HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1993/12/14
Tuesday, December 14, 1993
6:00 p.m.
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
Regular Meeting of the City of Chula Vista City Council
CALL TO ORDER
1.
ROll. CAIJ.:
Councilmembers Fox _, Horton _, Moore _, Rindone -' and Mayor
Nader _
2. PLEDGE OF AllEGIANCE TO TIlE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER
3.
APPROVAL OF MINlITES:
December 6, 1993 (Special Meeting of the City Council), and
December 8, 1993 (Special Meeting of the City Council).
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF TIlE DAY:
a. Proclamation commending Chula Vista Center wSpirit of Giving- Program - The proclamation
will be presented by Mayor Nader.
b. Proclamation commending MADD/SADD FOR THEIR EFFORTS OF INCREASING PUBliC
AWARENESS ON TIlE DANGERS OF DRINKING AND DRIVING IN TIlE CITY - The
proclamation will be presented by Mayor Nader to John and Silvia Barajas, representatives
of the MADD Organization.
c. Video Presentation: Oregon State Police - DUl Special Offer
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 20)
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 CounciImember, 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 wRequest to
Speak Formw 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. WRITfEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter suggesting the City improve the street appeal of Candy Cane Lane and Christmas Tree
Circle by designing and purchasing modified street signs and directional and entry signs
installed for the two weeks of holiday decorations to help the thousands of visitors
traditionally visiting the area - Gregory R. Cox, 647 Windsor Circle, Chula Vista, CA 91910.
It is recommended that Mr. Cox's letter be acknowledged and that he be notified of staffs
efforts to assist visitors to the community during the holiday season.
b. Letter requesting the City consent to the detachment of Assessor Parcel Number 562-323-01
and an adjacent approved vacated half-width right-of-way (Fifth Avenue) and inform the
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) - W.S. Cowling II, President, Dixieline
Lumber, P.O. Box 85307, San Diego, CA 92186-5307. Staff recommends that this item be
referred to Community Development and Planning staff for incorporation into the ongoing
negotiations between the City of Chula Vista and the City of National City.
Agenda
-2-
December 14, 1993
6.A. ORDINANCE 2579 ADOPTING ANINfERlM PRE-SR-l25 DEVELOPMENfIMPACfFEE (second
readin~) - On 1119/93, Council held a public hearing to amend the Eastern
Area Development Impact Fee for Streets (Trans-DIF) and establishment of
an interim pre-SR-125 Development Impact Fee. Following the hearing,
Council approved both items with the condition that new fees or revised
fees not be collected until 111195. Staff recommends Council place the
ordinances on second reading and adoption. (Director of Public Works)
B. ORDINANCE 2580 AMENDING ORDINANCE 2251 RELATING TO A TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENf IMPACf FEE TO PAY FOR TRANSPORTATION FACIIlTIES
IN TI-IE CITY'S EASTERN AREA (second readin~)
7. ORDINANCE 2583 AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2577, REZONING TI-IE 5.8 ACRE
PARCEL LOCATED AT TI-IE SOlTniWEST CORNER OF TI-llRD AVENUE
AND -yo STREET FROM CoO, OFFICE COMMERCIAL AND R-1, SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO C-C-P, CENfRAL COMMERCIAL, PRECISE PLAN,
TO AMEND CERTAIN PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS TI-IEREOF (first
readin~) - Council set a public hearing date for 12/7/93, to reconsider the
General Plan and Rezoning application of American Stores, Inc. for 5.8
acres located at the comer of Third and "J" Street. After conducting the
necessary hearing, Council voted to let their previous action approving the
General Plan and rezoning stand as approved by their vote on 1112/93,
and moved to amend the Precise Plan standards in accordance with the
ordinance. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on first reading.
(Director of Planning)
8. RESOLlfIlON 17330 ACCEPTING FEDERAL LIBRARY SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION ACf
GRANT FUNDS FOR TI-IE CONTINUATION OF SPECIFIC LIBRARY
REFERENCE RESOURCES, APPROPRIATING FUNDS AND AMENDING TI-IE
FISCAL YEAR 1993/94 BUDGET - For the fourth consecutive year the
California State Library has approved the Chula Vista Public Library's
application for Major Urban Resource Library (MURL) funds. The Fiscal
Year 1993/94 grant amount is $11,615. The funds will purchase Business
Collection, a microfilm product of nearly 400 business journals and
enhance the career and job seeking materials collection. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Library Director) 4/5th's vote required.
9. RESOLlfIlON 17331 ACCEPTING FEDERAL LIBRARY SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION ACf
(LSCA) FUNDS FOR TI-IE PURCHASE OF BOOKS AND MATERIALS TO
SERVICE SPANISH-SPEAKING IMMIGRANTS, APPROPRIATING FUNDS
AND AMENDING TI-IE FISCAL YEAR 1993/94 BUDGET - The State
Librarian has made available Federal Library Services and Construction Act
(LSCA) funds to develop a program to improve service to immigrant
populations. This is the second year the Castle Park Library has been
awarded grant funds which will be used to purchase approximately 700
books and other materials to serve Spanish speaking immigrants. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Library Director) 4/5th's vote
required.
Agenda
-3-
December 14, 1993
lOA RESOLlJI10N 17308 RECERTIFYING TI-IE FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENfAL IMPACf
REPORT (FPER 90-01) FOR TI-IE OTAY RANCH PROJECf; AMENDING
TI-IE GENERAL PLAN OF TI-IE CIlY FOR TI-IE 161 ACRE EASTLAKE LAND
SWAP; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACf PURSUANT TO TI-IE
CAIlFORNIA ENVIRONMENfAL QUALIlY ACf; READOPTING A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; READOPTING
A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS - The applicant is
proposing to amend the General Plan as part of the Otay Ranch Project for
161 acres located south and west of EastLake Greens from Low-Medium
Residential Medium Residential, and Public/Quasi-Public to Low-Medium
Residential, Medium-High Residential, High Residential, Professional and
Administrative, and Retail Commercial designations. In addition, the
applicant is also proposing as a separate but companion request, an
amendment of 74 acres within the existing EastLake Greens community
from Low-Medium Residential and Public/Quasi-Public designations. Staff
recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Planning) Continued
from the 12/7/93 meeting.
B. RESOLlJI10N 17309 AMENDING TI-IE GENERAL PLAN FOR 74 ACRES LOCATED WITI-lIN TI-IE
EASTLAKE GREENS COMMUNIlY, SOUTI-I OF EASTLAKE HIGH SCHOOL
AND ON BOTH SIDES OF TI-IE EXTENSION OF EASTLAKE PARKWAY
11. RESOLlJI10N 17332 APPROVING A BOUNDARY LOT ADJUSTMENT AT 1700 HORSESHOE
COURT IN TI-IE BONITA LONG CANYON DEVELOPMENf; AND
AUTI-lORIZING TI-IE MAYOR TO EXECUTE GRANT DEEDS - Westar Land
Services, Inc. has requested a boundary lot adjustment at 1700 Horseshoe
Court for the purpose of correcting an illegal encroachment on City-
dedicated open space land (Open Space District Number 14). The intent
of the report is to consider possible options to resolve the encroachment.
Staff recommends Council: (1) Approve staff recommended Option
Number 2, whereby an illegal encroachment on open space land will be
removed by exchanging for an equal amount of property by the property
owner; and (2) Approve the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation
and Director of Public Works)
12. RESOLlJI10N 17333 AUTI-lORIZING TI-IE INSTAIl.ATION OF TEMPORARY OVERHEAD
FACIUTIES WITI-lIN lJI1UlY UNDERGROUNDING DISTRICf NUMBER
124, OTAYVALLEYROAD BE1WEEN OLEANDER AND NIRVANAAVENUES
On 6/30/92, Council approved establishing Utility Undergrounding District
Number 124 on Otay Valley Road from Oleander Avenue to Nirvana
Avenue. The resolution grants special permission to the developers of the
Auto Park to install overhead electrical facilities within the boundaries of
said district. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of
Public Works)
13. RESOLlJI10N 17334 AMENDING SCHEDULE II, SECTION 10.52.030 OF TI-IE MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO TI-IE SPECIAL STOPS REQUIRED - THROUGH STREETS
AND STOP INTERSECTIONS - CALLE SANTIAGO - In response to concerns
from area residents regarding the recent accident history, and in
anticipation of the future connection of Calle Santiago through to Paseo
Ranchero, on 10/27/92, a Trial Traffic Regulation was initiated
establishing stop signs at various locations. Staff recommends approval of
the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
Agenda
-4-
December 14, 1993
14. RESOLlTTION 17335 AMENDING SCHEDULE II, SECTION 10.52.030 OF TI-IE MUNlOPAL CODE
RElATING TO TI-IE SPEaAI. STOPS REQUIRED - THROUGH STREETS
AND STOP INTERSECTIONS - 600 BLOCK OF SIERRA WAY - In response
to concerns from area residents regarding the recent accident history, and
the recent reconstruction of Sierra Way which removed all of the cross
gutters along Sierra Way, on 12/15/92, a Trial Traffic Regulation was
initiated establishing stop signs at various locations. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
15. RESOLlTTION 17336 AMENDING SCHEDULE III, SECTION 10.52.280 OF TI-IE MUNlOPAL CODE
RElATING TO PARKING PROHIBITED AT ALL TIMES ON CERTAIN
STREETS - "E- STREET FROM FIRST AVENUE TO EAST FLOWER STREET -
On 9/8/92, a Trial Traffic Regulation to establish the prohibition of
parking on "E" Street from First Avenue to Bonita Road/East Flower Street
was implemented pursuant to the provisions of Section 10.12.030 of the
Municipal Code. Signs indicating the restriction were installed on 2/5/93.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
16. RESOLlTTION 17337 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR TI-lECONSTRUCTION
OF STORM DRAIN CHANNEL REPAIRS IN TELEGRAPH CANYON
CHANNEL FROM PASEO DEL REV TO APPROXIMATELY 350 FEET
EASTERLY IN TI-IE 01Y - On 12/1/93, sealed bids were received for the
storm drain channel repair in Telegraph Canyon Channel from Paseo del
Rey to approximately 350 feet easterly in the City. The work to be done
involves the removal and replacement of approximately 6,300 square feet
of reinforced concrete channel that was cracked, buckled, and uplifted
during past winters. Staff recommends Council approve the resolution
accepting bids and awarding contract to Marquez Construction, Inc. in the
amount of $45,960. (Director of Public Works)
17. RESOLlTTION 17338 APPROPRIATING $16,548 FROM TI-IE FEDERAL DISASTER. ASSISTANCE
FUND (FUND 601), AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF $441 FROM TI-IE
GENERAL FUND, ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR
TI-IE GRADING RESTORATION AND SILT REMOVAL OF BONITA LONG
CANYON DAM IN TI-IE 01Y - On 12/6/93, sealed bids were received for
the construction of "Grading Restoration and Silt Removal of Bonita Long
Canyon Dam." The work to be done consists of silt removal, grading,
cleaning, grubbing, protection and restoration of existing improvements
upstream of the Bonita Long Canyon Dam. The work is mandated by the
State Division of Mines and Dams (Department of Water Resources) to
protect the integrity of the dam. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution and awarding contract to Fill Dirt, Inc. DBA Roberts
Earthmoving. (Director of Public Works) 4/5th's vote required.
18. REPORT RATIFYING AN APPUCATION FOR FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION, UBRARYSERVICESAND CONSTRUCTION ACT, LSCA, TITI.E
VI, UBRARY UTERACY PROGRAM GRANT FUNDS TO DEVELOP AND
IMPLEMENT A MODEL PROGRAM TO AID ADULT LEARNERS WITH
DYSLEXIA - The Chula Vista Literacy Team has applied for $34,720 in
grant funds from the LSCA, Title VI, Library Literacy Program to develop
and implement a model program to deal with the identification and
remediation of adult learners with dyslexia, during Federal Fiscal Year
1994/95. If awarded, the funds cannot be used to supplant the current
volunteer tutor reading program. Staff recommends Council accept the
report and ratify the application for Title VI, Library Literacy grant funds.
(Library Director)
Agenda
-5-
December 14, 1993
19.
REPORT
RATIFYING AN APPIJCATION FOR FEDERAL DEPARTMENf OF
EDUCATION, IJBRARYSERVICES AND CONSTRUcnON ACT, LSCA, TITLE
VI, IJBRARY IJTERACY PROGRAM GRANT FUNDS TO CONTINUE A
MODEL WRITING PROGRAM FOR ADULT LEARNERS IN FISCAL YEAR
1994/95 - The Chula Vista Literacy Team has applied for $34,986 in grant
funds under the LSCA, Title VI, Library Literacy Program to continue its
Model Writing Program for adult learners in Federal Fiscal Year 1994/95.
If awarded, the funds cannot be used to supplant the current volunteer
tutor reading program. Staff recommends Council accept the report and
ratify the application for Title VI, Library Literacy grant funds. (Library
Director)
20.
REPORT
REQUEST TO CONDUCT MOTORCYCLE EVENT - The Chief Executive
Officer of South Coast Harley Davidson is requesting permission to conduct
a special event, The 1993 Tijuana Toy Run, on Sunday, 12/19/93. The
event will involve temporary street closures on Glover, Garrett, and Landis
Avenues, and on "D" and "E" Streets. Street closures will vary in length
from several minutes to approximately three hours. Staff recommends
Council accept the report and approve the request subject to staff
conditions. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBIJC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as pub/U; hearings as required by law. [{you wish to speak
to any item, please fill out the RRequest to Speak FormR available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior
to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form
to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per individual
21.
PUBIJC HEARING
TO CONSIDER ABATEMENf OF TIIE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX - In
1990 Council established a maximum Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) rate
of ten percent and provided for annual abatement hearings at which time
the maximum tax could be lowered. In each subsequent year, Council has
abated the TOT rate to eight percent, the same rate it has been since 1978.
The purpose of the hearing is to hold the annual abatement hearing to
consider maintaining the TOT rate at eight percent. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Director of Finance)
RESOLUTION 17339 APPROVING ABATEMENf OF TIIE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX FROM
A RATE OF TEN PERCENT TO ElGHf PERCENT FOR CALENDAR YEAR
1994
22.
PUBIJC HEARING
COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABIIJ1Y STRATEGY (CHAS) - The
National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 requires all jurisdictions applying
for funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to
submit a CHAS. The CHAS is a planning document which identifies the
City's housing needs and outlines a strategy to meet the needs. Staff
recommends Council accept the report. (Director of Community
Development) Continued from the meeting of 10/19/93.
RESOLUTION 17340 ADOPTING TIIE 1994-1999 COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABIIJ1Y
STRATEGY (CHAS) AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTING THE
COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABIIJ1Y STRATEGY TO TIIE U.S.
DEPARTMENf OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Agenda
23.
PUBliC HEARING
-6-
December 14, 1993
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-94-09; APPEAL FROM TIIE DECISION
OF TIIE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A REQUEST BY
CONVENANT CHRISTIAN SCHOOL TO OPERATE A PRIVATE SCHOOL FOR
GRADES K-12 AT 2400 FENTON SlREET, IN TIIE EASTLAKE BUSINESS
CENTER - BONITA COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL - On 10/27/93, the Planning
Commission voted 5~2 to approve Conditional Use Permit PCC-94-09 and
allow the operation of a private day school (Covenant Christian School),
at 2400 Fenton Street for a period of five years. On 11/11/93, Bonita
Country Day School appealed the Planning Commission's decision. On
1217/93, Council considered the item, took public testimony, and
continued the matter for one week to allow Convenant Christian additional
time to attempt to: (1) resolve the concerns of Bonita Country Day School
regarding shared use of the facility; and (2) secure the use of Scobee Park
for a period of five years rather than the present agreement calling for two
years of use. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of
Planning) Continued from the meeting of 12/7/93.
RESOLUTION 17325 DENYING TIIE APPEAL OF TIIE DECISION OF TIIE PLANNING
COMMISSION AND ISSUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-04-09 TO USE
2400 FENTON IN TIIE EASTLAKE BUSINESS CENTER AS A PRIVATE
SCHOOL FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS
24.
PUBliC HEARING
ORDINANCE 2584
PCA-93-01 CONSIDERATION AND ADDITIONS TO AND AMENDMENTS OF
PORTIONS OF TITLE 19 OF TIIE MUNICIPAL CODE TO AlJ...OW
AUCTIONS SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF A CUP IN TIIE I-P (GENERAL
INDUSTRIAI.,/PRECISE PLAN) ZONE - The project is a City-initiated text
amendment to portions of the zoning ordinance to allow auctioning of
vehicles, heavy machinery, and equipment upon issuance of a Conditional
Use Permit. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on first
reading. (Director of Planning)
AMENDING TITLE 19 OF TIIE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD SECTION
19.04.050 AND 19.58.050 AND AMENDING SECTIONS 19.46.040,
19.58.070 AND 19.62.050 IN ORDER TO AlJ...OW AUCTIONS SUBJECT TO
APPROVAL OF TIIE CUP IN TIIE I-P (GENERAL INDUSTR.IAI.IPRECISE
PLAN) ZONE (first readin~)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject matter within the Council's
jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda. (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 whU:h have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
None submitted.
Agenda
-7-
December 14, 1993
ACI10N 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 stoff
recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those woo 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.
25. RESOLUTION 17319 AUlHORIZING ISSUANCE OF BONDS IN TI-IE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL
AMOUNf OF NOT TO EXCEED $18,000,000 TO REFINANCE TI-IE
OlITSTANDING OBUGATIONS OF TI-IE CIlYTO TI-IE CAUFORNIAPUBUC
EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM - Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Administration) Continued from the meeting of 11/23/93.
26. RESOLUTION 17341 MODIFICATION TO FIRST IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT FOR RANCHO
DEL REY COMMERCIAL CENTER ON EAST "H" STREET - The purpose of
this item is to clarify certain provisions of the agreement for Rancho del
Rey as to the phasing of public improvements on East "H" Street. Staff
recommends approving the first implementation agreement to allow for
revised phasing of the public improvements on East "H" Street. (Deputy
City Manager Krempl)
27. RESOLUTION 17342 SELECI1NG TI-IE CASTLE PARK ~- AREA AS TI-IE NEXT TARGET
NEIGHBORHOOD FOR TI-IE IMPLEMENTATION OF TI-IE NEIGHBORHOOD
REVITAUZATION PROGRAM AND REVISING TI-IE NEIGHBORHOOD
REVITAUZATION PROGRAM POUCY STATEMENT REDUCING TI-IE
DURATION OF TI-IE IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD FROM FIVE YEARS TO
THREE YEARS - On 11/2/93, Council approved a report outlining the
process for the selection of the next target neighborhood for the
implementation of the Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP). Part
of the selection process approved by Council was the classification of two
neighborhoods (Castle Park "B" and Woodlawn Park) as candidates for the
program. Council directed staff to hold meetings in the two neighborhoods
and, based on the response from the residents and the other criteria used
in the selection process, recommend one of the neighborhoods for
implementation of the program. Staff was also directed to change the
duration of the program from five to three years. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development)
28. RESOLUTION 17343 APPROPRIATING FUNDS, ACCEPTING BIDS, AND AWARDING CONTRACT
FOR INSTALLATION OF DRAINAGE FACIUTIES IN TI-IE CENfRAL
DRAINAGE BASIN WEST OF BROADWAY BElWEEN -G- STREET AND ..-
STREET IN THE CIlY (DR-116) - On 12/1/93, sealed bids were received
for "Installation of Drainage Facilities in the Central Drainage Basin West
of Broadway between "G" Street and "I" Street in the City (DR-116)." The
work includes: removal and disposal of existing improvements, excavation
and grading, concrete sidewalk and driveways, various sizes of reinforced
concrete pipes, various sizes of reinforced concrete box culverts, various
sizes of precast reinforced box culverts, various drainage structures,
Agenda
-8-
December 14, 1993
shoring, trench paving, base curb and gutter, sewer main, sewer laterals,
sewer manholes, P.c.c. trapezoidal channel, tunnelling under or
replacement of existing garage structure, pipe collars, plugging of existing
drainage pipes, connection of existing drainage pipes to new
improvements, protection and restoration of existing improvements, traffic
control, and other miscellaneous work required by the plans. Staff
recommends Council: (1) Appropriate $293,507 from the unappropriated
balance of Fund 253 Transportation Partnership Funds to CIP Fund 253-
2530 - DR-116 Central Drainage Basin; and (2) Accept bids and award
contract to T.C. Construction Company, Inc. in the amount of
$1,107,496.07 for construction of Alternate A (dual concrete reinforced
concrete pipes) and with the provision of delaying start of construction
until 5/1/94. (Director of Public Works) 4/Sth's vote required.
GRADING FOR TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES SUBDMSION AND TIlE
EFFECf ON ADJACENT PROPERlY ON LEJ-llGH AVENUE - On 10/19/93,
a resident on Lehigh Avenue, adjacent to the Telegraph Canyon Estates
Subdivision, expressed a concern about the grading of the subdivision and
its effect on their property. Council directed staff to return with
information on the grading. Staff has discussed the grading with the
resident and indicated the reasons the grading was done in the manner it
was done with the safeguards to their property. Staff recommends Council
accept the report. (Director of Public Works)
29. REPORT
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR EXTERIOR ADVERTISING ON
CHULA VISTA TRANSIT CCV1) BUSES - On 9/7/93, Council approved
exterior advertising on cvr buses and directed staff to prepare a RFP to
implement the ad program. The report discusses the major requirements
of the RFP. Staff recommends Council accept the report. (Director of
Public Works)
30. REPORT
CONSIDERATION OF A DRAFT WORK PROGRAM FOR TIlE SPHERE OF
INFLUENCE UPDATE STUDY - Pursuant to provisions of State law, and the
policies of the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) ,
on 7/12/93, LAFCO unanimously approved commencement of a
comprehensive study of the City's Sphere ofInfluence. Now that the study
has been authorized, the City, in cooperation with LAFCO, must prepare a
work program and time table for the study. Staff recommends Council:
(1) Accept the Draft Work Program; (2) Instruct staff to conduct a public
forum to solicit input/comments on the Draft Work Program, and return
to Council with a Final Work Program in January 1994; and (3) Authorize
the issuance of the Request for Proposals (RFP) to qualified firms for
preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Sphere
of Influence Update Study. (Director of Planning)
31.A. REPORT
CONSIDERATION OF TIlE ISSUANCE OF A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
(RFP) TO QUAl.JFIED FIRMS FOR PREPARATION OF A SUPPLEMENfAL
EIR FOR TIlE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE STUDY
B. REPORT
Agenda
-9-
December 14, 1993
32.
REPORT
UPDATE ON SOUD WASTE DISPOSAL ISSUES - An oral report will be
given by staff.
ITEMS PUllED FROM TIlE CONSENf CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent Calendm. Agenda
items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those puUed by Councilmembers. Public
comments are limited to five minutes per individual
OTI-IER BUSINESS
33. CIlY MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
34. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
a. Enforcement of graffiti abatement.
b. Ratification of appointment: Jorge F. Castillo - Cultural Arts Commission.
c. Authorization for the City Manager to withdraw from Special Act District if interim
extension agreements are not properly executed before 12/20/93.
d. Reconsideration of San Diego Wal-Mart lawsuit settlement. Continued from the meeting
of 1217/93.
35. COUNCIL COMMENfS
Councilman Robert Fox
a. Strategies for obtaining regional cooperation toward capitalizing on NAFTA opportunities.
Councilman Jerry Rindone
b. Appointment to MTDB Executive Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
The City Council will meet in a closed session immediately following the Council meeting to discuss:
Instructions to negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 - Chula Vista Employees
Association (CVEA), Western Council of Engineers (WCE) , Police Officers Association (POA) ,
International Association of Fire Fighters (lAFF), Executive Management, Mid-Management, and
Unrepresented. Continued from the meeting of 1217/93.
Agenda
-10-
December 14, 1993
Pending and potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - City of Chula Vista
vs. the County of San Diego and Aptec. Continued from the meeting of 1217/93.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - City of Chula Vista vs. San Diego
Palm Plaza Project. Continued from the meeting of 12/7/93.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Authorizing to retain outside
counsel - Chaparral Greens.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Clifton vs. the City of Chula
Vista.
Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - City of Chula Vista vs. County
of San Diego regarding tipping fee surcharge.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 - Evaluation of performance of personnel.
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the Regular City Council Meeting on January
4, 1994 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
A Special Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the
City Council meeting.
FOR COUNCIL AGENDA ON DECEMBER 14, 1993
ITEM TITLE: Proclamation - Commending Chula Vista Center's Spirit of Giving
Program in The City of Chula Vista, California
SUBMITTED BY: Mayor Tim Nader
The proclamation Commending Chula Vista Center's Spirit of Giving
Program will be presented by Mayor Nader to Ms. Donna Farrell and
Mr. Ben Richardson of Homart Development Co. Project
L/a ~J
COMMENDING CHULA VISTA CENTER'S
SPIRIT OF GIVING PROGRAM
IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, Chula Vista Center's Spirit of Giving Program was first unveiled during
the 1988 holiday season; and
WHEREAS, the Giving Tree is decorated each year with brightly colored tags
containing the names and ages of disadvantaged children along with their holiday wishes
from Santa; and
WHEREAS, each year Chula Vista Center works with three local agencies who
provide lists of disadvantaged children in the South County and a staff of volunteers for
the Giving Tree from the day following Thanksgiving until Christmas Eve, December 24th;
and
WHEREAS, Giving Tree agencies this year include: the American Legion, Head Start,
South Bay Community Services, and Options for Recovery; and
WHEREAS, the Spirit of the Giving Program is corporate sponsored, created at
Homart Development Company in Chicago, and is now implemented across the United
States at all Homart Development Company shopping centers:
NOW, THEREFORE,., TIM NADER, Mayor of the City of Chula Vista, California do
hereby COMMEND THE HOMART DEVELOPMENT COMPANY'S SPIRIT OF GIVING
PROGRAM for its commitment to Chula Vista's children during the holiday season,
express our gratitude for their contribution to our community and urge all citizens to
embrace the "spirit of giving" and make the holiday wishes of a disadvantaged child come
true.
:Dated" this I~~ art!! !Y bw.mbtA. ,/9 ~
z:- /IA~ h /
ZlJt~or!!f ti"e ctg' 5 chuta o/ista 7 CL :}
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
LJ/J
Item
Meeting Date Dec. 14, 1993
PROCLAMATION - COMMENDING MADD & SADD FOR THEIR
EFFORTS OF INCREASING PUBLIC AWARENESS ON THE DANGERS OF DRINKING
& DRIVING {4/5ths Vote: Yes No~J
MAYOR TIM NADER
THE PROCLAMATION COMMENDING ~ffiDD & SADD WILL BE PRESENTED
BY MAYOR NADER TO
JOHN & SILVIA BARAJAS
REPRESENTATIVES OF THE MADD ORGANIZATION.
Form A-113 (Rev. 11/79)
1/b- /
COMMENDING MADD
FOR THEIR EFFORTS OF INCREASING PUBLIC AWARENESS
ON THE DANGERS OF DRINKING AND DRIVING
WHEREAS, MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) is a nationwide organization
providing information and support to victims who have lost loved ones due to driving
under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and coordinates programs to increase public
awareness of the dangers of drinking and driving; and
WHEREAS, MADD has more than 1,500 members and 15,000 supporters throughout
San Diego County; and
WHEREAS, with court approval and support, MADD coordinated two Victim Impact
Panels in San Diego County where 1,000 convicted DUI offenders were court ordered to
attend and learn firsthand the tragic consequences of mixing drinking and driving; and
WHEREAS, 25 trained MADD speakers made 280 presentations to area schools, the
military and civic groups, impacting an estimated audience of 48,000; and
WHEREAS, MADD San Diego Chapter sponsors numerous annual events including
a 10K Run/Walk, the Candlelight Vigil, Sober Prom/Graduation, the Red Ribbon Safety
Campaign and the Red Ribbon Golf Tournament; and
WHEREAS, MADD's efforts in the legislative and educational areas have saved
thousands of lives:
NOW, THEREFORE, I, TIM NADER, Mayor of the City of Chula Vista, California do
hereby COMMEND MADD/SADD for their efforts of increasing awareness of the dangers
of drinking and driving.
:Dated" tEis1!f!~Jfry ~ bUlJnbR/l- , 19 ~
JC.~
UJt~or!!f t~e Ctg!!f chura VISta 1/ h :7
COMMENDING SADD
FOR THEIR EFFORTS OF INCREASING PUBUC AWARENESS
ON THE DANGERS OF DRINKING AND DRIVING
WHEREAS, SADD (Students Against Drunk Driving) is a nationwide organization
which provides information to educate students on the dangers of drinking and driving
and coordinates programs to increase public awareness of driving under the influence;
and
WHEREAS, SADD has several participating schools in the Sweetwater Union High
School District including, Bonita Vista High School, Castle Park High School, and Hilltop
High School, comprised of several hundred students; and
WHEREAS, SADD San Diego Chapter sponsors numerous youth activities on
campus including a Red Ribbon Week, dances, canned food drive, assemblies and
numerous alternative events; and
WHEREAS, SADD's efforts in the legislation and educational areas have saved
thousands of lives:
NOW, THEREFORE, I, nM NADER, Mayor of the City of Chula Vista, California do
hereby COMMEND SADD for their efforts of increasing awareness of the dangers of
drinking and driving.
:Dater,{ tEis/41'> r/ry.if ~1uA.. ,/9 q'3
,p;::- ~~
(J)te-or!!f llie ('!Y !f (/iura 'Vista I/ /J - ~
December 9, 1993
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT :
The Honorab 1 e Mayor and City cou~c i ...\
~~
John D. Goss, City Manager ~ ~ ~\
City Council Meeting of December 14, 1993
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council
meeting of Tuesday, December 14, 1993. Comments regarding the Written
Communications are as follows:
5a. This is a letter from Greg Cox suggesting that the City improve the street
appea 1 of Candy Cane Lane and Chr i stmas Tree C i rc 1 e by des i gn i ng and
purchasing modified street, directional and entry signs. For the past
several years the Police Department has provided traffic control for Candy
Cane Lane because of the increase in visitor traffic, through the use of
Reserve Officers and Explorers. In addition, two years ago the City's
Public Works Department had two signs made that were decorated with a
Christmas theme. The signs were then placed on barricades and posted in
the traffic flow area for Candy Cane Lane. One of those signs was stolen
so last year the signs were bolted to the barricade. This year additional
directional signs have been made for both Candy Cane Lane and Christmas
Tree Circle, as well as street name signs in holiday colors for both
streets, which will be placed over the regular street name signs, to be in
place prior to the lighting of these two streets.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT MR. COXI LETTER BE ACKNOWLEDGED AND HE BE NOTIFIED
OF STAFF'S EFFORTS TO ASSIST VISITORS TO THE COMMUNITY DURING THE HOLIDAY
SEASON.
5b. This is a letter from the President of Dixieline Lumber requesting that
the City consent to the detachment of Assessor Parcel Number 562-323-01
and an adjacent approved vacated half width of right-of-way and inform the
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS
ITEM BE REFERRED TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING STAFF FOR
INCORPORATION INTO THE ON-GOING NEGOTIATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED
JOINT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WITH THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY THAT
INCLUDES THE DIXIELINE STORE/TRUSS YARD (NATIONAL CITY PORTION) AND THE
VACANT PARCEL AT SR-54 AND FIFTH AVENUE (CHULA VISTA PORTION). Staff is
currently negotiating with National City staff toward a multi-phased
Cooperative agreement that will define jurisdictional responsibilities
with respect to traffic improvements, site planning, internal traffic
circulation, signage, landscaping design and other related items.
JDG:mab
Gregory R. Cox
647 Windsor Circle, Chula Vista, California 91910
Telephone: (619) 420-3104
November 29,1993
(")("') ~
=i=i
-<-< :0
no ~ rr1
r-""T1
me) (')
:::O::r.:: I rr1
~c - -
v,,.....- <
......11".
0---- ::s! ",
11.....:::-
.,,-- N C
-v
("'") ~ (,.j
m:t> N
The Honorable Mayor
and City Council
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor Nader and Council Members,
As we enter this holiday season, my reflections on what makes Chula Vista
such a pleasant community include as one or its most enjoyable aspects the
holiday decorations and spirit of Candy Cane Lane (Guava Avenue) and
Christmas Tree Circle (Whitney/Mankato Streets).
For over 35 years, these streets have opened their homes and hearts to
people from all over the world. Millions of visitors have come to Chula Vista
during the two weeks in which the residents of these streets have voluntarily and
at their own expense provide some of the best, most positive, advertising a city
could ever ask for.
These residents should be commended for their enthusiasm and recognized
for the contribution they have made to our City. It is time for the City of Chula
Vista to assist both streets. I have enclosed some photos (poor quality though they
be) taken last year in Charleston, South Carolina. These show thematic street
signs and directions for downtown Charleston's holiday lighting program.
The City of Chula Vista can improve the street appeal of Candy Cane Lane
and Christmas Tree Circle by designing and purchasing modified street signs
installed for the two weeks of holiday decorations, and directional and entry signs
to help the thousands of visitors traditionally visiting the area. An investment of
this kind would be wise, not only in marketing the City, but in properly welcoming
visitors. and in showing' the streets' residents that their efforts are annreciated.
This effort might not be' accomplished for 1993, but by beginning now ~it could
guarantee an even more enjoyable 1994 holiday season.
Thank you for your consideration, and best wishes for the upcoming
holidays.
cc: 45';y~('!J \VllnE.
~ 7?2J
. ~ ~ ~~v<:-R.
u
leA TIONS 2 )
/&t /'7;~3
c
~ -'I
P.O. BOX 85307, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92186-5307
TEL. (t:19) 224-4120 FAX (619) 225-8192
@ Dixieline Lumber
Established 1913
November 18, 1993
00 ~
--
-f-f
-<-< :::u
("") 0 {!j fI1
r- .."
mo 0
:;:::r I fTI
(j~F N -
r' :l':" <
"-...." -0 rr1
~.~~; \AI 0
-'v"}
("":J-i .b;.
rn)::;-. N
Honorable Mayor Tim Nader
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave
Chula Vista, CA 92010
SUBJECT: Dixieline Reorganization
Dear Mayor Nader:
The purpose of this letter is to request that an item be placed on the City Council's agenda
which would inform the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) -that the City of
Chula Vista consents to the detachment of Assessor Parcel Number 562-323-01 and an
adjacent approved vacated half-width right-of-way (Fifth Avenue). As the owner of the
property, Dixieline Lumber Company proposes to have the parcel annexed to National City
and consolidated with an approximately IS-acre parcel already within National City.
Enclosed is an exhibit illustrating current and proposed jurisdictional boundaries. The
property which is the subject of the proposed reorganization totals 0.61 acre. It is currently
part of our truss operation, which is located in National City. Ultimately the property may
become part of a proposed commercial development known as the National City Market
Place. Our consultants have been working closely with City of Chula Vista staff in
coordinating development of this project, as well as the adjacent commercial center which
is being proposed on our property in the City of Chula Vista.
State law requires that a detaching city consent prior to completion of a proposal. It is
LAFCO's policy that an application to detach territory from a city needs to be accompanied
by a letter indicating the detaching city's consent. Upon receiving City approval, Dixieline
would proceed to submit the necessary applications and fees to complete the reorganization.
This area is part of a portion of a LAFCO-designated Special Study Area for both cities.
Part of the application involves a concurrent revision to the two city spheres. While it is our
understanding the City is working on their Sphere of Influence update, we do not believe
this proposal would prejudice future actions or set a precedent, because of the special
circumstances involving the use of the property as part of our existing operations in National
ec' ~ ;;~ N) IUfiE C U~ 'jCA1'IO S
o ~ 1~ ~"""'" '^' meeo c" ",,,. ".'"" '" COM",,""',"e ,m""" ee"c". '^ ""~ /.?- Ij?r Y
3420 ,HIGHLAND, 'WE '"NATIONAL CITY, CA 91950.425,6660 1400, W, 28TH ST, ~JATIONAL CITY, CA 91950. 174,4671 50
1'2~i2 MIRA~L'\R RD, SAN DIEGO, eA 92121.695-0600 3607 ;-.vOCAOO GLVD LA MESA. CA 919..1. e;()-5600 ..-
\bUl CON'/CJY ST , SAN D!CGO, CA 92111 . 279.5010 3985 MISSION AVE" OCEANSIDE, C'>' 92056 . 75"i069
1;:6;: :=: r.."V'.iN ST" EL CAJON, CA 92021 .440-7711 2372 CENTER OR., l.A MESA CA 91942.465-4242
561 !\J TULIP, ESCONDIDa. ( '\ 92025 .. -"~5~7271
Honorable Mayor Tim Nader
November 18, 1993
Page 2
A number of reasons suggest that this minor reorganization be approved:
1. It would allow for the consolidation of Dixieline's property to support their
current business operation. The parcel proposed for reorganization is used
for storage as part of Dixieline's truss operation. It is contiguous to our
approximately 15 acre parcel already in National City. The properties would
be better served as one parcel in a single jurisdiction.
2. The current irregular boundary between the cities would correct an area
which illogically juts our into National City without a reason such as
topography, district boundaries, land use differences or street alignments.
3. The City of Chula Vista has approved the realignment of Fifth Avenue, as it
completes the vacation of an outdated paper street. The City has also
accepted dedication of the new alignment for Fifth Avenue. Approval of this
action would further the City's circulation objective while clarifying the
jurisdictional status' of the vacated right-of-way.
4. Redevelopment of the site to accommodate a commercial canter could be
unnecessarily cumbersome, because approvals and permits would need to be
obtained from two separate jurisdictions.
I appreciate your assistance. Please let me know if you require any further information.
Sincerely,
~~
~
W.S. Cowling II
President
Enclosure
c: John Goss, City Manager
€hrisSalomone, Community Development Director
Bob Leiter, Director of Planning
S-b/02
en
LU
-
a:
<(
o
z
::)
o
OJ
>-
~
-
()
_..CJ
...Z
-
I-
en
-
x
LU
) ~1~S G]"VNNn J . L
I.:J/\"\' '4 I
-..-:;;0 ?JNv=l1=t~!"H}~~-^ V is-H.l v"l....--N - ~-
~
. .~ .. . . . . .
"
r- I
0
I :t I
~
C\I
~ I
I
C\I .j I
CO "a-
Le ."'..,
Q.~
...... I
~
U'Y
'"
~
:!
N
,.
<:
.0
(3^'tyI l'tylNOI1'tylN) ~
'O^ 8.. ^H:l_L\,tNQlt~N :r ___
/ ~I-f-,r
( """"
i.<..:..... .
.)~ L,)P'
5b~3
ts
IT
U')
01
10
IQl
~
I
J
:-<.
~ I
, '
~
(/')
>
<(
.....I
::>
::c
o
lL.
o
~
o
I()
u
w
I/)
0-
cr:
o
a..
I
<(
r-
(/)
:>
<(
..J
::>
I
U
ro
<D
<D
t0W
W
~
v
II)
o
U)
a...
<(
~
u
.
I
~
()
...J
<(
Z
o
~
z:
o
(f)
UJ
-
a:
<(
o
z
::>
o
OJ
>-.
I-
-
()
Cl
W
(f)
o
CL
o
a:
a.
..
, ..~.. . . . . .
) ~llS a]~VNNn J . ~
! ;j/\'\' I
-'.;;;0 ~NVl1=t0t-H)~~-^ V u--H:l t>~._-- N - ~-
,...
o
I
cY)
C\I
('l')
I
C\I
CO
LO
~
C/)
5=
<(
...J
::>
:r:
~O
U'V
lL.
o
>-
~
-
o
....
'!:
:c
...
....
<;
"dO
. C:J^'rJ l'rJNOI1'rJN) ~
~O^ 8-. AH:L-'L'1iNQlf!N I _.- ~
(. ~t-~-r
",tIl
5b--~
tB
~
V)
01
I..
'01
~
u
I
-
Oil
u
w
I/)
0-
0::
o
ll.
I
~
I/)
>
<
-'
::>
I
U
,..,
<0
<0
2
v
111
o
Oil
a..
-<
2
~
o
...J
<(
Z
o
~
z
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 2
Meeting Date 12/14/93
ITEM TITLE: ORDINANCE .2~gJ Amending Ordinance 2577 rezoning the 5.8-
acre parcel located at the southwest comer of Third Avenue and J Street
from C-O, Office Commercial and R-l, Single Family Residential to
C-C-P, Central Commercial, Precise Plan.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning e~
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ ~ ~ (4/Stbs Vote: Yes_No X)
The City Council set a public hearing for December 7, 1993, to reconsider the General Plan and
Rezoning application of American Stores, Inc. for 5.8 acres located at the comer of Third and
"J" Street. After conducting the necessary hearing, Council voted to let their previous action
approving the General Plan and rezoning stand as approved by their vote on November 2, 1993,
and moved to amend the Precise Plan standards in accordance with the attached ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the attached Ordinance of the City of Chula Vista
amending Ordinance 2577 which established the rezoning of the 5.8-acre parcel located at the
southwest comer of Third Avenue and J Street from C-O, Office Commercial and R-l, Single
Family Residential to C-C-P, Central Commercial, Precise Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
(Iuckyord.Al13)
7-1/'1-Z
_ __ ._.. _..._...".~_"...__.~__...."~._,___~~~_~,,_~~.___~__~~"___''.,,_' '~_;_'_"'",,""",,_m"~<~,""""_____""_"""'_~_'V".__""~._,._._~_,---,_.,~"-,-_...,^.,
ORDINANCE NO.
025?T:3
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 2577, REZONING THE 5.8 ACRE PARCEL
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THIRD AVENUE
AND J STREET FROM C-O, OFFICE COMMERCIAL AND R-1,
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO C-C-P, CENTRAL
COMMERCIAL, PRECISE PLAN, TO AMEND CERTAIN PRECISE
PLAN STANDARDS THEREOF.
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a rezone was filed
with the Planning Department of the City of Chula vista on
December 2, 1993 by American Properties Inc., and
WHEREAS, the property consists of approximately 5.8 acres
located at the southwest corner of Third Avenue and "J" Street
and diagrammatically presented on the area map attached hereto as
Exhibit A ("Site" or "Property"); and
WHEREAS, said application requested to change the existing
C-O, Office Commercial and R-1, Single Family Residential zone to
C-C, Central Commercial; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for
a hearing on said rezoning application and notice of said
hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing
to property owners within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries
of the property at least 21 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as
advertised, namely 7:00 p.m. October 13,1993 in the Council
Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and
said hearing was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission found that the project
would have no significant environmental impacts and adopted the
Negative Declaration issued on IS-92-42, and voted 6-0-1
(Tuchscher-conflict of interest) to recommend that the City
Council approve the rezoning from C-O, Office Commercial and R-1,
single Family Residential to C-C-P, Central Commercial, Precise
Plan, subject to the Precise Plan Standards listed in the Draft
city Council Ordinance.
WHEREAS, the city Council approved and adopted Ordinance No.
2577 on November 9, 1993 rezoning the Property in the manner
recommended by the Planning commission, and imposing certain
Precise Plan standards therefore, numbered 1 through 25; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council moved to reconsider the adoption
e:\lucky.wp
December 5, 1993
Ord. Amending Lucky's Precise Plan Standards
Page 1
7,3
of said Ordinance No. 2577 on November 23, 1993 in light of
complaints received by neighbors on Garrett Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, the city council reconsidered their adoption on
December 7, 1993, and thereupon amended certain precise plan
standards in the manner herein identified, and continued the
matter to December 14, 1993.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City council of the City of Chula vista
does hereby find, determine, and ordain as follows:
SECTION I: Based on the findings and recommendations of the
Environmental Review Coordinator, the City Council does hereby
readopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration issued on IS-92-42.
In readopting said Mitigated Negative Declaration, the city
Council considered the comments of Bill Darnell as contained in a
letter dated December 7, 1993, and all evidence presented at said
public hearing of December 7, 1993, and respond thereto in the
manner set forth in the attached Exhibit A, incorporated herein
by reference. No such evidence has changed the conclusions of
either the Environmental Review Coordinator or the city Council
that the project as mitigated has no significant environmental
effects.
SECTION II. Ordinance No. 2577 is hereby amended by
amending the Precise Plan Standards therein contained as follows:
A.
Precise Plan Standard No. 3 shall be amended as follows:
"3.
No delivery truck traffic shall occur in the alley
during the time from ~~:OO p.m. to 7:00 a.m.. and all
access to said alley shall be in one direction with
access off of J Street proceeding southerly."
B.
follows:
Precise Plan Standard No. 12 shall be amended to read as
"12.
Loading docks shall be oriented away from the westerly
adjacent residential area and buffered with parts of
the building and/or wing walls equal in height to truck
height. The "winqwall" on the south side in the
southwest corner currently ?lanned to be adiacent to
the loadinq dock shall be extended easterly to coincide
with the full lenqth of the loadinq area and at a
height to screen all loadinq activities from view and
to reduce noise to acceptable levels. the exact heiqht
to be determined by the Desiqn Review Committee."
C.
follows:
Precise Plan Standard No. 18 shall be amended as
e:\lucky.wp
December 5, 1993
Ord. Amending Lucky's Precise Plan Standards
Page 2
7~ L-j
"18. Duty to Construct Wall. A zoning wall of sufficient
density to reduce noise of a material. auality and
design as may be required by Design Review shall be
built on or parallel to the west property line, at a
location determined in a manner specified by Condition
18.A.. shall be between 6 and 10 feet in height as may
be specificallY determined bY the maiority of the
owners of those properties located on the east side of
Garrett Avenue immediatelY abuttina the westerly
properlY line of the site ("Seven Property Owners")'.
The wall shall be architecturally treated on both
sides.
A. Location of Wall. The zonina wall required by
Condition No. 18 shall be built in a position as
determined bY the Seven Property Owners but no further
westerly than the westerly property line of site and no
further easterly than 20 feet east of the westerly
property line of the Site.
1. Grant of Easement. On the condition that the
Seven Property Owners waive any claim. action or
suit aaainst Applicant for the issuance of this
rezoning. and if the wall is located east of the
westerlY property line. Applicant shall grant. for
the period of time that the site is used by
American stores for commercial purposes. easements
to each of the Seven Property Owners over the area
formed by extendina each of their respective
property lines to said wall ("Extensions"). for
the purpose of entering upon. landscape. and
maintain landscaping. irriaation. and conduct
recreational uses upon. upon said area. American
Stores shall prohibit construction of above around
structures in said area except fences along such
Extensions.
2. Duty to Landscape InitiallY. On the condition
that. pursuant to the provisions of paraaraph
18.A.1. above. if Applicant arants the Seven
Property Owners easements. Applicant shall be
obliaated to initially landscape the area of each
easement so aranted. on a one-time basis only. to
the reasonable satisfaction of each of the
respective property owners. not substantially
qreater than existina landscaping. Disputes as to
the amount of landscapinq required shall be
1. define
e:\lucky.wp
December 5, 1993
Ord. Amending Lucky's Precise Plan Standards
Page 3
7-5
resolved bY the Planninq Director, or his
desiqnee. The Applicant shall be relieved of any
further obliqation to landscape or maintain
landscaping, and such shall be the sole
responsibility of the respective property owners."
D. Precise Plan Standard No. 26 shall be added which shall
read as follows:
"26. In the event that the Zoninq Administrator shalL
subsequent to the adoption of this ordinance, determine that
vehicles usinq the alleyway to the west of the proposed
improvement at inappropriate or excessive speeds
constituting a nuisance to the Seven Property Owners, the
Zoninq Administrator may require that Applicant install
speed bumps in a number and of a desiqn sufficient as he
shall determine appropriate, and such requirement shall
constitute a Precise Plan Standard in the same manner and
effect as if such requirement was listed in this resolution
without condition."
E. Precise Plan Standard No. 27 shall be added which shall
read as follows:
"27. Applicant shall, subject to appeal to the city
Council, implement any and all design features specifically
intended to mitiqate noise and traffic problems as
determined by the Desiqn Review Committee as a-ppropriate."
SECTION III: Findings.
The City Council finds that the modifications to the Precise
Plan Standards are consistent with the City of Chula vista
General Plan and that the public necessity, convenience, general
welfare, and good zoning practice support the rezoning to C-C-P,
Central Commercial, Precise Plan zone.
SECTION IV: This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full
force the thirtieth day from its adoption.
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
I
V
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
by
Presented by
e:\lucky.wp
December 5, 1993
Ord. Amending Lucky's Precise Plan Standards
Page 4
7-t
'\
0""
\ ^
r _ . ", \y,^{V',
j hk & associates
December 13, 1993
Mr. Hal Rosenberg
City Traffic Engineer
City of Chula Vista
Chula Vista, CA 92900
Subject:
Lucky Store Traffic Impact Study - JHK & Associates Response to Darnell
Review (JHK No. 20123)
Dear Mr. Rosenberg:
As requested, JHK & Associates (JHK) has prepared this letter report to document our
response to the transportation review report prepared by Darnell & Associates dated December
7, 1993. In addition to responding to the Darnell Review, this document also responds to the
traffic related issues raised by "the Gan'ett A venue Residents" in a memorandum dated November
28, 1993. Finally, this report concludes with a discussion of a Conceptual Striping Plan
developed by JHK to document the feasibility of providing an acceptable striping configuration
on "J" Street west of Third Avenue adjacent to the proposed Lucky Store and the existing Lucky
Store.
As a result of this further analysis all of the findings outlined in the Final Technical
Report have been confirmed and no changes in the original recommendations were identified.
However, one additional mitigation measure has been developed. This mitigation consists of an
extension of the raised median island along Third Avenue south of "J" Street to the southern edge
of the Proposed Lucky Store property. The design of this median island will prevent left turn
movements exiting the southerly driveway while allowing northbound left turns to enter the site
at this location. . A more descriptive discussion of this mitigation measure is provided in
Appendix A. With the adoption of the final list of mitigation measures outlined in Appendix A,
no adverse traffic impacts should occur as a result of the implementation of the proposed Lucky
Store Project.
RESPONSE TO DARNELL REVIEW REPORT
1. Response to Trip Generation Comment
JHK agrees with the Darnell review which states that a Commercial Grocery store (such
as the Proposed 60,000 square foot Lucky store) should have a PM peak hour rate of greater
than 8% which was the rate used by JHK in the development of Table 2-7 from the Final
Technical Report. The 8% rate was Oliginully developed by JHK to reflect the mix of land uses
8989 Rio San Diego Drive . Suite 335
San Diego, California 92108 . (619) 295-2248 · FAX (619) 295-2393
7~7
_ j hk & associates
Mr. Hal Rosenberg
December 13, 1993
Page 2
which were proposed in the initial site plan (grocery store with separate commercial shops) but
no longer applies to the latest site plan.
To reflect a worst case scenario JHK has performed a recalculation of projected traffic
conditions for the study :lrea intersections with a PM peak hour rate of 11 %. The directional
relationship remains the same at 50% for inbound and outbound traffic. A revised table 2-7 was
developed to document the new higher trip forecast and Appendix A contains a description of
the recalculation and updated findings.
2. Responses to Scope of Analvsis Comments
During the initial scoping session for the project between JHK and the City Traffic
Engineer, review of intersections in the vicinity of the Proposed Lucky Store was performed to
detennine which locations should be included in the traffic impact analysis. As a result of this
review it was determined that only the intersection of "J" So"eetffhird Avenue should be included
in the analysis. Other signalized intersections in the area were not considered critical based on
historical data, traffic projections, and anticipated dispersement of project traffic.
The Darnell Report concluded that the intersection of "J" Street and Fourth A venue should
be included in the revised analysis. Although JHK was confident of our original assumption, a
special Level of Service (LOS) analysis was peIformed for existing conditions and future
conditions with and without the project. The calculation of Year 1992 PM peak hour LOS
analysis for this intersection has been pelformed based on peak period turning movement
volumes (December, 1992) provided by the City of Chula Vista.
The revised calculation of project impacts presented in Appendix A shows that for
existing Year 1992 (Base Conditions) this intersection operates at acceptable levels (LOS B).
Additionally, the analysis of all future conditions indicated that this intersection remains at
acceptable levels of service with or without the Proposed Project.
3. Response to Proiect Analysis Comment
The JHK Final Report did not contain a specific analysis of traffic operations at the site
access driveways. However, the report did contain recommendations to improve on-site
circulation and ingress/egress at the site access driveways on Third Avenue and "J" Street. As
('] _1
/I-~ ?f
_jhk &. associates
Mr. Hal Rosenberg
December 13, 1993
Page 3
a result of these JHK recommendations, the following circulation/improvements were
incorporated into the current site plan.
. Provide a raised median on Third Avenue south of "J" Street to restrict turn
movements at the northern most projections/driveway to right turns in and out
only.
. Require the alignment of Proposed Lucky Store access driveway on the south side
of "J" Street with the existing Lucky Store access driveway on the north side of
"J" Street.
. Reserve additional right-of-way along the south edge of "]" Street along the
property frontage to provide the required width for an exclusive center turn lane
on "J" Street to allow improved operations of east/west through traffic on "J"
Street and traffic accessing either the existing store or the Proposed Lucky Store.
Also, this additional right-of-way will provide adequate width for the provision of
an exclusive right turn only lane for eastbound traffic on "J" Street approaching
the intersection Third Avenue and "]" Street.
. Provision of exclusive left turn phasing on Third Avenue!"J" Street for northbound
and southbound left turning traffic. To confirm acceptable operations at the site
access points under the revised trip generation values shown on Table 2-7, a
separate section "Site Access Review" is provided in the revised analysis
contained in Appendix A.
. In response to the Darnell Report comment that signalization may be warranted
at the southerly access driveway from the site to Third Avenue, JHK reanalyzed
internal circulation and concluded that there was a potential for traffic conflicts
that necessitated further control of site egress at this location. This additional
traffic control measure prohibits left turns exiting the site at this location while
allowing northbound left turns to enter the site at this southerly driveway access
point. Although this new condition will divert egress traffic to the "J" Street
driveway, there is sufficient capacity on "J" Street to accommodate the
redistribution of project traffic. The redistribution of project traffic, however, will
necessitate an additional modification of the Third A venue and "J" Street traffic
signal. The new modification requirement will provide a left turn protective signal
7-1}
_jhk & associates
Mr. Hal Rosenberg
December 13, 1993
Page 4
phase (arrow) for east and westbound traffic. A previously recommended signal
modification required similar treatment for north and southbound traffic at this
intersection.
. An additional condition has been developed in relation to control of traffic at the
site access driveways under future conditions. Due to the anticipated level of
traffic activity at the two main access driveways to the Proposed Lucky Store site
it will be important for the City of Chula Vista to closely monitor traffic
operations over time. This monitoring process will identify the potential need for
additional traffic control measures, especially at the main access intersection on
")" Su'eet west of Third Avenue. As indicated in the previous analysis, this "J"
Street main access driveway will experience acceptable operating conditions under
future conditions without a traffic signal. However, an additional condition should
be applied to the Proposed Lucky Store Project, to require City approval of any
future increase in square footage or driveway trip activity for the site. The basis
for this approval will be the completion of an acceptable Traffic Impact Analysis
as determined by the City Traffic Engineer.
4. Response to Future Conditions Analvsis Comment
As requested, the revised traffic analysis in Appendix A provides an assessment of site
access and study area intersection operations under future General Plan Buildout conditions with
the Proposed Lucky Store Project.
5. Response to Garrett A venue Concems Comment
As requested, the intersection of Fourth A venue and "J" Street is included in the revised
traffic analysis provided in Appendix A. As shown in the reanalysis, acceptable levels of service
are forecasted for both study area intersections (Fourth!"J" Street and Third Avenue!"J" Street)
under both Interim Year 1995 and Buildout u'affic conditions. Thus, impacts to local
neighborhood circulation facilities, such as Garrett A venue, will not occur as a result of the
proposed Lucky Store Project since the two signalized intersections on "J" Street at Third Avenue
and Fourth A venue are not expected to experience congested conditions under future Year 1995
or Buildout conditions.
7-){J
_ j hk & associates
Mr. Hal Rosenberg
December 13, 1993
Page 5
RESPONSE TO GARRETT A VENUE RESIDENTS MEMORANDUM
Appendix B provides a response to the traffic related comments detailed in the referenced
memorandum under Item 2.
PRESENT A TION OF CONCEPTUAL STRIPING PLAN
Appendix C provides an illustration of a conceptual striping plan for "1" Street west of
Third Avenue adjacent to the Proposed Lucky Store site. This conceptual striping plan was
developed to demonstrate the feasibility of accommodating east-west through traffic and left-
turning vehicles accessing the existing Lucky Store to the north of "J" Street and the Proposed
Lucky Store to the south of "J" Street. As shown on the conceptual sketch, the additional right-
of-way being acquired from the Proposed Lucky Store site, along the south curb line of "J"
Street, will provide adequate cross-sectional width to accommodate one lane of through travel
in each direction and a center median area to be striped to accommodate eastbound and
westbound left turning vehicles. As a result of this striping plan, on-street parking will be
eliminated along the southern curb line of "J" Street adjacent to the Proposed Lucky Store site.
Additionally, the City of Chula Vista will review the need to restrict parking along the northern
curb line of "J" SU"eet in the same vicinity. The elimination of on-street parking, on "J" Street,
along the n011hern property frontage of the Proposed Lucky Store site will improve traffic
operations by providing additional visibility for vehicles entering and exiting both the existing
Lucky Store site and the Proposed Lucky Store site. All anticipated parking demand for the
Proposed Lucky Store facility will be accommodated on-site with the construction of the
proposed project. .
The conceptual striping plan indicates that a set of left turn storage lanes can be provided
along this section of "J" Street to allow for approximately 100 feet of storage for each movement.
These 100-foot storage bays will be adequate to accommodate the queuing that is expected at the
signalized intersection of Third A venue!"J" Street, the unsignalized intersection of "J" Street/Old
& New Lucky Store entrances, and the unsignalized intersection of "J" Street/New Lucky Store
truck entrance.
7--) I
_jhk &. associates
Mr. Hal Rosenberg
December 13, 1993
Page 6
The infonnation detailed in this letter rep011, along with the revised technical analyses in
Appendices A and B, provide the City of Chula Vista with the required responses to the issues
raised by the citizens and their consultants during the review period for the Proposed Lucky Store
Project. If you have any questions or require further infonnation, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely,
JHK & Associates
J~~/I!~
Daniel F. Marum
Senior Transportation Planner
cc: Ken Lee
Barbara Reid
Doug Reid
7//2
APPENDIX A
REVISED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
PROPOSED LUCKY STORE
CHULA VISTA, CALIFIORNIA
Prepared bv:
JHK & Associates
Date:
December 10, 1993
7//Y
APPENDIX A
REVISED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
PROPOSED LUCKY STORE
JHK & ASSOCIATES - DECEMBER 13, 1993
As indicated in the response letter to the Darnell Review of the Lucky Store Final
Technical Report dated December 13, 1993, JHK & Associates (JHK) has prepared this Technical
Appendix to document the findings of the revised traffic analysis for the referenced project. This
Technical Appendix is divided into the following sections:
. Revised Trip Generation Analysis
. Revised Future Conditions Analysis - Interim Year 1995 Conditions
. Revised Future Conditions Analysis - General Plan Buildout Conditions
. Revised Site Access Analysis
. Final Recommendations
Each of the topics identified above are discussed in the following sections of this
appendix. Each section contains a discussion of the analysis process and the revised
findings/conclusions. It is important to recognize that this report focuses on PM peak hour
intersection operations as this is the key indication of significant impacts based on the guidelines
established by the City of Chula Vista.
REVISED TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS
A revised version of Table 2-7 from the Final Technical Report has been prepared to
document the total number of u'ips which are anticipated to be generated by this Proposed Lucky
Store Project. As shown, Table 2-7 (Revised) reflects a worst case scenario in which an 11 %
peak hour rate with a 50:50 split (inbound:outbound) was used to calculate PM peak hour project
generated traffic activity. All of the subsequent traffic analyses are based on the revised trip
generation values shown on this table. The following sections document JHK's recalculation of
projected (Interim Year 1995 and General Plan B uildout) traffic conditions for the study area
intersections.
REVISED FUTURE CONDITIONS ANALYSIS - INTERIM YEAR 1995 CONDITIONS
The following assumptions were used in the development of projected Year 1995 traffic
volume conditions on the Study Area circulation network.
. The Study Area circulation network includes the major signalized intersections of
Third Avenue!,J" Street and Fourth Avenue!"J" Street.
1
7-;/
-
'0
~
CIl
'S:
~
~
--
z
o
-
Eo-
<
~
~-
Z~
~~
~O~
~Eo-~
_en~
~>~
Eo-~~
~U~
~~~
O~,Q
::CEo-C
~O~
<O~
~'-~
~~CIl
~~~
~<~
~~'(j
QOO
Zen~
<=<
>~~
~Q~
:;:'-=::c
Q::C~
QC
~~
<
~
Eo-
en
~
r--
.
~
~
:is
~
Eo-
-
:::
o
::c
....
:::
o
.:.::
~
~
~
=
-
~
~
-
:::
O.~
::c....
~
.:.::~
~
~
~
-
~e
.- CIl
~ Q.
Q 'i:
Eo-
Q.
'i:
Eo-~
>.~
=~
~
Q
~>.
CIl....
~.Vi
'0=
= ~
~....
...;l~
\0
......
';
....
o
Eo-
~
CIl
~
'0
=
~
~
>.
a
;::l_
....>.
u_
s:: s::
~o
-- b./)
..c:s::
U'-
1-<'0
:s:-=
..c:;::l
UIXl
=
'..;
CIl
.~
~
.
~
l;;\ ~II
V")
......
:g\ ~II
......
~
::\ !II
~
00
~
00
......
~
00
~
~
~I ~
-
~
0-
en
o
o
......
-
("l
......
:9
:.2
~~
"'a
....
~
~
0-
en
o
o
o
N
~
s::
~
:.2
U
V")
("l
......
>.
-
B
~
E
.--
>(~
8'0
c..1-<
c..Q)
<:p.
-- s::
-Q)
0-8
,g~
u..c:
tr.lU
'v")
J:~
~I
~I
~I
~
......
......
=
--
--
......
--
en
p.
!I) 'C
SE-
.... >.
tr.l ~
~~
Q) Q)
U ;>
o .-
I-< I-<
08,
81
81
~I
~
......
......
~
~~
I-< >. Q) en
~ ~ -S 'c;j
-~ ......"Q
Q)Q) O~
..c;>
:;.._ s:: s::
~ '-1 0 ~
~ "0 ._ Q)
en '0 ~ ..c
>. s:: ........
~~ S::s::
~ s:: Q).-
~o E'O
:5~ -E.~
en;::l .5 Q)
en~ Q)'-1
Q).- ~
~:: -Sen
~~ ..cQ)
B E .~ E3
'c;j B ~ .~
.... s:: E......
~.~ ~ Q)
.~ .... Q) enQ)
8'c;j l:l
c.. s:: en F=
Q)O U
-s'O s^
~en
..c .~ l:l .9-
gp~ Q)l:l
8~ -Ss
-sa B[>
en Q) '0 en
~-s .g~.
p. s:: '0 p. en
'0 .- ~ en g
- '0 Q);::l .-
g ~ .0.5 U
~;::l :9E~
....~ ;::lenQ)
~ ~ 0 p.....
-S en ~ 'C .5
en~ ~~'O
~;::l ..c_S::
U b./) .....- ~
:.2t+:: ~.g~
~ ~ U II ~
......Q) :.2enE
o~ ~'EP.~
I-< ...... en
E<15 OQ)>'
EP. I-<;>~
;::l 'E .8';:: ~
s::~ E-3"g
~Q) ;::lE8
oS:: s::;::l....
....1-< Q)US::
Q) 0 -S d:~
..c: >. """l Q) ~
.....0 C':l
_ I-< ....; ~
~Q) ;::l--C':S
g. ~ ff=.... =
Q)~ en~O
~ Q) c...~ en
_ 'E 0....
'E a I-< U
Q)c..~
>. ~ .::: '0 E
~..c: ..... Q).-
~ .... >.~ ~ ....
Q) o'~ ;::l c.. ~
.~ s::.~ E 8'0'
o S ~8p..a
...... N
Vi
B
o
Z
2 7~/__S'
~
.:::
0-
en
o
o
o
......
~
C'
en
o
o
o
......
-
o
V")
......
.:::
g-
O
o
o
o
\0
.:::
0-
en
o
o
o
o
\0
--
N'
--
en
c..
'C
E-
E .~
.... ....
tr.l~
~;::l
8 ~
8 ;::l
o~
o
0\
0\
-
C'i
'N
~Vi
0\=
- QO
~~
=...:
ar::!
.....=
~ ~
c;j::;
=
= =
~ 0
::;''=
~~
o =
'e!l)
!I) 0
~ .IS'
.0 E-<
U) u 0
~!:QO
~",,!I)
.- e'-
gE-<o
~oa
<<V)
<ld~'O
~ <.~
.....V)u
Vi
Q)
~
;::l
o
tr.l
. The daily and PM peak hour trips generated by the existing Lucky Grocery Store
located in the northwest quadrant of the Third Avenue!"]" Street intersection have
been retained in this analysis of future conditions to reflect ongoing uses at this
location.
. No reduction in trips generated by existing church and preschool uses on the
existing site have been accounted for in the analysis of future conditions at the
Study Area intersections.
. A compounded annual growth rate of two percent has been applied to existing
daily and PM peak hour traffic volumes to reflect expected increases in traffic
activity due to other development projects in this vicinity of Chula Vista.
. The trip generation values shown on Table 2-7 (Revised) under the heading
"Grocery Store (Cumulative Trips)" were used to reflect the project impact. These
cumulative volumes (total trips minus passerby trips) have been added to the Year
1995 Base Condition volumes for the analysis of the two Study Area intersections.
. For the intersection of Third Avenue!"]" Street, an additional intersection capacity
analysis was performed to document the effect of the planned Medical Office
Building Development.
. The analysis of site access intersections is documented in a separate section of this
Technical Appendix.
Revised Proiect Site Distribution
Figure 2-1 (Revised) has been prepared to document the anticipated distribution of project
site traffic under the revised traffic control mitigation measure which will restrict left turns
exiting the site at the southerly driveway located along Third A venue. This revised site
distribution plan also shows the distribution of traffic to the west of the project site through the
intersection of Fourth A venue!"]" Street. As stated in the Darnell Report, a critical aspect of this
revised site distribution plan will be the testing of the ability of the Third A venue!"]" Street
signalized intersection to accommodate the additional eastbound left turn volume while
maintaining acceptable levels of service during the PM peak hour.
Revised PM Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analvsis
Table 2-9, revised, is provided to document the anticipated levels of service at the two
study area intersections under Interim Year 1995 traffic conditions with and without the Proposed
Lucky Store Project. As shown on this table, both study area intersections will operate at Level
of Service B with or without the Proposed project. With the addition of the Medical Office
3
7-J~
z, .....
0
0
~
.....
tZl
~
l:I!
S ~
l. r",
~nu~^y Pl!tlL e!i 1 T~ ( e!i (
"'--+ ~""""\,
'" "'""""\, e!i
tJi ~e!i '" e!i
s""""\, ....s ~
z
0
-
E-
~ ;:J
0 ==
l:I! ..... -
S tZl =
^UM~^pa l. tIi >. E-
"-..~ ^UM~^pa ~ en
(.) - -
PIO ::s 'C Q
M~N ....J 0 ~
l.tJi <Il
"0 os: -
'" 0 0 =
.... <Il = E-
o
0.. -- E-
o ..-4 U
I
d:: M ~
~U!PUO'1 0 ...,
~ 0
= =
~ ~
){JIU,L ~ Q
~
en
tJi ;:: tJi -<
-,0",00 U
J 1 l. "-..tIi ~
00 =
0
------- ------ ~
~nu~^y n~JlUO tJJ T
-,0
;::
'"
tJitJitJi
-,oa-.-,o "-..tJi
J 1 l. -,0
..-
~
tJiJ T ~
~nu~^y qunod ~
-,0 ....
tJi --
M
a-. ....
--
'"
..... i.
0 "ii
0
~ ... c
..... a: ~
tZl O'~
~ ""...
c:. U
GI C':I
"" Cl.
o E
~-
~u
7~/'7 .:..:5
u C':I
.5~
4
"0 ~
~~ C.J m
('1 "0 th:
=1Il~"'- 0 U
1I).c = = '~o = ..:l
C\.": 0-,- ~
e-, ~ Q. Q., Q., "; 5
~ 5 C.JQ.
III 0: "0'- 0 --
;=U~~"O- C.J
~
o 1Il~~ III
~ .- 0 0 ~ ~ '-" ~
> ....: "; '- Q. ~ \0
"O=~OIllQ ..... .-
== '-= 1:':1
0= Q.,_ 1:;
u< Q., Q
"0
~~ - m
('1"0 C.J
=1Il~ 0 ~ ~
m 1I).c = ='0 ..:l
Z e-,-O-
.- Q.Q., '-
0 e-, ~ 5 Q.,
- ~ .c --
E-c '-1Il0....."o C.J
<m 1:':1 ~U ~ ~ ~
III 0 0
~z ~.- 0 0 '-"
~o >=";'-Q. I/) 0
"O=~o ..... .- .-
Q.,- = = '- 1:':1
oC 0= Q., 1:;
-- ZQ u< Q
"0 OZ
~ ~"O
III _0 ~ -
.- E-cU m
~ ~ ('1 "0 0 C.J
~ UII) III =z~ 0 ~ ~
~ 1:':I.c = . ..:l
~e-, ~....: g, "0 e
'-" me-,
e-, ~~ II)~S=Q.,
. ~~ ~1Il01:':l"O --
('1 C.J
E-c< ~~U=~ ~
~ ~~ ,-'..:- ~ ~ III r-- 0\
::c '-"
~> 1:':1'- 1:':1 0 Q. ~ 0\
1:':1 ~"O='-O ..... .-
E-c ;J~ >==~'- 1:':1
0= Q., 1:;
O~ U< Q
::C;J
~E-c m
<;J
~~ 0 ~ ~
III ..:l
Q., ~=
~ = 0
.--- --
--
Q., 1Il'- C.J
._ "0 ~
~= III 0 \0
'-"
~o 0 0\
U .-
1:':1
1:;
Q
....
.... Q)
= Q) ~
0 ~ en
.-
- en
C.J ~
~ ~
III '-..
'- '-.. 43
~ 43 ~
- ~ <:
= <:
- -5
'E 1-0
.... ::s
~ 0
u..
5 7--,) ;Y
_^._~._.~"~~_~._~~~"-.o","
Development on Third Avenue, the intersection of Third Avenue!"J" Street would operate at LOS
C. Attachment 1 contains the HCM worksheets which were developed for this Interim Year 1995
analysis.
REVISED FUTURE CONDITIONS ANALYSIS - GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT
CONDITIONS
To examine the potential impact of this Proposed Lucky Store Project under General Plan
Buildout Conditions, a separate technical analysis has been conducted. A new Table 2-10 has
been developed to document the results of this Buildout analysis. The basis for developing the
Base Condition (without Proposed Project trips) was a detailed review of the Buildout travel
forecast developed for the Chula Vista General Plan Update Circulation Element in 1989. This
Buildout travel forecast indicates that the growth in average daily traffic (ADT) on the street
segments adjacent to the two study area intersections will be from 10 to 20 percent. To reflect
this growth during the PM peak hour, the intersection turning movement volumes at the two
study area intersections were modified to reflect an increase of approximately 1 percent
compounded annually or an overall increase in traffic activity of approximately 22 percent. This
increase in PM peak hour traffic activity accounts for all anticipated growth as a result of the
implementation of the General Plan Land Use Element.
A new Table 2-10 has been developed to document the results of PM peak hour
intersection operations under General Plan Buildout Conditions with and without the Proposed
Project. Table 2-10 also contains an additional column of information to document the impact
of the planned Medical Office Building to be located on Third Avenue south of "J" Street. As
shown on the table under all Buildout scenarios, acceptable levels of service (LOS D or better)
are achieved. LOS D operations at major signalized intersections in an urban setting is consistent
with the level of development which is forecasted by most General Plan Land Use Elements.
Attachment 2 contains the HCM worksheets which were developed for this General Plan Buildout
analysis.
REVISED SITE ACCESS ANALYSIS
In response to Item 3 of the Darnell Report (Project Analysis), JHK has conducted an
analysis of potential impacts at the site access driveways. The intersections analyzed include the
main access point on "J" Street (providing access to the Proposed Lucky Store to the south of
"J" Street and the old Lucky Store to the north) and the main access point on Third Avenue
located near the southern property line of the Proposed Lucky site. Both intersections were
analyzed for signal warrants and calculations of unsignalized intersection operations were
conducted using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) procedures. The following sections
discuss the analysis of each of the main site access driveways and Attachment 3 contains a copy
of the HCM worksheets for the Year 1995 PM peak hour condition.
6
7-/~{
-
~
~
z
--
VJ
Z
o
-
~
<z
~<
~....:lVJ
o~z
z....:lO
o<E:
-a:-
~~Q
uzz
~~o
VJe,:,u
a:
~a:~
~<~
z~o
->Q
a:~....:l
~a:-
o~~
::c~='l
~~
<'-
~
~
~
~
=
~
.
M
~
:is
cc
~
-
c
~
VJVJ5 VJ
_'::"O::l::lQ. 0 Cl
C=i~-s:o ....:l
::l VJ~ _
cocc ~
Cl.~-tj...
<e,:,I......~~
(j - .....Q
C.- 0
~ "0 _.~ _
~ -~ ~
~"OQ(j (j -
_c~<"OE (j r-
::l::lM ~ 00
OM(j~O VJ
.g Q. a:: 0 -- M
- 5 .... Q.- ....
.- ell cc 0 cc
::l 0 ~ _ I..~ c=
='lU--~~"O ~
~ Q
~
_'::"O~ VJ
C=i~-- 0 Cl co
::l VJ ~ (j ....:l
cocc ~
c - ~ -.0
<e,:,b$1.
C.>~
~ "0 _ ._
~ -"0
~"O~<~ -
_c VJ (j \0 00
::l::lM 0 ~
OOM(jQ. VJ 00 -
"0 Q. a:: 0 -- M -
5 .... -
::: ell c= ~ .....
::l0~1. cc
='lu--~ ~
Q
o
-.::"Oz
~i~"Otj
coc=5~
c - ~ ..".
<e,:,b-e
c .....~
~"O_;O::
~ ... "0
~ "0 Q.':: ~
_c~(jVJ
::l::lM<O
OOM Q.
"0 Q. (j 0
:: E ~C '-
::l 0 ....~
='lU~e
~
VJ
o
....:l
Cl
co
-
(j \0
~ c:
VJ
-- 0\ -
N -
.....
cc
-
~
Q
...
... ll)
ll) ll)
C ~ b
0 en
.- en
- ~
(j
~ ~ "-
VJ "- 0
- 0 ...
~
- ... <:
c <: .c
- ] 1:
::s
~ 0
u...
7
?<2C
"J" Street Main Access Drivewav
For the "J" Street main access driveway, it was determined that the need for traffic signal
control at this location is potentially necessary. The determination for the need for signal control
at this location should be based on observed traffic conditions in the future by the City of Chula
Vista. To confIrm adequate intersection operations at this location, un signalized intersection
analysis was conducted. This analysis revealed that all movements will operate at acceptable
levels of service (LOS E or better) with only the northbound and southbound left turn movements
exiting the old Lucky Store and the Proposed Lucky Store experiencing high levels of delay.
These high levels of delay for outbound left turn movements is typical for unsignalized
intersection control.
Third A venue Main Access Drivewav
As documented by the HCM worksheets shown in Attachment 3, this main access
driveway on Third A venue will experience acceptable operating conditions during the PM peak
hour. The northbound left turn movement is anticipated to operate at LOS D, however acceptable
gaps in southbound through traffIc should exist due to the effect of the traffic signal located at
the intersection of Third Avenue!"J" Street.
FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS
As a result of this revised u'affic analysis, it has been determined that all previous
recommendations be retained. As a result of site access plan review by the City of Chula Vista,
the previous recommendation documented in the Final Technical Report to remove the
northernmost access driveway along Third A venue has been eliminated. To adequately address
the issue of access at this location, it has been recommended that a raised median be installed
along Third Avenue south of the "J" Street intersection. This raised median would restrict
movements at this northerly access driveway to right turns in and right turns out only.
As mentioned previously, a new recommendation which was developed as a result of this
revised analysis is the extension of the raised median on Third A venue to the southern edge of
the Lucky Store property. This raised median will transition across the existing center left turn
lane on Third Avenue to channelize the northbound left turn movement into the Proposed Lucky
Store site while prohibiting the outbound left turn movement from this driveway. This additional
mitigation recommendation will be required if the daily and PM peak hour traffIc activity for this
Proposed Lucky Store occurs at the levels predicted by the trip generation values applied in this
study. Additionally, it has been confInned that the signalized intersection of Third Avenue!"J"
Street will have sufficient capacity to handle the total estimated amount of traffIc wishing to exit
the site and proceed northbound on Third A venue.
Although this new mitigation measure will divert egress traffic to the "J" Street driveway,
there is sufficient capacity on "1" Street to accommodate the redistribution of project traffic. The
8
0/-'1/
' ~
/
redistribution of project traffic, however, will necessitate an additional modification of the Third
Avenue and "J" Street traffic signal. The new modification requirement will provide a left turn
protective signal phase (arrow) for east and westbound traffic. A previously recommended signal
modification required similar treatment for north and southbound traffic at this intersection.
Site Access Analysis Under General Plan Buildout Conditions
Due to the anticipated level of traffic activity at the two main access driveways to the
Proposed Lucky Store site it will be important for the City of Chula Vista to closely monitor
traffic operations over time. This monitoring process will identify the potential need for
additional traffic control measures, especially at the main access intersection on "J" Street west
of Third A venue. As indicated in the previous analysis, this "1" Street main access driveway will
experience acceptable operating conditions under future conditions without a traffic signal.
However, an additional condition should be applied to the Proposed Lucky Store Project, to
require City approval of any future increase in square footage or driveway trip activity for the
site. The basis for this approval will be the completion of an acceptable Traffic Impact Analysis
as detennined by the City Traffic Engineer.
9
0/1+
/ cr-L
DEC 14 '83 16:47
P~l
JOHNSON, O'CONNELl & MCCARTHY
A PARTNERSHIl' INCLUDINC A I'KOFE5SIONM COKPOR^TION
"TT~NEYS AT lAIN
CABOT. CABOT & FOltlllS COltl'Oltl'!Tf CENTl:K
$$0 WI;$T 'C. STREET, SUITE 11 SO
""'.... OI!<;O. CALIFORNIA m 01-"40
TELEPHONE (61 gl 696-6211
TEl.eC:O"l!R (61" 6t6.1516
TElECOPI~J TRANSMISSION FORM
Transmitted on: ld-.l L"t (q3 Time: ~'.~ pm
Pages: "'1t.lX::> (includes cover page)
To: C\-\U or ~ \Ji ~ _ L~ta... \J(~
\ ,
CI~ 0:orell l 40 Beuefl~ef.
Telecopier No.: 5 '85 - 5l.&> I a.
Document (s): w(i~ non ce of Cbrn~eYY'\e'(\+
of ac;t"1DVI
from: \(e..ui Y\. ~ch(\SOtI
Johnson, O'Connell & McCarthy
File No:
t<~A
(<erA . 13'-1-
~
Client/File:
Operator:
Message:
Please confirm receipt of this transmission via telephone:
Yes No v""'" Attention:
.-NOTICE**
The information contained in this facsimile message is intended only for the use of the individual named above
and the privileges are not waived by virtue of this having been sent by facsimile. If the person actually
receiving this facsimile or any other reader ofthefacsimile is not the named recipient ortheemployee or agent
responsible to deliver it to the named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of the
communication i$strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately
notifr U$ brtelephone and return the original message to us atthe above address via the U.S. Postal Service.
7/e2 Y
DEe 14 '93 16:47
PRGE.002
u'""".... ~-
ItOIatT A. O'C:O"''1'loUl
D~""1ElI. foikO<<THY
HtlOl L POWN
OC~IS"NE A.. CARLINO +
JOHN EvAN lOWAA~
JEANNE l. MM:,f;INNON
JOHNSON, OICONNElL & MCCARTHY
A PAATNeR$HlP lNClUDINC A PROFESSIONAl. CORPOkATION
ATTORNfYSATI.AW
CAIK>T. CA80t ~ FOlt8fS <=ORPOR^Tf CENTER
S:>O WE>T 'C. STREET. SUlTf 11 so
SAN DIEcoO. CAllFOItNIA 92101-3540
December 14, 1993
MICH8.E D. REillY
LEC^,- ADMINIS11lATOR
nUPHONE (&1') &'6-6211
nlECOPIER (619) 69Ei.751 6
. .....,,_ ",,_~ncH'l
. __ ~D'" _......
_D 'lt~..."""
city of Chula Vista and the
Cbula Vista City council
c/o Beverly Authelet, city Clerk
276 Fourth A.venue
Cbula vista, CA 91910
VLA F.RX ~; 585-5612
Re: 'II1trP.rmr BOT:ICB 01' ~1ft1I R~"""'r OP &CT:IOJI
Jrot;1ce of riling petitioD for writ o:f llanaat.
on GPA-93-06 (Aaen4iDg ~he 8eDeral ~laD from
Pro:fessiona1 aa4 AGainistrati.e Office 'to
Retail commercial) aDd PCS-'3-B (.e.08iI19 :froa
co.aercial Of:fica ~4 ...i4ential to Oen~al
Co_ereia1) an4 1:he Relate4 lfotice of
J)et8DlinatioD ApproviDg a .egative Deolaration
for these oJlallgea
f.(lO THE CI:ft OF CHOIA VIS'l'A AND THB CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHO'LA vrSTA:
Pleaso be advised that, pursuant t.o Public Resources Code
521167.5, you are hereby notified that Gerrett Avenue Residents and
its individual member15 intend to file a Pet.it.ion for Writ of
Jtan<late in San Diego Superior Court, South Bay Branch, on
Wednesday, December 15, 1993, seeking- to void GPA-93-06 (amendlnq
the General Plan from prOfessional and administrative ottice to
retail commercial) and PCZ-93-E (rezoning trom commercial office
and residential to central commercial) and the related Notice of
Dete%1lLination approvinq a Keg-at! ve Declaration for these chanqes.
A lIotice of Determination was filed on or after November 15,
1993. A copy of this l.etter of notice will be attached to the
potition for writ of Kandate as an exhibit when filed on Wodnesday.
very truly your.,
JOJD1'SOJI, 0' CObkld. , .ccmRTIn'
~.l.-<JcAv cK - ~/ khl
Kevin K. Johnson
UJ/b
er.- ,,...
?-dj/
** TOTAL PAGE.002 **
ITEM TITLE:
ITEM r
MEETING DATE 12/14/93
Resolution /7,1~~ePting federal Library Services
and Construction Act grant funds for the
continuation of specific library reference
resources, appropriating funds and amending the FY
1993-94 budget.
SUBMITTED BY: Library Director ~
City Manager'r. \)'<, ~\
J\ '1\../ A
For the fourth consecutive yea~the California State Library has
approved the Chula vista Public Library's application for Major
Urban Resource Library (MURL) funds. These funds are available to
libraries serving cities having a population of 100,000 or more and
are awarded on a per capita calculation based on the population and
funding levels provided by the United States Department of
Education. These libraries must also participate in the California
Library Services Act (CLSA) database and statewide inter-library
loan programs. In FY 1993-94 the grant amount is $11,615. These
funds will purchase Business Collection, a microfilm product of
nearly 400 business journals and enhance the career and job seeking
materials collection.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
REVIEWED BY:
(4/5ths Vote:
Yes-1L-No_)
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution, appropriate the
funds and amend the FY 1993-94 budget.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
meeting of September 22, 1993,
application for MURL grant funds.
The Library Board, at their
voted to support the Library's
(Attachment A)
DISCUSSION
On September 28, 1993 the City Council approved the Library's
application for MURL funds.
As the Chula vista Public Library is a City agency serving a
resident population of over 100,000, it has been designated a Major
Urban Resource Library (MURL) and is, therefore, eligible for these
funds.
MURL funds were awarded to the Chula vista Public Library in FY
1990-91, 1991-92 and 1992-93. Monies were used to purchase
business directories, both regional and foreign, as well as timely
business information affecting the greater San Diego and southern
California area. As a result, the Chula vista Public Library has
acquired materials on twin plant/maquiladora projects with Mexico,
directories that highlight both product markets and suppliers in
the Southern California Area, directories which encourage import-
export with foreign companies and etiquette for doing business with
various foreign countries.
~/
ITEM r, PAGE 2
MEETING DATE 12/14/93
MURL funds were also used to purchase Business Collection for the
users of the Chula vista Public Library. Business Collection
provides access to 400 business periodicals and journals on
microfilm and is of use to small business enterprises, students,
private and public sector administrators.
It is the Library's intent to use the 1993-94 funds to continue
Business Collection, and to strengthen the collection of career and
job seeking materials for the users of the Chula vista Public
Library. As required by the grant, Paula Brown and Maureen Roeber
will attend a three-day seminar as a part of the 1993-94 MURL
program. A regional collection development plan will be drafted at
this meeting. Funds to support their participation will be drawn
from the grant itself.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Accepting the grant will provide $11,615 to the City's General fund
and this amount will be deposited into revenue account 260-3654,
and appropriated into the following accounts:
260-2614-5328 - $10,615
260-2614-5221 - 1,000
Reference Books
Travel
7-2/ ?-3
ATTACHMENT A
LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
- 6 -
SEPTEMBER 22, 1993
D. MURL Grant
E. Spanish Immigrant Grant
Director Palmer asked the Trustees to support the Library's
MURL and Spanish Immigrant grant applications. The MURL
grant, in excess of $11,000, would be used to continue the
business collection on microfilm and buy other materials to
support career development.
The $5,000 spanish Immigrant grant, if awarded, will be used
to improve service to the immigrant Spanish-speaking
population at the Castle Park Library.
MSC The Library Board supports the Library's application for
the MURL Grant as well as the Spanish Immigrant Grant for
continuing the business collection and career development
under MURL and for materials to assist Spanish immigrants.
(Donovan/Wilson 4-0-1, Williams absent)
IV. LIBRARY DIRECTOR'S REPORT
A. Parking Lot Resurfacing
Resurfacing the parking lot has been completed with few
public complaints.
B. ADA Grant
The state awarded this grant to Chula vista to develop
a model for service to the disabled and Library staff
is in the process of final implementation. The
equipment has arrived and will be located where the
computer terminal for the handicapped is currently.
These new tools will be available to the public once a
table upon which the equipment will be placed arrives.
Some of the special equipment the center will contain
are a voice-synthesizer system, a large screen
magnification system, an OPAC with a large screen and
voice output.
The Library is also buying a closed caption capable TV
and VCR to preview videos, a system to help the
hearing-impaired in the auditorium and a TDD. Mr.
Alexander suggested using closed-caption videos to aid
in literacy training.
~~j
RESOLUTION NO.
)7330
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING FEDERAL LIBRARY SERVICES
AND CONSTRUCTION ACT GRANT FUNDS FOR THE
CONTINUATION OF SPECIFIC LIBRARY REFERENCE
RESOURCES, APPROPRIATING FUNDS AND AMENDING
THE FY 1993-94 BUDGET
WHEREAS, for the fourth consecutive year, the California
State Library has approved the Chula vista Public Library'S
application for Major Urban Resource Library (MURL) funds; and
WHEREAS, said funds are available to libraries serving
cities having a population of 100,000 or more and are awarded on a
per capita calculation based on the population and funding levels
provided by the united States Department of Education; and
WHEREAS, these libraries must also participate in the
California Library Services Act (CLSA) database and statewide
inter-library loan programs; and
WHEREAS, in FY 1993-94, the grant amount is $11,615 which
funds will purchase Business Collection, a microfilm product of
nearly 400 business journals and enhance the career and job seeking
materials collection; and
WHEREAS, the Library Board, at its meeting of September
22, 1993, voted to support the Library'S application for MURL grant
funds.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby accept federal Library Services
and Construction Act grant funds for the continuation of specific
library reference resources.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the grant will provide
$11,615 to the City'S General Fund, which will be deposited into
revenue account 260-3654 and appropriated as follows: $10,615 into
Account 260-2614-5328 (Reference Books) and $1,000 into Account
260-2614-5221 (Travel).
David Palmer, Library Director
I
I
t
Presented by
c: \rs\murl
~Lj
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM Cj
MEETING DATE 12/14/93
1 t' 1?3J/ t' f d 1 'b '
eso u lon accep lng e era Ll rary Servlces
nd Construction Act (LSCA) funds for the purchase
If books and materials to serve Spanish-speaking
.mmigrants, appropriating funds and amending the FY
L993-94 budget.
SUBMITTED BY: Library Director~
REVIEWED BY: city Manager~ 'QID~\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes---X..-No_)
The California State Library has approved the Chula vista Public
Library's application for grant funds in the amount of $5,000 for
the purchase of books and other materials. The grant was awarded
to the Castle Park Library at 1592 Third Avenue.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution accepting
federal Library Services and Construction Act (LSCA) funds,
appropriate funds, and amend the FY 1993-94 budget.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: At their meeting of September 22,
1993 (ATTACHMENT A) the Library Board of Trustees supported the
Library's application for the grant to serve SpaniSh-speaking
immigrant populations.
DISCUSSION
On September 28, 1993 the City Council approved the Library's
application for federal Library Services and Construction Act
funds.
The State Librarian has made available federal Library Services and
Construction Act (LSCA) funds to develop a program to improve
service to immigrant populations. This is the second year the
Castle Park Library has been awarded these funds which will be used
to purchase approximately 700 books and other materials for Spanish
speaking immigrants. These materials will provide assistance to
immigrants in adapting to the United States, e.g., learning
English, finding employment or housing, and responding to medical,
legal and household repairs and concerns.
FISCAL IMPACT
Accepting this grant will provide $5,000 to the city's General Fund
which will be deposited into revenue account 260-3654 and
appropriated to the following accounts:
260-1615-5331
260-2615-5212
$4,500
$ 500
Books
Printing
tj -- / /q - :L
ATTACHMENT A
LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
- 6 -
SEPTEMBER 22, 1993
D. MURL Grant
E. Spanish Immigrant Grant
Director Palmer asked the Trustees to support the Library's
MURL and Spanish Immigrant grant applications. The MURL
grant, in excess of $11,000, would be used to continue the
business collection on microfilm and buy other materials to
support career development.
The $5,000 Spanish Immigrant grant, if awarded, will be used
to improve service to the immigrant Spanish-speaking
population at the Castle Park Library.
MSC The Library Board supports the Library's application for
the MURL Grant as well as the Spanish Immigrant Grant for
continuing the business collection and career development
under MURL and for materials to assist Spanish immigrants.
(Donovan/Wilson 4-0-1, Williams absent)
IV. LIBRARY DIRECTOR'S REPORT
A. Parking Lot Resurfacing
Resurfacing the parking lot has been completed with few
public complaints.
B. ADA Grant
The state awarded this grant to Chula vista to develop
a model for service to the disabled and Library staff
is in the process of final implementation. The
equipment has arrived and will be located where the
computer terminal for the handicapped is currently.
These new tools will be available to the public once a
table upon which the equipment will be placed arrives.
Some of the special equipment the center will contain
are a voice-synthesizer system, a large screen
magnification system, an OPAC with a large screen and
voice output.
The Library is also buying a closed caption capable TV
and VCR to preview videos, a system to help the
hearing-impaired in the auditorium and a TDD. Mr.
Alexander suggested using closed-caption videos to aid
in literacy training.
9-2
RESOLUTION NO.
/7 JJ J
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING FEDERAL LIBRARY SERVICES
AND CONSTRUCTION ACT (LSCA) FUNDS FOR THE
PURCHASE OF BOOKS AND MATERIALS TO SERVICE
SPANISH-SPEAKING IMMIGRANTS, APPROPRIATING
FUNDS AND AMENDING THE FY 1993-94 BUDGET
WHEREAS, the Chula vista Public Library has been awarded
a Federal Library Services and Construction Act (LSCA) grant by the
California State Library in the amount of $5,000 to purchase books
and other materials for the Castle Park Library at 1592 Third
Avenue; and
WHEREAS, on September 28, 1993, the Library Board of
Trustees voted to support the Library'S application for the grant
to serve Spanish-speaking immigrant populations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby accept the Federal Library
Services and Construction Act (LSCA) grant funds awarded to the
Chula vista Public Library for the purchase of books and materials
to serve Spanish-speaking immigrants.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the FY 1993-94 budget is
hereby amended by appropriating $5,000 from the Library Federal
Grant Fund 260-3654 as follows: $4,500 to Account 260-1615-5331
(Books) and $500 to Account 260-2615-5212 (printin
David Palmer
Library Director
ApPV d as{o
~ce M. ~Ogaard
City Attorney
Presented by
C:\rs\LSCAgmt
9-3
~C( St~ ~
(/{/?(93 ~ It/tie
~ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
.....0
Meeting Date 1
\0
~
\i>
I 2.-/' Li /ct:::,
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: GPA 92-03; Consideration of the 161-acre EastLake
Land Swap portion of the Otay Ranch General Plan Amendment.
GP A 93-04; Application by EastLake Development Company for a
General Plan Amendment for 74-acres within EastLake Greens.
Resolution / 7.3 tJ ~ending the General Plan for 161 acres located
south and west of the EastLake Greens community.
Resolution /73 f) CJ: Amending the General Plan for 74 acres located
within the EastLake Greens Community, south of EastLake High School
and on both sides of the extension of EastLake Parkway.
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of Planning;C:. )t/:
City Manager~ U<6 ~'11
(4/5tbs Vote: Yes_NoX)
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND
The applicant, EastLake Development Company, has submitted two requests for amendments
to the General Plan: a request for an amendment for 74 acres (GPA-93-04) located within the
EastLake Greens community and a request for an amendment for 161 acres (GPA-92-03)
located within the boundaries of the Otay Ranch Project, immediately south of EastLake
Greens, and known as the EastLake "Land Swap" parcels. Consideration of the two
amendments are combined here because of the close land use relationship between requests.
The Chula Vista Planning Commission also considered and made recommendations on the two
requests in a combined public hearing.
The General Plan Amendment (GPA 92-03) for EastLake Greens consists of a request for
redesignation of 74 acres located within EastLake Greens. The proposed GPA involves two
separate parcels, one south of Eastlake High School on the west side of Eastlake Parkway, east
of the future alignment of the SR-125 freeway (Subarea 1) and the second in the southwestern
portion of EastLake Greens, south and west of the (240 ft. wide) San Diego Aqueduct/SDG&E
utility easement (Subarea 2) [See Attachment A of the draft Council Resolution].
An Initial Study (Case No. 93-16) was prepared for the proposed project and a
recommendation was made by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator that the project
~
, 0-\
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 12
be found to have no significant impacts which were not discussed in EIR 86-04 for the
EastLake Greens project, and that an Addendum to EIR-86-04 for the proposed project be
adopted. Enclosed with this agenda statement is a copy 7f 'the EastLake Greens SPA
Environmental Impact Report (EIR-86-04) and the Addendum.
On Oc ber 28, 1993, the City Council took fmal act~on;to Certify the Final Program
Environme Impact Report (FPEIR-90-01) for the Otay ~ch Project and approve the Otay
Ranch Genera Plan Amendment (GP A 92-03), excluding the EastLake Land Swap parcels.
The EastLake L d Swap property consists of 161 acres. located immediately south of the
EastLake . Greens c mmunity and was analyzed within $e Otay Ranch Program EIR 90-01
(phase II Progress PI Alternative). Since this portion of the Otay Ranch Project is so closely
related to the EastLak Greens community and the/companion request by the EastLake
Development Company ( A 93-04), discussion of b9th requests have been combined in this
I
report.
The Final Program Environmenta PEIR-90-1), CEQA Findings, Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, d Stateme of Overriding Considerations for the Otay
Ranch Project, which the Council is 1:) 'ng asked to recertify and adopt, is not included in the
Council's packet due to recent action on e Ota Ranch. An additional copy can be provided
if any member of the Council desires.
-
This item was continued from the meeting of 0 mber 16, 1993 as requested by the EastLake
Development Company, in order to meet with ncerned property owners regarding the
proposed General Plan amendments. Three omeowne from the EastLake Greens community,
including Mr. Jack Pouchet, whose corr spondence received by the Mayor and City
Council on November 15, 1993 (see a hed), met with s f and the EastLake Development
Company on November 29, 1993, t discuss the merits f the proposed General Plan
amendment. Each of the property own s appeared to depart wi a much better understanding
of the proposal and indicated that ir initial concerns were les ned after receiving a full
explanation of the proposal. In dition, a petition which was esented to the City on
November 16 is attached. Neither lanning Department staff nor the a licant were aware of
this petition until December 2. taff and/or the applicant will be in ontact with these
petitioners prior to the Council eting.
RECOMMENDATION: Tha
1.
Recertify that they hav read and considered FPEIR 90-01, for the Otay Ranc Project,
and that the proposed project has no significant impacts which were not discussed in
the EIR, and adopt the General Plan Amendment for the EastLake Land Swap parcels
(GP A 92~03) per the Staff/Planning Commission recommendation contained in the
attached draft City Council Resolution.
-
~
Page 3, Item I 10
Meeting Date 12L 71993 \ 2,1 I'""' 1'1 ~
2. Recertify that they have read and considered EIR 86-04, for the EastLake Greens
project, and that the proposed project has no significant impacts which were not
discussed in the EIR, and adopt the proposed Addendum to Environmental Impact
Report EIR 86-04.
3. Adopt the proposed EastLake Greens General Plan Amendment (GPA 93-04) per the
Staff recommendation reflected in the attached draft City Council Resolution.
4. Adopt CEQA Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation
Monitoring Report for the EastLake Land Swap (GP A-92-03, part of the Otay Ranch
Project GPA) & EastLake Greens (GPA-93-04).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
Resource Conservation Commission
The Resource Conservation Commission (RCC) reviewed the contents of the Otay Ranch Final
Program EIR (FPEIR-90-0l) on February 15 and March 1, 1993, and after much discussion
failed to make a recommendation (vote 3-3) regarding adequacy of the FPEIR. No comments
regarding the EastLake Land Swap portion of the Otay Ranch GP A were made by the RCC
(see minutes attached).
The RCC reviewed the contents of the EastLake Greens EIR (EIR-86-04) on May 8, 1989,
prior to certification of the EIR and approval of the EastLake Greens General Development
Plan, Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map. The RCC recommended
(vote 4-0) that the EIR not be certified (see minutes attached). The Environmental Review
Coordinator prepared an Addendum to EIR-86-04 which analyzes the impact of the proposed
GP A for EastLake Greens, and found that the number of units proposed is less than that
analyzed in EIR-86-04, and that there have been no substantial changes in circumstances
regarding the project. The Environmental Review Coordinator therefore found that EIR-86-04
is adequate for the proposed GP A in accordance with the Addendum.
Planning Commission
On May 26, 1993, the Planning Commission recommended that the Council:
1. Adopt the proposed EastLake Land Swap portion of the Otay Ranch General Plan
Amendment (GPA-92-03) per the Staff Recommended Alternative (see attached
Planning Commission Recommending Resolution (PCM-90-3)), and
~
It'\-~
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 1
lO
-
2. Adopt the proposed General Plan Amendment for EastLake Greens (GPA 93-04),
subject to designating 20 acres south of EastLake High School (see Sub-Area #1 on
Exhibit 10) as Medium Residential (6-11 duJac) (see attached Planning Commission
Recommending Resolution (GPA-93-04)).
DISCUSSION:
The proposed General Plan Amendment for the EastLake Land Swap parcels for the Otay
Ranch Project relate closely to the proposal by the EastLake Development Company for an
amendment to the General Plan for 74 acres within EastLake Greens. Therefore, it is
appropriate to review and discuss each proposal in the same context and within the same
hearing.
Community Forum
On February 18, 1993, prior to Planning Commission hearings on either GP A proposal, the
Planning Department conducted a community forum for the proposed EastLake Greens GP A
(GPA 93-04). Also presented and discussed at that forum was the proposed EastLake Land
Swap portion of the Otay Ranch Project (GPA-92-03). The forum was held at the EastLake
High School library, where nine citizens from the EastLake Greens neighborhood attended.
-
EASTLAKE LAND SWAP (Otay Ranch GP A 92-03)
When the planning effort for the Otay Ranch began in 1989, the EastLake Development
Company owned approximately 160 acres completely surrounded by the Otay Ranch and
identified as part of the previously approved EastLake Phase II GDP (identified as Parcel "A"
on attached Exhibit 1). Without inclusion in the overall planning for the Otay Ranch,
comprehensive planning of the Otay Valley Parcel would have been difficult. Because of this,
various Project Team plan alternatives have been prepared which include this parcel of land.
During the planning effort for the Otay Ranch, Otay Vista Associates, L.P. (The Baldwin Co.)
and EastLake Development Company negotiated a private land swap agreement whereby land
area of similar size (3 separate sites totalling 161 acres, identified as Parcel "B" on Exhibit 1)
located immediately adjacent to the EastLake Development land holdings (EastLake Greens
SPA), but a part of the Otay Ranch, would be transferred to the EastLake Development
Company in exchange for the 160 acre parcel (Parcel A). This transfer permitted the
coordinated development of the Otay Ranch and resulted in a logical development boundary
for EastLake.
Environmental surveys and analysis have been conducted on the Otay Ranch parcels, including _
the EastLake parcel. Both land swap parcels are included in the Program EIR. Parcel B, which
~
lo-Y
Page 5, Item \ 0
Meeting Date l2l /1993 '"1../ l'-i 1'13
is now owned by EastLake, involves only a General Plan Amendment at this time. Table 1
reflects the applicant's proposal and the Staff/Planning Commission recommendations.
Applicant's Proposal
Proposed residential densities within the Land Swap area would result in a unit total ranging
from 670 dwelling units to 1,071. However, development at mid-range would result in a total
of 872 units, 65 units more than the current General Plan designations allow for the same area
(see Table 1 and Exhibit 6 for map).
Staff/Planning Commission Recommendations
The Staff/Planning Commission recommended residential densities would result in a unit total
ranging from 552 to 924 dwelling units in the Low-Medium and Medium-High Residential
designated areas. Development at mid-range would result in a total of 739 units, 68 units less
than the current General Plan designation allows for the same area (See Table 1 and Exhibit
7 for map).
~
IO-~
Table 1
EastLake Land Swap GPA
Page 6, Item
Meeting Date 12/'Z
//
10
-,
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
Dwelling Units
Land Use Designation Acreage Baseline High
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 47 Ac. 141 282
Medium (6-11 DUlAC) 70 Ac. 420 770
Open Space 9 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 14 Ac.
Pubic/Quasi-Public 21 Ac.
TOTAL 161 Ac. 561 DU 1,052 DU
PROPOSED GP AMENDMENT (Applicant's proposal)
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 15 Ac. 45 90
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC) 29 Ac. 319 522
High (18-27 DUlAC) 17 Ac. 306 459 -
Ret. Comm. 52 Ac.
Prof. & Admin. 17 Ac.
Open Space 14 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 17 Ac.
TOTAL 161 Ac. 670 DU 1,071 DU
STAFF/PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDA nON
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 19 Ac. 57 114
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC) 45 Ac. 495 810
Retail Commercial 52 Ac.
Prof. & Admin. 17 Ac.
Open Space 11 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 17 Ac.
TOTAL 161 Ac. 552 DU 924 DU
~
, 0-<.0
-
10
1l.,./I'-4/ 'i~
EASTLAKE GREENS (GPA 93-04)
As a result of the land uses proposed on the adjacent Otay Ranch and the need to provide a
variety of residential product types within the EastLake Greens community as well as meet
affordable housing goals within the community, the EastLake Development Company is
proposing density increases on a companion 74 acres within the EastLake Greens. Table 2
reflects the applicant's proposal as well as the Planning Commission and Staff s
Recommendations.
History
As originally proposed and analyzed, the EastLake Greens SPA called for a total unit count
of 3,609 dwelling units. In approving the tentative subdivision map for EastLake Greens in
1989, the City Council on an interim basis, reduced the density and unit count of five parcels
in EastLake Greens (parcels R-24, R-25, R-26 R-27, and R-28) from High Density Residential
(18-27+ du/ac.) to Low-Medium Density Residential with a density of 4.5 du/ac (see Exhibit
8 attached). This action deferred any consideration of future density increases and the provision
of an affordable housing agreement for the Greens until after refmement of the Land Use
Element pertaining to establishing densities within a designated range. The overall dwelling
units were reduced from 3,609 to 2,774, for a total reduction of 835 dwelling units. See
discussion of affordable housing under the following ANALYSIS section.
Applicant's Proposal
Proposed residential densities for the 74 acre area would result in an increase in allowable units
from the existing range of 156 to 312 dwelling units in the existing Low-Medium Residential
designated areas to a range of 574 to 891 dwelling units in the proposed Low-Medium,
Medium-High and High Density Residential designated areas. Development at mid-range would
result in a total of 734 units, 500 units more than the current General Plan designations for the
same area (see Table 2 and Exhibit 6 for map).
Staff and Planning Commission Recommendations
Staff is recommending that the proposed residential areas west of the existing 240 ft. wide
north/south utility easement, including the EastLake-owned portion of the easement (120 ft. in
width) be designated as Medium-High Residential (11-18 du/ac) for the reasons stated in the
ANAL YSIS section below. All of the land area located east of the utility easement, including
Water District-owned portion of the easement (also 120 ft. in width) is proposed to remain as
Low Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac), as presently designated in the General Plan. Although
the area located east of the utility easement is designated Low Medium, development projects
approved in the EastLake Greens SPA are in the range of 11-18 du/ac immediately adjacent
to the easement.
~
10-1
Page 8, Item
Meeting Date 121.
