HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1993/12/07
"1 declare under penalty of perjury that ""I am
emDlo\'ed bv the itv of Cl1ula Vista in the
.'~" '.
0;'/1co {y;: tr>r! '[i..-;.rk r~}lJ t~at i :")ost.ed
Tuesday, December 7, 1993
4:00 p.m.
n
L~e on thC1 8ulletin 01: Council Chambers
Dt Ci;:I....~,81l c[l.Public Services Building
/1- ~ _____"
Re
CALL TO ORDER
1.
ROIL CAlL:
Councilmembers Fox -' Horton _' Moore -' Rindone _' and Mayor
Nader _
2. PLEDGE OF AlLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SII.ENf PRAYER
3.
APPROVAL OF MINl.ITES:
November 16, 1993 (Council), November 16, 1993 (Joint
Council/RDA), November 23, 1993 (Council), and November 23,
1993 (Joint Council/RDA)
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Selection of Mayor Pro Tempore.
b. Oath of Office:
Charter Review Committee - Janet Lawry;
Child Care Commission - Angie Gish.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 11)
The staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by the
Council by one motion without discussion unless a Councilmember, a member of the publU: or City staff requests
that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a -Request to
Speak Form- available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form
to speak in favor of the staff recOl1lJ'1U!TUlati 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 publU: will be the first items of business.
5. WRlTfEN COMMUNICATIONS: None submitted.
6.A.
ORDINANCE 2579
ESfABUSHING AN INTERIM PRE-SR-l25 DEVELOPMENT IMPACf FEE TO
PAY FOR TRANSPORTATION FACIUTIES IN THE CITY'S EASTERN
TERRITORIES (first readin~) - On 11/9/93, 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 1/1/95. Staff recommends
Council place the ordinances on first reading. (Director of Public Works)
B.
ORDINANCE 2580
AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2251, RElATING TO DEVELOPMENT
IMPACf FEE TO PAY FOR TRANSPORTATION FACIUTIES IN TIIE CITY'S
EASTERN TERRITORIES (first readin~)
Agenda
-2-
December 7, 1993
7. RESOLUTION 17321 APPROVING 1993 CHRIS1MAS TREE RECYCl.JNG PROGRAM AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS TI-IEREFOR - Historically, the City has sponsored
a community recycling program for Christmas trees with donations of
equipment and labor from Laidlaw Waste Systems and free acceptance of
the trees in the County's "Clean Green" program operated at the Otay
Landfill. Due to elimination of "charity passes" (allocations of free
services), the County will be only able to accept the trees at the "Clean
Green" rate of $25/ton. The report describes the program and appropriates
funds from the Waste Management Trust Fund to ensure that the program
will continue this Holiday Season. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Administration) 4/Sth's vote required.
8. RESOLUTION 17322 DESIGNATING AND AUTIIORIZlNG REPRESENTATIVE AGENTS FOR THE
CllYS APPUCATION FOR PUBUC DISASfER ASSISTANCE FUNDS - The
resolution designates agents authorized to act on behalf of the City to file
an application for public disaster assistance funds for emergency response
to wildland fires in October 1993. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Fire Chief)
9. RESOLUTION 17323 APPROVING INfERJURISDICTIONAL PRETREATMENT AGREEMENT
WIlli THE Cl1Y OF SAN DIEGO, AND AUTIIORIZlNG MAYOR TO
EXEClITE SAME - In 1987, the City of San Diego began efforts to have
Interjurisdictional Pretreatment Agreements executed with each of the
agencies whose sewage is handled through the Point Loma Waste
Treatment Plan. The Environmental Protection Agency and the California
Water Quality Control Board must both be satisfied that San Diego has the
legal authorization to implement pretreatment standards required under
Federal regulations. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Director of Public Works)
10. RESOLUTION 17324 APPROVING THE AGREEMENT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SUBDMSION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK. AND
AUTIIORIZlNG MAYOR TO EXEClITE SAME - On 9/19/89, Council
approved a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with Otay Rio Business
Park, a joint venture, for the construction of public improvements
associated with Tract 87-6, Otay Rio Business Park. The improvements
constructed pursuant to the agreement did not meet City standards and
require an implementation agreement for the maintenance and repair of
said improvements in order to release the bond for material and labor and
the bond for survey monumentation installation. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
11. REPORT APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE
TO REVIEW THE CITY'S CONDmONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS - On
10/5/93, the Council directed staff to contact specified organizations and
individuals to serve on an ad hoc advisory committee, to work with staff
in a comprehensive review of the City's conditional use permit process.
The Committee is to consist of representatives of the Planning Commission,
Economic Development Commission, Resource Conservation Commission,
Chamber of Commerce, and three at-large members. Staff recommends
Council accept the report and appoint the individuals listed in the staff
report. (Director of Planning)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
Agenda
-3-
December 7, 1993
PUBIJC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The foHowing items have been advertised and/or posted as publU: hearings as required by law. If you wish to speak
to any item, please fill out the -Request to Speak Form- available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior
to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommeru.lLltion complete the pink form
to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per indiviLluaL
12. PUBIJC HEARING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENr GPA-92-03 AND GPA-93-Q4: REQUEST TO
AMEND TI-IE GENERAL PLAN FOR TI-IE 161 ACRE "EAS11.AKE LAND
SWAP- PORTION OF TI-IE OTAY RANCH PROJECT AND 74 ACRES
IMMEDIATELY ADJACENTWITI-lINTI-IEEASTI..AKE GREENS COMMUNIlY
- APPUCANT IS EASTI.AKE DEVELOPMENr COMPANY - 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 11/16/93 meeting.
A. RESOLUTION 17308 RECERTIFYING TI-IE FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENfAL IMPACT
REPORT (FPER 90-01) FOR TI-IE OTAY RANCH PROJECT; AMENDING
TI-IE GENERAL PLAN OF TI-IE OlY FOR TI-IE 161 ACRE EASTI.AKE LAND
SWAP; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT PURSUANT TO TI-IE
CAIJFORNIA ENVIRONMENfAL QUAUlY ACT; READOPTING A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; READOPTING
A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
B. RESOLUTION 17309 AMENDING TI-IE GENERAL PLAN FOR 74 ACRES LOCATED WITHIN TI-IE
EASTI..AKE GREENS COMMUNIlY," SOUTH OF EASTI..AKE HIGH SCHOOL
AND ON BOrn SIDES OF TI-IE EXTENSION OF EASTI..AKE PARKWAY
13. PUBUC HEARING PCC-94-09: APPEAL OF TI-IE DEOSION OF TI-IE PLANNING COMMISSION
TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-94-09 - 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.
The appeal was based on claims that child welfare, security, and safety
issues had not been adequately addressed; that the Planning Commission
made a facility use decision based on accepted planning practice that did
not address the unique circumstances of the project; and that the basis for
the approval of a five-year conditional use permit was the business
agreement between the building owner and the applicant. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning)
RESOLUTION 17325 DENYING TI-IE APPEAL OF TI-IE DEOSION OF TI-IE PLANNING
COMMISSION AND ISSUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-94-09 TO USE
2400 FENTON STREET IN TI-IE EASTI.AKE BUSINESS CENTER AS A
PRIVATE SCHOOL FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS
Agenda
14.
PUBIJC HEARING
-4-
December 7, 1993
PCM-94-06: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO TIIE OLYMPIC
TRAINING CENfER (OTe) SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN AND
PUBIJC FACIIJTIES FINANCING PLAN (PFFP) - On 8/10/93, the San Diego
National Sports Training Foundation filed an application requesting
consideration of amendments to the SPA Plan and PFFP texts as well as
their original conditions of approval. The recommended SPA and PFFP
Amendments would allow the construction of Phase I priority buildings and
sports venues prior to completion of permanent off-site road and utility
service infrastructure to serve the project site. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Director of Planning and Director of Public Works)
RESOLUTION 17326 RECERTIFYING TIIE SUPPLEMENTAL EIR FOR TIIE OLYMPIC TRAINING
CENfER SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN, (SEIR89-11), CONSIDERING
AN ADDENDUM TIIERETO, AMENDING TIIE OLYMPIC TRAINING
CENfER SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN AND PUBIJC FACIIJTIES
FINANCING PLAN AND RE-ADOPTING TIIE CEQAFINDINGS, MITIGATION
MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM AND STATEMENf OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS ON SEIR-89-11
15.
PUBIJC HEARING
16.
PUBIJC HEARING
ORDINANCE 2582
RECONSIDERATION OF TIIE REQUEST BY AMERICAN STORES, INC. FOR
5.8 ACRES LOCATED AT TIlE SOUTI-IWEST CORNER OF TIllRD AVENUE
AND - J" STREET - The item is a reconsideration of the previously approved
amendment to the General Plan and rezoning of 5.8 acres located at the
southwest comer of Third Avenue and "J" Street. The General Plan
Amendment redesignates the subject site from Professional and
Administrative Office to Retail Commercial and rezones from CoO
(Commercial Office) and R-l (Single Family Residential) to C-C-P (Central
Commercial Precise Plan). Staff recommends Council open the public
hearing and take testimony. (Director of Planning)
CONSIDERING ORDINANCE ESTABIJSl-llNG TELEGRAPH CANYON
SEWER PUMPED FLOWS DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (DIF) TO PAY FOR
SEWER IMPROVEMENfS WITl-llN TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER BASIN
AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR
CONSTRUCTION IN TIlE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER BASIN - On
10120/92, the City established the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Development
Impact Fee. Based on the "Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement
and Financing Plan Amendment Incorporating Pumped Flows" a fee of
$560 per pumped EDU should be established. Staff recommends Council
place ordinance on first reading. (Director of Public Works)
ESTABIJSl-llNG TIlE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER PUMPED FLOWS
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR SEWER IMPROVEMENfS
WITl-llN TIlE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER BASIN AS A CONDITION OF
ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN TIlE
TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER PUMPED FLOWS BASIN (first readin~)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general pub/U; 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 yeHow -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 foHow up action. Your time is limited to three minutes per speaker.
Agenda
-5-
December 7, 1993
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
None submitted.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by the
Council, staff, or members of the general pub/iJ:.. The items will be considered individually by the Council and staff
recOl1U'TU!1lLlati may in certain cases be presented in the altemative. Those who wish to speak, please fill out
a -Request to Speak" form available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Public
comments are limited to five minutes.
17. RESOLUTION 17327 ENDORSING TI-fE CITY'S APPUCATION TO TI-fE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE (DOJ) FOR A GRANT FROM TI-fE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
FROM TI-fE POUCE l-llRING SUPPLEMENT PROGRAM TO FUND ONE-
HALF TI-fE COST OF TI-fE CITY'S COPPS PROGRAM FOR TI-IREE YEARS -
The DOJ's Police Hiring Supplement Program makes available a total of
$150 million to underwrite innovative strategies for preventing and
controlling crime. The Police Department developed the proposed program
with the assistance of the Library, the Department of Building and
Housing, the HUman Services Council, and South Bay Community Services.
If the proposal is selected for funding, the Police Department will develop
a multi-disciplinary, community-oriented Policing and Problem Solving
Team. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Chief of Police)
18. REPORT UPDATE ON SOUD WASTE DISPOSAL ISSUES - An oral report will be
given by staff.
ITEMS PULLED FROM TI-fE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council wiD discuss items which have been removed from the Consent Calendar. Agenda
items puIled at the request of the public wiD be considered prior to those pulled by Councilmembers. Public
comments are limited to five minutes per indiviJJuaL
OTI-IER BUSINESS
19. CI1Y MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
Agenda
-6-
December 7, 1993
20. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
a. Reconsideration of San Diego Walmart lawsuit settlement.
21. COUNCIL COMMENfS
Councilmember Rindone
a. Application by the City to the International Council ofLocal Environmental Initiative (I CLEI)
a "Green Fleets" program.
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 11/23/93.
Pending and potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - City of Chula Vista
vs. the County of San Diego and Aptec.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - City of Chula Vista vs. San Diego
Palm Plaza Project.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Chaparral Greens vs. Baldwin,
the County of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista.
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) a Special Meeting on Wednesday, December
8, 1993 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room and thence to the Regular City Council Meeting on
December 14, 1993 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
A Special Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the
City Council meeting.
December 2, 1993
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Sid W. Morris, Assistant City Manager9~
City Council Meeting of December 7, 1993
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council
meeting scheduled for Tuesday, December 7, 1993. There are no Written
Communications on this agenda.
SWM:mab
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item (p
Meeting Date 12/7/93
Ordinance ~7 '1 Adopting an interim pre-SR-l25
development impact fee (first reading)
a.
b.
Ordinance ,;.5lr tJ Amending Ordinance 2251 of the City of
Chula Vista relating to a Transportation Development Impact Fee
to pay for transportation facilities in the City's Eastern Area (first
reading)
Director of PUbli.C W orks~
City ManageULt ~~l
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
On November 9, 1993, Council held a public hearing regarding amending 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 January 1, 1995.
Staff is now returning with new versions of the proposed ordinances that implement Council's
direction for a first reading. The reason that these ordinances are presented for first reading
is that they differ substantially from the previous ordinances and the City Attorney has
indicated that they need to be resubmitted for a first reading.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the ordinances implementing the Interim SR-125
Development Impact Fee and amending the Transportation Development Impact Fee.
BOARDS AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable.
The Transportation Development Impact Fee (TransDIF) ordinance has been revised to adjust
the proposed fees based on the delay in increasing the fees until January 1, 1995, resulting in
a proposed fee increase from $3,815 to $3,988 per EDU The attached addendum to the
Engineers Report for the TransDIF shows how the revised fee amount was developed. The
major components of the adjustment in fee amount involve estimating the effects of inflation
based on a 4% inflation factor and estimating the effects of having a reduced pool of
participants in 1995, based on an estimate of 1,500 EDUs of building permits issued during
the next year. This is consistent with the methodology used in developing the interim SR-l25
fee as presented at the November 9 hearing, and is consistent with growth estimates provided
by developers in testimony at the hearing.
Staff is aware that there may be some questions regarding these growth projections, given the
exceedingly slow growth rate experienced over the past few years. At the hearing, Council
directed staff to return in 9 months with a report regarding the actual growth experienced
&-/
Page 2, Item t,
Meeting Date 12/7/93
during this time. In this interim, staff will be working with a committee consisting of the City
staff and the developers to review the economic climate and to hire a consultant to assist in
obtaining outside funding. It is staff s intent to provide Council with a complete report at that
time, which identifies what the appropriate fee should be, and asking Council to enact that fee
(if it differs significantly from the proposed fee). Thus, the fees proposed will, if necessary,
be adjusted when staff returns with the report.
The significant change with respect to the interim SR-125 ordinance is regarding the
disposition of collected funds. Staff believes that the program proposed by the HNTB study
is sound, but represents one particular growth scenario. Should growth occur in a different
pattern, or if evolving traffic patterns suggest that different projects might solve traffic
problems more effectively, staff believes that there should be some flexibility in the ordinance
allowing for changes in programs, although such changes would only be made with Council
approval following a public hearing. An additional potential program change might be
financial participation in the toll road. Since any of the programs contemplated, including the
toll road participation, would be aimed at providing additional capacity in the circulation
system, staff does not believe this is a departure from the' intent of the adopted program.
Also attached to this report are addenda to the Engineer's Report regarding the TransDIP and
the SR-125 DIP. These addenda reflect changes discussed in this report.
At the November 9 hearing, Council also requested that staff look into the possibility of
waiving fees for projects that will produce jobs. Staff will be responding to that request as a
separate issue in the near future.
FISCAL IMPACT: Over the 15-20 years that the current program will be financing facilities,
implementation of the ordinances include collection of 5% of the TransDIf fee for "DIP
Support" and 2% of the SR-125 fee for administration. Of the 5% DIP support (which
amounts to 5% of the $97.7 million program or approximately $4.9 million), approximately
$2 million would be used for administration by City staff, and approximately $2.9 million for
support, studies, monitoring and other associated activities by consultants. Likewise, for the
SR-125 program, 2% of the $16.4 million program or $330,000 would be for administration
by City Staff. Therefore, the City would realize approximately $2.3 million to compensate it
for staff activities and $2.9 million to compensate the City for consultant services.
CST:HX-OOl
WPC F:\home\engineerlagendalsr125.ord
b~2
ADDENDUM TO
"INTERIM STATE ROUTE 125 FACILITY FEASffiILITY STUDY" REPORT
(Dated May, 1993)
Current Program Cost (Table 4.4.4)
Delete Segments 6 & 7
Subtotal
$27,953,000
($13,343,000)
$14,610,000
Financing Costs
Adjusted Program Cost (1/95)
$2,504,000
$17,114,000
Current Area of Benefit (AOB) (Table 8.2)
Est. Permits issued prior to 1/94
Est permits 1/94-1/95
Remaining Area of Benefit
22,831 EDUs
( 460)
(1,500)
20,871 ED Us
Proposed Fee
$17,114,000
20,871 EDU
$820
Fee applicable effective January 1, 1995
Development Type
Single Family Detached Dwelling
Single Family Attached Dwelling
Multi-Family Dwelling
Commercial
Industrial
Religious Institutional
Transportation Fee
$820Dwelling Unit
$656/Dwelling Unit
$492/Dwelling Unit
$20,500/Gross Acre
$ 16,400/Gross Acre
$ 15,992/Gross Acre
~'3
ADDENDUM TO
"EASTERN AREA DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FOR STREETS" REPORT
(Dated November 9, 1993)
Current Program Cost (Table 3)
Inflation factor (4%)
Subtotal
$98,128,585
$3,925,143
$102,053,728
DIF revenues projected to 1/95
Adjusted Program Cost (1/95)
$3,090,600
$98,963,128
Current Area of Benefit (AOB) (Table 1)
Est. Permits issued prior to 1/94
Est permits 1/94-1/95
Pennits with EDU credits
Remaining Participants
25,722
(220)
1500 EDU
-750 EDU
750 EDU
(750)
24,752
Proposed Fee
$98,963,128
24,752 EDU
$3,998
Fee applicable effective January 1. 1995
Development Type
Single Family Detached Dwelling
Single Family Attached Dwelling
Multi-Family Dwelling
Commercial
Industrial
Religious Institutional
Golf Course
Medical Center
Olympic Training Center (OTC)
Adjacent to O.T.c.
Transportation Fee
$3,998/Dwelling Unit
$3, 198/Dwelling Unit
$2,399/Dwelling Unit
$99,950/Gross Acre
$79,960/Gross Acre
$ 15,992/Gross Acre
$3,198/Gross Acre
$259,870/Gross Acre
$13,313/Gross Acre
$139,930/Gross Acre
t-i
ORDINANCE NO. 2579
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA,
ESTABLISHING AN INTERIM PRE-SR125 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE TO PAY FOR TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES IN THE CITY'S
EASTERN TERRITORIES
WHEREAS, the City's General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements require that adequate,
safe transportation facilities be available to accommodate the increased traffic created by new
development, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that potential delays in the construction of State
Route (SR) 125 by CALTRANS or others will adversely impact the City's ability to accommodate said
increased traffic, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that new development within the Eastern
Territories will create adverse impacts on the City's transportation system which must be mitigated by
the financing and construction of certain transportation facilities identified in this Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that a reasonable means of financing the
transportation facilities is to levy a fee on all development in the Eastern Territories of the City, and
WHEREAS, the fee has been justified by the financial and engineering study entitled "Interim
State Route 125 Facility Feasibility Study" dated May 1993, and prepared by Howard Needles Tammen
& Bergendoff ("Study").
WHEREAS, the financial and engineering study and the City's General Plan show that the
transportation network will be adversely impacted by new development within the Eastern Territories
unless new transportation facilities are added to accommodate the new development, and
WHEREAS, the financial and engineering study and the City's General Plan establish that the
transportation facilities necessitated by development in the Eastern Territories comprises an integrated
network, and
WHEREAS, developers of land within the Eastern Territories should be required to mitigate the
burden created by development through the construction of transportation facilities within the boundaries
of the development, the construction of those transportation facilities outside the boundaries of the
development which are needed to provide service to the development in accordance with City standards,
and the payment of a fee to finance the development's portion of the total cost of the transportation
network, and
Page 1
~A//
WHEREAS, all development within the Eastern Territories contribute to the cumulative burden
on the transportation network in direct relationship to the amount of traffic originated by or destined
for the development, and
WHEREAS, the amount of traffic generated has been determined based upon average daily trips
for various land areas based upon studies conducted by SANDAG (commercial trips being modified to
eliminate passerby trips) and verified by the financial and engineering study prepared for the purposes
of this fee, and
WHEREAS, the SANDAG traffic generation determinations have been used by numerous public
agencies in San Diego County for various purposes, including the preparation of General Plan
Circulation Elements, the justification of traffic impact fees, and transportation planning, and have been
determined to be a reliable and accepted means of allocating the burden on a transportation network to
development to be serviced by the network, and
WHEREAS, on July 27, 1993, the City Council held a duly noticed meeting at which oral or
written presentations could be made, and
WHEREAS, the City Council determined based upon the evidence presented at the meeting, the
City's General Plan and the various reports and other information received by the City Council in the
course of its business that imposition of the Interim pre-SR-125 impact fee on all development in the
Eastern Territories for which building permits have not yet been issued is necessary in order to protect
the public safety and welfare and in order to ensure effective implementation of the City's General Plan,
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amount of the fee levied by this Ordinance
does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the transportation facilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1:
Establishment of Fee.
(a) An interim pre-SR-125 development impact fee in the amounts set forth in subsection (d)
is hereby established to pay for transportation improvements and facilities within the
Eastern Territories of the City. The fee shall be paid before the issuance of building
permits for each development project within the Eastern Territories of the City. The fees
shall be expended only for the purposes set forth in this ordinance. The Director of
Finance is authorized to establish various accounts within the fund for the various
improvements and facilities identified in this ordinance and to periodically make
expenditures from the fund for the purposes set forth herein in accordance with the
facilities phasing plan or capital improvement plan adopted by the City Council. The
City Council finds that collection of the fees established by this ordinance at the time of
the building permit is necessary to ensure that funds will be available for the construction
Page 2
t/J --;2
of facilities concurrent with the need for those facilities and to ensure certainty in the
capital facilities budgeting for the Eastern Territories.
(b) Said fee shall be in effect commencing January 1, 1995.
(c) The fee established by this section is in addition to the requirements imposed by other
City laws, policies or regulations relating to the construction or the financing of the
construction of public improvements within subdivisions or developments.
(d) The fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit
application based upon the following schedule:
Development Type
Single Family
Detached Dwelling
Single Family
Attached Dwelling
Multi-Family
Dwelling
Commercial
Industrial
Transportation Fee
$820/Dwelling Unit
$656/Dwelling Unit
$492/Dwelling Unit
$20,500/Gross Acre
$16,400/Gross Acre
The City Council shall annually review the amount of the fee. The City Council
may adjust the amount of the fee as necessary to reflect changes in the
Engineering-News Record Construction Index, the type, size, location or cost of
the Transportation Facilities to be financed by the fee, changes in land use
designations in the City's General Plan, and upon other sound engineering,
financing and planning information. Adjustments to the above fee may be made
by resolution amending the Master Fee Schedule.
(e) The fees collected shall be used by the City for the following purposes as
determined by the City Council:
1. To pay for the construction of facilities by the City, or to reimburse the
City for facilities installed by the City with funds from other sources as
such facility may be modified, deleted, amended or added from time to
time by the Council in order to implement the pre-SR-125 strategy as
defined in the Study.
Page 3
~/9"3
2. To reimburse developers who have been required by Section 4(a) of this
ordinance to install improvements that are street facilities and are listed in
Section 3.
3. To reimburse developers who have been permitted to install improvements
pursuant to Section 4(b) of this ordinance.
4. To administer and update the fee program including retaining consultants
to perform engineering of financing studies.
SECTION 2: Definitions.
For the purposes of this ordinance, the following words or phrases shall be construed as
defined in this Section, unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is
intended.
(a) "Building Permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the Uniform
Building Code as adopted by reference by this City.
(b) "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development.
(c) "Development Permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or approval
for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision ordinance of the
City.
(d) "Development Project" or "Development" means any activity described in Section
65927 and 65928 of the State Government Code.
(e) "Eastern Territories" means that area of the City located between Interstate 805
on the west, the City sphere of influence boundary on the east, Bonita Road on
the north, and the alignment of the proposed extension of East Orange Avenue
on the south, as shown on the Chula Vista General Plan. The property known
as Bonita Gateway located at the northeast quadrant of Bonita Road and I-80S
intersection is also included. For the purposes of this fee, Eastern Territories
shall be further restricted to exclude the following projects:
Eastlake Trails
Eastlake Vistas
Eastlake Woods
Eastlake Business Park II
Bonita Meadows
Phases of Salt Creek Ranch exceeding 1043 Equivalent Dwelling Units
Phases of San Miguel Ranch exceeding 1350 Equivalent Dwelling Units
Page 4
~;1'1
(f) "Financial and engineering study": means the "Interim State Route 125 Facility
Feasibility Study" dated May, 1993, and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
SECTION 3:
Transportation Facilities to be Financed by the Fee.
(a) The transportation facilities to be financed by the fee established by this ordinance
are:
Segment 1 Sweetwater Road (Bonita Road to SR-125)
Segment 2 Bonita Road (Sweetwater Road To San Miguel Road)
Segment 3 San Miguel Road (Bonita Road to Proctor Valley Road)
Segment 4 Proctor Valley Road (San Miguel Road to SR-125 corridor)
Segment 5 SR-125 Corridor (The SR-125 corridor is the right-of-way reserved through Eastlake and Salt Creek I)
(b) The City Council may modify or amend the list of projects in order to maintain
compliance with the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan. The City
Council may also modify the list of projects funded by this program to adjust to
changes in projected growth patterns, or changes in traffic circulation needs
providing that the City Council finds, at a public hearing, that the collected fees
will be used to benefit overall transportation in the City of Chula Vista.
SECTION 4:
Developer Construction of Transportation Facilities.
(a) Whenever a developer of a development project would be required by application
of City law or policy, as a condition of approval of a development permit to
construct or finance the construction of a portion of a transportation facility
identified in Section 3 of this ordinance, the City Council may impose an
additional requirement that the development install the improvements with
supplemental size, length or capacity in order to ensure efficient and timely
construction of the transportation facilities network. If such a requirement is
imposed, the City Council shall, in its discretion, enter into a reimbursement
agreement with the developer, or give a credit against the fee otherwise levied by
this ordinance on the development project.
(b) A developer may request authorization from the City Council to construct one or
more of the facilities listed in Section 3. The request shall be made in writing to
the City Council and shall contain the following informational conditions:
1. Detailed description of the project with a preliminary cost estimate.
2. Requirements of developer:
Page 5
t,/J ,~
preparation of plans and specifications for approval by the City;
secure and dedicate any right-of-way required for the project;
secure all required permits, environmental clearances necessary for
construction of the project;
provision of performance bonds;
payment of all City fees and costs.
3. The City will not be responsible for any of the costs of constructing the
project. The developer shall advance all necessary funds to construct the
project.
SECTION 5: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day
from and after its adoption.
John Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Approved as ~ forn! b
~~lkl
l
. Bruce M. Boogaard,
Presented by
WPC F:\home\engineer\878.93
Page 6
~/l"~
ORDINANCE NO. 2580
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2251,
RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR
TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES IN THE CITY'S EASTERN
TERRITORIES
WHEREAS, in January 1988, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista adopted
Ordinance No. 2251 establishing a development impact fee for transportation facilities in the
City's eastern territories, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2251, the City has commenced the collection of
development impact fees to be used to construct transportation facilities to accommodate
increased traffic generated by new development within the City's Eastern Territories, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section l(c) of Ordinance No. 2251 and California Government
Code Sections 66000, et. seq., the City Council has caused a study to be conducted to reanalyze
and reevaluate the impacts of development on the transportation system for the City's eastern
territories and, to further reanalyze and reevaluate the development impact fee necessary to pay
for the transportation facilities which financial and engineering study prepared by City staff, is
entitled "Eastern Area Development Impact Fees for Streets 1993 Revision" dated July 13, 1993,
and
WHEREAS, the financial and engineering study and the City's General Plan show that
the transportation network will be adversely impacted by new development within the eastern
territories unless new transportation facilities are added to accommodate the new development,
and
WHEREAS, the financial and engineering studies and the City's General Plan establish
that the transportation facilities necessitated by development in the eastern territories comprise
an integrated network, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that developers of land within the Eastern
Territory should be required to mitigate the burden created by development through the
construction of transportation facilities within the boundaries of the development, the
construction of those transportation facilities outside the boundaries of the development which
are needed to provide service to the development in accordance with City standards and the
payment of a development impact fee to finance the development's portion of the costs of the
transportation network, and
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby determines that the legislative findings and
determinations set forth in Ordinance No. 2251 continue to be true and correct, and
(;.0//
Page 1
WHEREAS, on July 27, 1993, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista held a duly
noticed meeting at which oral or written presentations regarding the development impact fee for
the City's eastern territories could be made, and
WHEREAS, after consideration of the evidence presented to it including the "Eastern
Areas Development Impact Fees for Streets" study the City Council determined that certain
amendments to Ordinance No. 2251 are necessary in order to assure that there are sufficient
funds available to finance the transportation facilities necessary to serve the eastern territories
by the development impact fee, and
WHEREAS, the City Council determines, based on the evidence presented at the
meeting, the City's General Plan, and the various reports and information received by the City
Council in the ordinary course of its business, that the imposition of traffic impact fees on all
development in the eastern territories for which building permits have not been issued is
necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare and in order to assure effective
implementation of the City's General Plan, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amount of the amended fees levied
by this Ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the transportation facilities,
and
WHEREAS, the City Council determines that it is appropriate to resolve the fees for
commercial land uses to reflect the fact that many of the trips associated with the commercial
land uses are in fact, trips associated with other land uses that incorporate an intermediate stop
at a commercial land use (passerby trips), and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to ensure the timely payment of the "DIF program support"
cost item, included in Table 2 "Capital Improvement projects - cost estimate summary" of the
financial and engineering study to adequately fund ongoing and future administration activities
and studies, and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that reduction of trips from commercial land
uses may place an inordinate burden on commercial land uses where public facility assessments
have been placed on the affected properties in anticipation of payment of transportation fees, and
as a result of said adjustment, the proposed fees are now lower than the value of the
assessments.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as
follows:
SECTION 1:
That the development impact fee schedule set forth in Section l(c) of Ordinance No.
2251 is amended to read as follows:
~ [J-c2
Page 2
Table 1
Fee applicable prior to January 1, 1995
TABLE 1
Development Type Transportation Fee
Single Family Detached Dwelling $3,060/Dwelling Unit
Single Family Attached Dwelling $2,448/Dwelling Unit
Multi-Family Dwelling $1,836/Dwelling Unit
Commercial $122,400/Gross Acre
Industrial $61,200/Gross Acre
Religious Institutional $ 12,240/Gross Acre
Golf Course $3,052/Gross Acre
Medical Center $198,900/Gross Acre
Olympic Training Center (OTe) $10, 189/Gross Acre
Adjacent to O.T.C. $107,100/Gross Acre
Table 2
Fee applicable effective January 1, 1995
TABLE 2
Development Type Transportation Fee
Single Family Detached Dwelling $3,998/Dwelling Unit
Single Family Attached Dwelling $3, 198/Dwelling Unit
Multi-Family Dwelling $2,399/Dwelling Unit
Commercial $99,950/Gross Acre
Industrial $79,960/Gross Acre
Religious Institutional $15,992/Gross Acre
Golf Course $3, 198/Gross Acre
Medical Center $259,870/Gross Acre
Olympic Training Center (OTe) $13,313/Gross Acre
Adjacent to O.T.C. $139,930/Gross Acre
&(J-J
Page 3
The City Council shall at least annually review the amount of the fee. The City Council
may adjust the amount of the fee as necessary to reflect changes in the Engineering-News
Record Construction Index, the type, size, location or cost of the Transportation
Facilities to be financed by the fee, changes in land use designations in the City's
General Plan, and upon other sound engineering, financing and planning information.
Adjustments to the above fees may be made by resolution amending the Master Fee
Schedule.
SECTION 2:
That the definition "Eastern Territories" as set forth in Section 2e of Ordinance 2251 is
amended to read as follows:
"Eastern Territories" means that area of the City located between
Interstate 805 on the west, the City sphere-of-influence boundary on the
east, Bonita Road on the north and the alignment of the proposed
extension of East Orange Avenue on the south, as shown on the map
entitled "Developable Land Area (Map 1)" of the financial and
engineering study. The property known as Bonita Gateway located at the
northeast quadrant of Bonita Road and 1-805 intersection is also included.
SECTION 3:
That the definition of "Financial and Engineering studies" as set forth in Section 2f of
Ordinance No. 2251 is amended to read as follows:
"Financial and engineering studies": means the "Interim Eastern
Area Development Impact Fees for Streets" study prepared by
George T. Simpson and Willdan Associates dated November 1987,
the "Eastern Area Development Fees for Streets" study prepared
by Willdan Associates dated November 19, 1990, and the "Eastern
Development Impact Fees for Streets - 1993 Revision" study
prepared by City staff dated July 13, 1993, which are on file in the
Office of the City Clerk".
SECTION 4:
That the list of facilities and programs set forth in Section 3(a) of the Ordinance No.
2251 is amended to read as follows:
The transportation facilities and programs to be financed by the fee
established by this Ordinance are:
1. * State Route 125 from San Miguel Road to Telegraph Canyon
Road.
2. * State Route 125 from Telegraph Canyon Road to Orange Avenue.
~!J-Lj
Page 4
3. Telegraph Canyon Road from Paseo Del Rey to east of Paseo
Ladera/north side.
3a. Telegraph Canyon Road at 1-805 interchange/Phase II.
4. ** Telegraph Canyon Road - Phase I Rutgers Avenue to EastLake
Boundary .
5. ** Telegraph Canyon Road - Phase II Paseo Ladera to Apache Drive.
6. Telegraph Canon Road - Phase III Apache Drive to Rutgers
Avenue.
7. East H Street - 1-805 interchange modifications.
8. ** East H Street from EastLake Drive to SR-125.
9. ** Otay Lakes Road from Camino del Cerro Grande to Ridgeback
Road.
10. Otay Lakes Road from Telegraph Canyon Road to East Orange
Avenue.
11. Bonita Road from Otay Lakes Road to Central Avenue.
12. Bonita Road from Central Avenue to San Miguel Road.
13. San Miguel Road from Bonita Road to SR-125
14. ** East H Street from State Route 125 to San Miguel Road.
15. Proctor Valley Road (East H Street) from San Miguel Road to
Hunte Parkway.
16. Orange Avenue from Oleander Avenue to Sunbow Eastern
Boundary .
17. Palomar Street from Oleander Avenue to Sunbow Eastern
Boundary.
18. ** Telegraph Canyon Road from eastern boundary of EastLake to
Hunte Parkway.
19. ** EastLake Parkway from Telegraph Canyon Road to EastLake High
School southern boundary.
20. Hunte Parkway from Proctor Valley Road to Telegraph Canyon
Road.
~g~p
Page 5
21. ** Hunte Parkway from Telegraph Canyon Road to Club House
Drive.
21a. Hunte Parkway from Club House Drive to East Orange Avenue.
22. East Orange Avenue from EastLake Parkway to Hunte Parkway.
23. Paseo Ranchero Road to Telegraph Canyon Road to East Orange
Avenue.
24. East Orange Avenue from eastern Sunbow Boundary to EastLake
Parkway.
25. East Orange Avenue - I-80S Interchange Modifications.
26. East Palomar Street from eastern Sunbow Boundary to Paseo
Ranchero.
27. East Palomar Street at I-80S Interchange.
28. Telegraph Canyon Road from Hunte Parkway to Wueste Road.
29. East Orange Avenue from Hunte Parkway to Olympic Training
Center.
30. Telegraph Canyon Road from SR-125 to EastLake Parkway.
31. EastLake Parkway from Fenton Street to Telegraph Canyon Road.
32. East H Street from I-80S to Hidden Vista Drive
33. Bonita Road at Otay Lakes Road Intersection.
34. Otay Lakes Road at Elmhurst Drive Intersection.
35. East H Street at Otay Lakes Road Intersection.
36. Traffic Signal Interconnection - Eastern Territories.
37. EastLake Parkway from EastLake High School Southern Boundary
to East Orange Avenue.
38. East H Street from Paseo Del Rey to Tierra del Rey.
39. Bonita Road from I-80S to Plaza Bonita Road.
*Project is now included in the interim pre-SRl25 transportation facility fee.
**project has been completed.
~[l-~
Page 6
SECTION 5: PAYMENT OF "DIF PROGRAM SUPPORT"
The "DIF Program Support" shall with no exceptions be paid in cash concurrently with
the development impact fee at a rate equal to 5 % of the total applicable fee.
SECTION 6: This section shall become effective on January 1, 1995. Commercial land
uses with street improvement assessments placed on the property shall be eligible for a credit
against payment of applicable interim pre SR-125 fees as required by Ordinance 2579 or
subsequent amendments to said ordinance. Credits realized under this section shall not exceed
the lessor of:
1. The interim Pre-SR125 fee for the subject property, or
2. The amount that said assessment exceeds the Transportation Development Impact
fee in effect at the time payment of said fees is required.
SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force 30 days after its ado
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
Presented by
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works
C:\or\884.93
&8-7
Page 7
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
TITLE:
7
Meeting Date 12/7/93
RESOLUTION /73:2. / Approving 1993 Christmas Tree
Recycling Program for the City of Chula Vista and
Appropriating Funds Therefor
Item
SUBMITTED BY:
Principal Management Assistant SnYder~"
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager
(4/5ths Vote: Yes X No___>
Historically, the City has sponsored a community recycling program
for Christmas trees each year with donations of equipment and labor
from Laidlaw and free acceptance of the trees countywide in the
County's "Clean Green" mulching program. All cities have just been
informed that the County will no longer be able to accept the trees
at no charge due to the recent elimination of funding in the Solid
Waste Division budget for certain programs, including allocations
of free services. (See Attachment A.)
However, the trees will be accepted and processed at all "Clean
Green" sites for the current fees of $2S/ton. Since this is an
unexpected cost, Council action at this time is time-sensitive in
order to ensure that t:his community service is continued for the
1993 holiday season.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve resolution appropriating $2,000 from
the Waste Management Trust Fund to cover the "Clean Green" tip fees
for trees left at City-sponsored sites.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
While the details of all site locations are not yet finalized, it
is planned that this year's program will be similar to previous
years. Laidlaw will provide both containers and hauling labor for
the community drop-off sites. The City will provide publicity
announcing site locations and tree requirements. As in the past,
locations will also be reported by "I Love a Clean San Diego
County" volunteers to all Chula Vista residents calling the
Christmas tree recycling HotLine.
Although not part of the City-paid community program, one new
opportuni ty for residents this year will be the convenience of
curbside collection through the new yard waste recycling program
for trees put out after January 1, 1994. Residents who are not
subscribing to weekly service will be able to have the pickup of a
tree (cut into four foot lengths) for a $1 sticker.
7~/
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date 12/7/93
FISCAL IMPACT: Based on past records, it is estimated that 60-
70 tons of Christmas trees will need collection in Chula Vista in
1993. At $25/ ton, the total tip fee cost could be up to $1,750.
Although not all funds may be needed, it is recommended that $2,000
be appropriated to cover contingencies. The funds will be paid to
Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. on a reimbursement basis for the "Clean
Green" tip fees paid to the County for containers hauled from the
City's community-sponsored sites.
It is recommended that the funds be appropriated from the Waste
Management Trust Fund (Fund 270) to Account 100-0220-5298. The
Waste Management Trust Fund includes monies to be used for
recycling programs aimed at the long-term stabilization of trash
disposal rates.
Other program costs, such as printing and publicity, have been
included in current year appropriations and do not represent any
additional fiscal impact.
7~
Attachment A
QIouut~ of ~au ~icgo
(619) 694-2212
FAX (619) 268-ll461
LOCATION CODE 550
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
COUNTY ENGINEER
COUNTY AIRPORTS
COUNTY ROAD COMMISSIONER
TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS
COUNTY SURVEYOR
FLOOD CONTROL
LIQUID WASTE
SOLID WASTE
5555 OVERLAND AVE, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92123-1295
November 23, 1993
Conservation Coordinator
City of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Sir/Madam:
CHRISTMAS TREES AT COUNTY LANDFILLS
On October 1993, I Love A Clean San Diego County, Inc. (ILACSDC)
sent you a letter regarding the Christmas tree recycling program.
Attached is a copy of the letter.
The purpose of this letter is to advise you that the County will
not offer free disposal of Christmas trees at County landfills this
year.
At the recommendation of the Interim Solid Waste Commission
comprised of representatives from each of the cities in the County,
the County Board of Supervisors made substantial cuts in the budget
of the Solid Waste Division of the Department of Public Works. One
of the programs not funded is the Christmas tree recycling program.
Consequently, all Christmas trees brought to any of the County
disposal facilities will be charged the current tipping fee as
designated in the Fee Schedule.
Clean loads containing only Christmas trees and/or green waste will
qualify for the "Clean Green" tipping fee of $25 per ton; pick-up
truck loads will be charged $6.00; and cars, $3.00.
If you have any questions concerning fees at County disposal
facilities, please call the Solid Waste Division at 974-2661.
t
V!)Y truly yours,
V'~ 0' 0 '~-
WILLIAM A. WORRELL
Deputy Director
WAW:NO:lm
Attachment
7'3
o Priated oa recycled paper
RESOLUTION NO.
173:2./
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING 1993 CHRISTMAS TREE
RECYCLING PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF VISTA AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR
WHEREAS, the City has sponsored a community recycling
program for Christmas trees each year with donations of equipments
and labor from Laidlaw and free acceptance of the trees countywide
in the County's "Clean Green" mulching program; and
WHEREAS, all cities have just been informed that the
County will no longer be able to accept the trees at no charge due
to the recent elimination of "charity passes" (allocations of free
services) in the Solid Waste Division budget; and
WHEREAS, however, the trees will be accepted and
processed at all "Clean Green" sites for the current fees of
$25jton; and
WHEREAS, since this is an unexpected cost, Council action
this time is time-sensitive in order to ensure that this community
service is continued for the 1993 holiday service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve the 1993 Christmas Tree
Recycling Program for the City of Chula vista.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the sum of $2,000 is hereby
appropriated from the Waste Management Trust Fund to cover the
"Clean Green" tip fees for trees left at City-spo ored sites.
Presented by
~r
Stephanie Snyder, Principal
Management Assistant
Bruce M.
Attorney
C:\rs\xmastree
7,t!
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date -12/~7/93
?
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /73:<.;" designating and authorizing
representati ve agents for the Ci ty' s appl ication
for public disaster assistance funds
SUBMITTED BY: Interim Fire ChiJtf?l5tf
REVIEWED BY: Ci ty Manage~ \,I~lth Vote: Yes No --1L)
On october 29, 1993, the President of the united states declared
federal disaster areas in five counties in Southern California,
including San Diego County. The City of Chula Vista is applying
for federal financial assistance for emergency response by the Fire
Department to the wildland fires. The State requires the
designation of agents authorized to act on behalf of the City in
the filing of the application package.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council approve the resolution.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
The Chula Vista Fire Department supplied two strike team engines
and a fire agency representative to the Guejito fire in San Diego
County from October 26 to 30, 1993. Under the Presidential
declaration, the City is eligible to apply for federal assistance
to recover the cost for emergency response to the fire. As the
State requires the designation of representative agents authorized
to act on behal f of the Ci ty, staff recommends that the three
individuals named in the "Designation of Applicant's Agent
Resolution", Fire Chief James B. Hardiman, Battalion Chief Thomas
Layman, and Robert S. Nelson, Disaster Preparedness Specialist, be
authorized to act on behalf of the City in submitting the
application, to answer any questions, and deal with fiscal issues
related to public disaster assistance.
FISCAL IMPACT:
If public disaster funds are received, it could have a possible
cost recovery of more than $7,500 for the City.
>5'/
RESOLUTION NO.
) 73;<c2.
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING
REPRESENTATIVE AGENTS
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC
FUNDS
AND AUTHORIZING
FOR THE CITY'S
DISASTER ASSISTANCE
WHEREAS, the President of the united states declared Southern
California a disaster area on October 28, 1993; and,
WHEREAS, the City is applying for federal financial assistance
for emergency response by the Chula Vista Fire Department during
the wildland fires of October 26 through 31, 1993.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Chula Vista that:
James Hardiman, Fire Chief, or
Thomas Layman, Battalion Chief, or
Robert S. Nelson, Disaster Preparedness Specialist
is hereby authorized to execute for and in behalf of the City of
Chula Vista, a public entity established under the laws of the
State of California, this application and to file it in the Office
of Emergency Services for the purpose of obtaining certain federal
financial assistance under P.L. 93-288 as amended by the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988,
and/or state financial assistance under the National Disaster
Assistance Act for Wildland fires, which occurred in October, 1993.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chula Vista City Council, a
public entity established under the laws of the State of
California, hereby authorizes its agent to provide to the State
Office of Emergency Services for all matters pertaining to such
state disaster assistance the assurances and agreements required.
Passed and approved this 7th day of December, 1993.
Tim Nader, Mayor
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution is being executed
in duplicate, as set forth in Exhibit "A", to meet the requirements
of the Office of Emergency Services.
((J
I, Beverly A. Authelet, duly appointed and City Clerk of the
city of Chula Vista, do hereby certify that the above is a true and
correct copy of a resolution passed and approved by the ci ty
Council of the City of Chula Vista on the 7th day of December,
1993. '
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
Presented by
James B. Hardiman
Interim Fire Chief
C:\rs\OES
8'-i
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1
Meeting Date 12/7/93
ITEM TITLE: Resolution J 7 3..z] Approving Interjurisdictional Pretreatment
Agreement with the City of San Diego
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public of Works ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ ~1Jf5I (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No X)
In 1987, the City of San Diego began efforts to have Interjurisdictional Pretreatment
Agreements executed with each of the agencies whose sewage is handled through the Point
Lorna Waste Treatment Plant. The Environmental Protection Agency and the California Water
Quality Control Board must both be satisfied that San Diego has the legal authorization to
implement pretreatment standards required under Federal regulations.
An agreement incorporating the required provisions has been prepared and is submitted for
Council approval.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution approving the Interjurisdictional
Pretreatment Agreement with the City of San Diego.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The requirements of Federal regulations contained in 40 CFR, Section 403 are incorporated
in the Consent Decree in the case of U.S.A. vs City of San Diego, which involves the Point
Lorna treatment facility and its required upgrading. -
One of the features of these regulations is the necessary ability of the permittee (San Diego)
to oversee discharges by industrial users to be assured that all necessary pretreatment of waste
is accomplished. Inasmuch as San Diego does not have direct jurisdiction over industrial users
outside of that City, the subject agreement has been presented as a means of exercising that
oversight where the industrial users are located in other jurisdictions.
Chapter 13.10 of the Municipal Code was revised in July, 1991 to provide for the control of
industrial wastes in such a manner as to satisfy federal and state standards for concentration
and volume of undesirable constituents in the collection, treatment and discharge facilities.
The discharge of some of these materials, which include gasoline, naphtha, toxic or poisonous
liquids or solids, highly acid or. basic substances, heavy metals and many others into the
sewage system are completely prohibited. Other constituents are acceptable only in specified
maximum concentrations.
9"'/
Page 2, Item L
Meeting Date 12/7/93
This agreement gives the City of San Diego the authority to oversee the manner in which
industries within Chula Vista conform to all of these discharge requirements for wastes which
ultimately arrive at the Point Loma Treatment Facility for treatment and disposal.
The procedures enumerated in the agreement are those which have been practiced on a less
formal basis since the San Diego Industrial Waste Division was formed. The San Diego
technical support staff can handle Chula Vista industrial waste questions or problems at
substantially lower cost than we can because of the economy of scale.
The agreement includes stipulations that several provisions on industrial waste control be
adopted by ordinance. Those provisions were adopted into Chapter 13.10 of the Municipal
Code in July, 1991. This agreement, therefore, provides the City of San Diego with a needed
formalization of the relationship between us concerning industrial waste and requires Chula
Vista to do only what we already do.
FISCAL IMP ACT: Approval of this agreement will allow Chula Vista's relationship with the
EP A and San Diego to remain unchanged, with no fiscal impact. In the event that the
agreement is not approved, Chula Vista will be faced with the possibility of enforcement action
by EP A with unknown and possibly large fiscal impacts.
RLD:KY 059
f:\home\engineer\agenda\intagmt
9'~
RESOLUTION NO.
J 73023
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING INTERJURISDICTIONAL
PRETREATMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF SAN
DIEGO, AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, in 1987, the City of San Diego began efforts to
have Interjurisdictional Pretreatment Agreements executed with each
of the agencies whose sewage is handled through the Point Loma
Waste Treatment Plant; and
WHEREAS, The Environmental Protection Agency and the
California Water Quality Control Board must both be satisfied that
San Diego has the legal authorization to implement pretreatment
standards required under Federal regulations; and
WHEREAS, an agreement incorporating the required
provisions has been prepared and is submitted for Council approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve the Interjurisdictional
Pretreatment Agreement with the City of San Diego, 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 authorized and directed to execute said Agreement
for and on behalf of the City of Chula vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of.
Public Works
\~L- I ~ j~ ~\"
'Bruce M. BOOgaard!;-d;ty
Attorney ,J
C:\rs\pretreat
9-3/9-~
INTERJURISDICTIONAL PRETREATMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO AND THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of ,
1993, between the City of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista
("City") .
DEFINITIONS
Unless otherwise defined herein, terms relating to water and
wastewater shall be as adopted in the latest edition of Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, published by
the American Public Health Association, the American Water Works
Association and the Water Pollution Control Federation.
The meaning of other various terms as used in this Agreement
shall be as follows:
1. "Discharger" shall mean any person that discharges or causes
a discharge of wastewater directly or indirectly to a public
sewer.
2. "Industrial User" is a discharger of industrial wastewater
into a public sewer under a valid industrial wastewater
permit.
3. "Industrial Wastewater" shall mean all wastewater, excluding
domestic wastewater, and shall include all wastewater from any
producing, manufacturing, processing, institutional,
commercial, service, agricultural or other operation. These
may also include wastes of human origin similar to domestic
wastewater.
4. "Inspector" shall mean a person authorized by the Water
Utilities Director of the City of San Diego to inspect
wastewater generation, conveyance, processing and disposal
facilities and do any required sampling.
s. "Pretreatment Facilities" shall mean treatment works used in
the treatment of industrial wastewater prior to discharge of
wastewater into a public sewer.
6. "Sewage" is the used water supply of a community which
includes the domestic and industrial wastes, groundwater and
surface runoff as may be mixed with it.
7. "Sewerage" is a comprehensive term, including all construction
and appurtenant equipment utilized in the collection,
Interjurisdictional Pretreatment Agreement
B:\pretreat.agt
Page 1
Nov. 12, 1993
9-5
transportation, pumping, treatment and final disposal of
sewage.
8. "Waste" shall mean wastewater and any and all other waste
substances, liquid, solid, gaseous, ,or radioactive. associated
with human habitation, or of human or animal origin, or from
any producing, manufacturing or processing operation of
whatever nature, including such wastes placed within
containers of whatever nature, prior to and for the purpose of
disposal.
9. "Wastewater" shall mean waste and water, whether treated or
untreated, discharged into or permitted to enter a public
sewer.
10. "Wastewater System or Facilities" shall mean any and all
facilities used for collecting, conveying, pumping, treating
and disposing of wastewater.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City of San Diego operates the Metropolitan
Sewerage System; and
WHEREAS, the City currently utilizes this wastewater
treatment system pursuant to the Sewage Disposal Agreement between
the City of San Diego and City dated February 8, 1961; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Diego must develop and implement
an industrial pretreatment program pursuant to conditions contained
in its discharge permit (Permit No. CA 0107409) issued by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Water
Quality Control Board; and
WHEREAS, City desires to continue to utilize the
wastewater treatment system and recognizes its industrial waste
control obligations under 40 CFR 403.
