HomeMy WebLinkAboutRCC AGENDA PK 1990/10/22
Item 1B
September 28, 1990
T0: Resource Conservation Commission
VIA: Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator
FROM: Stephanie Popek, Principal Management Assistant, Administration
SUBJECT: Requested Information on Proposed Residential Curbside Recycling
Services
At your September 24, 1990 meeting, during review of the draft agreement for
curbside services, the motion to recommend approval to the City Council was
denied. At the time, comments were made to the effect that, while the RCC
supports the concept of recycling, the Commission did not have sufficient
information explaining the economics of the proposed program. In a follow-up
motion, the RCC directed staff to provide additional information on
recommended rates, as well as comments on "incentive based programs." This
memo is intended to respond to that direction.
A detailed explanation of the rate components and the program costs, revenues,
and credits are included in the attached Council Agenda Statement. This
report was not available for your last meeting but will be reviewed by the
City Council on the October 2nd agenda and again at the October 16th public
hearing. Both meetings will allow for public comment.
The Commission's interest in "incentive based programs" was a general
statement. As a starting point, it is important to note that any curbside
collection program, no matter how efficiently designed, will still cost more
to operate than the sale of the materials recovered will provide. Given that
the operation will therefore require payment by either an individual resident
or through an agency's General Fund, then it becomes a question of what
specific activities could be incorporated into a program which would produce
the desired results.
Major criteria for these activities would be to foster a positive approach to
recycling, increase interest in program participation, and improve the
quantity and quality of materials recovered. Some proven methods which have
been used in curbside programs to accomplish these goals include:
- A "Block Leader" volunteer support network
- Random checks of refuse placed curbside and "prizes" awarded for lack
of recyclable materials
- Direct mail or personal surveys regarding the service and soliciting
ideas from the public
t
-2-
The proposed curbside program budget includes $24,000 for necessary staff time
and supplies related to general education and promotion for the first fifteen
months of the program. The incentive activities described above typically
require significant staff time and funding, and any one could use a major part
(if not all) of the $24,000 budget. However, these are also the types of
discrete projects which make excellent grant applications. It is currently
planned that City staff will be evaluating and exploring opportunities such as
these, applying for funding when available and appropriate.
There is one final comment on program incentives which represents a concept
rather than a specific activity. It is a fact of human behavior that people
respond more rapidly to economic incentives or disincentives than to other
types. If the goal is to encourage the public to reduce the amount of garbage
placed at the curb -- by not consuming items that have to be thrown away
and/or by recycling as much as possible -- the best economic incentive is a
variable garbage rate: as the amount of trash decreases, so does the bill.
Changing from the current trash rate structure to a variable rate structure is
a complex assignment and one that cannot be accomplished without adequately
considering all the ramifications to the community. The City has discussed
this concept with Laidlaw and there is mutual interest in continuing to look
at the situation for a future shift. It is not feasible to initiate such a
change as quickly as is currently necessary for the City to begin responding
to the recycling mandates of AB 939.
In summary, I hope this information responds to the Commission's questions and
concerns. I may be reached at the City Manager's Office (691-5031) if you
need any clarification. Should you wish to take further action on this issue
at a future RCC meeting, or provide your input directly to the City Council, I
remind you of the scheduled public hearing on October 16, 1990 at 6:30 p.m. in
the Council Chambers.
SP:mab
rcc
JY
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 10/2/90
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Report on Expansion of Residential Curbside Recycling Services
Resolution Giving Notice of Intent to Consider
Granting a Franchise for Recycling Services to Laidlaw Waste
Systems, Inc. and Setting a Public Hearing
Stephanie Popek, Principal
City Manage r
Management Assistan~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No x )
On April 26, 1990, the City Council held a workshop to discuss the growing
landfill crisis and the alternatives offered by recycling. Issues of
paramount concern include: minimal remaining life span on existing landfills;
the exorbitant cost of new landfill property; increasing transportation costs
to reach the only reasonable site locations; and the continuing drain on
natural resources. An integrated waste management approach to include a wide
range of recycling programs has become a legislative priority at the State
level and offers some much needed solutions.
At that workshop, an expanded residential curbside recycling program was
approved to service approximately 22,000 single family homes at no City cost.
The decision to expand the program was based on data from a pilot program in
which City residents in 3,400 homes were being provided curbside services by
Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. since September, 1989.
The expanded program approved in April would pull recyclable materials out of
the waste stream as a first step in meeting the mandates of AB 939, the
California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. Under this State mandate,
all cities and counties in California are required to reduce waste by 25% by
1995 and 50% by the year 2000. Failure to produce and implement a workable
plan or to meet these goals can result in penalties to the jurisdiction of up
to 510,000 per day. Staff was directed to negotiate a contract and
implementation schedule with Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc.
In the staff update provided during the FY 1990-91 budget review sessions in
June, it was anticipated that the expansion to a total 23,500 homes could
begin in October 1990 pending the County's notification to Laidlaw on a
technical assistance grant which would be used to reduce the capital cost of
the program. At the time, Council also directed staff to prepare a public
awareness campaign that would inform residents of the cost and importance of
the program once specific details were available.
Subsequently, the County's delay in awarding grant funds and lead time needed
by Laidlaw for ordering special recycling vehicles have now set the Citywide
expansion date for January 1991. An agreement regarding the curbside services
has been reached with Laidlaw, and is represented in the attached Exhibit
"A". The proposal is for the recycling services to be incorporated within the
existing contract with Laidlaw for refuse collection and disposal. It is also
intended that a franchise be granted.
.~
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 10 2 90
Therefore, this report presents an overview of the program and its costs and
implementation schedule. In accordance with Charter Section 1201, the
resolution accompanying the report provides notice regarding the proposed
franchise and sets a public hearing for October 16, 1990. Further, the report
describes the public education efforts directed by Council which are currently
underway.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the resolution giving notice of intention to grant
a franchise for recycling services to Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. and setting
a public hearing.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission
reviewed the proposed agreement at its September 24, 1990 meeting. There was
agreement to support the draft ordinance in a 3-1 vote which failed because
the vote was not unanimous. Staff was further directed to provide additional
information regarding the proposed rate and the possibility of
"incentive-based programs." Since minutes will not be available for this
October 2 City Council meeting, Exhibit "B" is the staff response to the RCC.
Further, copies of the report and proposed agreement have been provided to the
Growth Management Oversight Committee and the former Chula Vista 2000
Subcommittee on Open Space and the Environment.
DISCUSSION:
The City's pilot program is still in operation at Laidlaw's expense. Since
data from the program was the primary basis for structuring the Citywide
program and its rates, this discussion will begin with a summary of the pilot
data and trends. Laidlaw's initial capital investment to conduct the pilot
program was approximately 5100,000 for one specially designed vehicle,
containers and promotional expenses. Ongoing operational expenses are
approximately 55,000 monthly and are offset partially by material sales of
about $650 per month.
In the first nine months, 699,000 pounds (or 350 tons) of recyclable
newsprint, aluminum, steel, glass and plastic were collected, diverted from
the landfill, and routed to secondary markets to be made into consumer goods.
Of that tonnage, 74.6% was newspaper and 20.6% was glass. The remaining
materials were less than 3% for bi-metal cans, slightly more than 1% for
plastics and less than 1% for aluminum cans. This profile is consistent with
data from other curbside programs, and is significant in illustrating that the
sales of recovered materials cannot come close to covering the cost of the
program: 95% of the materials collected will only bring from 1-5 cents per
pound in the secondary market.
This tonnage represented an average overall weekly participation rate of 38.9%
for the 3,408 homes in the pilot area. At the same participation rate, the
Citywide expansion to the 23,500 homes described in Exhibit "A" should remove
over 3,220 tons in the first full year of operation. A rigorous public
education campaign is included in this proposed program and is expected to
raise the participation rate and tonnage.
.-
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 10 2 90
Program Highlights
The proposed program will:
Allow Citywide expansion to all single-family homes in January
1991. Containers and instructions will be delivered during late
December. A weekly commingled collection of the same materials will
be picked up on the same day as the refuse collection.
Cost $1.25 per month per household, and the first quarterly
billing for this increase will be mailed in late December. All
23,500 single family homes will be charged the service fee and
provided with a collection container, whether or not they choose to
participate. This cast is the net cost of operational costs, less
estimated revenue from the sale of recoverable materials and
landfill diversion credits. Further information is covered in the
following discussion on Rates.
Provide that residential curbside recycling services from Laidlaw
be considered as additional services which are separate from the
refuse collection and disposal services. Accordingly, acceptable
performance of recycling services will be determined separately.
The City retains the right to bid out those services in the future
if performance is not acceptable or if Laidlaw is not interested in
providing services as needed.
Permit the City to work with Laidlaw on establishing a
comprehensive range of recycling services within the next 18 months,
to further meet the landfill diversion mandates of AB 939. Services
are planned to include yard waste collection, multi-family
residential collection and commercial/industrial recycling. Each
new program will require a negotiated amendment to the contract and
the City retains the right to bid out any or all programs.
Rates
Recycling rates are more complex than those for refuse collection, because
there are more variables to consider than just the operational cost of
collecting and disposing of the material. A reasonable calculation requires
consideration of four components: operational costs, revenues from material
sales, landfill diversion credits, and grant funding.
In general, the initial rate of 51.25 per household per month is a net cost
first established by projecting actual operating costs from the pilot program
($1.85), then reduced by estimated revenues (g.40) and landfill diversion
credits (5.20). Estimated revenues are based on current market data and
adjusted for reasonable trend projections. Landfill diversion credits are
current rates applied to estimated tonnage (3,300 tons) to be collected.
,-
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 10 2 90
Grant funding is one final component which has the ability to affect the net
calculation of the curbside recycling fee. There is no adjustment for grant
funding reflected in the $1.25 fee, although Laidlaw has applied for $100,000
from the County's Recycling Technical Assistance Program. Grant award notices
are expected out in October or November 1990, with actual payments much later
in the fiscal year. Because of the City's need to move forward now in
establishing the program expansion and rate, provisions have been made in the
agreement that any grant funds received will be applied during the next rate
review period and are estimated at a $.10 per household reduction each month.
The components of the proposed rate can be approximated as follows:
$1.85 Operational costs (personnel; depreciated capital,
[i.e. trucks and containers]; materials, supplies,
overhead; equipment operation, maintenance,
insurance; public education; City administrative
costs)
(.40) Revenue from sale of recovered materials
x.20) Landfill diversion credit
$1.25
Some important notes regarding the handling of recycling services rates in
this agreement include:
The $1.25 rate is set from January 1991 through March 31, 1992.
Rate changes (increase or decrease) will take place beginning in
April 1992 and be concurrent with one refuse collection fee increase
each year thereafter. From January to April of each year, the City
will review with Laidlaw the actual cost of the program during the
previous year to arrive at the new rate.
During the rate review period, actual revenues and landfill
diversion credits will be compared to original estimates and
shortfalls or overages will be applied to the new rate. Actual
operating costs are subject to the same conditions as the refuse
collection agreement, whereby that increase will not be above the
C.P.I. without an automatic public hearing.
Public Education
The City recognizes the need for an active, creative public education campaign
for the start-up and overall maintenance of the program. Plans are underway
for a "kickoff" and could include a slogan and logo contest, student and
community group participation and instructional literature about how and why
Chula Vista residents should recycle. The cost of ongoing public education
activities is provided for in the program budget.
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date 10 2 90
In addition, a Community Meeting will be held on Monday, October 8, 1990,
responding to Council concerns about the need to explain curbside recycling
economics to the public who will be paying the bill. That meeting will be
held in the City Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. and will be "Plain Talk about
Curbside Recycling in Chula Vista." Residents are also encouraged to make
comments during the Public Hearing on October 16. Notice of both meetings is
being sent out in Laidlaw billings, the Chamber of Commerce newsletter,
announcements through the news media and flyers distributed at public service
counters.
Summary
The City can no longer debate whether or not recycling will occur in Chula
Vista, but rather, which recycling activities will best assist in achieving
the necessary recycling goals. As a first step in meeting AB 939 mandates,
the proposed residential curbside recycling program can be expected to divert
between 5% and 8% of total waste generated. It is important to note that the
most significant contribution to wastestream reduction that is made by any
residential curbside program is that it is convenient to the residents. When
properly accompanied by well-designed public awareness programs, it does the
invaluable task of instilling the "recycling ethic." It has been the most
politically visible type of recycling program in the past and is, therefore,
commonly the first type of program established in a community.
For these reasons, it is recommended that the Citywide expansion described in
this report be approved for implementation.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no cost to the City as a result of this program.
Additional franchise fees are estimated for the remainder of FY 1990-91 at
$10,754, which will be used to partially- support the position of Conservation
Coordinator.
WPC 3428A
s
r '
. Item 1C
RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
MEETING OF AUGUST 6, 1990
RECOMMENDATION TO CREATE COMMUNITY PLANNING GROUPS
THE RESOURCE CONSERVATIOfi COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT THE CHULA VISTA
CITY COUNCIL CREATE TWO NEW COMMUNITY PLANNING GROUPS - ONE IN THE
SWEETA?ATER PLANNING AREA AND ANOTHER IN THE EASTERN TERRTTORIES
PLANNING AREA. BECAUSE OF UNPRECEDENTED GRCA'TH AND ITS RELATED
PROBLEPSS, THE NEIGHBORHOODS OF THESE TWO PLANNING AREAS NEED
A MORE IMMEDIATE AND RESPONSIVE VOICE IN THE PLANNING FROCESS.
