demonstrate an understanding of the role community norm
change has in influencing behavioral change regarding tobacco use.
[M:\home\parksrec\al13 - TobgmtJ,AI3]
1
8-1
Item:
Meeting Date: 08/20/96
In early September 1994, the Parks and Recreation Department received a Request for Proposal (RFP)
entitled "Community Tobacco Education Interventions" ITom TCS. It was anticipated that
approximately $6 million in grants ($3 million ITom each fiscal year [1994/95 and 1995/96]) would be
awarded to 30-40 agencies and organizations that specifically addressed one or more of TCS's three
priority program areas: environmental tobacco smoke, youth access to tobacco, and/or countering pro-
tobacco influences in the community.
In its efforts to continue strengthening and expanding services to youth in Chula Vista, the Parks and
Recreation Department and the Chula Vista Youth Coalition developed a grant proposal in response to
this RFP. During the September 22, 1994 Youth Coalition meeting, seven agencies expressed an
interest in being included in the grant proposal as project partners. All interested agencies were asked
to submit one-page summaries highlighting how a tobacco education component would be implemented
based on the TCS criteria, and the amount of funding needed to operate the program.
The grant proposal submitted requested funds for the following components:
1. Augmentation of funding for the youth newspaper project sponsored by the City and South Bay
Community Services' KidzBiz Program (the City's first-year California Healthy Cities Project
activity approved by the City Council on September 20, 1994).
2. Augmentation of funding for South Bay Community Services' gang prevention program. The
program targets at-risk ethnic youth between the ages of 10 and 18 who are involved,
associated, or at-risk of being involved in gang activities. Tobacco education would be
incorporated into the current program to increase participants' knowledge and awareness of the
dangers of tobacco use, and reduce youth access to tobacco products, by changing attitudes and
behaviors of this high risk group. Funding would be used to add a part-time counselor to make
presentations and coordinate follow-up activities at 20 local school sites. These presentations
and activities are not part of the Chula Vista Elementary School and Sweetwater Union High
School Districts' current curriculum.
3. Adaptation of tobacco education curriculum developed by the San Diego County Office of
Education to train older youth to be mentors and positive role models for younger children in
a variety of recreational settings (e.g., afterschool playground sites; WizKidz Program offered
at Lorna Verde and Lauderbach Community Centers; and programs offered by other youth-
serving agencies such as the South Bay Family YMCA, Boys & Girls Club, etc.).
4. Incorporation of tobacco education into components of the City's Youth ACTION Program,
particularly Junior High Outreach, High School Happenings, and Late Night Teen Programs.
ACTION stands for "Activities Coordinated Through Interagency Organizational Networks."
The program is intended to improve access and availability of services and programs to youth
13-18 years of age.
[M:\home\parksrec\aI13 - Tobgmt3.A131
2
8-~
Item:
Meeting Date: 08/20/96
5. Provision of start-up funding for the Boys & Girls Club of Chula Vista's "Smart Moves"
program. This program was developed by the Boys & Girls Club of America and targets teens,
adults, and the community at-large in efforts to prevent smoking. The local Boys & Girls Club
currently does not offer this program to its participants because of the lack of funding to
implement the curriculum. Based on similar concepts as the "Teens as Teachers" program,
"Smart Moves" will bring to participants in the Club's two educational programs (serving more
than 100 children and youth each year) opportunities for older youth to teach and mentor
younger children on the dangers of tobacco use.
6. Sponsorship of a variety of special events and activities promoting tobacco-tree living for Chula
Vista youth, including but not limited to dances, talent shows, annual art competitions, and an
annual Youth Health Fair.
7. The hiring of a part-time Project Coordinator (.50 FTE Recreation Specialist) and a part-time
Recreation Aide (.25 FTE) in the Parks and Recreation Department to support the tobacco
education program.
A total of ISO proposals were submitted to TCS. Of this total, 42 were funded, including the City of
Chula Vista. Of the 42 programs selected for funding, 38 had a primary focus on youth.
Selection for funding by the State offers the Parks and Recreation Department and the Youth Coalition
several opportunities to increase Chula Vista's visibility as a model program offering creative responses
to the changing needs of youth. As a funded program, the Parks and Recreation Department and the
Youth Coalition will also be active participants in the County's Tobacco Control Coalition. The other
agency partners with the City of Chula Vista are South Bay Community Services, South Bay Family
YMCA, and the Boys & Girls Club of Chula Vista.
Tobacco Education Graut Proe:ress ReDort
In the first six months of the program all the sub-contracting agencies proceeded with the
implementation of their portion of the program in addition to participating in the City-wide activities.
The .50 FTE and the .25 FTE Tobacco Education grant staff have been involved in numerous start up
activities such as negotiating the "Scope of Work" with the State, implementing agreements with the
sub-contractors, hiring and training staff, setting up Youth Advisory Boards, and preparation for the
"Teens As Teachers" training.
In February and March of 1995, Chula Vista's youth participated in "Operation Storetront," a program
which seeks to change policies regarding tobacco advertising and promotion targeting youth. Chula
Vista teens surveyed local stores to document the amount of tobacco ads and promotions in stores close
to schools. The results of the survey were included in the San Diego County information forwarded
to the State of California. The State is publicizing the survey results to raise community awareness
about this problem.
[M:\home\parksrec\all3 . TobgmtJ.A13]
3
8-3
Item:
Meeting Date: 08/20/96
Beginning in September 1995 and ending in May 1996, the Tobacco Education Program completed two
separate trainings for youth who were trained as "Teens As Teachers." Following their training, the
youth made 205 presentations at area playground sites, YMCA PRYDE sites, and the Boys & Girls
Club, reaching 1,137 youth under 13 years of age. As part of these presentations, the playground youth
were invited to participate in an Art Contest which would show the negative aspects of tobacco use.
There were 250 Art Contest entries, with the best 25 receiving awards which were distributed at the
City-wide Health Fair in April 1996. At the end of the "Teens As Teachers" portion of the program,
two events were held to recognize and reward the teens for their many contributions to the program,
to the Parks and Recreation Department, and to the residents of Chula Vista.
Another of the comprehensive goals for this program was the completion of a City-Wide Health Fair
focusing on tobacco use. The Health Fair, held as part of the Chula Vista Expo '96, had twenty-seven
different booths which served/educated several thousand Chula Vista residents on the consequences of
use of tobacco products.
The $30,000 received for the final six months of the program will be dedicated to encouraging the youth
of the community to work with City leaders in an effort to strengthen the existing tobacco Vending
Machine Ordinance, or to work towards implementing a tougher Ordinance which would provide
sanctions for those in business who sell tobacco products to the youth of the community.
FISCAL IMPACT: The City will receive $30,000 for use through December 31, 1996. These funds
are appropriated to the Community Tobacco Education Grant budget (290-2900) for use by the City and
the sub-contractors. These funds are part of the award of a 24-month grant in the amount of $120,000
by the California Department of Health Services, Tobacco Control Section, for a tobacco education
program. All General Funds appropriated for expenditure in this program will be fully reimbursed by
the grant.
Grant Award
Date Amount
111195 $30,000
711/95 $60,000
711/96 $30,000
TOTAL $120,000
Attachments: "A" - Award Letter
"B" - Budget for Grant Funds
[M:\home\parksrec\aI13 . Tobgmt3.AI3)
4
B-1
,~
jM :TOB~CCO CONTROL SECTION
916.3222189
1996.07-31
09:50 .880 P.02/02
STAn: Of CAU'ORNIA-MfALP1 AND WEl1.u.E AGBicY
ATTACHMENT A
PETE WItsON'. <;..."..,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
71~/1U. , SDHT
p.o. .oJ,: ...m:z
SACJl.AMENTO. CA 9.-2~7320
.
July 31, J996
Ms. Rosemary Brodbeck
Project Director
Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Department
276 Founh Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Grant No:
94-20954
Dear Ms. Brodbeck:
This is to foHow up on your request regarding the availability of funds for the remainder of
this calendar year
A5 you lenow, your agency has a multi-year grant funded :!Tom two fiscal years, $60,000
for FY 1994-95 and 560,000 for 1995-96. The FY 1995-96 funds were appropriated by the
legislature last year when the Govemor signed the FY 1995-96 Budget Act. Your agency has
approval to access the monies until the tobacco grant terminates on December 31, 1996.
If you nave any questions, please contact Elyse Lang, your assigned contract analyst at
(916) 323 -0684
Sincerely,
~p~!~
Administrative & Contract support Unit
Tobacco control Section
8 -,5
ATTACHMENTB
CHULA VISTA TOBACCO EDUCATION PROJECT
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
FISCAL YEAR 1996-97
290-2900 -- Community Tobacco Education Grant
LINE ITEM LINE ITEM LINE ITEM DESCRIPTION
TOTALS
5105 - Wages $6,508 .50 FTE Recreation Specialist, $8.66 -
$9.52/hour, .25 FTE Recreation Aide, $6.61 -
$7.01/hour.
5143 - Medicare $94
5145 - PARS $244
5202 - Contractual $15,500 South Bay Community Services - Youth
Serrvices Newspaper, $2,500, Gang Prevention, $2,500;
Boys & Girls Club ofChula Vista - Late Night
Teen Program, $1,167, "Smart Moves/Friendly
Persuasion" Program, $6,333; South Bay Family
YMCA - PRYDE/Junior High Outreach
Program, $3,000.
5212 - Printing and $1,325
Binding
5218 - Postage 50
5225 - Transportation 600
Allowances
5224 - Training 250
5252 - Telephone 535
5291 -City Staff Services $4,125
5301 - Office Supplies 40
5371 - Recreation $727
Supplies
TOTAL $30,000
Ob:TG2budget.076]
e-~
RESOLUTION NO. I r-y/.y
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING $30,000 IN GRANT FUNDS
FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH SERVICES, TOBACCO CONTROL SECTION AND
AMENDING THE FY 1996/97 BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE
$30,000 TO THE COMMUNITY TOBACCO EDUCATION
GRANT BUDGET
WHEREAS, on January 17, 1995, Council approved a $120,000
24-month grant from the California Department of Health Services,
Tobacco Control Section; and
WHEREAS, $30,000 was appropriated for the first six
months of the program (January - June 1995); and
WHEREAS, authorization was also given by the Council to
execute Service Provider Sub-Contracts with a provision for
extensions through the life of the grant based on satisfactory
performance and funding availability; and
WHEREAS, the State of california authorized the second
installment of the grant, in the amount of $60,000, for FY 1995-96
and now has authorized the third installment, in the amount of
$30,000, for FY 1996-97; and
WHEREAS, staff requests Council acceptance of the $30,000
in grant funds.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby accept $30,000 in grant funds from
the Department of Health services, Tobacco Control section and
amend the FY 1996/97 budget to appropriate the $30,000 to the
community Tobacco Education Grant budget (290-2900) for use by the
City and the sub-contractors.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jess Valenzuela, Director of
Parks and Recreation
C (,-- l J IVlO-t '^'- I'--
Ann Y. Moore, Acting city
Attorney
c: \ rs\ tobgrant
3"7
--:
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 9
Meeting Date 8/20/96
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: ZA V-96-12; Appeal from Planning Commission
denial of a request for a variance to increase the height of a rooftop
sign from 35 ft. to 42 ft. for the commercial building located at 396 E
Street in the C-T Thoroughfare Commercial zone - Martin Altbaum
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution Denying the appeal and thereby upholding the
decision of the Planning Commission to deny the request for a
variance to increase the height of a rooftop sign from 35 ft. to 42 ft.
for the commercial building located at 396 E Street in the C- T
Thoroughfare Commercial zone
Director of Pla~ning JlfIt
City Manager C{~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No..xl
()
REVIEWED BY:
This is an appeal from the Planning Commission's denial of a request for a variance to
allow the construction of a rooftop sign to 42 ft. in height for the commercial building
located at 396 E Street, within the C- T Thoroughfare Commercial zone. The C- T zone
limits the height of rooftop signs to 35 ft. above grade.
At the applicant's request (please see attached), staff recommends that this item be
continued to the September 17, 1996 meeting.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt a motion continuing ZA V-96-12 until the
September 17, 1996 meeting.
tf-I
I> .
~ \ ....~ . ,...--
RECEIVED
COIN MART JEWELIJtY .u. 31 P4:32
i:,. _
. .U
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
PUr
\ .
lit" fW et/ULA VISH '.
tRY IlMt{.S 'FF~6$Jt1ut. ChaI4~ 0I.!J1!Jl0,
G1!J/421.-1W
Carla Griffin
City Clerk's Office
City ofChula Vi.ta
278 Fourth Avenue
Chwa Vista, CA 91910
fax: 585-5612
Marty Altbaum
Coin Mart Jewe1r)'
July 31, 1996
Council agenda item: Coin Mart Jewelry sip
I would like to request that the City Council agenda item
regarding a roof-top sign on property currentJy occupied b.r
Coin Mart Jewelry be postponed until Sept.....,.,....l7. 1996. I
have submitted initial plans for .ignage to the City's Planning
Department_
Thank you tor your assistance.
md
ce.' ~(J
~~
.
?f~: J?k- J/~ /~t-On I~
~(~~/~
0,h~
9-:J.
?
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ) tJ
Meeting Date 8/20/96
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing:
PCA-96-06; Consideration of amendments to the
Municipal Code to provide a process for determination of
public convenience and necessity for alcoholic beverage
licensing.
Ordinance Creating and adding Chapter 5.09
to the Municipal Code for the purpose of providing a
permanent, local process for determination of public
convenience and necessity for alcoholic beverage
licensing.
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution Amending the Master Fee
Schedule to establish a fee to cover processing
costs for a determination of public convenience
n , ,and necessity for alcoholic beverage licensing.
Chief of policet~
Director of Planning DI!!
City Manager(/~'\G
1;'"
REVIEWED BY:
Staff has been working on a permanent process for the review of determinations of public
convenience and necessity when required for certain alcoholic beverage licenses. In order to obtain
additional input from business interests, staff recommends that the City Council continue this item.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a motion continuing PCA-96-06 to the
meeting of September 10, 1996.
ItJ -I
-:-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item-.1L
Meeting Date 8/20/96
ITEM TITLE: Public hearing to consider the vacation of a portion of right-of-way formerly
known as Industrial Boulevard
Resolution 181/ l.5"ordering the vacation of right-of-way formerly known
as Industrial Boulevard north of "L" Street subject to certain conditions.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public workf' ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager(;l'-\l, (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ NoX)
t,'
The owner of the property adjacent to a 0.61 acre parcel of land formerly known as Industrial
Boulevard, also formerly used as a Park and Ride Lot by Cal Trans, has requested that the City
vacate the parcel (see Exhibit A). In order to process the vacation, Council must first conduct a
public hearing, in accordance with the California Streets and Highways Code.
During the public hearing, Council may determine that there is no existing or future City interest in
the property and that it may be vacated. The resolution will include the condition that the vacation
will not take place until the City has been compensated for the interest it may have in the property
by the applicant. The compensation for the value of the City's interests in the property will be
determined using an appraisal staff will be authorized to obtain as the basis of negotiations with the
applicant.
RECOMMENDATION: Council conduct the public hearing and adopt the resolution to vacate
with the condition that the resolution is not to be recorded until the City is adequately compensated
for its interest in the property and that the City Manager and City Attorney, or their designees, be
authorized to negotiate the value of the City's interest.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: No Board or Commission action is required
for this matter.
DISCUSSION:
Backeround:
The City entered into a Freeway Agreement with the State of California to allow the construction
of Montgomery Freeway (old Highway 101) in 1948, connecting San Diego with the International
Border. As part of that agreement, the State was allowed to utilize portions of the City's surface
streets to make the interchanges workable and closing other streets at their intersections with the
freeway. One of those streets was Industrial Boulevard, then known as Bay Boulevard, East.
, I-I
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 8/20/96
Around 1955, a grade separation was constructed at the "L" Street interchange. A bridge was built
over the rreeway a few hundred feet north of"L" Street (see aerial Exhibit B). In order to reach "L"
Street, motorists had to cross the bridge in an easterly direction, then turn south onto Industrial
Boulevard. The portion of Industrial Boulevard right-of-way between "K" and "L" Streets was
relinquished to the City by the State Highway Commission on April 23, 1952 and was accepted for
maintenance by the City in June 1955.
When the fteeway was reconstructed to its current state (c. 1974), the old bridge was replaced by a
new one to the south, aligned with "L" Street (see aerial Exhibit C). Industrial Boulevard between
"K" and "L" Streets was abandoned and all pavement was removed. The right-of-way remained,
but was not used.
Baker Enterprises, owner of the property immediately west of the Industrial Boulevard right-of-way
applied for the vacation of all that abandoned portion. Much research was done to determine if the
City could vacate this right-of-way. In January of 1977, a public hearing was held to consider the
matter. The vacation issue was filed by Council, pending the outcome of an inquiry to the
Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) for any interest it may have had in the property,
since MTDB owned the property to the east ofIndustrial Boulevard. In February of 1979, MTDB
responded by saying the land was not needed.
The vacation request was renewed by Baker Enterprises in early 1980. Another public hearing was
set in March of 1980 to consider the vacation issue. The matter was again filed, because Cal Trans
expressed an interest in using it for a Park and Ride Lot. In July of 1980, a 10-year lease agreement
was executed between the City and Cal Trans to use the entire stretch of Industrial Boulevard
between "K" and "L" Streets as a Park and Ride Lot.
The ensuing two years saw court action brought about by Baker Enterprises against the City and the
State asserting Inverse Condemnation, contending that the entire street right-of-way was not needed
for parking space. In 1982, a settlement was reached and the City vacated the northerly portion,
deemed unneeded by Cal Trans for the Park and Ride Lot. Baker Enterprises acquired all but the
southerly 450 feet ofthe street, compensating the City in the amount of $60,000 for any rights the
City may have had in the northerly section. Title reports issued at the time indicated that it was not
clear who owned the underlying fee title. Both the City and Baker Enterprises were listed as
possibly owning the underlying fee title and that an actual determination would have to be judicially
determined. The southerly 450' x 59' (0.61 ac.) portion was retained for the Park and Ride Lot, with
the stipulation that Cal Trans allow free access to Baker Enterprises' property through the Lot.
In August of 1989, just prior to the State's lease date of expiration on January 1, 1990, Baker
Enterprises again applied to the City to vacate the remaining portion of Industrial Boulevard,
submitting a study indicating that the Park and Ride Lot was severely under-utilized and a letter
suggesting that the City would benefit more by vacating it and getting the land on the tax rolls.
11- ~
~
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 8/20/96
Again, Cal Trans was contacted to inquire of its interest in the property. The response was that the
City of Coronado was looking into a plan to use Coronado Bridge toll funds to develop a commuter
bus line trom the South Bay to the North Island Naval Air Station. It was indicated that this parking
lot could playa key role in that plan and CaI Trans would like to extend the lease. However,
Coronado did not pursue the shuttle service proposal, and the lease was never extended. Subsequent
to 1990, the signs for the Park and Ride Lot were removed trom the treeway and the lot abandoned.
MTDB was also contacted in 1989 to determine its interest in using the property. The response was
that use of the property was no longer needed by that agency.
On June 21 of this year, the firm of Lounsbery, Ferguson, Alton and Peak, acting as agent for Baker
Enterprises, submitted an application to vacate the remaining 59' x 450' portion of the old Industrial
Boulevard that was used as a Park and Ride Lot. Again, letters of inquiry were sent to CaI Trans and
MTDB. Both responses were that the parcel was not needed for their purposes.
Findings:
After contacting agencies which have expressed interest in the property in the past, staff has
determined there is no current or future need for it. It is now an unused, paved parcel and not being
maintained (including sweeping) by any agency. There is no lighting in the area, save for street
lights at the intersection of"L" Street and Industrial Boulevard. It would be appropriate in this case
for the City to release its interest in this parcel for three reasons:
1) Minimize City liability, should any damages occur on the property due to its non-maintained
state and/or lack oflighting
2) Relieve the City of maintenance costs which could occur
3) Place the parcel on the Tax Rolls
The City possesses an interest in the property which a title company could not define with
particularity. While a judicial determination could clarify the precise title, it is staft's
recommendation that Council hold a public hearing on the matter as prescribed in the Streets and
Highways Code. If, after hearing testimony for and against the matter, it is considered unnecessary
for public use, Council may vacate it and release the interest the City has, conditioning that vacation
with the requirement offair value compensation for quitclaiming the City's interest. Determination
ofthe City's interest could require negotiations between the applicant and the City. The appraisal
would be used as the basis of those negotiations. The quitclaim deed will pass whatever interest the
City has to the purchaser. The City Attorney's office has reviewed this recommendation and concurs
with it.
11- 3
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 8/20/96
With regard to the environmental issues, in September of last year, a Negative Declaration was
adopted in conjunction with an initial study involving a General Plan Amendment to bring this area
into compliance with the General Plan. The vacation of this parcel is in substantial conformance
with that Negative Declaration adopted by Council.
If, after the public hearing, Council decides to vacate, appropriate easements will be retained for all
utilities lying within the parcel, including the public sewer.
Staff also recommends that authorization be granted the City Manager and City Attorney, or their
designees, to negotiate the value of the City's interest in the land with the applicant using the
appraisal as a basis for the negotiations.
FISCAL IMP ACT: The applicant is required to deposit appropriate monies to cover the City's cost
for processing the vacation request under its Full Cost Recovery System. An appraisal must be
performed by a state-registered appraiser at a cost of approximately $2,000. After that appraisal is
done, the vacation may be conditioned to include payment to the City equal to the value of the City's
interest in property which will go to the General Fund. Therefore, the fiscal impact would depend
on the following scenarios:
1) No Council action, no fiscal impact, since processing costs are covered.
2) If Council adopts the resolution and an appraisal is prepared and the City and
applicant cannot agree on a fair amount, the General fund will be lowered by the
amount we pay for the appraisal.
3) Vacate property with condition of paying fair market price, which is yet to be
determined, plus one-half the appraisal cost (approximately $2,000).
Attachments: Exhibit A - Locator map
Exhibit B - Aerial view of area 1968 NOT SCANNED
Exhibit C - Aerial view of area 1990 .
Engineering File No. 0740-70.PV-040
[M:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA\PH PV040.JWH]
)1- J-/
".,
- ."\.
r~ ...
5"-~ --
~:
t~
.~
PAIlK ~
! 01 R/~;~~
I j 1 c::JC>
o ____./ fl 1 f
IF[- .
II I I I ~-
EXHIBIT f:1"
)/-5/11-7
I
J~
11-
M
~
~
~
.~
t?NlIU" BAKER J I
6"~~IlPR/$ES r 1_7 ",.
I ~
,
....,
".,
;n
C/)
~
....,
".,
.'
,
DWN BY: J H
DATE: 9/'J'"
--
-
-
~
II K'
59"
~
\ \~
~ ~
~ :-I
~ t)
~ ~
~
iii
~
!!
: ,.
;~
Ii
!~ ?\I
In: ~
lq
,
I n
0'(
o
I~
o
o
o
~
~
.-,;:
"
~
51EHRAI
---
~_.-
1-
I~
I~
I;;; .
.
.
ilL'
"' j
I ~_~
~~ LEGENO
W~ - POIlT/ON 70
BE VACATED
-.
I
- -'
I
-
'FILE No.PV.040
"Jt.
,--WI _-"t;
....;..'fr .....J
III
,L-
-
.;.:. ,
~t..;'
'/-1'
.....
"~: }.T:
~!4 '.~. ~'"
". ; ...;. .-
~. ~ .~;: , ..
-' . ~I:'.
--
.. .. .. .. .. ..
.
I
Ex
.
I
--
...._--._.~ ~ ~ ..;::........--
:,L.':-~_:':._
..~- .'. :-i/.~~:: :.
. .., :-"0 ~_."il'" 1.:..
RESOLUTION NO. J 8.1./ L5
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE VACATION OF RIGHT-OF
-WAY FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD
NORTH OF "L" STREET SUBJECT TO CERTAIN
CONDITIONS
WHEREAS, the city Council, at its meeting of August 6,
1996, adopted Resolution No. 18396 declaring its intention to
vacate a portion of right-of-way formerly known as Industrial
Boulevard north of "L" Street and setting August 20, 1996 as the
date for a public hearing thereon; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Streets and
Highways Code, the Council must hold a public hearing to take
testimony for or against the proposed vacation; and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was adopted in
conjunction with an initial study involving a General Plan
Amendment to bring this area into compliance with the General Plan
and the vacation of this parcel is in substantial conformance with
that Negative Declaration adopted by Council; and
WHEREAS, notices required by Streets and Highways Code
~8323 have been posted; and
WHEREAS, Tuesday, the 20th day of August, 1996 at 6:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Chula vista was fixed
as the time and place for hearing any objections to such vacation,
and the Council having heard all interested persons; and
WHEREAS, from all the
Council found that the parcel to
present or prospective public use.
evidence submitted, the city
be vacated is unnecessary for
NOW, THEREFORE, the city Council of the City of Chula
vista does hereby find, order, determine and resolve as follows:
section 1. That city Council does hereby order the
vacation of a portion of right-of-way formerly known as Industrial
Boulevard north of "L" Street subject to the following conditions:
1. That the vacation occurs only after the City is
adequately compensated for its interest in the property.
2. The City Manager and city Attorney, or their designees,
are authorized to negotiate with the applicant the value
of the City's interest.
1
1/-8
3. Appropriate easements will be retained by the City for
all utilities lying within the parcel, including the
public sewer.
section 2. That the city Clerk is hereby directed to
record a certified copy of this resolution with the office of the
San Diego County Recorder when the above conditions have been met.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
~J/11~-.r:~ a:~%
Ann . Moore, cfing ci y
Attorney
C:\rs\vacation
2
)1- c;
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1.2..
Meeting Date: 8-20-96
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Continue to the September 10, 1996 City
Council meeting the consideration of the Otay Ranch
Reorganization No. 1 consisting of annexing portions of the Otay
Ranch to the City, detaching the Otay Landfill from the City
and detaching territory from the Rural Fire Protection Dist . ct.
SUBMITTED BY: Special Planning Projects Manager, Otay Ranch Proj
REVIEWED BY: City Manager {)L <l (4I5ths Vote: Yes_ No X)
Xii I
Staff is requesting the hearing on the Otay Ranch Reorganization No. 1 be
continued to the September 10, 1996 City Council meeting because a LAFCO
required condition of the reorganization has not been met.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council continue the hearing to September
10, 1996.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: In August of 1995, the City Council authorized the filing of a
reorganization application with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
for the Otay Ranch Reorganization No. 1. The proposed reorganization would
annex the majority of the Otay Valley Parcel, the Mary Patrick Birch Estate
Ranch House and the Inverted "L" area to the City of Chula Vista. On July 1,
1996, LAFCO approved the reorganization, designated the City as the conducting
authority and authorized the City Council to conduct the proceeding to complete
the reorganization process. Those proceedings require the Council to hold a noticed
hearing on the reorganization. The Council is authorized by LAFCO to approve
the change in organization subject to the LAFCO conditions for maintaining fire
service to the Otay Landfill (completed July 30, 1996) and County of San Diego
receiving the landfill nuisance easements from Village Development and SNMB,
Ltd. The continuance is necessary because the County has not yet received the
easements from SNMB, Ltd. in a form satisfactory to them. The County Board of
Supervisors has to accept the easement before the City Council holds the final
reorganization hearing. There is a possibility the September 10 hearing may need
to be continued as welL All parties are trying to resolve the issues as soon as
possible. We will keep the Council appraised of the situation.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
a113anx3.doc
1.2. - /
Item No. r)_~.....
Council Meeting 8/20/96
TO:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA:
John D. Goss, city Manager
I
It/
Managert,'
FROM:
George Krempl, Deputy City
SUBJECT: Outstanding Issues regarding the Pre-Annexation
Development Agreement between the city and ~B" LTD.
On August 13, 1996, this item was continued to August 20, 1996.
Council requested a status report on the outstanding issues. There
were two issues discussed with the Planning Commission on August 6,
1996. The issues were the dedication requirement for the SR-125
right-of-way and the issue of whether or not monetary damages are
available to either party if there is a breach of the agreement.
The Commission supported the staff recommendation 5-0 (i.e., the
language contained in the SNMB, LTD. draft development agreement) .
Subsequent to August 6, 1996, the applicant and staff were able to
agree on compromise language for the SR-125 dedication (see
Attachment 1). One objection to the monetary damage exclusion
language was that it did not apply to the other development
agreements. The exclusion is contained in the EastLake and Rancho
del Rey Agreements. In addition, a letter was received from
Village Development saying they were willing to be subject to the
new provision (see Attachment 2). This is apparently acceptable to
the applicant to resolve this equity issue. The second issue is
the actual language of the monetary damage provision. Attachment
3 is the staff proposal. Attachment 4 is language the applicant
would like added. The language was received late on August 12,
1996 and raised a number of issues for the city Attorney's Office
which require additional research. Staff will be meeting with
SNMB, LTD. representatives prior to August 20, 1996 in an attempt
to reach agreement on the language of the default provision and a
monetary damage exclusion.
GK:mab
J3C-/
-,'
Attachment 1
7.2.1 Dedication of Land for SR-125. Developer
agrees to dedicate land for right-of-way purposes and property
owned by the Developer that is reasonably necessary for the
SR-125 configuration selected by CALTRANS and depicted: (1)
generally in the GDP or (2) that alignment identified as the
Brown Field Modified Alignment which is generally depicted in
the SR-125 draft Environmental Impact Report/statement and as
revised in the Final Environmental Impact Report/statement to
respond to engineering, design, environmental and similar
constraints.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, should CALTRANS not select
alignment (1) or (2) above, the Developer shall dedicate land
for any such alternate SR-125 configuration only on the
condition that the city agree to relocate any land uses
displaced by such alternate Freeway alignment.
city agrees that in the event city shall negotiate with
California Transportation Ventures (CTV) or other toll road
builder any participation or advantages to City that city
shall share such rights with subsequent owner/resident of the
property.
J 3C- :l
R..X; 13 '96 11: 42R'1 1.ESTB'1,( a:F'ITR..:
P.2/3
Village
DEVBLOPMENT
Attachment 2
Q..liIJI _ ,.,.,..,,_...11/IoI riMa lY74
August 12. 1996
Sat..;..~k
(61') SUo$61Z
.. u.s. JltIU
Mr. John Go,.. City ~"'~IV"
City ofChuIa VIIta
276 4th Avenue
C1ula Vi... CaIifomI& 91910
Dar Jolin:
I UIIderItInd that in connection with the City', neaotlatiOlll with SNMB CODOIII'IIiDs their
Dtve10pment Aaroomont. iliuM have booAl'IiJod QOJIC6j aiDs the iaterpretation of 1110 clamasos
lOCtIon Or the Development Aarecm= lnvo1vlq VIIIap ])eveIuyIlll'Dt. SpcdfiOl11y, the City
be1ieYeI tho current clamaaet 1mauaae CODt,,;IW! in all of the Otay Raneh reIatod DtveIopmeDt
/aafeOIIIOI1tI pormit illllIIICtive re1iet; but doeI DOt provide for moDctary damaaoI except tor
JltilPtlnn com and attorII8y',!MI. I agree with SNMB that the current ~ II IIIIbJauous
and UDdmtand the City desire to .1Hnift.... Ill'J ambisuitY. I fUrther recopizo that c\r-torioa to
other Otay Ranch DoveIopmont Ap-em. lOOk I "1m! playiq field."
To usilt in your efforts to dPnIncto any amblsuitY. UId to tIIIIUre that all Development
ApemeotB are tnatod equally, VIIJaae DeveIopmont would be wiIIiDa to ~ the ezIatIng
~ to cIariiY the damases IKtioDl. Specifically. If the SNMB Development Agreement
oontai". IUd1 1a"8'1ege. we would be wU1iaa 10 moditY Soc:tion 11.2.4 to read u t'ollowa:
11.2.4 AI other remecJiel at law or in equity which are COIIP,.ent
with tho proviJiODl of'tbia Aareemart are aVlllable to City UId Owucr to punue In
the eYeIIt there Is a bJwagh ..-..IdcoI h_. lIelthel' Dam ,!tall h_ thl
nmedY of moneta... d...... ....htlt the 8th.-.. ac:eDt for an awar4 of
IltlntIGli Mitt ADd attorn"'. 'MI.
:;.
."'"
:1..~~:.
1197511 CIaIao acN..... 1"." Diap, C\ fZISO
1\>1. 619.Up..a9U..... 6UMS9-+t64
".
"
.~..#\ .....
"....,....,.
.~,., ~.,
..'~' \U
)' ,'", 4"
.,' I' . I~'
,.. l., ....
I I ".<t' , .,
{;/,..... \::~:;.i . , .
:~:. "'~:~: ,~..t.;...
.~~I .....\ ....J..
." '1-'
............,.'f/.. "';. ~
... -....~:. -....
'.A .....,
I I .,...,~.
., ...,..,..... +
.., ,.:~:;~:;::'I...t.::~:>. .
.' .
1"5C. - 3
r:u; 13 '96 11:42R'\ !.ESTER'( CWITI'L
Mr. 10hn Goo
August 12, 1996
Page 2
Should you have any queItIona or concsnl. pleuc do DOt beIitatc to give me & call.
SUx.eIy,
IOKIjem
OQ: George Krempl
1erry lunriska
AIm Moore
L"tim\1fH\hr :~lJI'12.4oc1
13C - 'i
P.3/3
Attachment 3
staff has been unable to reach an agreement with SNMB, LTD.
regarding the following provision of the SNMB Development Agreement
(the disputed phrase is underlined):
11.2.4 All other remedies at law or in equity which
are consistent with the provisions of this Agreement are
available to city and Owner to pursue in the event there is a
breach provided. however. neither party shall have the remedy
of monetary damaqes aqainst the other. except for an award of
litiqation costs and attorney's fees.
13 ~ - 5
Ub-1L-~b U4:JirM ~KUM ~ou&K
JU IJUUL4b:Jb:J:JlJ J L
rUULI UUL
.
.
Attachment 4
ADD TO 11.2.4 TO SNMB [AND OTHER] AGREEMENTS:
The parties acknowledge and a,ree that. in light of the removal of the
monetarY damages .",medy, either party's remedies at law shall be conclusively presumed
to be inadequate, and iJ\junction, specific perfo~nce, mandate, or any other equitable
remedy, shall be available. In the event that [SNMB] claims a breach of this Agreement
in cormcction with an action in wbicb the City bas discretion, but must act reasonably,
[SNMB] may bring an action for breach of contract, and sba11 not be limited to the remedy
of Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.S, nor the evidentiary limitations of said section.
-1-
13(! -(,
.j;!~
THIS PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is , .3
made effective on the date hereinafter set forth below by and among
the CITY OF CHULA VISTA ("City") and JEWELS OF CHARITY ("Jewels"),
who agree as follows:
PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
1. RECITALS.
following facts:
This Agreement is made with respect to the
1.1 Owner. The owners of the properties subject to this
Agreement (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Owner" or as
"Developer") are as follows:
1.1.1 Jewels is the owner of approximately 475
acres of undeveloped real property ("the Jewels Property") in
the unincorporated area of the county, described in Exhibits
"A" and "C", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference. Portions of Jewels ProDerty are located in
Villaaes 9 and 10 of the otay Ranch ProDerty.
1.1.2 Jewels (the "property")
larger area commonly known, and referred to
Otay Valley Parcel of Otay Ranch."
1. 2 ci tv. The city of Chula vista is a municipal
corporation with Charter city Dowers afla afl incorporated ~
within the County.
is part of a
herein, as "the
1.3 Code Authorization and Acknowledaments.
1.3.1 City is authorized pursuant to its
charter. self-rule Dowers and California Government Code
sections 65864 through 65869.5 to enter into development
agreements for the purpose of establishing certainty for both
City and owners of real property in the development process.
1.3.2 Government Code section 65865 expressly
authorizes a city to enter into a development agreement with
any person having a legal or equitable interest in real
property in unincorporated territory within that city's sphere
of influence for the development of property as provided in
the Development Agreement Law i provided that the agreement
shall not become operative unless annexation proceedings
annexing the property to the city are completed within the
time specified by the agreement.
1.3.3 city enters into this Agreement pursuant
to the provisions of the California Government Code, its home-
rule powers, and applicable City ordinances, rules, regula-
tions and policies.
1.3.4 City and Owner intend to enter into this
aareement for the followinq DurDoses: ac]cfle\Jlea~e I
1.3.4.1 To This A~rcemeflt assures adequate
public facilities at the time of development.
-1-
1.3.4.2 12 TRie AEjreeJl\eflt. assures development
in accordance with city's capital improvement plans.
1.3.4.3 This A~FeemeRt eeRstitatea a earreRt
cxereise af Gi~y's peliee ~e~:ers ~ ~o provide certainty
to Owner in the development approval process by vesting
the permitted use(s), density, intensity of use, and the
timing and phasing of development as described in the
Development Plan, which is defined in Paragraph 2.4 of
this Agreement, in exchange for Owner's entering into
this Agreement and for its commitment to support the
Annexation described below.
1.3.4.4 This AEjreemefit. ..1ill
achievement of City growth management goals
tives.
12 permit
and obj ec-
1.3.4.5 TRie ^Ej~eemefl~ will 12 allow city to
realize significant economic, recreational, park, open
space, social, and public facilities benefits for the
city, some of which are of regional significance.
1.3.4.6
assure that the City
in the property tax
development, sewer,
TRie ^Ej~eell\ef\t. ",Iill 12 provide and
receive sales tax revenues, increase
base, residential housing and other
water and street facilities.
1,3.4.7 TRis AEjreemeflt ~ 12 provide and
assure that the city receives public facilities in excess
of project generated impacts and such facilities shall be
of supplemental size, number capacity or length, which
shall be provided earlier than could be provided either
by funds from the city or than would strictly be
necessary to mitigate project related impacts at any
development phase.
1.3.4.8 TRie p.Ejreemeflt. ',lill 12 provide the
city the developer's support to secure annexation of the
lands depicted in Exhibit "B".
1. 3.4.9 TRie p.Ej~eemeflt. ',:ill 12 enable the
city to secure title to the land within the boundaries of
the Property necessary to complete the Chula vista
greenbelt system as defined in the Chula vista General
Plan.
1.3.4.10 TRie AEj~ee1l\en~ '.Jill 12 assure the
city that the Developer will dedicate rights-of-way to
the city for SR-125, a route which, when constructed,
will sUbstantially alleviate congestion on 1-805 and 1-5,
and also will facilitate the economic development of
Chula vista.
1.3.4.11 Because of the complexities of the
financing of the infrastructure, park, open space, and
other dedications, and regional and community facilities,
and the significant nature of such facilities, certainty
in the development process is an absolute necessity. The
-2-
phasing, timing, and development of public infrastructure
necessitate a significant commitment of resources,
planning, and effort by Owner for the public facilities
financing, construction, and dedication to be success-
fully completed. In return for Owner's participation and
commitment to these significant contributions of private
resources for public purposes and for Owner's consent to
the Annexation described below, city is willing to
exercise its authority to enter into this Agreement and
to make a commitment of certainty for the development
process for the Property.
1.3.4.12 In consideration of Owner's agreement
to provide the significant benefits and for Owner's
consent to the Annexation described below, city hereby
grants Owner assurances that it can proceed with develop-
ment of the Property in accordance with city's
ordinances, rules, regulations, and policies existing as
of the effective date of this Agreement subiect to
section 5.2.1 below. Owner would not enter into this
Agreement or agree to provide the public benefits and
improvements described in this Agreement if it were not
for the commitment of city that the Property subject to
this Agreement can be developed in accordance with City's
ordinances, rules, regulations, and policies existing as
of the effective date of this Agreement subiect to
section 5.2.1 below.
1.4 The Annexation. The city has applied to the Local
Agency Formation commission ("LAFCO") for annexation of Sphere of
Influence planning Area 1 liThe otay parcel", Planning Area 2
"Inverted L" and the Mary Patrick Estate Parcel (see Attachment
"B") .
1.5 Sphere of Influence. A city application is pending
before LAFCO to have the otay Valley Parcel included within City's
sphere of influence. On February 5, 1996 the Local Agency
Formation Commission approved the inclusion of approximately 7,600
acres into the city Sphere of Influence (Sphere of Influence
Planning Area 2 and the northern two thirds of planning Area 1),
and designated the otay River Valley an Village 3 as special study
areas.
1.6 planninq Documents. On October 28, 1993, City and
county adopted the otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional
Plan (lithe GDP") which includes the otay Ranch village phasing
Plan, Facility Implementation Plan, Resource Management Plan and
service Revenue Plan, for approximately 23,000 acres of the otay
Ranch, including the otay Valley Parcel and the Jewels property.
1. 7 Owner Consent. City desires to have the cooperation
and consent of Owner to include the Property in the Annexation in
order to better plan, finance, construct and maintain the infra-
structure for the otay Valley Parcel; and Jewels desires to give
their cooperation and consent, provided that they obtain certain
assurances, as set forth in this Agreement.
-3-
1.8 city Ordinance. Auqust . 1996 is the date of
adoption by the City Council of Ordinance No. 2679 approving this
Agreement. The ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on
the effec~ive date of Annexation.
2. DEFINITIONS.
otherwise requires:
In this Agreement, unless the context
2.1 "Annexation" means the proposed annexation of that
portion of the otay Ranch into the City as depicted on Exhibit
"i.B" .
2.2 "city" means the City of Chula Vista, in the County
of San Diego, state of California.
2.3 "county" means the County of San Diego, State of
California.
2.4 "Development Plan" means the GDP.
2.5 "GDP" means the General Development Plan/ Subregional
Plan for the otay Ranch, described in Paragraph 1.6, above.
2.6 "Owner" or "Developer" means the person, persons, or
entity having a legal and equitable interest in the Property, or
parts thereof, and includes Owner's successors-in-interest.
2.7 "Project" means the physical development of the
private and public improvements on the Property as provided for in
the Existing Project Approvals and as may be authorized by the City
in Future Discretionary Approvals.
2.8 "Property" means the real property described in
Paragraph 1.1.1.
2.9 The "Term" of this Agreement means the period
defined in Paragraph 3, below.
2.10 "Builder" means developer to whom Developer has sold
or conveyed property within the Property for purposes of its
improvement for residential, commercial, industrial or other use.
2.11 "CEQA" means the California Environmental Quality
Act, California Public Resources Code section 21000, et seq.
2.12 "City council" means the City of Chula vista City
council.
2.13 "commit" or "committed" means all of the following
requirements have been met with respect to any public facility:
2.13.1 For a public facility within the city's
jurisdictional boundaries and a responsibility of the develop-
er.
2.13.1.1 All discretionary permits required of
the Developer have been obtained for construction of the
public facility;
-4-
2.13.1.2 Plans for the construction of the
public facility have all the necessary governmental
approvals; and
2.13.1.3 Adequate funds (i.e., letters of
credit, cash deposits, performance bonds or land secured
public financing, including facility benefit assessments,
Mello-Roos assessment districts of similar assessment
mechanism) are available such that the City can construct
the public facility if construction has not commenced
within thirty (30) days of issuance of a notice to
proceed by the Director of Public Works, or construction
is not progressing towards completion in a reasonable
manner as reasonably deemed by the Director of Public
Works.
2.13.2 For a public facility ,within the City's
jurisdictional boundaries, but to be provided by other than
Developer.
2.13.2.1 Developer's proportionate share of
the cost of such public facility as defined in the
existing Project Approvals and Future Discretionary
Approvals has been provided or assured by Developer
through the payment or impositions of development impact
fee or other similar exaction mechanism.
2.13.3 For public facility not within city's
jurisdictional boundaries:
the cost
existing
Approvals
Developer
of Public
2.13.3.1 Developer's proportionate share of
of such public facility as defined in the
Project Approvals and Future Discretionary
has been provided for or otherwise assured by
to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director
Works.
2.14 "Development Impact Fee (DIF)" means fees imposed
upon new development pursuant to the City of Chula vista
Development Impact Fee Program, for example, including but not
limited to the Transportation Development Impact Fee Program, the
Interim SR-125 Development Impact Fee Program, the Salt Creek Sewer
DIF and the Public Facilities DIF.
2.15 "Existing Project Approvals" means all discretionary
approvals affecting the Project which have been approved or
established in conjunction with, or preceding, the effective date
consisting of, but not limited to the GDP, the Chula vista General
Plan, the otay Ranch Reserve Fund Program adopted pursuant to
Resolution 18288, and the Phase I and II Resource Management Plan
(RMP) , as may be amended from time to time consistent with this
agreement.
2.16 "Final Map(s)" means any final subdivision map for
all or any portion of the Property other than the Superblock Final
Map ("A" Maps).
-5-
2.17 "Future Discretionary Approvals" means all permits
and approvals by the city granted after the effective date and
excluding existing Project Approvals, including, but not limited
to: (i) grading permits; (ii) site plan reviews; (iii) design
guidelines and reviews; (iv) precise plan reviews; (v) sUbdivisions
of the property or re-subdivisions of the Property previously
subdivided pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act; (vi) conditional
use permits; (vii) variances; (viii) encroachment permits;
(ix) sectional Planning Area plans; (x) Preserve Conveyance Plan
and (xi) all other reviews, permits, and approvals of any type
which may be required from time to time to authorize public or
private on- or off-site facilities which are a part of the Project.
2.18 "planning commission" means the Planning commission
of the city of Chula Vista.
2.19 "Preserve Conveyance Plan" means a plan that will.
when adoDted. sets forth policies and identify the schedule for
laRa te ~e transfer~ of land and/or fees to be paid to insure the
orderly conveyance of the otay Ranch land to the Preserve Owner
Manager. The purpose of the plan is to fulfill the obligations to
convey resource sensitive land, per the criteria contained in the
phase I and II Resource Management Plans and to mitigate environ-
mental impacts of the otay Ranch Project.
2.20 "public Facility"
public facilities described
Implementation Plan.
or "public Facilities" means those
in the otay Ranch Facility
2.21 "subdivision Map Act" means the California
SUbdivision Map Act, Government Code section 66410, et seq., and
its amendments as may from time to time be adopted.
2.22 "substantial Compliance" means that the party
charged with the performance of a covenant herein has sufficiently
followed the terms of this Agreement so as to carry out the intent
of the parties in entering into this Agreement.
2.23 "Threshold" means the facility thresholds set forth
in the city's Municipal code section 19.19.040.
3. nE,M. This Agreement shall become effective as a
development agreement upon the effective date of the Annexation
("the Effective Date"); provided, however, that if the Annexation
does not occur on or before January 1, 1997, this Agreement shall
be null and void. Any of the foregoing to the contrary notwith-
standing, from the date of first reading of the ordinance approving
this Agreement, and unless or until this Agreement becomes null and
void, Owner shall be bound by the terms of Paragraph 4. The Term
of this Agreement for purposes other than paragraph 4 shall begin
upon the Effective Date, and shall continue for a period of twenty
(20) years ("the Term").
The term shall also be extended for any period of time during which
issuance of building permits to Developer is suspended for any
reason other than the default of Developer, and for a period of
time equal to the period of time during which any action by the
city or court action limits the processing of future discretionary
-6-
approvals, issuance of building permits or any other development of
the property consistent with this Agreement.
4. OWNER CONSENT TO ANNEXATION. Owner hereby consents to
and shall cooperate with the applications of city to declare that
the otay valley Parcel is within city's sphere of influence and to
annex the otay Valley Parcel to the city; provided, however, that
Owner may withdraw such consent and withhold further cooperation if
the city, prior to the Effective Date, adopts rules, regulations,
ordinances, policies, conditions, environmental regulations,
phasing controls, exactions, entitlements, assessments or fees
applicable to and governing development of the Property which are
inconsistent with, or render impractical development of the
property according to, the Development Plan or the additional
commitments of city set forth in paragraphs 5.1.1 through 5.1.5
5.1.8, below. owner also aarees not to challenae the annexation of
the otav Valley Parcel into the city.
5. VESTED RIGHTS. Notwithstanding any future action or
inaction of the city during the term of this Agreement, whether
such action is by ordinance, resolution or policy of the city,
Owner and Developer shall have a vested right, except as may be
otherwise provided in this section 5, to construct the Project in
accordance with:
5.1 Existing project Approvals, subject to the following
reauests for modifications. if approved bv the city:
5.~.1 cit.y SR~ll reasel'1aelj' ee~sia~ ~:" i::
:~::~::~e: :1'1~ ',lith p;e;er ~ virel'1R\e~;al ~~e~l, : r~::e:t. ::
~:e~~~s~ = r~;~~nst.ial d'~lsi t.y. ef :~!.~~g<:~ :' ~! ~:: 8, :~
1.1: r i.dcnt!: un1 ts ~reYl.aaa l.fl '."l.llage J 19,.
the Ce~R~Y' aaep~ea CDr.
S.1. 2 eit.y sRall rea5eRa131y ee~::i~er ~R, ~t.:
:;;:~:;i:: ~: :rae;ss ;Ii t.R preper ':,n.~~~n;.~~ :~~;c~: :
~e-;::: ~~ ~;;t~i ~c ~i~aFY la.:~ ~se ~:::::;~: fer Y;I~:~:
:er~~:, ~:~=:~e:tde;:r:r:::l, i !':~~~;:~~;' t.R:%~::::~
:~E~r~~~:, ~:: ::::: =:~:~;:~~i i~e ~~{~~~:~1~1 ~1'1~:;~~;~!;L
in a ~eReFal pIa" ameRsmeflt.
5.1.35.1.1 If the interchange improvements at
otay Valley Road and 1-805 are needed to serve the project,
the city will hold appropriate hearings to consider an
amendment to amens its Transportation phasing plan (TPP) and
Development Impact Fee (DIF) Program to include said improve-
ments as may be deemed appropriate bv the city to accommodate
the project phasing. The city agrees to reasonably cooperate
and work with CALTRANS to complete plans for said ~ inter-
change improvement plal'19.
5.1.i5.1.2 city shall initiate contact and
diligently pursue discussions with the county of San Diego and
the city of San Diego to determine the number, scheduling and
financing of the otay River road and bridge crossings.
-7-
S.1.S5.1.3 city shall allow the owner for
purposes of processing entitlements to proceed with planning
of the property on a first come first served basis, with other
prop~rties in the area of the Annexation. In addition, if
necessary the City shall, with proper environmental review,
consider in its discretion an amendment to the village phasing
Plan to facilitate the planning and development of the
properties covered by this Agreement.
5.1.65.1.4 To the extent any of the foregoing
commitments of city are embodied in changes to the Development
Plan or the rules, regulations, ordinances, policies,
conditions, environmental regulations, phasing controls,
exactions, entitlements, assessments, and fees applicable to
and governing development of the Property, whether adopted
before or after the Effective Date, such changes shall be
deemed applicable to the property without change to this
Agreement.
S. 1. 75.1. 5 city shall diligently process
any amendments, applications, maps, or other development
applications.
may make such modifications or
amendments to the xistin o'ect A rova s Future isc et'o a
ADDrovals, as may be ordered bv a court of comDetent ;urisdiction,
in an action in which teh DeveloDer is a Dartv or has had an
ortun't to a ear or has been rovided noti e of suc action bv
the citv.
;,1.8 eity sRal1 reasenaaly eensiaer ana a~l~:
~~~i;~e:re2~e;:, a ,re:::s: ti~ e~::n~ve~~e !.~::~;:I>::~r::::~t:i
::::!;:,;::i~~e t~t areas e~ee een~ia~~~~ :~~~~;;;;;~:!~~
1. 11 19e. ~:ele~ee1. i..:1t.fisat. S1E)Rl.f1eaf\t., \inml.'tJ.f:Jaele
cft~ireftmeRt.al impaetc.
5.2 DeveloDment of ProDertv. The development of the
Property will be governed by this Agreement and Existing Project
Approvals and such development shall comply and be governed by all
rules, regulations, policies, resolutions, ordinances, and
standards in effect as of the Effective Date subject to the
provisions of section 5.2.1 below. The city shall retain its
discretionary authority as to Future Discretionary Approvals,
provided however, such Future Discretionary Approvals shall be
regulated by the Existing Project Approvals, this Agreement, and
city rules, regulations, standards, ordinances, resolutions and
policies in effect on the Effective Date of this Agreement and
subject to section 5.2.1.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the city may make such changes to
the city's Growth Management Ordinance applicable to the Project as
are reasonable and consistent with the purpose and intent of the
existing Growth Management Ordinance and which are generally
applicable to all private projects citywide or east of 1-805 or
within a specific benefit, fee or reimbursement district created
pursuant to the California Government Code.
-8-
5.2.1 New or Amended Rules. Requlations.
policies. standards. Ordinances and Resolutions. The city may
apply to the Project, including Future Discretionary Approv-
als, new or amended rules, laws, regulations, policies,
ordinances, resolutions and standards generally applicable to
all private projects east of 1-805 or within a specific
benefit fee or reimbursement district created pursuant to the
California Government Code. The application of such new
rules, or amended laws, regulations, resolutions, policies,
ordinances and standards will not unreasonably prevent or
delay development of the property to the uses, densities or
intensities of development specified herein or as authorized
by the Existing Project Approvals. The city may also apply
changes in city laws, regulations, ordinances, standards or
policies specifically mandated by changes in state or federal
law in compliance with section 13.3 herein.
5.2.2 Developer may elect with city's consent,
to have applied to the project any rules, regulations,
policies, ordinances or standards enacted after the date of
this Agreement. Such an election has to be made in a manner
consistent with section 5.2 of this Agreement.
5.2.3 Modifications to Existinq Pro;ect
At>t>rovals. It is contemplated by the parties to this
Agreement that the city and Developer may mutually seek and
agree to modifications to the Existing Project Approvals.
Such modifications are contemplated as within the scope of
this Agreement, and shall, upon written acceptance by all
parties, constitute for all purposes an Existing Project
Approval. The parties agree that any such modifications may
not constitute an amendment to this Agreement nor require an
amendment to the Agreement.
5.2.4 Future Discretionarv At>t>rovals. It is
contemplated by the parties to this Agreement that the city
and Developer may agree to Future Discretionary Approvals. The
parties agree that any such Future Approvals may not consti-
tute an amendment to this Agreement nor require an amendment
to the Agreement.
5.3 Dedication and Reservation of Land for ub ic
Purt>oses. Except as expressly required by this Agreement or the
Existing project Approvals and Future Discretionary Approvals
(excepting dedications required within the boundaries of any parcel
created by the subsequent subdivision of the property as required
by the SUbdivision Map Act), no dedication or reservation of real
property within or outside the property shall be required by city
or Developer in conjunction with the project. Any dedications and
reservations of land imposed shall be in accordance with section
7.2 and Section 7.8 herein.
5.4 Time for construction and Comt>letion of pro;ect.
Because the California supreme Court held in Pardee construction
Comt>anv v. citv of Camarillo (1984) 27 Cal.3d 465, that the failure
of the parties to provide for the timing of development resulted in
a later-adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to
prevail over such parties' Agreement, it is the intention of the
-9-
parties to this Agreement to cure that deficiency by specifically
acknowledging that timing and phasing of development is completely
and exclusively governed by the Existing Project Approvals,
including the Chula vista Growth Management Ordinance. The purpose
of the Chula vista Growth Management Ordinance is to "control the
timing and location of development by tying the pace of development
to the provision of public facilities and improvements to conform
to the city's threshold standards. " (Municipal Code section
19.09.010A.7) The findings in support of the Growth Management
Ordinance conclude that the ordinance "does not affect the number
of houses which may be built." (Municipal Code Section
19.09.010B.3) Therefore, the parties acknowledge that the Chula
vista Growth Management Ordinance completely occupies the topic of
development timing and phasing and expressly precludes the adoption
of housing caps, urban reserves or any other means by which the
rate of development may be controlled or regulated. The City
agrees that the Developer shall be entitled to, apply for and
receive all permits necessary for the development of property,
consistent with the Growth Management Ordinance, Existing Project
Approvals, Future Discretionary Approvals and this Agreement.
5.5 Benefit of Vestinq. Nothing in this Agreement will
be construed as limiting or impairing Developer's vested right, if
any, to proceed with the development and use of the Property
pursuant to the Federal and State constitutions, and pursuant to
statutory and decisional law.
5.6 Vestinq of Entitlements. All rights conferred by
this Agreement vest with the Effective Date hereof. The approval
of Future Discretionary approvals shall not be deemed to limit
Developer's rights authorized by this Agreement, and. once such
approvals are obtained they shall be vested to the same extent as
the Existing Project Approvals.
6. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
6.1 processinq of Future Discretionarv Approvals. city
will accept and diligently process development applications and
requests for Future Discretionary Approvals, or other entitlements
with respect to the development and use of the Property, provided
said applications and requests are in accordance with this
Agreement. city costs for processing work related to the Project,
including hiring of additional City personnel and/or the retaining
of professional consultants, will be reimbursed to city by
Developer.
6.2 Lenqth of Validitv of Tentative Subdivision Maps.
Government Code section 66452.6 provides that tentative subdivision
map(s) may remain valid for a length up to the term of a Develop-
ment Agreement. The city agrees that tentative subdivision map(s)
for the property shall be for a term of six (6) years and may be
extended by the City council for a period of time not to exceed a
total of twenty (20) years and in no event beyond the term of this
Agreement.
6.3 Pre-Final Map Development. If Developer desires to
do certain work on the Property after approval of a tentative map
(for example, grading) prior to the recordation of a final map, it
-10-
may do so by obtaining a grading and/or other required approvals
from the city which are authorized by the city prior to recordation
of a final map. Such permit shall be issued to Developer, or its
contractor, upon Developer's application, approval, and provided
Developer posts a bond or other reasonably adequate security
required by city in an amount to assure the rehabilitation of the
land if the applicable final map does not record.
6.4 Final Maps.
6.4.1 "A" Maps and "B" Maps. If Developer so
elects, the city shall accept and process a master subdivision
or parcel map ("A" Map) showing "super Block" lots and
backbone street dedications. "Super Block" lots shall be
consistent with the GDP and subsequent Sectional Plan Area
plans, and shall not subdivide land into individual single-
family lots. All "super Blocks" created shall have access to
dedicated public streets. The City shall not require improve-
ment plans in order to record a final map for any "A" Map
lots, but the city shall require bonding for the completion of
backbone facilities prior to recording in an amount to be
determined by the City. Following the approval by City of any
final map for an "A" Map lot and its recordation, Developer
may convey the "super Block" lot. The buyer of a "Super
Block" lot shall then process final improvement plans and
grading plans and a final map ("B" Map) for each "Super Block"
lot which the city shall process. The "B" Maps shall be in
substantial conformance with the related approved "A" Map. In
the instance of the multi-family dwelling unit areas, a
separate tentative subdivision map may be submitted to the
city and the "B" Map(s) for these areas may be submitted to
the city after the City Planning commission approves said
tentative subdivision map.
6.4.2 Recordation of Final Subdivision Map in
Name of Builder or Third Partv. Developer may, if it so
elects, convey to a Builder or third party any "super block"
lot(s) shown on the recorded Superblock Final Map. In such
case, the Builder or third party will (i) process any neces-
sary final improvement and grading plans and a final map for
each such "super block" lot, which map city shall accept and
process as subsequent phases in a multi-phase project, (ii)
enter into a subdivision improvement agreement with city with
respect to the subdivision improvements which are required for
such super block lot, and (iii) provide security and insurance
satisfactory to city for the completion of the subdivision
improvements.
6.4.3 Recordation of Final Subdivision Map in
Developer's Name: Transfer of Obliqations Under SUbdivision
Improvement Aqreementls). If Developer so elects, it may
defer the conveyance of any super block lot to a Builder or
third party until after the final map of such super block lot
has been recorded. If Developer elects to proceed in this
manner, it will enter into city's standard subdivision
improvement agreement(s) with city for the improvements
required as a condition to the approval of such map(s). Upon
sale to a Builder or third party, if such Builder or third
-11-
party assumes Developer's obligations under the improvement
agreement and provides its own security and insurance for the
completion of the subdivision improvements as approved by the
city, Developer shall be released from liability under the
subdivision improvement agreement(s) and Developer's security
shall be released.
6.4.4 Transfer of Riqhts and Obliqations of
Development. Whenever Developer conveys a portion of the
Property, the rights and obligations of this Agreement shall
transfer in accordance with section 15 herein.
7. DEVELOPER'S OBLIGATIONS.
7.1 condition to Developer's Obliqations to Dedicate. Fund or
Construct Public Facilities. Developer agrees to develop or
provide the public improvements, facilities, dedications, or
reservations of land and satisfy other exactions conditioning the
development of the Property which are set forth hereinbelow. The
obligations of the Developer pursuant to this Agreement are
conditioned upon: (i) the City not being in default of its obliga-
tions under this agreement; and (ii) the city not preventing or
unreasonably delaying the development of the property; and (iii)
the Agreement having not been suspended in response to changes in
state or federal law; and (iv) the city's obligations having not
been suspended pursuant to Section 13.2.
7.2 Dedications and Reservations of Land for public Purposes.
The policies by which property will be required to be reserved,
dedicated or improved for public purposes are identified in the
Existing Project Approvals. A more precise delineation of the
property to be preserved, dedicated or improved for public purposes
shall occur as part of Future Discretionary Approvals, consistent
with the Existing Project Approvals.
7.2.1 Dea~eati6R af LaRa feF ER 125. DcvclepcF a~Yecs te
dcElieate laRa fer FieJRt af tJay fJ\;lY19sscs aRa pre1gert.y e..lI~cel 13y
the DEveleper that is l'eas8Raely f\ceessary fer t.he ER 125
eeRfi~HratieR ~ha~ is ~cRerally acpietca in thc ~R 12S draft
ERvirsRmcRtal Im19aet RC19srtjctatcmeRt aRa as l'e~i6Ca iR the
FiRel EnvirsRmeRtal Im19aet. RepeFt/ ~tat.e1flCRt t.e reapeRs te
Cf\~iftECrifl!, aeei!R, eRvirsRmeRt.al aRB similar eSRstraiRt,e.
The dedieat.ieR5 shall Be t.e the city SF BY an alternate methea
aeeeptasle te t.he Gity at. Bash time as rc~ue5tea BY the eity.
ci t:y afJreea 'that iR thc e-,e:Rt ei ty shall ReEjstiate -_-i tft
califerRia Trafl.aper~a'tieR VeRt:~ree CCTV) aF ather t:ell reas
h~ilder aft} par~ieipa'tien SF aBV8R'taEjea ~S Ci~y ~l=1at: eity
Bhall saare Baeh rights -.titft e\iBae~U&:Rt a-.1Rcr/re:siaefrE af 'Ehe
prs13erty.
7.2.2 PrcservE. GeRVE.";aACC PlaR. 'rhe G1 t.y aRB 'the
Dcveleper aRall m1it\:ilall}~ a~rce \ipS!; a Prcaerve C8flveyaRee
rlaR. The City shall iR ~eea faith eensiaer fer aaapt.isR s\ish
a plaR aRa the Devcleper chall eeR~ey prepcrty aRaler fees in
lieu af lana as set fert.h in aaeh rlaR.
-12-
7.3 Growth Manaqement ordinance.. Developer shall commit the
public facilities and city shall issue building permits as provided
in this section. The City shall have the right to withhold the
issuance of building permits any time after the City reasonably
determines a Threshold has been exceeded, unless and until the
Developer has mitigated the deficiency in accordance with the
city's Growth Management Ordinance.
Developer agrees that building permits may be withheld where the
public facilities described in the Existing Project Approvals/-
Future Discretionary Approvals required for a particular Threshold
have not been committed.
In the event a Threshold is not met and future building permit
issuance may be withheld, the notice provisions and procedures
contained in section 19.09 .100C of the Municipal Code will be
followed. In the event the issuance of building permits is
suspended pursuant to the provisions herein, such suspension shall
not constitute a breach of the terms of this Agreement by Developer
or citv. Furthermore, any such suspension which is not caused by
the actions or omissions of the Developer, shall toll the term of
this Agreement as provided for in section 16.12 of this Agreement,
and suspend the Developer's obligations pursuant to this Agreement.
7.3.1 Required Condemnation. The City and Developer
recognize that certain of the public facilities identified in
the Existing Project Approvals/Future Discretionary Approvals
and required to comply with a threshold are located on
properties which neither the Developer nor the city has, or
will have, title to or control of. The City shall identify
such property or properties and at the time of filing of the
final map commence timely negotiations or, where the property
is within the city's jurisdiction, commence timely proceedings
pursuant to Title 7 (commencing with S 1230.010) of Part 3 of
the Code of Civil Procedure to acquire an interest in the
property or properties. Developer's share of the cost
involved in any such acquisition shall be based on its
proportionate share of the public facility as defined in the
Existing Project Approvals/Future Discretionary Approvals.
Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to preclude the City
from requiring the Developer to pay the cost of acquiring such
off-site land. For that portion of the cost beyond the
Developer's fair share responsibility, the city shall take all
reasonable steps to establish a procedure whereby the develop-
er is reimbursed for such costs beyond its fair share.
7.3.2 Information Reqardinq Thresholds. Upon
Developer's written requests of the City Manager, the City
will provide Developer with information regarding the current
status of a Threshold. Developer shall be responsible for any
staff costs incurred in providing said written response.
7.4 Improvements Required bv a Subdivision Map. Asmay
be required pursuant to the terms of a subdivision map, it shall be
the responsibility of Developer to construct the improvements
required by a subdivision map. Where Developer is required to
-13-
construct a public improvement which has been identified as the
responsibility of another party or to provide public improvements
of suppl~mental size, capacity, number or length benefiting
property not within the subdivision, city shall process a reim-
bursement agreement to the Developer in accordance with Article 6
of Chapter 4 of the Subdivision Map Act, commencing with Government
Code section 66485, and section 7.5, below.
7.5 Facilities Which Are the Obliaations of Another
Partv. or Are of Excessive Size. CaDacitv. Lenath or Number.
Developer may offer to advance monies and/or construct public
improvements which are the responsibility of another land owner, or
outside the city's jurisdictional boundaries, or which are of
supplemental size, capacity, number or length for the benefit of
land not within the Property. city, where requesting such funding
or construction of oversized public improvements, shall consider
after a public hearing, contemporaneous with the imposition of the
obligation, the formation of a reimbursement district, assessment
district, facility benefit assessment, or reimbursement agreement
or other reimbursement mechanism.
7.6 Pioneerina of Facilities. To the extent Developer
itself constructs (Le., "pioneers") any public facilities or
public improvements which are covered by a DIF Program, Developer
shall be given a credit against DIFs otherwise payable, subject to
the city's Director of Public Works reasonable determination that
such costs are allowable under the applicable DIF Program. It is
specifically intended that Developer be given DIF credit for the
DIF Program improvements it makes. The fact that such improvements
may be financed by an assessment district or other financing
mechanism, shall not prevent DIF credit from being given to the
extent that such costs are allowed under the applicable DIF Program
7.7 Insurance.
insured for all insurance
Project as pertains to the
the Project.
Developer shall name city as additional
policies obtained by Developer for the
Developer's activities and operation on
7.8 other Land Owners. Developer hereby agrees to
dedicate adequate rights-of-way within the boundaries of the
Property for other land owners to "Pioneer" public facilities on
the Property; provided, however, as follows: (i) dedications shall
be restricted to those reasonably necessary for the construction of
facilities identified in the city's adopted public facility plans;
(ii) this provision shall not be binding on the successors-in-
interest or assignees of Developer following recordation of the
final "Super Block" or "A" Map; and (iii) the city shall use its
reasonable best efforts to obtain agreements similar to this
subsection from other developers and to obtain equitable reimburse-
ment for Developer for any excess dedications.
8. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES.
8.1 Existina DeveloDment ImDact Fee Proaram Pavments.
Developer shall pay to the City a DIF, or construct improvements in
lieu of payment, for improvements which are conditions of a
tentative sUbdivision map upon the issuance of building permits (s) ,
or at a later time as specified by City ordinance, the Subdivision
-14-
Map Act, or Public Facility Financing Plan (PFFP).
in the amount in effect at the time payment is made
increased pursuant to Section 8.6 herein.
The DIF will be
and may only be
8.2 Other Undeveloped Properties. The City will use its
reasonable best efforts to impose and collect, or cause the
imposition and collection of, the same DIF program on all the
undeveloped real properties which benefit from the provision of the
public facility through the DIF program, or provided as a condition
of Project Approvals.
8.3 Use of Development Impact Fee Proqram. The DIF
amounts paid to the city by Developer and others with respect to
the Area of Benefit shall be placed by the City in a capital
facility fund account established pursuant to California Government
Code sections 66000-66009. The city shall expend such funds only
for the projects described in the adopted fee program as may be
modified from time to time. The City will use its reasonable best
efforts to cause such Projects to be completed as soon as practica-
ble; however, the city shall not be obligated to use its general
funds for such Projects.
8.4 Withholdinq of Permits. Developer agrees that city
shall have the right to withhold issuance of the building permit
for any structure or improvement on the Property unless and until
the DIF is paid for such structure or improvement.
8.5 Development Impact Fee Credit. Upon the completion
and acceptance by the city of any public facility, the city shall
immediately credit Developer with the appropriate amount of cash
credits (IIEDUs") as determined by Developer and city. However, if
the improvements are paid for through an Assessment District, the
city shall credit the Developer with the appropriate number of
Equivalent Dwelling unit Credits (EDU'S). Developer shall be
entitled to apply any and all credits accrued pursuant to this
subsection toward the required payment of future DIF for any phase,
stage or increment of development of the Project.
8.6 Modification of Development Impact Fees. The
parties recognize that from time to time during the duration of the
Agreement it will be necessary for the City to update and modify
its DIF fees. Such reasonable modifications are contemplated by
the City and the Developer and shall not constitute a modification
to the Agreement so long as: (i) the modification incorporates the
reasonable costs of providing facilities identified in the Existing
Project Approvals; (ii) are based upon methodologies in substantial
compliance with the methodology contained in the existing DIF
programs; or other methodology approved by the city council
following a public hearing; (iii) complies with the provisions of
Government Code sections 66000-66009.
8.7 Standards for Financinq Obliqations of Owner. In
connection with the development of the Property, the following
standards regarding the financing of public improvements shall
apply:
8.7.1 Owner shall pay its fair share for the
interchanges described in Paragraph 5.1.1 5.1.3, based upon
-15-
the number of dwelling units or equivalent dwellings of
development allowed on the Property as compared to the total
dwelling units or equivalent dwelling units allowed on
properties served by such interchanges.
8.7.2 Owner shall participate in the DIF Program
for the otay Valley Parcel with other owners in proportion to
the total dwelling units or equivalent dwelling units allowed
on the Property as compared with the total of such units
allowed on properties in that particular DIF or by some other
equitable methodology decided by the city Council.
8.7.3 The city shall diligently pursue the
requirements that the Eastern Territories' DIF requires
offsite third parties and adjacent jurisdictions to bear their
fair share of all otay River Valley crossings.
9. CITY OBLIGATIONS.
9.1 Urban Infrastructure. To the extent it is within
the authority of the City to provide, city shall accommodate urban
infrastructure to the project, consistent with Existing Project
Approvals. Where it is necessary to utilize city property to
provide urban infrastructure consistent with the Existing Project
Approvals, the city agrees to make such land available for such
uses, provided that the city if it so chooses is compensated at
fair market value for the property. To the extent that the
provision of urban infrastructure is within the authority of
another public or quasi-public agency or utility, the city agrees
to fully cooperate with such agency or agencies to accommodate the
urban infrastructure, consistent with Existing Project Approvals.
Urban infrastructure shall include, but not be limited to gas,
electricity, telephone, cable and facilities identified in the otay
Ranch Facility Implementation Plan.
9.2 Sewer CaDaci tv. The City agrees to provide adequate
sewer capacity for the project, upon the payment of ordinary and
necessary sewer connection, capacity and/or service fees.
10. ANNUAL REVIEW.
10.1 citv and Owner ResDonsibilities. City will, at
least every twelve (12) months during the Term of this Agreement,
pursuant to California Government Code S65865.1, review the extent
of good faith substantial compliance by Owner with the terms of
this Agreement. Pursuant to California Government Code section
65865.1, as amended, Owner shall have the duty to demonstrate by
substantial evidence its good faith compliance with the terms of
this Agreement at the periodic review. Either city or Owner may
address any requirement of the Agreement during the review.
10.2 Evidence. The parties recognize that this Agreement
and the documents incorporated herein could be deemed to contain
hundreds of requirements and that evidence of each and every
requirement would be a wasteful exercise of the parties' resources.
Accordingly, Developer shall be deemed to have satisfied its good
faith compliance when it presents evidence of substantial com-
pliance with the major provisions of this Agreement. Generalized
-16-
evidence or statements shall be accepted in the absence of any
evidence that such evidence is untrue.
10.3 Review Letter. If Owner is found to be in com-
pliance with this Agreement after the annual review, city shall,
within forty-five (45) days after Owner's written request, issue a
review letter in recordable form to Owner ("Letter") stating that
based upon information known or made known to the council, the City
Planning Commission and/or the city Planning Director, this
Agreement remains in effect and Owner is not in default. Owner may
record the Letter in the Official Records of the County of San
Diego.
10.4 Failure of Periodic Review. city's failure to
review at least annually Owner's compliance with the terms and
conditions of this Agreement shall not constitute, or be asserted
by city or OWner as, a breach of the Agreement.
11. DEFAULT.
11.1 Events of Default. A default under this Agreement
shall be deemed to have occurred upon the happening of one or more
of the following events or conditions:
11.1.1 A warranty,' representation or statement
made or furnished by Owner to city is false or proves to have
been false in any material respect when it was made.
11.1.2 A finding and determination by City made
following a periodic review under the procedure provided for
in California Government Code section 65865.1 that upon the
basis of substantial evidence Owner has not complied in good
faith with one or more of the terms or conditions of this
Agreement.
consider
submitted
11.1.3 City does not accept,
requested development permits
in accordance with the provisions
timely review, or
or entitlements
of this Agreement.
11.1. 4 Any other act or omission by city or Owner
which materially interferes with the terms of this Agreement.
11.2 Procedure Upon Default.
11.2.1 Upon the occurrence of default by the
other party, City or Owner may terminate this Agreement after
providing the other party thirty (30) days written notice
specifying the nature of the alleged default and, when
appropriate, the manner in which said default may be satis-
factorily cured. After proper notice and expiration of said
thirty (30) day cure period without cure, this Agreement may
be terminated. In the event that city's or Owner's default is
not subject to cure within the thirty (30) day period, city or
Owner shall be deemed not to remain in default in the event
that City or Owner commences to cure within such thirty (30)
day period and diligently prosecutes such cure to completion.
Failure or delay in giving notice of any default shall not
constitute a waiver of any default, nor shall it change the
-17-
time of default. Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Agreement, City reserves the right to formulate and propose to
Owner options for curing any defaults under this Agreement for
which a cure is not specified in this Agreement.
11. 2.2 City does not waive any claim of defect in
performance by Owner if, on periodic review, City does not
propose to modify or terminate this Agreement.
11.2.3 subject to Paragraph 16.12 of this
Agreement, the failure of a third person shall not excuse a
party's nonperformance under this agreement.
11.2.4 All other remedies at law or in equity
which are consistent with the provisions of this Agreement are
available to city and Owner to pursue in the event there is a
breach Drovided however. neither Dartv shall have the remedY
of monetarY damaaes aaainst the other. exceDt for an award of
litiaation costs and attorney's fees.
12. ENCUMBRANCES AND RELEASES ON PROPERTY.
12.1 Discretion to Encumber. This Agreement shall not
prevent or limit Owner in any manner at Owner's sole discretion,
from encumbering the Property, or any portion of the Property, or
any improvement on the Property, by any mortgage, deed of trust, or
other security device securing financing with respect to the
Property or its improvement.
12.2 Mortaaaee Riahts and Obliaations. The mortgagee of
a mortgage or beneficiary of a deed of trust encumbering the
Property, or any part thereof, and their successors and assigns
shall, upon written request to City, be entitled to receive from
city written notification of any default by Owner of the
performance of Owner's obligations under the Agreement which has
not been cured within thirty (30) days following the date of
default.
12.3 Releases. city agrees that upon written request of
Owner and payment of all fees and performance of the require-
ments and conditions required of Owner by this Agreement with
respect to the Property, or any portion thereof, City may
execute and deliver to Owner appropriate release(s) of further
obligations imposed by this Agreement in form and substance
acceptable to the San Diego County Recorder and title
insurance company, if any, or as may otherwise be necessary to
effect the release. City Manager shall not unreasonably
withhold approval of such release(s).
12.4 Obliaation to Modifv. City acknowledges that the
lenders providing financing for the Project may require certain
modifications to this Agreement and City agrees, upon request from
time to time, to meet with Owner and/or representatives of such
lenders to negotiate in good faith any such requirement for
modification. city will not unreasonably withhold its consent to
any such requested modification.
13. MODIFICATION OR SUSPENSION.
-18-
13.1 Modification to Aqreement bv Mutual Consent. This
Agreement may be modified, from time to time, by the mutual consent
of the' parties only in the same manner as its adoption by an
ordinance as set forth in California Government Code sections
65867, 65867.5 and 65868. The term, "this Agreement" as used in
this Agreement, will include any such modification properly
approved and executed.
13.2 Unforeseen Health or Safetv circumstances. If, as
a result of facts, events, or circumstances presently unknown,
unforeseeable, and which could not have been known to the parties
prior to the commencement of this Agreement, city finds that
failure to suspend this Agreement would place the residents of city
in a severe and immediate emergency to their health or safety.
13.2.1 Notification of Unforeseen Circumstances.
Notify Developer of (i) city's determination; and (ii) the
reasons for city's determination, and all facts upon which
such reasons are based;
13.2.2 Notice of Hearinq. Notify Developer in
writing at least fourteen (14) days prior to the date, of the
date, time and place of the hearing and forward to Developer
a minimum of ten (10) days prior to the hearings described in
section 13.2.3, all documents related to such determination
and reasons therefor; and
13.2.3 Hearinq. Hold a hearing on the deter-
mination, at which hearing Developer will have the right to
address the city council. At the conclusion of said hearing,
city may take action to suspend this Agreement as provided
herein. The City may suspend this Agreement if, at the
conclusion of said hearing, based upon the evidence presented
by the parties, the City finds failure to suspend would place
the residents of the city in a severe and immediate emergency
to their health or safety.
13.3 Chanqe in state or Federal Law or Requlations. If
any state or federal law or regulation enacted during the Term of
this Agreement, or the action or inaction of any other affected
governmental jurisdiction, precludes compliance with one or more
provisions of this Agreement, or requires changes in plans, maps,
or permits approved by city, the parties will act pursuant to
Sections 13.3.1 and 13.3.2, below.
13.3.1 Notice: Meetinq. The party first becoming
aware of such enactment or action or inaction will provide the
other party(ies) with written notice of such state or federal
law or regulation and provide a copy of such law or regulation
and a statement regarding its conflict with the provisions of
this Agreement. The parties will promptly meet and confer in
a good faith and reasonable attempt to modify or suspend this
Agreement to comply with such federal or state law or regula-
tion.
13.3.2 Hearinq. If an agreed upon modification
or suspension would not require an amendment to this Agree-
ment, no hearing shall be held. otherwise, the matter of such
-19-
federal or state law or regulation will be scheduled for
hearing before the city. Fifteen (15) days' written notice of
such hearing shall be provided to Developer, and the city, at
such hearing, will determine and issue findings on the
modification or suspension which is required by such federal
or state law or regulation. Developer, at the hearing, shall
have the right to offer testimony and other evidence. If the
parties fail to agree after said hearing, the matter may be
submitted to mediation pursuant to subsection 13.3.3, below.
Any modification or suspension shall be taken by the affirma-
tive vote of not less than a majority of the authorized voting
members of the city. Any suspension or modification may be
subject to judicial review in conformance with subsection
16.19 of this Agreement.
13.3.3 Mediation of DisDutes. In the event the
dispute between the parties with respect to the provisions of
this paragraph has not been resolved to the satisfaction of
both parties following the City hearing required by subsection
13.3.2, the matter shall be submitted to mediation prior to
the filing of any legal action by any party. The mediation
will be conducted by the San Diego Mediation Center; if San
Diego Mediation Center is unable to conduct the mediation, the
parties shall submit the dispute for mediation to the Judicial
Arbitration and Mediation Service or similar organization and
make a good faith effort to resolve the dispute. The cost of
any such mediation shall be divided equally between the
Developer and city.
13.4 Natural Communities conservation Act (NCCP). The
parties recognize that Developer and the city are individually
negotiating agreements with the united States Fish and wildlife
Service ("USF&W") and' the California Department of Fish and Game
pursuant to the ongoing regional effort to implement the Natural
communities Conservation Act ("NCCP"), locally proposed to be
implemented through the MUlti-Species Conservation Program
("MSCP"). The parties further recognize that implementation of the
agreements may necessitate modification to the Existing Project
Approvals. The parties agree to utilize their best efforts to
implement these agreements, once executed, through the timely
processing of modifications to the Existing Project Approvals as
they relate to the Property. The Developer agrees to pay the
reasonable city cost for processing work related to the modifica-
tions. Once such modifications are obtained they shall be vested
to the same extent as Existing Project Approvals.
14. DISTRICTS. PUBLIC FINANCING MECHANISMS.
This Agreement and the Existing Project Approvals recognize
that assessment districts, community facility districts, or other
public financing mechanisms, may be necessary to finance the cost
of public improvements borne by this Project. If Developer,
pursuant to the Existing Project Approvals/Future Discretionary
Approvals, is required to install improvements through the use of
assessment districts, community facility districts, or other public
financing mechanisms, the city shall initiate and conclude
appropriate proceedings for the formation of such financing
-20-
district or funding mechanism, under applicable laws or ordinances.
Developer may request that the City utilize any other financing
methods which may become available under city laws or ordinances.
All costs associated with the consideration and formation of such
financing districts or funding mechanisms shall be paid by
Developer sUbject to reimbursement, as may be legally authorized
out of the proceeds of any financing district or funding mechanism.
15. ASSIGNMENT AND DELEGATION.
15.1 Assiqnment. Owner shall have the right to transfer
or assign its interest in the Property, in whole or in part,
to any persons, partnership, joint venture, firm, or corpora-
tion at any time during the Term of this Agreement without the
consent of city. Owner also shall have the right to assign or
transfer all or any portion of its interest or rights under
this Agreement to third parties acquiring an interest or
estate in the Property at any time during the Term of this
Agreement without the consent of city.
15.2 Deleqation. In addition, Owner shall have the
right to delegate or transfer its obligations under this
Agreement to third parties acquiring an interest or estate in
the Property after receiving the prior written consent of the
City Manager, which consent shall not be unreasonably with-
held, delayed, or conditioned. Once the city Manager has
consented to a transfer, delivery to and acceptance by the
City Manager of an unqualified written assumption of Owner's
obligations under this Agreement by such transferee shall
relieve Owner of the obligations under this Agreement to the
extent the obligations have been expressly assumed by the
transferee. Such transferee shall not be entitled to amend
this Agreement without the written consent of the entity that,
as of the Effective Date, is Owner, which consent shall not be
unreasonably withheld, delayed, or conditioned. The entity
that is Owner as of the Effective Date, however, shall be
entitled to amend this Agreement without the written consent
of such transferee.
16. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
16.1 Bindinq Effect of Aqreement. Except to the extent
otherwise provided in this Agreement, the burdens of this Agreement
bind, and the benefits of this Agreement inure, to City's and
Owner's successors-in-interest and shall run with the land.
16.2 RelationshiD of citv and Owner. The contractual
relationship between City and Owner arising out of this Agreement
is one of independent contractor and not agency. This Agreement
does not create any third-party beneficiary rights.
16.3 Notices. All notices, demands, and correspondence
required or permitted by this Agreement shall be in writing and
delivered in person, or mailed by first-class or certified mail,
postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
If to City, to:
City of Chula. vista
276 Fourth Avenue
-21-
Chu1a vista, CA 91910
Attention: City Manager
.If to Owner, to:
Jewels of Charity, Inc.
705 Severn Road, suite 1040
Wilmington, DE 19803
Attention: Patrick Patek
STEPHENSON, WORLEY, GARRATT
SCHWARTZ, HEIDEL & PRAIRIE
101 West Broadway, suite 1300
San Diego, CA 92101
Attention: Donald R. Worley, Esq.
City or Owner may change its address by giving notice in writing to
the other. Thereafter, notices, demands, and correspondence shall
be addressed and transmitted to the new address. Notice shall be
deemed given upon personal delivery, or, if mailed, two (2)
business days following deposit in the united States mail.
with a Copy to:
16.4 Rules of construction. In this Agreement, the use
of the singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes
the feminine; "shall" is mandatory; "may" is permissive.
16.5 Entire Aqreement. Waivers. and Recorded Statement.
This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement
of city and Owner with respect to the matters set forth in this
Agreement. This Agreement supersedes all negotiations or previous
agreements between City and Owner respecting this Agreement. All
waivers of the provisions of this Agreement must be in writing and
signed by the appropriate authorities of city and Owner. Upon the
completion of performance of this Agreement, or its revocation or
termination, a statement evidencing completion, revocation, or
termination signed by the appropriate agents of City shall be
recorded in the Official Records of San Diego County, California.
16.6 Pro;ect as a Private Undertakinq. It is
specifically understood by city and Owner that (i) the Project is
a private development; (ii) City has no interest in or
responsibilities for or duty to third parties concerning any
improvements to the Property until city accepts the improvements
pursuant to the provisions of the Agreement or in connection with
subdivision map approvals; and (iii) Owner shall have the full
power and exclusive control of the Property subject to the
obligations of Owner set forth in this Agreement.
16.7 Incorooration of Recitals. The recitals set forth
in Paragraph 1 of this Agreement are part of this Agreement.
16.8 Caotions. The captions of this Agreement are for
convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain,
modify, construe, limit, amplify, or aid in the interpretation,
construction, or meaning of any of the provisions of this
Agreement.
16.9 Consent. Where the consent or approval of city or
Owner is required or necessary under this Agreement, the consent or
-22-
approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed, or con-
ditioned.
16.10 Covenant of CooDeration.
cooperate and deal with each other in good
other in the performance of the provisions
City and Owner shall
faith, and assist each
of this Agreement.
16.11 Recordina. The city Clerk shall cause a copy of
this Agreement to be recorded with the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego county, California, within ten (10) days
following the Effective Date.
16.12 Delav. Extension of Time for Performance. In
addition to any specific provision of this Agreement, performance
by either City or Owner of its obligations hereunder shall be
excused, and the Term of this Agreement and the Development Plan
extended, during any period of delay caused at any time by reason
of any event beyond the control of city or Owner which prevents or
delays and impacts City's or Owner's ability to perform obligations
under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, acts of God,
enactment of new conflicting federal or state laws or regulations
(example: listing of a species as threatened or endangered),
judicial actions such as the issuance of restraining orders and
injunctions, riots, strikes, or damage to work in process by reason
of fire, floods, earthquake, or other such casualties. If City or
Owner seeks excuse from performance, it shall provide written
notice of such delay to the other within thirty (30) days of the
commencement of such delay. If the delay or default is beyond the
control of city or Owner, and is excused, an extension of time for
such cause will be granted in writing for the period of the
enforced delay, or longer as may be mutually agreed upon.
16.13 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealinas. No party
shall do anything which shall have the effect of harming or
injuring the right of the other parties to receive the benefits of
this Agreement; each party shall refrain from doing anything which
would render its performance under this Agreement impossible; and
each party shall do everything which this Agreement contemplates
that such party shall do in order to accomplish the objectives and
purposes of this Agreement.
16.14 ODeratina Memorandum. The parties acknowledge that
the provisions of this Agreement require a close degree of
cooperation between city and Developer, and that the refinements
and further development of the Project may demonstrate that minor
changes are appropriate with respect to the details of performance
of the parties. The parties, therefore, retain a certain degree of
flexibility with respect to those items covered in general under
this Agreement. When and if the parties mutually find that minor
changes or adjustments are necessary or appropriate, they may
effectuate changes or adjustments through operating memoranda
approved by the parties. For purposes of this section 16.14, the
City Manager, or his designee, shall have the authority to approve
the operating memoranda on behalf of city. No operating memoranda
shall require notice or hearing or constitute an amendment to this
Agreement.
-23-
16.15 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the
performance of the provisions of this Agreement as to which time is
an element.
16.16 Amendment or Cancellation of Aareement. This
Agreement may be amended from time to time or canceled by the
mutual consent of City and Owner only in the same manner as its
adoption, by an ordinance as set forth in California Government
Code section 65868, and shall be in a form suitable for recording
in the Official Records of San Diego county, California. The term
"Agreement" shall include any such amendment properly approved and
executed. city and Owner acknowledge that the provisions of this
Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between them, and
that minor or insubstantial changes to the Project and the
Development Plan may be required from time to time to accommodate
design changes, engineering changes, and other refinements.
Accordingly, changes to the Project and the Development Plan that
do not result in a change in use, an increase in density or
intensity of use, cause new or increased environmental impacts, or
violate any applicable health and safety regulations, may be
considered minor or insubstantial by the City Manager and made
without amending this Agreement.
16.17 Estoppel Certificate. within 30 calendar days
following a written request by any of the parties, the other
parties to this Agreement shall execute and deliver to the
requesting party a statement certifying that (i) this Agreement is
unmodified and in full force and effect, or if there have been
modifications hereto, that this Agreement is in full force and
effect as modified and stating the date and nature of such
modifications; (ii) there are no known current uncured defaults
under this Agreement, or specifying the dates and nature of any
such default; and (iii) any other reasonable information requested.
The failure to deliver such a statement within such time shall
constitute a conclusive presumption against the party which fails
to deliver such statement that this Agreement is in full force and
effect without modification, except as may be represented by the
requesting party, and that there are no uncured defaults in the
performance of the requesting party, except as may be represented
by the requesting party.
16.18 Severabilitv. If any material provision of this
Agreement is held invalid, this Agreement will be automatically
terminated with neither partv bearina anv liabilitv hereunder.
Notwithstandina the toreaoina, 1:IRless within 15 days after such
provision is held invalid, if the party holding rights under the
invalidated provision affirms the balance of this Agreement in
writing this Aareement shall not be terminated. This provision will
not affect the right of the parties to modify or suspend this
Agreement by mutual consent pursuant to Paragraph 12.4.
16.19 Institution of Leaal Proceedina. In addition to any
other rights or remedies, any party may institute legal action to
cure, correct, or remedy any default, to enforce any covenants or
agreements herein, or to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation
thereof; to recover damages for any default as allowed bv this
Aareement or to obtain any remedies consistent with the purpose of
-24-
this Agreement. Such legal actions must be instituted in the
Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California.
16.20 Attornevs' Fees and Costs. If any party commences
litigation or other proceedings (including, without limitation,
arbitration) for the interpretation, reformation, enforcement, or
rescission of this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by
the court, will be entitled to its reasonable attorneys' fees and
costs.
16.21 Hold Harmless. Developer agrees to and shall hold
city, its officers, agents, employees and representatives harmless
from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury,
including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from
the direct or indirect operations of Developer or those of its
contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees or other persons
acting on Developer's behalf which relate to the Project. Developer
agrees to and shall defend city and its officers, agents, employees
and representatives from actions for damage caused or alleged to have
been caused by reason of Developer's activities in connection with
the Project. Developer agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, pay all
costs and provide a defense for city in any legal action filed in a
court of competent jurisdiction by a third party challenging the
validity of this Agreement. The provisions of this section 16.21
shall not apply to the extent such damage, liability or claim is
caused by the intentional or negligent act or omission of city, its
officers, agents, employees or representatives.
-25-
SIGNATURE PAGE TO PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
Dated this day of
, 1996.
"CITY"
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
SHIRLEY HORTON, MAYOR
"OWNER"
JEWELS OF CHARITY
By:
PATRICK PATEK, PRESIDENT
I hereby approve the form and legality of the foregoing Pre-
Annexation Development Agreement this day of , 1996.
Ann Moore, Interim City Attorney
city of Chula vista
By:
-26-
'_E~HIBIT A
~I~
~t-
~ ~
-
JEWELS OF CHARITY
01Y OF
CHULA VISTA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6/19/96
CI
Z
W
o
W
-1
.
o
Z
t:
ra 0
..... .-
U).....
.- ra
EO > .~
ra t:
... - -
.- .-ot \\1
.c"'C')
.-.s::::: L-
~UO
W,+-Q)
00:::
~J::
.- (,)
U t:
ra
0:::
>-
ra
.....
r'\
>-
....
'"
"'"C
V; c:
.- :J
> 0
.!:ECC
:J >-
.t=.~
UU
"C
QJ
"C
C:C
"'0
E:;::
'"
Ex",
0<:'>",
uCc.>
<l>c:....
c.::~~
'"
-.....
.~ 0 CJ
>CJ~
"'....<1>
-"':J
:J..c:_
..c: Co.....
UU).5
-
c:
"c'"
<l>E
"'..c:
Ou
Co",,,,
0- <:.>
....<1>....
Q.O~
;;: ra
"C QJ
C ....
"'-~
-1,~ >.
>.u"C
",c.>:J
_c...;:;
oU)U)
"
...
..
~ ..
,.
Z< ..
z:
0
~, ~!! 15> ;:
0<
::r
'"
~l j ~:5 0 ,
.. !
o U:.:> ~ ,
~
:r: ;;:
u 0<
'"
<.:
0
...
c.::
I
.,.......':;,.:-;,:<-:-".
~m
I
--I
I
I
L_,
....J
I
l, .,.
I
,I
-)
,
\--J
J
I
('or
~
'"
.~
::i:
N-
~I
c
EXHIBIT .C'
Pre-annexatipn Development Agreement
Planning Area Assessor Ownership Acreage
Parcel Numbers
Otay Valley Parcel 644-080-10 Jewels of Charity 315.17
Otay Valley Parcel 644-090-03 Jewels of Charity 160.00
475.17 Total
f~
PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is
made effective on the date hereinafter set forth below by and among
the CITY OF CHULA VISTA ("city") and STEPHEN AND MARY BIRCH
FOUNDATION ("Foundation'), who agree as follows:
1. RECITALS.
following facts:
This Agreement is made with respect to the
1. 1 Owner. The owners of the properties subj ect to this
Agreement (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Owner" or as
"Developer") are as follows:
1.1.1 Foundation is the owner of approximately
168 acres of undeveloped real property ("the Foundation
Property") in the unincorporated area of the county, described
in Exhibits "A" and "C", attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference.
1.1.2 The Foundation property ("Property") is
part of a larger area commonly known, and referred to herein,
as "the otay Valley Parcel of otay Ranch."
1. 2 citv. The city of Chula vista is a municipal
corporation with Charter city 1)owers aHe!. aH incorporated e*y
within the County.
1.3 Code Authorization and Acknowledqments.
1.3.1 city is authorized pursuant to its
charter. self-rule 1)owers and California Government Code
sections 65864 through 65869.5 to enter into development
agreements for the purpose of establishing certainty for both
City and owners of real property in the development process.
