HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1994/11/22
"I declare under penalty of perjury that I am
employed by the City of Chula Vista in the
Office of the City Clerk and that I posted
this Agenja/Notice on the Bulletin Board at
Tuesday, November 22, 1994 the pU~~fZreVBUilding an at Ci Ha I .n
6:00 p.m. DATED.' I! SIGNED
Re lar Meetin of the Cit of Chula Vista
Council Chambers
.. Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
1.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Fox _, Horton _, Moore _, Rindone _, and
Mayor Nader _'
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
November 15, 1994.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Oath of Office:
Economic Develooment Commission - Marcia Boruta (ex-officio);
Housin2 Advisorv Commission - Robert C. Flaugher, Margaret J. Helton, Rosa L. Lopez-
Gonzalez, Vicki E. Madrid, Thomas Alonso-Massey, Evelyn L. Michela, Jerry D. Mayfield (ex-
officio), and Kathryn Lembo (ex-officio).
b. Retiring Commission Member Resolution:
Safety Commission - Bill Koester.
c. Mayor's Farewell Speech.
*****
Effective April 1, 1994, there have been new amelUlments to the Brown Act. The City Council must now
reconvene into open session to report any .JingJ actions taken in closed session and to tufjoum the meeting.
Because of the cost involved, there will be no videotaping of the reconvened portion of the meeting. However,
Jinal actions reported will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's OfJice.
*****
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 14)
The stall recommendotlons regarding the following items Usted uruler the Consent Calendar will be enacted by
the Council by one motion without discussion unless a Councilmember, a member of the pubUc or City staff
requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please Jill out a
"Request to Speak Form" availoble in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete
the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to
the staff recommendation.) Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Board and
Commission Recommendations and Action Items. Items pulled by the public will be the Jirst items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter from the City Attorney stating that there were no observed reportable actions taken
from the Closed Session of 11/15/94. It is recommended that the letter be received and filed.
Agenda
6.
7.
8.
-2-
November 22, 1994
b.
Letter of resignation from the Safety Commission - Steve Padilla. It is recommended lbat the
resignation be accepted with regret and the City Clerk be directed to post immediately according
to the Maddy Act in the Clerk's Office and the Public Library.
Letter requesting funding of $5,000 to support the Federal Base Realigmnent and Closure
Commission (BRAC) '95 Committee in its efforts in deciding the fate of military installations
in San Diego County and in the rest of the nation - Gilbert A. Partida, President, and Joseph
W. Craver, Chairman, BRAC '95 Committee, Greater San Diego Chamber of Commerce,
Emerald Shapery Center, 402 West Broadway, Ste. 1000, San Diego, CA 92101-3585. It is
staff's recommendation that Council authorize a contribution of $3,000 from the Community
Promotions Account to support the efforts of the BRAC '95 Committee. Continued from the
meeting of 11/15/94.
Letters received from the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce and The Kobey Corporation
regarding the Visitor Infonnation Center - Roderick F. Davis, Executive Director, Chula Vista
Chamber of Commerce, 233 Fourth Ave., Chula Vista, CA 91910, and Charles Pretto, General
Counsel, The Kobey Corporation, P.O. Box 81492, San Diego, CA 92138. Continued from the
meeting of 11/15/94. It is recommended that Council refer the Chamber's request to staff and
authorize transferring the operation of the Visitor Center to Trolley Services, loc. under Kobey
until the City decides what long-term approach it wants to pursue.
c.
d.
RESOLUTION 17724
WAIVING THE BID REQUIREMENTS AND APPROVING
AGREEMENTS WITH THE URBAN CORPS OF SAN DIEGO (NOT TO
EXCEED $175,000) AND THE CHULA VISTA NATURE CENTER (NOT
TO EXCEED $50,000) FOR USED OIL RECYCLING EDUCATION
SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENTS - 00 4/12/94, Council authorized the City Manager to submit
an application for $270,300 to the California lotegrated Waste Management
Board for a Used Oil Opportunity grant. The grant application specifically
identified partoerships between the City, the Urban Corps of San Diego and the
Nature Center to implement the grant services. The agencies were specifically
selected because of their unique ability and history of providing environmental
awareness programs and employment for local youth. 00 8/9/94, Council
approved Resolution 17601 accepting the State of California Used Oil
Opportunity Grant for $270,300 and appropriating funds therefor. The
resolution implements the service agreements now needed to move forward on
the project. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Administration)
RF.IlOLUTION 17725
AMENDING FISCAL YEAR 1994/95 BUDGET TO ESTABLISH A
TEMPORARY EXPERT PROFESSIONAL POSITION (0.35 FULL TIME
EQUIVALENT) WITII1N THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND
HOUSING FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF PHASE TWO OF THE
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) - Approving the Fiscal
Year 1994/95 budget amendment for establishing a temporary expert
professional position (0.35 FTE) in the Department of Building and Housing for
implementing Phase Two of the ADA Transition Plan. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Director of Building and Housing) 4/5th's vote
required.
RESOLUTION 17726
APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NUMBER ONE FOR THE
BICYCLE/JOGGING TRAIL AT SWEETW ATERROAD AND WILLOW
STREET IN THE CITY (PR-I53) - 00 9/20/94, Council awarded the contract
for the Bicycle/Jogging Trail at Sweetwater Road and Willow Street. The work
to be done involves construction of a pedestrianlbicycle trail along Sweetwater
Road and Willow Street across the Chula Vista Golf Course with a bridge over
Sweetwater River. The project as bid contained a 70 foot long bridge with an
8 foot wide wooden deck. The bridge connected to two paths totaling 14 feet
wide on each side. Staff recommends that the 8 foot bridge be upsized to 14
feet wide in order to eliminate a bottleneck at the river crossing. Staff
Agenda
9.
RESOLUTION 17727
10.
RESOLUTION 17728
1l.A.
RESOLUTION 17729
B.
RESOLUTION 17730
C.
RESOLUTION 17731
12.
RESOLUTION 17732
-3-
November 22, 1994
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works and Director
of Parks and Recreation)
WAIVING TIlE BIDDING PROCESS AND AUTHORIZING TIlE
PURCHASE OF A NEW 1994 PARK A VENUE FROM HARRISON
BmCK - When a new Mayor is elected, it bas been the practice to purchase a
new vehicle for the Mayor's use. Funds were included in the Fiscal Year
1994/95 Equipment Replacement budget to replace the Mayor's car. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
ORDERING TIlE SUMMARY VACATION OF A GENERAL UTILITY
AND ACCESS EASEMENT WITHIN EASTLAKE GREENS MASTERS
COLLECTION, UNIT 17 AND AUTHORIZING TIlE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE THE QIDTCLAIM DEED VACATING TIlE EASEMENT-
Brehm Communities will be developing the remsining undeveloped portion of
EastLake Greens Unit 17, Lots 6-13, of the Masters Collection and bas obtsined
approval of minor revisions to the original development plan for the unit. The
proposed revisions required adjustments to the side lines for Lots 6-13 and to
the private drives. A condition of the adjustment requires the vacation of a
portion of the general utility and access easement that was dedicated to the City
on the final msp for Unit 17. Brehm Communities and EastLake Development
Company, owners of the Bristolwood development within Unit 17 of EastLake
Greens, have requested vacation of a portion of an existing general utility and
access easement. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of
Public Works)
ACCEPTING AN IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION FOR
STREET PURPOSES OVER A PORTION OF LOT A IN TIlE LADERA
VILLAS SUBDIVISION 12519 - On 7/18/91, Council approved the Tentative
Subdivision Map for Tract 90-02, Rancho del Rey Sectional Planning Area
(SPA) III. Condition of Approval Number 74 of the tentative msp allowed the
developer to file a Master Final Map (MFM) creating master lots. Approval of
the MFM does not confer development rights to the developer. Subaequent final
msps will be required to further subdivide the master lots into residential units.
The proposed amendment to Condition Number 74 will clarify when Telegraph
Canyon Channel Drainage DIF and the Park Acquisition and Development fees
are payable. Right-<lf-way for Paseo Ranchero previously offered to the City
through an irrevocable offer of dedication must also be accepted by the City to
provide adequate access to the lots being created by the MFM. Staff
recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works)
AMENDING CONDITION OF APPROVAL NUMBER 74 OF TIlE
RANCHO DEL REY SPA m TENTATIVE MAP TO CLARIFY WHEN
PARK ACQIDSITION AND DEVELOPMENT FEES AND TELEGRAPH
CANYON CHANNEL DRAINAGE DIF ARE PAYABLE FOR TIlE SUPER
BLOCK LOTS
APPROVING MASTER FINAL MAP OF TRACT 90-02, RANCHO DEL
REY, SPA m, MASTER FINAL MAP, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF
TIlE PUBLIC TIlE PUBLIC STREETS DEDICATED ON SAID MAP,
AND THE EASEMENTS GRANTED ON SAID MAP WITHIN SAID
SUBDIVISION, AND APPROVING SUBDMSION IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT FOR TIlE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS
REQIDRED BY SAID SUBDIVISION, AND AUTHORIZING TIlE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR "REMOVAL
AND SITE CLEARANCE OF EXISTING BmLDINGS AS PART OF THE
CMC CENTER PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS IN TIlE CITY (GG-
Agenda
-4-
November 22,1994
148)" - Funds for the project were budgeted in the Fiscal Year 1994/95 CIP
budget process. The overall scope of the project provides for the reconstruction
and expansion of the existing employee parking lot. The project is scheduled
to be done in two phases. The award of the contract represents the first phase
of the construction process, and involves the removal of existing buildings
currently located on the lot where the expansion of the parking lot is to take
place, and preliminary grading of the site. The second phase of the construction
which is scheduled for sometime in the next couple of months is for the
reconstruction and repaving of the parking lot. Staff recommends approval of
the resolution awarding the contract to Cement Cutting, Inc. San Diego in the
amount of $23,047. (Director of Public Works)
13. RESOLUTION 17733 ADDING PROJECT TF231 - ACCIDENT RECORD SYSTEM TO THE
CIP BUDGET AND APPROPRIATING $56,750 FROM FUND 219 FOR A
COMPUTERIZED ACCIDENT INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM-
The State Office of Traffic Safety has approved a grant of $56,750 to upgrade
the City's accident record retrieval system. The proposed system will integrate
with the City's newly implemented Geographic Information System (GIS). The
grant will allow the City to retain an information systems consultant to provide
the City with a state-of-the-art computer software accident record retrieval
system that is compatible with the GIS. The grant will also allow the City to
purchase a GIS hardware station. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Director of Public Works) 4/5th's vote required.
14.A. REPORT SANDAG REQUEST FOR SUPPORT IN SEEKING FEDERAL AND
STATE FUNDS FOR BEACH REPLENISHMENT - On 10110/94, the City
Manager received a letter from Ken Sulzer, Director of SANDAG, seeking
support from the City for a cooperative regional initiative to restore San Diego
region's critically eroded beaches. The initiative was approved by the SANDAG
Board of Directors on 9/24/94. Staff recommends Council accept the report and
approve the resolution. (Director of Planning)
B. RESOLUTION 17734 SUPPORTING STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDING ASSISTANCE FOR A
SAN DffiGO REGIONWIDE BEACH REPLENISHMENT 1NITIATIVE
· · END OF CONSENT CALENDAR · ·
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The foUowlng Ilems have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to
speale to any Ilem, please fill out the "Request to Speale Fonn" available in the lobby and submilll to the City
Cieri: prior to the meeting. (f:omplete the green fonn to speak In favor of the staff recommendation; complete
the pink fonn to speale in opposllion to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limiled to five minutes per
Individual.
15.
PUBLIC HEARING
CONSIDERING THE VACATION OF THE PORTION OF MOSS
STREET FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH NAPLES STREET
WESTERLY TO ALPINE AVENUE, NORm OF NAPLES STREET-
Country Club Villa Estates, owner of the triangular piece of property between
Moss and Naples Streets westerly of the juncture of those streets, has requested
that the City vacate the portion of Moss Street between Alpine Avenue and the
aforementioned intersection. In accordance with the California Streets and
Highways Code, on 10/4/94, Council set the associated public hearing for
11/1194. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public
Works) Continued from the meeting of 11/1194.
ORDERING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF MOSS STREET
FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH NAPLES STREET WESTERLY TO
ALPINE A VENUE, NORTH OF NAPLES STREET
RESOLUTION 17704
Agenda
-5-
November 22, 1994
16. PUBLIC HEARING PCM-94-20IPCA-94-02; CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE
CITY LANDSCAPE MANUAL AND ASSOCIATED AMENDMENTS TO
THE MUNICIPAL CODE - CITY INITIATED - The proposed revisions to
the Landscape Manual incorporate the water conservation measures called for
by Assembly Bill 325, the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act. The
Manual bas also been updated to include standards for public 1.nol""ope
installations, and to formally incorporate current landscape practices from its last
revision in 1978. Technical and procedural amendments to the Code which are
associated with the revisions to the Manual are reflected in the Ordinance. The
Environmental Review Coordinstor bas concluded that the project is exempt
from environmental review as a regulatory measure designed to enhance the
quality of the environment, Class 8 exemption under CEQA. Staff recommends
Council place the ordinance on first reading and approve the resolution.
(Director of Planning) Continued from the meeting of 11/1/94.
A. ORDINANCE 2616 AMENDING SECTIONS 17.10.050, 19.14.485, 19.14.030 AND 19.14.486
OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE REVISED
LANDSCAPE MANUAL AND APPROVAL OF LANDSCAPE PLANS (first
readiJlll)
B. RESOLUTION 17735 ADOPTING THE REVISED LANDSCAPE MANUAL OF THE CITY,
SUPERSEDING THE STATE MODEL CODE, AND REPEALING
COUNCIL POLICY NUMBER 476-04
17. PUBLIC HEARING ADOPTION OF THE SALT CREEK BASIN GRAVITY SEWER
ANALYSIS AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SALT CREEK BASIN
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE - The Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer
Anslysis was prepared by Wilson Engineering to recommend sewer
improvements necessary to convey sewage flows from the Salt Creek Basin to
existing or proposed dQWDStream sewerage facilities. Based on the Analysis, a
Development Impact Fee of $280 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit should be
established to pay for the facilities. Staff recommends Council place the
ordinance on first reading. (Director of Poblic Works) Continued from the
meeting of 11/1194.
ORDINANCE 2617
ESTABLISHING THE SALT CREEK SEWER BASIN DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WITIIIN THE
SALT CREEK SEWER BASIN AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF
BUILDING PERMITS (first readiJlll)
18. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERING ABATING THE SCHEDULED 1995 BUSINESS LICENSE
TAX INCREASE TO RETAIN BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES AT THE
CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR 1991 LEVEL - The public hesring is to
consider the advisability of abating the business license tax increase scheduled
to be effective on 111195. Ordinance 2408 specifies the business license tax
rates for each yesr and provides Council with the option of abating the
scheduled increase for a one-year period to not less than scheduled 1991 tax
levels. If the tax rates scheduled for 1995 are not abated, taxes for the vast
majority of businesses will more than double. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Finance)
Agenda
-6-
November 22, 1994
A.
RESOLUTION 17736
B.
ORDINANCE 2618
ABATING THE SCHEDULED CALENDAR YEAR 1995 BUSINESS
LICENSE TAX RATES FOR ONE YEAR AND RETAlNlNG BUSINESS
LICENSE TAXES IN CALENDAR YEAR 1995 AT THE 1991 LEVEL AS
PROVIDED IN ORDINANCE 2408, WITH THE EXCEPrION OF TAXES
ON SPEClFlC BUSINESSES WIllCR WERE ADOPrED BY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE AFTER JANUARY 1, 1991
AMENDING CHAPrER5.60 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO
BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES AND REGULATIONS OF VENDING AND
AMUSEMENT MACHINES (first readil12) - The taxation ordinance is
administrative in nature and will not increase taxes on any business currently
licensed. Passage of the ordinance will enable the City to collect taxes and
ensure licensure of unlicensed vending and amusement machines located in
Cbula Vista. Passage of the ordinance will also make the code consistent with
State and Federal laws. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on first
reading. This ordinance does not reauire a Dubhe bearil12 but is a related
mm.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject mIltter within the
Council's jurisdiction that is !Yll an item on this agenda for public discussion. (State law, however, generaUy
prohibits the City Council from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to
address the Council on such a subject, please complete the yeUow "Request to Speale Under Oral Communications
Fo",," available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speale,
please give your name and address for record purposes and foUow up action. Your time is limited to three
minutes per spealeer.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Comminees.
None submitted.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by
the Council, stoff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered individuaUy by the Council
and sttiffrecommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alte17Ultive. Those who wish to speale, please
.fill out a "Request to Speale" fo"" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
Public comments are limited to five minutes.
19. RESOLUTION 17710 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL
TRUST, INC. AND BONITA LONG CANYON PARTNERSHIP FOR
PURCHASE OF LAND AS WETLANDS MITIGATION FOR TWO CITY
PROJECTS AND AT&T'S PROJECT AT 86S TIIIRD AVENUE AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY - The winter storms of 1993 caused damage to a
number of locations within the City. Restoration won was accomplished for
two City projects and one private project. As a result of work done by the City
and proposed work by American Telephone and Telegrsph (AT&T) at 86S Third
Avenue, the Department of Fish and Game (DF&G) required wetlands
mitigation. The City has been working towards obtaining land to mitigate the
two City projects. The DF&G suggested that the City and AT&T combine
mitigation so as to provide a larger area rather than three smaller sites. The
agreement is the result of negotiations for both City projects and the AT&T site.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
Continued from the meeting of 11/8/94.
Agenda
-7-
November 22,1994
20.
REPORT
REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF WORK PROGRAM RESPONSES
FOR IMPLEMENTING RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGIIT COMMISSION'S (GMOC) 1993
ANNUAL REPORT - On 5/26/94, Council held a worlcshop to consider the
GMOC 1993 Annual Report regarding compliance with the City's Quality-of-
Ufe Threshold Standards. At that workshop, Council received and discussed
the Report, and directed staff to follow-up with a work program on the actions
recommended by the GMOC. Stsff has completed that follow-up and is
returning to Council with a work program report. Stsff recommends Council:
(1) Adopt the 1993 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations contsined
therein; (2) Direct stsff to implement the recommendations in accordance with
the work program responses; and, (3) Approve the Ststements of Concern and
cover letters for signature and issuance by the Mayor regarding the Water and
Air Quality Thresholds. (Director of Planning)
21.
REPORT
ABATEMENT OF THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX In 1990 Council
estsblished a maximum Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) of ten percent and
provided for annual abstement hesrings at which time the maximum tax could
be lowered to not less than eight percent. In esch subsequent yesr, Council has
absted the TOT rate to eight percent, the same rate it has been since 1978. The
purpose of the annual abatement hesring is to consider absting the TOT rate to
a rate below ten percent. If Council takes no action the TOT rate would
increase to ten percent on 1/1/95. Stsff is recommending that Council take no
action and allow the TOT rate to increase to ten percent, effective 1/1/95.
(Director of Finance)
22.
REPORT
UPDATE ON CHILDREN'S SAFE HAVENS PROGRAM - On 7/19/94,
stsff was directed to develop recommendations regarding coordination of a
Children's Safe Havens Program with locs1 churches and other organizations.
Stsff has made presentstions on a basic Safe Havens concept to a number of
groups and organizations, including the Child Csre Commission, Youth
Commission, Youth Coslition, and the Commission on Aging. Presentstions are
also planned for the Chula Vists Human Services Council and the Ecumenical
Council. The intent of the report is to discuss the organization of a Safe Havens
Program. Staff recommends Council accept the report. (Director of Parks and
Recrestion)
23.
REPORT
STATUS OF NEGOTIATIONS WITH BALDWIN BUILDERS
REGARDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY PURPOSE
FACD..ITIES OBLIGATIONS INCLUDING REQUESTS TO AMEND
CONDITIONS OF THE TENTATIVE MAP AND SUBDMSION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT RELATING TO SAME - Council directed
staff to negotiate an agreement with Baldwin which would provide for the
provision of 17.2 low-income and 17.2 moderate-income housing units and 1.5
acres of Community Proposed Facilities. After substantial negotiations, staff
and Baldwin have reached impasse on significant issues in such an agreement.
Staff requests Council provide direction regarding further negotiations.
(Director of Community Development and Director of Planning)
24.
REPORT
MULTIPLE SPECIES CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOCUSSED
PLANNING AREA ALTERNATIVE - The City is a participant in the Clean
Water Program Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP). On 6/21/94,
Council endorsed the approach for delinesting a "focused planned ares" aress
bssed on a concept approved by the San Diego City Council. Stsff has now
prepared such an alternative. Staff recommends Council authorize the draft
focussed planning ares prepared by stsff as the "fifth alternative" to be included
in the draft MSCP Plan and Environmental Impact Report. (Director of
Planning)
Agenda
-8-
November 22, 1994
25.
REPORT
UPDATE ON SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ISSUES - An oral report will be
given by staff.
26.
REPORT
UPDATE ON REGIONAL SEWER ISSUES - An oral report will be given
by staff.
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council will discuss items whleh hove beell removed from the COllsellt Calelldar.
Agellda items pulhd at the request of the pubUc will be cOllsidered prior to those pulhd by Coullcilmembers.
PubUc commellts are Umited to five mlllutes per individual.
OTHER BUSINESS
27. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTISl
a. Scheduling of meetings.
28. MAYOR'S REPORTISl
a. Appointment of Council representative 10 the Interagency Water Task Force.
29. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Moore
a. Board/Commission/Committee Liaison.
CLOSED SESSION
UlIless the City Attorney, the City Mallager or the City Coullcil states otherwise at this time, the Council will
discuss alld deUberate 011 the foUowillg items of business which are pemtUted by law to be the subject of a clased
sessioll discussioll, alld which the Coullcil is advised should be discussed ill clased sessioll to best protect the
illterests of the City. The Council is required by law to retum to opell sessioll, issue allY reporls of ibJJJl actWlI
takell ill clased sesnoll, alld the votes taken. However, due to the typical lellgth of time takell up by clased
sessions, the videotopillg will be tennillated at this pow ill order to save costs so that the Council's return from
clased session, reporls of Ji!HJl actWlI takell, alld a4joummellt will. not be videotaped. Neverlheless, the reporl
of /illal actioll takell will be recorded ill the mill utes which will be available ill the City Cleric's Office.
30. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING:
1. Existing litigation pursuant to Govenunent Code Section 54956.9
. Ten cities vs. the County of San Diego (trash litigation).
2. Anticipated litigation pursuant to Govenunent Code Section 54956.9
. Significant exposure 10 litigation pursuant 10 subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9: 1.
. City of Chula Vista vs. the County of San Diego (Daley Rock Quarry) regarding
approval of a major use permit.
. American Contraclors Indemnity Company vs. City of Chula Vista regarding City's non-
acceptance of surety bond from California domiciled insurer with less than A-V rating.
Agenda
-9-
November 22, 1994
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION - Pursuant to Govenunent Code Section
54957
. Title: City Attorney
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR. Pursuant to Govenunent Code Section 54957.6
. Agency negotiator: John Goss or designee for CVEA, WCE, IAFF, Executive
Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
Employee organization: CbuIa Vista Employees Association (CVEA), Western Council
of Engineers (WCE), and International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
31. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) a City Council tour on Saturday, December 3, 1994
at 8:00 a.m. and thence to the Regular City Council Meeting on December 6, 1994 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers.
A Special Joint Meeting of the City CouncillRedevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the City
Council Meeting.
November 17, 1994
-'
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
John D. Goss, City Manager tJ
City Council Meeting of November 22, 1994
TO:
FROM:
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council meeting
of Tuesday, November 22, 1994. Comments regarding the Written Communications are
as follows:
Sa. This is a letter from the City Attorney stating that there were no reportable actions
taken by the City Council at the closed session of November 15, 1994.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS LETTER BE RECEIVED AND FILED.
Sb. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT STEVE PADILLA'S RESIGNATION FROM THE
SAFETY COMMISSION BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET, AND THE CITY
CLERK BE DIRECTED TO POST IMMEDIATELY ACCORDING TO THE
MADDY ACT IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE AND THE PUBLIC LmRARY.
5c. This is a letter from the Greater San Diego Chamber of Commerce BRAC '95
Committee, requesting $5,000 to support the Federal Base Realignment and Closure
Commission in its efforts regarding the fate of military installations in San Diego
County and nationwide. Their letter states that there are approximately 850
households in Chula Vista that are supported by the Naval Research, Development
& Engineering Centers and the North Island Naval Air Depot, and thus would be
impacted by these base closures. The financial support contributed by other cities
and entities is as follows: the City of San Diego - $20,000; the County of San Diego -
$20,000; the Port District - $20,000; National Steel - $25,000; SDG&E - $10,000;
North Island Federal Credit Union - $5,000; Pacific Bell - $5,000; City of Coronado
_ $5,000; City of National City - $3,000). Based on the City's limited ("mancial
resources and the fact that there probably could be some flexibility in BRAC's
$140,000 budget, IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT COUNCIL
AUTHORIZE A CONTRmUTION OF $3,000 FROM THE COMMUNITY
PROMOTIONS ACCOUNT TO SUPPORT THE EFFORTS OF THE BRAC '95
COMMITTEE. (Continued from the II'efllqg of 11/15/94)
5d. These are letters from the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce and the Kobey
Corporation regarding the operation ofthe Visitor Information Center. The Kobey
Corporation has operated the center since February 1992; however Kobey's contract
with the City has expired. Previous to that expiration they notified the City that
they are not interested in exercising the option to extend the contract; however they
agreed to continue to operate the visitor center on a month-ta-month basis while the
company and staff explored the City's options. This letter requests that the City
agree to transferring the operation of the visitor center to Trolley Services, Inc.,
under Kobey until a decision is made by the City regarding the future ofthe center.
Kobey would maintain the cash bond. A separate letter from Trolley Services, Inc.
states that company's willingness to assume those duties.
The Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce proposes to operate and manage the visitor
center with the City providing some support for these costs. IT IS
RECOMMENDED TIlAT COUNCIL REFER TIlE CHAMBER'S REQUEST TO
STAFF AND AUTHORIZE TRANSFERRING TIlE OPERATION OF TIlE
VISITOR CENTER TO TROLLEY SERVICES, INC. UNDER KOBEY UNTIL
TIlE CITY DECIDES WHAT LONG-TERM APPROACH IT WANTS TO
PURSUE.
JDG:mab
" RESOLUTION
COMMENDING WILLIAM KOESTER
FOR HIS EXCELLENT SERVICES ON THE
SAFETY COMMISSION
WHEREAS, William Koester was appointed to the Safety Commission on April 5,
1988; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Koester brought to the Commission his experience from serving
in the U. S. Navy, as well as being an active volunteer with the Chula Vista Police
Department; and
WHEREAS, William had a special interest in the safety and welfare of others,
particularly the elderly and the children of the community; and
WHEREAS, William provided great insight and awareness for appropriate
solutions and recommendations for various safety issues:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, California, does hereby express its appreciation to William Koester for his many
years of excellent service to the Safety Commission.
1);./
~Vt-
~
~~;E~
CllY OF
CHUlA VISfA
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
From:
November 16, 1994
The Honorable Mayor and City COUjj;\L
Bruce M. Boogaard, city Attorney~~
Report Regarding Actions Taken in Closed Session
for the Meeting of 11/15/94
Date:
To:
Re:
The city Attorney hereby reports to the best of my knowledge from
observance of actions taken in the Closed Session in which the City
Attorney participated, that there were no actions taken in the
Closed Session of 11/15/94 which are required under the Brown Act
to be reported.
BMB:lgk
C:\lt\c!o88e88.no
.;;., ., /
276 FOURTH AVENUElCHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5031
STEVE PADILLA
RECEIVED
'94 fIIY 11 Pit :(;6
CITY OF CH, iu\ JIST A-
llY Cl~h'S OFFICE
November 10, 1994 ()' ~
"..Y
TO' Hon. Mayor and City Council, via Chairman-Safety COmmiS\; j J
FROM. Steve Padilla
SUBJECT Resignation from Safety Commission
Mr Mayor'
Please have this letter serve as official notice of my resignation from the Safety Commission due
to my election to the City Council on Tuesday, November 8.
I appreciate greatly the opportunity to have served. I look forward to the future, as I know and
trust the Safety Commission, it's members and staffwill continue their outstanding service.
Sincerely,
c~~/
. Steve Padilla
CCf
~ ~IUTTEN COM;~~~~:~NS
'}J
5//,/
!I
!I
I.
I'
CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
\i
"
AN
INVESTMENT IN
THE FUTURE
November 9,1994
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
President
Diane Flint
The Honorable Tim Nader
Mayor of Chula Vista and
Members of the City Council
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor Nader and Members of the City Council:
The Chula Vista Information Center located at the trolley station on "E"
Street does not advertise Chula Vista nor does it provide significant
informational resources for the City of Chula Vista. Furthennore, the
current operator has indicated a desire not to continue.
The Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce proposes to undertake management
and operation of the Visitor Information Center. In a quick overview-
details to be negotiated if the Council accepts the concept - the Chamber \\'ill
operate the center and advertise the City. The Chamber will provide
insurance in accordance with common business practices. The Chamber will
employ one full-time and one part-time employee. Staffmg would be
provided by a cadre of volunteers.
The City would maintain/operate the building as a City building. In
addition, the City would provide a one-time subsidy of $10,000 to procure
a stock of Chula Vista related memorabilia. The sale of this memorabilia
would then be used to restock the Visitor Center.
Prealdent Elect
Jim Weaver
Vice President.:
Greg Cox
Chris Lewis
Mary Anne Stro
Dave Ward
Members:
Patricia Barnes
r"'''IeeBlJIe
Ine Clayton
lileve Collins
Robert Garcia
Sussn Harney
Cathi Jamison
Tim Lewis
Tom McAndrews
Scott Mosher
Robert Penner, MD
Frank Scott
Bob Thomas
Brad Wilson
In addition, the City is requested to share the liability with the Chamber for
salaries. The City will, if required, pay up to 50% of the salary liability in
any month in whIch the center is not self sufficient. This concept represents
a maximum liability to the City on an annual basis of $15,000.
The OTC, the Amphitheater and a myriad of other projects need to be well
advertised. The Chamber is the best resource in the City to operate the
Visitor Information Center. We look forward to hearing from staff.
Sincerely,
Chula VIsta Chamber of Commerce
Past Praaldent
T. Pat Cavaneugh
executive Director
Rod Davis
-.~
ACCREDITED
C"".".Cl.c,O.lIn......
...."..' n....".
........."......
a1~~ft~nISN ~~tMUMC,;: =-1)~7"
2 3 3 f 0 U R T HAVE N U E . C H U l A V 1ST A, C A L I FOR N I A 9 , 9 , 0 . TEL ( 6 , 9) 4 2 0 6 6 0 3
..
The Kobey
Corporation
OCf?lalor~ ('I ~,'Do:-" ~ :'\'. at 1\ ~el2l
November 7, 1994
George Krempl
Deputy City Manager
City ofChula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr Kempl.
This letter is sent to confirm our meeting on Thursday Nov 3, 1994 The Kobey
Corporation would like to transfer the operation of the Chula Vista Information Center to
Trolley Services, Inc. owned and operated by Jack Knight and Craig Knudson. We would
like to facilitate this transfer as expeditiously as possible. In some regard this is similar to
the current state of affairs. Currently, the Kobey Corporation was under agreement to
operate the center but the actual operation was performed by Kobey's Kiosk, a separate
entity. The proposal as I discussed on Thursday would envision having Trolley Services
operate the center under Kobey until a decision is made by the city regarding the future of
the center. The bond which is maintained by Kobey was just rolled over; its anniversar)
date is August 24, 1995 Therefore the cash bond naming the cit) as beneficiary will be
maintained until that date by Kobey.
Further I envision that because Trolley Services has agreed to retain Carlos Rodriguez
who is the current supervisor no discontinuation of services are contemplated In fact
with the additions they plan to implement re: agreement with Travelers Aid, and
expanded financial services the center will be better As discussed they would like to add
check cashing and money exchange. I have enclosed a separate letter from them
describing in more detail their plans including resumes from each principal.
I appreciate your consideration of this matter
~~
Charles Pretto
General Counsel
The Kobey Corporation
cp
chulanot
PO Box 81492
San Dlego
CA 92138
5~~
619 523-2700
Fax 619 523-2715
HOY- 7-94 "ON 16:16 BAHK~~mF*
619584133(1
F. ].:.
,
IlANKtemfM
November 1,1994
Goorge KIempI
Deputy CIty Manager
and
Jeri GuIbran.Sen
Pubic It Iocnllltion CoordInator
'IlanlIIng SO\ullOrl.-
City of ChuIa VIsta
278 Fourth Avenue
Chula VIsta. CA 91910
Dear Mr. Krempland Ms. Gulbnlnsen:
Thank you for mil tit.g with us last Thunlday.
We ..... AlqIIMting that Trolley SeMces. Inc. become tM tT8nsfvree and assignee of the
ChuIa VIsta Inrorm8tIon Center.
In 8ddIUon to providing vI6Itor Inform8liOn, W8 would pIOvIde food and drink services
M'niI8r to the sorvIc;es being pnMded by Kobey. In addition, we would provide Ildditional
servlces that W8 or the ~ 01 CtuII Vb1a pert8ive to be the "needs- of the commuter
8nd vIsIklr to your city. These S8IVices could include check cashI~ Md money
..chIllgO. We would like to IUMIY the need$ of the c:oII'IIlUer and viIilors to determine
their needs.
We would ~ 10 enter into . longer term 1ee58 8gl1l8menl with the City of Chula VIsta
and to enhance the present seMces being provtded.
The ~ of TnlIlay Ser~ Inc. .. Jec:k KnIght. the owner of C8Ilfomla Water
Conditioning Comp.ny; CnIig Knudson. the owner 01 SUpernwcado TIllS Amigos and
BANIOl;jhlpS, and AIdo Sanchez. tha Store Manager of Supennercedo Tres AmIgos.
Er..clll.ld .. penonall'lllUl'l8S for each 01 the principals. The corpoI8tion II new.
We .. e)lldl~ 8bout .. new opporUlly IWId klOk forwlu'd 10 v\IItq wtth you about
your~ needs.
a_lily,
Ct
CraIg
.u7t 30Ih SbMt. Swllt 2 SIn Diego, CA 12104 T~I: (818)584-1330 tbth Count)': (tit) 434-8200
S~3
HOV- 7-94 "OH 1~:16 BAH~~~MPS
619SB41=Z0
P.17
CRAIG KNUDSON
4662 EAST TALMADGE DRIVE
SAN DIEGO, CA.12118
(819) 884-1330
SOC. SEC. , 504-48-1882
ANANCIAL EXECUTIVE
QUALIFIED BY: Over 2S years aperienc:e .. OwnerlOpera!or of an Equipment L_lng Com~Y. a
GnlCielYJMeat M8IlIet,. Bank Tompora., Person;~ Service. an InI\nnCll Agency; as wen.. an Ex8CUllve""Vlce
p.....,t and Chief L8ndiog Ofticar tI# . Ioc:8l bank; Sranc:h IoAanager d a major Wlilt COast Bank, plus many
IIdrrinIs1ratIVe and public relallons and civic l'lI$ponslbllitie..
EXPERIENCE:
Supermercado Tres Amp ITres Amlaos Inveslm&nt. I~
Chl*man and Chief CllIIc:lJlIYe 0IIIcer or aU servk;e grocery 8tDre and meet lIlaI1lel focaled at Ihe Int.malklnill
Border in Otay u.a, ClIIIfomla. R~ Indude .nleglc pIMrlinsJ, tln8ndal _lysis and c:ontrol,
budgetlng, and employee perf_ pIWlning IIld goal Hltlng I"erIonaIy tupeIVI.. lie PnlaldenllStore
wanager wno OplUtes Ille 81Iore, /IIIIOIllNll1tel, money Pdlang., ancIlnsurence 00I1lpaf1y. 6.... .'.800,000
annually. 0I*18d IIDr8 Septlll'/lber 1990.
BANKtemps (COIpOIBtion)
PAllldentIlld cn.rE-.a1llw OlIIcerof alllmporary atld run lime placement IeMc8 operating In" San DIego
County erN. Cn.al1I'1dude banIla lIIld other IInlnClallnslllullons. A NlalBd cotl1)Iny. exCEUemps oIrers
almllar HrVlcn to . brl*Ier range or lr1du8Ir*. ReIponalbHllIn Inc:Iude Il1alegIc p1Int11ng, fIolll1QeI ell81)'lll
and control, budgellJ 19, and ~oyee ~ planning IIlCI goal ..arng. Persondy lupervf.. a llalf or
8 .,ipIOIJelllnc:ll.lclW1g lWl 0I'IIce M~r, Placement OIIk:er, and Account M8n1gers. R....enues or
$1,!lOO,OOO IInnwllly. Founded ~y Decem~r 1ll9O.
PRIOR WORK EXPERIENCE:
La Wla Bank & Trust
EQallIve Vice PmldenIIInd ChlIIfl..endlng omcer. ....ponalblIlIes IndudIId MlIIng loan poIk:y, pnx::edurlls,
IlnIInlI p,artI.., and"~ of II $4OC MIllon Loan f'Of1IbIlo. ChII1rmIII of \he Bo<<d Loan c..."., Mb",.
......oIl<<of.. s.nIDr ~ c....,... ....loberCll' AIMtIUIIbIIlIy 0"'....1IM (MIl ,.... for ~ IInd cIepo6,
.,.,1IlIIIliM rm__lld.dllltll'll). ....jobll ofSl. II-: '1eI.11ng 0.....,,"'.. AddItioI. rwapan"lIlIIlI ialded
...,.4lIIon CII'':- DlvIIIon, RMI E8II LIldlg. .,., ea.,....... IMalllng. 4II*IeI projedIlncllded
da.._bpllllJ an 1nUanoI8an/IcM DIwIIIon to... UfI and C-..Ily InannCI Produc:b.
IU \he _ ...... _ eCIkI '" ~ F'\Kllk; NtllIor1III e.-... ~.t1l1llO. 1 Nod 1ld1le.-ed end _cle4
..Cotpor8Ia..w n, tmentOMla. All.'. .. r~- .....~Ador. -~n'lheIrOolll..
During mr..... will \he ,**-"30 dIIJ IInd ovr'~ _1I1ah..My _ 2 ~ or..... Non ....-r......1Q
..... kl TGlaI......... Q,3 'Ii. ... ClwgI Olfs SI10lha _ of 1~. I .upaMIId. Ngh queIIty, proIItabIe
lCllIn portIbIIo. (1985'" 1990)
Set'i
HOY- 7-94 MON 16:17 BAli~~~I.ps
6195841336
P.18
f1eritaae Leasina COIllQ[iI\ign
Presldenl of an equlpmenlleasir~ company wilh aill ol!ices from ClIIifomlalo Wamlnglon. ftellpollsibllltles
Included planning, man:IIJlIment. and conlrol. (197310 11lll9)
first Interstate Bank
~ Lendlng 0llI0Ir. Responsible for major ..... .,orale lending relaIIonships Ihroughoullhe San OiegQ
Counl)' lIre8. (191210 1;73) Ilrw1c;h ManIOerIn EI C4Ijon, Ca Opened new lIIlInch, Not only lIChleWll pnlIItarlle
opeI1Ilion, IU nI(;O'IIInd" ~ ~1I11n 24 months. ArnIi/IIIelc...--ded budgolb n other pelforman.:e
pb. (11J69lD 11172)
EDUCATION:
9. S.1n BanldnOand Frlance. UntvenIIy or SOuth DllkCllll. (1963)
Numerous 10..1.8. Counet .s studanl8llcS 1nd\JdOr.
Robert MorTIs a Assod2lea - Loen Management Semln.rs.
.
PERSONAL:
Age 53. Ellcellerll H.alll1.
RELATED ACHIEVEMENTS:
Pnll;1<l8n1 of w.1\8m A.8(lo -", of EquIpment Lneore, elrade aaeodallcln c:ompOeed or 350 memtlen In the
western half or lhe Untied SllIlD.. (1982)
Keyman of lhe ~ Aaaoc:I*n ofEquiplMllt uaaora, . lracle ..IOCI*" composed of 700 memben In
... United S~. (1gallO 1985)
Past Preslc3ent of GII1a Club 01 EI Ceton
Pas!. DtredDr of Ee.l Counll/ UnIllcl WWy.
BEHAVIOR:
OUtllolng. People ancl goal OIlanled, reIeX8cI, anD'epreneUr1el. clMolIAII led, faCt orfented, cleclslve. achIeVer
REFERENCES:
N\IIn8rOUS In W..-n UnilIld SlIliIs. PfcI'WIcIad """ ~
5~~5'
.
JACK D. KNIGHT
690 ROSECRANS STREET
SAN DIEGO, CA. 92106
619-223-3638
SOC. SEC. # 572-62-3305
BUSINESS EXECUTIVE
QUALIFIED BY: Over 24 years experience as owner/operator of a residential Water
Softening Company, a commercial and industrial Water Purification Company, retail
Water Stores and a Food Concession Stand.
EXPERIENCE:
California Water Conditionina Comoanv
Owner and operator of a commercial and industrial water treatment company
founded in 1977. California Water Conditioning Company's expertise lies in the
following fields: water softening, water filtration, design and manufacture of
commercial reverse osmosis equipment, design and manufacture of deionization
systems for high purity applications and waste water reuse, water sterilization
systems utilizing ozone and ultraviolet technologies for potable and medical uses,
water storage tanks and repressurization pump systems California Water
Conditioning employs 6 people.
California DrinkinQ Water Comoanv
Owner and operator of 2 retail water stores. The stores were opened in Barrio
Logan and San Ysidro areas of San Diego in 1991. The stores offer high volume
users of drinking water an alternative to the supermarket drinking water vending
machine. The stores offer Food and Drug Administration inspected and approved
drinking and purified products. Ancillary accessories include crocks, pumps,
dispensers and stands for the 5 gallon market. The San Ysidro location also is a
permitted vendor of hot dogs, tamales, burritos, nachos and fountain drinks.
PRIOR WORK EXPERIENCE:
Servisoft Soft Water Service and Water ConditioninQ Comoanv Inc.
Co-owner and operator of residential oriented water softener service company
purchased in 1970. Servisoft had 4300 customers that were serviced on the
average of every two weeks. Responsibilities included management of
Route Delivery, S...les, Service, Installation, Accounting and Collection
St:!. /,
.
departments. Set policy and procedures for all departments. Did the purchasing of
all products. Servisoft employed 20 people.
Precision Plastics Corooration
Vice President and Manager. Responsibilities included management of Sales.
Accounting and Fabrication departments. Set policy and procedures for all
departments. Did the purchasing of products. Precision Plastics employed
1 2 people
Harbor Blueorint Comoanv
Employed in sales of printing and graphics media to the architectural and
construction trades. Employed for two years before buying my own business.
EDUCATION:
.
Five years of College in Business Administration. San Diego State; Yampa Valley
College. Steamboat Springs. Colorado; Santa Barbara City College; and San Diego
City College.
PERSONAL:
Age 49. Excellent health. A member of San Diego Yacht Club. Avid sailor and
fisherman. Past President of 20-30 Luncheon Club and current member San Diego
Downtown Rotary Club # 33.
REFERENCES:
Numerous provided upon request.
s~-?
From. To, a...ct. Prdo
DIIe_ 11/WM TUM,18.48.41
Page 1 of 1
.
ALDO ABRAHAM SANCHEZ
.J ') >2 JA~t 'lnlnllf'lg" JJ1iv, . SiUl J);t'f.". CA 92 J 16 . lr.'krlk1nt': 619-282-7]90
OBJECTIVE
Funn a company )u\CM'l as TroUt")" Sl!"rvkes. hK.'. to opt"rate Food Concessi OilS, and
J-1.Wl.llcicil Servh:t'!. a.t InOljur trullt"), stops. Irmuediatdy, df'vdop tv.'U locations in Sdll
Ysidm ano Chu);.t VistA..
El)UCATION
1.1\ S.<\IU t INIVERSITY. MEXICO L1TY. MExIco
n. S., BitJrJ.emiH:f)'. ]fJS ')
rhe<>ifi Title: Org;;ni7ation :md DC'VdnpmC'r,t !0f :I (luality (.0T\t:nll.:)l~o:'.llt0ry."
Ana;yzc \'cgetabk Oik
IN5Tln;ro Tl<.'NOLLX:;rco AlTIUNOMO 111.: MLXlCO (HAM) MLXICO Cl fY
Mll:i!{'1'S;n Busiru:ss Ad",i"is!'Rti~ln. JutJ, 1985 - Dr.1".t"mbi7 19h7
] _},,'>IRlD\CE
1 ()Q() TO PJUSf.NT - TRE!-. A\1jC,.()S INVfSrMEl\:'! lNC. PHi\ SUfFR.""U ReA.)\) TRt-,S
A'\41(".c.:s
l~sidnlt
Ope-fatr: r.;~:rf':rmark("t, Mr-at. Markr-t. ane Monry- r.xC'hangc: at 2472 R:l[ llriv<. O:ay
Mt..s,a, ('A '121 T~, (J.orn~("d at Ota)' j\1esa Hord('f Crnssing;
10881'01 smo- C'yfU. ANO.A1.1.lANcL PllAJLt.A.A.CEVnCAL - L\ JOllA. CA
Lab Tc..-lmkiun
SKILLS
II Adm.inisuOltive
1 I Pl.lr<:hasing
! I Invc,nlmy (~onlrnl
I I M.,,+.,ndisinf,
[ 1 Labor Sr.h<:duling
o Cash Control
o Accounting
o Bilingual
Rt"fi!"rt"nnas Av~ilabli!" 1 Tpon Rt-'l11~1
5~, 8'
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
TITLE:
Item ?
Meeting Date 11/22/94
RESOLUTION /7'/.2.'1 Waiving the Bid Requirements,
Requesting Council Approval of the Agreements and Authorizing the
Mayor to Execute Agreements with the Urban Corps of San Diego (Not to
Exceed $175,000) and the Chula Vista Nature Center (Not to Exceed
$50,000) for Used Oil Recycling Education Services.
SUBMITTED BY: Conservation Coordinator
REVIEWED BY, C;lyM=g"J4~ (4J....V.." Y~~ No-l
City Council approved Resolution 17486 on April 12, 1994, authorizing the City Manager to
submit an application for $270,300 to the California Integrated Waste Management Board for a
Used Oil Opportunity grant. The grant application specifically identified partnerships between
the City of Chula Vista, the Urban Corps of San Diego and the Chula Vista Nature Center to
implement the grant services. These agencies were specifically selected because of their
unique ability and history of providing environmental awareness programs and employment for
local youth. On August 9, 1994 the City Council approved Resolution 17601 accepting the
State of California Used Oil Opportunity Grant for $270,300 and appropriating funds therefor.
This resolution implements the service agreements now needed to move forward on the
project.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve resolution.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission
reviewed and recommended the Opportunity Grant for submittal (including the Urban Corps
and Nature Center components and related budgets) at their April 11, 1994 meeting.
DISCUSSION:
The Used Oil Opportunity Grant provides funds for a regional program (Chula Vista, National
City and Imperial Beach) to establish State certified used oil recycling centers and related
public education. As part of their certification agreement with the State, certified centers
agree to accept used motor oil from the public at least twenty hours per week of their regular
operating hours.
The Urban Corps of San Diego is a State chartered non-for-profit private corporation. The
Urban Corps mission is to provide employment training services in the resource conservation
field, for at-risk youth. The Urban Corps currently operates out of the Logan Heights
neighborhood in the City of San Diego. The Urban Corps has also provided the City's office
recycling program, processing and marketing services for more than three years, at no charge.
&,.}
Page 2, Item"
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Attachment A is a recommended agreement between the City and the Urban Corps of San Diego
that provides up to $175,000 in funding for the Urban Corps to implement the operational
component of the used oil recycling education grant. The primary mission of the Urban Corps
grant component is to recruit, train and supply thirty new certified used oil recycling centers
throughout Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and National City. A secondary but important benefit
of the grant is the development of new jobs and job training for at-risk youth from Chula Vista.
The Corps currently provides employment training and jobs for approximately 100 youth from
all over San Diego County at their City of San Diego site. Approximately ten of those youth are
from Chula Vista and commute to the City each day. The grant provides funds to employ five
additional youth from Chula Vista, full-time for one year The Corps' new Chula Vista satellite
(temporarily located at the old Southbay Chevrolet site) will allow the Urban Corps to concentrate
on recruiting and employing Chula Vista youth for the used oil grant positions and as many
additional positions as they can generate from for future contracts and grants for the South Bay
area. A copy of their project description and complete scope of work is included in the
agreement, Attachment A.
Attachment B is an agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the Chula Vista Nature Center.
The agreement provides up to $50,000 for the Nature Center to incorporate used oil recycling
education into visitor tours, permanent displays and the science classes that are currently provided
for all Chula Vista Elementary School District third graders. The grant also provides funds for
some National City and Imperial Beach elementary students to be included in the used oil
recycling/science classes provided to Chula Vista students. A copy of the Nature Center's project
description and complete scope of work is included in the agreement, Attachment B.
Grant funding is based on a reimbursement process for tasks specifically described in the detailed
scope of work. As the program progresses the assignment of tasks will be re-evaluated and only
those tasks necessary to implement the spirit and intent of the grant will be authorized.
Subsequently, each agency will only be reimbursed for those authorized tasks. The agreements
with the Nature Center and Urban Corps provide for 10% retention of each payment, until all
tasks listed in the respective agreements are completed by the contract agency. At no time does
the grant require the Nature Center, Urban Corps or City staff to remove or convey used oil.
FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the proposed agreements ($225,000) is funded through a
grant of $270,300 from the California Integrated Waste Management Board and has been
appropriated. The grant also provides for the purchase of additional public education materials
and up to $9000 in overhead payments directly to the City for administration of the grant.
mtm:c
cntcts94.cas
Attachments
t..~
RESOLUTION NO.
J7701'1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA WAIVING THE BID REQUIREMENTS AND
APPROVING AGREEMENTS WITH THE URBAN CORPS OF
SAN DIEGO (NOT TO EXCEED $175,000) AND THE
CHULA VISTA NATURE CENTER (NOT TO EXCEED
$50,000) FOR USED OIL RECYCLING EDUCATION
SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE
SAID AGREEMENTS
WHEREAS, City Council approved Resolution 17486 on April
12, 1994, authorizing the city Manager to submit an application for
$270,300 to the California Integrated Waste Management Board for a
Used oil Opportunity Grant; and
WHEREAS, the grant application specifically identified
partnerships between the City of Chula Vista, the Urban Corps of
San Diego and the Chula vista Nature Center to implement the grant
services; and
WHEREAS, these agencies were specifically selected
because of their unique ability and history of providing
environmental awareness programs and employment for local youth;
and
WHEREAS, on August 9, 1994, the City Council approved
Resolution 17601 accepting the State of California Used oil
opportunity Grant for $270,300 and appropriating funds therefor;
and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to approve the service
agreements now needed to move forward on the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
ci ty of Chula vista does hereby waive the bid requirements and
approve the Agreement with the Urban Corps of San Diego (not to
exceed $175,000) for used oil recycling education services, a copy
of which is on file in the office of the city Clerk as Document No.
(to be completed by the Clerk in the final document).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby
approve the agreement with the Chula vista Nature Center (not to
exceed $50,000) for used oil recycling education services, a copy
of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk as Document No.
(to be completed by the Clerk in the final document).
t..J
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the city of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Agreements for and on behalf of the City of Chula vist
Presented by
A~rO
by
Michael Meacham, Conservation
Coordinator
Bruce M.
Attorney
c: \rs\usedoll
~-o/
\1
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
Chula Vista Nature Center
for Used Oil Recycling Education Services
This agreement ("Agreement"), dated October 18, 1994 for the purposes of reference only,
and effective as of the date last executed is between the City of Chula Vista ("City"), and Chula
Vista Nature Center, a non-profit, public benefit corporation of the State of California, and whose
place of business and telephone number is, 1000 GUl1Powder Point Drive. Chula Vista California
91910 (619) 422-8100, and is made with reference to the following facts:
Recitalsl
Whereas, City received a grant from the California State Integrated Waste Management
Board, pursuant to an agreement ("Grant Agreement") by which City is to comply with certain
terms and conditions (" Administrative ProcedureS and Requirements") for the implementation
of a used oil recycling program ("Program"), a copy of which agreement and program are
hereto attached as Exhibit A; and,
Whereas, Consultant desires to assist the City in the implementation of the Program
and is willing to abide by all the Terms and Conditions required of the City by the Grant
Agreement; and,
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a
manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to
City.
Whereas, Consultant desires to assist the City in the implementation of the Program
and is willing to abide by all the Terms and Conditions required of the City by the Grant
Agreement; and,
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a
manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to
City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of
this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby
mutually agree as follows:
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 1
t. ,,>
\~
!
1. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
On the condition that City and CWIMB remain in a valid contractual Grant Agreement
by which CWIMB is paying City grant monies thereunder, Consultant shall perform the
following general services "General Duties":
Consultant shall, in the detail outlined herein, generally provide educational services
promoting used oil recycling and the City's residential recycling program to center
visitors, elementary student science class participants and establish a permanent used
oil recycling display,
; and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
in the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Consultant shall also
perform all of the services described in Exhibit B, entitled "Detailed Scope of Work,"
Items II thru 15, not inconsistent with the General Duties, and in doing so, comply with and
perform the Administrative Procedures and Requirements that City js required to perform
under its Grant Agreement with CIWMB, attached as Exhibit C, according to, and within the
time frames set forth therein, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified therein
within the time frames set forth therein for delivery, time being of the essence of this
agreement. The General Duties and the Detailed Scope of Work and Deliverables required in
the Scope of Work shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete
the Defined Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, operate
to terminate this Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the
Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so,
City shall in good faith, and after meeting and conferring with Consultant, reduce the
compensation herein payable to Consultant.
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require
Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defmed Services
("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 2
t,-I,
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require
Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services
("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services
offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a fixed fee basis agreed to in advance
in writing, but not at the rates or fees greater than Consultant recovers from its best clients.
~
.
E. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defmed Services
or Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill
ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar
conditions and in similar locations.
F. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and sub-consultants employed by it in
connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by
the following insurance coverage, in the following categories, and to the limits specified,
policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V"
or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City:
Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance
coverage in the amount of $
Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance
coverage in the amount of $ , combined single limit applied separately to
each project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which names City and
Applicant as an Additional Insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may
otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City and
Applicant in the same manner as members of the general public ("Cross-liability Coverage").
Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount of $
Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy.
, unless Errors and
G. Proof of Insurance Coverage.
(1) Certificates of Insurance.
Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the
commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November :2, 1993 Page 3
4.-',)
1)'0
c
Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled
without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured.
(2) Policy Endorsements Required.
In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage
and Cross-liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Liability
Insurance Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating
same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager.
2. Duties of the City
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall provide initial training to Consultant,
B. Compensation
On the condition that City and CWIMB remain in a valid contractual Grant Agreement
by which CWIMB is paying City grant monies thereunder sufficient to fund the compensation
of Consultant, upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the
City not more than quarterly consistent with the Administrative Procedures and Requirements,
attached, and in amounts not greater than set forth in Detailed Scope of Work, City shall
compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the Administrative
Procedures and Requirements, in the amount set forth in the Detailed Scope of Work, subject
to the requirements for a 10% retention which will be released to Consultant when same has
been received by the CIWMB and Consultant has satisfactorily performed under this
Agreement.
All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the
propriety of the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable
thereunder is proper, and shall specifically contain the City's account number
to be charged upon making such payment.
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated as said
party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent them in the routine
administration of this agreement.
City: Michael T. Meacham, Conservation Coordinator
Consultant: Stephen Neudecker, Executive Director, Chula Vista Nature Center
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, ~993 Page 4
t~~
4. Term.
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all executory
provisions hereof.
5. Hold Harmless
Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and
appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and
expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the conduct of the
Consultant, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, or others in cOMection with the
execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims arising from
the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City, its officers, or employees. Consultant's
indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred
by the City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether the
same proceed to judgment or not. Further, Consultant at its own expense shall, upon written
request by the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officers,
agents, or employees. Consultants' indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior
or subsequent declaration by the Consultant.
6. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper maMer
Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the
covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate
this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the
effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that
event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports
and other materials prepared by Consultant, and all equipment and vehicles in good and
operable condition, purchased with grant funds shall become the property of the City.
7. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Administrator determines that the Consultants' negligence,
errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense
to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions,
Consultant shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing
herein is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement.
8. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 5
~-?
j)
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific
written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at
least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished
and unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove, and all equipment and
vehicles purchased with grant funds shall become City's sole and exclusive property, and shall
be returned to the City in a good and operable condition. If the Agreement is terminated by
City as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable
compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to
the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims
for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
9. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any
interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City.
10. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures,
systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole
and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part
under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant
in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City
shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the
provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in
whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or
properties produced under this Agreement.
11. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an
independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant's
work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives
are, for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed
to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City
employees are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's
compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold
state or federal income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be
2pty9.wp
November 2,
Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
1993 Page 6
(, "'It?
solely responsible for the payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with regard
thereto.
12. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City
unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the
City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated
by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City
in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the
purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
13. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the
prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of the
claim, including costs and attorney's fees.
14. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the
preparation of a report or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall
include, or cause the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the numbers and
cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report
or document.
15. Miscellaneous
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to
act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this
Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall
be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 7
"'-/1
I
pi>
United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with
return receipt requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each of
the designated parties.
C. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated
herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the
subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended,
modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party
against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
D. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that
it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement,
and that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this
Agreement.
E. Governing LawlVenue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought
only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if
applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement,
and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
[end of page. next page is signature page.]
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 8
t -'JJ.
Signature Page
to
Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Chula Vista Nature Center
for Used Oil Recycling Center
Recruitment and Technical Assistance Services
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement thereby
indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete
consent to its terms:
Dated.
,19_
City of Chula Vista
by:
Tim Nader, Mayor
Attest:
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney
Dated:
Chula Vista Nature Center
BY~~~
Step en Neudecker,
Executive Director
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 9
~-13
lib
1
"
EXHIBIT A
LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL
OPPORTUNITY GRANTS
PROGRAM REPORT
BACKGROUND:Local Used Oil Disposal Problems: The Cities of Chula Vista, Imperial
Beach and National City (Region) comprise most of the enclosed portion of South San Diego Bay.
The Region has an estimated 1,500 businesses that sell and/or generate motor oil. A significant
part of the Region's total households own more than one vehicle. Many households also own
recreational vehicles, boats and other motorized items that generate used oil. Approximately
350,000 gallons of the used oil generated in the Region are unaccounted for and may be disposed
of illegally I . The Region has less than ten facilities that are known to accept used motor oil from
the public.
The improper disposal of used oil in storm drains has a particularly devastating effect on the
Region. Most of the storm drains for city and county streets from downtown San Diego to the
border of Mexico drain into San Diego Bay and are captured in the enclosed South Bay. That
represents approximately one million residents who potentially utilize their gutters and storm
drains as the only convenient means of used oil disposal. Between Chollas Creek and the Tijuana
River there are at least four additional rivers and creeks that support hundreds of acres of
National Wildlife Refuge and wetlands. The wetlands and bay wildlife depend on the waterways
and are threatened by the used oil and other hazardous wastes they can transport.
Jurisdictions' Population: The City of Chula Vista is the second most populated City in San
Diego County with approximately 150,000 residents. National City has approximately 50,000
residents and Imperial Beach approximately 25,000 residents. The greater South Bay area serves
as home, work and retail center to more than 1,000,000 people from the United States and
Tijuana, Mexico.
Existing Used Oil Collection Opportunities: There are only two businesses in the Region that
have completed the certification process, neither of which promote their used oil collection
programs. There are approximately six additional non-certified centers in the Region that are
known to accept motor oil from the public. These centers are not well publicized and tend to be
located in dense commercial areas that are not convenient for many generators. Chula Vista,
Imperial Beach and National City have not had the resources to individually apply for and
implement used oil grants. This Regional approach represents an important opportunity for all
three cities and a significant change from past approaches.
County-Wide Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHW): The Region has paid an
additional per ton tipping fee to San Diego County for the HHW Round Up Program for the past
several years. The County HHW Round Ups accept used oil however, Chula Vista is an under-
served area. The County typically schedules an occasional roundup in National City and Imperial
Beach. The County has not scheduled a roundup in Chula Vista (the largest City in the County
system) in two years. The County expects Chula Vista residents to take their motor oil and other
HHW to the County's HHW subcontractor which is located in a remote part of the City. The
County's records indicate that the contractor receives less than 2% of Chula Vista's total HHW
waste stream of which only a part is used motor oil.
2
t~/'I
EXHmIT A
LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL OPPORTUNITY GRANTS
Public Education, Information and Promotion Program
Program Description: The Chula Vista Nature Center is a state of the art facility located on
hundreds of acres of wildlife refuge and wetlands on San Diego Bay. Local schools, families,
and visitors from throughout San Diego County travel to Chula Vista to see and participate in the
Chula Vista Nature Center facilities and activities. All third grade classes of the Chula Vista
Elementary School District attend annual "inter-active" science classes at the Nature Center.
This component of the grants supports staff and materials that will allow the Nature Center to
integrate used oil recycling education into their teacher training, third grade education program,
and guided and non-guided Nature Center/wetlands tours. The Nature Center Component will:
o provide more than 30,000 students with a comprehensive understanding of the
negative environmental effects of improper disposal of used oil,
o instill a desire among the student participants to preserve the environment by
encouraging their fellow students, families and neighbors to recycle used oil,
o allow the Center to schedule teacher training and third grade nature classes for the
Region's other elementary school districts (Imperial Beach! and National City),
o create awareness among the Center's 80,000 annual visitors for the connection
between the improper disposal of used oil and its negative effects on the environment,
o provide Center visitors with referral information for proper disposal of used oil, and
o make learning about used oil recycling fun and interesting!
The Nature Center's third grade education program will have a positive impact on additional school
used oil recycling activities. The Urban Corps and Region Intern will implement school based
activities (Le. poster contests and assemblies) designed to reach the entire elementary school student
body in the region during the grant period. Students who have participated in the Nature Center
program will stimulate participation among the students and promote an atmosphere of children
learning from other children at the school based events. Students will learn about the impacts of
improper oil disposal, how to take advantage of local used oil recycling opportunities and the
importance of buying recycled. All materials generated for Nature Center activities will recognize
the significant contribution made by the CIWMB.
This program component emphasizes a cooperative effort between the Chula Vista Nature Center,
the Tijuana River National Estuarine Reserve, local school districts, and the cities of Chula Vista,
Imperial Beach and National City. This innovative component places children in the middle of a
wetlands habitat that is symbolic of the environment we are trying so hard to protect. The "inter-
active" science classes will connect the vivid image of the fragile nature and beauty of the wetlands
with the choice between recycling and improper disposal of used oil. The Nature Center used oil
recycling component will establish an environmental legacy through which the State and region can
take great pride.
1 Imperial Beach Students may attend a comparable program to be established at the Tijuana River
National Estuarine Reserve.
8 ~.../.Y
~,
~
i
~~
~~a:
~~~
~~8
~~~
~a:~
~~~
OOu
u
OOg~
~~
~
...
t
Go) 05
E lr
i=1lI:
-
5
E
..
....
- ..
lllE;
-<
t:
.;J
:l
"S
ill
Ill:
Is
-
..
..
...
e
lO.
..
~
'll
g
'i
'C
1i
!
~~
'" .-
"O~
~ S
...
B
c::
0)
u
l:!
El:::
'" S
ZtIl
<<i
'C
B
e
e
.8"0
B ~
.- '"
t: c.
as.
~
... '"
II.) II.)
- '"
c:: '"
II.) '"
Uu
lUQJ.!3:
... "0 0
E '" 0
"'....0
Zcou
"OtIl
.......0
OMU
.... ... '"
fI} .~ G.)
~-=
'C 11)_
II.) i:.~
0; 1;! ...
~ ~ ~
II.) _
].~ ~
'" >>
~ E .~
c::"'u
"'~-
~-l!!