COUNCIL SHOULD USE THE MECHANISM IN MUNICIPAL CODE CHAFTER 2.48 TO
CREATE THESE TWO COMMITTEES (GROUPS). THE PROCESS SHOULD BE AS
FOLLOWS:
1. USE THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES AS DEFINED IN THE GENERAL PLAN
TO CREATE THE SWEETS4ATER AND EASTERN TERRITORIES COMMUNITY PLANNING
COMMITTEE.
2. FOREGO THE REQUIREMENT THAT 25o OF THE ELECTORS SIGN A PETITION
TO ESTABLISH THE COMMITTEES.
3. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO DETERMINE THE NECESSITY.
~~ :,
4. APPOINT THE INITIAL SEVEN MEP4BERS.
ALL OTHER NECESSARY PROVISIONS FOR FORMATION AND PROCEDORES ARE
LOCATED ZN MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 2.48.
2.46.100 Duties and functions designated.
The youth commission shall perform the following duties and functions:
A. Establish a direct communications link between the young people of the
city and the city council, to assist in those matters which are of concern
to the young people; and in turn, to the entire community;
B. Provide recommendations and suggestions to the city council and to all
boards and commissions of the city reflecting the point of view of the
young people of this community;
C. Assign one or more of its members to sit with and participate in the
deliberations of the various boards and commissions of the city in
accordance with reasonable rules and regulations that may be adopted by
said boards and commissions and thus be ex officio members of said boards
and commissions.- - '
D. Perform any other additional duties and functions as may from time to time
be developed by the youth commission itself.
(Ord. 1335 § 1 (part), 1971:. Ord. 1283 § 1 (part), 1970: prior code § 1.603.)
2.46..110 Staff assistance~nd funding.
The city manager may make available staff and clerical supports as
requested by the commission, to fulfill its functions and duties, provided
such staff and clerical support is available. In the event that private funds
or funds from other- governmental agencies are made available for special
projects, surveys, educational programs or general program support, the city
manager is authorized, upon recommendation of the commission and approval of
the council, to enter into appropriate contracts for the utilization of such
funds in furtherance of the purpose and intent of, and the duties and
functions of the commission. (Ord. 1335 § 1 (part), 1971: Ord. 1283 § 1
(part), 1970: prior code § 1.604.)
Chapter 2.48
COMMUNITY PLANNING COMMITTEE21
2.48.040
2.48.050
2.48.060
2.48.070
2.48.080
2.48.090
2.48.100
Sections:
2.48.010
2.48.020
2.48.030
provisions.
2.48.110 Review duties-Variances and conditional use
hearing when.
2.48.120 Funding and other assistance-Report duty.
2.48.130 Recommendations-Scope. _ . ,
Purpose and intent.
Creation authorized.
Formation procedure within incorporated
and hearing required.
Formation procedure in territory proposed
Public hearing-Scope-Council authority.
Resolution for creation-Contents.
Governing board-Composition-Term-Conduct
Powers and functions.
Review duties-Generally.
Review duties-C~neral plan and subdivision
area-Petition,
for annexation.
generally.
notice
and zoning
permits-Public
-- 7.^.
2.48.010 Purpose and intent.
A. It is the purpose of the city council to establish procedures for the
creation of advisory groups in the various communities of the city having
F ; particular community identification and cohesion, to be known as community
planning committees. Said committees would participate at all stages in
the formulation of the community's element of the general plan of the
city, and in the implementation of said commmunity element through the
adoption of zoning regulations and the imposition of such regulations upon
property within the community and the granting of variances and
conditional use permits.
B. It is the intent of the city council in encouraging the creation of such
community planning committees to develop a more immediate representative
and responsive voice in the democratic governmental process. by those
citizens in areas within the city which can truly be called distinctive
communities facing problems pecul-iar •to said communities. The primary
purpose of such community planning committees is intended to be, but not
limited to, direct participation in the. planning process of the city as it
relates to their own community.
(Ord. 1367 § 1 (part), 1971: prior code § 2.1001.)
2.48.020 Creation authorized:
The city council does hereby authorize the electors of the several
communities of the city to create community planning committees which will be
recognized by the city council for the purposes set forth herein and shall be
granted duties and powers prescribed hereinafter. (Ord. 1367 § 1 (part),
1971: prior code § 2.1002 (part).)
2.48.030 Formation procedure within incorporated area-Petition, notice and
hearing required.
Community planning committees shall be initiated by submission of a
petition to the city council delineating the territory of the community, which
territory should be based upon demographic considerations providing for some
well-defined geographic area as well as a community of interests. Said
petition shall affirm that at least five thousand persons reside within the
proposed community and must be signed by twenty-five percent of the electors
within said territory. Upon receipt of the petition, the city council shall
set a public hearing, publishing notice of said hearing twice prior thereto,
the second publication being not less than ten days prior to the day and hour
set for the hearing, and notice shall also be posted in any commercial centers
located within the proposed community territory. (Ord. 1367 § 1 (part),
1971: prior code § 2.1002(1).)
2.48.040 formation procedure in territory proposed for annexation.
In an area proposed for annexation, the city council shall at the time of
the public hearing consider the question of the formation of a community
planning committee and may place the issue of annexation and the formation of
a community planning committee. The city council may fill the positions on the
community planning committee by:
A. Appointment.
B. Placing a slate of candidates composed of electors of the area to be
~ annexed on the ballot.
'~ G. By adopting a resolution at the conclusion of the public hearing requiring
that the seven candidates with the most votes be elected to the community
planning committee for initial terms after which subsequent terms shall be
filled by appointment.
75
!R 1_~?5)
The .council" shall designate the method of selection at the public
hearing. (Ord. 1968 § 1 (part), 1982: Ord. 1914 § 1, 1980: Ord. 1367 § 1
} (part), 1971; Ord,. 2119; 1985: prior code § 2.1002(2),)
2.48.050 Public hearing-Scope-Council authority.
The purpose of the public hearing shall be to receive testimony from all
persons residing within the territory proposed to be established for a
community planning committee. Said testimony shall be required in order that
the city council may determine the necessity and desirability of creating such
a committee. At the close of said hearing, the city council shall consider
all testimony and determine said necessity and desirability for creating the
committee, which -shall be done by resolution. (Ord, 1367 § 1 (part), 1971:
prior code § 2,1003.)
2.48.060 Resolution for creation-Contents.
If the city council determines that it is necessary and desirable to
create a community planning committee within the territory as defined in the
initiative petition, they shall adopt a resolution which shall:
A. Fix the boundary of the territory to be represented by the community
planning committee after receiving a recommendation on said boundaries
from the planning commission of the city;
B. Adopt the name of the .community plahning committee and establish a time
and place for the convening of a meeting of the community planning
committee, which shall be open to all residents and property owners of the
community defined in the resolution.
(Ord. 1367 § 1 (part), 1971: prior code § 2.1004.)
~.
2,48.070 .Governing board-Composition-Term-Conduct generally.
A, The community planning committee governing board, which shall be known as
the community planning committee, shall be composed of seven members to be
selected by one of the following procedures as directed by the city
council after hearing testimony at the public hearing as provided in
Section 2.48,050:
1, Formation within incorporated area:
a. Election at initial meeting of the residents and property owners
of the community planning territory called by the city council
and noticed in the manner provided by the Government Code of the
state of California;
b. Appointment by city council; or
2, Formation in territory proposed to be annexed to t,tie city:
a. Election on annexation ballot:
b. Appointment by city council.
B. In order to qualify for membership on the community planning committee, it
shall be required that committeemen be at least eighteen years of age and
an elector in the community planning area at the time of their appointment
or election and shall be nominated by a petition signed by twenty electors
of the territory. Committeemen shall serve for two-year terms; provided
however, that the initial committee members shall upon election or
appointment draw lots to provide that initially four of the committeemen
76
(R 12/n~)
shall serve for a term of two years and three of the committeemen shall
serve for a term of one year. Upon its formation, the community planning
committee shall select from among its members a chairman, vice-chairman,
secretary and treasurer, who shall serve for a period of one year from the
date of the initial meeting. The community planning committee shall
possess those powers and duties set forth herein. They shall conduct
their meetings in public at a regularly scheduled time and place to be
designated by the community planning committee and shall be subject to all
rules .and regulations related to the conduct of the public's business as
contained in the Government Code of the state, provided however, that they
shall not be required to publish notices of public hearings except in
those cases where it is determined by the committee that the public
interest would be best served .by said publication.
C. The city council may review the procedures established by this chapter or
the method of operation of a community planning committee- after a period
of not less than one year from the date of formation of the first
community planning committee in the city, in order to make such changes
and modifications as may be deemed necessary or desirable, e. g., change in
method of selection o~members of committee by appointment to election of
said members by the electors of the territory. Said review shall be
undertaken at a public hearing to be called by the city council. It is
the intent of this provision to- r -de a sufficient test period for the
operation of a community planning iittee.
(Ord. 1968 § 1 (part), 1982: Ord. ~7 ~ 1 (part), 1971: prior code ~
2.1005.)
2.48.080 Powers and functions.
A. The primary and initial function of the community planning committee shall
be the development of the community element of the general plan of the
city for the area encompassed by the community planning committee.
B. In addition to the development of the community element of the general
pla n, the community planning committee shall have the power to review and
rec ommend upon, as provided herein, all of the following items:
1. Precise community plans, including but not limited to all land uses,
population density, transportation network planning, including
streets and trails (equestrian, bicycle and hiking), open space, park
lands, and all other items of a community plan;
2. Zoning regulations in terms of the comprehensive zoning ordinance,
including planned community and planned unit development programs,
and the incorporation of properties within the territory of the
community planning committee into particular zones;
3. Variances;
4. Conditional use permits;
5. Subdivision of land, including the review of tentative and final
subdivision maps submitted to the city subdivision advisory committee
and planning commission and the review of the subdivision development
standards relating to, but not exclusive of the following:
a. Local street design,
b. Landscaping,
c. Grading and hillside development,
I d. Open space;
~
6. _
Archi tectural review;
%i
r
7. All other police regulations
regulations, trees, etc.
(Ord. 1367 § 1 (part), 1971: prior code
affecting land use, e.g., animal
§ 2.1006.)
2.48.090 Review duties-Generally.
The planning department and/or the department of public works shall upon
receipt of any plans or maps or any proposed changes in the comprehensive
zoning ordinance or the subdivision ordinance forthwith transmit copies
thereof to any established community planning committee and it shall be the
duty of said committee to forthwith review said plans or changes in the
comprehensive zoning drdinance or subdivision ordinance and any requests for
zonings, variances .and conditional use permits and transmit their findings in
writing or be present at the hearings before the planning commission of the
city or the city council and make known the. conclusions of the community
planning committee at said hearings. In the event that the committee deems it
advisable; it shall call a public meeting, noticed in the manner set forth
herein, to discuss said items and to arrive at a determination for
recommendation to the planning commission 'or the city council. (Ord. 1367 § 1
(part), 1971: prior code § 2.1007.)
2.48.100 Review duties-C~neral plan ate-subdivision and zoning provisions.
The community planning committee shall review all items of the community
planning element of the general.-plan, zonings, subdivision developments,
comprehensive zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance, related to changes
within the territory of the community planning committee and shall report
their findings and recommendations to the appropriate body within twenty-one
-days of receipt of the information from the city or at the time said bodies
are conducting a public hearing.. Said bodies shall include the subdivision
advisory -committee and the planning commission, and the city council shall
recognize the representative of the community planning committee as a duly
selected representative of the community interests of the territory designated
as a community planning committee. (Ord. 1367 § 1 (part), 1971: prior code §
2.1008(1).)
2.48.110 Review duties-Variances and conditional use permits-Public hearing
when.
In those circumstances where the community planning committee ~ forwards
recommendations relative to variances and conditional use permits to the
planning commission of the city, the recommendation shall be accepted by the
planning commission and weighed with all testimony elicited at the public
hearing. The recommendation of a community planning committee made in
accordance with the same administrative standards and guidelines required of
the planning commission may only be overridden by a vote of five of the seven
members of the planning commission. In the event that the request for a
variance or conditional use permit is one heard originally by the zoning
administrator of the city, any determination contrary to the recommendation of
the community planning committee shall forthwith be forwarded to the planning
commission fora public hearing in accordance with the procedures set forth in
Title 19 of this code. (Ord. 1367 § 1 (part), 1971: prior code § 2.1008(2).)
73
r
i~ 2.48.120 Funding and other assistance-Report duty.