Table 2
EastLake Greens GP A
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
Dwelling Units
Land Use Designation Acreage Baseline Midrange High
Low-Medium (3-6 DU/AC) 52 Ac. 156 234 312
Circulation (Streets) 9 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 13 Ac. - - -
TOTAL 74 Ac. 156 DU 234 DU 3 I 2 DU
PROPOSED GP AMENDMENT (Applicant's proposal)
Low-Medium (3-6 DU/AC) 3 Ac. 9 14 18
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC) 17 Ac. 187 247 306
High (18-27 DU/AC) 21 Ac. 378 473 .... 567
Open Space 17 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 2 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 14 Ac. - - -
TOTAL 74 Ac. 574 DU 734 DU 891 DU
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Low-Medium (3-6 DU/AC) 3 Ac. 9 14 18
Medium (6-1 I DUlAC) 20 Ac. 120 170 220
Medium-High (11-18 DU/AC) 24 Ac. 264 348 432
Open Space 9 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 2 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 16 Ac. - - -
TOTAL 74 Ac. 393 DU 532 DU 670 DU
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Low-Medium (3-6 DU/AC) 3 Ac. 9 14 18
Medium-High (11-18 DU/AC) 44 Ac. 484 638 792
Open Space 9 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 2 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 16 Ac. - - -
TOTAL 74 Ac. 493 DU . 652 DU 810 DU
~
lo-~
10
-
-.
-
Page 9, Item
Meeting Date 12/ 71993
10
I-z...} I ~/t1~
The staff recommendation for the EastLake Greens GP A would result in an increase in
allowable density in the 74 acre area from a range of 156 to 312 dwelling units in the existing
Low-Medium Residential designated areas to a range of 493 to 810 dwelling units in the
Medium-High Residential density residentially designated areas. Development at mid-range
would result in a total of 652 units, 418 units more than the current General Plan designations
for the same area.
The Planning Commission concurs with staff with the exception that the 20 acre Subarea # 1
parcel, located south of EastLake High School, is recommended to be designated as Medium
Residential (6-11 dulac). The Planning Commission's recommendation at mid-range would
result in a total of 532 units, 298 units more than the current General Plan designations allow
at mid-range (See Table 2 and Exhibit 10 for map).
Table 3 reflects the composite totals of both the EastLake Land Swap and the EastLake Greens
GPA's. Approval of the applicant's proposals at mid-range densities would result in an increase
of 562 units over the current General Plan designations. The Staff Recommendations would
result in a total increase of 349 units. The Planning Commission recommendations would result
in an increase of 229 units.
ANALYSIS
Rationale for General Plan Amendment
The proposed General Plan Amendment and General Development Plan for the Otay Ranch
substantially alter the land uses and planning parameters for the land area in the vicinity of
EastLake Parkway and Orange Avenue. The EastLake Greens GPA (Sub Area #1 and #2) and
the bulk of the Land Swap Parcels, located between Eastlake Parkway and the SR-125
alignment, is within the "activity corridor" along SR-125. The location along a future Express
Bus route, the close proximity to a potential regional light rail transit station to the south, the
location adjacent to future SR-125, the location near retail services to the north and south,
placement adjacent to and access from a major roadway (EastLake Parkway), as well as
separation from residential neighborhoods to the east by a major water aqueduct and SDG&E
utility easement (240 ft. wide) make the proposed designation of these parcels as higher density
residential and freeway-oriented commercial appropriate (see Exhibits 1 through 4).
Staff is recommending approval of an alternative to the applicant's proposal that would provide
for Medium-High Residential (l ]-18 dulac) densities west of a major north/south utility
easement, similar to residential densities within Village Core areas on the Otay Ranch (from
14.5 to ] 8 dulac). No High Density Residential (18-27 dulac) is proposed within any village
on the Otay Ranch, and it is envisioned that through density transfers, limited higher density
multiple family units could be constructed, thereby providing the ability to provide a balance
~
~
1 c- ~
Page 10, Item
Meeting Date 12/
ID_
of housing types. Recommended multiple family densities are compatible with the planned
intensity of this area and would provide additional opportunities to provide affordable housing.
The Medium-High (11-18 dulac) densities recommended for both the EastLake Greens GPA
parcels and the Land Swap parcels could result in product types that are consistent with a
number of existing and planned townhome condominium developments within the EastLake
Greens SPA and thus would be compatible with the remainder of EastLake Greens. Through
transfers of density, some areas of EastLake Greens could provide higher densities necessary
to provide affordable units while, conversely, averaging the overall densities would result in
some lower density duplex or townhome units. Processing of a General Development Plan,
SPA Plan and Design Review applications would be required in order to develop the property.
The designation of 17 acres located at the southwest quadrant of SR-125 and Telegraph
Canyon Road as "Professional and Administrative Office" will result in an appropriate land
use surrounded on two sides by a major arterials (Telegraph Canyon Road and SR-125), and
on the remaining side by a high voltage power line easement. This easement will also act a
buffer between single family dwellings proposed to the west and the ultimate office land use.
The designation of 52 acres of "Retail Commercial!t north of East Orange Avenue and between -
EastLake Parkway and SR-125, will result in a logical extension of the freeway-oriented
commercial designed for immediately to the south within the Otay Ranch and is appropriately
located within the "Activity Corridor!t adjacent to SR-125 and EastLake Parkway.
Affordable Housing
An important consideration in staffs analysis of this proposed GPA is the prOVlSlon of
affordable housing opportunities. The City Council included in the Housing Element (updated
in 1992), the following policy (Part 3, Section III, Obj. 1, Policy 3), which provides for
flexibility in establishing, and in some cases, increasing densities within the Eastern Territories
that can provide for affordable housing units.
!tIn conjunction with the policy implementation, the City shall evaluate the Land Use
Element of the General Plan to determine the extent to which, in warranted cases,
increases in density would facilitate the provision of affordable units. As appropriate,
the City shall consider amendments to the Land Use Element."
As discussed previously, with approval of the EastLake Greens tentative map in 1989, the
Council also deferred a condition requiring the developer to provide a low and moderate-
income housing program (5% low and 5% moderate) for the EastLake Greens, subject to the
approval of the City's housing coordinator. An affordable housing program has not been
adopted to date for the EastLake Greens. The applicant's proposed General Plan Amendment .-.
would re-designate one of the five parcels, R-26 (which is part of Subarea 1), back to a High-
~
, 0-( 0
Page 11, Item
Meeting Date 1
/0
\~/,~jq3
Density Residential General Plan designation. With the proposed density increase staff is
recommending that the interim deferral of the housing requirement resulting from the EastLake
Greens tentative subdivision map conditions be concluded.
The current status for the provision of affordable housing units for the EastLake community,
as a whole, is as follows:
EastLake I - A total of 19 low-income housing units are still needed to achieve the
City's standard of 5% low & 5% medium income units. With the approval of the Kaiser
Hospital facility a displacement of 405 high density units occurred, which severely
impaired EastLake's ability to provide the 19 low income units within EastLake 1.
EastLake II (EastLake Greens) - A total of 139 low-income and 139 moderate-income
units would be required to achieve compliance, based on the SPA approval of 2,774
units.
(EastLake Trails) - A total of 63 low-income and 63 moderate-income units would be
required for this portion of the EastLake community. A total of 1,260 units are planned
to be built within the Trails project.
EastLake III - A total of 89 low-income and 89 moderate-income units need to be
provided within this portion of the EastLake community. A total of 260 medium density
and 506 medium-high density units are planned to be built within EastLake III,
providing increased opportunities for providing affordable housing.
EastLake IV - This area consists of 160 acres which has been exchanged for the Land
Swap parcels, and currently is included as part of the Otay Ranch General Development
Plan and is no longer owned by the EastLake Development Company.
With the approval of the staff recommended GP A alternative the Greens would be required to
provide a total of 160 low-income and 160 moderate-income units. The staff recommended
Land Swap units would require an additional 37 low-income units and an additional 37 low-
income units. Therefore, the total increase of required affordable housing units for the two
General Plan Amendment areas would be 197 low-income units and 197 moderate-income
units.
Staff intends to request that the developer provide an affordable housing implementation
program for the entire EastLake community, including the Land Swap parcels, which would
outline the phasing and location of anticipated affordable housing units. It is anticipated that
this program be submitted and approved prior to the approval of any final subdivision maps
and/or prior to approval of future General Development Plans within EastLake.
~
'O-it
Page 12, Item
Meeting Date 12/
10
-
FISCAL IMP ACT: A preliminary Fiscal Impact Study has been prepared by the Economic
Strategies Group for the EastLake Development Company. The study analyzes the impacts
anticipated for both the Land Swap and Greens GP A areas, for both the existing land use
designations and the proposed designations. Although a General Development Plan and SPA
Plan will be filed as subsequent actions on the subject properties, assumptions as to product
type, development phasing, service agencies, etc. have been made for purposes of the study.
Based on the preliminary study, the net cumulative impact to the City's General Fund for both
proposals is anticipated to be a positive $3,466,092 over a 15 year time period. Development
phasing (assuming the adoption of subsequent development approvals) will result in a $34,547
(positive) impact in the first year to a positive $385,150 in year 15.
If developed under the current General Plan designations, the 15 year net cumulative balance
would amount to a negative $832,205. See the attached Fiscal Impact Tables (Fig. 1 & 2) for
a summary of impacts between existing General Plan designations and proposed. A copy of
the complete preliminary Fiscal Impact Study will be forwarded to Council under separate
cover.
-
"........
~
'0"/2..
Table 3
Combined EastLake Land Swap/EastLake Greens GP A's
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
Dwelling Units
Land Use Designation Acreage Baseline Midrange High
Low-Medium (3-6 DU/AC) 99 Ac. 297 ..... 594
Medium (6-11 DU/AC) 70 Ac. 420 ... 770
Open Space 9 Ac. ..
Circulation (Streets) 23 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 34 Ac. - - -
TOTAL 235 Ac. 717 DU 1,041 DU 1,364 DU
PROPOSED GP AMENDMENT (Applicant's proposal)
Low-Medium (3-6 DU/AC) 18 Ac. 54 81 108
Medium-High (11-18 DU/ AC) 46 Ac. 506 667 828
High (18-27 DU/AC) 38 Ac. 684 855 1,026
Retail Commercial 52 Ac.
Prof. & Admin. 17 Ac.
Open Space 31 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 19 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 14 Ac. - - -
TOTAL 235 Ac. 1,244 DU 1,603 DU 1,962 DU
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Low-Medium (3-6 DU/AC) 22 Ac. 66 99 132
Medium (6-11 DU/AC) 20 Ac. 120 170 220
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC) 69 Ac. 759 1,001 1,242
Retail Commercial 52 Ac.
Prof. & Admin. 17 Ac.
Open Space 20 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 19 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 16 Ac. - - -
TOTAL 235 Ac. 945 DU 1,270 DU 1,594 DU
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 22 Ac. 66 99 132
Medium-High (11-18 DU/AC) 89 Ac. 979 1,291 1,602
Retail Commercial 52 Ac.
Prof. & Admin. 17 Ac. I...
Open Space 20 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 19 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 16 Ac. - - -
TOTAL 235 Ac. 1,045 DU 1,390 DU 1,734 DU
~
10-/3
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
---
LETTER RECEIVED FROM PROPERTY OWNER
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS AFFECTING EASTLAKE GREENS
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: .
· March 3, 1993 hearing (EastLake Greens GP A)
· May 12, 1993 hearing (Combined Land Swap and Greens GPA's)
· May 26, 1993 hearing (EastLake Greens GPA)
RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
· February 15, 1993 meeting (Otay Ranch FPEIR, which includes EastLake Land Swap)
· March 1, 1993 meeting (Otay Ranch FPEIR, which includes EastLake Land Swap)
· May 22, 1989 meeting (EastLake Greens EIR)
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING RESOLUTIONS:
.
Planning Commission Resolution and Draft City Council Resolution for GP A-92-03
(Otay Ranch Project)
Planning Commission Resolution and Draft City Council Resolution for GP A-93-04
.. (EastLake Greens GPA)
-,
.
DRAFT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS
· Draft City Council Resolution for GP A-92-03 (Otay Ranch Project)
· Draft City Council Resolution for GPA-93-04 (EastLake Greens GPA)
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS FOR THE EASTLAKE LAND SWAP GP A (GP A-92-
03)
· CEQA Findings & Statement of Overriding Considerations (not included in packet)
· Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (not included in packet)
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS FOR THE EASTLAKE GREENS GPA (GPA-93-04)
· EIR-86-4 (EastLake Greens SPA)
· Addendum to EIR-86-04
· CEQA Findings
· Statement of Overriding Considerations
· Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
..-
FISCAL IMPACT TABLES
~ '74
- /
/D-I'-1
July, 1989
July, 1989
July, 1989
February, 1990
October, 1991
May, 1992
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS EFFECTING
EASTLAKE GREENS
City General Plan Update
EastLake II General Development Plan adopted (expansion of EastLake
I). This area includes the Greens & Trails SPA's, totalling 4,034 units.
EastLake Greens SPA & Tentative Subdivision Map approved, totalling
2,774 units (this included reduction of 835 units from 5 lots and deferral
of affordable housing program; any consideration of increased densities
to occur after General Plan density policies revised and should include
affordable housing program consideration).
Revised General Plan density policies adopted.
Rezone of 2 lots within EastLake Greens from Residential Planned
Concept to Residential Single Family (no increase in units).
Transfer of 69 units within EastLake Greens to areas R-24 & R-25
approved. Transfer resulted in change from 4.5 duJac to 10 duJac (units
transferred from areas R-2, R-8, R-9, R-13, R-17 & R-19) with no
increase in Greens unit total.
~
IO-l'4-1
MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING
-
ae.ource CoD.erYation eo..i..ion
Cbala Vbta. California
5:30 p.m.
Monday, May 22. 1989
Conference loom 1
Public Services Building
CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meetin: vas called to order at 5 :39 p.m. by
Chairman Rowe. City Staff Environmental leview Coordinator Doug leid called
roll. Present: Chairman Rowe; Commissioners Fox. Stevens and Ray. Absent:
Waller. Also present vere Barbara Ball and Frank Chidester.
It vas MSP (Fox/lay) to move the meeting time to 6:00 p.m., beginning vith the
next regularly scheduled meeting of June 12, 1989.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of April 24, 1989 vere approved.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. It vas MSP (Stevens/Ray) to nominate Bob Fox as vice-chairman.
2. Commissioner Jim Stevens presented a report on the Eastlake Greens & Trails
EIR. After a lengthy presentation and discussion, it vas determined that as the
Master EIR is five years old, it makes the Eastlake EIR insufficient as to its
findings. Too many changes have taken place on the Master Plan and the range of
alternatives were not adequately dealt vith. It vas MSP (Stevens/Fox) that the
EIR is inadequate as presented.
-.,
It vas further moved and seconded (Rowe/Stevens):
"Based on the Commission's independent understanding of the requirements of
CEQA, and because of the lapse of time between the preparation of the
Eastlake Master EIR and the Eastlake Greens SPA Draft Supplemental EIR (Case
No. EIR 86-4), and in light of the changes which have taken place in the
region, the RCC is of the opinion that said Eastlake Greens SPA Draft
Supplemental EIR is inadequate in the following respect:
(a) The document fails to give adequate consideration to the projects
cumulative impact on:
(1) transportation and circulation;
(2) .ewer services;
(3) refuse disposal;
(4) vater availability
(b) The document fail. to describe a range of reasonable alternatives
to the project that could feasibly attain the project.. objectives
and fail. to evaluate the comparative merits of each alternative."
Motion carried.
.......,
Commissioner Stevens viII attend the Planning Commission meeting to present the
lCC.. po.ition on this issue.
-102
/ ,;/ .;L-
10-''"--1-2.
.
lesource Conservation Commission
Page 2
3. A Teport on the Trolley Commercial ElR-89-4M, was presented by Bob Fox. The
EIR was considered adequate, but inadequately addressed the alternatives. It was
MSP (Fox/Stevens) to adopt the ElR as presented. A recommendation .hould be made
to the Planning Commission to address the problem of the Orange Ave./Palamar St.
intersection. It was MSP (Fox/lay) to recommend a third alternative to the
Planning Commiuion, to Teduce project exclusion of four Testaurant pads and
inclusion of financial institution.
4. It was MSP (lay/Fox) that Commissioner Fox would present the General Plan
position of lesource Conservation Commission at the Planning commission on May
31.
5. Items for the Planning Commission Agenda for the meeting of May 24, 1989
were reviewed with no action taken by RCC.
ADJOURNMENT:
Meeting was adjourned by Chairman Rowe at 7 :08 p.m. to the Regular Business
Meeting of June 12, 1989 at 6:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
EXPRESS SECRETARIAL SERVICES
Barbara Taylor
~
ll""\ - 1'4-3
~,
FISCAL IMPACT TABLES
Figures 1 & 2
-
..........
/.2-11--JJ ~
. (
--
IO-I~-"'"
# g '.. ... ~ ~ '" 110 ~ r- ~.. ,... ,.. M .. ~ .... ~
.".., ~ - OQ ~ N I"" ~ ""'Oo' l"-
f! ~., ()o. ,... PI ... ('"l N (I', '" ~
~~g~~~~~t:~' cf1ii~
~ ~:;;V)~~~~~~~~~ ~
!~ ~~~~~~~""'~~~~~~~ t.
.....
C1 ~ ~ ~~Oo ~ CJ ~ Ii"L It\ "i Ifl "l V) -
.
~ ae '\Cl~-n~oot ,...g...-..,,---- ~
(I) ~ ~~~~a ~2i~iiiii
] r3
I ..
.,
~ J ~~~~U.~fi~~~~~U ~
~~~g~m~:1~~~5~~~
""Mtlttlttl'!-M"~ ~
,
I
I
l.lJ ~ i I€!: ~I~~:l~ i~&'~~ ~
~ ~.~. ~ .ltiQ.. .~~....
$:NOO &i~~"la' at; ,...
~
~u j ~~B ~~ Q ~ t! ~
i
; :
$ 8 ~ ~ ~ i S 8 ~ 8 ~ ~ g .~ g ~
..,' ~ 0 ....s V'i f'\ N N N N N N ('i ~ rot
M ~ ... ~ ! "'" "'" "'" on on on ,,\ VI "'"
g ] c.;.;~~~ ~~~~~~a:l:l ~
~~
! I ~~..., ~ ~ 8 ~ 0. ~~ N ~ t 2 ~ ~
..~ ~ ~ ~ s; . '"'Oo .;~ ~.. ("~ _ (
p. . ~ ~ ~n~~~E~~~~~~~~ -
~ ~,~ ~.. t" '''I I" I Co; e-'l f"'l p", M"', . e.
tlC VI "" 41" "" 400It ." .., M "" .., V\
~~~~ I V.
f"'( r
~ I
,1$ I i """ ...... ..... ..... ...... ...... ,.. 8' i ~ ,... ~ ..... ,.... ~
f"I c- - ,... c<'\ .0 J ~-
ifi~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~... _ ~ ''1 ..~ ~ C{
e" n~~ ;l.-; ~ 0- -c -c 00 0'1 -c ,.. t ~ ~ 8 ~ ... g ~
... I
~ ttl ~t;~c.ooot()O'Io- 00 .
"" "" 4;\ ~ _ - .- .-
~ ......... '-" .... .... e .... _ ~ ~ ~ ~ -
.... .... ...., ~
!J to. co', ~ t'- N N ,... ,... r- r- ~ \; I; t; C'-o ~
~rt ---"~'f~ ...
~ i 0 oq ~ ~ ~ ~ r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.
'" """' .. - .. ... .. ... ~ .... .~ ...
~~ !~!fii~ii~fia~~ ~
I cS ~
!
~ a~~"'InCl\~-COltf"l\OC'-o~ ~
~ J ., .~~~t ~.~.5 .~!(t~f'~
'-'l Cl\!~0\c-"'~~.... t..-Ci~~
~ ___ ...... . __ ~ r. '""" ,... .... .-1 ... .
;; ~~~~~~Q~~t;~~toI)
, I
,
ji ~ 00 '-'S'~""''''''-'''''''''''''''f;~~''''' N'
." N ;t. i ~ ! n ~I" '"" V\
l vi~~~ ~oO~o\~~~~S~ ~
... t; _ ti ... _ - ... ... ... .... ... ... g .
tfj - ~
~ .....~~~~~~ec~~t',,, a
] lJ ;... ~ ,.. ,... ,... ~ f. I' t'oo .... r.. f"o to. " f"o i t
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. .. ... .oO .., .~ .. ... -
l 'Oo ~~"".f"o~""~f"'o""
R fi~C"'INMr""""r--":s;ff~tir-: J
_:t:t:C~:!:!~.:!..-p. _:!
. ....~to'l..,to'l...'^""".....tIt.......
3 l1 ~?1.~~~~~~~~.~~~~~ ~
u
~ sa ~ .~
j ~~II"lQo\"'~8Q~~Co1O~""~"''''' f'l
_ ~ ~ ~ ~: ,.~ ~ .- .... r~ ... t! ~ ~ ~
. ... 4\ "" .., ... ... tit .., ~ ... ... (,iI!l CA tI\ ... ~
...
~ ! 11
I e-MC'I"VOl R 4
.. rt ,'"'I . VOl -c f"o eG 01 - ... - - - -
, , ...--....;. ...
..,t.:k ,..? r.5
10-1'-\-5 _ _ . .a. - ~ -' _ "'P' -...... ~ ~
.,
P.-:Jot,
.
rtGURE 2
-
'~."SlLAK'fi ORP.f..NS &. LAND SWAP
I
J!XfSTING OF.Nl:RA.L PLAN & PROf'OSBD AMRNOMP.N1S
I. NF..l folSCAL BA1.ANCE COMPAR.F.D TO HXJSllNO OEN.E.RAL PtA.~
t CJ'IY OF CHUlA VISTA
1993 DOU.ARS
j
_-.J
I i
I
.Y~~L__ _.._.~.H~ ~~~~._
I
,
._...... - -. -_. -.-.-.- .---".....-- ..,.#,.......-..-....---.~.."...... .-.. ...-.'_.' ...... ...
CC/!flhil1ed
Eail~~t~~~. $.~~P_ . .... _..~~~~~CI~~i~~~
1 ($2J, J40) $41,091 $1~,9.s1
1 ($50,76J) $64,247 $13,98~
3 ($6~,~9S) $110.581 $41.981
4 ($74.211) $165,179 $90,909
S ($7S,6S~) $229.983 1151.328
6 ($76.368) $290.732 S1J4,164
I
7 ($77,814) 5333.015 $1SS,191
8 ($18.452) $393,'270 $314,8J8
9 ($19,065) $472.342 $3~j,277
10 ($79.663) $~.50.~1,6 $170.6R3
It ($80,24 "I) $549,161 $4~8.914
~\
12 ($80,8 J7j $548.004 $167.187
13 ($8J.313) $$46.986 $16'.613
14 ($81.916) S~,J01 $464,185
I~ ($82,447) SS4S.346 $l62,899
!
"ot<11: ($J .088,09.\) $5,186.392 $4.?98.298
I I
4Ia ..-. _._~- .. ... .....__.._...-.._ ......~ r. .......--..._.,~.... ..-..-......,..
Sourci(: Economic St'i\l~git.$ Group. 199),
, '
!
-.
~ /'7J....z:, -;
10- l'-f-~
.,
,.
, -
Residents of EastLake Greens
Chula Vista City Council
Chula Vista City Clerk's Office
Chula Vista, CA 91910
This petition is written in regards to the notice of public hearing held by the City Council
of Chula Vista, CA, for the purpose of eonsidering and application for a General Plan
Amendment proposed by the EastLake Development Company for the EastLake Greens
community, case no. GPA-93-Q4 & GPA-92-D3 dated November 3, 1993.
The undersigned residents of the EastLake Greens community are vehemently opposed
to the proposed amendment which considerably increases dwelling concentrations in the
area, while reducing circulation streets. While the proposed amendment does increase
acres of open space and public/quasi-public land, the quality of life in the community is
directly threatened by the proposed 21 acres increase of high residential (18-27 dwelling
units per acre) which almost triples total dwellings allowed on the 74 acres from 312 to
891. Further, the lower cost housing will degrade both property values of present
residents and contribute to higher crime and a far less safe community for our families.
Name
Signature
Atfrfr~"'-
- '1
I ol. 7.,1 f ~......, '''" - - --
1',-
1"
~O-I.5
-
Name
Signature
.......................
"
C)(j
--
::--11
-.
~'o~l~
I te..tn 11
NOl'ember 12. 1993
The Honorable Mayor Time Nader and City Council of Chula Vista
City Hall
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula "ista, CA 91910
Subject:
Case No. GPA-93-04 and GPA-92-03
The Honorable Mayor Tim Nader and Esteemed Members of the City
Council:
Recently 1 received in the mail the Notice of Public Hearing
by the City Council of Chula Vista regarding Amendments to the
General Plan currently proposed.
I am astounded at the proposal offered and I implore you not
tog 0 f 0 n,' a r d k'i t h the 5 e p 1 a n s . A s are sid e n t 0 f Fa irk' a y Rid g e
for the past year. I have already become disillusioned by the
devaluation of the dream home mv husband and I inl'ested our
life's sa\.ings in.
As a resident of Eastlake Greens, I know the value of our
home has gone do~n severely since the modifications ~ere made to
the model homes and rest of the homes to be completed in our
project. The homes are now being sold at a much lower cost than
~e paid and the value continues to go down.
We were fortunate to purchase a substantial lot ~ith an
excellent view only to learn that we may soon be looking across
the fairway at apartment houses and even retail stores. I've
lived in San Diego County for eleven years. I've lived in
numerous locations and frankly if what you're proposing is not
unlike the neighborhoods J chose to move away from. J understand
the need for retail businesses, but I specifically chose to live
where I do in order to avoid the traffic associated with these
businesses.
The traffic on Otay Lakes Road already has the potential for
severe congestion due to morning commuter traffic to East Lake
High School and Southwestern College. The proposed 125 would
have alleviated much of my commute, but I understand this will be
in litigation for many years to come. With the density of
population proposed for these other residences, the traffic
congestion will be phenomenal.
Already neighbors have been unable to enroll their children
In local schools because of overcrowding. We too looked forward
to bringing up our child in a new neighborhood with a new school.
The hope for this seems very little at this time.
~
I 0- \"
-
- 2 -
We've worked very very hard to earn the savings we used to
purchase this home. I have personally worked a tremendous amount
of overtime and sacrificed a great deal during the past seven
years in order to make my dream a reality. We seriously shopped
for a home for two years before we decided to move to Eastlake
Greens. We considered moving to North County in order to escape
the population growth of the South Bay, but decided to stay
because it is our home and it is our culture.
It's very unfortunate that the city of Chula Vista is unable
to fulfill its original proposal of plans. It is my hope that we
can find a happy medium in order to make this master planned
community a pleasant reality and not a devastating nightmare.
Yours Truly,
~/--~,/V~.:?,~ _/
( . -.-J. ''(J''~';: J / //
fA ~ 7' L.-<. ':.c2 ?,
Ruth Ellen Sutehall -
.-
~
I 0- \ ~
Ite.n"\ 1 t
November 11, 1993
The Mayor Tim Nader and City Council of Chula vista
City Hall
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, CA 91910
Subject: Case No. GPA-93-04 & GPA-92-03
The Honorable Mayor Tim Nader and Esteemed Members of the City
council,
I petition you on behalf of the concerned homeowners of the
Eastlake Greens who do not wish to see the Amendments to the
General Plan go through as proposed. We have numerous issues with
the plan as presented which are outlined below.
1. As existing homeowners in the Eastlake Greens we purchased our
homes in the community based upon the plan presented to us. That
plan, the one presently in place, is drastically different from
the one now proposed. Many of us would have elected to buy homes
somewhere else were this new plan revealed to us at the time of
purchase.
We feel that the Eastlake Development company has a Legal, Moral,
and Ethical obligation to hold true to their original plan.
We believe that the City of Chula vista shares in this
responsibility and would be violating the public trust by now
allowing such a sweeping change take place in this master planned
community. The City of Chula Vista will clearly be breaking the
public trust in the event these amendments are approved.
2. We do not believe that the revised EIR fully takes into
consideration the entire impact of a these amendments to the
plan. As presently proposed these plans will more than triple the
number of families residing on this property. In addition
Commercial Retail and Office Space is being created further
adding to the traffic and congestion.
These changes will drastically increase the amount of air
pollution generated in the area daily. There will be an
associated increase from vehicles used in service and delivery
work to support the retail and commercial properties. We do not
believe that these items have been adequately defined and
addressed.
3.. There will be additional pollution form chemical, oil, and
other toxic leaks/spills as part of the normal course of business
in the retail and commercial world. IE. Dry Cleaners, Delivery
Vehicles, Service stations, Leaky pipes/Fittings etc. Trash and
residue from fast food places and other establishments.
y-1J
\0- 1'1
4. The more than tripling the population base will mean a
sizeable burden will be placed on the infrastructure. Sewers,
water, utilities, communication, hospitals, schools, etc. will
need to be enlarged, increased, or added.
~;
Who will pay for this? Certainly not those of us already living
here under a different Master Plan. .
And what about the damage on the environment each of these
additions will create? Are these factored into the EIR? Not
hardly!
5. The issue of schools has been quite a sore spot in this
community and we do not see where this plan makes any moves to
improve the situation. The Eastlake Development Company and City
of Chula Vista seem unable to move the School Districts to
provide the necessary facilities for the current residents of
Eastlake Greens. Now you want to radically increase the
population density with no guarantees of a new Elementary and
Middle School.
with the new proposed density we are going to need at least two
Elementary Schools and quite likely a larger middle school. Where
are the plans for these facilities? Who will pay for them? Who
will bet their career on them being built within the next two
years?
6. Traffic. How are you going to deal with the increase in people
using Telegraph canyon and otay Lakes Road every morning to go to
work? The back-up to get on the 805 will become ten minutes long.
The likelihood of accidents as people try to cut through the Vons
parking lot to avoid the delay will increase exponentially.
~-
What about the delay at each of the existing traffic lights? How
many new ones will you have to put on otay Lakes Road to
accommodate this plan? Who will pay for them? How many people
will become outraged at the inconvenience these lights will
become and the delays caused in their commute times?
7. And what about our children? Did we really buy our homes out
here in order that our children could be run over by speeding
commuters late to work? Do we want them subjected to the whims of
traffic as they dodge cars on their way home from school? Do we
want them hanging out at a mall or Shopping center just across
the fairway from their house? We don't think so.
We are not unreasonable people. We understand that the economy
has changed and there may be a market for smaller less costly
homes but we do not want to toss out all that is good with
Eastlake and Chula Vista for a short term gain in sales.
Furthermore there are clear signals at the National and Local
level that the economy is improving. This change may miss the
market and leave Eastlake and Chula Vista farther behind.
...........
.)-a: - ~U
10-20
Clearly the original plan had some room for additional homes. We
are not saying that no increase is the only acceptable answer.
Let us try to work toward a proposal that limits the total
increase to approximately ten percent.
Proposed GPA
Low-Medium 30 Acres
Medium-High 12 Acres
High 0 Acres
Open Space 15 Acres
Circulation st. 7 Acres
Public/Quasi 11 Acres
Total 74 Acres
Proposed GPA
Low-Medium 35 Acres
Medium 60 Acres
Medium-High 15 Acres
High 15 Acres
Proff.& Admin 0 Acres
Comm. Retail 0 Acres
Open Space 11 Acres
Circulation st. 15 Acres
Public/Quasi 10 Acres
Total 161 Acres
We ask that you do not accept this plan as presented. We would
like to work with Bob Santos and his team to reach a community
consensus on any changes to the Master Plan and present the new
Amendments to the city of Chula vista with the support of all
community members.
Thank-you for your time and consideration.
Best regards,
t~~&J~
/257- HAl- F MOON €}Ay' t)R. c. H u J..A \l1 E/,i A / C A
cc: Bob Santos, Eastlake Development Company
9/915
~
\0-2-'
~//
November 11, 1993
RECEIVED
.-
The Mayor Tim Nader and City Council of Chula vista
City Hall
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, CA 91910
Subject: Case No. GPA-93-04 & GPA-92-03
l.h~_
'93 t{JV 15 P2:23
CITY OF CI iL~t '/IS T A
CITY CLER~; '\ OF tiC ~
The Honorable Mayor Tim Nader and Esteemed Members of the City
Council,
I petition you on behalf of the concerned homeowners of the
Eastlake Greens who do not wish to see the Amendments to the
General Plan go through as proposed. We have numerous issues with
the plan as presented which are outlined below.
1. As existing homeowners in the Eastlake Greens we purchased our
homes in the community based upon the plan presented to us. That
plan, the one presently in place, is drastically different from
the one now proposed. Many of us would have elected to buy homes
somewhere else were this new plan revealed to us at the time of
purchase.
We feel that the Eastlake Development company has a Legal, Moral,
and Ethical obligation to hold true to their original plan.
We believe that the City of Chula Vista shares in this
responsibility and would be violating the public trust by now
allowing such a sweeping change take place in this master planned
community. The City of Chula Vista will clearly be breaking the
public trust in the event these amendments are approved.
,-
2. We do not believe that the revised EIR fully takes into
consideration the entire impact of a these amendments to the
plan. As presently proposed these plans will more than triple the
number of families residing on this property. In addition
Commercial Retail and Office Space is being created further
adding to the traffic and congestion.
These changes will drastically increase the amount of air
pollution generated in the area daily. There will be an
associated increase from vehicles used in service and delivery
work to support the retail and commercial properties. We do not
believe that these items have,been adequately defined and
addressed.
3. There will be additional pollution form chemical, oil, and
other toxic leaks/spills as part of the normal course of business
in the retail and commercial world. IE. Dry Cleaners, Delivery
Vehicles, Service Stations, Leaky Pipes/Fittings etc. Trash and
residue from fast food places and other establishments.
.-
~
10-"22.
4. The more than tripling the population base will mean a
sizeable burden will be placed on the infrastructure. Sewers,
water, utilities, communication, hospitals, schools, etc. will
need to be enlarged, increased, or added.
Who will pay for this? Certainly not those of us already living
here under a different Master Plan.
And what about the damage on the environment each of these
additions will create? Are these factored into the EIR? Not
hardly!
5. The issue of schools has been quite a sore spot in this
community and we do not see where this plan makes any moves to
improve the situation. The Eastlake Development Company and City
of Chula vista seem unable to move the School Districts to
provide the necessary facilities for the current residents of
Eastlake Greens. Now you want to radically increase the
population density with no guarantees of a new Elementary and
Middle School.
with the new proposed density we are going to need at least two
Elementary Schools and quite likely a larger middle school. Where
are the plans for these facilities? Who will pay for them? Who
will bet their career on them being built within the next two
years?
6. Traffic. How are you going to deal with the increase in people
using Telegraph canyon and otay Lakes Road every morning to go to
work? The back-up to get on the 805 will become ten minutes long.
The likelihood of accidents as people try to cut through the Vons
parking lot to avoid the delay will increase exponentially.
What about the delay at each of the existing traffic lights? How
many new ones will you have to put on otay Lakes Road to
accommodate this plan? Who will pay for them? How many people
will become outraged at the inconvenience these lights will
become and the delays caused in their commute times?
7. And what about our children? Did we really buy our homes out
here in order that our children could be run over by speeding
commuters late to work? Do we want them subjected to the whims of
traffic as they dodge cars on their way home from school? Do we
want them hanging out at a mall or shopping center just across
the fairway from their house? We don't think so.
We are not unreasonable people. We understand that the economy
has changed and there may be a market for smaller less costly
homes but we do not want to toss out all that is good with
Eastlake and Chula vista for a short term gain in sales.
Furthermore there are clear signals at the National and Local
level that the economy is improving. This change may miss the
market and leave Eastlake and Chula vista farther behind.
-12 ~]
lo..2-~
clearly the original plan had some room for additional homes. We ~
are not saying that no increase is the only acceptable answer.
Let us try to work toward a proposal that limits the total
increase to approximately ten percent.
Proposed GPA
Low-Medium 30 Acres
Medium-High 12 Acres
High 0 Acres
Open Space 15 Acres
Circulation st. 7 Acres
Public/Quasi 11 Acres
Total 74 Acres
Proposed GPA
Low-Medium 35 Acres
Medium 60 Acres
Medium-High 15 Acres
High 15 Acres
Proff.& Admin 0 Acres
Comm. Retail 0 Acres
Open Space 11 Acres
Circulation st. 15 Acres --
Public/Quasi 10 Acres
Total 161 Acres
We ask that you do not accept this plan as presented. We would
like to work with Bob Santos and his team to reach a community
consensus on any changes to the Master Plan and present the new
Amendments to the City of Chula vista with the support of all
community members.
Thank-you for your time and consideration. It is indeed
unfortunate that I must be out of town at the time of this
hearing. I am asking other members of the Greens to attend and
voice their concerns to you directly.
Best regards, ~O;jl
~/~
Jack P chet
1213 Half Moon Bay Drive
Chu1a Vista, CA 91915
619-656-1465
-,
cc: Bob Santos, Eastlake Development Company
>> ';17,4-
Ie - 2. ~
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
CHUlA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY
COUNCIL of Cbula Vista, California, for the purpose of considering an application for a General Plan
Amendment proposed by the EastLake Development Company for the EastLake Greens community. The
General Plan Amendment consists of an amendment to approximately 74 acres within EastLake Greens, which
consists of two triangular parcels, one south of EastLake High School, the second soutb and east of the current
terminus of EastLake Parkway. This amendment would result in the following changes:
Low-Medium Residential (3-6 dwelJ.iug uillts per acre)
Medium-High Residential (11-18 dwelling units per acre)
High Residential (18-27 dwelling units per acre)
Open Space
Circulation Streets
Public/Quasi-Public
Total
Existing
General Plan
*I' 9
52 aCt eii
o acres
o acres
o acres
9 acres
13 acres
74 acres
Proposed
GPA
3 acres
17 acres
21 acres
17 acres
2 acres
14 acres
74 acres
An Addendum to Environmental Impact Report EIR-86-04, EastLake Greens SPA, studying possible
environmental impacts, bas been prepared by the Environmental Coordinator and is available for public review.
NOTICE IS ALSO HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE
CITY COUNCIL for an application for a General Plan Amendment for approximately 161 acres, located
generally, soutb of tbe terminus of EastLake Parkway. This amendment, known as the "EastLake Land Swap"
portion of tbe Otay Ranch General Plan Amendment would result in the following changes:
Low-Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre)
Medium Residential (6-11 dwelling units per acre)
Medium-High Residential (11-18 dwelling units per acre)
High Residential (18-27 + dwelling units per acre)
Professional & Administrative
Commercial Retail
Open Space
Circulation Streets
Public/Quasi-Public
Total Total
Existing
General Plan
I ~/:,
47 acres
70 acres
o acres
o acres
o acres
o acres
9 acres
14 acres
21 acres
161 acres
Proposed
GPA
15 acres
o acres
29 acres
17 acres
17 acres
52 acres
14 acres
17 acres
o acres
161 acres
Program Environmental Impact Report PEIR-90-1. Otay Ranch Project. bas been prepared. which
analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the proposed General Plan Amendment.
A more detailed description of the proposed amendments are on file in the office of the Planning
Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula VISta, CA 91910. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please
contad Duane Bazzel at 691-5101.
wPc F:\home\planning\ustJph.ntc
-J-d. ;2~
\ 0 - 2-5
Any petitions to be submitted to the City Council must be received by the City Clerk's office no later
than noon of the hearing date.
-.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on these matters in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the City Council at or prior to the public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HE~G Wll..L BE HELD BY 1HE COUNCll.. on Tuesday, November 16, at 6:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers,' Public Services Building, 27~ Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring
to be heard may appear.
DATED:
CASE NO.:
..
November 3, 1993
GPA-93-04 & GPA-92-03
COMPLIANCE \VIm AMERlCANS WITII DISABll..ITIES ACT (ADA)
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the American With Disabilities Act, requests individuals who require
special accommodation to access, attend and/or participate in a City meeting, activity or service request such
accommodation at least 48 hours in advance for meetings and 5 days for scheduled services and activities. Please
contact Nancy Ripley for information or your request at (619) 691.510 1. California Relay Service is available
for the hearing impaired.
....:
4
--
~
,. ~..
'. .
---
OTAY RANCH
\1
NORm
w ~
EASTIAKE lAND SWAP (GPA-92-03)
. 161 ACRES .
~
, 0- 2.. <-
_.
$-
" < 'hJ- . ., -.;... ,I'~'" .....' .,
;,.AI' 'L ''''' - ''1(" r~/ :., ......~. ,.' 'l\.!. 1 . it '
/../ :;; .... . ~-) .~. . ....... ..-:-.. '" ; ,:.,... _; I'" '. ~ '~.........
I. ~..~ .' V . ...... i' ......... ; r;.~':J I-IJ.. \'J '. :/' ...: .J.~ .....\ .../ /' .
~.. ,I.J. . ." ..:.; y~\ ;',: \',~~ ~~ I,. l~'" '\.,.'. ~-'" ~~ EV1YTDIT 1 .
. _ c;. 1':' ,.. " ;'\'. ' .~'" \~. : . ...., 11\.:1: It.;.-' "r."/.r~ ~ '
.~ ..., "~'j" \...",~_ .., .' --'.. ,.... *it · '. /tv'
~ (. : .' .,,~~~-'''''-\ '.~\ "... , I, ~..:>....: .~'!";"']' ..: ,/~~_.~
s : . . ~ d., ./..,. "\ .~ ......" ," ~ · . ,"
't, .. . ~.' ~ "",';-'" " ~"'" '1"':" ..~. . I~\ I .
- .~~.. ~',. ,'. "~. ,,"'. ' ,\' ~.
,...., . .....,\.,...' I ",'
.... '. .:. \ ':C.L
. ....... ..~ ' '. v', .
..~ " ~'. . ~ ....
. '.. . ::'. . . ','"
... ".~, , " :, .'
. ,,' ',.
=' I, .:.
)1 -r l. \.
-., ,.
~ lo.
,
i
,,) ..
..,
,
',.~',.
a
..
;:
~:f
~..' . . '!l
'. I
.. .J'
- .
1.~'jl .
J /t..H-:i7
.;''', ~
li='," (0-2.../
. .
!:
.~
;i
'a
..
"',
,.
". \ I '......
EXlfiBIT 2
-..,
....
X~
W~
....>
~<(
U~ .
(!)U
~Z
Za:
Z~
<((I)
~L5
-
-,
.~)O-2.~
~a:
wO
I-Q
za:
00:
uO
CJU
z>-
-I-
~>
<(J=
....J U
a..<(
EXIllBIT 3
~
18 E
Ii
~
l.
i f)
en to) r
15
~
~ ~ .t'
Ii!
m ..;J i
~-&
\~
~o
'""'"
.
~
, 0- 2...q
~
w
!z
o
()z
. 0
(!)-
zt:(
--I
~::>
:5~
c.. (5 .
Q) Q)
.~ ~
..J is Q)"
~ a: B
en ...
C .- a:
~ ~ ~ 8
-= t= ~ 1a
! m ~ ti5
~ ~ 1ii ! .~
..J W .9 ~ ~
EXlllBIT 4
.-
ca
~
J
-.
.~
':e
\ -,
, .5
IC'L ~:
\t:I\..c~ _ 8l.~.....
.. ~ ~~'1l <I ..
~ .'A~~
1~ ..--
....J"" · f..-- If
-!II ~
~~ ;.
."" ~
1 ""-.
~ .
~ ~
i\~ . ~
-
-AJ:-:S?7 10-30
EXHIBIT S
~~
K~
1ij~
6
00
~
@
~
- i
W_-e
l~~! j oJ
I~f~.~l!ihll
iitil~U!i~m:
C::!2Q.~
~::Ej~u
3
~
.,
1
t-
o.
R
! ~
~
~2 1
~
&I
JtI,
!
!
. .
~ lo-~'
EXlllBIT 6
-
~-'
(@~
@:~
c:::==
Cijw
6~
~~
@)UJ
~
~;
6
2
.r;
~l
-...q
'W
W ~
~W:_
~!E! i
liiill'~I!iIJJII
Jill s~J!i! J
-.
Wl
1
t.
Do
.
.
(I'j
1
~
.
101 ·
!
! -
I
~2
.
~
lo~ 32..
-------. ---------.-..........
. - . -... -,
".
EXlllBIT 7
~~
~~
fQb~
s:::::=:= <:
~lt
~~
~cn
@)
~
.
'W i
~-~
'011111)_
~=a~1II
i~t~II~. I
~ljil)Hihll
Jill !~I~it ~
,
3
o (~'1
A.. .....'
I
~2
"loWS
~
10- ~ ~
,
"
I
II:
-
~
tll
A-
D.
tll
~
~
"=
c:
ft
~
~
:!
i
~
.
...---.
1
>>-
....
- -----
~ ......-
~EJcn
~ _, &.wz-
...., 1M ..... ...,..,..
.-.
...-.-- ---------.. . .-
~. -' . ~.
;;;;e;~F /.~
,;~~ ~ .
~
EASTlAKE GREENS SPA
. --- -. . ... . .J..;2 - :J 71 -. .-.. " -.-. -
10- 3~
EXHIBIT 9
r-..--..-..-
~, c:::.~€,
.. L ~
"
General
Development
Plan
AESIOEp..,,'T1AL
MU.
lJlICIloel IDIIlS Q.lIIJ; ~S .
.
~- ,., , ~~ ", I
\ .
.
~ 'L.-- Sd ~ ... '133 \ \
\
III I....,.. 13" ,. " ,ne l'O .
.
0.... ~ '20 ! ,,- '1 'lte ~
r:;::.. .
II' '1- 2' - '1'2 .
\
"'-'- '021 , '13' .
.
fOIl- RESOENTiAl. \
.
.
l.M'C .. ~S \
~
t ..... ...
..........
t~ -.-.a 121
. --..."".
t:::E:: ....r::r a , ~2 ·
I.I'IWc~'~
. 0 ClIIr IIIlIoCoI '13 0
~~/~ '03 ~
~.,.".. .~ 1M'
s: ..... er__ 2" .
....T~ ....2
[EJ '-An lIW -!.!!
..... ,. IOII'ee tp.I ..
.----
~ EASTLAKE
A fVJooND CCMd,JNITY '" WTWE 0EVE~N1 CO
~
. ~- 5.5
(!J Cirn.!,.
~ .~
.... ) ,. .. -
. .
. z :z
· ~oo
<ro ti) E=
c==~ <
'(Qbi ~
.o~
==== u ::E
~~~
6z8
~!= .
@~ ~ ~ ~ :I: 5 e 2 ~ B
~
P~..
~. ,~~
'/ ~..
r; ~.. :;;--
/ . ~.::.~~.~...~~.,....,..
1\\
I \ '
I "
\) \ \
\ \ \
\, \ ~
\3 ~ ,
\! I
~l .
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
-
V ~
......_~
'~~Cl:)_
~~ ~~ j
'e ~~~ I
jjjj ~l!i~]
EXHIBIT 10
-
~
~
~
~~ (!)
;..' (f)
r:::
(1)
~~
(!)~
(.)
Q)ctS
':'::q-
.51'
..-
VJ
ct1
W
-
~
~,3?-
lo-~~
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
LETTER RECEIVED FROM PROPERTY OWNER
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS AFFECTING EASTLAKE GREENS
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
. March 3, 1993 hearing (EastLake Greens GP A)
. May 12, 1993 hearing (Combined Land Swap and Greens GPA's)
. May 26, 1993 hearing (EastLake Greens GP A)
RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
. February 15, 1993 meeting (Otay Ranch FPEIR, which includes EastLake Land Swap)
. March 1, 1993 meeting (Otay Ranch FPEIR, which includes EastLake Land Swap)
. May 22, 1989 meeting (EastLake Greens EIR)
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING RESOLUTIONS:
. Planning Commission Resolution and Draft City Council Resolution for GP A-92-03
(Otay Ranch Project)
. Planning Commission Resolution and Draft City Council Resolution for GP A-93-04
(EastLake Greens GP A)
DRAFT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS
. Draft City Council Resolution for GP A-92-03 (Otay Ranch Project)
. Draft City Council Resolution for GP A-93-04 (EastLake Greens GP A)
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS FOR THE EASTLAKE LAND SWAP GP A (GP A-92-
03)
. CEQA Findings & Statement of Overriding Considerations (not included in packet)
. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (not included in packet)
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS FOR THE EASTLAKE GREENS GPA (GPA-93-04)
. EIR-86-4 (EastLake Greens SPA)
. Addendum to EIR-86-04
· CEQA Findings
. Statement of Overriding Considerations
. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
FISCAL IMPACT TABLES
.
~
July, 1989
July, 1989
July, 1989
February, 1990
October, 1991
May, 1992
-
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS EFFECTING
EASTLAKE GREENS
City General Plan Update
EastLake II General Development Plan adopted (expansion of FastLake
I). This area includes the Greens & Trails SPA's, totalling 4,034 units.
EastLake Greens SPA & Tentative Subdivision Map approved, totalling
2,774 units (this included reduction of 835 units from 5 lots and deferral
of affordable housing program; any consideration of increased densities
to occur after General Plan density policies revised and should include
affordable housing program consideration).
Revised General Plan density policies adopted.
Rezone of 2 lots within EastLake Greens from Residential Planned
Concept to Residential Single Family (no increase in units).
Transfer of 69 units within EastLake Greens to areas R-24 & R-25
approved. Transfer resulted in change from 4.5 dulac to 10 dulac (units
transferred from areas R-2, R-8, R-9, R-13, R-17 & R-19) with no
increase in Greens unit total.
~
.
..-....
~
10- ~8'
MINUTE S OF A SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING
aesource CoDse~tiOD eo..issiOD
Cbala Viata, California
5:30 p.m.
Monday, May 22, 1989
Conference Room 1
Public Services Building
CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meetin: vas called to order at 5:39 p.m. by
Chairman Rowe. City Staff Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid called
roll. Present: Chairman Rowe; Commissioners Fox, Stevens and Ray. Absent:
Waller. Also present vere Barbara Ball and Frank Chidester.
It vas MSP (Fox/Ray) to move the meeting time to 6:00 p.m., beginning vith the
next regularly scheduled meeting of June 12, 1989.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of April 24, 1989 vere approved.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. It was MSP (Stevens/Ray) to nominate Bob Fox as vice-chairman.
2. Commissioner Jim Stevens presented a report on the Eastlake Greens & Trails
EIR. After a lengthy presentation and discussion, it was determined that as the
Master EIR is five years old, it makes the Eastlake EIR insufficient as to its
findings. Too many changes have taken place on the Master Plan and the range of
alternatives were not adequately dealt with. It was MSP (Stevens/Fox) that the
EIR is inadequate as p'~esented.
It was further moved and seconded (Rowe/Stevens):
"Based on the Commission's independent understanding of the requirements of
CEQA, and because of the lapse of time between the preparation of the
Eastlake Master EIR and the East lake Greens SPA Draft Supplemental EIR (Case
No. EIR 86-4), and in light of the changes which have taken place in the
region, the RCe is of the opinion that said Eastlake Greens SPA Draft
Supplemental EIR is inadequate in the following respect:
(a) The document fails to give adequate consideration to the projects
cumulative impact on:
(1) transportation and circulation;
(2) sever services;
(3) refuse disposal;
(4) vater availability
(b) The document fails to describe a range of reasonable alternatives
to the project that could feasibly attain the project's objectives
and fails to evaluate the comparative merits of each alternative."
Motion carried.
Commissioner Stevens will attend the Planning Commission meeting to present the
RCC'. position on this issue.
~-~q
, .
-
Resource Conservation Commission
Page 2
3. A report on the Trolley Commercial EIR-89-4M, vas presented by Bob Fox. The
EIR vas considered adequate, but inadequately addressed the alternatives. It vas
MSP (Fox/Stevens) to adopt the EIR as presented. A recommendation should be made
to the Planning Commission to address the problem of the Orange Ave./Palamar St.
intersection. It vas MSP (Fox/Ray) to recommend a third alternative to the
Planning Commission, to reduce project exclusion of four restaurant pads and
inclusion of financial institution.
4. It vas MSP (Ray/Fox) that Commissioner Fox would present the General Plan
position of Resource Conservation Commission at the Planning commission on May
31.
5. Items for the Planning Commission Agenda for the meeting of May 24, 1989
vere reviewed with no action taken by RCC.
ADJOURNMENT :
Meeting vas adjourned by Chairman Rowe at 7:08 p.m. to the Regular Business
Meeting'of June 12, 1989 at 6:00 p.m.
-
Respectfully submitted,
EXPRESS SECRETARIAL SERVICES
Barbara Taylor
-
~
10-"10
FISCAL IMPACT TABLES
Figures 1 & 2
~\I
# e 8 .... ~. ~ ~ ~ .., ~ l- ~.. ,.. r. M ... :J ... r:s
~ ~- f.f N .r-~~.. ,....
.... c:>. .. r"" .... f:"l N t/I'- "" v,
r~ ~~g~~t~~~~. tf~t1~ ~
v. ;;V;~~~\\~~~~~~ "
-.
~l"'~~~~VI~~~~~~~ t.
~'"
~!~ c; ~ ~,,~. ~ ~ ~ li"L "& "& 111 "'l If) -
~~s~oot r-~..'-~---- ~
", ~'~ ~...... - ~ ... ...
c;') , ~~~ l; .ti~~~~~ t3
~ ..
I M<
i J ~~~gH~fi~~~aUj ~
_ ~ ; .c ~ ~ S :: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.., .. .,.. t; M .. .: ...: ..... ~ P: ~t PC .. .__
..6I')........,M.,... ~
,
;
I
2:lJ ~I~!?~i~i:l~i~~fi~ .....
~
~ g~~ i~~~ai~~a ...
!
!u I
~ i 8 ~ ~ ~ i i 8 ~ 8 S ~ g .~ g ~
...; ~ 0 ....s '" ..-\ M M M M ,..; N d ~ tot
M ~ ... ~ I Vl lI'I 11'I It" VI VI ", i VI
~; 3 y;~~~ ~ZJ.~Zl~~:l:l ~
~ < ! I ~~..., M f 8 ~ 0. ~i N i ~ S ~ ~
~I ~ ~ ~ ~ .~. . =-~ .~.. I. . I
P. . 0( J3 ~n~~l~~~~~~~~~ i.
~ ~,~ .'. f" f"l to, c; ...., ...., r"'". ..... "',
~ V) ... ... .., .., ." .., W') .., .., VI
, V)
.-l ~g;~~ I
~ .-.
:2 ~ ~ - - .... .... --- ..... ... ~' i ~ " ~ ~ " W
f"'l r- ... r- c"l .0 J-
. ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ "\ ~ ~~ ... ~ ''l ~~ ~ C{
~ 'M 14 0- oC .c 00 0- '" ,.. t ~ l ~ ... ... g ~
- i
~ ~ ~~~U)ooU)c-~ t:>o
~ "'" ~ '" .... .... .- .-
~ ........, '-' ... .... e .... '-' ~ ~ .., ~ -
~ .... - ~
!I to.: 4", ~ ~ ~ ~ r- ~ ~ " ~ \; S; ~ ~ ~
~ Iq 11 ! e '" '" ;!. ..., "-. ;.'!. '" '" '" to ".
~~ l~&R~~~~~~i~ ...
I ~
~ ~
!
~ ~~gr--lt'>O\~-oOo,tf"\~r--~ ~
ri J . . . ~ t;. ~ t' ~. ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ t'~
"-l $!~O\f"'o>Q~"'~ t4-C~~
.... .... ,. f"'" r-" ..... r.. ....- ..... ..... .
;; ~~tn~Zf"~~~t";~.,..,
! :l
t
,. II i 00 -. ~ ~ ^ .... - .... .... .... f; C""" .... N'
.iSs ~i~!fl~~...~s ~
l ~ . N t! ~ .0 ~ 0; o. ~ '" .. 0.. ; ~
eo 6. .. ........ - ... rao .- ... .... ... a -
! ~~~~~t!.ec~~~ {!
J II ~ ~ .... .... r- '" r.. l" ... .... r.. r- f' t- ,.. i f
~ t ~ ~ ~ ... .. - - .oO ... .. - ...
~. ~~~~"'.""''''''C''''''
J 5 r"">MNt,...,...r-"'~tfici.
"":I~."'~" ~ I
- -.... .........."...... ,.. r- .. _...
. ...~.,"'.,...~..."..."..,......
3 n ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~
u .-
~ sa .~
j ~ E ~ ~ ~ t: ri ~ ~ ~ n ~. E1 E E ~
"" ., ... ~ ... .. .., .., ., .., .. c" '^ '" 'oO ~
...
~ ~ tJ~
, C-N('\-.1f'I B- oil
~N""'."~r-toOl_____.... ... 10-'1'2-
,
..,
P.u;t.
~
nGUJH\ 2
'~,"~n..AA'n ORP.f..NS & LAND SW AJ.>
I
J!.XJSTING OF.Nl:.'R.AL PLA.~ N. PROPOS~D AMP,NL>MP..N1S
I. NEl fo1SCAl. BAl.ANCE COMPAR.F.D TO HX.JSllNO OfNE.RAL PLA."C
I CITY O}l CHUlA VISTA
1993 DOU.AAS
j
-l
....,.._._.- -. --- ---- - ..--.....--- ............-.-...-.--.~-""_._.. ............. ..
,
: C'C1~flhined
.~~~r.. __ _.._.~.~~~ ~~ Ore~._ Eait'.~t~~~~. ~~~p_ . _ _. _.. ~~~~~CZ~~~~~
i
(~2J.J40) $41,091 $19,Q51
($50.161) $64,247 $13.98~
(S6g.~95) $110.581 $4 1.981
($74.211) $165.179 590.909
($7516S~) S229.983 S 1 51.328
(S76.168) $290.732 S~14.164
($17.81.4) 5333,015 $1$$.191
(S1S,4S2) $393.210 $314.8J8
(~79,06S) $472,342 $3~3,277
($19.663) $~SO,~1,6 $~70/i~3
(t80.247) $549.161 $468,914
($80.817j $5'8.004 $167.187
($~1.313) $546.986 $f6S.6U
($81,916) S~.102 S~6U85
(S82.4147) $545.346 ~(''2.899
.
'''Ololl ($J.08S.09~) $5,186,392 $4.'98,'98
b.. t ....-.-..,..- .........--.-...-..-....... I~.._...-.. ......~_...._.....
SourCe: (?conomic St'i\ltgiu Group. l~J3.
! '
1
1
3
<4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
I~
I
\
,
I
>>- J(IYJO_Y~
.,
-
nns PAGE BlANK
._,
-
~C-'4\.(
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item *
Meeting Date _ I
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: GPA 92-03; Consideration of the 161-acre EastLake
Land Swap portion of the Otay Ranch General Plan Amendment.
10
1'2../'''''/~
GPA 93-04; Applicatinn by EastLake Development Company for a
General Plan Amendm:,.;t for 74-acres within EastLake Greens.
Resolution / / 3 (J 8'Amending the General Plan for 161 acres located
south and west of the EastLake Greens community.
Resolution /7.J P 1: Amending the General Plan for 74 acres located
within the EastLake Greens Community, south of EastLake High School
and on both sides of the extension of EastLake Parkway.
SUBMITTED BY:
. ~~
Director of Plannin~
City Manager j~ ~A jj ~
U~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No...K..)
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND
The applicant, EastLake Development Company, has submitted two requests for amendments
to the General Plan: a request for an amendment for 74 acres (GPA-93-04) located within the
EastLake Greens community and a request for an amendment for 161 acres (GPA-92-03)
located within the boundaries of the Otay Ranch Project, immediately south of EastLake
Greens, and known as the EastLake "Land Swap" parcels. Consideration of the two
amendments are combined here because of the close land use relationship between requests.
The Chula Vista Planning Commission also considered and made recommendations on the two
requests in a combined public hearing.
The General Plan Amendment (GP A 92-03) for EastLake Greens consists of a request for
redesignation of 74 acres located within EastLake Greens. The proposed GP A involves two
separate parcels, one south of Eastlake High School on the west side of Eastlake Parkway, east
of the future alignment of the SR-125 freeway (Subarea 1) and, the second in the southwestern
portion of EastLake Greens, south and west of the (240 ft. wide) San Diego Aqueduct/SDG&E
utility easement (Subarea 2) [See Attachment A of the draft Council Resolution].
An Initial Study (Case No. 93-16) was prepared for the proposed project and a
recommendation was made by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator that the project
~
~/.)..~7
. -r-I
\0- y S
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 1
be found to have no significant impacts which were not discussed in EIR 86-04 for the
EastLake Greens project, and that an Addendum to EIR-86-04 for the proposed project be
adopted. Enclosed with this agenda statement is a copy of the EastLake Greens SPA
Environmental Impact Report (EIR-86-04) and the Addendum.
On October 28, 1993, the City Council took fmal action to Certify the Final Program
Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR-90-01) for the Otay Ranch Project and approve the Otay
Ranch General Plan Amendment (GPA 92-03), excluding the EastLake Land Swap parcels.
The EastLake Land Swap property consists of 161 acres located immediately south of the
EastLake Greens community and was analyzed within the Otay Ranch Program EIR 90-01
(phase II Progress Plan Alternative). Since this portion of the Otay Ranch Project is so closely
related to the EastLake Greens community and the companion request by the EastLake
Development Company (GP A 93-04), discussion of both requests have been combined in this
report.
The Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR-90-I), CEQA Findings, Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Otay
Ranch Project, which the Council is being asked to recertify and adopt, is not included in the
Council's packet due to recent action on the Otay Ranch. An additional copy can be provided
if any member of the Council desires.
-.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council
1. Recertify that they have read and considered FPEIR 90-01, for the Otay Ranch Project,
and that the proposed project has no significant impacts which were not discussed in
the EIR, and adopt the General Plan Amendment for the EastLake Land Swap parcels
(GPA 92-03) per the Staff/Planning Commission recommendation contained in the
attached draft City Council Resolution.
2. Recertify that they have read and considered EIR 86-04, for the EastLake Greens
project, and that the proposed project has no significant impacts which were not
discussed in the EIR, and adopt the proposed Addendum to Environmental Impact
Report EIR 86-04.
3. Adopt the proposed EastLake Greens General Plan Amendment (GPA 93-04) per the
Staff recommendation reflected in the attached draft City Council Resolution.
4. Adopt CEQA Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation
Monitoring Report for the EastLake Land Swap (GPA-92-03, part of the Otay Ranch
Project GP A) & EastLake Greens (GP A-93-04).
--
~ L\ <o~
\
~, 0- "-\~
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
Page 3, Item /YI-/
Meeting Date~ ,!,"J'1~
10
I 2..[ , ~ {~3
Resource Conservation Commission
The Resource Conservation Commission (RCC) reviewed the contents of the Otay Ranch Final
Program EIR (FPEIR-90-01) on February 15 and March 1, 1993, and after much discussion
failed to make a recommendation (vote 3-3) regarding adequacy of the FPEIR. No comments
regarding the EastLake Land Swap portion of the Otay Ranch GP A were made by the RCC
(see minutes attached).
The Environmental Review Coordinator prepared an Addendum to EIR-89-04 on January 15,
1993, which analyzes the impact of the proposed GP A for EastLake Greens, and found that
because the number of units proposed is less than that analyzed in EIR-89-04, and that there
have been no substantial changes in circumstances regarding the project. Therefore, the EIR
is found to be adequate for this action in accordance with the Addendum. There is no
recommendation from the RCC on this item.
Planning Commission
On May 26, 1993, the Planning Commission recommended that the Council:
1. Adopt the proposed EastLake Land Swap portion of the Otay Ranch General Plan
Amendment (GPA-92-03) per the Staff Recommended Alternative (see attached
Planning Commission Recommending Resolution (pCM-90-3)), and
2. Adopt the proposed General Plan Amendment for EastLake Greens (GPA 93-04),
subject to designating 20 acres south of EastLake High School (see Sub-Area #1 on
Exhibit 10) as Medium Residential (6-11 du/ac) (see attached Planning Commission
Recommending Resolution (GPA-93-04)).
DISCUSSION:
The proposed General Plan Amendment for the EastLake Land Swap parcels for the Otay
Ranch Project relate closely to the proposal by the EastLake Development Company for an
amendment to the General Plan for 74 acres within EastLake Greens. Therefore, it is
appropriate to review and discuss each proposal in the same context and within the same
hearing.
Community Forum
On February 18, 1993, prior to Planning Commission hearings on either GPA proposal, the
Planning Department conducted a community forum for the proposed EastLake Greens GP A
~~
lo~i,
~';t:
Page 4, Item _
Meeting Date 716/93, '. ~~
10
I ~}I~l":!:>
(GP A 93-04). Also presented and discussed at that forum was the proposed EastLake Land
Swap portion of the Otay Ranch Project (GPA-92-03). The forum was held at the EastLake
High School library, where nine citizens from the EastLake Greens neighborhood attended.
EASTLAKE LAND SWAP (Otav Ranch GPA 92-03)
When the planning effort for the Otay Ranch began in 1989, the EastLake Development
Company owned approximately 160 acres completely surrounded by the Otay Ranch and
identified as part of the previously approved EastLake Phase II GDP (identified as Parcel "A"
on attached Exhibit 1). Without inclusion in the overall planning for the Otay Ranch,
comprehensive planning of the Otay Valley Parcel would have been difficult. Because of this,
various Project Team plan alternatives have been prepared which include this parcel of land.
During the planning effort for the Otay Ranch, Otay Vista Associates, L.P. (The Baldwin Co.)
and EastLake Development Company negotiated a private land swap agreement whereby land
area of similar size (3 separate sites totalling 161 acres, identified as Parcel "B" on Exhibit 1)
located immediately adjacent to the EastLake Development land holdings (EastLake Greens
SPA), but a part of the Otay Ranch, would be transferred to the EastLake Development
Company in exchange for the 160 acre parcel (Parcel A). This transfer permitted the _
coordinated development of the Otay Ranch and resulted in a logical development boundary
for EastLake.
Environmental surveys and analysis have been conducted on the Otay Ranch parcels, including
the EastLake parcel. Both land swap parcels are included in the Program EIR.
Parcel B, which is now owned by EastLake, involves only a General Plan Amendment at this
time. Table 1 reflects the applicant's proposal and the Staff/Planning Commission
recommendations.
Applicant's Proposal
Proposed residential densities within the Land Swap area would result in a unit total ranging
from 670 dwelling units to 1,071. However, development at mid-range would result in a total
of 872 units, 65 units more than the current General Plan designations allow for the same area
(see Table 1 and Exhibit 6 for map).
Staff/Planning Commission Recommendations
The Staff/Planning Commission recommended residential densities would result in a unit total
ranging from 552 to 924 dwelling units in the Low-Medium and Medium-High Residential
designated areas. Development at mid-range would result in a total of 739 units, 68 units less -.
~~~
..- I b- Y X
Page 5, Item / ~I z/
Meeting Date~ fh f~:3
lO
than the current General Plan designation allows for the same area (See Table 1 and Exhibit 17./....../ct3
7 for map).
Dwelling Units
Land Use Designation Acreage Baseline High
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 47 Ac. 141 282
Medium (6-11 DUlAC) 70 Ac. 420 770
Open Space 9 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 14 Ac.
Pubic/Quasi-Public 21 Ac.
TOTAL 161 Ac. 561 DU 1,052 DU
PROPOSED GP AMENDMENT (Applicant's proposal)
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 15 Ac. 45 90
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC) 29 Ac. 319 522
High (18-27 DUlAC) 17 Ac. 306 459
Ret. Comm. 52 Ac.
Prof. & Admin. 17 Ac.
Open Space 14 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 17 Ac.
TOTAL 161 Ac. 670 DU 1,071 DU
STAFF/PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 19 Ac. 57 " "
. ',..
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC) 45 Ac. 495
Retail Commercial 52 Ac.
Prof. & Admin. 17 Ac.
Open Space 11 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 17 Ac.
TOTAL 161 Ac. 552 DU 9~:-i DU
Table 1
EastLake Land Swap GPA
EXISTING GENERAL Pl.\ N
~
~ 10-'-19
EASTLAKE GREENS (GPA 93-04)
Page 6, Item / Y It, --
Meeting Date~
10 I 2./ I "13
1"2./I"1/~~
As a result of the land uses proposed on the adjacent Otay Ranch and the need to provide a
variety of residential product types within the EastLake Greens community as well as meet
affordable housing goals within the community, the EastLake Development Company is
proposing density increases on a companion 74 acres within the EastLake Greens. Table 2
reflects the applicant's proposal as well as the Planning Commission and Staffs
Recommendations.
History
As originally proposed and analyzed, the EastLake Greens SPA called for a total unit count
of 3,609 dwelling units. In approving the tentative subdivision map for EastLake Greens in
1989, the City Council on an interim basis, reduced the density and unit count of five parcels
in EastLake Greens (parcels R-24, R-25, R-26 R-27, and R-28) from High Density Residential
(18-27+ du/ac.) to Low-Medium Density Residential with a density of 4.5 du/ac (see Exhibit
8 attached). This action deferred any consideration of future density increases and the provision
of an affordable housing agreement for the Greens until after refmement of the Land Use
Element pertaining to establishing densities within a designated range. The overall dwelling
units were reduced from 3,609 to 2,774, for a total reduction of 835 dwelling units. See
discussion of affordable housing under the following ANALYSIS section.
-
Applicant's Proposal
Proposed residential densities for the 74 acre area would result in an increase in allowable units
from the existing range of 156 to 312 dwelling units in the existing Low-Medium Residential
designated areas to a range of 574 to 891 dwelling units in the proposed Low-Medium,
Medium-High and High Density Residential designated areas. Development at mid-range would
result in a total of 734 units, 500 units more than the current General Plan designations for the
same area (see Table 2 and Exhibit 6 for map).
Staff and Planning Commission Recommendations
Staff is recommending that the proposed residential areas west of the existing 240 ft. wide
north/south utility easement, including the EastLake-owned portion of the easement (120 ft. in
width) be designated as Medium-High Residential (11-18 du/ac) for the reasons stated in the
ANAL YSIS section below. All of the land area located east of the utility easement, including
Water District-owned portion of the easement (also 120 ft. in width) is proposed to remain as
Low Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac), as presently designated in the General Plan. Although
the area located east of the utility easement is designated Low Medium, development projects
approved in the EastLake Greens SPA are in the range of 11-18 du/ac immediately adjacent
to the easement.
-
~
. ~ lo-SO
Table 2
EastLake Greens GPA
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
Dwelling Units
Land Use Designation Acreage Baseline Midrange High
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 52 Ac. 156 312
Circulation (Streets) 9 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 13 Ac.
TOTAL 74 Ac. 156 DU 312 DU
PROPOSED GP AMENDMENT (Applicant's proposal)
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 3 Ac. 9 18
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC) 17 Ac. 187 306
High (18-27 DUlAC) 21 Ac. 378 567
Open Space 17 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 2 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 14 Ac.
TOTAL 74 Ac. 574 DU 891 DU
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 3 Ac. 9 18
Medium (6-11 DUlAC) 20 Ac. 120 220
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC) 24 Ac. 264 432
Open Space 9 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 2 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 16 Ac.
TOTAL 74 Ac. 393 DU 670 DU
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 3 Ac. 9 18
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC) 44 Ac. 484 792
Open Space 9 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 2 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 16 Ac.
TOTAL 74 Ac. 493 DU 810 DU
~
~/O-~I
1~~
10
I "2.-(I.-de,~
Page 8, Item ~
Meeting Date~.
10 '7J
1'2../1 '-f/'1?;'
The staff recommendation for the EastLake Greens GP A would result in an increase in
allowable density in the 74 acre area from a range of 156 to 312 dwelling units in the existing
Low-Medium Residential designated areas to a range of 493 to 810 dwelling units in the
Medium-High Residential density residentially designated areas. Development at mid-range
would result in a total of 652 units, 418 units more than the current General Plan designations
for the same area.
-'
The Planning Commission concurs with staff with the exception that the 20 acre Subarea # I
. parcel, located south of EastLake High School, is recommended to be designated as Medium
Residential (6-11 du/ac). The Planning Commission's recommendation at mid-range would
result in a total of 532 units, 298 units more than the current General Plan designations allow
at mid-range (See Table 2 and Exhibit 10 for map).
Table 3 reflects the composite totals of both the EastLake Land Swap and the EastLake Greens
GPA's. Approval of the applicant's proposals at mid-range densities would result in an increase
of 562 units over the current General Plan designations. The Staff Recommendations would
result in a total increase of 349 units. The Planning Commission recommendations would result
in an increase of 229 units.
-
ANALYSIS
Rationale for General Plan Amendment
The proposed General Plan Amendment and General Development Plan for the Otay Ranch
substantially alter the land uses and planning parameters for the land area in the vicinity of
EastLake Parkway and Orange Avenue. The EastLake Greens GP A (Sub Area # 1 and #2) and
the bulk of the Land Swap Parcels, located between Eastlake Parkway and the SR-125
alignment, is within the "activity corridor" along SR-125. The location along a future Express
Bus route, the close proximity to a potential regional light rail transit station to the south, the
location adjacent to future SR-125, the location near retail services to the north and south,
placement adjacent to and access from a major roadway (EastLake Parkway), as well as
separation from residential neighborhoods to the east by a major water aqueduct and SDG&E
utility easement (240 ft. wide) make the proposed designation of these parcels as higher density
residential and freeway-oriented commercial appropriate (see Exhibits I through 4).
Staff is recommending approval of an alternative to the applicant's proposal that would provide
for Medium-High Residential (11-18 du/ac) densities west of a major north/south utility
easement, similar to residential densities within Village Core areas on the Otay Ranch (from
14.5 to 18 du/ac). No High Density Residential (18-27 du/ac) is proposed within any village
on the Otay Ranch, and it is envisioned that through density transfers, limited higher density
multiple family units could be constructed, thereby providing the ability to provide a balance
-
~ J2.-52
, 0- $ 2..
Page 9, Item L
Meeting Date /16/93
\2-
1~,lq3
of housing types. Recommended multiple family densities are compatible with the planned
intensity of this area and would provide additional opportunities to provide affordable housing.
The Medium-High (11-18 dulac) densities recommended for both the EastLake Greens GPA
parcels and the Land Swap parcels could result in product types that are consistent with a
number of existing and planned townhome condominium developments within the EastLake
Greens SPA and thus would be compatible with the remainder of EastLake Greens. Through
transfers of density, some areas of EastLake Greens could provide higher densities necessary
to provide affordable units while, conversely, averaging the overall densities would result in
some lower density duplex or townhome units. Processing of a General Development Plan,
SPA Plan and Design Review applications would be required in order to develop the property.
The designation of 17 acres located at the southwest quadrant of SR-125 and Telegraph
Canyon Road as "Professional and Administrative Office" will result in an appropriate land
use surrounded on two sides by a major arterials (Telegraph Canyon Road and SR-125), and
on the remaining side by a high voltage power line easement. This easement will also act a
buffer between single family dwellings proposed to the west and the ultimate office land use.
The designation of 52 acres of "Retail Commercial" north of East Orange Avenue and between
EastLake Parkway and SR-125, will result in a logical extension of the freeway-oriented
commercial designed for immediately to the south within the Otay Ranch and is appropriately
located within the "Activity Corridor" adjacent to SR-125 and EastLake Parkway.
Affordable Housing
An important consideration in staff s analysis of this proposed GP A is the prOVIsIOn of
affordable housing opportunities. The City Council included in the Housing Element (updated
in 1992), the following policy (Part 3, Section III, Obj. 1, Policy 3), which provides for
flexibility in establishing, and in some cases, increasing densities within the Eastern Territories
that can provide for affordable housing units.
"In conjunction with the policy implementation, the City shall evaluate the Land Use
Element of the General Plan to determine the extent to which, in warranted cases,
increases in density would facilitate the provision of affordable units. As appropriate,
the City shall consider amendments to the Land Use Element."
As discussed previously, with approval of the EastLake Greens tentative map in 1989, the
Council also deferred a condition requiring the developer to provide a low and moderate-
income housing program (5% low and 5% moderate) for the EastLake Greens, subject to the
approval of the City's housing coordinator. An affordable housing program has not been
adopted to date for the EastLake Greens. The applicant's proposed General Plan Amendment
would re-designate one of the five parcels, R-26 (which is part of Subarea 1), back to a High-
~
~ \e-53
Page 10, Item / ~( .-
Meeting Date~ : i
10 \., J q~
I'L/''-i /'3
Density Residential General Plan designation. With the proposed density increase staff is
recommending that the interim deferral of the housing requirement resulting from the EastLake
Greens tentative subdivision map conditions be concluded.
The current status for the provision of affordable housing units for the EastLake community,
as a whole, is as follows:
EastLake I - A total of 19 low-income housing units are still needed to achieve the
City's standard of5% low & 5% medium income units. With the approval of the Kaiser
Hospital facility a displacement of 405 high density units occurred, which severely
impaired EastLake' s ability to provide the 19 low income units within EastLake I.
EastLake II (EastLake Greens) - A total of 139 low-income and 139 moderate-income
units would be required to achieve compliance, based on the SPA approval of 2,774
units.
(EastLake Trails) - A total of 63 low-income and 63 moderate-income units would be
required for this portion of the EastLake community. A total of 1,260 units are planned
to be built within the Trails project.
-
EastLake III - A total of 89 low-income and 89 moderate-income units need to be
provided within this portion of the EastLake community. A total of260 medium density
and 506 medium-high density units are planned to be built within EastLake III,
providing increased opportunities for providing affordable housing.
EastLake IV - This area consists of 160 acres which has been exchanged for the Land
Swap parcels, and currently is included as part of the Otay Ranch General Development
Plan and is no longer owned by the EastLake Development Company.
With the approval of the staff recommended GP A alternative the Greens would be required to
provide a total of 160 low-income and 160 moderate-income units. The staff recommended
Land Swap units would require an additional 37 low-income units and an additional 37 low-
income units. Therefore, the total increase of required affordable housing units for the two
General Plan Amendment areas would be 197 low-income units and 197 moderate-income
units.
Staff recommends that Council consider requiring the developer to provide an affordable
housing implementation program for the entire EastLake community, including the Land Swap
parcels, which would outline the phasing and location of anticipated affordable housing units.
It is anticipated that this program be submitted and approved prior to the approval of any final
subdivision maps and prior to approval of future General Development Plans within EastLake.
-
~-~~ IC"S'1
Page 11, Item
Meeting Date
1'"2.
I L./r Je7t3
FISCAL IMP ACT: Additional information regarding fiscal impacts of the proposed General
Plan Amendments will be forwarded to the City Council prior to the hearing.
~
~IO-SS
Table 3
Combined EastLake Land SwaplEastLake Greens GPA's
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
Dwelling Units
Land Use Designation Acreage Baseline ~drange. High
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 99 Ac. 297 594
Medium (6-11 DUlAC) 70 Ac. 420 770
Open Space 9 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 23 Ac.
Public/Quasi- Public 34 Ac.
TOTAL 235 Ac. 717 DU 1,364 DU
PROPOSED GP AMENDMENT (Applicant's proposal)
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 18 Ac. 54 108
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC) 46 Ac. 506 828
High (18-27 DUlAC) 38 Ac. 684 1,026
Retail Commercial 52 Ac.
Prof. & Admin. 17 Ac.
Open Space 31 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 19 Ac.
--
Public/Quasi-Public 14 Ac.
TOTAL 235 Ac. 1,244 DU 1,962 DU
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDA nON
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 22 Ac. 66 132
Medium (6-11 DUlAC) 20 Ac. 120 220
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC) 69 Ac. 759 1,242
Retail Commercial 52 Ac.
Prof. & Admin. 17 Ac.
Open Space 20 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 19 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 16 Ac.
TOTAL 235 Ac. 945 DU 1,594 DU
STAFF RECOMMENDA nON
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC) 22 Ac. 66 132
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC) 89 Ac. 979 1,602
Retail Commercial 52 Ac.
Prof. & Admin. 17 Ac.
Open Space 20 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 19 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 16 Ac.
TOTAL 235 Ac. 1,045 DU 1,734 DU
-,
-
~
..J-.2.. Sc; YO - $"
,~.:.-:.-,.... ""'-. ,,-
(Y' . -"'\ ~ r_ r"" .' ..... ."
, ) Gl _.I< . . ;....-. . ',* 1 '.
'-. ,.. 4.t'.......~1~ ~I-J-' . ~#.~'.' ;". .: '.__i .:~- '-.,,:;
4":;" ,',' ....,. ;'-,,' ~:.. ~". J.;'"r. (\
" . ;'~~." ';;.:\~"::"J / "Ji:: . \..
,,~ "~_1""~""" .~._.~... " I, t It\~.. \I:{ ~~":::H""
~. . ft,.~.- '.. -",..:~ ",.... .... .~ '..~".. '
. ~ .r ,:/' .... \: ' .', .. J .,..:
,....'- ...."
''''''''0 -
I'~,~..
~t. .
~~ :. '1-//./
~~ :, .,\~>/ /
. . ._:.~t EXHIBIT 1 '
_..... ':;;:"I~S ~
.. j.*.:r: ..'P ^,"~.v .
...~~: ] ........../ .1./ ....:-
;;c .. \
~.J"" ~~- . .. '\ I
....4 l '.
~.# \ I \ /..;+>>-"
... \. /.:
.... *~ \ , V-~L
_ ...~ ' .-.c: '-.
'.. .......
..
"
'",;;>>"
f
~>. \.
\0.-
,
'"
'. (
...,
.
..f'
c
z
O'
",.'
r . "
,
!.
I' .
;. \.
r ;
,
I
I
) I
,:< I \ _.1
,rS - \~ - '.1.
.( ~...'.-- ,.,,'
; t ,ClDe. -
'\: 1.\ t '; i
...,
~~
.=
'2
.&'
- . j.
.~~.:
,J I
I-
><~
w~
1->
z<(
O--.J
u~
(!)()
~z
za:
ZW
<:t-
-JU)
a.. us
EXHIBIT 2
-
c~ ~
-
-
~
J-2..-S~ la-S~
::-
EXHIBIT 3
~ 15
0
8!. ..c:
(.)
16 0) >. 0 U)
.1: ~ ... 0
.- ~
... Q. 5 ..c: >.
.0. Q. .0. 0 S =
Cf) 0 Q. E U) E
0 ..c: 0 E c:: 8:
:I: U) ..c: ..c: CD
en <3 .0) E .J..
:f CD ...
W '3
~
, t.
t-a:
><0
Wo
t--
Za:
Oa:
uO
(!)U
Z>-
-t-
Z-
Z~
<(I-
.....1 U
0..<(
~~
~c.
~ h
~""'"
y-
~
'E
If
I
:::
'3
~
~
~ 10- 59
!;< EXHIBIT 4
LU
t-
Z
0 <1> JB -
.~ :J
Uz ...J ~ JB
:t- :J .~
en ~ tt
c:: ~
(!JQ e en c:: JB
c::
t= e ... .0 ~
.- c:(
en
zl<i: == t= c:: ca
~ <1>
en e Ci5 ~ .<1> C'O
en t= ~ e
- --I ... e It)
.c ~ ... ~ c:(
.- N ~
z::> .2> Co en
an c:: ~ e ...
...J S e I e 0
Zu a: JB .<1>
t= U) JB is'
<(0: 1: 1: ~
..J -
D..U
~.~
..~
~\..,
. _0
.\ ~\
\ dIE-
~~. - ..-.)
\~ ~~. ~~!
\.1 -~ ~/.~
__a ~6Jl' c:c:c:
~~.....,.. ~
<~ .... ;
....~ O' """,-00-
~~ ~'i
.(; ~\
.~ \
\\... e-
';)\'- ~ -"
\~ /~
eo,; ..
i\-:' ~
0\.1 ~\
-
-.
--f!-t1;;
~ 10-(.0
~z
<t
C&ij..-J
c::= a..
JQbC)
=~
001 x
bW
00
~
@])
~
- 'Q"
~ :a
:aWCXl_
~:a:;:~
p~~I!~ ~
~I~iPHihll
Jjjj~~~~!i~ ~
1
~.
-',
~
'~IO-~J
EXHIBIT 5
~;
6
z
..
~I
~
!
~2
II)
-
Qj
C.I
..
l.
=-
=
~
CI'.J
"C
=
=
...;l
Qj
~
=
...;l
i
[;Jil
.
~ct
OO)CI)
=0
~Cl.
~
=
OO)W
b~
OO~
~~
@W
~
- W
y ~
:aWCZ)_
~~E~ i
1:bf~1 ~ "8
Ilii'h!il ~l
nnbU!ilh
1
~
EXIDBIT 6
-
~;
6
:
~
~I
~
~.
f'-l
-
Q,l
C.J
! ...
~
~
~2 =-
~
S~~.~ ~
~
~
=
~
....:l
Q,l
..Ill:
~
....:l
i
~
.. -
ftIr
..1'" ~L 10-Co2.
'.' a"
EXHIBIT 7
~~ . ~;
-- ~
~ta: w ~
~WlD__
fQbZ ;~ E~ j 6
~ prl ,. ~ :
~
!J i'~. !il ~ ~!
=<(
(00) unl~H!ilh
blt
OO~
~Cf.)
@J> ~
~ to
.-
l
~
A;
<
:t
SZ:l.~
!
..
~2
.JH7 _
~ lo-Ce3
I
III
-
QJ
(",I
...
~
=-
=-
~
~
l:I:J
"C
=
~
....;l
QJ
~
~
....;l
-
III
~
~
.
.--.
\
,
...... Gal ea.. ..... . -....
~
~ &ft:__
~EJ
~ .oor-= I pm
I I.i:.' ...~ A6sxaE
""'Ut.,t" 211a/llQ
-
'. ~e=- ' . ;.
.;;;o:::s: FU ..,.....~
. ,.....,...
i.-.".....
_. . ___ EASTlAKE
~ GREENS SPA
. _.~ IO-~'~
EXHIBIT 9
Genera'
Development
Plan
RESIDENTIAL
\..IKI UlIE t\JI4C IoWt
ACAES \,NT. .
.
bELow 2" , 003 7" (
.
LM 'Low/~ P .
3" 3 :)~ 1133 \
~~ 23e e e- " PO
1.50 ,
~ ..... ~
,.....~ 1205 1 I. Ie ,eeo ' M
I M ~ LIo4 .
U7 1&-27. ,e72 .
----.. \ \
s.,vlOlal 10257 713' \
t.()N - RESOENllAL \ \
l I
VH) \.fiE AOlES PO .
C ReI" 5e e \
,
C-O ProleUD'W& '2 e
- -.,,,"".
~ ReMer:t' & '32 ,
UowIlC loWUaeun;
;--0- ~ 5clece '130
l...,...,;-
~ PIAlIc/<:La~ 103 :)
~,..,.,.. ,'-'-" tee'
~ IwlaJQr c._lIQn 2115
....lOlll ..1.2
~ FIan~ 71.2
~lClllll aoe. 1 Ie 11)1 ..
. c..ealt c..c" ...
~ EASTLAKE
A PLANNED COMMUNITY BY EASTLAKE OEVEL~NT CO ~
~ 9i~~! .r..
~ -.~
0.1' )-n" -
~ lo-<o.s
. iPZZ
. ~oo
~~E=
c=::=2 00 <
.[Qb~ ~
.o~
c=:::::s U ~
~~8
@~~
~~~
@~
~
.^~ .~.fP'
~~. ".. ~
I ~~. / ffi
.f; ~ ..~~ en
p ~-~ ~cn
:1 (5 ~
1\ U
~ ~rn
.\, - ~
· \~ ~ .:J I'-
\\ ~ ...
\ \~ ~. .:: :~: ~~
".:1 W ::::::::~:: \
'.\ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :
~\ . :: :.:::: :::::::: II
" :S". '::::::::::::::::. ,
\, ~t:/ i rn
.\ . //: .....:l
.~ C/) // J: --=- rT'
\~--- ,-........ 0 ~ ...:;'~- I-Iool
\ -..::::':;~:-..~ . I ( f3 ) ,'-' .: : : :f' .<1.-::0-;.."...... -~ ~
J ~ ~~- :::.-"... .......\ D.. . .... ~ /J-<
· - - -- ~ ~ ,0" 7 I
.\ - --- -"';;::~" ...~.. 7 'I
5 1 en ~:::..:: ~ / ~
0.. J r::--. ~.:::. ...... .. ~.. ~
.. ~ I 2 t,V ..::~~~~~H H~~~~ 6 ~ .t?. ~
\(J)....~ .......::E.. ...... h~ ~
\ 0 . ........ ... .... ~., v.l
HI'lIS _ ~ Q CI)
't\\ lE.... /~".;;.""""'" .'- i1 . j :
vt
~
~
~
*
-
Q .!!!
ctl -a
- -
. -a u
ctlCO_
~:a~~ .
J J j j j! ~.i.~i~J]
EXHIBIT 10
-
:3:E~:I:5a:~0..~
~ f3 ~
-
~
~ \ 0- c... Co
LIST OF A IT ACHMENTS
DRAFT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS:
. Draft City Council Resolution for GP A-92-03 (Otay Ranch Project)
. Draft City Council Resolution for GP A-93-04 (EastLake Greens GP A)
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING RESOLUTIONS:
. Planning Commission Resolution and Draft City Council Resolution for EastLake Land
Swap GPA (pCM-90-03; includes Land Swap GPA as part of Otay Ranch Project)
. Planning Commission Resolution and Draft City Council Resolution for EastLake
Greens GPA (GPA-93-04) .
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
. March 3, 1993 hearing (EastLake Greens GPA)
. May 12, 1993 hearing (Com; ::1ed Land Swap and Greens GPA's)
. May 26, 1993 hearing (Easi: ,ke Greens GPA)
RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
. February 15, 1993 meeting (Land Swap)
. March 1, 1993 meeting (Land Swap)
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS FOR THE EASTLAKE LAND SWAP GP A (GP A-92-
03)
. CEQA Findings & Statement of Overriding Considerations (not included in packet)
. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (not included in packet)
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS FOR THE EASTLAKE GREENS GPA (GPA-93-04)
. EIR-86-4 (EastLake Greens SPA)
. Addendum to EIR-86-04
. CEQA Findings
. Statement of Overriding Considerations
. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
~
~ lo-<c:,'/
nns PAGE BLANK
~~
-
-
-
'0- Co g
d~ II
. \ ,,"t- \ \
~Vl It}
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING RESOLUTIONS
/2 ~~ /tJ/j/y
,.
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-9O-3
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA CERTIFYING THE FINAL
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FPEIR 90-
01); AND RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT
IT: CERTIFY FPEIR 90-01, AMEND THE CHULA VISTA
GENERAL PLAN TEXT AND DIAGRAMS, APPROVE THE
OTAY RANCH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN,
INCLUDING A RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN,
VILLAGE PHASING PLAN, FACIUTY IMPLEMENTATION
PLANS, AND SERVICE/REVENUE PLAN, ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE PREZONING MOST OF THE OTAY RANCH;
MAKE THE REQUIRED PREZONE FINDINGS; AND DIRECT
STAFF TO PREPARE AND REFER PROPOSED FINAL
VERSION OF CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT, THE MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND THE
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE
OTA Y RANCH PROJECT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR
REVIEW AND COMMENT PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTION OF THE FINAL FORM OF THE PROJECT, IF
ANY.
WHEREAS, the area of land which is subject of this resolution is diagrammatically
represented on Attachment A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; is
commonly known as the Otay Ranch Project; and for the purpose of general description herein
consists of approximately 23,088 acres located south of the rural community of Jamul, 2 miles
north of the United States-Mexico border, abutting the western Chula Vista City limits, and the
eastern boundary of which is generally State Route 94 ("Project Site"); and,
WHEREAS, a person having control over all or a portion of the development of the
Project Site, to-wit: the Otay Vista Associates. L.P., (formerly known as the Baldwin Vista
Associates, L.P.) ("Developer") has applied to the City for approval of an Otay Ranch Project
(New Town Plan). The proposal has been modified throughout project review, resulting in the
following project ("Project") (References to the "Project" herein refer to the following project
description and take precedence over any inconsistencies with other descriptions or references
to the Project herein contained): to develop a mixed use (residential, commercial and industrial)
community. The Project would involve 23,088 acres, which includes approximately 160 acres
of EastLake Land Swap Parcels (proposed residential and commercial General Plan land use
designations) and would allow a maximum of 26,017 dwelling units to be constructed, resulting
in a maximum population of approximately 75.706. An additional 891 units (maximum) would
f: \homc\p1annin&\duane\pcreso.OlyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
~ /0--70
Resolution No. PCM-9Q-3
Page 2
be allowed on the EastLake Land Swap Parcels. The buildout of the Project is projected to take
30-50 years. The plan would generally be divided into 14 villages 6 planning areas, plus the
Eastern Urban Center (EUC). Most of the proposed homes would be located in 14 villages; 11
on the Otay River parcel, 2 on the the Proctor Valley parcel, and one on the San Ysidro parcel.
Rural estate development is also planned for the eastern parcels. An extensive open space
system and circulation system, including greenbelt parkways and hiking trails, would connect
the. various development areas and parcels of Otay Ranch. A Resource Management Plan
(RMP), including an approximate 12,OOO-acre management preserve, would be implemented.
The management preserve will be conveyed in perpetuity to an entity other than the developer;
and,
WHEREAS, on August 1, 1989, the City Council, by Resolution No. 15220, adopted
a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Chula Vista and the County of
San Diego to establish a joint planning project approach and team for the processing of the Otay
Ranch Project, including among others, a General Plan Amendment, General Development Plan,
and Environmental Impact Report; and,
WHEREAS, said MOU empowered an Interjurisdictional Task Force (lTF) to establish
Goals, Objectives and Policies which would guide the preparation of various project alternatives
for development of the Otay Ranch; and,
WHEREAS, all the staff and Planning Commission preparation and recommendations
regarding the Project have been made in accordance with said MOU, and this Resolution is
being considered and acted upon concurrently with a similar one before the San Diego County
Planning Commission; and,
WHEREAS, the Otay Vista Associates, L.P., filed duly verified applications for a
General Plan Amendment, a General Development Plan including, among others, Resource
Management, Village Phasing, Facility Implementation, and Service/Revenue Plans ("Supporting
Documents") and Prezoning (collectively, the "Discretionary Approvals Applications"); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set a time and place for a hearing on said
Discretionary Approvals Applications, including the certification of the Final Program
Environmental Impact Report for this Project (FPEIR -90-01), and notice of the hearing, together
with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City
and its mailing to property owners within a minimum of 1,000 feet of the extension boundaries
of the property, and to other designated agencies as required at least ten days prior to the
hearing; and,
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the Discretionary Approvals Applications was held
before the Planning Commission at the meeting of April 29, then continued from time to time
to May 15, May 16, May 22, May 29, June 17, July 31, August 19, September 11, September
16, October 7, October 12, October 19, October 23, October 29, November 4, November 12,
f: \home\planning\duane\pcreso.OlyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
~
//,-:;) - 7 /
Resolution No. PCM-90-3
Page 3
November 20, December 2, December 9, December 18, 1992 and January 15, January 27,
January 29, Febuary 3, Febuary 10, Febuary 19, Febuary 24, March 13, March 17, March 24,
March 31, April 14, April 22, May 8, May 13, and May 18, 1993, and said hearings were
thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Chula Vista Planning
Commission does hereby fmd, determine, resolve and order as follows:
1. FPEIR Contents.
The FPEIR consists of the following:
A. "Final Program Environmental Impact Report - Otay Ranch Project" (EIR 90-
01) prepared by Ogden Environmental and Energy Services and dated December, 1992, SCH
# 89010154 (two volumes), which contains the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report
("DPEIR") distribution date July 31, 1992, revised to reflect responses made to comments on
the DPEIR; and
B. Technical Reports to the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report
(Appendices A, Band C, and Volumes I through IX); and
C. Comments and Responses to Comments to the DPEIR.
2. FPEIR Reviewed and Considered.
The Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed, analyzed and
considered FPEIR 90-01, the environmental impacts therein identified for this Project, prior to
approving the Project,
3. Certification of Compliance with CEQA.
The Planning Commission does hereby fmd that FPEIR 90-01 has been prepared in
accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR
Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista.
4. Independent Judgment of Planning Commission
The Planning Commission fmds that the FPEIR reflects the independent judgment of the
City of Chula Vista Planning Commission.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, based on the Findings and subject to the Conditions stated
in the attached Draft City Council Resolution and Draft City Council Ordinance, the Commision
recommends that the City Council:
f: \home\p1annil1i\duane\pcreso. ocyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
~3
/L51~7:J-
Resolution No. PCM-90-3
Page 4
1. Certify Final Program EIR-90-0I, and
2. Approve amending the text and diagrams of the Chula Vista General Plan for the
Otay Ranch Project, including the "Industrial Use Option," subject to modifications generally
listed and shown on maps in Exhibit 1, attached hereto, and
3. Approve the Otay Ranch General Development Plan, including Supporting
Documents (RMP, Village Phasing Plan, Facility Implementation Plans and Service/Revenue
Plan) and Errata Sheets, subject to modifying the RMP, Facility Implementation Plans and
Service/Revenue Plan to conform to the final plan (with the "Industrial Use Option" for Village
3) and to modifications generally listed in Exhibit 1, attached hereto, and
4. Adopt an ordinance approving the Prezoning of22,529 acres of the unincorporated
Otay Ranch property to the PC (Planned Community) Zone, and
5. Direct staff to prepare and refer the proposed fmal version of CEQA Findings of
Fact, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations for the Otay Ranch Project back to the Commission for review and comment
prior to City Council adoption of the final form of the project, if any, after adoption of items
2, 3, and 4 above.
y~'-'
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the owners of
the property and the City Council.
f:\home\planning\duane\pcreso.OlyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
~--
)1)/75
Resolution No. PCM-90-3
Page 5
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 18th day of May, 1993 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
").
4~/"1 -d7~
Susan Fuller, Chairman
ATTEST:
~u ~'-<"A k',J.L.<-
Nancy RiJley, Se~retaryf
~
f: Ihomelp lanning Iduane Ipcreso. DIy DRAFT
May 18. 1993
)1)-- 71
. EXHffiIT 1
)f)~75 ~-
CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COl\1MISSION
RECOMMEl'1J>ED MODllilCATIONS TO STAFF RECOMMEl''DED GPA & GDP
FOR THE OTAY RANCH PROJECT
The following are Planning Commission recommended modifications to the Staff Recommended
General Plan Amendment (GPA) and General Development Plan (GDP) for the Otay Ranch:
(1) (GPA); Modify GP diagrams (Fig. 1-2 and 7-2) and text (pages 1-48, and 14-16 through
14-18) regarding university site location (See attached).
(GDP); Reflect a university as the primary land use in the area of Villages 9 & 10 with
the staff recommended plan as alternate land uses, applicable after a certain period of
time should a university not locate there. Text references to a university shall be generic
and not identify a specific university (See attached).
(2) (GPA); Modify GP diagram (Fig. 1-2) and text (page 1-16, 1-18, 14-4 and 14-9)
regarding expanding development area (See attached).
(GDP); Expand most westerly development area located north of the Otay Landfill to
the south and west property lines, with no increase in total dwelling units. Modify text
to encourage access from Orange Avenue for this development area.
(3) (GPA); Modify GP text (page 1-4, 1-16, 1-18, 14-4 and 14-9) to reflect revised density
figures based on recommended density changes.
(GDP); Increase densities of transit village (Villages 1, 5, 6, and 9) core areas to 25
dulac, with no increase in total units for these villages.
(4) (GPA); Modify GP diagram (Fig. 1-2) to reflect expanded development area within the
San Ysidro East Parcel. (See attached)
(GDP); Expand development area at the southwesterly comer of Planning Area 17.
(5) (GPA); Modify GP text (pages 1-4, 1-16, 1-18, 14-4 and 14-9) and diagram (Fig. 1-2)
to reflect the two most easterly development areas of the staff recommended residential
development area east of Lower Otay Reservoir (identified as Village 15 in GDP) as L-3
Residential (l ac. min. lot size).
(GDP); Modify Village 15 text and maps to reflect a reduction of dwelling units to 516
and modification of minimum lot sizes as depicted on Table I-A and associated diagram
(See attached).
Exhibit 1
1 City Planning Commission Resolution
);; ~7 {:;
~-
(6) (GPA); Modify proposed GP text (pages 1-4, 1-16, 1-18, 14-4 and 14-9) and diagram
(Fig. 1-2) to reflect Medium-High Residential in those areas proposed as High
Residential (18-27 du/ac) on the EastLake Land Swap Parcels. In addition, delete the
proposed GP diagram change for a small triangular-shaped development area located east
of the north/south utility easement (to remain L-M, as currently designated in the GP).
(7) (GDP); Modify proposed GDP text (pages 210, 224 & 228) to incorporate transit
funding language (see attached).
Attachments
(:\GPAMOD.LSTI
Exhibit 1
2 City Planning Commission Resolution
/1)-77 ~
B
UNIVERSITY LOCATION AND PHASING
MAY 18, 1993
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Several sections of the GDP/SRP would have to be modified in order to accommodate the
Planning Commissions' concern regarding the university designation. It is recommended that
new language be added to the following sections:
Page 109: Potential University
Page 153: Village 9 Description
Page 158: Village 10 Description
Page 155: Other Village 9 Policies
Page 157: Village 9 Graphic
Page 160: Other Village 10 Policies
Page 161: Village 10 Graphic
Page 341: Phasing
Pan III, Plan Implementation, Page 23:
University SPA Requirements
Page 68:
Land Use Designations
(GDP; Part II, Chapter 1, Section D, Page 109) Modify as follows:
4. Potential University
The University of California Regents have expressed their intention to construct three new
University of California campuses over the next 20 years, one of which will be sited in Southern
California. On October 6, 1989, The Baldwin Company and the City of Chula Vista jointly
submined a proposal to the University of California Board of Regents to locate a new university
campus on Otay Ranch. The proposal identified a site near Wueste Road overlooking Otay
Lakes and adjacent to the United States Olympic Training Center. During 1992, the City of
Chula Vista and San Diego City Councils and the County Board of Supervisors approved
resolutions supponing the Wueste Road location for a university, subject to several conditions;
notably, that an environmental process be completed assuring the identification and protection
of significant resources.
,/ -- 9 --
/ /) r--7 {j
UNIVERSITY LOCA nON AND PHASING
MAY 18, 1993
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
The GDP/SRP Land Use Map identifies the geft!flil location for tBe l'eteBtial a university
campus within ViIJa2es 9 and 10 and potentiallv westerly of Wueste Road. If the a university.
acceptable to the local jurisdiction. UB:iversity ef CaIifeFftia aeeides to leeateEl ea tBe locates
within Otay Ranch, the ~ size of the campus, ~ location and intensity of Beeessary
support land uses wiIJ be su9jeet te eoverned by discretionary action by the appropriate
governmental agency.
University Policies
o The GDP/SRP Land Use Map sftell symeelieally ideatity identifies a geBefEll location for
a university campus and associated compatible uses within ViIJages 9 and 10 and westerly
of Wueste Road. The university site general location shaH include, but not be limited to,
400 + / - (usable) usable acres~ adjaeeftt te 'Vl::U~ste Read. +he These 8:fe& areas shaH also
be assigned &fl ~ \:lBderlyiftg secondary land use designation which shaH be 1:ltili:zed
activated, should tlie University ef CalifeFftia a university Eleeide not fa locate in the area.
o The university designation shaH be the primarv land use in ViIJages 9 and 10. The
university designation shaH be depicted on the Otav Ranch Land Use Map within ViIJage
9 and 10. Villages 9 and 10 shaH also have villalZe secondarv land use designations. as
described in Part II. Chapter 1. Section F9 and FIO. The express goal of the GDP/SRP
is to orovide a university land use designation for sufficient duration to enable a
university to locate within Otav Ranch. However it is rec02nized that if. a universitv
does not locate within Otav Ranch after an adequate opportunity has been afforded. the
vilJalZe land use designation wilJ be activated. Activation of the village land use
designation shall not occur until buildout of Western Phases I. II. and III. as identified
in the Ola)' Ranch Phasing Plan. However. if a university is selected prior to the buildout
of Western Phase I. II and III. the Phasing Plan may be modified. Any amendment to
the Phasing Plan proposing to accelerate the development of a Village land use on the
designated universitv site will require a GP and GDP Amendment.
o The Uni',ersity ef CaIifemia SBe1:lld Be FeEl\iired te A university shall prepare an
Environmental Impact Report which would identify and protect any significant
environmental resources that cannot be mitigated.
o The UB:iyersity of Califemia A universitv should be required to prepare an analysis to
ensure compatibility with adjacent villages.
o If me \:lftiversit}' eleets to laeate wimiB t:Be Performance standards shall be adopted to
address design, access and resource protection for any university proposed on the Otay
Ranch. Managemeftt Preserve, me The Resource Management Plan shall be re-evaluated
2
/fJ,7i
~
\0
UNIVERSITY LOCA nON AND PHASING
MAY 18, 1993
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
to ensure that the siting of this facility does Dot interfere with or adversely impact the
goals, objectives and policies of that plan.
o If the anlversitj' eleets to leeate, perl'omlmee staftdar4s shall be adapted to addfess
desigR, aeeess ana reS€laFee preteetieB.
o If the 1:miversity reqaifes more land theft desigaated by t:he GDP/SR.n Land Use Uap,
tramfers of resideBtial deBSity shall be eJta:miBed OR a ease by ease basis.
o If tfte ~ university requires Otay Ranch land designated by the GDP/SRP Land Use Map
as neighborhood or community park, the local park requirements shall be reviewed on
a case-by-case basis."
(GDP/SRP; Part II, Chapter 1, Section F, Page 155) Delete fIrst bullet under "Other Village
Nine Policies":
o The mixture of IIUie! uses, deasities, aAd serviees reql:iwed for a l:irHversit)' may ea1:lse
chaRges m the fabrie of the COHUBl:lnlt?)' east of SR 125. This village aRd adjaeeftt villages
shall be Fe exammed, sRO\:ild t:he Uah'ersity be located withiB the O~y RaBeR.
