HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1996/09/10
"I declare Mnder penalty 01 p~r!ur? that I am
employed by the C:'iy ,::.i' c:"!\~ ~1 V:s~;'J ~n ~',;"0
Office of the City C!~r!{ ;;:':1 ' C"':"~ i :"o";.od
this Agenda/NotiGe on the Cui~~:rLn Bc.:ud ::t.
Tuesday, September 10, 1996 the Public Servjces Bui~(;in', <,n.1~L ~':. Hpii on Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. DATED. 9J 5}-q{jJ SIGNED_,~ )A~'" Public Services Building
Re!!Ular Meetin~ of the Citv of Chula Vista Citv Council
CALL TO ORDER
1.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Alevy _, Moot _, Padilla _, Rindone _, and
Mayor Horton _'
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
June 12, 1996 (Special Meeting/Worksession), June 20, 1996 (Special
Meeting/Worksession), July 23, 1996 (Regular Meeting), August 10,
1996 (Special Meeting), and August 13, 1996 (Regular Meeting)
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Oath of Office:
Dr. Barry Russell, Cultural Arts Commission; and
Leo Kelly, Commission on Aging.
b. Mark Watton to present update on water transfer agreement with Imperial Valley.
*****
Effective April 1, 1994, there have been new amendments to the Brown Act. The City Council must now
reconvene into open session to report any final actions taken in closed session and to adjourn the meeting.
Because of the cost involved, there will be no videotaping of the reconvened portion of the meeting. However,
final actions reported will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office.
*****
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 8)
The staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by
the Council by one motion without discussion unless a Councilmember, a member of the public or City staff
requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a
"Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete
the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to
the staff recommendation.) Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Board and
Commission Recommendations and Action Items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter from the Acting City Attorney stating that there were no reportable actions taken in
Closed Session on 8/20/96. It is recommended that the leeter be received and filed.
b. Letter from South Bay Community Services request a waiver of fee for the bus/trolley at the
Nature Center for their 25th Anniversary Celebration to be held on the evening of 9/14/96
at the Nature Center. It is recommended that Chula Vista Transit provide the charter service
at the rate of $31 per hour and that either South Bay Community Services or the City pay the cost
of the service estimated at $155.
Agenda
-2-
September 10, 1996
6. RESOLUTION 18424 APPROVE AND APPROPRIATE A DONATION TO THE LOCAL
lNlTlATIVE SUPPORT CORPORATION'S (LISC) CALIFORNIA
AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRAINING PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF
F1VE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000) FROM THE 1996/97
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATlON - South
Bay Community Services and MAAC Project will both participate in the USC
Training and use LlSC predevelopment funds. The City's financial support will
help to increase nonprofit capacity substantially over the course of the year.
Better trained nonprofits can contribute to the City's efforts to increase the
production of affordable housing in Chula VistA. StAff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Director of Community Development) 4/5th's vote
required.
7. RESOLUTION 18425 APPROPRIATING $31,453 FROM UNANTICIPATED REVENUE TO
THE ENERGY CONSERVATION FUND TELECENTER BUDGET - The
East "H" Street telecenter has been open for two years and the downtown
telecenter has been operating for 19 months. During this time, the telecenters
have been funded solely by grants. The grants have been used as seed monies
to become self sufficient. To date, $31,453 in revenue has not been
appropriated. StAff recommends approval of the resolution. (EnvironmentAl
Resource Manager) 4/5th's vote required.
8. RESOLUTION 18426 APPROVING UNCONTROLLED EMBANKMENT AGREEMENT FOR
FILL AS UNCONTROLLED EMBANKMENT AT SALT CREEK I - FN
Development Company, Alpha, c/o JM Development Company, Inc., owner of
property known as Salt Creek I, has requested that certain grading work,
currently authorized under grading permit number PG-354, be designated as an
uncontrolled embankment. Municipal Code Section 15.04.285 stAtes that
uncontrolled embankment agreements must be approved and recorded as an
obligation of the land involved. StAff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Director of Public Works)
· · · END OF CONSENT CALENDAR · · ·
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to
speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City
Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete
the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff recommentkltion.) Comments are limited to five minutes per
individual.
9.
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 - In 1995, the City Council approved a Resolution
delegating temporary authority to the Chief of Police to make determinations as
to whether certain types of alcoholic beverage licenses should be granted, in
situations where there is already an over concentration of licenses based on
specified criteria. This report provides for the permanent processing of such
applications. Staff recommends the public hearim! be continued indefinitelv.
(Director of Planning) Continued from the meeting of 8/20/96.
Agenda
10.
PUBLIC HEARING
11.
PUBLIC HEARING
-3-
September 10, 1996
CONSIDERING THE OTAY RANCH REORGANlZATION NUMBER 1
CONSISTING OF ANNEXING PORTIONS OF THE OT A Y RANCH TO
THE CITY, DETACHING THE OTAY LANDFILL FROM THE CITY
AND DETACHING TERRITORY FROM THE RURAL FIRE
PROTECTION DISTRICT - In August 1995, Council authorized the filing of
a reorganization application with LAFCO for the Otay Ranch Reorganization
Number 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. The reorganization was filed with LAFCO on 4/8/96. On
7/1196, LAFCO approved the reorganization, designated the City as the
conducting authority and authorized Council to conduct the proceeding to
complete the reorganization process. Staff recommends the DubHc hearin!! be
continued to 9/24/96. (Special Planning Projects Manager, Otay Ranch)
Continued from the meeting of 8/20/96.
CONSIDERING COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NUMBER 72 TO
ALLOW THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A 19,500 SQUARE FOOT
TECHNICAL CAREER TRAINING FACILITY AT 780 BAY
BOULEVARD SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS - Edutek Professional College
proposes to establish a technical school for medical/dental career training at 780
Bay Boulevard. The project site is located within the Chula Vista Coastal Zone
and a Conditional Use Permit is required. The activity is covered by the general
rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a
significant effect on the environment. Based on staffs review of the project, it
can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question
may have a significant effect on the environment. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Director of Community Development)
RESOLUTION 18427 ISSUING COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NUMBER 72 TO
ALLOW THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A 19,500 SQUARE FOOT
TECHNICAL CAREER TRAINING FACILITY AT 780 BAY
BOULEVARD SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS
12.
PUBLIC HEARING
REQUEST TO DEFER UNDERGROUNDING REQUIREMENTS ON
OXFORD STREET, 600 BLOCK, BY PRICE COMPANY - There are plans
to develop the property located behind the Price Club building on Broadway
owned by Price Company. As part of the development, the owner must
underground the overhead utilities adjacent to the property. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) Continued from the
meeting of 8/13/96.
RESOLUTION 18428 APPROVING THE DEFERRAL OF THE UNDERGROUNDING OF
OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES ON NAPLES STREET AND DENYING
THE DEFERRAL REQUEST FORUNDERGROUNDING OF OVERHEAD
UTILITY LINES ON OXFORD STREET
13.
PUBLIC HEARING
ADOPTING OTAY RANCH PRE-ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT WITH BALDWIN BUILDERS - The purpose of this item is
to present a development agreement with Baldwin Builders. On 6/25/96, the
Planning Commission and 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). The remaining party who is a property owner of a portion
of the Otay Ranch property is Baldwin Builders, which is the trustee for the
bankruptcy. Staff recommends the DubHc hearin!! be continued to 9/17/96.
(Deputy City Manager) Continued from the meeting of 8/20/96.
Agenda
-4-
September 10, 1996
14.
PUBLIC HEARING
PCS-96-04; CONSIDERATION OF A REVISED TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR THE OT A Y RANCH SPA ONE, TRACT 96-04,
GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD
BETWEEN PASEO RANCHERO AND THE FUTURE SR-I25
ALIGNMENT AND EXCLUDING 288 ACRES IN ASSESSOR PARCEL
NUMBER 642-060-11 AND A PORTION OF ASSESSOR PARCEL
NUMBER 642-080-11 - Adopt a Second Addendum to and recertify FEIR 95-01
and the First Addendum for Otay Ranch SPA One and Tentative Map for Otay
Ranch, Tract 96-04, in accordance with the fmdings and subject to the condition
contained in !he draft resolution. Staff recommends the DubHe hearill!! be
continued to the meetill!! of 9/17/96. (Otay Ranch Special Planning Projects
Manager) Continued from the meeting of 8/20/96.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject matter within the
Council'sjurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda for public discussion. (State law, however, generally
prohibits the City Council from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to
address the Council on such a subject, please complete the yellow "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications
Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak,
please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up action. Your time is limited to three
minutes per speaker.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
None submitted.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by
the Council, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered individually by the Council
and staffrecommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak, please
fill out a "Request to Speak" form available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
Public comments are limited to five minutes.
15.A. RESOLUTION 18429 APPROVING REQUEST FROM THE BONITA BUSINESS AND
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION TO CONDUCT BONITAFEST - The
Bonita Business and Professional Association is requesting permission to conduct
the 24th Annual Bonitafest and the Bonita Sunrise Rotary is requesting
permission to conduct the Bonitafest Parade on Saturday, 9/28/96. Staff
recommends approval of the resolutions. (Chief of Police, City Attorney and
Risk Manager)
B. RESOLUTION 18430 APPROVING REQUEST FROM THE BONITA SUNRISE ROTARY
CLUB TO CONDUCT THE BONITAFEST PARADE
Agenda
-5-
September 10, 1996
16. RESOLUTION 18431 COMMENTING ON THE ADEQUACY OF THE DRAFT
EIR/STATEMENTFOR THE SR-125 TOLLWAY/FREEWAY PROJECT,
EXPRESSING A PREFERENCE FOR ALIGNMENTS, AND DIRECTING
STAFF TO FORWARD COMMENTS ON THE EIR/STATEMENT - The
South Bay Agencies have been working on the process to establish a route for
SR-I25 since lbe mid 1980's. Allbough the route had been on lbe California
Freeway/Expressway system since 1959, and the route adopted in mid 1960's,
the route adoption was rescinded in 1976. In 1984 SANDAG put this portion
of lbe freeway in the Transportation Plan and in 1987, by a five agency
agreement, the work on lbe EIS and Route adoption studies began. The Draft
Environmental Impact Report/Statement was circulated on 7/19/96. The closing
date for comments on the statement is 9/16/96. Staff recommends approval of
the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
17. REPORT PROGRESS REPORT AND REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION
REGARDING CONTINUED NEGOTIATIONS WITH JOELEN
ENTERPRISES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF PROPOSED GOLF
RESORT HOTEL - On 4/23/96, Council approved an Exclusive Negotiating
Agreement (ENA) with Joelen Enterprises for lbe development of a golf resort
hotel on City-owned property adjacent to the municipal golf course. The ENA
contains project milestones. Staff will present an update on progress to meet
lbese milestones. Staff will also advise Council regarding the developer's
request to provide their prospective lender with evidence of Joelen's conditional
control of the property, based upon the lender's indication that the existing ENA
is insufficient. Staff recommends Council accept the report. (Director of
Community Development)
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent Calentklr.
Agenda items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Councilmembers.
Public comments are limited to five minutes per individual.
OTHER BUSINESS
18. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTlS)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
b. Report on additional Assistant City Manager position. Continued from the meeting of 8/20/96.
c. Report on Chula Vista population change 1/1/96. Continued from the meeting of 8/20/96,
d. CIP Expenditures in Western Chula Vista. Continued from the meeting of 8/20/96,
19. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
a. Ratification of appointments:
Board of Ethics - Juan R. Gonzales;
Board of Appeals and Advisors - M. Kevin O'Neill;
Growth Management Oversight Commission - M. Kevin O'Neill;
Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee (Mfg/Bus) - Charles E. Sutherland; and
Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee (At-Large) - Jose R. Dovia.
Agenda
-6-
September 10, 1996
20. COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) a CIP Tour on Saturday, September 14, 1996 at 9:00
a.m., thence to the regular City Council meeting on September 17, 1996 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers.
*****
CLOSED SESSION
Unless the City Altorney, the City Manager or the City Council states otherwise at this time, the Council will
discuss and deliberate on the following items of business which are permitted by ww to be the subject of a closed
session discussion, and which the Council is advised should be discussed in closed session to best protectthe
interests of the City. The Council is required by ww to return to open session, issue any reports of final action
taken in closed session, and the votes taken. However, due to the typical length of time taken up by closed
sessions, the videotaping will be terminated at this point in order to save costs so that the Council's return from
closed session, reports of final action taken, and adjournment will not be videotaped. Nevertheless, the report
of final action taken will be recorded in the minutes which will be avaiwble in the City Clerk's Office.
21. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING:
1. Existing litigation pursuant to Govermnent Code Section 54956.9
. SNMB, L.P. vs. the City of Chula Vista and MCA.
2. Anticipated litigation pursuant to Govermnent Code Section 54956.9
. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) Section 54956.9: 2.
. Metro sewer issues.
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RELEASE - Pursuant to Govermnent Code Section 54957
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Govermnent Code Section 54957.6
. Agency negotiator: John Goss or designee for CVEA, WCE, POA, IAFF, Executive
Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
Employee organization: Chula Vista Employees Association (CVEA) and Western Council of
Engineers (WCE) , Police Officers Association (POA) and International Association of Fire
Fighters (IAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
22. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
*****
8-22-1996 5003PM
FROM CARPI AND CLAY SO 619 2348763
P.2
SAN
DIE G 0
COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY
Public review
period under way
The Water Authority has
released a summary. of draft terms
for a coopt!rative water conservation
and transfer program with the
Imperial Irrigation District, triggering
a public review period that WIll last
at least 60 days.
If ulUmately approved by nD
and Authority du'Cctors, the water
conservation and transfer program
would be the largest such agreement
In hIStory. (See summary of dr..fl
terms below for details.)
"We are discussing the proposed
",ater con~ervalion and tr.m.5tt:c
agn.."Cmcnt in. an open n1anner. takmg.
Into account the o<:eds of our com-
muruties and Our obhgatJons as water
providers," says Mark Watton, chaIT of
the AUlhority board of directors
"I hope thOlt aU jntere~led parties
will reVIew the draft terms and give
U~ their input"
Followmg the revIew period,
staff for the Authoraty arad no wllJ
~sse~s the comments (hey have
receivcu and draft a recommcnda-
lion for review by their directors and
the publtc this fall.
Both UD and the Authority have
planned extc:noive public outreach
progrnms that include briefmgs for
elected officials and other community
leaders. presentations to community
groups. public meetings and distribu-
40'1 of publications th3, explain ,he
potentiallnm.'iifer agreem~n(
This effort continues an outreach
program thOlt has been active since
last fall.
C<>mmunity organizations also
may receive pre:tenIalions On the
Draft terms for water transfers
between Water Authority and 110
. Quantity of water: 20,000 acre-feet i'l1999. i'lcreasing to
200,000 acre-feet by 2008 and possibly more aftelWard.
. Price: $200 per acre-foot in 1999. increasing by $11 to $12 annually
and reaching $306 per acre-foot in 2008. Price does not,nclude cost
of delivering water from Colorado River to San Diego County. Price
adjustment after 10 years; subsequent adjustments every 10 years
derived from recent water transfers and other mamet ac(ivity data.
. Contract length: 125 years. ij Authority builds facility to transport
transfer water. If '101. liD would have opllon after 75 years to reduce
deliveries by up to 2 percenf each year to m81lt increased municipal
and industrial demand.
draft terms. Call (619) 682-4130 for
more inionn~tion,
Neither liD nor the Authonty is
bound by the summary of draft
terms, but the summary does con.
flfrn their rnutua( und~rstanding and
des"'~ 10 enter into a more formal
and binding agreement within 90
days, Watton said.
Additional copies of this
newsletter containing the summary
of draft terms are available at the
'b~ /
Authority's two otfices. 32J 1 Fifth
Ave in San Diegu and 6JO West
fifth Ave, jn I;sc<:>ndiuo, 3( other
local water providers and at public
IIbraty branches.
Summary
of draft terms
The summary. of draft terms for a
water conservatlOn and transfer
agreement released July 23 by the
Water Authority include,
. The quantity uf water to be:
transferred by the Impelial
Irrigation Distnct (liD) to the
Authority and the delivety
ochedule.
. The price and provisions to
set a new market-based pnce
on~ every 10 yeacs_
. The length of a prospective
contract.
Th... sumffiilry a150 lists contin-
gencies that would invalidate the
contract, assigns responsibilities
for environm(!nlal reviews and
coratains provisions for dealing
Cont1nued on next page
8-22-1996 5,04PM
FROM CARP! AND CLAY SO 619 2348763
C01l1lmwd from firsr paS"
with water shortages
-This potential water conservation
and triln~ft:r ~gC(."(;;mcnt with no rcp-
r,,>ents an opportunity for San DIego
County to secure a reliable, long-term
water supply to augment the water
we already receive from the
Metropolitan Water DJsttlct," says
Mark Watton, chair of Ihe Authority
board of d,reclor.;
The summary of draft terms notes
thai waler transfers from liD 10 Ihe
""Ulhoriry may grow in subsequent
years based on Ihe AUlhority's needs
and liD's ability to provide the con-
$~rvt:d water.
The water transferred by liD
would result from volunlary, cxttaoJ-
dinary conservation measures taken
by Imperial Valley farnlers and system
improvements by Ihe distnct, The
summary of dralt lerms states thaI no
Imperial Valley farmland will be laken
out of production permanently to fur-
nish waler for sale to San DIego,
Each agency would be responsi-
ble for meeting applicable "nviron,
mc:nlallaws. For example, the
Authority would conduct the required
environmental rcvk"W for trnn~porting
transfer water to San Diego County,
no would be responsIble for environ-
mental review associated with the
conservation effolts that producc
water fo sell to San Diego.
Should normal Colorado River
dehveries be reduced by the federal
government, the Authority and liD
would share the reductions equally,
followmg IS the summary of draft
l~rms released by the Authority board
of directors for public rev,ew and
comment
San Diego County
Water Authority
and Imperial Irrigation
District
Cooperative Water Conservation
~lnd Transfer Program
Swnmary of
Draft Tenns ~ Overview
On September )9, 1995, the
Authority and the DlStflCt entered into
a Memorandum of UndelSranding to
explore the polemial for a joint Water
Conservation and Transfer Program
("Program"), Since that time, the
AgencIes have prepared techniC'.I1
an~lY$es and conducted extcnsive pub~
lic involvement programs, Based upon
that information and ,n response to
policy direction from their respective
Boards of Directors, the staffs of the
Agencies have developed a draft of
possible tenns under which ~ Program
could be impkmcnrcd,
The purpose of this document IS
to :)urnm~rjze the dt'Jft as Co price,
term, and quantity, as well a5 cen,;1in
of the other relevant term." and make
Ihe summary avarlable for broad pub-
he review and comment. Based upon
the input that is receIved Ihrough thaI
dIalog, the terms would be revised
and the resultant concepts would be
incorporated into the form of Final
Agreement for the Agencies' consider-
ation The essential terms for such a
program, as developed by Ihe staffs of
the Agencies, are as follows:
Quantity and Schedule
of Transferred Water
To meet future demands, the
3 conditions for Authority-liD
water transfer contract
. Water delivery: Authority must be able to transport the water from
Colorado River to San Diego County,
. EnVIronmental review: 110 must be able to comply with state and federal
environmental rules.
. Court validation: Sloth agencies released trom obligations ~ courts rule
water transfer agreement does not comply w~h federal and state law.
'/17---2.
P,3
Authority seeks a firm, affordable, ano
price certain wat"r supply of 500,000
acre-f~~t per year Depending upon
faclors such a,s landowner participa-
tion, envil'onmental compliance, com-
munity suppol1, and availability of
approvals agreed to be obtained, it is
expected that between 200,000 a"c-
feet per year and 500,000 acre-feet per
year of filTll water supply will be avail-
able 10 the Authority, the actual maxi-
mum quantity to be in(:orpord.ted into
the final Agreement, The Agencies
agree Ihat the '\Vater conservation pro-
grams of the District shall not include
permanenl retirement of farm land
Subject to the availability of tran.porta
tion on tenns satisfa~~ory 10 the
Authollty for the 'watcr supplied by Ih.
District, the District will offer to the
Authority and the Authonty will pur-
ch.se aU w.ter mad~ available by the
District, not to exceed 500,000 acre-fc."
per year, as provided below
The warer available shall be deliv-
ered by the Unit~d States to the
Authority al an acceptable delivery
point commencing in 1999 at a quanti-
ty of 20,000 acre-feet per year, or a
greater amount mutually agreed upon,
increasmg each ye.r by 20,000 acrc-
feet per year for 10 years, to a toral of
200,000 acre-feet per year and there-
after, sub1"cllo the needs and water
quality objectives of the Authority,
increasing each year by an estimated
increment of 8,000 acrcTfeet per year (~
the total to be "",de available by the
District, Thereafter, dehvery of such
total will continue each year unle.. rhe
delivery is reduced or discontinued
pursuant to the recapture and other ter,
r.ninauon pl"QvUion$ dc,<;:nbed helein.
The District will accelerate delivery at
the request of the Authority, The partie,
recogruze that th~ Authority, in order ""
secure transportation to deliv"," the .up'
pltes to Sin Diego and to attain such
water quality objective., may have 10
buy .evem hundred thousand acre-feel
from oth~rs, at least for a time,
The righr and ownership 10 all
water will remain with the Dis(tj(~(.
subject to the right of the authority 10
have delivery and use the wate;r a~
8-22-1996 5,05PM
FROM CARPI AND CLAY SD 619 2348763
agreed. All water delivered to and
used by the Authority shaJl be a part
of the District's Present Perfected
RIghts [0 Color.do River water The
District expects to create conoerved
water as defined in California Water
code Section lOll in quanuues equal
to the deliveries to the Authority and,
not inconsistent wHh such presem per-
fected righls, aJl such conserved water
is intended to be included in such
delivery .
Delivery Location;
Transportation
All waler will be delivered by the
United States to the Authority on the
Colorado River at Imperial Dam or
other location. and il will be thc
responsibility of the Authority to
arrange for tran..ltil)()rtation of such water
ftom there 10 the service area of the
Authonty. Should the Authority desire
to use the An American Canal to con.
nect to any aqueduct to San Diego. the
District would make capacity available
or palticipale in capacity enlargement
undcr an arrangement that takes into
account the arrangement that currently
exislS with the City of San Diego.
Price
~fhe Authority shall pay the DiMria:
the following sums:
Year" Year $ Per AI'
1 1999 $ZOO
2 ZOOO $212
3 ZOOt $224
4 2002 $Z35
5 2003 $247
6 ZOO4 $Z59
7 2005 $271
8 2006 $282
9 2007 $294
10 ZOO8 $306
If at :any time during the :above 10
years the Authority's Colorado River
Aqueduct transportation costs exceed
$75 per acre foot, the above prices for
such time shaJl be adjusted according
to a method to be negotiated.
Afler the first 10 years. the prices
selected in accordance wJlh the Ten-
Year Price Adlustment section below
shall be paid.
The above prices are subject to
the negohahon of a Ten-Year Price
Adjust-men! dause that is satisfactory
to both partics.
Ten-Year Price Adjustment
EIther party may. before the end of
each 10-year period. suggest a new
price. If the other party does not accept
the suggested price, and if the parties,
through good- faith negotiations, do
not sele-ct a ne-w price, the new price
shall be selected by arbltrallon ("Market
Price") The Market Prjce. whether
seleCled by agreement or arbitration,
shall be market-based. but, to lessen
the tmpact on the agendes from radical
swings in market conditions. shall not
vary from the Market Price selected 10
yc:ars previously. or from $306 in the
case of the first 10-year adjustment, by
more than 25% thereof. For example. at
the first 10-year adjustment. the limit on
the selected Market Price shall be
ba>ed on $306, and shall be no greater
than $383 and no less than $ZZ9. and.
as a further example, if the Market
Price selected at the fil':i! to-year adjust-
ment is $360, then the Market Pnc<;
selected at the next 10-year adjustment
shall be no greater than $450 and no
less than $270. Again. to lessen the
impact of such swings in rn.rk.et coodj..
tions, the new selected poce shall be
phased in gradually over the first five
years of the relevant 10-year period. In
case of upward price adjustments only.
each of the first flYe-year, phase-in pay-
ments shall be increased by Z% and the
Market Price shall be increased as fol-
lows, by 20/0 for year 6. 4% for year 7.
6% for year 8. 8% for year 9, and 10%
for year 10 ("Percentage Increase").
When the sc1eclcd new price reprc:.
sents a downward price adjusunem, the
Market Prtce shall be so paid over the
IO-year period without any percentage
adjustments. Also, dunng the years 6
through 10. the Authority in the case of
an upward pnce adjustment and the
D,stnct tn the cose of a downward
price adjustment. shall payor credit the
other agency the difference between
the selected new pnce and such five-
year phased-in payments.
Before the end of each W-year
o/b -,3
P.4
period (except for the Initial period).
either party may also request that a
market-based price be de[errruned for
each year of the expiring Io-year peri-
od ("Determined Price"). For each such
year, [he Determined Pri~ shall nol
vary by more than 10% from [he
Market Price selected 10 years previ-
ously. For example. if the Market Price
applicable during such expiring H)-year
period should be $360. then the
Determined Price for each such year
shall be no greater than $396 and no
less than $324, Then for each such
year. the water delivery .han be
repriced according 10 the Detennined
Price. The difference for each year
between the repriced amount and the
amount actually paid for such deliver-
Ies including any Percentage Increase
shall be paid or credited over the next
H).year period according to a method
to be negotiated.
Subject to such variation limits, the
Market Price and the Detemuned Pnce
shall be that price indicated by comp~ri-
son to then recent water ttansfcrs and
other market activity data, after adjust-
ment for all relevant factors. Includlrtg
but not limited [0 the value of reliabili-
ty, priority, volume. duration. base load
or peaking character. price and terms.
and water quality, excluding transporta-
tion and laking into account the cost of
delivering waler to the Authority, The
initial price, having been formulated
during an emerging market. shall not be
n;garded as a market price indication.
Term of Agreement
and Recapture/termination
Procedun:s
The initiallcrm shan be 75 years
from the commencement of deliveries
WIth each agency. subject to the terms
of the next paragraph. having the
optIon alter such initial term to reduce
the total quantity by no more than two
percent each year. Warer so recaptured
by the District shall be used solely for
new municipal and mdustrial uses and
shall be so used only after similar use is
flrs[ made of all w-.t"r herealter trans-
ferred by the District to others.
COlJllnu(."4 Qn nr:.xl page
8-22-1996 5,05PM
FROM CARPI AND CLAY SD 619 2348763
ConUtluod from pn:1JIQUS paRe
Notwltlutandlng the foregoing, the
Agreement will terminate at the end of
lh~ 12Sth year
If the Authority deci<ks [0 con-
struct a new convey-ance facility for
transponauon of the water made avail-
ahle by the District, th~ term of the
Agreement shall be 125 years from
such ~ommCJ"1cement of delivcrit:s and
.hallterminate at the cnd of the 125th
year with no right of recapture during
[he term
Responsibilities for
Environmental ComplianCe
Each agency shall be solely
responsible for comphance with cnvj-
.ronmentallaws for programs under
the leaderohip of that agency. For
example, the District will have lead
responsibility fOf environmental com-
pliance: assoCIated with any Final
Agreement and the water conserva-
tion programs and the Authority wIll
have lead responsibility for subse-
quent e-nvironmental compliance
aS50ciated with tr.m~port3tJon of
watcr.
Each agen~y shall be solely
responsIble for the cost of envU"on.
mental cornphance undcnaken by It.
Contingencies Which Could
J>re\rcnt Implementation of
PrograIIl
Drstrict Enlllml'l1ne'Jla/
CO'll"'l/ency The obUgations ot the
District to pesform under the Pto8,:om
sh~ll be voidable if environmental
compliance cannOl be accomplished,
such decision to be in the sole discre-
tion of the Distoct.
Authority Tm:tlSf.>OrUllIOrl
CQntiTlI/<'TIcy. The obligations of the
Authority to perform under thIS
Program shall be vOIdable tf the
AuthOrity is unable 10 arrange for trans-
portation of the waler from Ole
Colorado River to the Authority's .ys-
t"m for Ole term of the Agreement
through the COlorado River Aqueduct
on terms satisfactory to the Authority
or by other means satisfactory to the
Authority.
Court ValJdallOn oJ Final
A,gn~ent.: The obligJ.tJon of the
Agencies to pesform under this pro-
gram shall be voidable if validation or
declamatory judgment as to the Pinal
Agreement is nOl obtamed; provided
however, that the Agencies have the
option to agree to waive portions or all
of such validation requirements
Judgments shall be obtail1"d without
expense to the Authority
Interim Assig,wnent
of AuthOrity's Rights
The Authority shall have Ole right
to assign to tiny olher Metropohtan
Member Agency. on an inlt;rim basts,
any of the Authoflty'S ogllt,' and
rcspons,b,lmes under the Program.
Shortage Sharing
During any peoed when deliveries
of Color4do River water to the Dislrict
P.5
for reasonable beneficial u'"" or debv-
eries of Colorado River water to the
Authority for ~asonable beneficial use
are eurtailed by the Secretary of the
Interior, pursuant to Article II(BX3) of
the deere<: in Arizona v Califomia, the
Authority and the District will share the
same percentage reduction in water
availability, but, followmg court valsda-
tion of the 1"11131 Agreement, lhe District
mil be responsible for all claims by
any junior priorities in Califomia or
elsewhere that such deUveoes should
not be made
Confirmation of
Mutual Understanding
AJthough neither the Distnct nor
the Authority is bound' by this
Summary of Draft Tenns, nevertheless,
this Summary confirms the" mutual
understanding and desire to enter
within 90 days from the resp.::ctive
Board's approval hereof into a more
detailed formal and binding agreement
(the Final Agreemem) that is generally
consistent with the provisio..' hereof
as those provisions may be modified
through public review and input
The Wlter Trantt., Update pre..""
neWS .bout the proposed water lran8.
fer agr..ment beMlten the S.n Diego
County Water Au"',",Ilty and the
Imperlallrr'gatlon District. The
Authority will publl&h the newsletter
periodie.lty. If you ....ve question. or
would like tQ be added to the mailing
U." pl.... ..II 619-682-4100.
.@.s..Oi...C...'Yw....,Au"'....1y
3211 Fifth Av..
Son Ol.go, CA 92103
'II; , i
Bulk Rate
U.S. Postage
. PAID
Permit No. 2686
San Diego, CA
September 5, 1996
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
John D. Goss, City ManagerG~
City Council Meeting of September 10, 1996
TO:
FROM:
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council meeting of
Tuesday, September 10, 1996. Comments regarding the Written Communications are as
follows:
5a. This is a letter from the Acting City Attorney reporting that the City Council met in
Closed Session on August 20, 1996 to discuss Christopher v. City of Chula Vista, Public
Employee Release, Metro sewer and labor negotiations. There were no observed
reportable actions taken at this meeting.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS LEITER BE RECEIVED AND FILED.
5b. This is a letter from Stymie Ohlson of South Bay Community Services requesting the
waiver of fees for a Chula Vista Transit charter on September 14, 1996. State law
requires public transit systems funded with Transportation Development Act (fDA) funds
to establish rates for charter services. Rates for service provided to private entities must
be comparable to private charter operators, although lower rates may be set for service
provided to public or non-profit entities. Council has approved a Chula Vista Transit
(CVT) private charter rate of $75 per hour, and public/non-profit charter rate of $31 per
hour. The CVT service requested by South Bay Community Services will cost about
$155 ($31 hour x 5 hours). STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT CVT PROVIDE THE
CHARTER SERVICE AT THE RATE OF $31 PER HOUR AND THAT EITHER
SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES OR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PAY
THE COST OF THE SERVICE ESTIMATED AT $155.
JDG:mab
~~f?-
:---....:-:
~~~~
~~~~
CllY OF
CHUlA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY A TIORNEY
Date:
September 5, 1996
From:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Ann Y. Moore, Acting City Attorney Y ~,
Report Regarding Actions Taken in Closed Session
for the Meeting of 8/20/96
To:
Re:
The City council met in Closed session to discuss Christopher v.
City of Chula Vista, Public Employee Release, Metro sewer and labor
negotiations.
The Redevelopment Agency met
Redevelopment Agency v. One Park
on same on August 20, 1996.
in Closed Session to discuss
Limited, et al and reported action
The Acting city Attorney hereby reports to the best of her
knowledge from observance of actions taken in the Closed Session of
August 20, 1996, there were no actions that are required to be
reported under the Brown Act.
AYM: 19k
C:\lt\clossess.no
~-/
276 FOURTH AVENUE' CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 691-5037 . FAX (619) 585-5612
"7:',PosI~~P~
315 4th Avenue. Suite E . Chula Vista. CA 91910 . (619) 420-3620 I FAX.($1(Jj~~O~87?2
August 26, 1996
AUG 2 6 10:'S
L__.
Chu1a Vista City Council
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
..-..---....
Dear Armando,
I appreciate your support of South Bay Community Services. This
letter is to confirm our conversation whereby the City of Chula
Vista was requested to waive the fee for the bus/trolley that will
be used at the Chu1a Vista Nature Center at our event.
The event will be South Bay Community Services' 25th Anniversary
Celebration. It will be held on the evening of September 14, 1996
at the Chula Vista Nature Center. We will be honoring Supervisor
Greg Cox.
The proceeds from this event will benefit the programs of our
agency including: literacy and tutoring, runaway and homeless youth
services, short-term housing for families and domestic violence
services. America West's name will appear in the event program and
annual report.
Your donation will help make our milestone a success and assist in
maintaining our distinctive quality of services for children, youth
and families. Should any questions arise, I can be reached at 420-
3620. Thank you so much for your generosity.
Sincerely, ~
\.;1&/ }JCtk G"li(X )L~
Stymie Ohlson
Director of Special Projects
c.c: O+y C0cxl~
I! ~ =-
~ ~ f'I\
0
~ fI: rr1
;;:
.~ -v I'f1
-n<: ~ 0
-,1-
_'" J:,;.
('"').-'\
rn~ ""
~,,-'"
!tee
aI s.no;,g,Carty
v:t~"~~~ )(~~\~i~\';\;l"' ";,;,>.;,,,
~~J 5b-/
'c.." "",. n::n ~
,<.' ~ 1>_ ,.:~ 1~ '..
k-, COU:!~D! ~~~~..a
p' - -~ _'"Mf,__"
d?'7?
315 4th Avenue, Suite E . Chula Vista. CA 91910 . (619) 420-3620 I FAX (619) 420-8722
August 5, 1996
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Kathryn Lembo
Stymie Ohlson
420-3620
SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES CELEBRATES SILVER ANNIVERSARY
Founded in 1971, South Bay Community Services (SBCS) began as a
small agency named "Our House". It was operated by volunteers.
Posing as a drop-in center for local Chula Vista teens; it was open
from 3 to 11PM and gave young people a place to go other than
Memorial Park where drugs were prevalent and activities were
illicit.
The agency embarked on a decade of steady growth and even though
several years were a bit turbulent; dedication and concern for the
issues confronting the community prevailed through many programs.
Today, SBCS has 85 employees and a budget of more than 4 million.
It's success is due to community support. City officials, local
schools, involved citizens and local police have all advocated for
the agency and helped make it a strong active part of South Bay.
The mission of SBCS is to provide services to children, youth and
families with services and programs which reinforce the family's
role in our community and which assist individuals to aspire
realistically to lives of self-fulfillment. Some of the programs
of South Bay Community Services include: community development,
KIDZBIZ, short-term housing for homeless families, confidential
housing for victims of domestic violence and their children,
literacy and tutoring and runaway and homeless youth services.
On the evening of September 14, 1996, SBCS will host a 25th
Anniversary Celebration, honoring Supervisor Greg Cox. It will be
a unique evening of exotic music and tastes, with a exciting silent
auction/raffle. The locale of the event will be Chula Vista Nature
Center. The popular B-Side Players will provide entertainment. This
event is made possible through the generosity of several sponsors:
Home Savings, Laidlaw Waste Management, McMillin Companies,
Oppenheimer Funds, Gattis & Kuncz and Doug Lewis. Tickets are
~n",",,'25. 00.
.
. 'v:,.. ~
caUNTY a, aAN al.aa
--..-....--
-......-.
LJnltadw.y
" SanI>el>OCo.ny
-
.5b~.l.
315 4th Avenue. Suite E . Chula Vista. CA 91910 . (619) 420-3620 I FAX (619) 420-8722
25th ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION
WHO:
South Bay Community Services
WHAT:
A celebration of 25 years of service to the community,
honoring Supervisor Greg Cox.
WHEN:
Saturday, September 14, 1996
7:00 PM to 11:00 PM
WHERE:
Chula Vista Nature Center
From 1-5 exit E St. West
to Parking Lot, across ITom
Anthony's Fish Grotto
Park & wait for trolley
COST:
$25.00
An event sure to please the adventurer. Come sample the sounds and
tastes of the Tropics.
&QxnIc1i1.....bv
For more info: call Stymie Ohlson at 420-3620
.
. 'fl::U ~
COUNTY 0' .AN 01..0
-.,--
-'".....-.
united".,..,
d San C\eooCany
Sb~
COUNCil AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
1~'.2.'
Resolution to Approve and Appropriate a Donation to the
local Initiative Support Corporation's (LlSC) California Affordable
Housing Training Program in the amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000)
from the 1996-97 Community Development Block Grant Allocation.
Community Development Director C /
City Manager Gf:r&
k,J
Item I,
Meeting Date 09-10-96
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
(4/5ths Vote: Yes.1L No_
BACKGROUND: The local Initiative Support Corporation's (LlSC) California Affordable
Housing Training Program is an intensive nine month course which trains nonprofit community
organizations in technical skills to develop housing for low income households in their
communities. LlSC has made a request that the City of Chula Vista grant $10,000 in support of
this program. (See attached request - Exhibit 1)
LlSC has three independent programs in California serving San Diego, Los Angeles, and the Bay
Area. To meet the demand from nonprofit community development corporations for technical
training in housing development, the three LlSC programs have collaborated jointly to sponsor the
LlSC California Affordable Housing Training Program. LlSC believes that combining the three
separate training programs into one statewide program facilitates increased communication and
peer support among nonprofits and strengthens the capacity of nonprofit developers statewide.
The program consist of 28 days of training: three, five day training sessions, and one four day
training session. Participants are away from home and the office for the duration of the five day
sessions; this is an intensive program requiring participants to concentrate on learning and not be
available to address day to day business. There will also be two intersessions, two calculator
clinics, and a computer training session held in San Diego, and two local workshops for the
participant organization's Board of Directors and Executive Director. Thirty-five (35) applicants
were accepted to participate in the training, including nine from San Diego County. The remaining
participants were selected by Los Angeles, the Bay Area, and Rural LlSC programs. Each LlSC
local program must raise local funds to send participants to the statewide training program.
RECOMMENDATION: To approve and appropriate a five thousand dollar ($5,000) donation to the
local Initiative Support Corporation's (LlSC) California Affordable Housing Training Program
from the 1996-1997 Community Development Block Grant Allocation.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
DISCUSSION: Thirty-five applicants were selected statewide to participate in the training,
including nine from San Diego County. Selection of the nine was done through an RFP process.
The reviewing committee was made up of various contributors of nonprofit organizations.
~-/
Page 2, Item "
Meeting Date 09-10-96
Two of the nine Training Program participants, South Bay Community Services and MAAC Project,
work in Chula Vista. LlSC training and predevelopment funds directly benefit the City of Chula
Vista. The City of Chula Vista's financial support will help to increase nonprofit capacity
substantially over the course of the year. Better trained non profits can contribute to the City's
efforts to increase the production of affordable housing for needy families in Chula Vista. (See
attached letters of support from South Bay Community Services and MAAC - Exhibits 2 and 3)
The cost per participant for this training is approximately $17,000: $7,000 for professional
trainers, materials, room and board, and $10,000 in predevelopment assistance. (See cost
breakdown and summary of training modules attached - Exhibits 4 and 5) Ten thousand dollars
($10,000) of predevelopment funding is available to each participating nonprofit organization to
be used in its development projects. Predevelopment funding is in the form of short-term
recoverable grants and low interest loans for initial technical assistance to enable the organization
to identify a site, package the financing for the development, purchase options, and pay for
environmental studies, architectural and legal fees.
In addition to the primary four weeks training experience, LlSC will be training executive directors
and board members of the participating organizations. The City of Chula Vista's donation will help
pay a portion of the costs for the professional trainers, materials and training facility costs.
Although staff fully supports this program, staff recommends donating only $5,000, instead of
the requested $10,000, because of the limited funds available. This donation would be drawn
from the administrative category of the CDBG allocation. Staff recommends taking a conservative
approach to committing monies at this time given the numerous expected demands for these funds
throughout the fiscal year.
This request did not specifically appeal for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds,
however, staff feels the administrative category from the CDBG source is the most appropriate.
Other sources available are the Redevelopment Set Aside funds, HOME, and the City's general
fund. The CDBG administrative category is the most restrictive of these options. Staff's
preference is to use the most restrictive source the request fits into in order to keep the less
restrictive funds available for other needs. This request was not considered during the CDBG
appropriation process last spring, because the request was not made at that time. There were no
similar requests submitted among the 1996-1997 CDBG applications.
FISCAL IMPACT: 1996-97 Community Development Block Grant Funds are available through the
administrative category. Five Thousand dollars toward this LlSC California Affordable Housing
Training Program would be invested wisely since the Chula Vista recipients of the training, South
Bay Community Services and MAAC are both producers of affordable housing in Chula Vista. This
request fits the guidelines for the use of these funds.
(ssl M:\HOME\COMMDEV\STAFF.REP\09-10-96\liscdonation [September 5,1996 (8:40am)]
d,-.,2.
RESOLUTION NO.
18'Y.2Y
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA TO APPROVE AND APPROPRIATE A DONATION TO THE
LOCAL INITIATIVE SUPPORT CORPORATION'S (LlSC) CALIFORNIA
AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRAINING PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF
FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000) FROM THE 1996-97
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATION.
WHEREAS, the Local Initiative Support Corporation's (LlSC) California Affordable
Housing Training Program ("Program") is an intensive nine month course which trains nonprofit
community organizations, including South Bay Community Services and MAAC, in technical skills
to develop housing for low-income households in Chula Vista and other communities; and
WHEREAS, the City is desirous of having South Bay Community Services and
MAAC develop affordable housing for the benefit of low-income families in Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending that a donation to this Program be provided to
the LlSC; and
WHEREAS, the City participates in the Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Program, a principal goal of which is to fund projects and services which will benefit low-
income Chula Vista households; and
WHEREAS, a donation to this Program would be drawn from the Administration
category of the CDBG allocation and this request fits the guidelines for the use of these funds.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby find, order, determine and resolve as follows:
The City Council does hereby approve and appropriate a donation to the Local
Initiative Support Corporation's (LlSC) California Affordable Housing Training Program in the
amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) from the 1996-97 Community Development Block
Grant Allocation to be drawn from the CDBG Administration account 652-6521-BG21 8.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall take and be in full force and
effect immediately upon the passage and adoption thereof.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Ov-- ~ .
Chris Salomone
Director of Community Development
Ann Moore
Acting City Attorney
N:\sl,.red\clerk\!isc.res (September 4, 1996 (1 :28pm)
t-J
EXHIBIT 1
LOCAL INITIATIVES SUPPORT CORPORATION
450 B STREET, SUITE 1010
SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
(619) 239-6691
FAX (619) 239-3207
'f....",
, 'D:.tf
May 10, 1996
Mr. Juan Arroyo
Community Development Dept.
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Juan:
I am pleased to submit a request that the City of Chula Vista grant $10,000 to LISC to
support 9 nonprofits participating in LISC's California Affordable Housing Training
Program, for nonprofit, community based organizations in San Diego County. The
training program consist of four sessions, 4-5 days each, over the course of one year. An
addition six local one day trainings will be held. These trainings will include local
planning issues, calculator clinics, and a computer training sessions. LISC's training
method focuses on applied learning: each organization must identifY a site and work on a
particular development project during the training program. We have contracted with
Sue Reynolds of the California Housing Partnership and Carlos Carrero of Carrero
Consulting Services to lead the training sessions.
The combining of the LISC training programs into one statewide training program has
increased communication and peer support among the nonprofits and to strengthen the
capacity of nonprofit developers statewide. Thirty-five applicants were selected
statewide to participate in the training, including nine from San Diego County. Selection
of the nine was done through an RFP process. Tbe reviewing committee was made up of
various funders of nonprofit organizations.
Two of the nine Training Program participants, South Bay Community Services and
MAAC Project, work in Chula Vista. LISC training and predevelopment funds directly
benefit the City ofChula Vista. The City ofChula Vista's financial support will help to
increase nonprofit capacity substantially over the course of the year. Better trained
nonprofits can contribute to the City's effort to increase the production of affordable
housing for needy families in Chula Vista.
The cost per participant for this training is approximately $17,000: $7,000 for
professional trainers, materials, room and board, and $ I 0,000 in predevelopment
assistance. In addition to the primary four weeks training experience, LISC will be
t-'f
executive directors and board members of the participating organizations. The City of
Chula Vista funds will help pay a portion of the costs for the professional trainers,
materials and training facility costs.
I have included a brief outline of the overall program and the program and the program
budget. Since our ability to plan the next session and to subcontract with our trainer
depends on clarifying our source of funds, I would very much appreciate you letting me
know when the City of Chula Vista may be able to consider this request. if you have any
questions, please contact me at 239-6691.
Thank you for your continuing support.
cOl\~
nne B. son
Program Director
Attachments:
- 1996 Training Program Overview
- Budget
- Principal Training Staff
- San Diego Participants
&.-s
09/04/1995 14:59
5194208722
SBCS
PAGE 02
EXHIBIT 2
315 4th Avenue, Suite E . Chula Vista. CA 91910 . (619) 420-3620 I FAX (619) 420-8722
September 4, 1996
The Honorable Shirley Horton
Members of City Council
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
"
.' .
Dear Mayor Horton ."t1d;QJ~ Co~iwij';
'"/.'
, ;
,
I am writing to request that the City of Chula Vista fund the LlSC California Affordable
Housing Development Training Program in the amount of $10,000,
South Bay Community Services (secs) has one staff person, Chris Moxon,
participating in the program. The training, which has been running from the beginning
of 1996 and will end in Deqlmber 1 ~96. is proving to be extremely valuable. It is
improving the indiviqoaf:$!a,ff:pl;Jrsorl'S knoY<ll\\,dge. of. affc;>njljble housing development,
and increasing SBCSi cap'adty 'fo . carry ouf li'uccessfulcomm!inlty' development
projects.
This contribution to the LlSC training program is a small investment in improving the
capacity of organizations in the City of Chula Vista to attract millions of dollars into the
area for affordable housing projects,
''', ,
\~gain, I urge you to:~I.IPP()rfLlSCjntt1!s importan.tactivity;"
, ,incerel , '.,
athryn Lembo
xecutive Director
./
cc: Juan Arroyo, CPrT1rnuni"Y. Deveiopm,eflIDeparlfi'\ei)t ." ,
~~...'"
.
"'"'""....
01 sonaogoearo
. n:,n ~
COUNty a. ... DI.'.
-----
_"IIf'II"_'
t-?
-. 8-30-1995 ~,01PM
FROM CUATRO/MAAC/TRI-EN 519 I
EXHIBIT 3
August 30, 1996
~
..,....J
MAA~..Jp"BOJECT
A MULTI-P:~l,:fL,,~,:JICE AGENCY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
1770 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101
Mayor Shirley Horton
and Members of the Chula Vista City Council
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor Horton and Members of the City Council:
[write in strong SUpport of a funding request by the Local Initiatives Support Corporation for
their Statewide Training Program in Affordable Housing Development. This year, MAAC is
one of two South Bay organizations receiving scholarships to attend this intensive year-lOng
training program.
A contribution to this excellent program is an important tangible method of supporting
nonprofit housing developers and their work to create housing alternatives for low and
moderate income families. This training results in additional qualified staff to help
nonprofits maximize their unit production, and provide quality long-term management
services on their existing projects_
As an Advisory Board member for South Bay Community Services, I can speak for the
excellent projects that they have and continue to develop in the City of Chula Vista.
Although MAAC has not yet successfully completed a project in Chula Vista, we continually
research potential sites and opportunities in order to add Housing to the many social services
and assistance that we prOvide to Chula Vista residents. In total, three staff members of these
organizations have already benefitted from the LISC training program, and two additional
staff are being trained currently.
It means a great deal for Chula Vista organizations and ongoing success of their affordable
housing projects to benefit from this training. Thank you for your consideration of this
request.
Sincerely, (Z ~ 8)
Roger Cazares f
President/CEO
MAAC Project
Richard Juarez
(619) 595-7070
C1U.rlC5 W, fl..ck.
(619) 595-7071
SyJvia Mtttint:~
(619) 595-7072
k-mrifcrSomers
FAX
(6]9) 595-7077
ilNaR
.. . . ....... '." '.. .-- ....."......... . ..",. """',"""""./......,,..,,..
,....- "'" , "'1'''''8d'!lI\1i'm~D~, ""~"'"''
$.IlI'l,'!?J~1:O!%~~\ ~r;""',,, ,'''''',,'', '. ",',;",'"",- ""',",
(619) 595-7074
rrnnp~~n
SAN DIEGO ~
COUNTY CAP ~
t,-?
/
'f
EXHIBIT 4
1996 CALIFORNIA AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRAINING PROGRAM
DEVELOPMENT TRAINING PROGRAM
BUDGET
San Diego Total Cost
Room, Board, Conference Facility
Training Staff and Curriculum Design
Administration
Materials
Graduation Ceremonies
21,207
30,215
3,720
6,500
1,500
79,871
116,210
14,308
25,000
4,500
Total Training Program Expense
$63,142 $239,889
Total $10,000 predevelopment funds
for projects in development by
training participants
90,000
Total Predevelopment Funds
$90,000
TOTAL TRAINING PROGRAM AND
PREDEVELOPMENT EXPENSES
153,142
Total Cost per participant
Cost per participant
(minus predevelopment expenses)
17,016
7,016
~-y
~UFORNIA HOUSING OEVElOPMENT '996
; SUMMARY TRAINING MODUlES
,
Draft 2 1/18/96
EXHIBIT 5
PROJECT SKILlS COM\tUNITY
DEVElOPMENT
Management, Residents COMMUNICATION
Session Ananclal Slta and Coordination SKIllS
PresesSlon
Intro to Calculators
SessIon 1 Rental Economics Physical Due Diligences Development Team
Protormas Site: Pricing, Purchase, Dev. Team Selection Case ProJ Sel & Neigh Plans
Development Budgets Feasibility Case Comm Dev Talk Show
Ananclng Resources Mr Mole: Site Negot'n Development Planning History of Comm Devel
AnancJng Problems Develop Process/Feasibility Comm Dev PhlloS/VIslons
Tax Credit I(tracks)
Inter sessIon 1 Predevelopment Intro to Planning Project Management Tips
I Computers Computer Proformas
I ClinIc 1 Clinic Problems #1
SeSSIon 2 Resources:publlClPrlvate Building: Design Market Analysis Community Support
Phases of Funds Building Design Case Feasibility Review Case Personal CD Philosophy
lending Intro Legal:Tax Exempt Activities
Lender Talk Show
Rea/ Estate and IRS
Tax Credits It (tracks)
Anance/AppralSal Problems
Lender Case
InterseSSlon 2 Reading AnancJals Locally Determined
OperaUng BUdgets Project Management Tips II
~ ClinIc 2 Clinic Problems #2
MulUyear Proforma Construction Manage Devel. Schedule Case Personal CD Philosophy
Session 3
Development Problems Construction Case Intro Asset Management CD AdVOC/Trends LUnch
Escrow/Closings CD and Residents
Negotiation: Intro
Effective Project Meetings
SeSSIon 4 Tax Credit Problems Construction Draws Relocation CD and Contracting
Tax Credit "'(tracks) PlannIng for Rentup/cfose MIXed Use DealS!
Development Problems SlmulaUon Homeownershlp Intro
Internal Rate of Return Negotiation Review
Page 1
t-?