'" 0
= 5'-
o ._ ee
~<<Jz
~Zti
::::ts
O>c::
.- 0
~t:l:iu
"'~"g
:J ; '"
::0
~ :=-' ~
'" I-< 0
Q.. - .~
II.) _ '"
.... c._
~ '" >
.. .
.. co
~z
-
-
'" ~
>> .-
'" 0
"0 CO
~CJ
...
~
.0)
U
l:!l:::
~S
ZtIl
.0 .s
_ ~.~.5
C":S Q) - b.O
C::j:Q.oc::
.S! _ =' :.=
-C":S~CJ
Z'C ~ >>
.8.~~
SEO)_
V) ~ "0 .-
.- "0 '" 0
> c:: .... 0)
caC'Gco>
'3 ~ 'E 'il
..c:._.- U
UU.;l:!
...
~ B
'" c::
~ II.)
u U
~ ~ ~
E tl ~
'" "'Z
c:: l:!
11.)......0
"0"'-
ca 1$ =
... 0) 0
bJ) "0 .-
"OEo;
.: '" 8
';>>0
'0 .-= f:
c:: U._
'" - u
co co .-
c:: c-
._ o.e
c:: .- -
.- <<J Q..
'" Z 0)
t:: -
..."0.6
0) c:: ._
.0 OJ ...
u -
ftS ~.~
.!!eu:E
.... ~ >-
11.)_ '"
=c;"iS.
8'c'~
"0
l:! 8. .
E E 5
l!! ';',':l
_ c:: t!
u:eo~
::O::oC.O
"8 u ~ .~
o c: C":S.~
uct::>
N
-
t. -If,
'" co
~.e
'" 0
"0 CO
o c::
",0
...
~
II.)
u
l:!
El:::
'" '"
z(;i
--
.- '"
o '"
0) 0
> ~
.~~
(1).5
c.-
::0 u
o >>
l5 ~
"g
'"
'"
c.
5
...
co
]
j
~
o
- c::
... 0
II.) .-
- -
a ~
l:!'E
E'-
",-
Z lJl
...8.
o '"
.-
c:e
5 ~
-.-
1!u
"0>>
.- ~
Soli.)
- -
g.6
"g'E
o .!a
U"O
""
-
~
'0
o"'co
N ~c::
-"00
...
~
II.)
u
l:!l:::
~s
ZtIl
.s
.5
=:3
.- u
~ '"
>> ~<<i
<<S._ CIJ
"'S. u 0
fI)._ c-
._ _ U)
"0 .&j .-
:;1"0
~ c.:;::
'':: OJ 0
~';1!
~..c: fI)
B ~ ::0
c:: 0) ...
__0
'" ~
>> .-
'" 0
"0 co
~CJ
II.)
i:tll:::
~5s
t:l:iUtIl
~
1;!'E
11.)._
t:l:i 0)
'8 .=:
; ~
c:: ...
0) 0
"0.-=
a.~
tIl >
~
... .9
II.) .-
> .~
.- >
t:l:i
l!!"g
'" '"
:& i!
I-< 0)
0)"0
.;~
...0
u
E '"
e~
co-
8.~
c....
II.) 8.
- E
~-
... ...
a.s
E ~
8 0)
co '"
ti~
::0
'8 .~
o ...
Us
~l!l
c.-
o l!!
;:; 0
> 0'::
~z
II'>
-
Ill:
~
lO.
~
~
~
8
Ill:
I
~
~
~
=
i
'"
-
I
'"
~
II'>
N
-
.-
_ 0
.- "0
o II.)
"0 '"
II.) ::0
'" ...
::0 8.
~ 0
.- ...
tic.
"'...
... 0
II.) _
i$ QJ C'C
.: g 8-
c:: !'l '"
ill ;:;.-
; 8. "0
8.5 ~
8.J!! 8
'" ., c.
= ~.5
Q,)CU~
E t:: 0
II.) '" '"
-c::-
c.o~
c:: E c.
.= II.) E
'0 "0 .-
~..-
!ll .~
~-=l$
S ~~
'" - c.
c:: ~
0'- "0
U "0 c::
. co '"
c.c::-
0.- CIS
-- '"
II.) u 0
>>>c.
~ u '"
~l:!:e
~
-
a:l
I-
-
a:l
-
:l:
><
U.J
'"
a-
a-
...
.
'"
...
...
....
..
:
!Z ~
~
Cl
~
Z
~
a:
wO ~
!B:: ..
cc
i~ 0
..
~
c
~o 0
....
:E~ III
..
Gi
~::l >
....
iffi '"
...
....
0
lIE ...
Z Gi
a: III
~ :0
...
to
C
Cl 0
....
.J llC
< "
g '"
'"
to
.J III ...
...
III .c
.... ...
> ~
III
...
:l 0
ti 00
Gi
....
.... '"
0
'" C
III
... III
...
u
I ,
Q.
t
1
~-I?
;"
" \"
U ' .
n
II
..-
t:'.
l~
"'.
I!i.
,
U
~~
!j .
U
H
~i
~.
n
H
n
n
H
l'
U ,
U
I'
U
it ,I
U
, 1
II
J. ~ .. .. . .. . ~ . .. t . II II II II t :: t ~ R
.
'"
>.
..
"
0
-
c::
.~
~
....
.~
~
'"
c::
.~
c:: .
c::,;,<
.~ ..
",0
ell ~
J:>
....
ell 0
c::
.~ ell
- Q.
ell 0
e u
.~ '"
....
c::
c::.~
0
"
" ell
ell....
'" '"
...~
J:>_
ell '"
J:>';'<
'"
0 ..
........
"'~
ell....
u.~
.~ ~
>
.."
ell c::
"'0
Q.
- '"
.. ell
:s ..
.... ..
u 0
cr: u
..,
.-
ell I
....-
..-
....
VI '"
,;,<
>''''
J:>"
I-
ell
....
.. .
" >.
....
_.~
..u
>
0 ell
..~
Q.....
Q.
.. >.
J:>
"
ell"
....eIl
.. c::
e '"
~.~
.... '"
'"
ell '"
.~
c::
0....
u
" ..
ell ..
"'....
.. c::
J:> 0
U
ell
c:: ell
.~ ....
- ..
ell"
e
.~....
I- 0 I
i ,i
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REPORT
LOCAL GOVERNMENT OPPORTUNITY GRANT
NATURE CENTER COMPONENT
EXffiIT B
City of Chula Vista, South Bay San Diego Regional Oil Recycling Program
CIWMB
FUNDS
PERSONNEL EXPENSES
Nature Center Inst./Volt. Coord. 218 hr @ $18 p/hr $
Fringe Benefits2 @ 32.....2 % $
Temporary Expert Professional 416 Hours @ $18 p/hr $
Fringe Benefits2 @ 5.2% $
4 000 00
1.300.00
7 500.00
400.00
TOTAL PERSONNEL SERVICES
S 13.200.00
TOTAL OVERHEAD3
S -0-
CONTRACTS
S -0-
EQUIPMENT
MATERIALS & SUPPLIES
Classroom & Tour Supplies & Materials
S -0-
S 3.500.00
OTHER COSTS
Approximately 3,000 Imperial Beach and
National City Students:
Bus Transportation Costs
Admission and Shuttle Costs @ $1.15 per student
86 Teacher Orientation Fees @ $25 per Teacher
Tijuana River National Estuarine Reserve Program
PermanentIPortable Interactive Display
TOTAL OTHER COSTS
$ 5.000.00
$ 3.500.00
$ 2.000.00
$ 2.500.00
$ 19.000.00
S 32.000.00
TOTAL NATURE CENTER COMPONENT
S 48.700.00
t -Jft' ft16-J.h
Administrative Procedures and Requirements
Page 4
GRANT CLOSEOUT
I
I
A. The Project Manager will close out the award when it is determined thilt all applicable administrative actions and
all required work of the grant have been completed. '
I
B. The Grantee must submit a Final Report, a Payment Request and .all outstanding documentation of expenses
incurred that are required as a condition of the grant. Upon ~iPt of the Final Report, the Project Manager shall
ensure that all work has been completed and that all unexpendf/Cl funds are refunded to the State. If appropriate,
a check from the Grantee made payable to the State will be d\l'e within 60 calendar days after the grant project is
closed. Following the Project Manager's approval of the Final' Report and Payment Request, the ten percent
(10%) retention of the grant funds, as well as any other grar;rt funds due and owing, will be released to the
Grantee. The Final Report must be submitted at least 30 ilavs Drior to the termination of the arant,
C. The Grantee must retain all financial and grant program Iecords, supporting documents, statistical records, and
other records of projects funded by this grant. The Cal}fomia Integrated Waste Management Board must have
access to all related records during progress of the p"ject and for at least three (3) years after termination of the
grant. I
I
.
AUDIT REQUIREMENTS /
/
This grant is subject to a desk or field audit. The Gr,8ntee is responsible for maintaining source documents
substantiating the expenditures claimed and must n1ake them available at the time of an audit. Records relating to the
implemented program include: expenditure ledge1~yroll register entries, time sheets, paid warrants, contracts,
change orders, invoices, and cancelled checks. I1'lcords must be maintained for a period of three years from the date
of termination of the grant agreement. /
/
I
/
~".:J./
SUIte of c.llfornla
c.llfomla Integrated W.ate Managemant Board
ATTACHMENT C
LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL OPPORTUNITY GRANT
PaymentRequestFonn
I
11. Applicant
\2. COntract Number
UOOG. .
5. PAYMENT INFORMATION
a. Type of Payment (check box):
D REIMBURSEMENT
D ADVANCE
D FINAL
b. Total Grant Amount S
c. Less 10% Retention (paid upon completion of contract! S
d. Grant Funds Available After 10% Retention lb. minus c.l S
e. Funds Received to Date S
f. Available FundS (d. minus e.l S
g. Amount of TIlls ReQUest S
h. Remaining FundS After This Payment If. minus g.l S
4. THIS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED BY tlWMB STAFF
t"~~;.~_:;:':'l;;'::.i;:;;.;;i;'l;:;:::;;;i.!:;;;:l;iM:tt;it(;}I;ii;!~1;;.;ji
I
S. SEND PAY WARRANT TO
...~;,...:-,;. ,', .. .
11
Ageney Name I5Ime IS Applicant Namel:
street Address:
CltVlStltelZlp COde:
Attention:
..-,...cAJJClW: ,,.,,,., tIIK t1ItIlIIJCMt SIgnature Of PerSOn AutIlOrlZecl by ResolUtIon:
Ir/fomJItIOfI IS ccmICt ifill tIIK .. f&lIiCfS
~ ra.w DlllIn 01''' lie GIIfII)tI8d In
_1Ml1ce twtrtI t1ItI."",rwetlMllNlMflt NIITlI .. TItle (OIpe 01' pIfnO: Date:
for CIIi'OmIa ..tlo"o.-*"-
~tllOMl grwatlWldlng.
S& INSTRUCTIONS ON IU!lIERSE
~'.lJ
~.., c..-
~..
T..",. .nd Conditions
PUIllOSe. The pUrpose of this agreement Is to eltablish the telTnl Ind conditiona of the LocII Govemment
lJIed Oil Opportunity Gl'lnt.
Definitions. In interpreting this Igreement. the following telTnl will hive the munlngsgiven to them below,
unlul the context cleIrly Indicates otherwise.
A. "BOIrcI" will mun the CllIfornil tntlgl'lted WIm Mlnagement Board.
B. "Executive Director" will mun the Executive DiI'Ictor of the Clllfomil Integl'lted Wate
Manlgement BOIrd. or hillher designee.
-,
C. "State" will mun the State of Clllfomil, including but not Hmlted to, the Clllfomillntegrated
Wale Manlgement Board and/or its dellgnated ofIlcer.
D. "Gl'lntee" will mean the I'ICiplent of fundi pursuant to this Agreement.
E. "Program Manager" will mean the Board ItBff person l'llponllble for monitoring the grant.
6l!l!iL. The Grantee Igl'III that the BOIrd. the State Controller's Office Ind the State Auditor Genel'll's Office,
or their designated I'Iprnentatives. will hive In lbIolute right of lCOIII to III of the Gl'lntee's records
pertaining to the agreement to conduct I'Iviewl Ind/or ludits. GI'Intee's I'ICOrds pertaining to the Igreement,
or any part thereof requested, will be made IVlilable to the de~ignlted luditor(s) upon request for the
indicated reviews and/or ludita. Such records will be l'Ilained for at IIast three (3) y..rs after expiration of the
agreement, or until completion of the action Ind resolution of "'Issues which may lrisa IS I result of Iny
litigation. claim. negotiltion or ludit, Whichever Is 18ter.
If In audit reveals the State funds Ire not being expended, or hive not been expended In eccordlnce with the
agreement. the Gl'lntee may be requil'ld to forfeit the unexpended portion of the fundllndlor I'IP1Y the State
for Iny improperly expended monies.
DNa-Free Workolace Certification. The Gl'lntee, by lignlng this agl'llment, certifies compliance with
Govemment Code Section 8355 In rnattars I'Ilatlng to providing a drug-fI'Ia workplace. The Gl'lntee will:
A. Publish I statement notifying employ_ thet unlawful manufacture, distribution, 'dispensation,
poaMuion, or usa of I controlled substance is prohlblted and specifying lClions to be taken
agllnst employees for violations, II requil'ld by Govemment Code Saction 8355(1).
B. Establish I Drug-Free AWll'ln... Program II raquil'ld by Govemment Code Saction 8355(b),
to Inform employ.. lbout In of the following: (I) the daIIllIrs of drug abuse In the workplace,
(b) the Gl'lntee's policy of maintaining I drug-fI'Ia workplace, (e) Iny avelllbla counslling,
l'Ih1b111tat1on and employ.. llllatanca progl'lrns, and (d) panaltias that may be Imposed upon
employees for drug Ibusa violations.
C. Provide II raqull'lc:l by Govemmant Code helloh 8355(e), that every employ.. who works on
the propoMCI SlI'I"t (I) wiIIl'lCllva I copy of the company's drug-fI'Ia policy .~rnant, and
(b) will agree to IbIcIa by the tarmI of the companyl .~ II I colldltlon of ampIoyrnant
on the Dl'lnl The parson signing this gI'Int on behalf of the Gl'lnIII _rs that halshe Is
authorized to IagIIIy bind the GrantII to this ~lion and rnakas this OIrt1f1c1tion under
penalty of perjury under thelawa of the State of CIUfornil.
1 "",,<'/
"t"
Stoo Work Notice. 11'IlIlIId1ale1y. upon ~Ipt Of I wnbh notice 10 atop WOltt, the GranlH will cease In well<
under the agreement
DisDUles. If for Iny--.on the Oranl1le Ind the Executive Dnctor cannot ...eII mutualagreemen!, the
GranlH may rafer the dispute 10 the Board for final rIIOluIion.
RelMdles. Un... otherwlle ,,"sly prlWldId hIrwln. the rlglltllnd ramediM hlreunder Ire in Iddition to.
Ind not In Hmilllion Of. other rlglltllnd ramediM under the agreament. III1w or In equity, Ind exercise of one
right or ramedy will not III dllmed I walYlr Of any othIr right or NmIdy.
s.verabllllv. If Iny provIIIons of thisagreamentlrl found 10 III unlawful or unenforcNble. lUeII PIOYilions
will III voided Ind Hverad from thisagreament wtIhout ~'" Iny othIr prov\IIon of the agreament. To the
fulllXten!, however, thII the proviIIl:lns of IUcII appIicabllllw mey III walYld. thIy Ira hereby waivld, 10 the
end thllthe Igreamenllll delmld 10 III I valid Incl blueing agrlllTllnl enforcIIble In eccordInce with ita
am.. ~
Force Maleure. Neither the StIle nor the Grantee. including the Grantee'. OOhll~'), If Iny, will be
rllponsible hereunder for Iny deilY, default or nonpelfonnallCl of thilagrlllTllnt, 10 the extent thltsuch
deily, default or nonperformance II ceUlld by In ICI of God, WIIIhIr. 1CCident, labor llrike, fire. explosion.
riot. Wlr, rebellion, llboIage, or tIood, or Iny other CIUIIllIyoncl the IUIOIIIbII control of IUch party
Controllina Law. All qunlions conceming the vllidlty Incl operation of the agreement Ind the performance of
the obligltions impend upon the parliel hIrIunder will come within the jurildiction of Ind be govemld by tile
IIwI of the SlIte of California.
Eauiomenl and SUDoIles. Subject 10 the obIigllionllncl conditions III forth In thisllClion. IiIIe 10 equipment
Ind .upplles Icquired under I ;rani will veil upon Icquisltion In the Grantee, provided thII the Grant" uns
the equipment Ind .upplles for the purpo... Of used 011 collection for I period of IIl11st four (4) years from
the effective dlte of this grantagrlllTllnt. If the GranlH doll not UII the equipment or IUpplies for the
pufpoH of ulld oil coIlec1ion, the Board .....rves the rightta hive the equipment or .upplies returned 10 the
Board.
ComDliance. The GranlH .h111 comply fully with III applicable federal, IIIte Incllocllllwl, ordinlnces,
regulations Ind permlll. The Grantee nil MCUrI any new permIII required by luthorIIies having jurildiction
ovar the project. Incl .hall maintain III praHnlly required permIII. The Grantee .hall ensura thltthe
requlremenll Of the California Envlronmenlll QUlliIy Ac:I .... mil for Iny permill or other Inllllemenll required
10 carry out the 1Irm1 of thiI ",reament.
Hold Harmless.
A. GranI1Ie ISlrlllIo WIlYIIII c11lrna Incl rICOUI'II against the StIle Including the right 10
conlrlbuliOn for l01I or damage 10 JlIISOIls or property lrillng from, growtng out Of or in Iny
way COIlIlICIId with or Incldentlo thiI ",reament.
B. Grantee ISlrlllIo 1ndImo"llfy, hold hamll.1I end defend StIlI, III oIIlcers. ""nil Ind
empIcr, II. against any Incllll cIIlmI demlnclI. dlmagn, ClOIII, ... .... or liability COllI
eriIlng out of the ICIIvIIieI undIrtIkIn purlUlnllo thiI grant ",reament.
3 ~ ',2..5
IT APPROVED BY TliE
N - ATTORNEY~L
"'11 ~. 'f ~ ") /:'ff:)
o "', - .1 ~'t4. ::r..,,~~ TAX' A~FEllEAAl.EIM'LO'l:IDE"'IFN:AT,,,,".UlllEA
iltEEMENT. mlde and cn~ to this -- dlyof -mlr . I~ ..A)-.I, , q I
ite of CoIifomil. by and betw Slate of CoIifomil. throuah iu duly elected or appointed. qUllified and actina
~TRACT NUMBER
....NO.
'FICER ACTING FOR STATE
?cutlve Director
0R't HAllE
Y of Chula Vista . hereafter ~led tlte ConlrlClOr.
,SETH: Thlt lite Conlr_ for and in considerltion of lite covenanu. conditions. qrecmcnu. and stipulllions of tlte Slate hereinlfter e.pressed.
:by Igree to fumioh to lite Slate servicea and materiols u follows: (S61 forrh s6TVi.. 10 b6 I'6r1Ml'6d by Co"ua<:lor, /JIrIDWIl 10 b6 paid Cortlr""/or,
,.1'j01'1Ptlllll:. 0' comp~ iJIIIJ iUltKlI "i41u AM Sl'ecuU:i:UURIS. ,( any. J
_NCV
California Integraled Waste Management Board
. hereafter coiled tlte Sute. and
-"'7# .
~. ;/'''-.-7"". ~.........
Contractor agrees to unoertake and complet~ all necessary tasks to Implement a useo oil Opportunity Grant Program a\
authorized by Public Resources Code S48632<a) and as described In the grantee's Local Government Used Oil Opportunity
Grant application.
The State will withhold payment equal to 10% of each invoice until completion of all work and other requirements to the
satisfaction oi the Slate in accordance with this contract.
The term of the agreement will be 24 months, commencing+mrt, t994 and terminating on June 3D, 1996.
..I.nc. W, @-,
~
:clNTINUED ON
SHEETS. EACH BEARING NAME OF CONTRACTOR AND CONTRACT NUMBER.
The provisions on lite ,",verse side hereof constitute I pan of t1Us agreemenL
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, t1Us "areement hu been executed by tlte panies hereto. upon lite dlte rlTs' lbove written.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CONTRACTOR
AGENCV
California Inte rated Waste Mana ement Board
IV,
C>;
CC>NTRACTQfIl ("0lIl<<""" atll/wlitl.lMl, .t_.,..",.,.~,IOl't.~, ~,)
Ci of Chula Vista
o.;cArEl~.x_
I'A ANO Tm.E OF "ERION IIQNHG
· TCHt>J ,). .;:,' ~ ~ J [.Ty ,..1...... "
ACORESS" '1/ I!.. I .01
.1), . 71/1 I/~'~~ '.1",/1.'", rf, It,. .,1 0-
I FUND TI1\.& De,."",.", 01 a.".,., S.I'V/C"
Co Used Oil Re e1in nd U.. Only
r.
~O\JNT EfCUMHAEO IY .,..
..JCUMfNT
$
...:s270..100.00__. ._
",IQA .wourr.l ii:NCUUHREO FOR
TNII CONTRACT
$
I'llOllAAloIICATE_v ICOOE AND TITLEl
tOPTIONAL USi)
lOTAL AMOUNT ENCUMIEREO TO
GATE
ITEM CIolAPTEFI:
391 ().602.100 817
OLlEeT OF ElCl'ENCITUIIE ICOOE ANO TlTl.E)
IITATUTE
1991
I FISCAL YEAR
, 1993/94
I T..... NO.
I
I.R.NO.
~'TE
" -,;.-f-fV
t,~~
o OEPT. OF GEN. IER.
o CON'"!OLLEA
o
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
Urban Corps of San Diego
for Used Oil Recycling Center
Recruitment and Technical Assistance Services
This agreement ("Agreement"), dated October 18, 1994 for the purposes of reference only,
and effective as of the date last executed is between the City of Chula Vista ("City"), and Urban
Corps of San Diego, a non-profit, public benefit corporation of the State of California, and whose
place of business and telephone number is, 1864 National Avenue. San Dieio California
92113 Telt:l)hone Number (619) 235-0137 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the
following facts:
Recitals I
Whereas, City received a grant from the California State Integrated Waste Management
Board, pursuant to an agreement ("Grant Agreement") by which City is to comply with certain
terms and conditions ("Administrative Procedures and Requirements") for the implementation
of a used oil recycling program ("Program"), a copy of which agreement and program are
hereto attached as Exhibit A; and,
Whereas, Consultant desires to assist the City in the implementation of the Program
and is willing to abide by all the Terms and Conditions required of the City by the Grant
Agreement; and,
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a
manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to
City.
Whereas, Consultant desires to assist the City in the implementation of the Program
and is willing to abide by all the Terms and Conditions required of the City by the Grant
Agreement; and,
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a
manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to
City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of
this Agreement.
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 1
&,,,27
1/
'.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby
mutually agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
-.
-.
A. General Duties
On the condition that City and CWIMB remain in a valid contractual Grant Agreement
by which CWIMB is paying City grant monies thereunder, Consultant shall perform the
following general services "General Duties":
Consultant shall, in the detail outlined herein, generally provide recruitment services
designed to recruit businesses to apply for and receive certification as Used Oil
Recycling Centers from the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB)
by which said certified businesses will thereafter offer to the general public used oil
recycling services, and to render technical assistance both to the certified businesses
and to the City or City's designated recipients,
, and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
in the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Consultant shall also
perform all of the services described in Exhibit B, entitled "Detailed Scope of Work,"
Items , not inconsistent with the General Duties, and in doing so, comply with and
perform the Administrative Procedures and Requirements that City is required to perform
under its Grant Agreement with CIWMB, attached as Exhibit C, according to, and within the
time frames set forth therein, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified therein
within the time frames set forth therein for delivery, time being of the essence of this
agreement. The General Duties and the Detailed Scope of Work and Deliverables required in
the Scope of Work shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete
the Defined Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, operate
to terminate this Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the
Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so,
City shall in good faith, and after meeting and conferring with Consultant, reduce the
compensation herein payable to Consultant.
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2. 1993 Page 2
~ -,;<~
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require
Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services
(" Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services
offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a fIXed fee basis agreed to in advance
in writing, but not at the rates or fees greater than Consultant recovers from its best clients.
E. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined Services
or Additional Services, shall perform iIr a manner consistent with that level of care and skill
ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar
conditions and in similar locations.
F. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and sub-consultants employed by it in
connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by
the following insurance coverage, in the following categories, and to the limits specified,
policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V"
or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City:
Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance
coverage in the amount of $1.000.000.
Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance
coverage in the amount of $1.000 000, combined single limit applied separately to each project
away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which names City and Applicant as an
Additional Insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry
("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City and Applicant in the same
manner as members of the general public ("Cross-liability Coverage").
Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount of $ Nt A . unless Errors and
Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy.
G. Proof of Insurance Coverage.
(1) Certificates of Insurance.
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 3
/, '.21
1/
,
Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the
commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of
Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled
without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured.
(2) Policy Endorsements Required.
In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage
and Cross-liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Liability
Insurance Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating
same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager.
2. Duties of the City
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall provide initial training to Consultant,
B. Compensation
On the condition that City and CWIMB remain in a valid contractual Grant Agreement
by which CWIMB is paying City grant monies thereunder sufficient to fund the compensation
of Consultant, upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the
City not more than quarterly consistent with the Administrative Procedures and Requirements,
attached, and in amounts not greater than set forth in Detailed Scope of Work, City shall
compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the Administrative
Procedures and Requirements, in the amount set forth in the Detailed Scope of Work, subject
to the requirements for a 10% retention which will be released to Consultant when same has
been received by the CIWMB and Consultant has satisfactorily performed under this
Agreement.
All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the
propriety of the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable
thereunder is proper, and shall specifically contain the City's account number 270-2710-5298
to be charged upon making such payment.
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated as said
party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent them in the routine
administration of this agreement.
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 4
t-.J(;?
City: Michael T. Meacham, Conservation Coordinator
Consultant: Sam Duran, Executive Director, Urban CQrps of San Diego
4. Term.
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all executory
provisions hereof.
5. Hold Harmless
Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and
appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and
expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the conduct of the
Consultant, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, or others in connection with the
execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims arising from
the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City, its officers, or employees. Consultant's
indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred
by the City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether the
same proce.ed to judgment or not. Further, Consultant at its own expense shall, upon written
request by the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officers,
agents, or employees. Consultants' indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior
or subsequent declaration by the Consultant.
6. Termination of Agreement for Cause ,
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the
covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate
this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the
effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that
event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports
and other materials prepared by Consultant, and all equipment and vehicles in good and
operable condition, purchased with grant funds shall become the property of the City.
7. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Administrator determines that the Consultants' negligence,
errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense
to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions,
Consultant shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing
herein is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement.
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 5
&,..:1 /
I
') it?
(J
8. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific
written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying'the effective date thereof, at
least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished
and unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove, and all equipment and
vehicles purchased with grant funds shall become City's sole and exclusive property, and shall
be returned to the City in a good and operable condition. If the Agreement is terminated by
City as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable
compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to
the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims
for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
.,
9. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any
interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City.
10. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures,
systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole
and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part
under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant
in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City
shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the
provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in
whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or
properties produced under this Agreement.
11. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an
independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant's
work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives
are, for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed
to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City
employees are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's
compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 6i
t, ~3.2.
state or federal income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be
solely responsible for the payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with regard
thereto.
12. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City
.unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the
City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated
by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City
in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the
purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
13. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the
prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of the
claim, including costs and attorney's fees.
14. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the
preparation of a report or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall
include, or cause the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the numbers and
cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report
or document.
15. Miscellaneous
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to
act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this
Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2. 1993 Page 7
~-:J:J
'/,'t'
/
be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the
United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with
return receipt requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each of
the designated parties.
C. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated
herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the
subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended,
modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party
against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
D. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that
it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement,
and that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this
Agreement.
E. Governing Law/Venue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought
only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if
applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement,
and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
[end of page. next page is signature page.]
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 8
,-J1
Signature Page
to
Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Urban Corps of San Diego
for Used Oil Recycling Center
Recruitment and Technical Assistance Services
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement thereby
indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete
consent to its terms:
Dated: X/r> j ) ,19.24--
, ~
City of Chula Vista
by:
Tim Nader, Mayor
Attest:
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney
Dated:
u'bm~if:o . )
Sam Duran,
Executive Director
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2. 1993 Page 9
~ . 3.5
I"':
I1L
Exhibit List to Agreement
Exhibit A. Used oil recycling program ("Program")
Exhibit B: "Detailed Scope of Work for Urban Corps of San Diego"
Exhibit C; Administrative Procedures and Requirements
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 10
t,-J"
Exhihit A
Program Description, Certified Used Oil Centers: Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and National City (Region)
will identify and contact at least 300 qualified used oil recycling center prospects by mail. The initial mailing
will provide basic information on the requirements and benefits of being a certified used oil recycling center.
Prospective used oil recycling centers will be asked to return a self addressed mail card expressing interest.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL
OPPORTUNITY GRANTS
Certified Used Oil Reqcling Center Program
With the assistance of the San Diego Urban Corps the Region will encourage businesses to certify by:
o offering technical assistance to complete a certification application,
o providing free used oil rec)'cling containers for distribution to their customers,
o referring customers to certified centers through the recycling information telephone line,
o referring customers to certified centers through point of purchase information, and
o referring customers to certified centers through newspaper advertisements,
Businesses will be reminded that oil recycling will bring potential customers to their stores, and that automotive
oil changing facilities can benefit from the sixteen cent per gallon incentive fee that would apply to oil generated
from their vehicle service bays if they certify as a used oil rec)'cling center.
The Project Manager will train Corps members to contact and work with used oil centers, An Urban Corp
representative will visit prospective used oil collection centers that express interest in the program, The Urban
Corps representative will provide the owner/manager with an overview of the program and assist them with the
completion of a Certified Used Oil Collection Center Application.
The Urban Corps will provide qualified centers (those receiving CIWMB certification) and the store
owner/manager with a storefront sign, rosters, a counter display, used oil recycling containers and the on-site
training necessary to insure a successful program. The sign will recognize the store's participation and list the
days and hours that used oil is accepted. The manager/owner ....'ill receive rosters that encourage used oil
recyclers to register for prizes. Used oil recyclers wilt be randomly selected from the roster (by the Region) for
cash and gift certificates. The store o....ner/manager will receive a counter display promoting used oil rec)'c1ing,
The counter display will encourage participants to donate their change (including 4 cents per quart incenth'e fee)
to the Urban Corps and the Nature Center for programs that promote used oil recycling, Certified centers will
also receive free reusable used oil collection containers to distribute to the public at no cost. The containers will
prominently display the California Integrated Waste Management Board's logo and recognize their support of
the program.
The Urban Corps will service the rosters, counter displays and replenish, clean and/or dispose of the used oil
recycling containers as necessary. A primary goal of this component will be to work with the California
Integrated Waste Management Board (ClWMB) staff to certify a minimum of twelve (12) and as many as thirty
(30) strategically located used oil centers throughout the Region.
Every effort will be made to assure that the centers are sufficient in quantity and geographic distribution to assure
that every resident of the region has a convenient opportunity to participate in the program. Providing every
household with a convenient recycling opportunity is the first step in eliminating improper disposal and
eliminating used -:lil as a threat to the Region's \ 'aterwa)'s and wildlife habitat.
&>-J'1
V/
LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL
OPPORTUNITY GRANTS
PROGRAM REPORT
Exhibit A
BACKGROUl\1])
Local Used Oil Disposal Problems: The Cities of Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and National City (Region)
comprise most of the enclosed portion of South San Diego Bay. The Region has an estimated 1,500
businesses that sell andlor generate motor oil. A significant part of the Region's total households own more
than one vehicle. Many households also own recreational vehicles, boats and other motorized items that
generate used oil. Approximately 350,000 gallons of the used oil generated in the Region are unaccounted
for and may be disposed of illegally!. The Region has less than ten facilities that are known to accept used
motor oil from the public.
The improper disposal of used oil in storm drains has a particularly devastating effect on the Region. Most
of the storm drains for city and county streets from downtown San Diego to the border of Mexico drain into
San Diego Bay and are captured in the enclosed South Bay. That represents approximately one million
residents who potentially utilize their gutters and storm drains as the only convenient means of used oil
disposal. Between Chollas Creek and the Tijuana River there are at least four additional rivers and creeks
that support hundreds of acres of National Wildlife Refuge and wetlands. The wetlands and bay wildlife
depend on the waterways and are threatened by the used oil and other hazardous wastes they can transport.
Jurisdictions' Population: The City of Chula Vista is the second most populated City in San Diego County
with approximately 150,000 residents. National City has approximately 50,000 residents and Imperial Beach
approximately 25,000 residents. The greater South Bay area serves as home, work and retail center to more
than 1,000,000 people from the United States and Tijuana, Mexico.
Existing Used Oil Collection Opportunities: There are only two businesses in the Region that have
completed the certification process, neither of whichJ'romote their used oil collection programs. There are
approximately six additional non-certified centers in the Region that are known to accept motor oil from the
public. These centers are not well publicized and tend to be located in dense commercial areas that are not
convenient for many generators. Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and National City have not had the resources
to individually apply for and implement used oil grants. This Regional approach represents an important
opportunity for all three cities and a significant change from past approaches.
County-Wide Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHW): The Region has paid an additional per ton
tipping fee to San Diego County for the HHW Round Up Program for the past several years. The County
HHW Round Ups accept used oil however, Chula Vista is an under-served area. The County typically
schedules an occasional roundup in National City and Imperial Beach. The County has not scheduled a
roundup in Chula Vista (the largest City in the County system) in two years. The County expects Chula Vista
residents to take their motor oil and other HHW to the County's HHW subcontractor which is located in a
remote part of the City. The County's records indicate that the contractor receives less than 2% of Chula
Vista's total HHW waste stream of which only a part is used motor oil.
&,-.J~
Exhibit A
Certified Used Oil Center Program continued. . .
This component has the potential to reach the 225,000 local residents and many of the 1,000,000 people from
Tijuana and the surrounding area that buy oil in the Region. This component is designed to increase awareness
of used oil recycling opportunities and reduce the incidence of improper disposal. It will provide the first link
in a used oil collection system to an area which has been under-served in both co\1ection and education
opportunities.
This program component emphasizes a cooperative effort between the Cities ofChula Vista, Imperial Beach and
National City, and the Urban Corps of San Diego. The agencies wi\1 work together and utilize their considerable
resources to develop and implement a program through which the Region and State will take great pride.
~':J7
, ,
U,J
,
LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL
OPPORTUNITY GRANTS
Public Education, Information and Promotion Program Part II
Exhibit A
Program Description: The Chula Vista Nature Center is a state of the art facility located on hundreds of acres
of wildlife refuge and wetlands on San Diego Bay. Local schools, families, and visitors from throughout San
Diego County travel to Chula Vista to see and participate in the Chula Vista Nature Center facilities and
activities. All third grade classes of the Chula Vista Elementary School District attend annual "inter-active"
science classes at the Nature Center.
This component of the grants supports staff and materials that will allow the Nature Center to integrate used oil
recycling education into their teacher training, third grade education program, and guided and non-guided Nature
Center/wetlands tours. The Nature Center Component will:
o provide more than 30,000 students with a comprehensive understanding of the negative
environmental effects of improper disposal of used oil,
o instill a desire among the student participants to preserve the environment by encouraging their
fellow students, families and neighbors to recycle used oil,
o allow the Center to schedule teacher training and third grade nature classes for the Region's other
elementary school districts (Imperial Beach' and National City),
o create awareness among the Center's 80,000 annual visitors for the connection between the
improper disposal of used oil and its negative effects on the environment,
o provide Center visitors with referral information for proper disposal of used oil, and
o make learning about used oil recycling fun and interesting!
The Nature Center's third grade education program will have a positive impact on additional school used oil
recycling activities. The Urban Corps and Region Intern will implement school based activities (i.e. poster
contests and assemblies at all elementary schools) designed to reach the entire elementary school student
body in the region during the grant period. Students who have participated in the Nature Center program
will stimulate participation among the students and promote an atmosphere of children learning from
other children at the school based events. Students will learn about the impacts of improper oil disposal,
how to take advantage of local used oil recycling opportunities and the importance of buying recyeled.
All materials generated for Nature Center activities will recognize the significant contribution made by the
CIWMB.
This progranl component emphasizes a cooperative effort between-the Chula Vista Nature Center, the Tijuana
River National Estuarine Reserve, local school districts, and the cities of Chula Vista, Imperial Beach and
National City. This innovative component places children in the middle of a wetlands habitat that is symbolic
of the environment we are trying so hard to protect. The "inter-active" science classes will connect the vivid
image of the fragile nature and beauty of the wetlands with the choice between recycling and improper disposal
of used oil. The Nature Center used oil recycling component will establish an environmental legacy through
which the State and region can take great pride.
I Imperial Beach Students may attend a comparable program to be established at the Tijuana River National
Estuarine Reserve.
/, - 'II?
LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL
OPPORTUNITY GRANTS
OPERATION PLAN
Exhibit A
The rec)'cling/diversion of used oil will be achieved through a comprehensive system that refers oil generators
to conveniently located and "state certified" drop-off centers. The availability of state certified centers will be
promoted through an extensive public education and information program.
The Region will target businesses for certification which already meet local and state requirements for used oil
storage. The Urban Corps' on-site interviews of potential centers will include a visual inspection of storage
facilities and review of permits for proper used oil storage.
Qualified businesses will be encouraged to establish a schedule of days and hours for accepting used oil
(potentially their full hours of operation). Posting the days and hours of operation on the store front sign
provided will be a requirement of participation in the Region's assistance program. Businesses will not be
encouraged to apply for certification if they cannot meet the state minimum requirements for hours of used oil
collection.
Certified centers will be encouraged to contact the local used oil referral number(s) when they have temporarily
reached their storage capacity maximum or if they wish to drop from the program.
~"7'/
... ('
LOCAL GOVERo"1:\IENT OPPORTUNITY GRANT
URBAN CORPS CO!\lPOl'lENT BUDGET
Exhibit B
City ofChula Vista, South Bay San Diego Regional Oil Recycling Program
CIWMB
FUNDS
PERSONNEL EXPENSES
Recycling Manager $35,000 @ 33%
Corps Supervisor $20,400 @ 100%
Education Coord. $20,400 @ 5%
Vehicle Mechanic $10,000 @20%
Sub Total Salaries and Wages
Sub Fringe Benefits @22.75 %
$ 11.500 00
$ 20.400 00
$ 1.500.00
$ 2 000.00
S 35.400.00
S 8.800.00
Corps Members (4) 6656 hrs @ $5.00 p/hr.
Administrati\'e Ass!. 1 @ 1664 @ $6.00 p/hr.
Sub Total Salaries and Wages
Sub Fringe Benefits @ 22.43%
$ 33 300.00
$ 10 000.00
S 43.300.00
$ 9.700.00
TOTAL PERSONl'IEL EXPENSES
$ 78.700.00
TOTAL FRll'IGE BEi'\EFITS
S 18500.00
TOTAL PERSONNEL SERVICES
S 97.200.00
TOTAL OVERHEAD
-0-
CONTRACTS
-o-
w
EQUIPMENT)
Used Vehicles (2)
Computer (with software)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT
$ 20.000.00
$ ~ 000.00
S 25.000.00
MATERIALS & SUPPLIES
Uniforms
Vehicle Maintenance
TOTAL MATERIALS & SUPPLIES
$ 3.000.00
5.000.00
$ 8.000.00
OTHER COSTS
Vehicle Insurance
Vehicle Fuels
Vehicle Registration
Used Oil Referral Telephone Line
TOTAL OTHER COSTS
$ 3 000.00
$ 5 000.00
$ 1.000 00
$ 1.500 00
$ 10.500.00
CONSERVATION CORPS COI\!PONENT
$140.700.00
. Eqllipmcrll Iftt,llll be,~ 10 the City in COfldilion comp"rable to oriltlinal inVCSIr"~lllalc It tbe et>d ofthr I"nl cycle l.lfllcs5 the lhbIn COfll' Conli_ IfI pn:....idc tcchniuluaill&fttc '1:1 cmiliecl (enu:n for two full
MklitionaJ)'UfS
t -~..(
i
~
~
~
~
o
~t
00
~=
~o
o~
~~
8~
~~
==
~
o
~
:;!
u
S
!!
IS
6
C f!
ell
.~ 8
"S.i:l.
Q."O
~ ~
'C&.
f! 8
~ll.
..,
t.I .~
e :::
.- ...
... ..
=:
-
c
~
c
..c
.- ..
~l!:
t:
..
Vi
:l
;;
~
=:
15
-
!is
'i
..
c.
V) ell
;:., .:
cu 0
"0 ell
~c5
..
u
ff
C
cu
:::E
V)
e-
o
u
-
u
~
.9
V)
.!:!
"S.
Q.u
::l_
V) ::l
':':"0
gJ:!
ciS ~
cO
8
c..
iB
...
~
...
..
g
i.
l
.!:!
;0
~
'B 2!
r=:=
t:; g
- 0
C.c
tl Q.
"0 -
U '"
l:: t:
.= ..!!
il I:!
.. ~
~=
V) u
- ;:.,
cu u
.;: I:!
u
- -
cu .-
6 0
_.c
V) V)
u .-
:::;0
Eo!!
::l V)
V) U
.. .
u-
"0-
.. ..
o~
... .
~1.
-
V)
~
"0
~
e-
o
u
'B ..
cu ~
e"E
!!~
S~
-
o
o
<"l
- ..
~~
.!:! C
_ IS
cu CtJ
~.5
.- -
_ u
C ;:.,
U u
:E 2
-
'0
]-
u C
E.'le
:=-
.9'2
V) u
"2 ~
rl .~
;:.,la
"S.o
I:! E
.c
.~ .s
~ ..
~ 8-
~"8
cu cu
6 ~
8 .~
<"l:=
- I:!
~-
.!:! ~
_.9
CU f!
"8 g
r)l~
M
V)
~
"0
o
N
-
..
Sl
.. .-
~e
CU 8-
C ::l
",:::Ev.i
C V) V)
"e-e-
~ 0 0
_uu
-
'0
~ ~
_ u
V) -
11 ~
nlell
;:.,.5
=u
1:: ;:.,
8 ~
'B .~
CU c
e tl
cu"o
... u
eIll:
o ._
l:: 1::
-u
~ u
._ 0
t<"l
'" -
u .~
"0 -
O C
_ U
~~
:=.2
.~ r:a
~~
Q.
- Q.
rl CU
.- C
C 0
.c ._
u _
u CU
- u
ul:
- .-
.- -
V) ..
C: S
o u
u -
"O.!:!
.- Q.
i; 6
et 8
<"l
V)
~
"0
~
~ !5
~.!!l
6 e
u 8-
:::E ::l
v.i
e-e-
o 0
uu
ell
.5
-
f!
~
N
-
-
] t
c
:( e
~
!!
C
u
U
"0
U
l:
',::
u
u
o
<"l
'8
l:
',::
u
u
C
'g
"0
C
CU
;:.,
]:
~
Q.
::l
-
r)l
'<t
rn ~J
;:., .-
CU 0
"0 ~J
~c5
~ !5
~.!!l
E e
u 8-
:::E ::l
V) If).
e-e-
o 0
uu
o
<"l
o
N
-
~
u
Ii
'li
"E
CU V)
~ t
CU c
~ tl
..
.g
~
u
U '"
;:.,'
~ [
ti"8
u '"
elJ!l
. C
'" u
;:.,6
.!! ~
Q..-
.~ 1:
"0 ~
""0
!! CU
C u
5 ~
u-
o Q.
'" 0
.. '"
2:! ~
or; 'i:
C Co
o C
U.2
U'-=
u C
.- ell
e 8
~ I:!
~ -1:..!
.,.. \0
~'~
CU ._
"0 0
o~
~o
'" ..
e-~
y ~
E~
!! c.
C ::l
_v.i
-
c; ~
fC,,!:!
~'!
.!! I:!
~=
:; 0
u ..
u .~
CU '"
i:i: 6
c
.2
-
CU
E
..
.g
.5
~
CU
.c
l:!
::l
Co
...
o
-
C
'8, E
~t:
_CI)
~8
.- Q.
"0;:.,
go!!
~ .~
.!:!"O
'C; u
1!:s
_ 0
'0 E
.. -
o C
o e
E.!:!
_ Co
u 6
:=.-
5"8
u ...
'" ~
;:., .-
~g,
~c5
Co
'" ::l
e-v.i
0-
t1 ~
E~
!! u
.s:::E
.9
.g
.5
CI)
.5
-
u
~8
u ~.,
"0-
.- -
:> u
o ~
6:.5
~
1!
~
!!
Q.
o
.c
V)
o
-
::l
...
U
ell
.!:!
'0
u
~
'2
I
"8
...
l c
'" 0
.c .-
CI)~
:.c g
c:iJ
ec
u u
- "0
~~
--
c-
..
CU
U
;:.,
-
;f
..
~ Sl
~ .-
E e
u ~
:::E~
Ee-e.
S Q 0
_uu
.g~
c u
._ "0
Cl)E
c V)
:= u
u ell
;:.,CU
u
I:! i:' c
.. 0
u -c'-
"0 CtJ
.- U u
i;Ec:::::
.. u c
~ u.-
-
c
~
OJ
c
.2
-
CU
u
::l
'8
-
'0
-
CI)
.5
U
~.!!l
'8,g
~ ~
.oi:'
-:=
8 c
~ e
OJ
i:'u
:=0
c'<t
e.?;>
u!!
- CU
~ E
c .-
S e
u c.
- C.
Q....
E -
_ CU
00
V) ~
;:., .-
~g,
~c5
~
~
~
E V)
!!~
.su
V-
a g
c .-
.~ rc
.5 ~
U u
;:., .-
1-l:C
!:e..
'0 7G
~
U
.c
u
..
u
.5
l;>
:E
-
u
<
~
"S.
'"
S
u
-
:s
o
:::E
-
c
u
6
u
Q,
6
-
"8
cu
..
u
"E
o
0\
V)
:>.
cu
"0
o
N
-
6
OJ
::?!
-
Co
::l
v.i
V)
E-
o
u
I:!
::l
v-
8-
><
u
'?
c
o
'Cl
u
c:::::
V)
"E
~
CQ
-
..
u
-
'"
o
i:l.
;:.,
'"
c.
V)
:;
~
u
-
::l
.c
.;:
-
v-
Q
o
-
~&
cc
~
.....
cc
.....
::!:
><
""
...
'"
'"
....
.
...
....
....
""
...
Q.
<
~
!z ,.
c
~
C)
~
Z
::l
l-
e: e
wO 10
zOo ...
llC
-0. 0
-'0 ...
W-, "-
:E- e
j::0 0
""
lEe '"
...
~~ OJ
>
""
,,::l Q
01- -
e:Z .~
Q.W 0
:E ""
Z ..
e: '"
:>
W
~ ...
10
0
C) 0
-
-' 0.:
..
Ill: '"
U >-
0 10
..J 10 '"
'"
'" .c
"" '"
> ;l
0
10 III
....
;l 0
.c llC
u OJ
""
... Q
0
e
>- 10
'" III
""
U
C ~
.~ ~
i 0..
i
- I
0
l!
~
If !
~.
I '-
0
'1 '"
11 . i >,
'"
'0
U 0
.....
0:
II .~
,,;:
I ....
.~
\ ~
"I
1:'. 0:
.~
0:
!~ 0:
.~
"'e .
~.
H
.~
ll.
~~
~ .
H
, i
~.
H
H
U
H
~f \
. .
If
"'1
~.
U
ij~
tl I'
lIj.
U
'I
il.
l, . ~ ~ . .. .. . .. . ~ : :: : : : , ~ : ~ R
&.-~'1 / t - J/5
.,
C'l
C'l
OJ .
.a.,.
....
OJo
0::>:
~
.........
~ 0
e
~ '"
....0.
C e
OVl
'00
e; 0
"''0
.a OJ
....
OJ '"
.a ._
.....
o
.... '"
.,.
'" '"
OJ '"
U ....
~
t::j
OJ .~
'" i
""''0
'" 0
;l 0
.... 0.
U '"
-=: OJ
....
....
o
u
OJ
....
"'0
.... .....
VI,
.....
>,
.a oJ'>
.><
OJ on
.... '"
~I-
..... .
",>,
>....
O'~
....u
0.
o.OJ
"',,;:
....
'0
OJ>,
.... .a
'"
e'O
.~ OJ
....0:
on C'l
"'.~
'"
0:
o ,"
'0
OJ""
on u
'" '"
.a....
....
OJ 0
0: 0
.~ u
OJ OJ
e....
.~ '"
I- '0
EXHIBIT C
.,
:;.
'::::...::;
."
0.::- ~~,
"
.~z~.
..::t.'".::, .~;. . ")""
--;y;w ~'r"""
'f..
:i;~-:l~' .~.
"~
'-::"
+
'.~.
'.1'
.~,
.~.
'~"
:...~~ ~.~ i.\.4' "~' .
. ,. '1.::....
. ~~+.~~:
..
.~. .r
"f.i:*~.
..;.
ST A rEO f CAt,tf 6 R NI A
.*
.,.
..;.
"~'
.~.
+~
~.
.~, ~"'~'
'. . .~'
., ,~.~ :.~,
,:'t. ~i
"h'}^,., '1' '~'
p.<<...~.t.~.
..
..~..
"~"
...~.
.1--
.tt/P;t' ~t-
,t.'?' ..,:t(,{:.
"^
.f' .#.:::. ):.
'.::"::} -",
~'..*,* ~' '~"
~~. "~' ~.~.
~.~.
k
,~.'
,
...:;.,
~.
\4.t+<<.~:~~. ~~.
.,;>'
'~" '$-
'~:. t.f'
.::.' '':'
.>>.
w. "~'
.;.
. ~ ':}"
:$ t" '~,,:'~ ':::~'$- .~, .W
Y':;;. ....~ ,,,,. ';1; ",,, .,if,
w + .~
.~. A/ 4' .:;.>>"." .~~ ';:."
.,
,
'~"
.~. .
..
-$'
+ ..~.'~ ~. .' ~" ,'. ,
ADMINISTRA TIVEPROCepURE$ AND REQUlREMENTS
.~.
.~
_$;..*4-
.
..v
.,
'}"
,.
...~.
1.0CAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL OPPORTUNITY GRANTS
. t
:v.
.", <'1'
h.' ,~/.
,.
{f: .:;:'
.~ *
.,
.~.
.~. .* .::/
""
.~.
'~.
,~ '
.::;:.
.#
.;. ,'4"
'" .~.
'>.' $/ ~~- ~;r.:~. ';i,. :t
. . ~. _~".i;. "~'
-'::s. '-;:"
.~...t
~~ .,?-
..::--
.,..,
.>>.>>
...~.:.. -.::.
.,
_," '~t~: .~. ;t- '~":-' t '~::t~\ .~... -{. '~~::--t .*. .~. ~~.
.( .fo-.;.. . ,~* .-:-... -i-' :: ~f.:-~ ~~,q, ,~. ~.~: - .~~.
-'* - ., -:-';-.1. t...... ~ o::'.;y- .:.<<.' ,,:;.. - ~ '0
-{" ~_:-., "~~~ ,.., r,. ~,"~~ ~ r-'" '"'::
"'" '* '~1.. ''f;" -,$W.(rt,,4$ '~'~"
~. \ ~f{:. ,::.."*':::.. ~ ~;.:m'~4. .;h %~ ~....~ ~1"":,. ,~~~ ~ ''t....,.;
"" .,. .ff...., .. ,,, "'" . ::&"F~ "'. /.
".' "3:s>>. io' ,,'.- .;: 't, ,'~;_.,:..-t$'~ .J.,. -,' ~*..::::~t- ~'. - ~.~ '':"'~ . ~ -:-,
y '" ,"(."J[' '":>".. ;:::. -1- .$*-' .;:. .\:::: .~" ../.;.
"'f ;~,:'A\;>v ',>:':',"'1(,:,. . "~t :\1;".
'~ilf~1i\te9rate~W.~.M.njjj.meil~J3~i1:I
Markets, .rt....rch&T.ctlnologyOM.loii
Grants & Research Branch fUsed 011 Grants
'.. . '''Oll eal center Orlve '.
,i~l'i.~nto,.qA.t$82' ~...
~::-. ,~) ,~. .t. . .t'w ....... ~.~ . .'
. '. .,. ..,"., ., .J....'....;;...'..894 '. '.:'.~. . ..........
~~% ..;.... .-}~' @~. . 1f ....... -' .~ - ."~ ,~. "'.
-.:"- .;-~ --:::'
. }.'
.~.
'.0:
.::-.. ~.,
..,
.,
:.;...
.,.
~r t
".
.~
'0::'
1- -::--
4'
w
LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL OPPORTUNITY GRANT PROGRAM
Administrative Procedures and Requirements
INTRODUCTION
These Administrative Procedures and Requirements for the Local Government Used 011 Opportunity Grant
Program (Opportunity Grant) set forth the policies and procedures for administering the Opportunity Grant award
made through the Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board's (CIWMB) Used Oil Grant Program. This
document, which is incorporated by reference into the grant agreement, describes the administrative reporting
requirements, instructions for obtaining payment of the grant, and fiscal control procedures to be followed in
implementing CIWMB funded used oil grant programs.
Direct any questions regarding this document or the grant agreement to Patricia McDermott at (916) 255.2586 or Chris
Allen at (916) 255.2136.
REQUIRED REPORTS
A. QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORTS
The Grantee must submit Quarterly Progress Reports to the Project Manager based upon the following schedule:
QUARTER
July - September
October - December
January - March
April - June
REPORT DUE
October 30
JanLjary 30
April 30
July 30
Grantees must submit Quarterly Progress Reports until the grant project is completed. Grantees should use a format
similar to the sample found in Attachment A of this document. Each Quarterly Progress Report shall include the
following information:
1. Address each task in the 'Work Statement" as set forth in the contract giving a detailed description of work
that has been completed. This description should also discuss any problems encountered or proposed
changes to the project. Indicate what products or results have been achieved.
2. A discussion of whether the work has been completed according to the "Program Timeline" as set forth in the
Grantee's application. This discussion should explain departures from the original schedule.
3. A brief discussion of anticipated accomplishments in the upcoming quarter
B. FINAL REPORTS
Receipt and approval of the Final Report by the Project Manager is mandatory for the Grantee to receive final
payment of the grant award. This report is a work product and as such a condition of the grant agreement. This
reDort must be received bv the Prolect Manaaer bv Mav 30. 1996. so that final Davment can be made before
the arant tannlnates on June 30. 1996. The Final Report must be prepared in the format specified below:
1. Table of Contents;
2. A summary of the objectives of the entire grant project and how these objectives were accomplished;
3. Any findings, conclusions, or recommendations for follow-up o~ ongoing activities that might result from
sUCCbssful completion of the program;
~ -..y'~
EXHIBIT C
1:.
.~.%.
'STAtE :O'F .tQ,a:.l",o1t'N1A. "
',' ~~.. "*~ .f -t.-H' $.".~ '~~'"'' .~.
.i;: ';'"
.~~
.%::;~: ~.~;:;..;.~*- .~ ,.:;:
..' .~
1
.+
,-f.
--::
..~~1'
"~"
:i:',
'*
~:.
~'
.~:
.~.
--:0"'
.~: '\.~' ,,;i~
+
~,
,~t:4...
,,::"
~~
:::' -.::~.
?-"
...w,J.::--
.:::'
,y.
.~.
..
'v.
. ...!:
,."
+
i'-
"~'
.0;,'
'~"
+
$-'" 'l.
ADMINISTRATIVE. 'PROCJ:O\JRasAtfl)R~QU1REMENTS
. .
'l
.~. ,,. "~' -f..
't-
l;OCAL ~OvERNMENt USEOOILOPPOR'tUNITY GRANTS
I
:i ,~.+
,~ +
.~'~. ">1"
..;.,:
'%. w 4~~~''} >,
".$.'
"~'
'~.,
.~, "~' 1:. .~ It
'r %.. ~ ~''::' + .%'.<<~. ~..t. .~.
',. +..e.. .\,.. . "" "
..~.,...~ ~f. '@v .it, ,~,
~1/~~~... ~"'~$d"
,"'f,. .~
.~;. t~
,.
'.t:
"=:-"~1"
.{:-. .i~'~.
.~
.~.~.~.
.:,.
-"1
,~
.f.' l' '-::'
'b. I
.,.# .,.'
-::: '-$I'
+
"'''''111;[.., H1~<'~>"" ..'
~...l'..p.... -$:: . .:.~1Y~.i#' .'
* ,,?, .j" ~~...' ',:".
t~ . ~;;"., ,f' .~, . .
. ....~A' .",,' .
&;.,~., '{.
.;:.
.~:
.,.
+
'.~.
:@.{~:.~'~"\.;;.
i.
'{"
':Y
,~
^ "''''4
""I: ~_~:-& .~..;{?',. "'t
"'" .:{.:~ .... .' ~.:'., .',
'~" . ~ .~:~. .~' T
. "#'h~'
. ~''::' '.~, '.~..
..
-', 'ik'%
~.
.~,.
~.
+~.
.:;,
.t.
)~ + .:~;. "~'
'-16
..'., ,::;:.
~t'f',~ o..::~.
,..
/'-"r
t) .-
/
Administrative Procedures and Requirements
Page 2
4. As a result of this grant project, Indicate how many gallons of used oil were collected or how many citizens
were reached, whichever is applicable;
5. A statement of future intent of the Grantee to maintain or further develop the program;
6. A Payment Request Form requesting final payment of any remaining grant funds as well as the ten percent
(10%) retention, and required supporting documents (see Instructions for Submittal of Payment Requests); and
7. A list of contractors and subcontractors funded in whole or in part by the Grantee. Include the name, address,
concise statement of work done, time period in which work was done, and cost of each.
fAILURE TO COMPLY
Failure to comply with the reporting requirements specified above may result in termination of this agreement or
suspension of any or all outstanding Payment Requests until such time as the Grantee has satisfactorily completed the
reporting provisions.
PUBLICITY AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
A. The purpose of this grant is to ensure the widest possible collection of used oil. Therefore, public education or
promotional materials must not advertise one privately operated used oil collection center to the exclusion of
others. Such materials will attempt to promote all certified used oil collection centers within the Grantee's
jurisdiction to the maximum extent possible.
B. The Grantee shall submit to the Project Manager copies of draft public education or advertising materials. These
materials are subiect to the review and aooroval of the Proiect Manaaer orior to oublication or distribution.
Grantee must also provide 2 copies of all final publiC education, advertising or promotional materials to the Project
Manager I
C. The Grantee agrees to acknoWledge the Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board's support whenever
projects funded by this agreement (in whole or in part) are publicized in any news media, brochures, promotional
materials, or other types of print media. Vehicles or other large pieces of equipment purchased with grant funds
must have a sign attached indicating it was purchased with CIWMB grant funds and preferably using the "used oil
drop" logo. Such signs wi. be available from the CIWMB at no cost; or the Grantee, with their Project Manager's
approval, may develop their own sign.
GRANT PAYMENTS
A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1. The State IIhall reimburse the Grantee for performing only those ..rvices all specified in the Budget Report
and Opportunity Grant application. /4.nv deviations from the use of funds lloecified in the aoolication must be
aooroved bv the ProIect Manaaer before an exoenditure for that item ill made.
2. To receive payment the Grantee must submit a completed Payment Request Form and lIupporting
documentation as described below in Section B "Submittal of Payment Request." Payment Requests should
be submitted not more frequently than once each quarter and be for a minimum of $1,000. Pavments to the
Grantee shall normallY be made in arrears.
3. Payment will be made to the Grantee only. It will be the responsibility of the Grantee to pay all contractors
and subcontractors for purchased goods and services.
4. The State shall withhold and retain ten oercent 110%) of the arant award until all conditions stioulated in the
agreement have been satisfied.
/
6-'17
Page 3
Administrative Procedures and Requirements
5. Requests for advance payment must be submitted in writing to the Project Manager and demonstrate the need
for advance payment and that the Grantee wHl incur a soecilic expenditure(s) prior to or shortly after payment
from the Board. Suggested documentation includes purchase orders, bids, etc. The Project Manager may
partially or fully deny advance Payment Requests.
B. SUBMITTAL OF PAYMENT REQUESTS
1. All Payment Requests must be submitted using a completed Payment Request Form (Attachment C) signed by
the individual authorized in the resolution included in the grant application.
2. Payment requests must include an Itemization of all expenses by budget category as shown on the Grantee's
Budget Summary Form. The Grantee should use a format similar to the sample found in Attachment B of this
document.
3. Payment requests must include copies of documents supporting the claimed expenses (i.e., receipts, invoices,
cancelled checks, time logs, etc.). Supporting documents must contain sufficient information or notations to
establish purchases made or costs incurred are eligible for payment. At a minimum, the documentation should
include the name, amount, and date of purchase for the expense. Grantees must provide a time log for any
staff time claimed by a contractor/consultant indicating the date, activity, hours spent, and cost per hour For
site visits the log should also include the location/business and person(s) contacted.
4. Personnel expenditures must be computed on actual time spent on grant related activities. These
expenditures should be broken out by the classilication(s) of the employee(s), the hourly wage, fringe benefits
rate, and number of hours worked on grant activities, for calculating total personnel expense for each
employee.
5. Grantees must Drovld. three cODle. of each Pavment Reouest with an original signature on at least one
copy and one copy of supporting documentation (invoices, receipts, cancelled cheeks, etc.) attached.
I
c. MAIL PAYMENT REQUESTS TO:
California Integrated Waste Management Board
Grants Section / Used Oil Grant Program
8800 Cal Center Drive
Sacramento, CA 95826
D. RELEASE OF FUNDS
1. The Project Manager will review and approve all Payment Requests before payment is made. The Grantee
must meet the following conditions before the Project Manager will process any Payment Request during the
grant term:
a. The Grantee has submitted required Quarterly Reports and the Project Manager has deemed them to be
satisfactory;
b. The Project Manager has received copies of applicable contracts and/or subcontracts;
c. The Grantee has obtained permits or permit waivers from appropriate govemmental agencies and the
Project Manager has received copies of all such documents.
2. The State shall make payment to the Grantee as promptly as liscal procedures permit. After all Board staff
approvals have been obtained, Payment Requests will be forwarded to the State Controller's Office for
issuance of pay warrants. Grantee's can typically expect payment within 45 calendar days from the date a
Payment Request is approved by the Project Manager
3. The Project Manager will release the ten percent (10%) retention upon recei~t and approval of the Final Report
and Final Payment Request.
b-'1r
r'~
':)r
Administrative Procedures and Requirements
Page 2
4. As a result of this grant project, indicate how many gallons of used oil were collected or how many citizens
were reached, whichever is applicable;
5. A statement of future intent of the Grantee to maintain or further develop the program;
6. A Payment Request Form requesting final payment of any remaining grant funds as well as the ten percent
(10%) retention, and required supporting documents (see Instructions for Submittal of Payment Requests); and
7. A list of con~rs and subcontractors funded in whole or in part by the Grantee. Include the name, address,
concise state;;;;;~f work done, time period in which work was done, and cost each.
FAILURE TO COM~
Failure to comply with the reporti~ requirements specified above may result termination of this agreement or
suspension of any or all outstandiri9'-~ayment Requests until such time as t e Grantee has satisfactorily completed tlie
reporting provisions. \
,
PUBLICITY AND ACKNOWL~DGEMENT
A. The purpose of this grant is to ensure the idest possible coli tion of used oil. Therefore, public education or
promotional materials must not advertise 0 privately oper ed used oil collection center to the exclusion of
others. Such materials will attempt to prom e all certifie sed oil collection centers within the Grantee's
jurisdiction to the maximum extent possible.
B. The Grantee shall submit to the Project Manager
materials are sub'ect to the review and a roval 0
Grantee must also provide 2 copies of all final p Ii
C. :::r:~tee agrees to acknowledge the Ca . ~~ia Inte~-ted Waste Management Board's support whenever
projects funded by this agreement (in who or in part)~~PUblicized in any news media, brochures, promotional
materials, or other types of print media. ehicles or other rge pieces of equipment purchased with grant funds
must have a sign attached indicating it as purchased with IWMB grant funds and preferably using the "used oil
drop. logo. Such signs will be availa e from the CIWMB at n cost; or the Grantee, with their Project Manager's
approval, may develop their own si
es of draft public education or advertising materials. These
e Pro'ect M na er rior to blication r distribution.
education, advertising or promotional materials to the Project
3. payme will be made to the Grantee only. It will be the responsibility of the Grantee to pay all contractors
and s contractors for purchased goods and services.