The city council may from time to time appropriate necessary funds as a
portion of the budget of the city to support the activities of community
- planning committees established in various areas of the city. Said funds
shall be made available for publication of required notices of public hearings
or other matters presented to the city council during the course of
consideration of the budget of the city. Expenditure of all such funds shall
be supervised by the director of finance, and the community planning committee
shall make a quarterly report of their programs and activities and financial
expenditures to the city council. The members of the community planning
committees shall receive compensation for expenditures in the same manner as
may be prescribed from time to time for members of other boards and
commissions. The planning department and the department of public works of
the city shall at all times maintain close liaison with the community planning
committee and shall provide to them all information and material received
which shall be presented to the appropriate committee, board or commission of
the city as required by this code. (Ord. 1367 § 1 (part), 1971: prior code ~
2.1009. )
2.48.130 Recommendations-Scope.
Neither the planning commission-nor the city council shall take action on
any matters set forth herein concerning the territory lying within the
boundaries governed by a community planning committee before receiving a
recommendation from said community planning committee of the area thus
affected; provided however, that if no recommendation is forthcoming from the
community planning committee within twenty-one days of transmittal of
notification to the community planning committee, said bodies may proceed with
their consideration of the particular matter without regard to the necessity
for the recommendation from the .community planning committee. In the event
that any of the items to be considered by the community planning committee
might require a longer period of time than provided herein, a community
planning committee may request ah extension of time beyond the twenty-one day
limitation, provided that such request shall be in writing and submitted to
the planning commission or the city council at least twenty-four hours in
advance of the scheduled hearing or meeting where said item is to be
considered by the appropriate body; provided however, such extension shall not
be granted for a period extending beyond the next regularly scheduled hearing
or meeting of the appropriate body nor be in excess of statutory limitations
imposed by state or local regulations. (Ord. 1367 § 1 (part), 197H: prior
code § 2.1010.)
Chapter 2.50
MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS22
Sections:
2.50.010 Hours polls are to be open.
2.50.020 Authority for polling hours.
2.50.030 Authority for Sections 2.50.030 through 2.50.130..
2.50.040 Canvass board-Composition-Compensation.
L 2.50.050 Canvass board-Appointment-Qualifications.
~ o
~' CITY OF CFiULA VISTA 0/24/90 G~^~1
COUNCIL REFERRAL' ~ :GINATOR: ADMIN ' 4
REFERRAL N0: 2098 LEAD DEPARTMENT: CITY CLERK
BOARD & COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: Additional section to be added
to the Council agenda to provide for recommendations from Boards and
Commissions .
'~,ANAGER DUE COUNCIL DUE DATE 9/04/90 ORIGINATION DATE 8/21/90
dSST. CITY ATTORNEY
REFERRAL DETAIL
Beverly, the City Council (Nader) at its 08/21/90 meeting, directed
staff to modify the existing agenda format to allow for placement of
Boards and Commission items on the agenda. Placement by a Board or
Commission of an item on the Council agenda must be the result of a
majority vote of the Board and Commission and should be placed by
the chairperson of that Board or Commission. Staff, in preparing to
do this, should review existing City codes and policies to determine
if we have any existing guidelines related to placement of Boards
and Commissions recommendations on City Council agendas.
:OMPLETION DATE: COMMENTS:
;EPT. HEAD SIGNATURE: ADMIN SIGNATURE:
E,YNI/~l i f~
----------_ __ _ _-.-ORDINANCE.NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
SECTION 2.04.090 OF CHAPTER 2.04 OF THE CHULA
VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE COUNCIL
AGENDA PREPARATION
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain
as follows:
SECTION I: That Section 2.04,090 of Chapter 2.04 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 2.04.090 Agenda-Submission of items-Preparation
-Effect.
i~~//a'g'a'n'd'~/bks,~dd//4'd /kr~k,~,~k,~/fez`//e'a'dh'/kk//~~~i!~v~~
~~~c~~~~~~c~/,a~~wd~d~//~~r~~~~x/,a~,~,r~/d~/,~~,~rs/i~/~r/~~
~dfifr~~fi~//~vs//1~k//kk~,b,~-,tk.6///dsY//d'i~s'ddd~'dd'~//~~~//fiN~zX
~~`vs~f~if/f~/z'ldc~/~fb,~//~a'd~e~d~'/b,~/te'a'/~~~X~¢/ham'/~~~`r~¢~X~
~~v7t`r~~~///~?'ddddi/Y/~~/~//d5'/~t~~~~`~~K/kb//+/b'd /~~tJ~X ~~
r6ffNfrt///fN~///~~~~J~ff///r~a~ffr~f///~1~iff,~~ffl~f~rS///~~///fMr~
2~~r~~.tX,!///X~~~,~//b~//l~,t~,~~il~k,~,~//1//i4'a'//~Ya'ddd'//~d //~k~~
~~~~~~/~i/ff~rd/,e~~,~,~~~a.~//d~/~/~~~r~si/~~/~~/¢~~~¢~x,~
~N~///v~///~a~~~~r~t,G//kfi'a'//¢~~~///o~/a'riw///use`///rfi'a'//~~x~
f a~f /'k~t/~/a'r//~b~,fb/i~//dd /~k,{~,b~tk,~/,//~N~XX/fi¢//~~X~~~X`~z1
fb//+lMd //dilr/~///dlldr/1~!//~1//1/~k/d/h~t~//.~k,fi//,~/.,Tb/.//bt1//~k~~
x'Mu~ffid~]?//,i~,fkbk,ddby//kXt~.///r~(ytY~~///ddddil~'d////~Nd //~X~~`J~
~M~XX///~Yl~tr~a~XX~z`///~z`~t~~~'~///~1~~///r~~J~r~A~///~r~~~t///~M~
fffffff~a(//b,~//~t,~k///~Jut~y///da'dd~dd////Wl~dddyd~//f~~~~~X~,G
~~~li//lpfd//f~li//!t'itv~//~~J~-~21~///s'~1~i~1///~~P~~~~Y~///~'//ti~~X~
~`r~fu~~S~r~r~~a(f~~~//~/YMd /,~.~k,~/lk~,~//~'d~li~dd/,~,~~~k~,~~A/~Jq'/~~
~~K~r~//d~/,~X~k//ddu'ddi~Y///A~tusJ/~~}~~d ~,G//~lddd*!b'e'd /k%lh~~/~X X
f~~~z'~~.G////de'ddYd~'Yddd///f~v~'///b,~,d~l~,~,~.~////~~X~~~r~~c~u~
f iS ~f r~~ ~,!//s'ddYY/X~k//~~X ~z~~~`~~//~'d / ~fi'e'/,~bt~t~,~~i~ll~kln~kxk// ~Sr~
~k~~//F/d~/d'a~S//~~~r~~A.~b~//~'de'/~k,//r~ddlz'r~~!///~ihk//~~~r~~~
fM~XX//d~ddYfY//r!b'd/~h~v'a'/,~ty~/~1b,~,~~bh//bf//,~X~~//~~~1~X~~
t~~~k~ri~ ~//dk~dYk'//4'e'/~'s~'d'/,~//db~.~,t//fi~~b~~$f,ti4b//l~~srit,~
~~f~t~//~J//dd~~dXdrt//,{nkk~~t,tag///~~'//~///~/~h/~'//kz`~r~X~
~¢¢~~,~~~X~/k,6//dti'e'/~~~X~~L/,~~/q'd/~~d~/,61~,~/~/i,~,Wlk//dd/~l~r~
xn~~~/n/l,~,fka~/d~ x~sb/~f~g~~va~/~~~XX/,~k///ddx~~/b,~b ins,'/,~~s~
~du~~~.~X !//~z'dddld+!//~'~'/~/~/d~/cY/~1fi//,6kb,tdb~5//z/~R/.,OdA/. ///X
~f/~~,~~~vt/,~I~//r!h'e'/r~~b~~dd/h/a'/d~~~//,~/~ta'~lk'dd/l~b,~//dd/~~5~
t~~~k~d /,~k~4//d~'i~~'dd'/~~/fag/~(~a~l~~ ~/bf//k~a'd /ICb,~~~,id//dd/r~ ~
,t N~/,~,~Xv1~,~/,//rid'/~l+l~fr'd / X ~ ~/,~//r/~i~'r/t/ /d d / k ¢ /,~~A.~~/ /a' / ~i~k`,t,~ z`
C~;i/~/~ut~~t't~/,~s~~~~rf/n"/,~XX/,~s~~/s~~v~; k~xF1k~/af~~~s~;4,1
-1-
r
A. Preparation and Delivery of Agenda.
An agenda shall be prepared for each regular
meeting containing a tier general escription of
each item of business to be transacted or discussed,
1. Delivery to City Clerk,
Agenda items, i,e., background and requests
for particular actions or reports, shal oe
delivered to the city clerk not later than ten
a.m, on t e T ursoay preceding the regu ar
meeting. The clerk shall thereafter prepare
t o agen a un er t o erection or t o city
manger.
2. Delivery to Council.
The agenda, together with all reports,
resolutions an or finances pertaining thereto,
s a e e were to t o counci mem ers on
the Friday preceding the regular meeting,
B. Posting and Public Availability of Agenda.
The agenda shall be posted at least seventy-two
hours efore the regu ar meeting in a ocation
freely accessi e to t e pu ic, an e mace
available to the public as soon as practicable.
C. Contents of Agenda.
1. The agenda shall speci
of the regular meeting
~ the time and location
2. Items of business shall be placed on the
agenda a t e erection of a ma orrty o
E W council by the Chairman of a Council-approved
oar commission and committee, at t e
direction of said body upon a majorit vote of
t o mem ers t ereor, t o city manager, t o
ci y c erk, or the city attorney.
3. The agenda shall provide a section for members
of t e pu is to cirectly aearess the Councr
on items of interest to the public within the
subject matter jur~sc_ction of the Council.
:r
4. The agenda shall provide a section entitled
"Mayor's- Report" which section shall be
reserved for reports of the Mayor to the City,
t e sta or t e pu is on matters o City
business. If there is any written material
which is the su sect matter of a Mayoral
Report, t o Mayor or is esignee s a ma e a
i agent e ort to prove e t e city cler wit
a copy of said written material in sufficient
a vance time to permit t e me usion o same
into the agenda and related material for
e rvery to t e City Counci .
-~ 5. The agenda shall provide a section entitled
Council Comments" for counci mem ers to
erect y a ress t e City, sta
or t e
pu is on items o interest Council
Comments" to the councilperson. If there is
any written materia w is is t e su sect
matter of Council comments, the sponsoring
counci person shall ma e a diligent effort to
prove e t e city c er wit a copy of said
written materia in su icient a vance time to
permit the inclusion of same into the Agenda
an re ate materia or e every to t e
Council.
D. Agenda Package Material.
Whenever feasible, each item on the agenda shall
contain a staff recommendation and the specific
action requested to be taken by the Council.
E. Prohibition of Action; Exceptions.
No matters other than those listed on the agenda
shall be acted upon by the Council, except as
provided in Section 2.04.100.
1. A direction by the Council to refer a matter
not on t o poste agen a raise y a mem er o
the Council or of the public, to staff for a
report or to place a matter on a future agenda
shall not constitute action.
SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in
full force and effect on the thirtieth day from and after its
adoption.
?resented by Approved as to form by
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk Bruce [~1. 3oogaar~, City attorney
30G<.a
-3-
r
Item 1F
--£HULA-VI6 - ONMENTAL-~~ENDA FOR THE 90s
C by Councilman Tim Nader
INTRODUCTION
In our community and around the planet, the 80s were a decade
of environmental destruction which, unchecked, will destroy the
future of the human species. We have heard ever stronger warnings
from scientists about global warming, the greenhouse effect and
deforestation. Closer to home, in Chula Vista and throughout the
San Diego region, the explosive and largely uncontrolled growth
of the last decade has created an ironic situation: while it seems
as if the whole world would like to live here, unchecked growth
threatens the desirability of our community as a place to live.
Chula Vista has suffered traffic congestion, noise and air
pollution, rapid loss of open space, and school crowding, to name
a few effects of rapid growth, at levels unthought of 10 years ago.
These problems have been exacerbated by the failure of our
environmental policies - such as resource conservation; open space
preservation and public transit - to keep. pace with explosive
growth.
The environment has been called "the issue of the 90s". Yet,
some of us may recall that the environment 20 years-ago was being
called "the issue- of .the. 70s^. As we approach the twentieth
anniversary of the first Earth Day, it is imperative that we make
a lasting commitment to the protection of the environment on which
( life itself ultimately depends. While the City of Chula Vista, or
even the entire San Diego-Tijuana region, cannot single-handedly
save the earth, we must treat our corner of the planet more
responsibly than in the past.
AIR QUALITY
1. PUBLIC TRANSIT
A recent study released by the Worldwatch Institute, as
reported in the Los Angeles Times, indicates the need for a drastic
reduction in automobile use over the next 40 years if the human
race is to comfortably survive. All cities have a responsibility
to plan now the type of infrastructure which will work with our
environment, not against it.
Chula Vista Transit has experienced a significant
increase in ridership in the last few years - a tribute to all of
our transit staff (and perhaps also to the traffic congestion
caused by rapid growth). The city should promote the continued
expansion of public transit:
the City Council took990~ pproving helGeneraluPlannrevisionlof
July 1989, when we directed staff to draft a policy to expand the
1
availability of public transit on major traffic corridors and on
routes to t o e who. are, ess i e y to drive,
C such as senior citizens and youth.