USC MoDULES CA 96SUM
Date
Page 1, Item j7
September 10th, 1996
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
I i";'.25'
TITLE: Resolution appropriating $31,453 from unanticipated telecenter
revenue to the Energy Conservation Fund Telecenter budget
SUBMITfED BY: Barbara Bamberger, Environmental Resource Mana~-;sB
REVIEWED BY: John D. Goss, City Manager &1'-' 1> (4/5th Vote: Yes-L No-->
(,1
The East H Street telecenter has been open for two years and the Downtown telecenter has
been operating for 19 months. During this time, the telecenters have been funded solely by
grants. These grants have been used as seed money to establish and operate the te1ecenters
while working toward self sufficiency. To date, the telecenters generated $35,271. Of that,
only $3,818 has been appropriated. The remaining $31,453 has been placed in a fund but has
not been appropriated. Staff is recommending appropriation of the remaining unappropriated
revenue.
RECOMMENDATION: Appropriate $31,453 from unanticipated telecenter revenue to the
Energy Conservation Fund 280-2821 Telecenter Budget.
Boanls/Commission Recommendations: nla
DISCUSSION:
Historically, the telecenters have been funded through grant monies. Over the past few years,
the City has received over $390,000 in grants, with $74,978 remaining. Originally, the
telecenter Business Plan anticipated needing a three year incubation period where outside
funding was expected to be required to retain telecenter services. February 1998 will mark
the third-year anniversary of both telecenters operating three years. From the Telecenters'
opening day in 1994 through the end of the three year period (February 1998), the telecenters
hope to show an upward trend increasing annual revenue.
In FY 1994-1995, the telecenters generated $11 ,611. In FY 1995-96, the Telecenters
generated $21,19 and this fiscal year, the telecenters have generated $2,013 to date. Of this
amount, $3,818 has been appropriated. There is a $31,453 unappropriated balance.
Staff is recommending appropriating the remaining $31,453 in revenue for staff and
operational costs. It is anticipated that staff will need to bring recommendations to Council
on whether the Telecenters are bringing enough revenue to keep operating through 1997-98.
This will depend on the success of various partnerships currently being pursued, support
received from additional grants, and the outcome as to whether or not there can be any
integration into the libary system.
7,/
Page 2, Item
Date September 10th, 1996
he current total budget is found on attachment 2. To date, the program has rolled over three
grants through FY 1996-97. Remaining grant funds total $74,978. To operate both
telecenters, the total cost is $125,000. Staff is recommending appropriation of the
unanticipated revenue fund balance generated over the last two years. These funds will
operate the telecenters as additional revenue is generated this fiscal year and while the City is
waiting for notification of additional grant funding.
Telecenter Revenues:
FY 94-95
Rentals & Leases
Telecommuter rent
$10,427
$ 1,184
FY '94-'95 subtotal
$11,611
FY 95-96
Rentals & Leases
Telecommuter rent
$17,379
$ 3,940
FY '95-'96 subtotal
$21,319
FY 96-97
Rentals & Leases
Telecommuter rent
$ 2,013
$ 328
FY '96-97 subtotal
$ 2,341
Revenue to date
appropriated
$35,271
(-$3,818)
Revenue Balance
$31,453
Due to the nature of grant cycles, the telecenters have experienced financial peaks and
valleys. Staff has stretched telecenter funds over a number of years to maximize these funds.
We have recently received notice of an additional $25,000 from Public Technologies
Incorporated (pTI), which the City will obtain by the end of the calendar year. The PTI
funds have been provided to the City to document the results of its telecenter project, and to
provide guidance on how to make telecenters work. The City will produce a guidebook to
show communities how to develop telecenter marketing and business plans, how to operate a
telecenter, and how to recruit and educate managers and employees to shape a successful
telecommuting program. Funds will defray existing staff costs over the next year.
Staff has applied for three additional grants and if any of these are granted, the City will
receive additional funds mid 1997, enabling continued funding through '98. This includes an
7'.2
Page 3, Item
Date September 10th, 1996
$80,000 proposal to the Corporation for PublIc Broadcasting, a $65,000 proposal to the Air
Pollution Control District, and a $180,000 request to the state legislature.
Telecenter staff continues to develop a variety of partnerships as well as apply for additional
grants to increase revenue over the next year. At this time the City has funds to operate the
telecenters through FY '96-'97. However, there will be a need to reduce staff and operational
costs where possible, and potentially eliminate one staffperson or close one telecenter if
additional revenue and/or grant funding does not come through in the next six months. If this
is the case, staff will return to Council with specific recommendations and options on the
project and on the potential for self-sufficiency and future viability of the telecenter program.
Part1U!rships:
Per Council direction in July 1996, the library and telecenter staff have formed an internal
committee to explore technological connectivity between the two entities. Specifically, staff
is evaluating areas where the City can expand library services to include specialized
technologies such as video-conference educational seminars, greater public access and
computer services available to the business community.
In addition, the following partnerships are being formed. This list will provide Council with a
general idea of revenue-generating services offered at the telecenter:
. A local temporary agency leases space for clients that need temporary personnel but
don't have offices for them to work from. South county temporary employees save
mileage eliminating driving to the clients' office. The telecenter generated $2,300.
. Panasonic upgraded its video-conference system through higher quality
video-conferencing connectivity and multipoint capability. The video-conferencing
system will be used for various modes of communication, such as business meetings,
distance learning, and is rented to businesses at $100 per hour.
. A distance learning partnership with National University began in January '96 and
additional classes are scheduled this fall. Students attend their classes locally through
the use of the video-conference center as opposed to driving to Mission Valley for
their classes. 12 hours have been rented for distance learning to date.
. Staff is negotiating with a university to teach classes at the downtown telecenter in the
fall, potentially generating an additional $4,000 for use of the conference room.
. general classroom rental, Internet classes, etc.
Self-SufficienJ Status:
The basic strategy for telecenter operations and staffing is to bring in enough revenue,
combined with grants, so as not to utilize any General Fund ruonies; becoming less and less
reliant on grant funds during the three year incubation period. The Telecenter Business Plan
7-J
Page 4, Item
Date September 10th, 1996
anticipated the need for a three year 'incubation' period, similar to that needed for the
establishment of a new business.
Revenue generated in the first two years of operations, combined with $74,978 in current
grants, will provide enough funding to cover basic costs through FY 1996-97. To prepare for
funding shortfalls in FY '95-'96, staff is exploring budget reductions, reducing staff hours, and
the possibility of closing one telecenter. The PTI funding will help close the gap. Staff will
return to the Council for guidance on these issues in the near future.
Additional Funding Opportunities:
The Telecenters were notified in May that they were selected as one of the projects to be
funded through Public Technology Inc. (PTI). The telecenters will receive an additional
$25,000 for a technology transfer grant that will be used for staff and promotional costs
beginning 11/96.
The Telecenters have applied for a $80,000 grant through the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting (CPB). This grant is for the design and implementation of internet-based civic
networking services, SmartCommunities implementation and related activities. CPB is
promoting the development of public telecommunications services. If received, these funds
will build a link between the telecenters and the library.
The telecenters applied for $65,000 from the County of San Diego Air Pollution Control
District (APCD) for development and implementation of a distance education program via
video-conferencing.
Additionally, the State Legisature designated $180,000 for telecenter/smartcommunity
linkages. Although $180,000 in funding for the SmartCommunities program, which would
have assisted in supporting the Telecenters, was included as part of this year's Petroleum
Violation Escrow Account allocations, those allocations were blocked in a last minute action
by the Assembly as a result of the Governor's unwillingness to distribute PVEA funds during
this fiscal year. It is unclear whether those monies can or will be allocated at this time. If
they are not allocated this fiscal year, the City will re-apply for funds through the local
legislative delegation next year.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Council action will result in appropriation of all $31,453, per Attachment 1, of revenue
generated by the Telecenters. There is no impact to the General Fund. The telecenters will
continue to generate revenue on an ongoing basis.
?- '-I
Page 5, Item
Date September 10th, 1996
Attachment 1
Energy Conservation Fund
Telecenter Revenue Appropriation
280-2821
Account Account Description 280-2821
5105 hourly wages $ 6,465
5141 pers $ 1,100
5143 medicare $ 588
5271 rentals and leases $ 23,300
total $ 31,453
7~.>
Page 6, Item
Date September 10th, 1996
Attachment 2
CurTent Telecenter FUNDS AVAIlABLE
Account Description Caltnms APCD CEC Cox Total
Cable
Hourly Wages $12,851 $6,311 $19,162
pers $ 81 $1,629 $ 1,710
medicare ($ 51) $ 96 $ 45
pars ($ 95)
professional services
advertising ( $175) $1,659 $ 1,484
printing $ 275 $2,433 $ 2,708
postage $ 559 $3,978 $ 4,537
travel and conferences $ 146 $ 146
promotional $ 270 $ 270
transpo rtati on $ 300 $ 300
insurance $1791 $ 1,791
utilities $ 561 $2,500 $ 3,061
telephone $8,724 $ 8,724
city force-janitorial $2,100 (258) $ 1,842
rentals and leases $ 391 $10,172 $ 409 $10,972
office supplies $ 1,732 $ 1,732
other commodities $ 47 $1,531 $ 1,700 $ 3,231
computer equip $9,000 $ 9,000
buildings $ 1,450 $ 157 $ 1,607
office equipment $ 302 $1,500 $ 1,800
other equipment $ 856 $ 856
TOTAL $16,864 $ 22,411 $27,861 $9,209 $74,978
Grants:
7~?
RESOLUTION NO. / ~;"...2.5"
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING FUNDS FROM
UNANTICIPATED REVENUE TO THE ENERGY
CONSERVATION FUND TELECENTER BUDGET
WHEREAS, the East H Street telecenter has been open for
two years and the Downtown telecenter has been operating for 19
months; and
WHEREAS, during this time,
funded solely by grants, which grants
establish and operate the telecenter
sufficiency; and
the te1ecenters have been
have used as seed money to
while working toward self
WHEREAS, to date, the telecenters generated approximately
$35,271; and
WHEREAS, all revenue has been placed in a fund, although
the revenue has not been appropriated; and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending appropriation of such
revenue be taken from the existing revenue fund balance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby appropriate $31,453 as shown on
Attachment 1 from unanticipated revenue to the Energy Conservation
Fund 280-2821 Telecenter Budget.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Barbara Bamberger, Environmental
Resource Manager
U'-- ~I /1.~'Y01
Ann Y. Mdore, Actlng City
Attorney
C:\rs\approp.tcn
7- 7
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
/8"'.2b
Resolution Approving Uncontrolled Embankment Agreement for
fill specified as uncontrolled embankment at Salt Creek I
Item ?
Meeting Date 9/10/96
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public wo~~
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~ PcJ~\ (4/5 Vote: Yes_ No--X.J
FN Development Co., Alpha c/o The JM Development Company, Inc., owner of property
known as Salt Creek I, has requested that certain grading work, currently authorized under
grading permit number PG-354, be designated as an uncontrolled embankment.
Municipal Code Section 15.04.285 states that uncontrolled embankment agreements must be
approved by Council and recorded by the City Clerk as an obligation of the land involved.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution, authorize the Mayor to sign the
agreement on behalf of the City and direct the City Clerk to record the resolution and
agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
Grading operations for the Salt Creek I development, begun in December of 1990 by F.N.
PROJECTS, INC. and THE BALDWIN COMPANY, has not been completed in conformance
with the approved plans. FN DEVELOPMENT CO., ALPHA c/o THE JM DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY, INC. succeeded the previous developer and is now the development manager and
owner of the property upon which Salt Creek I is situated.
On July 3, 1996 THE JM DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. obtained approval from staff
for changes to the plans which will complete grading operations. The approved changes to the
plans include an uncontrolled embankment (see Exhibit "A"), which must be approved by
Council. As is the case with any grading operation which requires a permit and associated
inspection, the approved plan changes conform to accepted engineering practices. The approved
plan changes are complete in all respects except for soil analysis and compaction. The
uncontrolled embankment's slopes are no steeper than three horizontal to one vertical, all in
conformance with the Grading Ordinance.
The purpose of the Uncontrolled Embankment Agreement is to serve notice to future purchasers
or successors to the property that grading operations did not meet the City's minimum
specifications for compaction, that the property upon which the uncontrolled embankment is
situated is not suitable for building construction until proper grading has occurred, and to
~-/
Page 2, Item g'
Meeting Date 6/20/95
encumber the property owners and their successors in interest that construction and continuous
maintenance of the uncontrolled embankment shall occur in a safe and sanitary manner.
Approval of the Agreement shall therefore be conditioned and stated within the Agreement as
follows:
1. The fill deposited shall be designated as an uncontrolled embankment and
constructed in conformance with the approved grading plan and grading permit.
2. Tbe developer acknowledges that the uncontrolled embankment site is not eligible
for a building permit.
3. The uncontrolled embankment work shall be constructed and maintained in a safe
and sanitary manner at the cost of the owners and their successors in interest.
The owners have executed the Agreement, and the plans depicting the uncontrolled embankment
have been approved. The grading permit for these plans was issued in 1990, but a separate
uncontrolled embankment permit will be issued subsequent to the City's execution of the
Agreement.
To ensure that construction of the uncontrolled embankment is performed in a safe and sanitary
manner, issuance of the permit is contingent upon the Code requirements that the applicant
deposit a specified amount into an account to pay for engineering inspection, and post
performance bonds with the City. The Code stipulates that one performance bond will cover
appurtenant structures and grading, and the other shall separately cover slope planting and
irrigation. Recordation of the Agreement ensures that the applicant will pay for the long term
maintenance of the uncontrolled embankment, in a safe and sanitary manner, subsequent to
completion of its construction and the release of the corresponding performance bonds.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Additional funds for processing the uncontrolled embankment request have been added to the
account for the existing grading permit. Through this account the owner will reimburse the City
for inspection and all other engineering review activities. Thus, the City does not incur a direct
fiscal impact. If the uncontrolled embankment permit is not issued, however, the owner will
be required to spend an extensive, but unknown amount of money to comply with the Grading
Ordinance.
Attachments:
Exhibit "A"
JGA:PH-013
[M:\HOME\ENGINEER\PERMITS\Al13.013]
8" ~ ..2
RESOLUTION NO. I ~Y..2.?
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING UNCONTROLLED EMBANKMENT
AGREEMENT FOR FILL AS UNCONTROLLED EMBANKMENT
AT SALT CREEK I
WHEREAS, FN Development Co., Alpha c/o The JM Development
Company, Inc., owner of property known as Salt Creek I, has
requested that certain grading work, currently authorized under
grading permit number PG-354, be designated as an uncontrolled
embankment; and
WHEREAS, Chula Vista Municipal Code section 15.04.285
states that uncontrolled embankment agreements must be approved by
City Council and recorded by the City Clerk as an obligation of the
land involved.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby approve an Uncontrolled Embankment
Agreement for fill as uncontrolled embankment at Salt Creek I with
FN Development Co., Alpha c/o The JM Development Company, Inc., a
copy of which is on file in the office of the city Clerk as
Document No.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Agreement for and on behalf of the City and the city Clerk is
directed to cause same to be recorded. This resolution shall take
effect on the recording of said Agreement with the County Recorder.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
~~5CJ.t .:t=.. ~Iod
An Moore, AC~ C~ r tr
Attorney
G:\rs\uncontrl.agr
8" ;J
P.2/2
-A-,
""<.
"' "
~ ~
"'''' t
<.It.)
'!J 2~~~ ~
jZ~ '"
<.) ::J~<I)'!I)' i
U) II. <;)~~" ~
~ o~1C:iDQ
<(~~~~
~<J~!!!
o:(~ItJ~~
RUG 27 '96 14:25 LUNDSTROM & RSSOC
~ \l... ~\
,.Id ~~ '\
~ \
!~
<n
,
, "
( ~
~~'
, -
..~
'II" "
. \I.)
Or-
2;::
~ Jo- I'~
.&. UN
~J:~~
",00:1::.....
"'2....0(!
o ~~~
~ ~~~
A >-<:)
" UJ .
U) c{ (Ij It..
..J ~
:J~1Ii
%....11)
V
.... ~j
.----,-"
,.., .~ ~
'-~ ;.-
'.
',' ,-'
.-
'...:,
.--
. '-
~'..
,.-.......
'...'
\") :
..-
,
, '
IU
j;iO
2-<
~~
,,~
:EW
$:I!
11.<,)
~
~
~
~~
~~
UI....
~~
~i!
1t1~
;>
IU <t i,!
)(-J
'<~
~\.),
CI) ,
:(
~
aVQW
7;;nQlfI'I .J.Nno
~<(
~,-J
~~~
'<G<(
;5"1(~
~E~
'"
~\\- ,;j- )
Q) I ~ '~
-I)- ~
>'1) Ii)
I .
<(~<t . 1;'\ ,
"'- ,
....~ ~ ') \) ,.
"
~~- 'j ',-> j
"
'>", ~t ~
Cf, '-.
'~
EXH//3/T
;L1 0 ?,y
w
I
m
m'
1%.
I:
I'!
.,
:;
~I':..
,
~'
J1
,
-_..~.
Recording requested by and
please return to:
City Clerk
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
. This space for Recorder's use, only .
::.c: :::::: : :
Assessor's Parcel No(s). 595-030-11-00
C.V. File No. 071O-55-PH..o13
AGREEMENT FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT
FOR UNCONTROLLED EMBANKMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this
19 ,by and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
Development Company, Alpha (hereinafter "Developer").
day of
(hereinafter "City"), and FN
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, Developer is the owner of certain real property located within the City of
Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, and more particularly described in
EXHIBIT "A", attached and as Assessor's Parcel Number hereinabove indicated, (hereinafter
"Property"); and,
WHEREAS, the prior owner of Property, Baldwin Vistas, allowed to be placed upon
Property certain fill material, i.e. dirt, rocks, etc., which fill material has been so placed in the
manner known as loose fill and uncompacted; and,
WHEREAS, persuant to Section 15.04.085 of the Chula Municipal Code, such fill is
designated as an uncontrolled embankment requiring the execution of a special maintenance
agreement for land development,
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the City and
Developer as follows:
1. The fill deposited upon that certain property described in said EXHIDIT "A",
owned by Developer, shall hereby be designated as an uncontrolled embankment and shall
be constructed in accordance with Uncontrolled Embankment Permit No. PH-OB and
plans therefor approved by the City Engineer.
8'; .5'
2. Developer hereby acknowledges that as an uncontrolled embankment, said site is
not eligible for a building permit, unless special soils analysis and foundation design are
submitted and approved by the City and Developer hereby agrees to provide said soils
analysis and foundation design or to reconstruct the embankment and fIll in the manner as
approved by the City Engineer.
3. The land development work shall be done and maintained in a safe and sanitary
manner at the sole cost, risk and responsibility of the owner and successors in interest,
who shall hold the City harmless with respect thereto.
4. Developer shall comply with all requirements of State Water Resources Control
Board Order No. 92-08-DWQ (N.P.D.E.S. General Permit No. CASOOOOO2), Waste
Discharge Requirements for Discharge of Storm Water Runoff Associated with
Construction Activity.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto have set their hands and seals the day and
year fIrst above written.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Its Mayor
Date
(City Clerk to attach acknowledgment)
FN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY. ALPHA
Signed:
Title:
Date: 8/28/96
n Manager
Signed:
Title:
Date:
(Attach notary acknowledgment for each signatory)
Mailing address:
JM Development/Pacific Bay Homes
2300 Boswell Road, Suite 209
Chula Vista, CA 91914
Approved as to form:
Ann Moore, Interim City Attorney
8"~" /8-7
EXHmIT "A"
$I1EET!
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSIDP 17 SOUTH,
SAN BERNADINO MERIDIAN, RECORD OF SURVEY NO. 14064.
~..y
---q: G
!~i ~ ~ :3Z~ ~ Q >:~
~ llJ"'U~
\) ...J~ .....
\I) ...Jlu () ..
~ ~ ~~~~~
~~ "c::a
<(~<~i:::
(/) lUoot.....-
~; (tUIQ.. ~
~~~0~
~~
~
~~.. )(~
IIJ-c
, -
&!~ "
.(/) lli
0,..
2;:
~
~ t- r" ~~
ON
W:r:~< O'<t-
1- ~ 0 0: g~ <0
!:C "".....
o 2 t-u ~
II.J~ (Do
- X ~ ~ \/).. ~ IU'<(
I C\I <~
t- .J <A-t. -
~~
a::I \.U _...If)
w <( >.~
:t: U) ~~~ ~~
::E: (/) (/) .. >
:) t\: ~ lU<(
~ == IU
NQ :r~~ ~....J
LLI 2~ U'-- ~~
IUO ~\,)
~c!
G~ U)
~IU ~
~~ I(j
1&..0
fa:!
OYo~ ~ to..
7;Jn~)IW J.Nno I\j
\J
1)-<( ~~ ....~
~I...J ~
I \I) I :t ~ ~
~t~ I .....~~
:> n: \ >0;) ~~
~j...<( ~J.... ..::{ I ~ .
....Ju:x: -.Jv ,V)~
~~o ~~_o
Q .. ~" / \,)~-
Item
~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Meeting Date 9/10/96
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.
Resolution Amending the Master Fee
Schedule to establish a fee to cover processing
costs for a determination of public convenience
and necessity for alcoholic beverage licensing.
SUBMITTED BY:
Chief of Polico/% ./
Director of Planning I~t.>_ 0.A
City Manager 0(4 ~ ~ \
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
provide additional time to obtain 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
indefInitely.
Upon being rescheduled, this project will be re-noticed to the public.
9-/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I tJ
Meeting Date: September 10. 1996
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: 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 District.
SUBMITTED BY: Special Planning project~1.i.~er, Otay Ranch projecW {~G3":J
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ ~ ~ \ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No X)
Staff requests the hearing on the Otay Ranch Reorganization No. 1 be continued to the
September 24, 1996 meeting in order to perfect the LAFCO required landfill nuisance
easements. Staff believes the easement issue can be resolved to all parties satisfaction in the
next two weeks.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council continue the hearing to September 24,
1996.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: On August 20, 1996, staff reported to the City Council that a continuance
was necessary because the County has not yet received the landfill nuisance easements in a
form satisfactory to them from SNMB, Ltd. A continuance to September 10 meeting was
recommended by staff and approved by the City Council. Council will recall the County
Board of Supervisors has to accept the easement before the City Council holds the final
reorganization hearing. All parties are trying to resolve the issues as soon as possible but
were not able to do so in time for this agenda statement.
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 ofChula 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.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
Al13-91O.DOC
/&J - /
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / /
Meeting Date 09/10/96
ITEM TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERING COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT #72
TO ALLOW THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A 19,500 sa. FT. TECHNICAL
CAREER TRAINING FACILITY AT 780 BAY BOULEVARD SUBJECT TO
CONDITIONS / l' 1f,2.
RESOLUTION OF THE tTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ISSUING COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT #72 TO ALLOW THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A 19,500 sa. FT. TECHNICAL CAREER TRAINING
FACILITY AT 780 BAY BOULEVARD SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS
REVIEWED BY:
Community Develop~ent D' ector L0 ~ e..- s
City Manager~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ NO.1U
.--:r
SUBMITTED BY:
BACKGROUND:
Edutek Professional College proposes to establish a technical school for medical/dental career
training at 780 Bay Blvd. The project site is located within the Bayfront Redevelopment Project
Area and the Chula Vista Coastal Zone. The Local Coastal Program requires a conditional use
permit to allow educational facilities within areas designated as General Industrial.
The activity is covered by the general rule that CEOA applies only to projects which have the
potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Based on staff's review of the
project, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may
have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, in accordance with section 15061 (b)(3)
of the CEOA Guidelines, the project is not subject to CEOA.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council hold a public hearing, consider public testimony, and adopt a Resolution
issuing Coastal Development Permit No. 72 to allow the establishment of a 19,500 sq. ft.
Professional College at 780 Bay Blvd. subject to conditions.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
On August 28, 1996, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Edutek
project. The conditional use was approved by a 6 to 0 vote subject to conditions listed in Planning
Commission Resolution PCC-97-11. (The Planning Commission conditions of approval are included
in Attachment I to the City Council Resolution issuing Coastal Development Permit No. 72.)
//- /
DISCUSSION:
The applicant proposes to lease 19,500 sq. ft. of office space within an existing industrial building
located at 780 Bay Boulevard. The site is designated for General Industrial land use. The
proposed project required a conditional use permit which was granted, with conditions, by the
Planning Commission on August 28, 1996.
The San Diego Gas and Electric Company South bay Power Plant is located to the west of the site,
Community Health Group is located to the north, Bay Boulevard and Interstate - 5 are to the east,
and the property located to the south is vacant.
The site is developed with an industrial building which has approximately 100,000 sq. ft. of office
and warehouse space and currently houses the U. S. Post Office decoding center which occupies
about 28,250 sq. ft. of office area and an auto auctionhouse will move in shortly that will occupy
about 45,725 sq. ft. of warehouse space. The remaining 6,450 sq. ft. of office space is vacant.
Parking for 360 vehicles is located on the site and 105 additional parking spaces are located on
an adjacent parcel to the south and will be made available to the future auto auctionhouse on
Wednesday evenings and Saturday days.
The proposed use entails the operation of a career training college. The school will provide training
and degree programs for optical technicians, dental technicians, nursing assistants, and other
specialties within the general classifications of medical and dental assistants. All activities will
take place within an (indoor) classroom setting. Hours of operation will be from 8:00 a.m. to
10:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday, and 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Fridays. The number of
students anticipated is approximately 250 during the day and 125 during the evening.
The school use is compatible with the Post Office use located in the office area of the building and
is not in conflict with the auto auctionhouse to be located at the south end of the building within
the warehouse area or adjacent land uses.
PARKING
The Zoning Code does not specify parking requirements for schools of this type; therefore, parking
is determined on a case by case situation.
The maximum occupancy proposed by Edutek at anyone time is 250 students and 28 staff
members for daytime classes. If each student and staff member drove a private vehicle to the
school, 278 vehicle spaces would be required. In staff's opinion, that is not a reasonable
assumption.
The applicant submitted a survey of Edutek students in an existing facility that indicates
approximately 50% of the students either carpool or utilize public (or other non-automobile)
transportation (Exhibit A). Based upon that survey and using the 50% statistic for students, 153
spaces (125 students + 28 staff members) will be needed during the day, and 69 spaces (62
students + 7 staff members) will be needed in the evenings.
As previously stated, parking for 360 vehicles is located on the project site and 105 additional
spaces located off-site will be available for tenants at 780 Bay Boulevard to use with the exception
of Wednesday evenings and on Saturdays.
/ /, .2..
Page 3, Item _
Meeting Date 09-10-96
The following chart shows, provided that the adjacent 105 space parking lot is always available,
that the site is deficient in parking on Wednesday afternoons and evenings. The deficiency
corresponds with the hours of Baha International's Wednesday evening automobile auction.
Dailv Parkinq Requirements for 780 Bay Boulevard
Tenant
Number of Required Parking Spaces
4-8 a.m. 8-12 p.m. 12-4 p.m. 4-8 p.m. 8-12 a.m. 12-4 a.m.
M,T,Th,F M,T,Th,F M,T,Th,F M,T,Th,F M,T,Th,F M,T,Th,F
0 153 153 69 69 0
200 200 200 200 200 200
46 46 46 46 46 46
246 399 399 315 315 246
Edutek
Post Office
Vacant
Totals for
M,T,Th,F
Auto Auction
Wednesday only
o
8
100
200
200
o
Total for
Wednesday only
246
407
illllllllllll~ll! illlllllllllll~lllllllllllllllllllillllll~11
246
Deficit Parking
for Wednesday
1111111111111111,(1"",
Available Parkinq:
On-site = 360 spaces
Off-site = 105 spaces
Total
= 465 spaces
To ensure that adequate parking is available for tenants of the building, it is recommended that
the following conditions be met prior to the approval of a zoning permit or occupancy of the
building by Edutek:
1. In order to address the potential parking deficiency, prior to the issuance of a business
license/zoning permit, the applicant shall provide the Planning Department with a letter
from the Post Office confirming that a maximum of 165 parking spaces are adequate to
meet the Post Office's parking needs between the hours of 4:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m. on
Wednesdays, and that 150 parking spaces are adequate to meet its needs between the
hours of 4:00 p.m.-12:00 midnight on Wednesdays. Should the applicant be unable to
procure such a letter, one of the following alternatives may be utilized:
1/- J
Page 4, Item _
Meeting Date 09-10-96
. Provide an additional paved, striped parking/display area for 50 vehicles
immediately adjacent to the existing site parking. A reciprocal parking agreement
for said parking shall be provided, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney;
. Provide an agreement that Edutek Professional College will not hold Wednesday
classes;
. Provide an agreement that the proposed auto auction will not hold Wednesday
auctions.
2. A reciprocal parking agreement making available to the tenants of 780 Bay Boulevard the
existing 105 parking spaces located immediately to the south on adjacent property (Lot 7,
Parcel Map 13581) shall be recorded and shall run with the land for the duration of
Conditional Use Permit PCC-97-11 approved for Edutek Professional College.
3. Based upon the City's reliance on information provided by the school that approximately
50% of students utilize public transportation, the applicant shall arrange for their students
either reasonably close public transit after the last class (10:30 p.m.) Monday through
Thursday, or a shuttle service between the school site and the "H" Street Trolley Station.
4. Should the City become aware of excessive parking demand and/or violations of the
conditions of this permit, either through complaint or observation, the permit may be
reviewed by the Zoning Administrator, after notice to the applicant, for additional
conditions related to parking. Said conditions may include, but not be limited to, any of
those alternatives discussed in condition" 1 "above. The cost of any additional conditions
required shall be borne solely by the applicant.
5. The applicant shall provide 13 bicycle parking spaces at a location approved by the Director
of Planning.
Conclusion
The proposed conditions of approval will ensure that adequate parking is available for all uses on
the site.
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS
Based on the following findings, the proposed project, subject to conditions listed in Attachment
I of the resolution, the proposed project is found to be consistent with the certified Local Coastal
Program:
1 . The site is completely developed and is located approximately one-third mile from the
nearest coastal water; therefore, the site does not provide any opportunity for coastal
reliant recreational facilities or access to coastal reliant recreational facilities nor will the
project impede the use of or access to coastal resources or coastal recreational facilities.
II-V;
Page 5, Item _
Meeting Date 09-10-96
3. The proposed technical career training center use is compatible with the Post Office use
currently occupying the second floor office area of the north side of the building and the
school facility is not in conflict with the auto auctionhouse to be located at the south end
of the building within the warehouse area.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed project will not directly generate revenue to the City or Redevelopment Agency.
Indirect benefit is expected to be derived, however, from sales and services purchased by the total
375 students and 35 staff members housed in the facility.
(BUCHAN)) M:\HOME\COMMDEV\STAFF.REP\09-1Q-96\EDUTEKCC.CDP [August 29, 1996 (1 :06pmJ]
/;"f
RESOLUTION NO.
/8";'.2 '/
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ISSUING COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT #72 TO ALLOW THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A 19,500 sa. FT. TECHNICAL CAREER
TRAINING FACILITY AT 780 8AY BOULEVARD SUBJECT TO
CONDITIONS
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista Local Coastal Program (LCP) has been certified by
the California Coastal Commission; and,
WHEREAS. said LCP includes Coastal Development procedures determined by the
Commission to be legally adequate for the issuance of Coastal Development Permits and the City of
Chula Vista has assumed permit authority of the Chula Vista Coastal Zone; and,
WHEREAS. Edutek Professional Schools has proposed the establishment of a technical
career training center to be located at 780 Bay Boulevard; and,
WHEREAS, based on staff's review of the project, it can be seen with certainty that
there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment
and, in accordance with section 15061 (b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, the project is not subject to
CEQA; and,
WHEREAS, on August 28, 1996 the Planning Commission held a public hearing and
conditionally granted a use permit subject to the approval of this Coastal Development Permit and
Conditions 1 through 7 listed on Attachment I; and,
WHEREAS. a public hearing was duly noticed and conducted by the City Council on
September 10, 1996 in accordance with procedures required in the California Coastal Act; and,
WHEREAS. the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, as "approving authority", has
reviewed the Edutek Professional College proposal to establish a 19,500 sq. ft. technical career training
facility at 780 Bay Boulevard;
NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does
hereby find, in accordance with Section 13311 of Title 14 of the California Administrative Code, that
the Edutek proposal to establish a technical career training facility at 780 Bay Boulevard subject to
conditions listed in Attachment I, is in conformance with the Chula Vista certified Local Coastal
Program because:
1. The site is completely developed and is located approximately one-third mile from the nearest
coastal water; therefore, the site does not provide any opportunity for coastal reliant
recreational facilities or access to coastal reliant recreational facilities nor will the project
impede the use of or access to coastal resources or coastal recreational facilities.
2. Because of the distance from the bay and because the project will be required to provide off-
street vehicle parking adequate for the proposed use no traffic or parking related impact to
coastal access or coastal recreational resources is anticipated.
3. The proposed technical career training center use is compatible with the Post Office use
currently occupying the second floor office area of the north side of the building and the school
facility is not in conflict with the auto auctionhouse to be located at the south end of the
building within the warehouse area.
II...t
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves Coastal Development
Permit No. 72, subject to conditions listed In Attachment I.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Chris Salomone
Director of Community Development
CL- l'\\..m~
Ann Moore
Acting City Attorney
//- ?
ATTACHMENT I
Coastal Development Permit No. 72
Edutek Professional College
780 8ay Boulevard
September 10, 1996
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The following is a list of conditions of approval for Coastal Development Permit # 72 for Edutek
Professional College to establish a technical career training facility at 780 Bay Boulevard.
1. The student and staff population shall adhere to the numbers provided in the application,
namely that the number of students and staff present on site during the daytime hours shall
be limited, respectively, to 250 and 28; during the evenings to 125 and 7. Hours of operation
will be limited to Monday through Thursday 8:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m., and Fridays 8:00 a.m.
to 4:00 p.m.
2. Applicant shall comply with all Federal, State, County, and municipal laws, provisions, and
policies.
3. In order to address the potential parking deficiency, prior to the issuance of a business
license/zoning permit, the applicant shall provide the Planning Department with a letter from
the Post Office confirming that a maximum of 165 parking spaces are adequate to meet the
Post Office's parking needs between the hours of 4:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m. on Wednesdays, and
that 150 parking spaces are adequate to meet its needs between the hours of 4:00 p.m.-12:00
midnight on Wednesdays. Should the applicant be unable to procure such a letter, one of the
following alternatives may be utilized:
. Provide an additional paved, striped parking/display area for 50 vehicles immediately
adjacent to the existing site parking. A reciprocal parking agreement for said parking
shall be provided, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney;
. Provide an agreement that Edutek Professional College will not hold Wednesday
classes;
. Provide an agreement that the proposed auto auction will not hold Wednesday
auctions.
This requirement shall be met prior to approval of a zoning permit or occupancy of the building.
4. Based upon the City's reliance on information provided by the school that approximately 50%
of students utilize public transportation, the applicant shall arrange for their students either
reasonably close public transit after the last class (10:30 p.m.) Monday through Thursday, or
a shuttle service between the school site and the "H" Street Trolley Station.
5. The applicant shall arrange a security survey with the Crime Prevention Unit of the Chula Vista
Police Department and shall comply with the recommendations provided in said survey. Proof
of the survey shall be submitted to the Planning Department within 60 days of approval.
6. The applicant shall provide 13 bicycle parking spaces at a location approved by the Director
of Planning.
//-8"
7. Should the City become aware of excessive parking demand and lor violations of the conditions
of this permit, either through complaint or observation, the permit may be reviewed by the
Zoning Administrator, after notice to the applicant, for additional conditions related to parking.
Said conditions may include, but not be limited to, any of those alternatives discussed in
condition "3" above. The cost of any additional conditions required shall be borne solely by
the applicant.
8. Provide prior to issuance of a building permit a reciprocal parking agreement making available
to the tenants of 780 Bay Boulevard the existing 105 parking spaces located immediately to
the south on adjacent property (Lot 7, Parcel Map 13581). Said agreement shall be recorded
and shall run with the land for the duration of Conditional Use Permit PCC-97-11 approved for
Edutek Professional College.
9. A violation of any condition contained herein may subject this permit to revocation or
modification.
The property owner and the applicant shall execute this document by signing the lines provided, said
execution indicating that the property owner and applicant have each read, understand, and agrees to
the conditions contained herein. Upon execution, this document shall be recorded with the County
Clerk of the County of San Diego, at the sole expense of the property owner andlor applicant, and a
signed, stamped copy returned to the City Clerk with a copy to the Community Development
Department. Failure to return a signed and stamped copy of this recorded document within thirty days
of recordation to the City Clerk shall indicate the property owner'slapplicant's desire that the Edutek
technical career training facility, and the corresponding application for the coastal development permit
be held in abeyance without approval.
Owner's Agent
Greenwald Company
Applicant
Edutek Professional College
Bennet B. Greenwald, President
Date
Michael L. Dawson, President
Date
Leslie C. Cusworth, Vice President
Date
Patricia Partain, Controller
Date
N:\shared\clerk\edutekcc.res (September 4, 1996112:57pm))
11'/
J
.'
,
,.
"
I
r~&~~
//-/P
(
~
-
I
~ ~ iii .. .. ..
-
.,
~ ~ r 0 ~ ~ 0 ~. .
i
j ! ~
... .. .. C> 0 - g 0 ... I
~
x
0
.. ~ 51 ~
! :i -
m
> I
'I Ie .. . .. .. ~ ~ ~ 'I ~ '" .. -
I .. - ..
!
I
!
i
I
.
I
.
~ N , " -
- -
~
11"1/
EXHIBIT A
Public Hearing concerning the request to defer undergrounding requirements
on Oxford Street, 600 Block by Price Company
Resolution /8'''I~proving the deferral of the undergrounding of
overhead utility lines on Naples Street and denying the deferral request for
undergrounding of overhead utility lines on Oxford Street
Di_, of ".lili, W"k~~
CityManage~~ V~ (4/5thsVote:Yes_ NoX)
There are plans to develop the property located behind the Price Club building on Broadway and
owned by Price Company (parcel 4 of Parcel Map 12083). As part of that development, the owner
is required to underground the overhead utilities adjacent to the property both on Naples Street and
Oxford Street (see Exhibit A). The owner has requested that the undergrounding requirement be
deferred. Prior to considering the request for a deferral, Council must first hold a public hearing.
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / :L
Meeting Date 9/10/96
RECOMMENDATION: Council conduct a public hearing to consider Price Company's request
for a deferral of under grounding requirements along a portion of Naples and Oxford Streets and
adopt a resolution granting the deferral request for the overhead lines on the Naples Street frontage,
and denying the deferral of undergrounding those along the Oxford Street frontage.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: No City Board or Commission action is
necessary for this matter.
DISCUSSION:
Backl!:round
Parcel Map No. 12083, recorded in 1982, includes the block surrounded by MTDB railroad right-of-
way, Naples Street, Broadway, and Oxford Street (with the exception of Harborside Elementary
School site). The map created four parcels: Parcels 1, 2 and 3 contain Price Club, Levitz Furniture,
/.2 - /
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 9/10/96
Cousins Warehouse, Carl's Jr, and miscellaneous other establishments. Parcel 4 is currently vacant,
however, there is interest in developing it. The parcel map includes an Improvement Certificate
spelling out the requirements for development of the respective parcels created by the map.
Specifically attached to the development of Parcel 4 is the following requirements:
· "The developer shall construct Naples Street to industrial road standards. . . along the
frontage of Parcel 4. Said improvements. .. Overhead electrical facilities along Naples
Street shall be converted to underground at such time as said improvements are constructed."
· "Overhead electrical facilities along the south and west project boundaries shall be converted
to underground or removed as appropriate at such time as development within Parcel 4
occurs. "
The applicant has submitted a document titled "Preliminary Budget Estimate" prepared by Delta
Consultants, Inc., ofEl Cajon. The breakdown is as follows:
SDG&E Billing. . .. . . . .. . . .. .$155,000
Contractor charges. . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,000
Total...................... $197,000
Findint:s
Oxford Street:
Overhead lines (12kv) are currently in place on the south side of Oxford Street, beginning at a point
approximately 330 feet west of the southwest comer of Oxford Street and Broadway. (The
overhead lines along Broadway in this area have been converted to underground.) The lines continue
in a westerly direction for several hundred feet along the south side of Oxford Street. They then
cross to the north side at an angle to a pole located just east of the easterly boundary of Parcel 4.
There the lines continue westerly, spanning the 729-foot frontage of Parcel 4, then cross MTDB's
right-of-way to a pole within Industrial Boulevard right-of-way.
The overhead lines are supported by five wooden poles on Oxford Street. Two on the south side,
three on the north. All the poles, however support only three l2kv wires. There appears to be no
telephone or CATV lines on these poles.
I:L ,~
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 9/10/96
Naples Street:
South side: Along the relatively small frontage (125 feet) of Parcel 4, there are two wooden poles
supporting two wires which run from Industrial Boulevard easterly along the frontage of Harbors ide
Elementary School. The overhead lines end at the easterly property line of the school. There are
no overhead utilities on the south side between the school and Broadway; the lines were converted
when the street improvements were installed in conjunction with the development of that property.
North side: There are large, wooden poles with multiple cross arms all along this side of Naples
Street, supporting several 69kv transmission lines.
Conclusion
Oxford Street:
The Municipal Code requires the undergrounding of overhead utility lines adjacent to any
property being developed with a length in excess of 600 feet (in the case of l2kv distribution
lines). The frontage of this parcel along Oxford Street is 729 feet. In addition, the
Improvement Certificate on the parcel map requires that the conversion take place upon
development of Parcel 4. The Oxford Street frontage is a significant length and will be used
as the major access point to, and most visible part of Parcel 4 when developed. It follows
then, that the Oxford Street utilities should be placed underground and the request for a
deferral be denied.
Navies Street:
The utilities along the 1 25-foot frontage of Parcel 4 on Naples Street are minor (two small,
wooden poles and two wires), compared to those that would remain if the undergrounding
requirement was enforced. There are three larger poles in front of the school, in addition to
the heavy 69kv lines along the north side of the street which would remain.
The enforcement of the undergrounding on Naples Street would, in effect, result in merely
relocating the two existing poles to either side the frontage of Parcel 4, since they would be
needed on either side of the property to support the remaining overhead lines. The only gain
would be the elimination of two wires for a length of 125 feet.
The benefit-to-cost ratio in this case is very disproportionate. Imposing the undergrounding
would result in little improvement to the existing visual clutter of poles and wires. It is
/,2rJ
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date ~1O/96
logical, therefore, for staff to recommend granting the deferral request for Naples Street. It
should be noted, however, if the deferral is granted, that the applicant is required to enter into
an agreement with the City agreeing to not protest the future formation of an undergrounding
district, should that occur. The agreement should also require the property owner to pay their
share of the undergrounding costs, should either of the adjacent property owners
underground their facilities without the formation of a district.
In accordance with Section 15.32.070 of the Municipal Code, the Council may grant the deferral if
a) extraordinary conditions (cost-to-benefit ratio as mentioned above) exist to the extent that
enforcement of the conversion requirement would result in unnecessary hardship to the owner or
utility company; and b) the deferral will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare
of the neighborhood. This case meets that criteria.
There are slides available for Council viewing.
FISCAL IMP ACT: Staff costs for processing this deferral request are covered by a deposit
remitted by applicant under the City's Full Cost Recovery System. The Price Company will be
fiscally responsible for any conversions that take place along its frontages.
Attachments:
Exhibit "A"
Resolution
[M:\HOMEIENGINEERIAGENDA lUG DEF.JWH]
(LAST REV. 8/9/96)
1.2-1(
RESOLUTION NO. I r '/.2. 8"
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE DEFERRAL OF THE
UNDERGROUNDING OF OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES ON
NAPLES STREET AND DENYING THE DEFERRAL REQUEST
FOR UNDERGROUNDING OF OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES
ON OXFORD STREET
WHEREAS, the property located behind the Price Club
building on Broadway and owned by Price Company (Parcel 4 of Parcel
Map 12083) is planned to be developed; and
WHEREAS, as part of that development, the owner is
required to underground the overhead utilities adjacent to the
property both on Naples Street and Oxford Street; and
WHEREAS, the owner has requested that the undergrounding
requirement be deferred, but prior to considering the request for
a deferral, Council must first hold a pUblic hearing; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with section 15.32.070 of the
Municipal Code, the Council may grant the deferral if a)
extraordinary conditions (cost-to-benefit ratio) exist to the
extent that enforcement of the conversion requirement would result
in unnecessary hardship to the owner or utility company; and b)
the deferral will not be detrimental to the health, safety or
general welfare of the neighborhood; and
WHEREAS, the enforcement of the undergrounding on Naples
Street would, in effect, result in merely relocating two existing
poles and the only gain would be the elimination of two wires for
a length of 125 feet; and
WHEREAS, staff feels the benefit-to-cost ratio in this
case is very disproportionate and imposing the undergrounding would
result in little improvement to the existing visual clutter of
poles and wires and it is recommended that the deferral request for
Naples Street be deferred; and
WHEREAS, staff believes that the deferral request for
Naples Street would not be detrimental to health, safety or general
welfare of the neighborhood; and
WHEREAS, in case of Oxford Street, the Municipal Code
requires the undergrounding of overhead utility lines adjacent to
any property being developed with a length in excess of 600 feet
(in the case of 12kv distribution lines) and the frontage of this
parcel along Oxford Street is 729 feet; and
1
/2-5
WHEREAS, in addition, the Improvement Certificate on the
parcel map requires that the conversion take place upon development
of Parcel 4 and the Oxford street frontage is a significant length
and will be used as the major access point to, and most visible
part of Parcel 4 when developed; and
WHEREAS,
utilities should be
deferral be denied.
staff recommends that
placed underground and
the
the
Oxford
request
Street
for a
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve the deferral of the
undergrounding of overhead utility lines on Naples Street and
denying the deferral request for undergrounding of overhead utility
lines on Oxford Street based upon the findings contained in this
Resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said deferral for Naples
Street be conditioned on the applicant entering into an agreement
with the City, approved as to form by the City Attorney, to not
protest the future formation of an underground district and to pay
its fair share of the undergrounding costs should either of the
adjacent property owners underground their facility without the
formation of a district.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
CL- j h\.I.{:r- 9-
Ann Y. Moore, Acting City
Attorney
C:\rs\naples.def
2
/.,2~?
~I
E3120AOWA y'
CA/2.L'<;
J/Z..
II
II
:1 PAIZ 3
II
(
PAl<. Z
\I
~
~I I
I It--.: I-IOME
~II~ CWI5
i::.~
~I I
~! '::2
~ -...J
... Q
~ '"
'" ~
"j:: ,-
II :
.>1 I
'I :
'I I
I
i
I
LEvITZ
I
: i-IAIZ.e.O~SIDe.
I
: ELE1A,
I
: : ~ 5C::i-IOOL ~
~~ : .
:,,:. 70 BE
't,. t, "
, : ~I "-- APPROVED"
- - -A~
I - ~ M r: D 8. "0 ../
f ~ ~, .~
i /iJOU5T/2./AL
NORTJ.I
~ "'D
~CA 4..
DWN BY: J&1
PAI2 I
I
I
I
I
I
J P~ICE
CLUB
7i. 8 E.
"OCr ED "
F'A 12
4
~
BLVD
EXHIBIT ~IJ
/,2' 7
DATE: 8~/'~
L
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
,
II
'I
"
"
II
I,
"
,
~
"H.
Ii
I,'.
I ....
. I '111
\ I
, I ;
I 1/
i I I "I
\:i! ~
I ~...
, i I I >(
II- \" : ()
~ : I-
I I
\ I I
I I
. I J'
" I ,
,. II.'
\,Ir ')
'; ,(: .-/
i I
'--/
! FILE NO.P6'030
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 13
Meeting Date 9/10/96
ITEM TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING
ADOPTING OTAY RANCH PRE-ANNEXATION
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH BALDWIN
BUILDERS
SUBMITTED BY:
GV
Deputy City Manager Krempl
staff recommends the public hearing be continued to 9/17/96 so as
to allow staff and the applicant to further discuss the terms and
the issues that Council raised at the 8/20/96 hearing.
/3- /
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item:.! i
Meeting Date: September 10. 1996
ITEM TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING: PCS 96-04: Consideration of a revised 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 and excluding 288 acres in Assessor Parcel
No. 642-060-11 and a portion of APN: 642-080-01.
SUBMITTED BY:
RESOLUTION No. 18398 Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista approving a Revised Tentative Subdivision Map for portions of the
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 #95021012) and readopting
the Statement of Oveniding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting program for the FEIR and denying approval of alternative tentative
map proposals. ~
Special Planning.p. rojects Manager, Otay Ranch ., 0 .-/
. 6ft.- \;
CIty Manager ~,(J (4/5thsVote:Yes_No X)
REVIEWED BY:
The public hearing on this revised tentative map application was continued rrom the August 20, 1996
meeting at the request of the applicant.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Due to a potential foreclosure by Bank of America on portions of Village One, staff recommends the
tentative map public hearing be continued for one week to September 17, 1996 in order for staff to
review the map and conditions of approval to ensure the conditions can be implemented with multiple
owners. Please note that the staff report regarding St. Clair will be brought
back at the same time.
DISCUSSION:
Village Development has submitted a revised subdivision map for a portion ofOtay Ranch SPA One
Chula Vista Tract 96-04 to subdivide approximately 819.6 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
;l/w'1
Item: ~ Page 2
Meeting Date: September 10, 1996
delete this 288 acre area rrom the original Tentative Map and redesign the lots in Village One and Five
adjacent to WCLF collateral.
On August 28, 1996, the City was notified of a pending foreclosure by Bank of America scheduled for
September 9 and 13, 1996. The pending foreclosure involves 1,600 acres of the Otay Valley Parcel, of
which 540.7 acres are in SPA One Tentative Map for Village One. There are 1,820 acres involved in
the foreclosure in Village 13 (the Resort site). The Special Planning Projects Manager has been in
contact with a Bank of America representative. Their representative indicated that they are not at
liberty to discuss their current or future plans for the properties due to current lenderlclient
relationships and negotiations They are aware of the current status of all past and pending applications
at the City (i.e., SPA, Annexation, SPA and Tentative Map proceedings). Their representative also
indicted that, in contrast to the West Coast Land Fund objections to the Tentative Map, they will not
take a position at this time.
While staff has proposed Tentative Map conditions that anticipate the potential of future owners
(merchant builders), the map and conditions are once again being reviewed to ensure that foreclosure
and any other change of ownership will not effect the implementation of the conditions. If any are
found, recommended modifications will be presented for Council consideration at the public hearing on
September 17. 1996.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
}'/-2
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /.5
Meeting Date 9/10/96
ITEM TITLE:
/('1/.2.9
Resolution Approving request from the Bonita Business and Professional
Association to conduct Bonitafest.
Resolution / Jr1:JRroving request from the Bonita Sunrise Rotary Club to
conduct the Bonitafest Parade.
Chief of pOlicDJY""'
1~A
City Manager X:/J \9
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No..K)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The Bonita Business and Professional Association (BBi'A) is requesting permission to conduct the 24th
Annual Bonitafest and the Bonita Sunrise Rotary is requesting permission to conduct the Bonitafest Parade
on Saturday, September 28, 1996.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve the request from:
I) The BBPA to conduct Bonitafest subject to the conditions; and
2) The Bonita Sunrise Rotary to conduct the Bonitafest Parade and temporary closure of Bonita Road
subject to the conditions outlined in this report and required by Traffic Engineering.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
Not applicable
DISCUSSION: The Bonita Business and Professional Association (BBPA) is requesting permission to
conduct the 24th Annual Bonitafest and the Bonita Sunrise Rotary Club is requesting permission to
conduct the Bonitafest Parade on Saturday, September 28, 1996.