4. Th tate shall withhold and retain t n
J.9. eement have been satisfied.
GRANT PAYMENTS
A. GENERAL REQUIREMENT
1.
Iication must be
2.
Administrative Procedures and Requirements
Page 4
GRANT CLOSEOUT
A. The Project Manager will close out the award when It is determined that all applicable administrative actions and
all required work of the grant have been completed.
B. The Grantee must submit a Final Report. a Payment Request and all outstanding documentation of expenses
Incurred that are required as a condition of the grant. Upon receipt of the Final Report, the Project Manager shall
ensure that all work has been completed and that all unexpended funds are refunded to the State. If appropriate,
a check from the Grantee made payable to the State will be due within 60 calendar days after the grant project is
closed. Following the Project Managefs approval of the Final Report and Payment Request, the ten percent
(10%) retention of the grant funds. as well as any other grant funds due and owing, will be released to the
Grantee. The Final Report must be submitted at least 30 davs Drior to the termination of the aran!,
C. The Grantee must retain all financial and grant program records, supporting documents, statistical records, and
other records of projects funded by this grant. The Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board must have
access to all related records during progress of the project and for at least three (3) years after termination of the
grant.
AUDIT REQUIREMENTS
This grant is subject to a desk or field audit. The Grantee Is responsible for maintaining source documents
substantiating the expenditures claimed and must make them available at the time of an audit. Records relating to the
implemented program include: expenditure ledger. payroll register entries. time sheets, paid warrants, contracts,
change orders, invoices, and cancelled checks. Records must be maintained for a period of three years from the date
of termination of the grant agreement.
~ * 'If
57
Administrative Procedures and Requirements
Page 5
SAMPLE QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORT
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF EVERYTOWN
CONTRACT NO. UOOG.93.123-45
QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORT
JULY - SEPTEMBER, 1994
TASK 1
PUBLIC EDUCATION & AWARENESS CAMPAIGN
1.1 Produce Brochure - First draft has been completed and a copy is
enclosed for CIWMB Used Oil Staffs review. We plan to print the
brochures during the next quarter. This task is on schedule with
the program timeline.
1.2 Design stickers for collection containers - Stickers have been
printed and we are awaiting the shipment of containers. This task
is on schedule. /
1.3 Purchase and distribute collection containers to public - An order
for 2,000 used oil collection containers has been placed and
should be received by October 10, 1994. Distribution will begin
immediately at the City's used oil collection center and also at the
Chief Auto Parts and Jiffy Lube certified collection centers. This
task is on schedule.
1.4 Purchase display banners - Our program timeline indicated these
banners would be purchased during July, however, the company
we had planned to place the order with has suddenly gone out of
business. We hope to be able to find another company and place
the order by November.
TASK 2
ESTABLISH CERTIFIED USED OIL COLLECTION CENTERS
2.1 Identify and contact businesses - Staff established a list of 28
businesses as possible contacts (see attached list). Every
business on the list has been contacted and an appointment was
made to meet with the owner/manager if possible. Only three
businesses were unwilling to meet with us, Jesse's Maxi-Lube,
Acme Lube and Oil, and Sam's Service Station. During on-site
meetings we gave each business the CIWMB packet of
information on certification ana ~xplained how we'd assist with
6-St7
Administrative Procedures and Requirements
Page 6
City of Everytown
July - September Quarterly Report
Page 2
collection costs and would like them to distribute the collection
containers to the public. Since those meetings ABC Oil has
agreed to become a certified center and submitted their
application to the CIWMB. We are still working with the other
companies and hope to have two or three more certified by the
next quarterly report. This task is on schedule.
2.2 Assist firms to certify. Completed the forms for ABC Oil's
certification application and submitted them to the CIWMB. Will
continue to offer this assistance to other firms willing to certify.
As stated above we believe that we will have several others
certified by the next quarterly report. This task is on schedule.
TASK 3
PROVIDE INCENTIVES TO CERTIFIED COLLECTION CENTERS
3.1 Provide used oil collection - We have provided for used oil
collection twice for tl"ie Chief Auto Parts and the Jiffy Lube for a
total of four collections. We will be submitting the invoices for
these collection with our first payment request. We will continue
providing this service and extend it to other businesses as they
become certified collection centers. This task is on schedule.
3.1 Contaminated load reimbursement - No contaminated loads have
been reported.
TASK 4
CONSTRUCT CITY USED OIL COLLECTION CENTER
4.1 Pave collection area, fence, construct containment berm
4.2 Purchase and install 250 gal. used oil collection tank
No activity has taken place on this task. We anticipate work on these
tasks to begin in August 1995 as described in our program timeline.
Please note that this sample is only to provide a recommended fonnat for the
quarterly reports and demonstrate the type of infonnation that is required. It may be
appropriate for Grantees to provide more infonnation on each task than what has
been shown hare due to space constraints.
~-51
/
9'
Administrative Procedures and Requirements
Page 7
SAMPLE PAYMENT REQUEST ITEMIZATION
ATTACHMENT B
LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL OPPORTUNITY GRANT PROGRAM
PAYMENT REQUEST ITEMIZATION
September 15.1994
CITY OF EVERYTOWN
UOOG-93-200-19
DESCRIPTION
CIWMB REIMBURSEMENT
."
PERSONNEL EXPENSES
. Administrative Analyst ($15/hour & 30% benefit rate) 50 hours$975
. Used oil bulking labor ($10/hour) 20 hours
Total Personnel Services
~200
$1,175
TOTAL OVERHEAD
. Portion of utilities, rent, etc.
$700
CONTRACTS
. Used oil hauling costs for city-operated certified center
3 pickups of used oil at $75 a pickup
. XYZ Consultant _ preparation of used oil brochure ($65/hour) 30 hours
Total Contracts
$225
$1.950
$2,175
TOTAL EQUIPMENT
. 500 gallon used oil collection tank
$1.245
TOTAL MATERIALS & SUPPLIES
. Used Oil fact sheet printing costs 5,000 @ .64 ea.
. postage 5,000 @ .16 ea.
Total Materials & Supplies
$3,200
800
$4,000
TOTAL OTHER COSTS
. HazMat Training - 4 staff @ $200 ea.
. Permit
Total Other Costs
$800
$100
$900
---------------------------------------
----------------------------
$10,195
TOTAL COSTS
PLEASE NOTE: R:'und all numbers to nearest dollar and be sure Payment Request is for a
minimun of $1,000.
t,. ..5'.2
o
Administrative Procedures and Requirements
Page 6
City of Everytown
July. September Quarterly Report
Page 2
TASK 3
TASK 4
collection costs and would like them to distrib the collection
containers to the public. Since those meeti s ABC Oil has
agreed to become a certified center and bmitted their
application to the CIWMB. We are stil~ orking with the other
companies and hope to have two or 21ree more certified by the
next quarterly report. This task isdn schedule.
/
2.2 Assist firms to certify - Compl,ted the forms for ABC Oil's
certification application and"submitted them to the CIWMB. Will
continue to offer this a=ssi . ance to other firms willing to certify.
As stated above we bel' ve that we will have several others
certified by the next q rterly report. This task is on schedule.
PROVIDE INCENTIVES y6' CERTIFIED COLLECTION CENTERS
3.1 Provide used o' ~ollection - We have provided for used oil
collection twi . for th'e Chief Auto Parts and the Jiffy Lube for a
total of four ollections. We will be submitting the invoices for
these coli .tion with our first payment request. We will continue
providin his service and extend it to other businesses as they
becomcertified collection centers. This task is on schedule.
3.1 Con minated load reimbursement - No contaminated loads have
be n reported.
CONS RUCT CITY USED OIL COLLECTION CENTER
Pave collection area, fence, construct containment berm
Purchase and install 250 gal. used oil collection tank
activity has taken place on this task. We anticipate work on these
sks to begin in August 1995 as described in our program timeline.
Please note that this sample is only to provide a recommended format for the
quarterly repoTts and demonstrate the type of information that is required. It may be
appropriate for Grantees tl. provide more information on each task than what has
been shown here due to space constraints.
~-:fJ
Slate of California
California Integrated Waste Management Board
ATTACHMENT C
LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL OPPORTUNITY GRANT
Payment Request Form
II
11. APplicant
12. Contract Number
UOOC. .
3. PAYMENT INFORMATION
a. TYpe of Payment (check box):
o REiMBURSEMENT
o ADVANCE
o FINAL
b. Total crant Amount S
c. less 10% Retention Ipald upon completion of contraCll S
d. Crant FundS Available After 10% Retention lb. minus c.l S
e. Funds Received to Date S
f. Available FundS Id. minus e.l S
g. Amount of This ReQuest S
h. Remaining FundS After ThiS payment If minus g.l S
IJ
II AMOuNt AUr~lzED,oRPAYMEfn
......,............,'.',......
...,...-.-...,..,...,...,...,.....,...,....,..
.,'-:.'..:.,..".;.;.;.;.;...:.....,.........:..:'.
....,.....',.-.,...,.... .
...:......,..:..:.......-. .
I
S. SEND PAYWARRANTTO
Agency Name Isame as Applicant Name):
Street Address:
CltYlStatelZlp Code:
Attention:
CElmFlCA nON: I certH'Y t/lat tile abOve Signature of person AuthorIZed by Resolution:
information Is cmect and t/lat all fUnds
recetved have been or will be expended In
accordance wtt1I tile approved agreement Name & Title (type Qr plinQ: Date:
for callfomla IntJegratlld ~
Management Board grant fUndIng.
SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE "-:.5'3
1 I
.-)
PAYMENT INSTRUCTIONS
The following instructions are keyed to corresponding items on the Payment Request Form:
1. APPLICANT - Agency name as shown on the Standard Agreement. .
2. CONTRACT NUMBER - The number assigned by the State as shown at the top of the Standard Agreement.
3. PAYMENT INFORMATION
(a) Type of Payment - Mark "Reimbursement" if this is a regular quarterly payment request. Mark
"Advance" only If an advance payment has been approved by the Project Manager Mark "Fina'" when
all tasks have been completed. Final payment of any remaining funds and the 1 0% retention will be
made when the grantee's final report has been submitted and approved by the Project Manager
(b) Total Grant Amount - The amount of State grant funds awarded to this project.
(c) Less 10% Retention (paid upon completion of contract) - This amount is shown on the Budget
Summary Form included with your contract and is deducted from the total grant award. These funds
will be paid to the grantee upon completion of the project, submittal of the final report, and approval of
'the final report by the Project Manager Reauest for "Final Payment" must be submitted to the
Profect Manaaer by May 30. 1996 In order to obtain a Dav warrant from the State Controller's
Office before the arant terminates on June 30. 1996.
(d) Grant Funds Available After 10% Retention - b. minus c.
(e) Funds Received to Date - Total amount already received for this project.
(f) Available Funds - d. minus e.
I
(g) Amount of This Request - Amount that is being requested.
(h) Remaining Funds After This Payment - f. minus g.
4. The following item will be completed by Project Manager Upon request, a copy of the Payment Request with
this section completed will be mailed to the grantee:
AMOU!'IT AUTHORIZED FOR PAYMENT - Amount approved by the Project Manager for payment to the
grantee for this Payment Request.
5. SEND PAY WARRANT TO - The pay warrant will be made payable to the "agency name" provided. Please
note that the first line must be the locallurlsdlctlon's name as shown on the Standard Aareement,
subsequent lines may Indicate department, division, etc. Provide mailing address as indicated on remaining
lines.
CERTIFICATION _ This section is to be signed by the person authorized in the Resolution included with the
grant application. Please also type or print this person's name and title and include the date of signature.
PLEASE MAIL THIS PAYMENT REQUEST FORM AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION TO:
Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board
Grants Section - Used Oil Grants Program
8800 Cal Center Drive
Sacramento, CA 95826
~ 'ff'
." ~-
o.':iI
Terms and Conditions
Purnose. The purpose of this agreement is to establish the terms and conditions of the Local Govemment
Used Oil Opportunity Grant.
Definitions. In interpreting this agreement, the following terms will have the meanings given to them below,
unless the context clearly Indicatel otherwise.
A. "Board" will mean the Califomla Integreted WaIte Management Board.
B. "Executive Director" will mean the Executive Director of the Califomia Integrated Waste
Management Board, or hialher delign...
-.
C. "State" will mean the State of Califomia, Including but not limited to, the Califomia Integrated
Waste Management Board andlor Its deaignated officer.
D. "Grant.." will mean the recipient of fund. pursuant to this Agreement.
E. "program Manager" will mean the Board Ilafl person responsible for monitoring the grant.
6l!!liL The Grant.. agr..s that the Board, the State Controller'. Office and the State Auditor General's Office,
or their designated representatives, will have an absolute right of access to all of the Grantee's records
pertaining to the agr..ment to conduct revieWS andlor audits. Grent..'s records pertaining to the agreement,
or any part thereof requested, win be made available to the de~lgnated auditor(s) upon request for the
indicated reviews andlor audits. Such records win be retained for at least three (3) years after expiration of the
agreement, or until completion of the action and resolution of an Issues which may arise as . resuit of any
litigation, claim, negotiation or audit, whichever i. later.
If an audit reveals the State funds are not being expended, or have not been expended In accordance with the
agreement. the Grant.. may be required to forfeit the unexpended portion of the fund. andlor repay the State
for any improperly expended monies.
Druo-Free WorkDlace Certification. The Grantee, by .igning this agreement, certifies compliance with
Govemment Code Section 8355 In mltters ralating to providing a drug-free workpllce. The Grant.. will:
A. Publish a statement notifying employ..s that unlawful manufacture. distribution, 'dispensation.
possession, or use of a controlled substance Is prohibited Ind specifying actions to be taken
against employ..s for violations, 81 required by Govemment Code Section 8355(a).
B. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness program a. required by Govemment Code Section 8355(b),
to Inform employees about all of the following: (I) the dangers of drug abuse In the workplace.
(b) the Grant.... policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace, (c) any available counseling,
rehabilitation and amploy.. assistance programs, and (d) penalties that may be Imposed upon
Imployees for drug abuse violations.
C. Provide 81 required by Govemment Code Section 8355(c), that Ivery Imploy..who works on
the proposed grant (a) will receiYI a copy of the company'. drug-free policy .tetement, Ind
(b) will Igree to abidl by the terms of the company's stetement as a condition of employment
on the grant. The person .igning this grant on behalf of the Grantee swears thet helshe Is
authorized to legally bind the Grant.. to this certification and makes this certification under
penalty of perjury under thelawl of the Stete of Califomia.
1 ~ ,/5"
(vi
'I
Statement of Comoliance. The Grantee's signature affixed hereon will conslitllle e certification under penalty
of pe~ury under the laws of the SlIte of Califomia that the Grantee has, unless exempted, complied with the
nondiscrimination program requirements of Govemment Code Section 12990 and Titie 2, Califomia Code of
Regulations, Section 8103.
Availabl1itv of Funds. The SlIte's obligations under this agreement are contingent upon and subject to the
availability of funds appropriated for this grant.
Pavment. The Budget slltes the maximum amount of allow8ble costs for each of the lIsks identified in the
Work SlItement. The SlIte will reimburse the Grantee for perfonning only those services specified in the
WorX SlItement and presented on the payment request.
In the event the Grantee's projection of costs indicates a need to revise the Budget, the Grantee will notify the
Stete within ten (10) worldng days of the discovery of need for revision.
Entire Aoreement. This agreement supersedes all prior agreements, oral or written, made with respect to the
subject hereof and, together with the AtlBchments hereto, conllins the entire agreement of the parties.
-
Communications. All official communication from the Grantee to the SlIte will be directed to:
program M.nager
Califomia Integrated Waste Man.gement Board
Grants Section I Used Oil Grants Program
8800 Cal Center Drive
S.cramento, CA 95826
All fonnal notices required by this agreement will be given in writing and sent by prepaid mall, by personal
delivery, or by FAA followed by an original.
ConfidentialitvlPublic Records. The Grantee and the SlIte undersllnd that each party may come into
possession of Infonnation andlor dall which may be deemed confidential or propriellry by the person or
organization fumishing the infonnation or dall. Such infonnation or dall may be subject to disclosure under
the Califomia Public Records Act, commencing with Govemment Code Section 6250. The SlIte agrees not to
disclose such information or data fumished by the Grantee .nd to maintain such Information or d.ta as
confidential when so designated by the Grantee in writing at the time It Is fumlshed to the State, only to the
extl!nt that such infonnation or dlta Is exempt from disclosure under the Califomia Public Records Act.
Publicitv and Acknowledaement. The Grantee agrees that It willlc:k.nowledge the Board's support whenever
projects funded, in whole or in part, by this agreement are publicized in any news media, brochures, or other
type of promotional material. All equipment purchased under this grant shall bear a sign with language to the
effect that the equipment was purchased with funds from the Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board.
The purpose of this grant Is to ensure the widest possible collection of used 011. Therefore, publiC education or
promotion.1 materials must not advertiH one priv.tely operated used oil collection center to the exclusion of
others. Such materials will attempt to promote all certified used oil collection centers within the Grantee's
jurisdiction to the maximum extent feasible.
Stoo Wof1( Notice. Immediately, upon receipt of a written notice to stop wort. the Grantee will cease all wof1(
under the agreement.
Disoutes. If for anY-TAson the Grantee and the Executive Director cannot reach mutual agreement, the
Grantee may refer the dispute to the Board for finall'8$Olution.
Remedies. Unless otherwlH expressly provided herein, the rights and remedies hereunder are in addition to.
and not in limitation of, other rights and remedies under the agreement, at law or In equity, and exercise of one
right or remedy will not be deemed a WIIlver of any other right or remedy.
Severabilitv. If any provisions of this agreement are found to be unlawful or unenforceable, such provisions
will be voided and severed from this agreement without .rIectIng tiny other provision of the agreement. To the
full extent, however, that the provisiol!l of such applicable law may be WIIlved, they are hereby WIIived, to the
end that the agreement be deemed to be a valid and binding agraement enforceable In accordance with its
terms.
Force Maieure. Neither the State nor the Grantee, including th8 Grantee's contractor(I), If any, will be
responsible hereunder for any delay, default or nonperformance of this agreement, to the extent that such
delay, default or nonperformance is caused by an act of God, weather, accident, labor strike, fire, explosion,
riot. war, rebellion, sabotage, or flood, or any other cause beyond the TAsonable control of such party.
Controllino Law. All questions conceming the validity and operation of the agreement and the performance of
the obligations imposed upon the parties hereunder will come within the jurisdiction of and be govemed by the
laws of the State of Califomia.
Eouioment and Suoolies. Subject to the obligations and conditions set forth in this section, title to equipment
and supplies acquired under a grant will vest upon acquisition in the Grantee, provided that the Grantee uses
the equipment and supplies for the purposes of used 011 collection for a period of at least four (4) years from
the effective date of this grant agreement. If the Grantee does not use the equipment or supplies for the
purpose of used oil collection, the Board reserves the right to have the equipment or supplies ret'Jrned to the
Board.
Comoliance. The Grantee shall comply fully with all applicable federal. state and local laws, ordinances,
regulations and permits. The Grantee shall secure any new permits required by authorities having jurisdiction
over the project, and shall maintain all presently required permits. The Grantee shall ensure that the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ara met for any permits or other entitlements required
to carry out the terms of this agreement.
Hold Hannless.
A. Grantee agrees to WIIIYe all claims and recourse against the State Including the right to
contribution for loss or damage to persons or property arising from. growing out of or in any
way connected with or incident to this agreement.
B. Grantee agrees to Indemnify, hold harmless and defend State, Its officers. agents and
employees against any and all claims demands. damages, costs. expenses or liability costs
arising out of the activities undertaken pursuant to this grant agreement.
&"'57
3
\(7
Nondiscrimination Clause (ooP - 2)
1 During the perfonnance of this grant, the Grantee, contractor and its subcontractors will not deny the
grant's benefits to any person on the basis of religion, color, ethnic group identification, sex, age,
physical or mental disability. nor will they discriminate unlawfully against any employee or applicant for
employment because of race, -religion, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, mental
disability, medical condltion,maritalltatul, age or sex. Grantee will ensure that the evaluation and
treatment of employees and applicants for employment are free of IUch discrimination.
2. Grantee will comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Houling Act (Government Code,
Section 12900 11.HSI.), the regulationl promulgated thereunder (Califomia Administratlve Code. Tlt\e 2.
Section 7285.0 11.HSI.), the provisions of ArticII 9.5, Chapter 1, Part 1, Division 3, TltIe 2 of the
Govemment Code (Govemment Code, Sections 11135 -11139.5) and the re9ulations or standards
adopted by the awarding State agency to implement IUch article.
3. Grantee and eny subcontractors will give written notice of their obligations under this dause to labor
organizations with which they have a collective bargeining or other agreement.
4. Grantee will include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all contracts and
subcontracts to perform worX under the grant.
."
4
~-f?
. 1
~c@ rn. OG~~JTh T- APPROVED BYTllE
I ATTORNEY~l
~ $-I'), ,., '9C4 . ~
. . _ I ~ '\ .. ~..,.. TAX" R~ 'EDE.... EllPLDVER ICEIITI"C",C' NU"8ER
.,;>0 ...l.."t. r- I. -I q I
TIl . ~REEMENT. mlde and en\UOd' 10 this ._ day of ~ . l~. I - ., ~ ,~I
in ~lal'e of California. by and belwee 511'" of California. lhrou&h ilS duly eleeled ar Ippoinled. qualified and &eling
W..E uF Of=FICEA ACTING FOR STAlE AGENCY
Executive Director California Integrated Waste Management Board
CONTAACTOR'I NAME
City of Chula Vista .hereaflet eal1ed the ContraclOr.
Wl1NESSE'nI: That the Contrlctor far and in eonsidetation of the covenllllS, conditions, agrecmenu. IIId stipulations of the State heteinafler exprened,
doe. hereby Igree 10 furnish 10 the Slale seTYiees IIId malerials u follows: (S.r/orlllseNI.. 10 b. reNiored by COl'llrtll:ror, GmDU1IlIO be peid COnlrtll:10r.
UrM lor p.rformanu or campllllon, DNI elltll:lI plCllS end specijICCllons. if eny.)
CONTRACT NUMBER
.....NO.
s
,heteaflCT called the 511", and
Project Number: UOOG.93.338-37
Contractor agrees to undertake and complete all necessary tasks to implement a used oil Opportunity Grant Program as
aUThorized by Public Resources Code 948632(a) and as described in the grantee's Local Government Used Oil Opportunity
Crant application.
The State will withhold payment equal to 10% of each invoice until completion of all work and other requirements to the
satisfaction 01 the State in accordance with this contract.
The term of the agreement will be 24 months, commencing~, 1994 and terminating on June 30, 1996.
..I."LW,~
~
.
:ONTlNUEll ON SHEETS. EACH BEARING NAME OF CONTRACTOR AND CONTRACT NUMBER.
Th. provisions on the reVetse side hereof eonstilUte a pan of this IgreemenL
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Igreement hu been executed by the panies herelo. upon the dale rlTst lbove wrilten.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CONTRACTOR
;.)NT ENCUMIEAED IV TMIS
:JMENT
S~
-AIOR ......OUNT ENCUUBERED FOR
~1S CONTRACT
$
'~.u.&JCAlEGOAV (CODE AND TITLE.
CONTRACTOR (II 01'* INn." itldNid....t .,.,..,.".. GDl'JICINiotI. IM'fNNio, "e.)
Ci of Chula Vista
Iv ( D .""''l}lf'EI '-7'"
l> ~ J,. ~~-
ANO Tm.E OF PliIllON IlGHflQ
"J"CHIJ ;). ...'"-r: s ~ I C,T1 1"1,,~., 'f
-1t/1 Ik~-' /..?A,d" /..,;~ , ~.;,) '7' ~/,
FUND ilTLE Departm.nt 01 O.n.,.1 Servin.
Used Oil Re nd Us. Only
(OPTIONAL USE)
ITEII
CHAPTEA
I STATUTE
1991
I FISCAL. YEAR
, 1993/94
iOTA!. 'MOUN"/' ENeVIll.ERED TO
/lATE
3910-602.100 817
C"ECT OF EXPliNClTUAE (COCE ANC T1ll.EI
1 1 7 2
I ....r.by ..r1ify UDOn my..... psrsONlI<ttow'-dge lller_geled fimds
.,. .".iable for I> . period and purpos. of the .xpettdi~ .,.,ftlabove.
IGNA1'UA OF' NG()I:r:ICER
T...A. NO. i Ut NO.
i
I CATE
I t, .;-f-7V
" ~f9
(J
S':',,~ OF CAliFOi~"',A
"
STANDARD AGREEMENT
.<;-:-O.:! ;~EV, !>'''') "'l,,:,..;:l:iS!:)
The Contra.:tor a~rt'es to indt'mnir",. deft'nd :,md s:.l\'e h:.lrmlt!'is the SIi.ltt'. iLC; Hffi("~rs. m;cnl~ and l'mplQyees
from an)' and :111 claims :ond losses accruin:: or resulting to an)' and all contractors. subcflntractors.
materialmen. laborers and any ..ther person, firm or corporation furnishing or suppl)'ing work ser"ices,
maleri:lls or supplies in ,'onnection" ith lhe ;>erformance ofthiscontract. and from any and:lll claims and
losses accruing or resuJtin!: to any person. firm or corporation who may he injured or damaged by the
Contractor in the performance of this contracL
2. The Contractor, and the aqenls and emplo)'eeS of Contractor. in tbe performance of the agreement. shall
act in an independent caparit)' :lod not as oilieers or emphl)'eeS or a;:ents of State of California.
.t The State mtay termin:.\tt' this a;"'1'l'cmtnt and he rciic\'ed nfthe p:J~ mt'nt nflln~' consideration to Conlractor
should Contractor fail to perform lhe CflwnantS herein contained :lIlhe time and in the mannrr herein
pro\ ided. In the ennt of such lerminalion Ihe State ma)' proceed" ith the work in any manner deemed
proper b),the State. The cost to the Stme shall be deducted from an" sum due the Contractor under this
.J~l"Cl'm('nt. :.md th~ b.llancc. irany, :-:,i.i11 be paid the ('l)mra~1t)r upon demand.
~, Without Ihe written consent of the ~l:lte.this :Igrccment is not assignahle hy Contr:lctor either in whole
ur in part.
S, Time is of the es.sence in this agreenlenL
6. \;0 alteratiun or \';,lriation of th~ terms of this contract shaH be \ alid unless m:Jde in writ in;.; :Jnd '!oi~n~d b~'
the parti~s hfreto. and no oral mdcrst:lndin~ or i.lgrcement nllt incorpor~ltcd herein, shall bt' bindin~ on
an)' or the parties her~to.
"7. The con!'iderution to be paid Cnntr:Jctor. as pnn'idcd herdn. shall b~ in comp('ns:.nion for all of
Contractor's c'\penses incurred in th~ prrformc\nce hereof. including tra\'el :Jnd per dicm. unle~s
other" ise e:xprt'ssl)' so pro\'ided.
~-6-~
11 6101.
11/15 '94 15:00
J 0 : BI...CO'F 1 ao/RR J NSl.Rl=/ICE
FAX: 1415.9562944
F<<:;E
2
,AG.... :(;EATIFIQAtE Ot-,,,,$URANQE ~~~~~:"~~
_Due.. U'UoI'LI'AT',)N.. '.''OVNNY ....U.AN"N ""NN"'t, 'N' THI8 CEIlTlFICATE 1118SUED AS A IlIATTEIl OF INFOIlMATION
ONl V AND CONFEFl8 NO RIGHTS UPON THE CEIlTIFICA T(
~~ b..U.u)I "ta.~, !l.t.i'I ...1 Oft,. HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR
lll'UI "UllI:.i.YC'C.' l'A ,.'" ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POUCtES BELOW.
COIllPANI!!. AFFOADtNG COVERAGI!
........
IIrball C'orp.:. ,.1 :hd\ D'.fln
l... h.~lcn.l Avnnu.
S:M11 D._II'-' C1\ .211:1
i C(.'M'ANV
, A
I
I COMf'A"'v
I ·
I COMP^,"V
I C
1'.......-
I 0
Ar'.ol'"'-Il 8.vl. lnour."c:a r....lJ.lly
Nr.'rthbl~k. l"O\'l'."efl r~~IY
I
, ,
DftCRl~ OJ ~TION8ILOCAnOllIMNtCt.H,oSHCtAl.I'n.'"
I
COVMAOBS
THIS IS TO C~MlI'Y TliAT THE PO..ICIES OF INIUHANCE LISTED lliLOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED ...."'ED ABOVE FOR THE PCLICY PF.RIOD
IN[lICArtD, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY HfQUIAI!l!ENT TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTA.o.CT QROTHER DOCWiNT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH TM S
CtFmFlCATE MAY BE ISSUED OM MAY PERTAIN, THE INSlJRA"lCe AFFORDED IY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HERI!IN IG SUBJECT TO ALL THE TER"'S.
eXCll.lSlONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES liMITS SHOWN "'AV HAVE IlEEN REDUCED IV ."0 eLAIIIS
CO! TTfIIOP'MUMtlCE I roucy......." I POUCV...'lcnYI!rOUCYU'IMTIOItI! "'I~
LlR. ! I ""'.CO'_Ml ..TlCJIIlIDDM\
~- I . .
A i ~r:RAlUMa.m i i i : AtfltE~~AO~nrnATt ,_ "rr,.o ~Cc..
1)1 f,;~IIt:IAI (at'~rw.t lIM'i:.n"I' I I : PIIC'1O.tt:T$'COMI'IOPAAr:I S Included
i lr.iNMl'IlN^,~r i )( i (J(,.UJ" ("Ct J(lJ.litOJ U;.l I 1'i/::t~/!l" ! U/<lhf." i PEktIONAA.'ADVIN.!iJl1" ! S 1,0:0... ,"u"
!OWIlir:......"r;ll~ltlAc.t:.Jtrsmc';Ti ! ,tAQ,cr:....tIfij~M:t: I. I. IIOl} er:r.
! : fll'f' r~AOt tAl, UfI'Iflnl) I' 15 Otlu
! Mr-(,!EXoollA'l~I.lllplt'~. !O,UIJII
I r:OMtINto t;'~I.E ;.M'l i .
I ,-",u: 1,l"Ir,',
I ltUUlIV 1N,lllRV .
fIt'l*ao,\) i ·
I
1 IIC'OL.YfIlJUAY
i f"ti ICC:1U4!n:1
I
i~AT"1~Mir. "
I AlJTO aNi Y to' AC'.r:nr.., Is
i OT..rRT",t,NAUTn~..." l
f tAC:1' .vr.It~N r j ,
I N"JtAt::UA:E I.
I '. Ar.H uc..'t:UAAF.NC~ I' ·
"'~~UV'n.ArE . .
I I',. i RTAMOIIYI..'lg i'
~tI Ar.t".a:NT II
I '_Aft '''",ICY ,.." I' ·
-+-----f.... t~......ovrF. ·
I !
, ,
I I
I I
., ..,.. ,.n."~
.
... t'OIIo.. Lf LIA8I.f1V
!MI'I"HJTfl
I ! All OWhFrlAurlli
. X i 9(;HtUi.J.J,;OAlJTM
I. !lltJIr':'1NJlV:J
I x I HON.(,,'\i/\Nrn At ITOS
!J
, QlMOt L"'LITY
, 1
! : ANVAtJTt)
-t,J ,
(XC,.. LWIIUTY
I tj~I\An.l.J.,Fuu.,
91HCli 1l1AN lJMnRELo..A KJICM
I WORKI. eOll"fIlMTION AND
IItIPi.O,",M'LlAIIUTY
I ' ,
(HI: l'fIQPRIfTM/ I IN(,\,
1'^R1N:HWtJC!l'Clmvr.
orrlC".rM. Nit. ~I
OTHER
i'
IINDiJl.
H/nt,.
10/:1'" "5
The _.."ft.,,'aL.. hnlot." 1u nlll"'~ .. ..""f1....IIIJ ;neu..d .ft l....cr.t:. !k.....th "lilY ""Mal U.. nil 1I.~yn'1I1w 1."'1."....
:e1tlffi"."l'IW(iI;.OiEA ....
,.,
~;
...'.:.,::
~...~/
.....~'l'lQM...". ".... '....... ... '----
I . '_OLD ~ Of ,,,.".;..,,. ...c_. .o~.. __.u.s. ..,0.. '"'
IlJIfltftATIOII OATJ ,"IHor, ,.. tMUI.... COtll......v 'MIH fNDUVOR TO "AIL
~...... """EN NOnel TO Tf1f; CflmJlC:ATI I4OI~R tl4Ml:o TO rWli U:l'1.
aut, TO IMIL "C" ItOTlCI '1'tAU. ...., MO lDaUUTIOtI OR UAlII.m'
dID n. C Y. TI ACIIIrI'. 1M IIPIIfIUy,t,"lVfl.
D"
/
(
r
QORIIOlU.TlOIjl_ ~
l:ity j'".t 1.:I\\IJ. v;nr.
Mtr. ".1.1.'11..) .tl......,.~
2'" "mn.l"h AII.Il...."
c""alil V"DLIII r:" 91t10
&0..
f'Q\/ 15 '~ 03: oo='M
P 2/2
STA 1TfBE I'.o.lOlC C20107, SAN frRANCtSCO, CA 1.1.2.0107
COM..N.... IQ"
....."'"" c.
F= U N CERTI"C~TI OF WORKeRS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE
R~; KB!~ 15, 199.
1'01.lc'( NUMIIIl,
CUTI'ICATlIll~IIII',
1327154-94
10-20-9.5
r-
C~" or CHl1LA VIS'IA
"\'ttll HICHUL N!ACHAK
2716 YOtll tK A Vl:HOll
CHIlu. 'lITA, Cf. 91910
l..
Tills II to -li1w.IIIII WI IIIvI '..tel I ..lid Work",' Co"'llt""11on '",urlllct ""Ii.y Ill' lorm IllllrOVtClllv Ihl Ctlllorlll'
- '"11","" Com~.IOIllr to till emploYIf "'mod' lItlow lor thl IIP"yootriod illdll.ltd.
TIlIt 00110'1' II PlOt lubjlct 10 .""'11110" by Ihe 'unci ....01 UIlo<<116 clays' .""Gt wrltt," 110110110 lhe .mplo....',
30
w. Will .Iia ,ive you ltIII dl\'l' Idv._lIoli.. Ihoulcllhll """0'1' III ""..lIld Ilrlor 10 I.. IICll'1IlI1 '.oirtllon.
TlIII 01'1","" or ,.....,."" II /lO1 '" i"lUrll\Ct 00110'1' 'N cIotl IIOl 'mtIld. ""N or .ltIt IhI 1III'iIr", affordld lIy Ih.
""lioi" 11.1ocI h.,IIl. N8IWllIltttNI"ll Illy rtl:Iulltml"I, ttrm, or 'olldltlo" 01 '"V oolltr'ct or Olh" 1I0cuml"t willi
- to ""'Ic~ Ihlt 'MiliGtIl 01 1_.".. mil' lit itlutCI or m.... IItrlllll, th, Int",,"" IlIo'''ed Ilv Ihl 1101101"
....Ibod .....ill ~ lubieot 10 IlIlh,",,",. ...IUllolIl IlId colldltlonl olluch 1I01l.I.L
JOil SOUTH lAY 6.~. UQIONAL
UCYCLtNCl OIL PlOClMM
~~
."IIIDIN.,
!~!KINT '0015 INTttt!D 4DDI=IO~AL INSUlID IMPLOyta IPl!CTIVI 11-15-94 IS
a:rTAICHEl> TO AND rOL"tS It. PART or tilts POLICY.
IfW or AWITtONAL INSllU1l: CITY 0' CRt1LA VISTA
INDO"EHENT '2065 ENTITLID CERTIFICATE ROLDE~S'S NOTICE IrrlCTIYB 11-15-94 IS
ATT~/lHlD '1'0 f.lIIl ?ClIMB A PAU or 'DIIS POLICY,
IHPlAtn'S LIAlIIoI'n IS U,OOO,OOO '1!1 OCCI11UNCI.
.Wl.O'tIlI
r
qx COI.PS 0' SAN DIleo
18ll/~ NATIONAL AVENllE
IAN roll00 Cf. U113 R
L
Ie." ,i... ..~.... 1....
~ - /, ,,)..
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No.: 7
ITEM TITLE:
Meeting Date: 11/22/94
Resolution J 7? ~endlng Fiscal Vear 1994-95 Budget to
Establish a Temporary Expert Professional Position (0.35 FTE)
within the Department of Building and Housing for
Implementation of Phase Two or the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA)
~.1LAl/
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Building and HOU~v
REVIEWED BY, City Manager.::A~ (4/5" V"" V..X No----.J
Backaround; At the City Council Meeting of June 14, 1994, the Council adopted the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan. The components of the Transition
Plan were several fold, primarily structured to address physical modifications and
improvements for existing City-owned facilities. The Transition Plan as adopted also
contained other components mandated by the ADA, such as compliance regarding
Personnel Department's recruitment practices, employee work stations and customer
counters, Parks and Recreation program standards and provisions for off-site
improvements in the City's public right-of-way.
On May 4, 1994, Council approved a multi-year Capital Improvement Project, ADA
Modifications (CIP No. GG-144) through the proposed FY 1995-96 Budget to fund the
Phase Two programs and improvements contained in the ADA Transition Plan. Total
funding allocations for ADA programs and physical improvements for Phase One and
the pending Phase Two improvements of the Transition Plan is $243,405. Yearly
allocations were $36,109 in FY 1993-94, $100,000 in FY 1994-95 and $107,296 in the
proposed FY 1995-96 Budget.
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt the Resolution approving the FY 1994-
95 Budget amendment for establishing a Temporary Expert Professional position (0.35
FTE) in the Department of Building and Housing for implementing Phase Two of the ADA
Transition Plan.
Board/Commission Recommendation: N/A
7~/
'"
\vi
Council Agenda Statement
-2-
Item No.
1
Discussion: In Fiscal Year 1992-93, a classified position of ADA Intern was created in
the Personnel Department to initiate the City's effort for compliance to the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA Intern position has been funded for the past two
years as a twenty-hour per week position (0.42 FTE), shared by both the Personnel
Department and the Department of Building and Housing. During the FY 1994-95
Budget cycle, the position was intended to be removed from Personnel's staffing
allocation and transferred to the Department of Building and Housing. However, due to
an oversight during the budget cycle, the position was eliminated in its entirety and
subsequently not added to Building and Housing's staffing allocation. The ADA Intern
position was originally created to address numerous Personnel Department's compliance
measures required by the ADA. Since the individual was physically located in the
Department of Building and Housing and once the assigned tasks of the Personnel
Department's criteria were satisfied, the individual was assigned numerous tasks and
assignments for the Phase One physical improvements to various City-owned facilities.
Intern vs. TemDorarv Exoert Professional: As previously stated, the Resolution before
the Mayor and City Council is to amend Fiscal Year 1994-95 Budget with the
establishment of a Temporary Expert Professional position (0.35 FTE) within the
Department of Building and Housing. The available funds for this request were approved
by the City Council on May 4, 1994 and are allocated in CIP Account No. GG-144, ADA
Modifications for purposes of staffing the position.
The recommendation to staff the position at a level higher than the intern level is due to
the responsibilities associated with the position. Specifically, the professional
responsibilities associated with Phase Two of the Transition Plan, which addresses
numerous ADA physical improvements to City-owned facilities, necessitates that the
Department of Building and Housing select an individual to perform as a Temporary
Expert Professional with job skills of an entry level Building and Housing Inspector I
position. This is due to the contact and interaction required with the contractors
performing the improvements and insuring that the services performed are in compliance
with the ADA. As such, the rate of hourly compensation for the position would reflect
a minimum hourly rating of $13.17 per hour (Step A). It is anticipated that
approximately twenty to twenty-three hours per week of service shall be required by the
ADA Coordinator to complete the CIP Project, ADA Modifications for the balance of FY
1994-95.
The recommendation to select an outside Temporary Expert Professional is premised
upon the current Building/Housing Inspection staffing level and workload factors. Due
the tremedous upswing in construction activity during the past eighteen months, the
Department of Building and Housing is experiencing construction activity reflective of the
high growth periods of the late eighties and early ninties (Att. A). This activity, while
7'",2.
) ;
[;'
Council Agenda Statement
-3-
Item No. 7
certainly welcomed, is placing a high service demand on the inspection staff which
currently is short one position. Even with the Department's intent of filling the position
in the upcoming months, the service demands associated with the anticipated
construction activity will warrant full-time inspection assignments. Hence, the demands
to complete the ADA Transition Plan necessitate that the Department recommend the
services of a Temporary Expert Professional for this assignment.
FlscallmDact: Not to exceed $10,200. Funding source has been previously authorized
by Council approval of CIP Account No. GG-144, ADA Transition Plan, General
Preparatory Planning.
KGl:yu
(84:\\\f'51IADADUlS)
7-J /7-<1
~
""
RESOLUTION NO. 17 7.z5
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING FISCAL YEAR 1994-95
BUDGET TO ESTABLISH A TEMPORARY EXPERT
PROFESSIONAL POSITION (0.35% FTE) WITHIN THE
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND HOUSING FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF PHASE TWO OF THE AMERICANS
WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA)
WHEREAS, on June 14, 1994, the Council adopted the
Americans with Disabilities Transition Plan, which addresses
physical modifications and improvements for existing city-owned
facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Transition Plan also contained other
components such as compliance regarding Personnel Department's
recruitment practices, employee work stations and customer
counters, Parks and Recreation program standards and provisions for
off-site improvements in the City's public right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, on May 4, 1994, Council approved a multi-year
Capital Improvement project, ADA Modifications (CIP No. GG-144)
through FY 1995-96 to fund the Phase Two programs and improvements
contained in the ADA Transition Plan; and
WHEREAS, total funding allocations for ADA programs and
physical improvements for Phase One and the pending Phase Two
improvements of the Transition Plan is $243,405.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby amend the fiscal year 1994-95
budget to establish a temporary expert professional position (0.35%
FTE) within the Department of Building and Housing for
implementation of Phase Two of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Presented by
ed as
form by
~
J
Kenneth Larsen, Director of
Building and Housing
, City
C:\rs\35%fte.ADA
7~5' / 7 - ~
,-
',/
300
250
lit 200
z ~
0 ~
~ ,2 150
::l ~
~ 100
50
0
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND HOUSING
Construction Activities
'88 '89 '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95
FISCAL YEARS ytd
'95
e.t. ending
4000
3500
3000
2500 ~
2000 ~
w
1500 0-
'II:
1000
500
o
FISCAL YEAR ;; PERMITS VALUATION
'88 3197 $217,013,319
'89 3796 $190,370,354
'90 3656 $188,352,730
'91 3477 $162,432,421
'92 3696 $169,793,390
'93 2467 $83,433,841
'94 3325 $180,091,877
YTD '95 1143 $60,982,897
EST ENDING '95 3535 $188,633,538
/
1_ PERMITS _ VALUATION I
PERMITSNALUATION. FY 88 THRU FY 95 (10126/94)
7~?
Attachment "All
, ~1 I
I
; a a
~
t:
! a a
I
~
t:
I a a
I
~
~H t:
~ 0 ~ III '" ~ ~ ~
i'U ! .. ~ ..
N ;! ,,; ~ ~ ...
..'" .. 0
I .. .. ..
~
.. .. t:
C i iii
~ i! ~ 0 ~, ~ ~ ~. ~ ~
:a R a I 0 - $ ,,; 8 8 8
.. -
ii 15M .. .. ..
~
t:
lL ~i
~~ h ~ 0 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
5:a ~ N ...: .. a ~ ~
~~'" N
~~ ",,,,
t-ii::>itj
~g 01>."..
1"0:>
ulL U
I c
...I
i ~ 0 ~ ~ ill ~. ~ ~.
I" N
C ~-' ~ ~ ;:: ~ & '4 &
~
u i~ - ~
I>.
~ ~
~ ~
. "
.II z
Q
z
~
ii:
~c
h. ~ g
~ j ~
c ,~
I>. 1 I j i3
~ lli I 0
,~ 1 !5
I>. ~ 11 Ii g
~ ! l s ~ ~
': ~ 0
III
~~I ~ i g
5 ~ 0
-' - > 0
€~ ~c.b~
JD tii C) ~ .
:> _ _ ~ U)
" Q. i!! = 'i,~
" .
'U '.-LL18
llllll.-
.J::.&.. ,g
~<i ~ 0.. - > '"
. li' ~ lll.!'~ .....
:;" j j g ,g> .....
,,-,Il'
D" CGr::::(G=
-c .:.= .it
"i · c en 0. U
,,,] <<I cI E c
:> g Eo.80 ~
i- ~'?'.l
~ l! ~p
:ll ,g it
,Ili ~ '! ~ ~
.s:
.'t::~ .o.:;S'(i !!'
~'8 =~J1J
.s: ,g ,(;'.. e
-::; :;
,(;'.. .1:: 1a U
" . J ,II . j' ~
o ,- ~:c:.c
-:3: Q. '8 -. .. '"
"i E E = '€ a>
.g ,il 8. · ~ it
l~ olilll&.
_ ~.s: ~
1] ~ ';:2 .2
,g P g j
!~ . - '" :>
~o,~~ "i
-:11 - . ~
l5 ,it ' "i 0 ~
-;~ u -.
..s:
CD ,t2 "5- i!!
:11 0 ~ !r~ '"
!~ "
,g
'i :l,,~ -g I
~ ~ .. ! = ,2- ~ Ii
~~ i i i
:> E E 8 t
~.s lcs'" 1
.s:_
...~I!l o ~ ..,
Q. ~ ~o "
!~~ !!2'- . ,Il'
.s: ,-
r :.r::r.-!c "
.... ,- .
(' 0
c: ~. ~
.2"S .2 ~ "tJ
_,!I! e -~,,-"i ;; 7~8"
," .U~Cll1il
~i~ "" ''!! "i ;;;
..oW", .s:
.il ~ /I, ~
00 ~9_E
1~ ,
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item ~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Resolution ) 77~" Approving Change Order #1 for the
Bicycle/Jogging Trail at Sweetwater Road and Willow Street in the City
of Chula Vista CA (PR-153)
Director of Public Works ~I
Director of Parks & RecrdttionLJA/
City M""",SI 'vtJ~ . r (4'''''' Vote, Y~_N..xJ
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
On September 20, 1994, Council awarded the contract for the Bicycle/Jogging Trail at
Sweetwater Road and Willow Street. The work to be done involves construction of a pedestrian
and bicycle trail along Sweetwater Road and Willow Street across the Chula Vista Golf Course
with a bridge over Sweetwater River. The project as bid contained a 70' long bridge with an
8' wide wooden deck. The bridge joined two paths on each side totaling 14' wide. Staff
recommends that the 8' bridge be widened to 14 ft. in order to eliminate a bottleneck at the river
crossing.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution directing staff to enter into a
change order with Frank & Sons Paving for a 14' wide bridge at the river crossing and
authorizing the City Manager to approve this change order in an amount of $27,000.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
This project has been in process for several years. It originally began as a pedestrain/jogging
path across the river in order to keep peds off the Willow Street bridge. The project was later
expanded in concept to incorporate a bike path in the same location. Most of the project has an
8 foot wide asphalt pavement parallel with a 6 foot wide DG dirt path for Peds. At the river
crossing the plans as originally bid contained a new 70' long bridge with an 8' wide wooden
deck. It was originally believed by staff that the 8 foot wide 70' long bridge would be adequate
and since we were experiencing heavy costs increases the project included the 8' wide bridge.
However, since the bids came in lower than anticipated with about a $38,000 contingency, staff
requested the contractor give us a price to widen the bridge to 14 feet. The Bridge will be used
as a part of a two directional bike path plus a pedrestrianljogging trail. If the bridge were not
widened to 14 feet, both the 2 directional bike path and two directional pedrestrain/jogging trail
will have to share an 8 ft. right of way for 70 + feet. Staff believes that the project would much
better serve the two classes of users if they each have their own right of way.
The contractor has offered to widen the bridge for a price increase of $27,000. His original
proposal for widening was for $41,000 which was negotiated down by staff. Staff believes that
~~ l'
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 11/22/94
t
based on the bid savings of this contractor over the second low bid of $47,300 higher, that if
we ever want a wider bridge at this location, now is the most optimum time.
Frank & Sons Paving's original bid of $192,453.99 was approximately $47,300 less than the
next lowest bidder. An increase by $27,000 for the wider bridge would be still be $20,300
below the next lower bidder, ABC Construction.
FISCAL IMPACT: Contract would be increased $27,000. Upon completion of the project,
including the maintenance period, only routine City maintenance will be required.
Attachment:
Exhibit A: Site Location Map
DCD:SB
M:HOMB\ENOINEER\AOBNDA\BIKE3.1PL
~,.~
lit
RESOLUTION NO.
J77':U,
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING CHANGE ORDER #1 FOR THE
BICYCLE/JOGGING TRAIL AT SWEETWATER ROAD AND
WILLOW STREET IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
(PR-153)
WHEREAS, on September 20, 1994, Council awarded the
contract for the Bicycle/Jogging Trail at Sweetwater Road and
willow Street to Frank & Sons Paving for construction of a
pedestrian and bicycle trail along Sweetwater Road and willow
Street across the Chula vista Golf Course with a bridge over
Sweetwater River; and
WHEREAS, the project as bid contained a 70' long bridge
with an 8' wide wooden deck; and
WHEREAS, the bridge joined two paths on each side
totaling 14' wide and staff recommends that the 8' bridge be
widened to 14 ft. in order to eliminate a bottleneck at the river
crossing; and
WHEREAS, the contractor has offered to widen the bridge
for a price increase of $27,000 and staff believes that based on
the bid savings of this contractor, if we ever want a wider bridge
at this location, now is the most optimum time.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby approve Change Order No. 1 to the
contract with Frank & Sons Paving for a 14' wide bridge at the
river crossing.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby
authorized to approve this change order in a amount 0 $27,000.
ved as
~
fO~
ard, City
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Bruce M.
Attorney
C:\rs\Bicycle c01
1'".3 /8-4
/
/) ,
,. ,,.t
, ",[ ..
.. ' -, 'f..
~ <.-
.... .". .t~ '-f
" ", I ,'''C
~.",.~ ..... .' ~ .,
" '
- . . .~
.... ;. -~
;. ....'.,;. _:
[. _~ \; .}..ri' .
'l~ " ";
.... .~,.,
.. J
~' Ii"
.,. -...,
'Of ".
.\':,. lr\~' ;
. '.
, III'
, "I
~
I"
~ "'0.
,
~,
~. ~ "
~
01
..J
..J
." ...
,
.'.,1
,'~ I
J
I'
I'
I -
"
-
\ z" '. .X\
,'...... '. ~I~ r\~~~
~:____ ,"'8> f 'S:'\
F <-:=._ :::-::-::-~,'l j .~\
__-<-- -::o-......;..:::-l '\~
, "":">-. -................... \
-- ~~........ --
- '\ ..... -....-
, --"
"'.s: .................. ~
............ ......-......-
-.: ........ ':::-- ---,
_~~ ~-'s_~--- -
1., 'leO.Q.... 1/3 -- -......
Q~ ~ 11'1/ '
"'11/1.' .e./>' .#0 '
Q .q. 30Q3
"'7~_
-..;
....
....
~
c
...
%
(, , -- .
." . ~, .'.
I,' ..' ':.-'-'
J ,. //' %
:" ,.: I','; /. -/ l..-
';', _ .' ;", '1'.." ,". / ~;.' " j'
.,.,' I , ' . , - --.~
L' .,' ";/'
I';:
r:'___
I. . A""""" --
,'t:,::.--- .. '
. ..'. ."
09'_ -
1- .......
I "\
I \
I
I
'(f
, \. 8' I.
i r
y,~
CD
m
"0
.-
"-
m
.
....
u.
ex)
-
.-
..
III
...
l-
i:
m
"-
....
m
c
.-
m
m
o
..,
"
CD
-
CJ
~
CJ
.-
m
c
ui
~
GI
......
10
C\I
......
o
..
COUNCn.. AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMl'lTED BY:
Item 9
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Resolution J 'l 'I ~ '1 Waiving the Bidding Process and
Authorizing the Purchase of a New 1994 Park Avenue from Harrison
Buick
Director of Public Works}((
City Manage~ ~@1 (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No..x..)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
Funds were included in the FY94-95 Equipment Replacement budget for replacement of the
Mayor's car.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution authorizing the purchase of a
new Buick Park Avenue from Harrison Buick
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Routine replacement for the Mayor's vehicle was included in the FY 94-95 budget. A new
1994 Buick Park Avenue that staff would recommend as a suitable vehicle is available from
Harrison Buick. Staff requested informal quotes from four area dealers (Chula Vista dealers
do not sell Buicks). Seaside Buick did not respond. Both Marvin K. Brown and McClellen
Buick quoted a list price of $34,810 and indicated that the City would receive a discount of
$1,500 to $2,000. The price offered by Harrison Buick was $27,500 Because the price is
very reasonable (below invoice) and to save the time and expense of the normal bidding
process, staff recommends the normal bidding process be waived.
FISCAL IMPACT: $25,540 was budgeted for the purchase of a new vehicle for the Mayor's
use. The price of the vehicle at Harrison Buick is $29,462.45 including tax and document fees.
After Mayor-Elect Horton is sworn in as Mayor, staff intends to trade in the van used by
Mayor Nader. Harrison Buick will give us credit of about $6,000 for the van, leaving a
balance of $23,462.45 for the new vehicle. As this is less than the amount budgeted, no
appropriation will be required. Staff also examined the possibility of leasing the new vehicle,
but determined that a lease would not be cost effective. Staff believes operating and
maintenance costs will be about the same as that budgeted for Mayor Nader's van.
DCB:sb
m:\home\ongineeJ\a......\pubvc.dob
9')
-(6
RESOLUTION NO. /7'lCJ.. 7
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA WAIVING THE BIDDING PROCESS AND
AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF A NEW 1994 PARK
AVENUE FROM HARRISON BUICK
WHEREAS, funds were included in the FY94-95 Equipment
Replacement budget to purchase a new vehicle for Mayor-Elect
Horton; and
WHEREAS, staff requested informal quotes from four area
dealers (Seaside Buick, Marvin K. Brown, McClellen and Harrison
Buick) on a 1994 Buick Park Avenue; and
WHEREAS, Seaside Buick did not respond and both Marvin K.
Brown and McClellen quoted a list price of $34,810 and indicated
that the City would receive a discount of $1,500 to $2,000; and
WHEREAS, a 1994 Buick Park Avenue is available from
Harrison Buick at a cost of $27,500; and
WHEREAS, because the price is very reasonable (below
invoice) and to save the time and expense of the normal bidding
process, staff rcommends the normal bidding process be waived.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby waive the bidding process and
authorize the purchase of a new 1994 Park Avenue at Harrison Buick
at a cost of $29,462.45 including tax and document fee
Presented by
ed l 0 fO:])
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Bruce M.
Attorney
c: \rs\.ayor car
9'~
'7Q
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / P
Meeting Date 11/22/94
ITEM TITLE: Resolution J 7?..2 8'" Ordering the Summary Vacation of a General
Utility and Access Easement within EastLake Greens Masters Collection,
Unit 17 and Authorizing the Mayor to Execute the Quit Claim Deed
Vacating the Easement A . /
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Work~ Ir
REVIEWED BY: City Manager..J4 ~~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No..K.)
Brehm Communities will be developing the remaining undeveloped portion of EastLake Greens
Unit 17, Lots 6-13, of the Masters Collection, and has obtained approval for minor revisions
to the original development plan for the unit. The proposed revisions required adjustments to
the side lines for Lots 6-13 and to the private drives. A condition of the adjustment requires the
vacation of a portion of the general utility and access easement that was dedicated to the City
on the final map for Unit 17 Brehm Communities and EastLake Development Company,
owners of the Bristolwood development within Unit 17 of EastLake Greens, have requested
vacation of a portion of the easement.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The existing general utility and access easement was originally dedicated on the fmal map for
EastLake Greens Unit 17 (Map No. 12923 recorded February 28, 1992). The existing general
utility and access easement covers a portion La Costa Avenue, which is a private street. The
easement grants the City the right of access for construction and maintenance of a public sewer
serving the development. Subsequent to approval of the fInal map for Unit 17, Eastlake
Development Company constructed the full street and public improvements pursuant to the
subdivision improvement agreement associated with the fmal map. However, only Lots 1-5
were developed by EastLake. Brehm Communities has recently obtained the remaining lots (6-
13) of the Unit 17 maps and will be developing these lots as the Bristolwood development.
Brehm Communities has obtained approval for revisions to the original development and site
plans for Unit 17 through the design review process. These revisions required changes to the
existing lot lines established by Map No 12923 and minor re-grading of the site. Brehm has
processed an adjustment to the original lot lines and obtained a grading permit to re-grade the
site. One of the adjusted lots, Lot 10, includes a portion of the private street and general utility
and access easement dedicated on the Unit 17 map which is no longer necessary (see Exhibit A,
IP" /
~7)
Page 2, Item I ()
Meeting Date 11/22/94
attached). The existing utilities will be removed or abandoned and access to the adjacent lot will
be from the private street (La Costa Avenue). A condition of approval of the lot line adjustment
requires the vacation of this portion of the easement.
Although La Costa A venue has been fully constructed in accordance with the improvement
plans, only the portion of this private street providing access to Lots 1-5 of Unit 17 has been in
use. Therefore, the easement located within Lot 10 may be vacated as a summary vacation in
accordance with Section 8330 of the Streets and Highway Code since it will not eliminate access
to adjacent property. The action before Council will order vacation of only this portion of the
easement and will authorize the Mayor to execute the quit claim deed on behalf of the City. The
proposed vacation is exempt from CEQA environmental requirements.
In accordance with Section 8335 of the Street and Highways Code, the resolution ordering the
summary vacation shall state all of the following:
1. That the vacation is made under Chapter 4 of Part 3 of the Streets and Highways
Code.
2. The name or other designation of the easements, and a precise description of the
portion to be vacated (refer to Exhibit A, attached).
3. The facts under which the summary vacation is made.
4 That from and after the date the resolution is recorded, the easement vacated no
longer constitutes an easement.
FISCAL IMPACT: None, all costs to process this item are paid for by the applicant through
the full cost recovery program.
File: ER.241
F:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA\brehmvac.lmc
112294
Id..2.
(II
()
RESOLUTION NO.
1 77.J.K"
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF A
GENERAL UTILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT WITHIN
EASTLAKE GREENS MASTERS COLLECTION, UNIT 17
AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE
QUITCLAIM DEED VACATING THE EASEMENT
WHEREAS, Brehm Communities will be developing the
rema~n~ng undeveloped portion of EastLake Greens unit 17, Lots 6-
13, of the Masters Collection, and has obtained approval for minor
revisions to the original development plan for the unit; and
WHEREAS, the proposed revisions required adjustments to
the side lines for Lots 6-13 and to the private drives; and
WHEREAS, a condition of the adjustment requires the
vacation of a portion of the general utility and access easements
that was dedicated to the City on the final map for unit 17; and
WHEREAS, Brehm Communities and EastLake Development
Company, owners of the Bristolwood development within Unit 17 of
EastLake Greens, have requested vacation of a portion of the
easement; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with section 8330 of the Streets
and Highways Code, the easement located within Lot 10 may be
vacated as a summary vacation since it will not eliminate access to
adjacent property; and
WHEREAS, the proposed vacation is exempt from CEQA
environmental requirements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista, in accordance with Chapter 4 of Part 3 of
the Streets and Highways Code, does hereby order the summary
vacation of a general utility and access easement within EastLake
Greens Masters Collection, unit 17, more particularly described in
Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein as if set
forth.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the city of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute the
Quitclaim Deed vacating the easement.
1
/~"J
1)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby
directed to record this resolution and from and after the date the
resolution is recorded, the easement vacated no longer constitutes
an easement.
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
c: \r'8\vacate BU.
Bruce M.
Attorney
2
It) ..,y
ed as
~
C7,?
--
1 __~__----~A~A...--- -_____ J---------
_-~-- C.osiA uE
.------- L-~-I ~~ $
~"Yc LOr I.IC
. 'to <QZI LOr I.IC
EXISTING ACCESS AND U LITY EASEMENT
129~d
----------.
--
..------
----
--
--
--
--
---
,~ LOr I.IC
--
-- -
..a .aT _
OlAV LMCES tIDM)
N.T.S.
VlCIIITY MAP
LEGEND
~///////////~ EASEMENT TO BE VACATED
DATE' TITLE: ",
11-8-94 VACATION OF GENERAL ACCESS AND UTILITY IIJ~ I
DR~~t BY' EASEMENT - BRISTOLWOOD AT EASTLAKE GREENS q}
Order No.
Escrow No.
Loan No.
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
LANE/KUHN PACIFIC HOMES LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP NO. 1
c/o BREHM COMMUNITIES
2835 CAMINO DEL RIO SOUTH, S. 220
SAN DIEGO, CA. 92108
MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO:
SAME
PA E.AB VE THIS UN F R R C RDER'S U
-O~ TO CLEAR TITLE
.DOCUMENfARY TRANSFER TAX S ..........................._..........................
...... Computed on the consideration or value of property coriveYfld; OR
..... Comp.~ed on the consideration or value less liens or enCj:lmbrances
remaining at lime of sale.
SlQnature or Dedarant 01 Agent aeIem'Iining tax - FIrm Name
QUITCLAIM DEED
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION. receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
"GRANTOR"
dotes) hereby REMISE. RELEASE AND FOREVER QUITCLAIM to
LANE/KUHN PACIFIC HOMES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP NO. I,
A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, THEIR SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS
thfl real propflrty in thfl City of CHULA VISTA
County of SAN DIEGO . State of California. described as
SEE LEGAL DESCRIPTION AS SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" AND DEPICTED ON THE
ATTACHED PLAT MARKED EXHIBIT "B". THIS INSTRUMENT IS GIVEN TO TERMINATE THE INTEREST
OF THE GRANTOR IN THOSE PORTIONS OF A GENERAL UTILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT WHICH WAS
DEDICATED ON THE MAP OF CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 88-3 UNIT NO. 17, ACCORDING TO MAP
THEREOF NO. 12747, AND LATER DEPICTED ON A SUBDIVISION OF PORTIONS OF MAP NO. 12747
CHULA VISTA TRACT NO.88-3,ACCORDING TO MAP NO. 12923. SAID PORTION OF THE EASEMENTS
IS DESCRIBED AND SHOWN ON EXHIBITS "A" AND "B", RESPECTIVELY.
SEPT. . 1994
Dated
}
}sa.
}
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF
On
before me.
BY:
personally appeared
BY:
personally known to me (or pI'OVed 10 me on the basis of satisfactory
evidenea) to be the person(s) whose name(s) islare subscribed to the within
Instrument and acknowledged to me thet helsheJlhey exocutod the same
in his!hernheir authorized capecity(ies), and that by hisJherMeir signa.
ture(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behaK of which
thli person(s) acted. executed thli instrument
WITNESS my hand and Official saal.
Signature
.
I()"'~
(ThiI.....""---1
QI;;
''';
1085 (1194)
MAIL TAX STATEMENTS AS DIRECTED ABOVE
EXHIBIT 'A'
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ALL THAT PORTION OF LOT 10 OF CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 88-3, UNIT
NO. 17, IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO ~HE MAP THEREOF NO. 12923, FILED IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER, FEBRUARY 28, 1992, DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 10 AND
THE NORTHERLY LINE OF A UTILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT AS SHOWN ON
SAID MAP NO. 12923; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EASEMENT LINE
NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF A 777.50 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE
LEFT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 20037'00" WEST, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2045'18" A DISTANCE OF 37.38 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 23022'18" EAST 5.00 FEET TO A POINT ON A 297.50 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS
SOUTH 23022'18" EAST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID
CURVE THOUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 9026'59" A DISTANCE OF 49.07 FEET
TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT REVERSE 9.50 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO
THE LEFT AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG
THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 87036'41" A
DISTANCE OF 14.53 FEET; THENCE NORTH 11"32'00" WEST 73.86 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 78028'00" EAST 33.00 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 11"32'00" EAST 75.57 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
9.50 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG
THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 86002'00" A
DISTANCE OF 14.26 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ABOVEMENTIONED NORTHERLY
UTILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT LINE; THENCE SOUTH 82026'00 WEST
18.01 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 297.50 FOOT RADIUS CURVE
TO THE LEFT; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH
A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6021'19" A DISTANCE OF 33.00 FEET TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
)P-'1
~h
o -r
L
D
P
)\;J A
J~ O.