(GDP/SRP; Part II, Chapter 1, Section F, Page 157) Add graphic showing university as the
primary land use (See attached exhibit):
(GDP/SRP; Part II, Chapter 1, Section F, Page 160) Delete fIrst bullet under "Other Village Ten
Policies" :
o The laRd l:lses fer this village ed adjaeeftt villages will be Fe examined, sa0l:ild the
UnI':ersity be located with:i:B me Ofay R:aBoa. The mixatfe of led a5eS, aensities, aRd
services re<il:liree for a l:lBiversity may reql:ift ehaftges iB the fabric of tBe eOmHM:lrHf)'
east of SR 125.
(GDP/SRP; Part II, Chapter 1, Section F, Page 161): Add graphic showing university as the
primary land use.
3
) jJ ~-?5t/
.~
UNIVERSITY LOCATION AND PHASING
MAY 18, 1993
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
(GOP/SRP; Pan III, Page 341) Add the following policy:
The phasin~ of development within Villages 9 and 10 shall be consistent with the policies in Part
II. Chapter 1. Section 0.4.. regarding the potential university site. "
(GDP/SRP, Part m, Plan Implementation; Page 23): Modify as follows:
University
[Village 9. 101
The Uai',ersity af CaHfePBia A university locatini on the Otay
Ranch should be required to prepare an Environmental Impact Report
which would identify and protect any significant environmental resources
that cannot be mitigated. If ~ me university eleets to locate~ on the site,
the Resource Management Plan shall be re-evaluated to ensure that the
siting of this facility does not interfere with or adversely impact the goals,
objectives and policies of that plan. Performance standards shall be
adopted to address design, access and resource protection. If the liaiversity
re~ires more laas thaa ElesigftBted 1:1)' 1he GDP/SR.n wd Use UBI',
trililSfers ef residefttial deasity shall be exam:iBed eft a ease ey ease easis.
The mixture of land uses, densities and services required for a university
may cause changes in the fabric of the community east of SR-125. Should
the university be located within Otay Ranch, impacted villages shall be re-
examined (GDP/SRP Pages 109, 155, 160, 165).
(GDP/SRP; Part II, Chapter 1, Section C, Page 68) Add the following land use designation:
l! University A University is the primary land use in Villages 9 and
10. Villages 9 and 10 shall also have village secondary
land use designations, as described in Pan II. Chapter 1.
Section F9 and FI0. Activation of the villaie land use
designation shall not occur until buildout of Western
Phases I. II. and m. as identified in the Otav fW1ch
Phasini Plan. Any amendment to the Phasing Plan
proposing to accelerate the development of a Village land
use on the designated university site will require a GP
and GDP amendment.
4
If) /?f)
-~
\'2
UNIVERSITY LOCA nON AND PHASING
MAY 18, 1993
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
*** University Potential University site expansion is indicated bv this
desig:nation. UBiversi~ site pstefttial is indieated "y tftis
designatisB. The laeatisB is eSB5i:;teftt with fCsshnisBS sf
the Ci~ af ChYla Vista, C0\lBty sf SIR Diega &BEl Ci~ af
Se Diege. A General Plan Amendment is required for
implementation of this land use.
(:\Ul'VLANG2.CC)
5
) /) ~~~
~/
..
.-.
jf} ,- gr)
UNIVERSITY SITE
(Modification to GP Fig. 1-2,
Planning Commission
Recommendation
(This modification also affects
map exhibit for Village 9 & 10
on Pales IS7 & 161 of GDP)
~--
- ,
\..:
.
o University Site
(See Chapter 14, General Plan lcxt,
for secondary land use designation)
EXPANDED DEVELOPMENT AREA
VILLAGE 2
(Modification to GP Fig. 1 -2)
Planning Commission
Recommendation
(lbis modification also affects
map exhibit for Village 2 on
Page 126 of GDP)
/0 ~(ji
~.
~ (<oJ .....-
L.2 .,
.
-
:'j
..... - --,
I
I
-. I
.
I .
--------'
.
.
.t',.
''to,. '
, .l'';/'
. f1'_# / J"
, C"." .
".,,;" .
t!.~ .
I
OTAY RANCH
City of Chula Vista
#~
~~ :
L;' .
n
I .
.
S~
Development Expansion Area
EXPANDED DEVELOPMENT AREA
PLANNING AREA 17
(Modification to GP Fig. 1-2)
Planning Commlaalon
Recommendation
(This modification also affects
map exhibitffGorDVp)iUaae 17 on -10 _
Page 203 0 .~. r (
) ~)--~7 \fc
Table I-A.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION FOR VILLAGE 15
AREA UNITS ACRES UNITS/ ACRE MIN. LOT SIZE
A 53 53 1.34 1
B 69 69 2.00 1
C 27 27 1.33 1
D 112 16 7.00
E 133 19 7.00
F Commercial 21 10 ac. buildable
G 19 28 0.68 1.5
H 22 33 0.67 1.5
I 17 34 0.50 2
J 40 79 0.51 2
K 24 48 0.50 2
TOTAL 516 427
(Vll.US.REel
) fJ -6" ')
(
~
TRANSIT-RELATED THRESHOLDS
MAY 18, 1993
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Sections of the GDP/SRP would have to be modified in order to accommodate the Planning
Commissions' concern regarding the phasing and funding for regional transit. It is
recommended that new language be added to the following sections:
Page 210:
Mobility Goals, Objectives & Policies
Page 224:
Trolley System Goals, Objectives & Policies
Page 228:
Processing requirements for mobility items
(GDP; Part II, Chapter 2, Section B, Page 210) Modify objective and add policy:
GOAL: ACHIEVE A BALANCED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM WHICH
EMPHASIZES ALTERNATIVES TO AUTOMOBILE USE AND IS RESPONSIVE TO
THE NEEDS OF RESIDENTS.
Objective:
Study, identify, and designate corridors, if appropriate, as well as
participate in funding for rail and transit facilities.
Policy:
The Otav Ranch shall contribute its fair share of funding for programs for
the construction of regional light rail and transit facilities.
(GDP; Part II, Chapter 2, Section B, Page 224) Add Policy & Implementation Measure:
Trolley System/Express Bus Transit Svstem
Regional transportation plans envision the expansion of the light rail system to connect the
existing system to the international border and various urban areas, including Otay Ranch. Until
this system is in place an interim reeional express bus transit system is proj)Osed.
Objective:
The Otay Ranch land use and mobility plans shall incorporate regional
plans for the expansion of the light rail system and interim reg.ional
express bus system.
Policy:
Provide a phased master plan for the inte~tion of an interim reg.ional
express bus system throue.h the Otay Ranch.
1
/)-~
11',
TRANSIT -RELATED THRESHOLDS
MAY 18, 1993
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Implementation Measure: Prior to. or concurrent with. the first SPA
Plan. a master olan shall be orepared for an interim re~ional exoress bus
transit system which will precede the li~ht rail transit system.
Policy:
Developer shall contribute its fair share of fundin2 for pro~rams for the
construction of a re2ional li2ht rail transit system and interim ~l
express bus system which will run throu2h the Otay Ranch. .. . .
Implementation Measure: The approval of any Tentative Subdivision Mao
for the Otav Ranch shall-be conditioned on the proiect contributing its fair
share of funding for programs for the construction of a regional light rail
transit and interim re~ional express bus system through the Otav Ranch.
(GDP; Part II, Chapter 2, Section C, Page 228) Add Tentative Map processing requirement:
Processing Requirements
o Tentative Map Requirements
. Conditioned to contribute its fair share towards fmancin2 mechanisms for
construction of local and re~ional li~ht rail and interim re2ional express bus
transit facilities.
(:\TRANsm.cC)
2
/1) .~g/
_ Zo --
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA CERTIFYING THE FINAL PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FPEIR 90-01) FOR
THE OTA Y RANCH PROJECT; AMENDING THE GENERAL
PLAN OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TO INCLUDE THE
OTAY RANCH PROJECT AREA; APPROVING THE OTAY
RANCH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, INCLUDING A
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN, A VILLAGE PHASING
PLAN, FACIliTY IMPLEMENTATION PLANS, AND A
SERVICE/REVENUE PLAN; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS
OF FACT PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUAliTY ACT; ADOPTING A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM;
AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERA TIONS.
I. Recitals
A. Project Site.
WHEREAS, the area of land which is subject of this resolution is diagrammatically
represented on Attaclunent A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; is
commonly known as the Otay Ranch Project; and for the purpose of general description herein
consists of approximately 23,088 acres located south of the rural community of Jamul, 2 miles
north of the United States-Mexico border, abutting the western Chula Vista City limits, and the
eastern boundary of which is generally State Route 94 ("Project Site"); and,
B. Project.
WHEREAS, a person having control over all or a portion of the development of the
Project Site, to-wit: the Otay Vista Associates, L.P., (formerly known as the Baldwin Vista
Associates, L.P.) ("Developer") has applied to the City for approval of an Otay Ranch Project
(New Town Plan). The proposal has been modified throughout project review, resulting in the
following project (Modified Phase n Progress Plan) ("Project"): to develop a mixed use
(residential, commercial and industrial) community. The Project would involve 23,088 acres,
which includes approximately 160 acres identified as the EastLake Land Swap Parcels (proposed
residential and commercial General Plan land use designations) and would allow a maximum of
27,179 dwelling units, all of which is more specifically described in Section 2.0 "Project
Description" of the document entitled "Candidate Findings of Fact", Attaclunent B hereto
incorporated by this reference. (References to the "Project" herein refer to the project
f: \home\planning\duane\ccrcso.ocyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
Reso OlaY Ranch Project
Paae 1
/t---~()
~ J-I--
description contained in the Candidate Findings of Fact, and take precedence over any
inconsistencies with other descriptions or references to the Project herein contained) An
additional 891 units (maximum) would be allowed on the EastLake Land Swap Parcels; and,
C. Memorandum of Understanding.
WHEREAS, on August 1, 1989, the City Council, by Resolution No. 15220, adopted
. a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Chula Vista and the County of
San Diego to establish a joint planning project approach and team for the processing of the Otay
Ranch Project, including among others, a General Plan Amendment, General Development Plan,
and Environmental Impact Report; and,
WHEREAS, said MOU empowered an Interjurisdictional Task Force (lTF) to establish
Goals, Objectives and Policies which would guide the preparation of various project alternatives
for development of the Otay Ranch; and,
WHEREAS, all the staff and Planning Commission preparation and recommendations
regarding the Project have been made in accordance with said MOU, and this Resolution is
being considered and acted upon concurrently with a similar one before the San Diego County
Board of Supervisors; and,
D. Application for Discretionary Approvals.
WHEREAS, on September 8, 1989, the Developer filed applications with the City of
Chula Vista for a General Plan Amendment and a General Development Plan, including
Resource Management, Village Phasing, Facility Implementation, and Service/Revenue Plans
("Supporting Documents") and Prezoning (all of which may jointly be referred to herein as
"Discretionary Approvals Applications"); and,
E. Planning Commission Record on Applications.
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the Discretionary Approvals Applications was duly
noticed before the Planning Commission at the meetings of April 29, May 15, May 16, May 22,
May 29, June 17, July 31, August 19, September 11, September 16, October 7, October 12,
October 19, October 23, October 29, November 4, November 12, November 20, December 2,
December 9, December 18, 1992 and January 15, January 27, January 29, Febuary 3, Febuary
10, Febuary 19, Febuary 24, March 13, March 17, March 24, March 31, April 14, April 22,
May 8, May 13, and May 18, 1993; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a public hearing held on April 29, May 15,
May 16, May 22, May 29, June 17, July 31, August 19, September 11, September 16, October
7, October 12, October 19, October 23, October 29, November 4, November 12, November 20,
December 2, December 9, December 18, 1992 and January 15, January 27, January 29, Febuary
f: \homelplanninglduanclccreso.otyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
Reso OIllY Ranch Project
Page 2
j 6J'~/ I
-d~-
3, Febuary 10, Febuary 19, Febuary 24, March 13, March 17, March 24, March.31, April 14,
April 22, May 8, May 13, and May 18, 1993, considered the Discretionary Approvals
Applications, took evidence as set forth in the record of its proceedings, which are incorporated
herein by reference as if set forth in full, made certain fmdings as set forth in their
Recommending Resolution PCM-90-03, and recommended to the City Council the approval of
said Discretionary Approvals Applications based on certain terms and conditions; and,
F. City Council Record on Applications.
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City Council
of the City of Chula Vista on July 30, September 24, September 30, October 7, October 22,
November 4, November 24, 1992, and , 1993 on the Discretionary Approvals
Applications, and to receive the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and to hear public
testimony with regard to same; and,
G. Discretionary Approval Ordinance.
WHEREAS, at the same City Council meeting at which this Resolution is being
considered, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista will also consider placing on frrst
reading an ordinance, Ordinance No. by which they may approve the Prezoning of
PC (Planned Community) zone for all or a portion of the Otay Ranch (22,529 acres)
("Discretionary Approvals Ordinance"), to be effective only upon annexation;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Chula Vista City Council does
hereby find, determine, resolve and order as follows:
II. Planning Commission record.
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their
public hearings on the Draft PEIR, held on September 16, October 7, October 12, and October
19, 1992 and their public hearing on this Project held on April 29, May 15, May 16, May 22,
May 29, June 17, July 31, August 19, September 11, October 23, October 29, November 4,
November 12, November 20, December 2, December 9, December 18, 1992, and January 15,
January 27, January 29, Febuary 3, Febuary 10, Febuary 19, Febuary 24, March 13, March 17,
March 24, March 31, April 14, April 22, May 8, and May 13, 1993, and the minutes and
resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
III. FPEIR Contents.
The FPEIR consists of the following:
A. "Final Program Enviromnental Impact Report - Otay Ranch Project" (EIR 90-01)
prepared by Ogden Enviromnental and Energy Services and dated December, 1992, SCH
f: lhomelp1anninlllduanelccn:so.OlyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
Reso OIllY Ranch Project
Paae 3
)ti /7~
_ :) 3-
# 89010154 (two volumes), which contains the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report
("DPEIR") distribution date July 31, 1992, revised to reflect responses made to comments on
the DPEIR; and
B. Technical Reports to the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (Appendices
A, B and C, and Volumes I through IX); and
C. Comments and Responses to Comments to the DPEIR.
IV. FPEIR Reviewed and Considered.
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed, analyzed and considered
FPEIR 90-01, the environmental impacts therein identified for this Project; the Candidate
Findings of Fact ("Findings" or "CEQA Findings") attached hereto as Attachment B, the
proposed mitigation measures contained therein, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program ("Program") attached hereto as Attachment C, and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations which is attached hereto as Attachment D, all of which are incorporated herein
by this reference, prior to approving the Project.
V. Certification of Compliance with CEQA.
The City Council does hereby fmd that FPEIR 90-01, the Candidate CEQA Findings, the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations
have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula
Vista.
VI. Independent Judgment of City Council
The City Council finds that the FPEIR reflects the independent judgment of the City of
Chula Vista City Council.
VII. Conditional Approval of General Plan Amendments.
The Chula Vista General Plan text and diagrams are amended as set forth in the
document entitled "City of Chula Vista General Plan Amendments," and dated December 18,
1992, are hereby approved subject to the General Conditions hereinbelow set forth.
VITI. Conditional Approval of the General Development Plan.
The City Council does hereby approve the General Development Plan for the Otay Ranch
Project (e~titled the "Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan", dated October
f:\home\planning\duane\~reso. OlyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
Reso OlaY Ranch PrOject
Pqe4 .
J!; // Y
- ~4--
5, 1992) (Modified Phase II Progress Plan with the "Industrial Use Option" for Village 3,
including the Supporting Documents), subject to the General Conditions hereinbelow set forth.
IX. General Conditions of Approval.
The approval of the foregoing Discretionary Approvals Applications which are stated to
be conditioned on "General Conditions" are hereby conditioned as follows:
A. Project Site is Improved with Project.
Developer, or their successors in interest, shall improve the Project Site with the Project
as described in the FPEIR, except as modified by this Resolution.
B. Discretionary Approvals Ordinance Becomes Effective.
The Discretionary Approvals Ordinance, is introduced, adopted and becomes effective.
C. Implement Mitigation Measures.
Developer shall diligently implement, or cause the implementation of, all mitigation
measures identified in the FPEIR that are found by this resolution to be feasible.
D. Implement the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the Otay Ranch Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
X. Consequence of Failure of Conditions.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and
maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all
approvals herein granted, deny or further condition issuance of all future building permits, deny,
revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals
herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions
or seek damages for their violation.
XI. Findings of Consistency with the General Plan.
The City Council hereby finds that the Project, including but not limited to the adoption
of the General Plan Amendment, and the General Development Plan, including the Supporting
Documents, is and will be consistent with the general plan as amended by this Resolution based
on the following:
f; \home\planninglduanelccreso.OlyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
Reso Otay Ranch Project
PaceS
) j) --;11
-- :;;~ /
Land Use
The General Development Plan consists of Goals, Objectives and Policies that
provide for unique and new concepts to the City of Chula Vista. These include
rural estate development areas with large lot development~ the development of a
community structured around a "village" concept, a resort development near the
Lower Otay Reservoir and other features. The Amendments to the General Plan
include new land use designations which provide for the above concepts, and
include an expanded land use diagiam which extends the City's General Plan
boundary to the limits of the Otay Ranch.
Circulation
The circulation system design, included in the Otay Ranch General Development
Plan, consists of a road hierarchy designed to provide for the following: (a)
ensure that regional traffic is provided for both on and offsite, (b) major
transportation corridors will not bisect individual villages thereby protecting a
pedestrian-oriented development plan, and (c) provide residential streets designed
to encourage the use of alternate modes of transportation other than the
automobile, including golf carts, bicycles and transit. Amendments to the General
Plan include revising roadway segments on and offsite to accommodate expected
local and regional traffic and to modify the Bicycle and Public Transit routes to
incorporate the Otay Ranch planning area.
Public Facilities
The General Development Plan includes Facility Implementation Plans which
provide a policy framework for the provision of master plans for Water,
Wastewater, Drainage/Flood Control and other systems. Amendments to the
General Plan provide for application of these policies to include the intire Otay
Ranch.
Housing
Goals, Objectives and Policies contained within the General Development Plan
such as the provision of a diverse range of housing styles, tenancy types and
prices, the provision of Regional Share housing allocations, Fair Share housing
provisions and special housing needs for the handicapped,. and the elderly blend
with the existing Goals of the City's General Plan.
f: \home\planning\duane\ccreso.OlyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
Reso OlaY Ranch Project
Page 6
) {)- 5~~
-d4-
Growth Management
The General Development Plan provides a policy framework that will ensure that
public facilities be provided concurrent with need. A Village Phasing Plan for the
Otay Ranch is provided as part of the GDP which must be updated along with the
preparation of a Public Facilities Financing Plan, a Transportation Phasing Plan
update, and an analysis on adherence to the facility threshold standards. Each is
required in conjunction with each SPA plan. This is consistent with the Goals and
Objectives of the City of Chula Vista's General Plan Growth Management
Element and Program. .
Parks and Recreation
The General Development Plan provides for local park land in accordance with
current City park acquisition and development requirements and establishes
policies which will result in a master parks plan at the next level of project
review. This is consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies contained in the
existing General Plan. Amendments to the General Plan assure that the parks and
recreation policies of the GDP are consistent with the General Plan.
Safety Element
The General Development Plan provides Goals and Objectives and Policies
addressing General Public Safety, Seismic Disturbances, Geologic Phenomena,
Fire, Crime, Health Emergency, and Hazardous Substances, and is consistent
with the policies of the General Plan.
Noise
The General Development Plan addresses noise issues with Goals, Objectives and
Policies that are consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan with the
overall goal of promoting a quiet community and ensuring that residents are not
adversely affected by noise.
Eastern Territories
The General Development Plan for the Otay Ranch provides a community design
which incorporates many of the features currently contained in the Eastern
Territories Plan portion of the existing General Plan, including a major regional
commercial center, regional transit, a university, significant open space, local
parks which are linked, and distinct neighborhood identities. Amendments to the
General Plan expand the Eastern Territories planning area but also include many
f: \home\planning\duane\ccreso.otyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
Reso DillY Ranch Project
Paae7
)[J ~1 ~
-JJ)-
of the major features of the current General Plan. The General Plan Amendments
assure consistency of the Project with the General Plan.
XII. CEQA Findings, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Statement of Overriding
Considerations .
A. Adoption of Findings.
The City Council does hereby approve, accept as its own, incorporate as if set
forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the fmdings contained in the
"Candidate Findings of Fact" (Attachment B).
B. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted.
As more fully identified and set forth in the FPEIR for the Otay Ranch Project
(FPEIR-90-01) and in the CEQA Findings (Attachment B), the Council hereby
finds pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091 that the mitigation measures described as feasible in the above
referenced documents, are feasible, and will become binding upon the entity (such
as the project proponent, the City, or the school district) assigned thereby to
implement same.
C. Infeasibility of Alternatives.
As is also noted in the above referenced environmental documents described in
the above subparagraph B, each of the alternatives to the project which were
identified as potentially feasible in the FPEIR, except the Modified Phase II
Progress Plan, are found not to be feasible since they could not meet both the
objectives of the Project and substantially lessen or avoid the identified significant
environmental effects for the reasons set forth in said CEQA Findings.
D. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council
hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program")
(Attachment C). The Council hereby fmds that the Program is designed to ensure
that during project implementation the permittee/project applicant and any other
responsible parties implement the project components and comply with the
feasible mitigation measures identified in the Findings and the Program.
f:\home\planning\duane\ccreso.otyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
Reso Olay Ranch Project
Pace 8
/tY/5' 7
--- d-8 '
E. Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any feasible
alternatives, certain significant or potentially' significant environmental effects
caused by the project, or cumulatively, will remain. Therefore, the City Council
of the City of Chula Vista hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section
15093, a Statement of Overriding Considerations in the fonn set forth in
Attachment D, identifying the specific economic, social, and other considerations
that render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable.
xm. Notice of Determination
The Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is directed after City
Council approval of this project to ensure that a Notice of Detennination is f1led with the County
Clerk of the County of San Diego.
XIV. Invalidity; Automatic revocation
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent
upon the enforceability of each and every tenn, provision and condition herein stated; and that
in the event that anyone or more tenns, provisions or conditions are detennined by a Court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed to
be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
Presented by
Approved as to fonn by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce Boogaard
City Attorney
f:\home\p!anning\duane\ccrcso,OlyDRAFT
May 18. 1993
Reso Otay Ranch Project
Paae9
/1)--;6
- d- 9 ..-
ATTACHMENT A
....-
.'._--"~" t.- - ':::'~.J'''
~. ~~' '-,',- ~ \
-:- ~. _..~:~- -:-..~:.. -:~"l r~
-~._~ .::;~~:
"
\
~,
..~- {~:,
-- ~.
. .......,"! --:,
..~ ~ -: .~...
..~
-, .
G~ '.
~ ~---....".L:
-. ..,-~ \.-..... . ~... -:"..
'---~--- '
'7:... -:.- _i -
- . --
- - .
#' - - .
. '
,
.
- . ,_ .';;0
,__- ~_.--' or;.
.' ..
~
.. ..:.
~-'
) - -:. - ,',---'-
.:.. -- , .., . . '-~ .: ,-.:::=- .,.
- _ ~ .~;;:.:. _ .::~.~t__~ ~ .' ~-"
-~ - --, ,'- - ~ ~..;;,:;:ji -:-._.'f
.- .i-'..JtJa.::..- -.....-~. -
rJT.AY ~AIN -,
1. I :-..:.:.. ~-.,-
--~-,' -..- -...
- ~ ....
- - .., :...
,..,
~
'.
.- -~.~~.: :-+"!7
- J --- ::":!..:~-\'...~1:-~;
ctrAY aANaI IIOtJNDoUY ~~-,;>"'!:Y":oior
~-;:....~ )-
'~ ' - , !:, :::."."'"--=. ~"11
'. ~--~ . --=- "~~ ';;' .,
,- - =-'-----~,~------. . .,s'-..:- .,r<-I'-]~-; , ::~~D
. .' '.: - r '_ -'. []IIlj OTAY RANCH PROJECT
." - - -- -'~ " ~- '
. ~_..:-.:----:~IOl'DP
- . u.a....SlCO~
,Q-
,...-.."..--..........
fIlET
t~~~~~~?1
..;;
--
--
. ...
., _/
I. . \. _":::-
I ~~;j--;~~1~~~c- t,' :~
. :;;:;'~:..~
OTAY RANCH
LOCATOR MAP
! f) ~ 77
3v,-
ATTACHMENT B
FINDINGS OF FACT
(CEQA FINDINGS)
[To be prepared]
I!J ..- / &10>t)
- 31,
ATTACHMENT C
MITIGATION MONITORING ~'D REPORTING PROGRAM
[To be prepared]
If} '-) I) /
- 3:;1../
ATTACHMENT D
ST A TEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
[To be prepared]
/(1 r/ 0;;2..,
v ,
_ '33/
DRAFf CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE
) tJ --I u')-?
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA CERTIFYING THE FINAL PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FPEIR 90-01) FOR
THE OTAY RANCH PROJECT; PREZONING MOST OF THE
OT A Y RANCH TO THE PC (pLANNED COMMUNITY)
ZONE; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT PURSUANT
TO THE CAliFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUAliTY ACT;
AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM, AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT
OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS.
I. Recitals
A. Project Site.
WHEREAS, the area of the land which is subject of this ordinance is diagrammatically
represented on Attachment E (Attachments A through D omitted), attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference; is commonly known as Otay Ranch Project; and for the
purpose of general description herein consists of approximately 22,529 acres (the Project Site
defined in the Discretionary Approvals Resolution , excluding 3 EastLake Landswap
parcels, approximately 160 acres in size, and 390 acres within jurisdiction of the City of San
Diego) located south of the rural community of Jamul, 2 miles north of the United States-Mexico
border, abutting the western Chula Vista City limits, and the eastern boundary of which is
generally State Route 94 ("Project Site"); and,
B. Project.
WHEREAS, a person having control over all or a portion of the development of the
Project Site, to-wit: the Otay Vista Associates, L.P., (formerly known as the Baldwin Vista
Associates, L.P.) ("Developer") has applied to the City for approval of an Otay Ranch Project
(New Town Plan). The proposal has been modified throughout project review, resulting in the
following project (Modified Phase II Progress Plan) ("Project"): of 27,179 dwelling unitsto
develop a mixed use (residential, commercial and industrial) community. The Project would
involve 23,088 acres, which includes approximately 160 acres identified as the EastLake Land
Swap Parcels (proposed residential and commercial General Plan land use designations) and
would allow a maximum of 27,179 dwelling units, all of which is more specifically described
in Section 2.0 "Project Description" of the document entitled "Candidate Findings of Fact",
Attachment B to the Discretionary Approvals Resolution incorporated by this reference.
(References to the "Project" herein refer to the project description contained in the Candidate
Findings of Fact, and take precedence over any inconsistencies with other descriptions or
references to the Project herein contained) An additional 891 units (maximum) would be allowed
on the EastLake Land Swap Parcels; and,
f: \home\planning\duane\ccord .olyDraft
May 18. 1993
Ord RE Otay Ranch Project
Page 1
/ f) '---j [) i(
- 3'1--
C. Memorandum of Understanding.
WHEREAS, on August 1, 1989, the City Council, by Resolution No. 15220, adopted
a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Chula Vista and the County of
San Diego to establish a joint planning project approach and team for the processing of the Otay
Ranch Project, including among others, a General Plan Amendment, General Development Plan,
and Environmental Impact Report; and,
WHEREAS, said MOU empowered an Interjurisdictional Task Force (lTF) to establish
Goals, Objectives and Policies which would guide the preparation of various project alternatives
for development of the Otay Ranch; and,
WHEREAS, all the staff and Planning Commission preparation and recommendations
regarding the Project have been made in accordance with said MOU, and this Resolution is
being considered and acted upon concurrently with a similar one before the San Diego County
Board of Supervisors; and,
D. Application for Discretionary Approvals.
WHEREAS, on September 8, 1989, the Developer filed applications with the City of
Chula Vista for a General Plan Amendment and a General Development Plan, including a
Resource Management, Village Phasing, Facility Implementation, and Service/Revenue Plans
("Supporting Documents") and Prezoning (all of which may jointly be referred to herein as
"Discretionary Approvals Applications"); and,
E. Planning Commission Record on Applications.
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the Discretionary Approvals Applications was duly
noticed before the Planning Commission at the meetings of April 29, May 15, May 16, May 22,
May 29, June 17, July 31, August 19, September 11, September 16, October 7, October 12,
October 19, October 23, October 29, November 4, November 12, November 20, December 2,
December 9, December 18, 1992 and January 15, January 27, January 29, Febuary 3, Febuary
10, Febuary 19, Febuary 24, March 13, March 17, March 24, March 31, April 14, April 22,
May 8, May 13, and May 18, 1993; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a public hearing held on April 29, May 15,
May 16, May 22, May 29, June 17, July 31, August 19, September 11, September 16, October
7, October 12, October 19, October 23, October 29, November 4, November 12, November 20,
December 2, December 9, December 18, 1992 and January 15, January 27, January 29, Febuary
3, Febuary 10, Febuary 19, Febuary 24, March 13, March 17, March 24, March 31, April 14,
April 22, May 8, May 13, and May 18, 1993; considered the Discretionary Approvals
Applications, took evidence as set forth in the record of its proceedings, which are incorporated
herein by reference as if set forth in full, made certain fmdings as set forth in their
f: \home\planning\duane\ccord .oty Draft
May 18. 1993
Ord RE Otay Ranch Project
Page 2
)[lJ ,-/tJS'
- 3.r>
Recommending Resolution PCM-9O-03, and recommended to the City Council the approval of
said Discretionary Approvals Applications based on certain terms and conditions; and,
F. City Council Record on Applications.
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City Council
of the City of Chula Vista on July 30, September 24, September 30, October 7, October 22,
November 4, November 24, 1992, and ,1993 on the Discretionary Approvals
Applications, and to receive the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and to hear public
testimony with regard to same; and,
G. Discretionary Approvals Resolution.
WHEREAS, at the same City Council meeting at which this Ordinance was introduced
for first reading ( , 1993), the City Council of the City of Chula Vista adopted
Resolution No. by which it amended the City's General Plan, approved the Otay
Ranch General Development Plan, including its Supporting Documents ("Discretionary
Approvals Resolution");
NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as follows:
II. Planning Commission record.
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their
public hearings on the Draft PEIR, held on September 16, October 7, October 12, and October
19, 1992 and their public hearing on this Project held on April 29, May 15, May 16, May 22,
May 29, June 17, July 31, August 19, September 11, October 23, October 29, November 4,
November 12, November 20, December 2, December 9, December 18, 1992, and January IS,
January 27, January 29, Febuary 3, Febuary 10, Febuary 19, Febuary 24, March 13, March 17,
March 24, March 31, April 14, April 22, May 8, May 13, and May 18, 1993, and the minutes
and resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
III. FPEIR Contents.
The FPEIR consists of the following:
A. "Final Program Environmental Impact Report - Otay Ranch Project" (EIR 90-01)
prepared by Ogden Environmental and Energy Services and dated ~cember, 1992, SCH
# 89010154 (two volumes), which contains the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report
("DPEIR") distribution date July 31, 1992, revised to reflect responses made to comments on
the DPEIR; and
B. Technical Reports to the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (Appendices
A, Band C, and Volumes I through IX), and
f: \home\planning\duane\ccord .oty Draft
May 18. 1993
Drd RE Dray Ranch Project
Page 3
/ j) .~/t) J;
-36,-
C. Comments and Responses to Comments to the DPEIR.
IV. FPEIR Reviewed and Considered.
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed, analyzed and considered
FPEIR 90-01, the environmental impacts therein identified for this Project; the Candidate CEQA
Findings attached to the Discretionary Approvals Resolution as Attachment B, the proposed
mitigation measures contained therein, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
attached to the Discretionary Approvals Resolution as Attachment C, and the Statement of
Overriding Considerations which is attached to the Discretionary Approvals Resolution as
Attachment D, all of which are incorporated by this reference, prior to approving the Project.
V. Certification of Compliance with CEQA.
The City Council does hereby fmd that FPEIR 90-01, the Candidate CEQA Findings, the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations
have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula
Vista.
VI. Independent Judgment of City Council.
The City Council fmds that the FPEIR reflects the independent judgement of the City of
Chula Vista City Council.
VII. Findings for Approval of PC Zone Pre zoning
The City Council does hereby make the following fmdings of fact required by Chula
Vista Municipal Code Sections 19.12.020 and 19.48.050 for approval to prezone the Project Site
as the PC (Planned Community) Zone:
A. The proposed development as described in the General Development Plan adopted
concurrently herewith, will result in conformance with the General Plan as also amended
concurrently herewith, based on the reasons set forth in Section XI of the Discretionary
Approvals Resolution.
B. The frrst SPA Plan for the Project is expected to be submitted within one year after
approval of the General Development Plan, and therefor the proposed development can be
initiated within two years of establishment of the PC Zone.
f: \home \planning\duane\ccord .otyDraft
May 18. 1993
Ord RE Otay Ranch Project
Page 4
J j) -i ~' ?
- 31-
C. The project designed predominantly around a transit-oriented village concept, is
substantially different than other planned communities within the Eastern Territories of the City.
Basic needs of each residential neighborhood have been planned for and it is expected that the
proposed development will be compatible with surrounding areas. The proposed development
will constitute a residential environment of subtained desirability and stability and the public
facilities required to be provided are adequate to service the anticipated population and are
acceptable to public authorities having jurisdiction.
D. Proposed project industrial areas are adjacent to the Otay Industrial Park and Brown
Air Field and adjacent industrial parks. This will result in logical extensions of existing industrial
land use patterns. They are appropriate in area, location, and overall design, and the required
design and developmental standards will create an industrial environment of sustained desirability
and stability, as well as meet the performance standards established by Title 19 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code. .
E. Community parks are appropriate in area, location and overall planning and have
been planned in areas that minimize potential adverse impacts to adjacent residential areas.
F. The Project circulation system is suitable and adequate and will result in acceptable
levels of service. Proposed modifications to the circulation system within the General Plan
planning area will result in acceptable levels of service.
G. Village core commercial areas are designed to adequately service individual, and in
some cases, adjacent villages. Larger, freeway-oriented commercial services, as well as mixed
use regional commercial services are provided within a centralized regional commercial center.
All proposed commercial areas are adequate and justified economically at the proposed locations.
H. Many areas adjacent to the Project are either permanent open space or have been
developed already. Land use patterns are compatible with all adjacent developed areas and future
potential development areas.
I. Public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice support the
pre zoning to PC.
VITI. Conditional Adoption of Prezoning to PC (Planned Community) zone.
The Zoning Maps established by Section 19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code
are hereby amended by adding thereto the following prezoning of property pursuant to Section
19.12.020 of said Code which zoning shall be subject to the General Conditions set forth herein
below and become effective at and upon the date the subject property is annexed to the City of
Chula Vista:
f: \home\planning\duane\ccore!. ory Draft
May 18. 1993
ore! RE Olay Ranch Project
Page S
J[)--/()~
-3~,
That certain property consisting of approximately 22,529 acres located south of Jamul,
two miles north of the United States-Mexico border, abutting the current western boundary of
Chula Vista, and bounded on the east by State Route 94 to PC (Planned Community), as shown
on Attachment E hereto.
IX. General Conditions of Approval.
The foregoing discretionary approval, stated to be conditioned on "General Conditions,"
is hereby conditioned on the occurrence of the General Conditions as set forth in Section IX of
the Discretionary Approvals Resolution.
X. Consequence of Failure of Conditions.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and
maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all
approvals herein granted, deny or further condition issuance of all future building permits, deny,
revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals
herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions
or seek damages for their violation.
XI. Candidate Findings of Fact, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Statement of Overriding
Considerations .
A. Adoption of Candidate Findings of Fact.
The City Council does hereby approve, accept as its own, incorporate as if set
forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the fmdings contained in the
"Candidate Findings of Fact" attached to the Discretionary Approvals Resolution
(Attachment B).
B. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted.
As more fully identified and set forth in the FPEIR for the Otay Ranch Project
(FPEIR-90-01) and in the Candidate CEQA Findings the Council hereby fmds
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section
15091 that the mitigation measures described as feasible in the above referenced
documents, are feasible, and will become binding upon the entity (such as the
project proponent, the; City, or the school district) assigned thereby to implement
same.
f: \home\planning\duane\ccord. oty Draft
May 18, 1993
Ord RE Otay Ranch Project
Page 6
/ () --:) e) /
- 31-
C. Infeasibility of Alternatives.
As is also noted in the above referenced environmental documents described in
the above subparagraph B, each of the alternatives to the project which were
identified as potentially feasible in the EIR, except the Modified Phase IT Progress
Plan, are found not to be feasible since they could not meet both the objectives
of the Project and lessen or avoid the identified significant environmental effects
for the reasons set forth in said CEQA Findings.
D. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council
hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program")
(Attachment C). The Council hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure
that during project implementation the permittee/project applicant and any other
responsible parties implement the project components and comply with the
feasible mitigation measures identified in the Findings and the Program.
E. Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any feasible
alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects
caused by the project, or cumulatively, will remain. Therefore, the City Council
of the City of Chula Vista hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section
15093, the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment D) in identifying
the specific economic, social, and other considerations that render the unavoidable
significant adverse environmental effects. acceptable.
XIIT. Notice of Determination
The Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is directed after City
Council approval of this project to ensure that a Notice of Determination is filed with the County
Clerk of the County of San Diego.
XIV. Invalidity; Automatic revocation
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent
upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that
in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by a Court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this ordinance shall be deemed to
be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
f: \home\p1anninl!\duane\ccord. oty Draft
May 18. 1993
Ord RE OlaY Ranch Project
Page 7
I t\ -iII [;J
- LfD-
XV. Effective Date
This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after
its adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce Boogaard
City Attorney
f: \home \planning\duane\ccord. oty Draft
May 18. 1993
Ord RE Otay Ranch Project
Page 8
/tl ---)/ /
-tjl-
ATTACHMENT E
PREZONE TO PC
(plANNED COMMUNITY)
,.., .....,
:-~"--",,... :.......-J r
, ,
r-"'--' .
: \
! r-arAY RANCH BOUNDAR.Y
I ...rE:
r-------, : ~._-- ~...., I
L--'.l i r:.-J N~.P. I i
.J i =-J L" r---_": ,:
, _.. l...
, . .
.,.--.J 1_ "
r...... r....J
. : r-! :
~.._.. " , N' ~.P ·
L' _.n,. . 1
....1 :
, ,
: ."~
, N~.P....1 ,/ "'\..'
'7 :-1" .,,..' /' v
.. ... <" r-'
)' .. .-' '
\,~ . ~... r-' : I'
-..---, ........."....--> ""..........'1 : ~_______...J
r,'oo-.' rJ ~-.I
r.- , ~.1
, ":"i r.. --; LL.
[ 1,1 ~_..: ,: -"1~"
I L L....J
r'-.'; '-00' ....1
...., :
L...._.._..--J
,.,.-",
/ : r'.,
/ L;..
, \
')
i;
i
--'
LASTLAKE LAND SWAP PARCELS~" g
(NOT A PART OF PREZONE) f:
,/ ;,... 001
/ N~.P. '.. ,
" '" -.,
/ .~..:.:-..
n)"
" ~
~ N~.P.
\ .-.,
\...-"1 ~
) N~.P.
r' (~
, ...)
\ ~~
..,....",.,.., I
\ 'N.A.P ; :
\ L!...._;. I
\...\.-.._..'L....-r:l r.J
L.....J \ --
CTTY OF SAN DIEGO IURlSDIC170N
(NOT A PART OF PREZONE)
o
NOT TO SCAU!
NAP. . NOT A PAIrr QP.PRirlDNJNG
OTAY RANCH
PREZONE MAP
)1) ---//eA
- L/-~-
RESOLUTION NO. GP A-93-04
A RESOLUTION OF TIlE CITY OF CHUlA VISTA
PlANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THA TTIIE
CITY COUNca AMEND TIlE GENERAL PlAN FOR 74
ACRES lOCATED WI1HIN TIlE EASTI..AKE GREENS
COMMUNITY, SOUTII OF EASTI..AKE lDGH SCHOOL
AND ON BOrn SIDES OF TIlE EXTENSION OF
EASTI..AKE PARKWAY
.
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a General Plan Amendment wasJilcid with the
Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on September 15, 1992 by the EastLake
Development Company; and
WHEREAS, said applications requested that approximately 74 acres (reconfigured from the
original request for 51 acres) located within the EastLake Greens community, specifically
located on the west side of the southerly extension of EastLake Parkway, south of EastLake
High School (Sub Area 1) and east of the southerly extension of EastLake Parkway, south
of EastLake Greens Golf Course (Sub Area 2) as diagrammatically depicted on the
Attachment A, be amended from Low Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac), Public/Quasi-Public
and Open Space, to Medium Residential (6-11 du/ac), Medium-High Residential (11-18
du/ac), Public/Quasi-Public (reconfigured) and Open Space, and that the alignment for
EastLake Parkway as shown on the General Plan land use and circulation diagram be
adjusted; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said Project
and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 500
feet of the exterior boundaries of the Property at least ten days prior to the hearing in
accordance with Government Code Sections 65358, 65091 (a) 1 and 2 and Chula Vista
Municipal Code Section 19.12.070; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study (Case No. 93-16) was prepared for the proposed project; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator recommends that the project be found
to have no significant impacts which were not discussed in EIR 86-04 for the EastLake
Greens project, and recommends the adoption of an Addendum for the proposed project;
and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment has not been amended more than three (3)
times this calendar year and the Planning Commission intends the General Plan
Amendment recommended for approval by this action be heard, considered, consolidated
and treated as one General Plan Amendment along with the Otay Ranch General Plan
Amendment; and
- t/-3-
)[J-I!]
WHEREAS, the City Council, as a condition of Resolution No. 15200, for the EastLake
Greens Tentative Map, required a low and moderate income housing program with an
established goal of a 5% low and 5% moderate, and deferred.said low and moderate income
housing condition requiring that it be further evaluated as a factor in the analysis of the
General Plan density policies as they relate to parcels R-24, R-25, R-26 (Sub Area #1), and
R-28; and,
WHEREAS, the. proposed General Plan Amendment would provide the potential for
additional density on parcel R-26 (Sub Area #1) and therefore the additional potential to
provide affordable housing units within the EastLake Greens project to be analyzed further
at the General Development Plan level; and, .-
" ,,. -
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m.,
March 3, 1993, and continued to April 12, April 28, and May 12, in the Council Glambers,
276 Fourth Avenue, then continued to May 13 and May 18, in the County of San Diego
Department of Planning and Land Use Hearing Room, 5201 Ruffin Road,.San Diego, again
continued to May 26, 1993, in the Council Chambers, before the Planning Commission and
said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW TIlEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the Planning
Commission the Commission finds that the project would have no significant environmental
impacts which were not discussed in EIR 86-04 EastLake Greens project, and adopts the
Addendum to Environmental Impact Report EIR 86-04.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the Planning
Commission, the Commission recommends that the City Council enact the draft resolution
as attached hereto to amend the General Plan to redesignate 74 acres located on both sides
of the southerly extension of EastLake Parkway, south of EastLake High School, and south
of EastLake Golf Course, from Low Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac), Public/Quasi Public,
and Open Space to Medium High Residential (11-18 du/ac), Medium Residential,
Public/Quasi-Public (reconfigured) and Open Space, and that the alignment for EastLake
Parkway as shown on the General Plan land use and circulation diagram be adjusted as
diagrammatically shown on Attachment A
2
/ /J -))1
- 41-"
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
owners of the property and to the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 26th day of May, 1993 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
Chair Fuller, Commissioners Carson, Martin, Moot, Ray, Tarantino
NOES:
None
ABSE~: Commissioner Tuchscher
ABSTENTIONS: None
.
,
../ ':..
i::~-- ~~;
Sus .Fuller, Chairperson
ATTEST:
~ ~
, '~~ ~~~
Nancy R pley, S re
eastlkpc.rsl
3
--
-l./-J ,.
) !},!/.r
- , \
- .
=,
~ ,
,.
,
t
N
.: 800'
\
,
\
.-4"
"
.
.
"
,
,
- -.~
~ "~.
\
\
,
\
\
\
" \
't
-
)~.
\
"
....
,
"-
i
I
I
--'
J
/
AMENDMENT AREAS
i~' /
[0
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN
0.1>
~.r
~
~~
O~
"
GPA 83-04
/()~//k
"
EASTLAKE GREENS
-f6-
'-1!'~rB a 1 81 a u a UI:NnU~NT
ATTACHMENT B
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
EastLake Greens GPA
Existing Proposed
General Plan YfA
Low-Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac) S2 acres 3 acres ,;
f
Medium Residential (6-11 du/ ac) o acres 24 acres '.- -
Medium-High Residential (11-18 du/ac) o acres 20 acres
Open Space o acres 9 acres
Circulation Streets 9 acres 2 acres
Public/Quasi-Public 13 acres 16 acres
Total 74 acres 74 acres
/ j) >/ J 7
- IJ] -
~ !
~VQ)_
~!f,! j
IIJi;~I!itlll!
jjJJ~~~l!i~ ~
- .....;.
~ :E ~ ::J: 5 ~ 2 Q. B ~ fa ~
- - -
,
r
~
~(!)
';/"7
en
c:
0)
e~
(!)a.;.
o
0)<<1
~q-
jr---
.....
en
co
W
-
~------ - .----.---
-..-..-........
.
.
,~
J
.
/{;'__)/~ -19,-
<
ADDENDUM TO EN\1RONMENT AL IMP ACT REPORT EIR-86-04
EASTLAKE GREENS SPA EASTLAKE TRAILS PREZONE & ANNEXATION
I. Introduction
PROJECT NAME:
Eastlake General Plan Amendment
PROJECT LOCATION:
East of proposed SR-125 alignment; south of Telegraph
Canyon Road, north of Orange Avenue
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL #: Book 595 (Assorted parcels)
.
;
'"
PROJECT APPLICANT: Eastlake Development Company
CASE NO: IS-93-16
DATE: January 15, 1993
II. Background
The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the
Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC) to prepare an addendum to a Negative
Declaration or Environmental Impact Report, if one of the following conditions is
present:
1. The minor changes in the project design which have occurred since completion
of the Final EIR or Negative Declaration have not created any new significant
environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative
Declaration;
2. Additional or refined information available since completion of the Final EIR
or Negative Declaration regarding the potential environmental impact of the
project, or regarding the measures or alternatives available to mitigate potential
environmental effects of the project, does not show that the project will have
one or more significant impacts which were not previously addressed in the
Final EIR or Negative Declaration.
This addendum has been prepared in order to provide additional information and analysis
concerning land use, drainage, traffic and school impacts. As a result of this analysis, the basic
conclusions of the Environmental Impact Report have not changed. Land use, drainage, traffic,
and school impacts are found to be less than significant for the proposed project.
Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City. has prepared
the following addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the Eastlake Greens SPA
Eastlake Trails Prezone & Annexation.
JCr~) --)) I
.- L/- Cj -
DI. Project Setting
The project involves two-parcels totaling approximately 74 acres. The fIrst parcel is
located on the northwest comer of Palomar Street and Eastlake Parkway, bounded to
the east by the plann~ SR-125 alignment. The second parcel is north of Orange
A venue along the western and southern boundaries of the EastLake Greens SPA, where
it adjoins the Otay Ranch property (see parcels R-26, PQ-l, and R-9 on Exhibit A).
The land is currently vacant and has been used in the past for dry farming and cattle
grazing. The parcels have been graded and are covered with native grasse~.
.
, "" ~
Project Description
IV.
The proposed project is an amendment to the Chula Vista General Plan. ~ originally
proposed and analyzed, Eastlake Greens called for a total unit count of 3,609 dwelling
units. In approving the project in 1989, the City Council reduced the density and unit
count of five parcels in Eastlake Greens, R-24, R-25, R-26, R-27, and R-28, from High
Density (18-24 dulac) to a density of 4.5 dulac (see Exhibit A). Overall dwelling units
were reduced from 3,609 to 2,774, a reduction of 835 dwelling units. The current GPA
proposes increasing the density of parcel R-26 from Low-Medium to High Residential
(18-27 dulac), changing parcel PQ-l from Public/Quasi-Public to Public/Quasi-Public
and High Residential, and increasing the density of parcel R-9 from Low Medium
Residential to Medium High (11-18 dulac) as sho\W on Exhibit B. The proposed GP A
would increase the density range of these parcels from 156-312 residential units to 583-
891 residential units. This is a potential increase from 427 to 579 residential units. A
summary of these changes is provided below.
Eastlake Greens original project
After reductions by Council in 1989
With proposed GP A: - midpoint of range
- maximum end of range
Total Units
3,609
2,774
3,274
3,353
Exhibit B of this document provides a detailed breakdown of the changes in General
Plan designations and acreage associated with the proposed project. Subsequent actions
required to implement the project will include amendments to the adopted EastLake
Greens II General Development Plan (GDP) and EastLake SPA Plan. These actions
will be subject to future environmental revie';J at the time the particular projects are
proposed.
V. Compatibility witb Zoning and Plans
The proposed project involves a General Plan Amendment (GP A) on two separate sites
which are currently designated for approximately 52 acres of residential development,
2
/ () / )t~t)
_50-
13 acres of public and quasi-public. development, and 9 acres for transportation
infrastructure. The project proposes altering the General Plan designations to 41 acres
of residential, 14 acres of public and quasi-public, 17 acres of open space, and 2 acres
of major circulation systems. The density range of the parcels would increase from
156-312 units to 583-891 units. The zoning on the site is "Planned Community" (PC),
and the project is compatible with this zoning.
VI. Compliance with the Threshold Standards
1.
FirelEMS
. ..
The Threshold Standards require that fire and medical Ullits UlUst be able to
respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85% of the cases and within 5
minutes or less in 75% of the cases. The City of Chula Vista has incjicated that
this threshold standard will be met, since the nearest fire station is 4 -miles away
and would be associated with a 5 minute response time. The proposed project
would comply \\lth this Thresholq Standard.
In addition, Fire Station 6 will open in January 1993, approximately 1/2 mile
and 2 minutes away from the project site. Specific development projects could
be required to meet additional, site-specific Fire Department requirements.
2. Police
The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84% of
Priority I calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time
to all Priority 1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to
62.10% of Priorit)' 2 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average
response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The proposed project
will comply with this Threshold Standard.
The Police Department has indicated that the proposed project \\111 not impact
police services.
3. Traffic
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must operate at a Level
of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS)
"0" may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections.
Intersections west of I-80S are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS.
No intersection may reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday peak
hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this
policy. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold.
The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have an impact on traffic
circulation systems. According to the City Traffic Engineer, the actual change
/()'~/c2/
- 5"1-
in land use associated with the implementation of the GP A may impact adjacent
local street segments and nearby intersections. Therefore, further traffic analysis
may be required at the time specific development is proposed. See Section VI
for a more detailed analysis of traffic mitigation.
4. ParkslRecreation
The Threshold Standards for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/l,OOO population.
The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standards. Payment of
park fees may be required at the time specific projects are proposei':
.} ':
5. Drainage
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and volumes-'not exceed
City Engineer Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary
improvements consistent with the Drainage Master Plane s) and City Engineering
Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standards.
Existing one-site drainage consists of surface flow to catchments and city
storm water conveyance systems. The proposed GP A will not impact drainage
systems, however, improvements to existing facilities will be required when
specific development occurs.
According to the Engineering Department, off-site drainage flows into Poggi
Canyon. Existing facilities 'will not be adequate when the proposed project is
implemented. The Engineering Department has indicated that regional drainage
improvements may be necessary in the Poggi Canyon area when specific
development takes place. Future development will be reviewed on a case-by-
case basis. The proposed project, however, will meet this Threshold Standard.
See Section VI, for a more detailed discussion of drainage impacts.
6. Sewer
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes shall not
exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary
improvements consistent with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering
Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
The proposed project would not increase overall solid or liquid waste generation
in the Eastlake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA). Existing lines in the area
include an 8-inch polyvinylchoride (PVC) sewer leading to a 12-inch PVC sewer
in Otay Lakes Road. Flows from the Poggi Canyon Basin are pumped to the
Telegraph Canyon Basin. Some segments of the Telegraph Canyon Trunk
Sewer are over capacity. The City Engineering Department has indicated that
4
/' /: .-- I I) (\
t/;c:><.c:A-.
- ~;l -'
payment of fees in accordance with the Telegraph Canyon Basin Plan \\ill
mitigate these impacts.
7. Water
The . Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and
tranSmission facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that
water quality standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
.;
Because Southern California is in its 6th consecutive crit~calr, dfy year, the
County Water Authority is recommending a voluntary 10% reduction in water
consumption for new development through the use of low flow fi,xtures and
drought-tolerant landscaping. Applicants may also be required to participate. in
whatever water conservation or fee off-set program the City .of Chula Vista has
in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
VII. Identification of En,'ironmental Effects
School Imoacts
EIR-86-04 found that new students will be generated for both the elementary and
secondary school systems as a result of the project. One elementary and one high
school \\-ill be constructed within the project area. School construction is phased
concurrently with residential development.
Section 65995 of the California Government Code authorizes school districts to collect
fees from developers of both residential and non-residential projects to offset school
facility impacts. School facility fees are 51.58 per square foot for residential
development and $0.26 per square foot for commercial and industrial development.
Both school districts collect their proportional allocation of these fees. For each square
foot of commercial and industrial development, the Chula Vista Elementary School
District receives 50.12 and the High School receives $0.14 to assist in fmancing school
facilities.
EIR-86-04 found that impacts to school facilities could be mitigated to a level of less
than sigiuficant to the satisfaction of the school districts in the context of existing
binding agreements regarding school sites and fmancing. The Planning Department has
worked with representatives of both Otay Ranch (the Baldwin Company) and the
EastLake Development Company to establish strategies to mitigate school impacts. The
Sweetwater Union High School District has indicated that they have no objection to the
proposed General Plan Amendment. The Chula Vista Elementary School District has
entered into an agreement with the Eastlake Development Company and the Baldwin
Company to ensure school impact are mitigated adequately. Therefore, impacts to
5
/!)~/cl3
- ~3-
-
-
schools from the proposed project will be less than significant.
Land Use
The proposed GP A would have an impact on land use, as it involves altering the use
and density on the sites. However, the ..total number of units currently proposed is at
least 265 units less than that previously assessed . in the Eastlake Greens EIR-86-04.
EIR-86-04 found that implementation of the Eastlake Greens project would not have
adverse land use policy impacts, therefore no specific mitigation measures .Dr policies
are required for the proposed project. Thus, land use impacts from .the..pr~sed GPA
are found to be less than significant. ~ .
DrainalZe
EIR-86-04 found that no significant, unmitigable impacts to hydrology or drainage
would result from implementation of the Eastlake Greens project with impplementation
of the recommendations in the preliminary geotechnical report. These recommendations
include: minimizing surface runoff into downslope natural areas and graded areas;
planting slopes ""ith appropriate drought-resistant vegetation as recommended by a
landscape architect; and regularly maintaining drainage devices such as graded berms,
swales and area drains. In addition, drainage system plans must be approved by the
City of Chula Vista's Department of Public Works.
At the time specific development occurs, additional environmental review ""ill be
required to ensure impacts to drainage facilities are less than significant. All
recommendations contained in EIR-86-04 must be followed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineering Division.
Traffic
In addition to complying with all requirements of the Engineering Division at the time
specific development is proposed, the proposed project must comply with the traffic
mitigation measures set forth in EIR-86-04, as, follows:
1. Improve Telegraph Canyon Road between State Route 125 and Eastlake
GreenslTrails boundary to six lane prime arterial standards.
2. Construct Hunte Parkway and Eastlake Parkway as major roads between
Telegraph Canyon Road and Orange Avenue.
3. Construct a southbound SR 125 to eastbound Telegraph Canyon Road loop ramp
at the SR 125n"elegraph Canyon Road intersection, or extend SR 125 south to
East Palomar Street (which would connect to the Eastlake SPAll street system).
6 /O--/.2y
-51-
.
Compliance with these mitigation measures will ensure that impacts to traffic are
less than significant.
VIII. Consultation
1. Individuals and OrlZanizations
City of Chula Vista: Diana Lilly, Planning
Duane Bazzel, Planning
Roger Daoust, Engineering
John Lippitt, Engineering
Cliff Swanson, Engineering
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering
Bob Sennett, Planning :
Ken Larsen, Building and Housing Department
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Captain Keith Hawkins, Police Department
Martin Schmidt, Parks and Recreation Department
.
;
"
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
Applicant's Agent: Eastlake Development Company
2. Documents
IS-92-21 Addendum to Environmental Impact Report EIR-86-04 Eastlake Greens SPA
PlanlTrails Pre-zone and Annexation Final Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report Eastlake Village Center South (March 31, 1992)
City {\f Chula Vista Environmental Review Procedures
EIR-86-04 Eastlake Greens SPA PlanlTrails Pre-zone and Annexation Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (ERCE, June 1989)
Eastlake SPA I Plan
City of Chula Vista General Plan .
Title 19, Chula Vista Zoning Code
7
/0 -/2S-
-~j,
. .... -
. Jc ~ >>..1(.)(
.c:' -,- . I'TI,
ta II all" f" , ~ I' , 'I'll ~ '. ~! 11\1111
~ .t .1. . 1'.1 : : . . . . · · · : · · · · .1. · .'. .
..... i .. --=.I .. · - - -. t t t t t'. tIll &
~ -. J:":::I.. ~ ....... .;_..~ ;;1.!t.. ~
o I, i i ! 1 "... 5 I I & :: & · I : e.- .'. · ! _
16 II~ I ~111,n ~
.~. Ii'... .. . III, !Ill t IIIUI II II ~ I ~II
= it- ----r - · f!! I 1II1l1h~
::> II, lUllJm:immmm'm: I II'iiimuniHlUJ
Q) .' I i
t:1 '
:n
.
.
.
<~. . ..~" .
. l.IT'
." .
. .. .'
. . .....: .., .
:.
.
---
I
~11:
D:II
ill
EJ
. .. .
.
~--& --
EXHIBIT B
Existing General Plan Greens SPA Area
Residential
LM Low-Medium (3-6)
AC.
52
DU Ramze
156-312
Midooint
233
Non- Residential
PQ Public/Quasi Public
o Open Space
Circulation
TOTAL
.
;
""-.'
13.3
o
8.8
74 ac
156-312 du
233 du
Proposed General Plan Greens SPA Area
Residential AC. DU Ranee Midooint
LM Low Medium 3 9-18 14
MH Medium High (11-18) 17 187-306 247
H High (18-27) 21 378-567 473
SUB-TOTAL 41 ac 583-891 du 734
Non-residential
PQ Public/Quasi-Public 14
OS Open Space 17
Circulation ..z
TOTAL 74 ac 583-891 du 734 du
· Acres are gross acres based on planimeter readings. Actual net acres will vary.
8
/(1 ~)~ 7
- S'l-
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY
COUNCIL AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN FOR 58 ACRES
LOCATED WITHIN THE EASTLAKE GREENS COMMUNITY.
SOUTH OF EASTLAKE HIGH SCHOOL AND ON BOTH
SIDES OF THE EX'! ENSION OF EASTLAKE P ARKW A Y
WHEREAS. a duly verified application for a General Plan Amendment was f1l~ with the
Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on September 15. 199~b~tht EastLake
Development Company; and " .
WHEREAS. said applications requested that approximately 58 acres located within the EastLake
Greens community, specifically located on the west side of the southerly extension of EastLake
Parkway. south of EastLake High School (Sub Area 1) and east of the southerly extension of
EastLake Parkway, south of EastLake Greens Golf Course (Sub Area 2) as diagrammatically
depicted on the attached Anachment A. be amended from Low Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac).
Open Space, and Public/Quasi Public, to Medium High Residential (11-18 du/ac) and
Public/Quasi-Public (reconfigured), and that the alignment for EastLake Parkway as shown on
the General Plan land use and circulation diagram be adjusted; and
WHEREAS. the Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 3. and continued it to
April 12, April 28. and May 12, 1993 and voted to recommend that the City Council
approve the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on said Project and notice of
said hearing, together with its purpose. was given by its publication in a newspaper of general
circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 1000 feet of the exterior
boundaries of the Property at least ten days prior to the hearing in accordance with Government
Code Sections 65358, 65091 (a) 1 and 2 and Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.12.070;
and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study (Case No. 93-16) was prepared for the proposed project; and
WHEREAS. the Environmental Review Coordinator recommends that the project be found to
have no significant impacts which were not discussed in ElR 86-04 for the EastLake Greens
project, and recommends the adoption of an Addendum for the proposed project; and
WHEREAS. the General Plan Amendment has not been amended more than three (3) times this
calendar year and the Planning Commission intends the General Plan Amendment recommended
for approval by this action be heard, considered, consolidated and treated as one General Plan
Amendment along with the Otay Ranch General Plan Amendment; and
jO-/.2Y
-s-s-
WHEREAS, the City Council, as a condition of Resolution No. 15200, for the EastLake Greens
Tentative Map, required a low and moderate income housing program with an established goal
of a 5 % low and 5 % moderate, and deferred said low and moderate income housing condition
requiring that it be further evaluated as a factor in the analysis of the General Plan density
policies as they relate to parcels R-24, R-25, R-26 (Sub Area #1), and R-28; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed General Plan Amendment would provide the potential for additional
density on parcel R-26 (Sub Area #1) and therefore the additional potential to provide affordable
housing units within the EastLake Greens project to be analyzed further at the General
Development Plan level; and, .;
f
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely ~06 p.m., -
, 1993, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the Planning
Commission the Commission fmds that the project would have no significant environmental
impacts which were not discussed in EIR 86-04 EastLake Greens project, ancf adopts the
Addendum to Environmental Impact Report EIR 86-04.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the Planning Commission,
the Commission recommends that the City Council enact the draft resolution as attached hereto
to amend the General Plan to redesignate 58 acres located on both sides of the southerly
extension of EastLake Parkway, south of EastLake High School, and south of EastLake Golf
Course, from Low Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac), Open Space, and Public/Quasi Public, to
Medium High Residential (11-18 du/ac) and Public/Quasi-Public (reconfigured), and that the
alignment for EastLake Parkway as shown on the General Plan land use and circulation diagram
be adjusted as diagrammatically shown on Attachment D (Attachments Band C not included).
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
IISllktC.rsJ
2
-~9-
/0 -/2.1
THE CIn' OF CHUU nSTA PAR1l'DISCLOSURE STATl:.MENT
.;)ultement of disclosure of cenain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters
which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other
official bodies. The foIlo.....mg information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of aU persons having a financial interest in the contract, i.e.. contractor,
subcontractor, material supplier.
EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
.
f
- ,-
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or pannership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any pannership
interest in the pannership. :
DAVID B. KUHN, JR
T"lt.~'T1='T T"l Th~1='
J.G. BOSV:ELL
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names
of any person sen-ing as director of the non-profit organization or 8S trustee or beneficia!)' or
trustor of the trust.
N/A
4. Ha\'e you had more than 5150 worth of business transacted v.ith any member of the City staff,
Boards, Comr:;issions, Committees and Council v.ithin the past twelve months? Yes_
No ~ If yes, ple~se indicate person(s):
~. Please identify each and ever)' person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent
COnt!'Jctors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
~OB ~~!\TQS
KEN'! ADE!\
KA'!), WRIGHT
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contnbuted more than SI,OOO to a
Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No ~ If yes, state which
Councilmember( s):
P"f"ln is defined as: -Any indi, "idunl, Jiml, co.pnnn~nhip, joint ,'r1ttllrt, lUSocinrion, socinl clllb,!rntmtnl orrnnizDtion, corpornrion,
C'SIIIIl', 1nlSt, rtcti"tT. s)'ndi'tl1t, this mid nn." OIlier COIlIlI)', tit), nNt coun",', cit)'. nlllllicipnlit)', dis"iC/ or orlltr politicnl IlIbcins/u1/,
or (IllY olller grOllp or combmtltion ncting ns n IIn;t:
,
.,~OTE: Attach additional p:l~es :IS neces~'u)')
D:lt~:
8_: (..,
" - "
. I. -...
/ (7 ---) ][)
/'
Sisn~tur of co trnctor/applic~nt
KATY WRIGHT
__&D/
Print or type: ,n:lm~ of co:
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
/!)~/ 3/
MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
7:00 p.m.
Wednesdav. March 3. 1993
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
276 Fourth Avenue. Chula Vista
ROLL CAI.L
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Fuller, Commissioners Carson, Martin,
Moot, Ray, Tarantino, and Tuchscher
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Leiter, Assistant Planning
Director Lee, Principal Planner Howard, Associate
Planner Reid, Senior Civil Engineer Ullrich,
Associate Civil Engineer Ouadah, Assistant City
Attorney Rudolf
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER
The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chair Fuller, followed by a moment of silent
prayer.
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
Chair Fuller dispensed with review of the composition of the Planning Commission, its
responsibilities and the format of the meeting.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
Chair Fuller stated that the order of the agenda would be changed because one of the Planning
Commissioners had a conflict of interest on the San Miguel item. The Commission would
consider Item 3 first.
ITEM 3.
PUBUC HEARING: GPA-93-04, APPUCATION BY EASTLAKE
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR 51 ACRES OF EASTLAKE GREENS, LOCATED IN
TWO SEPARATE PARCELS, ONE SOUTH OF EASTLAKE HIGH SCHOOL,
THE SECOND IN THE SOUTHWESTERN PORTION OF EASTLAKE
GREENS
J [) -"I 32..
-(PI.,
PC Minutes
-2-
March 3, 1993
Principal Planner Howard stated the General Plan Amendment was proposed for two separate
parcels totaling 51 acres. Mr. Howard gave the staff presentation and noted that the staff
recommendation was to adopt the proposed addendum to the EastLake Greens Sectional Plan
Area EIR, finding there were no new impacts of the project not discussed in the EIR; and that
the Commission recommend approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment to the City
Council. He noted staff recommended the addition of a condition which would clarify (due to
the fact this was tied in with the Otay Ranch project in the EastLake Greens landswap area) in
case the Commission took a different recommendation on the EastLake landswap portion of the
Otay Ranch, reconsideration after a decision on Otay Ranch land uses, since that might change
the rationale for land uses on these parcels. Mr. Howard said there had been a community
forum where some concerns were expressed regarding the high density area proposal, the impact
upon the EastLake Greens Community in terms of the introduction of rental housing, as well as
the impact upon the community association. Staff felt the impact regarding introduction of rental
housing would be minimal both in terms of its location at the periphery of EastLake Greens and
the fact that it would be the only rental housing in this area; that it was a matter between the
EastLake Homeowners Association, the development company, and the homeowners as to the
disposition of this area within the EastLake Homeowners Association.
Commissioner Carson questioned the viability of EastLake returning before the Commission to
ask for 450 units which had previously been forfeited to the Kaiser project. She was also
concerned about the adjustment which had been made by the City Council on the number of
units. Looking at the maximum amount now proposed under the General Plan Amendment,
Commissioner Carson said the only difference would be 145 units. She felt this was not the
Council's intent.
Mr. Howard replied that it was his understanding that of the five areas redesignated, this was
the only one that would be coming back for potential redesignation; if this was approved as
proposed, there would be a different land use situation in the area that staff felt would justify
the proposed change. Regarding the Kaiser facility, the 450 units lost were the only units which
would have the potential for affordable housing in either EastLake I or ll. EastLake had a
requirement from the Housing Element to provide 5 % low-income households and 5 % moderate-
income households. Based upon their application for this area, staff felt this was an appropriate
site for a small amount, in comparison to the overall number of dwelling units in EastLake, of
potential rental or potential affordable housing opportunities at these densities.
Commissioner Carson was concerned about the high density near the high school and the quality
of students coming out of the rentals.
Commissioner Ray was also concerned about the density increase and the net loss of 38 acres
of open space. He asked for the rationale for eliminating the open space.
Mr. Howard explained there would still be open space within the projects along the major
roadways, but no longer specifically shown on the General Plan. There would not be an actual
) L) -' / :-.1 )
- ft,:J- #
PC Minutes
-3-
March 3, 1993
loss of open space. Regarding the justification for multi-family homes, the property was not
suitable for single-family residential uses and there was a need for additional multi-family units
to provide for a balanced community within EastLake.
in the General Plan, but
Commissioner Tuchscher explained that it was the accounting for the oP4n space that was
changing; the open space along the major arterials was counted as open space/1UW was no longer
being calculated as open space. Principal Planner Howard stated that the General Plan was not
meant to be precise as to the exact acreage; it was meant to represent that some buffer would
be along the roadway in order to provide a landscaped parkway or landscaped area within a
project to buffer to some extent the roadway from the development. It was never meant to be
scaled out.
Commissioner Tarantino asked about traffic; staff had stated in the report that there would be
no significant impact to the threshold, yet the Star-News had reported the project would generate
an extra 4,000 trips. Having served on the Growth Management Oversight Commission, he
understood that if all five projects along the Telegraph Canyon/Otay Lakes Road were approved,
that would already wave a red flag; that all those projects could not be approved and have the
current level of service remain the same without violating the threshold.
Mr. Howard explained staff's rationale which determined that as long they did not exceed the
original unit count that was reviewed for the original proposed project in EastLake Greens, they
would not get into new traffic impacts which had not already been accounted for.
Commissioner Tuchscher questioned how the land in the aqueduct area was handled, from a
construction and density standpoint--could it be built on and the real density. Mr. Howard
answered that the aqueduct could not be built on, and had a power line easement. For General
Plan purposes, it was also being shown as open space, and was not being counted as part of the
density allowed within the high-density area of the proposed General Plan Amendment area.
Commissioner Tuchscher concluded that the 400 units on that parcel were net units, not
including the aqueduct area. Principal Planner Howard concurred, and noted that there would
be additional easements going through that area. He also pointed out that if the General Plan
Amendment was approved, EastLake would still need to me a General Development Plan
Amendment and a SPA Plan Amendment, and while going through these different procedures
the area, after subtracting out areas for roadways and freeway right-of-ways, would get smaller
and the density would have to remain in the range. He believed the 405 units at mid-point
would probably end up being significantly less than that at the next phases of review.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Miss Katy Wright, EastLake Development Company, 900 Lane Avenue, CV, spoke of the
previous land swap with the Baldwin Company for a parcel south and west of the subject parcel.
In light of that land exchange, this specific proposal was before the Commission. EastLake
Jt?-) )f
~t8....
PC Minutes
-4-
March 3, 1993
Company believed the subject parcels warranted reconsideration in light of the high intensity,
high activity uses adjacent to them. The high density parcel had been one of five parcels
originally planned, studied, and proposed with the EastLake Greens proposal in 1989 and given
an interim low/medium density until such time EastLake could come back before the
Commission and Council and consider a more permanent designation on that site. They had not
specifically proposed apartments, but were proposing a multi-family use. That would be
determined at a different planning stage. Regarding affordable housing, they had met the
requirement in EastLake I; in EastLake Greens, the 10% affordable moderate income housing
requirement had been set aside until resolution of the density of the five parcels. This particular
site was a potential site for moderate-income housing, but a specific type of product home had
not been addressed.
Chair Fuller asked if that was the only site they would have for high-density affordable housing
within EastLake Greens. Ms. Wright said if the proposal was approved, it would be the only
high-density parcel in EastLake Greens. It would not, however, be concentrated in one location;
it would be a candidate site for a portion of those moderately priced homes.
Andre Chapman, 2470 Golfcrest Loop, CV 91915, spoke of the emotional commitment
involved in a neighborhood; he believed that by bringing in high density, it would bring in large
turnover, landlordship, tenantship, subletting, and the people did not have the same kind of
commitment and the same kind of stake in the future of the area. He felt this was a convenient
change for the worse.
Amir Pishdad, 2471 Golfcrest Loop, CV 91915, said he had lived in apartments and had made
a step up to EastLake Greens. It was advertised by EastLake that none of the homes in the area
would be apartments. He had written a letter to the Association, which was the developer. The
homeowners had not been informed by the Association of the impact of this high density. He
concluded there would be a loss of impact of fmancial dollars, as well as the monthly
assessments to the Association, if this area was designated for a rental project. It was advertised
as a country club type of living and this was not what was being represented at the meeting.
He asked the Commission to carefully study this proposal to ensure that the homeowners would
not be fmancially impacted; also the renters would not be paying Mello-Roos.
Mrs. Tess Sheckler, 1083 Waterville Lake Road, CV 91915, said as a recent property owner
in EastLake Greens, she was opposed to the proposed rezoning. She objected to the ambiguity
of the developer's statement that the proposed density would dictate housing types which may
be for sale or for rent. She saw this as an ill-conceived attempt to force rental properties to be
co-located with high-end residential communities and country club living. This would adversely
and directly impact property and resale values for existing properties. She and her husband had
invested a considerable amount of money and had risked a lot to afford their home. They had
no desire to be in close proximity to the type of residences that were being proposed. She
considered it a breach of implied contract for the type of community the developers had
advertised and sold to her. The renters would not have anything invested in the area and could
~
)[) -/ J)/
-&'1-
PC Minutes
-5-
March 3, 1993
move at any time. She concurred with Commissioner Carson regarding her comments about
students. She urged the Commission to not recommend approval of the proposal. She felt the
1989 approval still valid. However, if the Commission did recommend approval, she asked that
the Commission recommend prohibition of the number of rentals entirely or severely limit the
number of rentals and require that all rentals be included in the Homeowners Association and
that they be required to abide by the same Association requirements and covenants that the
current homeowners have to meet.
George Khoury, 2337 Eastridge Loop, CV 91915, concurred with the prior speakers, and
noted that the graffiti began after students started being bused from National City and San
Ysidro. He said that when people are brought from other areas that are of low income or high
density, that is what the residents would face. He said the developer was mostly interested in
turning their money to profit and were trying to create more income by turning the land to rental
apartments to create faster income.
Oscar Khoury, 2310 Eastridge Loop, CV 91915, was concerned with higher population, higher
traffic, more thieves, car thefts, transients who have no concern about cleanliness of the
neighborhood, overcrowding the high school, lack of control, and devaluation of homes. He
expressed their opposition to the project.
Bob McAlister, 2497 Golfcrest Loop, CV 91915, said he wanted to provide a safe community
for the people who live there and that the homeowners get to be a part of the Homeowners
Association. He was also concerned with the traffic generation; the proximity of the high
school; he hoped they would not see bars on the windows of the homes of the country-club style
living in EastLake Greens.
Teri Pishdad, 2471 Golfcrest Loop, CV 91915, said they had moved out of apartment areas
to get away from that, and she hoped they did not have to see that too soon again. The parks
already had a lot of graffiti and words the parents did not think their children should be seeing;
the parks were very noisy; neighbors couldn't sleep in their master bedrooms in the summer
because their bedrooms were next to the park where there was noise until 2 or 3 a.m.; children
are being bused in from other areas and some of the area children are having to be sent out to
other schools.
Martin Valdez, 2350 Eastridge Loop, CV 91915, supported his neighbors' positions and asked
that the Commission disapprove the plan.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Ray said he was tom on what may have transpired from 1989 to date. There
were comments regarding the City allowing something for potential fmancial gains. He wished
to go on record supporting staffs position who had taken their direction from City Council;
however, he felt the Commission had an obligation to the residents. Although there are no
~ &j,
/l'r/J b
PC Minutes
-6-
March 3, 1993
guarantees when anyone purchases property, he thought The Greens development was sold as
country style living. He was fIrmly opposed to a density change based on the comments heard
at the meeting; he thought there was a reason the Commission recommended and the City
Council approved the interim zoning in 1 ~89. He would not like to see that changed at this
time.
Commissioner Moot questioned staff with respect to the lower triangle--the parcel not adjacent
to the high school--and asked if it was medium-high density in the surrounding area. Mr.
Howard discussed the various densities in the general area. The triangle was proposed for
change to be consistent with the immediate surrounding area. Commissioner Moot asked if the
triangular property could be considered separately from the property adjacent to the high school.
Mr. Howard answered that it could be bifurcated from the property.
At Commissioner Martin's request, Mr. Howard discussed density of several other areas.
Commissioner Martin stated that he would oppose the amendment. He liked the idea of the land
swap of 169 acres for 169 acres, but after studying it, he felt it was really not the Sameil€feage..
Commissioner Tuchscher asked if everything east of the aqueduct was existing approved land
uses. Mr. Howard concurred. Commissioner Tuchscher commented that the audience had done
an excellent job presenting their cases and he appreciated their being sensitive to the other
speakers and not repeating themselves. He tried to explain to the audience the constraints the
City was under regarding affordable housing, stating that affordable housing was mandated by
the State. He said everyone likes it until it happens to be in their back yard, then it becomes
a negative. The noise, graffiti, etc. was not unique to EastLake or California regardless of
densities. It was up to the people who care to take care of it the best they can privately, but also
to make sure the City staff is aware that those things are ongoing so the City could respond to
it.
Commissioner Tuchscher questioned staff as to the urgency in dealing with the amendment in
light of the Otay Ranch project currently in process. Mr. Howard answered that it was fIled by
EastLake last year, and staff felt that although it was dwarfed by the Otay Ranch, it was a
proposal that was in keeping with what was going on with the Otay Ranch and they felt it should
be considered at a concurrent time as opposed to a later date after the Otay Ranch is approved.
Chair Fuller expressed her feelings regarding fmcting areas to locate affordable housing, not
necessarily apartments or rentals. She said the Commission owed it to the people who live in
Chula Vista to be able to live everywhere--not just west of 1-805 and south of "L" Street, but
in places like EastLake in affordable homes. She was offended by the statements that young
people attending Chula Vista schools from affordable housing or apartments didn't measure up.
She felt the speakers had presented some valid arguments--the inequity of supporting the
Homeowners Association and the fees the homeowners were required to pay, traffic and noise.
_ (,t--
Jl)~ /} ?
PC Minutes
-7-
March 3, 1993
Commissioner Carson asked if there was an element in the Affordable Housing that said if a
place could not be found in the developer area, that the developer could elect--providing it was
recommended by the Department and the City Council--to buy a piece of property elsewhere and
put affordable housing in that area. Mr. Howard said the Housing Element included flexibility
to consider that.
Commissioner Moot commented that it was not a persuasive argument to him to say they did
not want other people in their neighborhood; however, he did not like the fact that when
decisions are made about affordable housing, it is put in the least attractive place in the project.
He felt affordable housing should be spread throughout the project in different pockets of the
project. He would like to see the triangular area bifurcated from the project and considered
apart from the parcel next to the high school.
Commissioner Carson objected to the General Plan Amendment because EastLake had previously
given up their 450 units to allow Kaiser to come in and were now requesting the units be built
in another area of the project.
Commissioner Tarantino said it was also very painful to him to sit through a lot of the public
testimony, because he had spent 20 years in education in the areas and in the neighborhoods in
which many of the people had talked against. His experience in working with those families and
children was different from the apparent perception of the speakers. He could see the rationale
for the General Plan Amendment and liked Commissioner Moot's proposal for bifurcation.
MS (Moot/Tarantino) to bifurcate the two parcels and consider them in separate votes, starting
with the parcel next to the high school and then the triangular parcel.
At Commissioner Tarantino's suggestion, the Commissioners decided to consider the triangular
parcel fIrst, then the high school parcel since it was more controversial.
Mr. Pishdad approached the podium and asked that the Commission not consider the parcels
separately. Chair Fuller explained that the Commission was only changing the method, not the
intent of the motion.
Commissioner Martin agreed with Chair Fuller regarding the sensitivity of schools, but had a
problem with the land acre swap which took acreage out of the low Imedium residential and
medium residential and put it in medilunlhigh and high residential. He believed it would have
impacts on traffic and other thresholds; it would have a cumulative effect; he felt it would set
a precedent for future development and there needed to be more control.
Chair Fuller clarifIed that the fIrst portion being looked at was the triangle which was
medium/high density which was next to medium/high density on three sides.
-~1-
;i)-13l
PC Minutes
-8-
March 3, 1993
Commissioner Moot, the maker of the motion, echoed Commissioner Martin's comments but
said he saw some logic for consistency in planning and why the change made sense at that time.
Commissioner Tarantino said he believed at the SPA level, further refmement in terms of density
could be made and in looking at the individual SPAs for those two parcels, the density probably
would be less. Mr. Howard concurred.
Commissioner Tarantino noted that the safeguards to which the Commissioners were referring
were there. Mr. Howard said that these projects, if approved at whatever density, would go
through further review. .
Commissioner Ray commented that the land use to the west and south (Otay Ranch) had not
been officially designated medium/high density. Commissioner Moot concurred, and stated that
if the proposed Otay Ranch uses were not approved, the triangle would no longer be consistent
and the rationale for changing it would no longer exist.
Commissioner Ray noted that much of the area being considered was bordered by Otay Ranch
which had not been designated and which had not been addressed. He was concerned that the
decision made on this project would be counter to what would be proposed on the Otay Ranch
project, and would vote on the triangular parcel with what he would like to see in the Otay
Ranch there.
Commissioner Carson noted that the SPA plans, when they go back to the Commission, rarely
change. It might be adjusted by the City Council, but once the General Plan is approved, it is
difficult to change.
Commissioner Ray asked if the SDG&E easement running through the property was 200 ft.
wide, and asked how much additional buffer there was between the easement and the
medium/high density housing. Mr. Howard concurred that the easement was 200 ft., but the
additional setback or buffer would be determined at a later date. Commissioner Ray was
concerned with the high power lines, and asked if the City had made any recommendation for
SPA-level plans regarding buffering. Mr. Howard said there was no current policy, based upon
a lack of defmitive information on the nature of EMF.
VOTE ON MOTION TO BIFURCATE THE TWO PARCELS FOR DECISION LATER:
6-1 (Carson "no")
Answering Commissioner Ray, Mr. Howard said the northern parcel should be referred to as
Subarea 1 and the southern parcel as Subarea 2.
MS (Ray/Carson) to deny the proposed amendment for Subarea 2.
- ft,!-
/t)~/3/7
PC Minutes
-9-
March 3, 1993
Commissioner Tuchscher asked for the maker's rationale. Commissioner Ray said it was based
on the density, the location of the power lines, and the fact that he was going to vote for lower
density on the Otay Ranch in that area. Commissioner Carson said she believed it was
premature and she would be in favor of a resolution with a contingency which gave the
Commission the right to come back for discussion, depending on the land use designation of the
Otay Ranch.
Commissioner Tuchscher concluded that Commissioner Carson would rather defer this decision
until the Otay Ranch land use designation had been decided. Commissioner Carson concurred.
Commissioner Tuchscher felt there was no more appropriate place for high density than near a
high traffic corridor and the power lines. Estate housing could not be put there, from a land use
perspective. At the same time, he had some difficulty in dealing with the two small comers
surrounded by the Otay Ranch and felt adjacent land uses were critical. He did not believe the
land owner should be expected to wait for a decision until after the Otay Ranch land use
designation; he felt a decision should be made one way or the other to give the EastLake land
owner some direction so they could move forward. However, rather than vote to deny the
amendment, he recommended that the maker of the motion modify it to defer the decision until
after the next meeting regarding Otay Ranch.
Commissioner Ray concurred, and asked that an additional condition which had been presented
by staff be read to those in attendance. Chair Fuller read as follows: "Be it funher resolved
that the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval for this item is contingent upon
Planning Commission recommendation of approval for that ponion of the Otay Ranch Project
known as the EastLake Land Swap, and if the Planning Commission makes any recommendation
on this area which is significantly different from the staff recommendation, then staff is herelJy
directed to return this proposed General Plan Amendment to the next available Planning
Commission scheduled meeting agenda for discussion of potential reconsideration of the Planning
Commission recommendation." Chair Fuller noted that whatever action the Planning
Commission took, if they adopted the accompanying resolution, the issue could be revisited and
changed.
Commissioner Ray withdrew his motion, and the second agreed.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION:
MS (Ray/Carson) to table the issue to the fll"St regularly scheduled meeting following the
discussion on land use issues Cor the Otay Ranch.
Commissioner Moot did not feel it should be put off, and that is was unfair to those who had
attended and spoken at the meeting.
-b9/
,/IJ ~ / YcJ
PC Minutes
-10-
March 3, 1993
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf asked that the applicant be consulted as to whether they were
willing for the item to be continued.
Katy Wright, representing EastLake, concurred with the recommendation of continuance until
the Otay Ranch adjacency had been considered. She felt that gave it credence and made it more
logical.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf asked that the continuance be to a time and date specific so the
item would not have to be renoticed.
Assistant Planning Director Lee suggested the item be continued to April 14.
Commissioner Martin stated that he wanted to be very clear that he was not for the project
because of the land swap; he concurred with Commissioner Moot that a decision should be
made. It could still be changed after the Otay Ranch land use designation.
AMENDED MOTION:
MS (Ray/Carson) to continue the item to April 14, at 7:00 p.m. following the discussion on
land use issues for the Otay Ranch.
Principal Planner Howard clarified that the motion included the entire proposal, not just Subarea
2. Commissioner Ray concurred.
VOTE ON AMENDED MOTION: 4-3 (Commissioners Tarantino, Martin, and Moot voted
against)
Chair Fuller noted the item had been continued to the meeting of April 14, and thanked those
who had attended.
Chair Fuller called a 10-minute recess at 8:50. The meeting reconvened at 8:57 p.m.
Commissioner Tuchscher was excused from the meeting at this time because of a conflict of
interest on the following project.
ITEM 1.
PUBUC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE RANCHO SAN MIGUEL GENERAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (EIR 90-02) (SCH-90010155)
- 11) --
It1 --/'/ /
MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
7:00 p.m.
Wednesday. April 28. 1993
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
276 Fourth Avenue. Chula Vista
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Vice Chair Martin, Commissioners Carson, Ray,
Tarantino, and Tuchscher
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioners Fuller and Moot
STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Planning Director Lee, Associate Planner
Hernandez, Associate Planner Miller, Acting
Library Director Palmer, Senior Civil Engineer
Ullrich, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRA YER
Since Chair Fuller was out of town on vacation, the pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by
Vice Chair Martin, followed by a moment of silence.
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
Vice Chair Martin reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission, its responsibilities and
the format of the meeting.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
MSUC (Ray/Carson) 5-0 to excuse Commissioner Fuller, who was out of town, and
Commissioner Moot, who had a business conflict.
ITEM 1:
PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-93-04; APPLICATION BY EASTLAKE
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR APPROVAL OF A GENERAL' PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR 51 ACRES OF EASTLAKE GREENS, LOCATED IN
TWO SEPARATE PARCELS, ONE SOUTH OF EASTLAKE HIGH SCHOOL,
THE SECOND IN THE SOUTHWESTERN PORTION OF EASTLAKE
GREENS
-1/~
/!) -/Yc~
PC Minutes
-2-
April 28, 1993
Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that a letter had been received from EastLake asking for
continuance of this item to May 12, 1993, to coincide with action on the Otay Ranch.
MSUC (Carson/Ray) 5-0 (Fuller and Moot excused) to continue GPA-93-04 to the meeting
of May 12, 1993.
,
- 1:;"-
//)//7/)7
PC Minutes
-2-
May 12, 1993
Chair Fuller noted that the following two items would be heard concurrently, since they were
related items.
ITEM 3: PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-92-03, OTAY RANCH PROJECT (DISCUSSION
~ ON 169 ACRE EASTLAKE LAND SWAP PARCELS ONLY) (continued from
the meeting of 4-22-93)
ITEM 4: PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-93-Q4; APPLICATION BY EASTLAKE
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR 74 ACRES OF EASTLAKE GREENS, LOCATED IN
TWO SEPARATE PARCELS, ONE SOUTH OF EASTLAKE HIGH SCHOOL,
THE SECOND IN THE SOUTHWESTERN PORTION OF EASTLAKE
GREENS (continued from the meeting of 4-28-93)
Senior Planner Bazzel presented the staff report. Using the overhead, he indicated the changes
being recommended and gave staffs rationale for the recommendation. Since this was a
continued public hearing for the Otay Ranch on the EastLake Land Swap parcels, staff
recommended that the Commission take tentative action and continue the meeting to the
following night, and that the tentative action fold in with the fmal action on the Otay Ranch.
On the EastLake Greens GP A, staff recommended that since CEQA required the Planning
Commission to review the EIR for the EastLake Greens and certify that they had read the EIR
and considered it before taking fmal action on the project, staff recommended that the General
Plan request be continued until after fmal recommendation on the Otay Ranch to give the
Commission an opportunity to review the EastLake Greens EIR and certify that before making
their fInal recommendation.
Commissioner Ray stated that be was uneasy about bringing the item before the joint
Commission meeting the following night.
Mr. Bazzel said that staff had hoped to conduct all discretionary action on the item at this
hearing in line with the tentative action previously taken on the Otay Ranch project, of which
/f) ~/yr
-13~
PC Minutes
-3-
May 12, 1993
the land swap parcel was a part. That would be folded into the City of Chula Vista's portion
of the joint Commission's fmal recommendation on the Ranch. It would not be open for
additional discussion the following night.
Replying to Commissioner Ray, Mr. Bazzel said the EIR prepared for this project (Land Swap)
was all-encompassing for the Otay Ranch.
Chair Fuller clarified that tentative action should be taken on the land swap portion which would
be folded into their fmal decision and no additional discussion would be needed.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf explained that if and when fmal action was taken, the tentative
action on this project should be before the joint Commissions. Because of the complications
with the environmental review on the EastLake portion, action could not be taken at this time.
The EastLake portion would continue to travel with the Otay Ranch, so when Otay Ranch was
fmalized, the next action would be to finalize the EastLake Greens GPA recommendation.
Commissioner Moot asked Mr. Bazzel to show on the overhead the staff alternative plan which
showed the land swap area, and questioned the number of units. Mr. Bazzel explained that
within the land swap parcels themselves, there was a total of 739 units proposed.
Commissioner Moot asked staff s rationale regarding the medium high as opposed to medium
density--if it was because of the transit corridors and the desire to emphasize the use of transit
that a medium-high along the corridor was better.
Mr. Bazzel answered that staff felt a medium-high designation along the corridor provided
flexibility in achieving some product types in a higher density range. The densities would be
analyzed in greater detail at the General Development Plan and SPA levels to determine where
the most appropriate higher density products would occur in order to provide some affordable
units .
Commissioner Moot noted that at a previous meeting, some of the public expressed concerns
regarding high density adjacent to a high school, in addition to other concerns. The exact
location of higher densities as opposed to the less high densities within the medium high average
would be dealt with in more detail at the SPA level. Mr. Bazzel concurred.
Assistant Planning Director Lee pinpointed some other areas which had similar density, and
discussion ensued regarding density and the problems. Commissioner Carson stated that she
would be more comfortable with the medium residential with the range starting at 264 to 484
with a mid point at 8 dulac or a total of 342 units.
Mr. Lee stated that part of staff's rationale was to hopefully provide a mechanism of addressing
housing needs, and the opportunities were limited. They felt there was an opportunity with this
parcel to provide some affordable housing. With medium density, some of the opportunity
would be lost.
- /}tj /
J}}'/ /~ic;
PC Minutes
-4-
May 12, 1993
Commissioner Carson noted that she did not wish to change all of the areas, but would propose
the M-H to go to Medium by the high school, allowing the other two areas to be used for
affordable housing. She stated that the Commissioners needed to look seriously at any planned
community with affordable housing early-on rather than having it at the end of the project.
Commissioner Carson felt it forced the Coinmission to make a decision for affordable housing
density so the City would be in compliance.
Assistant Planning Director Lee concurred, and said staff had been working very closely with
the City Housing Coordinator in looking at these at various stages of the projects to work out
the details.
Commissioner Tuchscher was concerned about the procedures and how they related to the atay
Ranch Project. He did not feel this project should be held up, based upon someone else's
process, and would like to separate it from the atay Ranch process. He asked for staff to
comment.
Senior Planner Bazzel stated that the applicant, EastLake Development Company, had been
working with staff for some time, and had indicated that they realized that the EastLake Greens
companion request was dependent largely on the action on the landswap parcels and the atay
Ranch. They had indicated they were willing to trail the item until the City had made a decision
on the atay Ranch and landswap parcels; the atay Ranch would set the circulation and density
patterns in the surrounding area.
Commissioner Tuchscher expressed his concern that the Council and Board may not act as
quickly as originally anticipated and it would hold up approval of the subject item. He asked
that the applicant comment on this when the public hearing was opened.
Senior Planner Bazzel reiterated that the Planning Commission must also certify that they had
read and reviewed the EastLake Greens EIR and adopt the Addendum before taking action on
the Greens companion request. Because of that technicality, staff was recommending
continuance of the item.
Commissioner Tarantino questioned the distance of the medium-high density housing from the
high school property. Mr. Lee said it was basically contiguous, separated only by the 240' wide
easement on the west side. Mr. Bazzel stated that there was a slight elevation difference; the
high school site was slightly above that portion of the property.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Katy Wright, 900 Lane Avenue, Chula Vista, representing the EastLake Development
Company, agreed with Commissioner Carson that affordable housing needed to be addressed
early in the project and stated that by 1989/1990, they had met the affordable housing
requirement for EastLake I. The proposal being considered was their effort to continue to be
/6~~/L/6
- ?S'-
PC Minutes
-5-
May 12, 1993
ahead of the main flows in meeting those requirements and getting out ahead of any controversy.
In terms of being tied in with the Otay Ranch process, Ms. Wright said they believed and agreed
that it was tied to the Otay Ranch process from a planning standpoint and needed to go with it
because it put it in context. She noted that the landswap had been closed approximately six
months before and they actually owned the property. She continued by showing slides of some
of the types of product style that would be considered in the area.
Ms. Wright noted there was a concern of the homeowners about membership in the homeowners
association which had been brought up at the previous meeting. She said they had met with the
homeowners several times trying to address their concerns and they had made a diligent effort
to meet them. They would bring the homeowners association issue before the homeowners at
an appropriate time and they would be able to vote on it.
Regarding the Kaiser hospital site, Ms. Wright said their proposal did not represent a
regathering of units lost there. That was a land sale that was consummated to a hospital; the
current proposal would have come before the Commission regardless of what happened at that
site.
Ms. Wright stated that they felt it was important to be able to provide high density and a variety
of housing products; they felt this site was the right location for high density, given the
adjacency of the land uses, the transit corridor, etc. She asked for support of the EastLake
proposal.
Commissioner Moot asked for EastLake's rationale in their proposal for high density next to the
C-R (Commercial-Retail) designation. Ms. Wright said the entire area of the EastLake activity
corridor was a center of activity, the site referred to was immediately adjacent to an easement,
south of a possible reservoir and a future City park site, there were some recreational
opportunities there, and it was immediately adjacent to a major roadway. They felt it was an
opportunity to bring more affordable and a variety of home products to the EastLake community.
Commissioner Moot asked about the P-Q designation directly north. Ms. Wright answered that
it was currently, but would not necessarily remain, a reservoir site. They were in ongoing
discussions with the Water District on whether or not they would need that site. If they did not,
there was a good possibility it could be made a church site.
No one else wishing to speak, Chair Fuller closed the public discussion of these items. She
noted that the Commission was to take tentative action on the General Plan Amendment for the
EastLake land swap parcels which included directing staff to modify the necessary documents
to reflect the Commission's tentative action. .
MS (CarsonlRay) to take tentative action to accept the General Plan Amendments for the
EastLake Land Swap Parcel and EastLake Greens, with the staff recommended alternatives
with one correction: that the section with the medium-high designation located by the high
school be changed to medium.
JI)~)i7
- 1iP -
PC Minutes
-6-
May 12, 1993
Commissioner Ray commented that he would be more comfortable if everything to west of the
corridor was medium; however, he understood some other conditions exist which may preclude
that. He questioned the assumption that affordable housing had to be in a medium-high, high
density area. He agreed with Commissioner Carson that affordable housing should not be left
as a "tag-on" item.
Assistant Planning Director Lee said he thought there was an opportunity, with higher densities,
to provide subsidies in terms of rent structures. They were not necessarily looking at a for-sale
product, but to get people qualified at a low- or low-moderate income level into a livable space.
It was a matter of economy in terms of number. There were more problems associated with
single-family detached or lower-density attached products in terms of trying to accommodate any
sort of number in that income range.
Chair Fuller noted that the higher densities were mixed in with the medium and lower densities
around the lake; that it was done early on, and it was the product type that allowed it to be more
affordable. It wasn't considered affordable housing, but was higher density which lowered the
cost and made it more affordable for the fIrst-time homebuyers. That was the reason for
medium high as opposed to medium when talking about offering a more affordable product to
more people to buy.
Commissioner Ray understood the economics but felt there should be some option. He would
prefer to see a medium density there. If they chose to put affordable housing there, he was sure
the developer could make it work.
Commissioner Martin said he could support the motion because they were nice homes; people
with a lower income could afford them; he felt it should be in the corridor and that would be
where the transportation centers would be, and a light-rail system if one were built.
Commissioner Tuchscher did not understand the conflict between a higher density product and
a school, and asked Commissioner Carson about her concerns there. Because of the major
highway and the utility easement, it made sense to him to have high density in that area with it
being close to a school and park.
Commissioner Carson had attended a youth summit the same night as the prior Commission
meeting and had listened to students speak regarding their concerns about gangs with no place
to go except to hang out in a park; there was not a decent teen club. Ms. Carson did not believe
there was any wall, freeway, or area that a child could not get to if they wanted to be there.
They go over the fence and tag on the inside of the school. She hoped the gangs were not here
to stay, but that there may be some other kind of gang in the future.
Chair Fuller asked how Commissioner Carson related the gang problem with any more intensity
in a medium high density area next to a high school, to gang activity, and shootings in estate
homes. She asked Commissioner Carson to explain what she felt the danger was in having
medium high next to a high school or park.
/ fJ ~~ /'/~<
-1'7-,
PC Minutes
-7-
May 12, 1993
Commissioner Carson stated that she lived by a park and the students from the junior high
rumble in the park at about 3: 15 a.m. behind her house. She said the park was patrolled by
police officers because of the gang activities; they had heard gunshots and worried for their own
safety. Students did not have any place to go; if there was a park in the area, that would be a
good place to go.
Through following discussion, Commissioner Tucbscher surmised that with a school next to a
residential area, there could be bad activities at the school which could cause more problems
with higher density by affecting more people.
Commissioner Tarantino said it was his experience that the problems were that the children
would jump the fence and hang out at their homes or friends' homes. He had no experience
with violence or destruction of property; they would just go and party at houses which were
empty while the parents were at work. He did not believe density played a part. He noted that
other students went to a plaza to fight. They would fmd a place to go, and he did not know if
there was a great cause and effect relationship. He supported the staff alternative, which would
, give the developer flexibility. The developer may not choose to go to the high end and may go
to the low end, but they would have the flexibility.
Commissioner Moot said he was comfortable with the staff recommendation; however, he felt
Commissioner Carson's concerns made sense. High school students look for places to hang out
and do things where they can't be watched, because they don't want to get caught. With more
density, there was more opportunity for places to hang out and not be seen. Commissioner
Moot felt single-family housing around a school area created a buffer to that opportunity, more
of a community sense, with less places to go. He did not have a problem with the medium-high
or high density by the commercial center, but would like to reduce the invitation to hang out
adjacent to the high school.
Chair Fuller noted that the motion had only suggested a revision on the parcel adjacent to the
high school.
Commissioner Ray asked the approximate distance between the high school and the commercial
retail center. Senior Planner Bazzel said it was approximately 1/4 mile.
Commissioner Tucbscher asked if the parcel adjacent to the high school could be taken out, and
two separate motions be made. The frrst and second agreed.
REVISED MOTION:
MS (CarsonlRay) to take tentative action to accept the General Plan Amendments for the
EastLake Land Swap Parcel and EastLake Greens, with the staff recommended alternative,
except the section with the medium-high designation located by the high school, which
would be in a separate motion.
//J~ JVi'
- 19,
PC Minutes
-8-
May 12, 1993
After more discussion as to the wording of the motion and which alternative proposal to use, the
Commissioners voted on the revised motion above.
VOTE: 7-0
MS (CarsonlRay) 4-3 (Commissioners Fuller, Tarantino and Tucbscher voted against)
recommending that the designation of the section located by the high school be medium
instead of medium-high.
MSUC (CarsonlRa~') 7-0 to further direct staff to modify the necessary documents to reflect
the Commi~ion's tentative action on the Otay Ranch Project GPA and continue the public
hearing for the Otay Ranch Project until May 13, 1993, at 5:00 p.m.
Chair Fuller noted that the continued public hearing for the Otay Ranch Project would be held
at the County DPLU.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf clarified that the motion to continue the Otay Ranch hearing to
May 13, 1993, also included EastLake Greens. Chair Fuller concurred.
/!) ~ l___a7
_ '11 ~
PC Minutes
-10-
May 26, 1993
Chair Fuller said that because there were people present for Item 5, the application by EastLake
Development, and there was no one present for Item 4, she would switch the last two agenda
items with the Commission's concurrence.
ITEM 5:
PUBUC HEARING - GP A-93-04; APPLICATION BY EASTLAKE
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR 74 ACRES OF EASTLAKE GREENS. LOCATED IN
TWO SEPARATE PARCELS. ONE SOUTH OF EASTLAKE HIGH SCHOOL.
THE SECOND IN THE SOUTHWESTERN PORTION OF EASTLAKE
GREENS (Continued from the meeting of 5-18-93)
Senior Planner Bazzel presented the staff report. The Commission was being asked to fmalize
their previous tentative recommendation to: 1) fmd that the Commission had read and
considered E1R-86-04 for the EastLake Greens SPA and adopt the proposed addendum to the
Environmental Impact Report; 2) adopt the recommending resolution for GP A-93-14 as reflected
in Exhibits B and C. (;)
Chair Fuller opened the continued public hearing on GP A-93-04 to anyone who would like to
address the Commission. No one wishing to speak. the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Carson/Ray) 6-0 (Commissioner Tuchscher absent) to rmd that the Commimon has
read and considered EIR-86-04, for the EastLake Greens project, and that the proposed
project has no significant impacts which were not discussed in the EIR, and adopt the
proposed Addendum to Environmental Impact Report EIR-86-04.
/ i) ~.15/
_be.
_.
PC Minutes
-11-
May 26, 1993
MSUC (Carson/Ray) 6-0 (Commissioner Tuchscber absent) to adopt the Recommending
Resolution recommending tbat the City Council approve the General Plan Amendment
(GPA-93-04) as reflected in Attachment Band C.
/ ()-- / S-;2
- S 1-
'",",..,.. ..,~
RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
/ o~~ /57
MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED SPECIAL MEETING
Resource Conservation Commission
Chula Vista, California ' ,
6:00 p.m.
Monday, March 1, 1993
Conference Room #1
Public Services Building
CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meeting was called to order at 6:05 p.m. by
Chairman Kracha. City Staff Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid called roll.
Present were Commissioners Hall, Kracha, Ghougassian, McNair, Myers. Johnson arrived at
6:31 p.m.
Duane Basil, staff person on the Otay Ranch project team, answered questions regarding the
goals, objectives and policies of the EIR. Also present were Kim Kilkenny and Kim Glasgow.
Myers addressed LAFCO's concern of deferral of studies with the possibility of annexation in
mind. Staff responded the project does not take into consideration this possibility. Specific
studies (Le., water) was also deferred to the SPA level. Again it was pointed out that if water
is not available, Otay Ranch will not be built. Additionally, local water companies are not
making any statements on the current general plan level.
Discussion was held on why the environmental alternative is not acceptable. Staff replied on
the issue that it does not provide for adequate mass transit. Mitigation did not provide for the
trolley but is serviced by other transits. Myers referred to a South Bay Rail & Transit study
done in February 1991 noting that ridership is down. The village concept was also listed as a
viable alternative. The document was analyzed from the environmental standpoint and has met
CEQA requirements. Stafr s recommendation complies with the goals and objectives of the EIR.
Following discussion, it was moved and seconded (Ghougassian/Hall) to recommend certification
of the EIR of the General Development Plan of Otay Ranch.
In further discussion, Myers stated the project does not meet CEQA requirements for the
following reasons:
- Inappropriate review period (CEQA recommends 90 days)
- Problem with Chula Vista being the lead agency
- Alternatives are not varied enough
- Indirect issues on the impact of environment are inadequately covered
- Too many significant unmitigable impacts
- Given the size of the document, there was inadequate time for review
Doug Reid responded for staff: Otay Ranch is a program EIR and multi-phased. Full disclosure
of all environmental effects had to be made and were specifically identified. They went through
the possibility that all mitigation won't reduce significant impacts but may have adverse effects.
Indirect impacts are addressed at this general level. The alternatives listed are the ones with
little or no adverse effects. Chula Vista is the lead agency, but the County of San Diego
/6 - Jyf
--- g,;L ~
Page 2
provides the technical expertise. The 90 day review period, determined by the City Council and
Board of Supervisors, in actuality, ended up with around 260 days for public review. Since this
project involves over 2300 acres, the outcome would therefore be a lengthy document with
.lengthy hearings. Staff provided more detail in its studies than was actually required.
Noting over 11 areas of environmental concerns for RCC's consideration, most of which is
deferred to the SPA level, Myers stated this is more reason not to certify the EIR as a
commission. McNair added that with open and public dissent, the City could incur considerable
litigation costs. Staff responded that Tina Thomas has extensively addressed in writing the range
of alternatives and all concerns listed.
The vote was then taken: Ayes - KrachalHal1/Ghougassian; Nos - Johnson/McNair/Myers; 3-3,
motion failed.
It was then moved and seconded (Myers/Johnson) that RCC not certify the EIR due to its
inadequacy and deferral to later studies and later levels at all areas of concern, in particular, lack
of diversity of alternatives and excessive significant unmitigable environmental impacts. Vote:
Ayes - Johnson/McNair/Myers; Nos - KrachalHal1/Ghougassian; 3-3; motion failed.