In consideration of the following terms and conditions,
the City of San Diego and City agree:
1. The City shall adopt and diligently enforce an
ordinance which conforms to the minimum legal requirements
contained in the Federal Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR Part 403)
and which incorporates any other legal authorities specifically
mandated by this Agreement or otherwise necessary to implement
procedures outlined in this Agreement or in the Federal
Pretreatment Regulations. ·
2. The City shall explicitly incorporate the following
provisions into its ordinances:
Interjurisdictional Pretreatment Agreement
B:\pretreat.agt
Page 2
Nov. 12, 1993
9-?
a. A provision requ1r1ng any industrial user
responsible for a significant accidental discharge
into the sewer system to notify immediately both
the City of San Diego and City;
b. A prohibition on the use of dilution as a control
technique for compliance with discharge limits
except as allowed by Federal Pretreatment
Standards:
c. Authority to impose mass discharge limits in lieu
or, or in conjunction with, concentration discharge
limits;
d. A prohibition against and penalty for the knowing
transmittal of false information by an industrial
user to either the City of San Diego or the City;
e. Authority to require the installation of all
monitoring and pretreatment facilities by the
industrial user when determined necessary.
3. The City of San Diego and City shall periodically (at
a minimum of every three years) review their respective ordinances
and jointly draft and adopt equivalent amendments to their
respective ordinances when necessary to ensure the effective
administration and operation of the pretreatment program. Whenever
City is notified by San Diego of a problem with the pretreatment
program which can be mitigated by a change in the ordinance, it
shall take prompt action to prepare and adopt an appropriate
modification to the ordinance.
4. City shall adopt, as part of its ordinance, and
enforce specific discharge limits at least as stringent as the
specific discharge limits established in the City of San Diego
ordinance.
5. City's ordinance shall require that categorical
pretreatment standards promulgated by the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) [promulgated by authority of the Clean
Water Act, Sections 307 (b) and (c)] be automatically incorporated
by reference into the City ordinance. These standards shall
supersede any specific discharge limits in the ordinance which are
less stringent than the categorical standards as they apply to the
particular industrial subcategory. City shall notify all affected
industrial users of pertinent categorical standards and monitoring
and reporting requirements contained in 40 CFR 403.12 or included
as part of the categorical standard.
6. City shall adopt in its ordinance a definition for
"industrial wastewater" which is identical to the definition
Interjurisdictional Pretreatment Agreement
B:\pretreat.agt
Page 3
Nov. 12, 1993
q-7
adopted by the City of San Diego. The City of San Diego may make
a final determination as to whether a particular industrial user
requires an Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit based on
information the City of San Diego may request from City in the form
of an Industrial Waste Discharge Permit application. City shall
control, through Industrial Waste Discharge Permits, industrial
waste discharges into its sewers.
7. If there exists any industrial user not subject to an
interjurisdictional pretreatment agreement discharging to City
sewer system but located outside the jurisdictional limits of City,
City shall enter into a contract with the industrial user which
contains terms and conditions substantially equivalent to City's
industrial waste discharge permits.
8. City shall file with the City of San Diego a
certified copy of its ordinance and any amendments thereto, other
interjurisdictional pretreatment agreements, each industrial waste
discharge permit issued and any contract entered into for the
purposes of industrial waste control. City shall provide the City
of San Diego access to and copies of, if requested, all industrial
monitoring reports including 40 CFR 403.12 compliance reports,
self-monitoring reports, baseline reports, records of violations
and actions taken and any other monitoring or reporting
requirements imposed by Federal, State or local regulations. These
records and other relevant information shall be maintained for at
least three years.
9. Any inspector of the City of San Diego may enter and
inspect at any reasonable time any part of the sewer system of
City. The right of entry and inspection shall extend to public
streets, easements and property within which the system is located.
Additionally, inspectors of the City of San Diego shall be
permitted, as appropriate, to enter onto private property to
inspect industrial waste dischargers. City shall make all
necessary legal and administrative arrangements for these
inspections. The right of inspection shall include on-site
inspection of pretreatment and sewer facilities, observation,
measurement, sampling, testing and access to (with the right to
copy) all pertinent compliance records located on the premises of
the industrial user. City reserves the right to be notified and to
accompany City of San Diego representatives during any inspections
herein described.
10. City and the City of San Diego may enter into a
service agreement providing the City of San ,Diego with the legal
authority and responsibility for performance of technical and
administrative activities necessary for implementation of a
pretreatment program with City. These activities amy include,
among others: 1) updating the industrial waste survey; 2) providing
technical services, such as sampling, process chemical analysis and
Interjurisdictional Pretreatment Agreement
B:\pretreat.agt
Page 4
Nov. 12, 1993
q-~
engineering advice; 3) permitting; 4) compliance monitoring; 5)
enforcement support. Where services are provided by the City of
San Diego, the City of San Diego, the City of San Diego shall
assess City the costs incurred by the City of San Diego in
conjunction with the administration of the pretreatment program on
behalf of City. The City of San Diego shall provide City with a
timely detailed accounting of the pretreatment costs assessed City.
11. To the extent City chooses to administer its own
pretreatment program, the City of San Diego may periodically review
City's pretreatment program activities and funding to ensure that
City is adequately administering its pretreatment program in
conformance with the Federal Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR 403)
and all the City of San Diego requirements. The City of San Diego
shall review City's ordinance and amendments thereto, and any
interjurisdictional agreements for conformance with 40 CFR Part
403, and to ensure inclusion of all other legal provisions
mandated by this Agreement. The City of San Diego shall
periodically review the enforcement efforts of City to ascertain
whether pretreatment requirements are being diligently enforced.
12. If the City of San Diego determines that the City
has filed or has refused to fulfill any of the pretreatment
obligations as contained in paragraphs 1 through 9 of this
Agreement, the City of San Diego shall request the City to propose
a detailed plan and time schedule for the timely correction of the
specified pretreatment deficiencies. If the proposed plan is not
acceptable to the City of San Diego or, if a plan is not
forthcoming within 30 days of the notice of specified pretreatment
deficiencies, the City of San Diego may develop and issue a plan
detailing the nature of the pretreatment deficiencies, the steps
required to be taken by the City and a time schedule for attaining
compliance with pretreatment requirements. Such plans shall be
subject to arbitration according to paragraph 17 of this Agreement
and shall be specifically enforceable in a court of competent
jurisdiction.
13. Where a discharge to the wastewater treatment system
reasonably appears to present an imminent danger to the health and
welfare of persons, or presents or may present an imminent danger
to the environment, or threatens to interfere with the operation of
the wastewater treatment system, the City of San Diego may
immediately initiate steps to identify the source of the discharge,
and to halt or prevent said discharge. The City of San Diego may
seek injunctive relief against City or outside jurisdictions
discharging to City sewer system and/or any industrial user
contributing to the emergency condition, and/or may pursue other
self-help remedies.
Interjurisdictional Pretreatment Agreement
B:\pretreat.agt
Page 5
Nov. 12, 1993
9--9
14. Any disputes arising out of this Agreement shall be
submitted to binding arbitration performed in accordance with the
rules of the American Arbitration Association.
15. The terms of this Agreement may be amended only by
written agreement of the parties. In any event, this Agreement
shall be reviewed and revised, as necessary, at least every three
years.
16. This Agreement modifies only those provisions of the
existing Sewage Disposal Agreement of 1960 between the two parties
which conflict with the terms of this Agreement.
17. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase
or word of this Agreement, or the application thereof, to either
party, or to any other person or circumstance is for any reason
held invalid, it shall be deemed severable and the validity of the
remainder of the agreement or the application of such provision to
the party, or to any other persons or circumstance shall not be
affected thereby. Each party hereby declares that it would have
entered into this Agreement and each section, subsection, sentence,
clause, phrase and word thereof irrespective of the fact that one
or more section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word, or
the application thereof to either party or any other person or
circumstance be held invalid.
18. This agreement shall remain in effect only for so
long as sewage generated in or through Chu1a Vista is tributary to
the City of San Diego's sewer system and then only for such portion
of Chu1a Vista that is so tributary.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by San Diego,
acting by and through its City Manager, pursuant to Resolution No.
___, authorizing such execution, and by City, acting by and through
its Mayor, as authorized by the City Council to be in full force
and effect as of the date first hereinafter written, and to remain
in full force and effect so long as the aforementioned Sewage
Disposal Agreement of 1960 remains in effect between San Diego and
Chu1a Vista for transmission, treatment and disposal of Chu1a
Vista's sewage by San Diego through the Metro System, or until such
time as this Agreement is cancelled by mutual written consent.
Dated this
day of
, 1993.
THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Interjurisdictiona1 Pretreatment
B:\pretreat.agt
Mayor
Ag:f;L~) J 21)1 g
Nov.
Page 6
12, 1993
Assistant City Manager
9-/~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / tJ
Meeting Date 12/7/93
ITEM TITLE: Resolution / 7 .3 :l i Approving the agreement for implementation
of subdivision improvement agreement for Otay Rio Business Park
SUBMlTfED BY: nirector of Public wo,~.4k~
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~ ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NolU
On September 19, 1989, by Resolution 15313, the City Council approved a Subdivision
Improvement Agreement with Otay Rio Business Park, a joint venture, for the construction of
public improvements associated with Chula Vista Tract 87-6, Otay Rio Business Park. The
improvements are now acceptable and the owner is requesting that the City release the bonds
for material, labor and survey monumentation. City staff believes some improvements may
require additional corrections in the future and has requested a new agreement, contained
herein, to provide for the repair of any future deficiencies.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution approving the agreement for
implementation of a subdivision improvement agreement for Otay Rio Business Park.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Background
Section 18.16.150 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code provides that in lieu of completing all
improvements before the filing of a Final Map, the subdivider shall enter into an agreement
with the City, secured by an approved improvement security, to ensure the performance of said
work pursuant to the requirements of Title 18 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
After the developer completed the improvements, it was noticed that there was extensive
cracking in the pavement, separation of the pavement and gutter edges, and/or deflection and
cracking of the sidewalk. Based on the condition of the pavement, staff required the developer
hire a soils engineer to determine what caused the problems and how they could be repaired.
The soils engineer determined that the sub-base material, which the specifications required to
be treated with cement bacause of it's poor quality, had too high a cement content. As a result,
the base section acted like a semi-rigid pavement instead of having the flexibility of a normal
asphalt pavement. The report indicated that all major cracks should be filled and the surface
sealed to prevent water intrusion which caused the underlying clay soil to undergo expansion.
All displaced concrete also was to be replaced. As businesses started moving into the
It/-!
Page 2, Item / tJ
Meeting Date 12/7/93
development, it was also believed that the action of traffic on the pavement and more
consistant irrigation in the area would help stabilize the pavement. The developer's contractor
completed the repairs and the pavement is now acceptable. However, staff was concerned that
over the short range the pavement would continue to crack and cause problems. As an
assurance against future deficiencies, the City required a new agreement to make the owner
responsible for future cracking once the City accepts the subdivision. The following
implementation agreement outlines the City's and owner's responsibilities, and the bonding
necessary to enforce the same.
Agreement for Implementation of Subdivision Improvement Agreement
This agreement provides the terms and conditions for:
1. The City's acceptance of the corrected improvements.
2. The release of the material and labor bond.
3. The release of the survey monument installation bond.
4. The provision of replacement bonds to guarantee the improvements against defects.
5. The maintenance of the improvements.
Upon formal acceptance of the corrected improvements, the City will release the $3,235,000
material and labor bond and $15,000 survey monument installation bond (American Insurance
Bond Nos. 1141323143 and 1141328150 respectively). In return, the Los Alisos Company,
"owner", will provide the City with a $485,250 defects and maintenance bond to guarantee the
improvements for a period of one year, commencing with the City's acceptance of said
improvements. This first defects and maintenance bond will be released provided the
improvements are in a good state of repair and that the owner posts a second defects and
maintenance bond in the amount of $100,000 to guarantee the improvements for an additional
four years.
In addition, the owner will be required to obtain a maintenance agreement with the City for
all sidewalks within the subdivision prior to the release of the $485,250 defects and
maintenance bond. This agreement shall be recorded with the County Recorder and be binding
on all existing and future owners of the property.
During the 5-year maintenance period, the City will be responsible for street sweeping and lane
striping. At the end of the 5-year maintenance period, the "owner" (Los Alisos Company) will
repair all asphalt and concrete cracks at their own expense. After these repairs, the City will
apply a chip seal or slurry seal to all streets within the subdivision. The "owner" shall
reimburse the City 50% of this cost.
/?J"~
Page 3, Item J iJ
Meeting Date 12/7/93
FISCAL IMP ACT: It is intended that the bonding arrangements brought about by the
implementation agreement will provide all funding for cost associated with this resolution.
Therefore, the City's cost will only be 50% of the chip seal cost in 5 years, approximately
$20,300; lane striping, approximately $1,800; and street sweeping, approximately $900 for a
total of $23,000.
TAlFile: EY-255
Attachment: Agreement for Implementation of Subdivision Improvement Agreement
WPC F:\HOMEIENGINEER\AGENDA\1439.93
ItJ ~3
RESOLUTION NO.
/73;<1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE AGREEMENT FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT FOR OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK, AND
AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, on September 19, 1989, by Resolution 15313, the
City Council approved a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with Otay
Rio Business Park, a joint venture, for the construction of public
improvements associated with Chula vista Tract 87-6, Otay Rio
Business Park; and
WHEREAS, the improvements are now acceptable and the
owner is requesting that the City release the bonds for material,
labor and survey monumentation; and
WHEREAS, City staff believes some improvements may
require additional corrections in the future and has requested a
new agreement, contained herein, to provide for the repair of any
future deficiencies.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve the Agreement for
Implementation of Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Otay Rio
Business Park, 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 e cute said
Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula vist .
Presented by
as ~ fa
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
c: \rs\oIayrio.sia
/tJ,~
AGREEMENT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT [OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK]
This AGREEMENT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT [Otay Rio Business Park] ("Agreement") is made and entered
into this day of ,1993, by and between the CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, California, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and LOS ALISOS
COMPANY, a general partnership hereinafter referred to as "Owner" with reference to the
following facts:
WHEREAS, on September 19, 1989, by Resolution No. 15313, the City Council
for the City approved a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with Otay Rio Business Park, a
joint venture ("ORBP"), requiring the construction of public improvements upon certain real
property ("Property") known as Chula Vista Tract 87-6, Otay Rio Business Park, as more
particularly described in the Resolution, all according to plans and specifications per Chula Vista
Drawing Nos. 88-490 through 88-512 inclusive on file in the Office of the City Engineer; and
WHEREAS, on December 29, 1992, Owner acquired controlling interest in the
Property from ORBP; and
WHEREAS, certain improvements constructed pursuant to the Subdivision
Improvement Agreement dated September 19, 1989 did not meet City standards;
WHEREAS, Owner has taken steps to correct the improvement deficiencies; and
WHEREAS, the Owner and the City desire to enter into this Agreement in order
to specify the terms and conditions for (a) the City's acceptance of the corrected improvements;
(b) the release of bonds posted under the Subdivision Improvement Agreement; (c) the provision
of replacement bonds to guarantee against defects and for maintenance of the corrected
improvements; and (d) the future maintenance of the improvements, all as further provided
pursuant to the specific terms and conditions set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of. the above recitals, the terms and
conditions hereof, and for other good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows:
1. Conditions to City's Release of Subdivision Improvement Bonds.
The City will release Am. Insurance Bond No. 1141328143 in the amount of
$3,235,000 and Am. Insurance Bond No. 1141328150 in the amount of $15,000 (which bonds
were posted by ORBP under the terms of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement) upon
satisfaction of the following conditions precedent:
A. The City Engineer approves Owner's corrected improvements and
the City formally accepts the public improvement work required under the Subdivision
Improvement Agreement into its public system; and
I?J-.P'
Page 1
WPC F:\home\engincer\1028.93
B. Owner provides the City with a defects and maintenance bond in
the amount of $485,250, in a form approved by the City, to guarantee the corrected
improvements for a period of one (1) year commencing with the date of their formal acceptance
by City.
2. Conditions to City's Release of $485.000 Defects and Maintenance Bond.
Upon the expiration of the one year period described in Section 1.B above, the
City shall release the $485,000 defects and maintenance bond subject to the following conditions
precedent:
A. The City determines that the corrected improvements continue to be
in a state of good repair, normal wear and tear excepted.
B. Owner posts a defects and maintenance bond in the amount of
$100,000, in a form approved by the City, to guarantee the corrected improvements for an
additional period of four (4) years; and
C. Owner prepares, obtains the City Attorney's approval of, and records
with the Office of the San Diego County Recorder a maintenance agreement which shall run with
the Property and which shall require that all existing or future Property owner(s) be responsible
for maintaining all sidewalks located on the Property in accordance with City standards and at
such Property owner's sole cost and expense.
3. Five Year Maintenance Responsibilities.
The City shall be responsible for street sweeping and striping of the corrected
improvements for the five (5) year period following formal City acceptance of such
improvements as provided in Section I.A, above. All other maintenance of the corrected
improvements required during this period, as reasonably determined by the City, shall be
conducted by Owner at the Owner's sole cost and expense.
4. Post Five Year Repair Responsibilities.
At the completion of the five-year maintenance period described in Section 3,
above, the Owner shall repair any and all asphalt or concrete cracking at Owner's sole cost and
expense. Repair of the cracks shall be completed in accordance with City approved standards.
Upon Owner's completion of such crack repairs, the City shall apply a chip seal or slurry seal.
Owner shall reimburse the City for 50% of the cost of any seal application applied by the City
at the end of the five-year period. Upon Owner's satisfaction of its obligations under this
Section, the $100,000 defects and maintenance bond shall be released by the City.
5. Indemnity.
Owner shall protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its elected and
appointed officers, employees, representatives, and all such parties' respective successors and
assigns, from and against all losses for damages, costs and expenses, including without
limitation, reasonable attorney's fees and court costs, arising out of any and all acts or omissions
/tJ"u,
Page 2
WPC F:\home\engineer\1028.93
committed by Owner, any agent, employee, or independent contractor thereof, or any other
party, in the performance of Owner's obligations under the terms of this Agreement.
6. Rights of Way.
By execution hereof, Owner hereby grants City and City hereby grants Owner any
rights-of-way necessary to accomplish all repair or maintenance work required with respect to
the improvements as provided herein.
7. Amendment to Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
Except as otherwise specifically provided herein, all other terms of the
Subdivision Improvement Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
8. City's Remedies.
In addition to the rights and remedies set forth pursuant to the Subdivision
Improvement Agreement, which such terms are incorporated herein by this reference or
otherwise available to the City at law or in equity, the City, upon three (3) days written notice
to the Owner, shall have the right to take all reasonable steps necessary to repair or maintain
the corrected improvements where the City reasonably determines that the Owner has failed to
satisfy its maintenance responsibilities pursuant to the terms of this Agreement and that such
failure creates unsafe conditions at or near the Property.
9. Attorney's Fees.
If either party commences legal proceedings for any relief against the other party
arising out of this Agreement, the losing party shall pay the prevailing party's legal costs and
expenses, including, but not limited to reasonable attorney's fees.
10. Authority.
Owner represents that it is the owner of the Property. Owner further represents
that it has the full right, power and authority to execute this Agreement and to perform its
obligations hereunder, without the need for any further action under its governing instruments,
and that the parties executing this Agreement on behalf of the Owner are duly authorized agents
with authority to do so.
11. Further Assurances.
The parties agree to perform such further acts and to execute and deliver such
additional documents and instruments as may be reasonably required in order to carry out the
provisions of this Agreement and the intentions of the parties.
WPC F:\home\eogineer\102S.93
/6J" 7
Page 3
12. Successors.
All terms of Agreement shall be binding upon, inure to the benefit of, and be
enforceable by the parties hereto and their respective heirs, legal representatives, successors, and
assigns.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereby enter into this Agreement effective
as of the date first written above.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
LOS ALISOS COMPANY,
a general partnership
By Los Alisos Development Co.
a general partner
Mayor, City of Chula Vista
~
F. Jack
ATTEST:
By America Kuk Dong,
a general partner
City Clerk
Jt1-tr'
Page 4
WPC F:\home\c:ngineer\1028.93
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I /
Meeting Date 12/7/93
ITEM TITLE: Appointment of Members to the Ad Hoc Advisory Committee to Review
the City's Conditional Use Permit Process
:~::: B:~: ::::~::;:6~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-X)
On October 5, 1993, the City Council directed staff to contact specified organizations and
individuals, to serve on an ad hoc advisory committee which would work with staff in a
comprehensive review of the City's Conditional Use Permit process. The Committee is to
consist of representatives of the Planning Commission, Economic Development Commission,
Resource Conservation Commission, Chamber of Commerce, and three at-large members.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council appoint the individuals listed below to the ad
hoc advisory committee.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Permit Streamlining Workplan calls for a comprehensive review of the City's Conditional
Use Permit ordinance and process. On October 5, 1993, the City Council approved the make-up
of an ad hoc advisory committee to work with staff in this review. Based on Council direction,
the organizations listed below were contacted, and provided the following names of individuals
who are willing to participate on this committee:
Planning Commission - Susan Fuller
Economic Development Commission - Charles Sutherland
Resource Conservation Commission - Barbara Hall
Chamber of Commerce - Jim Algert
In addition, staff worked with the Mayor to identify three individuals who could serve as at-large
representatives, all of whom had recent experience in processing conditional use permits in
Chula Vista:
Roy Dixon - commercial business owner
II--!
Dan Marcus - staff member, South Bay Community Services
Billy Cox - Agent, Chula Vista Police Department
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
(F5\cupadhoc.all)
/ I'd-
Page 2, Item / /
Meeting Date 12/7/93
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I ~
Meeting Date 12/7/93
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 / 73 tJ ~ending the General Plan for 161 acres located
south and west of the EastLake Greens community.
Resolution / 73 {) '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 Planning /(:tf~ ~\
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ , (~1
BACKGROUND
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
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 GP A involves two
separate parcels, one south of Eastlake High School on the west side ofEastlake 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 AqueductlSDG&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
);2.~1
Page 2, Item /:<
Meeting Date 12/7/1993
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 final 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-90-1), 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.
This item was continued from the meeting of November 16, 1993 as requested by the EastLake
Development Company, in order to meet with concerned property owners regarding the
proposed General Plan amendments. Three homeowners from the EastLake Greens community,
including Mr. Jack Pouchet, whose correspondence was received by the Mayor and City
Council on November 15, 1993 (see attached), met with staff and the EastLake Development
Company on November 29, 1993, to discuss the merits of the proposed General Plan
amendment. Each of the property owners appeared to depart with a much better understanding
of the proposal and indicated that their initial concerns were lessened after receiving a full
explanation of the proposal. In addition, a petition which was presented to the City on
November 16 is attached. Neither Planning Department staff nor the applicant were aware of
this petition until December 2. Staff and/or the applicant will be in contact with these
petitioners prior to the Council meeting.
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.
) ;l ~.:L-
Page 3, Item / c2
Meeting Date 12/7/1993
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 GP A) & EastLake Greens (GP A-93-04).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
Resource Conservation Commission
The Resource Conservation Commission (RCC) reviewed the contents of the Otay Ranch Final
Program EIR (FPEIR-90-01) 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 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
/).,3
Page 4, Item 1:2-
Meeting Date 12/7/1993
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 (GP A-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
(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
/;2-i
Page 5, Item /;<'
Meeting Date 12/7/1993
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).
~~~
)).-6
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
Land Use Designation
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC)
Medium (6-11 DUlAC)
Open Space
Circulation (Streets)
Pubic/Quasi-Public
TOTAL
Table 1
EastLake Land Swap GPA
Acreage
47 Ac.
70 Ac.
9 Ac.
14 Ac.
21 Ac.
161 Ac.
PROPOSED GP AMENDMENT (Applicant's proposal)
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC)
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC)
High (18-27 DUlAC)
Ret. Comm.
Prof. & Admin.
Open Space
Circulation (Streets)
TOTAL
15 Ac.
29 Ac.
17 Ac.
52 Ac.
17 Ac.
14 Ac.
17 Ac.
161 Ac.
STAFF/PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDA nON
Low-Medium (3-6 DUlAC)
Medium-High (11-18 DUlAC)
Retail Commercial
Prof. & Admin.
Open Space
Circulation (Streets)
TOTAL
19 Ac.
45 Ac.
52 Ac.
17 Ac.
11 Ac.
17 Ac.
161 Ac.
/J.-~
Baseline
141
420
561 DU
45
319
306
670 DU
57
495
552 DU
Page 6, Item I :2..
Meeting Date 12/7/1993
Dwelling Units
..................................
..................................
..................................
............................-.....
..................................
.:::::::<~~g~(:::.
. . ..................
................ ........
. . ...........
..................................
..................................
..................................
-.-...............................
..................................
::::::::::::::::::::::::@~I::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::.::.:.:...::.:::.:::,~$/)i::::J..;::
!!I!I!:!!!!!I!:IIIII.::I.!III!::III:IIIIII!I!!:!!:!!::!i.!..!!!!!!!!
::::::!.:::!:::!::::::::.::::::::::.::::::::.:.:!:!:::::::!:::.:::::
::::::::::::::::lli::::mIDlt:::::::::
........
.. ...................
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::&1:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::::::::::@~g1.::::::::::::@:::::::::::
...!!.:!!!!.:::::::!:!.::!~I~:::::.:.::::.:.!!.!::!:::::
::::::::~:~:~:~;~:~:::~::~1~1r~r1~1~1~i~1~1~Ij~j~j~1~1~1~1~
.. ..........................
......................--..........
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
,.................................
......-...........................
..................................
..................................
.......................,.,..,.....
.....................-,-..........
.............."....,..".."...,.
...........................,."...
..................................
...............................",
..................................
...............................,.
...........................
.,.................
.,.....................
.......................
....................-.....................
..................................
:-:-:.:.:.:.:.:.:Oh~:.:.:t.<iit:t:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.
tttt~:trtrB*rrrr~
.....,.....................
...........................
......,."..,...,.,........
................,.... ......
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
)))))):~$$i))))))
al
~:~:~:::~:::::~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1~1~~~~~~~~:~:~tt:~:~:~:~:~:~
:!:..:!::.::::::?~f:.::By:.:::.:..::::::!
High
282
770
1,052 DU
90
522
459
1,071 DU
114
810
924 DU
Page 7, Item ) cJ.
Meeting Date 12/7/1993
EASTLAKE GREENS (GP A 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+ dulac.) to Low-Medium Density Residential with a density of 4.5 dulac (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 refinement 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 dulac) 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.
JrJ-,-7
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
Dwelling Units
Land Use Designation Acreage Baseline High
Low-Medium (3-6 DU/AC) 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 DU/AC) 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 DU/AC) 3 Ac. 9 18
Medium (6-11 DU/AC) 20 Ac. 120 220
Medium-High (11-18 DU/AC) 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 DU/AC) 3 Ac. 9 18
Medium-High (11-18 DU/AC) 44 Ac. 484 792
Open Space 9 Ac.
Circulation (Streets) 2 Ac.
Public/Quasi-Public 16 Ac.
TOTAL 74 Ac. 493 DU 810 DU
Table 2
EastLake Greens GP A
) J--~
Page 8, Item 1;2
Meeting Date 12/7/1993
Page 9, Item / :<.
Meeting Date 1217/1993
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 (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 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
/;2.-1
Page 10, Item ) d.-
Meeting Date 12/7/1993
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 du/ac) 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 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.
"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-
) ;2 -/ tJ
Page 11, Item ) d..
Meeting Date 12/7/1993
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.
/;2-) I
Page 12, Item J 2-
Meeting Date 12/7/1993
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.
);2 -)~
Table 3
Combined EastLake Land Swap/EastLake Greens GPA's
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
Dwelling Units
Land Use Designation Acreage Baseline 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 RECOMMENDATION
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 RECOMMENDATION
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
/;2.-/3
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
LETTER RECEIVED FROM PROPERTY OWNER
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS AFFECTING EASTLAKE GREENS
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: .
· March 3, 1993 hearing (EastLake Greens GPA)
· 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 forGP 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 GPA (GPA-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
Jc2-IY
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.
/;2. --/'-/
MINUTE S OF A SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING
Re80urce CoD8e~tiou ec-i88iou
Chol. Vist., California
5:30 p.m.
Monday, May 22, 1989
Conference Room 1
Public Services Building
CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meetin:: was called to order at 5 :39 p.m. by
Chairman Rowe. City Staff Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid called
roll. Present: Chairman Rowe; Conunissioners Fox, Stevens and Ray. Absent:
Waller. Also present were Barbara Uall and Frank Chidester.
It was MSP (Fox/Ray) to move the meeting time to 6:00 p.m., beginning with the
next regularly scheduled meeting of June 12, 1989.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of April 24, 1989 were 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 presented.
It was further moved and seconded (Rowe/Stevens):
"Based on the Conunission'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) sewer services;
(3) refuse disposal;
(4) water 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.
Conunissioner Stevens will attend the Planning Conunission meeting to present the
RCC's position on this issue.
/c2 -/'1-;2-
, .
Resource Conservation Commission
Page 2
3. A report on the Trolley Commercial EIR-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 EIR as presented. A recommendation should be made
to the Planning Commission to address the problem of the Orange Ave./Palomar St.
intersection. It was 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 was 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
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,
EXPRE SS SECRETARIAL SERVI CE S
Barbara Taylor
Jc2.-/L/-3
FISCAL IMPACT TABLES
Figures 1 & 2
/;l. - /i~,-/
# fJ '... ... 3 ~ Ii"! 04 ~ t'-. to. N rf M 'If fJ ... &e\
...- ~ _ OQ ~ N rl r- ~ ~.. .... N
.... <.>. .. t l"" C"'I oX. <:-1 N 'IQ ~
i.i.~~~~~~~~:;:~ ;i1a~'
. !~ .,. ~~~c:~~.:\~~~~~ t""
"
'I() ~ ,... r.. ~ '10 ~ .,.. C\ 00 ClO CIt..) (lO ~ ~ t.
toe .. ~ r--.....VlII'lVl.....\o"l "...
C1 ~ ~,,~ . ~ ":. at ~ If!. III 11'1 III III Vl -
.
!I 16 >C!~~OO(" ,....g.........'....--- ~
<I? l: IO'I()~$;! ~~iii;ji;;
] , Co') v, t.I) ~ CIt ..-. ... d
I ..
.,..
i v ~ i - ~ (OJ ~ a. r'. ~ a 8 0 E; 9 ~ ~
. ~~~~O\~fi. ~~. .('
J ~ ~ 00 N 0 00 t.. ~ ~ ~ '" - 8 ~ ~
(,() iC "I ,... S ... ~ <:)
1O\O~OOao... ~f...t.\
4f) .. v. ~ ~ ~.: ....: ..... ..: f": f""'f r1 ~: .,
..toI)......I/!'M.,..~ ,~
...
,
~ij ~~f€~s~~~6~~t1:~~~ .....
~
. "'0'1- C""> ~Q ....iQ...""
~ t:~~~~~~Viv-l~~~r;; r--
....
!u I ~~~ t1.~ a~...~ ~ ~
.
I
m ,
$ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ s s ~ 8 ~ ~ 8 .~ g 3
'of. ~ d ....s II) M M N N ~ ~ N ri ~ N
f""I ~ ... ~ ! ." VI 11'\ \('\ ." ." If. R VI
;;.;~:..,~ ~zt~~Z:4~a ~ ...
~; 3 ~
~< ! ! ~~,<)"'8i88O-~~f"4~~g~ ~
..~ ~ ~ ~ rt . ~~ 1". ;~ . ~. 0-, l'l .'
P. 0( t.~ ~ n ~ ~ ~ ! ~ r-- 'I() ~ or. If' ~ ~ -
~ ~,~ ~ f' Q\ 0\ Q\ 0- $..
r" ('-I f"l f'" . ~ t"'l f"'l f"'l M 1",
~ "" ... .-, .... ",) ~ ~ ~.. . '"
~~~~ I V)
.-c I .
~ ti ~ - - ..... ..... ..... ,... ,.. 8' i f' ""' ~ .... .... ~
t6~ 8 C"'lf""....,....c<"l-o J C\-
.1$ ij ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~... ~ ''1 .., &1 ~
c n~~ ~'; ~ Qo, -.0 .c 00 0\ .Q ,..:' t ~ ~ 8 ...; ..: g ~
... i
~ en ...t!.~ooooooo\Q'\ 00.
~ cA M ~ - - ,~ .-
~ ..........,....,..........e.... .......~ut~
....... ....., "-" ""will ...
~
!J t.. CO'1 ~ ,.. M M ,... ,... r-. t' ~ ~ s; ~ r-. ~
~r{ -_....,~.t"lr ....
~ ! 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t'':, ,... t~ ~ t';. t":.
a~ f~~~~~~~~~~~ ....
~
~ Q ~
! I
rs ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~
la J
'-'l Q,\~~~""\C'!l~''''I ..-o~~
~ ..... r"I ."" r'" r.'" .... ,."'........... ~ .
~ ti~~1ri~~Q~~f:.~..,V)
I ~
,
~l ~ ~ N'6'~~---~~.~ ~~~;;;~ r-i'
~ vi ~ ~ ~ N ;.r ! ~ ~. ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
to ~ t;..-........... - .... roO t.. ... ... .... ~ - ~
! .....~~~~~~ec~t'!.~-;-; a
1 II ~ ~ t'o- ,... ,... ,... r. I.... I""- ,... f" ,.... l"'. ,... l"- I f
Q ~ :r \0 \0 ~ PO. .- ~ ..... .-, .~ .- ... ....
~ ""'V'l. r-l''''''''''''r''~r--t-o
M ~~C""iMMC ~~"""':r':ff.;tir-: I .
..-. ... ~ :! :( ~ :! :! ~. :r!. ~ .. ... .... :t
, to'!~toI)~"''''~''''~~''M''''lI't tot
3 tl ~~~~i3~~~~~=!~~~~ ~
u
~ ::I ..,.... "'" f"'> 0 M ... ~ '::t
J ~ri~~~~~~~ ~ri~~~~~ ('1 J
... ..... .-r, ..... to'4 ".. _ ,.... ~ ~. r... r... .... ..... ~
. ... "" ... ~ ... ... ... to'! ~ ., .. ~ '^ ...- 'oO
""
~ ! ~
I e-M<""'''' ~ ..,
... M ,'" ~ "" -0 r.. QO 0\ .... ... - - - .....
, I;;" .- ILj.- S- o:,.
I
":-7:..,.'[ nH.L ~ 11$0__ z__- ::::l 3 a
..,
,
rrGUJlR 2
E,'\SlLAKfi ORF.f..NS ~ LAm> SWAP
I
J~JSTINO OF.Nl:1tAL PLAN &. PROPOS~D AMF.Nt)MI~TS
I. NET filSCAL BAl.ANCE COMPAR.F.D TO HX.lSllNO GENERAL PLA.~
I CITY O~ CHUlA VISTA
1993 DOU.ARS
I
~-l~
I
I'-'.u'of.
.. --,..,.~ -. - -... --..--. - ..,~-. .......- - ......#.'w.. ......-.,,_.. -...-....---.._."'... ....... .~.........., .... ...
I
I
I
.Y~~r.. ___.._.~-~!~ ~~..Q!!~!.....
I
($21.J40) $41,097
($50.161) $64,247
($68.~9S) $110,581
($14,211) $16S,119
($75,6S5) $229.983
($16.368) S290.132
I
($71,81A) $333,0IS
($18,452) $393,'270
($79,065) $472,342
($'19,663) $550,346
($80.247) $549,161
($80.817j $S48,OO4
($8i,37~) $S46,986
($81.916) SS46,102
($82,447) SS4S.346
I
1'Ololl, ($1.088.09.\) $5,386,392 $4,298.298
~ 1 ......_._._1__. .'. ". .._..I'__.._....~..,.._.....~........ ...~.._,. ...... .......,......._.......
Sourdt: Economic S~'i\tegit$ G,OUp, 1~J3.
I '
('C1!r1hin~
~l~.~t~~~. ~.w.~p_ . u_. ,...J;~~~~JJ)~~i~l~
1
2
:3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
J2
13
J4
15
I
I
,
I
!
\
/;z~/Lj-~
$19,951
$ 13.98t)
$41.987
$90.909
$151,328
S'214,164
$1S$.191
$314.818
$3~3.277
$~ 70.(i~3
$468.914
$167,187
S.J6~.6U
$464,18$
$46'2.899
'"
....
, .
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 considering and application for a General Plan
Amendment proposed by the EastLake Development Company for the EastLake Greens
community, case no. GPA-93-04 & GPA-92-03 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
Address
Name
Signature
Address
/;2 -J~
I te.n'\ it
November 12. 1993
The Honorable Mayor Time Nader and City Council of Chula Vista
City Hall
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula T/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 I 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
to go forward with these plans. As a resident of Fairway Ridge
for the past year. I have already become disillusioned by the
devaluation df the dream home my husband and I invested our
life's savings in.
As a resident of Eastlake Greens. I know the value of our
home has gone down severely since the modifications were 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
we paid and the value continues to go down.
We were fortunate to purchase a substantial lot with 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 I chose to move away from. I 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
ln 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.
);2 -/7
- ? -
...
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 ~s 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.
~7/~~fl ~c:/
Ruth Ellen Sutehall
);2--/~
It-e.", 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"0 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.
/;2-/;
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.
)2~~O
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,
~~tf)~
/25').. H~~F MOON ~AY bR. C:.. H LH.A \)1 ~'1A./ c A
cc: Bob Santos, East1ake Development Company
9/9/5.
/;2--;2/
~#-
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
CITY OF CIIUU, \/IS T A
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
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.
J 2 r- 2~
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 ErR? 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.
~~3
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,~./....,../...... ~./J.'
-~~ /J~
P~f== .--: . -y~. _.~
Jack
1213 Half Moon Bay Drive
Chula vista, CA 91915
619-656-1465
cc: Bob Santos, Eastlake Development Company
J ;2 , .)-7
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 Chula 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 }>lan 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 south and east of the current
terminus of EastLake Parkway. This amendment would result in the following changes:
Low-Medium Residential (3-6 dwelllfig units 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 a':les
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, has 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, south of the terminus of EastLake Parkway. This amendment, known as the "EastLake Land Swap"
portion of the 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 ~/"!J
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-9Q-1, Otay Ranch Project, has 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
contact Duane Bazzel at 691-5101.
wPc F:\home\planning\eastlph.ntc
J ;2 r- ;2/~
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 HEARING WllL BE HELD BY THE COUNCll., on Tuesday, November 16, at 6:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers,' Public Services Building, 27.6 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 WIlli AMERICANS WIlli 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) 691-5101. California Relay Service is available
for the hearing impaired.
......:;
,. -'.
'. .
. OTAY RANCH
\l
$ NORm
.~
EASTlAKE LAND SWAP (GPA-92-03)
161 ACRES
--
/ c2 -c21?
. .
"<;bJ~ .' ..;..: , I!' '. .
i I:; . L . V' "'\ .~" "((' t-~/. .., ..........-...., ..., . -"
_r-,. I' ~..... ~ '.: ...... ....-:-.. ..... : .'* 1~' I:; . .... V
..11. .';. '.,-' .::'. :.' ...'.. ,. .......... ~-;..~:J li; 'J ',.' J'....~. ~~ . '. ~ ..\~-"/
~ . . .... . ~,..., \...,..... .-r- ) , j' . '...'.. .' ...t
. " . '. .., ....i ~ ..' ..\..... ~~ ". . .. . ,,\., . .,,"C ~
;~' _1 ..': .'" ..~.;:-l..' - ,~~~..X'", . ft....:, /1\..:\i'. \~-' . ~;:"/~~ EXIllBIT 1 '
i. I . .' ....~ '1\ .,-...... ..4.. ..--.. -'.... *i~
~.: '. ~,. ~ ~... ......-.,\ '.... ".' \..' . ,,1. '".::J _..: . _~.!,,".; ] f... X,'-:-": .'
:Ii I. . '.~ "..../\ .. '. '. '.' ."',:"11--
.:;:. I " ~.' - '...._.";' ~~.. .' ;; . .. :.: .
. .... ........- ~"...'1:'.... . .,'
'4fH4J ...... ." . /". .. . ,i \' ~
"'''..... .' . \ ....
...... . .,:.. ',! . Z.
. ". '... .... . '. y':-":L
. . ~.~. :',' ~ . .,~....
.* .'/;.~,\.. ~,."
. . i':\. '. ~::~<
'Y ~'. \.
u) ~
,
.> .~
'.
f'
: . .0('..
~
.
.
~
I'
~:l
, -.~, ..!E
'. I
..- .:.
: //
\) II /)-.27
(V' .
. ~',
Ii' r I
/'" I I
!' \' .'
!:
t;
;!
'2
>.
.fI..
I.
".
, ,',
EXHIBIT 2
I-
x~
wtQ
1->
Z<t:
8~
C!lU
~z
~ffi
-" <( I-
--1~
Q.W
/c2";L~
7
~ 15
8!. ~
m E C) ~ 15 bj
= Q. ~ ~ ,g ~ ~
II Q. (.) s
2 en c: E
~ CD ~
en 0 E
(.) ..!.
m -
i
I I
~c:
wO
I-Q
zO:
00:
uO
(!)u
z>-
-I-
z-
z~
.5t5
-0..<(
~~
tc:.
O}'Z' 0
'&
""'"
1;2/2;
EXHIBIT 3
>-
E
~
I
:=
i
.~
\:6
\ B'
\ .J
~c ~.~:
\5'T,"~ ~
~} ~. ~-~~~
,v . -.:'C~ ~
__.. ~~l' >C("C("<J
~__.,...~,. r:
~~ .----
~~.j 1
i'" J,
.~ ~,
~..;J: ~..
.~ ~
\~ ~.
_\~ ~
t\~ ~
)c1-YCJ
EXHIBIT 5
~z
~~
=~
(@x
bW
00
~
00
~
~;
6
I
-
I
~I
~
i i
~-~
-CWCD_
~~ E~ j .
iili~~i!il II
nnlhl!ilh
1 3
!
~2
/02-3/
V,)
~
t.
C-
ell
~
(f.)
~
!
!
!
. .
~-J
(@C15
@:~
c::=
(ij~
~~
@UJ
~
- 'W
III :a
~'WCI:l_
~~ E! i
tiiil), ~l!illlll
1III 8~I!i, ~
~
..J
~
ExmBIT 6
V)
~
! t
t.
~2 0.
..
S~l'l:6 ~
~
c:
~ .
~ .
!
!
.
/;2~;r;L
.........----. --- ------_. -......-.-....--
.: ."
EXlllBIT 7
~~
~~
fQb~
c=::I <(
~
bH:
OO~
~CI)
@>
~
.
w ~
~WCD_
~~~! f
!:bI~lil. 'B
.! ~'i Mal 3!
~j rJ' .est8lJi
Jj)) !~J!ir ~
3
a:
c
2t
s~,.ws
!
~2
/;;~;J/
\
"
J
III
]
c;
Q.
=-
c;
~
{I.:l
"'C:I
=
=
~
61
~
~..
~
c;
[;Iil
.
.......-.
t
'.
. .
_. '9' .
...
I
:>>-
_ .. c....__.__
~ Ian:.....
~EJcn
~ &.taxIB;
It'" n. -,..a2l''''.
...-.-- -~.-_.__._--.. .
EASTIAKE
. ) 2 ~.3 'I GREENS SPA
EXHIBIT 9
.'
,........................
~ c.-:::.:::~("
'.~, L L-
.......
Genera'
Development
Plan
....Tl
I i
... I I
.
I --..~.
a-.............- -,
..'..
RESIDENTIAl.
l.NC) ~ AOIEI Q.v 4C .
,
~- ,.. , ~3 fI, t
I
.
10M ; Low''''''''' ". 3 H 1133 \
y I~ 231 I 1- " Ino PO .
.
.... ~ I~O S "." '''0 ~
r:;::.. '" '..27 . 1112 \
~T_ 102S 1 TU' .
.
N:lN. RESDENTlAl. \
.
.
l.NC) . A~S \
~ "-I. nl I.M :
---=
c-o ~""~ 128
G::: "-Mr::r- & I 3~ ,
lIOWlIO ~.e1l.n'I;
. 0 QIr. s.-.. 1130
~~/~ '033
~".".. .~ ttt'
s: -.ar c;,__ 2" I
~T.., ....2
G:j ,.... u.. ~
..... TIUl JOe' I ec ,u. III
.--..-
~ E"ASTLAKE
A ~ CCWMJNlTY BY EASTWE DEVEI.OPtIiNl CO
~
1c1-J};>
mCinti
u..,;,.....I...
~.-~
De'. ).,. Ii -
. .
'. ~ ~ ~
(9t] ~ ~
c::::::;I tr.l <
ofQbi ~
.o~
. ~~~
6Zu
~~~ .
<Ql>>S: ~ ::e ~ ::E: 5 ~ 2 Q. B !2 m ~
~ ~
A),., /.;
~ ~~ /7. c:
'/ ~~.. ~v (!)
I' ~.. ~r en
~ ~.. ....-!"...7 c:
I ~_..~-r Q)
I \\ Q)C/)
I \\ ~Q)
f d (!)o
\ \\ mctS
\~ ~ ~~
\\ 5 \ \ ...J I"-
\ ::J I'"
1 en
o co
~ w
\ ~ ~
\.--=-- ,--... ~ ." j r....:::---Z
~...., ( m )'-" .. 11'7~
"i;:....:-..~...... ~_ .............( !J .. .::: ~v
5 J --]::::=--- ~:"'~'. .-s..::.::~~~~ ~/~
0. @ .~::::'.:::::: .-
O:z: ....... ...t:!J.. a:
,/ tL ..::::::::: :::a:;:: U ~
! ""-l.. :.:::::::::E:::.:::::,/
.,. ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' /~
---- - . . . . . . . ~ : : : : : : : : : : : :
-
~ ~
----e
.-e~a)_
!i! ~~ i
j~.i~JOll~ i ~
II i'~~!!B ~~
JjjJJ~~l~tlf~
EXHIBIT 10
j;2,-3?
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
LETTER RECEIVED FROM PROPERTY OWNER
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS AFFECTING EASTLAKE GREENS
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
.
March 3, 1993 hearing (EastLake Greens GPA)
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 GPA-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 GPA (GPA-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
, /:J-~3?
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 du/ac to 10 du/ac (units
transferred from areas R-2, R-8, R-9, R-13, R-17 & R-19) with no
increase in Greens unit total.
.
/;2--:5 r
_'"..._,._..___._,_.....___..".__.__,._......_._._,_~~..~~".,__________4.._~__~."....~_,_....~_,_,~.w..~_~_'_...<..._~,.,,+_~_,'_'",..,",.....~------
COUNCIL INFORMATION MEMO
December 3, 1993
FROM:
The Honorable Mayor and Ci~ouncil
John Goss. City Manager 1
Robert A. Leiter, Director of Planning~
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
------
J: " _ LI.~
~ /c/
~ ..~...~._.__...~..._~.~_.__.-,._-,.~._-~..~---""
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
j ). "it
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 IMPACT ON THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ...................... 6
3.1 Revenues ............................................... 6
3.2 Expenditures ............................................ 10
3.3 Net Fiscal Impact ......................................... 12
APPENDIX
/1_L/"7
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 ......................
j,) _L/~
111
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
$4,298,298 in net revenues to the City strongly supports the General Plan Amendment
development alternatives for the EastLake properties.
The balance of this report describes the assumptions and results of the fiscal impact model
in detail for each of the four development alternatives. Note that all remaining tables
referenced in this analysis are included in the Appendix.
) ", _ )) c;
oL ( /
1
....
~
ec;
~<
enli3<
~enE-<
j~~~
~8:~:J
~~$O
~~~~
O..JO~
~c.;>-_
giO
~o
o
~
E-<
en
><
~
~
OJ
o
....
~
.... 8
ZI\) fa
E -a
~ ~
5
~ = ~
~ ~~
en~
ij
..J
!
~
.... 8
fa :l fa
IS: -a
e ~
5
0''''
5 ~
~ ft=
en~"O
ij
..J
~
d
~
8
:l fa
;a
~
5
i
~I'"
~ ~J
o~
~
~
.... 8
I\) a
aZ-a
IS: ~
e
I\)
5 I '"
o 5 a
~~:a
o
j
-_-.:tNlt"loo~r-r-NNN-.:tN_
0\-0100000 NNr--.:tlt"l-Nr-
It"lO\-Nr--.:t t'lOONlt"loot'lO\IO
o ...; C"i r-: ....: ~. 0\ 0\ r-: .n C"i ....: 0 00 r-:
It"l100\t'l0\ r-t'l-O\ 0\ 0\0\ 00 00
~Ho~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
100\r-0\00 100\lt"l0\ 00 00 00000000
OOO\;2)r-r-r-O\-.:tr-lt"llt"llt"llt"llt"llt"l
C"!..~ .~~C"ll'"";.~-:'''1.''1.''1.''1.''1.''1.
1O!lt"l-.:tooNr-O-------
It"l O\Nlt"lO\-.:tr-O\------
N It"l101O1Or-r-r-000000000000
~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'"
I\)
=
c::
.1\)
~
r-O-Nt'l-.:tO\t'l~OOONOO\
r--lt"l-.:tIOIOlt"lr- t'lO-r-OON
oooor-N-.:too-.:tN oo--.:too-.:tN
ItSvioOMooOr-:oo\ltSviC"i"":oo\
ONoolOlt"lt'lN-OOOOOOO\
t'llt"lIOr-ooO\O-Nt'lMMMMN
~(A-~{A-{A-~"':"':"':"':"':"':"':"':"':
~~~~~~~~~
It"l :8 ...-.. ...-.. ...-.. ...-.. ...-.. ..-.. ...-.....-....-.....-......-.....-.. ...-..
0\ oor-r-~IONlt"l-.:tONNO\lt"l
r--O\ It"l -r-Nlt"lr-r-r-
~~-.:t.~-:. .C"l~"1.q~-.~-:.~
~ r-r-ooit'lM-.:tlt"llt"lIOIOr-r-
-NM It"llt"llt"llt"llt"llt"llt"llt"llt"l
~~~ ~~~~~~~~~
""-''-''-''-'''-''-'''-''''-'''-''-'''-''-''-''
oo.....~..........It")..................................................
$8~~~~888888888
"';"';OM.nC"iMMMMMMMMM
MIO~_~~lt"llt"llt"llt"llt"llt"llt"llt"llt"l
~~Zi~~~~~~~~~~~~
'"
I\)
=
5
>
~
t'llt"lIOt'l~OIOO\IOr-N~O\Nr-
O\~-r-~OO-~OO~(5::oooooo
-:. . C"l C"!.. . l'"";. l'"";. -. "1. ~ . . C"l ~ C"l
~:'l~nt~~~~l;~~~~~~
-NMt'l Mt'lt'lt'lMt'lt'lt'lMM
~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~
~...-.. ~ t=:' ~ t=:' c;:\ \0 ~ ~ ~ 6 ~ S ~ ~
~100t'l~000000lt"lO\NNN
~~t'lt'lll"l~M-oo\OM-oolt"l
1tS001tS1tS000\1tSr-:00000\O"":"":M
~~t;~~~~~~~~~~~~
'-"'-''-''''-''-''-'''-''-''-''-''-''''''''{A-~~
'-" '-' '-" '-'
r-MO\r-NNr-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-
r-MN---,"","",""~,"","",",,,",,~
ooNlI"lOoooor-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-
.no\s8'.n.n"":"":"":"":"":"":"":"":"":
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'"
~
>
~
MONr-lt"lO\~-~O\r-t'lIOr-lI"l
t'lO\\O-r-1O ~ It"lO\lt"lN-N
oor-Or-~N ~ ooOMIOO\N
0\0\ ItS 0\ r-:1tS.n"';C"iMM"":Oo\o\
\O\QN.........................................................oo
_NMMMMMMMMMMMMM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~OO"-""'-""'-"""""''''-'''''-'''''-'''''-''''-''''-'''''-''''-''''-''
cs-~~Ntt~~~~8~!;:~l!!
. ~ ~ q ~ -:. ~ ~ q N. ~. "1.l'"";. ~ q
~ r-NNt'looooO\O\O\O\O\O\O
4iI':t..............................................................N
'-'~~~~~~~~~~~~
'-"'-''-''-''-''-''-''-''-''-''-''-'
~8r-lOlOlO!:;!:;!:;!:;!:;!:;!:;!:;!:;
t'lt'l~lt"llt"llt"lr-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~..................................................................................