15-/
Item
Meeting Date 9/10/96
The BBP A and Bonita Sunrise Rotary are requesting a temporary street closure of Bonita Road to stage
the annual parade. The street closure would involve Bonita Road between Willow Street and Central
A venue. Both Willow and Central would remain open at all times during the closure. Streets intersecting
Bonita Road between these points would also be affected during the parade. The parade is scheduled to
take place between 10:00 AM and 12:30 PM; the street closure would be in effect from approximately
8:00 AM to 1 :00 PM to allow for staging and dispersion of the parade participants. A diagram of the
area is attached (Attachment A). Traffic Engineering, Transit and Police staff are coordinating the plans
for the street closure and the subsequent traffic control and detouring that will be required.
The Bonita Sunrise Rotary is also requesting use of the vacant City-owned lot that is adjacent to and
immediately west of the parking lot of the Municipal Golf Course, for staging and dispersal of equestrian
units that will be participating in the parade.
The parade will consist of marching units, marching bands, floats, and other motor driven units, as well
as equestrian units. All horses would be ridden by their owners, and streamers, balloons, and noise
making devices will not be permitted along the parade route. The route will be marshalled by sponsor
volunteers and the Chula Vista Police. The street closures will have an impact on City bus service in the
area. Transit will need to cancel or re-route bus service in the area during the parade. The BBPA will
not be utilizing Allen School Road within the City limits for the festival at this year's event.
Staff is recommending approval of the Bonitafest sponsored by the BBP A subject to the following
conditions:
1. Prior to the event provide evidence of general liability insurance in the form of a Certificate of
Insurance and Policy Endorsement in the amount of $250,000, naming the City as additional insured
and their insurance as primary.
2. Compliance with conditions 2 through 5 shown below.
Staff is recommending approval of the Bonitafest Parade sponsored by the Bonita Sunrise Rotary Club
subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to the event provide evidence of insurance in the form of a Certificate of Insurance and
Policy Endorsement in the amount of $2 million, naming the City as additional insured and their
insurance as primary.
2. Execution of a Hold Harmless Agreement prior to the event.
3. Provision of adequate traffic control equipment and no-parking signs as specified by the Police
Department. This would include provision of adequate signage, barricades, and traffic control as
specified by the County of San Diego and the Sheriff's Department on the portion of Allen
School Road outside of the city limits.
4. Provision of adequate Police coverage at the event through coordination with the Chula Vista
Police Department and the San Diego County Sheriff's Department.
/ .s:- ,I-
Item
Meeting Date 9/10/96
5. Provisions to return all City-owned property to pre-use condition, including arrangements for
professional street sweeping and adequate trash control and disposal throughout the affected area
within 24 hours after the event.
Hold Harmless Agreement
Both groups have indicated that they are able to obtain insurance for each of the events and are requesting
the Hold Harmless Agreement requirement be waived (see Attachment B) based on advise from their
Attorney. The main reason provided to staff for refusing to sign the Hold Harmless Agreement is the
possibility of personal liability in the event the insured's policy will not cover a claim arising from the
Bonitafest and the Parade. According to BBP A staff, several claims related to the Bonitafest and Parade
were filed against the BBP A in the past. Only one claim has been filed against the City. The claim was
filed in September of 1994 and ultimately denied by the City based on operation of law. The claim was
also filed against the BBPA and settlement of an unknown amount reached.
The issues outlined above are the same as last year. Last year, the Hold Harmless requirements were
waived by the City Attorney. The Hold Harmless Agreement waives, releases and discharges the City
from any and all liability arising from the Bonitafest celebration. The required Hold Harmless Agreement
ensures that in the event the insured's policy will not cover a claim arising from the festival and parade,
the City would not be liable for damages, legal fees or costs associated with the claim. As with any other
event, the Risk Manager and the Acting City Attorney recommend approval of the event contingent on
the conditions described above, specifically, the Hold Harmless Agreement and Certificate of Insurance
and Policy Endorsement. In the event the Hold Harmless is waived, the Acting City Attorney
recommends the insurance requirements described in condition number 1 above for both events be
mandatory. In numerous telephone conversations with staff, both groups have indicated that they have
obtained the required level of insurance and policy endorsements to cover their respective event.
However, proof of the requirement outlined in condition 1 (above) has not been received by the Risk
Manager. If either group is unable to obtain the required level of insurance through their own insurance
broker, they may purchase a Special Event Liability Insurance Policy through the City.
FISCAL IMPACT: $2,410 has been allocated in the City's FY 96-97 Community Promotions budget
to pay for the cost of Chula Vista Transit shuttle bus services and Police staffing at the event. The BBPA
would be responsible for all additional costs incurred in conducting the parade, including provision of
traffic safety equipment, street sweeping services, purchase of their insurance, and other related and
required services and supplies.
A: Parade Area Diagram
B: Request to waive Hold Harmless Agreement
if" J
-
(I
"-
.-
.....
.....
co
w
CD
o
z
-
~
."
m
en
-f
"'C
~
:D
~
C
m
:0
o
c:
-f
m
-
~I"''''",IU;,[ A
--
0'
.
-
"
~f
~
~\
,"
.
=_,",,:::~-'4
.
Ir
, .
V7~ i \
o~r\\.
..' ~ \
_. 0
--
..
-:----,
. ,_! ;r.,..... ..... .' .. . ~ ~.
~ / .. ...>.:.'::o-,:.....r{~.~~.:.., . ,-'
,. "._ _., ~... .. 10 ;;,." . .:::
,:(.:'::'::~".?" ~ Y, ~. 0-
"~~'~~~};~~' . f,( . ......,,"'- ',~ .
. .... .... Q} t. )..~~
"..\-:~.':' ':. .. ~:,:'.::.\~i' -2
~~\""" r-...../.J
~.; -. "'t.., ...; S- I--
'~A.:~~ii.{Ni~:.~~::'/:t-'q ~ ~~
.t;- .......-....... ..":'" ...... .'. .,f -
~.-,.".;.:,...;"'. ..' .. -: -
\ >?i~{~~;<' "/~-'
-,(", ./ :;;.~}.:J.:; P~I
,.';<' \~~~ \:;~ii~l~ :%
. ,Ii' Z. (\'. V /4.7 .ttl::~.~~::3~\ -...~~l--.~.l-
, L.-~'" './:. ",.,.:.:,:.:;-':~':" .'i:"~"~ ~
':; .--\\ ," ~l.-I~:'" -"':~~-:i1t=::'I~ '-'f;;;:;""~I::~ ;.
\ "1 .-. - ,..,-'~,:~,_-.."",' ... ')II'
. ..'~ ~;'i~ -:o;:~' \ - '~-="-~;!. %
......,-, ." ,~., \i . ,<.,,~.,-'" ~"... Q ,
. \ ' '. . .."I........ -"'!< ~ . .-' .~.:,.~~f.: :!tr;,
_-. ,. ,...J '. " ...... l-~\...':;....._. ~~ c:,.' .'
'~ '. \ }'.&." .;,<;;". : ..~ !rt .;.... -:-
H.H.... . ~o :i ~ 't..ool'l' -. .."'<>\."" ....\ ..' \~\ \ '
...' ..-__,_~. -- ~&E ~~. - ..~ ~.- . ...... .
1-- -' .." · .,,:[. .'i~ .k;.A> . ....,,}.~. ~ Q " . '. \ "
I ...-' I ,~ "....,.. ~i''''''''''' <...':' ".,., ,.. '<~. .
~I-_ '\.. ~ ~ ~ .\cJI '<;"::.'7:.1. ~~~ '..I.:'-\:.~,:;:.-i'N,~'':\. ;',,, .,-~%... . \
v _ :..t. ."..'.'. i;~ ,.;._~....."....."-,,....:t-.. ....\... (-,-
J7t<J:' ,\ '. \ .1J.~. :.:~~.'~'~;i:t:.~~::;-';;s~:;-:,'i;..~:::~:: .._-~ ......- -~--. """',\..J
~ .... - ,::::'" "\:~:'~ ",,:..::~:;.:.,.:.''''':. ...',' - y .
. 1 C L-- To ....3-.. 't<-:..,. '~".'..'" .;....." . , .
~ r". '.;~:'~~ .:<:\::..~.':,.~~;r-'':';.:'';,; _..'V I
'. "--., .' ,. :..t. ,.:--:-;-,. ~:;-::::-:;'..,,:~~:.::.:;S.:..;>- ".... - .~
. h. ~ J,' ,,.,:.i;~1 ~''::.::..~:'.:r I '.
_/:= ~\)\ Q '~. ' ., ,\~~<r-
,- \ >-i.....~:':~..~. . ."\ . - ", ........ \.. ~( \ \
~.- <t!...... ..(\\_.~ ~'i -- - ~. j...-.
1, ,\ 'r: /~'4/'" .~~ i>~ - \ f\.A C3J
I 1 ...... ~ .,... ~" .:'" ~ ./
I .... ).-., ", :J:~.. ~ ....~:;.'<:.. . .~~ "'. ---" ~
_ k"" \ I T l' :II" -:l.;i'~" "<:..,.,::..~~~~ I IT \-1
L./j\ \ \ ~~ "'r"f"" T<\; ~.~ ~~~'.':.},.~\t~ ~ ~- '.''<j
, 1\ T r_It....,. , . "'- ""'- c'" ,~",,:;,-~,,<(-""""':.': \1 -rr. '-.,
II "1'\ \ \ : '-- .' .~.~~ .\.j J -~~~:..~';,~~~~;:i~~\: I " : f
......... \ r I I l..... \! '< '-i '}i~.'", .,~~~~~ t:>-:~ : I,I~
-r II.. .J ' '. 0;,";. ~..,... .,<,.>"-..;'..
~\~/':~'~~\>""_"'\':'<\ . .'. "\ L 1'!! .~~~- ... .'
,'. \. '\ ~ ~: ..., ~
~,"\ y~' ...".. ~
(~ -v;. y' I.\-, ~ ~ '\ :--.:
:"/:.i- .". . ~ . '.5 C.-\~\ ~ . - '. ...., . ..4" ~
-'0._'1\ ~\\. "Y-,:-. - '..~~ ',,::.::..
;
..
~
:C'
..
.'
-
...
::!
-
if
\
.'. .\~\
\
t'
,
/""'
,J'
. \~:' ~ ..
.' ' .
, . '
..~'.
.------. ,~....
...
;..
.....
>
,
'-<
,;
,
........ ,
.
,
,-
~'
, r'-"
. ' ,
~
-
"'--,
-'Q
.
'.
.
,-
~-
,
. .
, ,
,
~
'. ,
'.
.
{) '~J U.:J \j;)
1::.5',
'et
III O()2
----
Sporu;or or <he Annual Borut3feot
September 3, 1996
Honorabk Mayor Shirley Honon
and Citv CO;Jcilmen
CIty ofChula Vist"
271) ruuril'l A..renue
ChuL,VlSta CA 91'JlO
Dear ~,lavur ~Jjd City Councilme;"
()n beh"lf ofthe Bonita Bw;,oe" & Professional Association lnc" coordinator and
I
sponsor ot tlw ~Huuai Bonitafest, \vf are reqllestllg that the City ofChula Vista waive the
requirem(l1t of a 'hold harmless" agl "~mtlJt d550clated with the parade and Bonitafest.
The J e,LOO we ,,,re requi:sting ttus '.'/aJver is because the insurance premium would be
"b"dutdy t'fohibitive 10 cove! paro'le eal1Jcipanls Our insurance agent ha.s monned us that most
IIEtlnWCe ,,'Jrrrpan;es ,>Jill not wo',. a "hlanke" policy to cover parade parbctpants He estunates
pru11!w'ls wodd ,':can, at $5,OijO,CiO,'". more Ow' responsibility is to the: public, and our guests
whrch ,)Ul lnsurance policy ,'"V,,;,; fiJI $",000,000.00, Please see a copy of the Declaration page
ofou, U18urallCC jJolicy '95,'96 rhe cunen! policy premium for '96-'97 ha.:; been paid in full. It
provide,.: the same coverage as '95 '96
I
Bonita SUllshine Rut.ifY Club is sponsoring the Parade insurance. The club cannot SIgn a
"boJeI h!irmless' agreement as zJw;ed by tbel!' attorney lhe Bonita Business & Professional
'\",uciauCln, be has been a1;h;sc~ ~y ,JUt "ttorney not to sign a "hold harmless" agreement as
well
'."-'e 'you,d !U'~e 1.J diaIl;!.e <),:1' p:,J'dJe applications fOl next year to request each particIpant
tv jJIovlde the,!' pi':Jof of persona: :dtd!!v U1$urance to participate in our parade, In our 24 year
hi,tory, we have had one year wilhotlt a parade We deeply appreciate your consideration to
uLiow BOlutafesl and it's parade TO happen ,)fi Saturday, September 28th,
Enclosure
Wali1) r~gards.
,,-,!2 . ,.(i /?
~;C- /J-Ha'1""---___
Pat dOlull, Executive Secretaty
,
i
i
---.., ".----..
POST OfFICE BOX 2H4 . BONJTA, CA 91908. (619) 479-1360
/5-5'
Of. \I,~ :1,.1
1:5...
t;!
Ii!] 003
9..04.- i ~96 1 t3. 1.7Prl
r"'-aJII", L-~." ___. ~ .
olley No_
PJ.\CG0103S3
. -
i"!Oi-4{')ClAl G!i~ERAl1JABILI1Y COV. Aoe PART
'" tJECtARA1l0NS
: EffectIvl!Date:~01.~
12:01 A.\:;u.ndard
--- I
INln~ OfINSUMFrCE__' - , ad rail )
lelleiifA9lJfflgale Umil (Other ihan ProdUCl3-Complet Ope ons
'~u~-Completad Opemtiona Aggregate Umll .
'9nJOrn!J IIDd Ad\lertlsll1g ".Jury Urnll
,-a~ OCCUHef1C':) Urn.
'1,,, Darn,,1IE' DonI!
.1\Jd1al! ExJx;nIM! Urnll
$
$
$
$
,"
"
$
:1,000,000
},OOO,OOO
1,000,000
1,000,000
50,000
5,000
MY One Are
Any One Pe<Wn
"_....----
IJUSIrtEiiS DtcSCRII"T1~i'f~1JON Of PR-
FOim eft BIBiY1le3'l'
[Jlnd1vid",,! [J Jo;nt Venture
f$.} Gr'}"pOf(:\~O"
,
,
! J ParIl1"r$hlp I
! ] Organization (Other than PalVlershlp Dr Joint Venture)
3uslness Descr:pt1un.'
PROFB!:';SI<J.;1:U\L ct.UB
"c;atltn, of ' All Premlo;as You <'Jw.i, Rem d. Oc<:;up)i:
SAt'L;;-~
>1'i91lmT' -- -----
--~----- .----_._..~-,
+----
---.-...-..-
C1';;$$m~IJ~___
Code No,
Prell.urn,Sa...
Hal!!
Pr/Co AU Other
YJInc8 premium
pr 'co All Other
Cj,us-cnr).C,SKRvIcn OR
SOCrAJ_ NO SUILPINGS OR
PREl'tISII$I ommv 0!1. LEi\BED
EXC'IIPT FOR OYF'IC;,;
1'0KP0S8S nICI,ODur<:!
pRODtJC78 rom/1m
~LJ\"I'ltD Op1!R-,"'rICl!II1I
RBST1\.1JI!lJ;Ins -- o.'BI!Jn:E:r'
BY eO'NCESS::CO~I!l.-.l{:S-
orB:<."R TlW'I i'l'OT-P')R
~ROFXT
41.63
125 (,,) mcr., 2,55
MI;M!lERS
:tNCL,
750,
1(.,B19
Xi' 'ANY ("J FLAT OI:JUtGB
1:15,
XNCL.
iota) At:Ivance Premium
12'1
150
-_.._~..-....,,<-,_._-,.,.,-~..,..-
.~-........-...~.--~.,-~.
(a) v.l~..pl'Jl HJOOa.q.fJL (r;'!J) .drnln~'-"M1000 (e) eac:J'f
!oj gr_....... "", $1000 (PJ ",,;'nil" 9''' .11)0(; (0) _, "'"' 'pet $1000
'ORIIIS i\,N() mDOA9EMEMTS other tI1an II ~iaabJ. Fonml and OIRIIIents I own
'O<'IIS Md Ei1dor!:Om_ lip ng to J rn(leiPan Q .nad9 part of this cy at me
=. " .... ocmm " JI5. 002147 W 911, CU21<11111!11, R-0021 t 1 6:;, ~g4), &m25(2-$4}. ~CH3)
SI!OOrIM9H;OG2!I2!\ (11""),&:=! (0092),_ (C>I92J,_ CG7~ ("6!l1;~101 (118!>1:~ ('HI!)
I\J) ""lie
_11th oicy
Issue:
--
-'-_.~_._-_.-
"'---'-
ICYr\"'1'\ o-.,~ tf r:htlllm tl..Sllvot'\lIPe In \he /!lOUry
T,tt.u' 0H:tAf\A1'iON!\ ^~ I"AIt1 0&' TJoIt POUO"f VECL\I=\A'T'>O\tjS ::orrrAlflllM.O 1l1E. NA.Mt:; OF 'T'I"IE IN'!!URI!!D A"ID '1'HE POUC'Y' fiIERfOtI.
. "n\b -pJlog. &in- ~ 1"117& J"ofow:&t: CDWlf......' "'O~ H:U,-\ bv cI1II.LI1_ b:I a. CI:>lI'Il1lVl;ioIJ U1n e.Qmmon ~ gfi1Va1l0n0 ~g",
J:OrtlfJ'ltlf'l .~"CY C~~. C~vt:ragc Purt C-<lVU"4Je!I ro'm(~} 1'6'(I1S,f'1 ....ltrto l4Ip8c.tOlt ro.-~t t.ntJ Ond'0rU6mlJf1'U;.
i --n:SORED-
IY~
II
RESOLUTION NO.
/ y'1/.2. '1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING REQUEST FROM BONITA
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION TO
CONDUCT BONITAFEST
WHEREAS, the Bonita Business and Professional Association
(BBPA) will be conducting the Bonitafest event on Saturday,
September 28, 1996; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve the request from the BBPA
to conduct the Bonitafest event on Saturday, September 28, 1996
subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to the event, provide evidence of insurance in the form
of a certificate of Insurance and Policy Endorsement in the
amount of $250,000, naming the City of Chula vista as
additional insured, and their insurance as primary.
2. Prior to the event, execute the City's standard Hold Harmless
Agreement.
3. Provide adequate traffic control equipment and no-parking
signs as specified by the Police Department. This would
include provision of adequate signage, barricades, and traffic
control equipment as specified by the county of San Diego and
the Sheriff's Department on the portion of Allen School Road
outside of the city limits.
4. Provide adequate Police coverage at the event as determined by
the Chula vista Police Department through coordination with
the Chula vista Police Department and the San Diego County
Sheriff's Department.
5. Return all City-owned property to pre-use condition, including
arrangements for professional street sweeping and adequate
trash control and disposal throughout the affected area within
twenty-four (24) hours after the event.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of
Police
{tv \..~ y~\~~,~ .~
Ann Y. M ore, Acting
City Attorney
C:\rs\bonitafs
/M~/
TO: CHARLES MOORE, PRESIDENT
B.B.PA
FROM PAT DOLAN, EX SECRETARY
RE: INFORMATION ON "HARDSHIP" TO PARTICIPANTS IN THE
BONIT AFEST AND PARADE
PARADE:
1)
Bonitafest Committee and Parade Committee have already
ordered trophys and awards, presently being engraved for Band entrys
and Entertainment Stages appreciation plaques
2)
Marine Band has had Bonitafest Parade on their schedule since July.
This band "Spear-heads" the Parade.
3)
The Wells Fargo Stage Coach is in the Parade each year, the stage coach
is scheduled in November for the following year.
4) The following school bands are participating;
Chula Vista High, Chula Vista Jr. High,
Hilltop High, Hilltop Jr. High,
Bonita Vista High
Eastlake High
Hisperia High School
High School from Orange County
All schools have scheduled bus transportation for the parade competition, which is the first
in the County.
Bonita Valley Baptist church is building a float for the Parade
YMCA Tumbling Group will be participating
Service clubs; Optimist, Lions, Kiwanis, VFW and more
Youth, BVHS Cheerleaders, Boy Scouts and Junior Girl Scouts t mention a few.
AvJXJ OLY/tJP/C TU/I(j /AJC- C8/C)re~
!JAs- ~>C/-f-&7)ULQ;J 11 TflLG/2:3's' 7:t) CdI2K!
;::- /-.:A-C:' :;
Page 2
BONITAFEST.
Approximately 300 booths have been sold-out since early September with a deadline date
of August 1 st. The applications & checks paying for the booth space have been processed and
the post cards have been mailed out informing the "vendors" of their space number & location.
The following are a sample of partiipants in the Bonitafest;
Sharp Chula Vista Medical Center/Hospital
Scripp's Hospital is providing a 1st-Aid center
BV Baptist Church, Church of Joy, BV Christian Center, Pilgrim Lutheran most of
which are holding bake sales or acitivity to help their youth groups go to camp.
Banks such as; Bank of America and Great Western Bank. Bank of America is
scheduling their staff to "man" the Information Booth.
Many food vendors as well as crafters have fliers made up to send out to their
customers with the date and where to find them at Bonitafest.
Candidates running for public service office have their fliers and pamphlets printed
ahead of time to hand-out at the Bonitafest.
High School youth groups are having fund-raising projects already planned to help
raise money for ASB, team sport, and school equipment needs.
RESOLUTION NO. /YI/:J()
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING REQUEST FROM THE BONITA
SUNRISE ROTARY CLUB TO CONDUCT THE BONITAFEST
PARADE
WHEREAS, the Bonita Sunrise Rotary is requesting
permission to conduct the Bonitafest Parade on Saturday, September
28, 1996; and
WHEREAS, the parade will require the temporary closure of
Bonita Road between willow Street and Central Avenue.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the city of Chula Vista does hereby approve the temporary closure
from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. of Bonita Road between willow Street
and Central Avenue to conduct the Bonitafest parade on September
28, 1996 subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to the event, provide evidence of insurance in the form
of a Certificate of Insurance and Policy Endorsement in the
amount of $2 million, naming the City of Chula vista as
additional insured, and their insurance as primary.
2. Prior to the event, execute the City's standard Hold Harmless
Agreement.
3. Provide adequate traffic control equipment and no-parking
signs as specified by the Police Department. This would
include provision of adequate signage, barricades, and traffic
control equipment as specified by the County of San Diego and
the Sheriff's Department on the portion of Allen School Road
outside of the city limits.
4. Provide adequate Police coverage at the event as determined by
the Chula Vista Police Department through coordination with
the Chula Vista Police Department and the San Diego County
Sheriff's Department.
5. Return all City-owned property to pre-use condition, including
arrangements for professional street sweeping and adequate
trash control and disposal throughout the affected area within
twenty-four (24) hours after the event.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of
Police
(J /'v \t - rv't..z9 -<"-,~
Ann Y. Moo e, Acting
City Attorney
C:\rs\bonitafs
/.5"0 .../
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item / ~
Meeting Date 9/10/96
/8'i.Jl
Resolution Commenting on the adequacy of the Draft EIR/
Statement for the SR 125 Tollway/Freeway project in Chula Vista,
expressing a preference for alignments, and directing staff to forward
comments on the EIR/Statement.
Director of Public Works~
Director of Planning /tlL
C. )
Ity Manager 'j:
I
./
(4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No_X">
SUBMl'l"l'ED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The South Bay Agencies have been working on the process to establish a route for SR-125 since
the mid 1980's. Although the route had been on the California Freeway/Expressway system
since 1959, and the route adopted in mid 1960's, the route adoption was rescinded in 1976. In
1984 SANDAG put this portion of the freeway in the Transportation Plan and in 1987, by a five
agency agreement, the work on the EIS and Route adoption studies began. The Draft
Environmental Impact Report/Statement was circulated on July 19, 1996. The closing date for
comments on the statement is September 16, 1996. The purpose of this agenda statement is to
give the City Council the opportunity to give comments on the EIR/Statement, specify a
preferred alignment, and discuss briefly further actions that the staff will be working on with
CALTRANS and CTV once the report is approved and the route is adopted.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
I. Direct staff to make comments to CAL TRANS based on this report, further staff review
and further direction from Council.
2. Select Alternative 10, from Table S-I of the Draft EIR/Statement, (which includes the
CAC/Horseshoe Bend and Brown Field Modified alignments) as the preferred alignment.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The Resources Conservation Commission at their meeting on August 26, 1996 voted 4-2 to
recommend the No Project alternative, but that if the City Council decided to have a
Tollway/Freeway, then they preferred Alternative 6 (Brown Field Modified/Proctor Valley West!
Conduit West Alignment). Their full statement is Attachment A.
I/, "j
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date: 9/10/96
DISCUSSION:
The EIR/Statement looked at several combinations of alignments as well as the No Project
option. In addition, the report also compared the impacts associated with a freeway to those
associated with a tollway. These major impacts included different traffic volumes on the local
street system based on a tollway vs. a freeway.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
State Route (SR) 125 south is a proposed highway project connecting SR-54 with SR-905 in Otay
Mesa (See Figure I). Initially, it will be constructed as a 4 lane controlled access highway
(tollway) for II miles. Ultimately, it will consist of eight mixed use lanes and have a median
wide enough for two HOV lanes, although it's not anticipated that the HOV lanes will be
constructed until after the franchise period (35 years after construction). Initially there will be
interchanges at: SR-54, East H Street, Otay Lakes Road, Orange Avenue, and Otay Mesa Road.
Ultimately, there will be nine interchanges. The timing of the interchange for Mount San
Miguel Road depends on the timing of the Rancho San Miguel Project.
The northern mile will be paid for by the 1/2 cent sales tax measure, and the remaining 10
miles is proposed to be constructed and operated by California Transportation Ventures, Inc.
(CTV) through a 35 year Franchise given by the owner CALTRANS. If the tollway alternative
is selected, the project will begin construction in 1998 and be open for traffic in late 1999 or
2000. If the freeway alternative is selected, there are no funds identified over the next 20 years
and the earliest it could be constructed would be 2015. There is no guarantee that there will be
funds available in 2015.
Most of the route alignment through Chula Vista has been virtually determined by the course
of development, in accordance with the City's General Plan. There is only one alignment
through Salt Creek I, EastLake, and the Otay Ranch. The alignment just north of the Otay
River Valley through the SNMB ownership and the portion north of Eastlake have not been fully
determined.
CALTRANS has analyzed ten different combinations of alignments. They have also analyzed
the "No Project" alternative and the tollway vs. freeway alternative. Most of the impacts and
alignment decisions are concentrated in the area north of East H Street. The area with the most
impact to Chula Vista is the area south of Sunnyside/San Miguel Road area and north of Otay
Lakes Road. There are major alignment decisions and impacts on existing properties north of
this area, but that is under the jurisdiction of the County and sphere of Chula Vista and it is
likely to remain that way.
SHOULD CHULA VISTA CONTINUE TO SUPPORT A TOLLWAY?
Chula Vista has been in support of a freeway since adoption of the General Plan in the Mid
1980's. In the early 1980's, Council worked with three developers and hired Rick Engineering
to do an alignment study for SR-125. That study resulted in an alignment similar to the Proctor
/~',2.
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date: 9/10/96
Valley West Alignment and was the basis for preserving right of way from the Eastlake Project.
In 1988 the City entered into a five-party agreement to share in the cost of preparing an EIRlEIS
and Route Adoption. The parties included Chula Vista, City of San Diego, County of San
Diego, SANDAG, and CALTRANS.
In 1990, the Council supported CALTRANS seeking innovative financing for the construction
of SR-125 through Chula Vista. In June 1995 after a Public Hearing, the Council supported
using Transnet Funds to build the northern portion of a tollway through Chula Vista (See
Attachment G, City Council Minutes).
More recently, Council has supported the funding by the State for the construction of NAFTA
projects in San Diego County of which the tollway is one project, and the San Miguel connector
is to be funded by the State and CALTRANS.
In doing the planning for Chula Vista and the South Bay Region, SR-125 is an important and
necessary element in the Circulation Plans of the County, the City of San Diego, City of Chula
Vista and SANDAG. It will handle some of the traffic from Otay Mesa and the second border
crossing heading in the northeasterly direction, as well as relieve the extreme traffic congestion
projected for 1-805 and 1-5.
Traffic studies indicate that the tollway/freeway will relieve overburdened local streets in Chula
Vista and the Sweetwater Valley. Table 1-4 in the DEIS/DEIR (page 1-13) illustrates traffic
volumes on local streets for: I) 1995; 2) year 2015 no build; 3) year 2015 tollway; and 4) year
2015 freeway. There are dramatic reductions on some of the Bonita/Sunnyside streets for the
Tollway and Freeway alternatives vs. the No Project Alternative. However, it also shows that
there are volume reductions on most Chula Vista streets. For example, San Miguel Road, (east
of Bonita Road) with current volumes of 7,000 vpd, would increase to 35,500 for the no build
project, while actually dropping slightly, 6,800, for the Tollway Option. East H Street (east of
1-805) currently at 54,000, LOS D, would go to 61,500 (LOS E) under the no build alternative,
and go to 54,900 (LOS D) under the Tollway Option.
The above traffic volumes are for the year 2015, using SANDAG Series Eight growth
projections. Both Chula Vista and Otay Mesa are expected to grow significantly beyond 2015,
so the traffic numbers will only be higher on local streets without the highway.
The tollway/freeway will take much of the north/east traffic around Bonita and avoid congesting
the local streets.
Chula Vista is attempting to develop clean industrial projects in Eastern Chula Vista. The
tollway/ freeway is an important tool for economic development staff to be able to attract high
quality industrial development with high paying jobs.
There are no other direct arterials traversing north/south in the Chula Vista area that travel from
Otay Mesa to SR-54. All current northern trips must either go west on an arterial and use 1-805
/(" J
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date: 9/10/96
or 1-5, or travel north on Otay Lakes Road and wind through Bonita to get to SR-54 and points
north and east. The region needs SR-125 to be able to accommodate projected growth in
accordance with adopted regional and local plans. The job is to build it with the least impact
on the Bonita Area. That is the goal of this process.
TOLLWAY VS. FREEWAY.
This study looked at the two alternatives of both a tollway and a freeway. There is no question
about the issue that a freeway would be better for the South Bay than a tollway. There would
be even lower volumes of traffic on our local streets, and our users of the highway would not
have to pay a toll to use the facility.
However, there are no funds available now or in the foreseeable future to construct SR-125 as
a freeway. There are financial problems now in the TRANSNET Program to complete the
regional highway system on schedule. There are currently no funds programmed to complete
SR-905 in Otay Mesa.
Chula Vista has developed a program to pay for an interim SR-125 facility, which would allow
for additional trips in the eastern area. It would NOT allow build out of the City's General
Plan, but it would allow for growth for a few more years. This plan is expensive, $800 per
EDU, and will have an impact on the community of Bonita because the trips will exit through
San Miguel Road to Sweetwater Road to SR-54. If the tollway is built, the high fees paid by
Chula Vista homeowners could be lowered, and all the northeasterly bound traffic could avoid
winding through Bonita.
A tollway would insure an adequate facility in order to meet the traveling needs of the South Bay
in a timely manner, would reduce the burden of building the interim facility on the backs of new
homeowners and businesses, would not put the City in the position in 15 or 20 years of hoping
that CALTRANS builds a freeway, or have to place a moratorium on development.
In short, a freeway is better than a toll road but a toll road is much better than no road.
WHICH ALIGNMENT SHOULD CHULA VISTA SUPPORT?
Because Chula Vista has planned the eastern area of the City with the need for SR-125 in mind,
developments have allowed for right of way protection. This mainly refers to Eastlake, Salt
Creek I and the Otay Ranch. Development agreements with Eastlake and Otay Ranch required
that the developer dedicate the right-of-way for the facility. In fact, the developer of Salt Creek
I, did much of the grading for the highway project adjacent to this development.
The two areas where an alignment has not been determined are the Otay Ranch just north of
Otay Valley (Brown Field) and the San Miguel Ranch/Proctor Valley area just north of Eastlake
and Salt Creek I.
I~'{
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date: 9/10/96
BROWN FIELD ALIGNMENTS
There are three alignments that were studied: 1) Chula Vista General Plan Alignment, 2) Brown
Field Alignment, and 3)Brown Field Modified Alignment (See Figure 2). The Brown Field
Modified was a variation of the Chula Vista General Plan Alignment that was created to miss
some sensitive habitat. When the Brown Modified alignment was created, the Chula Vista
General Plan Alignment was dropped from further consideration.
The Brown Field Alignment has two major problems for Chula Vista: the landowner and the
environmental community. It goes through the developable part of the General Plan for the Otay
Ranch and makes it very difficult to construct the La Media crossing of the Otay River.
The departure from the adopted Otay Ranch GDP is only through greenspace and acceptable to
the property owners and consistent with our Development Agreement.
The Brown Field Modified meets the needs of the City, the landowner, and environmental
community. Therefore staff recommends that Council choose the Brown Field Modified
ali!mment in this area.
SAN MIGUEL RANCH/PROCTOR V ALLEY ALIGNMENTS
This section of the highway presents the most controversial issues (See Figure 3). This is where
a particular alignment could either split the Sunnyside neighborhood or an alternative alignment
goes around the neighborhood but enters sensitive habitat.
Staff has prepared a Table to compare Pro's and Con's of the two alignments choices. See
Page 6.
It is clear that with regard to impacts on the surrounding community, the Horseshoe Bend/CAC
alignments are preferable to the Proctor Valley Alignment. The Horseshoe Bend/CAC alignment
goes around the San Miguel Road neighborhood rather than split a small portion off from the
rest of Bonita/Sunnyside. It has much less impact on the number of houses that it will take, it
was favored by the Citizens Advisory Committee, will not require the relocation of several ball
fields, has less impact on expensive infrastructure (City Sewer and County Water Authority
Pipelines), has less noise impact on the Bonita neighborhoods, will allow for better circulation
in the San Miguel Ranch area, will allow Proctor Valley Road to not become a cul-de- sac, and
will provide for better integration of the Bonita Meadows Project with development of San
Miguel Ranch.
No organized citizens group in this area supports the Proctor Valley alignment. The County
Board of Supervisors has voted to strongly oppose the Proctor Valley alignment due to its impact
on the community. The only exception to the Proctor Valley alignment opposition is the City's
Resource Conservation Commission. While they voted that the "No Project" alternative
berecommended, they voted 4-2, that if the road were to be constructed, the Proctor Valley
alignment be chosen.
1"'5
Page 6, Item
Meeting Date: 9/10/96
Horseshoe Bend wi Proctor Valley
CAC Variation Alignment Alignment
Pros Cons Pros Cons
1. Results in the removal 1. Significant impacts to 1. Follows prior State- 1. Physically divides
andlor relocation of the Sunset Park (next to adopted route and natural the community of
least number of Sweetwater Reservoir). terrain, thereby reducing Bonita-Sunnyside.
residential structures. the amount of grading 2. Results in a
2. Significant impacts to necessary . significant number of
2. Reduces fragmentation landform by cutting removals or relocations
of Sunnyside. through Horseshoe Bend 2. Keeps future San of residential units.
(170 ft. high cut slopes). Miguel Ranch 3. Creates a significant
3. Minimizes direct neighborhoods cohesive. visual impact crossing
impacts to Sweetwater 3. Presents a barrier the Sweetwater Valley.
Valley (ie, visual, noise, between Sweetwater 3. Intersection spacing 4. Brings noise and
odors, etc.). Valley and open spaces with East H Street is I \4 odors closer to
to the east. mile (vs I mile). residential areas of
4. Provides better Sweetwater Valley.
integration of Bonita 4. Bisects neighborhoods 4. Less impacts to 5. Creates a narrow.
Meadows property into of future San Miguel Coastal Sage and difficult to develop,
overall development of Ranch development. Maritime Succulent strip of land between
surrounding area. Scrub. SR 125 and Bonita
5. More impacts to Highlands (Bonita
5. Less noise impacts to coastal sage and Meadows).
existing residential units maritime succulent scrub. 6. Requires relocation
in Bonita Highlands (west of sewer line (currently
of Bonita Meadows 6. Not in conformance in Proctor Valley
property). with C.V. General Plan Road).
or the Sweetwater 7. Cost is approx. $8
6. Cost is approx. $8 Community Plan. million more.
million less. 8. Requires Proctor
7. Interchange at Mt. Valley to be cul-de-
7. Provides better Miguel Road appears saeed. No connection
circulation for the San closer to "H" Street than to Bonita other than
Miguel Ranch area and a Proctor Valley alignment Frontage Road
4-way interchange. making transitions on and constructed by others.
off roadway more 9. Reconfiguration of
8. Leaves Proctor Valley difficult (However, the existing Little League
Road in its present distance still meets fields north of San
configuration. CALTRANS minimum Miguel Road is
of 1 mile). required.
COMPARISON OF SR 125 ALTERNATIVES
It ,.~
Page 7, Item
Meeting Date: 9/10/96
COMPARISON OF SR 125 ALTERNATIVES ATTACHMENT 2
I Brown Field I Modified Brown Field
Alignment Alignment
Pros I Cons Pros Cons
1. Slightly less biological 1. Not consistent with I. Consistent with 1. Results in a longer
impacts. approved Otay Ranch approved Otay Ranch bridge structure across
GDP. GDP. Otay Valley.
2. Shorter bridge across
Otay River. 2. Requires more cut and 2. Cost is $11 million 2. More impacts to
fill. less. proposed recreation area
3. Less impacts on within Otay River
recreation area within 3. Cost is $11 million Valley.
Otay River Valley. more.
The Resource Conservation Commission stated several reasons why the "No Project" alternative
should be chosen. (Attachment A.) With regard to their preference for the Proctor Valley
alignment over the Horseshoe Bend/CAC alignment, it is staffs understanding that the Proctor
Valley alignment was chosen primarily due to less impact on biological habitats (e.g., coastal
sage scrub and maritime succulent scrub) than the Horseshoe Bend/CAC alignment.
Staff recommends that the Horseshoe Bend/CAC alignment be chosen for the Route
Adoption. This alignment provides a better circulation pattern for San Miguel Ranch, removes
fewer residential units, is less expensive an has less noise impact on existing residences than the
Proctor Valley Alignment. Consideration should be given by Caltrans to make minor
modifications to this alignment that would reduce habitat impacts. However, if a major change
is required which would require recirculating the DEIR/DEIS, then staff would recommend the
Horseshoe Bend/CAC.
COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/STATEMENT
Staff from the Planning and Public Works Departments have reviewed the document and have
prepared preliminary comment and questions. The comments are for the most part detailed in
nature speaking to the correctness of statements in the document. These comments are
Attachments B thru F. Unless otherwise directed, staff will forward them to CALTRANS as
well as any other comments that the Council may express at the meeting. Other comments can
be submitted to CALTRANS by separate memo and time before the deadline on September 16,
1996.
CALTRAN8 has prepared a matrix of the impacts for each of the ten alignments. It is located
at the end of the summary chapter, page 8-29. It is also Attachment G. Detailed impacts are
discussed in Chapter 4. The major impact to existing houses would be noise. Berms and sound
11-7
Page 8, Item
Meeting Date: 9/10/96
walls will be constructed to reduce the impacts. However, for some houses near the alignment
in Eastlake, the noise impact will be significant. Overall, the Horseshoe bend alignment will
affect 377 homes with a 10 decibel increase in noise compared to 520 homes for the Proctor
Valley West, Conduit West alignment. Staff will be submitting the following comment to
Caltrans:
Table 4-7 indicates various residential lots within the City limits of Chula Vista
that would be subject to noise impacts in excess of acceptable City standards
(residential 45 dBA interior and 65 exterior). NOTE: The installation of walls
up to 10' high would not result in compliance. In addition, second story building
uses (i.e. bedrooms, etc.) would be subject to readings as high as 75 dBA with
no mitigation proposed. The EIR needs to provide better mitigation solutions
unless unfeasible and overriding considerations are in order.
Another impact will be the visual impact of the highway going through the region. The
Horseshoe Bend alignment will have a cut slope of 170 ft. high. This will be through the
Horseshoe Bend formation. Staff will make a further comment to landscape the slopes in
conformance with the surrounding area.
CALTRANS staff will be present at the meeting to answer questions.
ISSUES TO DEAL WITH AFTER ROUTE IS ADOPTED
There will be many issues that will require close coordination and agreement between
CALTRANS, CTV and Chula Vista once the project is a reality. Some of the issues are listed
below:
I. Timing and financial responsibility of the San Miguel Ranch Interchange.
2. Coordination of the Southern Interchanges for the Otay Ranch.
3. If Proctor Valley West is chosen, traffic circulation for trips between San Miguel Ranch
and Bonita Meadows and Bonita. Who will pay for the Frontage Road and when will
it be built?
4. How will City and other utilities be modified to provide for the tollway?
5. How will the right of way through the Chula Vista portion be dedicated? What
provisions will the City and developers want in the project in exchange for the right of
way dedication?
6. What will be the major items of a Freeway Agreement?
7. How will existing Interim SR-125 DIF monies be allocated? With what benefits to Chula
Vista residents?
There is still a considerable amount of effort on everyone's part to proceed from route adoption
to construction. Many long hours of negotiations should occur.
I~-r
Page 9, Item
Meeting Date: 9/10/96
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost estimates of the different alternatives are shown in Attachment G. These are CTV and
SANDAG costs estimates however. Costs to Chula Vista are unknown at this time. That will
depend on negotiations in the Freeway Agreement. If the Tollway is selected, the 125 DIP fee
could be deleted or reduced. That fee is currently $800 per EDU.
Attachments: Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
A - Resource Conservation Commission Comments
B - Planning Staff comments Re: SRl25 Tollway/Freeway Draft EIRlEIS
C - Otay Ranch Project Team Comments on SRl25 EIR
D - Engineering Staff comments Re: Review of SR125 EIR
E - Engineering Staff comments Re: SRl25 Environmental Impact Statement
F - Summary of Impacts for Alternatives
G - City Council Minutes of June 27, 1995
M:\HOME\ENOINEER\AOENDA \125BIS.JPL
It,' <1
RESOLUTION NO.
/YI/J J
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA COMMENTING ON THE ADEQUACY OF THE
DRAFT EIR/STATEMENT FOR THE SR 125 TOLLWAY/
FREEWAY PROJECT IN CHULA VISTA, EXPRESSING A
PREFERENCE FOR ALIGNMENTS, AND DIRECTING STAFF
TO FORWARD COMMENTS ON THE EIR/STATEMENT
WHEREAS, the South Bay Agencies have been working on the
process to establish a route for SR-125 since the mid 1980's; and
WHEREAS, although the route had been on the California
Freeway/Expressway system since 1959, and the route adopted in mid
1960's, the route adoption was rescinded in 1976; and
WHEREAS, in 1984 SANDAG put this portion of the freeway
in the Transportation Plan and in 1987, by a five agency agreement,
the work on the EIS and Route adoption studies began; and
WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report/Statement
was circulated on July 19, 1996 and the closing date for comments
on the statement is September 16, 1996; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this item is to give the City
Council the opportunity to give comments on the EIR/Statement,
specify a preferred alignment, and discuss briefly further actions
that the staff will be working on with CALTRANS and CTV once the
report is approved and the route is adopted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula Vista does hereby direct staff to make comment to
CALTRANS based on the Agenda Statement, further staff review and
further direction from Council.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council does hereby
select Alternative 10, from Table S-l of the Draft EIR/Statement,
(which includes the CAC/Horseshoe Bend and Brown Field Modified
alignments) as the preferred alignment.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director
of Public Works
~l1~
Ann Y. Moore, Acting
city Attorney
C:\rs\sr125.1
/6'" IrJ
H7T4CHiJ16VT4
DATE:
August 28, 1996
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the ChuJa Vista Council
YResource Conservation Commission ~
RCC comments and motion Re: SR-12S, at meeting of August 26, 1996
(DRAFI)
FROM:
SUBJECT:
At the August 26, 1996, meeting of the Resource Conservation Commission, the following
comments and motions were made regarding SR-12S EIR/EIS:
Present for discussion of SR-I2S: Ann Koby, California Transit Ventures; Susanne Glasgow,
Caltrans; and Cam Patterson, RECON, and Commissioners Marquez, Burrascano, Fischer,
Yamada, Hall and Thomas.
Commissioner Thomas asked a point of information of CalTrans concerning Chapter 6
Mitigation Monitoring Program, page 6-1. (see Footnote #1)
Commissioner Thomas asked if there existed county or other municipal ordinances or other
CalTrans or agency documents that were more specific concerning the concrete protocols or
details of carrying out any mitigation monitoring program. She noted that this statement itself
was very vague. RCC asked a response to what assurances are there that this will be
implemented and maintained'] Ms. Glasgow commented that a detailed mitigation plan for
SRI2S will be prepared following project approval.
Thomas requested information concerning CalTrans policies and procedures, in general, for any
highway construction are currently in place for dust control to protect the workers, drivers, and
residents and animals within wide range. Also, after construction, what SOP or other ordinances
are followed for quality control of the air quality around construction sites or areas prone to dust
storms. CalTrans noted that they do not own air quality monitoring equipment, but do follow
the recommendations of their Chief Engineer with regard to dust control on the job. CalTrans
Ms. Glasgow explained that a standard exists for dust control procedures and would investigate
it and forward this information to the RCC.
Commissioner Thomas provided a current journal article entitled WCoccidiodomycosis: A
Reemerging Infection Diseasew, Emerging Infectious Diseases Vol. 2 (No.3), July-Sept., 1996,
and written by Drs. Theo N. Kirkland and Joshua Fierer of the Dept. of Pathology and Medicine
of U.C. San Diego School of Medicine and Dept. of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, in San
Diego. She explained that the article noted that San Diego now has San Joaquin Valley Fever
(coccidioidomycosis) as an endemic disease and it is on the rise. It was noted that in Kern
County, for past several years, it had become epidemic and cost the County more than $66
/1 - /
million dollars in direct medical expenses and time lost from work.
It also noted that, although all people are susceptible to the spores of this agent which are found
in the dust and desert soil of San Diego area, certain populations have been exhibiting increased
vulnerability, e.g., IllY infected individuals and also pregnant women in their third trimester
of pregnancy.
Other types of agents found in dust that are increasing as emerging infectious agents include the
bacterial agent Legionella pneumophila (legionnaires disease) and, of course, assorted fungi
which causes allergies in many individuals. CalTrans said that they would investigate this
further and would address any concerns with regard to environmental health and highway
construction and landscape maintenance, in general, and provide them to the RCC.
Commissioner Thomas also noted that they were also interested in air drift of pesticides or
particulate matter into bodies of water.
Commissioner Marquez requested a review of the purpose and need for SR-12S. Ms. Glasgow
said the freeway would improve traffic flow from the U.S. Border through Eastlake, Chula
Vista, and Bonita. Ms. Marquez pointed out that all the projects that have been through the
RCC and Planning Commission in the past two years have met traffic analysis criteria based on
SR-12S not being constructed, why is there now such a sudden need for this freeway to support
the increase in traffic. Ms. Glasgow stated a phase of Kaiser Hospital was the only project that
required the construction of SR-12S. Doug Reid disagreed with this statement.
Ms. Glasgow stated that the 90S freeway connection to I-80S has been under consideration for
a long time and would serve a similar function as SR-12S. However, funds were not currently
available for this freeway and it was unknown when they would be.
Ms. Glasgow stated that the entire area large enough for eight lanes plus a wide median would
be cleared (and biological resources lost) at the start of this project, even though additional lanes
would not be constructed until needed.
Commissioner Hall questioned whether this project conformed to the mandate of CEQA not to
carry out leap frog development.
Ms. Glasgow stated that it was understood and agreed that all alternatives would significantly
impact biological resources of the region and that it would impact the quality of life in the Bonita
area. She also stated that it was clear that the Bonita area was a unique area and would require
a need for special mitigation regarding resident re-Iocation for displaced Bonita-Sunnyside
residents and businesses. The intense opposition from residents in this area was also noted.
Ms. Glasgow stated that in response to requests from Bonita residents no interchange will be
built in Bonita.
Tunneling the freeway was suggested as an option. However, according to Ms. Koby, the
tunneling has been deemed too costly and the monies invested could never be recovered.
4-~
It was noted that western alignments is less fragmenting, but future development is planned for
this area anyway.
The historical and archaeological impacts were discussed. Commissioner Thomas noted that the
Brown Field modified alternative option misses the archaeological and historical sites. She
ascertained that the archaeological sites referred to in the statement were Native American lands
and noted that they should be respected and preserved.
CalTrans noted that the western alignment was preferred because it is less fragmented and had
a less impact on the water and species then the eastern alignment. Alternatives S and 6 were
discussed as having less impact on scrub brush, and the least amount of impact on Gnatcatchers,
Least Bell's Virieo and Coastal Sage were found in Alternatives 6 and 8.
Commissioner Fisher stated that adequate studies were not conducted for sensitive reptiles and
amphibians, such as, Arroyo Toad, Red-legged Frogs and Pond Turtles. Mr. Patterson of
RECON stated that he was a botanist but he believed the habitat for these species did not exist
on or in Otay or Sweetwater River. Commissioner Fischer stated that Dudek and Associates
found Garter Snakes and the Pond Turtles in the Otay River and Reservoir. In addition, the
only known occupance in the U.S. (in the past decade) of the Baja California Racer was found
this year at Eastlake around the proposed 125 and Salt Creek project. He requested that all the
above-mentioned species be addressed.
Commissioner Thomas asked which, if any, of the proposed routes when overlaid with other
planned or proposed projects will contribute to chokepoints or impacts on the Multiple Species
Conservation Plan efforts. Are there any chokepoints created or enhanced? The holistic
overview of major construction or environmental efforts in the region in question should be
overlaid and analyzed to see the whole picture and a more valid evaluation and prediction of
impacts in Chula Vista and in the region. Ms. Glasgow stated that it was ail approved use in
the MSCP and overlays have not been done.
Commissioner Hall noted an error on page 4-127 of the EIR under 4.20.8 WATER. (See
Footnote 2 for this section). It should be "however, there may be incremental degradation in
water quality and risks to the Sweetwater River, Otay River, and Sweetwater Reservoir." Ms.
Glasgow agreed and said they would correct the error. Commissioner Hall stated that no project
should be allowed that would result in incremental or ANY degradation to our water supply.
Commissioners Thomas, Marquez, Fischer and Burrascano noted that this impact was quite
significant and warranted special attention by the City Council, Cal Trans, project developers
and regional planners.
Reasons to support a NO PROJECT alternative were supplies by commissioners throughout the
meeting.
A-3
These included the following:
Ie The threat to our water supply (source of drinking water) can not be tolerated.
(staff note; after reviewing the plans for 125 staff has determined that there will be no
impact on the Sweetwater and Otay Resevoirs. Any impact on water resources would
be in the Sweetwater and Otay rivers.)
Ie Neither Chula Vista or Bonita residents would benefit from this project.
D There is strong opposition to this project by a majority of the population.
Ie The biological impacts are too extreme to be mitigated (as stated in EIR).
Ie The impact to the Bonita community will have a major impact to the unique character
of Bonita.
Ie A large number of Bonita residences and business will be affected.
Ie Noise and air quality will be affected.
Ie The 905 freeway could serve the same purpose as 125.
Ie On pages 4-118 and 4-119, the short term and long term losses far outweigh the short
term and long term gains (Le. increased jobs due to construction and reduction of
congestion vs. a page of negatives).
Ie There exist too many unmitigated drawbacks to warrant the small advantages this project
may bring.
A motion was made by Commissioner Hall that the RCC recommend the No Project Alternative.
Seconded by Marquez; Motion passed 4-2; no - Yamada and Thomas.
A motion was made by Commissioner Thomas that "although the commission passed the motion
for the NO PROJECT alternative, that, if the City Council finds that it must approve a SR-125
project, they should approve Alternative #6, including quantitative air and water quality
monitoring (Brown Field Modified/Otay Ranch/EastlakelProctor Valley Road West, Conduit
Road West.) seconded by Marquez. Motion passed 4-2 no Burrascano and Fischer.
cc: Robert Leiter, Planning Director
John Lippitt, Public Works Director
A-'-/-
Footnote #1
Chanter 6 Miti~ation Monitorin, Pm21'3.m. Da2e &-1
According to this section wThe mitigation monitoring program will follow a three phase sequence
including design of the project, construction, and post-construction maintenance activities.