Kracha indicated the options and recomm~ndations for Commissioners at this time:
. Speak before the Planning Commission on behalf of RCC or as an RCC member
. Write to the Mayor and City Council and express personal concerns
. Attend other public hearings and express personal concerns
COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS:
. Kracha announced the Echo Art Contest on AprilS, sponsored by the Chula Vista Earth
Day Committee.
. Progress is being made on using battery-powered vehicles, to be tested on Ford, Chevy
and Toyotas.
. Hall will make personal recommendations on the Otay Ranch project.
. Johnson requested staff provide feedback on comments made by RCC after the Planning
Commission and Council receive them. Doug Reid will again follow up on this item.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Kracha at 8:01 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
EXPRESS SECRETARIAL SERVICES
')
'-1)(( U~<. u'-
Barbara Taylor
.~ j (j~
~
/1) ._;5:/t;
~g3 ./
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING
Resource Conservation Commission
Chula Vista, California
6:00 p.m.
Monday. Febnwy 15. 1993
Conference Room #1
Public Services Building
CALL MEETING TO ORDERlROLL CALL: Meeting was called to order at 6:06 p.m. by
Chairman Kracha.
Commissioners Present: Chair Kracha, Hall, McNair, Myers.
Commissioners Absent: Ghougassian, excused; Johnson, unexcused.
Staff present: City Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid.
Kim Glasgow, Ogden Environmental & Energy Services, Inc.
Kim Kilkinney, Baldwin Company
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was MSUC (Hall/McNair) to approve the minutes of the
February 8, 1993 meeting, corrected to delete the next to last paragraph on page 2, and
substitute with the notation that McNair concurred with the comments made by Myers.
NEW BUSINESS
Otay Ranch Final Program EIR-90-01
Staff Introduction
Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid advised members that the candidate fmdings of
fact had been written with the new town plan in mind, but they will be re-written as the project
changes. Mr. Reid noted as an example that staff no longer supported the mitigation measure
of the off site purchase of coastal sage habitat. Rather, the 1,000 acres in question should be
mitigation for future projects, although the actual details of this alternative have not yet been
worked out.
Discussion of CEOA Requirements
Commissioner McNair questioned the staff supported plan over the plan known as the
'environmental alternative'. She referred to the candidate fmdings of fact, stating that this is not
CEQA language, but is legal argument intended to persuade regarding CEQA requirements.
McNair quoted CEQA sections 15021 and 15043, dealing with the choosing of a project (among
alternatives) that minirni7..es environmental damage, and the circumstances under which projects
may be approved despite significant affects. She asked why the environmental alternative was
not considered feasible, and stated that in order to approve the plan supported by staff, specific
benefits must be stated, along with specific reasons why it is not feasible to mitigate them.
Commissioner Myers stated that she had the same questions as McNair, and questioned the
Ii> -/S-~
-gtf"
Resource Conservation Commission
-2-
February 15. 1993
validity of the Environmental Impact Report, stating that too many issues were being deferred
and that certain issues have not been resolved.
Kim Glasgow of Ogden Environmental & Energy Services advised that in deftning feasibility,
CEQA takes into account economic, environmental, technological, social, and other factors. She
also pointed out that this is a programmatic EIR, not a project EIR, and that this document is
to provide general guidelines for future projects. Mr. Reid added that this EIR has been
reviewed by attorneys specializing in CEQA, and they had found that the document has been
prepared in compliance with the law. Further discussion took place regarding CEQA standards.
Discussion of Plan Alternative Inadequacies
McNair stated that she was not ready to vote on the FPEIR, as she still has questions. She
asked for the reasons why the environmental alternative is not feasible. Ms. Glasgow responded
that there were three predominant reasons why the environmental alternative is not considered
feasible: the Resource Management Plan would not be implemented for economic reasons, the
project would not serve housing needs due to insufftcient multi-family housing, and the transit
aspects of the project would not be implemented. Discussion ensued regarding these three issues
as well as possible future conditions affecting the project. Kim Kilkinney of Baldwin offered
input on the feasibility of implementing the RMP, as well as information on the commercial and
industrial hub areas in San Diego County as they affect the need for more density in large
planned communities of this scope. Further discussion took place regarding population densities
and mass transit, air quality, and current economic trends.
Chair Kracha stated that if members felt that the EIR is inadequate, they should state so now.
McNair indicated that she would like more information, such as the deftning of the goals and
objectives of the Interjurisdictional Task Force pertaining to housing needs, and more speciftc
information on the costs of supporting resource maintenance areas. Mr. Reid stated that he
would obtain the ITF information, and operation costs for current open space maintenance
districts as they may relate to Otay Ranch RMP costs, for the next meeting.
Myers stated that there were 13 non-mitigated impacts identifted in the EIR in every alternative
plan except the environmental alternative. She felt that both CEQA and the City of Chula Vista
mandate choosing the least destructive environmental alternative.
Other Committee Comments
Commissioner Hall asked about the relocation of the FAA V ortek facility; Ms. Ogden responded
that she believed the intent was to relocate the facility, but that this was the responsibility of the
FAA. The extension of the railway was questioned, with Hall noting that she would like to see
mitigation measures that reduce in the number of truck trips in the area. Hall also expressed
concerns about the following issues: the providing of areas for stables (Mr. Reid pointed out that
the zoning regulations created for the planned community could regulate this use as needed);
10 ~ /S-7
... fJ//
Resource Conservation Commission
-3-
February 15. 1993
additional consideration to be given to building in floodplain areas; the County's potential use
of Wolf Canyon as a dump site (Ms. Ogden responded that currently, five sites are being
considered); and the designating of Otay Valley Road as a scenic highway.
Chair Kracha read the policies section (15003) of CEQA. He stated that since this item would
be going to the Planning Commission in March, his recommendation was that next week the
committee make a recommendation to certify the EIR, or not make a recommendation with
specific reasons. He asked Mr. Reid to bring the Planning Commission schedule involving the
Otay Ranch FPEIR to the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by Chair Kracha at 8: 12 p.m.
~ ~viIv~
Patty evins, Recorder
/l)~J~Y
_ rgb ...
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS FOR THE
EASTIAKE GREENS GPA (GPA-93-04)
/fJ .-/~~
J
ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT REPURT EIR-86-04
EASTLAKE GREENS SPA EASTLAKE TRAILS PREZONE & ANNEXATION
I. Introduction
PROJECT NAME:
Eastlake General Plan Amendment
PROJECT LOCATION:
East of proposed SR-125 alignment; south of Telegraph
Canyon Road, north of Orange A venue
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL #: Book 595 (Assorted parcels)
PROJECT APPLICANT: Eastlake Development Company
CASE NO: IS-93-16 DATE: January 15, 1993
II. Background
The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the
Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC) to prepare an addendum to a Negative
DecIaration or Environmental Impact Report, if one of the following conditions is
present:
I. The minor changes in the project design which have occurred since completion
of the Final EIR or Negative DecIaration have not created any new significant
environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative
Declaration;
2. Additional or refined information available since completion of the Final EIR
or Negative DecIaration regarding the potential environmental impact of the
project, or regarding the measures or alternatives available to mitigate potential
environmental effects of the project, does not show that the project will have
one or more significant impacts which were not previously addressed in the
Final EIR or Negative Declaration.
This addendum has been prepared in order to provide additional information and analysis
concerning land use, drainage, traffic and school impacts. As a result of this analysis, the basic
conclusions of the Environmental Impact Report have not changed. Land use, drainage, traffic,
and school impacts are found to be less than significant for the proposed project.
Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City has prepared
the following addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the Eastlake Greens SPA
Eastlake Trails Prezone & Annexation.
, .,
/1)-/60
- ~ '1~
III. Project Setting
The project involves two parcels totaling approximately 74 acres. The first parcel is
located on the northwest comer of Palomar Street and Eastlake Parkway, bounded to
the east by the planne9 SR-125 alignment. The second parcel is north of Orange
Avenue along the western and southern boundaries of the EastLake Greens SPA, where
it adjoins the Otay Ranch property (see parcels R-26, PQ-l, and R-9 on Exhibit A).
The land is currently vacant and has been used in the past for dry farming and cattle
grazing. The parcels have been graded and are covered with native grasses.
IV. Project Description
The proposed project is an amendment to the Chula Vista General Plan. As originally
proposed and analyzed, Eastlake Greens called for a total unit count of 3,609 dwelling
units. In approving the project in 1989, the City Council reduced the density and unit
count of five parcels in Eastlake Greens, R-24, R-25, R-26, R-27, and R-28, from High
Density (18-24 dulac) to a density of 4.5 dulac (see Exhibit A). Overall dwelling units
were reduced from 3,609 to 2,774, a reduction of 835 dwelling units. The current GPA
proposes increasing the density of parcel R-26 from Low-Medium to High Residential
(18-27 dulac), changing parcel PQ-l from Public/Quasi-Public to Public/Quasi-Public
and High Residential, and increasing the density of parcel R-9 from Low Medium
Residential to Medium High (11-18 dulac) as shown on Exhibit B. The proposed GPA
would increase the density range of these parcels from 156-312 residential units to 583-
891 residential units. This is a potential increase from 427 to 579 residential units. A
summary of these changes is provided below.
Eastlake Greens original project
After reductions by Council in 1989
With proposed GP A: - midpoint of range
- maximum end of range
Total Units
3,609
2,774
3,274
3,353
Exhibit B of this document provides a detailed breakdown of the changes in General
Plan designations and acreage associated with the proposed project. Subsequent actions
required to implement the project will include amendments to the adopted EastLake
Greens II General Development Plan (GDP) and EastLake SPA Plan. These actions
will be subject to future environmental review at the time the particular projects are
proposed.
v. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans
The proposed project involves a General Plan Amendment (GPA) on two separate siteshwhich are currently designated for approximately 52 acres of residential development,
2
/t)r-/~I -~g,
13 acres of public and quasi-public development, and 9 acres for transportation
infrastructure. The project proposes altering the General Plan designations to 4] acres
of residential, 14 acres of public and quasi-public, 17 acres of open space, and 2 acres
of major circulation systems. The density range of the parcels would increase from
156-312 units to 583-891 units. The zoning on the site is "Planned Community" (PC),
and the project is compatible with this zoning.
VI. Compliance with the Threshold Standards
1. FirelEMS
The Threshold Standards require that fire and medical units must be able to
respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85% of the cases and within 5
minutes or less in 75% of the cases. The City of Chula Vista has indicated that
this threshold standard will be met, since the nearest fire station is 4 miles away
and would be associated with a 5 minute response time. The proposed project
would comply with this Threshold Standard.
In addition, Fire Station 6 will open in January 1993, approximately 1/2 mile
and 2 minutes away from the project site. Specific development projects could
be required to meet additional, site-specific Fire Department requirements.
2. Police
The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84% of
Priority 1 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time
to all Priority 1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to
62.1 0% of Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average
response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The proposed project
will comply with this Threshold Standard.
The Police Department has indicated that the proposed project will not impact
police services.
3. Traffic
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must operate at a Level
of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS)
"D" may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections.
Intersections west of 1-805 are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS.
No intersection may reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday peak
hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this
policy. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold.
The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have an impact on traffic
circulation systems. According to the City Traffic Engineer, the actual change
/;f~ II. ,.)
/ J'- (p~~
...Sq-
.
in land use associated with the implementation of the GP A may impact adjacent
local street segments and nearby intersections. Therefore, further traffic analysis
may be required at the time specific development is proposed. See Section VI
for a more detailed analysis of traffic mitigation.
4. ParkslRecreation
The Threshold Standards for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/l,OOO population.
The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standards. Payment of
park fees may be required at the time specific projects are proposed.
5. Drainage
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and volumes not exceed
City Engineer Standards.. Individual projects will provide necessary
improvements consistent with the Drainage Master Planes) and City Engineering
Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standards.
Existing one-site drainage consists of surface flow to catchments and city
stormwater conveyance systems. The proposed GP A will not impact drainage
systems, however, improvements to existing facilities will be required when
specific development occurs.
According to the Engineering Department, off-site drainage flows into Poggi
Canyon. Existing facilities will not be adequate when the proposed project is
implemented. The Engineering Department has indicated that regional drainage
improvements may be necessary in the Poggi Canyon area when specific
development takes place. Future development will be reviewed on a case-by-
case basis. The proposed project, however, will meet this Threshold Standard.
See Section VI, for a more detailed discussion of drainage impacts.
6. Sewer
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes shall not
exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary
improvements consistent with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering
Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
The proposed project would not increase overall solid or liquid waste generation
in the Eastlake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA). Existing lines in the area
include an 8-inch polyvinylchoride (PVC) sewer leading to a 12-inch PVC sewer
in Dtay Lakes Road. Flows from the Poggi Canyon Basin are pumped to the
Telegraph Canyon Basin. Some segments of the Telegraph Canyon Trunk
Sewer are over capacity. The City Engineering Department has indicated that
4
/I}~-//p }
- CPO /
payment of fees in accordance with the Telegraph Canyon Basin Plan will
mitigate these impacts.
7. Water
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and
transmission facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that
water quality standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
Because Southern California is in its 6th consecutive critically dry year, the
County Water Authority is recommending a voluntary 10% reduction in water
consumption for new development through the use of low flow fixtures and
drought-tolerant landscaping. Applicants may also be required to participate in
whatever water conservation or fee off-set program the City of Chula Vista has
in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
VII. Identification of Environmental Effects
School Impacts
EIR-86-04 found that new students will be generated for both the elementary and
secondary school systems as a result of the project. One elementary and one high
school will be constructed within the project area. School construction is phased
concurrently with residential development.
Section 65995 of the California Government Code authorizes school districts to collect
fees from developers of both residential and non-residential projects to offset school
facility impacts. School facility fees are $1.58 per square foot for residential
development and $0.26 per square foot for commercial and industrial development.
Both school districts collect their proportional allocation of these fees. For each square
foot of commercial and industrial development, the Chula Vista Elementary School
District receives $0.12 and the High School receives $0.14 to assist in financing school
facilities.
EIR-86-04 found that impacts to school facilities could be mitigated to a level of less
than significant to the satisfaction of the school districts in the context of existing
binding agreements regarding school sites and financing. The Planning Department has
worked with representatives of both Otay Ranch (the Baldwin Company) and the
EastLake Development Company to establish strategies to mitigate school impacts. The
Sweetwater Union High School District has indicated that they have no objection to the
proposed General Plan Amendment. The Chula Vista Elementary School District has
entered into an agreement with the Eastlake Development Company and the Baldwin
Company to ensure school impact are mitigated adequately. Therefore, impacts to
5
) /)- -It; L/
_co _
schools from the proposed project will be less than significant.
Land Use
The proposed GP A would have an impact on land use, as it involves altering the use
and density on the sites. However, the total number of units currently proposed is at
least 265 units less than that previously assessed in the Eastlake Greens EIR-86-.04.
EIR-86-04 found that implementation of the Eastlake Greens project would not have
adverse land use policy impacts, therefore no specific mitigation measures or policies
are required for the proposed project. Thus, land use impacts from the proposed GP A
are found to be less than significant.
Drainasze.
EIR-86-04 found that no significant, unmitigable impacts to hydrology or drainage
would result from implementation of the Eastlake Greens project with impplementation
of the recommendations in the preliminary geotechnical report. These recommendations
include: minimizing surface runoff into downslope natural areas and graded areas;
planting slopes with appropriate drought-resistant vegetation as recommended by a
landscape architect; and regularly maintaining drainage devices such as graded berms,
swales and area drains. In addition, drainage system plans must be approved by the
City of Chula Vista's Department of Public Works.
At the time specific development occurs, additional environmental review will be
required to ensure impacts to drainage facilities are less than significant. All
recommendations contained in EIR-86-04 must be followed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineering Division.
Traffic
In addition to complying with all requirements of the Engineering Division at the time
specific development is proposed, the proposed project must comply with the traffic
mitigation measures set forth in EIR-86-04, as follows: .
1. Improve Telegraph Canyon Road between State Route 125 and Eastlake
Greensffrails boundary to six lane prime arterial standards.
2. Construct Hunte Parkway and Eastlake Parkway as major roads between
Telegraph Canyon Road and Orange Avenue.
3. Construct a southbound SR 125 to eastbound Telegraph Canyon Road loop ramp
at the SR 12Sffelegraph Canyon Road intersection, or extend SR 125 south to
East Palomar Street (which would connect to the Eastlake SPA II street system).
6
..~
/ 1)-/ ~.J
-9').-
.
Compliance with these mitigation measures will ensure that impacts to traffic are
less than significant.
VIII. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista: Diana Lilly, Planning
Duane Bazzel, Planning
Roger Daoust, Engineering
John Lippitt, Engineering
Cliff Swanson, Engineering
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering
Bob Sennett, Planning
Ken Larsen, Building and Housing Department
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Captain Keith Hawkins, Police Department
Martin Schmidt, Parks and Recreation Department
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
Applicant's Agent: Eastlake Development Company
2. Documents
IS-92-21 Addendum to Environmental Impact Report EIR-86-04 Eastlake Greens SPA
PlanlTrails Pre-zone and Annexation Final Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report Eastlake Village Center South (March 31, 1992)
City of Chula Vista Environmental Review Procedures
EIR-86-04 Eastlake Greens SPA PlanlTrails Pre-zone and Annexation Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (ERCE, June 1989)
Eastlake SPA I Plan
City of Chula Vista General Plan
Title 19, Chula Vista Zoning Code
7
/tJ~/~?
-13-,
EXHIBIT B
Existing General Plan Greens SPA Area
Residential
LM Low-Medium (3-6)
AC.
52
DU Ramze
156-312
Midpoint
233
Non-Residential
PQ Public/Quasi Public
o Open Space
Circulation
TOTAL
13.3
o
8.8
74 ae
156-312 du
233 du
Proposed General Plan Greens SPA Area
Residential AC. DU RanlZe Midpoint
LM Low Medium 3 9-18 14
MH Medium High (11-18) 17 187-306 247
H High (18-27) 21 378-567 473
SUB-TOTAL 41 ae 583-891 du 734
Non-residential
PQ Public/Quasi-Public 14
OS Open Space 17
Circulation ..l
TOTAL 74 Be 583-891 du 734 du
· Acres are gross acres based on planimeter readings. Actual net acres will vary.
8
/1) -)t 7
-1t//
__ __ __ 0__ l~,- _;"1
----.....
,/' --.,
I '
,-. : ." I
~"
~.
EASTLAKE GREENS
EIR.86.4
CANDIDATE CEQA FINDINGS
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 21081
OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
AND SECTION 15091 OF TITLE 14
OF THE CALIFORNIA ADMINlSTRA TION CODE
JUNE 1989
, ,
);;)~/hr!
-- ~ (~
'~'"
r::.
't~~,.
.-....iiil~.
1. INTRODUCTION
Section 21081 of the California Bnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that no
project shall be approved by a public agency when significant environmental effects have
been identified, unless one of the following findings is made and supponed by substantial
evidence in the record:
1) Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final Environmental Impact Repon (EIR).
2) Changes or alterations are the responsibility of another public agency and
not the agency making the fmding.
3) Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the
mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final ErR.
The following findings are made relative to the conclusions of of the Final
Supplemental EIR for the proposed EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan
and EastLake Trails Pre-zone and Annexation (SCH #86052803) and all documents, maps,
and illustrations listed in Section VI of these findings. The project's discretionary actions
include the following:
1) Pre-zoning and annexation from the County of San Diego to the City of
Chula Vista, consistent with the adopted Sphere of Influence of the City
2) Incorporation of the annexed land into the EastLake I Planned Community
District, increasing the District from 1267.9 aces to 2104.2 acres; this action
includes the approval of amendments to the EastLake I General
Development Plan and the EastLake Policy Plan
3) Amendments to the City of Chula Vista's Circulation Element
4) Adoption of the EastLake Greens Public Facilities and Financing Plan
5) Adoption of the EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan
6) Approval of the EastLake Greens Tentative Tract Map
7) Adoption of the EastLake Greens Design Guidelines
Implementation of the project as proposed would result in a mixture of residential,
commercial. circulation, recreational. educational, and open space land uses. The EastLake
Greens project consists of 3,609 dwelling units on 830.5 acres and EastLake Trails
consists of 1,206 dwelling units on 392.8 acres. The development concept includes a golf-
oriented residential community and a corridor of commercial, public, and quasi-public uses
between the SR-l25 aliJI1ment and the EastLake Parkway. This area is an 1m extension of
the Village Center withm EastLake I and would include a high school. a community park.
an area for churches, day care centers, health centers, and other uses.
1 /I)~-/ t-j
- C[/p "
- - - - -.. - -. . ,,--'
~
f-:.
~c
The following findings have been prepared pursuant to Sections 15088 and 15089
of Title 14 of the California Administration Code and Section 21081 of the California
Resources Code.
n. CITY OF CHULA VISTA FINDINGS
1) The Planning Commission, having reviewed and considered the infomlation
contained in the Final EIR for the EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area
(SPA) Plan and EastLake Trails Pre-zone and Annexation and the record,
finds that changes have been incorporated into the project which mitigate,
avoid, or reduce the level of identified impacts to insignificance or to levels
acceptable to the City, by measures identified in the Final Supplemental
EIR.
2) The Planning Commission, having reviewed and considered the infonnation
contained in the Final Supplemental EIR and the record, finds that none of
the significant environmental effects anticipated as a result of the proposed
project are within the responsibility of another public agency except for air
quality and water supply and water quality.
3) The Planning Commission, having reviewed and considered the infonnation
contained in the Final Supplemental ErR and the record, finds that no
specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the
mitigation measures identified in the EIR.
4) The Planning Commission acknowledges that these Recommended CEQA
Findings are advisory and do not bind the City Council from adopting
findings to the contrary if they are supported by substantial evidence 1n the
record.
The City of Chula Vista's Threshold/Standards, adopted November 17, 1987. were
developed to assure that the "quality of life" enjoyed by the City's residents is maintained
while growth occurs, That quality of life is also imponant to those who wish to develop
within the City. Implementation of the Threshold/Standards program will assure that
significant, adverse impacts are avoided or reduced through sound planning and that public
services and the quality of the environment will be preserved and enhanced. Based on
these threshold/standards, changes have been incorporated into the project to mitigate or
avoid environmental effects. The 11 issues addressed in the Threshold/Standards are
discussed in sections III and IV below.
III. SIGNIFICANT. tJN1\..1ITIGABLE IMPACTS
1) Air Ouality
Impact
It is the responsibility of the San Diego Air Pollution Control Board
(APCD) to ensure that state and national air quality standards are achieved. APCD's
current Air Quality Management Plan (APeD 1986) is based on the 1982 State
Implemenration Plan, which documents the necessary overall strategy and individual tactics
by which the San Diego air basin can meet its attainment goal. In the San Diego area, a
project is considered to have a significant, cumulative air quality impact if the project has
not been included in the SANDAG Series V and VI growth forecasts. These forecasts are
Z /1)/) ?P
-11} .-
,..---. \
r,. -.
x. ..
"'"
..
.".,...
the basis for the. air quality attainment strategies contained in the 1982 State Implementation
Plan.
The entire San Diego air basin is not in attainment for sta.te and federal
standards for ozone, and the western two-thirds of the basin is designated as a non-
attainment area for carbon monoxide (even though the region has been consistent with
carbon monoxide standards for the past several years) and suspended particulate matter.
The San Diego region has attained standards for sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and lead.
The City of Chula Vista has recognized that air quality is a regional issue that cannot be
addressed effectively by the City, and the City therefore implements the tactics established
by the Regional AQMP as stated in the Threshold/Standards.
The EastLake Greenstrrails project will result in long-tenn emissions of air
pollutants from both stationary and mobile sources. Stationary source pollutant emissions
Include those generated by the consumption of natural gas and electricity and by the
burning of wood in residential fireplaces. Vehicle travel associated with the project would
generate mobile source emissions, including carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and
hydrocarbons. The project would generate approximately 236 tons per year of
hydrocarbons. an imponant precursor to photochemical smog.
Mitigation
Four basic tactics for the mitigation of air quality effects are presented in
San Diego's AQMP (APeD 1986): traffic flow improvements. ride-sharing, bicycling,
and transit. The project, as proposed, incorporates traffic flow improvements, bicycling.
and transit In addition. the project applicant will contribute to the EastLake I transit center
and to a 120-space parking facility to encourage car-pooling and public transit use in the
area. All intersections affected by the project would be maintained at level of service C (the
City's threshold standard) or better, and the project provides both bicycle and transit routes
and stops throughout the development The project also reduces the potential for air quality
impacts through the mixed-use land use concept designed to reduce vehicle trips.
As a condition of approval, the applicant shall implement these measures
concurrently with development.
The City. per the City's adopted Threshold/Standards, shall provide the
APeD with a 12 to 15 month development forecast and request an evaluation of its impact
on CUITent and future air quality management programs.
Findini
The project, as proposed, was not included in the SANDAG Series V and
VI growth forecasts, and thus represents growth that was not considered when formulating
the air quality attainment plans for San Diego County. The proposed project is cUJTently a
non-conforming use and therefore is considered to have significant cumulative air quality
effects even after the implementation of mitigation measures.
Upon revision of the AQMP, the EastLake Greensrrrails project would be
incorporated into the SANDAG S~rles vn growth forecasts. The revised implementation
strategies would accommodate the additional emissions fro~ the project.
J
)l)~)7J
-q~ "
~
(~,
. ------,
"
IV. SIGNIFYCANT. MmGABLE IMPACTS
1) Transportation/Circulation
Inm8Ct
EastLake Greensni'aUs will add a significant number of average daily trip.s
(ADT) to the internal and external street system. In the shon-tennt the project Will
contribute a substantial portion (more than 30 percent) of the AnT to Telegraph Canyon
Road east of Otay Lakes Road to the EastLake boundary; to SR-l25 north to SR-54; and to
Otay Lakes Road between Telegraph Canyon Road and East H Street. The project will
contribute less than 10 percent of the ADT to all other affected street segmentst except for
Telegraph Canyon Road between Medical Center Drive and Otay Lakes Road (19 percent).
Two affected street segments already operate at less than Level of Service (LOS) C (the
City's threshold level): Bonita Road between I-805 and Plaza Bonita Drive (LOS F) and
Bonita Road between Willow Road and Otay Lakes Road (LOS D). The project will
contribute 1 percent of the ADT for these street segments.
Mipwation
Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to mitigate the
potential traffic impacts (see the EastLake Public Facilities Financing Plan
for details, phasing, and fmancing methods). As a condition of approval of
the project, the applicant shall agree to the following:
Improve Telegraph Canyon Road between SR-12S and the EastLake
Greenstrrails boundary to 6-lane prime arterial standards.
Construct Hunte Parkway and EastLake Parkway as major Roads between
Telegraph Canyon Road and Orange Avenue.
h)
a)
b)
c)
Construct a loop ramp off southbound SR-125 f9 eastbound Telegraph
Canyon Road or extend SR-125 to East Palomar Street (which would
connect to the EastLa.lce GreenslTrails street system).
Participate in the East Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan on a fair.
share basis with other area developers.
Internal to the project. construct th~ibternalloop street as a 2-lane collector
road with adequate width to provide for 2-travellanes and a continuous left-
turn lane.
Install traffic signals at locations and at a rime determined by the City traffic
engineer.
d)
e)
f)
g)
Coordinate proposed phased develo~ment with the City to ensure
compatibility \\ith the expansion ofmumcipal transit routes and facilities (as
outlined in the Circulation Element of the SF A Plan).
Develop alternative transit, including pedestrian and bicycle trails, 'Within the
project site (as outlined in the SPA Plan). Bikeways shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with Caltrans' criteria. to comply with state
standards.
4
_CfQ-
'/; 1'/-)
/V,/, /~.
....
constructed in accordance with Caltrans' criteria. to comply with state
standards.
The timing of the implementation of these measures shall be determined by the
"quality of life" Threshold/Standards Policy adopted by the City November 17, 1987 and
by the the East Chula Vista Transponation Phasing Plan (1989). Monitoring shall be
required as part of the determination of timing.
Findin,.
With the implementation of the above specified mitigation measures, no
significant environmental impact will occur.
2) EoUce Protection
lmnact
Increased calls associated with project implementation would place
additional demands on the single patrol car serving Beat 32. Current'response times are
slower than what is considered optimali project implementation would place additional
demands on an undermanned police beat and would result in an adverse impact.
Miti~ation
The provision of additional police personnel that is underway for the Police
Department in Chula Vista (1. Kohls, ~ersonal communication) will alleviate future
development impacts to service availability. Revenues generated by this and similar
projects could be used to upgrade the staffing and facilities (including the planned police
staff room within EastLake I) of the Police Department.
If the City's threshold standards are exceeded, a moratorium on the
acceptance of tentative maps applications may be adopted by the Orowth Management
Oversight Committee (GMOC). .
Findin,
With the implementation of the above specified mitigation measures. no
significant environmental impact will occur. .
3) Fire ProtectiQD
Impact
Implementation of the project will result in additional demands for fire
protection, including expansion of Fire Department facilities. Water pressure on the
EastLake Greens site is adequate for flre protection. The Fire DeplU'tment may be required
to use pressure reduction valves or pressure reducers to provide safe water pressures and
water flows. .
Upon development of the SPA Plan for EastLake Trails, any water pressure
and water facility concerns on that property would be resolved between the Otay water
District and the Chula Vista Fire Department.
5
-I btJ -
/CJ - 17;7
--~-'-.....-....
----"'.-. -..........-~-........~....---.-
",,"',"-Joo(_~-l
~ _. -- ~
-
Findha
With the implementation of the above specified mitigation measures, no
significant environmental impact will occur.
6) Librarv Services
Inmact
DeveloJ'ment of the proposed project will result in an estimated
9.636 residents and in Increased demand on library.facilities.
MitiptiOJl
The City of Chula Vista threshold standard requirement for library facilities
is 500 square feet of fully staffed and equipped library space per 1,000 population. The
Planned Community regulations for EastLake I require that a I-acre library site near the
Village Center be reserved with the stipulation that the library site must be developed within
10 years after dedication (WESTBC 1984). Plans for the construction of the new facility
shall follow concurrently with residential development. Capital costs shall be provided
either by EastLake Development Company or the property itself through the use of public
debt mechanism tied to the property.
Eindin i
With the implementation of the above specified mitigation measures, no
significant environmental impact will occur.
7) Parks and Recreation
Impact
Based on the City's park standards and thres.hold requirements, the
projected EaStLake Greens population of 9,636 will require approximately 30.72 acres of
parkland onsite. .
Mi. .
tJianoQ
The applicant plans to provide more than 40 acres of neighborhood and
community parks within the EastLake Greens/Trails site. The parks shall be a condition of
approval for the project. An extensive pedestrian and bicycle trail system will be
constructed. An IS-hole golf course and country club is a prominent feature of the project.
Findi.n&
With the implementation of the above specified mitigation measures, the
requirements of 3 acres of park for every 1,000 residents will be met, and no significant
environmental impact will occur. .
7
- I fJ/ -
/o~/7,/
!
j
l
/
I
I
."-'" .....::. ,-,- .L..:"~':"I t..~r-.I_.c..t..
~'. l..J
C",'
\~
~
.'
8)
\
'.
\
Water Avail11bili~
Impact ,~
Based on water consumption rates and land use allocations for the pro~ed
- project, approximately 1.77 million. gallons of water will be required each day. Accor~g
, to the Otay Water District (OWO), the provision of domestic water to the EastLake
Greenstrrails projects can be provided through existing infrastructure until the 980'.Zont
pump station's capacity is reached. Additional facilities would then be required. \
~
~. .
MitilmtlgD ., ~
.'. ~. ' '" ,.- An agreement' between EastLake Development Company and two other \
;"":,~'::J'" ',major developers has been approved by the OWO Board of directors. This agreement will
,;ffS~i~ ~de financing~ for th~ ~o~trucio1i of a below-ground SO MG reservoir that will provide " \
~_:",~:-termmal storage for a muumum of five average days water supply. EastLake Development ':\
-' , has offered a site for this facility.
;
,.
, The applicant has proposed to utilize 1.3 million gallons a day of recliiinted ~..
water (to be supplied by OWD) for irrigation in order to reduce onsite domestic water
consumption. In addition to the use of reclaimed water, other water conservation measures
beyond those required by state law are presented in the SPA Plan (maintenance of
minimum water pressure levels within residential units, incorporation of drought-tolerant
and naturalized landscaping, construction of attached housing designed with common
landscaping to reduce irrigation requirements).
Adequate water storage and distribution facilities shall be constrUcted i/
conjunction with the project development. , \
J
Flndin,
Provided water is available from OWO, with the implementation of the
above specified mitigation measures, no significant environmental iinpact will occur.
~
\
.
I
9) Sewer
8
__IO;J--
/0 ~/7~~
"--'.
r ~
, "-'.
~.
',---
Mitiprion
Cumulative im~acts to the City's sewer system will be mitigated by the
development of additional facilities to be funded by the EastLake Greens Development
Company and other developers. EastLake Development Company is currently negotiating
an agreement with the City of Chula Vista. Through this agreement, monitoring will be
conducted at EastLake Development's expense to ensure that the capacity of the existing
IS-inch sewer trUnk line in Telegraph Canyon Road is not exceeded prior to the
constn1ction of alternative means to transport such sewage.
Findinl
With the implementation of the above specified mitigation measures, no
significant environmental impacts will occur.
10) HvdroloiY/Water Quality
r~a~
Grading and infilling of onsite drainages and the construction of impervious
surfaces would increase the amount of surface runoff, a potentially significant impact.
Increased runoff could generate high erosional potential from soil materials, creating deep
erosion gullies, unstable slopes, build-ups of silt deposits within drainages, at the toe of
slopes, and in stonn drains. Increase of runoff would also magnify the potential for
flooding problems downstream of the site. Potential impacts to water quality are associated
with runoff contamination.
Potential impacts to water quality are associated with the use of reclaimed
water for irrigation.
Miti2ation
Implementation of the pro~osed EastLake Greens storm drain system, as
approved by the City of Chula Vista Publ1c Works Department, would mitigate potential
adverse hydrologic/water quality effects.
State and local regulations regulate the use of reclaimed water; adherence to
the regulations would ensure that no adverse impacts would result from such use.
Findini
With the inclusion of the above specified mitigation measures, no adverse
environmental impact will occur.
. V. OTHER rssu~s
The following issues are not included in the City's Threshold/Standards.
9
--10'...
//)-/7?
.--.--,-'..~--.........- ...._,..~......- --~","-' -..., :...,-.-.
------
----- -
'--
'"
. ,
1) Visual Resources
IrTJPact
Landform Alteration. The proposed EastLake GreenslI'rails development
would change the appearance of the project site as the pastoral character of the existing
landscape would be replaced with urDan development. Landform alteration would result
from significant grading throughout the EastLake Greens site, e.g., cut slopes of up to 70
feet in height are proposed and the topographic profile of the site as a whole would be
measurably altered. Specifically, several hills would be leveled and several small interior
drainages filled to facilitate construction in higher density building areas.
Specific impacts from landfonn alteration related to buildout of the proposed
EastLake Trails site cannot be identified because grading and development plans have not
been submitted.
Views. Development of the EastLake Greens project site is not expected to
result in adverse visual impacts to onsite views, but will create both short- and long-term
visual impacts for surrounding areas. The existing and proposed above-ground water
tanks would be partially concealed by siting and landscaping. The SDO&E transmission
line extends over several thousand feet of the EastLake Greens site and would be visible to
several proposed residential areas.
No potentially significant visual quality impacts are anticipated with buildout
of EastLake Trails.
Scenic Resources. The designated and potential scenic roadways in the
project vicinity would not be adversely affected by the proposed project. Development of
the project would increase local night-sky illumination levels, but because the site is a
considerable distance from the Mt. Palomar and Mt. Laguna observatories such
illumination should not adversely affect activities at those observatories. This is considered
an insignificant adverse impact on a project level and a contribution to a significant
cumulative effect.
Mitigation
The project has incorporated extensive measures to avoid potential visual
impacts. These measures include the designation of 214.3 acres of open space and
recreational use, comprehensive plans for landscaping, grading, circulation, architectural
and site design, lighting, fencing, and signage. Compliance with the guidelines in the
EastLake Greens SPA Plan regarding these measures would ensure that significant adverse
visual impacts within the EastLake Greens are minimized or eliminated. Possible
exceptions include residential views associated with the above-ground water tanks and the
SDG&E transmission lines. Recommended mitigation measures for these impacts include
additional landscaping for the tanks, and careful siting of residential units to minimize
. views of the t~ks and lines.
Additional environmental review will be required for EastLake Trails.
Endini
No significant visual impacts are expected to occur with complete
implementation of the SPA Plan and recommended mitigation me~sures. \VhiIe the
contribution to night-sky illumination is cumulatively significant. the site, as noted above,
10
/!J'~/?7
-lOt -
T
J
" ------
. "
,-.
is a considerable distance from the Mt. Palomar and Mt. Laguna observatories and such
illumination should not adversely affect activities at those observatories.
2) Geolorry/Soils
Impact
No major geologic constraints to development are known; the engineering
properties of the soil and bedroc1c materials, topography, surface drainage, and anticipated
relatively low degree of seismic risk offer favorable conditions for site development.
Potentially significant concerns include compressible alluvial and colluvial soils, expansive
clay beds, and the generation of oversized material from cemented bedrock zones.
Mitiprion
Implementation of sound construction practices, in conformance with
existing Buildin, Code standards will mitigate any potential effects of compressible alluvial
and colluvial solls. Disposal of oversized rocks generated from cemented bedrock zones
should comply with specifications identified by a geotechnical consultant
Findin ~
With the inclusion of the above specified mitigation measures, no adverse
environmental impact will occur.
3) Bioloiical Resources
Impact
No significant impacts to existing habitats within EastLake Greens are
anticipated. Impacts to biological resources related to the Salt Creek drainage within
EastLake Trails cannot be assessed until the development of the EastLake Trails SPA Plan
and Tentative Map. . -"
Mi. .
ni8non
No mitigation measures are required for EastLake Greens. Mitigation
measures if any, will be recommended for EastLake Trails following the assessment of the
effects of the EastLake Trails SPA Plan and Tentative Map, Le. as pan of subsequent
environmental review.
Findini
No significant impacts to biological resources are anticipated as a result of
the planned development of EastLake Greens. Potential impacts to biological resources of
. the Salt Creek drainage will be evaluated as part of subsequent environmental review.
4) Paleontolo~cal Resources
rnwact
There is potential for adverse impacts to significant paleontological
resources during construction of the EastLake Greensrrrails project. The significance of
these impacts cannot be detennined.
11
,/67 --/72)
- 10 J'
...-- .-..~..,.....,....~-,. -~- .......,.......-.__._--'~.,.
. -~
_ '. ._.__.r__~~""'~
o
"
Mitiprion
A qualified paleontologist shall monitor grading activities during
construction of the project.
Eindin i
With the inclusion of the above specified mitigation measures, no adverse
environmental impact will occur.
5) ~
Imnact
Potentially signifienat impacts associated with th EastLake Greens project
were calculated using the Federal Highway Administration Stamina 2.0 Noise Prediction
model. In residential areas adjacent to EastLake Parkway, between the northern and
southern entry roads and the park proposed adjacent to the high school. noise levels would
exceed 6SdB(A). Exterior noise levels above 65 dB(A) CNEL are considered incompatible
with both residential and parkland areas but compatible with commercial uses. These areas
would also experience significant interior noise impacts.
Miti~ation
The applicant shall constrUct walls or berms of a height determined to be
effective in reducing noise exposure to acceptable levels onsite. Anenuation of noise levels
at the park shall be achieved through raising the pad elevations near the contributing
roadways by two feet instead of incorporating a barrier.
Additional noise analysis shall be required for the ares designated as Future
Urban and for EastLake Trails once development plans with projec~ details are available. .
An interior noise analysis shall be required for any residential areas exposed
to exterior noise levels of 60 CNEL or greater.
Findini
With the inclusion of the above specified mitigation measures, no adverse
environmental impact will occur.
V. INSIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
In accordance with the evaluation provided in EIR-86-4 and previous
documentation. the project would not result in any significant impacts in the issue areas
. below; these issues have therefore not been discussed above:
1) Land Use (4.1)
2) Mineral Resource.s (City of Chula Vista EIR 84-1)
3) Archaeological! Historical Resources (City of Chula Vista EIR 84-1)
12
Jf) --/'7;;
_/o(p-
.....-...:,......---~~-;---"--._..
-....-:-...~~- .,,;----..;;...-
o
o
"'-~
.'
5} Energy Supplies and Conservation (4.3.8)
6) Solid Waste Disposal (4.3.9)
6) Socioeconomic Factors (4.11)
VI. THE RECORD
For the purposes of CEQA and these findings, the record of the Planning
Commission and City Council relating to these actions include the following:
1) Air Pollution Control District (APCD), 1986, Progress in Air Pollution Control
During 198', Draft. San Diego,June.
2} Atwood,J.1980. The United Sta.res distribution of the California Black-tailed
Gnatcatcher. Western Birds, 11:65-78.
3) California Air Resources Board (ARB), 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, Air Quality Data.
4) California Department ofFish and Game. 1980. At the Crossroads. A report on
California's endangered and rare fish and wildlife. The Resources Agency.
5) California Department of Fish and Game. 1985. Designated endangered or rare
plants. The Resources Agency, June 19.
6) Cinti and Associates, 1986, Draft EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA)
Plan, prepared for EastLake Development Company, September 11.
7) City of Chula Vista, 1974, Scenic Highway Element of the Chula Vista General
Plan.
8) City of ChuIa Vista, 1982, ChuIa Vista General Plan, EastLake Policy Plan, City
Council Resolution No. 10996, September 7. - .
9) City of Chula Vista, 1982, Housing Element.
10) City of Chula Vista, 1987, Policy: Threshold/Standards and Growth ~1anagement
Oversight Committee (November).
11) City of Chula Vista, 1989, Draft Fire Station Master Plan (March).
12) City of Los Angeles, 1983, Energy Action Plan.
13) County of San Diego, 1975 (revised 1983), Scenic Highway Element of the San
Diego County General Plan.
14) County of San Diego, 1984, San Diego County General Plan - 1995, Pan 11,
Regional Land Use Element and Map, August 22.
15) County of San Diego, 1984, San Diego County General Plan - 1995. Part x..Xlll.
Dtay Subregional Plan, August 22.
16) County of San Diego, 1985. The Zoning Ordinance, San Diego County,
November.
13
/ I \y:.-71
/O~/ t> t/
_101-
:-------..
\....... ..
~
\
'"'-
-'
17) . Evertt, W.T., 1979. Threatened, Declining nnd Sensitive Bird Species in San
Diego County San Diego Audubon Society. sketches,lune.
18) Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, 1986, Housing Vacancy Survey, San
Diego MSA, Survey date October 1985, June.
19) Goldwasser, Sharon, 1978. Distribution, Reproductive Success and Impacts of
Nest Parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds on Least Bell's Vireo, California
Department of Fish and Game, The Resources Agency, July.
20) Grinnell, 1. and A.H. Miller. 1944, The distribution of the birds of California.
Pacific Coast Avifauna 27.
21) HBW Associates Inc., 1986, Master Plan for the Chula Vista Public Library Draft,
Decembe:'.
22) Holland, R.F., 1986. Preliminary description of the ten'estrial natural communities
of California. State of California, The Resources Agency.
23) Leighton and Associates, 1979, Geotechnical Reconnaissance of an Area
Approximately Sevcn Miles East of Chula Vista, San Diego County, California and
Iminediately West of Otay Reservoirs, Project No. 179398-1.
24) P&D Technologics, 1989. Draft EIR City of Chula Vista General Plan Update,
March.
25) Remsen, V. 1978. The species of special concern list: and annotated list of
declining or vulnerable birds in California. Western Field Ornithologist. Museum
of Venebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley.
26) Salata, L.R. 1984. Status of the Least Bell's Vireo on Camp Pendleton, California:
Report on Research done in 1984. Unpublished. Repon., U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Laguna Niguel, California.
27) San Diego Association of Governments (SAI\'TJ)AG), 1984, A Housing Study for
the City of Chula Vista.
28) SANDAG, 1985, Final Series 6 Regional Growth Forecasts, 1980-2000.
29) SANDAG, 1986, Regional Economic Development Guide and Extract
(EDGE) Volumes 1 and 11, August.
30) SANDAG, 1987. Draft Series 7 Regional Growth Forecasts.
31) San Diego Soils Engineering, Inc., 1986, PreliminaI)' Geotechnical Investigation,
EastLake Greens, Chula Vista, California, prepared for EastLake
DevelopmentCompany. November 17.
32) Smith, J.P., Jr. and R. U. York 1984. Inventory of rare and endangered vascular
plants of California. California Native Plant Society, special publication no. 1
(3rd Edition)
14
/I?- /8"/
'-IO<{/
_ _ _.,...__.........~...._ -... ._--..-.r___' r-
. __T _~~ _ + . .____,.-,.~_____..- .-..---"-'
---.
r""'-
----
,......r_
"
33) University of California, Agricultural Extension Service, 1970, Climate of San
Diego County; Agricultural Relationship, November.
34) U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1973. Soil Survey
San Diego Area, California, December.
35) U.S. Environmental Proteetion Agency, Compilation of Air Pollution Emission
Factors, AP-~2, Supplement 7.
36) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1980. Federal Register. 45(242):82480-82569.
37) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: 1985a. Endangered and threatened wildlife and
plants: Review of plant taxa for listing as endangered or threatened species; Notice
of review; Federal Register, 50(188):39526-39527, September 27.
38) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986. Endangered and threatened wildlife and
plants; Least Bell's vireo; Detemrlnation of endangered status, and reopening of
comment period in the proposed critical habitat designation. Federal Register
51(85):16474-16483.
39) WESTEC Services, Inc. 1982, EastLake Final Environmental Impact Report,
prepared for the City of Chula Vista, February.
40) \VESTEC Services, Inc., 1985, EastLake I Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan
Final Environmental Impact Report, prepared for the City of Chula Vista, January.
41) Wilson Engineering, 1989a, Master Plan of Sewerage for Salt Creek I, March.
42) Wilson Engineering, 1989b, Overview of Sewer Services for Salt Creek Ranch
Projcct, April.
Also included in the record are the following studies prepared for the EastLake
GreenstTrails Planning Program: , -
1) Draft EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, Cinti & Associates
(May 1989).
2) Draft EastLake I Planned Community District Regulations, Second Amendment
(March 1989). , .
3) City of Chula Vista Public Facilities Financing Plan: EastLake Greens (June 1989).
4) Draft East Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan (June 1989)
5) EastLake Greens Development Agreement (in preparation)
, 5) Residential Design Guidelines: EastLake Greens SPA (May 1989)
Also included as part of the Planning Commission and City Council record are the
following:
1) Final Supplemental EIR-86-4, EastLake Greens and EastLake Trails (June 1989)
15
, /...?/1 ~/ 0- Cl
/ j}/ O~
-/09-
. ~
; . .l'='
------:
.r--....
-
y-
2)
Documentary and oral evidence presented to the Planning Commission anJ/or City
Council during public hearings on EIR-86-4 and the EastLake Greensffrails project
Matters of common knowledge to the Planning Commission and/or City Council,
such as
3)
a. The City of Chula Vista General Plan (1970)
b. The City of Olula Vista Draft General Plan (1989)
c. The Zoning Ordinance of the City of Chula Vista as most recently amended
d. The Municipal Code of the City of ChuIa Vista
e. All other fonnally adopted policies and ordinances
16
-I/{) --
/tJ ~/6J
PROPOSED STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act requires that the
decision maker in any project balance the benefits of a proposed project
against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve
the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning COlTlllission of the City of Chula Vista desires
to recommend such findings to the City Council of the City of Chula Vista to
assist in their consideration of the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has previously found that one unavoidable
significant impact would be experienced should the project be approved, namely
an air quality impact due to the failure of the project to be considered
earlier in the SANDAG Series V and VI Growth Forecasts;
NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commissions resolves that the following
project features provides benefits to the City and its citizens justifying the
approval of the project notwithstanding the air quality impact described in
the Environmental Impact Report;
1. The project contains a commitment to public infrastructure of
extraordi nary si ze or capaci ty servi ng the Eastern Terri tori es through the
requirements of the Transportation Phasing Plan, and the Public Facilities
Financing Plan wherein the project pledges to build facilities to accommodate
its impact and cumulative impacts while preserving levels of public service
consistent with the IIQuality of Life Thresholdll earlier adopted by the City
Council
2. The project contains a significant commitment to open space, public
and quasi-public land uses including, but not limited to, a one hundred and
sixty (160) acre golf course, thirty-six (36) acres of park and recreational
facilities, fifty-nine (59) acres for school facilities and seventeen (17)
acres of public and quasi-public uses; in the aggregate, thirty two percent
(32%) of the total project area.
3. The project helps fulfill the need for church sites in the near
future by providing a site within the EastLake Village Center and pledging to
develop a church master plan.
4. The project advances Chula Vista's environmental goals by developing
water conservati on and recl amati on programs, mass transi t faci 1 i ti es and an
extensive trail system.
WPC 6450P
--III...
)0-/%'1/-
I ,....,'..;.l~. w""'
t.!T .~. CKrH:rrr at A IL
1".1'.. ';A'!'!ON HO};!-:ORING 1-.JiD 1U:P.. ..TINe; PROGRAM
('-
The follo~in9 ~onitorinq progr~m is designed to insure compliance
~ith ~he California Environmental Quality Act and insure citigation
~easures are i~plemented. The tollowing identifies ho~ the City
of Chula Vista ,,'ill monitor IT.itigation measures and report the
findings of such. monitoring.
KIT:GATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The t01lowin9 identifies a step by step proce~s ~hich the City ot
Chula Vista will utilize to monitor and report on the implementation
of miti9ation m.asur~~.
1. All mitigation measures shall become conditions of a prcject
app~oval identifying ~hen the condition (mitigation) shall be
implemented, i.e., prier to pe~it issuance, prior to
recordation, during project construction, before occupancy,
or after occupancy.
2. ?roject approvals shall be by resolution or Notice of Oecision
(NOD) identifying all conditions including a special section
identifying all mitigation measures as conditions. Said
resolution shall be rou~ed to all City departments and
affected agencies.
3.
Upon application for impl ernenta tion permits (grading,
building, enc=oach~ent, utility connections, and the like),
the resolutio~ of approval or NOD with the rnitiga~ion shall
be attached to the constructi on plans for both in-house
(i~spector) use a~j on-~~te (co~t=Qctor) plans.
~
~. Should prcject i~ple~e~tation pa~its re~uire monitoring
curing construction, the mitigetion shall be identifiQd on
the construction plans for the ir.spector and contractor.
5. P=ior to issuance cf any i~p:ernentation pe=rr.its, the
resolution 0: epprova2 shall. be reviewed to determine if any
co~citions (mitigation; requir~ irnple~er.tation. This revie~
shall be by the Planning . Department. Staff ....ill
insure that such conc:tio~s have been co~plied with prior to
the issuance of the permits.
6. Prior to s~af! signing o~~ en City forms repo=ting that the
pe:;nit is co;r,j:)lete::, the cor.di~.ior.s (r.-.itigation) shall be
reviewed by staff to ir.sure co~~:iance.
7 .
?rior to project occu~~ncy 0= cornpletion being app=ovee by
~~e Ci:y all C~~y Departna~~s shall s~sn o~f on the occupancy
care. Each Depar~rent shall insure co~?liance o! the
co~c:tio~s {~it:9ati~~; ~~a~ rela~e ~o ~hat Depar~~en~. The
c~....._~u:-::t::. :~~~~:C.t=,,'T...'~ ::'e;?a:"~;."'~:'"'::. :;:-:2::. insu~E! .t.ha-:' ~~e
~:~iga~:c~ ~~a3~=es ~3\e ~~~~ ~e~, i~clu~:~g ~hose meas~~es
"C.h a': :7. a y rec:~.:. :-.,.::: ~~:-;~: a c: -:;.:: y ~ :":?-..: ~ a nc co::'...~en~/ a ccep-:'3~::: e
~~:o~ ~o si~~~~; c:~ O~ ~he o~c~~Q~c: care.
?A~
-"-",,,
? ~~ I c .~ ./ :- !.~ ~ - ~ , ..: :' ~. ~ = ~}. - ~ - ;: ..f )
l //J~)K5
-If/}.-
'"
JUt-, 12 '89
PHGE.04
kny conditions (citi;8t~C:'l) that requi:-e Illonitorinc; after
projec~ co~pletion shall be ~he respons1~i11ty of the
Pl ann; ng Department. The Oepartzr.ent shall
require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other
torms of guarantee) with ~he City. These funds shall be used
by the City to retain consultants and or pay for City staff
ti~e to ~onitor ana report on the ~iti9ation measure for the
required period of time. city related projects th~t have
conditions reflecting mitigation ~easures will not have to
post any deposi ts. Cor.;pl iance of the 1::i tigation measures
shall be insured by the Pl ann; ng Department and
other agencies, if applicable.
': 26
a .
~
In those instance requiring lonq term project monitoring, the
applicant shall provide the City vith a plan tor monitoring
the mitigation activities a~ the project site and reporting
the monitoring results to ~he City. Said plan shall identity
the reporter as an individual quali!ied to kno~ whether the
particular mitigatio~ measure has been impleme:'lted. The
monitoring/reporting plan ShAll conform to the City'S
mitigation monitoring program ana shall be approved by the
Pl ann; ng Department Di rec":or pr ior to t.he issuance of
building permits.
9. All monitoring ~nd repo~ting documentation shall be maintained
in the Primary projec~ !ile ~ith the Depar~ment having the
original authority for processing the project, and a copy of
the monitoring and reporting documentation shall be
transmitted to the agen=y requi~ing the ~itigation.
,
10.
Although
insuring
Planning
prior to
various City depa~tments ~ill be involved ~ith
compliance .....i-..:h rr'::'":igat.io~ measures, the
Dep~rt.~ent ~ill ~eview all ~itigation ~easures
grar.ting occupancy to double cheCK compliance.
','"
/
/O'-/5?
_II 3 J
/-' H ',' t: . ...1:,.
.I ,_,Ii ' - ;~ ~ 1.. , .. A--E/,D 1, p Ul1kJ1;aA / 0:; n~.
. ~
dlVIRONMENTAL MlTIGATIOU MONITORING CHECKLIST ,~.
c: ... !
... 0
~...
~
utollO
1110....
~ .~~ ...
e-'"
JtIoo4 .
~U"" "
<! .,!~ S
.- ...u" II
-I"') :; 'a c: · '0
~....... ! .- "
:: ... . ~ c
>< "- 0_"... ., .,
u., Jttl
-'IO~~ ... . 'a
I f'"
"""c... "=-
: c IN " ~ S .,
aI: I) .~
o · ., s: II";"
l"") ... - 0 I ~
~." It...
\ol') Q, 3 ~ ".. .
co - ..u c c g
N ,-~"OcX 0,,"
c ~ .o~
oQo,c ~."
V') ! . II I.!:: ~
N ~
I !u:;'8 c:
,..., 0 ;2~;o
ex) u o~ u
.. .... - .... .. '-
~ ~ a - ~ .~IS
ex ; 0" " l'
..... e .....
UJ CliO ... C . - ...
...... u .... ~ = I ~J8!
N 0 o c.... 0
I t;3 uea.ll ... tl
0\ II U e " ".... .......110
co Q J:"'OA: . ......~
~...u . ...... ...
u 0 .... U 1-4 1,*....2
Q.. ~ sje:=
C.l:l -- .Ij~
...... .s-JZ
0
(,.) ..J ,s.,_ 10 ~-
~ ~ c: coe: .
z !~.!2 II ;::ule
0 ....
.... ~ S-O:3
, .. ... 10 t""' 2--
~ .... a.-.... rt"\ g ... c:I. e
Cl o II ~ r:: ~ · J
~ z Q, > .... i . ~
<<l 0 ... " II .... i
z: u o....j... . e &
i u = 2 ... C II
= .$11 .... OIlJ'"
0 II) \0.4- ~
~ Sc..... A. - ~
..J = t 0 ,Q -
E: 1-4 ;1 II --- -- ~g.!:::
w 1'-1
- ...
U!:II ., it:.
2!.~. Ii i ~
:3!.S , , - .-
- II r: It ~ ~
i.......~ /
tJ5U . - g S
c !. ~f......
CO.,"
o . ~ f c ~ .. 0
II . e
:: S o-.o.,,,,!
- 0'\ ~~.~ :-1:2
co ... ...." ...,S
::I: 0'1 ....>3.... ... 0 C .
u - toI C * . 0 III
<: -0., .... .:2 c:
L..,j .. U - :3'" .! '"
a: ,... ...l;c t' .C:~ c
- ::)! :II...
CI ,...el m u .... ,Q
ex:: III lo.4"'0 ., II ....
0 ~ c.... a.- Il . ... .... ...
0:: ~~t.:... " ~ "'!.8C:U
u c a .,
;z: C II :l :I II c -!c:....
c e "0 II C" t c: '" a ~tJ"O
z ... Il f ." sn:ll:9...
Z ~~lllQ ::l a Il
< m . 1/ C 0
"'0 ""J~
C c: II <lJ ;: ...,
~ ~ 8 ~ II oS;; " .., Cl. II II !
E II '-
.. '.J ... 0 u.!c-
.. t.J ~:1-=S
t.J ... C 1'0 II . . Q.
~ ..J n 8 ""'>> -.c 0..
~ ~ ........Ilt... 0 ..... g o .0 0.. roo ..
= :II . llQ c: .... < "" C ."
Z o :1 0 ~ .... ..
c: ... 0..- S ~ c
..:a - S · c CJ /v').-/y/~ ... II !.
t ~ - .... ~ If ~ .... ..
:. 0 . ., .... V"l . - .. ,..,
WJ 0 ..... l.o oJ !.'C . .... I .c
Q :r. .. .. ..... . . ~ ~ " r1
0.. ~-e U H ~ . . . ,......E
" . .. ~..
- - ",.. ,... ~.
c.. 01( ... 0 ... u ... c. J ., ,
. ~ --~~- ---~~~._~....... ~---
J 1...1 j 4 !...:. O~ j...;..:.., F'H'7lE . 06
, i
~~
a...
8
!i .
ii
:>....
.t
-
B
ii:
8
I
il " .J
f f .J ., ., .
-"- '" .f f ., 1~ . ,
A: ..... ..... ... ~ g: ~
~ ~ p, ~
~
. . . . .
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
It? --//1>7 -~-
g ~~ B f~ ~~ ~
E ~li . hi h ~I sl
~ :;j B ~ ~.. ;li..~
~ ~ i"j .~ ~ !J ~ l3 ~ ti ~B
E a! 2!' ~. ~ i "8 i j :J i 8 ...
~ .Jh '01 :afi R~. ~~g :~.
j ~. ~8l ~~ -E~:; jp :!~ ll~
c j .~ ~ .~B ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 I '9 ~ il ::: t! ~ 8' t-
o 8 ~ ... 0 lIS 0 8 ~ :a E .... ~ "C....
"j S II) f: "j '& " I ~) .,.... e @j ; ~
~ .3 Ul :s .5 :; 0 ~ .~ ,'~ t l;' IW 8 ~ e.~ 'r:: ~
.~ ;1 = .... ~;~ ~ 41 ~ 11 8...... ~ Q. & I .c !. !!l
"~ I ci! 8 ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ III ~ I i ~ ~ b c; e ~ ~'c.!
. 0
P"1 N
" 0
M ..
~
o~
Q.~
...
1~
t~ci
~~~
8c.... ~
~:;1
c fI).~
~O~Ei
"';a
~....
E~~
~] &
11\
. ...
N .B.s
15 II.
t'U J
ore! fj.~g
~ G) ~~ ~
Uo~ ~i-o
sas CUo Iw
i ~ ~ 0
!!lO .c: I:
.!: ~iji
0...0" 11 C /0
cu2 OIW
.~ ~ ! .~ ~
~"" p..~,^
.
o
....
JL.I" 12 ',;'~ j~:~:
F'H'71E .0-:'
'. ~
"'"
j
,""'" Ci-
B
~
].1
'51
::--....
t
~
~
6
\
I
n.,
~J ~
I'
I l'
f I
~ ~
f
ii:
~
f
~ .1 ~'II i i~1 1*1
:i~~ II jt ] ]i; i:~f
I~.I Ii ~~ i ~~I u~sl
l! d ~ i I ~ .~~ B 0 I ~
j 8~i~ ~~ !~~ ~ ilB BE;j
'i 8 ~ R. 8. B :~'2 ~ .~.~..~ i'~ i .
~~ ~ ~ b~~ r ~~c~ t~ ~
a ~ ~ ~ .2 ~ ~ c: i:: ~1 g S 5 Q, ~ , E.~ ] ~
.,.,j I 0 'g ~ ~ j ..-4 ~ 8 ':1;S i i .... i .5 ~ 0... S
~ , ~ 1.0 ~ ~ .Q 6- ':d ~ ,j.,j '-= QI .,.,j
.~ !.S'~ ~ ~ ~.g; ~ .~~ ~ 8 :5 ~'a
~ a~' ~ a~ 8 B ~ ~~~ ~~....&~
.~ a l:: B 8 i ~ i 2 ~ ~ ~'s 8;: ~ ~ 2 to 8
.
....
...
. .
~ :l
. .
.. '^
.... r'1
~ /tJ --/cYi ~
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS FOR THE
EASTLAKE LAND SWAP GPA (GPA-92-03)
(Not contained in this packet.)
//J~/c;tJ
~~,()
COUNCIL INFORMATION MEMO
December 3, 1993
FROM:
The Honorable Mayor and 70uncil
John Goss, City Manager ,~.
Robert A. Leiter, Director of Plannin~
TO:
VIA:
SUBJECT:
Additional Information for the City Council Meeting of December 7, 1993
Attached is a copy of the Preliminary Fiscal Impact Analysis for the EastLake Land Swap and
EastLake Greens General Plan Amendments (Item # 12 for the December 7, 1993, City Council
Meeting). A summary of the information contained in this document has been included in the
agenda statement you have already received for the meeting.
RAL:DEB/nr
Attachment
/o'~/(?/
Economic Strategies Group
ESG
REPORT
@December 1993
. FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
OF EASTLAKE GREENS and
EASTLAKE LAND SWAP
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN AND PROPOSED
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
Submitted to:
EastLake Development Company
900 Lane Avenue, Suite 100
Chula Vista, California 91914
(619) 421-0127
/ i) ,~/~\:J-
2702 North 44th Street, Suite 102A
· Phoenix, Arizona 85008
.
(602) 957-8071
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................... 1
1.1 Summary of Results ....................................... 1
2.0 DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS .......................... 4
2.1 Project Demographics ..................................... 4
3.0 IMP ACT ON THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ...................... 6
3.1 Revenues ............................................... 6
3.2 Expenditures ............................................ 10
3.3 Net Fiscal Impact ......................................... 12
APPENDIX
) tJ-//}
11
Figure 1
Figure 2
LIST OF FIGURES
EastLake Greens & Land Swap: Existing General Plan & Proposed
Amendments; City of Chula Vista, 1993 Dollars ...............
EastLake Greens & Land Swap: Existing General Plan & Proposed
Amendments; Net Fiscal Balance Compared to Existing General
Plan; City of Chula Vista, 1993 Dollars ......................
) /7-/72-/
I
III
2
3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This analysis demonstrates the fiscal impacts of the existing General Plan and General Plan
Amendment alternatives for the development of two properties: the EastLake Greens, and
the EastLake Land Swap. The impacts on the operation and maintenance budgets of the
City of Chula Vista is detailed over a 15 year period. The development phase of these
projects varies from 3 to 10 years, depending on the alternative chosen. The remaining years
included in the analysis depict the impacts of the completed projects.
The information and observations contained in this report are based on our present
knowledge of the components of the developments, and of the current socioeconomic and
fiscal conditions of the City of Chula Vista. Projections made in this report are based on
hypothetical assumptions, and current public finance policies. However, even if the
assumptions outlined in this report were to occur, there will usually be differences between
the projections and the actual results because events and circumstances frequently do not
occur as expected.
1.1 SUMMARY OF RESULTS
The net annual impacts for each of the four development alternatives are shown in Figure
1. In the case of. EastLake Greens, both alternatives yield a negative net accumulated
balance at the end of the 15 year period. The proposed General Plan Amendment for
EastLake Greens has a larger negative impact than the existing General Plan alternative,
($1,302,436) versus ($214,342), given the higher density of residential development.
The EastLake Land Swap has a negative impact of ($617,863) under the existing General
Plan alternative which is for a strictly residential development. However, the General Plan
Amendment alternative which includes the addition of 741,000 square feet of office and
commercial/retail space yields a significant positive net impact of $4,768,528 cumulated over
the 15 year analysis period. The positive impact of the amended EastLake Land Swap
project more than offsets the negative impact of the amended EastLake Greens project.
Figure 2 shows the difference between the amended and existing General Plan alternatives
for each of the two properties. Over the 15 year period, the combined EastLake projects
would yield a positive net impact of $3,466,092 under the amended alternatives versus a
combined impact of ($832,205) under the existing General Plan. The difference of
$4,298,298 in net revenues to the City strongly supports the General Plan Amendment
development alternatives for the EastLake properties.
The balance of this report describes the assumptions and results of the fiscal impact model
in detail for each of the four development alternatives. Note that all remaining tables
referenced in this analysis are included in the Appendix.
/
;1/" )CJ ~
/ I{, ~- / _,_~,
/ U {
1
.-4
;
~;
~<
CI)!iJ<
~CI)~
~~>~
i~~~
~~~~
O~O~
~o.;>-_
~i~
~o
~
CI)
~
~
~
;:J
c
""'"
r;a;.,
.... 8
ZQ.) fa
c ca
j ~
~ = ~
~ ~:6
CI)~
i
~
~
':d
~
... 8
fa ~ ij
s:: ca
e ~
5
0''''
~!J
i
~
~
~
... 8
~ ij
-a
~
5
i
~ . '"
~ Ij
o~
~
~
... 8
~~
ij ~
s::
~
5 I '"
o s:l a
~i:6
o
~
~
--"<tC'l1rl00~r-r-C'lC'lC'l"<tC'l_
0\-0\00000 NC'lr-"<tIrl-Nr-
1rl0\-C'lr-"<t ~ooNIrlOO~O\\O
o ..; ~ r-: ...... ~. 0\ 0\ r-: vi ~ ...... 0 00 r-:
Irl\OO\~O\ r-~-0\0\0\0\0000
~~~Z;Z;~~~~~~~~~~
\0 0\ r-O\ 00 \0 0\1rl 0\ 00 00 00 00 00 00
000\~r-r-r-0\"<tr-1rl1rl1rl1rl1rl1rl
N. oq, . ~ "!. C"l r-: ~ ~ Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl
\O~Irl"<tooNr-O-------
Vl O\C'lVlO\"<tr-O\------
N Vl\O\O\Or-r-r-oooooooooooo
~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'"
~
5
~
r-0-M~"<t0\~~080MOO\
r--Vl"<t\O\OVlr- ~ -r-ooM
oooor-C'l"<too"<tM oo-"<too"<tM
8'~oOC'iooOr-:o~8'vi~"""8~
~Vl~re:2~g:::M~~~~~N
~~~~~~-:....:....:...:...:...:...:...:...:
~~~~~~~~~
Irl ~ .-.. ,,-... ..-... .-.. ,-... .-.. .-.. ...-.. ,-... .-.. .-.. .-.. .-..
0\ oor-r-~\ONVl"<tONNO\Vl
r--O\ Vl -r-NVlr-r-r-
~ ~ "<to ~ -. . C"l ~ Vl q "!. ~ "!. ~ "!.
~ r-r-ooi~~"<tVlVl\O\Or-r-
-N~ VlVlVlVlVlVlVlVlVl
~~~ ~~~~~~~~~
'-''-''-''-''-''-''-''-''-''-''-''-'''-'
oo.....'lIl:t.........."f"l.............................................
$8~~~~~~~~~~~~~
a~~iIIiiiiiiiii
'"
Q.)
::s
5
>
~
~Irl\O~"<t8~0\~r-M~O\Mr-
~ ~;;:;. ~ ~ r-: r-::::. Vl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~:t~~~~~~l;~~~~~~
-N~~ ~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~
~.-.. ~ ~ ~ r::- ~ \0 cD \0 ~ S ~ S ~:::'
"<t\Oo~"<tooOOooVlO\NMN
"<t"<t~~Vl"<t~-oo\O~-ooVl
..c 0\ vS vS 00 0\ vS r-: 00 00 0\ 8. ...... ...... C'i
z;~t;~~~~~~~~_s:s:s:
'-"'-''-'''-''-''-''-''-''-'''-'''-'...".~~.".
'-" '-' '-' '-'
r-~O\r-MMr-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-
r-~M---"<t"<t"<t~~~~~~
ooMVlOoooor-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-
.no\s8'.nvi'''':''':'''':'''':''':''':''':''':''':
~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'"
Q.)
5
~
~OMr-VlO\~-~O\r-~\Or-Vl
~O\\O-r-\O ~ Vlo\VlN-M
oor-Or-~M ~ ooO~\OO\M
o\o\VSo\r-:VSvi..;~C'iC'i......oo\o\
\o\QN.................................................oo
-M~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~QO.-....-....-....-...,-..".-....-...-...-...-...-....-....-..
~-~~Mtt~~~~8~~~~
. ~ oq, q ~ ~ "!. oq, q ("i, ~. Vl r-: ~ q
~ r-MM~ooooO\O\O\O\O\O\o
~.........................................................N
......,~~~~~~~~~~~~
'-"'-''-'''-'''-''-'''-''-''-''-'''-''-'
~8r-~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~VlVlVlr-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-
~";~C'iC'iC'ir-:r-:r-:r-:r-:r-:r-:r-:r-:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'"
Q.)
5
~
O\~Vlr-Vl~~MVlM""O\$~~
VlC'lr-~ooO\It'l\Or-O\-~O\o\O
~. -. Vl Vl oq, C"l q oq, "!. ~. C"l ~ . oq, .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
fIII}..............................................................................
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~
>-
~
E-<
/ /;' -/~/ip
O-M~~Vl
......M('f'1~\t"l\Of'""oOOO\...................................
00
C'l
Vl
00
\0
r-
i
r-
~
-
~
o
-
~
~
vS
~
vi
-
~
......
~
\0
00
r-:
-
\0
~
......,
~
r-
~
~
-
~
~
Vl
-
0\
"<t
vi
~
(0
~
~
C'i
o
C"l
-
~
......,
~
-
~
00
vi
~
~
Vl
~
Vl
i
......
M
~
..;
-
M
~
......,
~
~
-
~
00
~
C'i
~
~
e
o
~
.,
CI)
(,)
's
o
~
~
CI)
~
0\
~
r-
oq,
-
~
FIGURE 2
EASTLAKE GREENS & LAND SWAP
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN & PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
NET FISCAL BALANCE COMPARED TO EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
CI1Y OF CHULA VISTA
1993 DOLLARS
Combined
Year EastLake Greens EastLake Land Swap EastLake Projects
1 ($21,140) $41,097 $19,957
2 ($50,261) $64,247 $13,986
3 ($68,595) $110,582 $41,987
4 ($74,271) $165,179 $90,909
5 ($75,655) $229,983 $154,328
6 ($76,368) $290,732 $214,364
7 ($77,824) $333,015 $255,191
8 ($78,452) $393,270 $314,818
9 ($79,065) $472,342 $393,277
10 ($79,663) $550,346 $470,683
11 ($80,247) $549,161 $468,914
12 ($80,817) $548,004 $467,187
13 ($81,373) $546,986 $465,613
14 ($81,916) $546,102 $464,185
15 ($82,447) $545,346 $462,899
Total ($1,088,093) $5.386.392 $4,298,298
Source: Economic Strategies Group, 1993.
/1/)- J~ 7
2.0 DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
EastLake Greens
The first project, EastLake Greens, includes a total of 74 acres. The existing General Plan
would allow for 234 low-medium density single family housing units. The development
would also include 13 acres of public space and 9 acres of streets. Table 1A details the
project components showing the size and average market price of each product type in the
development. The proposed General Plan Amendment would reduce the number of low-
medium density single family units in this development to only 14, and add 700 units of
medium-high and high density residential. This would allow for the addition of 17 acres of
open space, along with 14 acres of public space, as shown in Table 1B.
The phasing of these alternative projects is detailed in the absorption schedules developed
by EastLake Development Company. The existing General Plan alternative would develop
over a 3 year period with a high level of absorption in the first two years, 100 units annually,
and 34 units in the third year, as shown in Table 2A The General Plan Amendment
absorption would extend over a 4 year period. The level of development is expected to peak
in the first year at 314 residential units, and taper off substantially over the remaining 3
years (Table 2B). For the purpose of this analysis, absorption represents new units being
sold (or rented), and occupied.
EastLake Land Swap
The EastLake Land Swap project is strictly a residential development under the existing
General Plan which includes a total of 161 acres. It would include 772 housing units of low
to medium density residential. The project would also include 9 acres of open space and
35 acres of streets and other public space. The development description is shown in Table
Ie along with average sizes and prices for the housing units in this alternative. The General
Plan Amendment alternative would increase the density of residential development, allowing
for 848 housing units, and add a nonresidential component. The nonresidential component
would include 221,000 square feet of professional/administrative space and 520,000 square
feet of commercial retail, as shown in Table 1D.
The expected absorption schedule for the first alternative is shown in Table 2C. The project
would be developed over a 5 year period at a rate of 225 units per annually in the first 2
years, tapering off to 60 units in the final year. In the second alternative shown in Table 2D,
the absorption schedule would be extended to a 10 year period. All residential development
would occur in the first 3 years, while the office and commercial absorption would be spread
out fairly evenly over the 10 year development period.
2.1 PROJECT DEMOGRAPHICS
Since many of the impacts of these projects are based on the additional population and
employment which would be generated, it is necessary to project population levels resulting
from the absorption of the new housing units, and the number of employees generated from
the development of office and retail space.
4
//J //~)~/
Table 3 shows the household size factors which were applied to the absorption of new
housing units in each of the four development alternatives. In addition, estimates of square
feet per employee are shown for the two types of nonresidential development included in
the EastLake Land Swap. These assumptions were obtained from Ed Batchhelder, of the
Chula Vista Planning Department. The population per dwelling unit of 2.884 is based on
the total housing inventory.
Since some revenue items are best estimated using the number of occupied housing units
and the square footage of occupied nonresidential space, it is also necessary to make
assumptions about the long term occupancy rates in each of the project alternatives.
Residential occupancy rates were assumed to be 96 percent in both developments, and
commercial/office occupancy rates were assumed to be 95 percent in the EastLake Land
Swap second alternative. These assumptions were based on data from the 1990 Census, and
our experience with Southern California real estate markets.
These occupancy rates are applied to the projected absorption schedules in Tables 4A
through 4D. Note that all housing units are assumed to be occupied in the year which they
are first sold. Likewise with commercial space, which is assumed to be occupied as it is
built. In the EastLake Greens existing General Plan alternative, the number of occupied
housing units increases over the first 3 years, and levels off at 225 occupied units (Table 4A).
The housing unit projections for the amended General Plan alternative are similar, although
the number of additional occupied units is much larger, given the increased density of
residential development (Table 4B). In the EastLake Land Swap project, the existing
General Plan alternative would imply the projected number of occupied housing units to
increase over the first 5 years of development, with a peak of 744 occupied units in year 5
(Table 4C) The second development alternative for the EastLake Land Swap property
would result in 815 new occupied housing units by year 4, as shown in Table 4D. In
addition, the square footage of nonresidential space would gradually increase over the first
10 years, levelling off at a total of 703,950 occupied square feet by year II.
Application of the household size assumptions to the number of new units yield population
projections for each of the projects as shown in Tables 5A through 5D. For the EastLake
Greens project, the long term increase in population ranges from 648 people to 1,978
people, depending on the development alternative. In the case of the EastLake Land Swap,
there is less variation in the population projections between the two alternatives, but the
General Plan Amendment also includes employment projections resulting from the
nonresidential component. Total employment resulting from this development alternative
is projected to peak at 1,834 people in year 10, with a long term projected increase of 1,828
people.
5
I /, ./ J (1 (1
j(./ J / i
3.0 IMPACT ON THE CIlY OF CHULA VISTA
This portion of the analysis will address the fiscal impact of these development alternatives
on the operation and maintenance budget of the City. The analysis is based on
intergovernmental municipal finance applicable as of July 1,1992. This analysis assumes the
constraints and limitations imposed by existing State laws, including Proposition 13.
In general, the methodology employed in this analysis is driven by socioeconomic and other
planning variables suitable for predicting revenues from a particular source or expenditures
by a particular department. By applying the levels of these planning variables implied by
each of the development alternatives to the base rates for the City of Chula Vista, the
expected impact of each of the projects can be calculated.
Table 6 shows the set of socioeconomic and planning variables compiled for Chula Vista and
the EastLake Greens and EastLake Land Swap projects for the purpose of this impact
analysis. Estimates of population and occupied housing units are for 1993, while street
miles, ADT's, and park and open space acreage are current as of 1991. Employment by
place of work for Chula Vista is based on the most recent SANDAG estimates which are
for 1990. Also, an integral part of the expenditure side of the analysis is the calculation of
total Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's) for the City of Chula Vista.
The EDU factor is based on the concept that public services are delivered to a community
which consists of both residences and businesses. It is an adaptation of the equivalent
connection unit concept used in utility rate analysis and utility billings. It provides a unit-
cost measure with a common base for all activities, computed by dividing expenditures by
a base factor of EDU's.
An EDU is equivalent to one residential unit, resulting in a total of 67,855 EDU's in the
City of Chula Vista, based on resident population and employment by place of work.
Residential EDU's are calculated by dividing the population by the average persons per
household as shown in Table 6. The residential EDU's (50,251) plus the business EDU's
(17,604) make up the total EDU's of 67,855 in Chula Vista.
3.1 REVENUES
The revenue information for the City of Chula Vista included in this analysis is based on
actual fiscal year data obtained from the 1992-93 Schedule of Revenues. The results of the
impact analysis are expressed in constant 1993 dollars. Although the analysis is based on
constant dollars, the general rate of inflation and property value appreciation will have an
effect on the results of the analysis due to the implications of Proposition 13. For this
analysis, both rates are assumed to be 4.5 percent per annum.
Table 7 displays the current General Fund revenue information by source for the City of
Chula Vista. Also shown in this table are the assumptions made to estimate the generation
of revenues in resulting from each of the four development alternatives. Four sources of
revenue are explicitly calculated based on current tax regulations: property tax, property
transfer tax, franchise taxes, and utility taxes. Calculation of these revenues is detailed in the
text below. Business license tax impacts are included only for the EastLake Land Swap
General Plan Amendment alternative.
6
/ i~\ --;;2/) (}
Six sources of revenue were identified as not being directly impacted by development of the
EastLake projects including: current unsecured property taxes, delinquent property taxes,
transient lodging tax, other revenue from agencies, and other revenues. Most of these
revenues are from sources which would not be affected by any specific development, or in
the case of transient lodging taxes, they do not apply to this type of development. The
remaining revenues sources listed on Table 7 are generally estimated on a per capita basis.
Property Tax
Property tax is a function of the property tax rate and the total assessed value of the
development alternatives. The property tax rate limit of 1 percent of total assessed value
(T A V) is shared out to the City according to Annual Tax Increment ratios. This analysis
uses a rate of 10.14 percent, the current average ratio of T A V for the EastLake properties.
It is important to note that Chula Vista's property tax share has recently been reduced to
this level by State legislation which has significantly impacted local government finances
throughout California. However, at the time of the 1992-93 budget from which the levels
of revenues and expenditures were taken, the City was still receiving a 13.85 percent share
of property tax revenues. This analysis uses the updated property tax share in order to
provide a more accurate estimate of future property tax revenues. It is likely that the City
will have to adjust its expenditures downward or increase local revenues from the levels
shown in the 1992-93 budget in order to account for the property tax redistribution.
Therefore, the assumptions used in this analysis represent a conservative projection of the
net impact of the EastLake projects.
Due to Proposition 13, assessed value can only increase at a rate of 2 percent per year,
unless a property is sold. Therefore, the calculation of projected assessed value must take
into consideration not only original sales price and the rate of inflation, but also the rate at
which housing units are re-sold. If we assume the rate of housing appreciation is equal to
the rate of inflation, then as time goes on, the total assessed value of any property will
decline in real terms unless the rate of inflation is less than 2 percent, or all properties sell
each year. In order to simulate this process, it is necessary to determine the turnover rate
for each type of residential and nonresidential development in the four alternatives. Tables
8A through 8D show the application of these rates to each of to each of the alternatives in
terms of the number of housing unit resales by type, and in the case of the EastLake Land
Swap General Plan Amendment alternative, square footage resale by type.
When a housing unit or nonresidential space is re-sold, its increase in assessed value is equal
to the difference between the current selling price, and the previous selling price inflated at
2 percent per year. Therefore, it is necessary to determine the period of time since the
property was last sold. The reciprocal of the turnover rate yields the average time since a
property was last sold--a 14.3 percent turnover rate implies a resale every 7 years. However,
this rate cannot be used in the early years of a development since none of the units will be
old enough to have been sold 14 years ago. As a result, no re-sales occur in the first year
of development, and the average age at resale increase with the age of the development until
the latest years of the analysis.
For the EastLake Greens existing General Plan alternative, the total number of sales (re-
sales) stabilizes in the post development period at 33 units annually, or about 14 percent
of the project inventory. In the second alternative for EastLake Greens, the number of
resales varies by development component. The total number of resales once the
development is complete is expected to be about 686 units annually.
)l~) - c2{; I
7
For the EastLake Land Swap, the existing General Plan alternative would imply a long term
turnover rate of 30 low-medium density units per year and 80 medium density units per year,
or about 14 percent of total inventory. Under the General Plan Amendment alternative,
total residential re-sales would stabilize at 93 units per year beginning in year 5. For the
nonresidential component, sale (re-sale) of space would increase up to year 11, when the
development would built-out, stabilizing at a long term turnover of 49,400 square feet per
year, or 6.7 percent.
Total assessed value becomes the sum of the value of each unit at the original time of sale,
plus the increase in assessed value at the time of resale, using prices inflated at a rate of 4.5
percent per year. Therefore, the projections of total assessed value must be deflated at the
rate of inflation to keep the analysis in constant 1993 dollars. Tables 9A through 9D show
the calculation of total assessed value for each of the development alternatives in thousands
of dollars, based on the assumptions outlined above. In both cases, the General Plan
Amendment alternative will have a higher assessed, and thus generate more property taxes,
than the existing General Plan alternative.
For EastLake Greens, the existing alternative assessed value peaks in year 3, the last year
of development, at $52.7 million in 1993 dollars. This is in comparison to the amended
alternative which peaks at over $88 million in year 3. After year 3, the assessed value
gradually declines as the rate of inflation begins to outstrip the 2 percent increase in value
for most units, based on Proposition 13 limitations. Using the new allocation of property
tax dollars to the City of Chula Vista, the peak year of the amended alternative would
generate about $89,337 in property tax revenues versus on $53,444 under the existing
alternative.
For the EastLake Land Swap property, the residential component of assessed value is higher
in the existing General Plan alternative, because of the higher average unit values. However,
the nonresidential component in the Amendment alternative adds significantly to the total
assessed value of the project which peaks in year 10 at $205 million in 1993 dollars,
compared to a peak of only $144 million in year 5 for the existing General Plan alternative.
The existing General Plan alternative would generate approximately $146,273 in property
tax revenues to the City in the peak year, compared with $208,470 in revenues from the
amended alternative.
Sales Tax
Sales tax generated by residents in the EastLake developments is based on a rate of $39.59
per person. The per capita rate is based on 50 percent of the total sales tax collections in
the City of Chula Visa divided by the resident population. The remaining 50 percent of
sales tax collections is assumed to be a function of retail development. For the EastLake
Land Swap amended alternative, there is a retail component which generates sales tax at a
rate of $300 per square foot. However, only half of the sales tax revenues generated by the
retail development are included in the projected sales taxes, because the other half were
attributed to the residential population.
Property Transfer Tax
Sales of real property in San Diego County are taxed at a rate of $1.10 per ~1,000 of th.e
sales price. The City of Chula Vista receives 50 percent of the revenues resultmg from thIS
tax. Tables lOA through lOD show the sales, and re-sales of housing units and
8
",
/ i:> -;2 () ~
nonresidential space in the EastLake project alternatives. These sales multiplied by the
average market price for that year, and the tax rate, yield projections of property transfer
taxes resulting from each of the development alternatives. As with property taxes, the total
value of collections must be deflated at the rate of inflation to be expressed in constant 1993
dollars. As with property tax revenues, the property transfer taxes generated by the
proposed General Plan Amendment alternatives are greater in both cases than the existing
General Plan alternatives, because of the increased number of units.
Franchise Fees
Franchise fees in the City of Chula Vista are collected for sales of natural gas, electricity,
cable television, and trash collection. Gross revenues per dwelling unit were estimated by
Angus McDonald and Associates to be $250 for gas, $469 for electricity, $252 for cable
television, and $144 for trash collection. These rates were applied on an EDU basis to the
nonresidential development component in the EastLake Land Swap, with the exception of
cable television which was assumed to generate no revenues from nonresidential
development. Gross revenues from the four sources listed above are currently taxed at rates
of 2.0 percent, 3.0 percent, and 7.0 percent, respectively. For the EastLake Greens property
this translates into $5,739 annually for the existing alternative and $17,513 annually for the
General Plan Amendment alternative when these developments are complete. For the
EastLake Land Swap, the existing alternative will generate $18,935 in franchise fees annually
upon completion, compared to the amended alternative which will generate $33,628 annually
in revenues to the City.
Utility Users' Taxes
The City of Chula Vista collects utility users' taxes for the use of natural gas, electricity, and
telephone service. The tax is based on 5.0 percent of phone revenues, $0.00919 per therm
of natural gas, and $0.0025 per kilowatt of electricity. Annual consumption of these utilities
by a residential unit was estimated by Angus McDonald to be $540 of telephone use, 480
therms of natural gas, and 4,800 kilowatts of electricity. For the proposed nonresidential
component of the EastLake Land Swap, utility usage was based on EDU's. Annual utility
users' tax generated by the EastLake Greens existing General Plan alternative was estimated
at $9,759 upon completion of the project. Utility taxes generated by the amended General
Plan alternative are substantially higher at $29,777 annually, given the increased number of
housing units. For the EastLake Land Swap, the existing General Plan alternative is
projected to generate $32,196 annually on a long term basis, compared to $62,882 annually
for the proposed General Plan Amendment alternative.
Total Revenues
Combining revenue generation of the four individually modeled sources with per capita
based revenues yields total annual revenues resulting from each of the four development
alternatives. As shown in Tables llA and llB, revenues from the EastLake Greens project
will more than double with the proposed increase in density of residential development. In
the existing alternative revenues increase over the three year development period to a peak
of $135,575, then level off to approximately $128,000 annually. In the latter years, total
revenues decline slightly due to the slow devaluation of real assessed value. For the ~eneral
Plan Amendment alternative for EastLake Greens, total revenues peak at $326,062 In year
3, then decline gradually over the remaining 12 years.
J (:fJ .- ~(J;J
9
Total revenues for the EastLake Land Swap are shown in Tables lIC and lID. The
existing General Plan alternative would generate an estimated $406,994 in revenues to the
City in the peak year (year 5). The General Plan Amendment alternative would generate
more than twice as much in annual revenues, peaking at $1,306,830 in year 10.
3.2 EXPENDITURES
Expenditure information for the City of Chula Vista included in this analysis is based on
actual data for fiscal year 1992-93, obtained from the Schedule of Expenditures. General
fund expenditures by department are used to quantify the operation and maintenance costs
of providing services. The projection of costs in this analysis assumes no significant or
predictable changes in the service standards of the City of Chula Vista.
Table 12 displays the current General Fund expenditure information for the City of Chula
Vista by department. Cost items are separated into two groups, Line Operations and
Overhead Functions. Overhead functions include all general government functions, as well
as the building and custodial maintenance functions of public works. These items currently
represent 16.23 percent of all city expenditures, or 19.4 percent of total Line Operations.
So as not to burden the EastLake projects with overhead charges for departments not
impacted by the developments, overhead costs are calculated as 19.4 percent of the total
Line Operation impact of the project.
The impacts of the EastLake projects on most of the Line Operations are estimated using
population and the Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) measure, discussed previously.
However, for some public services, such as street maintenance, specific factors like street
miles are acknowledged as standard indicators of cost.
Not included in the analysis are departments that are generally self-supporting, or whose
fees are calculated to exactly cover the cost of providing the services. Specifically, these
include: Economic and Community Development; Building and Housing; and Sanitary
Sewer and Waste Water Maintenance Departments.
The following sections review the impact assumptions for the Line Operations that would
be impacted by the EastLake projects.
Planning
Expenditures for non-current planning activities are projected using EDU's. Non-current
Planning expenditures are assumed to be 45 percent of total Planning expenditures. As
shown in Table 12, these non-current Planning activities currently require expenditures of
$735,508 annually, or $10.84 per EDU city-wide. This rates translates into an impact of
$2,608 per year upon build-out of the existing EastLake Greens alternative, compared to
$7,962 per year for the proposed alternative. For the EastLake Land Swap, the existing
alternative would have an long term impact of $8,610 per year, compared to the proposed
alternative which would generate annual expenditures of $16,838. For both properties, the
proposed General Plan Amendment alternatives translate into more EDU's, and thus
generate larger expenditure impacts.
10
, j": r OJ /~) L. /..1
/ L/ oL {./' /
Police and Fire Protection
Expenditure projections for police and fire protection are projected usingEDU's. As shown
in Table 12, Police Protection and Animal Control services cost $235.03 per EDU. The
resulting annual impact for the existing General Plan and proposed amendment alternatives
for the EastLake Greens development are $56,554 and $172,629, respectively, in the build-
out stage of the projects. For the EastLake Land Swap, the annual cost of police protection
is estimated at $186,680 for the existing development alternative at build-out, and $365,069
for the proposed alternative.
Fire Protection is estimated to cost $95.72 per EDD, translating into annual impacts of
$23,033 and $70,306 for the existing and proposed development alternatives for EastLake
Greens. Comparable impacts for the EastLake Land Swap existing and proposed
alternatives are $76,029 and $148,681, respectively.
Public Works
The basis for the cost of Public Works administration includes only Operations
Administration and Communications, resulting in an allocation rate of $9.875 per EDD city-
wide. All other costs in the area of Public Works are derived from street and traffic
operation and maintenance costs. Traffic Signal Maintenance, Street Sweeping, and Street
Tree Maintenance are all based on street miles which vary in each of the four alternatives.
Traffic Operations and Street Maintenance expenditure impacts are based 50 percent on
street miles and 50 percent on average daily trips (ADTs). The street maintenance functions
have no impact until year 7, since no services will be required until that time.
Total public works impacts from the EastLake Greens development alternatives are
projected at $15,722 annually for the existing alternative and $15,660 for the proposed
amendment. The proposed amendment alternative includes higher density development, and
thus requires fewer circulation streets. For the EastLake Land Swap, the existing alternative
would require $22,550 in annual public works expenditures at build-out, whereas the
proposed amendment alternative would require $52,343 annually. This difference is due
both to the additional street miles included in the second alternative, and the number of
additional trips generated by nonresidential development.
Parks. Recreation and Library
The expenditure allocation assumptions for these departments are as follows:
· Allocation of park administration and maintenance costs are based on total
number of park acres;
· Administration costs for open space are not applicable because they will be
paid through a lighting and landscaping district; and
· All recreation and library expenditures are on a per-capita basis and apply
only to residential development.
11
/ /' / l~) S
/ (/ ~t/-
These assumptions are applied to actual city-wide expenditures to yield projected
expenditures for the EastLake development alternatives. Currently, the City of Chula Vista
has approximately 317.4 acres of parks, about 700 acres of open space, and a population of
144,924. None of the development alternatives in this analysis involve the addition of any
park acreage, so there are no parks administration or maintenance impacts.
In terms of recreation and library expenditures, the total annual cost impact for the existing
General Plan alternative for EastLake Greens would be $24,062 at build-out, compared to
$73,449 for the proposed amended alternative which includes a much greater number of
residents. For the EastLake Land Swap, the existing General Plan alternative would have
an annual impact of $79,428 on recreation and library expenditures at build-out, whereas the
proposed amended alternative would have an estimated annual impact of $87,226.
Total Expenditures
Total City operation and maintenance expenditures resulting from each of the development
alternatives are shown in Tables 13A through 13D. In general, total expenditures increase
during the development period, then level off at build-out. A small additional increase
occurs in year 7 when street maintenance expenditures begin. For EastLake Greens, the
existing General Plan alternative, total recurring expenditures are projected to peak in year
7 at about $147,717 annually. The proposed development alternative for this property would
create an expenditure impact of approximately $411,747 annually, at build-out. For the
EastLake Land Swap property, the existing development alternative would generate an
estimated $452,061 in annual expenditures, whereas the proposed alternative would have an
expenditure impact of about $811,558 annually, once the project is complete.
3.3 NET FISCAL IMPACT
Tables 14A through 14D show the net fiscal impacts of each of the proposed development
alternatives during the first 15 years of development and operations. For the EastLake
Greens existing General Plan alternative, revenues are expected to exceed expenditures until
year 3 when a small annual deficit begins to occur. The accumulated balance at the end of
the 15 year analysis period is ($214,342). The proposed General Plan Amendment
alternative for EastLake Greens shows a negative net balance throughout the analysis
period. This net balance accumulates to a total negative net impact of ($1,302,436) over the
15 year analysis period.
The EastLake Land Swap property is projected to have a negative net impact under the
existing General Plan alternative, but a substantial positive net impact under the proposed
General Plan Amendment alternative. This is expected, due to the size of the proposed
nonresidential component. In the first development alternative, revenues are projected to
exceed expenditures beginning in year 3 of the impact. The total accumulated ne~ fiscal
balance in year 15 is projected to be ($617,863). The second development alternatIve for
the EastLake Land Swap property shows a positive net balance in every year which peaks
at $495 272 in year 10 as the development reaches build-out. Over the 15 year period,
accumuiated revenues are expected to exceed expenditures by $4,768,528. This large positive
net impact is enough to substantially offset the negative impact of the proposed amended
alternative for the EastLake Greens project.
12
/~ -o2L) 6
APPENDIX
J ;5' /c1{j' 7
TABLEIA
EASTLAKE GREENS
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION
Average Average
Development Housing Gross Lot Size Building Market
Component Units Acres (Gross Acres) Sq.Ft. Price
Low-Medium Residential 234 52.0 0.22 1,800 $225,000
Medium Residential 0.0 1,500 $175,000
Medium-High Residential 0.0 1,100 $150,000
High Residential 0.0 1,000 $110,000
Professional! Admin. 0.0 n.a. 0 $100
Commercial Retail 0.0 n.a 0 $150
Open Space 0.0 n.a n.a $0
Circulation Streets 9.0 n.a n.a $0
PuibliclQuasi Public 13.0 n.a n.a $0
TOTAL 234 74.0 0.32
Source: EastLake Development, Nov. 1993.
)i)~2C)~
TABLE 18
EASTLAKE GREENS
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION
Average Average
Development Housing Gross Lot Size Building Market
Component Units Acres (Gross Acres) Sq.Ft Price
Low-Medium Residential 14 3.0 0.21 1,800 $225,000
Medium Residential 0.0 1,500 $175,000
Medium-High Residential 238 17.0 0.07 1,100 $150,000
High Residential 462 21.0 0.05 1,000 $110,000
Professional/Admin. 0.0 n.a. 0 $100
Commercial Retail 0.0 n.a 0 $150
Open Space 17.0 n.a n.a $0
Circulation Streets 2.0 n.a n.a $0
PuibliclQuasi Public 14.0 n.a n.a $0
TOTAL 714 74.0 0.10
Source: EastLake Development, Nov. 1993.
JJ) 'dO?
TABLEIC
EASTLAKE LAND SWAP
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION
Average Average
Development Housing Gross Lot Size Building Market
Component Units Acres (Gross Acres) SQ.Ft Price
Low-Medium Residential 212 47.0 0.22 1,800 $225,000
Medium Residential 560 70.0 0.13 1,500 $175,000
Medium-High Residential 0.0 1,100 $150,000
High Residential 0.0 1,000 $110,000
ProfessionaV Admin. 0.0 n.a. 0 $100
Commercial Retail 0.0 n.a 0 $150
Open Space 9.0 n.a n.a $0
Circulation Streets 14.0 n.a n.a $0
PuibliclQuasi Public 21.0 n.a n.a $0
TOTAL 772 161.0 0.21
Source: EastLake Development, Nov. 1993.
/1')-2 } C)
TABLEID
EASTLAKE LAND SWAP
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION
Average Average
Development Housing Gross Lot Size Building Market
Component Units Acres (Gross Acres) Sq.FL Price
Low-Medium Residential 68 15.0 0.22 1,800 $225,000
Medium Residential 0.0 1.soo $175,000
Medium-High Residential 406 29.0 0.07 1,100 $150,000
High Residential 374 17.0 0.05 1,000 $110,000
ProfessionaV Admin. 17.0 n.a. 221,000 $100
Commercial Retail 52.0 n.a 520,000 $150
Open Space 14.0 n.a n.a $0
Circulation Streets 17.0 n.a n.a $0
Puiblic,Quasi Public 0.0 n.a n.a $0
TOTAL 848 161.0 0.19
Source: EastLake Development, Nov. 1993.
)(}-c-2J!
0
-
le
cl)
><
0\
le
cl)
><
00
le
cl)
><
t-
~
><
\0
a
cl)
><
10
a
cl)
><
~
a
cl)
><
("1
~~ ~ ~
("1
tI)...:lS ><
Z~Cl C'l
-< ~;!fj ~ 8
.....
M o ~ ><
t.1
..;l ~~z -
== <09 ~ 8
-<
E-o !::l~~ .....
><
~E=:o C
~tI)tI) 'a .g
x~ :::l 81000 ~g
~ 2 ~ C'l 10 10
...... .....-4 ....-4 ...... 00
<.&J ("1 10
<
cl)
~ 8 00
C"~
tI)
l:lO
.S ~ ~
.., ....
s C ~OOO
::x::::J
-
C
cl) C
E cl)
Q,.C
,Q
~ E
cl) 0
ClU
~ ~
C C
cl) .g
'0 'a ....
'<;l '::3 ..,
2C~'a
......g '::3
E '<;l fa c
:a~:E~
Ii) ,'''
::s ~ ~ ~
~~~fa
j::s::sx
=-
~ "[9
<~
~'a
c ....
o 8
.... cl)
~ E
~ E
~8
("1
g:
.....
>
~
..:
c
cl)
E
8-
~
>
~
!
~
~
~
o
tI)
, {, _ ! / '1
)!'J c~ /C7-
=
N
~
...:I
=
-<
E-o
~
~~
~e:l~
Z<o
~~~
~;~
g~~
<O~
~ffi~
~
2
~
~
C
o
~ .~
a ~
<.0
<
~ 8
C'~
~
o
.....
~
><
0'\
~
><
00
~
><
r"
~
><
\0
~
><
lrl
~
><
..,.
~
><
M
~
><
~
~
><
000
oolrl
.....
.....
~
><
00
lrl lrl
- -
..,.
.....
8lrlOO
~ lrl lrl
f"""It ..... ....-4 .....
~
.s :J 00 _.
fI).... ..,. 0 M ~
gc _ ~..,.
::c:::>
...
5 ...
e 5
Q.C
,g
~ e
o 0
ou
'a 3
.~ ...
c c
o -8
"0 <<I ....
.....e -,C en
~.8~~
a.... ~ c
3 :3 ::::l 0
;O:;~~:g
~ I fIl
:a ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
.3:a:al:E
~
-
o
lrl
-
~~
dd
M lrl
00
.$ -
.€I .s
<~
~3
o ~
.... 0
~ e
~ e
~8
M
0'1
0'\
-
>
~
...;
c
o
e
go
i
~
!
~
Gi
~
~
/&9 .--c2 / :5
~.. "
0
-
~
>-
0\
~
>-
00
~
II)
>-
f'
~
>-
IC
~
>-
lrl
~ ~
>-
"<t
~ lrl
~
-
>-
M
~~~ ~ ~lrl
-~
-
~liS >-
~
u ~i~ ~ 8 ~.
- -
N >-
~ <: Vl
....J ....l Z -
l:Cl ~~g ~ 8~
-< - -
Eo- !=l~~ >-
VlE=:o C
<:VlVl 0 ~~
~~~ iO::2 8lrlOO
8 ~ ~ lrl lrl
...-t ..... ...... ..... 00
<:.&J ('t') lrl
<:
II)
~ '8 00
C'~
Vl
bO
.S ~ ~ 0
~ 'S - IC 0 0
:ij::J ~lrl
....
5 ....
e 5
Q"C
.sa
~ e
II) 0
ClU
~ ~
c c
II) oS
'0 ca ....
or;! '::2 ..,
~.g~~
e.... ~ c
~~:E~
is ,'''
::a~~~
~ ~ ~ ~
.3::a::a:E
c-
.... 's
~~
~3
o ~
.... II)
~ e
~ e
~8
~
~
-
;;:
~
..:
c
II)
e
go
'is
>
~
!
~
G)
~
o
Vl
//J --02)'/
Q
~
t.:l
...;j
=:l
~
~
~!@~
~~~
en~~
!@ 'U
<li:en
~i~
~~~
enOen
~ffi~
en
2
~
,::l..
C
o
~ .=
2 ~
<.&J
<
~ 8
O"~
en
o
-
!;3
CI)
><
0\
~
>-
00
~
>-
f'
~
>-
\0
~
><
V'}
~
>-
"<t
~
>-
r"l
~
><
8t!
-
('l
~
><
00
V'} V'}
- -
-
~
>-
00
Vl V'}
- -
00
\0
8V'}00
('lV'}V'}
..... ..... ..... .....
l:lO
.5 !!i \0 "<t
~ 'a 00 0 0 f'
~::> \0 "<tr"l
...
53 ...
e 53
Q.C
oS
~ e
~8
Cil 3
.= ...
C C
CI) -8
'0 ;; ._
-;; .,C U}
2c~Cil
~ -8 .=
e.- ~ C
::S~:.::l-8
;;::; ~ j.J.i.-
~ I (I.l
"""' e e CI)
,o!; ::s ::s ~
~ ~ i ~
j::g::g::E
~~
"';0
- V'}
~~
00
r"l V'}
~~
,00
r"l V'l
~~
00
r"l V'l
~~
00
r"l V'l
~~
00
r"l V'l
~~
00
r"l V'}
~~
00
r"l V'}
~~
00
r"l V'l
aa
....0
('l ('l
('l V'l
.5 ~
~~
~3
o ~
.- CI)
~ e
~ e
~8
~
g
~
g
~
~
....
;;
~
...
C
CI)
e
8-
'i)
>
~
~
~
o
~
o
en
/ pi ~.. J / __Z;;
TABLE 3
EASTI..AKE GREENS & LAND SWAP
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN & PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
POPULA nON AND EMPLOYMENT DENSITY
Development
Component
Household
Size
Square Feet
per Employee
Low-Medium Residential
Medium Residential
Medium-High Residential
High Residential
2.884
2.884
2.884
2.884
Professional! Admin.
Commercial Retail
250
500
Source: Ed Batchhelder, Chula Vista Planning Department, Nov. 1993.
/1/,-;2/6,
'" 'I") 'I") 000 'I") 00' 0
~ - C'l C'l
I C'l C'l
-
>- -
0 'I") 000 'I") 00 0
- C'l C'l
~ C'l C'l
~
>-
0\ 'I") 0 0 0 'I") 00 0
~ C'l C'l
C'l C'l
>-
00 'I") 0 00 'I") 00 0
~ C"l C"l
C'l C"l
~ >-
U
~ f""- 'I") 000 'I") 00 0
CI) ~ C'l C"l
....:l C'l C'l
~ >-
~ \0 'I") 0 0 0 'I") 00 0
~ ~ C"l C"l
Q C'l C'l
- ~
CI) >-
~
~~ 'I") 'I") 0 0 0 'I") 00 0
~ C"l C"l
C'l C"l
en....:lZ >-
Zp..Q
~;~ '<t 'I") 0 00 'I") 00 0
-< ~ C'l C'l
'<t o ~ C'l C'l
~ ~~Z >-
...:l
= O::;:l r<"l \0 0 0 0 \0 00 0
-< ~OO ~ C"l C'l
E- C"l C"l
Cl)Z~ ~
<f::CI) >-
~CI)::;:l
XO C"l \0 0 0 0 \0 00 0
~:I: ~ 0\ 0\
Q - -
!:J >-
!5 - 800 0 8 00 0
U ~
U - -
0 >-
Q
G u r<"l
g:j bOl:: ~ 0\
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0\
~ I:: = -
.3~ = \0 \0 \0 \0 In 'I")
e 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ Q.
=
0 ~
~
....
';J bO
';J B
.~ .~ ~
I:: I::
.g ~ CI)
';J:;2 ~ =- ....:l u
'r;; .~ '" .... 's < 's
~ I::~';J .g ~
~.g .~ g <~ g 0
... e.... ~ I:: I::
I:: ... =~::E.g ~3 0
~ ~
e 5 ~ ~ ....
I '" o ~
Q. I:: ::E~~~ .... ~ G)
..9 ~ e
~ e ~~i~ ~ e a
~ 0 .3::E::E:E ~8 0
QU en
J (J '-'d-/'7
==
~
t;a;l
...:l
==
<
Eo-
u.l
U
<
I:l...
tI)
~
~
u.l
E-<O
z-
~~
~~
tI)~Z
Z::(O
~~~
o~~
~3~
~~~
tl)u.lfn
<C>~
u.l 0
ffi::t
tl)O
~~
~~
I:l...U
g
o
D
EQ
~
I:l...