1.3.2 Government Code section 65865 expressly
authorizes a city to enter into a development agreement with
any person having a legal or equitable interest in real
property in unincorporated territory within that city's sphere
of influence for the development of property as provided in
the Development Agreement Law; provided that the agreement
shall not become operative unless annexation proceedings
annexing the property to the city are completed within the
time specified by the agreement.
1.3.3 city enters into this Agreement pursuant
to the provisions of the California Government Code, its home-
rule powers, and applicable city ordinances, rules, regula-
tions and policies.
1.3.4 city and Owner intend to enter into this
aqreement for the followinq purposes: ae](He'.:lee!.'!Je I
-1-
1.3.4.1 %2 This AgreemeR~ assures adequate
public facilities at the time of development.
1.3.4.2 12 Thia AIJFeemel'lt assures development
in accordance with City's capital improvement plans.
1.3.4.3 This AgreemeRt eeRB~itatEs a e~rreRt
E!Kereise sf sity' s psliee Jls'.Jers t %0 provide certainty
to Owner in the development approval process by vesting
the permitted use(s), density, intensity of use, and the
timing and phasing of development as described in the
Development Plan, which is defined in Paragraph 2.4 of
this Agreement, in exchange for Owner's entering into
this Agreement and for its commitment to support the
Annexation described below.
1.3.4.4 TRis 1.!:reeme"t -...-ill ~
achievement of City growth management goals and
tives.
permit
objec-
1.3.4.5 This J.greemel'lt ,:ill 12 allow City to
realize significant economic, recreational, park, open
space, social, and public facilities benefits for the
City, some of which are of regional significance.
1.3.4.6 This 1.greemeRt ,Jill 12 provide and
assure that the City receive sales tax revenues, increase
in the property tax base, residential housing and other
development, sewer, water and street facilities.
1.3.4.7 This Agreement ~ 12 provide and
assure that the City receives public facilities in excess
of project generated impacts and such facilities shall be
of supplemental size, number capacity or length, which
shall be provided earlier than could be provided either
by funds from the City or than would strictly be
necessary to mitigate project related impacts at any
development phase.
1.3.4.8 This AlJreemel'lt ~ill 12 provide the
City the developer's support to secure annexation of the
lands depicted in Exhibit "B".
1. 3.4.9 This J.lJreemeRt will 12 enable the
city to secure title to the land within the boundaries of
the Property necessary to complete the Chula vista
greenbelt system as defined in the Chula vista General
Plan.
1. 3.4.10 This AgreemeRt ',1111 12 assure the
city that the Developer will dedicate rights-of-way to
the city for SR-125, a route which, when constructed,
will substantially alleviate congestion on 1-805 and 1-5,
and also will facilitate the economic development of
Chula vista.
-2-
1.3.4.11 Because of the complexities of the
financing of the infrastructure, park, open space, and
other dedications, and regional and community facilities,
and the significant nature of such facilities, certainty
in the development process is an absolute necessity. The
phasing, timing, and development of public infrastructure
necessitate a significant commitment of resources,
planning, and effort by Owner for the public facilities
financing, construction, and dedication to be success-
fully completed. In return for Owner's participation and
commitment to these significant contributions of private
resources for public purposes and for Owner's consent to
the Annexation described below, City is willing to
exercise its authority to enter into this Agreement and
to make a commitment of certainty for the development
process for the property.
1.3.4.12 In consideration of Owner's agreement
to provide the significant benefits and for Owner's
consent to the Annexation described below, City hereby
grants Owner assurances that it can proceed with develop-
ment of the Property in accordance with City's
ordinances, rules, regulations, and policies existing as
of the effective date of this Agreement sub;ect to
Section 5.2.1 below. Owner would not enter into this
Agreement or agree to provide the public benefits and
improvements described in this Agreement if it were not
for the commitment of city that the Property subject to
this Agreement can be developed in accordance with city's
ordinances, rules, regulations, and policies existing as
of the effective date of this Agreement sub;ect to
section 5.2.1 below.
1.4 The Annexation. The city has applied to the Local
Agency Formation commission ("LAFCO") for annexation of Sphere of
Influence Planning Area 1 "The Otay Parcel", Planning Area 2
"Inverted L" and the Mary Patrick Estate Parcel (see Attachment
"B") .
1.5 Sphere of Influence. A City application is pending
before LAFCO to have the otay Valley Parcel included within city's
sphere of influence. On February 5, 1996 the Local Agency
Formation commission approved the inclusion of approximately 7,600
acres into the City Sphere of Influence (Sphere of Influence
Planning Area 2 and the northern two thirds of Planning Area 1),
and designated the Otay River Valley an village 3 as special study
areas.
1.6 Plannina Documents. On October 28, 1993, City and
County adopted the otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional
Plan ("the GDP") which includes the otay Ranch Village Phasing
Plan, Facility Implementation Plan, Resource Management Plan and
service Revenue Plan, for approximately 23,000 acres of the Otay
-3-
Ranch, including the otay Valley Parcel and the Foundation
property.
1. 7 Owner Consent. city desires to have the cooperation
and consent of Owner to include the Property in the Annexation in
order to better plan, finance, construct and maintain the infra-
structure for the otay valley parcel; and the Foundation desires to
give their cooperation and consent, provided that they obtain
certain assurances, as set forth in this Agreement.
1.8 citv Ordinance. Auaust ,July 9, 1996 is the date
of adoption by the city Council of Ordinance No. 2679 approving
this Agreement. The ordinance shall take effect and be in full
force on the effective date of Annexation.
2. DEFINITIONS.
otherwise requires:
In this Agreement, unless the context
2.1 "Annexation" means the proposed annexation of that
portion of the otay Ranch into the city as depicted on Exhibit "D".
2.2 "City" means the city of Chula Vista, in the County
of San Diego, State of California.
2.3 "county" means the County of San Diego, state of
California.
2.4 "Development Plan" means the GDP.
2.5 "GDP" means the General Development Plan/Subregional
Plan for the otay Ranch, described in Paragraph 1.6, above.
2.6 "Owner" or "Developer" means the person, persons, or
entity having a legal and equitable interest in the Property, or
parts thereof, and includes Owner's successors-in-interest.
2.7 "Project" means the physical development of the
private and public improvements on the property as provided for in
the Existing Project Approvals and as may be authorized by the City
in Future Discretionary Approvals.
2.8 "Property" means the real property described in
paragraph 1.1.1.
2.9 The "Term" of this Agreement means the period
defined in Paragraph 3, below.
2.10 "Builder" means developer to whom Developer has sold
or conveyed property within the Property for purposes of its
improvement for residential, commercial, industrial or other use.
2.11 "CEQA" means the California Environmental Quality
Act, California public Resources Code section 21000, et seq.
-4-
2.12 "city council" means the city of Chula Vista city
council.
2.13 "Commit" or "committed" means all of the following
requirements have been met with respect to any public facility:
2.13.1 For a public facility within the city's
jurisdictional boundaries and a responsibility of the develop-
er.
2.13.1.1 All discretionary permits required of
the Developer have been obtained for construction of the
public facility;
2.13.1.2 Plans for the construction of the
public facility have all the necessary governmental
approvals; and
2.13.1.3 Adequate funds (i.e., letters of
credit, cash deposits, performance bonds or land secured
public financing, including facility benefit assessments,
Mello-Roos assessment districts of similar assessment
mechanism) are available such that the city can construct
the public facility if construction has not commenced
within thirty (30) days of issuance of a notice to
proceed by the Director of Public Works, or construction
is not progressing towards completion in a reasonable
manner as reasonably deemed by the Director of Public
Works.
2.13.2 For a public facility within the City's
jurisdictional boundaries, but to be provided by other than
Developer.
2.13.2.1 Developer's proportionate share of
the cost of such public facility as defined in the
existing Project Approvals and Future Discretionary
Approvals has been provided or assured by Developer
through the payment or impositions of development impact
fee or other similar exaction mechanism.
2.13.3 For public facility not within city's
jurisdictional boundaries:
the cost
existing
Approvals
Developer
of Public
2.13.3.1 Developer's proportionate share of
of such public facility as defined in the
Project Approvals and Future Discretionary
has been provided for or otherwise assured by
to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director
Works.
2.14 "Development Impact Fee (DIF)" means fees imposed
upon new development pursuant to the City of Chula vista
Development Impact Fee Program, for example, including but not
limited to the Transportation Development Impact Fee Program, the
-5-
Interim SR-125 Development Impact Fee Program, the Salt Creek Sewer
DIF and the Public Facilities DIF.
2.15 "Existing Project Approvals" means all discretionary
approvals affecting the Project which have been approved or
established in conjunction with, or preceding, the effective date
consisting of, but not limited to the GDP, the Chula vista General
Plan, the Otay Ranch Reserve Fund Program adopted pursuant to
Resolution 18288, and the Phase I and II Resource Management Plan
(RMP) , as may be amended from time to time consistent with this
agreement.
2.16 "Final Map(s)" means any final subdivision map for
all or any portion of the Property other than the Superblock Final
Map ("A" Maps).
2.17 "Future Discretionary Approvals" means all permits
and approvals by the city granted after the effective date and
excluding existing Project Approvals, including, but not limited
to: (i) grading permits; (ii) site plan reviews; (iii) design
guidelines and reviews; (i v) precise plan reviews; (v) subdivisions
of the Property or re-subdivisions. of the Property previously
subdivided pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act; (vi) conditional
use permits; (vii) variances; (viii) encroachment permits;
(ix) sectional Planning Area plans; (x) Preserve conveyance Plan
and (xi) all other reviews, permits, and approvals of any type
which may be required from time to time to authorize public or
private on- or off-site facilities which are a part of the Project.
2.18 "Planning commission" means the Planning commission
of the City of Chula Vista.
2.19 "Preserve Conveyance Plan" means a plan that will.
when adoDted. set forth policies and identify the schedule for ~
~e se transferped of land and/or fees to be paid to insure the
orderly conveyance of the Otay Ranch land to the Preserve Owner
Manager. The purpose of the plan is to fulfill the obligations to
convey resource sensitive land, per the criteria contained in the
phase I and II Resource Management Plans and to mitigate environ-
mental impacts of the otay Ranch Project.
2.20 "Public Facility"
public facilities described
Implementation Plan.
2.21 "Subdivision Map Act" means the California
Subdivision Map Act, Government Code section 66410, et seq., and
its amendments as may from time to time be adopted.
or "Public Facilities" means those
in the Otay Ranch Facility
2.22 "Substantial Compliance" means that the party
charged with the performance of a covenant herein has sufficiently
followed the terms of this Agreement so as to carry out the intent
of the parties in entering into this Agreement.
-6-
2.23 "Threshold" means the facility thresholds set forth
in the City's Municipal Code section 19.19.040.
3. TERM. This Agreement shall become effective as a
development agreement upon the effective date of the Annexation
("the Effective Date"); provided, however, that if the Annexation
does not occur on or before January I, 1997, this Agreement shall
be null and void. Any of the foregoing to the contrary notwith-
standing, from the date of first reading of the ordinance approving
this Agreement, and unless or until this Agreement becomes null and
void, Owner shall be bound by the terms of Paragraph 4. The Term
of this Agreement for purposes other than Paragraph 4 shall begin
upon the Effective Date, and shall continue for a period of twenty
(20) years ("the Term").
The term shall also be extended for any period of time during which
issuance of building permits to Developer is suspended for any
reason other than the default of Developer, and for a period of
time equal to the period of time during which any action by the
city or court action limits the processing of future discretionary
approvals, issuance of building permits or any other development of
the property consistent with this Agreement.
4. OWNER CONSENT TO ANNEXATION. Owner hereby consents to
and shall cooperate with the applications of city to declare that
the otay Valley Parcel is within City's sphere of influence and to
annex the otay Valley Parcel to the city; provided, however, that
Owner may withdraw such consent and withhold further cooperation if
the City, prior to the Effective Date, adopts rules, regulations,
ordinances, policies, conditions, environmental regulations,
phasing controls, exactions, entitlements, assessments or fees
applicable to and governing development of the Property which are
inconsistent with, or render impractical development of the
Property according to, the Development Plan or the additional
commitments of city set forth in Paragraphs 5.1.1 through 5.1.5
5.1.8, below. Owner also aqrees not to cha11enqe the annexation of
the otay Valley Parcel into the city.
5. VESTED RIGHTS. Notwi thstanding any future action or
inaction of the city during the term of this Agreement, whether
such action is by ordinance, resolution or policy of the City,
Owner and Developer shall have a vested right, except as may be
otherwise provided in this section 5, to construct the Project in
accordance with:
5.1 Existing Project Approvals, subject to the following
requests for modifications if approved bv the city:
5.1.1 Cit.y a1=J.all rcaE1efiabl~i cst=iciEicr iR it.s
diaert:tiefi aRe .u.i t.h 13rafJer E:f1";irenmcntal rc.....ic\: I a rCEJuE.st. t.o
iRort:asE ~he residential aCFicity sf Villa~ea 2, 4, aRa 8, ~p
te the RumBcr af resiacRtial uRita pre~iaca iR villa~c J BY
the CeuRty' aaeptea CBr.
-7-
. S ..1.. 2 cit.y shall re:ae6Fiaely eefuJifie:r iFi ita
aiserc't.isH aHa preeCS5 \Ji ~h prepeF eHvirsHHleFltal Fevia".: a
re~ue:5t te eRaR~c the pFim3FY laRa use aSai!RatieR fer Village
J fram IAaastrial te eemmereial, rcereatieRal, ~isiter
B~r~iA~, aRB same: reaidcRtial aseo iR assitieR ta ~hc IRa~D
~rial \ioe.. TRe ellBs't aereBEJca af 'the FesiElefit.ial, i}ui\iB~Fial,
eammereial, SF ether \isee, ahall se a~reea \ipaFi aRa eet. ferth
iR a ~eReral plaR am~RameRt..
5.1.35.1.1 If the interchange improvements at
otay Valley Road and 1-805 are needed to serve the Project,
the City will hold appropriate hearings to consider an
amendment to ameRB its Transportation Phasing Plan (TPP) and
Development Impact Fee (DIF) Program to include said improve-
ments as may be deemed aoorooriate bv the city to accommodate
the project phasing. The City agrees to reasonably cooperate
and work with CALTRANS to complete olans for said ~ inter-
change improvement plaRD.
5.1.15.1.2 City shall initiate contact and
diligently pursue discussions with the County of San Diego and
the city of San Diego to determine the number, scheduling and
financing of the otay River road and bridge crossings.
5.1.55.1.3 city shall allow the owner for
purposes of processing entitlements to proceed with planning
of the Property on a first corne first served basis, with other
properties in the area of the Annexation. In addition, if
necessary the City shall, with proper environmental review,
consider in its discretion an amendment to the village Phasing
Plan to facilitate the planning and development of the
properties covered by this Agreement.
5.1.65.1.4 To the extent any of the foregoing
commitments of city are embodied in changes to the Development
Plan- or the rules, regulations, ordinances, policies,
conditions, environmental regulations, phasing controls,
exactions, entitlements, assessments, and fees applicable to
and governing development of the Property, whether adopted
before or after the Effective Date, such changes shall be
deemed applicable to the Property without change to this
Agreement.
5.1.75.1.5 City shall diligently process
any amendments, applications, maps, or other development
applications.
5.1.6. city may make such modifications or
amendments to the Existina proiect Approvals/Future Discretionarv
Approvals. as maY be ordered bv a court of competent iurisdiction
in an action in which the Developer is a party or has had an
opportunity to appear or has been provided notice of such action bv
the city.
-8-
5.1.8 City ohall r~aoon~Ely eenoia~F and dili
~eR1:.1y prasaoa a raqucc'E 'Ee CHpilRd 'ERe Eicvcla~JReRt. arcas af
TlillaEJes 2, J, .( ana 8 in the. e":c.nt f1:1t.1:1re. cH9T-iranJRental
staaics iRsioatc that areao aROO C0Roidcrca cn~ireRmcRtally
CORstraiRca oaR be e1cT+Tclepca T.lithout oigRific.:lnt, uRmiti~aBlc
cnVireHmeRtal impaoto.
5.2 Development of Propertv. The development of the
Property will be governed by this Agreement and Existing Project
Approvals and such development shall comply and be governed by all
rules, regulations, policies, resolutions, ordinances, and
standards in effect as of the Effective Date subject to the
provisions of Section 5.2.1 below. The City shall retain its
discretionary authority as to Future Discretionary Approvals,
provided however, such Future Discretionary Approvals shall be
regulated by the Existing Project Approvals, this Agreement, and
City rules, regulations, standards, ordinances, resolutions and
policies in effect on the Effective Date of this Agreement and
subject to section 5.2.1.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the city may make such changes to
the City's Growth Management Ordinance applicable to the Project as
are reasonable and consistent with the purpose and intent of the
existing Growth Management Ordinance and which are generally
applicable to all private projects citywide or east of 1-805 or
within a specific benefit, fee or reimbursement district created
pursuant to the california Government Code.
5.2.1 New or Amended Rules. Requlations.
Policies. Standards. Ordinances and Resolutions. The city may
apply to the Project, including Future Discretionary Approv-
als, new or amended rules, laws, regulations, policies,
ordinances, resolutions and standards generally applicable to
all private projects east of 1-805 or within a specific
benefit fee or reimbursement district created pursuant to the
California Government Code. The application of such new
rules, or amended laws, regulations, resolutions, policies,
ordinances and standards will not unreasonably prevent or
delay development of the Property to the uses, densities or
intensities of development specified herein or as authorized
by the Existing Project Approvals. The City may also apply
changes in city laws, regulations, ordinances, standards or
policies specifically mandated by changes in state or federal
law in compliance with section 13.3 herein.
5.2.2 Developer may elect with City's consent,
to have applied to the project any rules, regulations,
policies, ordinances or standards enacted after the date of
this Agreement. Such an election has to be made in a manner
consistent with Section 5.2 of this Agreement.
5.2.3 Modifications to Existinq proiect
Approvals. It is contemplated by. the parties to this
Agreement that the city and Developer may mutually seek and
agree to modifications to the Existing Project Approvals.
-9-
Such modifications are contemplated as within the scope of
this Agreement, and shall, upon written acceptance by all
parties, constitute for all purposes an Existing Project
Approval. The parties agree that any such modifications may
not constitute an amendment to this Agreement nor require an
amendment to the Agreement.
5.2.4 Future Discretionarv Approvals. It is
contemplated by the parties to this Agreement that the city
and Developer may agree to Future Discretionary Approvals. The
parties agree that any such Future Approvals may not consti-
tute an amendment to this Agreement nor require an amendment
to the Agreement.
5.3 Dedication and Reservation of Land for Public
Purposes. Except as expressly required by this Agreement or the
Existing Project Approvals and Future Discretionary Approvals
(excepting dedications required within the boundaries of any parcel
created by the subsequent subdivision of the Property as required
by the Subdivision Map Act), no dedication or reservation of real
property within or outside the Property shall be required by City
or Developer in conjunction with the Project. Any dedications and
reservations of land imposed shall be in accordance with section
7.2 and section 7.8 herein.
5.4 Time for Construction and Completion of Proiect.
Because the california Supreme Court held in Pardee construction
Companv v. citv of Camarillo (1984) 27 Cal.3d 465, that the failure
of the parties to provide for the timing of development resulted in
a later-adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to
prevail over such parties' Agreement, it is the intention of the
parties to this Agreement to cure that deficiency by specifically
acknowledging that timing and phasing of development is completely
and exclusively governed by the Existing project Approvals,
including the Chula vista Growth Management Ordinance. The purpose
of the Chula vista Growth Management Ordinance is to "control the
timing and location of development by tying the pace of development
to the provision of public facilities and improvements to conform
to the city's threshold standards. " (Municipal Code section
19.09.010A.7) The findings in support of the Growth Management
Ordinance conclude that the ordinance "does not affect the number
of houses which may be built." (Municipal Code section
19.09.010B.3) Therefore, the parties acknowledge that the Chula
vista Growth Management Ordinance completely occupies the topic of
development timing and phasing and expressly precludes the adoption
of housing caps, urban reserves or any other means by which the
rate of development may be controlled or regulated. The city
agrees that the Developer shall be entitled to, apply for and
receive all permits necessary for the development of property,
consistent with the Growth Management Ordinance, Existing Project
Approvals, Future Discretionary Approvals and this Agreement.
5.5 Benefit of Vestinq. Nothing in this Agreement will
be construed as limiting or impairing Developer's vested right, if
any, to proceed with the development and use of the Property
-10-
pursuant to the Federal and state constitutions, and pursuant to
statutory and decisional law.
5.6 vestinq of Entitlements. All rights conferred by
this Agreement vest with the Effective Date hereof. The approval
of Future Discretionary approvals shall not be deemed to limit
Developer's rights authorized by this Agreement, and once such
approvals are obtained they shall be vested to the same extent as
the Existing Project Approvals.
6. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
6.1 processinq of Future Discretionarv ADDrovals. city
will accept and diligently process development applications and
requests for Future Discretionary Approvals, or other entitlements
with respect to the development and use of the property, provided
said applications and requests are in accordance with this
Agreement. city costs for processing work related to the Project,
including hiring of additional city personnel and/or the retaining
of professional consultants, will be reimbursed to city by
Developer.
6.2 Lenqth of Validitv of Tentative Subdivision MaDS.
Government Code section 66452.6 provides that tentative subdivision
map(s) may remain valid for a length up to the term of a Develop-
ment Agreement. The city agrees that tentative subdivision map(s)
for the property shall be for a term of six (6) years and may be
extended by the city council for a period of time not to exceed a
total of twenty (20) years and in no event beyond the term of this
Agreement.
6.3 Pre-Final MaD DeveloDment. If Developer desires to
do certain work on the Property after approval of a tentative map
(for example, grading) prior to the recordation of a final map, it
may do so by obtaining a grading and/or other required approvals
from the city which are authorized by the city prior to recordation
of a final map. Such permit shall be issued to Developer, or its
contractor, upon Developer's application, approval, and provided
Developer posts a bond or other reasonably adequate security
required by city in an amount to assure the rehabilitation of the
land if the applicable final map does not record.
6.4 Final MaDS.
6.4.1 "A" MaDs and "B" MaDS. If Developer so
elects, the city shall accept and process a master sUbdivision
or parcel map ("A" Map) showing "Super Block" lots and
backbone street dedications. "Super Block" lots shall be
consistent with the GDP and subsequent sectional Plan Area
plans, and shall not subdivide land into individual single-
family lots. All "Super Blocks" created shall have access to
dedicated public streets. The city shall not require improve-
ment plans in order to record a final map for any "A" Map
lots, but the city shall require bonding for the completion of
backbone facilities prior to recording in an amount to be
-11-
determined by the city. Following the approval by city of any
final map for an "A" Map lot and its recordation, Developer
may convey the "super Block" lot. The buyer of a "super
Block" lot shall then process final improvement plans and
grading plans and a final map ("B" Map) for each "Super Block"
lot which the city shall process. The "B" Maps shall be in
substantial conformance with the related approved "A" Map. In
the instance of the multi-family dwelling unit areas, a
separate tentative subdivision map may be submitted to the
city and the "B" Map(s) for these areas may be submitted to
the City after the city planning commission approves said
tentative subdivision map.
6.4.2 Recordation of Final Subdivision Map in
Name of Builder or Third Partv. Developer may, if it so
elects, convey to a Builder or third party any "super block"
lot(s) shown on the recorded Superblock Final Map. In such
case, the Builder or third party will (i) process any neces-
sary final improvement and grading plans and a final map for
each such "super block" lot, which map city shall accept and
process as subsequent phases in a multi-phase project, (ii)
enter into a subdivision improvement agreement with city with
respect to the subdivision improvements which are required for
such super block lot, and (iii) provide security and insurance
satisfactory to city for the completion of the subdivision
improvements.
6.4.3 Recordation of Final Subdivision Map in
Developer's Name: Transfer of Obliqations Under Subdivision
Improvement Aqreement (s) . If Developer so elects, it may
defer the conveyance of any super block lot to a Builder or
third party until after the final map of such super block lot
has been recorded. If Developer elects to proceed in this
manner, it will enter into city's standard subdivision
improvement agreement(s) with city for the improvements
required as a condition to the approval of such map(s). Upon
sale to a Builder or third party, if such Builder or third
party assumes Developer's obligations under the improvement
agreement and provides its own security and insurance for the
completion of the subdivision improvements as approved by the
City, Developer shall be released from liability under the
subdivision improvement agreement(s) and Developer's security
shall be released.
6.4.4 Transfer of Riqhts and Obliqations of
Development. Whenever Developer conveys a portion of the
Property, the rights and obligations of this Agreement shall
transfer in accordance with Section 15 herein.
7. DEVELOPER'S OBLIGATIONS.
7.1 Condition to Developer's Obliqations to Dedicate. Fund or
Construct Public Facilities. Developer agrees to develop or
provide the public improvements, facilities, dedications, or
reservations of land and satisfy other exactions conditioning the
-12-
development of the Property which are set forth hereinbelow. The
obligations of the Developer pursuant to this Agreement are
conditioned upon: (i) the city not being in default of its obliga-
tions under this agreement; and (ii) the city not preventing or
unreasonably delaying the development of the property; and (iii)
the Agreement having not been suspended in response to changes in
state or federal law; and (iv) the City's obligations having not
been suspended pursuant to Section 13.2.
7.2 Dedications and Reservations of Land for Public Purposes.
The policies by which property will be required to be reserved,
dedicated or improved for public purposes are identified in the
Existing Project Approvals. A more precise delineation of the
property to be preserved, dedicated or improved for public purposes
shall occur as part of Future Discretionary Approvals, consistent
with the Existing Project Approvals.
7.2.1 Dca~eatien af Lafla fer cn 125. De~cleper a~reea ~e
eieaieatc laRd for E'i~ht of T".9ay purp0oco aFla 13reperty e~;Rea Si"
t.he Dc.;cleper t.hat ie rcasoRably Rccezoary fer the ER 125
eeRfi~uratieR that ia ~cRerally dC13ietcel iF! the cn 125 araft
ER~ireRmeft~al Im~aet Re~art/EtatemeRt aRa ao re~iBea iR the
Fiflal Eft91irenmefital IJR13aet. Repsrt/ctatcmeRt. to reapeRS. te
~~~i;eeriR~, aesi~R, eRvireRmeRtal aRa similar eeRstr~~~~~.
e eaieatieRS chall se te the city er ey an alterRat.e method
aeec]?table te the city at SUCR time ac requested sy the city.
City a~rees that iR the CO/CRt city shall Re~etiate:. o.J~:~
c;iiferRia TraRcpertatieR ~eRturco (CTV) sr ether tell re~d
Builder allY part.ieipatieR or ae1~:aRtaEJes te city that. city
shall share SHea riE!ht-s ~.:i tR su130cqucnt e~.JFlCr jrCfJiEicRt ef t.ho
pre13ert}' ,
7.2.2 PrCDCL'''.,:€: CenYCVaI;CC rlaI;. The City aRa t.ho
Dc":'cleper ohall mut\:ially aE!Ycc upen a Pyc.Eioy":e ceR":c.y~~c~
rlall. The city cRall ill EJeea faith eSllciaer far aaeptieR sueh
a ~laR aRa the Dc~elepcr chall eeR~€:y prepert.y aRa/er fees in
liEa af laRa as set fert-a iR sueR rlan.
7.3 Growth Manaqement Ordinance. Developer shall commit the
public facilities and City shall issue building permits as provided
in this section. The city shall have the right to withhold the
issuance of building permits any time after the city reasonably
determines a Threshold has been exceeded, unless and until the
Developer has mitigated the deficiency in accordance with the
City's Growth Management Ordinance.
Developer agrees that building permits may be withheld where the
public facilities described in the Existing Project Approvals/-
Future Discretionary Approvals required for a particular Threshold
have not been committed.
-13-
In the event a Threshold is not met and future building permit
issuance may be withheld, the notice provisions and procedures
contained in section 19.09 .100C of the Municipal Code will be
followed. In the event the issuance of building permits is
suspended pursuant to the provisions herein, such suspension shall
not constitute a breach of the terms of this Agreement by Developer
or citv. Furthermore, any such suspension which is not caused by
the actions or omissions of the Developer, shall toll the term of
this Agreement as provided for in section 16.12 of this Agreement,
and suspend the Developer's obligations pursuant to this Agreement.
7.3.1 Required Condemnation. The city and Developer
recognize that certain of the public facilities identified in
the Existing Project Approvals/Future Discretionary Approvals
and required to comply with a threshold are located on
properties which neither the Developer nor the city has, or
will have, title to or control of. The city shall identify
such property or properties and at the time of filing of the
final map commence timely negotiations or, where the property
is within the city's jurisdiction, commence timely proceedings
pursuant to Title 7 (commencing with S 1230.010) of Part 3 of
the Code of civil Procedure to acquire an interest in the
property or properties. Developer's share of the cost
involved in any such acquisition shall be based on its
proportionate share of the public facility as defined in the
Existing Project Approvals/Future Discretionary Approvals.
Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to preclude the city
from requiring the Developer to pay the cost of acquiring such
off-site land. For that portion of the cost beyond the
Developer's fair share responsibility, the City shall take all
reasonable steps to establish a procedure whereby the develop-
er is reimbursed for such costs beyond its fair share.
7.3.2 Information Reaardina Thresholds. Upon
Developer's written requests of the city Manager, the city
will provide Developer with information regarding the current
status of a Threshold. Developer shall be responsible for any
staff costs incurred in providing said written response.
7.4 Imorovements Required bv a Subdivision Mao. Asmay
be required pursuant to the terms of a subdivision map, it shall be
the responsibility of Developer to construct the improvements
required by a sUbdivision map. Where Developer is required to
construct a public improvement which has been identified as the
responsibility of another party or to provide public improvements
of supplemental size, capacity, number or length benefiting
property not within the subdivision, city shall process a reim-
bursement agreement to the Developer in accordance with Article 6
of Chapter 4 of the Subdivision Map Act, commencing with Government
Code section 66485, and Section 7.5, below.
7.5
Partv. or Are
Developer may
Facilities Which Are the Obliqations of Another
of Excessive Size. caoacitv. Lenqth or Number.
offer to advance monies and/or construct public
-14-
improvements which are the responsibility of another land owner, or
outside the city's jurisdictional boundaries, or which are of
supplemental size, capacity, number or length for the benefit of
land not within the Property. city, where requesting such funding
or construction of oversized public improvements, shall consider
after a public hearing, contemporaneous with the imposition of the
obligation, the formation of a reimbursement district, assessment
district, facility benefit assessment, or reimbursement agreement
or other reimbursement mechanism.
7.6 Pioneerinq of Facilities. To the extent Developer
itself constructs (Le., "pioneers") any public facilities or
public improvements which are covered by a DIF Program, Developer
shall be given a credit against DIFs otherwise payable, subject to
the city's Director of Public Works reasonable determination that
such costs are allowable under the applicable DIF Program. It is
specifically intended that Developer be given DIF credit for the
DIF Program improvements it makes. The fact that such improvements
may be financed by an assessment district or other financing
mechanism, shall not prevent DIF credit from being given to the
extent that such costs are allowed under the applicable DIF Program
7.7 Insurance.
insured for all insurance
Project as pertains to the
the project.
Developer shall name city as additional
policies obtained by Developer for the
Developer's activities and operation on
7.8 Other Land Owners. Developer hereby agrees to
dedicate adequate rights-Of-way within the boundaries of the
Property for other land owners to "Pioneer" public facilities on
the Property; provided, however, as follows: (i) dedications shall
be restricted to those reasonably necessary for the construction of
facilities identified in the City's adopted public facility plans;
(ii) this provision shall not be binding on the successors-in-
interest or assignees of Developer following recordation of the
final "Super Block" or "A" Map; and (iii) the City shall use its
reasonable best efforts to obtain agreements similar to this
subsection from other developers and to obtain equitable reimburse-
ment for Developer for any excess dedications.
8. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES.
8.1 Existinq Development Impact Fee Proqram Pavments.
Developer shall pay to the city a DIF, or construct improvements in
lieu of payment, for improvements which are conditions of a
tentative sUbdivision map upon the issuance of building permits (s) ,
or at a later time as specified by City ordinance, the Subdivision
Map Act, or Public Facility Financing Plan (PFFP). The DIF will be
in the amount in effect at the time payment is made and may only be
increased pursuant to section 8.6 herein.
8.2 other Undeveloped Properties. The city will use its
reasonable best efforts to impose and collect, or cause the
imposi tion and collection of, the same DIF program on all the
undeveloped real properties which benefit from the provision of the
-15-
public facility through the DIF program, or provided as a condition
of Project Approvals.
8.3 Use of Development Impact Fee Proqram. The DIF
amounts paid to the City by Developer and others with respect to
the Area of Benefit shall be placed by the city in a capital
facility fund account established pursuant to California Government
Code sections 66000-66009. The city shall expend such funds only
for the Projects described in the adopted fee program as may be
modified from time to time. The city will use its reasonable best
efforts to cause such Projects to be completed as soon as practica-
ble; however, the city shall not be obligated to use its general
funds for such Projects.
8.4 withholdinq of Permits. Developer agrees that city
shall have the right to withhold issuance of the building permit
for any structure or improvement on the Property unless and until
the DIF is paid for such structure or improvement.
8.5 Development Impact Fee Credit. upon the completion
and acceptance by the city of any public facility, the city shall
immediately credit Developer with the appropriate amount of cash
credits ("EDUs") as determined by Developer and city. However, if
the improvements are paid for through an Assessment District, the
city shall credit the Developer with the appropriate number of
Equivalent Dwelling unit Credits (EDU's). Developer shall be
entitled to apply any and all credits accrued pursuant to this
subsection toward the required payment of future DIF for any phase,
stage or increment of development of the project.
8.6 Modification of Development Impact Fees. The
parties recognize that from time to time during the duration of the
Agreement it will be necessary for the city to update and modify
its DIF fees. Such reasonable modifications are contemplated by
the city and the Developer and shall not constitute a modification
to the Agreement so long as: (i) the modification incorporates the
reasonable costs of providing facilities identified in the Existing
Project Approvals; (ii) are based upon methodologies in substantial
compliance with the methodology contained in the existing DIF
programs; or other methodology approved by the city Council
following a public hearing; (iii) complies with the provisions of
Government Code sections 66000-66009.
8.7 Standards for Financinq Obliqations of Owner. In
connection with the development of the Property, the following
standards regarding the financing of public improvements shall
apply:
8.7. I Owner shall pay its fair share for the
interchanges described in Paragraph 5.1.1 5.1.3, based upon
the number of dwelling units or equivalent dwellings of
development allowed on the Property as compared to the total
dwelling units or equivalent dwelling units allowed on
properties served by such interchanges.
-16-
8.7.2 Owner shall participate in the DIF Program
for the Otay Valley Parcel with other owners in proportion to
the total dwelling units or equivalent dwelling units allowed
on the Property as compared with the total of such units
allowed on properties in that particular DIF or by some other
equitable methodology decided by the city council.
8.7.3 The City shall diligently pursue the
requirements that the Eastern Territories' DIF requires
offsite third parties and adjacent jurisdictions to bear their
fair share of all otay River valley crossings.
9. CITY OBLIGATIONS.
9.1 Urban Infrastructure. To the extent it is within
the authority of the city to provide, city shall accommodate urban
infrastructure to the project, consistent with Existing Project
Approvals. Where it is necessary to utilize city property to
provide urban infrastructure consistent with the Existing Project
Approvals, the city agrees to make such land available for such
uses, provided that the city if it so chooses is compensated at
fair market value for the property. To the extent that the
provision of urban infrastructure is within the authority of
another public or quasi-public agency or utility, the City agrees
to fully cooperate with such agency or agencies to accommodate the
urban infrastructure, consistent with Existing Project Approvals.
Urban infrastructure shall include, but not be limited to gas,
electricity, telephone, cable and facilities identified in the Otay
Ranch Facility Implementation Plan.
9.2 Sewer capacity. The city agrees to provide adequate
sewer capacity for the project, upon the payment of ordinary and
necessary sewer connection, capacity and/or service fees.
10. ANNUAL REVIEW.
10.1 citv and Owner Responsibilities. city will, at
least every twelve (12) months during the Term of this Agreement,
pursuant to California Government Code 565865.1, review the extent
of good faith substantial compliance by Owner with the terms of
this Agreement. Pursuant to California Government Code section
65865.1, as amended, Owner shall have the duty to demonstrate by
substantial evidence its good faith compliance with the terms of
this Agreement at the periodic review. Either City or Owner may
address any requirement of the Agreement during the review.
10.2 Evidence. The parties recognize that this Agreement
and the documents incorporated herein could be deemed to contain
hundreds of requirements and that evidence of each and every
requirement would be a wasteful exercise of the parties' resources.
Accordingly, Developer shall be deemed to have satisfied its good
faith compliance when it presents evidence of substantial com-
pliance with the major provisions of this Agreement. Generalized
evidence or statements shall be accepted in the absence of any
evidence that such evidence is untrue.
-17-
10.3 Review Letter. If Owner is found to be in com-
pliance with this Agreement after the annual review, city shall,
within forty-five (45) days after Owner's written request, issue a
review letter in recordable form to Owner ("Letter") stating that
based upon information known or made known to the Council, the city
Planning commission and/or the city Planning Director, this
Agreement remains in effect and Owner is not in default. Owner may
record the Letter in the Official Records of the County of San
Diego.
10.4 Failure of Periodic Review. City's failure to
review at least annually Owner's compliance with the terms and
conditions of this Agreement shall not constitute, or be asserted
by City or Owner as, a breach of the Agreement.
11. DEFAULT.
11.1 Events of Default. A default under this Agreement
shall be deemed to have occurred upon the happening of one or more
of the following events or conditions:
11.1.1 A warranty, representation or statement
made or furnished by Owner to city is false or proves to have
been false in any material respect when it was made.
11.1.2 A finding and determination by City made
following a periodic review under the procedure provided for
in California Government Code section 65865.1 that upon the
basis of substantial evidence Owner has not complied in good
faith with one or more of the terms or conditions of this
Agreement.
consider
submitted
11.1.3 City does not accept,
requested development permits
in accordance with the provisions
timely review, or
or entitlements
of this Agreement.
11.1.4 Any other act or omission by city or Owner
which materially interferes with the terms of this Agreement.
11.2 Procedure Upon Default.
11.2.1 Upon the occurrence of default by the
other party, city or Owner may terminate this Agreement after
providing the other party thirty (30) days written notice
specifying the nature of the alleged default and, when
appropriate, the manner in which said default may be satis-
factorily cured. After proper notice and expiration of said
thirty (30) day cure period without cure, this Agreement may
be terminated. In the event that City's or Owner's default is
not subject to cure within the thirty (30) day period, city or
Owner shall be deemed not to remain in default in the event
that city or Owner commences to cure within such thirty (30)
day period and diligently prosecutes such cure to completion.
Failure or delay in giving notice of any default shall not
constitute a waiver of any default, nor shall it change the
-18-
time of default. Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Agreement, city reserves the right to formulate and propose to
Owner options for curing any defaults under this Agreement for
which a cure is not specified in this Agreement.
11. 2.2 city does not waive any claim of defect in
performance by Owner if, on periodic review, city does not
propose to modify or terminate this Agreement.
11.2.3 subject to Paragraph 16.12 of this
Agreement, the failure of a third person shall not excuse a
party's nonperformance under this agreement.
11.2.4 All other remedies at law or in equity
which are consistent with the provisions of this Agreement are
available to City and Owner to pursue in the event there is a
breach provided however. neither partv shall have the remedY
of monetary damaqes aqainst the other. except for an award of
1itiqation costs and attorney's fees. .
12. ENCUMBRANCES AND RELEASES ON PROPERTY.
12.1 Discretion to Encumber. This Agreement shall not
prevent or limit Owner in any manner at Owner's sole discretion,
from encumbering the Property, or any portion of the Property, or
any improvement on the Property, by any mortgage, deed of trust, or
other security device securing financing with respect to the
Property or its improvement.
12.2 Mortqaqee Riqhts and Obliqations. The mortgagee of
a mortgage or beneficiary of a deed of trust encumbering the
property, or any part thereof, and their successors and assigns
shall, upon written request to city, be entitled to receive from
city written notification of any default by Owner of the
performance of Owner's obligations under the Agreement which has
not been cured within thirty (30) days following the date of
default.
12.3 Releases. City agrees that upon written request of
Owner and payment of all fees and performance of the require-
ments and conditions required of Owner by this Agreement with
respect to the Property, or any portion thereof, City may
execute and deliver to Owner appropriate release(s) of further
obligations imposed by this Agreement in form and substance
acceptable to the San Diego county Recorder and title
insurance company, if any, or as may otherwise be necessary to
effect the release. city Manager shall not unreasonably
withhold approval of such release(s).
12.4 Obliqation to Modifv. city acknowledges that the
lenders providing financing for the Project may require certain
modifications to this Agreement and city agrees, upon request from
time to time, to meet with Owner and/or representatives of such
lenders to negotiate in good faith any such requirement for
-19-
modificat~on. city will not unreasonably withhold its consent to
any such requested modification.
13. MODIFICATION OR SUSPENSION.
13.1 Modification to Aqreement bv Mutual Consent. This
Agreement may be modified, from time to time, by the mutual consent
of the parties only in the same manner as its adoption by an
ordinance as set forth in California Government Code -sections
65867, 65867.5 and 65868. The term, "this Agreement" as used in
this Agreement, will include any such modification properly
approved and executed.
13.2 Unforeseen Health or Safetv Circumstances. If, as
a result of facts, events, or circumstances presently unknown,
unforeseeable, and which could not have been known to the parties
prior to the commencement of this Agreement, city finds that
failure to suspend this Agreement would place the residents of City
in a severe and immediate emergency to their health or safety.
13.2.1 Notification of Unforeseen Circumstances.
Notify Developer of (i) city's determination; and (ii) the
reasons for City's determination, and all facts upon which
such reasons are based;
13.2.2 Notice of Hearinq. Notify Developer in
writing at least fourteen (14) days prior to the date, of the
date, time and place of the hearing and forward to Developer
a minimum of ten (10) days prior to the hearings described in
section 13.2.3, all documents related to such determination
and reasons therefor; and
13.2.3 Hearinq. Hold a hearing on the deter-
mination, at which hearing Developer will have the right to
address the city Council. At the conclusion of said hearing,
City may take action to suspend this Agreement as provided
herein. The City may suspend this Agreement if, at the
conclusion of said hearing, based upon the evidence presented
by the parties, the City finds failure to suspend would place
the residents of the City in a severe and immediate emergency
to their health or safety.
13.3 Chanqe in State or Federal Law or Requlations. If
any state or federal law or regulation enacted during the Term of
this Agreement, or the action or inaction of any other affected
governmental jurisdiction, precludes compliance with one or more
provisions of this Agreement, or requires changes in plans, maps,
or permits approved by city, the parties will act pursuant to
Sections 13.3.1 and 13.3.2, below.
13.3.1 Notice: Meetinq. The party first becoming
aware of such enactment or action or inaction will provide the
other party(ies) with written notice of such state or federal
law or regulation and provide a copy of such law or regulation
and a statement regarding its conflict with the provisions of
-20-
this Agreement. The parties will promptly meet and confer in
a good faith and reasonable attempt to modify or suspend this
Agreement to comply with such federal or state law or regula-
tion.
13.3.2 Hearina. If an agreed upon modification
or suspension would not require an amendment to this Agree-
ment, no hearing shall be held. Otherwise, the matter of such
federal or state law or regulation will be scheduled for
hearing before the city. Fifteen (15) days' written notice of
such hearing shall be provided to Developer, and the city, at
such hearing, will determine and issue findings on the
modification or suspension which is required by such federal
or state law or regulation. Developer, at the hearing, shall
have the right to offer testimony and other evidence. If the
parties fail to agree after said hearing, the matter may be
submitted to mediation pursuant to subsection 13.3.3, below.
Any modification or suspension shall be taken by the affirma-
tive vote of not less than a majority of the authorized voting
members of the city. Any suspension or modification may be
subject to judicial review in conformance with subsection
16.19 of this Agreement.
13.3.3 Mediation of Disputes. In the event the
dispute between the parties with respect to the provisions of
this paragraph has not been resolved to the satisfaction of
both parties fOllowing the city hearing required by subsection
13.3.2, the matter shall be submitted to mediation prior to
the filing of any legal action by any party. The mediation
will be conducted by the San Diego Mediation Center; if San
Diego Mediation Center is unable to conduct the mediation, the
parties shall submit the dispute for mediation to the Judicial
Arbitration and Mediation Service or similar organization and
make a good faith effort to resolve the dispute. The cost of
any such mediation shall be divided equally between the
Developer and city.
13.4 Natural Communities Conservation Act (NCCP). The
parties recognize that Developer. and the city are individually
negotiating agreements with the united States Fish and wildlife
Service ("USF&W") and the California Department of Fish and Game
pursuant to the ongoing regional effort to implement the Natural
communities Conservation Act ("NCCP"), locally proposed to be
implemented through the Multi-Species Conservation Program
("MSCP"). The parties further recognize that implementation of the
agreements may necessitate modification to the Existing Project
Approvals. The parties agree to utilize their best efforts to
implement these agreements, once executed, through the timely
processing of modifications to the Existing Project Approvals as
they relate to the Property. The Developer agrees to pay the
reasonable city cost for processing work related to the modifica-
tions. Once such modifications are obtained they shall be vested
to the same extent as Existing Project Approvals.
-21-
14. DISTRICTS. PUBLIC FINANCING MECHANISMS.
This Agreement and the Existing Project Approvals recognize
that assessment districts, community facility districts, or other
public financing mechanisms, may be necessary to finance the cost
of public improvements borne by this Project. If Developer,
pursuant to the Existing project Approvals/Future Discretionary
Approvals, is required to install improvements through the use of
assessment districts, community facility districts, or other public
financing mechanisms, the city shall initiate and conclude
appropriate proceedings for the formation of such financing
district or funding mechanism, under applicable laws or ordinances.
Developer may request that the city utilize any other financing
methods which may become available under City laws or ordinances.
All costs associated with the consideration and formation of such
financing districts or funding mechanisms shall be paid by
Developer subject to reimbursement, as may be legally authorized
out of the proceeds of any financing district or funding mechanism.
15. ASSIGNMENT AND DELEGATION.
15.1 Assiqnment. Owner shall have the right to transfer
or assign its interest in the Property, in whole or in part,
to any persons, partnership, joint venture, firm, or corpora-
tion at any time during the Term of this Agreement without the
consent of city. Owner also shall have the right to assign or
transfer all or any portion of its interest or rights under
this Agreement to third parties acquiring an interest or
estate in the Property at any time during the Term of this
Agreement without the consent of city.
15.2 Deleqation. In addition, Owner shall have the
right to delegate or transfer its obligations under this
Agreement to third parties acquiring an interest or estate in
the Property after receiving the prior written consent of the
City Manager, which consent shall not be unreasonably with-
held, delayed, or conditioned. Once the city Manager has
consented to a transfer, delivery to and acceptance by the
City Manager of an unqualified written assumption of Owner's
obligations under this Agreement by such transferee shall
relieve Owner of the obligations under this Agreement to the
extent the obligations have been expressly assumed by the
transferee. Such transferee shall not be entitled to amend
this Agreement without the written consent of the entity that,
as of the Effective Date, is Owner, which consent shall not be
unreasonably withheld, delayed, or conditioned. The entity
that is Owner as of the Effective Date, however, shall be
entitled to amend this Agreement without the written consent
of such transferee.
16. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
16.1 Bindinq Effect of Aqreement. Except to the extent
otherwise provided in this Agreement, the burdens of this Agreement
-22-
bind, and the benefits of this Agreement inure, to city's and
Owner's successors-in-interest and shall run with the land.
16.2 Relationship of city and Owner. The contractual
relationship between city and Owner arising out of this Agreement
is one of independent contractor and not agency. This Agreement
does not create any third-party beneficiary rights.
16.3 Notices. All notices, demands, and correspondence
required or permitted by this Agreement shall be in writing and
delivered in person, or mailed by first-class or certified mail,
postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
If to city, to:
City of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, CA 91910
Attention: City Manager
If to Owner, to:
stephen and Mary Birch Foundation
705 Severn Road
suite 1048
Wilmington, DE 19803
Attention: Patrick Patek
with a copy to:
STEPHENSON, WORLEY, GARRATT
SCHWARTZ, HEIDEL & PRAIRIE
101 west Broadway, Suite 1300
San Diego, CA 92101
Attention: Donald R. Worley, Esq.
City or Owner may change its address by giving notice in writing to
the other. Thereafter, notices, demands, and correspondence shall
be addressed and transmitted to the new address. Notice shall be
deemed given upon personal delivery, or, if mailed, two (2)
business days following deposit in the United States mail.
16.4 Rules of Construction. In this Agreement, the use
of the singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes
the feminine; "shall" is mandatory; "may" is permissive.
16.5 Entire Aqreement. Waivers. and Recorded Statement.
This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement
of city and Owner with respect to the matters set forth in this
Agreement. This Agreement supersedes all negotiations or previous
agreements between city and Owner respecting this Agreement. All
waivers of the provisions of this Agreement must be in writing and
signed by the appropriate authorities of city and Owner. Upon the
completion of performance of this Agreement, or its revocation or
termination, a statement evidencing completion, revocation, or
termination signed by the appropriate agents of city shall be
recorded in the Official Records of San Diego County, California.
16.6 proiect as a Private Undertakinq. It is
specifically understood by City and Owner that (i) the Project is
-23-
a private development; (ii) City has no interest in or
responsibilities for or duty to third parties concerning any
improvements to the Property until City accepts the improvements
pursuant to the provisions of the Agreement or in connection with
subdivision map approvals; and (iii) Owner shall have the full
power and exclusive control of the Property subject to the
obligations of Owner set forth in this Agreement.
16.7 Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals set forth
in Paragraph 1 of this Agreement are part of this Agreement.
16.8 captions. The captions of this Agreement are for
convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain,
modify, construe, limit, amplify, or aid in the interpretation,
construction, or meaning of any of the provisions of this
Agreement.
16.9 Consent. Where the consent or approval of City or
Owner is required or necessary under this Agreement, the consent or
approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed, or con-
ditioned.
16.10 Covenant of cooperation.
cooperate and deal with each other in good
other in the performance of the provisions
City and Owner shall
faith, and assist each
of this Agreement.
16.11 ReCordinq. The City Clerk shall cause a copy of
this Agreement to be recorded with the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego county, California, within ten (10) days
following the Effective Date.
16.12 Delav. Extension of Time for Performance. In
addition to any specific provision of this Agreement, performance
by either city or Owner of its obligations hereunder shall be
excused, and the Term of this Agreement and the Development Plan
extended, during any period of delay caused at any time by reason
of any event beyond the control of city or Owner which prevents or
delays and impacts city's or Owner's ability to perform obligations
under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, acts of God,
enactment of new conflicting federal or state laws or regulations
(example: listing of a species as threatened or endangered),
judicial actions such as the issuance of restraining orders and
injunctions, riots, strikes, or damage to work in process by reason
of fire, floods, earthquake, or other such casualties. If city or
Owner seeks excuse from performance, it shall provide written
notice of such delay to the other within thirty (30) days of the
commencement of such delay. If the delay or default is beyond the
control of City or Owner, and is excused, an extension of time for
such cause will be granted in writing for the period of the
enforced delay, or longer as may be mutually agreed upon.
16.13 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealinqs. No party
shall do anything which shall have the effect of harming or
injuring the right of the other parties to receive the benefits of
this Agreement; each party shall refrain from doing anything which
-24-
would render its performance under this Agreement impossible; and
each party shall do everything which this Agreement contemplates
that such party shall do in order to accomplish the objectives and
purposes of this Agreement.
16.14 ODeratinq Memorandum. The parties acknowledge that
the provisions of this Agreement require a close degree of
cooperation between City and Developer, and that the refinements
and further development of the Project may demonstrate that minor
changes are appropriate with respect to the details of performance
of the parties. The parties, therefore, retain a certain degree of
flexibility with respect to those items covered in general under
this Agreement. When and if the parties mutually find that minor
changes or adjustments are necessary or appropriate, they may
effectuate changes or adjustments through operating memoranda
approved by the parties. For purposes of this Section 16.14, the
City Manager, or his designee, shall have the authority to approve
the operating memoranda on behalf of City. No operating memoranda
shall require notice or hearing or constitute an amendment to this
Agreement.
16.15 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the
performance of the provisions of this Agreement as to which time is
an element.
16.16 Amendment or Cancellation of Aqreement. This
Agreement may be amended from time to time or canceled by the
mutual consent of City and Owner only in the same manner as its
adoption, by an ordinance as set forth in California Government
Code section 65868, and shall be in a form suitable for recording
in the Official Records of San Diego County, California. The term
"Agreement" shall include any such amendment properly approved and
executed. City and Owner acknowledge that the provisions of this
Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between them, and
that minor or insubstantial changes to the Project and the
Development Plan may be required from time to time to accommodate
design changes, engineering changes, and other refinements.
Accordingly, changes to the Project and the Development Plan that
do not result in a change in use, an increase in density or
intensity of use, cause new or increased environmental impacts, or
violate any applicable health and safety regulations, may be
considered minor or insubstantial by the city Manager and made
without amending this Agreement.
16.17 EstotJDel Certificate. Within 30 calendar days
following a written request by any of the parties, the other
parties to this Agreement shall execute and deliver to the
requesting party a statement certifying that (i) this Agreement is
unmodified and in full force and effect, or if there have been
modifications hereto, that this Agreement is in full force and
effect as modified and stating the date and nature of such
modifications; (ii) there are no known current uncured defaults
under this Agreement, or specifying the dates and nature of any
such default; and (iii) any other reasonable information requested.
The failure to deliver such a statement within such time shall
-25-
constitut~ a conclusive presumption against the party which fails
to deliver such statement that this Agreement is in full force and
effect without modification, except as may be represented by the
requesting party, and that there are no uncured defaults in the
performance of the requesting party, except as may be represented
by the requesting party.
16.18 Severabilitv. If any material provision of this
Agreement is held invalid, this Agreement will be automatically
terminated with neither partv bearinq anv liabilitv hereunder.
Notwithstandinq the foreqoinq. lil'lless within 15 days after such
provision is held invalid, iL-the party holding rights under the
invalidated provision affirms the balance of this Agreement in
writing. this Aqreement shall not be terminated. This provision will
not affect the right of the parties to modify or suspend this
Agreement by mutual consent pursuant to paragraph 12.4.
16.19 Institution of Leqal Proceedinq. In addition to any
other rights or remedies, any party may institute legal action to
cure, correct, or remedy any default, to enforce any covenants or
agreements herein, or to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation
thereof; to recover damages for any default as allowed bv this
Aareement or to obtain any remedies consistent with the purpose of
this Agreement. Such legal actions must be instituted in the
Superior Court of the county of San Diego, State of California.
16.20 Attornevs' Fees and Costs. If any party commences
litigation or other proceedings (including, without limitation,
arbitration) for the interpretation, reformation, enforcement, or
rescission of this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by
the court, will be entitled to its reasonable attorneys' fees and
costs.
16.21 Hold Harmless. Developer agrees to and shall hold
City, its officers, agents, employees and representatives harmless
from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury,
including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from
the direct or indirect operations of Developer or those of its
contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees or other persons
acting on Developer's behalf which relate to the Project. Developer
agrees to and shall defend city and its officers, agents, employees
and representatives from actions for damage caused or alleged to have
been caused by reason of Developer's activities in connection with
the Project. Developer agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, pay all
costs and provide a defense for city in any legal action filed in a
court of competent jurisdiction by a third party challenging the
validity of this Agreement. The provisions of this Section 16.21
shall not apply to the extent such damage, liability or claim is
caused by the intentional or negligent act or omission of city, its
officers, agents, employees or representatives.
-26-
SIGNATURE PAGE TO PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
Dated this ____ day of
, 1996.
"CITY"
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
SHIRLEY HORTON, MAYOR
"OWNER"
STEVEN AND MARY BIRCH FOUNDATION
By:
PATRICK PATEK, PRESIDENT
I hereby approve the form and legality of the foregoing Pre-
Annexation Development Agreement this day of , 1996.
Ann Moore, Interim City Attorney
City of Chula vista
By:
-27-
EXHIBIT A
,
\--
"-.
i
~(f?
-.-
..~- ----
-=...::.:;: -
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STEPHEN AND MARY BIRCH FOUNDATION
7/3/96
o
z
W
t?
W
..J
>-
....
'"
"'''0
V; C
.- :J
> 0
!;!DJ
:J >-
~~
uu
'"
-
<I)....
.- 0 '"
> !-'
"'c
"'....'"
-"'~
:J.c..:::
.c 0.....
uv>E
"0
'"
"0
cc
"'0
E"
'"
E><U)
0"'",
uc:",
"'c:....
D::c:(c:(
I
T""
.
o
Z
t:
ctI 0
..... .-
(I).....
._ ctI
tC >.~
ctI t:
... - -
:Q::I5>
.- J:: I-
~UO
WI+-Q)
00::
~"5
.- t:
U ctI
0::
>-
ctI
.....
o
-
c:
"0'"
...E
U).c
0(.)
0.",,,,
0-'"
...........
a.Clc:(
z<
"
~
~
~
~ ~
~~ ~~! O~ I
';;('\ U ~:s ~
~'( U U~ ~
U ~
o
~
<,;
;.;: ra
"0 ...
C ....
",-c:(
..J.~ >-
>-u"O
","':J
_0..;:;
OU)U)
~m
'"
.E
:!E
N-
~I
o
I
_dJ
I
I
I
\.!:;,
,
EXHIBIT .C. I I
Pre-annexation Development Agreement
Planning Area Assessor Ownership Acreage
Parcel Numbers
Ranch House 595.{)90.{)5 Stephen & Mary Birch 71.56
Ranch House 595.{)90.{)6 Steohen & Mary Birch 0.22
Ranch House 595.{)90.{)8 Steohen & Mary Birch 96.25
168.03 Total
-=1/0
PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is
made effective on the date hereinafter set forth below by and among
the CITY OF CHULA VISTA ("City") and SNMB, LTD. ("SNMB"), who agree
as follows:
1. RECITALS.
following facts:
This Agreement is made with respect to the
1. 1 Owner. The owners of the properties subj ect to this
Agreement (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Owner" or as
"Developer") are as follows:
1.1.1 SNMB is the owner of approximately 1,827
acres of undeveloped real property ("the SNMB Property") in
the unincorporated area of the County of San Diego ("County"),
described in Exhibits "A" and "E, attached hereto and incorpo-
rated herein by this reference.
1.1. 2 The SNMB Property (the "Property") is part
of a larger area commonly known, and referred to herein, as
"the Otay Valley Parcel of Otay Ranch." Portions of SNMB
ProDertv are located in Villaqes 2. 3. 4. 7. 8. 9 and Planninq
Areas 12 and 18B of the Otav Ranch ProDertv.
1. 2 ci tv. The City of Chula vista is a municipal
corporation with Charter city Dowers aHa aH incorporated ~
within the County.
1.3 Code Authorization and Acknowledqments.
1.3.1 city is authorized pursuant to its
charter. self-rule Dowers and California Government Code
sections 65864 through 65869.5 to enter into development
agreements for the purpose of establishing certainty for both
city and owners of real property in the development process.
1.3.2 Government Code section 65865 expressly
authorizes a city to enter into a development agreement with
any person having a legal or equitable interest in real
property in unincorporated territory within that city's sphere
of influence for the development of property as provided in
the Development Agreement Law; provided that the agreement
shall not become operative unless annexation proceedings
annexing the property to the city are completed within the
time specified by the agreement.
1.3.3 City enters into this Agreement pursuant
to the provisions of the California Government Code, its home-
rule powers, and applicable City ordinances, rules, regula-
tions and policies.
-1-
1.3.4 city and Owner intend to enter into this
aareement for the followina DurDoses: aelll'la,llea-:Jc 1
1.3.4.1 To Tais A~rcemeRt assures adequate
public facilities at the time of development.
1.3.4.2 lQ Tl'lis h-:JreemcRt assures development
in accordance with city's capital improvement plans.
1.3.4.3 This ~~recmcAt eeRstitates a earreAt
exereise af city's paliee pe,:eFs t to provide certainty
to Owner in the development approval process by vesting
the permitted use(s), density, intensity of use, and the
timing and phasing of development as described in the
Development Plan, which is defined in Paragraph 2.4 of
this Agreement, in exchange for Owner's entering into
this Agreement and for its commitment to support the
Annexation described below.
1.3.4.4 TaiG A~ree"'eRt ,:ill To permit
achievement of City growth management goals and objec-
tives.
1.3.4.5 Tais }'.~reeH\ef\t '.:ill To allow City to
realize significant economic, recreational, park, open
space, social, and public facilities benefits for the
city, some of which are of regional significance.
1.3.4.6 Tais A~reelllef\t ~ill To provide and
assure that the City receive sales tax revenues, increase
in the property tax base, residential housing and other
development, sewer, water and street facilities.
1.3.4.7 Tl'lis A~FeemCf\t ~ To provide and
assure that the City receives public facilities in excess
of project generated impacts and such facilities shall be
of supplemental size, number capacity or length, which
shall be provided earlier than could be provided either
by funds from the City or than would strictly be
necessary to mitigate project related impacts at any
development phase.
1. 3.4.8 TRis A~rcel'flef\t o.:ill To provide the
city the developer's support to secure annexation of the
lands depicted in Exhibit "B".
1.3.4.9 TRis A~Feel'flef\t o.:ill To enable the
city to secure title to the land within the boundaries of
the Property necessary to complete the Chula vista
greenbelt system as defined in the Chula vista General
Plan.
1. 3.4.10 TRis A~reeH\cf\t ',:ill To assure the
City that the Developer will dedicate rights-of-way to
the city for SR-125, a route which, when constructed,
-2-
will substantially alleviate congestion on I-80S and 1-5,
and also will facilitate the economic development of
Chula vista.
1.3.4.11 Because of the complexities of the
financing of the infrastructure, park, open space, and
other dedications, and regional and community facilities,
and the significant nature of such facilities, certainty
in the development process is an absolute necessity. The
phasing, timing, and development of public infrastructure
necessitate a significant commitment of resources,
planning, and effort by Owner for the public facilities
financing, construction, and dedication to be success-
fully completed. In return for Owner's participation and
commitment to these significant contributions of private
resources for public purposes and for Owner's consent to
the Annexation described below, city is willing to
exercise its authority to enter into this Agreement and
to make a commitment of certainty for the development
process for the Property.
1.3.4.12 In consideration of Owner's agreement
to provide the significant benefits and for Owner's
consent to the Annexation described below, City hereby
grants Owner assurances that it can proceed with develop-
ment of the Property in accordance with City's
ordinances, rules, regulations, and policies existing as
of the effective date of this Agreement sub;ect to
section 5.2.1 below. Owner would not enter into this
Agreement or agree to provide the public benefits and
improvements described in this Agreement if it were not
for the commitment of City that the Property subject to
this Agreement can be developed in accordance with city's
ordinances, rules, regulations, and policies existing as
of the effective date of this Agreement sub;ect to
section 5.2.1 below.
1.4 The Annexation. The city has applied to the Local
Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") for annexation of Sphere of
Influence Planning Area 1 liThe Otay Parcel ", Planning Area 2
"Inverted L" and the Mary Patrick Estate Parcel (see Attachment
"B") .
1.5 Sphere of Influence. A city application is pending
before LAFCO to have the Otay Valley Parcel included within city's
sphere of influence. On February 5, 1996 the Local Agency
Formation commission approved the inclusion of approximately 7,600
acres into the city Sphere of Influence (Sphere of Influence
Planning Area 2 and the northern two thirds of Planning Area 1),
and designated the otay River Valley an Village 3 as special study
areas.
1.6 Plannina Documents. On October 28, 1993, city and
County adopted the otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional
Plan (lithe GDpII) which includes the Otay Ranch Village Phasing
-3-
Plan, Facility Implementation Plan, Resource Management Plan and
Service Revenue Plan, for approximately 23,000 acres of the otay
Ranch, including the Otay valley Parcel and the SNMB property.
1. 7 Owner Consent. city desires to have the cooperation
and consent of Owner to include the Property in the Annexation in
order to better plan, finance, construct and maintain the infra-
structure for the Otay Valley Parcel; and SNMB desires to give
their cooperation and consent, provided that they obtain certain
assurances, as set forth in this Agreement.
1.8 citv Ordinance. Auaust ..Jlily 9, 1996 is the date
of adoption by the city Council of Ordinance No. 2679 approving
this Agreement. The ordinance shall take effect and be in full
force on the effective date of Annexation.
2. DEFINITIONS.
otherwise requires:
In this Agreement, unless the context
2.1 "Annexation" means the proposed annexation of that
portion of the Otay Ranch into the city as depicted on Exhibit "D".
2.2 "City" means the City of Chula Vista, in the County
of San Diego, State of California.
2.3 "County" means the county of San Diego, State of
California.
2.4 "Development Plan" means the GDP.
2.5 "GDP" means the General Development Planl Subregional
Plan for the Otay Ranch, described in Paragraph 1.6, above.
2.6 "Owner" or "Developer" means the person, persons, or
entity having a legal and equitable interest in the Property, or
parts thereof, and includes Owner's successors-in-interest.
2.7 "Project" means the physical development of the
private and public improvements on the Property as provided for in
the Existing Project Approvals and as may be authorized by the city
in Future Discretionary Approvals.
2.8 "Property" means the real property described in
Paragraph 1.1.1.
2.9 The "Term" of this Agreement means the period
defined in Paragraph 3, below.
2.10 "Builder" means developer to whom Developer has sold
or conveyed property within the Property for purposes of its
improvement for residential, commercial, industrial or other use.
2.11 "CEQA" means the California Environmental Quality
Act, California Public Resources Code section 21000, et seq.
-4-
2.12 "City Council" means the City of Chula vista City
Council.
2.13 "Commit" or "Committed" means all of the following
requirements have been met with respect to any public facility:
2.13.1 For a public facility within the City's
jurisdictional boundaries and a responsibility of the develop-
er.
2.13.1.1 All discretionary permits required of
the Developer have been obtained for construction of the
public facility;
2.13.1.2 Plans for the construction of the
public facility have all the necessary governmental
approvals; and
2.13.1.3 Adequate funds (i.e., letters of
credit, cash deposits, performance bonds or land secured
public financing, including facility benefit assessments,
Mello-Roos assessment districts of similar assessment
mechanism) are available such that the City can construct
the public facility if construction has not commenced
within thirty (30) days of issuance of a notice to
proceed by the Director of Public Works, or construction
is not progressing towards completion in a reasonable
manner as reasonably deemed by the Director of Public
Works.
2.13.2 For a public facility within the city's
jurisdictional boundaries, but to be provided by other than
Developer.
2.13.2.1 Developer's proportionate share of
the cost of such public facility as defined in the
existing Project Approvals and Future Discretionary
Approvals has been provided or assured by Developer
through the payment or impositions of development impact
fee or other similar exaction mechanism.
2.13.3 For public facility not within City's
jurisdictional boundaries:
the cost
existing
Approvals
Developer
of Public
2.13.3.1 Developer's proportionate share of
of such public facility as defined in the
Project Approvals and Future Discretionary
has been provided for or otherwise assured by
to the reasonable satisfaction .of the Director
Works.
2.14 "Development Impact Fee (DIF)" means fees imposed
upon new development pursuant to the City of Chula vista
Development Impact Fee Program, for example, including but not
limited to the Transportation Development Impact Fee Program, the
-5-
Interim SR-125 Development Impact Fee Program, the Salt Creek Sewer
DIF and the Public Facilities DIF.
2.15 "Existing Project Approvals" means all discretionary
approvals affecting the Project which have been approved or
established in conjunction with, or preceding, the effective date
consisting of, but not limited to the GDP, the Chula Vista General
Plan, the otay Ranch Reserve Fund Program adopted pursuant to
Resolution 18288, and the Phase I and II Resource Management Plan
(RMP), as may be amended from time to time consistent with this
agreement.
2.16 "Final Map(s)" means any final subdivision map for
all or any portion of the Property other than the Superblock Final
Map ("A" Maps).
2.17 "Future Discretionary Approvals" means all permits
and approvals by the City granted after the effective date and
excluding existing Project Approvals, including, but not limited
to: (i) grading permits; (ii) site plan reviews; (iii) design
guidelines and reviews; (iv) precise plan reviews; (v) subdivisions
of the Property or re-subdivisions of the Property previously
subdivided pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act; (vi) conditional
use permits; (vii) variances; (viii) encroachment permits;
(ix) sectional Planning Area plans; (x) Preserve Conveyance Plan
and (xi) all other reviews, permits, and approvals of any type
which may be required from time to time to authorize public or
private on- or off-site facilities which are a part of the Project.
2.18 "Planning Commission" means the Planning commission
of the City of Chula Vist~.
2.19 "Preserve Conveyance Plan" means a plan that will.
when adoDted. set forth policies and identify the schedule for ~
~e ee transferFe6 of this land and/or fees to be paid to insure the
orderly conveyance of the Otay Ranch land to the Preserve Owner
Manager. The purpose of the plan is to fulfill the obligations to
convey resource sensitive land, per the criteria contained in the
phase I and II Resource Management Plans and to mitigate environ-
mental impacts of the otay Ranch Project.
2.20 "Public Facility"
public facilities described
Implementation Plan.
or "Public Facilities" means those
in the otay Ranch Facility
2.21 "Subdivision Map Act" means the California
Subdivision Map Act, Government Code section 66410, et seq., and
its amendments as may from time to time be adopted.
2.22 "Substantial Compliance" means that the party
charged with the performance of a covenant herein has sUfficiently
followed the terms of this Agreement so as to carry out the intent
of the parties in entering into this Agreement.
-6-
2.23 "Threshold" means the facility thresholds set forth
in the City's Municipal Code Section 19.19.040.
3. TERM. This Agreement shall become effective as a
development agreement upon the effective date of the Annexation
("the Effective Date"); provided, however, that if the Annexation
does not occur on or before January 1, 1997, this Agreement shall
be null and void. Any of the foregoing to the contrary notwith-
standing, from the date of first reading of the ordinance approving
this Agreement, and unless or until this Agreement becomes null and
void, Owner shall be bound by the terms of Paragraph 4. The Term
of this Agreement for purposes other than Paragraph 4 shall begin
upon the Effective Date, and shall continue for a period of twenty
(20) years ("the Term").
The term shall also be extended for any period of time during which
issuance of building permits to Developer is suspended for any
reason other than the default of Developer, and for a period of
time equal to the period of time during which any action by the
city or court action limits the processing of future discretionary
approvals, issuance of building permits or any other development of
the property consistent with this Agreement.
4. OWNER CONSENT TO ANNEXATION. Owner hereby consents to
and shall cooperate with the applications of City to declare that
the Otay Valley Parcel is within city's sphere of influence and to
annex the otay Valley Parcel to the City; provided, however, that
Owner may withdraw such consent and withhold further cooperation if
the City, prior to the Effective Date, adopts rules, regulations,
ordinances, policies, conditions, environmental regulations,
phasing controls, exactions, entitlements, assessments or fees
applicable to and governing development of the Property which are
inconsistent with, or render impractical development of the
Property according to, the Development Plan or the additional
commitments of City set forth in Paragraphs 5.1.1 through 5.1.8,
below. OWner also aqrees not to challenqe the annexation of the
otay Valley Parcel into the city.
5. VESTED RIGHTS. Notwi thstanding any future action or
inaction of the city during the term of this Agreement, whether
such action is by ordinance, resolution or policy of the city,
Owner and Developer shall have a vested right, except as may be
otherwise provided in this section 5, to construct the Project in
accordance with:
5.1 Existing Project Approvals, subject to the following
requests for modifications if aDDrOyed bv the city:
5.1.1 city shall reasonably consider in its
discretion and with proper environmental review, a request to
increase the residential density of Villages 2, 4, and 8, up
to the number of residential units provided in village 3 by
the County adopted GDP.
-7-
5.1.2 City shall reasonably consider in its
discretion and JjLeeeaa with proper environmental review a
request to change the primary land use designation for Village
3 from Industrial to commercial, recreational, visitor-
serving, and some residential uses in addition to the Indus-
trial use. The exact acreages of the residential, industrial,
commercial, or other uses, shall be agreed upon and set forth
in a general plan amendment.
5.1.3 If the interchange improvements at otay
Valley Road and I-80S are needed to serve the Project, the
City will hold appropriate hearings to consider an amendment
to amefts its Transportation Phasing Plan (TPP) and Development
Impact Fee (DIF) Program to include said improvements as may
be deemed appropriate bv the City to accommodate the project
phasing. The city agrees to reasonably cooperate and work
with CALTRANS to complete plans for said t.Re interchange
improvement plafts.
5.1.4 city shall initiate contact and diligently
pursue discussions with the county of San Diego and the City
of San Diego to determine the number, scheduling and financing
of the otay River road and bridge crossings.
5.1. 5 City shall allow the owner for purposes of
processing entitlements to proceed with planning of the
Property on a first come first served basis, with other
properties in the area of the Annexation. In addition, if
necessary the city shall, with proper environmental review,
consider in its discretion an amendment to the Village Phasing
Plan to facilitate the planning and development of the
properties covered by this Agreement.
5.1.6 To the extent any of the foregoing
eammit.meftt.s af Cit.y aLe emeasies ift changes are embodied in ~
the Development Plan or the rules, regulations, ordinances,
policies, conditions, environmental regulations, phasing
controls, exactions, entitlements, assessments, and fees
applicable to and governing development of the Property,
whether adopted before or after the Effective Date, such
changes shall be deemed applicable to the Property without
change to this Agreement.
5.1.7 city shall diligently process any amend-
ments, applications, maps, or other development applications.
5.1. 8 City shall diligently process and reason-
ably consider in its discretion with proper environmental
review a request to expand the development areas of Villages
2, 3, 4 and 8 in the event future environmental studies
indicate that areas once considered environmentally con-
strained can be developed without significant, unmitigable
environmental impacts.
-8-
5.1.9. city may make such modifications or
amendments to the Existina Pro;ect ADDrova1s/Future Discretionarv
ADDrovals. as may be ordered bv a court of comDetent ;urisdiction
in an action in which the Developer is a party or has had an
opportunity to appear or has been provided notice of such action bv
the city.
5.2 Development of Propertv. The development of the
Property will be governed by this Agreement and Existing Project
Approvals and such development shall comply and be governed by all
rules, regulations, policies, resolutions, ordinances, and
standards in effect as of the Effective Date subject to the
provisions of section 5.2.1 below. The city shall retain its
discretionary authority as to Future Discretionary Approvals,
provided however, such Future Discretionary Approvals shall be
regulated by the Existing Project Approvals, this Agreement, and
City rules, regulations, standards, ordinances, resolutions and
policies in effect on the Effective Date of this Agreement and
subject to section 5.2.1.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City may make such changes to
the city's Growth Management Ordinance applicable to the Project as
are reasonable and consistent with the purpose and intent of the
existing Growth Management Ordinance and which are generally
applicable to all private projects citywide or east of 1-805 or
within a specific benefit, fee or reimbursement district created
pursuant to the California Government Code.
5.2.1 New or Amended Rules. Reaulations.
Policies. standards. Ordinances and Resolutions. The City may
apply to the Project, including Future Discretionary Approv-
als, new or amended rules, laws, regulations, policies,
ordinances, resolutions and standards generally applicable to
all private projects east of 1-805 or within a specific
benefit fee or reimbursement district created pursuant to the
California Government Code. The application of such new
rules, or amended laws, regulations, resolutions, policies,
ordinances and standards will not unreasonably prevent or
delay development of the Property to the uses, densities or
intensities of development specified herein or as authorized
by the Existing Project Approvals. The City may also apply
changes in city laws, regulations, ordinances, standards or
policies specifically mandated by changes in state or federal
law in compliance with section 13.3 herein.
5.2.2 Developer may elect with City's consent,
to have applied to the project any rules, regulations,
policies, ordinances or standards enacted after the date of
this Agreement. Such an election has to be made in a manner
consistent with section 5.2 of this Agreement.-
5.2.3 Modifications to Existinq Pro;ect
Approvals. It is contemplated by the parties to this
Agreement that the city and Developer may mutually seek and
agree to modifications to the Existing Project Approvals.
-9-
Such modifications are contemplated as within the scope of
this Agreement, and shall, upon written acceptance by all
parties, constitute for all purposes an Existing Project
Approval. The parties agree that any such modifications may
not constitute an amendment to this Agreement nor require an
amendment to the Agreement.
5.2.4 Future Discretionarv ADDrovals. It is
contemplated by the parties to this Agreement that the city
and Developer may agree to Future Discretionary Approvals. The
parties agree that any such Future Approvals may not consti-
tute an amendment to this Agreement nor require an amendment
to the Agreement.
5.3 Dedication and Reservation of Land for Public
PurDoses. Except as expressly required by this Agreement or the
Existing Project Approvals and Future Discretionary Approvals
(excepting dedications required within the boundaries of any parcel
created by the subsequent subdivision of the Property as required
by the Subdivision Map Act), no dedication or reservation of real
property within or outside the Property shall be required by City
or Developer in conjunction with the Project. Any dedications and
reservations of land imposed shall be in accordance with section
7.2 and section 7.8 herein.
5.4 Time for Construction and ComDletion of Proiect.
Because the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction
ComDanv v. citv of Camarillo (1984) 27 Cal.3d 465, that the failure
of the parties to provide for the timing of development resulted in
a later-adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to
prevail over such parties' Agreement, it is the intention of the
parties to this Agreement to cure that deficiency by specifically
acknowledging that timing and phasing of development is completely
and exclusively governed by the Existing Project Approvals,
including the Chula vista Growth Management Ordinance. The purpose
of the Chula vista Growth Management Ordinance is to "control the
timing and location of development by tying the pace of development
to the provision of public facilities and improvements to conform
to the city's threshold standards. " (Municipal Code Section
19.09.010A.7) The findings in support of the Growth Management
Ordinance conclude that the ordinance "does not affect the number
of houses which may be built." (Municipal Code Section
19.09.010B.3) Therefore, the parties acknowledge that the Chula
vista Growth Management Ordinance completely occupies the topic of
development timing and phasing and expressly precludes the adoption
of housing caps, urban reserves or any other means by which the
rate of development may be controlled or regulated. The City
agrees that the Developer shall be entitled to, apply for and
receive all permits necessary for the development of property,
consistent with the Growth Management Ordinance, Existing Project
Approvals, Future Discretionary Approvals and this Agreement.
5.5 Benefit of Vestinq. Nothing in this Agreement will
be construed as limiting or impairing Developer's vested right, if
any, to proceed with the development and use of the Property
-10-
pursuant to the Federal and state constitutions, and pursuant to
statutory and decisional law.
5.6 vestinq of Entitlements. All rights conferred by
this Agreement vest with the Effective Date hereof. The approval
of Future Discretionary approvals shall not be deemed to limit
Developer's rights authorized by this Agreement, and once such
approvals are obtained they shall be vested to the same extent as
the Existing Project Approvals.
6. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
6.1 processinq of Future Discretionarv Approvals. city
will accept and diligently process development applications and
requests for Future Discretionary Approvals, or other entitlements
with respect to the development and use of the Property, provided
said applications and requests are in accordance with this
Agreement. city costs for processing work related to the Project,
including hiring of additional city personnel and/or the retaining
of professional consultants, will be reimbursed to City by
Developer.
6.2 Lenqth of Validitv of Tentative Subdivision Maps.
Government Code section 66452.6 provides that tentative subdivision
map(s) may remain valid for a length up to the term of a Develop-
ment Agreement. The City agrees that tentative subdivision map(s)
for the property shall be for a term of six (6) years and may be
extended by the City council for a period of time not to exceed a
total of twenty (20) years and in no event beyond the term of this
Agreement.
6.3 Pre-Final Map Development. If Developer desires to
do certain work on the Property after approval of a tentative map
(for example, grading) prior to the recordation of a final map, it
may do so by obtaining a grading and/or other required approvals
from the city which are authorized by the city prior to recordation
of a final map. Such permit shall be issued to Developer, or its
contractor, upon Developer's application, approval, and provided
Developer posts a bond or other reasonably adequate security
required by City in an amount to assure the rehabilitation of the
land if the applicable final map does not record.
6.4 Final Maps.
6.4.1 "A" Maps and "B" Maps. If Developer so
elects, the City shall accept and process a master subdivision
or parcel map ("A" Map) showing "super Block" lots and
backbone street dedications. "super Block" lots shall be
consistent with the GDP and subsequent sectional Plan Area
plans, and shall not subdivide land into individual single-
family lots. All "Super Blocks" created shall have access to
dedicated public streets. The city shall not require improve-
ment plans in order to record a final map for any "A" Map
lots, but the city shall require bonding for the completion of
backbone facilities prior to recording in an amount to be
-11-
determined by the City. Following the approval by city of any
final map for an "A" Map lot and its recordation, Developer
may convey the "Super Block" lot. The buyer of a "super
Block" lot shall then process final improvement plans and
grading plans and a final map ("B" Map) for each "Super Block"
lot which the City shall process. The "B" Maps shall be in
substantial conformance with the related approved "A" Map. In
the instance of the multi-family dwelling unit areas, a
separate tentative subdivision map may be submitted to the
City and the "B" Map(s) for these areas may be submitted to
the city after the city Planning commission approves said
tentative subdivision map.
6.4.2 Recordation of Final Subdivision MaD in
Name of Builder or Third Partv. Developer may, if it so
elects, convey to a Builder or third party any "super block"
lot(s) shown on the recorded Superblock Final Map. In such
case, the Builder or third party will (i) process any neces-
sary final improvement and grading plans and a final map for
each such "super block" lot, which map city shall accept and
process as subsequent phases in a multi-phase project, (ii)
enter into a subdivision improvement agreement with city with
respect to the subdivision improvements which are required for
such super block lot, and (iii) provide security and insurance
satisfactory to City for the completion of the subdivision
improvements.
6.4.3 Recordation of Final Subdivision MaD in
DeveloDer's Name: Transfer of Obliaations Under Subdivision
Improvement Aqreementls) . If Developer so elects, it may
defer the conveyance of any super block lot to a Builder or
third party until after the final map of such super block lot
has been recorded. If Developer elects to proceed in this
manner, it will enter into City's standard subdivision
improvement agreement(s) with City for the improvements
required as a condition to the approval of such map(s). Upon
sale to a Builder or third party, if such Builder or third
party assumes Developer's obligations under the improvement
agreement and provides its own security and insurance for the
completion of the subdivision improvements as approved by the
city, Developer shall be released from liability under the
subdivision improvement agreement(s) and Developer's security
shall be released.
6.4.4 Transfer of Riqhts and Obliqations of
DeveloDment. Whenever Developer conveys a portion of the
Property, the rights and obligations of this Agreement shall
transfer in accordance with Section 15 herein.
7. DEVELOPER'S OBLIGATIONS.
7.1 Condition to Developer's Obliqations to Dedicate. Fund or
Construct Public Facilities. Developer agrees to develop or
provide the public improvements, facilities, dedications, or
-12-
reservations of land and satisfy other exactions conditioning the
development of the Property which are set forth hereinbelow. The
obligations of the Developer pursuant to this Agreement are
conditioned upon: (i) the City not being in default of its obliga-
tions under this agreement; and (ii) the city not preventing or
unreasonably delaying the development of the property; and (iii)
the Agreement having not been suspended in response to changes in
state or federal law; and (iv) the City's obligations having not
been suspended pursuant to section 13.2.
7.2 Dedications and Reservations of Land for Publicpurcoses.
The policies by which property will be required to be reserved,
dedicated or improved for public purposes are identified in the
Existing Project Approvals. A more precise delineation of the
property to be preserved, dedicated or improved for public purposes
shall occur as part of Future Discretionary Approvals, consistent
with the Existing Project Approvals.
7.2.1 Dedication of Land for SR 125. Developer agrees to
dedicate land for right-of-way purposes and property owned by
the Developer that is reaso"nably necessary for the SR-125
configuration that is generally depicted in the SR-125 draft
Environmental Impact Report/Statement and as revised in the
Final Environmental Impact Report/Statement to respond to
engineering, design, environmental and similar constraints.
The dedications shall be to the City or by an alternate method
acceptable to the City at such time as requested by the city.
city agrees that in the event City shall negotiate with
California Transportation Ventures (CTV) or other toll road
builder any participation or advantages to city that City
shall share such rights with subsequent owner/resident of the
property.
7.2.2 Landfill Nuisance Easements. The carties to this
Aqreement understand and acknowledqe that the "Landfill
Nuisance Easement" is an inteqral cart of this Aqreement.
Develocer shall deliver to the city "Landfill Nuisance
Easements" in the form attached as Exhibit "c" and satisfacto-
ry to the County of San Dieqo Drior to the second readinq of
the Ordinance aDDrovinq the Aqreement. If there is no second
readinq of this Aqreement. the city shall return said ease-
ments to the DeveloDer. If the County Board of SUDervisors
does not acceDt or aDDrove said easements. this Aqreement
shall be automaticallY terminated with neither Darty bearinq
any liability hereunder. Deyeleper shall ~raH~ ~e ~ae Ce~H~Y
lay .Jaly 1, 199~ IILaRelfill UaiaaRcc EaSemf:Rt.etl 6\iBataR'Eially iR
t.he ferm a'tt.ae1=u:a as Euhiei t. c. The Eaae:meftt Bhall ee-;e:r all
laJui ,_which is \:i t.hip! t.he Ot.ay Larulfill Buffer }6re:a af YillalJes
2, J aRe rlaRRiRIJ Area 19B af t.he: Ot.ay RaReR car as saevR eft
Euhisit. I> heret.e.
7.2.3 city shall reasonablY consider in its discretion
and with DrODer environmental review. a request to relocate
all land uses which may be eliminated as a result of an
-13-
unknown relocation of SR-125 from the route currently del)icted
in the GDP. PrEserve Celr./Cyartcc rlaR. The City aRB 'the
De..;ele~eE' shall B\\:l'Etlally alJre:c 1:1.pSFt a Frcac.:r-:e OeR"';eyafiee
Plan. The oity ahall iR ~eaa faith eeRsidcr fer aaaptisR 6~eh
a plaFt aRa thE Develepcr shall eaR~ey prepcrty aRa/aE' fees iA
lietl af laRa as oct fer~h ift sueh PlaR.
7.3 Growth Manaaement Ordinance. Developer shall commit the
public facilities and city shall issue building permits as provided
in this section. The city shall have the right to withhold the
issuance of building permits any time after the City reasonably
determines a Threshold has been exceeded, unless and until the
Developer has mitigated the deficiency in accordance with the
City's Growth Management Ordinance.
Developer agrees that building permits may be withheld where the
public facilities described in the Existing Project Approvals/-
Future Discretionary Approvals required for a particular Threshold
have not been committed.
In the event a Threshold is not met and future building permit
issuance may be withheld, the notice provisions and procedures
contained in section 19.09. 100C of the Municipal Code will be
followed. In the event the issuance of building permits is
suspended pursuant to the provisions herein, such suspension shall
not constitute a breach of the terms of this Agreement by Developer
or Citv. Furthermore, any such suspension which is not caused by
the actions or omissions of the Developer, shall toll the term of
this Agreement as provided for in section 16.12 of this Agreement,
and suspend the Developer's obligations pursuant to this Agreement.
7.3.1 Reauired Condemnation. The city and Developer
recognize that certain of the public facilities identified in
the Existing Project Approvals/Future Discretionary Approvals
and required to comply with a threshold are located on
properties which neither the Developer nor the City has, or
will have, title to or control of. The City shall identify
such property or properties and at the time of filing of the
final map commence timely negotiations or, where the property
is within the City's jurisdiction, commence timely proceedings
pursuant to Title 7 (commencing with S 1230.010) of Part 3 of
the Code of civil Procedure to acquire an interest in the
property or properties. Developer's share of the cost
involved in any such acquisition shall be based on its
proportionate share of the public facility as defined in the
Existing Project Approvals/Future Discretionary Approvals.
Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to preclude the City
from requiring the Developer to pay the cost of acquiring such
off-site land. For that portion of the cost beyond the
Developer's fair share responsibility, the City shall take all
reasonable steps to establish a procedure whereby the develop-
er is reimbursed for such costs beyond its fair share.
7.3.2 Information Reaardina Thresholds. Upon
Developer's written requests of the City Manager, the City
-14-
will provide Developer with information regarding the current
status of a Threshold. Developer shall be responsible for any
staff costs incurred in providing said written response.
7.4 ImDrovements ReGuired bv a Subdivision MaD. Asmay
be required pursuant to the terms of a subdivision map, it shall be
the responsibility of Developer to construct the improvements
required by a subdivision map. Where Developer is required to
construct a public improvement which has been identified as the
responsibility of another party or to provide public improvements
of supplemental size, capacity, number or length benefiting
property not within the subdivision, City shall process a reim-
bursement agreement to the Developer in accordance with Article 6
of Chapter 4 of the Subdivision Map Act, commencing with Government
Code section 66485, and Section 7.5, below.
7.5 Facilities which Are the ObliGations of Another
Partv. or Are of Excessive Size. CaDacitv. LenGth or Number.
Developer may offer to advance monies and/or construct public
improvements which are the responsibility of another land owner, or
outside the City's jurisdictional boundaries, or which are of
supplemental size, capacity, number or length for the benefit of
land not within the Property. City, where requesting such funding
or construction of oversized public improvements, shall consider
after a public hearing, contemporaneous with the imposition of the
obligation, the formation of a reimbursement district, assessment
district, facility benefit assessment, or reimbursement agreement
or other reimbursement mechanism.
7.6 PioneerinG of Facilities. To the extent Developer
itself constructs (Le., "pioneers") any public facilities or
public improvements which are covered by a DIF Program, Developer
shall be given a credit against DIFs otherwise payable, subject to
the City's Director of Public Works reasonable determination that
such costs are allowable under the applicable DIF Program. It is
specifically intended that Developer be given DIF credit for the
DIF Program improvements it makes. The fact that such improvements
may be financed by an assessment district or other financing
mechanism, shall not prevent DIF credit from being given to the
extent that such costs are allowed under the applicable DIF Program
7.7 Insurance.
insured for all insurance
project as pertains to the
the Project.
Developer shall name city as additional
policies obtained by Developer for the
Developer's activities and operation on
7.8 Other Land Owners. Developer hereby agrees to
dedicate adequate rights-of-way within the boun~aries of the
Property for other land owners to "Pioneer" public facilities on
the Property; provided, however, as follows: (i) dedications shall
be restricted to those reasonably necessary for the construction of
facilities identified in the City's adopted public facility plans;
(ii) this provision shall not be binding on the successors-in-
interest or assignees of Developer following recordation of the
-15-
final "Super Block" or "A" Map; and (iii) the city shall use its
reasonable best efforts to obtain agreements similar to this
subsection from other developers and to obtain equitable reimburse-
ment for Developer for any excess dedications.
8. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES.
8.1 Existina Development Impact Fee Proaram PaYments.
Developer shall pay to the city a DIF, or construct improvements in
lieu of payment, for improvements which are conditions of a
tentative subdivision map upon the issuance of building permits(s),
or at a later time as specified by City ordinance, the Subdivision
Map Act, or Public Facility Financing Plan (PFFP). The DIF will be
in the amount in effect at the time payment is made and may only be
increased pursuant to section 8.6 herein.
8.2 Other Undeveloped Properties. The City will use its
reasonable best efforts to impose and collect, or cause the
imposition and collection of, the same DIF program on all the
undeveloped real properties which benefit from the provision of the
public facility through the DIF program, or provided as a condition
of Project Approvals.
8.3 Use of Development Impact Fee Proaram. The DIF
amounts paid to the City by Developer and others with respect to
the Area of Benefit shall be placed by the city in a capital
facility fund account established pursuant to California Government
Code sections 66000-66009. The city shall expend such funds only
for the Projects described in the adopted fee program as may be
modified from time to time. The City will use its reasonable best
efforts to cause such Projects to be completed as soon as practica-
ble; however, the city shall not be obligated to use its general
funds for such Projects.
8.4 withholdina of Permits. Developer agrees that City
shall have the right to withhold issuance of the building permit
for any structure or improvement on the Property unless and until
the DIF is paid for such structure or improvement.
8.5 Development Impact Fee Credit. Upon the completion
and acceptance by the city of any public facility, the city shall
immediately credit Developer with the appropriate amount of cash
credits ("EDUs") as determined by Developer and city. However, if
the improvements are paid for through an Assessment District, the
city shall credit the Developer with the appropriate number of
Equivalent Dwelling unit Credits (EDU's). Developer shall be
entitled to apply any and all credits accrued pursuant to this
subsection toward the required payment of future DIF for any phase,
stage or increment of development of the Project.
8.6 Modification of Development Impact Fees. The
parties recognize that from time to time during the duration of the
Agreement it will be necessary for the City to update and modify
its DIF fees. Such reasonable modifications are contemplated by
the city and the Developer and shall not constitute a modification
-16-
to the Agreement so long as: (i) the modification incorporates the
reasonable costs of providing facilities identified in the Existing
project Approvals; (ii) are based upon methodologies in substantial
compliance with the methodology contained in the existing DIF
programs; or other methodology approved by the city council
following a public hearing; (iii) complies with the provisions of
Government Code sections 66000-66009.
8.7 Standards for Financinq Obliqations of Owner. In
connection with the development of the Property, the following
standards regarding the financing of public improvements shall
apply:
8.7.1 Owner shall pay its fair share for the
interchanges descr ibed in Paragraph 5. 1. 3 , based upon the
number of dwelling units or equivalent dwellings of develop-
ment allowed on the Property as compared to the total dwelling
units or equivalent dwelling units allowed on properties
served by such interchanges.
8.7.2 Owner shall participate in the DIF Program
for the Otay Valley Parcel with other owners in proportion to
the total dwelling units or equivalent dwelling units allowed
on the Property as compared with the total of such units
allowed on properties in that particular DIF or by some other
equitable methodology decided by the city Council.
8.7.3 The city shall diligently pursue the
requirements that the Eastern Territories' DIF requires
offsite third parties and adjacent jurisdictions to bear their
fair share of all Otay River Valley crossings.
9. CITY OBLIGATIONS.
9.1 Urban Infrastructure. To the extent it is within
the authority of the City to provide, city shall accommodate urban
infrastructure to the project, consistent with Existing Project
Approvals. Where it is necessary to utilize city property to
provide urban infrastructure consistent with the Existing Project
Approvals, the city agrees to make such land available for such
uses, provided that the city if it so chooses is compensated at
fair market value for the property. To the extent that the
provision of urban infrastructure is within the authority of
another public or quasi-public agency or utility, the city agrees
to fully cooperate with such agency or agencies to accommodate the
urban infrastructure, consistent with Existing Project Approvals.