- After Assemblyman Peace proposed three years ago
an eastward trolley extension to connect the existing trolley line
to our shopping center, Southwestern College and Eastlake, we made
a referral to staff. -The proposal has languished since, an
apparent victim. of other priorities. In the meantime, the widening
of L St./Telegraph Canyon Rd./ Otay Lakes Rd. is underway, and
staff has indicated in conjunction with yet another delay in
construction of the Youth Center on L St, that provision must be
made to widen that street to accommodate automobile traffic
generated by growth in the east. Palomar St. is slated for similar
action. It would be better, if streets must be widened, to
accommodate a trolley link than more cars. The time to act on
Assemblyman Peace's proposal is now - if not much sooner - so as
to avoid the gross inefficiency which will result if we continue
to expend funds on massive street projects which consider only the
needs of automobiles, leaving other improvements for another time.
2: TRAFFIC
Besides being a serious stress factor, traffic causes the
bulk of-our air pollution.
C - In 1987, the City Council unanimously approved our
"Thresholds Ordinance" - a growth management measure requiring that
new development not cause traffic flow to deteriorate below what
is known as "level C" - except during certain hours. This
exception should be reconsidered, as it has been documented that
the exception enables some of our most congested streets to meet
the letter, though not the spirit, of the "threshold" standard.
- During the General Plan hearing in July 1987,
Councilwoman McCandliss and I questioned the wisdom of planning to
use streets in existing residential neighborhoods - such as Palomar
St., western H St, and Hilltop Dr. - to accommodate more growth in
the east. The City Council directed staff to come back with an
amendment to the General Plan which would allow the traffic
"thresholds" to be met without further jeopardizing our established
neighborhoods. A plan should devised and implemented as part of
the Growth Management Element of the General Plan to assure that
priority is given to Sparing existing residential neighborhoods
from bearing the burden of growth-generated traffic. Our city's
interest requires that we meet this objective, whether by a
reduction in future growth or by working with developers to curtail
traffic impacts.
2
r' --
..~i, 3. BICY -TANFS ~- -
( When growing up in Chula vista I was able to go almost
anywhere on my bicycle - E St., Bonita Rd. and Rohr Park, Broadway
and the shopping center, Southwestern College, the civic center,
or Memorial Park, to name a few frequent destinations. Today,
parents allowing their children to take bicycle trips I took for
granted might seriously wonder if they could be charged with
neglect, thanks to the hazards posed by sharing city streets with
an overabundance of auto traffic.
Our city should be safe for bicyclists and pedestrians
as well as motorists. Safe and adequate bicycle lanes should be
a high priority in our capital improvement budget (as well as a
requirement in new development).
4. TRAFFIC REDUCTION IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS
The City Council has directed that a Growth Management
Element of the General Plan be prepared which will address air
quality. The growth management plan should require any new
development to include, among other items, the following measures:
- .Land use patterns (ie, quality mixed use
developments instead of traditional segregated land use "blobs" on
a zoning map) which encourage people to walk to employment or
neighborhood -services rather thane drive. Our downtown
redevelopment is one example.
C
- Emphasis in street design (eg design speed and
layout) should be given to .the safety needs of pedestrians and
bicyclists, and safe bicycle lanes should always be required.
- Commercial and industrial centers of significant
size should be accessible to public transit, provide flexible
working hours and alternative work weeks for employees, and have
convenient and secure facilities for bicycles.
5. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT
Chula Vista should enact a Transportation Demand Ordinance,
requiring major employers (including city government) to file plans
for significant reductions in drive-alone commuting. Methods to
be employed could include incentives for carpooling, subsidies for
use of public transit in lieu of free parking, and preferential
hiring of local residents with shorter commutes.
6. MAKE PROPOSED PROJECTS ACCOUNTABLE FOR AIR QUALITY I?fPACTS
As we enter the 90s, the San Diego region is not in
compliance with federal clean air standards. Air quality in our
region has deteriorated, not improved over recent years. The Los
3
Angeles Times_r~~enty rep~rtar~ rhat_~n-th~firs~hal-f-of-the-last
decade, a 23~ increase in deaths from asthma was attributable to
air quality deterioration; many avoidable deaths may also be
expected from other cardiopulmonary illnesses and cancer.
The politicians, the press and the public must understand
that air pollution is more than a nuisance - air pollution kills
people.
In Chula Vista, our problem is considerably milder than
in much of the region, according to air quality offic~'als.l
However, that does not relieve us of our moral obligation to
improve the air quality in our community, or our legal obligation
to realistically consider the air quality impacts of new projects
on our community.
Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
government officials are required to consider the environmental
impacts -including air quality impacts - of any project requiring
government action or approval,. through. an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR). However, the practice in Chula Vista has been that
when it comes to air quality its considered "someone else's
problem". EIRs have been accepted for projects such .as Eastlake
and Rancho del Rey with no more analysis of air quality impacts
than to tell us that the project is within SANDAG Series VII
Forecasts. As SANDAG presently forecasts a failure to comply with
federal clean air standards, all that such an EIR tells us is that
the project will make things worse - but no worse than SANDAG
~. .expected them to be with poorly controlled growth.
Approximately how many senior citizens will die
prematurely? Approximately how many children will become ill when
exercising out of doors? How many work days will be lost? Our
EIRs often greet such questions with eerie silence.
The law requires more than an assurance that a project's
impact will be no worse than another entity's forecast, which is
unrelated to achieving healthy air for our people. Amore thorough
EIR in this area won't let politicians hide behind "SANDAL Series
VII" and other terms with which the public is unfamiliar, but it
will straightforwardly tell the people what their politicians are
approving.
By coming out of the closet of "someone else's problem",
a more complete EIR can also help us address ways of dealing with
' It should be noted that these assurances are generally
based on measurements at one location in our city - Fire Station
#2, on E. J St. , and do not reflect conditions closer to major
sources of air pollution, such as more heavily traveled roads and
freeways, or the SDG&E power plant.
l 4
our problems - through the anal sis of mitigation measures also
required -rjy CEQA. Some -air ~
C should be quality mitigation measures which
routinely discussed in any acceptable EZR on a project
with air quality impacts include changes in land use mixes to
reduce automobile trips, street designs to make walking and
bicycling safer and more attractive, development agreements
promoting flex hours and .ride sharing, and open space preservation.
A review of past EIRs should be conducted, particularly those
which were done for projects which have turned out to have impacts
on air quality or traffic which were not anticipated (ie, projects
which contributed to unprecedented traffic on E St, H St,.and L
St), to determine how deficiencies occurred and how they can be
avoided in the future. Consultants should be responsible for
negligence.
7• CITY EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
The City Council should receive a report on the periodic
maintenance of city equipment, ie vehicles, which can reduce the
air quality impacts of government activity.
8. ALTERNATIVE FUELS
In the 1970s,-city vehicles switched to the use of propane,
a cleaner fuel than gasoline. The rising cost of propane induced
the city to return to the use of gasoline.
Performance of public emergency vehicles - police and fire -
must not be sacrificed for any reason, and costs must be contained.
However, we must not forget the cost of continuing to use gasoline
as our transportation fuel - a cost measured in death and suffering
as well as dollars.
The City Council should a) adopt a policy of preference
for cleaner alternative fuels, by procuring vehicles designed to
run on cleaner fuels and by making any necessary modifications on
current city vehicles to enable them to run on cleaner fuels, and
b) receive annual public reports on the use of alternative fuels
in city operations.
9. CITY VEHICLES
All city vehicles should be regularly inspected and
maintained to reduce pollution and improve efficiency. The city
should adopt a procurement policy giving preference to vehicles
demonstrating reliable emissions control, fuel efficiency and
ability to use alternative fuels.
10. CITY E:4PLOYEES
Immediate steps should be taken to reduce air pollution
5
created-by--automobile-commuting to City Hall. Government should
set-'an ezamp~.e:
C - Financial bonuses should be provided to employees who
carpool, walk, bicycle, or use public transit to get to work. We
are currently .planning an expansion of our civic center and the
acquisition of more parking facilities. In closed session, our
staff has estimated that city-built parking costs the taxpayers
12 000 er space! Employees who do not drive to work alone are
good for the environment and good for the taxpayer, and should be
rewarded.
- Trolley and bus passes for employees should receive an
appropriate subsidy, similar to those currently provided to
employees of county and state government as well as many private
firms.
- Plans for flexible working hours and alternative work
weeks should be offered to employees wherever possible; to reduce
drj.ving at peak hours on our streets. Slow-stop-and-go traffic
creates more air pollution than. smooth travel.
while each of the above measures would alter. working
conditions for employees - making them better - all are voluntary
and should therefore be implemented immediately, without waiting
for employees to bargain for them. All- of these measures would
benefit -not only 'our employees, but their boss - the People of
( Chula Vista. These are win-win proposals.
11. SDG&E MERGER
Chula Vista should continue the efforts initiated here by
Councilman Malcolm to oppose the merger of SDG&E with SoCal Edison.
The merger is a transparent attempt to fuel more growth in the Los
Angeles air basin at the expense of the air quality of our
community and the health of our children. t9e should demand a full
accounting of all potential environmental impacts, and be ready,
together with other jurisdictions, to back our demands with
litigation and with a denial of necessary franchise transfers.
We should ask the City of San Diego and other jurisdictions
to consider with us a partial public takeover of SDG&E
acquisition of the distribution grid, leaving energy production in
the hands of private enterprise, and opening up the field to free
enterprise. A public energy distribution utility could choose from
among various competing private energy producers based on financial
and environmental costs to ratepayers.
12. SDG&E POWER PLANT
Last year, Councilman Malcolm revealed that SDG&E's plans to
put a new fossil fuel burning plant in Chula Vista were
6
Item ID `
DRAFT
Subject: Criteria for the designation of historical trees
A historical tree should be designated only when it meets one or more of
the following criteria:
I. The subject tree and/or site has been the location of a historical
event.
2. The tree and/or site has been associated with the lives of historical
personages and/or the achievement of the individual.
3. These species of trees is unique in the Chula Vista area.
4. The tree or trees relates to the overall cultural, political,
economic, aesthetic or social history of the City of Chula Vista.
In all cases, the trees must meet the following criteria:
1. It must be demonstrated that the tree is over 50 years old.
2. Based on the opinion of more than one practicing arborist in this
location, the trees must exemplify excellent health and will not
be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the
general public.
Item lE
September 28, 1990
To: Distribution List
From: Bob Leiter, Director of Planning ~~~
Subject: City Attorney Report and Draft Ordinance Regarding Communications
Between Boards and Commissions and City Council
The City Attorney has prepared the attached report and draft ordinance in
response to a City Council referral, requesting that the City Council
agendas be revised to provide for direct communications between the boards
and commissions and the City Council.
The City Attorney has requested that this draft report and ordinance be
forwarded to all boards and commissions for their review and comment, prior
to forwarding it to the City Council for consideration at their meeting on
October 16.
Please forward the attached report to your respective board or commission,
and present the matter to them at their next available meeting. In addition,
please provide written communications to the City Attorney, with a copy to
me, regarding any specific comments received by your board or commission.
If you have any questions, or will have a problem in meeting the deadline
for comments as set by the City Attorney, based on the regular scheduled
meetings of your board or commission, please let me know.
RAL:nr
Distribution List
Planning Commission - Ken Lee
Design Review Committee - Luis Hernandez
Montgomery Planning Committee - Frank Herrera
Resource Conservation Commission - Doug Reid
r
Date: September 24, 1990
To: City Manager, Assistant and Deputy City Managers
Department Heads
Other Staff Liason to Boards and Commissions
cc: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
City Clerk
From: City Attorney, Bruce M. Boogaard
Re: Boards and Commission's Agenda Section
vat- ~'i ~< C~',L~
SEo 2 5199p
The attached report has been prepared in response to a Council
referral (No. 2098) to my office to create Ordinance authority that
will permit Boards and Commissions to submit matters to the City
Council by and through the Agenda process.
The report is self explanatory.
The section of our typical "A-113" dealing with the recommendation
of our Boards and Commissions is left blank in anticipation of
receiving the comments on this report of any board, committee, or
commission with which you offer staff support, or otherwise may
deal.
Requested Action:
Please review this report with any and all Boards, Committees, or
Commissions for which you, or a member of your department, acts as
staff. Please obtain their comments, if any, and direct them to my
office. I will include them in the final report. I expect to
forward this report, along with their comments, or a summary
thereof, to the City Council for their meeting of October 1G--
approximately 4 weeks from now.
Thanks for your anticipated cooperation.
agenda2.wp Boards Right to Submit Agenda Items
September 24, 1990
Page 1
r
Proposed
Agenda Statement
Item
Meeting Date:
Item Title: Ordinance - AN ORDINANCE PERMITTING BOARDS,
COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES TO PLACE
MATTERS ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA.
Submitted by: City Attorney
Reviewed and approved by: City Clerk
(4/5ths Vote: Yes No X_)
Referral No: 2098
On August 21st, the City Council directed staff to modify the
existing agenda format to allow for placement of Boards and
Commission items on the agenda. The attached ordinance
accomplishes that result. Pursuant to said proposed ordinance, the
chairperson of a Board, Commission or Committee, ("Board") upon a
majority vote of said Board, shall direct the City Clerk to add a
report and recommendation of said Board to the Agenda in a separate
section, entitled: Boards, Committees and Commissions Reports and
Recommendations, and in such other format as the City Clerk, in
cooperation with the City Manager, shall determine.