During preparation of the contract plans, there will be a periodic review to ensure mitigation
measures and other commitments that have been made are being incorporated into the final
project plans, specifications, and cost estimates.
Prior to the start of construction, meetings with environmental specialists, field engineers, and
contractor staff will be conducted to identify environmental mitigation measures, the locations
of environmentally sensitive areas (FSAs) and other environmental commitments or concerns and
to explain their background and importance. A preliminary environmental monitoring plan and
schedule of review for the duration of construction will be developed, including the names of
contact persons who have expertise in environmental matters that could arise during construction.
This plan will also include the contract's Water Pollution Control Plan which will be reviewed
periodically during construction. Proposed changes to the original contract plans will reviewed
by the environmental branch to determine if environmental impacts could result. All three
phases of this monitoring will involve Caltrans' environmental specialists as appropriate.
Implemented environmental mitigation measures will be maintained after construction work is
completed and their effectiveness determined through timely monitoring by Caltrans
environmental specialists and the engineering coordinator. Highway maintenance personnel will
check that all drainage facilities, erosion control devices, irrigation systems, and other
environmentally-related installations are functioning as intended. Plan material will be swept
to remove dirt and debris that could become air borne particulates or water sediments. W (page
6-1 of EIRlEIS)
Footnote #2:
4.20.8 Water
During project construction, both the Route 125 Sough project and associated development
projects may contribute to erosion and sedimentation problems in the watershed. Subsequently,
during operation of the transportation and development projects, the major water quality issue
is pollutant deposition on surfaces and subsequent flushing by runoff. the first flush of runoff
water contains the highest concentration of contaminants. Water quality issues may also be
associated with chemicals used in landscaping development projects. Water quality impacts of
the project will be effectively mitigated through use of Best Management Practices as required
under CalTrans wspecifications and the Clean Water Act. Urban runoff from development
projects in the study area will also be subject to state and federal regulation. However, there
by be incremental degradation in water quality, and risks to the Sweetwater River and Otay
Rim.
M:\Home\PIaDniD&\SRl25.DR
4-s
ATTACHMENT !3
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 4, 1996
TO: John Lippitt, Director of Public Works
VIA: Bob Leiter, Director of Planning pt
FROM: Ken Lee, Assistant Planning Director~
Duane E. Bazzel, Principal Planne~
Paul Manganelli, Project Planner ;t:-
SUBJECT: Comments Re: SR 125 Tollway/Freeway Draft EIR/EIS
The following comments are provided by the planners listed above and are directed as a response
to the SR 125 Tollway/Freeway Draft EIR/EIS. Also attached are two draft tables which
identify pros and cons of potential alignments for SR 125 which may be used as a basis for
internal discussion and as the basis for any staff position on proposed alignments.
Project Description
Pg. 1-1
If permitted under federal regulations, it would be helpful to re-organize Sections
1. and 1.1 into Goals and Objectives.
Purpose of and Need for Project
Pg. 1-7
Table 1-3, Otay Ranch Business Park. Status should read: "Currently within
Otay Ranch adopted plan area. Development plans will require City of San Diego
approval. "
Pg. 1-8
Table 1-3, Salt Creek Ranch. Status should read: "Approved GDP/SPA/TM.
Final Map being processed. "
Pg. 1-9
Table 1-3, Rancho San Miguel GDP. Status should read: "GDP and final EIR
approved, with condition. Revised GDP being processed."
B-1
John Lippitt
September 4, 1996
Project Description
Alternative Segments No Longer Under Consideration
Pg. 2-22
Section 2.4, Alternative Segments No Longer Under Consideration, should
provide reference to the purpose and need for the project.
Construction Scheduling and Staging
Pg. 2-27
Pg. 2-41
Pg. 2-41
On Table 2-2, Mt. Miguel Road interchange is planned for 2007-2009--how will
this impact local roads in the interim since construction of SMR will probably
commence in 1999 or 2000? Who pays for interchange? The EIR says it is to be
provided "by others" .
At a meeting held on 8-20-96, Mr. Stoll (CALTRANS) said that if Mt. Miguel
Road is being constructed at the same time SR-125 is being built, the interchange
could be built at the same time. He also said that the table probably should be
amended to place the Mt. Miguel interchange in the year 2000-2030 column.
On Figure 2-13, in Proctor Valley alternative, Proctor Valley Road is planned to
be cul-de-saced just north of Mt. Miguel Road and again at the San Diego Gas
and Electric substation. How is local circulation to be accommodated? How will
trips get to Bonita from the SMR project and its environs? Will Proctor Valley
Road connect to Mt. Miguel Road until the interchange is constructed?
At the 8-20-96 meeting, Mr. Stoll stated that this was done to avoid traffic
impacts to Sunnyside. This means that, from the San Miguel Ranch area, to get
to Bonita with its many attractors, one would either go north on SR-125 to SR-54
and double back via Briarwood, or travel via East H Street to Corral Canyon
Road. This is going to put so many new trips on these streets that the LOS on
Corral Canyon goes from existing A to F when SR-125 is built; Briarwood goes
from E to F. This is a major concern to the City of Chula Vista. Alternatives
should be analyzed that include a direct connection from SMR to San Miguel
Road in Bonita.
On the Proctor Valley alignment, who builds and pays for the frontage road to
San Miguel Road and bridge approaches indicated on Figure 2-13? The EIR says
they are to be built by others.
2
13-~
John Lippitt
September 4, 1996
At the 8-20-96 meeting, Mr. Stoll stated that this road was only one method by
which to provide access to Bonita but is not part of the project, nor has it been
environmentally assessed.
Affected Environment
Social, Economic and Land Use
Pg. 3-4
Pg. 3-9
Pg. 3-13
Pg. 3-13
Pg. 3-15
Pg. 3-18
Pg. 3-24
5th para., 2nd sentence. The statement that"... the existing rural character of
Bonita-Sunnyside is at risk from urban density residential development plans to
the south being processed through Chula Vista..." is very presumptive. If there
is any risk to the character of this area it is a perceived risk and should be so
stated.
1st para. The Baldwin Company does not own or control Salt Creek Ranch. This
property is being developed by JM Development.
1st para. The other property being considered for annexation besides the Otay
Valley portion of the Otay Ranch would be immediately to the east of Salt Creek
Ranch.
2nd para. LAFCO approved a change in the City's Sphere of Influence to
include the Otay Valley parcel of the Otay Ranch in the Spring of 1996.
2nd para. A new property owner has proposed modifications to the approved
GDP for San Miguel Ranch.
Future Trails. The Chula Vista General Plan designates a trail system within the
greenbelt open space corridor. This future trail system will need to traverse
SR125 from Sweetwater Valley to Salt Creek Ranch. While direct mitigation
may not be required, consideration of a point of crossing will be necessary to
implement the policies of the General Plan.
1st para. This paragraph should be deleted since this information is repeated at
the top of Pg. 3-26.
4th para., last sentence. The appropriate reference to the Otay Ranch document
is the "Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan."
5th para., last sentence. The Otay Ranch SPA I was adopted by the City Council
in July, 1996.
3
/3--3
John Lippitt
Pg. 3-25
Pg. 3-26
Pg. 3-29
Pg. 3-45
Pg. 3-49
Pg. 3-57
Pg. 3-58
Pg. 3-65
September 4, 1996
6th para., last sentence. Add the unit numbers reflected in the first para. on this
page for the EastLake Trails, Vistas and Woods.
Ditto comments on Pg. 3-15, above.
1st para., 4th & 5th sentences. Delete reference to EastLake projects since these
are discussed in a dedicated section on Pg. 3-24.
5th para. This paragraph should be reworded to clearly state that "unattractive
aspects of the South Bay" is related to "marketing" and should reference the
regional or sub-regional transportation system.
Exhibit 3-2 - Elementary school missing.
Exhibit 3-6 - EastLake industrial mapped - not developed to extent shown on
exhibit label "Existing Land Use". Also commercial at EastLake Parkway now
developed.
Figure 3-14. This General Plan map has been superseded by a new colored
General Plan map incorporating the Otay Ranch area.
Figure 3-15. This GP Circulation map has also been superseded.
Figure 3-22. A revised greenbelt and open space corridor plan has been prepared
incorporating the Otay Ranch area.
Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures
Socioeconomics
Pg. 4-15
Pg. 4-16
Last para. Consideration of the Chula Vista greenbelt trail connection across or
under SR125 should be discussed as a future trail impacted by the
tollway/freeway.
5th para. Delete the statement "This seems likely since there is no local serving
commercial area in the approved General Development Plan for Rancho San
Miguel. " The proposed revisions to the San Miguel Ranch GDP include
commercial at East H Street, and not at SRI25/Mt. Miguel Road (future).
6th para., 2nd sentence. The statement "However, any such use would likely
seek approval and annexation through the City of Chula Vista, where
4
B-1
John Lippitt
Pg. 4-20
September 4, 1996
authorization may be easier to obtain." is totally inappropriate. The City of
Chula Vista would evaluate any proposal for commercial in light of its
consistency with General Plan policies and in consideration of impacts to existing
neighborhood areas.
Last para. Major hiking and riding trail crossings not only occur on the Otay
Ranch, but also on the San Miguel Ranch property.
Land Use/Local Plans
Pg. 4-28
Pg. 4-29
All references to the Otay Ranch should cite "GDP/SRP."
5th para. Replace "East H Street" with "East Orange Avenue."
3rd para. This statement should be included for each of the alternative
alignments, or at least referenced.
Biological Resources
Pg.4-79
Noise
Pg.4-104
& 105
Depending on which alternative is selected between the Brown Field and Modified
Brown Field alignments, there would be a significant difference in the level of
indirect impacts. This EIR/EIS may defer impacts of La Media Road to the
environmental analysis associated with that project; however, in considering
alignments of SR125 these impacts should be considered.
Table 4-7 indicates various residential lots within the City limits of Chula Vista
that would be subject to noise impacts in excess of acceptable City standards
(residential 45 dBA interior and 65 exterior). NOTE: The installation of walls
up to 10' high would not result in compliance. In addition, second story building
uses (i.e., bedrooms, etc.) would be subject to readings as high as 75 dBA with
no mitigation proposed. The EIR needs to provide better mitigation solutions
unless unfeasible and overriding considerations are in order.
Cumulative Impacts - Biological
Pg. 4-125
Last para., 4th sentence. The draft MSCP has expanded coverage to 85 species.
5
B-~
John Lippitt
Pg. 4-126 &
Pg. 4-159
Attachments (2)
September 4, 1996
Otay Tarplant. Although the biological section seems a good evaluation in most
areas because so many field studies and previous reports have been done, there
is one exception; from the biological studies done from San Miguel Ranch it
would appear that the "Horseshoe Bend" alternative would have a greater impact
on the Otay Tarplant than the "Proctor Valley" alternative. This should be
examined further and recognized in the document.
cc: Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator
6
B.. {p
COMPARISON OF SR 125 ALTERNATIVES
ATTACHMENT 1
Horseshoe Bend wi Proctor Valley
CAC Variation Alignment Alignment
Pros Cons Pros Cons
1. Results in the removal 1. Significant impacts to I. Follows prior State- I. Physically divides the
andlor relocation of the least Sunset Park (next to adopted route and natural community of Bonita-
number of residential Sweetwater Reservoir). terrain, thereby reducing the Sunnyside.
structures. amount of grading
2. Significant impacts to necessary. 2. Results in a significant
2. Reduces fragmentation of landform by cutting through number of removals or
Sunnyside. Horseshoe Bend (170 ft. 2. Keeps future San Miguel relocations of residential
high cut slopes). Ranch neighborhoods units.
3. Minimizes direct impacts cohesive.
to Sweetwater Valley (ie, 3. Presents a barrier 3. Creates a significant
visual, noise, odors, etc.). between Sweetwater Valley 3. Intersection spacing with visual impact crossing the
and open spaces to the east. East H Street is I \4 mile Sweetwater Valley.
4. Provides better integration (vs I mile).
of Bonita Meadows property 4. Bisects neighborhoods of 4. Brings noise and odors
into overall development of future San Miguel Ranch 4. Less impacts to Coastal closer to residential areas of
surrounding area. development. Sage and Maritime Sweetwater Valley.
Succulent Scrub.
5. Less noise impacts to 5. More impacts to coastal 5. Creates a narrow.
existing residential units in sage and maritime succulent difficult to develop. strip of
Bonita Highlands (west of scrub. land between SR 125 and
Bonita Meadows property). Bonita Highlands (Bonita
6. Not in conformance with Meadows).
6. Cost is approx. $8 million C. V. General Plan or the
less. Sweetwater Community 6. Requires relocation of
Plan. sewer line (currently in
7. Provides better circulation Proctor Valley Road).
for the San Miguel Ranch 7. Interchange at Mt.
area and a 4-way Miguel Road appears closer 7. Cost is approx. $8
interchange. to "H" Street than Proctor million more.
V alley alignment making
8. Leaves Proctor Valley transitions on and off 8. Requires Proctor Valley
Road in its present roadway more difficult to be cul-de-saced. No
configuration. (However, the distance still connection to Bonita other
meets CALTRANS than Frontage Road
minimum of I mile). constructed by others.
9. Reconfiguration of
existing Little League fields
north of San Miguel Road
is required.
B -7
COMPARISON OF SR 125 ALTERNATIVES
Brown Field
Alignment
Pros
1. Slightly less biological
impacts.
2. Shorter bridge across
Otay River.
3. Less impacts on
recreation area within Otay
River Valley.
( .
DuANI:'.\:'>K 1~5(m).J:o!KI
Cons
1. Not consistent with
approved Otay Ranch GDP.
2. Requires more cut and
fill.
3. Cost is $11 million more.
ATTACHMENT 2
Modified Brown Field
Alignment
Pros
1. Consistent with approved
Otay Ranch GDP.
2. Cost is $11 million less.
13-. g
Cons
I. Results in a longer
bridge structure across Otay
Valley.
2. More impacts to
proposed recreation area
within Otay River Valley.
A7TA{I!I11~NT ~
Memorandum
DATE: August 27, 1996
TO: John Lippitt, Director of Public Works
FROM: Rick Rosaler, Senior Planne~
RE: Otay Ranch Project Team Comments on SR-125 EIR
cc: Bob Leiter, Planning Director
The Otay Ranch Project Team has reviewed the SR-125 EIR and has the following
comments:
Page S-22, Discussion of Built Alternatives
The Project Team recommends that the City support the Brown Field Modified alignment.
This alignment appears to be most consistent with the Otay Ranch General Development
Plan (GDP) alignment whereas selecting the Brown Field alignment would require a GDP
amendment to change not only the SR-125 alignment but also the village design between
Village 7 and the Eastern Urban Center (EUe) and between Villages 8 and 9. Village 9 is
part of the University site. The ElR should find the Brown Field Modified Plan consistent
with the Otay Ranch GDP and the Brown Field alignment inconsistence requiring
substantial land use plan amendments.
Page 1-28, Figure 1-7, 8 and 9, SR-125 Traffic Circulation Network
This map presents the traffic forecast for the three alternatives: No-Build, Tollway and
Freeway. It projects in the Year 2015 development in the Otay Ranch will include full
development of Villages 1, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11 and the Eastern Urban Center and partial
development of Villages 2,4,8 and 9. Villages 9 and 10 contain the University site, and
GDP policies prohibit residential development until 75% of the Otay Valley Parcel is
developed. The Project Team believes Villages 3 will develop prior to Village 8.
In addition, the network seems to extend Birch Road west of La Media through Village 2
to Paseo Ranchero. The Otay Ranch GDP Circulation Plan does not have this connection.
Also the network loads 8,000 trips on Rock Mountain east of Hunte Parkway. The GDP
does not indicate Rock Mountain east of Hunte except for the future connection of Alta
Road. The land use in this area is open space. We further believe that Otay Valley Road
will be extended east to connect with Paseo Ranchero and Rock Mountain before Rock
Mountain is connected to Hunte Parkway.
C -/
SR-125 Memo
August 27, 1996
Page 2-6, Brown Field Modified
Page 2
The Project Description under Construction Features indicates that there will be an
overcrossing of a future arterial on the Otay Ranch. This overcrossing seems to connect
Village 6 with the Freeway Commercial area of the EUC. The Otay Ranch GDP does not
indicate this connection. It does indicate that the future transit line will cross SR-125 in
this location.
Page 3-10, Transportation and Utilities
The City of San Diego has a major water line that runs ITom their filtration plant at the
south end of the Lower Otay Reservoir to their existing reservoir on the west side of
Village 8.
Page 3-13, Chula Vista General Plan
The EIR indicates the Otay Ranch is not within the City and that a change in the sphere is
anticipated. The City's Sphere ofInfluence was amended by LAFCO on February 5 and
July 1, 1996 to add the 9,300 acres to the City's Sphere and authorized the City to
conduct the reorganization proceedings to annex this area to the City. The reorganization
hearing is scheduled for September la, 1996.
Page 3-14 and Page 3-24, Otay Ranch
The Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan for Villages 1 and 5 was approved by the City
Council on June 4, 1996. The SPA One Plan approved 5,573 units on 1,110 acres in these
two villages. Both villages are planned on the village concept.
Page 3-61 Figure 3-18, Otay Ranch Project Area
The Project Team strongly encourages the EIR to use the Otay Ranch GDP to show the
alignments of the Brown Field and the Brown Field Modified. We are concerned that the
Brown Field Modified alignment be definitely shown to be consistent with the Otay Ranch
alignment for SR-125. We have provided a reduced copy of the GDP plan for use in the
EIR.
Page 3-68 Figure 3-25, Major Land Development
This map is woefully out of date. The Eastlake Landswap is not shown, and the Salt Creek
Ranch Project is shown as part of the Otay Ranch. If they are going to indicated Orange
Avenue, then all the other arterial streets should also be indicated.
c-~
SR-125 Memo
August 27, 1996
Page 4-23, Otay Ranch
Page 3
The EIR indicates that the SR-125 alignment on the Otay Ranch occupies approximately
120 acres which are privately owned by Baldwin. Ownership of the Otay Ranch has
changed over the last 2 1/2 years since the approval of the GDP. Ownership of the
alignments is now controlled by SNMB Inc. Village Development and West Coast Land
Fund.
Page 4-25, Consistency with Plans
While the Otay Ranch GDP does recognize the potential to modifY the route shown, the
Project Team believes the Brown Field alignment is inconsistent with the GDP and is not
sure that the Brown Field Modified alignment is consistent. We believe the two alignments
should be shown on the Otay Ranch GDP Land Use Plan to ensure consistency.
Page 4-44, Otay Ranch
The description of the Otay Ranch indicates that "each urban core" will have its own light
industry, office, commercial facilities, schools, residences and other essential services.
There is only one urban core planned for the Otay Ranch in the Eastern Urban Center
which will have commercial, office and high density residential uses. The villages will only
have sufficient neighborhood commercial and public facilities to support the residential
component of the village.
Page 4-104, Table 4-7 Noise Impact and Mitigation Summary
This table indicates the existing and predicted noise levels at noise receivers along the
proposed right-of-way. Receivers 19,21 and 22 are indicated on Figures 2-9 and 2-10 in
Village 9 which is designated for the University. The table indicates these receivers will
have between 63 and 70 dBA. Consideration should be given to lower the alignment
across the Otay River to reduce the University's exposure to noise.
The Otay Ranch Project Team believes the Brown Field Modified is the only supportable
alignment through the Otay Ranch. The Brown Field alignment will require amendments
to the Otay Ranch GDP and the Chula Vista General Plan.
We have attached copies of the Otay Ranch GDP, the Otay Ranch Ownership map for the
annexation area, and the SPA One land use plan for use in the EIR.
C-3
/!TTAC II~~ tVT j)
August 29, 1996
File
TO: John P. Lippitt, Director of Public Works
VIA: Clifford 1. Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works/ City Engineer
FROM: William A. Ullrich, Senior Civil Engineer 1, ~ j: /
SUBJECT: Review of SR-125 EIR
Following are my comments on the subject document:
SPECIFIC COMMENTS
Parle S-24.25. Both segments which contain the Proctor Valley Road West alignment should indicate
that the Proctor Valley sewer needs to be relocated.
Pal!e 1-8. Table 1-3, Otay Ranch does not have approval of Villages One and Five. Planning
Commission approved a revised Tentative Map on August 14,1996 which included most of Village
One and only Phase IA of Village Five.
Page 1-8. Table 1-3, Salt Creek Ranch has an approved Tentative Map and has processed
improvement and grading plans as well as final maps with the City. None has been approved to date.
Pal!e I-II. Chula Vista Interim Plan. The SR-125 Fee includes only segments 1-5 as listed. Segment
7 is in the Transportation Development Impact Fee Program.
Pal!e 1-26. FIGURE 1-5, Interim SR-125 does not include segment 7.
Page 2-8. Construction Features, The Kaiser ErR indicated a need for ramps trom EastLake Parkway
to SR-125. Those ramps are not considered in this EIR. The ramps are shown as northbound on and
southbound offramps.
Parle 2-9. Maior Utility Relocations and Crossings, This section should include the realignment of
the sewer main in Proctor Valley Road which serves Salt Creek I.
Page 2-21, Orange Avenue from 1-805 to EastLake Parkway is a 6 lane prime the majority of the
distance. Only a portion is designated as expressway. Paseo Ranchero is a 6 lane prime from Otay
Valley Road to Telegraph Canyon Road. North of Telegraph Canyon Road the Chula Vista General
Plan designates Paseo Ranchero as a Class I Collector. The portion of East "H" Street trom Otay
Lakes Road to SR-125 is designated a four lane major. See FIGURE 3 which indicates the proper
General Plan designations for the streets indicated above. Figure 3 does not include the Otay Ranch
system however.
D -/
SR-125 ErR COMMENTS
2
August 29, 1996
Palle 2-27. Table 2-2 Add to the 2000-2030 time frame under and overcrossing needed to serve
planned roadways.
Page 3-10. This section should include the Proctor Valley Sewer that will have to be relocated if the
Proctor Valley West alignment is adopted.
7.
M:\HOME\ENGINEER\ TRAFFIC\SR-125EI.W AU
()-~
A7T/lCI-!/l1,ErVT E
MEMORANDUM
August 6, 1996
File # 0600-20- YEool
TO:
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works
VIA:
Clifford L. Swanson, Deputy Public Works 2tor/City Engineer
Kenneth Goldkamp, Senior Civil Engineer 'r
SR125 Environmental Impact Statement
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Attached are two memos containing comments about the geology, waste collection system (sewers)
and street crossings along the SRl25 alignment.
The EIS makes no mention about what impact the project will have on the present and future
waste collection system.
George Varshock in his memo raises questions about the impacts of blasting during construction,
identified probable slide areas in the Horseshoe Bend region, the presence of an inactive fault in
the Otay Valley, and the potential for liquefaction in the Sweetwater and Otay Valleys.
These are all issues which probably need to be addressed and included in the E.I.S. If you need
any further information, please call me.
KJG:rkb
i-,1':.;.;r:;;J.::J.(~nts
"~,' ~.: ,'1"-:(: :\:81' ~.}~NEER',J'E.f:MIT~\,~~j.~,-:; .~,jG
E - (
MEMORANDUM
August 5, 1996
File 1/ 0600-20-YEOOl
TO: Ken Goldkamp, Senior Civil Engineer
FROM: George Varshock, Engineer Assistant 116.Y-
SUBJECT: Comments on p.3-I, 3-2, 3-49, 3-50, 4-88, 4-89 of E.I.S. for SR-125 (for areas
within the City of Chula Vista)
I. Blasting will probably be required if excavating Santiago Peak Volcanics. This will create
noise, safety and water quality issues.
2. I have read literature that suggests the possibility of a fault (probably not active) striking
roughly east-west along the Otay River Valley in the vicinity of the proposed highway
crossing.
3. The area within Horseshoe Bend is a "Landslide Susceptibility Area," as mapped by the
State of California, (1995). See attached.
4. There is the possibility that perched water could exist in the areas of alignment that cross
Proctor Valley and Otay River Valley. These could be areas of a shallow water table.
With certain alluvial soils (certain sands) this could create the potential for liquefaction.
Need more information for a determination of this.
5. The proposed alignments cross Sweetwater Formation and Otay Formation. Clay soils of
these formations can create unusual and difficult construction problems. For example,
grading that removes substantial overburden of deep-seated, preconsolidated clay soils
could cause unstable subgrade. A comprehensive soils and engineering geology study
should be performed to determine if the proposed alignments(s) is adequate for this
proposed highway.
M:\HOME\ENGINEER\LANDDEV\SR125.GV
E-~
'.
."'. .,..
,
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
DMG OPEN-FILE REPORT 95-03
"
LANDSLIDE HAZARDS IN THE SOUTHERN
PART OF THE SAN DIEGO METROPOLITAN
AREA, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Landslide Hazard Identification Map No. 33
1995
----
~-
1ME REIOURCES AaENCY-------- STATE OF CALIFOIINIA
DOUGLAS p, WHEELER PETE WILSON
SECRETARY FOR RESOUFICES GOVERM:'R
IlEPAJI'IIIENT OF CONIERVA11OH
MICHAEL BVRHE
Dll/EC1DR
E -3
. ,
,.
"
)'
ir
f
f'
Ii
,
I
1;
,
f
. " "~
E-'f
"",,"-
.
~
~
~:::~~,.,- /
'~'>.
""--< '
~~~-
2
o
~
>
,
i)
-'-
"
~~
.,),0
~
."-~
.~.. .
io..
"17
. f,'t~
$~~ .
. i>~
,,1
V'fLLWA Y ....
"15
;
~ .fJJI
18CO(\(\
FEET
"13
.
~
~
~
.
>
>
,
~
~ ~
-.." ,
:.
~' ~~,~.:
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
RELATIVE LANDSLIDE SUSCEPTlBR.ITY AREAS
1 2 3-1 I 3-2 4-1 I 4-2
Least MargiDaJly Generally Most
Susceptible Susceptible Susceptible Susceptible
IDa'easiDg IaDdslide susceplibility
>
Tbesc maps depict the suscepIibility to 111 types of slope hazards. As used berein, s10pe hazards iDcIude DOl 0DIy
traditional, deep seated IAnd.li""". which affect bedrock, but also a variety ofotherpnt-riAlly ""-gin! pI>-....."'A
rdaIcd to the behavior of mobilized slope materials such as surficial (shallow) failures, eanbtlows, debris f1ows,
.......iI.Ii~.. rMmll", soil creep, erosion, npid ....i.......hltiOD, IJId debris or mud fIoniIing
The scale used to designate susceptibility symbolizes the comparIIIivc capacity of slopes to resist faillIR. The
IeYeIs iDcIude:
AREA 1 - LEAST SUSCEPTIBLE. T...nilc1ides and other features rdaIcd to slope iDsIabiIity are IIOD-nistel>t
to vety rare within this area due primarily to the lack of steep slopes. lDcluded within this area are
topographically low-lying aIluviated fIoodpIains. Slope angles of 5 depees or less cbaracterize this
area. Pan of the area may be under1ain by material that lacks the strength to support steep slopes
(such as unconsolidated Illuvium) but is relatively stable due to the fI._ or the slope aDd Iadt of
potential energy. Land within AmI 1 will probably mnain relatively stable lIDless the w..-...by is
mdically modified. Locally, the area may coDlain 1DI5IabIe slopes, such as akmg steep baDks of
eroded gullies or slopes of cut and/or fill material that bave been modified by grading.
P.........mended ADDlication: Factor of Safety values for slopes are gaIenIIIy above 1.5 except for a
few Oess than 5% of Area 1) local steep slopes. With respect to slope mitiJ1diOD, moogi.-.mg-
geological investigations are generaIIy DOt ~'Y for proposed deveIopmeDt, except where grad-
ing is likely to create and/or enaoacl1 upon local slopes, such as deep cuts aDd draiDage ~honnel
banks.
AREA 2 - MARGINALLY SUS\;U'IUSLE. This area iDcIudesgeol1etomodelateslopes, wheres10peangles
are gaIenIIIy less than 15 degrees. This area typically iDcIudes low-lying boctoms ofbJoed vaIIeys
and basins and large elevated swfaces of PI.,;~ temII:e deposits. T...nd.li..... aDd other slope
failures are rare within this area, although slope hazards are possible on IIOIIIIeIleeper slopes within
the area or along its borders.
p................""" ADDlication: Factor of Safety values for most slopes are above or It 1.5; 1IoRYer,
some Oess than 20".4 of AmI 2) local steep slopes Diay bave F.S. values less than 1.5. Due to the
variability in terrain, engiDccring-geological investigation may be advisable prior to dewIopment.
AREA 3 - GENERALLY SUS\;U'lusLE. This category ........i... two subareas. SUBAREA 3-1 - Slopes
within this area are at or De8J' their stability limits due to a combiJJatioD ofMak matcriaIs aDd steep
slopes (many slope angles exceed 15 degrees). Although most slopes within Subarea 3-1 do DOl
c:urrent1y coDlain IAnd.lide deposits, they can be ~ to fail, 1oca1Iy, wilen adwndy modified
SUBAREA 3-2 - GeneraI1y occupies IIeeper aDd higher slopes wbich are less stable aDd _ suscep-
tible to lIIIIdslides and other slope failures. Most slopes in this IIIIbImI bave angles -.-ling 25
degrees and heights in excess of25O feet DebrisfIows and rncI<f!all. may Ofi&iaate within Suberea 3-
1 or 3-2 IJId flow cIowDslope. 9C)11V'fi....... at high enough speeds to CIIaSIrOphicaIly impIIct ~
cIowDslope land which may lie ~thin Areas I, 2, 3, or 4.
3
-
;=-~
".
-
-.......
""-~_.' "-''',=--" -,_.
""J!"
.-
__ m~
lI.....mm.....!"" ADDlication: Factor of Safety values for most slopes lie at or below 1.,. Detailed
~gi"'"'ling-geological investigations sbouJd be required for proposed~.....d ~.I.... s\opes in
Area 3 lie at or near Ibeir stability limits.
AREA" - MOST SUSU;YU.lJLE. This area (shaded on the map) is characterized by unstable s\opes and
includes alllanileHmo, shown on the maps (wbether appIRIItIy 8Ctivc at present or DOt) and s\opes
wbeIe IhiR: is evidcDce of downslope creep of surface matcriaJs. SJopcs within Area 4 sbouJd be
considmd naturally unstable, subject to failure even in the ~ of the activities of man. This
catcgoiy is subdivided into two subareas. SUBAREA 4-1 . Generally located outside the ""'lndaties of
tWini... mapped lanilell.!es but contains observably unstable s\opes underlain by both weak materiaJs
(particularly, geologic units that contain rocks with abundant CXJIIIIISM clay matcriaJ such as the
Ardath Shale, Otay Formation, and Friars Formation; see Kennedy and ~...... 1975), aDd adverse
geologic sttudure (dip slopes 8DdIor daylighled lwI.!i", planes). It also includes questionable land-
slides and ovcnteeponed high coastal bJuft's which lie subject to 8Ctivc sea-wave erosion. Not included
in the pRSellt study lie beach 8Ie8S exposed to sea-wave action '--~ beach erosion Is DOt a "slope
ba7ard." SUBAREA 4-2 . Includes the definite Iandsliclcs shown on the map aDd IIeIIIby unstable
areas.
11_""""'-' ADDlication: Factor of Safety values for most slopes lie below 1.'. Detailed, compre-
hensive engineering-geologica1 investigations, which include specitic measures that address slope-
hazard mitigation, lie nee I r"J Cor any proposed development in Area 4 '-all<e the slopes lie the
most unstable within the mapped area of the County of San Diego. !;nocial Note: -.~ of the
unstable nature of terrain in Area 4, when '-ssing appropriate uses for UDdeveIoped land, it is
advisable to consider extreme alternatives and avoid intermediate approaches. For example, ciI!!cr the
. land should remain (I) undeveloped, lJ1inimallydeveloped orbe used for open space (such as a nature
preserve, parle, golf course, etc.) !!! (2) high-density or other high-value development should be per_
mitted to occupy sufficient area to allow use of proper stabilization measures and to justify the high
cost of mitigation unless comprehensive engineering-geologica1 investigation of the area suggests
other feasible alternatives may be possible.
..
1::::-(.;,
.-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
.
I
MEMORANDUM
August 2, 1996
File No. 0600-20- YEOOl
TO:
Ken Goldkamp, Senior Civil Engineer
Roger L. Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer ~~ eiP
FROM:
SUBJECT:
SR125 Environmental Impact Report/Statement
We have reviewed the subject document. Our main concern is that the potential conflicts of the
various alternative routes with the existing and future sewer trunk lines that serve portions of the
City have not been addressed. Locations of potential conflicts (please see the attached plat)
include:
1. The 15"/12" Proctor Valley Road Sewer Trunk Line and the "Proctor Valley Road West
Alignment" which runs along Proctor Valley Road for a substantial distance. The
Horseshoe Bend Alignment will also cross this facility.
2. The 15" Frisbee Sewer Trunk Line which runs west from the intersection of Proctor
Valley Road and Bonita Meadows Lane and the "Proctor Valley Road West Alignment."
3. The 8" Sewer main running along San Miguel Road (a County facility) has potential
conflicts with all of the alignments.
4. The future 30' Salt Creek Sewer Trunk Line will be constructed in the Otay Valley.
However, this sewer line should present little conflict with the various alternative roadway
alignments if they are constructed using a structure (bridge) high above the valley floor.
We also looked for the impacts of the project on the City's existing and future streets and
neighborhoods. The report seems to address these concerns. The only existing streets that are
affected are East "H" Street, Otay Lakes Road and Eastlake Parkway. Apparently, these streets
and the neighborhoods they serve were designed around a future SR125 corridor. Consequently,
there should be little impact. It seems that, depending upon which alignment is chosen, the
Sunnyside area along San Miguel Road will be impacted. In addition, all of the City's future
major roads that will be crossing the corridor are included in the EIR.
MJI:mji
[M: I.. IAdv PlanISRI25EIR.MJI]
E -7
PROPOSED MITIGATIONS
FOR HIGHWAY 125 SOUTH
Discontinue plans to expand the campground
The current plan is to expand the current campground to several times its current size. This
planned use is no longer appropriate for three reasons:
1) The planned highway cuts through part of the planned campground expansion area.
2) With a highway so nearby, the already floundering campground attendance cannot be
expected to justifY expansion.
3) Although a campground is an appropriate use of a regional park, it services travelers much
more than nearby residents. It seems like there might be other potential uses of this regional
park that might benefit the immediate community in addition to others within the Sweetwater
Region.
Although the County Board of Supervisors recently voted to "not make it a high priority" to
preserve the existing horse campground, there is very real potential that this expensive
campground won't need to be scrapped if other parts of the park are developed with
complimentary recreational uses that encourage use of the existing horse campground. Three
things that would very much compliment the horse campground would be: 1) Public fishing on
Sweetwater Reservior. 2) Enhanced riding/hiking trails within Sweetwater Park. 3) A regional
horse show facility.
Create a Regional Horse Show Facility in Sweetwater Regional Park
A Regional Horse Show Facility would seem an appropriate use with this Regional Park
because:
1) It would fill a currently unfilled regional recreational need. There is currently no first-
class public horse show facility south of Del Mar.
2) The Red Hill Portion of Sweetwater Regional Park is surrounded by the community of
Sunnyside, which is unique in the county of San Diego for it's rural equestrian nature. Why
not leverage this uniqueness with a complimentary use of the regional park?
3) Something has to be done with the excess dirt generated from the long freeway cut. Why
not use it to fill in a nearby canyon to create soft, flat land that is ideal for horse show rings?
4) It is a very quiet, scenic, and ecologically non-destructive use of public park space.
(Horse rings do not require any lawns or fertilizer. The slopes of the filled canyon can be
hydro seeded with native vegetation, thereby actually upgrading the current non-native
grassland. )
5) It is inexpensive to set up and operate. (See details below)
Dean Ziegler. Candidate for Sweetwater Community Planning Group 619-475-4111
1
CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
-_.~~----
-----------"-,.-
______n_____..
-------..
ACCREDITED
etuo.....0" c_.....JK:..
Rod Davis, Excutive Director, 233 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910
.~...... O' 00......"
~. .~. vM"H ......
AN
INVESTMENT iN
THE FUTURE
Construction of SR 125 South from SR 54 to Interstate 805
Mayor Horton and council members, thank you for the opportunity to comment
on SR 125 South.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
?!"esident
C:,r;s L.ewls
'::.I The Chamber of Commerce supports construction of SR-125 South (
Brown Field Modified, Otav Ranch, EastLake, Horseshoe Bend I Citizens
Advisory Committee Variation) as a vital required "Outer Loop" link in the
north-south corridor for transportation. [t should not be delayed.
President E!ect
Dave \IV ard
'.::J SR 125 South will have a major int1uence on the growing residential,
commercial, and industrial areas of Chula Vista east of 1-805 and South San
Diego County (Otay Mesa, east of [-805 and south of the proposed Otay Valley
Regional Park).
Vice Presidents:
P2tric~a 3arnes
..;oAnne Clayton
Gary r-Jordstrom
Brae Wiiscn
.::J SR 125 will improve street circulation and reduce out of direction travel.
Memb~rs:
Renee Bute
Jose Dona
Mike Green
Susan Herney
Dan Higgins
T cm McAndrews
Berta MenElk
Len :v1oore
Sc::>rt Mosner
Rooert Penner. MD
Sen H~chardson
Frank Scott
Mary Anne Stro
Bce Thomas
Jon Ulsh
::J SR 125 will reduce projected traffic congestion on Otay Mesa Road by
providing additional access to and from the international border with Mexico.
::J Spending $60 million dollars of Prop A Trans-Net funds to construct the
connector between SR 125 and SR 54 (Spring Valley), the region will receive a
critical transportation facility worth over $300 million.
.::J Funded with $340 million in private capital, it will not be a burden on the
local taxpayers.
u The Chamber supports the northern portion of the route alignment proposed
bv the SR 125 Citizens Advisorv Committee, referred to as the Horseshoe
Bend I CAC alignment. -
.::J The Horseshoe Bend I CAC variation alignment routing is through a larger
Executive Direc:cr part of an undeveloped area, north and east of San Miguel community and
Rod DavIs causes the least impact than the other alignments - ont y 8 to 10 homes will
require relocation and no commercIal Horse Facilities will be displaced. Other alignments may impact
up to thirty one homes.
.::J Any alignment east of the Sweetwater Reservoir would be Inconsistent with the proposed
Multi-Species Conservation Plan (MSCP) habitat reserves.
.::J The Horseshoe Bend I CAC Variation alignment is consistent with the proposed MSCP
developed to address the impact of planned development on sensitive natural habitats in San Diego
County and the City of Chula Vista's sphere of int1uence.
.::J The Director of the San Diego County Department of Parks and Recreation has concluded
that the CAC alternative is the preferred alignment alternative that minimizes impacts on public park
and recreational resources, and would not significantly impact the Summit Mountain recreational
vehicle campground.
:; 3 3 F 0 U R T H J, '/ E N U E . :: H U L A V : S T A. C .\ '- ! F (.'I ~ ~ I A. J 1 ~ ~ 0 . TEL. (6 1 9) 4 2 0 - 6 6 0 J
I
6) Financing by the builders of the highway could be easily justified as a powerful mitigation
to the equestrian community of Sunnyside. Justice would be particularly poetic because the
park would be located most closely to the equestrian homes that will suffer most from
proximity to the new highway.
Itemization of primary costs to build a regional horse show facility:
. Land. For three show rings and parking.
. Access road and parking. Horses prefer dirt to pavement.
. Horse trails leading from the campground and nearby commercial horse facilities.
. Fill dirt. (There should be plenty of dirt left over from highway construction. Even without
the highway, there are plenty of potential sites that don't require fill dirt.)
. Earth moving equipment.
. Rock removal. Each of the three horse show rings needs to be free of rocks 4 to 5 feet deep.
. Pipe fencing for two show rings and a warm up ring. 200 yards by 75 yards oval. (If
Sunnyside Saddle Club moves, they already have one.)
. Jumps. (If the Sunnyside Saddle Club moves, they already have some jumps.)
. Water sprinklers. To keep dust down.
. Bleachers. Shade is a must, since horse shows occur in the heat of summer days.
. A few picnic tables, coal receptacles, and trash cans.
. Shade trees, some native landscaping, and temporary irrigation.
. One lit ring for night use.
. A public bathroom.
. A concession stand/announcers booth, with water and electricity. (If Sunnyside Saddle Club
moves, their existing stand can be moved with them.)
Itemization of on-going operating costs to run a regional horse show facility:
. Compensation for a local person with a tractor to drag all three rings twice a week, and
during every horse event.
. Park personnel to maintain the bathroom, trash receptacles, and routine maintenance.
. Water and electricity.
Potential sources of revenue for San Diego County Parks:
. Despite the highway, attendance at the existing horse campground facility might actually
increase due to the fact the campground would now be located right next door to public
fishing, enhanced riding trails, and first class horse facilities.
. Public fishing would benefit from increased exposure to regional horse show attendees.
. There may be a few events that become large enough for the County to charge a parking fee,
similar to the Lakeside Rodeo events.
. Chula Vista might be willing to assist with funding if the Sunnyside Saddle Club would
agree to forfeit their land within Chula Vista's Rohr Park. (Primary Saddle Club concerns
are guaranteed free use of the new facility and a large degree of self-control.)
. Now is the time to seek highway mitigation funds. This particular use of Sweetwater
Regional Park would serve as mitigation both to San Diego County Parks and to the
equestrian community of Sunnyside.
Dean Ziegler. Candidate for Sweetwater Community Planning Group 619-475-4111 2
o Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration should give considerable weight to the
Director of San Diego County's Parks and Recreation Department's opinion.
.J Selection of the Horseshoe Bend / CAC Variation alternative could result in a net increase in
recreational park space, would not impact the Golf Course, the Little League Ballfields and the least
visual and sound impact on the surrounding homes in eastern section of Bonita Highlands. The
Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) Variation alignment is the best alternative to protect the interest of
all parties.
:J The Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce appreciates the opportunity to comment on the
proposed SR 125 tollway, as SR 125 is extremely important to the future of the City of Chula Vista
and South San Diego County.
Respectfull y,
-(b.'
Y'~.
)(&v.
/~od avis
COLUMN ONE c-A -;\""c'>
l:\n\"I1.>
A Wrong
Turn on
Mexico's
To 11 ways
. Ultramodern roads have
everything-except
customers. Poor planning
led to fees as high as $630.
Now. government is stuck
with a $2-billion bailout.
By MARY BETH SHERIDAN
TI\tES ST.\FF WRITER
PASO MORELOS. Mexico-
Slumped against his tollbooth on
Mexlco's Highway o( the Sun. Isa-
ias Arroyo leisurely ticks 0(( the
virtues o( this Cadlllac o( Latin
American roads-a billion-dollar
(reeway linking Acapulco to the
outskirts o( MexIco City.
There's the gently curving
pavement that permits cars to
rocket through the desert scrub-
land at 70 mph. Four-lane swaths
bld,ted through pink. rock-ribbed
mountams to save time. Iron brid-
ges 50 elegant they 3eern to be
taking (lIght.
The ~.)f1j',' '.hlng mi~Sing ::: ';'.lfflc.
"Wf"n> 11IJne oUl h~re ., JdmIts
the young ~oii laker, turnmg t.o
scan the cloudle::is hOrizon for dnv-
ers on the lonely road to Acapulco.
[mpressIVe though It IS. the
stunning. 165-mde concrete nbbon
is getting altenuon for the wrong
reason: It has become a much-rldi.
culed illustration of how a reputea
breakthrough for developln~ coun-
tries can turn into a fmanclal
disaster.
initially, It seemed to represent a
model Idea (or cash-strapped gov.
ernments: Allow prIvate compa-
nies to build the hlghwavs. and let
them charge lOlls. In one of the
world's most ambitious such pro-
grams. Mexico has built more than
3.000 miles of modern roads.
.stretchillll !rom TlJuana to the
Yucatan.
3'1t Noefui mJscaJcuiatlOns
pt.;.shed the MeX1can tolls to RoJls-
Royce levels. For the three-hour.
one-way triP from the outskirts of
MeX1co City to Aca\Ulco. cars paid
an eve-poPPIn, 70. r'or 18-
wheelers. the tol soared to $630-
the better part o( a year's salary for
a mimmum.wage worker.
Now, a red-faced ~overnment is
embarked on a S2-billion bailout o(
the roads. And as countnes from
Poland to Colombia launch theIr
own pnvate toll-road proJects, the
\-lexlcan experience has become a
case study 10 what not to do.
~lexlcans "paid a certam price
for being mnovators. They taught
people some mistakes not to
make." said Jose Gomez Ibanez. a
Harvard I:nIversity professor who
has studied the roads.
But despite the rocky experi-
ence. he insists, "toll financmg
makes sense (ortlrese [developing)
COUOlrles. because there's so much
else competing for these
scarce tax dollars. These projects
are gettmg done more than they
would through other devIces."
Toll roads have existed in this
hemisphere since the early days o(
U.S. independence. But the Idea o(
having private companies build
them. instead o( governments. took
Plea... .. MEXICO, 11.6
Continued from 11.1
of( in developing countries only in
the last (ew years. as privatization
became a mantra o( re(orm-
minded leaders.
One was Mexico's visionary but
now discredited ex-president. Car-
los Salinas de Gortari.
Mexico was hurtling into a new
age. Salinas. whose term ended in
1994. wanted highways for the
expected boom in trade with the
. UnIted States and Canada. And.
with the government-run banking
system being sold to private com-
panies, a revolutionary concept
was catching on: auto loans,
"Until 1990. it would he very
rare to find an average Mexican
who had access to a car," said
Laurie Mahon. a project-finance
expert at CS First Boston in New
York who has studied toll roads.
The government. she said, was
"presuming more and more peo~le
would buy cars and drive. They ad
verY allln'eSSive oroiections of how
many oeoole would use toll roads."
Blindlr optimistic about ~wth.
the MeXIcan government a was
in a hurry. M in some other
controversial LaUn privatlzations,
officials were anxious to produce
results.
Their hute nuId prove dIIu-
troua.
Pressure and Errors
#- /~
[n some cases, government ,,",p_
neers drew up specificatjons for
roads without carefully [studying
the sites. Meanwhile. Mexico
granted concessions to construc-
tion companies that typically
would agree to huild and operate
the highways for as little as 15
years. then hand them over to the
government. The companies were
expected to make their money In
that relativety short time.
"There was a (at of pressure on
the part of the government to move
forward on these privatizations,"
said Carlos Melcer, a private con.
sultant who analyzed the toll pro-
gram (or the Transport Ministry.
"I don't think they (ully under-
stood the consequences of making
mistakes on that level."
For Manuel Gomez-Daza. presi-
dent o( Grupe Mexicano de Desar-
roIlo, which won the bid to build
the Acapulco road. the engineering
surprises proved a nightmare.
Sitting in his glass- waIled. sub-
urban Mexico City o(fice. he re-
called one unpleasant discovery
after another.
There were higher.than-ex-
peeted mountains to slice through.
There was unstable land in an
earthquake zone. And there was an
unanticipated need (or a half-mile-
long bridge-the Mezeala span-
the highest in Mexico.
By the time the (our-year proj-
ect was eomp[eted. it had cost
about $1.6 billion-roughly twice
the original estimate.
Without a doubt. the Highway o(
the Sun reflects the huge invest-
ment. For a driver, it is the First
World. In contrast. the 71-year-old
country road that also links the
capItal to Acapulco is distinctly
Third World.
On lhe .~!! ""~rI, rars zip over
smooth pa .I~mer.r. '.nat gcr,Uy rises
and falls, .\'~th 1 'TIaXJirmm 6%
slope. Br'JJd. pl"k.tlntcd break-
down !anf'.';; 'rl orange "'OS tele-
phone boxe, fldnk the highway.
ShinY rest .,tops ,eIl potato chips
and Coca-Cola.
"Although the terrain IS nearly
the same as on the road from
Denver to Vail. this has better
technical ,peelfications." boasted
Gomez-Daza.
In contrast. the two-lane "(ree
road" to Acapulco winds through
d~t1 villages. past restaurateurs
gnJhng chicken outdoors and ma-
chete.wielding peasants waiting to
slash a coconut (or thirsty travelers.
There are hairpin turns, crawl-
m, trucka and, on a recent week-
day. a dead horwe. plopped In Ute
middle at tile I'OIId.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
_...:.. -)-';:''''
"It IwIlots of potholes," volun-
teered Ftdenc10 Texta, 52. a gri7.-
tied 10000-dtmance taxi driver who
travels the old road. When it raiM,
"the mud rovers the road, and
sometimes cars can't pass,"
But the old road sees brisk
traffie-while the new road often is
empty.
"That's for the rich people,"
snorted Texta. who disdains the
toll road. In favor of dodgmg trucks,
~igs and children on the Iree road.
or the pnce 01 tolls, ne sala, .. I
could pay for all the gasoline for
my trip."
A Road Yearned For
Initially, curious Mexicans did
flock to the Highway of the Sun
when it opened in 1993. Cutting the
trip to Acapulco nearly in half, "it
was a road everyone had yearned
for," said Gordon Lee, a COMtrUC-
tion anaJyst at ING Barings in
Mexico City.
It remains the most expensive
hia-hwav ever built in MexIco.
And with only a 15-yearoconces-
sian in which to recover their
investment and turn a profit. build-
ers at the Highway of the Sun
argued they bad no choice but to
charge outrageous-and ultimately
self-defeating-tolls.
Soon, trame slumped. And when
the severe economic crisis hit
Mexico last year, cars and trucks
all but abandoned the eletnt toll
roads. The recessIon hIt t e toll
road to vacation mecca Acapulco
especiaily hard.
"The lirst thing a middle-class
family cuts from their expenses is
their vacation. That means not
going to Acapulco," said Sergio
Pena, an officiaJ at Banca Serfin
who oversees one of the main loans
for the highway,
The economic crisis wreaked
havoc on the toll-road program in
more ways than one, As.the peso
collapsed, for example, U.S. invest-
ment bankers dropped their
pledges to convert builders' bank
loans into cheaper, long-term
bonds for U,S. investors.
Builders like Gomez-Da7.a, who
bad adjustable. rate bank loans,
saw their interest rates shoot from
20% to nearly 100% as Mexico's
inllation soared. Meanwhile. toll
revenues were evaporating. Build-
ers could pay little of the interest-
grim news for banks already awash
In unpaid loa....
Ftnallt the =ment s~
In with &3. _ pro-
gram. ~... .... IQIIOIJ w be
.---t-....
)
IInanclaUy restructured was the
Highway of the Sun.
Now, the pnvate concession has
been lengthened to 30 years. The
jfOvernment is pickinR up about
40% or interest D3vments on the
hiRhway's bank loans. And tolls
ha ve been reduced to encourage
usage. For cars, the one- way toll to
Acapulco is about $35.
Traffic now a veraRcs about ,1.000
vehicles dailv. But It's still well
below the government's original
estimatc of 4,400, A reporter trav-
eling the road on a recent Monday
encountered only 44 vehicles.
Francisco Cruz, a gas station
attendant near the Paso Morelos
tollbooth, is hardly surprised. The
toll at this booth, about 115 miles
from Acapulco. is 99 pesos, or about
'15-serious change in a country
with a 53 minimum daily wage.
"This is half a paycheck," he
said, gazing at the booth. "It's the
most expensive in the country."
ruc ra tCISO mas a a .
cally. While the Acapuleo road had I,
been planned mainly for cars. most
toll roads expected heavy truck
use. But, facing the steep rates.
drivers balked.
Meleer, the consultant, said the
government had predicted truck-
ers would use the roads despite the
fees because they'd save lime.
"We told them. 'That's not true.'
ft's not how things happen," Mel-
cer said in a telephone interview.
"The people they [the truckers)
have delivered to for years are on a
schedule. . . . Just because you
build a toll road, that's not going to
change their inventory system and
controls.
"It will take years for the (Mexi-
canI market to become sensitive to
time,"
If their customers weren't going
to pay the tolls, truckers certainly
weren't. Some already were barely
getting by in the wake of deregula-
tion of the industry.
Free Alternatives
And for nearly every toll road.
trtlckers had an alternative: the
free road that wound. nearbY. In
the two cases where there was no
adjacent free road, protests broke
out The government is taking over
those two highways.