Urban infrastructure shall include, but not be limited to gas,
electricity, telephone, cable and facilities identified in the otay
Ranch Facility Implementation Plan.
9.2 Sewer capaci tv. The city agrees to provide adequate
sewer capacity for the project, upon the payment of ordinary and
necessary sewer connection, capacity and/or service fees.
10. ANNUAL REVIEW.
-17-
10.1 citv and Owner ResDonsibilities. City will, at
least every twelve (12) months during the Term of this Agreement,
pursuant to California Government Code 565865.1, review the extent
of good faith substantial compliance by Owner with the terms of
this Agreement. Pursuant to California Government Code section
65865.1, as amended, Owner shall have the duty to demonstrate by
substantial evidence its good faith compliance with the terms of
this Agreement at the periodic review. Either City or Owner may
address any requirement of the Agreement during the review.
10.2 Evidence. The parties recognize that this Agreement
and the documents incorporated herein could be deemed to contain
hundreds of requirements and that evidence of each and every
requirement would be a wasteful exercise of the parties' resources.
Accordingly, Developer shall be deemed to have satisfied its good
faith compliance when it presents evidence of substantial com-
pliance with the major provisions of this Agreement. Generalized
evidence or statements shall be accepted in the absence of any
evidence that such evidence is untrue.
10.3 Review Letter. If Owner is found to be in com-
pliance with this Agreement after the annual review, city shall,
within forty-five (45) days after Owner's written request, issue a
review letter in recordable form to Owner ("Letter") stating that
based upon information known or made known to the Council, the City
Planning Commission and/or the City Planning Director, this
Agreement remains in effect and Owner is not in default. Owner may
record the Letter in the Official Records of the county of San
Diego.
10.4 Failure of Periodic Review. City's failure to
review at least annually Owner's compliance with the terms and
conditions of this Agreement shall not constitute, or be asserted
by city or Owner as, a breach of the Agreement.
11. DEFAULT.
11.1 Events of Default. A default under this Agreement
shall be deemed to have occurred upon the happening of one or more
of the following events or conditions:
11.1.1 A warranty, representation or statement
made or furnished by Owner to city is false or proves to have
been false in any material respect when it was made.
11.1.2 A finding and determination by City made
following a periodic review under the procedure provided for
in California Government Code section 65865.1 that upon the
basis of substantial evidence Owner has not complied in good
faith with one or more of the terms or conditions of this
Agreement.
consider
submitted
11.1.3 City does not accept,
requested development permits
in accordance with the provisions
timely review, or
or entitlements
of this Agreement.
-18-
11. 1.4 Any other act or omiss ion by city or Owner
which materially interferes with the terms of this Agreement.
11.2 Procedure UDOn Default.
11. 2 . 1 Upon the occurrence of default by the
other party, City or Owner may terminate this Agreement after
providing the other party thirty (30) days written notice
specifying the nature of the alleged default and, when
appropriate, the manner in which said default may be satis-
factorily cured. After proper notice and expiration of said
thirty (30) day cure period without cure, this Agreement may
be terminated. In the event that city's or Owner's default is
not subject to cure within the thirty (30) day period, City or
Owner shall be deemed not to remain in default in the event
that city or Owner commences to cure within such thirty (30)
day period and diligently prosecutes such cure to completion.
Failure or delay in giving notice of any default shall not
constitute a waiver of any default, nor shall it change the
time of default. Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Agreement, City reserves the right to formulate and propose to
Owner options for curing any defaults under this Agreement for
which a cure is not specified in this Agreement.
11. 2 . 2 ci ty does not waive any claim of defect in
performance by Owner if, on periodic review, City does not
propose to modify or terminate this Agreement.
11.2.3 Subject to Paragraph 16.12 of this
Agreement, the failure of a third person shall not excuse a
party's nonperformance under this agreement.
11. 2.4 All other remedies at law or in equity
which are consistent with the provisions of this Agreement are
available to city and Owner to pursue in the event there is a
breach Drovided however. neither Dartv shall have the remedY
ot monetary damaaes aaainst the other. exceDt for an award of
litiaation costs and attorney's fees.
12. ENCUMBRANCES AND RELEASES ON PROPERTY.
12.1 Discretion to Encumber. This Agreement shall not
prevent or limit Owner in any manner at Owner's sole discretion,
from encumbering the Property, or any portion of the Property, or
any improvement on the Property, by any mortgage, deed of trust, or
other security device securing financing with respect to the
Property or its improvement.
12.2 Mortaaaee Riahts and Obliaations. The mortgagee of
a mortgage or beneficiary of a deed of trust encumbering the
Property, or any part thereof, and their successors and assigns
shall, upon written request to city, be entitled to receive from
city written notification of any default by Owner of the
performance of Owner's obligations under the Agreement which has
-19-
not been cured within thirty (30) days following the date of
default.
12.3 Releases. City agrees that upon written request of
Owner and payment of all fees and performance of the require-
ments and conditions required of Owner by this Agreement with
respect to the Property, or any portion thereof, city may
execute and deliver to Owner appropriate release(s) of further
obligations imposed by this Agreement in form and substance
acceptable to the San Diego County Recorder and title
insurance company, if any, or as may otherwise be necessary to
effect the release. City Manager shall not unreasonably
withhold approval of such release(s).
12.4 Obliqation to ModifY. city acknowledges that the
lenders providing financing for the Project may require certain
modifications to this Agreement and city agrees, upon request from
time to time, to meet with Owner and/or representatives of such
lenders to negotiate in good faith any such requirement for
modification. city will not unreasonably withhold its consent to
any such requested modification.
13. MODIFICATION OR SUSPENSION.
13.1 Modification to Aqreement bY Mutual Consent. This
Agreement may be modified, from time to time, by the mutual consent
of the parties only in the same manner as its adoption by an
ordinance as set forth in California Government Code sections
65867, 65867.5 and 65868. The term, "this Agreement" as used in
this Agreement, will include any such modification properly
approved and executed.
13.2 Unforeseen Health or Safety Circumstances. If, as
a result of facts, events, or circumstances presently unknown,
unforeseeable, and which could not have been known to the parties
prior to the commencement of this Agreement, city finds that
failure to suspend this Agreement would place the residents of City
in a severe and immediate emergency to their health or safety.
13.2.1 Notification of Unforeseen Circumstances.
Notify Developer of (i) City's determination; and (ii) the
reasons for City's determination, and all facts upon which
such reasons are based;
13.2.2 Notice of Hearinq. Notify Developer in
writing at least fourteen (14) days prior to the date, of the
date, time and place of the hearing and forward to Developer
a minimum of ten (10) days prior to the hearings described in
section 13.2.3, all documents related to such determination
and reasons therefor; and
13.2.3 Hearinq. Hold a hearing on the deter-
mination, at which hearing Developer will have the right to
address the city Council. At the conclusion of said hearing,
city may take action to suspend this Agreement as provided
-20-
herein. The City may suspend this Agreement if, at the
conclusion of said hearing, based upon the evidence presented
by the parties, the City finds failure to suspend would place
the residents of the city in a severe and immediate emergency
to their health or safety.
13.3 Chanae in state or Federal Law or Reaulations. If
any state or federal law or regulation enacted during the Term of
this Agreement, or the action or inaction of any other affected
governmental jurisdiction, precludes compliance with one or more
provisions of this Agreement, or requires changes in plans, maps,
or permits approved by City, the parties will act pursuant to
sections 13.3.1 and 13.3.2, below.
13.3.1 Notice: Meetina. The party first becoming
aware of such enactment or action or inaction will provide the
other party(ies) with written notice of such state or federal
law or regulation and provide a copy of such law or regulation
and a statement regarding its conflict with the provisions of
this Agreement. The parties will promptly meet and confer in
a good faith and reasonable attempt to modify or suspend this
Agreement to comply with such federal or state law or regula-
tion.
13.3.2 Hearina. If an agreed upon modification
or suspension would not require an amendment to this Agree-
ment, no hearing shall be held. otherwise, the matter of such
federal or state law or regulation will be scheduled for
hearing before the City. Fifteen (15) days' written notice of
such hearing shall be provided to Developer, and the city, at
such hearing, will determine and issue findings on the
modification or suspension which is required by such federal
or state law or regulation. Developer, at the hearing, shall
have the right to offer testimony and other evidence. If the
parties fail to agree after said hearing, the matter may be
submitted to mediation pursuant to subsection 13.3.3, below.
Any modification or suspension shall be taken by the affirma-
tive vote of not less than a majority of the authorized voting
members of the City. Any suspension or modification may be
subject to judicial review in conformance with subsection
16.19 of this Agreement.
13.3.3 Mediation of Disputes. In the event the
dispute between the parties with respect to the provisions of
this paragraph has not been resolved to the satisfaction of
both parties following the City hearing required by subsection
13.3.2, the matter shall be submitted to mediation prior to
the filing of any legal action by any party. . The mediation
will be conducted by the San Diego Mediation Center; if San
Diego Mediation Center is unable to conduct the mediation, the
parties shall submit the dispute for mediation to the Judicial
Arbitration and Mediation service or similar organization and
make a good faith effort to resolve the dispute. The cost of
-21-
any such mediation shall be divided equally between the
Developer and City.
13.4 Natural Communities Conservation Act (NCCP). The
parties recognize that Developer and the City are individually
negotiating agreements with the united states Fish and wildlife
Service ("USF&W") and the California Department of Fish and Game
pursuant to the ongoing regional effort to implement the Natural
Communities Conservation Act ("NCCP"), locally proposed to be
implemented through the Multi-Species Conservation Program
("MSCP"). The parties further recognize that implementation of the
agreements may necessitate modification to the Existing Project
Approvals. The parties agree to utilize their best efforts to
implement these agreements, once executed, through the timely
processing of modifications to the Existing Project Approvals as
they relate to the Property. The Developer agrees to pay the
reasonable City cost for processing work related to the modifica-
tions. Once such modifications are obtained they shall be vested
to the same extent as Existing Project Approvals.
14. DISTRICTS. PUBLIC FINANCING MECHANISMS.
This Agreement and the Existing Project Approvals recognize
that assessment districts, community facility districts, or other
public financing mechanisms, may be necessary to finance the cost
of public improvements borne by this Project. If Developer,
pursuant to the Existing Project Approvals/Future Discretionary
Approvals, is required to install improvements through the use of
assessment districts, community facility districts, or other public
financing mechanisms, the City shall initiate and conclude
appropriate proceedings for the formation of such financing
district or funding mechanism, under applicable laws or ordinances.
Developer may request that the City utilize any other financing
methods which may become available under City laws or ordinances.
All costs associated with the consideration and formation of such
financing districts or funding mechanisms shall be paid by
Developer subject to reimbursement, as may be legally authorized
out of the proceeds of any financing district or funding mechanism.
15. ASSIGNMENT AND DELEGATION.
15.1 Assianment. Owner shall have the right to transfer
or assign its interest in the Property, in whole or in part,
to any persons, partnership, joint venture, firm, or corpora-
tion at any time during the Term of this Agreement without the
consent of City. Owner also shall have the right to assign or
transfer all or any portion of its interest or rights under
this Agreement to third parties acquiring an interest or
estate in the Property at any time during the Term of this
Agreement without the consent of City.
15.2 Deleaation. In addition, Owner shall have the
right to delegate or transfer its obligations under this
Agreement to third parties acquiring an interest or estate in
the Property after receiving the prior written consent of the
-22-
City Manager, which consent shall not be unreasonably with-
held, delayed, or conditioned. Once the City Manager has
consented to a transfer, delivery to and acceptance by the
city Manager of an unqualified written assumption of Owner's
obligations under this Agreement by such transferee shall
relieve Owner of the obligations under this Agreement to the
extent the obligations have been expressly assumed by the
transferee. Such transferee shall not be entitled to amend
this Agreement without the written consent of the entity that,
as of the Effective Date, is Owner, which consent shall not be
unreasonably withheld, delayed, or conditioned. The entity
that is Owner as of the Effective Date, however, shall be
entitled to amend this Agreement without the written consent
of such transferee.
16. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
16.1 Bindinq Effect of Aqreement. Except to the extent
otherwise provided in this Agreement, the burdens of this Agreement
bind, and the benefits of this Agreement inure, to City's and
Owner's successors-in-interest and shall run with the land.
16.2 Relationshio of citv and Owner. The contractual
relationship between city and Owner arising out of this Agreement
is one of independent contractor and not agency. This Agreement
does not create any third-party beneficiary rights.
16.3 Notices. All notices, demands, and correspondence
required or permitted by this Agreement shall be in writing and
delivered in person, or mailed by first-class or certified mail,
postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
If to City, to:
If to Owner, to:
City of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attention: City Manager
SNMB, LTD.
7811 La Mesa
suite B-3
La Mesa, CA
Attention:
Boulevard
91941
Christopher Patek
STEPHENSON, WORLEY, GARRATT
SCHWARTZ, HEIDEL & PRAIRIE
101 West Broadway, suite 1300
San Diego, CA 92101
Attention: Donald R~ Worley, Esq.
city or Owner may change its address by giving notice in writing to
the other. Thereafter, notices, demands, and correspondence shall
be addressed and transmitted to the new address. Notice shall be
deemed given upon personal delivery, or, if mailed, two (2)
business days following deposit in the united States mail.
With a Copy to:
-23-
16.4 Rules of Construction. In this Agreement, the use
of the singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes
the feminine; "shall" is mandatory; "may" is permissive.
16.5 Entire Aareement. Waivers. and Recorded statement.
This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement
of city and Owner with respect to the matters set forth in this
Agreement. This Agreement supersedes all negotiations or previous
agreements between city and Owner respecting this Agreement. All
waivers of the provisions of this Agreement must be in writing and
signed by the appropriate authorities of City and Owner. Upon the
completion of performance of this Agreement, or its revocation or
termination, a statement evidencing completion, revocation, or
termination signed by the appropriate agents of City shall be
recorded in the Official Records of San Diego County, California.
16.6 Pro;ect as a Private Undertakina. It is
specifically understood by City and Owner that (i) the Project is
a private development; (ii) city has no interest in or
responsibilities for or duty to third parties concerning any
improvements to the Property until City accepts the improvements
pursuant to the provisions of the Agreement or in connection with
subdivision map approvals; and (iii) Owner shall have the full
power and exclusive control of the Property subject to the
obligations of Owner set forth in this Agreement.
16.7 Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals set forth
in Paragraph 1 of this Agreement are part of this Agreement.
16.8 captions. The captions of this Agreement are for
convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain,
modify, construe, limit, amplify, or aid in the interpretation,
construction, or meaning of any of the provisions of this
Agreement.
16.9 Consent. Where the consent or approval of City or
Owner is required or necessary under this Agreement, the consent or
approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed, or con-
ditioned.
16.10 Covenant of Cooperation.
cooperate and deal with each other in good
other in the performance of the provisions
city and Owner shall
faith, and assist each
of this Agreement.
16.11 Recordina. The City Clerk shall cause a copy of
this Agreement to be recorded with the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego county, California, within ten (10) days
following the Effective Date.
16.12 Delav. Extension of Time for Performance. In
addition to any specific provision of this Agreement, performance
by either city or Owner of its obligations hereunder shall be
excused, and the Term of this Agreement and the Development Plan
extended, during any period of delay caused at any time by reason
of any event beyond the control of City or Owner which prevents or
-24-
delays and impacts city's or Owner's ability to perform obligations
under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, acts of God,
enactment of new conflicting federal or state laws or regulations
(example: listing of a species as threatened or endangered),
judicial actions such as the issuance of restraining orders and
injunctions, riots, strikes, or damage to work in process by reason
of fire, floods, earthquake, or other such casualties. If City or
Owner seeks excuse from performance, it shall provide written
notice of such delay to the other within thirty (30) days of the
commencement of such delay. If the delay or default is beyond the
control of City or Owner, and is excused, an extension of time for
such cause will be granted in writing for the period of the
enforced delay, or longer as may be mutually agreed upon.
16.13 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealinas. No party
shall do anything which shall have the effect of harming or
injuring the right of the other parties to receive the benefits of
this Agreement; each party shall refrain from doing anything which
would render its performance under this Agreement impossible; and
each party shall do everything which this Agreement contemplates
that such party shall do in order to accomplish the objectives and
purposes of this Agreement.
16.14 Operatina Memorandum. The parties acknowledge that
the provisions of this Agreement require a close degree of
cooperation between City and Developer, and that the refinements
and further development of the Project may demonstrate that minor
changes are appropriate with respect to the details of performance
of the parties. The parties, therefore, retain a certain degree of
flexibility with respect to those items covered in general under
this Agreement. When and if the parties mutually find that minor
changes or adjustments are necessary or appropriate, they may
effectuate changes or adjustments through operating memoranda
approved by the parties. For purposes of this section 16.14, the
City Manager, or his designee, shall have the authority to approve
the operating memoranda on behalf of city. No operating memoranda
shall require notice or hearing or constitute an amendment to this
Agreement.
16.15 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the
performance of the provisions of this Agreement as to which time is
an element.
16.16 Amendment or Cancellation of Aareement. This
Agreement may be amended from time to time or canceled by the
mutual consent of city and Owner only in the same manner as its
adoption, by an ordinance as set forth in California Government
Code section 65868, and shall be in a form suitable for recording
in the Official Records of San Diego County, California. The term
"Agreement" shall include any such amendment properly approved and
executed. City and Owner acknowledge that the provisions of this
Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between them, and
that minor or insubstantial changes to the Project and the
Development Plan may be required from time to time to accommodate
design changes, engineering changes, and other refinements.
-25-
Accordingly, changes to the Project and the Development Plan that
do not result in a change in use, an increase in density or
intensity of use, cause new or increased environmental impacts, or
violate any applicable health and safety regulations, may be
considered minor or insubstantial by the city Manager and made
without amending this Agreement.
16.17 EstoDDel certificate. within 30 calendar days
following a written request by any of the parties, the other
parties to this Agreement shall execute and deliver to the
requesting party a statement certifying that (i) this Agreement is
unmodified and in full force and effect, or if there have been
modifications hereto, that this Agreement is in full force and
effect as modified and stating the date and nature of such
modifications; (ii) there are no known current uncured defaults
under this Agreement, or specifying the dates and nature of any
such default; and (iii) any other reasonable information requested.
The failure to deliver such a statement within such time shall
constitute a conclusive presumption against the party which fails
to deliver such statement that this Agreement is in full force and
effect without modification, except as may be represented by the
requesting party, and that there are no uncured defaults in the
performance of the requesting party, except as may be represented
by the requesting party.
16.18 Severabilitv. If any material provision of this
Agreement is held invalid, this Agreement will be automatically
terminated with neither Dartv bearinq any liability hereunder.
Notwithstandinq the foreqoinq. anle!)!) within 15 days after such
provision is held inyalid, if the party holding rights under the
invalidated provision affirms the balance of this Agreement in
writing this Aqreement shall not be terminated. This provision will
not affect the right of the parties to modify or suspend this
Agreement by mutual consent pursuant to Paragraph 12.4.
16.19 Institution of Leqal Proceedinq. In addition to any
other rights or remedies, any party may institute legal action to
cure, correct, or remedy any default, to enforce any covenants or
agreements herein, or to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation
thereof; to recover damages for any default as allowed bv this
Aqreement or to obtain any remedies consistent with the purpose of
this Agreement. Such legal actions must be instituted in the
Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California.
16.20 Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If any party commences
litigation or other proceedings (including, without limitation,
arbitration) for the interpretation, reformation, enforcement, or
rescission of this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by
the court, will be entitled to its reasonable attorneys' fees and
costs.
16.21 Hold Harmless. Developer agrees to and shall hold
City, its officers, agents, employees and representatives harmless
from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury,
including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from
-26-
the direct or indirect operations of Developer or those of its
contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees or other persons
acting on Developer's behalf which relate to the Project. Developer
agrees to and shall defend City and its officers, agents, employees
and representatives from actions for damage caused or alleged to have
been caused by reason of Developer's activities in connection with
the Project. Developer agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, pay all
costs and provide a defense for city in any legal action filed in a
court of competent jurisdiction by a third party challenging the
validity of this Agreement. The provisions of this section 16.21
shall not apply to the extent such damage, liability or claim is
caused by the intentional or negligent act or omission of City, its
officers, agents, employees or representatives.
-27-
SIGNATURE PAGE TO PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
Dated this ____ day of
, 1996.
"CITY"
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
SHIRLEY HORTON, MAYOR
"OWNER"
SNMB, LTD.
By:
CHRISTOPHER PATEK, General Partner
I hereby approve the form and legality of the foregoing Pre-
Annexation Development Agreement this day of , 1996.
Ann Moore, Interim City Attorney
City of Chula Vista
By:
-28-
EXHIBIT A
'.
1
OlY OF
CHUIA VISTA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
6119196
SNMB, LTD.
'=;]
I
I
I
IF
I
[
o
~
t\)
'<
;;0
~ ()
-.
(') ~
=r'<
~S.m
o()~
~ ::r -.
tc!:C"
~ -::;..
::s t\)
N' <m
t\) -.
~cn
-. ~
o t\)
::s
Z
o
.
~
-N
s:
is"
II>
m ~ I
I
:'> I
~
c
:'> (j I
"
.. r
~ J: I m
;:; c:nf c/)c/)o )>c-c )>)>;:0 G')
..J :z cc- "'n>'" "'~n> m
:; s:~ ! a.~~ n> _0 n>~n ('")('") Z
'" D>D>"'O D>n>o -C/)('")
:> 0 '< jij'r nO 111)(3 ::'"'0 ::r ;::::;::r c
3 " <0 ::rill -::rl: '< I:
J: ~Z )>-D> D> I:n>_
,.. .. .., ~ 3n> :::3 [Diii"
... _"T\ n> a. n>a. On> n>..,D>
0 ~ ~ :: ~ ~~ ~n>< 0<
2 - n> 0-' I: -,
'" a. ....111 ~ III
.. n> - a.-
'" a. D> D> D>
...
~ ..,
~ '<
....~
EXHIBIT "e"
. ........,. .....t_ 11,......-.
IN, ~ PI_ ....... T.,
O..f .....,._... Offl_
- "'.... .,-
1~ _If,e 1IIIy.
... .,_. ca R101
~ _ fw ", "'. UM:I
UJmI'ILL Ift1ISUCB 2ASEKIN'r
AND
c::ovJ:NMTS KtJNNING 1rr:H 1'SJI: UNO
,
(herein5tter referre~ to .. "Grantor"), for v.luable
conaieSeration, doe.' hereby GRAN'1' to the COt1N'1'Y 01 SAN DIEGO, a
politic.l subdivision of the state of california (h~.inafter
.ref.~. to _ ..ar.nt....) .. the owner of ~t real propeny
locate~ in the county of San Diego, California knoYn a. the "OUY
1.an4fill" which i. 1IIor. particul.rly d..oriHd. in .Exhibit A"
. h.reto (h.r.inafter ref.rred. to .. th. .1>oainant Ten_.nt") an~
its lauce_sor. in int.r_t to the noainant TenemQnt, an EASEKENT
(hereinatt.r referred to .e "~ui.ance z.._ont") ovor all ~t
r.al property locateci in t.ha county of San DiOl1o, Calitornia
4e.criba4 in "Exhibit a" h~eto (h~e1nafter ret~ecS to a. the
"s.rvient ~eneaent").
Thi. lIuisance Ea....nt 18 for the US8 ancS ~enefit of Grantee
an4 LbI succ:_sors in int.rest and invited CJUaat. in the conduct
ot solid waste landtillinq operations on the Dominant Tenement,
. tor the fr.e and unobstructed pa..aqe on, onto, in, throuqh, and
aoro.s the .urface end airap.co above the IJUrfaoe of tho S.rvient
'1'ene1llent or the following thinq. (bere:l.naft.r refe~4 to a. .
"Nui.ance Xt....):
dU.t, 'nois.: vibr.tions: eny and all abe1llic.1s or p.nicl..
au.pended (peraanently or taaporarily) in the air aneS wine!
inclu4inq but not U..ited. to ..than. p., oeSor., twae., fuel
particle., s..quJ.ls ancS other .cavenq~ blrcb and the
_cremant droppinq. th~efro1ll' en4 the unob.tructe4 pas.a;e
below the .1.1rf.oe of leachate and oth~ pollutanbll and for
.ach, every and all effect. a. aay be caused. bi or re.ult
~r_ ~e o~at;ioll. of 8 landfill vbich ia now II. .xiatanoa
or vb10b ..y be developed. in the f~un,
to<Jeth.r with the oontlnuin9 right to cau.. or allow in all of4auch Servi.nt Ten_Qnt auch Nui.ance ItelU. .it beinq understood
aDd 8,reed t1I.at araJ1tae, or it. woca..or. in intere.t, intend8
to develop. aalntain end expand the landfill on the ad.jaoent
Dc1ll1nant "-'_ent in INch a ..nn~ that .aid landtll1 and. the
.....ent vranted. herein will ~e used at all'tau in compliance
with all appl1ea})l. Stat. and 'eeSeral law. and. the lawful O%'!!era
of .tat. aM Federal aClanci.. nqulat~ enviroDlMnul tactor.,
1:OXic and/or ba.ar4ou. va.te, ancI the open~ion of the lanclt1l1.
Grant:or, for iteelf aneS it. .uce...ora aneS a..ign., 40..
hereby f\llly waive and relaue any dqht or C&Wle of action Which
.1:hey or any of t.be. ..y now bave or ..y have in the future
a9a1n.t Crantee, ita .\iO~aaor. aD4 a..1CjJn., on aooo\ll\t of or
a1'1e11\9 o~ or .\iOh ~iaanoe %~ be1'et:otore and ".r_rt.r
oa\Wed by ~. 0...rat:10~ oC a landtU.l.
Grant:or, for i1;ealt aD4 it. auoce.aora and a.aign.,
COYWIanta ancs a'11='--, with the Gnde%'8tan4inq ancS in~.nt: 'that .u.cm
ahall run vith the la.nc!, an4 whi= llball run with the land, that
neither 1:hey nor any ot th_ will OO1IIIIance or aaintain a .\lit,
action, writ, arbitration, or other l.gal or equ1table proceeding
aqatnat Crante. or it. .uoce..or. or a..iCjJnIl vherein the relief
~ugbt U the O6Il..t10n or lWution on the ua. of the Dom1nant
Wane..nt a. . landfill. Grantor, for it..lf and it. .uace..ora
and ...ic;n., coYananta and agree., vith the un4ar.tand~ and
1n~t that _uch ahall run with the laneS, ancs Whioh lJhall run
vith the land, that in the evant that they violate the above
oovenanta of the for*901nq .antence, they lJhall pay to I:rante.
. .u<:b attonl.Y.' f... and. oo.t. a. ..y be d.t.ra1necl to be
rea.on&1l1a ~Y a Court ot CCIIIIp.tent juri.4i~ion. %nqulrle. or
. r.qu..t. for anforcQ.nt aa4. by Grantor, it. .uooe..or. or
aa.i~ t:o But. or l"e4enl agenele. with r.gulatory authority
over the operation of landfill. .hall not ])a conaid.rali a
.violation of thia paragrap!a.
Upon the t.rainatlgn of _e of the Dominant Tan_ant tor
lanclfill purpo..., (lnclY4inq ocapletion of a~lv. landfill
operations and all oloaure and poet-cloaure a~lvltle.), orantor,
ita .ueee..ora or a..1qna ..y nqu..t that Grantee, it.
auoo...ora or a..lqna, through the appli~le 1.gal p~ooaclur.,
va_t. or terminat. thi. .....ent, vhich requ..t vill not ~.
-unreaaonably w1theld.
. . IIxacutacl thla
.eau':rornla.
day of
, 1..', .t S.n D1ego,
. . 4RAN'1'Oa
. ..
_...__ ....... ".1'<\
.~'TT C~~"/7JCO
<(
I
CO.J
f' ..J '"
O G: IU
. &> 01:
o Z c
I 5 Ii
III
to ~ tt
(J)b~
~
w
U
0:::
<(
0....
0::::
W
u....
u....
::J
CD
o
Z
<(
-'
-'
u....
o
z
::5
>-
<(
~
o
J
-
S
\
.,
:I:
U
ZN
<",
D::aJ
~Cl.
1-<
0::;
9
.
~ "-
-
..., ~
.....
I- -
0 ~ 'U
-'
0 · UJ
~VI
~
4,....
Q.-
.!-6>
....",
.9....
~J'
r.
--
....
,)J'
r
...
~
..
~
..
"
'"
I
".
.
EXHIBIT "En I
Pre-annexation Development Agreement
Planning Area Assessor Ownership Acreaae
Parcel Numbers
Otay Valley Parcel 644.()30.()7 S NMBLtd. 134.25
Otay Valley Parcel 644.060.()7 SNMBLtd. 159.18
Otay Valley Parcel 644.060'()8 SNMBLtd. 80.00
Otay Valley Parcel 644.060.()9 SNMBLtd. 80.00
Otay Valley Parcel 644.060-10 SNMBLtd. 289.70
Otay Valley Parcel 644.060-12 S NMBLtd. 82.20
Otay Valley Parcel 644.()70.()8 SNMBLtd. 313.28
Otay Valley Parcel 645'()30-19 SNMBLtd. 335.34
Otay Valley Parcel 646'() 10.()2 SNMBLtd. 352.70
1,826.65 Total
Item No. 13
Council Meeting of 8/20/96
ERRATA SHEET
Public Hearing - Otay Ranch Pre-Annexation Development Agreements
with SNMB, LTD., JEWELS OF CHARITY AND STEPHEN AND MARY BIRCH
FOUNDATION
The applicants and the staff are in agreement and recommend the
following changes to the three Development Agreements:
11. 2.4. Remedies Upon Default. In the event of a
default by either party to this Agreement, the parties shall
have the remedies of specific performance, mandamus,
injunction and other equitable remedies without having to
first prove there is an inadequate remedy at law. Neither
party shall have the remedy of monetary damages against the
other; provided, however, that the award of costs of
litigation and attorneys' fees shall not constitute damage.
17. AUTHORITY
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.
The following section should be added to the SNMB, LTD. Agreement
only.
7.2.1 Dedication of Land for SR-l25. Developer
agrees to dedicate land for right-of-way purposes and property
owned by the Developer that is reasonably necessary for the
SR-125 configuration selected by CALTRANS and depicted: (1)
generally in the GDP or (2) that alignment identified as the
Brown Field Modified Alignment which is generally depicted in
the SR-125 draft Environmental Impact Report/statement and as
revised in the Final Environmental Impact Report/statement to
respond to engineering, design, environmental and similar
constraints.
Notwi thstanding the foregoing, should CALTRANS not select
alignment (1) or (2) above, the Developer shall dedicate land
for any such alternate SR-125 configuration only on the
condition that the city agree to relocate any land uses
displaced by such alternate Freeway alignment.
City agrees that in the event City shall negotiate with
California Transportation Ventures (CTV) or other toll road
builder any participation or advantages to city that city
shall share such rights with subsequent owner/resident of the
property.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
City council Meeting Date
No. /~
8/20T96
ITEM TITLE:
ordinance~~'~ Adopting Otay Ranch Pre-Annexation
Development Agreement Between the city of Chula
vista and Baldwin Builders
SUBMITTED BY: Deputy City Manager
Planning Director
Otay Ranch PrQjept Manager
, '
I ,'1 V" I,~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager cY '~\ ~ 4/5 Vote: Yes No---1L
Y"
The purpose of this item is to present a development agreement
between the City of Chula vista and the Baldwin Company. On June
25, 1996, the Planning Commission and City Council considered a
series of development agreements with Village Properties, united
Enterprises, Greg smith and the Foundation. (The Foundation
agreement was subsequently split into three separate agreements in
August.) The remaining party who is a property owner of a portion
of the otay Ranch property is the Baldwin company, which is the
trustee for the bankruptcy. This draft agreement represents the
final agreement necessary to satisfy the city and property owner's
intent in that regard.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council place the Ordinance on
First Reading.
BOARD/COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning commission recommended approval
of the Agreement, 5-0, on August 14, 1996.
BACKGROUND
On February 5, 1996 and July 1, 1996, the Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCO) approved the inclusion of Planning Area 1, "the
Otay Parcel", into the city Sphere of Influence. Also, on July 1,
1996, LAFCO approved the annexation of Sphere of Influence Planning
Area 1, "the otay Parcel", Planning Area 2, "the Inverted L", and
the Mary Patrick Estate Parcel.
In addition to the LAFCO process and negotiations with property
owners, the city has also been working cooperatively with the
County of San Diego. On May 15, 1996, a Property Tax Sharing
Agreement and an Agreement Regarding Jurisdiction Over and
Operation of the Otay Landfill were entered into between the city
and County. An agreement to continue to provide fire service to
the otay Landfill once it is detached has also been negotiated.
county approval occurred on July 30, 1996 and City council approval
on August 6, 1996.
CEQA review is not required for the development agreement since an
/1/, I
City Council Meeting Date 8/20/96
Page 2
in-depth review occurred when the environmental review approved for
the Otay Ranch General Development Plan adopted by the City on
October 28, 1993. (Lonq Beach Sav. and Loan v. Lonq Beach Federal,
232 Cal. Rptr. 772, 781-2 (1986).
DISCUSSION
The following discussion focuses on the benefits of the Agreement
to the parties and a description of the terms of the Agreement
which are constant for all the parties. The benefits to the
parties and the basic dea~ points have not changed and are the same
as in the prior agreements presented to the commission and Council
on June 25,1996 and on August 6,1996 (i.e., #1 and #2 below).
1. Benefits to the Parties
a. Benefits to the citv
. developer support for annexation of the Otay Parcel
to Chula vista.
. provision of property for the Chula vista Greenbelt
open space areas and MSCP compliance.
. assurance of adequate public facilities when
needed, and in some cases development of excess
capacity or facilities sooner than required.
. compliance with the city's Growth Management
Program.
b. Benefits to the Developer
. vests permitted land uses, density, intensity of
use per the approved General Development Plan and
timing and phasing of development per Future
Discretionary Approvals (i.e., SPA Plan and Public
Facility Finance Plan) and in compliance with the
City's Growth Management Ordinance.
. grants the owner certainty to proceed with the
development of the property in general accordance
with today's ordinances, rules, regulations and
standards or as they may be changed in the future
citywide or east of 1-805. Special benefit, fee
districts are also contemplated.
. allows for fee credits and/or reimbursement
mechanisms for extraordinary facility improvements
or pioneering thereof and specifies that DIF fees
will be used to facilitate regional backbone
19' :J..
city council Meeting Date 8/20/96
Page 3
facilities.
. allows the Developer to receive timely processing
on an equal basis with other Developers of Future
Discretionary Approvals and allows those approvals
to be covered by these Agreements.
2. Description of the Aqreement Terms
The Agreement contains the following major points:
(1) The owners consent to the annexation and the annexation
of the Otay Parcel is to be accomplished by January 1,
1997. (Final action by the conducting authority, the
City Council, is scheduled for September 10, 1996.)
(2) The term of the Agreement is 20 years.
(3)
Application of new or
ordinances, Resolutions,
amended Rules, Regulations,
Standards and Policies.
The Agreement permits changes in rules, policies, etc. as
long as they are applied citywide or east of I-80S and do
not unreasonably prevent or delay the development of the
Property to the approved uses, densities or intensity of
use. Changes necessitated by changes in State or Federal
law are also covered.
(4)
Modification
contemplated
Agreement.
contemplated
Agreement.
to Existing Project Approvals are
and do not constitute an amendment to the
Future Discretionary Approvals are also
and do not constitute an amendment to the
(5) The dedication and reservation of land is to be
consistent with the Existing Project Approvals.
(6) The timing for project construction is to only be
regulated by the Growth Management Ordinance and
threshold standards which include the adequate provision
of all public facilities needed to serve the Project as
well as project phases through subsequent SPA and Public
Facility Finance Plan Approvals. The Project is subject
to amendments to the Growth Management Ordinance subject
to certain conditions. Changes to the Growth Management
Ordinance and Threshold Standards are to be consistent
with the purpose and intent of the existing Growth
Management Ordinance and generally applicable citywide or
east of I-80S or applicable to a benefit, fee district as
described in earlier sections.
I'I~ J
City Council Meeting Date 8/20/96
Page 4
(7)
Application of Fees and Special
and allowed so long as they are
east of 1-805 or relate to some
assessment district formed in
Government Code.
Taxes are contemplated
applicable citywide or
special fee or benefit
accordance with the
(8) The city will accept and diligently process development
applications with the Developer paying for the staff and
consultant costs therewith.
(9) Length of validity of Tentative Maps. The tentative
map(s) are vested for 6 years and may be extended by the
Council for a term not to exceed that of the Agreement.
(10) Recognizes that the Developer can do certain work such as
grading at the pre-final map stage subject to City
approval and posting of required performance bonds.
Acknowledges the ability to record Superblock Final Maps
("A" Maps) for financing purposes as well as the standard
Final Maps ("B" Maps). Allows for maps to be recorded in
the name of builders or third parties and certain
transfer of obligations to occur with city approval.
(11) The Developer is obligated to dedicate or reserve land
and fund/construct public facilities as required by the
General Development Plan and subsequent approvals
(12) The Developer is to comply with the Otay Ranch Reserve
Fund Program as adopted as part of the Existing Project
Approvals.
(13) The City has the right to withhold the issuance of
building permits if a threshold has been violated until
the deficiency has been cured per the Growth Management
Ordinance. Permits may also be withheld where public
facilities required for thresholds have not been
committed. The suspension of the project due to building
permits being withheld is not a breach of the Agreement.
Unless the Developer is responsible for the threshold
violation, the Agreement is tolled while permit issuance
has been stopped.
(14) If the Developer constructs a facility which is the
obligation of another Developer or builds a facility of
supplemental size, the City will consider a reimbursement
district. similarly, the Developer will dedicate land
for others to pioneer projects on the Property.
(15) The Developer agrees to pay DIF fees. The City agrees to
establish and use the DIF fees in an appropriate fashion.
The DIF can be modified if it incorporates reasonable
1'1.,'/
City Council Meeting Date 8/20/96
Page 5
cost estimates to provide facilities based on specified
methodology and justification. The city can withhold
permits until the DIF is paid. The Developer can get DIF
credits when facilities are completed. The city will
undertake reasonable efforts to collect and impose the
DIF on others and spread the costs on an equitable basis.
The Property Owner will pay its fair share of the DIF for
Otay River Road crossings and the City will pursue other
parties, such as the County and City of San Diego, to pay
their fair share as well.
(16) The City will cooperate in the provision of utilities to
the Project.
(17) The Agreement contains provisions for
default, encumbrances and releases
modification or suspension, assignment
delay and amendments.
annual review,
on property,
and delegation,
(18) A provision has been included that in the event of a
dispute between the parties that a mediation process be
followed. If any party commences litigation, the
prevailing party as determined by the court, will be
entitled to attorney's fees.
(19) The parties recognize that the Developer and the City are
negotiating agreements with the U.S. Fish and wildlife
and California Fish and Game to implement the IINCCPII and
the "MSCP" multi-species habitat programs. Modifications
to the Existing Project Approvals will be required to be
processed by the City, paid for by the Developer, and
would not constitute an amendment to the Agreement.
3. Aqreement Terms Relatinq to Specific Parties
The specific changes unique to the Baldwin Agreement are outlined
below.
section 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 pertain to the Baldwin Agreement. The
first request indicates that the city will be willing to consider
modifications to the land use designations of the General Plan for
the Property subject to proper environmental review and in the
City's discretion. The second provision is that the city will
provide legal notice to the Owner of any actions involving
assessment district formation, development impact fees or other
discretionary actions affecting the Property. In addition, the
City will notify the applicant and use reasonable efforts to
involve them early in any pending discretionary actions for the
Property.
/'1.5"
City Council Meeting Date 8/20/96
Page 6
section 5.3 has a sentence added that acknowledges that Baldwin
will not be required to dedicate land for the sole purpose of
satisfying an obligation of Otay Ranch L.P., Tiger Development Two,
Tigerheart, Inc. and Village Development or their successor
interests. By way of background, as a part of Village
Development's SPA One approval, an Open Space Conveyance Plan was
adopted. This Plan, together with the entitlements given, requires
that the property owners of SPA One to convey off-site land or pay
fees in-lieu of land to the Preserve Owner Manager. Village
Development no longer controls the land that was designated as part
of the Conveyance Plan. Baldwin Builders has requested that the
provision in section 5.3 be added to protect them from the burden
of conveying open space land for Village Development entitlements.
section 7.5 has a sentence added clarifying how DIF credits are
given to the property owners in the cases of assessment districts.
section 11. 2.4 contains language stating that neither party is
eligible to receive monetary damages if there is a breach of the
agreement.
Staff and the applicant are in agreement on all of the above
changes.
Fiscal Impact
It isn't possible to quantify the value of the Agreement to the
ci ty or the other parties. Through annexation and the related
property tax, sales tax, etc., the city will realize significant
benefits. Likewise, the Developers benefit from the vesting and
certainty provided by the Agreement to be able to get loans and
sell and develop the Property in accordance with current and future
approvals.
IY"j.
z::
~
ORDINANCE NO.
.2/, 9()
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ADOPTING OTAY RANCH PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
BALDWIN BUILDERS
WHEREAS, a City of Chula vista application to have the
Otay Valley Parcel included within City's sphere of influence was
approved on July 1, 1996 by the Local Agency Formation Commission;
an.d
WHEREAS, the development of the Otay Valley Parcel will
require substantial public improvements phased over a period of
time; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code ~65867. 5 et seq.
provides authority for cities to enter into development agreements;
and
WHEREAS, CEQA review is not required for the development
agreement since an in-depth review occurred when the environmental
review was approved for the Otay Ranch General Development Plan and
adopted by the City on October 28, 1993. (Lonq Beach Sav. & Loan
v. Lonq Beach Redevel., 232 Cal.Rptr. 772, 881-2 [1986]); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on
August 14, 1996 to consider the Pre-Annexation Development
Agreement and the City Council held a public hearing on August 20,
1996 to consider the Pre-Annexation Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, City Council has found that this Pre-Annexation
Development Agreement is consistent with the City's General Plan
and all applicable mandatory and optional elements thereof as well
as other applicable pOlicies and regulations of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council have
reviewed the Pre-Annexation Development Agreement and recommend its
approval.
NOW, THEREFORE,
Vista ordains as follows:
the city Council of the City of Chula
SECTION I:
Pre-Annexation Development Agreement for
a portion of the Otay Valley Parcel.
In accordance with section 65867.5 of the Government
Code, the city council of the City of Chula Vista has
approved that certain document entitled "Pre-Annexation
Development Agreement" for a portion of the Otay Valley
I
)~/I"'/
Parcel with Baldwin Builders, on file in the office of
the City Clerk as Document No.
SECTION II: The Mayor of the City of Chula vista is
hereby authorized and directed to execute said Agreement for and on
behalf of the City of Chula vista.
SECTION III: This ordinance shall take effect and be in
full force on the effective date of annexation as set forth in the
Pre-Annexation Development Agreement.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
~~~
Ann Y. Moore, Acting
City Attorney
George Krempl, Deputy city
Manager
c: \ or\ baldwin. or
2
1'I~,.2.
I Civic Center Drive
San Marcos. CA 92069-2949
Telephone
(619) 744-1050
FAX: (619) 744-7543
August 16, 1996
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE: Public Hearing - Adoption of Otay Ranch Preannexation Development
Agreement with Baldwin Builders
Dear Mayor and Council members:
As part of your decision making process regarding entering into the Otay
Ranch Preannexation Development Agreement with Baldwin Builders, the City of
San Marcos thought it best that you hear about our dealings with the Baldwin
Company.
In 1987 the Baldwin Company approached the City of San Marcos with its
plans to develop a 1,561 unit master planned community called Paloma. In an
effort to minimize their burden regarding the financing of the necessary
infrastructure needed to support their project, they aggressively pursued the use
of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. The result was a project
that currently has Mello-Roos special taxes that range from $2,125 to $3,623
per lot for Fiscal Year 1996-97. The impact of these high maximum special
tax amounts can be seen in the project's anemic absorption rate and the
significant drop in resale price of homes throughout the Paloma development.
To further complicate matters, in July of 1995, the Baldwin Company filed
for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. The Baldwin Company and its
subsidiaries are delinquent by $166,000 and $1,046,000 in their Fiscal Year
1994-95 and 1995-96 Mello-Roos special taxes. Although the delinquencies
have not had a direct financial impact on the existing homeowners, the
bankruptcy has prevented Baldwin from continuing to develop their project which
would provide some relief to the existing homeowners by expanding the
assessment base. The residents of Paloma have been forced to look at partially
framed homes as a memorial to Baldwin's financial woes. These incomplete
structures may be regarded as a public nuisance subject to abatement.
IC ar . ocurn, ice- ayor
etty vans
arre . entry
la Jms- ert
Page 2
Mayor and City Council
City of Chula Vista
August 16, 1996
Unless Baldwin's financial condition improves and/or they sell off the
remaining portion of their project, the Mello-Roos bonds may be in default by
Fiscal Year 1999-2000. In addition, the City, in an attempt to address the
Paloma residents' concerns, had recently moved forward in a process to
restructure CFD 88-1. However, the City received the attached letter from
Baldwin's Trustee threatening litigation and implying that they would exercise
their "veto" of the process if the Council did not comply with their wishes.
The letter from Lobel & Opera is not a positive sign of their willingness to
cooperate in a process that is absolutely critical if we are to address the
residents', the bondholders' and even Baldwin's issues and get this project back
on track. The resulting political backlash from the Paloma residents due to
Baldwin's bankruptcy and the high Mello-Roos special taxes can be seen and
heard at almost every San Marcos City Council meeting.
The City of San Marcos respectfully suggests that you carefully consider
the shortfalls that may arise from your adoption of the Preannexation
Development Agreement with Baldwin Builders.
Sincerely,
~fI~~
F. H. "Corky~~ftI'i, Mayor
on behalf of-1Vlayor and City Council
cc: City Council
City Manager
City Attorney
RUG 8 '96 12:82
FROM LOBEL RND OPERA
PRGE.802
LOBEL tic OPERA
PROFESSIONAL CORPOR.ATION
ID.....O P. CIIIUSTrAN
;\.L"1'I J. ,....ZDMAN
'AWILA ZYLSTAA It..aOIJL
)111(1'(1" G. aUdit.
wtt.Lt..uc H. LaBlt
1.01laT E. or!.~A
JAY (;). SAND1Jl!l
Cru.1TL A. JEICIN'
TAVt C. STANLEY
S1.:IT1: 110a
'UO, )bCA&TKt:1. IOt:LZVAItU
PO !IT OFFICE .OX ",..
Jl,VTSt. CALII'Oa.NIA H11.'
August 8.1996
0' COUNSEL:
aOBtJlT (. ."O'~A
T!1.tPHONF. ('HJ .".:'Ieo
'AX p'141 .".,....
9''kIT!:Il'S DtllECT DIAl.
NUMltJll: (714) H,.14C.
VIA TELECOPTF.R (619) 744-7543
Tbe Honorable Mayor of 53.11 Marcos
City Council Members of San Marcos
I Civic Center Drive
San Marco 93069
Dear Honorable Mayor 3.I1d City Council Members
Lobel & Opera, professional corporation. as special counsel tor David Gould, the Chapter
11 trustee (the "Trustee"), for Bald....i.n Buildcrs, a C.alifomia Corporation and Baldv.in Building
Contractors, a California limited partnership (collectively referred to herein as "Baldwin"),has
becn directed. by the Trustee to undertakc whatever legal action is necessary to halt the rollback
or reapportio=ent of the Fiscal Year 1996-1997 Special Tax levy (tbe "Mello-Roos t:1.'C) to the
financial detriment of Bald....m b~. the City of San Marcos (thc "City") in violation of~!i 53331.
53332,53334,53335.53337, and 53338 ofthc California Government Code.
Tbe purpose of this correspondcnce is to place the City on notice that if any action is
taken at the meeting oftbe City council on August 8, 1996 which would result in the submission
of a tax assessment reapportioning the Mello-Roos ca." in ref=ce to San Marcos Community
FacUities District No. 88-1 Special Tax Bonds. Serics 1988, the Trustee ....ill immediately file an
action to perm:l11ently enjoin the City. Further, Lobel & Opera intends to request a hearing
seeking a tempor:J.rj' rcstr:lining order to prohibit the City's action and to schedule such hearing
on August 9, 1996.
P1Jrsuant to the California Government Code sections cited above. notice is hcreby given
that the City is prohibited from reapportioning Mcllo-Roos obligations ....ithout (1) the adoption
of a resolution of consideration; (2) containing proper notice of the reapportionment sought;
(3) which is thc subject of a hearing not less than 30 or more than 60 days afu:r adoption of the
resolution; and, (4) is approved in an election by a tv..o thirds majority ofthc registered voters
subject to the assessment prior to thc adoption of the resolution of change by the City. The City
failed to adopt a resolution of consider:>tion in compliance ....ith California Govcmmcnt Code ~
53332. As the resolution of consideration was never properly before the City, thc City failed to
mcct thc notice and hearing requirement ofCalifom.ia Gov.emment Code!i 53334. Further. the
City has attcmpted to adopt a resolution of changc ....ithout submission of a proper resolution of
consideration to thc registered voters.
c..............,;
AUG 8 '96 12:03
FROM LOBEL AND OPERA
PAGE.003
August 8, 1996
Page 2
Notwithstanding the failure by the City to properly notice and hold a he:1ring pursuant to
Government Code 953334. this leller constitutes ",Tinen protest by Bald....1n. PU!'SU3llt to
Cllifomia Government Code 9 53337. as the O"'11er of more th;JIlSO"/o of the land ",ithin the
territory of the Di5t!ict against the proposed alteration or reapportionment of the existing special
tax within the District.
The City is in receipt of the ....Tinen opinion of its bond counsel, Mr. Warren Diven. that it
can not proceed to rollback or re:lpportion the Mello-Roes Ta.'( unilaterally. Mr. Diven has
clearly informed the City th:lt it must follow the statutory procedures outlined above including
procurement of:l two-thirds majority for the reapportionment or rollback in a registered voter
elc::ction.
In light of the clear mandate of the statutory authority which sets forth the proper
procedures for reapportionment and the 'Iirinen opinion of the City's independently retained
special bond counsel, it is evident that the City can not unilaterally rollback or reapportion the'
Mello-Roos Ta.'I:. Further. the refusal b)' the City to cease and desist in it attempt to unilaterally
reapportion the Mello-Roos obligation in violation of the Gov=cnt Code will result in
irreparable h:um to Baldwin. In light of these facts, it is respectfully requested that the City
consider both the legal deficiencies inherent in its present course of action and the ramifications
of litigation which may negatively impact its ability to collect the previously properly' assessed
Mello-Roos tax from the p:Jrties properly assessed under the 1989 resolution.
If you wish to discuss this matter in greater detail. please contact the undersigned at your
earliest convenience. It is in the interests of all parties to reach a resolution of these issues and
avoid the expense of litigation as well as the potential loss of the ta."{ receipts due to improper
assessment.
CAS/cas
cc: David E. Gould. Esq.
LOBEL & OPERA
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Village
DEVELOPMENT
Quality master planned communities since 1974
August 20, 1996
Via Telefax
Honorable Mayor Shirley Horton
Chula Vista City Council Members
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Re: SPA One Tentative Map Agenda Items
Dear Mayor Horton and Members of the Council:
Village Development requests the Council to continue agenda items 15 A-D until the next
Council session.
I regret making this request, in light of the efforts of City staff and the Planning
Commission to promptly review the revised tentative map. However, the added time
should afford an opportunity to resolve the few remaining tentative map issues.
Sincerely,
VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT
KJK\mdm
cc: John Goss, Chula Vista City Manager
Bob Lieter, Planning Director
Jerry Jamriska, City ofChula Vista Special Projects Manager
Ann Moore, City of Chula Vista Acting City Attorney
NlichaelVVoodward, VVCLF
Bill Brasher, Baldwin Builders
c:\mora\kim\1etters\horton
1197S El Camino Real, Suitt:' 10+. San Diego, CA 92130
Tel. 619-2 SQ~2934-. Fax. 619-259-+364
BALDWIN'S
LEGACY
WIDE OPEN SPA C E S AND A BIT
OF THE OLD WEST
i
THE
VILLAS
NEIGHBORHOOD
PARK
COMPLETION
SCHEDULED 3/94
r{'
r ~
I
O~f yt~t IN 1\\t:3 CDN DT1/0N
. m__ ._THE STICKS
~_.__._~-
. ... ....-
~. ~ ~~...,-.,--, '''-'''''''' ~'.~......-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item~
Meeting Date 8120/96
ITEM TITLE:
A) Resolution 18416 - Approving the Resource Conveyance Plan for the
Otay Ranch SPA One
B) Resolution 18417 - Approving the Resource Indemnification Agreement
C) PCS-96-04 - Consideration of Tentative Subdivision Map for the Otay
Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 96-04, Generally Located South of
Telegraph Canyon Road Between Paseo Ranchero and the Future SR-125
Alignment
D) Resolution 18398 - Approving a Revised Tentative Subdivision Map
for Portions of Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 96-04, and
Making the Necessary Findings, Adopting the Second Addendum to and
Recertifying Final Environmental Impact Report FEIR 95-01 (SCH
#95031012) and Readopting the Statement of Overriding Considerations
and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the FEIR, and
Denying Approval of Alternative Tentative Subdivision Map Proposals
SUBMIT 1 ~D BY: Special Planning Projects Manager, Otay Ranc
REVIEWED BY: City Manage0? (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No X )
Village Development has submitted a revised subdivision map for a portion ofOtay Ranch SPA
One Chula Vista Tract 96-04 to subdivide approximately 822 acres into 2,042 single family
residential lots, approximately 1,722 multi-family residential units, one elementary school site, 7
park sites totaling 28 0 acres, 172.7 acres of open space, 11.5 acres of commercial and 18.2
acres of community purpose facility land. The application has been modified since the original
submittal to delete the portion of land on which West Coast Land Fund (WCLF) holds a
promissory note. Village Development proposes to delete this 288 acre area uom the original
Tentative Map and redesign the lots in Village One and Five adjacent to WCLF collateral.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed revised Tentative Map and
has determined that while the revised map is in substantial conformance with the Otay Ranch
SPA One Plan for which Final Environmental Impact Report 95-01 and the First Addendum
were certified by the City CounciL the revision to delete 288 acres will require an a second
Addendum. After preparation, the Second Addendum did not identifY any adverse
environmental impacts. Removing acres of development and reducing the number of dwelling
units will reduce the severity of the environmental impacts identified in EIR 95-01. Therefore,
staff recommends the recertification of FEIR 95-0 I and the First and Second Addendum and
reapproval of the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring
Program related thereto.
/f:/
Item: ~ Page 2
Meeting Date: August 20, 1996
ISSUES:
The following are unresolved policy and design issues between the project applicant and staff:
. Implications of deleting 288 acres !Tom the previously proposed tentative map
. Gated Neighborhoods (Council requested issue)
. Access to EastLake triangular parcel to the east of Village Five
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Second Addendum to and recertifY FEIR 95-01 and the First Addendum for the Otay Ranch
SPA One and Tentative Map for Otay Ranch, Chula Vista Tract 96-04.
Adopt the attached resolution of approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map for Village One and Phase
I-A of Village Five of the Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 96-04, in accordance with the
findings and subject to the conditions contained in the attached Draft City Council Resolution
(Attachment 3).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: The Planning Commission met on August
14, 1996 and vote unanimously to recommend to the City Council approval of the Tentative Map for
Village One and Phase I-A of Village Five. Adoption ofthe Second Addendum to the SPA One EIR
was also included in their recommendation. The Commission reiterated their opposition to gates. The
Commission's recommendation is Attachment 3.
DISCUSSION:
1. BACKGROUND
The original tentative map covering approximately 1, 11 0 acres of the Otay Ranch SPA One (all of
Villages One and Five) was approved by the Planning Commission on July 10, 1996. The proposed
map was scheduled to be reviewed by the City Council on August 6, 1996. On July 25, 1996 the
Court released a"Stay of Action" which was previously applied to the property, that prohibited WCLF
!Tom foreclosing on the subject property(See Exhibit A). In light of this action, Village Development
requested a two week continuance !Tom the August 6 City Council hearing date so that they might
prepare a revised tentative map excluding the 288 acres on which WCLF holds a collateral interest.
Staff recommended and the City Council determined that it would be best to refer the matter back to
the Planning Commission for review prior to the August 20, 1996 City Council hearing. On Thursday,
August 8, 1996, the Court granted an additional stay of action until August 15, 1996 to enable the
debtors to file the necessary papers with the 9th District Court of Appeals. The Planning Commission
heard the revised Tentative map at their August 14,1996 meeting.
2. APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL
The Applicant is proposing to revise the tentative map to delete that portion of the 288 acres ofWCLF
collateral interest in Village One and Village Five (See Exhibit B). Neighborhoods R-12 is not
/y..J..
Item: ~ Page 3
Meeting Date: August 20, 1996
proposed to be subdivided as this time because the collateral line bisects the area. Neighborhood R-I0
has been relotted to reflect the WCLF boundary.
Village Development's revised subdivision map for their portion ofOtay Ranch SPA One Chula Vista
Tract 96-04 to subdivide approximately 822 acres into:
2,042 single family residential lots
1,722_ multi-family residential units
one 10 acre elementary school site
7 park sites totaling 27.2 acres
174.6 acres of open space
11. 5 acres of commercial
14.6 acres of community purpose facility land
3. ISSUES
A. Implications of deleting 288 acres from the previously proposed tentative map
Technical Committee: The Technical Committee consisting of representatives ITom Fire, Police,
Planning and Public Works departments and the Project Team met on August 8, 1996 to review the
proposal. Staff concerns are as follows:
1) Staff is concerned that future flexibility to replan Village Five would be lost if the center portion of
SPA One is deleted. WCLF has previously their voiced concern on the park, school and CPF uses
located on their collateral in the Village Five Core. It is therefore foreseeable that if WCLF gains the
property rights to the collateral that they would seek a SPA amendment to relocate these uses
elsewhere in Village Five, which would require discussions with Village Development and City staff.
City staff believes that these issues should be addressed between all parties prior to approval of any
tentative map for Village Five.
2) Staff sees the eastern part of Village Five as just a large subdivision without the support of the
village core or other amenities.
3) Staff is also concerned about the development of the pedestrian paseos if split by the property
holdings. This pedestrian facility will not go anywhere until the village core is developed.
4) Planning Department is concerned with proposed access through non-gated neighborhoods. There
are portions ofWCLF collateral that are ooly accessed through a gated Village Development
neighborhood. This access would not comply with City ordinance or policies.
5) Grading adjacent to or on the WCLF collateral for Village Development is also a concern. While the
subdivision may be approved, actual development could be held back ITom the undeveloped property
between 50 to 100 feet to avoid future grading conflict when the WCLF property does develop.
/5'3
Item: ~ Page 4
Meeting Date: August 20, 1996
6) Both the Police and Fire Departments continue to express concern regarding the applicant's
proposal. They want to be ensured that La Media Road and East Palomar Street will be in place no
later than the trigger points which were established for the original tentative map proposal. They
reiterated that if possible they would strongly prefer that these road segments be installed earlier than
original1y approved. While initial analysis indicated the thresholds could be met, the departments remain
concerned with the current proposal and the timing of La Media and East Palomar. Both departments
also indicated their concern with Neighborhood R-33 in Village Five and would like to have a
temporary secondary access into this neighborhood crom Telegraph Canyon Road. The existing sewer
road may be used as an emergency access to this neighborhood.
B. Gated Neighborhoods
During the SPA One Plan hearings, the Planning Commission recommended to deny the use of gates
as proposed by the project applicant in the SPA Plan. The City Council voted tentatively (3-2) to
support the Planning Commission's recommendation, but agreed to reconsider their final decision on
gates when the Tentative Map was submitted.
Eight gates are proposed on the Revised Tentative Map restricting access to all the single-family
neighborhoods in both villages Under the SPA proposal, only the single-family neighborhoods north of
Palomar Street in Village One were proposed to be gated. The Tentative Map proposes gates for the
neighborhoods south of Palomar Street as well as the others proposed under the SPA Plan. For
analysis, staff has numbered the gates 1 through 10 on the previous tentative map. On the revised map,
Gates 4 and 8 are on the WCLF collateral. Gates 1,2 and 3 now restrict auto access to the Village One
neighborhoods north of Palomar Street. There are 874 single-family homes behind these gates on
Village Development property. There were 115 lots in Neighborhoods R-9 and 11 that are on WCLF
collateral on the original tentative map.
Gates 5, 6 and 7 restrict vehicular access to the 159 homes proposed south of Palomar ~treet in Village
One. On the original tentative map, there were 199 lots in the WCLF collateral and 185 in Village
developments property neighborhoods R- 12, 13 and 14. Vehicular access to the Village
Development's portion of Village Five is now restricted by Gates 9 and 10.
All the gates restrict vehicular access only. Pedestrians, bicyclists and carts will have full access under
the proposed gating plan. Gates having the most amount of traffic are tentatively proposed to be
staffed. Under the proposed phasing plan, it should be noted that the gates will remain open for a
number of years prior to being closed to the general public.
While staff believes the proposal to gate neighborhoods has merit in either alternative, we believe the
City Council should consider the following points which are not specifically addressed in the table:
Exclusivity vs. Community: There are many arguments for and against gated communities rrom a
social perspective. Concerns have been raised that separating segments of society behind walls and
gates will only lead to further economic and racial segregation within our community. There is the fear
that those who live behind gates have a greater apathy for those outside. On the other hand, others
argue that gates create more of a sense of neighborhood and community than a traditional subdivision.
15., 'I
Item: ---' Page 5
Meeting Date: August 20, 1996
The feeling is that people will work better together to support their "defined" neighborhood rather than
losing that focus in a sprawling subdivision.
Crime: Fear of crime is the most important factor leading to the move toward gated communities.
People see gates and guards and assume an area is inherently more secure. That fact, however, is
debatable and is dependent on the type of crime studied. Some reports on crime in gated communities
show that certain offenses, such as petty theft or voyeurism, are reduced with the presence of gates.
However, certain violent crimes that usually involve people who are known to each other, like murder
and rape, may not be reduced. Nonetheless, the perception of any affected homeowner is that gated
neighborhoods are safer.
Traffic and Circulation: Reducing traffic flow and making streets safer is one of the main reasons
gates are proposed. Proponents of gated communities argue that diverting traffic ITom high volume
residential streets makes the streets quieter and safer for children. In addition, if only residents are
allowed access to the streets, monitoring strangers driving through neighborhoods will be easier,
therefore, making the area safer for the residents.
Opponents argue that gating a community may do nothing more than transfer the problem of
residential traffic ITom one street to another. They believe that these communities may create more
congestion by concentrating traffic on collector streets outside the development. Although if the gated
community is only a feeder to the major arterial (like a street system that is basically a series of cul-de-
sacs), it makes little difference if it is gated or not in terms of the traffic coming into a collector street.
Some literature argues that the gating of communities reduces choice and opportunities for vehicular
travel routes. This could be true depending upon the design of the street system. If it were a grid
system it could be true but it would not be true if it were a cul-de-sac system.
Emergency Access: Gated communities pose challenges for emergency responses ITom police, fire and
paramedics. Unless properly controlled, gates can lead to minor delays or can result in major
difficulties in responding to emergencies or acting to evacuate areas. Mechanical access systems to
these communities exist but may not operate effectively at all times. Systems that rely on solely entry
codes face the problem of notifYing emergency services when the code is changed. If these emergency
services are not notified in time, delays may result. Additionally if gated communities have limited
points of entry and, if one entry is blocked, there is an increased delay in access to the emergency.
Currently, systems like the "Opticom" Vehicle Strobe Detector Systems, Knox Boxes and Knox Key
Switches are provided to eliminate any difficulty in responding to emergencies that police, fire or
paramedics might have. These systems work effectively and have not led to substantially lower
response times. To ensure that, redundant multiple systems could be required. Even with these
systems, the Police and Fire Departments are still concerned and feel that gates should be staffed 24
hours a day if the gated communities cover the large number of units as proposed by the applicant.
Metropolitan Transit Development Board: MTDB staff is not supportive of gated communities,
primarily because they believe gating contributes to a discontinuous street system and restricts mobility.
They believe that discontinuous streets inhibit pedestrian, bicycle and transit circulation and increase
/y5
Item: ~ Page 6
Meeting Date: August 20, 1996
automobile dependence. In addition, they believe gates form artificial barriers between neighborhoods.
MTDB sees this action as contrary to the neo-traditional goals of the Otay Ranch GDP.
During the SPA Plan review, staff prepared a gated communities policy paper containing general and
specific guidelines for gating neighborhoods. The general guidelines focused on the following items:
. Discourage gates in communities where the Growth Management Threshold Standards
could not be met.
. Maintain pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, open space and other facilities.
. Require that all State and City criteria be met for street design, including access for school
buses, trash pick-up and mail delivery and enforce the traffic and parking regulations of the
Vehicle Code.
. Review and approve the number of units behind gates to reduce impacts to surrounding
communities.
The specific guidelines and requirements focused on the following:
. Signs indicating gated street areas and location of trails and parks open to the public.
. No public services such as libraries, fire or police stations located behind gates.
. Maintain alternative access to public facilities.
. Enforcement of the Vehicle Code in gated communities.
. Require staffing on some or all of the gates.
The Engineering Department criteria for gated communities requires:
. Sufficient stacking for peak flows
. Construct streets to City standards but privately maintained
. Private storm drains
. Private street lights conforming to public standards
In addition, the Chula Vista Elementary School District wants to ensure access for the school buses,
require hold harmless and indemnification agreements and insurance ITom the homeowners association.
Recommendation:
The gates, as proposed on the Tentative Map, meet the criteria as proposed by staff in the following
table. While restricting vehicular access to a limited number of the single-family neighborhoods could
be acceptable, staff is still concerned about the number of units proposed behind gates in this project
and recommends denial of the gates as proposed. Gated products on a reduced scale could be
acceptable and might be advantageous to the overall project by providing an additional mix of
residential opportunities to the overall community. So, while what is proposed by the applicant is not
recommended, less intense gated areas could acceptable. Additionally, at the July 10 Planning
Commission hearing, the Commission reiterated their previous position which was not in support of
gating the project.
I..?j,
Item: ~ Page 7
Meeting Date: August 20, 1996
The following table analyzes the 10 proposed gates in relationship to the above criteria:
General
Criteria
GMOC Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
Threshold
Standards
Ped access Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
City Ord Yes Yes Yes *" No No No *" Yes Yes
Other Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
AQencies
Number of 989 989 989 989 364 364 364 H98 H98 H98
units 874 874 874 159 159 159 1098 1098
Specific
Criteria
Sil!l1S Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
Signs to Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
. Dublic file
Facilities Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
private
Access to Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
otber
attractors
Public Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
enforcmnt
Staffed No Yes Yes No No No No No Yes Yes
Stacking Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
Pvt. Street Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
Pvt. Drain Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
Pvt. St. Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
LigbtinQ
Scbool bus Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes Yes *" Yes Yes
Staff has included conditions of approval for gates if the Council determines some are appropriate.
C. Access to EastLake Triangular parcel:
Some time in the future , when appropriate, EastLake will be requesting that the City install a
signalized intersection on Otay Lakes Road at the triangular parcel. EastLake has funded a private
traffic study that indicates a mid-block signal would function within City standards. EastLake
Development also commissioned City staff to have a traffic study done to determine whether of not
a traffic signal and median opening would be warranted on Otay lakes Road at the entrance to the
Eastlake triangular parcel. This study, which was done by BRW, Inc., indicated that it may be
more desirable to have a signal installed at the entrance to the triangular parcel rather than limit the
traffic to right turns in and out and have that traffic making "u-turns" at a signal to the east.
However, the study also indicated that, if the signals at SR-125 ramps were not interconnected with
the City signals and on the same timing system, backups could occur which would stack up through
IY}
Item: ~ Page 8
Meeting Date: August 20, 1996
the entrance to the triangular parcel. Staff will make a final detennination on the advisability of
traffic signal and median opening when a development proposal with sufficient traffic generation
infonnation is submitted to the City for approval.
Planning Commission took no action on this issue.
4. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Alternative A - Approve Village One Only
Staff recommends approval of the Tentative Map for only Village Development's portion of Village
One and denial of the map for Village Five. Approval of the Tentative Map for Village Five together
with the previously approved development agreement substantially restricts the City's flexibility to
adjust land uses in the future for the WCLF collateral properties in Village One and Five. West Coast
Land Fund has previously indicated they are not satisfied with the SPA One land use plan and they may
desire an amendment to adjust the school and park locations, increase the commercial acreage, delete
multi-family areas and add single-family neighborhoods. If Village Development is successful in
retaining ownership the proposed map can be brought back to the Commission and Council for
approval. Any modification to the existing SPA land use plan will require a SPA amendment and a new
tentative.
The recommendation for only Village Development's portion of Village One will subdivide 556.54
acres into:
I, 126 single family residential lots
1,457 multi-family residential units
one lOA acre elementary school site
11.5 acres of commercial
11.6 acres of community purpose facility
4 park sites totaling 22.2 acres
116.3 acres of open space
If the City Council wishes to approve the staff alternative for only Village One, a resolution of approval
with conditions is available for Council consideration (Attachment B)
Alternative B - Approve Village I and Phase I-A of ViUage 5 Only
Alternatively, staff could also support approval of the tentative map for only Village Development's
portion of Village One plus Phase I-A of Village 5 which will subdivide 608.24 acres into:
1,362 single family residential lots
1,457 multi-family residential units
one lOA acre elementary school site
5 park sites totaling 23.5 acres
122.7 acres of open space
Iyr
,
,
Item: ~ Page 9
Meeting Date: August 20, 1996
11.5 acres of commercial
11.6 acres of community purpose facility land.
This alternative would give Village Development additional entitlements for their land sales program.
Staff believes that because of the limited size of Phase I-A (236 units 51.7 acres), City services easily
can be extended and threshold standards can still be maintained while not restricting future flexibility to
reallocate land uses. Construction of Gate 10 is also possible.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no impact of processing the tentative map application on the General Fund because Village
Development is reimbursing the City through a deposit account. However, the June, 1996 invoice of $
88,156.46 was due and payable on July 25, 1996. The July, 1996 invoice for $76,234.83 is due and
payable on August 26, 1996 for a total of$ 164,391.29. It is staffs recommendation that the project be
continued until Village Development is current on all delinquent accounts. Staff will present an oral
report to Council on the status of the account.
The Indemnification and Resource Conveyance Agreements between Village Development and the
City are ready for the City Council action. The Open Space Feasibility Study require by the SPA has
been approved by the City Engineer and the Director of Parks and Recreation.
Attachments:
~bit A: August 2, 1996 Councillnformational Memo
!bit B: Revised Tentative Map
xhibit C: Second Addendum to OtayRanch SPA One EIR 95-01
ttachment I Draft City Council Resolution Approving Applicant's Proposal
fi Attachment 2 Draft City Council Resolution Approving Staff Alternative A - Village I
F-. Attachment 3 Draft City Council Resolution Approving Staff Alternative B - Village I and Phase I-A
~
I~'
RESOLUTION NO. / X;/ / r:
~L{~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A RESOURCE
CONVEYANCE AGREEMENT FOR THE OTAY RANCH SPA ONE,
CHULA VISTA TRACT 96-04
WHEREAS, on October 28, 1993, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors and the Chula
Vista City Council jointly adopted the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan
(GDP/SRP), including the Otay Ranch Phase I Resource Management Plan (Phase I RMP), governing
the development of the 23,000-acre Otay Ranch project; and,
WHEREAS, on October 28, 1993, the Chula Vista City Council, pursuant to Resolution No.
17298, and in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Pub. Resources
Code ~21000 et seq.), certified the Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the GP, SCH
#9010154 ("Program ErR 90-01" or "Program EIR"), made certain Findings of Fact, adopted a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations;
and,
WHEREAS, the GDP and Phase I RMP require, as a condition of the development of Otay
Ranch, the phased creation of an 11 ,375-acre Resource Preserve to be owned and operated by a public
or quasi-public Preserve Owner/Manager; and,
WHEREAS, the Otay Ranch GDP Program EIR and Findings of Fact find that the creation of the
11 ,375-acre Resource Preserve mitigates identified biological impacts of the Otay Ranch project,
including cumulative biological impacts; and,
WHEREAS, the Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Otay Ranch GDP Program EIR
and Findings of Fact find that the creation of the 11,375-acre Resource Preserve mitigates identified
biological impacts of the Otay Ranch project, including cumulative biological impacts; and,
WHEREAS, on March 6, 1996, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors adopted the Otay
Ranch Preserve Conveyance Plan which identifies specific open space areas within Otay Ranch which
must be conveyed to the Otay Ranch Preserve Owner/Manager as a condition of the development of
Otay Ranch SPA One; and,
WHEREAS, on June 4, 1996, the City of Chula Vista City Council adopted the Otay Ranch Phase
2 Resource Management Plan (Phase 2 RMP), including a Preserve Conveyance Plan essentially identical
to the plan previously adopted by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors; and,
WHEREAS, the Conveyance Plan adopted by the City of Chula Vista and the San Diego County
Board of Supervisors, requires that for every one acre of developable land within Otay Ranch, the project
applicant must convey 1.188 acres of preserve land to the Preserve Owner/Manager as a condition of
approval of each Final Map, or pay a fee-in-lieu thereof; and,
} ~ -/Q
WHEREAS, on June 4, 1996, the City of Chula Vista enacted the Otay Ranch SPA One Plan,
including a SPA condition that development within SPA One convey land to the Preserve Owner/Manager
in compliance with the provisions of the Phase 2 RMP and the Otay Ranch Preserve Conveyance Plan;
and,
WHEREAS, on May 14, 1996, the City Vista City Council, pursuant to Resolution No. 18284,
and in accordance with CEQA, certified the SPA One Second-Tier Environmental Impact Report and
Addendum, SCH #95021012 ("FEIR 95-01" or "SPA One EIR"), made certain Findings of Fact, adopted
a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations;
and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Pub.
Resources Code 921000 et seq.) the Otay Ranch General Development Plan ("GDP") Program
Environmental Impact Report, SCH #9010154 ("Program EIR 90-01" or "Program EIR"), was prepared
to analyze the significant environmental impacts of the GDP, as well as mitigation measures and
alternatives to lessen or avoid those significant environmental impacts to the extent feasible; and,
WHEREAS, on October 28, 1993, the Chula Vista City Council, pursuant to Resolution No.
17298, and in accordance with CEQA certified the Otay Ranch GDP Final Program EIR, made certain
Findings of Fact, adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopted a Statement of
Overriding Considerations; and,
WHEREAS, in reliance on the analysis in the Otay Ranch Program EIR, the Sectional Planning
Area One ("SPA One") Second-Tier Environmental Impact Report, SCH #95021012 ("FEIR 95-01" or
"SPA One EIR"), was prepared to analyze the significant environmental impacts of SPA One, as well
as mitigation measures and alternatives to lessen or avoid those significant environmental impacts to the
extent feasible; and,
WHEREAS, on May 14, 1996, the Chula Vista City Council, pursuant to Resolution No. 18284,
and in accordance with CEQA, certified the SPA One EIR, made certain Findings of Fact, adopted a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations;
and,
WHEREAS, the SPA One EIR incorporated the findings, conclusions and mitigation measures
contained in the Otay Ranch GDP Program EIR, including those mitigation measures relating to the
creation of the 11,375-acre Resource Preserve; and,
WHEREAS, the Phase I RMP, the Phase 2 RMP, the GDP, the Conveyance Plan and attendant
environmental documentation rely upon implementation of the land plan and the Resource Preserve
System which concentrates development onto less sensitive and non-sensitive land while preserving large
interconnected areas of habitat; and,
WHEREAS, the Resource Preserve not only mitigates environmental impacts caused by the
development of SPA One, but also mitigates impact caused by the construction of public facilities outside
of SPA One which are needed to serve SPA One; and,
WHEREAS, Village Development and the City have executed a Pre-annexation Development
Agreement which compels Village Development to comply with all existing approvals including the GDP,
Phase 1 RMP, Phase 2 RMP and the Open Space Conveyance Plan; and,
)1- ) I
WHEREAS, the SPA One Conditions of Approval ItS requires an agreement to implement the
GDP, Phase I and 2 RMP with the City prior to approval of the initial SPA One Tentative Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PASSED, APPROVED
and ADOPTED the attached Agreement for Implementation Of The Otay Ranch Phase 2 Resource
Management Plan As It Relates To The Conveyance Of Land To The Otay Ranch Preserve
Owner/Manager Attendant To Otay Ranch Spa One.
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:
Gerald J. Jamriska, AICP
Special Planning Projects Manager
~ '-1 rY(,(K~
Ann Y. Moore
Interim City Attorney
Jt - ) ~
.iI) ~J(
- ~
-
RESOLUTION NO. 18417
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE INDEMNIFICATION
AGREEMENT BETWEEN VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AND THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
WHEREAS, the Indemnification Agreement was originally
approved by the city with Village Development on May 14, 1996.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve the First Amendment to the
Indemnification Agreement between Village Development and the City
of Chula vista, 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 Chula vista is
hereby authorized and directed to execute said First Amendment to
the Indemnification Agreement on behalf of the city of Chula vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
CL- y~
Ann Y. Moore, Acting city
City Attorney
Gerald Jamriska, Special
Planning Projects Manager
C:\rs\resource,ind
/'-)3
~ /-('/)
AGREEMENT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OTAY RANCH
PHASE 2 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
AS IT RELATES TO THE CONVEYANCE OF
LAND TO THE OTAY RANCH PRESERVE OWNER/MANAGER
ATTENDANT TO OTAY RANCH SPA ONE
THIS AGREEMENT, made this day of 1996, for the
purposes of reference only and effective as of the date last
executed by the parties, is made between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
a Chartered municipal corporation of the State of California
("City") and VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT, a California general partnership,
Tiger Development Two, a California limited partnership, by
Tigerheart Inc., a California corporation, and THE OTAY RANCH,
L.P., a California limited partnership, collectively referred to
hereafter as ("Village"), and is made with reference with the
following facts:
WHEREAS, on October 28, 1993, the San Diego County Board
of supervisors and the Chula vista City Council jointly adopted the
Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP),
including the otay Ranch Phase 1 Resource Management Plan (Phase 1
RMP), governing the development of the 23,000 acre Otay Ranch
project; and,
WHEREAS, on October 28, 1993, the Chula vista City
council, pursuant to Resolution No. 17298, and in accordance with
the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Pub. Resources
Code S21000 et seq.), certified the Final Program Environmental
Impact Report for the GP, SCH #9010154 ("Program EIR 90-01" or
"Program EIR"), made certain Findings of Fact, adopted a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopted a Statement of
Overriding Considerations; and,
WHEREAS, the GDP and Phase 1 RMP require, as a condition
of the development of otay Ranch, the phased creation of an 11,375
acre Resource Preserve to be owned and operated by a public or
quasi-public Preserve/Owner Manager; and,
Fact find
mitigates
including
WHEREAS, the Otay Ranch GDP Program EIR and Findings of
that the creation of the 11,375 acre Resource Preserve
identified biological impacts of the Otay Ranch project,
cumulative biological impacts; and,
WHEREAS, the Statement of Overriding Consideration for
the Otay Ranch GDP finds that the creation of the managed Resource
Preserve provides for substantial social, environmental and
economic benefit, so as to outweigh the project's adverse,
unavoidable environmental impacts; and,
1
WHEREAS, on March 6, 1996, the San Diego County Board of
supervisors adopted the otay Ranch Preserve Conveyance Plan which
identifies specific open space areas within otay Ranch which must
be conveyed to the otay Ranch Preserve Owner/Manager as a condition
of the development of otay Ranch SPA One; and,
WHEREAS, on June 4, 1996, the City of Chula vista City
Council adopted the Otay Ranch Phase 2 Resource Management Plan
(Phase 2 RMP), including a Preserve Conveyance Plan essentially
identical to the plan previously adopted by the San Diego County
Board of supervisors; and,
WHEREAS, the conveyance Plan adopted by the city of Chula
vista and the San Diego County Board of supervisors, requires that
for everyone acre of developable land within otay Ranch, the
project applicant must convey 1.188 acres of preserve land to the
Preserve Owner/Manager as a condition of approval of each Final
Map, or pay a fee-in-lieu thereof; and,
WHEREAS, on June 4, 1996, the city of Chula vista enacted
the Otay Ranch SPA One Plan, including a SPA condition that
development within SPA One convey land to the Preserve
Owner/Manager in compliance with the provisions of the Phase 2 RMP
and the Otay Ranch Preserve Conveyance Plan; and,
WHEREAS, on May 14, 1996, the City vista City Council,
pursuant to Resolution No. 18284, and in accordance with CEQA,
certified the SPA One Second-Tier Environmental Impact Report and
Addendum, SCH #95021012 ("FEIR 95-01" or "SPA One EIR") , made
certain Findings of Fact, adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, and adopted a Statement of Overriding
considerations; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental
Quali ty Act ("CEQA") (Pub. Resources Code !;21000 et seq.) the otay
Ranch General Development Plan ("GDP") Program Environmental Impact
Report, SCH #9010154 ("Program EIR 90-01" or "Program EIR"), was
prepared to analyze the significant environmental impacts of the
GDP, as well as mitigation measures and alternatives to lessen or
avoid those significant environmental impacts to the extent
feasible; and,
WHEREAS, on October 28, 1993, the Chula vista City
Council, pursuant to Resolution No. 17298, and in accordance with
CEQA certified the otay Ranch GDP Final Program EIR, made certain
Findings of Fact, adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, and adopted a Statement of overriding Considerations; and,
WHEREAS, in reliance on the analysis in the otay Ranch
Program EIR, the sectional Planning Area One ("SPA One") Second-
Tier Environmental Impact Report, SCH #95021012 ("FEIR 95-01" or
"SPA One EIR") , was prepared to analyze the significant
2
environmental impacts of SPA One, as well as mitigation measures
and alternatives to lessen or avoid those significant environmental
impacts to the extent feasible; and,
WHEREAS, on May 14, 1996, the Chula vista City Council,
pursuant to Resolution No. 18284, and in accordance with CEQA,
certified the SPA One ErR, made certain Findings of Fact, adopted
a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopted a
Statement of Overriding Considerations; and,
WHEREAS, the SPA One ErR incorporated the findings,
conclusions and mitigation measures contained in the otay Ranch GDP
Program ErR, including those mitigation measures relating to the
creation of the 11,375 acre Resource Preserve; and,
WHEREAS, the Phase 1 RMP, the Phase 2 RMP, the GDP, the
Conveyance Plan and attendant environmental documentation rely upon
implementation of the land plan and the Resource Preserve System
which concentrates development onto less sensitive and non-
sensi ti ve land while preserving large interconnected areas of
habitat; and,
WHEREAS, the Resource Preserve not only mitigates
environmental impacts caused by the development of SPA One, but
also mitigates impact caused by the construction of public
facilities outside of SPA One which are needed to serve SPA One;
and,
WHEREAS, Village and the City have executed a Pre-
annexation Development Agreement which compels Village to comply
with all existing approvals including the GDP, Phase 1 RMp, Phase
2 RMP and the Open Space conveyance Plan; and,
WHEREAS, Village has a current application pending before
the City for Tentative Map approvals related to Otay Ranch SPA One;
and,
WHEREAS, the SPA One Conditions of
requires the Tentative Map applicant to enter
with the City prior to approval of the initial
Map to implement provisions of the Phase 2 RMp;
Approval No. 5
into an agreement
SPA One Tentative
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto do hereby agree as
follows:
1. Pursuant to the SPA I Resource Preserve Conveyance
Plan and the Phase 2 RMP, Village agrees to convey land described
in Paragraph 3 below ("the Land to be Conveyed"). Village agrees
to convey to the Preserve/Owner Manager said land prior to approval
of each Final Map submitted for approval to the City. Village
agrees to provide the City with proof that such conveyance of fee
or easement has been completed prior to or upon its application or
3
request for each final map approval. For purposes of this
Agreement, "each Final Map" shall be defined as set forth in Chula
Vista Municipal Code section 18.08.180, which includes what may be
referred to as an "A Map" or "Superblock Map".
2. Pursuant to the Phase 2 RMP Village shall convey
1.188 acres of preserve land within the Resource Preserve for each
one (1) developable acre in each Final Map.
Pursuant to the Phase 2 RMP a developable acre is
defined as the land area contained in each Final Map excluding
schools, local parks, arterials, SR 125, lands designated as a
public use area and Limited Development Areas in Planning Areas 16
and 17.
Pursuant to the SPA One Tentative Map, there are
1,054.2 acres of developable land within SPA One, which requires
Village to convey 1,252.4 acres of land to the Resource Preserve to
mitigate the impacts of such development.
3. The Land to be Conveyed shall be located in an area
in conformance with the criteria set forth in the Phase 1 and 2 RMP
and the SPA One Preserve Conveyance Plan. All parcels to be
conveyed to the POM shall be generally contiguous unless determined
otherwise by the City Manager or designee. The Land to be Conveyed
must be approved by the City Manager or designee.
4. Village Development agrees that the Land to be
Conveyed shall be in fee, free and clear of liens or encumbrances,
except for easements for existing public infrastructure and
easements for planned public infrastructure as permitted in the
Phase 2 RMP.
5. Notwithstanding Paragraph 4, upon written consent of
the POM and the appropriate lien holder, Village may convey an
easement to the POM which restricts use of the Land to be Conveyed
to those uses permitted by the Phase I and II RMP. Conveyance of
said easement shall be required upon the recordation of each Final
Map for an amount of land equal to the final map's obligation to
convey land to the Resource Preserve.
If Village conveys an easement with the requisite
consent, it shall provide written subordination of any prior lien
holders in order to enstIre that the POM has a first priority
interest in such land. Where an easement is conveyed, fee title
shall be conveyed immediately upon demand by the POM. Where
consent and subordination cannot be obtained, Village shall convey
fee title.
4
6. At the time of conveyance, Village agrees to
provide, at its sole cost and expense, a standard form C.L.T.A.
Owner's Title Insurance Policy issued by a title company acceptable
to City insuring POM's title to the Land to be Conveyed subject
only to the exceptions set forth in Phase 2 RMP.
7. Village agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, pay all
costs and provide a defense for City in any legal action filed in
a court of competent jurisdiction by a third party challenging the
validity of this Agreement. The provisions of this section 7 shall
not apply to the extent such damage, liability or claim is caused
by the intentional or negligent act or omission of City, its
officers, agents, employees or representatives.
8. Village acknowledges that the City of Chula vista
and the County of San Diego are currently developing ordinances
which will permit payment of fees-in-lieu of Land to be Conveyed to
the POM. It is anticipated that said City ordinance will be
considered by the City Council in its discretion prior to approval
of any Final Map. Village agrees to comply with the provisions of
said City ordinance upon its adoption.
9. All provisions of this Agreement are binding on
Village and its successors in interest. The parties further agree
that this covenant touches and concerns the land within the
territory of Otay Ranch General Development Plan, and is for the
specific benefit of the City. The parties agree that this
Agreement shall run with the land and shall be recorded upon its
execution.
10. The Recitals set forth in this Agreement are part of
this Agreement.
11. If there is a conflict between this Agreement and
the provisions of the SPA I Preserve Conveyance Plan, Phase 1 or 2
RMP, the provisions of the SPA I Conveyance Plan, Phase I or 2 RMP
shall prevail.
12. The City is a third party beneficiary of this
Agreement and has the right, but is not required to enforce the
provisions contained herein. Village shall provide any purchaser
of property within SPA One with notice of this Agreement.
5
13. village acknowledges and agrees that conveyance of
the preserve land in accordance with this Agreement is necessary
and needed to mitigate the environmental impacts, as identified in
the Program ErR, 95-01, and the GDP PCM 90-03, resulting from the
development of SPA One of the otay Ranch Project.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto do hereby agree as of
the date indicated adjacent to their signature below.
6
SIGNATURE PAGE TO AGREEMENT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
OTAY RANCH PHASE 2 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
AS IT RELATED TO THE CONVEYANCE OF OPEN SPACE
TO THE OTAY RANCH PRESERVE OWNER/MANAGER
ATTENDANT TO OTAY RANCH SPA ONE
DATED:
DATED:
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT, a
California general
partnership
By:
. shirley Horton, Mayor
By:
James P. Baldwin, Partner
ATTEST
city Clerk
DATED:
Approved as to form by
OTAY RANCH, L.P., a
California limited
partnership
By: Sky Communities, Inc., a
California corporation,
General Partner
Ann Moore
Acting city Attorney
By:
DATED:
TIGER DEVELOPMENT TWO, a
California limited partnership,
By: Tigerheart, Inc., a
California corporation
By:
James P. Baldwin, President
C:\Ag.t\Convagr1.Doc
7
-;it/ 5;5
t
I
I
I
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR INDEMNIFICATION
AND COVENANTS FOR ACTIONS TAKEN BY CITY RELATED
TO THE OTAY RANCH
This First Amendment to Agreement for Indemnification and
Covenants for Actions Taken by City Related to the otay Ranch is
made as of July 30, 1996, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
a Chartered municipal corporation of the State of California
("City"), The Otay Ranch, L.P. ("Otay"), a California limited
partnership, and Village Development ("village"), a California
general partnership, acting on their own behalf and on behalf of
various other Baldwin-related entities they have been empowered to
act as the agent for in the securing of entitlements, Tiger
Development Two ("Tiger"), a California limited partnership, James
Baldwin and Al Baldwin, (Otay, Village, Tiger, James Baldwin and Al
Baldwin are collectively referred to herein as "The Baldwin Group",
and when doing so in the context of a duty or obligation, shall
constitute a joint and several duty on each and everyone of said
entities) and is made with reference with the following facts:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Parties entered into an Agreement for
Indemnification and Covenants for Actions Taken by city Related to
the Otay Ranch on May 14, 1996, which was approved by the city
council by Resolution No. 18287 on May 14, 1996, ("The Original
Agreement"), and;
WHEREAS, good cause exists for amending The original
Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto do hereby agree as
follows:
amended
amended
The following portion of The Original Agreement is hereby
and shall henceforth read as follows, unless further
in writing by the Parties:
II. Third Party Claims.
A. Indemnity.
The Baldwin Group hereby agrees to indemnify and
hold the City, and each of its officers (including elected
officials), employees and agents ("Indemnitees") harmless from and
against any and all claims, suits, actions, or other proceedings to
which the Indemni tees are exposed ("Proceedings") and from and
against any and all losses, expenses, expenditures, costs,
judgments, decrees, and orders (including orders for the payment of
attorney's fees and costs) to which the Indemnitees are exposed or
which the Indemnitees have incurred ("Losses") relating to, caused
1
by, or resulting from the Indemnitees's preparations, review,
approval or implementation of each and all of the Current
Applications for Discretionary Approvals and otay Ranch Tentative
Map(s), Otay Ranch Development Agreement and otay Ranch Open Space
Conveyance Plan ("Indemnitee's Actions"), including, but not
limited to:
(1) any and all Proceedings related to an alleged
violation of automatic stays that may apply in the
existing Bankruptcy Case or future bankruptcies;
or,
(2) any and all Proceedings to attack, set aside,
void or annul any of the decisions or
determinations that the Indemnitees make in
connection with the approval of the Project,
including but not limited to, circulation and
certifications of Environmental Impact Report, and
the making of findings, approval of mitigation
measures, approval of a mitigation monitoring and
reporting programs, and statement of overriding
considerations; or,
(3) any and all Proceedings contending
Indemnitee's Actions constitute one
incidences of exercise of eminent domain,
or inversely; or,
that the
or more
directly
(4) and all Proceedings contending that the
Indemnitee's Actions are invalid as not roughly
proportional to the impact of the development; or,
(5) any and all Proceedings asserting any other
theory contesting or challenging the lawfulness or
legality of the Indemnitee's Actions.
In addition, at page one of the Original Agreement,
footnote 3 is hereby deleted.
All other provisions of the Original Agreement remain in
full force and effect.
By signature below, the Parties hereto acknowledge
receipt of good and valuable consideration upon execution of this
First Amendment.
2
SIGNATURE PAGE TO FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
FOR INDEMNIFICATION AND COVENANTS FOR ACTIONS
TAKEN BY CITY RELATED TO THE OTAY RANCH
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto do hereby agree as
of the date indicated adjacent to their signature below.
DATED:
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Shirley Horton, Mayor
[attach acknowledgement]
ATTEST
Beverly A. Authelet
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ann Y. Moore
Acting City Attorney
DATE:
THE OTAY RANCH, L.P., a California
limited partnership
By Sky Communi ties, Inc., a
California Corporation, its
General Partner,
By:
Alfred E. Baldwin
President
Village Development, a California
General Partnership,
By:
Alfred E. Baldwin
General Partner
3
Tiger Development Two, a California
Limited Partnership,
By:
Alfred E. Baldwin
President
James Baldwin, by Alfred E.
Baldwin, his attorney in fact per
power of attorney attached
Alfred E. Baldwin
C:\Agmt\A~endmnt.lnd
4
DATE:
August 16, 1996
FROM:
Honorable Mayor and City Council ~ (
.. rJ.. .
Ann Moore, Actlng Clty Attorney
TO:
SUBJECT:
Council Agenda Item Number 15
These resolutions
late for review.
signed copies of
August 20, 1996.
were submitted to the City Attorney's Office too
The City Attorney's Office will be providing
the resolutions prior to the hearing on
I'
'I
I
.'
-:# J~s])
j
Attachment 1
Village Development
RESOLUTION No. 18398
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A REVISED TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR PORTIONS OF THE OT A Y RANCH
SPA ONE, CHULA VISTA TRACT 96-04, AND MAKING THE
NECESSARY FINDINGS, ADOPTING THE SECOND
ADDENDUM TO AND RECERTIFYING FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FEIR 95-01 (SCH
#95021012) AND READOPTING THE STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND THE MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE FEIR
AND DENYING APPROVAL OF ALTERNATIVE TENT A TIVE
MAP PROPOSALS.
WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of this resolution is identified and
described on Chula Vista Tract 96-04 and is commonly known as Otay Ranch Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) One ("Property"), and;
WHEREAS, Village Development filed a duly verified application for the subdivision of
the Property in the form of the tentative subdivision map known as Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula
Vista Tract 96-04, with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on December 6,
1995 ("prejeet"), and;
WHEREAS, Village Development filed a revised tentative map for Tract 96-04
("Pro;ect") on August 9, 1996, and;
WHEREAS, 5ftitl the revised application requested the approval for the subdivision of
approximately 822 acres located south of Telegraph Canyon Road between Paseo Ranchero and
the future alignment of SR-125 into 3,729 residential lots, 235 acres of open space, one 10
acres school site and one school site proposed for the area west of Paseo Ranchero, 26.5 acres
of neighborhood parks and 18.5 acres of community purpose facility lots, and;
WHEREAS, City staff has recommended that only the Village one portion of the
proposed tentative map owned by Village Development be recommended for approval, or in the
alternative, the portions of Village One owned by Village Development and Phase I-A of Village
Five be approved as more specifically set forth in the staff report, and;
WHEREAS, the development of the Property has been the subject matter of a General
Development Plan ("GDP") previously approved by the City Council on October 28, 1993 by
I
Resolution No. 17298 and as amended on May 14, 1996 by Resolution No. 18285 ("GDP
Resolution") wherein the City Council, in the environmental evaluation of said GDP, relied in
part on the Otay Ranch General Development Plan, Environmental Impact Report No. 90-01,
SCH # 89010154 ("Program EIR 90-01 "), and;
WHEREAS, the development of the Property has been the subject matter of a Sectional
Planning Area Plan ("SPA Plan") previously approved by the City Council on June 4, 1996 by
Resolution No. 18286 ("SPA Plan Resolution") wherein the City Council, in the environmental
evaluation of said SPA Plan, relied in part on the Otay Ranch SPA Plan Final Environmental
Impact Report No. 95-01, SCH # 95021012 ("FEIR 95-01 "), and;
WHEREAS, this Project is a subsequent activity in the program of development
environmentally evaluated under Program EIR 90-01, FEIR 95-01, and addendum thereto, that
is virtually identical in all relevant respects, including lot size, lot numbers, lot configurations,
transportation corridors, etc., to the project descriptions in said former environmental
evaluations, and;
WHEREAS, the City Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed
tentative map alternatives and determined that they are in substantia] conformance with the SPA
Plan and the related environmental documents and that the proposed alternative tentative maps
would not result in any new environmental effects that were not previously identified. nor would
the proposed alternative tentative maps result in a substantial increase in severity in any
environmental effects previously identified; therefore only an a Addendum to FEIR 95-01 is
required in accordance with CEQA, and;
WHEREAS. the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the original
tentative map application on July 10. ] 996. and another advertised public hearin!! on the Proiect
on August 14.1996 at which time the Plannin!! Commission voted to: 0) recertify FEIR 95-01:
(2) readopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reportin!! Program: and (3) recommend that the City Council approve the Proiect in accordance
with staff's recommendation and the findings and conditions listed below: and
ViIIERE,\S, tRe PlaRRiRg COffiffiissioR reeeived aRd eORsidered all evideRee OR tRe reeord
whieh supports the recoFAfAeRdatioA of denial of the proposed alterAative teAtntive fAaps other
thaR staff's reeoffimeRdalioR, ElRd,
WIIERE!.S, the PlflRRiRg CemmissioR ReId ElR aevertised pliBlie heariRg OR saie projeet
OR Ilil)' 10, 1996 aRd reeertified FEIR 9501, '<,eled 10 recomR-leRd that the City COIJReil approve
the TeR!ative Map iR flecersflRee with the fiRsiRgs fiRS ceRditiolls listed Below ails readopted the
StatemeRt ef Overridillg CeRsideratiells aRe tRe Mitigati6R MORiteriRg aAd Reportillg Program,
~
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on said tentative
subdivision map application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by
2
its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least ten days prior to the
hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the " hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on August 6,
1996 and continued to August 20, 1996 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before
the City Council and said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL finds, determines and resolves as follows:
SE.CTION 1. CEQA Finding re Previously Examined Effects
The City Council hereby finds that the Project, as a later activity to that evaluated in the
Program EIR 90-01, FEIR 95-01, and addendum thereto, would have no new effects that
were not examined in the preceding Program EIR 90-01 and FEIR 95-01 (Guideline
15168 (c)(2)), and;
SECTION 2. CEQA Finding re Project within Scope of Prior Program EIR
The City Council hereby finds that: 1. there were no changes in the project from the
Program EIR and the FEIR which would require revisions of said reports; 2. no
substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken since the previous reports; 3. and no new information of substantial
importance to the project has become available since the issuance and approval of the
prior reports; and that, therefore, no new effects could occur or no new mitigation
measures will be required in addition to those already in existence and made a condition
for Project implementation. Therefore, the City Council approves the Project as an
activity that is within the scope of the project covered by the Program EIR and FEIR,
and, therefore, a second addendum has been prepared (Guideline 15168 (c)(2) and 15162
(a)), and;
SECTION 3. Incorporation of All Feasible Mitigation Measures and Alternatives
The City does hereby adopt and incorporate herein as conditions for all approvals herein
granted all applicable mitigation measures and alternatives, if any, which it has
determined, by the findings made in the GDP Resolution and the SPA Resolution, to be
feasible in the approval of the General Development Plan and the SPA Plan, respectively,
1Ifl6t"
SECTION 4. Notice with Later Activities
The City Council does hereby give notice, to the extent required by law, that this Project
3
is an activity within the scope of the program approved earlier in the GDP Resolution
and the SPA Plan Resolution, and the Final EIR adequately describes the activity for the
purposes of CEQA (Guideline 15168 (e)). Notice was given on the EIR on June 4, 1996.
SECTION 5. Ceneral Plan Findings Conf-ormanee to tAe Ceneral Plan
Tentative Map Findings.
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5 ifl of the Subdivision Map Act, the City
Council finds that the tentative subdivision map as conditioned herein for Otay Ranch
SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 96-04, is in conformance with all the various elements of
the City's General Plan, the Otay Ranch General Development Plan and Sectional
Planning Area Plan based on the following:
Ir.L Land Use - The Project is a planned community which provides a variety of land
uses and residential densities ranging between 3.5 and 36.8 dwelling units per
acre. The project is also consistent with General Plan policies related to grading
and landforms.
1r.2. Circulation - All of the on-site and off-site public and private streets required to
serve the subdivision consist of Circulation Element roads and local streets in
locations required by said Element. The Applicant shall construct those facilities
in accordance with City standards or pay in-lieu fees in accordance with the
Transportation Development Impact Fee program.
e-;-3. Housing - The Applicant is required to enter into an agreement with the City to
provide and implement a low and moderate income program within the Project
prior to the approval of any Final Map for the Project.
6-:4. Parks and Recreation Open Space. - The Project will provide a 25 acre (gross)
community park, 44.1 acre (gross) neighborhood parks and the payment of PAD
fees or additional improvements as approved by the Director of Parks and
Recreation. In addition, a recreational trail system will be provided throughout
the Project, ultimately connecting with other open space areas and trail systems
in the region. e. Conservation and Open Space - The Project provides 235 acres
of open space, 20% of the total 833 acres. A program to preserve 83 % of slopes
greater than 25 % has been established ranch-wide and is detailed in the
recirculated FEIR 95-01.
~ Conservation. The Program EIR and FEIR addressed the goals and policies of
the Conservation Element of the General Plan and found development of this site
to be consistent with these goals and policies.
4
f.-6. Seismic Safety - The proposed subdivision is in conformance wit the goals and
policies of the Seismic Element of the General Plan for this site. No seismic
faults have been identified in the vicinity of the Project.
't': 7. Public Safety - All public and private facilities are expected to be reachable
within the threshold response times for fire and police services.
Ir.~ Public Facilities - The Applicant will provide all on-site and off-site streets,
sewers and water facilities necessary to serve this Project. The developer will
also contribute to the Otay Water District's improvement requirements to provide
terminal water storage for this Project as well as other major project in the
eastern territories.
i-02.., Noise - The Project will include noise attenuation walls as required by an acoustic
study dated June 6, 1995 prepared for the Project. In addition, all units are
required to meet the standards of the UBC with regard to acceptable interior noise
levels.
HO. Scenic Highway - The roadway design provides wide landscaped buffers along
the two scenic highways, Telegraph Canyon Road and East Orange Avenue
(Olympic Parkway).
*'-.l.L Bicycle Routes - Bicycle paths are provided throughout the Project.
1-:12. Public Buildings - The Project provides three elementary school sites and one
high school site to serve the area. One elementary school site and the high school
site will be off-site of the project. The project will also be subject to Public
Facilities Development Impact Fees.
SECTION 6. S\:I6divisiofl Map f.ct FiAdiAgs
B.A Balance of Housing Needs and Public Service Needs.
Pursuant to Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Council certifies that it has
considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the region and has balanced
those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City and the available
fiscal and environmental resources. The development will provide for a variety of
housing types from single family detached homes to attached single-family and multiple-
family housing and will provide low and moderate priced housing consistent with
regional goals.
5
C.B Opportunities for Natural Heating and Cooling Incorporated.
The configuration, orientation and topography of the site partially allows for the optimum
siting of lots for passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities as required by
Government Code Section 66473.1.
D.G Finding re~ardjn~ Suitability for Residential Development.
The site is physically suitab1e for residential development and the proposal conforms to
all standards established by the City for such projects.
E.!) The conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other entitlement herein
contained is approximately proportional both in nature and extent to the impact created
by the proposed development.
SECTION +Q.
Conditional Approval of Tentative Subdivision Map
The City Council does hereby approve, subject to the following conditions, as Exhibit
A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, the Proiect. teAtative
subdivisioA map for Otay RaAch SPA OAC, CAlI1a Vista Tract 96 01
SECTION 81. CEQA Findings of Fact. MitiIJation Monitoring Program and Statement
of Overriding Considerations.
a. Adoption of Second Addendum
The City Council does hereby adopt the Second Addendum to the Final EIR 95-
or
b. Re-adoption of Findings of Fact
The Council does hereby re-approve, accept as its own and re-incorporate, as if
set forth full herein, and make each and everyone of the CEQt. Findings
contained in the Findings of Fact. attached hereto as Attachment A known as
Document No. C096-056 which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
c. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Re-adopted
As more fully identified and set forth in the Program EIR and the FEIR and
Addendum and in the CEQA Findings for this Project, which is hereby attached
6
hereto as Attachment A, the Council hereby finds that, pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the
mitigation measures described in the above referenced documents are feasible and
will become binding upon the !I!'Jpropriate eAtit} sllch as the Applicant and its
successors in interest. and the City or other special districts whicA Aas to
implement these specific mitigation measures.
d. InfFeasibility of Alternatives
As is also noted in the environmental documents referenced in the immediately
preceding paragraph, alternatives to the Project, which were identified as
potentially feasible, are hereby found not to be feasible.
e. Readoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, City Council hereby
re-adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") set forth
as Attachment B to this resolution known as Document No. C096-057. which is
on file in the Office of the City Clerk aAe ineofj3orated hereiA B) refereRee as set
forth iR ftill. The City Council finds that the Program is designed to ensure that,
during the Project implementation and operation, the Applicant and other
responsible parties implement the Project components and comply with the
feasible mitigation measures identified in the Findings and in the Program.
f. Statement of Overriding Considerations
Even after the re-adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, and any feasible
alternatives. certain significant or potentially significant environmental affects
caused by the Project or cumulatively will remain. Therefore, the City Council
of the City of Chula Vista re-issues, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093,
as set forth and attached hereto as Attachment C known as Document No. C096-
058 a CODY of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, a Statement of
Overriding Considerations identifying the specific economic, social and other
considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental
effects still significant but acceptable.
SECTION 9B..
Notice of Determination
City Council directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to post a Notice of
Determination and file the same with the County Clerk.
7
SECTION 9.
Consequence of Failure of Conditions.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur. or if they are. by their terms. to be
implemented and maintained over time. if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms. the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted. deny. revoke or further condition issuance
of all future building permits issued under the authority of approvals herein granted.
institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek
damages for their violation.
SECTION 10.
Invalidity: Automatic Revocation.
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent
upon the enforceability of each and every term. provision and condition herein stated:
and that in the event that anyone or more terms. provisions. or conditions are
determined by a Court of competent iurisdiction to be invalid. illegal or unenforceable.
this resolution shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and
effect ab initio.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
G~~~
Ann Moore
Acting City Attorney
Gerald J. Jamriska
Special Planning Projects Manager
M:\home\anolTlcy\villag~ .1
Attachments:
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Attachment A: Findings of Fact
Attachment B: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Attachment C: Statement of Overriding Considerations
Attachment D: Second Addendum to FEIR
8
r
ij
ATIACHMENT 2
VILLAGE I
RESOLUTION No. 18398
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A REVISED TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR PORTIONS OF THE OTA Y RANCH
SPA ONE, CHULA VISTA TRACT 96-04, AND MAKING THE
NECESSARY FINDINGS, ADOPTING THE SECOND
ADDENDUM TO AND RECERTIFYING FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FEIR 95-01 (SCH
#95021012) AND READOPTING THE STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND THE MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE FEIR
AND DENYING APPROV AL OF AL TERNA TIVE TENTATIVE
MAP PROPOSALS.
WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of this resolution is identified and
described on Chula Vista Tract 96-04 and is commonly known as Otay Ranch Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) One ("Property"), and;
WHEREAS, Village Development filed a duly verified application for the subdivision of
the Property in the form of the tentative subdivision map known as Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula
Vista Tract 96-04, with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on December 6,
1995, ("Projeet:) and;
WHEREAS, Village Development filed a revised tentative subdivision map on August
9, .1996, and;
WHEREAS, 5ftffi the revised application requested the approval for the revised
subdivision of approximately 822 acres located south of Telegraph Canyon Road between Paseo
Ranchero and the future alignment of SR-125 into 3,729 residential lots, one lO-acre school site
and one school site proposed for the area west of Paseo Ranchero, 26.5 acres of neighborhood
parks and 18.5 acres of community purpose facility lots, and;
WHEREAS, City staff has recommended that only the Village one portion of the
proposed tentative map owned by Village Development ("Proiect") be recommended for
approval, or iA the alterAative, tRe j3ertioAs of Village One svmee BY Village De\'elej3ffieAt aAd
PRa3e 1 /\. sf Village Fi\'e Be a]3]3re\ed as more specifically set forth in the staff report, and;
WHEREAS, the development of the Property has been the subject matter of a General
Development Plan ("GDP") previously approved by the City Council on October 28, 1993 by
Resolution No. 17298 and as amended on May 14, 1996 by Resolution No. 18285 ("GDP
Resolution") wherein the City Council, in the environmental evaluation of said GDP, relied in
part on the Otay Ranch General Development Plan, Environmental Impact Report No. 90-01,
SCH #9010154 ("Program EIR 90-01 "), and;
WHEREAS, the development of the Property has been the subject matter of a Sectional
Planning Area Plan ("SPA Plan") previously approved by the City Council on June 4, 1996 by
Resolution No. 18286 ("SPA Plan Resolution") wherein the City Council, in the environmental
evaluation of said SPA Plan, relied in part on the Otay Ranch SPA Plan Final Environmental
Impact Report No. 95-01, SCH # 95021012 ("FEIR 95-01 "), and;
WHEREAS, this Project is a subsequent activity in the program of development
environmentally evaluated under Program EIR 90-01, FEIR 95-01, and addendum thereto, that
is virtually identical in all relevant respects, including lot size, lot numbers, lot configurations,
transportation corridors, etc., to the project descriptions in said former environmental
evaluations, and;
WHEREAS, the City Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed
alternative tentative maps (including the Proiect's) and determined that they are in substantial
conformance with the SPA Plan and the related environmental documents and that the proposed
alternative tentative maps would not result in any new environmental effects that were not
previously identified. nor would the proposed alternative tentative maps result in a substantial
increase in severity in any environmental effects previously identified; therefore only an a
Addendum to FEIR 95-01 is required in accordance with CEQA, and;
WHEREAS. the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the original
tentative map application on July 10. 1996. and another advertised public hearing on the Proiect
on Aue:ust 14.1996 at which time the Planning Commission voted to: (I) recertify FEIR 95-01:
(2) readopt the Statement of Overridine: Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and
ReDorting Program: and (3) recommend that the City Council aDDrove the Proiect in accordance
with staff's recommendation and the findine:s and conditions listed below: and
WIIERE.\S, the Planning COffiffiission received and considered all eviaenee on the record
wlliell Sl:1pports tile recommendation of denial of tile proposed altemative tentative maps otRer
thlm sl!lff's reeoffiffiendation, and,
WIIEREf.S, tile Planning Commission lIeld an a<h'eftised pl:l61ie Rearing on said projeet
on Al:1gust 11, 1996 ana recertified FEIR 95 01, votea to reeommend tllat tRe Cit)' Cal:1neil
approve tRe Revised Tenffitive Map for onl) the Village One and Phase 1 A sf Village Five af
the map and deny the proposed tentative map alternatives in aee6rdanee 'J. itll tRe findings and
e6nditi6ns listed below and adopted tile Second .^.aaendl:1m to and reeertified tile fEIR 95 01 and
reaaopted tile Sffilement of Overriaing Considerations and tile Mitigation Msnitoring and
Reporting Prograffi; and
2
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on said tentative
subdivision map application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by
its 'publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least ten days prior to the
hearing, and;
WHEREAS, tfle i! hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on August 20,
1996 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing
was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL finds, determines and resolves as follows:
SECTION 1. CEQA Finding re Previously Examined Effects
The City Council hereby finds that the Project, as a later activity to that evaluated in the
Program EIR 90-01, FEIR 95-01, and addendum thereto, would have no new effects that
were not examined in the preceding Program EIR 90-01 and FEIR 95-01 (Guideline
15168 (c)(2)), and;
SECTION 2. CEQA Finding re Project within Scope of Prior Program EIR
The City Council hereby finds that: I) there were no changes in the project from the
Program EIR and the FEIR which would require revisions of said reports; 2) no
substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken since the previous reports; 3) and no new information of substantial
importance to the project has become available since the issuance and approval of the
prior reports; and that, therefore, no new effects could occur or no new mitigation
measures will be required in addition to those already in existence and made a condition
for Project implementation. Therefore, the City Council approves the Project as an
activity that is within the scope of the project covered by the Program EIR and FEIR,
and, a second Addendum has been prepared(Guideline 15168 (c)(2) and 15162 (a)).
SECTION 3. Incorporation of All Feasible Mitigation Measures and Alternatives
The City does hereby readopt and incorporate herein as conditions for all approvals
herein granted all applicable mitigation measures and alternatives, if any, which it has
determined, by the findings made in the GDP Resolution and the SPA Resolution, to be
feasible in the approval of the General Development Plan and the SPA Plan, respectively,
and;
SECTION 4. Notice with Later Activities
The City Council does hereby give notice, to the extent required by law, that this Project
is an activity within the scope of the program approved earlier in the GDP Resolution
3
and the SPA Plan Resolution, and the Final EIR with first and second addendums
adequately describes the activity for the purposes of CEQA (Guideline 15168 (e)) Notice
on the SPA EIR was given of June 4, 1996.
SECTION 5. CCAcral PlaA FiAdiAgs COAformaAcc to tAc CCAcral PlaA
Tentative Map Findinp.
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5 ffi of the Subdivision Map Act, the City
Council finds that the revised tentative subdivision map for the Village Development's
portion of Village One as conditioned herein for Otay Ranch SPA One, Chu]a Vista Tract
96-04, is in conformance with all the various elements of the City's General Plan, the
Otay Ranch General Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area Plan based on the
following:
Ill. Land Use - The Project is a planned community which provides a variety of land
uses and residential densities ranging between 3.5 and 36.8 dwe11ing units per
acre. The project is also consistent with General Plan policies related to grading
and landforms.
62. Circulation - All of the on-site and off-site public and private streets required to
serve the subdivision consist of Circulation Element roads and local streets in
locations required by said Element. The Applicant shall construct those facilities
in accordance with City standards or pay in-lieu fees in accordance with the
Transportation Development Impact Fee program.
e;l. Housing - The Applicant is required to enter into an agreement with the City to
provide and implement a low and moderate income program within the Project
prior to the approval of any Final Map for the Project.
eA. Parks and Recreation Open Space. - The Project wi1l provide a 25 acre (gross)
community park, 44. I acre (gross) neighborhood parks and the payment of PAD
fees or additional improvements as approved by the Director of Parks and
Recreation. In addition, a recreational trail system will be provided throughout
the Project, ultimately connecting with other open space areas and trail systems
in the region. e. CSAscrvatioA aAd Open Space - The Project provides 116 acres
of open space, 2] % of the total 556.54 acres recommended for approval. A
program to preserve 83 % of slopes greater than 25 % has been established ranch-
wide and is detailed in the recirculated FEIR 95-01.
~ Conservation. The Program EIR and FEIR addressed the !!oals and policies of
the Conservation Element of the General Plan and found development of this site
to be consistent with these goals and policies.
f..6. Seismic Safety - The proposed subdivision is in conformance wit the goals and
4
policies of the Seismic Element of the General Plan for this site. No seismic
faults have been identified in the vicinity of the Project.
~ 7. Public Safety - All public and private facilities are expected to be reachable
within the threshold response times for fire and police services.
1r.-8. Public Facilities - The Applicant wi1l provide all on-site and off-site streets,
sewers and water facilities necessary to serve this Project. The developer will
also contribute to the Otay Water District's improvement requirements to provide
terminal water storage for this Project as well as other major project in the
eastern territories.
h2,. Noise - The Project will include noise attenuation walls as required by an acoustic
study dated June 6, 1995 prepared for the Project. In addition, all units are
required to meet the standards of the UBC with regard to acceptable interior noise
levels.
j-,1O. Scenic Highway - The roadway design provides wide landscaped buffers along
the two scenic highways, Telegraph Canyon Road and East Orange Avenue
(Olympic Parkway).
Ir.-ll... Bicycle Routes - Bicycle paths are provided throughout the Project.
J-:.12. Public Buildings - The Project provides three elementary school sites and one
high school site to serve the area. One elementary school site and the high school
site will be off-site of the project. The project will also be subject to Public
Facilities Development Impact Fees.
SECTION 6. S\:lbdi';,isisn Map Act Findings
~fI. Balance of Housing Needs and Public Service Needs.
Pursuant to Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Council certifies that it has
considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the region and has balanced
those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City and the available
fiscal and environmental resources. The development wi1l provide for a variety of
housing types from single family detached homes to attached single-family and multiple-
family housing and wi1l provide low and moderate priced housing consistent with
regional goals.
Ce. Opportunities for Natural Heating and Cooling Incorporated.
The configuration, orientation and topography of the site partially allows for the optimum
5
siting. of lots for passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities as required by
Government Code Section 66473.1.
De. Finding regarding Suitability for Residential Development.
The Village One site is physically suitable for residential development and the proposal
conforms to all standards established by the City for such projects.
Ed. The conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other entitlement herein
contained is approximately proportional both in nature and extent to the impact created by the
proposed development.
Section (H\. Tentative Map Findings In Support Of Denial Of The Tentative Map Alternatives
Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474 (a) in the Subdivision Map Act, the revised
tentative subdivision map for the portion of Village One and Five adjacent to the West
Coast Land Fund collateral are denied for Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 96-
04, as not being in conformance with all the various elements of the City's General
Plan, the Otay Ranch General Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area Plan based
on the following:
a. Public Facilities
West Coast Land Fund is in the process of foreclosing on 288 acres of Villages
One and Five and have informed the City that they are not satisfied with the
elementary school and neighborhood park location within the Specific Plan and
revised tentative map. West Coast has indicated, when foreclosure is complete,
they plan to initiate SPA amendments to relocate the school and parks locations.
The relocation of the school and park sites may be on Village Development's
portion of Village Five. Therefore, the revised tentative is denied for VilJage Five
in order to maintain flexibility and orderly development in providing public
facilities for schools and parks in Village Five.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474 (b) in the Subdivision Map Act, the revised
tentative subdivision map for the portion of Village One and Five adjacent to the West
Coast Land Fund collateral are denied for Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 96-
04, as not being consistent with the approved specific plan based on the following:
b. Village Core
The required public facilities and private services in the village core for Village
Five are on the West Coast Land Funds collateral and may not be available when
needed for the development of Village Five.
6
Pursuant to the City Code Section 18. 04.050 subdivisions are to be design with
consideration to existing streets and the effect of the extension of said streets and
alignment thereof in undeveloped land surrounding the subdivision.
C. Streets
The proposed subdivision does not adequately plan for the extension of public
streets into adjacent residential area that are part of the West Coast Land Fund
collateral. The tentative map proposes gated neighborhoods adjacent to the West
Coast Land Fund collateral that is not part of the tentative map. City policy
requires private streets in gated neighborhoods. Therefore public street access to
the West Coast land Fund collateral is not provided in the proposed tentative
map.
SECTION 7. Conditional Approval of Tentative Subdivision Map
The City Council does hereby approve, subject to the following conditions, as Exhibit
A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, the Proiect revised tentative
subdivision map for only Village One of the Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista Tract
96-04 and denies the approval of the tentative map alternatives which include other
territory other than staff's proposed alternative B, based upon the findings and
determinations on the record for the project.
SECTION 8. CEQA Findings of Fact. Mitigation Monitoring Program and Statement of
Overriding Considerations.
a. Adoption of Second Addendum
The City Council does hereby adopt the Second Addendum to the Final EIR 95-
01.
b. Re-adoption of Findings of Fact.
The Council does hereby re-approve, accept as its own and re-incorporate, as if
set forth full herein, and make each and everyone of the CEQA Findings
contained in the Findings of Fact. attached hereto as Attachment A known as
Document No. C096-056 which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
c. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Re-adopted
As more fully identified and set forth in the Program EIR and the FEIR and
Addendum and in the CEQA Findings for this Project, which is hereby attached
hereto as Attachment A, the Council hereby finds that, pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the
7
mitigation measures described in the above referenced documents are feasible and
will become binding upon tRe appropriate eAtity sueR as the Applicant and its
successors in interest. and, the City or other speda! districts ".!lic!l !las to
implement these specific mitigation measures.
d. InfFeasibility of Alternatives
As is also noted in the environmental documents referenced in the immediately
preceding paragraph, alternatives to the Project, which were identified as
potentially feasible, are hereby found not to be feasible.
e. Readoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, City Council hereby
re-adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") set forth
as Attachment B to this resolution known as Document No. C096-057. which is
on file in the Office of the City Clerk and iJ1corporatecl AcrciJ1 by ref-ercJ1cc as sct
fortA iA ft-ill. The City Council finds that the Program is designed to ensure that,
during the Project implementation and operation, the Applicant and other
responsible parties implement the Project components and comply with the
feasible mitigation measures identified in the Findings and in the Program.
f. Statement of Overriding Considerations
Even after the re-adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, and any feasible
alternatives. certain significant or potentially significant environmental affects
caused by the Project or cumulatively will remain. Therefore, the City Council
of the City of Chula Vista re-issues, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093,
as set forth and attached hereto as Attachment C, known as Document No. C096-
058 a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. a Statement of
Overriding Considerations identifying the specific economic, social and other
considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental
effects still significant but acceptable.
SECTION 9. Notice of Determination
City Council directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to post a Notice of
Determination and file the same with the County Clerk.
SECTION 10.
Consequence of Failure of Conditions.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur. or if they are. by their terms. to be
implemented and maintained over time. if any of such conditions fail to be so
8
implemented and maintained according to their terms. the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all aoorovals herein granted. deny. revoke or further condition issuance
of all future building permits issued under the authority of approvals herein granted.
institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek
damages for their violation.
SECTION II.
Invalidity: Automatic Revocation.
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent
upon the enforceability of each and every term. provision and condition herein stated:
and that in the event that anyone or more terms. orovisions. or conditions are
determined by a Court of comoetent iurisdiction to be invalid. illegal or unenforceable.
this resolution shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and
effect ab initio.
Presen ted by:
Approved as to form by:
~, Y1A^~
Ann Moore
Acting City Attorney
Gerald J. Jamriska
Special Planning Projects Manager
M:\hom~\lInomey\vjllagr. 2
Attachments:
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Attachment A: Findings of Fact
Attachment B: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Attachment C: Statement of Overriding Considerations
Attachment D: Second Addendum to FEIR
9
:1
Attachment 3
Village I and Phase I-A
RESOLUTION No, 18398
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A REVISED TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR PORTIONS OF THE OT A Y RANCH
SPA ONE, CHULA VISTA TRACT 96-04, AND MAKING THE
NECESSARY FINDINGS, ADOPTING THE SECOND
ADDENDUM TO AND RECERTIFYING FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FEIR 95-01 (SCH
#95021012) AND READOPTING THE STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND THE MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE FEIR
AND DENYING APPROV AL OF AL TERN A TIVE TENT A TIVE
MAP PROPOSALS,
WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of this resolution is identified and
described on Chula Vista Tract 96-04 and is commonly known as Otay Ranch Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) One ("Property"), and;
WHEREAS, Village Development filed a duly verified application for the subdivision of
the Property in the form of the tentative subdivision map known as Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula
Vista Tract 96-04, with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on December 6,
1995 ("Projeet"), and;
WHEREAS, Village Development filed a revised tentative subdivision map on August
9, 1996, and;
WHEREAS, said application requested the approval for the revised subdivision of
approximately 822 acres located south of Telegraph Canyon Road between Paseo Ranchero and
the future alignment of SR-125 into 3,729 residential lots, one 10-acre school site and one school
site proposed for the area west of Paseo Ranchero, 26.5 acres of neighborhood parks and 18.5
acres of community purpose facility lots, and;
WHEREAS, City staff has recommended that only the Village ORe penioR of tAe
l"ml"oscd ICRtativc ffiap OWRcd by Village DeveleprncRt ee reeoffiffieRded for appre', aI, er iR tAe
altemativc, tAc portions of Village One owned by Village Development and Phase I-A of Village
Five be approved as more specifically set forth in the staff report ("Proiect"), and;
WHEREAS, the development of the Property has been the subject matter of a General
Development Plan ("GDP") previously approved by the City Council on October 28, ]993 by
Resolution No. 17298 and as amended on May 14, 1996 by Resolution No. 18285 ("GDp
Resolution") wherein the City Council, in. the environmental evaluation of said GDP, relied in
part on the Otay Ranch Genera] Development Plan, Environmental Impact Report No. 90-0],
SCH #9010]54 ("Program EIR 90-01 "), and;
WHEREAS, the development of the Property has been the subject matter of a Sectional
Planning Area Plan ("SPA Plan") previously approved by the City Council on June 4, 1996 by
Resolution No. 18286 ("SPA Plan Resolution") wherein the City Council, in the environmental
evaluation of said SPA Plan, relied in part on the Otay Ranch SPA Plan Final Environmental
Impact Report No. 95-01, SCH # 95021012 ("FEIR 95-0]"), and;
WHEREAS, this Project is a subsequent activity in the program of development
environmentally evaluated under Program EIR 90-01, and FEIR 95-01 and addendum thereto,
that is virtually identical in al1 relevant respects, including lot size, lot numbers, lot
configurations, transportation corridors, etc" to the project descriptions in said former
environmental evaluations, and;
WHEREAS, the City Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed
alternative Tentative Maps and determined that they are in substantial conformance with the
SPA Plan and the related environmental documents and that the proposed alternative maps would
not result in any new environmental effects that were not Dreviously identified. nor would the
proDosed alternative tentative maps result in a substantial increase in severity in any
environmental effects previously identified; therefore only an a Addendum to FEIR 95-0] is
required in accordance with CEQA, and;
. WHEREAS. the Planning. Commission held an advertised Dublic hearing on the oriJ?inal
tentative maD application on July 10. 1996. and another advertised Dublic hearing on the Proiect
on August 14. ]996 at which time the Planning Commission voted to: (1) recertify FEIR 95-01:
(2) readopt the Statement of OverridinJ? Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program: and (3) recommend that the City Council approve the Proiect in accordance
with staff's recommendation and the findin~s and conditions listed below: and
'NHEREAS, Ihe PlaAAiRg COfAffiissioR received aRE! eORsidered a1l evideRee OR Ihe reeard
whieh stlrparts the reeomffieR8ation ef 8eRial ef the rfOresed alteTREltiw teRtRtive maps otAer
thaR staff's reeammel18atieR, aAd,
WHEREt.S, the PlaAAing CSfAITIissioA Aeld aA as'/crtised p\:l131ic AeariAg OA sais preject
eA f.!lg\:lst 14, ]996 and reeertifie8 fEIR 95 01, veted to reeol1'llfleAd tAat tAe City C01;lAcil
IIprreve the Re...ised TeAtative Mar fer eAl) the Vil1age ORC and Pf1a3e I ,'\ of 'lil1age fiYe of
IAe mllp aA8 8eRY tAe prerosed tCRtatiye ffiar alternati\ es iR aeeordaAee \VitA tAe HRdiAgs aAd
eORditioRs listee13els'I" aRS adertes tAe SeeoR8 AdseAduffi to aR8 recertified the FEIR 95 0] aRe
readopted the SffiteffieAt ef O,'errisiAg COAsideratieAs and tAe MitigatieA MORitoriRg aRd
ReportiRg Pragfllffi, aAd;
2
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on said tentative
subdivision map application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by
its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least ten days prior to the
hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the City Council received and considered all evidence on the record which
supports the recommendation of denial of the proposed alternative tentative maps other than
staff's recommendation, and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised on August 20, 1996
in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was
thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL finds, determines and resolves as follows:
SECTION I. CEQA Finding re Previously Examined Effects
The City Council hereby finds that the Project, as a later activity to that evaluated in the
Program EIR 90-01, FEIR 95-01, and addendum thereto. would have no new effects that
were not examined in the preceding Program EIR 90-01 and FElR 95-01 (Guideline
15168 (c)(I)), and;
SECTION 2. CEQA Finding re Project within Scope of Prior Program EIR
The City Council hereby finds that: I) there were no changes in the project from the
Program EIR and the FEIR which would require revisions of said reports; 2) no
substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken since the previous reports; 3) and no new information of substantial
importance to the project has become available since the issuance and approval of the
prior reports; and that, therefore, no new effects could occur or no new mitigation
measures will be required in addition to those already in existence and made a condition
for Project implementation. Therefore, the City Council approves the Project as an
activity that is within the scope of the project covered by the Program EIR and FEIR,
and, therefore, an second addendum has been prepared (Guideline 15168 (c)(2)), and;
SECTION 3. Incorporation of All Feasible Mitigation Measures and Alternatives
The City does hereby adopt and incorporate herein as conditions for all approvals herein
granted all applicable mitigation measures and alternatives, if any, which it has
determined, by the findings made in the GDP Resolution and the SPA Resolution, to be
feasible in the approval of the General Development Plan and the SPA Plan, respectively,
and;
3
SECTION 4. Notice with Later Activities
The City Council does hereby give notice, to the extent required by law, that this Project
is an activity within the scope of the program approved earlier in the GDP Resolution
and the SPA Plan Resolution, and the Final EIR with the second addendum adequately
describes the activity for the purposes of CEQA (Guideline 15168 (e)).
SECTION 5. CeHeral PlaR FiRdiHgs CORf-ormaRee to tAe CeHeral PlaR
Tentative Map Findings.
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5 ffi of the Subdivision Map Act, the City
Council finds that the tentative subdivision map as conditioned herein for Otay Ranch
SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 96-04, is in conformance with all the various elements of
the City's General Plan, the Otay Ranch General Development Plan and Sectional
Planning Area Plan based on the following:
al. Land Use - The Project is a planned community which provides a variety of land
uses and residential densities ranging between 3.5 and 36.8 dwelling units per
acre. The project is also consistent with General Plan policies related to grading
and landforms.
132,. Circulation - All of the on-site and off-site public and private streets required to
serve the subdivision consist of Circulation Element roads and local streets in
locations required by said Element. The Applicant shall construct those facilities
in accordance with City standards or pay in-lieu fees in accordance with the
Transportation Development Impact Fee program.
e1. Housing - The Applicant is required to enter into an agreement with the City to
provide and implement a low and moderate income program within the Project
prior to the approval of any Final Map for the Project.
tl:!:. Parks and Recreation - The Project will provide a 25-acre (gross) community
park, 26.5 acres (gross) of neighborhood parks and the payment of PAD fees or
additional improvements as approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation.
In addition, a recreational trail system will be provided throughout the Project,
ultimately connecting with other open space areas and trail systems in the region.
However, the neighborhood park site in Village Five may change. e. CORservatioR
aOO Open Space - The Project as recommended for approval provides 122.7 acres
of open space, 20 % of the total 608 acres. A program to preserve 83 % of slopes
greater than 25 % has been established ranch-wide and is detailed in the
recirculated FEIR 95-01.
~ Conservation. The Program EIR and FElR addressed the goals and policies of
the Conservation Element of the General Plan and found development of this site
4
to be consistent with these goals and policies.
fQ. Seismic Safety - No seismic faults have been identified in the vicinity of the
Project.
g1. Public Safety - All public and private facilities are expected to be reachable
within the threshold response times for fire and police services.
fi8. Public Facilities - The Applicant will provide all on-site and off-site streets,
sewers and water facilities necessary to serve this Project. The developer will
also contribute to the Otay Water District's improvement requirements to provide
terminal water storage for this Project as well as other major project in the
eastern territories. However, the elementary school site in Village Five may
change.
i2. Noise - The Project will inc1ude noise attenuation walls as required by an acoustic
study dated June 6, 1995 prepared for the Project. In addition, all units are
required to meet the standards of the UBC with regard to acceptable interior noise
levels.
j.li}. Scenic Highway - The roadway design provides wide landscaped buffers along
the two scenic highways, Telegraph Canyon Road and East Orange A venue
(Olympic Parkway).
kil. Bicyc1e Routes - Bicyc1e paths are provided throughout the Project.
111. Public Buildings - The Project provides three elementary school sites and one
high school site to serve the area. One elementary school site and the high school
site will be off-site of the project. The project will also be subject to Public
Facilities Development Impact Fees.
SECTION 6. SI.-lbdivision Map .^.et Findings
~a. Balance of Housing Needs and Public Service Needs.
Pursuant to Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Council certifies that it has
considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the region and has balanced
those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City and the available
fiscal and environmental resources. The development will provide for a variety of
housing types from single family detached homes to attached single-family and multiple-
family housing and will provide low and moderate priced housing consistent with
regional goals.
Cb. Opportunities for Natural Heating and Cooling Incorporated.
5
The configuration, orientation and topography of the site partially allows for the optimum
siting. of lots for passive or natura] heating and cooling opportunities as required by
Government Code Section 66473.1.
De. Finding re!!arding Suitability for Residential Development.
The site is physically suitable for residential development and the proposal conforms to
all standards established by the City for such projects.
Ed. The conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other entitlement herein
contained is approximately proportional both in nature and extent to the impact created
by the proposed development.
Section 6-A Tentative Map Findings In Support Of Denial Of The Tentative Map Alternatives
Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474 (a) in the Subdivision Map Act, the revised
tentative subdivision map for the portion of Village One and Five adjacent to the West
Coast Land Fund collateral are denied for Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 96-
04, as not being in conformance with all the various elements of the City's General
Plan, the Otay Ranch General Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area Plan based
on the following:
a. Public Facilities
West Coast Land Fund is in the process of foreclosing on 288 acres of Villages
One and Five and have informed the City that they are not satisfied with the
elementary school and neighborhood park location within the Specific Plan and
revised tentative map. West Coast has indicated, when foreclosure is complete,
they plan to initiate SPA amendments to relocate the school and parks locations.
The relocation of the school and park sites may be on Village Development's
portion of Village Five. Therefore, the revised tentative is denied for Village Five
in order to maintain flexibility and orderly development in providing public
facilities for schools and parks in Village Five.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474 (b) in the Subdivision Map Act, the revised
tentative subdivision map for the portion of Village One and Five adjacent to the West
Coast Land Fund collateral are denied for Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula Vista Tract 96-
04, as not being consistent with the approved specific plan based on the following:
b. Village Core
The required public facilities and private services in the village core for Village
Five are on the West Coast Land Funds collateral and may not be available when
needed for the development of Village Five.
6
Pursuant to the City Code Section 18. 04.050 subdivisions are to be design with
consideration to existing streets and the effect of the extension of said streets and
alignment thereof in undeveloped land surrounding the subdivision.
c. Streets
The proposed subdivision does not adequately plan for the extension of public
streets into adjacent residential area that are part of the West Coast Land Fund
col1ateral. The tentative map proposes gated neighborhoods adjacent to the West
Coast Land Fund collateral that is not part of the tentative map. City policy
requires private streets in gated neighborhoods. Therefore public street access to
the West Coast land Fund col1ateral is not provided in the proposed tentative
map.
SECTION 7.
Conditional Approval of Tentative Subdivision Map
The City Counci] does hereby approve, subject to the following conditions, as Exhibit
A attached hereto and incOl:porated herein by this reference, the Proiect revised tentative
subdivision map for only Village One and Phase I-A of the Otay Ranch SPA One, Chula
Vista Tract 96-04 and denies the approval of the tentative map alternatives which include
other territory other than staff's proposed Alternative B, based upon the findings and
determinations on the record for the project.
SECTION 8. CEQA Findings of Fact. Mitigation Monitoring Program and Statement
of Overriding Considerations.
a. Adoption of Second Addendum
The City Council does hereby adopt the Second Addendum to the Final EIR 95-
01.
b. Re-adoption of Findings of Fact.
The Council does hereby re-approve, accept as its own and re-incorporate, as if
set forth full herein, and make each and everyone of the CEQA Findings
contained in the Findings of Act. attached hereto as Attachment A known as
Document No. C096-056 which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
c. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Re-adopted
As more fully identified and set forth in the Program EIR and the FEIR and
Addendum and in the CEQA Findings for this Project, which is hereby attached
hereto as Attachment A, the Council hereby finds that. pursuant to Public
7
Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the
mitigation measures described in the above referenced documents are feasible and
will become binding upon the apfJrofJriate entity sHeh as the Applicant and its
successors in interest. and the City or otl1er special districts vil1icl1 l1f1s to
implement these specific mitigation measures.
d. InfFeasibility of Alternatives
As is also noted in the environmental documents referenced in the immediately
preceding paragraph, alternatives to the Project, which were identified as
potentially feasible, are hereby found not to be feasible.
e. Readoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, City Council hereby
re-adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") set forth
as Attachment B to this resolution known as Document C096-057. which is on
file in the Office of the City Clerk aRa iReorporated l1ereiR by refercRce as set
fortA iR flil!. The City Council finds that the Program is designed to ensure that,
during the Project implementation and operation, the Applicant and other
responsible parties implement the Project components and comply with the
feasible mitigation measures identified in the Findings and in the Program.
f. Statement of Overriding Considerations
Even after the re-adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, and any feasible
alternatives. certain significant or potentially significant environmental affects
caused by the Project or cumulatively will remain. Therefore, the City Council
of the City ofChula Vista re-issues, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093,
as set forth and attached hereto as Attachment C known as Document No. C096-
058. a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, a Statement of
Overriding Considerations identifying the specific economic, social and other
considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental
effects still significant but acceptable.
SECTION 9.
Notice of Determination
City Council directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to post a Notice of
Determination and file the same with the County Clerk.
SECTION 10.
Conseouence of Failure of Conditions.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur. or if they are. by their terms. to be
implemented and maintained over time. if any of such conditions fail to be so
8
implemented and maintained according to their terms. the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted. deny. revoke or further condition issuance
of aH future building permits issued under the authority of aoorovals herein granted.
institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek
damages for their violation.
SECTION 10.
Invalidity: Automatic Revocation.
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent
UDon the enforceability of each and every term. provision and condition herein stated:
and that in the event that anyone or more terms. provisions. or conditions are
determined by a Court of comoetent iurisdiction to be invalid. ilIe!!al or unenforceable.
this resolution shaH be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and
effect ab initio.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
Gerald J. Jamriska. AlCP
Special Planning Projects Manager
C'5v-- ~~'r--9--
Ann Moore
Acting City Attorney
M:\home\attomey\village.3
Attachments:
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Attachment A: Findings of Fact
Attachment B: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Attachment C: Statement of Overriding Considerations
Attachment D: Second Addendum to FEIR
9
. - ~ - -
-
-,
-
..--
:://}~~
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP
A LIMITE:J LiAB,U;Y J'AR"rNERSHIP INCLUDING F'F10F"ESS!ONAL CORPO:::..AiiON$
TWENTY.THIRD FLOOR
555 SOUTH FLOWER STREET
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90071
TELEPHONE (213) 683-6000
FACSIMILE (213) 627-0705
( ~ ,
I (, t-.
", ,
, )
./
CONFIDENTIAL
RUSH
x
DATE: Aua 15, 1996 3: 09pm
FROM: Michael Woodward
DIRECT DIAL #: (2131 683-6103
~ MSW ~
to:
<DF:
FACSIMILE #:
to:
OF:
FACSIMIL.E #:
to:
@F:
,
FACSIMILE #:
TO:
<DF:
FACSIMILE #:
TO:
OF:
FACSIMILE #:
GERALD JAMRISKA
Otay Ranch Project Office
619 422-7690 SWITCHBOARD #: 619 422-7158
ROBERT LEITER, Planning Director
City of Chula Vista
619 691-5171 SWITCHBOARD #: 619 691-5101
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
city of Chula vista
619 476-5379
SWITCHBOARD #: 619 691-5044
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
city of Chula vista
619 969-5171 SWITCHBOARD II: 619 691-5101
ANN MOORE, Assistant city Attorney
City of Chula Vista
619 585-5612 SWITCHBOARD #: 619 691-5037
CLIENT NAME: Colonv - WOLF otav Ranch
CUENT#: 21784.61555
THIS MeSSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENT/1Y TO WHICH rr IS ADDRESSED. AND MAY
CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPUCABl.E I AW I~
THE R"-ADER OF THIS MESSAG!: IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPiENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE ~OR
DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION
OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR,
PL~Ag; NOTIFY US; IMMEDIAT~LV QV"~LEj:)HONE, AND nETunN Tile: ORIGINA.L MESSAae io us AT THe: ABove ADDRESS VIA
THE U.S. POSTAL SERVice. THANK YOU.
Total numbcr of pogC$. including this cover sheet: J:#
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES. PLEASE CALL IMMEDIATELY
FACSIM'.L.f: CENTER: (213) 683-5059
!:::'~..
_.,
ORIGINAL WILL FOLLOW VIA:
';" ,~
MESSAGE:
FAx OPERATOR'S NAME:
',',
DATE:
TIME:
.. ~.
-".'
..-::.-""-..:-::--
............ or-r,c:::<; ,~...
P.-\UL. HAST!~GS. .J.\XOFSKY & V,ALKER LLP
.. _ .'-E" .......,_._.,. ;..._~....._~..,.. ..,=~~:..., w_",~..~".,:,.... .~~",..::.....-,::o","
JOICIS!:.... .. ....9"..:;; :1~'C'1~.OJ
~c.......o:..
_t!II!:':) :00....1..
,~E:O.....,::.O :: -'.....c,.~.....
::........~& '" ...........1;.
5~,5 SOV-rl F"'..~W~=> "STI=\e,::::i
3.J ::A"'$:~!: S". 5':'0::. I,ZC
':...... ...;:,....,;,$CO =~..,...oq"',.... ,...,C"'. ~o.:.
-=:'E:OO~C"'!: .....!5: ........:=..7....,.~
L..05 ANGE!...ES. CAI..IFO~NI. $oo"I-~3"1
".....C.SI'Io1.I..E ;2131 I!:'Z"'-O"'OS
'2:~'3 OCi::~'" M."t;;NI".oC
~.."'..",Q. ...Q...'.::..... c:..._,...Q<:I"',.... ~~.....:::I,~.<:':'~
.::I..!:~"C",I( :}':::: J'9-JJCO
-t~t:,sHON~ :;h~; ~a3-6000
e.oe 1O'~.::.","FlE:E: ST '" I!:.. ~"'e. .t...OO
;.;.,.:'.._..."'w.... C;EO~~'''' 3030e-i:.Z2
,.E..........~..c: (404) a 5..:=...:>0
'N"'E:~"'E:T 'N""'W.~!'1I'" com
u~.,. __=-. ..\3,.-=-... ~O,",,,,~v""'L,I
~.T~.'" ~ 0,",0 =:O.~...E:CT'.;V,. OO'ioCl"~~'"
":""r::..~....?...0!: !~Qj!: ~~;.~...OC
j IIS~S "0",,1'1 CE...,.;:IIt Oq,v!:
;0$'1'.... MI:S". .;:......:...0......... ..ziI!Iao"O~...
; ,.c:..!!:~...O...C !71"'1 l!!i~e-c"'C:-O
:l~a .......1'\ ..."O::,......!:.
....f:..... ...r"'I~.o;, NCW "'0"'1'1. 100.!.1!:-""'591
T'E._E.PI-ION~ 'Z'!~ 311!!H!COO
August 15, 1996
,\<::... "'OIOt, I!"_I_O'NG. 30~" ,.~.::C...
'<!-.J<. ......__._..... ...,:.....o....c.
...'.......-0......., '1'0","'0 '07 ..;..~AN
':"'~...:;::P...c"'~ (03) 3507-073=:
,~";:'Q p~,......svL.VAN'. .Va:;N....r.:. N W
''I''.II.Sr-II'IGTON. 0'; lC~O"":;;"o~
TE:'E"''''C'''f; ;::CZ) ;;oe..~~OO
_......e,..~ OI"C~'" ....=~.Q.
c;:n..!I:I !""\L.C NO
(213) 683-6103
21784.61555
VIA FACSI!ULE
Mayor Shirley Horton
Chula vista City council
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, california 91910
Re: Otav Ranch Tentative MaD - Aua. 20 Aaenda
Dear Mayor Horton and Honorable councilmembers:
We are writing on behalf of West Coast Land Fund
L.P. ("West Coast") in support. of lact night's unanimous
decision of the Planning commission approving the SPA One
tentative map for Village One and Phase 1A of Village Five,
and denying a tentative map on the remainder of SPA one
property. As several commissioners stated, this decision,
whioh was ~ore than wha~ the staff and West Coast had
proposed but less than what the Baldwins asked for,
represents an appropriate compromise given the current
circumstances. This decision also has the strong support. of
the city Manager and the city Planning Department, as well
as support from other departments.
Given the status of the pending Bankruptcy Court
proceedings, discussed below, West Coa~t believes that its
long-delayed foreclosure sale will occur on or before Aug~st
23, 1996. Assuming that West Coast becomes the owner of the
1,034 acre Property in Otay Ranch, 2aa acres or which is
located in the middle of SPA one, one of the options that it
will pursue will hA ~n attempt to resolve its land use
concerns with adjoining SPA One property owners and then
participate in an appropriate city application and approval
process.
- - ' . ~. ..
- -
..--- ---- ---
Mayor Shirley Horton
chula vista City Council
August 15/ 1996
Page 2
Status of the Bankr\1nt.<"'v pyoceedinas
As you may have been informed by your staff, on
Thursday July 25, 1996, the Honorable Peter Bowie, united
states Bankruptcy Judge, granted West Coast's motion for
relief from the automatic stay to foreclose on 1/034 acres
of property ("Property") owned by Tiger Development Two
("Tiger") in the middle of Tentative Map CVT 96-04 which is
on your August 20th agenda. Specifically, Judge Bowia found
that Tiger and the three engineering firms that filed the
involuntary bankruptcy on February 8/ 1996, acted in bad
faith. This rUling allows Wes~ coast to proceed with its
long-delayed foreclosure sale of the Property, which is
currently scheduled for Friday, August 16, 1996, but will
probably be continued to Friday, August 23, 1996.
Tiger appealed Judge Bowie's decision and on. two
occasions, unsuccessfully sought an emergency stay of that
decision while it pursues its appeal. Most recently, on
August 13, 1996, the Honorable Irma Gonzalez, United States
District Judge, denied Tiger's motion on the grounds that
Tiger will not likely succeed on the merits of its appeal.
(See Attachment 1) Tiger currently has an appeal pending
before the Ninth circuit in San Francisco on Judge Gonzalez'
order. It. that appeal 1s denied, it's next avenue would
presumably lie with the united States Supreme Court.
~ustification for Plannina Commission Decision
The city's own laws (the CDP and its PC zoning)
require SP~ plans and villages to be planned and developed
as a unit, under unified ownership or control. West coast
has been denied that opportunity since February 8~h of ~his
year by a bankruptcy filed in bad faith. Given this bad
faith detex~ination and the relief from the automatic stay
(which has now been upheld by two united states judges), the
city cannot. continue to insist that a unity of ownership
exists.
1'he August 2, 1996 Council Informational Memo
contains a ,~hart that illustrates the disparate treatment
that the Pr,operty is being subjected to in terms of the
distributicI of land uses. Upholding the Planning
commission'~; decision gives the City the flexibility to
. ....
.........."":.-.......
. .-- ...
"": ...
Mayor Shir~<!>y Horton
Chu~a vista City Counci~
August 15, 199-,;
Page 3
address these issues in the future. That ability will be
lost or severe~J i~paired if a tentative map on either side
of the Property is approved.
The sales and marketing plans of Otay Ranch L.P.
for SPA One will not be materially affected. In a letter
dated 3uly 23, 1996 by Jim Baldwin to Jimmy Johnson, the
chief executive I;.fficer of the Chapter 11 estates of Baldwin
Builder and Baldwin Building contractors, Mr. Baldwin states
that otay Ranch L.P. proposes to sell or transfer a total of
1,332 single family lot areas for a total purchase price in
excess of $51 million. (See Attachment 2)
West Coast believes that the Commission's action
strikes a balance that still allows otay Ranch L.P. to
complete ever $38 million of these proposed sales within its
proposed ~chedu1e (August 31 - October 31) plus develop the
core area of Village One. The decision also allows west
Coast the opportunity to complete its foreclosure sale and
discuss wil:h Village Development a reallocation of uses and
densities 10lhich could then be considered by the City. As
noted abov'., the City's procedures require the owners within
a SPA to pI'epare a unified proposal. West Coast would like
the opport\lni ty to do so.
1'hank you for your consideration in this matter.
very truly yours,
I -.
/lI1A. ~~CA..uf A- cUdIJ ~ ~ c(
MichaelS. Woodward
for PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP
MSW:cm
Enclosures
cc: John G~ss, city Manager
Robert A. Leiter, Director of Planning
Gerald J. Jamriska, special Projects Manager
Ann Mo-,re, Acting city Attorney
Ed DaiJey, colony Advisors
--
.. -- --
'? ~'):
0.&. l..t g6 ..lq=::D OS ~i' F.\J 81 ;155780.J2
l"S?C SOD I ST FU
i
C~ERIC. U.S. DISTRICT COURT !
SOUTJof!RN DI$T1IICT OF (AUFORNI..:'. I
IT O"DUTY:
lOOTED STATES DISTRICT COURT
1
~
j
4
5
FILED
AU; I 3 e:E
6
SOVTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
s
9
10
11 111 ItB
12 '1'IOp. gZ"TILOl'KDlT no, .
California Limi~ed p.~~u.r.hip,
13
De!:ltor ud
14 D~~or-~-~o.....ioD
15
waST COAST LAND F~, L.P.,
16
xovaat,
17
v.
18
TIOD DEV".lLOPJUiiI"t no, _n_.g',
19 .ay INC., KU!f.:A.XD i USOCIATI8
IU DIEGO, I1Ie., Bt1JtTOIJ
20 AS8OCl'AU8 LUD'On,
UCHU'BCTU.. I PLJ.1QJIJIG, Plaa'!'
21 UDJ:Cd '1'ITL!: IJI8~B
COMl'UT ,
22
. .aspond.llt..
23
) ca.. ~r 9'~1370-IBQ
)
) ORDD DmRIaIG 1)OToa',
) DPGUCY 110'1':[011 J'OK
) ''fAT PDt);!:.G UiB:AL U1) DDYlJiQ
) AS XOOT DBIITOR'I ZKUGDCY
) .O!!:rox ~ AIr EUGU'BJ)
) BRl'BJ'l'1IG SCJ[ZDaLB
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
24
25 BACXC30tnID
26 On july 26, 1~96. the United stat.. Bankruptcy Court for the
27 souther~ District of Calitornia granted 6acur.~ creditor Wast
28 Coast Land 1'"Und, L.P. ("WCLr-) relioa! from the automatic IOtay in
A_..~../"'rj,_
~~. - "': - -~. . .: "': --
03. 1~'9~ ~E~ 0' :7 FA~ G13~~~OOJ:
rSDC SOD! ST FU
~ ~OJ
1 the Chapt~r 11 bAnkruptcy proceeding of aebtor Tiger Development
2 Two. specifically, the court found that debtor and petitioning
3 creditors Hunsa~.r , Associates, Burton Associates Landsoapm,
4 Architecture' Planning, and Dexter S. Wilson Engineering acted in
! bad faith by improperly tiling an involuntary bankruptcy
6 prooeeding, simply to allow the debtor's managor5 to evade
7 liability on their personal guaranty of the $25,000,000 note I
I
8 executed in favor ot WCLT. Thus, by granting WCLF relief from the
, automatic stay for cause under 11 D.S.C. S 362(d)(1), the Court
10 permitted WCLl to for.close its first priority lien on 1,034.26
11 aores o~ land debtor owns in otay Ranch, San Die~o, Californi..
12 WCLF's foreclosure sale was scheduled for Monday Auqust 12, 19'5.
13 On AUgust 2, 1996, debtor fil.d a notic. of appeal frolll the
14 bankruptcy court's July 26, 1996 order, and .lQc~Qd to havQ the
15 appeal decided by the United state. Di.trict Court tor the
16 Southern District of California. On the same day, debtor filed
17 with the bankruptcy court an emerqency Illation for a .tay of
18 executiQn pending appeal pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 8005.
19 Pe~i~ionin9 creditors joined debtor'. emerqency motion. The
20 parties essentially 50ught a thirty to torty-tive day stay to
21 allow an expedited appeal of the bankruptcy court's order grantin9
22 WCLl relief from the automatic stay.
23 On AU9Ust 7, 1996, debtor's appeal was transferred to this
24 Court and assigned to the Honorable Irma E. Gonzale~. Also on
25 Auqust 1, 1996, debtor tiled with this Court a second identical
26 emergency motion tor stay pending appeal, and sought an imm_aiat.
27 haarinq before this Court. Instead, this Court issued an order
28 denying dobtor's emergency ~otion as procedurally improper und~r
-z-
-:.-.......-:-:-- ---
0-9- 14 96 I,":~D .15; ~S rAX 619SS':"SOJ:
~.SD(, saDIST I='L5
2:oo~
.
1 5ankruptcy Rule 8005. specifically, the Court instructea debtor
I
2 to renew 1ts request a!ter the bankruptcy ccu~ heard and decided I
) debtor's original emerqlncy motion.
4 The bankruptcy court hald a hearinq on debtor's fir~t
5 emerqency motion on Auqust 8, 1996. Atter reviewing the
6 voluminous record and entertainins lengthy oral argument,
7 Bankruptcy Judse Peter W. Bowie denied debtor and the petitioning I
i
S creditors the relief they requested. At the haaring, Judge Bowie'
9
explained:
I have to tell you that atter QU4 last hearing [on
WCLF's motion tor relief trom stay] I went back and
reread most o~ the stuff, in part because or the
vehemence of the argu=ents, and I have to tell you that
I'm more convinced than ever that this was a carefully
choroo9rap.~od or orchestrated bad faith tilinq...
I do not accept that as a standard tor participation in the I
~ankruptcy proc... that you can act ~.ltciou51y, that you ca~
act collusively, ana ao long as you've got a colorable claim!
of authority under the coda to do it, the ~orality of the :
act or i~orality of the act goes out the window...
10
11
...~
13
14
l'
16
11
I'm not goir:,g to qrant a 30 to 45 clay stay Pecause, among
other things, it's ~y view that ea) the debtor will not
~r.vail on the ~erit. [and] (b) qrantinq th4t kind ot stay
~s, 1n ettect, qranting the debtor the kind ot relief they
,ought when tbay cOllusively caus.d thi_ bankruptcy to be
tiled in the first place, which (was to] delay... [and)
p,stpone havi~~ to deal with the lender creditor on this
~\\tter .
18
19
20
Motiol
21
(Transc.dpt of August 8, 1996 Hearing on Debtor's Emergancy
22 tor Rellef from Stay, pp. 41,43,50-51). Judge Bowie 010,
2) howevler. issue a tamporary etay ot .even clays to allow the debtor
24 to ar~ue its second emerqoncy motion for stay ponding appeal
25 before this Court.
26
Or' A\lqust 9, 1996, this Court ordered debt Dr to advise the
I '
I
n
Court ~.'Gther by its second amarqency motion it ~ou9ht appellate
I
26 review ".'f JUdge BOwie's denia.l of a stay pending appeal, or rather
-3-
OS' 14. ge wED 08.:5 FAX 61355760J:
rSDC SC'D I ST FU
i
i
~ 005
II
.
1 an indepelrdent deterJD!nat!on pur:ouant to Rule 8005.1' Debtor
4 noti!iec1 t.ne cour~ tha~ it int'ilnQQd tllQ latter. In 4ddition,
3
dCl~tor seCl.lts an order setting al1 expedited briefing schedule and
15chadulinq a hearing on debtor's appeal en or about Auqullt 21,
4
5
199\i.
6
pUrsuant to Local ~u~. 7.1(d)(1), the Court tin4s ~oth
7
Motions suitable tor decision without oral argument.
8
,
nI8CV8'I~ !
Bankruptc1' ~ule 8005 provides that a party must first pr8senJ
I
ill motion tOl: .t.sy o! a judqment, order, or cleere. of the !
I
banJcruptcy c;:ourl: to the banJtruptc:y juc2qe, ])ut, upon denial ot the I
I
motion, may tilt< the lIIotion with the district court. Whether to
i
qrant a stay pending appeal i. left to the district court'.
I
di.c;:..tion. Yn re Arnold. eOG F.24 937, 939 (9~ ci~. 1985). [
Whi1!1 the power to maintain the status quo pend in; appeal "'should
alwa1"s be exerci..d when any irr_ediable injury uy result fr01ll !
the effect ot the decree as rendered,' ~oth federal and calitorni~
C;:O~lt hold that '. . . this power $boule! be .parin91y "~ployec! an4
I
r...rYl,d for the e)(ceptional situation.'" In r. WVTIIer, 5 B.R. 802,
804 (BU> 9th c:ir. 1980) (citations omitted).
An appellant s..king discretionary stay pendin9 appeal undel:'
Dankrupt.q RulOll 800S lIIust;
(1) ~ake a showing that it is likely to succeeo on tho
merits ot the appeal;
9
lO
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
i:i:
23
24
25
26 V ~u1e S005 is in par~ an adaptation ot Federal Rule ot App.llat
Proc.du:~e 8 (a), which allows the court ot appeals to entertain a
27 motion :or relief from stay onco the trial court has denied a
s1m1lar appllca~10n. ~ Ba~. Rul~ 800S Adv. Coma. Note;
2S Fed.R.A.'p.P. 8(a).
-4-
08 l~ ga ~ED a~ 1~ ~~X el~$5~6nJ2
rSDC SCDIST FU
<1: 006
i
.
1
(2) demonstratu that it will suffer irreparable injury it
the stay is nQt granted;
2
3
(3) prove that the issuance of the stay would not
substantially harm the other parties; and
(4) establish that a stay pending appeal yould surve the
public interact.
4
5
6 ~. (citins Schwartz v. Covinqton, ~41 Y.Zd 537, 531-39 (9~^ cir.
7 1965)).
a After raviewinq the memoranda, declaration.. deposition
9 transcripts, and uxhibit. filed in support of and in opposition t~
10 debtor'. .~ergency ~otions, and considcrinq the transcript8'fro~
11 thQ banJtruptc:y court 2:'u11no;. qranting' WCLl'" relief fro~ 'the
i
12 automatic stay and denying debtor a thirty to forty-five day stayi
I
13 pending' appeal, the Court finds tbat debtor has failed to make an!
i
14 adequate showing tha~ ~e to~ e~umerated tactors wei9h in favor i I
15 ot i&&uinq a stay pending' appeal.
16 Debtor has made .ome showinq that it .ay be irreparably
17 harmed it a stay i8 not irantea; it has arqued, ror ex~ple, that
18 the colla~.r.l p~ope~y is nece..arily unique, and ~ha~ debtor
19 will lose its opportunity to have this Court consider its appeal.'
20 Hoy.ver, the Court aqrees yith Judge Bowie's Auqust 8, 1996
21 !i~dinq that debtor has failed to daaonstrate a likelihood of
22 prevailinq on appeal. Sp~citically, after careful review of ~h.
23 submitted papers, the court finds that debtor is unlikely to
24 succeed in its challenge to the bankruptcy court'. determination
25 that the totality of the circumstance. surrounding tho involuntary
Z6 b.nkr~p~cy ri1in~ ovidoncQ bad faith and ~on5titute ca~s. for
27 relief fro~ the automatic stay, partly because that determination
28
-5-
- - - - ~ -'.. - - - -.. . . .. . - .
0:5 1~.90 wED os ~9 F~X SlO$!7&OJ2
l'SDC SOD I S1 FL5
~ 097
1 is largely aepenaent on factual findingsV subject to a
2 dererential, clearly erroneous standard or review. ~ In ~e
3 Marsch, 36 F.3d 825, 828 (9th cir. 1994); In re Sarrett, 964 '.2d
4 S8a, 591 (6th Cir. 1992); In the Matter or Little Creek
5 Develo~ment Co., 779 F.2~ 1068, 1073 (5th C1r. 1986). The Court
6
finds persuasive Ule factual findings and analysis of the
bankruptcy court in denying debtor's first eMergency motion, and
I
I
concludes that debtor will not likely succeed on the merits of it$
appeal. I
I
7
8
9
10
Accordinqly, the Cour~ herab7 D~B. debtor's ea.r~.ncr
I
motion for stay pendinq appeal. Because the need for an expedited
I
I
briefinq schedule no longer appears necessary, the Court >>"IZ'
that request AS )lOOT.
11
12
13
14
%~ %. .0 ORD~.
15
16 l).teCS:
a\l~ I J mS
IRMA E. GONZAlEZ
%JUIa Z. r:mrzAL..
1hti1:ed .tat;.. Dbtrioi: o7IIdi'.
17
18
19
20
Z1
22
23
24
25
~ When determining the 9004 faith of . debtor's filing, a court
should take into account the totali~y o~ the circumstances.
Do~.v savinas B~~ Loan Assoc. v. M.~~, 820 F.~d 1495, ~4g8 (9th
Cir. 1987). Indeea, the Ninth Circuit has specitically aqreed
that f1ndi~q a lack of 900d taith depends upon an ama19am or
racts, and that once such a r~ndinq is made, it 1. cau.. to qrant
relief from the automatic star. In re Arnold, 806 F.2d at 939.
-6-
26
27
28
~-~-
O~ lJ ~g ~~J C~ JQ ~~I 61gS5-80J~
l SQC SOD I ST FU
2:::c ~
1 Ccpi.. di.tributedJtaxed tOI
2 JEFYREY W. BRO~ER
SEAN A. O'KEEFE
3 BROXFR. O'KEEFE
4 695 KAC ARTHUR COURT. T'HELFTH FLOOR
4 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
5 CLENN D. DASSOFY
GARY P. TOAAELL
6 GWENETH A. CAKP5ELL
FAVL. HASTINGS, JANOFSKY , wALKER
7 TWENTY-THIRD FLOOR
555 soUTH FLOWER SorRE!:T
8 LOS ANGELES, CA 90071-2371
9 PAUL 3. COUCHOT
p~~ W. LIANIDES
10 DO~T GOOSS~5
WINTRHOP COUCHOT P~OfESSIONAL CORPORATION
11 3 CIVIC PLAZA, SUITE 280
NEWPO~T BEACH. CA 92660
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-7-
~ '-
. - .......... - -:. --. - - : -:_-
I
j ~D 13,lZ f,U ~O~He.jO),-
. '~_~I,.,~\"""""", ~t, 0- "-OQ ,
(
t"'<ITUJ PROCESS SERYERS ~ a2S
.u .",. ,an':' r'Ur.JKr IX..1~~U@ru \ t. "IIIID~ry;; '[/10
(
.
OTAY, RANCH, LaP.
3e8 s., M9* DrIve, SUi_ 375
NII.k1= ,J, t hId'I, CiA 92eeO
eH - f8X 644-785$
1\!IIY~. 1996
. ~nW1NBUILDERS
Alan: >>, JIm ZabnIoa
IMl1 Halo AWDJI
~CA~11"
.. F'..II"" Tr.II'!r at..+.~ bJ oea, "~t 1....
I
QiIar Mr. loalS08:
Ahbouah !be Otay Im:b, LP. b IIOt alipatary to tIIe~.~ ApeeII'.eN claUd
1~ n. 1993. by w IIIaDdI 'alctMa ...01","",,\ VtItp PropctIeI. ..... VL~ odIer'
OIIlillo... (tile .....-~ m <<ditto avoid." ~ III.u 1111& we Uve UC ~ &IIy
ooapl)' wIt!Ilhe T_ponry ...... Order ... cd by ciII..... ..pfN1 Court CIa. ~
19, 1~, ......9fCMbI)'OU wtda DCIIbIhl&Otay .~""'~. L.P. ~4tav- to Tratb'
(lit &ba& term ill ,lo..ll cd 10 tbII~) OMCI ~-,.:;. Ita on-" bf OtI1..~, U.
Pi...... u.n-t tMt ~I dce b bI!aI )o...Mcd ~ JI"i..Ltto Ir1'f rips"
OIay ~ U'., or fttl'/" *IRIy. III&)' line to ~.-. tbI"IBdIcy 0161 ~_
Ui i& ..... to t!.e or "'f odIer tr-t~...
oby 1anDA. L'. JX1If- --,ID TnaI8II' tt.e.. d.. l:b.d ba' f :"I '1 A 1if'1~~.... * lilt
IA III cub buia 9Iida ~ of T ~ws ~ T~-=..,4 ,'" 31. ItM.IDII........,
tllrouJh Oct* 31. 19M. s,whlt "4"'" .~... ......~--pDce. U WIll U aha
moM)' 10 be ~CII ~"fd lito 4IC4'W ~- &0 ftIId ~.... ~ Ud -......
dtpOSitJ wID bt MId it CKIW ~- to !hi'" b SIUIP~11I ot.....
eOI!IINCISoII filii... ud InttucNocIn De( .,. to deIYw.... t'PS*l" pea
,
,j FOIl bow, die P"" ........ of'dM Otay bleb p., bat _ I *<OP~ ad
~ 160C.. Our IeWII!I ~ IIftbrt .....ow 9' . '14 lit die ............a '" die 0I.III
VM&a Cky CouncIl fit De SPA 0. pIID _ "-... 1"'- n. SPA. 0. pLut ....... ,..-- ...
tM~ ...~ot5.15.Uftftsiedlll"{~"'w' J.-- '11Ie'I- .....",.~,rv-mep
lenlS. '751 ualtn.. ""..h AIs ~4-..d b1 tile c:kJ otOala "'*,. . 'C
~.Ioa oaJaly 10. 19S16. ftlC2Iak VlaCkyC4II'-'" ilr....~..odto.. tI_-tt:.
,....map b 8aI1 ~...... ...Aupa" 1"'- .
A 'r-r-tv' 1-4 "A !- 'k!. \' "l
..._._ _u_
. - ..-. - -: - -.. - .
I
)~ W!D 13:12 F.\I 80~g8e~OJl
(~
t-:;!TIJ> PROCESS SEJn~s
(
! BAI..DW1N' BUJ:I.DI:I.S
[Mr. amn".
IPqe Two
10tIy 1I~1V!". L.P. is ~-t 011 1M .. oflaDd fbr tIIe~.... ~11oa ora. ~.
.A-...dLlalY. it iI tM ~-.;- ctOtay~ L.P. to 0(..'1_..... * r-oo.'--" of
the 5,158 is 1IIe SPA ODIIIQ 011 a reauW' bull, wUe ,....1imnIt."CIOUdy ~~ OUt
endtJ-~ ~ atU~ u.ab iii oWr vIItqet ottlw ca, ,....." AI we t{\oOll',_"
~ft8 Iud is ddI............. QOUttt ol'~ . I . we wi! pmk!e DOC:Ic:a to BaJchria
BuiIdcn to litem IUCh DOtIce lIlY be n:quired by the SaIinIptcy Ccut.
ow. dsc arr~."'t period attboo tIIat baa IIpMd "'-inI1he ~dt.... ...0-. it lias
~ iN..... tilt die lad pt.""",,'" Ibr Ti.... ideItIecd 112 JI~ It,
t.: 1.;<':..,. total of U321ou. he coavtyed OllIS ~ bI-. Balk ot ANdel.
die ~ia& liell halderoa tbe loa, llalh...,d, &cI a IIOdoe ctAalM... OIl die
0'........, 133 MIIIWo If jllllCJ 1IOIe.. &It Dee4of'TMI. 11II flu u_. . ....t
judlo1I1 fix. ..."'...... n. blat II puradq ibjr..at;t~ ~ ICdoo
.. '~cIJ. ThII,..IW IDa ....J!JIIIN, coupkd wItb '~III clio 1I(f!lou. '-Io~...
....5 -~~~ 1'IIOOI4W ~pl..-c ....l. ottMloCI ill ViIIIII S,ab 11-- 7
to ..u ....&oca CIa _.. . .l'tc4. .n CIIIt ..
~ acoon!IIa 'tIIitk ~ 1IIt~ 0-.,11I)o ... -~. ..... nacify lit oa at Ddbn tbllIIIIh
dt)' toIIowIqr reoeIpc Otlllil aodee ItBUIwID h1d... ... ..,.... .~ 1mI...~ -<<i
I'ot"" U U-4I~" ~ A.
slhouki ya.a line IIIJ' qI.atbIJ (II' (:0.- .'\ .... d6 ftOt ....:.0. to JIve 1M . caI 01" tu
COCIIIct lob C . --oaia.. Sa a.eo ~
~,
~ OTAY IA!<<:2I. LoP"
. tdbai& LIaIIIC ,., 11"
B~=' ~JII.
I~ 6:~. -~ a..
~&-"r-' -
]iT. ~~~~i..-'.
I 0:;., ~
r. .6
I
coi n.vw ~LI TNaI
. .
. .
~~IJ~lI"
,
I
aJ Q29
I
!
~ ..!""f2....U, P,.f2!- }O~96_~.~.OU
(
.-~ .
['HIED PRCCESS <;~YERS . '2! 030
.....,.u..' ""ot&.. ,,,,,",I'1:~f ~~'Ut::;20Q"".II,Ia:r..a!ry.. (?J.IJ
IOOIIIIT A
. O~.4' ~ LOTS l'R01OUJJ TOJ 1IN<<1!I
.uu.
.
s
I
"
.~
I
:I
..~
PU:I
.. 1-1"11'&_
J
,
'..:
. Re.\Ii..se..D
~-I G,,- q (.,
ATTACHMENT 1
POLICE IJ\UIATED TOWING RATES IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
San Diego E1 Cajon Natioual Escondido Survey Cbula Vista Chula Vista
Service City Average Current Proposed
Basic Tow $72. 00 $55.00 $75.00 $75.00 $69.25 $55.00 $70.00
Mileage $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $0.00 $1.88 $2.50 $2.50
Labor $40.00 $40.00 $00.00 $40.00 $30.00 $24.00 $30.00
Storage Hour $4.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.50 $1.50 $2.50
Storage $15.00 $12.00 $12.00 $15.00 $13.50 $12.00 $15.00
MaxlDay
PM Release $28.00 no service $28.00 $35.00 $30.33 $25.00 $30.00
Heavy Tow $125.00 no servIce $125.00 $120.00 $123.33 $120.00 $125.00
A verage Cost $98.00 $79.50 $87.00 $100.00 $90.41 $71.00 $93.00
Referral Fee $17-35 no no no nla no $18.00
Incl uded in
Tow Rate
Note: Due to variance in the application of ancillary charges, it is difficult to accurately
compare one jurisdiction's rate schedule with another. Such ancillary charges interact with the
basic rate to create the tow operator's revenue stream. For example: in Chula Vista, mileage
charges accrue only after the first mile; in San Diego and National City, mileage charges accrue
after five miles; El Cajon charges for all mileage; and, in Escondido there is no charge for
mileage. Additionally, National City does not have a labor rate which skews the average labor
rate reported.
/7 (3-3
~~~
~
,,~~~
......"'"~......
CA (/ UL"11L '
ClW Of
CHUlA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
NEWS RELEASE
JeCQN.IACifu."blic Information
Coordinator, 691-5296
Juan Arroyo, Housing Coordinator
691-5722
For Immediate Release:
August 19, 1996
STATE FUNDING APPROVED FOR CHULA VISTA VETERANS HOME
State funding has been approved for the construction of a $32 million Veterans Home in Chula
Vista. Two bills appropriating the funds, one authored by Sen. Steve Peace and the other by
Assemblyman Pete Knight. were signed into law Saturday by Gov. Pete Wilson.
Chula Vista Mayor Shirley Horton praised local legislators, veterans and members of the
community who led this successful three-year effort. "Senator Peace was determined and tireless
on this issue," she said. "Coupled with the full support of Assemblymembers Denise Ducheny
and Steve Baldwin as well as local veterans groups, this regional facility has passed a major
milestone."
The Chula Vista facility will be a 400-bed, multi-care facility on a site adjacent to Sharp Chula
Vista Medical Center off Telegraph Canyon Road. This site was chosen to take advantage of its
proximity to nearby hospital facilities and to provide housing to San Diego County's population
of more than 300,000 veterans as well as the more than 400,000 veterans residing in Imperial,
Riverside and Orange counties. The project is expected to bring an additional 200 to 300 new
jobs to the area.
A two-year study by the Governor's Task Force on a Southern California Veterans Home resulted
--MORE--
276 FOURTH AVENUE' CHULA VISTA' CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 691-5031
@ .....c--~"-
2-2-2-STATE FUNDING APPROVED FOR VETERANS HOME
in a unanimous recommendation in favor of the Chula Vista location. In selecting Chula Vista,
the commission highlighted the site's proximity to acute health care facilities, and the area's wide
range of commercial, recreational and cultural services that would be available to residents of the
facility.
"This is a tremendous opportunity for our city and the veterans community --- one which
wouldn't have happened without many different forces coming together," Horton said. "Veterans
like Chula Vista's own Bill Ayers, Gus Hermes and Robert McCauley, and Dan Kreyling from
San Diego were key to this success. The Sweetwater Union High School District also played an
important role by making the proposed site available adjacent to Sharp's Chula Vista location."
The City of Chula Vista's Veterans Advisory Commission, the San Diego United Veterans
Council and the San Diego County Veterans Advisory Committee are among the groups that have
joined the city in pursuit of this veterans facility.
The $12 million state funding for the new facility represents a one-third match to federal grant
funds. Application for the $20 million federal funding has already been submitted to the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs by the State Department of Veterans Affairs. Once the federal
funds are secured, construction could begin as early as April 1997.
Currently, the state has two veterans homes -- one located in Y ountville in Northern California
and another recently built in Barstow. The Chula Vista Veterans Home will be the first located
in a coastal, urban setting.
---30---
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
axJNCIL AGENDA STA1EMENT
IDLE:
Item /~
Meeting Date 8\20\96
T> 1 . 18''''a '/r'M .. 1 P 11' Pr . 1.
.l'-eso utlon a optmg uruclpa 0 utlOn eventlOn Po ICY,
recommendations and Best Management Practices to reduce the use of
toxic materials in the City's operation as identified in this policy
SUBMIIUlJ BY: Barbara Bamberger, Environmental Resource Manag~ ~'::3. ~
/1'-
REVIEWED BY: John D. Goss, City Manager ).-',J 1 \) (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No....L)
The Environmental Health Coalition (EHC) and the City of Chula Vista worked jointly on a
multi-year Municipal Pollution Prevention project, starting in July of 1993 and ending in July
of 1995. The project was funded by a $30,000 grant to EHC from the Jesse Smith Noyes
Foundation. The goals of the project were to (a) audit the use of toxic products in city public
places and city work areas, (b) reduce the use of toxic materials used in City operations, and
(c) to create a model for other cities to follow. This report, prepared by EHC, is the
culmination of that work, and contains findings and recommendations for changes in city
practices resulting from the audit. The report is attached for Council's information and
background.
BOARD/mMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: nla
RECXJMMENDATION: Approve recommendations as follows:
1. Adopt a fonnaI Pollution Prevention Policy to institutionalize the progress already
made and provide for continuing reduction in the City's use and release of toxic
materials and adopt Best Management Prnctices developed in the pilot program and
listed in Section 2.0 on pages 8-15 of this report.
2 Develop a purchasing criteria and policy for products that contain toxic materials. The
criteria shall take into account environmental and public health criteria, and emphasize
a switch of products from those previously purchased to nontoxic or least toxic
alternatives where reasonable, and to include this criteria in consultants contracts,
requests for proposals, and landscape & maintenance contracts and bid packages.
3. Reduce the use of pesticides. specifically materials identified for phase-out and those
used by city contractors. Alternatives are available for most uses. Where alternatives
exist, staff recommend that the use of two formulations of '2,4-D' be discontinued and
the following pesticides targeted for reduction to the lowest possible level and eventual
phase-out: Dursban, Diazinon, Torus 2E, and Tempo and reduce the Oty's use of
harsh maintenance materials. where appropriate and adopt 'safer substitute'
recommendations listed on page 61-67.
/~"l
Page 2, Item
Date 8120/96.
4. Reduce gasoline utilization, where feasible, via expansion of replacement vehicles in
the fleet using altemative fuels. To date, the natural gas replacement vehicles have
reduced gasoline costs for the City.
5. Develop a trnckiJ1g form and process. as fea<>ible. so quantities and costs of materials
targeted for use-reduction or phase-out can be easily accOlmted for on an annual basis
by fiscal year.
BACKGROUND:
The Following is a synopsis of the Environmental Health Coalition's Report:
I. General Overview and Information
"Pollution prevention" can be defmed as "changes in processes or materials that reduce, avoid,
or eliminate the use of toxic or hazardous substances or generation of hazardous by-products.
It seeks to reduce the quantity and toxicity of materials going into processes, not just those
coming out as hazardous wastes." The purpose of the partnership between the City and the
Environmental Health Coalition was to improve environmental health by facilitating a shift
toward pollution prevention as a means of managing toxic and hazardous materials.
There has been much effort at the manufacturing and household levels over the past decade to
reduce the use and disposal of toxics. There are still vast numbers of small businesses,
offices, and municipalities where toxics --- in the form of pesticides, herbicides, cleaning, pest
control, building and fleet maintenance, and other operations are used on a daily basis.
Because people work and visit these places; their health and well-being may be affected by
the workplace environment. Government agencies are in a position to provide leadership for
their communities, by example and by procurement of less-toxic materials and services rrom
private business; thus pointing to the opportunity of becoming a leader in pollution
prevention.
The benefits of toxic use reduction for cities include:
. A safer, healthier work environment for employees and the visiting public;
. Improved indoor air quality for staff and public;
. More economical cleaning and pest control;
. A contribution towards improved environmental quality;
. Reduced regulatory burden;
. Encouraging the growth of businesses which provide least toxic pest control, cleaning
services, and products.
II. ERC and ERC Contract
It.. ,2.,
Page 3, Item
Date 8/20/96.
ERC is a San Diego-based non-profit environmental education and advocacy group, founded
in 1980. The Coalition is dedicated to the prevention and cleanup of toxic pollution that
threatens human health and the environment. In 1993, ERC obtained grant fimding to
conduct an audit and develop a pollution prevention policy on behalf of a municipality. The
City contracted with ERC to accomplish the following scope of work:
1. An audit of toxic materials currently used for City operations;
2. A pilot project to implement less toxic pest control and cleaning methods at
one City facility on a trial basis;
3. Development of Best Management Practices for City operations for which
alternative products or processes could be identified.
(A) Audit
1. Program Process
The City and ERC conducted an extensive audit to determine which materials are
being used. This was done through a series of interviews with departmental
supervisors and by examination of information provided by the Purchasing Division to
verifY amounts and costs of materials purchased in one year. In most cases, the data
was clearly available. Where records were not available, the cost and quantity is
based on departmental estimates. A database was created which can be made
available should Council wish to review it.
2. Staff Resources
The following departments participated in the process: Environmental Resources
Management, Public Works; Parks and Recreation, Purchasing, Risk Management,
Fire. Central Stores.
(B) Pilot Project
An 8-week pilot project was conducted at the Parkway Complex to evaluate pest
control and cleaning methods and products. It was anticipated that alternatives which
proved to be workable and acceptable to staff during the pilot project could be
implemented on a citywide basis. Parkway Memorial Recreation Center was the site
used for the pilot project. Building pest control, landscape pest control. and cleaning
staff met with ERC staff and discuss the alternatives to be tried. Each of the three
groups kept ongoing records with weeldy notations on what worked and what didn't.
Information and results were communicated between supervisor and line staff to get
input and suggestions.
/J-J
Page 4, Item
Date 8/20/96.
(C) Best Management Practices
Phase III of the Municipal Pollution Prevention Program (MPPP) consisted of
development of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for City operations. BMPs are
defmed as any program, process, technology, or operating method that prevents or
reduces pollution. BMPs is a tenn used frequently in clean water laws and
regulations. The EP A defmes BMPs as follows:
"Schedules of activities, pmhibitions of practices. maintenance pmcedures. and other
management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of 'waters of the United
States. ' BMPs also include treatment requirements. operoting pmcedures, and pmctices
to contJVl plant site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, or drainage
fmm raw material storage. ,,]
BMPs developed for the City's MPPP incorporates results from the Pilot Project.
These BMPs are listed from pages 13-22 in the report.
Additional BMPs have been developed by the Engineering Department to fulfill the
City's obligations for the Stonnwater Pennit program as required by the Clean Water
Act. These MPPPs are not part of that Permit process but complement and enhance the
work being done by the Engineering Department.
Technical Ovetsight Boanl: A Technical Advisory Board was developed to oversee
the project and provide comments on the fmdings and recommendations. 1his
technical committee included: Dr. Ruth Heifetz of the UCSD School of Medicine: Dr.
Ann dePeyster of SDSU's Graduate School of Public Health; Linda Pratt, Pollution
Prevention Specialist with the County of San Diego's Environmental Health Services,
and Ray Palmer, Integrated Pest Management specialist with the San Diego Unified
School District. The participation of all these individuals was valuable throughout the
MPPP and have been incorporated into the recommendations..
I Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Part I of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit Applications for Discharges from Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems, EPA, April, 1991.
EPA-505/8-91-003A.
/~ ,. 'I
Page 5, Item
Date 8/20/96.
DISQJSSIOl'I
A) Audit FIndings:
1. "Toxic material" is defined throughout this document as any material for which
a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) is required by Federal Occupational
Safety and Health Administration Worker Hazard CommlU1ication Regulation
and CalOSHA, General Industry Safety Orders, section 5194, Title 8 of the
California Administrative Code. Therefore, the City has developed a Hazard
CommlU1ication Program which:
"requires the collection and maintenance of MSDS sheets. Copies of
MSDS for all hnzardous substances to which City employees may be
exposed will be maintained in the Risk Management Division. MSDS
are to be made available for review by all employees in their work area
dwing eoch work shift. "
The individual worksites have been keeping MSDS sheets for their operations.
City-wide coordination is on the Risk Manager's list of items to address.
2. The annual total of toxic materials used in the City is approximately 2.2
million pOlU1ds. The largest portion of this comes fTom gasoline used for the
City's vehicle fleet. The annual cost of these materials is approximately
$357,000.
3. 24 different types of pesticide applications were identified, with an annual total
of 15,700 polU1ds at an approximate cost of $9,331 annually. Of this amolU1t,
over 14,000 pOlU1ds is used by Public Works contractors for structural and
landscape/parks pest control. The highest priority for phase-out of all
pesticides is an herbicide which is used in two fommlations (Trimec and
Weed-B-Gone) at Marina Park. These two pesticides amolU1t to only 13
gallons annually at a cost of $285 per year.
Trimec and 'Weed-Be-Gone' contain 2,4-D, which is listed on the State of
California Department ofIndustrial Relations (CAUOSHA) Hazardous
Substances list because of its toxicity. Other pesticides accolU1t for
approximately 13,400 pOlU1ds. These include: Dursban, Diazinon, Torus 2E,
and Tempo and are used by the Park and Recreation Department and its
contractor, Fire Departments Station #2 and #6. Total cost spent annually for
these are $341. Substitution of alternatives will be tested for these chemicals
and replaced, where possible.
It -:5'
Page 6, Item
Date 8/20/96.
4. Other chemicals beside pesticides are solvents and corrosives. The City uses
solvents in Public Works and during Print Shop operations. City staff is
recommending substitution for these items (see BMP list).
5. The City has already made, or is in the process of making, substantial
reductions in the use of toxic materials. The most significant include: use of
cWorine gas and muriatic acid has been substantially reduced at city swimming
pools. Virtually all building paints and coatings are now water-based. Traffic
paints no longer contain lead pigments. A simple vinegar/water solution is
used to clean the gym floors.
6. Gasoline, dispensed each year to City vehicles trom the fuel tank at the City
Operations Yard accounts for almost 1.2 million pounds of the total materials
consumed by the City. Gasoline containing benzene is listed by the State of
California as a carcinogen and is also considered a respiratory hazard. Most, if
not all gasoline contains benzene. However, there is very little that can be
done, other than fuel-switching, to reduce the city's overall need for gasoline.
7. Storage of materials was examined in relation to the amounts used. With a few
exceptions, it appears that amounts stored are not excessive.
8. Difficulties in identifYing materials for the inventory data points to the need to
better track the use of materials identified as high priorities for phase out and
for the city to gain confidence in its inventory changes.
B) Pilot Findings:
I. Cleaning staff, under the direction of Barry Edwards, Supervising Custodian in
the Public Works Dept., tested cleaning alternatives for most major cleaning
applications. They were satisfied with results on most alternatives except the
floor cleaner. Additional training on use of new products is required by
CalOSHA and should be more aggressively pursued.
2. Successful pest control alternatives were found for fungicides and herbicides
used in landscape pest control by Parks and Recreation staff. These alternatives
were found to be successful. Other suggested alternatives were not tried
because no pest problems arose during the pilot test period.
3. Structural pest control (i.e., ants, cockroaches, and fleas in and around
buildings) is perfonned by an outside contractor. The current contractor
already works in an Integrated Pest Management mode. His weekly service
II" "
Page 7, Item
Date 8/20/96.
consists of monitoring for pest problems, recommending additional sanitation
measures when needed, and providing occasional spot treatments with least-
toxic pesticides. EHC made several recommendations for additional pest control
alternatives, which the contractor accepted.
q Best Management Practice Findings
Specific BMP's were developed in the pilot program. Staff worked with the consultant
to identifY appropriate BMPs and provide Council with the results, including costs, of
those used during the pilot program and those recommended to test in the future.
Each of the BMPs are listed in detail in the attached report found on pages 8-15.
These BMPs are recommended for Council adoption.
D) Other Facton; which mll'Jt be Addressed to Successfully Implement the
Recommendations:
Staff have evaluated and acknowledge the following obstacles to implementation that
must be addressed and overcome in switching to 'least toxic' alternatives. These
include:
. Difficulties in procurement - municipalities typically purchase garden and
cleaning supplies ITom one supplier who can provide the materials in large
quantities. Some alternative cleaning and pest control products are not carried
by janitorial supply outlets; they may have to be obtained separately.
. Product labels and other materials are mostly written in English, not necessarily
the first language of those who will be using them. It is recommended that
measures be taken to assure an understanding of the use of new product
instructions and infonnation, and to provide where possible, translation into the
appropriate languages. This will facilitate use as well as communicate product
risk and safety to the workforce.
. Additional training - least toxic pest control requires knowledge of Integrated
Pest Management (IPM) which prescribes evaluation of mechanical and
biological controls and nontoxic chemicals before using a toxic material. Also
required is some knowledge of the pest. Some IPM training for landscape and
park maintenance will result in a smoother transition to better alternatives, and
will provide staff with a greater understanding of integrated pest management
and its relationship to the public's health and well being. The County's
Environmental Health Services has planned some training sessions for IPM in
1996-97.
/~,?
Page 8, Item
Date 8/20/96.
· Govemment specifications - in certain cases, government agencies working
with the City have prescribed products to be used, particularly in cases where
the City maintains parkland owned by the Port District. For example, the Port
District requires the City to use a particular pesticide at Marina Park for which
a less toxic alternative is available. In the absence of specifications that
contain environmental/heaIth criteria, price considerations may be the primary
determinant. The least expensive product will be purchased rather than the
most environmentally benign product.
· Contracted work - In situations where the City contracts pest control and/or
cleaning services, the contractors must be trained in integrated pest
management and the contract conditions specified by the Contract Manager
and/or Purchasing Division as appropriate, in conjunction with the
Environmental Resource Manager.
None of these problems are insurmountable. The key to successfully adapting new
products and routines is the involvement and support of all the staff. "Making the
switch" is a team effort that requires enough flexibility to allow for some
experimentation.
E) Pollution Prevention Policy
Staff is recommending implementation of a Pollution Prevention Policy resulting ftom
the three year effort. A Pollution Prevention Policy will result in reducing the toxicity
and vollU11e of materials used to the greatest extent possible, and will incorporate a
mechanism to ensure continuous improvement in its pollution prevention practices.
The goal of such a policy is to ensure that the City is using the best available options
for pollution prevention throughout the City and to promote awareness and support for
pollution prevention among employees, the public, and the business community.
The Pollution Prevention Policy will ensure that City operations and maintenance
activities will be structured so that the need for toxics is reduced or eliminated.
Strategies for pollution prevention include choice of materials and design; preventive
maintenance; operating procedures; and product substitution. It will ensure a process
that dictates when a toxic material is needed, the amount used is the least possible;
and a protocol will be developed that includes training, doclU11entation and monitoring.
It will also ensure an improved process for providing access to information for the
public. The policy will continue to evolve through ongoing review and update as new
information becomes available and better techniques and products are developed.
Every effort will be made to adopt practices that do not increase the operating costs of
the City. Pollution prevention is a long term investment and cost savings are intended
/I.r
Page 9, Item
Date 8/20/96
to be realized over the long run. The Pollution Prevention Policy is specified on
Appendix A.
FISCAL IMPACf:
There are two categories of costs incurred by the use of toxic materials:
1. The cost of the material itself, which in many cases is higher than the cost of non-
toxic alternatives
2. The cost of managing toxics, including environmental regulatory fees, hazardous waste
disposal costs, and time spent complying with hazard communication, reporting
requirements, and training.
It is important to consider these factors, so that the true costs of using a product can be
incorporated into purchasing decisions. Therefore, an immediate goal is to develop
specifications for toxicity criteria and purchasing products.
Direct Cost Savings
Cost savings result when particular uses of toxics are simply eliminated, for example, the use
of "air freshening" urinal blocks which contain the carcinogen para-dichlorobenzene.