.r)
j .?
--I
--I J} )
;'
a
BOUNDARY.
SUBDiVISION
~
II
.
....
..---
..
l.J
-.J
~
ARDI ro BE QlIff -CLAlAlBJ
~ ~~
~ \.
-.
~~ ll?l/c POhVT Or
.Jt, 8c(;'hVN/N(;'
~h
~
e...i:"l
_Ie...
<c~
\ lXl.'i'\
Po/NT O"r \~
8c(;'hVN/N(;'
-.'-
--~ ~\
~~
"-l
6
L D r
10
\:-
6 == 8/j02'00.
H... 9.50'
L ... 14.26'
6 ... 87J6'41-
H .. 9.50'
L .. f.I.5J'
---
---
---
N8726'OtfE
18.01
~
~
A ... 02'45'18"
R == 777.50'
L - J7.J8'
A ... 0/j21'1,-
H .. 297.50'
6 .. 09'26'59- L!!! JJ.OO' --
R .. 297.50'---
.J. .. 49.07'
.....- .1
N2J'22'f8"W (R;
5.00'
---
---
-
IfffABT
:or
~,.,
III1IQU
"'/8 A'r~a._
(:' ~~
LMd_
~1fUINi~ NwIM
"'~e:.H"""..eMN~"
EXHIBIT 'B'
I~'Y
DATE ~
SHEET 1 OF 1 <h'l
PROJECT NO. 940201
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
/I
Meeting Date 11/22/94
ITEM TITLE: A. Resolution /77 J. ,
for Street Purposes over
Subdivision Map 12519
Accepting an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication
a Portion of Lot A in the Ladera Villas
Resolution I?? .J~ Amending Condition of Approval No. 74 of
the Rancho del Rey SPA III Tentative Map to Clarify when Park
Acquisition and Development Fees and Telegraph Canyon Channel
Drainage DIF are Payable for the super block lots.
C. Resolution I ? ? :J I Approving Master Final Map and Subdivision
Improvement Agreement for Chula Vista Tract 90-02, Rancho del Rey
SPA III 111,/
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public works~lf'
Director of Planning ~t
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ ~~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No...xJ
On July 18, 1991, by Resolution 16222 (Exhibit A), the City Council approved the Tentative
Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 90-02, Rancho del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA)
III. Condition of Approval No. 74 of the tentative map allowed the developer to file a Master
Final Map (MFM) creating master lots. The map before Council is the MFM for Rancho del
Rey SPA III. Approval of the MFM does not confer development rights to the developer.
Subsequent fmal maps will be required to further subdivide the master lots into residential units.
The proposed amendment to Condition No. 74 will clarify when Telegraph Canyon Channel
Drainage DIF (TCDIF) and Park Acquisition and Development (PAD) fees are payable.
8.
Right-of-way for Paseo Ranchero previously offered to the City through an irrevocable offer of
dedication must also be accepted by the City to provide adequate access to the lots being created
by the MFM.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Adopt the resolution accepting the irrevocable offer of dedication for street
purposes;
2. Adopt the resolution amending Condition of Approval No. 74 to clarify when
Telegraph Canyon Channel Drainage DIF and PAD fees are payable;
3. Adopt the resolution approving the Master Final Map and the subdivision
improvement agreement.
/1,1
r,b
't
Page 2, Item-LL
Meeting Date 11/22/94
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The project is generally located between East "W Street and Telegraph Canyon Road, from
Paseo del Rey to Buena Vista Way. It consists of 407.7 acres which are proposed to be divided
into 16 super block lots, which will be further subdivided into residential and open space lots
by subsequent final maps. The map now before Council for approval is the Master fInal map,
which creates the 16 super block lots (See Exhibit B).
The developer has dedicated or obtained all right-of-way necessary to construct or widen the
major streets within the subdivision with the exception of a portion of Paseo Ranchero, which
was previously offered for dedication as a public street. This right-of-way, a portion of Lot A
in the Ladera Villas subdivision, was offered for dedication but rejected on Final Map No.
12519 (See Exhibit C). In accordance with Section 66477.2 of the Subdivision Map, rejected
offers of dedication remain open until the City accepts or terminates and abandons the offers by
Council resolution. The action before Council will accept this irrevocable offer of dedication
(IOD) in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act thereby providing adequate right-of-way to
construct Paseo Ranchero in conformance with City standards. The acceptance of the IOD is
being requested at this time because access to the development during construction is limited to
Paseo Ranchero and Ladera. Consequently the road construction will be one of the fIrst items
of work.
Condition of Approval No. 74 of the Rancho del Rey SPA III tentative map allowed the
developer to me a master fInal map (MFM) to create super block lots for the purpose of selling
said lots to guest builders. Subsequent fInal maps would be required to create the lots shown
on the approved tentative map. The condition also provided that the MFM was not to be
considered the fIrst fInal map referenced in other conditions of approval. However, Condition
No. 74 did not indicate whether the Telegraph Canyon Drainage DlF (TCDDlF) and Park
Acquisition and Development (PAD) fees were to be paid at the time of approval of the MFM
or upon approval of subsequent final maps.
The proposed amendment to Condition No. 74 clarifIes that the TCDDlF and PAD fees are
payable prior to approval of the final maps which create individual lots as depicted on the
approved tentative map. Staff recommends that Condition No. 74 be amended to add the
following:
"The Telegraph Canyon Drainage DlF and Park Acquisition and Development
fees applicable to the property to be subdivided by the master fInal map are due
and payable prior to approval of subsequent fInal map(s) med over said property
to create individual lots as depicted on the Rancho del Rey SPA III tentative
map. "
The MFM for Rancho del Rey SPA III has been reviewed by the Public Works Department and
found to be in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map. Approval of the MFM
constitutes acceptance on behalf of the public portions of Paseo Ranchero, East" 1" Street, Paseo
/ /..,).
,C\
l
Page 3, Item~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Ladera, Paseo Entrada and Buena Vista Way and acceptance on behalf of the City of Chula
Vista easements for installation and maintenance of traffic control, drainage and sewer facilities
all as shown on the MFM.
The developer has processed plans for the construction of the following public improvements:
1. Paseo Ranchero - Telegraph Canyon Road to East "H" Street;
2. East "J" Street - within subdivision boundary;
3. Paseo Ladera - Telegraph Canyon Road to East "J" Street;
4. Rancho del Rey SPA III Outfall Sewer - Paseo Ranchero to Paseo del Rey.
The developer has satisfied all conditions of approval applicable to the MFM, executed a
Subdivision Improvement Agreement and provided bonds to guarantee construction of the
required public improvements. All applicable fees have been paid, deposits submitted and a
bond provided to guarantee the monumentation for said subdivision.
VILLA PALMERA HOMEOWNERS CONCERNS
At the August 23, 1994 meeting, Council directed staff to meet with the Villa Palmera
Homeowners (VPHO) to answer questions raised by the written correspondence submitted by
Ms. Claudia Diamond concerning the improvement of Paseo Ranchero. Staff has met with Ms.
Diamond and two other members of the VPHO. An informational item from the Planning
Director containing staff's responses and a copy of Ms. Diamond's letter are attached as Exhibit
D.
Ms. Diamond has been notified that this item is being considered by the Council tonight.
CEQA CERTIFICATION
All CEQA requirements for this project were met when the Tentative Map was approved by
Resolution 16222. No other environmental review is necessary.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. All Staff costs associated with processing of improvement plans
and final maps will be reimbursed from developer deposits.
Attacbments:
Exhibit A - Council Resolution No. 16222 & Minutes of7/18/91 Council Meeting /i,r S~A-NNE!>
Exhibit B - Rancho del Rey SPA m. MFM
Exhibit C - Location of offer of dedication Map 12519
Exhibit D - Memorandum to Council from Planning RE Villa Palmera concerns
ExhimtE. Dfficlosme Statemem
Pile: BY-311
F:\HOME\BNOll'lEBll\AGBNDA\rdn3mfin.1mc
112294
II' J 1/1 -~i
f' .-;-
',1 L
'.
.,
tt.
t '
J
.
.
.
.
.
.
~'l //
u~A
USOIm'JON .0. ''''-'l.'1.
USOZ>>1'JON OF DE CJft COUNCIL OF ftE CJft DF CII'ULA
USTA APPROVING '1'JIZ IJ'EN'l'ATIVE 8U8DJVJIJON IIAP FOR ,
aANCHO DEL UY aZCTJONAL ~JNG AREA cap~) Xli, CII'ULA
UaTA BACT .0-02
.
. "'_nZAS, a lIuly ...dUed eppUcation for a ~antativ.
.u.dlv1.10n aap va. fU.d vlth the Planning Dapart:a.nt of the
City or Cula Yiata on .oveabar I, 1111 a.y bneho 1181 ..y
.artnarablp, and
wa~. aald appUcation ~.fIU..t.d the 8Ub41v1alon of
approx1aat.ly 405 acr.. into ndd.nUal lot., open .pac. are..,
a .ehool lot, park and oo.aunlty purpo.. facUlty lot, and
,
'-a-zAS, th. Planning eo.al..lon ..ld an ady.rU.d pu~l1c
.earlng on .ald pro'.ct on Kay I, 1"1, and contlnu.d to Kay 22,
1'11, and
WnuJ:AS, 1:h. City council ..t the ~1ae and plac. tor a
..arlng on .ald tentative .ubdlyl.lon aap application and notice
or .ald .earing, ~ether vlth ita purpoae, va. .iven by it.
pUblication in a new.paper of .eneral circulation in the city and
It. aalUng b propeny owner. vlthln 300 t..t- of the exterior
boundarl.. of the propeny at lea.t ~an lIay. p140r to the
..ar1ng, and . '.
.~, 1:h. ..aring va. .81d at the ~1ae and plac. a.
adv.ni..d, ....81y ,.00 p..., ~. 11, 1111, in the Council
C....r., 171 Fourth Avenu., "for. the City council and .dd
Maring va. 1:har.artar clo..d, and
'--ZU, 1:h. City council noart1fi.d aa-It-10, vlth
atat...nt of OVerriding Conaidarationa, and a..ociat.d MitigaUon
IIonltoring h~.. tor Jtaneho lid "y DA X%I.
.OW I to.. "".ZFOU, H D UsOLVED I'IIAT 11m CUI' OOUNCJL find. a.
follon. "
....unt _ ..ctlOJa .'4n.1 or the autivl.lon Kap &c1:, the
"tatlva AWlviaion aap for .aDCllao ..1 ..y ..ctlonal Planning
araa CDA) UJ, Cula Yl.ta I'nct lID. ,o-D2, U found b .. in
eonforaanoa vlth 1:he ftriou e1aanu of the City'. aanaral Plan
....d on the following. .
1. ft. .lu ia pbyalo&11y .ulUlala fcpr nald.ntial
".v.lopaant ad 1:h. propo..l oontora. b all .tendard..
..UlaU...d a.y the City for ROb pro'ecta.
1 ~ //0
.
.
2.
.~
-
:I.
~. d..ign of the aUbaivi.ion vill not aff.ct the ~
existin; 1aprov...nts - str..t., aew.r., .tc. __ r,
which bav. be.n d..ignecS to avoid any a.riou. pro))l.m.......
ft. prot.ct Is in autlst.ntial oonfonaanc. vith the
Cbula V ata. ..naral Pl.n al...nt as follow. I
e. ltand U.. - '!'ba proj.ct is oon.istant with the
Gen.ral Plan, al "ncho dal ..y Specific Pl.n anI!
'the SPA III Plan Which d.sign.t.. the prop.rty
PC -Plann.d CoJIImunity, with a vari.ty of l.nl! u...
and ~..id.nti.l d.n.iti...
a.. Circulation - All of the on-.it. and off-.it.
public atr..t. ~.quir.d to aarv. th. aubdivi.ion
ar. con.ist.nt with the circulation .l...nt of
Cbul. Vi.t. G.n.r.l Pl.n and the oircul.tion
propo..d wUhin the al ..ncho del ..y Specific
Pl.n. '!'bo.. f.clliti.. vill .ith.r be oon.truct.1!
or In-li.u f..~ p.id In accord.nc. vith th. Rancho
d.l ..y SPA III Public F.cilitl.s Financing Pl.n.
Boudn; - A 10v and aodar.t. boudn; progr.m vi th
an ..t.))lish.d ,oal of I' low and ., aod.rat. vill
be !mpl...nt.d .u))j.ct to th. approval of the
City'. Hou.ing Coordinator. Comput.tion of the
aatlsfaction of this condition viII includ. the
entire al ..ncl\o del ..y Speci(ic planning Ar...
.. . .
. .
Con..rv.Uon and Op.n Spac. - .. proj.ct provil!e.
148.3 acr.. of op.n .pac., 36' of the total 404.'
acr... Grading ba. been 11ait.4 on blllside. .nl!
vradlng plan approval wll1 ~.quir. th.
~.v.;.t.tlon of .lope. In n.tural .e;.tatlon.
Approval of aIR-II-1O lnclud.d th. adopUon of a
aitl;ation aonltorlng program outllnln; the
aitl,ation ....ur.. r.quir.d for project lapact.
on 9.01091, aolls, 1:>>101o;y, air, watar, cultural
~.sources, l.nd fora, tranaportAtion and utility
.ouren.
c.
d.
e. Parks and .acr..Uon - I'ba project ,,111 be
~.apondbl. for th. bprov...nt of th. 10 acre net
Ildyhl:>>orbOod park and payaant of PAD t..s or
add tlonal iaProv..nu as approv.d IIy th.
Director Para and "cra.Uon. In addition, a
vaU ay.ta will be bpl..ntad through th. aouth
I.; Of Jl1ca Canyon, oonnecting with othar open
ap.ce araa..
t.
adalc aafety - I'b. bncho d.l ..y alt. is
cros..d IIy th. z.a ".cion Fault lone Which has one
2
.. V
//-?
"
"
'"'"
~'
Q
.
.
.
l J
t-
c.
.
(
9.
proaln.nt f.uU, lr'Uftftlng DOrth to .outh, with
oth.r pot.nti.l ~.e... lb. aitlgation aonitoring
Pl'OlJZ'u .dopt.d with EIIl-It-lO provid.. tor
....ur.. ~o .. ~k.n ~o aitlg.t. the tapa ct. of
".velopaent ill ...ocl.tlon with th. t.uU aon..
..t.ty - lb. al~ w111 .. within th. thr..bold
....pon.. ~1a.. for tlr. and pollee a.nie... '1'h.
pro,.c:t: w111 iller.... the Mac! for additional
per.oMel, a.ov.v.r, th. City i. pl.nning to ...t
that M.d with .ddltional ~evenu.. provid.d by
thia pro~.c:t:.
.ublio P.ellltl.. .l...nt - Ibl. pro~.c:t: 1.
obllgat.d 1n th. conditione ot .pprov.l w provide
.11 on-alt. .nd ott-.it. tael11ti.. D.o...ary to
a.n. thb pro~.ct:. In .ddition w that, there
.r. oth.r ~.gional t.el1ltl.. vblob thi. proj.ct (
~09.thar wlth .PAa Z .nd II) i. contributing to,
lnoludlng a publio libr.ry ait., tlr. atation
al~., and tir. ~a1nlll9 t.0111ty alt.. '1'h.
aubc!ivl.lon 1. al.o OOfttrlbutlng to th. ctay Wat.r
Diatrlc:t:'. iaprov...nt ~.lI\l1r...nt. ~o provide
~.raina1 vat.r .tor.g. for. thb pro~.ct: a. w.ll ..
oth.r ..~or proj.ct:. In th. ..a~ ~itori...
11018. - ft. 1Iftlt. w111 .. ~.lI\llr.d w ...t the
at.ndard. ot the vae with ngQd ~o .ooapubl.
lnt.dor Dob. l.vel.. :
~ .
b.
b.
1.
.eenio IIlghway - lb. proi.c:t: lllca. Dot .tt.ct: thb
.l...nt ot th. Gen.ral .l.n.
.1oyol. aout.. - .1oyol. path. ar. provid.d along
hl.9l'.pb Canyon ac.d, ...t _..w 8Ue.t and ....0 .
"nobaro aced .. ahown In th. C1z'ou1ation .l...nt.
,.
,
.ubllo aul1d1n;. - 110 pUbllo ~11dln;. ar. plann.d
for th. .1~. lb. pro'.~ ahall .. Abj.ct: ~o aCT
and D%F t....
~n.n~ U ..ct:lon 11412.2 ot th. 8ubdlv1alon "p Act,
the counc11 octlli.. tlaat 1~ .... oonaldand th. .tt.et
of thl. .pprov.l Oft th. bouln; DHc!a ot tIaa "9ion and
.... ..laMed tboH Mad. ...1n.t the .-110 ""10.
...IS. of the ~ld.nta of th. City ana the .vailabl.
tl.oal and envlnManal riaounu. fta .....lop11.nt
will pJ'ovld. f. . ftZ'laty of Iaoulltt ~ tra .1ngl.
'ully lII.taob.d ..... w .taob.d alftgl. tully .nd
aanlozo bou.1n;. In .dlSlt1on, th. .ddr.....nt w
k.
.. ~
.~
~ )/-;
.
.
j
\'
,
. 1.
,
\ 2.
s
, ..
f "
s.
Provldl1 a percentage of low and aoderate priced
IlDUSing a in keepin; with n;ional ,oala.
fte oontl9U'aUon, odentaUon and topograflhy of the
.lu partially allow. tor the opUmum aiUng of lot.
~or pa.alve or baturd .eaUn; and oool1n;
OPportunltle.. .
...."""
U
.Z J'l' rUA;j,A&iK USOL'VED 'J'HAT '1'BZ ft:NTA'lIVE 8VBDIVISION !lAP
~or "nebo del "y SPA %11, Chula Viata I'ract '0-02, ia aflflroved
eujeet: U tile ~ol1ov1.ng COnd1t:lonsl
.
..ft.r.t/Pp.t~ft.rv
4.
'l'he ~110 Paol1lUe. Plnan;ing.,nan ahall be followed with
laflrovaanu In.€"aii.crInaccordanc. with add plan or a.
~equlred ~ ..et thre.bold atandard. adoflted by the City of
Chule Vlate. %n addiUon, the ae;uence In wbich improvement.
are conatruet:ed ahall corre.pond to an)' future Ze.t Chula Vista
!'ran.ponetlon Phadng Plan adopted by the Cit)'. 'lbe City
En;ineer and Plannin; J:lirector .ay at their discreUon, aodif)'
the aequence of laprov..ent oon.tructlon ahould oondition.
cban;e ~ warrant auob a ~evlaion.
A1.1.. .i~~:11o~..~.c'-~.~~_t~ '-~~.1d aJ.;nHieal'lt: .ff,gU~.lIlil!Al!I .J
~. ,aUon .lIon.1torjn;bogr~" tor Zl\vironaental Imfllct .., j
.eport EIR-It-l0 a. re;uired prlpr_~o..J'..1naUD..approval, are
hereb)' incorporated.... .R.ondi1;lon._of.appro~l. The J:lirector of
'Planning .a)' .Ddif)' the ae;uenee of aiti;ation at hi. di.cretion
ahould c:bange. warrant auob a revldon.
.
'l'he developer ahall Coapl)' with ~e ~unl~y .Purpo.e -"acUity
Ordinanee. 'l'he are.. propo.ed to abow oompllance with add
ordinance aha11 be provided prior to approval of the first final
..p. Area. of con.ideration forliU.-UUcaUon n.t be within
be area. of SPAs %, %1 or III. amendment to the Zl "neho del
.e)' Speclflo Plan and .ectional Plan Area. _)' .. Mca...ry to
aocoapliab oo.pliance.
~l~1;~..fl.nal ..p approval ~or Pha.e 1, a Preci.e Plan ahall be
ipprovad a,y the Ci t)' Councll detailin; ttili -'.u.1uMnt J~f_th.
fpecla11;y .Boyainl..Project. 'l'he preciae plan ahall InCIude but
Tliliiit"""'D.iilted ~I detalling the density of the variOD portions
of the pro:tect:, idenUf)'~ the aaount of ncreational and Qen
apace ~aoll1tlaa, detalling the financial arran;...nta avaUa~le
~ p~aed unant., idenUf)'in; the a,e l1ait:a and an)'incOlle
nquiraaanu of tananta, and abOlllDg the percent of the pro'ect
~or aala or ~t. .
..
k
:;>
~~J/-r
-
'.
.
.
e.
..
Ii
~
e
(
.
.e
t
"
pr..~. _ .l""~.-e.__.v aft&! rBmr8V...t'lI~.
klor to any final Mp .pproval for .h... a or J or any unit
tIIlveof, till. .eveloper ..11 0~.1n all Me....ry rlgbt-of-way
for tile con.trueUon of the unlaprov.d off alte POrtion of h.t
-07- 8tre.t w..t of ....0 Ladv., frOll aiv.r Aah Driv. to aae! O.k
Pl.ce.
fte dav.loper ..11 OOftatnct the unbprov.d off alte portion of
...t -07- ftn.t w..t of ....0 Lad.r., frOll aiv.r Aab Driv. to
Jled oak .1.c., to . Cl... II Coll.ctor ~nd.rd, exc.pt that the
. foot ald.walk My .. a.phal t OOftCl'.te ilulte.d of portl.nd
...nt concr.te. ft. con.tncUon of th... bprov..ant. .ball
.. ~ante.d prior t:o final ..p .pproval for .h.... a or 3 or
any unit tIlereof. !'he aubcl!vld.r ..y n;u..t the tcmaaUon of .
nlllbura.ant diatrlct tor the.e off-.lte bprova.nt. 1n
aooordanoe w1th ..cUon 11.10 of the Ilunlc1pal Cod..
ft. .ev.IOPar .h.ll re;u..t the vac.tion of th.t portion of
....0 Kargu.rlta .. MC....ry to accoapli.h the d.dgn .. .hown
on the tentative ..p. .dd vac.Uon _.11 .. .cCOllpl1.b.d prior
to the approv.l of the final ..p for .h... a, Unit 3.
ft. off ait. portion of aa.t -J- .tr.at adj.c.nt to Bu.na Vi.ta
.a)' ahall .. vrant.d 1n f.. to the City for Open Ipac., public
utUltl.. .nd oth.r public ...... !'h. vrant of thb propart)'
.all .. compl.t.d prior to .pproval of . final ..p for Ph... J,
Unit J. '1'h. d.v.loper ah.n .nt.r Into an .vr....nt to not
oppo.. the Includon of thia propart)' In Open ...c. Dlatrict ,
ao (Ion. 7) pdor to .pproval of .n)' tln.l ftap tor bnebo del
by IPA III. '1'h. ..v.loper ah.ll be r..pondbl. for the oo.t.
...oel.ted with .nn.xlng thl. property to qp.n ...e. Di.trict ,
aD.
.. ft. ..veloper ah.ll be r..pondbl. t~r the DOft8tnctlon of off
alt. _rov..nt. at the "..tvl)' and of ....0 d.l Wort. 1n the
C... ..1 a.)' aubcl!vlalon. D. oonatnctlon of the..
.. uprov...nt. .hall be guar.nt..d prior t:o approv.l of the final
up for .h... a, Unit a. A caah d.po.lt va. pr.vloualy
..po.lted with the Cit)' to pay the co.t of thla work. D.
uount ..r;ltad 1a av.U.ble t:o the ..veloper tor oonatncUon
.f till... rov..-nt.. .
- r\ .
io., klor t:o final up approval for Rae.. 1, the davaloper ahall
Co/ ..dlcat. additlonal dght-of-v.y alOftl the frontag. of the
p-opvty OIl ...t -.- 8tn.t t:o provide a ao ~oot parkway
(axl.tlftg IlUZ'bllfte t:o ~operty llfte).
.al. .... ..veloper ahall .. n.pou1bla ~or ~lOft of a
a1d.valk/ncr..Uonal pathway alOftl the anUn f""tag. of
aubi.ct property Oft ...t -.- 8treet from ....0 1tIm..ro ...tvly
t:o ....0 ..1 by t:o the uU.f.ctlon of the City Enllna.r,
Dlnctor of .1annlftt and the Director of Pub and bcr..Uon.
ft. oon.trucUon of th... iaprov..-nta ahall .. guarante.d prior
t:o final ..p .pPl'ov.l for .h... 1.
..
'7.
I.
,r )///.
~ ""!L ___ ~~
.
12.
:~
j~
13.
...
.15.
.
.
;
11..
ft. lI.v.loper ahall be r..ponsibl. for th. con.truction of vid.r
.ld.v.na at: tz'anaU at:op., a\lb~.ct: ~ th. approval of the City
ang1naar .
fta final lI.sign of ....0 "nchero Rall includ. al;ht foot vid.
laJldac:ape ......nt INff.re a. r.;u'1r.d by th. .tr..t Design
at:andarda or be ad~oln.d by an open apac. lot at l...t .ight
f..t: vld. vlth alop.. no vr.at.r than 1.1, exc.pt In the
followln; ar.a. w.r. the final d.sivn ahall be aub~.ct to the
approv.l of the .lannln; Dlr.ct:or, Land.cap. ArehU.ct .nd City
Zn;ln..rl
a. Ad~ac.nt to the lot. front In; on Cabo eelabuo, Call.
Cand.l.ro and Planto Miral..t. vh.r. a apeclal alop. and
rat.inln; vall d..l;n vill be l.pl...nt.d;
~. Alon; the :runior Bi;h .chool alt.;
o. Alon; the exleUn; Laden Vl11.. anlS Miasion V.rd.
.ubc!i vidon. w.r. exletin; condition. ahall ~in; .nlS
II. Ad~ac.nt to th. out~parca1 own.1S by the Chula Vleta School "'"
Dlatrlct. ..'
"
ft. final 1I..ivn of East -3" .tr..t ahall Includ. 1.5 foot vid.
l.nd.c.p. ......nt tiuff.r. a. re;u1r.d by the .tr..t Desi;n
.tand.rd. or be .djoin.d by an op.n apac. lot at l.a.t 1.5 f..t
vld. vith 1:1 aaxl.um ald. .lop.., .xc.pt In th. fOllowing
location. Wher. the final d.sivn ahall be a\lb~.ct: to the
approval of the Pl.nnin; Dir.ctor, Land.cap. Arehit.ct: and City
Zn;1na.rl
a. Alon; the park aU.;
~. Alon; t:ba ao corner Iota at: th. Int.ra.ct:lon of East -3"
atr..t and Camino Ki.l (Iota I:t and .7 of Pha.. 2, Unit 1)
and th. aouth.a.t oomar lot of ...t -:r- atr..t anlS Cabo
capota (lot .5 of .ha.. 2, Unit 2) I
o. Adj.oant to th. O1It-paroal own.1S by th. Clbul. Vlata Ichool
Dbtrlctl and .
II. Alon;"'I:b. exleUn; ..1 Mr. aid;. aubdiv1alon wbar.
ex1aUn; oondltlona &hall &'aMin.
.
All "tainin, valla which interface .lth th. PubUc atr..t
.yat_ ..11 be oon.truct:ac! to aatch th. "nc:h "ncho del a.y "'"
.PA %%1 Dadvn auid.Un. atandard. for ext.rior ..11.. l
.,
//-/ t?
.
.
,
.
~
.
-
J
.
"
;.
1
'.
S7. fta .eveloper eh.ll " n.ponalbl. ror ClOnaU1leUon of full
.u..1: !aprovea.n1:. ror all publle and prlva1:. atr.et. .hown on
t:.b. 'l'enb1:1v. Map wlthln 1:11. aubdlv1alon ltolmd.l"JI and for the
ClOna1:z'ucl1:ion of off-.l1:. iaprov...nt. 1:0 ClOft.U1aet ....0
aanebaro, ...1: .J- .ua.t and ....0 Ioad.ra .. abown on the
'l'enbUv. llap, to 1:11. .aU.f.otlon of 1:11. Cit)' bglnaer.
..ld iaprovaenu ehall inolud., llut .ot " llaltad b, a.phalt'
oonc:r.1:a pavaa.nt, ...., ClOner.ta curb, pttar and .1d.walk,
..var and w.tar utl1Iti.., dr.lnag. tael1Itla., .tr..t 11ght.,
.llftll, ~h'a b)'dr.nt. and ".naltlon. to al.Ung laprov...nt..
auaa1: 1ntar..etlon .p.elng .. abown on 1:11. 1:antativ. aap 1a
Ilarur approvad. '
s.. &11 t:.ba aua.u ehown on 1:11. lJ'ant.Uv. Map wl1:l11n 1:11.
auWlvialon IloUftd.rrl except priv.t. atr..t., eh.ll " dedleated
~or public ... Des 1ft ot aald atra.ta eh.ll ..et .11 Clt)'
.t.ftCIar4a.
.
St.
A tuporary turn.round conformll'1g 1:0 CltI .tandard. .b.ll be
providad at 1:11. and of .tr.et. bevll'1g a .n;tb 9l"..t.r than 150
~a.t, ....ur.d troe the c.nt.r 111'1. of 1:11. ...r..t 1I'1t.r.ectlng
.tr..t 1:0.1:I1e c.nter of the cul-cS.-..c, exc.pt a. approved by
th. Ci1:)' Zngll'1eer.
CUl-d.-a.c. al'ld kI'luekl.. .ball " d.dlft.d and wilt in
accord.l'lc. with Clt)' abnd.rd. unl... oth.rwi.. approved by the
Cit)' Znvlne.r.
20.
w~~ ee"~{aur.~~
~.
11.
.
. .
~ol'lbV. on all lota 0.11 be a alnl.. of ;s t..t .t the Z'ight-
of-w.)' 111'1. .xc.pt a. approv.d by 1:11. Clt)' bgll'1..r. 'lbia
condltlol'l doe. not appl)' 1:0 tlag lot., a. d.UI'I.d in the
IIUI'lic1p.l Cod.. .
loot lin.. ab.ll " locat.d .t the top Of alope. except ..
approv.d b)' 1:11. Clt)' bgll'1..r. Jrh..n ad~.c8l'lt to open .pae.
lot., propert)' 111'1.. 0.11 ... locati! '. all'lbD. 2.1 t.et from
~!IL~P_. ~l.._.10'p.. .
ft. preparation ot ~ina1 _.. and plan. ~or 1:11. locaUon. '11.ted
"low ab.ll ... ourl.d out 11'1 .c:cordaftca with 1:11.
~ol1owift; odtada ural... otherwl.. ..ppn....d b)' 1:11. Clt)'
8n;l..r and Director of'laNWagl .
a. ....,u. a aiftiInaa SO tae1: ~roa the DDt~ of ....0 "neb.ro
aNI ...t .J- Itnet to lota . uti "11'1aa.. I, IJft1t 2, to
1*ov.1d. .ad41tional _tt.r and tnu tl_ area at 1:11. .
DDrMr.
22.
23.
.
It.
~ov.1d. a padeatrlan t:bnu;hva)' htve.n lota 2.10 and 131,
.... I, Vnl1: i,' troe c..lno calabalo to a..t .J- ft.r.et
ac:ro.. tra 1:11. .cbool and park .lta..
Il,j I
.II- _~
i
;It
.;'
.
LD~ 121 or Pha.. 2, vnlt 1, ahall be wld.n.d to . .1~i.um
SO roo~ vldth ~o accommodat. a combined .lope and .aximum 5
roo~ r.ulnln9 w.ll. !'hia 1. ~o avoid. -tunn.l" effect """'
cr..~d a~ aide 10~ line.. J
LDb , and S, Ph..e 2, vnl~ , ah.ll utUbe .axlmWll 5 foot.
.1gh r.u1nln9 w.ll., end/or a combination of r.tainlng
"alla and crib w.ll.. '
e. I'z'ovld. a dUferent ... ror .ach of ~. portion. of
.ala&&~ Court; 10ca~ed ~o ~. ...t and weat of ".t """
au.et and ~e portion. of I)or.eSo Way located ~o the .ut
and ves~ of Camino Xlel.
c.
d.
~r..~ ~../ne." aeaea
24.
25.
21..
27.
21.
2t.
fte dev.loper all.ll grant ~o ~. City atre.t ue. planting .nd
.aln~.nce ......nt. aloftlJ all public atre.t. a. ahown on the
"enta~lv. Xap. 'Ih. width of add ....m.nt. ahall be a. outlin.d
in the Cl~Y'a Str..t De.l9ft ItaneSard. Polley.
'lbe d.v.loper .all be re.pon.lble for atr..t u... In
accord.nce with ..ctlon 18.28.10 of ~. Chula Vl.t. Municipal
Cod.. 'lb. u.. of con.. ahall be InclueS.eS vb.r. n.c....ry to
r.duc. the lapact of root .y.t... dl.ruptln9 .djac.nt aldewalk.
and rights-of-way.
All open apace lot.adjac.nt ~o public r19ht.-of-vay ahall
.aintaln . width ao a. ~o provide 10 fe.t or land.caplng --..
ua.ta.nt behind the back of ald.walk.!
.
Xaint.nance of all facl1ltl.. and 1.prove.~nta.wlthln open apac.
ar.a. cover.d by ho.. owner. a..oclatlon. eball be cov.red by
CC'Ra ~o be autllll tt.IS .nlS approv.IS by ~. Pl.Ming Dep.rtment
prior = approval of the a..oclate4 final "51.
Prior ~o the approval of any final .ap, ~e developer' ah.ll
requaat in vritln9 that .alnt.nance of all racl11tie. and _
laprov_ents vi thin ~. OPen apac. area a..oclatelS with auch "51
ahall be the re.ponalbUlty of tha bncho d.l ..y Open Ipac.
llalnt.ananca Dlatrlct.
Prior = approv.l of ~. flrat final "51, a ooaprehenl1v.
landacape plan .all be a\lbal~telS for :reviaw end approval of th.
Cl~y Landecape Arobltact: anlS Dlractor of ..ru anlS "creation.
Prior = approval of aach final _51, ooaprehanaiva, detaUed
landacape anlS irrigation plana, erosion control plana aneS
dauUalS ...~ar ..nag...nt gulde11ne. ror all lendacape
irrigation ahall be auba1ttad 1n accordance vlth the Cbula Viata
Landscape Kanual ror tha aaaocla~ad land.caplftlJ 1n that flnal
"51. 'lbaaa dataUad lanlS.cape anlS irrigation plana ahall be for
the review and approv.l of th. City &.andacape kchlt.ct: and
Diractor of paru and bcreation. fte 1.neSacaplng foraat; within
th. projact .all be to uphaab. uUft, drought tol.r.nt plant!""lllo.
..tar!.l. axoepUona can .. _d. for ara.a nere racl.lmeeS,
;IJ>
., -~'). . )/--/~
:2~~ .
"
. watu I. excludvel)' ...lS. !'b. coapreh.n.iv. 1.nIS.cap. plan.
. ehal1 addr...:
.
-.i
..
.
.
(
.. .lope .nIlanc...nt .nd lanlS.cap. u.ata.nt for the .lop. in
Open _ace z.ot A, Pha.. J, Unit " llen.ath the .7unlor Hi;h
8c:bool lot. I'b. plara ahall .dlSr... and provida for ..tv.
ab. plant aat.da1, tIoullSer work and/or _ttr... vork on
th. .lope. .
tI. A aaturaU..lS ~avagataUon progr.. for ar... of .ralSira; ira
epen apace lot., which aa)' iraclulS. teaporU)' in'i;aUon.
,
o. fta d18turlled -nativa- .raa. within -"lagraph Can)'on ltoalS
open apaca oorrilSor. '1'h18 .r.a ahall includ. u.a
~ouplng. or ua. grova.. !'b..a plantiqa ahall lie u.at.lS
a. ~ando. plaraUng. anlS .hall lie ilSanUfialS ira at l.aat .ix
araa. .10rag the oordlSor vith .ach locaUon provilSln;
planting. of 10 to 100 ua... I'b. ..act INIIber of u...
.nlS 10caUon. are to lie .pprov.lS b)' th. .lannlra; .Departaant
aralS Daparta.nt of Park. anlS bcraaUon. I'b. intant of
th... grov. .r.a. i. to provilS. a cons18t.nC)' wlth .xbUng
orov. .r.a. ira the op.n .pac. corridor ...t of the Rancho
"al ..)' SPA IJI ar...
'0. Prior u .pproval of the Uz:G final aap, d.t.U,,-_'bowlng the
locatiora arad d.dgn of the traU .)'.t.. arad a _lgn progra. ahall
lie .ublli U.lS to and approvalS I>y th. Dir.ct... of .lannin; anlS
Park. .rad bcr.aUon. ft. tral1 .)'.t.. ira th. open apac. lot.
ahall lie . .1rala.. I f..t vllS. withlra ara . foot bori.ontal cl.ar
apac. arad a 10 foot v.rtlcal cl.ar apac.. J'b. ...oclatalS .1gn
progr.. ahall ilSanUf)' tha u.U n.twork in the open apac. ar.a.
anlS coran.cUng alorag ....0 "racharo, u th.- ut1af.ct1on of th.
Diractora of .lannirag and .arka and bcr.aUora.
31. Prior flnal .ap approval for .ha.. " .Unit , anlS Ph..a .., "ralt :I
.. ahown ora the ".ntaUv. Nap, cro.. aactions ahall lie auba1ttalS
to aralS approv.lS I>y the Dir.ctor of Pl.raniq and Cit)' "'glra..r
illu.traUrag th. lnt.rfac. wh.r. th. U.U 1a locat.1S alSjac.nt
~o th. drainag. dltch alorag 'J'el.graph Cara)'on ltoalS. !'b. f.nclrag
of th. drainag. charanel ahall .. a..th.Ucall)' pl...1rag
lraClorpOraUrag th. .. of plaraUq., atU..triara t)'pe fenelrag aralS
"ira)'l olalS f.racirag. !'b... cro.. ..ctions and d.C01"aUv. f.nelrag
progr.. ..)' lie inolud.d with th. DDapz'aenaive landscape plan.
Pence .at.. aball lie provld.lS at locaUons .~OYed b)' th. Cit)'
"'giDaar to allow ..lDtenarace of tha drainag. lDbanraal.
.
>>.rk.
al.
.... daveloper aIlall lie obU.atelS for aI.1 .... of ~land a.
"..crlllecJ 1ft th. a=~A Plara, .IDoldl,. land, and/or fa..,
and/or acJlSltional nt., in .ooordance with the .arklanlS
DedicaUon Ord1raance. I'ba .ctual final ...ag. will nlat. to
t:b. ..-t.v of units approved with th. final aap..'
!'b. park locatalS in Pha.. " Unlt .. .ball lie a .1raD_ 10 ...t
.ubl. .cr... >>nlgn anlS d.velopaarat of tha park ahall lie
.".. _ -a __9.... / /~ /3
. ,J.
.
,
auject; U the .pproval of tb. City'. Director of Part. aneS
"cr.ation .nd .hall confona with tb. park ...t.r plan td be
adopted by th. City Council.
J.. An actequate INner and ..paration of 10 fe.t .hall be provicS.I~:'
"twe.n the re.idantial lot. .t the ea.tarn aneS of Palazzo coUr~
and th. exi.tln; park faciliti.., to tb. .ati.faction of the
Dlract;or ofP.ru and "cr.ation. .olution..y lnclueSe but b
Bot U.aited to ralocatin; an exbtin; tannb court or lot
nd..ign.
JI. A .inbNa 20 loot wid. .cc... corridor .hall be ..intain.eS at
the end of ....0 .al.no where tb. cul-d.-.ac .but. the .xbtift9
park. .aid area .hall be ..d. part of the .ark. Detall aneS
. ..dgn of th..eea.. .hall be .ubmitt.eS to .nd .pprov.eS by tb.
Departaant. of .lannin; .nd Park. .neS ..cr.ation pdor to final
aap approval lor Pha... J, I1ni t 1.
r
oJ
.
..
...
ar.d{~s/Dr.fft.a.
II.
n.
II.
It.
co.
C1.
.
An aro.ion and ..eSi..ntation control plan &ball be pr.par.eS a.
part of the 91"adin; plan..
8p.c1fic ..thoda of haneSHn; .tona draina;. are .ubj.ct to
..tailed .pproval by tb. City En;in.ar .t tb. ti.. of .ubmi..ion
of laprovem.nt .nd vrading plan.. De.ign .hall be .ccompli.h.eS
on th. bad. of tb. r.quir...nt. of tb. .ubdivbion Manual aneS
th. Grading Ordinanc. (No. 1'" .. ...nd.eS). ~. d.v.loper
.hall .Ubmit calculation. to d..on.trat. complianc. with all ~
dralna;e requirem.nt. of tb. .ubdivbion -:nUal. ;:;. 1
Grading proposal. .hall be r.view.d and .ppr~.d by the city
Zngin..r and Director of Planning for consid.ration of belanc.eS
cut .nd 1111, utililation of .ppropriat. .oil type., eff.ctiv.
land.caping .nd r.v.g.tation wh.r. applicable. Grading .hall
occur in ..parate ph.... unle.. . .in;le pha.a operation b
.pproved with the vracUng plan.
A letter of perab.ion for vraeSinv .hall be obtaineeS from .DelE
prior to .ny vradin; within or .eS:1ac.nt to..n .DO'I: ea.em.nt or
Which would affect acee.. thereto. .
'!'be .eveloper &ball .ake . na.onable .ffort to obtain
pend. don to grade the .lope. alon; .uena V.l8ta .ay .t the
foraar inter.ection of ...t -3- Street. If perabalon to vrad.
aaid alope ia not rea.onably .ttainable .. detera1naeS by the
ei ty Zn;lnear, the regrading of tbe.. .lope. ahall not be
nquired. '!'be prov.l8ions of thi. concSition &ball M coapUeeS
wlth prior u .pproval of tha linal up lo~ Pha.e J,.1Jnit :to
Prior u .pproval of .ny linal aap for .ingle lem111 nalcSential
... the .eveloper ahall aubmit a li.t of proposed ot.
WIoatin; _ether the atructure will M located on IU1, cut or
a tranaition Mblaen Wo aituationa.
~l
.ae-
-t ~~~/-/y
.
.
"
-
.
-
I
~.
t
.2.
.J.
...
a.w.r
45.
.1.
.7.
.1.
Lob ah.ll .. a" gr.d.d .. 1:0 drain 1:0 1:b. .tr..t or .n .pprov.d
dr.inag. .)'.t... Drainag. ahall not _ ..raitt.d t:o flow ov.r
alop... lot. 71, 72 .nd I' of Pha.. 2 unit 1 ahall _ d..lgn.d
ao t;h.t th.r. wll1 _ no _gaUv. gr.ding or draina,. upact. to
. t;h. .d,.cant off-ait:. properti... .
tlrad.d .ooe.. ahall .. provid.d t:o all pBllc atora drain
aUvRUZ'.. including inl.t and outl.t aUuRUZ'... Pav.d .cc...
ehall .. provid.d 1:0 drainag. aUuRUZ'.. locat.d in t:h. r.ar
7ard of an)' ".idanU.l lot or .. .pprov.d I>>)' 1:b. Cit)' Engin..r.
ft. ... of huld.r. In .inor draina,. _aln. .nd .n.rvy
dla.ip.tor. In 1:b. canyon and open apac. er.a. in t:h. aann.r
approv.d I>>)' t;h. CU)' Engin..r and Pl.nning Dir.Ror, is
encourag.d t:o .llow vat.r 1:0 _ captur.d and 1:0 allow t.r... to
9Z'ow utUZ'.ll)'.
ft. d.velop.r ahall _ I"..ponslbl. for pertorain, ..wag. flow
..t.ring t:o .onitor thr.. a.;m.nt. of ..in id.ntifiad in t:h.
.iCk Engin..ring I".port dat.d S.ptaHr S, 1..0 .. ..ction. QR,
X1X2 .nd XL. M.t.ring .hall _ acco.pli.h.d at 1:ba locatlon.
d.t.rain.d I>>)' 1:b. City Engin..r. M.t.rin, ah.ll _ .cco.pli.h.d
prior 1:0 1:b. 1..uanc. of any buildin, perait for IPA JII and _
a-.p.at.d at int.rval. dir.ct.d I>>)' 1:b. City En,in..r. Should any
of 1:b... a.;m.nt. bav. ..t.red flova Which fill acr. t:han lot Of
t;h. pip. dla..tar, 1:b. appllcant .hall con.truR parallel -
I.ciliti.. .. d.terminad by 1:b. City En,in~er. ft. d.v.lop.r
ah.ll .nt.r into an .gr....nt wlt:h 1:b. CUi prior 1:0 first Unal
.ap G~val provldln, for alllt:eu Indl..d above.-'-.
An laproved .co... a-o.d wl t:h a alnia. wldth of 12 te.t ahall _
provld.d 1:0 .11 aanltary aew.r _nhol... ft. a-oadway .hall _
dealgn.d lor .n H-20 wheel load or other loadi.ft, .. approv.d by
tIl. Clt)' &n91n..r.
fte d.veloper ahall obt:ain perala.lon trom 1:b. Clty 1:0 d.podt
a.w.,. in a foreign basin. "h. d.veloper ab.ll uter into an
.gr....nt wlth 1:ba Clty a-elaUve 1:0 1:ba diver. ion of a.wa,e
prior 1:0 linal _p .pproval tor u)' pha.. or _it 1:ber.of
propo.ing aaid diver.lon.
ft. devaloper llball _ naponaibl. lor t;ha &'DOYal of t:h.
exi.Ung aewe puap atations (llia.ion Verd. and Caftd1evood).
~ior 1:0 .pproval of any linal aap utalling aaid naoval, 1:b.
INner and tIla Cit:)' llball ant:ar int:o an .graaaant: 1:0 eRabl1sh
tIl. acope of work and 1:b. aaO\lftt 1:0 _ niablll"aad ." 1:b. Cit)' t:o
tIla aubdlvid.r lor perforalng aaid work. fta d.valoper aay also
&'&qU..t: t;ha lonaUon of . apeelal MWer aarvi_ area 1:0 provld.
tOI" t;h. co.t: of connaction of t:ha ern O\1Z'I"utl)' _ing ..rv.d I>>)'
tIla Cendlawood puap~ataUon 1:0 tIl. peraanant gravlt:)' aewar "
.,.taa.
Unla.. otharwi.. approv.d I>>)' 1:b. ~ity Engin..r, 1:b. acope of 1
work at: iloth alta. &ball _ liait.d 1:0 tIl. naoval" ~ dl.po.a
oK. , )/-/5
. -t:1_ 1\ ...
i
i
,,:
of equlp..nt, vr.ding, land.caping and con.truction of new .
..w.rlin.. and aanhol.. r.quir.d for connection to the propo.ed
bncho 41.1 ltey a.w.r ay.t.lD. Any vpd&1ng of ltancho d.l Ray
a.w.r 11ft.. due aolely to the flow ,en.rat.d by the Hiadon 1"-""
Yerde and C&ndlewood ar... ahall .1.0 be includ.d.
..elf!..!! ..~.r
~. "
4.. Prior t:o approval of the a..oclat.d final ..p, the d.Veloper
.hall provide on-a it. infra.tructur. to accept and to u..
hcl.liI.d v.ter Wh.n .a ia .vailabl., along ....0 ltanchero frolD
l'alegraph canyon acad to z..t -H. Stre.t and .long Ia.t ..7"
atre.t ~rea ....0 ltanch.ro to the park ait., per t.he adopt.d
>>ublic Facilltl.. Ftnancing .lan.
10. Any coate incurred frea J"~:tC!tJ.~ot1ng t.h. r.clai..d_VatUJY.at.am,
Wh.n reclai..d vater HCOID.. avaha~l., _hau Dipaid by the
d.v.loper. lIonie. for t.hb ahall be held by t.h. City, through a
d.po.it a.t up by the ~.v.loper~- The .1D0unt ahall be determined
lby the dev.lop.r;".pproved by the City and In place prior to
approv.l of .ach a..ociat.d final map.
..f.P.
Fire hydrant. vill be r.quir.d per t.h. Fire Department
atandard.. Hydrant apacing i. 500 feet for aingle family and
300 ~e.t tor aulti-family dwelling..
'2. llax1aua hydrant pre..ure ahall not axc..d 150 p.i. /......
'3. Fire bydrant. and roadway acce.. (par City lir. Harahall _
approval) ahall be in.tall.d, t..t.d and oper~tional prior to
any combu.tibl. .aterial. placed on-ait.. ,.
'1.
B3.~ DeveloDer and ei~v ahall have en~ered in~~ : R:~~:~~:e:~:~
.a?.m.n~ vhieh ~rovid.. ~or ~h. d.v.to~. 0 _ .~~ir.
. cos~. or reloea~ina Fire S~a~ion No. · .~: :~~ :~~~: e:r:~:~;r
.hall hA eo1ftr.an..tad ~or _am. .b~v. and v . '.
~.ir .hare ~h.r.ofa
A8r...."~./eev."."~.
14.
15.
II.
Prior t:o final aap approval for .ha.. 1, Unit 1, the develop.r
ahall entar into an agr..m.nt with t.he City to parantee the
develop.ant of the parcel apacifically for aanior houaing.
Prior t:o the approval of the fir.t final ..p,' t.h. d.v.loper
ahall ent.r into an .gr._.~~_~9..:Pf-~lf~:'a ri,ht_*\lnl.1.~...at
t.b. ifttara.ct1on of ......0 de1 "y and ...t...... 8tr.et, to the
.atiafaction of the Ci~y JEngin..r, if the thrUhold atendard.
~or thia inter..ction a. expr....d in the th.n currant Growth
..naguant Ordinanc. are exc..d.d at any u.. during t.h.
d.v~lop.ant of thi. froj.ct.
Prior ~o approval of the firat final "P, the d.veloper shall oJ
enter into an agr.'t!I.nt t~..Fovid. a park-n-rid. fac1111:y near _
;r
~
,
// -j~ .
.
.
.
~
.
,
-.
th. in~.~lon of a..t -8" .tr.et and ....0 Jtanchero to
includa 10 parkin; apat:.., 10 ~lqtl:1a lol:kar., li;hting, traah
~aoaptat:l.. ani! olrculation atripin; to th. aati.faction of the
City I'ranalt Coordinator. In addition, a v.nait .top, to
includ. . hnc:b, ab.ltar and v..h rat:aptacla, all.ll ~ provided
on th. north ald. of a..t -8" .tra.t. A pl.n of .ald
t.pro....nta .nd th. ti81ng th.r.of ahall ~ .ubaltt.1S .nlS
.pprov.d _ tha City IT.nalt 'COordlnator. ..,dr..ant. of thb
oondltlon aay al.o ~ aat ~ d.ISIAtion," ~rov..ent., anlS/or
'inanclal partiCipation In a ,.rk-n-rlda taclllty ...tar pl.n,
.. ... .... ti....Uon of ... Ci~~t ~ ~~~ ~
~i:~ft~~:!i::~:!~:ii::::: ~ F::: ! :~
17.
~lor to .pproval of aach tlnal ..p, oopl.. of Itropo.alS CClRa
tor tha 8UbS1v1alon ahall ~ aubal t:t..d to and approv.1S by th.
City Planning Dapartaent. .
~lor to approval of th. tj,.~.U~nal. ..p,' th. dav.loper .h.ll
.provld. a aCb.dul~, aubj.ct to th. .pprov.l of th. Pl.nnlng
I>irat:tor and City Houdng coordln.tor, .tor. th....veloplD.nt of
low incoa. !lou.ln; a. d.Unad In tha .'r....nt ex.cut.1S ~tw.en
th. CltI and ltant:ho del Itay ..rtnarahlp per City COuncll
".olut on Ho. 15751 d.talS AuVU.t 7, '1..0.
II.
It. ~lor to th. approval of any tln.l ..p for th. aubj.ct
aublSlvi.ion or any unit th.r.of, th. d.v.lop.r .h.ll obt.ln .11
off-.lta rlvht-of-w.y n.t:....ry for tha lnat.llatlon of r.;uir.1S
laprov..ent. tor th.t unit. ft. d.valoper .h.ll al.o provide
......nt. tor all on-.it. and off-.lt. pubrlt: atore drain.,
a.w.r. and oth.r public'uti1iti.. prior to..pproval of th. fln.l
aap. ......nt. aIlall ~ . 81n18um width of . ta.t vr.ater than
pipe ab., tut in no oa.. 1... th.n 10 t..t.
10. fte d.veloper aIlaU notify th. City .t "l...t 10 day. prior to
conalder.tion of th. tlnal ..p ~y City if off-.it. ri,ht-of-way
oannot _ o~ta1n.d a. ra;uir.d by th. COneSi tion. of approval.
(Only off-a Ita rlvht-of-way or ......nt. aff.ct.1S by '.ction
16462.5 of th. 'ublSlv1eion "p Al:t v.cov.r.1S by thb
oondiUon.
.&ftar aald noUflt:ation, t:ba d.veloper aIlaU.
.. P.y th. full co.t of ao;ulrtn, off-.lta dtht-of-way or
......nta n;ulralS by th. COnditione of Appz-ov.l of th.
tentative "p.
IJ. DaPOalt with the City tha ..tlaatad coat of ao;ulrln; aallS
~l,ht-of..,ay or ....enta. ..11. ..t1aata to ~ approv.d by
tha City anvlnaar. .
o. .... .11 ..aaenb uIJ/or ~lPt-of""y dOCUMnta and plai.
.apared and appral..l. ooaplata wblcb ara naoaa.ary to
ou...anoa condaanatlon proca.dln;..
.~
~_ _ ~ )/~/7
d. Zf th. d.v.loper .0 r.qu..~.,.~. Ci~y ..y U.. i~. powers
to .cquir. rivh~-of-v.y, ......n~. Dr lic.n... n.e4ed for
off-ai~. bprov...n~. Dr work r.1a~.4 ~o th. SOent.tive Map..""'"
~e dev.loper. .h.11 p.r .11 oo.t., both dir.ct an4 L ~
indir.ct incurr.d ~n aa d .cqui.i~ion. ~
ft. requirement. of a, b, and 0 .bov. ahall be .CCoapU.he4
.r1or to th. .pprov.l of t:h. Pinal Kep. .
All off__i~. nquir..ant. whlch f.ll undar tha purvlaw of
.action .6.62.5 of the .~a~. SUbdivi.lon Map Ac~ wl11 be waiv.4
in .ooordanoa wlth t:ha~ .actlon of th, Ac~ if th. Clty do.. not
1l~1J' vit:h th. 2.20 day U.lution apec!f1.d in t:h.t ..ction.
.1. hior to .pproval of .ach final ..p, tha d.veloper ah.ll .nter
h~ an .;r...ent wlth the Ci~y ~o includ. th. aUbdlvblon. ln
~e .ello aoo. publlc facl1iti.. dl.~rlc~ Dr .n .ccapt.bl.
.lternativ. financlnv pro;ra., aubject to tha .pproval of both
th. Cbula Vi.b E1e.en~ary and 1V..tw.~ar 81Vh School Dl.trlct..
Prior ~o approval of .ach final .ap, tha developer ahall enter
in~o .n .vr....nt wl~h the Clty wherein he .;r.a. ~o comply wlth
t:hat v.r.lon of th. Growth Man.ve.ent Ordlnanca in .ffect at the
~l.e . bul1dlnv peralt i. i..u.4. Such oo.plianca lnclu4.. but
i. no~ li.it.d to ~h. th.n currant ".t Chula Vi.ta
!Tan.portation Phasln; Plan and th. .doptad Alr Quality
Z.prov..ent Plan .nd Watar Con..rvation Plan for Rancho d.1 R.y
~m. ~
Prior ~o final .ap approv.l for .ny ph... OJ" unlt ther.of, th. '"
developer aha~l enter into .n .vr....nt wi1;b ~a Ci~y whereby:
, .
.. ~e dev.loper avree. th.t ~he Cl~y .ayvitbhold bu1141n;
peral~. for .ny unl~. in tha aUbject aubdlv1alon if any on.
of t:h. tollowinV occur.:
.
.
;
,
J
...
.2.
.3.
.c.
2.. .e;lonal d.veloplll.n~ ~e.hold lbllt. aet by the then
current .dopted ...t Chula Vl.ta ~anaporution
. Pha.1nv Plan hava bean r.ached.
2. !T.ffic vol_.., level of .ervice, public utilitie.
.nd/or aervice. .xcead the t:hre.hold aundard. in th.
th.n .ff.ctive GrOvt.b Kenav_ant Ordinance.
It. ft. d.veloper .;r... that th. City ..y withhold occupancy
peralt. for .nr of the pba... of dev.10p1llan~ idan~lfl.4 In
t:h. PUblic Pac 11 ti.. Pinanclnv Plan (PFDl for aancho del
.ey SPA :ElI if t:ha required publio f.cilit .., ..
identifi.d in tha PI'D or a. ..endad by t:ha Annual
IIonl~orin9 ~ovr" bava not beeJ? ooapl.t.d.
hior to approval of .ach final ..p, th. d.veloper aball a;r..
to not pro~..t th. foraation of a dl.ulct for the ..lntan.nce
of land.caped ..dlan. and partway. alOftv auaat. withln .nd I""""\.
.djao.nt ~o t:h. aubject property. . ~ )
..101-
~
//~/r
.
1
-I
.
t
-.
,
!
.1. ~lor to .pproval of each final ..p, the d.v.loper .h.n .nter
iat:o an .,r....nt with the City Vb.rein b. bold. the City
Iuunal... for any liability for .ro.ion, ailtation or incr....d
flow of drainag. raaulting from thi. proj.ct.
.,. ft. d.v.loper aha11 ent.r Into an .gr....nt with the City
Deruy t:b. d.v.loper agr... to participat. In the .onitoring of
exlating and future a.wag. "flow. In the !'al.,r.pb Canyon 1'runk
hver and t:b. financin, of t:b. pr.paraUon Of the aa.in 'lan
and. purauant to any .dopt.d aa81n .lan, .gr.. to particip.t. In
'th. fiDanc1ng of _rov...nt. a.t forth t:b.reln, in an .quitabl.
aanner. add .'JZ'....nt aha11 _ .x.cut.d by t:b. d.veloper prior
~o final ..p .pproval for .ny pha.. or unit propo81n, to
lI1ac:barg. a.wag. Into the !'al.graph Canyon t'runk "wer.
" "
.7. ft. d.v.loper ahall perait .11 franchi..d cabl. televl.lon
o~anl.. (-Cabl. Coapany-) equal opportunity to plac. conduit
~o .nd provide cabl. t.l.vi.lon .ervic. for .ach lot within the
aUbdivi.ion. ~. d.veloper .hall .nt.r Into .n .gr....nt with
.11 partlclpatln, Cabl. Coapani.. whicb ahall provid., In part,
t:bat upon recdvin, written noUc. fro. the City that .aid Cabl.
eo.pany 1. In violation of the t.raa and conditione of the
fr.nchi.. ,rant.d to add Cabl. Coapany, or .ny other t.rm. .nd
ooncUtion. r.,ulaUng .dd Cabl. CoIIIpany in the City of Chula
Vi.ta, .. .... .ay fro. ti.. to ti.. _ ...nd.d, d.valoper .ball
auap.nd Cable CoIIIpany'. .co... to aaid oonduit until City
otb.rwia. noUn.. d.velop.r. add .gr....nt ahall _ .pprov.d
~ t:b. City Attorn.y prior to final ..p .pproval.
.,. ~. d.veloper ,hall utllh. the ....0 bncbero oorridor for
oon.truction traffic unl... oth.rwi.. .pprov_d"by the City
Engin..r. A con.truction traffic plan abal1 _ aubaitt.d for
r.vl.w .nd .pproval prior" to-.'pprov"~....Rf ."tb.:..ur.t:..Iinal "P-U.
1..uanc. of . 9ra~Un, permit, which.ver oCC\ll'. fir.t. 'lh. plan
nall Includ. proviaione for du.t oontrol and atat. bour. of
oper.Uon. bvJ.aion. to add pl.n ah.ll _ .pproved by the City
angineer. "
~.../P.VII."t..
.1.
fte aubj.~ property Is within the Mundari.. of Open 'Pac.
>>J.atrict 120 (Ion. 7), Open apace Di.trl~ 110 (Pha.. II) .nd
AIa......nt DJ.atrl~ 187-1. hior to I1nal ..p .pproval or other
WZ'.nt of .pprov.l for any pha.. or unit t:bereof, t:b. d.v.loper
eball pay .11 ooata ...ocl.ted wltha
.) ..tacbaant of aubje~ property froa Open apa. Diatri~ 110
('ba.. %X), and
It) "appoRl_ant of ........nt. for Open apace Dl.trlct 120
(Ion. 7) and Aa...aent Dlstrlct 187-1 .. ". renlt of
auW1vblon of land. within t:be po:t.ct Munday.
.,0.
fte d.v.loper ahall paya
.as- ~ )/-/;
~ 1.~
8Prlng Valley Sewer ~nk connection fee. ($130/acre) prior
~o final .ep approval for anr pha.e or unit tileraof _,
oonulbutlng flow ~o tile Spr ng Valley 'trunk aewer. "
'l'elegraph Canyon drainage ~ee. In accordance with OrcunanO
:1314. .
'1. .AD ~aea aIlall be vaived or .odified a. prov1delS in tile e40ptad
hbllc racl11tle. Pinancing Plan for bncho del aey. aCT te..
and PIP ~e.. ahall be paid In accordarice with tile applicabl.
..gul.~lon.~fteludi~a ~h. du~v ~c eav ~h. ~... t" .ff.et .~ ~h.
SSm. ~h. ttutdi1UI e.rmiota are t~.';.d. PAD f... ahall be
9'luanteed tmtU auch ~1De a. tile City vaive. aaid f....
.
i
.~
,
a.
1>>.
JIS._f!atta"Ae.u.
'2.
u.
,c.
.
fte I>>oundary of 1:I1e aubdividon aIlall be ~i.1S ~o 1:11. California
ay.taa - aon. VI (U83).
klor ~ final aap approval for any unit, 1:11. developer .hall
aubmit a copy of aai4 final .ap In e digital foraat .uch a.
(DXF) vraphic fUe. 'J'hb COIIIputer Aided Dadgn (CAD) copy of
1:11. final ..p ahall ba ba..1S on accurat. coordinat. ,.ometry
calCUlation. and ahall ba aubmltted on 1 1/2 HD floppy di.k
prior ~ Z'acordaUon of tile final .ap.
fte developer .ay fUe a .a.ter final aap which provide. for tile
aale of auper I>>lock lot. corre.ponding to tile unit. and pha.lng~
or oombination of unit. anlS phadng 1:I1ereof, ahown on the .
~entative .ap. ".. .
%f aaid auper I>>lock lot. do not ahow lnlSlv4dual lot. deplcte4 on
1:I1e approved ~entaUve ..p, a aub.e;uent final .ap ahall be
filed for any lot which will ba further aubdivide4.
fte City Engineer .ay conlSiUon approval of nch a final ..p to
Z'equire nece..ary plan. to provide lnfra.tructure nece..ary tqp
.eet City ~e.hold pOlicie. and ~o confora ~o tile approved
~blic pacilitie. Financing Plan. All auper I>>lock lots createlS
ahal1 have acce.. ~o a delSicatelS public atreet..
aond. in 1:I1e aaount. detarained I>>y tile City Engineer uall ba
po.ted prior u approval of a ...ter final aap. .a1d ...ter
flnal .ap ahall not ba DOl:UlicSerecS .the ~lr.t final ..p a.
bdicated in other oondiUon. of approval 1ID1e...'.!tid .P.P
!!on~~ ~ingle ,~ "u1:~ip~~. ~~~~)'._l,~. ~own ..o~. ~~e~~t1ve
~.
~-.. ..8UI....ft~.
.