Recommendation:
Adopt the attached Ordinance amending Section 2.040.090 which
will require the Chairperson of any Council-approved Board,
Commission or Committee of the City, upon a majority vote of such
body, to place matters on the City Council's Agenda. Other changes
conforming the Agenda-preparation procedures to our current
practice have been made. The proposed Ordinance also encourages
written "backup" support for Mayoral Reports and Council Comments,
if any exists, to be included in the Agenda Package Material.
agenda2.wp Boards Right to Submit Agenda Ztems
September 24, 1990
Page 1
.,-
Board and Commission Recommendation:
[To Department Heads: Insert Your Boards, Commission or
Committee's comments here.]
Discussion:
Primary Objective of Ordinance.
The attached ordinance achieves the directive of Referral No.
2098, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A, by allowing a
Council-approved Board, Commission or Committee to have a matter
placed on the City Council's agenda by a majority vote of the
members thereof.
Secondary Objective No 1 - Reorganization of Section.
The proposed ordinance also attempts to re-organize the
content of Section 2.04.090 into perhaps more logically separate
concepts dealing with the agenda preparation, posting, delivery and
accessability.~
However, except for the following, no substantive concepts in
this reorganization effort were altered:
A. Under the current section, the placement of items on the
agenda appears permissive: "Items of business may be placed on the
agenda The proposed language makes the placement of such
matters mandatory.
B. In order to conform to our current Agenda practice, two
sections were added to permit Mayoral Reports and Council Comments.
Secondar Objective No. 2 - Backu for Ma or's Re ort and
Council Comments
Zn each of the sections relative to t•fayoral Reports and
Council Comments, the sponsoring councilperson is urged, but not
required, to provided written "backup", if any already exists, to
agenda2.wp Boards Right to Submit Agenda Items
September 24, 1990
Page 2
the City Clerk in time for inclusion in the delivery of the Agenda
Package to the Council, to wit: Friday preceding the meeting. The
sections do not require a Councilperson to prepare, as new
material, any special report in order to have their reports or
comments considered.
Cit 72-Hour Postin Re uirement Remains Unchan ed.
The 1990-91 State Budget Act amendment to the Brown Act has,
this year, eliminated the state 72-hour posting requirement. Our
Muncipal Code, at Section 2.04.090 and 2.04.1002 was originally
patterned, almost verbatim, after the now-eliminated state 72-hour
pasting requirement (See Government Code Section 54954.2).
Section 2.04.090 and 2.04.100 now operate as the sole basis of
authority for the 72-hour posting requirement at our local level,
despite the State Budget Act deletion of the same provision in the
Brown Act. This Office supports the advance noticing requirement.
Therefore, no change is advised or recommended. Furthermore, the
existence of this section obviates the need for a policy statement
to the effect that we should follow the 72-hour posting requirement
regardless of the state deletion.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce M. Boogaard,
City Attorney
agenda2.wp Boards Right to Submit Agenda Items
September 24, 1990
Page 3
r
Endnotes:
Currently, the Section reads as follows:
"2.04.090 Agenda-Submission of items-Preparation-Effect.
An agenda shall be prepared for each regular meeting
containing a brief general description of each item of
business to be transacted oz• discussed, and shall provide an
item for members of the public to directly address the Council
on items of interest to the public within the subject matter
jurisdiction of the Council. Items of business may be placed
on the agenda by the direction of a majority of the council,
the city manager, the city' clerk, or the city attorney.
Agenda items, i.e., background and requests for particular
actions or reports, shall be delivered to the city clerk not
later than ten a.m, on the Thursday preceding the regular
meeting. The clerk shall thEareafter prepare the agenda under
the direction of the city manager. Whenever feasible, each
item on the agenda shall contain a staff recommendation and
the specific action requestecl to be taken by the council. The
agenda, together with all reports, resolutions and ordinances
pertaining thereto, shall be delivered to the councilmembers
on the Friday preceding the regular meeting. The agenda shall
specify the time and location of the regular meeting, shall be
posted at least seventy-two ;hours before the regular meeting
in a location freely accessible to the public, and be made
available to the public as soon as practicable. No matters
other than those listed on the agenda shall be acted upon by
the council, except as provided in Section 2.04.010. A
direction by the council to refer a matter not on the posted
agenda raised by a member of the Council or of the public, to
staff for a report or to plz~ce a matter on a future agenda
shall not constitute action."
Section 2.04.100 reads as follows:
"2.04.100 Items not on posted agenda.
The city council may take action upon items of business
not on the posted agenda upon a determination:
A. By a majority vote than an emergency situation, as
defined by Government Code section s4956.5 exists; or
agenda2.wp Boards Right to Sub;,iit :agenda Items
September 24, 1990
Page 4
B. By a two-thirds vote, or, if less than two-thirds of the
members are present, a unanimous vote of those members
present, that the need to take action arose subsequent to
the agenda being posted; or
C. The item was posted for a prior meeting of the city
council occurring not more than five calendar days prior
to the date action is taken, and at the prior meeting the
item was continued to the meeting at which action is
being taken.~~
agenda2.wp I3oard~ Yignt to Euk;.,~i . Agenda Ttems
September 24, 1990
Page 5
~-
considerably further a~ng_tha„ h
Considerin ad--been-led-to--believe.
C say no to anotherxonelhere.W1Whilee t may be Po uer hat a~combined
cycle plant will create less pollution than the old plant, the old
plant is not being replaced; thus, the net effect is more air
pollution in the lungs of our citizens. As for SDG&E's claim that
the augmentation proposal will reduce pollution, it appears this
only holds true if natural gas rather than oil is burned. Our
citizens need something more valuable than SDG&E's word to protect
our environment. We must be ready to use every regulatory and
legal tool at our disposal to protect the health and property of
our citizens. We should move forward expeditiously with Malcolm's
proposal to rezone the SDG&E land.
13. INDOOR AIR POLLUTION
- Adoption of the County's smoking regulations would
offer greater protection to the health of those who choose not to
smoke. Being an asthmatic who has had to go to the emergency room
as~a child for treatment of life-threatening asthma attacks brought
on by exposure to "second-hand" tobacco smoke, I know the need for
this from painful personal experience.
- We should make an effort within city government to
eliminate use of chemicals which pollute the indoor air of public
facilities.
/ 14. OZONE LAYER PROTECTION
- We should support state and federal legislative
efforts, such as those of our Congressman Bates, to .protect the
earth's ozone layer.
- We should move quickly to adopt a city procurement
policy to prohibit purchase of products which attack the ozone
layer.
2 Residents downwind of the existing power plant often used
to awake to find their private property covered with soot. SDG&E
at one point claimed the soot came not from burning of oil at the
power plant, but from bee droppings. (Common sense says the only
agoreedngot lto ocontdi uee bu~ ningdpolluting voil at the plant without
prior notification to the city, burning gas instead. when
residents came to me indicating their suspicion that SDG&E was
again burning oil - suspicion based on the reappearance of soot in
their neighborhood - I brought the matter up at the next City
Council meeting, only to be told that this couldn't be so because
SDG&E had .made an agreement with us. When it turned out that it
was so, we were then treated to assurances that the resumption of
oil burning posed no threat to air quality - based on measurements
taken two miles away.
7
-_ = _" _ One ofthe_largest_cnnt,-;h„t~~_to_ozone-deplet-ion is
the escape of ccoolant from .automobile air conditioners during
C repair. Currently available equipment can prevent this but the
equipment costs about $3,000. We should adopt an ordinance
requiring businesses engaged in work on automobile air conditioning
to have and use such equipment; however, to avoid a
counterproductive competitive disadvantage-for local business, we
should provide that the ordinance takes effect only on adoption of
similar laws by neighboring jurisdictions, including the City and
the County of San Diego.
which deplete ethe oozone layers whereusubstit tes aree availab dects
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
1.' GENERAL PLAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
in July 1987, I cast a crucial third vote for the General Plan
revision despite serious environmental reservations (two
councilmembers were precluded from voting because of conflicts of
interest}.. Prior to agreeing to support the General Plan revision,
I obtained approval of a motion to require staff to bring back to
the council a Growth Management Element of the General Plan which
would address, among other concerns, the protection of air quality,
of water quality and supply, and the need to prevent our existing
residential streets-from becoming mini-freeways serving the traffic
needs of new development. I hope approval of my motion was not a
ruse to obtain a vote. The draft Growth Management Element which
was presented to council .last fall-contains little more than "Mom
and apple pie" goals, without the necessary policies to achieve
them. It in no way addresses the environmental concerns mandated
by the Council. This is particularly dangerous to our local
environment because the City Council has approved major
developments since last summer on the condition that they
ultimately conform to the yet-to-be-adopted Growth Management
Element of the General Plan - a condition which will mean nothing
if the Growth Management element has no teeth.
We should resolve in 1990 to adopt a Growth Management Element
to our General Plan which protects our citizens' health and
lifestyle. At a minimum, such a Growth Management Element must
contain strategies to reduce air and water pollution, conserve
water supply, hold traffic to healthy levels and protect sufficient
open space to keep Chula Vista distinguishable from Los Angeles.
As state law requires development to conform with the General plan,
a strong Growth Management Element, if enforced, will do much to
protect our local environment for generations to come.
If, lII lmpi2menting the Growth "Management Element (or the.
Thresholds ordinance), we find we must limit the number of units
built to less than that otherwise allowed, tae should not allocate
permits on a first-come, first-served basis, but according to
community benefit from a project. First-come, first-served
8
allocation- wouldmerely reward thn~e_de~zelnpers-whc~_rush-their
C projects .through-the fastest; we should reward those who show
sensitivity to community needs.
2. PARKS
Relevant conditions of new developments at each approval stage
should be reviewed by our Parks and Recreation Commission prior to
being brought to the City Council, to assure future park needs are
met.
3. ACQUISITION OF LAND FOR PERMANENT OPEN SPACE
Adequate open space is crucial for both the appearance and the
psychological health of a community. Science has suggested a
correlation between overcrowding and violent, anti-family
behaviors.
While we should continue to require new development in the
east to provide permanent open space, we should also take steps for
open space preservation as western Chula Vista continues to in-
fill. Too often, we hear that a development project must replace
open space because we Tack the funds to acquire the land: While
this sometimes sounds like a misleading excuse for pro-growth votes
(the law generally allows us to preserve more open space-than we
do), it is nonetheless true that we currently lack a funding
mechanism to acquire additional open space in the city.
We should adopt the proposal of the Environment and Open Space
subcommittee of Chula Vista 2000 to create assessment districts
within which new development would be assessed to create a fund for
open space and parks acquisition in areas of our community which
are most in need.
4. REDEVELOPMENT
All redevelopment plans should take into account not only
protection of sensitive environmental habitat, but the open space
and recreation needs of our community. I propose requiring
redevelopment plans to go through our Resource Conservation
Commission and our Parks and Recreation Commission before coming
to the City Council.
5. RESOURCE PROTECTION
Our Hillside preservation Ordinance, passed by the City
Council in 1973, was a model for protection of hillsides from
overgrading. However, its application has been limited by the
practice of exempting from its ambit any area not specifically
zoned for its protection. The Hillside Ordinance should be amended
to protect the entire city.
Other than the Hillside Ordinance, it may surprise many to
9
t
learn, that the City of Gh~~yista~ursentl1, has n~
protection of sensitive lands, beyond those mandatedobycs ate and
C federal law and those contained in the General Plan. Case-by-case
ad hoc assessment of projects may be inadequate to assure open
space and sensitive lands preservation. The City Council should
adopt a Sensitive Lands Ordinance to assure preservation of canyons
and other open space with important ecological or aesthetic value.
This ordinance, together with the hillside ordinance and the
General Plan, should form a floor, not a ceiling, for environmental
protection as our city continues to face unprecedented pressure for
growth.
6. EIRs
Again CEQA requires that projects be approved only after
consideration of an EIR which provides comprehensive information
on the environmental impacts of the project - including generation
of further growth. We have both a legal and a moral obligation to
reject any EIR which does not provide useful information as to any
growth-generating impacts of a project, ie, open space loss, air
degradation, water consumption, traffic, etc. as a result of
additional growth caused by leapfrog development or by generating
jobs which cannot be filled by our own community. A reference to
SANDAG projections is inadequate. .SANDAG tells us what will happen
if we don't manage .growth - we have- an obligation to learn -the
specific impact of a project before we vote on it, and to consider
realistic alternatives, as the law requires.
The convenience of government. or of developers, while nice,
are not acceptable as "overriding considerations" to justify
serious environmental impacts, nor as a basis for declining to
consider alternatives to approval of a proposed project and should
never be accepted as such.
7. THRESHOLDS ORDINANCE REVISION AND ENFORCE>IENT
Our "Thresholds Ordinance", designed to assure that new
development does not overburden our streets, schools, emergency
services, and environment, represents in manycaays a model approach
to growth management. Unfortunately, it has not been consistently
implemented, and weaknesses need to be addressed.