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~
5
>
I\)
~
O\~lt"lr-lt"lM~Nlt"lN~O\~~~
It"lNr-t'looO\lI"llOr-O\-~O\i\O
~. -:. "1. "1. ~ C"l q ~ ~ '"". C"l -:. . . .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~..................................................................................
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~
>-
O-Nt'l~lt"l
_Nt'l~lt"l\Or-ooO\------
00
N
It"l
00
10
r-
i
r-
t'l
-
~
o
-
~
~
ItS
~
N
.n
-
~
.......
t'l
10
00
r-:
-
10
~
'-'
~
r-
M
g
-
~
g
"1.
-
~
vi
~
~
~
~.
s
C"l
-
~
'-'
~
-
~
00
.n
~
~
"1.
~
"1.
~
~
~
...;
-
N
~
'-'
~
00
~
M
~
~
0\
C"i
r-
~
-
~
~
M
~
-
ci.
5
cO
~
0'
en
u
Os
g
~
8
g
en
/ .) -:5'l)
D+-
FIGURE 2
EASTLAKE GREENS & LAND SWAP
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN & PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
NET FISCAL BALANCE COMPARED TO EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
CITY 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.
, ", - 0/
Jc~ ~ .
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 ofresidential 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
! '/ - ~~
/ 01.- /
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.
/) //7
d~/~
5
3.0 IMPACT ON THE CI1Y 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
/ ') - t;L/
~<- ~/ I
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 TA 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 redistnbution.
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.
/2 /S~~
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. Mter 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 ~l,OOO 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
J;L ~5t,
8
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 11A and lIB, 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 General
Plan Amendment alternative for EastLake Greens, total revenues peak at $326,062 in year
3, then decline gradually over the remaining 12 years.
,) ..5'7
/ d-- -~--
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.
/) --~~g/
Police and Fire Protection
Expenditure projections for police and fire protection are projected using EDU'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 EDU, 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 EDU 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
)~J -__s"~i
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 net 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.
/.2--tbC
12
APPENDIX
/,2 - 0 (
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.
Ic2--~2
TABLE IB
EASTLAKE GREENS
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 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.
);2 -'~. ,)
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
Professional/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.
J,; -~ 1
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 1,500 $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.8. 221,000 $100
Commercial Retail 52.0 n.a 520,000 $150
Open Space 14.0 n.a D.a $0
Circulation Streets 17.0 n.a n.a $0
PuibliclQuasi Public 0.0 n.a n.a $0
TOTAL 848 161.0 0.19
Source: EastLake Development, Nov. 1993.
J2~ ?5
0
.-
~
Q)
>-
0\
~
Q)
>-
00
~
Q)
>-
r-
~
Q)
>-
I,C)
~
Q)
>-
Irl
~
Q)
>-
-q-
~
Q)
>-
M
Zu.l ~ -q-
M
(/)j~ >-
ZA-<O C'l
<:: ~;gj ~ g
-
M \:) ~ >-
~
...;l u.lu.lZ -
== ~\:)O ~ g
<:: <:: .....
E=l~~ .-
Eo-< >-
~!=:O C
u.l(/)(/) ca .g ~~
~~ ::l glrloo
u.l C ~ C'llrllrl
C ....-4 ...... ....-4 ....-4 00
<:: &l M Irl
<::
Q)
~ 8 00
c:r~
(/)
bIl
.5 !!l -q-
'" o-
S C ~ooo
X:::;l
....
C ....
Q) C
E 0
Q.,C
.9
~ E
o 0
OU
~ ~
C C
o .g
'0 ca ._
01il'~ '"
Q)cQ)ca
~ .g ~ o~
E '1il ~ c
~~:E~
cj) I '"
:Egg~
':.a~.J:
~oii5b1l
.3:E:E::E
d
~3
<:: Q)
~~
c .-
o e
.- 0
~ E
~ E
J:8
t..-i
0\
0\
-
-.;
~
...
c
e
~
Q)
~
~
~
~
~
o
(/)
/;2 /~. ~
....
C ....
e ~
Q.C
o.
~ e
00
ou
:j :j
C C
o .g
~ 'a._
'r;; '::l CIl
2C~ta
......g '::2
~ .~ i ~
~ ~ , il
~~g~
~ ~ ~ ~
.3~~l:E
c::l
.- i
~~
~:3
o B
.- 0
~ e
~ e
~8
f"i
0\
0\
-
>
o
Z
..:
C
o
8
8'
~
!
~
i
tI)
f ') /& '7.
101-
,i
0
-
~
>-
0-
~
>-
00
~
Q)
>-
f'
~
>-
\0
~
>-
10
~ ~
>-
"<t
~ 10
~
-
>-
~
~ ~~. ~ ~IO
-~
-
~~5 >-
~
u ~i~ ~ 8~
- -
N >-
~ -< VI
~ ....:l~Z -
= ~OO ~ 8~
< ~~5 - -
E-c >-
~!=:O =
VI VI VI 0
iii~~ ~ .= 81000 ~~
E ~ ~ V'l 10
...... ...... ...... ..... 00
-<.&J M 10
-<
~ ti 00
O"~
VI
co
.5 :i ~~oo
'" ....
8 =
=::J ~ 10 ~
~
-
;;
~
J
=
~
ca ~ 8-
.= 1)
= = ~
Q) .g c:l
~ ca ....
.;; .= '" .... ] !
~.8~~ !~
.... e.... ~ =
5 .... .= ~ :Il .g ~
&~ ~ ~ .... = ....
o ~
::s~~~ .... Q) ~
oS ~ e
~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ )f\-IaK
Q) 0 .3::s::Sffi ct8 0
QU VI ~.
0 ~
-
~
0 g
>-
0'1 ~
~
>- g
00 ~~
~
"':0
>- - V'l
r- ~~
~
00
>- ('f') V'l
\0 ~~
~
00
>- ('f') V'l
V'l ~~
~
00
>- ('f') V'l
"<t ~~
; ~
00
>- ('f') V'l
M ~~
e;:~~ ~ ~"<t
_r- oo
~~8 >- ('f') V'l
N ~~
tI)~~ ~ 00
Q V'l V'l
~....:lU - - 00
N >- ('f') V'l
~ <l:l..tI)
,...;j ~i~ - ~~
= ~ 00 00
< \0 10 V'l
- - 00
Eo- ~~~ >- ('f') V'l
=
tl)Otl) 0
iiifi1~ i .= 81000 ~~
a Sl NV'lV'l
CI) ..... ...... 'f""'4 ...... 00
2 <.&:l M V'l
~ <
l:l.. ~~
~ 3
0"11.. -0
tI) N N
N V'l
tlO
.s !!l 0008rt
CI:l ....
= =
o~ \0 "<tM M
::r: ~
-
:>>
~
oJ
=
0
E
'a 'a 8-
.= .= 'i)
= = >
o -8 .51 ~
'0 ~ ....
.c;;. c.f.) ~
~=~'a ~~
-8 .=
... ~ .... .c =
5 ... ~ .tlO 0 ~:! ~
e 5 ~p::::E:s!
I fIl o ~
!:l.= ~ e e 0 .... 0 0
,.S;l = = p:: ~ E
~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ /'
~8 .3~~:E !:8 0 ) 1 ~ /.. '-?
tI) .e>'- U i
TABLE 3
EASTLAKE GREENS & LAND SWAP
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN & PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
POPULATION 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.
/ ') , ') /}
/,~ /C
-<
..,.
~
...:.l
=
-<
Eo-
~
u
~
en
.....l
~
!i
~
o
-
en
~
~~
en.....lZ
Zt:l..O
~3~
o~~
!:l~z
:;:0::>
~oo
enz25
<:E=:en
~en::>
XO
~:I:
o
!:9
~
u
u
o
o
G
~
~
t:l..
~~
>--:::
u
gf3~
.3~8
o
5 ~
s 5
Q,C
o
~ S
Q) 0
ou
onooo
C"l
C"l
o
-
onooo
C"l
C"l
la
Q)
>--
0\
la
Q)
>--
onooo
C"l
C"l
00
~
>--
onooo
C"l
C"l
r-
la
Q)
>--
onooo
C"l
C"l
\0
~
>--
onooo
C"l
C"l
on
la
Q)
>--
onooo
C"l
C"l
"<t
la
Q)
>--
onooo
C"l
C"l
('t')
la
Q)
>--
\0000
C"l
C"l
C"l
~
>--
\0000
0\
-
-
8000
-
la
Q)
>--
~~~~
\0\0\0\0
0\ 0\ 0\ 0\
ta ta
'J:! OJ:!
c: 5
~ta~ .....l
.2 .~ ~ ta <:
.... -8 OJ:! Eo-
S .... .c: c: ~
='~~-8
:a ~ '.l;' .c;;
~gg~
i ~ ~ ~
.3::E::Ex
on
C"l
C"l
00
on
C"l
C"l
00
on
C"l
C"l
00
on
C"l
C"l
00
on
C"l
C"l
00
on
C"l
C"l
00
on
C"l
C"l
00
on
C"l
C"l
00
\0
C"l
C"l
00
\0
0\
-
00
8
-
00
~~
on on
0\ 0\
c:
~3
<:~
:ata
c: ....
o 8
.... Q)
~ s
~ s
~8
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
('t')
0\
0\
-
~
Eo-
~
s:i.
='
~
""
Q)
'j>
~
en
u
's
o
c:
o
~
Q)
~
o
en
/ 'J r 7/
I~ /
=
~
~
...;l
=
~
~
U
~
tI)
~
~
~
~~
~~
tI)~Z
Z<Cl
~j~
~~~
~i~
tI)~~
<~:J
~ 0
~:I:
tl)Cl
~~
~~
~U
g
Cl
~
~
~
~~
>-:::
u
bI) C a
c ::s
.s~::s
8
...
5 ...
e 5
Q,C
oS
~ e
o 0
ClU
('<'l00'l~
- C"l
C"l
o
-
~00'l~
- C"l
C"l
~
>-
0'1
~
>-
C"'l00\~
- C"l
C"l
00
~
>-
('<'l00'l~ \0
- C"l 00
C"l \0
r-
~
>-
('<'l00'l~ \0
- C"l 00
C"l \0
\0
~
>-
('<'l00'l~ \0
- C"l 00
C"l \0
V'l
!a
o
>-
C"'l00'l~ \0
- C"l 00
C"l \0
~
~
>-
C"'l00\~ \0
- C"l 00
C"l \0
!"'l
!a
o
>-
C"'l00'l00 0
.... C"l C"'l 00
C"l~ \0
C"l
~
>-
C"'l0C"l~ 0
- C"'l 0\ ~
C"lC"l V'l
....
~ooo ~
.... V'l V'l ....
........ C"'l
~
>-
~~~~
\0\0\0\0
0'1 0'1 0\ 0\
';l ~
"g c
~:a~
2 05 ~ ';l ~
..... ~ 0::2 .......
8 Oij ~ 5 ~
:;::I~=:g
as I CI:l
~8g~
i:g:g~
.s~~=
\0
00
\0
00
\0
00
\0
00
\0
00
\0
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
V'l V'l
0'1 0'1
c_
o- "s
~~
~3
o ~
0- 0
~ e
~ e
&:8
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
<:>
o
~
!"'l
~
....
Q.
::s
cS
~
o-
bi)
~
CI)
u
o~
6
~
i
tI)
l~--7d-
~:s ~~oo C'l 00 0
C'l II"l ~
>-:::
0 ~~OO C'l 00 0
- ~
~ C'l II"l
>-
0\ ~~OO C'l 00 0
~ "<t
C'l II"l r-
>-
00 ~~OO C'l 00 0
~ C'l II"l ~
B >-
~ r- ~~oo C'l 00 0
tI) ~ "<t
3 C'l II"l r-
>-
~ \0 ~~oo C'l 00 0
~ ~ "<t
C'l II"l r-
......
tI) >-
~
I II"l ~~oo ~ 00 0
z ~
~~~ C'l II"l r-
4)
~~Cl >-
~f "<t ~~oo 0\ 00 0
u ~ ~ ~ 00
-.:r C'l"<t \0
~ >-
..:I
!Xl ~o~ ('f') ~~oo 0\ 00 0
< 00 ~ \0
E- C'l ('f') II"l
~z~ 4)
tI)~~ >-
<tI)o
!1:l~:I: C'l \0 II"l 0 0 - 00 0
~ ~~ ~
Cl
~ >-
- 8~00 II"l 00 0
U ~ C'l
U - - C'l
0 >-
Cl
G u ~
fQ ~3a 0\
~~~~ ~~ 0\
~ 3~= \O\O~\O II"l II"l -
0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ c:i.
Cl.. 8 =
0 ~
~
~ ~ .50
.::2 .::2 ~
C C
4) -8 ci tI)
'0 ] .... ~ ~ U
e;3. U'.) ~3
~C~] .e
-8 . <~ ~ 0
... ~.... ~ C g
5 - :a~
e 5 ~~:f~ c.... ~
I <12 o ~
Q,C ::s~~~ .... 4) 4.)
.sa ] ~
~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
4) 0 3::S::S:f ~8 0
ClU tI)
) ^ (J '7
~ - / /
Q
'lI'
~
..::I
=
~
Ej
<
,:l.,
tn
3
~
~
E-<O
~~
~~~
~~~
tn~~
~ ,tn
<li:~
~;~
~~Vi
tnO~
<00
~l1:l:I:
tno
~~
~!5
~u
~
o
~
~
,:l.,
"'V'l
~'-;'
>-:::
u
~ata
.s~='
~
o
-
5 -
e 5
Q..C
oS
~ e
o 0
ou
V'l000\
\0 0\ V'l
~ ~
o
-
V'l000\
\0 0\ V'l
~M
~
>-
0\
~
>-
V'l000\
\0 0\ V'l
~ ~
00
~
>-
V'l000\
\0 0\V'l
~ ~
r-
~
>-
V'l000\
\0 0\V'l
~ ~
\0
~
>-
V'l000\
\0 0\ V'l
~ ~
V'l
~
>-
V'l000\
\0 0\V'l
~ ~
'V
~
>-
V'l000\
\0 0\ V'l
~M
~
~
>-
V'l O.'V ("I
\0 0\\0
~ M
("I
~
>-
~Oa;a;
("I ("I
-
00000
\0 V'lV'l
- -
~
>-
~~~~
\0\0\0\0
0\0\0\0\
~ ~
c c
-8'a~
.;; -.0 en
.9c~-a
.... -8 '::2
e.... ~ C
.=' fj :.:::l -8
~ ~ ... ....
~~~~
~ ~.~ ~
.s~~:E
V'l
-
00
~~
git,
("I 'V
~~
gi~
("I 'V
~~
~~
88
V'l V'l
oC'i
- 00
("I ~
V'l
-
00
V'l
-
00
V'l
-
00
V'l
-
00
~~
...;.,.)"
o ~
("I ~
V'l
-
00
88
V'l V'l
C'ir-:
r- 00
-("I
V'l
-
00
~~
~o
-~
88
V'l V'l
-n-C'i
- 0\
- -
V'l
-
00
~
00
~~
r-:-n-
00 'V
-
~
\0
88
V'l V'l
00r-:
V'l 0\
00
\0
~
~~
00
~ V'l
~~
V'l V'l
0\ 0\
~
E-<
~
d_
.... 's
~~
~3
o ~
.... 0
] ~
~8
o
V'l
~
~
o
r-
o
V'l
0\
8
r-
o
V'l
0\
0\
\b
~
M
0\
V'l
~
..c
M
V'l
~
g
~
~
~
~
~
00
o
M
~
("I
M
("I
~
..c
V'l
-
~
o
00
M
0\
0\
-
~
b
E-<
ci.
='
~
fj
'f
tn
u
.,
~
~
o
tn
) .2 / ?L/
'" V) 00000 00 00 0
~ - ~ ~
.
-
>- -
0 00000 00 00 0
- ~ ~
t:a
0
>-
0\ 00000 00 00 0
~ ~ ~
>-
00 00000 00 00 0
t:a ~ ~
0
>-
r- 00000 00 00 0
~ ~ ~
>-
E-< 10 00000 00 00 0
~ ~ ~ ~
>-
>-
0 V) 00000 00 00 0
~~ t:a ~ ~
V)~~ 0
Zl:l..~ >-
~~~ ~ 00000 00 00 0
-< ~ ~ ~
II)
~ >-
....;l ~~O
== ~oE= ~ NOOO N 00 0
-< ~o-< ~ V) V)
~ 10 10
V)ZS
-<E=l:l.. >-
~V)2 N V)OOO V) 00 0
><!o ~ 10 10
~C V) V)
>-
~ - 00000 00 00 0
~ ~ 00 00
N N
l:l.. >-
'" " r.-i
= u 00 00 00 00 ~
i o"a ~8
00 00 00 00 -
~ 8,0 c-4c-4c-4c-4 N V) c:i.
::I
~
~
-; '60
-; ~
0.::2 '.::2
= =
o 0 = V)
-o-;:sa ~ ~ u
or.;; 0.::2 '" ~~
o = ~ -; "s
~ 0 0.::2 E-< ~ 0
... e :sa .c:: = ~ ~~ g
5 ... ::Ifj:f-8 =3 ~
e 5 ~ ~ "-
I '" o ~
0,.= :E~~~ .- 0 4)
.9 ~ e
~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~
o 0 .3:E:E:i a:8 0
ou V)
1:2 7/
. ----I
==
II)
~
,..;j
==
<
Eo-
~~
~~
~~~
~~~
Ca:z
~~~
~~5
VI~t:l.
iiic2
~~
~~
t:l.~
t:l.
~~
>-:::
fIl <.i
= .!.? ...
8o.c
~ 8. ~
'5 ...
e 5
0..=
oS
~ e
4) 0
QU
0\00\0
~ 1000
\0 C"l
-
o
-
0\00\0
~ ~~
-
~
>-
0\
~
>-
0\00\0
~ 1000
\0 C"l
-
00
~
>-
0\00\0
~ 1000
\OC"l
-
l'
~
>-
0\00\0
M 1000
\0 C"l
-
\0
~
>-
0\00\0
M 1000
\0 C"l
-
10
~
>-
0\00\0
~ 1000
\OC"l
-
~
~
>-
0\00\-
M 1000
\OC"l
-
M
~
4)
>-
0\00\~
M 10
\0
-
C"l
~
>-
0\00\00
M ~~
-
OOMt""l
~ t""l t""l
~~
~
>-
00 00 00 00
00 00 00 00
NNN~
-a 3
.~ ...
= =
4) .g
:9 <;; .-
fIl .:;3 fIl
~.8~]
E! .- .c =
i3 fj .bI) 4)
:o:l~!:E:s!
is I fIl
::S88~
~ ~~ ~
.3::s::S::E
00 00
l'
~
00 00
l'
~
-
00 00
l'
~
-
00 00
l'
~
00 00
l'
~
-
00
l'
~
-
00
00
l'
~
-
00
0\
l'
~
-
00
C"l
~
-
00
\0
10
"l
-
00
~
0\
00
~8
C"l1O
~
~
J3
<~
1~
o ~
.~ 4)
J! ~
~8
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
~
~
~
-
Q.
='
~
fj
.60
8
g
VI
y
.~
o
~
~
o
VI
Jl'7G,
"'V'l I'NOO 0\ 00 0
~"';' 00 V'l M
V'l V'l -
><::: - c-i
0 I'NOO 0\ 00 0
- 00 V'l M
~ V'l V'l -
- c-i
><
0\ I'NOO 0\ 00 0
~ 00 V'l M
V'l V'l -
- c-i
><
00 I'NOO 0\ 00 0
~ 00 V'l M
V'l V'l -
- c-i
><
I' I'NOO 0\ 00 0
~ 00 V'l M
V'l V'l -
- c-i
><
i \0 I'NOO 0\ 00 0
~ 00 V'l M
V'l V'l -
- c-i
><
><
0 V'l 1'0000 V'l 00 0
~~~ ~ 00 V'l ~
V'l V'l -
- c-i
~~W ><
~I~ ~ 1'0\00 \0 00 0
U ~ 00 0\ 00
II) ~ Z V'l M ~
-
f;I;:l :s 0 >< -
...;!
=:I ~O~ M O\MOO C'I 00 0
~ ~ 00 V'l ~
~~5 V'l 0
- -
en~2 ><
<en ~ V'l1'00 N 00 0
W~o ~ \0 0 I'
V'l I' <"!.
~ >< -
u
~ - 00-00 0\ 00 0
~ ~ 00 \0 ~
N M
><
jg U ~
~ 8'a 00 00 00 00 ~8 ~
00 00 00 00 -
~ 8.::> NNNM ~ V'l c:i.
=
c5
~
] '60
'il ~
'::1
I:: I::
o -8 c_ en
'0 ~ ._ ~ ~ 0
.r;;. en .- '5 .-
~5~'il ~~ e
'0 '::1 ~ J
- ~ ._ .c I::
5 - . ~:E-8 ~3
e is ~ ~ .- o ~
Q.I:: :E~~& .~ e ~
,g
~ e ~~~-Q ... e
o 0 .3::e::E::x: ~8 0
ou en
/v2/7?
~:s 00010\0 0\ 000 00
00 N M """ ~~ N
- - 0 M ~
><::: - - N -
0 00010\0 0\ 0""" """
- 00 N M ~ ~g:: M
~ - -0 ~
- - N -
><
0\ 00010\0 0\ 00 ~
~ 00 N M """ ~~
- -0 M l'"-:.
- - N
>< -
00 00010\0 0\ N 10 ~
ta 00 N M """ ~~
- -0 M
Q) - - N
>< -
I"- 00010\0 0\ c;g rt
ta 00 N M ~
- -0 00 \0 "'t
Q) - - N -
><
~~ \0 00010\0 0\ ~l(! 11"I
~ 00 N M ~ \0
- -0 M \0 10 N~
- - N
~>< >< -
~~ 10 00010\0 0\ \0 0 \0
~ 00 N M ~ I"- 00 10
- - 0 M 10 """ q
- - N
~~W >< -
~~~ ~ 00010\0 0\ N 10 I"-
Q ~ 00 N M ~ \0 00 ~
- -0 ~ M
VI ji~ - - N
~ ><
...:l
=:l ~ ~ M 0001"-10 0 OO~ 00
~ ~ 00 M~ I"- ~N M
- - M \0
~W~ - - N
><
~o2 N 0000000 ~ ~~ 0\
W@O ~ ~ ~~ N
~C ~ N- ~
>< -
~!!; - ~O(f'lM N ~8 ~
Q..~ ~ M M ~
- ~~ - - N
Q.. >< -
sg U M
B 8'a 00 00 00 00 ~8 g::
00 00 00 00 -
If 8.::J ~C'iC'i~ NIO c:i.
::l
~
~
~ .~
~ 8
.:;1 g
c 5
.g~:g =- tI)
~ ~ u
'<;3' ." .- .s ]
~.8~~ .8 Q)
- 8 .- .g, c i~ ~
5 - . ~:c-8 :3
e is :g ~ .- o ~
~c ::E8~~ .- Q) U
.Sl ~ ~
~ e ~~~.g, ~
Q) 0 3~~:c ~8 0
ou tI)
/.2 /77/
TABLE 6
EASTLAKE 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
Nonresidential EDUs
= # of Locally Employed
Persons per Dwelling Unit
50,769
2.884
=
Total EDUs
50,251
=
17,604
=
67,855
Sources:
California Department of Finance, 1993.
SANDAG, Series 7 Projections, 1990.
City of Chula Vista, Planning Department, 1993.
City of Chula Vista, Transportation Department, 1991.
Government Finance Review, "The Equivalency Factor", 1990.
Economic Strategies Group, 1991 & 1993.
/" [I n C/'
-...c... -' (
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% ofl % 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.
I..') _. V /)
/.~ 0 ~
<
QC
~
...:l
CQ
<
Eo-
z
<
en...:l
Ii
~o
p~
~r::
~~
b
> s
o t':l
~~
f-<
'5 -
e 5
c.c::
o
i e
II) 0
ClU
V'l
-
~
II)
>-
'<t
-
~
;:...
M
....
~
II)
>-
N
....
~
II)
;:...
....
-
~
>-
o
-
~
II)
;:...
0\
~
;:...
00
~
;:...
r---
~
>-
'"
~
;:...
V'l
~
;:...
'<t
~
>-
M
~
>-
N
~
>-
....
~
>-
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
~
U
<
~
en
MOOO
M
~
~
Cl
......
en
~
Z
o
z
~
~
~
~
Cl
~
~
o
~
~
tn
~
~
~
en
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
'"
'<t000
....
-
8000
-
~~~!)
MMM~
, , . r---
'<t '<t '<t .
....-4....-4....-4\0
<a :3
'::l -
c:: c::
II) II)
'O";;:!:g
.r;j .,C ~
2c::~<a
.....g '::l
e .... ..c: c::
=~::E-8
:a ~ I 'r;J
~ g g ~
i i i ~
.3~~ffi
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
r--- r---
..0..0
.53
.€ II)
<~
:aca
c:: ,-
o ~
.... II)
~ e
~ e
~8
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
~
U
~
en
~
r::
ffi
Cl
......
en
~
Z
o
z
Cl
~
~
~
~
Cl
......
tn
~
~
o
~
en
~
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
MOOO
M
0\000
N
'<t000
....
0000
~~~~
~~~r---
;!;!;!..o
<a :<'l
'::l '::I
c:: c::
II) .g
:g ";;:! .-
'" '::1 '"
1I)c::1I)<a
~ II) ~ '::l
e :g ..c: c::
=~~-8
:.;::l ~;.L;....
G:S I '"
~gg~
i i i ~
.3~~ffi
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
r--- r---
..0..0
.53
.€ II)
<~
:aca
c:: ....
o ~
.- II)
~ e
~ e
~8
M
0\
0\
-
ci.
=
~
:s
'60
~
tn
U
's
o
c::
o
~
~ (v
a Jr2~2 /
o
tn
=
QC)
~
...;!
=
<
Eo-
~
f@
~~
~~
c~
~~
~~
tI)~
~c
~
tI)
~
~
~
b
> B
o <<l
~~
~
'5 ...
e 5
c.c:
o
~ e
4) 0
ou
V"l
.....
~
><
~
.....
~
><
M
.....
~
><
C"l
.....
~
><
.....
.....
~
><
o
.....
~
><
0'1
~
><
00
~
><
r-
~
><
\0
~
><
II"l
~
><
~
~
><
M
~
><
C"l
~
><
.....
~
><
C"l0~..... 00
M M
C"l0~"'" 00
M M
C"l0~"'" 00
M M
C"l0~"'" 00
M M
C"l0~"'" 00
M M
B
~
tI)
~
o
......
tI)
~
z
o
z
~
~
~
~
ffi
o
~
~
o
~
tI)
~
~
~
tI)
C"l0~(;;
C"l0~"'"
M M
C"l0~"'"
M M
C"l0~"'"
MM
C"l0~"'"
MM
C"l0~"'"
M M
C"l0~~
C"l0~0
M r-
.....
C"l0~~
..... .....
~ooo
..... II"l V"l
..... .....
~~~~
~~<"'!r-
~ ~ ~ .
...............\0
] ~
c: c:
~]~
2C:~";l
- -8 0=
e .... .c c:
.= ~ $~
~8~~
i~~~
:3::E::E53
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
r- r-
\CS~
d_
.... .3
~~
1:3
o ~
.... 4)
~ e
.E e
&:8
C"l0~"'" 00
M M
C"l0~- 00
M M
C"l0~- 00
M M
C"l0~"'" 00
M M
C"l0~- 00
M M
~
~
tI)
~
~
o
~
Z
o
z
o
~
~
~
~
~
......
tI)
~
~
o
~
tI)
~
C"l0~(;;
C"l0~"'"
M M
C"l0~"'"
M M
C"l0~"'"
MM
C"l0~"'"
M M
C"l0~-
M M
C"l0~0
MM
C"l0~~
C"l0..... 0
C"l .....
0000
~~~~
<"'!<"'!<"'!r-
~ ~ ~ .
...............\0
~ ]
c: c:
4) -8
"'0 <<I ....
.;:1 .::1 ."
2C:~";l
- -8 .=
e .... ~ c:
.= ~ 53 ~
~8~~
i ~ ~ ~
:3::E::E53
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
r- r-
-D-D
d_
.... .3
~~
1~
o ~
.... 4)
~ ~
&:8
M
~
.....
Q.
~
~
.SO
~
tI)
u
.s
g
o
~
Q
~
v.l
/J ~7~
U
QC
Wil
..J
=
-<
E-o
~~
~~
~~
:s~
~g
~Z
tI)~
<tI)
~~
b
> S
~~
F-<
...
5 ...
8,g
oS
~ e
~8
\I")
-
~
><
~
-
~
><
~
-
la
o
><
N
-
~
><
-
-
~
><
o
-
~
><
0\
~
><
co
~
><
r--
~
><
\0
~
><
V)
~
><
~
~
><
~
~
><
N
~
><
-
~
><
0000 00
~ 00
0000 00
~ 00
0000 00
~ 00
0000 00
('f') 00
0000 00
~ 00
B
~
V)
~
~
Cl
-
tI)
~
z
o
z
~
~
~
~
Cl
~
f1..
o
~
V)
~
~
~
~
tI)
0000
('f') 00
0000
~ 00
0000
('f') 00
0000
('f') 00
0000
('f') 00
0-00
~ ~
-
00\00
('f') r--
-
--00
~\O
-
~('f')00
- ~
- -
8~00
- -
~~~~
~~~r--
~ ~ ~ .
___10
~ ~
= =
o .g
'0 ;;; ...
.U; ..= Ul
2=~;;;
-.g ':;I
e; '.. .c. =
:3 ~ ,co 0
:;:l~:I!:g
is I Ul
::s~~~
i ~ ~ ~
3::s::s:I!
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
r-- r--
\4:5\4:5
c_
~ '3
<~
13
o ~
'.. 0
~ e
.e e
J:8
0000 00
~ 00
0000 00
('f') 00
0000 00
~ 00
0000 00
('f') 00
0000 00
~ 00
B
~
tI)
~
~
Cl
-
V)
~
~
z
Cl
~
tI)
E-<
~
~
~
Cl
~
f1..
o
~
tI)
~
0000
~ 00
0000
~ 00
0000
~ 00
0000
~ 00
0000
('f') co
0-00
~ r--
o ~ 0 0
('f') V)
0\1000
N ~
~0000
- -
0000
~~~~
~~~r--
~ ~ ~ .
...............\0
~ ~
= =
o .g
'0 ;;; '..
.~ ..a Ul
0=0;;;
~ .g ~ ':;I
e '.. ~ =
,= ~ :.= .g
~ ~;J;;.;;
::s~~~
i~~~
3::S::S:I!
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
r-- r--
\4:5\4:5
c_
... '3
~ 0
~~
23
o ~
'.. 0
~ e
.e e
J:8
M
~
-
c:i.
=
cS
~
'60
~
V)
u
's
o
5
Iii
i ),2 -r3
V)
V'l 00 00 V'l ~ r-- 0000V'l ~ r--
- - V'l ("'l ~~ - V'l ("'l ~~
~ ~~ ~~
>- - 0- - ~
"<t 0000V'l M r-- 0000V'l ~ r--
- - V'l ("'l ~~ - V'l("'l ~~
~ ~~ ~~
>- - 0- - ~
~ 0000V'l ~ r-- 0000V'l M r--
- - V'l ("'l ~~ - V'l ("'l ~~
~ it. ~~
>- - ~
("'l 0000V'l M r-- 0000V'l ~ r--
- - V'l ("'l ~~ - V'l ("'l ~~
~ it. i~
>-
- 0000V'l M r-- 0000V'l ~ r--
- - V'l ("'l ~~ - V'l ("'l ~~
~ B it. ~~
>- - ~
0 ~ OOooV'l ~ r-- 0000V'l M r--
- (I) - V'l ("'l ~~ e - V'l("'l ~~
~ ~ ig ~o
~ - M
>- i
(I)
0'1 0000V'l M r-- I 00 00 V'l ~ r--
~ - V'l ("'l ~~ - V'l ("'l B~
~..c "<t \0
; >- (I) - 00 - ("'l
00 ~ OOOO~ ~~ 0000V'l ~~
~ z - V'l - - V'l ("'l
~@ 0 v1~ ~ ~~
>- z ("'l r-- - ("'l
~ I
~~ r-- 0000V'l ~~ ~ 0000111 ~~
- 111 ("'l - V'l ("'l
(I)~ ~ C'io C'io
Q >- (I) "<t r-- 0 - ("'l
ClC @....1 \0 ~ 0000V'l ~~ ~ 00 00 V'l ~~
r.::I <~ ~ - V'l ("'l - V'l ("'l
..:I ....1~ ~
c::Q ~ ~~ o..c
< ~~ >- - -
~ 111 ~ 0000V'l ~~ 0000111 ~~
~~ ~ - V'l ("'l ~ - V'l ("'l
(I) 0 0 oO~ oO~
iil@ >- - M \0 ~ -
"<t ~ OOOO~ ~~ 0000V'l ~~
(I) - 111 - 111 ("'l
~ ~ l1. ~~ 8 ..co
~ >- 0 ~ -
M ~ 000'l"<t ~~ OOMO ~~
~ ~ - "<to'l ~ - "<t("'l
~ - 0
(I) ~~ ~..c
>- I ~
C'l ~ OO-~ ~~ 00-0 ~~
~ - r-- (I) - ("'l -
~ - - ,
C'i~ ~ C'i~
>- M V'l
- ~ 00000 ~~ 0000 00
\0 111 V'l
~ - -
(I) 00
>- M V'l
~
U ~~~~ ~~~~ ~
> 8 ~~ ~~ -
o ~ ~~~r-- r-- r-- ~~~r-- r-- r-- c:i.
~~ "<t "<t "<t . \0\0 "<t "<t "<t . \010
...............\0 ...............\0 :I
E-< cS
~
<<l <<l ~ .60
~ .= .= ~
c: c: c: c:
~:a~ J] ~~~ .5 ] (I)
Co)
u:l. u:l ....
~c:~~ ~c:~~ ~ 0 ~
-8 . <~ -8 . i3
... 8 .... ~ c: 8 '5 ~ c:
5 ... ~~~~ ii ~~:E~ ~
8.8 o ~ I u:l o ~
~88~ .... 0 ~88~ .... 0 u , ') /01
oS ~ e ~ e ~
~ e ~ i i ~ ~ e ~ ii ~ ~ e /~
o 0 .3::s::s:E ~8 .3::s::s:E ~8
ou (I)
-<
0'1
rlIil
..:l
=
-<
Eo-
~
V)S:UJ
ffi~=>--.
~~~~
o~;>8i
UJrilCl-
~ ,., UJ '0
<'""'V)'"
~O~~
V)~V),-,
~V)<
~
C) 'S
~=>
;> ...
i:: ...
C) c::
~~
'i) E;
~ 6
ClU
on
-
~ooo
00
~
lil
C)
><
'<t
-
1'-000
0\
....
r.:
00
lil
C)
><
("I
-
0\000
....
I'-
l"'i
00
lil
C)
><
N
....
>0000
00
("I
e
00
lil
C)
><
....
-
-000
0\
-
r.:
I'-
lil
C)
><
o
-
0\000
N
-
..,f
I'-
lil
C)
><
0\
lil
C)
><
("1000
0\
....
....
I'-
00
lil
C)
><
0\000
I'-
("I
rxS
>0
I'-
:a
C)
><
-000
00
>0
~
>0
lil
C)
><
0\000
>0
N
l"'i
>0
on
lil
C)
><
("1000
N
....
....
>0
'<t
:a
C)
><
'<tooo
N
N
0\
on
("I
:a
C)
><
>0000
on
on
r.:
on
N
:a
C)
><
0\000
00
on
r.:
'<t
:a
C)
><
8000
V'l
N
N
V'lV'l00
Nf"""'f"i ....,c,
M~...-04"'"
~~~~
] 3
'5 l
"Cl 01 ._
......".;:j CIJ
:Jc::C)0l
e::: -8 e::: ._
E; .- .d i::
;3 r;.2!l Q)
.- c:l:: :I: :9
~~~~
l.~...... ~
~ '3 '3 ._
...J::E::E:I:
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
.s ....
~'3
<~
~Ol
S .~
] I
~u
on
N
00
~
I'-
0\
-
r.:
00
0\
....
I'-
l"'i
00
>0
00
("I
e
00
-
0\
-
I'-
I'-
0\
N
....
..,f
I'-
("I
0\
....
-
I'-
0\
I'-
<<'!.
00
>0
-
00
>0
ori
>0
0\
>0
N
l"'i
>0
("I
N
-
-
>0
~
N
0\
V'l
>0
V'l
V'l
r.:
V'l
0\
00
on
r.:
'<t
8 8 ~
V'l V'l V'l
N N .of
N N
~
Eo-
~
("I
c;
0\
'<t
("I
~
0\
'<t
>0
>0
(<'l
0\
'<t
~
V'l
0\
'<t
~
I'-
0\
'<t
N
00
00
0\
'<:t"
N
>0
o
e
V'l
I'-
~
e
V'l
>0
("I
'<t
e
V'l
o
I'-
I'-
e
on
V'l
on
C"!.
-
V'l
00
0\
~
-
V'l
~
I'-
N
V'l
o
'<t
V'l
ori
'<t
~
(<'l
8i
-
9
]
'"
<<;::
C)
Cl
~
e:::
6
''::
'"
<<;::
i
''::
'"
]
<"i
8i
-
go
~
'"
C)
'6'0
C)
~
V)
t)
.~
c::
~
~
o
V)
; ') _V5~
~ /--,,-
CQ
0-
l:I;:l
..:l
CQ
0(
Eo-
ffi
::E
ffi
CI)~u:l
ffi<:>---
~~~~
o~>~
u:l~~::
~i:2(1)~
~u:l~~
Cl)ffiCl),-,
~oo(
~
CI)
~
~
~ os
..:>
> ...
...
5 ...
~~
i 8
~u
I/")
.....
.....0.....1/") 00
~ ~~
on g~
1;
Q)
>-
"<1"
.....
I'"-O\ON 00
~ ~r::
on 00\15
I/") I'"-
ta
Q)
>-
('t'l
.....
NO('t'lN 00
"<1" ..........
00 0"<1"
~ \15~
I/") I'"-
1;
Q)
>-
N
.....
\OO~..... 00
;2; I'"-~
~ MN
I/") I'"-
1;
Q)
>-
.....
.....
00 0 \0. \0 0 0
~ \O~
~ ....0
VI I'"-
1;
Q)
>-
o
.....
ooO"<1"VI 00
I'"- VII'"-
C"i "l~
"<1" 0-1'"-
"<t \0
1;
Q)
>-
0-
1;
Q)
>-
:g0(::~ 00
..... VI 0-
~ r:vi
"<t\O
00
1;
Q)
>-
Sj!ONN
0- ~~
M '4"$
I'"-
iii
Q)
>-
~O~~
I'"- 00_
M MN
"<1"\0
\0
iii
u
>-
~O~o-
. C"i ~
('t'l ~~
VI
1;
u
>-
~Os:g
VI 00 00
M ~~
"<1"
1;
u
>-
~Ol'"-I'"-
N 00
VI ('t'l
M o\r-:
('t'l VI
('t'l
lil
u
>-
I'"-Ooo~
~ ~"<1"
M oO~
('t'l VI
N
:a
u
>-
~O~~
N "<too
M ~;i
lil
u
>-
S'l088
-:. "l"l
('t'l N\O
N -
VlVIOO
NI'"-Vl-
N....-4..... .....
~~~~
.. :3
"::I ...
5 .g
"0 .. ._
.;;:.::1 ~
~5~"
-"0 "::I
E;.;;: ~ ~
~ C,)..... u
]~::r::g
::E~~~
~]] ~
.3::E::E::t:
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
.s -
~ "3
<~
~..
6 .-
";;I ~
~ ~
~u
I'"-
I/")
.....
on
:!;
\0
-
-
~
-
00
\0
N
vi
('t'l
-
~
o
('t'l
-
.....
N
-
\15
N
-
I'"-
o
OC!.
.....
N
-
I'"-
VI
\0
r-:
-
-
VI
\0
\0
M
.....
.....
('t'l
N
00
g
-
~
('t'l
t
-
('t'l
I'"-
.....
M
o
.....
00
-
('t'l
8
-
-
-
N
..c
0-
00
N
VI
vi
I'"-
o
I/")
-
~
~
.....
00
('t'l
00
I'"-
('t'l
:g
0\
I'"-
('t'l
\0
I'"-
0\
r-
0-
I'"-
"<1"
o
00
('t'l
.....
N.
-
00
VI
~
.....
00
VI
('t'l
I'"-
N
00
~
VI
M
00
('t'l
('t'l
('t'l
~
00
N
('t'l
on
00
I'"-
-
VI
..c
00
~
r:
00
~
.....
00
00
\0
~
N
I'"-
o ~
~ VI
N ...t-
"<t
""
('t'l
~
-
9
1
ll:::
Q)
Q
.Y
III
~
6
":J
III
ll:::
~
":J
III
~
~
~
-
~
~
l1
"00
B
III
b
CI)
()
.~
~
~
CI)
) ;l - ,r-&
u
CI\
r.il
...:l
=
~
~~
~~UJ
~ni
~o~~
~o~~
~en,-,
en<
~~
8 '8
o;;:l
> ..
'5 '5
i
~ 8
~u
.,...
-
~[DOO
0\00
-:N'
00 r-
-
a
Q)
><
'<t
-
MO\OO
OM
r- 0
~:8
a
Q)
><
M
-
O\MOO
.,... 0\
"'l"'t
.,... 0\
r- .,...
-
a
u
><
N
-
.,...r-OO
'<t-
"'l<'!.
NM
r- .,...
-
a
u
><
-
-
~800
\ON
o\r:
\O'<t
-
a
Q)
><
o
-
r-OOO
00 M
00'<t
'ii"";
\O'<t
-
a
Q)
><
0\
a
Q)
><
NOOOO
M 0\
N 00
;i~
-
00
a
Q)
><
OOMOO
00 0\
\0.,...
"';0
\0 M
-
r-
a
Q)
><
~~OO
N.,...
~ri
-
\0
a
Q)
><
OOMOO
\0.,...
00\
r:cS
.,...N
-
.,...
a
~
0\\000
N 0\
_ 00
vi'ii
.,... -
-
'<t
a
u
><
'<tMOO
- -
'<t\O
:;f8
-
M
a
Q)
><
r-MOO
&;~
"";N
.,... r-
N
iii
u
><
O\r-OO
00 \0
.,...N
r:'ii
'<t'<t
-
8~00
.,... 00
N"";
NN
lil
u
><
"".,...00
Nr-.,...-
('01...-.4...-4.-4
{,I't {,I't {,I't (,I't
0; :3
':;j ..
.go;~
.... ':;2 '"
~5Q)o;
cc:: -c cc:: ':;j
~ .... .= c:
!3 ~ .!!!l ~
;,::l cc:: :: ....
u I '"
~~~~
~ ii ~
.s~~:E
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
~~
.6 '3
~ ':1
< u
:;:~
6 ....
';J ~
~ ~
ceu
00
00
00
-
.,...
00
..;
.,...
N
N
'<t
r-
;-
N
N
.,...
<:t
.,...
M
N
~
l"-;.
~
N
\0
.,...
00
-c
-
N
r-
-
M
00
o
N
o
M
-
8
N
-
00
N
o!
-
'<t
.,...
r-
i
-
N
o
00
r-
-
~
N
r-
-
s
..;
""
-
~
~
-
r-
.,...
00
M
0\
.,... .,...
r- r-
M M
;- ;-
~
M
-
\0
r:
M
-
-
~
00
M
-
~
00
M
-
'<t
-
-
0\
M
-
0\
M
\0
0\
M
-
r-
r-
-
~
-
~
r-
~
-
~
<'!.
-
'<t
-
N
r-
OC!.
-
'<t
-
M
.,...
00
N
'<t
-
'<t
~
;-
-
M
S\
i.
-
~
00
M
-
-
""
-
00
0\
00
~
M
&
-
s
1
Q
u
Q
~
"'l
'<t
!
cc::
6
':;j .
t:! ~
i~
~ 'f
en
Q
J
i
en
<"i
&
-
) ') _ ("/')
.,.<- 6 /
Q
01
{;I;;l
...:l
=
<
~
ffi
~
~ffi
~~~--
U);~""
~~>~
~~~~
<UJ~~
~~~'-'
U)o<
~!il
U)
l2
~
8 o-a
;;::>
> ...
5~
~~
U a
~ !5
QU
lrl
-
~OO\I"'-
lrl lrl-
lrl lrllrl
v-i v-it'i
N 0\0
-
:a
u
><
..,.
-
lrlONOO
- ",0\
on ~on
:i ....;....;
" 0 \0
-
:a
u
><
~
-
-OOon
N N..,.
on ~ I"'-
t'i r-:o\
N 0\ on
:a
u
><
N
-
000\01"'-
\0 onon
on ..,.0\
N t'ir-:
N 0\ on
:a
u
><
-
-
ono-o
on on~
\0 t-N
....; 0\..0
N 00 on
:a
u
><
o
-
~O~~
t- _ on
o ...0"';
N 00 on
:a
u
><
0\
:a
u
><
NOon~
~ ~~
0\ NN
- 00 on
00
:a
u
><
~og~
- on~
0\ 0\"";
- I"'- on
t-
:a
~
O\O-~
~ ~oo
oQ ...00\
- t-..,.
\0
iii
u
><
&10~:g
\C!. ."l.
t- ~oo
- t-..,.
on
iii
u
><
~O~~
o -N
r-: ....;r-:
- t-..,.
..,.
~
><
~OOO~
on ~o
..0 oQ...o
_ \0""
~
iii
u
><
~O-\O
:g ~~
~ ~i
N
iii
u
><
~OO\N
on 00 t-
\0 on 00
vi r-:...;
- ""f"'l
:a
u
><
!:(088
(:;r:; on",
vi N..o
_ N_
ononOO
NI"'-on-
N....................
"" "" "" ""
.. :3
"::l ..
~..~
";"::l l1
u5~;;
~.., "::l
a "Iii ~ c
:3 ~ ..... u
:;::l~:r::g
u . '"
~~~~
i ~~~
.s~~=
\0 ~
1"'-""
N I"'-
~~
-
~~
00 I"'-
orio\
~N
-
00 \0
onN
ono
~~
-
0\ ~
~ \0
~ \0
t'io
~N
-
~~
N...o
~ -
-
~~
on~
_ 00
"";N
~ -
-
\0""
I"'- t-
-t-
oori
~ 0\
gg
N 0\
0\0\
Nt-
0..,.
-t-
0\ N
...or-:
N \0
88
C'!."'I.
Non
Non
..,.\0
-~
00."'1.
~;
~~
t- C"l
~~
00 _
~l=:
o\~
~~
..0 vi
-
~~
t'ir-:
aa
"5 -
~ 03
<~
~;;
6 --
-; ~
.2 ~
~u
I"'-
~
..0
\0
C"l
\0
C;
t'i
on
~
o
t-
-
~
C"l
00
0\
r-:
N
C"l
t-
;
...0
-
C"l
00
N
"'I.
on
o
C"l
0\
C"l
"t
-
00
N
~
N
0\
~
00
~
oQ
C"l
N
-
0\
~
t-
-
N
~
t-
r-:
0\
-
~
on
0\
t-
-
0\
~
N
\0
-
a
C"l
~
-
8
00
i
~
o
00
0\
r-:
0\
-
..,.
-
N
~
-
\0
00
on
8
N
C"l
o
-
~
$
t-
t'i
~
-
0\
on
~
N
on
~
00
0\
-
\0
-
"'I.
~
-
-
-
~
C"l
00
-
\0
N
on
ti
....
~
00
:2
-
t-
-
C"l
r-:
on
-
-
~
oQ
..,.
-
~
-
vi
-
-
8
00
t
""
C"l
~
-
g
1
l;;:
~
~
It')
..,.
~
~
6
-::l
td
i
"::l
td
]
M
~
-
g.
~
'"
u
"60
~
~
U)
C)
"~
J
i
U)
)-2, - 't' 't'~
lrl 8000 00 8 ("'I
..... C"l
~ ("'I
<l.l 00 00 i
>- ~
"<t ....000 00 .... ("'I
.... ~ ~ C"l
~ ("'I
r-: r-: i
~ ~
("'I ....000 00 .... ("'I
.... ("'I ("'I C"l
~ ("'I ("'I ("'I
<l.l r-: r-: i
>- ~
C"l lrlOOO 00 lrl ("'I
.... .... .... C"l
~ 0 0 ("'I
<l.l r-: r-: i
>- ~
.... ("'1000 00 ("'I ("'I
.... .... .... C"l
~ l""- I""- ("'I
<l.l ..0 ..0 i
>- (A
0 r:!iooo 00 r:!i ("'I
.... C"l
~ "<t "<t ("'I
..0 ..0 i
~
0- 00000 00 00 ("'I
:a ::!; ::!; C"l
("'I
<l.l ..0 ..0 i
>- ~
00 ~ooo 00 ~ ~
~ :a 00 00 C"l
00 00 ~
<l.l ".; ".; i
E-< >- ~
0::
~~ I""- 0000 00 0 ~
:a ~ ~ C"l
\0 \0 ~
en~~ <l.l ".; ".; i
>- ~
< ~~~ \0 1""-000 00 I""- ~
~ 00 00 C"l
Q ~ ~ ~
.-4 O~E-< ".; ".; it
~ ~~~ ~
~
~ lrl lrlOOO 00 lrl ~
.....:lOO ~ lrl lrl C"l
.- .... ~
Eo< E-<250:: ".; ".; i
en p.., >- ~
<E-<~
~~en "<t ~ooo 00 M ~
:><..... ~ ~ ~ C"l
~> 0- 0- ~
< >- ~ i i
@ M \0000 00 \0 C"l
:a ~ ~ ~
U 00 00
<l.l 00 00 00
>- ~ ~
C"l ;000 00 ~ 0-
~ l""-
I""-
".; lrl ~
.... .... ....
~ ~
C"l000 00 C"l C"l ~
~ ~ ~ ~
0- 0- 0- lrl
c-i c-i c-i ~
.... .... ....
~ ~
~~~~ ~ ~ M M
0-
~ <l.l 8~ ~ 0-
0- :l "';"';00 0- 0:: ....
o-ta .... .... 0- S g.
....> C"l I""- lrl .... ~~ ....
~....-4f"""4....-4
~~~~ 9 '::1 8
'"
1 ..::: 0
0 .g
'5 - co
ta ta Q S E
'::1 '::1
is .8 '::1
'"
J~ E en
"0 ta ._ C)
-- -:::I CI:l!
~5&!ta 's
"0 '::1 i3 g
... ~ .;;; ~ =
= ... <l.l:I: <l.l ~
E is .- 0:: "0
"S .-
I '" o ~
0.= ~~~&! -r;; Q) H
0 ~ ~ f(CJ
] E ~ ~~ ~ ~ t ,., - - I
<l.l 0 .3~~:I: ~8 joi-
QU
=
=
.-4
~
...:l
~
Eo<
~~
J~
~gEo<
o~~
~~~
~~g:
~o~
~ ~
@>
11)<
~s
g:5
(<'I G)
~~
->
l~
o
i E
G) 0
ClU
It")
-
O\OOO~
r-- <'l
'<t '<t
1l"iM'
~
'<t
-
00 0 It")-
It") 0\ It")
'<t -'<t
1l"iM'
~
>-
(<'I
-
O\O-<'l
(<'I r-- 0
'<t 0\(<'1
.,fM'
~
>-
<'l
-
oor--o
<'l 1t")\O
'<t r---
.,fM'
~
-
-
<'l0<'l~
~ ~o
.,fM'
~
>-
o
-
;;to:g~
(<'I (<'I 00
.,fN
~
0\
~
>-
~O~$
(<'I - r--
.,fN
00
~
<'l00\0
It") 00 It")
(<'I 0\\0
M'N
r--
~
r-- 0 r-- \0
(<'I - (<'I
(<'I 00 It")
M'N
\0
~
<'lO(<'lr--
<'l It")<'l
(<'I \O'<t
M'N
It")
~
OOO\O<'l
o O\<'l
(<'I '<t(<'l
M'C'i
'<t
~
>-
It") 0 It") 0
0\ '<t(<'l
<'l (<'10
M'M'
(<'I
~
>-
<'l 0 - r--
00 0(<'1
<'l <'lr--
~...:
-
<'l
~
000\-
r-- It") r--
<'l 00 It'l
0\0
-
~
o O<'l (<'I
- (<'100
00 O\'<t
~ C'io\
-
~~~~
ll"ill"ioo
<'l r-- It") -
N.........-4......