'1. fte developU. ahall OOIIplr with ail nlevant hderal, state anlS
z,ocal Z'agulaUons, includ ng tile Clean Water Act. fte developer
ahall be n.pons~l. for providing all Z'a;yirad b.Ung and' ~
dOCUllen1:aUon u duonstrate aaid OOIIIpllance a. Z'e;uirelS I>>y the 1
City Engineer. -.
~
~ ~J)-dLO
~
.
"
.
. '71.
,.
~ t
-
7'.
.
.
(
.
..
'-
'lb. ..valoper .all comply wlth all .ppUca~l. ..ctions of the
Cbula Vi.ta Munlclpal C04. as th.y axlst at the tlm. of ls.uanc.
of ~a buildlng permlt. Pr.paraUon of the flnal .ap an4 all
plan. .hall be In .ccordanc. wlth the provislons of the
aubdlvl.lon Map Act .n4 the Clty of Chula Vista Sub4lvlslon Map
Act an4 ~. City of Chula Vista SWldl vision Ordlna.,caa and .
aWldlvi.ion Manual.
~llcant shall ClClIIply with, rualn in coapUance with, .nd
bpl..ant, tha .tarms, oon41Uona .nd provia1ons of the S.cUonal
.lannln; Araa Plan, .nd .uch Watar ConaervaUon Plan, the All'
OUallty Plan .nd the Publlc Facilitles Financln; Plan .pproved
~ ~e COUncil (.Plans-) .s .re .ppUoa~le to ~e property whlch
i. th. .B~ect attar of this TentaUv. Map, pdor to .pproval
of th. Final "51, or .hall bav. antar.4 into .n .;r....nt wlth
the City, providing the City with .uch .ecurity (lnclu41n;
racordation of ClOv.nants running with the 1an4) .nd
bpl..entation proc.4ura. a. the Clty ..y r.quire, .ssurin;
~atl .fter .pproval of th. Flnal Map, the Applicant .hall
ClOnt nue to coaply Wlth, rualn In oompUance with, .nd
bpl..ent .uch Plan.. pav.lo~.r shall acr.. ~o vaiv. anv elaim
tha~ ~h. .~ce~ieft ef a ~in.l W.~.r eOft..rv.~ion Plan or Aft
Ou.li~v Plan ecn.ti~u~.. an iftero~.r .ub..au.n~ imeoaition of
th. eOJ'ldi'tion.
7hat . oopy of thi. resolutlon be transmltte4 to the owner. of the
property.
.ASSED AND APPROVED BY 'tHE CITY COUNCIL OF 'tHE OITY OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 11th day of July, UU, by the.followlng vote, to-
wit: .<. .
AYES :
.OES:
alENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
~a.nt.d by
.
Sebert A. t;ilt.r
I>>ir.~r of .lannln;
- ...
A."f'
.. .- ~-reC
~ J//J-}
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
~
Thursday, July 18, 1991
4:39 p.m.
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
CALLED TO ORDER
I CALL THE ROLL.
PRESENT:
Councilmembers Grasser Horton, Moore, Rindone.
ABSENT:
Councilman Malcolm (attending Coastal Commission Hearing) and Mayor Nader
ALSO PRESENT:
John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce Boogaard, City Attorney; and Berlin Bosworth,
Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency
BUSINESS
Mayor Pro Temp Moore explained that Mayor Nader had possibly dislocated his sboulder and was at the Clinic but
was expected to return. Mayor Pro Temp Moore, in reviewing tbe Agenda and Addendum to Agenda for those
present, noted tbat several items called for 4/Sths vote. As only three Councilmembers were present, he called a
brief recess at 4:46 p.m.
The members reconvened as the Redevelopment Agency and met in closed session at 4:47 p.m.
Mayor Pro Temp Moore reconvened the City Council meeting at S:OS p.m.
.........
2. PUBLIC HEARING PCS-90.(l2: REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 404.9 ACRES KNOWN AS
RANCHO DEL REY SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA m, CHULA VISTA TRACT NmffiER 90-02
LOCATED BETWEEN EAST "H" STREET AND TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, IMMEDIATELY
SOUTH OF RANCHO DEL REY SPA I; RANCHO DEL REY PARTNERSHIP - The public hearing on this
matter was continued from the meeting of July 9, 1991 to allow for notification of additional residents within the
vicinity of tbe proposed project. The City Attorney's Office bas revised the draft resolution to reflect changes in
the tentative map conditions whicb were voted on by the Council prior to taking action to continue the hearing.
Staff recommends approval of tbe resolution. (Director of Planning)
RESOLUTION 16266 APPROVING THE TENTATIVE SUBDMSION MAP FOR RANCHO DEL REY
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) m, CHULA VISTA TRACT 90-02
City Allomey Boogaard informed the Council that he advised Councilwoman Gra8!'er Horton that there may be a
potential contlict of interest due to stock ownership in a joint venture partner with the developer
Mayor Pro Temp Moore asked and received consensus to continue the public hearing on Item 2 (PCS-90-02:
Request to subdivide 404.9 acres"known as Rancbo Del Rey Sectional Planning Area III, Chula Vista Tract Number
90-01 located between East "H" Street and Telegraph Canyon Road, immediately south of Rancho Del Rey SPA
I; Rancho Del Rey Partnership) to Tuesday, July 30, 1991 at 6:00 p.m.
7. RESOLUTION 16258 APPROPRIATING FUNDS AND DIRECTING STAFF TO ENTER INTO
AN AGREEMENT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS OF PARCEL 618.152.16 (1070.1072 FIITH
A VENUE) FOR DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ADJACENT TO THE FlITH A VENUE STREET
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FROM "L" STREET TO NAPLES STREET - The property owners of 1070-107'1
Fifth Avenue are requesting in accordance witb the City's drainage policy for lateral channels tbat the City
~ J/~;2:2-.
e'
e
e
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
IlemZ
.,-1"1 Date,/18/91
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hurina: PCS-90-02: Request to subdivide "0.409 ICIU known as
aancbo del !ley SectionaJ PJannina Ana m. Cbula Vista Tract No. 9G-02
located between East wHo SIreet and TI1epapb Canyon Road, flll"lediately
lOuth of Jtancbo del ley SPA Ii )tIncbp del !ley ~p ./
~;!'~lr~' _-d-.7/w/erl
Jtesoluti 11# . the tentatrve subdivision map for Rancbo
del Rey SPA
Director of PJannin~~
~ .
City Manaaer b ths Vote: Yes _ No.xJ
1tJB1ou1 u.D BY:
Jt.EVIEWED BY:
'Ibe public bearina on this matter was continued from tile meetlna of July 9, 1991, to allow for
DOtific:ation of additional residents within the vicinity of tile proposed project. Copies of the
oriainal Aaenda Statement and attachments arc available. 'Jbe City AqDmey'l office bas reviSed
Ibe draft resolution to reflect cbanaes in the tentative map conditions which were voted on by
Ibe City Council prior 10 takina action to continue the bearina. ,.
IlECOMMENDAnON:
Based on the Findinas and Conditions in the attacbed draft City Council Jteso1ution, approve the
_wive ,ubdivision map for Rancbo del Rey SPA m.
I1SCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
'--21
./
.
.
~
-. ~-
))';2]
,
"
0....
N <t: \ ...
0 ~ , S(
I .....J J"' ;
0 <t:
Z \ i
OJ l.L..
,..,
'"
. 0:::
0 W Vd
~ I-
~ Z (j)
CD I ~ ~
<t: .
~ ~ .
~ I- 8ft~
I- u ~
"- CO) tJ i
- <( 0 5 ~~~
CD ~ <t: -.I -.I g!i::;
- 0....
I I- (j) 01"
..-
'"
X <( >-
w w
I- 0:::
(f)
- .....J '.
> w
0
<( 0
--.J I .
~ U r
I z "
<t:
U 0:::
DATE'
11/10/94
DRAWN BY'
L.M.C.
1'-.:lSf/-Zb . .
. W.O. NO. EY-311
TITLE: CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 92-02
RANCHO DEL REY SPA III. MASTER FINAL MAP
. {
Gj.
<(
Cl.
U)
~
>-
W
0:::
-l
W
O~
02
~
I ~
-l U SoL'"
U <(::
ZZ
<( -f-
0::: LL m
Z 0::: I
_ Wx
f-W
oU)
0:::<(
W2
I
U
Z
<(
0:::
o
W
(f)
<(
Cl.
i~
~~ E~ ~~
Ii
,n ~i
N lf~ v~
..--- ~a ~ 10
0 z~ ~ ~
I- ~= S~
~
a
~ fIl . = i
~ 9~
~
LZ ~
i 8~
~
~- -- 6~
I ft4 //---;2
r-r)
\
I
I
I'.
I-
a
-1
..---
I-
a
-1
---
Cl z
o
~ 80
,roo i51:!
'-' w Q.
W o~
I .....u
--' 0<
lrW
wID
.....
.....0
0....
DATE, TITLE'
11/10/94 ACCEPTANCE OF A PORTION OF PASEO RANCHEROCi'~
Dlt~~.~~' IN RANCHO DEL REY. SPA III MASTER FINAL MAP "
..
.
.
.
'G .,. hA-IoLi b
COUNCIL INFORMATION MEMORANDUM
DATE:
November 11, 1994
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City cou(f.~L
John Goss, City Manage~6' b~/
Bob Leiter, Director of Planning ~t AI/
John Lippitt, Director of Public work~r
Staff response to concerns of Claudia Diamond of
Villa Palmera Homeowners Association (HOA)
regarding proposed Rancho del Rey (RdR) SPA III
i~provements (Council Referral No. 2921)
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
At the City Council meeting of August 23, 1994, a written
communication from Claudia Diamond raised several concerns
regarding proposed improvements associated with RdR III as they
relate to Paseo Ranchero and the existing Villa palmera project for
which Ms. Diamond serves as the President of the HOA. Villa
palmera consists of 76 condominiums at the northwest corner of
paseo Ranchero and East "J" Street, and is surrounded by property
to be developed with the RdR SPA III Community.
In response to Council direction, staff met with Ms. Diamond and
another representative of the Villa Palmera HOA on September 23,
1994. Ms. Diamond followed-up that meeting with a letter to staff
on September 28th, and staff responded to Ms. Diamond's remaining
concerns in the attached letter dated November 4, 1994. Ms.
Diamond's concerns involve (1) the lack of noticing on the RdR III
project, (2) equestrian use of the proposed recreation pathway
fronting Villa Palmera, (3) the speed limit proposed on paseo
Ranchero, (4) noise impacts from paseo Ranchero, and (5) RdR III
construction activities as they may affect Villa palmera residents.
As detailed in the attached letter:
1. city records indicate that notices of the RdR III SPA and
Tentative Map hearings were mailed to all Villa Palmera
homeowners and the management company for the HOAj
2.
The recreation pathway/sidewalk in front of the Villa Palmera
project, which is required to be widened from 5 1/2 to 8 feet,
is not intended to accommodate equestrian activity and could
not be used for this purpose according to local ordinancej
yr /1~29
G1~
....
Memo Council Referral No. 2929
"""
3. The speed limit will be posted on Paseo Ranchero after the
street is complete and studies have been undertaken to
determine the appropriate limit based on safe operating
conditions and state law; Villa palmera homeowners will be
noticed and given an opportunity for input when the studies
and speed limit are considered by the Safety commission;
4. The environmental documentation shows that according to the
accepted standard, the Villa Palmera residents will not be
significantly impacted by traffic noise from paseo Ranchero;
and
5. McMillin must comply with all City and State regulations
regarding grading and construction activities, and also will
post signs at entrances to Villa Palmera reading "No Rancho
del Rey Construction Traffic Permitted". City Staff has
provided Ms. Diamond with information regarding applicable
City regulations, and the names of contact persons on City
staff who oversee compliance with these regulations.
Council also asked staff to determine whether the current
specifications for Paseo Ranchero were the same as those in effect
when Villa Palmera was developed.
The road classification for Paseo Ranchero when Villa Palmera
(Mission Verde) was developed in 1988-89 was a Collector Street.
When the General Plan was updated in 1989, the streets were defined
differently. Paseo Ranchero became a Class I Collector at that
time. Along with the change in name there were slight changes in
design criteria. Following is a comparison of the design standards
for paseo Ranchero at the time Villa palmera was developed and
current standards. ADT is the average daily trips.
~
VILLA PALERMA CURRENT
DESIGN (ADT) 10,000-20,000 22,000
DESIGN SPEED 40 MPH 45MPH
NO. TRAVEL LANES 4 4
NO. PARKING LANES 2 2
MEDIAN WIDTH 0 4-10 FEET
CURB TO CURB DISTANCE 64 FEET 68-74 FEET
MAXIMUM GRADE 10% 8%
MINIMUM CURVE RADII 300-500 FEET 700-1100 FEET """
~ ///3v
..
.
.
.
Memo Council Referral No. 2929
The actual ADT which the roadway can carry depends upon the number
of possible side interferences (driveways) that occur on the
roadway. The fewer the number of driveways, the more traffic the
street will carry. In this case the number of driveways is small
so the road as designated prior to 1989 and currently is not
significantly different. The center median indicated under our
current design criteria provides an added measure of safety but
adds little to the carrying capacity of the roadway. The segment
of paseo Ranchero adjacent to the Villa Palmera project was
designed to meet the 40 MPH design speed. That will not change
when the road is completed by ~he developer of RdR SPA III.
Ms. Diamond has been noticed of Council consideration of the RdR
III Master Final Map, which is scheduled for November 22, 1994.
Attachments
Letter with attachments to Claudia Diamond dated November 4, 1994.
e'\wp51\lupe\MEMRDR.III
N J/~J/ //1-32-
"'
'A ~/
,
.
.
.
~Vt.-
......
~~
cmOF
CHUIA VISTA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
November 4, 1994
Claudia Diamond
President, Villa Palmera Homeowner. A..ociation
539 Telegraph Canyon Road, Ste. 145
Chula Vi.ta, CA 91910
Dear Ms. Diamond:
Following are responses to the items listed in your letter of
September 28, 1994 (attached hereto):
The copies of the mailing label. contained in our files for
the Rancho del Rey (RdR) III Sectional Planning Area Plan
(peM-90-06) and Tentative Subdivision Map (PCS-90-02) reflect
that notices were .ailed to all of the Villa Palmera
homeowners and the .anagement company for the HOA at least 10
days prior to each of the public hearing. a..ociated with each
phase of the project. I would be glad to review the.e records
with you in detail at your convenience.
Since the City does not u.e certified or regi.tered ..il for
public hearing notices, we have no direct information
confirming that the notice. were received, only that they were
.ailed. However, we were not .ade aware of any irregularities
in the noticing procedure. during the bearing proce.s, wbich
.ometimes occur. if there i. a problem with ..il delivery.
2. The 8-10 ft. wide sidewalk/recreational pathway called for in
Tentative Map Re.olution 16222, attached bereto, is intended
as a pede.trian trail/pathway to accommodate pede.trian. only,
i.e., walker. and joggers. The pre.ent propo.al to expand the
sidewalk fronting Villa pal.era from the standard 5.5 ft.
width to an 8 ft. width b intended to facilitate the trail in
a aanner whicb i. not di.ruptive to Villa Palaera re.ident..
1.
A. stated previou.ly, the trail/sidewalk is not intended to
accommodate aque.trian u.e, nor could a .idewalk be used for
thie purpo.e. s.ction 10.28.050 of the Chula Vieta lIIlnicipal
Cod. prohibit. the u.. of .idewalk. for bor.e. (pl.... .ee
attached CVMC 10.28.050). According to the Police Departaent,
bor.e. cannot be probibited from u.ing public .tre.t. in
accordanc. with California Vehicle Code Section 21050, al.o
attached bereto. But again, there ie no intention to
d..ignate, encourage or facilitate eque.trian u.e of pa..o
Ranchero.
~
//- }J
00
~
It is our understanding that you were going to .eet with the
Villa Palmera homeowners regarding the proposal to widen the
sidewalk by 2.5 ft. and get back to us with their reaction and
further discussions if necessary.
3. With respect to the issue of speed limits, school posting and
road protection, please see the attached .emos from Harold
Rosenberg, City Traffic Engineer, dated October 20, 1994, and
from William Ullrich, Senior Civil Engineer, dated October 25,
1994.
It was previously stated that Paseo Ranchero would be posted
for a speed limit of 35 M.P.H. for an interim period prior to
completion of the street and the necessary studies to
establish a permanent speed limit consistent with State law
and safe operating conditions. After further review, the City
Traffic Engineer reports that the most appropriate posting
based upon roadway design would appear to be 40 M.P.H. and
that it would be inadvisable to post any speed limit now which
might have to be increased at a later date based upon detail
studies.
The City Traffic Engineer should be contacted regarding posted ~
speed limits or any other issue related to traffic control.
The City Traffic Engineer will also assume the responsibility
for notifying Villa Palmera homeowners as well as the
management company for the HOA, regarding any proposal to
establish or change the posted speed limit along Paseo
Ranchero.
4. The Environmental Review Coordinator, Mr. Doug Reid, will be
glad to review with you in detail the applicable Environmental
Impact Reports for the RdR III Sectional Planning Area Plan
(EIR-89-l0) and the General Plan Update (EIR-88-02); the
latter document being the one which reviews the potential
noise impacts from the City'S .ajor and collector street
network. Mr. Reid can be contacted at 691-5104.
As noted, the latest documentation on traffic noise tapacts
comes from EIR-88-2. This document shows that the 65 CNEL
(Community Nobe Level Equivalent) contour, which 18 the
acceptable standard for exterior residential noise levels,
falls 39 ft from the centerline of Paseo Ranchero. Since the
right-of-way for paseo Ranchero is 94 ft., the 65 CNEL would
occur within the right-of-way, some 35 ft. from the bomes
within Villa Palmera which front upon Paseo Ranchero. The
figures indicate that these bome. fall within the 60 CNEL
contour, which i. 5 CNEL below the acceptable level.
~
~)I-3'Y
.
5.
.
.
Furthermore, the residential .etback. and cODllllunity walls
proposed for the RdR III hoae. which will beck onto the .ast
.ide of pa.eo Ranchero were not required for noise
attenuation. As noted above, the 65 CNEL contour fall. within
the Paseo Ranchero right-of-way, and thus the properti.. on
either .ide of the .treet do not require extraordinary
measures to attenuate exterior noi.e level..
Please .ee the attached letter froa Mr. 'thoa Fuller, Vice
Pre.ident for McMillin Project Service., r.garding their
intention. with respect to construction .ctiviti.. in .nd
.round Villa Palmera. A. noted in Mr. Full.r'. l.tt.r,
construction activities will be governed by City Ordinances
and State laws regulating excavation .nd grading activitie.,
a .uDllllary of which are listed on the Land Developaent Permit.
This permit also includes a certification that the applicant
has read and will comply with said ordinances and laws (pl.ase
see attached for a copy of the permit).
Mr. Fuller has further .tated in his l.tter that McMillin will
direct their contractors to avoid any incidental u.e of Villa
Palaera streets, and will post a .ign at each of the two
project entrances reading "No Rancho del R.y Con.truction
Traffic Permitted". The Inspection Section of the Engineering
Division at 422-0636, or Ms. Constance Byraa of McMillin at
477-4117, may be contacted regarding any violations or
concerns related to construction traffic or activiti.s in and
around Villa Palaera.
You requested information relative to when the final map will be
before city Council for approval and what .re the final map
conditions. The developer i. processing what i. known a. . "Master
Final Map" (MFM) which creates large lots requiring further
.ubdivision (super-block parcels). Resolution 16222 contains the
conditions of approval which must be met before final map approval.
Not all conditions of approval are required to be met with .ach
final map. Soae conditions only pertain to .pecific ar.a. within
the t.ntative map area.
The MFM will be the fint map to 90 before City council for
.pproval. Condition 74 of R..olution 16222 .ddr....d this aap .nd
indicate. the intent of the City r.lativ. to what va. nece..ary
prior to finaling a MFM. 'th. City Engineer b.. r.quir.d plan. .nd
surety for all of the backbone str.ets in ord.r to .s.ur. acc...
and utilities to .11 of the lot. being created. 'the MFM doe. not
includ. any individual lot. therefor. .aid aap i. not consider.d
the fir.t final aap a. indiact.d in soa. condition. of .pproval.
'the MFM i. t.ntativ.ly .cheduled for noveaber 22,1"4.
Sub.equent final aap. for the .uper-block parc.l. created by the
MFM are curr.ntly in proce.. and .re .xpected to be con.idered by
the City Council in mid-Deceaber or early January.
~ /1<J5'
q~ '
""""
The Master Final Map is tentatively scheduled for City Council
consideration on November 22, 1994. The Villa Palmera homeowners,
HOAmanagement company and anyone else requesting notification will
receive notice of this and any subsequent RdR III final map.
SG:mw
cc: sid Morris, Assistant City Manager
Bob Leiter, Director of Planning
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works
Jess Valenzula, Director of Parks' Recreation
Cliff Swanson, City Engineer
Bill Ullrich, Senior Civil Engineer
Hal Rosenberg, City Traffic Engineer
Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator
Curtis Management Company, 10455 Sorrento Valley road, Ste.
102, San Diego, CA 92121, Attn: Christine Olivas
Villa Palmera Homeowners Association, c/o 539 Telegraph Canyon
Road, Ste. 145, Chula Vista, CA 91910
Thom Fuller, Vice-Present McMillin Company, 2727 Hoover
Avenue, National City, CA 91950
Constance Byram, Community Relations, McMillin Company, 2727
Hoover Avenue, National City, CA 91950
'""'
Attachments
Letter from Claudia Diamond dated September 28, 1994.
(~E Pt.EI/I E)l)S'
RdR III Tentative Subdivision Map Resolution No. 16222 ErU'B'~~
Copy of CVMC 10.28.050.
Copy of California Vehicle Code Section 21050.
Memo from Harold Rosenberg, City Traffic Engineer, dated October
20, 1994.
""'"
~//-3?
.
.
.
Memo from william Ullrich, Senior civil Engineer, dated October 25,
1994.
Letter from Thom FUller, McMillin Company, dated October 21, 1994.
Copy of Land Development Permit Application.
..~\plennl",\claudl..DI.
~ /1-;17
10D
-....
A DMSION OF CC4 R PROPERTYINYESTMEIorI'S,INC.
539 TcJeJl'lph Canyo. Rd. S1e.' 145 Cbula Vial&, C.... 91910
Office: (619) 421..121 Fu: (619)-421.5628
TO: Steve Griffin, Principal Planner
Planning Department
276 Fourth Ave.
Chura Vista, CA. 91910
September 28, 1994
Dear Steve.
I'm glad I had the opportunity to meet with you and the other gentlemen on
September 23, 1994. It's nice to be able to attach names to faces.
While the meeting was somewhat productive, there are still issues which
remain undiscussed and/or unresolved. I will use my letter to Mr. Nader
and the City Council dated August 23. 1994 for the following format.
,. The City may have copies of addresses In a book, however, that supplies
no proof that the residents were notified.
"'"'"
2. The City insists that an equestrian trail was never planned through the
area, however, it is so stated In Resolution 16222, Condition 12 that the
developer shall be responsible for construction of an expanded 8.10' wide
sidewalk/recreational pathway along the west side of Paseo Ranchero to
connect the trail aystems in the south leg of Rice Canyon and In the
Telegraph Canyon Rd. open space area. . Condition 30 of the same Resolu.
tlon refers to the sign program identifying the trail network In the open
apace areas and connecting along Pa..o Ranchero and Condition 31 refers
to the equestrian type fencing. Clearly the Intention Is for horaes to
travel through this area.
Per our meeting (and your memo dated September 23, 1894), the City Is
proposing expanding the existing aldewalk by 2.5' which would enlarge It
to 8'. Per the City's 'Street Design Standard Policy', 8' wide aldewalks
are constructed along 4 Lane and 6 Lane Major 8treets In commercial
areas, not in residential areas. Infact, the aidewalk designation for a
'Class I Collector Street' Is 5.5', which Is the existing condition along "'"'"
Pasto Ranchero. (See Condition 14. C. of Resolution 16222).
At the meeting we also discussed City Health Codes with regards to
~ )/~;rr
e
horses, but no one In attendance knew what they were. ,"What.,e the
".alth codes with regards to hor.es; I.e., proximity to nonpublic resi-
denc.s and the disposal of excrement?
Also with regards to horses, does the city have any ordinances
, prohibiting hor.es from using concrete sidewalks that are designated as
f recreational pathways? At the meeting on September 23, we determined
that the City will not designate or promote the sidewalks on the western
side of Paseo Ranchero, (along Villa Palmera) as an equestrian trail. twill
f there be signs posted indicating 'no horses'? Will the ho....s be allowed
, to travel on or adjacent to Paseo Ranchero?
3. As we discussed at the meeting, and as Is addressed In your memo to
me dated September 23, 1994, the City will post Paseo Ranchero at 35
MPH, rather than the 'Collector I ' minimum designation of 45 MPH. Once
construction of Paseo Ranchero Is completed between E. OH" St. and Tele.
graph Canyon Rd., a speed study will be conducted to determine the appro-
priate speed limit for the entire length. tNhich department should the
a Board of Directors of Villa Palmera contact at the City and how will the
. City notify the Board of Directors of Villa Palmera and Its residents
regarding any changes to the 35 MPH? A McMillan representative just this
week, Indicated to me that the section from Telegraph Canyon Rd. north to
the oJ" St. area must be posted at 35 MPH due to the topography of the
land.
Discussion ensued regarding the entrance to the proposed schools along
E. oJ" St. and the associated speed. Whether the main entrances to the
.chools are located on E. oJo St. or not, speed along Paseo Ranchero In the
vicinity of the schools cannot be .afely posted "r.ater than 25 MPH. To do
10 would be negligence on the part of the City. For example, the entrance
to the Hazel Goes Cook School Is on Cuyamaca Ave. and yet the posted
speed limit along oL. St. in the vicinity of the school II 25 MPH. The
entire expanse has a fence and the posted apHd limit before and beyond
the school Is 35 MPH.
\ Protecting the ..Istlng down elope residents In the VIla Palmera Com-
,"x along PaHO Ranchero from out of control vehlclal, hoodlum. or users
of the recreational trail/expanded sidewalk II 81111 an unanswered
~ concern. n also remains a concern how the City plans 10 protect Clrculo
e I Verde (the private road) from public aco....
4. I was told that EIRs wert don. for both sid.. of PaHO Ranchero and
that infact the noise levels fall within the acceptable range of IS dB-A.
.l;vt\ //- 3'J
101
The front entrances of the Villa Palmera homes face Paseo Ranchero and .........
are in some areas within 30 feet of Paseo Ranchero. Along the east side
of Paseo Ranchero (where the McMillan houses are proposed) the homes
will be at least 50 feet from the road, with the backyards facing Paseo
Ranchero. Additionally, walls are proposed, which further protect the
homes from noise. It Is pretty obvious that the existing Villa Palmera
",omes will suffer much more from noise pOllution than the proposed
, McMillan homes! When asked to see a copy of the EIRs, we were told that
\ the documentation was too thickl .
5. With regardS to the upcoming construction, removal of the pump
station was discussed at length. The City will Inform Villa Palmera when
the pump station area will return to the homeowners. McMillan will be
removing the pump station and they will so Inform us when this will
occur. As of this date, McMillan feels that the removal will not occur for
about one year. The Board of Villa Palmera Is currently surveying the
community to see how they would like to see the area (once the pump is
removed) redesignated. The results will be provided to McMillan.
I was told by McMillan that there are standards with regards to noise, dirt .........
and construction traffic during construction. We need a copy of these
standards. I was also told that contruction trucks and traffic will be on
Paseo Ranchero and East oJ." St. in the direct vicinity of Villa Palmera.
McMillan is aware that construction vehicles are unable to turn around on
Paseo Ranchero and E. oJo St. as it currently exists.: I have been told that
should vehicles pass through the development, we can contact the City
Mitigation Monitor, Marilyn Ponsengi and/or Constance Byram of McMillan.
Can McMillan provide a written Guarantee that this will not occur? As
per my missive dated August 23, 1994, the City and McMillan are aware
that our private road was recently resurfaced. 'A Iett.r from McMillan
". Guaranteeing repair If damage occurs needs to also be provided. ' Villa
t Palm.ra also requires a written Guarantee that dirt moving .111 Hlse If
\..wlnd Is In excess Of the reasonable atandards.
I Lastly, what are the final map conditions? When Is II going to CIty Coun-
t. ell? We request a copy before It goes to CIty Council for the ~roval.
I n.ed documentation to take to the home owners which answer the ques-
tions presented to Mr. Nader and the City Council on August 23, 1894, IS .........
w.II as those Gen.rated from our meeting of September 23, 1994.
~J//'I(J
.
, have been advised by our Management Company that an correspondence
and proposed changes to existing conditions ( such as the expansion of the
existing sidewalk along Paseo Ranchero and alteration to the sidewalk,
landscaping and stairs along East "J" SI.) must be reviewed by our legal
council prior to any commencement of work. Once reviewed and
advisement is received by the Board of Directors of Villa Palmera, the
homeowners must then vote on any proposed alterations, additions or any
construction which will affect them. 'Therefore, any end all documenta.
tlon by The City and McMillan must be forwarded to:
\ Curtis Management Co.
" 10455 Sorrento Valley Rd. Ste.102
San Diego, CA. 82121
Atln: Christine Olivas
and copies sent to: Villa Palmer a Home Owners Assoc.
clo 539 Telegraph Canyon Rd. Ste. 145
Chula Vista, CA. 91910
. Thanking you in advance and looking forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
~tA lhf!4fhpf/
ClaudilPfJ) Diamond RN, BA. MPH
President, Wla Palmera Home Owners Assoc.
President, COlA Property InveStments, Inc.
. cc:
Mayor Tim Nader and City Council of Chula Vista
Constance Byram of McMillan
Christine Olivas of Curtis Management Co.
~ ~/-y/
J ~
/ ') .
c.
.
10.28.040 Commercial fthicIeI prohibited oa priftre WlIYS-Eueption.
.-,
No penon shall operate or drive a commercial vehicle in, on or across any private driveway approach
or sidewalk area or the driveway itself without the consent of the owner or occupant of the property, if a
sign or markings are in place indicaring that the use of such driveway is prohibited. For the purpose of Ihis
seclion, a commercial vehicle shall mean a vehicle having a raled capacity in excess of one.half Ion. (Ord.
97311 (Part), 1966; prior code 519.8.4'.
10.21.050 1ticIiq<< drmaa 0II1MWwa1U probibired wbea.
No penon shall ride, drive, propel or cause to be propelled any vehicle or animal across or upon any
sidewalk excepring over permanently COlUlI'\lCled driveways and excepting when it is necessary for any
temporary purpose to drive a loaded vehicle across a sidewalk: provided further, that said area be
substantially protected by wooden planks two inches thick, and written permission be previously obtained
from the city engineer. Such wooden planks shall not be permitted to remain upon such sidewalk area
during the hours from six p.m. to six a.m. (Ord. 973 51 (pan), 1966; prior code 119.8.5).
10.28.060 Limited access roadways-Unauthorized eDtnDCel or ailS prolu'bited.
No person shall drive a vehicle onto or from any limiled access roadway or freeway excepI at such
entrances and exits as are lawfully established. (Ord. 973 51 (pan), 1966; prior code 519.8.8).
10.28.070 Freeway lilt restrictiolll.
No penon shall drive or operate any bicycle, motor.driven cycle, or any vehicle which is not drawn
"1 a motor vehicle upon any Streel established as a freeway as defined by Slale law, nor shall any pedestrian
walk across or along any such streel so designated and described except in space sel aside for the use of
pedestrians, provided official signs are in place giving notice of such resllictions. (Authorized by Section
21960 Vehicle Code). (Ord. 973 51 (pan), 1966; prior code 519.8.9).
~
10.28.080 Blockina iotenect:ioas prolu'bited. .
No operalor of any vehicle shall enter any intenection or a marked crosswalk unless there is sulflcien!
space on the other side of the intersection or crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle he is operating without
obsll'\lcting the passage of other vehicles or pedestrians, notwithstanding any traffic control signal indication
to proceed. (Ord. 973 11 (part), 1966; prior code 119.8.11).
10.28.090 Toy fthicIe lilt IWlrictionI-Skareboanl defined.
A. It is unlawful for any penon to skate, or use or ride any roller skates, couter, skateboard, toy vehicle
or other similar device upon or over any public street, bridge, underpass, sidewalk space, sidewalk,
or public property within the business district of the city. Business district is dermed by the California
Vehicle Code as .that portion of a highway and the property contiguous therelo (a) upon one side of
which highway, for a disrance of 600 feet, SO percenl or more of the contiguous property fronting
thereon is occupied by building in use for business, or (b) upon both sides of which-tlighway,
collectively, for a distance of 300 feet, SO percent or more of the contiguous property fronting thereon
is so occupied. A business district may be longer than the distances specified in this IleCtion if the
above ralio of buildings in use for business to the length of the highway exists..
~//~VA)J}-~
654 (R 11/91)
~
,
IIll1QBAllIHllI
[1.......
.. I .~
,
~
October 20, 1994
File: PC-989
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
Stephen Griffin, Principal Planner
Cliff Swanson, Deputy Public Works DireCtor/City FzictnNJl!iI
Harold ROSenbergf'1<:!m~glneer ""P
SUBJECT:
Proposed Speed Limit on Paseo Ranchero
Subsequent to our discussion in the meeting held to consider the impact of the
development along Paseo Ranchero, we have reviewed the roadway desllTl speed in the
area of Paseo Ranchero and East "J" Street. Based on the roadway design, it appears
that the most appropriate speed for posting would be 40 M.P.H. However, our standard
procedures are to not post a limit until after the road is opened to traffic and a
speed sUrvey can be completed. Once that is completed, all factors which affect the
establishing of the speed limit on Paseo Ranchero wl11 be considered and the most
appropriate speed limit wl11 then be established and posted. The California speed trap
law requires Engineering/Traffic Survey be performed to determine what the most
appropriate speed limit Is for prevailing conditions.
An EngineerlnglTrafflc Survey takes into account design characteristics of the roadway
including design geometries such as vertical and horizontal curves, accident rates,
special conditions such as schools, parks and other factors, and most importantly, the
85th percentile speed. California Law bases the posting of speed limits on the
assumption that motorists on the roadway wl11 drive at or below a apeed that they
feel to be safe and appropriate for roadway conditions. We do not believe it is
advisable to post a lower limit now that might bave to be increased later.
A lower posted speed limit than that determined by the FziClneerlnglTrafflc Survey, is
considered a "Speed Trap" is therefore Dot legally enforceable by the Pollee
Department and is not defensible in the courts. An artificially low speed limit can aiso
pose a real problem In maintaining . lafe operation of the Itreet. 10 the
Fzi&lneerlnclTrafflc Survey, unusual conditions are considered to be roadway conditions
that are not readily apparent to the motorists and are taken into account wben
eatablisblng the most appropriate apeed limit.
The City will install the nece"11!')' acbool lip for the proposed ElementarY School
lite at the interaectlon of East "J" Street and Pueo Ranchero once constrUCtion for
the acbool nears completion. At that time, we will be postln& the tIPPl'opriate "School"
leJ'ies lip (Speed Limit / 25 M.P.H. I When Children Are Preaent) in advance of the
acbool boundaries facing northbound andaouthbound traffic. In order to be effective,
the overall apeed limit also aeeds to be posted.
I hope this information will belp you reaolve any questions reprdln& thia llaue. If you
bave any queatlon about this information or any other traffic related matters, please
feel free to call me at 691-5237.
~ //-L/t-/
(Ca~'IIllC)
.
.
.
,Ob
v.ll
""'-641-
MSlON 11. BULESOFTBEROAD
Department
21000. Wbereftr in thia
DepartllleDt of the Ca1ifornia
IIcope of DM./on
21001. The proviaiOnl ofthia dm
of~c1.. upon the hichwaya, WlIeu e
to.
.
Article 2. Effect of
IIIdItIfI or DrIvinI of Anilul
21060. Ewry penon ridiDc or driviDc an
af the rlIhtl and i. IUbjeet to all of the dutie.
fthicle by W. di\'!aion and Di\'!aiOD 10 (
-.pt thole proviaiODl wbich by their -,- aa CUI ba
-- Ch. 471.lI&all. 1111. m_ -.,.-....10. 118.
-- Cb.18lI. SI&ca. 1117, DlOliw Mo. ...... 7.
TroI.Y Coeche. ..
21061. The foUowiDc actioDIepply to
(e) SectiODll800, 4000, 4001, 4002, .4006,4009,4150.4151.
4153, 4155, 4166. 4158, 4166, 4300 to 4309. . uai.... 4460 to 4454. iIlIcl
4457.4458,4469,4460, 4600 to 4610,' uaive, 4750, 47111.411&0.
4862.4853,5000,11200 to 11206. iDduaive, .6062, 6601.!I2U. ud 4000
with ~ to 4000, n1a~to ori8iDal nanal of~OD.
(II) SectiODl 9250, 92611, 9400. 1W06. 07. lN08, 9lI5O,llIilI2,llIilI3,llIilI4.
IlOO to 1809. iDduai.... 14901. 42230 to 4I2U. iDduai.... II!IatmI to
ftI!atratioD and other feaa. .'.:". ", .~.. . ." .
(e) SectiODI2800, 10851. 108l12, 1 .10001 to 10009, iIlIcl......21OU.
11063,210114, 21450 to 21457. iDduaive. l"l.l1ll1O. 21661.21668, 21669.
21700.21701, 21702. 21703. 21709, 2 12, 21750. 217l18. 217114. 217M.
21100, 21101, 21102. 21806, 218l5O. 2 1. 12101, 12107. 12108, 12109.
228lIO. 22351, 22352.12400.12450 too . iIlIcllllllft,1I101.III04,1I110.
111112, 231l18, 40831. 42002 wiCh .-,.c:t to 101112 ud 10ll113. ud C2OO4.
"'~1 ~'::s;:~'lI8'107. udll8'101. nIat:bar to ~:itJ ;":~"" . '. .' .
(I) e.ctlou 1'7301. 17l102. 17808. 21"l.lIlOOO. 111100.111101, 111101.
111101. 111111. 1lIlIlIO. 1lIlIlI1. 111750. 1117111. I117l18. 40000.1 tD 4OOOO.IlI.
iIlIcluai.... 40001. 40003, ud 42031. nIat:bar to tbe.... -.~. ud1-M.
alfthiclM. . , .
__Cb.m......Im.......~I,_ .. .........
-- Cb. 114...... JIlL --..~ 1.'" .
-- Cb. ............ --"'-'-11. -'._tl._~
"""'/c omc... MtJ impq.... 0" .
21012. 'DIa JIIlI9iIiaaa 01 thia llIIlIa app"-loI.o to .. cImws or wbicIeI
IIpCIIl tbe biPw.,. 8JIP!7 to tbe clmwsolall..."....- wIIiJe ..-"'" ill tbe
- 0I_p1~ by thia S&at.a. UI7 patiticaI nbdi..... ~ D7
IDllDielpaI -.-.tiCll1, or D7 diatrict, iIlIcl~ aa&boriaad - .-:'
~!e!..l~ to thoae pOl_ .....w 8lIch r~~ ~... ..".
_""__ft."',,'_
\
.
October 25, 1994
File: PC-989
nOlI:
IUBJBCT :
Stephen Griffin, Principal Planner
Clifford L. Swanson, Deputy Director of Public
City Bngineer
William A. Ullrich, Senior Civil Bngineer~~
Response to Claudia Diamond, Villa Palmera HOA
w#
'l'O :
VIA:
This is in response to a portion of items 3 and 5 of Ms. Diamond's
letter dated September 28.1994. The majority of Bngineering's
response to item 3 was contained in a previous memo from Hal
Rosenberg. The response to item 5 will be relative to Bngineering
aspects only.
ITEM 3
.
Relative to protecting Villa Palmera residents from out of control
vehicles.
.
Only the northerly portion of Paseo Ranchero adjacent to the
Villa palmera has a curve. That curve has a centerline radius
of 2010 feet. The remainder of the street is straight.
Staff considers this segment of paseo Ranchero a location
where there is a low potential for a vehicle running off the
road. The 2010 foot radius curve at the northern segment of
paseo Ranchero adjacent to Villa Palmera can accommodate a
speed of 55 miles per hour (MPH) comfortably (State Highway
Manual Fig. 203.2). Since the speed limit will be 35-40 MPH,
the curve will not create circumstances which would lead to
vehicles leaving the road. The nearest unit is approximately
30 feet from the curb. The possibility of a vehicle leaving
the roadway and striking a building is considered extremely
low because of the road alignment and geometries.
The CALTRANS Traffic Manual indicates that guardrails may be
necessary on the outside of curves having a radius of 1000
feet or less. Since the curve radius is 2010 feet, guardrails
are not warranted based upon the curve radius. The 1II&Dual also
indicates that . guardrail is more .evere to bit than going
over a slope when the height of . 2 to 1 .lope is 12 feet or
lower and when there is a high potential for cars running off
the road. Placement of a guardrail in this location would be
more hazardous to the occupants of the vehicle than going over
the bank because the maximum height of 2 to 1 slope within
Villa Palmera is approximately 8 feet.
~ ;1- t/~
Ibl'---
Stephen Griffin
2
Villa palmera
"'""
How is the City going to protect the private road Circulo Verde
from public use?
The City does not attempt to keep the public from using
private streets other than to have the drives indicated as
private. Private streets are not as wide as public streets
and therefore give the appearance that use is limited to
residents of the area. Use of such streets by the general
public is usually by those visiting homeowners who live in the
complex. Occasionally, someone might get lost and
accidentally use such a street, but that situation should be
very limited.
I believe that this question is directed at the short term
construction traffic which might be required to turn around or
might travel through the private road in lieu of turning
around before paseo Ranchero is connected to Bast "H" Street.
If this problem develops during construction, the homeowners
should contact the developer and the City. City personnel
would then attempt to control that type of activity through
the developer and contractor. The only City control over this
type of activity would be to shut down construction until the
activity ceased.
Staff does not anticipate this to be a major problem in that ~
the road will not take long to get a rough street through to
East "H" Street. Consequently, there should be little or no
need or desire to use that private street.
ITEM 5
The master final map is anticipated to be before Council in mid-
November. That final map will create super block type lots that
will require a future final map to develop the parcels. This being
the case, the majority of the conditions of approval do not apply
to the master final map. Condition number 74 of the tentative map
addresses this master map. The only requirement for this map was
to provide plans and surety for the backbone streets which provide
access to the parcels being created.
The developer has also been processing other maps which are
anticipated to be before Council in mid-December or early January.
.,_~._\_n'.\V1"""'''''.lWl
"""'\
~//---y~
.
.
.
October 21, 1994
rl'~ -: .-
. . .
Mr. Steve Griffin, Principal Planner
City ofChula VlSta
P!aMins Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula VIStA, California 91910
Subject:
RespoDse to Claudia DiamoDd's CODceras
Your MemoraDdum or October 10, 1994
Dear Steve:
As you requested in your memo, we are responding to Item 5 of a letter to you from
Claudia Diamond, D.iamond Consulting Group, relaying her concerns u a MighOOr to our
Rancho Del Rey SPA m project.
The first paragraph of Item 5 describes our discussions regarding the removal of the
temporary sewage pumping station which serves the VI11a Palmera project. Rancho Del
Rey is required, as a condition of approval of the Tentative Map for SPA m. to remove
the sewage pumping station from service. City staff bas asked us to contact the VUla
Palmera Home Owners Association to determine if the Associltion wishes to have the
concrete slab and surrounding wall demolished and removed or left ..is wben the station
is removed. Once the station is removed, the City will quitclaim its ea"""". The
Association owns the underlying fee ownership.
Our current schedule for the gravity sewer which will make poSSlDle the removal of the
station shows completion in the fourth quarter of 1995. It is conceivable that the work
will Dot be completed until mid.I996.
The second paragraph ofltem 5 diseusses .I"dards for BOise, dirt and coastruction traffic
during construction. We have told Ms. Diamond that we will be Sovwoed by the land
development aenera1 conditions of our land development permit. A bIaDk copy of an
Application for Land Development Permit is eDC10sed for WormatiOD. Tbe paera1
conditions are printed on the reverse aide of tile Application.
With regarda to COIIItNCtiOll traffic, our project is conditioned to UIC the PlIeD bncI-o
corridor aoutherly from East "II" Street u the primary COIIIUUdion at celf. We have been
clear iD dilC'lIPOD with Ms. Diamond that &lOIIItNdioa trdic wiD Deed to UII PlIeD
1lInchero and East -J- Street beeft',.. portions of our ploject are 0D1y ~T"'" throuah
UII of those 1UeetS. Other than for work uaoci-ted with the nmova1 of the I8WIF
pumpina station, there is DO reuon for project 00IIItNCti0D traffic to UII the Villa Palmera
private streetS.
cb
~/!/~/?
. /'
Iff!
We will include direction to the contractors at each pre-construction meeting to avoid any
incidental use of the Villa Palmera private streets. We will post a sign at each of the two
entrances to Villa Palmera reading "No Rancho Del R.ey Construction Traflic Permitted".
The City-directedMitigation Monitor, Marilyn Ponsegi will be monitoring construction
traffic access as part of the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program. Constance Byram,
from our Community Relations Department will be available to addreu complaints.
We believe we understand Ms. Diamond's concerns. We also believe that her concems are
best dealt with through the existing City ordinances and permit pnI ~ses, iDcluding
Construction Inspection and the Mitigation Monitoring Program. Rancho Del R.ey will
comply with City ordinances, permit conditions. inspection procedures and monitoring
programs.
........
,
If you require additional information, Steve, please do not hesitate to call me at 477-4170.
extension 443
Very Truly Yours,
Rancho Del Rey Investors. LP.
~~~
Thom Fuller
Vice President, McMillin Project Services, Inc.
~
ce. McMillin Project Services, Inc.
Ken Baumgartner
Craig Fukuyama
Constance Byram
Ken Screeton
""'"
ill ~~11-51-
.
&.UID _NT
__IIIJ-u. .c.CIIDmONI
THE OWNER. "'S PERMITTEE. IS RESPONSIBLE FOR "'LL THE FOLLOWING REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE WORK IS
DONE BY HIM. HIS ENGINEER. OR HIS CONTR"'CTOR.
"'Olll &UTM_ZlD:
ISSU...NCE OF ... LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CONSTITUTES AUTHORIZATION TO DO ONLY THAT WORK WHICH
IS SPECIFIED "'ND "'PPROVED BY SUCH PERMIT.
T'1I1 LIMITS.
THE PERMITTEE SH"'LL COMPLETE ALL OF THE WORK DESCRIBED WITHIN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT SPECIFIED IN SUCH PERMIT IF NO TIME LIMIT IS SPECIFIED. WORK SHALL BE COMPLETED
WITHIN 110 D"'YS ...FTER THE D"'TE OF ISSU...NCE OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
IF THE PERMITTEE IS UN"'BLE TO COMPLETE THE WORK WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME. HE SHALL PRIOR TO
EXPIR& TION OF THE PERMIT. PRESENT'" WRiTTEN REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME SETTING FORTH THE
RE"'SONS FOR SUCH REQUEST
ITDII.. D......GI ...IC..UTIONS
DURING THE PROGRESS OF LAND DEVELOPMENT OPERATIONS THE PERMITTEE SHALL TAKE "'LL SAf'ETY
PRECAUTIONS REASONABLY NECESSARY TO PROTECT ADJ"'CENT PROPERTY FROM DAMAGE DUE TO EROSION.
FLOODING. SILTING OR OTHER STORM RELATED HAZARDS WHICH "'RE'" CONSEQUENCE OF HIS OPERATION.
DUIT CDNTIIOL.
THE PERMITTEE SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE DUST CONTROL MEASURES.IY WATERING OR OTHER MEANS
ACCEPT ABLE TO THE CITY ENGINEER DUST CONTROL MEASURES SHALL IE APPLIED AT THE CUT SITE. THE FILL
.. SITE AND/OR MATERIAL IN TRANSIT AS M"'Y BE NECESSARY
-'11
THE PERMITTEE SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 17.24.050 OF THE CITY CODE WHICH
LIMITS THE GENERATION OF NOISE BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 10:00 P.M. AND 7:00 ....M.
IlIPONIIIILm Of ""..,TTll.""OTICTION Of UTILITlII:
DURING LAND DEVELOPMENT OPERATIONS THE PERMITTEE SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PREVENTION OF
DAMAGE TO ANY PUBLIC UTILITIES OR SERVICES. THIS RESPONSIBILITY APPLIES TO THE SITE OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT "'ND ALONG ANY ROUTES OF TRAVEL OF ANY EQUIPMENT PERFORMING THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT
IIIPO"""L'TT Of PIII...TTlI.""DTlCTlON Of _CINT _TT:
NOTWITHSTANDING MINIMUM STAND"'RDS SET FORTH IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE OR THE
CONDITIONS OR ISSUANCE OF A LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ISSUED THEREUNDER. THE PERMITTEE IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PREVENTION OF D"'MAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY AND SH"'LL NOT EXC"'VA TE ON LAND
SO CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE"'S TO END"'NGER ANY ADJOINING PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY WITHOUT
SUPPORTING AND PROTECTING SUCH PROPERTY FROM SETTLING. CRACKING. OR OTHER DAMAGE WHICH
MIGHT RESULT
IlDD.IC&_ Of _OftD PLANI:
ALL MODI FICA TIONS OF "'N APPROVED LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN MUST R IN WRITING AND 8E APPROVED BY
THE CITY ENGINEER.
CDIlPLlTlON Of _II_T__ _ .....,.. --:
THE PERMITTEE SHALL NOTIFY THE CITY ENGINEER WHEN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT OPERATION IS READY FOR
FIN...L INSPECTION FINAL APPROVAL SHALL NOT R GIVIN UNTIL ALL WORK INCLUDING INSTALLATION OF "'LL
DR...INAGE STRUCTURES AND F...CILITIES. AND ALL PROTECTIVE DEVICES HAVE BEEN COMPLETED "'ND ANY
REQUIRED PLANTING EST ABLlSHED. AND ANY REQUIRED CERTIFICATIONS. ......UIL T PLANS. AND/OR REPORTS
_HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED THE CITY ENGINEER MAY. U1"ON REQUEST. ClATIFY THE COMPLETION OF WORK IN
"'CCORD WITH THE PERMIT ISSUED PURSU"'NT TO THE LAND OEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE.
ILO'Na "Mil': .
THE ROUGH GRAD'NG PHASE OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT WORK DESCRIBED ON FORM PW-E-'oe I SHALL IE
CO~IPLE.ED BEFORE A BUILDING PERMIT CAN IE ISSUED.
~ I/--Vj
~
--
~ .-
tHE OWNER. AS PEIIlMITTEE. tS.....-or r-ILE trOf' AU. ".. FOU.C 'DIQ -.G4.....~ OF....".,. THE WONt IS
DONE IT HI". HIS ENGINEEII. Ofl HIS ~.
tID......~ ,.
ISSUANCE OF A LAND DfV'EL.OPMENT""'" ~" ,1II'Ii ~ ,-.- TODD ONL Y,..,....,..WtICH
IS SPECI',ED AND _\lED IY *JCH _IT. ... .
- .....
THE P'lAUlifEE IHAU. COMPLEtt AU. OF THE WOM OU7llMD wme. tHE t.NCI DEVIUWUBfT .....IT
WITHIN THE T_ ""IT _CIFlED.. IUCH-.T. "NOv.EUMlTI8~. WOIIUHAU..COlIlPUTED
WITHIN 180 DAYS AFTEII TME DATI OF _ "'ICE OF TME I.AHD 1lEVEL-.n ......IT
" THE PlII"mu IS _E TD COMPLnt TME WOIIK _ TME __lIED v.E. .. ~ "'_ TO
E.~IRATION OF THE ""..IT 'MaNT A ~IIEOUUT _AN ___ OF v.E 8ETT..o_TME
llEASONS 'Ofl SUCH 1lE0\JEST .
..... ........ ....CMmCIII&.
DUlliNG THE ~OGIIESS OF I.AHD DEVELOPMENT _TlONS TME _ITTIE ~ TME lW. -.v
~ECAUTIONSllEASONAlLTNECE5SAIITTO",OTlCT _ ____I , __GEOUETOEIlOSION.
FLOODING. SILTING 011 OTHEII STOflM IlELATlD HAZAIIOS _'0M AIlE A _OUlNCE OF HISOPE....TION.
DUlT COWTIlOi..
THE ~EIIMITTEE SHALL ~OV1DE ADEOUATE DuST CClHTIIOl. ItIEASUIIES II'f ."TEIIING Of! OTHEII _5
ACCE'T AILE TO THE CITY ENGINEER DUST CONTllOL ..EA5UllES SKAU.8EAPPl.IEDATTME CUTIITI. THE FILL
SITE AND/OR MATERIAL IN TRANSIT AS....'.. NECE5SARY
-..
THE PEIIMITTEE SHALL CONFOIIM TO THE IlEOUIIIE..ENTS OF SECTION ".1<_ OF THE CITY CODE _'CH
LIMITS THE GENERATION OF NOISE 8E'TWEEN THE. HOl.MS OF '0:00 P.M. AND 1:00 A....
.., C ...1,.," Of' ~...-mI"OTlI:TlOtrt 0lI' ""'-"N'
DUlliNG LAND DEVELOPMENT ~EIIATIONS THE PE....'TTEE SHlW.lIE_IILE 'OATHE ",EVENTION 0'
DAMAGE TO ANT PUBLIC UTILITIES 011 SEIIVICES THIS _'IILITY A""-'ES TO THE SITE OF THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT AND aLONG "NT "OUTES OF TIlAVEL OF lIMY _ _~ THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT
.. II ......,.,... ....-na~................-n;
NOTWITHSTANOlfllG MINIMUM STAHOAIlmS lET ,0fItTH IN THE LAND DlVlLOIIMENT D-C.ll.&NCE ()IIII: THE
COND'TIONS 011 ISSUANCE OF A LAND DEVELll"tOENT PE....IT IISUEll THEIIE_. TME _"ITTEE IS
IIESPONSISLE '011 THE PREVENTION OF D.......OE TO All./"CENT ""Of'tll''f _1HALl. NOTEXCAVATE ON LAND
SO CLOSE TO THE PIIOPEIITY LINE AS TO END....OEII ANT All./OINING _LIC Of! ",IVATE ~WlTHOUT
SUPPOIITING AND PROTECTING SUCH _IITY _ IETTUHG. CliActtING, Ofl 01HIIl D.....IIE _ICH
MIGHT RESULT
-'""'\
....ICATIOtI 01' ....OWlD ~
ALL MODIFICATIONS OF" AN A~ LANDDEVEL~ IlLAHMUST. "WIIIITWlIGAND.J.rfIfl.eW'IDIV
'THE CITy ENGINEER
~___.fIO-nn:.aTlOlll_~,,-:
THE PEIIMITTEE SHALL NOTIFY THE CITY _..__ TME LANliOlVELllPMENT ~TION IS ....DY'OII
"NAL INSPECTION FINAL "~II0VaL~NOT.CIIVIN c..T1LlW. _K INCl.UDlNGNTo.uATlONOF AU.
OIIAINAGE STIIUCTUIIES AND '''CIL'TIES. AND aLL fIIIOTECTIVE llEVICIS HAVE lIEN CllItt1"-ETED ....D ANT
IIEOUIIIED PLANTING EST AlLISHED. AND ANY IIEOUIIIIID ClllTlFICATIONS.......,.L ~ PLANS. ANDIOlIIIIE~S
HAVE BEEN SUIMITTEO THE CITT ENGINlE" ....Y. U'ON MOUUT. ClllTIFY TME _ETION OF _ IN
ACCORD WI'TH THE "'''MIT 1I&l1O ~ TO THE J.NIC) DlVlLOI".-n OMHN4NCI.
~""'T
TMe "OUGH GIIIAOING .....ASE or: THE LAND DIVIL~WOIIIC [+v
CO"'PL.E~ED IEFOIlllE A aUILOIHG """'T CAN" 18SUID.
~L. ClN_PW+".~1E
. . .'
.'.."'"'
1--"::
;.
.'" ".~..
'. ,
"""'I
~_:
//~5V
~
,
\
", ..
. -.
.
.
.
CIT't' OJ Ct4ULA VlST...
DI'AIlITMlNT OF INGINEE'UNG
APPLICATION FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
NOTE A"'L leA TICIN MUST IE ACCOM'ANlED IY ClAADING ~ AND
ESTIJr./lAT( AOOITIONAl. .....TANT....TfNG DOCUMENTIIMY
IE. REQUIIIIED ",I~ TO VALIDATION Of' THI......11.
..~'IOM
~......... -......~
........1I.....-__ClI~,
D..e""''''''Dh.- 4..1 .~..~__
1IIClDI1Wt"",O__~.____"~
C ~'IlIIOu.IUl____'"
a .ftllCOl.M( ........."
-.-
....
IIlIlO"OIIO ~t1\A.' Of OI'IM'nOIII
""pIIIU~
"
-
.....' - """'................------'..
......~..._....----~--.
t"A""",._....'*I___.~___..--......
...cm__.,..".".._~...."""'",-,__
----~.....~_........... -----
....
........... Of......
~......"
-......
__n
.-j {- .--
-
-.....
1ftIIoIt'''*1
--...
'O"...~1OICl
.,.
....
LMIOICA"""Cl
_lGATIOtIl
tOt...u at'"
--
a,. ...
ate ...
-......-:
o =IIMATI~"::;;
.--
"U
....
-
-
~~c.""
..e.....'" ...
-.ttlOM'"
(
....... Of.CI T.:
. ...1AIl Of ........-.0
""""0 ...
. ........Of~l___
-..
..........",WIlIIn ~_
_1; _~
-
..-
-
---.
....
--...
..
-
...
.,..
-
-
'"'
I~:
a.....-cMII......, ..-0
D~.......n.tOCD
a. -""....~
D..,.......n__
-
"-" .-.-....-.-:
-..
....
--..
....
._-
....
41 I DPT.:
~ CIlIIIWhOMI............,. 0.
,......", ."......ClCIIemClIMIOtIl
--
8--.,....- --.-0
-'~"""'...-D
D -':...,.-.-cl
U C = n 1lU''D -"'~"'Wf:
....,... ~ ODI.IIIQ" "''''01 tIC
..".~..........,--
1IOl-,":
.....~ .
.....-- .
-~._.
-"-
-..
_q,-.u
-
-"'"'
--
-..
-.-g
~.,
...
...q.-.-
_......................_tUIII.
.......,,.oo...._~
---
..
....
...-r...... ....
.-,......-
__L4.-=
--
--....
--....
--....
--
--...,., --
- .....
",..,..- --
---
--
_ 1 JqA
-
,....-
-
--
-
-.
))-5/
'P-&5
Jf1B art OF c::rIVU JIIIJ'A PAltl'l_~ DU'BIDZN't
Statemat eIIdfaCloaure ellcutaIa ___ Ildtf..., ~ ,... ." Gr caspafp (I IIR..41au, _d..uen
wblc:h wm ~ dllcretlotwJ aeIIcm _.. part oldle at, ~. PfaDfq ~~.lIIId II DII2cr
".-" ~... Tbe fD1IowID& ~...... _lie III.." -.e.
. final map'
L LIlt ... ..."'.. cf d JlIOOIII .... . IP-'" ....... . .. . ..... at&IU1Ol'.
.Llt 1~6CICII'. _IloiW 1ippUer. .
Rancho Del Rei Inve~ L,PJ' A California L~ited Partnerphin
Owned by: Tr dent ~ite , an Arizona L1mitea-Partnership
McMil~in-RDR Inc. l California Corporation
.
2.
.
10.1-11-'94 FlU 16:22 ID:CI'TY IF QU.A VISTA TEL 1C1lCI'TY IF QU.A VISTA ~ Pe2
.
E KfU..b i-f E
I
,
If 11I1 pmcm ~dhd ~t to (1) a1MM II. _......_ ClI' ....".-..'\1. JIlt 6a -" ol all
lIldMdu GWJIiIDI .... ilia 1"" or tile .... III ilia apara1Iaa or ... all)' JlUIMII1IIp
...., II die ~Mp. .
N~ .
J.
If U1 penon Id&Dtlled pamIIDt 10 (1) a1xM II JIOD1IIc6 ~dcm ClI" ... JIM tbo -1IIC1
ollll1 pencm senfD& u dfrector ol tbo ......-......81 arr' Gr U trII1CO or _...." or
tnIIlOr at UIe tnaat. .
McMillin Family Trust
Macey L. McMillin Jr., Trustee
Vonnie L. McMillin, Trustee
...
H... JOU IIId more UIIn $250 wortb ell MisI.. tm-0IId wIGI all)' ..... or tbe Q)' lid,
8oarda, o,...lIIlu1ou, Qmmdt10u ad ~ wlUdD tbe put__ ~, Yu_
No ~ IfJUe pleae flldlcate pa'IOII(.): .
lleue ldendty eadl ad IftIJ paaan,1Dl:hIdID&., =1IIIpk..._a.llaIInltatI ClII' ~lIdeDt
eontraetorl who ~\J JIa\Ie IIIfped to I..... _lad ~ die a,.- ~.".
Ed Elliott . Ken Baum~artner .
Thom Fuller
Crab Fukuvama
"
6.
II..- '" IIIIUor J'CIUI' - I . GrIl'O'\ 1I........t.e- I6JlId.......1tODO to.
~ftltmbIr Ia 1IIe ~.1IIl ClII' prll CW "'" tllc:daD pedICI' Y. _ No...!. .,.,... wJdc:b
0,.--'-(.)
. .
. ='~~~:~---;;;-~.:~~~=- ...-~~T"; '''b.;:__;~'. ..~
...,........Jla..11l ~ ..........
eo-om: AaICIllddtdllllll...... 1IIII1 If)
J:Jat.: November 14. .1994
':';:'1i. ./ ~_.~ ~
olCOD~
,
)/-~L-r
Kenneth S. Baum~artner
.JIJtat Ill' .. __ 01 CODtraCllll'lapplaDt
_ . ....... u.os
..........9:..---- -w.ft
.
~\~ ))
A DIVISION OF C C & R PROPERTY INVESTMENTS, INC.
539 Telegraph Canyon Rd. Ste #145 Chula Vista, CA 91910
Office: (619) 421-4121 Fax: (619) 421-5628
E-Mail: Prodigy' wumk22a
November 22,1994
TO: Mayor Tim Nader and City Counsel of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Mayor,
The Community of Villa Palmera (which represents 76 single family homes) still has concerns which have not
been answered despite a meeting with The City and subsequent correspondence. The following are issues which need
to be addressed or require further attention.
1) Notice of hearing
With regards to the noticing process, paragraph II of correspondence dated November 4, 1994 sent to Villa
Palmera, mention was made that The City was not made aware of any irregularities in the noticing procedures during
the hearing process, which "sometimes occurs if there is a problem with mail delivety" It would be impossible to
inform The City of a lack of receipt if we are not aware that notices were sent. Since my presentation at the City
Council Meeting of August 23, 1994, I have had the opportunity to question many more home owners of Villa
Palmera as to whether they received notice; the answer is always in the negative.
2) Trail
The 8-10' sidewalk/recreation pathway called for in Resolution 16222 (Condition 12) calls for the pathway to
connect the trail systems in the south leg of Rice Canyon and in the Telegraph Canyon Rd. open space area. (I have
referred to this twice before). Again I refer you to Condition 30 of the same Resolution which refers to the sign
program identifying the trai1 network and Condition 31 which refers to equestrian type fencing. Yet The City
continually says that a horse trai1 has never been intended ?
Regarding horses and sidewalks, The City has provided CA. Vehicle Code 21050, however this refers to the
highway, not residential streets. Park Rule 2.66.100 refers to leaving or hitching horses and Park Rule 2.66.130 is
at the discretion of the Director of Parks and Recreation. The City has already stated that it eannot keep horses off
of the sidewalk. I have previously asked for evidence of Health Codes with regards to horses: i.e. proximity to non-
public residences and the disposal of exaement. Are there no health codes? Also unanswered, will horses be allowed
to travel on or adjacent to Paseo Ranchero and will signs be posted indicating that horses are not allowed in the area?