~~
>-:::
u
~3a
.3~=
8
5 -
e is
Q.,=
oS
~ e
~ 0
ou
f"')00'l~
- C"l
C"l
o
-
f"')00'l~
- C"l
C"l
~
>-
0'1
~
>-
f"')OO'l~
- C"l
C"l
00
f"')00'l~ \0
- C"l 00
C"l \0
~
>-
l""-
~
>-
f"')00'l~ \0
- C"l 00
C"l \0
\0
~
>-
f"')00'l~ \0
- C"l 00
C"l \0
10
~
~
>-
f"')00'l~ \0
- C"l 00
C"l \0
~
~
>-
f"')00\~ \0
- C"l 00
C"l \0
f"')
~
>-
f"')00'l00 0
- C"lM 00
C"l~ \0
C"l
~
>-
f"')0C"l~ 0
- MO'I ~
C"l C"l \I"l
-
~ooo ~
- 1010 -
- - f"')
~
>-
~~~~
1010\0\0
0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1
til ~
'E =
~ .g
~ ~ ';3 ....:l
.9=~til <
.....sa .... f-l
e .::: .c C 0
.= :3 ~ .g E-<
~ ~ ~....
~~~~
i ~ ~ ~
.3~~:f
\0
00
\0
00
\0
00
\0
00
\0
00
\0
00
00 0
00 0
00 0
00 0
00 0
00 0
00 0
00 0
~~
10 10
0'1 0'1
=
.... 3 ~
~.9 E-<
-...... ~
l:3
o ~
.... ~
~e
~ e
~8
o
o
o
M
~
-
Q.
=
c5
:3
'f
tI)
u
'1
~
i
tI)
;/.(Y ,- ~. /~
U
"'f'
~
...:l
=
-<
Eo-
e
~
tI)
~
~
~
.....
tI)
~
z
~~~
~S:Cl
tI)~~
h~
!:90:;::l
:;:00
~z25
tl)f::;g
<tI)o
~~~
Cl
~
U
U
o
Cl
C
~
~
~
~~
>-:::
Co)
~3ta
.3~=
8
o
5 ....
E 5
Q.C
oS
~ E
G) 0
ClU
C5~OO
C'l lI"l
o
-
C5~OO
C'l lI"l
~
>-
0'1
~
>-
C5~OO
C'l lI"l
00
~
>-
C5~OO
C'lll"l
r--
~
>-
C5~OO
C'l lI"l
\0
~
>-
C5~OO
C'l lI"l
lI"l
!a
G)
>-
c;~oo
C'l lI"l
oq-
~
>-
C5~OO
C'loq-
~
c;:200
C'l ~
~
>-
C'l
~
>-
\0 lI"l 0 0
~~
.....
8:qoo
..... .....
~
>-
~~~~
~~~~
'a ~
'::1 '::1
C C
G) -8
'0 ';;l ...
-r.;j.= ~
G)cG)';;l
~ -8 ~ '::I
a ... .c c
=:S~-8
~ ~ ~ or;;
~~~~
~~~-Q
.3~~::E
C'l
oq-
r--
00
C'l
tt
00
C'l
oq-
r--
00
C'l
oq-
r--
00
C'l
tt
00
C'l
oq-
r--
00
~
00
0\
~
00
$
lI"l
00
.....
~
00
lI"l
C'l
C'l
00
~~
Vl lI"l
0'1 0'1
~
=-
~ '13
<~
~3
o ~
'.. G)
j ~
~8
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
~
f-o
~
~
0\
0\
-
Q.
=
~
:3
'60
~
tI)
Co)
'I
~
4)
~
o
tI)
j). /1 ,-,) ;!q
t> ( /
~~ \l')O~O\ \I') ~~ 0
\0 \I') - \I')
("1 ("1 00 ~
>-::: ~CJ; ("1
0
C"l~ t-
O \I') 0 0 0\ \I') ~~ 0
- \0 0\ \I') .... \I')
~ ("1M 00 0\
g~ 8
>- C"l ~ t-
0\ \l')O~O\ \I') ~~ 0
~ \0 \I') .... \I')
("1M 00 0\
0\
>- ~o \1)
C"l~
00 \l')O~O\ \I') 88 ~
~ \0 \I') ....
M("1 00 \I') \I')
oc-i ("1
e >- .... 00 0\
C"l ("1 \I')
< ~~ ~
c.. r- \l')O~O\ \I')
fJ') ~ \0 \I') ....
3 M ("1 00
......It"\' .c
>- 0("1 M
ffi C"l M \I')
\0 \l')O~O\ \I') 88 ~
~ \0 \I') ....
i~ ("1M 00 \I') \I')
c-ir: g
>- r- 00
-C"l ~
~~~ \I') \l')O~O\ \I') ~~ ~
~ \0 \I') ....
("1M 00
~~~ >- ~o ~
....~ M
fJ')~~ ~ \l')O~O\ \I') 88 ~
Q ~ \0 10 ....
~....1fJ') ("1M 00 \I') \I')
..... It"\'c-i 00
r;;r;l <c..~ >- .... 0\ 0
....1 ~i~ .... .... ("1
l:CI ("1 \l')O~C"l C"l ~~ ~
< ~ \0 0\\0 C"l
Eo< ("1M 00
r:1t"\' c-i
~~Cii >- 00 ~ ("1
fJ')O::J - C"l
<@o C"l :aoCJ;~ ~ 88 ~
~ ::z:: ~
fJ')Cl C"l C"l \0 \I') 10
00r: .c
2!E >- \I') 0\ 10
~!5 ....
.... 00000 00 ~~ ~
c..U ~ \0 \I') \I') \0
g - .... ("1
00 i
Cl >- ("1 \I')
~ u ("1
~aa 0\
~~~~ ~~ 0\
~ ....
S ~ = \O\O~\O \I') \I') c:i.
0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\
c.. 8 =
0 ~
rs
-a '50
-a ~
'.:l '.:l
= =
o -8 .53 fJ')
"0 -a ... ~ ~ u
.(;3 .~ en .~
~=~'a ~ ~~
-8 '.:l
... e '.. ~ = ~3 0
5 ... .= ~ 53 ~ ~
&~ ~8~~ o ~
... 0 i
oS ] ~
~ e i ~~ ~
o 0 S:E:E53 et8
ClU fJ')
/(':'J ---. ) <JC
/' / .:;?"o... G- ,/
-<
III
~
....;l
=
-<
Eo-
E-<
~
>-
o
~....l
VJ....l~
z~tI-l
~i~
tI-ltI-lO
~o~
~~5
<E=:~
tI-lVJ~
~o
tI-l~
U
~
~
~
"'V'l
~'"";'
>-:::
'" .
= u
~ 0'8
~...;::l
~ 8.
...
= ...
~ 53
c.=
,g
~ e
Q) 0
ou
00000
~
o
-
00000
~
~
>-
0\
~
>-
00000
~
00
t<l
Q)
>-
00000
~
r-
~
>-
00000
~
\C
~
>-
00000
~
11"\
t<l
Q)
>-
00000
~
~
~
>-
00000
~
r"l
NOOO
11"\
\C
~
>-
N
~
>-
11"\000
\C
V'l
-
00000
00
N
~
>-
00 00 00 00
00 00 00 00
~~~~
~ ~
53 5
-o-a:9
'Cil'~ '"
2=~-a
-.g .~
e .... .c =
.= ~ ~ .g
~ ~;.I.i._
:s~~~
~ ~ ~ ~
.3:s:s:E
00
~
00
00
~
00
00
~
00
00
~
00
00
~
00
00
~
00
00
~
00
00
~
00
N
11"\
\C
00
V'l
\C
V'l
00
00
00
N
00
~8
N 11"\
~
~
c
~~
i~
o ~
.... Q)
~ e
~ e
&:8
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
~
b
Eo-
~
~
-
c:i.
=
~
'"
Q)
'60
B
g
VJ
U
's
o
5
~
4)
a
o
VJ
/1t:J .- c1 c2 )
~~ 0\00\0 00 00 0
('<') V) 00 r-
\0 C'-l ~
>-::: -
0 0\00\0 00 00 0
- ('<') ~~ r-
~ ~
- -
>-
0\ 0\00\0 00 00 0
~ M V) 00 r-
\0 C'-l ~
-
>- -
00 0\00\0 00 00 0
~ M V) 00 r-
\0 C'-l ~
-
>-
r- 0\00\0 00 00 0
~ M V) 00 r-
\OC'-l ~
-
>- -
E-o \0 0\00\0 00 00 0
~~ ~ M V) 00 r-
\ON ~
- -
>-
~g V) 0\00\0 00 00 0
~ ('<') V) 00 r-
en~~ \0 C'-l ~
-
>- -
Z u:l
~~~ -=:t 0\00\- 0\ 00 0
== ~ M V) 00 r-
"l \0 C'-l ~
~i~ -
~ >- -
...:l
== M O\OO\~ N 00 0
-< ~ -< ~ M V) ~
E- \0
enu:l~ - -
>-
~C>~ C'-l 0\00\00 \0 00 0
~o ~ M ~ot V)
2t "1.
>- -
~~ - OOMM ~ 00 0
A.~ ~ -=:t M M
-=:t-=:t
A. >-
fI:l U ~
=8- 00 00 00 00 ~8 ~
8 .a 00 00 00 00 -
~ 8.::> C'4~~C'4 C'-lv) Q.
=
~
:s
'a 'a "60
.9
":;2 ":;2 ~
is .g ~3 en
'0 ~ .... ~ ~ .~
.fii. :s
~.g~~ ~ ~ e
<~ 0
- 8 .... .c: = 5
is - :s . tlO 4) 111
e is i~:Il:g ~
I fI:l o ~
c;:l,= ~8~~ .1 e ~
oS
~ e i~~-Q .... e
4) 0 3::a::a:Il ~8 0
ou en
!~) c2;:2 tj
/t/.--- .d-
U
In
~
...:l
=
~
;
>-
o
~~~
~~w
v.l~~
~ Z
j 0
~o~
~~~
v.lv.l2
~~o
~
u
~
~
~:s
>-:::
~ c.>
BOos
,:f 8. =:J
5-
8.~
,g
~ e
~ 0
ou
I"--NOO
00 V'l
V'l V'l
-
o
-
I"--NOO
00 V'l
V'l V'l
-
~
>-
0\
~
>-
I"-- N 0 0
00 V'l
V'l V'l
-
00
~
>-
I"-- N 0 0
00 V'l
V'l V'l
-
I"--
~
>-
I"-- N 00
00 V'l
V'l V'l
-
IC
~
>-
I"-- N 0 0
00 V'l
V'l V'l
-
V'l
~
>-
I"-- 00 0 0
00 V'l
V'l V'l
-
'<f'
~
>-
1"--0\00
00 0\
10 ~
-
~
O\~oo
00 V'l
V'l 0
-
~
>-
N
~
>-
101"--00
ICO
10 I"--
-
00-00
00 IC
N ~
~
>-
00 00 00 00
00 00 00 00
~MM~
~ ~
c c
~!~
~~~~ g
m 05 ~ is ..
~~:;~
::Em~~
:k~~~
.3~~::E
0\ 00
~
-
c-i
0\ 00
~
-
c-i
0\ 00
~
-
c-i
0\ 00
~
-
c-i
0\ 00
~
-
c-i
0\ 00
~
-
c-i
10 00
'<f'
-
c-i
IC 00
00
~
-
N 00
~
-
N 00
I"--
N.
-
0\ 00
~
~8
N 10
c_
o" .s
~~
1:3
o~ ~
.... e
~8
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
~
E-<
~
~
~
-
ci.
=
c5
~
.60
B
~
v.l
y
"s
!
i
v.l
/v' 'c;2~-5
Q
II)
~
..J
=
-<
Eo-
~~
~~
~~
~~~
~~~
:5~~
~~~
~~s
~o~
~~o
28
~~
Po.~
Po.
~~
~:::
~ u
~ 8'8
tf 8.::>
5 ...
8.~
,g
~ e
4) 0
ou
00010\0
00 ~ ~
- -0
- -
o
-
00010\0
00 ~ ~
- -0
- -
~
~
0\
~
~
00010\0
00 ~ ~
- - 0
- -
00
t:a
4)
~
00010\0
00 ~ ~
- -0
- -
r-
~
~
00010\0
00 ~ ~
- -0
- -
\0
~
~
00010\0
00 ~ ~
- -0
- -
10
~
~
00010\0
00 ~ ~
- - 0
- -
"<t
~
~
00010\0
00 ~ ~
- -0
- -
~
~
~
000r-1O
00 ~"<t
- - 0
- -
~
~
~
0000000
~ ;;b~
-
\Oo~~
0\ ~ ~
- "<t"<t
~
~
00 00 00 00
00 00 00 00
~~~~
~ ~
c c
4) .g
'0 <;:I ....
a;; .~ rn
~.8~!
a .... .c c
.= :s ~ .g
:g ~ ... .;;
~8~~
~ ~~ ~
..3 ::E ::E ::a
0\
"<t
~
C'i
o 00
;;b~
0\
~
C'i
O"<t
;;b~
0\
"<t
~
C'i
00
;;bgg
0\
-;t.
C'i
~ 10
;;b~
0\
"<t
~
C'i
~~
00 \0
0\
~
C'i
~~
\0 10
0\
"<t
~
C'i
\0 0
r- 00
10 "<t
0\
-;t.
C'i
~ 10
\0 00
"<t ~
o
r-
~
C'i
oo~
~~
;;b
~
-
~~
~ -
~
-
~8
- -
~8
~IO
~
c_
.... .5
.8 4)
<~
~:3
o e
.... 4)
! ~
~8
00
~
~
-
~
~
-
o
~
r-:.
-
~
-
"<t
r-
"<t.
-
~
-
\0
10
~
-
r-
~
00
~
\0
0\
~
"<t
~
~
~
~
~
-
ci.
=
~
:s
'60
8
g
CI')
y
'1
~
~
o
CI')
)t:J --c2<;;2 i
TABLE 6
EASTI..AKE GREENS & LAND SWAP
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN & PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
ANALYSIS PARAMETERS
GENERAL
Chula Vista
Population in Households
Occupied Housing Units
Employment (1990)
Street Miles
Total ADTs
Park Acres
Open Space Acres
EastLake Greens
Park Acres
Public Street Miles
Open Space Acres
EastLake Greens Amendment
Park Acres
Public Street Miles
Open Space Acres
EastLake Land Swap
Park Acres
Public Street Miles
Open Space Acres
EastLake Land Swap Amendment
Park Acres
Public Street Miles
Open Space Acres
144,924
50,251
50,769
281.5
1,148,035
317.4
700.0
0.00
1.13
0.00
0.00
0.25
17.00
0.00
0.82
9.00
0.00
1.00
14.00
Residential EDUs
EQUIVALENT DWELLING UNIT CALCULATION
= # of Residents = 144,924 =
Persons per Dwelling Unit 2.884
50,251
Nonresidential EDUs
= # of Locally Employed
Persons per Dwelling Unit
=
50,769
2.884
=
17,604
Total EDUs
=
67,855
Sources:
California Department of Finance, 1993.
SANDAG, Series 7 Projections, 1990.
City ofChula Vista, Planning Department, 1993.
City of Chula Vista, Transportation Department, 1991.
Government Finance Review, "The Equivalency Factor", 1990.
Economic Strategies Group, 1991 & 1993.
/t!} ~ ~~_r;/
TABLE 7
EASTLAKE GREENS & LAND SWAP
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN & PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
REVENUE GENERATION ASSUMPTIONS
City of Chula Vista
Actual 92-93 Revenues
Amount Percent EastLake Properties Generation
Property Taxes
Current Secured 7,495,135.82 18.79% Based on 10.14% of! % ofTA V
Current Unsecured 423,696.25 1.06% Not Applicable
Delinquent 407,573.69 1.02% Not Applicable
Other Taxes
Sales & Use Taxes (1) 11,473,867.12 28.76% $39.59 per Capita
Franchise Fees 1,906,397.73 4.78% Based on Gross Revenue per EDU and Tax Rates
Transient Lodging 1,078,914.00 2.70% Not Applicable
Property Transfer 253,434.25 0.64% Based on Tum-over Driven Simulation
Utility Taxes 2,740,462.44 6.87% Based on Consumption/Revenues and Tax Rates
Licenses and Permits
Business Licenses 806,790.06 2.02% $15.891 per Employee
Animal Licenses 45,022.50 0.11% $0.311 per Capita
Bicycle Licenses 2,804.45 0.01% $0.019 per Capita
Fines, Penalities and Foreitures
Ordinance Violations 115,412.80 0.29% $0.796 per Capita
Library Fines 129,542.27 0.32% $0.894 per Capita
Use of Money 595,464.82 1.49% Based on 7 percent of the previous year net
fIscal impact for EastLake properties (if positive).
Revenues from Other Agencies
State HOPTR 180,485.57 0.45% $1.245 per Capita
Motor Vehicle Licenses 5,006,271.65 12.55% $34.54 per Capita
Gas Tax (2) $10.71 per Capita
Other 865,531.50 2.17% Not Applicable
Charges for Current Services
Swimming Pools 149,200.56 0.37% $1.03 per Capita
Recreation Programs 37,565.32 0.09% $0.259 per Capita
Park Reservation Fees 22,405.00 0.06% $0.155 per Capita
Other Park & Recreation Fees 7,698.00 0.02% $0.053 per Capita
Misc. Service Charges 6,333.99 0.02% $0.044 per Capita
Other Revenues 6,146,788.00 15.41% Not Applicable
Total Recurring Fund Revenue 39,896,797.79 100.00%
Sources: City of Chula Vista, Statement of Revenue, 1993.
Economic Strategies Group, 1991 & 1993.
01-Dec-93
(1) Based on 50 percent of total collections.
(2) Based on the 70 percent of $15.30 per capita Gas Tax revenues allocated to the General Fund.
/v r-,22t-
-<
QCI
~
~
==
-<
Eo<
z
<:
en....1
Ii
~o
~~
~~
~~
~
~ ~
~~
E-<
5
e 5
Q,C
.sa
~ e
o 0
ou
V'l
-
l:a
o
><
'<t
-
~
><
(")
-
l:a
o
><
('.l
-
~
><
-
-
~
><
o
-
~
><
0\
~
><
00
~
><
r-
~
><
10
~
><
V'l
~
><
'<t
~
><
(")
~
><
('.l
~
><
-
~
><
(")000
(")
(")000
(")
(") 0 0 0
(")
(") 0 0 0
(")
(")000
(")
~
u
~
en
(") 0 0 0
(")
~
~
o
-
en
~
Z
o
z
~
~
~
~
o
~
~
o
~
~
en
~
~
~
en
(") 0 0 0
(")
(")000
(")
(")000
(")
(") 0 0 0
(")
(") 0 0 0
(")
(")000
(")
MOOO
10
'<t000
-
.....
8000
.....
~~~Q
~~~~
'<t '<t '<t .
~..-I....-I\O
] ]
c c
o .g
"C ta ...
';l 'a rJ':l
o C~ta
~.g 'a
e ... .c C
.::1 ~ ~.g
~ ~ ..... ...
::E g ~ ~
i~~~
3::E::E::c
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
r- r-
-Q-Q
.53
~~
:ata
C ...
o ~
... 0
~ e
~ e
J:8
(")000
(")
(") 0 0 0
(")
(") 0 0 0
(")
(") 0 0 0
(")
(")000
(")
~
u
~
en
~
~
Z
~
o
-
en
~
Z
o
z
o
~
~
~
~
o
-
CI)
~
~
o
~
en
~
(") 0 0 0
(")
(") 0 0 0
(")
(")000
(")
(") 0 0 0
(")
(") 0 0 0
(")
(") 0 0 0
(")
(") 0 0 0
(")
0\000
('.l
'<t000
.....
0000
~~~~
~~~r-
~~~-Q
] ]
C C
o .g
"C ta ...
';l 'a rJ':l
OCOta
~ .g ~ 'a
e ... ~ C
::I~::c.g
~ ~ I ';l
::Egg~
i~~~
.3::E::E::c
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
r- r-
-Q-Q
.53
!~
C ...
o ~
... 0
~ e
~ e
J:8
(")
0\
0\
.....
c:i.
::I
o
o
~
'60
~
en
u
's
o
g
~
j /!) -,2-d?
=
QC
~
...:I
=
<
E-o
~
~
~~
~~
Oa:
~~
~!@
enlI.l
~O
~
en
2
~
t:l..
~
> 8
o ~
~~
Eo-<
...
;5 ...
e 5
Q.C
,g
~ e
Q) 0
ClU
Irl
....
~
>-
'<t
....
~
>-
M
-
~
Q)
>-
C"l
....
~
>-
-
....
~
>-
o
-
~
>-
0\
~
>-
<<Xl
~
>-
r-
~
>-
\0
~
>-
Irl
~
>-
'<t
~
>-
M
~
>-
C"l
~
>-
-
~
>-
C"l0'<t- 00
('<") ('<")
C"l0'<t- 00
(,<,,)M
C"l0'<t.... 00
('<") ('<")
C"l0'<t.... 00
('<") ('<")
C"l0'<t.... 00
('<") ('<")
e
~
en
:;;!
~
Cl
......
en
~
Z
o
z
~
~
~
t::
~
......
en
~
~
o
~
en
~
~
~
en
C"l0~~
C"l0'<t....
M(,<,,)
C"l0'<t....
M(,<,,)
C"l0'<t....
M(,<,,)
C"l0'<t....
MM
C"l0'<t-
(,<,,)M
C"l0~~
C"l0'<t0
M r-
-
C"lOS~
- -
'<t000
- Irl Irl
- -
~~~~
l"'ll"'ll"'lr-
'<t '<t '<t .
_...._\0
~ ~
c c
Q) .g
"t:l Oil ._
au; .i3 ~
2C~"a
.....g "J:!
e.r;; ~ c
.= Q) :.= .g
'3 ~ ;Li .-
:E~~~
i~~~
.3:E:Ex
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
r- r-
Icilci
d_
.- "s
~~
i3
o ~
.- Q)
~ e
~ e
~8
C"l0'<t.... 00
('<")M
C"l0'<t- 00
MM
C"l0'<t- 00
(,<,,)M
C"l0'<t- 00
MM
C"l0'<t.... 00
MM
e
~
en
~
i
~
z
o
z
~
en
E-o
~
~
~
o
......
tI)
~
~
o
~
en
~
C"l0~~
C"l0'<t-
MM
C"l0'<t....
M(,<,,)
C"l0'<t-
MM
C"l0'<t....
M(,<,,)
C"l0'<t....
(,<,,)M
C"l0'<t0
(,<,,)M
C"l0~~
C"l0-0
C"l -
0000
~~~~
l"'l~~r-
'<t '<t '<t .
....__\0
~ ~
C C
~~~
2C~'a
.....g "J:!
e "- ..c c
.= ~ ~ .g
'3 ~ ;.1.0 .-
:E~~~
i~~~
.3:E:Ex
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
r- r-
Icilci
d
~~
<~
i3
o ~
.- Q)
j ~
~8
~
~
....
Q.
~
~
.60
~
en
u
.~
~
i / C) ~c2d- 8/-'
en
V'l 0000 00 0000 00
- C'"l 00 C'"l 00
~
>-
-.:t 0000 00 0000 00
- C'"l 00 C'"l 00
~
4)
>-
C'"l 0000 00 0000 00
- C'"l 00 C'"l 00
~
>-
N 0000 00 0000 00
- C'"l 00 ('f') 00
~
>-
- 0000 00 0000 00
- C'"l 00 C'"l 00
~ e
>-
0 ~ 0000 00 0000 00
- tI) C'"l 00 e ('f') 00
~ ~ ~
>- ~ tI)
0\ 0000 00 ~ 0000 00
~ ('f') 00 ('f') 00
0 ~
-
>- tI)
~ 0000 00 0000 00
00 I C'"l 00 0 ('f') 00
~ Z -
0 (I)
~~ >- Z ~
~ I
r- 0000 00 ~ 0000 00
~2C ~ C'"l 00 ('f') 00
~i z
u >- (I) 0
00 IC ~ 0000 00 ~ 0000 00
rlIil ~ ('f') 00 ('f') 00
..J ...:lUJ tI)
= ~g >- ~ f-<
-< ~
Eo- V'l ~ 0- 0 0 00 0- 0 0 00
~Z ('f') ('f') ('f') r-
tI)~ ~ - ~
<tI) >- 8 ~
UJ~ -.:t ~ 00\00 00 O-.:too 00
('f') r- ('f') V'l
~ - 0
~ -
>- 0 tI)
C'"l ~ --00 00 ~ O\ICOO 00
~ -.:tIC ~ N C'"l
- 0
(I)
>- I ~
N ~ -.:tC'"l00 00 -.:toooo 00
~ - -.:t tI) - -
~ - - I
>- ~
UJ 0000 00
- ~ 8~00 00
~ tI) - -
>-
b ~
~~~~ ~~~tf! ~
> S ~tf! tf!~ -
o~ ~~~r- r- r- ~~~r- r- r-
~ -.:t -.:t -.:t . ..0..0 -.:t -.:t -.:t . \0..0 c:i.
..................\0 ...............\0 ~
~
1 ~ ~ ~ .~
= 5 c = ~
~1:g c_ ~~~ c_ tI)
(,,)
fI). fI) .- .3 .- .3 .-
~.g~1 ~~ ~.g~1 ~ 4) 8
... ~ ._ .c = ~ ._ .c = i~ 5
5 ... ~:E.g ~:3 ~:E.g :3 ~
8.~ ~ ~ .- i ~ .- o ~
I fI) o ~ I U)
::E~~~ .- t) ::E~~~ .- t) i ~ /;~.-J f) [)
,Q ~ e ~ e
~ e ~ i i ~ ~ e ~ ii ~ ~ e C ~ t?'-7
~8 .3~::E::E J:8 .3::E::E::E J:8 tI)
V'") 0000 V'") (<'l r- 0000 V'") (<'l r-
- - V'")~ ~~ - V'")~ ~~
~ ~~ ~~
>- - 0'\ - (<'l
'<t OOOOV'") (<'l r- OOOOV'") (<'l r-
- - V'")~ ~~ - V'")~ ~~
~ ~~ ~~
>- - 0'\ - (<'l
(<'l OOOOV'") (<'l r- 0000 V'") (<'l r-
- - V'") ~ ~~ - V'") C'l ~~
~ :it. ~~
>- - M
C'l 0000 V'") M r- 0000::q M r-
- - V'") C'l ~~ - V'") ~~
~ :it. :i~
>-
- 0000 V'") (<'l r- o 0 00 V'") M r-
- - V'") C'l ~~ - V'") C'l ~~
~ ~ :it. ~~
>- - (<'l
0 ~ 0000 V'") (<'l r- 0000 V'") M r-
- tI) - V'") C'l ~~ ~ - V'") C'l R~
~ ~ :ig '<t 0
- M
>- ~ ll..
tI)
0\ 0000 V'") M r- ~ 0000 V'") (<'l r-
- V'") C'l R~ - V'") C'l ~~
~ 8 '<t\O :i~
; >- tI) - 00
~ 00 00 Irl ~~ 0000 V'") ~~
00 . - V'")C'l 0 - V'") C'l
~ Z ....
~~ 0 V'") (<'l ~ ~~
>- z C'l r- - C'l
~ I
~~ r- 0000 V'") ~~ z 0000 V'") ~~
~ - V'") C'l 0 - V'") C'l
~~ C'io z C'io
Q >- ~ '<t r- 0 -C'l
oc <~ \0 0000 V'") ~~ ~ 0000 V'") ~~
~ - V'") C'l - V'") C'l
....J ~~ ~ tI)
= ~ ~~ ~ o~
< ~~ >- - -
E- V'") ~ 0000 V'") ~~ 0000 V'") ~~
- V'")C'l - V'") C'l
~~ ~ I
tl)t::) 0 00 M oO~
~~ >- .... M \0 -
'<t ~ oooo~ ~~ OOOCll'l ~~
tI) ~ - Irl - 1rlC'l
~ l1. ~~ \00
~ >- 0 ~ -
~ 000'\'<t ~~ o OM 0 ~~
ll.. (<'l ~
- '<to'\ l1. - '<tC'l
~ - 0
tI) ~~ ~~
>- . ~
C'l ~ OO-~ ~~ 00-0 ~~
~ ~ - r- V,) - C'l-
- - .
C'i~ ~ C'i~
>- M Irl
- ~ 00000 ~~ 0000 00
\0 V'")V'")
~ - -
V,) 00
>- (<'l lI'l
(<'l
b tf'!tf'!~tf'! ~tf'!~tf'! ~
~ ~ tf'!tf'! tf'!~ -
~rt'!rt'!r- r- r- ~rt'!~r- r- r- c:i.
~~ '<t '<t '<t . 1()\Cl '<t '<t '<t . \Cl\Cl
...............\0 ___\0 ~
f-o
~
~ -a ~ 060
~ .::1 ~
c c c c
~~~ .5 =j ~:E~ c tI)
.- =j to)
~. ~ ~. ~ .-
~c~~ ~~ ~c~~ .8 0 e
-8 . -8 . ~~ 0
.. ~ .- ~ c ~ .- ~ c c
5 .. i:i ~ 53 0 :3 0
:g~~~ :g~ :g ~
&~ o ~ . ~ o ~ J/)/~~?iJ
::E~~~ .- 0 ::E~~~ .~ ~ 4i
,g ~ e a
~ e ~ ii ~ ~ e ~ii~ ~ e
o 0 .s~~53 ~8 .s~~53 ~8 0
ou tI)
"-- ..-..~"~....~._~_._.~,~~"---
~ooo 00 II') <"I
II') ("I c;
- 00 00
la ~ ~ 0\
~ -.t
><
1"'-000 00 I"'- <"I
-.t 0\ 0\ 0
- - - ("I
~ r: r: 0\
00 00 -.t
><
0\000 00 0\ \0
M - - \0
- l"'- I"'- M
la M M 0\
~ 00 00 -.t
><
\0000 00 \0 ~
("I 00 00
- <"I M II')
la 0 0 0\
~ 00 00 -.t
><
- -000 00 - ::g
- 0\ 0\
la - - I"'-
r: I"'- 0\
~ l"'- I"'- -.t
><
0 0\000 00 0\ ("I
- ("I ("I 00
la - ..... 00
"<'i "<'i 0\
u l"'- I"'- -.t
>-
0\ <"1000 00 M ("I
0\ 0\ \0
la - --:. 0
u - - 0
>< l"'- I"'- V)
00 0\000 00 0\ l"'-
I"'- I"'- ;:!l
la M M
~ 00 00 0
>- \0 \0 V)
~ -000 00 ..... \0
CI)....ltll I"'- 00 00 M
la \0 \0 -.t
ffi~;J~ u vi vi to
~ :;j~ >< \0 \0 V)
<
0- offi:>~ 0\000 00 0\ 0
l";I;:l tll 0- \0 \0 \0 I"'-
....l ~otll'O lil ("I ("I I"'-
= <: CI) '" u M M to
< ~O~~ >< \0 \0 V)
E-o
CI)~CI),-" II') MOOO 00 M V)
("I ("I V)
L:jCl)< :; - - ("I.
~ u - - -
>< \0 \0 V)
-.t -.t000 00 ;:!l 00
("I 0\
lil ("I ("I CX!.
u 0\ 0\ -
>- V) V) V)
M \0000 00 \0 ::g
V) V)
lil V) V) r-
~ r: r: N
>- II') II') II')
("I 0\000 00 0\ ~
00 00
lil II') V) It"}.
u r: ~ V)
>- -.t -.t
8000 00 8 8 ~
lil II') V) II') 111
~ N N N ..t
>- ("I ("I ("I
u '8 B
OIl M
111 V) 0 0 r:::.:: ~
:::l;J ("11"'-11')- 00 5
al .. N ~....-4...... ~~ -
:> ~~~~ '.::l go
OIl
l::
u ~
~ ~
M '"
~ ,~
al - '.::l tlI)
al OIl E
.~ 9 ]
'.::l ..
5 .8 .5 - :;j i CI)
:9] ';;J u
l1=~al ~ '3 E-o l:: .~
r:::.:: -8 r:::.:: .~ u
~.~ ..c:: i:: <:~ ~ 0
i:: .. ~ .2P ~ :;rOil ~
i~ ~r:::.::::I::9 6 .~
' ...
~~~~ ] I u /v'--dyl
Q) 8 I o......~ ~ ~
~ .s~~x ~u 0
QU CI)
CQ
0\
r.il
..J
CQ
<
roo
ffi
~
ffi
ffi~~'"'
ga~:;;!~
o~>~
~~~::
~c;afl)O
~~~~
fl)ffifl),-,
~o<
~
fI)
l:2
~
~ .'8
;a::J
> ...
'"
....
....0....'" 00
~ ~~
.,; g~
t;;
<.l
><
~
....
1'0\o('l 00
! ~r:
.,; 00>6
'" I'
t;;
<.l
><
(<'l
....
('l0(<'l('l 00
~ ......
00 O~
~ -c~
on I'
t;;
Q
><
('l
...
\OO~'" 00
;2; I'~
~ ~C'i
on I'
t;;
<.l
><
...
...
000\0\0 00
~ ;o!
~ ":0
on I'
t;;
<.l
><
o
...
ooo~on 00
I' on I'
<"!. "l.0l.
~ 0\1'
~\O
t;;
<.l
><
0\
t;;
<.l
><
:g0I::~ 00
... on 0\
~ ~.,;
~\O
00
t;;
<.l
><
S20('l('l
0- ~!
~ '4i
I'
t;;
<.l
><
&l0~~
I' 00'"
~ ~C'i
~\O
\0
t;;
<.l
><
S20~0\
.:0 ('l~
~ ~g
on
t;;
<.l
><
:!:lOS~
'" 00 00
~ ~~
~
t;;
<.l
><
~01'1'
('l 00
on (<'l
~ o\r-:
(<'l on
(<'l
la
<.l
><
1'000~
~ ~~
~ 00~
(<'l",
('l
la
~
~O~~
('l ~oo
~ ~~
~088
... on on
~ N-c
('l...
la
~
ononOO
('ll'''''''
N""""...-.4...-4
~~~~
II ..
~~
~ B
~u
;a :3
.::l ..
5 .8
"C ;a ...
..... -zj VJ
:l5~;a
~"C .::l
a .....c: c
::I :l.~.g
] ~ ::c ...
~~~~
~ ... ] ~
.s~~:E
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
.s '3
.€ .;:;
-< <.l
~~
s."
... ~
j ~
J:u
I'
'"
....
on
~
...
\0
...
...
~
...
00
\0
<"!.
on
(<'l
...
~
o
(<'l
...
...
('l
...
>6
('l
....
s
00.
...
('l
...
I'
on
\0
r-:
...
...
on
\0
\0
~
...
...
(<'l
('l
00
g
...
~
(<'l
~
-
(<'l
I'
...
~
o
...
00
...
(<'l
g
...
...
...
('l
'8.
00
('l
on
.n
I'
o
'"
...
~
~
...
00
(<'l
00
I'
(<'l
:g
0\
I'
(<'l
\0
I'
0\
I'
0\
I'
~
o
00
(<'l
...
<"!.
...
00
~
...
00
on
(<'l
I'
N
00
~
"l.
(<'l
00
(<'l
(<'l
(<'l
~
00
('l
(<'l
or)
00
I'
...
"l.
\0
00
~
r-:
00
!
...
00
00
\0
~
N
I'
o
'"
...
~
~
(<'l
~
...
9
1
I;:l
Q
o
~
on
~
y
.
~
S
.::l
.
c::
i
.::l
.
~
M
~
...
g:
cS
'"
u
.co
E
fI)
()
]
i
fI)
--::>(j
J /) -- ,'") ( <~
/ L/ .L ../ ,
.__ ,__"_,,,,~,~,_,,~.,,=,,,>,"~'_'M"'_~k'~'~~="'_~~""_"~....--
~
f;I;:l
~
=
<
Eo<
~~
~eClIJ
~i~~
~o~~
go~~
~tI),-,
tI)<
~~
~ 0'8
;;0
> ..
V'l
-
V'lr-oo
00 10
0\ 00
""':N'
00 r-
-
lil
u
>-
"<I"
-
.... 0\ 0 0
0....
r-o
~~
-
lil
u
>0
....
-
0\....00
V'l 0\
V'l"<l"
vi 0\'
r- V'l
-
lil
u
>0
('I
-
V'lr-oo
"<1"-
"'l.<'!.
('I....
r- V'l
-
lil
u
>-
-
-
~800
10 ('I
o\'r-:
10"<1"
-
lil
u
>0
o
-
r-ooo
00 ....
00"<1"
..0....
10"<1"
-
lil
u
>-
0\
lil
u
>-
('10000
.... 0\
('I 00
i~
-
00
lil
u
>0
00....00
00 0\
1OV'l
~O
10 ....
....
r-
lil
u
>-
~800
('I V'l
~~
-
10
lil
u
>0
00....00
10 V'l
00\
r:d
V'l('l
....
It'l
lil
u
>-
~~oo
.... 00
vi..o
V'l ....
....
"<I"
lil
u
>-
"<1"....00
.... ....
"<1"10
:;f8
-
....
lil
~
r-....oo
~~
"';N
V'l r-
('I
liiI
u
>-
O\r--oo
00 10
V'l ('I
r:..o
"<1""<1"
....
8~00
V'l 00
N....
('1('1
liiI
~
It'lV'l00
('I r- V'l ....
N........-4~.....
~~~~
'5 '5
~
u s
~ !5
QU
;; ]
.~ .g
'C ;; ...
'w;':;2 ~
BD~;;
- 'C ':;2
S 'w; ~ ~
3 C)..... .0
:rl ~ = ...
l) I II>
~ ~ ~ ~
~ii ~
"s::E::E:c
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
.s '3
~'::l
<~
~;;
6 ...
olil ~
~ ~
~u
-
V'l
00
~
V'l
('I
('I
"<I"
r-
i
('l
('I
V'l
C!.
V'l
....
('I
~
l'"";.
~
('I
10
V'l
00
..0
....
('I
r--
....
....
oC
o
('l
o
....
....
8
('l
-
00
('I
8!
....
"<I"
V'l
r-
i,
-
S
oC
r-
....
S
N
r-
....
~
"<I"
V'l
-
~
~
-
r-
V'l
00
~
0\
V'l V'l
r- r-
.... ....
i i
~
....
-
10.
r-
....
-
-
o
-
oC
....
....
~
oC
....
-
"<I"
-
....
0\'
....
-
0\
....
10
0\'
....
-
r-
r-
-
~
-
~
r-
~
....
a;
<'!.
-
"<I"
-
('I
r-
OC!.
-
"<I"
-
....
V'l
00
N
"<I"
-
"<I"
~
;
-
....
S\
i.
-
('I
10
00
~
-
-
V'l
-
00
0\'
00
~
....
~
-
s
1
c;::
u
Q
~
"l
"<I"
~
~
6
0:;2
'"
c;::
i
0:;2
~
~
~
-
go
tS
~
'OQ
~
l:2
tI)
u
.~
~
i
tI)
" .-" '"7
J // __ l) 5
/ V C"'- //
~
01
liIil
...J
j:Q
<
Eo<
ffi
::s
~~
~~~---
{/)j~~
~Q.>~
~~~~
<lJl~~
t::ffi~,-,
{/)o<
~fi)
{/)
~
~
Vl
....
<<'l00\r-
Vl Vl....
Vl Vl Vl
vi' vi'""
N 0\0
....
lil
u
><
'<t
....
VlONoo
.... Vl 0\
Vl <<'l Vl
~ ....:...;
,~ 0 \0
.....
lil
u
><
<<'l
.....
..... 0 0 Vl
N N'<t
Vl <<'l r-
"" r-:o\
N O\on
la
u
><
N
....
ooo\Or-
\0 Vl Vl
on '<to\
N ""r-:
N O\on
la
u
><
.....
.....
ono.....o
on on <<'l
\0 r-N
,...; 0\..0
N ooon
la
u
><
o
.....
~o~~
r- ..... on
o ..0";
N ooon
la
u
><
0\
lil
u
><
NO Vl <<'l
'<t O\on
0\ r-O\
0\ NN
..... 00 Vl
00
la
u
><
~0~S;
..... Vl <<'l
0\ 0\"";
..... r- on
r-
la
u
><
O\o.....a:,
~ ~oo
oQ ...00\
..... r- '<t
\0
la
u
><
NON~
~ ~"1
r- <<'loo
..... r- '<t
on
la
u
><
~O~~
o .....N
r-: ,...;r-:
..... r-'<t
'<t
a
><
~OOO~
on ~o
..0 oQ...o
..... \O'<t
<<'l
lil
u
><
<<'lO.....\O
~ S;~
~ ~1
N
la
u
><
<<'lOO\N
V'l 00 r-
\0 on 00
vi' r-:..;
..... '<tM
la
u
><
$(088
(:1:) V'lV'l
vi' N...o
..... N.....
8 'a
al::>
> ...
ononOO
Nr-on.....
N..................
~~~~
5 ...
~8
C) ~
~ 6
ou
al :3
'::l ...
.8al~
'Oil '::l ~
25~al
-"0 '::l
~ ';;; ~s:::
3 t) .... u
~~=:2
is I '"
::s~~~
~ ~~~
's::s::s:E
\0 <<'l
r-'<t
N r-
~~
.....
~~
00 r-
vi'o\
<<'IN
.....
00 \0
VlN
onO
~~
.....
O\<<'l
<<'l \0
<<'l \0
",,6
<<'IN
.....
~~
N..o
<<'l .....
.....
<<'l <<'l
on <<'l
..... 00
"";N
<<'l .....
.....
\O'<t
r- r-
.....r-
g~
~~
N 0\
0\0\
N r-
O'<t
..... r-
O\N
..or-:
N \0
88
<'i"1
Non
Non
'<t\O
..... <<'l
IX!. "1
!::~
~~
r- <<'l
~~
00 .....
~I::
0\";
N
~~
..0 vi'
.....
~~
""r-:
~a
,5 ]
~ u
<~
~al
6 '..
';;; ~
~ ~
~u
r-
~
...0
\0
<<'l
\0
;!
""
Vl
<<'l
o
r-
.....
~
<<'l
00
0\
~
<<'l
r-
:t
\0
.....
<<'l
00
N
"1
on
o
<<'l
0\
<<'l
~
.....
00
N
~
N
0\
~
00
~
oQ
<<'l
N
~
r-
.....
N
~
r-
~
.....
~
Vl
0\
r-
.....
~
S
.....
on
o
<<'l
~
.....
8
00
i
~
o
00
0\
r-:
0\
....
'<t
.....
N
~
.....
\0
00
.,...
8
N
<<'l
o
.....
~
$
r-
""
o
N
.....
0\
"1
.,...
o
N
on
~
oQ
0\
.....
\0
.....
"1
~
.....
.....
~
<<'l
00
.....
\0
N
"1
'<t
r-
.....
~
IX!.
on
\0
.....
r-
.....
<<'l
r-:
on
.....
.....
~
oQ
'<t
.....
~
.....
vi'
.....
.....
8
00
i
~
....
~
.....
g
1
..:
u
o
~
"'l
'<t
~
~
5
'::l
lIS
i
'::l
lIS
]
M
&
.....
~
~
'"
u
'60
B
II
{/)
u
]
i
{/)
//J ,,-:23 t(
<n ~ooo 00 8 <"'I
- ('l
l<J <"'I
Q.) 00 00 i
>- ~
-.r -000 00 - <"'I
- ~ ~ ('l
l<J <"'I
r-: r-: i
~ ~
<"'I -000 00 - (<'I
- (<'I (<'I ('l
l<J <"'I (<'I <"'I
Q.) r-: r-: i
>- ~
('l <nooo 00 <n <"'I
- - - ('l
l<J 0 0 (<'I
Q.) r-: r-: "i
>- ~
- <"'1000 00 (<'I <"'I
- - - ('l
l<J r-- r-- <"'I
Q.) ..0 ..0 "i
>- ~
0 ~000 00 ~ (<'I
- ('l
~ -.r -.r (<'I
..0 ..0 "i
~
0- 00000 00 00 (<'I
~ -.r :!; ('l
- <"'I
..0 ..0 "i
~
00 (<'1000 00 (<'I (<'I
~ l<J 00 00 ('l
00 00 (<'I
Q.) .0 .0 i
E-< >- ~
IJG
~~ r-- 0000 00 0 <"'I
l<J (<'I <"'I ('l
~ IQ <"'I
CI)~~ Q.) <n .0 "i
>- ~
< ~~~ IQ r--OOO 00 r-- (<'I
~ 00 00 ('l
C> (<'I (<'I (<'I
.-I o~ffi .0 .0 "i
~ >- ~
...:l ~~c.
~ lrl <nooo 00 lrl (<'I
..JOO ~ lrl .,.. N
- - (<'I
E-< t;g;8: .0 .0 i
<E-<< >- ~
WCI)E-< -.r (<'1000 00 (<'I <"'I
-CI)
><:- ~ (<'I (<'I ('l
w> 0- 0- (<'I
< >- .,; i it
~ (<'I IQOOO 00 IQ N
~ (<'I <"'I ~
U 00 00
00 00 00
>- ~ ~
N ~OOO 00 ~ 0-
~ r--
r--
.0 .0 .,;
>- - - -
~ ~
- ('l000 00 N N ~
~ (<'I (<'I (<'I
0- 0- 0- lrl
c-i c-i c-i ~
- - -
~ ~
~~~~ ~ ~ ~ t<'i
0-
(<'I Q.) 8~ ('f"l 0-
0- ::l 0- -
o-ca lrllrlOO - - 0- S I
-> N r-- lrl - ~~ -
N....................
~~~~ S "P
tI:l
~ c;::
Q.) ...
0 Q.)
<<E - '60
ca ca 0 S ~
'p 'p
5 5 "P
tI:l
'Oca:5! J~ ] CI)
-- -::1 u:!I U
~5~ca "s
... ~ ~ ~'a i~ g
\:l ... Q.) :E Q.) ~
Q.) \:l .- IJG :g
E Q.) as ,''' o ~
c..\:l ~ ~ ~ ~ .- Q.) 8
0 ~ ~
l E ~ ~~ ~ o 0 ~ / t?1~ ? ~.c--
Q.) 0 .3~~:E o::u ,;;:-- ~~/
au
=
C
.-4
riIil
...:l
~
E-o
i~
~;I
~<~
o~~
~~~
gffi8:
<o~
lI:! ga
~>
~<
~g
~ ~
~'a
->
5~
8.~
o
~ e
u 0
QU
It''l
-
O\ooo~
r- <"I
"<t "<t
.,.;-~
~
><
"<t
-
00 0 It''l-
It''l 0\ It''l
"<t -"<t
.,.;-~
~
><
~
-
~or:s
"<t O\~
...;~
~
<"I
-
oor-o
<"I It''l\O
"<t r--
...;~
~
-
-
<"Io<"l~
~ ~o
...;~
~
o
-
~o~~
~ ~ 00
...;t:i
~
0\
~
><
000000\
\0 \0\0
~ - r-
...;t:i
00
~
><
<"100\0
It''l 00 It''l
~ 0\\0
~t:i
r-
~
r-or-\O
~ -~
~ 00 It''l
~t:i
\0
~
<"IO~r-
<"I It''l<''l
~ \O"<t
~t:i
It''l
~
000\0<"1
o 0\<"1
~ "<t~
~t:i
"<t
~
><
It''l0lt''l0
0\ "<t~
<"I ~o
~~
~
~
<"IO-r-
00 0 ~
<"I <"Ir-
C'fi"";
-
<"I
~
000\-
r- It''l r-
<"I 00 It''l
0\0
-
-
OO<"l~
_ ~ 00
00 O\"<t
. t:i 0\
-
~
~~~~
"';-"';-00
<"I r- It''l -
<'I..................
~~~~
'a ~
'a =
u -8
'0 'a ....
.....~ <I.l
~~~~
~.~ ~ 5
:rIll!::X:9
iI:l I <I.l
::s~~~
~~~~
j::s::Sx
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
8~
- -
~~
J~
~~
I:! '0
.~ t
~ ~
o 0
ctu
"<t
-
It''l
0\
~
~
-
0\
~
<"I
-
r-
oO
~
r-
~
~
00
~
00
r-
0-
r-:
~
"<t
~
\0
r-:
~
It''l
o
~
r-:
~
-
~
\IS
~
$
\IS
~
~
\0
~
\0
<"I
-
\IS
~
o
r-
\0
~
~
<"I
.,.;-
-
~
8
r-
~
~
~
~
~
~
r-
~
-
.,.;-
~
r-
~
-
.,.;-
~
r-
~
-
.,.;-
~
r-
~
-
.,.;-
~
r-
~
-
.,.;-
~
r-
~
-
.,.;-
~
r-
~
-
.,.;-
~
r-
~
-
.,.;-
~
r-
~
-
.,.;-
~
r-
~
-
.,.;-
~
r-
~
-
.,.;-
~
It''l
~
.,.;-
~
00
~
0-
~
-
~
00
o
00
0\
-
~
~
<"I
~
~
~
~
~
-
9
~
'5
Q
~
It''l
~
~
6
.~
<IS
~
--
6
.~
<IS
]
~
0-
0-
-
ci-
S
...
o
<I.l
u
'60
~
~
C)
's
g
~
j
//) rc-:!-/Jj7
V) .....NOO 00 V) .....
- ~~ V) ~
~ -
r-:~ r-i -
>- - N -
~ ~
~ ~~OO 00 - C"l
~ 10
~ 0'1 N ~
\l5i - -
N -
~ ~
..... ~~OO 00 00 .....
- 00 10
~ C"i. ~
\l5~ ~ -
- -
~ ~
N 100000 00 -.t .....
..... V) V) - ~
~ .....0 "<t..
\l5~ 0'1 -
- - -
~ ~
- NIOOO 00 00 .....
- 00 0'1 r- 10
~ O-.t V) ~
\l5r-i oC -
>- - ..... -
~ ~
0 00000 00 00 .....
- NV) r- ~
~ 00 0'1 r-
vi'''': r-: .....
..... - .....
~ ~
0'1 0.....00 00 C"l C"l
~ &:;~ - ~
0
..,.;-...: r-: -
>- - - .....
~ ~
00 0000 00 0 C"l
~ ~ C"llf'l ~ 10
C"l 0'1 0'1
.00 \l5 ...:
E-< - ..... .....
a:: ~ ~
If r- 8~00 00 0'1 C"l
~~CI) ~ r- ~
-:. -.;f'.. V)
~~~ V)O .0 -
- - .....
~ ~
U CI)~E-< 10 .....r-oo 00 00 ~
~ OON ~
=> ~~i 000 ~
... ~o ~ .....
~ - - -
...:l ~ ~
~ ~oo V) ~;Zoo 00 V) 10
~ C"l C"l
~a:: "!.l":. -.t. .....
E-o ~ ~ -.tV) ~ r-:
..... .....
~ ~
~CI)E-< -.t O'I~OO 00 ~ r-
~><~ ~ r-
~> ~ -.t. 0'1 ~
< -.t~ ~ .....
N
~ ~ ~
C"l O'INOO 00 N .....
~ N V) 00 .....
U r-IO C"l "<t..
.or-: ~ .....
- N N
~ ~
N ~.~OO 00 ~ 00
~ -.t
.....
V) If'l 0 0\
..... - C"l N
~ ~
- NC"lOO 00 ~ ~ ~
~ C"l r-
~Vj, V) Vj, V)
N N ~ ~ -.i
- .....
~ ~
~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
C"l u 8~ 0'1
C"l 0'1
~~ ~ .....
~lf'l00 - ..... 8 6 ~
-> r- V) ..... ~~ .....
M...............
~~~~ 9 0:: e
~ ~ 0
'"
~ Q u
- 060
'a ~ ~ 6 ~
.::
5 ~ .::
<IS
i~ ~ CI)
'0 'a ._ (,)
..-4 '"::1 f4
S~~~ .~
I~ ~.~ ~ 5 i~ l5
~a::fE:9 ~
I '" o ~
::s~~~ .- u i
0 ~~
.~ ~ ~~~~ J 1/' .,;2 __~?
QU .3::S::SfE ctu CI)
.. ___...,.h~~_"'"~__""~___""__"_
Q
c:>
~
~
..:l
~
e--
~~
~;~
~<~
~~E
~~~
~~~
r:s
tl)O~
<Q~
~~~
~5
<"'I~
&-a
->
...
5 ...
~~
~ 8
QU
10
-
~o~~
<"'I C'l0l
c-f o\'c-f
~
~
-
\OoC'l~
C'l \001
C'l 001"
c-f 00c-f
~
>-
<"'I
-
000<"'1
<"'I 00 I"
- ~\O
c-f 00c-f
~
>-
C'l
-
0101000
<"'I - 10
o -10
c-f 00c-f
~
>-
-
-
-01000
10 \O~
01 I"~
...: "c-f
~
o
-
1"0-<"'1
~ ~~
...: "c-f
~
01
~
\OO-C'l
00 -. ~
I" -('I
. " c-f
00
~
>-
001010
- O~
I" 00-
...: ..oc-f
I"
~
\OOC'l<"'l
<"'I - 10
\0 100
...: ..oc-f
\0
a
~
:go;;:;:'t
10 C'l0\
...: \IS"':
10
~
>-
000<"'10
01 \000
~ 0100
...: "'..:
~
~
>-
~08&
~ 1"1"
...: vi'''':
<"'I
~
C'l0~0
I" -01
<"'I o~
...: ~..o
-
C'l
~
<"'IO~-
- I"
<"'I 10
. vi 0'
- -
-
~OC'l<"'l
01 <"'100
I" OI~
rxS c-fo\'
-
~
~~~~
vi vi 0' 0'
C'l I" 10 -
N..................
~~~~
ca ~
0::1 ...
ft 5
.gca:9
o '::1 ""
~5~~
~]~~
:r:I t:II:: :E ....
~ I ""
~~~~
~~~~
j~~:E
00 10
\0 -
10 -
...:'t"i'
-
~~
...:..;
-
\0-
~~
""':-(f"\'
-
~~
...:~
-
IO~
- I"
<"'1\0
"":N"
-
00\0
~~
- -
-
2!~
C'l\O
"":0
-
~~
"':oC
~~
- 00
M"
1OC'l
\0\0
00 -
c-f"
10 -
~;;:;
c-f..o
- <"'I
~~
N"vi
~IO
<"'I <"'I
-<"'I
c-fvi
C'l1O
C'l0
01 00
...:~
01
00
-
...:
<"'I
~
!
0\'
C'l
~
-
\0
10
00
C'l
~
-
<"'I
<"'I
"
C'l
~
~
10
-
..0
C'l
~
10
-
10
~
~
01
~
c-f
C'l
~
01
-
<"!.
-
C'l
~
~
-
C'l
~
01
00
I"
0\'
-
~
I"
10
~
rxS
-
~
~
"
-
~
~
~
~
10
10
o
~
<"'I
~
~~ ~ ~
...:~ " "
<"'I <"'I
~ ~
8~
- -
~~
j~
<~
~~
o ()
...-t 13
~~
ctu
~
-
~
..0
-
~
-
~
..0
-
~
-
~
..0
-
~
~
..0
-
~
-
~
..0
-
~
\0
~
..0
-
~
-
10
-
..0
-
~
C'l
01
10
vi
-
~
C'l
~
..0
-
~
01
I"
00
vi
-
~
I"
I"
~.
10
-
~
,10
b
vi
-
~
C'l
I"
00
~
~
00
00
10
c-f
<"'I
~
~
<"'I
&
-
9
)
~
~
"'l
~
~
6
'::1
as
~
-
!5
"::1
as
~
<"'I
01
01
-
~
e
o
""
Q,)
'60
~
tI)
()
"s
o
!
i
/~1) .- ;2 ___--~ r
~
...
roil
..:l
-=
~
t;
~
~-
Vl..:l~
ZIl.Z
~3~.~
t:l~<:J
~~!a8
~t:l>~
Vl~<o-
<~5-
~f!a:I:
~u
~
~
)t); :lJ)
Vl
00
'" '"
r-- r--
~~
-.r -.r
....
5
><
-.r
-
MM
0- 0-
GO GO
~~
-.r -.r
....
i
><
'"
-
i
><
r-- t-
~~
00
VlVl
....
~
i
><
NN
MM
00
VlVl
....
-
-
SS
-.r -.r
00
Vl ""
....
~
~
~
00
GO GO
"" ""
00
"" ""
....
0-
...
-
'"
><
.., ..,
\D \D
r--r--
00
Vl ""
....
GO
~
00
VlVl
0- 0-
00
Vl ""
....
t-
i
><
MM
~~
- -
"" ""
....
\D
i
><
Vl
i
><
-.r
~
..,
~
M
~
-
~
\D-.r0\-.r00\D0<'l0\
t;~~~~~~ ~~
~~vl"':"':"':ri ..;~
....
;eV';~~~&~0~~
.\Ot""-...............r:s ('f"lIf"-o
~~.,;...:...:...:ri .;~
....
\D-.r0\-.r00~0"'0\
t-"".., M>D 0\ M""
..-\Or------ ~r--
vl'-nvr....:....:...:r.r ";0\
-.r M
....
\D""""OO~O"'O\
r--"".., M>D 0\ MVl
..\Of'............... MI""-
~~vi'...:....:...:M .0\
....
;eV';~~~&~0~~
...'Ot'-.............N fiP"t'
~~vl...:...:...:ri .~
""
\D-.r0\..00~0"'0\
t-"""'<'I>D0- <'I""
...\rOf"'--........ ~t--
-nvlvl"':":"':ri ";0\
"<'I
....
\D-.r0\-.r00~
t-"""'<'I>DO\
...\Ot--........
~~vi..:..:..:ri
....
0..,0\
<'I ""
..,t-
.,;~
\D-.r0\..00~0"'0\
t-Vl..,M>Do- <'I""
...\Of'-........ ('f"lIf"'oo
~~"'...:..:..:ri ..,,;~
....
\D"0\-.r00~0"'0\
r--"""'<'I>D0- <'I""
.....\Ot""-............. Mt-
~~vl..:..:..:M .0;
....
- -
GO GO
.... .....
- -
Vl ""
....
\D"0\-.r00~0"'0\
r--Vl"'<'I>Do- <'I""
...\Dl'--........ C""at"--
",.nvr":"':"':ci ";0\
-.r<'l
....
.., ..,
t-t-
~~
- -
"" Vl
....
\D"0\-.r00~0"'0\
t-"""'<'I>D0- <'I""
...\of"'oo.............. ('f".lf""oo
~tivi'...:..:..:ri ';0\
....
~~
\D\D
MM
"" ""
....
\D"O\"OO~O"'O\
t-"""'<'I\DO\ M""
...\Or-....-- C"\C"
~~.n..:...:...:ri .0\
....
-.r"
....
.. ..
~~
"" ""
....
~~...;;;~~~CM~
-.rGO!=:---M ~GO
o\..n";":":":ri oCo\
-.r<'l
....
GO GO
t- t-
- -
..Q..Q
-.r"
....
""GO~O<'lGO\DOO\<'I
~~Cl5~oa~ !=:v::
OMvi' ...:..:...: "';00
""<'I -
....
~~
GO GO
MM
M<'I
....
~S~g~~G080~;
N...V"aVlV"a," 0\C"'l
"':"':ri ...: ri";
..,- -
....
:3]
>< S
~Vl
~i
ta
Il.
13 ... ...
>< .5 of
-:'I 2:- .....
E;; u'u ~ !'l :3
.. l1.'~ ..J c ><
:3 ;:J II .!! ii .. f-o ..
>< . = "i1!6;"'f-o
~ cIlI :ij t:l 61 U f-o .- tl: .~
i-!I! a 'Ei
<5Vl~ f-o;:J
-.rOMM
- o-
M M
....
..OMM
c::a ~....
....
..0<'1<'1
- o-
M M
....
"OM<'I
- 0-
<'I <'I
....
"0<'1<'1
- o-
M <'I
....
"O<'lM
~ ~-
....
"OM<'I
- O-
M <'I
....
..OMM
~ ~.....
....
"OM<'I
c::a ~....
....
..OM <'I
- 0-
<'I <'I
....
"0<'1<'1
- 0-
<'I <'I
....
"0<'1<'1
- 0-
<'I <'I
....
""O..,M
r:i ~-
....
\00'-0-
GO t--
;; -
""00""
0\ 0\
....
:l
.~ ~ ;s l3
I) 9 . .
Il. ,_ ~ ~
.., ...l .- .-
i.....l...l
..:s..!!
II .~ .fa ~
S =' C:;.-
._ a:l < a:l
...l
Vl\DO\
~.v:: &:i
-
....
"" \D 0\
O\-t-
0."" ""
-
....
"" \D 0\
O\-t-
0..'" V'\
-
....
"" \D 0\
O--t-
0""""
...:
....
"" \D 0\
o--t-
0."" ""
-
....
"" \D 0\
O\-t-
0.""""
-
....
"" \D 0\
O\-t-
0."" ""
;;
"" \D 0\
O\-t-
0."" ""
;;
"" \D 0\
O\-t-
00"" ""
-
....
"" >D 0\
O\-t-
0."" ""
-
....
"" \D 0\
O\-t-
0."" ""
-
....
"" \D 0\
O\-t-
00"" ""
;;
S~~
-:,tnV'l
;;
""0""
""""0
0\"""
....
t-O\t-
~~~
....
e
a
'i!
~ ~
"0 .g
i..!!
.. 0
.! :> :3
~8tf
cf i ~
o~ j
II a ;:3
.S
~
o
....
O\t-MOO
MOGO"
-00('1"\0\
o M..Q
'" M
....
o
....
O\t-MOO
<'loGO"
..... GO ('f".l 0\
o M..Q
.., M
....
o
....
O\t-MOO
~2~~
g ~..Q
....
o
....
~Ei~~O
..... 00 C'f'\ 0\
o M..Q
.., M
....
o
....
O\t-<'IOC
MOGO"
_00<<"'10\
g ~..Q
....
o
....
O\t-<'IOC
<'loGO"
-OOMO\
o M..Q
.., M
....
o
....
O\t-MOO
MOGO..
....ooC""\O\
o M..Q
.., <'I
....
o
....
~H~~~O
g ~..Q
....
o
....
O\t-<'IOO
MOGO..
.... QC C'f"lI 0\
o M..Q
.., M
....
o
....
O\t-<'IOO
MOGO..
.... 00 f"l 0\
o M..Q
.., M
....
o
....
~Ei~~O
.... 00 f"\ 0\
o M..Q
.., M
....
o
....
O\t-<'IOO
~~:::~
g ~..Q
....
o
....
""<'10"'0
__~oo
<'l GO "" 0\
o M..Q
<'l <'I
....
o
....
o <'l ""-0
l'O.....,..,
Mt-""C
~ ~..Q
....
o
....
_O\GO..O
0\ Vl ... 00
C""\t""lIO\O
~ O;~
....
~
8-
e
~
!
....
o
'"
..
;:J
:s
"H
~ u
II g
~ ~
~~3!
....O~
8:I:~~"
61'lS=-5
~fIl~t:lO
O\r--GO g" 0\
~~~_~N
....
O\t-GO g" 0-
o-\D\D "'<'1
0\ \0 ..... .....
....
O\t-GO g" 0\
o->D>D <'1M
0\\0--
....
O\t-GO g" 0\
O\\D\D "'<'1
0\ ~........
....
O\t-GOg"O\
O\\D\D "'<'1
0\\0-.....
....
O\t-GOg"O\
o->D\D ..,<'1
0\\0--
....
O\r-GO g" 0\
O\\D>D ..,M
0\\0_.....
....
O\t-GO g" 0\
O\\D>D "'<'1
O\\C--
....
o-t-GOg"O\
o-\D\D ..,M
0\\0..........
....
~!O~g~~
0\\1)--
....
O\t-GO g" 0\
O\\D>D <'lM
O\\()........
....
O\t-GOg"O\
O\\D\D ..,M
0\ \0 ..... ....
<It
'" N 0\ -, '" 0\
go !O :2 ~ <'l <'I
;;
-N \0 00 0,,",
t-GO"GO<'lM
GO "" _
....
..t-""""""..,
...0\1-............
.. M
....
~
8 5
] B 'j ;s
.. ~"'ur:
n..!!"'5 "'0
I: ~ 2 "- a::
dd::d:;"cIlI8
.2 .lIIll.1 i ! ]
;S i!a::....t
r: . H 1 .; .!
6Vlll1:Il.O~
M
..
\D
~
-
....
~
~
;;
0\
~
~
-
....
0\
..,
-
oC
~
....
:!:
..,
oC
~
....
~
..
oC
~
....
""
!O
oC
~
....
M
:i
oC
<'I
-
....
..
""
o
~
....
..,
0\
..,
~
~
....
""
GO
GO
~
....
t-
..,
""
o
..,
;;
""
&:i
vi
<'l
-
<It
~
E
....
0-
""
..
oC
~
,.;
~
-
ci .
~~
~;
~~
r~
s ~
Vlt:l
~ .g
.:3 :t
:: ~
'3Vl
o .:!
'(; ~
.~ 8
UlIJ
~
g
Vl
:s
J
f
'S
~
a::
1
E-
. .,. ...,'_,~."""__..,,,._,.,..._".~,, .....'w_~_,~.,",..._~__~__
=
...
...
fol
..J
=
<
Eo<
!Zt
~~
0-
Zg;
~~~~
~jga..J
Sl:l.<..J
<3~8
~~~~
~als-
alO:I:
Ou
all:..
~o
~~
l:l.t.)
)!)-:J1f)
V>
-
00 00
r-r-
..
~~
r- r-
~
5
><
~
~
00
~~
dd
00 00
~
~
Q\ Q\
r- r-
oo 00
dd
00 00
~
~
N
-
gg
~~
00 00
~
~
-
-
~
00
V> V'l
.... ....
NN
00 00
~
~
~
NN
- -
--
(f'\t"\
00 00
~
Q\
~
.... ....
Q\ Q\
00 00
~~
00 00
~
00
~
.... ....
Q\ Q\
>Q >Q
..
00 00
~
r-
..
.
..
><
~~
V'l V'l
.,.;.,.;
00 00
~
>Q
~
V'l
~
.
~
....
~
N
i
><
5
><
~g~~~~:!:o~t::
t"-MV"a"'lll"V1\OO\ -t""-
o..~r-:~~cori"..o v)~
~t'--- N
~
~g~~~~:!:o~t::
t"--("t"l"'..V1I\oo\ -t'--
doC~~~~..c .,.;~
~t'- N
~
~g~~~~:tO
r-....V'l.V'l>QQ\
o oer:"",cori'f:Ilo..D
~t'-
~
r-r-
.... r-
-r-
.,.;~
N
~s~~~~~O~:::
t""-('f"j"'....Vl\oo\ -t'-
doOr::~~~..,; vi'~
<""'If""'- N
;;
~S~~~~:!:O~I=:
t-C""\"'....,,\OO\ -I:'
doc~~~~..c .,.;~
~r-- N
~
~g~~~~:!:o~~
r-....V'l.V'l>QQ\ -r-
doC~~~~..c .,.;~
~r-- N
~
~S~~~~~O~:::
t--C""\........."'\OO\ -t'--
doOr-:~~~"li .00\
('f'lir--- N
;;
~S~~~~~O~~
f"'-('f"IVl..Vl\OO\ -r--
doC~~~~..c .,.;~
~f""'- ("ol
~
~s~~~~~O~:::
t"-oMVl"''''\OO\ -I:"'-
doC~~~~..c .,.;~
~r--- N
~
("l<'l
NN
V'l V'l
tt
~
~g~~~~~O~F::
t'-oC""\"''''Vl\OO\ -f'
doOr-:~~~~ ",0\
~t""-- N
~
00 00
NN
r-. r-.
r- r-
oo 00
~
~S~~~~~O
r-....V'l.V'l>QQ\
doC~~~~..c
.... r--
-
~
E(::
.,.;~
N
Q\ Q\
~~
~~
00 00
~
!:~~~:;~2:0~~
V'l....V'l.V'l>QQ\ oor-
"':oOr-:~~~v:i vlo\
If'l"\t--- ('tool
-
~
r-r-
.... ....
.... ....
~~
00 00
~
V'l>QQ\~0~r-000....
-t""'"\O ..... Vl C""'tC""ll
V'l>Q.... V'l 00 Q\V'l
oC~~~~~..c ~~
~r-- -("01
~
00 00
00 00
N N
~~
r- r-
~
>Q~OOOO.>QOO
..... 1:'-0\00"''''
>Q r->Qr-oo.
oC";~NNN"';
- >Q-
;;
00
..
t- t-
NN
. .
~
~Q\!:g?:lN~O~;:;:;
t-~0V'l>Q:g- N>Q
"':"';oO":"':"':f/I'l .~
OO('f"l N-
~
a1
>< S
~rIl
~i
t8
l:l.
:l OIl ..
>< .5 ~
~l:fi 3H:l
:S;J is.!!..c .. Eo< :a
><~-.a;; S-i! 6;o,.Eo<
~ ~ 1J 0 til u Eo< .- ! ?;-
~jl !ct~
MOVlOO
~ ~("")
~
....0V'l00
V'l - ....
~ >Q
("'\0,,",00
V'l _ ....
>Q >Q
~
~O~:=::
>Q >Q
~
....0V'l00
V'l -....
~ >Q
....0V'l00
V'l - ....
>Q >Q
~
MOVlOO
V'l - ....
~ >Q
....0V'l00
V'l - ....
~ >Q
~O~:=::
>Q >Q
~
f"')OVloa
V'l -....
>Q >Q
~
~O~:=::
~ >Q
C""\OVlOO
V'l - ....
>Q >Q
~
r-00r-
. -....
>Q >Q
~
00 t-
ON
00 .
~~
_ N
....0.0
_ 00....
V'l .
~
~O~!:
N N
~
:s
.~ ~ :s :s
If .~ fi fi
.., ..J .- .-
i...J..J
. - ..
~..."U
;; .8 .13 ~
g :l C:;.-
._ I%l < I%l
..J
.... . 00
.r->Q
.... V'l r-
~ -: ..
~
.... . 00
.r->Q
.... V'l r-
f:'l"':"":
~
.... .00
.r->Q
....V'lr-
~...:...:
~
C""'l ..,. 00
.r->Q
.... V'l r-
~...:...:
~
.....00
.r->Q
.... V'l r-
~....:..:
~
.....00
.r->Q
.... V'l r-
~..:..:
~
.....00
.r->Q
.... V'l r-
~..:..:
~
.....00
.r->Q
.... V'l r-
~..:..:
~
.....00
.r->Q
.... V'l r-
~..:..:
~
.....00
.r->Q
.... V'l t-
~..:..:
~
.....00
.r->Q
<'l. "l. r-.
.... --
~
V'l V'l Q\
. r-.>Q
....V'lr-
~....:..:
~
>QN.
_>QV'l
.... V'l r-
('r\":"":
~
o Q\-
.... .... Q\
>QN....
f'i"":":
~
_ _ 0
.... N -
tn..!""" 00
-
~
I!
a
'j!
If g
.., ';1
i ·
. 0
.~:> :s
18tf
!fit'
.~ ~
:s J:o .-
.S 0 ..J
I:..
o
~
r-....O.O
\D\ONOO
0\'" M"'"
-:~oO"':
Q\ >QN
~
o
~
r-....O.O
>Q>QNOO
0\ .... ('f'\ ....
"':~oO":
Q\ >QN
~
o
~
r-....O.O
>Q>QNOO
0\ .. f"") ....
":NoO"':
Q\ >QN
~
o
~
r-....O.O
>Q>QNoo
O\....f"")....
":rioO":
Q\ >QN
~
o
~
r-....O.O
>Q>QNoo
O\...('f'\....
"':riOl!":
Q\ >QN
~
o
~
r-~?:l~0
~.....-
":rioC":
Q\ >QN
~
o
~
r-....O.O
>Q>QNOO
O\...('f"II....
"':riOl!"':
Q\ >QN
~
o
~
r-~?:l~0
~.....-
"':riocr...:
Q\ >QN
~
o
~
r-~?:l~0
~.....-
"':rioO":
Q\ >QN
~
o
~
r-....O.O
>Q>QNOO
O\....('f'\....
"':cioO"':
Q\ >QN
~
o
~
!D~?:l~0
O\.....('f'\....
...:~oO...:
Q\ >QN
~
o
...,
~:!~~O
0.....-
rir:ioC":
Q\ >QN
~
o
~
........r-....O
M ..... \Q ....
N.r-O
"':C"ir-:...:
Q\ >QN
~
o
~
>Qr-.V'l0
~~~:g
ri"':(f'\\li
r- V'l-
~
o
~
.00........0
NNQ\O
.... .... ra t'
f'i"':"':o\
. ....
~
~
8-
~
t'
!
....
o
..
.
;J
:l
.~ ~
~ ;;
~ g
6 ;:J
.!l
~ ~.~
~o~
ijl~g
Cll:
OOr-Nr-V'lr-
~8V;~8OO
~N
~
oor-Nr-V'lr-
"'"....-0000
oOV'\f"")......
~N
~
oor-Nr-V'lr-
.."....._0000
oO\nf"")-
~N
~
00 r-N r-V'lt-
.,....._0000
oO\nf"").....
~N
~
oor-Nr-V'lr-
~av;~~oo
(f'\N
~
oor-Nr-V'lr-
.,....._0000
o OV'\ f'I"II....
~N
~
00 r- N r- V'l t-
.."....._0000
OO\n('f'\.....
~N
~
00 r-t'l r-V'lr-
....._0000
oOV'\('f"II.....
~N
~
!S;;~~t;
~N
~
oot-Nr-V'lt-
~av;~~oo
~N
~
oor-Nr-V'lr-
~a;;~s:oo
~N
~
000....r-V'lr-
~av;~~oo
~N
~
...._00~~>Q
ss~...._oo
~N
~
OOf"")('f"II.....("IIOO
~~~~OO>Q
C'i":
~
>Q....V'l0000
~~~:!:........
;;
u l
'E s'~ :s
~ ~ I:.. 'ft t6
e~ClIl15~d
8 l ce .~ dlI .~
.2 .I.~ I ! j
:s~eCll:~d
;>>'i ~ ~ oS ."
orllCll:Cl.o:i
~
N
g
....
~
!:
Q\
g
....
~
~
>Q
~
....
~
....
V'l
.....
-
-
....
~
r-
S
ti
....
....
Q\
V'l
00
ti
....
~
o
:!.
~
....
~
-
.
.
'i.
....
~
~
.,.;
-
....
~
Q\
~
..c
-
....
~
V'l
r-
.
~
....
~
!:
r-.
~
....
~
N
g
~
....
~
&
r-
~
~
~
~
....
....
00
~
>Q
;;
oj .
~~
t-
Cll:dlI
.... -
~g::
Ii
mO
:! .;1
~,
"Ern
o .~
"0 8
.~ 8
Ual
~
g
rIl
I
~
.~
!
~
{,)
...
...
~
.J
=
-<
...
ti
<
~
~~~
~s::z
(I);~~
~ ~<
:JtIJ~~
~g>~
..J~<o-
ti...!:l-
<fa:!::
tIJ~{,)
~
b
{,)
) I) ~..v2 Yi
.,.,
0- 0-
,., ,.,
.,., V)
~~
~~
...,
5
><
;!:
~
V) V)
,., ,.,
00
00
:!;:!:
...,
~
5
><
('I ('I
.... ....
V) V)
00
:!::!:
...,
~
~
('I ('I
8.8.
- -
........
- -
tOt
-
-
~
.... ....
0- 0-
""..V"I..
- -
~:!;
...,
~
~
00
:!::!:
riri
:!;:!:
tOt
0-
~
g:~
\D \D
riri
.... ....
- -
tOt
ao
5
><
('1('1
~~
~~
:!::!:
tOt
I"-
~
ao ao
V) V)
00 ao
~~
:!::!:
tOt
\D
5
><
V)
~
....
5
><
,.,
~
('I
5
><
~
OO~VlOO\OVl\()O
l"-ao,.,O('l('lr-
I"-\Do-r-ao0-....
r:.oo~~~r-:
.... 00 _
-
...,
~~
0- -
"':M
... ,.,
ao..,V)ao\DV)\DO
1"-00,.,0('1('11"-
I"-\Do-I"-aoo-....
r-:.oo~~~r-:
:!:oo-
tOt
.., \D
~~
...:r-r
... ,.,
~~~~~~ueo,.,~
I"-\Do-I"-aoo-.... ~-
r-:.OC..~('f'\~r-: ...:rr
:!:oo- _('f'\
tOt
~~~~~~teO,.,~
I"-\Do-I"-aoo-.... ~-
r::.OO~fPl~r:: ..:~
:!:oo- _('f'\
tOt
~~~~~~teO~~
t-\OO\f"'ooOOO\..... 0\-
,;..;OOC"1~~r:: ..:~
:!;OO.... _(f\
...,
~~~~~~teO,.,~
f"'oo\OO\t-ODO\"- ~-
r-:..,;oOCC'\~f"ir:-.: "':ri
:!:oo- -~
tOt
~~~~~~teO~~
t-\DO\r-ooO\'" 0\-
r:-:"';oOt:r\~~r:: ..:~
...00- _C"'\
-
tOt
~~~~~~teO"'~
I"-\Do-I"-aoo-.... ~-
r-:.oo~~~r-: "':ri
:!:OO..... _('Ir\
tOt
~~~~~~teO..,~
t-\OO\t"'-OOO\..... ~-
r-:..;oo~~~r-: ":N'
.00_ -('f'\
;;;
,., ..,
V) V)
ao ao
..;..;
.... ....
;;;-
~~~~~~te
I"-\Do-I"-ao0-....
r::..;oo~C"i'~r::
.... ao...
-
tOt
O..,~
~-
...:t:i
- ..,
.., ..,
~~
-D-D
:!::!:
tOt
- - le 0 00 I"- 8 0 \D. 0-
V) ('1<5\('1"'''' ..,0-
"'. Ol . 1"-. ao. Ol "'l. -. t"\
..,....ao..,..,..,1"- 1"-('1
",,00- _t:"l
;;;
.., ..,
\D\D
ao ao
-D-D
.., ..,
- -
...,
s:l~0-""""\D""01"-S::::
i!S\D==:~~:!~ toes;
oOoOr-.:~t:f'\rn~ "':0;
:!:t'--- NN
tOt
\D \D
V) V)
.... ....
:i:i
;;;-
ao8V)I"-I"-'"0-0
\0 cor."'('f'\-('f'\
\D V)aoo-Ol"-
onon";riri<"ion
('I \D -
;;;
.., ..,
s. s.
- -
0- 0-
tOt
_OO('l\~\OV'lr-ooo-
~~~~~~: :!:~
~o":ririri"; ~~
~""_ M-
...,
~~
..;..;
.... ....
tOt
o......"'__ooovaoo
r:~~~~~~ ~~
t~on":":":ri ~~
tOt
n1
" 2
~(I)
i~
eO
Il.
n ...
" .s .g
~~:~ !RD
! ~ .11 :; fi i 1 '8 ... ~
~ all :.a 0 m {,) ... .;; ~~ ~
D g R.-
~~J: "'Il.~
\DOV)-
g :g....
tOt
\DOV)-
g :g....
tOt
'OOV)-
o :g....
t;
'OOV)-
o :g....
t;
'OOV)-
g :g....
tOt
'OOV)-
o :g....
t;
'00""-
o :g....
t;
\DO""-
o :g....
t;
'00""-
g :g....
tOt
'00""-
o :g....
t;
aoOI"--
o :g....
t;
.,.,oaoao
.,., - ..,
\D \D
tOt
_ .,.,
.t:
...:..;
('1('1
NO--
.... - ..,
.,., .,.,
tOt
OO\D....
('I 0-('1
~ ..,
....0('1('1
(::; ~-
...,
::I
.~ ~ ~ ~
If .~ B fi
1-=;:J;:J
.;...!!
~ .a J t-
g IS .-
.- = =
..J
V)"-'('I
-0-
\DI"-o-
~....;-:
...,
.,.,..,('1
-0-
\DI"-o-
~..:....:
...,
V) .., ('I
-0 -
\DI"-o-
~..:..:
tOt
.,.,..,('1
-0-
\D I"- 0-
~..:....:
tOt
.,.,..,('1
_0_
\DI"-o-
f"'i"":":
tOt
.,., .., ('I
-0-
\D I"- 0-
~...:....:
tOt
~a~
\D I"- 0-
~....:...:
tOt
.,.,..,('1
-0-
'01"-0-
~...:..:
tOt
.,., .., ('I
-0-
\DI"-o-
~...:..:
tOt
.,., .., ('I
-0-
.0 I"- 0-
~...:..:
tOt
~S~
\D I"- 0-
~..:..:
tOt
\D-""
.,., ao I"-
.., .,., I"-
(f'\":":
tOt
""sao
(::..,~
N":":
tOt
o .., l"-
V) - ..,
-0-
N":":
tOt
r-I"-O
o--ao
o..V\'V'I
-
...,
!
a
.i!
If g
.., .;:
; .
.0
.8:> D
isU!
l.J j
n ~.-
.s O....l
a..
o
tOt
r""lr""l-~O
~:g~C5\
~ri<"iri
0- I"- ('I
...,
o
tOt
..,..,-~O
~:g~C5\
~ri<"iri
0- r- ('I
...,
o
tOt
('t'\C"'\-~O
~:g~C5\
~ri<"iri
0- 1"-('1
tOt
o
...,
..,..,-~O
~:g~es;
~ri<"iri
0- 1"-('1
tOt
o
tOt
..,..,-~O
~:g~C5\
~~<"iri
0- 1"-('1
tOt
o
tOt
..,..,-~O
~:g~C5\
~ri<"iri
0- 1"-('1
tOt
o
tOt
('f'\('I"\....s;tO
~:g~C5\
~ri<"iri
0- 1"-('1
tOt
o
tOt
..,..,-~O
~:g~C5\
~ri<"iri
0- 1"-('1
tOt
o
tOt
..,..,-~O
~:g~es;
~ri<"iri
0\ 1"-('1
tOt
o
tOt
..,..,-~O
~:g~es;
~ri<"iri
0- 1"-('1
tOt
o
tOt
~""oo('l"\o
~tD~~
~riti~
tOt
o
tOt
~~~go
..,.....,.,('1
ririoO":
0- .0('1
tOt
o
tOt
~....:::~O
..,<!I"-""
-Dri-Dr:
I"- V)-
tOt
o
tOt
('1.....,.,..,0
....ao..,('I
...."'O\\()
O\...:~~
V) .... -
tOt
o
tOt
"'oo\()....o
1"'"-0......'"
......00..0-.
o N-D
.., ('I
tOt
~
8.
e
ll:::.
t'
~
'c;
C)
;;)
D
l !
.. ~
~ ;:J
~~J
ilj~~
g,::
~"-,,,('I"'''''
M~~~::o-.
~N
.....
\OC""".-MC"'..-
~~~~::O\
<"iri
...,
\OC""""'~(f'\"
~~~~=O\
<"iri
tOt
~",,,,,('I"'''''
~~~~::o-.
<"iri
tOt
~"'''''('I'''''''
~~~~::O\
<"iri
tOt
~,,-,""('I"'''''
N~~~=O\
<"iri
.....
~",""('I"'''''
N~~~=O'\
<"iri
tOt
~",""('I"'''''
~~~~::o-.
<"iri
tOt
~",""('I"'''''
~~~~::O'\
<"iri
tOt
~",""('I"'''''
~,~ ~ ~ :: 0\
<"iri
tOt
""~\D('I""""
o Vlrr.....O\
~ tn(f'\....
<"iri
tOt
~~....ao.,.,1"-
_ooao
.,., .., -
<"iri
tOt
O...."'tnl"'"-N
:;:l$~~aol"-
r-r...:
tOt
$S~s:tD~
~C'l'l(f'\"""
- -
tOt
~0000.......0'\
'0 \D 0..,('1
\C--
-
tOt
B
.- ~
~ ~ ~.~ ~
gi~.~~a
oc;.~tall.~
.....g!i!~t
.g .s.;: il :. ~
g!ji~~
~
l-
ao
..,
..,:
0-
..,
tOt
('I
ao
ao
..;
'"
..,
tOt
0-
ao
..,
on
0-
..,
tOt
~
on
0-
..,
tOt
('I
....
....
t
..,
tOt
I"-
ao
0-
t
..,
tOt
~
"'l.
I"-
0-
..,
tOt
~
-
00
0-
..,
tOt
8
I"-
00
0-
..,
.....
8
I"-
~
..,
tOt
....
g:
~
~
..,
~.
:t
..,
tOt
:2
..,
<"i
('I
..,
tOt
.,.,
:g
~
tOt
..;
0-
~
of .
~g:
t-
g,::all
... -
~g:
17t
:! ~
(1)0
; .!l
.- :t
=: S
"3(1)
o .~
'() ~
8~
I
(I)
..,
~
..;
~
tOt
I
~
~
'S
9
g,::
1
...
c:l
...
...
~
~
=
<
Eo<
!Zb
~~
0_
eczg5
~~z
en<~~
~~~:l
~i~8
~ >'"
...J <8:
~ ;5-
<0::I:
tzltzlU
~~
~8
) () ~c:1 if J-
V'l
-
- -
V'l V'l
t-t-
88
N N
tI't
~
~
~
><
'" '"
gg
gg
tI't
~
~
><
...,. ...,.
0- 0-
'" '"
~~
tI't
N
-
~
NN
'" ....
0- 0-
~~
tI't
-
-
~
~n:1
\D \D
~~
tI't
o
-
~
00
t- t-
...,. ...,.
0000
~~
tI't
0-
~
><
t- t-
- -
00 00
88
NN
tI't
00
~
'" '"
00 00
- -
~~
0- 0-
;;-
t-
~
00 00
s:s:
"''''
00 00
;;-
\D
~
V'l
~
><
...,.
~
'"
~
N
~
-
~
00 l"'--OO('f1("l"')--O
"'O\N...r-_O
oo..-\oN...("l"')\O
-:oC~r-:r-:..~
'" t'"'l t'"'l ....
0- 00
tI't
-N
...,. 00
00 00
..oM
- \D
oot-OOC'f'l<""l__O_N
;:t~~~!;:~~ ;:;gg
-:oO"",r-:~...; \&Sri
~~('f"t ""'-\4)
tI't
00 r-oo('f'\C""\--o
:; ~ .~ ~ !; ~ ~
":oO~r:r:-:~.
'" ('f'\ ('If'\ -
0- 00
tI't
- N
...,. 00
00 00
..oM
- \D
oor-OOC'f'\('f\--O-N
:;~~~!;~~ :;gg
":oO~r:r:-:... ..DN
V'\c""\('f'\ ""'-\0
0- 00
tI't
=:~~~~::oo
00...,. \DN""''''\D
":orjtf'i'r-:r:..,;..,;
va <""l ('f'\ ....
0- 00
tI't
- N
...,. 00
00 00
.oM
- \D
~s:g"':;=~O~~
\D.~\D.~~<'l.\D. ...,..~
-OO('f'\~f"'oo""'''' \ON
V'\('If'\C""\ __\0
0- 00
tI't
...,.t-0V'l 0-...,. 0
~8:l;;;~~~~
...MMr-:r-:....
~....'" -
tl'tt-
_ \D
~~
..,;..:
- \D
_r---r-o-.OO_O'\ON\n
S:i!b~n:;~&:l ~~
~~~~r-:..~ :S~
t- \D
tI't
~S:~~~=~0&:l:;:
......._\()QO('f'\C'f'\ NV'\
g- vi" ..: ..0 \IS .,; C"i" ..cr r-:
O'\('t'\ ",,""V'\
t- ....
tI't
00
t- t-
O- 0-
..0..0
t-t-
- -
tI't
~t;f::r--~::~o~s
NN\D~""''''\D 00...,.
....o\..Q"O..M "'..
NNN ""'''''V'\
~....
.... ....
:::~
0000
~~
tI't
tnr-OXN-f"\Or--
~8:NC5\g~& !;~
r:r:ioOvl...o.": "'...:
""""'N "",""'V'\
.... ...,.
~
~~
.... ....
0\0\
~~
~
Ot-"'Moo-NO........
00.........--1:" S....
\D. 1". t-. "l. 1". ..... -. . -.
r=;~"'''''.''':: ~:
...,. ....
~
\D \D
55
.... ....
;;-
...,.ool"....-O-....OM\D
('f'\Ntn-OO"- r-~
o-"'...,.M............ ooM
~=~"'vi'...g ~~
...,. ....
~
I" t-
'" ....
t-I"
~~
;;-
~~~=~~l;;O~~
0-00\D0-...,.0 V'loo
s~~.......oo" ~;i
"'M
~
"'V'lO--MI" 000""'1"
;;!~~~~~ ~~
..r-:OMM":" r-:o\
00__ cr.-
;;-
bb
r-:. 1".
'" V'l
\D \D
tI't
:ll!
IoC S
~en
I)
:l OIl
IoC .s .!
. ~ "..
~ l:a oS 2 IS
IS::J II S.!!.c:l...Eo< =
IoC dil -a :; ~ 1i 2 U ~Eo<
~ :l 13 0 6i U Eo< oi 8. o~
~~! f-'l~
...O\-V)
&:lC!i~"'"
0\0\
N N
tI't
... 0\ .... '"
&:lC!i~"'"
~~
~
...O'\-tn
&:l~~"'"
~~
~
...0-.-'"
&:l~~"'"
0\0\
N M
~
... 0'\ ..... '"
&:l ~ ~....,.
~~
tI't
O\...-V"a
........tf"lI....
0- - I"
~~
tI't
00<<,",-'"
0...........,.
-....1"
oo"r-:
NN
tI't
('II r-.... Ilt"'I
-- <""l ('f'\ ...
........1"
~~
tI't
0-....-....
o-M.......,.
- ...,. I"
.....
NM
~
r:::s~~
oo-t-
~~
~
\0--",",
trnOO<""l....
.... I" t-
r-:..Q
;;-
~~;;;~
M""'I"
..~
;;-
_oor--\n
f:"I ('f'\ ('f"a ...
o--t-
00
- -
tI't
o-t-\D\D
('t'\ ..... 00 f"'\
...,. 00 V'l
r-:..o
tI't
~~~~
00 ...,. '"
C'f'i'C'f'i'
tI't
:I
"@ ~ :l :l
cfB..
.- ~ ~
." ....J .- .-
i....J...J
.;...2
I o~ 05 ~
~ ::I ~ 0_
0_ III III
...J
ggg
0-00-
~_-N
tI't
ggg
0-00-
rr\-:N
~
ggg
0-00-
rr\"':N
tI't
oog
~l;;;-
~-:ci
tI't
ggg
0-00-
rr\":ri
~
oog
S:l;;;-
~..:t'i
~
ggg
0-00-
C"'i-:N
~
ggg
0-00-
~":ri
tI't
oog
s:tD-
~"':N
tI't
ggg
0-00-
C"'i"':ri
tI't
ggg
0-00-
~"':N
tI't
ggg
0-00-
~":f"i
~
"'g ~ ~
00 _
~":M
:;g:;
-V'l\D
~..:..:
~
V'l .... 0-
0- ...,. ...,.
t-.oo 0-
-
~
B
OJ!
tf a
.., og
i ·
.-0
08:> :l
18~
.J j
IS 1: .-
oS u...J
p.
o
tI't
:::~;:!;::O
NO'\--
gMoi~
~
o
~
~~~~o
N ~_.....
~Moi~
tI't
o
~
~~~::o
("ot~--
gMoi~
;;
o
tit
t-&!...,. 00 0
- ........
N --
~Moi~
~
o
~
:::~;:!;::O
~O\.........
gMoi~
-
~
o
~
t-&!...,. 00 0
- ........
M --
gMoi~
;;
o
tI't
!:~;:!;::O
('to\.........
gMoi~
;;
o
~
~~~::o
NO'\--
gMoi~
;;
o
~
!:~;:!;::O
('to'\--
gMoi~
;;
o
~
~~~::o
("ot~.... -
gMoi~
-
~
o
~
!:~;:!;::O
("'010\.........
~Moi~
~
o
tit
!:~;:!;::O
t-\o---
gMoi~
-
~
o
~
....-~....O
0- .... 00
- 0- ....
~M;~
;;
o
~
I"\D ",00 0
~;:!;b!:
~M~~
~
o
~
00 N...... 0
t-N 00 I"
f"'\ tl"lI \0 tl"lI
0;-: \IS":
...,. ....-
~
!
fi'
~
-
o
C)
.
::J
:l
"I !
~ B
8 ~
]~~
.0:> IoC
!l::I:~~tl
U!!=.s
ten.....OO
llii:
00\00.....(""\
fJ;~~~~
~M
tI't
~o-oo...,....,.'"
\C;~~~2
"'M
tI't
o 0\ 00 ... ... f"'\
~;~~~2
"'M
~
~o-oo...,....,.....
\O:;i~~S
"';M
~
~~00~~8
\C...~cor.--
"'M
~
~o-oo...,....,.....
\O:;~~~2
"'M
~
00-00...,....,.....
~:;;~~~2
"'M
tI't
00-00...,....,.....
~:;;~~~2
"';M
~
~o-oo...,....,.....
\D;~~~~
"'M
tI't
~o-oo...,....,.....
\O;~~~2
"'M
~
~o-oo...,....,.....
\O;~~~2
"';M
tI't
~o-oo...,....,.'"
\O;~~~2
"'M
~
~;~~~~
\O..\OC"'\_......
"'M
~
('f'\..... 00 Ng....
0...,.000- 00
o-o-...,.M-
f:"i":
~
t-."''''\Dt-
.... 0\1" \D"''''''
~:>r("ot-
~
9 l
oe g
C) ..! Oil !
~ !p.e..-
gi ~.!~a
a ~ 6:; t dil o~
.2 .r 08 H ! j
ISm!~t<.l
~ o~ H 1 .s o.
c;enc2c:l.O:i
0-
N
N
~
N.
;;
~
...,.
8
"'.
-
tI't
N
~
o
"'.
-
tI't
o
-
...,.
a
.....
-
tI't
~
~
"'.
;;
o
....
00
~
.....
-
tI't
~
~
-
tI't
....
~
~
-
-
~
0-
....
...,.
~
-
tI't
~
00
00"
'"
0-
tI't
....
\D
...,.
o
'"
00
tI't
M
...,.
N
M
\D
t;
-
....
t-.
00
00
~
e
00
~
....
~
..;
~
oJ 0
::I....
58:
~;
'!i
Ii
enO
;09
~~
:;en
o o~
~ 8
.~ 8
Utzl
r:::
00
~
'"
~
J
If
os
!
l
~
8
en
TABLE 12
EASTLAKE GREENS & LAND SWAP
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN & PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
COST ALLOCATION ASSUMPTIONS
City ofChula Vista
Actual 92-93 Expenditures
Amount Percent EastLake Properties Allocation
TABLE 12
EASTLAKE GREENS & LAND SWAP
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN & PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
COST ALLOCATION ASSUMPTIONS
City of Chula Vista
Actual 92-93 Expenditures .
Amount Percent EastLake Properties Allocation
Parks and Recreation 4,506,638 8.79%
Administration - Parks 365,107 0.71% $1,150.31 per Park Acre
Administration - Open Space 214,743 0.42% Provided by Lighting and Landscaping District
Maintenance 2,053,815 4.00%
General 1,855,878 3.62% $5,847.13 per Park Acre
Marina Park Maintenance 197,937 0.39% Not Applicable
Recreation 1,872,973 3.65% $12.924 per Capita
Athletics 100,464 0.20% $0.693 per Capita
Aquatics 446,410 0.87% $3.080 per Capita
General 960,992 1.87% $6.631 per Capita
Administration - Recreation 365,107 0.71% $2.519 per Capita
Library 3,143,378 6.13% $21.69 per Capita
Otay Ranch Project 240,450 0.47% Not Applicable
TOTAL 42,969,861 83.77%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 51,297,562 100.00%
Sources: City of Chula Vista, Statement of Expenditures, 1993.
Economic Strategies Group, 1991 & 1993.
(1) EDU allocation base includes only Public Works Operations
Administration ($480,008), and Communications ($190,056)
(2) Street Maintenance expenditures would not be incurred until year 7 of the projecL
Ie ~cJ~ll
-<
....
...
r..:l
...:l
=
-<
Eo-
t;
-<
p..
~
Ul
~~
eIl...:lE-
~~~~
t::l;:i~...:l
[;2ffiUl...:l
:st::l~8
?ii~~~
~eIl:S
x::J
Ul:I:
U
~
o
>-
E-
O
IF I lit
/1/ .,~ '1j?
V)
~
>-
:!;
~
>-
~
~
>-
~
~
>-
-
-
~
>-
o
-
~
>-
'"
~
>-
00
~
>-
r-
~
>-
-0
~
>-
V)
~
>-
.
~
>-
....
~
>-
N
~
>-
~
>-
in
5
.~
8-
.,
~
<Xl
~
N
~
<Xl
~
&f
00
~
&f
00
~
&f
00
~
&f
<Xl
f6
&f
00
~
&f
<Xl
f6
&f
00
f6
&f
00
f6
&f
00
~
&f
00
f6
&f
.
~
&f
.
r-
N
&f
'"
V)
-
z;;
!
~
~
i
.
V)
V)
..0
V)
~
.
V>
V)
..0
V>
~
.
V)
V>
..0
~
.
V>
V)
..0
V>
~
.
V>
V>
..0
V)
~
.
V>
V>
..0
V>
~
.
V)
V)
..0
V)
~
.
V>
".,
..0
".,
~
.
V)
".,
..0
V)
~
.
V)
".,
..0
V>
~
.
V>
".,
..0
V>
~
.
V>
".,
..0
~
,.,
&
..0
V>
~
;:
,.,
0\
~
V>
~
.,;
~
i
u
l
~
8
;:::l
~
,.,
,.,
o.
,.,
~
N\O~"""Vl-.::rOOcr'lM
Nr---r-~"'O\N\O
r-M-OVlOOMN-
V)N~"'; t"i....:....:r--r
Z;;
....
8
a
N-oN-V>;;!;~~~
~~::S~OO~N-
",C"i'~.....; t"i"":"":r-i
Z;;
,.,
,.,
o
M
~
~~~~~~~~s
l't""l_O""'OOM~-
vici"";": C"i"';"';N
Z;;
,.,
,.,
o
a
N-oN-V>.OO,.,N
~~::S~~~~~
.,:jci.": t:-f":":N
Z;;
,.,
8
M
~
~~~-~;;!;~~~
r-C""l-bV\OOMf'I-
"':;ci~"'; C'i"';"":M
Z;;
,.,
8
a
~~~_~.OOt""lf'l
r-M-SV'\~~~~
~ci"''''': ci":":ci
~
....
,.,
o
M
~
N-oN-V>;;!;~~~
~l;:;=S~OO"'N-
v)ri~"'; N"":"';N
Z;;
,.,
8
M
~
~~~-~;;!;~~~
r-C""l-bV'\OOC""lN-
~N~": C"'i...:..:t:-t
~
,.,
,.,
o
M
~
~-oN-"";;!;~<'l~
r-l;:;=S~oo",~-
""ci";"': ci"':"":C'i
Z;;
,.,
~
,.,
~
O-oN-V>OO,.,N
!;t~:::S~ ~~
::ic-i";": -=N
~
,.,
,.,
o
a
O-oN-".,OO....N
t;~::S~ ~~
::iei";": "':C"i
~
,.,
,.,
o
M
~
O-oN-".,OO,.,N
!;~=S~ ~~
::N''';'': "':ci
~
V>
~
M
~
~_r-ooooooo\O
v>~~S~ ~~
::N''';''': "':N
~
~
o
o
~
-NVl.OOOO~.~oo.
8S~~~ ~
ONM
Z;;
r-
,.,
N
o
Z;;
00-000-0.00.-
g~~t;~ ;;!;~
..,.;....:...:
~
gO
o
Z;;
OV)N
r- ,.,
,.,-0
~....:
SO
o
Z;;
OV>N
r- ,.,
,., -0
00"':
SO
o
Z;;
OV>N
l;:;~
00":
SO
8'
~
OV>N
l;:;~
00":
SO
8'
~
OV>N
l;:;~
00"':
SO
o
Z;;
OV>N
l;:;~
00"':
SO
8'
~
OV>N
l;:;~
00"':
SO
8'
~
OV>N
I'- ,.,
,., -0
00"':
SO
8'
~
OV>N
I'- ,.,
,.,-0
00"':
SO
8'
~
OV>N
I'- ,.,
,.,-0
00":
SO
8'
~
OV>N
l;:;~
00"':
SOOV>N
I'- ,.,
,., -0
~ 00"':
~
"'OO~N
;g .~
o 00"':
Z;;
~oog~
I'- ,.,.
00 r:...:
~
ooOO~~
~ 1'-1'-
~ M
co ~~~~
J h ~ ~ ~ 1.80 1
~i1816Hp 11!8 ~
.rA ,... i i ,. g/ c:l:: '13. 8 8
!s. ell ~~&;~ >!~~'j'j
~:.,~~~!!!! ta ~~
~-<E-E-E-eIlellellell i~~c:l::c:l::
5
J
.r:l
~
V>
V>
o
~
Z;;
V>
~
~
Z;;
V>
V>
o
:!
~
V>
V>
o
:!
~
V>
V>
o
:!
~
V>
V>
o
:!
....
V>
V>
o
~
Z;;
V>
V>
o
:!
~
V>
V>
o.
.
-
~
V>
V>
c
:!
~
V>
~
~
Z;;
V>
V>
o
~
Z;;
~
:!
~
V>
~
ti
~
t;
N
~
~
'"
I'-
~
~
~
'"
s;,
E
~
'"
s;,
E
~
'"
I'-
~
c::i
Z;;
'"
I'-
~
E
~
'"
s;,
E
~
'"
r-
~
E
~
'"
s;,
c::i
Z;;
'"
I'-
~
c::i
Z;;
I'-
N
~
~
-
~
~
1'-.
~
-
~
~
~
Z;;
,.,
V>
.
.,;
-
Z;;
~
S
Z;;
~
,.,
N
V)
~
1
.,
~
~
E-
00
,.,
r-
.,;
N
~
r-
r-.
I'-
.
~
00
,.,
I'-
a
I'-
-
r-
,.:
.
z;;
00
,.,
I'-
a
~
~
r-
.
z;;
00
,.,
I'-
.,;
~
I'-
~
I'-
.
~
00
,.,
1'-.
a
~
1'-.
~
~
00
,.,
I'-
ri
~
1'-.
I'-
.
z;;
00
,.,
r-
.,;
~
~
1'-.
r-
.
z;;
00
,.,
1'-.
a
~
r-.
I'-
:!;
~
00
,.,
1'-.
V>
~
~
1'-.
I'-
:!;
~
~
00
..;
~
~
"l.
~
~
~
00
..;
~
~
"l.
~
z;;
~
00
..;
~
~
"l.
~
~
.
'"
'"
..;
~
r-
~.
,.,
.
z;;
'"
V>
-0.
a
;g
<'1.
.
N
z;;
,.;
'"
~
~
-
a-
s
'::2
~
I
>
o
g
i!
'0;:
ti~
e r:i.
~&
;3 ~ ,~
!3 :>.,
1 s~
co 'O~
.; ~ ~
i I
E- ell
~.
-
z;;
~
"'.
,.,
~
=
fOl
...
rill
oJ
=
-<
Eo<
~~
::;~
ffi~
CJ)~!::
~jffi~
oll.~oJ
!:;loJ-<8
:s~~~
~~>~
tijo:S
O::J
tIl::c
2~
00
8:5
) !)~2 L/ t1
It'l
-
~
><
....
-
~
><
~
~
><
~
~
><
-
-
~
><
o
-
~
><
0'<
~
><
00
~
><
I"'-
~
><
IO
~
><
It'l
~
><
....
~
><
~
~
><
N
~
><
~
><
00 J J
018 5 1
e ~
I -
. 8
~ ~
N
10
0'<
r-:
fA
~
0'<
r-:
fA
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
0'<
t;;
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
0'<
t;;
~
~
00
0'<
00
~
~
~
~
~
..;
fA
0'<
~
~
!::::
fA
0'<
~
~
I"'-
Z;
0'<
~
~
!::::
fA
0'<
~
~
I"'-
Z;
~
~
!::::
fA
0'<
~
~
!::::
fA
0'<
~
~
I"'-
Z;
~
~
I"'-
Z;
0'<
~
S
fA
0'<
~.
N
I"'-
Z;
~
~
!::::
fA
IO
-
1"'-.
N
!::::
fA
N
~
-
!::::
fA
~
1"'-.
It'l
~
~
-
b.
0'<
~
8
~
o
t;
~~""oo~~r-M-
Vl-('l""l ('l""l\Or-oo
NO'<N IONN....
vi"r-: ....: ~
Z;
8
~
o
t;
Si!~....OO~....I"'-N-
~~o:~~~~~~
v;r-: ...: ~
Z;
:g
~
o
~
Si!~....OO~....I"'-N-
~~o:~~~~~~
vi'r: ...: ~
Z;
:g
~
o
~
Si!~....oo~....r-N-
~~o:~~~~~~
"'~ ...:..
Z;
:g
~
o
~
Si!~....oo~....t"-N-
~~o:~~~~~~
vir-.: ...:.,;
Z;
:g
~
o
~
Si!~....oo~....r-N-
~~o:~~~~~~
vrr-: ..:.,;
Z;
:g
~
o
t;
Si!~....oo~....r-N-
~~o:~~~~~~
.,.;r;-: ...:..,,;
Z;
:g
~
o
t;
Si!~....oo~....t"-N-
~~o:~~~~~~
'" r-: ..