Despite the problems. not all the
toll roads were disasters. A few.
llke the highway linking Mexico
City to the nearby tndllllrlal center
of ifoIuc:r. bave had.-:rtr.me: "
'Nt._ ...... ."",.1Ie.':
IIIorter n.dI1IIa=:lI:lj'
to bi8bly "'""14 ..... ai\ :
!;f.~~., .~4.. ".
-'--
.~
Some of Mexico's mistakes. says
Gomez Ibanez, were understand-
able. The government, for exam-
ple, favored short concessions Cor
the highways in part because there
was little long-term financing for
infrastructure projects available at
the time.
"You ha ve to put yourself back
in 1989 . . . and appreciate the
limits of the capital markcts," the
Harvard professor said by phone.
And the government and builders
have learned from their mistakes on
the early toll roads. Thanks to better
preliminary engineering work, for
example, construction costs more
closely match estimates.
Seeing More Clearly
With longer. term concessions,
lower charges and a slowly recov-
ering economy, the toll roads could
even prove profitable eventually.
analysts say. A chastened Mexican
government, in fact, has plans to
build more toll roads. But now,
things will be different.
''The question is to see clearly
which (roads to build]. to see
clearly where, to see clearly under
wbat financial conditioM they're
profitable," said Oscar De Buen, an
MIT -educated engineer who over-
sees the toll roads for the Trans-
port Ministry.
Added Darryl McLeod, chief
Latin American economist Cor
Lehman Bros. in New York, ''The
linal verdict isn't in yet on whether
these roads will work. There is a
steep learning curve that involved.
making a lot of mistakes."
sEf' 09 'SIb .,7' ~- ... - .---
/
lo)~m~OWlli
wI SEP - 91996
COU~'CIL OFfiCES
CJ1cU VIST.\ CA
#-.
Ii:
~ I Viviane Marquez
~ 14 Second Avenue
C ula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor and Council Members, .
. . 'ded for consideration regarding
The foll,owing information Is ~~n pr~~ Chula Vista Council members
the resolution'on SR-125. I am requ tive ~ the State Route 125 Toll Road.
recommend the NO PROJ~CT athltem~ the No Project alternative are
The impacts of all alternatives 0 er an
enormous.
The following table shows ranges of impacts (Ca~rano D~ln i OM, p. s-
29) from the various project alternatives:
Impact to:
displaced homes
displaced business
previously designated open space
residences that will be affected by an increase of 2 X or
more from existing noise level (with mitigation)
Sweetwater Regional Park
homes affected by impacts to visual vlewshed
vema' pools .
Coastal Sage Scrub
Maritime Succulent Scrub
California Gnalcateher pairs
Least Bell's Vireo pairs
Cactus Wren
OIay Tarplant individuals (State Endangered endemic to
South County)
Button Celery (State and Federal Endangered)
costin millions Of right of way and construction
The area to be Impacted will affect Sweetwater Little league Relds
(either directly or Indlrectiy by noise and air quality) that are used by children of
many convnunities and a regional park used by nature lovers, hikers and
equestrians. This was previously designated open space. An alternative that
has not been adequately addressed Is the expansion of State FloU1e 905 . why
not? - because all the emphasis has been Ie advocate the toll roae:!. Those of
~u who are familiar with Bonita will realize what an enormous impact this
project will have on the unique character of this small equestrian community.
Evaluation regarding the potential for slope failure and damage to the
Sweetwater Dam and Reservoir due to blasting has not been conducted (see
attached). In addition, contamination of the reservoir by airbome pollutants has
minimum mulrnum
10 31
6 12
66 ac. 119 ac.
750 900
12.5 ae. 74 ae.
420 715
21c. 2.5 ae.
50 ae. 101 ac.
0.18C. 19 ae.
10 22
2 3
unknown up to 38
IndividualS
9,900 143,000
200 250
218 243
~--------------~-------------------------------
;:46 MARQlEZ AND ASSOCIATES
619 476 1040
. TO: 4765379
P02
not been addressed nor has the potential of contamination (including
hazardous wastes) of the Otay and Sweetwater Rivers which flow into the bay.
This tollway is being presented as a Nafta project, it Is said to be
necessary for border traffic. Border traffic does not usually have Lemon Grove
or Santee as a final destination. It would have to get to 1-805 or 1-5 eventually,
the only rational route for border traffic is SR 905 to 1-805 or 1-5 and beyond.
The truckers union has issued a statement that they will not use SR 125 (see
attached). Money Is not currently available for the expansion of 905, but It is
planned for the future. Funding for this freeway expansion would likely become
a state priority If the tollway is not constructed.
Many people take the Strand to avoid paying the $1.00 toll acrosa the
Coronado Bridge, how many will be willing to drive an extra four miles to avoid
a toU which will certainly be more than 50 cents each way? Although this
toUway could be beneficial to the OIay Ranch Development, their current state of
bankruptcy suggests a long delay in buildout, if it occurs at all. How many
people from Otay Ranch will be commuting to Santee or Lemon Grove? How
many years will this tollway stay empty waiting for the development that mayor
may not occur, whose residents mayor may not use it?
The biological Impacts from this project are enormous. Impacts to up to
22 pairs of Califomia Gnatcalchera is outrageous and one of the highest
Impacts to California Gnatatchers since the species has become listed as
threatened. Impacts to up to 36 CactUs Wren in conjunctIOn with Otay Ranch
impacts and San Miguel Ranch impacts could lead to ,this species becoming
extinct In the South Bay Region. The South Bay is wholly responsible for the
atate endangered Otay TarpJant since this is the only place It occurs. Impects to
this species from this project in conjunction with Clay Ranch Impacta and San
Miguel Ranch Impacts could lead to this species becoming extinct in the wortd!
Publicly financed projects such u this one should be much more respontive to
and responsible for the preservation of our natural rnource8. This is our tax
money (EIR preparation and San Miguel Connector) that is going towards
killing these plants and animals.
Vehicle emissions produced in a valley remain in the valley, air quality
will undoubtedly be negatively affected despite the erroneous conclusions by
Caltrans to the contrary.
There is . misconception that the Citizens Advisory Commission
alternetive Is the one preferred by the citizens, It 18 not. This group was
assembled by CTV and later administered by Caltrans and Includes primarily if
not completely individuals representing political and business Interest in the
alignment (Ie. Caltrans representatives. CTV representatives. Clay Ranch
representatives. eiected officials 8Ic.). There is also the misconception the CAC
eupports this alternative. They requested It be studied, but did not vote to
support It.
This tollway does not make sense under any scenario at this time. The
mmrr~~mi ~,f.,i'/~~~~'\the~ur1~vi8lmtm1V~t~~J.rn.
1Dllway and will Incur no benefits by Its constru~iOn. I am requesting that you be
responsive to the citizens of the area by voting for the NO PROJECT altematlve
on the SR 125 Toflway.
.
Sincerely,
19~ 11'10
Vlvlane Marquez
,
--------------------
):4"( J'"IHKL.:AJc,.L HNlJ H:=>:=>lA..!HIt:..;:J
I..'.&.J oooy'.... ...............
Roll Away! Tollway
By Clarke A. Stillwagon, President
Building Material, Construction, Industrial,
Professional and Technical Teamsters Union Local # 36
This letter Is In response the San Diego Union's recent endorsement of
three San Diego highway projects in "Critical Projects: Three San DIego
Highway Plans are Vltaf' which appeared on April 22, 1996.
I am a native of San Diego and I have been a trucker for twenty three
years. As President of the Teamsters Union Local #36, I represent over one
thousand members. Including truckers and construction workers who live and
work throughout the San Diego region. Our union members have been strong
supporters of highway construction to facilitate ~ommerce and a strong
economy.
However, we dlsagr.e with the San Diego Union that the construction of
the SR 125 Tollway South is vital or crucial to the local or ltate economy.
The decision to build the Tollway Is premature, and based on Inaccurate
assumptions about the trucking industry and local economy. Tollway
promoters say Tollway will provide vitally needed NAFTA Infrastructure. Just
the opposite, the Tollway will not Improve North-South arterial capacity but will
simply become a white elephant In the middle of nowhere.
With regards to goods moving from Mexico to the United States, our
trucker counterparts In Mexico are much lower paid and will do whatever Is
necessary to avoid paying to drive the Tollway. Instead they will opt for free
1
.:J: 48 ~UEZ RND RSSOC I RTES
619 476 1040
TO: 4765379
P05
local routes. This means taking 1-905 from the Otay Border crossing west to the
two main arteries 1-805 and 1-5. I-90S is a straight downhill run, versus the
Tollway which will be a stressful uphill climb. Truckers always prefer downhill
grades to save fuel and wear and tear when carrying heavy loads. The 1-905 at
Otay Mesa Is ~nly a few minutes from 1-805 and 1-6. There would be no
Incentive either natural or market-drlven for Mexican truckers to take the
Tollway.
Further, most goods arriving from Mexico go to Los Angeles not to
Lemon Grove or EI Cajon but that Is exactly where the Tollway would direct
traffic. (In fact, the Lemon Grove, La Mesa and EI Cajon industries are served
by a railhead that runs goods east after the trolley shuts down late at night.)
The most efficient way to truck goods to Los Angeles is to take I-S or 1-805.
Moreover, any goods moving to the eastern United States from Mexico
will enter through Mexicali or through Arizona or New Mexico to bypass the
California mountains.
.
.
Domestic truckers will similarly avoid the Tollway to save tolls and fuel
by taking 1-905 downhill west to 1-805 or 1-5 instead of uphill on the Tollway,
More than ever domestic truckers are cost conscious In an era of thin profit
margins and high fuel costs.
With regards to goods shipped south from San Diego and Los Angeles,
the Tollway would not facilitate the movement of goods east to Calexlco
because 1-10 from Los Angeles Is the most efficient route. Nor would the
Tollway facilitate the movement of goods to the north.ast to Nevada and Utah.
The route would be 1-80S or 1-5 to 1-15. To get to 1-16 from the Tollway a trucker
would have go to Santee and then to Route 52. That would be the scenic uphill
route.
2
3:49 MARQUEZ AND ASSOCIATES
619 476 110410
TO: 4765379
P0E>
In short. the Tollway would expensively and Inefficiently detour all trucks
whether north or south bound eastward without rhyme or reason.
The State legislature would have to force trucks on to the Tollway by
prohibiting truck traffic on 1-805 and 1.5. That would be wholly unjustified since.
1-805 and 1-5 have not reached capacity In the South Bay area. Indeed, the
reserved center lane of 1.5 has yet to be opened to expand that freeway to Its
fullest capacity.
In fact. the SR 125 Tollway South Is corporate welfare at It worst. The
Tollway would be unfairly subsidized by Stat. taxpayers since the California
Transportation Commission recently agreed to fund the $132 million project to
connect the Tollway to San Diego freeways.
CTV should have to pay for the connectors Just like a homebuilder pays
for the hook up of sewer and water. The Commission's vote is a unfair
subsidy, to a foreign corporation no less, that Is draining State and local
<<
citizens of vitally needed tax dollars that could be spent on more urgent
highway projects. The Commission was for the first time under funded this
year for requested projects but voted $132 million to subsidize the Tollway.
(That amount could have built three new downtown public IIbrariesl)
The U.S. Customs Services reports that currently there are about 2,200
truck crossings per day. which translates into 3.6 trucks per minute. Caltrans
projects the Tollway will be nece.sary to accomodate a twenty percent
Increase to 2,750 truck crossings per day by the year 2015. That translates
Into 4.5 trucks per minute. Just how necessary could a ten lane Tollway
possibly be to accomodate a mere twenty pecent increased truck traffic. After
all, 1.5 and 1-805 are not at full capacity now. Further, cOonsider that the United
States Is planning substantial expansions and enhancements of the border
crossings elsewhere as well, for example, at Tecate, Mexicall and all along the
Arizona-New Mexico and Texas border.
3
.J':j:4':1 IYIHKGI~ H'iU ~::.ULiHII:.::'
, I;)J.':; ~(o ll::::l"+l::::I
IW. ~(o"'.Jr:;l
r<n
The Tollway i. a whit. el.phant, a pork barrel, and a fOlly and should be
seriously reconsidered by the CalifornIa Transportation Commission and by
the foreIgn and domestIc Investors allk., who sImply do not seem to
understand the logic that truckers will have no reason or motive to take the
Tollway. Our.union members rely on and support quality highway
Infrastructure to keep the economy moving and growing but we can not In
good conscience SUpport the Tollway.
Date:
Clarke A. Stillwagon
PresIdent
.
. .
4
SNEETWATER AUTHORI'IY
&05 O.,AAETT .,VENUE
I'08T OFFICE BOX 232JI
CHULA VIST", CALIFORNIA '1'12-2328
18181 42001413
FA)( (01') 42S-748'
OOVIIIHINGIOARO
GEOi'GI lot. WAU"., CIltAIJIMNrf
WI.RGAAIT COOK WELSH. Va. CHAIR
.lAWEI,. DO\JO, I'"
....1_..1'1
IUD IIOCKUNGTON
_Ell. WOLIjIlW~
CAIIY~. WIIIGHT
WANDA "VI""
TlllEASLIIIEA
OIAN J. AlIYEI
lEOI\I!TARY
September 4, 1996
~
Mr. Tim Vasque:t, Chief
Environmental Analysis Branch A
CAL TRANS District 11
P.O. Box 65406
San Diego, CA 92186-5406
"
Subject:
DRAFT EIRlS - SR 125 SOUTH
SWA FILE: ROUTE 125 - CAL TRANS
Dear Mr. Vasquez:
We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on the DEIRlS for SR 125 South,
between SR 54 and SR 905. Subsequent to our review of this document, we hlilve prepared
the attached Table 1 listing potential conflicts with our op~rations, property and facilities
which would be caused by this project. The table Is also based on the information In the draft
Project Report SR 125 South (May 1996). All quantities listed In the table (i.e., acreage and
footage of pipelines) are approximate. More accurate Information can be obtained upon final
plan review and/or meeting with your agency to discu~s this In greater detail.
Unless otherwise noted, all ofthe conflicts listed on the attached table were not addressed in
the DEIRlS. Under the 'Water Facilities" column, we have noted future facilities based on
our 1993 Master Plan Update as adopted by our Board of Directors. We request that
CAL TRANS consider Incorporating design features Into the final plans to accommodate
these needed Improvements.
Other items not Included In Table 1, or expanding on some concerns, are as follows:
(1) Section 3.4, Page 3-2, Groundwater and Water Quality. The Authority 16 proposing a
groundwater demineralization facility within the lower Sweetwater River basin. Water
from the alluvial basin will be extracted and treated to drinking water standards. The
document notes (last sentence, first paragraph) that demineralization process ia
required for domestic U8e due to poor quality of surface runoff. However, what
planning will CAL TRANS do for hazardous spills. etc., that could drain to the lower
Sweetwater River? Removal of contamInants from hazardous materials spilled In the
watershed i8 not a feature of our Demineralization Facility,
A Public A~,
Sening NfltioMl City, Chu/a V'I$fQ tInd Surrounding Areczr
------------------~.._---------------
~9:50 MARQUEZ AND ASSOCIATES
619 476 1040
TO: 4765379
Pe9
'. ,
Mr. Tim Va.que~, Chief
Re: Draft EIRlS - SR 125 South
September 4,1996
page 2
(2) Section 3.5.2, Page 3-B, Ownership. The Sweetwater Reservoir and all operating
properties are owned, operated and administered by the Sweetwater Authority and not
the South Bay Irrigation District. The ownership of property was transferred to
Sweetwater Authority from South Bay Irrigation District in May 1990. Page 3-17,
Sweetwater Reservoir Park. For accuracy, please refer to this 8S the "Sweetwater
Reservoir Recreation Program". Also state that the program will be owned and
operated by the Sweetwater Authority unless an agreement Is developed between
Sweetwater Authority and other agencies. Coordination, design and operational plans
must be made with Sweetwater Authority. This should also be clarified in Section 4(f),
Page A-19. Finally, on Page 3-17, County RaDiana! Trails Planning, there is no
existing County trail on Sweetwater Authority property located at the north end of
Conduit Road (west of Sweetwater Dam). Please delete this from any figures In the
DEIRlS and Project Report. We would appreciate the addition of Sweetwater
Authority as a reviewing agency in the relocation of trails within and adjacent to our
properties.
(3) Please be aware that we presently operate an urban runoff diversion system (URDS)
along the north shore of Sweetwater Reservoir. Wel10pe to complete an expansion
by 1999. Periodically, we discharge up to 5000 G.P.M. (10.5 ets) into the Sweetwater
River below Sweetwater Dam from this system. 'Times and duration of releases vary
and should be taken into consideration for desIgn and construction of improvements
proposed within and adjacent to the lower Sweetwater River. This also applies to
emergency releases and spills from Sweetwater Dam which have variable flow rates
(maximum flow during a 100 year storm is estimated to be 72,000 cfs).
(4) As stated in Item 1 above, we are proposing a demineralization facility in the lower
Sweetwater River. Water discharged from URDS is a source of recharge to the
alluvial basin. SR 125 South must not alter or cut off flows In the Sweetwater River 80
as to eliminate this source of 8UPPIy.
(5) Several maps showing Sweetwater Authority properties and facilities are attached.
These may be useful in clarifying locations of our property and facilities for your
drawings. Due to Sweetwater Authority's prior rights, CAL TRANS will be responsible
for any costs of relocating Authority facilities. (Please refer to Route 54 project, Notice
to Owner, No. 25703-1 as example of prior project of similar scope.) The Authority will
pay for any depreciation and betterment.
(6) We could not find in the document any reference and impacts to our landfill operation
and resldenca (I.e., Thompson property) which is presently under lease to a private
party. These properties are located on the south side of the reservoir adjacent to San
Miguel Road. Impacts to aecass, reduction In use, and residence relocation were not
,8:51 MARQLEZ AND ASSOCIATES
_.. .--...-..-
619 476 1040
TO: 4765379
P10
.'
"
"
Mr. Tim Vasquez, Chief
Re: Draft EIRlS - SR 125 South
September 4.1996
page 3
noted in the document. Table 1 addresses acreage impacts. Furthermore, It appears
that the document did not address the "take" of other Sweetwater Authority property
for freeway. right of way or project mitigation.
. .
(7) Section 4.6, Biologic!$l ,Resources, Table 4-3. With respect to vernal pools, we would
appreciate a copy of the surveys for areas within and adjacent to our reservoir.
(8) Section 4.15, Air Quality. This section does not address potential water quality
impacts to Sweetwater Reservoir from airborne pollutants. This information was
requested during our meeting with CAL TRANS, and we feel that some analysis should
be provided. Please refer to information we sent you via transmittal letter dated
August 2,1995.
(9) The Authority is concerned that the report did not address the need to maintain
access to Authority property and existing and proposed facilities. This Includes
Sweetwater Dam and tunnel. pipelines. south dike, water tank, and south side of
Sweetwater Reservoir. Constant access is essential to effective reservoir and facility
operations.
.
(10) Attached is a notebook containing correspondence from Sweetwater Authority to
CAL TRANS between 1986 and 1995. Some of these letters were omitted from
Chapter Five.
Finally, the Authority does not take a position on a preferred alignment. We will work with
your agency on any of these alignments with the understanding that all conflicts with our
property and operations will be mitigated.
Very truly yours,
AI R. Sorens
Operatl ns anager
SWEElWATER A
;#
ARS:JLS:le
attachments: Table 1
Maps
Sweetwater Authority Route 125 Correspondence, 1986 through 1995
t.~2I.
<):;::0" r'lHi'<UUIoL Hi'll! H::'::'Ul-iHIIo::'
bl:; 4'(b W4<)
I u: ~r(b~"Y(~
.. '1-' ~ N - ..
, ~.}:;) .~::'::.~
:'~ "":, ~ ,~( .~:.... ~il i
~t ~! ~
S~ ' -
.e~ $8 Jd~1
I i [
.
f f lill , f Itf~
"
iis ~i.l~ is !~&~ is 18~~ if 1:$ ~
oil g'l( Wf. ~t~ ~ Wi ~t~ ~ ~i~'i
il. : ii~' ,t 8'J~ ~,
i~ ij '[t 'I [lU ~~i
~il . ~[J ~t!
~. Ji' ' J ~r
6' ,S'!
liS ~tJ~ f:~s ~ti~ f~s ~I-!~ flf$ ~iI!J~ i
~- ;""
I r I HI i iff rs ...[ ifi lj.J( 1(1 Ii n
.~ 5' ~!,f CD ~ . i ilp i .
~ I ~~i ~2'1 ~n~ ~~I i~!~ ;
""~ ~ ,~ r ~~~ i' . J ""rl IiI
~ ~ ~~~I=~ Z """'."
I f"!
lit il
~ J If f CI)~ i llil
JiJ
0
=
ig'! n ji~ [ ~"!i Jf~ I -4i
iI"" "" 8 il"i~ . ij
.
~tf ~[=' l~iI If
,I "'~i'
f Is~ ~ 9.1 s l;~ -4'!'3~ f II
r-N !~ II!f~~
-~~ 'j .!i~g l;
~
f j Islls ~~ f fi
Ii
roo, 1 i
J . .
I! If Ii If iiJ~
if}
i ,.S' '
~:ID:g9S~ :ID:g9S~ :g 9S~ ~ ~~:ID:gDi~ I
~~f~S8i ~lj.i~~ lii~ii~ IQ-n-""Q[;I~1~88
:il~~:~ IJIII( .r-~~ j
~t ~ :". .
filiil I!f!ial ! ''''11'1 i
ailli!}. af~~f.,ij~J
~Isl "'iii.. flli 1Ii~ jfl"i~IIj","I Jimifun
i~ii!i~ Ilrf!~ . Rolil! ~
il: i~
~~ ...p.~r jf~~[~i 8. ~!; i ~~~i_ '~Iff
~ ii' ~~' ~
J ~ I, i ~p.J. ~~~i~' 'if
15'~ j ~ ! ,is l' r-
" ' i"
~
...
1-'11
~
m
....
GJ
t'
~
II.)
(11
I
i
:Ii
~
I
...
t
i
" .
- - .-. ... - . ". '-'.. - - -.-....
f
f
!
tI:
...
, ," ... .'
1
-= !If f
-
~
~~
g
II
r .
Ii. I'lf fifJ
f
,.
i: fli Ii:! ~fJ~ i
f
&. if mil'! f
j
Q. JE ~fl IJI
J
. I g
J I;: ~tJ~ f
II
r lif IiI'
t f
~ ~ f II [I
J
~flf~ 'Ii
i
J ii .
"
f jij~ llil
g
r. JfJ I if
If
lIs i ~'~il~l~fS~ If
... (ill ~"~N
i ~ .~. ~ J ~
filf! ~=>>- fi
~r J!
If ifJ~
'rr
~ S lis~ ,
. fllrJI~
(. j
~fflJ J
I iii ~ iii
( ~ !I(
f J Ij.
a. j ~
Ii.
~
.
.
!
...
f.
5"
....
Po.)
U\
I
(")
g
ii!!
&
!
I
j
.
.
.
, .
:r-b-tt I G:,
PRESERVE SOUTH SAY
PO Box 1271
Bonita, California 91908
595-3889
{D' r' r' ':---:--- u___,
J It, I I., I: " r --....,
r "", I ' , , '
, l/ ,..----:.. -:.':- _--:..:._....!.: I r. :
I n I: ' , '
UUCEP 1019% 10
cr'''''", J .
"" .Il c' rlCES
CHJ,/' VIS:,1, CA
.
September 9,1996
Chula Vista City Council
Dear Councilmember;
Enclosed are two documents regarding the 125 Tollway South.
We urge you to reconsider your support for the project and adopt
the 4-2 recommendation of the Chula Vista Resource Conservation
Commission to adopt the No-Build Alternative.
Thank you for your time and consideration..
.
Sincerely,
Marianne O. Greene
Executive Director
294-8258
Why the 126 Tollway South Is Against the Interest of Chula Vista
. THE TOLLWAY WILL GO BELLY UP BEFORE OTAY RANCH IS COMPLETE.
The Baldwin Corporation bankruptcy is causing the fragmentation of the ownership of the OIay Ranch The pre-
planned village concept once planned for the Otay Ranch will give way to requests for many changes, including increases
in density, and leaD froo develoDment near the tollwav New developers of the area will prDtest that although the entire
plan was at one time economically viable as a whole, their individual parcels can not now profit under the approved
development plan. In other words, economies of scale will no lonoer work with the 'balkanization" of the Olav Ranch.
This means the development of OIay Ranch will be very slow because new environmental impact reports will
have to be prepared with each and every significant deviation from the master development plan. Tim Nader, former Mayor
of Chula Vista predicts that OIay Ranch will not be comDlete fDr fifty vears and the densest portions Df the OIay Ranch
may be completed in thirty-five years.
.
Yet the 125 TDllway South will deDend entirelv on the Olav Ranch to be economically viable. This is because
domestic truckers have already rejected the route as economically, geographically, and commercially unsound. Mexican
truckers are less likely to use the route because they have soundly rejected the Mexican tollway system which is in a state
of utter collapse. Even California Transportation Ventures has conceded that truckers will not use the 125 Tollway South.
They further admit they have not conducted studies on the economic viability of the 125 Tollway South.
The 125 Tollway South can hardly be viable if the OIay Ranch will not be completed until well after the contract for
the tollway franchise expires The franchise is only thirty-five years. The 125 Tollway South will 00 bellv UD before its
customers arrive. It is like putting a shopping center in the middle of nowhere Indeed, the 125 Tollway South is a ~
to nowhere Who will be asked to bailout the 125 Tollway South when it goes belly up?
. OTAY RANCH RESIDENTS WILL INSIST ON BETTER EAST-WEST CORRIDORS.
The 125 Tollway South leads on Iv to Doints northeast such as Lemon Grove, Santee, and EI Cajon. These areas
are not places where the affluent residents of OIay Ranch are going to gravitate for jobs, shopping and recreation Lemon
Grove, Santee and EI Cajon can onlv hODe to comDete commerciallv with the South Bav Downtown and North County
As more affluent residents, the Otav Ranch residents will inevitablv demand be"er east-west access to 1-805 and 1-5 which
are not congested and will be well positioned to dilute ODDosition to expanding H Street, Orange Avenue, and Telegraph
Canyon Road. It is just human nature that the new residents will not tolerate taking the roundabout and inferior route, the
125 Tollway South, because it is out of direction to eet to the most desirable Darts of the County
. THE 1-905 IS THE REAL NAFTA HIGHWAY. ALSO, REMEMBER THE PORT AND THE RAILROAD.
Improving the '-905 is the real answer to accommodatino increased truck crossinas to and from OIay Mesa
Ninety-five percent of the truck traffic moves north to San Diego and Los Angeles and therefore demands direct access to
1-805 and 1-5. Congressman Bob Filner recently pointed out that even if the 125 Tollway South is used by commercial truck
traffic it will be viable at best for ten years By then, the 1-905 eXDansion, the San Dieao Port imDrovement, and the ~
Dieoo-Arizona Railroad will be in place to accommodate NAFT A-generated commerce along the border.
. THERE ARE BETTER USES IN THE SOUTH BAY FOR LOCAL TAXPAYER PROPOSITION A FUNDS.
The two-mile San Miguel Connector to connect Route 54 to the 125 Tollway South has been slated to be funded
with Transnet funds generated by Proposition A. The cost is astronomical and is an unfair corDorate subsidv tD a gigantic,
multinational corporation. For construction, it is estimated to be $60-70 million dollars The cost of environmental
mitigation, design, and ather hidden costs also to be borne by the taxpayers may make this estimate artificially low,
according to one high ranking transportation official There are other transportation improvement projects in the South Bay
that are more reliable and deserve more urgent attention.
. LOSS OF REGIONALLY IMPORTANT RECREATIONAL AREAS AND OPEN SPACES.
Many area residents use recreational and open space areas that would be destroyed by the 125 Tollway South
For example, the Sweetwater Valley Little League Ballfields would be sacrificed despite their recDnfiguration because
the noise, pollution and rattling impacts would be so severe for the children and families playing next to tollway that the
fields would likely be abandoned for quieter, more serene ballfields in other communities.
THE NO-BUILD ALTERNATIVE --- THE ONLY RATIONAL ALTERNATIVE
PRESERVE SOUTH BAY
JRdIIOUII.C ....~"u... ""'.........
PRESERVE SOUTH SAY
Join Thousands of Your Neighbors Who Agree With Us.
The Ten-lane Tollway is Illegal, Destructive, and Untimely.
"Impacts to community cohesion cannot be mitigated. . . Substantial
urban presence may result in higher density residential uses. . .
annexation through the City of Chula Vista ... The toll plaza would have
lighting and traffic impacts similar to a commercial convenience use. . .
New commerically zoned land would require approval and would erode
the current rural flavor of the area. . . The peace and serenity so valued
by residents would be permanently altered ... mitigation to community
impacts include textured concrete, . . and earth tone colors. . ."
Caltrans Draft 125 EIR
". . . It is clear the proposed toll road is illegal if it is intended to
accomodate future development. , ," .
State Senator Steve Peace
"The tollway is neither vital nor crucial to the local or state economy. . the
tollway is premature and based on inaccurate assumptions about the
trucking industry and local economy. . "
Clark A. Stillwagen, Building Material, Construction Teamsters,
Local #36
PO Box 1271
Bonita, California 91908
For more information please call
696-3889
ERESERVE SOUTH BAY'S ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The Caltrans environmental impact report on the private, ten lane 125 Tollwav South is wholly
inadequate. It is superficial and glosses over the serious ramifications for the entire South Bay. It grossly
exaggerates the need for a tollway by protraying it as a vital link to economic growth. The enviromental
impact report is in short: "speculation on speculation."
What would the effects be on Bonita businesses? The real estate values would substantially
decrease within close proximity to the tollway. This would place downtown Bonitan businesses at a
competitive disadvantage. Further, the customer base would be reduced because area housing would
gradually shift downward. The tollway would devastate large sectors of the equestrian businesses,
including boarding facilities, ferriers, veterninarians, feed supply stores, and related rural businesses.
What would be the effects on Bon/tan residents? The substantial decrease in property values and
quality of life would extend far beyond the areas adjacent to the tollway. It would have a domino effect
throughout the community. Toll avoidance would likely cause San Miguel, Bonita, and Sweetwater Roads
to be widened.
Who is going to truly benefit? Developers are relying on the tollway to be the transportation spinal
cord to the Otay Ranch. However, the tollway would be out of direction for the majority of residents.
Chula Vista should have attempted to resolve the predicted increases in traffic in the South Bay by
creating east west parkway corridors to direct traffic west to 805 and 5 and will have to anyway when the
benefits of the tollway are not realized.
J.Vhat are the impacts on biological resources? The environmental impacts mimic and foster the same
environmental impacts as the Otay Ranch. It would fragment sensitive habitat in a biologically important
region. It would also destroy the Sweetwater Regional County Park no matter what route is selected
.
because the visual and noise impacts.
What are the impacts to noise and air pollution? Just imagine Route 8 circling the valley. The air and
noise impacts would be highly similar. Caltrans states these impacts are either not significant or can be
mitigated. This simply defies all logic and common sense. Caltrans ignores the impacts of particulate
matter and ozone, which experts agree pose significant health risks. The tollway would be no exception.
What would be the effect of toll avoidance? Caltrans promised a toll avoidance task force would
study this issue but they never followed through. Instead Caltrans substituted its own tollway versus
freeway study. That is not substitute. The citizens were ignored and the report is bias in favor of a pro-
build alternative. A toll avoidance study likely would have shown a dramatic increase in local traffic with a
tollway.
What is the best al1ernative route? Complete the expansion of 1-905 and when needed expand both 1-805
and 1-5, and revitalize the Port and the Arizona-California railroad.The Caltrans environmental report is a
divide and conquer strategy to split our community into factions. To mislead our community into thinking
that we can truly impact the agency's decision, for example to adopt the CAC route. These decisions
typically get made far in advance of the hearings. And the cheapest, most direct route for the tollway
would be the Proctor Valley Road alternative, the one towards which the Caltrans EIR is clearly most
bias. In any event, the pro-build choices are only between strangling Bonita or slitting its wrists.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /7
Meeting Date 09/10/96
ITEM TITLE:
Progress Report and Request for Council direction regarding continued
project processing and negotiations with Joelen Enterprises for the
development of a proposed golf resort hotel
REVIEWED BY:
Community Develop~t ))irector
Planning Director /llpC
Parks and Recreation Directo
Public Works Director
City Manager (
~
{5.
SUBMITTED BY:
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No_X...!
BACKGROUND:
On April 23, 1996, Council approved an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with Joelen
Enterprises for the development of a golf resort hotel on City-owned property adjacent to the
municipal golf course. The ENA ensures Joelen that the City will not negotiate with any other
project proponents during the 12 month ENA period, and that staff intends to return to Council
with a recommended Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) in the event that Joelen
satisfactorily meets the ENA milestones. Per the ENA, the DDA, if approved, would provide for
the lease or sale of the City-owned land, and for development of the hotel subject to the
developer's securing entitlements and meeting various other conditions. The City has the right to
terminate the ENA if any of the milestones are missed.
At the April 23 meeting, Council requested that staff return in early August with a preliminary
MOU. While a preliminary MOU between the City, the developer andlor American Golf has not
yet been developed, all parties have been attempting to move the project ahead. Weekly
interdepartmental meetings with the Joelen and American Golf representatives began on June 6,
1996. This report is intended to inform Council of the progress that has been made.
Additionally, this report is being brought forward at the request of the developer to advise Council
regarding the developer's request for site control. Specifically, Joelen has advised staff that a
"credit facility", i.e. a preliminary lending commitment, has been received from a major foreign
investor for $38 million in project financing. Joelen indicates that the lender's loan commitment
is subject to receipt of certain documentation by September 11, including evidence of the
developer's control of the property. Joelen has therefore requested that the City enter into a
conditional escrow by September 11 in order to meet the site control requirement. At the time
of this writing because of the short time line of the lender, there are questions regarding the lender
itself, the lender's requirements, the timing of these requirements and the lender's ability to offer
greater flexibility to work within the constraints of the ENA as discussed herein. While the
developer's request to immediately open an escrow is not consistent with the existing ENA nor
with previous Council direction, and is judged by staff to be premature, staff is bringing this
request forward for Council's information and direction.
/7- /
Page 2, Item L 1
Meeting Date 09/10/96
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept this Progress Report and direct staff to: 1) continue
to negotiate with Joelen Enterprises under the existing Exclusive Negotiating Agreement; and 2)
continue to perform due diligence regarding the lender's capabilities and loan requirements, and
to attempt to obtain extended lender deadlines which both facilitate loan approvals and
accommodate Council direction that Joelen satisfy ENA/DDA conditions prior to the transfer of the
property.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
As noted, since June 6, the Interdepartmental Project Team has met weekly with the developer
and American Golf to address ENA related issues. The following is an update.
A. MARKET FEASIBILITY STUDY
ENA Milestone: The ENA requires that a "Preliminary Market Study" {Phase 1 J and follow-
up "Comprehensive Study" (Phase 2) be conducted to determine project feasibility. The
ENA requires a Phase 1 deposit by July 7, 1996.
Status: The City has contracted with PKF Consulting to conduct the required market
study. The contract is a three way agreement between the City, PKF and Joelen, providing
for PKF to provide their services for the City, and for Joelen to pay the total $16,000 cost
($10,000 for Phase 1 and $6,000 for Phase 2). Staff received Joelen's executed contract
and a $10,000 deposit (for Phase 1) on August 12 and gave PKF the notice to proceed on
that date. The Draft market study was received by staff on August 26; comments have
been submitted to PKF for inclusion in the Final report, which is expected to be received
on September 6. The final report will be provided to the developer and to Council.
B. GOLF COURSE RELATED ISSUES
ENA Milestone: The ENA requires that an MOU be executed between American Golf and
Joelen by October 7, 1996. The MOU should address such issues as course improvements
and American Golf's, Joelen's and/or the City's involvement in their financing, guaranteed
tee times, course fees, etc. (Staff suggests that this MOU may include the City as a third
party due to the interrelationship of the golf course related issues with City interests.)
Status: The key golf course-related issues are outlined and their status is summarized
below.
1. GOLF COURSE IMPROVEMENTS - WHAT IS NEEDED?
The developer feels that a threshold question is whether the City golf course can be
upgraded to the standard that a resort hotel clientele would demand while still meeting the
City's needs to maintain reasonable pricing for the City's golfing public. A preliminary
analysis by American Golf (AG) has indicated that the course needs improvements costing
approximately $2.8 million. City staff has identified additional improvements needed.
Also, until the developer has submitted a site plan, staff is unable to estimate the impacts
11- ;J
Page 3, Item _
Meeting Date 09/10/96
on the course and resulting costs. Meetings are on-going to finalize what improvements
are needed, respective costs, and, importantly, who is responsible for which costs.
2. FINANCING THE GOLF COURSE IMPROVEMENTS
American Golf (AG) has submitted a proposal suggesting that the golf course
improvements, estimated at $2-$2.8 million, be financed by City borrowing or by AG itself.
AG is seeking to amend its lease accordingly to extend the lease term and to adjust lease
formulas to ensure debt repayment. As noted, meetings are ongoing to refine needed
improvements, and to identify appropriate financing mechanisms and financing
responsibility.
3. GREEN FEES
AG's initial proposal suggests that fees be increased to help finance the golf course
improvements, with residents and seniors continuing to receive discounted rates. Both
staff and the developer's intent is to set fees for hotel guests at rates substantially higher
than for locals. These matters are being analyzed and negotiated, with a goal of
minimizing the impact on local golfers.
4. GUARANTEED TEE TIMES
Joelen wants to establish a minimum and maximum number of guaranteed rounds per day
for hotel guests. Generally, these guaranteed times for hotel guests would be released 48
hours in advance if not specifically reserved by a guest. Currently it appears that the
hotel's needs could be met; negotiations are ongoing to ensure that the proposed
guaranteed rounds and the times of these rounds do not negatively impact the public.
5. DRAINAGE
Drainage of the golf course is a threshold question for the developer and is also an item of
concern to the city. There are three primary problems: 1) Arundo Cane blocking the
channel west of Willow Street bridge; 2) two water pipes that have caused excessive
siltation of the channel east of Willow Street bridge (one pipe is owned by Sweetwater
Authority; one is owned by the City of San Diego); and, 3) inadequate channelization
capacity to carry the normal water flow west of Will Street bridge. What this means is
that during times of heavy rain, water may be released from the Sweetwater Reservoir, it
backs up flooding the golf course, sometimes closing it for 1-2 months.
Public Works staff has now determined that the County plans to remove 15 acres of the
cane in October of this year and to contract with Environmental Trust for annual cane
removal/maintenance. Also, the Sweetwater Authority plans to lower their pipe at an
estimated cost of $250,000. Sweetwater Authority is willing to pay one-third ($83,333)
and is looking to the City of Chula Vista and the County for the additional funding
($166,667). The City of San Diego has no plans to relocate or lower their pipe.
There are numerous issues to evaluate and negotiate here. Staff is currently evaluating the
need to contract with Boyle Engineering to update their 1980 study of this area in order
to obtain answers to flood control issues. Neither the developer nor American Golf has
expressed a willingness to share in the $24,640 cost of this study. Staff have expressed
/I). :3
Page 4, Item 12
Meeting Date 09/10/96
a willingness to recommend to Council that the City advance the $24,640 on the basis
that the DDA would provide for total or partial reimbursement to the City upon the
developer's receipt of financing.
C. SITE PLAN AND DEVElOPMENT REVIEW ISSUES
ENA Milestone: In terms of development review, the ENA provides the following
submission deadlines:
. Preliminary Site Plan
. Environmental Initial Study Application and Deposit
. Master Plan and EIR Information
. GPA and Rezone Application
. Preliminary Design Plans
July 7
Aug 7
Oct 7
Oct 7
Nov 7
Status/Site Plan
A concept development plan has been submitted. but is currently undergoing significant
changes by the developer. No Site Plan has yet been formally submitted. The applicant
still needs to refine the boundaries of the proposal so that the application for the GPA,
rezoning and precise plan can be submitted and the environmental review process can
begin. The applicant has just recently introduced a revised concept plan which shifts
property boundaries to the east to accommodate additional parking and to remove buildings
from the flood way . This plan also is intended to enhance traffic circulation by providing
for an entrance at the Bonita Road/Otay Lakes Road intersection (see below). As noted.
no site plan has yet been submitted reflecting this proposal. This new plan would require
the developer's acquisition of approximately 2.5 additional acres, extending the existing
box culvert, realigning the pond, and modifying the 18th hole.
Status: Environmental and Proiect Submittals:
The developer submitted a deposit for environmental review in the amount of $5,000 on
August 22. At the time of writing, an environmental application has not been received.
The deposit enables staff to begin soliciting the EIR consultant and to review existing data.
The applicant will be required to fund the EIR consultant's contract once negotiations with
the selected consultant are completed. The environmental application is needed to actually
begin the environmental review process and in order to meet proposed project time-frames.
Status/Traffic and Circulation Issues:
As noted above, the applicant and City staff are currently reviewing the possibility of
locating the hotel's main access driveway at the northern terminus of Otay Lakes Road.
The entrance would be used by hotel guests, golfers, trail users and commercial vehicles
serving the hotel (golfers would then veer to the east; others to the west). The main
access driveway at this location would avoid having a separate traffic signal between Allen
School Lane and Otay Lakes Road, increase the area available for parking, and provide
controlled left turn movements to and from the hotel. American Golf has conceptually
endorsed the access at the intersection and the necessary modifications to hole 18.
Staff is presently studying this option, which includes extending a drainage pipe,
reconfiguring the small water reservoir, realigning the jogging/equestrian trail and
redesigning the last hole.
/1-1
Page 5, Item 11
Meeting Date 09/10/96
StatuslParkinq Issues:
The conceptual development plan initially submitted by the applicant contained insufficient
parking per code. Preliminary analysis of the revised concept plan indicates there may still
be a shortage but requires further analysis following site plan submittal. A shortage of
parking per code could be mitigated by the fact that parking demand for the hotel uses and
golf course will vary during the day and the days of the week, and examples exist of other
successful resort hotels which function with less parking than per code. Therefore, the
applicant is preparing and will submit as part of the project a "parking study" to help clarify
actual parking needs. Additionally, staff and the developer are evaluating the possibility
of using the vacant triangular parcel at the east end of Rohr Park (at the convergence of
Sweetwater Road and Central Avenue) as an alternate parking lot for trail users (see map,
Attachment 1) with additional parking potentially available at the Rohr Park northerly lot.
Proiect Processinq/Deposit
It should be noted that while the ENA does not call for a project application until October
7, development department staff (Planning, Public Works, Parks and Recreation) have
incurred extensive costs to-date without a developer's deposit account against which to
charge these costs.
D. JOGGING/EQUESTRIAN TRAIL
ENA Milestone: All but one of the milestones enumerated in item C above require that the
jogging/equestrian trail design and layout be addressed.
Status: As noted, the developer submitted a concept development plan which is now
undergoing significant revision by the developer. Among the items which have been
undergoing substantial staff review is the location of the proposed jogging/equestrian trail.
Staff and the developer are currently evaluating a fifteen to twenty feet (15'-20') wide
jogging/equestrian trail along the north and eastern side of the hotel. The trail as proposed
would allow a continuous, user-friendly trail but would require some modifications to the
golf course. Analysis will continue to evolve as a site plan is developed.
Communitv Input:
On July 16, a meeting was held by American Golf with the Chula Vista Mens Golf Club,
with Parks and Recreation staff present, to solicit input and to provide very preliminary
project information. Concerns revolved around availability of tee times, the impact of
planned tournaments, adequacy of parking, encroachment on the golf course, increased
green fees, disruption to trails, and impact upon pro-shop prices. A second meeting was
held on July 17 with representatives of the jogging community and Parks & Recreation
staff to discuss the trail. These representatives appeared to generally support the hotel
and its positive economic benefits to the city. Key comments were a strong opposition to
routing the trail along Bonita Road (fear of traffic at the entrances); a preference to route
the trail on the north side of the hotel alongside the golf course; a secondary preference
to route it south of the hotel; and the "approval" of a new parking lot at the east end of
the Rohr Park for recreation trail users.
,..-
(? - 5
Page 6, Item / .1
Meeting Date 09/10/96
E. PROJECT PROCESSING TIMElINES
A Processing Schedule has been prepared by staff (see Attachment 2) and has been
distributed to the developer and Project Team. This schedule (which was distributed July
18 and updated August 8) is based upon an August 1 Initial StudylEIR application and
deposit and a project submittal date of August 15. The developer has not yet submitted
the project or environmental applications and is preparing a site plan. The actual schedule
will shift depending upon the actual dates of submittal.
The schedule calls for one or more public forums to be held as the project proceeds. It also
requires approvals by the DRC, Planning Commission and Council, with final Council
approval projected for approximately eight (8) months from the date of the EIR and project
application submittals.
F. LENDER COMMITMENT/CONDITIONAL LAND SALE
ENA Milestone: The ENA requires the developer to provide letters of interest from the
lender andlor equity investors by November 7.
Status:
The developer indicates that on August 9 they obtained a "credit facility" (preliminary
indication of intent to fund) from a major foreign investment trust. (Joelen has requested
that the trust's name not be released to the public.) Joelen has indicated that the lender
will not finance a lease and is requesting that the City give them conditional "control" of
the property (I.e. a conditioned escrow) by September 11 in order to meet the requirements
of the lender. Joelen has also indicated a reluctance to move forward on the project or to
incur additional predevelopment costs necessary to meet the conditions of the ENA without
such site control. (It should be noted that the existing ENA provides for the developer to
assume responsibility for all predevelopment costs.)
Developers's Requested Conditional Escrow
The opening of an escrow at this stage of the negotiations is not consistent with the ENA.
While an escrow could theoretically be opened with closing subject to negotiation of a
sales price and to the determination of defined boundaries, and to the developer complying
with all ENA/DDA related conditions, the value of this type of escrow to the lender remains
in question. At time of writing, staff is still awaiting clarification on this point from the
lender's agent.
Among the challenges of trying to structure escrow instructions at this time are the
following:
1) The ENA approved on April 23 provides for negotiations to take place over a period
of 12 months at which time a DDA would be presented to Council for
consideration. The DDA would provide for the specific scope of the hotel project
and for the transfer of the property (via lease or sale) per specified business terms
and subject to the developer's complying with specific, negotiated conditions. For
example, conditions would relate to a revised lease agreement with American Golf,
guaranteed tee times, construction and financing of course improvements, course
!1~0
Page 7, Item / '7
Meeting Date 09/10/96
fees, site planning (including recreational trail alignment). hotel amenities and
design, parking, etc. These conditions and business terms have not yet been
negotiated, and their successful negotiation and the developer's compliance
therewith would therefore need to be conditions of the escrow. Additionally, the
escrow would need to require the developer to obtain all necessary entitlements
(e.g. GPA, rezone, CUP, parcel map) and a certified EIR as a condition of the
escrow closing. Collectively, these conditions are projected to require 6 to 8
months minimum. (The EIR requires approximately 6 months per state mandated
timeframes.)
2) Council has not yet determined whether the property should be leased or sold. A
full analysis of the cost/benefits to the City of selling the property versus leasing
the property has not been conducted and cannot be conducted until more specifics
are available on the final hotel facility and budget. By opening an escrow, the City
commits to a land sale if the stated conditions are met.
3) At the time of writing, an appraisal has not been conducted by the City. Joelen's
appraisal has not been received, and a sales price has not been negotiated.
4) The precise property boundaries have not been determined. The developer is
considering a revised site plan which may include approximately 2.5 acres of
additional property to the east of the "restaurant parcel" (located within the golf
course). Additionally, the 4.1 acre "restaurant parcel" is currently leased by the
City to American Golf. American Golf would have to agree to terminate the lease
(or sell it to Joelen) in order for the sale to occur, prior to the City's overall lease
negotiations with American Golf being concluded.
5) No terms/conditions have been negotiated with the developer and/or lender
regarding security for the developer's performance (normally a DDA condition).
Staff's Request of Lender
The lender's initial request was that the conditional escrow be opened by September 11
with instructions to close within 30 days, or possibly as late as within 90 days, subject to
approval of an extension request, That scenario is problemmatic to the City due to the
inability to negotiate ENA/DDA issues and business terms and to complete an EIR within
a 30 or 90 day timeframe. Staff has explained this to the lender's agent and requested the
agent clarify the following:
1) Would an escrow that is subject to all conditions of an ENA/DDA, including a yet
to be negotiated purchase price, be acceptable to constitute "evidence of site
control"?
2) Can the September 11 due diligence deadline be extended?
/'7- 7
Page 8, Item fl
Meeting Date 09/10/96
3) Could the escrow period (30 day to 90 day) be extended to allow all ENA/DDA
conditions to be resolved, including completion of the EIR, and subject to all
required entitlements? (This could require an estimated 6-8 months minimum.) As
of August 4, 1996, the lender's agent indicated that this was a possibility. The
developer expressed a reluctance to enter an escrow period for this amount of
time.
4) Can the lender approve a predevelopment loan for the developer based upon the
conditioned escrow but prior to closing, i.e. without having fee title? (As noted,
the developer has indicated a reluctance to move forward without site control
acceptable to the lender which would enable them to obtain predevelopment
financing. Staff has requested the developer to provide predevelopment cost
estimates to assist staff and Council with these policy determinations.)
A lender response to these items is pending. Staff has also requested (but has not yet
received): 1) a copy of the credit facility that has been issued; and 2) written information
on the lender which would establish the lender's capability and experience.
FISCAL IMPACT: As noted in the report, cost recovery development departments are currently
providing extensive staff support for this project without a developer's deposit against which to
charge staff time.
The recommendation to continue negotiations per the ENA has no additional direct fiscal impacts
per se. As negotiations continue, staff will return to Council for adoption of related MOU's,.
leases, and of course the DDA itself, at which time fiscal impacts will be delineated.
Similarly, the recommendation to continue discussion with the lender has no direct fiscal impact.
In the event that such discussions were to result in a recommendation to open a conditional
escrow, such a recommendation would be brought to Council for consideration. A fundamental
impact would be that the City would be agreeing to sell - versus lease. At this time a cost/benefit
analysis has not be undertaken. (The developer's most recent lease revenue projections (rent and
T.O.T.) estimated cumulative revenues of $38 to $41 million by year 25. The developer has
offered a purchase price of $2.2 to $2.3 million.) Additional analysis is needed (per the ENA) to
assess the validity of the developer's revenue projections and/or an acceptable purchase price.
ATTACHMENTS:
1 Rohr Parking Lot Map
2 Processing Schedule
3 September 3 letter from Joelen
(CD/md) M:\HOMEICOMMDEV\STAFF.REP\09-1Q-96\BONITARES.SHT [September 6,1996 (3:03pm)]
/7-0"
. ....,
~c
-- ':\,
,( $
:i1
~<i,
~"'~
~"'~
..
~-
~
~
__.2. I
\
~-
11-9
ATTACHMENT 1
Cl
~
~
~l<J
~
~;
G
~
'.
..
'.-'
..
-.
".
,
,,;,
-~.
o
~..."...
,':;
,.'-
FIGURE 1
Growth Areas
Development Plans and Proposals
~.
RECON 199~ . ~
L!1..: . 'I... . ~!::,'.llJJlf
"~ ,*.::,,,,.t~:~._~<',..-.._~.._L!
.. '0
'.
.....J
I
','
"
,
.
'"
,
"
",
'./.
,:
\,:\'
~e
,,:';b
';'",
,';:,
~.;I
\
, /--
--'y..,
,
", /'8"Ctr;
/....~ , !
i
~ /'"
';.'4
"
"
~; ,
" .:.~;'
:$ c.
'e' -,
~~ ~'" ;::
,/!/
::i"I ',5;,' ,
n ""~i ,
~i ~ ~"I,
-Y'
~~ , /
s
I
Qd ,
~j FI GURE 2
i~
r.r:,rJ':
;' ~;
. ",
't'
.'
','r
II: ~)
, 'I'
.
':
.'
'~~-
,~f
.
'\
;,1
'1.