- No project which will result in impacts not allowed
under the ordinance should even be brought to the Planning
Commission or the Council, except with the clear understanding that
under Proposition V, such a project cannot be aporoved without a
unanimous vote of the council. Such projects un~ortunatcly have
3 4dhen such decisions are made, i.t is crucial
that the media report them; otherwise the la:, ando ire public
interest .it is supposed to protect are lifeless.
10
i
been brought forward, in at least one instance~~e;v;.,g "approval"
on a sp~.it council vo£e. No law is worth the paper its written on
without enforcement.
- It is clear, following the first report of the Growth
Management Oversight Committee which we created to monitor
implementation of the Thresholds Ordinance, that we are presently
failing to meet the "threshold" levels of service in parts of our
city for schools and traffic, and are in danger of failure in the
areas of air and water.4 The ordinance should be toughened to
assure that development does not imperil our ability to meet these
standards. For example, we should require provisions in every
development agreement that development stops when a threshold
standard is not being met, and we should create provisions for more
meaningful action than a "letter of concern" by the Council to
other agencies when standards in such areas as schools, air and
water are not being met. P7e must recognize that, within our city,
the City Council is the ultimate land use authority, and we should
not be content to "pass the buck" for the consequences of our
decisions to other agencies.
consideration of finanaialncand e environmental e impacts rand not
service quality. 5 For example:
A. The cost to ratepayers and to the environment
of new sources of water supply for growth should be
considered; sources which raise rates for existing
C users or seriously degrade the environment should
not be construed as meeting the water supply
threshold.
B. Our firefighters have been asking for years that
we enhance their safety and their service by
providing four-person crews for each fire engine;
management tells us we lack the financial resources
to do so. we should not resign ourselves to
continuing this situation as a means of paying for
service to new development, and doing so should not
be construed as meeting the fire service threshold.
C. Pedestrian and bicyclist safety, particularly
4 Toe "met" the threshold for police service by simply
reducing the standard, not by growth management. Council took this
action on the recommendation of the GidOC. Unfortunately, it turns
out that G.iOC in turn made its recommendation to the council based
on a staff presentation .leading at least some G.~?OC members to
believe that the City Council had directed them to recommend an
adjustment of the standard that would bring us into compliance.
In fact, we never gave such a direction.
5 The City
,~ Council has directed the Gb10C to consider a "cost
component" to the thresholds.
11
J
`' in - resdential_nei-ghlzorhoads_and nPar_~chOOls,
--
-- should never be sacrificed as a means of "meeting"
C a traffic threshold to accommodate more growth.
Street "improvements" that create hazards, although
allowing more cars to travel at the same rate of
speed, should not be construed as a way of meeting
the traffic threshold standard.
Generally, our policy should be that thresholds are not met by
increasing costs to existing ratepayers and taxpayers, by harming
the environment, or by accepting less than top-quality service.
- We should make clear to GbSOC that we encourage them
to use their talents to recommend changes in our growth management
strategy whenever they view change as desirable.
8. TREES
Chula Vista is rightly proud of its designation as "Tree City
USA". Preservation and planting of trees has always been known,
without the benefit of consultants or staff reports, to contribute
to the aesthetic .quality of the community. Today, we also know
that trees are an important weapon in the fight to save our planet
from the Greenhouse Effect.
Our city should do its part by adopting a policy directing
staff to work with property owners to identify trees in the area
of any project and to promote their preservation. This should be
done at the earliest stage of an application, not later when the
desirability of saving a tree will come as a surprise to a property
owner.
We should review our ordinances and policies to assure that
unpermitted grading and destruction of trees does not occur.
Escondido's new Arbor Day program is a model which we should
consider.
9. CREATING JOBS FOR LOCAL RESIDENTS
Several studies have confirmed what I suggested on the council
three years ago: the greatest factor creating pressure for new
residential development is the creation of jobs which cannot be
filled by local residents - and which therefore necessitate the
construction of new housing, often of a type promoting sprawl and
unaffordable to most families in our community. SVe should create
a jobs program to:
A. Identify job skills which will be present in our
local labor pool in the future;
B. Working with our school districts, our conununity
college district, and other institutions of higher learning, see
to it that our community's workers, present and future, have the
opportunity to acquire the job skills that will put ti:em ahead in
tomorrow's market; and,
C. In our development decisions, give preference to land
uses which will help achieve these goals.
12
Ths_program_would-both-improves __ortomic--opportunity--in our
community and help alleviate the pressure for urban sprawl.
C
WASTE
1. .BKK
Following the three spill incidents which we were told
couldn't happen but did last year, it is clear that a toxic waste
facility such as BKK does not belong near a residential
neighborhood in Chula Vista. Another, more suitable site must be
found for this facility, away from the homes of law-abiding
citizens. A site near the prison would be far more appropriate,
coupled with a site in southern Orange County to reduce the
transportation of toxic wastes to the South Bay. Councilwoman
McCandliss and I, working as a council subcommittee, will continue
pushing the relocation of BKK, and the continued support of
colleagues and neighbors is appreciated. In the meantime, every
possible measure, including a demand for full environmental review
backed by a readiness to litigate if necessary, should be taken to
protect our citizens from continued operation of the facility at
its present site.
2. TOXIC WASTE REDUCTION AND ON-SITE TREATMENT
The best solution to problems posed by facilities like BKK is
to use technology that reduces the generation and transportation
~ of toxic waste. We should instruct our staff to work with the
Environmental Health Coalition to sponsor a model ordinance in this
area for our county.
3. DRUG LAWS
San Diego County is the Methamphetamine Capital of the World,
and 25~ of the toxic waste processed at the BKK plant is from the
illegal manufacture of this hellish drug. Illegal methamphetamine
manufacturers are murderers as well as serious polluters, and
should get life in prison, not probation. Then they could
permanently reside near a toxic waste site more appropriate than
the one currently used by BKK. Our city should again make known
to the Legislature and to local judges our dissatisfaction with
sentencing priorities and practices which actually encourage
criminals to make money by killing our citizens, destroying our
families and polluting our environment.
4. RECYCLING IN CITY GOVF:,RNMENT
It is clear that without substantial increases in recycling,
we will soon run out of places with which to feed our traditional
belief in the myth that there is an "away" to throw things to.
Government should set an example with a comprehensive recycling
13
f
r'=~"""• l,lr-year; ~n addition to tie-cu~re~t program of
recycling computer paper generated in City Hall, we should
implement a program to recycle all paper (which government is known
to generate large amounts of), plus aluminum and glass.
S. CURBSIDE RECYCLING
We should expand the current pilate program of curbside
recycling to include the entire city. When the trash contract next
comes up, recycling services should be a component of the ne~v
contract.
6. CITY PROCUREMENT OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS
Again, government should lead by example - we should adopt a
policy of procuring recyclable materials wherever feasible.
7. BANNING NON-RECYCLABLE AND OZONE-DEPLETING PRODUCTS
Following the lead of other cities such as Irvine, we should
ban the sale of non-recyclable and ozone-depleting products for
which .affordable alternatives are available.
8. RECYCLING STORAGE AND PICKUP
At least until-curbside recycling becomes a reality city-wide,
we should set aside convenient places for dropoff, storage and
pickup of recyclable materials in such places as parks, and in new
developments.
9. PRISON RECYCLING PROPOSAL
We should support - subject to appropriate environmental
review - the proposal for biogeneration of methane from trash at
Donovan Prison. This technology promises the potential of deriving
environmentally superior energy from trash - without the air
pollution caused by trash incineration.
WATER POLLUTION
1. SUPPORT BAY CLEANUP
We should adjourn the debate over whether San Diego Bay is the
most polluted bay on the West Coast, or merely unacceptably
~' I am currently working with the sponsors of Earth Day on an
event to be held. at Rohr Park in Chula Vista on April 21,
emphasizing recycling (along with free entertainment). Our Par},s
and Recreation Department staff .is also working on Earth Day
festivities for our city.
14
polluted. Chula Vista,_~articularl~in_it_s _role_ as a pQrt_city,
a~c3- given our ong-term interest in recreational use of our
C bayfront, should support any efforts by the Regional Water Quality
Control Board, the Port District, the Environmental Health
Coalition and others to see to it that pollution laws are enforced
and that San Diego Bay is cleaned up.
Any-plan for "revenue sharing" by the Port should assure that
sufficient funds are reserved for cleanup of the bay.
2. OFFSHORE OIL
The recent oil spill off Huntington Beach dramatizes the need
to continue steadfast opposition to offshore oil drilling - not to
increase offshore drilling, as some politicians have suggested.
We should also support legislation to require double-hulling
of oil .tankers.
3. SDG&E
We should require SDG&E to identify any equipment or processes
at its South Bay plant using PCBs. or other toxic water pollutants,
and to eliminate their use in our city.
4. SEWAGE
We can expect soon an attempt to foist on Chula Vista
ratepayers a huge rate increase to pay for the City of San ego's
unilateral decisions on the Metro sewer system - an attem~ .which
some Chula Vista councilmembers, including myself,
have indicated at public meetings will probably be refused. We
should, in conjunction with our possible secession from the Metro
system, explore more economical alternative technologies for
environmentally acceptable sewage treatment as well as water
reclamation. Technologies to be explored in a cooperative effort
of government agencies and the private sector should include
biological solutions and waste reduction. A willingness to
innovate - and to carefully manage our growth until a viable answer
to sewage treatment is available - is essential to both the
environmental and economic future of our community.
ENHANCE STREETSWEEPING PRIOR TO RAINY SEASON
Enhanced streetsweeping activity prior to rain can help
minimize polluting runoff into the bay.
F7ATER CONSERVATION
1. CONSERVATION FINANCE AUTHORITY
We should establish a city Conservation Finance Authority to
make no-interest loans to boL-h new and current homeowners for
15
installation of conservation technologies (such as low-flow
glumbing-fixtures,-drought=resistant landscaping, solar heating and
C heat exchange systems) where such technology can be expected to pay
for itself within a reasonable time.
2. RETROFIT ORDINANCE
In the current litigation between the City of San Diego and
the federal government, Sierra Club has taken the sound position
that any settlement should include a city conservation program,
including an ordinance requiring retrofit of conservation devices
at time of resale. Such a policy, by reducing the flow through the
sewage system, can achieve significant cost savings (San Diego's
current plan will cost over $2 billion to ratepayers) as well as
conservation of energy and water.
The City of Chula Vista will probably refuse to pay for San
Diego's unilateral decisions on sewage of the last 20 years, but
we should in any event pursue a conservation program similar to
that advocated by the Sierra Club, embracing an energy and water
conservation retrofit ordinance.
An ordinance requiring buildings sold in the city to be
equipped with simple, cost-effective conservation devices (i.e.,
insulation and low-flow showerheads) and requiring large new
developments to subsidize conservation retrofitting in older
developments to offset their consumption of more resources, could
save both scarce resources and money.
( 3. DROUGHT TOLERANT LANDSCAPING
\ When I first raised this issue at the City Council three years
ago, it was met with little attention and some controversy.
However, the Council adopted a policy requiring developers to save
water by landscaping with native and drought tolerant plants.
Fortunately, since then, thanks largely to the efforts of the
County Water Authority and the recent focus on the water shortage
facing our region, the issue has gained more attention and
acceptance. We should expand our existing policy to use tentative
subdivision map conditions to put CC&Rs in new subdivisions
requiring landscaping to be done with native and drought resistant
plants. Such water conservation measures will help protect the
lifestyles and pocketbooks of our citizens.
4. j^7ATER RECLAMATION
In addition to steps -the city is taking to require water
reclamation uses and capabilities in new developments, we should
expand the use of reclaimed water at city parks and other public
facilities.
16
-' EMPOWERIN<,_OUR$ELVES T9 PROTECZOUR~NVrRONMENT
C 1. RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
We should act without further delay on the package of
recommendations made to the City Council last year by our own
Resource Conservation Commission to beef up environmental awareness
and protection in our city, including proposed improvements in the
commission's function and broader participation from neighborhoods
on environmental issues. We should not allow key environmental
decisions to be made in an atmosphere of a club with a closed
membership.
2. LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
Our City's lobbying program with the State Legislature and
U.S. Congress should continue to include pro-environment positions,
particularly on such issues as clean air, global warming (the
"greenhouse effect"), offshore oil, toxic waste and land use. We
shr~uld join vigorously with other cities in fighting the Governor's
recent proposals. to replace local land use decisions with
centralized State policy (it didn't work in Russia, and it won't
work here) and to increase offshore oil.
3. PUBLIC INFORMATION
We should improve our efforts to provide information to the
public on environmental and land use issues. Such efforts should
include articles by environmental experts in the city newsletter,
information on how to participate in decision-making at City Hall
before decisions are cast in concrete, and speakers for public
awareness programs at schools, churches, and other forums. Our
participation in Earth Day this year will be a forward step in this
direction.
4. IN-HOUSE ENVIRONMENTAL EXPERTISE
While other cities have departments devoted to environmental
quality, or give individual councilmembers the authority to hire
individual staff (such as Jay Powell on Councilwoman Bernhardt's
staff in San Diego) to deal with environmental issues, our city
does not presently have the capability to readily provide impartial
expert information to the council on many environmental issues.