Lastly, I refer you to Paragraph II ofIssue II in my letter to Steve Griffin dated September 28, 1994. In part it
reads, per The City's 'Street Design Standatd Policy'. 8' wide sidewalks are constructed along 4 Lane and 6 Lane
Major Streets in commercial areas. not in residential areas. The sidewalk designation for a 'aass I Collector Street'
is 5.5', which is the existing condition along Paseo Ranchero. Per Condition 14 C of Resolution 16222, ' the
existing conditions shall remain' Eularging the sidewalk is therefore not an issue, as it is an existing condition
AND is not in a commercial area.
3) Safe Speed along Paseo Ranchero
At the meeting of September 23. it was agreed that Paseo Ranchero would be posted at 35 MPH, at least until
such time that the construction was completed between E. "II" St. and Telegraph Canyon Rd. At that time a speed
study would be conducted to determine the appropriate speed limit. Per correspondence from Harold Rosenberg, City
Traffic Engineer, dated October 20, 1994. the posted speed will be 40 MPH. Two points stand out in the city's de-
fense of the higher speed: 1) a lower posted speed limit may be considered a speed trap and 2) it is not believed to be
a good idea to post a lower limit now that might have to be increased later. What kind of convoluted thinking is
/'
j)/fl
III
this? It sounds like The City is giving in to pressure, rather than doing the right thing! Page I of The City of
Chula Vista 'Street Design Standards Policy', Paragraph II so states 'The street design standards establish uniform
policies and procedures to carry out the City's General Plan and Circulation Element. It is neither intended as, nor
does it establish, a legal safety standard for these functions" Who then, does take responsibility for determining
safe speeds?
McMillin has indicated that from Telegraph Canyon Rd. north to the E. "J" St. intersection, Paseo Ranchero
cannot be posted above 35 MPH due to the slope of the bill. Per Harold Rosenberg's memo dated October 20,
1994, in the area of the school (north and south), the speed limit will be posted at 25 MPH. That means in a
relatively short stretch of road, there will be THREE different posted speed limits! Going from 40 to 25 MPH is a
danger in and of itself. It seems that the safety and welfare of the cbildren is not a concern of The City How many
cbildren have to be injured or die for The City to wake up?
Exhibit D from Bob Leiter re: The City Council Meeting of November 22, 1994, includes a comparison of the
1988 designation to the current street standards of Paseo Ranchero. We were told at the meeting of September 23,
1994 that there would be NO parking along Paseo Ranchero, the comparison shows otherwise. Please clarify this
point.
4) A) Safety of Villa Palmera Homes/Residents
William Ullrich, The City's Senior Civil Engineer, response to the vebicle out of control issue is based on 35-
40 MPH parameters. This is the minimum posting speed. A vehicle traveling faster will result in a much different
outcome. When questioned about a guardrail, the consequences of a vebicle going over the rail seems of more im-
portance than the safety of the residents of the home and any resultant injuries.
B) Private Road Issue
The City's response to the concern that the private road rmming through Villa Palmera would not be traveled
by the general public seems very unlikely. "Private streets are not as wide as public streets and therefore give the ap-
pearance that use is limited to residents" Given the location of Circu10 Verde, it is likely that it will be viewed as a
short entto E. "J" St., especially when the school posting is in place. Charter Point, whose entrances are located on
Otay Lakes Rd. and Telegraph Canyon Rd. is an excellent example of a community whose streets are used for
shortcuts. This issue has been a concern of theirs for a long time. It seems reasonable that The City would post
'NO THOROUGHFARE' OR 'NO OUfIEf' signs for the residents of Villa Palmera.
William Ullrich has also indicated that The City would attempt to control construction traffic going through
Villa Palmera by shutting down construction until the activity ceased. What is the likelihood that The City would
proceed in this manner? Who, at The City would we contact?
5) Builder Issues
McMillin has posted both entrances to Villa Palmera with signs indicating that constuetion traffic should not
pass through. A letter has been requested from McMillin guaranteeing repair to Cireulo Verde if trucks do drive
through Villa Palmera and damage the newly resurfaced road. This certainly seems a reasonable request in light of
good community relations.
As recent as September, McMillin has guaranteed notification within 10 days of construction activities to the
Villa Palmera Homeowners. Recently earth moving activities commenced with no one in the community being
notified.
Steve Griffm, The City Principal Planner, has indicated that homeowners in Villa Palmera and the Home Owner
Association will receive notice of any subsequent RdR III fmal map considerations that go before The City Council.
To help ensure delivery to the current home owners, he can contact Curtis Management for the most recent list.
I look forward to a conclusion of the preceding issues.
~BA.
President, Villa era Homeowners Assoc.
President, CC&R Property Investments, Inc.
J)~.5~
\':~
ce: Steve Griffin, City of Chnla Vista (including 6 copies for his distribution)
McMillin, Constance Byram and Thorn Fnller
Curtis Management, Christine Olivas and Legal Counsel
Villa Palmera Board of Directors
/!-3?
"
}\ r,
I,
RESOLUTION NO. J ??J.. 9
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING AN IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF
DEDICATION FOR STREET PURPOSES OVER A PORTION
OF LOT A IN THE LADERA VILLAS SUBDIVISION MAP
12519
WHEREAS, the developer has dedicated or obtained all
right-of-way necessary to construct or widen the major streets
within the subdivision with the exception of a portion of Pas eo
Ranchero, which was previously offered for dedication as a public
street; and,
WHEREAS, this right-of-way, a portion of Lot A in the
Ladera Villas subdivision, was offered for dedication but rejected
on Final Map No. 12519; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with section 66477.2 of the
Subdivision Map, rejected offers of dedication remain open until
the city accepts or terminates and abandons the offers by Council
resolution; and
WHEREAS, the action before Council will accept this
irrevocable offer of dedication (IOD) in accordance with the
Subdivision Map Act thereby providing adequate right-of-way to
construct Paseo Ranchero in conformance with City standards; and
WHEREAS, the acceptance of the IOD is being requested at
this time because access to the development during construction is
limi ted to Paseo Ranchero and Ladera, consequently, the road
construction will be one of the first items of work.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby accepting an Irrevocable Offer of
Dedication for street purposes over a portion of Lot A in the
Ladera Villas Subdivision Map 12519.
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Bruce M.
Attorney
to forDY
Presented by
?red
Ij/}'/
I"'!
RESOLUTION NO. /77 J ()
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING CONDITION OF APPROVAL NO.
74 OF THE RANCHO DEL REY SPA III TENTATIVE MAP
TO CLARIFY WHEN PARK ACQUISITION AND
DEVELOPMENT FEES AND TELEGRAPH CANYON CHANNEL
DRAINAGE DIF ARE PAYABLE FOR THE SUPER BLOCK
LOTS
WHEREAS, Condition of Approval No. 74 of the Rancho del
Rey SPA III tentative map allowed the developer to file a master
final map (MFM) to create super block lots for the purpose of
selling said lots to guest builders; and
WHEREAS, subsequent final maps would be required to
create the lots shown on the approved tentative map and the
condition also provided that the MFM was not to be considered the
first final map referenced in other conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, however, Condi tion No. 74 did not indicate
whether the Telegraph Canyon Drainage DIF (TCDDIF) and Park
Acquisition and Development (PAD) fees were to be paid at the time
of approval of the MFM or upon approval of subsequent final maps;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment to Condition No. 74
clarifies that the TCDDIF and PAD fees are payable prior to
approval of the final maps which create individual lots as depicted
on the approved tentative map; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that Condition No. 74 be
amended to add the following:
"The Telegraph Canyon Drainage DIF and Park
Acquisition and Development fees applicable to the
property to be subdivided by the master final map
are due and payable prior to approval of subsequent
final map(s) filed over said property to create
individual lots as depicted on the Rancho del Rey
SPA III tentative map."
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby amend Condition of Approval No. 74
of the Rancho del Rey SPA III Tentative Map to clarify when Park
Acquisition and Development Fees and Telegraph: Canyon Channel
Drainage DIF are payable for the super block lots.
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Presented by
I/{J-I
/
1\ L)
RESOLUTION NO. 177 J I
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING MASTER FINAL MAP OF
CHULA VISTA TRACT 90-02, RANCHO DEL REY, SPA
III, MASTER FINAL MAP, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF
THE PUBLIC THE PUBLIC STREETS DEDICATED ON
SAID MAP, AND THE EASEMENTS GRANTED ON SAID
MAP WITHIN SAID SUBDIVISION, AND APPROVING
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE
COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY SAID
SUBDIVISION, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista hereby finds that that certain map survey
entitled Chula vista Tract 90-02 RANCHO DEL REY, SPA III, MASTER
FINAL MAP, and more particularly described as follows:
Being a subdivision of a portion of Quarter
Sections 36, 37, 41, 42, 62, 63, 64, 69 and 70
of Rancho De La Nacion, in the City of Chula
Vista, County of San Diego, State of
California, according to Map thereof No. 166
filed May 11, 1869, in the office of the
County Recorder of San Diego, including
therein Lots 'A' , 'B', 'D', 'E', and 'G' and
a portion of Paseo Marguerita of Casa Del Rey,
according to Map thereof No. 9125, filed
February 22, 1979, in the office of said
County Recorder.
Area: 407.821 acres
Numbered Lots: 16
No. of Lots: 16
Lettered Lots: 0
is made in the manner and form prescribed by law and conforms to
the surrounding surveys; and that said map and subdivision of land
shown thereon is hereby approved and accepted.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said Council hereby accepts
on behalf of the public the public streets, to-wit: portions of
Paseo Ranchero, East "J" Street, Paseo Ladera, Pas eo Entrada, and
Buena vista Way (as shown on the final map) and said streets are
hereby declared to be public streets and dedicated to the public
use.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED said Council hereby accepts on
behalf of the City of Chula vista the easements tendered with the
right of ingress and egress for construction and maintenance of
traffic control, drainage and sewer facilities and street tree
planting and maintenance, all as granted and shown on said map
lIe., I
) \b
within said subdivision, subject to the conditions set forth
thereon.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk of the City of
Chula vista be and she is hereby authorized and directed to endorse
upon said map the action of said Council; that said Council has
approved said subdivision map, those public streets set forth
therein, and that those certain easements with the right of ingress
and egress for the construction and maintenance of traffic control,
drainage and sewer facilities and street tree planting and
maintenance, as granted thereon and shown on said map within said
subdivision are accepted on behalf of the city of Chula vista as
hereinabove stated.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk be, and she is
hereby directed to transmit said map to the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors of the County of San Diego.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that that certain Subdivision
Improvement Agreement dated for the completion
of improvements in said subdivision, a copy of which is on file in
the office of the City Clerk as document number (to be
completed by the City Clerk in the final document).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the city of
Chula vista be, and he is hereby authorized and directed to execute
said agreement for and on behalf of the city Chula vi
~
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
as to
Presented by
Booga
C:\rs\RDRSPA3 f.p
2
lIe ,.2.
RECORDING REQUESTED BY, AND
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
City Clerk
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
270 Fourth Avenue
Chu1a Vista, CA 91910
No transfer tax is due as this is a conveyance to a
public agency of less than a fee interest for which no
cash consideration has been paid or received.
Declarant
For Recorder', UIe Only
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS SUBDMSION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and
entered into this day of , 1994, by and between RDR INVESTORS,
L.P., a California limited partnership, 2727 Hoover Avenue, National City, California 92050
("Subdivider"), and the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a California municipal corporation ("City")
with reference to the following facts:
A. The City Council of the City, on July 30, 1991, approved Resolution No. 16222
(the "Resolution"), approving a tentative map of Chu1a Vista Tract 90-02, a proposed subdivision
known as Rancho del Rey SPA ill (the "Subdivision"), subject to certain requirements and
conditions.
B. Condition No. 74 of the Resolution provides that Subdivider may file a master final
map, as more particularly described in the Resolution.
C. Subdivider is about to present to the City Council of the City, for approval and
recordation, a master final subdivision map (the "Master Final Map") of the Subdivision, pursuant
to the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, and in compliance with
the provisions of Title 18 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (the "Code") relating to the filing,
approval and recordation of final subdivision maps.
D. The Code provides that before a final subdivision map is finally approved by the
City Council of the City, a subdivider must have either installed and completed all of the public
improvements and land development work required by the Code to be installed in subdivisions
before final maps of subdivisions are approved by the City Council for the purpose of recording
in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, or, as an alternative, the subdivider
s"o..impr.Glr
11108/94
-1-/}C ~3
\ \~,
shall enter into an agreement with the City, secured by an approved improvement security to insure
the performance of the work pursuant to the requirements of Title 18 of the Code, agreeing to
install and complete, free of liens at Subdivider's own expense, all of the public improvements
and land development work required in the subdivision within a definite period of time prescribed
by the City Council.
E. Subdivider is willing in consideration of the approval and recordation of the Master
Final Map by the City Council, to enter into this Agreement which provides that Subdivider will
install and complete, at Subdivider's own expense, all of the public improvement work
("Improvement Work") required by the City in connection with the Master Final Map of the
Subdivision and will deliver to the City improvement securities described below as approved by
the City Attorney.
F. Complete plans and specifications for the construction, installation and completion
of the Improvement Work have been prepared and submitted to the City Engineer. The
Improvement Work consists of the following five separate public improvement projects (sometimes
referred to in this Agreement singularly as a "Project" or collectively as "Projects"):
1. City File No. PC-989 (paseo Ranchero, East H Street to Telegraph Canyon
Road) as shown on Drawing Nos. 94-48 through 94-59 inclusive, on me in the office of the City
Engineer ("Project PC-989");
2. City File No. PC-1023 (Corte de Cera Pump Station Removal) as shown
on Drawing Nos. 94-383 through 94-384 inclusive, on me in the office of the City Engineer
("Project PC-1023");
3. City File No. PC-990 (East J Street, East of Paseo Ranchero) as shown
on Drawing Nos. 94-196 through 94-201 inclusive, on me in the office of the City Engineer
("Project PC-990");
4. City File No. PC-991 (East J Street, Paseo !.adera to Paseo Ranchero) as
shown on Drawing Nos. 94-253 through 94-258 inclusive, on me in the office of the City Engineer
("Project PC-991 ");
5. City File No. PC-996 (Paseo Ladera, Paseo Entrada to East J Street) as
shown on Drawing Nos. 94-316 through 94-319 inclusive, on me in the office ()f the City Engineer
("Project PC-996"); and
6. City File No. EY-354 (Rancho del Rey SPA ill Outfall Sewer) as shown
on Drawing Nos. 91-573 through 91-582 inclusive, on me in the office of the City Engineer
("Project PC-1046").
G. An estimate of the cost of constructing the Projects according to the plans and
specifications has been submitted and approved by the City in the amount of $4,097,900.
nlb-impr.G,r
11I06/94
-2- lIe _ y
I !e]
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Subdivider, for itself and its successors in interest, an obligation the burden of which
encumbers and runs with the land, agrees to do and perform or cause to be done and performed,
at its own expense, without cost to the City, in a good and workmanlike manner, under the direction
and to the satisfaction and approval of the City Engineer, all of the Improvement Work required
to be done in connection with the Master Final Map in and adjoining the Subdivision, and will
furnish the necessary materials for the Improvement Work, all in strict conformity and in accordance
with the plans and specifications, which documents have been filed in the office of the City Engineer
and are incorporated by this reference in this Agreement.
2. All monuments have been or will be installed within thirty (30) days after the
completion and acceptance of the Improvement Work, and that Subdivider has installed or will
install temporary street name signs if permanent street name signs have not been installed.
3. Subdivider will cause all necessary materials to be furnished and all Improvement
Work required under the provisions of this Agreement to be done on or before the third anniversary
date of City Council approval of this Agreement.
4. Subdivider will perform the Improvement Work as set forth above, or that portion
of the Improvement Work serving any buildings or structures ready for occupancy in the
Subdivision, prior to the issuance of any certificate of clearance for utility connections for the
buildings or structures in the Subdivision, and such certificate shall not be issued until the City
Engineer has certified in writing the completion of the Improvement Work or the portion thereof
serving the buildings or structures approved by the City; provided, however, that the improvement
security shall not be required to cover the provisions of this paragraph.
5. In the performance of the Improvement Work, Subdivider will conform to and abide
by all of the provisions of the ordinances of the City and the laws of the State of California
applicable to such work.
6. Subdivider agrees to furnish and deliver to the City, simultaneously with the execution
of this Agreement, approved improvement securities in the sums specified below from a sufficient
surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City, which securities shall guarantee the
faithful performance of the respective Projects by Subdivider and are attached as Exhibits" A-I"
through ~:
(c)
(d)
Project PC-991:
$1,082,800
$ 24,500
$ 281,500
$ 210,950
Project PC-989:
(a)
(b)
Project PC-loo3:
Project PC-990:
Sllb-impr.al"
11108/94
-3-
Ile*S
o'JU
-'
(t)
Project PC-1046:
$ 80,600
$ 187,300
(e)
Project PC-996:
. 7. Subdivider agrees to furnish and deliver to the City, simultaneously with the execution
of this Agreement, approved improvement securities in the sums specified below from a sufficient
surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City, to secure the payment of material and
labor in connection with the installation of the respective Projects by Subdivider and are attached
as Exhibits "B-1" through ~:
(a) Project PC-989: $1,082,800
(b) Project PC-1023: $ 24,500
(c) Project PC-990: $ 281,500
(d) Project PC-991: $ 210,950
(e) Project PC-996: $ 80,600
(t) Project PC-1046: $ 187,300
8. Subdivider agrees to furnish and deliver to the City, simultaneously with the execution
of this Agreement, an approved improvement security from a sufficient surety, whose sufficiency
has been approved by the City in the sum of Forty-Nine Thousand Dollars ($49,000) to secure
the installation of monuments, which security is attached as Exhibit "C".
9. Subdivider has furnished and delivered to the City an approved improvement security
from a sufficient surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum of Seventy-
Seven Thousand Dollars ($77,000) to secure vernal pool mitigation and monitoring pursuant to
the "Final Vernal Pool Restoration Plan for Rancho Del Rey SPA ill, City of Chula Vista,
California" dated October 2, 1991, a copy of which security is attached as Exhibit "D".
10. Upon certification of completion of a Project (or Projects) by the City Engineer
and acceptance of the work by the City, and after certification by the Director of Finance that
all costs of the work are fully paid, the whole ainount of the improvement security for the Project
(or Projects), or any part thereof not required for payment of the costs of the work, shall be released
to Subdivider or its successors in interest, pursuant to the terms of the improvement security.
11. If the work on any Project (or Projects) is not completed within the time specified,
the sums provided by the improvement securities for the Project (or Projects) may be used by
the City for the completion of the Project (or Projects) in accordance with such specifications
contained or referred to in this Agreement. Subdivider agrees to pay to the City any shortfall
between the total costs incurred to perform the work, including design and administration of
llIb-lmpr.agr
11108/94
-4- lIe ~t
,1-1
construction (including a reasonable allocation for overhead) and any proceeds from the
improvement security.
12. In no case will the City, or any department, board or officer thereof, be liable for
any portion of the costs and expenses of the Improvement Work, nor shall any officer, his/her
sureties or bondspersons, be liable for the payment of any sum or sums for such work or any
materials furnished for the work, except to the limits established by the approved improvement
security in accordance with the requirements of the state Subdivision Map Act and the provisions
of Title 18 of the Code.
13. Any engineering costs (including plan checking, inspection, materials furnished
and other incidental expenses) incurred by the City in connection with the approval of the
Improvement Work, plans and installation of the Improvement Work, and the cost of any street
signs and street trees as required by the City and approved by the City Engineer, shall be paid
by Subdivider, and that Subdivider shall deposit with the City, prior to recordation of the Master
Final Map, a sum of money sufficient to cover such costs.
14. Until such time as all work on a Project is fully completed and accepted by the
City, Subdivider will be responsible for the care and maintenance of, and any damage to, the
Project improvements. It is further understood and agreed that Subdivider shall guarantee all
public improvements for a period of one (1) year from the date of final acceptance and correct
any and all defects or deficiencies arising during such period as a result of the act or omission
of Subdivider, its agents or employees, in the performance of this Agreement, and that upon
acceptance of the work by the City, Subdivider shall grant to the City, by appropriate conveyance,
the public improvements constructed pursuant to this Agreement; provided, however, that acceptance
by City shall not constitute a waiver of defects.
15. City, as indemnitee, or any officer or employee thereof, shall not be liable for any
injury to person or property occasioned by reason of the act or omission of Subdivider, its agents
or employees, related to this Agreement. Subdivider further agrees to protect and hold the City,
its officers and employees, harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability
or loss of any sort, because of or arising out of acts or omissions of Subdivider, it agents or
employees, related to this Agreement; provided, however, that the approved improvement security
shall not be required to cover the provisions of this paragraph. Such indemnification and agreement
to hold harmless shall extend to damages to adjacent or downstream properties or the taking of
property from owners of such adjacent or downstream properties as a result of the construction
of the Subdivision and the public improvements as provided in this Agreement:' It shall also extend
to damages resulting from diversion of waters, change in the volume of flow, modification of
the velocity of the water, erosion or siltation, or the modification of the point of discharge as
the result of the construction and maintenance of drainage systems. The approval of plans providing
for any or all of these conditions shall not constitute the assumption by City of any responsibility
for such damage or taking, nor shall the City, by such approval, be an insurer or surety for the
construction of the Subdivision pursuant to approved improvement plans. The provisions of this
paragraph shall become effective upon the execution of this Agreement and shall remain in full
force and effect for ten (10) years following acceptance by the City of the improvements.
..impr.GJ'
11108/94
-5- / / c - '1
'-2
\(,-
16. Subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its agents,
officers and employees, from any claim, action or proceeding against the City, or its agents, officers
or employees, to attack, set aside, void or annul an approval of the City, advisory agency, appeals
board or legislative body concerning a subdivider, which action is brought within the time period
provided for in 166499.37 of the California GoVERNMENT CODE.
17. The burden of the covenants contained in this Agreement is for the benefit of the
land owned by the City adjacent to the Subdivision. The burden touches and concerns the
Subdivision. It is the intent of the parties, and the parties agree, that this covenant shall be binding
upon, and run with, the ownership of the land which it burdens. The burden of this Agreement
shall be released from title, as to an individual lot or unit within the Subdivision upon the sale
of any lot improved with a residence. If requested by Subdivider, City shall execute a quitclaim
releasing the burden of this Agreement from the title to any such lots. If Subdivider assigns any
portion of the Subdivision subject to the burden of this Agreement, Subdivider shall have the right
to obtain a Telease of any of Subdivider's obligations under this Agreement, provided Subdivider
obtains the prior written consent of the City to any such release. City shall not withhold its consent
to any such request for a release so long as the assignee demonstrates, to the reasonable satisfaction
of the City, its ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement as it relates to the portion
of the Subdivision which is being acquired by the assignee..
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as
of the date set forth above.
RANCHO DEL REY INVESTORS, L.P.,
a California limited partnership
By: McMILLIN PROJECT SERVICES, INC.,
a California corporation, as Attorney-in-Fact
under Durable Power of Attorney
By
Its
By
Its
611b-impr.4&T
11/08/94
-6-
//c~ r
.,
/) ...)
\v
ATTEST
IMb-impr.."
11108/94
o ed as to.!h
City Attorney
CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
a Califom).a municipal corporation
By
Mayor of the City of Chula Vista
-7- lIe. 9/ /I e. -10
.., zJ
fy
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
)
) ss.
)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
On , 19_, before me,
Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared
,
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s)
whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they
executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s)
on the instrument, the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed
the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
(Seal)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
On , 19_, before me,
Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared
,
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s)
whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they
executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s)
on the instrument, the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed
the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
(Seal)
sllb-1mpr.qr
11108/94
-8-
/JC"'//)
LIST OF EXlUBITS
Exhibits "A":
Improvement Security:
Form:
Amount (Exhibit A-I):
Amount (Exhibit A-2):
Amount (Exhibit A-3):
Amount (Exhibit A-4):
Amount (Exhibit A-5):
Amount (Exhibit A-6):
Exhibits "B":
Improvement Security:
Form:
Amount (Exhibit B-1):
Amount (Exhibit B-2):
Amount (Exhibit B-3):
Amount (Exhibit B-4):
Amount (Exhibit B-5):
Amount (Exhibit B-6):
Exhibit "C":
Improvement Security:
Form:
Amount:
Exhibit "D":
Improvement Security:
Form:
Amount:
Faithful Performance
Bond
$1,082,800
$ 24,500
$ 281,500
$ 210,950
$ 80,600
$ 184,300
Material and Labor
Bond
$1,082,800
$ 24,500
$ 281,500
$ 210,950
$ 80,600
$ 184,300
Monuments
Bond
$49,000
Vernal Pool Mitigation and Monitoring
Bond
$77,000
Securities approved as to form and amount by:
City Attorney
Three (3) years from date of City Council approval of the
Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
Improvement Completion Date:
Sflb-impr.qT
11108/94
-9-
I/C~//
\ J.-S
COUNCn. AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY:
Item ) ~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Resolution I ? ? J;; Accepting bids and awarding contract for
"Removal and Site Clearance of Existing Buildings as part of the Civic
Center Parking Lot Improvements in the City of Chula Vista, California
(GG-148)"
Director of PUbliC~ Wr r
City Manager-.JGt (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No.xJ
:..--e
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
At 2:00 pm on November 2, 1994, in Conference Room 2 of the Public Services Building, the
Director of Public Works received bids for "Removal and Site Clearance of Existing Buildings
as part of the Civic Center Parking Lot Improvements in the City of Chula Vista, California."
The work includes the removal of buildings, removal and disposal of existing improvements,
excavation and grading, removal and replacement of existing trees, and other miscellaneous
work as shown on the plans.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution accepting bids and awarding the
contract for "Removal and Site Clearance of Existing Buildings as part of the Civic Center
Parking Lot Improvements in the City ofChula Vista, California (GG-148)" to Cement Cutting,
Inc. San Diego, in the amount of $23,047
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Funds for this project were budgeted in the Fiscal Year 1994-95 CIP budget process. The
overall scope of the project provides for the reconstruction and expansion of the existing
employee parking lot. The project is scheduled to be done in two phases. The award of this
contract represents the first phase of the construction process, and involves the removal of
existing buildings currently located on the lot where the expansion of the parking lot is to take
place, and preliminary grading of the site. The second phase of the construction, which is
scheduled for sometime in the next couple of months, is for the construction and paving of the
parking lot.
The project was advertised for a period of four weeks beginning October I, 1994 and on the
bid opening date, bids were received from six (6) contractors and are listed below
/.J. i
I~IP
Page 2, Item 12-
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Cement Cutting, Inc. - San Diego
Hatlem Construction Co. - EI Cajon
C. E. Wilson Corporation - Spring Valley
. American Processing Company, Inc. - San Diego
Mark McDowell Corporation - San Diego
Templeton Engineering, Inc. - Escondido
$23,04700
$35,000 00
$36,70000
$39,300 00
$40,798.00
$90,000.00
The low bid by Cement Cutting Inc. is below the Engineer's estimate of $26,000 by $2,953 00
or 11.35%. The contractor's bid mirrors the engineer's estimate in that it takes into
consideration the salvage value of the buildings. It is the contractor's intention to salvage and
move the buildings from the project site to another location.
The specifications require that the low bidder have experience in the moving and demolition
of buildings. Cement Cutting, Inc. is a locally based company that has an excellent reputation
in the industry
Staff has reviewed their references and determined that the contractor has the relevant
experience and resources to carry out the work necessary for the construction of this project.
We, therefore, recommend that the contract be awarded to Cement Cutting, Inc.
Disclosure Statement
Attached is a copy of the contractor's disclosure statement (Exhibit A).
Environmental Status
The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the work involved on this project
and determined that the project is exempt under Section 15301, Class 1 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (moving of existing structure).
Prevailing Wage Statement
The source of funding for this project is Development Impact Fees. Contractors bidding this
project were not required to pay prevailing wages to persons employed by them for work under
this contract. No special minority or women owned business requirements were necessary as
part of the bid documents. Disadvantaged businesses were encouraged to bid through the send
of the notice to contractors to various minority trade publications.
1.2'~
Page 3, Item J )..
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Financial Statement
A. Contract Amount
C. Contingencies
Total Funds Required for Construction
$23,04700
$2,305 00
$2,305 00
$27,657 00
B Staff (Inspection)
A. Civic Center Parking Expansion (GG-148) Account
Total Funds Available for Construction
$185,000.00
$185,00000
FISCAL IMPACT:
This phase of the construction will utilize $27,65700 of the total budgeted funds for this
project. The next phase of the construction will utilize the balance of the funds ($157,343 00).
This project was funded through Development Impact Fees.
Attachment A.
Disclosure statement
File: GG-148
AC:sb
m:\homc\cngincer\agcnd\rcmoval.ac
).). .3/0. .. f
RESOLUTION NO.
/77JJ..
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING
CONTRACT FOR "REMOVAL AND SITE CLEARANCE OF
EXISTING BUILDINGS AS PART OF THE CIVIC CENTER
PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA (GG-148)"
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on November 2 1994, in Conference
Room 2 of the Public Services Building, the Director of Public
Works received the following six sealed bids for "Removal and site
Clearance of Existing Buildings as part of the civic Center Parking
Lot Improvements in the City of Chula Vista, California."
Cement Cutting, Inc. - San Diego
Hatlem Construction Co. - El cajon
C. E. Wilson Corporation - Spring Valley
American Processing Company, Inc. - San
Diego
Mark McDowell Corporation - San Diego
Templeton Engineering, Inc. - Escondido
$23,047.00
$35,000.00
$36,700.00
$39,300.00
$40,798.00
$90,000.00
WHEREAS, the low bid by Cement Cutting, Inc. is below the
Engineer's estimate of $26,000 by $2,953.00 or 11.35%; and
WHEREAS, staff has
determined that the contractor
resources to carry out the work
this project; and
reviewed their references and
has the relevant experience and
necessary for the construction of
WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has
reviewed the work involved on this project and determined that the
project is exempt under section 15301, Class 1 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (moving of existing structure); and
WHEREAS, the source of funding for this project is
Development Impact Fees and no prevailing wage requirements were
necessary or a part of the bid documents; however, disadvantaged
businesses were encouraged to bid through the sending of the notice
to contractors to various minority trade publications.
1
.J~,f
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby accept said six bids and awards
the contract for removal and site clearance of existing buildings
as part of the civic Center Parking Lot improvements to Cement
cutting, Inc. in the amount of $23,047.00.
BE
Chula vista
contract for
IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the city of
is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
and one behalf of the city of Chula vista.
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works
o ed A to
Presented by
Bruce M. Booga
City Attorney
M:\Ho.e\Attorney\Building.bid
2
I J. -t
(:jD
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE SfATEMENT
You are RqUired to file a StatemeDt of Disclosure of certain ownership or fioaocial interests, paymeDts, or campaip cootributioDs,
OD III matterS which will require discretiODal}' action on tbe part of lhe City Council, P1anniDll Comm;,,;oD, aDd aU otber official
bodies. The followiDll iofonnation must be disclosed:
I.
,
; 2.
i
13.
\
4.
s.
6.
Lisllhe names of all persons baviDll a financial interest in lhe property wbich is the subject of the application or the Co_
,e.g., owner, applicaDt, Cootractor, subcootractor, material supplier.
rlo-J ~
If any person. identified pursuaDt to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more
lhan 10% of tbe shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in lhe partnership.
..J/A
,
If any person. identified pursuant to (I) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list lhe names of any person serving as
director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
~/IX
I
Have you bad more than $250 worth of business transacted with an~ber of lhe City staff, Boards, Commissions,
Committees, aDd Council within lhe past twelve month? Yes _ No A.lf yes, please indicate person(s):
Please identify each aDd every person, including any ageDts' employees, consu1taots, or independeDt Comractors who you
have assigned to represeDt you before the City in this matter.
M ..J
(,~~ ~K~rl/
~ {;./ 1\Ao~C/,p-J
Have you and/or your officers or agems, in~ aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Council member in lhe. curreDt
or preceding election period? Yes _ No A.lf yes, state which Council members(s):
· · · (NOTE: Attached additional pqeI as nec:es,ury) · ,. j
<S 1bI..J,.,J. ^'-L1f> rvy-~
Signatore of Contractorl ApplicaDt
~e-l AAf)~-.J
Prim or type name of Comractorl ApplicaDt
· &asm is defined as: "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint vtlltun, association, social clMb, fraternal organization,
corporation. to,tate, trust, receiver, syndicate, lhi.' and any other county, city or country, city municipaUty, di.,trict, or other fHJUtical
.'ubdM.,ion, or any other group tIT co/ll/Jinotion acting as a unit.
13 /.2 *?
: Date:-!. \... \ ..- <} '1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item 1.3
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Resolution 177 .:JJ Adding project TF231 - Accident Record
System to the CIP Budget and appropriating $56,750 from Fund 219 for
a Computerized Accident Informa' n Retrieval System
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Wor
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
REVIEWED BY:
City Manage~ ~ --7
The State Office of Traffic Safety has approved a grant of $56,750 to upgrade the city's
accident record retrieval system. The proposed system will integrate with the city's newly
implemented Geographic Information System (GIS). The grant will allow the city to retain an
information systems consultant to provide the City with a state-of-the-art computer software
accident record retrieval system that is compatible with our GIS. The grant will also allow the
city to purchase a GIS hardware station.
RECOMMENDATION: that Council approve the resolution adding project TF231 - Accident
Record System to the CIP Budget and accept funds, deposit into fund 219-0TS-Accident
Record System and appropriate $56,750 from Fund 219-0TS-Accident Record System for a
computerized Accident Record Information Retrieval System subject to fmal grant approval.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On April 5, 1994, City Council adopted Resolution 17440 (Exhibit I) authorizing the City
Engineer to file an application with the State Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) for a grant to
develop a Computerized Accident Record Information Retrieval System. The grant has been
approved at the staff level by the State and should receive formal approval within one month.
The grant will allow the City to develop a computerized accident record information retrieval
program that is compatible with our GIS. The compatibility of the program is important to
staff in order to eliminate double data entries and, most importantly, expedite the process with
less staff time.
A computerized accident record information retrieval system provides statistical information
regarding accidents in the city through the use of two data bases; a) accident information and
b) accident location. Through the proposed accident system, staff will no longer have to enter
the accident location information. The accident location information on any accident will be
retrieved from the GIS data base. This process will save an inordinate staff time. Currently
staff spends a lot of time entering accidents and locations information and preparing accident
information and diagrams manually The proposed system will make use of our GIS location
data base to generate accident diagrams electronically
13 ,,/
Page 2, Item I J
Meeting Date 11/22/94
The $56,750 grant will provide the city with $49,000 for software development and $8,000 for
GIS hardware station. The program schedule is November 1994 to September 1995
FISCAL IMPACT: The City's contribution for implementation of the program, which
includes coordination, supervision, administration and evaluation, will require approximately
500 hours of City staff time at a cost of $15,000 (salaries and benefits only). This staff time
will be a part of normal staff services included in the Traffic Engineering operating budget.
Funds for the purchase of the computerized system will be available in aC"count 219-2192-
TF231 as a result of this action and are from a Federal grant. Implementation of this program
will reduce the amount of staff time now devoted to the existing Accident Record System by
approximately 50%. Presently we are expending approximately 550 staff hours annually,
equivalent to an operating expenditure of $16,500, on the existing labor intensive, manually
operated program. The annual savings of approximately 275 person hours or $8,250 per year
will allow the Traffic Engineering Section to absorb work assignments associated with
transportation forecasting for proposed land development and to perform critical traffic
engineering assignments in a more timely manner. It should be noted that the staff savings is
equivalent to a twenty two month payback.
ZAO:rb
File TF-231
Exhibit 1 - Resolution 17440 and Minutes of Council meeting (excerpt) Nt:l7" S ~A ~/'J I;()
(M:\HOMEIENGINEER\AGENDA\TF231.ZAO)
I;$..-l
RESOLUTION NO. 1773:J
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADDING PROJECT TF231 - ACCIDENT
RECORD SYSTEM TO THE CIP BUDGET AND
APPROPRIATING $56,750 FROM FUND 219 FOR A
COMPUTERIZED ACCIDENT INFORMATION RETRIEVAL
SYSTEM
WHEREAS, the State Office of Traffic Safety has approved
a grant of $56,750 to upgrade the city's accident record retrieval
system; and
WHEREAS, the proposed system will integrate with the
city's newly implemented Geographic Information System (GIS) and
will allow the city to retain an information systems consultant to
provide the city with a state-of-the-art computer software accident
record retrieval system that is compatible with our GIS; and
WHEREAS, the grant will also allow the city to purchase
a GIS hardware station.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby add Project TF231 - Accident Record
System to the CIP Budget.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the amount of $56,750 is
hereby appropriated from Fund 219-0TS-Accident Record System into
Account 219-2192-TF231.
"1" ~ d!
Booga ity
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\TF231 CIP
1~'3
.-
Exhibit 1
RESOLUTION NO. 17440
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO FILE
APPLICATIONS WITH THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF TRAFFIC
SAFETY (OTS) FOR FEDERAL GRANT TO PURCHASE AND
INSTALL (1) EMERGENCY VEHICLE TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRE-
EMPTION CONTROL SYSTEM AND (2) A COMPUTERIZED
ACCIDENT RECORD RETRIEVAL SYSTEM
WHEREAS. the City of Chula Vista has received a invitation from the California Office
of Traffic Safety (OTS) to participate in a statewide federal grant fund traffic safety
improvement program; and.
WHEREAS. staff has identified two traffic safety projects that qualify under this grant
program:
(1) Emergency Vehicle Traffic Signal Pre-emption Control System which will anable
emergency units to move uninterrupted through signalized intersections by directing
the traffic signal controller via an electronic device. called a phase selector. to advance
to and/or hold a green light in the direction of the oncoming emergency vehicles. and
I
121 A Computerized Accident Record Retrieval System which will provide staff with an
automated accident retrieval process.
NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council ofthe City of Chula
Vista does hereby authorize the City Engineer to file applications with the California Office of
Traffic Safety for federal grant to purchase and install an Emergency Vehicle Traffic Signal
Pre-emption Control System and a Computerized Accident Record Retrieval System.
Presented by
J
-JL/~"'
J nP.Up itt~
Director of Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaarit
City Attomey
}:J..f
Resolution No. 17440
Page 2
PASSED. APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista.
California. this 5th day of April, 1994. by the following vote:
YES: Councilmambers: Fox. Horton, Moore. Rindona. Nader
NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
.." -/7 ,1...
=_ ,u~'-
Tim Nader, Meyor
ATTEST:
~L0~ () C~-d! (J E
Beverly /It. Authelet. City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA I
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO I ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA I
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chuta Vista, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 17440 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City
Council at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 5th day of April.
1994.
Executed this 5th day of April. 1994.
IJ""
THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT IS A
CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL ON
FILE IN THISC:~ (")[1
ATTEST: d ,19~
~U ~T'C7'ACLEi!lK ~.
: ..(;11,.", I (,.,0 \k...,::t<L l
/ 0
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCll..
. OF THE CITY OF CIRJLA VISTA
T~y,ApriIS, 1994
4:02 p.m.
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROLL CALL:
PRESENT:
Councilmembers Fox, Horton (arrived at 4: 16 p.m.), Moore, Rindone (arrived
at 4: 12 p.m.), and Mayor Nader
ALSO PRESENT:
Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. Sll..ENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March IS, 1994 (City Council Meeting), March 22, 1994 (City Council
Meeting), March 22, 1994 (Joint Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency/City Council), and March 29, 1994
(Regular MeetinglWorksession).
MSC (Fox /Moore) to approve the minutes nf March 15, 1994 (City Council Meeting), March 22, 1994 (City
Council Meeting), March 22, 1994 (Joint Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency/City Council) as presented.
Approved 3-0-2 with Horton and Rindone absent. The minutes of March 29, 1994 were trailed.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
4a. Proclamation recognizing Easton Alwninwn for service rendered to the citizens, and particularly the
young people, of Chula Vista for their support of archery programs. The proclamation was presented by
Councilmember Fox to Lloyd Brown of Easton Aluminum.
4b. A plaque was presented by Councilmember Fox to Mr. Lopez in recognition of the opening of the Otay
Golden Hands Center.
40. Rod Davis, the new Executive Director of the Chamber of Commerce, informed Council that the Business
Coalition would have a graffiti paint-out day on May 14th from 9:00 a.m. to noon. He also presented copies of
the new 1994 Chula Vista Visitors Guide and Directory.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Item pulled: 9)
BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR OFFERED BY COUNCll..MEMBER MOORE, reading of the
text was waived, passed and approved unanimously with Rindone abstaining on Item U.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
Sa. Letter requesting Council adoption of a resolution supporting the 617/94 ballot measure to relocate
Charles A. Lindbergh Field to Miramar . John F. Seymour, Citizens for Miramar, 501 West Broadway, Suite
2020, San Diego, CA 92101. It is recommended that Council receive this letter and request staff to notify Citizens
for Miramar that lime would be made available on the 4/12/94 agenda for a presentation.
IJ-7
Minutes
April 5, 1994
Page 2
RESOLUTION 17450 ENDORSING AND SUPPORTING THE JUNE, 1994 MIRAMAR ADVISORY
BALLOT MEASURE AND DESIGNATING MIRAMAR AS THE PREFERRED SITE FOR THE SAN
DIEGO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
'\.
Counci1member Rindone stated Items 5a and 5c were similar types of requests. Staff recommendation on one item
was to refer it to staff to be brought back to Council for action, the other item had a resolution attached for action.
He did nol feel there was information included on which staff had based their recommendation for adoption of a
resolution on Item 5a. He questioned whether a "yes" vote on the Consent Calendar would approve Resolution
17450.
Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager, responded there had been a miscommunication between the City Manager's
Office and the City Attorney's Office regarding the item. It was staffs intent to bring the resolution back to
Council for action at the 4/12/94 meeting.
City Attorney Boogaard informed Council that due to the agenda description Council could take action on the
resolution if they chose to do so.
5b. Letter requesting approval of amendment to 1986 County Solid Waste Management Plan to ioclude
the proposed Flynn Rainbow Nurseries and A.l Soils Com posting sites - Gloria McClellan, Chairwoman, Board
of Directors, San Diego Association of Governments, 401 "B" St., Suite 800, First Interstate Plaz.a, San Diego, CA
92101. It is recommended that staff be directed to prepare a letter to the Chair outlining actions taken by the City.
Councilmember Fox wanted to verify for the record that the letter related to the Greenway Landfill would not
indicate that Council had taken action either in support or opposition to the Greenway Composting facility. Council
had not taken formal action on that issue.
Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager, responded that Councilmember Fox was correct.
5c. Letter requesting Council adoption of a resolution opposing the proposed reduction in Federal Transit
Operating Assistance - Leon Williams, Chairman, Metropolitan Transit Development Board, 12S5Imperial Ave.,
Suite 1000, San Diego, CA 92101-7490. It is recommended that Council direct staff to bring a resolution back at
the 4/12/94 meeting.
6. RESOLUTION 17438 AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE ALL NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ENERGY COMMISSION TO IMPLEMENT AN ALTERNATIVE FlJEL RETROFIT PROGRAM FOR
$55,000 AND AN ALUMINUM AIR BATfERY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR
$50,000 - In November 1993, Council accepted funding that had been legislated to the City for the development
of an aluminum air fuel cell for electric vehicles and to create an alternative fuel retrofit program. A total of
$105,000 in funding was accepted; $55,000 for the alternative fuels retrofit program and $50,000 for the aluminum
air battery development project. This action allows staff to proceed with a contract to receive Energy Commission
funds. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Administration)
7. RESOLUTION 17439 AMENDING THE GRAFFITI POLICY ON YOUTH SPORT FACILITIES
AND STRUCTURES ON CITY PARKLAND. 00 1/18/94, Council adopted a Graffiti Policy for youth sport
facilities and structures on City Parkland and referred two options for staff and the Youth Sports Council to
consider. Staff recOmmends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
8. RESOLUTION 17440 AUTHORIZINGTHECITYENGINEERTOFlLEAPPLICATIONSWITH
THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY (OTS) FOR FEDERAL GRANT TO PURCHASE AND
INSTALL (1) EMERGENCY VEmCLE TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRE-EMPTION CONTROL SYSTEM AND
/3-8'"
Minutes
April 5, 1994
Page 3
(2) A COMPUTERIZED ACCIDENT RECORD RETRIEVAL SYSTEM - The City bas received an invitation
from the OTS to participate in a State-wide Federal grant fund traffic safety improvement program. Staff bas
identified two traffic safety projects that qualify under the grant program: (a) Emergency Vehicle Traffic Signal
Pre-emption Control System and (b) Computerized Accident Record Retrieval System. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Director of Public Works and Fire Chief)
9. RESOLUTION 17441 APPROVlNG SUBMISSION OF THE FISCAL YEAR 1994/95
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) ARTICLE 4.5 CLAIM FOR HANDYTRANS
OPERATION _ The Fiscal Year 1994/95 claim for Handy trans operation was submitted to the Metropolitan Transit
Development Board and the San Diego Association of Governments on 4/1194 as required by State law. The claim
includes $152,766 in TDA Article 4.5 funds and $22,194 in transit funds. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Public Works) Pulled from the Consent Calendar.
. Carolyn Butler, 97 Bisbop Street, Chula Vista, CA, stated sbe was in support of funding the Dial-A-Ride
system. Sbe questioned bow many days advance notice was required for the Handy trans system, bow disabled one
bad to be to use the system, and wbat the minimum income was for those utilizing the system. Sbe requested that
Greg A1bado be elevated to the position of Transit Coordinator.
Councilmember Rindone stated that a discussion of personnel was inappropriate.
Mayor Nader informed Mrs. Butler that under the Charter only the City Manager could address the request made
regarding personnel and she sbould contact him.
MSUC (NaderlFox) to refer Mn. Butler comments to staff for a report back to Council.
RESOLUTION 17441 OFFERED BY MAYOR NADER, reading of tbe text was waived, passed and approved
unanimously.
10. RESOLUTION 17442 AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF FISCAL YEAR 1994/95
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) ARTICLE 4.0 CLAIM - The Fiscal Year 1994/95 TDA
Article 4.0 Claim for Chula Vista Transit operation and capital procurements is in the amount of $2,466,700. The
claim was submitted on 4/1194 to San Diego Association of Governments and Metropolitan Transit Development
Board as required by State law. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
II. RESOLUTION 17443 APPROVlNG AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO FOR
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994/95, AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR
TO EXECUTE SAME - The agreement autborizes the City to claim $99,551 of County Transportation
Development Act Article 4.0 funds for Chula Vista Transit service provided in the unincorporated area in Fiscal
Year 1994/95. Staff fOC!>mmends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
. Carolyn Butler, 97 Bisbop Street, Chula Vista, CA, requested that Council read into the record the
information she bad previously given to them.
12. RESOLUTION 17444 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF TWO EASEMENTS AS
REQUESTED BY THE SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY (SDG&E) FOR THE PURPOSE OF
INSTALLING UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND APPURTENANCES ADJACENT TO EUCALYPTUS
PARK AND WITHIN UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING DISTRICT NUMBER 122, ALONG FOURTH
AVENUE _ On 6/30/92, Council approved establishing Utility Undergrounding District Number 122, along Fourth
Avenue from 'E' Street to a point approximately 100 feet soutb of State Higbway 54. SDG&E bas requested two
)3.1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item -.!!i
Meeting Date 11/22/94
ITEM TITLE: /I Report on SANDAG Request for Support in Seeking Federal and State
Funds for Beach Replenishment
P Resolution J? l.;t;l>rting State and Federal Funding Assistance for a San
SUBMITTED BY: :::::o:e:;o;:::e:~:h; ~ePleniShment Initiative
. .c.
REVIEWED BY: City ManageUt:1 ~ . (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-X)
On October 10, the City Manager recei~ a:tter from Ken Sulzer, Executive Director of
SANDAG, seeking support from the City of Chula Vista for a cooperative regional initiative to
restore the San Diego region's critically eroded beaches. This initiative was approved by the
SANDAG Board of Directors on September 24, 1994.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the attached resolution supporting State
and Federal funding assistance for a San Diego Regionwide Beach Replenishment Initiative.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None
DISCUSSION: The attached report from SANDAG describes the proposed beach replenishment
initiative. The focus of this initiative is to capitalize on a unique opportunity stemming from
the Navy's planned Aircraft Carrier Homeporting Project, which is expected to dredge
approximately 12 million cubic yards of uncontaminated beach quality sand from San Diego
Harbor. The purpose of the state and federal funds would be to assist in transporting this sand
to eroded beaches in several of the region's coastal cities. These beaches include Imperial Beach
in the South Bay, as well as several other beaches in North County
The replenishment of beaches within the region would have general benefit to Chula Vista
residents who utilize these facilities, as well as supporting regional tourism efforts. Therefore,
it is recommended that the City Council support this initiative.
FISCAL IMPACT: This action would have no direct fiscal impact to the City; however,
improvements to beaches within the region could have indirect fiscal benefits as a result of
increased tourism.
(F: \home\planning\sdgbeach.al1)
piA .'/
OCT I 3 1994
~ San Diego
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS
October 10, 1994
Suite 800, First Interstate Plaza
401 B Street
San Diego, California 92101
(619)595-5300 Fax (619)595-5305
Mr. John Goss
City Manager
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912-1087
DearMr.~
At its Seprea 23, 1994 meeting, SANDAG acted to support a lIll\ior initiative to restore the San
Diego region's critically eroded beaches. This letter requests your City's support of this initiative,
particularly of efforts to seek state and federal funds to assist beach replenishment efforts.
The focus of the beach replenishment initiative is to capitalize on a once-in-a-generation opportunity
to replenish the region's critically eroded beaches at an unprecedented low cost. This opportunity
stems from the Navy's planned Aircraft Carrier Homeporting Project which is expected to dredge
in the range of 12 million cubic yards of uncontaminated beach quality sand from San Diego Harbor.
The purpose of the state and federal funds will be to assist in transporting the sand to eroded beaches
in all of the region's coastal cities.
-~'--.'-:~
J1l16l~ f')[ j.Q1lr~ ~jI). t;"n.i.i-t;Olt~.a IIl!Wl!lp l".I""'lllt.nn .Allo tIlC'lo8ed for yoiii'
information is the ~:AG Board report on this item and a map showing potential beach
replenishment sites. The sites were developed by SANDAG's Shoreline Brosion Committee.
...
Please call me or Steve Sachs of the SANDAG staff (595-5346) if you need additional information.
Thanks for your assistance in furthering this important regionwide initiative to improve our economy
and environment.
'7fl-
KENNETH B. SULZER
Executive Director
KBS/SS/ce
Bnclosures
cc: Hon. Tim Nader, Mayor
MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Ca_. Chula Vista. CoIonado. Del 1.1 ,1,.., :~i. :!:!" I:~ Beach. La Mesa, Lemon Grove,
National City, OoeansJde, Poway, San Diego, San It!aroos, Santee. Solana Beach. VIsta, and County of San Diego.
ADVlSORYlLlAISON MEMBERS: CalWomia Deparbnent of Transportation, U.S. Deparbnent 01 Defense, S.D. unified Port DIstrid, andlijuanaJBaja California.
SAMPLE RFSOLUTlON
SUPPORTING STATE AND FEDERAL
FUNDING ASSISTANCE FOR A SAN DIEGO
REGIONWlDE BEACH REPLENISHMENT INITIATIVE
WHEREAS, the U.S. Army COIpS of Engineers' Coast of California Study has
identified the majority of the San Diego region's beaches as having eroded significantly in the
past 15 years; and
WHEREAS, currently narrow beaches will continue to erode in the future due to
limitations on natural sand sources due to development of the region's coastal plains and
foothills; and
WHEREAS, the San Diego region's beaches are a priceless resource of state and
national significance which provide important environmental, recreational and economic benefits
to the region, the state and the nation; and
WHEREAS, the San Diego Regional Shoreline Preservation Strategy, adopted by
SANDAG in 1993, calls for a cooperative regionwide beach replenishment program to preserve
and enhance the region's beaches; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Navy's Aircraft Carrier Homeporting Project is expected to
dredge in the range of 12 million cubic yards of uncontaminated beach quality sand from San
Diego Harbor, providing a once-in-a-generation opportunity to substantially replenish the
region's eroding beaches; and
WHEREAS, potential beach replenishment sites have been identified that would benefit
the public beaches of the region's eight coastal cities, as well as beaches controlled and managed
by the state Department of Parks and Recreation, the V.S. Navy and the San Diego Unified Port
District; and
WHEREAS, additional funds will be needed to transport the sand to beach
replenishment sites. The average additional cost is estimated to be about $1 per cubic yard; an
unprecedented low unit cost for beach replenishment; and
WHEREAS, SANDAG and its Shoreline Erosion Committee have supported a major
initiative to restore the San Diego region's critically eroded beaches, including seeking the
additional funds needed to transport sand from the Navy's Carrier Homeporting Project to
potential beach replenishment sites; NOW 1HEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that the supports obta;n;ng state
and federal funds to assist in a San Diego regionwide beach replenishment initative based on
transporting sand from the U.S. Navy Carrier Homeporting Project to the region's critically
eroded beaches.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this _ day of
,1994.
/0/,4 :J
San DiEgo ~"flon of Govemmeots
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
September 23, 1994
AGENDA REPORT No.: 94-09.18
Action Requested: APPROVE
SHORBUNE EROSION COMMITI'EE: REQUEST FOR
AUTHORIZATION TO SEEK FEDERAL AND STATE
FUNDS FOR BEACH REPLENISHMENT
Introduction
The Committee is requesting SANDAG authorization and support to seek federal and state funds
for replenishing the region's critically eroding beaches. Beach replenishment is the primary
shoreline management tactic recommended in the Shoreline Preservation Strategy adopted by
SANDAG in July of 1993.
The Committee is making this request in order to take advantage of a unique opportunity
presented by the Navy's Aircraft Carrier Homeporting project in San Diego Harbor. The project
will dredge over 10 million cubic yards of beach quality sand; the bulk of the dredging will
begin in mid-1996. In discussions at the Committee, the Navy has agreed to barge the material
to beach replenishment sites throughout the region and deposit it on eroded beaches. The sand
from this project will be available at an unprecedented cost because the Navy will be covering
all costs as part of the project budget, except the incremental barging costs in excess of 30
miles. Additional funds will be needed to cover these costs.
It is my
RECOMMENDATION
that SANDAG support the cooperative, regionwide beach replenishment initiative described
above, amend the legislative program to give priority to developing a source of funds at the
federal and state levels to support the initiative, and authorize the Shoreline Erosion Committee
to work on seeking the needed funds.
Discussion
The region's coastal jurisdictions and the Navy have identified eight beach replenishment sites
that would benefit eroding beaches in all of the region's coastal jurisdictions. Several million
dollars in incremental barging costs (in excess of 30 miles) will be needed to ensure that the sand
1'-/,1.'/
g:",1;
Son Diego Region
MAP AREA
RIveraldeCountr
Comp
Pendleton
E
Batiqu1tos Lagoon
D
C
B
Figure 1
POTENTIAL BEACH
REPLENISHMENT SITES
FOR NAVY CARRIER HOMEPORTlNG
DREDGING PROJECT
0- Replenishment Sites
to be Evaluated
9 ...~s" ,
A
Tljuana Estuary
UNITED 6T~S
MextcO
!
~Se.n Diego
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS
}l/~/
T1Juan. B.C.
RESOLUTION NO.
/77Jr
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA SUPPORTING STATE AND FEDERAL
FUNDING ASSISTANCE FOR A SAN DIEGO REGIONWIDE
BEACH REPLENISHMENT INITIATIVE
WHEREAS, the U. S. Army corps of Engineers' Coast of
California study has identified the majority of the San Diego
region's beaches as having eroded significantly in the past 15
years; and
WHEREAS, currently narrow beaches will continue to erode
in the future due to limitations on natural sand sources due to
development of the region's coastal plains and foothills; and
WHEREAS, the San Diego region's beaches are a priceless
resource of state and national significance which provide important
environmental, recreational and economic benefits to the region,
the state and the nation; and
WHEREAS, the San Diego Regional Shoreline Preservation
Strategy, adopted by SANDAG in 1993, calls for a cooperative
regionwide beach replenishment program to preserve and enhance the
region's beaches; and
WHEREAS, the U. S. Navy's Aircraft Carr ier Homeporting
Project is expected to dredge in the range of 12 million cubic
yards of uncontaminated beach quality sand from San Diego Harbor,
providing a once-in-a-generation opportunity to substantially
replenish the region's eroding beaches; and
WHEREAS, potential beach replenishment sites have been
identified that would benefit the public beaches of the region's
eight coastal cities, as well as beaches controlled and managed by
the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the U.S. Navy and the
San Diego Unified Port District; and
WHEREAS, additional funds will be needed to transport the
sand to beach replenishment sites. The average additional cost is
estimated to be about $1 per cubic yard; an unprecedented low unit
cost for beach replenishment; and
WHEREAS, SANDAG and its Shoreline Erosion Committee have
supported a major initiative to restore the San Diego region's
critically eroded beaches, including seeking the additional funds
needed to transport sand from the Navy's Carr ier Homeporting
Project to potential beach replenishment sites.
1
pI fJ-j
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the city of Chula vista supports obtaining state and federal funds
to assist in a San Diego regionwide beach replenishment initiative
based on transporting sand from the U.S. Navy carrier Homeporting
project to the region's critically eroded beaches.
Presented by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
ruce M. Booga
City Attorney
M:\Ho.e\Attorney\Beach
2
~~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item J 5
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Public Hearing to consider the vacation of the portion of Moss Street from
its intersection with Naples Street westerly to Alpine Avenue, north of
Naples Street
Resolution 1111:>4 ordering the vacation of the portion of Moss
Street described above and adopting the Negative Declaration and
Addendum on IS 94-0 I
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~ (4/5 Vote: Yes_ No X )
Country Club Villa Estates, owne~ the triangular piece of property between Moss and Naples
Streets westerly of the juncture of those streets has requested that the City vacate the portion of
Moss Street between Alpine Avenue and the aforementioned intersection (see Exhibit" A"). In
accordance with the California Streets and Highways Code, the Council adopted Resolution No.
17681 at its meeting on October 4, 1994, setting the associated public hearing for November 1,
1994.
ITEM TITLE:
The Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial Study, IS 94-01 of potential impacts
associated with the street vacation of a portion of Moss Street. Based on the attached Initial
Study and comments thereon, the Environmental Review Coordinator has concluded that the
vacation of Moss Street would cause no significant environmental impacts as per Negative
Declaration issued on IS 94-01.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council hold the subject hearing, adopt the resolution approving
Negative Declaration and Addendum on IS 94-01 and ordering the vacation of the subject
portion of Moss Street with the following conditions:
1. The owner/developer pay the City $100,000 for the vacated right-of-way or, at
the Council's option, install missing curb and gutter along the north side of Moss
Street from Alpine Avenue to Third Avenue or place the $100,000 in the
Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP) for this area.
2. An all-way stop be installed at the intersection of Naples Street and the portion
of Alpine Avenue north of Naples Street.
3. Alpine Avenue north of Naples be widened to 52 feet curb-to-curb with
dedication of the needed right-of-way.
4. The developer/owner of the triangular parcel shall install all needed street
improvements along the parcel's Alpine Avenue and Naples Street frontages.
5. Retain an easement 20 feet wide for Sweetwater Authority.
6. Restrict access to Alpine Avenue to those locations approved by the City Engineer
and Director of Planning.
7. Completion of all discretionary approvals for the development of the parcel.
/'5.../ /vJJ
Page 2, Item I~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
8. If all or part of the small triangle to the south is held to be a public easement, this
order of vacation shall have no further force or effect, and be deemed revoked
ab initio.
The street vacation would not become effective or recorded until all the above conditions are met
or assured.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
I. The Resource Conservation Commission considered the Negative Declaration on
November 22, 1993. The Commission voted 5-0 to accept the Negative Declaration for
IS-94-01 (Moss Street Vacation).
2. At its meeting held September 9, 1993, the Safety Commission approved a staff report
by a vote of 6-0 recommending that the street be vacated with three conditions:
a. Widen Alpine Avenue between Moss and Naples Streets to 52 feet (curb-
to-curb)
b. Provide an all-way 'STOP" at the intersection
c. Prohibit access to Alpine Avenue from applicant's property
(See Exhibit "E")
3. At a public hearing held October 27, 1993, the Planning Commission found that the
proposed vacation would be consistent with the existing General Plan; however, the
Planning Commission recommended on a vote of 6-0-0-1 (Commissioner Fuller
abstaining due to a conflict of interest) that the issue of the vacation be considered in
conjunction with the proposed development of the property and not separate from it.
Staff concurs with this requirement.
DISCUSSION:
Back2round
In 1956, the City approved plans for the adjacent subdivision east of Alpine Avenue, Robinhood
No.2, showing the curb and gutter on the east side of Alpine Avenue to be installed as part of
a knuckle design, similar to what is now being proposed. However, the improvements were
never constructed. Research of our records did not indicate the reason they were not built.
In February 1988, the City Council considered a request from the San Diego Country Club for
relief from requirements for installation of improvements on Moss Street (see Council Agenda
Statement, Exhibit "B"). That requirement was generated by the request for a temporary club
house gaining access from Naples Street. It was determined that the improvements along Naples
would be constructed at such time as permanent development occurred along the Naples frontage
or by an assessment district if the south side of Naples installed street improvements by an
I~";;'"
Page 3, Item 1~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
assessment district. The improvements along Moss Street were not made a condition at that time
and it was intended to impose them at the time that the permanent club house was built on "L"
Street. When the building permit for the permanent club house was processed it was determined
by staff that a nexus could not be made that the construction of the new club house on "L" Street
placed a burden on Moss Street and therefore a condition to build the curb and gutter on Moss
Street was not made a condition of the building permit.
Country Club representatives at that time did verbally agree that they saw a benefit to install
curb and gutter along Moss Street and indicated that they would commit to participate in area
improvements through Assessment District proceedings if the general area did so. That has not
happened, and this proposal will provide an opportunity to get the improvements installed on
Moss Street.
Proposal
The developer (owner of the triangle parcel, Country Club Villa Estates) has made an offer to
the San Diego Country Club that if the City will vacate the portion of Moss Street between
Naples Street and Alpine Avenue at no cost and if the S.D. Country Club would grant the
northerly half of Moss Street to the developer at no cost, the developer will install curb, gutter
and pavement along the north side of Moss Street between Third Avenue and Alpine Avenue.
The installation of street improvements on the east side of Alpine Avenue between Moss Street
and Naples Street and pavement, curb, gutter and sidewalk on the north side of Naples Street,
between Alpine Avenue and the current intersection of Moss Street and Naples Street will be a
condition of the vacation or requirement of the development of the triangular parcel.
Parcel Information
The existing parcel containing 8323 square feet (s.f.) is designated low-medium residential (3-6
dwelling units per acre) on the City's General Plan and is zoned R-l (single family). Upon
vacation of Moss Street, another 12,259 s.f. would revert to the Country Club Villa Estates
Parcel and 18,544 s.f. to the Country Club. If the Country Club portion were combined with
the Country Club Villa Estates portion, the parcel would contain 39,126 s.f.
Currently Alpine Avenue has a street right-of-way of 60 feet. In order to meet the General Plan
designation, the right-of-way must be 72 feet in width. Consequently, street dedication for
Alpine Avenue would be required. That dedication would be approximately 1,000 s.f., leaving
a parcel containing approximately 38,000 s.f. (see Exhibit "A"). This could, theoretically, be
subdivided into five single family lots if the configuration of the parcel would support it.
AIiPllment Alternatives
The alignment recommended by staff is shown on Exhibit "CO indicating that Moss Street be
curved southerly at its intersection with the present alignment of Alpine Avenue. This option
was recommended by the Safety Commission and supported by the Planning Commission with
the conditions stated herein. This option will allow the use of the existing street improvements
on Alpine Avenue lowering the cost to install the public improvements necessary to provide a
1~"3
-
Page 4, Item /6
Meeting Date 11122/94
full street. It also provides the developer with the best configuration for developing the property
in a logical manner.
Another option studied was to relocate the northerly portion of Alpine Avenue to meet the
existing portion of Alpine Avenue on the south side (Exhibit "D"). This would necessitate
obtaining an easement from the applicant which would bisect the existing parcel. As was
indicated at the Safety Commission and Planning Commission hearings, the public has apparently
been using that alignment as a shortcut for a number of years. Aerial photos taken since 1960
indicate a tire-worn area created by vehicles crossing from the T -intersection, across the vacant
land and meeting Moss Street on its south side.