Elimination of 2,4-D herbicides and recommended priority pesticides would provide a simple
cost savings totaling $626 annually. Other savings will come from replacement of more
extensively used materials, such as Round-Up, which costs the City $7,835 annually. There
is currently no alternative for Round-Up, but this policy will implement a process for seeking
out alternatives as they become available. An alternative for 2,4-D is a decision that clover
growing on lawns in City parks is acceptable. Similarly, implementation of integrated pest
management for structural pest control can provide significant savings in materials costs.
Typical pest control spray services cost up to several hundred dollars per year, depending on
the size of the buildings and frequency of spraying. This cost minus the cost of relatively
inexpensive alternative pest control products represents the potential cost savings available
from a switch to less toxic pest control.
Use of generic vinegar, ammonia, and soap or detergent in cleaning formulations can offer
great savings over commercial cleaners that use these same ingredients as the active materials.
In a sample cost comparison, one gallon ofVons white vinegar, enough to make two gallons
of window cleaner, cost $2.18. In contrast, two gallons ofVons Window Cleaner cost $9.22.
Improvements in operations and maintenance, and better housekeeping, also result in cost
savings. An example is good inventory control, so that products do not get too old and have
/t"
Page 10, Item
Date 8/20/96.
to be thrown out. Keeping the lids on volatile liquids, such as parts cleaning solvents and
paints, reduces losses due to evaporation. Purchase of good mechanical weeding equipment
such as weed whackers reduces the costs of both labor and herbicides used to control weeds.
Also, if alternative materials are used, the City could capitalize on a reduction of paperwork,
since the use of toxic materials is accompanied with a regulatory reporting process, whereby
most materials are tracked, recorded, and catalogued for the State of California and the
federal government.
No Net OJanges
In other situations, a product substitution results in a safer product with neither a cost savings
or loss. An example is the proposed alternate blanket wash solvent for the print shop, to
replace the currently used solvent that contains percWorethylene, a carcinogen. When dealing
with listed carcinogens, there is no set level to detennine what is dangerous and what is not.
Trace amounts accumulate over time in the human body; thus it is impossible to determine an
appropriate use.
Cost Increa<>es
Initial investments and increases in labor can result in increased costs, at least for the fIrst
years of a pollution prevention policy. The cost of chlorine bleach for disinfection of
swimming pools, for example, is greater than the cost of cWorine gas, used previously,
because more is needed. In the San Diego UnifIed School District, the results of using IPM
instead of conventional pest control have been mixed.
/J.".- /~
Page 11, Item
Date 8/20/96.
Indirect Costs
In addition to the direct cost of continued hazardous substances use due to product expense or
labor, there is also a category of indirect costs which should be taken into account when
considering product purchase or use. These indirect costs include such items as overall
worker health and productivity. Further, while no specific data exists, there are potential
impacts on potential lost productivity, the general citizenry, as well who use or frequent
various public facilities.
Attachments:
~ Appendix A - Policy
f Appendix B - Basis for Detennining What is Toxic
Appendix C - Sample Pollution Prevention Staff Task Force
U Appendix D - Sample Pollution Prevention Plans
rn Appendix E - Toxics By Type of Material
S Appendix F - Toxics Audit, By City Department
z: Appendix G - Toxics Report and appendices
I~"'//
-'.
.
RESOLUTION NO.
14'9/~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING MUNICIPAL POLLUTION
PREVENTION POLICY, RECOMMENDATIONS AND BEST
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES TO REDUCE THE USE OF
TOXIC MATERIALS IN THE CITY OPERATIONS
WHEREAS, the City entered into a contract with the
En.vironmental Health Coalition (EHC) to initiate a multi-year
Municipal Pollution Prevention project, starting in July of 1993
and ending in July of 1995; and
WHEREAS, the project was designed by EHC as a model
program for other public agencies to utilize to help reduce the use
of toxic materials; and
WHEREAS, the EHC has prepared a report which was used by
the city for informational purposes only to prepare the Pollution
Prevention Policies and Best Management Practices; and
WHEREAS, the project was funded by a $30,000 grant to EHC
from the Jesse smith Noyes Foundation; and
WHEREAS, the goals of the project were to:
(a) audit the use of toxic products in city public
places and city work areas.
(b) reduce the use of toxic materials used in City
operations, and
(c) create a model for other cities to follow.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby adopt the Pollution Prevention
Policy attached hereto as Appendix A, and the Best Management
Practices as identified in this Policy.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby
adopt the following recommendations:
1. Develop a purchasing criteria and policy for products
that contain toxic materials. The criteria shall take into account
environmental and public health criteria, and emphasize a switch of
products from those previously purchased to nontoxic or least toxic
alternatives where reasonable, and to include this criteria in
consultants contracts, requests for proposals, and landscape and
maintenance contracts and bid packages.
1
It ' 1..2
2. Reduce
specifically materials
City contractors.
the use of pesticides, as feasible,
identified for phase-out and those used by
3. Reduce gasoline utilization, where feasible, via
expansion of replacement vehicles in the fleet using alternative
fuels.
4. Develop a tracking form and process, as feasible, so
quantities and costs of materials targeted for use-reduction or
phase-out can be easily accounted for on an annual basis by fiscal
year.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
~ y yL{.A'r\~
Ann Y. Moore, Acting
City Attorney
Barbara Bamberger, Environmental
Resource Manager
C:\rs\polution.pol
2
/~, J J
APPENDIX A
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT: POLLUTION PREVENTION POLICY POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
1
ADOPTED BY: Resolution No.
I DATED:
POLLUTION PREVENTION POLICY
The City of Chula Vista uses in its operations potentially hazardous and toxic materials in the
course of providing operations and maintenance of city owned facilities. These materials pose
potential hazards to city employees and members of the public, and constitute toxic pollution
when released to the environment. These materials generate costs associated with purchase,
regulatory compliance and disposal.
Local governments have the opportunity and obligation to act as regional leaders in pollution
prevention, by procurement of least-toxic materials, and by educating the public regarding its
efforts to reduce the use of toxics.
Accordingly, the policy of the City of Chula Vista is to prevent pollution resulting from its
activities whenever possible. The City will accomplish this by reducing the toxicity and volume
of hazardous materials used to the greatest extent possible, and will incorporate a mechanism to
ensure continuous improvement in its pollution prevention practices.
GOAL STATEMENT
1. Ensure that the City is using the best available options for pollution prevention
throughout City.
2. Promote awareness and support for pollution prevention among employees, the public,
and the business community.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
City operations and maintenance activities will be structured so that the need for toxics is
reduced or eliminated. Strategies for pollution prevention include choice of materials and
design; preventive maintenance; operating procedures; and product substitution.
When a toxic material is needed, the amount used shall be the least possible. The material will
be used in a protocol that includes training, establishes documentation, and monitoring. The
protocol will be established by staff upon approval of the policy.
\ 10 - 11..\-
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT: POllUTION PREVENTION POLICY
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
2
.
ADOPTED BY: Resolution No.
I DATED:
The public will have access to information about hazardous materials used by the City as
required by state law.
The public will have access to information about pollution prevention. In certain cases, public
education itself may be the Best Management Practice.
The policy will continue to evolve through ongoing review and update as new information
becomes available and better techniques are products are developed.
IMPLEMENTATION
1. The City shall implement the Polution Prevention Policy. Pollution Prevention Plans
shall be developed for each major department dealing with hazardous and toxic
substances. The Plans shall include:
A. A timeline for implementation of plans shall be developed and
incorporated into the pollution prevention plans. "Timelines shall
result in implementation of product substitutions, minor building
improvements such as caulking, and other measures that do not
require major capital expenditures, within three years.
B. Incentives and recognition for employees who advance the
implementation of pollution prevention by identifying substantially
new approaches, techniques, or products to reduce use of toxies.
2. Development of toxics audit tracking form and procedures, to be used with toxic
materials that remain in use, so that the amounts and costs of using the materials can be
quantified on a yearly basis.
3. Pollution prevention measures shall be tracked to determine costs and savings, and
corresponding reductions in use of toxic materials.
I b- IS-
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT: POLLUTION PREVENTION POLICY POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
3
ADOPTED BY:
I DATED:
4. Identification of pending state and federal legislation that may help or hinder cities to
conduct pollution prevention, and recommendations to the Council regarding support,
opposition, amendment of such bills.
5 A report shall be prepared and presented to the Council each January regarding progress in
implementation of the policy, and recommendations for amendments, if any, to the policy.
6. Development of a pollution prevention staff task force which will implement Council
recommendations, and shall be established to track and analyze on an ongoing basis, the
implementation of this policy. This task force shall act as a resource to staff and Council
on issues related to the use of potentially hazardous or toxic substances. The City
Managers office shall take the lead in establishing this task force.
7. Adoption of the Best Management Practices (BMP), as listed in Exhibit A.
8. Develop a purchasing criteria and policy for products that contain toxic materials. Criteria
shall take into account environmental and public health criteria and emphasize a switch of
products from those previously purchased to nontoxic or least-toxic alternatives where
reasonable, and to include this criteria in consultants contracts, requests for proposal, and
landscape and maintenance contracts and bid packages.
16-1 (0
"
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT: Pollution Prevention Policy Attachments POLICY EFFECTIVE
NUMBER DATE PAGE
08-20-96 10f9
ADOPTED BY: I DATED:
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE CBMP) RECOMMENDATIONS:
The EP A defines BMPs as follows:
"Schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other
management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of waters of the United States. '
BMPs also include treatment requirements, operating procedures, and practices to control
plant site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, or drainage from raw material
storage. ,,}
Print Shop
The City print shop is a small offset printer which does a high volume of work. Staff recommends an
evaluation be made to examine the possibility of venting solvents outdoors. Current practice is to
leave the door of the print shop open. Direct ventilation may increase the protection of personnel in
the building working in close proximity to these solvents.
I. Current UselIssue: Blankrola solvent
Staff has been evaluating a substitute for Blankrola, which contains perchloroethylene. This
chemical is listed on the Director's List as a carcinogen.
BMP: Continue evaluating new products to replace Blankrola. Also consider
substituting a citrus-based blanket wash product.
I. Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Part I of the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Applications for Discharges from Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer Systems, EPA, April, 1991. EPA-505/8-91-003A.
J6- Il
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT: Pollution Prevention Policy Attachments
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
20f9
ADOPTED BY:
08-20-96
I DATED:
Associated Costs: The city currently uses Blankrola at a cost of $46 per gallon. Helion
produces a low volatile organic compound (VOC) product called Safe Solve 240-A. This solvent
is currently used by the City of Santa Monica. It utilizes a water rinse and wipe off blade. To
compare the two, instead of using a pint ofBlankrola, approximately $6.00 worth, one would use
a smaller quantity (i.e: 1-2 ounces) of Safe Solve 240-A at an approximate cost of$14-$16 per
ounce. Another alternative is Nature Wash at $42 per gallon.
2. Current UselIssue: Inks
The City currently uses conventional hydrocarbon-based inks in the print shop. Soy-based inks
are available and the cost is currently $31.55 for a 5# can which equates to $6.31 per pound.
The City of Santa Monica print shop found that 100% soy-based ink did not work well; they now
use a partially soy-based product.
BMP: IdentifY a soy-based ink that will work appropriately with the city's printing needs.
Vanson provides a 30-50% vegetable oil- based ink (at least 20% coming from soy oil) at a cost
of$8.00 per pound.
Associated Costs: Last year the city used 100 pounds of hydrocarbon-based ink at a total cost
of $574.20. Soy-based/vegetable oil-based inks could be purchased for $800 or less for the same
amount. Switching to a less toxic ink would cost the city an additional $225.80 per year.
3. Current UselIssue: Paper
The shop currently uses recycled paper for about 90% of its work.
BMP:
continue.
4. Current UselIssue: Increased ventilation in the Print Shop.
The City hire an industrial hygienist to evaluate the print shop to determine control methods for
solvent vapors.
BMP:
Follow recommendations of industrial hygienist
\6-1~
.
COUNCIL POUCY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT:
Pollution Prevention Policy Attachments
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
30f9
ADOPTED BY:
08-20-96
I DATED:
Public Works: Equipment Maintenance
I. Current Use/Issue: Gasoline powered vehicles
The City is currently test-driving two electric vehicles. A number of /rucks have been converted
to compressed natural gas (CNG). The City is also involved in a national program to evaluate
alternative fuels and a groundbreaking demonstration of fuel cell technology for transit buses.
BMP:
Continue evaluating alternatives to gasoline or diesel fueled vehicles.
2.
Current Issue:
Motor Oil:
The City uses 4,000 gallons of oil a year.
BMP:
Evaluate switch to re-refined motor oil.
3.
Current Issue:
Use of antifreeze:
The city currently uses 100 gallons of antifreeze per year. There are two issues regarding the
use of antifreeze that have been addressed in this report. The first has to do with properly
disposing the waste to reduce its environmental impact, and the second is its potentially harmful
effect on wildlife.
Used antifreeze may contain high concentrations of copper, lead and zinc due to the antifreeze
sitting in the vehicle radiator. The City currently disposes of the antifreeze in the sewer system.
Recycling is the recommended approach. Recycling used antifreeze can easily be done.
Additionally, the city can begin to purchase a less toxic antifreeze compound on the market which
contains propylene glycol instead of ethylene glycol. Ethylene Glycol, is toxic to animals if
ingested, pursuant to section 6626.24(a)(8), Title 22. 22CCR. Antifreeze attracts birds and
animals because of its sweet taste. The California Condor recovery program was stifled by
condors drinking antifreeze and dying. One alternative brand was located: Sierra Antifreeze,
manufactured by Sajebrands Corp. This brand is considered five to ten times safer than typical
antifreeze. This type of antifreeze is also accepted by Safety-Kleen for recycling. The annual
cost difference between the two products is an additional $289.00.
I"=-- Iq
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT: Pollution Prevention Policy Attachments
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
40f9
ADOPTED BY:
08-20-96
I DATED:
BMP:
Conduct a pilot test of Sierra Antifreeze in City vehicles.
Associated Costs: The City currently purchases 100 gallons of antifreeze per year at a cost of
$3.77 per gallon. Sierra antitTeeze, the recommended alternative is $6.66 per gallon. The cost
of switching to the less toxic alternative an additional $289 annually.
BMP:
recycling.
Set aside a place in the garage for 3D-gallon containers of used antitTeeze for
4. Current UselIssue: Auto Paints
The City cu"ently buys mlto parts pre-paillfed, so that painting does not have to be done on site.
BMP:
Continue.
5. Current UselIssue: Parts Cleaner:
A Safety-Kleen unit is present in the garage for cleaning parts using petroleum hydrocarbon
solvent. This type of unit is beneficial because used solwnt is collected by the company, thus
reducing exposure to city workers, and the solvent is recycled and reused.
BMP: Continue to use solvent only for final cleaning of parts; cover tank when not in use
to prevent evaporation; allow parts to drain completely to reduce spilling.
6. Current UselIssue: Diesel exhaust:
It is sometimes necessary to have engines rulming in the garage, which adjoins a building where
other City operations take place. As in item 4 above, staff recommends hiring an industrial
hygienist to evaluate ventilation needs in the garage related to diesel exhaust.
BMP:
Evaluate recommendations of the industrial hygienist.
Cleaning Products
Cleaning products are used regularly by the Custodial Division of the Public Works Operations
division and by the Parks and Recreation Department. The Custodial Division performs all regular
cleaning of City Administration buildings, libraries, and the parks and recreation centers. Staff at
the Recreation centers also clean the facilities during evening hours and weekends, when the
I b - J....O
COUNCIL POUCY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT:
Pollution Prevention Policy Attachments
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
50f9
.
ADOPTED BY:
08-20-96
I DATED:
facilities are open to the public but the Custodial staff are off duty. In addition to the BMPs, one
other recommendation derives ITom staff input to the process:
Cleaning protocols become standardized to assure both Custodial and Recreation staff are using
the same products and procedures. Training materials be established for staff working in the
recreation centers, including part-time evening and weekend staff, in order to receive adequate
information about cleaning techniques and their potential hazards if not used properly.
.
BMPs:
1. Current UselIssue:
Concrete Floors
Several related cleaning problems appear to come from the rough, unsealed concrete floors in
the showers and outdoor restrooms. State law regarding public restrooms, toilet, and dressing
facilities requires:
.
For shower, toilet, and dressing facilities, the walls, partitions, doors, lockers, and similar
surfaces which require periodic cleaning shall be maintained smooth and finished so as to
facilitate cleaning. (CCR, Title 22, Section 65551)
The indoor showers and reslrooms are scheduledfor remodeling which will include re-grouting
and sealing. The outdoor restrooms should at least have the sealer applied to reduce the
frequency and increase the effectiveness of disinfectant cleaners used.
BMP: To apply a sealer to prevent seepage of organic matter in porous surfaces that
cannot be thoroughly cleaned.
2. Current UselIssue: Cleaning Services
In the past, a night cleaning crew from the Custodial Division cleaned the facilities, so that by
the morning they were clean and dry. Dry surfaces are not conducive to bacterial/fungal growth
and odor. Resumption of this cleaning ~hift would provide more effective cleaning and allow the
use of less-toxic cleaning products for routine cleaning.
BMP: Consider adjusting cleaning schedule to allow adequate time for drying facilities
through night cleaning.
tb--'L \
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT: Pollution Prevention Policy Attachments
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
60f9
ADOPTED BY:
08-20-96
I DATED:
3. Current UselIssue:
General Cleaning Problems
There is a variety of products that the city's janitorial service comes in contact with. These
include ink on desks and tables, cleaning in the recreation centers and libraries. Staff currently
uses Super-800. a glycol ether containing a product considered irritating and strong smelling
by workers.
BMP: Replace Super 800 with trisodium phosphate cleaner, either generic tsp or brand
same which also contains sodium sesquicarbonate. Gloves are required with either alternative
product. For indoor walls, doors and countertops, replace Super 800 with Naturally Yours AlI-
Purpose Cleaner or similar citrus-based cleaner. Naturally Yours is a line of cleaning products
made from citrus-derived solvents.
BMP: Metal polish. Previously used: Brite Boy Metal Polish, contains oxalic acid and
ammonia. Recommended substitute: a moderately abrasive cleaner without acid or ammonia, such
as Kleen King Stainless Steel and Copper Cleaner, which contains abrasive minerals and a
nonionic surfactant.
BMP: Graffiti remover. Previously used: solvent-based graffiti removers. Suggested
replacement: So Safe or other citrus-based graffiti remover.
BMP: Air freshener for showers and restrooms. Previously used: Bubble Gum Air
Freshener, disinfectants. Suggested instead: seal porous concrete surfaces, as noted above; add
an additional cleaning shift per day, as suggested above; substitute Earth Care products mineral
deodorizer, a zeolite-based deodorizer, or other mineral deodorizer which acts as a filter and does
not release anything into indoor air.
BMP: Glass cleaner. Previously used: sudsy ammonia solution. Suggested replacement:
vinegar and water solution or commercial citrus-based glass cleaner such as Naturally Yours Glass
and Window Cleaner.
BMP: Tile cleaner for removal of soap and water spots. Previously used: Cling On, a
phosphoric acid containing product. Suggested substitute: Naturally Yours Basin/Tubrrile cleaner
or similar citric acid-based product.
\ 6 - 2.."2--
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT: Pollution Prevention Policy Attachments
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
70f9
ADOPTED BY:
08-20-96
I DATED:
BMP: Water Conditioning Unit: An additional step which would reduce water and soap
spots and reduce the need for cleaning to remove them, is installation of a water conditioning unit
to the water line coming into the building. A water conditioner, as opposed to a water softener,
does not add or remove minerals from water; it consists of a semi-precious metal alloy which
changes the electrical properties of mineral ions so that they do not precipitate out. It also has
potentially great benefits for reducing the amount of cleaning and chlorine needed for the
swimming pools. Staff is recommending evaJuation of a system, for a trial period, on a water line
which supplies water to a swimming pool and adjacent building.
BMP: Tile cleaner, disinfectant. Previously used: A-500; contains quaternary ammonium
chlorides. Suggested replacement: Naturally Yours Basinffub/Tile cleaner or similar citric acid-
based product. Citric acid is not considered a disinfectant although it may have weak disinfecting
action. However, this cleaner has been used successfully in the City of Santa Monica to clean aJl
public restrooms and showers, including outdoor facilities used by Santa Monica's large homeless
population. According to staff, both custodial workers and the public are pleased with the level
of sanitation and the smell of the facilities.
BMP: Spot cleaning of body fluids. Previously used: chlorine bleach (5.25% sodium
hypochlorite) for fast, effective cleanup and disinfection of spills of potentially pathogenic organic
materiaJs such as blood and human wastes. We do not recommend any change in this procedure,
in accordance with City policy on prevention of blood-borne pathogens and general worker safety
considerations.
BMP: Toilet Bowl Cleaner. Previously used: Pine Odor Disinfectant, containing
quaternary ammonium chlorides and pine oil, for basic sanitation, and a hydrochloric acid-based
cleaner for removaJ of hard water deposits. Suggested replacement: Naturally Yours Toilet Bowl
Cleaner, or other citric acid based cleaner. The cleaner may need to be left on longer or used
more frequently to remove hard water deposits.
BMP: Drain cleaner. Currently used: an enzyme based product which digests organic
matter that may block drains ifallowed to accumulate. Suggested alternative: Continue current
practice. This is the safest type of product available for prevention and clearing of blocked drains.
BMP: Cleaner for gymnasium floors. Currently used: a vinegar/water solution. Suggested
cleaner: continue current practice.
II
/6-'23
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT: Pollution Prevention Policy Attachments
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
80f9
ADOPTED BY:
08-20-96
I DATED:
Swimming Pool Chemicals
The Recreation Division of Parks and Recreation has responsibility for maintaining the City's two
swimming pools, at the Parkway Memorial Recreation Center and at Lorna Verde.
Current UselIssue:
Pool Chemicals
Several major changes have already been made to use safer substitutes that will effectively disinfect and
maintain pH balance ill the pools:
. Chlorille gas: replaced with chlorine bleach.
. Muriatic acid: replaced with CO2 at one pool so far, with plalls to introduce it at the other
pool as well.
BMP: Test feasible aJternatives for chlorine-based disinfection available for public pools
and compatible with health codes.
Pesticides
1. Current UselIssue:
Phase out priority pesticides for use in landscape and recreational areas.
Of the pesticides used by and for the City of Chula Vista, 01l1y Drione is considered low enough ill risk
that the BMP is to continue using it indefinitely. For all the remaining pesticides the goal should be to
ultimately phase them out. Five pesticides that are high priority for phaseout are:
. 2,4-Dichlorophelloryacetic (2,4-D) acid -found in Trimec and Weed-B-Golle
. Diazilloll
. Dursball
. Tempo
. Torus 2E
BMP: Products that contain 2,4-0 be phased out. Other listed pesticides should have the
highest priority for implementation of alternatives to reduce or eliminate their use.
\ '.:, - '1...4
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJE<::T: Pollution Prevention Policy Attachment
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
PAGE
90f9
ADOPTED BY:
08-20-96
I DATED:
BMP: An Integrated Pest Management (IPM) training program be implemented to
provide permanent, least-toxic pest control for the City. The IPM program is proposed to consist
of the following elements:
1. Identification of all potential pests
2. Establishment of monitoring guidelines for each pest
3. Establishment of injury levels and action thresholds for each pest species before doing any
treatment
4. Creation of a recordkeeping system
5. Development of a list of acceptable management strategies for each pest. The existing list
of BMPs for pest control may be used as a reference in developing this list.
6. Development of specific criteria for selection of pest management methods.
7. Development of guidelines to be followed each time a pesticide is used.
8. Development of a list of resources
9. Establishment of procedures for review and update of the IPM program.
~
\ 6 - )....:5
APPENDIX B
Basis for Determining What is Toxic:
The following were used as guidelines to define "toxic" for the purpose of this report.
There is not one definitive list, so staff attempted to utilize those lists considered most
authoritative and utilized widely for legislative and reporting purposes.
Materials audited were those for which Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) sheets are required
by law to be available to provide workers with information on the health and safety risks of
materials with which they work and methods of treatment should exposure occur. MSDS is
triggered by a material that is used at a workplace that has a potential for causing either a public
health or an environmental problem. We found that every department had lists of materials for
which MSDS are required and that the MSDS sheets themselves are a useful source of
information about the ingredients and hazards.2
Under the California Hazardous Substances Information and Training Act and the Hazard
Communication regulation, Title 8, California Code of Regulations, Section 5194:
"all California employers who use hazardous substances have hazard communication
responsibilities to provide this information to their employees...if 1% or more of the
product is a hazardous substance (0.1% for carcinogens). Chemicals found on the State
of California Director's List of Hazardous Substances have already been shown to be
hazardous but there are many other hazardous substances that are not on the list."
The State of California's Hazard Communication Standard Manufacturer/Importer Duties
Checklist is a guideline of hazard communication responsibilities for U.S. manufacturers and
importers of hazardous substances. It requires California manufacturers to automatically list
chemical substances on: a) the National Toxicology Program federal list of carcinogens, b) the
International Agency for Research on Cancer list or c) OSHA carcinogen lists as carcinogens.
The substances need to be identified as such (5194 (d)(5)(B)). Manufacturers must prepare and
employers must make available for employees these MSDS sheets. Manufacturers must prepare
MSDS for any product containing a substance on the Director's List of Hazardous Substances,
any material that has an OSHA permissible exposure limit or American Conference of
Governmental Industrial Hygienists threshold limit value; or the carcinogens listed on those lists
as defined above.
2 MSDS lists only OSHA-dcsignated Hazardous Substances. Trace ingredients known to be present in a product, (e.g.
benzene) may not be listed. Information on the health etTccts ofspecitic materials is often not availahle or incomplete: for categories
which include reproductive. developmental. and immune effects.
\ 6 - ).. <..0
.
State of California Toxicity Lists Referenced in Report
Two sources used as references for this report include the State of California's Hazardous
Substances List, otherwise referred as the "Director's List". This is a list of hazardous substances
required to be prepared by the Director ofCalOSHA, pursuant to Labor Code Section 6380.
The substances on this list are subject to the provisions of Labor Code Sections 6360 through
6399.7 and Section 5194 in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations. Established by the
State of California, the Director's list identifies hazardous substances and carcinogens. Sources
used for listing include I) International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2) Environmental
Protection Agency lists pursuant to the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts; 3) General Industry
Safety Order Section 5155; 4) California Department of Pesticide Regulation's list of Restricted
Material; 5) Information Alerts put out by the Hazard Evaluation System and Information Service
pursuant to Labor Code Section 147.2. Additionally, the State of California has determined
characteristics of toxicity, pursuant to section 66261.24(a)(8), Title 22, California Code of
Regulations (22 CCR).
The Proposition 65 List is a State of California list which identifies substances that contain either
a probable or a known carcinogen.
ToxicIHazardous Substances used within the City
The City does not use many substances identified on these lists, but there are a few. These
materials are the key materials recommended for phase-out.
They include: (I) Blankrola solvent (p. 12) used in the print shop - containing perchloroethylene,
Trimec and Weed-B-Gone (p.17-l8) which both contain 2,4-D and are used as a pesticide in one
or more parks; (2) polytech MAB-l 0 used in building construction and repair -- containing
methylene chloride; (3) Stamark brand primer P-46 and safety Ideen solvent used in maintenance -
containing benzene.
Ib-21
Appendix C
Sample Pollution Prevention Staff Task Force
The Pollution Prevention Staff Task Force shall be established to track and analyze, on an
ongoing basis, the implementation of this policy. It is proposed that the following departments
and divisions participate:
City Manager - designee
Engineering
Finance: Purchasing
Fire
Parks & Recreation
Personnel: Risk Manager
Police: Crime Lab
Public Works: Custodial Services
Public Works: Building C & R
Public Works: Vehicle Maintenance
Ib- )..~
Appendix D
Sample Pollution Prevention Plans
.
Major Areas:
1. Pesticides: Landscape and Building
Lead Department:
Parks & Rec
2. Building Maintenance, including
custodial
Paints/Coatings
Print Shop
3. Vehicle Maintenance
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Pesticides:
The Plan shall consist of development of an
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Program, to
contain the following elements.
A. Indentify the major pest problems.
B. For each pest. establish monitoring guidelines and a
recordkeeping system.
C. Establish injury levels for each pest before undertaking
any treatment. Total eradication of pests is not
economically or biologically feasible. The" inj ury
level" is that level of economic or aesthetic damage
judged not to be tolerable. Action is warranted against
pests that are causing damage at or above the injury
level.
D. Develop a list of acceptable management strategies for
each pest. The existing list of Best Management
Practices (BMPs) for pest control may be used as a
reference in developing this list.
E. Develop specific criteria for selection of pest
management methods.
P. Develop guidelines to be followed each time a pesticide
is used.
G. Develop a list of resources.
R. Establish procedures for review and update of the IPM
program.
16-l.'i
II. Building Maintenance
The Pollution Prevention Plan for
Building Maintenance shall contain
these elements:
A. Review, revision, and update of BMPs for CUstodial
Services, Building Construction and Repair. Park and
Recreation. Print Shop. and Street Maintenance every 2
years.
B. Development of workplans for staff training, including
identification of staff training needs. and potential
resources available.
C. Review purchasing specifications to identify those that
may need to be rewritten to allow purchase of least-toxic
materials, and development of timelines and assignment of
staff to rewrite them.
D.
Fox toxic materials still in use,
priorities for phaseout. and
possible, for reductions in use.
identification of high
numeric goals, where
III. Vehicle Maintenance
The Pollution Prevention Plan for
Vehicle Maintenance shall contain
these elements:
A. Review, revision, and update of BMPs for Vehicle
Maintenance every two years.
B. Development of workplans for staff training, including
identification of staff training needs, and potential
resources available.
C. Review of purchasing specifications to identify those
that may need to be rewritten to allow purchase of least-
toxic materials and development of timelines and
assignment of staff to rewrite them.
D.
For toxic materials still in use.
priorities for phaseout. and
possible. for reductions in use.
identification of high
numeric goals. where
\~-)..'iPt
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTlONALL Y BLANK
\ Co - 30
3
==
~
~
~
o
w~
x~
~E-o
~>
g;=
<r:
....
Q
~
r/.)
{,)
~
o
E-o
'"
[;'j
)-4000
000
E-< 000
tf)U100
.0 r-- N CD
U ........
</>
'"
[;'j
><~~~
..;..;..;
e-d!' l!H.'
Z
=:toooU")
o N....
~
uu
'-''-'
Z zz
o HH
HC(QO
U)WH...:!
H:3HH
>"'::>::>
HVJc::Il:Q
o
'" UHf!
"'''''''
"'''''''
E-<OOO
Z3::;::;:
'"
~uuu
E-<HHH
"H...:I...:I
..;",,,,,,,
Cl.::>::>::>
tzJp.,p..o..
o
~
...
..
r:J
~
~~
H'"
"''''
E-<"':I:
Z:I:O
"'0";
~..;'"
U'-'O
ZO
E-<H~
Z"'''"'
"''''
>>'-'
...:1...:10%
";OUO
H'" '"
'" "'E-<
tzJuoU)
E-<>O~
";o..~
~U""'
"''''
"''''
M
M '"
oooo::J' ('
'" OM
~.. </>
l':(Cf.ln
HZ'"
"'00..
taJ...:IZE-<
~~5~
:l:t.!)o..U
~~~~
E-<E-iE-te-.
0000
E-<E-<E-<E-<
'"
[;'j
OU")OOOOOO~O~~OOOOOOOOOOOO~O
U")('OOOOOOMO('~OOOOOOOONOOU") 0
00000000000000000000000 oE-< 0
NMOU")NOU")~U")MU")r--NOOOOOQ)M~r--OOU)M
~U")OU")r--N~Mm~~mQ) ~M ~Nr--OM
ON~ M M~U")MM M NM U
N~ ....
'"
15
~U)CI)CI)Clh-=lH)-I~
"''''E-<''''':'':
...:I...:IC-I...:It.jC)E-<
Z
OU")OO~OU")~~NN~OOOOOQ)OONOO~::>~
U")nMn N MNr--m O~ U")M 0
M~ ~ ~
~~~~5~~~~~~~~~~~
'"
U
~"'''''''''''''
'"
E-<~l.(:Io.,!$o.I:Il.IJ
Z
HUUUUU
,c:( ...:IH~...:I...:I...:I...:IHHH
~'-''-''-''-''-'..;..;..;..;..;..;..;..;..;..;
ZZZZZHHHHHHHHHH
E-<HHHHHQQCQCCCOOC
""tzJCCCCCOOOOOOOOO~
tzJWtzJ...:I...:I...:I...:I...:IE-<E-<E-<E-<E-<E-<E-<E-<E-<E-<
~:3"HHHHHu)u)u)u)u)u)u)u)u)u)
taJtzJE-<::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>O::>::>
U)U)U)c::Ic::Ic::Ic::Ii:CIUUUUUUUUUU
0..
o
:I:
'"
E-<
Z
H
'"
0..
Z
o
H
'"
H
>
H
o
E-<E-< E-<E-<E-< E-<
ZZ ZZZ Z
WtIJ tzJtlJtzJ tzJ
U)U)U)U)U)U)CI)U)U)U)U)U)U)U)CI)U)CI)U)~~ ~~~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E-<E-< E-<E-<E-< E-<
"'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' "''''''' '"
000000000000000000";"; ";";";E-<";
:;::;::;::;::;::;::;::;::;::;::;::;::;::;::;::;::;::;:0..0.. o..o..o..Zo..
tz.JtzJtzJtzJ4Uz.1tzJtzJ
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUOCUCOC~C
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~ ~
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHWW~WWW~W
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Z~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~HHHHHH~H
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~W~
o
I
u
..;'" u
Okl = :I:
gJ"'&'i gJ~ ~
HZ:I: ..;t.J Z
ZOtf) ~"'~ H
HHW ~ tL.
,,",E-<'" '" '"
E-t OtL.~ HW ~r.u
ZE-< ~H tf) CZ ON
'" ..: 8 ~H 'H OH
~ ><H~ 0'" ~'"
>< U ~E-<";O ~~:I: ""'0
N W ~~ ~ _ C
~ H~ ~ o~ wo ~
u w~oO ~ Z ~ ~H U NW <
'" >"'M'" 0' H "'><'-'..; 0 >< ":0 0
OZIE-t HO tf) <c> E-t W:I:tf) ~ tf)
E-< ~Z~H ~m H H ..:"'''' "'E-<": '-'><
..;0 WH Z ~ Q ZE-<t.J~~ "'Ht.JZ ..: Z
~:I: ~:I:~m Otf):I:~ c~ ~~~ 0
~ E-< "'''' 0'" ~<( "'>< :;: - 0.."'0.. H
~OH =: ..1C(~~08 ~o~oZO~:z.:tf)~tf)H~
~~~uz~ ~ro ~~~o~w- ~ <0
r.u HWWO cc 0= o~ tf) ~tf)~HH
'-''''''"'::>~'''<(''' '" U><E-<~"''''~'''~~ M'"
~E-t~O~~>E-toww~~:z.: HE-tZH UHIr.u~
"''':U~'';~HOo..ZWOO ~HH~ H~OE-<Z
<~~OH Z~~HH~~W~~H~HH~~U~H
O~~~~~ ~<tf)~~tf)~C~~U~UUtf)~~~~
\0
o
....
....
..
....
....
o
'"
'"
'"
:s
/6- ~\
- -----------
0000CDU'100\.OOI.O<o:I'
OOMCDNO'I<o:I'OO....-lO....-lr--
. . . . . . . . . . . .
NO'IC\JI.OCDO'Io::rr--U'1I.Or--O
r--N MM....-I 0'1 o::rMM <0:1'
..... N .....
..,"'..,..,..,..,..,..,"'..,..,~
":IQ":":":":":":IQ":":
C)~C)C)C)C)C)(!)~C)C)
\OO\OM NU'1MI.O CD 01.0 \0
o M Oo::rM
'" .....
E-if-4f-4E-if-4E-iE-tf-4E-iE-iE-iE-t
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
wWWWWWWtLIWWWtzJ
:>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>:
E-tE-iE-tE-tE-iE-tE-tE-tE-iE-tE-iE-t
c:;c:;o:::o:::c:;o::c:;c:;c:;c:;c:;"
..:..:..:..:..:..:..:..:..:..:..:..:
c..c..o..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
tLltLItzJtLlWWtzJtLltLltLlWW
QQQQQQQQCOQC
tz,JWWWWWWtzJWtLItzJW
0::0::0::0::0::0::0::0::0::0::0::0::
HHHHHHHHHHHH
tz...b.itz...b.ib.ib.ib.ib.ib.ib.iww
0:: ....
'" Z
3 ,,~
[;'J ",0::
.., ""'"
U ""....
H'"
'" 0::0
0.. tn><: E-i
:I:": 0'" "'''
tnO c..c Z
Htn O:::Z O:::H
Z ::>H O:I: tzJ
HO 0..3;: Otl):I:Z
"'o::~ ~,c:( UH
~o::: Wb.i;:toet:c..
>-10 Z :I:t.J
o tC( HOrn~ZO'I
O~ tI) :I:OHooWO
~ :.::::> tI1<o:rO W<o:r'
b.i H~~ I taJ....1
0..:....""~"'3"'Z"'..:
OooHtn OH ~
E-i Z,c:(tI1 zW,c:(c:;w~
Z:'::OE-itl10tzJHUOH
oz~"'''::>:'''><:''''''><:
O::H ":~O::"''';''::I:'';O
"""" "''''':'''3UU3t..
r-
r- ~
MOMN
'" '" .
uU'1l.f)C\J
'" ..........
..,.. <f>
,c:(tI1..
HZ'"
O:::OOu
W...:IZf-i
E-t....1::>rn
":":00
)::;C)c..u
..,..,..,..,
..:..:..:..:
f-4E-iE-d-1
0000
................
Ib- 3'-
00000000000000000000
00000000000000000000
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
OCDI.f)C\JCDOOM~00000000U'100
O\I.f)Nl.O\oOOo::rM o\OOal.OI.l)o::r....-lMN
MI.l)I.l)M....-INM~ \OMMN\OU'1C\J M
MI.OMU'1 I.l)
N N
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CDOOOON00U'1000I.l)OOOOM....-I0
000000 M<o:ro::rOONN('\JMU'1N M
'<:I'U1 '<:I' 00 0U")
'" '" .....
'"
U
~tLltLlwwtzJtLlWtLItLI
zuuuuuuuuu
~~~~~~~~~~
zzzzzzzzzz"""""""
HtLltLltiltzJtilWtLIWtil
,c:(E-tE-iE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-t~~~~~~~
:>:ZZZZZZZZZ
HHHHHHHHHUUUUUUU
~~~~~~~~~~"""""""
W zzzzzzz
~E-tE-tE-iE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tf-4HHHHHHH
c..WWWWWWWWWQOOOOQC
HWWtzJWWWWWtzJ....1...:1....1...:1...:1...:1...:1
::>"""""""""HHHHHHH
OE-tE-tE-tE-tE-iE-tE-tE-tE-t::>::>::>::>::>::>::>
tzJtI)rnrnrnrntl)tI) tl)rn 0000000000 aJaJ
............
ZZZ
"'''''''
rntntl)rnrntntntntntl)tI)tntntntntl1rn~~~
:.::~~~~~~:.:::.:::.::~~~~:.:::.:::.::E-iE-tE-t
""""""""""""""",,0::0:::"0:::
00000000000000000":":":
33333333333333333""""""
"'''''''
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUOCQ
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
...:I...:I...:I...:I...:I...:I...:I...:I...:I...:I...:I....1...:1...:1....1....1...:1tL1WW
00000000000000000000000000000000000:::""~::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>HHH
c..o..o..o..o..c..c..c..o..c..o..o..o..c..c..o..o..www
t!J
:<;
H
~
U
'" ~"''''
P:::; :EON
tJ ,,~:s
::>\0 Z (!)
O<o:r' HU1
tLI I WHO
p:::;c.. Of-if-i
0"''''
.... "'0:: ~~..:..:
tnZ f-iE-t tLI r-o.....~~
E-tH zzrn~ tnzc:;o..tLI tzJ
Z,c:(E-tHH...:IH f-IHW C
Hc..Z,c:(,c:(WC:; Z,c:(E-ttLItn H
,c:( Hc..c..:Ec..E-t Hc..,c:(UC:;"
""3": ..: Z ......: 3":'" ""
Oc..UUZCHOZc..O tLi:E Q
~....1 HHW~,c:("H WWC:;~(!)O ><:
,c:(....1ob.ib.i c..,c:(,c:(Otl1~::>...:IZOE-t tLI
0::"''''''''''''' ~"""'..: "'OH3:Z ....
""~O::":":>IQIQ" ",IQ "".... H"''':
'" O::O::H 0:: 0..; ........ ..:o::..:~~
UUE-tE-tE-t:'::::>...:ItzJooE-tWWUOHc..
ZHH O~UH'" ZO::3:HU": .
S~~~Da W~~~~~([)~wd~~""~
~"P:::;H,c:(E-t ::>WUE-t....1...:10UOza: H
O::UU:I:~~......,...."''':OON'':OH'''' ..:
"''':'': 3: IQ":"'IQ ",0:: 3: ",""#""0:: "'''' > ""
H
..:
....
'"
"
Z
H
""
H
3:
N
~ CD
00 '"
N 0
o
UM 00
'" 0'"
..,.. <f>
,c:(tI) ..
HZ'"
0::00..
tzJ...:IZE-t
~~58
~C)Q.,U
~~~~
E-tf-4E-tE-t
0000
................
cr:
~
~~OOOOOOO~~OOON~OOO~~~MOO~W
N~NOOOONOOWm~mOOOM~~MWO~~
~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~O~~OOO~OOO~~OOO~~OO~~M~NON~
OOOOOOOO~~~~ ~N N~M~~~
UN~~N~~ N
""...
a:
~
>-~~~H"""'''''' .."'...., "''''HH~ H""~
~~~~~~NN~N~N~~~~ N<<
~ ~~H~OOOOHO~OO...,~~ O~~
Z
~NmO~OO~OMO~ON~~OOO~OO~~~"
O~ ~m~~ M mO~MN~N
~ M M~~
a:
o
~
U
;;:
~
Zoooooo
o C4 Odl.j
u666
tl)tf}Cf.ltI)
~QQQ
~~~~
a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a:
E-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-4
zzzzzzzz
00000000000000
C4C4C4uuuuuuuu
666 . . . . . . . .
22266666666
;;;tx..tz.,tz..tz..~~tz..tz..
::'::'::'00000000
~~~~~N""~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~uuu~~####uuuoooooooo
~~~~ ~~~uuuuuuuu
z zzzzzz
o ........000000.........................
H~Cf.lCf.lCf.lCf.ltI)Cf.lHHHHHHCf.lCf.lCf.lCf.lCf.ltI)tI)Cf.lCf.lCf.ltI)
Cf.I~~~~~~~E-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-t~~~~~~~~~~~
>H~a:~~~~~<<:<<:<<:<<:~<<:a:~~~~~~a:cr:a:cr:
~<<:~~~~~~~~~~~<<:~~~~~~<<:<<:<<:<<:
HC4C4C4C4C4C4C4Cf.1tnCf.ltl'}tI)tI)C4C4C4C4C4C4C4C4C4C4C4
Q
E-<E-+E-...q..-t88
zzz:z:zz
WtL1WWWW
. . . . . . .:>:::>:::>:::>:::>:::>:: . . . . . . . . . . .
UUUUUUUE-tE-tE-<E-tE-tE-tuuuuuuuuuuu
tzJwwwwww~~~~~~wwwwwwwwwww
~a:a:a:a:a:a:a:<<:<<:<<:<<:<<:<<:a:a:a:cr:a:a:a:a:a:a:a:
z C4 c... C.dldl.. 0..
w~~~~~~~wwwwww~~~~~~~~~~~
:>:: 000000
E-<Cf.lCf.ltI)tI)tI)Cf.ltn tl)Cf.ltI)tI)Cf.lCf.lCf.lCf.ltI)tI)tI)
~~~~~~~~wwwwww~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
WC4C4C4C4C4C4C4tz..tz..~~tz..tz..C4C4C4C4C4C4C4C4C4C4C4
Q
cr:
'"
'"
!;;
><:
u
H
a:
u
'"
'"
00 .00
~ ~:;
g~~; C).
o H" ~ ta.1 03:
N o..tzJ..t.!) Z U"I.oo..
Z H~ 0 ...,~~
H ooOZH~Z ~ Z 0 00
~u3~~~~~~g~ g33~ g33~00 Noo
~tzJ~QQO~~~H OH~~I~H~~~ZO~~
ta.1X~ZZZ~H~NO~N~~Q~~~~~Oo..~H
~H~~~~Z~ <~~<~~tzJ<~~~~H~~o..
<<:a:~oooo~ Hooa:H~~ooOH~~~cr:~O:>::
:>::~",cr:cr:cr:a:~ o~ooo"'~"'ooooo~~oo
r-
...0 ~
NCO ""
.CO ""
nr-4r-4..
'" ~'"
:;!cn..<II-
HZ'"
cr:OO..
t&JHZ8
8H::>~
~<3~8
:;!:;!:;!:;!
888~
0000
~~~~
1(.:.- ~3
cr:
~
OOU"lOOOoooo)-4o
OONOOOOI"CON ("I")
. . . . . . . . . .~ .
OMMOU"lCDr-4MOU"l~r-4
MNCD<o::rCDMU")NO("l")OU")
N r-4 M U")<o::rr-4 U
~
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Z
U")r-4U"1r-40r-400NN::;>r-4
N N I"CI"C 0
~
o..o..o..o..tl..o..o..o..o..o.. 0..
0000000000 0
:r:::r:::I::I::I::I::I::I::I::I: :r:
~~~U)U']~~~U']~ZU)
o
8888888888H8
ZZZZZZZZZZ~Z
HHHHHHHHHHHH
a:a:a:a:a:a:a:a:a:a:>a:
o..o..o..o..o..o..o..o..o..o..HP-I
o
~
....
G:
~
Z
ta.1ta.1t&Jta.1t&Jta.1ta.1ta.1ta.1ta.1ta.1ta.1
UUUUUUUUUU~U
~~~H~~~~~~~
HHHHHHHHHHCL.H
~~tI.I~tE..~~~~tl.iwtu
o
...,
~
<XI
gj 6
Z~ a:
OH ~o
HU :::e;ta..
o::~~ ~ta.1
~ ~OO...,OO >
Z Z:I:O>~~HQ
00 oo","'a:.,~"'z
::> ;:>1--1 t&Jz~ta.1::>
..., HZU"'O"':I:O
o OHHtzJE-t Ao..
CI)~CI)w8O:: tzJ.::t::E 0
z ......ii(c..O~ 0 0
<<:H~a:~""H<<:~U N
~cr:zoo"'cr:ooajcr: ...,
Oo..Hc..OtzJH ,::(C>,::(,::(
~ NOO::::I:)-4~o..ZH~
><:~.tH~'" oo<<:Ha:~
~ ...~~UH:I:IJ) I Ota.1
~>ooZ~<XIZO~
lJ)o~~cj~~~~~~2
'"
~
0'-<
OM
00'"
"'...
'"
.-<
..:I
M
0",
o
o
o
N
"''''
00
::::
"''''
E-<E-<
ZZ
HH
0::0::
"''''
"''''
UU
~~
ZZ
HH
......
::
'"
<(
~~
"'E-<
E-<'"
"''''
~~
U"'
H
~~
"'..:I
OU
0::
E-<O::
U'"
"'~
...10
"''''
00 '"
.-< '"
00 0
001.00
'" "'...
H" (/)0
<("'00
HZ'"
O::OQ
~H:z.8
E-iH:,;\tn
<(<(00
Xt.!)Cl.IU
;;];;];;];;]
E...d,,'E-iE-t
0000
E-<E-<E-<E-<
000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ooooo~momONOo~ooooro~1.O
OOO~W~I.OM~a~a O~OOrl~~M
ml.Orl~ N 1.0 N rl
OMf"- rl
.-<...'"
.-<
~~
ONOOW~~N~OOOO~ooo~om~
o~o~ 00_("') o_~ N
Qr-IMrl Mrl.-t.-t
...0'"
"'"'
.-<
..:I..:I..:I..:IH..:I..:I..:I..:I..:I..:I..:I..:I~HH..:I~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
~E-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-t
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
E-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-tE-t
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
wwwwwww~wwwwwwwwwww
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
::>::>~::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>::>o
0000000000000000000
wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
E-<E-<
ZZ
"''''
tf}tf}tf}tf}tf}tf}tf}tf}~tf}tf}tf}tf}tf}tf}tf}tf}tf}tf}~X
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E-tE-t
~~~~~~~~~oc~ococococococococococ
0000000000000000000<(<(
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"''''
"''''
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCC
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHW~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~m~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~HH
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~
U
...
=
~
Q
0:: Q Z
t4 f-I H 0
~ Q Z ::> U
H '" ...1
::> > ... E-<
o ~ Q ~ ~ ~
" l!) tj ~ 8
~ ~ r;; ~ ~ U
o::!i: ~ ~Q Z
::> ~ Z iU ,,>< 0
~roO ~ IX
~ tI) H 8~ \O...lZ
<( '" 6 N~HH
U ::G tI) ~ NOO~
H N UOH _ mf-l tI)
W M tI) HH~ HW W U::G
...1::> ::>::>'" 0::..:1 NU~UO..:lU
H~WQ ~zoH~ ~::G t4H"~~HH
o Z::C ~ ~ ~~ I ~f-!e-.I'-)OOH
~H W8 ~H~W~~ ...::>
"w~Oo HtI)Wf-!~ f-!tI)~ O~N~~
OWOQ~~::G~~ ~~W~H l!)~ o~
E-<"''''~'O::~O::~::O~'''iUE-< E-<~~E-<Q
OH~ Q~~::C"O"~~~ZWHUHO~
~Q" ~",",E-<",E-<"''''''''<(E-<U~~~::
J b - ~L.j
Q
H
::>
...1
...
'"
.-< r-
oo '"
.-< r-
N'-<
... ...
ooN N
'" ON
H 00 (J)-
<("'00
HZ'"
~OOoo
tLI...lZf-!
~;;]5~
~l!)~U
;;];;];;];;]
f-!f-!f-!f-!
0000
E-<E-<E-<E-<
a:
;5
>+Oooooo"Q"
0000001,,0
E-< . . . . . . .
tf}OOONLOOO
o <o:f'Q)\.Or-MM......
U '""' '""'
a:
;5
><:i!':3~::;~::;:i!
8~t1)E-iUUU(!)
z
~I.I')OI.O\DOON
O...-t Mr-IM
~
'"
U
~a:a:a:a:a:
'"
E-t<a~~~o.tI
Z
HUUUUU
~ t.') l? 19 C.!H.'
Z ZZZZZ
OE-tHHHHH
HWQQQOQ
UJtzJ...:I...:I...:I...:IH
Ha:HHHHH
>E-<::>::>::>::>::>
Hrn~OCIOCIa:LcQ
o
E-<
Z
'"
u)V1U'JU)U)tI)~
~~:::.c::~::':::::':::E-t
a: a: a: a: a: a: a:
E-<OOOOOO":
Z 3:3:3: 3:3:3:""
'" '"
~UUUUUUQ
E-tHHHHHH
a:HHHHHH~
~CQa:la:lIXIIXla:ao:::
o...::>~~::>O:JH
WCLlo...o...o...o...a..ra..
o
~
....
~
'"
Oz
Z'"
::>""
o
!;:3:
~O
O~
U,,",
H
lOa:
ZE-<
H
E-<><
":'"
~~
a:OlO
"'''"'Z
.t ::> H
a: ~.."'
E-< "'
...:IX :z:ZtzJ
":'" UOa:
H t&J1iJU)Q
a:Z tl)E-+o.. 0
"'3: .t><:EE-<..,.
E-< O....1ti1...:1 0...:::1 I
..:c:a:Ha:O:I:WO
~UO(!)o...e-.CQ~
~
H
o
'"
~
'"
::>
~
o
"'
o
:z:
r-
r- r-
uN N
"' 001)
:i!.;; ..<J>
HZ",
a:OQ..
tLI....1Ze-.
E-<~::>"'
..: 00
:E ""u
HHHH
..:..:..:..:
E-<E-<E-<E-<
0000
E-<E-<E-<E-<
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOONO
CQOOOOOOOoooooomc
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
OQ)U1000000000U100~O
ONr- ......ONIJ)C\lON......M ~N
NU"')<oq' r-40r-\D..-no
r- N 01)
N
:i!~CI)
(!)~~
~~~~~~~~~~b~;5
OOOOOOOOLOONU"JU")00...-40
01,,00 C\lOQ)U)...-40 NO 0
OIJ)I.i') 0...... M rlr-......
0'\ r- r-I r-t
"'''''''
UUU
~~~
ZZZa:a:a:a:
"'''''''
E..q-q.04~I4fI4f""
ZZZ
ZZZHHHUUUU
888:ii:ii:iilOl!>lOl!>
E..q.....e-. ZZZz
.t.t.tE-<E-<E-<HHHH
tz.1c4tiJWWWCQQO
a:c::::a:WWtLIHHHH
UUUa:a:a:HHHH
WtzJWE-tE-+E-t::>::>:JO
a:a:a:U)U)U}a::lCQa:;jCQ
E-tE-tE-.q..q.....E-.q-t
ZZZZZZZ
tzJWWWWWW
'U)U)U)U)U)U)U)XX~::t::t::t::t
UUU::':::::':::::':::::':::::':::::':::::':::E-+E-+E-+E-+E-tE-tE-+
"'","'a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a:
a:a:a:0000000":":":":":":":
3:3:3:3:3:3:3:""""""""""""""
...,...,..., WWWWWWW
UUUUUUUOQOCQQQ
tlJtI)V1HHHHHHI-I
::':::~~H~HHHHH~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<<~~~~~~~~~H~~~H~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
a
o
~
E-<
CI)
:<:><
UCI)
H 01) ~
~QN H
QltIJ\O 0
":CI)'
~ E--40H Q
fool tIJ i:(HtIJ ~
H E-<E-< <JU3: '"
a: ..:~ CI)
o Z.ta:O~"'~ Z a:
H O::I:~~OQ H tIJ
::cC~~Z OH H~Z
UHa:"1Z '""'U~ "'Z
OU'::(ICI;H~I~U a..ZH
a..<U :c H H HZ:C
>< H:EE-<"'''' .t a:HE-<
::CU~~ ~~~U~:c ~:c
H tlJa;o,::( U)~~tIJ U)C)
~~~8~~:z:=~ ZE-<~~~:Z:~
HHH~O<u)u)C)NtlJZQl~c)U)::C
g~g~~~:i!:i!:i!~~~~~~~~
U)Xu)~~U~3U~~~~a..O~:C
CI)
a:
'"
:<:
:<:i
Z
HO
~~
H
UCI)
ZZ
"''''
E-<""
CI)
l!>
><Z
CJ:~
Ib-35
'"
'" r-
r-O ..,.
t""'4...01/')
00 _
.. t""'4 Q) r---
CI) "''''
",.. <J>
ICI:;U)..
HZ",
a:00..
"'~ZE-<
~:i!.8~
XC)~U
:i!:i!:i!:i!
E-tE-tE-tE-t
0000
E-tE-tE-tE-t
J<1
1'1
....
U
....
E<
.,
re
THIS PAGE LEFT INTEf\ITlONALL Y BLANK
I b- 3b
Eo<
H
Q
~
tIJ
U
H
X
0
Eo<
<
Eo<
tIJ
H
;>
LL.
>< j
.....
Q =>
z: :I::
UJ U
c..
c.. r.-
ei: 0
>'
Eo<
H
U
'" ...><
UtI):I:Q....:I Z
:'S~~8~ t5
c:::ItlJtlJU::I: 0
i5~ .:;"!t; ':1
IXIHtIJ ~
"'. "'5"':.:....zl
e-.cx: cPO iC()o1U HZ
ZbJ IOZ ..e-.ZH%tnQ
tz:I~ I::J ....:I/:I.IHiH"'Z
>,;:: NO .H"'> ..."
_~ j:4Z0:I:~ 0 ..
o tIJ~H H ;UtI)
:i~ ~8~;i~~?5~~~
HI "2::3'2:." .,,>
E-4('" tIJ tIJ :::::)[;&1 dP tzJ U H
;.::s fo.."'O..O.U":O
X:taJ:I! Q....:I,,-4:;Z:....:ItJ")tf)H en
"'~~E-o ~~~~8",~?5",u
E"q:::i;Utu >4E-t)-lW>q...,::(/:I.IClH
Z HO Ut&J....:Ia::....:IiC(a: Hf-I
tIJ ......:IJ::r:dP,:(o..O l!)E-tE-t ..)(iit
H oHOO>:: 0... tuHdPO~
CI:I:cn....:!Ntz:!CI Z .UZo 0
tz:Ia..~:I: :cZ ..)-10..,:( NUCX:
a::HE-tU....:I Hti.!tnQ ... z-<
t!)....:!t%JHO::E:...:ICI IX....:IW.H
Z,:(::E:CX:Z;:JHH ../3.I>+ZE-tN~
H E-eiC(HO><:U ZHU)
..:I: I C!.IUJa::aO:C ..Ha:;H .. .
cx: .:::;~OU) I X::>tzJOCX:::X::
aUH ..CX:4::I:Z .tz:!),IU CUe..
tjO::Q~o..E-t~OE-tE-tH)-IE-to..H
":"'0 .1 OH""';':O...",..:...
Xo..u),...-fZo..:CHo..~o..t!)o..o..<
'"
N
.-<
:>:
'"
0::001./")0000000000......
t5c:~~~~~c:~c:~c:~c:r:
)-oOMMOIJ1<Dr-I("f)O..o,...-fO\M\.D
MNCD'<3'Wf'1I1)('\JO('f")1.O O'I~
E-tN ..... M rJ")""'....-i C7\
'" .-<
0<1)-
U
HHHHHH OU)HHHU) H
"":":":":":":"'''''':'':'':E-o'':'':
[;jl!)(!)l!)l!)t!)t!)O....:!Cll!)19o..trJt..')
)-4U1.....If)MO.....OONNr-INOLf)
N N I..C\.D 0
E-o 0
Z 0
=> N
o
~
'"
o
:>:
'"
E-o
Z
H
"
'"
'"
'"
'"
U '"
'" ...
fo.. Z
o
'"
" "
'" ..:
:s u :>:
ZOJ" ~
8cj ~2 ~~
e-........ z tlJE-t
1X::>a: Htu E-ttIJ
E-t E"d~Htz:I > fI)::G
Z z:>:O>""'HO ..:~
tz:I rL!U)tI)"CU::JtnZ X
:> :>H "'Z"''''=> ><
H ....:IZUU)Oo..XO tf.IUa:I
o QHHtlJE-t QIJ.! ~H
cnE-ttl1tz.o1E-ta: tIJ<:tO~E-I~
Z ..........:ec...CU) 00 ..:e
..:H""E-o.........:E-oUN.E-o
....1a:ZUJU)a:UJccn; ZU)...:I
Oc...Hc...OUJH .:t:t..?IIt.. OU
...:10:: NOa:X)-Ia:c...Z~ 0::
":"'~":"'E-o'" "''':H~~E-o''
H5 ~UJUHXCCIC UUJ
0:: f.9:>UJZt..?ca:z;C UJ:!:
w ...:IUJUJ...:IHH:J~..:eO...:l...:lO
E-IcaUQCtzJt....Xa:;tz..jc...tz.lUUJc...
!ii
'"
U
~
H
fo..
E-o
~
"
=>
'"
"
'"
u :>:
H "E-o
Z "''''
o E-o "
H"'''' ..:...'"
gg; :3'8~
.!<!< :SZ~~:3'
"'HH UOZ" .
"'XX H'" '"
E-o "E-o" .~
..: E-o E-< . '" => " E-o
:z:Z~ "''''''''''z
~'" '" OE-o":O
....:> ...:I .(I)UJE-4...:1
5...:1...:1 E-IN CUH tz..j
00 E-oO": ~'" H
U) en 0 H...tz,.i
UJ CCNZa:a:H Q
E-4 ...z Z c... r-4 0 UJ ~)-4 :$
HU)OO < 0 ~XU)X ~
tzJ~ a:UJccca 0 MX<E-4 E-I N
:;ji;jo3~'!i~~oooo"'",.", "'..:~o::i~o
E5C1~Q~gg~~~~~~"'~~~~8~~~ .~:>[;<
UJa:;HOcna:O::>HHHH c...a:U~UO)-4Hc... H
t..?E-4 c...OClC...:I Oc... ...:I)-4i'" "'...
~UJO)-lX~)-IOOOOOOa:c...NHH oOUJoo
>c...zxc...xxcnzzZZcac...~r-4C1t..? c...za:U)z
'"
Z
~
~
...0
H><
0:>:
o
'"
'"
;a
1
E-o
Z
~
o
'"
OOOOOOO~OOOOOOONOOOO~OOOO
ooooooo~o~ooooomMOONm~oooo
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
O~OOM~O~OOOMNmoomN~oom~o~~
N~~M~r-4Mr-4N~M~N ~ MMr-4NMm
r-4r-4 N r-4r-4 r-4
.-<
......"'''''''.....................'''...E-<...~~......... ...~
":":"''''''''':'':'':'':'':'':'':''''':fo..'':'':'':'':'':'':'':'':'':
t..?~HHHt..?t..?t..?t..?~~t..?Ht..?Ut..?t..?t..?t..?t..?t..?~t..?~
NmOaa~~NO~~~Oaar-4~r-4N~r-4a~~
NO~~ r-4r-4 aNa r-4 a
~ Mr-4~ r-4
.-<
E-o
Z
'"
~
'"
o
'"
"
H
fo..
=>
o
'"
6
u
X X a: U)
xu U) UJ a:
~t5 ~ :s "'"
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
H U) a: ~ u X c...
H HUJ a:UJ Z H
o ClZ ON H tzJ CI a:
....H OH '" "'O~:': E-o
CI Cia: He::: x~ ...:I ~ < U)
~ ~~ ~8 ~g 0 ~~ U) a:
U) =_ UJOc...z Z ~H Z 0
Z U ""'''''':HO '" "':3' "'00
H 0 '" ":o~fo..~ E-o "'H...
H tzJ~ a:z ~ V~ U)...:Ia: UJ ~tz..j
"E-o "'z "><~ " ~o z"...
c... UJHZZH ZO ~ < HZtz..jO
H O:3''':z:>: "oo~ ..: "':>:H 0
a:;H~ c...HE-4 Wc...HH a:; ~~ U)E-IU~
E-IHOa:U)~ c...U)E-Itz..j c... HHH :I:HI
(l)Oc...tzJ E-Ia: ~ 0 OUJ u)<E-4c......:I~t..?H~
U)~ tzJ U)~HOcaZZ HU) lit H~
z""'~ E-o=>O M E-o ..:"':>:z..:"'''z.....:'''
UJOH UZO~HI~Z~c...t..?(I)OE-lU)OUJ:I:O::H
"'E-o~ HHUI",ozozo><"i"''':2:'''~OX
HO~Hc...<IItClIltUHO::Ho::XIIt ..:e~O::HH~<
~x~uU)c...~~~xc...c...c...c...o~ tz..jt..?..:e~:I:X~
Ih -31
'"
8 8 0
~ Z 8 0 H
'" ~ '" U
i'5 ~ 0<:
...:I '" '"
'" dP H !2 ...:I U 8
0.. '" 0.. '" '" H a:
0 '" '" 0.. 8 '"
a: . Z a! 8 '" Z
0.. '" '" H 0 ~ H
8 0.. Z '" dP "'''''''
'" Z !2 '" E--4f-1E-t ..
'" 8 ~ 8 '" >: r< p:;a::a::::c
8 H Z 8 8 '" 0 ~taJtzJf-I
Z a: '" Z Z Z Z ~ cnZZZCG
'" 0 0 ~ '" '" H '" ~HHHt5
::;: ...:I '" ~ H X 0
'" X '" 0 0 0.. 0.. '" . - .
H U a: a: '" 0 '" '" a! ZU]r/)tf)U1
0.. 0 "'''' '" a: ~ HOOO::;'
"'0.. XX '" 0 '" '" tLitLitLiO
8>< 88 '" Z H ...:I 8 ~ ...HHHtLI
U)U1Z:r: .0'" 0 Z H Za: XZO<: Zcr::cr::a::U
f-1f-dsJ 0 H 0 0 0>< UH'" '" O><><><~
ZZl9XtL. ...~ U Z '" zo.. H...:IO 0 Zo...Q..j!l4
t.JWa:::JZa::O H H 0 Z Ha: 00<: X X Ha:: a:: a:: 0
>>UJHHtzJU 8 '" ~ H NO I No.. 0.. :(0008
...:1...:180 8>< '" 0<: 0<:...:1 ..,.><>< >< ...:1...:1...:10<:
00"'000<:...:1 '" H 0 HX . a: ...:I ...:I H::r:::r:::t:H
u)UJQtI)Z;3:~ 0.. 0 '" Z OU "'0'" '" CUUUQ
OO\DOI.OO~ '" r< 0 0:> "'''' "'00:> 0 ...-41..D-.:J'MO
OO.-10rior- '" 0:> '" '" "'''' "''''''' 0 M...-4q<MI.O
lJioU"')\.Or-oo 0 0:> ..,. ..,. 0:>0 0"'''' 0 r-qoMU1N
....+C.Y') qo M M N <o:r' .... .... 0:>0:>0:> 0 <o:rMr-i.........-4
'" r< r< "''''.... '" '"
"" ..,.
....::!HU'1HHHH '" ...:1...:1...:1 ...:I tf)HHH
0<:0<:"'0<:0<:0<:0<: N '" '" '" "'''' 0<:0<:0<: ~ "'0<:0<:0<:'"
l~H" H l:) t.!H..? ~ 0 0 0 0 ...:10 "''''''' ....::Il9t.=1l?O
r-I...-4CDO\.DO\D 0 "" 0 ..,. 0'" ","'0 .... CD\D 0 0"""
OoqoM...-I .... .... r- '" L11MNLl1N
.... ..,.'"
r<
a:
0
8
~ a:
8
8 Z
Z 0
~ 0 U
U
8 0.. '" ()
Z '" '"
'" H
'" 8 :.: '"
a: .... '" "" '" '" '" '" 0
'" "" "" "" "" :.: ""
8 U '" ~
'" Z Z Z Z H Z ::>
0 0 0 0 0 a: 0 ...:I
H H H H U H '" U
'" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Z .. .
H 8 8 8 8 8 '" '" '" '"
X '" '" '" '" '" r5 '" '" ~ :.: :.:
"'xz ...:I ~ ~
O<:UH . ::>
~~o..>: 8 8 '" 8 8 ...:I 8 ~ 0.. 0..
Z Z ::> Z Z '" Z '"
8 tn....::lztzJm '" '" ...:I '" a: '" '" O~
Z H~tlJf-10 ::;: ::;: 0.. ::;: '" ~ . ::;: " 1.11 .00...
Htz:lC tlJ50q0 ~ Z !2 ~ ...:I 8 !2 U U U ...:I"'~
o<:~ "'...:I 0 Z ...:I ~ Z ~ '" '" Z 0
0.. "'z:': :s H ~ 0 H 0<: g~ U~~ a: 0.. a: g~~~",
o H . X Z 0.. :.: 0.. 0.. ::>
>q-4/f<O::Wf-1~ '" ~ '" H '" '" 0 '" H'" .. '" 0 .. 0 .,; HaJt:O[QZ
;ji;jiUOHZ 0 0 N 0 0 0 X 0 "'''' ::;:"'Z Z NU1rncnO
U1...:1~H 0<: '" !2 0<: a: '" Ha:::> '" ::> '" .,:(C(o::et::H
o..~o<:X 0<:0 '" ~ '" H '" '" '" '" H::> :.: a:::>0 :.: a! :.: H::>::>::;'O::
V) UU~c...tL, a: a: 0 a: ~ a: 0 a: 00 ~ 8",a: a: a: QCQQQ
H H H H H 0<: 0<:
'" '" '" '" '" 0.. 0..
16- 3~
'"
...
0::
'"
Z
H
Z
H
0::
'"
...
g
...
><
U
0...",
0"'....
0"''''
"'''''''
,,;,,;,,;
'-''-''-'
"'........
'"
'"
'"
0"'0::
o..::>H
:.:0::0..
"'0:':
......'"
z
o
Z
H
N
,,;
H
o
'"
!2
'"
Z'"
H'"
0::
Z'"
3Z
""OH
~ ~ .
z'"
..:::>Z
'" "''''
o U) ~ E-t ..
0..::> >dX U) tzJ
"'x "'... Z
..0... ZO:::O
tzJ "'HtzJ~
E-tZo... ..z
";OOZH
U)Nt&..H
0"; H >'I .",
:I:HN,r:CQO
o..O.:(NI...:!
)-4)-t::>)-4...rU
HXH~ ..)-4
19Qta..QNU
000000
000000
OOIl1~iJ")oo
1J")U"')"<3'N N
.......
~"''''''' '"
......a:I,c(.:(NE-t
C)...:Il9C)OQl
00.-4.-4\00
rlu") 0'\0
.... ....
'"
0..
6
'"
o
5
'"
~
.
'"
:.:
~
'"
....
o
o
o '"
'" Z
o
'" '-'
0..0::05'
::>,,;..: "'
0"'''' ,...
ZU)Htl-iQU)
::>Z"'O::"''';
00::00::::>::>"'0
tL.Cf.I;3:c..
U
'"
0::
..
'"
:.:
~
'"
!2
'"
Z
H
.
'"
...
HO
O::H
S~
'"
uu
OH";
0..0::0
><00
"'''''''
'"
:.:u,-,
::>oz
HO::H
00:':
0><";
"''''"'
000
000
0"''''
0"'.....
"''''...
..... '"
"'''''''
";";",
'-''-''''
000
0"'0
0"''''
'" .....
Z
o
H
~
0::
U
'"
0::
'"
... '"
~ ~
o Z
'" 0
"'0"'
UHO::
2~6
>< H
"'u",
H
~~~
HHH
00::0
0::>0
",:.:'"
U
'"
0::
..
'"
'"
~
6
'"
~6
"'H
0'"
"'H
'"
'"
o ...
H Z
~ ~
o 0
>< '" '"
::r: en 0... ..
U)U] E-tO" tt1..
~ ~ "" "'~ 5 ~~o~ ~~'"
- s; ,,; ~~i5
[;; '" ~ ~~ 1;] ~~. "':>:"'...
o ~< c.. E-tZ~ ZQl!)tI)
~ en U) oe-. O~U)~IJ") w~ ~
o 0 0:::0 ~H N :t:,:(wcn
U Z I-< 0 0.. '" 0.. 0 . I-< .., ...0 . Z ..
>< 0 '" >< Z ... z..: _ -'" ~
...:I [f.I &Q ~ ::E::..o..tI) I riI:IJ E-t 0:: . H Z
,-,...Z~ '" Wa::I. .:J..-IUE-t ,:(~:t:>q.i
'" :>:...~... '" .0:: '" 1-<,,; 0.. '" '"
..~ .( b< U)...:Ir-tCUo.. tu HE-tO
U);>O HtJ Htu ...0....( U ..~t&JO
Z...:la: to. U)HQOE-tf""'l Z ,:(V:H( U
HOC cPt&JtIl...:l1:( .. E-t..
U)Cf.I)-4 ......E-t,::(HO"......O.. HH ",:Z:U
tu :I:tuNHE-tU)~E-tE-tHH~ ~a:WH~
o::Z ~ O::O";"'''''UU''' H~"'>
o ta.. . E-i 0.. f-t 0.. r-4 ":(,, 0.. tu:Z:
..t:QQ E-tH tIJ:E ..tLj N U)"
'" ~ E-t tn Z U) :t b ..r-i:Z: U .... E-t 0:::
E-t tLjtIJH Z tilE-t ..tlJHtuOE-t~WUOOCl)E-t
Z a: 0:: C:EH:E...:II M...:Ia:Zta..I a:H~WWZ
"'0::>::> ::>,,;::>0.... ><::>"'Z.... ::>'" Z:>:'"
::€O:::E-t)-t oHE-tHcG .. ..:=tL.::>H ..taJ)-t)-tUH>-i>
l!)CX...:lE-tCZCE-trlUE-tHH .-tZ...:Io::;ea.. NH
H)-IHOtuOOOtIJ ..ta.. cu::> 0 0 ...HOUUOZO
o..:I::Eo...o...Cf.lUCf.lo...riUXCf.lE-tZrlXo...<:I:ZWU)
H
'"
H
'"
00000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000
.. .. .
OO~OOOOOOONNOOO~OOOO~~O
O~~OON~NOO~~~NNOOMM~~O~M~
~M MN~~M MMMrl ~~~ MN
'"
~~~~~"''''~~~~3~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~UU~~~UU~~H~~~
OOO~OOO~O~~~OO~OOOOO~~O
ONrlNNOO~rlM NNMMMM~O N
"'.... M
0::
tzJz~ H
~ffi~ ~
",UI-< [;;
ffi...:>: 0 Z '"
::toW Z EzJ N
0... ::> 0..":
,-,0::", 0 ..:I
Z >< 0.. 30 '-' '-'
HU~ Xo ~ I Z
~H ~ ~EzJ>H 0 H
O~ON U ~>HW ~ ~
O~EzJ~ H~H ~ H
~ ~~~I ~ ~~EzJ~ ~ EzJ~
~ ~~OH Z ~tzJ~~ ~ ~
~~ ~o..d~ ~ :'i~~>< '" ~~
Z~ ~EzJ ~ ~ ~ ~ HH
Ho..o::~U"''''~ UOO 0:::>: 0:: ::>0::
~ EzJ~~OQ HrlEzJ~O~ ~ O~
~ez WOH ~I~ZOO~~ He
"'Z"'o::....U'" "'~HH"'...Z><'-' "'8
O"'H~::>I~U ~ z~~ HHZ
"'..:'" "'H 6 "'::>~ ""'OH ~"'3
~~~ EzJ >~ ~~~ ~~
......3>'1 "'''' .OZZ'" ;,: ,,;...0::
~~tzJtzJ ~ UUZUOO~UO ~ H
ZEzJ~~ Z EzJ~tzJO ~~eHU e~
0::"'::>::> "'~O "'......0::0::...0..... <"'..:I
EzJ>O~oo~~~ ~~~~O~X~H~N>~U
"''''U'''0''''''6'''''''''''''';0~0'''U8''''''HZ
~O~ON~< H~OOHH ~W~ I~ZH
~~~~~~~ O~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~
..
U
'-'
Z
H
o
'"
H
::>
"'
.
'"
'"
0::
o
3
U
H
'"
"'
::>
0..
Ib- 34
'-'
Z
H
I-<
~
U
o
'"
'"
:is
Z
H
,,;
...
'"
~
H
o
o
I-<
'"
::>
U
.
'"
'"
0::
o
3
U
H
'"
"'
::>
0..
""
.... ""
'"
'"
'"
Q
H
'"
o
..0
:I:
U
:>:
::>
H
z
o
~
..0
H
o
'"
Z""
H'"
"'N
Q .
"''''
~E-<
1D:i!
E-<
"'u
"'<
E-<'"
<'"
3::>
'"
.",
'"
"''''
QE-<
HH
"" tf)dO
00 0:....
..0..:1 '"
:I: :I: :>:-
UU<:tO~U)
OIJ"')HE-<
>+ .~ oz
0: ~><V"''''
<.:I: >
ZO O<U..o
C:::~ XHHQ
ClJZ .::>Z....:lU1
E-<H~HO)-t
< <Q~"'''''
::>0::>0 Ur-
OzQlt/1 ~M
'"
'"
;3
'"
E-<
Z
'"
'"
'"
'"
E-<
'"
Q
U
H
Z
o
H
<Z
HO
ZZ
o
~~
U
-<
Q
HU
UH
<0:
o
U:I:
H'"
..0'"
~g
0'"
\00\0\0000000
MOt-...-IOOOOOO
U')("!1U")r-NOOOOO
m....n.o 0"\ CD
'<;f'LOM......
,:Q~HHHHHH
::><<<<<<0<
E-<"'''''''''''''''''''
\ONN\Oooooom
MNr-O'I
'"
<'"
'" 0'"
o ::z::tr.lZ
.... '" '"
..-t HZ:r:
ZO'"
=# HHCIJ
"'E-<'"
E-< o "':I:
:z; C:::H tI1
~ 0 c:r::H
E-< O><H..o
U ..oE-<O<O
tIJ tI.I:> tl.I
LO ~ ~OSH
....... H a:~~,c:(
o tI) IC(Q> E-<
0'\ H H ,otWCIJ
X 0 Zf."d&.:IH)::
m Orn::Z::a:I
0'" ~<( ID><
><00 "'O::>OZ
C(ooQ a::1!:H;QQ
Q ox 01)..
a:: U)-4E-<~"'''''''
OCIJCIJ!l:CUJZ HE-1Z
op..Z~OO XHH
IJ);:JHH:>C:::W.:t;a:H
,c:(u)CLla:lU)p..O~CQu
..0
~
E-< ""
"" Z N
VJ Lt) IC(..-t
'" E-<'" Q I
~ E-<~~ ~ '" ~ :
~ 3tj. 9 ~ ~ ~
E-< ~"'E-< _ <~Z ~ '"
tI) ..:cow ~ ~_~ ~ W
H Wa::tl.I CLlW tI1 N
o p..p.. .. U):J... 0 H
~ o::z:: ~ O...:lCLI ::z:: C
~x: C:::...A.I H :CO-=( 0.. H
.....b Q..dPH ::t ,,",80 0 ><
CIJ CI'IH tI) H 0
......:1 ..CD,:( ...... ... ::c
tf)tI)tf)Q c tf)~ ~W~dOU)~tI18
Z:z:z:a: HW.. ZtIJ :>Z:>t.l')ZH:ZO
0008 U~<:tO g::c HClJHCI'IOCQC
a:la:la:lWE-1,c:( 0..... a::N:I:la:I a:I
a:a::a:o..Z IJ) 6.. ..:tZE-<OC:::ZC:::.
<..:C< WU81 U) ~WHOO..tN..:ttl)
UUUU>HClJIJ"') U a:lH U UW
OOOHHHOMtI10H ... HO ..08
o:o:"'ZO><o: E-<O:E-< "'''' .00:""0:0.:
QOCt-04tfJU)OC:::ZO,::( ... U..:cUOMOa::
>+)-t>+~ WHClJW>+X U":cH>+>+CI'I>+E-<
x::z::::z::~ca:::z::::z::>::z::O XC:::OH:I:IXH
~WUUE-<H a:: E-< ~ U") Z
SS~o<~ .:;!"'g~< ~ .~"'~<-~ -
tz:I~Wp...Z~e-.H tU ..WtzJ,:!WZtJ:JHWtI)
...:i...:i~ HZ I ~t-lH .Z....lXt-lCIJ....lH....lW
OOO~~WMXOOX~Oe-.Ot-lOOOe-.
0::.0::0::>0> ...~Uo::.o..p..o::::z:a:.)-4O:: .0::,:(
~~~~HH~W~e-.H08o..e-.:z:~~~a:
WWWW::r::O ..HHWHa:W~WE-tWWWO
o..o..o..:I:Utl)rlQ~o..~o..o..Zo..Wo..o..o..~
00000000000000000000
00000000000000000000
.
ooooo~mO~OONOO~OOOOOO
oOO~ro~~MrlOmmO O~OOrl~
O\\'o"'-'q' N 1.0 N
OMr- rl
........'"
....
t-lHHt-lt-lHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
<<<<<<<<0<<<<<0<<<<<<
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ONOOoo~~N\.OOmOOO~OOOrlO
O~Orl 0 OrlM Orl~
QrlMrl M rlrl rl
....0'"
"'00
....
'"
U
:i!
z
'"
E-<
Z
H
;'i
Z
o
H
E-<
H
Q
'" Q Z
w E-t H 0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o ~ 0 g ~ ~
~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ 8
f3 ~ z~ 15 ~~ 15
ID ~ 00< '" I:I:
a:: tI) Ho.. E-to.. \.0 HZ
< '" 5 NcGHH
U ::.:: VJ)-t Z NOOo..
t-l C\I UOH,:( W me-. tI)
W M tI) HHXa: HW W U~
..0::> - ::>::>"'''' "'..0 "'u<uo
H~WQ ~zo..o~tI) ~~ WHa:~~
o Z:I: [&J ~ WOI WE-tE-tt-:)O
HH we-. ZZH>+WO::~ ....
O::Wt-lQO HtI)WE-tO~ E-ttl)~ O>+N
Otl)OQ~O::~~~ ...:Io..o:;.W,:(H ~~
E-<"''''~''''<'''<:I:><0<'''~E-< E-<~~
OH~ Qwa:::I:a:Qa::O::~~O::ZWHUH
XQ~ ~~~E-t~E-t~o..~tI)~~E-tUX~
E-<
Z
'"
:>:
'"
H
::>
o
'"
'"
'"
'"
o
3
U
H
..0
ID
::>
'"
Ib-YO
'"
Z
~
"':I:
E-<O
:i!~
E-<><
UU
<
'" .
"'~
::>'"
"':>:
U .
~~
:Z:~
o
z
Z
'" _H
"'''''''
Z"''''
~~'"
"'",U
"'Z'"
E-<"'U
0"'0
"'<-0
N"''''
"''''<-
ON
N....
..0"',""
<"'<
"'..0'"
0"'00
"'....
....'"
0:
'"
3
'"
'"
E-<
o Z
00 '"
U 15
'" U
;;: !;:
o '"
..0 >
"'0..0
<.!JO
'" '"
"''''
~~~
O~~
-
'"
'"
'"
o
3
U
H
..0
ID
::>
'"
'"
U
:c
""
'"
V
Q
'" ..0
E-< 0
;2",~
"'E-<'"
~~:i!
~O'"
"'00:0
Z :I:O:
o ..uo..
IDUO
a: H tz... ...
("j~5!;:
OI:flJH
0:0 0<
ca::on..
><<oot
:I: ~Q
...0 '"
:>:U '"
::JHu)~
"'E-<Z'"
..oo.:HI
O~<'"
a:;o..e-.w
E-!HZE-+
"'..000<
"'O<U3
0000
0000
.
ooroU"')
"""'N
...."''''
"''''
N
..:1..0..0
<<<
"'<.!J'"
0000
NOOO
....'"
'"
'"
U
~
E-<
Z
H
~
E-<
Z
H
E-< O<E-<
..0 "'z
<'" H
~"'30<
o..zoo..
",z..o
~HHQ
:I:"''''
SE-<><'"
ClJa:uu
HtilHH
O~HH
"'0><><
E--4UC:::C:::
",ootuu
"'...<<
E-<
'"
'"
0:
E-<
'"
.
'"
'"
0:
o
3
U
H
..0
ID
::>
'"
~ 0: .
~U
H ~UU
0..0 <O~...:!
U 0 ::nl'1lC(
t-l...... i:I:: f-iN
:><0- ..0 0
C> ~ tI1 ...)-1 .....-1
:;!;E-< ~u":en
...;:;!; E-< ~ lJ
en"'~ 0<0>-<.
..00:> E-<OHN'
00:..0 ~O>-<OE-<
:I:~O U tn....Z
o en 0<:>< E-<>-<
u .. )-to::..,:(
t-lCl)Q X~M...c..
O<H~en OUO:;!;
O~l!)tn:I:a::UHO
..:C ZZE-tbJ!CCtnb)
ZO HHCIJ::E:tJbJH
HU E-dLII a::u
U)HCf.I~~C\lH" )-t
tiJ<::>O~ >diJbJU
a:: a:u ..ZZObJ
..8 ZbJHHa::
..:z.HQo..H:I:a:~
.(HUbJ tI1o..bJ<..
UCf.I-U)ObJHU>40
HtIJ <bJP::;Q~HbJ
...:I IX. . a:::i E-t H 0 UJ
>-< en 0< ..."",..:
CI) ...bJE-tZW)-4 a:i
IC(ZZHZO:: ... ..
..UbJbJO::H::>a::cna::
NHc..>ONU!:4C1)bJ
o ..00: ..0 H:;!;O: E-<": E-<
HHbJO:CbJtzJ<~ii:(
e-.(fJE-tU'JUa:l~:3C>:3
0000000000
0000000000
. . . . . . . . . .
NCOOOOOMr---.OO
\0 \.000 <o::I"O"=l"M 0
u')MO\......t NM<o::rO
M", "'
N N
HHHHHHHHtI1,::!
~~~~~~~~~"
o OOC\Ju"') oou"') 00
DeeM ......'":1""=1"00
oo:rco 00
M .........
en
0:
~
UH
::>HID ::c:
00'":1" U
~ I >-<
IXtzJC4 ::>
..,~a:: ~
E-<E-< ~~ ~
:;!;:;!; enH:>: ..:
HH HQH U
O<O<o:~eno:
Il.ill.ibJ2:: o..E-t 0
:>0<0 :;!; ~E-<
UUOZ:I:OHO Z
HHffi~ ~o<o: H
""'~ ..: "'0<<00<
~_"tzJa:: ::> 0..
..:..: :>E-<<O"'''~
a::a::HHX a:: E-tO
E-+f-4E-tE-tbJ::G::>...:IObJ
>-<0 IUH:I:H
tIJ::c:w::E:z UD.lU
E-<U:s,,",03 ~:;!;o<:><
H ICI:e-.O ::>>bJf-4U
:I: a:~a:E-<HE-<":~
:3t:QC><Utna:::itnUa::
/
Ib-L-f \
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
\6-Y~
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
\ 6- Y 3
THIS PAGE LEFT INTEmlONALL Y BlANK
\ 6- Lp-\-
Ib -4 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Audit
1.2 Pilot Project
1.3 Project Findings
1.3.1 Pilot Project Findings
1.3.2 Audit Findings
1.4 Final City Council Recommendations
2.0 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Best Management Practices Recommendations
2.2.1 Print Shop
2.2.2 Public Works - Equipment Maintenance
2.2.3 Cleaning Products
2.2.4 Swimming Pool Chemicals
2.2.5 Pesticides
2.3 General Comments
3.0 MUNICIPAL POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
3.1 History and Scope of the Project
3.2 The Environmental Health Coalition
3.3 The City ofChula Vista
3.4 Costs of Using Toxics
3.5. Pollution Prevention
3.5.1 Definition of Pollution Prevention
3.5.2 Benefits of Pollution Prevention
3.5.3 Obstacles to Implementation
3.5.4 Making the Switch
4.0 THE TOXICS AUDIT
4.1 City Structure
4.2 Methodology
4.3 Toxics Inventory
4.4 Hazards of Toxic Materials in Use
4.4.1 Hazards of Maintenance Materials
4.4.2 Hazards of Pesticides
Introduction
Insecticides
2
16-4 S-
MUNICIPAL POLLUTION PREVENTION PROJECT
FOR
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Dated August 8, 1996
1
I b-l\l.\
Herbicides
4.5 Analysis of the Audit
4.5.1 Toxic Totals
4.5.2 Changes Made
4.5.3 Exceptions
4.5.4 Priorities for Phase-Out
4.5.5 Financial Analysis
Direct Cost Savings
No Net Changes
Cost Increases
Indirect Costs
4.5.6 Storage of Materials
5.0 PILOT PROJECT
5.1 Purpose of Project
5.2 Methodology
5.3 Summaries of Pilot Project
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
3
\6-YIo
1.0 Pollution Prevention Policy and Inventory: Executive Summary
Environmental Health Coalition (EHC) and the City ofChula Vista worked jointly on a one year
Municipal Pollution Prevention project, starting in July of 1993 and ending in July of 1994. The
project was funded by a $30,000 grant to EHC from the Jesse Smith Noyes Foundation. The
goals of the project were to assist the City to reduce the use oftoxic materials used in City
operations, and to create a model for other cities to follow.
"Pollution prevention" can be defined as "changes in processes or materials that reduce, avoid, or
eliminate the use of toxic or hazardous substances or generation of hazardous by-products. It
seeks to reduce the quantity and toxicity of materials going into processes, not just those coming
out as hazardous wastes." The purpose of a partnership between the City and EHC in pursuing
projects such as this one is to improve and protect environmental health by facilitating a shift
toward pollution prevention as the primary means of managing toxic and hazardous materials.
The Municipal Pollution Prevention Project (MPPP), consisted ofthree phases:
1. An audit of toxic materials currently used for City operations;
2. A pilot project to implement less toxic pest control and cleaning methods at one
City facility on a trial basis;
3. Development of Best Management Practices for City operations for which
alternative products or processes could be identified.
Each phase is described briefly, with findings and recommendations. A summary ofthe
recommendations is given at the end.
1.1 AUDIT
The range of materials covered by this audit is broad. This report attempts to track materials
used in public spaces, to provide this information in a concise and available report for the City
Council to review, and to provide a basis in which the Council can make sound public policy
decisions. In order to develop the report, the City and EHC conducted an extensive audit by
interviewing department supervisors to determine which materials are currently in use, what
quantities those materials are being used, and by examining information received from the
Purchasing Department to verify amounts and costs purchased in one year. In most cases, the
data was clearly available; where records were not available, the cost and quantity is based on
departmental estimates. A database was created which has been made available for the City
Council to review.
4
Ib- 41
Basis for Determinine 'What is Toxic?':
Materials audited were those for which Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) sheets are required
by law to be available to provide workers with information on the health and safety risks of
materials with which they work. MSDS is triggered by a material that is used at a workplace that
has a potential for causing either a public health or an environmental problem. We found that
every department had lists of materials for which MSDS are required and that the MSDS sheets
themselves are a useful source of information about the ingredients and hazards.'
Under the California Hazardous Substances Information and Training Act and the Hazard
Communication regulation, Title 8, California Code of Regulations, Section 5194:
"all California employers who use hazardous substances have hazard communication
responsibilities to provide this information to their employees...if 1% or more of the
product is a hazardous substance (0.1 % for carcinogens). Chemicals found on the State
of California Director's List of Hazardous Substances have already been shown to be
hazardous but there are many other hazardous substances that are not on the list."
The State California's Hazard Communication Standard ManufacturerlImporter Duties Checklist,
which is a guideline for the hazard communication responsibilities of U.S. manufacturers and
importers of hazardous substances used by California employers requires manufacturers to
automatically establish substances on: a) the National Toxicology Program federal list of
carcinogens, b) the International Agency for Research on Cancer list or
c) OSHA carcinogen lists as carcinogens and need to be identified as such (5194 (d)(5)(B)).
Manufacturers must prepare and employers must make available for employees these MSDS
sheets. Manufacturers must prepare MSDS for any product containing a substance on the
Director's List of Hazardous Substances, any material that has an OSHA permissible exposure
limit or American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists threshold limit value; or
the carcinogens listed on those lists as defined above.
MSDS lists only OSHA-designated Hazardous Substances. Trace ingredients
known to be present in a product, (e.g. benzene) may not be listed.
Information on the health effects of specific materials is often not available
or incomplete for categories which include reproductive, developmental, and
immune effects.
5
16-Yq,:
State of California Toxicity Lists Referenced in Report
Two sources used as references for this report include the State of California's Hazardous
Substances List, otherwise referred as the "Director's List". This is a list of hazardous substances
required to be prepared by the Director ofCaIOSHA, pursuant to Labor Code Section 6380.
The substances on this list are subject to the provisions of Labor Code Sections 6360 through
6399.7 and Section 5194 in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations. Established by the
State of California, the Director's list identifies hazardous substances and carcinogens. Sources
used for listing include 1) International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2) Environmental
Protection Agency lists pursuant to the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts; 3) General Industry
Safety Order Section 5155; 4) California Department of Pesticide Regulation's list of Restricted
Material; 5) Information Alerts put out by the Hazard Evaluation System and Information
Service pursuant to Labor Code Section 147.2. Addtionally, the State of California has
determined characteristics of toxicity, pursuant to section 6626J.24(a)(8), Title 22, California
Code of Regulations (22 CCR).
The Proposition 65 List is a State of California list which identifies substances that contain either
a probable or a known carcinogen.
The City does not use many substances identified on these lists, but there are a few. These
materials are the key materials recommended for phase-out.
They include: (1) Blankrola solvent (p. 12) used in the print shop - containing
perchloroethylene, Trimec and Weed-B-Gone (p.17-18) which both contain 2,4-D and are used
as a pesticide in one or more parks; (2) polytech MAB-I0 used in building construction and
repair __ containing methylene chloride; (3) Stamark brand primer P-46 and safety kleen solvent
used in maintenance - containing benzene.
.
EHC staff interviewed department heads and supervisors to determine which materials were
currently in use and to obtain estimates of the quantities and costs of the materials. A draft audit
was then sent to each department for additions and corrections. A final draft was circulated in
September, 1994. The Public Works divisions, in particular, have been commended for their
efforts to complete the audit.
.
Staff Resources: Staff and departments participating are as follows: Barbara Bamberger,
Environmental Resources Manager, Iracsema Quintilana, Public Works; Lynn Brown, Central
Storekeeper; Public Works supervisors Ted Larson; Rick Matkin, Harlan Wilson, and Greg
Hanson. One of the most critical individuals in the pilot project was Barry Edwards, Custodial
Services Supervisor and the Parkway Recreation Center staff including Manuel Solario and
Frank Alvarado; Jim Davis and Sal Cuellar of the Parks Department; Paul Taylor of Commercial
of California and Tom Layman of the Fire Department.
6
/b-Ycr
Technical Oversi!!:ht Board: A Technical Advisory Board was developed to oversee the project
and provide comments on the findings and recommendations. This technical committee
included: Dr. Ruth Heifetz of the UCSD School of Medicine: Dr. Ann dePeyster ofSDSU's
Graduate School of Public Health; Linda Pratt, Pollution Prevention Specialist with the County
of San Diego's Environmental Health Services, and Ray Palmer, Integrated Pest Management
specialist with the San Diego Unified School District. The participation of all these individuals
was valuable throughout the MPPP.
Fundine: for Proiect: The project was funded by the Jesse Smith Noyes Foundation and the
Environmental Health Coalition. Staff provided in-kind staff resources.
7
\ b - '50
1.2 PILOT PROJECT
An 8.week pilot project was conducted to evaluate alternative pest control and cleaning methods
and products for a trial period at one site. It was anticipated that alternatives which proved to be
workable and acceptable to staff during the pilot program may be implemented citywide.
Parkway Memorial Recreation Center was the site used for the pilot project. Building pest
control, landscape pest control, and cleaning staff met with EHC staff and discussed the
alternatives to be tried. Each of the three groups kept ongoing records with weekly notations on
what worked and what didn't.
1.3 PROJECT FINDINGS:
1.3.1 Pilot Project Findings
1. Cleaning staff, under the direction of Barry Edwards, Supervising Custodian in the Public
Works Dept., tested cleaning alternatives for most major cleaning applications. They
were satisfied with results on most alternatives except the floor cleaner. They noted that
additional training on use of new products would be helpful.