This situation has greatly disadvantaged our citizens on such
issues as air quality downwind of the SDG&E plant. ;•7e should hire
an environmentalist with expertise and proven background on
environmental issues within the city manager's office, on council
staff, or as a retained consultant to provide the city with
independent information on environmental issues on which we are
called to make decisions. TVe should not be at the mercy of special
interests or other bureaucracies whose own agendas may or may not
include the best interests of Chula Vista.
17
CONCLUSION
Saving our environment, on which the next generation's
survival depends, will be a monumental challenge for all levels of
government. It will require new approaches, and in some cases a
willingness to discard. orthodoxy, to protect and enhance our
community's future. The sooner we start, the easier it will be.
The time is now.
C
1Q
Items for Council Action f~gm „Fnv. ronmanta_j,__pgPr,~la fir the 90s"
(~ 1. Council policy to undertake no further east-west streets or
widenings for accommodation of more eastward development until
planning is completed fcz new east-west public transit.
2. A General Plan amendment precluding further approvals of major
new projects which would have been illegal prior to the General
Plan Revision of 1989 until the issues raised by council referrals
on General .Plan issues - provision of public transit, protection
of residential neighborhoods from increased traffic, and a Growth
Management Element to the General Plan - have been resolved.
3. Directing staff to prepare a long-term plan for the
construction of a citywide system of bicycle lanes to make
bicycling convenient and safe throughout the city, with a phased"
plan for implementation through the capital improvements budget.
4~. Anew zoning ordinance requiring mixed uses (e.g., neighborhood
commercial and residential ). within walking distance of each other
in new development, and facilitating. mixed .uses consistent with
community character in previously built areas, subject to design
review.
5. A new street design ordinance, requiring new streets to be
designed to be driven at a safe speed far pedestrians (not.just
C motorists), prohibiting high-speed design on residential streets
and near sc:ools and senior centers, and requiring the provision
of usable a~:d safe bicycle lanes.
6. A zoning ordinance requiring new employment centers to be
situated within convenient walking distance of public transit
services, with provisions for partnerships between developers and
the city for the provision of such services where feasible.
7. A Transportation Demand Management Ordinance. This ordinance
would require large employers, including the City, to prepare plans
for a reduction in "drive alone" commutes during peak hours of over
508 within five years. Measures in transportation demand
management plans could include carpooling, transit and bicycle
incentives, flex hours and alternative workweeks, hiring from
residential areas near the place of employment, or other measures
to be determined in each plan. Plans should be monitored for
compliance with goals, and goals should be periodically evaluated
for their ability to achieve healthier air.
8. Adoption of a city government transportation demand management
plan in advance of the effective date of the above ordinance,
including the measures listed above.
9. Direct staff to prepare a plan for the construction, through
1
the -capital im~ro_v_e~nents_prnceG~~~~;_it-}~_redevelopmeat €unds in
~~ appropriate areas). of secure bicycle parking facilities at city
facilities-and commercial centers, giving priority to locations at
businesses wishing to provide such improvements in partnership with
the city.
~~
10. Adoption of an ordinance prohibiting contracts for EZRs which
do not require the best po§sible quantification of impacts in areas
mandated by CEQA, and prohibiting payment for unacceptable EIRs.
11. Direct staff to identify projects impacting Chula Vista where
environmental and. traffic forecasts on which policy makers relied
turned out. to be seriously wrong, to hire a consultant not
connected to any such projects to conduct a study of how they went
wrong, and to provide recommendations for correcting the process
in the future, as well as on any remedies the city may have.
12: Request a staff report on current air quality maintenance
programs for city equipment, with recommendations for improvements
if appropriate.-
13. Adopt: an ordinance containing a preferential procurement
policy for clean fuels (within realistic economic parameters) and
requiring an annual public .report on implementation.
14. Send a letter from the City Council to Mayor O'Connor of San
Diego, the Chair of the County Board of Supervisors, and the mayors
of the other cities in the county asking them to join in a
`~ cooperative effort to explore the-feasibility and desirability of
creating a public energy distribution utility while opening energy
production to the free market.
15. Direct our staff, as intervenors in any proceeding concerning
proposals for new SDG&E facilities in Chula Vista, to demand proof
of air quality claims, and to oppose any such proposals in the
absence of proof that they will improve our air quality and that
SDGSE will be held to any assurances it gives by the prospect of
meaningful penalties for violations of any agreements.
16. Send a letter to the California Energy Commission outlining
our agreement with SDG&E concerning the rezone of their Chula Vista
land and putting on the record of any Energy Commission proceeding
the invalidity under that agreement of any implication that new
industrial uses by SDG&E on our bayfront are consistent with local
land use regulations.
17. Consider an Open Space zone alternative for at least part of
the SDG~E bayfront property.
18. Adopt an indoor smoking law patterned after San Diego
County's.
2
r -
19. :-..Direct .staff. to report on tha _n~CRlt,le-e$tab~i-ShmauL of a
u d; similar to that proposed at the federal level by the
~~ Environmental-Defense Fund, to subsidize the removal of lead from
` older Chula Vista homes.. This report should include an analysis
of need, and, if the need is shown, of possible funding sources,
e.g., a ballot measure tb tax lead products.
20. Direct staff to prepare a policy, with input from the
Environmental Health Coalition and appropriate others, to eliminate
the use of polluting chemicals by the city and prescribing
alternatives.
21. Adopt a city policy to identify and prohibit the purchase of
any unnecessary products the production, use, or disposal of which
is harmful to the earth's ozone layer, and assure that all staff
with purchasing authority receive a copy.
22'. Adopt an ordinance requiring work on automobile air
conditioners to be performed with equipment to prevent the escape
of ozone-depleting chemicals into the environment, with the
effective-date delayed until a similar ordinance is adopted in all
jurisdictions in the county.
23. -Add support for the Bates ozone layer protection bill to the
city's legislative .program.
24. Add support for Assemblyman Peace's A.B. 1332 to phase out
chlorofluorocarbons from automobile air conditioning by 1995 to the
(~ .city's legislative program.
25. Hold off on further .tentative map approvals for major projects
relying on the 1989 General Plan revision until that revision.-
including a Growth Management Element with implementation measures
- is complete.
26. Adopt an ordinance requiring new developments to be considered
by the Parks and Recreation Commission, with that commission's
recommendation being put before the City Council at the time of any
council action, and prohibiting council approval prior to such
input.
27. Adopt an ordinance for the creation of open space and parks
acquisition assessment districts.
28. Adopt an Open Space zone.
29. Adopt an ordinance requiring redevelopment plans to be
considered by the Planning Commission and the Resource Conservation
Commission prior to City Council action.
30. Adopt a Sensitive Lands Ordinance for the protection of
slopes, canyons, riparian habitats and other environmentally
3
._ r
sensitive lands. __ -
r 31'. =`Adopt a policy requiring certification, prior to approval, of
~i projects' compliance with .the General Plan Growth Management
Element, the "Threshold" standards, and Proposition V, with the
understanding that projects not in compliance with the latter are
required by law to gain a unanimous council vote to win approval.
~`
32._. Adopt an ordinance requiring all development agreements to
contain provisions halting development where the "threshold"
standards are not met.
33. .Adopt an ordinance amending the "threshold" standards to
measure compliance by impacts on cost and quality, as well as
quantity, of city services, and by impacts on public safety.
34. Adopt an ordinance requiring new developments to show they
will pay their own way in staffing needs as well as capital
improvements.
35. Send.a letter from the City Council to-the Growth Management
Oversight Committee, the Planning-.Commission, the Parks and
Recreation Commission and the Resource Conservation Commission
emphasizing the council's intent. to give these bodies the widest
possible latitude to develop policy recommendations for the
council.
36. Adopt a Tree Preservation Ordinance.
37. Direct staff to consider a future Arbor Day program.similar
to that being implemented this year in Escondido.
38. Direct staff to prepare an RFP for a study (to be done jointly
with neighboring.jurisdictions if they wish) to identify future job
demands and training needs in our locale and to recommend
education, training and economic development measures, with
assistance from a city Economic Development Commission.
39. Direct staff to work with the Environmental Health Coalition
to develop a model Toxic Waste Reduction Ordinance.
40. Send letters from the city to legislators and local judges
reiterating our desire for greater protection - touoher sentencinrt
- of methamphetamine manufacturers.
41. Send appropriate letters in sentencing proceedings involving
methamphetamine manufacturing in Chula Vista, reminding judges of
the seriousness of this activity and the need for protecting the
public.
42. Establish a program for collecting all recyclable materials
(glass, aluminum, paper) generated at City Hall.
4
(~ ~3: Establish a timetable for citywide curbside recycling.
44. .Adopt a program similar to Irvine's to restrict the sale and
use of unnecessary products harming the environment through ozone
depletion and nonrecyclz~ility.
45. Direct our staff to'~stablish neighborhood recycling centers
and negotiate appropriate pickup services.
46. Adopt an ordinance requiring new development to provide
recycling facilities.
47. Adopt a Toxics Disclosure Ordinance.
48. Empower the Resource Conservation Commission to review
generation and uses of toxic waste in Chula Vista, and make
recommendations for reductions.
49. Direct our staff to provide us with an interim updated report
on alternatives to continued participation in or .payment for the
Metro sewer, system, including alternative treatment technologies.
50. Direct our staff to implement enhanced streetsweeping prior
to forecast storms.
51. Establish a Conservation Finance Authority to provide low- and
r no- interest loans to homeowners and businesses for capital
.improvements conserving .energy and water.
52. Adopt an ordinance requiring retrofit of residential buildings
at time of sale with simple, cost-effective conservation technology
(insulation and low-flow fixtures), using funding from the
Conservation Finance Authority and Development Impact Fees assessed
on developments consuming energy and water resources.
53. Adopt an ordinance requiring new developments to use drought-
tolerant landscaping, and to include CC&Rs requiring drought-
tolerant landscaping.
54. Direct our staff to prepare a plan for expanded use, of
reclaimed water in city facilities.
55. Establish neighborhood planning groups to provide input on
development and planning proposals affecting the community.
56. Direct the Resource Conservation Commission to provide or
arrange for quarterly articles on local environmental issues in our
city newsletter, and to work with the city's public information
coordinator to develop better communication with the public on
environmental and planning issues.
5
57• Direct_st_f_~__thr~ugh-our-Fy-i99p_g~budget,-tcrether hire
a staff person at-the Deputy City Manager level with a solid
environmentalist background, or to retain a private environmental
expert to work directly with city policy makers on all policy
issues having environmental implications.
~~
~,
6
C
r
MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING
Resource Conservation Commission
Chula Vista, California
C
6:08 p.m. Council Chambers
Monday, August 20 1990 Public Services Building
CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meeting called to order at 6:08
p.m. by Chairman Fox. Env ironmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid
called the roll. Present: Commissioners Fox, Chidester,
Ghougassian, Hall and Ray. Absent with notification:
Commissioner Stevens. Absent without notification Commissioner
Johnson
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MSC (Chidester/Fox) 4-0-1, with Ghougassian
abstaining, to approve the minutes of July 23, 1990 as mailed.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. PUBLIC HEARING: To take public testimony relevant to the
proposed "Environmental Agenda for the
90 s as proposed by Councilmember
Nader. (Continued from July 23, 1990
meeting.)
Environmental Review Coordinator Reid said it was the
opinion of the City Attorney that the minutes of July 23,
1990 were of sufficient detail to permit Commission members
who were absent to dispense with listening to the tape of
the meeting and still participate in voting on the continued
items.
Chairman Fox suggested that Items #2 and #25 be combined
into one article. He asked what the effect would be if a
time line of October 31, 1990 were affixed to both items.
Councilman Nader replied that any developer who had received
approval prior to November 1 would have an advantage until
the Growth Management Implementation Plan was adopted.
This, staff had recently indicated, would be ready by the
end of the year. Mr. Nader replied to Commissioner Hall
that effective "holding-up" action could not be implemented
immediately by denial of a project on the basis of not
having a complete Growth Management Plan or by a moratorium
as expressed in #25. It would be subject to the usual
public hearing process and 30-day waiting period prior to
enactment unless Council were to adopt the moratorium as an
Urgency Measure.
Commissioner Chidester spoke on Article #3 (bike lanes)
saying that more emphasis needs to be placed on bicyclists
obeying the traffic laws and that the appropriate ordinances
RCC Minutes 3 Au ust 20 1990
thresholds and reports to the Council on how they are being
implemented and on recommended changes.
Commissioner Ray referenced #39, regarding developing a
model Toxic Waste Reduction Ordinance. He asked if there
would be any input from organizations representing certain
types of industries (like Rohr) on a Commission or Board
working with staff. The Councilman replied that an advisory
board to work with staff would be one approach or another
way would be for staff to consult with effective groups on a
more formal basis. Commissioner Ray remarked that no one
person could be a special ist in the many fields to be
considered and make specific recommendations on policies
dealing with toxic waste without input from the groups most
affected.
Rent Aden, Eastlake Development Company, Eastlake Business
Center, 900 Lane Ave., Ste 100, CV 92013, submitted a letter
to the Commission indicating EastLake's support of Mr.