Desiring this realignment, public input has indicated they believed that the City had the right-of-
way for that extension by prescriptive rights. A street easement could possibly be obtained
through prescriptive rights or condemnation, but both actions would require court action and
could be quite costly. The property owner, on the other hand, indicates that although vehicles
have been cutting across the property, the area has been blocked at least one day a year since
acquiring the land, thus precluding any taking of the easement by prescriptive rights. The owner
would object in court if the City attempts to claim prescriptive rights.
In addition, should the City condemn property in order to align Alpine Avenue with the portion
south of Naples Street, the usability of the remaining portion of the land would result in a parcel
that could not be developed to the extent that all the street improvements could be required of
the developer. This would require the City to pay for the majority of the improvements as well
as remove the existing Alpine Avenue improvements. In addition, the two houses adjacent to
Alpine Avenue would have to change their address.
Staff believes that lining up the two sections of Alpine Avenue is not critical because of the low
traffic volume on the portion of Alpine Avenue south of Naples Street (260 average daily trips)
It is also staffs belief that the recommended alignment (Exhibit "CO), doing away with the
existing angled intersection is a significant improvement.
The existing curb return at the southwest corner of Moss Street and Alpine Avenue has sufficient
radius so as not to require reconstruction or additional dedication for the proposed Alpine
Avenue alignment adjacent to the existing homes.
Accident Record
According to accident records from January 1, 1990, through the end of August, 1994, there
have been four reported accidents at the intersection of Moss/Naples/First. One of these
accidents involved a single vehicle traveling west hitting the chain link fence along the Country
Club property line. This accident occurred in 1990. The other three accidents involved
eastbound vehicles entering the intersection and failing to yield the right of way to eastbound
vehicles (2) and a westbound vehicle on Naples Street.
Another reported accident occurred to the east of the intersection in question. It involved an
eastbound motorist on Naples Street turning south into the 1100 block of Alpine Avenue and
being broad-sided by a motorcyclist attempting to pass the car on the right shoulder.
I~...lf
Page 5, Item J r
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Only one other mishap occurred in the area within the last three years, which involved a single
car hitting the same chain link fence just east of the 1000 block of Alpine Avenue.
The low number of accidents at the intersection can probably be attributed to the fact that, due
to the hazards presented by the acute angle of the intersection, drivers tend to be extremely
cautious when making turning movements. As indicated, the majority of the accidents are a
result of drivers failing to yield the right-of-way.
Com{)ensation for Vacated Area
Council has, in the past, required payment for streets which have been vacated although there
is no official Council Policy relative to payment for vacated right-of-way. Each circumstaoce
has been considered on its own merit. In some instaoces payment has been for the whole area
vacated, in other cases, payment has been for the difference between the area vacated and the
area dedicated. Some streets have been vacated at no cost (Power Center in Rancho Del Rey
Business Center) because that issue was addressed in the Disposition and Development
Agreement (DDA). The County assessor's office has verbally indicated that the vacated right-
of-way parcel would be appraised at $50,000. Staff has obtained sales comparisons for other
raw land in the area for the past three years. The price per square foot of unencumbered area
has ranged from $4.00 to $9.00 per square foot. In this case, staff has used a lower price of
$5.00 for estimating the value of the vacated area. This is based on telephone input from the
assessor, the recent drop in raw land values, and difficult configuration of the parcel.
There is a water line in the existing Moss Street which the Sweetwater Authority has requested
a 20 foot easement be retained. Since the easement will prohibit the construction of any
structure within it, staff estimates that the value of the easement area to be 50 % of full value or
$2.50 per square foot. The water easement will contain approximately 11,500 square feet (s.f.).
Therefore, staff estimates that the value of the vacated land to be 11,500 s.f. multiplied by $2.50
plus 18,300 s.f. multiplied by $5.00 or $120,250.
The applicant has proposed to install off-site missing street lights, curb and gutter along the
north side of Moss Street between Alpine Avenue and Third Avenue in return for the vacated
right-of-way. The improvements are estimated by staff to cost $130,000.00. They do not
propose to install sidewalk along this frontage because they feel that it might be hazardous to
pedestrians due to errant golf balls landing in the area. Because there are no homes fronting on
that side, staff believes that use of such a walk would be extremely low and does not believe it
is needed. The estimated additional cost to install sidewalk is $60,000. The improvements to
be installed are in lieu of paying the City or the Country Club for the vacated right of way. The
developer is willing to do either of the following: 1) pay the City $100,000 for the vacated
portion of right-of-way, or; 2) install curb and gutter along the north side of Moss Street from
Alpine Avenue west to Third Avenue. The developer is only willing to give the City $100,000
because he believes that through his contracting abilities, he could build the improvements for
less than $100,000.
If the City accepts the $100,000 payment, then the Country Club would not be responsible to
install the curb and gutter on Moss Street between Alpine Avenue and Third Avenue in the
future unless they redevelop their golf course into a use that requires frontage improvements and
)S-5
-
Page 6, Item If:.
Meeting Date 11/22/94
access onto Moss Street. If the City later wishes to have improvements on the north side of
Moss Street, it would be our responsibility to fund them.
Future Develooment
Any future development of the parcel would require additional action by the City by holding
public hearings and receiving input from residents. All actions would be subject to further City
processing as follows:
1. Should the vacation be approved and the applicant wish to develop the property as now
zoned, they would be required to file an initial study and a subdivision map (for five or
more parcels) on the property showing the proposed parcels. Processing would be
subject to a public hearing before the City Planning Commission and the City Council.
2. Should the applicant propose an increase in density for the property but still within the
General Plan range of 3-6 dwelling units per acre, it would be necessary to fIle a
rezoning request in addition to the environmental analysis and the subdivision map
process and the zone change would require a public hearing before the Planning
Commission and the City Council with notification to residents.
3. Should the applicant seek a density increase above the low-medium density range of the
General Plan (3-6 dwelling units per acre), the next highest category (medium density)
is 6-11 dwelling units per acre which would require an amendment to the General Plan
as well as the rezoning application, initial study and subdivision processing necessitating
public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. It should be noted
that any zone change consideration for property from an R-l category to an R-3 category
requires a unanimous vote of the City Council, per the Cummings initiative that was
passed several years ago. This was the initiative that was passed several years ago that
required us to set up a growth control process, and made it harder to upgrade zoning.
4. Should the applicant desire to develop the property into four parcels or less under the
present zoning category, the applicant would fIle an initial study as well as a parcel map
which is processed at staff level, therefore, the staff approval is final unless appeals are
filed setting a public hearing before the Planning Commission. Any development of the
parcel map process again requires environmental review as well.
Safetv Commi..<rinn's Recommendation of Umitim. Access to Moine Avenue
The Safety Commission recommended that, if the vacation is approved, access to Alpine Avenue
be prohibited from the applicants property upon development. Upon review of this condition
by the Planning and Public Works Departments, it is requested that the requirement for access
to Alpine Avenue be subject to the approval of the City Engineer rather than a specific
prohibition. The primary reason being that a complete prohibition of access on to Alpine
Avenue may not be prudent based upon the potential for two lots being created towards the west
end of the project, thus requiring a flag lot design to provide access only to Naples Street. Staff
would prefer to hold this option open until a development plan is put forth for complete
evaluation.
I~-IP
Page 7, Item / s-
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Noise hnnacts
A noise analysis was performed based upon the impacts of the project with the following
conclusions:
1. "Baseline levels are sufficiently low on Alpine to accommodate an additional estimated
3,000 vehicles and still meet the 65 Db CNEL standard."
2. "Speed reduction will allow the diverted Moss Street traffic to be placed on a portion of
Naples with no significant change in the acoustic environment. "
3. "There are no significant noise impacts associated with the project implementation (the
street vacation) that require any mitigation. "
4. "Depending upon site layout, the new residences on the triangle parcel may require a
noise wall if side yard or rear yard space abuts on the Naples Street right-of-way. Noise
exposure will need to be evaluated during environmental clearance for the residential
project. "
Onnosition to Vacation
At both the Safety and Planning Commission meetings, a number of residents registered their
complaints relative to this proposed vacation and realignment. A number of letters of opposition
have been received as well as a petition against the vacation containing 67 signatures. The main
concerns were:
1. Increased traffic on Naples Street and Alpine Avenue
Answer: Staff agrees that the proposed closing of Moss Street will divert traffic to the
intersection of Alpine Avenue and Naples Street. An increase in stacking is unavoidable
at the intersection during peak hours due to the realignment. The applicant will be
required to widen Alpine Avenue and provide a right and left turn lane at that
intersection. Staff believes that with the installation of the street improvements and an
all way stop, the traffic would flow satisfactorily (see Exhibit "E"). Staff feels that the
traffic flow on Moss and Naples Streets will remain essentially the same as they currently
exists. Staff anticipates that there will be a minor increase on Naples Street of 5 percent
or less. Staff believes that the westbound motorists intending to go to Moss Street west
of Third Avenue or to the portion of Moss Street east of Third Avenue will still turn on
Alpine Avenue rather than go the 1/4 mile out of the way through at least one more
traffic signal to stay on Naples Street.
2. The request for a waiver of sidewalk along the north side of Moss Street between
Alpine Avenue and Third Avenue which could, according to the individuals
testifying, encourage schoolchildren to use Naples Street with its lack of
sidewalk.
/~-7
Page 8, Item / ~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Answer: Staff believes that the lack of sidewalk on the north side of Moss Street has
little bearing on the amount on foot traffic on Naples Street. Moss Street has sidewalk
on the south side, and there is no reason for schoolchildren to walk on the north side.
3. Increased noise and air pollution
Answer: In the Noise Impact section of this report, page 7, it was concluded that the
project will not create any significant noise impacts and that mitigation is not required.
The traffic flow on Moss and Naples Streets west of the north leg of Alpine Avenue will
remain essentially the same as currently exists, however, there will be a minor increase
on Naples Street of 5 percent or less. The existing ADT of 6050 will increase to an
approximate ADT of 6350. This limited increase in traffic flow will not result in a
significant impact to Air Quality on a regional level since this is only a redistribution of
trips and not an increase.
4. Speed of traffic on Moss and Naples Streets
Answer: Installation of the all-way stop should help to slow the traffic on Naples and
Moss Streets in the vicinity of Alpine Avenue.
5. Concerns relating to left turns from both sides of Alpine Avenue onto Naples
Street.
Answer: Although the distance on Naples Street between the two legs of Alpine Avenue
is relatively short, staff feels that motorists at the stop sign will have adequate time to
judge whether the turn is safe. This combined with the very low traffic volume on the
south leg of Alpine Avenue (260 ADT) and the offset of the intersections in the direction
favorable to the flow of traffic, should prevent conflicting movements.
6. Residents were concerned that the parcel would be developed with higher density
than they feel should be allowed.
Answer: The vacation will not be effective until the applicant receives approval by the
City of the proposed development of the property. Residents would be notified of the
proposed development or any other changes which might be proposed. Any change in
zoning to increase density would require hearings before the Planning Commission and
City Council as previously discussed.
Public Notice
Due to the amount of opposition which has been generated against this project, staff has
exceeded the public hearing notification area to include property owners within a radius of 1,000
feet (instead of the required 300 feet) around the affected portion of Moss Street, plus all signers
of the above-mentioned petition, plus owners of properties on Second Avenue between Moss and
Naples Streets, Karen Way (the cui de sac north of Naples Street), along Moss Street and Naples
I~..f
Page 9, Item Ie;-
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Street between Alpine Avenue and Third Avenue, with the exception of the condominium owners
at the west end of Moss Street near Third Avenue.
The posted and mailed notices indicated that Council will consider IS 94-01 along with the street
vacation. The notices were mailed on November 2,1994 in order to meet the legal requirements
for the initial study.
COUNCIL OUESTIONS FROM NOVEMBER 1. 1994 MEETING
1. PRESCRIPTIVE RIGHTS
The City Attorney recommends, in a memorandum to Council included as an attachment to this
report (Exhibit "a"), that we abstain from rendering a legal opinion on whether the public
acquired a prescriptive easement because the City doesn't want the parcel, and we would be
giving the public gratuitous legal advice without fully researching the history of public use, and
at the legal risk of being wrong. It also discusses requirements to obtain a prescriptive easement
such as having the use be open and notorious, adverse and hostile, continuous and uninterrupted.
Notices of Consent filed by Mr. Ferreira in 1981 and 1990 allow permissive use of the property
and thus take away the adverse and hostile use by the public since 1981, but not necessarily
prior to that time.
2. IMPACTS OF CONSTRUCTING ALPINE AVENUE TO ALIGN WITH THE
SOUTHERLY SEGMENT.
Impacts associated with the alignment of Alpine Avenue with the southerly segment would be:
a) The need for the City to install the street improvements at a cost of $110,000 including
design, contingencies and inspection. This price also includes the cost of removing the
existing portion of Moss Street that would be eliminated and the improvements on
existing Alpine north of Naples Street. As an additional consideration, since the owner
of the subject piece of property would be an unwilling party to this arrangement,
improvements on the north side of Moss Street along the country club would not be
achieved.
b) The need to obtain an easement from the applicant of adequate size to install standard
improvements. This would be required even if the City were able to obtain a
prescriptive easement for the portion being used because that portion is not adequate to
install a standard intersection. The additional cost of acquisition of right of way without
consideration of prescriptive rights is estimated at $17,000, not including the probable
costs of eminent domain.
c) The need to vacate the existing northerly segment of Alpine Avenue in order to make the
remaining portion of the triangular lot large enough to build upon. In addition, that
portion of Alpine Avenue should also be vacated to prevent having two intersections
within 100 feet of each other, creating a potentially hazardous condition.
1~-9
Page 10, Item I~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
d) If the existing section of Alpine Avenue north of Naples Street is removed, the two
existing houses adjacent to Alpine Avenue would no longer have front yards. Installation
of a fence at the property line would restrict the view from the front of the house.
3. AREA OF THE PARCEL OWNED BY APPLICANT
At the November 1,1994 Council meeting, Ms. Jean Taylor indicated that she had contacted the
County Map Division and a title company and they indicated that the triangular parcel was 6534
square feet rather than the 8323 square feet stated in the staff report. Ms. Taylor had obtained
a property profIle from the title company which indicated the 6534 square feet (see Exhibit "K").
Staff has not pursued this with the title company but believes that the lot information came from
the assessor's maps which do not indicate areas under 0.50 acres. Exhibit"L" is a copy of the
assessors map and within the subject parcel there is delineation as follows: POR.15. In actuality.
POR. 15 means a portion of Lot 15 of Map 505. If the .15 was assumed to be the acreage, the
square footage would be exactly 6534 square feet. A search of City records did not indicate that
the parcel was not mapped by either a parcel map or subdivision map. In addition, no record
could be found that the parcel was mapped by a Record of Survey. Records of Survey would
be indicated in the title report and non were listed, please see Exhibit "M".
Staff has run a mathematical closure on the triangular parcel in question based upon the legal
description contained in the title report (by the same title company that did the property profIle
mentioned above) in order to establish the square footage of the parcel. (see Exhibit A). The
closure was not based upon a surveyor an extensive search of monuments in the area and
therefore is not exact and could change upon a thorough survey of the property. The
calculations indicate that the parcel contains 8321 square feet. Our previous report indicated
8323 square feet. No change in our calculations have been made since the difference is minor
and without an actual survey there is no way to know the exact number. Regardless of the size
of Country Club Villa Estates parcel, the price analysis is based on the publicly owned parcel
and not the privately owned parcel.
4. PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT ISSUES
The City's Pavement Management System software suggested in 1988 that this segment of Moss
Street should be reconstructed. However, the reconstruction of a street is the most costly of all
maintenance alternatives. As such, once the pavement has deteriorated to the point it can no
longer be effectively maintained with a less expensive and more cost effective overlay, the actual
reconstruction can be deferred a number of years. The availability of funds for such work, more
pressing demands for the use of these funds on more heavily travelled streets, the pending
development of the property adjacent to this segment of the street, and the fact that the pavement
had already deteriorated to a need for reconstruction all argued against the immediate work, and
it was not included in our current overlay program. Likewise, the future reconstruction of
Naples Street between Alpine and Third Avenue was indicated in the 1993 run of the Pavement
Management System program. The surface of the Naples Street segment appears substantially
better than that of Moss Street, and with the designation of "future" reconstruction no effort has
been made thus far to schedule work on the street for an overlay program.
I ~ ...It>
Page 11, Item I ~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
As a further factor, the field data previously collected for the pavement management program
has an effective life span of approximately five years before time, traffic and the elements causes
it to become outdated. Consequently, our data, which has exceeded that lifespan, has become
outdated and a project STL-211 was placed in the current CIP budget to contract with a
consultant specializing in pavement testing for testing and collection of data on the current
condition of City street pavements. This information will be used to update the program to
provide the most cost effective maintenance program. It is expected that, because of the
condition of the pavement and both Naples and Moss Streets, we will have a more in depth
project level analysis done on these streets rather than the more general network analysis.
S. EAST-WEST STREETS IN MONTGOMERY AREA
A report on the major east-west streets in Montgomery is almost complete. That report will
prioritize projects along Moss, Naples, Oxford and Palomar Streets. Widening of Palomar Street
between 1-5 and Industrial Boulevard is proposed in the current 5 year program for FY 97-98.
Main Street from Fourth Avenue to Hilltop is proposed for construction in Fy 98-99.
Staff is currently working with the Community Development Department and citizens groups to
prioritize street and drainage improvements in the Castle Park area. Projects in this program
will be proposed to be funded with CDBG funds.
Conclusion
This is an opportunity for the City to clean up an area that may otherwise remain "under
improved" . For example:
1. No curb and gutter along Moss Street between Third Avenue and Naples Street
2. No curb, gutter and sidewalk along Naples between Alpine Avenue (north side)
and Moss Street
3. Less than desirable intersection angle for Naples Street and Moss Street.
This area adjacent to the Country Club between Third Avenue and Naples Street could be
improved at no cost to the City or the Country Club. Staff believes that most of the concerns
of the Citizens could be mitigated by a stop sign at Naples Street and Alpine Avenue (northerly
extension) and by having Council approval of development plans for the triangular parcel prior
to recording the resolution of vacation.
Recommendation
After reviewing past studies and their recommendations regarding the vacation and realignment,
staff maintains the position that the most practical means to realign the intersection is to vacate
the portion of Moss Street similar to that proposed by the applicant.
/S:-II
I ( )
)J
Page 12, Item
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Following the direction of the Safety and Planning Commissions, staff recommends that Council
adopt a resolution adopting Negative Declaration and Addendum on IS 94-01 and ordering the
vacation of Moss Street as proposed by the applicant subject to the following conditions:
1. Owner/developer pay the City $100,000 for the vacated right-of-way or, at the Council's
option, install missing curb and gutter along the north side of Moss Street from Alpine
Avenue to Third Avenue or place the $100,000 in the Neighborhood Revitalization
Program for this area.
2. An all-way stop will be established at the intersection of Naples Street and the portion
of Alpine Avenue north of Naples Street.
3. The owner/developer shall dedicate sufficient street right-of-way to widen Alpine Avenue
north of Naples to 52 feet curb-to-curb in order to facilitate traffic flow at the
intersection.
4. The developer/owner will install all needed street improvements along the parcel's Alpine
Avenue and Naples Street frontages when the physical closing of Moss Street takes place.
5. Retain an easement 20 feet wide for Sweetwater Authority along the northerly side of
Moss Street.
6. Restrict access to Alpine Avenue to those locations approved by the City Engineer and
Director of Planning.
7. Require all discretionary approvals by the City to be approved prior to completion and
recordation of the street vacation.
8. If all or part of the small triangle to the south is held to be a public easement, this order
of vacation shall have no further force or effect, and be deemed revoked ab initio.
FISCAL IMPACT: All costs to process the vacation are paid by the applicant. Income from
compensation of $100,000 for the right-of-way if the cash offer is accepted by Council, none
if the improvements are not considered as compensation.
AUachments: Exhibit . A.: ~ Plat showing areas to be vacated and the vacant parcel
Exhibit OB": Copy of report to Cooncil on rcquelt by SID Diego Countly Club for reHef from reqWremems to install improvements along
the north side of Moss Street.
Exhibit . C.;" Plat showing aligmnent of Moss Street (if subject portion is vacated) .. reccmmended by the Safety Commission
Exhibit "D":. Plat showing an alternate alignment suggested (but not fP~P.f'dNl).
Exhibit "E": Plat showing ~""""M improvements to be done at DeW intersection
Exhibit "P"; Safety Commission Minutes fmnmeetiqj: of 9/9/93 NII'- _~""IUAJ 81)
Exhibit .0"; P1anniQg CommissionMiDutea from meetins of 10m/93 I' ,
Exhibit: "H": ReIOUl'Ce ConselVation Commission Minutes from meeting 11/22/93" "
Exhibit "I"; Residential. Notification Lm /tI.T ~CAlJlJi t>
Exhibit "r: Closure of triaugulu parcel . ,
Exhibit "K": Property profile Fidelity National Title ,1
Exhibit "L": Asseasorplat .t
Exhilift "M': P1>Hmlna1y TItle Report l'idoIio/ NotioMl TItle ,/
Exhibit "N": . Negative Declaration and A.ddendum. IS 94-01
Bxhibit .0": Memorandum from City Attorney
Exhilift "P": Minuteo from Nov....ber 1, 1994 Counoil Meeting I'J IJ" ~ CO ,., I.J AJ II' '"
PUe No. PV-057 WAU/JWH!JPL [M:\HOhlB~OINEER\AOENDA\RESO _V AC.JWH]
\S" ,~
RESOLUTION NO.
)i1D4
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE VACATION OF A PORTION
OF MOSS STREET FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH
NAPLES STREET WESTERLY TO ALPINE AVENUE, NORTH
OF NAPLES STREET
WHEREAS, Country Club Villa Estates, owner of the
triangular piece of property between Moss and Naples Streets
westerly of the juncture of those streets has requested that the
City vacate the portion of Moss Street between Alpine Avenue and
the aforementioned intersection; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Streets and
Highways Code, the Council adopted Resolution No. 17681 at its
meeting on October 4, 1994, setting the associated public hearing
for November 1, 1994; and
WHEREAS, the Resource Conservation commission considered
the Negative Declaration at its meeting of November 22, 1993 and
voted 5-0 to accept the Negative Declaration for IS 94-01 (Moss
Street Vacation); and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Negative Declaration and
Addendum to the Negative Declaration thereon (IS-94-01) of possible
significant environmental impacts of the vacation of Moss Street
was issued by the Environmental Review Coordinator; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting held September 9, 1993, the
Safety Commission approved a staff report by a vote of 6-0
recommending that the street be vacated with three conditions:
a. Widen Alpine Avenue between Moss and Naples Streets
to 52 feet (curb-to-curb)
b. Provide an all-way "STOP" at the intersection
c. Prohibit access to Alpine Avenue from applicant's
property
WHEREAS, at a public hearing held October 27, 1993, the
Planning commission found that the proposed vacation would be
consistent with the existing General Plan; however, the Planning
commission recommended on a vote of 6-0-0-1 (Commissioner Fuller
abstaining due to a conflict of interest) that the issue of the
vacation be considered in conjunction with the proposed development
of the property and not separate from it and staff concurs with
this requirement; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting held on October 4, 1994, Council
adopted Resolution 17681 stating the Council's intent to vacate a
portion of Moss Street; and
/~/3
WHEREAS, in accordance with S8320 of the Streets and
Highways Code, the resolution also set November I, 1994 at 6:00
p.m. as the date and time for the public hearing for the Council to
consider this matter; and
WHEREAS, notices required by Streets and Highways Code
S8323 have been posted; and
WHEREAS, Tuesday, the 1st day of November, 1994 at 6:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Chula vista was fixed
as the time and place for hearing any objections to such vacation,
and the Council having heard all interested persons.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the city of Chula
vista does hereby find, order, determine and resolve as follows:
section 1. That the proposed Moss Street vacation will
have no significant environmental impacts and adopts the Negative
Declaration and Addendum to the Negative Declaration issued under
1S-94-01 and that the City Council finds that the Negative
Declaration on 1S-94-01 and Addendum has been prepared in
accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act, the State E1R Guidelines, and the Environmental Review
Procedures of the city of Chula vista.
section 2. That City Council does hereby order the
vacation of the subject portion of Moss Street, more particularly
described in Attachment 1, attached hereto and incorporated herein
by reference as if set forth in full, with the following
conditions:
1. The owner/developer pay the City $100,000 for the vacated
right-of-way, or, at the Council's option, install
missing curb and gutter along the north side of Moss
Street from Alpine Avenue to Third Avenue or place the
$100,000 in the Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP)
for this area.
2. An all-way stop at the intersection of Naples Street and
the portion of Alpine Avenue north of Naples Street.
3. Alpine Avenue north of Naples widened to 52 feet curb-to-
curb with dedication of the needed right-of-way.
4. The developer/owner of the triangular parcel install all
needed street improvements along the parcel's Alpine
Avenue and Naples Street frontages.
5. Retain an easement 20 feet wide for Sweetwater Authority.
6. Restrict access to Alpine Avenue to those locations
approved by the City Engineer and Director of Planning.
\S..,~
7. Completion of all discretionary approvals for the
development of the parcel.
8. If all or part of the small triangle to the south is held
to be a public easement, this order of vacation shall
have no further force or effect, and be deemed revoked ab
initio.
section 3. That the City Council does hereby find that
the Negative Declaration IS 94-01 reflects the independent judgment
of the City of Chula vista City Council.
section 4. That the city Clerk is hereby directed to
record a certified copy of this resolution with the office of the
San Diego County Recorder.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaard, City
Attorney
C:\rs\vacation
.
\S ..15
..
eo'
~I
a! ~
=
~i ~
(")
0 =
~ ~
~
-
0 > ~
2 ..
< S. ALPINE AVENUE
0
-
"!!l "J: F
~ ~ ..
0 >
CI:l Z
CI:l ~ ~
CI:l ~ ~
~ >
" z
~ z I
~ -
~ z IXI
~
I
I') 1iJ ~
~~~
!II III ~
~ ,. ~
..
c
~>
> -I
"
~
3:
~ ..
z
~
..--
III. .
:. - .
..--
o . .
.!~
-
'- FIRST AVENUE
-
..
;i"l~
III 1::Ji~
..
~
't.
ALPINE AVENUE
I
.0'
. ~ /15-/IP
I (tI""".' :::
. :.v~~ :::
~~ '. ...
n it II
! I
~
.
ADDENDUM TO IS-94-01 VACATION OF A PORTION OF MOSS STREET
PROJECT NAME: Vacation of a portion of Moss Street
PROJECT LOCATION: Moss Street between Naples Street and Alpine Avenue
PROJECT APPLICANT: San Diego Country Club and Country Club Villa Estates
PROJECT AGENT:
Greg Cox of Cox and Associates
CASE NO.:
IS-94-0 I
I. INTRODUCTION
The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the Environmental Review
Coordinator (ERe) to prepare an addendum to a Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact
Report, if one of the following conditions is present:
.
1. The minor changes in the project design which have occurred since completion of the
Final EIR or Negative Declaration have not created any new significant environmental
impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative Declaration;
2. Additional or refined information available since completion of the Final EIR or
Negative Declaration regarding the potential environmental impact of the project, or
regarding the measures or alternatives available to mitigate potential environmental
effects of the project, does not show that the project will have one or more significant
impacts which were not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative Declaration.
This addendum has been prepared in order to amend the project description to include additional
requirements that will improve traffic circulation . These minor changes are improvements to the
proJect and will further reduce the potential of any significant environmental impacts. As a result of
this analysis, the basic conclusions within the negative declaration have not changed. All impacts are
found to be less than significant. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA
Guidelines, the City has prepared the following addendum to the negative declaration for the vacation
of a portion of Moss Street.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
.
The proposed project originally consisted of the vacation or closing of a 30,800 sq. ft. section of Moss
Street east of Alpine Avenue and west of First Avenue. The northern portion of Moss Street will
become part of the holdings of the San Diego Country Club and the southern half would be added to
the triangularly shaped parcel to the south. Discretionary actions that are required for this include the
/5-/7
\ f /?
:7
fmding of General Plan Consistency and the action for approval of the closing of Moss Street. The
applicant's eventual plan is that the San Diego Country Club will quit-claim or transfer title of their ~
portion of Moss Street to the County Club Villa Estate's partnership in consideration of the Country
Club Villa Estate's partnership installing the missing curbs and gutters on the San Diego Country Club
side of the Street. Access to the property will be allowed along Naples; however, access on Moss
Street will be limited to one driveway at a location determined to provide safe ingress and egress by
the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant eventually plans to apply for a tentative parcel map for 4
units or subdivide the property into 5 units. Under the original project description, the applicant was
required to widen Alpine Avenue from the current 20 feet to 52 feet. The developer will install curb
and gutter, and pavement along the north side of Moss Street between Third Avenue and Alpine
Avenue. The installation of street improvements on the east side of Alpine Avenue between Moss
Street and Naples Street and pavement, curb, and gutter on the north side of Naples Street, between
Alpine Avenue and the current intersection of Moss Street and Naples Street will be a requirement
of the development of the triangular parcel. The amended project description includes a stop sign
installed on Naples at Moss Street, to create a three-way stop controlled intersection and attendant
warning devices as deemed necessary by the City Traffic Engineer. These traffic measures enhance
traffic safety and provide more efficient flow of traffic within this area adjacent to the project. These
street improvements were included to address the traffic concerns of residents.
III, PROJECT SETTING
The project setting consists of a 30,800 square foot section of Moss Street immediately east of the
westerly stub street of Alpine Avenue and immediately north of the intersection of First A venue and
Naples Street. Immediately south of the above described section of Moss Street is a vacant 8,322.98 ""'"
square foot triangular piece of vacant land. Single family homes are located to the west across Alpine
Avenue and to the south across Naples Street. The San Diego Country Club, a golf course with club
house facilities, is located to the immediate north of Moss Street. To the east of the proposed project
is neighborhood shopping.
III. IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Traffic
The negative declaration analyzed potential environmental effects of the project and found that all
impacts could be mitigated to a level below significance. Some of the concerns raised by residents
subsequent to the negative declaration being posted with the County of San Diego on September 27,
1993, included concerns of: (I) Increased traffic and high speed, (2) Stacking of traffic on Alpine
going onto Naples, (3) Air Quality, (4) Safety of children going to school and (5) that the closing of
Moss Street at Alpine would create a knuckle of 90 degrees which would be dangerous. Engineering
staff responded as follows:
(1)
Increased traffic and hil!h sneed - The proposed project intersection is currently at Level of
Service (LOS) "A" and will remain at "A" after the project is completed. Traffic flow will
improve in the area. Conflicts with other vehicles will be reduced from the widening, which
will allow separate turning lanes. Traffic will also slow down with the installation of a stop
sign on Naples at Moss Street, creating an all-way stop.
"""
/5-/8
.
.
e
~I~IS ~~-f
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item II
Meeting Date 11/1/94
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing to consider the vacation of the portion of Moss Street from
its intersection with Naples Street westerly to Alpine Avenue, north of
Naples Street
Resolution I""""o~
Street described above
ordering the vacation of the portion of Moss
rr;r/
SUBMITTED BY: Director of p/,orks
REVJEWED BY: City Manage/! .. (4/5 Vote: Yes_ No.X">
Country Club Villa Estates, owner IJ the triangular piece of property between Moss and Naples
Streets westerly of the juncture of those streets has requested that the City vacate the portion of
Moss Street between Alpine Avenue and the aforementioned intersection (see Exhibit" An). In
accordance with the California Streets and Highways Code, the Council adopted Resolution No.
17681 at its meeting on October 4, 1994, setting the associated public hearing for November I,
1994.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council hold the subject hearing, adopt the subject resolution
ordering the vacation of the subject portion of Moss Street with the following conditions:
1. The owner/developer pay the City $100,000 for the vacated right-of-way (or, at
the Council's option, install missing curb and gutter along the north side of Moss
Street from Alpine Avenue to Third Avenue).
2. An all-way stop be installed at the intersection of Naples Street and the portion
of Alpine Avenue north of Naples Street.
3. Alpine Avenue north of Naples be widened to 52 feet curb-to-curb with
dedication of the needed right-of-way.
4. The developer/owner of the triangular parcel shall install all needed street
improvements along the parcel's Alpine Avenue and Naples Street frontages.
5. Retain an easement 20 feet wide for Sweetwater Authority.
6. Restrict access to Alpine Avenue to those locations approved by the City Engineer
and Director of Planning.
7. Completion of all discretionary approvals for the development of the parcel.
The street vacation would not become effective or recorded until all the above conditions are met
or assured.
~3'-)?
Page 2, Item 1\
Meeting Date 1111/94
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDA nON:
"""""
I. The Resource Conservation Commission considered the Negative Declaration on
November 22, 1993. The Commission voted 5-0 to accept the Negative Declaration for
IS 94-01 (Moss Street Vacation).
2. At its meeting held September 9, 1993, the Safety Commission approved a staff report
by a vote of 6-0 recommending that the street be vacated with three conditions:
a. Widen Alpine Avenue between Moss and Naples Streets to 52 feet (curb-
to-curb)
b. Provide an all-way "STOP" at the intersection
c. Prohibit access to Alpine Avenue from applicant's property
(As shown in Exhibit "E")
3.
At a public hearing held October 27, 1993, the Planning Commission found that the
proposed vacation would be consistent with the existing General Plan; however, the
Planning Commission recommended on a vote of 6-0-0-1 (Commissioner Fuller
abstaining due to a conflict of interest) that the issue of the vacation be considered in
conjunction with the proposed development of the property and not separate from it.
Staff concurs with this requirement.
""'"
,
DISCUSSION:
Back2round
In 1956, the City approved plans for the adjacent subdivision east of Alpine Avenue, Robinhood
No.2, showing the curb and gutter on the east side of Alpine Avenue to be installed as part of
a knuckle design, similar to what is now being proposed. However, the improvements were
never constructed. Research of our records did not indicate the reason they were not built.
In February 1988, the City Council considered a request from the San Diego Country Club for
relief from requirements for installation of improvements on Moss Street (see Council Agenda
Statement, Exhibit "B"). That requirement was generated by the request for a temporary club
house gaining access from Naples Street. It was determined that the improvements along Naples
would be constructed at such time as permanent development occurred along the Naples frontage
or by an assessment district if the south side of Naples installed street improvements by an
assessment district. The improvements along Moss Street were not made a condition at that time
and it was inte'nded to impose them at the time that the permanent club house was built on "L"
Street. When the building permit for the permanent club house was processed it was determined
by staff that a nexus could not be made that the construction of the new club house on "L" Street ~
placed a burden on Moss Street and therefore a condition to build the curb and gutter on Moss
Street was not made a condition of the building permit.
~ J5,/g
.
.
.
Page 3, Item---1L-
Meeting Date 11/1/94
Country Club representatives at that time did verbally agree that they saw a benefit to install
curb and gutter along Moss Street and indicated that they would commit to participate in area
improvements through Assessment ~istrict proceedings if the general area did so. That has not
happened, and this proposal will provide an opportunity to get the improvements installed on
Moss Street.
Pro9osal
The developer (owner of the triangle parcel, Country Club Villa Estates) has made an offer to
the San Diego Country Club that if the City will vacate the portion of Moss Street between
Naples Street and Alpine Avenue at no cost and if the S.D. Country Club would grant the
northerly half of Moss Street to the developer at no cost, the developer will install curb, gutter
and pavement along the north side of Moss Street between Third Avenue and Alpine Avenue.
The installation of street improvements on the east side of Alpine Avenue between Moss Street
and Naples Street and pavement, curb, gutter and sidewalk on the north side of Naples Street,
between Alpine Avenue and the current intersection of Moss Street and Naples Street will be a
condition of the vacation or requirement of the development of the triangular parcel.
Parcel Information
The existing parcel containing 8323 square feet (s.f.) is designated low-medium residential (3-6
dwelling units per acre) on the City's General Plan and is zoned R-1 (single family). Upon
vacation of Moss Street, another 12,259 s.f. would revert to the Country Club Villa Estates
Parcel and 18,544 s.f. to the Country Club. If the Country Club portion were combined with
the Country Club Villa Estates portion, the parcel would contain 39,126 s.f.
Currently Alpine Avenue has a street right-of-way of 60 feet. In order to meet the General Plan
designation, the right-of-way must be 72 feet in width. Consequently, street dedication for
Alpine Avenue would be required. That dedication would be approximately 1,000 s.f., leaving
a parcel containing approximately 38,000 s.f. (see Exhibit" A"). This could, theoretically, be
subdivided into five single family lots if the configuration of the parcel would support it.
Alilmment Alternatives
The alignment recommended by staff is shown on Exhibit "C" indicating that Moss Street be
curved southerly at its intersection with the present alignment of Alpine Avenue. This option
was recommended by the Safety Commission and supported by the Planning Commission with
the conditions stated herein. This option will allow the use of the existing street improvements
on Alpine Avenue lowering the cost to install the public improvements necessary to provide a
full street. It also provides the developer with the best configuration for developing the property
in a logical manner.
Another option studied was to relocate the northerly portion of Alpine Avenue to meet the
existing portion of Alpine Avenue on the south side (Exhibit "0"). This would necessitate
obtaining an easement from the applicant which would bisect the existing parcel. As was
indicated at the Safety Commission and Planning Commission hearings, the public has apparently
.~/YII
.-
(2)
Stacking of traffic on Alpine going on to Naples - The requirement that the applicant install
an all-way stop at the North end of Alpine will reduce the queuing effect caused by motorists
waiting for an adequate gap in traffic. The street section of Naples that the applicant will be
required to construct would adequately handle the expected traffic in the area.
(3) Air Oualitv - Concern was raised about the air quality at Moss where it intersects with Naples
as a result of traffic that is sometimes backed up, going east six to eight cars deep. Staff
consulted with an Air Quality expert who stated that the project is in conformance with the
existing Air Basin Plan.
(4) Safety of Children - Residents stated that it would be dangerous for elementary school children
to walk to school along Naples without a sidewalk. The addition of a stop sign installed on
Naples at Moss to create a three-way stop controlled intersection and attendent warning devices
will improve the safety of the area. If the applicant does proceed at a later date with plans for
a subdivison, then the applicant would be required to fund the construction of sidewalks within
the subdivision and may be required to fund some of the offsite infrasture as well.
(5) Closing of Moss Street creating a "Dogleg"- Concerns were raised that the closing off of Moss
Street at Alpine would create a "dogleg" of 90 degrees which would be quite dangerous with
the rate of speed the cars traveling on Moss Street. The traffic engineering staff will review
the proposed plans when submitted and will apply applicable City and State roadway standards.
~
V.
CONCLUSION
Traffic impacts are found to be less than significant and within the acceptable range of LOS C or
better in accordance with the City of Chula Vista's General Plan. Pursuant to Section 15164 of the
State CEQA Guidelines and based upon the above discussion, I hereby find that the project revisions
to the proposed project will result in only minor technical changes or additions which are necessary
to make the Negative Declaration adequate under CEQA.
REFERENCES
General Plan, City of Chula Vista
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
City of Chula Vista Environmental Review Procedures
EIR -89-11
Memorandum from Hans Giroux to Barbara Reid, 10/22/93 and telephone conservation re: Air Quality
-
,./
/5-/9
)5'1J
Page 4, Item 'I
Meeting Date 11/1/94
been using that alignment as a shortcut for a number of years. Aerial photos taken since 1960
indicate a tire-worn area created by vehicles crossing from the l' -intersection, across the vacant
land and meeting Moss Street on its south side.
""""
Desiring this realignment, public input has indicated they believed that the City had the right-of-
way for that extension by prescriptive rights. A street easement could possibly be obtained
through prescriptive rights or condemnation, but both actions would require court action and
could be quite costly. The property owner, on the other hand, indicates that although vehicles
have been cutting across the property, the area has been blocked at least one day a year since
acquiring the land, thus precluding any taking of the easement by prescriptive rights. The owner
would object in court if the City attempts to claim prescriptive rights.
In addition, should the City condemn property in order to align Alpine Avenue with the portion
south of Naples Street, the usability of the remaining portion of the land would result in a parcel
that could not be developed to the extent that all the street improvements could be required of
the developer. This would require the City to pay for the majority of the improvements as well
as remove the existing Alpine Avenue improvements. In addition, the two houses adjacent to
Alpine Avenue would have to change their address.
Staff believes that lining up the two sections of Alpine Avenue is not critical because of the low
traffic volume on the portion of Alpine Avenue south of Naples Street (260 average daily trips)
It is also staff's belief that the recommended alignment (Exhibit "C"), doing away with the '"""'
existing angled intersection is a significant improvement.
The existing curb return at the southwest corner of Moss Street and Alpine Avenue has sufficient
radius so as not to require reconstruction or additional dedication for the proposed Alpine
Avenue alignment adjacent to the existing homes.
Accident Record
According to accident records from January I, 1990, through the end of August, 1994, there
have been four reported accidents at the intersection of Moss/Naples/First. One of these
accidents involved a single vehicle traveling west hitting the chain link fence along the Country
Club property line. This accident occurred ,in 1990. The other three accidents involved
eastbound vehicles entering the intersection and failing to yield the right of way to eastbound
vehicles (2) and a westbound vehicle on Naples Street.
Another reported accident occurred to the east of the intersection in question. It involved an
eastbound motorist on Naples Street turning south into the 1100 block of Alpine Avenue and
being broad-sided by a motorcyclist attempting to pass the car on the right shoulder.
Only one other mishap occurred in the area within the last three years, which involved a single
car hitting the same chain link fence just east of the 1000 block of Alpine Avenue.
'"""'
The low number of accidents at the intersection can probably be attributed to the fact that, due
to the hazards preseI:~d by the acute angle of the intersection, drivers tend to be extremely
~/~.20
LEGEND:
G.t~co-rz
r:;~;,~-:,.',:'l .... STREET VACATION.
PAPCE L t-J CZ: 1. - 0.28 k
VIII! II ,.... 5iP-EET vACAilON
PARCEL N2.. Z -0.44Ac..
5.1 f; ~ .~ /
\.. ~O~
c:....GI.u& ~ J::t
""oS!> ~1 SITE ~
N~f'\..~S S1 SCALE: ,".100'
\ -
.. ~
~
'"
VICINITY MAP w.t> t.Jl!.' ~&
CNiS) 15
..
. '.
MAP ~~
Ii 52.
.
N4.~15~.E
P~EPA~EO BY:
A\...GE~ ENG\I'teE~ING. INC.
42.8 e,ROADWA'(
Cl-luLA VISiA, CA. "'ZOIO
("'19) 4%0-,00.0
/5~ UJ
SAMES 1-1. A\..GERT, RCE' 190'?>
,.
CIT'l' OF C\-IU\..A VISi'A
.........,..."".,. "^,, A-r'l'It..r, U(')a,e, C,T~FET - !;ETWEEN ALPINE. AVE" &- 1 ~ AVE
~
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
FOR
THE VACATION OF MOSS STREET
BETWEEN ALPINE AVENUE AND NAPLES STREET
PARCEL 1 AND 2
PARCEL 1:
A PORTION OF LOT 15 IN QUARTER SECTION 120 OF CHULA VISTA, IN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO.505, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, MARCH 13, 1888, DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOW~:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF ROBINHOOD SUBDIVISION NO.
2, ACCORDING TO ~~P NO. 3488, ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BEING ~~SO A POINT ON THE
CENTER LINE OF MOSS STREET, SAID POINT BEING ON THE ARC OF A 2,740
FOOT RADIUS CIRCLE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 4047'51" EAST,
A DISTANCE OF 2,740 FEET FROM SAID CORNER; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY
ALONG SAID ARC, A DISTANCE OF 32.59 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF ........
BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ~~ONG THE ARC OF SAID CIRCLE, A
DISTANCE OF 383.63 FEET TOA POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF NAPLES STREET, FORMERLY KNOWN AS SIXTH STREET, AS
SHO~~ ON SAID MAP NO. 505, SAID POINT HAVING A RADIAL LINE WHICH
BEARS NORTH 30 54' 21" WEST; THENCE SOUTH 71023' WEST ALONG SAID
NORTH LINE OF N~~LES STREET, A DISTANCE OF 143.80 FEET TO A POINT
ON THE ARC OF A 2,780 FOOT RADIUS CIRCLE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS
NORTH 1002'17" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2,780 FEET FROM SAID POINT;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CIRCLE, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 4048'39", A DISTANCE OF 233.42 FEET; THENCE NORTH
18031' WEST, 43.2~ FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
"'""
PAGE
/5 ... J..I I
.
.
.
Page 5, Item 'I
Meeting Date 11/1/94
cautious when making turning movements. None of the accidents mentioned appear to be
attributable to the existing geometries. As indicated, the majority of the accidents are a result
of drivers failing to yield the right-of-way.
Comnensation for Vacated Area
Council has, in the past, required payment for streets which have been vacated although there
is no official Council Policy relative to payment for vacated right-of-way. Each circumstance
has been considered on its own merit. In some instances payment has been for the whole area
vacated, in other cases, payment has been for the difference between the area vacated and the
area dedicated. Some streets have been vacated at no cost (Power Center in Rancho Del Rey
Business Center) because that issue was addressed in the Disposition and Development
Agreement (DDA). The County assessor's office has verbally indicated that the vacated right-
of-way parcel would be appraised at $50,000. Staff has obtained sales comparisons for other
raw land in the area for the past three years. The price per square foot of unencumbered area
has ranged from $4.00 to $9.00 per square foot. In this case, staff has used a lower price of
$5.00 for estimating the value of the vacated area. This is based on telephone input from the
assessor, the recent drop in raw land values, and difficult configuration of the parcel.
There is a water line in the existing Moss Street which the Sweetwater Authority has requested
a 20 foot easement be retained. Since the easement will prohibit the construction of any
structure within it, staff estimates that the value of the easement area to be 50 % of full value or
$2.50 per square foot. The water easement will contain approximately 11,500 square feet (s.f.)
Therefore, staff estimates that the value of the vacated land to be 11,500 s. f. multiplied by $2.50
plus 18,300 s.f. multiplied by $5.00 or $120,250.
The applicant has proposed to install off-site missing street lights, curb and gutter along the
north side of Moss Street between Alpine Avenue and Third Avenue in return for the vacated
right-of-way. The improvements are estimated by staff to cost $130,000.00. They do not
propose to install sidewalk along this frontage because they feel that it might be hazardous to
pedestrians due to errant golf balls landing in the area. Because there are no homes fronting on
that side, staff believes that use of such a walk would be extremely low and does not believe it
is needed. The estimated additional cost to install sidewalk is $60,000. The improvements to
be installed are in lieu of paying the City or the Country Club for the vacated right of way. The
developer is willing to do either of the following: 1) pay the City $100,000 for the vacated
portion of right-of-way, or; 2) install curb and gutter along the north side of Moss Street from
Alpine Avenue west to Third Avenue. The developer is only willing to give the City $100,000
because he believes that through his contracting abilities, he could build the improvements for
less than $100,000.
If the City accepts the $100,000 payment, then the Country Club would not be responsible to
install the curb and gutter on Moss Street between Alpine Avenue and Third Avenue in the
future unless they redevelop their golf course into a use that requires frontage improvements and
access onto Moss Street. If the City later wishes to have improvements on the north side of
Moss Street, it would be our responsibility to fund them.
~ /Yd/
Page 6, Item \ \
Meeting Date 11/1/94
Future DeveloDment
""""
Any future development of the parcel would require additional action by the City by holding
public hearings and receiving input from residents. All actions would be subject to further City
processing as follows:
1. Should the vacation be approved and the applicant wish to develop the property as now
zoned, they would be required to file an initial study and a subdivision map (for five or
more parcels) on the property showing the proposed parcels. Processing would be
subject to a public hearing before the City Planning Commission and the City Council.
2. Should the applicant propose an increase in density for the property but still within the
General Plan range of 3-6 dwelling units per acre, it would be necessary to file a
rezoning request in addition to the environmental analysis and the subdivision map
process and the zone change would require a public hearing before the Planning
Commission and the City Council with notification to residents.
3.
Should the applicant seek a density increase above the low-medium density range of the
General Plan (3-6 dwelling units per acre), the next highest category (medium density)
is 6-11 dwelling units per acre which would require an amendment to the General Plan
as well as the rezoning application, initial study and subdivision processing necessitating
public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. It should be noted
that any zone change consideration for property from an R-I category to an R-3 category
requires a unanimous vote of the City Council, per the Cummings initiative that was
passed several years ago. This was the initiative that was passed several years ago that
required us to set up a growth control process, and made it harder to upgrade zoning.
""""
4. Should the applicant desire to develop the property into four parcels or less under the
present zoning category, the applicant would file an initial study as well as a parcel map
which is processed at staff level, therefore, the staff approval is final unless appeals are
filed setting a public hearing before the Planning Commission. Any development of the
parcel map process again requires environmental review as well.
Safetv Commission's Recommendation of Limitinl! Access to Alnine Avenue
The Safety Commission recommended that, if the vacation is approved, access to Alpine Avenue
be prohibited from the applicants property upon development. Upon review of this condition
by the Planning and Public Works Departments, it is requested that the requirement for access
to Alpine A venue be subject to the approval of the City Engineer rather than a specific
prohibition. The primary reason being that a complete prohibition of access on to Alpine
Avenue may not be prudent based upon the potential for two lots being created towards the west
end of the project, thus requiring a flag lot design to provide access only to Naples Street. Staff
would prefer to hold this option open until a development plan is put forth for complete """"
evaluation.
~ J~~A
r'Il r'Il
eo' "b
"b
~
:bo
\)
r-
IT)
(J)
en
O.
It.
~- ALPINE AVE.
It.
(J)
-I
:tJ
IT)
IT)
-I
a, FIRST AVE.
c.
...
, -,
-'00'
D D 0
II
~
l./)
~
~
'v
Cb
.0,
."
/5,j#
ao'
:::D
l"T1
c:::
l"T1
:::D
~
C>
z:
-4
C>
"'"
c
C":)
C":)
:::D
l"T1
c:::
l"T1
:::D
~
C>
z:
-4
C>
>-
C
eo-
52
:!:
z:
G")
-,:,
>-
:::D
C":)
l"T1
r-
l"T1
><
c;;
=
z:
G")
-,:,
>-
:::D
C":)
l"T1
r-
d
b\
""""
PARCEL 2:
A PORTION OF LOT 15 IN QUARTER SECTION 120 OF CHULA VISTA, IN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 505, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, Y~RCH 13, 1888.
TOGETHER WITH A PORTION OF THE WESTERLY HALF OF FIFTH AVENUE, AS
VACATED, ADJOINING SAID LOT 15 ON THE EAST, DESCRIBED AS A WHOLE AS
FOLLOWS:
""""
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF ROBINHOOD SUBDIVISION NO.
2, ACCORDING TO MAP NO. 3488, ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BEING ALSO A POINT ON THE
CENTER LINE OF MOSS STREET, SAID POINT BEING ON THE ARC OF A 2,740
FOOT RADIUS CIRCLE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 4047'51" EAST,
A DISTANCE OF 2,740 FEET FROM SAID CORNER; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY
ALONG SAID ALONG SAID ARC, A DISTANCE OF 32.59 FEET TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CIRCLE,
A DISTANCE OF 383.63 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF NAPLES STREET, FORMERLY KNOWN AS SIXTH STREET, AS
SHO~~ ON SAID MAP NO. 505, SAID POINT HAVING A RADIAL LINE WHICH
BEARS NORTH 3054'21" WEST; THENCE NORTH 71"23' EAST J>.LONG SAID
NORTH LINE OF NAPLES STREET, 179.5 FEET TO A POINT IN THE ARC OF A
2,700 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, CONCENTRIC WITH
SAID 2,740 FOOT RADIUS CURVE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID :2,700
FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO A RADIAL LINE OF SAID 2,740 FOOT RADIUS CURVE
BEARING NORTHEASTERLY FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE
SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID RADIAL LINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING ANY PORTION LYING EASTERLY OF THE CENTER LINE OF SAID
VACATED FIFTH AVENUE ADJOINING LOT 15 ON THE EAST.
t.
-
15-;:415'-75
.
.
.
Page 7, Item "
Meeting Date 11/1/94
Noise ImDacts
A noise analysis was performed based upon the impacts of the project with the following
conclusions.
I. "Baseline levels are sufficiently low on Alpine to accommodate an additional estimated
3,000 vehicles and still meet the 65 Db CNEL standard."
2. "Speed reduction will allow the diverted Moss Street traffic to be placed on a portion of
Naples with no significant change in the acoustic environment. "
3. "There are no significant noise impacts associated with the project implementation (the
street vacation) that require any mitigation. "
4. "Depending upon site layout, the new residences on the triangle parcel may require a
noise wall if side yard or rear yard space abuts on the Naples Street right-of-way. Noise
exposure will need to be evaluated during environmental clearance for the residential
project. "
ODDosition to Vacation
At both the Safety and Planning Commission meetings, a number of residents registered their
complaints relative to this proposed vacation and realignment. A number of letters of opposition
have been received as well as a petition against the vacation containing 67 signatures. The main
concerns were:
1. Increased traffic on Naples Street and Alpine Avenue
Answer: Staff agrees that the proposed closing of Moss Street will divert traffic to the
intersection of Alpine Avenue and Naples Street. An increase in stacking is unavoidable
at the intersection during peak hours due to the realignment. The applicant will be
required to widen Alpine Avenue and provide a right and left turn lane at that
intersection. Staff believes that with the installation of the street improvements and an
all way stop, the traffic would flow satisfactorily (see Exhibit "E"). Staff feels that the
traffic flow on Moss and Naples Streets will remain essentially the same as they currently
exists. Staff anticipates that there_will be a minor increase on Naples Street of 5 percent
or less. Staff believes that the westbound motorists intending to go to Moss Street west
of Third A venue or to the portion of Moss Street east of Third A venue will still turn on
Alpine Avenue rather than go the 1/4 mile out of the way through at least one more
traffic signal to stay on Naples Street.
2.
The request for a waiver of sidewalk along the north side of Moss Street between
Alpine Avenue and Third Avenue which could, according to the individuals
testifying, encourage schoolchildren to use Naples Street with its lack of
sidewalk.
~ ly02J
Page 8, Item~
Meeting Date 11/1/94
"""'
Answer: Staff believes that the lack of sidewalk on the north side of Moss Street has
little bearing on the amount on foot traffic on Naples Street. Moss Street has sidewalk
on the south side, and there is no reason for schoolchildren to walk on the north side.
3. Increased noise and air pollution
Answer: As a result of the realignment closure of the Moss Streetl Naples intersection
and the increased in traffic trips to the widened portion of Alpine Avenue there would
be an increase in noise at that location. With the increase in the number of vehicles at
the Alpine Avenue segment their will be an unavoidably increase air pollution at that
location. The air pollution for the overall area should not be affected.
4. Speed of traffic on Moss and Naples Streets
Answer: Installation of the all-way stop should help to slow the traffic on Naples and
Moss Streets in the vicinity of Alpine Avenue.
5. Concerns relating to left turns from both sides of Alpine Avenue onto Naples
Street.
Answer: Although the distance on Naples Street between the two legs of Alpine Avenue
is relatively short, staff feels that motorists at the stop sign will have adequate time to .........,
judge whether the turn is safe. This combined with the very low traffic volume on the
south leg of Alpine Avenue (260 ADT) and the offset of the intersections in the direction
favorable to the flow of traffic, should prevent conflicting movements.
6. Residents were concerned that the parcel would be developed with higher density
than they feel should be allowed.
Answer: The vacation will not be effective until the applicant receives approval by the
City of the proposed development of the property. Residents would be notified of the
proposed development or any other changes which might be proposed. Any change in
zoning to increase density would require hearings before the Planning Commission and
City Council as previously discussed.
Public Notice
Due to the amount of opposition which has been generated against this project, staff has
exceeded the public hearing notification area to include property owners within a radius of 1,000
feet (instead of the required 300 feet) around the affected portion of Moss Street, plus all signers
of the above-mentioned petition, plus owners of properties on Second Avenue between Moss and
Naples Streets, Karen Way (the cui de sac north of Naples Street), along Moss Street and Naples
Street between Alpine Avenue and Third Avenue, with the exception of the condominium owners .........,
at the west end of Moss Street near Third Avenue.
~~-2(
.
.
.
Page 9, Item \ \
Meeting Date 11/1/94
Conclusion
This is an opportunity for the City to clean up an area that may otherwise remain "under
improved". For example:
1. No curb and gutter along Moss Street between Third Avenue and Naples Street
2. No curb, gutter and sidewalk along Naples between Alpine Avenue (north side)
and Moss Street
3. Less than desirable intersection angle for Naples Street and Moss Street.
This area adjacent to the Country Club between Third Avenue and Naples Street could be
improved at no cost to the City or the Country Club. Staff believes that most of the concerns
of the Citizens could be mitigated by a stop sign at Naples Street and Alpine Avenue (northerly
extension) and by having Council approval of development plans for the triangular parcel prior
to recording the resolution of vacation.
Recommendation
After reviewing past studies and their recommendations regarding the vacation and realignment,
staff maintains the position that the most practical means to realign the intersection is to vacate
the portion of Moss Street similar to that proposed by the applicant.
Following the direction of the Safety and Planning Commissions, staff recommends that Council
adopt a resolution ordering the vacation of Moss Street as proposed by the applicant with the
following conditions:
1. Owner/developer shall pay the City $100,000 or, at the Council's option, install missing
street improvements along the north side of Moss Street (from Alpine Avenue to Third
Avenue) to City standards, except that no sidewalk will be required.
2. An all-way stop will be established at the intersection of Naples Street and the portion
of Alpine Avenue north of Naples Street.
3. The owner/developer shall dedicate sufficient street right-of-way to widen Alpine Avenue
north of Naples to 52 feet curb-to-curb in order to facilitate traffic flow at the
intersection.
4. The developer/owner will install all needed street improvements along the parcel's Alpine
Avenue and Naples Street frontages when the physical closing of Moss Street takes place.
5.
Retain an easement 20 feet wide for Sweetwater Authority along the northerly side of
Moss Street.
~ J~~S-
Page 10, Item~
Meeting Date 11/1/94
."",,,
6. Restrict access to Alpine Avenue to those locations approved by the City Engineer and
Director of Planning.
7. Require all discretionary approvals by the City to be approved prior to completion and
recordation of the street vacation.
FISCAL IMPACT: All costs to process the vacation are paid by the applicant. Income from
compensation of $100,000 for the right-of-way if the cash offer is accepted by Council, none
if the improvements are not considered as compensation.
A copy of the Negative Declaration for the Initial Study is on file in the City Clerk's office.
Attachments: Exhibit. A" Plat showiI:@'areastobevacated and the neant parcel
Exhibit "B" Copy of report to Council aD request by San Diego Counuy Club for relief from requiremeots to install improvement..'>
along the north side of Moss Street.
Exhibit .C' Plat sbowing alignment of Moss Street (if subject portion is vacat.ed) as recommended by the Safety Conunission
Exhibit "D": Plat sbowin@ an alternate alignment suggested (but DOl. recommended).
Exhibit "Eo: Plat showing recommended improvements to be done at DeW intersection
Exhibit "P" Safety Commission Minutes from meeting of 9/9/93
Exhibit "0": P1annine Commission Minutes from meetine of 10/27/93
Exhibit "Ho: Resource Conservation Commission Minutes from meetine 11/22/93
Exhibit "}": Residential Notification List
File No. PV -057
WAU/JWH/JPL (l\.i:\HOME\ENGINEER\AOENDA\RESO _ V AC.JWH}
~
,
j)--tO/}': cJ~
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. ',",,",0,"+
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE VACATION OF A PORTION
OF MOSS STREET FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH
NAPLES STREET WESTERLY TO ALPINE AVENUE, NORTH
OF NAPLES STREET
WHEREAS, Country Club Villa Estates, owner of the
triangular piece of property between Moss and Naples Streets
westerly of the juncture of those streets has requested that the
City vacate the portion of Moss Street between Alpine Avenue and
the aforementioned intersection; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Streets and
Highways Code, the Council adopted Resolution No. 17681 at its
meeting on October 4, 1994, setting the associated public hearing
for November 1, 1994; and
WHEREAS, the Resource Conservation Commission considered
the Negative Declaration at its meeting of November 22, 1993 and
voted 5-0 to accept the Negative Declaration for IS 94-01 (Moss
Street Vacation); and
WHEREAS, at its meeting held September 9, 1993, the
Safety Commission approved a staff report by a vote of 6-0
recommending that the street be vacated with three conditions:
a. Widen Alpine Avenue between Moss and Naples Streets
to 52 feet (curb-to-curb)
b. Provide an all-way "STOP" at the intersection
c. Prohibit access to Alpine Avenue from applicant's
property
WHEREAS, at a public hearing held October 27, 1993, the
Planning Commission found that the proposed vacation would be
consistent with the existing General Plan; however, the Planning
Commission recommended on a vote of 6-0-0-1 (Commissioner Fuller
abstaining due to a conflict of interest) that the issue of the
vacation be considered in conjunction with the proposed development
of the property and not separate from it and staff concurs with
this requirement; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting held on October 4, 1994, council
adopted Resolution 17681 stating the Council's intent to vacate a
portion of Moss Street; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with S8320 of the Streets and
Highways Code, the resolution also set November 1, 1994 at 6:00
p.m. as the date and time for the public hearing for the Council to
consider this matter; and
~ /5~.;2. 7
WHEREAS, notices required by Streets and Highways Code
S8323 have been posted; and ~
WHEREAS, Tuesday, the 1st day of November, 1994 at 6:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Chula vista was fixed
as the time and place for hearing any objections to such vacation,
and the Council having heard all interested persons.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby order the vacation of the subject
portion of Moss Street, more particularly described in Attachment
1, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as if set
forth in full, with the following conditions:
1. The owner/developer pay the City $100,000 for the vacated
right-of-way (or, at the Council's option, install
missing curb and gutter along the north side of Moss
Street from Alpine Avenue to Third Avenue).
2. An all-way stop at the intersection of Naples Street and
the portion of Alpine Avenue north of Naples Street.
3. Alpine Avenue north of Naples widened to 52 feet curb-to-
curb with dedication of the needed right-of-way.
4.
The developer/owner of the triangular parcel install all
needed street improvements along the parcel's Alpine
Avenue and Naples Street frontages.
~
5. Retain an easement 20 feet wide for Sweetwater Authority.
6. Restrict access to Alpine Avenue to those locations
approved by the City Engineer and Director of Planning.
7. Completion of all discretionary approvals for the
development of the parcel.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby
directed to record a certified copy of this resolution with the
office of the San Diego County Recorder.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt; Director of
Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaard, City
Attorney
c: \rs\vacation
-"""'\
~//~oL~
.
'.
.
PARCEL 2:
A PORTION OF LOT 15 IN QUARTER SECTION 120 OF CHULA VISTA, IN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALI FOPJUJ..,
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 50S, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, Y~RCH 13, 1888.
TOGETHER WITH A PORTION OF THE WESTERLY HALF OF FIFTH AVENUE, J..S
VACATED, ADJOINING SAID LOT 15 ON THE EAST, DESCRIBED AS A \-.'HOLE J..S
FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF ROBINHOOD SUBDIVISION NO.
2, ACCORDING TO MAP NO. 3488, ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COmlTY
RECORDER, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BEING ALSO A POINT ON THE
CENTER LINE OF MOSS STREET, SAID POINT BEING ON THE ARC OF J.. 2,74 C
FOOT RJ..DIUS CIRCLE, TrlE CENTER OF \-.'HICH BEARS NORTH 4047'51" EJ..ST,
A DISTJ..NCE OF 2,740 FEET FROM SAID CORNER; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY
ALONG S.UD J..LONG SAID ARC, A DISTANCE OF 32.59 FEET TO THE TR1.JE
POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE J..RC OF SAID CIRCLE,
A DISTANCE OF 383.63 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF NAPLES STREET, FORMERLY KNO~~ AS SIXTH STREET, AS
SHO~~ ON SAID Y~~ NO. 505, SAID POINT HAVING A RADIAL LINE WdICH
BEARS NORTH 3054' 21" WEST; THENCE NORTH 71" 2 3' EAST J..LONG SJ..ID
NORTH LINE OF NAPLES STREET, 179.5 FEET TO A POINT IN THE ARC OF A
2,700 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, CONCENTRIC WITH.