~~~~
;a :3
':I -
r:: r::
-8;a~
-- .::2 U}
~~~~
E! .;;; ~ r::
3G);.::lG)
;;::!C!::...:g
as I II>
~gg~
~~~ ~
.3~~:E
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
8~
- -
~~
J]
<~
~]
o ...
.... G)
~ m
o 0
ctu
'<t
-
It")
0\
~
C!;
-
0\
~
<'l
-
r--
oC
~
r--
(<'I
(<'I
00
~
00
r--
0\
r-:
~
"<t
(<'I
\0
r-:
~
It")
o
(<'I
r-:
~
-
~
~
~
\0
\IS
~
~
\IS
~
~
-
\IS
~
o
r--
\0
~
~
<'l
II"i
-
~
8
r--
~
~
\0
<'l
<'l
~
~
~
r--
(<'I
-
II"i
~
r--
(<'I
-
II"i
~
r--
(<'I
-
II"i
~
r--
(<'I
-
II"i
~
r-
(<'I
-
II"i
~
r-
(<'I
-
II"i
~
r-
(<'I
-
II"i
~
r-
(<'I
-
II"i
~
r-
(<'I
-
II"i
~
r-
(<'I
-
II"i
~
r-
~
-
II"i
~
It")
;;t
II"i
~
00
(<'I
0\
M'
-
~
00
o
00
0\
-
~
~
~
~
~
(<'I
~
-
9
~
~
~
It")
~
!
6
':1
<IS
~
-
6
':1
<IS
~
(<'I
0\
0\
-
f
o
'"
G)
'60
~
II)
(,.)
.~
~
G5
(,.)
~
)1~7/)
\0 <"\ N 0 0 00 \0 <"\
- ~~ \0 ~
~ -
r:-:-.i' c-i -
>- - N -
~ ~
""" :;SOO 00 - ~
- ~
~ 0\ N ~
..o-.i' - -
- N -
~ ~
~ ~~OO 00 00 ~
- 00 ~
~ N
..o~ ~ -
- -
~ ~
N \00000 00 """ ~
- Irl Irl - ~
~ Cf).q ~
\0 ~ 0\ -
- - -
~ ~
- N \0 00 00 00 <"\
- 00 0\ t- \0
~ 0""" Irl ~
..oc-i oC -
- - -
~ ~
0 00000 00 00 ~
- N \0 t- ~
~ 00 0\ t-
vi'''': r:-: -
- - -
~ ~
0\ O~OO 00 ~ ~
~ &i~ - ~
0
>- Irl - r:-: -
- - -
~ ~
00 0000 00 0 ~
~ ~ ~ Irl 00 ~
~ 0\ N
viO' ..0 -
E-< - - -
0::: ~ ~
If t- 8~00 00 0\ ~
~ t- ~
~~C/) -",," \0
~~~ viO' vi -
- - -
~ ~
U C/)~E-< \0 -t-oo 00 ~ ~
~ 00 N
C ~~~ 00 0
~ -.i'O' -.i' -
~ . - - -
~ ~~~ ~ ~
~ 00 \0 r:::~oo 00 Irl \0
~ ~ ~
00::: \Ot- """~ -
E-o ~~~ -.i'vi 0 r:-:
- N -
~ ~
~C/)E-< """ O\~OO 00 ~ t-
~><E!3 ~ ~ """~ t-
~> 0\ oq,
~ """~ (( -
N
~ ~
~ O\NOO 00 N -
~ NIrl 00 -
U t-\O ~ """~
vir:-: ~ -
>- - N N
~ ~
N ~SOO 00 ~ 00
~ """
-
vi vi 0' 0\
- - ~ N
~ ~
- N~OO 00 Irl ~ ~
~ ~ t- O
~"l. Irl "l. Irl
N N ~ ~ -.i
- -
~ ~
~~~~ ~ ~ ! M
~ 4) 8~ 0\
~ 0\
~~ ~viO'o' ~ -
- - 6 ~
-> t-\O- ~~ -
N...-I............
~~~~ g "0:3 e
1 ~ 0
u
Q '"
4)
~ - ";0
ta ta 6 ~
"0:3 "g '0:3
~ -8 <<l
J~ ~ C/)
... ta .... 0
. '0:3 '"
~~~~ 's
i3 g
5a ~.~ ~ 5 0
~o::::E:9 ~
&8 I '" o ~
~ ~. ~ ~ .... 4) ~
0 ~ ~
~ ~ ii~~~ / J--1
o 0 /
QU .3~~:E ctu C/)
Q
=>
~
~
...:l
~
E-o
~~
;~
~<~
~~E
~~!
...:lffic..
&io~
<ora
n:lJJ:l>
en<
~s
g:o
C"l g
~ta
->
...
5 ...
8.~
o
~ 13
ou
'0
-
~O~~
C"l C'l0\
N o\N
~
>-
~
-
\OOC'l~
C'l \00\
C'l oof'
N cON
~
C"l
-
000C"l
C"l 00 f'
- ~\o
N cON
~
C'l
-
0\0'000
C"l - '0
o -'0
N cON
~
>-
-
-
-0'000
'0 \o~
0\ f'~
...: r-:N
~
o
-
f' 0 - C"l
\0 C"l~
00 ~C"l
-=- r"C"i
~
0\
~
\OO-C'l
~ :::~
...: r-:N
00
~
>-
00'0'0
- O~
f' 00-
. ..oN
f'
~
\OOC'lC"l
C"l - '0
\0 '00
...: ..oN
\0
la
~
~O~:'J:
'0 C'l0\
.. \f5 ...:
'0
~
000C"l0
0\ \000
~ 0\00
...: "'...:
~
~
;;!;08~
~ f'f'
...: vi'''':
C"l
~
C'l0~0
f' -0\
C"l O~
...: "';..0
-
C'l
~
C"l0~-
- f'
C"l '0
. .no
- -
~
~0C'lC"l
0\ C"l 00
f' O\~
00 No\
-
~~~~
.n.noo
C'l f' '0 -
N~""'~
{,jI} {,jI} {,jI} {,jI}
ta ~
.~ =
fi -8
-0 ta ...
.- .,c Ul
~5~ta
~~~1
;;::i ~ :E ...
~ I <I.l
~~~~
~~~~
j~~:E
00 '0
\0-
'0 -
"':vi'
-
~~
...:..;
-
\0-
~~
-:'(f"\'
-
~'O
~~
...:~
-
'O~
- f'
C"l \0
"':N
-
00 \0
~~
- -
-
S~
C'l\O
"':0
-
~~
"':00
~~
- 00
t"'ir-:
'0 C'l
\0\0
00 -
Nr-:
'0 -
~:;:;
N..o
-C"l
~~
N.n
~'O
C"l C"l
-C"l
N.n
C'l'O
C'l0
0\ 00
...:...;
~:::
f' C"l
...:...;
8~
- -
{,jI} {,jI}
j~
i~
o ~
... u
~ ~
~8
0\
00
-
-
C"l
{,jI}
~
0\
C'l
{,jI}
-
\0
'0
cO
C'l
{,jI}
-
C"l
C"l
~
{,jI}
~
'0
-
~
{,jI}
'0
-
'0
~
{,jI}
~
N
C'l
{,jI}
0\
-
C1
-
C'l
{,jI}
C"l
~
-
C'l
{,jI}
0\
00
f'
0\
-
{,jI}
f'
'0
~.
00
-
{,jI}
C"l
~
r-:
-
{,jI}
~
gi
{,jI}
'0
~
...;
C"l
{,jI}
~ ~
r-: r-:
C"l C"l
{,jI} {,jI}
~
-
~
..0
-
{,jI}
-
~
..0
-
{,jI}
-
~
..0
-
{,jI}
-
~
..0
-
{,jI}
-
~
..0
-
{,jI}
\0
0\
~
..0
-
{,jI}
-
'0
-
..0
-
{,jI}
C'l
0\
.,.,
.n
-
{,jI}
C'l
~
..0
-
{,jI}
0\
f'
00
.n
-
{,jI}
f'
f'
~.
.,.,
-
{,jI}
.,.,
b
.n
-
{,jI}
C'l
f'
00
~
{,jI}
00
00
.,.,
N
C"l
{,jI}
~
C"l
~
-
9
)
~
~
"'l
~
!
6
.~
~
-
5
.~
~
]
C"l
~
-
g.
e
o
'"
u
'60
~
en
.~
!
Q)
l
J,2~9~
;S
....
roil
..::I
=
E:5
ti
~
~-
v.I..::I~
ZQ..Z
~3~~
O~~:l
~~~8
~o>g;
v.I. i2; < 0\
<e::s-
~fa::r::
~U
~
t
U
J) -; J
on
5
><
~
-
~
....
-
~
~
~
-
-
~
:::
~
0\
~
.... ....
\0 \0
1""-1""-
00
on on
~
00
~
00
on V>
0\ 0\
00
V> V>
~
I""-
~
N N
:!:. ~
- -
V> V>
~
ID
~
0000
... ~
- -
V> V>
~
V>
~
.... ....
I""- I""-
0\ 0\
.,..- ..:
V> V>
~
~
5
><
~Hl
\0 \0
NN
V> V>
~
....
~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~~
V> V>
~
N
~
00 00
~~
~~
~ ~
~
-
5
><
V> V>
00;::
~~
~
]
2 B
~v.I
~~
~(3
Q..
00
.... ....
I""- t-
0\0\
~ ~
~
ID~O\~OOIDO
~~~~~~~
"," v) -n ..: ...: -: N
~N
~
N N
0\ 0\
00 00
~~
~ ~
~
!'e~~~~~IDO~~
.\Ot--.,..-~ ('I"lt-
~~""":":":N ~~
~
t- I""-
~~
00
V> V>
~
\O~O\~OO~O....O\
I""-V>....NIDO\ NV>
..\Ot""'--- C"""t-
~~vi'''':''':''':N ';0\
~
~~
N N
00
V> V>
~
~~O\~OO~O....O\
,-V>....NIDO\ NV>
..\Ot--........ C"\f"'oo
~~~...:...:...:<"'i ";0;
~
ss
~ ~
00
en V"a
~
\O~o-~OO~O....O\
t-V>....N\OO\ NV>
..\Ot-.............. ('f"lt'--
vl.n.,;"':"':"":N' ";0\
~N
~
00
00 00
V> V>
00
V> V>
~
\O~O\~OO~O....O\
t-V>....N\bO\ NV>
..\Or-...._- C""'\t-
~~.,;..:...:...:N ";0\
~
\O~O\~OO~O....O\
t-V>.... N\b 0. NV>
.\Ot-....._- Mt"--
",,,,,,,,"':":"':N ';0\
~ N
~
\O~O\~OO~O....O\
t-V>....NIDO' NV>
.\01-....._- C""'lt-
~~.,.;...:...:..:ri ';0\
~
\O~O\~OO~O....O\
I""-V>....NIDO\ NV>
..\Ot""--- C""'\t-
~~.n"':"':"':N ";0\
~
\O~O\~OO~O....O\
1""-V>....N\bO\ NV>
..\Qt'----- C"\t'
",..n.,.;.....:...:....:t:i ..0\
~N
~
\O~O\~OO~O....O\
I""-V>.... N\b 0. NV>
...\Ot'--.... C""'\f'-o
"';"';vi"':":"':N .~
~ N
~
ID~o.~OO~O""O\
I""-V>....NIDO' NV>
...\Ot---...... C"'\t"'"
~~.n...:...:...:N ";0\
~
V>....~-I""-I""-O\ONI""-
~oo~~~~~ goo
o\",,,,...:...:..:c-..r 000\
~N
~
V>OO~ONOO\OOO\N
:g~C!S~os~ 1=:;;;
Otivl ..:...:...: .,;or:
V>N _
~
~S:rig~~oo80~;
M"lInlln\f"'l\f"'l O\('f'\
...:...:t:i ...: M";
.... - -
~
II OIl ..
.. .s ~
~~:~ 3!1I
II ::J ~ 5 .!! -5 .. E'o =
......:a:; ~-i I! 6;>,.E'o
~ ~ u 0 fii u E'o .- : ~
..lIl! ~~:s
8;;!U. E'od:::J
.... 0-
N V>
.... I""-
";0\
~os~
N N
~
~ONN
- O-
N N
~
~O~N
- -
N
~
~ONN
- O-
N N
~
"'ONN
- O-
N N
~
"'ONN
- O-
N N
~
...ONN
~ ~-
~
"'ONN
- O-
N N
~
"'ONN
- O-
N N
~
"'ONN
- O-
N N
~
"'ONN
- O-
N N
~
"'ONN
- O-
N N
~
V>O....N
N ~-
~
...cO\Q-
00 1""--
;; -
V>OOV>
0\ 0\
~
:s
.~ ~ II II
cfg....
.- g g
'0..::1 ._ ._
1i....::I..::I
. D..!!
~.S.~ ~
S l' ~ .-
._ a:l a:l
..::I
on ID 0\
~;;;&;
- .
~
V> \0 0\
0\-1""-
O.V> V>
-
~
V> \0 0\
0\-1""-
O.V> V>
-
~
V> \0 0\
0\-1""-
5"''''
~
V> \0 0\
0\-1""-
0."" ""
;;
"" \0 0\
0\-1""-
0."" ""
-
~
V> \0 0\
00.-1""-
0."" ""
-
~
.,., \0 0\
00.-1""-
0..'" V'l
-
~
V> \0 0\
00.-1""-
O.V> .,.,
-
~
.,., \0 0\
00.-1""-
0."" .,.,
-
~
V> \0 0\
0\-1""-
o V> V>
...:
~
"" \0 0\
0\-1""-
0V>.,.,
...:
~
NO\....
0_00
-:''''''''
-
~
.,.,0.,.,
V>.,.,O
0\ ... V>
~
I""- 0\ I""-
~~~
~
i!
a
.f!
If l!!
'0.8
Ii..!!
. 0
.!:> II
~8d!
J! Ii t-
. ~ .a
IICS;:]
.s
u.
o
~
O\I""-NOO
NOOO~
-00<"""'0'\
o M~
.... N
~
o
~
O\I""-NOO
NOOO...
-OOC""'\Q\
o N~
.... N
~
o
~
O\I""-NOO
~2~~
o N~
.... N
~
o
~
O\I""-NOO
NOOO...
_00 C""'\ 0\
g ~~
~
o
~
O\I""-NOO
NOOO...
-00<"')0'\
o N~
.... N
~
o
~
~b~~O
-00<<""'0'\
o N~
.... N
~
o
~
~b~~O
-OO('f"lO'\
o N~
.... N
~
o
~
O\I""-NOO
~~~a:
o N~
.... N
~
o
~
~b~~O
-00 C"'" 0\
o N~
.... N
~
o
~
O\I""-NOO
NOOO...
-00 ('f"\ 0\
o N~
.... N
~
o
~
O\I""-NOO
NO 00...
-00 C"\ 0\
o N\o'
.... N
~
o
~
~b~~O
-00 fi'" 0\
o N~
.... N
~
o
~
.,.,NO....O
-_~oo
.... 00 "" 0\
o N~
.... N
~
o
~
0.....,.,-0
t-o-V'l
NI""-V>O
~ ~~
~
o
~
;:~~:1;0
C""'l ("'\ 0\ 0
ti o\f'l
~
!
I
...
o
u
;:)
II
.~
~ g
~ ~
~~:g
...o~
JH~~
O\r"'--OOO_::!.0\
g: :g ID 0 '" N
~
O\I""-OOO~O\
O\ID\OO....N
0\\0......
~
O\I""-OOO~O\
~~~S~N
~
O\I""-OOO~O\
O\ID\OO....N
0\\0......
~
0\1""-000"'0\
0\\0\0 0.... N
0\\0.......
~
0\1""-000"'0-
0\\0 \00.... N
0\\0......
~
0\1""-000"'0\
0\\0 \0 O....N
0\\0......
~
0\1""-000"'0\
O\ID \0 0.... ('I
0\ \C ... ...
~
~!;j;~g~~
0\ \0 ..... ......
~
~!;j;~g~~
0\ \0 ...... ......
~
0\1""-000"'0\
o\\O\OO....N
O\\C..........
~
0\1""-000"'0\
o\\O\OO....N
0\\0.......
~
v>NO\-v>O\
8I""-\OO....N
- \Q ...... ......
;;
-N\OOOOV>
I""-OO...OO....N
00 V> -
~
... I""- V> .,., .,., ....
.O\r--.............
.... N
~
B ~
.~ ft .~ II
~ ~J!Bl!!l
~ i ~.~ Q! a
(3 c:t c1; · ~ .~
.2 .010,.1 i ~ j
II e~"u
1;. H -s .s .::l
~v.I~Q..O~
N
~
r:
N
~
~
E
~
0\
~
~
~
0\
~
cO
~
~
:!:
....
cO
~
~
N
0\
~
cO
N
~
V>
!;j;
cO
N
-
~
N
~
cO
N
;;
...
.,.,
o
~
~
~
....
0\
....
~
~
.,.,
00
00
~
;;
I""-
....
.,.,
o
~
~
V>
I""-
.,.,
vi
....
;;
~
E
~
0\
.,.,
...
cO
~
~
oJ .
l'....
ii~
~;
~~
I~
s ~
v.l0
~ .;1
~r
· G
ov.l
a .~
~ 8
.~ 8
Utll
~
8
v.I
II
l'
J
If
.e
B
~
~
E-
=
...
...
rol
..:l
=
~
f-<t
Z<
~~
!2-
en~~
z<~~
~j~..:l
~~<..:l
if-<8
fa
~ ~&
enal~-
~O$
0(,)
allI.
~o
~~
~(,)
).2 -] L/
""
-
00 00
r--r--
.,. .,.
0\0\
r-- r--
....
~
;...
:!:
~
00
~~
00
00 00
....
....
-
0\ 0\
r-- r--
00 00
gg
....
~
~
~
~~
\0. \0.
- -
00 00
....
-
-
00
"" ""
.... ....
NN
00 00
....
~
~
~
~~
- -
Cfir-i'
00 00
....
0\
~
.... ....
0\ 0\
00 00
~~
00 00
....
00
~
.... ....
0\ 0\
\0 \0
..
00 00
....
r--
...
.
.,
;...
.... ....
- -
"" ""
vr",
00 00
....
\0
~
MM
MM
"" ""
tt
....
""
~
00 00
MM
r--r--
r-:r-:
00 00
....
.,.
~
0\ 0\
~~
0\0\
00 00
....
....
~
r-- r--
.... ....
.... ....
0\0\
00 00
....
M
~
00 00
00 00
MM
..;..;
r-- r--
....
~
00
.,..,.
r-- r--
NN
.,. .,.
....
~g~~~~:!o
r--...."".,.""\OO\
cioo-"':C'f'ir"'l-~"'...o
~t----
....
r--r--
....r--
-r--
.00\
M
~s~~~~:!:o
r--...."".,. ""\0 0\
OoOr-:..;..;..;,Q
~I'~
....
r-- r--
.... r--
- r--
.00\
N
~~~~~~:!;O~~
1"'--('1'\"''''''''\00\ .....r--
cioOr-:~~~...o ",0\
~r----..... ~
....
~g~~~~:!:O~I::
t'-C"'l"'...."'''OO\ .....t-
ooOr-:~~~toD ",,0\'
('f"lt-- N
;;
~g~~~~:!:O~I::
t"-C"'")"'...."'\Q0\ -t"
OOOr-:..;..;..;,Q .00\
C""It-..... N
;;
~s~~~~:!:o~t'--
l-rr'li"''''V'l\OO\ .....1=:
OOOr-:..;..;..;,Q "';0\
~t-..... N
....
~g~~~~:!:o~~
t'('f'\"''''V'l\OO\ -t'--
OOOr-:..;..;..;,Q "';0\
~t-..... N
....
~g~~~~:!:O~1=:
t"-('f'\"'...."'\OO\ -t'
doOt-"'~~M...o "";0\
~t-- N
....
~g~~~~:!:O~I::
f""'.rr'li"'''''''''\Oo\ -t'-
OoOr-:..;..;..;,Q "';0\
('f'\t-- N
;;
~g::::~~~:!:o
1"-...."".,.""\00\
OoOf"'o"'f'I'i'~M..o
....1"--
;;
~I::
- r--
"';0\
N
~s~~~~:!:o
1"-...."".,.""\00\
OoOr-:..;..;..;,Q
~l'-
....
~~~~;~~o~~
""...."".,.""\00\ 001"-
":oOr-:~~M...o ",,0\
~t-- ~
....
:!:l;e$s::!~SCf;;O
""\O....:;:""::z;OO
oOr-:r-:..;..;..;,Q
~t'--......
....
\os::!OOOO.,.\OOO
:c::z;I::$~~~
oO-:";NNN"';
- \0-
-
....
MO\I"-OON""O
l!:iO&:;~.~~
"":";oO"":"':":M
00 ....
....
Zl1!
oc S
~en
~~
ta
~
Zl 00 ...
oc .5 .;
~ ~.~ ! ! Zl
Zl ::i lil oS..!! ii .. r- =
oc....-a:; S-i l! 6;>:.f-<
~ .... 1J 0 as (,) f-< '-11:: ~
Zl 1;; l!:.=
~~J: ~:s
f""'lOV'lOO
"" -....
\0 \0
....
('f'\ 0 '" co
"" -....
\0 \0
....
....0""00
"" -....
\0 \0
....
....0""00
"" -....
~ \0
....0""00
"" -....
\0 \0
....
....0""00
"" -....
~ \0
('r'IOtnOO
"" -....
~ \0
....0V'l00
"" -....
~ \0
....0""00
V'l -....
\0 \0
....
('f'\ 0"" 00
V'l _....
'\0 \0
....
E~
"';0\
M
('f'\ 0,,", 00
V'l _....
~ \0
C"'lIOVlOO
V'l _....
\0 \0
....
00 ....
.... ....
0\ ""
";0\
-N
!;;O~~
\0 \0
....
00 I"-
~~
0\";
- N
~o:~
V'l .,.
....
~;;
N \0
.:~
N -
g:O~~
N M
....
:I
Og ~ Zl Zl
ceg--
.- 9 B
1-:::3::3
- - .,
~.,.-
1Il.~ 05 ~
ft ::I r:;._
._ a:l < a:l
..:l
.... .,. 00
.,. r-- \0
.... V'l r--
('f'\....: ...
....
.... .,. 00
.,.r--\O
.... V'l I"-
M":"":
....
.... .,. 00
.,. I"- \0
.... V'l I"-
('1'\"':"':
....
.... .,. 00
"'1"-\0
.... V'l r--
M":"':
....
.... .,. 00
"'1"-\0
C"l. V'\, r""-.
.... --
....
.... .,. 00
.,. r-- \0
.... "" r--
M": ...
....
.... .,. 00
"'1"-\0
.... V'l I"-
M":":
....
.... .,. 00
...r--\O
..... "1. 1"-.
.... --
....
.... ... 00
...r--\O
.... V'l r--
~..:...:
....
.... .,. 00
...r--\O
.... V'l r--
M"':":
....
.... ... 00
...1"-\0
.... V'l I"-
M"':":
....
V'l V'l 0\
...1"-\0
.... V'l I"-
M":":
....
\ON...
- \0 V'l
....V'lr--
M''':'':
....
00\-
.... .... 0\
\ON....
M":":
....
--0
....M-
"\,t-OO
-
....
!
a
.il
tE l!
1'~
_0
.8:> Zl
l8tf
cf;~
.,ij]
Zl J:o ._
.51 0 ..:l
lI.
o
....
r--....O...O
\0 \0 NOO
0\.C"f"'l-
":NoO"':
0\ \ON
....
o
....
1"-....0.,.0
\O\OMOO
0\ ..... ('f'\ .....
":C'ioti..:
0\ \OM
....
o
....
r--....o.,.o
\O\OMOO
0\ .. (""') .....
":NoO":
0\ \ON
....
o
....
1"-....0.,.0
\O\OMoo
0\ .. (""') .....
..: r--i 00. ..:
0\ \OM
....
o
....
1"-....0.,.0
\O\OMOO
0\...(""').....
":rioO":
0\ \OM
....
o
....
I"-~~:;o
~.,.....-
":NoO":
0\ \ON
....
o
M
r--~~:;O
~.,.....-
-:NoO":
0\ \OM
....
o
....
r--....o.,.o
\O\ONoo
0\ .... (""') .....
":NoO":
0\ \OM
....
o
....
I"-~~:;o
~.......-
":NoO":
0\ \OM
....
o
....
r--.... 0.,. 0
\O\OMoo
0\ .. (""') .....
":NoO":
0\ \OM
....
o
....
~~~:;o
O-'...C"'lI....
":NoO"':
0\ \OM
....
o
....
:!::!~~o
c.cor'.l....
C"irioti..:
0\ \OM
....
o
....
........1"-....0
M..,o....
M.,.I"-O
":rir:..:
0\ \OM
....
o
....
\01"-"'''''0
iJ;~~:8
N":~\45
I"- ""-
....
o
....
~~~ao
..... ..... f"l r-
ri"':"':O;
.,. ....
....
i:
~
i
~
....
o
.,
::i
Zl
.~
~
u
g
~ ~
~~~
'::o~
!l~~~b
L~~~~
e&::
OOr--Nr--V'lr--
!8V;~~OO
r1M
....
OOr--NI"-V'l1"-
.,.....-0000
CCVl('f'\.....
..;N
....
00 I"-N I"-V'l I"-
..,.....-0000
OCVlcor'.l-
~N
....
ool"-Mr--V'll"-
..,.....-0000
OCVlC"'ll.....
";N
....
00 I"- M I"- V'l I"-
~a;;:;~~oo
..;N
M
00 I"- M I"- V'l I"-
.,.....-0000
OCVlC"'ll.....
";N
....
00 I"- N I"- V'l I"-
........-0000
OCVl(""').....
..;N
M
ool"-MI"-V'll"-
.,.....-00....
OCVlt'\-
";N
....
00 I"-M I"-V'l I"-
........_0000
OCVlt'\......
..;N
....
....I"-NI"-V'll"-
~.a.;;:;~~oo
....M
....
00 r--M r--""I"-
..,....._0000
OCVlC"'ll....
";N
....
o OO....I"-V'l I"-
~a~~~oo
..;N
....
~N""~~~
oofX...._
";N
....
OOt""'ll('f'\....NOO
~~~~OO\O
N"':
....
~....V'l0000
~~~~......
-
....
u ~
.e ir~ IS
Jl 1lI.12!'
i i oo.~ ~ ~
a et; ce ~ oil! .~
.2 .f.~ H ~ j
i .11 ~ J oll
oUle&::~o;1
~
N
~
....
....
~
0\
g
....
....
~
\0
~
....
....
....
V'l
.....
-
-
....
....
r--
g
~
....
....
0\
V'l
00
~
....
....
o
~
~
....
....
-
.,.
.,.
~
....
....
~
.,.;
-
....
....
0\
~
,Q
-
....
....
V'l
I"-
.,..
~
....
....
~
r--
~
....
....
M
~
~
....
....
&
r--.
0\
~
....
,..;
8:
-
,; .
5~
t-
e&::oil!
.... -
~~
1-.
s ~
enO
:! .~
.:l r
=:E
~en
o .l:!
'Cl ~
.~ 8
(,)al
....
....
00
0\
~
....
I
:-
~
!l
'e
2
e&::
!
~
g
en
u
...
...
roil
...l
=
-<
Eo<
t
~
~~~
~~z
eni~::a
~ ~<
j ~~
El~fa
<:o>g:
~~-<~
enen5
~~o
~
~
u
) J --7-~
.,.,
0\ 0\
.... ....
.,., .,.,
c:c:
.... ....
- -
....
~
"Ot"
-
V'l V'l
.... ....
00
00
:!::!:
....
~
~
t"lt"l
.. ..
V'l V'l
00
:!;:!
....
~
~
~
t"lt"l
:8. :8.
- -
:!::!:
....
-
-
~
.. ..
0\ 0\
"1."1.
- -
:!::!:
....
:;
~
00
.. "Ot"
- -
NN
~:!:
....
0\
~
~~
-c -c
NN
"Ot" "Ot"
- -
....
00
~
t"l t"l
~n~
~~
.. "Ot"
- -
....
r-
...
.
~
00 00
V'l V'l
00 00
,..;,..;
~,~
....
-c
~
.... ....
V'l V'l
00 00
..;..;
"Ot" ..
;;-
lO
~
.... ....
~~
-D-D
:!:~
....
..
5
>-
....
~
t"l
~
~
00('1"\\1') 00 \OV"l \0 0
t-OO~ONNr-
r--cO\r-ooO\"Ot"
r-:"""oC~~Mr-:
"Ot" 00 -
-
....
oo....V'lOO-ClO-CO
r-00....0t"lt"lr-
r--cO\r-ooO\"Ot"
~~oO~~C"'i'r-:
"00_
-
....
oo~~~~~reO
~-c0\r-000\..
r--".oO~('f'\~r:
..00_
....
oo~~~~~re
~-c0\r-000\..
r: .,; oc" ~ ~ ('f'\ r:
:!;OO'"
....
00....V'l00-C~-C
r-00....0t"l r-
r- -c 0\ r- 00 ..
~.oO~~~r-.:
:!:oo_
....
~~~~~~reO
r- -c 0\ r- 00 0\ ..
r-:";oO,..;,..;,..;r-:
..00_
-
....
~~~~~~reO""~
t-\CO\t-ooO\... ~....
r:";oO~~Mr: -:~
:!;OO...... .....fI"l
....
~~~~~~reO""~
r--cO\r-ooO\"Ot" ~-
r:"':oO~~~r: ":N
... ClCI ..... ..... f'I\
-
....
....~
~-
-"f"i
- ....
.... -c
~~
":C'i
- ....
.... -c
~~
"":C'i
-.....
O.....~
~-
"":f'i
- .....
O.....~
~-
":f'i
-.....
..... -c
~~
";f:"'i
- ....
~~~~~~reO""'~
r--c0\r-000\" ~-
r-:..;oCC'f"i~~r-.: "':C'i
...00...... ......fI"l
;;;
~~~~~~re
r--c0\r-000\..
r:....OOM~~r:
"Ot" 00_
-
....
O.....~
~-
"":f'i
- .....
--~000r-80-C0\
lOt"l t"l.......... .....00.
f"'l0\ t-ooO\"" -('.I
,..;";oO,..;...;...;r-: r-:N
~oo- -('f'l
....
..... .....
-c-c
00 00
-D-D
~~
....
Si!~~~~~~0
~-ClO"lO-CO\
oOoOr-:...;...;...;-D
:!;r---
....
-c -c
V'l V'l
"Ot""
"''''
- -
;;;-
oot:;::lOr-r-.....O\O
~~~~~o~
vivi";NN...;vi
~'-C-
....
M~:tP~~~!;:O
0'\ C"'\ N (:::S ...... fI"l ...
C:O":NNN";
;:"".....
....
..... .....
S. S.
- -
0\ 0\
....
~~
..;.,;
.. ..
....
0....."'..........000
r:$l!~~~~
~~-n....:...:...:N
....
~&
"':0\
t"l t"l
1
! ~
~en
~~
~a
c..
:l till
==;l ~ .8 .g
~ 1t:0 ! a n
9;;J.l1:: fi~1 iiEo<~
~ .IiJ :s 0 iii u Eo< .- t~
~~l !l~
-co.,.,
~ :g"
....
-C0V'l-
~ ~..
....
cgOV'l~
r- ~
....
-COlO-
~ ~..
....
:80~~
r- .c
....
'CIO""-
o ~..
t:;
'CIOlO-
~ ~..
....
'CIO""-
~ ~..
....
'CIOlO-
~ ~..
....
'CIOlO-
~ ~..
....
~O~~
t:; .c
""00000
lO - .....
~ -c
-""
;r::
....:..;
t"l t"l
rfO...........
.. - .....
lO lO
....
00 _
:!:~
~~
t"l-
~O~~
~ ....
lO 00
o-c
"" r-
~c:
:!:Orf~
.... ~
....
:l
.~ g n ~
cfjj-g
.- jj ?:l
.., ...l .... .-
&_....l
.l!.,!!
~ .Ii .s t-
fi ::s c;._
.~ = < cr:l
...l
V'l .... .....
-0-
-c r- 0\
f'f'i"':-:
....
"".....t"l
-0-
'CI r- 0\
M"":"':
....
V'l.....t"l
-0-
-cr-O\
M"":"':
....
"".........
-0-
.c r- 0\
~..:....:
....
lO ..... ....
-0-
-cr-O\
~..: ..
....
""..... ....
-0-
-c r- 0\
f'I"l":"":
....
""..... ....
-0-
-cr-O\
M"":"":
....
lOst"l
~t';:
('1'\"':"":
....
"".....t"l
-0-
-cr-O\
~....:....:
....
""..... ....
-0-
-cr-O\
M":":
....
~S~
-c r- 0\
~....:....:
....
-c _ lO
lO 00 r-
..... lO r-
~..:....:
....
""Soo
~.....~
c--r...:....:
....
O....r-
"" -.....
- o-
N...:....:
....
r-r-O
0\_00
0.."" V"a
-
....
i!
a
'i!
tf g
.., .=
& .
_0
.~:> n
=i8~
~.J j
:l J:o .-
.S O...l
Po.
o
....
('f"'l<""'l-~O
~~::gC5\
C:N...;N
'" r-....
....
o
....
.........-~O
~~::gC5\
~N...;N
'" r-....
....
o
....
..........-~O
~~::gC5\
C:N"';N
0\ r-t"l
....
o
....
..........-~O
~~:gC5\
~N...;N
0\ r-t"l
....
o
....
.......... - ~o.
~~:gC5\
tN~~
~
o
....
C"'\fI"l.....~O
~~:gC5\
~N...;N
0\ r-....
....
o
....
.........-~O
~~:gC5\
~N...;N
0\ r- ....
....
o
....
..........-~O
~~:gC5\
~N...;N
0\ r-t"l
....
o
....
.........-~O
~~:gC5\
~N,..;N
0\ r-t"l
....
o
....
..........-~O
~~:gC5\
~N...;N
0\ r-t"l
....
o
....
rf ..... 00 ,('f'\ 0
~~~S;
~N";N
0\ r-....
....
o
....
~~~~O
.......lOt"l
NNoO":
0\ 'CI....
....
o
....
V'l"lO-CO
~C5r:~
-DN-Dr-:
r- V'l-
....
o
....
...... ""..... 0
..oo....t"l
...... '" 0\ \C
O\...:~~
"" ..-
....
o
....
"" 00
!::i
o
....
....
-c-O
- V'l
.. 0\
N-D
....
i
~
I
...
o
i
;;J
n
'i
~
!
jj
8 ~
]E~
_ 0 > ==
!j::t:15f-'b
63'6::-5
~en';OO
~...."Ot"""'''''''
M~~~::O\
~N
....
-c...."Ot"t"l....."Ot"
~~.~~=O\
..... ....
....
-c ..... .. .... ..... "Ot"
~~~~::O\
('f'\N
.....
~a~~~~
NNV'lC""li-'l
...;N
....
~a:;~:::~
NNV"a('f"a......
MN
....
~a~~~~
NNV'l('f"a-'l
...;N
....
~s~~~~
NN"'~-
...;N
....
~......t"l.......
N~~~::O\
...;N
....
~s~~~~
NNV"a('f"a.....
"';N
....
~..................
N~~~::O\
...;N
....
lOO ~ -c .... .. ..
V'l~....0\
<""lI V"a <""lI....
...;N
....
~~..oo""c-
-0000
""..... -
...;N
....
O-'lV"a"'t'-oN
~$~~oor-
N":
....
~~-~~~~
- -
~
SiC:GClOO-"'O\
C!S_~~~('f'\N
-
....
~
U ~
~ I ~'i ~
gif.~~6
a a:. ~ E .IiJ .~
.2 .f.~ is ~ j
:l~ell!:td
2!"1i H ~ -5 .!
aen~c..O';
r-
oo
....
..;
0\
....
....
....
00
QO
..;
0\
....
....
'"
00
.....
vi
0\
.....
....
~
vi
0\
.....
....
t"l
"Ot"
..
t.
.....
....
r-
oo
ell.
~
.....
....
-c
..
lO
~
.....
....
~
-
oO
0\
....
....
:8
r-
oO
0\
.....
....
8
r-.
~
.....
....
..
~
i
"Ot"
....
.....
'r-
.....
:t
.....
....
~
.....
...;
....
....
....
lO
~.
~
....
g1
~
of .
::s.....
6g:
r;-
ll!:.IiJ
~~
17t
:! ~
enO
; .!i
.- If
~ E
"Sen
o .~
'0 8
.~ 8
UI1l
i
en
.....
~
..;
:!;
....
I
~
I
'e
!
~
~
...
...
"'l
~
=
~
E--t;
z<
S1!3l
0_
~zgJ
~S1z
<I)<~~
~~~:J
j;~8
~ >'"
..J <~
tigss-
<0=
tllWU
~~
~i:
Q.,U
) J- --9 t,
Vl
-
~
:!:
~
~
~
('I
-
~
-
-
..... .....
..... .....
\D\D
~~
M
~
~
o 0
~~
. .
~~
M
~
0\
~
~~
00 00
88
..... .....
M
00
~
'" '"
00 00
- -
.~~
0\ 0\
;;-
~
~
00 00
l;l;
vi vi
00 00
- -
M
\D
~
00
~ ~
0\ 0\
..0..0
~ ~
;;-
Vl
ti
><
Vl Vl
::~
0000
~~
M
.
~
~~
.... ....
0\0\
~~
M
'"
~
\D\D
~~
.... ....
;;-
.....
~
~ ~
'" '"
~~
~~
- -
M
~
bb
~~
vi vi
\D \D
M
:I]
I< S
~<I)
~I
1a
- -
.... ....
~~
88
..........
M
oot""--OO('f"'a('f1....._0
'-o\N..,.r---_o
OO.\D......"'\D
..:oo~r-:r-:....
." ('f"'a ('f"'a _
0\ 00
M
88
~~
M
OOt""'QC)('t")<",__o
:~~~t;;:~
":oC~r:-:r-:.;..;
""' ('f'\('f'\ .....
0\ 00
M
. .
0\ 0\
'" '"
~~
M
oor--OO('f'\('fl--O_('ol
.O\......~-O .00
OO.\D......"'\D 0000
..:oc~r-:r-:.;..; \l!rl
tnt'f'1(""\ """-\0
0\ 00
M
('I .....
'" '"
0\ 0\
ii
..... .....
M
OOf"OOC""\f""\..........O_("II
:~~~!;;;;~ ::
":00...r:r:..;..; ..oN
V\<"lf"" ""-\0
0\ 00
M
~~~~~=oO;&1
OO.\D......"'''O 0000
":00...r:r:..;..; ..oN
V')C""\C'f'\ ....._',Q
0\ 00
M
~l;g"':=~o~~
~ .. \D. ~ ~ "'. \D. .. 0\.
-ooC""\r--r--...... '-OM
V'aC"'\C'f'\ --\0
0\ 00
M
...t"""OVlO-"O-\C
~~&;~~;;;~ ~~
...NNr-:r-:..;..; ..0":
\OtnC""\ ""'-\0
oo~
M
-t'I"""'O'\OO-O\ON'"
~r!b~bC;;~ ~~
:d'~~~r-"""':~ ~~
~\D
~
~l;~~~=~0~~
.....-\OOOf'f'\('f'\ ~tn
g. vi ..: ..0 ..0 ..; ... ..0 r-:
o\('f'\ .....-tn
1;;....
2!;1;:r---:g:::~o~S
<<'!. <<'!. \D. ~ .. "'. \D. "'!. ..
..O\\D\D.('I .,.,.
NNN """-V"'a
~.,.,
""~OX('l-SO~-
~C5\-C5\g;;;O\ !;~
..<<'!..... ..
t""'NOOVl\o..."'" tn-
..,.VlN ..........."
.,., .
M
0~",('I00-('I0""""
~t!t!~r:~~ S=
r:oi~";vi"':= ~~
. '"
~
.oo~""-O\"'O""'\D
C"'\('oltn.....oo..,.- r--~
0\"'.('1"'",.,., 00('1
~=~vi',,","""g '#i'4
. '"
M
~~~=~~~O:~
0\00\D0-.0 Vloo
!3~~";";"'00 ~~
"'('I
6I't
.,.,.,.,0\-.....~000.~
;;~~~~~t;; ~~
...;r-:df:'<t~..:...; r;-:",
00__ ('I'lI-
- -'
6I't
:I 010 ..
:= -= ~
~~:5' !~fl
!~1=Y~1il~~
~ :I 13 0 iil U E--.~ 8...~
.. Ii Ii I! e- OS
8<1)p.. E--Q.,;:J
-.....
.00
00 00
..oN
- \D
..,. 0\ ..... \t"')
~;:!;~.
0\0\
..... .....
6I't
- .....
.00
00 00
..oN
- \D
;-0\-'"
~;:!;~.
~~
6I't
""0\-'"
~;:!;~.
0\0\
..... .....
M
"'0\-,,",
~;:!;~.
0\0\
..... ('I
6I't
""'0\-'"
~;:!;~.
~~
6I't
0\ ... ..... tn
..... ... f"'\ ...,.
O\-~
0\0\
('I ('I
6I't
00C""\-'"
0"'",.
-"'~
..or-:
('1('1
M
Nf"'--Vl
..... <""" ('I"') ...
'" .... ~
~~
6I't
0\"'-""
0\('1",.
-. ~
.~
('1('1
6I't
~S;;;~
oo_~
~~
6I't
\O--V"I
""00"'.
Vl ~ ~
!:""~
M
.,.,~-.,.,
~..~.
. '"
- -
6I't
..... 00 t' V')
Nt""lIC"'\...
0\ - ~
gg
M
0\ ~ \D \D
C""\ ..... 00 f'l"\
.00.,.,
r-:..o
M
\D\DOO
.0\"'.....
00 . '"
f'Pi'.~
M
:!
-~ ~ :I ~
efg"c:I
"C ;:s .H .~
1i.....l..J
.~-J.!!
~.~. ~
6::1 .-
._ C:ll C:ll
..J
ggg
a-oo-
~"':N
6I't
ggg
0\00-
~":N
6I't
ggg
0\00-
~":N
6I't
oog
l;&;-
~":N
M
oog
l;&;-
~":ci
M
oog
l;&;-
~":col
M
ggg
0\00-
~":N
M
ggg
0\00-
<"'i..:c-..r
6I't
oog
l;&;-
~...:t:i
M
ggg
0\00-
trl..:t:i
M
ggg
0\00-
~":N
M
ggg
0\00-
~":N
M
.,., ~ 0\
goo_
00 _
~":N
:g:
- .... \D
~..:..:
6I't
Vl .,., 0\
0\..
l""-.. GO 0\
;;
D
.j!
If a
"C .g
Ii.!
. 0
.11 :> :I
lstl!
cfit-
ij,fi
.S U ..J
p..
o
6I't
~~~~o
NO\--
gN;;i~
6I't
o
6I't
!:~~~o
N~~_
gN;;i~
;;
o
6I't
!:;~:;~o
N 0\.......-
gN;;i~
;;
o
6I't
~~.ooo
- '" .,.,
<<'!. .~-.
~('Io;;~
M
o
6I't
t:~:;~O
N 0\.........
gN;;i~
-
6I't
o
M
!:~;:!;~o
<<'!.O\.~~
~('Io;;~
6I't
o
M
!:~;:!;~o
~O\..........
gN;;i~
;;
o
M
~~~~o
('40\--
~N;;i~
M
o
M
~~.ooo
- '" .,.,
('I --
~N;;i~
~
o
M
!::~~~o
NO'\--
gN;;i~
-
6I't
o
6I't
!:~;:!;~o
NO\--
~N;;i~
6I't
o
M
!:~;:!;~o
C"'f 0\""''''''
gN;;i~
-
6I't
o
M
"'-~"'o
0\ .,., 00
- 0\ '"
=-N;~
6I't
~\D"'000
~;:!;b!:
~N~~
6I't
o
M
o
M
00('1-.0
~('IOO~
('f'\ ('f'\ \0 ('f'\
o\"':.,D":
. "'-
6I't
!
I
~
0)
.
;:J
:I
1 D
~ g
8 ;:s
]~~
.0> I<
Jil~~
00\00..",
~;~~~~
~N
6I't
~O\oo..",
\C;~~~~
~N
6I't
00\00..'"
S;~~~2
"'N
6I't
~O\oo"'.'"
\D.~:S:~~
...N
6I't
00\00..'"
fC1;~~~2
"'N
M
~O\oo"'.",
'\0 :;: ~ ~ ~ S
...N
~
00\00..'"
S.f6~~~
"'N
M
00\00..'"
S;~~~2
"'N
6I't
~O\oo..'"
\O;:i~~2
"'N
M
~O\oo."''''
\O;~~~2
...N
~
00\00..'"
~;~~~~
...N
M
00\00..'"
~;~~~2
...N
6I't
~-:!;t;~~
"':\OC'I"\.......
"'N
M
f'f'\_OONg'"
0.000\ 00
O\o\.N-
C'i"':
6I't
~.""""\D~
~g~:eV').
;;-
H ~
.f 8
~ .. I ~ 'j ~
~ "8 ~.I ~ a
a c;. l1; t <Ill .~
oS .Ef.g H! ~
l1!je.:..,{
If .Ii 1'; .-
0<1) Q.,o:i
a-
.....
('I
~
......
~
~
...
8
"'.
;;
('I
to.
e;
"l
-
6I't
o
-
.
S
"l
-
6I't
~
~
"'.
-
M
o
'"
00
t
"l
-
M
~
~
-
M
'"
~
~
-
-
M
0\
Vl
...
~
-
M
i
00
'"
0\
6I't
'"
\D
.
o
.,.,
00
6I't
('I
~
N
\D
I;;
-
....
~
00
00
~
o
0;;
~
....
6I't
..;
~
.; .
::I'"
5g:
~:;
!=:
00
t
'"
6I't
- -
~~
17t
~~
~ Ji
.- r
=: s
;;<1)
a _2
- 8
o c::
.~ 8
Utll
9
J
l!'
.e
~
e.:
l
B
8
<I)
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
OVERHEAD FUNCTIONS
General Government 6,997,239 13.64% 16.3% of Line Operations
City Council 277,198 0.54%
Boards and Commissions 55,140 0.11%
Community Presentations 21,969 0.04%
City Attorney 646,199 1.26%
City Clerk I Elections 299 ,206 0.58%
Administration 1,029,477 2.01%
Managment Services 1,183,138 2.31%
Personnel Operations 889,414 1.73%
Finance I Purchasing 1,307,250 2.55%
Insurance 974,924 1.90%
Non- Departmental 313,324 0.61%
Public Works 1,330,462 2.59% 3.1% of Line Operations
Building Maintenance 696,575 1.36%
Custodial Maintenance 633,887 1.24%
TOTAL 8,327,701 16.23% 19.4% of Line Operations
LINE OPERATIONS
Economic and
Community Development 1,161,693 2.26% Not Applicable
Planning (Non-Current) 735,508 1.43% $10.84 per EDU
Police I Animal Control 15,947,879 31.09% $235.03 perEDU
Fire Protection 6,494,763 12.66% $95.72 per EDU
Building and Housing 1,128,430 2.20% Non-recurring
Public Works 9,611,122 18.74%
Administration I Planning (1) 4,545,392 8.86% $9.875 perEDU
Traffic Signal Maintenance 1,028,890 2.01% $3,655.03 per Mile of Street
Traffic Operations 536,129 1.05% 50% - $1,904.54 per Mile of Street
50% - $0.467 per ADT
Street Maintenance (2) 1,428,366 2.78% 50% - $5,074.12 per Mile of Street
50% - $1.244 per ADT
Street Sweeping 305,998 0.60% $1,087.03 per Mile of Street
Street Tree Maintenance 541,092 1.05% $1,922.17 per Mile of Street
Sanitary Sewer Maintenance 1,000,000 1.95% Self-Supporting
Waste Water Maintenance 225,255 0.44% Self-Supporting
)) c.''?
0"- - ,I
I
TABLE 12
EAS1LAKE 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 Chuta 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 project
J~ -9?/
-<
fOl
~
[;I;l
...:l
=
-<
E-
t;
-<
t:l..
~
l:J
~~
en...:lE-
ffi~~~
~~p.,-<
Of;lx...:l
~~l:J...J
-<o~8
...JoenM
~~s:~
~enj
X:J
l:J:I:
U
P-
o
>-
E-
o
/:1 -1j
~
>-
~
>-
~
~
>-
0-
~
>-
00
~
>-
r-
~
>-
'l)
~
>-
V'l
~
>-
v
~
>-
M
~
>-
N
~
>-
~
>-
V'l
~
>-
v
-
~
>-
M
-
~
>-
~
-
-
0;
5
.~
8-
<)
j
00
~
~
00
~
&f
00
~
~
00
~
&f
00
~
&f
00
~
&f
00
~
N
~
00
~
~
00
~
&f
00
~
&f
00
55
&f
00
~
&f
v
~
&f
v
r-
N
&f
0-
V'l
-
-
~
J
~
f
v
V'l
V'l
..c
V'l
~
v
V'l
V'l
..c
V'l
<4
v
V'l
V'l
..c
V'l
~
v
V'l
V'l
..c
V'l
~
v
V'l
V'l
..c
V'l
<4
v
V'l
V'l
..c
V'l
<4
v
V'l
V'l
..c
V'l
<4
v
....
V'l
..c
....
<4
v
....
....
..c
V'l
<4
v
....
....
..c
V'l
~
v
V'l
....
..c
V'l
....
v
....
....
..c
~
M
o
0-
..c
V'l
...
~
M
~
~
....
~
vi
~
~
l
~
8
;::l
~
M
M
O.
M
~
N\ON-V')VQ()('f")~
Nr--r-NV'lO\N\O
r-M-O\("')ClOMN-
v) ('.1" -q: -: c--i ...: -: C'i
~
M
8
M
~
N'l)N-....~~~~
~~=S~OO~N-
v)ci~": t:i"':"':~
~
M
M
o
M
~
~:e~-~~~~~
t't""I-b..,.,OOMN-
viC'i~": ci"':"':ri
~
M
M
o
~
N'<ON-V')~OO('f'\N
~:;;=l:;&:l::ci~~~
~C'i";"': f:i..:..:t:i
~
M
8
a
~:eN-~~~~~
r-t""I::SV')OO('f'\N-
.nri";": ri"':":ri
~
M
8
a
~~~~~:;~~~
t"'-C""\-OV")OOt""lN-
vi N ~ ..: ci ..: ..: ci
~
M
8
M
~
N'l)N-....~~~~
~:;;=l:;&:looMN-
.nt:i~...: ri":"':c-i
~
M
8
M
~
N'l)N-....~~~~
~~=b~QOt""IN-
tici"';"': ci...:...:t:i
~
M
M
o
M
~
~:e~-~~~~~
r-t""I-bV'lOOt""lN-
~<"i'''';''': r:i"':":N
...
M
8
M
~
O'l)N-V'lOOMN
t;:~=b~ ~~
::ci"';": "':ri
~
M
8
M
~
O'l)N-....OOMN
t;t~=S~ ~~
:iC'i";": ":C"'i
....
M
M
o
~
O'l)N-....OOMN
t;~=S~ ~~
":r:i"';": "":N
~
V'l
~
M
~
O_r-ooooOOO\O
~~~l:;&:l ~~
:ic-i"';"': ":ri
....
N
00
o
o
~
..... N In -.:t ~ 0 0 ~.::cioo.
8l:;~~~ ~
ONM
~
r-
~
o
~
~~~:e;3;OO~:Q
OooovN ....0-
V'I.....: ..