Z;
:g
~
o
t;
Si!~....oo~....t"-N-
~~o:~~~~~~
vi"r-.." ..:.,;
Z;
:g
~
o
~
O'<~....OO~OON-
l!2~O:~~ ~~
dr-.." ...:
Z;
:g
~
o
~
O'<~....OO~OON-
l!2~O:~~ ~~
cSr-: ...:
Z;
~
~
o
~
1t"lt"-....OOs:;lOON-
je~O:~~ ~~
dr: ...:
-
~
t"-
~
t"-
~
N.... lj(1O 0'<0 0 Ot"-
!02:a\~:: ~~
dr: ...:
Z;
:g
~
'"
It"l
fA
~IOO'<t"-~OO""oo
0-00 -f"oo
,....t'--- ~f'l"')
00"; .
fA
~
N
~
oo~2:8;::lOO~S3
~"'''''_I'''- -N
~~
~OO$~
Vl' VlOl
o "'.
~ N
fA
~OO$~
It"l It"l 0'<
o "'.
~ N
~OO$~
It"l It"l 0'<
g ~.
<A
~OO$~
It"l It"l 0'<
a ~.
~OO$~
It"l It"l 0'<
o "'.
~ N
~OO$~
It"l It"l 0'<
o "'.
~ N
~OO~~
It"l It"l 0'<
o "'.
~ N
<A
~OO~~
It"l It"l 0'<
a ~.
~OO~~
It"l 1t"l0'<
o ~.
~
~OO~~
It"l It"l 0'<
o "'.
~ N
~OO~~
It"l It"l 0'<
o ~.
~
('f0 0 t"-It"l
IO t"-OO
It"l It"l 0'<
o ~.
~
O'<OOt"-N
0'< It"l....
C'!. ...~
a ~....
0'<0000
S ;:::~
. ~..;
~
-OO8;N
~ t"-.~
~ -N
- -
<A
I~~~~ 8
f ~~~~ ~ :1
_' 8 8 i i ~ 08.8 8 .
jO,SinuH UtB~
~~~~tiiii i~::;jl
~-<E-<E-<E-<CJ)CJ)CJ)CJ) i~~!~
5
J
~
8
0'<
~
~
~
&
~
~
&
~
&
~
~
&
~
~
&
~
&
~
~
&
~
&
~
&
~
~
~
S!
~
IO
It"l
It"l
~
o
It"l
t"-
..;
~
-
It"l
IO.
0'<
z;
~
~.
~
~
fA
~.
~
~
~.
~
~
~.
~
~
~.
~
~
~.
~
~
~.
~
~
~.
~
~
~.
~
~
~
'"
~
~
~
'"
~
~
It"l
~
It"l
~
~
....
0'<
...
N
~
~
-
:D.
~
~
~
It"l
z;
8
I
~
J
....
1"'-.
-
t"-
fA
I"'-
....
1"'-.
-
~
~
t"-.
-
t;
~
t"-.
-
~
-
....
~
-
~
~
t"-.
-
~
~
t"-.
-
~
t"-
....
t"-.
-
-
~
~
t"-.
-
~
I"'-
....
1"'-.
-
-
~
"
~
t"-.
t;
t"-
....
t"-.
-
~
~
1"'-.
-
~
~
t"-.
-
~
-
....
t"-.
t;
~
t"-.
-
~
~
t"-.
-
~
t"-
....
~
-
~
b
I"'-
o
~
~
i
b
t"-.
o
~
N
-
00
'"
~
~
....
t"-.
o
~
t"-
t
It"l
~
-
o
~
~
...
!
N
~
'"
~
..;
~
~
~
~
~
i
I!
'5-
\1~
I ~
CJ)&
~_ ~ a .i
.~ :> j
1 1 ~j
i I 6.
o J i
~
...
N
~
E.
It"l
00
z;
U
<"l
~
roil
..J
=
<
Eo<
ti
<
Q.,
~
~
~jE
~o..e
~~~~
~~~8
!;2~!i;....
:5z>~
E--!= -
~~:5
<><~
UlUl:I:
U
t>..
o
>0
E--
U
J()' JL/ I]
.,.,
~
>0
~
-
~
>0
~
~
>0
~
~
>0
-
-
~
>0
o
-
~
>0
a-
~
>0
00
~
>0
I"-
~
>0
\0
~
>0
111
~
>0
~
~
>0
....
~
>0
c-.
~
>0
~
>0
'"' ]
~ j ~
i ! ~
~ ! ~
o
10
00
~
o
~
00
~
o
~
00
~
o
~
00
~
o
~
00
~
o
~
00
~
o
~
00
...
o
~
00
~
o
~
00
...
o
~
.,;
~
~
~
00
...
~
g:
t;;
~
~
~
~
c-.
\0
~
o
00
10
..0
00
z;;
o
~
..0
00
;;
~
..0
00
z;;
o
00
10
..0
00
-
~
~
..0
00
z;;
o
00
10
~
~
o
00
10
~
;;
o
00
10
..0
00
-
~
o
00
10
~
;;
o
00
10
~
~
~
I"-
00
;;
~
'"\.
....
I"-
;;
~
'"\.
....
~
;;
....
o.
-
-
-
~
i
..0
~
a-
S
..0
t;
o~o..,.c-.a-.....,.,....
V)"'l:t-OO~QO-O'\OO
1110001"-1"-01000111
cir-:~ -:r:-i~ ..
&t
a-
S
..0
t;
~;~:~~~~::6
1110001"-1"-01000111
cir-:r-r -:C"i~ ..
&t
S
..0
t;
~~~~~~~~~
1110001"-1"-01000111
ar-:~ ~~. ....:
a-
S
..0
t;
~;:=:~~~~~
"1. 00. q I"- 1"-. o. 10. 00 "1.
NI"'-~ .....N. .....
&t
S
..0
t;
~;~:~~~~::6
1110001"-1"-01000111
~r:~ ":ci. ..:
&t
S
..0
t;
~;~:~~~~::6
1110001"-1"-01000111
ar-:~ ":r:i. ..:
S
..0
t;
~~~:~~~~rJ
1110001"-1"-01000111
ar:~ ":C"i. ..:
a-
S
..0
t;
~;~:~~~~::6
1110001"-1"-01000111
cir:~ ..:r..r...; ..:
&t
S
..0
t;
~;~:~~~~::6
1110001"-1"-01000111
ar:M' ":ci.. ..:
a-
S
..0
t;
~;~:~oo~:;a
00 000 r--r- 00"l
.~"':M" .....
~
c-.
..,.
c-.
..0
t;
....~00101"-00001"-
0\ .....oo('f") 0'\00
00 01"-1"- 00"1.
v\'r:M''': .....
-
~
&
111
C
t;
V'lc-.II1oo~OO_O
_ooO\N ~.....
1"-. c-.. 1"-. 1"-. 00 ..,..
""I"-c-. -
Z;;
~
....
00
111
~
II1--s::!
:2S;:\ZS
ti~r:i
~
a-001"-V'l
c-. 00-
..... 10 c-..
- -
c-.
c:;
vi
~
~~~~8
0\';": ..:
~
OO~.
111 a-
~
a
~~~00~00c-.~
00....a-~II1 ~..,.
~M
8
J
~
8~~~~
jl~~~~ i
_'lii8888 B
ilinUH
j~!~tllll
....00..,.""
8. ~ ~
('1'1 ro-:",
.... c-.
~
800~~
M r-:vi
.... c-.
....
....00:::1:00
8 iD~
rri' r-:vi'
~ c-.
....00..,.00
8 ~~
M r-:vi
~ c-.
800~~
M r-:vi
~ c-.
8.00~~
.... r-:vi
~ c-.
....00..,.00
8 ~~
M .~vi
~
800~~
M r-:vi
~ c-.
8.00~~
.... r-:vi
~ c-.
800~~
M ~vi
t4
EOO~~
M ~vi
~
000
le
c
~
~8
~vi
1"-00-10
~ ~~
vi' ..:..;
&t c-.
~OO~~
0\ ~~
;;
SO
c
;;
000V'l
00 ....
....10
oC ....."
B
8t8 I
J:~,I BS
1 ~ ~ 01 'j
i!!~!
111
a-
....
~
V'l
a-
....
~
111
a-
....
~
V'l
a-
....
~
l(')
a-
....
~
111
a-
....
~
V'l
a-
....
~
V'l
a-
....
~
l(')
a-
....
~
111
a-
....
~
~
~
\0
S
M
~
V'l
\0
vi
~
&
l(')
tt
l"-
S
~
~
j
10
a-
C'\
....
I"-
....
...
10
~
....
I"-
~
~
....
I"-
....
~
~
C'\
....
I"-
~
8
C'\
....
I"-
t4
8
C'\
....
I"-
t4
~
....
I"-
t4
8
C'\
....
I"-
....
~
8
C'\
....
I"-
~
..,.
a-
"1.
~
....
~
~
10.
le
~
c-.
l"-
'"\.
i
~
l(')
..
-
00
&t
8.
00
a
~
-
-
;;
8
I
~
J
111
10
I"-
00
t;
-
:8
M
111
~
8
~
~
~
c-.
111
~
~
c-.
111
~
8.
c-.
111
~
8.
c-.
111
~
8.
&:l
~
8.
c-.
111
~
8.
c-.
i
111
10
I"-
00
t;
~
1"-.
00
t;
~
1"-.
00
1;;
~
1"-.
00
t;
111
\0
1"-.
00
1;;
~
I"-
00
t;
~
I"-
00
t;
~
1"-.
00
1;;
-
V'l
....
g
111
..,.
0\-
!
~
111
r-:
1;;
-
2:
i
2:
00
..:
t;
;
M
i
a-
I"-
....
~
~
..,.
a-
1"-.
i
....
~
~
vi
~
M
~
8.
~
~
a
.1
~
I
o
!
I!
~-
ll~
Jt
i .~o!
o >!
~~
I 8.1
J I
~
a
00
~
..,.
....
;;
Q
l"l
...
roil
...:l
=
-<
E-<
i~
::>E~
~~~
U)j~~
~Q..~3
:S...:l~8
~~~~
E-<~ -
U)o:J
~~:J
U):I:
li:~
00
~><
Q..t;
U
~ ;(-) 'I 1--/. \V
/ (/ ./.,.t- ,)
VI
~
><
:!
~
><
::l
~
>-
~
~
><
-
-
~
>-
~
~
>-
0-
~
>-
00
~
>-
....
~
>-
10
~
>-
'0
~
><
..,.
~
>-
....
~
><
M
~
>-
~
><
.. J j
8 ' 'a
.~ 8 e
~ ~ ~
~ f I
00
....
00
~
....
00
....
00
..0
Z;
00
....
00
~
....
00
....
00
~
....
00
....
00
..0
z;
00
....
00
..0
Z;
0-
....
....
..0
Z;
..,.
~
vi
z;
0-
00
....
vi
Z;
~
'0
~
....
;g
.....
::l
....
VI
:5l
c-i
Z;
00
~
c-i
Z;
~
....
~
....
~
~
0-
;g
vi
10
....
....
0-
;g
vi
10
....
....
0-
;g
vi
10
....
....
~
:a
~
~
'0
10
~
~
vi
10
....
....
~
-
vi
VI
....
....
00
VI
Ci.
VI
..,.
....
....
o
~
....
....
....
....
~
..,..
=:l
....
....
~
~
~
~
00
a
N
"l.
~
:g
00.
o
~
10
00
00.
-
-
z;
00
"l.
00
'It"
z;
('f"'lO\Vl~O\r-~r-~
~~~~~~~~~
t:f~~ r-:N~""
....
-
00
10.
00
'It"
Z;
.... 0-'0 M 0-.... M....M
;];~:a~~~~~~
~~M r-:~~""
....
-
~
00
:!
....
....o-V'\Mo-....M....~
'It"....V'\V'\M....Moo
<1- ..... 10. 0- <1- "'L "'L o. .
~V\f"1 1"<"'10\--
'0- -
....
-
00
10.
00
..,.
Z;
~~~~~f;;~!;Os::!
<1- ..... 10. 0- <1- "l. "l. o. ~
~~M r-~~--
....
-
00
10.
00
'It"
-
....
~l!l~~~~~~~
~~~ r:c-i2S"':"':
-
00
10
.,;
..,.
-
....
~~~~~f;;~!;Os::!
........100-....'0'000\
~~~ r-:C'i~..:..:
....
0-
~
!
....
~&1~~~~~~~
!:!~ \liN~...:...:
M
:a
~
Z;
S<;gV'\M-....o-....s::!
iZ5 '0 :a ~ ~ ~Po ~ 0\
r-:~M ..oc-i..o":":
~- -
'0
00
00
vi
::l
....
....o-V'\MM....s:;l....Sj
~o:a~~~.~O\
~:!~ .nci~"':":
10
'0
'It"
.,;
M
z;
-MV'\M~OO!;OO.Sj.
~~:a~<,\ 0\
~~f'i tn
~
N
Z;
~~~~~00~.&l
~:cit"'i'.; --
~-
0-
0-
"l.
....
-
Z;
~~~~aOO~.&l
a=~ ~ --
:e
Ol-
~
....
....000-0000....0-
~~~8~ ~~
a::rra C"'i" --
....
N
&i
....
~~;;;~V'\OO~~
M 'It" 0- .... :a 00 '0_,
!ioeN N
....
~
'0
vi
~
("')_('I_OOOO_~
~g:a~~. ~:g
~ ~ .
....
i~~~~
J.I ~~~~ I
-::>E88ii~.
.i ~:181IJij!~
;@ ~~~~~!!!!
~ ~-<E-<E-<E-<u)u)u)u)
-00000....
.... VI -
M <"l 0\
..0 civi
<"l <"l
....
100000....
.... '0 -
~ 2~
<"l ....
....
100000....
~.. ~ ;:
10 civi
~ ....
100000....
.... '0 -
~ 2~
~ ....
100000....
~.. :q ~
10 0'0
~ ....
100000....
~ ~;:
10 civi
~ ....
100000....
!::; '0-
~ .2~
.... ....
....
100000....
~ ~;:
..0 civi
~ ....
100000....
~. ~;:
10 civi
~ ....
100000....
~.. ~ ;:
10 civi
~ ....
-oOOoo!:;
~ ~o-
10 civi
.... ....
....
100000....
~ ~;:
..0 civi
~ ....
~O
..0
~
000
l(3l;
civi
....
V'\OO~~
g ........
~ ~~
S<OO~~
. ....10
ItCJ tici
Z;
8
H 8 I
hiH
i~~~~
o
'0
0-
ci
VI
....
o
'0
0-
ci
~
o
'0
0-
ci
'0
....
o
'0
Ol-
o
~
o
'0
0-
ci
~
o
'0
0-
ci
~
o
'0
0-
ci
'0
....
o
'0
0-
ci
~
o
'0
0-
ci
~
o
'0
0-
ci
~
o
'0
0-
ci
'0
....
o
'0
0-
ci
~
~.
-
'0
....
~
00
~
'0
a
a
I
VI
'0
ci
....
~
'0
=:l
ci
~
'0
=:l
ci
~
'0
'0
-
ci
~
'0
=:l
o
~
'0
'0
-
o
!i
~
<1-
....
~
0-
:a
10
~
~
"l.
....
i
0-
....
.....
-
a
~
Ol-
....
'It"
~
'0
00
o.
:e
'0
....
~
~
~
'It"
0-
"l.
i
~
M
....
"l.
-
a
j
f ] 1
~ ~ '1
~ 1 ~
~ 0 ~
....
~.
:;;
....
~.
-
'It"
z;
~.
~
....
~
.
z;
~.
-
:!
....
~.
.
z;
M
'0
00
r-:
....
-
....
~
<1-
..,.
....
z;
'It"
~
o
....
z;
....
~
~
z;
'0
10
.....
:!:
z;
'It"
0-
00
.,;
o
z;
....
00
.....
a
z;
~
....
ci
00
....
'It"
:a
I
~
-
00
VI
"l.
=
00
....
00
VI
"l.
-
-
00
....
00
'0
"l.
-
-
~
00
'0
"l.
-
a
00
'0
"l.
-
a
00
'0
"l.
-
-
~
0-
!:;.
~
t;
'0
'It"
Ol-
o
....
t;
~
r-;.
~
t;
10
....
<1-
i
00
~
00
'0
~
0-
s;.
'It"
~
~.
'0
0-
~
~
i
..;
~
J
I!
<s-
ll~
I c:
U)~
;.!
:> i
!~
~ 's
BJ
:5l
Ci.
10
a
j
TABLE 14A
EASTLAKE GREENS
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
CITYOFCHULA VISTA
1993 DOILARS
Revenue-
Net Expenditure Accumulated
Year Revenues Expenditures Balance Ratio . Balance
1 $68,459 $63,363 $5,096 108.0% $5,096
2 $125,124 $124,306 $818 100.7% $5,914
3 $135,575 $143,447 ($7,872) 94.5% ($1,958)
4 $130,537 $142,567 ($12,030) 91.6% ($13,988)
5 $129,885 $142,567 ($12,682) 91.1 % ($26,670)
6 $129,393 $142,567 ($13,174) 90.8% ($39,844)
7 $129,054 $147,717 ($18,663) 87.4% ($58,506)
8 $128,862 $147,717 ($18,854) 87.2% ($77,361 )
9 $128,675 $147,717 ($19,042) 87.1% ($96,403)
10 $128,492 $147,717 ($19,225) 87.0% ($115,627)
11 $128,314 $147,717 ($19,403) 86.9% ($135,030)
12 $128,139 $147,717 ($19,577) 86.7% ($154,607)
13 $127,969 $147,717 ($19,747) 86.6% ($174,354)
14 $127,804 $147,717 ($19,913) 86.5% ($194,267)
15 $127,642 $147,717 ($20,075) 86.4% ($214,342)
Total $1,873,923 $2,088,266 ($214,342)
Source: Economic Strategies Group, 1993.
/
/ {} ..~ ;)/-/ (}
TABLE 14B
EASTLAKE GREENS
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1993 DOLLARS
Revenue-
Net Expenditure Accumulated
Year Revenues Expenditures Balance Ratio Balance
1 $169,833 $185,877 ($16,044) 91.4% ($16,044)
2 $269,790 $319,233 ($49.443) 84.5% ($65,487)
3 $326,062 $402,529 ($76.467) 81.0% ($141,954)
4 $319.717 $406.017 ($86,301) 78.7% ($228.255)
5 $317,475 $405.812 ($88.337) 78.2% ($316.591)
6 $316,269 $405,812 ($89,543) 77.9% ($406.134)
7 $315,260 $411,747 ($96,486) 76.6% ($502,620)
8 $314,441 $411,747 ($97.306) 76.4% ($599 ,926)
9 $313,640 $411,747 ($98,106) 76.2% ($698,033)
10 $312,859 $411,747 ($98,888) 76.0% ($796,920)
11 $312.097 $411.747 ($99 .650) 75.8% ($896,570)
12 $311.353 $411.747 ($100.394) 75.6% ($996,964)
13 $310.626 $411,747 ($101.120) 75.4% ($1.098.085)
14 $309.917 $411.747 ($101.829) 75.3% ($1.199,914)
15 $309 ,225 $411.747 ($102,521) 75.1% ($1,302,436)
Total $4.528.566 $5.831.002 ($1.302,436)
Source: Economic Strategies Group, 1993.
/ (; J J.~~01
TABLE 14C
EASTLAKE LAND SWAP
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1993 DOLLARS
Revenue-
Net Expenditure Accumulated
Year Revenues Expenditures Balance Ratio Balance
1 $144,193 $134,698 $9,495 107.0% $9,495
2 $264,665 $264,001 $664 100.3% $10,158
3 $323,316 $340,794 ($17,478) 94.9% ($7,319)
4 $384,273 $412,191 ($27,917) 93.2% ($35,237)
5 $406,994 $445,191 ($38,197) 91.4% ($73,434)
6 $399,700 $443,945 ($44,244) 90.0% ($117,678)
7 $398,706 $452,061 ($53,356) 88.2% ($171,034)
8 $398,119 $452,061 ($53,942) 88.1% ($224,976)
9 $397,546 $452,061 ($54,515) 87.9% ($279,491)
10 $396,987 $452,061 ($55,074) 87.8% ($334,565)
11 $396,442 $452,061 ($55,620) 87.7% ($390,185)
12 $395,909 $452,061 ($56,152) 87.6% ($446,337)
13 $395,389 $452,061 ($56,672) 87.5% ($503,009)
14 $394,882 $452,061 ($57,179) 87.4% ($560,189)
15 $394,387 $452,061 ($57,675) 87.2% ($617,863)
Total $5,491,509 $6,109,373 ($617,863)
. Source: Economic Strategies Group, 1993.
J{) - ;25/
TABLE 14D
EASTLAKE LAND SWAP
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1993 DOLLARS
Revenue-
Net Expenditure Accumulated
Year Revenues Expenditures Balance Ratio Balance
1 $306,877 $256,286 $50,591 119.7% $50,591
2 $525,810 $460,899 $64,911 114.1 % $115,502
3 $688,751 $595,647 $93,104 115.6% $208,606
4 $762,242 $624,979 $137 ;lfJ2 122.0% $345,868
5 $850,463 $658,678 $191,785 129.1 % $537,654
6 $938,864 $692,376 $246,488 135.6% $784,141
7 $1,027,459 $747,799 $279,660 137.4% $1,063,801
8 $1,110,273 $770,945 $339,327 144.0% $1,403,128
9 $1,209,006 $791,179 $417,827 152.8% $1,820,955
10 $1,306,830 $811,558 $495,272 161.0% $2,316,228
11 $1,305,100 $811,558 $493,542 160.8% $2,809,769
12 $1,303,410 $811,558 $491,852 160.6% $3,301,621
13 $1,301,872 $811,558 $490,314 160.4% $3,791,935
14 $1,300,480 $811,558 $488,922 160.2% $4,280,857
15 $1,299 ,229 $811,558 $487,671 160.1% $4,768,528
Total $15,236,666 $10,468,137 $4,768,528
Source: Economic Strategies Group, 1993.
1/)_')('1
/ {/. - cZ.-.--' oL-
RESOLUTION NO. 17308
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA RECERTIFYING THE FINAL PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FPEIR 90-01) FOR
THE OTAY RANCH PROJECT; AMENDING THE GENERAL
PLAN OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FOR THE 161
ACRE EASTLAKE LAND SWAP; MAKING CERTAIN
FINDINGS OF FACT PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT; READOPTING A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM;
READOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS
I . Recitals.
A. Project site.
WHEREAS, the area of land which is subj ect of
this resolution is diagrammatically represented on
Attachment A, attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference; is commonly known as the EastLake
Land Swap; and for the purpose of general description
herein consists of approximately 161 acres
(reconfigured from the original request for 169 acres)
located south and west of the community of EastLake
Greens ( "proj ect site" ) (For the purposes of this
Resolution, the "Project site" is part of the larger
23,068 acres of the Otay Ranch Project, previously
considered); and,
B. Project.
WHEREAS, a person having control over all or a
portion of the development of the Project Site, to-
wit: the Otay vista Associates, L.P., (formerly known
as the Baldwin vista Associates, L.P.) (representing
the EastLake Development Company) ("Developer") has
applied to the City for approval of an Otay Ranch
Project. The proposal has been modified throughout
proj ect review, resulting in the final proj ect to
develop a mixed use--residential, commercial and
industrial--community of approximately 23,068 acres
and 23,483 units (including approximately 161 acres
identified as the EastLake Land Swap Parcels, the
subject of this resolution). The EastLake Land Swap
parcels consist of proposed residential and commercial
General Plan land use designations and is a part of
the Otay Ranch General Plan Amendment but is herein
Ie/!- (
Resolution No.
Page 2
separately considered. A maximum of 924 residential
units and commercial are proposed in addition to the
23,483 units on the balance of the Otay Ranch project
("Project"); and,
C. Application for Discretionary Approvals.
WHEREAS, on september 8, 1989, the Developer
filed applications for the whole Otay Ranch project
with the City of Chula vista for (1) a General Plan
Amendment (which included the 161 acre EastLake Land
Swap Parcels) ("GPA"), (2) a General Development Plan,
with Supporting Documents ("GDP"), and (3) Prezoning
(the GDP and Prezoning apply to the balance of the
Otay Ranch, but not to the Project, all of which
applications may jointly be referred to herein as
"Discretionary Approvals Applications"); and,
D. Planning commission Record on Applications.
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the Discretionary
Approvals Applications and/or the Draft PEIR was duly
noticed before the Planning Commission at the meetings
of April 29, May 15, May 16, May 22, May 29, June 17,
July 31, August 19, September 11, September 16,
October 7, October 12, October 19, October 23, October
29, November 4, November 12, November 20, December 2,
December 9, December 18, 1992 and January 15, January
27, January 29, February 3, February 10, February 13,
February 19, February 24, March 13, March 17, March
24, March 31, April 14, April 22, May 8, May 12, May
13, May 18, and October 13, 1993; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a public
hearing held on April 29, May 15, May 16, May 22, May
29, June 17, July 31, August 19, September 11,
september 16, October 7, October 12, October 19,
October 23, October 29, November 4, November 12,
November 20, December 2, December 9, December 18, 1992
and January 15, January 27, January 29, February 3,
February 10, February 13, February 19, February 24,
March 13, March 17, March 24, March 31, April 14,
April 22, May 8, May 12 (focused consideration of
EastLake Land Swap Portion of the otay Ranch GPA), May
13, May 18, and October 13, 1993, considered the
Discretionary Approvals Applications, took evidence as
set forth in the record of its proceedings, which are
f:\bomclpIamin&IdUllllC.....tIaIoo""""'"".!swFINAL
Dcoombcr 9, 1993
J t!J /I -" d-
Resolution No.
Page 3
incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in
full, made certain findings as set forth in their
Recommending Resolution PCM-90-03, and recommended to
the City Council the approval of said Discretionary
Approvals Applications, including the Project subject
to certain conditions; and,
E. City Council Record on Applications.
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing
was held before the City Council of the city of Chula
vista on July 30, September 24, September 30, October
7, October 22, November 4, November 24, 1992, June 2,
June 16, June 30, July 12, July 21, July 22, July 26,
August 25, September 13, September 27, October 28, and
November 16, 1993 on the Discretionary Approvals
Applications, and to receive the recommendations of
the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony
with regard to same; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Chula vista
City Council does hereby find, determine, resolve and order as
follows:
II.
Planning commission record.
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the
Planning Commission at their public hearings on the Draft
PEIR, held on September 16, October 7, October 12, and
October 19, 1992 and their public hearing on this Project
held on April 29, May 15, May 16, May 22, May 29, June 17,
July 31, August 19, September 11, October 23, October 29,
November 4, November 12, November 20, December 2, December
9, December 18, 1992, and January 15, January 27, January
29, February 3, February 10, February 13, February 19,
February 24, March 13, March 17, March 24, March 31, April
14, April 22, May 8, May 12, May 13, May 18, and October
13, 1993, and the minutes and resolutions resulting
therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this
proceeding.
III. FPEIR Contents.
The FPEIR consists of the following:
A. "Final Program Environmental Impact Report - Otay
Ranch Project" (EIR 90-01) prepared by Ogden
Environmental and Energy Services and dated
f:_IpIamin&'<Iuanc\casllakclccreso.lswFIN AL
Dc<>cmbor 9, 1993
/0/9 ;3
Resolution No.
Page 4
December, 1992, SCH # 89010154 (two volumes), which
contains the Draft Program Environmental Impact
Report ("DPEIR") distribution date July 31, 1992,
revised to reflect responses made to comments on
the DPEIR and Addendum thereto dated October 8,
1993, known as document number C093-225, a copy of
which is on file in the office of the City Clerk;
and,
B. Technical Reports to the Draft Program
Environmental Impact Report (Appendices A, Band C,
and Volumes I through IX); and,
C. Comments and Responses to Comments to the DPEIR
(all hereafter collectively referred to as "FPEIR 90-
01") .
IV. FPEIR Reviewed and Considered.
The City Council of the City of Chula vista has
reviewed, analyzed and considered FPEIR 90-01, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this Project;
the Candidate Findings of Fact ("Findings" or "CEQA
Findings") and the statement of Overriding Considerations
(Document Number C093-226), the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program ("Program") (Document Number C093-227),
both of which are on file in the office of the City Clerk
and incorporated herein by this reference, prior to
approving the Project.
V. certification of Compliance with CEQA.
The City Council does hereby find that FPEIR 90-01,
the Candidate Findings of Fact, the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program, and the statement of Overriding
Considerations have been prepared in accordance with
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act,
the state EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental Review
Procedures of the City of Chula vista.
VI. Independent Judgment of City Council.
The City Council finds that FPEIR 90-01 reflects the
independent judgment of the City of Chula Vista City
Council.
f:lhanolplumin&'dllane'aatlaloelc=oo.lswFIN AL
Dooombcr 9, 1993
/v/},'1
Resolution No.
Page 5
VII.
Conditional Approval of General Plan Amendment.
The Chula vista General Plan Land Use diagram is
amended as shown in areas identified as the "EastLake Land
Swap Parcels" as set forth in Attachment A hereto,
incorporated by this reference, subj ect to the General
Conditions hereinbelow set forth.
VIII.
General Conditions of Approval.
The approval of the foregoing Discretionary Approvals
Applications which are stated to be conditioned on "General
Conditions" are hereby conditioned as follows:
A. project site is Improved with Project.
Developer, or their successors in interest, shall
improve the Project site with the Project as described
in the FPEIR, except as modified by this Resolution.
B. Implement Mitigation Measures.
Developer shall diligently implement, or cause the
implementation of, all mitigation measures pertaining
to the Project identified in the FPEIR that are found
by this resolution to be feasible.
C. Implement the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation
of, all portions of the otay Ranch Project Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program pertaining to the
Project.
IX. Consequence of Failure of Conditions.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or
if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and
maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be
so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the
City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals
herein granted, deny or further condition issuance of all
future building permits, deny, revoke or further condition
all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of
f:\bomolplannin&\duanc\casllaloclccrcso.lswFINAL
~r 9, 1993
/"
/ (j /J .-):;
Resolution No.
Page 6
approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute
litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions
or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are
gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the
City's approval of this Resolution.
x. CEQA Findings, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and statement
of overriding Considerations.
A. Readoption of Findings.
The City Council does hereby reapprove, accept as its
own, incorporate as if set forth in full herein, and
make each and everyone of the findings contained in
the "Candidate Findings of Fact" (Document Number
C093-226).
B. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted.
As more fully identified and set forth in FPEIR-90-01
and in the Candidate Findings of Fact, the Council
hereby finds pursuant to Public Resources Code section
21081 and CEQA Guidelines section 15091 that the
mitigation measures described as feasible in the above
referenced documents, are feasible, and will become
binding upon the entity (such as the project
proponent, the City, or the school district) assigned
thereby to implement same.
C. Infeasibility of Alternatives.
As is also noted in the above referenced environmental
documents described in the above subparagraph B, each
of the alternatives to the project which were
identified as potentially feasible in FPEIR-90-01 are
found not to be feasible since they could not meet
both the obj ecti ves of the proj ect and avoid the
identified significant environmental effects through
implementation of feasible mitigation measures for the
reasons set forth in said Candidate Findings of Fact.
D. Readoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
As required by the Public Resources Code section
21081.6, the City Council hereby readopts the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
("Program") (Document Number C093-227). The Council
f:lbornelplamin&\d_lcutlaloolccrcao.lswFIN AL
Deocmbcr 9, 1993
/0//-;;
Resolution No.
Page 7
hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure
that during project implementation the
permittee/project applicant and any other responsible
parties implement the project components and comply
with the feasible mitigation measures identified in
the Candidate Findings of Fact and the Program.
E. statement of Overriding Considerations.
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation
measures and any feasible alternatives, certain
significant or potentially significant environmental
effects caused by the project, or cumulatively, will
remain. Therefore, the City Council of the City of
Chula vista hereby reissues, pursuant to CEQA
Guideline Section 15093, a Statement of Overriding
Considerations (Document Number C093-226), identifying
the specific economic, social, and other
considerations that render the unavoidable significant
adverse environmental effects acceptable.
XI. Notice of Determination.
The Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of
Chula vista is directed after city Council approval of this
Project to ensure that a Notice of Determination is filed
with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego.
XII.
Invalidity; Automatic revocation.
It is the intention of the City Council that its
adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon the
enforceability of each and every term, provision and
condition herein stated; and that in the event that anyone
or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by
a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or
unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed to be
automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab
initio.
XIII.
One General Plan Amendment
It is the intention of the City council that its
action on the EastLake Land Swap parcels, by its action on
this Resolution, and its action on the General Plan
Amendment for the balance of the companion otay Ranch
f:_IpIaming\duanc'caa.labolccreao.lawFIN AL
~r 9,1993
JtJ/J-7
Resolution No.
Page 8
Project, and its action on the EastLake Greens GPA (GPA-93-
04) be and is one General Plan Amendment for the purposes
of the state law limitation on the number of allowable
General Plan Amendments in one year.
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
as to
Presented by
Bruce Boogaard "
City Attorney .
f:\bomolplamin&\duano'cutlalooIccreao.lswFINAL
Iloalmbcr 9, 1993
/t://J - ~
Resolution No.
Page 9
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City
of Chula Vista, California, this 14th day of December, 1993, by the
following vote:
YES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista,
California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. _
was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council
at a meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 14th day
of December, 1993.
Executed this 14th day of December, 1993.
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
f:_IpIanning'<l.....,~llakc\ccrcso.lswFINAL
Dcccmhor 9, 1993
/tJ/J-C;
.
.' ~ ..
AITACHMENT A
~~
~ti
@bZ
~
=== <t
tij
blt
OO~
~Cf.)
@
~
.
i !
~WID_
~~E! f
!:hJp-JiJ. ~
!i" ~'i j~i ~
~j tit .e~8Jfl.
J J JO J ! ~ j ! i t ~
~~
~;
6
!
~
~,
~
~
...J
StlOl::tS
~
~
o
S
~8
~N
~~
<0
h'
.
.
~2
<
%
~
/011- 10
,
o.
,
;
cr.
-
~
~
a-
n:
=-
C.
n:
~
tn
"C
=
~
-
Iol
~
C'IIl
,
-
-
\I:
C'IIl
~.
.
-
-
-
~/e</1-r
RESOLUTION NO. 17309
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY
COUNCIL AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN FOR 74 ACRES
LOCATED WITHIN THE EASTLAKE GREENS COMMUNITY,
SOUTH OF EASTLAKE HIGH SCHOOL AND ON BOTH
SIDES OF THE EXTENSION OF EASTLAKE PARKWAY
I. Recitals.
A. Project site.
WHEREAS, the area of land which is subject of this resolution
is diagrammatically represented on Attachment A, attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference; is commonly known as the
EastLake Greens General Plan Amendment; and for purposes of general
description herein consists of approximately 74 acres (reconfigured
from the original request for 51 acres) located within the EastLake
Greens community on the west side of the southerly extension of
EastLake Parkway, south of EastLake High School (Sub-Area 1 on
Attachment A) and east of the southerly extension of EastLake
Parkway, south of EastLake Greens Golf Course (Sub-Area 2 on
Attachment A) ("Project site"); and,
B. Project.
WHEREAS, a person having control over all or a portion of the
development of the Project Site, to-wit: the EastLake Development
Company ("Developer") has. applied to the City for approval of an
amendment to the General Plan for 74 acres (reconfigured from the
original request for 51 acres) located within the EastLake Greens
community. The request generally consists of an amendment to the
General Plan Land Use Diagram from Low Medium Residential (3-6
dujac), PublicjQuasi-Public and Open Space, to Medium Residential
(6-11 dujac), Medium-High Residential (11-18 dujac), PublicjQuasi-
Public (reconfigured) and Open Space, and that the alignment for
EastLake Parkway as shown on the General Plan land use and
circulation diagram be adjusted ("Project"); and,
C. Prior City Council Action.
WHEREAS, the City council, as Condition No. 44 of Resolution
No. 15200 adopted July 18, 1989, for the EastLake Greens Tentative
Subdivision Map ( "Tentative Map"), required a low and moderate
income housing program with an established goal of a 5% low and 5%
moderate ("Condition No. 44"), and deferred said low and moderate
income housing condition pending further evaluation of the General
f:\home\planning\duane\eastlake\ccres1.grnFINAL
December 5, 1993
/v$-/
Plan density policies as they relate to parcels R-26 (Sub-Area 1 on
Attachment A), R-24, R-25, R-27 and R-28; and,
WHEREAS, the Project allows review of the affordable housing
requirements for the EastLake Greens development and the oppor-
tunity for the preparation of an affordable housing program prior
to further E~otL~]ce Creeno fin~l m~p ~pprov~lo or Cener~l
Development rl~n modific~tiono; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed Project would provide the potential for
additional density on parcel R-26 (Sub-Area 1 on Attachment A) and
therefore the additional potential to provide affordable housing
units within EastLake Greens to be analyzed further at the General
Development Plan and sectional Planning Area Plan level; and,
D. Application for Discretionary Approvals.
WHEREAS, on September 15, 1992, the Developer filed
applications with the City of Chula vista for a General Plan
Amendment ("Discretionary Approvals Application"); and
E. Planning Commission Record on Application.
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the Discretionary Approvals
Application was duly noticed before the Planning Commission at the
meetings of March 3, and continued it to April 12, April 28, May
12, and May 26, 1993; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a public hearing held
March 3, April 12, April 28, May 12, and May 26, 1993, considered
the Discretionary Approvals Applications, took evidence as set
forth in the record of its proceedings, which are incorporated
herein by reference as if set forth in full, made certain findings
as set forth in their Recommending Resolution GPA-93-04, and
recommended to the City Council the approval of said Discretionary
Approvals Application based on certain terms and conditions; and,
F. City Council Record on Applications.
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held
before the city Council of the city of Chula vista on November 16,
1993 on the Discretionary Approvals Application, and to receive the
recommendations of the Planning commission, and to hear public
testimony with regard to same; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Chula vista
City council does hereby find, determine, resolve and order as
follows:
f:\home\planning\duane\eastlake\ccres1.grnFINAL
December 5, 1993
2
/z}!3 /2
II. Planning Commission record.
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Plan-
ning commission at their public hearings on Project held on March
3, April 12, April 28, May 12, and May 26, 1993, and the minutes
and resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into
the record of this proceeding.
III. EIR Reviewed and Considered.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted a Initial
study (Case No. 93-16) for the proposed Project and prepared a
Addendum, known as document number on file.in the
office of the City Clerk, which finds that the Project would have
no significant impacts which were not analyzed in EIR-86-04 for the
EastLake Greens SPA Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map, known as
document number on file in the office of the City
Clerk.
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed,
analyzed and considered EIR 86-04, and the Addendum thereto, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this Project; the
Candidate Findings of Fact ("Findings" or "CEQA Findings"), known
as document number on file in the office of the City
Clerk, the proposed mitigation measures contained therein, the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program"), known as
document number , and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, known as document number , all of which
are incorporated herein by this reference, prior to approving the
Project.
IV. certification of Compliance with CEQA.
The City Council does hereby find that EIR 86-04, and the
Addendum thereto, the Candidate CEQA Findings, the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations have been prepared in accordance with requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR
Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the city of
Chula vista.
V. Independent Judgment of City Council
The City Council finds that EIR-86-04, and the Addendum
thereto, reflects the independent judgment of the City of Chula
vista City Council.
f:\home\planning\duane\eastlake\ccres1.grnFINAL 3
December 5, 1993
)()!J-3
VI. Conditional Approval of General Plan Amendments.
The Chula vista General Plan Land Use diagram of the city's
General Plan is amended so that the portion thereof as shown in
that portion of Attachment A labeled Subarea 1 and Subarea 2,
attached hereto, is hereby amended to reflect the land use
designations for such subareas shown on Attachment A, incorporated
herein by this reference, subject to the General Conditions
hereinbelow set forth.
VII. General Conditions of Approval.
The approval of the foregoing Discretionary
Application which is stated to be conditioned on
Conditions" is hereby conditioned as follows:
Approvals
"General
A. Implement Mitigation Measures.
Developer shall diligently implement, or cause the
implementation of, all mitigation measures identified in EIR-86-04
that are found by this resolution to be feasible.
B. Implement the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the
EastLake Greens Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
VIII. Consequence of Failure of Conditions.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they
are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if
any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained
according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke
or modify all approvals herein granted, deny or further condition
issuance of all future building permits, deny, revoke or further
condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority
of approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for
their violation.
IX. CEQA Findings, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Statement of
Overriding Considerations.
A. Adoption of Findings.
The City Council does hereby re-adopt, accept as its own,
incorporate as if set forth in full herein, and make each
f:\home\planning\duane\eastlake\ccres1.grnFINAL 4
December 5, 1993
/tJ[J-1
and everyone of the findings contained in the "Candidate
CEQA Findings"
B. certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted.
As more fully identified and set forth in the EIR for the
EastLake Greens SPA (EIR-86-04) and in the CEQA Findings,
the City Council hereby finds pursuant to Public
Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines section
15091 that the mitigation measures described as feasible
in the above referenced documents, are feasible, and will
become binding upon the entity (such as the proj ect
proponent, the City, or the school district) assigned
thereby to implement same.
C. Infeasibility of Alternatives.
As is also noted in the above referenced environmental
documents described in the above subparagraph B, each of
the alternatives to the Project which were identified as
potentially feasible in the EIR are found not to be
feasible since they could not meet both the objectives of
the Project and substantially lessen or avoid the
identified significant environmental effects for the
reasons set forth in said CEQA Findings.
D. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
As required by the Public Resources Code section 21081.6,
the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program ("Program"). The Council hereby
finds that the Program is designed to ensure that during
project implementation the permittee/project applicant
and any other responsible parties implement the project
components and comply with the feasible mitigation
measures identified in the Findings and the Program.
E. Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation
measures and any feasible alternatives, certain
significant or potentially significant environmental
effects caused by the project, or cumulatively, will
remain. Therefore, the city Council of the city of Chula
vista hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guideline section
15093, a Statement of overriding considerations in the
form set forth in document number , identifying
the specific economic, social, and other considerations
that render the unavoidable significant adverse
environmental effects acceptable.
f:\home\planning\duane\eastlake\ccres1.grnFINAL 5
December 5, 1993
/
/t.?E~~
X. Notice of Determination
The Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula
vista is directed after city council approval of this Project to
ensure that a Notice of Determination is filed with the County
Clerk of the County of San Diego.
XI. Invalidity; Automatic revocation.
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of
this Resolution is dependent upon the enforceability of each and
every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that in the
event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are
determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid,
illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed to be
automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
XII. One General Plan Amendment.
It is the intention of the city Council that its action on the
EastLake Greens GPA, by its action on this Resolution, and its
action on the General Plan Amendment for the EastLake Land Swap and
the companion Otay Ranch Project and its action on the EastLake
Greens GPA (GPA-93-04) be and is one General Plan Amendment for the
purposes of the state law limitation on the number of allowable
General Plan Amendments in one year.
f:\home\planning\duane\eastlake\ccres1.grnFINAL 6
December 5, 1993
/{}[J ~t.
f:\home\planning\duane\eastlake\ccres1.grnFINAL 7
December 5, 1993
/og-7
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City
of Chula Vista, California, this 14th day of December, 1993, by the
following vote:
YES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) SSe
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A. Authelet, city Clerk of the city of Chula Vista,
California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No.
17309 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at
a meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 14th day of
December, 1993.
Executed this 14th day of December, 1993.
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
f:\home\planning\duane\eastlake\ccres1.grnFINAL 9
December 5, 1993
)/J[J.-~
_i.i~l~&~.Y1"I.
...........'................,.......................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
/~
APpr1d as
!
r
Presented by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce Boogaard
City Attorney
f:\home\planning\duane\eastlake\ccres1.grnFINAL
December 5, 1993
8
/(1[; ~1
----.:=:- .~~-~ -:.~ '..:-::-:-....
..-.
- -
. -..:. -~...--:.;.~-::. .. _......:::::..;...:---:-: ~~=::.:--. .
.
.
ATIACHMENT~
.
/"
I
I
,
,
· 1i
V_:a
hn ~H~i:ID:
ru~I::15~~~~
efJ:l;i I . r ~
~~
~~
@:~
=~
~U-
bl..L
OO~
~U)
~
~
,
"d'
tI:lo
ZM
u.JC1\
UJ'
~~
00
UJ ~
~ -l
-<
~
~
-<
UJ
p
Vl
(;
C..I
"-
co;
~
c.
~
~
tIj
"=
C
~
~
I.l
-;
,
-
-
In
~
~
.
!
.-
~c
\Jl!~
/?J.l3 //0
~
A-J9 -d?
.-
..-..
XI
one General Plan Amendment.'
It is the intention of the City Council that it action on the EastLake
Greens GPA, by its action on this Resolution, and its ction on the General Plan
A:rnendme t for the EastLake Land Swap and the companio Otay Ranch Project and its
action the EastLake Greens GPA (GPA- 93 - 04) and is one General Plan
Amendment for the purposes of the state law limita on on the number of allowable
General Pl Amendments in one year. (
f
Presented by
~
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
.0
-
,~
'~"""ill.
~9.1993 i
5
~~
~~ {Db
RESOLUTION NO. 17309
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY
COUNCIL AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN FOR 74 ACRES
LOCATED WITHIN THE EASTLAKE GREENS COMMUNITY,
SOUTH OF EASTLAKE HIGH SCHOOL AND ON BOTH
SIDES OF THE EXTENSION OF EASTLAKE PARKWAY
I. Recitals.
A. Project Site.
WHEREAS, the area of land which is subject of this resolution
is diagrammatically represented on Attachment A, attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference; is commonly known as the
EastLake Greens General Plan Amendment; and for purposes of general
description herein consists of approximately 74 acres (reconfigured
from the original request for 51 acres) located within the EastLake
Greens community on the west side of the southerly extension of
EastLake Parkway, south of EastLake High School (Sub-Area 1 on
Attachment A) and east of the southerly extension of EastLake
Parkway, south of EastLake Greens Golf Course (Sub-Area 2 on
Attachment A) ("Project Site"); and,
B. Project.
WHEREAS, a person having control over all or a portion of the
development of the Project Site, to-wit: the EastLake Development
Company ("Developer") has applied to the City for approval of an
amendment to the General Plan for 74 acres (reconfigured from the
original request for 51 acres) located within the EastLake Greens
community. The request generally consists of an amendment to the
General Plan Land Use Diagram from Low Medium Residential (3-6
dujac), PUblicjQuasi-Public and Open Space, to Medium Residential
(6-11 dujac), Medium-High Residential (11-18 dujac), PublicjQuasi-
Public (reconfigured) and Open Space, and that the alignment for
EastLake Parkway as shown on the General Plan land use and
circulation diagram be adjusted ("Project"); and,
C. Prior City Council Action.
WHEREAS, the City Council, as Condition No. 44 of Resolution
No. 15200 adopted July 18, 1989, for the EastLake Greens Tentative
Subdivision Map ( "Tentative Map"), required a low and moderate
income housing program with an established goal of a 5% low and 5%
moderate ("Condition No. 44"), and deferred said low and moderate
income housing condition pending further evaluation of the General
f:1bomc Iplanninj;lduanc 'easlla)g, 'clggp03. wp
Do<>ombcr 14, 1993
JOBl//tJB -if
Plan density policies as they relate to parcels R-26 (Sub-Area 1 on
Attachment A), R-24, R-25, R-27 and R-28; and,
WHEREAS, the Project allows review of the affordable housing
requirements for the EastLake Greens development and the oppor-
tunity for the preparation of an affordable housing program prior
to further E::lotL::l]ce Creeno fin::ll m::lp npprov::llo or Cener::ll
Development rl::ln modific::ltiono; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed Project would provide the potential for
additional density on parcel R-26 (Sub-Area 1 on Attachment A) and
therefore the additional potential to provide affordable housing
units within EastLake Greens to be analyzed further at the General
Development Plan and sectional Planning Area Plan level; and,
D. Application for Discretionary Approvals.
WHEREAS, on September 15, 1992, the Developer filed
applications with the City of Chula Vista for a General Plan
Amendment ("Discretionary.Approvals Application"); and
E. Planning Commission Record on Application.
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the Discretionary Approvals
Application was duly noticed before the Planning Commission at the
meetings of March 3, and continued it to April 12, April 28, May
12, and May 26, 1993; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning commission, at a public hearing held
March 3, April 12, April 28, May 12, and May 26, 1993, considered
the Discretionary Approvals Applications, took evidence as set
forth in the record of its proceedings, which are incorporated
herein by reference as if set forth in full, made certain findings
as set forth in their Recommending Resolution GPA-93-04, and
recommended to the City Council the approval of said Discretionary
Approvals Application based on certain terms and conditions; and,
F. City Council Record on Applications.
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held
before the City Council of the City of Chula vista on November 16,
1993 on the Discretionary Approvals Application, and to receive the
recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public
testimony with regard to same; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Chula Vista
City council does hereby find, determine, resolve and order as
follows:
f: \bomclplannin& '<Iuano ......tlal<c'cl&gp&3.wp
Doo:mbc, 14, 1993
2
)(/)[J ~/~
II. Planning Commission record.
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Plan-
ning commission at their public hearings on Project held on March
3, April 12, April 28, May 12, and May 26, 1993, and the minutes
and resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into
the record of this proceeding.
III. EIR Reviewed and Considered.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted a Initial
study (Case No. 93-16) for the proposed Project and prepared a
Addendum, known as document number on file in the
office of the City Clerk, which finds that the Project would have
no significant impacts which were not analyzed in EIR-86-04 for the
EastLake Greens SPA Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map, known as
document number on file in the office of the City
Clerk.
The City Council of the City of Chula vista has reviewed,
analyzed and considered EIR 86-04, and the Addendum thereto, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this Project; the
Candidate Findings of Fact (lIFindingsll or lICEQA Findingsll), known
as document number on file in the office of the City
Clerk, the proposed mitigation measures contained therein, the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (lIProgramll), known as
document number , and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, known as document number , all of which
are incorporated herein by this reference, prior to approving the
Project.
IV. certification of Compliance with CEQA.
The City Council does hereby find that EIR 86-04, and the
Addendum thereto, the Candidate CEQAFindings, the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations have been prepared in accordance with requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR
Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the city of
Chula Vista.
V. Independent Judgment of City Council
The City Council finds that EIR-86-04, and the Addendum
thereto, reflects the independent judgment of the City of Chula
Vista City Council.
(:lbcmolplannin&'<Iuano\cullalll:lcl&&Pl'3.wp
Dc<lcmbc. 14, 1993
3
J!!J[?- 1/]
VI. Conditional Approval of General Plan Amendments.
The Chula vista General Plan Land Use diagram of the City's
General Plan is amended so that the portion thereof as shown in
that portion of Attachment A labeled Subarea 1 and Subarea 2,
attached hereto, is hereby amended to reflect the land use
designations for such subareas shown on Attachment A, incorporated
herein by this reference, subject to the General Conditions
hereinbelow set forth.
VII. General Conditions of Approval.
The approval of the foregoing Discretionary
Application which is stated to be conditioned on
Conditions" is hereby conditioned as follows:
Approvals
"General
A. Implement Mitigation Measures.
Developer shall diligently implement, or cause the
implementation of, all mitigation measures identified in EIR-86-04
that are found by this resolution to be feasible.
B. Implement the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the
EastLake Greens Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
VIII. Consequence of Failure of Conditions.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they
are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if
any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained
according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke
or modify all approvals herein granted, deny or further condition
issuance of all future building permits, deny, revoke or further
condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority
of approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for
their violation.
IX. CEQA Findings, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Statement of
Overriding Considerations.
A. Adoption of Findings.
The City Council does hereby re-adopt, accept as its own,
incorporate as if set forth in full herein, and make each
f:\bomc'PIannin&'<IUllDO'casllakc\cl&Q>03. WI'
Dcoombcr 14, 1993
4
Jc)!J~/li
and everyone of the findings contained in the "Candidate
CEQA Findings"
B. certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted.
As more fully identified and set forth in the EIR for the
EastLake Greens SPA (EIR-86-04) and in the CEQA Findings,
the City Council hereby finds pursuant to Public
Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section
15091 that the mitigation measures described as feasible
in the above referenced documents, are feasible, and will
become binding upon the entity (such as the proj ect
proponent, the City, or the school district) assigned
thereby to implement same.
C. Infeasibility of Alternatives.
As is also noted in the above referenced environmental
documents described in the above subparagraph B, each of
the alternatives to the Project which were identified as
potentially feasible in the EIR are found not to be
feasible since they could not meet both the objectives of
the Project and substantially lessen or avoid the
identified significant environmental effects for the
reasons set forth in said CEQA Findings.
D. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
As required by the Public Resources Code section 21081. 6,
the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program ("Program"). The Council hereby
finds that the Program is designed to ensure that during
project implementation the permittee/project applicant
and any other responsible parties implement the project
components and comply with the feasible mitigation
measures identified in the Findings and the Program.
E. Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation
measures and any feasible alternatives, certain
significant or. potentially significant environmental
effects caused by the project, or cumulatively, will
remain. Therefore, the City Council of the City of Chula
vista hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guideline section
15093, a Statement of Overriding Considerations in the
form set forth in document number , identifying
the specific economic, social, and other considerations
that render the unavoidable significant adverse
environmental effects acceptable.
f:_\p~'d\lOlll>lcasllal>o'cIg,gp03.wp
Dc<lcmbcr 14, 1993
5
/I)[f-i~
X. Notice of Determination
The Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula
vista is directed after City Council approval of this Project to
ensure that a Notice of Determination is filed with the County
Clerk of the County of San Diego.
XI. Invalidity; Automatic revocation.
It is the intentio~ of the City Council that its adoption of
this Resolution is dependent upon the enforceability of each and
every term, provision and condition hereinstatedj and that in the
event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are
determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid,
illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed to be
automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
XII. One General Plan Amendment.
It is the intention of the City Council that its action on the
EastLake Greens GPA, by its action on this Resolution, and its
action on the General Plan Amendment for the EastLake Land Swap and
the companion Otay Ranch Project and its action on the EastLake
Greens GPA (GPA-93-04) be and is one General Plan Amendment for the
purposes of the state law limitation on the number of allowable
General Plan Amendments in one year.
XIII. Affordable Housing Requirement Reinstituted.
While the Council has not yet determined that entire EastLake
Greens proiect. under the authority of section 6.2. Establishinq
Residential Densities within the Range. of Chapter 1. Land Use
Element of the city's General Plan. provides sufficient exceptional
and extraordinary benefits to the residents of the City. sufficient
to permit an increase in densities above the midpoint of the
overall range of densities for the EastLake Greens SPA. which is
"LM" or 4.5 dwellinq units per acre. the Council does find and
determine that. by virtue of havinq increased General Plan density
as they relate to parcel R-26 of the Tentative Map by the adoption
of this resolution sufficient to permit affordable housing to be
built. that Condition No. 44 of the Tentative Map is therefore no
lonqer deferred. and declares that Condition No. 44 requiring an
affordable housinq program for the entire Tentative Map area
remains in full force and effect without deferral and shall be
applicable to the approval of the next or subsequent Final Maps.
Council is resolved however that for final maps applied for in the
short term (approximately 1 year). such affordable housinq
requirements may be met by enterinq into a bindinq aqreement with
f:Ibome\p~\duan:'castlalo:'cJupa3.wp
Dcccmbcr 14, 1993
6
) t'v .~/ t
the city bY which Developer shall aqree to meet subsequently
imposed affordable housinq requirements on remaininq area of the
Tentative Map, and the lots included in such final map shall be
included in determininq the number of such affordable housinq
units.!'
XIV. Resolve to Create Ad Hoc EastLake Affordable Housinq Task
Force.
citv Council hereby resolves to consider creatinq an Ad Hoc
EastLake Affordable Housing Task Force ("Task Force") for the
express purpose of creatinq an affordable housinq implementation
proqrarn for the entire Planned Community of EastLake I, II, III and
the Land Swap Parcels as shown on Attachment I ("Task Force
Territory") .
~ Establish Objectives of Task Force.
It is the intention of the Council that the Task Force provide
recommendations for Council consideration and possible adoption,
for the timinq and locations of low and moderate income housing
units required, pursuant to city of Chula vista Housing Element
policies, for the Task Force Territory.
~ Timing Considerations for Task Force Recommendations.
The Council requests that the Task Force return with their
recommendations by JulY, 1994, but not later than October, 1994.
~ Composition of the Task Force.
The City Council shall appoint the Task Force members, which
shall be selected from. at least one representative of the
followinq: (1) Resident of EastLake, (2) EastLake Development
Company, (3) City of Chula vista Planning Commission, (4)
Individual versed and knowledgeable in the requirements and
feasibility of providinq affordable housing, and (5) city of Chula
Vista staff.
XV. Resolve to Consider Community Purpose Facility Zone in Planned
Community Requlations.
1. This differs from the reso in the Council Agenda package by
making it clear that EastLake will not be constrained from
requesting density increases on the two remaining, "yet-to-be-
increased" parcels. But we still get the deferral lifted on
affordable housing, per Condition No. 44.
f:lbomolplanniD&\duanc: 'castlalo:\cIUP03. wp
Dooomber 14, 1993
7
)tJj!/) 7
City Council hereby resolves, for the sole benefit of itself,
to consider creatinq a Community Purpose Facility Zone in the
Planned Community Requlations applicable to land shown in that
portion of Attachment A containinq a land use desiqnation of "MH"
in Subarea 1 (IIMH Portion of Subarea 1") at the time the Council
adopts Planned Community Regulations, which is expected to be at
the time the Council approves either the General Development Plan
or the Sectional Planninq Area Plan.
A. Council to Consider Permittinq Transfer of Density.
On the condition that Council approves a Community Purpose
Facility zone with the permission of the Owner in MH Portion of
Subarea 1, Council is resolved, for its own benefit only, to
increase a comparable amount of residential units displaced by such
Community Purpose Facility zoned area within other Community
Purpose Facility sites and/or areas within EastLake.
XVI. Resolve to Consider the Submittal of a Consolidated EastLake
General Development Plan.
The Council hereby resolves that, if the Developer prepares
and submits for Council consideration, prior to the end of 1994, a
consolidated EastLake General Development Plan for the entire East-
Lake community, Council shall consider adoption of same. However,
said consolidate GDP should consolidate existinq General Devel-
opment Plan approvals, and include the final land use desiqnation
pro~osal for the MH Portion of Subarea 1 (recoqnizinq any modifi-
cation for any Community Purpose Facilities as Developer may
propose), the location of transferred units (~ursuant to action
taken under the resolve of Section XIII.A above), if any, and
should not propose to increase or decrease densities above or below
~reviouslY approved density ranqes for EastLake. Nothinq herein is
intended to vest EastLake with any riqhts to density ranqes
previously approved in the General Development Plans for the
EastLake community.Y
Presented by Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce Boogaard
City Attorney
2. This language was revised from that in the Council Agenda
Package for the 12/14/93 meeting by making it clear that this
consolidation effort should not be used as a vehicle for changing
densities by the Council. But the Council also reserves the right
to change density ranges under its continuing oversight authority
to the extent permitted by law.
f:\homolplannin&'<luanoleasllal<c\cIUP03.wp
December 14, 1993
8
/~!J-/6/
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City
of Chula Vista, California, this 14th day of December, 1993, by the
following vote:
YES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista,
California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No.
17309 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at
a meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 14th day of
December, 1993.
Executed this 14th day of December, 1993.
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
f:lbcmelplannin& 'd.......'cas1la1oe'c1&&P03."'l'
Dcc>cmber 14, 1993
9
Jt) {J-- Ji
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY:
Item II
Meeting Date 12/14/93
17.33 :L
Resolution Approving a boundary lot adjustment at 1700 Horseshoe Court
in the Bonita Long Canyon Development; and authorizing the Mayor to execute
grant deeds
Director of Parks and RecreC)tio{Jw
Director of Public Work~!n.A
City Manager~ bi4 ~l
u.--::::-
(4/Sths Vote: Yes _ No 1U
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
The property owners on 1700 Horseshoe Court have requested a boundary lot adjustment for the purpose
of correcting an illegal encroachment on city-dedicated open space land (Open Space District #14). The
intent of this report is to consider possible options to resolve this encroachment.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Approve Option #2, whereby an illegal encroachment on open space land will be removed by
exchanging for an equal amount of property by the property owner;
2. Approve Open Space encroachment permit for the sloped, landscaped area to the north of the
property;
3. Approve the Resolution to effect the boundary line adjustment subject to specified conditions; and
4. Authorize the Mayor to execute grant deeds.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: We star Land Services, Incorporated, contacted the Department on November 26, 1992 to
propose a boundary lot adjustment at 1700 Horseshoe Court. The purpose of the boundary adjustment is
to correct an illegal open space encroachment by the property owners, Mr. and Mrs. Leizorek. The
boundary adjustment would exchange a portion of City-owned open space land where the Leizoreks
constructed a pool, spa, pond and deck for an equal amount of land on the south side of the property
which the Leizoreks would deed to the City. The end result of this land exchange would be a zero net loss
of property to the City. In addition to the boundary lot adjustment, it is recommended that an
encroachment permit be issued allowing the property owners to keep the fence (located at the northeast
end of their property) intact. By issuing this encroachment permit, the fence and landscaping would remain
intact at the top of slope and next to a City-owned brow ditch.
History of Encroachment on Subiect Propertv
The Open Space District affected by the encroachment is located in the Bonita Long Canyon Development
Unit 2 as part of Map 11602 - Chula Vista TCT. No. 86-3 in the San Diego County Assessor's map. In 1988,
the City was informed of this encroachment violation by McMillin Company when the open space was
being transferred to the City for ownership and maintenance. Presently, the pending sale of the Leizorek's
property prompted action by them to correct the encroachment. During the staffs investigation of this
BOUNDRY.A13 December 9, 1993
j/-j
Page 2, Item / /
Meeting Date 12/14/93
encroachment, other possible encroachment violations were observed in this neighborhood. The
Department is taking the necessary steps to co:rrect these violations.
OPTIONS
. The Department evaluated the following three options for Council consideration:
Option #1
The City could order the property owners to abate the encroachment and re-establish the original property
boundary with property owner-provided fencing. This option would require the property owners to remove
the pool, spa, deck and pond structures encroaching on City open space at their own expense.
Option #1 would restore City open space as dedicated by the developer. However, the property owner
would have to incur a substantial financial expense in order to comply. Further, with the exception of the
Open Space area to the south, the open space area affected by the structures is not visible from the street,
the lot is located at the end of the canyon. The area is landscaped and irrigated, and contains no apparent
benefit or sensitive resources.
Option #2 (Staffs Recommendation)
The City could approve:
1) a boundary lot adjustment consisting of approximately 1,100 square feet on the south side of the
property, as requested by the property owners; and
2) issue an encroachment permit for the sloped, landscaped area located on the northeast end of the
open space area.
The Department could support this option subject to the property owners being required to:
a. Remove the existing fences on the south end of the open space property and place the
fences inside the proposed new property boundary lines.
b. Restore open space property on the south side of the lot to its natural condition.
c. Maintain the sloped, landscaped area on the northeast side of the lot.
Option #2 would result in an even exchange of property; thereby mitigating the encroachment. The
property owner would gamer economic relief by not having to remove all of their amenities (pool, spa,
etc.) located in the area of the illegal encroachment. It would reduce the total expense to the property
owner, whereby they would only be required to relocate the fences (on the south side of the property) on
the new property line. The property owners have indicated this option is acceptable.
If the fence encroaching on the northeast end of the property was moved further down the slope to match
the existing property line, it would create an uneven fence line (with the adjacent neighbor) and affect the
landscape and irrigation that has been installed. Therefore, an encroachment permit would allow the fence
line and the landscaping to remain intact.
BOUNDRY.A13 December 9, 1993
/ / ./ 02-
Page 3, Item / /
Meeting Date 12/14/93
Option #3
Offer to sell all of the encroachment property to the homeowner at a fair-market price determined by an
appraisal of land value in the area. The Department does not support this option because it may set
precedent for other property owners who have illegally encroached to obtain open space property, and it
is not consistent with the City's current mechanism to sell open space property under the City's "Grading
Deviation Policy." The Grading Deviation Policy allows the purchase of Open Space property when a
grading error was made and the open space land is an extension of the homeowner's pad.
The impact of Option #3 would be the loss of City open space property, and setting a precedent for selling
of open space property. In addition, it would sanction the ability of property owners to encroach on City
property without penalty.
FISCAL IMPACf: Under Option #2, all costs associated with a boundary lot adjustment would be borne
by the property owner.
Attachment:
Plat Map
BOUNDRY.A13 December 9,1993
)/-3
RESOLUTION NO.
)7J];L
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A BOUNDARY LOT
ADJUSTMENT AT 1700 HORSESHOE COURT IN THE
BONITA LONG CANYON DEVELOPMENT; AND
AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE GRANT DEEDS
WHEREAS, the owner of 1700 Horseshoe Court, Mr. and Mrs.
Leizorek, have requested a boundary lot adjustment for said
property for the purpose of correcting an illegal encroachment on
city-dedicated open space land (Open Space District #14); and
WHEREAS, the boundary adjustment would exchange a portion
of City-owned open space where the property owner constructed a
pool, spa, pond and deck for an equal amount of land on the south
side of the property which the property owners would deed to the
City; and
WHEREAS, after exploring various options, staff
recommends Option # 2 wherein the City could approve a boundary lot
adjustment consisting of approximately 1,100 square feet, as
requested by the property owners and issue an encroachment permit
for the sloped, landscaped area located on open space property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve the Boundary Lot
Adjustment Plat No. 94-02 at 1700 Horseshoe Court in the Bonita
Long Canyon Development SUbject to the following conditions:
1. Remove existing fences on the south end of the open
space property and place the fences inside the
proposed new property boundary lines.
2. Restore open space property on the south side of
the lot to its natural condition.
3. continue to maintain the sloped, landscaped area on
the northeast side of the property.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is hereby
authorized and directed to execute the necessary grant deeds to
effect the transfer proposed in the Agenda Report and authorizes
same to be recorded.
C:\rslborshoe
Presented by
Jess Valenzuela, Director of
Parks and Recreation
/ I ~ 1-/
ADJUSTMENT PLAT
NO. q~-o-z..
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LOT 179 & LOT "H" OF CHULA VISTA TRACT
NO. 86-3 UNIT NO. 3 IN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. ACCORDING TO MAP
THEREOF NO. 11602 FILED IN THE OFFICE
OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO
COUNTY, ON SEPTEMBER 2, 1986. dS
~~.
a
I
!lCl
!
100 JClO 3lf
I , ,
SCALE: 1" = 1 00'
----v.lliill~lIIll[
}fJ\r
N43'13'2Tf, / (,1>-"
~.22' (.f \(""..\ ~
(~
.r
~-29'47'3S:
R-SO.OC'
L-~OO'
",\
:? ~ \
t...J 1:: \ SEE DETAIL SHT. 2
P ~ J
;; ;l:
~ ~ I
27"E 9 ~ /
~~
5;Z:
~lg
V ~~
.-- Iq~
~ PLAT PREPARED BY:
Z WESTAR LAND SERVICES. INC.
5333 MISSION CENTER ROAD
SUITE 380
SAN DIEGO. CA. 92108
~
ll\
'b
~
...
(<'\
t,.
"
....1
~
.J;- "- 5
(0 "":::::",...
~ 1.n1 17~
~ u-.-
CI\
~
~
-
rD
U'
~
.
"-
N
Si:
In
!
ICIiI'arw ( '5'..,.
!IJ~1A
LOT -A- PROPOSED ACREAGE -2.89 ACRES
EXISTING ACREAGE 2.89 ACRES
OT "B" -PROPOSED ACREAGE 0,78 ACRES
EXI TI G ACREAGE - 0.78 ACRES
'C
BY:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA .OWNER
276 FOURTH AVENUE
/) _,---- CHULA VISTA, CA 92010
// ~ (619)591-5071
I ~~~~~~~~O~':L ..,~, ~""nr
APPROVAL:
/6.,
",."" o/".h
",,,,' ,;'--1 "
1" I rONp I
, . )~
" , ( ,." flo
/ ~ ......-.",.
/ / ~
,. /
g' ~
,4?i~) .1
L-,- _J I
\ i
\ HO~ d
, ~
\ .
. .
\ ~ I
. \l1 '
\ i I
\ j
.
.
ttor:&-;,E:. ~ Eo
VO~ 12-'-
~I?rl N9{
~.pe:FtTY LI t4E)
i'1"P1 CoAl- ~YM~ 1-.
e.XISrl HC1 FEt4GE.)
"",-PICAL s,t-ieoL,
EXIc::,l1li<::r A~
CJF ~1-1~T
IHTC::' ~ ~E.
T'1P'ICAL ~YMe:oL-:
~
NO.-:r++
))-?
e::x (~-r lNe:;- c.ot4 DrT/ot--i
E,)(I$'iINq- F='fSHG-J5. -...4
.,..0 I2.E.HA I N /~'"
~~H ~P'AC.E ~-C~~
e.~~EHT /~ ~" I
peJ2.M\. W E!C. "q .f"V'0t'4D)
I$S~EP 00 ...... -""
f2.E." 1 'f::tJU;l PIaOPEJt,""" ." / -
ut--f E /
e.~I4bT1Hc:r "
P~W""5- ,I--t/./\
CP~'
GO/ /~/\ J
# L/~//
~..
o
\
tt~e..
.
.
\
o
.
\
o
o
\
.
o
ttDf&&E ~E
c:.ou.ra.. r
;/-7
~
~
w
'>
it
II
o
I
o
I
.
o
I
o
I
.....c
NO....,.,...
~"J5EP
p,zoPISFZ-T1" L-I N Eo
E><ISTINCr
pp.o PEfl"T'f I-I~.E-
pPOjDEJC:,TY TV
ee. p~e:t:> i"'o
o PE.N #;>PACE..-
e.x I~TI f'oolC:r FEHc.E..
"Tt) "e.E f2.E.l-'iolE.D
F IZOM OPE'N ~
STAFF /2-ECOMr1ENDA-r\Ol'
F2-e.po~-r- - o~,...\o"'4 2..
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /;(
ITEM TITLE:
Meeting Date 12/14/93
Resolution / ? :3 .3.3 Authorizing the installation of temporary
overhead facilities within Utility Undergrounding District No. 124, Otay
Valley Road between Oleander and NiIvana Avenues
Director of Public wor9t
City Manager J& ~ ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-X.)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
On June 30, 1992, the Chula Vista City Council approved Resolution No. 16703 establishing
Utility Undergrounding District No. 124 on Otay Valley Road from Oleander Avenue to Nirvana
Avenue. This resolution grants special permission to the developers of the Chula Vista Auto Park
to install temporary overhead electrical facilities within the boundaries of said district.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution authorizing the installation of
temporary overhead facilities within Utility Underground District No. 124.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On November 23, 1993, Construction Management and Development Co. (CM&D), representing
the developers of the Chula Vista Auto Park, forwarded a letter to the Director of Public Works
asking for permission to install overhead electrical facilities within Utility Undergrounding District
No. 124.
Chapter 15.32 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code prohibits any entity from installing overhead
electrical facilities within an already established Utility Undergrounding District except in order
to provide emergency service and upon approval by the City Council. The conversion work is
scheduled to occur during the summer of 1994. CM&D has indicated that power to the project
is currently an urgent requirement and the owners need to provide temporary overhead power to
the site in advance of the conversion. According to Section 15.32.170 of the Code, the Council
may grant special permission on such terms and for such duration as the Council may deem
appropriate in cases of unusual circumstances and where not detrimental to the public interest.
Approval of this resolution will grant special permission to the developers of the Chula Vista Auto
Park to install temporary overhead electrical facilities to service their properties. This grant of
permission is valid until the existing overhead facilities on Otay Valley Road are ready to be
removed at which time this proposed overhead facility is also to be removed.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
SMN:KY-078, AO-060
WPC F:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA \utilover.hed
/;2 ~/
RESOLUTION NO.
) 7 3 :JJ
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE INSTALLATION OF
TEMPORARY OVERHEAD FACILITIES WITHIN UTILITY
UNDERGROUNDING DISTRICT NO. 124, OTAY VALLEY
ROAD BETWEEN OLEANDER AND NIRVANA AVENUES
WHEREAS, on June 30, 1992, the Chula vista City Council
approved Resolution No. 16703 establishing Utility Undergrounding
District No. 124 on Otay valley Road from Oleander Avenue to
Nirvana Avenue; and
WHEREAS, on November 23, 1993, Construction Management
and Development Co. (CM&D), representing the developers of the
Chula vista Auto Park, forwarded a letter to the Director of Public
Works asking for permission to install overhead electrical
facilities within utility Undergrounding District No. 124; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 15.32 of the Chula vista Municipal Code
prohibits any entity from installing overhead electrical facilities
within an already established utility Undergrounding District
except in order to provide emergency service and upon approval by
the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the conversion work is scheduled to occur during
the summer of 1994 and CM&D has indicated that power to the project
is currently an urgent requirement and the owners need to provide
temporary overhead power to the site in advance of the conversion;
and
WHEREAS, according to section 15.32.170 of the Code, the
Council may grant special permission on such terms and for such
duration as the Council may deem appropriate in cases of unusual
circumstances and where not detrimental to the public interest; and
WHEREAS, this resolution grants special permission to the
developers of the Chula vista Auto Park to install temporary
overhead electrical facilities within the boundaries of said
district.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby authorize the installation of
temporary overhead facilities within Utility Undergrounding
District No. 124, Otay Valley Road between Oleander and Nirvana
Avenues, which permission is valid until the existing overhead
facilities on Otay Valley Road are ready to be removed at which
time this proposed overhead faCilit:cy.& also to be moved.
Presented by ,Apg oved as! tol
/ ~ I
l r ,I
Bruce M. Boogaar ,
Attorney
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
c: \rs\utilover .hed
/2~2
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY:
Item / J
Meeting Date 12/14/93
Resolution /733 ( Amending Schedule II Section 10.52.030 of
the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to the Special Stops Required -
Through Streets and Stop Intersections - Calle Santiago
Director of Public wo~~.' ~
City Manager ~ \j."t)~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NolO
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
In response to concerns from area residents regarding the recent accident history, and in
anticipation of the future connection of Calle Santiago through to Paseo Ranchero, on October
27, 1992, a Trial Traffic Regulation was initiated establishing stop signs at various locations as
listed in the schedule below.
RECOMMENDATION: That City Council adopt this resolution to make these stop sign
installations permanent.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Safety Commission, at its November
11, 1993 meeting, voted 5-0-2 to recommend to City Council to make the stop signs permanent.
Commissioners Pitts and Bierd were absent.
DISCUSSION:
On October 27, 1992, staff sent to the City Council, a Trial Traffic Regulation to install stop
signs at various locations along Calle Santiago. This Trial Traffic Regulation stated the
following:
10.52.030
SCHEDULE n - SPECIAL STOPS REQUIRED - THROUGH STREETS
AND STOP INTERSECTIONS
Through Streets
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At
Calle Santiago Buena Vista Way Paseo Ranchero
Street Intersection Direction Travel Traffic Stopped Signs
Calle Candelero East Eastbound on Calle Candelero 1
Valencia Loop North Westbound on Valencia Loop 1
Valencia Loop North Westbound on Valencia Loop 1
Calle Candelero West Southbound on Calle Candelero 1
Calle Candelero East Northbound on Calle Candelero 1
/3" !
Page 2, Item / J
Meeting Date 12/14/93
The City Engineer on October 27, 1992, determined that in the interest of minimizing traffic
hazards and congestion and for the promotion of public safety, that stop signs be installed in the
locations along Calle Santiago as listed in the schedule above. This is in response to concerns
from area residents regarding the recent accident history, and in anticipation of the future
connection of Calle Santiago through to Paseo Ranchero. On October 27, 1992, a Trial Traffic
Regulation establishing stop signs at various locations as listed in the schedule above was
established.
Said regulation became effective upon the posting of signs on February 2, 1993, and has run
through the trial period of almost eight months from the date of such posting. A review of said
installations have been made and it has been determined that the prohibition should be made
permanent. Section 10.12.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code only allows a Trial Traffic
Regulation to exist for eight months, at which time either a resolution affIrming the Trial Traffic
Regulation must be adopted or the Trial Traffic Regulation ceases to be effective.
A review of the traffIc conditions by staff and the Police Department show that this Trial Traffic
Regulation is operating effectively. Therefore, staff recommends that the Trial Traffic Regulation
be made permanent.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
File No.: CY-027
WPC F:'bome\engineeNgeoda\146s.93
Attachments: Area Plat ~
Trial TraffIc #121 NOT SCANNED
Excerpts Safety Commission Minutes dated 11/11/93 NOT S~~EI)
/3-c2
RESOLUTION NO. / 7 J .J'I
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING SCHEDULE II SECTION
10.52.030 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO THE SPECIAL STOPS REQUIRED
THROUGH STREETS AND STOP INTERSECTIONS - CALLE
SANTIAGO
WHEREAS, in response to concerns from area residents
regarding the recent accident history, and in anticipation of the
future connection of Calle Santiago through to Paseo Ranchero, on
October 27, 1992, a Trial Traffic Regulation was initiated
establishing stop signs at various locations as listed in the
schedule below; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission, at its November 11, 1993
meeting, voted 5-0-2 (commissioners pitts and Bierd absent) to
recommend to City Council to make the stop signs permanent; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends making these stop sign
installations permanent.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby amend Schedule II section
10.52.030 of the Chula vista Municipal Code relating to the Special
stops Required - Through Streets and stop Intersections - Calle
Santiage as follows:
10.52.030
SCHEDULE II - SPECIAL STOPS REQUIRED - THROUGH STREETS
AND STOP INTERSECTIONS
Name of Street
Calle Santiago
Street Intersection
Calle Candelero East
Valencia Loop North
Valencia Loop North
Calle Candelero West
Calle Candelero East
Presented by
Through Streets
Beginning At
Buena Vista Way
Direction Travel
Eastbound on
Westbound on
Westbound on
Southbound on
Northbound on
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
c: \rs\santiago
1_3- 3
Ending At
Paseo Ranchero
Traffic Stopped
Calle Candelero
Valencia Loop
Valencia Loop
Calle Candelero
Cal.llee 1 'andelero
AfP0ed a~ t9
Signs
1
1
1
1
1
City
v
\
'-- \
(!1 1',1
I ..~~~ ~~~
I ~~~ -~~ t~.1
= r-....r.::J ~ ~ ~ _: .... ~
~ ' ~~;,.~ ,-', ;:~:: ~ Is . I ! I~
l..- ."
CT)'~ ..
r- C\
,'~.
.... ....
~~:.'
.'W
.- "CI:
'". .')... -
. ..1= -
..~w~
-?-:;~ ~
~.~.... '.-
~.~.~ ~.
"','~...-..-.~
..:~.:~~:~:-:;::
, I.
i /'
,
p,\SEO
~. t\l
j~.. ~J."
\ --..
_.J _ .rv
-
-
if
~
2E
~\ 1111~x
~~l.~[ L ~ ~ ~t-:-/I
I~ -'vi I I I I .'I'J' J """""(;z
~... :....or:;;::" -........ .Jtl
'C~ I I I . I , I I I lD/' 'A "I,
I :AI Lt .....
I t... ,~ l'r." .
I ~ ..!'c;,i:5:.:
~r ...~ ,-~.','
,. r ~'..'
COATE f vE~A -;:/;..,.","
. 1_ ":'1 (
-.:PARK ~.; ~
. '"('_ 't r,
,. ,'.-:,r ~ ( ("',
'f~.,. ..... Cr
':.~:~
e,.'~~:"" t'r ... .
. ~ )\Fll ':i? 7;,::';!:.;'[<:i;:;;'~.,.~.. ,..';:;' 0
r '\ ,. ". t',,,, I..... . .,.....( ('1"';'" ,~, rt~
'r,"',.~ rJ,.,"/ "'~".'~
I ."',,,,,,,,".'.'~" ""'''r...~f~('''r.'',. ''1'
r r ~r,. ;- :',.,.. .r-r'I'"N'o'"E'''pt''' N'DE' .' , He" E'" 'P'AR' K'':'':~ i../r,.. ~r,' f
..' .....r I ;. ',.;...,".. II' : 1 (1" ,. I , (T \1.. ,"
tl~ :-;': ~!..f:.~ r,,~.;;" !"... :-'" t;. ,0,.,.''' ,e, r ',! '~':f. ,. .-..:..:r ': ..,.~. {r.,..s.. '~l.:'.' ,', "
',' .',:- ."'~,.".., ..1:. '.-,.'". .t-.," ....,;. ..' t:'; .....,. ..,.....((" ..:.., '_~'. .
,:',':,' "".'I".'~ .t- .~ ~r ,":. ,1. .. '; ,.'; ,~. ~.' " :,' ,.,. ::04"" r';",-:,.!:~. (. -" ~," ,.,l .;'~"""'..:,.." JJ
,,' ,"" : .' I" . " r,'" " ,.,' , ," ." . " '. " ..,.,.
I (.'{ ;,t CEij] r
t t~
I' :;,,\\ , \
I 0- Sv.bi~ct LOCAnons /~~~ \ ~ ~ -
;,J :,~,: I ~~
' ,..
("I' '..
: ;". ~"'~::.
, :r",,' ." ~
I I . .r .... \ ~
I ~~~ ~
:-------------------- - -- - -1 '..p'.,R~,'. ~~",.. ~
I" ,. '(" r""I
I :: .,' , . .... .
'. I I' .~ ",., ,f., ,. t'
I .. , ", "
I , (,,.~,c:,,~.,.. d'CEJ'"
: r - - - ~~.. ,.... ,
: \ cov~'
-
_.
-
-
Subie.ct: St,.O-if'
., I
I
I
L If
&
CHUL- VISTA
HILLS
TIT L E
JRAWH BY
D.tt1. w"lrt.
-----------
OA T E '/2€ ":1..
------'::,/---
AREA PLAT
j 3 -4-
... N
.
~
U"~ .l:W
~~
~.
~ --'" "
~
(
-
-
...
~,
...
,
~\ \
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
REVIEWED BY:
Item--1i..
Meeting Date 12/14/93
/
Resolution J 7 .3]...> Amending Schedule II Section 10.52.030 of
the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to the Special Stops Required -
Through Streets and Stop Intersections - 600 Block Sierra Way
Director of Public wo~J ~
City Manag~ 'tl i1~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No.K.)
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
In response to concerns from area residents regarding the recent accident history, and the recent
reconstruction of Sierra Way, which removed all of the cross gutters along Sierra Way, on
December 15, 1992, a Trial Traffic Regulation was initiated establishing stop signs at various
locations as listed in the schedule below.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt this resolution to make these stop sign
installations permanent
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: At the November 11,1993 meeting, the
Safety Commission recommended that the City Council approve a resolution to make the stop
signs permanent. The vote was 5-0-2 with Commissioners Pitts and Bierd absent.
DISCUSSION:
On December 15, 1992, staff sent to the City Council, a Trial Traffic Regulation to install stop
signs at various locations along Sierra Way. This Trial Traffic Regulation stated the following:
10.52.030
SCHEDULE n . SPECIAL STOPS REQUffiED . THROUGH STREETS
AND STOP INTERSECfIONS
Through Streets
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At
Sierra Way Riverlawn A venue Colorado A venue
Street Intersection Direction Travel Traffic StoDDed Signs
Riverlawn A venue Eastbound on Sierra Way 1
Madison A venue Southbound on Madison A venue 1
Jefferson Avenue East & Westbound Sierra Way 2
Oaklawn Avenue North & Southbound Oaklawn Avenue 2
Woodlawn Avenue East & Westbound Sierra Way 2
Colorado A venue Westbound on Sierra Way 1
/'1-;
Page 2, Item / 'I
Meeting Date 12/14/93
The City Engineer on December 15, 1992, determined that in the interest of minimizing traffic
hazards and congestion and for the promotion of public safety, that stop signs be installed in the
locations along Sierra Way as listed in the schedule above. This is in response to concerns from
area residents regarding the recent accident history, and the recent reconstruction of Sierra Way,
which removed all of the cross gutters along Sierra Way. On December 15, 1992, a Trial Traffic
Regulation establishing stop signs at various locations as listed in the schedule above was
established.
Said regulation became effective upon the posting of signs on February 2, 1993, and has run
through the trial period of almost eight (8) months from the date of such posting. A review of
said installation shave been made and it has been determined that the prohibition should be made
permanent. Section 10.12.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code only allows a Trial Traffic
Regulation to exist for eight months, at which time either a resolution affIrming the Trial Traffic
Regulation must be adopted or the Trial Traffic Regulation ceases to be effective.
A review of the traffic conditions by staff and the Police Department show that this Trial Traffic
Regulation is operating effectively. Therefore, staff recommends that the Trial Traffic Regulation
be made permanent.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
File No: CY-027
WPC F:'Ibome\euginedlagenda\1464.93
Attachment: Area Plat
Trial Traffic #122 NOT sc~n
Excerpt Safety ComnusslOn mmutes dated 11111193 NOT SCANl,,'"ED
)i-~
/
RESOLUTION NO. / 7 J J-5
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING SCHEDULE II SECTION
10.52.030 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO THE SPECIAL STOPS REQUIRED
THROUGH STREETS AND STOP INTERSECTIONS - 600
BLOCK SIERRA WAY
WHEREAS, in response to concerns from area residents
regarding the recent accident history, and the recent
reconstruction of Sierra Way, which removed all of the cross
gutters along Sierra Way, on December 15, 1992, a Trial Traffic
Regulation was initiated establishing stop signs at various
locations as listed in the schedule below; and
WHEREAS, at the November 11, 1993 meeting, the Safety
Commission recommended that the City Council approve a resolution
to make the stop signs permanent by a vote of 5-0-2 (Commissioners
pitts and Bierd absent); and
WHEREAS, staff recommends making these stop sign
installation permanent.
NOW, THEREBE IT RESOLVED that FORE, the city Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby amend Schedule II section
10.52.030 of the Chula vista Municipal Code relating to the Special
stops Required Through Streets and stop Intersections - 600 block
Sierra Way as follows:
10.52.030
SCHEDULE II - SPECIAL STOPS REQUIRED - THROUGH STREETS
AND STOP INTERSECTIONS
Name of Street
Sierra Way
Street Intersection
Riverlawn Avenue
Madison Avenue
Jefferson Avenue
Oaklawn Avenue
Woodlawn Avenue
Colorado Avenue
Presented by
Through Streets
Beginning At
Riverlawn Avenue
Direction Travel
Eastbound on
Southbound on
East & Westbound
North & Southbound
East & Westbound
Westbound on
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\sierra
Ji~:J
Ending At
Colorado Avenue
Traffic Stopped
Sierra Way
Madison Avenue
Sierra Way
Oaklawn Avenue
Sierr Way
Sie a Way \
aS/~ I
Boogaard,
\
I
I
Signs
1
1
2
2
2
1 ( '\
bjJ
" ,.......~_._-"-'.,"-~'"'---~--,.~~-,._------_._.~_...-
BROADWAY
t
.
...
...
...
......
...
INTERSTATE
D"4WN ..,
__0__ /J1.r1J.. __
~:T~jJjiJ.i.Jd_
TITLE
A.REA
/ - 'f
PLAT
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY:
Item J~
Meeting Date 12/14/93
Resolution / / :J .3 ~ Amending Schedule III Section 10.52.280 of
the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to Parking Prohibited At All
Times On Certain Streets - "E" Street from First Avenue to East Flower
Street.
Director of Public wo~> f!/'
City Manager~ \)'0 ~\
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-X)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
On September 8, 1992, a Trial Traffic Regulation to establish the prohibition of parking on "E"
Street from First Avenue to Bonita RoadlEast Flower Street was implemented pursuant to the
provisions of Section 10.12.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Signs indicating this
restriction were installed on February 5, 1993.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution to permanently restrict
parking along the south side of "E" Street from Toyon Lane to Bonita Road/East Flower Street
and along the north side of the street from First Avenue to Bonita RoadlEast Flower Street.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On August 12, 1993, the Safety
Commission voted 5-0-1 with Commissioner Braden absent to recommend that the City Council
pass a resolution affIrming this Trial TraffIc Regulation to make the parking prohibition
permanent.
DISCUSSION:
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 10.12.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, adopted by
Ordinance No. 1625 on May 27, 1975, the City Engineer, on September 8, 1992, determined that
in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and congestion and for the promotion of public
safety, a Trial TraffIc Regulation be established. That regulation being:
SCHEDULE HI - PARKING PROHmITED AT ALL TIMES ON CERTAIN STREETS
Name of Street Beginning at:
Ending at:
Side
"E" Street From the PCR at the east To the PCR at the west South
curbline of Toyon Lane curbline of Bonita Road
------------------ ---------------------------- ------------------------------ --------
"E" Street From the PCR at the east To the PCR at the west North
curbline of First Avenue curbline of E. Flower Street
PCR = Point of curb return
/~/
I~
Page 2, Item './
Meeting Date 12/14/93
Said regulations became effective upon the posting of signs on February 5, 1993 and has run for
a trial period of eight (8) months from the date of such posting.
The City Engineer has determined the need to post parking restrictions along both sides of "E"
Street in the area described above. In accordance with the City of Chula Vista General Plan and
more specifically the Circulation Plan for the City of Chula Vista, this portion of "E" Street is
designated as a Class I Collector roadway. Since the opening of the Lorna Bonita Subdivision
and the recent addition of sidewalks in this area, the concern for vehicles parking along this
segment has been realized. The #2 traffic lanes are not wide enough to allow for on-street
parking. Our observations over the last several years have shown that this area of "E" Street has
not been used for parking. Upon completion of the housing project at Lorna Bonita, and the
completion of the Public Improvements associated with this project, the City Engineer
determined, based on the reduced lane width that there is a need to prohibit parking on the
portion of "E" Street as described in the Schedule above.
A review of the traffic conditions by staff and the Police Department show that this parking
prohibition is operating effectively. Therefore, staff recommends that this parking prohibition be
made permanent.
FISCAL IMP ACT: Not applicable.
File No.: CY -027
WPC"F:\bome\engineel'lageoda\1406.93
Attachments: Area Plat
Trial Traffic No. 120 NOT SCANNEn
Minutes From August 12, 1993 Safety Commission Meeting (excerpt) It:JO' T ~C. If ~,.P'J1!!'"f~"
1"~ '. v'!. .tU'4.s. \/;.J....:}
J~:<'
RESOLUTION NO.
J73J~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING SCHEDULE III SECTION
10.52.280 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO PARKING PROHIBITED AT ALL TIMES ON
CERTAIN STREETS - "E" STREET FROM FIRST AVENUE
TO EAST FLOWER STREET
WHEREAS, on September 8, 1992, a Trial Traffic Regulation
to establish the prohibition of parking on "E" Street from First
Avenue to Bonita Road/East Flower Street was implemented pursuant
to the provisions of section 10.12.030 of the Chula vista Municipal
Code. Signs indicating this restriction were installed on February
5, 1993; and
WHEREAS, on August 12, 1993, the Safety Commission voted
5-0-1 with Commissioner Braden absent to recommend that the City
Council pass a resolution affirming this Trial Traffic Regulation
to make the parking prohibition permanent; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that the City Council adopt a
resolution to permanently restrict parking along the south side of
"E" Street from Toyon Lane to Bonita Road/East Flower Street and
along the north side of the street from First Avenue to Bonita
Road/East Flower Street.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby amend Schedule III section
10.52.280 of the Chula vista Municipal Code relating to Parking
Prohibited at All Times on certain Streets - "E" Street from First
Avenue to East Flower Street as follows:
SCHEDULE ill - PARKING PROHIBITED AT ALL TIMES ON CERTAIN STREETS
Name of Street Beginning at:
Ending at:
Side
"E" Street From the PCR at the east To the PCR at the west South
curb line of Toyon Lane curb line of Bonita Road
------------------ --------------------------- ------------------------------ --------
"E" Street From the PCR at the east To the PCR at the west North
curbline of First Avenue curbline of E. Flower Street
PCR = Point of curb return
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\n\Flower
/5-- :1
I
. ~
i
I <
...I
,
0-
ct
w
a:
<
..
..
I
s
to
c:
C
..
Q
~
.
....
iZ
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / t,
Meeting Date 12/14/93
Resolution ) 7 ;53? Accepting bids and awarding contract for the
construction of Storm Drain Channel Repairs in Telegraph Canyon Channel from
Paseo del Rey to approximately 350 feet easterly in the City of Chula Vista, CA
Director of Public W ork~, ~
City Manager ~ t~
On Wednesday, December 1, 1993, at 2:00 p.m., the Director of Public Works received sealed bids for
the construction of the "Storm Drain Channel Repair in Telegraph Canyon Channel from Paseo del Rey
to approximately 350 feet easterly," in the City of Chula Vista, California.
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No.xJ
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution accepting bids and awarding contract to
Marquez Construction, Inc. in the amount of $45,960.00.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Funds for the construction of this project were appropriated in the FY 1993-94 CIP Budget (DR-114).
The work to be done involves the removal and replacement of approximately 6,300 square feet of
reinforced concrete channel that was cracked, buckled and uplifted during past winters.
BID RESULTS
The project was advertised for a period of 25 days beginning November 6, 1993. During that period,
plans were purchased by 18 contractors and on the bid opening date, bids were submitted by 5
contractors. The bids received are as follows:
Contractor Bid Amount
1. Marquez Construction, Inc. $45,960.00
2. Hunters Construction, Inc. 47,888.00
3. Western Gunite, Inc. 49,684.00
4. L. L. Browne's Engineering 67,957.50
5. IntelWest Pacific, L TD 86,405.00
The low bid by Marquez Construction is below the Engineer's estimate of $63,729.00 by $17,769.00 or
by 27.9%. Marquez Construction submitted three references from prior clients that utilized their
services. Staff conducted a background check and past performance evaluation and determined that
Marquez Construction has the resources to prosecute the job within the specified schedule and budget.
Staff has reviewed the bid and recommends awarding the contract to Marquez construction, Inc., Spring
Valley.
/?-J
Page 2, Item / b
Meeting Date 12/14/93
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Attached is a copy of the Contractor's Disclosure Statement.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS
The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is a Class II exemption
(Section 15302 CEQA - Replacement or reconstruction of an existing structure). Since the project entails
the repair of an existing concrete lined channel, no Streambed Alteration Permit was required.
PREVAILING WAGE STATEMENT
The source of funding for this project is Storm Drain Revenue fund. No prevailing wage requirements
were necessary on a part of the bid documents. However, disadvantaged business enterprises were
encouraged to participate and the project was advertised with several DBE publications per the City's
outreach policy. The low bidder is a minority owned business.
FISCAL IMPACT:
If the resolution is adopted, the following table represents the funding status of the project.
Funds Required for Construction
A. Contract Amount $45,960
B. Contingencies (approx. 6%) 2,935
C. Staff Cost 5,000
D. Otay Water District Inspection 5,000
Total Funds Required for Construction $58,895
Funds Available for Construction
A. DR-114 - Telegraph Canyon Repair (Storm $58,895
Drain Revenue fund)
Total Funds Available for Construction $58,895
After construction, only routine City maintenance amounting to normal dirt and debris removal will be
required.
LdeT:AR045
WPC F:IHOMEIENGINEERIAGENDAI1488.93
/? -c2
RESOLUTION NO.
/7337
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING
CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF STORM DRAIN
CHANNEL REPAIRS IN TELEGRAPH CANYON CHANNEL
FROM PASEO DEL REY TO APPROXIMATELY 350 FEET
EASTERLY IN THE CITY OF ,CHULA VISTA, CA.
WHEREAS, on Wednesday, December 1, 1993, at 2:00 p.m.,
the Director of Public Works received the following five sealed
bids for the construction of the "storm drain channel repair in
Telegraph Canyon Channel from Paseo del Rey to approximately 350
feet easterly," in the City of Chula Vista, California:
Contractor Bid Amount
1. Marquez Construction, Inc. $45,960.00
2. Hunters Construction, Inc. 47,888.00
3. Western Gunite, Inc. 49,684.00
4. L. L. Browne's Engineering 67,957.50
5. Interwest Pacific, L TO 86,405.00
WHEREAS, the low bid by Marquez Construction is below the
Engineer's estimate of $63,729.00 by $17,769.00 or by 27.9% and
staff has conducted a background check and past performance
evaluation and determined that Marquez Construction has the
resources to prosecute the job within the specified schedule and
budget; and
WHEREAS, the City'S Environmental Review Coordinator has
determined that this project is a Class II exemption (Section 15302
CEQA - Replacement or reconstruction of an existing structure) and
since the project entails the repair of an existing concrete lined
channel, no Streambed Alteration Permit was required; and
WHEREAS, the source of funding for this project is Storm
Drain Revenue Fund and no prevailing wage requirements were
necessary on a part of the bid documents, however, disadvantage
business enterprises were encouraged to participate and the project
was advertised with several DBE publications per the City'S
outreach policy and the low bidder is a minority owned business.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby accept said five bids and
awards the contract for the construction of storm drain channel
1
/? -J
awards the contract for the construction of storm drain channel
repairs in Telegraph Canyon Channel from Paseo del Rey to
approximately 350 feet easterly to Marquez Construction, Inc. in
the amount of $45,960.00 to be completed in accordance with the
specifications approved by the Director of Public Works.
IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
and on behalf of the City.
A70vedi as
/~.r
V Bruce M.
Attorney
BE
Chula vista
contract for
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\TCChane1.bid
2
) ~- Lj
o fori by
.~
d, City
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item n
Meeting Date 12/14/93
Resolution ) 7 J ] 'roPriating $16,548 from the Federal Disaster
Assistance Fund (Fund 601), Authorizing expenditure of $441 from the
General Fund, Accepting bids and awarding contract for the grading
restoration and silt removal of Bonita Long Canyon Dam in the City of
Chula Vista, CA " /
Director of Public worfMJ rr
City Manageu-:\ 'v1J~- (4/5ths Vote: Yes-X-No_)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
At 2:00 p.m. on December 6, 1993, in the Public Services Building, the Director of Public Works
received sealed bids for the construction of "Grading Restoration and Silt Removal of Bonita Long
Canyon Dam", in the City of Chula Vista, CA. The work to be done consists of silt removal,
grading, cleaning, grubbing, protection and restoration of existing improvements upstream of the
Bonita Long Canyon Dam. This work is mandated by the State Division of Mines and Dams
(Department of Water Resources) to protect the integrity of the dam (see letter attached).
RECOMMENDATION: That the council approve the resolution appropriating funds, authorizing
expenditure, accepting bids and awarding contract to Fill Dirt, Inc. DBA Roberts Earthmoving.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On October 5, 1993, the City Council approved Resolution 17269 (attached) adding four projects
to the 1993-1994 Capital Improvement Program and authorized staff to utilize informal bidding
procedures for certain drainage projects, including this project (D97099). This project will provide
for silt removal and grading restoration for Bonita Long Canyon Dam in order to remove
approximately 6 feet of silt behind the Dam and maintain the original drainage capacity of the
structure. The only difference in the bidding process on this project from that normally used was
that we bid it for only three weeks instead of the customary 30 days.
Resolution 17269 outlined the funding mechanism from both The Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) and the state Office of Emergency Services (OES). FEMA will fund 75% of the
cost of constructing the project, OES will fund 18.75% leaving the City to fund the remaining
6.25% plus design and administration costs.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS
The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is statutorily exempt
under Section 15269 (c) "Specific actions needed to prevent or mitigate an emergency" of the
California Environmental Quality Act. In addition, a Stream Bed Alteration Agreement has been
entered into between the Department of Fish and Game and the City of Chula Vista. The
agreement (attached) requires the City to provide mitigation measures amounting to the creation
or enhancement of one acre of stream with willow riparian habitat upstream of the project site.
Staff is now locating a mitigation area acceptable to the State. Cost to implement the mitigation
/7-/
Item fl
Meeting Date 12/14/93
requirement could range from $5,000 up to as much as $20,000. However, as much as 94% of this
cost may be reimbursed by FEMA and OES if they accept the expense as a legitimate component
of the silt removal project. Once the area has been identified and accepted by the State, a more
accurate cost estimate will be prepared and a report will be submitted to Council for its
consideration. The mitigation work required by the permit must be completed by March 31, 1994.
It will be done under a separate contract.
Staff has spent a considerable amount of time in discussions with FEMA on their guidelines for
payment of costs on projects. FEMA has indicated that, under their guidelines, they will pay the
actual cost of the project as long as the scope of work remains the same as indicated in their
Damage Survey Report (DSR). They also indicated that they will pay any costs related to the
project that are necessary in order to do the project such as mitigation measures required to get a
fish and game permit. FEMA has indicated that in order to increase the amount of funding due
to increased costs, a supplemental request to increase the DSR must be sent in. They indicated
that this is a routine procedure. Therefore, the indication is that FEMA will pay their share of the
mitigation costs, however, if for any reason they do not, the funding for that part of the project
would have to come from City funds.
PREVAILING WAGE STATEMENT
The source of funding for this project is the City's Federal Disaster Assistance Fund. No prevailing
wage requirements were necessary or a part of the bid documents. However, disadvantage
business enterprises were encouraged to participate and the project was advertised with several
DBE publications per the City's outreach policy
BID RESULTS
The project was advertised for three weeks after which eight bids were received. The low bid of
$54,450 received from Roberts Earthmoving is above the Engineer's estimate of $50,000 by $4,450
or 8. 90%. We have reviewed the low bid and checked the contractor's references and recommend
awarding the contract to Fill Dirt, Inc DBA Roberts Earthmoving. Attached is a copy of the
Contractor's Disclosure Statement.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
Resolution 17269 appropriated funds based on an estimated cost of $ 50,011 for this project.
Additional appropriations are needed to account for the actual costs as follows:
TOTAL FEDERAL STATE CITY
COST SHARE SHARE SHARE
Total appropriations $ 67,000 $ 50,250 $ 12,563 $ 4,187
required
Previous $ 50,011 $ 37,012 $ 9,253 $ 3,746
appropriation
Additional $ 16,989 $ 13,238 $ 3,310 $ 441"
appropriations needed
/70/ :L
Item II
Meeting Date 12/14/93
· These funds are operating budget expenses and will not be appropriated to the
project, but will be counted as in-kind services to achieve the City's share of the
proj ect cost.
Funds Required for Construction
1. Contract Amount $54,450.00
2. Contingencies (10%) 5,445.00
3. Stafr 7,105.00
TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION $67,000.00
Funds Available for Construction
1. D97099 FEMA $50,250.00
2. D97099 OES 12,563.00
3. D97099 City Share 3,746.00
4. General Fund (Operating Budget) 441.00
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION $ 67,000.00
FISCAL IMPACT: After construction, only routine City maintenance amounting mainly to annual
cleaning will be required. Environmental mitigations are required to be installed by March 31,
1994, with an estimated total revegetation cost of $ 20,000.00 with as much as 94% of this
potentially eligible for reimbursement from FEMA and OES. Once the revegetation plan gains the
Department of Fish and Game approval, staff will provide an update on approval and revenue
sources.
Attachments:
Contractor's disclosure statement. } ,,~
Stream bed alteration agreement
Agenda statement for resolution No. 17269 . ~
Letter from Department of Water Resources ~ ~
.. ~O
SA:LY-I07
WPC F:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA \blcsilt.a13
)7'.3
RESOLUTION NO.
J 7 ;J3?r
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $16,548 FROM THE
FEDERAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE FUND (FUND 601),
AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF $441 FROM THE
GENERAL FUND, ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING
CONTRACT FOR THE GRADING RESTORATION AND SILT
REMOVAL OF BONITA LONG CANYON DAM IN THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on December 6, 1993, in the Public
Services Building, the Director of Public Works received the
following eight sealed bids for the construction of "Grading
Restoration and Silt Removal of Bonita Long Canyon Dam", in the
City of Chula Vista, CA.:
BIDDER AMOUNT
Fill Dirt, Inc. DBA Roberts Earth $ 54,450
Moving
McLaughlin Engineering 68,825
Marquez Construction 77,500
JSA Engineering, Inc. 81,099
Hunter's Construction Co. 88,990
Sign & Pennick, Inc. 136,395
Erreca's Inc. 163,320
Heffler Co., Inc. 198,500
WHEREAS, the low bid of $54,450 received from Roberts
Earthmoving is above the Engineer's estimate of $50,000 by $4,450
or 8.90% and staff has checked the contractor's references and
recommends awarding the contract to Fill Dirt, Inc DBA Roberts
Earthmoving; and
WHEREAS, the City'S Environmental Review Coordinator has
determined that this project is statutorily exempt under section
15269 (c) "Specific actions needed to prevent or mitigate an
emergency" of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, in addition, a Stream Bed Alteration Agreement
has been entered into between the Department of Fish and Game and
the city of Chula vista requires the City to provide mitigation
measures amounting to the creation or enhancement of one acre of
/'7-y ;;7~~
stream with willow riparian habitat upstream of the project site;
and
WHEREAS, staff is now locating a mitigation area
acceptable to the State but the cost to implement the mitigation
requirement could amount to about $20,000. However, as much as 94%
of this cost may be reimbursed by FEMA and OES if they accept the
expense as a legitimate component of the silt removal project.
Once the area has been identified and accepted by the State, a more
accurate cost estimate will be prepared and a report will be
submitted to Council for its consideration; and
WHEREAS, the source of funding for this project is FEMA,
OES and the City's Federal Disaster Assistance Fund and no
prevailing wage requirements were necessary or a part of the bid
documents, however, disadvantaged business enterprises were
encouraged to participate and the project was advertised with
several DBE publications per the City's outreach policy.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby accept said eight bids and
awards the contract to Roberts Earth Moving in the amount of
$54,450 for grading restoration and silt removal of Bonita Long
Canyon Dam in the City of Chula vista.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that $16,548 is hereby
appropriated from the Federal Disaster Assistance Fund (Fund 601),
and $13,238 is transferred to Account 601-6010-D97099 and $3,310 is
transferred to Account 601-6011-D97099 and $441 is hereby
authorized from the General Fund Account 601-6012-D7099 for said
project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
contract for and on behalf of the City of Chula V' ta.