2. Successful pest control alternatives were found for fungicides and herbicides used in
landscape pest control, under the direction of Jim Davis and Sal Cuellar in the Parks and
Rec. Department. Other suggested alternatives were not tried because no pest problems
arose during the pilot test period. These alternatives tested were found to be successful.
3. Structural pest control (i.e., ants, cockroaches, and fleas in and around buildings) is
performed by an outside contractor, Paul Taylor of Commercial of California. This
contractor already works in an Integrated Pest Management mode. His weekly service
consists of monitoring for pest problems, recommending additional sanitation measures
when needed, and providing occasional spot treatments with least-toxic pesticides. EHC
made several recommendations for additional pest control alternatives, which Mr. Taylor
accepted.
1.3.2 Audit Findings:
I. The annual total of toxic materials used in the City is approximately 2.2 million pounds.
The largest portion of this comes from gasoline used for the City's vehicle fleet. "Toxic
material" is defined throughout this document as any material for which a Material Safety
Data Sheet (MSDS) is required by Federal Occupational Safety and Health
Administration Worker Hazard Communication Regulation and CaIOSHA, General
Industry Safety Orders, section 5194, Title 8 of the California Administrative Code.
Based on CalOSHA requirements, the City has a Hazard Communication Program which
8
Ib- 5\
"requires the collection and maintenance ofMSDS sheets. Copies ofMSDS for all
hazardous substances to which City employees may be exposed will be maintained in the
Risk Management Division. MSDS is to be made available for review by all employees
in their work area during each work shift."
2. The annual cost of these materials is approximately $357,000.
3. 24 different types of pesticide applications were identified, with an annual total of 15,700
pounds. Of this amount, over 14,000 pounds is used by Public Works contractors for
structural and landscape pest control. The annual cost of the pesticides in use by staff and
contractors is $9,331. The highest priority for phase-out of all pesticides is an herbicide
which is used in two formulations (Trimec and Weed-B-Gone) at Marina Park.
Trimec and 'Weed-Be-Gone' contain 2,4-D, which is listed on the State of California
Director's List because of its toxicity. Other pesticides account for approximately 13,400
pounds. These include: Dursban, Diazinon, Torus 2E, and Tempo. Substitution of
alternatives will be tested for these chemicals and replaced, where possible.
4. Other chemicals beside pesticides are solvents and corrosives. The City uses solvents in
the print shop and in public works. Staff is recommending substitution for these items.
5. The City has already made, or is in the process of making, substantial reductions in the
use of toxic materials. The most significant include: use of chlorine gas and muriatic acid
has been substantially reduced at city swimming pools. Virtually all building paints and
coatings are now water-based; traffic paints no longer contain lead pigments; a simple
vinegar/water solution is used to clean the gym floors.
6. Gasoline, dispensed each year to City vehicles from the fuel tank at the City operations
yard accounts for almost 1.2 million pounds of the total materials consumed by the City.
Gasoline containing benzene is listed by the State of California as a carcinogen and is
also considered a respiratory hazard. Most, if not all gasoline contains benzene.
However, there is very little that can be done, other than fuel-switching, to reduce the
city's need to use gasoline for fleet vehicles.
7. Storage of materials was examined in relation to the amounts used. With a few
exceptions, it appears that amounts stored are not excessive.
8. Worker safety was not comprehensively evaluated as a part of this project. As a result of
visual inspections and interviews with staff, it is recommended that the City request
consultation from the county industrial hygienist to evaluate two situations and determine
further action upon completion ofthe evaluation. The two situations are the print shop
and the public works yard where vehicle maintenance is performed.
9
16- S L-
Due to the fact that EHC was not qualified to do such an evaluation, staff was unable to
ascertain the impact and extent of dust and vehicle exhaust in the operation yard and
garage and whether or not chemicals used in the print shop are adequately diffused. An
industrial hygienist can further advise the City as to recommended ventilation
improvements that might advance those operations.
9. The difficulties in identifying materials for the inventory data points to the need to better
track the use of those materials that are identified as high priorities for phase out and for
the city to gain confidence in its inventory changes.
1.4 FINAL CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Adol't a formal Pollution Prevention Policv to institutionalize the progress already
made and provide for continuing reduction in the City's use and release of toxic materials.
2. Develop purchasin!! criteria and policv for products that contain toxic materials. The
criteria shall that take into account environmental and public health criteria, and
emphasize a switch of products from those previously purchased to nontoxic or least
toxic alternatives where reasonable, and to include this criteria in consultants contracts,
requests for proposals, and landscape & maintenance contractors.
3. Adopt Best Mana~ement Practices developed in pilot program and listed in Section 2.0
on pages 8-15 of this report.
4. Reduce the City's use of pesticides. specifically materials used by city contractors.
Alternatives are available for most uses. Where alternatives exist, staff recommends two
formulations of '2,4-D' be discontinued and the following pesticides targeted for
reduction to the lowest possible level and eventual phase-out: Dursban, Diazinon, Torus
2E, and Tempo.
5. Reduce the City's use of harsh maintenance materials. where appropriate and adopt
'safer substitute' recommendations listed on page 61-67.
10
{l:.- 53
6. Request industrial hVi:ienist to provide an overall evaluation of key areas within the
city. Utilize existing contract with the County of San Diego for this service. Because
this survey did not fully address worker safety issues, it is recommended these services be
utilized to more fully evaluate ongoing operations for worker related health issues.
a. Identify oDDortunities to reduce Dossible respiratory eX\:lOsure in
consultation with industrial hygienist.
b. Reduce e-asoline and any potential health effects through:
a) development of a worker protection plan for the city's public works
operations yard and b) expansion of replacement vehicles in the fleet that
utilize alternative fuels.
7. Develop a trackini: form and process so quantities and costs of materials targeted for
use-reduction or phase-out can be easily accounted on an annual basis.
11
[6- Sy
2.0 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs)
BMPs are the specific practices that represent the least-polluting method for a given activity at
the current time. Best Management Practices were developed by EHC for the City's pest control,
cleaning, print shop, swimming pools, and equipment maintenance. The BMP for pest control
consists essentially in development of an Integrated Pest Management plan for pest control
citywide. In a few cases, BMPs call for initial capital expenditures, such as sealing porous
concrete floors. In several other instances, the BMPs call for continuing the current practices,
which are already "state of the art." (Removed rest of paragraph)
Obstacles to BMPs were identified as follows: custodial services - the number of staff relative to
the number of people using the city's recreational facilities, along with long hours of operation
hinder accurate control over BMPs. Similarly, the load of work at the print shop does not allow
time for trying out new products or techniques. Technical assistance and staff training need to be
implemented in these two areas to create a more consistent BMP program.
2.1 INTRODUCtION
Phase III ofthe MPPP consisted of development of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for City
operations. BMPs can be defined as any program, process, technology, or operating method that
prevents or reduces pollution. BMPs is a term used frequently in clean water laws and
regulations. The EP A defines BMPs as follows:
"Schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other
management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of 'waters of the United States. '
BMPs also include treatment requirements, operating procedures, and practices to
control plant site runoff. spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, or drainage from
raw material storage. "2
BMPs developed by EHC for the City's MPPP incorporates results from the Pilot Project.
Additional BMPs have been developed by the Engineering Department to fulfill the City's
obligations for the Stormwater Permit program as required by the Clean Water Act. These BMPs
are not part ofthat Permit process but complement and enhance the work done by the
Engineering Department.
2. Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Part I of the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Applications for Discharges from Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer Systems, EPA, April, 1991. EPA-505/8-9l-003A.
12
\ b - ':>S-
2.2 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE (BMP) RECOMMENDATIONS:
2.2.1 Print Shop
The City print shop is a small offset printer which does a high volume of work. Staff
recommends an evaluation be made to examine the possibility of venting solvents outdoors.
Current practice is to leave the door of the print shop open. Direct ventilation may increase the
protection of personnel in the building working in close proximity to these solvents.
1. Current UselIssue: Blankrola solvent
Staff has been evaluating a substitute for Blankrola, which contains perchloroethylene.
This chemical is listed on the Director's List as a carcinogen.
BMP: Continue evaluating new products to replace Blankrola. Also
consider substituting a citrus-based blanket wash product.
Associated Costs: The city currently uses Blankrola at a cost of $46 per gallon.
Helion produces a low volatile organic compound (VOC) product called Safe Solve 240-
A. This solvent is currently used by the City of Santa Monica. It utilizes a water rinse
and wipe off blade. To compare the two, instead of using a pint ofBlankrola,
approximately $6.00 worth, one would use a smaller quantity (i.e: 1-2 ounces) of Safe
Solve 240-A at an approximate cost of$14-$16 per ounce. Another alternative is Nature
Wash at $42 per gallon.
2. Current UselIssue: Inks
The City currently uses conventional hydrocarbon-based inks in the print shop. Soy-
based inks are available and the cost is currently $31.55 for a 5# can which equates to
56.31 per pound. The City of Santa Monica print shop found that 100% soy-based ink
did not work well; they now use a partially soy-based product.
BMP: Identify a soy-based ink that will work appropriately with
the city's printing needs. Vanson provides a 30-50% vegetable oil- based ink (at least
20% coming from soy oil) at a cost of $8.00 per pound.
Associated Costs: Last year the city used 100 pounds of hydrocarbon-based
ink at a total cost of$574.20. Soy-based/vegetable oil-based inks could be purchased for
$800 or less for the same amount. Switching to a less toxic ink would cost the city an
additional $225.80 per year.
13
16- '0;"'(0
3. Current UselIssue: Paper
The shop currently uses recycled paper for about 90% of its work.
BMP:
continue.
4. Current UselIssue: Increased ventilation in the Print Shop.
The City hire an industrial hygienist to evaluate the print shop to determine control
methods for solvent vapors.
BMP:
Follow recommendations of industrial hygienist
2.2.2 Public Works: Equipment Maintenance
1. Current UselIssue: Gasoline powered vehicles
The City is currently test-driving two electric vehicles. A number of trucks have been
converted to compressed natural gas (CNG). The City is also involved in a national
program to evaluate alternative fuels and a groundbreaking demonstration of fuel cell
technology for transit buses.
BMP:
vehicles.
Continue evaluating alternatives to gasoline or diesel fueled
2.
Current Issue:
Motor Oil:
The City uses 4,000 gallons of oil a year.
BMP:
Evaluate switch to re-refined motor oil.
3.
Current Issue:
Use of antifreeze:
.
The city currently uses 100 gallons of antifreeze per year. There are two issues
regarding the use of antifreeze that have been addressed in this report. The first has to
do with properly disposing the waste to reduce its environmental impact, and the second
is its potentially harmful effect on wildlife.
Used antifreeze may contain high concentrations of copper, lead and zinc due to the
antifreeze sitting in the vehicle radiator. The City currently disposes of the antifreeze in
the sewer system. Recycling is the recommended approach. Recycling used antifreeze
can easily be done.
14
U::L - s:-.
Additionally, the city can begin to purchase a less toxic antifreeze compound on the
market which contains propylene glycol instead of ethylene glycol. Ethylene Glycol, is
toxic to animals ifingested, pursuant to section 6626. 24(a)(8), Title 22, 22CCR.
Antifreeze attracts birds and animals because of its sweet taste. The California Condor
recovery program was stifled by condors drinking antifreeze and dying. One alternative
brand was located: Sierra Antifreeze, manufactured by Safe brands Corp. This brand is
considered five to ten times safer than typical antifreeze. This type of antifreeze is also
accepted by Safety-Kleen for recycling. The annual cost difference between the two
products is an additional $289.00.
BMP:
Conduct a pilot test of Sierra Antifreeze in City vehicles.
Associated Costs: The City currently purchases 100 gallons of antifreeze per year at a
cost of $3.77 per gallon. Sierra antifreeze, the recommended alternative is $6.66 per
gallon. The cost of switching to the less toxic alternative an additional $289 annually.
BMP: Set aside a place in the garage for 30-gallon containers of
used antifreeze for recycling.
4. Current UselIssue: Auto Paints
The City currently buys auto parts pre-painted, so that painting does not have to be done
on site.
BMP:
Continue.
5. Current UselIssue: Parts Cleaner:
A Safety-Kleen unit is present in the garage for cleaning parts using petroleum
hydrocarbon solvent. This type of unit is beneficial because used solvent is collected by
the company, thus reducing exposure to city workers, and the solvent is recycled and
reused.
BMP: Continue to use solvent only for final cleaning of parts;
cover tank when not in use to prevent evaporation; allow parts to drain completely to
reduce spilling.
15
Ib- '5~
6. Current Use/Issue: Diesel exhaust:
It is sometimes necessary to have engines running in the garage, which adjoins a
building where other City operations take place. As in item 4 above, staff recommends
hiring an industrial hygienist to evaluate ventilation needs in the garage related to diesel
exhaust.
BMP:
Evaluate recommendations of the industrial hygienist.
2.2.3. Cleaning Products
Cleaning products are used regularly by the Custodial Division of the Public Works Operations
division and by the Parks and Recreation Department. The Custodial Division performs all
regular cleaning of City Administration buildings, libraries, and the parks and recreation centers.
Staff at the Recreation centers also clean the facilities during evening hours and weekends, when
the facilities are open to the public but the Custodial staff are off duty. In addition to the BMPs,
one other recommendation derives from staff input to the process:
Cleaning protocols become standardized to assure both Custodial and Recreation staff are using
the same products and procedures. Training materials be established for staff working in the
recreation centers, including part-time evening and weekend staff, in order to receive adequate
information about cleaning techniques and their potential hazards if not used properly.
BMPs:
1. Current U se/Issue:
Concrete Floors
Several related cleaning problems appear to come from the rough. unsealed concrete floors in the
showers and outdoor restrooms. State law regarding public restrooms. toilet, and dressing
facilities requires:
For shower, toilet, and dressingfacilities, the walls, partitions, doors, lockers, and similar
surfaces which require periodic cleaning shall be maintained smooth andfinished so as to
facilitate cleaning. (CCR, Title 22, Section 65551)
The indoor showers and restrooms are scheduledfor remodeling which will include re-grouting
and sealing. The outdoor restrooms should at least have the sealer applied to reduce the
frequency and increase the effectiveness of disinfectant cleaners used.
BMP: To apply a sealer to prevent seepage of organic matter in
porous surfaces that cannot be thoroughly cleaned.
16
\Io-.~
2.
Current Use/Issue:
Cleaning Services
In the past, a night cleaning crew from the Custodial Division cleaned the facilities, so that by the
morning they were clean and dry. Dry surfaces are not conducive to bacterial/fungal growth and
odor. Resumption of this cleaning shift would provide more effective cleaning and allow the use
of less-toxic cleaning products for routine cleaning.
BMP: Consider adjusting cleaning schedule to allow adequate time for
drying facilities through night cleaning.
3. Current Use/Issue:
General Cleaning Problems
There is a variety of products that the city's janitorial service comes in contact with. These
include ink on desks and tables, cleaning in the recreation centers and libraries. Staff currently
uses Super-BOO, a glycol ether containing a product considered irritating and strong smelling by
workers.
BMP: Replace Super 800 with trisodium phosphate cleaner, either generic
tsp or brand same which also contains sodium sesquicarbonate. Gloves are required with either
alternative product. For indoor walls, doors and countertops, replace Super 800 with Naturally
Yours All-Purpose Cleaner or similar citrus-based cleaner. Naturally Yours is a line of cleaning
products made from citrus-derived solvents.
BMP: Metal polish. Previously used: Brite Boy Metal Polish, contains oxalic acid
and ammonia. Recommended substitute: a moderately abrasive cleaner without acid or ammonia,
such as Kleen King Stainless Steel and Copper Cleaner, which contains abrasive minerals and a
nonionic surfactant.
BMP: Graffiti remover. Previously used: solvent-based graffiti removers.
Suggested replacement: So Safe or other citrus-based graffiti remover.
BMP: Air freshener for showers and restrooms. Previously used: Bubble
Gum Air Freshener, disinfectants. Suggested instead: seal porous concrete surfaces, as noted
above; add an additional cleaning shift per day, as suggested above; substitute Earth Care
products mineral deodorizer, a zeolite-based deodorizer, or other mineral deodorizer which acts as
a filter and does not release anything into indoor air.
BMP: Glass cleaner. Previously used: sudsy ammonia solution.
Suggested replacement: vinegar and water solution or commercial citrus-based glass cleaner such
as Naturally Yours Glass and Window Cleaner.
BMP: Tile cleaner for removal of soap and water spots. Previously used:
Cling On, a phosphoric acid containing product. Suggested substitute: Naturally Yours
17
16- bO
BasinlTubrrile cleaner or similar citric acid-based product.
BMP: Water Conditioning Unit: An additional step which would reduce
water and soap spots and reduce the need for cleaning to remove them, is installation of a water
conditioning unit to the water line coming into the building. A water conditioner, as opposed to a
water softener, does not add or remove minerals from water; it consists of a semi-precious metal
alloy which changes the electrical properties of mineral ions so that they do not precipitate out. It
also has potentially great benefits for reducing the amount of cleaning and chlorine needed for the
swimming pools. Staff is recommending evaluation of a system, for a trial period, on a water line
which supplies water to a swimming pool and adjacent building.
BMP: Tile cleaner, disinfectant. Previously used: A-500; contains
quaternary ammonium chlorides. Suggested replacement: Naturally Yours BasinlTub/Tile cleaner
or similar citric acid-based product. Citric acid is not considered a disinfectant although it may
have weak disinfecting action. However, this cleaner has been used successfully in the City of
Santa Monica to clean all public restrooms and showers, including outdoor facilities used by
Santa Monica's large homeless population. According to staff, both custodial workers and the
public are pleased with the level of sanitation and the smell ofthe facilities.
BMP: Spot cleaning of body fluids. Previously used: chlorine bleach
(5.25% sodium hypochlorite) for fast, effective cleanup and disinfection of spills of potentially
pathogenic organic materials such as blood and human wastes. We do not recommend any
change in this procedure, in accordance with City policy on prevention of blood-borne pathogens
and general worker safety considerations.
BMP: Toilet Bowl Cleaner. Previously used: Pine Odor Disinfectant,
containing quaternary ammonium chlorides and pine oil, for basic sanitation, and a hydrochloric
acid-based cleaner for removal of hard water deposits. Suggested replacement: Naturally Yours
Toilet Bowl Cleaner, or other citric acid based cleaner. The cleaner may need to be left on longer
or used more frequently to remove hard water deposits.
BMP: Drain cleaner. Currently used: an enzyme based product which
digests organic matter that may block drains if allowed to accumulate. Suggested alternative:
Continue current practice. This is the safest type of product available for prevention and clearing
of blocked drains.
BMP: Cleaner for gymnasium floors. Currently used: a vinegar/water
solution. Suggested cleaner: continue current practice.
18
,
\b- Ie \
2.2.4. Swimming Pool Chemicals
The Recreation Division of Parks and Recreation has responsibility for maintaining the City's two
swimming pools, at the Parkway Memorial Recreation Center and at Lorna Verde.
Current Use/Issue:
Pool Chemicals
Several major changes have already been made to use safer substitutes that will effectively disinfect and
maintain pH balance in the pools:
. Chlorine gas: replaced with chlorine bleach.
. Muriatic acid: replaced with CO] at one pool so far, with plans to introduce it at the other
pool as well.
BMP: Test feasible alternatives for chlorine-based disinfection available
for public pools and compatible with health codes.
2.2.5. Pesticides
J. Current UsefIssue:
Phase out priority pesticides for use in landscape and recreational
areas.
Of the pesticides used by andfor the City ofChula Vista, only Drione is considered low enough in risk
that the BMP is to continue using it indefinitely. For all the remaining pesticides the goal should be to
ultimately phase them out. Five pesticides that are high priority for phaseout are:
. 2.4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic (2,4-D) acid -- found in Trimec and Weed-B-Gone
. Diazinon
. Dursban
. Tempo
. Torus 2E
BMP: Products that contain 2,4-D be phased out. Other listed
pesticides should have the highest priority for implementation of alternatives to reduce or
eliminate their use.
BMP: An Integrated Pest Management (IPM) training program be
implemented to provide permanent, least-toxic pest control for the City. The IPM program is
proposed to consist of the following elements:
J. Identification of all potential pests
2. Establishment of monitoring guidelines for each pest
19
\6-b~
3. Establishment of injury levels and action thresholds for each pest species before doing any
treatment
4. Creation of a recordkeeping system
5. Development of a list of acceptable management strategies for each pest. The existing list of
BMPs for pest control may be used as a reference in developing this list.
6. Development of specific criteria for selection of pest management methods.
7. Development of guidelines to be followed each time a pesticide is used.
8. Development of a list of resources
9. Establishment of procedures for review and update of the IPM program.
2.3 GENERAL COMMENTS
The following information is offered to assist in development of acceptable management strategies to be
included in Chula Vista's IPM program, and to provide guidance during the interim period before the
IPM program is implemented.
Pest problems affecting the City of Chula Vista's structural, landscape, and open space properties include:
indoor and outdoor ants, roaches, fleas, mice, rats, gophers, squirrels, skunks, mosquitoes, pigeons,
termites, weeds, and plant pests. The following information provides general guidelines for managing
these pests in the least toxic manner.
Indoor Ants:
Indoor ants come indoors for the following reasons:
. They are lured by food.
. They seek water when weather is hot.
. Construction disturbs their nests
. Heavy watering or rain floods their nests.
Guidelines:
. Sanitation and food storage that excludes ants.
. Caulking and sealing structural cracks where ants enter.
. A one-time treatment of boric acid inside the walls needs to be done.
. Avoid watering outdoor vegetation on days when City Council meets or when there are other
public meetings
. Trim all vegetation away from structures. Ants use tree branches as bridges to get inside of
buildings.
. If their nest/s can be located, place a bait of two tablespoons each ofcommeaI and boric acid
moistened with soy oil down into the nest.
. If ants get into indoor areas, wipe up the areas with white vinegar. This eradicates the pheromone
system by which ants communicate to the nest about their food source.
20
Ib-63
Outdoor Ants
The most common types of ants, Argentine ants, are attracted to sweet and sticky foods. They also like
sweet sap in some foliage.
Guidelines:
. Sanitation is crucial. Sidewalks must be kept clean ofthe attractive sticky stuff. If treatment is
needed, apply a light soap spray or white vinegar spray (half vinegar, half water) to discourage
them.
. Avoid foliage that attracts ants because of sap or aphid infestation.
. If ants do infest foliage, spray foliage with mild soap spray and then apply vegetable-based
Tanglefoot or other sticky barrier around the base of foliage to keep ants from traveling up
branches.
Cockroaches
Cockroaches have been around for 400 million years and are hardy, adaptive insects. Toxic pesticide
sprays do not kill all of them; survivors infest walls, procreate, and return in three to four weeks. Hence,
common sense control practices are needed.
Guidelines:
. Sanitation and food storage that exclude cockroaches.
. Caulk and seal structural cracks and crevices.
. Apply boric acid into walls, a one-time-only activity.
. Set out nontoxic sticky traps, which are good for up to three months, in kitchen and bathroom
areas. Commercially, these traps are available in grocery stores: Black Flag Roach Motels are one
brand that is generally available. See Resources for other brands.
Fleas
Besides being annoying, fleas can cause disease and allergies. Spraying toxic pesticides is futile in
controlling them and can be hazardous to your health.
Guidelines:
. Indoor fleas are best controlled by frequent vacuuming of carpets and upholstery. Stearn cleaning
of rugs or carpets provides effective emergency treatment if there is a serious flea infestation.
. If these procedures are insufficient, use an insect growth regulator in a liquid spray formulation to
prevent adult flea emergence. Desiccating dusts such as silica aerogel or diatomaceous earth are
also effective non-toxic flea controls for indoor areas. Use a dust mask when applying either type
of dust.
21
\6 - bY
. Fleas in outdoor areas can be controlled by either drying out or heavily watering the area.
Insecticidal soaps or pyrethrin-based insecticides may be needed in addition.
. Some professional pest control companies have additional methods at their disposal, such as
borate insecticides for carpets and devices that use heat or cold to kill fleas.
Termites
. Most termite problems can be managed with spot treatment of dehydrating dusts, wood
replacement, and other least toxic practices. These methods usually require the services of a least
toxic pest control company.
Weed and Plant Pests
The presence of weed and plant pests, which includes fungus diseases, are symptoms of poor landscape
design: inappropriate plant and grass selection; poor landscape practices such as over- or underwatering,
lack of aeration; inappropriate mowing height; use of synthetic fertilizers and toxic pesticides which
sterilize the soil, kill natural predators, and weaken grass and plants making them susceptible to pests;
and lack of knowledge about plant care. These problems are not restricted to Chula Vista but are
universal.
Until IPM for lawns are fully implemented, Fusilade will be needed on spot basis for crab grass. Better
landscape design and the introduction of grasses that will crowd out crabgrass, the use of organic
fertilizers, and a regular soil aeration program are the needed changes to reduce the crabgrass problem.
Resources for BMPs
. A reference for landscape personnel is: Common Sense Pest Control. It is $39.00 from the Bio-
Integral Resource Center in Berkeley, CA. It can be ordered by calling: 1-510-524-2567.
. Educational consultants in least toxic pest control practices or Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
are recommended for landscape as well as structural pests. Locally, Dr. Kenuel Ogwaro is
available for IPM education. He can be contacted at: EcoCare Co.- 672-2810. In California, Bio-
Integral Resource IPM consultants and trainers can be contacted at: 510-524-2567.
. Companies in San Diego County which provide nontoxic or least toxic termite control include:
Tallon Termite and Pest Control (freezing method using liquid nitrogen) - 236-0304; Lloyd's Pest
Control (heat method) - 298-9865; The Termite Inspector (microwave method) 562-6941.
. Pigeons: Albert Green, U.S General Services Administration, Integrated Pest Management
Director for the Federal Government, is a pigeon control expert with the best in pigeon control
information and films. He can be contacted at: 202-708-6948.
. To order non-toxic traps in bulk: Contact AgriSense Co.in Fresno, CA (1-209-276-4250) or
22
1-6-65
Seabright Laboratories in Emeryville, CA (1-800-284-7363).
. Vectors. Mice, rats, gophers, squirrels, skunks, and mosquitoes are known as vectors. San Diego
County has the best least-toxic Vector Control Department in the country. San Diego County and
all 18 cities participate financially in a regional vector control program. They have educational
films available to all on vector control and since cities pay for vector control services, call on
them for least toxic vector control guidance. Vector Control can be contacted by any city or any
city or county resident at: 338-2170.
23
\6- 66
3.0 Municipal Pollution Prevention Program Description
3.1 HISTORY AND SCOPE OF PROJECT
The Municipal Pollution Prevention Program (MPPP) is a model program designed by EHC to reduce
the use of toxic materials by non-industrial users.
There has been much effort at the manufacturing and household levels over the past decade to reduce the
use and disposal of toxics. There are also vast numbers of small businesses, offices, and municipalities
where toxics --- in the form of pesticides, herbicides, etc.. are used on a daily basis for cleaning, pest
control, building a..rld fleet maintenance, and other operations. These institutions have mostly been
ignored in the push to reduce our society's use oftoxic materials, yet people work in them and visit them;
their health and well-being on the job potentially affected by the workplace environment. Govemmental
entities such as municipalities utilize materials that may be toxic; thus pointing to the opportunity of
becoming a leader in pollution prevention.
The MPPP consisted of three phases: an audit of current toxic materials use; a pilot pollution prevention
project at one location; and development of best management practices to reduce toxics use. The City of
Chula Vista MPPP was funded by a $30,000 grant from the Jesse Smith Noyes Foundation to the
Environmental Health Coalition.
3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH COALITION
The Environmental Health Coalition (EHC) was contracted by the City to examine the use of potentially
toxic materials. These materials are identified by OSHA and CalOSHA as requiring Material Safety
Data Sheets (see page 5). EHC was responsible for recommending alternative materials that would
reduce the risk to both workers and the general public. EHC was responsible for recommending
alternative materials that would reduce the risk to both workers and general public. EHC is a San Diego-
based non-profit environmental education and advocacy group, founded in 1980. The Coalition is
dedicated to the prevention and cleanup of toxic pollution that threatens human health and the
environment. To achieve this, EHC:
. Promotes environmental, social, and economic justice among all people;
. Organizes with communities to increase their empowerment;
. Advocates institutional, policy, and social change, and;
. Educates to increase understanding oftoxic hazards.
EHC has worked with a variety of agencies to reduce and/or eliminate the use of toxic materials in order
to prevent potential adverse health effects on workers. These institutions have included a large hotel, a
fast-food restaurant, many schools in San Diego County, a large church, and three day-care centers. In
1988, the EHC began a Safe Substitutes project as an element of community education for the San Diego
County Household Hazardous Waste Program. The Safe Substitutes project produced a series of
educational materials on less-toxic alternatives for households.
24
\6-bl
3.3 THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
The City of Chula Vista has seventeen major departments. A total of approximately 1000 full time
equivalent staff are employed within these departments. The organization of the departments and the
toxic materials and substitute materials used by them are outlined in the Toxic Audit section of this
report.
The EHC selected the City for a Municipal Pollution Prevention Project (MPPP) based on the City's
demonstrated enthusiastic commitment to the reduction and/or elimination of pollution caused by
materials used at its facilities. Virtually every department surveyed by the EHC during the course of this
project had already made changes, many of them major, in the use and storage of hazardous materials.
During the course ofthe year, the City continued to demonstrate its commitment to least toxic operations.
These changes are described in detail under the Toxic Audit section of this report.
A parallel process to the MPPP that has also addressed the City's use of toxics is the development of
Chula Vista's Stormwater Permit. The permit was issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board in
1990 to the 18 cities in San Diego County, to the County itself, and to the Unified Port District. Each of
these agencies is a co-permittee and, as such, is required to develop stormwater management plans to
reduce the non-source pollutants entering their stormwater systems, by:
. Development of a monitoring program for both dry weather and wet weather flows into the storm
water system;
. Development of an illicit connection/illegal discharge detection program; .
. Development of both educational and structural best management practices for the reduction of
pollutants in storm water;
. Development of the authority to implement and enforce stormwater pollution control programs.
In Chula Vista, the Engineering Department has responsibility for implementing the permit. The BMPs
developed by the EHC for the City of Chula Vista are not a part of this permit, but complement and
enhance the work done by the City Engineering staff.
3.4 COSTS OF USING TOXICS
There are three categories of costs incurred by the use of toxic materials:
1. The cost of the material itself, which in many cases is higher than the cost of non-toxic
alternatives
2. The cost of health care and lost productivity due to worker exposure to toxic materials
3. The cost of managing toxics, including environmental regulatory fees, hazardous waste disposal
costs, costs of insurance and liability, and time spent complying with hazard communication and
reporting requirements
25
l6- 6'i!:
It is important to consider all three of these factors, so that the true costs of using the product can be
incorporated into purchasing decisions. Therefore, an immediate goal is to develop specifications for
toxicity criteria and purchasing products.
3.5 POLLUTION PREVENTION
3.5.1 Definition of Pollution Prevention
Pollution Prevention is defined as using the safest materials as efficiently as possible to reduce human
health exposure and environmental risk. The Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Act is an example of
pollution prevention legislation (Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Institute, 1993):
"Toxics Use Reduction means in-plant changes in production processes or raw materials that
reduce, avoid, or eliminate the use of toxic or hazardous substances or generation of hazardous
by-products per unit of product, so as to reduce risks to the health of workers, consumers, or the
environment without shifting risks between workers, consumers, or parts of the environment."
There are four recognized techniques applicable to the City which meet this definition:
. Input substitution - using nontoxic or less toxic raw materials instead of highly toxic ones;
. Production unit modernization - replacing or upgrading production equipment and
technologies.
. Improved operation and maintenance - implementing better housekeeping, system
adjustments, control equipment, etc., to improve efficiency.
. Recycling within production process - installing closed-loop recycling of certain substances as
part of the process line.
Product substitution is the method relied upon most in development of Best Management Practices
(BMPs). Opportunities for improved operation and maintenance, and upgrading of equipment and
technologies are potential toxic reduction techniques; for example, the City has sealed concrete floors to
reduce the need for certain harmful cleaners, or investing in well-designed weed whackers to reduce use
of herbicides.
3.5.2 Benefits of Pollution Prevention
The benefits of toxic use reduction for cities include:
. A safer, healthier work environment for municipal staff and the visiting public;
. Better indoor air quality for staff and public;
. More economical cleaning and pest control;
26
J6-69
. A contribution toward improved environmental quality;
. Reduced regulatory burden;
. Encouraging the growth of businesses which provide least toxic pest control, cleaning services,
and products.
Municipalities present opportunities for significant quantity reduction oftoxic materials, as well as ways
to make workplaces safer for staff and visitors. Government agencies are also in a position to provide
leadership for their communities, by example and by procurement of less-toxic materials and services
from private businesses.
3.5.3 Obstacles to Implementation
Because switching to products that are non or less toxic require use of new products and new ways of
using these products, EHC and staff have evaluated and acknowledge the following obstacles to
implementation that must be addressed and overcome in switching to 'least toxic' alternatives. These
include:
. Difficulties in procurement - municipalities typically purchase garden and cleaning supplies from
one supplier who can provide the materials in large quantities. Some alternative cleaning and pest
control products are not carried by janitorial supply outlets; they may have to be obtained
separately.
. City staff or contractors may be fluent in Spanish, Tagalog, or other languages, whereas product
labels and other materials are mostly in English. Management will need to take extra measures to
assure an understanding of use of new product instructions and information, and to provide,
where possible, into the appropriate languages. This will facilitate their use as well as help
communicate product risk and safety to the workforce.
. Additional training - least toxic pest control requires knowledge of Integrated Pest Management
(IPM) which prescribes evaluation of mechanical and biological controls and nontoxic chemicals
before using a toxic material. Also required is some knowledge of the pest. Some IPM training for
landscape and park maintenance will result in a smoother transition to better alternatives, and will
provide staff with a greater understanding of integrated pest management and its relationship to
the public's health and well being.
. Government specifications - in certain cases, government agencies working with the City have
prescribed products to be used, particularly in cases where the City maintains parkland owned by
the Port District. For example, the Port District requires the City to use a particular pesticide at
Marina Park which can be substituted for a less toxic alternative. In the absence of specifications
that contain environmentallhealth criteria, price considerations may be the primary determinant;
the least expensive product will be purchased rather than the most environmentally benign
product.
27
16-lD
. Contracted work _ In situations where the City subcontracts pest control and/or cleaning, the
contractors must be trained in integrated pest management and the contract conditions specified.
None of these problems are insurmountable. The key to successfully adapting new products and routines
is the involvement and support of all the staff. "Making the switch" is a team effort that requires enough
flexibility to allow for some experimentation.
3.5.4 Making the Switch
Although each department has a unique configuration of functions, materials, staff, and routines, the
basic steps of pollution prevention will become standard as products are switched::
. Identify the hazards of each material;
. Categorize the materials that most need to be eliminated or reduced;
. Identify alternative products and techniques;
. Create a plan for implementing alternatives. Alternatives may be tried a few at a time throughout
the city, or a particular facility may be used to pilot test the substitutes;
.
. Evaluate and problem solve. How well do the alternatives work? What obstacles exist? Review of
the alternatives should continue on a regular basis until use of the new products and techniques is
routine.
.
28
Ib-l I.
4.0 TOXICS AUDIT
The Toxics Audit was the first stage of the MPPP conducted for the City ofChula Vista. This part of the
project began in August 1993. The purpose of the audit was to establish baseline information on toxics
used in the City, and to pinpoint opportunities for reduction or elimination of particular uses of materials.
4.1 CITY STRUCTURE
The City of Chula Vista has seventeen major departments. They are:
. Administration
. Bayfront Conservancy (Nature Interpretive Center)
. Building and Housing
. City Attorney
. City Clerk
. City Council
. Community Development
. Finance
. Fire
. Management Services
. Parks and Recreation
. Personnel
. Planning
. Police
. Public Works
Each ofthese departments contains one or more divisions. The Finance, Fire, Parks and Recreation, and
Public Works Departments were found to be the departments responsible for the majority of toxic
materials purchasing and use; they were also the primary ordering departments. Departments may
purchase small amounts of products with petty cash, but standard supplies are ordered from the
Purchasing Department, which makes the purchase and may store bulk quantities at the City's Operations
Center.
Materials are grouped by Department and Division, and also by their primary uses: adhesives; cleaners;
fuels; paints/coatings; pesticide; print/photo chemicals; and vehicle maintenance materials.
4.2 METHODOLOGY
EHC focused their attention on those products being used by the city for which Material Safety Data
(MSDS) sheets are required. These are the materials deemed occupational hazards, a broad category
which seemed very likely to also include the materials that may present a hazard to the public or the
environment. We found that every department had lists of materials for which MSD sheets are required
29
l6-1:2...
and that the MSDS sheets themselves are a useful source of information about the ingredients and
hazards.3
Not all of these materials are necessarily of great concern - as is the case with pink lotion soap. Others
may be more dangerous, such as the pesticide Trimec, which contains 2,4-0 used at Marina Park.
EHC staff interviewed department heads and supervisors to determine which materials were currently in
use and to obtain estimates of the quantities and costs of the materials. A draft audit was then sent to each
department for additions and corrections. A final draft was circulated in September, 1994. The Public
Works divisions, in particular, have been commended for their efforts to complete the audit.
4.3 TOXICS INVENTORY
Hazardous materials, such as those used by the City of Chula Vista, can be classified many different
ways, e.g., by hazard, by use, or by department. The Appendix lists the materials inventory by use of
material (Appendix A), the hazards of the material (Appendix B), and a comparison of amounts used per
year versus amounts stored (Appendix C).
4.4 HAZARDS OF TOXIC MATERIALS IN USE
The incidence and severity of harmful effects of toxic materials depends on two primary factors - the
chemical characteristic and toxicity, and the method by which it is used. For example, is the material
used in large amounts? Is it sprayed? Is it heated? Is it used outside or in a well-ventilated location
inside? Does it come into contact with skin? Does it generate dust or vapors?
Harmfulness to the environment depends on the hazardous characteristics of the material which includes
toxicity, reactiveness, ignitability and corrosiveness. It also depends upon the use ofthe material. Is it
allowed to evaporate or run into storm drains? Is it contained? Is it a potential threat to wildlife?
Specifics on the type of products and their potential effects are listed in appendix 2.
4.4.1 Hazards of Maintenance Materials
A variety of materials are used in the janitorial, public works and park and recreation departments for
various maintenance operations. Maintenance materials include solvents, lubricants, fuels, automotive
fluids, cleaning supplies, and such. These materials have been catalogued and recommendations are
listed in the Environmental Health Coalition's White Paper to the City in Attachment 2.
MSDS lists only OSHA-designated Hazardous Substances. Trace ingredients known
to be present in a product, (i.e. benzene) may not be listed. Information on the
health effects of specific materials is often not available or incomplete for
categories which include reproductive, developmental, and immune effects.
30
Ib-,.3
4.4.2 Hazards of Pesticides
Introduction
A pesticide is a generic name for chemicals meant to control and/or eradicate a pest. Pest refers to
something that occurs where it is not wanted. Large classes of insect and plant pests have their own
specific names: insecticide (insects), herbicides (weeds), rodenticides (rodents), acaricides (mites and
ticks) etc. The City of Chula Vista uses primarily insecticides and herbicides. Basic information
regarding these materials is summarized below:
. Information about acute, or direct, effects of pesticide exposure is the primary information
existing today. Long term health effects and the effects of chronic, low-level exposure are mostly
unknown or cannot be accurately determined because of the lack of health data. Therefore, all
health effects information for the purposes of this report have been obtained from the product
MSDS sheets designed to prevent acute health effects. Additional comments regarding health and
environmental effects from sources other than the MSDS are included in certain instances.
. Pesticides are used for the following pest problems: ants, silverfish, roaches, fleas, termites,
weeds, and plant diseases.
. None of the active ingredients used in the City's pest control has been tested for the full range of
health effects required by federal law.
. All of the product labels wam to keep the product out of the reach of children, not to swallow it,
and not to contaminate water with the product.
. Pesticides can actually cause pest problems by killing beneficial insects. This leads to an increase
of unwanted insect pests, called pest resurgence.
31
11o-,L\
The following table lists the pesticides used by the City. All are either insecticides or herbicides:
PESTICIDE AMOUNT/ YEAR DIVISION OR CONTRACTOR
DIAZINON GRANULES (I) 10 LBS STATION #6
DURSBAN (I) 2 OZ. STATION #6
TRIMEC (H) 12 GAL PARKS
SURFLAN (H) 9 GAL PARKS
ROUNDUP (H) 70 GAL PARKS
ROUNDUP (H) 91 GAL PARKS, BLUE SKIES CONTRACTOR
DIAZINON 5 G (I) 458 LBS PW CUST, COMM OF CA. CONTR
DURSBAN L.O. (I) 1536 GAL PW CUST, COMM OF CA. CONTR
DURSBAN sow (I) 20 GAL PW CUST, COMM OF CA. CONTR
DURSBAN WP (I) 50 GAL PW CUST, COMM OF CA. CONTR
DRIONE D (I) 21 OZ PW CUST, COMM OF CA. CONTR
TEMPO (I) 5 GAL PW CUST, COMM OF CA. CONTR
TORUS 2E (I) 1 GAL PW CUST, COMM OF CA. CONTR
EMPIRE (I) 1 GAL PW CUST, COMM OF CA. CONTR
ROUNDUP (H) 10 GAL PARKS, RC'S LANDSCAPE
RONSTAR (H) 150 LBS PARKS, RC'S LANDSCAPE
FUSILADE 2000 1E (H) 1 GAL PARKS, RC'S LANDSCAPE
SURF LAN (H) 1 GAL PARKS, RC'S LANDSCAPE
WEED-B-GONE (H) 96 OZ PARKS, RC'S LANDSCAPE
POAST (H) 100 OTS PARKS. RC'S LANDSCAPE
H = Herbicide
I = Insecticide
Insecticides
The City ofChula Vista contracts with a local firm to provide pest control for City administration
buildings, recreation centers, libraries, and fire and police departments. Insect problems for which
pesticides are applied are fleas, ants, roaches, and silverfish. The inside and perimeters of most City
administration buildings are sprayed once a month. Pesticides are bought off the shelf and used
occasionally at the fire stations to control ants and cockroaches.
Herbicides
Landscape maintenance is assigned to the Parks Division ofthe Parks and Recreation Department. Parks
staff provide weed management on landscaped areas. The Parks Division contracts with two companies
for weed control in the open spaces. Weedkillers used by both the Parks Division and the contractors are:
RoundUp, Surflan, and Trimec. One of the two contractors also applies Ronstar, Fusilade, Poast, and
Weed-B-Gone.
A comprehensive list of all pesticides used by the City, with their application, formulation, and health
32
Ib-l'5"
hazards is presented in Appendix D ofthis report.
4.5 ANALYSIS OF AUDIT
4.5.1 Toxic Totals
The City uses a total of2.2 million lbs. oftoxics a year with an annual cost of approximately $357,000.
TABLE 1
CHULA VISTA TOXICS AUDIT
TOTALS, BY TYPE OF MATERIAL
Type of Number Total Cost per
Material of Pounds* Year
Items
Adhesive 3 359 $375
Cleaner 37 6,206 $12,247
Coating 20 83,800 $68,058
Lubricant 7 225 $527
Other** 17 92,817 $37,547
Pesticide 24 15,697 $9,331
Print 13 586 $4,099
Vehicle 21 2,013,782 $224,797
TOTALS 142 2,213,472 $356,981
. Gallons converted to pounds at 8.34 lbs. per gallon.
"Other materials include pool chemicals, water cooling system chemicals, propane and oxygen, highlighting pens and
markers, etc.
The single largest quantity toxic material used by the City is gasoline: about 186,300 gallons per year.
Gasoline has respiratory effects if not vented properly. It is on the proposition 65 list as a carcinogen due
to the benzene in the gasoline. Thus it is a high priority for pollution prevention efforts.
33
16-1'-0
Other materials used in large amounts include automotive products - diesel fuel and motor oil - and
paints. These materials do not currently have substitutes. The City has already switched almost entirely to
water-based paints, as noted below.
4.5.2 Changes Already Made
The audit reflects the use oftoxics by a City that has already implemented pollution prevention in many
of its practices and products. The following is a summary of changes undertaken in recent years to reduce
or eliminate use oftoxics:
. Street paints are all water-based, not solvent-based;
. Street paints no longer contain leaded pigments;
. Graffiti removers are citrus based solvents (terpenes), not chlorinated hydrocarbon solvents;
. Cement and asphalt: are now bought pre-mixed, so that aggregate mixes and calcium chloride are
no longer stored on site. This also eliminates the dust hazard of storing and mixing these
materials;
. Vehicle parts are purchased already painted. This eliminates the use and storage of auto enamels
and reducers on site;
. Chlorine gas pool cleaner has been replaced with sodium hypochlorite, a much safer form of
chlorine. Sodium hydroxide for alkalinity control has been phased out. Carbon dioxide (CO,) is
being used at one pool to replace muriatic (hydrochloric) acid for pH control. This has been a
successful trial and CO, will replace muriatic acid at the other pool, completely eliminating this
corrosive liquid;
. The sewer lift degreaser is now citrus based instead of a petroleum based product;
. Building paints are water-based;
. For auto parts cleaning, the City is now using the reformulated Safety-Kleen solvent in place of
Safety-Kleen 105, which contained from 0.5 to 1.0% each of xylene, ethylbenzene, toluene, 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, and perchloroethylene;
. Vehicle air-conditioning Freon is now recycled by a mobile service business. This is the best
option (besides no air conditioning) until a substitute refrigerant that works in cars is developed
for commercial use;
. Drain openers are enzyme based instead of sulfuric acid based;
. Urinal blocks (contained p-dichlorobenzene) have been eliminated;
. The cleaner for gym floor is a solution of vinegar and water.
. Simple Green is used instead of the solvent based cleaner Instromet for cleaning parking meter
parts.
Also, EHC assisted the City with the selection of Tallon Termite for the treatment of the City
Administration building. This firm used liquid nitrogen, a non-toxic method which uses cold
temperatures to kill termites.
34
16-1,
4.5.3 Exceptions
One type of material used by virtually every department is penetrating lubricant such as WD-40, a
petroleum distillate solvent. This represents a high priority for phase-out, but as yet no substitute product
or process has been identified.
4.5.4 Priorities for Phase-Out
1. Use reduction: It is recommended that materials which are highly toxic and environmentally
damaging chemicals be phased out, where possible. These include certain pesticides, carcinogens, and
chlorinated hydrocarbons, especially Trimec, Polytech MAB-IO, and Blankrola.
2. Quantity Reduction: It is recommended that the quantity oftoxic materials in use, especially
regarding auto fuels and related materials be reduced. The City's ongoing interest in utilitizing feasible
alternative fuels for automobiles will assist this effort.
35
\6-l~
TABLE 2
CHULA VISTA TOXICS AUDIT:
MATERIALS THAT CONTAIN A CARCINOGEN
MATERIAL CARCINOGEN USED BY AMOUNT COST PER YEAR
PER YEAR
USED
Trimec 2,4- D Parks Division 12 Gal. $280
Weed-B-Gone 2,4-D Parks Div., RC's 1 Gal. $5
Landscape
Gasoline Benzene** Equipment Maint. 186,300 Gal. $167,000
Safety-Kleen Benzene, trace*** Equipment Maint. 30 Gal. NA
Premium
Solvent
Stamark Brand Benzene Street Maint. 10 Gal. $200
Primer P-46
Polytech MAB- Methylene chloride Building C & R 6 Cans $72
10
Blankrola Perchloroethylene Print Shop 25 Gal. $230
*These compounds are listed on the State of California Director's List (see page 5-6). Information on
ingredients comes from Material Safety Data Sheets.
**Gasoline also contains toluene, listed on the Prop. 65 list as a reproductive toxin.
*** The reformulated Safety-Kleen Premium Solvent does not list benzene as one of the Hazardous
Ingredients on the MSDS. However, the solvent may contain a detectable amount of benzene, at a level of 0.4
mg/I or less. The solvent may also contain detectable amounts of toluene. (Material Safety Data Sheet #6608,
revised 2/94, Safety-Kleen Corp.)
NA = Information not available.
36
Ib-I~
TABLE 3
CHULA VISTA TOXICS AUDIT:
MA TERIALS THAT CONTAIN A CHLORINATED HYDROCARBON
CHLORINATED USED BY AMOUNT/ COST/
MATERIAL COMPOUND YEAR YEAR
Trimec 2,4-D Parks Div. 12 Gal. $280
Weed-B-Gone 2,4-D Parks Div., RC's 1 Gal. $5
Landscape
CPVC Solvent CPVC resin* Sewer Div. 8 Gal. $75
Cement
WD-40 Chlorinated Solvent Equip. Main!. 8 Gal. $80
Brakleen TCA** Equip. Main!. 4 Gal. $69
Crown Extra HD Chlorinated Street Main!. 5 Gal. $40
Soluble Oil paraffins
Grease TCA Building C & R 6 Tubs $60
Polytech Lub. CFC, TCA Building C & R 6 Cans $72
Compound
Polytech. MAB- Methylene Building C & R 6 Cans $72
10 Chloride, TCA
Thompson & TCA Building C & R 30 Cans $135
Formby Triflow
Belt Dressing Aerothene* * * Building C & R 10 Cans $30
Blankrola Perchloroethylene Print Shop 25 Gal. $230
Deglazing TCA 96% Print Shop 5 Gal. $183
Solvent
Chlorinated compounds persist in the environment and are known to interfere with the reproductive capacity of
many animal species, including humans. Recent research links them tentatively to human breast cancer as
well. (Davis, D.L., Bradlow, H.L., Wolff, M., Woodruff, T., Hoel, D.G., and Anton-Culver, H., 1993.
"Medical Hypothesis: Xenoestrogens as Preventable Causes of Breast Cancer." Environmental Health
Perspectives. Vol. 101 (5), pp. 373-377.)
37
\b-'30
All ingredients information is from Material Safety Data Sheets.
· Chlorinated polyvinylchloride resin.
** TCA = I, 1,1- Trichloroethane, also known as methyl chloroform
.** Aerothene is a trade name for a group of chlorinated solvents (Hawley's Condensed Chemical Dictionary,
II th Ed., 1987).
4.5.5 Financial Analysis
Direct Cost Savings
The most clear-cut cost savings result when particular uses of toxics are simply eliminated, for example, the
use of "air freshening" urinal blocks which contain the carcinogen para-dichlorobenzene. Elimination of 2,4-0
herbicides would provide a simple cost saving; the alternative is a decision that clover growing on lawns in
City parks is acceptable. Similarly, implementation of integrated pest management for structural pest control
can provide significant savings in materials costs.
Typical pest control spray services cost up to several hundred dollars per year, depending on the size ofthe
buildings to be sprayed and frequency of spraying. This cost minus the cost of relatively inexpensive
alternative pest control products represents the cost savings available from a switch to less toxic pest control.
Example: Minimal monthly building perimeter spraying for ants starts at $12 and goes up according to
building size. Applying boric acid powder to cracks and crevices where roaches live and ants enter then
caulking and sealing them would cost about $200 for a building with an approximate area of 4,000 square
feet. Control for such a method generally lasts about 25 years. This is a big savings in a very short period of
time - the monthly spray service would come to $3,600 in this time, assuming no price increases.
.
Use of generic vinegar, ammonia, and soap or detergent in cleaning formulations can offer great savings over
commercial cleaners that use these same ingredients as the active materials. In a sample cost comparison, one
gallon ofVons white vinegar, enough to make two gallons of window cleaner, cost $2.18. In contrast, two
gallons ofVons Window Cleaner cost $9.22.
Improvements in operations and maintenance, and better housekeeping, also result in cost savings. An
example is good inventory control, so that products do not get too old and have to be thrown out. Keeping the
lids on volatile liquids, such as parts cleaning solvents and paints, reduces losses due to evaporation. Purchase
of good mechanical weeding equipment such as weed whackers reduces the costs of both labor and herbicides
. used to control weeds.
Also, if alternative materials are used, the City could capitalize on a reduction of paperwork, since the use of
toxic materials is accompanied with a regulatory reporting process, whereby most materials are tracked,
recorded, and catalogued for the State of California and the federal govemment.
No Net Changes
38
.
\ 6- 'b \
In other situations; a product substitution results in a safer product with neither a cost savings or loss. An
example is the proposed alternate blanket wash solvent for the print shop, to replace the currently used solvent
that contains perchlorethylene, a carcinogen.
Cost Increases
Initial investments and increases in labor can result in increased costs, at least for the first years of a pollution
prevention policy. The cost of chlorine bleach for disinfection of swimming pools, for example, is greater than
the cost of chlorine gas, used previously, because more is needed. In the San Diego Unified School District,
the results of using IPM instead of conventional pest control have been mixed.
Indirect Costs
A category of indirect costs are those due to potential workers-compensation related injuries, illnesses, and lost
productivity because of employee exposure to toxics on the job. Statistics for City of Chula Vista employees
are not available, but figures compiled by Cal-OSHA for the state show a significant number of state
employees suffered work injuries or illnesses due to contact with hazardous materials (radiation, caustics, toxic
or noxious substances). This included 136 workers in street construction/maintenance, and 100 in parks and
recreation. (1991 California Work Injuries and Illnesses. Department ofIndustrial Relations, Division of
Labor Statistics and Research, San Francisco.)
These statistics are compiled from reports submitted to Cal-OSHA from accidents or illnesses that required
one or more full days off the job. The statistics do not cover workers who were "patched up" at work or went
home early on their shifts or chronic illnesses, such as respiratory disorders that may have been caused or
compounded by work exposures.
It is beyond the scope of this project to compile data on Chula Vista's worker health, accident, and absenteeism
rates. The available State statistics show that a significant, continuing toll is being taken on workers from
exposure to toxics on the job. Adverse health effects to workers could be as simple as rashes, sinus infections,
headaches, and dry, irritated skin. The toll shows up in the city's budget in lost productivity and worker's
compensation claims.
4.5.6 Storage of Materials
A simple analysis was done to examine whether materials storage may pose concerns. Analysis included both
amounts used and amounts stored to analyze risks of on-site storage and the potential for reductions. The ratio
of stored to used materials is presented in Appendix C. Only a few cases stand out where storage appears to be
in excess of the amount of material needed on-site: these include a large supply of propane stored by
Equipment Maintenance, and 11 years worth of grease, a 2 year supply of chlorine bleach and Super-SOO
cleaner stored by Custodial Services. Chlorine bleach will continue to be used, but only on an occasional
basis. This is a highly reactive material to be storing for long periods of time. Also, Street Maintenance has a
2-year supply of Stamark Primer P-46, which contains benzene.
39
\6- ~ l-
This crude analysis assumes that any storage of less than a year's worth of a material is acceptable. A more
refined analysis would look more closely at the flow of materials to determine whether there is potential for
"just in time" delivery of toxic materials. "Just in time" delivery is the system favored by industry to reduce
the hazards and regulatory burden of storing large quantities oftoxics on site.
5.0 PILOT PROJECT
5.1 PURPOSE OF PROJECT
The second phase of the Municipal Pollution Prevention Project was a pilot pollution prevention project. The
purpose of the pilot project was to test and evaluate pollution prevention strategies for a limited period of time
at one location in the City. Successful strategies could then be adapted for use Citywide.
5.2 METHODOLOGY
Criteria for selecting the site for the pilot project included:
. A location where both pesticide and non-pesticide alternatives could be tried;
. The site is used by the public on a daily basis;
. Supervisors and staff should be willing to experiment with new products and techniques in their
daily work, and to document their conclusions.
Early in the project, the City parks and recreation centers were identified as potentially good sites for the pilot
project because they are heavily used by the public, and maintenance of the buildings, pools, and grounds
requires a wide variety of pest control, cleaning, and pool chemicals. An initial meeting with Barry Edwards,
Supervising Custodian, resulted in the tentative selection of Parkway Memorial Recreation Center for the Pilot
Project. Further discussion confirmed that the landscape maintenance staff, headed by Jim Davis and Sal
Cuellar, were willing to participate in the pilot. Parkway was selected for the 8-week project. Paul Taylor of
the private pest control company Commercial of California also participated in the project; this company
provides structural pest control services for the City. Pool chemicals were not included in the pilot project.
The Pilot Project began on February 21, 1994. Prior to the project, staff were asked to comment on their
feelings about the proposed venture. The response was as follows:
"Let's hope it works. I'm all for it." Manuel Solario
"I'm proud to try the program. Let's give it a shot and see if alternatives to toxics work." Jim Tollefson
"I want cleaning chemicals to be breathable. We are canaries. Keep the canaries well." Frank Alvarado
"Let's go for it." Barry Edwards
"We're interested in improving the environment and eliminating all toxic chemicals possible." Jim Davis
"I'm concerned about employees doing the job but concerned about the possible harmful effects of toxic
chemicals to City employees and the environment. If the program is going to help the City and the public then
40
I b- ~:,
let's go for it." Sal Cuellar
"I believe chemical treatment should be a last resort, especially in a public facility." Paul Taylor, California
Pest Control
Each of the three participating staffs and their supervisors - Custodial Services, Landscape Maintenance, and
Structural Pest Control- was presented with a monitoring notebook with BMPs recommended by the EHC.
The staff members agreed to implement the BMPs for the duration of the pilot project and to make daily or
weekly notations in the notebook of how well the BMPs worked, and any other comments they had. The pilot
for the Custodial Division extended into May, so that staff had an opportunity to try samples of a new line of
citrus-based cleaning products that were solicited by EHC from the manufacturer. This line of products, called
Naturally Yours, from Ecolo Int. in Springfield, Missouri, is currently being used by the City of Santa Monica
in all of their public facilities.
41
\6-<61-\
5.3 SUMMARIES OF PILOT PROJECT
A swnmary of the BMPS is given below.
Summary of Pilot Project: Custodial Services
PROBLEM OLD BMP EVALUATION
PRODUCT
Ink on tables Super-SOO tsp:generic or brand name Works well. Will
continue to use.
All Purpose Super-SOO Naturally Yours All Better for countertops,
Cleaner Purpose Cleaner doors, walls. Ammonia
works better for floors.
Metal Polish Brite Boy Abrasive Cleaner w/o Will do the job.
Metal Polish oxalic acid & ammonia,
eg, Kleen King Stainless
Steel & Copper Cleaner
Air Bubble Gum mineral deodorizer, eg, Will use the replacement.
Freshener Air Freshener, zeolite or Earth Care
disinfectants product
Graffiti Solvent based So-Safe citrus based Will continue to use.
graffiti remover
removers
Glass sudsy ammonia NY Glass Cleaner Needs careful dilution: I
Cleaner oz. to II oz. water works
well. No odor, very easy
to work with, no irritant
effect on hands.
Tile Cleaner, A-SOO, Cling- NY Tub, Tile, & Basin No odor, cleans well.
disinfectant on Cleaner Need gloves, leaves hands
sticky. More instructions
needed.
42
16- ~5
:."".
Toilet Bowl Pine Oil NY Clinging Toilet Bowl No vapors, easy to work
Cleaner disinfectant Cleaner with, cleans well. Must
cleaner; acid leave overnight on heavy
based cleaner stains. Must use 2 X day
for hard water to be effective.
deposits
Summary of Pilot Project: Structural Pest Control
PROBLEM PREVIOUSLY BEST EVALUATION
USED MANAGEMENT
PRACTICE
Ants, perimeter Diazinon granules 1. Cornmeal Frequent water;
of gym 2. Pyrethrin insecticide cornmeal impractical.
for quick knockdown X Spot treatment with
I Tempo 2 times during
3. Sanitation pilot.
Ants, sidewalk Tempo, spot Better sanitation around Spot treatment
and trashcan treatment trashcans w/Tempo 2 times, not
areas in children's play areas.
Cockroaches, Dursban, 1. Boric acid inside Inspected 3 times. No
inside gym Maxforce bait walls and crevices actions taken. Baits
2. Caulk, seal. working well.
3. Continue baits.
Fleas, carpeted Dursban L.O. Diatomaceous earth Inspected 3 times, no
areas applied to carpets problems. No actions
taken.
Ants, occasional, None Increase tolerance for Inspected 3 times, no
in children's occasional ants actions taken.
outside play area
(sandbox)
43
\ b -~!o
Summary of Pilot Project: Landscape Maintenance Pest Control
PROBLEM PREVIOUSLY BMP EVALUATION
USED
flower beds Surflan No alternative at this Sprayed twice
time during pilot
project
Weeds, plant & Round-Up Manual weeding Takes 2-4
flower beds hours/week vs. 2
hours/week for
spraymg
Insects on roses Ortho Systemic Spray mix of com oil, No pest controls
Rose Spray liquid detergent, and implemented
water; spray every 10 during the pilot
days. project
44
Ib-<? 1
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
In its one-year time frame, the MPPP project successfully fulfilled its immediate objectives: the
audit was completed, pilot project took place as planned, and BMPs were developed. The project
showed that a nonprofit environmental group can successfully collaborate with a city to work
toward goals that are of mutual interest. Limitations of the project were the short time frame of the
pilot project - many of the pest problems did not arise during the 8-week period - and the limited
economic analysis that was possible.
The next steps for the City of Chula Vista in pursuing pollution prevention are to:
. Evaluate the need to rewrite specifications to require procurement ofleast-toxic materials
. Implement Best Management Practices
. Adopt a Pollution Prevention Policy with the following elements:
I. Goals and Guiding Principles
2. Establishment of a Pollution Prevention Committee, with representation from
each of the affected departments and divisions, to implement and oversee Pollution
Prevention activities;
3. Development of specific Pollution Prevention Plans for each department which
would include opportunities to reduce the use of targeted hazardous materials; such
a plan should include BMPs, purchasing specifications, employee training,
employer incentives for pollution prevention ideas.
45
\ 6-<6 ~
References:
Hallenbeck, W.H., and Cunningham-Burns, K.M. Pesticides and Human Health. New York:
Springer-Verlag, 1985.
Hazard Evaluation System and Infonnation Service. The Toxicity of Glycol Ethers. State of
California Department of Health Services, 1989.
Johnson, J.M., Ware, G.W. Pesticide Litigation Manual. New York: Clark, Boardman, Callaghan,
1994.
Material Safety Data Sheets, provided by product manufacturers.
Morgan, D.P. Recognition and Management of Pesticide Poisonings. University ofIowa: Iowa
Pesticide Hazard Assessment Project, 1989.
US Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance documents for reregistration of active ingredients.
46
I b - <6'9
Appendix 1
Pesticide Descriptions
Pesticides Used by the City ofChula Vista in 1991, 1992, and 1993:
The following list of pesticides was obtained from Material Safety Data Sheets and interviews with
Park and Recreation and Public Works staff. The material characteristics were developed from the
reference material at the back of this appendix.
Pesticide Terms
Two terms used in the following product information section require explanation:
Inert ingredients - "Inert" does not mean they are safe. It means they are a filler ingredient not
specifically designed to kill the particular pest on the label. Inerts often make up the bulk of a
pesticide product formulation and can be as toxic or more toxic than the active ingredient. Inert
ingredients in pesticides can be innocuous materials such as clay or they can be toxics such as
xylene, benzene, asbestos, DDT, or formaldehyde. Inerts of concern found in pesticides used by
the City include: xylene and other hazardous petroleum distillates, phenol, glycol ethers, and the
surfactant POEA. Adverse effects of these chemicals include nervous and immune system
damage; brain, liver, and kidney damage; and reproductive hazards including testicular retardation
and atrophy. (Hallenbeck and Cunningham-Bums, 1985; HESIS, 1989)
LD50 (oral) - is a term used to indicate acute oral toxicity. LD (lethal dose) 50 describes the lethal
dose for 50 percent of the test organisms. It is a value used in presenting mammalian toxicity,
usually oral toxicity, expressed as milligrams of toxicant per kilogram of body weight. The lower
the LD50 number, the more toxic the material is. Limitations ofLD50s are important to keep in
mind: they offer no indication of cancer risk, reproductive hazards, or environmental toxicity; the
oral LD50 does not reflect absorption rates by other parts of the body (the scalp and the scrotum
being the most absorbent). The LD50 refers only to the active ingredient(s) in the product and not
the inerts which can be as toxic or more toxic than the active ingredient. (Johnson and Ware, 1994)
STRUCTURAL PESTICIDES
I. PESTICIDE NAME: Diazinon 5G
TYPE: Organophosphate
ACUTE HAZARD RATING: Warning
LD50: (oral) 300 mglkg
PRIMARY USE: exterior ants around foliated areas of buildings
APPLICATION: granules sprinkled around buildings
FORMULATION: 5% active ingredient (Diazinon), 95% inerts
HEAL TH: Very acutely toxic. A poison that acts upon the nervous system
47
16-90
ENVIRONMENT:
through inhibiting cholinesterase production. Label warning:
"Repeated exposure to cholinesterase inhibitors may without
warning cause prolonged susceptibility to very small doses of any
cholinesterase inhibitor." It is a known neurotoxin and suspected of
being a reproductive toxin. Testing for carcinogenicity and chronic
health effects is incomplete.
Very toxic to fish and wildlife. Diazinon was banned for use on golf
courses and sod farms in 1991 due to the large bird kills involving 23
species in 18 states. (Hallenbeck and Cunningham-Bums, 1985;
Material Safety Data Sheet)
2. PESTICIDE NAME: Dursban L.O. (low odor)
TYPE: Organophosphate
ACUTE HAZARD RATING: Warning
LD50: (oral) 135
PRIMARY USE: interior crack and crevice treatment for roaches, ants, and fleas
APPLICATION: liquid spray
FORMULATION: 41.5% active ingredient (chlorpyrifos), 58.5% xylene range aromatic
solvent.
HEALTH: Very acutely toxic. The active ingredient, chlorpyrifos, is a
cholinesterase inhibitor as described above under "Diazinon." Very
toxic to fish, bees, and wildlife.
.
Currently, the EP A is concerned about human exposure to chlorpyrifos from dietary and non-
dietary sources. Human exposure data from indoor and lawn uses is being required. The American
Journal of Public Health, 1990, advises not exposing children under the age of 10 months to
chJorpyrifos. While more testing needs to be done to determine potential for causing cancer,
reproductive harm, and environmental fate effects, chJorpyrifos has been shown to be chronically
toxic to laboratory animals, farm animals, and pets. The main target organs are liver, kidney,
brain, and testes. (Hallenbeck and Cunningham-Bums, 1985; Material Safety Data Sheet; USEPA)
The xylene component of the Dursban formulation is a toxic solvent and reported to cause liver,
kidney, and blood effects at high levels. Chronic exposure effects include: flu-like symptoms (i.e.,
headache, nausea), tremor, weakness, mucosal hemorrhage, vertigo, and loss of memory.
Suspected effects include: fatty liver, prenatal damage, mutagenicity, and reproductive system
effects (Morgan, 1989).
3. PESTICIDE NAME: Dursban 50W (Water soluble packets)
TYPE: Organophosphate
ACUTE HAZARD RATING: Warning
LD50: (oral) 135
PRIMARY USE: exterior base of structures, expansion joints, foliated borders at
footings.
.
48
1.6- q \
liquid spray
50% active ingredient (chlorpyrifos), 50% inerts including wetting
agents and clays.
HEAL THlENVIRONMENT: see infonnation above for the active ingredient
(chlorpyrifos)
APPLICATION:
FORMULATION:
4. PESTICIDE NAME: Empire 20 Microencapsulated Insecticide
TYPE: Organophosphate
ACUTE HAZARD RATING: Caution
LD50: (oral) 25,000 mglkg
PRIMARY USE: interior/exterior crack and crevice general pest control (i.e., fleas,
ants, roaches)
APPLICATION: Liquid spray (microencapsulated means the droplets are very small
and the pesticide is time-released)
FORMULATION: 20% active ingredients (chlorpyrifos), 10% petroleum solvents, and
70% inerts
HEAL THlENVIRONMENT: same effects as described above for chlorpyrifos and petroleum
solvents (see xylene).
5. PESTICIDE NAME: Drione
TYPE: Amorphous silica
ACUTE HAZARD RATING: Caution
ENVIRONMENT:
none established. Believed to have very low oral toxicity.
interior crack and crevice and void application for roaches
Dusting
40% Amorphous (i.e., non-crystalline) silica gel, 49% petroleum
distillates, 10% piperonyl butoxide, 1% pyrethrins
While the active ingredient is considered nontoxic, it is a dust and as
such can cause respiratory irritation. Suspected effects of piperonyl
butoxide include cancer, kidney damage, and reproductive harm.
Pyrethrins are a natural substance derived from chrysanthemum
flowers. While pyrethrins have low systemic toxicity, they are
highly allergenic, especially to children and adults with asthma and
other respiratory conditions. Petroleum distillates are solvents and
have the same effects discussed under the solvent, xylene, an inert in
Durban LO mentioned previously.
Drione's active ingredients (amorphous silica gel and pyrethrins) are
good choices; silica is nontoxic, and pyrethrins break down quickly
in the environment.
LD50:
PRIMARY USE:
APPLICATION:
FORMULATION:
HEAL TH:
49
Ib-ql-
.
6. PESTICIDE NAME: Tempo 20% Wettable Powder
TYPE: pyrethroid (synthetic pyrethrin)
ACUTE HAZARD RATING: Warning
LD50: (oral) 500 mg/kg
PRIMARY USE: interior/exterior crack and crevice treatment for ants
APPLICATION: Liquid spray
FORMULATION: 20% active ingredient (cyfluthrin), 80% inert ingredients. Listed as a
partial inert is crystalline silica, up to 10%.
HEALTH: Cyfluthrin's structure resembles that of the organochlorine DDT
more than any of the other pyrethroids do. It causes repetitive
discharge and strong excitatory action on the central nervous system,
peripheral nerves, and skeletal muscle fibers by interfering with
axonal sodium and potassium channels, as does DDT.
As a result cyfluthrin induces salivation, incoordination, muscle trembling, jerky movements,
behavioral changes, and convulsions. While an oral LD50 rating of 500 mg/kg has been assigned
to this product's active ingredient, acute toxicity studies of cyfluthrin show widely different LD50's
for male and female test animals. The health data base for cyfluthrin is incomplete and EP A is
requiring further data on neurotoxic and reproductive harm. No permissible exposure limits
(PELs) have been set by OSHA. The inert listed, crystalline silica, unlike the amorphous silica
which is the active ingredient in Drione, is a dangerous respiratory hazard. Excessive, long-term
exposureto crystalline silica can cause silicosis, a form of disabling, progressive, and sometimes
fatal fibrotic lung disease. It is considered carcinogenic in animals.
ENVIRONMENT:
Cyfluthrin is acutely toxic to fish and wildlife. (footnotes 1,5)
7. PESTICIDE NAME: Torus 2E
TYPE: Carbamate
ACUTE HEALTH HAZARD: Danger
LD50: (oral) 5000 mg/kg
PRIMARY USE: interior crack and crevice application for the l,arval stage of fleas and
cockroaches
Liquid spray
24.37% active ingredient (fenoxycarb), 75.63% inert ingredients.
Inerts include: xylene and other petroleum solvents, and propylene
glycol monomethyl ether (a glycol ether).
Fenoxycarb is a non-cholinesterase inhibiting carbamate insect
growth regulator.
APPLICATION:
FORMULATION:
HEALTH:
While the acute effects are listed by the manufacturer as practically nontoxic if swallowed and
slightly toxic if inhaled, it is a skin irritant and corrosive to the eyes. OSHA has not established
50
Ib-9~
PELs for fenoxycarb in any formulation. A commercial respirator is required by federal law to be
worn by applicators. The health effects of xylene and other petroleum solvents have been discussed
above. (Hallenbeck and Cunningham-Burns, 1985; Morgan, 1989) Glycol ethers have recently
come into the spotlight because several of them have been found to cause birth defects and
testicular atrophy in laboratory animals. Some are less hazardous and others have yet to be tested
for reproductive effects. All glycol ethers can suppress sperm counts in men, and are not
recommended for use by pregnant women. In general, glycol ethers can be highly intoxicating.
Other symptoms include headache, nausea, trembling, appetite loss, anemia, and personality
changes. Glycol ethers are easily absorbed through the skin, causing dryness, cracking, and
dermatitis. They are irritating to eyes and skin. While the propylene glycol ethers are thought to be
less toxic than the ethylene glycol ethers, much remains unknown about the entire class of
chemicals.
ENVIRONMENT:
F enoxycarb is toxic to fish and aquatic invertebrates. Drift or runoff
from treated areas could cause harm. (Material Safety Data Sheet)
The environmental effects of xylene and other petroleum solvents are
discussed above.
LANDSCAPE PESTICIDES
I. NAME OF PESTICIDE: Roundup
TYPE: Post-emergent herbicide
ACUTE HAZARD RATING: Warning
LD50: 5600 mg/kg
PRIMARY USE: treatment of emerging weeds in flower and shrub beds
APPLICATION: Liquid spray
FORMULATION: 41% active ingredient (glyphosate), 59% inert ingredients,
including 15% polyoxyethyleneamine (POEA)
HEALTH: Glyphosate is considered relatively nontoxic to most forms
of life, although it can cause eye irritation. It is the 15% POEA that presents toxicological
concerns. Adverse effects of POEA include fluid in the lungs, cardiovascular and CNS effects. It
is very toxic to aquatic animals. The California Department of Food and Agriculture supports the
claim that the Roundup produce is the most widely used weed killer in the state and has been
associated with the greatest number of skin and internal injuries. Most serious information gaps
for glyphosate are for carcinogenicity and neurotoxicity.
ENVIRONMENT:
While it is known to be toxic to aquatic life, other environmental fate
data is missing.
2. PESTICIDE NAME:
TYPE:
ACUTE HAZARD RATING:
LD50:
Fusilade
Post-emergent herbicide
Caution
2450 mg/kg
51
lb- 9 Y
PRIMARY USE:
APPLICATION:
FORMULATION:
HEALTH:
ENVIRONMENT:
3. PESTICIDE NAME:
TYPE:
ACUTE HAZARD RATING:
LD50:
PRIMARY USE:
APPLICATION:
FORMULATION:
HEALTH:
ENVIRONMENT:
treats bermuda grass on banks
Liquid spray
13.1 % active ingredient (fluazifop-p-butyl), 86.9% inert
ingredients, including xylene.
Fluazifop-p-butyl is primarily a skin irritant though it is not
readily absorbed by the skin. The health hazards are most
significant in the inert ingredients which are primarily
solvents which can cause nervous system effects including
headache, dizziness, loss of coordination, and fatigue.
Very toxic to fish. Avoid weather conditions that might
encourage drift.
Trimec
Post-emergent herbicide
Danger
375 mglkg
Selective broadleafweed (dandelion, clover) control in turf
areas
Liquid spray
27.93% active ingredient (2,4-dichlorphenoxyacetic acid, or
2,4-D, 1385% propionic acid, 2.76% Dicamba (another
herbicide), 57.46% inert ingredients.
2,4-D is corrosive, especially to the eyes. Toxic effects
include motor disorders, disturbed cerebral electrical
activity, degenerative changes in the spinal cord, liver, and
kidney. The National Cancer Institute (1986 report to the
American Medical Association) links 2,4-D to two types of
cancer, lymphoma and soft-tissue sarcoma.
2,4-D is toxic to wildlife, contaminates water, and while it generally
dissipates within a month, in dry, nutrient-poor soils it can persist for
months. (Hallenbeck and Cunningham-Burns, 1985; MSDS;
Morgan, 1989)
(Weed-B-Gone, another formulation of2,4-D without the Dicamba, is also used by the landscape
maintenance division.)
4. PESTICIDE:
TYPE:
ACUTE HAZARD RATING:
LD50:
PRIMARY USE:
APPLICATION:
Surflan
Pre-emergent herbicide
Caution
10,000 mglkg
used before planting grasses and in flower beds for
prevention of several common kinds of weeds
Liquid spray
52
Ib-95
FORMULATION:
HEALTH:
ENVIRONMENT:
5. PESTICIDE NAME:
TYPE:
ACUTE HAZARD RATING:
LD50:
PRlMARY USE:
APPLICATION:
FORMULATION:
HEAL TH:
ENVIRONMENT:
40.4% Active ingredient (oryzalin), 59.6% inert ingredients
Oryzalin can cause skin irritation and shortness of breath.
The EP A currently classifies oryzalin as a Class C or
possible human carcinogen.
will contaminate bodies of water.
Ronstar
Pre-emergent herbicide
Warning
8,000 mglkg
Used to prevent crabgrass in turf
Granules .
2.0% active ingredient (oxydiazon), 98% inert ingredients
Active ingredient can cause eye and skin irritation. Most of
product is composed of inert ingredients, none of which are
known except to the manufacturer. The toxicity of inert
ingredients may explain the Acute Hazard Rating of
Warning instead of Caution.
Very toxic to fish. (MSDS)
53
16-96
Attachment I
THE PROBLEM WITH TOXICS
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH COAL nON ISSUE PAPER
This section is provided as backgroundfor those wishing additional information to provide
a better understanding of the relationship between various hazardous substances and their
potential health impacts. This section was written by the Environmental Health Coalition.
Generally, toxic materials endanger the health of workers and the public, pollute the ambient
environment, and generate direct and indirect costs for toxics users and society at large. This
section presents a summary of current information about the health, environmental, and
financial impacts of toxic materials.
Threats to Workers
Acids, bases, solvents, metals, oxidizers, asbestos, and respiratory dust hazards are among
the threats faced by the staff who do cleaning, pest control, and building and vehicle
maintenance. Office workers also encounter some toxic materials, such as are found in
correction fluid and printer toners, and may breathe indoor air that contains high levels of
pollutants.
Indoor Air Pollution
The full extent of health and economic damage due to indoor air pollutants is not known,
and much research remains to be done. However, a 1989 USEP A report to Congress on
indoor air quality (Report to Congress on Indoor Air Quality, USEPA, 1989) contained the
following conclusions:
. Risk estimates are not available for most pollutants, but available estimates for radon,
ETS (environmental tobacco smoke), and VOCs (volatile organic compounds)
demonstrate that indoor air pollution is among the nation's most important
environmental health problems. (VOCs include volatile vapors and gases given off by
thousands of common office sources, such as paint, adhesives, solvents, cleaning
compounds, deodorizers, copy machine toners, cleaning compounds, and common
pesticides.)
. The potential economic impact of indoor air pollution is quite high, and is estimated in
the tens of billions of dollars per year. Such impacts include direct medical costs and
lost earnings due to major illness, as well as increased employee sick days and lost
productivity while on the job.
. A recent study conducted in Denmark demonstrated that exposures to mixtures of
.
54
l b- q"1
VOCs can produce behavioral and sensory irritant effects, even though each individual
compound is below the known threshold for neurological effects.
Additional air quality problems are generated by HV AC (heating, ventilation, air
conditioning) systems in large buildings. If the amount of fresh air coming in is not high
enough, and the air flow is not maintained in all areas, pollutants build up to much higher
levels that those outdoors. Besides the pollutants listed above in the EP A report, carbon
monoxide and ozone are hazards in areas where office machines operate with poor
ventilation.
Prevention of indoor air pollution requires well-designed and maintained HV AC systems as
well as industrial hygiene monitoring when a problem is suspected. A system for reporting
employee complaints related to air quality (such as headaches, odors, and respiratory
problems) is necessary so that patterns, or clusters, of symptoms that indicate a problem may
exist can be spotted. Finally, a system for responding to complaints is necessary to ensure
that action is taken to resolve the problem.
Special Risks of Pesticides
For most people, pesticides are the single most toxic category of materials to which they are
exposed. In contrast to most other chemicals in common commerce, pesticides are designed
to be killers. Reduction of pesticide use offers the greatest potential for reducing human
health risk and environmental contamination of any category of commonly used chemical
substance. The common assumptions that pesticides have been adequately studied and are
safe when used as directed are wrong for the following reasons:
. Only 17 active ingredients, out of the 600 in use, have not been fully tested for health
and safety as required by current federal law. The rest either lack information, or the
information has not been reviewed by the USEPA. EPA estimates that it will take until
2006 just to complete a review of the agricultural pesticides, at which time they will
~ to review data on non-agricultural pesticides. (GAO, 1994) [emphasis added]
. Pesticide risk is estimated by extrapolating from laboratory studies conducted on
animals. These estimates consider toxic exposure only to healthy, adult males. The risk
to children, seniors, females, and the chronically ill is not estimated; individuals in these
higher risk groups may be harmed by exposures deemed safe by pesticide regulations.
(O'Brien, 1991).
. Most studies have not adequately addressed questions ofreproductive outcomes, subtle
neurologic impact, or immune system problems. (Heifetz, 1994)
. Labeling of pesticides is based on risk/benefit information. Because the benefits are
well known and the risks are not, available evidence is weighted toward continued use
55
\ b - S~
ofthe products. (Taylor, 1990)
. Toxic pesticide residues on lawns from weed and insect killers can be absorbed through
skin and inhaled, especially by children who are in closer contact with their environment
than are adults. Children's mouths and noses are closer to the ground, where pesticide
vapors may be more concentrated. Children absorb more through the skin as well,
relative to their body weights, because they have greater surface area to weight than
adults. (California Department of Agriculture, 1985).
. According to a recent study done at DC Berkeley, the public is at greater risk from
pesticides used in their homes and communities than from pesticide residues in food.
While pesticides in food capture the most public attention, other sources of exposure
have been neglected by regulators. (Robinson, Pease, et al., 1994).
. Pesticide residues indoors can expose people to hazardous vapors. These chemicals
bind to carpet, books, and draperies and can emit vapors for various lengths of time.
Common ant and roach killers can adversely affect health with common flu-like
symptoms for up to four months. Effects, such as cancer and immune system diseases,
from long-term, low-level exposure are under study. (Thorpe, 1988)
. A 1987 National Cancer Institute study showed that children living in homes where
pesticides were used regularly had a three to nine times greater risk of childhood
leukemia, depending whether the chemicals were used inside, outside, or both.
(Lowengart et aI., 1987)
. Another National Cancer Institute study found that Midwest farmers who used 2,4-
D (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid) 20 or more days a year had a 6 times higher rate of
leukemia and lymphatic cancer. (Hoar et aI., 1986).
. Links between breast, prostate, and other cancers and the use of chlorinated organic
chemicals (e.g., pesticides) have been identified in several recent studies (Davis et aI.,
1993)
. Certain pesticides have the ability to mimic estrogens and disrupt the reproductive
systems of many species. Male reproductive anatomy and physiology, in particular, are
disrupted by the feminizing effects of estrogen-mimicking chemicals in the
environment. (Birnbaum, 1994; Guilette, Gross et al., 1994)
56
1b- <1~
Bibliography
Birnbaum, L.S., 1994. "Endocrine Effects of Prenatal Exposure to PCBs, Dioxins, and Other
Xenobiotics: Implications for Policy and Future Research." Environmental Health
Perspectives, Vol. 102, pp. 676-679.
California Department of Food and Agriculture, 1985. Parklands Pest Management.
Sacramento, CA.
Davis, D.L., Bradlow, H.L., Wolff, M., Woodruff, T., Hoel, D.G., and Anton-Culver, H.,
1993. "Medical Hypothesis: Xenoestrogens as Preventable Causes of Breast Cancer."
Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 101 (5), pp. 373-377.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1989. Report to Congress on Indoor Air Quality:
Executive Summary and Recommendations. Washington, D.e.
Guilette, LJ., Gross, T.S., Masson, G.R., Matter J.M., Franklin Percival, H., and
Woodward, A.R., 1994. "Developmental Abnormalities of the Gonad and Abnormal Sex
Hormone Concentrations in Juvenile Alligators from Contaminated and Control Lakes in
Florida." Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 102, pp. 680-688.
General Accounting Office, 1994. Pesticides: Pesticides Registration May Not Be
Completed Until 2006. GAO\RCED\93-94.
Heifetz, R., personal communication. 1994.
Hoar, S.K., Blair, A., Holmes, F.F., Boysen, e.D., Robel, R.J., Hoover, R., Fraumeni, J.F.,
1986. "Agricultural Herbicide Use and Risk of Lymphoma and Soft-Tissue Sarcoma."
Journal of the American Medical Association, Sept. 5,1986, Vol 256 (9), PP. 1141-1147.
Lowengart, R.A., Peters, J.M., Ciconi, C., Buckley, J., Bernstein, L., Preston-Martin, S.,
Rappaport, E., 1987. "Childhood Leukemia and Parents' Occupational and Home
Exposures." Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 79 (I), pp. 39-46.
Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Institute, 1993. Seminar for Environmental Leaders on
Taxies Use Reduction, p.6. Lowell: University of Massachusetts.
O'Brien, M., 1991. "Are Pesticides Taking Away the Ability of Our Children to Learn?"
Journal of Pesticide Reform, Winter, 1990-1991.
Robinson, J.e., Pease, W.S., Albright, D.S., and Morello-Frosch, R.A., 1994. "Pesticides in
the Home and Community: Health Risks and Policy Alternatives." Berkeley, CA: Calfornia
57
Ib- lDO
Policy Seminar, University of California.
Taylor, S. 1990. SPUR Guide: School Pesticide Use Reduction. San Diego: Environmental
Health Coalition.
Thorpe, K., 1988. "The Dangers of Pesticides in Schools," PTA Today, February, 1988.
EHC pollution prevention publications:
Home Safe Home Fact Sheets, 1989. A series of 2-4 page brochures on the least toxic
household management. Sections include: Cleansers, Indoor Pests, Garden Pests, Arts and
Crafts, Paints, and Auto Maintenance.
. Baywatch Guide, 1990. Information for recreational boaters on least-toxic boat
maintenance.
. Ecological Buying Guide, 1990. A brand name list of household cleaning and pest
control products that meet the EHC criteria for toxicity; and a list of stores which carry
them.
. Toxics Use Reduction Manualfor the Workplace, 1991. Describes toxic hazards to
health and the environment generally found in small businesses, restaurants, churches,
hotels, etc. Recommendations for least toxic alternatives are included.
. School Pesticide Use Reduction (SPUR) Guide, 1990. A resource for parents, teachers,
students, pest management personnel, and communities interested in reducing pesticides
in schools. The SPUR program includes a slide show on how to work together to
protect children and the school environment from the harmful effects of toxic pesticides.
The Guide has been recognized as a national model and is listed in the Environmental
Success Index in Washington, D.C.
. Best Management Practices Guide, 1992. Information on alternatives for toxics found in
the workplace.
.
58
16-\0\
Attachment 2
Environmental Health Coalition Issue Paper
Recommendations of Safer Substitutes for Maintenance Related Materials
These are recommendations for each of the categories covered in the report, developed by
the Environmental Health Coalition. The materials currently used and their potential
relationship to health are listed, along with the recommendations. These recomendations
were incorporated into city staff recommendations.
1) Petroleum Hvdrocarbons (i.e. Gasoline)
].] Products. The largest volume of hazardous materials used in the City fits within this
category; including fuels, solvents, and lubricants. The City maintains gasoline and diesel
fuel tanks with which to fuel vehicles at the operations yard. Also used at the yard are
motor oils, cleaning solvent (Safety-Kleen units), brake and transmission fluids, lacquer
thinner, grease, WD-40, floor covering adhesives, solvent-based hand cleaners, and aerosol
propellants (propane and butane). Petroleum hydrocarbons may be indicated on product
labels as "petroleum distillates," "petroleum naphtha," or "mineral spirits."
1.2 Health Hazards. The major workplace danger related to petroleum hydrocarbons is
inhalation of vapors released from volatile liquids. Skin exposure is also a concern unless
precautions are observed. Petroleum hydrocarbons affect the central nervous system,
causing dizziness, loss of coordination, and intoxication leading to drowsiness and
ultimately loss of consciousness. Long-term exposures can produce permanent nerve
damage with symptoms such as tremors, weakness, or memory deficits (see Gosselin, R.E.,
Smith, R.P., Hodge, H.C. 1984 Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products Section 2-
]57).
Internal organs such as the kidney and liver can also be damaged by acute or chronic
exposure to petroleum hydrocarbons. The lungs and respiratory passages can be irritated or
damaged by toxic exposures, resulting in chemical pneumonitis (lung disease) or pulmonary
edema (fluid in the lungs).
All of these materials can irritate and dry out skin, causing dermatitis, and some solvents can
penetrate skin and enter the bloodstream. Certain petroleum hydrocarbons are known to be
carcinogenic, such as benzene, found as an additive in gasoline. Xylene, found commonly
in hydrocarbon mixtures, has been implicated in clusters of birth defects occurring in
industrial communities along the Mexico-US border.
The oxygenated hydrocarbon solvents, such as isopropyl alcohol and acetone, are less
acutely toxic but are highly flammable. The least toxic and flammable petroleum
hydrocarbons are oils, greases, and asphalt, which are heavier, less volatile, and combustible
rather than flammable.
59
lb-10"L-
1.3 Environl11~ntal Hazards. All of the petroleum hydrocarbons are environmental hazards
and should be prevented from evaporating into air, soaking into the ground, or running off
into ditches or storm drains.
.
Petroleum-based materials may contain hazardous additives, such as ethylene dibromide
added to unleaded gasoline, or the material may pick up hazardous constituents during use,
such as heavy metals found in used motor oil.
1.4 Vehicle Exhaust. Both gasoline and diesel exhaust have toxic constituents: unburned
hydrocarbons, particulates, nitrogen and sulfur oxides, and carbon monoxide.
Petroleum Hvdrocarbon Recommendation:
. Hire industrial Itygeinist to evalaute tlte exltaust and exltaust ventilation in tlte
garage.
2. Chlorinated Hvdrocarbons (i.e. nrint shop solvents)
2.1 Products: Solvent cements and lubricants containing methylene chloride, 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, CFC, and other chlorinated solvents; print shop blanket wash containing
perchloroethylene; and herbicides (Trimec and Weed-B-Gone) containing 2,4-D.
2.2 Hazards. Chlorinated compounds such as dichlorodiphenyltrichlorethane (DDT) and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are notorious for their persistence in the environment and
are sources of increasing concern about their ability to interfere with the reproductive
capacity of many animal species, including humans. Recent research links them tentatively
to human breast cancer as well. (Davis, D.L., Bradlow, H.L., Wolff, M., Woodruff, T.,
Hoel, D.G., and Anton-Culver, H., 1993. "Medical Hypothesis: Xenoestrogens as
Preventable Causes of Breast Cancer." Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 101 (5), pp.
373-377.)
Clt/orinated Hvdrocarbon Recommendation.
. From both health and environmental standpoints, these materials are a high priority for
phaseout.
3. Glycol Ethers (i.e. bathroom cleaners, degreasers)
3.1 Products: Glycol ethers are very commonly present as solvents or degreasers in
cleansers, inks, paints, and other coatings, especially in water-based products. They are the
active ingredients in cleaners such as 409 and water-based engine cleaners such as Simple
Green.
60
\6- 1(:)'":1-
3.2 Hazards: Some are volatile enough to be respiratory hazards. They are also readily
absorbed through skin. They have little odor, so that smell cannot be relied on as an
indicator of overexposure. Health effects of over exposure include anemia, mild
intoxication, and irritation of the eyes, skin, nose, and throat. Certain glycol ethers are
reproductive health hazards for both men and women. In laboratory studies, these
compounds caused birth defects and damage to the testicles of labratory animals. Studies of
exposed workers showed reduced sperm counts. The ethylene glycol ethers are considered
more hazardous than the propylene glycol ethers; however, neither product labels nor
MSDS sheets can be relied on to state which glycol ether a product contains - often, "glycol
ether blend" is the only information given.
Glvcol Etller Recommendation.
. Used with care, glycol ether products may be the best alternative, at this time, to more
volatile, flammable, and toxic petrochemical solvents. For example, Simple Green, a
glycol ether/detergent product, is now used in place of the solvent-based cleaner
Instromet for cleaning parking meter parts. Glycol ethers are preferable to solvent-
based engine degreasers. They should be avoided in situations where a hot water-
detergent cleaning process, a citrus-derived cleaner, or an abrasive cleaner could be
substituted.
4. Corrosives (e.g. carborator cleaner)
4.1 Products: The most corrosive material used by the City is the muriatic acid used in
sizable amounts at one City swimming pool. (The caustic material sodium hydroxide,
previously used for pH control, has been phased out). Sulfuric acid is present in one brand
of drain opener, although it has been mostly replaced with enzyme-based products, a much
safer alternative. Many cleaners contain an acidic or alkaline corrosive as the active
ingredient: carburetor cleaner contains cresylic acid, metal cleaner contains oxalic acid, and
ammonia, bleach (sodium hypochlorite 5%), phosphoric acid, and quaternary ammonium
chlorides are found in other cleaners. A product used in water treatment systems for control
of scale contains the high-pH corrosives sodium metasilicate and potassium hydroxide. A
microbiocide used in water treatment, isothiazolinone, is also corrosive. Sodium
hypochlorite is used now in place of chlorine gas at both City swimming pools. Corrosion
inhibitors used in water treatment systems or vehicle coolant systems contain nitrates,
nitrites, and borates, which are also themselves corrosive.
Corrosive Recommendations:
. Continue use of carbon dioxide in swimming pools and reduce use, where appropriate
of muriatic acid. Continue use of sodium hypochlorite for disinfection of swimming
pools, as the law requires that a chlorine residual be present in public swimming pools.
Replace acid drain openers with enzyme-based products.
61
\ b - \ O~
4.2 Hazards. The immediate hazard is damage to skin, eyes, respiratory passages, mucous
membranes, or clothes from contact with the corrosive material. Many are also powerful
oxidizing or reducing agents and are therefore reactive with a wide variety of other
materials. Muriatic (hydrochloric) acid gives off corrosive vapor at room temperature and
can irritate or damage the lungs if breathed.
62
\6 -loY
5. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) -- refrieerants in HV AC. aerosol sorav. some
nolvstvrene
5.1 Products: There are three uses of these potent ozone-depleting chemicals: as
propellants in certain aerosol products; as refrigerant for building air-conditioning systems,
and as refrigerant in vehicle air-conditioning systems. The City uses CFCs for all these
purposes; Freon vehicle air-conditioning refrigerant is recycled on-site by a mobile
recycling service.
5.2 Health H~7~rds. CFCs, when inhaled, can cause heart arrythmias that can manifest as
heart attacks.
5.3 Environmental Hazards. CFCs are stable, long-living compounds which persist for
decades. They react with sunlight and ozone molecules in the stratosphere to convert the
ozone into oxygen, thereby damaging the ability of the ozone layer to shield the Earth's
surface from harmful amounts ofUV radiation. Large holes in the ozone layer appeared
first over Antarctica but are now present over populated continents as well. Human health
impacts: increased incidence of skin cancer and cataracts, damage to the immune system.
Some CFC's are being phased out of existance for use in the United States over the next 5
years. Environmental damage: destruction of oceanic phytoplankton, which forms the basis
of the marine food chain, and destruction offorest and crop plants.