Nader's recommendations regarding water conservation and
reclaimed water programs at a planned community level.
Eastlake is also supportive of all portions of the
C "Environmental Agenda" consistent with the City's existing
growth management policies including the City's General
Plan, the "threshold" standards and Proposition V. However,
it does not support any items which are in conflict with
these existing facility driven thresholds. Eastlake has an
on-going "think tank" process and within the next 45-50 days
they will be considering all 57 of Mr. Nader's points. They
would like to return and report to the Commission on how
these are being implemented.
Chairman Fox asked if Eastlake had received notif ication of
the meeting. Mr. Aden replied affirmatively.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Fox reviewed the method by which the 57 points
would be addressed and asked each Commissioner to request
whichever items they wish to discuss more fully.
Chairman Fox asked to have items #2 and #25 pulled.
Commissioner Ray asked to have items #6, #17, #20, #24, #33,
#40, #41, #44 and #52 pulled.
MS (Fox/Hall) to recommend that City Council adopt the docu-
ment entitled "Items for Council Action from 'Environmental
Agenda for the 90's"' Items #1 through #57 except Items #2,
~- #6, #17, #20, #24, #25, #33, #40, #41, #44 and #52.
Commissioner Ray objected to the word "adopt" saying that
RCC Minutes 5 August 20, 1990
item.
No input forthcoming from the public, the public hearing was
closed.
MS (Fox/Hall) to combine Items #2 and #25 to read Item #2
and recommend that Council adopt for approval as goals.
Commissioner Ray questioned that both Item #2 and #25 were
the same since the General Plan to which Councilman Nader
refers is much more encompassing than the tentative map
approval in #2. Chairman Fox replied that all major
approvals on new projects and tentative map approvals would
both be halted until such time as the Growth Management
Element to the General Plan had been satisfied. His motion
is not merely to combine Item #2 and #25 but for the purpose
of recommending that they also be adopted as goals. When
the General Plan was revised, certain elements were not
addressed by the promised date of October 1989. This motion
would force Council to take the matter of growth management
more seriously.
Commissioner Ray maintained that by this item we are
prohibiting certain types of growth by saying all further
approvals of major developments cannot be good for the City
instead of impacting the City itself. In reply to whether
he would approve time restrictions on Item #2 and #25, he
replied that he would if a provision were included as to
what kind of repercussion would be felt by the City, not the
developer, if the deadlines were not met.
Chairman Fox asked if the Commissioner would be agreeable
for the sake of a consensus to the deadline of December
31st. The Commissioner replied he would not.
The motion to combine Items #2 and 25 to read Item #2 and
recommend Council adopt for approval as goals failed by the
following vote•
Ayes: Fox, Chidester, Hall
Noes: Ray
Abstain: Ghougassian
SUBSTITUTE MOTION
MSC (Ray/Chidester) 4-0-1 with Ghougassian abstaining, to
combine Items #2 and 25 singularly and label it #2, taking
no action on approval at this time.
Chairman Fox informed the Commission that before commencing dis-
cussion on Item #6, he would like to consider Item 3 on the
Agenda. The Commission members agreed.
RCC Minutes 7 Auaust 20 1990
Councilman Nader reiterated that the intent of the item was
that the objective could be met either by new employment
centers located near public transit or the transit
rescheduled.
Commissioner Ray moved that the Council adopt an objective
to require new employment centers and public transit routes
to be situated so that they allow for convenient walking
distance to a public transit service and provisions for
partnership between developers and the City for provision of
such services where feasible.
He pointed out that he was eliminating reference to the
zoning ordinance originally called for. Upon not hearing a
second, he withdrew the motion.
MS (Hall/Fox for purpose of discussion) that Council should
plan that new employment centers be situated within
convenient walking distance of public transit services, with
provisions for partnerships between developers and the City
for the provision of such services where feasible.
1
Commissioner Ghougassian suggested as substitute wording
that City Council encourage public transit services be
located at new employment centers with provisions for
partnerships...etc.
Commissioner Hall said she had no objection to the
substitute wording but she believed Item #6 was referencing
Eastlake and other planned communities where the location of
new employment centers is being planned.
Councilman Nader on being asked, confirmed that the
reference was primarily to new developments in the eastern
territory, as well as some redevelopment projects that may
have new employment centers.
Commissioner Hall withdrew the motion and Chairman Fox
withdrew the second.
MS (Ray/Fox) to recommend that Council adopt Item #6 as a
goal where feasible.
Commissioner Ghougassian objected on the basis that it
doesn't make sense when it is known that there is an
ordinance that legally overrides #6. The proper way would
be to delete #6 because it will not fly.
Commissioner Ray withdrew the motion and Chairman Fox
withdrew the second.
RCC Minutes 9 Au ust 20. 1990
and the mitigation monitoring program.
b. IS-90-49 Security First Self Storage Phase III, 3033
Hermosa.
Coordinator Reid said the area was located in an urban
area of Montgomery to the north of Otay wetlands and
the river valley. Project area has already been
disturbed greatly. The drainage run-off will remain
the same.
MSUC (Fox/Hall) 5-0, to adopt the Negative Declaration.
c. IS-90-55, 4th Avenue Apartments, 82 Fourth Avenue
The project is on 1/3-acre lot on Fourth Avenue between
"C" and "D" Streets.
Applicant will be requesting a bonus as there are more
units than would be allowed under existing zoning and
the General Plan.
The Commissioners recommended that the overcrowding in
the schools and the parking situation be pointed out to
the Planning Commission. Commissioner Hall recommended
that the density bonus not be granted. Coordinator
Reid replied that the matter went before the DRC for
approval and that the project met the CEQA
requirements.
MSUC (Ray/Hall) 5-0 to recommend adoption of the
Negative Declaration.
MS (Ray/Hall) that it be noted that the Resource
Conservation Commission collectively has a negative
response to the project itself.
Commissioner Ray withdrew his motion, Commissioner Hall
withdrew the second.
Commissioner Ray asked when the DRC would review and
was informed the week of 9/17/90. He said he would
plan to represent the Commission at the meeting and
voice the RCC's concerns.
MS (Ray/Ghougassian) 3-2 with Fox and Chidester voting
no, to recommend to the DRC that the project be denied
as currently proposed. MOTION FAILED.
MS (Ghougassian/Hall) 3-2 with Ray and Chidester voting
no, to recommend to the DRC that the project be denied
as it stands, however, if certain conditions are met
r
RCC Minutes 11 August 20 1990
5. Review of Planning Commission Agenda for August 22, 1990.
Environmental Review Coordinate- Reid noted that Item 1 was
being continued. Item 2, PCC- -27, consideration of
revocation of conditional use mit for the Office Club at
630 "L" Street because of non-compliance with approved
plans. The owner moved in without the landscaping, paving,
etc. Work has been started and it is possible that by
Wednesday staff may request a 2-week continuance to bring it
up to Code. Item 3, PCA-91-1, consideration of an amendment
to Title 19, is a housekeeping item to bring conflicts
between the widths of driveways in panhandle and flag lots
into compliance. Item 4, is a referral on low density and
estate housing on a couple of projects which Council did not
consider the lot sizes to be truly estate-sized. Item 5
involves a briefing on Salt Creek Ranch issues.
L
OLD BUSINESS:
1. Council Referral on Historical Trees.
MSUC (Chidester/Ray) to continue to the meeting of September
24, 1990.
Commissioner Chidester said he had spoke with John Rojas who
is compiling the list of historical trees. This will be
incorporated in the report. He would like to make a
presentation to the Commission and asks if he could be the
initial item on the Agenda because of another commitment.
COMMUNICATIONS
STAFF REPORT
Environmental Review Coordinator Reid noted that a more
detailed copy of the Commission budget had been distributed
to the members of the Commission.
Saturday, September 8, 1990, was selected as the day for the
paleontological resources tour of Rancho del Rey.
Commissioners Ray, Chidester and Hall will be present.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
It was requested that a letter be sent from staff or the RCC
regarding the pollutants emitted by SDG&E.
ADJOURNMENT AT 9:41 p.m. to the regular business meeting of
September 10, 1990 at 6:00 p.m. in Conf. Rm. 1
Ruth I4. Smith, Rer~rder
MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING
Resource Conservation Commission
Chula Vista, California
6;15 p. m. Council Chambers
Monday, July 23, 1990 Public Services Building
CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meeting called to order at 6:10
p.m. by Chairman Fox. Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid
called the roll. Present: Commissioners Fox, Ray, Stevens and
Hall. Absent with notification: Commissioners Chidester and
Johnson
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MSUC (Hall/Stevens) to approve the minutes
of June 25, 1990 as mailed.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. PUBLIC HEARING: To take public testimony relevant to the
proposed "Environmental Agenda for the
90's" as proposed by Councilmember Nader
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public
hearing was opened.
C Councilman Nader stated that the 57-point proposal covered
three areas needing City action to reverse environmental
de cline.
(A) In-house policies on open space and non-use of toxic
facilities; City Government to set an example by
recycling; and staffing of the newly created position
for an overall conservation coordinator in the City
Manager's Office (#57).
(B) Shaping of land use policies by encouraging developers
to consider the use of public transportation rather
than more cars; by consideration of land pattern
development as well as land use development by the City
as the land use authority; by preserving open space
resources and applying the Hillside Preservation
Ordinance more consistently.
(C) Make an impact on the global issues through support of
legislative representatives in Washington on
environmental issues and through City legislative
action as well as by educating the citizenry on these
issues.
Councilman Nader requested that the RC C, as the Commission
charged with environmental issues, contribute to these 57
{"
RCC Minutes 3 Jul 23 1990
Other issues concerned (1) Point #11, incorrect environ-
mental and traffic forecasts made by consultants, with
counter-measures suggested of review by in-house experts,
identification of such unreliable consultants and that
contracts stipulate penalties for inaccurate forecasts; (2)
whether there might be an enlargement of the Commission's
powers to include final authority on certain points
regarding EIRs; (3) the obligation of the RCC to inf orm the
Council if an area is not addressed in the EIR or proposal;
and (4) scheduling a workshop on potential projects which
might have a cumulative impact on Chula Vista.
Chairman Fox (1) referenced #25 and questioned why the
developer should be penalized when the delay was really
caused by staff and the Council; (2) #4 (from his experience
as a lender) appeared to be economically inf easible,
however, Councilman Nader replied that the type of mixed-use
could include a center in a City block laid out for
usability and was essential because of traffic circulation
problems. (3) Mr. Fox expressed concern about the possible
conflict of loyalties of consultants working both for the
City and in the private sector. (4) Referencing #34, he
asked if this meant "in perpetuity" and was informed that a
combination of taxes and fees would support the staffing
requirements. (5) Referencing page 2, paragraph 2 under
TRAFFIC, Mr. Fox pointed out that the matter had not been
addressed in the 57 points.
Commissioner Hall said she could find no mention of noise
impact in the 57 points.
William Claycomb, 457 Delaware St., Imperial Beach, 92032, a
sociologist, said his primary interest was in the Bay and
the Otay River, that nothing said tonight had touched on his
particular concern; that he would be happy to be informed of
any projects that might have an impact on this; and offered
to make a presentation to the Commission on the wild life
inhabitants of the South Bay Area at their convenience.
Larry Dumlao, 650 Rivera St., CV, 92011, Vice Chairman for
the Executive Committee of the Sierra Club, South Bay, said
his branch had discussed the 57 points and is using it for a
working document. They recommend that the Commission review
the document thoroughly and take it on to the Council. He
said all Chula Vista, the Sierra Club, other environmental
groups and citizen groups need to know of the Agenda which
can become a working tool for them. He accepted Vice
Chairman Steven's invitation to attend the Commission
~- meetings. Staff was requested to see that Mr. Dumlao was
provided with appropriate EIRS.
j,
RCC Minutes 5 ___ July 23 1990
Motion made by Commissioner Steven to recommend that PCZ-91-
A be prezoned as A-8 (Agriculture).
Chairman Fox objected on the grounds that the Commission had
not been provided any documentation.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
OLD BUSINESS
1. Council Referral on Historical Trees
Environmental Review Coordinator Reid noted that
Commissioner Chidester, who had been going to speak on the
item, was absent.
MSUC (Stevens/Ray) 4-0, to continue to the meeting of August
6, 1990
COMMUNICATIONS - None
STAFF REPORT
1. Scheduling of Tour of Paleontological Resources of Rancho
del Rey
Saturday, August 18, 1990 was selected as the date for the
tour.
COMMISSIONER'S COMb1ENT5
Commissioner Ray said he felt the Commission should submit a
collective comment on Councilman Nader's draft.
Chairman Fox commented that there was no answer within the
context of the 57 points on the toxic waste issue. He would
like to see a specific resolution proposed such as a "dual
pipe" for water purposes.
Commissioner Hall said there were several items like the
open space zone and the sensitive area zone that should be
proposed for immediate adoption.
After a short discussion, it was decided that at the August
6 meeting, the Commission would pull out the items they
wished to discuss and address those remaining as a consent
item.
ADJOURNMENT AT 8:28 p. m. to the Regular Business Meeting of
August 6, 1990 at 6:00 p. m. in Conference
Room 3.
Ruth i~t. Smith, Recorder