....
80
o
-
~
OV'lN
r- M
M'l)
00"':
80
~
~
O....N
r- M
M 'l)
oC":
80
o
~
O....N
r- M
M'l)
00"':
80
~
~
OV'lN
r- M
M'l)
00":
80
o
~
O....N
r- M
M 'l)
00"':
80
o
~
OV'lN
r- M
M 'l)
00":
80
o
~
O....N
r- M
M 'l)
00":
80
o
~
OV'lN
:;;l2
00"':
80
~
....
OV'lN
r- M
M'l)
00"':
80
o
~
OV'lN
r- M
M'l)
00"':
80
o
~
O....N
r- M
M 'l)
00"':
80
o
~
O....N
r- M
M'l)
00 -"'
800~~
~ 00"':
....
~OOS~
r- MV
00 r-:..:
~
0000~~
~ r-r-
~ M
<)5 <)5
~nlii ~ ..18
~ H~ U~JiI8 :l
~ i 1'~ .~ .Ii .Ii ~ ~ ".~ I 5 8
~:1~~~~~~~ 1~~'1'1
~~!!~~~~~ ~ll""
5
J
.~
P-
V'l
V'l
o
..;
-
~
....
....
o
~
~
V'l
:g
..;
~
V'l
:g
..;
~
....
....
o
..;
~
V'l
....
o
~
~
V'l
V'l
o
..;
~
V'l
:g
~
....
V'l
V'l
o.
~
....
....
:g
~
....
....
:g
..;
~
....
:g
..;
~
N
~
~
~
....
~
N
~
!;:
N
~
~
0-
r-
0-.
~
~
0-
r-
Ol.
N
~
0-
r-
Ol.
~
~
0-
r-
Ol.
N
~
0-
r-
Ol.
-
~
~
0-
~
N
~
0-
r-
Ol.
~
~
0-
r-
Ol.
~
~
0-
r-
Ol.
-
N
~
r-
N
r-
~
~
!::i
r-.
~
~
~.
~
~
M
....
v
oti
-
-
....
r-
::!
tf
~
~
M
N
V'l
~
g
J
<)
j
~
E-
00
M
r-
vi
~
r-
r-.
r-
v
~
00
M
r-
~
~
r-.
r-
v
~
00
M
r-
~
~
r-.
s:
~
00
M
r-
vi
~
~
r-.
!;:
~
00
M
r-
vi
~
~
r-.
s:
~
00
M
r-
~
~
r-.
!;:
~
00
M
r-
~
~
r-.
r-
~
....
00
....
r-
~
~
r-
ro:
~
....
00
....
r-
vi
~
r-
R
!;:
~
~
00
..;
~
r-
'l)
"l.
~
~
~
00
..;
~
!O
"l.
N
v
~
~
00
..;
~
r-
'l)
"l.
N
v
~
v
0-
0-
..;
~
r-
~.
....
v
~
0-
....
'l).
a
8
<"l.
v
~
~
M
0-
2:
~
-
g
i!
'Cio-
5~
e co:.
~&
; .~.~
I i~
co 'Ci ~
.! ~ ~
i I
E- en
~.
-
~
l2
M
M
~
a-
S
."
~
P-
l
>
o
=
....
...
r.l
..:l
=
-<
Eo<
ffi~
::1J~
ffiga
i~l~
o~~~
~....l-<8
j~~t;....
E-< t""'0\
rI:I ....~
tiloj
@::>
fIl:I:
~~
00
8:8
Jd --Jt/'{)
.,.,
~
><
:!:
~
><
~
~
><
~
~
><
-
-
!
:::
~
><
0\
~
><
00
~
><
r--
!
\0
~
><
In
!
...
~
><
....
~
><
~
~
><
~
><
.. J
! ~
~ f
~
\0
0\
r-:
....
~
0\
r-:
....
~
~
~
~
~
0\
~
~
~
~
0\
~
~
t;;
~
~
~
~
~
0\
~
~
~
00
0\
00
~
~.
~
~.
....
....
0\
~
c-i
r--
....
0\
~.
~
r--
0;;
~
c-i
!:::;
....
0\
~
s
....
~
~
r--
0;;
0\
~
~
r--
0;;
0\
~.
~
r--
0;;
0\
~.
~
r--
0;;
0\
~
N
r--
0;;
0\
~
~
r--
0;;
0\
~
N
!:::;
....
~
r--.
~
r--
0;;
~
~
j:::
0;;
0\
0\
r--.
In
~
....
-
B.
0\
~
]
]
~
8
::l
~
8
....
ci
t;
~""~oo~'IIl:tt--N-
Vl-('l"\ ('l"')\Of'OO
~O-~ \O~~~
vir-: . ~
....
8
....
ci
~
S!.......oos::!~r--~-
~~;:~'ZS~~~~
vir-: . ~
0;;
8
....
ci
~
S!.......oos::!~....~-
\2S~<;~iZS:a~~~
vl'r-: ...: ~
0;;
8
....
ci
~
S!.......oos::!...r--~-
\2S~<;~iZS:a~~~
vir-: . ~
0;;
8
....
ci
~
S!.......oos::!...r--~-
\2S~<;~iZS:a~~~
vi": ...:.
0;;
8
....
ci
~
S!.......oos::!...r--~-
\2S~<;~iZS:a~~~
vl'r: ..:.
0;;
8
....
ci
~
S!.......oos::!...r--~-
\2S~<;~iZS:a~~~
vir-: . ~
0;;
8
....
o
~
S!.......oos::!...r--~-
\2S~<;~iZS:a~~~
vir-: ...:..
0;;
8
....
o
~
S!.......oos::!...r--~-
\2S~<;~iZS:a~~~
~,..: ..:..,;
....
8
....
o
~
O\.......oos::!oo~-
~~<;~iZS ~~
or-: .
0;;
8
....
o
~
O\.......oos::!oo~-
~~<;~iZS ~~
gr: ..:
....
~
....
o
~
Inr--...oos::!oo~-
je~<;~iZS ~~
~r-: ...:
....
r--
....
~
~
~"')li!\OO\ooor--
ro~a\~~ ~!;
or-: ...:
0;;
8
....
vi
In
....
~\OO\r--~oo~oo
0-00 -I'
f"'oo......- t:'I~
00.n ...:
....
~
~
14
00~~~~00;!i!3
~......-r-- -N
~....
5
J
.~
~
I~~~~
f. ~~~~ j
--::1JSSli~.!i
~ :18 }llj j l~
~~~~tllll
~-<Eo<E-<E-<fIlfllfllfll
~00;Zl;ci
Vl" VlO\
ci vi~
.... ~
....
~00;Zl;ci
In In 0\
o vi~
14 ~
~00;Zl;ci
In In 0\
~ ~~
~00;Zl;ci
In In 0-
~ ~~
~00;Zl;ci
In In 0-
o vi~
~ ~
~00;Zl;ci
In In 0-
o ~~
14
~00;Zl;ci
In In 0\
o vi~
14 ~
~00;Zl;ci
~ ~Ol,
~ ~~
~00;Zl;ci
In In 0\
o vi"';
14 ~
~00;Zl.2
In In 0-
o vi"';
14 ~
~00;Zl.2
In In 0-
o ~...;
14
r.:!o 0 r--In
_ r--oo
In In 0-
g ~...;
....
O\oor--~
0\ In'"
~ ....0\
o ~...;
14
0-0000
S =~
a ~..;
-oo~~
~ r--. ~
.... -~
0;; -
8
8i8 I
):m.IS8
l~~.j.1
!!!!~
8
0\
c-i
~
&
c-i
~
&
~
&
~
&
~
&
~
~
c-i
~
&
c-i
~
~
~
....
&
c-i
~
~
~
~
~
\0
In
In
c-i
~
o
In
r--
..;
14
-
~
~
....
I
~.
~
....
....
~.
~
14
~
g
....
....
~.
~
14
~
~
~
~.
~
14
~.
~
~
~
~
~
~.
~
~
In
:::
vi
....
14
~
vi
....
14
In
~
In
....
14
...
0\
...
~
....
14
-
.0.
~
&
....
....
~
....
s
1
~
J
~
r--.
-
r--
....
r--
~
r--.
-
i
~
r--.
-
!;
r--.
-
-
~
~
-
...
r--
...:
~
r--
...
r--.
-
i
~
~
-
~
!;
r--.
-
-
~
~
~
~
r--
...
r--.
-
i
~
r--.
t;
r--
~
r--.
-
i
-
...
r--.
-
t;;
!;
r--.
-
i
~
r--.
t;
!;
r--.
-
-
~
~
~
t;;
!;
r-:.
-
i
B
r--
o
t;;
~
i
B
r--.
o
t;;
~
-
00
vi
i
....
...
r--
o
t;;
r--
I
In
~
o
t;;
0-
~
~
~
vi
~
,.;
~
....
~
~
~
g
I!
~<;
il~
I ~
fIl~
~ ~ .t.~
a I ~E
s o~
J I BJ
I ..
~ J J
~
...
~
14
5
vi
00
0;;
t.I
..,
...
roil
...:l
=
<
~
t;
~
~
~j~
~~~~
~1~8
~.~ t;; M
~~>~
cncnj
~~~
t.I
~
o
><
~
tl
j;;.-/ti/
V'l
-
~
><
v
-
~
><
~
~
><
~
~
><
-
-
~
:::
~
><
0-
~
><
00
~
><
I"-
~
><
\0
~
><
V'l
~
v
~
><
....
~
><
("I
~
><
~
><
-- -g
.. j ~
i { ~
~ f i
o
iO
00
~
o
iO
00
~
o
iO
00
~
o
iO
00
~
o
iO
00
~
o
iO
00
~
o 0
iO ~.
~ . ~
-
~
o
iO
00
~
o
iO
00
~
:::
\0
00
~
v
:a
00
~
v
~
ti
~
~
~
~
("I
iO
ri
o
00
\0
..0
00
-
~
o
~
\0
00
;;
~-
\0
00
;;
o
00
~
\0
00
-
~
~.
\0
00
;;
o
00
~
~
;;
o
00
~
~
-
~
o
00
\0
t
;;
o
00
\0.
~
-
~
~
('\
I"-
00
;;
~
'"l.
M
I"-
;;
~
'"l.
M
V
;;
M
0_
-
-
;;
~
..0
~
0\
S
..0
t;
OvOv("lO\MV'lM
""""'-00<""00-0\00
V'looOI"-I"-O\OooV'l
Mt-"~ -:M..,,;' ..
~
0\
S
..0
t;
~~:::~~~~~~
V'loo 0 1"-1"-0 \0 00 V'l
a.......... "':ci. -
0\
S
..0
t;
~~:::~~~~~~
V'l000 1"-1"-0 \OooV'l
C"'ir-:"f'"'i' ..:~. ..:
~
S
..0
t;
~;~:~~~~~
V'l 000 1"-1"-0 \OooV'l
N.........~ "':N." ..:
~
0\
S
..0
t;
O~OV("lO\""V'lCO!
tn ......OOMOC......O\OC
"1. _0_1"-1"-0\0 00 V'l
~I""'f"') ":N. ..:
~
~
\0
t;
~~:::~~~~~~
V'looOI"-I"-O\OooV'l
a r--" cori' ..: N . ..:
0-
S
..0
t;
~~2:~~~~~
V'l 00.0 I"- I"- 0 \0 00 V'l
a.......... "':ci. .
S
..0
I"-
~
~~~:f.1~~~~
V'loo 0 1"-1"-0 \0 00V'l
a.......... "':ci. -
~
\0
t;
~~:::~~~~~~
"1.oo.ql"-l"- 0 \0 00 V'l
a.......trl ...:rt. ..:
0\
S
..0
t;
!;:~:::~~OO~~
ooQOor--....... 00"1-
~r-:M'" ...
~
("I
.,.
("I.
\0
t;
i~~~~.OO~~
vi'r--:"M'" ......
;;
&
V'l
o
t;
V\t"IV\oostoo...o
-OOo\N\.Z5 ('1'\1"'"
~~~.......: 00.,._
;;
:a
M
00
V'l
...
~s;;~~OCto~
ci..oci:} \O~
;;
("I
;q
V'l
~
~~~~8
0\. - -
~
00("1-
M .,.
V'l 0-
8
....
~
~il~~~OO~il
ooMo-("IV'l ("I'"
;tci
8
J
o~
~
8~~~~
JI~~~~ i
_oiS88i .!l
8~0!'j ~ M ~i
i 01 j ~~oi oli t~
~~i~t!iii
~<~~~cncncncn
MOO.,.oo
8 ~~
M r-:v1"
M ("I
~
MOO:::l:oo
8 .o~
~ ~vi'
~
aOO~~
M r-:vr
~ ("I
MOO.,.oo
8 ~~
.... ......vi'
~ ("I
aOO~~
.... ......vi'
~ ("I
~OO~~
M ......vi'
~ ("I
aOO~~
.... ......vi'
~ ("I
aOO~~
.... ......vi'
~ ("I
aOO~~
.... ......vi'
~ ("I
aOO~~
.... ......vi'
~ ("I
EOO~~
.... ......vi'
~ ("I
000
lO
o
~
:88
~vi'
1"-00-\0
V'l ("1M
M ("I-
t! ~.
MOO
~
0\
;;
o-x
~N
~M
!:]0000V'l
o ~:a
0" oC ..:
;;
08
8 8 01
0101 8 :.,
il~jj i
{
i!
'(S-
'6~
Jl
~ I o~'i
. >...
a ~!:J
! j ~i
~ ~ I e.!
~ J ~ J
V'l
0\
M
!
V'l
0-
M
!
V'l
0-
M
!
V'l
0-
'"l.
~
V'l
0\
'"l
~
V'l
0-
....
!
V'\
0-
....
!
V'\
0-
i
V'l
0-
'"l.
~
V'\
0-
....
!
~
V'\
t
\0
b.
CO!
~
V'l
iO
vi'
....
...
&
V'\
a
s
~
~
\0
0\
('\
M
I"-
....
~
\0
~
....
I"-
~
~
('\
CO!
I"-
CO!
~
~
....
....
~
~
....
I"-
CO!
~
~
....
....
~
~
('\
....
I"-
~
~
....
I"-
~
~
CO!
I"-
~
.,.
0\
"1.
:8
~
~
li
~
("I
....
'"l.
~
~
V'l
~
-
00
~
8_
00
ii
~
-
-
;;
V'l
\0
I"-
00
&;
8
ci
V'\
~
8.
("I
V'\
~
8_
("I
V'\
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
("I
V'\
~
~
("I
V'\
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
V'\
\0
~
00
t;
~
.....
00
t;
~
1"-.
00
t;
~
.....
00
t;
V'\
\0
~
00
t;
V'\
\0
....
00
t;
~
....
00
t;
V'\
\0
....
00
t;
-
V'l
CO!
E
V'\
.,.
Ol.
~
~
f8
V'\
E
-
2:
vi'
!
2:
00
...:
t;
;
N
i
0-
I"-
CO!
0\
V'\
...
v
0-
1"-.
~
~
g:
vi'
~
...;
~
a
~
~
a
00
~
v
~
...
Q
O'l
...
~
~
=
-<
Eo<
t;
~~
::>J~
~II
~~~~
~~~8
j~Ul81
Eo<~!>-
UlC)j
~~~
CIl:I:
~~
00
8:g
/ d- - /t~};2..
.,.
~
>0
M
~
>0
C'l
~
>0
~
>0
Vl
-
~
>0
.,.
-
~
>0
::l
~
>0
~
~
>0
-
-
~
>0
~
~
>0
0-
~
>0
GO
~
>0
r-
!
10
~
>0
V>
~
>0
00 J J
8 ' 01
I ! !
~ f ~
GO
M
GO
~
'^
GO
M
GO
..0
;;
GO
M
GO
~
'^
GO
M
GO
~
'^
GO
M
GO
..0
;;
GO
M
GO
..0
;;
0-
r-
M
..0
;;
.,.
~
~
'^
0-
GO
M
.,;
;;
r-
.,.
.,..
:i
(,lOt
:g
r-
....
;;
V>
::il
ti
(,lOt
GO
~
N
;;
~
M
~
~
.,;
'^
0\
:g
V>-
10
M
'^
0-
:g
.,;
10
M
'^
~
V>
10
M
'^
~
:g
M
'^
~
V>
10
~
~
:g
M
...
~
.,;
V>
M
(,lOt
GO
V>
<'i.
V>
.,.
~
o
V>
"!.
M
M
~
o
~
~
~
~
~
~
&1
GO
Ii
N
"\
~
~
~
o
~
10
GO
GO.
-
-
;;
-
GO
10_
00
.,.
-
(,lOt
MO\VlC'lO\r-C'lr-C'l
~~~~~~~~~
~~M r-"N~""
'^
-
GO
10.
GO
:!
(,lOt
Mo-V>C'lo-r-C'lr-C'l
~~:g~~:;::~~~
~~~ f"ooo"c-i~":-:
(,lOt
-
~
GO
.,.
;;
~~~~~~~~S!
~~~ r-:N'eS-:":
(,lOt
-
GO
"!.
GO
.,.
;;
Mo-V>C'l!:1lr-C'lr-S!
.,. M V> V> " M C'l GO
... ... "!. 0- M. "l. "\ o. .
~"'~ f"~0\--
V> - -
...
-
~
GO
:!
(,lOt
~o-V>~~:::i~l;;tt
M~:go-MV>V>O~
Nvl~ r-:No\":":
V> - _
...
-
GO
10.
GO
.,.
...
~~~~~:::i~l;;tt
MMlOo-MV>V>O~
N"'~ r::cio;,,:,,:
~- -
~
!
(,lOt
.,....V>C'l8r-(!;r-tt
s;~:g~r-:;::-~~
o\..rrr \lSc-ioO":":
~- -
C'l
~
~
;;
~~~~~~~~S!
~:!tl"i" 'Cfci~":":
V>
GO
GO
.,;
M
...
r-0-V>C'lC'lr-s::!r-C'l
~o:g~~:;::.~~
.n"":~ .nN"''':'':
~- -
10
V>
.,.
.,;
~
'^
-C'lV>C'lC'l00r-C'l
~~:g~~. ~.st
~~~ '" --
~
E
(,lOt
.,.1OV>C'lC'lOOr-tt
~~:g~~. ~.Ol
~c-i~... --
~-
&
"\
::l
;;
~ 0- V> C'l C'l 0 0 1;;0. tt.
.r:~~~ 0\
ti=~. -.-
~
Ol-
:g
;;
MOGO-GOOOr-o-
~8.~.8~ ~~
a=(f') M --
M
c::;.
C'l
GO
'^
~~;;:;~~OO~~
~:~r-~ GO:2
...
~
V>
.,;
~
M-<""I_OOO
GOOV>MM
~ ~ 10. .,. :-
'^
O-~
~GS
1000GOr-
r- Vl-
~ d~
M M
'^
1000GOr-
r- Vl -
~ 2~
M M
'^
1000GOr-
~ ~~
..0 0";
M M
'^
1000GOr-
r- V>-
~ 2~
M M
(,lOt
1000oor-
~. ~ ~
10 0";
~ M
1000GOr-
~.. ~ ;:
10 0";
~ M
1000GOr-
~ ~c;
10 0";
M M
'^
1000GOr-
~ ~o:
..0 0";
~ M
1000GOr-
~ ~;:
10 0";
~ M
1000GOr-
~ ~;:
..0 0";
~ M
1000GOr-
~ ~;:
10 0";
~ M
1000GOr-
t; ~;:
10 0";
~ M
~O
..0
~
000
~s;
0";
M
V>OO~~
~ Mr-
&i ~..;
Sii!00~~
. r-IO
\15 tiC'i'
;;
I~~~~ 8
j llH.l i 01
~iHlhJ Hi 8~
U~~L)l~~ 1~ in
~~~!~)I)) !ii~~
8
j
og
p.,
o
V>
0\
o
Vl
'^
o
V>
0-
o
~
o
V>
0-
o
~
o
V>
0-
o
~
o
V>
Ol-
o
~
o
V>
0-
o
V>
(,lOt
~
0-
~
(,lOt
~
0-
o
~
o
V>
0-
~
o
V>
0-
o
~
o
V>
0-
o
~
o
V>
0-
o
~
~.
-
V>
...
~
GO
~
V>
8
a
i
V>
Vl
o
r-
~
V>
:!:l
o
~
V>
:!:l
o
~
V>
V>
-
o
r-
~
V>
:!:l
o
~
V>
V>
-
o
~
~
...
M
V>
~
0-
~
10
M
~
V>
o
"\
r-
~
0-
M
r-.
-
~
~
Ol-
M
.,.
~
V>
GO
q
10
~
l
c;
~
.,.
0-
"\
i
~
C'l
M
"!.
-
a
~ ~
i i 1
~ ~ o~
~ I J
! 0 !
M
~.
-
.,.
(,lOt
~
-
.,.
;;
~.
-
:!
'^
~.
~
...
~
~
'^
~
~
'^
C'l
V>
00
r:
M
-
(,lOt
~
...
.,.
M
;;
.,.
~
o
::l
'^
r-
~
~
;;
V>
10
r-;.
:!
-
(,lOt
.,.
0-
GO
.,;
o
...
~
r-.
~
(,lOt
~
M
o
~
.,.
:g
!
00
Vl
"\
=
GO
'^
GO
V>
"\
-
-
GO
'^
GO
V>
"\
-
-
~
GO
V>
"\
-
-
~
GO
V>
"\
-
a
GO
V>
"\
-
-
~
0-
!;
c;
1;;
~
0-
o
E
&
t--.
t;:
1;;
10
r-
...
~
GO
~
.,;
~
0-
s:.
.,.
~
~.
V>
0-
~
&
i
...;
&
-
l
I!
::il
<'i.
10
a
~-
'6~
I c:
Ul~
o~o!
> j
~~
~ Os
BJ
j
TABLE 14A
EASTLAKE GREENS
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1993 DOLLARS
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.
'?
) J- -It).,}
TABLE 14B
EASTLAKE GREENS
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
CITYOFCHULA VISTA
199300ILARS
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.
);2 - lel/
TABLE 14C
EAS1LAKE 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.
..-/
/-2 -Jo~
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 $137,262 122.0% $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.
)2 --It;' b
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY THE
CITY COUNCIL OF
CHULA VIST A, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE
CITY COUNCIL of Chula Vista, California, for the purpose of considering an appeal,
filed by Bonita Country Day School, on the Planning Commission's decision to approve
conditional use permit PCC-94-09, and allow the operation of a private day school
(Covenant Christian Schoo!), with a student body of approximately 270 students at 2400
Fenton Street, within the Eastlake Business Center. A plot plan and legal description for
the proposed school facility and appeal documents for the subject proposal are on file
in the office of the Planning Department.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project is exempt from
environmental review as a class 1(a) exemption. 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 this conditional use permit and appeal
application 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 HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday,
December 7, 1993 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276
Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED:
November 24, 1993
CASE NO. PCC-94-09
COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The Oty of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA),
requests individuals who may need special accommodation to access, attend, and/or
participate in a City meeting, activity, or service to contact Nancy Ripley at (619) 691-5101 for
specific information on existing resources or programs that may be available for such
accommodation. Please call at least forty-eight hours in advance for meetings and five days in
advance for schedule services and activities. California Relay Service is available for the hearing
impaired.
WPC F:\home\planning\t447.93 <PCC-NOf.PC)
/ A /"Ic' f/
_.. ~._._.~__.______.......,.~.__"_",,'~=_"~k~___~~-._.'~"<
RESOLUTION NO.
J73//Y
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
X. 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 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 ("project
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 approva2. f an
Otay Ranch Project. The proposal has been modified thrcL,';>.out
project review, resulting in the final project 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 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)
Pre zoning (the GDP and Pre zoning 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,
~ /~/) -!
Resolution No.
Page 2
-
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, Kay 15, Kay 16,
Kay 22, Kay 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, Karch 13, Karch 17, Karch 24, Karch 31, April 14, April 22,
Kay 8, Kay 12, Kay 13, Kay 18, and October 13, 1993; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a public hearing held
on April 29, Kay 15, Kay 16, Kay 22, Kay 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, Karch 13, Karch 17, Karch
24, Karch 31, April 14, April 22, Kay 8, Kay 12 (focused
consideration of EastLake Land Swap Portion of the Otay Ranch
GPA), Kay 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 incorporated herein
by reference as if set forth in full, made certain findings as
set forth in their Recommending Resolution PCK-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, Kay 15, Kay 16, May
22, Kay 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, Karch 13, Karch
17, Karch 24, Karch 31, April 14, April 22, Kay 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.
.-
r:-...................""-o.1owDRAFT
NCMIIIbor II, 1993
~ /02/;"-;Z
Resolution No.
Page 3
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 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), ~he Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program ("Program") (Docu:', : (. Number C093-227), both of which are on
file in the office of th~:~ty Clerk and incorporated herein by this
reference, prior to apprc' _,..g 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.
VII. Conditional Approval of General Plan Amendment.
The Chula Vista General Plan Land Use diagram is amended as set
forth in Attachment A hereto, incorporated by this reference, subject
to the General Conditions hereinbelow set forth.
VIII.
General Conditions of Approval.
,,_...-mc-a--..--.ilwDRAF1'
~ II, 1993
~/2~:3
Resolution No.
Page 4
-"
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 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.
-
f:~~_.....'--o.1owDIlAFT
N-.. II, 1993
~/~~,-y
Resolution No.
Page 5
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 objectives of the Project 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 0093-227). 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 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 any
one 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 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
f:...............~~-......DIlAFT
~ 11. 1993
.J
~ /:</1-5
Resolution No.
Page 6
law limitation on the number of allowable General Plan Amendments in
one year.
-
Presented by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
f:lboIIlelp_inl'<luanc\alatlakc"""-<>.lIwOllAFT
November 9, 1993
I
Apj'rov tt. fo~
~' I;
Bruce Boogaard
City Attorney
~
~
~/o?~--~
...__..____r~ .... .---..---.---..
.
.
ATTACHMENT A
~~
~G:
fQbZ
~
=~
~
6lt
OO~
~Cf.)
~
~
,
w i
~~a:I_
;~ E~ ~
!:bI~I~i. ~
~! t'i M~i ~
~j 'I' .e~8~ll'
JjJ'J !~~!i, ~
~~
~I
6
!
.:
~,
~
'\
~
~
~
~
~
V)
o
~
~~
~:
<0
JM-/ ~c2/~?
.
..
~~
sea '!:IS
~
0"
,
)
'"
~
<.I
...
~
Q..
a.
~
~
CI:l
"C
=
~
~
-
G.l
~
~
...J
-
~
~
~
.
-
1HISPAGEBLANK
-
-
~/~/9-r
RESOLUTION NO.
/7.3 tl9
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 acr€s)
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 du/ac), ~ublic/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 ("Project"); and,
C. Prior City Council Action.
WHEREAS, the City Council, as a condition of Resolution No. 15200, for the
EastLake Greens Tentative Subdivision 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-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 opportunity for the preparation of
an affordable housing program prior to further EastLake Greens final map
approvals or General Development Plan modifications; 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,
f:_..............---........paDIlAFT
N.......' 11, 1993
~ /.2g~1
-,
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:
-
II. Planning Commission record.
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission
at their public hearings on Project held on Karch 3, April 12, April 28, Kay 12,
and Kay 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.
-
f:IIoamo\pl8mq.....____.pIlI)RAFT
N--.. II, 1993
2
~ /c2{?-;(
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..
VI. Conditional Approval of General Plan Amendments.
The Chula Vista General Plan Land Use diagram is amended as set forth in
Attachment A hereto, incorporated by this reference, subject to the General
Conditions hereinbelow set forth.
VII. General Conditions of Approval.
The approval of the foregoing Discretionary Approvals Application which are
stated to be conditioned on "General Conditions" are hereby conditioned as
follows:
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 Baid conditions or Beek 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 Bet forth in full herein, and make each and every
one of the findings contained in the "Candidate CEQA Findings"
r:\IK.-..........-........._...,.DRAFT
.....-. II, 1993
3
~/;<B.-3
B.
Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted.
-.
As more fully identified and set forth in the EIR for the EastLake
Greens SPA (EIR-S6-04) 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 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 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.
Statement of OVerriding Considerations.
E.
-
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.
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.
-
f:""-.........-...-...............an>DRAfT
~ll.l993
4
~ /;;<il~'I
-
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. (
I
Presented by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
"~
.-
f:lIlamelpIanDinllduoneleutlak.........pnDRAFT
NovmIber 9, 1993
Bruce Boogaar
City Attorney
5
~ /:I.!3~
~
..
-
-A
~_.._-_.
--
_______._..- - -.-,.. .p.. _. P"
--- --.' p,.. ----.
.. ..
. P"~ ..-_...___. . ..--.....-.. _.-.-......'__
---...-...-----..----. -- .__. . ----,_..
.
,
ATIACHMENT A
ca.;
<
~
Sl~-~
!
~t
\)!!~
III
-
;J
("j
...
~
=-
c.
~
~
tr.l
"C
=
~
..J
~
.:I!.
~
..J
.....
III
~
~
.
/c2.l? --6
rf/l7:::z:'
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / 3
Meeting Date 12/7/93
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
Resolution J 7 J .2...5' Denying the appeal and thereby afftrming 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 Planning ~.
City Manage~ ~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X)
On October 27, 1993, the Planning Commission considered and approved Conditional Use
Permit PCC 94-09 to allow Covenant Christian School to operate for a period of five years a
private school for grades K-12 at 2400 Fenton Street, in the Eastlake Business Center. Bonita
Country Day School, which presently occupies a portion of the building at 2400 Fenton Street,
has appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project proposal is exempt from
environmental review as a class 1 (a) exemption.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council deny the appeal and thereby afftrm 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 ftndings and subject to the conditions in Resolution PCC 94-09, attached
hereto.
DISCUSSION:
Proiect Site Characteristics
The property is zoned P-C (Planned Community) and designated for Business Center-
Manufacturing Park, as are the properties to the north, south and west. The area to the east is
designated for Research and Limited Manufacturing within the EastLake III Community, and is
13"/
Page 2, Item /:3
Meeting Date 12/7/93
planned as an extension of the EastLake Business Center. The 1.25 acre site is occupied by a
20,400 sq. ft. two-story building and 65 parking spaces with access from Fenton Street. The
property is surrounded by undeveloped industrial parcels.
Existing: Use
A majority of the second floor and a portion of the first floor are presently occupied by Bonita
Country Day School, a private non-denominational school for grades K-12 with 70 students and
10 staff. The school was originally granted a one-year administrative conditional use permit
(PCC 91-55) which was subsequently extended by the Zoning Administrator for a two-year
period to expire on July 19, 1994. Since the site contains no outdoor playground or recreational
facilities, physical education activities are conducted in Scobee Park under an agreement with
the EastLake Business Center Owners Association.
Proposed Use
The proposal by Covenant Christian currently operating at 505 East Naples Street is to occupy
9,900 sq. ft. of the first floor and share the building with Bonita Country Day. The requested
term for the conditional use permit is five years. The proposed lease is for a period of five
years with an optional 5-year extension. The applicant views this site as one that could not only
accommodate the school's current operation, but also as one that has future long-term potential.
The school's current enrollment for the 1993-94 academic year is 165 students, which is
expected to increase to approximately 268 students (152 elementary/116 secondary) over the next
five years. A total of 20 administrative and faculty staff members are currently employed by
Covenant Christian School. The increase in students is expected to require the addition of 5-10
faculty staff members over the next five years.
Covenant Christian proposes to relocate only grades K-6, representing approximately 100
students, during the 1993-94 academic year. The remainder of the student body would be
relocated from the Naples Street facilities to Fenton Street during the second and third year of
operation. The building owner has stated the current lease of Bonita Country Day School will
not be renewed, thus making room for the additional students from Covenant Christian.
Classes are held between 8:15 a.m.-3:00p.m. Monday-Thursday, and between 8:15 a.m.-12:00
p.m. on Friday. A supervised child care program for children dropped off early or picked up
late operates between 7:00 - 8: 15 a.m. and 3:00 - 6:00 p.m. Approval has been obtained from
the EastLake Business Center Owners Association to utilize Scobee Park for recreational and
physical education purposes between the hours of 9:30 to 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 to 4:00 p.m. for
a period of two years.
/3-~
Page 3, Item )3
Meeting Date 12/7/93
APPEAL:
Bonita Country Day School has submitted the following statement in support of their appeal (see
attached appeal form):
"This appeal is based on a sincere belief that the issues of child welfare, security
and safety have not been adequately addressed. The Planning Department as well
as the Planning Commission has made a facility use decision based on accepted
planning practice which does not address this unique situation. At the hearing,
the Planning Commission had agreed that they could not base their decision on
what they deemed to be a "business issue." However, it was a business
agreement between the owner of the building and the applicant that was the basis
for the Planning Commission to grant the applicant a five year CUP on the
property. "
ANALYSIS:
With regard to the issue of child welfare, security and safety, in previous correspondence and
testimony before the Commission, the appellant raised several concerns with respect to sharing
the building with Covenant Christian. These included traffic safety, parking, security, a
relocation of their first floor classrooms to accommodate Covenant Christian, as well as a
possible conflict in operations resulting from two different schools with two different
philosophies sharing the same facilities.
It was the opinion of staff and the Commission that the significant issues from a land use
perspective are traffic safety and parking. Traffic safety in terms of potential conflicts with the
timing and guidelines under which drop-offs and pick-ups occur, and parking in terms of its
inadequacy to meet the needs of both schools beyond the second year. As a result, a condition
of approval was included which requires that prior to occupancy the property owner shall submit
a program to avoid traffic conflicts and allocate parking between the two schools, said program
to be agreeable to both schools or shown to be legally enforceable by the property owner.
With respect to the appellant's statement regarding the term of the permit, in presenting this
matter to the Planning Commission, one of the major issues raised by staff was the term of the
proposed use. Specifically, the proposal to establish a private school as a long term use within
the EastLake Business Center raises issues which were considered by the Zoning Administrator
with the Bonita Country Day School (BCD) application. BCD had an immediate need for
facilities to accommodate a maximum of 70 students, and was granted an initial one-year
approval and two-year extension with the understanding that they would be seeking permanent
facilities elsewhere. When their permit was originally granted in July, 1991, it contained the
following language:
/3".3
Page 4, Item ).J
Meeting Date 12/7/93
"The school is 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 EastLake Planned Community District regulations."
When the permit was extended for two years in July, 1992, the following language was added:
"The permit extension is approved for a period of two years, and will expire on
July 19, 1994. Any proposed operations after that date will require submittal for
a new Conditional Use Permit, and approval of such must be obtained prior to the
expiration date. This school is currently approved as an interim use, and
approval for the continued use of a school at this site after the two year extension
is not guaranteed."
The staff was and is concerned with the long term use of this site as a school. The potential for
conflicts between the operations of industrial users and the comings and goings and activities of
children seem great, particularly when there is no provision for on-site recreation, but children
must be chaperoned to and from Scobee Park for their recreation and physical education needs.
Although there may be little potential for conflict now since most of the immediately surrounding
area is undeveloped, this condition can change in a relatively short period of time. The City in
fact is now working with EastLake to create a "BioTech" zone which would encourage and
facilitate the establishment of bio-medical manufacturers in this portion of the Business Center.
In a more general sense, the City Council has recently expressed concern over the availability
of industrial land and its rezoning to other uses. The EastLake Business Center now represents
perhaps the primary focus for high quality industrial park development east of 1-805. Although
the request by Covenant Christian is not a rezoning, it would represent non-industrial use of
industrial acreage and should be considered in view of Council's concern.
Although we believe it is probably desirable to offer school (as well as day care) facilities in
close proximity to employment centers, the relationship between the uses must be carefully
preplanned in order to ensure that the operations of one do not have an adverse impact on the
other. With the expansion of the Business Center anticipated with EastLake III, this parcel will
be in the middle of a manufacturing district, and on a property which contains no on-site
playground facilities and inadequate parking to serve both schools beyond the second year of
shared use.
There is a concern for the welfare of the children over the long term, and there is also a concern
with the impact a school at this location may have on the decisions of bio tech or other
prospective manufacturers to locate within this area of the Business Center.
J J -'I
Page 5, Item )..J
Meeting Date 12/7/93
For these reasons, staff has taken the position from the outset that we could support only a
temporary, short-term permit of two years, subject to review and possible extension based upon
a reevaluation of development progress within the Business Center at the end of that period.
During that time, Covenant Christian could investigate the possibility of expanding or
redesigning the site to include on-site recreation and other measures to perhaps support
permanent school use. This issue, however, should be addressed in the broader context of a
plan amendment which would consider redesignating the property to a CPF Community Purpose
Facility site, rather than in the context of a conditional use permit.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
At the Planning Commission hearing, the applicant, Covenant Christian, stated that they need
at least five years of use in order to justify the disruption of the move and the cost of the
necessary interior improvements. Eastlake Development Company did not oppose the five year
term, and the Commission believed that there is little potential for conflict between the school
and industrial uses during that period of time. As a result, the Commission approved the permit
with a five-year term. Included within the conditions of approval is a requirement that traffic
and parking be coordinated between the two schools in order to resolve the concerns of Bonita
Country Day School (please see attached Planning Commission minutes and resolution).
CONCLUSION:
Both the staff and Commission believe the facility is appropriate for school use for an interim
period. There is simply a difference of opinion on what the initial approval period should be,
either two years or five years. As noted above, included within the conditions of approval is
a requirement that traffic and parking be coordinated in order to resolve the potential safety
issues between the two schools.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
Attachments
City Council Resolution
Locator
Eastlake General Development Plan diagram
Site and floor plans (3)
Appeal Statement
Planning Commission Resolution PCC 94-09
Planning Commission Minutes (10/27/93)
Correspondence/Information from Covenant Christian
Correspondence/Information from Bonita Country Day
School and Property Owner
Disclosure Statement
s
z
WPC F:\home\planning\1454.93
/3-f/ !p
RESOLUTION NO.
/ '/.3:<5
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
J;J--?
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 CUP for Private School
/ :J ~ 3 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:
i. 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 CUP for Private School
I J'- r 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
Reso Granting CUP for Private school
Page 4
/ J-.J?J
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.
Presented by
Robert Leiter
Director of Planning
covcrhist.wp
November 28, 1993
Reso Granting CUP for Private School
I ] -- / I Page 5
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item--.!..i
Meeting Date 1217/93
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: PCM 94-06; Consideration of amendments to the Olympic
Training Center Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and Public Facilities Finance
Plan (PFFP) to allow construction of priority (Core) athletic facilities - San Diego
National Sports Training Foundation
Resolution / 7.J ;2 t, Approving amendments to the Olympic Training
Center Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and Public Facilities Finance Plan
(PFFP) to allow construction of priority (Core) athletic facilities
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning 9~
Director of Public WO. r. ~l-
REVIEWED BY: CIty Manager ~ ~~l
On May 1, 1990, the City Council approved the Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and Public
Facilities Finance Plan (PFFP) for the Olympic Training Center (OTC) to be located adjacent to Lower
Otay Lake, within the Community of Eastlake. The Sectional Planning Area Plan for OTC calls for
the development of a 150 acre campus-like sports training facility for elite athletes. The long-range
master plan for the OTC upon which the SPA was based is shown on Exhibit I. The PFFP sets forth
the phasing and timing of public facilities construction based on a two-phase project development
scenario.
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X )
Development of the OTC was anticipated to occur in two phases, each requiring approval of a precise
plan prior to construction. The Design Review Committee approved the Olympic Training Center Phase
I Precise Plan (Exhibit II) on March 18, 1991. Although the San Diego National Sports Training
Foundation has recently been quite successful in raising funds to construct on-site infrastructure
improvements, the persisting economic recession has created circumstances that require construction
staging of the Phase I Precise Plan.
On August 10, 1993, the San Diego National Sports Training Foundation filed an application requesting
consideration of amendments to the SPA Plan and PFFP texts as well as their original conditions of
approval, to allow the construction of Phase I priority buildings and sports venues prior to completion
of permanent off-site road and utility service infrastructure to serve the project site.
An Addendum to the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR-89-11) for the Olympic
Training Center has been prepared to address environmental impacts associated with this proposal. The
addendum finds that the proposal will have no potentially significant environmental impacts.
RECOMMENDATION: That City Council consider the Addendum to the Supplemental EIR-89-11
for the Olympic Training Center and adopt the resolution approving the amendments to the Olympic
Training Center SPA and PFFP.
I tj- /
Page 2, Item3
Meeting Date 12/7/93
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On November 17, 1993, the Planning
Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that Council approve the amendments in accordance with
Resolution PCM 94-06.
DISCUSSION:
Construction Phasing
The applicant proposes incremental construction of the Phase I Precise Plan athletic facilities. The
proposed phasing has been necessitated in part by funding shortages and by delays in the construction
of off-site street and utility service improvements. Implementation of the proposed construction phasing
plans will enable USOC to commence operations of the OTC in the Spring of 1994.
A "Core facilities" development proposal (see Exhibit III), consisting of priority building and sports
venues, has been developed as the initial construction stage of the Phase I Precise Plan. The proposal
has been tailored to best utilize presently available funds for on-site improvements and address the most
immediate athletic facility needs. The following are included in the Core facilities development
proposal:
Core Facilities
Sports Venues:
Tennis (four courts)
Swimming (50-meter pool and adjacent poolhouse. Poolhouse will incorporate
lockers, restroom, pool utilities room and temporary athlete's weight room)
Soccer (four fields)
Field Hockey (one field)
Archery (entire outdoor venue)
Athletics (entire outdoor venue)
Softball (two fields)
Criterion Course
Maintenance and Storage Facilities:
Outbuildings (used for equipment storage, one building per sport)
Maintenance and Grounds building
Athlete Housing and Administrative Facilities:
Thirty-five (35) housing units
Dining Hall
National Governing Bodies (NGB) Office building (to be used as a sports science/sports medicine
training center)
/L!-2
Page 3, Item / i
Meeting Date 12/7/93
The balance of the previously approved Phase I sports venues and athlete housing and administrative
facilities are intended to be constructed as needed, and as financing becomes available and off-site
infrastructure facilities necessary for subsequent project phasing are completed. These are as follows:
Balance of Phase I Facilities
Sports Venues:
Tennis (remaining eight courts)
Diving Pool
Field Hockey (second field)
Gymnasium
Athlete Housing and Administrative Facilities:
One hundred fifteen (115) additional housing units
Completion of the administrative center (athlete's reception, recreation, NGB offices and meeting room
facilities)
Sports Science/sports medicine complex (including permanent weight room)
Visitor's Center
Interim Infrastructure
Major off-site capital facilities, including primary access road extensions (Hunte Parkway from
Telegraph Canyon Road to Orange Avenue, and Orange Avenue from Hunte Parkway to the westerly
boundary of the project site) and utility service extensions to the site were to be constructed by Eastlake
Development Company as part of the development of Eastlake II and Eastlake III prior to the originally
planned 1993 opening date for the Center. However, the development of these EastLake Communities
has not progressed as originally planned, and therefore, the street and utility extensions required by the
OTC have yet to be constructed. The OTC SPA Plan and PFFP required the completion of Hunte
Parkway and Orange Avenue to provide access for the Center prior to the opening of the first phase.
Wueste Road, which was intended to provide secondary access, is now proposed by the OTC to function
as the sole interim access into the site. Interim infrastructure for water and sewer services is proposed
as follows:
. A temporary offsite water line which will connect the OTC site with a water main in Hunte
Parkway has been approved by the Otay Water District and installation has been completed. The
line will serve the Center until the Hunte Parkway - Orange A venue connection to Wueste Road
has been completed by Eastlake.
. A temporary off-site sewer line is proposed to be constructed to provide for sewer service to the
site. This line will extend from Telegraph Canyon Road directly south to the OTC site. Like
the interim waterline, the temporary sewer line will serve the OTC until the Orange Avenue
extension is constructed.
11/' :1
Page 4, Item / i
Meeting Date 12/7/93
SPA Plan and PFFP amendment proposal
The amendments to the OTC SPA Plan and PFFP do not propose any additions or changes to the
buildings, venues or facilities shown on the OTC Master Plan, or those approved as part of the Phase
I Precise Plan. The plan amendments only involve: a) modification of the conditions of the SPA and
PFFP approval that require the construction of Hunte Parkway and Orange A venue prior to the opening
of the Center, b) addition of a condition to require traffic studies to verify actual Core facility trip
generation prior to subsequent construction of Phase I facilities, c) addition of conditions to require
street light and road improvements along Wueste Road, d) modification of the condition requiring
specialized on-site fire services and equipment, e) addition of conditions requiring appropriate
environmental review and issuance of permits by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the City of
Chula Vista, f) a number of SPA and PFFP Plan "housekeeping" text revisions which define the scope
of the Phase I construction stages, and interim infrastructure construction and update fire and emergency
service requirements based on currently available services to the OTC site.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has reviewed the "Core facility" development proposal and has concluded that the proposed
phasing will adequately address all on-site needs, including parking as well as on-site pedestrian and
vehicular circulation. It has also been determined that Wueste Road and the interim improvements for
water and sewer are sufficient to serve the OTC Core facilities.
As part of the adoption of the OTC SPA Plan and PFFP, the City Council adopted a design standard
for "Wueste Road Rural Recreation Access Route". This standard is based on two 12 foot wide travel
lanes and 8 foot wide shoulders for a total roadway width of 40 feet along the entire route. The
capacity of this roadway is given as 5,000 vehicles per day. However, Wueste Road as it currently
exists, has the required shoulders only on a portion of the road with an average roadway width of 30
feet. Thus, Wueste Road currently can support a total of 1800 ADT's according to an analysis under
the Highway Capacity Manual. Prior to buildout of the OTC, Wueste Road would have to be widened
to provide the required shoulders. The current traffic volume on Wueste Road is 850 ADT's. The
anticipated traffic to be generated by Core facility operations is 945 ADT's which would result in a total
volume of 1795 ADT's. Conditions #2 and #3 to the approval of the SPA Plan and PFFP are proposed
to be amended to still require, but allow the delay of, construction of the Hunte Parkway and Orange
Avenue extensions until the generation of 950 or more ADT's from Phase I Precise Plan facility
operations.
When it became apparent that Hunte Parkway and Orange A venue could not be constructed at this time,
OTC representatives approached the City about using Wueste Road as the access for the core facilities
since the traffic to be generated would be within the allowable capacity. Staff concurred that, from a
traffic standpoint, Wueste Road has the needed capacity. However, the physical condition of Wueste
Road is deteriorated and has required considerable repair work. While the future work would be
minimal if the OTC traffic were not placed on the road, the additional traffic caused concern with the
pavement condition. Therefore staff indicated that, if Hunte Parkway and Orange Avenue were not to
be built now, Wueste Road should be repaired and resurfaced to avoid the continued maintenance
problems.
I Lj- '-/
Page 5, Item~
Meeting Date 12/7/93
Staff's proposal was that the City pay the cost of all of the dig out and repairs since they are needed to
correct an existing problem unrelated to the increase of traffic caused by the OTC. OTC representatives
informally presented the possibility of splitting the cost of the resurfacing equally between the City and
the OTC. Staff proceeded on that basis. The equal split of resurfacing costs was presented to the
Planning Commission with no negative input by OTC representatives. City staff supports the equal split
of the cost of resurfacing Wueste Road with the OTC for the following reasons: 1) approximately one-
half the traffic on Wueste Road will be non-OTC generated; 2) the City will avoid future ongoing
maintenance by Operations Division; and 3) the proposal continues ongoing cooperation to facilitate
the completion of the OTC.
The estimated cost to do the digout and repair work needed to replace extremely deteriorated pavement
before resurfacing can be done on the 1.6 mile section of Wueste Road from Otay Lakes Road to the
Boathouse entrance is $97,000. In addition, the cost of resurfacing that same stretch of pavement with
1-112 inch of asphalt concrete over a pavement fabric after the digouts are complete is $85,000. An
equal split of the overlay costs would require the OTC to pay an estimated $42,500 toward the
resurfacing costs. When the pavement is resurfaced, staff recommends that the actual resurfacing
extend an additional 0.4 miles to the south to join a good section of pavement which was overlaid by
the County prior to Wueste Road's annexation into the City. The total cost of that resurfacing work
is $110,000. The OTC would still only pay one-half the cost to resurface to the Boathouse entrance
and the City would pay all of the difference to extend it to the good pavement section. In summary,
the total estimated project cost would be $207,000, of which the OTC would pay an estimated $42,500.
Staff also had a concern over an increase in the evening volume of traffic trying to exit Wueste Road
onto Otay Lakes Road and required a street light to be constructed at that intersection to provide safety
lighting. The estimated cost of the street light is less than $5,000.
In order to properly implement revised conditions #2 and #3, it has been recommended that an analysis
of actual trip generation from the Core facilities be conducted prior to any subsequent Phase I facility
construction. Furthermore, as indicated, the Engineering Division recommends that the developer
install a street light at the intersection of Otay Lakes Road and Wueste Road, and pay one-half the cost
of overlaying Wueste Road from Otay Lakes Road to the OTC Boathouse entrance.
The construction and operation of Fire Station No.6 at Otay Lakes Road and Lane Avenue has
eliminated the need for specialized on-site fire services and equipment. Original condition of approval
#20 has been amended to reflect current emergency service needs by requiring only on-site private or
volunteer police personnel and eliminating the requirements for on-site fire and emergency medical
services by private or volunteer personnel, an on-site fire brigade and an emergency fire pumper.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has recommended, in light of the recent listing of the
gnatcatcher as a threatened species and potential impacts of the project to Coastal Sage Scrub, that proof
of an "incidental take permit" under Section 7 or Section lOA of the Endangered Species Act, or any
other form of approval by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service relative to California Gnatcatcher and
Coastal Sage Scrub should be provided to the Environmental Review Coordinator prior to consideration
of any final subdivision or parcel map, issuance of grading permits or issuance of building permits for
any portion of the project. If such permit is not required at the time of project development, written
/ L/ -~
Page 6, Item~
Meeting Date 12/7/93
verification to that effect from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service should be provided to the
Environmental Review Coordinator. Any project redesign requiring the issuance of a Section 7 or lOA
permit may require reconsideration by the appropriate City decision making body.
In addition, the Environmental Review Coordinator has recommended that the San Diego Sports
Training Foundation provide the City of Chula Vista with a detailed revegetation plan, approved by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, prior to the construction of the left-turn pockets along Wueste Road
adjacent to the OTC athletes' entrance and boathouse access road entrance.
As noted above, all of these conditions and requirements appear to have been accepted by the San Diego
National Sports Training Foundation and are incorporated into the Council resolution.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of resurfacing Wueste Road is estimated at $207,000 of which it is
recommended that the OTC pay an estimated $42,500 based on an equal split of the cost of resurfacing
Wueste Road from Otay Lakes Road to the Boathouse Entrance. The City's share of the contract would
be $164,500. The CIP budget includes $1,795,650 for the FY93/94 Pavement overlay program.
Originally, due to the low volume of traffic on Wueste Road, that road was not included in the
program. However, it is recommended that this work be included in the program based on the
increased traffic and need for the work. Two streets were originally included in the overlay program
which are now recommended to be deferred because they are a lower priority. These streets are: 'J'
Street from Hilltop Drive to 3rd Avenue; and 'L' Street from 1st Avenue to 3rd Avenue. Those streets
would be added to next years resurfacing program.
Attachments:
c,
~'l
f:-.f ~V'
~t
OTC Master Plan (Exhibit I)
OTC First Phase Precise Plan (Exhibit II)
OTC Core Facilities (Exhibit III)
City Council Resolution
Locator
Specific Planning Area Plan
Public Facilities Financing Plan
SEIR 89-11, CEQA Findings, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Statement of Overriding
Considerations, Second Addendum
Planning Commission Resolution PCM 94-06
Planning Commission Minutes (11/17/93)
Disclosure Statement
WPC F:\home\planning\1453.93
I tj-i,
RESOLUTION NO.