CFC Recommendations:
. For all new car purchases, buy CFC-free air conditioning units. Where possible,
eliminate the use ofCFC's in new HVAC purchases. Where CFC elimination is not
possible, purchase systems that use the least damaging CFC as refrigerant. Eliminate
all computer cleaning solvents containing CFC's and replace with water-based solvents.
6. Heavv Metals (street paints)
6.1 Products: Lead and mercury compounds were still present in certain street marking
paints at the beginning of the project. As these paints wear off, the heavy metals are washed
off the streets and curbs into storm drains, which flow into San Diego Bay. The City has
found a lead-free red paint, and has started using a lead-free yellow paint. The blue paint
contains an organic mercury compound.
6.2 Hazards. Worker and neighborhood exposures, as paints are applied or removed, can
have direct human health impacts. There are environmental hazards also: as these paints
wear off, the heavy metals are washed off the streets and curbs into storm drains, form
63
16- IDS
where they pass untreated out into San Diego Bay.
When the MPPP project began, the Streets division had found a lead-free red paint, but was
still using leaded yellow paint. At this time, a lead-free yellow paint has been found and is in
use.
Heavv Metal.~ Recommendations
. Continue complete phase out of heavy metal based paint for streets and curbs.
7. Disinfectant Cleaners (i.e. disinfectants in recreational facilities)
7.1 Products. The major disinfectant used in cleaners at City facilities is quaternary
ammonium chloride.
.
7.2 Health Hazards. This class of materials is rated "very toxic," according to Clinical
Toxicology of Commercial Products (Gosselin, Smith, Hodge, 5th edition, 1986).
Concentrated aqueous solutions (10%) are primary skin irritants, and solutions of 10-20%
will cause destruction of eyes, nose, breathing passages, and lungs. Some evidence suggests
that ingestion of quaternary ammonium chlorides can interfere with nerve transmission - the
same reaction generated by organophosphate pesticides. However, no evidence was found
to suggest that quaternary ammonium chlorides are absorbed through intact skin; as long as
standard precautions are taken not to ingest the materials, the major occupational health
hazard is skin irritation.
The other disinfectant agent used by custodial staff is chlorine bleach (5.25% sodium
hypochlorite), a corrosive material. As with other corrosives discussed above, it is
damaging to skin, eyes, and mucous membranes on contact, and, as a powerful oxidizing
agent, it is reactive with organic matter and many other cleaning compounds.
Disinfectant Cleaners Recommendation:
. Continue use of sodium hypochlorite for spot cleanup of potentially pathogenic
materials. Citric acid-based cleaners in place of quaternary ammonium chloride-based
products for other cleaning uses.
8. Print ShOD Materials
8 I Products: The print shop uses Blankrola, which contains perchloroethylne which is on
the Director's List as a carcinogen. Blankrola is used to clean metal plates. The print shop
is in the process of trying out an alternative to this product. The shop uses another
chlorinated hydrocarbon compound, in a deglazing solvent which contains 96% 1,1,1-
trichloroethane (also an ozone depletor). Both solvents - perchloroethylene and 1,1,1-
64
lb- to b
trichloroethane, are neurotoxins, and harmful to the liver as well. They also use a corrosive
material, Clean Print, containing sodium metasilicate. For the most part, the other hazardous
print materials are toners, inks, and related processing solutions which are petroleum
hydrocarbon mixtures and have the health and environmental hazards cornmon to this class
of chemicals.
8.2 Health Hazards. While these materials are used in relatively small amounts compared
to some of the other divisions, the way they are used raises concerns about the potential for
human exposure: these chemicals are used indoors, the print shop personnel are directly
breathing the vapors, and the ventilation system needs to be evaluated to determine if there
is adequate circulation throughout the building.
Print Shop Materials Recommendations:
. Test soy-based inks and cleaning solutions that do not contain a chlorinated
hydrocarbon. Use the materials with the lowest VOC that is compatible with the drying
times needed in the operation. Have an industrial hygiene evaluation o/ventilation in
the print shop through free services provided by the County.
. Identify and test alternatives to Blankrola to remove the use ofperchloroethylene.
9. Paints and Coatim,:s
9.1 Products. Paints are used by both the Building Construction and Repair Division and
the Streets Division of Public Works. Staff in both divisions have done a great job of
identifying water-based alternatives to solvent-based coatings whenever possible. At this
point, all traffic paints and most building paints are water based. Paint collected at
household hazardous materials events is used for graffiti paint outs. Automotive paints have
been eliminated by buying the parts pre-painted, so this is no longer done by City personnel.
Solvent-based products still in use include polyurethane floor coatings, building paint for
some industrial areas, wood stains, and roofrepair materials. Primer for plastic cross-walk
tape contains benzene.
9.2 Hazards. Water-based coatings are much better from both environmental and health
perspectives, but they are not nontoxic. In addition to water, the carrier contains
petrochemical-derived plastic polymers, and may contain complex alcohols, ethylene glycol,
and glycol ethers as well. Pigments, except the heavy metals noted above, are organic or
inorganic coloring agents oflow-to-moderate toxicity. Titanium dioxide, the white pigment
found ubiquitously in light-colored paints, is a metallic substance but is considered virtually
nontoxic. Both paints and pigments, if packaged in powdered form, constitute a dust hazard
and care should be taken to handle the material so that it is not inhaled.
65
'b- \ Dj
Paint.~ and Caatinfs Recommendations:
. Continue the switch to water-based coatings in place of solvent-based products
wherever possible. Institute careful inventory control to minimize generation of waste
paint or sludge, as these materials must e disposed of as hazardous waste. It is
appropriate to use donated paints, such as from household hazardous waste collections,
for grafitti paint-outs and renovation project with the exception that military paints may
contain lead.
.
.
66
I b - l O'D
Bibliography
Birnbaum, L.S., 1994. "Endocrine Effects of Prenatal Exposure to PCBs, Dioxins, and Other
Xenobiotics: Implications for Policy and Future Research." Environmental Health
Perspectives, Vol. 102, pp. 676-679.
California Department of Food and Agriculture, 1985. Parklands Pest Management.
Sacramento, CA.
Davis, D.L., Bradlow, H.L., Wolff, M., Woodruff, T., Hoel, D.G., and Anton-Culver, H.,
1993. "Medical Hypothesis: Xenoestrogens as Preventable Causes of Breast Cancer."
Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 101 (5), pp. 373-377.
Guilette, L.1., Gross, T.S., Masson, G.R., Matter J.M., Franklin Percival, H., and
Woodward, A.R., 1994. "Developmental Abnormalities of the Gonad and Abnormal Sex
Hormone Concentrations in Juvenile Alligators from Contaminated and Control Lakes in
Florida." Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 102, pp. 680-688.
General Accounting Office, 1994. Pesticides: Pesticides Registration May Not Be
Completed Until 2006. GAO\RCED\93-94.
Heifetz, R., personal communication. 1994.
Hoar, S.K., Blair, A., Holmes, F.F., Boysen, C.D., Robel, R.1., Hoover, R., Fraumeni, J.F.,
1986. "Agricultural Herbicide Use and Risk of Lymphoma and Soft-Tissue Sarcoma."
Journal of the American Medical Association, Sept. 5, 1986, Vol 256 (9), PP. 1141-1147.
Lowengart, R.A., Peters, J.M., Ciconi, C., Buckley, J., Bernstein, L., Preston-Martin, S.,
Rappaport, E., 1987. "Childhood Leukemia and Parents' Occupational and Home
Exposures." Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 79 (1), pp. 39-46.
Massachusetts Toxies Use Reduction Institute, 1993. Seminar for Environmental Leaders on
Toxics Use Reduction, p.6. Lowell: University of Massachusetts.
O'Brien, M., 1991. "Are Pesticides Taking Away the Ability of Our Children to Leam?"
Journal of Pesticide Reform, Winter, 1990-1991.
Robinson, J.C., Pease, W.S., Albright, D.S., and Morello-Frosch, R.A., 1994. "Pesticides in
the Home and Community: Health Risks and Policy Alternatives." Berkeley, CA: Calfornia
Policy Seminar, University of California.
Taylor, S. 1990. SPUR Guide: School Pesticide Use Reduction. San Diego: Environmental
67
\6- lOC1
Health Coalition.
Thorpe, K., 1988. "The Dangers of Pesticides in Schools," PTA Today, February, 1988.
EHC pollution prevention publications:
Home Safe Home Fact Sheets. 1989. A series of 2-4 page brochures on the least toxic
household management. Sections include: Cleansers, Indoor Pests, Garden Pests, Arts and
Crafts, Paints, and Auto Maintenance.
. Baywatch Guide, 1990. Information for recreational boaters on least-toxic boat
maintenance.
. Ecological Buying Guide, 1990. A brand name list of household cleaning and pest
control products that meet the EHC criteria for toxicity; and a list of stores which carry
them.
Gosselin, R.E., Smith, R.P., Hodge, RC., 1984. Clinical Toxicology of Commercial
Products, 5th ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
Sax, N.r., Lewis, RJ., 1987. Hawley's Condensed Chemical Dictionary, 11th Ed. New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Hazardous Substances Data Bank: on-line database available through the National Library
of Medicine. Peer-reviewed and referenced toxicology data.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1989. Report to Congress on Indoor Air Quality:
Executive Summary and Recommendations. Washington, D.C.
68
'6- \ \0
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM
17
MEETING DATE 8/20/96
IYJ//~
ITEM TITLE: Resolution - Accepting proposals and awarding contracts
for police initiated towing and storage services.
R I . /g" '/tJ.Ad d. h I. ... d .
eso utlOn - men lng t e po Ice lDltIate tOWIDg
service rate schedule and implementing a referral fee.
"
SUBMITTED BY: Chief of Police (,.,-""
REVIEWED BY: City Manager
f ," '. I ~
\.," - \ ,\
( ,
(4/5THS VOTE: YES_ NO X-)
On March 7, 1995, Council authorized Police Department staff to design a competitive process
to select providers of Police Initiated Towing and Impound Services. Proposals were accepted
on June 30, 1995, with twelve providers responding. The process used was designed to improve
the tow services provided to consumers and the City while enhancing General Fund revenues
through the implementation of a referral fee paid by tow companies under contract with the City.
RECOMMENDATIONS: That Council:
1. Approve agreements with the following tow operators: 1) Anthony's Towing, 2) South
Bay Towing, 3) Paxton's Towing, 4) AZ Metro Towing, and 5) J.C. Towing.
2. Approve amendments to the Police-Initiated tow operators rate schedule and adopt a
referral fee.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Background. The City of Chula Vista is authorized by Section 22671 of the California Vehicle
Code to issue a franchise or execute contracts for the towing and storage of vehicles having a
deleterious impact upon public safety. Such vehicles include, but are not limited to, those that
have been illegally parked, abandoned, involved in a serious traffic accident and the vehicles of
persons who have been arrested. Chula Vista Municipal Code (Me) Chapter 5.58 prescribes
the basic regulations governing the selection and operation of these tow companies. The existing
tow agreements provide for consumers to use the towing company of their choice if the towing
company can arrive in a reasonable period of time.
17., I
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 8/20/96
The Police Department currently uses five companies to provide Police-initiated towing services:
Anthony's Towing, Arnold's Towing, Glenview Towing, Paxton's Towing and South Bay
Towing. Arnold's, South Bay and Paxton's have had contracts with the City to provide these
or very similar services since September 27, 1966. Anthony's was added to the list of Council
authorized companies on April 4, 1973. Glenview was added subsequent to the most recent
competitive selection process on May 8, 1984. Each of the five companies has operated in
compliance with their agreement during the contract period. Currently, each of these five
companies has an identical agreement with the City and is first-up on the call rotation six days
each month.
Previous City Council Action. The existing agreements were approved by the City Council
on June 13, 1989. In lieu of conducting a competitive process at that time, Council directed
staff to require all five companies to meet higher consumer service and equipment standards in
order to retain the contract. Specifically, each company agreed to: a) a twenty-minute average
and forty-minute maximum response time; b) the acquisition of a variety of upgraded equipment
and apparatus; c) undertake abandoned vehicle abatement activities at the direction of the City;
and d) develop more responsive customer relations practices (i.e., maximum one-hour release
processing and releasing impounded vehicles after normal business hours). The Council
authorized staff to enter into three-year agreements with the five tow companies. The actual
contracts have an indefinite term but include a "termination for convenience" clause which
allowed the City to terminate the contract after three years or at any other time.
The most recent rate increase was approved by unanimous Council consent via Resolution 15804
on August 21, 1990. The rate increase was recommended by staff based upon a survey of
county cities that similarly regulate Police-initiated towing and storage services; the fact that it
had been three years since the previous rate increase; and, the notion that there had been an
increase in towing equipment, equipment operations and equipment maintenance prices over that
three year period. On September 18, 1990, Council received a staff report in response to a
request to expand the number of tow companies from five to six. In this report, staff
recommended that the number of tow companies not be changed. Council directed staff to bring
back another report within the next twelve months discussing the appropriate number of towing
companies and the bidding process.
Council received a follow-up report on November 5, 1991, recommending that five tow
companies be retained. Council discussions at that meeting focused on the need to effect a
competitive process and the various components of that competitive process.
17"~
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 8/20/96
On March 7, 1995, Council approved staffrecommendations to: 1) design a competitive process
to select providers of Police Initiated Towing and Impound Services and 2) implement a Referral
Fee to recoup costs associated with the Police Initiated Tow Program and as a method to
increase Police Department generated General Fund revenues. The referral fee was proposed
to be collected on a per vehicle basis and would reflect the City's costs of adminislering the
towing program (Agenda Statement and Council Minutes attached as attachments A and B).
Subsequently, the Principal Management Assistant (PMA) managing the project left the City.
In light of the fiscal constraints facing the City, the Police Department tried to absorb the duties
and role of the P.M.A. A Request for Proposal using a competitive process was released and
proposals received. However, the vacant P.M.A. position coupled with competing priorities
delayed the towing referral implementation process.
Contract Award. On July 28, 1995, twelve tow operators submitted proposals. Nine of the
twelve proposals met qualifying and fiscal specifications. These firms were then requested to
demonstrate their capability to provide the necessary services, comply with the proposed rate
structure and, within the rate structure, propose a per Police-initiated tow Referral Fee to be
paid to the City all nine operator's proposed a $25.00 referral fee). Each of these requirements
were rated and scored by the police department review team. The following is a list of tow
operators meeting specifications in rank order:
Score Tow Operators in rank order:
33 AZ Metro, 850-D Energy Way, Chula Vista, CA
33 Anthony's, 305 E St. Chula Vista, CA
32 JC Towing, 2501 Faivre St. Chula Vista, CA
32 So Bay Towing, 619 K St. Chula Vista, CA
31 Paxton Towing , 3487 Main St. Chula Vista
27 Glenview Towing, 140 Center St. Chula Vista
25 Arnold's, 1187 Walnut Ave. Chula Vista
24 Alcon, 4501 Otay Valley Rd, Chula Vista, CA
23 American, 127 Reed Ct. Chula Vista, CA
Proposals were evaluated using a three-tier rating syslem by the Police Traffic Unit, the former
PMA and Lt. Gawf to ensure that responses were in compliance with the specific requirements
outlined in the request for proposal. The results from the three methods of evaluation were the
same. The same five tow operators received the highest scores.
Some of the specific RFP requirements include:
o Having a minimum of three years in the towing business and ownership of a fleet of at
least four (4) tow trucks in a variety of tow-capacity ratings and configurations.
/7- ;J
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 8/20/96
o Maintaining an impound and release facility in the City of Chula Vista and providing
unobstructed and convenient customer access thereto.
o The ability to remove motor vehicles on a twenty-four-hour-a-day, seven-days-per-week
basis.
o The ability to respond to requests for towing services within twenty (20) minutes.
o Towing inoperable City vehicles twenty-four-hours-a-day at no cost to the City.
o Removing and impounding up to ten (10) vehicles per day at no cost to the City from
both private property and the public right-of-way as may be required by the Police
Department and the Department of Building and Housing.
The remaining requirements were described in the RFP. The five successful proposers clearly
met specifications and demonstrated, through their proposal and follow-up site visits, their ability
to meet these requirements. Additionally, the successful proposers agreed to implement the
proposed rate structure and referral fee. Staff recommends acceptance of the proposals and
award of contracts to the top five responsible bidders previously mentioned.
Number of Tow Companies. Since 1989, the City has successfully used five tow operators
to provide towing and impound services. The purpose of having a towing referral list is to
provide fast, efficient emergency and abandoned vehicle tow services on an as needed basis.
Long repose times to emergency tow requests adversely impact Police Officer's ability to return
to active duty. The Police Department's main concern is the quality of service for our officers
and citizens. Staff does not believe that increasing or decreasing the number of towing
companies would enhance the quality of services. Furthermore using five tow operators the
quality of services provided by tow companies and response times have been within contractual
guidelines. Staff is also sensitive to the reasonable profit levels that must be maintain in order
to make the towing business viable. There is simply not enough Police-initiated business to
support more than five towing firms. The companies currently under contract averaged
approximately 550 tows per year over the past three years. Increasing the number of companies
would reduce the amount of business to be generated by each tow operator and make
management and monitoring of tow companies more difficult. On the other hand, reducing the
number of tow companies may jeopardize the quality of service and response times.
Furthermore, if one of five tow operators went out of business, the City could continue to
operate without service interruptions. Staff recommends keeping the number of tow
companies under contract with the City at a maximum of five.
I?~ 'I
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date ~/LO/96
Rate Increase. Staff has periodically contacted the tow companies to review and discuss the
status of their agreement. Until July 1994, the consensus among the tow companies was that
the existing system was working adequately. During the four years from August 1990 until July
1994, each of the tow companies stated at various points-in-time that the rate schedule would
eventually need to be amended upward to reflect the increasing cost of doing business.
However, no formal request or proposal was made by any party to increase the Police-Initiated
Tow Rate Schedule until late July 1994. At that time, staff made contact with the tow operators
to facilitate the implementation of the Negligent Vehicle Impound Fee (NVIP).
The NVIP fee was implemented as part of the FY 1994-95 budget to recover the staff-time costs
associated with processing negligent vehicle impounds. Specifically, the NVIP fee recovers the
administrative costs of impounding and processing each vehicle impounded due to owner
negligence. Such negligent behavior is limited to vehicles impounded based upon an owner or
operator's failure to comply with state statutes relating to the operation, care and use of a motor
vehicle. In 1995, about 60% of all vehicles towed and impounded at the request of the Police
Department were subject to the NVIP, 12% were subject to abandoned vehicle abatement and
the remainder were for law abiding motorists eligible for cost recovery from the referral fee.
As a result of this renewal and solicitation for bids, the tow operators made a formal request to
increase the Council approved rate schedule. In response to this request, staff initiated a rate
and contract compliance analysis. Staffs initial analysis included a survey similar to that
conducted in 1990 and a review of the tow companies performance over the term of the existing
agreements. This analysis concluded that the current Chula Vista Tow Rate Schedule was lower
than the majority of agencies surveyed. Notwithstanding staffs recommendations, the rationale
for the operator's request for a rate increase was based primarily on two factors:
A. That the City's rate schedule was out of line with other jurisdictions since, as mentioned
above, the most recent rate increase occurred in August 1990.
B. That the City has required an increasing level of administrative work on their part to
comply with state law and City policies, most notably the implementation of the
Negligent Vehicle Impound Fee.
17.5
Page 6, Item
Meeting Date 8/20/96
Staff conducted a survey of cities in 1995 to determine what the new rates should be. The
survey results and proposed rates negotiated with the tow operators are presented below:
PoLICE INITIATED TOWING RATES IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
San Diego FJ Cajon N_ F.<icowtido Survey ChuIa vm. Chula VISta
Service City Average CumJDt Proposed
Basic Tow $72.00 $55.00 $75.00 $75.00 $69.25 $55.00 $70.00
Mileage $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $0.00 $1.88 $2.50 $2.50
Labor $40.00 $40.00 $00.00 $40.00 $30.00 $24.00 $30.00
Storage Hour $4.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.50 $1.50 $2.50
Storage $15.00 $12.00 $12.00 $15.00 $13.50 $12.00 $15.00
MaxlDay
PM Release $28.00 no service $28.00 $35.00 $30.33 $25.00 $30.00
Heavy Tow $125.00 no service $125.00 $120.00 $123.33 $120.00 $125.00
Average Cost $98.00 $79.50 $87.00 $100.00 $90.41 $71. 00 $93.00
Referral Fee $17-35 no no no n/a no $18
Included in
Tow Rate
Note: Due to variance in the application of ancillary charges, it is difficult to accurately
compare one jurisdiction's rate schedule with another. Such ancillary charges interact with the
basic rate to create the tow operator's revenue stream. For example: in Chula Vista, mileage
charges accrue only after the first mile; in San Diego and National City, mileage charges accrue
after five miles; El Cajon charges for all mileage; and, in Escondido there is no charge for
mileage. Additionally, National City does not have a labor rate which skews the average labor
rate reported.
Proposed Rates. Tow Operators in Chula Vista have not received a rate increase since 1989.
The proposed rates for the most part are equal to or slightly above the 1995 survey average.
These proposed rates are acceptable to the five recommended tow operators. Staff recommends
implementation of the proposed rates as shown above.
Referral Fee. The Police Department refers approximately 2,500 tows annually to private tow
operators. The proposed referral fee would be collected on a per vehicle basis and would reflect
the city's cost of administering the towing program and its role in developing the business of the
private firms chosen to provide Police-initiated towing and impound services. Consumers may
contact any towing company they choose, provided their choice will not unreasonably delay the
attending Police Officer.
J7,.,?
Page 7, Item
Meeting Date 8/20/96
All successful tow operators proposed up to the maximum referral fee of $25.00. This amount
was the highest referral fee possible under the initial program cost information provided to
interested tow operators. Subsequently, staff negotiated a referral fee of $18.00. The proposed
referral fee of $18.00 was derived by dividing the non-reimbursed towing cost by the number
of impounds not reimbursed at this time. The calculation of the non-reimbursed program cost
set the maximum referral fee at $18.00. Under current State law, the referral fee rate cannot
exceed the non-reimbursement towing program costs. Therefore, staff recommends
implementation of a $18.00 referral fee to recoup non-reimburse towing costs to the City.
The total towing program cost is summarized below:
Classification Rate: FCR: Hours: Cost:
Community Service Officer $28,0401 2.56393 nla $ 71,892.60
Communications Operator II $17.12 2.92998 350.0' 17,556.44
Peace Officer $22.78 2.92998 2007.3' 133,977.13
Police Records Assistant II $13.03 2.92998 1040.0' 39,704.74
Police Sergeant $27.78 2.92998 104.0' 8,465.06
Total Cost $271,595.99
1.0 CSO in the Police Department is assigned full time to the Towing Program. The
City's Full Cost Recovery program differentiates full and part time positions in its methodology
to determine the appropriate full cost recovery amount.
'The Communications Operator must take the call, dispatch a Police Officer, make the
appropriate data entries and then contact the tow company. These tasks average approximately
six (6) minutes per call for tow service.
'Based on an average of 34.41 minutes per tow; this is the per call for service average
derived from the FY 1995-96 Patrol Staffing Study.
'1.0 Police Records Assistant spends approximately one-half of their time on tasks related
to the Police Department's Towing Program.
'1.0 Police Sergeant spends approximately 5% of his time on tasks related to the Police
Department's Towing Program.
/7...7
Page 8, Item
Meeting Date 8/20/96
FISCAL IMPACT:
Currently, the Police Department receives approximately $140,000 annually for reimbursement
of Abandoned Vehicle Abatement efforts and approximately $80,000 annually for reimbursement
of costs associated with negligent vehicle impounds. Based on a Referral Fee of $18.00, the
Referral Fee would generate an additional $46,700 in annual General Fund revenue. The Police
Department would recover approximately 98% of the costs associated with providing Police-
initiated towing services. The Referral Fee would not be applicable to the towing of city
vehicles or on the towing and impoundment of abandoned vehicles.
Attachment A: March 7, 1995 Agenda Statement NOTSCANNEU
Attachment B: Tow~ng Council Minutes NOT SCANNED
Attachment C: Towmg Agreement
17- Y /17-.55
.
~. :~, ~,
-----------
.,
j9r,F/IC/-/)h'_ - /'r"
~ ~aAA-sLJ
COUNCIL AGEND" STATL.:.\lENT
Item ~ '7
Meeting Date 3/1J7/95
ITEl\1 TITLE
~
ReFort: Police Initiated Towing Services -- Rate Schedule and
Selec:'2G of Service Providers.
SUB/vaTTED BY
(\ .
Chief of PolIce \! leV
. "-'
-~ J [b'
City Manager U' ",-l (4/5ths Vote: Ycs_NoX)
REVIEWED BY
The City currently contracts with five companies to provide Police"'.::.:::ed vehicle towing and
storage services. These firms have requested that Council review and amend the existing tow
rate structure. Staff has evaluated this request and is not recommending a tow rate increase at
this time. Additionally, based upon prior Council direction, Police Department staff has
designed a competitive process to select providers of Police initiated towing and impound
services after June 30, 1995. This report discusses both the operator's proposal to increase tow
rates and the components and time-line for the competitive process recommended by staff. The
proposed competitive process is similar to a successful competitive process recently implemented
by the City of San Diego. This proposed process is designed to improve tow services provided
to consumers and the City while enhancing General Fund revenues through the implementation
of a Referral Fee paid by tow companies under contract with the City.
-" --
RECOMM.E1\'DA nONS That Council:
1. Defer any increase in the Police-Initiated Towing and Storage Rate Schedule at this time.
2. Authorize staff to Conduct the Proposed Competitive Process including a Referral Fee,
BOARDSfCOl'v1l\lISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
Background. The City of Chula Vista is authorized by Section 22671 of the California Vehicle
Code to issue a franchise or execute contracts for the towing and storage of vehicles having a
deleterious impact upon public safety. Such vehicles include, but are not limited to, those that
have been illegally parked, abandoned, involved in a serious traffic accident and the vehicles of
persons who have been arrested. Chula Vista Municipal Code (MC) Chapter 5.58 prescribes
(7 0
~--r,
the basic regulations governing the selection and operation of these tow companies. The existing
tow agreements provide for consumers to use the towing company of their choice if the towing
company can arrive in a reasonable period of time.
The Police Department uses five companies to provide Police-initiated towing services:
Anthony's Towing, Arnold's Towing, Glenview Towing, Paxton's .Towing and South Bay
Towing. Arnold's, South Bay and Paxton's have had contracts with the City to provide these
or very similar services since September 27, 1966. Anthony's was added to the list of Council
authorized companies on April 4, 1973. Glenview was added subsequent to the most recent
competitive selection process on May 8, 1984. Each of the five companies has operated in
compliance with their agreement during the contract period. Relatively few complaints are
received as a result of PD initiated towing services. .
Currently, each of these five companies has an identical agreement with the City and is first-up
on the call rotation six days each month.
Previous City Council Action. The existing agreements were approved by the City COUTICiJ
on June 13, 1989. In lieu of conducting a competitive process at that time, Council directed
staff to require all five companies to meet higher consumer service and equipment standards in
order to retain the contract. Specifically, each company agreed to: a) a twenty-minute average
and forty-minute maximum response time; b) the acquisition of a variety of upgraded equipment
and apparatus; c) undertake abandoned vehicle abatement activities at the direction of the City;
and d) develop more responsive customer relations practices (i.e., maximum one-hour release
processing and releasing impounded vehicles after normal business hours). The Council
authorized staff to enter into three-year agreements with the five tow companies. The actual
contracts have an indefinite term but include a "termlmtion for convenience" clause which
allowed the City to terminate the contract after three years or at any other time.
-
The most recent rate increase was approved by unanimous Council consent via Resolution 15804
on August 21, 1990. The rate increase was recommended by staff based upon a survey of
county cities that similarly regulate Police-initiated towing and storage services; the fact that it
had been three years since the previous rate increase; and, the notion that there had been an
increase in towing equipment, equipment operations and equipment maintenance prices over that
three year period.
On September 18, 1990, Council received a staff report in response to a request to expand the
number of tow companies from five to six. In this report staff recommended that the number
of tow companies not be changed. Council directed staff to bring back another report within the
next twelve months discussing the appropriate number of towing companies and the bidding
process.
Council received a follow-up report on November 5, 1991, recommending that five tow
companies be retained. Council discussions at that meeting focused on the need to effect a
competitive process and the various components of that competitive process.
{\,\ b
\ 21 2
Page 3, Item --L1.
Meeting Date: 3/07/95
The staff reports and minutes (in those cases where there was Council discussion) from these
meetings are attached for your reference.
.
Request for Rate Increase. Staff has periodically contacted the tow companies to review and
discuss the status of their agreement. Until July 1994, the consensus among the tow companies
was that the existing system was working adequately. During the four years from August 1990
until July 1994, each of the tow companies stated at various points-in-time that the rate schedule
would eventually need to be amended upward to reflect the increasing cost of doing business.
However, no formal request or proposal was made by any party to increase the Police-Initiated
Tow Rate Schedule until late July, 1994. At that time, staff made contact with the tow operators
to facilitate the implementation of the Negligent Vehicle Impound Fee (NYIP).
The NYIP fee was implemented as part of the FY 1994-95 budget to recover the staff-time costs
associated with processing negligent vehicle impounds. Specifically, the NYIP fee recovers the
administrative costs of impounding and processing each vehicle impounded due to owner
negligence. Such negligent behavior is limited to vehicles impounded based upon an owner or
operator's failure to comply with state statutes relating to the operation, care and use of a motor
vehicle. About 57% of all vehicles towed and impounded at the request of the Police
Department are subject to the NYIP, the remainder of Police-initiated tows are for law abiding
motorists.
As a result of this contact, the tow operators made formal request to increase the Council
approved rate schedule. In response to this request, staff initiated a rate and contract compliance
analysis. Staff's initial analysis included a survey similar to that conducted in 1990 and a review
of the tow companies performance over the term of the existing agreements. This analysis
concluded that the current Chula Vista Tow Rate Schedule was lower than the majority of
agencies surveyed and that each of the existing companies had generally demonstrated
satisfactory contractual performance. Based on this preliminary analysis, staff met with the five
tow companies to discuss potential amendments to their agreement presuming that staff's ultimate
recommendation to the City Council would be to enter into new agreements with the same five
companies.
~'.-
However, subsequent analysis of this issue's history indicated that it would be more appropriate
to identify Police-initiated tow service providers through a competitive process. This
dctErmination was based upoD the following facts:
1. the current companies have had contracts to provide Police-initiated towing services for
periods of time ranging from a minimum of eleven years to a maximum of twenty-nine
years;
2. since 1966, only one competItIve process been conduded to select the providers of
Police-initiated towing services; and,
17-\\
,~
!
i em
:, reltC: 3/07/95
3,
the competItIve process used in 1984 resulted in a contract e.'~'
companies already under contract with the city and the addition 01 ,
tor the four
;;ompany.
Notwithstanding staffs recommendations, the rationale for the operator's request for a rate
increase was based primarily on two factors:
A. That the City's rate schedule was out of line with other jurisdictions since, as mentioned
above, the most recent rate increase occurred in August 1990,
B. That the City has required an increasing level of administrative work on their part to
comply with state law and City policies, most notably the implementation of the
Negligent Vehicle Impound Fee.
Staff conducted a survey of cities to determine if a rate increase was appropriate and, if so, what
the new rates should be. The survey results are presented below. There are as many
approaches to the provision of Police-initiated towing and impo,und services as there are cities:
methods run the spectrum from city operated towing and impound operations to single-vendor
franchises to unregulated competition. Therefore, only those fees common to San Diego county
cities that regulate the provision of Police-initiated towing services by municipal Ordinance were _ __
included in the survey.
Due to variance in the application of ancillary charges (i.e., mileage, labor and storage) it is
difficult to accurately compare one jurisdictions rate schedule with another. Such ancillary
charges interact with the basic rate to create the tow operator's revenue stream. For example:
in Chula Vista, mileage charges accrue only after the first mile; in San Diego and National City,
mileage charges accrue after five miles; EI Cajon charges for all mileage; and, in Escondido
there is no charge for mileage, In order to effectively compare the rates charged in the cited
jurisdictions, staff developed a normalizing process that is reflected in the last row of the table.
This row, entitled" Average Cost" reflects the cost to a citizen of a routine tow. The routine
tow used by staff in this normalizing process includes: a basic tow of five miles, one-quarter
hour of labor, and one day's maximum storage charge_ The maximum storage charge was
incillded because the maximum rate is charged <liter four 10 six hours of storage and most
vehicles remain in storage longer than four hours. The l1onnalizedT<tte.s cited in the Average
Cost row corrects for most of the known inter-jurisdiction variances in the application of
ancillary charges.
..v
,,- \
'-. -"f-
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date: 3/07/95
POLICE blTIATED TO\\1"G RATES I" SA'" DIEGO COUl'.'TY .
San Diego FJ CJ\ioo Natiooal F.5cood;do 50rvey Chub Visla Chub VISta
Senw:e - City A YerDge Current Proposed
Basic Tow S72.00 S55.00 S75.00 S75.00 S69.25 S55.00 $70.00
Mileage S2.50 S2.50 S2.50 SO.OO S 1.88 S2.50 $2.50
Labor S40.00 S40.00 SO.OO S40.00 S30.00 S24.00 $30.00
Storage Hour S4.00 S2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.50 S 1.50 S2.50
Storage $15.00 SI2.00 $12.00 $15.00 $13.50 $12.00 SI5.00
MaxlDay
PM Release $28.00 DO service $28.00 $35.00 S30.33 $25.00 S30.00
Heavy Tow $125.00 no service SI25.00 $120.00 $123.33 $120.00 SI25.00
A verage Cost $98.00 $79.50 $87.00 $100.00 $90.41 $71.00 $93.00
Referral Fee $17-35 no DO DO nla DO yes
Included iD
Tow Rate
The column entitled "Chula Vista Proposed" presents the rate structure staff would recommend
if the City were to grant a rate increase and institute a Referral Fee (discussed in detail below)
now instead of going through the recommended competitive process.
.~-
The five existing tow companies are adamant that a rate increase should be implemented
immediately. The Average Cost figures presented above provide a normalized comparison
between Chula Vista's current rates and the rates of other comparable cities that regulate Police-
initiated towing services. Chula Vista's current rates and the "Average Cost" of a Police-
initiated tow in Chula Vista are currently less than in the survey cities. However, it is important
to emphasize that San Diego's rate includes a Referral Fee of $17 to S35, depending on the
geographic zone. The net revenue to the tow operator for the average tow therefore ranges from
$63 to $81 in San Diego. Chula Vista's current rate structure is thus not as much lower than
the other cities rates as it might seem. Furthermore, none of the tow operators have asked to
be Tl'll'"""rI from their existing contracts.
Adopting the rates presented in the Chula Vista Proposed column would place Chula Vista's
Police-initiated tow rate structure at the median level for comparable jurisdictions in San Diego
county. However, Chula Vista's Proposed rate structure would provide for an average cost of
$93.00, an average cost $5.00 less than in the City of San Diego. In order to place rates in the
context of the overall Police-initiated towing market, the analysis should recognize that the San
GtR
. .
Ige 6, Item. __
:'~ting Date: 3/07/95
Diego Police Department initiates approximately 50,000 tows annuall:
the number of tows initiated by the police department's of the City of .
and National City combined. Therefore, Chula Vista's proposed rate s:
proposed Referral Fee, compares very favorably on the basis of both-a cit.
and when viewed in the context of a market-wide analysis.
,vre than three times
.' a Vista, Escondido
re, including the
"ity comparison
However, in the absence of the proposed Referral Fee, implementation of the. ::Jla Vista
proposed rate structure would push the City's rates to second highest in the COULlY among
comparable cities (recall that San Diego's price structure includes a $17 - $35 Referral Fee).
Therefore, it is staffs recommendation to implement the rate structure presented in the
Chula Vista Proposed column only at the conclusion of the recommended competitive process
with the establishment of a Chula Vista Referral Fee.
~.
Referral Fee. Staff is recommending the Referral Fee as a method to increase Police
Department generated General Fund revenues. The Police Department refers approximately
3,500 tows annually to private tow operators. The proposed Referral Fee would be collected
on a per vehicle basis and would reflect the City's costs of administering the towing program
and its role in developing the business of the private firms chosen to provide Police-initiated
towing and impound services. Consumers may contact any towing company they choose,
provided their choice will not unreasonably delay the attending Police Officer, but the Police
Department's referral is valuable in terms of the business opportunities for tow companies on
the list. Additionally, the Referral Fee would assist in developing full cost recovery (FCR)
associated with the Police Department's Towing and Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program.
Total program costs compared with current reimbursements are described in the table below.
,.
.
"I
CITY OF CIIULA VISTA TOWII'G PROGRA\! COSTS
CI.assiIicatioa Rate: FCR: Houn: TOVoing Program Costs:
Commuruty Service Officer S28,040.00' 2.56393 nla S7I,892.60
Communications Operator II S17.12 2.92998 350.0' S 17,556.44
Peace Officer S21.90 2.92998 2007.3' S128,798.33
Police Records Assistant S13.03 2.92998 1040.0' S39,704.74
Police Sergeant S26.71 2.92998 104.0' S8,139.02
Total Police Department Towing Program Costs: S266,091.U
--.
-"
City's Full Cost Recovery Piog-iim dif~es fuJl-.aDd j,irt-time pQSiiions Dlits meili~nloiY-to rlei';:"';;;e the --
.appropmt" full cost recovery .amounL
~ The Communications Operator must take the call, dispatch a Police Officer, make the appropriate data entries
and then contact the tow company. These tasks average approximately six (6) minutes per call for tow service.
) Based on an average of 34.41 minutes per tow; this is the per calI for service average derived from the FY
1995-96 Patrol Staffing Study.
. 1.0 Police Records Assistant spends approximately one-half of her time on tasks related to the Police
Department's Towing Program.
, 1.0 Police Sergeant spe,ds approxim.,cely 55\ of his time on tasks related 10 Ibe Police Department's Towing
Proo"", ~.,'
Page 7, Item
11
Meeting Date: 3/07/95
Currently, the Police Department receives approximately $100,000 annually for reimbursement of
Abandoned Vehicle Abatement efforts and approximately $100,000 annually for reimbursement of costs
associated with negligent vehicle impounds. Based on a Referral Fee of$17.00 (the most common rate
in San Diego city), the .Referral Fee would generate $59,500 in annual General Fund revenue.
Therefore, if the Referral Fee. concept by staff is adopted, the Police Department would recover
approximately 98 % of the costs associated with providing Police-initiated towing services if Chula
Vista's Referral Fee is at San Diego's most common level. The Referral Fee would not be applicable
to the towing of City vehicles or on the towing and impoundment of abandoned vehicles.
Competitive Process. There has been significant interest in a competitive process from local and
regional towing firms. Moreover, the five existing firms have stated that they are prepared to respond
ID.a competitive bid and operate in a more competitive environment. Staff is proposing to implement
a process similar to that recently used by the City of San Diego. That process used an administrative
analysis to determine an appropriate rate structure. Firms were then requested to demonstrate their
capability to provide the necessary services, comply with the appropriate rate structure and, within that
rate structure, bid a per Police-initiated tow Referral Fee to be paid to the City. This method has the
advantage of allowing a comparison among responsible bidders based on a single, directly comparable
moving point: each bidder's proposed Referral Fee. The San Diego Police Department received
separate bids for each of nine pre-determined geographic zones or tow districts. The referral fees bid
for these nine districts range from $17.00 to $35.00, however, the most frequently occurring referral
fee is $17.00.
Contract A ward. The proposed competitive process would include two distinct phases: a Qualifying
Phase and a Fiscal Impact Evaluation. The Qualifying Phase would consist of an analysis to determine
if the proposer meets specific minimum business operation, equipment, contractor performance and
customer relations requirements. These requirements would be articulated in any agreement negotiated
for Police-initiated towing and impound services and include:
-- -
. Having a minimum of three years in the IDwing business and ownership of a fleet of at least four
(4) tow trucks in a variety of tow-capacity ratings and configurations.
. Maintaining an impound and release facility in the City of Chula Vista and providing
unobstructed and convenient customer access thereto.
. The ability to remove motor vehiclEs on a twenty-four-hour-a-day, seven-d.ays-per-week basis.
. The ability to respond to requests for towing services within twenty (20) minutes.
. Towing inoperable City vehicles twenty-four-hours-day at no cost to the City.
'7-1~
\~- \
;tem
;.; ;ate: 3/07/95
. Removing and impounJing up to ten (iL; vehicles per day at"no ., to I:\(. City from both
private property and the public right-of-way as may be required by the Police Department and
the Department of Building and Housing.
.:
i!
,
The remaining requirements are described in Attachment 1. Proposers would be required to clearly
demonstrate, through their proposal and, if necessary follow-up site visits, their ability to meet these
requirements. Additionally, this phase would ensure the proposer agreed to implement the rate structure
presented as Chula Vista Proposed shown above. Firms passing the Qualifying Phase would be certified
as responsible bidders.
All responsible bidders would qualify for the Fiscal Impact Evaluation. This evaluation would assess
only the respondents proposed Referral Fee. The firm proposing the highest Referral Fee would be
identified as the successful bidder. Staff would negotiate with the successful bidder to develop an
operational agreement based upon the RFP's requirements. Next, staff would negotiate with the
remaining responsible bidders in descending rank Referral Fee bid order to determine if those firms
would provide Police-initiated towing services under the Referral Fee negotiated with the successful
vendor. This process would continue until a maximum of three firms were identified or the list was
exhausted.
Staff would ultimately bring forward a Resolution approving agreements with not more than three firms
and amending the Police-initiated Towing Service Rate Schedule to reflect those rates presented as Chula
Vista Proposed in ~.:IS report.
.-- --
Number of Tow Companies. Staff recommends that agreements with no more than three tow
companies be brought forward for Council appm'.! b:\sed upon their capabilities as demonstrated in
the Qualifying Phase and their ability to enhance General Fund revenues via their proposed Referral
Fee. A survey conducted by the California State University at Bakersfield in 1992 indicates that most
cities with populations in excess of 50,000 have fewer than five tow contractors. This study further
indicates that three (3) is the most frequently occurring number of city authorized tow companies among
cities with populations over 50,000. (see Attachment 3) Additionally, regulating the activities of three
(or fewer) rather than five tow companies, even taking into account the exemplary compliance record
of the existing firms, is likely to reduce the regulatory burden on staff. Staff anticipates that the time
required for site visits, equipment inspections, routine follow-up and abandoned vehicle abatement
.service coordination activities will be reduced with fewer companies. Therefore, reducing the number
of companies to three or fewer based on the proposed competitive process will result in a more effective
"Ii 1 i"" tilln of Polli:e -IXt'",-d:wen! staff.
However, staff would have no serious objections to including as many as five firms in the future Police-
initiated towing rotation. Staff would have significant concerns with identifying more than five firms.
Staff and the existing companies agree that there is simply not enough Police-initiated business to
support five towing firms. The final number of tow companies will be addressed further when staff
returns for Council review of the proposed contracts.
'7 -\l,
';/ ~
Page 9, Item ~
Meeting Date: 3/07/95
Staff would implement the proposed competitive process on the following schedule:
.
Issue Request for Proposals:
Responses to RFP Due:
Proposah Evaluated:
Contract(s) Negotiated:
Contract(s) Reviewed by Council:
March 16, 1995 .
April 16, 1995
April 16 through April 30, 1995
May I through June I, 1995
June 13, 1995
.
.
.
.
Conclusions. Approval of the staff recommendations would:
a. implement a competitive process to select the providers of Police-initiated towing and storage
services consistent with past Council direction;
b. result in an appropriate revision to the City's Police-Initiated Towing and Impound Rate
Schedule; and,
c. develop additional General Fund revenue to offset the costs of providing and administering the
Police Department's Towing Program -- a service that benefits a very limited, and well-defined
spectrum of the community.
Alternatives. There are a variety of alternative approaches to the staff recommendations. These
alternatives include:
1.
Retain the five existing tow companies under the allspices of a new agreement with a Referral
Fee. This alternative could be implemented; however, numerous local tow companies have been
waiting for an opportunity to compete for the City's Police towing business and the amount of
the Referral Fee would need to be determined.
-.
2. Allow the competitive process to set Ihe rale SITUClllre instead of or in addilion 10 the Referral
Fee. There are three approaches within this alternative:
a. Council establishes a Referral Fee in advance of the cOmpel1tlve process and all
responsible bidders would be evaluated based upon their proposed tow-related rates.
b. The Referral Fee is bid as part of the competitive process and all responsible bidders
would be evaluated based on both their proposed ~ and proposed Referral Fee. Staff
does Dot recommend this approach dw: to the difficulties inherent in simultaneously
evaluating two floating points (i.e., Tates and Referral Fee).
~
" Item
:i
,1
"
"
Date: 3/07/95
c.
Council rejects the recommended Referral Fee and aH r:
evaluated based upon their proposed rates.
'e bidders would be
3. Implemem a rate increase but not implement the proposed Referra" " ; 'Jetitive process.
This alternative ~ould provide for a rate increase (in an, amount that ' 'ould have to be
detennined) without implementing a Referral Fee or going through a compeulive process.
flSCAL IMPACT: The proposed Referral Fee would generate annual General Fund revenue to help
recover the City's costs for the Police Department's towing program. The
amount of revenue would vary depending on the bids received but would be about
$59,500 if the final Referral Fee is $17.00.
-
11 - \<b
~~
ATTACHMENT 1
1. Contractor shall have been providing tow operations for a minimum of three years.
2. Contractor shall maintain an impound and release facility in the City of Chula Vista and
shall provide unobstructed and convenient customer access thereto.
3. Contractor shall remove motor vehicles on a twenty-four-hour-a-day, seven-days-per-
week basis. .
4. Contractor shall respond to requests for towing services within twenty (20) minutes of
being notified by the Police Department. . .
5. Contractor shall tow inoperable City vehicles twenty-four-hours-day at no cost to the
City.
6. Contractor shall, at the request of the City, remove and impound up 10 ten (10) vehicles
per day at no cost to the City.
7. Contractor shall comply with the approved schedule of charges and posting of same in
a conspicuous place at all locations where the Contractor does business.
8. Contractor shall maintain the following equipment in good working order:
a. Tow Trucks. A minimum of four trucks including: 1 Wheel Lift rated at 14,500
Gross Vehicle Weight(GVW); 1 Rollback rated at 14,500 GVW; 1 Twin Cable-
Boom rated at I ton or more; and, 1 Hydraulic Boom rated at 1 ton or more.
b. Tow Truck Winches. Each truck shall have a winch that is power-driven in both
directions and equipped with an adequate braking system.
c. Tow Truck Lighting. Each truck shall be equipped with the lighting systems as
required by CVC. Additionally, trucks shall be equipped with utility lamp
lighting systems that comply with the CVe.
d. Tow Truck Implements. Each truck shall be carry the miscellaneous implements
and equipment required by CVC Section 27700. Additionally, Contractor shall
have a mimmum of one set of dollies readily available at all times.
e. Tow Truck Identification. Each truck responding to requests for police initiated
towing and impound services shall, on both sides of the vehicle, conspicuously
bear the company name, address and phone number(s).
f. Tow Truck Radio Commurucations. Each truck responding to requests for police
initiated towing and impound services shall be equipped with radio
C(m1m,mi""tinns equipment U!pable of effecting two-way radio communications
'. between the truck and the contractDr's dispatching operation. Citizens Band
radios shall not be used to meet this requirement.
g. Tow Truck Maintenance Standard. Each truck responding to requests for police
initiated towing and impound services shall be well maintained and clean on the
exterior and interior and should reflect the clean image of the City of Chula
Vista.
17 - I C;
~ ..-r
1
~-
~--
9. Contractor shall provide tow truck Ope:atOTS with a uniform t~at clearly identifies the
company and the operator.
10. Contractor shall preserve the right of any individual involved in a ~Dn-criminal traffic
collision to call the tow company o(tl,"'( )wn ~h')()~ing and shall nm ,'< infringed except
in those cases where an unnecessary ," 'c,y in .t:!.1C.' ing the mator vehicle will, in the
opinion of the investigating Peace Officer, ";'rr.;nish public safety.
11. Contractor shall maJce and sign an accurate damag{~ assessment and vehicle inventory for
each vehicle towed and that the damage assessment is recorded on City approved forms.
12. Contractor shall be liable for any damage or loss of property occurring to 'the vehicle
while in contractor's possession. All damage not recorded on the damage assessment
will be considered the contractor's responsibility.
13. Contractor shall make vehicles stored at the request of the City available for the purpose
of estimating or appraising damages.
14. Vehicles impounded by the City for investigative purposes shall be held in maximally
secured areas.
15. Contractor shall not make any repairs or alterations of vehicles in their possessIOn
without express written authorization.
16. Contractor shall release impounded vehicles in compliance with and subject to the
following terms and conditions.
a.
Contractor shall courteously provide any information required by claimant to
effect the release of the impounded vehicle.
Contractor shall not release any vehicle impounded as the result of a Police
initiated tow unless the claimant presents a valid, City-issued Police Release.
Contractor shall efficiently process claimants requests so that legitimate and
appropriate requests for the release of stored or impounded vehicles are
completed within one (1) hour of the time claimant arrives at the contractor's
location.
--.-
b.
c.
17. Contractor shall display in a conspicuous manner, at every place of business from which
Police initiated towing and impound services are rendered, City issued "Consumer
Complaint" forms provided by the City.
18. Contractor shall comply with 2pp1ic.able City Bu.sines.s 1 iN>T1<f": Building and
Construction; and Zoning Regulations.
19. Contractor shall comply with all applicable sections of the California Vehicle Code.
2
, 1 .. J.{)
'~ .~
\ .... I
ATTACHMENT 2 -- PROPOSED POLICE INITIATED TOWING AND IMPOUND
SERVICE RATE SCHEDULE
Service Proposed Rate
Basic Tow . $70.00
Per Mile Charge After First Mile $2.50
.
Hourly Storage Fees - $2.50
Daily Storage Fee $15.00
Dry Run Charge $20.00
Dolly Usage $30.00
Labor at Scene After First 1/2 Hour $15.00
Heavy Duty Tow $125.00
Heavy Duty Dry Run $20.00
Heavy Duty Hourly Storage Fee $2.50
Heavy Duty Daily Storage $20.00
After-Hours Release $30.00
Negligent Vehicle Impound Fee $55.00
Notes:
-q
I. Mileage charges shall accrue from the point of vehicle pick up to the location of storage.
2. A second day's storage charge shall not accrue until the vehicle has been in storage for
twenty-four hours.
3. Labor charges shall not aurue until the tow operator has been on-scene for thirty
minutes. The operator shall sweep up the scene at no charge. There shall be no labor
charge for unlocking a vehicle or removing a vehicles linkage.
4. After-hours release charges shall be applicable after 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,
Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays.
5. Tow companies shaH accept cash or major credit cards for all payments required to
release vehicles impounded at the request of the Police Department. Companies shall
keep adequate cash on-hand to make change.
/7-~'
ijL~
3
j
i:
CJ)
Q)
--
C
ct1
Cl. c
E 0
"-
+-'
0 (1j
-
() :J
0..
~ 0
0....
t2 +
0
-a 0
0
Q) ~
0
N I.!)
--
~ ...c
0 +-'
~
...c
+-' (1j
::J "-
<( c
~
0
~ '+-
+-' (1j
-- 0 en
() Q)
......
c 0
'+- ......
0 CJ) 0
Q) "-
Q)
~+-' ...Q
0)- -E-
..cO =:!
z
E
::J
Z
~
'J
"
~
.
o
C\J
f'-..
.,-
A, ",'nen't 3
1!)
.,-
,.-.--...
co
'~' '''. ~,-'~;:' :;~~~i- ''-:,~~~::
."..,-. ........~~. ;........."V'_...,...~
,'~"'" ojj::.5.~iI:tr~.-_~,
-.-.....,. -,
"<:t
('I)
C\J
co
co
C\J
.,-
~f~;~:Zg~-t4~1k~~~~~fSi~~
- ~~~~~~~;tr~1.';:'~~'f~1~~~:;i
('I)
,(Y) ,
,T-
C\J
~
o
.,-
1!)
o
( 1 . \.'1,./'
~b.f
+
o
.,-
-0
Q)
......
en
"-
Q)
..::.::
CU
CD
>;
......
en en
"-
Q) Q)
"- >
C
CU c
0... ::J
E Q)
0 ......
0 CU
......
3: C/)
~ CU
c
-0 "-
0
Q) ......
N
"- CU
0 0
..c
...... j1> -
=:! ..c
<! --' --
......
...... ......
0 0
"- C
Q) 0
...Q en r--.
E en r--.
=:! E >-
z OJ
"- >
Q) ~
OJ
0.... (fJ
0
Q) -
..c OJ
...... ,",
"0
..c c:
...... 0
'3: Q.
'"
OJ
a:
(j)
co
f'-..
co
1!)
'<:t
4
-0",
Q) OJ
(JOE
=:!U
-00
o ~
"- OJ
0.....0
Q) E
LI:~
Minutes
November 5, 1991
Page 12
RESOLtnlON 16404 OFFERED BY COUNOlMAN MOORE, reading of the text was waived, poused and
approved unanimously.
Councilman Rindone stated he supporred the motion but felt this was one of the taxethat could be imposed
with minimal impact upon the residenrs of the Ciry.
Councilwoman Grasser Harron noted that it would cause a hardship on the hotels and motels in being
competitive with others in the COULlty.
RESOLtnlON 16404 APPROVING ABATEMENT OF THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX. FROM
A RAn: OF TI:N PERCENT TO EIGHT PERCENT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1992
ORAL COMMUNrCAllONS
Don Swanson, 187 Murray Street, Chula Vista, c.... representing the Downtown Business Association,
informed Council that the County Board of Supervisors had unanimously voted to supporr the Otay Mesa
site for the University of California campus. He then updated the COULlcij on the selection process for the
Town Manager. Forry applications were received and it is anticipated that review will be completed by next
week with finalists submirred to the DBA by December 1st. The Honorary Grand Marshall for the Starlight
Yule Parade will be Ex.Chief of Police Bill Winters and the Grand Marshall will be Mother Goose from EI
Cajon.
~-~~. -~ ~~~.
.---..
.,~.~---~ "'~'-_... - ~... ~
ACDON ITEMS
-..--
fl2. REPORT POUCE INITIATED VEHlQE TOWS; REVIEW OF APPROPRlAn: NlUMBER
/ ~r TOW COMPANIES TO RETAIN UNDER CONTRACT AT CONCLUSION OF EXISTING 1l-IREE YEAR
AGREEMENTs. The latest tow agreements Were executed in October 1989. On 9/18/90, Council approved
two stafi recommendations: 1) that no additional tow companies be added to the list at thar time; and 2)
that the issue be reviewed again prior to expiration of the current operating agreements. This item is
intended to provide Council with rhat review. Staff recommends that upon expiration of the current
op~ratjng agreements, Council continue to retain fi,,'e (5) tow companies. (Chief of Police)
~ ,~.. --- ---~~
.-- --
Ed Wood, 1~0 Reed Courr, Chula Vista, CA, representing Glenview Towing, spoke in sup parr of the staff
recommendation. He stared that u~e businesses Were having a difficulr time with their revenues do\\.'TI 40%
and he did not feel they could word the additional competition.
Bo Lemler, 3~87 Main Street, Chula Vista, CA, representing Paxton Towing, spoke in supporr of the staff
recommendations. He nored thar all their expenses Were rising wirh their revenues down 42% and it would
be a hardship if other companies Were added.
Brad Ramsey, 1421 California Street, Imperial Beach, CA, representing A to Z Towing, spoke in supporr of
the staff recommendarion. He suggested that staff and the Police Department look at lowering the number
of companies in the future.
Clay Plan, 449 D Street, Chula Vista, CA, representing Platt's Towing, spoke in oppoSItIOn to the staff
recommendation. He stated that he was not one of the five current tow companies and felt that the system
should be set so that if one company felt they could service the entire ciry, they should be able to submit
a proposal indicating this. The serring of any number Was unacceptable. He questioned whether the row
contracts would Come under the California PubJic ContTact Law.
Ruth Fritsch, Assistant City Anomey, responded that she would have to research this and retum ro Counci!.
~3
5
Minuees
"vember 5, 1991
Page 11
I,
other uses ~mg taxed should be reviewed, i.e, billboards, cardrooms, rock c
'sticldng' the local businesses, He felt this was a different set of priorities than}
.:5, erc. rather than
MS (Nader/G=ser Horton) to defer the 1991.92 Business License T.1x increase fOI,' year.
'.
Mayor Nader srared that if the economy was better Council would be justified in increasing the tax but at
this eime the Cicy-:oshould be encouraging businesses ae rhis rime.
Councilman Malcolm stated he would suPPOrt the morion if it was promised thar sraff would work and bring
forth to Council proposed curs in the budget to balance the deficit.
Mayor Nader stated he could accept that if credit was given for ruming over the operation of the Youth
Center ro the Boy's and Girl's Club.
SUBSTI11JTI MOTION: (MalcolmlNader) 1) to continue the public hearing for CWo weeks, and 2) direct
staff to bring back a revised schedule that will look at r.illing some of the uses while trying ro come up with
a balance within the schedule (keeping in mind that it is the Council's wishes that the !:aXes be reduced as
close 4S possible to the current 1evei<).
Councilman Moore questioned whether there would be a 5146,000 shortfall in the budget if the Business
License Tax was nor increased. He felt the proposed action by Council was appropriare and thar the options
broughr back for revie.....' should be varied regarding potencial cuts.
City Manager Goss responded that rhe bUdger, in terms of being balanced, was our of balance by
approximately S60,OOO of revenues ovec expendirures, therefore Loere was a plus figure for this fiscal year.
Councilman Rindone stared he would like to see the net reduction due ro rhe Business License Tax be offser
by increases in other areas as mentioned and/or orher budget reducrions so rhis would be zeroed O~t ro be
reflective of the downturn of the economy.
i'.layor Nader stated that the intent of L1e marion ......as paniJ.IIy COL:.r.terbalanced \'11m Increases i.-:. omer
categories with staff coming back with a report L1.Jt ......ould indicate 2??ropriate budget cuts or at Je:lst with
staff recommendations.
.
City Manager Goss scared it would not be acrually reducing Loe rares but raising selected rates and
addressing possible budger curs.
VOTE ON SUBSTI11JTI MOTION: approved unanimously.
21. PUBUC HEARING FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING ABATEMENT OF THE TRANSIENT
OCCUPANCY TAX . In October 1990, Council adopred Ordinance No. 2407 increasing the Transient
Occupancy Tax (TOn ro a maximum rare of 10% and pro\iding for annual abatement hearings ar which
rime the tax could be lowered. Scaff recommends approval of the resolurion. (Director of Finance)
Lyman Christopher, Director of Finance, informed Council thar all local horels and motels had been r.oriiied
of the public hearing and only one response had been received which was in suPPOrt of staff
recommendation.
There being no public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
~t
6
Minutes
November S. 1991
P oge 13
Mayor Nader infonned Mr. Platt thot the oction taken by Council tonight would not in any way extend rhe
current contncts of the five [ow com ponies. Action would on:y set the number of componies at five. Upon
expiration of Ehe conrracts n~xt year it wiJ! be opened for competi~ive bid.
Keith Hawkins, Acting Police Chief, responded that staff was recommending five companies at this rime and
that it would be opened for competitive bids next yeor. The current contracts are for three years with one
year left on th~ contracts. There was also a waiting list of current contractors that would also be contacted.
The RFP had been .published in the past along with individual letters being mailed.
Councilwoman Grasser Horron questioned what me RFP process would be at thar rime.
City Manager Goss responded that the RFP process would be based on the Ordinance of the City and sem
[0 all concracrors in the City that could provide service.
1v1r. Platt felt the Council was picking a "magic" number and that it was to the City's disadvantage to do this.
He would be against any specific number being set.
Duane PudgiJ, 378 San Miguel Drive, Chula Vista, CA, representing South Bay Towing, spoke in sUPPOrt of
the staff recommendation. He stated the current system hod worked for him since 1965 and felt they could
COnti....1Ue to operate with four competitors.
MSUC (Malcol1n/Grasser Horton) to approve the staff reco=endation to continue to retain five (S) tow
companies.
--..-~..
Mayor Nader requested that staff notify all interested parries Upon the expiration of the contracts and the
new RFP process next year.
. - -. - .~~-. .
-
BOARD AND COMMJSSION RECOMMENDATIONS
None submirred.
ITEMS PllLLED FROM 1l-!E CONSENT CALENDAR
.-.
-~~ ~-
rtems pulled: 6, 10, 11, and 15. The minutes will renect the published agenda order.
23. OTY MANAGER'S REPORTfS)
01l-!ER BUSINESS
a. Scheduling of meetings. No report given.
b. Updated Council on the recruitment for a Police Chief. Fifty.five applications were received and due
to the large number of qualified candidates the original screening process has been modified. Seventeen
applicants will be interviewed with the final applicants going on to the assessme.:,' Center. None of the
seventeen fmalists .are from our-of.srare.
c. Infonned Council that Chuck Cole, Ad"ocation, Inc., Consult2nr in Sacra;;,ento, would be here
t>:ovember 13-14 and would be available to meet with Councilmembers. He will be meeting with the
De?artmenr Heads during one of L1.eir regular meetings.
COLL'1cilman Moore requested that the Council be imited to the Department Head meeting.
/7-~~
~~
7
!
i'
J
Ii
k:
",
Minutes
November 5, 1991
Page 14
"
f
i'l
I,i
lid. Introduced Dan Beintema the new Senior Management Assistant replacing Iracema Quilantan in the
' legislative Program.
(i
,
24. MAYOR'S REPORTCS):
,
:
i,
a. Cicy participation in the S"-NDAG Connict Resolution Procedure. The north counties have requested
that the south counties participate in the SANDAG Connict Resolution procedure. He felt the procedure was
ambiguous but recommended that Council not decline to participate but appoint a delegation to protect the
interests of the Cicy.
MSUC (Nader/Grasser Horton) to appoint a delegation of Councilman Moore, Cicy Manager Goss or his
designee, Councy Supervisor Brian Bilbrey, and Councilman Malcolm to sit down and talk wjth the north
councy cities and discuss participation in the SANDAG Conflict Resolution procedure.
Cicy Manager Goss stated that due to events happening, perhaps the SANDAG Dispute Resolution should
be withdrawn.
Mayor Nader responded that this action tonight should not be used as an excuse for delay but on the
con tracy, it should be used as a product for acuon.
b. Ratification of appointments and reappointments to Boards/Commissions/Committees
MSUC (NaderlRindone) to ratifY reappointment of Kacy Wright and appointment of Willi= M. Canedo and
Tonnette S. Joynes to the Child Care Commission.
Mayor Nader stated he had completed interviews for the Growth Management Commission and would bring
forth the eight recommendations as soon as possible.
: ~
Councilman Moore stated it was his understanding that the full Council would be involved in the selection
process for me GMOC. He recommended that the eight recommendations be given to Council for review
before being placed on the agenda for ratification. He felt that a Commission of that importance should be
intetviewed and selected by the full Council.
..
Mayor Nader stated he was open to any suggestions by Council and unless directed otherwise, he would
proceed with bringing forward the names for ratification.
Councilman Rindone questioned when the recommendations for the Mobilehome Rent Review Commission
\',rQuld come (0 Council.
Mayor Nader stated he would have the Mayor/Council secretary pole the members for nominations. After
being informed by several Council members that they had already submitted their nominations, Mayor Nader
stated he would obtain that information and rerum with appointments as soon as possible.
c. Authorization for trip to Ciudad Victoria to attend the Bridges and Border Crossings Conference,
November 13-14. This is a semi-annual conference which will be attended by federal officials from the U.S.
and Mexican governments. He had been invited by the Transportation Ministry to speak on the proposed
airport issue.
. MS (Nader/Grasser HarroD) to authorize the Mayor and one staff member to attend the Bridges and Border
Crossing Conference, November 13-14, at Ciudad Victoria, and appropriate $1,300 from the Contingency
Fund.
Councilman Malcolm questioned the cost of the tickets and why a scaff member would also be attending.
'1.~
~
8
COUNCIL AGL"IDA STATEJ~!
Ite~ 11
ITEM TITLE
Meeting Date 11/05/91
Report -- Police Initiated Vehicle T~ws; review of appropriate
number of tow companies to retain under contract at conclusion of
existing three year agreements.
~
SUBMllllill BY
Acting Chief of pOlicey
REVIEWED BY
City Manager
(4/Sths Vote: Yes_NoX)
Referral No. 2I29
Currently the City contracts with five companies to provide Police initiated vehicle tows:
Anthony's, Arnold's, Glenview, Paxton and South Bay. These towing services are provided
under separate but identical three year agreements executed in October, 1989. At it's meeting
of March 28, 1989, Council directed the Police Chief to hold these companies to improved
response time, upgraded equipment, directed abandoned vehicle abatement and performance
standards; and, to drop from this' towing referral list any companies unable or unwilling to meet
these new standards. The Chief returned to Council on June 13, 1989, with a report indicating
that all five companies had, some at significant expense, agreed to meet the new standards, and,
that the Department would ensure their compliance with the amended standards. Council last
visited this issue in September, 1990, in response to a written commurucation requesting that the
towing referral list be expanded. On September 18, 1990, Council approved two staff
recommendations: one) that no additional tow companies be added to the list at that time; and,
two) that the issue be reviewed again prior to expiration of the current operating agreements.
This agenda item is intended to provide Council with such a review.
~'..
RECOl\1ME.t'<'DA TION:
Upon expiration af the current operating agreements, continue to retain five (5) tow companies.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
DISCUSSION:
This review will focus primarily on three issues: the purpose of a such a program; issues
inherent in expanding and (if necessary at a later date) reducing the number of companies on the
referral list; and, general staff concerns.
'7-~
1~
9
.i
,.)..
Item
"ing Date 11105/91
The purpose for having a towing referral list is to provide fast, e!;'c : emergency and
abandoned vehicle tow services on an as-needed basis. Long response tir; ) emergency tow
requests adversely impact Police Officer's ability to return to active d~ty. L ,~rgency referrals
include accidents, arrests and other calls for service where vehicles are involved and are, for any
number of reasons, unable to be moved to the appropriate location without Police intervention.
Each company on the !'eferral list is granted an approximately equal share of the emergency
referrals each month through a first called rotation. During a typical month, each company is
at the top of the list for six days, Additionally, each company has agreed to provide up to ten
abandoned vehicle abatements per day for each day they are first up on the referr.3.I list ( each
company is first up appoximately six days per month). Abandoned vehicles can be identified
by Police Officers, Code Enforcement Officers of the Building and Housing Department or
citizens. In any case, these five companies abate abandoned vehicles at no cost to the City as
part of the towing program.
Expanding and reducing the Teferral list presents several issues. Initially, the number of
companies which can provide the services and still make a reasonable profit must be estimated,
If too few companies are employed, City initiated tow business is not appropriately distributed
and profit is high. Should too many fums be retained, the City's business is not profitable to
any of the fums and quality of service inevitably suffers. Staff must also identify the method
to be used in evaluating a tow company's ability to provide the services required. In the present
case, companies on the previous referral list were asked to meet enhanced minimum
qualifications (most incurring significant costs to do so). A Request for PToposal methodology
has also been used successfully by other jurisdictions in the County. Additionally, contingencies
must be provided in case the number of Police initiated tows falls below that previously
identified level where all firms can continue to profitably provide the required services.
Determining the method to eliminate firms from the list is problematic. For example, what
decrease in Police initiated tows triggers a list reduction (that previously identified level or
something below it) and what technique is used to determine which, and in what order,
companies are eliminated from the rotation (first in/first out, last in/first out or random)? While
firms might drop out of their own volition, this strategy would benefit larger, or more
established, operations better able to absorb business segment operating losses.
"
As stated in previous communications on this subject, the Police Department's main concern is
that tow companies provide quality service for our officers and citizens. Staff is not convinced
that adding additional tow companies would enhance the quality of tow services. Response times
have been, in the main, within contractual guidelines, and, while there have been occasional
complaints regarding each of the companies, performance continues to be satisfactory. Staff is
sensitive to businesses, especially those owned by Chula Vista residents, which would like to
be included on the referral list, however, the number of Police initiated tows bas b= relatively
constant over the past three years:
10
l1-)ij.
~~
Page 3
Item -11
Year
1989
1990
1991 (estimated)
Police Initiated Tows
3698
3573
3625
Meeting Date 11/05/91
Companies currently ooder contract have averaged approximately 726 tows per year (or 60 per
month) over the past three years. Adding a sixth company would reduce that average 17.4 %
to about 600 per year. Without a significant increase in the number of Police initiated tows, and
in the absence of any other quality/performance issues, Staff does not believe that a
recommendation to increase the number of companies on the towing referral list is indicated.
F1SCAL IMPACT: None
-
/7--''1
~;; - "") ~
11
r'inures
September 18, 1990
Page 6
T
minutes during Cicy Council closed sessions, as well as the pros and cons of releasing ttc..'
the public, with a special request to consider audio taping as part of the alternatives. Stah
Council accept the report. (Cicy Attor,,,,y)
.- ,~ion Co
",:ends
:6D
Councilmembers MalCDlm and Nader vOlcd no.
~
12. REPORT ENFORCEIV'J;~i': roucy CONCERNING SECDON 1O.S2.i10 OF TI-IE
MUN!OPAL CODE. TI-IE PLACEMENT OF "FOR SALE" SIGNS ON PARKED VEHIQ.ES . Staff has reviewed
the ordinance with the Cicy Attorney's office and staff has concluded that it is enforceable and serves 3 very
useful pUrpose. For uniform icy in enforcement of this ordinance, a written policy has been distributed to
all members of the Police Deparement. Staff recommends Council accept the report. (Chief of Police)
Pulled from Consent Calendar J-tJ8/
Councilman Nader stated he supported the staff recommendations but wanted to get clarification of the
memorandum to be distributed to the Police Deparement. He questioned whether the Depanment would
cite in response to a complaint, a car on private properry owned by the pro perry owner.
William Winters, Chief of Police, responded that they are advising their officers not to cice for a violation
of this section if the car is on a public street, a, L"" department has to "\O'N ,;::!t it was the primary purpose
which is difficult to do. If parked in frOnt of someone's home or on a publIc o,:;'eet, the Department prefers
to Use the 72 hour section to handle those violations and that is the intent of the memorandum.
MSUC (Nader/Moore) to accept the staff reco=endation.
!
13. REPORT PROS AND CONS OF EXPANDING POUCE EMERGENCY TOW REfERRAL
UST FROM FIVE TO SlX COMPANIES . At the 8/28/90 Coyncil meeting, Council received a written
communication from Mr. Casey Jones requesting that he be added to the police emergency [OW referral list.
Staff recommends Council not add any company to the two list at this time and review the issue again when
the 'current contract expires in October of 1992. (Chief of Police) Pulled from Consent Calendar m8~
-
..
Ed Wood, 140 Center Street, Chula Vista, California, representing Glenview Towing, spoke in favor of the
staff recommendations. If Council expanded the list and pUt on anyone that wanted to be on, it would
create pandemonium. He felt the process currently utilized was equitable and should be followed. There
are currently five companies on the list, each is on for six days, with the companies rotating. Towing
assignments are currently once a month. He noted the towing comparues also tow abandoned cars for the
Cicy at no charge which takes away from the gross revenues. He felt it would create a financial hardship
on the exisring companies,
Duane Pudgil, 378 San Miguel Drive, Chula Vista, California, representing South Bay Towing, spoke in favor
of the staff recommendations. He has been serving the Cicy for twency.one years and stated he was a local
small businessman. They currently have a three year contract for towing and he would like tp see the
COntract honored.
Councilman Nader questioned whether the contracts contain conditions regarding exclusivicy.
Cicy Arromey Boogaard responded that the contracts do not contain any verbiage regarding exclusivicy.
was informed that during the negotiating pro<;ess, there was a verbal commitment to the companies.
He
,,-31)
'4~~
12
Minutes
Seprember 18, 1990
Page 7
William Wimers, Chief of Police, responded thar the only things represemed Co the rowing companies Was
thae the Cicy would be doing business with the five companies. He was unaware of any other verbal
agreements.
Councilman Malcolm questioned whar the opinion was regarding a cOmmitmem ro only five row companies.
Chief Winrers responded thar sraff had recommended thar the number be reduced from five ro three and ie
was Council's desire ro reeain the existing five companies. He felr the Council had made a cOmmitmenr Co
the rowing companies. .
Bo Lemler, 34867 Main Screee, Chula Visra, California, represeming Paxton Towing, spoke in favor of ehe
sraff recommendarion. He srared the Cicy of Chula Visra had the lowesr raCes of all cieies in the srare. When
Council requesred new condieions, the companie.. agreed and purchased the equipmem needed and hired
personnel as needed. He scared the calls are down approximarely 30% from two years ago and if another
company is broughr in, the companies would nor be able ro give the same service and response rime. He
did noe feel ie Was fair Co bring on another Company ar this rime.
Peggy Rolling, 316 K Scrrer, Chula Visra, California, representing Arnold's Towing spoke in favor of the sraff
recOmmendarion. They have purchased two row crucks in order ro comply with Council's conditions. This
Was done in anricipation of being able ro continue ro row for the Cicy. She fele there would be a financial
hardship if another company was added.
John Clark, 904 Redbud Road, Chula Vista, California, represeming J. E. Towing Inc., spoke in favor of ehe
Staff recommendarion. He fele ir would be wrong ro add another company ro the lisr ar this rime. He nored
the high cosr of equipmem and operarions. He also requested thar Council keep in mind the needs of the
row companies when rezoning areas of the city.
Casey Jones Jr., 178 Minor Avenue, Chula Vista, California, represenring Eagle Towing, spoke in opposirion
ro rhe stalf recommendation. He sraeed he had researched the number of cars rowed within the City OVer
the 12sr year and felr the Council would be surprised ae the large number.
~.
~. --
Dawn Herring, Principal Managemene Assisram for the Police Departmem, srated there were 3,698 rows in
1989 with 2,449 rows from January co Augusr 1990, which is a 3% decrease from 1989.
Mayor Cox srared there Were six or seven companies on the waiting lisr and quesrioned whether rhese
companies would be considered in 1992.
Cicy Manager Goss responded thar those companies expressing inrerest would be included for review in
1992.
Mayor Cox felt the sysrem ucilized worked very well. If Eagle Towing were ro be added to the list, ie could
be expecced thac the same requesc would be received from the five other companies on the wairing list. He
would recommend that Council accepc rhe Staff recOmmendarion and ask sraff to begin a process ro evaluace
the towing service in conjunceion with 1992 and come back to Council nine to twelve months prior to rhe
expiracion of the concracrs in Occober 1992 and lay our what rheir recOmmendations would be in regards
ro rhe cominuacion of rowing services in the Cicy along with alcernarives: Oprions should be made available
for the Council to consider.
Councilwoman McCandliss srared Council had felc thac the five companies could respond ro the Cicy's needs
and the companies had complied with the conditions see by Council. She also felt ir Was an exclusive
agreemem and thae Council had a responsibility ro honor it.
-
I!j, ~fJ---
13
Minutes
September 18, 1990
Page 8
Councilman Malcolm replied rmn:me testimony had made a difference Ui ho','; : ' ,
He felc there could be changes, but he had not remembered requiring the five tc'..
equipment, ecc. He complimented Mr. Jones for working with the staff and C....
He also felr thar the City should have a minority ser.aside program. He"
recommendations because of the amount of money spent by the five contracted '~..(,
Council's condirions.
",garding the issue.
;-;panies to purchase
. 'Jrding his requesr.
\'es for the scaff
:'panies (0 meet
,
;
!
,
I
MSC (MalcolmlMoore) ro accept ~taff reco=endations and direct staff to bring back a report within the
next twelve months on how the City will deal with the problem, how many towing companies are proper,
and when the contnct will go out to bid. ' A minority ..,t.aside progr.am (ie. County of San Diego) is to be
brought back to Council within the next n.inety daY' for review. .
City Attorney Boogaard srared he had done extensive research on the ser.aside programs and in the lasr ren
years there were three major Supreme Coure cases which limired the ability to permir ser.aside programs
on an echnic based classificarion. He would like che opportunity to review che report with the Police
Deparrment and provide a legal analysis.
Councilman Nader srared he would ""pecr Io see included in the reporr a program that assures OPpommity
to minoriry o\VT1ed businesses and a b:.si:, (">-:- Council to determine the optimum number of towing
companies for a ciry the size of Chula Visr~.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously.
. . END OF CONSEN'; , ENDAR . .
PUBUC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLe.- " :':'::IS AND ORDINANCES
None Scheduled
OTIiER BUSINESS
14, ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. None.
15, ITEMS PUll.ED FROM TI-1E CONSENT CALENDAR (Items pulled: SC,9, 12 and 13) The minuces
will reflect the published agenda order.
16. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) . None.
17. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
a.
Ratification of appoinnnenrs to Boards and Commissions: Safety Comrnission
f1.:,B3
MSUC (Moore/Cox) to appoint Frank Chister ro the Safety Commission.
b, Establishment of a Blue Ribbon Committee for review of the City's Draft Housing Element Update
(1991-1996) 1'I,g8'f
u
I
I
.
~~-- ~
14
ATTACHME~;':.' .
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
I tem----11-
Meeting Date 9/~/90
ITEM TITLE: Report
Police
Pros and Cons of expanding the
Emergency Referral TO~ing list.
SUBMITTED BY: Chief
of ~jw
REVIEWED BY: City Manager
(4/5ths Vote: Yes NoXX)
Referral # 2106-- --
At the August 28, 1990 Council meeting the Council
received a ~ritten communication from Mr. Casey Jones
requesting that- he be added to the existing Police
Emergency To~ing Referral list. Staff ~as directed by
Council to research the issue and present the pros and
cons of adding additional to~ cDmpanies to th~ emergency
to~ referral list.
RECOMMENDATION: Do nDt add any additional to~ companies
at this time, hD~ever recommend revie~ing this issue ~hen
the existing agreements expire in October of 1992.
/
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
In October Df 1989 the
entered into an operating
to~ companies ~ho ~ere on
These companies include:
Paxton's and SoQt~ Bay.
City Council, by resolution,
agreement ~ith each of the five
the referral list at that time.
Anthony's, Arnold's, Glenvie~,
:..-- - -
AS part of this ney contract each company yas required to
enhance the level of service provided in Chula Vista. This
enhancement included the requirement to have four (4) tOY
trucks of varying kinds, increased levels of insurance, as
~ell as specific types of equipment to be carried on each
truck.
In order to meet these qualifications each of the
companies invested in ney equipment and insurance
personal cost averaging around $35,000 each. This Yas
~ith the anticipation of receiving 20% of the
referrals for lhe next.3 years. The Police department
assigned each of the five (5) traffic officers to a
five
at a
done
tOY
has
to~
\
w
15
;.,
company to monitor each ctnllpany and cond1.'ct
inspections. To date the Depazuent is satisfied 'col
quality of service provided by all five companies.
:-.e
, ;
, ,
While the Department recognizes the merit of hel
Chula Vista resident to start his oyn business,
circumstance Ye do not believe that there is Sue:
information indicating that a ~ange in the current
of the tOY list yould be of be~fit to the City.
Council also requested cl~Iifi~ation of the ow~ership
the primary business location of the eXisting 5 tOY
companies. As you yill note in this chart the existing
five companies all operate in Chula Vista and are oyned
and operated by Chula Vista or Bonita residents, except in
one case.
a
, Is
:It
us
Company Yrs in CV Primary Owners Comments
Business Residence
Location Location
Anthony's 25 Yes Bonita WBE (1 )
Arnold's 54 Yes Bonita (2 )
G1env ie w 4 No EI Cajon (3 )
Paxton's 54 Yes Bonita
South Bay 21 Yes Chula Vista (4 )
1) WBE stands for Wo- oyned Business Enterprise
2) Arnold's is legali; ryned by son-in-lay of founder yho
is currently yorki-' O1lt of state. The business is
being operated by th<c 'aughter of the founder.
3) Pr!~ary location is in ~pring Valley, yith branches in
Elajon and Chula Vist~
4) Oy;.' ~ started a second t, ,; company (Fe,,:' "0) in last fey
year, Yhich operates in Po. and Hir~,
As a note, each of
six days per month,
days per yeek.
these companies tOYS fo~ r ' :a Vista
and picks up abandoned vec" .:s one
PROS AND CONS OF ADDING ADDITIONAL TOW COMPANIES
Pros
*
Additional tOY companies Yill have an opportunity to
participate in the emergency tOYing service.
~
~ The City negotiated in good faith Yith the existing
fivt:ompan!~s and has indicated that they yill be the
providers G~ COY service until Oc~ober of 1992.
~ Adding one or more additional tOY companies will not
itt
',c
,-
16
improve the quality of the emergency tO~ing service in
Chula VIsta.
* Adding any additional to~ companies ~ill reduce the
amount of revenue each to~ company receives. W1th the
goal of providing the best service to Chula Vista ~e
believe that further dividing of the "revenue pie" ~ould
tend to reduce the responsiveness of the to~ companies
to the requests of the City.
* Additional staff time ~ould be required to inspect and
monitor the additional to~ companies and investigate
complaints. ~
If Council elects to add any additional to~ companies,
this can be accomplished by Council Resolution. The five
existing companies ~ere selected by Council Resolution and
the City Attorney has advised staff that there is no legal
restriction to increasing the number of to~ companies on
the referral list. If a'\--eJ::;~"~u,, is made to the referral
list, staff recommends that), the selection be made through
the RFP process. aj~+~~
Currently staff has a
companies in addition to
the to~ing rotation. The
~aiting list
Hr. Jones, ~ho
list includes:
of six (6) to~
are interested in
Company Primary Business Location HBE/WBE
Ecology Santa Fe 'Spr ings, CA NO
Aloha Chula Vista HBE (1 )
Platt Chula Vista NO
A to Z To~ing Clairmont Mesa ( 2 ) NO
Rhode~ay Chula Vista NO
J C TO~ing Chula Vista WBE (3 ) '0---
}) MBE stands for Minority o~ned Business Enterprise
2) Has a branch in Chula Vista
3) WBE stands for Woman o~ned Business Enterprise
In summary, staff recommends that the City maintain the
five company rotation until the current agreements
terminate in October of 1992.
Attached for information is
from June 13, 1989 ~hich
company referral list.
the Council Agenda statement
established the current to~
FISCAL IMPACT: None ~ith this action
/7 ~3'
8 .()..-:t
17
1
I
,
'.
.,-
i'
.
I,
r")~ c.-,
f": __.~
. "j COI150-Vl-r 4-D- \
RESOLUT!DN NO. 15804
Rc.-:c.'JTfON OF "IE CITY COIJNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHUe.. =TA
APP;: "!G RAn-PEASE FDR THE POLICE REQUESTED 'iG
SERle
The City CounLi: of, the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as
follows: ~
WHEREAS, the tow companies have contacted the Pol ice Department staff
with a request to increase the rates for Police 'requested tow service, and
WHEREAS, the current rate schedule was adopted on September 8, 1987 and
the Chief of Police now recommends the adoption of the followin9 rates:
8asic Tow Rate
$ 55.00
2.50
Charge for Each Mile aftc.
the First {'1ile
Daily Storage Charge
1. SO/hour
Maximum $12.00/day
Dry Runs
20.00
30.00
Use of Dolly
Labor at Scene afL: :.,-.
30 mi nutes
12.00/ 1/4 hour
Charge to Release Vehicle
a fter norma 1 hours
-
25.00
Heavy Duty Tow Trucks
(No add'l mileage)
Heavy Duty Storage Rate
(Vehs. over 18')
150.00
2.00/hour
20.00/Maximum
NOli, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby approve a rate increase for Pol ice requested towing as set
forth hereinabove based upon the recommendation of the Chief of Police that
said increase is justified.
~i = It
1B
Resolution No. 15804
Page 2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said rates will be effective upon the
adoption of this resolution.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
"
;LA~
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney .
-.. -
11 -3D-
-1a' - '8. ~
19
p/Cj:,z,.- '
.!
t:cUNCIL AGENDA S"l,7!f;L"
Item
ITEM TI TLE :
Resolution - Approvi . ate Increase for
the Police R~uested TO~ing Service
Chief of p~yM
~ting Date 8/21/90
SUBMITTED BY: ,
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager
(4/5ths Vote
Yes
No XX
Council Referral H1933
At the March 27, 1990 City Council meeting, D~ayne Pudgil of
South Bay TO~ing reguested that the City evaluate a propOsed
increase in the Police Emergency To~ Rate Schedule. Mr. Pudgil
presented the proposed increases as they ~ere agreed to by the
existing five (5) authorized Police Emergency To~ Companies.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution approving the proposed
increase in the to~ rates.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIJ~' "fA
DISCUSSION:
~
The existing
September 12,
follo~s:
Police Emergency To~
1987. The existing
Rate SChedule ~as revised
and proposed rates are as
..
Current
E'roDosed
Rec.
Survey Av. ~
Basic To~ Rate
(Day and Night) $44.00 $55.00 $52.00 55.00
Mileage Charge
(after 1st mile) 2.25 2.50 2.30 2.50
Storage Charge
(daily) 10.00 Max. 12.00 Max. 11.33 12.00 Max.
Storage Charge
(Hourly) 1. 00 1. 50 1. 67 1. 50
Dry Runs 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.50
Dolly Jobs 25.00 30.00 28.25 30.00
'l-~
~'3D
20
,,'
Page 2, Item I/)
Meeting Date~
Labor at Scene After
1st 30 minutes
10.001
1/4 He
12.001
1/4 Hr.
10.83 12.001
114 Hr. 114 Hr.
Heavy Duty To~ Trucks
(no add'l mireage) 100.00
150.00
110.00 120.00
Heavy Duty Storage
Rate (Vehs. Over 18')
Hourly
Daily (per licensed
Unit)
2.00
2.00
--*
2.00
18.00 Max. 20.00 Max.
--*
20.00
Release of Vehicles or
Property Removal After
Hours (5:30 PM to
8:00 AM, Sat, Sun &
Holidays) 20.00
25.00
26.50
25.00
*Charge unique to Chula Vista
A survey ~as completed of local jurisdictions (San Diego,
El Cajon and National City) ~hich have similar circumstances as
Chula Vista.
The rates proposed appear reasonable based on the average rate
from the survey. The only rate ~hich ~e questioned is the heavy
duty to~ rate of S150/hour. Since the survey average is $110. ~e
~ould recommend increasing the rate from the $100 currently
charged to $120, ~hich is the same fee in San Diego.
........ . -
We believe the increase is justified since it has been three
years since the last increase and in that time span ~e have seen
significant increases in the purchase price for tow trucks and
increased gasoline and repair costs. These proposed rates should
become effective immediately upon adoption by City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
WJWIDH/amh
TowRate
I 7 -1ft
~\
21
Resolution No. 15804
Page 3
PASSED, APPROVEO, and ADOPTED by the Ci >0
Vista, California, this 21st day of August, 19Y::
:1 of the City of Chula
~ following vote:
AYES: Counci 1members: ~1a 1 co 1 m, ~Ioo'
NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT; Council members : McCand1iss
ABSTAIN: Counc i lmembers: None
:der, Cox
~. g;.~,
ATTEST:
erK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ss.
_.
---
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 15804 was duly passed,
approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Chu1a Vista,
California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 21st day of
August, 1990.
Executed this 21st day of August, 1990.
11 . ~O
~ )6-
22
,<,.1(11 . '8 ru.o/I c. ~
5-I1/-"~'
. - - I
RESOLUTION NO. 14135
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
SAFETY TO ENTER INTO A THREE YEAR AGREEMENT
FOR POLICE REQUESTED TOWING SERVICE WITH THE
FIVE EXISTING COMPANIES ON THE TOW REFERRAL
LIST
The Ci~y Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows~
HHEREAS, at the March 28,
Council was presented with a report
the process with which tow companies
1989 City Council 'meeting,
recommending the revision of
are selected, and
process
addition
HHEREAS,
to select
to making
that report recommended initiating an
the three most qualified tow companies,
the qualifications more stringent, and
RFP
in
WHEREAS, Council directed staff to return with an
amended ordinance requiring higher standards and to keep the
existing five companies rather than going to a RFP process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the Ci ty of Chula Vista does hereby author ize the Di rector of
Public Safety to enter into a three year agreement for Police
requested towing service with the five existing companies on the
tow referral list.
Presented by
"s to form by
.-.
/Jllik) {J41~
H~\;iam. J '.,\'I~~:ers~/Director
Oc - uol1c <o...~ .--d~
5793a
omas 'Cron, City Attorney
I j,l ~ 1</-J---
23
':
I
ADOPTED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCi!
THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this
13
day 0 f
J Uj~e
19 R9 , by the following vote, to_it:
AYES: Coune i 1 members Cox, Noore, NcCandliss. Nader
NAYES: Counei lmembers None
,
ABSTAIN: Counei lmembers None
ABSENT: Counei lmembers Nalcolm
i
,
"
Q /?;~ _ Mayor
\ > . .'., /
ATTEJ> ~/??~ _ ;?L. ":~
U City Clerk c:--r
Vista
"
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
)
) ss.
)
--
SO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is 0 full, true and correct copy of
I, JENNIE M. FULASZ, CMC, CITY CLERK of the City of Chula Vista, California,
R~SOLUT ION ,'10.
14135
,cnd that the same has not been amended or repealed
DATED
7-&. 29
~,~,~
(].jt
24
,CC-660
flI.~lJiE:S
- 15 .
ffarina Garelis, 60 K Street, addressed the no
stating it should be allol/ed, that traffic cannot
Cl ub Drive and urged Counci 1 go back to where it
up there.
June IJ, 1989
Cauncilllor:Jan ~!cCandliss .er.1phasized the decision is difficult but
she cannot support a cuI de sac as appropriate from any
standpoint. She would support, on a trial basis, the no left hand
turn as long as r:Jonitoring aSSures no impact on "K" Street. The
goal is to solve problem \;jthout creating new problems in any
fashion for the neighborhood. Councilman Nader agreed. Mayor Cox
did not sUPPort 'th~ cul de sac and stated his concerns of the
people going eastbound on K Street to First Avenue and continuing
on to Country Club. He stated the Savel property. as an
extraordinary awkward intersection and a need to remedy the access
or channel traffic in a more appropriate ~ay.
left hand turn
get into Country
was and put signs
NOTION
M (,'100re) to di rect Sta ff and the Sa fety Commi ss i on
measuring the effects of eastbound traffic and
(Motion died For lack of d second.
to consider
Si erra \.lay.
TrafFic E:ngineer Rosenberg conFirmed the traFFic COunts were made
prior to the last phase of improvements in the area.
,'.fr. Garelles, 60 K Street, urged Council to enForce the speed
1 im i ts .
~1QT! ON
,'-IS (COx010ore) to direct staff and the Safety COr.1mission to
speciFically come up with current traffic counts and Current speed
surveys given the fact modifications were made; that staFf and the
Sa Fe ty Commi ss i On look a tal terna te si gnage at Si erra Way and ~'__
Country Club Drive to see if the mOdiFications would be
appropriate for the residents in the area.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION
If S (N a d e r / j'1 C Can d 1 i s s) t 0 ado p t the s t a f f r e Com men d a t ion but to
delay For six '''eeks while staff obtain the Current counts, and
Pl'ior to implementation of the staff recommendation, to Come back /
i fit s how san y va ria t ion s 0 f s i g n i f i can t d a t a . (110 t ion fa i 1 e d ;
Mayor Cox and Councilman Moore voted no; Councilman Malcolm absent)
VOTE ON THE nOTION
D ass e d . ( Co un C i 1 man /., a I co 1 m a b s en t ) _ '___"___ ""'_ "_"_'-=_>~..,,=.--=.~.~,,_ .- _ ~"_.-~.._
'.~ ........--=-:-:. "7:-- ~~~:___:_......-=-_~_..-:-'::..::..:~-. __. ".: '_::-:"_. .~_ ,__. ..... '___'. ... _.___. .
13a ORDINANCE: 2314 AMENDING CHAPTER 5.58 OF THE MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO REGULATION OF TOW
. /" COMPANIES FIRST READING (Director of
V Public SaFety) _ FIRST READING
b. RESOLUTION 14135
V'
AUTHORIZIIJG THE
TO ENTER INTO A
POLICE REQUESTED
FIVE EXISTING
REFERRAL LIST
~c1
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY
THREE YEAR AGREEMENT FOR
TOWING SERVICE WITH THE
COMPANIES ON THE TOW
25
:,1 I IIUT~ S
- 16 -
"ne 13, 1989
I
I
f
I
l
i
The amended ordinance requires higher standards 0'
ex i s tin g f i ve co mlla n i e s rat her t h a n go i n g to an R ''',
implementation of the higher standards and ho'; ".:
cOr.lpanies account<lble for r:laintaining those ,_
department believes the service provided will alsc i
proposed revisions to the current agl"eement include
equipment requirement and positive citizen/Police rel,
'.0 keep
)rOcess.
ng the
dards,
"Qve.
", n S e
the
By
tow
the
Major
time,
D u an e P u d g i l, Sou t h Bay Tow i n g, 378 San ~1 i g u e 1 Dr i ve , ~ p 0 r t e d
three companies had contacted him to state their concurrence with
thi s item but requa.s t the requi rer.lent for a three year agreemen t
be changed to a non-~nding situation.
I
;'i
I'
,.
Joe Kellejian, 825 Energy" Way, Ecology Auto ,:ireCking, stated his
support of the staff recommendation for five tow companies if they
meet the new qualifications but asked for clarification if the
companies do not perform as noted. He questioned whether the
Director of-Public Safety evaluation of replacement applicants for
the posi tion woul d come before Council. He al so referred to the
City's applications being sent to all tow companies in San Diego
County and his fee] ing the companies should be selected from this
area.
Director of Public Safety Winters offered that a problem
sometimes exists, as happened in the past, a company was sold
and the ne>l owner took over a current contract. Councilman
Nader emphasized that, although the Council may by resolution
authorize the Public Safety Director to r:lake the selection,
Council would certainly retain the authority to change or
amend the process at any time.
Clay Platt, Platt's Towing, 395 Mitchell Street, Chula Vista,
stated he is not in support of the recommendation,
Mayor Cox referred to the process of selecting a new company,
and his expectation that final action should be taken by the
City Council as taken in similar actions with licenses to
operate On behal f of the City. City Manager Goss reported it
is discretionary justified on how much detail Council wants to
get into but certainly judgements have to be made. Director
\iinters reported he would not be reluctant to share any
deci sions with Council.
......... ~ -
Councilman Moore referred to the COr.lments of one speaker
asking to "restrict to Chula Vista companies only" and City
Attorney Harron confirmed the restriction has been reviewed
for contracts across the board. Only in very 1 imited
cirCUr:1stances and with sufficient findings, can the City limit
to just certain companies. The use of' bonus points require
the sar:le technique.
MOT! O,'!