"
.1,
I'
>
:\
", \
L
"
,
.
I'" 0 :;
- a::I
N ..
"" ^ ::I
~
~
0
i
..
<
!!1.
is"
::I
"'II
0
:a
....
i
0
::I
FIGURE 3
.
....7'
,.:.", '
Ii,) II"
I" ,,<$":1"',,,
." "'I.,,, i.'
>>
"
,/:/
."...,--..J.i.
:~.~,!e
; '.:,.)t.,..~,~ ..'
.,.~. :"
'>.: '..::...... '
.... ~, "-.._e......
, ,~r.:::t~.t~~~0~.'.:,;:....,'~~
" .~....,::>. "
~~J:
), .
t::'fiI
,., ',.
/,
"'., 'f"
:/~~ <.1/
",. 0.1
.~;;::'r":"::'
" I
:;~~~ii' '
'-"':-"--~{.--"'''
. . , " ..;~~~.~
"",'>
',;,"
II~/
"
w g~
~Q ....
~~Jl
,pi
n~~~
, ~ ~ i;.; "
~ ~~~j~
i ~~~f.1i
< ~ , ~.~~~6
~ ,
, ~t~LJ_
~ ~ ~~n~
1 , , J
" ^
~ ' , ~ ' '<t, , [1J ~ [~ lID 0
"' ;,
lJ
c
(j)
OJ
(j)
....J
~ ]
~. ~ ~ ~
,g ~ ~ ~
j ~ i g i ]
~, ! ~ .5 '" ~
,1"~'-~"ki~~;:
]~5~8:S~~o.~
'Il~l 0 [~] 10 [] 8J 0 8 (e) @
J
<
,
J
,
~
,
.~
,
j
~
!.~
,
~ i
,
~ i
- ~ !
]
,
I
r~ [ill [!]
~
~ ~
~: j
" ~ -.J j
j ~ g !
!
8
, ,
.~ ;:;
J
j ~
-' .::i j
'i H 13i~0~1
~:i
~
~j)j
.
.
:>
u
c
j
~
.
u
c
o
o
.
0>
. .
. .
:>:>
Uu
c c
jj
~~
. .
Eu
';::5
0, 0
",.
cO>
'",
0._
uu
c..-i
'i' c: _
c\]~
Q)Q
'- Q)
::J <J)
.'?1:::J
lJ...",
c:
qj
-J
Q
[(
VJ
ci.
a
(,')
.c:
'-'
c:
qj
ct
A
21
a
,',
cr,
~~
,0
"
I'
f,
'"
a,
~
,
<
C
I~,
'"
'0
"
"
"
(fj
~ <,
'U
\.~, .
\
.1
,
utay KanCn uwnersmps
!IIIJ] Otay Ranch, L.P.
J
"
I:::::: Village Development
..,r'
0'
!ill
~
~
(@
~
[J
~
D
Baldwin Builders
'"
~1I''''\''
Tiger Development TwolWCLF
SNMB, Inc.
Jewels of Charity
Greg Smith
-,
1
n_,~L
'f.
,p
t . [P8Dl-- .:: ,.n:
.:: - ~<{~r
.~ /r' "
,'/p ,,'
, 't'.{
" ,,;,c'j
" (
Stephen & Mary Patrick Birch Foundation
.
United Enterprises
-'-
",
""-;: -,' '
'~
,
-L-r- ---
1
l_''':, \,'.
,./ '
\(
,
I.
.- -'
!" '\ '~l
. ,,""fQ' ~,)
,. . J -
\ \-- '" ',II
\"" .
,
.1 I"
, ,.
lD'rimaryt:al
I" "
,r . :'".
\.
(\
'\"..
-;--
:'
~~
~:.
..\ ".
.!L'"
1- ~ .
t<I"T
~~ .;'.;.' \"
~J i' ':..)
"
i
,.
,
, " ~
1.o1,.y: land Useoj'
i,
~~
,
,
,
~ IPi1944l,/
-i h~ ~S-J~
< -
<I
, I
,'.1
--------
'"
BU"" 11'1.1.
;'(,
,.
,,""'II' ""
-"""':'<!.-~
J:"",.,,,
~~~~
It
~ ~ ~ ~
c:coco-
;, i" ii'
~ ~ ir
~ 1;1. 3
<~
c:' :J
!:; i
[@B~ii[> . a ~ 8
. (")
. ~ ~
0 ~ "0 -:;< 3
-g t [: b' "Ob' r:
~ 11 '" r: g>:.
" ::r 3 -g 3 ::r.:t
VI " !: ~ 3
"0 9: '" III 3 g
" " VI ~ It "r: -
n " liT n "
" 0 ". -:;< !: Dt'~
< 0 " ~
" " "
~ " ~
1! ~
"
"
z
~
~ ~~\
~ ~ ~
r
m
---
.'
,
\
\
\
,
I
I
I
........i
,
; g
\
, '
,
\ \ \
en \ ~ \ (1)\
"TI 1 ,.",
, '\
, ,\
-':::-.:~~.eo: \
/""':::='::::'') \
, I '
, I '
, ' \
..../ '\ ~
VI , '
"TI ..-/ \
'\ ~ \
, '
, ,
\ ,
\ I
.
,-
I
I
,
---\---....,
\ '
\ !: \
!: \ ..,
VI
..,
g
,
\
-'
I
'"
c
.
,
.
<
..
~
"
-!!
<
-"
iii
(Q
CD
o
::J
CD
.'
'.'
g
~
-;;"...-,
, '
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
0'
VI'
,
\
\
\
,
,
,
\
\
\
,
,
-"-
,
\
,
\
\
\
\
,
,
VI
..,
,
,
o
VI
, --
<
==
iii
(Q
CD
."
:c"
CD
/----
VI I \
"'11 I '
I VI I
.., ,
,
\
I
I
<
,
,
,
,
,
..... _......... I
t - _,,'
\ \
I I
I VI'
1"'11,
) ~ ,n,o__, \
I VI
, .., \
LJ..----
I
I
I
I
I
VI
..,
~
()
.-
iiI
"
".
.
~-&
000
;g~
~
O:IJ
~)>
z
o
:J:
~
~
~
.
~
.
&>~
~<8
o '
, .
:D~
o
.
~
o
~
r
.
~
.
.
:D
o
.
~
t'
~
.
~
.
...,....
(
- -
- ~
D ~mc.nuiorII
- -
- - ~-.::---
.994
- PIrt......... fIc:iIi&ia
- ---
( - ..........
......--
:':"
FIGURE 3-6
EXISTING LAND USE
orth Portion
3-49
C ({
~
I
i~
w~
~,
i~
!f"
I
I'~.
~" ,
Wi
I
Jij'
~'::<:
r$i
~WJ
olti
~>t
;,<:;"
I~
iA\~
%~:'!
"''':1
',:,~':
~,t
':
<..
'J:J
i
~
1-3
~
'J:J
....
.' CO
t""
l":I
[I.>
.
...
--
fi lilil~ t~1 p~ i I ~hlf'UU i !IHH ii~JU J.fn~UHJ ~ f ~lr'f;1 ' n
~1.lli!l: HI iH ~lljHir r. tfJfr ~tui ihill ~llf~ F. Ufll ~
~! I i; I H~ ~hHU i ~c " In~ Hid~~n~ ~ 1 f ~I I
~i i f j, t, ~ HI tI ~ c ?:?: f;" h i~ U[:t ~ !! f' I.,
il is ~ . ~! t c$ · ~ w_, -! ~ - , i I' '_
I · uii,' I ilQ'
i~' I ~I I ~ ii1S~:~~o ~;H~i Itili '1m I!!! · Ii, . 'II
~~ f :':'I~~,~ ~ [;~'"
· ~ iii ~$ ~ ~ ! E!1:
i ~ II Ii i ~
~f~ I ~~~
~f~I~~~I~ 811'4 !I~
Iii '< :Eqf",
w. a~n
ii' -~
I if ~
I 't:: ~ w I:'
S ~ ~' d t
· i
I I I ~~ ~
l!i~ ! H r
II +n p a
11 I i
I'" !
i It::i II~I ' lif, ' ~
I.$I~I t I~I I~ tl III
I ' I " I. ~I I 0
I i r I III Iii i I "
! i i II 'I
1'1 U ~ ~
Mt::1 I!O ~ II:'
~;; ~' ~
.. t
t:t::1 i:jll t
'"' ~I:! ~
i 1~lglll~ ~ t
1i II111 i~
I , ; t Ii
, . I'
I I ' ~
!l!1j I~ t
.....0\ .... );
I ~~ i
I! ! ii' I
I
00
z
o
~ I:'
~ t
o
-
'Ii, t:;
b~t::......P~~-
~....08-:""v.c
N
~o~
IS ~i!:
i!!i!!~.!!
. . E
...._N.-~
-!!:..,;,IftODO
UIo~S=:"':!Q
..~~iiI
--13~
~q~
-
~
~'Ii N;:;_~N_
h:S8-~'^0
1
.
~ON
.III!;..... ....
~~ "",-
i!!i!!~"I1Ii
< < Ii 101 101
8~~eJ~::;
!!!! "'iiI "
::.::.~.:!]~
.... <,to e: __
"'''~
;:;
f.~
. N.N N '-" N_
. ~::S"':'" 0.... 0
~ 'Ii, :;:
.
~Ig~~~
!!1!6~q
< < Ii - 101
8=~1~:::i
~~!':n~
MM'g-jIII;Ii
oV;I,!;_
'O;!Q~
, ,
;;
"
o _
~1!.~~-oo....._
i!\o~O~ N
'Ii,
.
g.
~ N
~ ~~~
1!~~M~
0.:' Q c; DO
~...~=-".!~
, !!1Ii~iiIiiI
~:..n
"II~
cnQ~..,;,...
z ~~ CO! '-" '-"
~ ~ _ i!!~I~!!
101 ~~'Ne .... _ t:'~~:
.III! ~8'~-ONN o"':S~",:!Q
.. I ~ I I I < IIt."M 101
J ~I~'''~~~ ~~~~!~
a I 'Ii, II I:. ~. ~~
I · , II" II
I
~ I I
'~I' I
~ ;c;
~ ... N
J U8~"~~o
. ".
a l
~Q~
I~ ~..,;, ~
~~~
~~Ii:::;
~-~I~::::i
o-t-.....::r".!....
is 0 _" ..,.
::::::~I~~
g; ",," -
-"!\
~
~ f
"
~I-
~ N
i i' ~
I{!j
8 ~ i
fi'~
iHi
;irZ.
Ii'i!'
z
H~
~ . .
dSl~R
(iU I
~~i
fi'&-
Jir~
t;;f~
n~~
8 ~ I!.
fi'~
~iI'_
~ 5' ~ ~
SI1~R
Ii
", ['0'1'
-1.(
h!
.~
I"!f~~
~ e,~
- it ~
Un
~
m
~
1-
I
~~~~~~II~
... ........N'-"..,;, CleO
8 tt::i::$~ ~
,
z
o
m
~
'i~
10: _
l~ ~I ~
.. 11;:; ~Ifj
, as H
r I I 1m.
, I:' I' I ~l~i, d~
I ,i ' ~ it 0;1' !~~ ~
1: PI~ ~18:1~ ::;'~I 1 :!Ii c ~I~I 1..1~ :;,
o ~ L ~1$'~[~I~11 1 ~ io %'1', i 1,~I,~liil'
I I i I I r ' ';'!I Iii I[I~
i ii' I' I 3" II · :()i~'~
I 1 II' .., g ,- a
". I :< ~ ~
~2"; i:::0'!!
~~~I~~gl~' ~ !~i~ ir~~
, I ~! . <:
I '< 1'I'1q-
~" I.~....
It I J ,- ~
~ I-~- (J'I
! n
~ ('JITJ=
-. -. c fA a
I a~~ H~
~~~~~~f~1 I~~ ~,~
~.......~:'-"~ t =~~.~~ ~~~
liSllli~ ~f~r~11 ~II 1~liliiIIQIII~II~
i ! I I! 1111~1! I ! I~I I!
Ii, i i II I);' Ii ifu~
'I i II i 1 i I r i~
~~e:~t8:~Ig;~ 1~I~iIJ ~!~
~~t~~I$F~,t~! .~IIOi Illi
I ' I I ,1~ I' J=: I
"I z "Iz! [ i ! ~
~ li'~ ... ~ 00 I a~
;! iifl5 S" ,
Rt "~[ I i a
.47TA Cf-I4,f'E fVT F
A77AUlA1EIVT 6-
Minutes
June 27, 1995
Page 11
(
Cheryl Dye, Economic Development Manager, replied that the Ihree interim personnel would be charged entirely
to the EDA grant and CDBG funds that had been allocated.
RESOLUTION 17944 OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOOT, reading 01' the text was waived, passed
and approved 4-0-1 with Horton absent.
12.A. RESOLUTION 17945 SUPPORTING THE PROPOSAL TO FUND THE SAN MIGUEL
CONNECTOR FROM TRANSNET FUNDS AS A SCALED DOWN PROJECT SUBJECT TO IT BEING
CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SCHEDULE FOR ST-125 SOUTH SECTION AND
SUBJECT TO THE SR-125 SWEETWATER SECTION BEING CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH
ADOPTED PLAN OF FINANCE - California Transportalion Ventures has requested tbe opportunily to address
Council on two issues concerning the SR-125 Toll Road between the US/Mexican border (SR-905) and SR-54. Due
to several factors, funds are not expected to be adequate to construct the enlire regional highway system under tbe
Transnet Program. This could mean that the San Miguel connector hctwlXn the Toll Road and SR-125 will not be
fully funded. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works)
B. RESOLUTION 17946 SUPPORTING THE EFFORTS OF CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION
VENTURES TO CONSTRUCT SR-125 BETWEEN SR-905 AND SR-54
Mr. Boogaard stated he would abslain from participation doe 10 the proximity of his home to Ihe alternate
transportation routes. He did not believe there was any dir~t connie! hut want~ to avoid any appearance of
impropriet)' .
(
Mayor Horton 4uestioncd if she had a contliet due to the location of her home and the ownaship of other properties
in Bonita.
Mr. Boogaard stated he had nol analyzed the possibility of a contlict for the Mayor. He did not know where the
alignment was, therefore, he did not know how to measure the 2,500 ft. distance ftXIuirement.
Mayor Horton stated she did not f~elthere was a contlict b~causd her properties were in the western area of Bonita
and his property was further to the east.
John Lippitt. Director of Public Works. slated the issue was the funding shortfall in the program and how to assure
there would be funding for the San Miguel connector. II was part of thd TransNet program and needed to be
constructed in order to build any facility to the sooth. whether an interim prqjecl or the tollway. CTV and Caltrans
would address Council regarding the toll road. Revised resolutions had b~n placed on the dais for Council
consideration. Resolution 17945, last sentence on the tirst page, language should he added to r~d .... .funding, and
the fact that since the community....". Staff and members of the uevdopment community met with Senator Peace
and he had concerns that 125 would be built as a toll tacility based on language in the legislation. He felt it may
be challenged and that efforts should be made oy the rdgion to look at 905 and even parts of 52 as toll road in lieu
of Ihe project. He did supporl the City's efforts 10 keep the funding in tacl II" Ihe San Miguel section. Staff had
advised him that they would he recommending Council go t()rward with the resolutions because there was no
alternative funding source at the present time for 125.
Ken Olsen, CTV, stated SR 125 sooth toll road would not be done as a purely private toll road, they needed to tie
inlo the regional highway network with a TransNet funded connector and they needed the approved TransNet
projects to be built in a reasonable time frame so there was a complete system. Other transportation prqjects in the
County had vigorous pohtical support from various areas. He requestoo Council adopt the same vigorous support
for the 125 project because it was important to Chula Vista, the Southbay. and San Diego region. A brief slide
pr~entation was given outlining the n~d, why it was ~ing huill as a toll road, what it was, who would build it,
and benefits to tbe community.
(
Charles Stohl, Project Manager, Caltrans, reviewed the status of the environmental studies being conducted for the
proj~ct. Th~y were also performing the ~ngineering stlldi~s to support the tmvironm~ntal studies. Several
ah~rnatives had bc:en studioo in the past and s~veral alternatives were currently heing considered. A new alignment
.
.
Minutes
June 27, 1995
Page 12
had heen added at the request of the Citizens Advisory Committee which was in the Bonita/Sunnyside area and was
the most easterly alignment being considered adjacent to the Sweetwater Reservoir. They were trying to avoid
impacts to the greatest extent possible, if th~re were impacts to minimiZd them. and to devdop mitigations for the
impacts that were left. Because it was a federd.1 process it r~uiroo an environmental impact statement. It would
be submitted to the FHW A for review during the summer and he hoped to circulate it shortly after for review.
Mr. Olsen showed a video of the technology developed by SAIC for high tech toll collection systems. Syntonic
was a San Diego based firm and was a potential supplier of the system.
Eric Pahlke, 401 B Street #800, San Diego, CA, Program Manager lor Highways, SANDAG, reviewed the
inlormation presented from the TransNet Subcommittee. There could be delay of lour years for the various
segments of the 125/Sweetwater section. In terms of the TransNet program it was reasonahle to assume there would
be a gas tax increase before the end of the sales tax program. That would represent a four cent increase in the gas
tax beginning 1998, and one cent per year for the next four years for a total of eight cents. A funding increase of
that magnitude would make the program complete per the current plan. They would also be discussing the
feasihility of extending the sales tax.
Council member Rindone questioned what type of johs would he created hy the pr~iect.
Mr. Olsen replied that there would be toll booth positions, administration, maintenance, and 8l,;counting.
.
Rod Davis, 233 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, Executive Director, Chula Vista Chamber of
Commerce, felt the benefits to business was self evident. The TransNet program would be broke
long before 2008 as it had tremendous bond debt and deht service and depended on sales tax that
was down state-wide. Any project moved out to a further date ran the risk of not being funded.
Diane Jacobs was pushing for completion for the Santee leg of 52 and using all her clout. It was
up to the City to do the same. If it weren't for the voters in the Southhay there would not be a
half cent sales tax, but virtually all of the projects were in the North County. The only one that
impacted Southhay was the San Miguel cOMector. Chula Vista needed to hecome as aggressive
as North County to get their fair share. The City needed another major north/south freeway
system to connect to the existing system. The program Was the key to the future and he requested
Council's support.
George Kost, 3609 Bele Bonnie Brae Road, Bonita, CA, representing Sweetwater Valley Civic
Association, stated he was confused why the Council was involved when it was County land.
Bonita residents did not vote lor the Council and yet the Council was making decisions lor Bonita.
The predictions of continuing thd saldS tax s~mdd optimistic in the present ~onomy. He
questioned why the developers weren't paying lor the road. He was already established and a
taxpayer and did not feel he should have to pay lor new development. The health and general
welfare of the people affected had not been discussed, i.e. noise, air pollution, etc. If the
alignment went west of the reservoir it would have the least aff~t on pdople which was his main
concern .
Dave Nielsen, 416 University Avenue, San Diego, CA, representing the Olay Mesa Chamber of
Commerce, passed when called to the dais.
Kim Kilkenny, 11975 EI Camino Real, San Diego, CA, Baldwin Company, representing the South County
EDC, stated they felt it was important that the San Diego Transportation Regional Plan he fulfilled
and that it was equally, if not more important, that the South County get its proportional share of
the TransNet revenues and associated facilities. Other regions had done very well under the
TransNet program and had lacilities built or committed. They Idtit imperative that the battle be
had and won because if 125 was not connected to the 54 connector and the Sweetwater portion
of 125, South County's transportation system lor years to come, if not decades, would be doomed
to congestion and South County's economy would fail. They supported the resolutions and
requested that Council do likewise.
Bruce Sloan, 900 Lane Avenue #100, Chula Vista, CA, representing the EastLake Development Company,
stated Mr. Kilkenny had expressed their views and passed.
Patty Davis, 1375 #17, Caleya Montefrio, Chula Vista, CA, Chair of the Chula Vista Economic
Development Commission, stated the Commission had voted to support SR 125. Construction was
~
':J
.
.
.
Minutes
June 27, 1995
Page 13
(
critical to the comme:rcial and industrial de::vdopme::nt in th~ e::astcm portion of Chula Vista. One
company was already lost to Otay Mesa because there was not a straight shot from EastLake south
to Tijuana. She urged Council to support the project and tight for the TransNet funds.
· Mark Marchand, 8880 Canarios Court, Chula Vista, CA, Executive Vice President of Pacific Southwest
Association of Realtors, stated the:: Association had not formally taken a position on th~ issue but
they had met several times and discussed SR 125 with all parties on both sides. Given all the
pro's and con's the Association !;onsistently supported the project. He urged Council to take
action to do anything that would expedjt~ the:: project and support the staff recommendation
regarding the San Miguel connator.
· Rick Otis, 3394 Armagosa Way, Jamul. CA, President of Clark Lit\ of San Diego, First Vice President
of the Dtay Mesa Chamher of Commc:rce, and Chair of Citizens for Border Transportation, stated
they had been working hard for several years on the horder transportation problem. 905 was not
funded by any proposal at the present time, the environmental studies were going forward but
there was still no way to get on or off Otay Mesa. It was important not only for Otay Mesa but
also for the mequiladora program. Since the ~rly 1990's there had been over 24 people killed
on Otay Me:sa Road. 125 was another way to get pe::opJe to and from a.very active business area.
It was important for the Council to support SR 125, the connector at 54. The City's sphere of
influence could include the north portion of 125 that was still not fully funded.
· Mike Vogt, 4932 Golf Glen Road, Bonita, CA, Chair of the Otay Mesa Planning Group, stated there was
an industrial revolution at th~ hord~r and there: was no link for Chula Vista to directly benefit from
it and SR 125 was Ihat link. Their projections showed Ihat there would be 70,000 jobs on Otay
Mesa at build-out and many of them would he living in Chula Vista with an economic benefit to
th~ City. As a Bonita rc:siJe::nt he: fc:1t the surfa~e streds we:rc: overcrowded because there were
no fre:eways going tu and frolu Southwe:ste::m Collc:ge, Spring Valley, EI Cajon, etc. He did not
feel many people realized the bend;ts of SR 125. There were very few public projects where the
majority of the fees wc:re:: paid for hy the users. He: urge:d Council support of SR 125.
· Laurex Sahha, 916 SiC:l11pre Viva Road. San Die::go. CA. rerresenting the Dtay Mc:sa Chamher of
Commer~e, was not present when !;alled to the: dais.
Councilmemher Alevy fc:1t it was clear that SR 125 !;re:ated a lot of positives for the: Southhay and th~ entire region.
There Were a lot of conce::ms that Were valid and hoped that when the:: project was put together that considc:ration
be given to the Bonita area and their neoos and desires. The heauty ami amhiance of Bonita should be retained.
RESOLUTIONS 17946 AND 17946, AS AMENDED, OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALEVY, reading
of the text was waived.
Council member Rindone stated he would support the motion. It was clear that the amount of money the South
County should have had from the 1/2 cenl sales tax was not proportionate. If the San Miguel connector was not
built all traffic would have to snake through Bonita and conge:st the streets even further. Council needed to look
at the lesser of two evils. The conn~tor woulJ allow north hounJ trips to the northeast of Chula Vista and avoid
Bonita.
Mayor Horton stated she also supported the motion. She had heen a long time resident of Bonita. She believed
that if the motion was not supported the traffic impacts and quality of lit" tor the community would be lessened.
She was concerned regarding the traffic flows into the Bonita area as it was an exclusive area for the Southbay and
an area Council nceJed to tight hard to pre:serve. It had a natur..) h~l1ty and there were many executive homes
in the area. The cut through traffic would be eliminated from Bonila with SR 125." She would not support an on/off
ramp along the San Miguel seclion. She was a memher of SANDAG and would fight that. SR 125 was also
important to the future: dcvdopment of the industrial parks and it would also haye a regional bc:ndit. Without the
road the whole con!;e:pt of NAFTA would not work. The connl'Xtor was more important to the Southhay region
than any of the other projects being r~questeJ he.cause the other projects affected selected areas only.
(
Councilmember Moot stated be would support the motion as it was vital 10 the health and well being of the
community to avoid the congested streets Ihat had plagued Orange County and other areas. The City needed to take
a very realistic attitude regarding the role: SR 125 would play in the: community to help the City avoid the mistakes
and problems in other areas. It had to be a r~gionaJ approach. Eve:ryon~ should urge thdr r~pres~ntatives at the
Minutes
June 27. 1995
Page 14
State and local levels to take a realistic aUitude about the traflic situation, NAFT A, and the business opportunities
available to the Southbay.
Mayor Horlon statoo a coli road was not her prd~rcncc out il was ~ithcr a loll road or no road hccau~ Ihe funding
was not Ihere.
VOTE ON RESOLUTIONS AS AMENDED: approved unanimously.
Council met in Closed Session to discuss Puhlic Employ"" Perl'onnance Evaluation at 5:38 p.m. and
reconvened at 7:17 p.m.
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
Items pulled: none. The minutes will relleet the published agenda order.
OTHER BUSINESS
13. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S\
a. Scheduling 01' meetings. The next Council meeting will be on July II, 1995, no meeting will be held on
July 4, 1995.
b. Mr. Goss distributed shirts from USA Volleyball. They were in tbe process of trying to locate their
training facilities in Chula Vista.
)
14. MA YOR'S REPORTfS\ . None
15. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Alevv
a. Councilmember Alevy informed Council that fonner Parks & Recreation Commissioner Clifford Roland
had been killed in an automobile accident. He stated if anyone knew of Mr. Roland's tamily he would appreciate
it if they would contact Jerry Foncerrada in the Parks & Recreation Department.
b. Councilmember Alevy stated he had auended the LAFCO meeting regarding the Sphere of Inlluence and
it had been continued to the next meeting. He requested a report back from staff.
Mr. Goss slaled Ihere was an issue;: wilh Ihe;: Olay Water Dislricl ove;:r the cosl of the storage of wale;:r. The olher
issue was negoliating a property lax agr~menl wilh Ihe County. Slaff was al Ihe beginning slages of negotialions
with the County regarding that issue.
Councilmemher Rindone
a. Slalus reporl on negolialions of Ihe Broadway Business Homes Projcct. The rCc.lucst is 10 discuss in ClosOO
Scssion.
Mr. Boogaard questioned if Mayor Pro Tern Rindone wanted to consider his item as it was tangentially related to
the demolition item on the Agency agenda.
Mayor Pro Tern Rindone stated it was a related item.
J
~ N
~ I-
" Z
. ~ W
~ ~ Ii
" . :t:
u _ ~
~ ~
;;; IIIIII 111111
~
~
~
~
. ~
. .
~ -
o ~
.
~
~
~
f
~
N
f
.
. .
~
~
0
" ~ ~!!
~
~
. IIIIII 11111/
. ~
~
~ ~ 1111-11 IIIIII ,
. . ~
~
" III I I '---
w ;;
. ~
% 11111 II I
IIIIII 111111
IIIIII IIIIII
I ~IIII /-11111
IIIIII II1III
IIIIII 1111/1
. II(. 0
. l B~' B~
1;1< . I
~ . ~ I ~
- - 0
.H . I ~
Q:llft-a:: ~... 0
b a" . '8 S to)
Z~!jl ~1J~
Ir~~6i" u
. ~ z
0
.' 6
\C>
0'1
0'1
....
.:
'"
....
..
'"
&=.0
~
~
...;I
;;;J
~
~
=
U
111
~
~
111
111
~
U
~
~
...;I
~
Eo<
o
=
~
~
z
o
~
~
~
.
.
- ..
~ -
~ ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ ~
< -
~ ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ ~
~ ~
= ..
.. -
.. ~
~
~
~
~ ~
~ ~
~
~ -
~
~ ~
~~ :::; I!:! ?.:: ,:;:' $~ ~.!oC '::: ~ ....} ;::$ .'-:) -:} ~
* .:...;: Q a::;: ~ oIij ~ oIij .;." s..:! v ~ :{ ",
tl~~}t1~<~uo~~ %8<~e~ ~0~ ~
$ e: I: <1.1 'r.,. t :::. I>. s I: ~ tJ II. s:e S ~ <1.1 %- ... "
~ ~I&om", .B~~ Q~ ~ e ;;,~lt .i
en ~: ,:.'.;, ~cn Uti::; Ji: 13 -:9:'':''::::~ ~;
~~ t'~H~~j!ij~ ~j!i",.!:~ ~ II if"; :I!~
"" .. 0 @: ~~} a. ~ tIoo:,:' .. ~ ~
'1E[i.W:~-,..5J !2;ew} $~ OJ!
'7" a:?::: r"~?: iI' ~ !t v ~~:::; ~~ ?4 t a::"
~ ,:. :::;$ X' W ,:. ~ -:,':' h j" ....,
:::.,:- II:: -:of:::;..v ..~, :::..
- \::;:;:: {:;.:- :;: :::..)t, a: z
~ ~~ ~?- \: ..;:::: f2 :J
U :::;::.::~ '{ .;:..: x;:: :::E
..~ l.:{ ..J- 8:-: 9 :::E
:z: t:::~ ~ ....I 0
:::> ~;:::::.. $..~ ~ U
'" !;::a:; (; .. It:
~.. % i.. ~
::oJ J ~~ ;a ~ ~
Iii: ~. ~ Ii ~ ,g,' ~
. , ~!!!! '
, 'i ,.
- !Ii .Q~."
JJiW W ~ Q:i
I" ,^
...\.....",
~ I
~ II
~ ~ III
~ I '~IIIII
~ ~'. ~ 1/ jill/II
~if-: ~ ~ III . IIIII1
~nf-IIIII IIIIIII
~ ~ I!U IIIIII 1III II
II/III 1/11111
IIIIII IIIIIII
IIIIII IIIIIII
IIIII1 IIIIIII
niB 1JO
~~:~H
~ ~ ~~~
:c...s 8
I ~ ~ ~
iH u
z
s s I if I~;:!
.-.. \~ :::: ~(
x) K I L I r~ ~f
8 ~ t.:- 1:::' ~::: -:~..~
"'-'-':;::S" "x ,:::
;;. t{ ..-:-;~ :i.~ ~.. ~(
, g II~d; I;;' Iii!}
~ III
~t,;$ ~~Clrt~
pI}~?: Q::: ~~...$
a'Gr:I: s:::~ 101 r. ":.~
4lff-~ i~*;i~
ti~l ::Eto~ij
:r: Il ~ :[ ~WIJ.
I~~ I f$:::g
~;z; ~. l~;e,
II! 'I' # .tj z
I: ,r>. ::;$ ~.;: " 52
i ~.:m* ::;;~~.. 4 {~'X::; ~
:I!
g
~
~
It:
Z
"
iii
w
o
Nt "II~
~ i.r 1J1
"
,
~
c-{
"
'"
'-
,g ~ 'ii~ ~~
f! ~ sa:
"E "Ii;:;
!! .~ -:=:J:
Q. m E E Z
I;:J:Z 0
Gi~~ 2f
Er::J:~1:!~i
:8"lS~ ~
';s u
~:gGl ~
5z~ ~
'8 :Ii ::3 =3
Z < 0.. M
eJ
8
>
a
I.C
<:rI
<:rI
....
..:
on
....
...
on
::I
~
::I
<
Sep-04-96 05:00P JosQf & LQno~Q Cit~n
"'.
619 223-3313
P.Ol
~ ~~sr~
..7(1'/'11 !)JI"rpr1S'S
ATTACHMENT 3
-'-1872
......, & Lonon c......
0wn0N, -"'rtnots
September 3, 1996
Mr_ Chris Salomone, Director of Development
CityofChula VISta
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 920]0
re: Bonita Golf Lodge Resort Land, Purchase
Dear Chris:
.!-. ~;';~":1.~"""! I~-.
~.~.r '1:":>
Thank you for meeting with us fur uptlRti"8 our progress on the Bonita Lodge, and for
conferencing with us and our lender's agent. It is hoped that we ntade SOnte progress in
clearing the air, and the beginnings of a better rapport in our work to reach a common
goal. To be sure there mDains no antbiguities, please accept this as a reiteration of our
offer to purchase the above-referenced land.
As you are aware, we have together IjIlcovered problems and concerns attendant to the
referenced property that effeCt attei1ipts to build on it. We do not think these problems
unsolvable and our architects, along with us and your City staff have ntade progress in
solving theD1, while atteIIIpting to intprove the final design thereby. We think we've made
SOnte good progress in this. The two principal problCQ1S I speak of are the flood-table line
at the north side, where our last design had buildings encroaching on it, and your planning
and traffic departments restated desire to move the hotel entrance east to have it aligned
with the existing Otay Lakes intmection. We shared some sketches with you at our
meeting today, and I thinIc there is a COI1SeT1SUS on the one prefen-ed by all of us.
This leads to the thrust of our ultimate offer on the land. We wish to purchase sufficient
land for our 250 rooms buildings, plus the ntain building with apProxUnate interior spaces
as delineated in our Pf""e"Otation to the Council last April, (copy of information we
provided then, and projected at the Council meeting C!!closed). Obviously, there will be
some final changes in these figures, as dictated by land restraints, as well as ongoing
market input, but we feel fiIirly confident that these nwnbers are in the baUpark. Also
included in this offer is sufficient land for two tennis courts, swimming pool and, of
course, land to &CCOD1D1Odate the mjUired number of parking spaces for use by the hotel
and the golf course, as to be finally determined between us with input iTom our (mutual)
traffic, marketing and parking consultants. And naturally, access onto the property ftom
the final City street location to be agreed between us.
--...,....
4000 Coronado Bay Road a!J Coronado, CA 92118 . (819) 4.24-C-474 FAX 423-0884
17-/3
- - - - - - - --.
--__ I -. L.._rliL1'r--_ _.~. .......
O..L~ .i:::::Z..:5-~~J.~
P.02
The total gross doDar land cost to the hotel that our computations show us that the project
can carrr. is $2,310,000. .
IN REITERATION
We plan to:
1. Build the hotel, as a golf resort, on city property. purchased by us for that purpose.
2. Process the project through an the steps, as legally required by an relevant
governmental agencies.
3. Preserve and improve" all the uses for which-file' propcriy is ~y being utilized as,
incJudius, but not neecs!latilyIbnited to. golf; jogging,cbicyclli!81ind horseback riding.
Thc:sc JIKI. by present and future residents of Chula VISta .mil not only IW .b.t:
iaterfered with. Jw1 will be imDnwrd .I!!!I cohanurl by our development. We
pledge our reputation on the above being competently and properly done and our
promises adhered to.
4 . We do not exPect to have a part in the decisions regarding greens fees on the golf
. COIlI1le. These decisions lie solely with the City and American Galt: and we trust to
common sense and market forces so that no player win be foroed out of play. We arc
confident that market information and local sta1istics win prove American Golf's
contention that the course is presently underllh1i7Pd. and that adding our hotel guests
play win not keep any Chula VISta resident fi'ottrplaying the course.
Please commUDicate the above to the City Council in a timely manner so that they may
~pond in an infonned manner at the September 10" Council meeting. You have our
permission to reproduce this letter for distribution to an concerned:
We continue to look forward to consummation of all of our work, we, you and the staff;
and hopefully an ongoing mutually satis1}ting and profitable relationship.
Thank you,
~/~
Lenore S. Citron
Josef A Citron
JAC:ja
cc: AlI Astor Hotels CKeartive staff
/7- /1/
df/7
September 10, 1996
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Patty wespfjJfl
BONITA HOTEL
MEMO TO:
FROM:
Chris Lewis phoned to express his personal support of the above project.
4.______-________ )
f n I:
Ul.: SEP - 9 10""
L ,'1'),""
( "'-C"-;c--;c,--1
If you want the Hotel in Bonita, you need to call, fax and com c: '~' " ; .'.', '
council meeting on Tuesday, If you want the golfers who we subsidize -
and many of whom do not live in Chula Vista - to make the decision,
then stay away.
--........__...___........ ~r____ __
We need to communicate to our council. Call 691-5044 and/ or fax
476-5379. Come to the council meeting at 6:00 PM Tuesday night;
speak jf you can, and if you don't want to speak, then fill out a slip ani 1
mark the non-speaking block, And bring a friend or two or three -
bodies count.
Any questions, please contact Rod at the Chamber. 420-6603
At a glance the hotel means
$40,000,000 in consruction
375 construction jobs
280 regular jobs many are high paying jobs
annual contirbutions at stablized occupancy of
$6,000,000 per year payroll
$1,000,000 in TOT
$1,000,000 in Sales Tax
The multiplier effect is over $50,000,000
We either make the project or kill the project on Tuesday
night. There is no second chance!
WE STRONGLY FAVOR THIS PROJECT!!!!
CHICAGO TITLE WESTSTAR ESCROW BRANCH
4210 Bonita Road
'7~~~
fy-,'
':.U-IU-~C! VY.i:li
--
1 i..' UO r 111
C, D, n, i
,'f,!' hu, tl j LcUbe,t;
P i
FAX TRANSMITTAL
'ff/ ')
/
r;)1 ~ ~;: r~ D W R\\ rnJ:
111}r-~_ I~ n I
~ ~ '\ ; ; I I :
i Ji; ~.~cr;;J ~I
JOELEN ENTERPRISES
DATE:
9/10/96
PAGE(S): 8
(including cover page)
TO:
Nayor Shirley Horton
FAX NUMBER:
HARD COpy TO FOllOW BY MAil:
YES
NO
FROM: Josef & Lenore Citron
COMPANY:
REGARDING:
.
PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE AT (619) 424.4474 IF THERE ARE ANY PROBLEMS
WITH THIS TRANSMISSION.
5000 Coronado Bay Rd. - Coronado, CA 92118 - (619) 424-4474 _ FAX (619) 423.0884
~oelen ~nte'PI';.es
Established 1972
Josef & Lenore Citron
Owners, General Partners
L "12onh.. 0011 '?1II50rt -&otlll[
Clarifications to
staff Recort for Sectember 10 City Council Meetina
On receipt of a partial copy of the above staff Report to the Council, we desire to clarifY
some of the defining issues, for better possibility of our reaching a mutual understanding.
Pages 1-4 Missing from copy sent to us.
faae 5, our Item (1): Applicant feels certain that studies of parking done by Consultant,
Ace Parking Co., will confinn that existing "code" does not apply to a development such
as the proposed resort hotel. Ace has furnished examples to staff of about six operating
golf hotels' parking to attest to their numbers being correct.
Item (2): Joelen Enterprises has already agreed to staff's recommendation that together
we allocate and improve the "vacant triangular parcel". Joeten requested at that time only
that they be furnished with the size of the parcel, and the improvements needed, so Joelen
can estimate their cost, and is awaiting receipt of that jnformation
Item 0): Joelen has come to understand that continuin~ to work under the ENA would
annul their efforts to obtain financing at this time. They so notified staff in May, and
June. If the hotel is to go forward, City and Joelen must enter into an escrow on the land,
conditioned only on Joelen successfully completing requirements under the C.u.P.
Lender's agent has spoken to Development Agency and City Attorney's office personnel,
informing them definitely of that. An additional call was made to the City Manager by the
Lender's Agent with the same infonnation. This lender has been unusually forthcoming in
speaking directly with at least 5 members of City staff to clarify conditions for funding.
Item (4): Director of Parks & Recreation, Jesse Valenzuela, laid out an attractive trail
running along the East and North portions of the site. The rest of staff concurred. Joelen
agreed, and our architects have been showing that design on their August plans.
Item (5): To get the very best final hotel design, it helps to understand that the plans will
remain "concept", continually being refined until we go into plan check -in about 6
months, according to the revised time schedule about which staff has been notified.
4000 Coronado Bay RoaCl B!J Coronado, CA 92118 tr (618) 4244474 FAX 423-0884
.-----------------------------------------------------.-------
WED 1 ~: 09 PM C, B, H, V
FAX NO, 619 4230684
p, 3
\
Item (6): American Golf has apprised Joelen and staff that they plan an upgraded 18th hole
an}Way, and that the present plot plan will not interfere in any way with this, nor with any
other aspect of the golf course upgrade and continued operation as a Municipal course,
Item (7): Joelen also held a meeting with the Men's golf Club several months ago,
Item (8): Please see attached letter ftom Joelen to Chris Salomone, page 2, paragraph 3,
please note words stated in underlined &.112!!! type,
Item (9): See Items (2) & (4), above
PaQ'e I'i, Item (IO): Again, the present "schedule" must be revised for the hotel to go
forward. Joelen has been working to get staff to understand that they have excellent
funding offered, and far sooner than expected, that the ENA is now outdated and useless
for purposes of continuing under present conditions, and that the new lender requirements
must be implemented to commence funding of pre-development costs, This dates to the
beginning of May, and the original date on the Lender's Credit Facility Letter was June.
Item (11): Under this schedule, there could be no hotel. Joelen looks to the Counsel to
direct staff on the scheduling of a "fast track" process and ENA. If escrow is opened to
satisfY the lender, there will be money available to pay for processing as required.
Item 12): Please see Item (3), above, first sentence, also It~ (10).
Item (J 3): Same as immediately above.
Item (]4). On May 29th, Joelen submitted a complete document for Joelen to enter into an
agreement with the City and American Golf that covers all these items. City stafthas been
using this document as a ftamework for subsequent meetings. Joden has discussed the
document with American Golf, received their input on suggested changes which Joelen
stated would probably be acceptable. Our understanding is that it is for staff, not Joelen to
work out the fee schedule with City's tenant, American Golf, and that Joelen claimed no
status in these negotiations. American Golf has furnished staff with information on fee
schedule, with backup information ftom other courses. It is deemed necessary at this time
for Council to direct staff, in clear terms, to finalize these negotiations. By American
Golfs estimation, this should require only one more full meeting.
Page 7.. Item (\5): Joelen will do all these things. "Fast trac!cing", which Development
Agency Director has agreed to do, needs a new definition agreed upon between the parties
hereto. ElR's have been completed in 45 days, and public hearing times can be complied
with without taking "6 to 8 months minimum".
Item (16); Joelen has had a written offer in to the City ftom February, modified in writing
in May, to coincide with Lender's requirements.
2
~ED ! 2: ! 0 PM C. B. H. V
FAX NO. 6!9 4230884
P. 4
Item (17): A completely conect sentence. Council has voted in favor of the project. If
that majority vote remains, this step needs to be taken on order for the hotel to go
forward.
Item (I8): The MAl appraiser has notified Joelen, and Joelen notified the City, that the
appraisal was 85% completed in July, awaiting only the draft input from PKF, the firm
hired by the City (and paid by Joelen) to do the marketing and feasibiJity study Staff has
not let Joelen see the completed draft, though the PKF executive has told staff that "this is
an iterative process", and that we must work together with them on it. The appraiser, 8
licensed MAJ, informed staff that ifhe could have a copy of the draft *, he would not let
Joelen owners see it. This has held the process up by several months.
Item (19): For "Developer-is G9RsiQeAAg a revised site plan", please substitute
"...Developer has had designed a revised site plan, according: to Citv staff requests. and is
awaiting staff action for aporoval".
Item (20): Joelen and American Golf have worked out their differences. Again, it is for
City staff to sit down with American Golf, (see Item (14), last 2 sentences. We request
that directions be given that this sort of "Catch 22" be done away with. We believe that
working together we can find a mutually acceptable way to get the job done, with clear
direction from the Council to staff and Joelen.
Item (21 ):
The lender has been trying very hard to do just that.
Item (22):
Yes.
Item (23):
No.
~ge 8. Item (24): See Item 3, above.
*Marketing and Feasibility Study
,']:7n 1 "'11 nr
WED 12: 10 PM
1 U-~b rut: 11: UH
(' n TT H
,... ,1' ~ T r\
r,,-, .' -"-,,--,,
C. B. H. V
lJUMnUNJTY Iil:Vt:LU~Ml:NT
FAX NQ 619 4230884
rAX NU, bl~4(8bjlU
P. 5
~,u,
Page S. Item 11
Meeting Date 09/10/96
StatuslParkina Issues:
The conceptual development plan initially submitted by the applicant contained Insufficient
parking per code(DPrelimlnary analysis of the revised concept plan Indicates there may ,till
be a shortage but requires further analysis following sfte plan submittal. A shortage of
parking per code ~ be mitigated by the fact that parking demand for the hotel uses end
golf COurse will very during the day and the days of the week, and examples exist of other
successful resort hotels which function with less parking than per code. Therefore. the
,ppllcam is preparing and will submit liS pa" of the project a 'parkfng study. to help clarify
actual parkIng needs. Additionally, Staff and the developer are evaluating the possibjlity~
of using the vacar'lt triangurar parcel at the east end of Rohr Park Cat the convergonce of
Sweetwater Road 8r'1d Central Avenue) as an alterr'late parkfng lot for trail users (see mal',
Attachment 11 with additional perking potentially available lit the Rohr Park northerfy lot.
Proiect ProcessinolOeposit
It should be noted that while the ENA does not call for e project application until October
7, development department staff (Planning, Public Works, Parks and Recreatlor'l) have
incurred extensive costs to-date without a developer's deposit account against which to
charge these COSts.~
D. JOGGfNGIEQUESTRIAN TRAIL
fNA Milestone: All bUI one ot the milestones enumerated In Item C above require thet the
Joggingfequestrian treil design and leyollt be addressed. @
Status: As noted, the developer submitted a ctl>aot development plan which Is now
undergoing significant revision by the develope Among the Items which have been
undergoing substantial staff review Is the (oeation of the proposed Jogging/equestrian trail.
Staff end the developer ere currently evaluating e fifteen to twenty feet CI5'.20') wide
Joggir'lg/equestrfan trail along the north and eastern side of the hotel. The trail as proposed
would aflow a continuous, user.frlendly trail but would require some modifications to ths
golf course~nalYsis will continue to evolve as e sit\! plar'l is developec!.
CommunitY Inn\!!:
On JUry 16, a meeting was held by American Golf with the Chula Vista Mens Golf Club. t!P
with Pllrks and Recrelltion staff presen" to sOlicit Input "r'ld to provide very preliminary
project information. Concerns revolved around availability of tee times, the impact of
planned tournaments, adequacy of parking, encroachment on ~ golf course, InoreS$ed
green fees, disruption to trails. and Impact upon pro-shop prices(glA second meeting was
held on Jufy 17 with representativQs of the jogging communitY and Parks & Recreation
staff ta discuss the trail. These representatives appeared to generally support the hotel
and its positive economic benefits to the city. Key comments were a strong opposition to
routing the trail al009 Bonita Road Ifear of traffic at the entrancesl; a preference to route
the trail on the north side of the hotel alongside the gall course: 8 secondary preferer'lce
to route it SOUth of the hotel; Ir'ld the "apprOVal" of a new psrkir'lQ lot at the east end of
the Rohr Park for racreation trail users.(2)
S~r-10-95 WED 11 :03 AM
;-
f'l- S
6194765310
P. 2
'"...i.; 1...'.1 ...1.... ..,.., '., !
'JU-~~ IU~ 11 :U~ l,\JMI'1UNllV V~Vt.LUPI'1~NT
....-... ...,
"'.,) ,.. - '.'1".'.-;:
'.
~AX N\), ol~4.r~OJ1U
p, UJ
E.
PROJECT PROCESSING "TIMElINES
Page 6, Item 11
Meeting Date 09/10/96
@J
A Processing Schedule has been prepared by staff (see Attachment 21 and has baon
distributed to the developer end Project Team. ThIs schedule (whIch was dIstributed July
18 and updated Augu~t 81 Is based upon an August 1 InItial Study/~IR "pplicatlon and
deposit IInd II project submitta' date of August 16. The developsr has not Yet SUbmitted
the project or environmenta' appliCations and is preparing a Site plan. The actual sChedule
will shift depending upon the actual dates of submittal.
The schedule calls for one or more public forums to be held as the project proceeds. It also
requires approvals by the ORC, Planning Ccmmisslon and Council, with final Council
apprOval projected for approximately eight (8) mOnths from the date of the ErR and project
application submittals. @
LENDER COMMITMENT/CONDITIONAL LAND SALE
F.
ENA Milesto~ "The fNA requires the developer to provide 'eners of Interest from the
lender and/or equity investors by November 7.
Status:
The developer Indicatea that on August 9 they obtained. 'credit facility" Ipreliminary
Indication of Intent to fUnd) from a major foreign investment trUlt. (Joelen has requested
that the trust's name 110t be released to the public.) Joelen has Indicated that the lender
will ~ flnal1ca a Ie ale and is requesting that tile City give them conditional .control' of
the property (I.e. a conditioned escrow) by September t 1 in order to meet the requirements
of the lender, Joelen has also Indicated 8 reluctance to move forward on the project or to
incur eddltional p~evelopment costs necessary to meet the conditIons of tho ENA without
lI1Ieh sito contro!2ltlt ,hould be noted that the existing ENA provldas for the developer to
assume responsibility for .U predevelopment costs.'
DeveloDers's Reauested Conditional Escrov.:
The openIng 0' an escrow at this stage of the negotiations Is not consistent with the ENA. @
While an escrow could theoretically be opened with clMina sUbject to negotiation of II
sales price and to the determination of defined boundaries, and to the delleloper complying
With 811 ENA/DDA related conditions, the value of this type of 8$~row to the lender remains
in question. At time of Writing. staff Is still awaiting olarificatlon on thIs paint from the
lender's agent.
Among the ~hallenge$ of trying to Structure escrow instructions at this time ere the
following: .
11 the ENA approved on April 23 provides for negotiations to take place over a peliod
of 12 months at which time a DDA would be presented to Council for
consideration. The OOA would provide for the specific scope of the hotel project
and for the transfer of the property (via lease or sale) per specified business term.
and subject to the developer's COmplying with specific, negotiated conditions. For r.:7\
example, ~onditlons woutd relate to a rellised lease agraement with American GOIf.1.!!P
guaranteed tee tImes, construction and financing of course improvements, course
5EP-10-96 WED 11 :03 AM
11~0
61947653iO
P. 3
~~~~~\~rrrrr_________r~~~
o WE D !:: 11 PM
~-lU-~o rUE 11: 09
---~---:::===----
====:========-------
=------------
--===========
C, B, H, V
COMMUNJTV I>EVELOPMENT
FAX NO, 619.4230884
fAX NO, I:H941tJb3IU
p, 7
P,U4
Page 1. Ilem 11
Meeting Dale 09/10/96
21
fees, site planning (Including recreatlon,,1 trail alignment), hotel amenIties and
design, parking. etc. These conditions and business terms have not yet bean
negOtiated, and their successful negotiation and the developer' C Compliance
therewith would therefore need to be conditions of the escrow. Additionally, the
escrow would need to require the developar to obtain all necessery entitlements
fe.g. GPA. re2~ CUP. parcel map' and 81 certified ErR ae 8 condition of the
escrow crosln~Ollectivery, these conditions are projected to requIre 6 to S
months minImum. (The EIR requires approximately II monlhs per slate mandated
timeframes.1
. (if;J
CouncIl has not yet determined whether the property should be leased or eold:'1(
full analysis of the cost/benefits to ths City of colling ths property varcus leasing
the property has not been conducted and cannot be conducted until more specifics
are available on the final hotel facility and budget. By opsning an ascrow. tho City
commits to a land sale If the stated conditions are met. @
At the time of writing, an appraisal has not been conducted by the City. Joelen's (f!)
appraisal has not been received. and a sales price has not been negotiated.
31
41
@
The precise property boundaries have not been determined. The developer Is
considering a revised site plan which may include approximately 2.5 acres of
additional property to the east of the .restaurant parcel' flocated within the golf
course). Additionally, the 4.1 acre "restaurant parcel" Is currently Ip.~nd by tho
city to American Golf. American Golf would have,to agra" to term in at. the laace
(or sell it to Joelan) in order for ths sale to occur, prior to the City's overall lease
negotiations with American Golf beIng concluded. @
No terms/conditions have been negotiated with the developer and/or lendef
regarding security for the developer's performance (normally a DQA condition), @
Staff's ReQuAst of lender
5)
The lender's initial request was that the conditional escrow be opened bv September 11
with Instructions to close withIn 30 days, or possibly as 18t8 as within 90 days, subJect to
approval of an extension request. That scenario Is problemmatic to the City due to the
Inability to negotiate I"NA/DOA issues and business terms And to complete an EIR within
830 or 90 day timefl",me. Staff has sxplalned this to the lender's agent and requ8$ted the
agent clarify the foRowing:
@ 11
@21
SEP-10-96 WED 11 :04 AM
Would an escrow thai is Subject to all conditions of an ENAlDDA, incJudlng a yet
to be negotiated purchase price. be accsptable to constitute 'evidence of site
controi"?