173~~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA RECERTIFYING THE SUPPLEMENTAL EIR FOR
THE OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER SECTIONAL PLANNING
AREA PLAN, (SEIR 89-11), CONSIDERING AN ADDENDUM
THERETO, AMENDING THE OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN AND PUBLIC FACILITIES
FINANCING PLAN AND RE-ADOPTING THE CEQA FINDINGS,
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ON SEIR-89-
11
I. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of this resolution is diagrammatically
represented on Attachment A-I attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, identified as the
Olympic Training Center site, and located adjacent to the Lower Otay Lake within the Community of
Eastlake of the City of Chula Vista ("Project Site"); and
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on August 10, 1993, the San Diego National Sports Training Foundation
("Developer") filed an application requesting consideration of amendments to the SPA Plan (known as
Document No. C093-244 on file with the Office of the City Clerk) and PFFP (known as Document No.
C093-245 on file with the Office of the City Clerk) text and conditions of project approval (" Application
for Discretionary Approval"), to allow the developer to proceed with the construction of priority
buildings and sports venues prior to construction of permanent off-site road and utility service
infrastructure to serve the Project Site ("Project"), and
C. Prior Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, the development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of a General
Development Plan (EastLake III General Development Plan) previously approved by the City Council
on December 5, 1989 by Resolution No. 15413 ("GDP Resolution"); wherein the City Council, in the
environmental evaluation of said GDP relied in part on the EastLake III/Olympic Training Center Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 89-9, SCH No. 89080929 ("SEIR 89-9"), and
WHEREAS, the development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of a Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) Plan and a Public Facilities Finance Plan (PFFP), previously approved by the City
Council on May 1, 1990 by Resolution No. 15599 ("Olympic Training Center SPA Plan and PFFP
Resolution") wherein the City Council, in the environmental evaluation of said SPA Plan and PFFP
IL/- 7
Resolution No.
Page 2
relied in part on the u.s. Olympic Training Center Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
No. 89-11, SCH 89010284 ("SEIR 89-11"), and
D. Planning Commission Record on Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on said project on
November 17, 1993, voted to recommend that the City Council approve the SPA Plan and PFFP
amendments in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions listed below and recommended
that the City Council re-approve each and every one of the CEQA Findings as found in SEIR-89-11.
E. City Council Record on Application
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista on December 7, 1993, on the Discretionary Approval 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 Council does hereby find, determine,
and resolve as follows:
II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public
hearing on this Project held on November 17, 1993, and the minutes and resolutions resulting
therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
III. SEIR AND ADDENDUM REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed, analyzed and considered SEIR 89-11
(known as Document No. C093-246 on file in the Office of the City Clerk), the environmental impacts
therein identified for this project; the Candidate Finding of Fact ("Findings" or "CEQA Findings") and
the Statements of Overriding Consideration (known as Document No. C093-247 on file in the Office
of the City Clerk), the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") (known as Document
No. C093-248 on file in the Office of the City Clerk) and Second Addendum (known as Document No.
C093-249 on file in the Office of the City Clerk) thereon prior to approving the Project.
IV. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The City Council does hereby find that SEIR-89-11, the Candidate Findings of Fact, the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations and
Second Addendum 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.
/'-I'~
Resolution No.
Page 3
V. INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council finds that SEIR-89-11 and Second Addendum reflect the independent judgment
of the City of Chula Vista City Council.
VI. SPA AND PFFP FINDINGS
A. THE OTC SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN AS AMENDED IS IN
CONFORMITY WITH THE EASTLAKE III GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND
THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN.
The amended Olympic Training Center Sectional Planning Area Plan reflects land
use, circulation system, and public facilities that are consistent with the Eastlake
III General Development Plan and the Chula Vista General Plan. The Olympic
Training Center proposes athletic training facilities that are consistent with the
public and quasi-public designations depicted on the General Development Plan
and General Plan.
B. THE OTC SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN, AS AMENDED WILL PROMOTE
THE ORDERLY SEQUENTIALIZED DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVOLVED
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA.
The SPA Plan and Public Facilities Plan, as amended, sets forth and further
clarifies the phasing of the project and the timing of public facilities construction
to ensure the orderly, sequentialized development of the project. The Public
Facilities Financing Plan identifies the public facilities, public services needed to
serve the project. The amendments reflect necessary changes to the timing of
construction.
C. THE OTC SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN AS AMENDED WILL NOT
ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND USE, RESIDENTIAL ENJOYMENT,
CIRCULATION, OR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY.
The land uses within the Olympic Training Center represent the same uses approved by
the Eastlake III General Development Plan. The majority of the 150+ acre site (82 %)
will consist of open practice facilities for soccer, field hockey, archery, tennis, cycling,
athletics, and swimming. The project has been planned to provide the neCessary support
for U.S. athletes seeking to compete in international competition. The site plan is
compatible with adjacent land uses and will avoid off-site impacts through the provision
of mitigation measures specified in the OTC Supplemental Environmental Impact Report.
D. THE OTC PUBLIC FACILITIES PLAN AS AMENDED IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH
CVMC CHAPTER 19.09 PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO
PUBLIC FACILITY FINANCE PLANS.
/ t/--;
Resolution No.
Page 4
The PFFP amendment has been prepared and has been reviewed in accordance with
CVMC Sections 19.09.070 and 19.09.080.
VII. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the Olympic Training
Center Sectional Planning Area and Public Facilities Finance Plan amendments ("Discretionary
Approvals Amendments") subject to the general and special conditions set forth below.
VITI. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The approval of the foregoing Discretionary Approvals Amendments 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 SEIR, 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 SEIR 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 Olympic Training
Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program pertaining to the Project.
IX. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Conditions 2, 3 and 20 of Resolution No. 15599 approving the Olympic Training Center
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and Public Facilities financing plan shall be amended to read as
follows:
A. Condition #2
Upon generation of 950 or more ADT from Phase I Precise Plan facility operations, the
applicant shall construct Hunte Parkway to a four-lane Major Street Standard from
Telegraph Canyon Road to Orange Avenue. Said construction shall include
improvements of 20 feet of pavement on each side of a fully improved landscaped
median including street lights. Improvement of the intersection of Hunte Parkway and
Orange Avenue shall include transitions as directed by the City Engineer.
B. Condition #3
Upon generation of 950 or more ADT from Phase I Precise Plan facility operations, the
applicant shall construct Orange A venue to a four-lane Major roadway as follows:
J ~/- / e:J
Resolution No.
Page 5
1. From Hunte Parkway to the westerly boundary of the project: 20 feet of
pavement on each side of a fully improved landscaped median including
street lights. Improvements at the intersection of Hunte Parkway and
Orange Avenue shall include transitions as directed by the City Engineer.
II. From the westerly boundary to the easterly boundary of the project: Full
improvements to include, but not be limited to, A.C. pavement and base,
curb, gutter and sidewalk, street lights and drainage facilities.
C. Condition #20
Police shall be provided by properly trained, on-site private or volunteer personnel,
subject to entering into an agreement with the City prior to issuance of use and
occupancy certificates. In addition, the applicant shall provide fire suppression
equipment and facilities, together with sprinklering and other mitigation measures to the
satisfaction of the City's Fire Prevention Bureau.
Transition to City fire protection and emergency medical services shall occur on a
schedule established by the City. Said schedule shall be based on the construction of
planned fire stations in the Salt Creek Project and in the Otay Ranch project area west
of Lower Otay Reservoir, as outlined in the City's Fire Station Master Plan.
D. The applicant shall perform traffic studies to verify trip generation rates from Core
Facilities prior to construction of any subsequent Phase I building or sports venue
facility. The applicant may construct additional Phase I facilities at the discretion of the
Planning Director, only if existing and projected traffic generated by subsequent project
construction equals or is less than 950 ADT.
E. The developer shall install a street light at the intersection of Otay Lakes Road and
Wueste Road.
F. The developer shall overlay Wueste Road from Otay Lakes Road to the OTC Boathouse
entrance, as required by the City Engineer. The developer shall be reimbursed for fifty
percent (50%) of the Wueste Road overlay cost by the City of Chula Vista.
G. The developer shall provide proof of an "incidental take permit" under Section 7 or
Section lOA of the Endangered Species Act or any other form of approval by the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service relative to California Gnatcatcher or Coastal Sage Scrub to the
Environmental Review Section of the Planning Department prior to the consideration of
any final subdivision or parcel map, issuance of a grading permit, or issuance of a
building permit for any portion of the project site. If such a permit is not required,
written verification to that effect from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service shall be
provided to the Environmental Section of the Planning Department. Any project redesign
which would require the issuance of a Section 7 or lOA permit may require
reconsideration by the appropriate City decision making body.
/tf~//
Resolution No.
Page 6
H. The developer shall provide the City of Chula Vista with a detailed revegetation plan,
approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, prior to construction of the left-turn
pockets along Wueste Road, adjacent to the OTC athletes' entrance and boathouse access
road.
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. No vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest
by the City's approval of this Resolution.
XI. 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 every one of the findings contained in the "Candidate
Findings of Fact" .
B. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted.
As more fully identified and set forth in SEIR-89-11 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 SEIR-89-11 are found not to be feasible since they could not meet
both the objectives of the Project and avoid the identified significant environmental
effects through implementation of feasible mitigation measures for the reasons set forth
in said Candidate Findings of Fact.
;J/---/:<
Resolution No.
Page 7
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"). 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 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, identifying the specific economic, social, and other considerations that
render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable.
XII. 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.
XIII. 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.
Presented by
. Approved as to form by
IL-Ih. ~
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
WPC F:\home\planning\1415.93
J~-/J
.-~"'':,7:'i/~'-''':',~_"",_",,~;=~ '""-'" --'.,,--'1',,-, "'_'~ ;:~,__~_,S,..,~,__"",. '''<P__,',o,_~
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CITY COUNCIL
OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN TIlA T A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY TIlE CITY
COUNCIL OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, for the purpose of considering an amendment
to the Olympic Training Center Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and Public Facilities
Financing Plan (PFFP). The applicant, San Diego National Sports Training Foundation proposes
incremental construction of the Phase I precise plan which would require SPA Plan and PFFP
Plan text revisions and modifications and additions to previous conditions of project approval.
A second addendum to Environmental Impact Report (EIR 89-19) for the Olympic Training
Center has been prepared to address environmental impacts associated with the implementation
of the project and is on fIle in the Office of the Planning Department.
Copies of the proposed amendment PCM 94-06, are on file in the office of the Planning
Department. 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 this matter 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 HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE COUNCIL on Tuesday, December 7,
1993, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at
which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: November 24, 1993
CASE NO. PCM-94-06
COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), requests
individuals who may need special accommodation to access, attend, and/or participate in a City
meeting, activity, or service to contact Nancy Ripley at (619) 691-5101 for specific information
on existing resources or programs that may be available for such accommodation. Please call at
least/arty-eight hours in advance/or meetings andflve days in advance/or scheduled services and
activities. California Relay Service is available for the hearing impaired.
WPC F:\HOMlN'LANNING\l424.93
/ 1;/ -/ t/4
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER /SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN
Revised
November 1993
Prepared for:
San Diego National Sports Training Foundation
1994 Hete1 Cirs1e }! erth
1650 Hotel Circle North #125
San Diego, CA 92108
(619) 291-8802
Prepared by:
The MsKiRley Grey}}
McKinley Nielsen Assoc.. Inc.
399 LaaFel Street
416 University Ave. #200
San Diego, CA ~ 22.llU
(619) 232 4394296-4394
It!.. /7
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER/SAN DIEGO
Developed by the San Diego National Sports Training Foundation in cooperation with the United States
Olympic Committee.
San Die~o National Sports Trainini Foundation
Officers and Executive Committee
Gloria D. McColl, President
Mr. C. Terry Brown, Vice President
Mr. Malin Burnham, Vice President
Mr. Robert 1. Watkins, Secretary
Mr. Ron L. Fowler, Treasurer
Mr. David Armstrong, Executive Vice President
Mr. Neil Derrough
Mr. Brian G. Dyson
Mr. D. Jay Flood
Mr. Peter J. Hall
Mr. Charlie Jackson
Mr. Herbert G. Klein
Mr. David B. Kuhn, Jr.
United States Olympic Committee
Mr. LeRoy T. Walker, President
Mr. Michael Lenarc4 Vice President
Mr. Ralph W. Hale, Vice President
Mr. George M. Steinbrenner III, Vice President
Mr. Charles U. Foster, Secretary
Ms. Sandra Baldwin, Treasurer
Ms. Anita DeFrantz, IOC Representative
Harvey Schiller, Executive Director
Charles Davis, Director, Olympic Training Centers
/L./-)~Y
! I 15
Consultants to the San Diego National Sports Training Foundation
contributing to this report include the following:
Planning & Architecture:
Skidmore, Owings and Merrill
1201 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, DC 2000
Architecture:
Tucker, Sadler & Associates
2411 Second Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101-1593
Planning Consultants:
The McKinley Group
416 University Ave. #200
San Diego, CA 92103
Traffic Engineers:
Urban Systems Associates, Inc.
4540 Kearny Villa Road, Suite #106
San Diego, CA 92123
Civil Engineers:
Rick Engineering
5620 Friars Road
San Diego, CA 92110-2596
Landscape Architecture:
WYA
516 Fifth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
Graphics & Signage:
Patrick Maddux & Associates
1842 Third Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
Lighting Consultants:
Francis Krahne Associates
4500 Campus Drive, Suite 586
San Diego, CA 92101
) ~) -- /;
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER/SAN DIEGO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION
1.1. Location of the Olympic Training Center 1
1.2. Relationship to the Community of EastLake 1
1.3. Surrounding Uses 2
1.4. Scope, Purpose and Implementation of the SPA 2
1.5. Legal Significance of the SPA 2
1.6. Public Facilities Finance Plan and Development Agreement 3
1.7. Environmental Impact Report 3
CHAPTER TWO-OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER BACKGROUND
2.1. Project Background
2.2. The San Diego National Sports Training Foundation
2.3. Olympic Training Center Activities
2.3.1. Training Activity
2.3.2. Visitor Activity
4
4
5
5
6
CHAPTER TIlREE - SPA PLAN
3.1. Planning Concepts 7
3.1.1.' Circulation 7
3.1.2. Visitors 8
3.1.3. Athletic Facilities 8
3.1.4. Housing and Other Support Facilities 9
3.2. Statistical Summary of Land Uses 9
3.3. Traffic/Circulation 9
3.3.1 Sub Regional Network 10
3.3.2 Onsite Access 12
3.3.3. Parking 12
3.3.4. Transit 19
3.3.5. Cycling Routes 19
3.4. Grading Concepts 19
3.5. Parks, Open Space and Landscape Concepts 19
3.5.1 Parks and Open Space 20
3.5.2. Landscape Concepts 20
3.5.3. Irrigation Guidelines 21
3.6. Graphics and Signage 21
3.6.1 Permanent Signs 22
3.6.2. Temporary Signs 23
3.6.3. General Guidelines 23
3.7. Lighting 23
3.7.1. General Onsite Lighting Parameters 24
3.7.2. Vehicular and Pedestrian Circulation and Parking Area Lighting 24
3.7.3. Architectural and Accent Lighting 24
3.7.4. Athletic Field Lighting 24
3.8. Architecture and Community Relationships 24
) LjI~020
)i-I-d)
,__....~___~,., ,. . ._~.,'~~__'''''._,._'''w,.,_''..,_
CHAPTER FOUR - PUBLIC FACILITIES
4.1. Stonn Drain System
4.2. Sewer System
4.3. Water Systems
4.3.1. Domestic Water Supply
4.3.2. Reclaimed Water
4.4. Public Safety
4.4.1. Security
4.4.2. Fire and Medical Emergency Services
4.5. Schools
26
26
28
28
28
30
30
30
31
JLI-~~
FIGURES
1. Vicinity Map
2. EastLake III General Development Plan Map
3. Olympic Center Sports
4. Olympic Center Masterplan (illustrated)
5. Visitors' Areas
6. Visitor Towers Viewing Corridors
7. Olympic Center Masterplan (labeled)
8. Project Access and Planned Circulation Element
9. General Plan Amendment Volume Assignment
10. Long Range Access/Onsite Circulation
11. 25 Mile Cycling Loop
12. Great Western Cycling Loop
I3. 40 Mile Cycling Loop
14. 60 Mile Cycling Loop
I 5. 100 Mile Cycling Loop
16. Grading Concept
17. Open Space Plan
18. Landscape Concept Plan
19. Sign Location Plan
20. Storm Drain System
21. Sewer System
22. Domestic Water System
23. Reclaimed Water System
TABLES
3.A Trip Generation
3.B Parkin!: Requirements for Core Facilities
3.SC Parking Requirements for Initial Phase
3.GD Shared Parking Requirements, Initial Phase
3.~E Parking Requirements for Buildout Phase
3 J~F Shared Parking Requirements, Buildout Phase
4.A Average Wastewater Flow
4.B Average Domestic Water Demand
APPENDIX
A. The Economic Impact of the New U.S. Olympic Training Center on the San Diego Economy/CIC
Research
) j-.1.]
CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION
The San Diego National Sports Training Foundation, in cooperation with the United States Olympic
Committee and the City of Chula Vista, are engaged in an exciting proposal - to build the fIrst multi-sport,
warm-weather Olympic Training Center for the United States. The Training Center will serve elite athletes
from all over the United States providing training in many of the sports on the Olympic sports program.
This Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan - and its accompanying Environmental Impact Report illli1 Public
Facilities Finance Plan and Development Agreement detail, as required by the City of Chula Vista, the
planned development for the Olympic site. Development of the Center will be consistent with, and subject
to, the provisions of this SPA and subsequent implementation actions by the City of Chula Vista and other
affected public agencies.
1.1. Location of the Olympic Traininl: Center
The Olympic Training Center is located in the eastern area of the City ofChula Vista City limits. The site
includes 150 acres bounded on the east by Wueste Road, adjacent to Lower Otay Reservoir. It is
approximately 7.5 miles east of downtown Chula Vista and 7 miles north of the United States/Mexico
International Border. Figure 1 illustrates the location of the Olympic Center.
1.2 Relationship to the Community of EastLake
The Olympic Training Center is a part of the Community of EastLake, a 3,OOO-acre masterplanned
community which has a long planning history with and commitment to the City of Chula Vista. A General
Plan Amendment and Planned Community Zoning for the 1,267 -acre EastLake I area, which represented
approximately 40% of the property, was adopted by the Chula Vista City Council on July 15, 1984.
Approval of the EastLake I Plans led to annexation of the area into the City and development ofEastLake
I, the western-most area of the Community. The remainder of the EastLake property was designated
"Future Urban" and an EastLake Policy Plan was adopted by the City Council to establish future planning
and development guidelines.
The second phase of the EastLake development included planning for two residential neighborhoods,
EastLake Greens and Trails, located east of the proposed alignment of State Route (SR)-125, between
Telegraph Canyon Road and Orange Avenue. A General Development Plan for EastLake II and a SPA
Plan and Tentative Map for EastLake Greens were submitted to the City in May, 1988. Following a
Citywide General Plan Update approved by the City on July 17th, the EastLake Greens Plan and Trails
zoning were approved by the Council on July 18th, making way for annexation of portions of this second
phase to the City.
The Olympic Training Center site is part of the third major EastLake Community development phase,
EastLake III. The General Development Plan and zoning for EastLake ill were approved by the Chula
Vista City Council on December 5, 1989, which provided for the subsequent annexation of 1030-acres into
the City.
This Sectional Planning Area Plan represents the third SPA plan for the Community of EastLake. The
EastLake I SPA Plan included EastLake's fIrst two residential neighborhoods, EastLake Hills and Shores,
and portions of commercial and industrial districts, EastLake Village Center and EastLake Business Center.
EastLake's second SPA, EastLake Greens, brought an additional residential neighborhood to the
community. This SPA, the United States Olympic Training Center/San Diego, will provide for the orderly
development of the Olympic Training Center and insure compatibility with existing neighboring
JL/' ) L/
, (:;><..., I
.----------
---
-. ~::----------
--
VICINITY MAP
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
. .. ...
...
E9
SKIDMORE. OWINGS .It MERRD..L
TIJCKER SADLER .It ASSOCIATES A&CHITECF
WYAASSOCIATES LUlDSCAPE A&CHITECF
RICK ENGINEERING CIV1L ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GIIAPHIC DESIGN
FRANCIS KRARE UGHTlNG DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAf"FlC CONSULTANT
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PUNNING CONSULTANT
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
MAY 1910
r--
/'
/1'~J..-S Figure 1
development, future uses to be developed adjacent to the site and with the Community of EastLake as a
whole.
1.3. Surrounding Uses
The General Development Plan for EastLake III (Figure 2) depicts the land uses that will be adjacent to the
Olympic Training Center site. The site is somewhat isolated, with Wueste Road and Lower Otay Reservoir
abutting its eastern boundary and the Salt Creek basin - planned for open space uses - following its western
boundary. A Chula Vista City community park is planned to the south of the site, which will abut an
already existing San Diego County Regional Park.
To the north of the site more intense uses are planned including two commercial centers which are planned
to be complimentary to the Olympic Training Center. A retail commercial center is expected to develop
northwest of the site. This area is specifically proposed for development as a commercial "village" with
casual shopping, dining and entertainment uses, catering to both the athletes in training and visitors as well
as community residents. Adjacent to the northeastern boundary of the Center a Visitor Commercial
designation will allow for development of a visitor-oriented facility which could include lodging and
conference related activities.
Residential development is also planned to occur north of the Olympic Training Center site, with a broad
mix of densities. All residential uses will be separated from the Olympic Training TraiRiRg Center by
Orange A venue.
1.4. Scope. Purpose and Implementation of the SPA
The purpose of the Olympic Training Center Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan is to provide guidelines
for future development of the site. The SPA outlines a masterplan concept for the site and includes a
number of development objectives which are consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan and Eastlake III
General Development Plan. In addition, a Public Facilities Finance Plan and Development Agreement
have been included to guide development on the site.
The Plan is intended to be a dynamic document, with ability to alter as needs change and future phases are
constructed (subject to appropriate approvals by the City of Chula Vista). Commencment of development
is expected to occur immediately following the submittal and City approval of a Precise Plan and
Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Approval of the Phase I Precise Plan will enable construction of Core
Facilities to be completed and operated as the initial construction sta~e. Completion of the full first phase.
or Phase I Precise Plan. will follow incrementally. at the discretion of the Planning Director and subiect to
review and analyses of traffic impacts to Wueste Road. The Precise Plan will provide a detailed site plan,
grading plans and architectural plans and elevations for all first phase facilities. A fmal parcel map will
also be required prior to the issuance of any building permits for the site.
1.5. Legal Significance of the SF A
Adoption of the Olympic Training Center SPA Plan by the City Council will establish the official
development policy of the City of Chula Vista for the Olympic Training Center. All future discretionary
permits will need to be consistent with the Olympic Training Center SPA Plan.
) ,-/r;2 ~
2
..:.........
''':'',
" "
" "-
\ "
\".,
\ "
\ ,
I "
/ J
i-:-
\,\ '2-'0
L '-;7 ~/ :...A
/~""\ ,/
\..- / "-'-
,--:../ =- \.
I "",-,' ...--.,. _.
II ~
.</
I ';/
\ -.'
\ //./
'--'
General
DevelopnJent
Plan
I
I'
,
Ii
I
~
.-
..-"
..-"
j.../
fE!IlENlW. lWC. PAO.B:lEl
LAN) USE ACRES DUlAC lHIlI DUlAC
ILl '- >ao .... ". 12
IUoII~ .... ... 2M ..
~- .... .... ... u
1...,-.... .U It-'. ... '...
.....,... -, 17'7.
NOM-AESlDENl1Al
LAN) USE ACRES
c:::J---' ,~.
[EJ- ,..
~=: 12
~ =-..:........ 101.'
r;;a--: ~ a ~ '....
~_.- 70..
~ cr.-...., 0.... ,....
-,- ".....
TOT... -,. .m..
._..._.___~te-WJ_O"'___~
~
/
\ /
\ ;1
v
I
I
\
FACIJ1'ES
.... --
LIeI ~. ,,1cIf.-
can CI.-a r,... '....
\.
\.
\.
\.
\
,.
\
r
(
=- \
c
EASTLAKE III
General Development Plan
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
. .. lJt
!II
EB
SKIDMORE, OWINGS" MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER" ASSOCIATES ARCHITECT
WYA ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
RICK ENGINEERING CML ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIGlIi
FRANCIS KRAHE UGHTING DESIGl'i
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES ntAFFIC CONSULTANT
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSllLTAl'<T
"-lAY 1910
r--
Figure 2
) ;I .~-J. 1
1.6. Public Facilities Finance Plan and Development AKreement
Two important companions to the SPA Plan are the Public Facilities Financing Plan and Development
Agreement. The Public Facilities Financial Plan !ff.El2 provides the description of infrastructure needs
such as sewer, water, road, storm drainage, schools, parks, fIre and safety and transit facility needs
generated by the project, with an outline of estimated costs and methods of fmancing those facilities. In
addition. the PFFP provides more detailed information about prQject phasin~ and construction plans.
The Public facilities Financing Plan must be adopted by the City Council prior to the approval of any
Precise Plan for the Olympic Training Center to ensure that required public facilities will, in fact, be
provided concurrent with need.
In order to ensure that the responsibilities of the developer and the City are clearly understood, a
Development Agreement will serve as a contract to vest the development rights of the Center and the
attendant responsibilities of both the City and Olympic Training Center developer.
1.7. Environmental Impact Report
The Master Environmental Impact Report prepared for the EastLake General Plan Amendment in 1982
concluded that adverse environmental impacts were insignifIcant or could be mitigated with the exception
of impacts in the areas of:
.
Agriculture
Air Quality
Growth Inducement
.
.
The City Council adopted CEQA fmdings (EIR 81-03) which include a statement of overriding
considerations as required by the California Environmental Quality Act.
A Supplemental Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the EastLake III General Development
Plan and a site-specifIc Supplemental Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the Olympic
Training Center SPA Plan which will be considered by the City Council in accordance with applicable law.
)~/rc2r-
3
CHAPTER TWO - OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER BACKGROUND
2.1. Project Background
The development of America's fIrst warm-weather Olympic Training Center, to be located in the San
Diego region, is an exciting prospect - one that will bring national and international prestige to our
community as a leading sports center for the United States. The Training Center will serve as a magnet for
national and international sports organizations for conferences, clinics, seminars, training camps and other
athletic activities. The Center will serve as an incubator for various sports-related, high-tech and scientifIc
fIrms; will provide positive role models and serve as an inspiration for our young athletes; and will
ultimately produce and provide support to those elite athletes who will represent the United States in sports
competitions throughout the world.
The Olympic Training Center to be located at EastLake will be the third Olympic Training Center in the
United States, joining existing centers at Colorado Springs, Colorado and Lake Placid, New York. This
will be the fIst ever "masterplanned" Olympic training facility for the United States, planned and
constructed from the ground up, specifIcally for the United States Olympic Committee, providing a world-
class "state-of-the-art" Training Center for America's athletes.
The Olympic Training Center site at EastLake was officially designated by the United Sates Olympic
Committee (USOC) in November, 1988. The selection of the site adjacent to Lower Otay Reservoir
represents the culmination of two years of planning studies. In considering the San Diego region, the
USOC considered four basic criteria:
1. A superb year-round climate for outdoor training;
2. a major metropolitan population of sufficient size to support resident
athletes with educational and employment opportunities;
3. pr9ximity to a major airport with competitive services and airfares; and
4. a market area that could facilitate the expansion ofUSOC and NGB
awareness and athletic development.
Over 30 sites in the greater San Diego region were examined by the San Diego National Sports Training
Foundation, the non-profIt organization that presented the proposal to the USOC for development of the
Center in this region. All sites were measured against the needs expressed by the USOC for land size,
access, transportation, proximity to schools, colleges, jobs and cultural amenities. After review of all
potential alternatives, the Olympic site at EastLake was selected by the Foundation and approved by the
USOC.
The Center is intended to be the only multi-sport warm-weather facility to be located west of the Rocky
Mountains. When supplemented with the existing scientific, technological, medical and industrial
resources of the South Bay arid greater San Diego area, the Olympic Training Center - seheauleEi te el3eR ill
mis 1991 should offer America's athletes the best possible environment for training and success.
2.2. The San Diego National Sports Trainine Foundation
The San Diego National Sports Training Foundation is a non-profIt foundation, dedicated specifically to
the goal of developing a major, fIrst-class warm-weather United States Olympic training facility in the
greater San Diego area. The Foundation's efforts have been formerly approved by the USOC and the
Foundation worked closely with the USOC to determine which sports will have priority at the new
Olympic Training Center. The foundation is also working closely with the various sports' National
Governing Bodies (NGB's) in order to design facilities that will meet international standards for each sport.
/ tJ -d- /
4
The Foundation will be the developer of the Olympic Training Center at EastLake. In addition to
committing to fmance and develop the facility, the Foundation has begun to act as coordinator, facilitator
and advocate on behalf of Olympic sports and athletes who are training or wish to train in San Diego.
2.3. Olympic TraininK Center Activities
Activity at the Olympic Training Center will revolve around athletes participating in a myriad of programs,
designed and offered by the NGB's and supported by the United States Olympic Committee. The Center
has been designed to meet the training and housing needs of our Country's most elite athletes as well as
younger athletes preparing for future careers.
The natural draw of the Olympic movement, the stature of the athletes expected to train at the facility and
the nature of the Training Center itselfwill also attract a significant number of visitors to the site. This
Olympic Training Center Plan recognized this reality, and provides for accommodation of the visitors who
will come to watch the athletes train and learn about Olympic activity throughout the United States and
other parts of the world.
2.3.1. Training Activity
The training of American athletes will be the primary purpose and highest priority of the Olympic Training
Center at EastLake. The Center will focus its resources and facilities toward the training of elite athletes.
The long-range masterplan of the Olympic Training Center accommodates almost every major recognized
Olympic sport. Figure 3 outlines the Olympic sports that the Center is being planned to accommodate.
The USOC has designated BiRe "priority" sports, which will receive first priority in the planning,
construction and use offacilities at the Center. Venues for these sports, which include archery, athletics,
canoe/kayaking, cycling, rowing, synchronized swimming, team handball, volleyball, aBEI water polo. fkh1
hockey. soccer. softball and tennis will be included in the ~ ~ Precise Plan. BRa SaR&Wstea ...:ith
the first phase ee'/elel'lHl.eRt ef tee CeRter. Off seaseR BaBslea BRa lage tFaiBiBg will alsa Be iBserperatea
inta this first f)hase, as well as Hela haskey sasser aaa teRBis fasiliHes.
The Core Facilities will be built frrst and remainine Phase I venues will be constructed incrementally. as
needed by the National Govemine Bodies and after review and ap,prQval by the Plannin!: Director.
Athletes in a wide range of ages will live and train at the Center. Programs will include short-term
seminars and training camps where athletes spend from a few days to a few weeks at the Center focusing
on selected sports training activities. Other athletes will train for specific events, living at the Center for a
few months prior to major competition or on amore permanent basis to focus entirely on their athletic
training. It is also expected that the USOC and/or NGB's will eventually bring coaches to the area for year-
round training at the Center. In these cases, athletes may reside onsite or live off-campus and commute to
the Center for training.
. "?"r:
/ l! / _) (/
5
0'0111, A Speu.
A,e'."
Tu.....
'aelllU., a.llIetr...
:'"'r.:.. .....
I.
DeM Tn..... Tr......
0.. ..C'.ItUe. "1..~ '..111.... "'.IIM
0-, III'Utll P..." La.., P.....
TPII..... PHiU....
P...... .. ........ ... Trtt.t..
I. ...... ...m.... "1'1",....
T...,. ... ....... ..... ,_
At".Il~. :._~i'''':':- -=:.=:::... 0..
0..
.....,....
......u
1.".,'.11
1...tII...
.............
...1..
e....Ie.,.,
I. 1II~IIIII11I1III1I1I1I1I11I1I11IHIU
, - "- 1!01ll11ll1ll11ll1ll1l1ll1ll111ll
- I.
~=~-~~ '- 80mllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
P-' ...... ......., ........
a~ .....
.......c_
.- <
e~c~I~, _.~_ c_
0"1" I ..... ~
- --- -Dt~. ...-.-._.-;,___..;.
...... ......... I,.......
I DII, '--.. I.... "'"- C,,!"-
11lI..cut..
'..el., 0...-., ........
1_" ....., .......
PI.I" Hoell...,
I"..n :a.u.,
0,...,1'''''
Ie. H_Il..,
I....
L...
M...... "..111'.'..
..u., nail.,
a..t.,
... ......,....
0-
1M .......,.....
a,...... I... "...
........, ......,
..-~-..;...~- I.
~~~-:":".= ~:::- 0..
............... ....
...... e_
-
1111111111111111111111111111111111111
I.
...11....................1.
.....,.. _~~~~..;::..~::.. 0..
0.,
lee..,
'.'1.. -.- . ....... .........
......u
',.....11..11..
I,... '.t.....
1'_111'..'.... 'wt....
T.". T.....
T.., .......
T... H.......II
T...i,
v.n.,...u
..,., '0'.
......lltU..
.,'''"..
'f.c'II..
u.
I...'.... ......
.... ............. e-
'--
........-,....
-
-
T_C_.
,at..... Of. C_
..-... . __ c_
'._c-I.
'--
.-... . - ,....
0,-
-
pt,.. P'IM",
--
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMI1TEE
...,-
EB
r-'I
. I. 151
.
/t! /J I
SKIDMORE. OWINGS" MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER" ASSOCIATES AIlCHITI:cr
WYA ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHrlY.CT
RICK ENGINEERING crvR. ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DF..'!JGN
FRANCIS KRAHE L1GJrI1NG DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAmC CONSULTANT
THE MCKINLEY GROUP PLAHHIl'lG CONSULTANT
F; P'11TP. ~
2.3.2 Visitor Activity
Although the primary purpose of the Olympic Training Center is to train athletes, visitors will naturally be
attracted to the site. The excitement generated by the Olympic movement and the draw of Olympic athletes
in training will bring both local spectators and out-of-town visitors to the site. Because the San Diego
region already offers an attractive visitor's destination, it is expected that many of the same tourists the
come each year to visit existing attractions will also visit the Olympic Training Center. The Center is
expected ultimately to host an estimated 424,000 spectators per year. The Mastefl3laa fer the Olymflie site
earefully aeeommoaates these visiteFS, The total number of annual visitors is expected to evolve from the
development of the Core Facilities and the early years of operation. to this ultimate number when the
Center has been in operation for some time. The Phase I Precise Plan and MasteIlllan are desi~ed to
accommodate these visitors. who will have controlled access to the facility via a Visitors Center and guided
toUFS.
Because this facility is planned to focus on training activities, major competitions are not planned to be
held onsite. Smaller exhibitions and competitions, drawing from 1,000 - 3,000 spectators will occasionally
be held at the Center. These may include competitions such as junior team championships and special
exhibition games with teams from throughout the United States or between U.S. and visiting foreign teams.
An annual total of 50,000 spectators is estimated to attend Training Center events. Accommodations for
these visitors are included in the parking and circulation element of this Plan.
/1- 3d--
6
CHAPTER THREE - SPA PLAN
3.1. Plannini Concepts
The primary purpose of the Olympic Training Center is to provide a complete training support system for
athletes who desire to achieve their maximum potential in athletic competitions. The Center accomplishes
that goal by providing the highest quality athletic training facilities along with a pleasant and attractive
living support environment. This "Olympic Village" will function as both home and workplace for
athletes, providing positive environmental settings for both motivation and relaxation. In addition to
serving athletes needs, the project must be designed to accommodate visitors under controlled access.
In planning for the Training Center, several goals were fIrst defined:
*
to plan for development of state-of-the-art athletic facilities
to provide an aesthetically pleasing campus setting for the athletes
to separate the athletes housing from athletic venues and create a sense
of home for athletes returning from training sessions
to maintain natural open-space areas and create "quiet" spaces for
athletes on campus
to separate visitor activity away from athletes housing
to control visitor access and activity throughout the campus
*
*
*
*
*
The long-range Masterplan for the Olympic Training Center is shown on Figure 4. This design document,
upon which this SPA is based. addresses each of the planning objectives noted above. Planning for the
Center has been comprehensive in scope, including a review of training sites throughout Europe and
meetings and discussions with athletes and officials from both the NGB and the USOC.
The Olympic Center will be constructed in phases, each requiring approval of a Precise Plan by the City of
Chula Vista. The following is a general discussion of the basic Masterplan concepts for circulation, visitor
serving facilities, athletic venues and athletes' housing and support facilities.
3.1.1. Circulation
The ISO-acre Olympic site, consisting primarily of gently rolling hills, is generally divided by a high point
running north and south through the center of the property. This corridor provides a natural access spine
for activities onsite. All campus activities revolve around this central spine, which will serve as a
pedestrian path, circulation for onsite tours and emergency access. Each athletic activity will be marked
along the "Olympic Path", providing every venue (sports training site) with its won "address".
Section 3.3 of this report provides a detailed discussion of traffic and circulation. In general, because the
Olympic Training Center is essentially a campus, vehicular circulation in the traditional sense will not be
provided. The Masterplan for the Olympic Training Center calls for two points of automobile access: a
primary access off Orange A venue for visitors and administrative staff; and a secondary access from
Wueste Road for resident athletes, visiting athletes and medical and housekeeping staff. Each of these
access points leads to parking areas appropriate to the visitor and athlete needs.
Durin~ the initial phase of operations. until construction of Oran~e A venue is complete. athletes.
employees and visitors will all use Wueste Road to access the site. Wueste will serve as the primary access
for the Core Facilities and possible additional Phase I facilities. as lon~ as cumulative averaie daily traffic
ienerated by the prQject remains under 950 trips per day.
)l-/-]}
7
:.
~~~,'
\
;..
OLYMPIC CENTER MASTER PLAN Ulustratedl
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
) 'i- ;? L/
SKIDMORE, OWINGS & MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER & ASSOCIATES ARCIDTECf
WY A ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECf
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIGN
FRANCIS KRAHE LIGHTING DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC CONSULTANT
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSULTANT
. 1M 151
...
E9
HOVI"
,........
Figure 4
3.1.2. Visitors
It is anticipated that this Olympic Training Center will ultimately play host to over 400,000 visitors each
year. Visitors will come to tour the Olympic site, becoming acquainted with the facilities primarily
through walking tours (mini-bus tours will also be available for elderly and handicapped visitors). Other
visitors will come to the site as spectators, attending specific exhibitions and/or competitions as described
in Section 2.3.2.
The visitor serving areas planned for the Olympic Training Center are shown on Figure 5. The Visitors
Center is located on the north end of the site where access and parking are provided immediately off of
Orange A venue. The Visitors Center will include Olympic display areas, an auditorium where visitors may
view athletic and inspirational films, a restaurant, a gift shop and administrative/support offices.
The Visitors Center is ~ located on a high point in the property that provides visual access to the
entire site. Two viewing towers, approximately 30-40 feet in height, will be located in the Visitor Center
Plaza so that visitors may enjoy a panorama of the campus and its athletic venues. (Figure 6 displays the
potential viewing corridors from the visitor towers). An outdoor pavilion will provide yet another viewing
area for tourists as well as space for special outdoor athletic exhibitions.
Several small visitor overlooks are provided along the Olympic Path. These will include restroom facilities
and concessions stands that may be activated for events as required. In addition, each of the outdoor
venues includes a grass viewing area. These will be gently sloping spaces, provided at one field for each
venue, where spectators may sit and watch games and exhibitions.
3.1.3. Athletic Facilities
Figure 7 provides a Masterplan which labels all of the long-range Olympic Training Center facilities.
Planning for the Olympic Training Center is naturally focused on the athletic facilities. Each venue has
been planned to meet the requirements of the NGB of the sport(s) that it will serve.
Indoor athletic facilities are planned to be interspersed in groupings through the Olympic site. One main
gymnasium, initially designed for volleyball and team handball, is located adjacent to visitor parking on the
north end of the site. A second gym is planned for this area for future phases. Located close to parking,
these gyms will double for training in other sports and as multi-purpose space for indoor exhibitions or
competitions held onsite.
Outdoor venues constitute the majority use of the site. Circling around the Olympic Path, soccer, field
hockey, archery, track and field, softball and tennis facilities are planned for first phase development, as
well as a cycling criterium course. aBEl Baseball, bobsled and luge practice facilities aBEl safteall are
planned for future development. Biathlete training may also be incorporated in later phases, using the
criterium course for dry-land ski practice.
The swimming complex is located on the north end of the Path, making it a key viewing location for
visitors. First phase plans call for an Olympic 50-meter swimming pool, to be shared by swimmers, water
polo players and synchronized swimmers. Later phases will add a second 50-meter pool and diving pool.
The Olympic rowing and canoe/kayaking venue is to be located outside the SPA boundaries, east of
Wueste Road on Lower Otay Lake Reservoir. A Boathouse will be constructed on the Reservoir's edge on
land leased from the City of San Diego. This facility will derive access from Wueste Road and will be a
part of the Olympic Training Center (a pedestrian overpass may be constructed as part of a later phase).
Although not currently a part of this SPA Plan, the Boathouse and its surroundings could be included if the
area owned by the City of San Diego east of Wueste Road is considered for annexation into the City of
Chula Vista.
/i- 35
8
~----~. /
/~- .~
f' > -~] ,rJ
,'\:lJIt\l
I '~~"J
'~ ~ ~t
\ - - "~~~<""
\ i~ ~~
\ \\\--
\ )i@
\ I' //'
\~~ = (~
\ I =- '~\
\ ' ~~i
\~ .. ,,11
\1=-1 (j
\/1 iI. ==~-/.'
\~_~~, Ii
_L ___ I
\ \
VISITORS' AREAS
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
r-'""
EB
. ,. :.se
...
/ L/-)?,
Figure 5
SKIDMORE, OWINGS &: MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER &: ASSOCIATES ARCHITECT
WY A ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIG:<oI
FRANCIS KRAHE LIGHTING DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAFnc CONSULTANT
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSULTA~"
t--_ .-1
( "--- ~
I I
\ i
I I
I \
) ,
I ~, (
I '" ___/ {
r-----/ '", )
\ ''''~ ~
\ ~~" ~
\ ~"
\ '~
\ ~~
\ '~
\ ,\
\ \
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\"
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\ Ii
\ II
~--_---4li
~
\
"?"
~
I
i
."~>
1
~
t?
{J
p
2
.~
\
VISITORS' TOWER VIEWINC CORRIDORS
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
TIlE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
lItAy 10Jlll0
EB
r-
. I. UI
..
.SKlDMORE, OWINGS" MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER" ASSOCIATES ARCHITECT
WYA ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
RICK ENGINEERING CIV1L ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIGN
FRANCIS KRAHE LIGHTING DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC CONSULTANT
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSULTANT
)t/~] 7
Figure 6
OL YMPIC CENTER MASTER PLAN
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTUi
. .. ...
..
EB
SKIDMORE, OWINGS'" MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER '" ASSOCIATES ARCHITECT
WYA ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DfSlGN
FRANCIS KRAHE LIGHTING DKI;IGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TIIAnlC CONSULTANT
THK M'K1NLfo:Y GROUl' PLANNING CONSULTANT
r--
/~ - 3,g/
Figure
7
~
~.:,
o. a
'\.0
o~
\1-'
0" c~
to ....A-.
.. ..~':o",
o
o
~.." ......-
-..0 .:
, ,
't'
en
~
o
.
.
o
.
.
.
o
.
.
o
.
o
.
.
o
.
.
.
.
.
o
o
o
o
llEQENO
. IlOADWAY CUSSIFICAIIOtIS. CII1CUlAIIOH ElEMEHf
. . -
-
-
,._.,
&",",w.,
sa. l_ r..... "".1.1
sa. l_ ...."" St....
r_ l_ ...."" SIt...
- Cl.... C<lIeclor
.......... Qa,. I CoAectar
- Cl... . Coleclor
o Go.d. s.".......
. .,_" t'U.ChQIf'9I'
PRomer ACCESS &: PLANNED CIRCULATION ELEMENT
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
)LJ--}j
SKIDMORE. OWINGS & MERRILL
roCKER SADLER & ASSOCIATES AIlCHlTECT
WY A ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE AIlCHlTECT
RICK ENGINEERING ctVtL ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIGN
FRANCIS KRAHE L1GH11NG DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC CONSULTANT
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSULTANT
r-"'
o I" :3.
...
E9
Figure 8
3.1.4. Housing and Other Support Facilities
In working with athletes to prepare the Masterplan, emphasis was made by the athletes that the campus
must provide a way for them to retreat from their work to the privacy of their residence. Even more
importantly, they stressed that housing should be separated from any visitor activity onsite.
Athletes housing is located along the hillsides that slope toward Otay Reservoir. Buildings will be
constructed in clusters, each containing several housing "units", housing two to four athletes. Core Facility
housin~ will include 35 units. providin~ from 70- 100 beds. Upon completion. Phase I development will
provide for 300-400 athlete-beds. At buildout, the Center expects to house up to 1,000 athletes.
Housing units are stepped down the hill to reduce grading and to provide for maximum views across the
lower Otay Reservoir to the mountains to the east. Although easily accessible from the central spine, the
housing is separated by parking, the Sports Medicine/Science Center and ;by topography as it steps down
the hill.
Sports research and medicine is an important component of Olympic training. The Sports
Medicine/Science facilities are located directly adjacent to the Olympic Path, adjacent to and serving as a
physical buffer for athletes residences. Because the athletes will spend considerable time in this facility
both before and after work-outs, it is important that it be centrally located - "close to home". It is also
expected that this will be an important viewing facility, portions of which will be open for visitor tours at
the Center. Durin~ the initial operatin~ years. a temporaty Sports Medicine/Science Center will be
provided in the NGB office buildin~ in the athletes' center.
Athlete dining and recreation areas are located north and adjacent to the residential units. ana servea ey the
seeaRaary alitamaBile aeeess af[ Wlleste Raaa. This area will include a reception area, recreation room,
meeting room facilities and small office spaces for short-term use by athletes and their coaches.
3.2. Statistical Summary orLand Use
MASTER PLAN USES BY ACREAGE
BUILDINGS
ROAD
PARKING
OPEN SPACE
...OUTDOOR ATHLETIC VENUES
...GENERAL OPEN SPACE
CORE FACILITIES
1.1
3.19
7.29
FIRST PHASE
4.65
3.19
7.29
BUILDOUT
9.19
3.52
13.03
30.0
106.39
34.52
98.32
45.29
76.92
TOTALS
147.97
147.97
147.97
3.3. Traffic/Circulation
The circulation element of the Olympic Training Center SPA Plan is based on a comprehensive sub-
regional traffic study by the City of Chula Vista. The study is used as the basis for establishing the
appropriate size for offsite roadway facilities. Site access and onsite circulation and parking are based on
shared parking and a manual traffic analysis.
j L/-'1/ l)
9
Z
o
-
E-<
~~
t.I.l~
...JZ
CO~
~o
~
C2
E-<
00 0 9~ 0 ~ 0 0 ~~~~~ I-
0
~ 0 Sl~ 0 V'l N V'l 0 ~ l""l
0 0 N 0 ~ \C 0-
V'l N N N' ~ ~'
E- :>.:>.:>. >. :>. :>.:>.
:J eu eu eu eu eu eu eu
~~~ ~ ~ ~~
0 '- '- '- -.. -.. -- -- --
C '" '" '" '" '" '" '"
0 '" '" '" c.c.c. c. c. c.c.
...J ~~~ 0 "i: '= .= ',5 ',5 ',5 ',5
000 ~ - - -
:J 000 Go) C! C! C! "1 C! C! 0
CO NNN .e- N N N l""l N N
'"
c.
',5 '"
0 ~ ...
0
0 0 <a
<.,..; <.,..; -
<.,..; - '(jj - '" '"
en en en !::: ';; '" U 0 '" 0 '"
Go) :u - 0 - 0
0 00 '" c. ;::s - ;::s - -
0 00 eu 0'1 ;::s '" eu ~ eu ;::s ~
-
N. 0,0 '" N .c l""l 0 0 eu
0,0 0
V'l0 ~ N ~ 0 0 0 0 -
N_V'l N l""l V'l N V'l '-'
s
~
t.I.l
...J
~
::E
o
u
t.I.l
en
<
:c
~
>-
E-
:i
o
<
~
~
o
u
gg~~
N l""l
'- '- '-
'" '" '"
~~~
000
000
NNN
<.,..;<.,..;<.,..;
cIi cIi rJi
000
000
000
O~ or\' N~
-
~9eM~
'-
'"
~
o
000
N I I
<.,..;
en
I I
000
o I ,
N,
l""l
t.I.l
en
:J
1::
o
c.
c.
=
~
=
.S!
- '=
E ,S ,-
- e e
"'~~
:5 < <
euco
~E-O
<oz
...J '"
... < ,S:!
,S E- ~ l:1:: ::
euO=eu-
::E E- (5 ~ .~
t::' cO ~ <<i r-
o:JYu2;
c. en :a :e -
c.. ~ Q) ";;
~ ~::E>
o
N
-
~~~~~~
o
V'l
-
=
o
'"
...
Go)
.e-
'"
c.
',5
o
o
-
:>.
eu
~
:>. :>.--
eu eu cg"
~ ~ ,-
-.. -.. ...
'" '" -
,9- ,9- 0
l:ll:lN
0C!
NN~
'" 0
... -
o '" ~
_ Go) U
'r;; en Q.)
';;.E ~
~oo
- I-
V'l
'"
o
~
o
o
>.
eu
~
'"
c.
',5
V'l
!:::
eu
-
'"
N
o
N
:!\C~~
V'l V'\
V'l
l""l
=
o
~
Go)
c.
"'Cil
c.
',5
o
o
-
:>.:>.~
eueu~
~~"'Cil
'" '" c.
,9- c. ',5
l:l ',5 0
00 '
NNN
~
'" 0
... -
o '" ~
- Go) U
'en en Q,)
';;.E ~
I- l""l V'\
V'l l""l
N
>.
eu
~
c.
',5
"1
'"
g
~
l""l
N
l:1::
~
'"
N
'"
o <I)
:; ~
<co
~
=
.;;
:3 t
g...J~e'j <
~g~8~ ~
,;, ~ 0 ,S ':; 'a:i' ,S
5 CQ W) con Q:I .~ r.n
~:J~~tacs~
uen_~o _
<I) ;';;0~-5
~ <<e::::..<
I I
Ei 23
en en
'C 'C
;::s ;::s
o 0
E-E-
J 21-- 1/;1
~
V'\
N
N
g~~N~~
N N-Nl""l
N' N'
~
~
'"
c.
',5
C!
l""l
>.>.
eu eu
~~
"'Cil"'Cil
c.c.
',5 ',5
00
NN
'"
o
-
;::s
eu
V'\
N
'" '"
gg
~ ~
o V'\
ON
-
-
~
o
-
'-'
eM
V'\
l""l
~~~~~~
I
o
I
>.>.
eu eu
~~
"'Cil"'Cil
c. c.
',5 ',5
C!C!
N N
I
o
I
'" '"
o 0
~~
o V'\
\C -
-
:f=-=-
._ 0 ;::s
> ~ 0
::i:g;g
_ ...JGo)co=...J...J
ti <=_co<<
o E-~oeu~E-E-
J2 0""0000
':; 'a:i' E- 0 N ~ E- E-
CO ,:: cO '" ';; '" cO
~):;::J~~.,g::J
o-en.!!~uen
O~ .s.;;eu
::::..::::.. <<8
'3
o
-E-
~ <I)
o ~
-.=
'-'~
:!
-
'2
-
'"
c.
E5
..;
'"
~
In addition to tourists, there will be spectator visitors that will visit the Center for specific events. To
estimate the number of spectators at events, the center doubled attendance at the Colorado Springs facility
for a total of 50,000 spectators. Assuming all spectators arrive by auto and 350 operating days per year, at
buildout 143 spectators would visit the center. Assuming one spectator per car and two trips per car per
day, then 286 ADT would result.
Athletes will live both on site and offsite. Of those living onsite, it was assumed that one-third of the
temporary residents would have cars and make an average of 1.5 trips per day (450 ADT). Of the longer-
term residents, it was assumed one-half would have cars and that these athletes would make an average of
3.0 trips per day (150 ADT).