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
ruce M.
Attorney
by
Presented by
AP~as/ri f
C:\rs\dam
J7/t,
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM Ir
MEETING DATE 12/14/93
ITEM TITLE: Report ratifying an application for Federal
Department of Education, Library Services and
Construction Act, LSCA, Title VI, Library Literacy
Program grant funds to develop and implement a
model program to aid adult learners with dyslexia
SUBMITTED BY: Library Director~
REVIEWED BY: city Manage~ "':6~ (4j5ths Vote: Yes_No....lL)
The Chula vista Public Library nas applied for $34,720 in Federal
Department of Education, Library Services and Construction Act,
Ti tIe VI, Library Literacy Program grant funds for fiscal year
1994-95 to develop and implement a model program to aid adult
learners with dyslexia.
The Department of Education accepts multiple proposals from
individual libraries, and considers each proposal separately. This
application is distinct from the Library's proposal to continue its
model writing program for adult learners, which is also on the
Council's December 14th agenda.
RECOMMENDATION:
application.
That Council accept the report and ratify the
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: It is expected that the Library
Board of Trustees will support the Title VI grant application at
their meeting on December 8, 1993.
DISCUSSION
If approved, grant funds will be used to develop and implement a
model program to identify and aid adult learners with dyslexia. A
.57 FTE instructor will be hired as well as a .47 FTE position for
administrative/clerical support for the program. The program
requires training of 60 volunteer tutors to use instructional
materials and techniques specially designed for this population.
All participants will be pre and post-tested to determine the
model's efficacy.
FISCAL IMPACT
These funds cannot be used to supplant the existing tutor reading
program, however, if our application is successful, $4,920 in
salaries and benefits budgeted in the Title VI grant will be
available to offset general funds in FY 1994-95.
/~I
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEMfl
MEETING DATE 12/14/93
ITEM TITLE: Report ratifying an application for Federal
Department of Education, Library Services and
Construction Act, LSCA, Title VI, Library Literacy
Program grant funds to continue a model writing
program for adult learners in FY 1994-95
(\
SUBMITTED BY: Library Director(~~'
Tt<" ( '\ \
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ \>'i\~1 (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-1L)
The Chula vista Public Librarylhas applied for $34,986 in Federal
Department of Education, Library Services and Construction Act,
Title VI, Library Literacy Program grant funds for fiscal year
1994-95 to continue its model writing program for adult learners.
The Department of Education accepts multiple proposals from
individual libraries, and considers each proposal separately. This
application is distinct from the Library's proposal to offer a
specialized program to deal with dyslexic adults, which is also on
the Council's December 14th agenda.
RECOMMENDATION:
application.
That Council accept the report and ratify the
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: It is expected that the Library
Board of Trustees will support the Title VI grant application at
their meeting on December 8, 1993.
DISCUSSION
In FY 1993-94 a Federal Department of Education, LSCA, Title VI,
Library Literacy Program grant was awarded to the Chula vista
Public Library to establish a model writing program for adult
learners at the Chula vista Literacy Team.
If approved, FY 1994-95 grant funds will be used to continue the
model writing program. A variety of small group writing classes
for learners enrolled in the Chula vista Literacy Team will
continue to be taught in the evenings at the library at 365 F
Street, the Castle Park/Otay Library and the vista Square
Elementary School. A .48 FTE instructor will conduct the classes.
It is anticipated that approximately 60 adult learners will be
served, in addition to training up to 20 volunteer tutors. The
classes will also serve as a training ground for volunteer tutors
to improve their techniques for teaching basic writing skills.
FISCAL IMPACT
These funds cannot be used to supplant the existing tutor reading
program, however, if our application is successful, $9,541 in
salaries and $3,415 in benefits budgeted in the Title VI grant will
be available to offset general funds in FY 1994-95.
/'(-/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ;20
Meeting Date 12114193
ITEM TIlLE:
Report: Request to Conduct Motorcycle Event
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Parks and R~creati~
REVIEWED BY: City ManageJ0 \yv' 6.\f\\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No..xJ
~1 ^'-../J
The Chief Executive Officer of South Coastl.iIarley-Davidson is requesting permission to conduct a
special event, the 1993 Tijuana Toy Run, on Sunday, December 19, 1993. The event will involve
temporary street closures on Glover, Garrett, and Landis Avenues, and on "D" Street. Street closures
will be in effect for approximately three hours.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept the report and approve the request subject to staff
conditions.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable
DISCUSSION: The Chief Executive Officer of South Coast Harley Davidson is requesting
permission to conduct the annual Tijuana Toy Run on Sunday, December 19, 1993. The purpose of
the event is to provide donated Christmas gifts to children in Tijuana. The sponsor is expecting
approximately 3,000 participants, and is anticipating that 2,000 motorcycles will be involved in the
event.
South Coast Harley-Davidson will be the starting point for the event, and motorcycles and their riders
will assemble on City streets immediately surrounding the business. The sponsor expects that
participants will begin arriving at approximately 7:30 AM. The motorcycles will leave the area at
approximately 10:30 AM, and will proceed west on "E" Street to Interstate 5.
The Sponsor is requesting permission to temporarily close the streets immediately around his business
to allow for the staging of the event, and is requesting support from the Police Department for crowd
and traffic control. The street closures would involve Garrett, Glover, and Landis Avenues between
"E" and "D" Streets, and "D" Street between Third and Fourth Avenue. These closures would be in
effect from 7:30 AM - 10:30 AM. Emergency access lanes on all of these streets would be
maintained by the Police Department.
The sponsor has contacted all residents on the affected streets notifying them in writing of the event,
and requesting their cooperation.
The Police Department does not anticipate any problems with this event, and they concur with the
staff recommendation for approval of the event subject to the following conditions:
1. Provision of evidence of general liability insurance in the amount of $1 million, in the form
of a certificate of insurance and policy endorsement which names the City as additional
insured.
2. Execution of a standard Hold Harmless Agreement
;2L) - /
Item ..2 {}
Meeting Date 12/14/93
3. Provision of adequate crowd and traffic control as determined by the Police Department. All
costs for Police services will be reimbursed by the event sponsor.
South Coast Harley-Davidson submitted the request for permission to conduct this event less than
two weeks ago. The sponsor has been notified that a more timely request for permission will be
required for future events.
FISCAL IMPACf: None. All costs for required Police services will be paid by the event sponsor.
2
c2(}.-2
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item c2 /
Meeting Date 12/14/93
Public Hearing for the Purpose of Considering
Abatement of the Transient Occupancy Tax
Resolution ) 7J37APproving Abatement of the
Transient Occupancy Tax From a Rate of Ten
Percent to Eight Percent for Calendar Year 1994
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Fina~~f~. .
REVIEWED BY: city Manage~ ~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No l( )
At its meeting of October 25, 1990, the City Council adopted
Ordinance No. 2407, option 1, amending the Municipal Code regarding
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) by establishing a maximum TOT rate of
ten percent and providing for annual abatement hearings at which
time the maximum tax could be lowered.
ITEM TITLE:
In 1990, 1991 and 1992 the city Council held abatement hearings and
set a TOT rate of eight percent for the subsequent calendar year,
the same rate it has been since 1978.
The purpose of tonight's action is to hold the annual abatement
hearing and to consider reduction of the legally maximum TOT rate
from ten percent to eight percent. without an abatement hearing
the TOT rate will automatically increase to ten percent.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council hold the public hearing and adopt the
resolution maintaining the TOT rate at eight
percent.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
As highlighted in the City Manager's annual Budget presentation for
the past several years, the structure of municipal revenue is an
increasing problem for Chula vista and all other cities. while the
property tax and sales tax revenues normally increase at a rate
reflecting economic activity in the community, a number of other
revenue sources are ei ther "flat" or actually decrease.
Accordingly, the city's overall revenue base does not keep up with
the expenditures, resul ting in a constant search for ways of
providing services more efficiently and less costly, as well as
ways to increase revenues. The City has come to rely to some
extent on one time windfall revenues, or ongoing revenues from
special funds to pay for general City operations. In order to
02/- /
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 12/14/93
address the structural insufficiency in the municipal revenue base,
the City has made efforts in the past three years to identify
additional revenue possibilities, as well as taking steps to make
overall operations more efficient. One outgrowth of these efforts
was to bring the business license tax rates more in line with other
cities. Although a three year phase-in of rate increases was
scheduled, the past three years' proposed increases have been
deferred because of continuing poor economy.
The City Council also agreed to increase the Transient Occupancy
Tax from eight percent to a maximum of ten percent, but held the
increase in abeyance given the economic situation at the time, with
the idea that an economic recovery might warrant an increase in TOT
in future years. Unfortunately, the current economic environment
has not improved from previous years. The motel occupancy rate has
declined over the past several months because of the recession and
overbuilding in San Diego. In FY 1992-93, the City's actual TOT
revenue declined by 8.6% from the previous year. California is
continuing to lag behind any economic recovery. In light of this
discussion, staff is recommending that the TOT be maintained at its
current rate of eight percent.
Alternative
As an alternative to the staff recommendation, Council may wish to
consider not abating the TOT rate and allowing it to automatically
increase to ten percent or abating it to a rate somewhere between
eight and ten percent. Each one percent in TOT rate equals
approximately $140,000 in revenue. Therefore, if the TOT rate is
abated to nine percent it will increase revenue by $140,000 and if
the TOT rate is ten percent it will increase revenue by $280,000.
Comparison of TOT Rates in Neighboring cities
The following table indicates the TOT rate in neighboring cities:
Previous Current Date
city TOT Rate TOT Rate Changed
Imperial Beach 7% 10% 7/1/90
Coronado 6% 7% 10/1/85
National City 8% 10% 7/1/92
San Diego 8% 9% 6/1/89
2/~.2
. ^."-,._~,-_.,..~_.--.."~._,-"".~-_.~._--_-.-..----
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 12714/93
As indicated above, most of the adjoining cities have a higher TOT
rate than Chula Vista. Imperial Beach increased its TOT rate by
43% as of 7/1/90 and its TOT revenue increased by 35% in FY 1990-91
and maintained in FY 1991-92. In FY 1992-93 Imperial Beach
experienced a 20% decrease in TOT revenue, in all likelihood
because of fewer tourists to the San Diego area and the lagging
economy.
National City increased its TOT rate by 25% beginning 7/1/92, yet
its TOT revenue increased by only 12% in FY 1992-93, once again
probably due to decreased tourism in the San Diego area.
This means that our motel/hotel operators would not be competing at
a disadvantage with National city or Imperial Beach if Chula
vista's rate was raised to nine or ten percent. Also, as you will
recall, this is a tax that provides support for City services from
non-residents of Chula vista, so it will not have a direct impact
on most Chula vista taxpayers. Finally, in light of the state's
continuing budget woes the City may very well need this additional
revenue at some point in time in order to support existing service
levels.
FISCAL IMPACT:
By keeping the current TOT rate of eight percent, the City's TOT
General Fund revenue for this fiscal year is anticipated to be
approximately $1,100,000.
If the TOT rate is abated to nine percent, then it is estimated
that the City will receive an annual revenue of $1,240,000. with
a TOT rate of ten percent the City will receive $1,380,000 in
revenue.
J./~3
RESOLUTION NO.
1733;
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING ABATEMENT OF THE
TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX FROM A RATE OF TEN
PERCENT TO EIGHT PERCENT FOR CALENDAR YEAR
1994
WHEREAS, at its meeting of October 25, 1990, the city
Council adopted Ordinance No. 2407, option 1, amending the
Municipal Code regarding Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) by
establishing a maximum TOT rate of ten percent and providing for
annual abatement hearings at which time the maximum tax could be
lowered; and
WHEREAS, in 1990, 1991 and 1992, the City Council held
abatement hearings and set a TOT rate of eight percent for the
subsequent calendar year, the same rate it has been since 1978; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, at a public hearing held on
December 14, 1993, considered the reduction of the TOT rate from
ten percent to eight percent and voted to maintain the TOT rate as
eight percent.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve the abatement of the
Transient Occupancy Tax from a rate of ten percent to ight percent
for calendar year 1994.
LYman Christopher, Director of
Finance
/1
?~asvto 0
Bruce M. Boogaard,
Attorney
Presented by
F:home\attomey\8%TOT
J/-1
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ;J 2
Meeting Date 12/14/93
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing
CONCERNING THE COMPREHENSIVE
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution ) 73 it? Adopting the 1994-1999 Comprehensive
Housing Affordability Strategy & Authorizing Submitting the CHAS to the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Community Developme~rector L ? \
City Managerj~~~\
U (4/5ths V ote: Yes No X)
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 requires all jurisdictions applying for funding
from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, including Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG), to submit a Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS). The
CHAS is a planning document which identifies the City's housing needs and outlines a strategy
to meet these needs.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council open the public hearing; take public comment
regarding the City's Draft Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy; close the public
review period; adopt the CHAS; and authorize forwarding it to HUD for approval.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Housing Advisory Committee
reviewed and unanimously approved the draft CHAS at a Special Meeting, December 7, 1993
and their comments have been incorporated into the CHAS.
DISCUSSION: The National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 requires all jurisdictions applying
for funding assistance under most programs administered by the Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) to submit a Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS)
to HUD for approval. The full CHAS is submitted to HUD every five years, but the CHAS is
updated annually with a One Year Action Plan.
The CHAS is a comprehensive planning document that identifies the City's overall needs for
affordable and supportive housing and outlines a strategy to address these needs. The National
Affordable Housing Act requires the City's CHAS to contain elements which describe the City's
housing needs and market conditions, sets out a five year strategy which establishes priorities
for meeting these needs, identifies resources anticipated to be available for the development of
housing, and establishes an investment plan that outlines the planned uses of resources.
The Act also requires citizen input in the process and mandates a thirty day public comment
period as well as a public hearing before City Council. A public hearing was held on October
02;2 -j
Page 2, Item .;ld...
Meeting Date 12/14/93
12, 1993. The public comment period ended on November 12, 1993 and the summary of citizen
comments has been incorporated into the CHAS.
The CHAS is exempt from environmental review under CEQA. This statutory exemption is
found in State Code Section 15267.
The City's Draft CHAS identifies the following housing priorities:
1. Preserve Palomar and Oxford Terrace Apartments because they are "at-risk" of
converting to market rate rentals;
2. Administer the City's housing rehabilitation program entitled the Community Housing
Improvement Program (CHIP);
3. Implement the City's Affordable Housing Program;
4. Assist low, moderate, and middle income residents to become homeowners;
5. Support non-profit corporations to develop affordable housing;
6. Assist mobile home park residents who are faced with rent increases and park closures;
7. Work with the San Diego County Housing Authority to provide public housing in Chula
Vista and to transition such responsibility to the Chula Vista Housing Authority;
8. Utilize CDBG funds for supportive services for residents with special needs.
9. Develop a transitional housing shelter.
City Council adopted a CHAS document in 1991. However, due to the arrival of the new 1990
Census Data, HUD is now requiring that all jurisdictions review their City's housing needs and
strategies with this new information and prepare a revised five year plan. This new CHAS
document will be a planning document for 1994 through 1999. It might also be mentioned that
the CHAS' goals and priorities run parallel with the City's Housing Element of the General
Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
[C :\WP51 \AGENCY\RMS\CHAS-94.RA4]
02)'~cJ
RESOLUTION J? 3 'i 0
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ADOPTING THE 1994-1999 COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY STRA TEGY (CHAS) AND AUTHORIZING
SUBMITTING THE COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
STRATEGY TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the National Affordable housing Act of 1990 requires the
development of a Comprehensive housing Affordability Strategy by jurisdictions requesting
funding from the U.S. Department of housing and Urban Development.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA does hereby rmd, order, determine and resolve that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby adopt the 1994-1999 Comprehensive housing Affordability Strategy and
authorizes its submission to the Department of Housing and Urban D velopment.
APE 'L~
<rJ'
~ Bruce M, Boogaard '
City Attorney I
~C)~
. BY:
PRESENTED BY:
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
[BM\B:CHAS.RSO]
DISK #2
;2 J. .- _7
NOllce or I:.xemptlon
Supplementary Document Q
To: 1&
Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121
Sacramento, CA 95814
From: (Public Agency) C/7'Y tIP {}./VlA {/I'5.11'I
2. 7& ~ At4?N~
t'"' ~ I (Addras)
'-f"-( {)LA- 1/'(5)>4- CJQ q Ie; / (;)
g1
County Clerk
County of c51;N a/?""~
~IJ. M\C" /?S-tJ
MrJ Ole~ ffi
C?:u /2. .1./1'17
Project Title: ()111!" ff O-tUt"A- [/Igm (byy;/!ld-Njg~ J-I/JV,k~ . fl-r/ZJMA-81l-~rl .s~
/l ~/ _ H h""r ~y /qt:fL/- m1
Project Location - Specific: ld LX- ~y~
Project Location - City: (l~L/LA t/;.>TJ4
Project Location - County: d4v PI t:::fnJ
Description of Project: 7ft(/' (}JyyJ.#/le-rlB'JV~~ J..IcrL{"JINt, ~t?~/ur-t' 5f7h4--nsl('
Iflef"A/'!);:::1~S PI1tJIPh:h11> W~/~ p~#~ '?1.~/1't. ~/S~ /?);L ~cr
Pt:!Vt!2.d/11~ A,vp /d. ~/.5I77nV or HOV$M/~. rHt.j ~13tdtfl.r (;7~ ~
.
Pkd6J1!' fi-t!-TVr-k. C!<nu677C-VCllnJ ~ .r-u.n/3 /uVt::'.
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: e, f'17 d CuLA-A ///f,TJ4
Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: &'FY p::r G.tvLA t/j~~
Exempt Status: (check one)
o Ministerial (Sec. 2108O(bXl); 15268);
o Declared Emergency (Sec. 2108O(b)(3); 15269(a));
o Emergency Project (Sec. 2108O(b)(4); 15269(b)(c));
.~:.\.
o Categorical Exemption. State type and section number:
C8I Statutory Exemptions. State code number: /$'2 ~7: h/VI9'NOIIh- A-ss.$~ 1Z> '-<TW ~ #7~Ptf"Mnr
IAJ~er ~tJV*/U1- .
Reasons why project Is exempt: 1Ue"" ?4nrcr t' /l-A-AJ) PRQ.VIOE.5 poJZ. ~/~C/A-1.-
AS,}/b17btJl3l:r ~ 7H'e- t1~#7e7VT rbvPh,,l. ~tNf/T/ff>"'J or /2-t:n>/~&V77A-L-
flOV.h/Ub 1uJZ..Su~ 7b ,'Ea7aw- l5"2.{p7 tlr T1-ftr ~vIArWA/lr::> tf)C n:--tt:;" ~~/V/14-
f!1VV1A:7rJ~~ ~rtr,4c.r:
Lead Agency
Contact Person: ~ /J1J41t..-n/J~-Z
Area Code/TelephonelExtension: ((P/9/ ~c; 1- .?dG/7
If filed by applicant:
1. Attach certified docwnent of exemption finding.
2. Has a Notice of Exemption been med by the public agency approving the project? 0 Yes 0 No
SignalUre: ~ ~ Dale: 12-/2/9..
~Signed by Lead Agency Date received for f1ling at OPR:
o Signed by Applicant
Title: eNV/~AI?f:9IJl1:Ii..-
P~;n:z.?3 ...n~
Revised October 1989
,2:2- --I
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . 243
~ ~ ~q St~\1..W
d~ 73/03
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item cJ,,;>
Meeting Date 12/14/93
Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit PCC-94-09; Appeal from the
decision of the Planning Commission to approve a request by Covenant
Christian School to operate a private school for grades K-12 at 2400
Fenton Street, in the EastLake Business Center - Bonita Country Day
School (Continued)
Resolution I 7 ; -2~Ying the appeal and thereby affirming the
decision of the Planning Commission to approve PCC-94-09 for a private
school at 2400 Fenton Street for a five-year period
Director of Pl~ing ,ftt
City ManagerJ11 ~~) (4/Stbs Vote: Yes_NoX)
This item is an appeal by Bonita Country Day School from a decision of the Planning
Commission to approve a request by Covenant Christian School to establish a private school for
grades K-12 for a period of five years at 2400 Fenton Street within the EastLake Business
Center. Bonita Country Day School presently occupies a portion of the building at 2400 Fenton
Street.
On December 7, 1993, the City Council considered this item, took public testimony, and
continued the matter for one week to allow Covenant Christian additional time to attempt to (1)
resolve the concerns of Bonita Country Day School regarding shared use of the facility, and (2)
secure the use of Scobee Park for a period of five years rather than the present agreement calling
for two years of use.
Please see attached for a copy of the full staff report on this item from the meeting of December
7, 1993.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council deny the appeal and thereby affirm the decision
of the Planning Commission to approve PCC-94-09, but modify the resolution to reflect a two-
year rather than five-year term.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On October 27, 1993, the Planning
Commission voted 5-2 to approve Conditional Use Permit PCC-94-09 for a five-year term in
accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions in Resolution PCC-94-09.
)3-/
Page 2, Item c2 J
Meeting Date 12/14/93
DISCUSSION:
On December 8, 1993, the Planning staff met with representatives from Covenant Christian
School and Bonita Country Day School to discuss the issues regarding shared use. Tentative
agreement was reached on all of the issues of concern, and it is expected that a formal
agreement and full resolution of the issues will be completed between the two schools prior to
the Council meeting.
The most recent correspondence from the EastLake Business Center Owners Association
indicates that the Association does not favor extending the use of Scobee Park to five years at
this time, but that it should not be difficult for Covenant Christian to receive an extension if
everything goes well over the next two years (please see attached letter from EastLake dated
November 4, 1993). Following the December 7 Council meeting, EastLake was contacted by
staff to determine if they would reconsider their position and extend the use of the Park to five
years. They indicated that it may not be possible to resurvey their membership in such a short
period of time, but that they would take the matter under consideration. Staff will report to
Council on this issue at the meeting.
It should be noted that Condition #3 of the Resolution states, in part, "... the applicant shall
provide proof satisfactory to the Director of Planning that legally enforceable rights to suitable
outdoor recreational and physical education facilities have been obtained for the duration of the
permit. Loss of such facilities shall be grounds for revocation of the permit. "
This condition contemplated that Covenant Christian may have alternatives to the use of Scobee
Park to provide for outdoor recreation, including the possibility of securing the use of vacant
acreage adjacent to their site from EastLake, or perhaps transporting the children to recreational
facilities outside the immediate area. Thus, it was not anticipated that Covenant Christian would
be entirely dependent upon the use of Scobee Park to meet the recreational and physical
education needs of the children.
(c:\wp51 \nancy\covchris.Al13)
Not applicable.
~~~
~'ftd~'
FISCAL IMPACT:
J3" 2-
RESOLUTION NO. 17325
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE DECISION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ISSUE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-94-09 TO USE 2400
FENTON STREET IN THE EASTLAKE BUSINESS CENTER
AS A PRIVATE SCHOOL FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE
YEARS.
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a conditional use
permit was filed with the City of Chula vista Planning Department
on August 18, 1993, by Covenant Christian School, and
WHEREAS, said application requested approval to establish and
operate a private school for a minimum five-year period at 2400
Fenton Street (APN 595-232-11) ("Subject Property") in the EastLake
Business Center ("Project"); and,
WHEREAS, the City'S Planning commission has the authority to
grant conditional use permits for certain uses over the Subject
Property pursuant to the authority of Ordinance No. 2522 adopted by
the city Council on June 30, 1992, being the EastLake I Planned
Community District Regulations, as amended; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a
hearing on said conditional use permit application and notice of
said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and
its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior
boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing;
and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as
advertised, namely 7:00 p.m. October 27, 1993, in the Council
Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and
said hearing was thereafter closed; and,
WHEREAS, on October 27, 1993, the Commission voted 5-2 to
approve the conditional use permit for a five year period, based on
the findings and subject to the conditions contained in Resolution
PCC-94-09, a signed copy of the resolution was filed with the city
Clerk on November 3, 1993; and,
WHEREAS, on November 11, 1993, and within the time to file an
appeal, an appeal from the decision of the Planning Commission was
filed by Bonita Country Day School; and,
WHEREAS, said appeal was based on claims that the child
welfare, security and safety issues associated with the proposed
use have not been adequately addressed; that the Planning
Commission's decision was based on accepted planning practice that
does not address the unique circumstances of this project, and that
covcrhist.wp
December 9, 1993
Reso Granting CUP for Private School
Page 1
-23 - J
Resolution No.
Page 2
the basis for the approval of the five year permit term was the
business agreement between the building owner and Covenant
Christian School; and,
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing
and said appeal and notice of said hearing, together with its
purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general
circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners within
500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten
days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as
advertised, namely 4:00 p.m. Tuesday, December 7, 1993, in the
Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council.
WHEREAS, this Resolution is passed pursuant to the authority
of section 19.14.130 by which the city Council may affirm, reverse
or modify in whole or in part any determination of the planning
commission upon the hearing of such appeal, subject to the same
limitationsd and requirements of finding as are placed upon the
planning commission by said Chapter 19.14.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL hereby
finds as follows:
section 1. CEQA Consideration.
The city Council does hereby confirm and endorse the
determination of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator that,
and hereby finds on its own behalf, that the Project is exempt from
environmental review as a Class l(a) exemption under section 15301
of the CEQA Guidelines.
Section 2. Conditional Use Permit Findings.
Pursuant to the requirement of Section 19.14.130, the City
Council makes the following findings, presented in bold lettering,
as specified in section 19.14.080 as follows, based on the evidence
therein below set forth:
1. That the proposed use at the location is necessary or
desirable to provide a service or facility which will
contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood
or the community.
The site represents a suitable interim location for the
school to continue to meet the private educational needs
of the community provided the circumstances which favor
approval at this time are subject to review and
reconsideration in five years time to determine if the
covcrhist.wp
December 9, 1993
Reso Granting CUP for Private School
Page 2
:2 3./1
Resolution No.
Page 3
development of the surrounding area and/ or any changes in
the plans or regulations of the Business Center may
result in a conflict in uses.
2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the
particular case, be detrimental the health, safety or
general welfare of persons residing or working in the
vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the
vicinity.
The present lack of development immediately surrounding
the site should ameliorate any potential conflicts
between uses. The permit, as conditioned, will further
ensure compatibility with co-tenants and other properties
within the Business Center, and will allow review and
reconsideration of these circumstances within five years
time.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations
and conditions specified in the Municipal Code for such
use.
The approval of the permit, as conditioned, will require
the use to comply with all applicable regulations, codes
and requirements.
4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not
adversely affect the general plan of the City or the
adopted plan of any government agency.
with the approval of this permit and the implement of all
conditions, the use will be consistent with the General
Plan and EastLake PC District regulations.
section 3. Grant of Use Permit on Specified Conditions.
The City Council hereby grants permission to the Owner of the
Subject Propert to use the Subject Property to establish and
operate a private school for a minimum five-year period
subject to the following conditions:
1. Term. The permit is approved for a period of five years
(until October 27, 1998) and subject to periodic review
during that period of time. The permit may be considered
by the Planning Commission for renewal and extension
beyond that date provided a written request therefor,
along with the required fee, exhibits and information, is
received, deemed complete and approved at least 30 days
but no more than 120 days prior to the expiration date.
covcrhist.wp
December 9, 1993
23-5
Reso Granting CUP for Private School
Page 3
Resolution No.
Page 4
The primary factors to be considered in renewing and
extending the permit is the potential for conflict with
surrounding development and/or any changes in the plans
for the Business Center.
2. Traffic and Parking. Prior to occupancy the property
owner shall submit to the Director of Planning a program
to avoid traffic conflicts and allocate parking between
the two schools and any other potential building tenants
per city standards. Said program shall be agreeable to
and signed by representatives from both schools, or shall
be shown to be legally enforceable by the property
owner/landlord.
3. Physical Education. Prior to occupancy the applicant
shall submit a schedule of outdoor recreational and
physical education activities which conforms with the
parameters of use approved by the EastLake Business
Center Owners Association; the applicant shall provide
proof satisfactory to the Director of Planning that
legally enforceable rights to suitable outdoor
recreational and physical education facilities have been
obtained for the duration of the permit. Loss of such
facilities shall be grounds for revocation of the permit.
4. Occupancy. The occupancy of the building by Covenant
Christian shall not exceed the staff/student figures
provided by the applicant, i.e., 24 staff and 208 total
students consisting of 122 students in grades K-6, 46
students in grades 7-9, and 40 students in grades 10-12,
and/ or the number of staff/students indicated by the
parking allocation program, whichever is less.
5. Restriction on outside , On-Site Uses. All on-site school
activities, including recess and recreation, and pre-
school and post-school activities, shall be limited to
the inside of the building.
6. Crossing Guards. Trained, uniformed adult crossing
guards shall be provided at the intersection of Fenton
Street and Lane Avenue to oversee and protect the
children on all trips to and from Scobee Park.
7. Code Compliance. Prior to occupancy the school shall
comply with all of the codes, requirements and conditions
imposed by the Department of Building and Housing and the
Fire Department.
8. Interim Use Acknowledged. By the acceptance of this
permit, the applicant acknowledges that the school has
covcrhist.wp
December 9, 1993
Reso Granting CUP for Private School
Page 4
:2;( --tf,
Resolution No.
Page 5
been approved as an interim use, and its occupancy of the
facilities at 2400 Fenton street shall in no way restrict
the use of adj acent properties from uses otherwise deemed
appropriate under the Business Center PC District
Regulations.
9. Post-Approval Conditions. This permit shall be subject
to any and all new, modified, or deleted conditions
imposed after approval of this permit to advance a
legitimate governmental interest related to health,
safety or welfare which city shall impose after advance
written notice to the permittee and after the city has
given to the permittee the right to be heard with regard
thereto. However, the City, in exercising this reserved
right/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or
deprive Permittee of a substantial revenues source which
the Permittee can not, in the normal operation of the use
permitted, be expected to economically recover.
10. Time to Commence Use. This conditional use permit shall
become void and ineffective if not utilized within one
year from the effective date thereof, in accordance with
Section 19.14.260 of the Municipal Code. Failure to
comply with any condition of approval shall cause this
permit to be reviewed by the City for additional
conditions or revocation.
failing any of which conditions, or failing the continued mainte-
nance of same as the condition may require, this permit, shall,
following a public hearing by the City Council at which the App-
licant or his successor in interest is given notice and the oppor-
tunity to appear and be heard with regard thereto, be terminated or
modified by the City Council.
section 4. Denial of Appeal.
The City Council does hereby deny the appeal of Bonita country
Day School. ~
Robert Leiter
Director of Planning
,aft r
Presented by
ruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
covcrhist.wp
December 9, 1993
Reso Granting CUP for Private
;2J~? /~3-Ff
School
Page 5
RESOLUTION NO.
I ?.32.?
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE DECISION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ISSUE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-94-09 TO USE 2400
FENTON STREET IN THE EASTLAKE BUSINESS CENTER
AS A PRIVATE SCHOOL FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE
YEARS.
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a conditional use
permit was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department
on August 18, 1993, by Covenant Christian School, and
WHEREAS, said application requested approval to establish and
operate a private school for a minimum five-year period at 2400
Fenton Street (APN 595-232-11) ("Subject Property") in the EastLake
Business Center ("Project"); and,
WHEREAS, the City's Planning Commission has the authority to
grant conditional use permits for certain uses over the Subject
Property pursuant to the authority of Ordinance No. 2522 adopted by
the City Council on June 30, 1992, being the EastLake I Planned
Community District Regulations, as amended; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a
hearing on said conditional use permit application and notice of
said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and
its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior
boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing;
and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as
advertised, namely 7:00 p.m. October 27, 1993, in the Council
Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and
said hearing was thereafter closed; and,
WHEREAS, on October 27, 1993, the Commission voted 5-2 to
approve the conditional use permit for a five year period, based on
the findings and subject to the conditions contained in Resolution
PCC-94-09, a signed copy of the resolution was filed with the city
Clerk on November 3, 1993; and,
WHEREAS, on November 11, 1993, and within the time to file an
appeal, an appeal from the decision of the Planning Commission was
filed by Bonita country Day School; and,
WHEREAS, said appeal was based on claims that the child
welfare, security and safety issues associated with the proposed
use have not been adequately addressed; that the Planning
Commission's decision was based on accepted planning practice that
does not address the unique circumstances of this project, and that
covcrhist.wp
November 28, 1993
Reso Granting
~-\$
CUP for Private School
Page 1
Resolution No.
Page 2
-.
the basis for the approval of the five year permit term was the
business agreement between the building owner and Covenant
Christian School; and,
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing
and said appeal and notice of said hearing, together with its
purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general
circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners within
500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten
days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as
advertised, namely 4:00 p.m. Tuesday, December 7, 1993, in the
Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council.
WHEREAS, this Resolution is passed pursuant to the authority
of Section 19.14.130 by which the City Council may affirm, reverse
or modify in whole or in part any determination of the planning
commission upon the hearing of such appeal, subject to the same
limitationsd and requirements of finding as are placed upon the
planning commission by said Chapter 19.14.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL hereby
finds as follows: ~
Section 1. CEQA Consideration.
The City Council does hereby confirm and endorse the
determination of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator that,
and hereby finds on its own behalf, that the Project is exempt from
environmental review as a Class l(a) exemption under Section 15301
of the CEQA Guidelines.
Section 2. Conditional Use Permit Findings.
Pursuant to the requirement of Section 19.14.130, the City
Council makes the following findings, presented in bold lettering,
as specified in Section 19.14.080 as follows, based on the evidence
therein below set forth:
1. That the proposed use at the location is necessary or
desirable to provide a service or facility which will
contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood
or the community.
The site represents a suitable interim location for the
school to continue to meet the private educational needs
of the community provided the circumstances which favor
approval at this time are subject to review and
reconsideration in five years time to determine if the
-
covcrhist.wp
November 28, 1993
Reso Granting
~
23-lc.o
CUP for Private School
Page 2
Resolution No.
Page 3
development of the surrounding area and/or any changes in
the plans or regulations of the Business Center may
result in a conflict in uses.
2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the
particular case, be detrimental the health, safety or
general welfare of persons residing or working in the
vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the
vicinity.
The present lack of development immediately surrounding
the site should ameliorate any potential conflicts
between uses. The permit, as conditioned, will further
ensure compatibility with co-tenants and other properties
within the Business Center, and will allow review and
reconsideration of these circumstances within two years
time.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations
and conditions specified in the Municipal Code for such
use.
The approval of the permit, as conditioned, will require
the use to comply with all applicable regulations, codes
and requirements.
4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not
adversely affect the general plan of the City or the
adopted plan of any government agency.
with the approval of this permit and the implement of all
conditions, the use will be consistent with the General
Plan and EastLake PC District regulations.
Section 3. Grant of Use Permit on Specified Conditions.
The city Council hereby grants permission to the Owner of the
Subject Propert to use the subject Property to establish and
operate a private school for a minimum five-year period
subject to the following conditions:
1. Term. The permit is approved for a period of five years
(until October 27, 1998) and subject to periodic review
during that period of time. The permit may be considered
by the Planning commission for renewal and extension
beyond that date provided a written request therefor,
along with the required fee, exhibits and information, is
received, deemed complete and approved at least 30 days
but no more than 120 days prior to the expiration date.
covcrhist.wp
November 28, 1993
Reso Granting
>>*
23-11
cup for Private School
Page 3
Resolution No.
Page 4
-.
The primary factors to be considered in renewing and
extending the permit is the potential for conflict with
surrounding development and/or any changes in the plans
for the Business Center.
2. Traffic and Parking. Prior to occupancy the property
owner shall submit to the Director of Planning a program
to avoid traffic conflicts and allocate parking between
the two schools and any other potential building tenants
per City standards. Said program shall be agreeable to
and signed by representatives from both schools, or shall
be shown to be legally enforceable by the property
owner/landlord.
3.
Physical Education. Prior to occupancy the applicant
shall submit a schedule of outdoor recreational and
physical education activities which conforms with the
parameters of use approved by the EastLake Business
Center Owners Association; the applicant shall provide
proof satisfactory to the Director of Planning that
legally enforceable rights to suitable outdoor
recreational and physical education facilities have been
obtained for the duration of the permit. Loss of such
facilities shall be grounds for revocation of the permit.
-
4. Occupancy. The occupancy of the building by Covenant
Christian shall not exceed the staff/student figures
provided by the applicant, i.e., 24 staff and 208 total
students consisting of 122 students in grades K-6, 46
students in grades 7-9, and 40 students in grades 10-12,
and/or the number of staff/students indicated by the
parking allocation program, whichever is less.
5. Restriction on Outside , On-Site Uses. All on-site school
activities, including recess and recreation, and pre-
school and post-school activities, shall be limited to
the inside of the building.
6. Crossing Guards. Trained, uniformed adult crossing
guards shall be provided at the intersection of Fenton
Street and Lane Avenue to oversee and protect the
children on all trips to and from Scobee Park.
7. Code Compliance. Prior to occupancy the school shall
comply with all of the codes, requirements and conditions
imposed by the Department of Building and Housing and the
Fire Department.
8.
Interim Use Acknowledged. By the acceptance of this
permit, the applicant acknowledges that the school has
-
covcrhist.wp
November 28, 1993
-IJ /V -
2 3-1 ~
Reso Granting CUP for Private School
Page 4
Resolution No.
Page 5
been approved as an interim use, and its occupancy of the
facilities at 2400 Fenton street shall in no way restrict
the use of adjacent properties from uses otherwise deemed
appropriate under the Business Center PC District
Regulations.
9. Post-Approval Conditions. This permit shall be subject
to ,any and all new, modified, or deleted conditions
imposed after approval of this permit to advance a
legitimate governmental interest related to health,
safety or welfare which City shall impose after advance
written notice to the permittee and after the City has
given to the permittee the right to be heard with regard
thereto. However, the City, in exercising this reserved
right/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or
deprive Permittee of a substantial revenues source which
the Permittee can not, in the normal operation of the use
permitted, be expected to economically recover.
10. Time to Commence Use. This conditional use permit shall
become void and ineffective if not utilized within one
year from the effective date thereof, in accordance with
section 19.14.260 of the Municipal Code. Failure to
comply with any condition of approval shall cause this
permit to be reviewed by the City for additional
conditions or revocation.
failing any of which conditions, or failing the continued mainte-
nance of same as the condition may require, this permit, shall,
following a public hearing by the City Council at which the App-
licant or his successor in interest is given notice and the oppor-
tunity to appear and be heard with regard thereto, be terminated or
modified by the City Council.
section 4. Denial of Appeal.
The City Council does hereby deny the appeal of Bonita Country
Day School.
Presented by
,/
IBruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
Robert Leiter
Director of Planning
covcrhist.wp
November 28, 1993
Reso Granting CUP for Private
~/~"-~4-
School
Page 5
-
I
nns PAG~ BlANK
~
\
\
\
-
--
COUNCIL INFORMATION MEMO
December 14, 1993
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
John Goss, City Manager 9
Bob Leiter. Director of P1anning x:
Update regarding City Council Agenda Item 23 with respect to agreement
between schools regarding shared use of 2400 Fenton Street, and extending use
of Scobee Park from two to five years
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
As noted in the staff report on this item, a meeting was held in which tentative agreement was
reached between the two schools on all of the issues regarding shared use of the building and
site at 2400 Fenton Street. Attached hereto is a draft written agreement prepared by Covenant
Christian which will be presented to Bonita Country Day School for review and consideration
prior to tonight's meeting.
Mr. Curt Stephenson, representing the EastLake Business Center Owners' Association, has
stated in the attached letter that their position is clear; i.e., two years of use of Scobee Park have
been approved, and an extension beyond that time should not be a problem in the future
provided Covenant Christian performs satisfactorily during the initial two-year period.
Mr. Stephenson has also raised an issue in his letter regarding the fact that State law requires
expensive special analysis for any facility that proposes to use toxic chemicals within 1,000 ft.
of a school or health care facility. Although he does not suggest that the school use be denied
for this reason, he believes this information should be brought to Council's attention in their
consideration of the school use in relation to the City's efforts to establish a biotech zone in this
area of the EastLake Business Center.
Staff commned Mr. Stephenson's statements with the Hazardous Materials Management Division
of the County Department of Environmental Health. Any facility proposing to use a specified
quantity of an "acutely hazardous material" within 1,000 feet of a "sensitive population" (which
would include a school), would be required to prepare a Risk Management and Prevention
Program, the cost of which, according to the Hazardous Material representative, can range from
only a few dollars up to $100,000 or more, depending on the chemical and circumstances
involved. Although this would not prohibit a biotech user from locating in the area, it could
influence their decision or ability to do so.
RAL: SG/nr
(schlagmt.mem)
-2] /?~ / 2S- ~3
~
Draft Revision of
RESOLUTION NO. 17325
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE DECISION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ISSUING A CONDI-
TIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-94-09 TO USE 2400 FENTON
STREET IN THE EASTLAKE BUSINESS CENTER AS A
PRIVATE SCHOOL UNTIL JUNE 30, 1996, SUBJECT TO
POSSIBLE EXTENSION.
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a conditional use permit was filed with the
City of Chula Vista Planning Department on August 18, 1993, by Covenant Christian School,
and
WHEREAS, said application requested approval to establish and operate a private school
for a minimum five-year period at 2400 Fenton Street (APN 595-232-11) ("Subject Property")
in the EastLake Business Center ("Project"); and,
WHEREAS, the City's Planning Commission has the authority to grant conditional use
permits for certain uses over the Subject Property pursuant to the authority of Ordinance No. .
2522 adopted by the City Council on June 30, 1992, being the EastLake I Planned Community
District Regulations, as amended; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said
conditional use permit application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was
given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and its mailing to
property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior
to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m.
October 27, 1993, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed; and,
WHEREAS, on October 27, 1993, the Commission voted 5-2 to approve the conditional
use permit for a five year period, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained
in Resolution PCC-94-09, a signed copy of the resolution was filed with the City Clerk on
November 3, 1993; and,
covcrhist. wp
December 21, 1993
J3-~'f
Reso Granting CUP for Private School
Page 1
Resolution No.
Page 2
WHEREAS, on November 11, 1993, and within the time to file an appeal, an appeal
from the decision of the Planning Commission was filed by Bonita Country Day School; and,
WHEREAS, said appeal was based on claims that the child welfare, security and safety
issues associated with the proposed use have not been adequately addressed; that the Planning
Commission's decision was based on accepted planning practice that does not address the unique
circumstances of this project, and that the basis for the approval of the five year permit term was
the business agreement between the building owner and Covenant Christian School; and,
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing and said appeal and
notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper
of general circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the
exterior boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 4:00 p.m.
Tuesday, December 7, 1993, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City
Council.
WHEREAS, this Resolution is passed pursuant to the authority of Section 19.14.130 by
which the City Council may affirm, reverse or modify in whole or in part any determination of
the planning commission upon the hearing of such appeal, subject to the same limitationsd and
requirements of finding as are placed upon the planning commission by said Chapter 19.14.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL hereby finds
as follows:
Section 1. CEQA Consideration.
The City Council does hereby confirm and endorse the determination of the City's
Environmental Review Coordinator that, and hereby finds on its own behalf, that the Project is
exempt from environmental review as a Class l(a) exemption under Section 15301 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
Section 2. Conditional Use Permit Findings.
Pursuant to the requirement of Section 19.14.130, the City Council makes the following
findings, presented in bold lettering, as specified in Section 19.14.080 as follows, based on the
evidence therein below set forth:
1. That the proposed use at the location is necessary or desirable to provide a
service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the
neighborhood or the community.
covcrhist. wp
December 21, 1993
,2JYS(~
Reso Granting CUP for Private School
Page 2
Resolution No.
Page 3
The site represents a suitable interim location for the school to continue to meet
the private educational needs of the community provided the circumstances which
favor approval at this time are subject to review and reconsideration in five years
time to determine if the development of the surrounding area and/or any changes
in the plans or regulations of the Business Center may result in a conflict in uses.
2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be
detrimental the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or
working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the
vicinity.
The present lack of development immediately surrounding the site should
ameliorate any potential conflicts between uses. The permit, as conditioned, will
further ensure compatibility with co-tenants and other properties within the
Business Center, and will allow review and reconsideration of these circumstances
within two years time.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions
specified in the Municipal Code for such use.
The approval of the permit, as conditioned, will require the use to comply with
all applicable regulations, codes and requirements.
4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect the
general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency.
With the approval of this permit and the implement of all conditions, the use will
be consistent with the General Plan and EastLake PC District regulations.
Section 3. Grant of Use Permit on Specified Conditions.
The City Council hereby grants permission to the Owner of the Subject Propert to use
the Subject Property to establish and operate a private school for a minimum five year period
until June 30. 1996. subject to the following conditions:
1. Term. The permit is approved for a period ending June 30. 19961/ of fiye years
(until October 27, 1998) and subject to periodic review during that period of
1. Council motion was for 2 1/2 years, in order to get it out of the normal school year. I
choose date specific of June 30, 1996, since 2 1/2 years would be June 14, 1996, which may
be around the time of graduation.
covcrhist. wp
December 21, 1993
~;l J~~"
Reso Granting CUP for Private School
Page 3
Resolution No.
Page 4
time. The permit may be considered by thc Planning Commission by the City
Council for renewal and extension beyond that date provided a written request
therefor, along with the required fee, exhibits and information, is received,
deemed complete and approved by June 14. 1995~' at least 30 days but no more
thafl 120 days prior to the cxpiration datc.
The primary factors to be considered in renewing and extending the permit is ill
whether there exists. or there is expected in the near future to exist. within the
EastLake Business Park a demand for sites by users which. by virtue of re-
quirements of law involving the siting of hazardous waste generating uses with
a given distance from an operating school. may require such prospective users to
engage in costly and time consuming studies and reports before such use may be
allowed. and (2) the potential for conflict with surrounding development and/or
any changes in the plans for the Business Center.
2. Traffic and Parking. Prior to occupancy the property owner shall submit to the
Director of Planning a program to avoid traffic conflicts and allocate parking
between the two schools and any other potential building tenants per City
standards. Said program shall be agreeable to and signed by representatives from
both schools, or shall be shown to be legally enforceable by the property
owner/landlord.
3. Physical Education. Prior to occupancy the applicant shall submit a schedule of
outdoor recreational and physical education activities which conforms with the
parameters of use approved by the EastLake Business Center Owners Association;
the applicant shall provide proof satisfactory to the Director of Planning that
legally enforceable rights to suitable outdoor recreational and physical education
facilities have been obtained for the duration of the permit. Loss of such facilities
shall be grounds for revocation of the permit.
4. Occupancy. The occupancy of the building by Covenant Christian shall not
exceed the staff/student figures provided by the applicant, Le., 24 staff and 208
total students consisting of 122 students in grades K-6, 46 students in grades 7-9,
and 40 students in grades 10-12, and/or the number of staff/students indicated by
the parking allocation program, whichever is less.
2. The Council motion on December 14 was for 18 months, which according to my
calculations is approximately June 14, 1995. Better to have specific dates so that when it comes
about, future readers don't have to recalculate backwards from date of approval of resolution.
covcrhist. wp
December 21, 1993
L2 J '-~7
Reso Granting CUP for Private School
Page 4
Resolution No.
Page 5
5. Restriction on Outside, On-Site Uses. All on-site school activities, including
recess and recreation, and pre-school and post-school activities, shall be limited
to the inside of the building.
6. Crossing Guards. Trained, uniformed adult crossing guards shall be provided at
the intersection of Fenton Street and Lane Avenue to oversee and protect the
children on all trips to and from Scobee Park.
7. Code Compliance. Prior to occupancy the school shall comply with all of the
codes, requirements and conditions imposed by the Department of Building and
Housing and the Fire Department.
8. Interim Use Acknowledged. By the acceptance of this permit, the applicant
acknowledges that the school has been approved as an interim use, and its
occupancy of the facilities at 2400 Fenton Street shall in no way restrict the use
of adjacent properties from uses otherwise deemed appropriate under the Business
Center PC District Regulations.
9. Post-Approval Conditions. This permit shall be subject to any and all new,
modified, or deleted conditions imposed after approval of this permit to advance
a legitimate governmental interest related to health, safety or welfare which City
shall impose after advance written notice to the permittee and after the City has
given to the permittee the right to be heard with regard thereto. However, the
City, in exercising this reserved right/condition, may not impose a substantial
expense or deprive Permittee of a substantial revenues source which the Permittee
can not, in the normal operation of the use permitted, be expected to
economically recover.
10. Time to Commence Use. This conditional use permit shall become void and
ineffective if not utilized within one year from the effective date thereof, in
accordance with Section 19.14.260 of the Municipal Code. Failure to comply
with any condition of approval shall cause this permit to be reviewed by the City
for additional conditions or revocation.
failing any of which conditions, or failing the continued maintenance of same as the condition
may require, this permit, shall, following a public hearing by the City Council at which the App-
licant or his successor in interest is given notice and the opportunity to appear and be heard with
regard thereto, be terminated or modified by the City Council.
covcrhist. wp
December 21, 1993
:23-?6'
Reso Granting CUP for Private School
Page 5
Resolution No.
Page 6
Section 4. Denial of Appeal.
The City Council does hereby deny the appeal of Bonita Country Day School.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
covcrhist. wp
December 21, 1993
~3,-J(1
Reso Granting CUP for Private School
Page 6
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item A
Meeting Date 12/14/93
ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: PCA.93-01 - Consideration of additions to and
amendments of portions of Title 19 of the Municipal Code to allow
auctions subject to approval of a conditional use permit in the I-P (General
Industrial-Precise Plan) Zone - City of Chula Vista
ORDINANCE ..?~JY~ending Title 19 of the Municipal Code to add
Sections 19.04.015 and 19.58.050; and amend Sections 19.46.040,
19.58.070, and 19.62.050 in order to allow auctions subject to approval
of a conditional use permit in the I-P (General Industrial-Precise Plan)
Zone
SUBMITTED BY: DCl~tyreCMtOarnaOfgePrI7~/~
REVIEWED BY: '.1"> . 0 ~\ (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No-X)
1. Pursuant to the Siroonian Settlement Agreement (Attachment "A"), the City agreed to
consider an amendment to Title 19 of the Municipal Code to allow "'the lien sale of
impounded vehicles' to occur in an I-P (General Industrial-Precise Plan) designated zone
subject to securing a conditional use/special permit".
2. City staff prepared a draft Code amendment which would allow lien sale of impounded
automobiles as a conditional use in the Industrial - Precise Plan (I-P) zone. This
proposed amendment was reviewed by the Planning Commission, and at their direction,
was revised. The expanded definition encompasses auctions involving automobiles, large
heavy equipment items, and other items usually auctioned by businesses in this zone.
On October 27, 1993, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed
Code amendment, based on the expanded defInition.
3. An Initial Study, IS-93- 24, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project has
been conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC). The ERC concluded
that there would be no signifIcant environmen~l effects and recommends that the
Negative Declaration, and addendum attached thereto, be adopted.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the ordinance approving additions to and
amendments of portions of Title 19 of the Municipal Code to allow auctions, subject to approval
of a conditional use permit in the I-P (General Industrial-Precise Plan) Zone.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On June 9, 1993, the Planning
Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Code amendment, and continued this matter
to allow consideration of an expanded defInition of "auctions." On October 27, 1993, the
;;. '-1- I
Page 2, Item 4
Meeting Date 12/14/93
Planning Commission voted 6-1 to recommend that Council enact the additions and amendments
in accordance with R~solution PCA-93-0l.
DISCUSSION:
Siroonian Agreement
The Siroonian Settlement Agreement was executed on November 25, 1992 as an out-of-court
settlement resulting from litigation brought about by several property owners in the vicinity of
Energy Way related to the Otay Valley Assessment District and Otay Valley Road
improvements. The City, however, is not committed to approve any text amendment by the
agreement, only to process it. Item II.C, Condition Precedent No.1, on page 6 of the
Settlement states:
"Condition Precedent No.1. Initiation of Lien Sale Zone Text Change Processing. City
shall commence, within 20 days of the effective date of this Agreement, an initial study
for the Lien Sale Zone Text Change, which shall be deemed to be the initiation of the
process to accomplish a Lien Sale Zone Text Change. Nothing herein contractually
commits the City to implement the Lien Sale Zone Text Change."
Proposed Code Amendment
The original proposed Code amendment would have allowed lien sale by auction of automobiles
as a conditional use in the I-P zone, as described in the Siroonian agreement, and also would
establish development and operational standards for this use. This proposal was reviewed by
the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on June 9. At that time, the Planning
Commission received testimony and correspondence from Rebecca Michael, representing Jim
and June McCormack, who own property at 880 Energy Way, some of which is used for auto
dismantling and some for vehicle storage. Ms. Michael requested that the Planning Commission
consider an expanded defInition of "auction," which would include sale of vehicles, heavy
machinery and equipment. The Planning Commission continued this matter and requested staff
to return with alternative language which would include this expanded defInition of auctions.
Staff returned to the Commission with this alternative language at its meeting of October 27.
At that time, the Planning Commission received another letter from Ms. Michael outlining three
issues still of concern to her clients (Attachment "B"). Rather than bring this project back to
the Planning Commission by continuing the item, the Planning Commission adopted staff's
recommendation, but directed staff to consult with Ms. Michael in an attempt to resolve ~e
issues brought up in her letter prior to consideration of the matter by the Council. Following
this direction, staff held several meetings with Ms. Michael.
The three issues brought up in the 10/27/93 letter deal with:
:21--- ;2
Page 3, Item ~
Meeting Date 12/14/93
1. Paving requirements (Section 19.58.055 of the draft ordinance);
2. The requirement for an acoustical study if outdoor loudspeakers will be used for
auctioning (Section 19.58.055); and
3. Parking requirements (Section 19.62.050 of the draft ordinance).
With regard to the paving requirements, the proposed Code amendment would require that "all
areas shall be properly paved, striped, and improved to City standards, and screened to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Director of Planning." Ms. Michael expressed a
concern that this requirement would result in excessive costs associated with paving both vehicle
storage areas and parking areas. Staff's response is that the Code requirement for paving applies
to all uses and that the use of property for auctions is not being singled out. It should be further
noted that the City's paving standard (see Attachment "C") does provide flexibility for paving
treatments other than asphalt for temporary uses. In addition, staff does not believe that it would
be appropriate to allow a different paving requirement for auctions to the exclusion of other
uses. In addition, the McCormacks may apply for a variance from Code requirements, but it
should be noted that without meeting the findings as specified in the Zoning Ordinance, staff
could not support such an application.
In response to Ms. Michael's second concern regarding the requirement for a noise study if loud
speakers are used at an auction, based on further explanation by staff that this provision
implements the existing noise standards in the Municipal Code, Ms. Michael withdrew her
objections to this item at the hearing.
In response to Ms. Michael's third concern, the proposed parking ratio has been revised to allow
more latitude for the applicant and the approving authority to agree on an appropriate parking
ratio during review of a project.
Application Under I-P Zoning
It should be noted that this text amendment would be applied City-wide and not just in a
Redevelopment Area, and an applicanrowning land zoned I-P could apply for a conditional use
permit for auctioning if the text amendment is approved.
Attachment "D" consists of a map showing the property in Chula Vista with I-P zoning. As can
be seen, I-P zoning exists north of Otay Valley Road. There is also some in the Bayfront area,
but his will be changed to another. zone as part of the revision of the Bayfront Plan.
Generally, when a proposed project is located in a Redevelopment Area, the CUP would be
processed in the form of a "Special Land Use Permit" (special use permit) through the Project
Area Committee and Redevelopment Agency, not the Planning Commission, and, if appealed,
~ '/-) /z~-1
Page 4, Item ~
Meeting Date 12/14/93
City Council. This depends on the procedural provisions of the applicable redevelopment area
plan. In the case of A-Z Metro Towing, the provisions of the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment
Area are applicable. These provisions require processing a special use permit through the Otay
Valley Road Project Area Committeel Redevelopment Agency, instead of through the Planning
Commission/City Council.
The Siroonian Agreement refers to I-P zoning, General Industrial with the Precise Plan
modifying district applied. This means that besides the provisions of Chapter 19.46 "I - General
Industrial" Zone being applied, the provisions of Chapter 19.56 "Modifying Districts" must also
be applied. The purpose of the P -Precise Plan Modifying District, as stated in Section
19.56.040 is:
"to allow diversification in the spatial relationship of land uses, density, buildings,
structures, landscaping and open spaces, as well as design review of architecture and
signs through the adoption of specific conditions of approval for development of property
in the city. Within the boundaries of the P district, the location, height, size and
setbacks of buildings or structures, open spaces, signs and densities indicated on the
precise plan shall take. precedence over the otherwise applicable regulations of the
underlying zone".
The "P" modifIer provides the flexibility to customize a proposed development to its site. This
is desirable, especially given the potential traffic, parking and aesthetic impacts that could result
from the use. Any application for the subject use, because of the "P" modifier, would be
required to obtain approval from the Design Review Committee prior to, and in addition to, the
conditional use permit.
Present Regulations on Auctions and Automobile Auctions
At present, auctions, as discussed in this report, are not addressed in the Zoning Ordinance.
The only types of auctions addressed are "Auction Rooms" and "Livestock Auctions." These
are not related to the subject use and are allowed in zoning districts other than industrial.
Therefore, staff concluded that the creation of a new category of land use called "auction" is
needed, especially given the circumstances along Energy Way.
An understanding of how "auctions" are currently treated under the Zoning Ordinance is
important, however. At present, auto auctions are treated as used car sales, which is a
prohibited use in the I (General Industrial) Zone. An auto auction would, however, be permitted
in the C- T (Thoroughfare Commercial) or I-L (Limited Industrial) Zones if it were accessory
to the sale of new automobiles. In the C-T Zone, if it were the primary use or associated with
a use other than the sale of new automobiles, a conditional use permit would be required.
e1 '/ - ~---
Page 5, Item .2 i_
Meeting Date :i2Il:4J93
This has proven problematic at times, since the criteria for automobile sales facilities (Section
19.58.070) provides for off street parking equal to one-tenth of the car storage capacity. This
is inadequate for auctions because such uses, which usually occur at specified intervals and not
on a daily basis, can attract hundreds of people to one event, as opposed to the traditional car
lot where generally only a few people browse at their leisure. If the provisions listed in the draft
City Council Ordinance are adopted, each applicant would have to justify the parking with a
parking analysis. If problems related to off-site parking impacts occurred even with
implementation of the recommendations of the parking analysis, additional parking could be
required through a review of the conditional use permit.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
F:\HOME\PLANNINGlMARTIN\A UCTION\9301A.I13
:2;J --t
ORDINANCE NO. .25JY'Y
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADDING SECTIONS
19.04.015 AND 19.58.055 TO, AND AMENDING SECTIONS 19.46.040,
19.58.070 AND 19.62.050 OF, THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO
ALLOWING AUCTIONS IN THE I-P ZONE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Siroonian Settlement Agreement ("Agreement"), the City
agreed to process an amendment to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to consider "'the lien sale
of impounded vehicles' to occur in an I-P designated zone subject to securing a conditional
use/special permit" (Item II.B, page 6 of the Agreement)(Project)(case number PCA-93-01); and,
WHEREAS, on June 9, 1993 at the public hearing for the Project, the Planning
Commission determined that subject land use is too narrowly defined, and continued the hearing
to September 22, 1993 to allow staff time to study the feasibility of expanding the defInition to
include other similar types of auctioning, however, the hearing was subsequently rescheduled
to October 27, 1993; and,
WHEREAS, the I-P (General Industrial-Precise Plan) Zone does not specifIcally address
"auctions" as either a permitted or conditional use; and,
WHEREAS, within the industrial park located north of Otay Valley Road, the auction
of vehicles and general equipment has occurred since 1978 with no adverse affects on the
neighborhood or community at large; and,
WHEREAS, good planning principles suggest expanding the limited definition of the
Siroonian Settlement Agreement of "the lien sale of impounded vehicles" to include the broader
generic category of all forms of vehicle and general equipment auctioning; and,
WHEREAS, on October 27, 1993, the Planning Commission voted 6-to-l to approve
Resolution PCA-93-01 recommending that Council enact the proposed text additions and
amendments contained in this Resolution, and directing staff to consult with citizens regarding
paving requirements and parking ratios; and,
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial Study, IS-93-24,
of potential environmental impact associated with the proposal Project and has concluded that
there would be no signifIcant environmental impacts, and recommends adoption of the Negative
Declaration issued on IS-93-24, and addendum attached thereto; and,
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said Project and
notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper
of general circulation in the city, and its mailing to parties who have shown an interest in subject
project at least ten days prior to the hearing,
;2t/-?
Ordinance No.
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as
follows:
SECTION I: That the Project will have no significant environmental impacts,
and the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby adopts the Negative Declaration issued
on IS-93-24, and addendum attached thereto.
SECTION II: The City Council hereby fmds that the public convenience justifies
the proposed text amendment and that it is in substantial conformance with the General Plan of
the City of Chula Vista, and that the Planning Commission has duly considered and reported on
same.
SECTION III: That Section 19.04.015 is hereby added to the Chula Vista
Municipal Code to read as follows:
"Section 19.04.015
Auction
" Auction" means the auctioning and sale of merchandise and equipment to the
highest bidder, but excluding auction rooms and livestock auctioning. "
SECTION IV: That Section 19.46.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is
amended to read as follows:
" 19.46.040 Conditional uses.
Conditional uses in an I district include:
A. Motels;
B. Restaurants;
C. Service stations, subject to the provisions of Sections 19.58.280;
D. The retail sale of such bulky items as furniture, carpets and other similar items;
E. Retail distribution centers and manufacturers' outlets which require extensive
floor areas for the storage and display of merchandise, and the high-volume,
warehouse-type sale of goods and, retail uses which are related to, and supportive
of existing, on-site retail distribution centers or manufacturers' outlets.
Conditional use permit applications for the establishment of retail commercial
F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\AUCTION\9301CC .ORD
;2 Lj-r
Ordinance No.
Page 3
uses, covered by the provisions of this subsection, shall be considered by the city
council subsequent to its receipt of recommendations thereon from the planning
commission;
F. The following uses covered by this subsection, shall be considered by the city
council subsequent to its receipt of recommendations thereon from the planning
commission:
1. Brewing or distilling of liquor, or perfume manufacture,
2. Meat packing,
3. Large scale bleaching, cleaning and dyeing establishments,
4. Railroad yards and freight stations,
5. Forges and foundries,
6. Automobile salvage and wrecking operations, and industrial metal and
waste rag, glass or paper salvage operations; provided, that all operations
are conducted within a solid screen not less than eight feet high, and that
materials stored are not piled higher than said screen;
G. Any other use which is determined by the commission to be of the same general
character as the above uses;
H. Unclassified uses, as provided in Chapter 19.54.
I. Roof-mounted satellite dishes subject to the standards set forth m Section
19.30.040.
J. Recycling collection centers, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.340.
K. Hazardous waste facilities, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.178
L. Auctions of vehicles. heavy machinery and eauipment. subiect to the provisions
of Section 19.58.055. and onlv where the "P" Precise Plan modifier has been
applied to the I - General Industrial zone."
F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\AUCTION\9301 CC .ORD
~ 1/-' /
Ordinance No.
Page 4
SECTION V: That Section 19.58.055 is added to the Chula Vista Municipal
Code to read as follows:
"19.58.055 Auctions of vehicles, heavy machinery and equipment:
A. Subject use shall only be allowed by the issuance of a conditional use permit by
the Planning Commission in the I-P (General Industrial-Precise Plan) Zone.
B. The applicant shall list specific items proposed to be auctioned. Said items shall
meet the categories "vehicle, heavy machinery and equipment." The conditional
use permit, if issued, shall clearly specify the types of items authorized for
auctioning as determined by the issuing authority (the Planning Commission, or
City Council if appealed).
C. Auctions shall be limited to one per week with a minimum of one week between
auctions.
D. Auctions shall only be held between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
E. All areas shall be properly paved, striped and improved to City standards, and
screened to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Director of Planning.
F. Outdoor loudspeakers shall be prohibited unless a noise study conducted by a
certified acoustician determines that the proposal can meet the City's noise
standards.
G. The on-site repair or dismantling of automobiles or equipment by purchasers is
prohibited. "
SECTION VI: That Section 19.58.070 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is
amended to read as follows:
"19.58.070 Automobile sales facilities.
Automobile sales facilities, new and used, shall provide customer off-street
parking equal to one-tenth of the car storage capacity of the facility, with ingress and
egress designed to minimize traffic congestion, and shall provide a six-foot high masonry
wall separating the entire area from abutting residential property. except as Drovided
under Section 19.58.055 for auctions. Said wall may be replaced with a fence subject
to department approval. "
F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\AUCTION\9301 cC.ORD
). V~/O
Ordinance No.
Page 5
SECTION VII: That Section 19.62.050 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is
amended to read as follows:
"19.62.050 Number of spaces required for designated uses.
NOTE: In the case of any building, structure or premises, the use of which is
not specifically mentioned herein, or in the opinion of the approving authority is
not similar to any use found herein. the approving authority may. apply a ratio
based on a similar existing; use not found herein. the provisions for a 1:1se of/hich
is mentioned aOO to which said l:lse is similar, ill the opinion of the commission,
shall apply. In computing parking requirements, a resultant fractional space of
one-half shall count as a full space.
The number of off-street parking spaces required shall be as set forth in the
following:
Businesses or use and number of spaces required
1. Automobile or maemaery sales aDd serviee garages (See Section 19.58.070):
1 for each 400 sq. ft. of floor area;
1.. Auctions (See Sections 19.04.15 and 19.58.055):
At the time of application for a conditional use permit. applicant shall
submit parking information justifying the amount of parking proposed to
be provided and the parking ratio. The information must consist of data
upon which the approving authority can reasonably base a determination
of adequacy. such as expected patronage or a comparison with the
patronage of similar uses. Said parking ratio shall range from 1 space for
each 50 square feet of net usable lot area to 1 space for each 4.000 square
feet of net usable lot area:
NOTE: For pur:poses of this sub section. "net usable lot area" means the area of
the parcel exclusive of setbacks. slopes. easements. required right-of-way
dedication or other constraints which would preclude use of the land. If
complaints are filed with the City regarding; impacts related to off-site parking.
the project shall be modified to add additional parking for employees and
customers. and/or by reducing the auction and/or storage area. subject to the
review and approval of the Director of Plannine and City Engineer. Failure to
resolve such off-site public parking; problems by the owner of the propertY
constitutes grounds for revocation of the conditional use permit.
F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\AUCTION\9301 cC.ORD
;2 tj ,; /1
Ordinance No.
Page 6
2. Automobile sales facilities. new or used. (See Section 19.58.070):
1 for each 400 sq. ft. of gross floor area. or 1/10 of the maximum car
storage capacity. whichever is greater:
l:. Automobile repair and service garages:
1 for each 400 sq. ft. of floor area:
~. Banks and savings and loans:
1 for each 200 sq. ft. of floor area; minimum of 5;
3J.. Bowling alleys:
5 for each alley;
42. Business and professional offices:
1 for each 300 sq. ft. of gross floor area; minimum of 4;
~1. Car wash (coin-operated) self-service, or attendant-operated:
3 for each stall, plus 1 for each employee;
6~. Children's homes:
1 for each 4 beds plus 1 for each employee;
=12. Churches and private schools:
1 for each 3.5 seats in an auditorium or 1 for each 17 classroom seats;
whichever is greater;
810. Dance halls and assembly halls without fixed seats, exhibition halls, except
church assembly rooms in conjunction with auditorium, nonprofit clubs and
lodges:
1 for each 50 sq. ft. of floor area used for assembly or dancing;
911. Dwellings, single-family, duplex:
2 for each family or dwelling unit, both spaces shall be in a garage with
a minimum area of 400 sq. ft. (See Chapter 19.22 for remodeling of
garages.) ;
.
W12. Dwellings, townhouses:
2 for each dwelling unit; both spaces shall be in a garage or carport, a
minimum area of 400 sq. ft.;
F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTlN\AUCTION\9301 CC .ORD
J ~/-/2-
Ordinance No.
Page 7
H13. Dwellings, multiple:
1-1/2 per unit for each studio or I-bedroom apartment;
2 per unit for each 2-bedroom apartment;
2 per unit for each 3-bedroom or larger apartment; *
For every 10 parking spaces required, 1 of this total may be a "compact"
space;
NOTE: No parking space shall be located within twenty feet of any curb return
of intersection streets; or eight feet of any side property line, unless approved by
the city traffic engineer.
H 14. Funeral homes, mortuaries:
1 for each 4 seats of the aggregate number of seats provided in all
assembly rooms of the mortuary;
-815. Furniture and appliance stores; household equipment or furniture repair shop:
1 for each 600 sq. ft. of floor area;
-1416. Hospitals:
1-112 for each bed;
H 17. Nursing homes and convalescent hospitals and homes for aged:
1 for each three beds;
M18. Houseboats:
See dwellings, subsection 9 above;
-1119. Hotels, motels, motor hotels:
1 space for each living or sleeping unit, plus 1 space for every 25 rooms
or portion thereof to be provided on the same lot as use;
20. Machinery sales and service garages:
1 for each 400 sq. ft. of floor area:
-1-821. Manufacturing plants, research or testing laboratories, bottling plants:
1 for each 1-112 persons employed at anyone time in the normal
operation of the plant or 1 for each 800 sq. ft., whichever is greater;
-1-922. Medical and dental clinics or offices:
1 for each 200 sq. ft. of gross floor area; minimum of 5;
F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\AUCTlON\930ICC.ORD
d-vj//3
Ordinance No.
Page 8
~23. Mobilehome parks:
2 spaces on each pad, 1/3 guest space per mobilehome located within 400
feet of the farthest unit, and at the community center-l space for each 5
pads up to 50 pads and 1 space for each 10 pads thereafter;
~24. Restaurants, bars and night clubs:
1 for each 2-1/2 permanent seats, excluding any dance floor or assembly
area without fIxed seats which shall be calculated separately as one space
per 50 sq. ft. of floor area;
~25. Restaurants - Drive-in, take-out, snack stands:
15 spaces (minimum);
~26. Retail stores, shops, etc., except as provided for furniture stores, in 13 above:
1 for each 200 sq. ft. of floor space;
~27. Rooming and lodging houses:
1 for each bedroom;
~28. Schools:
Elementary - 1 per teacher or employee, plus 5 spaces,
Jr. High - 1 per teacher or employee, plus 5 spaces,
High - 1 per 4 students;
~29. Sports arenas, auditoriums, theaters, assembly halls and meeting rooms:
1 for each 3-1/2 seats of maximum seating capacity;
~30. Wholesale establishments, warehouses, service and maintenance centers,
communication equipment buildings:
1 for each 1-1/2 persons employed at one time in the normal operation of
the establishment, or 1 for each 1,000 sq. ft., whichever is greater."
fThe following wording has been moved to the opening of 19.62.050 and amended as
shown:
"In eemputiBg parking reE}1:lireIBeBts, a fesulttmt fraetione1 Sf)8ee of eRe half shall
eO\fllt as a full Sf)fte6.
F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\AUCTION\9301CC.ORD
02'1 ~/i
Ordinance No.
Page 9
NOTE: In the ease of any Buildiag, strncture or premises, the use of which is
oot specifically mentioned herein, the provisioB5 f-or a use '.vhich is mentioned and
to which said 1:lse is similar, m the opinion of the commissien, shall apply. "]
SECTION VIII: This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect
on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption.
~~~'L /'"
Presented by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\AUCTION\9301CC.ORD
/'
) L/ / /~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
,(~
Meeting Date
12/14/93
ITEM TITLE: Resolution 17319 authorizing issuance of bonds in
an aggregate principal amount not to exceed
$18,000,000 to refinance the outstanding
obligations of the City to the California Public
Employees Retirement System (PERS)
SUBMITTED BY: Assistant City Manager~.{'\' i
Director of Finance ~~1
. .P"
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager
(4/sths Vote: Yes___ No~)
This item was previously submitted to Council on November 23, 1993
and was continued to tonight's meeting. Attached is a copy of the
original agenda statement and a memo which was in response to
questions raised by City Council with regard to this item.
~ ~ :ff1'1 Crl-
/f;f93 t:: ~
a~. ;sr~ w
d~ -- /
November 23, 1993
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: John D. Goss, City Manager
FROM: Sid W. Morris, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Response to City Council Questions Regarding How PERS'
Practice of Charging the City for Unfunded Liabilities
Got Started
There are two ways in which the City develops an unfunded liability
with PERS:
1) To cover the cost of an employee's retirement for the
period of employment with the City prior to joining PERS
or prior to the adoption of a new PERS benefit.
2) To cover any deficit created during the year if actual
experience differs from the actuarial cost estimates
(e.g., PERS rate of return on investments is lower than
anticipated, City salaries rise faster than estimated).
The City joined PERS in 1948. Since that time there have been
numerous enhancements to PERS services, both elected and mandatory.
Each time one of these benefits is adopted, an unfunded liability
arises to cover the costs of providing that benefit to the current
employees and former employees with PERS balances for their period
of employment with the City during which the benefit was not paid
for. Rather than charge the City for the entire cost of this
unfunded liability at the time the service enhancement is given,
PERS finances the City's unfunded liability over a number of years
and blends the financing costs into the annual PERS rate. Examples
of service enhancements include: public safety personnel receiving
2% at 50 and POST retirement survivor's allowance benefits in 1984,
and public safety and miscellaneous personnel receiving single
highest year compensation benefits in 1990 and 1991, respectively.
The unfunded portion of costs of these benefits (for existing
employees' years of employment prior to benefit adoption) are paid
by the City over a period of years through the year 2011.
Spreading the payments over a period of time minimizes fluctuations
in the PERS rate.
Unfunded liabilities can also occur as a matter of course in any
year where the PERS rate paid by the city is not sufficient to
cover the City's actual PERS costs. PERS rates are set each year
based on actuarial assumptions, which are based on projected rates
of returns, projected number and salaries of employees and expected
benefit levels. After the year is completed PERS compares the
c23~02
actual costs for the City with the amount collected based on the
actuarial estimate. If the City paid more in than necessary, the
City gets rate offsets to reduce the rate in the current and/or
subsequent two years. If the City did not pay enough in a given
year an unfunded liability occurs which is again spread through the
year 2011.
If the City does payoff the unfunded liability, that portion of
the PERS rate being paid for previous year's unpaid services will
be erased and the PERS rate will go down. Unfunded liabilities
will occur during the future if estimated payments do not meet
actual experience or if new programs are added electi vely or
mandatorily.
.2..5~J
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No.
;2~
ITEM TITLE
Meeting Date 12/14/93
Resolution /73 Yl Modification to First Implementation
Agreement for Rancho del Rey Commercial Center on East "H"
Street
Deputy City Manager KremPl~\L!
Pub 1 ic Works qirector 9J!~\
City Managet~G nt1. 4/5 Vote: Yes No X
SUBMITTED BY
REVIEWED BY
The purpose of this item is to clarify certain provisions of the Agreement for
Rancho del Rey as to the phasing of public improvements on East "H" Street. The
change is necessitated by the recent listing of the California Gnatcatcher as a
"Threatened Species" by U.S. Fish and Wildlife. As a result, certain
improvements will be delayed with an outside worst case scenario that some
improvements could be precluded. Our strategy is to minimize any delay and
address as best we ~an the scenario of improvements being precluded.
RECOMMENDA TI ON
Approve the First Implementation Agreement allowing for a revised phasing
schedule of public street improvements on East "H" Street.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N.A.
DISCUSSION
1. Historv and Status of Public Improvements
Last year the City approved certain agreements to allow for the
development of a Home Depot, Price Club and K-Mart on property within the
Rancho del Rey Commercial Center on East "H" Street. One of the
agreements established phasing requirements for the development predicated
on the installation of certain improvements on East "H" Street. One
requirement was that public improvements on "H" Street at Paseo del Rey
must be completed prior to the occupancy of Home Depot. A second
requirement was that improvements on "H" Street at Avila Way and Tierra
del Rey and on Avila Way must be completed prior to occupancy by either
Price Club or K-Mart (see Exhibit A).
Home Depot and Price Club are under construction and occupancy is
anticipated in mid-January, 1994. K-Mart's construction and occupancy
schedule is anticipated for starting in February, 1994 and opening in the
Summer.
;tjp - /
The north side improvements on "H" Street are not an issue and are
completed, underway, or will be completed prior to any occupancies by
tenants on-site. The south side improvements on "H" Street, however,
contain some coastal sage vegetation which is critical habitat for the
California Gnatcatcher. Prior to construction of the south side
improvements, a "IDA Permit" must be issued by U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS). In August, 1993, McMillin filed a IDA permit
application. Local service input has so far been positive on the prospect
of a IDA permit being granted. The local Carlsbad office has recommended
its approval. The decision, however, is made by the regional office in
Portland, Oregon, where it is currently under review. A decision is
expected sometime in January, 1994. In addition, a 4d ruling is
anticipated soon as to the guidelines to be exercised at a local level for
take of a certain percentage of gnatcatcher habitat. These guidelines and
their implementation could allow for the habitat to be "taken" in the
context of an overall 5% habitat "take" allowance, thus eliminating the
need for a IDA permit once such an overall program is developed.
2. Alternative Strateqy
A. If USFWS approves the IDA permit, then the complete road
improvements can be accomplished albeit in different time frames.
The north side of "H" Street construction (Alternative B/Increment
I) can proceed immediately. The south side improvements would be
delayed so as to not interfere with the gnatcatcher mating season
(February-July) and thus would begin in August, 1994. Traffic
capacity and flow would not be affected by this phasing scenario.
B. If USFWS denies the lOA permit, a number of strategies would be
pursued. Staff has developed an alternate strategy which includes
a retaining wall concept which reduces the amount of grading
required and might be an acceptable alternative to USFWS. The
retaining wall cost is included in the project cost estimates and
can be exercised at the option of the City. Second, the opportunity
to provide off-site mitigation could be a factor in the IDA permit
decision making. It is anticipated that when RDR SPA III is fully
developed, the habitat will be removed in any event and an off-site
mitigation provided. Third, the Natural Communities Conservation
Program (NCCP) or the Multiple Species program of the Clean Water
Program (MSCP) could provide a long-range program which would result
in a "take" situation in non-critical areas being less of an issue.
Fourth, the 4d guidelines referenced earlier could allow us to
proceed.
As to traffic impact during the interim, staff had a traffic study
conducted which indicated a 5-year time horizon within which adequate
capacity will exist on East "H" Street with only the interim improvements.
This is based on the assumption of a build-out of the Rancho del Rey
Commercial Center and an increase of background traffic of 5% per annum on
top of existing traffic. Staff is hopeful that the incidental "take"
question in this instance can be satisfactorily resolved in the immediate
future and certainly within 5 years. If not, then at that time we would
have to address a threshold issue and either curtailing development or
accelerating the construction of the Interim SR-125 facility. The above,
~" -A
however, while conceivable, does not appear to be a likely scenario. It is
a risk though that cannot be 100% removed either.
In conclusion, staff recommends the approval of the resolution so as to allow the
occupancy of Home Depot and Price Club next month and is optimistic that either
a lOA permit will be issued or resolution of the issue through other means can
be achieved.
FISCAL IMPACT
McMillin is responsible for the added cost of rephasing and completing the
improvements, as well as complying with any conditions/mitigation costs
associated with a lOA permit. If occupancy of Home Depot or Price Club is
delayed, there would be an unknown but significant loss of revenue to the City
as well as the retailers.
GK:mab
.2{,,:3
~
n
0
~
s::
tr:j
~.
h. n~
~~ ~ ~ ........>
t:::~ >z
h.~
~~ g ::I: t'"""'4n
~...... . i ,::I:
"'<
D:I too
6 I C
....
Ul lflt::'
--
~~ ! . ~ ........t%j
""'~ Z~
~........ --
'"~ ~ --I t:r:j
h.~
<:~ UJ:::o
~ (j)~
\ n~
tr:j
Z
~
t%j
~
')'/'~r /.:<6-6
RESOLUTION NO.
/7:Jil
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING MODIFICATION TO FIRST
IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT FOR RANCHO DEL REY
COMMERCIAL CENTER ON EAST "H" STREET
WHEREAS, it is necessary to modify the First
Implementation Agreement for Rancho del Rey as to the phasing of
public improvements on East "H" Street; and
WHEREAS, the change is necessitated by the recent
listing of the California Gnatcatcher as a "Threatened Species" by
U. S. Fish and wildlife.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve the modification to
First Implementation Agreement for Rancho Del Rey Commercial Center
on East "H" Street, a copy of which is on file in the office of the
City Clerk.
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 Cl.'~//f Chulai/ista.
Presented by APP~ved as ~t form by
;' Jl~, t
City Bruce M.
Attorney
C:\rs\RDRlst.imp
.;t,-? /.26-8
RECORDING REQUESTED BY,
AND WHEN RECORDED, MAIL TO:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Attn: George Kremp1
(Space Above for Recorder's Use)
FIRST IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT
(DEVELOP.MENT AGREE1\fENT - RANCHO DEL REV COMMERCIAL CENTER)
THIS FIRST IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT (the "Implementation Agreement")
is entered into on , 1993 by and among RANCHO DEL REY
PARTNERSHIP, a California general partnership (the "Partnership"), RDR BUSINESS
CENTER, LTD., a California limited partnership (the "Business Center"), HOME DEPOT
U.S.A., INC., a Delaware corporation ("Home Depot"), KMART CORPORATION, a Michigan
corporation ("Kmart") and the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation having
charter powers ("City"), with reference to the recitals set forth below. The Partnership and the
Business Center are collectively referred to herein as the "Developer." Home Depot and Kmart
may be collectively referred to herein as the "Successors".
RECITALS
A. On November 30, 1992 Developer owned certain real property (the "Property")
within the City comprised of approximately 60.5 acres and generally located approximately 1.5
miles east of Interstate 805, 1 mile west of Otay Lakes Road, and bounded on the north by Rice
Canyon and on the south by East H. Street. The Property is generally shown on the "Map of
the Property" attached hereto and incorporated herein as Attachment No.1 and is described for
identification purposes only in the "Description of the Property" attached hereto and incorporated
herein as Attachment No.2. For purposes of this Implementation Agreement the Property may
also be referred to as the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center.
B. On November 30, 1992, by Ordinance No. 2535, the City approved and entered
into that certain Development Agreement Rancho del Rey Commercial Center (the "Development
Agreement") in order to provide for the development of a 45 acre portion of the Property (the
"Development Agreement Property"). The Development Agreement was recorded in the
Recorder's Office of the County of San Diego on , 199_, as Document No.
113093/16597.5
-1- ..2t..?
C. All "Conditions to Effectiveness" of the Development Agreement have been
complied with and the Development Agreement is in full force and effect.
D. All capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined shall have the same
meanings as set forth in the Development Agreement.
E. Subsequent to the approval of the Development Agreement, Developer conveyed
a portion of the Development Agreement Property to Home Depot and a portion of the
Development Agreement Property to Kmart.
F. Section 6.1 of the Development Agreement sets forth certain obligations of the
Developer and establishes phasing requirements for the private development of the entire
Property based upon the construction or installation of certain public street improvements as
follows:
"[A]. The public improvements on H Street at Paseo del Rey
and on Paseo del Rey must be completed prior to the occupancy
of 'Major A' on the west end of the Property."
"[B]. Improvements on H Street at Avila Way and Tierra del
Rey and on A vila Way must be completed prior to occupancy by
either 'Major B' or 'Major C.' If both Majors B and C precede
Major A, the street improvements required by Major A must be
completed prior to occupancy by the second-east-end anchor
(Major B or C). "
G. Section 13.6 of the Development Agreement provides that minor technical
changes, corrections, extensions of time not to exceed a cumulative total of 180 days, and
clarifications which do not substantively change the terms of the Development Agreement may
be made by a writing executed by the Developer and City Manager, or his designee, upon the
approval of the City Attorney.
H. On January 19, 1993, by Resolution No. , the City approved and
entered into that certain Public Facilities Financing and Implementation Agreement (the
"Facilities Financing Agreement") by and among the Developer, the City and The Price
Company ("Price") for the purpose of, inter alia, (i) providing for the construction of a Price
Club facility (the "Price Club") on a 15.5 acre portion of the Property (the "Price Club Parcel")
and (ii) financing the construction and installation of certain public improvements, including
those benefitting the entire property referred to in Section 6.1 of the Development Agreement.
I. For purposes of this Implementation Agreement, Major A shall refer to Home
Depot; Major B shall refer to Kmart; and Major C shall refer to the Price Club.
J. Pursuant to the Facilities Financing Agreement the City agreed to acquire from
Developer certain street improvements (the "Specified Street Improvements") as set forth in the
113093/16597.5
-2- cJt -/~
"List of Specified Street Improvements" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference as Attachment No.3.
K. The Specified Street Improvements include those improvements which are required
to be completed in accordance with Section 6.1 of the Development Agreement.
L. Development of the Property has been the subject of the following environmental
documents:
(i) EIR-87-1 was prepared for the development of property including
the Property and certified by the City of Chula Vista City Council on December 15, 1987 by
Resolution No. 13388;
(ii) An Addendum to EIR-87-1 was prepared and certified on December
15, 1987; and,
(iii) A Supplemental EIR was prepared for the Rancho del Rey
Commercial Center (EIR-92-02) which analyzed the environmental effect of certain modifications
to the land use entitlements applicable to the Property as well as the Development Agreement
and the Facilities Financing Agreement.
M. Pursuant to the provisions of the Facilities Financing Agreement the City agreed
to pay to Developer $835,000 as the Purchase Price for the Specified Street Improvements. As
of the date of this Implementation Agreement City has not disbursed to Developer any of the
Purchase Price for the Specified Street Improvements.
N. Subsequent to the approval of the Development Agreement and the Facilities
Financing Agreement the following occurred:
(i) The California Gnatcatcher was listed as a "Threatened Species" pursuant
to the provisions of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C.A. ~~ 1531, et seq.);
(ii) A portion of the real property necessary to complete certain of the
Specified Street Improvements on the south side of "H" Street (the "South Side Improvements")
as set forth in the List of South Side Improvements attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference as Attachment No.4, was determined to contain "Coastal Sage Vegetation", a
critical habitat for the California Gnatcatcher;
(iii) As a result of the existence of Gnatcatcher Habitat on property required
for the South Side Improvements, completion of the South Side Improvements requires a permit
(the" lOA Permit") from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (the "USFWS");
(iv)
being processed;
Owner has submitted an application for a lOA Permit which is currently
113093 I 16597.5
-3- c2t, '1/
(v) A mitigated negative declaration relative to the issue of the Gnatcatcher
Habitat has been prepared to supplement the prior environmental impact reports certified for the
completion of the development of the Property;
(vi) A traffic study which evaluated alternatives to the phasing of the Specified
Street Improvements (referred to as Alternate A and Alternate B in the letter referred to below
and attached hereto as Attachment No.5) was completed bya consultant to City on
approximately August 31, 1993 (the "JRK Traffic Study"). The JHK Traffic Study concluded
that Developer's completion of the Alternate B/Increment I improvements, as described in
Attachment No.5, would provide adequate traffic capacity to accommodate complete
development of the Property for a period of five (5) years from September, 1993;
(vii) Developer has determined that, while it will be unable to complete
Alternate A within the construction time restraints mandated by the USFWS, it will be able to
complete the Alternate B/Increment I improvements within those restraints, with the South Side
Improvements (referred to in Attachment No.5, and hereinafter, as the "Alternate B/Increment
II improvements") to follow. Therefore, the Specified Street Improvements shall be completed
as provided in Alternate B;
(viii) The cost of the Alternate B/Increment II improvements, with the retaining
wall, has been estimated by Developer's contractor to be $580,202.39 in 1993.
NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency
of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. Purpose of this Implementation Agreement. Based upon the new information
which has become available since the approval of the Development Agreement and the Facilities
Financing Agreement the parties hereto desire to (i) modify and clarify the provisions of Section
6.1 of the Development Agreement to clarify the required timing of the construction of the
Specified Street Improvements relative to the build out of the private improvements on the entire
Property and, (ii) clarify the provisions of the Facilities Financing Agreement regarding the
manner in which the completion of the Specified Street Improvements will be secured and paid
for.
2. Modification of Section 6.1 of the Development Agreement. In order to clarify
the timing of construction of the Specified Street Improvements, Section 6.1 of the Development
Agreement shall be modified to read as follows:
"6.1 Responsibilities of Developer.
a. The public improvements on East "H" Street north of the median
(the "Phase I Improvements") must be completed prior to occupancy of any of Majors A, B,
or C.
113093 I 16597.5
-4-
02 t, -;.:L
b. 1b.e median improvements on East liB" Street at Avila Way must
be completed. prior to occupancy of Major B and the remainder of the Business Ccmcr.
c. Improvements at the southwestern quadrant of Paseo del Rey aDd
East "H" Str=t must be completed prior to the occupancy of Major B and the remAinder of the
Business Center.
d. Improvements on Pueo del Rey north of East "B" Str8Bt must be
completed prior to ~ occupancy of Major A.
e. Improvements on Tierra del Rey north of:nut "B" Street muat be
completed prior to the occupancy of Major C.
f. Provided that the Alternate BIIncrement I improvements (as defined
below) are completed by Developer, the Alternate B/Iacrement n improvements (as defined
below) need not be completed prior to the occupm:y of any of Majors A. B or C or the
remainder of the Business Center. The Alternate B1Increment II improvements must be
completed within eighteen months of the receipt by Developer or' any successor to Develcp:r
of a lOA or other peImit authorizing constru.ction of the same aDd in no event later than April
1, 1998.
g. The Alternate BlIncrement I and Alternate BlIncmnent U
improvemcDb are those improvements described in Attachment No. S to the First
Implementation Agreement (Development Agreemeru - Rao;ho del Rey Commercial CeD1cr). II
"Developer shall continue to diligently pursue a lOA or other appropriate permit to
complete the Alternate BlIncrement n improvements and shall provide City with quarterly
written repoIt! regarding the status of the Developer' 5 efforts to obWn such permit. "
liTo the extent that the existin& dedicated right-of-way is inadequate to complete the
Alternate B/Increment n improvements, Developer shall dedicate a:.adIor as applicable grant City
a license to enter onto Developer's property as ~ary to complete the Alternate BlIncrement
n improvements. II
"For purposes of this Development Aireement "Major A" refers to Home Depot, "Major
BOO refers to Kmart and, "Major e" refers to Price Club. At least ODe Major Retailer must be
constructed and open for business prior to the occupancy of either of the two pads fronting on
"H" Street."
3. Clarification ReeardiQi DilWDsition of the Purchase Price for the ~ Street
Iuwrovements. Notwithstanding any provision of the Dovelopment Agrccmcnt or the Facilities
Financing Agreement to the contrary I City and Developer hereby qrec that except u provided
below. disburJemem of the Purchase Price for the Specified Street Improvements shall be in the
manner set forth in the November 24, 1993 letter to Clifford L. Swanson from 1bom Fuller (the
"Letterll) attached hereto and incoIporatcd herein IS Att:a.chment No.~. It is understood that the
obligations of the "Owner" under the Letter shall be the obligations of the Developer.
113093 Il6597.6
-5-
e2t'IJ
The provisions in the Letter Cor disbursement of funds shall be modif1ed as follows:
A. In the event that Developer bas not ~omplotec1 b Altwmate BIID:rwm8nt
n improv~$ on or before the earlier to occur of eighteen months after receipt by Developer
of all permits DCCeSSaIy to authorize the construction of the Alternate B/lm;rancnt U
improvements or April 1, 1998, Developer shall forfeit any and all rigbl to such portion (the
"Increment n Socurity") of the "Security Deposit" (as deflDCd in the Letter) which is allocable
to the Alternate B/lDcrcmcnt n improvements (currently $580,202.39. as provided in Recital L,
above) and City is authorized (with the full cooperation of Developer) to expend all or any
portion of such fumIs to pay any and all costs related to the comtruction of the Altema1e
BlIocren1el1t n improvements including the costs to obtain from other &ovcrnme.otAl ~ lily
ncc::cssary pcnn.its for construction of the Altemate BlID;remcm II improvcmcDts.
B. In the event that, following Developer's failun: to complen: the Altcmate
B/lncrement n hnprovemems on or before the date provided above. the City elects to construct
the Alternate BlIncremeDt n improvements and City's cost to complete the. Alternate
BJIncremc:nt n improvements, illCluding pennit costs, exceeds the Increment U Securi~,
Developer sball relmburse City for all additional COBt&. In the event that City completes the
Alternate B/lncrement II improvements for less than the Increment n Security the IeITVlinMr of
the Increment n Security shall be retained by City as damages for Developer's failure to
complete the COOStnlctiOD of the Alternate Bl1ncrcmcnt n improvements.
4. Effect of Agreement: Counterparts. Except u expressly provided herein, the
terms and provisions of the Development Agreement and the Facilities Financing Agreement
remain in full force and effect as originally written. In the event of a conflict between the
provisions of paIaiflph 1 of thi8 Agreemem and the Development Agreement or the FacUlties
Agreement, the provisions of this Implementation Agreement shall control. In the event of a
conflict between the provisions of AttJlcbment No. 5 of this Agreement am llIl)' other provision
of this Agreement, such other provision of this Agreement shall control. This Agretment may
be executed in countelparts.
IN WITN.ESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into this Implementation
Agreement as of the day and year first above written.
"CITY"
CITY OF CHULA VISTA.
a lJIUIlicipaJ corporation
By:
Name:
Title:
11309'J 11"9'7.6
-6-
rJt ~)1
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
Chris Salomone
Executive Director
Community Development Department
113093 I 16597.5
"DEVELOPER"
RANCHO DEL REY PARTNERSHIP,
a California general partnership
By: McMILLIN COMMUNITIES, INC.,
a California corporation,
General Partner
By:
Name:
Title:
By: ~rq-I)jJ->>A-
Name: Thorn Fu//~r
Title: V P
By: McMILLIN ACQUISITION
CORPORATION,
a California corporation,
General Part er
-7-
By:
Name: &ItA M
Title:
~~e: ~3J:~a.tJ-
Title: V P
;u. ~/j'/ :;,~ --21
JOB NO. 192-035.5
REVISED: 11-19-92
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF A PORTION
OF TRACT ~O. 88-2 AND TRACT NO. 88-1
THAT PORTION OF CHUtA VISTA TRACT NO. 88-2, RANCHO DEL REY BUSINESS CENTER, IN
THE CITY OF CHULA. VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO
~p THEREOF NO. 12267, FILED AS FItE NO. 88-611737 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, NOVE.t.t.BER 30, 1988, AND !HAT PORTION OF CHULA VISTA
TRACT NO. 88-1, RANCHO DEL REY PHASE 5, UNIT NO.' .2, IN THE CITY OF CHOU VISTA,
. ..... .'.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 12502,
FIt!O AS FILE NO. 89-619507 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO
COUNTY, NOVEKBER 15, 1989, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOU'I'1iilEST CORNER OF LOT 4 OF SAID MAP NO. 12267; THENCE ALONG
THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF LOT 2 OF SAID MAP NO. 12267, NORTH 82-16'50. WEST,
186.50 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1457.5 FOOT RADIUS CURVE. CONCAVE
NORTHERLY; THENCE CON'I'INUINC WESTERLY ALONG THE SOU'I'HERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT
2 ANt) ALONG THE ARC OF SAID 1457.5 FOOT RADIUS CTJR.VE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGU: OF
12-06' 05" A DISTANCE OF 307.84 FEET TO THE SOUTmTEST CORNER. OF SAID LOT 2, SAID
CORNER ALSO BEING THE SOlnHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1 OF SAID MAP NO. 12267, SAID
CORNER ALSO BEING THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND 1907.5 FOOT RADIUS CURVE. CONCAVE
NORTHEASTULY; A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS SOU'I'H 19-49'15. tlEST; THENCE
CONTINUING NORnNES!ERLY ALONG THE SOlJ"I'HERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID L01' 1 ANt) ALONG niE
ARC OF SAID 1907.5 FOOT RADIUS CURVE THROUCl{. .~..CEN'TR.AL ANGLE OF 8-31' 59. A
. . - .
DISTANCE OF 284.08 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOlnHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID
LOT 1 AND !ANGEKT TO SAID 1907.5 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, NORTH 61-38'46. WEST, 153.79
FEET; THENCE CON'I'INtJING ALONG THE SOtJ'I'HER.I.Y BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 1 NORTH
55- 53' 02" WEST. 579.53 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE NCRTHWEST BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 1
NORTH 25 - 31' 30. EAST, 113.80 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID
LOT 1 SOUTH 83- 02 · 20. EAST, 381. 77 FEE!; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE NOR.THER.LY
BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 1 NORTH 77.07'16" UST, 296.11 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONC
THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 1 SOUTH 77-35'45" US!, 30.68 FEET; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 1 SOU"I'H 56-48'54" EAST,
ATTACHMENT NO.2
PAGE 1 /'
.2 t .,.-4>
374.47 F!E'l'; THENCE DEPARTING 7HE ~iOR!HERl.Y BOUNDARY OF SAID toT 1 SOtmi
56048'54" EAST, 25.03 FE!'!'; THENCE ~10RTH 65042'33" EAST. 323.32 FEET TO THE
NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF toT 3 OF SAID MAP NO. 12267; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE
NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID toT J SOUTH 67 '19 I 52" ::AST, 3.25 FEn TO THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF SAID LOT 3, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORrHiJEST CORNER OF toT 6 OF SAID
MAP NO. 12267; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERl.Y BOUNDARY OF SAID toT 6 NORnI 79.06' 30.
EAST, 104.79 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 6,
NORTH 89046' 00" EAST, 122.80 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE NORniERLY BOUNDARY
OF SAID LOT 6 SOU"!'H 80.16'06" EAST. 198.31 FEET; THENCE CON'l'INUING ALONG niE
NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID toT 6 SOUTH 21037'56. EAST, 74.32 FEET TO A PaIN'l' ON
THE lJESTERLY RIGHT-OF-~AY LINE OF PASEO OEL REY AS SHOW ON SAID MAP NO. 12267,
SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON niE ARC OF A NONTANGENT 236 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 21.37'56. ~EST; THENCE EASTERLY
ALONG SAID RIGHT-oF-~AY LINE AND SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAl. ANGLE OF 20.02' 56.
A DISTANCE OF 82.58 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-oF-YAY LINE AND
TANGENT TO SAID 236 FOOT RADIUS CURVE NORni 88.2S'OO. EAST, 223.92 FEET TO THE
BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 164 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORniERLY; niENCE CONTINUING
EASTERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-~AY LINE AND SAID 164 FOOT RADIUS CURVE 1'HR.Ot1CH A
CEN'I'RAL ANGLE OF 14.00'00. A DISTANCE OF "0-.07. nW='niENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID
RIGHT-OF-YAY LINE AND TANGENT TO SAID 164 FOOT RADIUS CURVE NORni 740 2S' 00. EAST,
lSS . 20 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 236 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHERLY; THENCE CON'l'INUING EASTERLY AtoNG SAID RIGHT-OF-YAY ANt) SAID 236 FOOT
RADIUS Ct..'RVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14"00' 00. A DISTANCE OF 57.67 FEET;
':"HENCE CON'l'INUING AtoNG SAID RIGHT-OF-~AY LINE AND TANGENT TO SAID 236 FOOT
RADIUS CURVE NORTH 88.25'00. EAST, 120.00 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING SAID RIGHT-oF-
~AY LINE NORTH 88.2S'OO. EAST, 145.86 FEET; THENCE NORnI 74.04'54. EAST, 104.88
FEET; THENCE NORTH 79.22'32" EAST, 100.83 FEET; THENCE NORnI 88012'53. EAST,
139.50 FEET TO THE NORnNEST CORNER OF LOT 14 OF SAID MAP NO. 12267; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG nlE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID toT 14, NORTH 83043'lS" EAST,
114.29 FEET; niINCE DEPARTING THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID toT 14 SOUTH
88010'32. EAST, 239.49 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 75'22'27. EAST, 86.74 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 0.00'00. lJEST, 354.93 FEET; THENCE NORTH 90000'00. EAST, 38.48 FEET; THENCE
SOtJ"Il{ 0"00'00" YES!. 455.70 FEET; THENCE NORm 86"47'15. tJEST, 258.19 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 0.00'15" EAST, 21.33 FEE'l';THEMCE'S'oo11{ 89~59"45. TJ'EST, 21.27 FEET
TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-~AY LINE OF AVIlA YAY AS SHOW ON SAID MAP NO. 12267;
ATTACHllENT NO.2
PAGE 2
eJt"'.;,(,
!:-{ENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-t,.;Ai' LWE SOtmi 1.20'00" EAST, 10.47 FEET TO TI-lE
3EG!~!~G OF A TANGEN'! 20 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY; THENCE
SOU'I'HEASTERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-t,.;AY LINE AND ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CEN'I'RAL
~~GLE OF 8S"40'15" A DISTANCE OF 30.95 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-~AY LINE
OF EAST 'H' STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID ~~p NO. 12267; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-~AY
LINE SOU'I'H 89.59'45" t,.;EST, 106.99 FEET; TH~~CE DEPARTING FROM SAID RIGHT-OF-YAY
LINE NORTH 0"00'15" YEST, 40.06 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89"40'12" YEST, 191.98 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 86"48'33" YEST, 110.61 FEET; THENCE NORTH 69"34'31" ~EST, 19.79 FEET
TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 11 OF SAID MAP NO. 12267, SAID CORNER ALSO BEING
ON THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF PARCEL 2 AS SHOW ON CI'Ii' OF C'1iU1A VISTAADJUS'I'MEN1'
PLAT NO. 91-8 AND IN DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 28, 1991 AS FILE NO. 91-0086527 IN
THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN D~EGO. COUNTY;. THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY
BOUNDARY OF. SAID PARCEL 2 NORTH 0.26'43" EAST, 321.61 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 2: TH~~CE ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 2
SOUTH 82"37'37" ~EST, 274.62 FEET TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-YAY LINE OF LAZO COURT
AS SHOYN ON SAID MAP NO. 12267, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE BEGINNING OF A NON-
TANGEN'! 60 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS
SOUTH 83"13'49" EAST: THENCE YESTERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT-oF-~AY LINE AND ALONG THE
NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 2 ntROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 146-42 '00" A
DISTANCE OF 153.62 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 63-28'11" WEST;
THENCE DEPARTING SAID RIGH'I'-OF-~AY LINE AND ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOt1NOAR.Y OF SAID
PARCEL 2, NORTH 85-00'41" YEST, 246.29 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID
PARCEL 2; "THENCE ALONG THE YESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 2 SOUTH 4"59'19"
YEST, 242.97 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 8 OF SAID MAP NO. 12267; THENCE
DEPARTING THE YESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEl. 2 AND ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY
OF SAID LOT 8 SOUTH 61- 31 ' 37" YEST, 56. 72 FEET: THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE
SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 8 NORTH 82 \16,/1\)" YEST., 170.00 FEET TO THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 7 OF SAID MAP NO. 12267; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY
BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 7 NORTH 82-16'50" YEST, 124.38 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG
n:E SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 7 NORTH 40'44'46" YEST, 98.78 FEET TO THE
EASTERLY RIGH'I'-oF-~AY LINE OF PASEO DEL R.EY AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP NO. 12267;
THENCE NORTH 82-20'00" YEST, 46.00 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID PASEO DEL REY;
THENCE ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF PASEO DEL REi' SOUTH 7-40'00" YEST, 3.23 FEET;
'THENCE NORTH 82- 20' 00" \JEST, 46.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 4,
SAID CORNER ALSO BEING ON THE ~ESTERLY RIGHT-OF-~AY LINE OF SAID PASEO DEL REi';
ATTACHMENT NO.2
PAGE 3
:lJ,;~?
THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-VAY L:NE ~~D ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT
4 NORTH 7"40'00" EAST, 167.09 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 20 FOOT RADIUS
Ct.'RVE CONCAVE SOUTHiJESTERLY; THENC! NORTHERLY AND VESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND
ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 4 THROUGH .. CENTRAL ANGLE OF
90"20'00", A DISTANCE OF 31.53 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID
. . '. ..... J' .
LOT 4 A.'iD ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-VAY LINE OF PLAZA COURT AS SHOYN ON SAID
MAP NO. 12267 AND TANG~~ TO SAID ct'RVE, NORTH 82"40'00" VEST, 245.32 FEET TO THE
NOR'I'H'lJEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE ALONG THE VESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT
4 SOUTH 6"31'16" VEST, 247.66 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ATTACHMENT NO.2
PAGE 4
..2~ ,.:t~
ATTACHMENT NO.3
LIST OF SPECIFIED STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Street Improvements
Cost Estimate
Right Turn Lane on North Side of East "H" Street
$ 235,000
80,000
\Videning of Paseo del Rey, South of East "H" Street
Right Turn Lane on Paseo del Rey
120,000
Widening of East "H" Street at A vila Way
320,000
TOTAL:
80.000
$ 835,000
Traffic Signal at Tierra del Rey and East "H" Street
113093 I 16597.5
e:lt'-Zi
1.
2.
113093 I 16597.5
ATTACHMENT NO.4
LIST OF SOUTH SIDE IMPROVEMENTS
Improvements at the southeastern quadrant of Paseo del Rey and
East "H" Street; and
Improvements on East "H" Street south of the median.
e2(,-'J~
J 13093 I J 6597.5
ATTACHMENT NO.5
November 24, 1993 letter to Clifford Swanson from Thorn Fuller
providing the manner of disbursement of the Purchase Price for the
Specified Street Improvements including description of the Phase
2 Alternate A and Phase 2 Alternate B Improvements.
,)./, .. J I
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY:
Item .J. 7
Meeting Date 12/14/93
RESOLUTION / 7 3 '-I ;Z Selecting the Castle Park "B" Area as
the Next Target Neighborhood for the Implementation of the
Neighborhood Revitalization Program and revising the Neighborhood
Revitalization Program Policy Statement to reduce the Duration of the
Implementation Period From Five Years to Three Years.