Can the September 1 1 due diligence deadline be extended?
/'7- 7
6194765310
P. 4
-- __'_~h ---- - --- - n m n --- - - -- - - - - - n - - - - - - F~;- ;I~~ - - Gig: 4230884- - - m - --- - - -- p ~ -8- - - - - ---
oWED!2:!=PM ClH.V
.:P-IU-IJB rUE 11 :U9 CUMMUNITY I)!:VELUPMI:.NT I-AX NU. Bl~416bm P. Ub
3) Could the e~crow period (30 day to 90 day) be extended to allow all ENAiOOA
conditions to be resolved, including completion of the EIR, and subject to all
required entitlements? (This could require iiln estimated 6-8 months minimum.! As
of August 4. 1996, the lender's "senl indicated thot this was e possibility, The
developer expressed a reluctance to enter 8n escrow period for thl~ amOunt of
time, .
41 Can the lender approve a predevelopment loan for the developer based upon the
conditioned escrow but prior to closing, i.e. WithDut having fee title? (As noted,
the developer has indiCated a reluctance to move forward without site control
acceptable to the lender which would enable them to obtain predeveropment
financing. Slaff has requested the deveroper to provide predevslopment cost
estirmtes to assIst staff and Council with these pOlicy determinations. I
Page 8. Item LJ.
Meeting Date .Oa/10/96
@
A lender response to these items is pending. Staff has also requested (but has not yet
received): , I · copy of the credit facllltv that has been issued; and 2) written informatIon
on the lender which would establish the 'ender's capability and experience.
FISCAL IMPACT: As noted In the report, cost recovery development departments .re currentlv
providing e)(tertslve SUlff support for this project without a developer's deposit against whle,," to
charge staff time. .
The recommendation to continue negotiations per the ENA has no additional direct fiscal impacts
per se. As negotiations continue. staff will return to Council for adoption of related MOU's,.
leases. end of course the DDA itself, at which time fiscal impacts' wJII be delineated.
Similarly, the recommendation to COntinue discussIon wfth the lender ha~ no direct fiscal Impact.
In the event that such discussions were to result in a recommendatIon to open a conditional
escrow, such 8,ecommendation would be brought to Council for coneideration, A fUndamentel
impact would be that the City would be agreeIng to sell - versus lease. At this tinle II COst/benefit
analysis has not bs undertaken. IThe developer's most recent lease revenUII projections Irent and
T.O. T.' estimated cumuratlve revenues of $38 to $41 million by year 25, The developer flu
offered a purChase price of $2.2 to $2.3 million,) Additional analysis is needed Ipl;!r the ENA) to
assess the validity of the developer's Ilvenue projections andlor 8n acCeptable purchase price.
ATTACHMENTS:
t - Rolv Parking lot Map
2 - PrOCesSing Schedule
3 September 3 letter from Joe!en
tOOlrndl "':UlOMe\COMMOE'i~STAFF.RIr,09_11).'11\8CHtTA1iES,$}.IT {S~""bet a, 1$$. (3',03J!imll
/7-1"
SEP-IC-96 WED 11:C4 AM
6194765310
. <
Summary Report on the Potential
Market Demand for the
Proposed Bonita Golf Resort
to be Located on the
Municipal Golf Course in
Chula Vista, California
Prepared for:
Mr. Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista. California 91910
Prepared by:
PKF Consulting
Los Angeles, California
September 1996
P<F'
CONSULTING
August 22, 1996
811 Wilshire Boulevard
Suite 800
Los Angeles CA 90017
Telephone (213) 680-0900
Telefax (213) 623-8240
Mr. Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 9191 D
Dear Mr. Salomone:
Pursuant to your request, we have completed our Phase I analysis of the potential market demand
for a proposed hotel at the municipal golf course in Chula Vista, California. This summary report
determines the market demand for a 25D-room, group oriented resort such as is currently planned
by Joelen Enterprises and provides a five year estimate of annual operating results for the proposed
facilities.
The conclusions reached in this report are based upon our present knowledge of the lodging market
in the competitive area, as of completion of our fieldwork on August 21, 1996.
As in all studies of this type, the estimated results are based on competent and efficient
management of the proposed facilities and presume no significant change in the respective
competitive markets. Since the estimated operating results are based on estimates and assumptions
that are subject to uncertainty and variation, we do not represent them as results that will actually
be achieved. This report is subject to the assumptions and limiting conditions set forth in the
Addenda.
If we can be of further assistance in the interpretation and application of our findings and
conclusions, please let us know. We thank you for providing us with the opportunity to be of
assistance to you.
Sincerely,
PKF Consulting
~g~
Vice President
Member, Pannell Kerr Forster International
ill
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Number
Section I
INTRODUCTION................................................................. ..........................................1-1
SCOPE AND METHODOLOGy................ ................. ..... .................. ........ ...................................... I-I
STIE ANALYSIS. ............. ........ .... .................................... ............. ... .......... ...................................... I-I
AREA REVIEW................ ............... .................... .............................................................................1-2
Primary Research.......................................................................................................................... 1-2
Preparation of Hotel Supply and Demand Estimates...................................................................... 1-2
Market Share and Occupancy Estimates............... ...................... ................................................... 1-2
Estimated Annual Operating Results.... ....................... ............ .............................. ........................1-2
Preliminary Estimate of Financial Benefit to the City .................................................................... 1-2
Section II
SITE ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................... 11-1
ACCESSIBILITY...................................................................................................................... ...... . II-I
VISIBILITY........................................................................................................................ ............ . II-I
PRESENT UTILIZATION......... .... ... ..... ............ ....... .... ..... .... ... ... ... ... ... ....... ........... ... ...... ...... ..........II-2
TOPOGRAPHY. ..... .... ................... ... ........ ... ... ...... .... .......... ... ... ..... .... .......... ........... ......... .......... ..... .II-2
IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD.. ..... ... ... ...... ... ... .... ...... ... ... ....... ... ... ..... ..... ........... ........... .... .... ..... .II-2
DESTINATION AWARENESS. ....... ..... ............................................ ..... ....... .................... ............. .II-3
Relationship to Demand Generators... ............... .................... .............. ....... .................... ...... ....... .II-5
Advantages and Disadvantages of the Site Compared to Competitors...........................................II-7
Conclusion...................................................................................................................... ............. II-8
Section III
AREA REVIEW ...................................................................................................................... 111-1
INTRODUCTION ......... ..... .......... ..... ........ ...... ...... ..... .................. ... ... ... ....... ......... ................... ...... III-I
CONCLUSION .. ..... ......... ............ ..... ... ........... ... .... .... ... ......... ... ... ... ... ... ....... ........... ....... .......... ...... III-5
Section IV
SUPPLY AND DEMAND FOR LODGING ACCOMMODA TIONS...........................................IV-1
OVERVIEW....... ............. ............... ..... ... ... ... ............. ... ... ...... ... ....... ... ........ ............. ....... ................ IV-I
COMPETITIVE HOTEL SUPPLY ................................................................................................. IV-I
Existing Hotel Supply ................................................................................................................ IV-I
Singing Hills Resort .............................................................................................................. IV-3
Quail Inn at Lake San Marcos Resort .................................................................................... IV-3
Lawrence Welk Resort and The Greens Executive Conference Center ................................... IV-3
Pala Mesa Resort ................ ................................................. ................................................ 1V-4
Morgan Run Resort ............................................................................................................... IV-4
Lodge at Torrey Pines............................................................................................................ IV-4
Sheraton Grande Torrey Pines ............................................................................................... IV-4
Carmel Highlands Doubletree Resort..................................................................................... IV-4
Rancho Bernardo Inn ............................................................................................................ IV-5
Historical Market Conditions .....................................................................................................IV-5
Demand Interviews ............ ............................................ ..........................................................IV-7
Market Segmentation........ ........... ..... ......... ............................................. ........... ................. ..... IV-lO
Projected Future Market Conditions ......................................................................................... IV-1O
Additions to Supply ............................................................................................................. IV-lO
Growth in Demand.............................................................................................................. IV-II
Projected Performance of the Subject Property.......................................................................... !V-I2
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Number
Section V
FACILITIES RECOM MENDA TION .............................................................................. V-1
Function Space.......... _................................................................................................................. . V-I
Dining Facilities... _..................................................................................................................... . V-I
Recreational Amenities............................................................................................................... . V-I
STATEMENTS OF ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING RESULTS...........................................V-2
Departmental revenues............................................................................................................ V-4
Departmental Expenses........................................................................................................... V-4
Undistributed Operating Expenses.................................................................................... _...... V-5
Statements of Estimated Annnal Operating Results .................................................................V-<S
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF FINANCIAL BENEFIT TO THE CITY.......................................V-8
Section I
INTRODUCTION
Section I - Introduction
1-1
INTRODUCTION
PKF Consulting has been retained by the City of Chula Vista to conduct a study of
potential market demand for a proposed 250-room group oriented hotel adjacent to the
Chula Vista municipal golf course. We understand that the proposed hotel is planned to
be operated under a ITanchise ITom a nationally recognized chain such as Hilton, Marriott,
or Sheraton. We have assumed that this resort style property will obtain an adequate
number of preferred golf tee-off times at the adjacent course and that the course will
receive the $2.5 million dollar renovation planned by American Golf, its current lessee. We
have also assumed that the project will offer its guests approximately 20,000 square feet
of meeting space, restaurants, tennis, and health/fitness facilities. Specific
recommendations as to the number and sizing ofthese amenities may be found in Section
V.
This report represents the culmination of our market research, economic analysis and
evaluation relative to the market demand for the proposed Bonita Golf Lodge.
SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
We have conducted an analysis of the competitive lodging market, spoken to persons
familiar with development in the Chula Vista/Dtay Mesa area, surveyed similar golf
oriented resorts, surveyed area businesses, and surveyed meeting planners who currently
use San Diego resorts in order to develop conclusions and recommendations concerning:
. the competitive market in which the proposed facilities will be operating;
. the appropriate position of the proposed facilities within the market; and
. estimates of annual operating results for the proposed property's first five
years of operation.
SITE ANALYSIS
We evaluated the subject site according to the following criteria:
. Accessibility
. Visibility
. Present Utilization
. Topography
. Relationship to demand generators
. Advantages/disadvantages to the site compared to the major competitors
Section I - Introduction
1-2
AREA REVIEW
We have gathered and analyzed relevant economic data to determine whether the overall
economic environment in the area appears suitable for the development of the proposed
facilities.
Primary Research
We have conducted primary market research in the area, consisting of interviews with
representatives of key lodging demand generators, inspection and evaluation of
competitive lodging properties, discussion with people familiar with development patterns
in the area, and surveyed both area businesses and meeting planners who are familiar with
San Diego.
Preparation of Hotel Supply and Demand Estimates
We have analyzed the historical growth in supply and demand for lodging
accommodations in San Diego County and in Chula Vista, and then estimated the amount
of demand that a fIrst class, full-service golf resort hotel could retain or induce to the area.
Combining all of this data, we have estimated the future supply and demand for lodging
accommodations to reach our conclusions on the overall market potential.
Market Share and Occupancy Estimates
After completing our estimate of the market area's supply and demand, we estimated the
share of the market that the facility should be able to capture during its fIrst fIve years of
operation, which are assumed to be from January I, 1998 to December 31,2002. Based
on the market research, we also estimated the probable average daily room rate, based on
the anticipated market segmentation of the Bonita Golf Lodge.
Estimated Annual Operating Results
We have prepared Statements of Estimated Annual Operating Results for the proposed
resort hotel. The statements include revenues and expenses for the fIrst fIve years of
operation, resulting in a "bottom line" of income before rent, incentive management fees,
debt service, depreciation, amortization, and income taxes.
Preliminary Estimate of Financial Benefit to the City
Based on the income stream of the hotel, prevailing tax rates and operating data, we have
formulated preliminary estimates of the fInancial benefIt of the project to the City. The
sources of ongoing revenue would be: net increases in transient occupancy tax receipts,
net increases in sales taxes on food and beverage revenues, additional employment
opportunities, and the multiplier effect of the increased economic activity at the proposed
Bonita resort. As we understand that the City and the developers are currently in
negotiations as to whether the site will be leased or sold, we have not included this in our
analysis.
Section II
SITE ANAL YSIS
Section 1/ - Site Analysis
11-1
SITE ANALYSIS
ACCESSIBILITY
The accessibility of the site is currently very good and, if State Route 125 were to be
completed as proposed, would become excellent relative to other resort hotels. (Unlike
generic commercial hotels or motels, resort hotels are best located when they are
convenient to, but not adjacent to major highways.)
The proposed site is located on "E" Street/Bonita Road, which has its own exit ITom
Interstate 805 approximately two miles west of the site. Specifically, the site is located on
the north side of the "T" intersection of Bonita Road with Otay Lakes Road. This
intersection has a signal, which will facilitate a left hand turn (for eastbound motorists)
into the property's main entrance.
San Diego's airport is located approximately 14.5 miles northwest of the site, via 1-805,
State Route 54, and 1-5. This drive takes between 15 and 25 minutes, depending on
traffic For first time arrivals who prefer simpler directions and don't mind using surface
streets, there is also an "E" Street exit from 1-5 which would preclude navigating onto two
other high speed arterials. The site is also located within 15 miles of General Abelardo L.
Rodriguez Airport in Tijuana's northeastern suburbs.
As currently planned, State Route 125 would be a high speed, limited access highway that
would originate at the Otay Mesa border crossing and would continue up to connect with
Highway 54 and eventually, to an existing leg of SR-125 near 1-8 further north. The leg
ITom the current terminus of SRI25 would be funded by private enterprise and would be a
tollway. A hearing on the EIR is planned for late August; assuming there are no
environmental issues the routing of the highway near its intersection with SR54 could be
resolved by year's end. At present, a Wall Street firm is reviewing the developer's
projections of toll revenues and costs for underwriting the bond issue to be used for
financing. It would appear from the status of the project that the soonest the first and
privately funded leg of the road could be completed would be three years from now, or
mid-1999. Depending on the eventual routing, SR 125 would pass within 1.5 to 2.5 miles
to the east of the proposed site.
VISIBILITY
Visibility of the site is very good. The site's extensive frontage along Bonita Road will
provide the motorist ample opportunity to slow down or change lanes to enter the
property's drive.
The subject will have excellent visibility from Otay Lakes Road, which is perpendicular to
Bonita Road. Otay Lakes Road provides a short cut to the new Rancho del Rey and
Eastlake residential communities, and to the Arco Olympic Training Facility.
Section 11- Site Analysis
11-2
PRESENT UTILIZATION
The subject site is presently developed with surface parking lots and the pro shop/starter's
desk for the Chula Vista Municipal Golf Course. This will be demolished and incorporated
into the hotel structure.
TOPOGRAPHY
The subject site slopes gently but not to such a degree that puts design constraints on the
development of the site. We understand that, at times, the lower portions of the golf
course flood and that floodway improvements are being contemplated. We understand that
the current site plan places the improvements above the areas typically affected by
flooding.
IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD
The Chula Vista Municipal Golf Course is located to the north and east of the subject site.
Ajogging trail and fitness course borders the western side of the site. Equestrian facilities
are located within a five minutes drive.
To its west, on the north side of Bonita Road, are two multi-family housing complexes
which appear to date to the 1960's or 1970's and are of fair to good quality. South of
these condominium complexes, across Bonita Road, is a collection of strip center retail,
professional offices and other low density commercial development which continues along
Bonita Road to the east ofthe subject site. These commercial developments appear to
date to the 1970's and are of fair to good quality.
Our interviews with meeting planners indicated that proximity to a wide variety of
restaurants and shopping were desired locational attributes for a meeting destination.
While the retail outlets across the street are not "destination retail" these shops will enable
hotel guests to easily obtain forgotten toiletries, or to walk to inexpensive or ethnic
restaurant outlets. The two strip centers across from the site include: a Boll Weevil, a
Taco shop, a Chinese restaurant, a "California Bistro" called Tomatoes and a McDonald's.
Other dining opportunities are available further west between this center and The Bonita
Store, approximately 1.5 miles from the site. These include but are not limited to. a
Japanese restaurant, two Italian restaurants, and of course the Bonita Store. The Pla2a
Bonita offers a wide variety of stores and is located only 2.5 miles from the site.
Good and very good quality single family homes are located to the south of the
commercial developments.
Our interviews and numerous articles in hotel trade publication indicate that hotel guests
are becoming increasingly concerned about safety and security while traveling. The Bonita
neighborhood's suburban, almost rural character is likely to reduce anxiety among
security conscious travelers.
Section 1/ - Site Analysis
11-3
DESTINATION AWARENESS
We conducted a survey of meeting planners to determine, among other things, the name
awareness and any preconceptions or misconceptions about Chula Vista as a low-income,
Navy bedroom community. Our methodology was as follows:
We obtained a list of approximately 120 meeting planners from Successful Meetings
magazine who were entered into their data bank as having planned a meeting in San Diego
County. It should be noted that this list was not exhaustive and included only those
meeting planners that voluntarily provide information on their group's booking activity.
This list was somewhat dated; we were only able to contact approximately 80 meeting
planners by FAX transmission or by U.S. mail with a survey questionnaire. A large number
of persons on the initial list had changed positions, had telephone numbers disconnected,
or were otherwise unreachable. A copy of the meeting planner questionnaire is included in
the Addenda.
We received faxed responses back from some respondents, and followed up with phone
calls to all of the other names on the list for which we had received "transmission
received" messages. Due to barriers imposed by voice mail and messaging systems, we
received responses from only 20 survey candidates. Three of these were relatively
meaningless because the respondents had groups that were far too large for the proposed
resort and cut short the interviews, or because the meeting planners did not in fact use any
San Diego County hotels and cut short the interviews. In total we received only 17 usable
responses, which did not provide enough information to make the facility design
refinements we would have liked. However, we feel that the survey does provide some
directional information as to the appropriate positioning of the resort.
In our survey, the project was described as "a 250-room, group oriented, first class resort
directly on a golf course in Southeastern San Diego County." The setting was described
as being "in a suburb of good quality homes with mature landscaping". No additional
information was provided on either Bonita or Chula Vista. After soliciting information on
desired amenities; which other resorts the groups were currently using; and the prevailing
rates paid; we posed the questions: "Would the suburb of Bonita be an appealing
destination for your group?" and, "Would the suburb ofChula Vista be an appealing
destination for your group?"
In response to the query for Bonita six answered yes, five were unwilling to commit, and
six answered no. Some interpretation of the answers was involved; for example the
response "pending quality" was deemed to refer to the project and not the destination, and
was interpreted as a yes. A response of "Huh?" to the question on Bonita and then later a
"No-people are not familiar with it" to the same question for Chu/a Vista was
interpreted to be a "No" because of the destination awareness/image issue.
Among the No answers, one of the responses was not related to Bonita's image. Rather,
the meeting planner worked for a company located at I-80S and Governor's Road that
only used hotels in that neighborhood. She was in fact a resident of Chula Vista and
Section 11- Site Analysis
11-4
believes that the rest of San Diego County sees Bonita in a positive light; further, that the
inland South Bay is in need of facility such as is proposed, particularly with the growth at
East Lake and Otay Mesa. From a purely image standpoint then, seven of the responses
were positive and only five of the responses (29 percent) were negative.
Of the remaining No answers, four were trom meeting planners that had recently used
waterfront hotels-- The Del Coronado, the Loews Coronado Bay Resort, the Meridien on
Coronado, or the Hyatt Regency at the Convention Center. Only one meeting planner that
was currently using a non-waterfront (Mission Valley) hotel rejected Bonita for an
image/awareness reason. (Hers was the "Huh?" and then "No, people are not familiar with
it" response.) However, two of the negative and water-oriented respondents were
residents of San Diego County, and presumably have some preconceptions or perhaps
misconceptions of the Bonita and Chula Vista.
Within the "Yes" answers, two of the respondents were residents of San Diego County.
One of these County residents indicated that the rate their groups were paying were in the
$65 to $99 range. A second County resident indicated that Bonita (and Chula Vista)
would be an appealing destination for groups in the $65 to $95 range. A third "Yes"
response (rrom an L.A. based planner) was paired with an "Under $100" rate response.
The fourth "Yes", provided by a meeting planner from Sacramento, indicated that Bonita
would be an appropriate destination, but that Chula Vista would not. This planner had
groups in four rate categories: $80 to 95, $95 to 105, $105 to 130 and $130 plus. As the
two hotels mentioned were the Hanalei and the Marriott Hotel and Marina, we surmise
that only a waterfront hotel would fall into the top two rate categories.
Another meeting planner rrom Sacramento provided the fifth "Yes" and is currently paying
between $100 and $125 at the Hyatt Islandia and the Doubletree Palm Springs. This
planner wanted golf to be included in the rate, which, depending on greens fees and cart
rentals, could significantly lower this range for a "rooms only" quote. The final "Yes"
response came from a Joplin, Missouri based corporate meeting planner whose groups are
using La Costa and the Rancho Bernardo Inn at rates ranging from $140 to $225.
Of the five planners that were unwilling to commit, two were a somewhat favorable
"perhaps" and "if the location were not too isolated and offered easy accessibility (on
foot) to nearby shopping, high quality restaurants & entertainment." The former was using
the Kona Kai, the latter the Hotel Del Coronado, the Wyndham Emerald Plaza and the
Hyatt Aventine. The three rate categories provided were in excess of $11 O. Both of these
meeting planners were trom San Diego County. A Los Angeles based meeting planner
answered "not sure" to both Bonita and Chula Vista. "I am not familiar with the area" and
"Don't know of Bonita" rounded out the other "no opinion" answers. One of these two,
however, provided the second split vote ("No" to Chula Vista).
Our conclusion from this survey of group meeting planners is a) that there is a market for
the subject golf resort, and b) this market is in the "$100 and under" rate category. Both
Bonita and Chula Vista lack the high status image of North County San Diego; that lack
Section 1/ - Site Analysis
11-5
of destination name awareness would be a handicap in attracting status-conscious and
higher rated groups to the resort. Finally, the resort's name should be tied to Bonita, and
not to Chula Vista.
Relationship to Demand Generators
While much of the demand for the proposed Bonita Golf Lodge will be group meeting
business that will originate at corporate employers or association headquarters located
outside of the South Bay, there is a significant quantity of demand for first-class hotel
accommodations originating in the South Bay that is currently being accommodated at
hotels in Mission Valley, Downtown San Diego, and along the waterfront.
Presented in the following paragraphs is a discussion of the location of the subject relative
to these potential demand generators. Specific data as to their industries and trends in their
business activity may be found in Section III, the Area Review. For the most important
demand generators an estimate of the capturable demand is provided in Section IV,
Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations. A map illustrating the location of the
subject hotel, relative to the potential demand generators is located on the following page.
Rohr, the market area's largest employer and user of hotel rooms, is located
approximately 4.5 miles west of the subject, near the 1-5 "E" Street exit. A number of
smaller employers are located up and down 1-5 in this same vicinity. Chula Vista Capital,
which owns approximately 100 useable acres near the Rohr headquarters, is contemplating
the development of a large amusement park along the Bayfront. According to representa-
tives of Chula Vista Capital, the preliminary feasibility study has been completed and is
being reviewed along with a number of other options. For the purposes of our analysis, we
have assumed that the Bayfront acreage remains undeveloped.
The second most significant source of commercial demand is contained in the industrial
parks at the Otay Mesa border crossing which is located approximately 12 miles to the
south and east of the subject. Sony, Hitachi, Casio, and Sanyo and a number of other
manufacturing firms occupy nearly 4.5 million square feet of industrial space located at the
border crossing.
Hyspan and a number of other employers are located in a smaller, more northerly
industrial area offOtay Valley Road approximately 7.0 miles south of the subject.
A planned MCA amphitheater is in this same general vicinity. Upon its completion in April
of 1997, it is likely to generate both commercial and leisure demand. According to an
MCA executive, the entertainers travel with sizable entourages. Our observation of hotels
near other similar facilities indicates that, if "no hassle" shuttle service is provided, a
number of the attendees at weekend events will stay in a nearby hotel. The MCA
amphitheater is also likely to have an indirect benefit to the subject property, by
introducing other residents of San Diego County to the east side of Chula Vista, and,
optimally, dispelling some of the misconceptions about the income levels and quality of
housing in Chula Vista.
--
,.\'
DEMAND GENERATORS
1/-6
~ ,-I
..
.rJ;!I~
..
..
"
\
~
"
-=
"
Co
~
>>
~ :C..:t:
i;ij -I-,
c ~ [r
~ """ .-
S ~~=E
Q.. =.l) e::I = =
oS .5 ';:: ~ ~
~~t;"C:
..o="c,c-
~...",
U = 1-0";
- - do; 10.
g ~ "C -= ~
100 "'C = ~ CoI
'>.5~:'a.~
== >,:C e"
=C=dJc.>>-
't:I~=5-0~"
;;::;:>:<00"",
.E >.>.<u'5~
o::::~,,;;
c::oo""<c::~
<=UQ~~~
I'
.'
".
l "
l__,; 'i'- !
~ ___UL_~
..
/
,
I
~.
~',o
.0
i:1~
0>
zO
<C)
(J)!!!
c
,
\":1
J
," .
Section II - Site Analysis
11-7
A water park is proposed to be developed to the east of the amphitheater. This facility is
likely to have an indirect benefit as well, in that it will expose more residents of San Diego
county to the new Chula Vista.
A considerable amount of group demand is likely to be generated by the Arco Olympic
Training Facility on lower Otay Reservoir approximately eight miles south and east of the
site. As this facility is new and only partially built out, much of the demand generated by
coaches' clinics, the boards of governing bodies, and sporting competitions will emerge
with the completion of additional facilities. Future construction is dependent on fund
raising efforts. At present there are no funds or schedules for the completion of additional
facilities.
Our interviews of area employers who were also area residents indicated that, at present,
home owners in the high-end residential neighborhoods of Bonita, EastIake and Rancho
del Rey have no local hotels to which they can refer visiting friends and relatives, or at
which they can host weddings and other social functions. The existing Ramada Inn, La
Quinta and Holiday Inn Express are not deemed to be of sufficient quality.
At present, there is no first class full-service hotel serving this market of existing and
planned demand generators. The subject hotel will fill a void in this area. Presented in
Section IV is our estimation of the quantity of business that could be captured ITom
existing and planned employers.
Advantages and Disadvantages of the Site Compared to Competitors
The majority of the competitive golf resorts are located in North County San Diego,
remote ITom San Diego's Lindbergh Field. The subject is only a 15 to 20 minute drive
ITom the Lindbergh field. Only the Sheraton Torrey Pines and the Torrey Pines Inn enjoy
similar airport accessibility. Singing Hills, the Quail Inn (San Marcos), Lawrence Welk
Resort (Escondido), and Pala Mesa Resort are at a distinct disadvantage to the subject
with regard to airport accessibility.
From a status/name recognition standpoint, the Torrey Pines, Rancho Santa Fe (Morgan's
Run) and Rancho Bernardo properties have the advantage over the subject. The remainder
of the properties are in what we would classify as "status neutral" locations.
On balance, the subject site's appeal in the group market is likely to be inferior to the
Coastal North County and Rancho Bernardo resorts, equal to the remote North County
resorts, and superior to Singing Hills' East County location.
The subject golf resort is also located close to a market of relatively untapped commercial
demand generators. Only those golf resorts located in the Torrey Pines neighborhood of
La Jolla and Rancho Bernardo capture significant amount of commercial demand. These
resort hotels however are also competing with a number of first-class commercial hotels
for the same business and have varying levels of success in capturing that business; (The
Section /I - Site Analysis
11-8
Sheraton Torrey Pines obtains 20 to 25 percent of its demand ITom neighborhood
businesses; the Rancho Bernardo Inn receives almost none.)
The commercial demand that is leaking ITom the South Bay is currently being
accommodated by hotels in Mission Valley, Downtown San Diego, and along Central San
Diego's Bayftont. It is interesting to note that none of the commercial interviewees
indicated using or recommending the Radisson Suites in National City. Most of the South
Bay employers we interviewed indicated a preference for a first-class hotel in the South
Bay, except for those visitors for whom the waterfront views or five-minute airport
proximity were important.
Conclusion
The subject site offers both good access to the airport and a somewhat secluded resort-
like atmosphere. The quality of the neighboring improvements is fair to good and is well
suited to the development of a first-class hotel such as a Hilton, Marriott, or Sheraton of a
good (but not luxury) quality. These brands are consistent with the rate and quality
preferences indicated in group demand interviews. Local employers indicated that much of
the first-class hotel business that is currently being referred to hotels outside of the South
Bay could be captured by such a facility as the proposed Bonita Golf Lodge.
Section III
AREA REVIEW
Section JI/- Area Review
11/-1
AREA REVIEW
INTRODUCTION
The intended audience of the Phase I summary report demand is understood to be people
knowledgeable regarding the economic and demographic characteristics of San Diego in
general, and the South Bay in particular. Therefore, this section will be presented in a
particularly abbreviated format, and will focus on only those areas that are relevant to the
proposed hotel's market demand.
The health of San Diego's Visitor industry is influenced by economic conditions in its
source markets-the Los Angeles Basin, California at large, the Western United States,
the rest of the country, contiguous countries and the rest of the world. San Diego's
economy has relevance mainly for commercial travel, and, to a lesser degree, group
meetings.
California is San Diego's primary source market for visitors. Within California, the Los
Angeles Basin is the single largest source market. The Los Angeles Basin was hard hit
during the most recent recession due to structural changes in the defense industry. Until
recently, this was manifested in low hotel occupancy levels and declining average daily
room rates. The first signs of improvement in the San Diego hotel industry were
attributable to improvements in the national and Northern California economies. Recently,
the rate of improvement in San Diego has accelerated, which is believed to be a function
ofthe economic rebound in the Los Angeles area and the re-emergence of Southern
California as a glamorous tourist destination. (Los Angeles' riots, fires and quakes had a
dampening effect on the entire region.)
Presented in the following table is a summary of the historical occupancies and average
daily room rates for San Diego County from 1986 through 1995, with our forecast for
1996.
Section /1/- Area Review
111-2
Historical Occupancies and Average Daily Room Rates
San Diego County
1986-1996
Occupancy
1986 72.7%
1987 73.9
1988 69.0
1989 67.8
1990 63.1
1991 64.0
1992 65.0
1993 63.0
1994 65.6
1995 67.8
1996' 71.0
Source: PKF Consulting and Pannell Kerr Forster
Average Oaily
Room Rate
$74.49
75.77
78.22
78.43
75.81
75.15
80.81
79.64
78.33
82.18
89.00
Through the end of 1995, the five-county Los Angeles area had replaced only one-third of
the jobs lost during the aerospace restructuring. At the present pace of recovery,
economists and estimate that these jobs will not fully be replaced until 1997. Thus, the
growth in tourism that San Diego has seen from Los Angeles county residents is likely to
continue.
On a national level, the most recent quarter's 4.2 percent economic growth has exceeded
economists' expectations and has not shown the "soft landing" that was forecast. The
August survey of consumer confidence rose to its highest level in six years which the Wall
Street Journal attributes to "a strong job market and a steady economy". This index has
declined only twice in the past 10 months, in January and June. The Federal Reserve
Board is expected to increase interest rates in September in an effort to preempt
inflationary growth and reduce the rate of economic growth to more modest, sustainable
levels. On balance however, the national economy appears very supportive of growth in
tourism over the next one to two years.
International tourism has rebounded, a dramatic increase in foreign visitation has been
reported a all of Southern California's major tourist attractions and in Northern California
as well. Given the very modest levels of growth in the Japanese and European economies,
this implies an increase in the appeal of Southern California compared to alternate
destinations.
Mexico's economy appears to have begun its rebound. In mid-August the Mexican
National government announced that the country's economy had grown 7.2 percent
during the quarter ended June 30. While still below its heady 1994 levels of GNP, this
improvement bodes well for Chula Vista's retail sales, and for hotel usage by more
affluent Mexican nationals. According to the non-profit group San Diego Dialogue, there
are approximately 40 million northward border crossings per year by Mexico based
individuals. The purpose of these trips is as follows:
Section 111- Area Review
111-3
. shopping - 16.9 million
. work - 9.6 million
. social visits - 4.8 million
. tourism - 1.2 million
. all other - 7.2 million
Residents of Tijuana and San Diego County account for 96 percent of all crossings.
Further individuals who cross the border more than four times per month constitute 96
percent of all crossings. This correlation and the anecdotal evidence collected at intercept
interviews suggests that the vast majority of the Mexican Outbound traffic is of the
commuter or day trip variety. However, we expect that with the number of affluent
Mexican Nationals that have purchased second homes in Chula Vista's better
neighborhoods, there is a fair amount of weekend social demand (weddings, quincefieras,
etc.) that could be captured by the subject facility
On a local level San Diego County, which was also hard hit by the restructuring, is also
forecast to recover its lost jobs by 1997. San Diego's recovery is being fueled by the
telecommunications industry (Qualcom), tourism, international trade, non-defense-related
aviation, and instrument manufacturing. Growth in San Diego's economy is important for
the commercial and, to a lesser degree, group markets. However, commercial travelers
generally prefer to stay within a 5 to 10 minute drive of the place at which they will be
doing business. For commercial demand, the relative health of the industries and
employers of the South Bay are the most relevant.
The Rohr Corporation, identified earlier as the area's major employer and rooms demand
generator, appears to have weathered the restructuring of California's aerospace industry
and to be in a growth mode, with $1.0 to $2.0 billion in backlogged orders. In addition to
the ongoing commercial aviation component manufacturing activity, Rohr was awarded a
$100 million contract in June, 1996 to develop a new type of titanium metal sheathing
material for use in the X-33 space shuttle program. While funding for this newest contract
will be spent over the next two years (before the subject hotel opens), success in this
experimental phase could lead to contact extensions and commercial applications. In
general, we have assumed that Rohr shows modest growth over the term of our
projections.
The number of maquiladora plants at the Otay Mesa border has grown. Television
manufacturers such as Sony, Matsushita, Panasonic, Sanyo, Hitachi, Samsung, and JVC
all produce televisions in Tijuana. Toy makers Matte!, Fisher-Price, Hasbro and others,
along with Sporting goods manufacturers such as Adidas and Easton Composites are also
involved in cross border manufacturing.
The future of the maquiladoras and industrial space absorption at the Otay Mesa
International Center appears favorable. According to Michael V ogt ofInternational Real
Estate, the vacancy factor among Otay Mesa's 4.5 million square feet of industrial space
was approximately six percent as of mid-year 1996. Two buildings containing a total of
Section 111- Area Review
111-4
155,000 square feet were breaking ground this summer, which were the first new
construction starts in five years. A third building of 122,000 square feet is expected to
break ground in the third quarter of 1996. Nearly 6,000 acres of developable land remain
in the City and County enterprise zones.
Further Japanese manufacturing investment in the South Bay is expected to be attracted by
a Saturday "Japan school" for the children of expatriate managers, which selected the
Eastlake High School as its campus in April, 1996. An estimated 500 students began
supplemental schooling on July 6. The only cloud on the horizon for the Maquiladora
industry was the mid-August kidnapping of a Sanyo executive in Tijuana. Sanyo paid the
$2.0 million dollar ransom and the executive was returned unharmed. It is not yet known
what effect this may have on the maquiladora industry. A representative from Sanyo went
on record as saying that "There will not be any repercussion in the expansion of the Baja
California economy" but went on to say that his company would ask the Mexican,
Japanese and U.S. authorities to "contribute to an effort to build a safer environment
around the maquiladoras."
The Rancho Del Rey and Eastlake master-planned communities have continued to add and
sell speculative residential construction. For 1996 the annual luxury home tour of San
Diego County, called the Tour d' Elegance, selected an exclusive new neighborhood in
Chula Vista for the builders' showcase tour. If the event's sponsors are successful in
enticing other county residents to the home tour, the summer event should enhance the
image of Chula Vista as a residential community and, indirectly, as a resort destination.
The construction of the Visitor Center at the Arco Olympic Training Facility also bodes
well for the community. The U.S. Olympic training facility in Colorado Springs provides
tours to between 85,000 and 90,000 visitors per year. The Chula Vista Visitor Center
opened in April and, as of the date of our research, had yet to catch on as a "must see"
attraction in San Diego County. Greyline tours, for example, had no imminent plans to add
it as a stop on their full- or half-day tours of San Diego. The Colorado Springs facility is
also the national headquarters of the U.S. Olympic effort but has only 36 acres of grounds
compared to the 187 available in Chula Vista. While only nominal levels of demand are
expected trom the athletes and their families; coaching clinics, incentive trips for
corporate sponsors and meetings of the "Governing Bodies" of each officially sanctioned
sport are expected to generate demand for hotel accommodations. As of the date of this
report, there are 42 accredited Olympic Sports. The majority of the governing bodies are
presently headquartered in Colorado Springs; none are based in Chula Vista. It is not yet
known how many of the governing bodies will move to the Chula Vista facility when that
sport's facility is completely built out. Track and Field for example, is headquartered in
Indianapolis, Indiana, which is not a year-round (outdoor) training locale. A more detailed
analysis of the demand generated by the Colorado Springs facility and projections for the
subject property may be found in Section IV
The imminent construction of the MCA amphitheater and, to a lesser degree, the
proposed Water Park will also increase a more educated awareness of the inland South
Section 1/1- Area Review
/11-5
Bay. The amphitheater is planned to have 10,000 permanent seats and lawn seating for an
additional 10,000 persons. Newspaper accounts indicate that the facility should be open
for a complete season in 1997, which would run from April to October or November.
Representatives of the Chamber of Commerce indicate that the venue wil1likely host 40
performances per season, divided evenly among domestic U.S. performers and performers
from South of the border targeted at Hispanics and Mexican Nationals. The amphitheater
is also likely to generate weekend leisure demand for the subject hotel, as mentioned
earlier.
CONCLUSION
The economic health of San Diego's major source market for tourism is improving and
gaining momentum. Assuming that the recent kidnapping does not seriously impact the
maquiladora industry, the prospects for economic growth in the local South Bay economy
are also favorable.
Section IV
SUPPL Y AND DEMAND FOR LODGING
ACCOMMODA TIONS
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations
IV-1
SUPPLY AND DEMAND FOR LODGING ACCOMMODATIONS
OVERVIEW
The proposed subject resort project has as its defining characteristics a 250-room size,
preferred golf tee-off times, a high ratio of function space to guest rooms, a national chain
affiliation, and a South Bay location. At 20,000 square feet of meeting space, the subject
property will have a ratio of 80 square feet per guest room. There are presently no direct
competitors to the proposed Bonita Golf resort because of differences in location, size,
quality, market segmentation, and facilities. We were forced to perform our analysis using
secondary competitors, and to augment this analysis with demand interviews. The
potentially if indirectly competitive golf resort hotel supply will be discussed first. The
results of our research into the demand side of the equation will be discussed afterward.
COMPETITIVE HOTEL SUPPLY
Existing Hotel Supply
Within San Diego County there are ten existing golf-oriented hotels properties that have
70 rooms or more. Of these, we deemed nine to be potentially competitive, eliminating La
Costa from our analysis because of its extensive spa orientation and national name
recognition. The nine remaining properties still vary widely in quality, market orientation
and rate structure, as indicated in the following table.
Quantity Ratio of
Number Enclosed Meeting Range of
Map of Year Meeting Space to Published
Property TvpelName Code Rooms Opened Space Guest Rooms (Asking) Rates
Small Golf Resorts
Singing Hills 1 102 1960's/'91 2,670 26 s.l.:l $80. $120
Quail Inn (at the Lake San Marcos Resort! 2 142 1970's 7,570 53 s.l.:1 83.125
Lawrence WeJk Resort and Greens 3 132 1960's 6,240 47 s.l.:l 90.110
Executive Confsrence Center
Pala Mesa Resort 4 133 1970's 5.412 41 s.f.:l 109.159
Morgan Run Resort 5 66 1966 2.400 28 s.l.:l 139.159
lodge at Torrey Pines 6 74 1960's 4,220 57 s.l.:1 95.110
Sub-market NIA 669 NIA 28,512 43 s.f.:l NIA
large Golf Resorts
Sheraton Grande Torrey Pines 7 392 1989 17,705 45s.1.:1 195.205
Carmel Highlands Doubletree 8 168 1890 8,900 53 s.l.:1 99.159
Rancho Bernardo Inn 9 287 1960's 13,628 48 s.l.:1 165.190
Sub-total NIA 847 NIA 40,230 47 s.f.:l NIA
Total/Average NIA 1.516 NIA 68.742 45 s.f.:l NIA
COMPETITIVE SUPPLY
i
ProDertv TVDe/Name
Singing Hills
Quail Inn (at the Lake San Marcos Resort)
Lawrence Walk Resort and Greens
Executive Conference Center
Pala Mesa Resort
Morgan Run Resort
Lodge at Torrey Pines
Sheraton Grande Torrey Pines
Carmel Highlands Doubletree
Rancho Bernardo Inn
IV-2
t:.
1-\
"
MaD Code
I
2
3
"""
4
5
6
7
8
9
i
,
SiAN
c'
_~- ~l
'i'~L
<,,,,,\-
i_ '\
/,
ti;
)
d
\.,.."
,'~~. \. ,(-
-, -~-- ....!.
".,
.,,'" ...~~
'.-<...'"'; .,.' "
"..~'; \.';"~
;",,:!,I \,~I
."i'--~~~?_~
I "')' -.-'-:--
: ~,I H'R;UI
--l~-:!- wr
: "
I (U15
','
.."II"".
OIAI
", 1331
!,s
13:12
j""i
f' it 1
1J~ ..
.
\ Ii
r ~
I ,,,,,,,
! -.-.., ~'\ .,,~
,~__......_~!,;;.,~I~ 11&fI~
, '
, -
"
"
~,.-'-
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations
IV-3
We excluded from our analysis the three economy and moderate rated properties along 1-
805 due to differences in quality level and market orientation. Brief descriptions of each of
the nine potentially competitive golf resorts follow:
Singing Hills Resort
Singing Hills Resort is the most isolated and most rustic of the potentially competitive
resort properties. With the exception ofa 22-room addition in 1991, most of the property
dates to the 1950's and 60's. Its guest rooms are contained in two-story buildings
scattered around one comer of the 425-acre property. The property boasts two
championship courses and one executive course and derives its demand from serious
golfers and golf affinity groups. The General Manager reports receiving almost no
demand from groups whose primary focus is a meeting (versus golf). There are a
significant number of Singing Hills golf club members; however, one course is always
reserved for hotel guest use. The meeting space is contained in one-story, low-ceiling
rooms and is used mainly for awards banquets after tournament play. The property has
two dining rooms, a cocktail lounge, 11 lighted tennis courts, two pools and a small
fitness center.
Quail Inn at Lake San Marcos Resort
The Quail Inn at Lake San Marcos Resort is located in a neighborhood that is similar to
the subject in terms of its mix between multi-family and strip center commercial
development, but is relatively remote, being located four miles south of State Route 78.
While the exterior corridor, single-loaded buildings appear somewhat dated, they have
been well maintained and landscaped and are furnished with average quality case goods.
One wing of guest rooms and nearly all of the suites overlook Lake San Marcos as does
the restaurant and conference space. The resort suffers from chronic difficulties in booking
tournament play onto the 6,500 yard par 72 course that is controlled by club members in
the contiguous planned residential community. A second 2,700 yard executive course is
also available, as are rental boats, four lighted tennis courts and a small fitness/health club.
The majority of the demand for this facility is group, with a significant component of that
being derived from retreats.
Lawrence Welk Resort and The Greens Executive Conference Center
The transient (non-timeshare) inventory of rooms consists of 132 conventional hotel
rooms served by 6,240 square feet of meeting space. The Greens Conference Center is a
member of the International Association of Conference Centers and offers special
"ergonomically" designed chairs, in-house audio-visual service providers and an all
inclusive "complete meeting package" (CMP) for conference attendees. There are a larger
number of timeshare units (not in the transient rental pool) and the resort's dining,
shopping and entertainment facilities are fairly extensive given the number of conventional
hotel rooms. Guests may chose from a 6,521 yard par 72 course, a 4,002 yard executive
course, or a par 3 course. The hotel section offers two pools and three whirlpool spas and
the option of using any of the larger pools in the timeshare unit section.
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations
IV-4
Pala Mesa Resort
Pala Mesa resort is similar to Singing Hills in that it is both remote and rustic, but is
significantly younger, has higher public space ceilings, and has been updated quite
recently to a fairly good level of finish. The guest rooms are located in 14 separate
buildings, some of which are a healthy walk from the lobby and pro shop. The guest
rooms are oversized and most feature a separate wet bar. The resort offers two
restaurants, a cocktail lounge, four tennis courts and a pool. Virtually every group meeting
booked at this hotel involves a golf outing. Like the previous three properties, it suffers
ITom its distance relative to the airport, which is exacerbated by the remoteness of this
property ITom any restaurant or retail amenities. The vast majority of its guests drive in
ITom the L.A. Basin.
Morgan Run Resort
Morgan Run Resort, formerly called Whispering Palms, is one of the smallest facilities
considered and is located in Rancho Santa Fe, approximately 1. 5 miles east of the Via de
La Valle interchange. This 86-room resort, which was completed in the mid-1980's, has
27 holes of golf and changed hands recently. The new owners spent $10.0 million to
renovate the golf courses and hotel; the product today is of a very high quality. Because of
its high status location, small size, and a low ratio of meeting space to guest rooms, it is
only tangentially competitive with the subject.
Lodge at Torrey Pines
The 74-room hotel, formerly the Torrey Pines Inn, is one of the older facilities, having
been constructed in the 1960' s on land leased ITom the City of San Diego that abuts the
Torrey Pines Golf Course. Guests at the hotel do not receive special golf privileges at the
course. This becomes an issue only on weekends as there are adequate weekday tee-off
times for the individual player that drive demand at this hotel.
Sheraton Grande Torrey Pines
At 392 rooms, the Sheraton Torrey Pines is the largest hotel in the competitive supply,
and one of the newest. Like its neighbor the Lodge at Torrey Pines, this City of San Diego
tenant overlooks the golf courses but has limited playing privileges. The Director of Sales
indicated that during the winter and early spring months the hotel succeeds in getting
approximately 90 percent of their weekday tournament play requests. During the warm
weather months and on weekends, however, the hotel uses fairly remote courses (Aviara)
for group play The hotel is well designed with a high level of finish. As a "Grande" hotel,
Sheraton is attempting to position this property to compete with the highest rated resorts
in San Diego County. At 45 square feet per guest room, the Director of Sales indicated
that the ratio of meeting space to guest rooms was too low for a predominately group
hotel. The hotel does however offer 22,400 square feet of outdoor terraced areas.
Carmel Highlands Doubletree Resort
The Carmel Highlands Doubletree Resort is one of the newest properties in the supply,
and one of the most meaningful comparabIes. While somewhat spartan in its level of finish,
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations
IV-S
the buildings are of good quality, guest rooms are spacious, and most of the rooms have
good views of the golf course. In addition to the 72 par 6,418 yard course this resort
offers a 5,500 square foot health and fitness center, 6 lighted tennis courts, a 25-yard lap
pool, a recreational pool and a wading pool. In addition, this property offers guests two
restaurants, a cocktail lounge, and a beauty salon. While the majority of this resort's
business is group, this property receives a significant percent of its demand trom individual
commercial travelers due to its proximity to Scripps Ranch, Miramar and Rancho
Bernardo. Individual leisure accounts for the balance of its demand.
Rancho Bernardo Inn
This Spanish Colonial style resort is the only hotel in our competitive set to enjoy
significant name recognition and institutional status. There are 18 holes of championship
golf available on site, extensive tennis facilities, a 5,000 square foot health fitness center,
two restaurants, two cocktail lounges and a large number of patios and terraces for
outdoor dining. EI Bizcocho is one of the County's top rated restaurants. The guest room
buildings and public areas are spread out over a fairly large area, and are connected by
very wide covered walkways. The level of finish is very good to excellent. Corporate
groups from outside California predominate at this property. The distance from the airport
and to shopping are the primary shortcomings of this resort.
Historical Market Conditions
Between 1986 and 1988 no new rooms opened among the competitive resorts. Then, with
the opening of the Sheraton Torrey Pines and the Doubletree Carmel Highlands Resort in
late 1989 and early 1990, the number of rooms in the competitive supply increased by
nearly 60 percent. A 20-room addition to Singing Hills opened in 1991, but by then such a
small addition had a nominal impact on the market. Since 1991 there have been no new
rooms added. Over the long ten year period from 1986 through 1995, the compound
annual rate of growth in supply has been 5.5 percent.
As is shown in the following table, demand was flat to declining between 1988 and 1989.
This is because of the opening of new hotels in La Jolla and Rancho Bernardo that were
oriented toward individual commercial travelers who had previously been staying at the
resorts. The opening of new resorts with group meeting facilities caused demand to
increase.
In the year that supply increased 49 percent, demand was increased by 31 percent. Even
during 1991, the year of the Persian Gulf war, the national recession, and some of the
worst news for California's economy, demand for the competitive facilities increased by
double digits. The market occupancy level had returned to 56.5 percent by 1992, its mid-
1980' s level. Since then occupancy levels have been increasing. The newer hotels are in
general larger and have the critical mass necessary for adequate marketing expenditures.
They also have national chain affiliations, and, relative to the smaller North County and
East County resorts, are much more accessible from the airport.
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations
IV-6
Historical Market Perfonnance
1986 to 1996 (Forecast)
Annual Available Percent Annual Occupied Percent Occupancy
Year Rooms Change Rooms Change Percent
1986 341,640 193,100 56.5%
1987 341.640 0.0% 193,100 0.3% 56.5
1988 341.640 0.0 184,300 .4.9 54.0
1989 365.730 7.1 192,000 4.2 52.5
1990 546,040 49.3 252,300 31.4 46.0
1991 553,340 1.3 292,500 15.9 53.0
1992 553,340 0.0 312,900 7.0 56.5
1993 553,340 0.0 312,800 0.0 56.5
1994 553,340 0.0 331,700 6.0 60.0
1995 553,340 0.0 341,400 2.9 61.5
C.A. G. '86-'95 5.5% 6.5%
1996(F) 553,340 0.0 356,830 4.5% 64.5%
C.A.G. '86-'96 4.9% 6.3%
Year-to-date results indicate that in 1996, the competitive market's average annual
occupancy will have grown to almost 65 percent, its highest in the ten years being
analyzed. We attribute this to'
. the shift in the supply towards larger, chain-affiliated resorts;
. San Diego's increasing popularity as a destination and,
. the recovery in Los Angeles which is particularly beneficial for the smaller golf
resorts that are too far removed from the airport to appeal to a national or
regional clientele.
Within the two competitive groups of hotels, the "Small Golf Resorts," which have an
average of 112 rooms, tend to achieve occupancies that are 15 to 20 percentage points
lower than the "Large Golf Resorts", which have an average of282 rooms per property.
For example, in 1996, the Small Golf Resort sample is forecast to achieve a market
occupancy of approximately 55 percent, compared to a "Large Golf Resort" average of
72 percent. The subject property will be most like the sub-set oflarge golf resorts.
The significant gains during the recessionary years were achieved partially by discounting
room rates. In 1991, the effective weighted average room rate, which is referred to as the
average daily rate or ADR, decreased, despite the higher levels of per room investments in
the new properties. Presented in the following table is a comparison of the changes in the
ADR. This is compared to the changes in gross rooms revenues for the year, so that the
effects of declining ADR's are shown.
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations IV-7
Percent Room Percent
Year Occupancy A.D.R. Change Revenue Change
1986 56.5% $ 85.00 $16.411.000
1987 56.5 90.00 5.8% 17.422.000 6.1%
1988 54.0 91.00 1.6 16,846.000 .3.3
1989 52.5 93.00 1.5 17,813.000 5.7
1990 46.0 101.00 8.8 25.468,000 43.0
1991 53.0 97.00 .3.7 28.433,000 11.6
1992 56.5 100.00 3.3 31.428,000 10.5
1993 56.5 103.00 2.7 32,255,000 2.6
1994 60.0 105.00 2.2 34,937,000 8.3
1995 61.5 110.00 4.2 37.484,000 7.3
1996(F) 64.5 113.00 3.0% 40,551,000 8.1%
In the aggregate, the larger resorts also outperform the smaller resorts with regard to rate.