For athletes living offsite, based on experience at Colorado Springs, it was estimated that at buildout 200
athletes per day all driving alone would make two trips to the Center per day (400 ADT). Similarly, 50
coaches were estimated to live offsite. Assuming one coach per vehicle and two trips per auto per day at
buildout, 100 ADT would result. For the initial phase, one-half of the buildout ADT was used.
After calculating all trips, total buildout average daily traffic flows were increased by 10 percent to account
for support trips, deliveries, postal service, etc., resulting in 2,333 ADT after construction of Phase I and
4,937 total ADT at buildout.
3.3.2 Onsite Access
Access roads within the SPA Plan, shown on Figure 10, will be private, thus assuring an appropriate
atmosphere and security for the Training Center. Ingress and egress easements will be provided for
emergency vehicles and public facility maintenance. Access to all potential Phase I Precise Plan uses will
be provided from the Wueste Road entrance. After completion of Oranl:e A venue. all visitor and support
office administrative uses aFe ~ located at the northwest comer of the site. Public access from Orange
A venue will be jointly developed and may be used by the adjacent support commercial uses. Onsite,
visitors and athletes will walk, cycle or use small buses.
Access for athletes will be provided from Wueste Road as indicated on the Plan. Access for water related
activities will also be off Wueste Road as shown. Also, an emergency vehicle and cycling access to
Wueste Road will be provided near the southeast comer of the training center.
Wueste Road is currently a two-lane, winding "country road", without curbs, gutters and sidewalks.
Wueste Road is not planned as a primary access road to any future development in the area. South of
Telegraph Canyon Road the only link to Wueste Road will be the connection with Orange Avenue. No
other connections are planned onto Wueste from planned residential or commercial areas. Its location,
following the western edge of Lower Otay Reservoir and terminating at a City of San Diego-owned,
County operated park, limits vehicular activity to those who are park-destination bound or simply
sightseeing. It has Beea reeeHUReaaea that WHeste Reaa Be aesigaatea speeifie~' as a speeial "IUFaI
aeeess reme", preservrng the reaa as a 1:wa laRe eelleetiaB WMBeRt die emes 811.a siaewllllEs FeE{HifeEi B)'
Barmal elassifieatiaBs.
Actual impacts on Wueste Road resulting from development at the Training Center will be minimal.
Wueste Road has been desi~ated as a special "Rural Recreation Access Facility". preservin~ the existinl:
features of the two-lane road without curbs and sidewalks as normallv reQ)lired. Improvements that will be
required include the construction of a public hiking/biking path adjacent to the road and expansion of the
road at the athletes entrance to include left turn pockets.
)L/-1~
12
3.3.3 Parking
Due to the unique nature of the Training Center, visitors will generate a majority of the parking demand.
Figure.l.Q depicts general locations for parking onsite for the Core Facility and MasteIlllan. Table 3.B
shows expected parkin I: demands for the Core Facilities project. Tables 3.B C and 3.b D show the total
and shared parking demand for the initial f3Rase completed Phase I of development. As can be observed
from Table 3.D, about 377 parking spaces will be required at the time of peak parking accumulation for
Phase I. Tables 3.g E and 3.B E summarize the total and shared parking requirement for project buildout.
A total of 824 spaces will be needed at buildout.
) L/ ~ j/~
13
~
NO SCALE
SOURCE: SANDAG 03/10/89
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT VOLUME ASSIGNMENT
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
. I" Uf
lOt
EB
/L/_ tlL/
Figure 9
SKIDMORE, OWINGS & MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER & ASSOCIATES AJlcmn:cr
WYA ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCmn:CT
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPIl1C DESIGN
FRANCIS KRAHE LIGHTING DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TIlAFFIC CONSULTANT
THE MCKINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSULTANT
MAY 1990
r--:
'\
i
,
'""
I
}
/
\
\~
..
..
"""""T
,..
-
Vi;.
--
-
0. Site .11
_Of'fSiw >>
..,
,.
LONG RANGE ACCESS / ON SITE CIRCULA nON
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
JL-j - L/~
SKIDMORE. OWINGS & MERRILL
roCKER SADLER & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECT
WYAASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIGN
FRANCIS KRAHE L1GII11NG DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAmc CONSULTANT
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSIlLTAST
...
EB
I'"""""
. I. ue
Figure 10
TABLE 3.B
PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR CORE FACILITIES
USE
REQUIRED SPACES
EMPLOYEES
Administrative
3200 sq.ft./administrative office
I per 300 sq. ft.
10
Coaches
15
Sports Science/Sports Medicine
2
ATHLETES
Living Onsite
1 car per 3 rooms
II
Living Offsite
.75 per athlete
45
VISITORS
autos: I car per 2.6 tourists
(buses: 1-4 buses daily)
205
TOTAL PARKING REQUIREMENT
288
) 1.;J- 1/ '7
14
TABLE 3.B C
PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR INITIAL PHASE
PEAK PARKING DEMAND FACTORS
."CITY OF SAN DIEGO REQUIRED RATES."
LAND USE
# of
sf, rooms,
RATE visitors TOTAL
1 Per 300 sq. ft. 17,000 57
1 Per Staff Person 12 12
OFFICE
MEDICAL OFFICE
NUMBER OF STAFF FOR
MEDICAL OFFICE
VISITORS
1 Per 2.6 Tourists
514
198
1 Per 2.0 Spectator
71
35
30 per Bus
240
8
GIFT STORE, VISITOR CENTER.
RESTAURANT, AUDITORIUM, AND
VISITOR VIEWING AREAS
ATHLETES
LIVING AREAS
GUEST ROOM
DORMITORY
150 rooms
1 Per 3 rooms
150
50
VIP APARTMENTS
10 rooms
1 Per room
10
10
A THLETES LIVING OFF-SITE
ATHLETES
COACHES
100 athletes
25 coaches
.75 Per athlete
1 Per coach
100
25
75
25
TOTAL
470
/t-)-i7
15
TABLE 3.G D
SHARED PARKING REQUIREMENTS
INITIAL PHASE
OFFICE & VISITORS ON-SITE OFF-SITE
MEDICAL OFFICE ATHLETES ATHLETES
HOUR OF WEEK HOURLY WEEK HOURLY WEEK HOURLY DAILY HOURLY TOTAL
DAY DAY ACCUMU DAY ACCUMU DAY ACCUMU % ACCUMU BY
% LATION % LATION % LATION LA TION HOUR
SPACES
NEEDED STAND
WITHOUT ARD:
SHARED
PARKING: 69 241 60 100 470
6:00 A.M. 7= 5 0= 0 100 = 60 40= 40 105
7:00 A.M. 15 = 10 0= 0 95 = 57 50 = 50 117
8:00 A.M. 63 = 43 0= 0 90= 54 50 = 50 147
9:00 A.M. 90= 62 50 = 120 87 = 52 50 = 50 285
10:00 A.M. 100 = 69 85 = 205 85 = 51 50 = 50 375
11 :00 A.M. 100= 69 90= 217 85 = 51 40= 40 377*
12:00 NOON 85 = 59 100 = 241 85 = 51 10= 10 361
1:00 P.M. 85 = 59 100 = 241 75 = 45 10= 10 355
2:00 P.M. 90= 62 90= 217 50= 30 10 = 10 319
3:00 P.M. 90= 62 85 = 205 65 = 39 30= 30 336
4:00 P.M. 85 = 59 75 = 181 85 = 51 45= 45 335
5:00 P.M. 35 = 24 0= 0 90= 54 60= 60 138
6:00 P.M. 25 = 17 0= 0 95 = 57 100= 100 174
7:00 P.M. 20= 14 0= 0 90= 54 100= 100 168
8:00 P.M. 10= 7 0= 0 80= 48 60= 60 115
9:00 P.M. 5= 3 0= 0 80= 48 40= 40 91
10:00 P.M. 5= 3 0= 0 80 = 48 10= 10 61
11:00 P.M. 5= 3 0= 0 95 = 57 0= 0 60
12:00 5= 3 0= 0 100 = 60 0= 0 63
MIDNIGHT
/1// Lli~ 16
TABLE 3. DE
PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDOUT PHASE
PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDOUT PHASE
PEAK PARKING DEMAND FACTORS
***CITY OF SAN DIEGO REQUIRED RATES.**
MEDICAL OFFICE
NUMBER OF STAFF FOR
MEDICAL OFFICE
#of
sf, rooms,
RATE visitors TOTAL
I Per 300 sq. ft. 40,200 134
I Per Staff Person 22 22
LAND USE
OFFICE
VISITORS
I Per 2.6 Tourists
1,029
396
I Per 2.0 Spectator
143
71
30 per Bus
300
10
GIFT STORE, VISITOR CENTER,
RESTAURANT, AUDITORIUM, AND
VISITOR VIEWING AREAS
ATHLETES
LIVING AREAS
GUEST ROOM
DORMITORY 150 rooms 1 Per 3 rooms 500 167
VIP AP AR TMENTS 10 rooms I Per room 20 20
ATHLETES LIVING OFF-SITE
ATHLETES 200 athletes .75 Per athlete 200 150
COACHES 50 coaches 1 Per coach 50 50
TOTAL 1,020
/ 7 ~f7
17
TABLE 3.e E
SHARED PARKING REQUIREMENTS
BUILDOUT PHASE
OFFICE & VISITORS ON-SITE OFF-SITE
MEDICAL OFFICE ATIll..ETES ATIll..ETES
HOUR OF WEEK HOURLY WEEK HOURLY WEEK HOURLY DAILY HOURLY TOTAL
DAY DAY ACCUMU DAY ACCUMU DAY ACCUMU % ACCUMU BY
% LATION % LATION % LATION LATION HOUR
SPACES
NEEDED STAND
WITHOUT ARD:
SHARED
PARKING: 156 477 187 200 1,020
6:00 A.M. 7= 11 0= 0 100 = 187 40= 80 278
7:00 A.M. 15 = 23 0- 0 95 = 178 50 = 100 301
-.
8:00 A.M. 63 = 98 0= 0 90= 168 50 = 100 367
9:00 A.M. 90= 140 50 = 238 87 = 163 50= 100 642
10:00 A.M. 100 = 156 85 = 405 85 = 159 50= 100 820
11 :00 A.M. 100 = 156 90= 429 85 = 159 40= 80 824*
12:00 NOON 85 = 133 100= 477 85 = 159 10= 20 789
1:00 P.M. 85 = 133 100 = 477 75 = 140 10= 20 770
2:00 P.M. 90 = 140 90= 429 50 = 93 10 = 20 683
3:00 P.M. 90= 140 85 = 405 65 = 122 30 = 60 727
4:00 P.M. 85 = 133 75 = 358 85 = 159 45 = 90 739
5:00 P.M. 35 = 55 0= 0 90= 168 60= 120 343
6:00 P.M. 25 = 39 0= 0 95 = 178 100= 200 417
7:00 P.M. 20= 31 0= 0 90= 168 100= 200 399
8:00 P.M. 10 = 16 0= 0 80= 150 60= 120 285
9:00 P.M. 5= 8 0= 0 80 = 150 40= 80 237
10:00 P.M. 5= 8 0= 0 80 = 150 10 = 20 177
11:00 P.M. 5= 8 0= 0 95 = 178 0= 0 185
12:00 5= 8 0= 0 100= 187 0= 0 195
MIDNIGHT
/1.~C:[J 18
_~.._~._..~.~___---.....____o____'~ _..,-----_.._..~._._._..~-_._..'''_..
3.3.4 Transit
It is expected that public transit will be provided along Orange Avenue in the later phases of the project. In
the interim it may be possible for Training Center operators to provide on-call shuttle service for athletes to
the nearest public transit center. Currently a transit center is located near Southwestern College. A closer
center is planned to be located in the EastLake Business Park.
3.3.5 Cycling Routes
Onsite cycling training circuits will be provided as shown on the concept plan. For training purposes,
however, offsite circuits need to be provided. In consultation with local bicycle clubs and organizations
and based on previously sanctioned cycling events, 25 mile, 40 mile., 60 mile and 100 mile cycling loops
have been conceptually established. Coaches will ultimately refme these training circuits; however, all
offsite training events and efforts will be carried out with appropriate warning signing, leading and
following vehicles. Figures 11 through 15 show possible cycling circuits and the established 40-mile Great
Western Cycling Loop.
3.4. Grading Concepts
In its natural condition, the Olympic Training Center property is characterized by gently rolling hills on
either side of a north/south ridge. On the east side, the hills generally step down to Otay Lake Reservoir
and on the west side they step down to Salt Creek. The main objective of the grading concept is to
maintain this basic ridge and stepped appearance.
The meandering Olympic Path following the ridge provides access to the playing fields and training
facilities. In order to minimize grading, elevation differences of twenty to fifty feet have been maintained
between the fields as they step away from the Olympic Path. The athletic housing will be incrementally
stepped down toward the Reservoir, providing a peaceful retreat area with spectacular views.
To avoid pollution the potable water supply in the Otay Reservoir with urban runoff; the Athletic Track
and Field area will be graded to drain to the southwest. Runoff from these fields will be conveyed across
the lowest point of the ridge in an underground storm drain system and discharged into the Salt Creek
basin, as described in Section 4.1. of this report.
The preliminary grading concept for the Olympic Training Center is illustrated in Figure 16. Grading of
the Olympic site will conform to Chapter 15.04 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Special attention will
be paid to sloping areas to allow for successful landscaping and revegetation. Slopes in excess of five feet
in height will be constructed at maximum gradients of 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical), and rounded to flatter
gradients wherever possible. Graded slopes will be blended into the existing terrain to provide a natural
appearance. Erosion potential will be reduced with beams at the tops of slopes, terrace drains and
vegetation.
3.5. Parks. Open-Space and Landscape Concepts
Landscaping, outdoor venues and open space will playa major role in creating the aesthetic quality of the
Training Center campus. Because actual structures cover a relatively small portion of the site, much of the
150 acres will be dedicated to outdoor activity.
/'
/Lj,~ /
19
LEGEND
= PREVIOSL Y USED CYCL.NG RCUTE
= EXISTING ROADS IN PROJECT AREA
NOTE: COURSE DISTANCE IS APPROXIMATE
2S MILE CYCLING LOOP
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
EB
/-
} i -:3 cJ.-
SKIDMORE. OWINGS II MERRILL
roCKER SADLER II ASSOCIATES A&CHrn:cr
WYA ASSOCIATES 1.AND5C4~ UCHrn:cr
RICK ENGINEERING C1VlL ENG1"lEER
PATRICK MADDUX GUptllC DE.~lc;,
FRANCIS KRAHE UGtmNG DDIC'
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES T1l4fTlC CONSULT4'"
THE M'KINLE\' GROUP rulOONG COI'lSULT4""
- THE SAS DIEGO NATIO'AL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
l'SITEI> STATES OL\'MPIC COMMITTEE
Figure 11
NTERST ATE 8
LEGEND
NO SCALE
= PREVIOUSLY USED CYCLING ROUTE
= EXISTING ROADS IN PROJECT AREA
NOTE: LOOP DISTANCE IS APPROXIMATE
GREAT WESTERN CYCLING LOOP (40 MUes)
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
~
IL/- 53
Figure 1 2
SKIDMORE. OWINGS" MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER" ASSOCIATES AJlCHITECT
WYA ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE: AaCHITECT
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGISr.U
PATRICK MADDUX GUPHIC DESII;"
FRANCIS KRAHE L1GlmNG DL~IG!\
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES T1lAITK ClI!\ISVLTA""
THE McKINLEY GROUP I'LANNING CONSl.'LTA!\"
THJ,: SA" DlF.GO NATIOSAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
l'NITJ,:1> STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
LEGEND
= POSSIBLE CYCLING ROUTE
= EXISTING ROADS IN PROJECT AREA
NOTE: COURSE DISTANCE IS APPROXIMATE
.0 SCALE
40 MILE CYCLING LOOP
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
~
/ (,~~9/
SKIDMORE. OWINGS" MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER" ASSOCIATES AIICHITECT
W\'A ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGI!'oir.U
PATRICK MADDllX GRAPHIC DE!illo"
FRANCIS KRAHE U(iH11NG DESIG!'\o
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES 'BAFfle CONSU1.TA"',.
THE M'KINl.EY GROUP PLANNING CONSULTA'"
THE SA!\i DIEGO !\iATIOSAL SPORTS TRAINING FOl'NDATION
l'NITEU STATF.S OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
Figure 1 3
NTERsT ATE a
LEGEND
= POSSIBLE CYCLING RQJTE
= EXISTING ROADS IN PROJECT AREA
NO SCALE
NOTE: COURSE DISTANCE IS APPRCDCNATE
60 MILE CYCLING LOOP
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SA~ DIEGO NATIO~AL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
l'!',ITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
Figure 1 4
SKIDMORE. OWINGS" MERRILL
roCKER SADLER" ASSOCIATES UCHm:cr
WYA ASSOCIATES LAHDSCAPE ARCHm:cr
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIGN
FRANCIS KRAHE UGIl'T'r.'iG DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAfFIC COSSL'LTAST
THE McKINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSl'LTAN"
E9
,I ~//
/ 4, .~ L.l-;
/ I ~_.-"
LEGEND
-. ~ CTCLIlIIlaIft
-. ElleT,,1IOAlle II ~ IlIIU
NO SCALE
NOTE: LOOP DISTANCE IS APPROXIMATE
100 'MILE CYCLING LOOP
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAS DIEGO NATIOSAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
l'JIlln:1> STATF.S OL\'MPIC COMMITTEE
Figure 15
SKIDMORE. OWINGS" MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER" ASSOCIATES AIICHITEn'
WYA ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE AaCHITEn'
RICK ENGINEERING OVIL ENGISJ:F.R
PATRICK MADDUX CRAPHIC DL'iI'"
FRANCIS KRAHE UGHmIG DL'iIG'
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TlAml" CONSULTA''''
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLANNING COIllSULT"''''
E9
ILj~
GRADING CONCEPT
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
// -:s7
SKIDMORE, OWINGS" MERRILL
roCKER SADLER" ASSOCIATES ARCHITECT
WYAASSOClATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
RICK ENGINEERING CJV1L ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIGN
FRANCIS KRAHE UGHT1~G DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAmc CONSULTANT
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSULTANT
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
MAY li11QO
E9
~
. '.:sf _
Figure 1 6
,
"'-"
'-"""
~~
f'-!......'-- ',--- -
. -'..... ----- - -
.~. - ~_._.~'!
)\
~..
''-~.
\
/
/
LEGEND
\
~.....-.
. ~.. ~. ....~
:~.. -' ._..:~
. ..'
LANDSCAPE OPElII SPACE
SPA PROJECT LINE
\ \
\
-
NATUIlALlZED OPE!'\ SPACE
ATHLETE'S PARK! VISITOR'S PARK
OVTDOOR TRAINING
OPEN SPACE PLAN
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATIO:'o/
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
,. &51 _
EB
/L/sr
SKIDMORE, OWINGS & MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER & ASSOCIATES AJlOJITECT
WYA ASSOCIATES LAl'IDSCAl'E ARCHITECT
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL E!'\GIl\IEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIG~
FRANCIS KRAHE L1GIfIT.'OG DESIGlII
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TllAFFlC CO!'\SLl.TA."(f
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLA!'\NING CO'S!:LTA'T
'o4AY lllNO
r---r-----"'
Fi~ 17
..
"
"
"
"
..
..
..
..
..
"
..
..
"
"
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
\
/
" '
i i
I)
1/
~'
OTAY LAKF.
LEGEND
OPEN SPACE
-
[l~~~~j
: ~...; .
-
E:::::::::::~
-
I .eo o. I
-
r=:J
I~::{::::::::::::;H
11II
1&
c=J
SLUONAL COLOR. n.owa_
...-..a PIAN'TI roe COLOa
PA&KJNG LOT GROVE. Iwrnl:MALLY
DM2It n... ... IIIADI: AN8 ICaUNING
semIEN PLANTING. _ nUl
AD.... ~ YISUAL AND WIND
~ .....1IC1JaJTY
OLYMnC PATH. c.............-
fWTAU. TUD'" a-.&LINE LUlDMAU.
INTIlY GROVl! . ......... TaU 'OWS
TO DaINI Dn'IY
PARIt AREAS. o..mua. CATHUPIG
.uID 'AllIn IICaEAnmt UL\I FOIl
v...-ou AND ATIIL&1'U
GARDEN AREAS. on......,...
ft.A1IfT1IIM". AND IEA~ .aa.u roa
LD1lUDUO\'JID<T
TKU ao5QlJI!S. TaU ...........,. "'"
IDDII'ITY Of' VI..,.., f'EAn...a 4JID
ATBft"I YINt.lII
MEADOW GRASS. "iATIn GI.... ma
IIdlOUI4L GIl(JlJJq COYU "NO ."TD
CONIDY4T1ON
NATIVE sa.vas. COASTAL PLANTS
ON a.u ... DCJU(JN cmn-.oc UD
~ TO raun:TD VEGETATION
WILDFLOWERS . ~.tJG4TD
/lfAnft WII.JIIfLOWUS PnlIILOPE
rr.ulLlZ4T1ON 4ND COl.OII
1't11lP . COILU'I A!lID IPttIAL n... .\ALU
... oaNAMPTAL A:'lID 4T'IILETIC L:SU
LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
,. ...
..
EB
)L/~ S-CJ
7 .---- /
Figure 1 8
SKIDMORE, OWINGS" MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER" ASSOCIATES ARQllTECT
WYAASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIGN
FRANCIS KRAHE UGHTlNG DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC CONSULTANT
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSULTANT
r-'"
SIGN LOC'" nONS
o PRIMARY
@ SECONDARY
SIGN LOCA nON PLAN
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
EB
SKIDMORE. OWINGS & MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER & ASSOCIATES oUCHlTEcr
WYAASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE A1tcmn:cr
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL E.'I;GINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIG:'ol
FRANCIS KRAHE UGHTI:'olG DESlG:'\
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAmc CO:\SlUA-'T
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLANNING CO'Sl'LTA'T
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITI'EE
~
. '81 _
/2/--cfcJ
Figure 19
3.5.1. Parks and Open Space
The concept for the Olympic Center landscaping is to maintain an open, campus-like feeling throughout.
Because the majority of use on the Olympic Training Center campus is outdoor athletic venues,
approximately 82% of the ISO-acre site will be retained as visual open space. Fields are stepped down
hillsides to minimize grading and to tuck facilities into the gently rolling terrain. Outdoor fields, except
field hockey, will be planted with specialized turf grasses. Spaces between all venues will be left as natural
as possible.
Two "parks" are planned for the Olympic Training Center site. A private outdoor area will be developed
near housing for use by the athletes as their "neighborhood park." A quasi-public green area will be
developed adjacent to the Visitors Center. This passive picnic area will be a multi-use turf area for visitors
at the site and may be used for outdoor sport exhibitions and other visitor-related activities.
Figure 17 shows the area of the site that will be free of structures, including outdoor venues, "parks' and
open space.
3.5.2. Landscape Concepts
The primary goal for the landscaping at the Olympic Training Center will be to enhance and reinforce the
aesthetic qualities of the proposed campus setting.
Landscaping will be designed to be compatible with surrounding development and to be complimentary to
existing native vegetation. In addition, several more specific goals will be used as guideposts in refming
landscape plans:
.
to create a landscape plan that will be compatible with the surrounding
community
to use state-of--the-art materials for athletic venues
to retain an open space feeling throughout the campus
to use water conserving plant materials wherever possible
to develop and use a state-of-the-art irrigation system
to use landscaping as security in areas where the site meets adjacent
uses at grade level
to use landscape to denote special areas onsite, such as areas of interest
to visitors and venue addresses
to delineate the Olympic Path in a special way
to provide a separate, park-like atmosphere in and around the athletic
housing area
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Figure 18 shows the Concept Landscape Plan for the site.
The landscape development concept for the Olympic Training Center is depicted on Figure 18. The
landscape concept plan is designed to accomplish the goals noted, and to relate to the general landscape
guidelines for the Community of EastLake. A series of landscape zones have been defined which vary in
development intensity with building density and public visibility. Areas of highest visibility and use occur
at the main EntryNisitors Center and the Operations/Administration area. Formal flowering bedding
plants with ornamental shrubs and trees provide these facilities with seasonal color and special recognition.
From the Visitors Center, the curvilinear Olympic Path extends the entire length of the site, connecting it
with the Operations Buildings, Sports Medicine/Science Center, athletes housing and athletic venues. This
feature is lined with a continuous row of stately 60'-80' high landmark trees (possibly eucalyptus).
Periodically along this path, clusters of highly identifiable tree and shrub plantings occur to mark venue
/ L/ /~ /
20
"addresses" and special visitor facilities. The Sports Medicine/Science Center's prominent location along
this spine also incorporates ornamental planting elements.
Athlete housing is located downhill from the Sports Medicine/Science facility and is planned as a quiet
area, secluded from visitors and a athletic training facilities. The spaces between and around the residential
structures will serve as a garden patios and private retreats. To the east of the housing, between it and the
Dining Building, a neighborhood park space is provided for infonnal gatherings. This area contains
walking paths and an amphitheater. Native and naturalized plantings will be used here and elsewhere to
stabilize potential soil erosion. In other large, remote areas and canyons, non-irrigated native wildflower
meadow mixes will provide expanses of color and transition to surrounding open space.
In an effort to achieve the goal of providing state-of-the-art athletic training facilities at the Olympic
Center, special design provisions will be required for outdoor venues. Input from the NGB's of each sport
will dictate special turf requirements, including meadow grasses at field events and artificial turf at field
hockey facilities. Fire retardant plant materials will be considered in areas of high risk. Throughout and
around the site, screen plantings will be strategically located to provide visual and wind protection as well
as security buffers. Also, for health reasons, specified plant material throughout the site will be chosen
from species and varieties that ensure minimal allergic response.
3.5.3. Irrigation Guidelines
The potential exists for the use of reclaimed water for irrigation of playing fields and landscaped areas
throughout the Olympic Training Center campus. Careful consideration of drainage patterns will be
necessary in designing the system. It is expected that reclaimed water will not be used for any areas that
will drain into the Otay Lakes drainage basin, to avoid potential contamination of the potable water
resource at Otay Reservoir. All venues located on the western side of the ridgeline, and those fields on the
eastern portion of the property which will be graded to drain southwest into Salt Creek will be candidates
for use of reclaimed water.
The conceptual irrigation system for the Olympic Training Center maximizes water conservation by
utilizing minimum ground water and allowing minimum percolation of water into the soil. The irrigation
system will potentially be separated into two pressure zones, serving two drainage basin areas. A central
computer will be specified to assist in monitoring irrigation water usage. The computer will be the heart of
the operations, maintenance and monitoring programs for the project, providing maximum efficiency from
the irrigation system. This system will control the operation of valves and sprinklers, and will monitor
water flow and pressure, pump operation, fertilizer/chemical injection, and a weather station.
A Water Management Plan will be developed and submitted with landscape plans as part of the Precise
Plan for the Olympic Center Phase 1. The system manager will prioritize schedules and irrigation pumping
rates according to the Plan. The overall system will have the capability to segregate various parts of the
system into separate schedules according to dry or wet conditions. The weather station will assist the
computer in adjusting sequence according to evapotranspiration rates. On terrain such as exists at the
Olympic Training Center site, it is imperative that elevation changes be properly addressed so there is no
chance for water to be wasted due to high-pressure surges. Pressure regulating valves will therefore be
utilized to assist in keeping water pressures in the piping system to safe, minimum levels.
3.6. Graphics and Signage
Signage and graphics will play an important role at the Olympic Training Center. In addition to providing
a useful and necessary tool, signs and graphics can create a feeling of warmth and excitement, and give
expression to the mood of the activities taking place onsite. The ultimate goal of the signage standards
incorporated into this Plan is to allow for signage and graphics to contribute to the environment envisioned
for the Center. These standards are an attempt to set forth the following objectives:
/t/--~~
21
.
.
To provide a major central focal point of identification for the entire
facility
To provide low-key yet sufficient perimeter identification for the entire
facility
To allow adequate off-street traffic and parking signs to promote safe
and efficient flow of vehicular traffic
To allow adequate infonnational and directional signs to promote an
even flow of pedestrian traffic
To allow sufficient exterior signs for the clear identification and
effective operation of each building and facility
To insure that the exterior signs for each facility contribute to the
aesthetic integrity of the Center
.
.
.
.
At the Olympic Training Center, signing is considered and integral part of the overall Masterplan
development. All signage at the Training Center will be designed to coordinate with the overall
community design standards developed by EastLake. While recognizing that no signage guidelines can be
completely comprehensive, the major types of signing that the Center will require are anticipated to fall
within the following categories:
A. Pennanent Signs
1. Primary identification signage
2. Secondary identification signage
3. On-property traffic signage
4. Building address signage
5. Donor Signage
6. Training area signage
B. Temporary Signs
1. Construction signage
2. Seasonal/special even signage
3.6.1. Permanent Signs
Figure 19 shows the location of Primary and Secondary identification signs planned for the Olympic
Training Center. Primary project monument signs will be located at the visitors entrance on Orange
A venue and at the athletes entrance on Wueste Road. Monument signs will be either building attached or
mounted on ground support bases and located within the boundary of the Training Center property. These
signs will be maintained by the United States Olympic Committee.
Secondary perimeter signs identifying alternate entrances to the Center will be located as needed on
Orange A venue and Wueste Road.
On-property traffic signs are intended to direct the flow of vehicular and pedestrian traffic within
driveways, walkways and parking areas. Infonnational and directional signs will direct traffic to
significant features of the Center and to sector parking entrance/exit location.
Building address numerals will be of a size and fonn consistent with surrounding identification signage and
be of materials consistent with the building to which they refer. Numerals will be visible fonn the
appropriate walkways and will not appear to be the dominant graphic device on the facade of any building.
Donor signage identifying contributors to the Center may be free-standing or building mounted, whichever
is appropriate. The size and fonn of each donor sign will be detennined by the San Diego National Sports
Training Foundation and/or the USOC.
/ 1/- ~3
22
Training area signs will be located at the various sports venues. They will be both informational and
decorative, but low key in nature. Donor signs can be incorporated with the training area signs, if
appropriate. Only one training area sign per sport is planned.
3.6.2. Temporary Signs
Temporary construction signs will denote the lending institution, donor(s), architect, engineer, contractor,
designer and/or developer of the project during construction periods. These signs will be subject to
approval for specified periods of time.
Cooperative seasonal or special event signage will be permitted at the Olympic Training Center. These
temporary signs will denote special events at the Center, celebrate occasional Olympic-related activities,
mark locations of onsite competitions and/or depict home states or countries of visiting athletes. Flags and
banners will be considered appropriate signage in this category.
3.6.3. General Guidelines
Because identification signage is considered an integral part of the Olympic Training Center project, all
signs must meet the general goals, objectives and intent of the signage program. Variations from
restrictions will not be permitted. In addition, except for donor/sponsor signage, no signage will be
permitted that does not directly relate to the services or function of the Center's activity.
The design of all permanent and temporary signs will meet a uniform standard established by the San
Diego National Sports Training Foundation and the USOC. No signs, either permanent or temporary, will
be allowed to use the United States Olympic logo without direct, written consent of the USOC. All signs
will be governed by the rules and regulations of the affected government agencies, the EastLake Planned
Community Development Guidelines and the USOC.
The following signs will not be permitted under any circumstances:
- Roof signs
- Free standing ground signs except as allowed they these Guidelines
- Time and temperature signs
Large flashing, revolving, moving, animated or rotating signs
- Political advertising signs
- Wind signs
3. 7 Lightin~ Design Guidelines
Exterior lighting will be provided to complement the landscape design and architecture and provide a safe
and secure environment for pedestrians, cyclists and motorist throughout the Olympic Training Facility.
The intent of the lighting design is to create a nighttime character which will reinforce the image of the
facility as a home for athletes in training. Further, the lighting system will provide appropriate illumination
for visitors and spectators at the complex for special events.
As with landscaping and signs, lighting is an important element contributing to the identity and unity of the
site. To reinforce identify and unity, all exterior lighting will, whenever possible, be consistent in height,
spacing, color and type of fixture throughout the project.
. I
/1/-- b 1/
23
3.7.1 General Onsite Lighting Parameters
Onsite lighting includes lighting for pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking areas, building exteriors,
services areas, landscaping, security and venue lighting for training and special events.
All exterior onsite lighting will be shielded and confmed within the site boundaries. No direct rays or glare
will shine onto public streets or adjacent property.
3.7.2 Vehicular and Pedestrian Circulation and Parking Area Lighting
All pedestrian and vehicular circulation, and parking lot lighting will use zero degree cut-off fixtures
(fixtures which do not allow any light above a horizontal plane passing through the fixture). Fixtures will
be mounted at a uniform height.
Maximum fixture height above grade for roadways and parking areas will be as follows:
Vehicular Circulation: 30'
Parking Area: 25'
Lighting used in pedestrian circulation areas where security is an issue will employ a light source that will
accurately render color.
3.7.3 Architectural and Accent Lighting
Architectural lighting is encouraged to promote nighttime identity and character as well as to provide a
secure environment. All exterior architectural lighting will utilize indirect or hidden light sources.
Acceptable lighting includes wall washing, overhead down lighting and interior lighting that spills outside.
Unique lighting may be used to feature architectural elements, landscaping, entries and pedestrian areas,
provided it is compatible with adjacent site lighting. Accent lighting used in landscaping and pedestrian
areas shall employ light sources that will accurately render plants, lawns and skin colors.
3.7.4 Athletic Field Lighting
Training lighting of athletic fields for night use will be permitted. The fixtures will be equipped with
timing devices where feasible, and be shielded and/or focused to minimize light pollution.
Lighting for athletic fields may remain on until 11 :00 p.m. For special activities that continue past 11:00
p.m., lights may remain on until the scheduled even is over.
3.8. Architecture and Community Relationships
Architecture at the Olympic Training Center promises to be a unique blend of quiet resoluteness and
Olympic serendipity. Development of a nationally recognized facility provides a unique opportunity to
create something very special. The challenge to design an exciting architectural environment reflecting the
thrill and mood of the Olympic movement will, nonetheless, be combined with recognition that the
Training Center must respect its location a well-designed masterplanned community and develop in a style
that is not inconsistent with its neighbors.
Many of the indoor athletic facilities will be simple structures, dictated by the uses contained therein.
Athlete housing will blend in with the southern California terrain and remain much in character with the
surrounding community of EastLake.
iJ ./
) '-; -t~s
24
The visitors facility at the north end of the site will be the most architecturally prominent. Planned to be a
sophisticated piece of design, it will be unique in character and promises to become a regional landmark.
Although great architectural focus will be on the Visitor Center, it too will need to blend with the
residential neighborhoods across Orange A venue and with the commercial centers to its west and east.
/~!/~)~
25
CHAPTER FOUR - PUBLIC FACILITIES
4.1. Storm Drain System
In its natural condition, the Olympic Training Facility property is divided into two drainage basins.
Approximately 50 acres of the site is located in the Otay Lakes Basin and 100 acres lies within the Salt
Creek Basin. To avoid polluting the potable water supply in Otay Lake Reservoir with urban runoff, the
majority of the area within the Otay Lake Basin will be graded away from the reservoir. The runoff from
this area will be conveyed in an underground storm drain system across the lowest point of the ridge and
discharged into the Salt Creek Basin.
Runoff from areas west of the ridge will be collected in three systems and discharged into three different
natural streams west of the property boundary. The proposed storm drain system is illustrated in figure 20.
4.2. Sewer System
+he When Oranl:e A venue is constructed. wastewater generated by the Olympic Training Center will be
sewered into a system to be installed by the EastLake Development Company in Orange A venue at the
north boundary of the site. The Orange Avenue System will be temporarily sewered into Telegraph
Canyon Road with a series of temporary pump stations. Long-range plans call for the Orange A venue
System to sewer to the future Salt Creek treatment facility or offsite lines. (A complete discussion of the
offsite sewer system is provided in the EastLake III Water/Sewer System Study prepared by NBS Lowry).
The Orange :\'/esl:le filsility is sseelkiled te ee in "lase 9Y lale s1:HIHBer in 1991, eessistest ,-,:itA the
seeed\ded e"esing sf s"eFatiess setae Olym.pis TflliniBg CeBter.
Until Oranl:e A venue is available. a temporary sewer line will extend directly from Tele~h Canyon
Road to the site and a temporary pump station will be consructed prior to occupancy of Core Facility
buildinl:s or sports venues.
The planned collection system which will be completed with the initial construction activity for the Core
Facilities. for the Training Center is shown on Figure 21. One pump station will be required to move the
wastewater generated in the south half of the site over the hill and into the system which then gravity flows
to Orange A venue. A second pump station will be located at the Olympic Boathouse. a<ljacent to Lower
Ot&)' Lake and outside the SPA boundaries. It is anticipated that the future park area to the south of this
site, and potentially the existing County and City of San Diego public facilities located on Otay Lake
Reservoir, will tie into this system. It is therefore proposed that this system be constructed and maintained
as part of the public sewer system.
The Average wastewater flow for the Training Center is 0.14 mgd, as shown in Table 4.A.
jL/.-i> /
26
, ~':c~\:
,.
EXISITIIG PIPELINE
- PROPOSED PIPELINE .
~ PROPOSED STORM DRAIN INLET
>-- PROPOSED STORM DRAIN Olm.ET
.DESIG:S .-11.:--;0 StZISC OF SYS'TEM Sli'BJECT TO
E.""IGr.\"E:ER.rIo'G REFINE.\4E."'IT
STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
/7,-~,r
SKIDMORE, OWINGS'" MERRILL
roCKER SADLER '" ASSOCIATES ARCHITECT
WY A ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIGN
FRANCIS KRAHE L1GII11NG DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC CONSULTANT
THE McKINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSULTANT
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
r--
E9
MAY 1900
. lOl ~
Figure 20
TABLE 4.A
AVERAGE W ASTEW A TER FLOW
LAND USE
UNITS
DEMAND FACTOR DEMAND (med)
Athletic Residences
1,000 people
80 gaVcapitalday 0.08
Training Facilities
81 EQD
80 gaVcapitalday 0.02
(3.5 people/EQD)
Support Facilities
12 acres
80 gaVcapitalday 0.04
(43.7 people/acre)
TOTAL ESTIMATED AVERAGE FLOW
0.14
I -j / 9
/'7'~::1
27
-
PROPOSED PIPEUNE .
EXISTING PIPEUNE
FORCE MAIN
PUMP ST AnON
DIRECTION OF COlLECTION FLOW
--
@
~
. OEStGN"-"II"O SIZJNG OF SYSTEM StJBJECT TO
ENGlNEERISG RB'INEMENT
SEWER SYSTEM
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
o tOl ~.
'"
EB
SKIDMORE, OWINGS" MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER" ASSOCIATES ucmn:cr
WYAASSOCIATES LAHDSCAPE ucmn:cr
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIGN
FRANCIS KRAHE UGtmNG DESIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC CONSULTANT
THE M<KINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSULTANr
r--
)1/- ,71)
Figure 2 1
4.3. Water Systems
The Olympic Training Center is planning for the use of both domestic and reclaimed water on site.
4.3.1 Domestic Water Supply
The Otay Water District is responsible for water supply to the Olympic Training Center. The site will
ultimately be served by a water system in future Orange Avenue. An interim water main will be
constructed with the OTC Core Facilities. extendini service directly from Hunte Parkway. The permanent
facility in Oran~e A venue will be constructed by EastLake Development ami is ssaeElaleEl te ee iB ~lase ey
late sammer 1991.
Fire flow requirements will be determined using Appendix lll-A of the Uniform Code, 1988 Edition. The
maximum requirement on this site is 2,500 GPM.
The average annual domestic water demand for the Training Center is estimated to be 0.65 MDG, as
calculated in Table 4.B. This is reduced to 0.25 MGD if reclaimed water is used for irrigation of
landscaped areas and playing fields.
Figure 22 depicts the proposed domestic water system. It is anticipated that in addition to serving the
Olympic site, this system will eventually serve the proposed future public park to the south. (A detailed
analysis of the water supply requirement and planned facilities is contained in the EastLake III Water
System Study prepared by NBS/Lowry).
4.3.2. Reclaimed Water
The use of reclaimed water for irrigation is being considered for the Olympic Training Center.
Transmission mains are being constructed by EastLake Development Company from the Jamacha
reclamation plant though the EastLake Greens project to Orange Avenue; however, availability of water for
the Olympic Center has not yet been determined. At present the Jamacha plan is supplying 1.2 MGD. The
irrigation demand for this project is estimated to be 0.4 MGD. The long-range plan calls for the Jamacha
plant to be upgraded to supply 2.6 MGD of reclaimed water. Additionally, a new reclamation plant is
being studied for construction in the Salt Creek area, southwest of the Olympic Training Center site.
Because contamination of the potable water supply in Otay Lake Reservoir is a major concern, a reliable
irrigation maintenance program will be essential to avoid system failure. (Section 3.5.3. discusses
irrigation system concepts in more detail).
Furthermore, the health and safety aspects of the use of reclaimed water on playing fields that will have
direct human contact must be carefully reviewed and conform to current health regulations
Figure 23 illustrates the proposed reclaimed water system for the Olympic Training Center.
)1)- ?/
28
I....... EXISTING WATER LINE
PROPOSED WATER LINE .
. DESIGN .~"IlD SIZING OF SYSTEM SUBJEC"Y' TO
E.'''GINEElUNG REFINEMENT
DOMESTIC WATER SYSTEM
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
Figure
SKIDMORE, OWINGS" MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER" ASSOCIATES ARCHITECT
WY A ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC DESIGS
FRANCIS KRAHE LlGHTI:;G DF.~IGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC CO:;SULTANT
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSULTANT
/ i / /'''""'/'1
1'-/-:-
, ,..
...
E:1
~
22
PROPOSED RECLAIMED WAlCR LINE .
.. DESIGN....SD SIZING OF SYSTEM SUBJECT TO
ENGINEERING IlEFlNEMEI'IT
RECLAIMED WATER SYSTEM
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC TRAINING CENTER
SAN DIEGO
THE SAN DIEGO NATIONAL SPORTS TRAINING FOUNDATION
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
. ,.
...
EB
/y',. 7 J
SKIDMORE. OWINGS" MERRILL
TUCKER SADLER" ASSOCIATES ARCHITECT
WYA ASSOCIATF.s I.ANDSCAPF. ARCHIH:CT
RICK ENGINEERING CIVIL f.NGlNf.ER
PATRICK MADDUX GRAPHIC nf.~IGN
FRANCIS KRAHE LJC;HTlNf; Of.SIGN
URBAN SYSTEM ASSOCIATES TRAffiC CONSULTANT
THE M'KINLEY GROUP PLANNING CONSULTANT
!.tAy lIMO
r-"
FIGURE 23
TABLE 4.B
AVERAGE DOMESTIC WATER FLOW
LAND USE UNITS DEMAND FACTOR DEMAND (m~d)
Athletic Residences 1,000 people 150 gaVcapita/day 0.15
Training Facilities 81 EQD 150 gaVcapita/day 0.04
(3.5 peoplelEQD)
Playing Fields and 100 acres 4,000 gal/acre/day 0.40.
Landscaped Areas
Support Facilities 12 acres 5,000 gal/acre/day 0.06
TOTAL ESTIMATED AVERAGE FLOW 0.65
· If reclaimed water is used for fields and landscape areas, domestic water demand will drop to an estimated
0.25
) L/- ? i
29
4.4. Public Safety
The City of Chula Vista operates under a service threshold and standards policy in detennining the
adequacy of the provision of public safety to a new project. If existing police, fIre and medical emergency
services cannot be provided at the designated standard, new development must provide alternative methods
to bring the project into confonnance and or seek an exemption from the thresholds policy.
4.4.1. Security
The nearest police station to the Olympic Training Center is located in downtown Chula Vista. Response
times to this area from downtown would vary widely, from 7-20 minutes depending upon the circumstance
and type of call received. Citywide thresholds call for a 5 - 7 minutes emergency response time.
The USOC, who will operate the Training Center, will provide year-round, 24-hour private security for the
entire campus. Professionally trained, USOC retained security personnel will utilize camera surveillance
and onsite patrols. Special consideration for security will be given to the design of athletes housing and
indoor training complexes.
The USOC will enter into an agreement with the City ofChula Vista which will provide that USOC
security personnel may detain offenders until such time as the City police can arrive on the scene.
4.4.2. Fire and Emergency Medical Service
lRitially, tke Citoy's existiRg fwe statieR at Otay Labs Reae aRe Bast "H" Skeet '.'Jill serve as the first iR
reSJ3eReeRt te fire aRe emeFgeRsy meeisal salls frem the Olj'IRJ3is TFaiRiBg CeRter. :\s eetailee iB tke
Citoy's fire StatieR Master PlaR, leRg teFIR ee'/eRige far tke site will ae pfe'/ieee a)' Re'l: fife statieRs
plar.nee far tke Salt Creel, eeyelepmeBt aRe tAe Otay RaRek Mea west eftAe resecveir.
The Cit:y's I'lrejeet gyieeliBes, aeeptee as part eftAe fire StatieR master PIIHl, target a fH'St iB wvel time to
spri.'lkleree, sJ3eGial risk site ef 5.7 minHtes ane seeeRe iR travel time ef 8.7 miButes. These gyieeliRes will
l:le met wkeR the phumee [we sabeRS Me seRsl:rYstee in the Eastem T8R'iteAes. The gyieeliBes v:iII Ret,
ke'l/ever, ae met EiyriBg tAe iRterim fleriee '...,keR primary seyeFage is previeee ay the me stageR eR Otay
Lakes Reaa. Estimatee tFa-vel time te the site frem tke Otay Lakes fwe stageR is 9 miBl:ites; estimatee
SeGeRe in travel time ta the site is 1 €i,4 miBytes.
IR ereer te mitigate reeysee Ge'/eRige levels e\H'iRg tke iRitial J3erieQ, the City's fire eepartfReRt preflesee,
iB aaEiitieR t9 sflrirlderiRg aRe asseGiatee fife seae reE{yiremeRts, tAat:
* the USOC lRaiRtaiR a "fwe erigaae" eRsite, te ae traiBee ay the City
fire DeplH'HReRt as yehmteer fwe f:1gkteFS; aR altemative te v91URteeFS
weyle ae te Rire eff Qu~' Ci~' fife f:1ghteFS te staff a miBi pYRlper as an
eRsite "fn arigaee",
* the USOC preeyre aaamaiBtaiB a miBi fife pYmper far eRsite
respeRses: aRa
* the sl'lel1s MeeieiRe/Ssieaee fasili~', 'Nkiek will ae staffee a)' ninee
Rl.edieal perseRRel, aanele Basite Rl.eeisal emergeasies YIltil ~Jlr9flriate
City 8IRaylaaee reS9\H'eeS Me a':ailalJle. :\maylaaGe 86eess will ae
a'/ailalJle aleRg tke Olj'IRpie Patk aejaseBt te tee faeility.
. ~.
/1~ 75
30
Initially. the temporax:y Eastlake Fire Station. located at 975 Lane Avenue will serve as the fIrst-in
respondent to fIre and emerwency medical calls from the Olympic Trainin~ Center. Second-resp~nse units
will be available from the City fIre station located at Otay Lakes Road and East "H" Street. City prQje~t
wuidelines for fIre service. which tariet as fIrst-in travel time to sprinklered. special risk sites of 5.7
minutes and a second-in travel time of 8.7 minutes. will be met by the existinl: stations. In addition. the
City's' fIre Station Master Plan calls for construction of new. permanent fIre facilities to be located in both
the Salt Creek development and in the Otl:\Y Ranch area west of the Otay Reservoir.
Medical emergency service will be au~ented by the Sports Medicine/Science facility
onsite. Personnel trained in emergency medical services are expected to be onsite and available 24 hours a
day. These personnel include the Sports Medicine Trainers employed by the USOC. A minimum of three
to fIve trainers are onsite during daytime operation. At least one trainer is onsite, on-call at all times. All
USOC Sports Medicine Trainers have masters degrees or are masters candidates in sports medicine; all are
required to be nationally certified in Sports Medicine, which involves CPR training and emergency medical
training beyond the paramedic level.
4.5. Schools
The Community of EastLake is served by the Chula Vista Elementary and Sweetwater High school
District. Although the entire Community, including the Olympic site, is included in a Mello-Roos
Community Facilities District which levies a special tax for school capital construction, it is not expected
that the USOC will impact the local School District. With few possible exceptions, athletes who will live
and train at the Center year-round are expected to be beyond high school age. Younger athletes living at
the Center will be attending shorter term camps and training programs, or training for short periods to
prepare for special events. Sports Training representatives are currently discussing school impacts with
both Districts.
)L!-7b'
31
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
I~
Meeting Date 11/7/93
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Reconsideration of the following request by American
Stores Inc. for 5.8 acres located at the southwest comer of Third Avenue
and "J" Street:
a) GP A-93-06: Amend General Plan from Professional and
Administrative Office to Retail Commercial
b) PCZ-93-E: Rezone from C-O (Commercial Office) and R-l
(Single Family) to C-C (Central Commercial)
Resolution Amending the Land Use Diagram of the General
Plan from Professional and Administrative Commercial to Retail
Commercial for 5.8 acres located at the southwest comer of Third Avenue
and "J" Street.
REVIEWED BY:
Ordinance Amending the zoning map or maps established by
Section 19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, rezoning the 5.8
acres 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,/l'
---:7-
,
On November 2, 1993, the City Council considered and approved the application submitted by
American Stores Inc., parent company of Lucky, to amend the General Plan Diagram and rezone
the 5.8 acres located at the southwest comer of Third Avenue and "J" Street.
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
On November 23, 1993, the City Council, after hearing testimony from residents of the 700
block of Garrett Avenue, resolved to reconsider the previously approved General Plan
amendment and rezoning, and set a public hearing for reconsideration on December 7, 1993.
Council also authorized staff to meet with residents on December 1, 1993. The meeting was
held with the project applicant and approximately 30 residents of the immediate area.
/5-/
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date
/
/~
11/7/93
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council take no action and allow previous action to stand.
DISCUSSION:
In addition to reviewing the sequence of events leading up too the December 1st, 1993 meeting
staff provided residents with copies of the proposed Precise Plan Standards recommended for
the General Plan and rezoning action for Third and "J" Street.
Staff also reviewed the analysis presented in the November 2, 1993 Agenda Statement, and the
evaluations received from the traffic and noise consultants and found no evidence to modify the
analysis and recommendation presented in the attached November 2, 1993 Agenda Statement.
However, the following paragraphs identify the major issues discussed at the December 1,
1993, meeting as well as questions raised by the City Council on November 23, 1993.
Noise
Even if the projected noise levels are within acceptable ranges according to the City
of Chula Vista Noise Ordinance, the existence of more noise than at present would
be an annoyance. (Residents' comments)
(Staff Response)
For purposes of land use planning, the City of Chula Vista uses the performance
standards in the zoning ordinance which regulate exterior noise levels. These standards
establish maximum allowable exterior noise levels for single family dwellings as 65 db
during the day and 45 db at night. The noise assessment undertaken by Hans Giroux and
Associates was done on a worst case scenario of a previously submitted site plan which
showed t4e loading areas on the west side of the store, and for the store operating 24
hours a day. Even under the worst case scenario, the performance standards for noise
were met.
As a result of the recommendations of the noise study and comments from residents and
staff, the applicant revised the site plan to put the loading bays on the east side of the
store, limit the hours of operation, require that truck traffic not occur between 10 PM
and 7 AM.,enclose the trash compactor, require that truck/trailers not be parked in the
alleys with any mechanical equipment such as refrigerator/freezer units running during
the time from 10 PM - 7 AM, exclude refuse or recycled cardboard trucks from
collecting waste materials during those times when the operation of the refuse compactor
is prohibited and the construction of a 6 foot block wall along a 20 foot setback on the
J S~ e2..
Page 3, Item //
Meeting Date 11/7/93
western site boundary for additional noise protection. All of these measures will reduce
the noise level to below significance.
According to Mr. Giroux, residents will still hear noise on occasion as a result of the
proposed project, but the mitigation as proposed will bring the noise to well within the
acceptable limit. Mr. Giroux also commented that the proposed siting of the store will
block much of the noise of cars pulling in and out and people shouting to each other.