;~SC (Cox/tJader) to modify the Ordinance to reflect the concerns of
Council, (Councilman Malcolm absent)
~
26
II !.'II.:TE 5
- I 7 -
June 13, 1989
~fO TrOll
M (Nader) to reconsider this item.
second. )
(Motion died for lack of a
~IO T 10/1
,., S ( II ad e r /;.1 c Can d) i s s ) to
Public Safety Director to
any 10caJ towing service
proposed a9reement.
Oirector Winters -questioned whether ten companies should be
s e 1 e c t e d i f all qua"l i f Y wit h the s tan d a r d s; t hat t his w 0 u 1 d
si9nificantly impact their business after the compa.ny's
invest;;Jent of f'luch money to meet the standa'rds; and reported
the additional things tow companies are asked to do such as
the large number of abandoned vehicles removed each day.
amend the resol ution to authori ze the
enter into a three year a..greement with
meeting the standards set forth in the
Councilman .Iiader withdre" his motion >lith the agreement of the
seconder.
:.fAYOR COX
reading of
unanimously.
OFFERED THE ORDIIJANCE which was read by title, the
the text "aived by unanimous consent and approved
(Councilman Malcolm absent)
I'IAYOR COX O,=-FE,~EO THE RESOLUTION I;hich was read
reading of the text waived by unanimous Consent
"1anir.lous1y. (Councilman Malcolm absent)
---- --~~...-: -..
by title, the
and approved
~J. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
-,.=~.:=-:-.~~-~-.~ ..7
~7"'-__"_ __._Y.._._.._ '"._ -___""L '~_'_~_'~~--:.-::=--:-:
a. SC/ledul ing of Council meetings - The Wednesday, June 14 Budget
Session scheduled for 7:00 p.m., will include the Boards and
COf'1;;JiSsions and other departments, carryover from this Meeting
and the crp Budget. A reminder was given that at the City
Council ;,'orkshoo scheduled for June 22 the items planned for
discussion inc)~de the Civic Center Master Plan and a Planning
Item relative to a small lot subdivision north of East "H"
Street.
-". --
22. MAYOR'S REPORT
a .
Co unci I Referra 1 s
pending and coul d
staff to bring a
written Or 'Jerba1
- Mayor Cox addressed 50 referrals which are
be completed orally by staff and directed
s tat u s 1 i s t to Co u n C i I n e x t I; e e k Iii the i the r
type rep ly.
?-
_ J.
C 0 U U elL C 0 ,'.~ ,'j E.'J T 5
: 0 U 11 C I U.I A II I: C eRE
a. Legishtive Report for Council Action
Counci 1 .Referral
R e co ve r y ,'J e t \01 0 r k
,'10. 1528: AB 901
Study - SUPPORT
(C.
Green)
Stolen
Vehicle
, 7 - iJ~
~.
27
~--~
,
~---." ~-- -.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATE HE ,
"
Item
,g Date 6/13/89
ITEM TITLE: a) j i nance AmemJi ng S ce,"'
" 'e relating to regulation of tc" ,:c:1oan
of the Municipal
b)
R,,:;:ol uti on Authori zi ng
Safe-ty to enter into a 3-year iJ
towing service with the five eXl
referral 1 i st J{~J
Director of PUbli) ~~fety
The Director of Public
'"m~nt for Pol ice requested
:,' companies on the tow
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager
(4/5ths Vote: Yes No X )
Council Referrar-#~6
At the March 28, 1989, City Council meeting, Council was presented with a
report recommendi ng the revi si on of the process with whi ch tow compani es are
selected. That report recommended initiatin9 an RFP process to select the
three most qualified tow companies, in addition to making the qualifications
more stri ngent. Council directed staff to return with an amended ordinance
requiring higher standards and to keep the existing five companies rather than
gOing to a RFP process.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Place on first reading.
2. Adopt the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSIDNS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
-~~ - -
DISCUSSION:
The existing policy for Police-initiated tows allows any tow comoany meeting
the minimum qualifications to be placed on the active list at any time. Each
company is then granted their equal share of emergency referrals for a
specific number of days each month. The resulting effect on the tow companies
when a new company is added is a reduction in the number of days per month
that the tow company gets referral s. For tow companies that rely to a great
extent on police business, each additional tow company added to the list means
a reduction in their business and profits.
The Police Department's main concern is that the tow companies provide quality
service for our officers areG citizens. If a tow company consistently has long
response times, this affects the Police Officer's ability to return to active
patrol, si nce they must wait for the tow truck to arrive to clean up an area
after an accident. In addition, a driver with limited understanding of their
equipment can mean additional damage to a citizen's vehicle.
28
11- cl6
~ 38""
~~
Page 2, Item l I)
Meeting Date67Ii71f9"
Proposed High Qualifications Requirements
By implementing the following higher standards and holding the tow companies
accountable for maintaining those standards, the department believes that the
service provided will also improve. The existing five tow companies
recommended impl ementi ng the hi gher standards and have agreed to the proposed
changes listed below.
The higher qual ifications proposed for the new agreement are basically an
enhancement of the existi~g minimum qualifications found in th~ existing
agreement.
The following are the major proposed revisions to the current agreement:
1. Response Time
Current Agreement
20 minute response time
Proposed Agreement
20 minute average response time
not to exceed 40 minutes. Tow
companies to immedi ately noti fy
police dispatch if they will not
arrive within the 20 minute
response, tow compani es will gi ve
a revi sed E. T .A. or recommend
call i ng another company if
response wi 11 be del ayed beyond 40
minutes.
2. Equipment Requirement
-:;::-. ~
Current Agreement
Two twin boom trucks, 10,000
grcss vehicle weight (GVW)
with dual rear wheels.
Proposed Agreement
The following four (4) trucks are
required as a minimum:
1 wheel lift - 14500 GVW
1 roll-back - 14500 GVW
1 twin cable/boom - 1 ton or above
1 hydraulic boom - 1 ton or above
3. Winch
Current Agreement
Proposed Agreement
To be power-driven in either
direction and equipped with
an adequate braking system.
To be power driven by power
take-off from transmission
equipment power-up and power-down.
!~y
29
I'
,
,
"
"
I
?~qe 3~ Hem
" ting Date 6'/13/89
1:
1
4. Positive Citizen/Police Relations
Current Agreement
None
.
Proposed ~~,. -nt
Good re,1L..,at' for dealing with
the public. low company may be
removed from the acti ve 1 i st as a
result of excessive citizen and/or
police complaints.
5. Abandoned Vehicles
Current Agreement
The on-duty tow company will tow
at least five abandoned vehicles
each day (Monday through Friday
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) at no
cost to the City.
Proposed Agreement
The on-duty tow company will tow
up to ten abandoned vehicles
each day (Monday through Friday
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) at no
cost to the Ci ty.
Ordinance Amendments
Chapter 5.58 of the Municipal Code related to tow trucks is proposed to be
amended. The changes include:
Section 5.58.030 Regulations Generally.
Cl arification of 1 anguage and removing the 1 iabil ity for damages issue
which will be addressed in new Section 5.58.075.
Secti on 5.58.070
Secti on 5.58.080
Insurance Required.
Bond Requi red.
~---
Both sections are recommended to be deleted from the Code. Since the
requirement levels for bonds and insurance fluctuate, it is more
appropri ate to refer to these requi rements in the contract that they
may be easily revised as necessary.
Section 5.58.075 Indemnification and Hold Harmless, Insurance, and Bond
Requi rements
Any agreement to provide tow service shall include a hol d harmless
cl ause and bond and insurance requi rements as requ i red by Ci ty Risk
Manager and City Attorney.
Recommendation
The Department will evaluate the existing five companies to insure that they
meet the proposed requirement. Should any of the five fail to meet these new
standards we will not enter into an agreement with them. In order to select a
30
~
Page 4, Item I,
Meeting Date~
rep1 acement company we will notify all 1 icensed tow companies in San Diego
County. In fact, we currently have a 1 ist of companies who have expressed
interest in the contract who appear to meet the qual ifications. The Police
Department would evaluate any app1 icants to detennine- the most qualified
repl acements. The fi na 1 fi ve compani es sel ected will be subject to stri cter
qualifications and will be closely monitored to ensure that they continue to
meet the tenns of t~eir contract.
The Department believes that by implementing the proposed chanqes in this
program, the result will be more efficient and effective tow service for the
police officers and the citizens.
FISCAL IMPACT: No change is recommended for the current tow rate fee
schedule. In the past, changes in the rates have been made only after staff
has analyzed requests from the tow companies and presented a recommendation to
the Counc il .
\lpe 0137N
--
---
/l~~
31
I;
~
THIS PAGE BLANK
11-s1)
~~
---
.
.,
.......... .. ~ -- .....;...:.,...,
""'....,.....,.1 11'.....
,.....u..::
i
~ ...rc
\.H.0.,,", --- 3
v
Ivfuyor Shirley Horton and Memb= of
Chula Visb City CounciJ
276 FoW1h Avcn~
Chula Vista, California 91910
March 4, 1995
Re : Towing Services - March 7, 1995 .'\gcncL1 Item #13
Dear Mayor FIOI1On and M=befS of Chula Visb City Council .
On behalf of the 5 current provid= of towing ~ccs to the Chula Visb Police
Th..>partmcnt , we rcq~st your support of Ali=rive 1 of the Council Agenda Sbt=cnt.
We are preparcd to offer the City ofChula Vista, Full Cost Recovery (FCR) as indicated
as the shortfall on pages 6 and 7. The City's cost for the poli"", towing program is
approximately $266,000. Currently the City rcccives appm~tely $100,000 from the
Abandoned Vehicle Abatan=t fund (A V A). In aflrlition, the City receives approximately
S100,OOO for rcimbur>cmcnt from it's Negligent Impound Payment program (NIP).
Therefore the Shortfall is approximately $66,000 on 3,500 tow calls, or $1&.86 per calL
City staffis recommending an RFP process that when completro (approximately 90 days)
may or lIL1y no[ provicic full cost recovery. The 90 day time line is at best a minimum, in
fact the City of San Diego's RFP process took 2 years of staff time to complete. The funds
that we are proposing arc available inuncdiately, not at a future date. Staff has indicated
"the exemplary compliancc record of the existing firms" page 8 , shows that the syst= is
not broke, however the City is exp::ricncmg a cost, short-fall in regards to the towing
progr=. Of the 5 companies c=t!y under contr.ac~ 2 arc WBE and.ill 5 businesses are
long term members of the Chula Vista business community. We currently collect the 1\1P
fees for the city and remit those fo:es in a timely manner. (approximately $100,000 yearly)
The process to account for and remit the Referral Fcc is already in place.
CancJusion : We rcq~st your support ofAltemative 1, which would keep in force a
system that is "not broken", kcc:p this important servicc in the City of Chula Vista, and
immediately generate revenue for the general fund.
<O:!<-- _
Anthony' 5 T o""ing
305 E Street
Chula Vista, CA. 91910
Jeanette Charlton
Arnold's Towing
1187 WalnUt S!rcct
Chula Vista, CA. 91910
Peggy Rollin
GI.:nview Tov,ing
140 Re~ Court
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Ed Wood
Pa:wm '5 TO>;>'1ng
3487 ~ Street
Chula Vista, CA. 91911
Bo Lemler
South Bay Towing
619 K Stecet
C1mla Vista, CA. 91910
Duane Pudgil
~j-
TOT":;L P.C2
~
.
,
r
I
,.-.-
~-~-
Minutc:s
March 7. 1995
Pag~ 6
,;/-r7/J{11I /J1r,{,fj 3
· William Tuchschc:r, 3633 Bonita Vc:rd~ Drivc:, Bonita, CA, re:pr~sc:nting: Jode:n Enkrpris~s, r~u~stct.l that
th~ 24 months time: frame be includc:u with v~ry stringe:nt be:nchmarks. That would he more beneficial than
~nchmarks without the 24 month time: frame. That would giv~ the propon~nt of the project the: ability to repr~sen(
to prospective investors and I~nders and that they did control th~ property and had thre:sholds to meet. The;: Citron's
Were contident that they could m~t those thresholds and move forward with the project.
Councilmember Moot stated the motion was to have: stafr bring: hack a proposed semi~exclusive negotiating
agreement for Council approval and that it be brought back in a till1~ frame: staff fdt comfortable: with. Council
could then give th~ Citrons what they ne:.:eJed to go forn'ard.
Councilmember Rindonc: clarified that it was up to 24 months.
Mayor Horton stakd that was correct.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-0-0-1 with Fox ahstaining.
. . . Council met in Closed Session at 6:45 p.m. and reconvened at 7:47 p.m.
. . .
!\1ayor Horton stated no r~portahJ~ actions were: taken in Close:d S~ssion.
. . Council recessed to the Rede\'elopment Al.:enc)" m~tin/..: at 7:~ p.m. and ret:on\'cned at 8: 18 p.m.
. .
13. REPORT . POLICE INITIATED TOWING SERVICES -- RATE SCHEDULE AND
SELECTION OF SERVICE PROVIDERS - The City currently contracts with five companies to provide Police-
initiate:d vehicle towing and storage savices. The firms have r~ueslcd thaI Council review and ame:nd the e:xisting
tow rate structure. Staff has c:vaJuate:d the: reque:.:st and is nut re:.:commemling a tow rate:.: incrase at this time:.
Additionally, based upon prior Council direction. Polict: Department staff has designed a cornpditivc process to
select providers of Police-initiated towing and impound se:rvice:s afte:r 6/30/95. The: re:rort discusses both the
operator's proposal to incr~se tow raks and the: components ami time-line for the: comretiti\'~ process n:commcndcJ
hy staff. Staff recommends Council defa any increa:-;o:::; in towmg <-lOll storage: rales until the conclusion of the:
proposeu comrctitiv~ process. (Chid' of Police:)
Richard Emc::rson, Chief of Police, statc:d it had been approxirnatdy thirty ye.ars sinL'e: som~ of [he: tow companies
had he:en involved, i.e. ove:r 100,000 tows. The City Was looking for a competitiv~ pruce:ss and a re:ferral fe:e and
the towing operators were: looking for a ralt: increase. Staff had rcceiveJ a FAX from the: five existing tow
operators which had been distrihukd to Council for re:.:view.
· Gwrge Bagdaharian, 9640 Alto Drive:. La Mesa, rerrcse:nting Alcon Towing. rC4uc:,StcJ the City utilize:
a competitive hid.
· Pe:ggy Roland, 622 D~I Mar Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, representing Arnold's Garage, requested support
for Alternative # I and a raise: in fees,
· Ed \Vood, 140 Reed Court, Chula Vista, CA, re:prc:se:nting Glenvic:w Towing, rc:quc:st~ support for
Alternative #1.
· Jeanett~ Charlton, 305 E Street, Chula Vista, CA, re:pr~se:nting Anthony's Towing r~4ue:steJ support for
AJtc:rnative #1.
· Bo Lemler, 3487 Main Street, Chula Vista, CA, re:pre.sc:nting Paxton Towing, Inc., re.quc:ste:d continuance:
of existing program for 18 months to study the: issue.
· Clay Platt, 395 MontcJair Street, Chula Vista, CA, represe:nting Piau's Towing, support~ Alte:rnative #2.
The problem he:.: had encountered was the: zoning requirements of the: City for a towing/automohile
storage lot.
· Brad Ramsey, 5320 Overland Drivc:, San Diego, CA, re:presenting A to Z Metro Towing ope:rating out of
850 Energy Viay, Chula Vist<i, requeste:.:u support of Alternative #2.
'1.. #
Minut~s
March 7. 1995
Page 5
Mayor Horton stat~d sh~ had originally \'ot~t..! ag.tinst th~ pro.i~ct b~caus~ sh~ did not f~1 th~ .sil~ wa.s aLlt::quate: to
support a re:sort facility ami hav~ the: draw th~ propose:r anticipat~J. Sh~ also did not fcd th~y coulLl obtain the:
financing. Wilh Ihe opening of Ihe OTC and olher things happening in Ihe Cily she fell Ihere could be a market
for such a facility. She: fe:1t anoth~r rdail C~nt~r would d~stroy the: ambiance: of the: community., He:r first
prefac::nce: would be: to have: high-c:nd condominiums hut she: did not f~d the:r~ was a markd for that at the: prese:nt
time: or that it would ge:nc:rate: the: n~~ re:vc:nuc:s for future: growth and to provide: sc:rvices to the: citiuns.
The:refor~. she support~ the: rc::commc:ndation from staff. In ordc:r for Jodc:n Ente:rprises to obtain funding the:y
n..ued 10 show Ihey had full supporl of Ihe Cily and conlrol of the land.
MS (Horton/Rindone) to direct swff to renegotiate a semi-exclusive negotiating pgreement with Joelen
Enterprise for the development of a golf resorl hotel on City o,vned property in the 4{lO block of Boniw Road
with the tenn limited tu six months.
Councilmembc:r Rindone: statc:.d h~ support~ the: project from its inception. He: did not f~1 thc:re was anyone single
projc::ct that would havc:: more: of a be:ndit 10 th~ community than a tirst class hotd \lith banquet facililie:s. He
questiont:.d if the: six month time frame was to short.
Mr. Citron r~plie:d that if six months was all the: City wantc:d to commit to the projc:ct, whe:n they wc::rc:: willing to
commit that thc:y would t'IUild a hote:!. they wOldt..! have to back oul. Six months was out of the: question. He: fdt
Chula Vista was in n~~d of th~ prqjecl ant..! the)' could prove th4it. Th~y nc:~ded a 24 month period and we:re willing
to s~t b~nchmarks so th~ property would nol he: lied up for two ye:ars and th~ City would not ~nd up with a hote:!.
Mayor Horton state:d sh~ had a problem with 24 months. She: question~ why thc:y ne:t:.de:d 24 monlhs and what the
monc:y would be: spe:nt am.! on what would it b~ spent on.
Mr. Citron stated the:re: we:re: a lot of ~nvironmcntal conce:ms which W~r~ time: consuming and expc:nsive to address.
The:y would have to do a sufficient plan for Ie:nd.;-rs as wdl as architectural and engin~ring f~s. The:y would have
over 5250,000 into the: project hdor.;- rt:<tching the point to tak~ it to a lenc.J~r to finalize: the: commitme:nt and start
ne:gotiations. Negotiating would take approximalely 6-9 months for a $35 million dollar projc:ct.
A~[ENDMENT TO MOTION: (Rindooe/Horton) to ~dopt staff rewmmendation to renegotiate the semi-
exclusi\'e negotiating agreement not to exc~d 24 months.
~:::;:-- -
Mayor Horton stated some of the work should alrc:.ad): be: in place:.
Mr. Citron r..ponded thai they had oil-shore money offered 10 Ihem hut they would ralher not take il. They wanled
it to be an American proje.ct. He felt the country ne:ede:d to address the balancc: of payment probl~m and image in
the: world. They were working within Chula Vista re:garding funding and hoped to keep it within the state:.
Mayor Horton stateJ she was relui:tant to support the motion hut the City did not have another resort dc:\'dope:r
knocking on the tJoor. There was a ne~J for lJu~tlity fal.;ilities in the: 1.;0111111unily anJ hoped something coulJ be
al,.'l.;omplishe:!.J within the: ne:xt 12 months.
Councilme:mbe:r Moot state:tJ he was not prepare:uto I.;ommit to 24 months. He: did fed the Citron's should be given
every opportunity to pull th~ pn~jt':Ct tngc:iher. Staff did not recomme:nd a lime frame:, but if sw.fT could come back
with a proposed semi-exc.::lusi,'~ negotiating agr~ment with benchmarks and had reasonable "out" clauses he:
would b~ more comfortahle:.
Mayor Horton stated she would agree and incorporate that into the motion, if agreeable to the Moaker of the
Motion. Agreed to by the ~faker of the Motion. She questioned if24 monlhs could be removed from Ihe motion
and allow staff and the Citron's work it oul.
Councilmember Rindone stated he ,,'ould agr~ tu "up to 24 months".
11ft
Minut~s
March 7, 1995
Pag:~ 7
. Duan~ Pudgil. 378 San Miguel Driv~. Chula Vista. CA, r~pr~s~nling South Bay Towing, requ~st~d support
for AIt~m3tiv~ # I.
· John Clark, 720 Camino De La Riena, San Diego, CA, represenling J. C. Towing, request.,.] support of
Altt:mativ~ #2.
Council member Padilla stat~ previous council's had requested me.asurement of average response times, undertaking
of vehicle abakment activities. etc. and he question~ if the agre.c:ment provided for specific measurements for
performance,
Kevin Hardy, Principal Management Assistant. re:plietJ those conditluns of the contract h~d been included and surf
had measured them and fuund that the companie:-o had complied throughout the term of their contract.
Councilmember Rindone questioned what fuIJ cost recovery was for the services per tow.
Chief Emerson replied that there were two other programs that helped fund the towing program. The program was
approximaldy $66,000 short of full cost recov<<y, It would be approximatdy $18-$20 sbort per low,
Councilmembe:r Rindone questioned if the:re was a provision for coll~ting the money, i.e. frequency.
Mr. Hanly replied that staff had not proc~ded th<tt tar with the referr<tl but was looking for direction from Council.
Councilme:mher Rindone stakd if a referral fee was instituted il cou!d he paid on a monthly basis. H~ questioned
what the penalty would be if they did not pay,
1\1r. Hardy replied that City pulicies we:re in pla!.:e for late fe~s and it would he subject to those policies. It was
his understanding [hat there was a 10 day grace period and then a late: charge was imposed on th~ tow company.
Councilmemher RinJon~ questioned if th~re was a penally such as not using the tow c..Jmpany until the f~s were
paid.
~'fr. Emerson stated that coulJ be considc:reu if a rd"erral t"ee was instituted.
Councilm~mber RinJone stated it was a complex issue:. He felt Council's first responsihility was to have effa:tive
towing and gaoL! service. Council also wanted to have the hest rate:s possihle: and he would be reluctant to honor
a rate increas~. The one tim~ Council may want tu con.sid~r raising a fee was when it applied only to the pt:rson
requiring that special se:rvi!.:e. The City coulL! go out to bi<J and the lowest price bid would be the: rate, but then
ev~ry company would have a ditferent rate and it could he confusing. Another possibility would he to establish a
cap with a referral fee to help ahate the costs of City services. The owners had pointed out that their costs had gone
up over time also and they were required to take credit cuds and, therefore, absorb the credit card charges. Dc:lay
of the process would delay any implementation of a referral fee: which he did not feel was beneficial. A
compromise would h~ to authorize raising the t~ from $55 to S70 with a referral fee, colle.cted imme.diately, of
$ I 0 and put out an RFP to be effective in six months. The companies would not bid the rate as it would be a
universal rate, but bid on what the referral f~ would be.
Chief Emerson stated that setting up the process would be part of the RFP, i.e. how to collect, when to collect, what
the fines were, etc, He felt staff could d<vdop an RFP within 60 to 90 days.
Chief Emerson felt it could be completed hy 7/1/95.
1\15 (RindonelHorlon) increa.,e the pnlice initialed tnwing rates for Chula Vista from 555 to 570 per tow
effectiye l\1arch 15, 1995; to continue with the fi\'e companies curnmtly operatin~ towing services in the City;
510 of the 570 d't'<<tiH ~Iarch 15th would he a rererral fee tn he paid to the Cit) no later than the 10th of
the month followinJ,.: collection; and, sla'Tis to d~\"elop a competiti\'t~ hid to he suhmitted h}' 411/95 to maintain
the same rates and make a ret:ommenclation to Council reJ.:arding the operation of the towing services with
/1-~
Minutes
March 7, 1995
Page 8
the respet.:ti...c n:fl'rral fees cffl'1..'tive 7/1/95. CUl1lr:u:l..; to he fur:1 periud (If fivc )'cars wilh threc ()nc~Yl'ar
Ilptimt..;.
Councilmem~r P..,dilla did not f~d Council should h~ setting rates at the: curre:nt time. Staff had aske:d for dirc:ction
to de:fer the: f~~ until they had complc:t~ the: RFP process and ope:n it to compditivc: bidding, He: undc:rstood the:
companies had provid-c:U a lot of good years of sc:rvice:, but there were other operators in the City that wantoo the
opportunily to compete and he fdt that was the: bc:st course=: of action. He would support the staff rc:commc:ndation
to defer it until it could be open~ up 10 the competitive bidding process.
Councilmember Fox agreed with Councilmem,her Padilla.
SUBSTITUTE ~IOTlON: (Fox/Padilla) to adopt the staff recommendation on page 13-1 to defer any increase
in the police initiated towing and storage rate nt the current time nnd authori7.e stafT to conduct the proposed
competiti"e bidding process including the referral fee.
Mayor Horton request~ claritication of Councilmember Rindone's motion.
Councilmember Rindone repli~ if the substitute motion was approved there would be no immediate referral f~ or
full cost re.covc:ry. Dc:pending upon when the competitive hid wc:nt out would be when the institution of the change
would be. He was concerned also that if the bidding process was for ~olh the referral t~t: and tow charge it would
rt:sult in difft:rent rates to tht: user. He supported fr~ compdilian. ~ut felt an opportunity would ht: lost 10 institut~
a rd~rral fu imm~iatdy.
Councilmember Padilla stated th~y had a tlat rat~ that was negotiate:u with the providc:r rt:gardle:ss of who they were
for the conlract with the City. Ther~ was no conc~rn with anyon~ in Ihe field con.;~ming th~mselv~s with varying
rat~s. It was not an eh::m~nt of discussion and was set hy tht: ttgre:e:mt:nt and was univt:rsttl.
Mayor Horton agre~J with Councilmemher Rindone: as it would mak~ the users pay for thc:ir savice and save the:
taxpaye:rs mon~)'. The last part of the: motion Was to go fOrv.'ard with the: compt:litivt: hidding proct:ss. The s~rvice
rro\'id~d by the: five: companit:s and history with Ihe Ciry should he taken into consideration.
Councilmember Moot queslioned why staff was not r~comme:nding that Ihe ratt:s not he raised at the: current time.
Chit:f Emerson rt:plied that staff want~d to get into the competitive process without getting into referral fees at that
time.
Council member Moot srated if the rate was raised now it would he rigging the de.ck for a higher rale when it went
out for competitive rate.
Councilmember Rindone state:d the marion would institute an imme:diate referral fee and when staff came back to
Council prior to 411/95 they would give Council a recommenJation on how they wanted to see it bid.
Councilmemher Padilla stated he was not preparecl to support anything that did nol leave all questions up to the
",:ompelitive bidding process.
VOTE ON SUBSTITUTE ~IOTlON: (Fox/Padilla) appruved 3-2 with Horton and Rindone opposed,
14. REPORT
by >taff.
UPDATE ON REGIONAL SEWER ISSUES - An oral report will be given
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, stated the City of San Diego informed them that the sewer billing would
be in the mail. The City did get a request from the Spe.cial Act District 10 conlinue the operation of the
\1-~
ATTACHMENT C
(The same agreement will be
used for all five selected
tow operators)
Parties and Recital Pages
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
A to Z Metro Towing
for Towing and Impound Services
This agreement ("Towing Agreement"), dated August 20, 1996 for the purposes of
providing towing and impound services, and effective as of the date specified in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 1 is between the City-related entity as is indicated on Exhibit A, paragraph 2, as such
("City"), whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 3, and the entity indicated on
the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4, as Service Provider, whose business form is set forth on
Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of business and telephone numbers are set forth on
Exhibit A, paragraph 6 ("Service Provider"), and is made with reference to the following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the Chula Vista Police Department requires professional towing and impound
services to maintain the safety of the public right-of-way and to secure vehicles involved in
criminal activity; and,
Whereas, the Chula Vista Police Department issued a Request for Proposal to
competitively select the firms to provide these activities; and,
Whereas, Service Provider successfully responded to this Request for Proposal and has
agreed to provide towing and impound services for the Chula Vista Police Department; and
Whereas, Service Provider 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
Service Provider to City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Service Provider do
hereby mutually agree as follows:
1. Service Provider's Duties
A. General Duties
Service Provider shall perform all of the services described on the attached Exhibit A,
Paragraph 7, entitled "General Duties"; and,
/?~56
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Service Provider
shall also perform all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled "Scope of
Work and Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to, and within the
time frames set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are
identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein, time being of the
essence of this agreement. The General Duties and the work and deliverables required in the
Scope of Work and Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to
complete the Defined Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the
City, operate to terminate this Agreement.
C. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require
Service Provider 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 Service Provider, Service Provider shall perform same on a time and materials
basis at the rates set forth in the "Rate Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (C). All
compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
D. Standard of Care
Service Provider, 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.
E. Insurance
(1) Liability Insurance
Service Provider shall obtain insurance of the types and in the amounts
described below.
(a) Commercial General Liability Insurance. Service Provider shall
maintain occurrence version commercial general liability insurance or equivalent form with a
limit of not less than $1,000,000 each occurrence. If such insurance contains a general
aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to this agreement or be no less than two (2) times the
occurrence limit.
Such insurance shall:
i. Include the City its elected and appointed officials,
officers and employees as insured with respect to those operations, uses, occupations, acts, and
2
J ]..>'7
activities for which this agreement is granted. The coverage shalt contain no special
limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the "above-listed insured".
Named Insured: City of Chula Vista
ii. Be primary with respect to any insurance or self-insurance
programs covering the City, its officials, officers and employees.
(b) Business Automobile Liability Insurance. Service Provider shalt
maintain business automobile liability insurance or equivalent form with a limit of not less than
$1,000,000 each accident. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non-
owned automobiles.
(c) Workers' Compensation Insurance Service Provider shall
maintain workers' compensation insurance with statutory limits and employers' liability
insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000 each accident.
(d) Other Insurance Requirements. Service Provider shalt:
i. Prior to the effective date of this agreement, furnish the
City with properly executed certificates of insurance which shall clearly evidence alt insurance
required as shown above and provide that such insurance shall not be canceled, allowed to
expire or be materially reduced in coverage except on 30 days' prior written notice to the City.
Certificates of Insurance will be reviewed by the City's Risk Manager to ensure compliance
with the insurance requirements stated herein.
ii. Provide certified copies of endorsements and policies if
requested by the City in lieu of or in addition to Certificates of Insurance. Endorsements shall
be on the form shown as Exhibit C.
(2) Replace certificates, policies and endorsements for any such insurance
expiring prior to termination of this agreement.
(3) Maintain such insurance from the time this agreement commences until
its termination.
(4) Place such insurance with insurers licensed to do business in California
having A.M. Best Company ratings of no less than A:V.
MAIL CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE, ENDORSEMENTS AND
NOTICES OF CANCELLATION, LIMIT REDUCTIONS, NON-
RENEWALS, AND CHANGES IN COVERAGE TO:
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
A TTN: Risk Manager
3 I ?~r
Reference: (Towing and Impound Agreemeut)
I. Business License
Service Provider agrees to obtain a business license from the City and to otherwise
comply with Title 5 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
2. Duties of the City
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall regularly consult the Service Provider for the purpose of reviewing the
progress of the Defined Services and Schedule therein contained, and to provide direction and
guidance to achieve the objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access to its office
facilities, files and records by Service Provider throughout the term of the agreement. In
addition thereto, City agrees to provide the information, data, items and materials set forth on
Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, and with the further understanding that delay in the provision of
these materials beyond 30 days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the
justifiable delay in the Service Provider's performance of this agreement.
B. Compensation
Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Service Provider submitted to the City
periodically as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, but in no event more frequently than
monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, City shall compensate
Service Provider for all services rendered by Service Provider according to the terms and
conditions set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph II, adjacent to the governing compensation
relationship indicated by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the
requirements for retention set forth in paragraph 19 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate
Service Provider for out of pocket expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12.
All billings submitted by Service Provider shall contain sufficient information as to the
propriety of the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable
thereunder is proper, and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on
Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 @ to be charged upon making such payment.
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit
A, Paragraph 13, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to
represent them in the routine administration of this agreement.
4. Term.
4
) 7''>'
This shall terminate on October I, 2001, when the Parties have complied with all
executory provisions hereof.
5. Financial Interests of Service Provider
A. Service Provider is Designated as an FPPC Filer.
If Service Provider is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as an "FPPC filer",
Service Provider is deemed to be a "Service Provider" for the purposes of the Political Reform
Act conflict of interest and disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the
City Clerk on the required Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are
specified in Paragraph 15 of Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the
City Attorney.
B. Decline to Participate.
Regardless of whether Service Provider is designated as an FPPC Filer, Service
Provider shall not make, or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Service
Provider's position to influence a governmental decision in which Service Provider knows or
has reason to know Service Provider has a financial interest other than the compensation
promised by this Agreement.
C. Search to Determine Economic Interests.
Regardless of whether Service Provider is designated as an FPPC Filer, Service
Provider warrants and represents that Service Provider has diligently conducted a search and
inventory of Service Provider's economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations
promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission, and has determined that Service
Provider does not, to the best of Service Provider's knowledge, have an economic interest
which would conflict with Service Provider's duties under this agreement.
D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Service Provider is designated as an FPPC Filer, Service
Provider further warrants and represents that Service Provider will not acquire, obtain, or
assume an economic interest during the term of this Agreement which would constitute a
conflict of interest as prohibited by the Fair Political Practices Act.
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Service Provider is designated as an FPPC Filer, Service
Provider further warrants and represents that Service Provider will immediately advise the City
Attorney of City if Service Provider learns of an economic interest of Service Provider's
which may result in a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act,
and regulations promulgated thereunder.
5
J 7.. ~ b
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests.
Service Provider warrants and represents that neither Service Provider, nor Service
Provider's immediate family members, nor Service Provider's employees or agents ("Service
Provider Associates ") presently have any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any
property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2
radial miles from the exterior boundaries of any property which may be the subject matter of
the Defined Services, ("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 15.
Service Provider further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment,
remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Service
Provider or Service Provider Associates in connection with Service Provider's performance of
this Agreement. Service Provider promises to advise City of any such promise that may be
made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter.
Service Provider agrees that Service Provider Associates shall not acquire any such
Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of
this Agreement, except with the written permission of City.
Service Provider may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this
Agreement, or for any third party which may be in conflict with Service Provider's
responsibilities under tl1is Agreement, except with the written permission of City.
6. Hold Harmless
Service Provider 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 Service Provider, 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 elected and
appointed officers, or employees. Service Provider'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, Service Provider 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. Service
Providers' indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration
by the Service Provider.
7. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Service Provider shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper
manner Service Provider's obligations under this Agreement, or if Service Provider 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 Service Provider of such
termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective
6
/7.. "I
date of such termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies,
surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other materials prepared by Service Provider shall, at the
option of the City, become the property of the City, and Service Provider shall be entitled to
receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed on such
documents and other materials up to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed
the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Service Provider's
breach.
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 Service Provider of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof,
at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished
and unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the
City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City as
provided in this paragraph, Service Provider 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. Service Provider 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 Service Provider are personal to the City, and Service Provider shall
not assign any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same
(whether by assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City, which City may
not unreasonably deny. City hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the Defined
Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the subconsultants identified thereat as
"Permitted Subconsultants".
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 Service
Provider 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.
11. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Service Provider 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 Service
7
J7"~;J.
Provider's work products. Service Provider and any of the Service Provider'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.
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, Service Provider 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 Service Provider prepares a report or document, or participates in the
preparation of a report or document in performing the Defined Services, Service Provider 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.
15. Miscellaneous
A. Service Provider not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Service Provider 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
8 17... t J
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.
F. Reductions in Scope of Work
City may independently, or upon request from service provider" from time to time
reduce this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and Service Provider agree to meet in good faith
and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation
associated with said reduction.
G. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Administrator determines that the service Providers'
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, Service Provider 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.
9
11-/. 1
Signature Page
to
Agreement between City of Chula Vista and
A to Z Metro Towing
for Towing and bnpound Services
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Service Provider 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:
Ann Moore, Acting City Attorney
Dated:
A-Z Towing
By:
[name of person, title]
By:
[name of person, title]
Exhibit List to Agreement
( X ) Exhibit A.
( X ) Exhibit B: A-Z Request for Proposal
( X ) Exhibit C: Policy Endorsement
10 I '/ ." tf'
Exhibit A
to
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
A to Z Metro Towing
1. Effective Date of Agreement: October I, 1996
2. City-Related Entity:
(x) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California
3. Place of Business for City:
City of Chula Vista,
276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910
4. Consultant: A to Z Metro Towing
5. Business Form of Consultant:
( ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
(x ) Corporation
6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant:
850-D Energy Way
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Voice Phone (619) 573-1610
Fax Phone (619)
7. General Duties:
A. Background. The City of Chula Vista, California (City), requires qualified towing companies to provide
tow and impound services for the Police and Building and Housing Departments. The City of Chula Vista
encompasses 35.4 square miles and has a population of approximately 150,000 residents. Growth will be a
significant issue well into the next millennium.
B, Individual Rights. The right of any individual involved in a non-criminal traffic collision to call the
tow company of their own choosing shall not be infringed except in those cases where an unnecessary delay in
removing the motor vehicle will, in the opinion of the investigating Peace Officer, diminish public safety.
C. Courteous Cuslomer Relations. Tow companies shall courteously provide any information required
by claimant to effect the release of the impounded vehicle including: confirming !hat a particular vehicle is in the
tow company's possession; directions to the location of the vehicle, the method of securing its release,
documentation required, applicable charges and fees required to be paid and terms of payment. Tow company
employees shall discuss only matters immediately related to the work being completed and shall not make gratuitous
comments !hat could harm the City.
/7" t "
D. Consumer Complaints. Tow companies shall display in a conspicuous manner, at every place of
business from which Police initiated towing and impound services are rendered, City issued "Consumer Complaint"
forms. Such forms shall be provided by the City, at City expense and shall be made readily available to tow
companies. Such consumer complaints will be reviewed by the Chief of Police or his/her designee.
E. Efficient Processing. Tow companies shall efficiently process claimants requests so that legitimate
and appropriate requests for the release of stored or impounded vehicles are completed within one (1) hour of the
time a claimant arrives at the consultants' location.
F. Charges and Fees. Tow companies shall be authorized to, and responsible for, collecting applicable
towing and impound charges and any fees required by the City prior to releasing a vehicle.
G. Charge and Fee Schedule. Attachment A to this Request for Proposals provides a complete schedule
of all charges and fees that the Successful Proposers will be authorized to collect from consumers for towing and
impound services rendered on behalf of the City. This rate schedule shall remain in place unless and until amended
by the City Council, successful proposers shall not request a change in the rate schedule for one year after
agreements have been executed with the Successful Proposers. After this initial one-year period, the sucessful
proposers may request that the rate schedule be amended by the City Council.
H. Towing and Impound Service Charges and Fees Posted Conspicuously. The schedule of City
Council approved Towing and Impound Service Charges and Fees presented in Attachment A shall be posted in a
conspicuous place at all locations where the Tow Company does business. This posting shall also include all
instructions necessary for consumers to effect City observed Holiday's and an after-hours vehicle release.
I. Billings. All invoices for towing and impounds shall be clearly itemized by charge or fee type.
Disputes associated with Police initiated towing and impound services that cannot be satisfactorily resolved by the
parties involved shall be adjudicated by the City.
J. Nwnber of Tow Companies. There shall be a maximum of five tow companies eligible to provide
towing and storage services to the City.
K. Repair and Alteration of Impounded Vehicles. Except as provided for in sub-section 4.5.5, tow
companies shall not make any repairs or alterations of vehicles in their possession without the express written
authorization of the vehicle's registered owner, the registered owner's insurance carrier or a verifiable agent of the
owner or insurance carrier.
L. Damage to Vehicle While in Tow Companies' Possession. Tow companies shall be responsible for
any damage occurring to the vehicle while in their possession. AIl damage not recorded on the damage assessment
will be considered the tow company's responsibility.
M. Loss of Property While in Tow Companies' Possession. Tow companies shall be responsible for
all property belonging to that vehicle as identified by the content inventory.
N. Docwnents Required Prior to Release. Tow companies shall not release any vehicle impounded as
the result of a Police initiated tow unless the claimant presents a valid, City-issued Police Release. Any and all
responsibilities for the release of a vehicle without a Police Release shall devolve fully to the tow company.
O. Police Department Errors and Omissions. When any vehicle has been ordered towed by the City
and it is established that the tow was in error through a mistake of fact, tow companies shall release the vehicle to
its registered owner or another legitimate claimant at no cost. If an error by the City results in a vehicle being
stored longer than it can reasonably be determined that it should have been, the tow companies shall release the
vehicle to the claimant, and bill the claimant only those storage charges that would have accrued if no error had
)7--J- 7
occurred. In the case of erroneous towing, tow companies shall charge the City 50% of the Basic Tow rate. In
the case of erroneous extended storage, tow companies shall charge the City $2.00 per day for storage charges
beyond the claimant's responsibility. However, if the City can reasonably establish that the circumstances resulting
in the error were beyond the control of the City, neither the City or claimant shall be liable for such charges.
P. Call List. The City will select the Successful Proposer to provide required towing and impound service
on the basis of a call list. The call list will be maintained by the City. The City shall contact, by telephone, the
Successful Proposer occupying the first position on the call list whenever a towing service is required by the City.
(1) Each eligible tow company will occupy the first position on a "call list" for prescribed dates
each month as shall be determined by the City and the Successful Proposers. At midnight of prescribed "first -up"
transition dates, the company in the first position on the call list will rotate downward to the last position, the firm
in the second position will rotate upward to the first position and each of the remaining companies will rotate up
one position.
(2) If, except as a result of natural disaster or other causes beyond the reasonable control of the
tow company, the tow company occupying the first position on the call list cannot perform services required by the
City, the City will contact companies, in descending order of the call list, until a company that can perform the
towing service is identified.
(3) Except in extraordinary circumstances, an interim call list rotation will be effected if the tow
company occupying the first position on the call list fails to respond to three (3) consecutive requests for service.
Interim call list rotations will remain in effect until the offending tow company's turn in the rotation has been
completed when, at that time, the call list shall revert back to its regular schedule. In order to preserve the integrity
of the call list rotation schedule, a tow company rotating into the first position on the call list as the result of an
interim rotation shall, in addition to retaining the first position for the remainder of the offending company's turn,
maintain the first position for its regularly scheduled turn.
Q. Municipal Towing Services Review Board. The Municipal Tow Services Review Board (MTSRB)
will supervise Police initiated towing and impound services. The purpose of the MTSRB will be to investigate and
adjudicate Police initiated towing and impound service related disputes and consumer complaints; to assess the
quality of service being provided by tow companies as measured by compliance with the terms and conditions of
this agreement; to impose progressive disciplinary measures on tow companies failing to comply with agreed upon
policies and procedures; to implement changes to existing policy and procedures; to make recommendations to the
City Manager and Council as to the amendment of the City's agreements with the Successful Proposers; and. to
undertake other activities that help ensure the City obtains the highest quality municipal towing services possible.
(I) The MTSRB shall be composed of two tow companies representatives serving staggered two-
year terms and two sworn City peace officers assigned to the Traffic Uuit of the Patrol Division. The MTSRB shall
be chaired by the Captain of the Patrol Division or his/her designee.
(2) The MTSRB shall meet on the final Wednesday of February, June, August and November,
at 1:30 P.M., at the Chula Vista Police Department.
(3) Determinations of the MTSRB shall be appealable. The venue of appeal for all MTSRB
determinations shall be the Chief of Police whose determination, made in good faith, shall be final.
R. Audit and Inspection of Records. Tow companies shall, during normal business hours, make all
records, equipment and storage facilities available for periodic, unscheduled inspection by the City.
S. Ethics. Tow companies shall conduct all business in an ethical manner.
T. Responsibility for Acts of Employees. Tow companies shall be responsible for all acts of their
17.,t y
employees while those employees are performing selVices for the City.
U. Compliance with City Business License and GeneraI Operation Regulations. Tow companies shall
conduct all business activities in compliance with Title 5, and other applicable Cbapters, of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code.
V. Compliance with City Building and Construction Regulations. Tow companies shall maintain all
buildings and properties used in the provision of services to the City in compliance with Title 15, and other
applicable Cbapters, of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
W. Compliance with City Zouing Regulations. Tow companies sball conduct all operations relative to
the provision of services to the City in compliance with Title 19, and other applicable chapters, ofthe Chula Vista
Municipal Code.
X. Compliance with California Vebicle Code. Tow companies shall comply with all applicable sections
of the California Vehicle Code (CVC).
8. Scope of Work and Schedule:
A. Response Time. Tow companies will respond to requests for towing selVices within an average of
twenty (20) minutes of being notified by the Police Department.
B. Removing Motor Vehicles. Tow companies shall, at the request of the City, move, tow away and
impound motor vehicles which are, under the authority California Vehicle Code or Chula Vista Municipal Code,
declared by the City to be: illegally parked, abandoned, have been involved in a traffic collision, or constitute an
obstruction of traffic due to mechanical failure or operator negligence or arrest. Such services are required on a
twenty-four-hour-a-day, seven-days-per-week basis.
C. Removal of Inoperable City Vehicles. The City may, from time-to-time, require the removal of
inoperable City vehicles from the public right-of-way and tow such vehicles to the appropriate City facility. Such
services will be provided by the tow company first-up on the Call List at rales that shall be set at a future time.
D. Abandoned Vehicle Abatement. The company occupying the first position on the Call List shall, at
the request of the City, remove and impound up to ten (10) vehicles from private property or from the public right-
of-way which are declared abandoned by the City. Such services will be provided from 7:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday at no cost to the City. The City will make a reasonable attempt to schedule the removal
of abandoned vehicles.
E. On-Scene Duties. Upon arriving on-scene, tow company employees sball report to the Peace Officer
in charge and discbarge their duties in accordance with the following conditions:
(I) Tow companies shall make every reasonable effort to comply with direction provided by the
officer-in-charge.
(2) Tow companies sball be responsible for making an accurate damage assessment for each
vehicle towed and recording said damage assessment on City approved forms and signed by the consultant's
employee.
(3) Tow companies shall be responsible for making an accurate conlent inventory for each vehicle
towed and recording said vehicle inventory on City approved forms and signed by the consultant's employee.
(4) Tow companies sball be responsible for removing and appropriately disposing of collision-
17"/,'/
related debris from the public right-of-way to ensure public safety.
(5) Tow companies may make any emergency alterations reasonably required to safely move
and/or tow vehicles.
F. Vehicle Impounds. Subsequent to removing a vehicle from the public right-of-way or private property,
tow companies shall securely impound that vehicle.
G. Negligent Vehicle Impound Program (NVIP) and Referral Fees. Tow companies will be authorized
to, and responsible for, the collection and remittance to the City of NVIP and Referral fees. The NVIP fee is
$55.00, the referral fees shall be $18.00 for each vehicle towed except as set forth below. Tow companies shall
charge and remit collected fees to the City through a mutually agreed upon process and shall keep all required
documentation as required in association with the collection of these fees.
(I) It may be presumed that NVIP Charges will be collected on vehicles impounded under the
following sections of the CVC: 22651(a) - (t), 22651(h) - (s), 22651.5.22652,22653 (a) - (c), 22655(a), 22669;
and, Chapter 10.80.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. The City may, at is sole discretion, amend NVIP
violation list from time to time as may be required by state law or City policy.
(2) Tows Excepted from Referral Fee. Referral Fees shall not be collected in the following cases:
(a) the towing of vehicles, or parts thereof, declared abandoned by the City;
(b) the towing vehicles that are City-owned;
(c) when the City requests a tow truck and, as a result of that request, a vehicle, or part
thereof, is not towed; or,
(d) when the collection of a referral fee would be in contravention of any local. state or
federal law.
H. Release of Impounded Vehicles. Tow companies shall provide vehicle release services on a twenty-
four-hours-a-<lay, seven-<lays-per-week basis. After hours releases charges shall applicable after 5 pm Monday
through Friday, Saturday, Sunday and City observed holidays.
I. Access to Stored Vehicles. During regular business hours, tow companies shall, except as restrained
in Sub-Section 4.23 below, make vehicles stored at the request of the City available to that vehicles registered
owner, a person who can be verified to be the registered owner's agent, insurance agents, insurance adjusters, or,
representatives of automotive repair businesses for the purpose of estimating or appraising damages.
J. Evidentiary Vehicle Security. Vehicles impounded by the City for investigative purposes shall be held
in maximally secured, non-public areas of the consultant's property until the vehicle is released by order of the City.
Any property or other contents of such vehicles shall not be removed by any person other than a Peace Officer or
Evidence Technician employed by the City. Property removed from such vehicles shall be recorded as removed
on the content inventory and the content inventory dated and signed by a representative of the tow company and
the Peace Officer or Evidence Technician removing such property.
K. Records of Services. Tow companies shall keep and maintain records of each vehicle towed at the
request of the Police Department for at least three years. At a minimum, these records shall include: date of tow;
make and model of vehicle; license plate number and vehicle identification number (presuming both are readily
available); the time the tow company was dispatched to the location requested by the Police Department, the time
17~70
tow company arrived on-scene; and, the fees and charges levied against the vehicle and disposition thereof. The City
shall have the right to inspect and audit, without prior notification, tow companies' records at reasonable times
during the normal working hours to determine compliance with these record-keeping requirements.
L. Annual Report. On an annual basis, tow companies shall submit a Tow Company Annual Financial
Report to the City. These reports shall be retained. in confidentiality, by the City for no less than two years. The
content of such annual reports shall be determined at a later date.
M. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services:
(x) Same as Effective Date of Agreement
N. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables: Not Applicable
O. Date for completion of all Consultant services: Not Applicable
9. Insurance Requirements:
(x) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance
(x) Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000.
(x) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000.
( ) Errors and Omissions Insurance: None Required (included in Commercial General Liability
coverage) .
( ) Errors and Omissions Insurance: $250,000 (not included in Commercial General Liability
coverage).
10. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant: None
n. Compensation: None
12. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement
13. Contract Administrators:
City: Chief of Police
Consultant:
14. Liquidated Damages Rate: None
IS. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest Code:
( ) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer.
(xx) FPPC Filer
() Category No. 1. Investments and sources of income.
() Category No.2. Interests in real property.
() Category No.3. Investments, interest in real property and sources of income subject to
the regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the department.
17.. 71
() Category No.4. Investments in business entities and sources of income which engage
in land development. construction or the acquisition or sale of real property.
() Category No.5. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type
which, within the past two years, have contracted with the City of Chula Vista
(Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or
equipment.
() Category No.6. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type
which, within the past two years, have contracted with the designated employee's
department to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment.
( ) Category No.7. Business positions.
( ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of Project Property, if any:
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
16. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
17. Permitted Subconsultants: None
18. Bill Processing:
A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period of time:
(xx) Monthly
B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing:
(xx) First of the Month
C. City's Account Number: 100-1030-5202
19. Security for Performance: None
17"' 1;1-
RESOLUTION NO. ) B'I , f
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING PROPOSALS AND AWARDING
CONTRACTS FOR POLICE INITIATED TOWING AND
STORAGE SERVICES TO ANTHONY'S TOWING, SOUTH
BAY TOWING, PAXTON'S TOWING, AZ METRO TOWING
AND J. C. TOWING
WHEREAS, on March 7, 1995, Council authorized
Department staff to design a competitive process to
providers of Police Initiated Towing and Impound Services;
Police
select
and
WHEREAS, proposals were accepted on June 30, 1995, with
twelve providers responding; and
WHEREAS, the process used was designed to improve the tow
services provided to consumers and the City while enhancing General
Fund revenues through the implementation of a referral fee paid by
tow companies under contract with the City; and
WHEREAS, proposals were evaluated using - a three-tier
rating system to ensure that responses were in compliance with the
specific requirements outlined in the request for proposal; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends no more than five tow companies
be approved by Council based on their capabilities as demonstrated
in the Qualifying Phase and their ability to enhance General Fund
revenues via their proposed Referral Fee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby accept proposals and award
contracts for police initiated towing and storage with the
following companies:
Anthony's Towing, on file in the Clerk's office as Document No.
Southbay Towing, on file in the Clerk's office as Document No.
Paxton's Towing, on file in the Clerk's office as Document No.
Metro Towing, on file in the Clerk's office as Document No.
J. C. Towing, on file in the Clerk's office as Document No.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Agreements for and on behalf of the City of Chula vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of
Police
C:\rs\towing
~
(k, If ItLQ#-,<.:
Ann Y. Moore, Acting city
Attorney
17 fI-1
RESOLUTION NO. J~~~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE POLICE INITIATED
TOWING SERVICE RATE SCHEDULE AND IMPLEMENTING
A REFERRAL FEE
WHEREAS, as a result of the renewal and solicitation for
bids, the tow operators made formal request to increase the Council
approved rate schedule; and
WHEREAS, in response to this request, staff initiated a
rate and contract compliance analysis; and
WHEREAS, staff's initial analysis included a survey
similar to that conducted in 1990 and a review of the tow companies
performance over the term of the existing agreements; and
WHEREAS, this analysis concluded that the current
Chula vista Tow Rate Schedule was lower than the majority of
agencies survey; and
WHEREAS, the rationale for the operator's request for a
rate increase was based primarily on two factors:
A. That the city's rate schedule was out of line with
other jurisdictions since, as mentioned above, the
most recent rate increase occurred in August 1990.
B. That the City has required an increasing level of
administrative work on their part to comply with
state law and city policies, most notably the
implementation of the Negligent Vehicle Impound
Fee.
WHEREAS, staff is recommending a referral fee be added to
the tow rate to be paid to the City to cover the City's cost of
administering the towing program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby amend the Police Initiated Towing
Rate Schedule to increase the rates as set forth in Attachment 1,
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and to
incorporate the referral fee.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said rates shall be effective
upon adoption of this resolution.
J713-1
Presented by
Approved as to form by
~ ~ }VI A~"" Q
Ann Y. Mo re, Actlng Clty
Attorney
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of
Police
C:\rs\towing
178 ~ A
. R. e,\J'( oS c. D
g-I,,-q~
ATTACHMENT 1
POLICE INITIATED TOWING RATES IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
San Diego EICajon National Escoodido Survey Cbula Vista Cbula Vista
Service Cit)' Average Current Proposed
Basic Tow $72. 00 $55.00 $75.00 $75.00 $69.25 $55.00 $70.00
Mileage $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $0.00 $1.88 $2.50 $2.50
Labor $40.00 $40.00 $00.00 $40.00 $30.00 $24.00 $30.00
Storage Hour $4.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.50 $1.50 $2.50
Storage $15.00 $12.00 $12.00 $15.00 $13.50 $12.00 $15.00
Max/Day
PM Release $28.00 no servIce $28.00 $35.00 $30.33 $25.00 $30.00
Heavy Tow $125.00 no servIce $125.00 $120.00 $123.33 $120.00 $125.00
A vera~e Cost $98.00 $79.50 $87.00 $100.00 $90.41 $71.00 $93.00
Referral Fee $17-35 no no no nla no $18.00
Ine! uded in
Tow Rate
Note: Due to variance in the application of ancillary charges, it is difficult to accurately
compare one jurisdiction's rate schedule with another. Such ancillary charges interact with the
basic rate to create the tow operator's revenue stream. For example: in Chula Vista, mileage
charges accrue only after the first mile; in San Diego and National City, mileage charges accrue
after five miles; El Cajon charges for all mileage; and, in Escondido there is no charge for
mileage. Additionally, National City does not have a labor rate which skews the average labor
rate reported.
/7 G-3
----------------------------
AUG-19-1996 12:05
DURU INC.
SOUTH 8A~TOWINC,'Nc.
619 "K"' STREET . CHl..LA VISTA, CA 91911 . TOWING: 6194220379
Mayor Horton and Members of
the City Council
City of Chula Vista
216 Fourth Avenue
Chu\a Vista, CA. 91910
August 18, 1996
Re . Accepting proposals and awarding contracts for Police Initiated
towing and storage services. City Council Agenda of August 20,
1996 Item #17 A, B
Honorable Mayor Horton and
Members of the Council.
We request your support of staff recommendation on items #17 A,B. South Bay
Towing has operated as a Police Authorized towing company for the City of ChuJa Vista
since 1966. We have been working with Staff for almost two years in implementing a
Contract that provides for .
I. Full Cost Recovery to the City to operate their Towing program.
2 A Competitive Bid-Process
3 A Competitive Towing Rate to the public.
4 A back-up system that allows the City the ability to call upon over 40 Tow
trucks.
5. 5 locally owned and operated Towing Companies committed to the Police
Department.
I appreciate this opportunity to communicate my comments to you. I will appear
at the Council Meeting on August 20th, at which time I will again urge you to support city
staffs recommendation. Thank You
pe
Duane W Pudgil
Owner
P.02
~)7
---------------------
TOTAL P.02
AUG-19-1996 12:05
DURU INC.
SOUTH BA~TOWINC,'Nc.
61 q "K" STREET . CHULA VISTA, CA 91911 . TOWING. 619.422 0379
Mayor Horton and Members of
the City Council
City of Chula Vista
276 Founh Avenue
Chula Vista, CA. 91910
August ]8, 1996
Re : Accepting proposals and awarding contracts for Police Initiated
towing and storage services. City Council Agenda of August 20,
]996ltem #17 A, B.
Honorable Mayor Horton and
Members of the Council .
We request your support of staff recommendation on Items #17 A,B. South Bay
Towing has operated as a Police Authorized towing company for the City ofChula Vista
since 1966. We have been working with Staff for almost two years in implementing a
Contract that provides for .
1. Full Cost Recovery to the City to operate their Towing program.
2. A Competitive Bid-Process
3. A Competitive Towing Rate to the public.
4. A back-up system that allows the City the ability to call upon over 40 Tow
trucks.
5. 5 locally owned and operated Towing Companies committed to the Police
Department.
I appreciate this opportunity to communicate my comments to you. I will appear
at the Council Meeting on August 20th, at which time I WIll again urge you to support city
staffs recommendation. Thank You.
Very Respectfully,
~We
Duane W. Pudgil
Owner
P.02
-ft/?
TOTAL P.02
------------ -----
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1f3.
Meeting Date 8/20/96
ITEM TITLE: Report Regarding Proposed Multiple Family Residential Development
Project at the MTDB "H" Street Trolley Station
-..-"7 I
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning 41-'
REVIEWED BY: City ManagerU~ 110 (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X )
Ie"
On July 1, 1996, the Planning Department received a request from Mr. Edward F. Wagner for
a letter of support from the City of Chula Vista for a proposed five story, IDS-unit multiple
family residential development project planned to be constructed above the existing parking lot
at the Metropolitan Transit Development Board's (MTDB) "H" Street Trolley Station. The
requested letter of support is intended to be included with Mr. Wagner's formal project proposal
to MTDB.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize the Director of Planning to forward
a letter to Mr. Wagner and MTDB providing comments regarding the development proposal.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Background
On March 28, 1996, staff from the Planning and Community Development Departments met
with Mr. Edward F. Wagner to discuss a preliminary proposal to construct a five story, multiple
family residential and office mixed-use project that would be constructed over the MTDB "H"
Street Trolley Station parking lot (with the possibility of extending over the trolley station and
tracks). The request by Mr. Wagner at that time included whether the City would support the
provision of affordable housing funding for the project. The Community Development
Department staff indicated to Mr. Wagner that the limited funds that were available were being
targeted for other areas of the City and for larger family-oriented units.
On July 1, 1996, Mr. Wagner submitted a letter to the City requesting a letter of support from
the City of Chula Vista for a proposed five story, IDS-unit multiple family residential
development project to be constructed above the existing parking lot at the MTDB 'H' Street
Trolley Station. In Mr. Wagner's letter he again described the project proposal, and indicated
that he is now proposing that the project be funded privately, with the use of Federal tax credits,
18-1
Page 2, Item _
Meeting Date 8120/96
and that local funding would not be required or requested. He further indicated that the project
will require a written indication of support from the City of Chula Vista, to be included with a
formal proposal to MTDB (See Attachment A).
The "H" Street Trolley Station site is designated in the City's General Plan as "Commercial-
Professional and Administrative," and the property is zoned both "CV-P" (Visitor Commercial)
and "R-3" (multiple-family residential). Thus, the zoning is not fully consistent with the General
Plan. However, the property could be rezoned to "C-O" (Administrative and Professional Office
Zone) which would be consistent with the General Plan designation, and would allow multiple
family residential as a conditional use. Therefore, the proposal could be considered by the City
without an amendment to the General Plan, but would require rezoning, a conditional use
permit, and design review.
Analvsis
Through acceptance of the Land Use Distribution Element of the SANDAG Regional Growth
Management Strategy, and with the adoption of the Otay Ranch and its village core concepts,
the City of Chula Vista has demonstrated support of the concept of transit-oriented development.
This concept involves intensification of development on and around trolley stations in order to
increase ridership and make transit a viable alternative to the automobile. In addition, the
Central Chula Vista Area Plan, contained in the City's General Plan, also supports the concept
of mixed-use development in the area west of Broadway and surrounding the transit stations at
"E" and "H" Streets.
The proposed residential development on the MTDB "H" Street Trolley Station proposed by Mr.
Wagner is generally consistent with the policies mentioned above. However, staff would like
to highlight that any development proposal resulting in intensification on or around the "H"
Street Transit Station needs to address a number of issues including the following:
I) Proposed development needs to consider land use policies contained in the Central Chula
Vista Area Plan (Chapter 10 of the General Plan), which address the interrelationship of
land uses in this immediate area, as well as effects to existing infrastructure (eg, schools,
sewers, circulation and parks). Consideration should to be given to redevelopment
efforts in the Bayfront area to the west, including the Rohr site, which may ultimately
affect the overall land use and circulation patterns along the "H" Street corridor.
2) Design compatibility with adjoining land uses needs to be considered, including building
height, massing, articulation, open space, circulation and parking. Specifically, the
relationship of parking for this facility with overall parking needs for the Trolley Station,
and building height and open space requirements in the Zoning Ordinance, need to be
carefully addressed.
18- ~
Page 3, Item _
Meeting Date 8/20/96
3) The proposed development project does not meet the currently identified priorities for
use of low and moderate income housing funds, and the City does not have programs in
place that would allow for indirect subsidies, such as development fee waivers.
In conclusion, staff recommends that Council authorize the Director of Planning to respond to
Mr. Wagner with the attached draft letter containing comments that need to be considered with
the development proposal (See Attachment B).
FISCAL IMPACT: The project would be anticipated to process through the City's typical
development review. No fiscal impact is anticipated with the current request.
Attachments:
A. Letter submitted by Edward F. Wagner, dated July 1, 1996. /
B. Draft letter to Edward F. Wagner from the Director of Planning. "
C. Locator / Zoning Map. "
(M:\homc\planning\wagner .AII)
)8-3
Edward F. Wagner
1836 N. W. Couch Street
Portland, OR 97209
July 1, 1996
Mr. Robert Leiter
Director of Planning
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Bob:
This letter is submitted as verification of our intent to proceed
with the development of the transit station project on the MTDB
Park and Ride Site at "H" Street and 1-5 in Chula Vista, and in
response to our telephone conversation last Thursday, June 27, 1996.
MTDB has reviewed our development concept and invited us to submit
a proposal for formal consideration and approval.
The project remains identical to the concepts reviewed at our meet-
ing with you and other representatives of the City of Chula Vista
Friday, May 10, 1996 in your offices at City Hall. It consists of
a four story one hundred and five unit housing complex constructed
over the existing park-and-ride lot. The project is envisioned to
accommodate an adult transit-based tenancy with one-bedroom and
two-bedroom units and would include sixty four parking spaces on
the adjacent deck over the existing parking. MT~B has indicated
that additional required parking could be accommodated at the
existing ground level park-and-ride lot in an area specially
designated for residents. The existing ground level site plan will
remain intact with the exception of pier placement for the new
structure in a non-conflicting configuration. All existing ground
level vehicular traffic and circulation patterns and facilities
will remain intact. A copy of the concept drawings is attached
hereto. These drawings are conceptual only and should not be
considered to be the final architectural plans. Detailed planning
and architectural designs will commence only upon mutual agreement
of the concept by all parties.
ATTACHMENT A
18 -J{-
Page 2
Mr. Robert Leiter
July 1, 1996
It is envisioned the project will be funded privately with the use
of Federal Tax Credits. Local funding will not be required or
requested.
The project will, however, require the approval and support of the
City of Chula Vista. A written indication of that support from
your office should be included with our formal proposal to MTDB.
A high level of cooperation will be essential to expedite the
necessary entitlements for an accelerated processing and develop-
ment schedule.
We are prepared to proceed immediately and await your response.
Ed..,d F w.:l tt/~
1836 N. W. Couch
Portland, OR 97209
Tel: (503) 221-1837
FAX: (503) 228-1016
cc:
Jack Limber
Bill Lieberman
David Gustafson
Steve Gri ffi n
Bi 11 Gustafson
18-.5
:snN3M;' NMY'1aOCW\
-:I- r------------------ --I
~
, I
.
I ..
'" II
"
c
,> ., I
; .2:'
'" L~ '):,l c
...~" ",
"0 's. ...
~
" m
..
c 0
'" '"
.....:!
it'
Q .. u
&
~ ;,t'"
D ~$
~~ ..
"0 I~ ,,~
.~ :>tt '~ ;;!;w
t;:J :~ ~~
<(0
" h
Q
" ~
0.
0.
'"
'"
r'> ~ c
~ .,' . j
" (. ,
'" ~ . l: . '"
t~.....r' \ ~.........
~.<
. r:.,j '~' ~
.0
~ " 0
r . ;,
'>
'. , '"
~'''r.-
J~' e(j
'" ' .,;4~". '"
~."I.~ I.
.. S ...""
, .
,
. '" ..
-- ---I
'I.-+-"'-~ ~ l> . b ~
1- 'k ;t~2 1. ....
~'1 " ii
11 b 1. .~
'1. ~ 'I..
18-'
!InN""'" NMY100cw.
?l.r---------
~ I ---------,
I" I
I" I
I" Q I
I ) i~":;,, I
I " y~,~g " I
I 1....:.-1 ~ I
" . ~
~ I " I
I . ~ . I
I < b\~~I_: I
I " :r R~"" I
:0 I I
~ I I
~ I I
I '
I """ I
I < i
I " I
I" " I
"0 I I
~ I " I
I <;i- ~~~ - " I
I ".;.~~~" I
I . f f2 I
I ",," I
I J
+-~~'1~1 ~ 'I~'I b "1
1 s> . \II
I ~
~ \1\1
! ~ I
~ i
i< i ~
0.. ~ jI
~
'"
z;; .
~~ " I ~ Ii
~:x: II. 3
'-.) ~ ':"
Icj-7
. :.~.~,. :t-~.. ,- "'0
....~::::-~ .~.J.... -
, _.;-----
~__ H"' :.~ ~
J.... .n -____'_
~_.......-.
~
-, ~
.
w
0
[b) <C
I-
@ Z
::J
)8 -{3 / I~-/()
~<
i~",E
i5>~.'
o ~;f.
~~~
:2
o
~
~
~
c!)
I-
Z
::)
. ?'. '\ . I
~l '" .:..~, \.'JOOOI.l\WN ' S.' .' s ....__ '1 ~,AVENUE
~ ~~-~. ~l ~:~_7~.:~;! ~.;~~.:.....~~f~ ~~~ -.:t: ~~ t-C.:: q' ~~_==
.- --'-'... '. --:......... ,..:- ' :::2::: . "-_..... ........
">:'-":t .~,~. ~. ",. 1"". '-
. . ,. ~ - to ~. .. . .:.... - !ij:1 ::..:...:..- _ _
/~~:'I'~ I~' : " .. ',~' ;1-~~,':~ :, .~' ..........,"-1- ._~ 'll ~"'~A'-~o'~
- - :1 '\) - - - - '-1 -'- ~i\\J '- _
" . I. If'). I f7 L-Ii,...J'It ...- _ ~ ' 1..,....... - -'. ' Z I
.~~ 1 ~ ,rvl 5.:~ ...-.; .. \ 9 @ 9' ~- ~ '.~ /' ,~
N- I t-=;4~', .1 It 'J I'. I Jt') '}yO ~
"\:~f~I' '~"'R4.0;uri..e/.a~;N.v' Y.!7.0~/Jl.OI'24/tJlg.~/~f2I' IJj' '. r~
I,.,~ I ...........::;-~--j;;., I ~ ......1 I. ,I -n;::: I ~ It: ,.~
I' " ,
I I, u! L - - - .....,.~.... I ! ,I' ._ I', \ "-
I ' i .i L,,____J; ~"7 ,
~' \' ~ I 10.. \ I
- - ...J I ' ; 2~ 13 234 , I- ~,
i <<4"" !,o;
; . ~. -.J ct
... ~-. .; -,.. I I
~ ~3 4 . J I T- '> '
.. - \ I' ;. ,,-" T I \ L- .,,'_ ...., ~
:;k : ~f _.-l-~_ ~ ~. .-1~ ~- -~- 'iij ~:r- .. ~ - i ~..~
:z l" . ,. ~:- I ~ ~ I' Q:- 1:' (H, ~ I t'4
- t\ !.5 " ,.; I _ -= t..~ 'I I J ~ I _ 1/
~ I~ C/ ~) i\: - ~ ." t. 'I ~~_
I~'J N' , <!:J ~ I\,,;... 11' (I r . II -; , ~~
~ ~ I ~\,..;o . 1 ~ UI .. -: t\J
\ ~/-J...~ 1_ ~ i" _:: ~_~ J ~ -~~. .,' ;-- ; ~f~l/ 1 I ~:~. f'.. "' ~
'C.7~_ -. ::.J--.-.fa -.- f""--':"- ._~-~ ! i% -''\: 22,S ~ f'J ~ I
~ t. !'~ J l I -:- 7!J1 _ U I.. I I.. _ ~.
---~.. _. ~~ 1l~.1--._.-:._--: ~.I2L.~ ~ __ ., ~ -'~-Ih ..toI. ,-, ~_.~
"':-c.~ p -'-, .'J , r:"~. _...:.::..."V- _..
i. , . , .. . .__.--._ . _ ,~,,__ .__
\- ~ - .. .. -.- -I~
. ,'..10. ..... ....., \... _ ~ :
-~\\..~: 3:>~.~_,,-.2'6COL~FAD 1l.4 -.. 222., ".::._~.
- G " 1 .. , _ _- - ~"_. _ ...;:"'.:: : ._~._-=;:
---- - .... I ,
- ..... - - .. '. .L u ! _.. t. 1. .. "."
~~.~..- i.....,.___...._~ = 'r'- ._-.~ "r--- ~Z(':
tp'-'-- -: -. 9 ;-I'~'''-- J" 9 !, I tIE.!! I ; 2i!.~ ' 0:.' . ,
t I I'; I I
,~ 'i. ! L ; I " ,_'
.--, I~ ~--.l.-A"" J'"'- r-- .-,_.J-l r -,--~:,.-, I -- --=
I I /1 ) -!- I I I R .
.1 'I ~.r i.1 , . I I II I
:... i II I II Ilf~ I
I I. I I I I -;-.11 I
I'~!I _ 'I --- ,- I ___ J I .~~I, ~j
I ~. 2;'~ J.'~'~ ~'~-"""'J "t, t'..) .~ tO~~'r ~/.:,
.J .-' _' _ ~. ~ I / I .0 I I .:;/
- . 1 . -t..-... , J' .' , 1;), . ._..1--1---- -,;-.. .. __.... I ,~
. ...L.-.. ~Jf...j.fi.,."..,. ~..~---.~~ ~- -~2__ '--2~'=-'~'-'::!.~":
---.-' - ,.. .. _. -...-' .t\, ..... _.t-==,.-..".,.'<J. .=..... ,
- PC' .. - _,-.o..r:d:Zf'!"n",-. -._.,_u,_.... -"'f -==-...:::.-::;-.-;.;..'----.-... ~ liD ~
.~-~., ':'" _~,,:'---':-" . ._'..::"'~.~\ _.-r:.:.:.I;~:;:...."':.. ,__..r_ -_ " ..,,\ _, '-
')
. ". '" I
. ". '. . \ 2' .
'" -----aO.,.Z--WOODL/IWN' S' . v__ " , AVENUE
-~.'.~ ~~'. _.7S,'o.'... \..G~~4;.e~~~. .:J'~'~~ ..t:.J!:4.~, ~. ~.~
..,;&..--.., - - - -...:...L-- ........ - -- I~':-'/.. - f =1 ~"r"-
:- z~'~_\"J~ . ~ t:. -..' -. _ ..::;._
.~ . . ~ , ". J:::t .h~ ... : . ....~.:;I-~-; ,r-.,..,..rA..... Co!
_ ,J' ~ ." r j'-'_ ~ 1 .. "\.lJ L~ -." . I _I' L,~:': -:10' 'J
\I~ I .n h V ,- -' ~ ~ '~-.... I-p-",trl-'- - t:t z ,
.:~ I \rv, 5.:~,9'. .n..; I' \ 9 @ 9"/'-1 ~ I. I' . .
'.. I t---=+, . t ,I ,. . OQ-,
I'> :--"1' -:I! '" I ,I '11 I""\! t: ;~\
I : !L_ -.., -.'-- '! / I 'It:, \
~ I -...----.
~. \~ ~. ! I \ I
/ 23 3 ,34 ,
~ ' 1.0. .'
- J..... , .. 1
1--'
I" I I I 10(
...+.-+. .1 Z'.L " I I ~\1 i "
~; " 2' \ I 1 ..- - ~
~ 'U I I ..r= _-!-...... !4-_..,
~: -!...~ I' r- ~ ..L \./ ~. ~ -+h ~_~
0( " ~?,I" ~ I' ~ ~ 1- ~ {\j
~:\.! I ~II ~ I ~ ~ \' i I\) I ,"
~;~ I' t::;, I .tIi I .. .:' '. -} ~t{
\---l'I~ ~ "_1, . I. ~ ~ -+,- t\i
'.~ . ~ ---.~=F"I--' ~b ~ m f'(: If " I".-. " '-
~'"'"".:-~ i---fc3n- ~-~ ~-;- "j/ . ; . 1%1' -') : R1\t> ~ ~~
,~'I I~ .J ,. - J ih. I ~.3...-. ~
-.:-"b--'; ..., 22 ~ 1:~- .:.: ~m.'1 -- ,r,"J ~ tt_ :,,'f.....,..., . A.~ ~,
~.~~ '.:. F=-- ~~~. .~J.C~ oel: - ~~~~:. '-.. 22 .,'~~ '.-
. .~___ J r I" ~ u1l ~ .>,::
-G '\.. . - - -"',~ .>0.-
. .i._~ _. -",'
7- '. -,- L,. ,- ., _\ . ",I. ....I. r~'- ~;.. rl.. _ ~>":2,-.2 ~:~:
'M"""-- ' "i .- A ,---'~.- .. p-- :._ ...., I' ~2r~
r? =. ~ .. .: n.s I ! 2Z~ :
1 l I L.. :' " ~'" '
- -, 'I' " -'-(1':' :__.1_ r: r .':, ':V ~-'
I : I ,.I I. I I I ..L '- '"
- :'25 -~,~~._---t I: # ~..
I . 22 I .... ---.. 1,/ I. _~' to.t{1 '"
~. ~ .."" ./ ~...... -..Jf "":- I
- .J '. " I' --t-"- .. . It;).' / I __.:...... I ,{g.
..' .....L ...a 11.5 _:=;;: ::::l.----~~:.-r. t-. r--.--+-.
-- .. '. u - ""- -~ ...._,_ . --;::0;;..."'.'
.._~ . . ;. ;...,."'",.... '{CI '''~__~' ':V;~. .v,~"7"..;;\. -- ~-\\j '. '.. =---- --- .. Ct: ..--- -:.
. V It . _ _ --\ti:.. .::
.' ... ._, ...:- "'. ". - .... -=- '. - __ .:~~ f~'::~"~/-::i(.-=:7.',-.'~ '7,." '.. -- ..
. ." - ----.-2'--,>,>' ,- --.. ,_ ._ ''''. ._.. ...... ___.......
: ~j- : . .... ---(:~8.;~r~.~.--t~t~10'~" - '.. /.~~;L//;j
:: .:ii.iW(!~~I~A~r~~~ ~...!!Z~~. ::;~'.u' ..0
. ......, .. . -.---::--.~~,-'-:._-.-.. ....17-;7. 777/'-7.-/n .-,..
J ~~'iji~:i~f/7//777 /////77//Y;:~
"-- .~-
........... I
18 -10
j :J-(1
~ ~ f.t..
~
~~~~
-:;...~~-
CllY OF
CHUlA VISTA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
August 21, 1996
Edward F. Wagner
1836 N. W. Couch Street
Portland, OR 97209
Subject:
Development Proposal for the H Street MTDB Trolley Station Site
Dear Mr. Wagner:
In response to your letter, dated July I, 1996, I have prepared this response which I hope
explains clearly what the City of Chula Vista's position is regarding your development proposal
for the H Street MTDB Trolley Station site. The proposal includes the development of 105
multiple family residential units to be constructed over the existing park-and-ride trolley station
lot and would be five stories in height.
I would ftrst like to indicate that the City recognizes and supports the concept of transit-oriented
development, which involves intensification of development on and around transit station sites
in order to increase ridership and make public transit a viable alternative to the automobile. As
an example, the City recently adopted the Otay Ranch General Development Plan, which
includes policies that provide for a mixed-use village core with increased residential densities
and village-serving commercial uses surrounding future transit stations. However, any
development proposal resulting in intensification on or around the "H" Street Transit Station site
needs to address a number of issues including the following:
1) Chapter 10 of the Chula Vista General Plan (Central Chula Vista Area Plan) contains
policies that recommend that the area between, and surrounding, both the "H" Street and
"E" Street Transit Stations be considered for redevelopment. Any redevelopment of this
area, or in-fill development, should include consideration of the effects of an increase of
residential units on existing infrastructure (e.g. schools, sewers and circulation, parks
etc.). Any design or land use proposal for this area should also encourage pedestrian-
friendly circulation patterns. Potential circulation modifications that could affect the
status of Woodlawn Avenue are recommended for consideration in this chapter of the
General Plan.
2) Redevelopment of the transit station site and area should take into consideration
redevelopment plans for the Bayfront, including the Rohr Industries site, immediately
west of Interstate 5 (accessible from "H" Street). The Bayfront area has significant
18-1/
ATTACHMENT B
;- ":'H AV~/CHU~'
_ 't"ORNIA 9'Q,
Edward F. Wagner
2
August 21, 1996
development and redevelopment potential which could influence development on the "E"
Street, "F" Street and "H" Street corridors. Plans for this entire area are under
consideration but have not been completed.
3) Design compatibility issues will also need to be addressed with the pursuit of any
development proposal at this site. Building height, massing, articulation, open space,
circulation and adequacy of parking will be considerations addressed through the City's
Design Review process. Fire access will also need to be evaluated. The preliminary
project proposal identifies a five story structure which would exceed current zoning
height limitations of three and one-half stories (or 45 ft.) and would appear to have
difficulty meeting the City's common open space requirements for multiple family
developments.
4) Previous discussions with you regarding this proposal have included possible City
financial participation, in order to make the project affordable to low and moderate
income residents. We wish to emphasize that at this time the City does not see this
project as meeting currently identified priorities for use of low and moderate income
housing funds, and the City does not have programs in place that would allow for
indirect subsidies, such as development fee waivers.
In conclusion, the City of Chula Vista is interested in any project which will result in the
implementation of its General Plan policies, provided that it is well conceived, fiscally sound,
and is in the best interests of its citizens and those of the region. While the City is generally
supportive of the project concept, the issues stated above need to be considered with any project
submittal.
Please feel free to contact me at (619) 691-5254 if you have any questions or wish to discuss
the project further.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
cc: Chris Salamone, Director of Community Development
Duane Bazzel, Principal Planner
Steve Griffm, Principal Planner
Bill Gustafson, Transit Coordinator
(#ll,\WAGNERI.LTR)
18-/~
CITY OF CHI" ^ VISTA
-
-z-
...-\
t'f\
?J
c.I'
...-\
Y
...-\
t'f\
<.J'
BISON
MOBILE
HOME PARK
MHP
MUELLER
ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
VlSTAN
APT'
CTD
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT N A PROJECT DfSCRlI'nON,
C9 APPlICANT, .. "H" Street Trolley Station
PROJECT N,A. Housing Proposal
ADDRESS,
- J8-/3
SCALE, FILE NUMBE~ ATTACHMENT C
NORTH No Scale NA
ITEM TITLE:
Item )..1) ~
Meeting Date 8/20/96
Resolution / 8't'-2~king a position to oppose AB 956, which is not
addressed in the Legislative Program and therefore requires direct
Council action.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY: Legislative Committee
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_ NoX)
The City's 1995-96 Legislative Program was last amended by Council on December 12, 1995.
Although this program was intended to provide comprehensive direction to the Legislative
Committee on City's legislative priorities, there are certain issues which are reserved for direct
action by the Council.
Attached is an analysis of a bill which is not addressed in the Legislative Program. The
Legislative Committee recommends that Council take a position to oppose this bill.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution opposing AB 956.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: Legislative Committee recommends
approval of the resolution.
DISCUSSION
The bill proposed for Council action is follows:
1. AB 956 (Alpert) TIDELANDS: SAN DIEGO: PUBLIC SAFETY INSTITUTION
Would declare an urgent need for the on-going use of the tidelands and submerged
lands at the Naval Training Center (Camp Nimitz) for purposes of public safety
training. This would pre-empt any attempts by the San Diego Unified Port District or
other agencies to find alternative uses for the property being vacated by the Navy,
including the expansion of Lindbergh Field.
Defeat of this bill does not negate the possibility of a public safety institute, but
preserves several options for site use and would prevent these options from being
restricted or determined at a State level. Additionally, the Federal government, under
the auspices of the Federal Aviation Administration and, ultimately, the Secretary of the
Navy, will still playa role in the re-use of the site.
Fiscal Impact: No direct fiscal impact. However, actions which preclude the
expansion of Lindbergh Field may impact the long-term viability of that facility and
lead to the reconsideration of a regional or bi-national airport at Otay Mesa.
Legislative Committee Recommendation:
OPPOSE
Attachments: Analysis and bill text, AS 956
.2tJJ.. /
c:\...\ccm\ab956.113
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
LEGISLATIVE ANALYSIS
August 14, 1996
I BILL I AUTHOR I TITLE I INTRODUCED I AMENDED
AB 956 Alpert Tidelands: San Diego: 2/23/96 7111196
public safety institute
CITY POSITION LEAGUE POSITION RELATED BILLS ADDRESSED BY LEG. PROGRAM
PENDING NONE NONE No; Council Action Required
STATUS: Senate Second Reading
BACKGROUND:
On 7/16/96, the San Diego City Council v01ed 5-4 to reject a San Diego Unified Port District proposal
to acquire portions of the land currently occupied by the Naval Training Center. The Port District
intended to utilize the land in order to expand Lindbergh Field. Chula Vista Port Commissioner David
Malcolm reported the actions of the San Diego City Council and noted the likelihood of a protracted
legal battle over the acquisition of the land in question.
AB 956 would:
Declare an urgent need for the on-going use of the tidelands and submerged lands at the Naval
Training Center for purposes of public safety training. The bill would make legislative findings that
the public trust is best served by the continued use of this property for that purpose.
The effect of this legislation would be to pre-empt any other use of the land being vacated by the
Navy, and would prevent the Port District or any other agency from pursuing other options for the
property. Members of the San Diego City Council are contacting public safety departments through
out the region, including the Chula Vista Fire Chief, requesting their support of this legislation.
Defeat of this bill would not negate the possibility of a public safety institute, but, rather, would keep
the options for site use from being restricted or determined at a State level. Additionally, the Federal
government, under the auspices of the Federal Aviation Administration and, ultimately, the Secretary
of the Navy, will still playa role in the re-use of the site.
The San Diego Unified Port District staff will ask their Commission to take a position of opposition
to this bill on 8/20/96. The Port District staff points out that the Public Trust Doctrine, which
governs tidelands use, requires that these lands be used to promote commerce, navigation, fisheries
or recreation. They also note that many court cases have held that a legislative action cannot
eliminate the public trust doctrine, which is part of both the State and Federal Constitutions.
Although this subject of this bill is not addressed by the City's Legislative Program, it has a significant
impact on two issues of regional concern; public safety and the operational effectiveness of Lindbergh
Field. For this reason it is being brought to the Council for action.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No direct impact, however the action to preclude any expansion of Lindbergh Field may impact the
long-term viability of that facility and, subsequently, could lead to reconsideration of a regional or bi-
national airport in the Otay Mesa area.
August 14, 1996
RECOMMENDATION
OPPOSE
LETTERS
YES
DATE TO COUNCIL
C:\wp51 \ANAL YSES\ab956.ana
.,2()b ., ;J..
California 1995-96 Regular Session
1995 CA AB 956
Amended
AMENDED IN SENATE AUGUST 5, 1996
AMENDED IN SENATE SEPTEMBER 15, 1995
AMENDED IN SENATE SEPTEMBER 7, 1995
AMENDED IN SENATE AUGUST 28, 1995
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 26, 1995
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 27,1995
ASSEMBLY BILL
No. 956
----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member [0> Oucheny <OJ [0>
(Coauthor: Senator Peace) <0] [A> Alpert <A]
FEBRUARY 22, 1995
----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
An act relating to [0> coastal resources, and making an appropriation therefor. <0] [A> tidelands
and submerged lands within the City of San Oiego. <A]
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 956, as amended, [0> Oucheny <0] [A> Alpert <A]. [0> State
Coastal Conservancy: state grants <OJ [A> Tidelands: San Oie90: public safety institutions <AJ .
[A> Under existing law, state tidelands and submerged lands are held subject to a public trust for
the benefit of all of the people of the state. <A]
[A> This bill would declare that the use of tidelands and submerged lands within the area of San
Die90 Bay formerly designated as the Naval Training Center-San Oiego (Camp Nimitz) for the operation
of a public safety institute, as described, is a proper public trust use. The bill would make legislative
findings. <A]
[0> (1) Under the California Parklands Act of 1980, no state grant funds may be disbursed until
the applicant agrees that any property acquired or developed with those funds shall be used by the
applicant only for the purpose for which the funds were requested and that no other use of the
property shall be permitted except by specific act of the Legislature. < OJ
[0> This bill would authorize the State Coastal Conservancy to permit use for the construction of
facilities related to the South Bay Ocean Outfall Project a portion of the reai property within the Tijuana
River National Estuarine Research Reserve acquired by the City of San Oiego from the Japatul
Corporation in part with funds 9ranted by the conservancy pursuant to the act, as specified, subject
to specified conditions, including requiring the project proponent to pay specified funds to the
conservancy, which would be continuously appropriated for expenditure by the conservancy for
conservation purposes within the reserve. < 0]
[0> (2) The bill would also authorize the conservancy to request the Department of General
Services to retain, reserve, transfer, or convey to a public entity or nonprofit organization any portion
of, or interest in, the real property known as Cascade Ranch in San Mateo County that is owned by
the state and is under the control of the conservancy, subject to specified conditions. < 0]
Vote: majority. Appropriation: [0> yes <0] [A> no <A]. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
.2~Jr J
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOllOWS:
[D> SECTION 1. (a) The legislature hereby finds and < D]
[A> SECTION 1. (a) The legislature hereby finds and declares that the use of tidelands and
submerged lands within the area of San Diego Bay formerly designated as the Naval Training
Center-San Diego (Camp Nimitz) for the operation of a public safety institute, as described in
subdivision (b), is a proper public trust use of those lands. <A]
[A> (b) The legislature hereby further finds and declares as follows: <A]
[A> (1) The military base closure process has made available lands which merit special
consideration because of their former use within the context of a military operation. <A]
[A> (2) The Base Reuse Committee established by the City Council of the City of San Diego has
recommended that a public safety institute be established on the Camp Nimitz portion of the Naval
Training Center, which constitutes tidelands and submerged lands subject to the public tidelands trust.
<A]
[A> (3) That parcel of land was previously used for public safety training, and contains existing
structures which include a twenty-two million dollar ($22,000,000) fire simulator, one of only a very
few in the entire country, a six million dollar ($6,000,000) indoor firearms range, and several
classrooms and administrative office spaces. The cost savings achieved through the continued use
of those facilities provide a significant public benefit and is consistent with the purposes of the
tidelands public trust. Incorporating existing resources at the site, the cost of the public safety
institute has been estimated as twenty-eight million eight hundred thousand dollars ($28,800,000).
A 1988-89 study by police and fire departments estimated that a comparable institute elsewhere would
cost one hundred million dollars
($100,000,000). <A]
[A> (4) The Public Safety Institute would constitute both an entry level and advanced educational
training facility for police, sheriffs, firefighters, lifeguards, correctional officers, dispatchers, and
emergency medical technicians. <A]
[A> (c) The establishment of a public safety institute by the City of San Diego, alone or pursuant
to a joint powers agreement with other agencies, on the lands described in this act, does not constitute
a violation of the public tidelands trust applicable to those lands. <A] [D> declares all of the
following: < D]
[D> (1) In 1981, the State Coastal Conservancy authorized implementation of the Tijuana River
Estuarine Sanctuary, including the disbursement of funds under the California Parklands Act of 1980
(Chapter 1.69 (commencing with Section 5096.141) of Division 5 of the Public Resources Code) for
the acquisition of property within the sanctuary boundaries. < D]
[D> (2) In 1985, the State Coastal Conservancy authorized the City of San Diego to acquire
property from Japatul Corporation with funds available from the authorization described in paragraph
(1). The purpose of the acquisition was to implement the Tijuana River Estuarine Sanctuary and to
protect the wildlife habitat and agricultural values of the property. < D]
[D> (3) A small portion of that property, approximately one-half acre needed for a permanent
structure and a 12-acre temporary staging area, is now needed by the City of San Diego for the
construction of the South Bay Ocean Outfall Project. The City of San Diego is constructing the outfall
project in conjunction with the International Boundary and Water Commission and the Environmental
Protection Agency. The outfall project is a part of the international wastewater treatment plant which
,2/)bY
is needed to alleviate sewage contamination impacts to the Tijuana River Valley and estuary and
southern San Diego County beaches. The plant and outfall projects, costing hundreds of millions of
dollars, will generate numerous jobs in the San Diego region. < D]
[D> (41 Under subdivision (al of Section 5096.158 of the Public Resources Code, a change in the
use of property acquired with state grant funds pursuant to the California Parklands Act of 1980
requires approval by specific act of the Legislature. < D]
[D> (5) The use of the property for the construction of the South Bay Ocean Outfall Project may
constitute a change in use from that authorized in the original grant agreement between the City of
San Diego and the State Coastal Conservancy. < D] [D> (b) Pursuant to subdivision (al of Section
5096.158 of the Public Resources Code, the State Coastal Conservancy may authorize for use in the
construction of facilities related to the South Bay Ocean Outfall Project a portion of the real property
within the Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve acquired by the City of San Diego from
the Japatul Corporation in part with funds granted by the State Coastal Conservancy in 1985. If the
conservancy authorizes that use of that property, it shall require the project proponent to do all of the
foliowing: < D]
[D> (1) Revegetate the property used on a temporary basis within one year from the date of the
end of the construction period, to a level that is consistent with the adjacent native habitat so as to
approximate, in the future, the ecological conditions of those adjacent areas. < D]
[D> (2) Restore the area of the property used for permanent construction, including the structures
and surrounding fencing, by planting those areas with native vegetation. < D]
[D> (3) Pay the conservancy the amount of the fair market value of the portion of property that
is used for permanent construction and the amount of the fair market lease rate for the portion of the
property that is used on a temporary basis. < D]
[D> (41 Pay to the conservancy the sum of four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) to be used
for the mitigation of unforeseen impacts of the project on the resources of the Tijuana River National
Estuarine Research Reserve. < D]
[D> Ic) The State Coastal Conservancy shall deposit any funds received pursuant to subdivision
(b) into a special deposit fund account, and those funds are hereby continuously appropriated for
expenditure by the conservancy for conservation purposes within the Tijuana River National Estuarine
Research Reserve, with priority to be given to the acquisition of land in Goat Canyon. < D]
[D> SEC. 2. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the State Coastal Conservancy may,
consistent with Division 21 (commencing with Section 310001 of the Public Resources Code, request
the Department of General Services to retain, reserve, transfer, or convey to a public entity or nonprofit
organization, any portion of, or interest in, the real property known as Cascade Ranch in San Mateo
County, that is owned by the state and is under the control of the conservancy, subject to the
following conditions: < D]
[D> (al The Department of General Services, at the request of the State Coastal Conservancy, shall
retain for the conservancy, reserve for the state, transfer, or convey to a public entity or nonprofit
organization an agricultural easement over any portion of, or interest in, the reai property that the
conservancy determines is appropriate for the protection of agricultural uses. Any such portion of, or
interest in, that property shali be clearly described and the description recorded in the Official Records
of the County of San Mateo. < D]
[D> (b) The Department of General Services, at the request of the State Coastal Conservancy, shall
retain for the conservancy, reserve for the state, transfer, or convey to a public entity or nonprofit
..2~b ..f
organization any portion of, or interest in, the real property that the conservancy, after consultation
with the Department of Fish and Game, determines is appropriate for the protection of endangered
species, consistent with the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1531 et seq.)
or the California Endangered Species Act IChapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 2050) of Article 1
of the Fish and Game Code), or other habitat and recreational purposes. Any such portion of, or
interest in, that property shall be clearly described and the description recorded in the Official Records
of the County of San Mateo. < DJ
[D> Ic) The State Coastal Conservancy shall provide for the periodic monitoring of any easement
that is created for the purposes specified in subdivisions (a) and (bl. < DJ
[D> Id) The Department of General Services, at the request of the State Coastal Conservancy, shall
transfer the remaining interest in the property to private buyers in a manner that is consistent with
continued agricultural use of the property. < DJ
~/)J "t
RESOLUTION NO. I~~.z~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA TAKING A POSITION TO OPPOSE AB
956, WHICH IS NOT ADDRESSED IN THE LEGISLATIVE
PROGRAM AND THEREFORE REQUIRES DIRECT COUNCIL
ACTION
WHEREAS, AB 956 (Alpert) would declare an urgent need for
the on-going use of the tidelands and submerged lands at the Naval
Training Center (Camp Nimitz) for purposes of public safety
training; and
WHEREAS, this would pre-empt any attempts by the San
Diego Unified Port District or other agencies to find alternative
uses for the property being vacated by the Navy, including the
expansion of Lindbergh Field; and
WHEREAS, actions which preclude the expansion of
Lindbergh Field may impact the long-term viability of that facility
and lead to the reconsideration of a regional or bi-national
airport at Otay Mesa.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby oppose AB 956 (Alpert) Tidelands:
San Diego: Public Safety Institution, which is not addressed in the
Legislative Program.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Mayor Shirley Horton
/)
{ff-~lfS.{Yl ~~~A&_/~_ r-
Ann Y. Moore, Act~g ci ~or
Attorney
C:\rs\AB956.opp
;J.~IJ ., ?
/
;/1/,