Year-to-date data for 1996 indicates that the Small Golf Resorts will achieve an average
daily rate of $77.00 compared to that of$135.00 for the Large Golf Resorts.
Demand Interviews
Our interviews with meeting planners were discussed earlier in Section II. Because a
product such as the Bonita Golf Lodge does not yet exist, we also conducted interviews
with area employers to ascertain if there was a local need for a first-class, full-service
hotel.
To do this, we obtained a Chamber of Commerce listing of members/major employers in
Chula Vista and Otay Mesa. Three "atypical" employers were singled out for in-depth
telephone interviews: Rohr, the Arco Olympic Training Facility, and MCA. Then from the
two lists with approximately 90 names, we contacted approximately 60 employers by Fax
or U.S. Mail with a one page questionnaire as to their lodging needs and preferences.
Follow-up telephone calls were made to increase the number of responses.
The three key interviews yielded the following information:
Rohr purchases approximately 400 room nights per month, or 4,800 room nights per year
for its employees and clients. The Rohr representative was unable to quantify the number
of room nights used by vendors calling on them but believed it was significant. The Rohr
account is spread over three properties at present: a Coronado waterfTont property, a
Downtown non-waterfront property, and a good quality economy lodging property in
Chula Vista. In general, clients, executives and mid-week meetings tend to be lodged on
Coronado; mid-level executives or weekend meetings are hosted at the downtown
property, and lower level employees are housed in the economy lodging property. The
1996 rates for the two better quality properties are in the mid-$80 range. The economy
lodging rate is in the mid-$40 range. The Rohr representative was familiar with the subject
project and pleased with the prospect of a first-class hotel on the Municipal Golf Course.
We estimate that the subject hotel could replace the downtown hotel and capture a portion
of the meetings business currently being conducted at the Coronado property as that
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations
IV-8
property's negotiated rate is increased. We estimate that the subject property will capture
45 percent ofRohr's business or 2,160 room nights at an $85 to $90 ADR in today's
(1996) dollars.
The Olympic Training Facility is too new to have a visitation history, and at other training
facilities each department handles its own travel. The Director of Sales at one large group
hotel in Colorado Springs estimated that the coaches' meetings and governing bodies hold
approximately 300 meetings across town, with room blocks ranging ITom 10 rooms to
500. Sixty to 70 percent of the meetings involve fewer than 60 rooms, however. The
average length of stay is between 3 and 4 nights. In general, this kind of business is rate
sensitive. At this particular (3 star) property, Olympic groups pay rates in the high $50's
and low $60' s during their slow winter season, but can go up to the $80 range during the
peak summer season. With no knowledge of if and how many governing bodies may
ultimately be located in Chula Vista and no local meetings history, we will estimate that
the coaches' meetings and governing bodies account for 2 groups per month of 50 rooms
for an average oD.5 days. This yields 4,200 room nights per year which we assume will
be at a $75 ADR.
In addition to the Olympic coaches and administrators, the Colorado Springs Training
Facility also generates corporate sponsor travel and meetings. The sponsor services
department indicated that Chula Vista would not likely benefit from individual travel to
negotiate sponsorship agreements, but that they are already fielding requests for sponsor's
group incentive trips and sales meetings in Chula Vista. With no hotels in the area and
only a skeletal staff on-site, they are presently discouraging this. However, the head of
meeting planning for sponsor services indicated that the subject property would probably
receive one "large" (ISO-room) group every other month, alternating with a smaller (50
room) group on the off months. With a 3 day length of stay, this equates to about 3,600
room nights per year. The negotiated rate at the preferred hotel in Colorado Springs, the
Doubletree Antlers, is $84 in the off season and $89 in the peak season. We estimate that
this business will be booked into the subject at similar rates, say $87.
We made numerous telephone calls to the contact at MCA for the amphitheater; none
however were returned. Based on conversations related by the developer, we understand
that the average size of an entertainer's entourage is 70 rooms. From the Director of the
Chamber of Commerce we understand that the venue is forecast to host 40 events per
year. Assuming that half of the entertainers arrive the night before each performance, the
average length of stay is 1. 5 nights. We estimate that entertainer demand from the
amphitheater contributes 4,200 rooms per year to the subject at relatively high rates (all of
the suites would be used) of, say, $120.
We estimate that 10 events per year will be held on weekend nights, and that these events
will generate leisure demand of 50 rooms on these nights, also at a relatively high rate, say
$100 after taking into account the shuttle charges. The annual leisure contribution is
therefore 500 room nights per year.
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations
IV-9
If our assumptions are correct, the three primary demand generators account for
approximately 14,700 room nights of demand or 16.0 percentage points of occupancy
(14,700/91,250) for the subject hotel. The weighted average daily rate for this business
would be $94, due to the higher rates assumed for the MCA business.
We were successful in receiving responses trom 31 other employers. These interviews
quantified approximately 3,100 room nights of demand for hotel accommodations of all
quality levels. Contrary to our expectations, the television manufacturers in the Otay Mesa
area did not report generating a high level of visitation (fewer than 250 room nights per
year) and were evenly split in their opinions as to whether their visitor would switch their
business to the proposed hotel. Based on the opinions expressed by interview subjects, it
appears that at least 2,200 room nights would likely be captured by the subject property.
Interview subjects had "no opinion" on the proposed project's ability to capture additional
500 room nights of demand, and definite "no's" accounted for the remaining 400 room
nights. We estimate from the range of rates cited that the capturable business would be in
the $90 to $100 rate range.
The total amount of demand quantified from our 33 employer demand interviews was
.therefore 16,900 room nights, or approximately 18 5 percentage points of occupancy
(16,900/91,250). The average daily rate would be approximately $93. This does not take
into account the room nights generated by the businesses we did not know to contact, or
that did not respond. For example, a recent newspaper account indicates that there are 130
maquiladoras in Tijuana. We obtained contact information on fewer than 10 such
employers in our survey process. And other Chula Vista employers such as Hyspan, which
is reported to bring clients in from all over the world for its specialty steel, did not
respond. The true figure of demand for good quality hotels by South Bay employers is
likely to be materially larger than was quantified in our survey process. Nor does this
method of analysis reflect the demand generated by vendors to these businesses, as few of
the interviewees were willing or able to estimate the number of vendors calling on them,
or their lodging habits and preferences.
We estimate that the South Bay businesses will generate something on the order of25
percentage points of occupancy for the subject hotel. While most employers lumped
together demand trom the individual transient and group markets, we believe that the
demand from these South Bay Employers will be evenly split between group and transient
demand. Of these 25 percentage points of occupancy 13 percent would likely be group,
and 12 points would likely be transient (commercial or leisure).
Local social demand, trom events such as weddings and quincefieras, and from visits to
families and friends, could add an additional five occupancy points. Thus, we believe the
existing base oflocal demand for the subject would contribute approximately 30
occupancy points and is likely to grow over the next five to seven years. The balance of
the market support for the subject would need to be attracted or "induced" to the South
Bay by virtue of the subject's meeting space and golf course privileges.
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations
IV-10
Based on the success of the Sheraton Torrey Pines and the Doubletree Carmel Highlands
in "inducing" demand to the market, we believe that the subject property, operating with a
national brand affiliation and ample meeting space could induce a significant amount of
demand.
Market Segmentation
Our interviews indicate that the demand for the golf resort accommodations is broken out
as follows:
Category Group Leisure Commercial Total
Small Golf Resorts 50% 45% 5% 100%
large Golf Resorts 59 25 16 100%
Weighted Average 57 31 12 100%
Projected Subject 65 20 15 100%
As indicated earlier, the subject property is planned to have as much as 20,000 square feet
of meeting space and will likely have a high ratio of group demand. Based on the mix of
demand at the Large Golf Resorts and our demand interviews, we estimate that the subject
property will achieve approximately 65 percent of its business from groups.
We estimate that 15 percent of the hotel's business will be derived from individual
commercial, and further that 20 percent of the demand will be from individual leisure
guests.
Projected Future Market Conditions
Additions to Supply
We are aware of a number of other proposed projects that could enter the golf or local
market over the next few years:
Construction has resumed on the Four Season Aviara in Carlsbad. Due to the luxury rate
orientation ($225 to $275 per night) of the Four Seasons and the national orientation of its
appeal, we have not included it as competitor to the subject
A 710-room Pointe Resort is proposed for Carlsbad in the LegoLand development As
this property is likely to compete in the arena of much larger hotels (500 to 1,000 rooms)
it is not likely to directly impact the subject's market However, the rates targeted by this
facility will be somewhat lower than those targeted by the Four Seasons, and as such, this
property may have an indirect impact on the subject's market We have assumed that the
property will open in the year 2000, but that its impact will be felt mainly in the absence of
any growth in demand for the competitive set and the absence of any rate growth.
A second Pointe Golf Resort is also proposed for Spring Valley, near the Sweetwater
Reservoir. Again, this facility would be very large, with 700 rooms. If completed, it would
be relatively close to the subject, and would be attempting to fill slow period with smaller
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations
IV-11
groups such as would be targeted by the subject property. On the positive side, with 700
rooms the Pointe Resort could afford to market southeastern San Diego County and
presumably increase destination awareness. We have adjusted for the large size ofthis
project by treating only one-third of its rooms as competitive and have assumed that these
231 "competitive" rooms enter the market in 2002, two years after the North County
project.
On a local level, there is a full service hotel site in the Otay Mesa International Center that
is rumored to be in escrow. Our research into demand generators in that area indicates
that a hotel that relied exclusively on South Bay commercial demand would not likely be
economically viable. The same can be said for the hotel site in the Eastlake Business Park.
We have assumed that neither hotel is developed within the time rrame under analysis in
this report.
F or the subject, we have assumed a fast tracked construction schedule and an opening on
January I, 1998.
Growth in Demand
The competitive market of golf resorts has shown strong growth in demand over the past
two years, as evidenced by increases in both rate and occupancy. Year-to-date results
through June for 1996 indicate that the national market continues to be strong and that the
improving health of the Los Angeles Basin economy is translating into more frequent
vacations in San Diego.
Presented in the following table are our projections for future growth in both supply and
demand, together with the average daily rates projected for the years 1996(forecast)
through 2002.
Projected Growth in Supply and Demand
SupplV Demand Market
Year Room Nights % Change Room Nights % Change Occupancv AOR
1996 553,340 0.0% 356,800 4.5% 64.5% $113.00
1997 553,340 0.0 370,700 3.9 67.0 120.00
1998 644,590' 16.5 400,000 7.8 62.0 123.00
1999 644,590 0.0 419,000 4.9 65.0 128.00
2000 644,590 0.0 419,000 0.0' 65.0 128.00
2001 644,590 0.0 431,000 3.0 67.0 131.00
2002 728,905' 13.1 452,000 4.6 62.0 135.00
2003 728,905 0.0 466,000 3.2 64.0 140.00
2004 728,905 0.0 481,000 3.1 66.0 146.00
'Opening of the subject property.
'Demand growth impeded bV the opening of the Pointe Carlsbad.
30pening of the Pointe Sweetwater, one-third of the rooms treated as "competitive."
Source: PKF Consulting
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations
1V-12
As the occupancy improves, we believe this market will follow the pattern set by so many
other recovering markets in which ADR growth becomes the prevailing philosophy. For
example, for all of San Diego County the average daily rate grew 7.4 percent during the
first half of 1996. For 1997, we forecast that the market occupancy continues to improve,
growing by approximately two and one-half percentage points to 67 percent, and that the
area operators attempt to catch up with the countywide ADR growth in the previous year
(1996). The ADR is forecast to grow by 6.2 percent in 1997.
With the opening of the subject property in January 1998, we anticipate that demand will
increase by some 29,000 room nights, but since this is less than the number of room nights
added to supply, the market occupancy will decline 5.0 percentage points. Average daily
rate growth is projected to fall to the inflationary level of3. 0 percent as operators assess
the impact of the new addition.
In 1999 additional growth in room nights sold will likely occur as the new rooms continue
to be absorbed. The occupancy level is forecast to partially rebound. With this, operators
will likely become more aggressive in average daily rate growth.
In the year 2000, growth in this competitive set is forecast to temporarily cease as the
opening of the Carlsbad Pointe Resort will likely cause a handful of groups to "trade-out"
of this competitive market. No net loss in demand is anticipated, only an absence of
growth.
In 2001, the market occupancy is anticipated to recover slightly, before dipping down
again with the opening of the Pointe Resort near Sweetwater Reservoir.
In summary, we expect that the market occupancy will oscillate between 62 and 67
percent as new rooms enter the market and are subsequently absorbed. Growth in the
average daily room rate will slow and accelerate depending on changes in the equilibrium
between supply and demand.
Projected Performance of the Subject Property
To estimate the subject's occupancy level over its first five years of operation, we
performed a penetration analysis. This measure forecasts a hotel's performance relative to
its competitors. A hotel possessing competitive advantages should penetrate the market in
excess of 100 percent offair market share, while competitive disadvantages are reflected
in penetration rates ofless than 100 percent affair market share.
In 1998, the 250 room subject hotel will provide 0.14156 of the rooms available that year
(250/1,766). Ifit were exactly equal to the competitive set, it would capture 0.14156 of
the available demand, or 100 percent of its fair market share.
We anticipate that the subject property will have more in common with the sub-market of
Large Golf Resorts. In 1996, this sub-set of properties is likely to achieve an aggregate
occupancy of 72 percent compared to that of 55 percent for the Small Golf Resorts.
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations
IV-13
Because this subset offered only 55.9 percent of the room nights available, but capture
62.5 percent of the demand it received considerably more than its fair share. The exact
calculation is as follows.
62.5% x 356,800 total roam nights sold
55.9% x 356,800 total roam nights said
= 223,000
= 199,450
=
=
1.12%
The aggregate of these three hotels will likely penetrate the market at 112 percent of fair
market share in 1996, compared to 113 percent in 1995.
We will assume that in its initial year, the subject achieves a penetration rate and
occupancy that reflects the existing South Bay demand, but that the group meeting market
has not fully "discovered" the property. We are forecasting a penetration rate of 88
percent in year one, which yields an occupancy rate of 55 percent.
In the remainder of the years, we are forecasting penetration rates ranging ITom 105 to
106 percent. Individual penetration rates and the occupancies yielded by these estimates
are provided in the following table:
Market Subject Subject
Year Occupancy Occupancy Penetration
1998 62.0% 55% 88%
1999 65.0 68 105
2000 65.0 73 112
2001 65.0 75 112
2002 62.0 72 116
2003 64.0 73 115
2004 67.0 75 114
In a typical or average year, the subject property will likely achieve an occupancy of 74
percent, its more or less "stabilized" occupancy level.
Our group meeting planner and commercial demand interviews indicated that the demand
for the subject facility will be somewhat rate sensitive relative to that captured by the
Sheraton Torrey Pines or the Rancho Bernardo Inn, due mainly to image and a lack of
destination awareness.
We estimate that in a stabilized year, the average daily rate for the subject property will be
approximately $95.00 in today's dollars. This is approximately 16 percent lower than the
rate of $113 likely to be achieved by the combined Golf Resort Market in 1996, but still
above the rates achieved by the sub-market of Small Golf Resorts. It is slightly above the
average daily rates being achieved at the Mission Valley and non-watemont downtown
hotels mentioned in our commercial demand interviews; however, these hotels are
experiencing high levels of ADR growth at present.
Section IV - Supply and Demand for Lodging Accommodations
IV-14
In the initial two years, we expect that is will be necessary to discount the room rates to
generate trial usage. Our forecast of the average daily rate, by year, is presented in the
following table:
Year
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Projected Average Daily Rate for the Subject Property
ADR Inflation Inflated ADR Discount % Discount Amount
$95.00 0.0% $95.00
95.00 3.0 97.85
97.85 3.0 100.79
100.79 3.0 103.81
103.81 3.0 106.92
106.92 3.0 110.13
110.13 3.0 113.43
110%1
(5%1
($10.681
(5.19)
Effective ADR
$95.00
98.00
91.00
99.00
107.00
110.00
113.00
Section V
FACILITIES RECOMMENDA TIONS AND
STA TEMENTS OF ESTIMA TED ANNUAL
OPERATING RESULTS
Section V -Facilities Recommendations and Statements of Estimated Annual Operating Results V-1
FACILITIES RECOMMENDATION
In our interviews of meeting spanners, we queried them on such items as space
requirements, mandatory amenities, and desirable amenities.
FUNCTION SPACE
The most extreme example that one meeting planner could think of was a group with a
150 room block that required 22,500 square feet of function space that was completely
enclosed (excludes pre-function areas). This information was provided to support this
meeting planner's assertion that 20,000 to 25,000 square feet of space for a 250 room
hotel might be overkill. Of the remaining 11 meaningful responses the largest requirement
was for 19,000 square feet of space for a 140-room group room block. The average
requirement was for about 7,500 square feet for groups ranging in size from 30 to 210.
The subject hotel is forecast to have a mix of business similar to that of the Sheraton
Grande Torrey Pines, which has roughly 17,000 square feet of space for 392 rooms.
While the Director of Sales expressed a desire for more space, he also had 50 percent
more rooms to fill. We recommend that approximately 17,000 square feet of enclosed
meeting space be constructed, which will provide the hotel with a ratio of 68 square feet
per guest room.
In addition, meeting planners indicated a preference or requirement for a variety of
outdoor function areas. We recommend that there be at least 10,000 square feet of patios
and terraces for outdoor functions.
DINING FACILITIES
The meeting planners queried indicated a preference for a variety in restaurants both on-
and off-site Two restaurants in the hotel will be adequate to provide this variety and to
serve the needs of the local residential base which currently has no "white tablecloth"
options in Chula Vista. One should be a signature or special occasion restaurant of
approximately 75 seats, and the second a casual all-purpose restaurant of approximately
85 seats. Outdoor seating should be available adjacent to the casual restaurant.
A small 8 to 10 seat bar/waiting area should be provided with the signature restaurant.
We recommend that a large lobby bar be located in one corner of the lobby as in the
Loews Coronado.
A hotel of this size and market orientation does not warrant a pool bar. A waterproof
menu may be posted near a house phone so that the room service can provide poolside
food and beverage service.
RECREATIONAL AMENITIES
The hotel will require the flexibility to schedule tournament play on the adjacent golf
course. Tee-off times that have been blocked for hotel use, but not reserved in the name
Section V -Facilities Recommendations and Statements of Estimated Annual Operating Results V-2
of a specific party, should be released within a reasonable time to be determined jointly by
the hotel sales staff and the golf course operator.
The only meeting planner surveyed who indicated that a healthlbeauty spa was a
mandatory requirement was negative on Bonita as a destination. Health spa and "fitness
room" were mentioned by only two other meeting planners. We recommend that the
health/fitness facilities be limited to a 1,500 square foot exercise equipment room, massage
cubicles for each gender, the locker rooms, and the pro shop.
STATEMENTS OF ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING RESULTS
To aid in determining the economic feasibility of the subject property, we have prepared
five-year statements of estimated annual operating results. Since the estimated operating
results are based on estimates and assumptions that are subject to uncertainty and
variation, we do not represent them as results that will actually be achieved. As in all
studies of this type, the estimated results are abased on competent and efficient
management of the proposed facilities and presume no significant changes in the
competitive market.
Presented on the following page are the comparable statements upon which our
estimations are based. These properties are located in San Diego County and are of
relatively new construction. They were selected because of their similar chain affiliations,
quality levels and rooms revenue levels.
$
"3
'"
Q)
a::
C>
~
['!
Q)
c.
o
'",
Q)
:is
'"
m
c.
E
o
()
~
G
'"
g
5
~
E
.3
=
G
'"
g
5
~
E
g
~
""
G
'"
g
5
~
E
g
~
E
S 8
g ~
E 5
""...
E
g
~
G
'"
-'!
.~
""
c
~
E
~ g
g g
g ~
E
""'::
E
g
g
~
g
'"
-'!
.~
""
c
~
~
E
S 8
g ~
E
""'::
E
~
g
'"
-'!
.~
""
8
~
~~~~g~
~~""'~c:::i~
~
,
,
,
'"
~
g
...
'" ~
~~~~8S
~~~ c:>~
~
g
g
E
""
!i1
~.
~
~
~-
~
I
<:I '~
;--
;:::
,~-
~
r
~ ~
~~
~- ;~
~-
~
'"
~
~
~
~
.;
~
~
~:=~~
"":"":""';N
~
'"
g
~
g
...
'"
~~~~
co...,:c-.i......
~ ~
, .
:g~
o '8
;-
,
I
'"
g
g
E
""
~
~
~-
::>
:;;
5;E
~!~ ~-
~
>:3
~-
:=;
~-
~ 's:;
~~~;:1:;
CO~Nr-..:-
~
~
.
.
...
i
I
'" ".
~~~~~8
~Mc-.."",;"'g
~
~
g
E
""
88:1;;'"
""llorl, ('<J ~
...... <:> --,....-
~~~~
~('<J-
~~
,....- co-
~ =
......~
r
~
~
...:
:;;
~~~
o'o:-.<coi
~
~
~
.;
~
~
~
..;
~
~
_ <=> a- ....,
C1.~~_~_
.-,;
~ .... 'eg
~ ~-;;-
~
,
~
~-
F
i
~
,"
,~
I
'"
0::
~-
lQ
~-
~
'g:
~
~-
;;;
~-
~
V-3
~
q
~
~
;r
~ ~ !i!t
~ :I:
-,i""-
~ ;::8
t!
1
i
;g
~
~-
~
~
'"
1!;
~-
~
'"
~
N_
r
..
~
g;
~
~F::~
"";"';('<J
~ ~ ~
I
I
:g~
:[
~-~
~ I~-
~
..;
~
I
'"
~~S~
...,.: MI ...,.: ,~
=
~
~
::<:
s;
~-
~
~-
~
~
=
-0
g:
~
11;
~
\!.i
~-
N
~
~
~
;
;;.
~
!:1
~
~
~-
:b
~-
~
~ ~ :::J
~ ~ '"
~
Z G l'J- ~
~ ~ ""
\!< g ~ ~ ~
~ ~ = ~ ~
. ~ '" <>
'" .. '" '" ~ ~
. ~ ~ 8- ~ z ~ ~ "" -
E ~ ~ u:: ~ e " 15 u::
~ .!I ~ ~
t g Z t '" ~ g .. '"
8- -" g ~ 8 ~
~ ~ -.; ... <!: s E ~ . ~
C': \!< . .. '" ... '" - = ~
. ~ ~ . <> ~ <> .. ~ ,2 g u:: 5 '"
= ~ . ~ = i! z <> " ~ ~ ~ ~
~ g is g "" ~ t >= ~ g ~ 5 ~ ~ g ~ ~
g ~
~ ~ ~ E g as 5 ~ .. ~ ~ g '" " -= '"
li! z " g ~
~ . ~ g g :it = ~ j <> ~ ~ ~ g ~
~ = ~ ~ g ~ = ~ ~ <> ... '" .. . g " -= = "" f ~ u:: =
0 '" .,g '" '" ~
'" E .. ~ :;;; E .. 'E = '" ~ ~ ~
z :it 5 -.; -.; ~ ~ 11 ~ t;; 0 ~ g = 0 '" g -.;
-g ~ " J -!~ 'E ~ " <> ~ a "
1:: 0 ~ ~ 8 0 is is ~ g '" g '"
0 .2 -;; is ~ ~ ~ g g ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ 0: ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" z "" '" '" ... ~ '" -= '"
~ '" ~ '" u::
~~~
~-..- ~i
__~_1;'oI
- ~
~
~
~
....
;:!:
,.,.
"~_",,,o-I.....
. ~ N ~ ~
~
!
'"
~
~
0::
=
~-
:0
"'-
:;;
'" ~
:J: ~ :! j;; .~
~g;j~~:g;
I
i
~;;g:~
~-~-~-I~
~- ~
I
i
a
~-
;:It
~
~
~
;:!:
r
~~
N~
~
~;;:~
"";::8
r
,
I
;;. ~
!;;: ~ ~ M ':::
~;;;~~~
~
~
;<.-
~-
:;;
~ ~
= =
= ~
~-~-
~-
;!: ~'~
~ =
......-....,-
ti';I;
~-
~a~
;::...r"";
c
;:::
i:f
~-
~
,
~ .~
>:3:8
....:_-
~ =
~ ~
.,;
~
>:3_
~
:;;
~c....o;:g
....~~.....
5;;!- :f ~i f;f
...... "'...... I.I"t
~
...:
~
~:=_-_8058
.:;t .,..- c.....-r-.r
11;
~
g
'"
~8,;:!:8~g
O-:C"1c:Oo.n.,;
~
~
~
",-
~
'"
",-
:;;
~
~
~-
:;;,
:;;
E~=
co~ ~~
~ ~
. ~~
ii'i
~-
'"
~
:g
~-
~
~
~
.,
I::
~
U"'Io-~=g:;~~
~::-..-:I- :::- .-:=-
;;i -f
;;. 18':
~~~8~r::U"'I
0.:..-:1 ac:i c:i ~ ~:~
i
8':
=
..;
~
0::
~
;;E-
~
~
~
~-
iii_
:;;
;a$=~
~-~- ~-
~
~
c-
~
~
~
~
~
:;;
~ ~
~:;;
~
'#
=
~
~
'" 1'#
~ ~,!~
N ~
1';
~
:8
~
.,;
~
gf
~ ,'"
~-~
-I
'"
I::
~-
~
~:$~
.......U"'IB;.
8':
~
\!.i
;;. ;;.
~~~
~
~
~
",-
S1
N
~
v
~
~
~-
:;;
~ ~
!'1~
0-- ~-
~ =
- ~
~
Section V -FacIlities Recommendations and Statements of Estimated Annual Operating Results V-4
Our rationale for the indices used in formulating our projections is presented in the
following paragraphs.
Departmental revenues
Rooms revenues were forecast based on the data provided in the market analysis section.
Rather than to forecast the year-by-year market oscillations however, we have shown
years three through five at the stabilized year occupancy level of 74 percent. Year three of
the hotel's operation is almost five years from now (2000); thus the simplification of the
income stream projection is warranted.
The subject is located in an area that is underserved with regard to function space, and
lacks special occasion restaurants. Food and beverage sales were estimated after
expanding our analysis to include other hotels with similarly high ratios of function space
to guest rooms. We are forecasting banquet sales of approximately $175 per square foot
for the subject property, which equates to roundly $3,000,000. Restaurant, room service
and lounge sales were estimated at $1,500,000, or approximately $22.00 per occupied
room.
Telephone sales for the comparable hotels ranged from $2.06 to $3.60 per occupied room.
For the subject, we used an indicator of $2.75 per occupied room.
Other operated departments, such as business centers, health clubs, mini-bars and other
miscellaneous services had revenues ranging from $2.60 to $5.24 per occupied room. For
the subject property, we have estimated these revenues at $3.00 per occupied room.
Rentals and other income for the comparables ranged from nothing to $6.18 per occupied
room. For the subject property, with the limited retail space envisioned, we have
estimated rentals and other income of $1. 00 per occupied room.
Departmental Expenses
Rooms departmental expenses for the comparable hotels ranged from $17.47 to $22.13
per occupied room, and from 22.4 to 26.5 percent of departmental sales. For the subject
property, we selected an expense indicator of$21.00, or 23.2 percent of rooms sales.
Food and beverage expense ratios for the comparables ranged from 75.7 to 82.3 percent
of departmental sales. Because of the high ratio of relatively profitable banquet revenues,
we estimate a Food and Beverage expense ratio at the low end of the range, or 75 percent.
Telephone expenses ranged from 50.3 to 53.7 percent of departmental revenues. For the
subject, we selected an expense ratio of 52 percent.
Other Operated Departments expenses consumed between 73 and 94 percent of
departmental sales. For the subject, we estimated a departmental expense ratio of78
percent.
Section V -Facifities Recommendations and Statements of Estimated Annual Operating Results V-5
Undistributed Operating Expenses
Administrative and General Expenses for the comparables ranged from $3,369 to $4,579
per available room and ITom 9.3 to 11.9 percent of total sales. (The hotel with the highest
Administrative and General expense also had a significantly lower building and contents
expense, leading us to believe that a portion of the liability insurance expense is missing
ITom comparables A and B.) We will follow the classification of the majority of the
comparables and forecast an Administrative and General expense of $3,700 per room, or
8.1 percent of sales.
Management fees ranged ITom 3.0 percent to 4.0 percent of total sales. The amounts paid
are determined by contracts that may have been signed as many as seven years ago, in a
very different negotiating climate. Current terms for a hotel with the projected sales
volume would be 2.0 to 2.5 percent for the base fees, with incentive fees subordinated to
debt service and an owner's return. We selected 2.5 percent for our assumptions.
Two of the three hotels are operated by the company that provides the chain affiliation,
and have no separate ITanchise fees. The subject hotel is to be operated under a franchise
agreement with a national chain. Generic franchise fees for such arrangements average 7.0
percent of rooms sales, excluding reservations charges that are reflected in the rooms
department expense.
Marketing expenses for the comparables ranged from $2,239 to $3,119 per available
room, and ITom 5.8 to 8.1 percent of gross sales. The hotel with the relatively "low"
marketing expenditure is the property that reports a separate franchise fee. For the
subject, with its separate ITanchise fee, we have estimated a marketing expense of $2,500
per available room.
Property Operations and Maintenance Expenses at the relatively new comparables ranged
ITom $1,520 to $2,018 per available room. For the subject, we have estimated
maintenance expenses at $1,900 per available room.
Energy costs for the three comparables were surprisingly disparate, ranging ITom $1,434
to $2,177 per room. For the subject property, we estimated energy expense at $1,800 per
room.
Property taxes were estimated at $200,000 per year ($800 per room) based on the two
comparables whose property taxes clustered near $800 per room.
Insurance was estimated at $400 per available room, which is consistent with the
expenditures at the two comparables that appear to include liability or umbrella insurance
policies in the "Building and Contents" insurance line item, instead of the administrative
and general department. (These two hotels have relatively low administrative and general
expenditures. )
Section V -Facilities Recommendations and Statements of Estimated Annual Operating Results V-6
Statements of Estimated Annual Operating Results
Based on the foregoing analysis, we have estimated the annual operating results for ten
years of operation, beginning in 1998 and stated in inflated (future year) dollars. Inflation
was estimated at 3.0 percent per year.
Based on the indicators as described above, we have estimated a ratio of net operating
income, before a reserve, of approximately 24.8 percent in a "stabilized" year. The
equivalent income line of the comparables ranged ITom 16.9 to 25.4 percent.
The Statements of Estimated Annual Operating Results are presented on the following
page.
a
~ .
~ N
~
"
"
< ~
~ i
. .
g ~ ~
Bh
3 ~ ~
~ ~ ~
8 ~ ~ ~
> '" .
~ ~ ~ ~
Z ..
~ 0 ~
~ i'i
z
.0
~ ~
~
~
Z
o
o
"
.
~
~
~
<
N
::;:t:
g ~
N
a
g ~
N
m
g: ~
"
m
; ~
o
o
~
"
"
~
~
a
-
"
a
o
a
E
~
a
.
"
a
a
"
o
"
~
~
.
"
a
o
m
m
~
~
a
~
a
o
"
m
~
~
o
.
~
"
'"
~
8
"
~
~
"
~
~
,
~
~
.
~
~
~
e
u
o
~ 8
0"
~'
~ 8
0"
~'
~ Ii
0"
~'
g 8
0"
~'
~ 8
0"
~'
<:> N 0',) CO ~
N 0\ CD w N
U1 <!' coOl,..,
a"
~ N
~
~
~~~~~
~ ~
~
o
~
00000
00000
oocoo
0..., N N .-I
~ ::; ~ ~ <0
" .
~
N co 0 0 N
~ ~ ~ ~ ;;::
m a
N N
~
:::~~::~
. m 0
. ~
g
o
~
00000
ggggg
c:c......,,'-"""
N .-I .... ..., r-
... N N N
" .
~
0:;; \0;::: ~
'" N CD '" ,..,
m 0
~N
~
*~~""""
"'<.1'1"''''''''
'" '" .-I .-I 0
. ~
g
o
~
00000
ggggg
-
"''''0\'''''''
... \D 0 N r-
NON N
:;;.
N'" ... N N
:;; ::: ~ ~ :::;
. m
~"
~
~~~~f;;
... N .-1.-10
. .
~
~
00000
ggggg
m
.,. co <0 0 '"
.... t- .... N
o _
~
~g;~~
~ ;:;
~
~
~~~~~
'" "'.-1.-10
. .
~
~
ggggg
00000
.. "
r- 0 '" 0 M
\D 0... '" In
",,,,,,..,.-1
. -
~
~
"
"
"
~
"
~
~
"
i'i
~
.
o
~
C .
E 8
, c
. "'
~
. .,
rn o.
. ~
, '0"
. . 0
> "
. . '0
~ 'c
~ j & ~
~ , .
'0 ~ III .....
0....; ..c: c
o V .... Q)
.... ~ 0 Q:
~
H .
~ g
" "
~
o
~
o
a
a
"
N
m
"
~
~ ~ ~ ~
r-.... <!'r--
. .
"
~~~:!:
~ ~ :;:: ~
o
o
o
m
~
0000
0000
0000
,.., 0 If! '"
"'''''.-I''''
'" co .-I ....
"
~
N
m
.
'" N oJ N
1'-111......,
Li1 W "" r-
~
"
N
~
~
:!:~:!:~
N If) "'....
N r- I/) r-
o
o
"
a
g
~
~
0000
g g g g
...,.., N,..,
..,..... ....<0
It> '" ,..; .-I
~
"
"
N
m
N
::~\D;:::
,..,.......r-
~
. ~
"
~
o
a
~
""""""""
00 N .-I
N U'I N <r>
Nr--Ll1r-
g
o
gggg
\00\<n00
~ ~ ~::;
~
~
~
o
~
.
.
.
~a~E
~
~
o
o
a
"
~:::~~
Mill N....
N r- 111 <0
a
g
.
m
0000
g g g g
~:;: i;;;:'
.. "
"
"
"
~
~ ~ ~ ~
~
"
o
~
~
o
~::::!:~
~ ~ ~ ~
"
~
a
o
o
g g g g
0;> 0 0 0
o
N
N
,;
Li'I",,,,,,,,
....."'r-'"
N. "
" ~
.
"
c
.
E
,
.
~
.
o
!
"
.
"
&
.
"
C
.
E
"
,
.
~
. .
rn 0
.
" '0
. .
> "
. .
~ ,
. .
'gaB'
. .~
:E m a. 001
f-< ~ '0 Q) II!
~oga:'5
c.. II:: .... f-< 0
"
o
"
~
.
~
Z
"
.
"
"
~
~
.
"
o
'"
m
~
-
N
~
.
.
o
a
o
"
N
a
m
o
.
~
N
~
.
.
.
a
o
a
N
~
m
m
N
"
N
N
~
~
:
o
g
~
.
.;
N
~
"
N
~
N
"
.
a
g
m
"
~
.
a
o
o
~
~
~
.
g
a
~
m
.
.
.
.
C
.
~
"
"
~
C
W
"
,
.
~
.
o
~
.
"
o
~
-
m
a
a
~
\DI,P.,.",'"
.-I,.,<D\D.,.
.,...-1..,... .-I
~ . . - .
""............
~
.
::~t;;.':::;
~
a
a
a
"
N
.
00000
00000
00000
- -
.,. .,.\Dr-I'-
~ :;.: ~ ::; :;::
..;
.
m
N
co 0 0 <d' CO
cD cD 0 0 a>
... 0 0\... 0
-
m
N
.
N
~
o
.
~
~~t;;.'::~
. . .
g
a
00000
00000
00000
"
~
- - .-
NO"''''' '"
1"'......"'...
O.nr-1lI1lI
"
"
~
.
;gE~g
m
N
"""I""""""
~
~~~~~
~
~
m ._
o
g
"
.
"
,:
00000
00000
00000
....1' "''''
"" 0 0 '" 0
0"'1"-"''''
..;
~
a
0<:> <0 0 ""
"'''' 0 '" II>
'" r- r- 0 0\
"N "
.
N
:
'*'*'*'*'*
r- <0 "'.... M
N
.
1")"'''''''
~
o
a
a
ggggg
00000
00
"'''''1'''.-1<>:1
"'''''''''''''''
~
~ :: :: ~ ~
'P'" '" 0'\""
ri"".-I.-I
"
"
~
"
'*'*'*'*'*
<:> NO,.., <:>
a "
"
o
.
g
a
"
~
00000
ggggg
-
" 0
.-10\.,.0'\'"
0\ N \D .,. .,.
.
~
.
o
re
~
.
~
Z
""
. .
" ,
" .
C
~ ~
'"'0
~ .
W
. .
o > .
"' .
O"~
~ ~ IV m
5... If! I:
III III..........
..........c.l.l
~ .~ ~ .:!
~ .a ~ ~
~ '" /J,,::E
~
~
.
o
~
N
.
U
C
.
C
.
"
c
i
'0
C
.
C
~
"
.
,
.
~
o
>.
~ ~
~,
o .
" C
. "
N
.
~
~
"
~
.
~
a
a
a
m
~
a
~
~
"
~
.
N
g
o
~
~
~
o
"
~
"
~
.
N
a
g
~
N
a
o
.
~
~
N
"
N
a
g
g
"
~
"
"
~
a
~
o
g
"
~
N
.
.
.
C
.
~
,
"
rn
c
~
"
.
,
.
~
o
'0
.
"
~
,
"
.:':
'0
C
o
~
.
"
~
N
~
"
o a ~
. m "
~ m _
o
"
:
~
N
t;::;~
a
a
a
a a a
a a 0
a 0 a
~
a
.;
m
;:!; :::
-
N
"
~
"
om_
" . ~
~ ~ .
..;
:
m
N
t;::;.
N " a
g
a
g g g
a a a
"
~
m
m 0
N ~ "
~ N "
o
m
~
~
"
:; ~ ~
N m .
..;
~
o
~::;~
N
a
~
a
g
m
.
m
000
ggg
" ~
NN"
~N"
~
o
"
"
~:~
"m.
~
~~:;
.
N
N " "
a
g
o
a
m
N
a a a
ggg
~ " m
m N 0
N N "
~
.;
~ ~ ~
~
N
~~-:;
~
g
o
g g g
000
" .
~ "a
N N "
:
-
~
"
o
~
u
o
"
~
.
.
"
o
.
.
.
"
~
i'i
.
!::! ::
.
~
~1U!~
. . 0
o C >( III
to:! fIj II:! C
;:; X t-< H
.
N
N
"
m
N
~
a
o
o
~
a
"
m
N
"
N
~
.
g
a
~
o
N
~
N
~
N
o
a
a
~
.
o
o
.
N
~
~
.
a
g
~
o
.
g
N
~
a
o
g
a
~
~
.
.
rn
,
.
~
U
'0
.
!i
.
"
.
"
~
o
N
~
~
"
~
~
~
a
o
a
a
:;;
.
m
m
N
;;:
~
.
N
g
a
m
.
N
~
~
.
.
"
N
"
~
:
~
N
a
g
.
m
"
~
~
~
"
m
~
~
"
a
N
a
g
~
N
N
~
N
~
~
~
~
N
a
"
a
a
o
~
.
~
~
'"
~
"
o
~
u
o
w
~
.
~
"
"
o
.
"
.
"
~
H
m
~
"
~
a
a
a
~
m
o
"
N
~
o
.
a
a
a
"
N
.
~
~
a
o
a
.
m
~
N
"
m
~
a
N
~
m
N
N
a
~
~
a
N
a
a
o
.
m
"
~
"
Z
"
~
.
"
"
.
~
"
>
"
W
~
"
"
N
~
"
"
"
~
*
o
o
N
o
a
a
m
m
"
N
~
m
m
m
a
;;:
~
o
N
a
g
N
N
"
N
~
.
a
N
"
"
~
~
m
"
N
g
a
8
m
N
~
~
N
m
~
~
"
m
"
a
a
a
~
o
a
~
N
~
;;
~
N
a
g
~
:;;
.
"
~
.
.
~
.
.
>
"
"
~
. ~
i ~
<
"
" "
~ i'i
u 0
~
V-7
,
.
"
,
:: ~
. u
5 .~
u
c ~
"' C
.
,
U! 0 6
Q.I C -.-I
o 0 "
C.ri n:I
. " N
> "'....
. N "
..... ..
'0 t: ~
. ~ .
~ OJ d
..-1 . 0
" C ~
. 0 "
011.... 1\1
"~
. . U
", .
" U ,
C . ~
. , .
E ~'O
" .
''0 _
. "
~ - .
. . .
'0 . ,
C .
. . "
:5 ~~
.
C
o " "
. C
'0..
. , E
. . .
. " u
.a.5~
0.
.
,
,
~
.
"' .
'0
.~ .::
" u
. c
, ",
~ ~ ~
C C .
. .
~.g ~
.
. .
" . ,
. rn 0
" , ~
C . .
~'5.a
~ ~ g
~ , U
. ~ C
'0. H
~
U N ~
.
"
::!
.
.
"
~
Section V -Facilities Recommendations and Statements of Estimated Annual Operating Results V-8
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF FINANCIAL BENEFIT TO THE CITY
We have been asked to estimate the potential financial benefit of the proposed project to
the City ofChula Vista. Our projections in the Phase I portion of the study will deal with
the direct benefit to the city, and will not take into account any of the multiplier effect that
new tourism dollars can bring.
Without knowing the lease terms or sales price, it is not possible to estimate the financial
benefit of the land transaction.
The demand interviews with employers in the South Bay indicated that the vast majority
of the hotel's local support will come rrom guests who are presently ovemighting in the
Mission Valley or Downtown areas of the City of San Diego and not at any of the
economy lodging facilities in the City of Chula Vista. The group business will be induced
to the area and is not currently generating any transient occupancy tax revenues. We
estimate that 95 percent of the hotel's room revenues will generate new transient
occupancy tax receipts for the City of Chula Vista. In a typical year, and assuming the
current 10.0 percent tax rate, this equates to $640,000 (250 x 365 - 74% x $95 x 10%.)
The City ofChula Vista currently lacks high quality meeting and banquet facilities. We
estimate that 80 percent of the $3,000,000 in banquet sales forecast, or $2,400,000, will
generate new tax revenues for the City. Further, that 60 percent of the $1,500,000 in
restaurant, room service and lounge revenues, or $900,000 will bring "new" dollars to the
City's coffers. At a 1.0 percent City tax rate, this equates to $33,000 in tax revenues
($3,300,000 x 1%.)
The City will also benefit rrom the employment that this facility creates. Hotel companies
have cut back or automated to reduce payrolls. Full-service hotels now typically generate
81 equivalent full-time positions for every 100 rooms, compared to the 1 for 1 ratio that
was common in the 1980's. For the subject hotel, this would mean 202.5 positions
(250/1 00 x 81). This must be netted out against the existing restaurant and banquet
operation's full-time equivalent employment, which we estimate at roundly 22 persons.
Thus, the subject hotel will create approximately 180 new jobs for the community.
ADDENDA
Addendum A
STA TEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
This report is made with the following assumptions and limiting conditions:
Economic and Social Trends - The consultant assumes no responsibility for economic, physical or demographic factors
which may affect or alter the opinions in this report if said economic, physical or demographic factors were not present as of the
date of the letter of transmittal accompanying this report. The consultant is not obligated to predict future political. economic
or social trends.
Information Furnished bv Others - In preparing this report, the consultant was required to rely on infonnation
furnished by other individuals or found in previously existing records and/or documents. Unless otherwise indicated. such
infonnation is presumed to be reliable. However, no warranty, either express or implied, is given by the consultant for the
accuracy of such information and the consultant assumes no responsibility for infonnation relied upon later fmmd to have been
inaccurate. The consultant reserves the right to make such adjustments to the analyses, opinions and conclusions set forth in
this report as may be required by consideration of additional data or more reliable data that may become available.
Hidden Conditions - The consultant assumes no responsibility for hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil,
ground water or structures that render the subject property more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for arranging
for engineering, geologic or environmental studies that may be required to discover such hidden or unapparent conditions.
Hazardous Materials - The consultant has not been provided any infonnation regarding the presence of any material or
substance on or in any portion of the subject property or improvements thereon, which material or substance possesses or may
possess toxic, hazardous and/or other hannful and/or dangerous characteristics. Unless otherwise stated in the report, the
consultant did not become aware of the presence of any such material or substance during the consultant's inspection of the
subject property. However, the consultant is not qualified to investigate or test for the presence of such materials or
substances. The presence of such materials or substances may adversely affect the value of the subject property The value
estimated in this report is predicated on the assumption that no such material or substance is present on or in the subject
property or in such proximity thereto that it would cause a loss in value. The consultant assumes no responsibility for the
presence of any such substance or material on or in the subject property, nor for any expertise or engineering knowledge
required to discover the presence of such substance or material. Unless otherwise stated, this report assumes the subject
property is in compliance with all federal, state and local environmental laws, regulations and rules.
Zonin!! and Land Use - Unless otherwise stated, the projections were fonnulated assuming the hotel to be in full
compliance with all applicable zoning and land use regulations and restrictions.
Licenses and Permits - Unless otherwise stated, the property is assumed to have all required licenses, permits,
certificates, consents or other legislative and/or administrative authority ITom any local, state or national government or private
entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this report
is based.
Eni!ineerini! Survey - No engineering survey has been made by the consultant. Except as specifically stated, data relative
to size and area of the subject property was taken from sources considered reliable and no encroachment of the subject property
is considered to exist.
Subsurface Rii!hts - No opinion is expressed as to the value of subsurface oil, gas or mineral rights or whether the
property is subject to surface entry for the exploration or removal of such materials, except as is expressly stated.
MaDs. Plats and Exhibits - Maps, plats and exhibits included in this report are for illustration only to serve as an aid in
visualizing matters discussed within the report. They should not be considered as surveys or relied upon for any other purpose,
nor should they be removed from, reproduced or used apart from the report.
Lei!al Matters - No opinion is intended to be expressed for matters which require legal expertise or specialized
investigation or knowledge beyond that customarily employed by real estate consultants.
Rie:ht of Publication - Possession of this report, or a copy of it, does not carry with it the right of publication. Without the
'Mitten consent of the consultant, this report may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the party to whom it is
STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
(Continued)
addressed. In any event, this report may be used only with proper written qualification and only in its entirety for its stated
purpose.
Testimonv in Court - Testimony or attendance in court or at any other hearing is not required by reason of rendering this
report. unless such arrangements are made a reasonable time in advance of said hearing. Further, unless otherwise indicated,
separate arrangements shall be made concerning compensation for the consultant's time to prepare for and attend any such
hearing.
Archeolol!ical Si!mificance - No investigation has been made by the consultant and no information has been provided to
the consultant regarding potential archeological significance of the subject property or any portion thereof This report assumes
no portion of the subject property has archeological significance.
Comoliance with the American Disabilities Act - The Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") became effective
January 26, 1992. We assumed that the property will be in direct compliance with the various detailed requirements of the
ADA.
Definitions and Assumotions - The definitions and assumptions upon which our analyses, opinions and conclusions are
based are set forth in appropriate sections of this report and are to be part of these general assumptions as if included here in
their entirety.
Dissemination of Material - Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report shall be disseminated to the general
public through advertising or sales media, public relations media, news media or other public means of communication without
the prior \\Titlen consent and approval of the consultant(s).
Distribution and Liability to Third Parties - The party for whom this report was prepared may distribute copies of
this report only in its entirety to such third parties as may be selected by the party for whom this report was prepared; however,
portions of this report shall not be given to third parties without our \\Titten consent. Liability to third parties will not be
accepted.
Use in Offerine Materials - This report, including all cash flow forecasts, market surveys and related data, conclusions,
exhibits and supporting documentation, may not be reproduced or references made to the report or to PKF Consulting in any
sale offering, prospectus, public or private placement memorandum, proxl' statement or other document ("Offering Material")
in connection with a merger, liquidation or other corporate transaction unless PKF Consulting has approved in writing the text
of any such reference or reproduction prior to the distribution and filing thereof.
Limits to Liabilitv - PKF Consulting caMot be held liable in any cause of action resulting in litigation for any dollar
amount which exceeds the total fees collected from this individual engagement.
Le2al Exoenses - Any legal expenses incurred in defending or representing ourselves concerning this assignment will be
the responsibility of the client.
Addendum B
CERTIFICATION OF THE CONSULTANT
CERTIFICA nON OF THE CONSULTANT
I, Karen Johnson, MAl, certifY that, to the best of my knowledge and belief::
The statements offact contained in this report are true and correct.
The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported
assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, unbiased professional analyses,
opinions, and conclusions.
I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report,
and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved.
My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined result that
favors the cause of the client, the estimates, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the
occurrence of a subsequent event.
My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been
prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
Karen Johnson made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject ofthis report
on July 5 and August 19, 1996.
No one other than the undersigned provided professional assistance to the person signing
this report.
This consulting engagement was not based on requested results, specific results or the
approval of a loan.
The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been
prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and the
Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice ofthe Appraisal Institute.
The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to
review by its duly authorized representatives.
Karen Johnson is a certified General Real Estate Appraiser in the State of California. My
certification expires on July 28, 1997.
h~~
Karen Johnson,
Vice President
California Certificate #153-00748
-----.
Addendum C
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES
Proposed Resort, near San Diego, California
We are analyzing the feasibility of developing a ZSD-room, group oriented, first-class resort directly
on a golf course in Southeastern San Diego County. The setting is in a suburb of good quality homes
with mature landscaping. The airport is 20 minutes away. On-site, the hotel will have: 20,000 to
25,000 square feet ofmeeting space, a sexy pool area, guaranteed tee-otrtirnes and tennis.
Horseback riding will be five minutes away
What amenities are mondatory fur your groups?
What other amenities are desirable, but not mandatory?
What other hotels and resorts have you used recently?
What range of rates do your groups typically pay?
Group A Group C
Group B Group D
Would the suburb ofBonita be an appealing destination for your groups?
Would the suburb ofChula VISta be an appealing destination for your groups?
What room block and meeting space requirements do your 20 to 200 person groups have?
Group No.
Example
A
B
C
D
Room block
200
Ballroom size
(S.F.)
6,000
Jr. Ballroom
size (S.F.)
3,000
# Breakouts
4
Breakout
Size (S.F.)
2,000
# Golfers in
Tournament
40
Please fax back to: Karen Johnson (213) 623-8240
Facsimile Transmission
Date:
26 July, 1996
To:
Christina Braunstein
Facsimile:
(619) 661-7390
(213) 680-0900
(213) 623-8240
From:
Karen Johnson
PKF Consulting, Los Angeles
Telephone:
Facsimile:
Total Number Pages: I (including cover page)
We are perfonning a feasibility study for the City of Chula Vista for a proposed
resort hotel to be located on the municipal golf course in the Bonita neighborhood.
As part of this study, we are surveying area businesses to see if the visitors to their
offices would be interested in a HiItonIMiuriott quality hotel that would be close to
your offices.
We would appreciate if you could take a few minutes to think about the kinds of
visitors you have, and their lodging needs or preferences. Any input you have as
to: number of visitors; where your visiting employees and clients are staying;
where your vendors are staying; and whether they would prefer to be closer would
be greatly appreciated. To organize the responses, we have put together a short
form:
Type of
visitor
Estimated No.
per Quarter
Average # nights
in stay
Hotels used
/recommended
Range of
rates
executives
mid-level mngrs
meeting/training
clients
vendors
Do you believe that any of these visitors would use a good quality resort hotel in
Bonita? If so, which ones?
We will be calling to talk with you during the next few days. Or if you prefer, you
could fax this back to (213) 623-8240.
, .
Member, Pannell Kerr Forster International
P{f'
CONSULTING
811 Wilshire Boulevard
Suite 800
Los Angeles CA 90017
Tetephone (213) 680-0900
Telefax (213) 623-8240