Community Development Director ("..S I
City Manage\.J;.~~j\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No X)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND: On November 2, 1993, the City Council approved a report from Staff
outlining the process for the selection of the next target neighborhood for the implementation of
the Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP). Part of the selection process approved by the
Council was the classification of two neighborhoods (Castle Park "B" and Woodlawn Park) as
candidates for the program. Council directed Staff to hold meetings in these two neighborhoods
and, based on the response from the residents and the other criteria used in the selection process,
recommend one of these neighborhoods for implementation of the program. Staff was also
directed to change the duration of the program from 5 years to 3 years. This report is the final
step in the selection process. If Council accepts Staff's recommendation, the implementation
of NRP in the selected neighborhood will become effective and Staff will begin working with
the neighborhood residents immediately.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution selecting the Castle Park
"B" neighborhood as the next target area for the implementation of the Neighborhood
Revitalization Program and changing the implementation period from five years to three years.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The November 2, 1993 report to Council described the selection process and the criteria used
to select the next target neighborhood. The criteria recommended by the Montgomery Specific
Plan and used in the selection of Otay Town is the following:
. Need for public improvements
. Need for housing rehabilitation
. Neighborhood character
. Income status
. Opportunity to show results within program's time frame
. Demonstration of local support for NRP
02 7- /
Using this criteria in analyzing each of the neighborhoods listed above, Staff concluded that
Castle Park "A," Harborside, and Broderick Otay Acres were not prime candidates for the next
target neighborhood for NRP. However, these neighborhoods will be considered for selection
again in three years after the program is fully implemented in the neighborhood selected tonight.
The two neighborhoods which were found to be most in compliance with the NRP criteria and
were selected as candidates are Woodlawn Park and Castle Park "B" (see table attached as
Exhibit B).
Neighborhood Descriptions
Woodlawn Park
Woodlawn Park is a small semi-rural neighborhood bounded by Main Street on the south,
Walnut Drive on the west, north, and northeast, and Maple Drive on the east (See map listed
as Exhibit A). The neighborhood has a population of approximately 500 people and contains
about 127 housing units. It is self-contained, with its own character and identification. It
contains a community center, which includes a branch library, two churches, a park on the
northern boundary, and a non-descript open space which is known as the "Plaza." One of the
outstanding characteristics of Woodlawn Park, and probably the most problematic, is its
topography and the layout of streets and lots. The topography is very uneven with gentle hills,
some pronounced slopes, and small creeks and ditches. The streets of the neighborhood, which
was subdivided in 1910, are not only substandard in terms of width but are also very sinuous.
The lot configuration is very irregular. Many lots are underdeveloped or vacant. Numerous
structures are built over property lines or in the public right-of-way.
Castle Park "B"
Castle Park "B" is a larger neighborhood bounded by Palomar Street on the south, Third Avenue
on the west, Naples Street on the north, and Hilltop on the east (see Exhibit A). It has a
population of approximately 3,750 people and contains about 1,278 housing units. Although
there are a few vacant lots, the community is fully developed and urbanized. The layout of the
neighborhood is the typical grid pattern of straight streets and rectangular blocks. Standard
street improvements are largely missing. Most of the streets, although lacking sidewalks, curbs,
and gutters, have sufficient width to comply with city standards.
Neighborhood Meetings Held
As directed by the Council, Staff held public meetings with Castle Park "B" and Woodlawn Park
residents. The purpose of the meetings was to try to measure the level of interest for NRP on
the part of the residents, to see if they were interested in forming the neighborhood group, and
to gauge the existence of neighborhood leadership. The purpose was also to obtain information
as to the residents' perception of the needs and priorities in their neighborhoods.
The meetings were held in the evening on November 17 and 18, 1993. Notices of the meetings
were mailed to every property owner in both neighborhoods, and a survey was distributed at the
meetings requesting information from the residents regarding their needs and their support for
NRP. Approximately 75 people attended the Castle Park "B" meeting, with over 30 expressing
interest in serving on a committee; thirteen people attended the Woodlawn Park meeting, with
:2 7---;L
Item _ Page L
Meeting Date 12/14/93
three indicating interest in serving.
Neighborhood Comparison
Exhibit B is a comparison matrix for Castle Park "B" and Woodlawn Park. Based on that
comparison, Castle park "B" is recommended as the next NRP Neighborhood. In general, it is
felt that Castle Park "B" offers a challenge that can be significantly addressed in a 3-year NRP
effort. This conclusion is based primarily on the following:
. Public improvements are largely absent, but are fairly straightforward to
accomplish.
. The bulk of the neighborhood is clearly eligible for CDBG funding without
extraordinary proof required.
. There is a lot of neighborhood interest, and a willingness to participate.
. The large population in the neighborhood assures that the City's and
neighborhood's efforts will benefit many at a low per capita cost.
The total costs for public improvements in Castle Park "B" are unknown, but will clearly be
extensive. A very rough estimate by the Engineering Department approaches $6 million. The
magnitude of this need will necessitate that the neighborhood committee and the City strategize
carefully on the selection and prioritization of the improvements to be made during the NRP
period.
It is clear that Woodlawn Park demonstrates many of the physical deficiencies NRP was
designed to address. However, the complexity of the issues in Woodlawn Park creates a
situation which far exceeds NRP's ability to effectively address. The very serious issue of
property line and right-of-way encroachments alone will take extraordinary actions by a cohesive
neighborhood to resolve, and could take years to be resolved. Many Woodlawn Park residents
have expressed substantial anxiety about impacts on their properties resulting from encroachment
adjustments, making neighborhood cohesiveness problematical.
Because of the extent of these problems, the Engineering Department is unable to prepare even
a rough estimate of the cost to upgrade the Woodlawn Park street improvements without a
comprehensive and substantial study, although it appears likely it would approach or exceed the
$6 Million cost estimate for Castle Park "B." A separate report on the Woodlawn Park area is
being prepared by Engineering and will be submitted to the City Council in the near future.
That report will describe the problems and will provide alternative solutions for upgrading the
neighborhood's infrastructure.
The Next Step
In January, Staff will hold a meeting with the residents of the selected neighborhood who
expressed interest in participating in the neighborhood group. Election of the members will be
held at that meeting. Once formed, the group will work on a list of needs and will prioritize
:2 7,-;J
Item _ Page ....4.-
Meeting Date 12/14/93
them. At the same time, Staff will look into the potential sources of funds ($5,000-10,000) for
the group to use in activities to improve the neighborhood, such as clean-up campaigns,
newsletters, etc.
Implementation Period -- Amendment to Policy Statement
When the NRP program was initially adopted by Council and implemented in Otay, the period
for implementation was set at five years. This time frame provided enough time to implement
most of the program. However, when seen in the context of improving the four remaining
neighborhoods, the period required to improve them is too long. For example it would take a
period of twenty-five years to improve all the neighborhoods. Therefore, it is recommended that
the program in each neighborhood be implemented in three years instead of five years. This will
require a change to the NRP Policy Statement, a revised copy of which is attached to the
resolution.
FISCAL IMPACT: No funds are committed by this action. Upon selection of the next
neighborhood for the implementation of NRP, funds will be required to plan, design, and
construct the missing public improvements. A preliminary cost estimate prepared by the
Engineering Department shows that the cost of the needed public improvements will be
approximately $6 Million. However, it is clear that NRP projects would have to carefully be
selected to have the highest impact possible, given that funding sources needed to provide the
necessary improvements over the NRP period would likely be in the range of $2 Million to $3
Million (the annual CDBG budget for capital improvements has been approximately $800,000
over the past several years; gas tax funds could also be available). Funds will also be needed
to fund the neighborhood improvement activities of the committee. During the implementation
of the program in Otay Town, the City allocated $10,000 the first year and $5,000 per year,
subsequently. In the past, most of the funds allocated to NRP and committee have been from
CDBG funds. It is expected that this source will continue to be the main source of funds for
this program.
[FILE:\MZT DISK VffiA:\CSTLPARK.RPT]
~?-i
RESOLUTION No.
I 73Lj;2,
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA SELECTING THE CASTLE PARK "B" AREA AS THE NEXT
TARGET NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION PROGRAM AND REVISING THE
NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION PROGRAM POLICY STATEMENT
REDUCING THE DURATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD
FROM FIVE YEARS TO THREE YEARS
WHEREAS, in April 25, 1989 the City Council adopted Resolution 14064
establishing the Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP), approving the program's Policy
Statement, and selecting Otay Town as the initial target neighborhood for the implementation
of said program; and
WHEREAS, the implementation of NRP in Otay Town has been successful and
is now considered completed; and
WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the remaining potential neighborhoods for
selection and has identified Castle Park "B" as the best candidate for the implementation of
NRP; and
WHEREAS, given the time limitation faced by the City in implementing NRP
in all the Montgomery neighborhoods within an appropriate period of time, the City Council
wishes to accelerate the process by reducing the NRP implementation period from five years to
three years.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA does hereby resolve to approve the following:
1. Selecting Castle Park "B" as the next neighborhood for the implementation
of the Neighborhood Revitalization Program.
2. Revising the NRP Policy Statement reducing the NRP implementation
period from five years to three years.
3. Directing Staff to begin the implementation of NRP in Castle Park "B"
immediately.
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
[File:\MZT DISK VIDA:\CSTLPARK.RES]
? Bruce M. Boogid
City Attorney
PRESENTED BY:
&,S~
(
:2 /--3 /~ 7-6
I
I
. ,,' ::'.;;-.-0"1<. h~~~;' ,,;:';;T:~;: "'1\')!';> "S.';.,.'; C, .,.. .:.;" .: .c._ . .,: 1......- __c. .";'
] C .;~ I'z<"i~~': ~~i~~T;r{t~~, ; ,,~';~ ~~i,~~~
'6$1 > en w . --{~___.y1-1'{ \ ~ :r,'" '';',; ~~'l:~\,.i' :.1. ..~. - 0 o:F; ot- III)
\. a: ~ w a: J,.....(~ I~f:-'~ ~. '..:.v~'-' .:':" i~' ':,: \:tJ~_:L,,;J .~ 00 ~ _ 0'- as~;
1 I\'~ w...l i::<( ~\-..~> -"'~ .c:::-~_~~ ~ . -. ..~~::;oo
, ft r- P ....._~. ...,--+:.~..,..'~..... . z"'~' /_---:r-:-. 0.. . ~~, ';- ~ " i o-.m . 0" II
. ~.... _ ..______ ~~:.. \' ~ .."':"Ar~,,;.. ,~~."" ~!---~ ~/;l..!ii':'~.:. t-lf:; CJ ()
...::: Z ..J '';'1' . r.' . \~~~ ~. \.~, '/ ! Z ); ~ ~1-<~"".!" UJ - i
Q. ~. ;'1'./" ... . .,),'~ ~\-~-'- == : .' 'f'>{ ~ .c: -. h '0 ~ c
'.. 00::;) :e~.A' :~\t~.' ~',-Jtt~J~"~;\"~ ".;t~~'~~\~.c: ~,,!~'L.;-,J!wl;'J.:t" \..\ ~.' -~~
:;: In _ 0 ~ 'I "..' ,~'-".i.i ." ,,":I. ....J ! ~. ~ -"'ij,,- _.- '. ",....
\ '-' U. ~ _ ~ ~f '+)!~- / l';:... '..: \'!.. .'" 00 I: ~~T'- ~ ...t -J- = i.c:
o I- _ "'" I- "'" ..\ :",,,l-'; '" '.\... L ~ .' . 0 ! ~ I"" 'P - rl lJ
\ z 0 Oel) \ \\ ":/ ._\\ I}, .~.~:~ · . n'''''.' ~.
ow 0- , \ .... .....~:>, - ,->' ,: LJ".. ,'/. ._", f'I' if'l
,.~ ft m.... ,,,,\"~"\',\~~...::t.n~'~1'\4~' ~-n-~+~ '-~ .1 I~. l./ 2'G,"
~. :e.... .AI &. t\ .~\. 'Y '"~-:'~~"~'~'.;'~'.". \1:- ~ ., ~.- ~ "ii lIf;. II il--. iILL. . ::.'.:-~ >
en .... ~ ;,!.; !)..\ ' -...,....,~... ~ \ .. ~. ~t. r.- ~~ ul ....t",- I' ~ - <
..J.... '-',.i ~,~- ~.,\' - _J',--- .. ... /. .
,'. . .....~. . ,. . ....... ..... '
.' en ;.. .". \ ~\ .~, ,,' .."'1' ~':: .....-. . ,.... I .
f-'( en ~/;;~ .~ \ "f'~ l.,-+:~--~{,-:j ~l;~ : 'I : ~. t/) ~"-
"oJ' ....... ~ '\:; .....:;:-:-;. \ '; .~: t" ".., ~i z . f~' i ~ !
~ -~' '" 1\' f ",\"...-:' : "."Y: .".-. r. ~::> .i ()
------ '! ~ .,.. ',' . . ,. .~' ." }': . \'-'" ,... ~'
. . \;"'1-\' t t \', . l. 2: -- ..
':' F .: '( ~.... i-r( \..... ~ ,;" . \ ~ i . -J to: (. 1 " .... ......
.~'.... ~'. .:.:...- ..:<' \ .:. . \\ ....>~.......\.' tfi-/ ..;.....~t1.~.:.z '1 ~--'
.~ $.". ....._..., l' ~"'~ :-, --:-:" -:-:~~,*,<.., .l$,', iI';;' "1< .". i ~ I b >
l~.I.~ ... "'~ ~i "",, ,~ l \ ~ \,., \ ~... ):. " ,''''''' . ., : ..:.c: :.1'
i ~ .: -:r~ \ \ . ~( \ .;.':) '.', "'.' \.., .... t- ~!.
,-.,:;,,- ..1 ~...J ~..\ .., , ,.... . ,.' '" - . ~
'7'~ :-- -A :?' ,... .. - ~p ~,v \ ,. -:; , --<f; ~., .' : .. ~ 0 J
~ i}"."o<;<,~" ~~~ ~~.. \ otc~:jj Df . .'~' .. · \" .~'f 1.
" _~. .~:':.\ ! \. ',~.~ ;r'~~ i ~ _F- ;..1 it! :.:
)1;" 1~
.k"' 0 .
~;.~. 0).< ::;;.- t-,.' Nt ~ r; t- '0' HI' .1 , .f / ~!.. ..
s~::\ ,.' J} ~ t/) \ Ii 0 ~ \ ' CD l '
...::.:t , ~ ~ll < - .....- ". I i I - ..,) . -i (, . '. \.-.-.:'
\\~\_ ,~.~o c~.: .....~ ~-~Ii" ~~--- :m--r-~
A ' ~. :" (l\:~\" -- ~ I ~ !.;~ ,- . ',..~;,; - ~
~~.~?::t;~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~--- P.JJ f.:~ ,- ----,. W'O~~~~.'" ~!!I.'~~lI/
..-- \ . r . 11' < ;;I.;::;; ~ >." '../11 '1;.
. ~~~~-.~_.".l' k AI" ~ ... ~ ," ~ ''''7''' g- L.LIIllIIIl'" ;?;l i
".. " ,,_ :.....leI' .to \1 w '-' - --];i;;I!!:::::j--- ~ "\ 1
f!;,.-"'-,. \ ~, ' . l. :\ 'Ii r ~\:~ (); ~@ ...." ~ St II. ----- ; ".J U
~';'*'<M . .... ~.. .~.
'" ...,'. , . ~ .c: -- CD 0<
~. ,-,.-V." .. ~ . . w' '-
1:5?A---f: .' r~~~ ~JI ,~~ ~.J--.~~.'1 CO
I~ .. " .-~. 111"""' I _;;; I (i r
1~'::""::::J 0 .". ~ ~> '; 0" ~;:.._'~t::. ~ j . '7 J . ":'.6.0"
._ ~~ ., -ic. ~CD """",:,,_iI .'~.' ."... . ,;.' ";':":'.' -- -;.;;;;;;' '~-:-1 i ":-:o..~. .
~t:~~j~ ',~:1'Lj~ ~- . 1"~ I:
.........~ .. '\ w>"" ~0:6"~s~ ~'. ...;}.~f'1.. il::: ~-rlA ",:. .'.~ .. ~~~ .
"/',.y~ _ r' . .. .': ", "" .
1-: ::- ........ \ ~~Y..1.f1J-:....i1. ?; '. ,'. .
..... .. . ....>/._..... '. :;;:::::; I !I> .. . -.J."" :." ,:<> ",. . .
P:ft!.!J- . .-' ~...... .'.;w j ,...,..... ',;. y ~"':;,f::;
.~_..._._. ...... ..,1,.,'<,.....-- ;; .. ~ .." ~ '."~ 1 .;.,;:...y:.)...".<~- .",."..':
r'." ~ /' ~A\l....." . ..\].' f::f... .~: !.,;..,:.,..'.:....,.' .?'*"~,;-',-. ,---::,-,}' ".'. ,. "., ,.....
?/~:~;:~/ 7/t.?rrv: I;", 'I\'""~.''& ..'
.....\'\. /. ;"r6.. ~~_ : .' ..... ....:J;:.~If:II,~'Ii*.~t Ix
. ' ........ _ 3 _._< ..... 'i:...?,:::..,.>:,-",~+.y:;:t;/;:- 1\:-';:,
.2. ?- '/
.
EXHIBITB
NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION PROGRAM AREAS
COMPARISON MATRIX BY CRITERIA
Castle Park B Woodlawn Park
Need for Public Imorovements Great and feasible; 95 % of public Need is great and difficult to
improvements are missing, but fulfill; delivery of public
are standard items; requires improvements are very
mostly curbs, gutters, and complicated & costly because
sidewalks; some drainage streets are substandard there are
facilities and street lights; rights- complications regarding property
of-way widths generally line locations and street rights-of-
adequate. way.
Neil!hborhood Character Grid pattern parcels & most city Area is about half the size of
standard streets; regular lots; Castle Park "B"; semi-rural
mostly SFR housing w/some character; complicated topography;
duplexes and few MF complexes. very irregular lots and streets;
complicated ownership patterns
and rights; mostly SFR housing.
Need for Home Rehabilitation Some houses require rehabili- Extensive; many properties are
tation; many require yard clean- blighted and require major
up and overall landscape impro- improvements; several homes have
vement; installation of public been improved publicly and
improvements would greatly privately; major investment is
improve appearance of area. needed.
Oooortunitv to Show Results Great; improvements needed are Low; major efforts, time, and
standard and can be programmed investment needed; complications
well; improvements will provide with lot line locations and
great benefit and will show substandard streets would
immediately. undermine the efforts of NRP.
Fundinl! elil!ibilitv CDBG: CDBG:
(Census information related to 3 groups Yes All in one group, does not qualify;
income is available only in block 1 group No would require door -to-door income
groups. Castle Park "B" area survey.
includes four block groups, Low/Mod Housing:
while Woodlawn Park is part of Rehab only Low/Mod Housing:
one group in conjunction with Rehab only
another part of the City.)
Leadershio Meeting was well attended; Existing and organized, but very
residents showed lots of interest; few people attended meeting; some
many want to be on committee; residents have been part of MPC.
many showed support for NRP,
but with some vocal opposition.
Miscellaneous Entire area within SW Redevelop-
ment Area.
v2 7~g/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item :2 ~
Meeting Date 12/14/94
R I. /7 J 'i J:.A .. ~ d . b'd d d'
eso utlOn ppropnatmg lun s, acceptmg 1 san awar mg contract
for "Installation of Drainage Facilities in the Central Drainage Basin West of
Broadway between "G" Street and "I" Street in the City of Chula Vista, CA
(DR-116)"
~
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~(v ') t
-tel
(4/5ths Vote: Yes X No_)
At 2:00 p.m. on December 1, 1993, in Conference Rooms 2 and 3 in the Public Services Building,
the Director of Public Works received sealed bids for "Installation of Drainage Facilities in the Central
Drainage Basin West of Broadway between "G" Street and "I" Street in the City of Chula Vista, CA
(DR-116)." The work includes: removal and disposal of existing improvements, excavation and
grading, concrete sidewalk and driveways, various sizes of reinforced concrete pipes, various sizes of
reinforced concrete box culverts, various sizes of precast reinforced box culverts, various drainage
structures, shoring, trench paving, base, curb and gutter, sewer main, sewer laterals, sewer manholes,
P.C.C. trapezoidal channel, tunnelling under or replacement of existing garage structure, pipe collars,
plugging of existing drainage pipes, connection of existing drainage pipes to new improvements,
protection and restoration of existing improvements, traffic control, and other miscellaneous work
required by the plans.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Appropriate $313,507 from the unappropriated balance of Fund 253 Transportation Partnership
Funds to CIP fund 253-2530 - DR-116 Central Drainage Basin.
2. Accept bids and award contract to T.C. Construction Co., Inc. in the amount of $1,157,496.07
for construction of Alternate A (dual concrete reinforced concrete pipes) and with the provision
of delaying start of construction until May 1, 1994.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Funds for the central drainage project were budgeted in the FY 1992-93 and 1993-94 budgets.
Attached is a copy of the CIP detail sheets for project DR-116 for both FY 1992-93 and FY 1993-94.
Existing drainage facilities in the central drainage basin between "G" and "H" Streets are inadequate
and contribute to periodic flooding upstream which results in property damage. Upgrading of these
inadequate portions of the storm drain system to handle a 50-year storm will mitigate most flooding
problems. Staff also included in the scope of the project construction of drainage facilities in Oaklawn
Avenue south of H Street to eliminate the flooding occurring near 532 Oaklawn Avenue. The City
received a petition in September of 1992 from several of the property owners in that area discussing
the flooding which occurs during very heavy rains. The property owner at 532 Oaklawn Avenue
indicated that they had water up to six inches high in their garage. In response to the petition, a
cJ ~-/
Page 2, Item .2 ~
Meeting Date 12/14/93
drainage analysis of the existing system was made and it was found to be inadequate. Corrective
measures were incorporated in design of this proj ect to eliminate the flooding in this area. This work
was included in the scope of the budgeted CIF project.
Staff designed two alternative drainage options to solve the area's flooding problems. Option A
consisted of using dual reinforced concrete pipes and Option B used pre-cast box culverts. The
contractors had the option of bidding on Option A, Option B or both Option A and B. This gave
competition for concrete pipe which would tend to lower the price. In addition, staff felt there could
be a significant savings in cost if construction were delayed until May 1, 1994 after this ~ear' s rainy
season. So an additional item was included in the bid as a deduct item to delay construction of the
work, while requiring the contractor to install flood protection measures immediately upon award of
contract. After meeting with the low bidder to discuss their bid, we determined that four factors
entered in their decision to grant the City a $50,000 credit for a May start date. These reasons were:
1. Elimination of rain delay stoppages - The contractor estimated that there could be between 20
to 30 days lost to inclement weather.
2. Elimination of liability exposure problem - Working during inclement weather increases the
potential accidents to both vehicular traffic and construction workers. Postponing the work
until the dry season reduces this exposure for both the contractor and the City. The City's
exposure could arrive from complaints from the area business owners and residents due to
delay of work.
3. Creates construction options - Working during the dry season provides the contractor
opportunities to work at different areas at once. It also increases the rate at which the work
is accomplished and allows the contractor the opportunity to better plan his work.
4. Delivery of materials - Due to easement and alignment constraints of this project, special pipe
has to be manufactured. The pipe manufacturer informed the contractor during bidding that
there could be a price reduction if the project start date would be delayed until May.
The contractor in preparing his bid felt these four factors equate to $50,000 credit in the construction
of the project.
Based on our subsequent meeting with the low bidder, it is apparent to staff that the City would be
better served by a May start date. During the preparation of plans and specifications, staff realized
that the contractor would not be able to complete flood protection to 616 G Street Apartments prior
to the winter rains (January and February). Both options of the contract have a provision for the
contractor to install flood protection measures at the upstream entrance and to safeguard the flooding
of the apartments at 616 G Street. The low bidder indicated to us that these measures would be in
place before the end of December, provided the contract is awarded and signed within 10 days of
tonight's meeting. It should be noted that the earliest the contractor would start in the construction
of the storm drain improvements would be mid-March. This is due to the lead time needed to
construct sufficient pipe to enable a productive construction operation. Since the project cannot be
constructed in time to provide flood protection by January, temporary flood protection is being
provided at 616 G Street under the later start date option. Under normal circumstances, it takes 30
to 60 days to start construction after award of the contract. Therefore, staff is recommending that a
c2 ~~ ;L
Page 3, Item ;2.- ~
Meeting Date 12/14/93
May 1, 1994 start date be used in order to save $50,000 and cause less disruption to the general public
by allowing the contractor to complete the project in a shorter (albeit later) time frame.
Bids for construction of the project were received from five contractors as follows:
Bid Amount
Contractor Alternate A Alternate B
Dual Pipes Precast Box
l. T.C. Construction Co., Inc. $1,157,496.07 $1,244,438.33
Santee
2. Granite Construction Company 1,318,376.00 1,399,948.50
San Diego
3. Erreca's, Inc. 1,391,983.00 No Bid
Spring Valley
4. Southland Paving, Inc. No Bid 1,481,338.50
Escondido
5. Chilcote, Inc. 1,603,349.40 1,705,674.40
E1 Cajon
Either alternate is an acceptable method of constructing the storm drain system. Therefore, staff
recommends utilizing the low bid for Alternate A with a May 1, 1994 start date.
The low bid by T.C. Construction Co., Inc. is above the engineer's estimate of $1,011,365.00 by
$146,131.07 or 12.6%. In reviewing the bid, staff believes the low bid received from T.c.
Construction Co., Inc. is satisfactory.
Staff has completed a reference check on the contractor and has found his work to be satisfactory.
PREVAILING WAGE STATEMENT
The source of funding for this project is Charter Point funds and Transportation Partnership funds.
No prevailing wage requirements were necessary or part of the bid documents. Compliance with
federal and state minority/women-owned business requirements was unapplicable on this project.
However, by advertising, minority business owners were encouraged to participate. The low bidder
is not a minority business.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS
A negative declaration pursuant to CEQA requirements for this project was filed February 11, 1993
with the County Clerk's Office (IS-93-10). It was cleared on March 27, 1993.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
A copy of the contractor's disclosure statement is attached.
)~-J
Page 4, Item :2. ~
Meeting Date 12/14/93
FISCAL IMPACT: The difference between the budget amount for this project and the amount
needed to construct it is $313,500. The deficit is attributable to the following reasons:
1) Right-of-way acquisition - The C.I.P. budget allocated $25,000 for right-of-way. Actual cost
for acquiring the easements is about $62,000;
2) Oaklawn Avenue Sewer - In order to construct the drainage improvements in Oaklawn Avenue,
it is necessary to add a paralleling sewer main. The cost for this work is $20,000. The C.I.P.
budget made no provision for this; and
3) Construction Cost - The C.I.P. budget provided $905,000 to cover the construction cost of the
proj ect. The low bid including a 5% contingency amounts to $1,163,000.
Staff has reviewed possible funding sources necessary to award this contract and recommends that a
portion of the unappropriated balance in the Transportation Partnership Fund be appropriated to the
Central Drainage Basin Project.
Fund Required for Construction
1. Contract Amount ($1,157,496.07 less ($50,000) deduct $1,107,496.07
item
for Alternate A
2. Contingencies (approx. 5%) 55,503.93
3. Additional right-of-way expenses 27,000.00
4. Staff (Design and Inspection) 32,000.00
5. Relocation of water facilities 40,000.00
Total Funds Required for Construction $1,262,000.00
Funds Available for Construction
1. Central Drainage Basin - $260,000.00
Transportation Partnership fund DR-116
2. Central Drainage Basin - Charter Point Funds - DR -116 688,493.00
3. Appropriation of funds from Unappropriated Balance of 313,507.00
Transportation Partnership Funds (Fund 253) to Central
Drainage Basin - DR-116
Total Funds Available for Construction $1,262,000.00
ATTACHMENTS
CIP Detail Sheet for Project DR-1l6 from FY 1992-93 and 1993-94 budgets NOTSCANNED
Contractor's Disclosure Statement NOT SCANNED
SHiFile No.: AR-039-1
WPC F:\horne\engineer\agenda\1492.93
d.'6~ ~/
RESOLUTION NO.
/73L/3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING FUNDS, ACCEPTING
BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR "INSTALLATION
OF DRAINAGE FACILITIES IN THE CENTRAL DRAINAGE
BASIN WEST OF BROADWAY BETWEEN "G" STREET AND
"I" STREET IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CA.
(DR-116)" .
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on December 1, 1993, in Conference
Rooms 2 and 3 in the Public Services Building, the Director of
Public Works received the following five sealed bids for
"Installation of Drainage Facilities in the Central Drainage Basin
West of Broadway between "G" Street and "I" Street in the City of
Chula Vista, CA (DR-116):
Bid Amount
Contractor Alternate A Alternate B
Dual Pipes Precast Box
1. T.C. Construction Co., Inc. $1,157,496.07 $1,244,438.33
Santee
2. Granite Construction 1,318,376.00 1,399,948.50
Company
San Diego
3. Erreca's, Inc. 1,391,983.00 No Bid
Spring Valley
4. Southland Paving, Inc. No Bid 1,481,338.50
Escondido
5. Chilcote, Inc. 1,603,349.40 1,705,674.40
EI Cajon
WHEREAS, either alternate is an acceptable method of
constructing the storm drain system, therefore, staff recommends
utilizing the low bid for Alternate A.
WHEREAS, in addition, the low bidder gave a price for the
deduct item of $50,000 if the start of work could be delayed until
May 1, 1994 and staff recommends accepting this deduct because we
do not believe the majority of the work will be completed during
this winter's rainy season; and
WHEREAS, the low bid by T.C. Construction Co., Inc. is
above the engineer'S estimate of $1,011,365.00 by $146,131.07 or
12.6%, but in reviewing the bid, staff believes the low bid
received from T.C. Construction Co., Inc. is satisfactory; and
:2?1~5
WHEREAS, the source of funding for this project is
Charter Point funds and Transportation Partnership funds and no
prevailing wage requirements were necessary or part of the bid
documents, but compliance with federal and state minority/women-
owned business requirements was unapplicable on this project and by
advertising, minority business owners were encouraged to
participate although the low bidder is not a minority business; and
WHEREAS, a negative
requirements for this project was
County Clerk's Office (IS-93-10)
1993.
declaration pursuant to CEQA
filed February 11, 1993 with the
which was cleared on March 27,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby accept the five bids and awards
the contract to T. C. Construction Co., Inc. in the amount of
$1,157,496.07 for construction of Alternate A (dual concrete
reinforced concrete pipes) and with the provision of delaying start
of construction until May 1, 1994.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the sum of $313,507 is hereby
appropriated from the unappropriated balance of Fund 253
Transportation Partnership Funds to CIP fund 253-2530 - DR-116
Central Drainage Basin.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the city of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
contract for and on behalf of the City of Chula vista.
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Presented by
C:\rs\1482
c2Y~ !/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ItemA
Meeting Date 12/14/93
SUBMITTED BY:
Report on Grading for Telegraph Canyon Estates Subdivision and the
effect on adjacent property on Lehigh Avenue.
Director of Public wor~ r
City Manager j:.\ '\)~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
On October 19, 1993, a resident on Lehigh Avenue adjacent to the Telegraph Canyon Estates
Subdivision expressed a concern about the grading of the subdivision and its effect on their
property. Council directed staff to return with information on the grading. Staff has discussed
the grading with the resident and indicated the reasons the grading was done in the manner it
was done and the safeguards to their property.
RECOMMENDATION: Accept the staff report.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Telegraph Canyon Estates Project consists of 344 single family lots on approximately 100
acres located on the north side of Otay Lakes Road, east of Southwestern College Estates and
Otay Lakes Lodge mobile home park, and south of Eastlake Shores. The first phase final maps
for the project have been approved, grading is underway, and building permits have been issued
for the first phase model complex. At the October 19, Council meeting, Mr. Russell Barnhill
of 873 Lehigh Avenue, within the College Estates subdivision, expressed a concern with the
grading, drainage and height of the slopes along the westerly boundary of the project as it
adjoined his property. Mr. Barnhill indicated that the Telegraph Canyon Estates grading created
a large slope that drained into his property, would cause a concrete ditch on his property to
become filled with sediment and would damage his fence. Staff has reviewed the situation,
including making site visits to the Barnhill's home, and has slides available for viewing at the
Council meeting.
Mr. Barnhill also appeared at the November 16, 1993 Council meeting at which the Gotham
Street closure was discussed. Since Mr. Barnhill was unable to discuss the issue with the
Council at that time, staff spoke with Mr. Barnhill and tried to explain the constraints Baldwin
was under on the grading and the steps they took to protect the adjacent property. Staff also
suggested to Mr. Barnhill that he visit our office to review the plans with City staff. Mr.
Barnhill indicated that he had been unaware of the information staff gave him, but that he was
still concerned about the effects of the grading on the value of his property due to the height and
;2'1-/
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date 11/16/93
proximity of the new manufactured slope. Mr. Barnhill indicated that he wanted to have an
opportunity to discuss it with the City Council. Mr. Barnhill has not availed himself of the
opportunity to look at the plans and discuss it more in depth with staff.
Prior to the grading work done on Telegraph Canyon Estates, the homes on the east side of
Lehigh Avenue within the College Estates Subdivision backed up to this undeveloped area. The
Telegraph Canyon Estates property generally was higher than the adjacent lots on Lehigh
Avenue and drainage was toward the lots which front on Lehigh Avenue. Most of the homes
on Lehigh Avenue had a manufactured 2: 1 slope in their backyard and a concrete ditch to
receive the water from the property to the east. The area of the Telegraph Canyon Estates
property that previously drained toward Lehigh Avenue was 8.0 acres and extended to a
maximum distance of 300 feet and a minimum distance of 150 feet east of the property
boundary. While several of the lots along Lehigh Avenue had large slopes in their yards up to
more than 15 feet high, the Barnhill property was at a point where they had no slope in their
yard, only the concrete brow ditch.
The grading on Telegraph Canyon Estates has reduced the contributory drainage area by 70 %
to 2.3 acres and, in some cases, reduced the height of the hill. Baldwin's engineers looked at
reducing the height of the fill even more, but, because the County Water Authority pipeline ran
through that part of the subdivision, and a minimum amount of cover was required over the
pipe, the elevations of the roads and building pads could not be lowered any further. Mr.
Barnhill was initially under the impression that the County Water Authority only had the one
pipe they recently installed and believed that it should have been installed lower to facilitate the
lowering of the grading within the subdivision. Staff pointed out to him that the recently
installed pipe, a 72 inch steel pipe, paralleled an older 69 inch concrete pipe that could not be
lowered.
However, even though the height of the hill was reduced, the 2: 1 slope has made it appear quite
different. Attached as Exhibit A are cross sections illustrating the changes created at several of
the properties along Lehigh Avenue. Conditions on the subdivision map required that the slopes
be landscaped for erosion protection and appearance. The landscaping proposed consists of trees
and shrubs with a low growing ground cover on the top part of the slope and a native flowering
hydroseed on the bottom portion of the slopes.
The cross section for 873 Lehigh Avenue, the Barnhill property, is the maximum slope which
occurs at the north edge of their property. The slides available at the Council meeting show that
the slope behind the Barnhill property remains the natural slope to the southerly edge of their
property.
Staff also investigated the possibility that a second brow ditch be constructed on the Telegraph
Canyon Estates property to intercept the flow before reaching the property boundary. Due to
:<1-2
Page 3, Item .2 I
Meeting Date 11/16/93
the terrain at the property's edge, which goes uphill in both directions from the vicinity of the
Barnhill property, it was not possible to construct another ditch.
In summary, what staff found as a result of our investigation of Mr. Barnhill's complaint is as
follows:
1. The pre-grading condition caused drainage to run onto the Lehigh Avenue properties
through a fence into a concrete brow ditch designed to accept that drainage. The grading
done by Baldwin did not change that pattern.
2. The grading done on the Telegraph Canyon Estates property reduced the amount of
drainage going towards Lehigh Avenue. Constraints caused by the location of the
County Water Authority pipeline kept the height from being reduced even more. Mr.
Barnhill has adequate drainage now and the grading will only make it better.
3. The steeper manufactured slopes will be landscaped to prevent erosion and for
appearance. In the event siltation takes place in the existing brow ditches before the
landscaping becomes established, tentative map conditions and the grading ordinance
permits staff to require the developer to clean it up.
4. Terrain conditions are such that a secondary ditch on the Baldwin property is not
feasible.
Last, Mr. Barnhill asked staff if the ditch in his yard could be removed or covered. Staff
indicated that it probably could, but that he would have to have an engineer prepare the plans
to assure that existing drainage is not disrupted.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
WPC F: \home\engineer\agenda \lehigh. tee
~") Q f) J
0<. I --p<.--
EXHIBIT:A
SUBDIVISION
"----BOUNDARY.
40'- - 40'
30'- f- 30'
EXISTING
20'- V~ - -20'
-- --
---- ---
2.. ---
10'- Lk- - -10'
r
0'- -0'
1"'- I
0' 849-LEHlIGH AVE. 230'
c C
LEGEND.
ow GRADBUNE. - -
NEW GRADBUNE.
DlREC110N OF DRAINAGE. ----.-
1/
/ ~
~
~
.
02 9-- J
DRAWN BY
J.P. CROSS SECTIONS ALONG THE WESTERLY SUB
DATE: BOUNDARY OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES.
10/28/93
40'-
30'-
20'-
10L
0'-
I
40'-
30'-
20'-
10'-
0'- -
I
0'
DRAWN BY
DATE:
10/28/93
0'
EXHIBIT:A
SUBDIVISION
BOUNDARY.
-40'
---
-30'
----
2% _-
~-~
~
--
b-
-20'
10'
OTAY LAKES LODGE
MOBILE HOME PARK.
LOT #8
-0'
I
230'
~
~
SUBDIVISION
BOUNDARY.
-40'
-30'
~ 2.. ___ __ ""~ --
J1IlNCB. ---
~
--
~
-
-20'
10'
OTAY LAKES WDGE
MOBILE HOME PARK.
LOT #6
-0'
I
230'
LEGEND. OUJGRADELlNE. - -
NEWGRADEUNE.
DRECI'lON OF DRAINAGE. ----
:2.7-'(
CROSS SECTIONS ALONG THE WESTERLY SUB
BOUNDARY OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES.
EXHIBIT:A
~
~
401-
0'-
I
SUBDMSlON
BOUNDARY.
30'
30'
20~
- 20'
2..
~
10'-
~ ----
-----
10'
0'
0'
861-LEHIGH AVE.
230'
B
B
401-
-40'
30'
SUBDMSlON
___BOUNDARY.
30'
---
PBNCB.
2..
~
20'
20~
10'-
~---
~
--
---
10'
0'
873-LEHIGH AVE.
-0'
I
230'
0'-
I
A
A
LEGEND.
DRAWN BY
J.P.
DATE:
10/28/93
OLDGRADEUNE. - -
NEWGRADEUNE.
DIREC110N OF DRAINAGE. ~
02 'j-S
CROSS SECTIONS ALONG THE WESTERLY SUB
BOUNDARY OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item .3 0
Meeting Date 12/14/93
ITEM TITLE:
Report on Request for Proposals (RFP) for exterior advertising on Chula
Vista Transit buses
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager!
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No.xJ
Council Referral No. 2799
At its meeting on September 7, 1993, Council approved exterior advertising on Chula Vista
Transit (CVT) buses (excluding the four trolley buses) and directed staff to prepare a Request
for Proposal (RFP) to implement the advertising program. Council also directed staff to draft
a letter for Mayor Nader's signature to the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB)
to request clarification on the use of future bus advertising revenue for special transportation
services for Chula Vista youth programs. This letter to MTDB Chairman Jim Mills was signed
by the Mayor and sent to Mr. Mills on November 8, 1993. Staff has prepared an RFP for
exterior advertising on CVT buses, and a draft contract for advertising services (Attachment 1).
This report will discuss the major requirements of the RFP.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept this report and authorize staff to issue a Request
for Proposal (RFP) for exterior advertising on Chula Vista Transit buses.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The following is a discussion of major requirements of the RFP. This discussion will reference
specific sections in the RFP (Attachment 1).
IA. The proposer is responsible for implementation of the entire advertising program,
including: procuring advertisements from one or more advertisers; obtaining ads;
placement of ads on buses; maintenance and repair of ads; removal of ads; and repair of
any damage to buses caused by ad placement or removal.
IC. A total of 27 CVT buses will be available for exterior advertising. The four Chula Vista
trolleys will be excluded. A maximum of three ad panels may be placed on each of 27
buses, for a total number of 81 ads (3 x 27). The RFP excludes the front of each vehicle
from advertising due to limited space. Standard exterior ads panels are classified as king,
queen, and tail with the following dimensions: king (30" x 144"); queen (30" x 88"); tail
(21" x 72"). The RFP gives proposers the flexibility to use any size ad on all three sides
of the 27 CVT buses, providing that the ads do not interfere with bus operations or
maintenance.
3(J~ /
Page 2, Item -3 0
Meeting Date 12/14/93
lIB. The tentative schedule proposes issuing the RFP on January 3, 1994, having a pre-
proposal submission conference on January 13, 1994; receiving proposals on February
4, 1994; completing evaluation of proposals by February 18, 1994; and making a
recommendation to Council by March 9, 1994. If Council authorizes staff to issue the
RFP at tonight's meeting, staff is proposing to advertise the RFP in Passenger
Transport, a national publication of the American Public Transit Association (APT A),
and in the Chula Vista Star News. The advertisement would appear in the December
27, 1993 issue of Passenger Transport; therefore, the pre-proposal submission
conference is scheduled for January 13, 1994, in order to give prospective proposers
responding to the Passenger Transport advertisement time to receive and review the
RFP.
IIEl. The evaluation procedure is divided into two parts: four requirements which determine
whether a proposal is responsive or non-responsive (discussed in Section IV A.); and a
scored evaluation based on criteria presented in Section IVB.
IV A. There are three "non-scored evaluation requirements" that a proposer must meet in order
to be considered a responsive proposer. These are:
. Submission of financial statement demonstrating financial ability to fulfill the
requirements of the RFP and draft contract.
· Submission of a letter from a corporate surety stating that the proposal is
bondable in the amount of $25,000 (an Irrevocable Letter of Credit may be
substituted for a performance bond).
· Submission of the name or names of key personnel assigned to the project.
IVB. Qualitative Evaluation Criteria
Four criteria will be rated on a score of either 0-5 points of 0-7.5 points. The criteria
are: l)'financial benefit to City (0-7.5 points); 2) advertising program (0-7.5 points);
3) ads for Chula Vista businesses or services(0-5 points); and 4) additional services (0-5
points). Criterion 3 encourages proposers to make a commitment that a certain
percentage of advertising will be from local Chula Vista businesses or services.
Accordingly, points will be assigned to this criterion as follows: 5 points for a
commitment that 100% of ads will be from Chula Vista businesses; 4 points if 80% of
ads are from Chula Vista businesses; 3 points if 60% of ads are from Chula Vista
businesses; 2 points for 50% Chula Vista ads; 1 point for 20% Chula Vista ads; and 0
points for no commitment for Chula Vista business ads.
Criterion 4, "Additional Services", permits the proposer to offer any additional services,
not required in the RFP, which may be of benefit to the City of Chula Vista. For
example, a proposer could offer to pay production costs for a certain number of public
.3{J~.2
Page 3, Item ..3 tJ
Meeting Date 12/14/93
service announcements or could provide free media exposure to the City that could not
otherwise be obtained. Proposers may be assigned up to 5 points for additional services
offered to the City.
After the evaluation committee has completed the qualitative evaluation and scoring of
proposals the committee may interview one or more proposers before making a
recommendation to Council, or the committee may choose to make a recommendation
without discussion with any proposer.
V. Scope of Services
A. Proposer is responsible for all phases of the advertising program including
soliciting advertisements; obtaining ads; placement of ads on buses; removal of
ads; and any necessary repair to CVT bus exterior if damaged by advertising
display.
C. City reserves the right to place public service announcements/advertisements on
CVT bus exteriors on a space available basis. The announcement(s) may appear
on the bus for a minimum of four weeks. The successful proposer will be
responsible for placement and removal of public service announcements on
buses at no cost to the City.
D. All advertisements may be subject to approval by City.
E. The successful proposer is required to remove any advertisement from the bus
at the City's request. The City will not accept in any form the following types
of advertising: liquor, tobacco, political, public art, religious, pornographic or
ads promoting sexually explicit or sexually oriented products or services.
G. The City encourages ads for businesses and organizations located in Chula Vista,
and encourages the successful proposer to make a reasonable effort to procure
ads from these local Chula Vista businesses.
1. Copies of all advertising contracts between the successful proposer and
advertisers shall be sent directly to the City on a monthly basis and shall
accompany the monthly advertising revenue payment to the City. The City
requires the following information at a minimum in each advertising contract:
the number of ads sold, size of the ads, the cost of each ad and the term of the
ad contract. This information is required in order for City staff to monitor the
type, number, and size of ads on CVT buses and verify this information with the
monthly revenue payment to City.
VI. Insurance
The RFP requires the following insurance:
Jt?~J
Page 4, Item ..J ()
Meeting Date 12/14/93
A. Statutory Workers Compensation and Employer's Liability Insurance Coverage
in the amount of $1 million.
B. Commercial General Liability Insurance in the amount of $1 million.
C. A Performance Bond or Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of $25,000.
D. A Fidelity Bond in the amount of $25,000.
Section IV (page 5) of the Draft Contract specifies a base term of the contract which will
become effective upon contract execution until June 30, 1988. The Tentative Schedule
anticipates Council action on this agreement on February 22, 1994; therefore, the base term of
this agreement would be approximately four years and four months. The agreement also
includes an option term at the City's discretion for a two year extension until June 30, 2000.
FISCAL IMP ACT: Based on San Diego Transit's exterior advertising contract, staff
estimates that a minimum of $50,000 in annual advertising revenue could be generated from
exterior ads on CVT buses. However, the RFP process could result in a higher advertising
revenue figure.
WMGlFile: DS-020
WPC F:\HOME\ENGINEER\BILLG\1437.93
30-tJ
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR EXTERIOR ADVERTISING
ON CHULA VISTA TRANSIT BUSES
I. INTRODUCTION
A. The City of Chula Vista, hereinafter referred to as "City", is soliciting proposals
from qualified organizations to manage a transit advertising program on the
exterior of Chula Vista Transit (CVT) buses. The proposer selected by the City
to imple::Jent this program will be responsible for: procuring advertisements
from one or more advertisers; obtaining ads; placement of ads on CVT buses;
maintenance and repair of ads on CVT buses; removal of ads at the end of
advertising contracts; and repair of any damage to CVT buses caused by ad
placement or removal.
B. In an effort to give interested proposers an opportunity to respond to this RFP,
the RFP has been designed to allow proposers flexibility to propose creative and
innovative programs. It is incumbent upon the proposer to clearly demonstrate
to the City the potential benefits of its proposed program.
C. A total of 27 CVT buses will be available for this exterior advertising program.
The 4 Chula Vista Trolley vehicles will be excluded from this program. On the
remainder of the 27 bus CVT fleet, exterior advertising may be placed on the
two (2) sides and rear of each vehicle; the front of each vehicle is excluded from
this program. Therefore, a maximum of three (3) ads may be placed on each
of 27 CVT buses.
n. PROCUREMENT PROCESS
A. General
Proposals for this project must be submitted in accordance with Section ill
entitled "Submission of Proposals".
B. Tentative Schedule
The t~ntative schedule of events for this procurement process is given below:
Item
Date
1
2
3
4
5
RFP Issued
Pre-Proposal Submission Conference
Proposals Due
Proposal Evaluation Completed
Award of Contract by City Council
January 3, 1994
January 13, 1994
February 4, 1994
February 18, 1994
March 9, 1994
WPC F:\HOME\ENGINEER\BILLG\1318.93
~-5
Page 1
C. Proposal Contents
-.
1. Proposer should carefully follow the instructions outlined below. Failure
to follow these instructions may be considered grounds for excluding a
proposal from consideration.
2. Proposals must contain all the information requested in the RFP and be
organized as explained in Section D, titled "Proposal Organization".
Incomplete proposals may be rejected by the City as being non-
responsive. The City shall be the sole and fmal authority for
determination of non-responsive proposals.
3. All proposals must be legibly typewritten. Any erasures or changes
appearing in the proposal shall be initialed and dated by the individuals
signing the proposal. Measurements shall be the system of weights and
measures in common usage in the United States, and pricing shall be in
United States dollars.
4. Proposals shall be signed and dated in ink in the following manner:
a.
If from a Corporation, it must be signed by the President or Vice
President and the Secretary or Assistant Secretary with a
corporate seal. (When the signing officer is not the President or
Vice President simply because hislher title is different, evidence
of authority to sign on behalf of the Corporation must be
submitted. )
........
b. If from an Individual, Sole Proprietorship, or Proposer operating
under a trade name, it is to be signed by that individual and
witnessed by at least two witnesses.
c. If from a Partnership, it must be signed by one of the full partners
and witnessed by at least two witnesses. If signing partner is a
Corporation, that partner shall sign in the same manner as if a
Corporation were itself submitting the proposal. (See "a" above.)
All members of the partnership must sign if the performance of
services are not within the scope of the partnership agreement.
As with an individual, each signature must be witnessed by at
least two persons.
d. The proposal must include the exact name of the contracting
organization.
e.
A proposal submitted by a Corporation must list the name of the
state wherein the Corporation is chartered, and the business
address of the Corporation.e
-.
WPC F:\HOME\ENGJNEER\BnLG\1318.93
30-u,
Page 2
f. A proposal submitted by a joint venture must be executed by all
joint ventures in the same manner as if they were individually
submitting proposals. .
D. Proposal Organization
1. Proposal shall be submitted in two sections: (1) Statement of
Qualifications, and (2) Description of Proposed Services.
2. The Statement of Qualillcations must respond to the Non-Scored
Evaluation requirements explained in Section IV.A. of this RFP. These
requirements are: fmancial statement of proposer~ surety of performance
bond or an irrevocable letter of credit~ and resume of key personnel.
Other pertinent information to demonstrate the proposer's experience in
the provision of transit advertising services may be included in this
section.
3. The Description of Proposed Services. must contain a complete
description of your organization's proposed services for advertising on
bus exteriors, and address the factors described under Section IV B, titled
"Qualitative Evaluation Criteriall, and Section V, titled "Scope of
Servicesll.
E. Evaluation Procedure
1. Following receipt of proposals, proposals will be opened and checked for
compliance with the requirements set forth in this RFP. A prooosal will
be deemed non-responsive if it does not meet the three (3) requirements
in Section IV.A. Copies of responsive proposals will then be distributed
to an evaluation committee. Committee members will individually
review and study the proposals in terms of the requirements outlined in
this RFP in preparation for a meeting where a comparative discussion
and evaluation of proposals will take place.
2. Negotiations and/or an oral interview mayor may not be conducted with
proposers. Therefore, proposer should make its proposal as advantageous
to the City as possible, since selection may be made without discussion
with any oroooser.
3. It is the proposer's responsibility to clearly describe all aspects of its
proposal, including but not limited to: benefits to the City~ services to
be provided by proposer~ and resources required from the City (if any).
4. The City reserves the right to reject any proposal which does not fully
and clearly describe the services being offered or the benefits to be
derived by the City. The City reserves the right to withdraw this RFP
at any time without prior notice. The City makes no representation that
any contract will be awarded to any proposer responding to this RFP.
WPC F:\BOME\ENGINEER\Bn.LG\l31B.93
Page 3
30-1
The City reserves the right to waive any minor irregularities as part of
this RFP process.
-.
F. All proposals and attached materials will be available for public review at the
time of award of contract by the City Council.
G. A contract will be awarded to the proposer whose proposal will be most
advantageous to the City.
H. A draft agreement is included in this RFP as Attachment 1.
m. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS
A. A pre-proposal submission conference will be held on Thursday, January 13,
1994, in Conference Room at the City of Chula Vista Civic Center, 276
Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910. The purpose of the conference is to
answer any questions prospective proposers may have about the RFP.
Attendance at this conference is not mandatory, but is encouraged.
B.
Proposals must include six (6) complete sets of signed copies. Proposals must
be delivered to Bill Gustafson, Transit Coordinator, Chula Vista Public Works
Building, 707 F Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910. Proposals must be received bv
2:00 p.m. on Friday. February 4. 1994. Ifmail delivery is used, proposer should
mail documents early enough to provide for arrival by this deadline. The
proposer uses mail service at its own risk. Proposals received by the City after
the date and time specified will not be considered and will be returned to the
proposer unopened.
-.
IV. EVALUATION CRITERIA
The evaluation part of this RFP process is divided into two parts: non-scored
evaluation requirements; and qualitative evaluation criteria.
A. Non-Scored Evaluation Requirements
1. In order to be considered a responsive proposer. proposer must submit
a fmancial statement demonstrating proposer's ability to fulfill the
requirements of this RFP and the draft contract (attached).
2.
In order to be considered a responsive Droposer. proposer must submit
with its proposal a letter from a corporate surety satisfactory to the City
stating that the proposer is bondable in the amount of $25,000. The
successful contractor will be required to furnish a Performance Bond as
surety for the faithful performance of this agreement within 10 days after
selection by the City Council. The Performance Bond will be in the
amount of $25,000. An Irrevocable Letter of Credit may be submitted
instead of a Performance Bond.
-,
WPC F:\HOME\ENGINEER.\BILLG\1318.93
30-~
Page 4
3. In order to be considered a responsive proposer. proposer must submit
with its proposal the name or names of key personnel assigned to this
project.
4. City reserves the right to determine if any proposal in response to this
RFP shall be deemed responsive and to waive any discrepancies or minor
irregularities pertaining to any proposal submitted in response to this
RFP.
B. QUALITATIVE EVALUATION CRITERIA
The following four (4) criteria will be rated on a scale of either 0 to 5 points or
0-7.5 points. Therefore, a proposer may receive a maximum of 25 points. Each
criterion will be evaluated as described below:
1. Financial Benefit to the Citv of Chula Vista (0-7.5 points)
A determination of the highest monetary return to the City. Proposer
should describe in detail all advertising revenue to be paid to the City,
and should discuss the basis for this revenue estimate or commitment.
If proposal includes a guarantee payment to City in addition to, or
instead of, payment projections based on anticipated ad sales, proposer
should clearly discuss this payment guarantee in its proposal.
2. Advertising Program (0-7.5 points)
A detailed discussion of the advertising program that will maximize use
of available advertising space on CVT buses. The following are issues
that proposer should address.
a. Describe the advertising program that you would implement for
CVT.
b. Discuss the staff that would be assigned to this project.
c. Explain why your proposed approach to the management and
operation of this advertising program is in the best interest of the
City of Chula Vista.
d. What types of ads, including size and specific advertisers, if
known, do you anticipate placing on CVT buses?
e. Discuss your organization's relevant experience to this project.
f. Discuss your program for placing ads on the CVT buses, and
maintenance, upkeep, and repair of advertising display units.
WPC F:\HOME\ENGJNEER\Bn.LG\1318.93
Page 5
~g
g.
Discuss the graphics standards you would use in your advertising
program from the standpoint of visual quality and taste. (Note
certain requirements discussed in Section IV - Scope of Services.)
-
3. Ads for Chula Vista Business or Services (0-5 points)
The City encourages advertising from businesses or services whose
headquarters are located in the City of Chula Vista, or who have
operations in the City of Chula Vista. In order to encourage proposers
to procure advertising from local businesses, this criterion will be rated
as follows:
a. 5 points for a commitment that 100% of the ads will be
from Chula Vista businesses
b. 4 points for a commitment that 80% of ads will be from
Chula Vista businesses.
c. 3 points for a commitment that 60% of ads will be from
Chula Vista businesses.
d.
2 points for a commitment that 50% of ads will be from
Chula Vista businesses.
-~,
e. I point for a commitment that 20% of ads will be from
Chula Vista businesses.
f. 0 points for no commitment for ads from local Chula
Vista businesses.
4. Additional Services (0-5 points)
This criterion gives the proposer an opportunity to discuss any additional
services not required in the RFP which may be of benefit to the City of
Chula Vista. For example, Section V.C. of this RFP states that "The
City reserves the right to place public service
announcements/advertisements on the exterior of CVT buses if contractor
has not sold advertisement space in that location." In its proposal,
proposer may wish to pay the production cost for a certain number of
public service announcements on an annual basis. A maximum of 5
points may be given to a proposer who commits to providing a service
or services for the City that would either increase revenue to the City, or
provide a service that would be of benefit to the City.
.
-.
WPC F:\HOME\ENGINEER\BlI.LG\1318.93
30-10
Page 6
V. SCOPE OF SERVICES
A. The City is seeking proposals from qualified organizations to manage a transit
advertising program on the exterior of CVT buses. Proooser shall be responsible
for all phases of this advertising prollfam. including ad procurement and
obtaining ads: placement of ads on CVT buses: maintenance. upkeep and repair
of ads: removal of ads at the appropriate time: and repair to CVT bus exterior
if damaged by advertising display application and/or removal.
B. The City reserves the right to require the addition, removal, change of location,
modification or refurbishment of any or all advertising until end of this
agreement. Placement of ads shall in no way interfere with the safe operation
and maintenance of CVT buses.
C. The City reserves the right to place public service announcements/advertisements
on the exterior of CVT buses if contractor has not sold advertising space in that
location. Should the City exercise its prerogative to use public service
announcements on unsold exterior space, this public service announcement may
appear on the bus for a minimum of four (4) weeks. The successful proposer
shall be responsible for placement on buses and removal of public service
announcements from buses at no cost to the City.
D. All advertising materials, advertisements, and manner of presentation may be
subject to approval by the City which may disapprove any such items at its sole
discretion.
E. The successful proposer shall immediately remove from the bus at its sole cost
and expense any ad which is disapproved by the City. Any ad previously
approved which may subsequently be considered objectionable by the City shall
likewise be removed. In the event that such disapproved ad is not removed by
the successful proposer within 24 hours upon receipt of written demand, the City
may cause to be moved said material and the successful proposer shall pay all
costs and expenses. The City shall not be liable for any damages in connection
therewith.
F. The City will not accept in any form the following types of advertising: liquor,
tobacco, political, public art, religious, pornographic or ads promoting sexually
explicit or oriented products or services.
G. The City encourages ads for businesses or organizations located in Chula Vista.
The successful proposer shall make a reasonable effort to procure ads from these
local Chula Vista entities.
H. The successful proposer shall adhere to generally accepted principles of
advertising in relationship to good taste and truth in advertising.
I. The City prefers advertising displays to be placed on the buses by an adhesive
backing. However, if proposer proposes to display ads in advertising racks, the
Page 7
WPC F:\HOME\ENGINEER\BD.LG\1318.93
~r'\ _ , ,
proposer is responsible for installing all hardware on the buses. All advertising
display hardware (frames, racks, moldings, etc.) once installed on the transit .-
system under this contract shall become the property of the City.
1. Copies of all advertising contracts between the successful proposer and
advertisers shall be sent directly to the City on a monthly basis and shall
accompany the monthly advertising revenue payment to City. The information
in each advertising contract required by the City shall include at a minimum: the
number of ads; the size of ads; the cost of each ad; and the term of the ad
contact.
VI. INSURANCE
Proposer represents that it and its agents, staff, and subcontractors employed by it in
connection with the services required to be rendered are protected against the risk of
loss by the following insurance coverages in the following categories and to the limits
specified, policies of which are ensured by insurance companies that have a Best rating
of AS or better or shall meet with the approval of the City:
A. Statutory Worker's Compensation and Employer's Liability Insurance coverage
in the amount of $1 million.
B.
Commercial General Liability Insurance including business, automobile
insurance coverage in the amount of $1 million. Combined single limit applied
separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by contractor
which names City as additional insured and which is primary to any policy
which the City may otherwise carry (primary coverage) and which treats the
employees of the City and applicants in the same manner as members of the
general public (cross liability coverage).
-~
C. Performance Bond or an Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of $25,000
by a surety and in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney.
D. Fidelity Bond in the amount of $25,000 which shall cover contractor employees,
protecting City from employee theft with respect to any occurrence by
contractor's employees.
E. Proof of insurance coverage.
1. Certificates of Insurance.
Contractor shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required prior to
the commencement of services required under this agreement by delivery
of certificates of insurance demonstrating same and further indicating that
the policies may not be cancelled without at least 30 days written notice
to the additional insured.
........,
WPC F:\HOMElENGINEER\BR.LG\131B.93
30 - J ;\-
Page 8
2. Policy Endorsements Required.
In order to demonstrate the additional insured coverage, primary
coverage and cross liability coverage required under contractor's general
liability insurance policy contractor shall deliver a policy endorsement to
the City demonstrating same which shall be reviewed and approved by
the Risk Manager.
WPC F:\HOME\ENGINEER\Blll..G\1318.93
3? - l3
Page 9
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR EXTERIOR ADVERTISING
ON CHULA VISTA TRANSIT BUSES
-"
I. INTRODUCTION
A. The City of Chula Vista, hereinafter referred to as "City", is soliciting proposals
from qualified organizations to manage a transit advertising program on the
exterior of Chula Vista Transit (CVT) buses. The proposer selected by the City
to implement this program will be responsible for: procuring advertisements
from one or more advertisers; obtaining ads; placement of ads on CVT buses;
maintenance and repair of ads on CVT buses; removal of ads at the end of
advertising contracts; and repair of any damage to CVT buses caused by ad
placement or removal.
B. In an effort to give interested proposers an opportunity to respond to this RFP,
the RFP has been designed to allow proposers flexibility to propose creative and
innovative programs. It is incumbent upon the proposer to clearly demonstrate
to the City the potential benefits of its proposed program.
C.
A total of 27 CVT buses will be available for this exterior advertising program.
The 4 Chula Vista Trolley vehicles will be excluded from this program. On the
remainder of the 27 bus CVT fleet, exterior advertising may be placed on the
two (2) sides and rear of each vehicle; the front of each vehicle is excluded from
this program. Therefore, a maximum of three (3) ads may be placed on each
of 27 CVT buses.
-,
n. PROCUREMENT PROCESS
A. General
Proposals for this project must be submitted in accordance with Section ill
.
-,
?:/J-I11
AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND
FOR TRANSIT ADVERTISING, SERVICES
'\
This agreement ("Agreement"), dated for the pwposes of
reference only, and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is otherwise
specified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 1 is between the Gty-related en'Lf as is indicated on Exhibit
A, paragraph 2, as such ("Gty"), whose business fonn is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 3, and
the entity indicated on the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4, as Contractor, whose business fonn
is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph S, and whose place of business and telephone numbers are
set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 6 ("Contractor"), and is made with reference to the following
facts:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Contractor warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in
a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Contractor to
City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of
this Agreement;
WHEREAS, City operates a fixed-route bus system called "Chula Vista Transit",
hereinafter referred to as "CVT"; and
WHEREAS, City is desirous of selling advertising space on the exterior of CVT buses
in order to generate additional revenue for transportation services; and
WHEREAS, Contractor has the management and technical personnel, expertise and other
assets useful to provide transit advertising services for CVT; and
WHEREAS, Gty is desirous of obtaining such services for CVT; and
WHEREAS, Contractor is desirous of providing such service; and
WHEREAS, Contractor warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in
a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Contractor to
City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of
this Agreement;
(End of Recitals. Next Page starts Obligatory Provisions.)
"
Page 1
Wl'C F:'\IIOME'CNGJNFJlR\B1Ll.D\l346.93
~-I5'
OBLIGATORY PROVISIONS PAGES
.-",
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Oty and Contractor do hereby
mutually agree as follows:
1. Contractor's Duties
A. General Duties
Contractor shall perform all of the services described on the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph
7, entitled "General Duties"; and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Contractor shall also
perfonn all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled" Scope of Work and
Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to, and within the time frames set
forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and deliver to Oty such Deliverables as are identified in Exhibit
A, Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein, time being of the essence of this
agreement The General Duties and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of Work
and Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete the
Defined Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, operate to
terminate this Agreement -
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
Oty may independently, or upon request from Contractor, from time to time reduce the
Defmed Services to be perfonned by the Contractor under this Agreement Upon doing so, City
and Contractor agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a
corresponding reduction in the advertising rates associated with said reduction.
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require
Contractor to expand its advertising program by increasing the number of spaces on CVT buses
available for advertising. Contractor shall compensate Oty at the rates set forth in the "Rate
Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (C), unless a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon.
E. Standard of Care
Contractor, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defmed Services
or Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill
ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions
and in similar locations.
.
-,
WPC P:\BOllIE'CNGlNEER'IBILLO\1346.93
Page 2
30 -) Lo
F. Insurance
Contractor represents that it and its agents, staff and subconsultants employed by it in
connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by the
following insurance coverages, in the following categories, and to the limits specified, policies
of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Oass V" or better,
or shall meet with the approval of the City:
Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Ins::mmce coverage
in the amount set forth in the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9.
Commercial General liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance
coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied
separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Contractor, which names City
and Applicant as an Additional Ins~ and which is primary to any policy which the City may
otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City and Applicant
in the same manner as members of the general public ("Cross-liability Coverage").
Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, unless
ElTors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy.
G. Proof of Insurance Coverage.
(1) Certificates of Insurance.
Contractor shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the
commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of
Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled
without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured.
(2) Policy Endorsements Required.
In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage and
Cross-liability Coverage required under Contractor's Commercial General Liability Insurance
Policy, Contractor shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating same, which shall
be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager.
H. Security for Performance.
(1) Performance Bond.
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Contractor to
provide a Performance Bond (mdicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately
preceding the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Contractor shall provide to the
City a performance bond by a surety and in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager
or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Performance
Bond", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A.
Page 3
WPC F!'BOME'CNOINa:R'JlllLO\l346.93
30-1,
(2) Letter of Credit.
-
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Contractor to
provide a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately
preceding the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Contractor shall provide to the Oty
an irrevocable letter of credit callable by the City at their unfettered discretion by submitting to
the bank a letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that the Contractor is in breach of the terms
of this Agreement. The letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and amount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space
adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A.
(3) Other Security
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Contractor to
provide security other than a Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark
in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Other Security"), then
Contractor shall provide to the Oty such other security therein listed in a form and amount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney.
I. Business License
Contractor agrees to obtain a business license from the Oty and to otherwise comply with
Title 5 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
-
2. Duties of the Oty
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall regularly consult the Contractor for the purpose of reviewing the progress of
the Dermed Services and Schedule therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance to
achieve the objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access to its office facilities, mes
and records by Contractor throughout the term of the agreement. In addition thereto, Oty agrees
to provide the information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, and
with the further understanding that delay in the provision of these materials beyond 30 days after
authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the Contractor's
performance of this agreement.
B. Payment to Oty
Contractor shall pay City monthly for advertising on CVT buses. The following
information shall be sent to City monthly with the advertising payment: the number and type
of ads on CVT buses for the month upon which payment is based; the rate at which each ad was
sold to each advertiser; and a current copy of each advertising contract between contractor and
advertiser.
.-
WPC P.\HOMJN:NGINEEK\BJU.O\1346.93
:30-1 <6
Page 4
3.' Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A,
Paragraph 13, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent
them in the routine administration of this agreement.
4. Term.
Term of Agreement
A. Base Term - This Agreement shall become effective upon execution until June 30,
1998.
B. Ootion Term
(1) In consideration of the herein Agreement, Contractor hereby grants to City
the below option, exercisable in writing at City's sole election. At any time on or before April
1, 1998, City may extend the service provided by Contractor under this Agreement for a period
of two years until June 30, 2000. Compensation related to such an extension shall be determined
through negotiations between City and Contractor.
(2) It is mutually understood and agreed that all work performed and services
provided under the exercised option shall be in strict compliance with all of the requirements of
this Agreement as such may be amended from time to time by mutual agreement.
(3) It is mutually understood and agreed that City is under no obligation
whatsoever to exercise this option. Such option exercise may be by amendment hereto, or by
issuance of a new agreement.
S. Liquidated Damages
The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided in Exhibit
A, Paragraph 14.
It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this
Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in per-
fonnance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to compensate
for delay.
Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted time period specified in this
Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of
the time specified for the completion of the respective work assignment or Deliverable, the
Contactor shall pay to the City, or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated
Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14 ("Liquidated Damages Rate").
.
WI'C P.IBOMINlNGINEBNIIl.1.G\l346.93
Page S
3O-l 9
Time extensions for delays beyond the Contractor's control, other than delays caused by
the City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior to
the expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when granted, will be based upon the
effect of delays to the work and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless
it can be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work.
.-.
6. Financial Interests of Contractor
A. Contractor is Designated as an FPPC Filer.
If Contractor is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as an "FPPC filer", Contractor is
deemed to be a "Contractor" for the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and
disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Oerk on the required
Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 15 of
Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney.
B. Decline to Participate.
Regardless of whether Contractor is designated as an FPPC Filer, Contractor shall not
make, or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Contractor's position to influence
a governmental decision in which Contractor knows or has reason to know Contractor has a
fmancial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement
C.
Search to Determine Economic Interests.
-,
Regardless of whether Contractor is designated as an FPPC Filer, Contractor warrants and
represents that Contractor has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Contractor's
economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political
Practices Commission, and has determined that Contractor does not, to the best of Contractor's
knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Contractor's duties under this
agreement.
D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Contractor is designated as an FPPC Filer, Contractor further
warrants and represents that Contractor will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest
during the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited by
the Fair Political Practices Act
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Contractor is designated as an FPPC Filer, Contractor further
warrants and represents that Contractor will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if
Contractor learns of an economic interest of Contractor's which may result in a conflict of
interest for the pwpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated
thereunder.
-
WPC P.\HOME'CNOJNEER\BIU.G\l346.93
30 - Ot 0
Page 6
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests.
Contractor warrants and represents that neither Contractor, nor Contractor's immediate
family members, nor Contractor's employees or agents ("Contractor Associates") presently have
any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject matter
of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of
any property which may be the subject matter of the Defmed Services, f'Prohibited Interest"),
other than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 15.
Contractor further warrants and represents that no prorru'ie of future employment,
remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Contractor or
Contractor Associates in connection with Contractor's performance of this Agreement.
Contractor promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of
this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter.
Contractor agrees that Contractor Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited Interest
within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement,
except with the written permission of City.
Contractor may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or
for any third party which may be in conflict with Contractor's responsibilities under this
Agreement, except with the written permission of City.
7. Hold Harmless
Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed
officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense
(including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the conduct of the Contractor, or any
agent or employee, subcontractors, or others in connection with the execution of the work
covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole
willful conduct of the City, its officers, or employees. Contractor's indemnification shall include
any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents,
or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not.
Further, Contractor at its own expense shall, upon written request by the City, defend any such
suit or action brought against the City, its officers, agents, or employees. Contractors'
indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the
Contractor.
8. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Contractor shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
Contractor's obligations under this Agreement, or if Contractor shall violate any of the covenants,
agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate this
Agreement by giving written notice to Contractor of such termination and specifying the effective
date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all
fmished or unfmished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other
materials prepared by Contractor shall, at the option of the City, become the property of the City,
WPC F.\IIOME'ENGlNEER\BJll.G\l346.93
Page 7
30 -c;t \
and Contractor shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work
satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up to the effective date of Notice
of Tennination, not to exceed the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City
by Contractor's breach.
-,
9. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Administrator determines that the Contractors' negligence,
errors, or omissions' in the perfonnance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense
to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions,
Contractor shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein
is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement.
10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific
written notice to Contractor of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least
thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished and
unfmished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City,
become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City as provided
in this paragraph, Contractor shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any
satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to the effective date of such
termination. Contractor hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation
arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
--
11. Assignability
The services of Contractor are personal to the City, and Contractor shall not assign any
interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment
or novation), without prior written consent of City, which City may not unreasonably deny. City
hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the Dermed SelVices identified in Exhibit
A, Paragraph 17 to the subcontractors identified thereat as "Pennitted Subcontractors".
12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems
and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and
exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under
this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Contractor in the
United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have
unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the
Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any
such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this
Agreement.
.
-.
WPC P.IIIOME'CNOINEER\BIUD\1346.93
Page 8
3? - d.~
13. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Contractor shall perform as an
independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Contractor's
work products. Contractor and any of the Contractor's agents, employees or representatives are,
for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be
an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees
are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation
benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits.
14. Administrative Oairns Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City
unless a claim has first been presented in writing and med with the City and acted upon by the
City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by
this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in
the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Contractor shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the
purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
15. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the
prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of the
claim, including costs and attorney's fees.
16. Statement of Costs
In the event that Contractor prepares a report or document, or participates in the
preparation of a report or document in performing the Dermed Services, Contractor shall include,
or cause the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the numbers and cost in
dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or
document.
17. Miscellaneous
A. Contractor not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Contractor shall have no authority to
act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Contractor is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
WPC F~ME'CNGJNEER\BIl1.G\l346.93
Page 9
30- ~3
If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 is marked, the Contractor and/or their principals
is/are licensed with the State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker or
salesperson. Otherwise, Contractor represents that neither Contractor, nor their principals are
licensed real estate brokers or salespersons.
-."
C. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or pennitted to be given pursuant to this
Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall
be deemed tc.' have been properly given or served if personally selVed or deposited in the United
States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt
requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each of the designated
parties.
D. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated
herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the
subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended,
modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against
which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
E. Capacity of Parties
-
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it
has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and
that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this
Agreement.
F. Governing LawNenue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only
in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable,
the Oty of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and
performance hereunder, shall be the Oty of Chula Vista.
[end of page. next page is signature page.]
~,
Page 10
WJIC Jl:'\IIOME'CNGINEB\BJU.O\l346.93
3O-a,4
Signature Page
to
Agreement between City of Cbula Vista and [Name of Contractor]
for
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Contractor have executed this Agreement thereby
indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete
consent to its terms:
Dated:
City of Chula Vista
By:
Tim Nader, Mayor
Attest:
Beverly Authelet, City Oerk
Approved as to form:
Broce M. Boogaard, City Attorney
Dated:
[Name of Contractor]
By:
[name of person, title]
By:
[name of person, title]
Exhibit List to Agreement
(X) Exhibit A
() Exhibit B
WPC P~OME'ENGINEER\BJU.G\l346.93
Page 11
30-~5"
EXHmIT A
TO
AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND
-
1. Effective Date of Agreement:
2. City-Related Entity:
(X) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California
() Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a political subdivision of the
State of California
() Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula Vista, a
() Other:
. a [insert business form]
("City")
-
3. Place of Business for City:
City of Chula Vista,
707 F Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
4. Contractor:
5. Business Form of Contractor:
( ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
( ) Corporation
6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Contractor:
[Address]
[City]
Voice Phone:
Fax Phone:
..-,
WPC P~OME"CNOJNEER\BllLG\l348.93
3:? -a {,p
Page 1
7. General Duties:
Contractor is responsible for the following:
A. Procuring ads from one or more advertisers for display on the exterior of CVT
buses.
B. Placement of ads on CVT buses.
C. Maintenance and repairs of ads on CVT buses.
D. Removal of ads.
E. Repair of any damage to CVT buses caused by ad placement or removal.
8. Scope of Work and Schedule:
A. Detailed Scope of Work:
(1) Contractor shall manage a transit advertising program on the exterior of
CVT buses. Contractor shall be res1>onsible for all 1>hases of this
advertisine: 1>romm. includine: ad 1>rocurement and obtainne: ads;
1>lacement of ads on CVT buses: maintenance. u1>kee1> and re1>air of ads:
removal of ads at the a1>1>ro1>riate time: and re1>air to CVT bus exterior if
damae:ed bv advertisine: dis1>lav a1>1>lication and/or removal.
(2) The Gty reserves the right to require the addition, removal, change of
location, modification or refurbishment of any or all advertising until end
of this agreement Placement of ads shall in no wav interfere with the safe
o1>eration and maintenance of CVT buses.
(3) The City reserves the right to place public service
announcements/advertisements on the exterior of CVT buses if contractor
has not sold advertising space in that location. Should the Gty exercise
its prerogative to use public service announcements on unsold exterior
space, this public service announcement may appear on the bus for a
minimum of four (4) weeks. Contractor shall be responsible for placement
on buses and removal of public serv~e announcements from buses at no
cost to the Gty.
(4) . All advertising materials, advertisements, and manner of presentation may
be subject to approval by the Gty which may disapprove any such items
at its sole discretion.
(5) Contractor shall immediately remove from the bus at its sole cost and
expense any ad which is disapproved by the Gty. Any ad previously
approved which may subsequently be considered objectionable by the Gty
shall likewise be removed. In the event that such disapproved ad is not
WPC p!'BOMINlNGlNEER'BILUN348.93
Page 2
3:)-a.,
removed by the contractor within 24 hours upon receipt of written demand,
the City may cause to be moved said material and the contractor shall pay
all costs and expenses. The City shall not be liable for any damages in
connection therewith.
-
(6) The City will not accept in any fonn the following types of advertising:
liquor, tobacco, political, public art, religious, pornographic, or ads
promoting sexually explicit or oriented products or services.
(7) The City encourages ads for businesses or organizations located in Chula
Vista. The contractor shall make a reasonable effort to procure ads from
these local Chula Vista entities.
(8) The contractor shall adhere to generally accepted principles of advertising
in relationship to good taste and truth in advertising.
(9) The City prefers advertising displays to be placed on the buses by an
adhesive backing. However, if contractor proposes to display ads in
advertising racks, the contractor is responsible for installing all hardware
on the buses. All advertising display hardware (frames, racks, moldings,
etc.) once installed on the transit sy~tem under this contract shall become
the property of the City.
(10) Copies of all advertising contracts between the contractor and advertisers
shall be sent directly to the City on a monthly basis and shall accompany
the monthly advertising revenue payment to City. The information in each
advertising contract required by the City shall include at a minimum: the
number of ads; the size of ads; the cost of each ad; and the tenn of the ad
contract
.-
B. Date for Commencement of Contractor Services:
(X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement
() Other:
C. Dates or Time limits for Delivery of Deliverables:
Deliverable No.1:
Deliverable No.2:
Deliverable No.3:
.
D. Date for completion of all Contractor services: June 30, 1998
.-
WPC P!1IIOMIN1NOJNEEIl\BJU.O\l348.93
~ -a8'
Page 3
9. Insurance Requirements:
(X) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance
(X) Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000.
(X) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000.
(X) EITors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included in Commercial General
Liability coverage).
() BITors and Omissions Insurance: $250,000 (not included in Commercial General
Liability coverage).
10. Buses available to Contractor for exterior advertising space:
A. Nine (9) 30-foot Orion buses
B. Fourteen (14) 35-foot Orion buses
C. Four (4) Goshen buses
D. The 2 sides and rear of each bus may be used for ad space; the front of each bus
is excluded. Therefore, a maximum of three (3) ads may be placed on each CVT
bus.
11. Compensation:
A. () Single Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For performance of all of the Dermed Services by Contractor as herein required, City shall
pay a single fixed fee in the amounts and at the times or milestones or for the Deliverables set
forth below:
Single Fixed Fee Amount:
, payable as follows:
Milestone or Event or Deliverable
Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee
WPC F~MJNlNOINEEll\Bl1J..G\1348.93
Page 4
3o-OlQ
B. (X) Phased Advertising Rate Payment to City.
-.
Contractor shall pay City the amounts shown in the following advertising rate
schedule.
RATE SCHEDULE
FascaI Year Type of Ad
FY 1993-94 King: $ Queen: $ Tail: $ Other: $
FY 1994-95 King: $ Queen: $ Tail: $ Other: $
FY 1995-96 King: $ Queen: $ Tail: $ Other: $
FY 1996-97 King: $ Queen: $ Tail: $ Other: $
FY 1997-98 King: $ Queen: $ Tail: $ Other: $
C. () Hourly Rate Arrangement
For performance of the Dermed Services by Contractor as herein required, City shall pay
Contractor for the productive hours of time spent by Contractor in the performance of said
Services, at the rates or amounts set forth in the Rate Schedule hereinbelow according to the
following terms and conditions:
D. () Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials Arrangement
-
Notwithstanding the expenditure by Contractor of time and materials in
excess of said Maximum Compensation amount, Contractor agrees that Contractor
will perform all of the Dermed Services herein required of Contractor for
$ including all Materials, and other "reimbursables" ("Maximum
Compensation ").
-
WI'C P.'B>MEefGJNI1EIl'IBIU.O\l348.93
30 - ~O
Page S
(1) () Limitation without Further Authorization on Time and Materials
Arrangement
At such time as Contractor shall have incurred time and materials equal to
("Authorization Limit"), Contractor. shall not be entitled to
any additional compensation without further authorization issued in writing and
approved by the City. Nothing herein shall preclude Contractor from providing
additional Services at Contractor's own cost and expense.
Rate Schedule
Category of Employee of Contractor Name Hourly Rate
() Hourly rates may increase by 6% for services rendered after [month],
19_, if delay in providing services is caused by City.
12. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement
For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Contractor in the performance of
services herein required, City shall pay Contractor at the rates or amounts set forth below:
(X) None, the compensation includes all costs.
Cost or Rate
() Reports, not to exceed $
() Copies, not to exceed $
() Travel, not to exceed $
() Printing, not to exceed $
() Postage, not to exceed $
() Delivery, not to exceed $
() Long Distance Telephone Charges,
not to exceed $
() Other Actual Identifiable Direct Costs:
, not to exceed $
, not to exceed $
.
Page 6
WPC p!\HOME\ENGJNEElNJJLLG\l348.93
3D -3 \
13. Contract Administrators:
City:
-
Bill Gustafson, Transit Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
707 F Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Contractor:
14. Liquidated Damages Rate:
() $ per day.
() Other:
15. Statement of Economic Interests, .Contractor Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest
Code:
() Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Flier.
-.
() FPPC Filer
() Category No.1. Investments and sources of income.
() Category No.2. Interests in real property.
() Category No.3. Investments, interest in real property and sources of
income subject to the regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the
department.
() Category. No.4. Investments in business entities and sources of income
which engage in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale
of real property.
() Category No.5. Investments in business entities and sources of income
of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the City
of Chula Vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies,
materials, machinery or equipment.
---
WPC P!\HOMJN:NGINEEIl\BIUD\1348.93
&>-32--
Page 7
() Category No.6. Investments in business entities and sources of income
of the type which, within the past two years,bave contracted with the
designated employee's department to provide services, supplies, materials,
machinery or equipment.
() Category No.7. Business positions.
() List "Contractor Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial
miles of Project Property, if any:
16. () Contractor is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
17. Permitted Subcontractors:
18. Bill Processing:
A. Contractor's payment to the City to be submitted for the following period of time:
(X) Monthly
() Quarterly
() Other:
B. pay of the Period for submission of Contractor payment to City:
() First of the Month
() 15th Day of each Month
() End of the Month
() Other:
C. City's Account Number:
Page 8
WPC P.IHOME'CNOINEEK\BJl.L(JI1348.93
~-3~
19. Security for Perfonnance
I;
-,
(X) Performance Bond, $25,000
() Letter of Credit, $
(X) Other Security:
Type: Fidelity Bond
Amount: $25,000
() Retention. If this space is checked, then notwithstanding other provisions to the
contrary requiring the payment of compensation to the Contractor sooner, the Gty
shall be entitled to retain, at their o}1tion, either the following "Retention
Percentage" or "Retention Amount" until the Gty detennines that the Retention
Release Event, listed below, has occurred:
() Retention Percentage: %
() Retention Amount: $
Retention Release Event:
() Completion of All Contractor Services
() Other:
-
.
-
Page 9
WPC P:'.HO~INEBNlJl1D\1348.93
?::f)-34
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item J)
Meeting Date 12/14/93
SUBMITTED BY:
Consideration of a Draft Work Program
Sphere of Influence Update Study.
tl1t
for the Chula Vista
ITEM TITLE: Report:
REVIEWED BY:
Director of Planning
City Manager rj
4/Sths Vote: Yes_ No X
As previously reported to Council, in August of 1990, the Local Agency Formation Commission
(LAFCO) adopted a city sphere update and amendment policy establishing procedures and a
schedule for reviewing the sphere of influence of all cities on a five year periodic basis.
Pursuant to that policy, on July 12, 1993, LAFCO held a public hearing to consider their
executive officer's preliminary Chula Vista sphere evaluation report, and unanimously approved
commencement of a comprehensive study of the Chula Vista Sphere. That evaluation report was
based substantially upon the City's responses to an earlier LAFCO questionnaire, which "
responses were reviewed by the City Manager and forwarded to Council.
Now that LAFCO has authorized the study, the City (in cooperation with LAFCO) must prepare
a work program and time table for the study. Staff from the Planning Department Advance
Planning Division and Otay Ranch Community Planning Division have held several meetings
with the City Manager's Office and LAFCO staff to identify issues and strategize approaches
to the study. As a result of those discussions, the attached Draft Work Program has been
developed and is being presented for Council consideration and direction.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Accept the attached Draft Work Program; and
2. Instruct staff to conduct a public forum to solicit input/comments on the Draft Work
Program, and return to Council with a Final Work Program in January 1994.
DISCUSSION:
Background
LAFCO is required by state law to adopt a sphere for each city and special district in the
county. A sphere is a plan for the probable ultimate boundaries and service area of a
local government agency (in this case the City), with focus on projected service demands
for the next 10 to 15 years. LAFCO's periodic sphere review process is intended to
increase the sphere's effectiveness as a regional planning tool by keeping it up to date
3/~/
Page 2, Item J )
Meeting Date 12/14/93
in conjunction with changes in land use and growth patterns. Chula Vista's existing
sphere was adopted in 1985.
A Sphere study is typically comprehensive in nature and should review the entire existing
Sphere area, as well as any new areas to be considered for inclusion that will require
urban services now or within the next 15 years. Exhibit A delineates Chula Vista's
existing Sphere of Influence and General Plan Boundaries. Exhibit B delineates the Otay
Ranch Project Area and the proposed Sphere Study Area Boundary in relation to the
City's existing Sphere.
Through the series of meetings held over the last several months with Planning
Department, Baldwin representatives, City Administration and LAFCO staff, the Draft
Chula Vista Sphere Update Work Program (attached as Exhibit C) has been prepared.
In preparing the Draft Work Program, there were several pertinent topics addressed
including proposed boundaries for the overall study area, scope/depth of the study,
staffing and financial considerations, environmental review and timing, particularly as
it relates to the continued processing of approvals for the Otay Ranch Project. The
following sections highlight the main aspects of those topics which are presented in the
attached Draft Work Program.
As a Draft Work Program, staff's intent is to receive Council input and to then proceed
to a public forum which would be jointly hosted by the City and LAFCO. This forum
will serve to notify affected parties and the general public that the City is undertaking the
study, and will allow for identification of issues which may affect the work program.
Staff plans to hold the forum in early January 1994, and return to Council in late January
for approval of a Final Work Program to be submitted to LAFCO.
It is anticipated that the study/update process will take approximately 9 - 12 months to
complete. Staff will provide a detailed time table with the Final Work Program.
Proposed Study Area and Scope
When the City's Sphere was originally adopted in 1985, LAFCO established several
"Special Study Areas" which are depicted on Exhibit A. The largest of those was the
Otay Valley parcel of Otay Ranch, which at the time was designated as "Agriculture and
Reserve" in the City General Plan. The requirement for reviewing this Special Study
designation was the establishment of "urban" land use designations for which municipal
services would be warranted, and thereby necessitating a final sphere determination.
With the recent adoption of the Otay Ranch General Plan Amendment / General
Development Plan, such "urban" land use designations exist and form the basis for a
sphere determination.
In reviewing the existing Sphere area, and patterns of proposed development, staff's
3/-.2
Page 3, Item '3)
Meeting Date 12/14/93
intent is to focus the sphere update principally on the Otay Ranch, with minor exceptions
as noted in the attached work program introduction. One of the primary reasons for this
is that all of the other major project areas (i.e. Eastlake, Salt Creek Ranch, Rancho San
Miguel, etc.) that comprise anticipated development over the next 10 - 15 years, are
already within the City's existing Sphere. Considering development densities and
anticipated timing, those areas of the Otay Ranch to be studied include the Otay Valley
parcel, the Resort area, and the "inverted L" north of Upper Otay Reservoir. An
approximation of this study area boundary is depicted on Exhibit B.
Secondarily, LAFCO requires that lands proposed for sphere inclusion be within the
General Plan of the proposing jurisdiction. Therefore, inclusion of miscellaneous smaller
property holdings has the potential to prolong and complicate the study, as they are
currently not within the City's General Plan Area, and would thereby require evaluation
for General Plan amendment and associated environmental review. The majority of such
properties are situated northeast of Upper Otay Reservoir, although some additional
properties are also interspersed among the Otay Ranch holdings east of the Otay
Reservoirs and extending to Hwy. 94. While some properties may thereby be excluded
from the present sphere study, it should be emphasized that LAFCO' s periodic sphere
review process offers future opportunities in 5-year increments, with the next review
commencing in 1998.
Typically, a sphere study evaluates a larger area than is ultimately proposed for inclusion
in the updated sphere. Such an approach accommodates thorough evaluation of the
longer-range development pattern and service needs, and is based upon topography,
major land features, drainage patterns, and the need for future urban services within the
next 15 years.
Staffing / Financial
Staff intends to prepare the study in-house utilizing staff of the Planning Department's
Advance Planning Division and Otay Ranch Community Planning Division. Given that
the study constitutes a comprehensive review of the entire Sphere, but will be focused
to Otay Ranch, it is anticipated that the work load be split "50/50" between the two
Divisions.
Staff is recommending that a consultant be hired to prepare the Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) for the study. Staff is currently preparing a Request for Proposal (RFP),
and will report to Council on the selection process when the Final Work Program is
presented in January.
The City and the Baldwin Company would proportionately share costs based on the
study's scope and inclusion of territory. Given the proposed study area/focus, it is
anticipated that the majority of the study's total costs would be absorbed by the Baldwin
3/-3
Page 4, Item 3 J
Meeting Date 12/14/93
Company. However, as we are still at the Draft Work Program stage, actual costs
estimates and distributions have not yet been determined. Staff will present that data to
the Council with the Final Work Program in January.
Input from The Baldwin Company
Discussions have been held on several occasions with representatives of the Baldwin
Company. The issues discussed included delineation of the project area, fInancing the
study, staffmg, and timing.
a. Proiect Area. Baldwin's position is to submit the work program to LAFCO
studying the area recommended by staff. During the analysis portion of the
study, the fmal boundary of the area(s) proposed for actual inclusion in the sphere
would be a smaller area to achieve the criteria of LAFCO.
b. Financing: the Studv. Baldwin's position is that they would be responsive to
financing their fair share of the study. Additional discussions will be necessary
with all the concerned parties, and costs estimates need to be prepared before
. beginning the study.
c. Timing. Baldwin's position is to facilitate processing of the Sphere Study, and
avoid delays which may be presented by including other non-general planned
areas into the Sphere Study.
Input from LAFCO
Discussions have also been held on several occasions with LAFCO staff to receive their
input and direction on developing the work program, with the following results:
a. Proiect Area. LAFCO staff concurs with the study area recommended by staff.
However, given the irregular shape of the Otay Ranch holdings, they have
requested that the study boundary be modifIed as necessary to make it coincident
with more logical sphere planning geographies, such as ridgelines, drainage
basins, etc.
Staff has agreed, and is in the process of reviewing various resource maps to
determine the specific configuration of such a boundary. Based upon further
review with LAFCO and the County, staff will present a fmalized study area
boundary to Council with the Final Work Program in January. In the interim,
an approximation of such a study area boundary is shown on Exhibit B.
.
b. Preoaration of the EIR. LAFCO staff has suggested that the EIR be structured
to present the study area as several sub-areas. Such a structure is envisioned to
3/-1
Page 5, Item 3/
Meeting Date 12/14/93
provide increased flexibility for the LAFCO Board, and the City Council, for
possibly considering alternate boundaries for the sphere update, and eventual
phased annexations, at the time of public hearing.
City staff concurs, and has provided for such sub-area structuring in the attached
Draft Work Program.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Baldwin Company has agreed to fund both the Sphere Study and the EIR in a "fair share",
proportionate manner based on the study's scope and inclusion of territory. As the study's
primary focus will be to Otay Ranch, it is anticipated that a large portion of the efforts will be
the responsibility of The Baldwin Company. Any City costs would be General Fund supported.
Absent development of a Final Work Program, and responses to the RFP from consultant firms,
the overall costs and their proportioning between the City and The Baldwin Company are not
known at this time. However, both the Draft Work Program and RFP have been structured to
identify those aspects of the work are and are not specific to Otay Ranch in order to enable
proportioning of costs, once known. Staff will be focusing on these fiscal issues over the next
several weeks, and will present more detailed cost information when Council considers the Final
Work Program in January 1994.
(sphdrwpLa13)
~
3/-}J
1
I 0'
I 0
of
0
III
1ft
:II
so
-
..
..
..
j 0
::;
! "i
0
I "
0
:z:
c:
,..
:.
<
;;;
...
:.
...
,..
:.
z
z
i
Q
c
1ft
"
:.
:II
...
I:
1ft
Z ..
... .!
I
I
"
".l
"!,
01[mmn f I
p:U 'll -.
:g 3 i' ~ 0 ~
ji!.';;- ~ ca
_ ~ E' CD ~ :'03
~IQ 2,:! ,0
~ ~,~ a" :' S
>0 ~ ,Q,
CD 0" m
!I' og ..
.,\" It -.
.!, CD
og en
III . .
;; ;1,
l>.Q.. ! 0
'CD
"C
....
.
0(')
"C-
::r(l
CD
CD 2-
00
,- ::r
5'5.
_m
c<
CD -
~ en
n m
CD
'm
<'
m
C
m
....
o'
~
...
co
fA)
N
..
...
..
~
'"
.
..
~
EXHIBIT-i
-
Y j--?
"
III
n
III
Ii
.
..
:JI
..
':0
lillmi
0.
00
'0 ;::;:
:Zl<
~ 0
CD ...
o 0
....:z
c
5'ii
....
c~
CD fit
::s ....
nQ)
CD
c
'0
.~
Q)
....
.CD
o
2'
'~
',<
-
..
..
..
n
~
-<
o
."
n
%
c
,.
.
<
in
-I
.
"
,.
.
z
z
Z
g
"
III
"
='
o !i:t !.~
;- i.g c;-
'C .0 .=
= ~: ~=
::I .,0.. en
ft en en '1II1l1
~ ~-g. g.;
:~ ii
~. · 0
. . 0 i.-
... .
.
· r-
: I
. I
: I
.
. I
. I
. I
: I
t-I
..,
.J
l,
. I
. I
'.
"i
..
"
co
f
I
r
I
I
c: I
. I
Ii !
c
!:
~
I
i.
.. II
-
" I
C!
i
EXHIBIT B
CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE STUDY - 1993
DRAFT WORK PROGRAM
(December 1993)
Introduction
In August of 1990, the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) adopted
a city sphere of influence update and amendment policy which established procedures and
a calendar for reviewing the sphere of influence for all cities in the county on a five year
periodic basis. This periodic review process is intended to increase the sphere's
effectiveness as a regional planning tool by keeping them up..to-date in conjunction with
changes in land use and growth patterns. Pursuant to LAFCO's calendar, the Chula Vista
Sphere of Influence is being studied for the purpose of update. Initiation of the sphere
review process involves the City's preparation, in cooperation with LAFCO, of a work
program and time table for the Study. This document presents that work program and time
table.
LAFCO, in reviewing areas proposed for inclusion in the sphere, will analyze the proposal
based upon criteria established in the Cortese/Knox Act and in LAFCO's Sphere of
Influence guidelines. LAFCO's goals are to encourage compact development, to
discourage the premature conversion of open space and agricultural lands, and to
encourage the orderly development and expansion of local agencies, such as the City of
Chula Vista.
In addition, the following factors are important in determining an appropriate sphere:
. present and planned land uses;
. need for city services;
. capability of the city to provide services;
. social and economic communities of interest;
. cost of services;
. impact on adjacent agencies and services;
. consistency with general plans; and
. natural boundaries.
Pursuant to LAFCO policy, the Sphere study is comprehensive in nature and should review
the entire existing Sphere area, as well as any new areas to be considered for inclusion
that require urban services now or within the next 15 years. Typically, a sphere study
evaluates a larger area than is ultimately proposed for inclusion in the updated sphere.
Such an approach accommodates thorough evaluation of longer-range development
patterns and service needs.
The following discussions are intended to preface the work program outline presented on
the subsequent pages:
-1-
3;-;
Study Area Boundaries -
Attachment A delineates areas within the City of Chula Vista's existing Sphere of Influence
(originally adopted in 1985), and areas within the City's current municipal and General Plan
boundaries. The purpose of a Sphere of Influence Study is to determine a recommended
boundary for the City of Chula Vista Sphere which encompasses land that will require
urban services now or within the next 15 years.
Otav Ranch
In reviewing the existing Sphere area, and patterns of proposed development, staffs
intent is to focus the sphere update principally on select sub-areas of the Otay
Ranch. One of the reasons for this focus is that all of the other major project areas
(Le. Eastlake, Salt Creek Ranch, Rancho San Miguel, etc.) that comprise
anticipated development over the next 10 - 15 years, are already within the City's
existing Sphere. Furthermore, given the 30-40 year buildout timeframes for the
Otay Ranch project, and varying density of development, many of the more rural,
eastern reaches of the project area are not envisioned to be built within the 15 year
horizon of the sphere study, and/or to need urban levels of services from Chula
Vista. An approximation of the intended sphere study area is depicted on
Attachment B.
In addition to the Otay Ranch, the Study will also address the Watson property
which is already within the City's General Plan Area but not the sphere, and the
existing sphere "Special Study Areas" designated by LAFCO in 1985.
Despite this larger study area, the final sphere area recommended for LAFCO's
consideration will likely be smaller, since some of the lands within this larger study
area may not presently meet the LAFCO factors for sphere inclusion at this time.
For example, the development densities may not necessitate urban services, or
anticipated development timing may be beyond the 15-year horizon of the update
process. Study of the larger area will clarify current unknowns regarding longer
term development timing and related urban service provision/financing issues, and
thereby provide the guidance necessary to determine an appropriate sphere
boundary.
"Outoarcels"
LAFCO requires that lands proposed for sphere inclusion be within the General Plan
of the proposing jurisdiction. At present, there are miscellaneous smaller property
holdings adjacent to the Otay Ranch project area that are currently not within the
City's General Plan Area, and would thereby require evaluation for General Plan
amendment and associated environmental review. The majority of such properties
are situated northeast of Upper Otay Reservoir, although some additional properties
are also interspersed among the Otay Ranch holdings east of the Otay Reservoirs
and extending to Hwy. 94. While some properties may thereby be excluded from
-2-
JJ~/O
the present sphere study, it should be emphasized that LAFCO's periodic sphere
review process offers future opportunities in 5-year increments, with the next review
commencing in 1998. Staff envisions interested property owners using this interim
period to address the necessary general planning and environmental review work
in expectation of consideration in future sphere review/update efforts.
LAFCO Soecial Studv Areas
As previously noted, LAFCO will also require that the sphere study review the
existing sphere area, in particular the four "Special Study Areas" established when
the sphere was originally adopted in 1985. Those areas include the SR54 corridor
with National City west of 1-805, National City's area of jurisdiction in southern San
Diego Bay, the Otay River Valley area east of 1-805 south of Otay Valley Rd. in the
City of San Diego, and the western parcel of Otay Ranch.
Given the intended focus to Otay Ranch, and the fact that many issues surrounding
the special study areas remain unresolved, staff will conduct a more basic
evaluation of conditions and propose removal of the special study status, with the
adopted sphere boundary remaining as is (Otay Ranch's western parcel excepted).
LAFCO policy provides that. sphere/boundary issues between two cities can be
addressed at any time, independent of the five-year comprehensive sphere review
cycle. This would enable the City to focus the current study mainly on Otay Ranch,
and at the same time retain our ability to study these areas when conditions warrant
such.
Studv Schedule
It is anticipated that the overall study effort, including the proposal and adoption of an
updated sphere boundary will take approximately one year. The last page of the
subsequent work program outline presents a tentative timeline for major tasks.
(sph-drft. wp)
-3-
3/-//
DRAFf 1994 SPHERE OF INFLUENCE WORK PROGRAM
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
LIST OF TABLES
liST OF EXHIBITS
I. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
A Purpose and Scope of the Sphere of Influence and EIR
A 1. Introduction: Purpose of Document
A2. LAFCO and the Sphere of Influence
A.3. CEQA Requirements
B. Subregional History of Sphere of Influence/Annexations
B.1. Chula Vista: Sphere of Influence Amendments
B.2. Chula Vista: Recent Annexations
B.3. City of Chula Vista Sphere/Annexation Policies
BA. County Board Policy I-55
B.5. City of San Diego Sphere/Annexation Policies
C. Project Summary
C.1. Project Location
C.2. Project History
C.3. Project Objectives
CA. Sphere of Influence Planning Area
C.5. Recommended Sphere of Influence
D. User's Guide
II. EXISTING PLANS AND POLICIES
A Introduction
B. San Diego LAFCO
C. City of Chula Vista Plans and Policies
D. County of San Diego Plans and Policies
E. City of San Diego Plans and Policies
F. Regional Circulation/Mobility
ID. PROJECf AREA
A Otay Valley Parcel Area
Sub Areas:
A 1. Otay Ranch Villages 1-12. 18b
A2. Eastlake Swap Properties
A.3. Otay Mesa Industrial Areas
3)-'/2
A4. County Landfill
B. Resort Area
Sub Areas:
B.l. Resort Village
B.2. MPE Parcel
B.3. Daley Properties
C. Proctor Valley Area
Sub Areas:
c.l. North Proctor Valley
C.2. Reverse L Parcel
C.3. South Proctor Valley
C.4. Watson Properties - South
D. San Ysidro West Area
Sub Areas:
D.l. San Ysidro West Village
D.2. Helix/Lambron/Mc Bain Properties
E. Lower Otay Reservoir
F. Palm Avenue-Special Study Area 207
G. Broadway-Special Study Area
H. SR 54 and National City
IV. REGIONAL OPEN SPACE/RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
A Otay Ranch Resource Preserve and RMP
B. MSCP
C. NCCP
V. AGRICULTURE
A Introduction
B. lAFCO Agricultural Policy
C. City of Chula Vista Agricultural Plans and Policies
D. County Agricultural Plans and Policies
E. City of San Diego Agricultural Plans and Policies
F. Existing Conditions
G. Environmental Review
G.l. Environmental Impacts
G .2. Significance of Impacts
G.3. Mitigation Measures
VI. PUBliC FACIUTIES AND SERVICES
A Otay Valley Analysis
A 1 Access
J) - /}
A2 Drainage Basins
A3 Water
A4 Sewage
AS Police
A6 Fire and Emergency Medical
A.7 Schools
A8 Postal
A9 Health and Medical
A 10 Parks and Recreation
B. Resort
B.I Access
B.2 Drainage Basins
B.3 Water
BA Sewage
B.S Police
B.6 Fire and Emergency Medical
B. 7 Schools
B.8 Postal
B.9 Health and Medical
B.IO Parks
C. Reverse Land Watson Property
C.l Access
C.2 Drainage Basins
C.3 Water
CA Sewage
C.5 Police
C.6 Fire and Emergency Medical
C.7 Schools
C.8 Postal
C.9 Health and Medical
C.IO Parks
VII. SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY IDENTITY
A Postal Services
B. School District Boundaries
C. Newspaper Service
D. Cable Service
E. Regional Public Services
F. Hospital Services
G. Access
3/ -Ii
-"- ,... '"'~_.^'~."~"...~-,,~_....--~~~._-".~._----,,~-"'.'""._----
H. Impact Analysis
H.1. Otay Valley Parcel Area
H.2. Resort Area
I. Growth Inducement
I. 1. Related Projects
J. Air Quality
K. Circulation/Mobility
VIII. FISCAL IMP ACfS
A Introduction
B. Summary of Fiscal impacts
C. FIND Model
D. Fiscal Impacts by Sub Area
D.1. Otay Valley Parcel Area
D.2. Resort Area
IX. RECOMMENDATION
X. SOURCES
A. Agencies and Staff Consulted
B. References
XI. APPENDICES
XII. TECHNICAL REPORTS
/
J/,-/->
"------,..._..~.....~~,~",.~~~-~."---~-_.-'~--_.-..-. - _.._"~-,,^,,._,~~--
PROPOSED TENTATIVE
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY SCHEDULE
NOV. 24
NOV. 29-DEC. 3
DEC. 14
JAN. 1
JAN. 10-14
JAN. 25
FEB. 11
FEB. 22
FEB. 23-June 1
JUNE-JULY 1994
AUGUST 10
AUGUST 23
SEPTEMBER 1
DECEMBER 1994
(sp-alenl.sch)
Discuss study approach/strategy and work program logistics with
LAFCO staff.
Finalize Draft Work Program.
Report to City Council on:
proposed approach to study and Draft Work Program
outline.
LAFCO input on above.
authorization to proceed to public forum.
Publish notice of first Public Forum.
City and LAFCO hold joint public forum to present proposed City
approach to study and Draft Work Program, and receive
reaction/in put.
Report to City Council on:
outcome of public forum / issues.
Final Work Program and schedule for study.
the RFP for preparation of the EIR.
Hold Study kick-off meeting with all parties to finalize/clarify roles,
relationships, responsibilities, etc.
Report to Council presenting results of RFP process and
awarding EIR contract.
Prepare Draft Study document and Draft EIR.
(monthly progress/discussion meetings to be held with all involved
parties in March, April and May).
Compile final study and sphere proposal and DSEIR, route for
comments, and hold public forum(s).
Planning Commission public hearing.
City Council public hearing.
Submit for LAFCO processing and consideration.
LAFCO public hearing and adoption of the sphere update.
JI-/?