The acoustical study was done incorrectly. Noise readings should have been taken
with the windows and doors of the residences on Garrett Street open and then the
readings would have been significant. (Residents' comments)
(Staff Response)
Performance standards based on exterior noise levels have been met. Staff will, in
response to resident concerns, attempt to take noise readings from the interiors of some
of the residences on Garrett in order to establish some baseline data for future studies.
Staff also offered to review any information which specific residents stated was available
to them indicating that the noise level was significant. At this time, no such
documentation has been received.
Traffic
The traffic study was inaccurate and incomplete. J street should have been shown
as a Class III Collector instead of a Class II Collector. Overflow traffic on Garrett
should have been analyzed, as well as Garrett being used as a short-cut to Fourth
A venue. (Residents' comments)
(Staff Response)
The City Traffic Engineer, after reviewing the work of J.H.K., the applicant's traffic
consultant, agreed that J Street should have been shown as a Class III Collector instead
of a Class II Collector. This correction will be made and it will not change the findings
of the traffic study. The City Traffic Engineer and J.H.K. both believe that overflow
traffic on Garrett will not be to a level above significance and that the use of Garrett as
a short cut to Fourth will also not be to a level of significance. The City Traffic Engineer
further stated that baseline studies could be undertaken at this time in monitor this in the
future.
/~3
P 41t ~
age , em 1<
Meeting Date 11/7/93
Emissions
Diesel emissions from specific delivery trucks will not meet standards and
cumulatively will be a significant impact. (Residents' comments)
(Staff Response)
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines state that air pollution is considered significant
when it "violates any ambient air quality standard, or contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality violation, or exposes sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations."
The applicant has estimated that there will be 4 diesel trucks delivering products to
Lucky on a daily basis. Diesel trucks do project particulate matter and carbon monoxide
into the air. This proposed project would not violate the standards established by the Air
Resources Board for air pollution. The standards have not been violated by recent
projects because of the regulations on cars, trucks and other motor vehicles.
An Environmental Impact Report is needed in order to address significant issues to
the neighborhood, including noise, emissions, and traffic. (Residents' Comments)
(Staff Response)
In making a determination that an environmental impact report is needed rather than a
negative declaration, the CEQA guidelines require consideration of the following: public
controversy alone does not require an EIR; however, violations of air and water quality
standards are presumed significant, and significant cumulative impacts require an EIR.
In any case, there must be substantial evidence of a potential significant effect to require
an EIR. In Leonoff v. Monterey County Board of Supervisors, the Court held that
"unsubstantiated opinions, concerns and suspicions about a project, though sincere and
deeply felt, do not rise to the level of substantial evidence supporting a fair argument of
significant environmental effect. Environmental decisions should be based on facts."
Site Planning: Alternatives
Were site design alternatives discussed during the evaluation of the GPA and
rezoning? (Council Question)
During the initial review of the Lucky's conceptual development proposal, the staff
recommended some modifications to the site layout in order to resolve the concerns
expressed by the residents of the area about the truck traffic and associated loading
activities along the west property line.
/Y'I
Page 5, Item JS
Meeting Date 11/7/93
The suggested alternatives included:
The building located at the northeast comer of the parcel (more in keeping with the urban
character of this segment of Third Avenue) - see alternative A.
The building located on the west side, truck traffic along the east side of the building and
a landscape buffer separating the residences to the west - see alternative B.
The building on the southeast comer of the parcel occupying the southerly adjacent
Masonic Lodge - see alternative C.
Based on the parcel configuration, desired building orientation and store operational
functions, alternative B presented the best possible scenario. However, the truck traffic
along the east side of the building as suggested in this alternative created potential
conflicts with customer parking and pedestrian traffic flow and was not recommended by
the City Traffic Engineer & traffic consultant. However, to soften the potential impact
that the truck traffic and store operational functions may create, staff suggested several
Precise Plan standards requiring service driveway to be operational between 7 AM to 10
PM no service doors along the west side of the building, loading facility oriented away
from the westerly adjacent property line and restricting the placement of the trash
enclosures, equipment and storage to be within the building. Staff will provide Council
with a more detailed site plan to show the feasibility of frontal truck access.
In addition, the City Council authorized the use of a higher wall along the west property
line to the satisfaction of the affected residence.
At the December 1, 1993 meeting, residents asked that truck parking be restricted along
the service driveway.
Staff remains committed to meeting with residents to resolve specific issues during the
Precise Plan process which will follow the zoning action. Additional Precise Plan
conditions may be imposed by the City's Design Review Committee during the next
public hearing process. Their decision is appealable to the City Planning Commission
and ultimately to the City Council, if necessary.
FISCAL IMPACT: The expansion of commercial land use will generate additional revenues
through an increase in sales tax and property tax. The land in question is currently tax exempt
(existing Church).
(f: \home\planning\lucky .113)
/'
/ ~/ J;;
(-
11+\ fi=. Q
,4~
( . \ ~
.
r--
\U ("I]
~
. ~~
~
<t
~
\-j
.pAfI.~~'~
\
i'rt\~ ~
~ .
?~~~\N"
. ~ll-,
\\t-
\fl
1-
r
h
L.4~bSC4Pe:D ~U~~ 'q
~(.~~~ly
/ /tI W~,..4...1I,.J.ta~ ~
~.J.{ . c:::o:-c.~~i'f34"~ou.~
I~-
-rrtt ra.P -A ~.,
t--=
I
~
h
.~
z
~
X
~
"
.
.
.
~R~N~
~ .
5L~"~ ~~lu.A
.bW~\~(;.~ - \
f"/,.( JcY! _c-~~c=.t=a IU-USi
-
RECEIVED
"93 NlV 23 P4:47
Tie-W\ s- A
CITY OF CHULA~r~T A
CITY CLERK'S OF FleE
COUNCIL INFORMATION
DATE:
November 23. 1993
SUBJECT: PHONE CALL FROM JACK GARDNER
Jack Gardner (co-owner of Lucky store @ 3rd Avenue & J Street) called to inform
Council that the current lease on their Lucky store runs for another 2 1/2 - 3 years and
that they have every intention of renewing.
/~,r /0
1 tE:-ffi 5 a..
L~
AMERICAN STORES PROPERTIES, INC.
REPRESENTING
:;555 KNOTT AVENUE
BUE~" PARK, CA 90620-1158
,EL (714) 739-6312
,,:,X (714) 739-7409
ACME MARKETS I JEWEL FOOD STORES I JEWEL OSCO
LUCKY STORES I OSCO DRUG I SAV.ON DRUG I STAR MARKET
November 17, 1993
MR KENNETH HAM
724 GARRETT AVENUE
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
RE: LUCKY STORE #31-257. CHULA VISTA. CA.
SWC OF 3RD A VENUE AND J STREET
Dear Mr. Ham:
I am in receipt of your November 10, 1993 letter from you and the residents on Garrett
Avenue who live directly behind the property where American Stores Properties Inc. (ASPI)
plans on developing a new Lucky market, to the Mayor of Chula Vista, wherein you have
requested a meeting to be arranged with ASPI (applicant).
At the request of the Mayor of Chula Vista and the Chula Vista City Council, I have been
asked to respond to your letter. First let me reiterate our continued willingness to not only
work with the City, but with the neighbors as well regarding this project. Ordinance No.
2577 sets out in detail a number of restrictions and limitations on the project. Nearly all of
these restrictions and limitations were placed on the project to address neighbors concerns
and preserve the tranquility of the neighborhood. Item IV #18 of the Ordinance provides for
the continuation of a zoning wall at the west property line between 6 feet and 9 feet in height
as may be specifically determined by the zoning administrator after meeting and conferring
with the westerly adjacent property owners. I assume it is this wall you wish to discuss.
Before addressing the wall I would like to address other comments in your letter which color
this project in the wrong light.
1. Regarding your statement that the City's actions were in opposition to the
consensus of residents along Garrett Avenue, you should know that we
conducted two town meetings to solicit input from the neighbors prior to
presenting the project to the City for approval. Many changes to our initial
Site Plan were made based on the residents input.
Corporate Offices
709 EAST SOUTH TEMPLE / SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84102
PO BOX 27447/ SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84127-0447
TELEPHONE (801) 539-0112 (800) 541-2863 / FAX (801) 537-7808
A SUbSIdiary of American SIOteS Company
/~// /
Mr. Kenneth Ham
November 18, 1993
Page Two
2. Though there were some residents who voiced their opposition to the project at
the Planning Commission hearing on October 13, 1993 there was no
opposition to the project at the City Council meeting on November 2, 1993. In
fact, some of the same residents who had voiced their opposition at the earlier
meeting spoke in favor of the project at the November 2, 1993 meeting.
3. Addressing your concern about increased noise and traffic, acoustical and
traffic studies were conducted and are on file with the City. Each shows that
our project would have no significant impact on the residents behind the store.
In spite of those reports, ASPI agreed to additional measures to be imposed
upon the development, including the location of certain noise generating
equipment inside the store, restricted delivery hours and an additional 20 foot
landscape barrier between the project and the residential property.
4. Regarding your statement that the development will cause a decrease in
property values and subsequent monetary loss, I want you to know that with
almost twenty years experience in real estate, I have yet to learn of a
commercial project which, of itself, has led to any decrease in property values,
nor were any instances or examples presented to the City supporting that
claim. In fact just the opposite is more likely to be true. When developers plan
residential development projects, one attractive sales tool, and always a
concern for new home owners and residential buyers moving into a new area,
is the need for a supermarket in their neighborhood. In many cases homes are
not purchased if some commercial development (generally a supermarket) is
within close proximity to the home site. I believe, and I believe the City
Council believes, that our new state of the art facility will actually have a
positive impact on the neighborhood. Also, as we mentioned at the above \
hearings, the relocation of the Lucky Market will most likely produce
additional renovation and rejuvenation to other commercial projects along 3rd
A venue, as well as our present older and outdated facility.
5. Loss of enjoyment of our property - I can not comment on this statement, as
I'm not certain what is meant by it. I'm sure the church believes it's plans to
sell and relocate to a new site are in the best interest of the First United
Methodist Church to serve the community as a whole, not just a specific group
of citizens.
As we have stated and shown all along, we will be happy to cooperate and participate in
another meeting, if necessary. However, it appears that the only issue to be addressed, as
outlined in the ordinance referenced above, is the height and texture of the wall separating
the commercial property from the residents. Since construction will not being begin until the
/5~/;<
Mr. Kenneth Ham
November 18, 1993
Page Three
church relocates to their new site, estimated to be September 1994, I think that we may be a
bit premature to begin discussions. Should you have any other questions please do not
hesitate to contact me at (714) 739-7865.
cc: Brent Agnew/City Council/Charlotte Helms/Louise Hernandez, Associate
Planning/Chris Huss/Ed LaGuardia, Grubb & Ellis/Robert A. Leiter, Planning
Director/Ken Lee, Assistant Planning Director/Bruce M. Boogaard, City
Attorney/William Tuchscher, Grubb & Ellis/Curt Ward/Dave Weigel
1117PSL.257/jIm
/~/y
~
...
Ul
0\
You recently approved the rezoning of the parcel at the comer of 3rd and J St. for the
purpose of permitting the construction of a new Lucky Supermarket. As you probably know
your actions were in opposition to the consensus of the affected residents along Garrett
Ave.
. ,
j~>.:.. ~
, QQ!d
-4-4 W
November 1 ~93
r-""T1 ~
~ C") 4IC
:;Il;~ -
v) r:=. Q
o:t>
""T1 .... -
~~
("")-J
m~.
Mayor Nader and City Council
276 4th Ave
Chula Vista, CA 91910
;
l.._.._
Dear Mr. Mayor and City Council:
::0
m
n
rn
-
<
fTI
o
We have a quiet neighborhood and the residents consist of long time owners, 30+ years in
most cases. We were vocal at the town meetings, and the planning meeting voicing our
opposition to this zoning change. Each resident voiced their respective oppositions and we
collectively agreed with each other.
Several of the concerns regarding the rezoning were not addressed and/or mitigated by the ~
applicant. .L
~ll=r
o
;.:
~
"'Q
Z
,:,
~"l
~~
o ",!;J\
V ~\
Z:"f
IIJ \~
f~
--
f
. The increased noise.
. The increased traffic.
. The decrease in property values and subsequent monetary loss.
. The loss of enjoyment of our property.
We don't want to file suit to enforce our rights, however if some agreement cannot be
reached it will be our only option.
We request that you contact the applicant on our behalves and arrange a meeting to
mediate these and other infringements.
Please inform us of your intentions within the next 10 days.
Sincerely,
~~
-;s
~t..t~
M/l... Q>.. h?.M... C. l ~
~~~~
~/2t:; O'-:J~~/~'tA-k
~/ll/~
,'fit. (lliLj ~ jJ. ~
:t"~7"-"t3.~ ~ D
fr0r1Ce5 JQ.blon5k~ ~~~..
~~ ~~~~.~
------
~\;.~,: .t)ipl
tt'~"';~:"'~""~"""f~~
......~... 1: ~'1.. """~.'..
._~,;-,~"":_""'_l_' ,"-,.~_
I.:; :,\1]. ,!If.
',.." ....
~" ,.0- '.'. ....., "
"; ",...,.;W",.-,__. ~.. __ ""-""oIilH', .
t:
......c
~""{~~;;~>:,;i"<t ',',;' ''i
~;\>&~:rt:.i-...~_ ' '
""'. ,'!Ii.
~.,',..,"J.
_ir~:~,::~,.:,~"". ~ '
'f~
"irlti';",~
".
..,,\:'(!2
~ /;
,."",.
,-~:'I',:'i?;.,~~
.-, .-,./"
t;' ,
~,,',, ,~"
.'.JJ:'j(~
...... '.,~~
'.t ., .. ~Wz,;a
W' ,
'.- .':'i~t./.;", ",'. , ,':4'_;:-'~
. . ~<' ....(...~ . ''''''''",' ,..... .
'.".""'-
...'10;,.'.......;-,....:.
I'f",
~,""
.~
. ~, .."!~\~~..
.~-','<:~, ",', ">:!~~:":;~
~-.:./.;;.,-, ::~""""\fat
;.!~",;~
L?'iI
kA /J4~
~~
~ ~ /S"/~
~2-
,C)
{t. /I.
, (2.1/
l~,'" ',',,'""',";~"""';'''''''~
~lt~~~>'::'" ',t:~';7c~:~':;Z:2::~___
prt _
~;~,,~ ", " ';kf;;f:,1,',,~;';jf
Mayor Nader and City Council
276 4th Ave
Chuta Vista, CA 91910
V/l0~J
November 11, 1993
Dear Mr. Mayor and City Council:
We request that the time period of thirty days allowed prior to the new zoning and the
amendments to the general plan becoming law be extended. Currently these changes
affecting the parcel at the corner of 3rd and J street will become law 30 days after
November 9, 1993.
We request this extension so that we can meet with the parties involved with the proposed
Lucky store to mediate the issues cited in our letter of 11-10-93.
If you could allow us 90 days to try and resolve these matters we feel that unnecessary
legal expense can be avoided.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
GIS;. reentt A Av:;rve r ~~ts.
~~ 1~,/ ~~IIA--~
'12 z-/:! S9
~c..J.._.
7 0 cr ~II\AtA! L 77 ~ c) L.
~J~//'
.-
~,\~ \ ',,,-.
RECEIVED
"93 lIe -7 P2 :30
CITY OF CHULA VISl A
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
r:~~~
l~~ J '7
; BY MAIL
NO. MAILED
-55!~1 ~
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 Chula Vista, California, for the purpose of reconsidering a previously approved
application to change the General Plan designation and zoning of a 5.8 acre parcel located at the
southwest comer of Third Avenue and "J" Street. The application, submitted by American
Stores Properties, Inc., requests the following changes:
1. Existing General Plan designation from Professional and Administrative to Retail
2. Current zoning of the easterly 300 ft. of the parcel* from Office Commercial (C-O) to
Central Commercial (C-C)
3. Current zoning of the westerly 325 ft. of the parcel* from Single Family Residential
(R-1) to Central Commercial (C-C)
*See Zoning Map
An Initial Study, IS-93-20, of possible significant environmental impacts has been conducted by
the Environmental Review Coordinator. A finding of no significant environmental impact has
been recommended to the City Council and is on file, along with the Initial Study, in the
Planning Department.
Copies of the proposed amendment are on file in the office of the Planning Department. Any
petitions to be submitted to the City Council must be received in the City Clerk's office no later
than noon of the hearing date.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this amendment 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 HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday,
December 7, 1993, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth
Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: November 24, 1993
CASE NO. GPA-93-03, PCZ-93-E
Beverly Authelet
City Clerk
)/5'- / 7
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I ~
Meeting Date 12/7/93
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing on Adoption of the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Fee
Ordinance 2..s-3" :2.. Establishing the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped
Flows Development Impact Fee (DIP) to Pay for Sewer Improvements within
the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin
SUBMITfED BY: Director o[Public wor~ ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ ~~\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-xJ
On October 20, 1992, the City established the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Development Impact Fee of
$184 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDD), as recommended in the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin
Improvement and Financing Plan prepared by Wil1dan Associates. A subsequent amendment to that
plan entitled "Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement and Financing Plan Amendment
Incorporating Pumped Flows", provides for the pumping of flows generated by the EastLake and Salt
Creek Ranch Developments within the Salt Creek Basin, and EastLake Development within the Poggi
Canyon Basin into the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin. Based on this plan and as updated by staff,
a fee of $560 per pumped EDU should be established.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council conduct subject public hearing and place the Ordinance
establishing the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Development Impact Fee on the first reading.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement and Financing Plan for the gravity flow basin was
prepared by Wil1dan Associates on July 31, 1992. This report included an estimate of sewage flows,
recommended the type, size and location of improvements, and established a fee for gravity flows
tributary to the Telegraph Canyon Basin. Based on the report's recommendations, the City Council
established a Development Impact Fee of $184 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit on October 20, 1992.
At the time that the gravity basin plan was being prepared, staff recognized that Eastlake Development
would temporarily pump flows from portions of EastLake Greens located in the Salt Creek and Poggi
Canyon Basins into the Telegraph Canyon Basin. These flows were not included in the gravity basin
plan because it was anticipated that most of them would be re-routed to the new Salt Creek Trunk
Sewer within approximately two years. However, due to the uncertainty of the type and construction
schedule of downstream facilities, it now appears that the pumped flows may remain in the Telegraph
Canyon Basin for several years. These flows therefore need to be included in the design capacity of
F:IHOME\ENGINEER\SEWER\TCPUMPFE.A13
)& -j
Page 2, Item I?
Meeting Date 12/7/93
Telegraph Canyon sewer line. According to the Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer Analysis report
prepared by Wilson Engineering (12/16/92), the Salt Creek Basin flows will be eventually conveyed to
either the future Otay Valley Water Reclamation plant, the existing Metro trunk sewer, or the City of
San Diego's Otay Valley Trunk Sewer/Prison Line. The properties anticipated to convey flows to the
Salt Creek Interceptor include:
1) Salt Creek Ranch
2) EastLake (Business Center, Greens, Woods, Vistas, Trails and Olympic Training Center)
3) Otay Ranch (Otay River Valley, Proctor Valley, and San Ysidro Parcels)
4) Hidden Valley Estates
City Council approved an amendment to the Telegraph Canyon Gravity Basin Plan to include the
pumped flows generated by EastLake and Salt Creek Ranch Developments within the Salt Creek Basin,
and EastLake Development within the Poggi Canyon Basin (Pumped Flows Report). This report was
completed by Willdan Associates on June 9, 1993.
According to the Pumped Flows Report, sewage from a total of 7,800 EDUs will temporarily need to
be pumped into the Telegraph Canyon Basin. This includes 3,592 single family and 3,137 multiple
family dwelling units (including apartments and condominiums), the Olympic Training Center, 29.2
acres of commercial use, six schools, 75.1 acres of parks, 15.8 acres of Community Purpose Facilities
and a reservoir site.
The incorporation of the pumped flows in the plan results in an additional 25,280 feet of parallel or
replacement sewer lines being required. The construction cost will increase from an estimated
$1,740,290 for only the gravity flow basin to $5,890,246 for the gravity basin plus pumped flows. The
higher cost of upgrading the sewer to serve pumped flows is due to the fact that the original design for
the Telegraph Canyon Trunk sewer included capacity for anticipated future gravity basin flows but not
pumped flows (Report on Collection, Treatment and Disposal of Sewage and Industrial Waste,
Engineering Science 1959).
The pumped flows report analyzed two fee conditions for distributing the cost of improvements between
the gravity and pumped flow basins. Both fee conditions assumed that the sewer segments which needed
improvements only if pumped flows were added would be paid entirely by the pumped flow
developments. Fee condition I allocated the remaining costs based on the proportion of maximum
pumped flows to maximum total flows (gravity plus pumped) to the pumped flow developments. Fee
condition II allocated to the pumped flow developments the difference in cost between the total facilities
and the facilities needed to serve the gravity basin flows only. The fees calculated for the pumped flow
developments were $615 per EDU for Condition I, and $553 for Condition II. The fees for the gravity
flow basin would be reduced to $135 per EDU under Condition I, and would remain at $184 per EDU
under Condition II.
F: \HOME\ENGINEER\SEWER\ TCPUMPFE.AI3
1~~:2..
Page 3, Item / ~
Meeting Date 12/7/93
In the final report, the number of EDU's used for assessment of the capacity fee was reduced from
7,800 to 7,508 to account for the building permits already issued. However, after the report was
completed, City staff updated that number from 7,508 to 7,416 based on a field investigation and current
information from the Building and Housing Department. Consequently, the fees were revised to $622
for Fee Condition I, and $560 for Fee Condition II. City staff recommends the adoption of the $560
per EDU fee obtained by condition II. These flows are temporary and the pumped fee is relatively high.
It would seem most reasonable to require the pumped flow developments to pay only for the additional
facilities required to provide for these flows. Under this option, the fee for gravity basin developments
would not need to be modified.
Since the developments being pumped to the Telegraph Canyon Basin will discharge to the Salt Creek
and Poggi Canyon Basins when gravity sewerage facilities become available, developers could be
required to pay fees to construct facilities in both basins. The requirement for payment of fees will
depend on the available sewerage facilities at the time building permits are issued.
If gravity sewer service becomes available in the Salt Creek and/or the Poggi Canyon Basins prior to
construction of the full Telegraph Canyon improvements, the fee will be separately revised for each
basin to cover only the costs incurred prior to diversion of pumped flows to the gravity basins. These
costs should include expenses incurred for Amended Plan preparation, sewage flow monitoring, design
and construction and all related City staff costs (including flow monitoring, flow modeling, engineering
design and review).
City will refund the existing property owners the difference between the fees paid and the revised fee.
Refunds will be calculated on a per EDU basis.
If flow monitoring indicates that the full Facilities must be constructed before gravity sewer service
becomes available in the Salt Creek and/or the Poggi Canyon Basins, developers will be responsible for
paying the full Fee. Pumped flows will be rerouted to the Salt Creek and/or Poggi Canyon Basins when
the downstream facilities are completed.
We provided EastLake and Baldwin with information on the report preparation at various stages. The
information on projected development and land uses was confirmed by them, and their comments were
addressed in the final report.
A public meeting was held on September 21, 1993 to discuss the final report and staff recommendations
for establishing the fee and was attended by representatives of EastLake Development and the Baldwin
Co.. Bruce Sloan, of EastLake Development, requested that the revenues from the gravity basin DIF
and the pumped basin DIF be deposited in different accounts to allow an easier transfer of funds to
the Salt Creek Trunk fund if required. Staff agrees with this idea and proposes to set up a new account
for this purpose. Mark Burbrink of Wilson Engineering and Jeff Warmoth of The Baldwin Co.
requested that the City perform flow simulations and monitoring more frequently than yearly to obtain
a more accurate assessment of upgrading requirements. Engineering Staff has software provided by
the consultant and proposes to update the computer models as individual developments occur. Staff will
F: \HOME\ENGINEER \AGENDA \ TCPUMPFE.A13
/t -;X
Page 4, Item / i:,
Meeting Date 12/7/93
then schedule periodic flow metering at strategic locations in the basin to detect sewer capacity
deficiencies which will trigger the sewer improvements.
The pumped flows report recommends replacing the sewers along J Street downstream of the intersection
of Hilltop Drive and J Street instead of paralleling the existing facilities. This is mainly due to the
existence of numerous underground utilities, including an existing parallel sewer. The developers
inquired about the possibility of combining sewer rehabilitation funds (from Fund 226) with DIF funds
for construction in that area.
Projects are included in the Sewer Rehabilitation Program based on the results of sewer TV inspections.
These inspections are performed in phases according to the age of the lines. Approximately 55 % of the
existing parallel sewers on J Street were constructed in the early 1970's. These lines are too new to
require extensive rehabilitation and will not be televised in the near future. The other sewer segments
were built in two phases, one in 1959 and the other in 1964. These segments will be televised at the
time the upgrades are needed to assess the need for rehabilitation. If it is found that rehabilitation work
is needed, the estimated cost associated with that rehabilitation could be contributed by the City to
partially offset the replacement cost.
Environmental review of this project is not necessary at this time. Such review will be performed later,
prior to project construction. At that time, an Initial Study Application will need to be filed with the
City of Chula Vista Planning Department in accordance with CEQA requirements.
City staff prepared the enclosed map (Exhibit 2) showing the developments subject to pumping and the
basin boundaries which will be used for fee assessment purposes. A portion of the boundary line along
the east side of the basin was based on tentative maps and the natural ridge line and will be amended
in the future as additional development information becomes available.
FISCAL IMPACT: Passage of this ordinance will result in revenues of approximately $4,149,956, plus
increases due to an annual adjustment for inflation. These revenues plus the $1,740,290 obtained from
the gravity basin developments would be specifically used for design and construction of sewer
improvements and flow monitoring in the Telegraph Canyon Basin.
RM: ST -002
Exhibits
Revised Fee Calculation
F:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA \ TCPUMPFE.A13
) I, - L/
EXHIBIT 1
Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement and Financing
Plan Amendment Incorporating Pumped Flows
Maximum number of EOU's estimated in the basin = 7,800
EOU's available for assessment of Capacity fee = 7,800 - EOU's permitted in the basin
Number of units built or building permits issued as of September 1993
Eastlake Greens
Subdivision Units Edu/Equiv # of EDUs
Unit 17 136 0.75 102
Unit 5 14 1.00 14
Unit 11 38 1.00 38
Unit 8 26 1.00 26
Unit 14 2 1.00 2
Sub Total = 182
Other Existing EDU's
Estimated EOUs from Eastlake High School
Estimated EOUs from Eastlake Golf Club House =
Sub Total =
192
10
202
Total existing/permitted EO Us in the basin = 384
EDU's available for assessment of Capacity fee = 7,800 - 384 = 7,416
Revised Fee Calculation
Condition 1: $4,614,499
(7,800-384)
$622.24 per EOU
Condition 2: $4,149,956
(7,800-384)
$559.59 per EOU use $560.00 per EOU
Recommended
A:\FEERECAL.XLS
R. Miranda 10/12/93
Pagel /t:, ~/ j;/'-b
ORDINANCE NO. .257r c:;..
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
ESTABLISHING THE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER PUMPED FLOWS
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR SEWER IMPROVEMENTS
WITHIN THE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER BASIN AS A CONDITION
OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE
TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER PUMPED FLOWS BASIN
WHEREAS, the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Basin ("Pumped Flows Basin") is that area of
land within the City of Chula Vista from which wastewater will be collected and pumped into the Telegraph Canyon
Sewer Basin (Gravity Basin), which area is shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "2"; and,
WHEREAS, on February 25, 1992 the City Council passed Resolution No. 16519 approving the First
Amendment to the Telegraph Canyon Basin Sewer Monitoring and Gravity Basin Usage Agreement to provide for
the preparation of the "Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement and Financing Plan Amendment Incorporating
Pumped Flows" (Amended Plan). Said Amended Plan was to: (1) include an estimate of ultimate sewer flows
anticipated from the Pumped Flows Basin; (2) recommend improvements to handle the combined incremental
increases of sewage flow anticipated from the Pumped Flows Basin and from the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin
("Gravity Basin"); and (3) establish a fee payable by all dwelling units discharging within the Pumped Flows Basin
and benefiting from trunk sewer improvements; and,
WHEREAS, on February 25,1992 the City Council passed Resolution No. 16518 approving an amendment
to the agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Willdan Associates for preparation of said Amended Plan;
and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to said agreement, Willdan Associates have prepared said Amended Plan dated June
9, 1993; and,
WHEREAS, the Amended Plan has determined that new development within the Pumped Flows Basin will
create adverse impacts on the City's existing sewer facilities (to wit, that the sewage expected to be generated from
new development within the Pumped Flows Basin will exceed the capacity of the current sewer system to handle
said additional sewage). These impacts must be mitigated by the fmancing and construction of certain sewer
facilities identified in this ordinance; and,
WHEREAS, sewer improvements and a fee to be levied on new development in the Pumped Flows Basin
have been justified in the Amended Plan; and,
WHEREAS, developers of land within the City should be required to mitigate the burden created by
development through the construction or improvement of sewer facilities within the boundaries of the development,
the construction or improvement of sewer facilities outside the boundaries of the development which are needed to
provide service to the development in accordance with City standards and the payment of a fee to fmance a
development's portion of the total cost of the public facilities; and,
WHEREAS, all development within the City contributes to the cumulative burden on various sewer
facilities in direct relationship to the amount of population generated by the development or the gross acreage of
the commercial or industrial land in the development; and,
WHEREAS, on September 21, 1993 a public meeting was held with the developers of developments located
within the Pumped Flows Basin to discuss the fmal Amended Report and City Staff recommendations for
establishing the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Basin Development Impact Fee; and,
/k-7
Ordinance No.
Page 2
WHEREAS, on December 7, 1993 a Public Hearing was conducted before the City Council to provide
an opportunity for interested persons to be heard on the approval of the Amended Plan and establishment of the
Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Fee; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council determined, based upon the evidence presented at the Public Hearing,
including, but not limited to, the Amended Plan and the various reports and other information received by the City
Council in the course of its business, that imposition of the sewer facilities development impact fee on all
developments within the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Basin in the City of Chula Vista for which
building permits have not yet been issued is necessary in order to protect the public safety and welfare and to ensure
effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amount of the fee levied by this ordinance does not
exceed the estimated cost of providing the public facilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION I.
Facilities.
The facilities which are the subject matter of the fee herein established are fully described in the
Amended Plan at page 24 thereof, and the locations at which they will be constructed are more
fully described on Plates 1 through 14 under the section thereof entitled "Improvement Locations" ,
all of which facilities may be modified by the City Council from time to time by resolution
("Facilities"). The City Council may modify or amend the list of projects herein considered to
be part of the Facilities by written resolution in order to maintain compliance with the City's
Capital Improvement Program or to reflect changes in land development and estimated and actual
wastewater flow.
SECTION II.
Territory to Which Fee Is Applicable.
The area of the City of Chula Vista to which the Fee herein established shall be applicable shall
be to the East of the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin, within the Salt Creek, Otay Lakes and Poggi
Canyon Basins, and from which the generated sewage will be pumped into the Gravity Basin. The
Pumped Flows Basin is defined as that territory shown on a map on file in the Office of the City
Engineer entitled "Developments Subject to Pumping" and dated June 23, 1993, a copy of which
is attached as Exhibit "2" ("Territory").
SECTION III. Establishment of Fee.
A development impact fee ("Fee"), to be expressed on a per Equivalent Dwelling Unit ("EDU")
basis, and payable prior to the issuance of a building permit for a development project within the
Territory, is hereby established.
SECTION IV. Determination of Equivalent Development Units.
Each single family detached dwelling or single family attached dwelling shall be considered one
EDU for purposes of this Fee. Each unit within a multi-family dwelling shall be considered. 75
EDU. Every other commercial, industrial, non-profit, public or quasi-public, or other usage shall
be charged at a rate calculated in accordance with the method for estimating EDUs set forth in
the Master Fee Schedule for the purpose of estimated Sewer Capacity Charges currently located
/t-~
Ordinance No.
Page 3
in Chapter XII ("Engineering - Sewer), Section A.3. or successor thereto, as same may from time
to time be modified by the City Council.
SECTION V.
Time to Determine Amount Due; Advance Payment Prohibited
The Fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance and shall
be the amount as indicated at that time and not when the tentative map or fmal map was granted
or applied for, or when the building permit plan check was conducted, or when application was
made for the building permit.
SECTION VI. Purpose and Use of Fee.
The purpose of the Fee is to pay for the planning (including preparation of the Amended Plan),
design, construction, repair, maintenance, and/or financing (including the cost of interest and other
financing costs as appropriate) of the Facilities, or reimbursement to the City or other third parties
for advancing costs actually incurred for planning, designing, constructing, or financing the
Facilities, including those facilities appurtenant to the Salt Creek Interceptor as provided in Section
IX of this ordinance. Any use of the Fee shall receive the advance consent of the City Council
and be used in a manner consistent with the purpose of the Fee.
SECTION VII. Amount of Fee.
The initial amount of the Fee shall be $560 per EDU. The City Council shall annually review the
amount of the Fee. The City Council may adjust the amount of this Fee as necessary to reflect
changes in the costs of the Facilities as may be reflected by such index as the Council deems
appropriate, such as the Engineering-News Record Construction Index, or such other basis; or
changes in the type, size, location or cost of the Facilities to be fmanced by the Fee, changes in
land use on approved tentative maps or Specific Plan Amendments, and upon other sound
engineering, financing and planning information. Adjustments to the above Fee may be made by
resolution amending the Master Fee Schedule.
SECTION VIII. Authority for Accounting and Expenditures
The proceeds collected from the imposition of the Fee shall be deposited into a public facility
fmancing fund ("Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Pumped Flows Development Impact Fee Fund",
or alternatively herein "Fund") which is hereby created and shall be expended only for the
purposes set forth in this ordinance.
The Director of Finance is authorized to establish various accounts within the Fund for the
Facilities identified in this ordinance and to periodically make expenditures from the Fund for the
purposes set forth herein in accordance with the facilities phasing plan or capital improvement plan
adopted by the City Council.
SECTION IX. Revision and Refund of Fees
If gravity sewer service becomes available in the Salt Creek and/or the Poggi Canyon Basins
prior to construction of the full Facilities, the Fee will be separately revised for each basin
/~ -7
Ordinance No.
Page 4
to cover only the costs incurred prior to diversion of pumped flows to each gravity basin.
These costs should include expenses incurred for Amended Plan preparation, sewage flow
monitoring, design and construction and all related City staff costs (including flow
monitoring, flow modeling, engineering design and review).
City will refund the existing property owners the difference between the fees paid and the
revised fee. Refunds will be calculated on a per EDD basis.
If flow monitoring indicates that the full Facilities must be built before gravity sewer service
becomes available in the Salt Creek and/or the Poggi Canyon Basins, developers will be
responsible for paying the full Fee. Pumped flows will be rerouted to the Salt Creek and/or
Poggi Canyon Basins when the downstream facilities are completed.
SECTION X.
Findings.
The City Council fmds that collection of the Fees established by this ordinance at the time of
the building permit is necessary to ensure that funds will be available for the construction of
facilities concurrent with the need for these facilities and to ensure certainty in the capital
facilities budgeting for growth impacted public facilities.
SECTION XI. Fee Additional to other Fees and Charges.
The Fee established by this section is in addition to the requirements imposed by other City
laws, policies or regulations relating to the construction or the financing of the construction
of public improvements within subdivisions or developments.
SECTION XII. Mandatory Oversizing of Facility; Duty to Tender Reimbursement Offer.
Whenever a developer of a development project is required as a condition of approval of a
development permit to cause a portion of the sewer system which is the subject matter of a
Facilities enhancement planned for improvement under the Basin Plan (Work for the removal
of a Critical Sewage Constriction) to be enlarged to accommodate the sewage flow created
by the development, the City may require the developer to install the Facilities according to
design specifications approved by the City, that being with the supplemental size or capacity
in order to accommodate estimated ultimate flow as indicated in the Basin Plan and
subsequent amendments. If such a requirement is imposed, the City shall offer to reimburse
the developer from the Fund either in cash or over time as Fees are collected, at the option
of the City, for costs incurred by the developer for the design and construction of the Facility
not to exceed the estimated cost of that particular Facility as included in the calculation and
updating of the Fee. The City may update the Fee calculation as City deems appropriate prior
to making such offer. This duty to offer reimbursement shall be independent of the
developer's obligation to pay the Fee.
SECTION XIII. Voluntary Construction of a Portion of the Facilities; Duty of City to Tender Reimbursement
Offer.
If a developer proposes to design and construct a portion of the Facilities in conjunction with
the prosecution of a development project within the Territory, or is required by Section 11
"Mandatory Oversizing" to design and construct a portion of the Facilities described in the
/~ -It}
Ordinance No.
Page 5
Amended Plan ("Work"), the City shall offer to reimburse the developer from the Fund either
at the time the expenditures are incurred or over time as Fees are collected, at the option of
the City, for costs incurred by the developer for the design and construction of the Facility
not to exceed the estimated cost of that particular Facility as included in the calculation and
updating of the Fee.
SECTION XIV. Procedure for Entitlement to Reimbursement Offer.
The City's duty to extend a reimbursement offer to a developer pursuant to Section 12 or 13
above shall be conditioned on the developer complying with the terms and conditions of this
section:
a. Written authorization shall be requested by the developer from the City and issued by the
City Council by written resolution before developer may incur any costs eligible for
reimbursement relating to the Work.
b. The request for authorization shall contain the following information, and such other
information as may from time to time be requested by the City:
(1) Detailed descriptions of the Work with the preliminary cost estimate.
c. If the Council grants authorization, it shall be by written agreement with the Developer,
and on the following conditions among such other conditions as the Council may from
time to time impose:
(1) Developer shall prepare all plans and specifications and submit same to the City for
approval;
(2) Developer shall secure and dedicate any right-of-way required for the Work;
(3) Developer shall secure all required permits and environmental clearances necessary
for construction of the project;
(4) Developer shall provide performance bonds in a form and amount, and with a surety
satisfactory to the City;
(5) Developer shall pay all City fees and costs.
(6) The City shall be held harmless and indemnified, and upon demand by the City,
defended by the developer for any of the costs and liabilities associated with the
construction of the project.
(7) The developer shall advance all necessary funds to design and construct the project.
(8) The developer shall secure at least three (3) qualified bids for work to be done. The
construction contract shall be granted to the lowest qualified bidder. Any claims for
additional payment for extra work or charges during construction shall be justified
and shall be documented to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
(9) The developer shall provide a detailed cost estimate which itemizes those costs of the
construction attributable to the Work. The estimate is preliminary and subject to
/ ~ ,- //
Ordinance No.
Page 6
final determination by the Director of Public Works upon completion of the Public
Facility Project.
(10) The agreement may provide that upon determination of satisfactory
incremental completion of a Facility, as approved and certified by the
Director of Public Works, the City may pay the developer progress
payments in an amount not to exceed 75 percent of the estimated cost of the
construction completed to the time of the progress payment but shall provide
in such case for the retention of 25 % of such costs until issuance by the
City of a Notice of Completion.
(11) The agreement may provide that any funds owed to the developer as
reimbursements may be applied to the developer's obligations to pay the Fee
for building permits to be applied for in the future.
(12) When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the City, the
developer shall submit verification of payments made for the construction
of the project to the City. The Director of Public Works shall make the
final determination on expenditures which are eligible for reimbursement.
(13) After fmal determination of expenditures eligible for reimbursement has
been made by the Public Works Director, the parties may agree to offset the
developer's duty to pay Fees required by this ordinance against the City's
duty to reimburse the developer.
(14) If, after offset if any, funds are due the developer under this section, the
City shall reimburse the developer from the Fund either at the time the
expenditures are incurred or over time as Fees are collected, at the option
of the City, for eligible costs incurred by the developer for the design and
construction of the Facility not to exceed the estimated cost of that
particular Facility as included in the calculation and updating of the Fee; or
the developer may waive reimbursement and use the amount due them as
credit against future Development Impact Fee obligations.
SECTION XV. Procedure for Fee Modification
Any developer who, because of the nature or type of uses proposed for a development
project, contends that application of the Fee imposed by this ordinance is unconstitutional or
unrelated to mitigation of the burdens of the development, may apply to the City Council for
a modification of the Fee and the manner in which it is calculated. The application shall be
made in writing and filed with the City Clerk not later than ten (10) days after notice is given
of the public hearing on the development permit application for the project, or if no
development permit is required, at the time of the filing of the building permit application.
The application shall state in detail the factual basis for the claim of modification, and shall
provide an engineering and accounting report showing the overall impact on the DIF and the
ability of the City to complete construction of the Facilities by making the modification
requested by the applicant. The City Council shall make reasonable efforts to consider the
application within sixty (60) days after its filing. The decision of the City Council shall be
fmal. The procedure provided by this section is additional to any other procedure authorized
by law for protection or challenging the Fee imposed by this ordinance.
/i, --/02,
Ordinance No.
Page 7
SECTION XVI. Fee Applicable to Public Agencies
Development projects by public agencies, including schools, shall not be exempt from the
provisions of the Fee.
SECTION XVII.
Assessment District.
If any assessment or special taxing district is established to design, construct and pay for any
or all of the Facilities ("Work Alternatively Financed"), the owner or developer of a project
may apply to the City Council for reimbursement from the Fund in an amount equal to that
portion of the cost included in the calculation of the Fee attributable to the Work Alternatively
Financed. In this regard, the amount of the reimbursement shall be based on the costs
included in the Basin Plan, as amended from time to time, and therefore, will not include any
portion of the financing costs associated with the formation of the assessment or other special
taxing district.
SECTION XVIII. Expiration of this Ordinance.
This ordinance shall be of no further force and effect when the City Council determines that
the amount of Fees which have been collected reaches an amount equal to the cost of the
Facilities.
SECTION XIX. Time Limit for Judicial Action.
Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this ordinance
shall be brought within the time period as established by Government Code Section 54995
after the effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION XX. CEQA Findings for Statutory Exemption.
The City Council does hereby find that the Fee herein imposed is for the purpose of obtaining
funds for capital projects necessary to maintain service within existing service areas. The
Council fmds that the proposed Facilities are in existing rights of way parallel to or replacing
existing sewer lines. Therefore, the City finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is
statutorily exempt under the provisions of Public Resources Code Section 21080 (b) (8) and
CEQA Guidelines Section 15273.
SECTION XXI. Other Not Previously Defined Terms.
For the purposes of this ordinance, the following words or phrases shall be construed as
defined in this Section, unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is intended.
(a) "Building Permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the Uniform
Building Code as adopted by reference by this City.
(b) "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development.
/t --I J
Ordinance No.
Page 8
(c) "Development Permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or approval for a
development project issued under any zoning or subdivision ordinance of the City.
(d) "Development Project" or "Development" means any activity described in Section 65927
and 65928 of the State Government Code.
(e) "Single Family Attached Dwelling" means a single family dwelling attached to another
single family dwelling; each on their own lot.
SECTION XXII. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall become effective sixty (60) days after its s
Presented by
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works
/
/~-/,//I /{; --/7
---
tI-J;i /> I /:{,
Residents of The Vintage at EastLake Greens
RECEIVED
"93 IE -7 P3 :39
Chula Vista City Council
Chula Vista City Clerk's Office
Chula Vista, CA 91910
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
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 considering and application for a General Plan
Amendment proposed by the EastLake Development Company for the EastLake Greens
community, case no. GPA-93-04 & GPA-92-03 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 38 acres increase of high residential (18-27 dwelling
units per acre) which increases total dwellings allowed on the 235 acres from 1364 to
1962 + * for an increase of 598 + * units. 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. Further, the decrease of circulation streets from 23 acres to
19 will help ensure traffic congestion in the area. Homeowners in this community invested
in their homes under the specifications of the existing general plan and, unless equitable
compensation is offered, seek termination of the proposed change.
*Note that the High Rasidential increase is left ominously vague by the dascription"18-27 + dwelling units per acre."
Name
Signature
Address
/
)IJ .)~
Name
Signature
Address
/;;1 -/ (p
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY TIlE CHULA VISfA CfIY COUNCIL
CHUU VISfA, CAUFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL will hold a public
hearing to consider the following:
Consideration of an ordinance establishing the Telegraph Canyon Sewer
Pumped Flows Development Impact Fee to pay for sewer improvements
within the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin as a condition to issuance of
building permits for construction in the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped
Flows Basin. The Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Basin is that area
of land within the City of Chula Vista from which wastewater will be
collected and pumped into the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this matter 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 Clerk's Office at or prior to the
public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday, December
7th, 1993 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth
Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: November 22, 1993
Beverly A. Authelet
City Clerk
/6, /2C)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL will hold
a public hearing to consider the following:
Considering ordinance establishing Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows
Development Impact Fee to pay for sewer improvements within the Telegraph
Canyon Sewer Basin.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this matter 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 Clerk's Office at or prior to the
public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday,
December 7, 1993, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276
Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: November 19, 1993
Beverly A. Authelet
City Clerk
) /:;J .2 /
Consideration of an ordinance esablishhing the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows
Dvelopment Impact Fee to pay for sewer improvements within the Telegraph Canyon Sewer
Basin as a condition of issuance of building permits for construction in the Telegraph Canuon
Sewer Pumped Flows Basin. The Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Basin is that area
of land within the City of Chula Vista from which wastewater will be collected and pumped into
the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin.
~ ~ ~"2--.
~~"\,,,\~v,- - ~ D~~
Jf; /c2A
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM
/7
Meeting Date 12/07/93
ITEM TITLE: Resolution / 7.3;;' ? Endorsing the City's Application to the
Department of Justice (DOJ) for a Grant from the DOJ's Police Hiring
Supplement Program to Fund One-Half of the Cost of the City's Proposed
Otay Copps Program.
SUBMITTED BY: Chief of Police ~\~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager
(4/5th's Vote: Yes_ No_X",)
The DOl's Police Hiring Supplement Program makes available a total of $150 million to
underwrite innovative strategies for preventing and controlling crime. The Police Department
developed the proposed Otay Area Community Oriented Policing and Problem Solving (Otay
Copps) Program with the assistance of the Chula Vista Library, the Department of Building and
Housing, the Chula Vista Human Services Council and South Bay Community Services. If the
proposal is selected for funding, the Police Department will develop a multi-disciplinary,
community-oriented policing and problem solving team.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the proposed Resolution endorsing the City's application
for funding under the Police Hiring Supplement Program.
In early September, the DOJ issued the Police Hiring Supplement Program. This program will
make direct grants to law enforcement agencies to hire additional sworn law enforcement officers
as part of an overall strategy to address crime and related problems through community policing.
Specifically, the Police Hiring Supplement Program required applicants to propose non-
traditional, community-based partnerships in response to the unique needs of their jurisdiction.
Community oriented policing and problem solving prevents and solves crime by creating
partnerships between police officers and the residents on their assigned beat.
A total of $150 million is available for funding these partnerships; $75 million for jurisdictions
serving populations of less than 150,000 and $75 million for jurisdictions serving populations
in excess of 150,000. These funds may be used only to pay 50% of salaries and fringe benefits,
specifically excluding overtime, of newly sworn officers. The City is responsible for all other
costs associated with the 3.0 additional Peace Officer positions (i.e., safety equipment, motor
vehicle operations and office supplies). The grant is for a period of three years and, if the
application is authorized approved, would supplement expenditures for sworn police officer
positions in FY 1994-95, FY 1995-96 and FY 1996-97. Under the grants guidelines, the
deployment of the newly hired officers funded under the Police Hiring Supplement Program and
the selection of officers to implement the proposed Otay Copps Program are at the discretion
of the City of Chula Vista. The federal government requires that Federal funds made available
/ 7' I
Page 2, Item J 7
Meeting Date 12/07/93
under this the grant application will not be used to supplant state or local funds, but will be used
to increase the amount of State or local funds that would be available for law enforcement
purposes in the absence of Federal funds.
The goals of the Police Hiring Supplement Program are to:
1. Increase the number of sworn law enforcement officers serving areas where they are
needed most.
2. Improve the long-term ability of law enforcement agencies to engage in community
policing by deploying additional sworn law enforcement officers.
3. Improve public safety through innovative crime prevention including community policing.
4. Hire additional law enforcement officers to increase sworn officer deployment and
expand community policing designed to prevent crime, promote problem solving and
enhance public safety.
5. Rehire law enforcement officers who have been laid off as a result of budget reductions.
The Police Department developed the concept articulated below with assistance from City staff
in the Library and Department of Building and Housing. The Otay Copps program reflects a
geographically focused, multi-disciplinary team designed that will partner with the community
to identify opportunities to prevent crime before it occurs and to enhance the effectiveness of law
enforcement efforts already in-place.
The criteria used to evaluate applications will include the following:
1. Public Safety Need 40%
2. Strategy 30%
3. Implementation Plan 10%
4. Continuation and Retention Plan (10%)
5. Additional Resource Commitments (10%)
Under the proposed Otay Copps program, sworn officers would act as a community resource
integrator to identify and solve citizen/community problems and provide a mechanism for the
community to take a significant role in the provision of municipal service delivery. Under the
direction of the Chief of Police and concerned citizens of the Otay neighborhood, assigned police
officers would focus on identified community public safety issues. These issues may include:
. Directing youth who might otherwise be attracted to gang activity, to diversionary
programs like the Police Activities League or to the Gang Alternative Program.
/7-:2,
Page 3, Item / />
Meeting Date 12/07/93
· Directing citizens to appropriate community and social services agencies
· The identification of adults who may want to get involved with their local government
by serving on a board or commission or volunteering in one the City's many important
volunteer programs.
· The identification of persons who might benefit from the Library's Literacy Team.
· Bringing together city staff from many departments to help solve community needs as
identified by citizens and building a bridge to continue the work began by the Otay Town
Council under the Neighborhood Revitalization Program.
· Coordinate the flow of community information and criminal intelligence from he Otay
neighborhood with the Police Department's Patrol and Investigative Divisions.
· Increasing the interaction between police officers and citizens through foot and/or bicycle
patrols.
· Diminishing criminal activity through a consistent and visible police presence.
Community policing and problem solving projects are, by definition, responsive to the causes
of crime rather than a call for service. The Otay Copps program would provide the Otay
community a set of resources that can be adapted to meet changing crime prevention and law
enforcement needs. The underlying value of the Otay Copps program will be one of preventing
and solving crime by bringing to bear a wide-spectrum of community-based resources on
whatever problems may emerge.
FISCAL IMPACT: Should the City's application be authorized by the City Council and
approved by the DOJ, the City will incur Employee Services expenses of
approximately $115,000 to $120,000 annually between FY 1994-95 and
FY 1996-97. Additionally, the City will incur Supplies and Services
expenses of approximately $10,000 to $12,500 annually.
Total City expenses during the term of the grant are estimated to be
$375,00 to $397,500.
Upon expiration of the grant on June 30, 1997, the City will be
responsible for all Employee Services and Supplies and Services expenses
associated with the 3.0 Peace Officer positions added as a result of the
Otay Copps program. These costs are estimated at $240,000 to $252,500
annually.
) 7-;3
RESOLUTION NO.
/7321
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ENDORSING THE CITY'S APPLICATION
TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ) FOR A GRANT
FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FROM THE POLICE
HIRING SUPPLEMENT PROGRAM TO FUND ONE-HALF THE
COST OF THE CITY'S OTAY COPPS PROGRAM FOR
THREE YEARS
WHEREAS, the DOJ's Police Hiring Supplement Program makes
available a total of $150 million to underwrite innovative
strategies for preventing and controlling crime; and
WHEREAS, as one such strategy, the Police Department
developed the proposed Otay Area Community Oriented Policing and
Problem solving (Otay COPPS) Program with the assistance of the
Chula vista Library, the Department of Building and Housing, the
Chula vista Human Services Council and South Bay Community
Services; and
WHEREAS, if the proposal is selected for funding, the
Police Department will develop a mUlti-disciplinary, community-
oriented policing and problem solving team that will eventually
function out of the new South Chula vista Library.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby endorse the City's Application
to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for a grant from the DOJ's
Police Hiring Supplement Program to fund one-half th cost of the
City's otay COPPS Program for three year .
C:\rs\DOJ
as 0
Presented by
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of
Police
17-,/