SAID 2,740 FOOT RADIUS CURVE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID 2,700
FOOT RJ.~IUS CURVE TO A RADIAL LINE OF SAID 2,740 FOOT RJ.~IUS CURVE
BEARING NORTHEASTERLY FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THE);CE
SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID RADIAL LINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING ANY PORTION LYING EASTERLY OF THE CENTER LINE OF SAID
VACATED FIFTH J..VENUE ADJOINING LOT 15 ON THE EAST.
PAGE 2 OF 2
.
~ 5-YO
ATTACHMENT 1
L
r-
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
FOR
THE VACATION OF MOSS STREET
BETWEEN ALPINE AVENUE AND NAPLES STREET
PARCEL 1 AND 2
PARCEL 1:
A PORTION OF LOT 15 IN QUARTER SECTION 120 OF CHU~. VISTA, IN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STJ..TE OF CJ..LIFORNIA,
ACCORDING TO Y~P THEREOF NO.505, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COm,TY
RECORDER OF SAID S~, DIEGO COUNTY, MARCH 13, 1668, DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOW. :
~
COl'{!{ENCING AT THE NORTHEJ..STERLY CORl,ER OF ROBINHOOD SUBDIVISION NO.
2, ACCORDING TO Y';'P NO. 3466, ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COm,TY
RECORDER, S~, DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BEING i.LSO A POINT ON THE
CENTER LIl,E OF MOSS STREET, SAID POINT BEING ON THE J..RC OF A 2,740
FOOT RADIUS CIRCLE, THE CENTER OF ..'RICH BEARS NORTH 4.47'51" EAST,
A DISTANCE OF 2,740 FEET FROM SAID CORl,ER; THENCE SOUTHEhSTERLY
ALONG SAID ARC, J.. DISTJ..NCE OF 32.59 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINKING; THENCE CONTINUING J..LONG THE ARC OF SJ..ID CIRCLE, A
DISTANCE OF 383.63 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION ..ITH THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF NAPLES STREET, FORMERLY KNOWN AS SIXTH STREET, AS
SHO..~ ON SAID MF.P NO. 505, SAID POINT ~.VING A RADIJ..L LINE ..'RICH
BD.RS NORTH 3.54' 21" ..EST; THENCE SOUTH 71"23' WEST ALONG SJ..ID
NORTH LINE OF NJ.~LES STREET, A DISTANCE OF 143.80 FEET TO A POIKT
ON THE ~.RC OF A 2,760 FOOT RADIUS CIRCLE, THE CENTER OF ..'RICH BEJ..RS
NORTH 1" 02' 17" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2,780 FEET FROM SJo.ID POINT;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ~.RC OF SAID CIRCLE, THROUGH A
CENTRJo.L ANGLE OF ';.48' 39", A DISTANCE OF 2 3 3 . 4 2 FEET; THENCE NORTH
18.31' WEST, 43.20 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
"....,
PAGE 1 OF 2
~ /~5/d--1
.
.
.
.
..
(
(
..z...,f; I { g
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item f
~-~-...,,~
Meeti ng Date ~ ,'[(jiBS
Report on the request of the San Diego Country Club for relief
from requirements for ins~:~/on of improvements
Director of Public Works rfY~ .
City Manager (4/Sths Vote: Yes No X )
--
SUBMITT~D BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The San Diego Country Cl ub has applied for a modffication of its Conditional
Use Permit for the temporary use of a portion of the southerly end of the golf
course property (fronting Naples Street) as a parking area for members
vehicles and to place five commercial trailers IS interim locker rooms, pro
shop and offices while the permanent clubhouse is under construction.
As part of the review of this application the Public Works Department has
requi red a number of street improvements in conjuncti on with the buil di ng
permit for the interim facilities and advised the Country Club that a
commitment to participate in the construction of permanent improvements along
Moss Street in conjunction with the building permit for the new clubhouse
would be required in lieu of providing those facilities now. Permanent
improvements along flaples Street would be required at such time as a permanent
development along that frontage occurs.
Because of the relatively high cost of this work the Country Club is
requesting relief from these requirements.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council support Staff's position that:
(1) curb, gutter and neCeSsary paving and street lights along Moss Street will
be required with issuance of the building permit for the permanent
clubhouse, with installation of said improvements to be the Subject of a
BlOCK Act project with a petition requesting same submitted by the Country
Club,
(2) that the proposed interim driveway be located at a point opposite Dixon
Street with minor widening in Naples Street to provide for left turning
vehicles to be bypassed by through vehicles and adequate transitional
improvements to allow for a safe connection of the driveway to the Naples
Street roadway,
I
(3) concur with the requirement that ultimate improvements along Naples Street .
will be installed at such time as the permanent development of the
fronting property occurs or if the improvements along the south side of
Naples Street are installed by an assessment district the Country Club
will agree to participation in a district to install the Naples Street
improvements al.on9 their frontage., { ,. ~ ~J
(]) _ ~..-.~ 4-0 /?t.~u!u-e.-- tzllQ7T 7
l.N'l~~r - / (I /5- JJ
.' _... .._._ ....... ...:E4'
.
.'
(
(
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date Z/Z/88
~
DISCUSSION:
A number of processes have been included in the Country Club's overall project
and as a result, some inconsistency on our part may have developed.
The ~rocesses that have been involved to date include:
1. A C'onditional Use Permit for the construction of the new clubhouse which
was approved in Harch, 1987.
2. A Conditional Use Permit for interim facilities at Naples Street currently
being processed.
3. Environmental reviews for interim facilities at "L" Street and at'-Naple~
Street.
4. Building Permits for the placement of mobile units at Naples Street.
5. Bui 1 di ng Permi t for the reconstructi on of the permanent Cl ubhouse at "L"
Street.
The Conditional Use Permit for the construction of the new club house centered
on the site of that structure at "L" Street. The need for improvements was~
related to access to that building. With Naples Street approximately one half
mile to the south and the multitude of parcels of land that the Country Club
owns we did not originally relate the lack of improvements along Naples Street
or Moss Street to that permit.
However, when the application for a Conditional Use Permit for the temporary
facilities at Naples Street was referred to us for comments it became apparent
that improvements were required.
Representat i ves of the Country Cl ub requested a meeti ng wi th staff to di scuss
these requi rements and several di scussi ons have ensued. On the basis of a
di scussi on on January 15, 1988, a prelimi nary agreement as to the type and
timing of the installation of public improvements was reached between staff
and Club to the effect that:
1. The present .service entrance to the club off Naples Street would be
relocated easterly to be directly opposite Dixon Street.
2. Street widening on Naples Street would be provided IS necessary to provide
safe ingress and egress from the relocated entrance.
"""\
~ )YJ1
.-
.
.
.
(
(
Page 3, Item ~
Meeting Date Z/Z/88
3. The Country Cl ub woul d make an affi rmathe conmitment to participate in
future assessment districts for the provision of permanent public
improvements on a fair pro rata basis.
Letter dated January 18, 1988 from Stephen P. Oggel which is attached as an
exhibit, contains statements of such agreement.
In our 'original proposed conditions of approval we identified street lights,
monolithic curb, gutter and sidewalk, street paving to a line 32 feet north of
the centerline of Naples Street and possible drainage facilities as building
permit requirements. We also indicated that utility service facilities would
be required to be undergrounded.
-
That staff position was based upon our impression at the time that
improvements coul d be requi red only along the frontage of the parcel actually
being developed (i.e., the new clubhouse). Subsequent to that time we were
advised by the City Attorney that the City has the right to require
improvement of streets along the Country Cl ub 's enti re frontage as ei ther
conditions of approval for the Conditional Use Permit or a Building Permit.
On the basis of this info~ation we believe that all of the missing
improvements along Moss Street should be required with issuance of the
building permit for the new permanent clubhouse. This construction will
complete the improvements around the periphery of the Country Club except for
approximately 700 feet along I~aples Street and 550 feet along ~Ioss Street.
(The I.loss frontage is intended for vacation in the future.)
We also believe that the need for the improvements is not so urgent that it
can be included in a future Block Act project in which the Country Club would
be able to pay for the improvements over a period of ten years.
It is our opinion that development of temporary Club facilities along Naples
Street shoul d not create an inmedi ate need for permanent improvements a10n9
that street at this time.
The Club facilities are intended to be used for approximately one year and we
believe that providing for safe ingress and egress to those temporary
facilities during their existence'is adequate. If an improvement district
should be created for improvements along the south side of Naples, we believe
it would be reasonable to require their installation across the Club frontage
at that time.
A very preliminary estimate of providing the improvements IS rec(llllllended in
Moss Street is $62,000 (less than 2S of total project cost). This cost
incl udes the install ati on of curb and gutter along a 2.450 foot segment of
Moss Street, minimal pavement overlay. preparation of the street subgrade and
street 1 i ghts.
Y~~-J~
~
.
(
(
""'"
Page 4, Item ~
Meeting Date Z/Z/bb
An exhibit showing the Country Club property, the location of the improvements
and the proposed temporary and permanent, structures is attached, for
reference as Exhibit "A". Exhibit "B" shows the temporary Club facilities.
The temporary Club facilities to be installed adjacent to Ilaples Street under
a Building Permit are proposed to be conditioned to have the driveway
relocated to align with Dixon Street and to provide' for left turns into or
from Napl es Street by a wi dening of the street pavement and restripi ng.' The
cost of the work is estimated to be minimal. Transitions from the existing
edge of pavement to the driveway are also proposed.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
RLD:nr/ Z t3 II ~
WPC 3521E
""'"
""'"
~ J5"~J?
!yJ
yr- EXHIBIT
J
Cl\ ALPINE AVE. H
c
-
I ~
~
~
~~~ i
"'t
. . ~
-
FIRST AVE.
OWN BY:
~
-
H
f\1
-
FIL.E NO.
'(:::' "
~ ALPINE
J
-
AVE. -
I
~
FIRST AVE.
~
~ ~
~
H ~
'"
CD
(I) ~
0
~ ..
~ IIlI
....
'"
)(
-
III
-c
-
z
CD
-
i
0
-
co
i
co
- -..,
CD
z
)~:J~
EXHIBIT liD"
Ql
()
.
H
C>>~
~~
~
,...~
I
;
.
\
~
, )
\ ~
\
I
,
I IIJ i I
'\ UJI'\ (_' ",.,.ItDI(. $/),,&
#, ~"t/.,",4"7
.. \ tllll {T"'''' e.",,)
,It-I \
\',1/'1\ ___--
,1.....1"'& .AVI..
~-~~-
(
.1. J J: ~
I
J _ \- AL.PIIJE ",,,e..
... ,
-I
1 I
. \ ~
I I
I \
.nl\ ~
~ \
~I \
2.\-
I ...", ---- ~ -
\ .&.M "I/~ .
. r----
FILE NO,
I
t I ~ :1
.... I:
'- _J\
J-=~
/ -,,,,. ~I
/ ~\,
EXHIBIT "Eu*
.,
::J
oJ
lJ
EXISTING
KI6f1T.()t.W1d'
).
4-
I-
o
U
iii
~
:)
o
v
...
o
~
V
VI
OWN BY:
.
Llt,,_
.
.
.
.
~xtu~/f F
PV-057
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CHULA VISTA SAFETY COMMISSION
Thursday, September 9, 1993
7:02 p.m.
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call:
Present:
Chair Thomas, Vice Chair Padilla (arrived at 7:15), Commissioners Braden,
Koester, Matacia, and Pitts
Also Present:
Harold Rosenberg, Traffic Engineer; Frank Rivera, Associate Traffic Engineer;
Agent Bryan Treul, Police Department; Shirley Buxton, Recording Secretary
2. ,1.d2e of Alle2iance/Silent Prayer
3. ODenin!! S1atement . Read by Chair Thomas
4. ADoroval of Minutes: July 1, 1993 (Workshop); July B, 1993 (Revised); August 5, 1993 (Work.
shop); and August 12, 1993
MSC (Braden/Pitts) to accept the minutes of July 1, 1993 (Wor1cshop); July 8, 1993 (Revised)i August 5, 1993
(Workshop); and August 12, 1993 as presented. Approved unanimously with Commissioner Koester
abstaining on the minutes of July 8, 1993; Commissioners Pitts and Koester abstaining on the minutes of
August S, 1993; and Commissioner Braden abstaining on the minutes of August 12, 1993.
MEETING AGENDA
5. REPORT on vacation of a portion of Moss Street between Alpine Avenue and First Avenue
Frank Rivera presented staff's report and the realignment options staff considered.
Hal Rosenberg said from a traffic engineering perspective, the realignment of Moss Street would be an
improvement over existing conditions which created an acute angle for motorists and made it difficult for
motorists turning east onto Naples Street.
Commissioner Matacia asked how much additional traffic would be created on Alpine Avenue.
Frank Rivera said the current volume on Alpine Avenue was approximately 200 vehicles per day.
Hal Rosenberg said there were 6,000 cars traveling on Moss Street. Those vehicles would be transferred to
the curved section of Moss Street/Alpine Avenue. Motorists making a left hand turn from Alpine Avenue to
Naples Street would be on a new portion of road wider than the current 20'. The increase on Alpine Avenue
would be significant.
Chair Thomas asked if there was off-street parl<ing allowed on Alpine Avenue and how many spaces would
be gained by widening the street.
Frank Rivera answered that off.street parl<ing was allowed.
Hal Rosenberg said when improvements were made, there would be parl<ing allowed on both sides of the
street. .;p-r ) f t/I
Safety Commission Minutes
September 9, 1993
Page 2
l
Chair Thomas said there were palm trees that caused a sight problem. He asked how the realignment would
take place so that the trees would not cause a sight problem.
Hal Rosenberg said if there was a sight distance problem, it would be investigated.
Commissioner Pins asked staff if there was adequate room on Naples Street for vehicles making a left turn from
both sides of Alpine Avenue onto Naples Street.
Hal Rosenberg said the distance was shon, but staff felt motorists at a stop sign had adequate time to judge
the surrounding circumstances. The ability to see an opening to turn left was ample. Staff did not view that
as a problem.
Chair Thomas asked if there was any consideration given to an all-way stop at the intersection.
Mr Rosenberg said it could be a candidate for an all-way stop after the improvements were completed. The
voiumes of traffic were balanced on botn Moss and Naples Streets.
John Krabacher, 147 Naples Street, Chula Vista, 91911, said the Commission had addressed the angle of
Moss and Naples Streets and said it was a problem for drivers. There had never been an accident at that
intersection, but on Naples Street there were five. The Commission was going to double the traffic on Naples
Street. He asked if the Commission was going along with the developer's idea or the City's view With all
the traffic there would be either a signal installed or an all-way stop and accidents would occur. He would
like to see the intersection remain as it was or staff's option A. He asked what was going to be built on the
land.
~
Hal Rosenberg said the applicant's representative was in attendance, but he believed single family dwelling
units were proposed. It was not a City project. The developer requested the City consider closing the street
in turn for installing missing improvements that would beautify the area. Staff was obligated to review the
project for feasibility From that perspective and safety point of view, staff felt it could WInk and would
improve a substandard position.
Mr Krabacher said that staff had all but ruled out Option E which would have made Alpine Avenue a cross
intersection because it would go through the applicant's propeny.
Hal Rosenberg said staff did not rule that out, but it was not the applicant's proposal. If the applicant offered
that proposal to staff, it would be accepted.
Mr Krabacher said he could foresee head-on collisions occurring. Since Naples Street went through to the
hospital, it had become a thoroughfare for ambulances.
Gre, Cox, 3130 aonita load, Suite 200, Chu/a Vista, CA 91910, represented the San Diego Country Club
and the Country Club Villa Estates who were the co-applicants tor the street vacation. The owner was Frank
Ferreira who put the property in a family trust, and in December 1992 transferred title to his children who
were the owner of record. The parcel was zoned R.l and was a 8,000 square toot triangular parcel which
could accommodate one residence. With the vacation of Moss Street, it could accommodate tour to five
homes. The San Diego Country Club was supponive of the application for two reasons. It would improve
their operations, because there would not be the traffic along Moss Street; and if the street was vacated the
easement on the property would be abandoned. The beneficiaries of the vacation would be the San Diego
Country Club and the Ferreiras. The Ferreiras negotiated with the San Diego Country Club in order to dedicate
their half of Moss Street to them. San Diego Country Club wanted to be released from obligations to install
public improvements and wanted the Ferreiras to install the improvements (curb, gutter, street lights). The
~ /y y~
.
l
.
Safety Commission Minutes
September 9, 1993
Page 3
improvements from Third Avenue to Alpine Avenue and Naples Street were valued at approximately $130,000.
As a part of the application, a waiver to install the sidewalks had been filed. The rationale was there was no
need for sidewalks on the north side, since there were sidewalks on the south side. It might be used as a
jogging trail instead. There were many places in the City where sidewalks were not installed near open space
areas. The balance of the improvements would be a condition of the proposed site. Curbs gutters, and
sidewalks would be required by the City.
.
Mr Cox said the vacation would be an economic benefit to the applicant as well as the City since the current
intersection of Moss and Naples Streets would be corrected. He sympathized with the residents since traffic
was heavy on Moss Street and travelled rapidly. He felt those improvements would slow traffic down.
Installation of a three-way stop sign would be supported by the applicant. He agreed that traffic on Moss Street
would decrease and Naples Street would increase. The three-way stop sign would keep traffic flowing and
would not cause a back up in front of residences on the comer of Alpine Avenue and Moss Street. The
intersection of Alpine Avenue and Moss Street would be improved and would provide for both a left and right
turn lane on Alpine Avenue. Staff recommended that no access be permitted along the realigned Moss Street
for the development. The applicant's concern was that if it was zoned R-l, it would be an awkward lot and
requested the condition be modified to allow the applicant to submit a proposed design for the parcel and
allow staff to look at it at that time. He felt it was a win-win solution since it would eliminate an awkward,
dangerous intersection. Also vehicles were driving through the vacant dirt parcel rather than making a stop
on Alpine Avenue and Naples Street. The parcel was an eyesore and a maintenance problem, but the vacation
and development would bring the area up to City standards as well as improve the neighborhood.
Commissioner Braden said hopefully the homes would only be one-story homes and not townhomes.
Mr Cox said there had not been any design yet, and could not respond to Commissioner Braden's comments.
.
Charles Mitchell, 161 Naples Street, Chula Vista, CA 91911, stated he was a former police officer for the City
of Chula Vista and never had investigated a traffic accident at Moss and Naples Streets. He had seen accidents
at every other T-intersection along Naples Street due to the speeds. Vehicles travelling westbound on Naples
Street between Hilltop Drive and Second Avenue reached speeds of 6(}70 mph. A motor officer recently
monitored the area and the officer wrote tickets for speeds 15 mph over the speed limit and could not write
tickets fast enough. The officer mentioned that he could write two ticket books per day at that location, which
equalled SO tickets. Mr. Mitchell said he watched motorists roll through the stop sign at Second Avenue at
speeds of 30 _ SO mph and asked the Commission why they would add an additional 6,000 cars to the street.
He said there would be trouble. Since Naples Street had been opened through to Chula Vista Community
Hospital, ambulances used Naples Street as their access. The south side of Naples Street from Third Avenue
to Dixon was unimproved. Recently, he saw an ambulance travelling eastbound on Naples Street and
motorists in front of the ambulance pulled off the road at 35 . 40 mph and caused the area to be covered in
dust. He wondered how the ambulance driver could see the road. If a motorist had attempted a turn from
Alpine Avenue, the ambulance would have collided with the vehicle.
Chair Thomas asked for accident statistics in the area.
Frank Rivera said staff had accident history for the past three years. At Naples Street and First Avenue, there
had been two accidents. One was a rear-end accident, and one a single vehicle accident that struck a fence.
There had been an accident on Naples Street when an eastbound motorist was attempting a right turn onto
Alpine Avenue and was passed on the right by another vehicle and broadsided the motorist attempting the
turn. Another accident in the area was at Moss Street and Alpine Avenue in which a vehicle struck the fence
near the Country Club.
~ /yt/;J
Safety Commission Minutes
September 9, 1993
Page 4
~
Hal Rosenberg said when an unusual intersection had sight distance problems, motorists became more
cautious. Staff would never allow that type of intersection to exist today as it was a liability risk to the City.
The City would be negligent in allowing the intersection to exist and recommended against retaining the
existing intersection.
Robert Cans, 129 Naples Street, Chu/a Vista, CA 91911, lived on the corner of Naples Street and Alpine
Avenue and stated the parcel of land used to be a vegetable fjeld. Bob Casey owned the property and made
the mistake of pulling the jog in Alpine Avenue and thought the area was originally supposed to be
commercial. later Mr Casey tried to have the area re-zoned for a home, driveway, and gas station. Residents
defeated the proposal. Mr. Casey sold the land to Frank Ferreira. Mr. Ferreira also tried to develop the land
which included closing Moss Street. The residents on Moss Street would be for it, because it would mean less
traffic. Traffic however would back up on Alpine Avenue and the residents on the corner of Alpine Avenue
would not be able to exit their homes. He hoped the Commission would take into consideration all the traffic
that would be added to Alpine Avenue and Naples Street.
Robert MacNear, 121 Naples Street, Chula Vista, CA 91911, said the traffic had increased and motorists used
Alpine Avenue to shortcut to Naples Street. The intersection of Moss and Naples Streets was a bad location
and made it difficult to see traffic on Naples Street. Motorists were apprehensive leaving the intersection. He
suggested widening Moss Street. The area was not an eyesore because he cut the grass. He would like to see
residents purchase the lot or see Moss Street widened with a traffic signal installed.
Corinne Cabella, 1098 Alpine Avenue, Chu/a Vista, CA 91911, lived at the corner of Naples Street and
Alpine Avenue and said the cars did not stop on Alpine Avenue. She was concerned about her health since
exhaust would increase with the additional traffic. It would be easier to have Alpine Avenue north meet
Alpine Avenue south at Naples Street even though it would cut through the proposed project. Her garage was
on Naples Street. The sidewalks were needed and she didn't know why the Country Club could not put them
in. She said children walked the area daily to get to school.
"'"
jenene lord, I1S Naples Street, Chu/a Vista, CA 91911, was opposed to staff's recommendation. It would
be nice if both Mr. Cox and Mr Ferreira could make their profit, but Mr. Ferreira bought the property on a
gamble. She said it would be good to install a stop sign on Naples Street, but what about at Moss Street
instead of Alpine Avenue. The south side of Naples Street was unimproved and residents voted for
incorporation with the assumption that it would be improved, and it had not been. Naples Street was a main
thoroughfare for children going on Hilltop Drive and Castle Parks Schools. She was not for added traffic to
Naples Street and agreed with previous speakers that speeds were high in lhe area. She was against closing
any public street because then options were closed for both citizens and emergency vehicles. It happened
with Fifth Avenue. Even though there was a nice shopping center, lhe closure had impacted other streets.
It happened with Fig Avenue and motorists had to wait on H Street at a long stop light at Fourth Avenue. If
an emergency vehicle saw Moss Street was backed up, it could take Alpine Avenue and vice versa. If the
street was closed, that option would be gone. She didn't see any reason for going ahead with the project to
benefit two individuals. She had not heard what the proposed project was, whether it was one house or five
houses. All homes on Naples Street and in the affected area had their entrances and exits on Naples Street
and more traffic would make it difficult to enter and exit their residences.
Derry CouBh'an, 1094 Alpine A_Ill!, Chula Vista, CA 9191" lived in the area for many years and would
have known of traffic problems, if any He agreed with previous speakers in that even though the comer of
Moss and Naples Streets was awkward, it had never caused an accident. One of the accidents in the area was
when a motorist fell asleep at the wheel and hit the fence by the Country Club. It had nothing to do with the
intersection. He opposed the project because during early evening rush hours, there were five or six cars
backed up at Alpine Avenue and Naples Street and there would be seven or eight cars backed up and at the
corner of Moss and Naples Streets. Without the thoroughfare of Moss Street, the seven or eight cars from Moss ,
~JytjY
~
.
Safety Commission Minutes
September 9, 1993
Page S
Street would be wrapped around from Naples Street on Alpine Avenue to where he could not get out of his
driveway. A bottleneck would be created on lhe comer. He liked option A, but recommended staying with
the current situation.
.obert Vega, 110B Hilltop, Chu/a Vista, CA 91911, lived at the corner of Hilltop and Naples Street and said
trees blocked the view of drivers on Alpine Avenue trying to enter Naples Street. At First Avenue and Moss
Street, there was brush that obstructed vision and he did not understand why the City could not make the
Country Club keep it trimmed. At Hi IItop Drive and Naples Street, vehicles travelled through the red light and
traffic was bad in the area.
.
Mr Cox returned to the podium and said the staff proposal was predicated on the fact that Moss and Naples
Streets was a substandard intersection and a potential liability problem. Even though there had not been any
accidents in the last three years, there was sti lithe potential. The Commission had an opportunity to have
improvements made to the intersection with no cost to the City It would be a condition of the vacation to
have the missing improvements installed. He agreed that speeding was a problem, but it was a problem in
the entire City not just in the area. He supported the installation of a three-way stop on Naples Street. The
re-alignment had been looked at by the City since 1985, and was not something new The concern about the
back up of traffic on Alpine Avenue was a legitimate concern. However, there would be two lanes of traffic
on Alpine Avenue, one lane to turn left, and one lane to turn right. With a better defined roadway, it would
be an improvement of the existing conditions and he asked for the Commission's favorable opinion.
Chair Thomas said that after listening to the public hearing, he was more in favor of adding an all-way stop
at Naples Street and Alpine Avenue not as a trial traffic regulation, but as part of the recommendation.
Hal Rosenberg said staff had not evaluated the intersection in accordance with the Council policy, but it would
most likely be a good candidate. Even if an all-way stop was installed, traffic patterns would remain the same.
Moss Street represented a short cut to Third Avenue. There was an advantage to motorists travelling
westbound who wanted to go north on Third Avenue to use Moss Street, it was convenient. Motorists
southbound on Third Avenue would probably continue to use Moss Street to access Naples Street. The traffic
volumes would remain the same. He provided additional comment regarding the size of lanes on Moss Street.
Commissioner Pitts asked to review the traffic volume data.
Hal Rosenberg displayed a table of traffic volumes in the area.
Commissioner Pitts asked staff to clarify the statement that because of the new turn lanes on Alpine Avenue,
the resident who lived on comer of Alpine Avenue and Moss Street would not have a problem exiting the
driveway.
.
Mr. Rosenberg said there would be times when the intersection would be backed up to the curb, but with an
all-way stop, the 6,000 vehicles represented a lood balance, and with the all-way stop the traffic would flow
adequately.
Commissioner Pitts asked what the City would have to do to proceed with Option E, which would take Alpine
Avenue through the property and connect on Naples Street with the south side of Alpine Avenue.
Mr. Rosenberg indicated that the developer did not volunteer a redesiln of the parcel to allow for the
realilnment. The City could negotiate purchase of the property if it felt the intersection was needed. He did
not believe there was any incentive to do that.
~)5rS
Safety Commission Minutes
September 9, 1993
Page 6
~
Vice Chair Padilla said it seemed they were being asked to consolidate the property which would allow the
property owner to have better selling options. There were also existing City-wide concerns. With a closure
of a street, traffic would be moved to Naples Street or Alpine Avenue. The residents were concerned with the
additional traffic but felt that it should be balanced with the City having a cleaner, safer area. Diverting
directly to Naples Street would move traffic on Alpine Avenue. He would be more comfortable to go with
Option A which would sti II allow westbound access to Moss Street from Naples Street. It was understood that
it could interfere with the developers plans for the parcel. He would be comfortable with Option C with the
addition of an all-way stop.
MOTION: (Thomas) to approve staff's recommendation with two additions: 1) the all-way stop be
incorporated in the design; and 2) the intersection of Alpine Avenue and Naples Street, in conjunction with
the sight distance, be reevaluated and redesigned.
Vice Chair Padilla asked if he should attempt to get support for Option A and asked Chair Thomas if he would
withdraw his motion.
Motion withdrawn by Chair Thomas.
MOTION: (Padilla) to accept Option A of staff's report. Motion died for lack of second.
MSUC (Thomas/Padilla) to: 1) realign a portion of Moss Street to be built to collector street design standards;
2) striping, marking, and signing be provided for the new alignment; 3) no access be permitted along the
realigned Moss Street for the proposed development; 4) an all-way stop be installed at the intersection of
Naples Street and Alpine Avenue; and S) the addition of realigning the sight distance of the intersection of
Alpine Avenue and Naples Street.
"""\
Hal Rosenberg asked the Commission for clarification on realigning the sight distance portion. He asked if
the Commission was asking staff to do whatever was necessary to improve the visibility or if the Commission
actually intend to have the developer reconfigure the intersection.
Chair Thomas said his motion was to have staff redesign the intersection in relationship to the crosswalk for
the sight distance. At the current location of the crosswalk, a motorist could not make a right turn. Motorists
moved up 10' or 12' encroaching into the right of way in order to see past the palm trees.
Mr. Rosenberg made the observation that once the all-way stop was installed, that problem should disappear.
Chair Thomas explained to the audience the motion and the decision that the Commission made. He clarified
that stop signs would be placed on Naples Street at Alpine Avenue.
6. REPORT on Request for crosswalk and stop signs in the vicinity of Rohr Elementary School
Frank Rivera presented staff's report and the Commissioners viewed slides of the area.
Commissioner Matacia asked what the school had designated as the "safe route to school" and if the area
would be safer without the walkway.
"""\
Frank Rivera said Rohr School did not recommend a particular route and left that decision to the parents. The
School distributed the map to the parents to assist them in planning where the most protected crossings were.
ptr )yt/~
.
.
.
OJ. tvt h,.f C-
MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA. CAUFORNIA
7:05 p.m.
Wednesdav. October 27. 1993
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
276 Fourth Avenue. Chula Vista
~OLL C A 1.1.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Martin, Commissioners Fuller, Moot
(7:06). Ray, Salas. Tarantino, and Tuchscher
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT.
Assistant Planning Director Lee, Principal Planner
Griffm. Associate Planner Miller, Associate Planner
Reid, Sr. Civil Engineer Ullrich. Assistant City
Attorney Rudolf
PI.F.DOE OF AU .F.GlANCE - SILENT PRAYER
The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Martin. followed by a moment of
silence .
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
Chairman Martin reviewed the composition of the pIRnning Commission, its responsibilities and
the format of the meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MSUC (FullerlRay) 7-0 to accept the minutes of October 13, 1993. as submitted.
ORAL ("oMMUNICA TlONS - None
Commissioner Fuller asked that she be ru:used from consideration of Item 1 be{''',,,,, of a
conflict of interest. She bad at least $250 business with the Country Club during a year.
~j~/t7
PC Minutes
-2-
October 27, 1993
~
ITEM 1:
PUBUC HEARING: REPORT ON GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY OF
PROPOSED VACATION OF MOSS STREET BETWEEN ALPINE AVENUE
AND NAPLES STREET - San Diego Country Club and Country Club Villa
Estates Partnership
Principal Planner Griffm presented the staff report and recommended that the Commission report
to the City Council that the proposal was consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan. He
noted that several letters of concern and objection were received, and copies of a petition which
had been submitted that day had been given to the Commissioners. Mr. Griffm stated that he
had reviewed all of the materials and the issues focused on some of the more fmite vacation
issues rather than the General Plan issues.
Commissioner Salas stated that she did not see any fmdings of fact that would support that the
safety issue had been resolved. How could it be determined that it is consistent with the General
Plan. She was concerned with the potential stacking problem off Moss Street to Naples. She
conceded the existing angle presented a safety problem, but felt it was not logical to have the
short distance with three stops.
Principal Planner Griffm replied that Commissioner Salas' concerns should be considered in
relation to the street vacation, but even if there were a fmding that they were creating a negative
safety impact, it would not be a General Plan level issue. It would be more specifically related ~
to a detail regarding the installation of additional signaling devices, warning signs, or different
approaches to moving the traffic around. He did not believe the possibility of stacking would
present the same sort of safety concern as the angle at which Moss now intersects with Naples.
Sr. Civil Engineer Ullrich agreed. He stated that the average daily traffic at that intersection
was 6790, with eastbound trips of 3370. There would be approximately 337 trips during the
peak hour in the eastbound direction, about 6 per minute. There would be some stacking during
peak hour.
Commissioner Salas concluded that at this point the Commission was not to consider any
alternative to what had been proposed. Mr. Ullrich answered aff1nl18tively, noting it was only
to make a finding to determine whether it was consistent with the General Plan. The Safety
Commission had considered five alternatives, and had proposed the alternative before the
Commission.
Commissioner Tarantino was concerned that the letters and testimony that would be presented
would most likely deal with the peripheral issues, and how the Commission would deal with it.
Mr. Griffin stated the residents had been noticed and encouraged to attend to get their concerns
on the record, and it would also help staff to prepare for the Council hearing. He suggested that
their testimony be taken.
.
~
~ )3~Y~
.
PC Minutes
-3-
October 27, 1993
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf commented that it was within the discretion of the Commission
whether to take the testimony. There were a number of issues regarding this item, but the
Commission was only charged with mald1\g a finding of General Plan consistency.
Commissioner Tuchscher was concerned about what was proposed on the property, what would
be next, and what might be coming down the road.
Principal Planner Griffm explained how the parcel was now zoned and the potential for the
property if the street were vacated. He noted if the parcel were split, the applicant would apply
for a parcel map for four or less parcels; for five or more parcels, it would be a subdivision
map. Mr. Griffm explained the procedures for a parcel map, noting that the neighbors are
noticed and could comment. If objections were received, an administrative hearing would be
held and any decision could be appealed to the Planning Commission and City Council. If the
applicant wished to pursue a multiple family zone, they would need to apply for a General Plan
amendment and rezoning of the property which would require public hearings before the
Planning Commission and the City Council and the neighbors would be noticed. Environmental
review would also be included in any higher density usage. Staff was not aware of any
particular proposal on the part of the applicant for the property beyond the vacation.
.
The Commissioners were concerned that the item was not part of a plan or proposed
development for that particular area and why it was not being considered as part of a broader
plan or solution of a problem. The applicant may have their own reasons for processing the
project in this manner and they would be in the best position to address this issue. Mr. Griffm
replied, however, that it was being taken at face value, as a vacation. The applicant was
probably asking for a threshold decision on the vacation before getting into the expense of a
parcel map or some other process.
Commissioner Ray was concerned with the level of service on both Moss and Naples and the
LOS differential impact on the neighborhood. He believed the LOS would increase on Moss and
would decrease on Naples. Mr. Ullrich did not expect a decrease or increase in LOS. The
basic traffic would be the same. The intersection would only be realigned.
Commissioner Tuchscher asked what would happen if the parcel was split into lots which would
have substantial value. What would happen when these properties are vacated. Would there be
any compensation to the City. Mr. Ullrich said that would be included in the agenda statement
to the City Council. In this case, there could be some compensation relative to loss of land.
Compensation would be a City Council decision.
Commissioner Tuchscher concluded that it was consistently. policy of the Council to determine
some valuation to the City for that property. The pioperty would be appraised, and seek
remuneration would be sought for the sale of the property. Mr. Ullrich said it depended on the
circumstance under which the PIUperty had been vacated.
.
~y1"l
PC Minutes
-4-
October 27, 1993
"""'"
Commissioner Ray again asked why the item was before the Planning Commission if it was
currently zoned and consistent with the General Plan. Mr. Griffm explained that the text in the
staff report to which Mr. Ray was referring was to the General Plan Land Use Element. The
General Plan contained both the Land Use Element and Circulation Element which addressed
the issues before the Commission. Mr. Ray concluded that the Commission was not discussing
the usage of the property, but if the property were developed, what the potential impact could
mean.
Commissioner Salas said she had not read anything in her packet that satisfied her that the
Circulation Element had been met. She could not fmd the facts that supported that the
recommendation would meet the General Plan.
Assistant Planning Director Lee explained it was staff's conclusion that both the existing and
proposed realignments were consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan, which
showed the connection between Moss and Naples. The issue of where the connection should be
and the safety issues were addressed as a recommendation from the Safety Commission going
on to the City Council. It is a requirement of the State that the Planning Commission make such
a fmding. Staff had tried to make it clear to the residents that the Safety Commission was
dealing with the safety issues and were making the recommendation to the Council relating to
the General Plan consistency To invite the people to provide testimony also provides feedback
to the City Council prior to their public hearing. This was not a required hearing before the
Planning Commission. It was advertised as a public hearing to give people the opportunity to
speak on the matter.
"""'"
Principal Planner Griffm, referring to Commissioner Salas' concern, said that when it was
mentioned in the report that the proposal meets the General Plan street standards, it specifically
referred to the fact that this was a Class 2 residential collector in accordance with the General
Plan which required a 52' width travelway. Moss and the section of Alpine as conditioned
would provide that General Plan level travelway width. Also, the level of service would remain
at 'A'. The resolution could be amended to refer to those specifics if the Commission desired.
Chairman Martin coocluded that the Commission was to determine whether this was consistent
with the General Plan, but some of the Commissioners had serious questions about that corner.
He felt it was important to get input from as many people as possible.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf stated that the staff report discussed the IaDd use portion of the
General Plan, but the portion dealing with the requirements for maint....."".e of level of service
did not give factual information. His understanding was that staff had given those .facts and
could provide that information. It had been stated for the record, and for the C<mtmi~~ion and
the public so it could be made a part of the decisionmalring process.
Commissioner Ray asked again, if this was consistent with the General Plan and the facts before
staff bore that out, why this was coming before the Planning Commission as opposed to being ""'"
an administrative approval. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf stated it was a statutory requirement.
~/yftJ
.
PC Minutes
-S-
October 27, 1993
The California Government Code provision required that the Planning Commission make a
recommendation in a report to the City Council with regard to General Plan consistency for all
street vacations.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
The following were in favor of the project and gave a IS-minutes org~n;7M presentation:
.
.
Greg Cox, 3130 Bonita Road, Suite WO, Chula Vista, CA 91910, representing Country Club
Villa Estates, agreed with the staff report with the exception to precluSion of access to Alpine.
Mr. Cox stated the street was an easement provided by the two adjoining property owners, and
discussed the existing traffic circulation. The street would be widened, parking would be
allowed on both sides of the street, curbs and gutters would be installed at the intersection along
with a three-way stop, and it would clear up an existing acknowledged dangerous intersection
that is a potential liability problem for the City. Regarding the concerns of the Commissioners,
if there was not a street vacation, it would be useless to go through a parcel map process and
other things that would be necessary, lengthy, and expensive. The obligation to put in the curbs,
gutters, street lights, and missing pavement would be picked up by the applicant and the owner
of the triangular parcel. The installation of those improvements would be a benefit to the City
and to the Country Club. A noise study had been done, which would be introduced at the
Council meeting, which indicated that it would be below the noise standards of 6Sdb. He urged
approval by the Commission, and asked to reserve a short time at the end to respond to
comments or questions raised during the public hearing.
Commissioner Ray asked if there was any kind of conceptual map of the potential 4-S dwelling
units that could be built. He was concerned about access.
Mr Cox said there had not been any conceptual maps. By precluding access on Alpine Avenue,
it would make it a more difficult site to develop. He did not know what the alternative would
be. They would request that there not be a total preclusion of access onto Alpine and that they
be given the opportunity to come back with a plan accessing the back portion of Alpine.
Commissioner Ray asked the specific reason for preclusion to access to Alpine. Mr. Cox said
he thought it was probably the proximity to Naples. Commissioner Ray felt it would be an
improvement over the existing alignment. Mr. Cox said that dirt tracks go through the middle
of the parcel presently. because a number of people cut through.
.
commissioner Moot would be more comfortable considering the ploposed development for the
area at the same time as the vacation. Many times at this level, problems the residents seem to
have are resolved in the context of designing a particular project. PiecePllling must have some
type of fmancial advantage to the proposed developer, but makes it more difficult for the
Commissioners to make a decision.
~/~~
PC Minutes
-6-
October 27, 1993
"""
Mr. Cox replied that if there were any other land use to be considered other than R-l, it would
be back before the Commission for their consideration, and for the Council's, with full notice
to the residents. At this point, there had been no plans for anything other than the R-l.
Commissioner Tuchscber thought that regardless of the cost involved relative to preparing for
f1ling, he would be happy if they had some exhibits showing examples of what the site plan or
subdivision map might look like that might be fJed at a later date. It would give him a comfort
level of how access would be derived, how the site would be laid out, and give the residents a
comfort level as well. He was uncomfortable in voting without a total picture of what the future
implications might be.
Russell Froemming, ISO Moss St., CV 91911, had deferred his time to Mr. Cox.
Arthur Erber, 142 Moss St., CV 91911, passed.
The following were against the project:
Nancy Coughlan, 1094 Alpine Avenue, CV 91911, gave a group presentation representing the
following: Raul Castoreno, Claudia Castorena, AI Cabella, Corenne A. Cobella, Jo Marim,
Charlotte LeSage, George Alcantera, Robert Gans, Jerry Caughlan. She read the petition '"""
previously submitted to the Commission, which consisted of 73 residents against the vacation
of Moss. Their concerns consisted of: increased traffic and high rate of speed, stacking of
traffic on Alpine going onto Naples, air quality, safety of children going to school, residents'
view, closing off Moss Street at Alpine would create a dog leg of 90 degrees which would be
dangerous. Mrs. Coughlan said the intersection of Moss/Naples was the safest comer on that
section of Naples. The residents suggested the City buy the property and make it into a park
or a greenbelt area with the neighbors volunteering to maintain and use it. If that was not a
viable option, the residents recommended that the new portion of Alpine Avenue be aligned with
the 1100 block of Alpine A venue south of Naples, making a four-way intersection instead of two
T's. They also recommended a thorough study of the traffic pattern in the area, and the cost
to the City of widening Alpine and installing the necessary stop signs at Alpine and Naples
before any approval was given to the closing of Moss Street between Alpine and First. They
felt that if the vacation was approved by the City Council, the Country Club Villa Estates would
file for a rezoning of the property and the adjacent lot to accommodate condominiums rather
than the single-borne sites the applicant said may be built. They did not UDdcrstand wby the
Country Club did not have to install curbs, gutters, and sidewalks when they built their new
clubbouse. What compensation would the San Diego Country Club and the Country Club Villa
Estates plan to pay for the 30,000 sq. ft. piece of prime real estate overlooking the Country
Club?
Jenene Boyd, 115 Naples St., CV 91911, said they would like the streets to remain as they
were; there were no accidents at the MosslNapleslFirst intersection. She did not want to give '"""
Cbula Vista property away-"dcdication" meant "free". She did not want to dedicate it to two
private individuals for their gain. They knew the existing road conditions. It was not causing
~ J~5'P-
.
PC Minutes
-7-
October 27, 1993
the neighborhood trouble. This did not become an issue with the General Plan until Mr. Fererra
and Mr. Cox decided they had some agenda for the property. The residents objected; and asked
that the Commission consider that the General Plan should be the General Plan of the people and
not for some unknown nondescript entity.
John Krabacher, 147 Naples St., CV 91911, asked if the existing intersection conformed to
the General Plan.
Assistant Planning Director Lee said only in the respect that the Circulation Element diagram
shows Moss Street coming into Naples. In terms of the alignment, the Safety Commission, the
City Traffic Engineer, and staff agree that the acute angle is not a safe intersection. Part of the
concern was to leave it in that condition opened the City up for potentialliabUity issues.
Mr Krabacher rebutted the Safety Commission's agenda statement which discussed the actual
accidents that occurred in the immediate area of the intersection. He discussed the various
accidents from 1990 to present, and stated that the angled intersection had nothing to do with
the accidents. Speed and irresponsible driving habits were getting worse. Reconfiguration of
the street would increase the traffic on Naples and lead to more problems.
. Charles W. Mitchell, 161 Naples St., CV 91911, deferred his time to Mr. Krabacher.
R. MacNear, 121 Naples St., CV 91911, suggested running the street across from Alpine
directly to Moss, leaving Moss Street a two-way street with a traffic light at Moss and First
Avenue. He did not understand how the City could not afford the improvements, but could give
the land away. He had no objection to building on the lot. The shift in traffic to Naples Street
would cause problems. He presently had problems getting out of his driveway onto Naples; the
increased traffic flow would exacerbate the problem. He was concerned that the new homes
would have access onto Moss Street rather than Naples Street and the present residents would
not. Mr. MacNear showed some pictures he had taken indicating where people had driven
across the land from Alpine to Moss Street instead of going to the intersection. He said after
being used for a certain number of years, it was considered public domain. This should be
public access road and there was no way it could be stopped. Tbe only alternative was to hire
a lawyer to stop it.
Chairman Martin asked Mr. Cox if he wished to respond to any of the issues raised.
.
Mr. Cox said there were presently no improvements on the south side of Naples and this project
would not address that problem. It would put curbs. puers. and sidewalks on the entire
frontage of the parcel and would clean up the lack of improvellJl'l'fs on Mosa loing back to
Third Avenue. While they were suggesting that Council waive the sidewalks. it was stil1 a
sisniflClDt improvement and would provide a more defined road. He did not feel the property
owners would stand in the way of the City buyms the property to be used as a park; likewise
if the City wanted to buy the property to realisn Alpine with the existing Alpine, it was an
option that was available to the City. This proposal, at no cost to the City, cleaned up a number
~/5~
PC Minutes
-8-
October 27, 1993
.,"""
of problems. The City would not currently design the type of intersection that existed at Moss
and Naples. He emphasized that the portion that was being requested for vacation was an
easement and not an ownership of the City. He noted that an easement reverts back to the
adjoining property owners, and the Council normally required compensation if was a fee
ownership, or an easement. Mr. Cox hoped the Council would consider the improvements to
be a more than fair offer. He agreed there was a problem with the speed of traffic, but the
three-way stop sign would require traffic to slow down. With the stop Ctgns, it would provide
some normal breaks in the flow of traffic for the residents to pull out in a safer manner. The
LOS would still be A. The applicant asked, however, for consideration of allowing staff to
consider access to Alpine predicated on a design that would be safe and that would meet design
standards.
Commissioner Moot asked Mr. Cox if there was an overall development proposal for the whole
area of vacant land, including some vacant property belonging to the Country Club and the area
proposed for vacation. Mr. Cox was not aware of any. It was under the control of the Country
Club.
10hn Krabacher returned to the podium to ask about the sidewalk that Mr. Cox said would be
put in for the children, and what would be done when they reached the end of the easement.
The safety of the children was firSt. They had to cross at Second Avenue so they could walk
down the street to the school. Also, there were no traffic accidents that were related to Moss
Street. No one came eastbound on Moss, looked back, pulled out in front of someone and got
hit.
'"""
Charles Mitchell, 161 Naples St., CV, who had previously deferred his time to Mr. Krabacher,
approached the podium and asked the City Attorney about the area across the vacated property
and onto Moss Street becoming public right-of-way. He said he had lived there 29-112 years
and the cars crossing the vacated property had occurred for at least 25 years. The only time it
had not occurred was when the grass and weeds got too tall.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf said he understood that Mr. Mitchell was mAking a factual
assertion that for 25 uninterrupted years there had been a steady, continual, open, notorious use
of that area of the lot directly across from the northern edge of Alpine. Mr. Mitchell concurred
and showed pictures of the car path. Mr. Rudolf said he couldn't tell from the pictures. There
was a provision in the law for acquisition of an easement by that use, but it would have to be
researched with an attorney and established factually that it was there and that all the elements
were there, established in court and established title to take it.
Chairman Martin reiterated that they were tAtking about the General Plan consistency, and asked
if anyone else wanted to bring up something new. .
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
"'""
~JY5f
.
PC Minutes
-9-
October 27, 1993
Sr. Civil Engineer Ullrich clarified the traffic counts given earlier as follows: at Alpine and
Naples in May 1993 - ADT was 6,790 trips with eastbound direction being 3,370 and westbound
being 3,320; at Moss and Naples in September 1992 - 10,190 trips with eastbound trips being
5,830 and westbound trips of 4,360; at Alpine and Moss in March 1993 - ADT of 6,050 with
eastbound trips of 2,660 and westbound trips of 3,390.
Commissioner Tarantino thanked the people for coming to make their feelings known.
MS (TarantiDolRay) to adopt the attached resolution reporting to the CouneD that the
Co......1ccion bad found that the proposed street vacation is CODSistent with the Cbula Vista
General Plan.
Commissioner Ray recommended that City staff prepare a different detail of traffic impact. He
did not understand the ADT count. Mr. Ray felt it was unfortunate that the Commission could
not vote on their instincts and whether they believed it would be a good project in the future,
but there was only the option of voting on the General Plan consistency.
.
Commissioner Moot asked the maker of the motion to consider a substitute motion sending the
item to the City Council without a recommendation and suggest that the City Council also
consider the vacation issue in conjunction with an actual plan to develop the property, and if the
fees were a concern with the applicant that the City consider some lesser fee compensation in
exchange for considering the issue of vacationing along with an actual plan to develop the
property at the same time. He felt it would be much easier to deal with the issue of a vacation
in conjunction with an actual proposal for development of the property.
Commissioner Tarantino asked for Counsel's opinion on the possible substitute motion. Mr.
Rudolf replied that the Statute requests the Planning Commission's recommendation in regard
to the General Plan consistency. As he understood the motion, the Commission would not
specifically address the General Plan consistency in the motion. The Commission would be
silent with regard as to whether it was consistent or inconsistent to the General Plan. It would
be preferable to at least in some way indicate whether, all those other things aside, the pIRnning
Commission concluded it was either consistent or inconsistent with the General Plan to meet the
requirements of the Statute.
Commissioner Ray was concerned that if they passed forward a recommendation, they would
like to give themselves an option to have the item brought before them all at once. By vacating
this lot, it could become a bigger vacant lot with people using a right-of-way to an existing Moss
Street that was vacated if nothing was ever built. He asked if there was anything they could do
to substitute an actual vote with a recommendation.
.
Mr. Rudolf said be bad no objection to other things being placed in a substitute motion, but
requested that the Planning Commission address along with them the consistency versus
inconsistency.
y4)~5~
PC Minutes
-10-
October 27, 1993
"""'\
Chairman Martin questioned the easement by prescription and if the City of Chula Vista had the
authority to vacate this particular street. Mr. Rudolf said they did have the authority to vacate.
If it could be established that there was already a prescriptive easement to square off the
intersection with Alpine Street, if it were determined that there were facts present that could
establish that and Council gave direction to file a suit in declaratory relief and attempt to prove
in court that the public had acquired that easement through the property squaring off the Alpine
intersection by prescription, then the public (the City) would already own that and there would
be no condemnation action necessary to accomplish that goal. Staff would look at that before
it went to Council.
Principal Planner Griffm added that the Commission's actions are reported to Council in the staff
report, and staff could convey to them the fact that the Planning Commission found consistency
with the General Plan but also recommended that they not consider the vacation until a package
is presented including a development plan.
Commissioner Moot said that would be acceptable if the maker of the motion would consider
an amendment that the Planning Commission pass on a recommendation that it is consistent with
the General Plan; however, the Planning Commission did not feel that the vacation issue should
be decided separately from a plan to develop the property in total, and that the City Council
defer ruling on the vacation issue until the Planning Commission is presented with a development
plan for the whole parcel of land. and that if the fees associated with that are deemed to be """"
excessive, that the P1anning Department can consider some adjustment to that if they deem it
appropriate.
The maker of the motion concurred.
Commissioner Tucbscher stated he was uncomfortable with the situation and would have voted
against the original motion. He did not feel there was inadequate information that it met with
the General Plan and that the Planning Commission was making the right decision in the broad
view. He thought that the proposal as it evolved satisfied his concerns that they would be able
to make a good land use decision later and, at the same time, it kept the project moving forward
for the applicant.
Commissioner Moot proposed the following substitute motion:
That the pllInning Commission find that the proposed vacation would be
consistent with the existing General Plan; however, the pllInnil1g Commission
recommended that the issue of the vacation be considered in conjunction with the
proposed development of the property and not separate from it; that if the fees to
consider the vacation and the proposed development are deemed excessive by the
PllInning Department, that some consideration be given to the applicant to
potentially reduce those fees so that the two issues could be beard at the same
time.
"'"
~ /5'~~
.
PC Minutes
-11-
October 27. 1993
Commissioner Tuchscher agreed with the proposed motion in total with exception of the fee. He
believed this project should not be given special treatment.
Commissioner Moot proposed leaving it to the staff's discretion to decide the fee issue. He felt
the applicant was being asked to bring both forward at the same time and he didn't have to;
there was aflnancial reason why he didn't, and there was a benefit to the City. HefeIt some
consideration should be given to the applicant for that reality. He wanted to befair to all sides.
Commissioner Ray said he was struggling with the City deeming the fees as adequate because
there were very high fees today and they deem those adequate.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf stated that the current status of the fees and the ability to waive
fees--if it was $25,000 or less, the City Manager had authority to waive, and it ifwas $25,000
or more, the City Council had authority. In light of that information, perhaps Mr. Moot would
like to amend his proposed motion.
Commissioner Moot asked that the portion concerning the fees be deleted, and urged the
applicant to make such an application to the City Manager if he felt it appropriate.
. Commissioner Ray seconded the motion and asked that the portion of the discussion regarding
the Planning Commission's concern over the fees be highlighted.
lffiST A TEMENT OF SUBSTITUTE MOTION
That the Planning Commission rmd that the proposed vacation would be consistent with the
existing General Plan; however, the Planning Commlc.~ion recommended that the issue of
the vacation be considered in conjunction with the proposed development of the property
and not separate from it.
VOTE:
6-0-1 (Commissioner Fuller-conDict of interest)
.
~ /f~~7
&tN.'hi -I- H
. Resource Conservation Commission
.
Page 2
4.
Myers submitted three written items for the Ideas for Improving the Environment: (a) the
DO curfew rule at Brown Field; (b) City's responsibility in the O'YOiIWV...ded lChools; (c)
tbe aesthetics of Pier One Imports on Bonita Road and I-80s.
BurrasCano conveyed her concerns on the brush fire c:learancC policy on how it specifically
impacts the coastal sage scrub, and the landscaping manual. Doug Reid noted the manual
is currently in revision. Guemiro's conce:ms were of cardboard cereal boxes and the like
DOt recyclable. Len Moore slated that a company is currently looking into that type of
recycling. K%acha advised members to submit all ideas in writing by Ibe Deltt meeting.
He also suggested to note any possible fiscal impact to the City.
Review of Negative Declaration for IS-94..()l, Vacation of a portion of Moss Street. A~ ~
a brief discussion, it was MSUC (HallIBurrascano) to accept the negative declaration; vote
S..(); motion carried. .-/
S.
'--
,/
(
STAFF REPORT:
Doug Reid noted a major changes in CEQA guidelines will occur in February or March.
The local procedures will then change. Information to follow after that time.
Commission's Banquet Dinner is scheduled for Tuesday, November 30th.
cHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS:
Kracha asked if the commission wanted to schedule a tour of the APTEC facility. It is
taltatively scheduled for January 15 around 10 a.m. K%acha asked if comrni.cioners also
wanted to see bow the American Car Wash located on Broadway recycles its water.
Members will decide on this at the next meeting.
COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS:
Myers DOted there was a duplicate of mailings in the recent plCbt after the Jut meetinI
was canceled. Members were advised to ave the bandouts in the future until the Deltt
meeting to avoid having to recopy everything and incur the apeme of Clttra postIIe.
Also, she wanted staff' to be reminded to mail pl't'kets to be nceived on Thursday rather
dlan Friday.
ADJOURNMENT: 1be merti"l was adjoumed by Chairman XrIdIa at 8:08 p.m.
. Japectfully submitted,
Barbara Taylor "- L~
,t6adL,fJA/ -/
r-r /55;
~ta.p-~ cl ()lU1).A-~
.
6191004600
SAN DIEGO COUNTRY CLUB INC
R8 L ST
,HULA VISTA CA 91911
6190611299
o
6190710100
GRADILLAS TRUST 09-24-93
206 MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190611366
RULON JANICE K
165 TWIN OAKS CIR
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
6191001400
CLUB INC
CHULA VISTA CA
6190720200
WOLF DANNY L&KAREN L
1031 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191002200
CLUB INC
CHULA VISTA CA
6190721000
ELSON EDWARD&FLORENCE
162 W MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
.
C><hA bit
L
6191000800
CLUB INC
CHULA VISTA CA
6190610800
DATE KIMIYE TR
NSJT'UMEKUBO SHIRLEY A TR
257 W MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190710200
TIMONEY TnSUKO
202 MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190721500
SANCHEZ JAMES R&HELEN M
186 W MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190710300
ZELECHOSKI STANLEY&DOLORES 1990 TRU
1030 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190721200
GRIFFIN CHARLES E III&NANCY J
172 W MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190710400
GRIMES THOMAS L&MARY A
1036 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190720400
WEB!R ALBAN&BRIDGET
1110 HAWAII CIR
SEATTLE WA 98199
~~/~ f
6191000700
6190720100
PAUU 'ENU JR&ALAISEA
1025 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190721400
JAYNES WALTER D
MWJT'HOVEY DIANA M
182 W MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190721300
ERECE TONY N&CATALINA M
176 W MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190721100
JACOBUS ALLEN L
166 MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190720300
OOVIAK GEORGE G&LINDA
2512 ARLINGTON AVE
ASHTABULA OH 44004
6190720500
MOVSESIAN ANDREW A
1053 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
C!P
6190900100
OEGRAFFENREID BILLY J&MARY L
158 W MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190720700
MIHAICHAK GEORGE&KATHERINE 0 TRS
1061 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190900300
FROEMMING RUSSELL L
NSNS#FROEMMING DIANNE V
150 W MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190710600
AMEZCUA JESUS A&MARGARITA
1046 2NO AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190820100
MCLINDEN HUGH F&ELIZABETH A
1077 2NO AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190820200
TRAVIS CHARLES M&LINDA J
1081 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190710800
WUBENHORST BETHEL J
1054 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191510100
RICE JAMES O&LYNNETTE G
1103 1ST AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
GOLOER FAMILY TRUST
3745 DUFFY WAY
BONITA CA 91902
CUTCHER L1NOA
154 W MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
JIMENEZ JUAN S&MARTHA S
1073 2NO AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
SOUTH BAY PROPERTIES
650 GATEWAY CENTER YAY #H
SAN OIEGO CA 92102
ABRAHAM INES
13B MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
SEVERANCE TERUKO
1104 DIXON DR
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
HAYNES ALLEN C&ELLA
130 Y MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
OLIVER JACK N JR
126 Y MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190720600
6190900200
6190720900
6190611600
6190900600
6191511100
6190900800
6190900900
61907105'1
POPPLEYELL YANDA D
1040 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190720BOO
VILLALPANOO FEOERICO&IRMA G
1065 2NO AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190900400
HAMMONDS HOYARD Y&BENNIE F
5464 HONORS OR
SAN DIEGO CA 92122
6190900500
ERBER ARTHUR G&JOANN V TRS
142 Y MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
YONG GEORGE JR&HIROKO A
1050 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190710700
"""\
6190900700
MURPHY DAVIO R TR
134 MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190820300
GARCIA JOSE
1083 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190710900
FAWVER BILLIE&ALICE R
1058 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
""'"
~ /f~j,;2
:zq
.
6191511200
VALENCIA AUGUSTINE P&DORA
1108 DIXON DR
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190901000
~ILLINGHAM JON A&DOROTHY S
122 ~ MOSS ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190711100
CANIZALES RAUL&LETICIA
1066 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190901900
KOLl SH GEORGE
1075 KAREN ~AY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
. 6191002300
C Y CLUB VILLA ESTATES
CONS1/3#COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES
270 BONITA GLEN DR
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
6190811200
RICE LIVING TRUST 03-30-93
1063 JACQUELINE ~AY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191420500
SISEMORE RICHARD ~
11 1 ~ NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190603200
BACKES RONALD J&MILDRED A TRUST 8-0
534 POINSETTIA ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
.
6190820400
CAFFAREL JOSEPH G&MALVINA A
1085 2ND AVE
CNULA VISTA CA 91911
6190711000
QUEVEDO ROBERT G
1782 POINT DR
ST GEORGE UT 84770
6190901200
COUGHLAN DIARMUID P&NANCY B
1094 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190711200
2IMMERMANN JAMES F SR&SALLY R
1070 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190812600
TORRES FERNANDO
1074 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191511300
GRIFFIN ~ALLACE S TR
1112 DIXON OR
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190901800
MIKOLICH RUDOLPH&SARAH FAMILY TRUST
1085 KAREN ~AY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190901600
KRABACHER JOHN G JR&MARGIE J
147 NAPLES ST
CMULA VISTA CA 91911
~-!-)
6190902000
MORGAN TRUST 06-18-91
1074 KAREN ~AY
CNULA VISTA CA 91911
6190901100
LORENZ FAMILY TRUST 12-15-93
1925 OTAY LAKES RD #123
CHULA VISTA CA 91913
6190603100
SOUTH BAY PROPERTIES
650 GATE~AY CENTER DR #H
SAN DIEGO CA 92102
6191510200
JORDAN MICHAEL&LAURA A
1107 1ST AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191420600
CALLICOAT JOHN C&TOMOKO
103 ~ NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190812500
MOORE FRANK&JULIA
1078 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190811300
MURPMY JOSEPH A EST OF
NSNS1/2#MURPHY CLAIRE V EST OF
CIO MATTMEW S MURPHY
1067 JACQUELINE ~AY
CMULA VISTA CA 91911
6191420400
10YO JOHN M&JENENE L(DVA)
115 ~ NAPLES ST
CMULA VISTA CA 91911
-.;< ?'
6190812400
COX DOUGLAS O&JUDY A
1080 INO AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190901500
HANSEN CHARLES
145 W NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190901400
SIMMONS DAN R&SYLVIA C
135 W NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191511400
WOMACK THOMAS G&OONNA J TRUST 10-13
1118 OIXON DR
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191410200
MACNEAR ROBERT F&MARY E
121 W NAPLES 51
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190901100
LESAGE JACQUES B&CHARLOTTE M
10B4 KAREN WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190820600
WEGENER EUGEHE A&NANCY K
1093 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190901700
LAMAR LESLIE C TRUST 09-13-91
1095 KAREN WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190901300
CABELLA ALBERT C TR
NSJT#CABELLA CORRINE A TR
1098 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190811400
FERGUS JAMES A&MARY E
1071 JACQUELINE WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190B11500
KAMPERSCHROER GLENN N&HELEN K FAMIL
1075 JACQUELINE WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190811600
MATSUMOTO JERRY S&SANDRA K
1079 JACQUELINE WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190812300
HIPNER RONALD S
HWJT#GOLOEN 0 W&YOSHIKO M
1084 2NO AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191420700
KISH JOSEPH JR&MILOREO
1112 1ST AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191510400
ARIZALA LARRY&LYOIA
1117 1ST AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190603400
BOll N ROBERT A
1076 SAGE VIEW
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
~/5/~~
6190810~ -;
BROWOER VIRGINIA M
NSJT#BROWOER KATHLEEN
1089 2NO AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191510300
DINSMORE RICHARD A&DEBORAH A
1111 1ST AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191420300
JORGENSEN MARTIN G
42675 ROUNDUP DR
AGUANGA CA 92536
6190603300
CISNEROS JOSE E&AURORA
330 BAY LEAF DR
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
6190B11~
DAHLEN VINCENT R&THELMA M "
1085 JACQUELINE WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
61914Z0100
GANS ROBERT E JR&FRANCES M
129 W NAPLES 51
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191511500
CRUZ ANTONIO R&VICENTA R
1122 DIXON DR
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190811800
ANDERSON VERA 1992 TRUST 10-23-92
1089 JACQUELINE WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
,
.;?tf
.
DELVALLE RALPH V&ALMA
8105 CHAZ PL
LA MESA CA 91942
MARINO JOSEPHINE
1129 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
MATHIEU URBAN E JR
C/O LE FRIANT JACQUES
1151 HORNBLEND ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92109
REGISFORD JOEL&ANNIE
149 NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
.
BERNARDY ALPHONSE H
2527 AVENUE G
COUNCIL BLUFFS IA 515Dl
CASTRO MARY L
1131 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
LACEY OLEN C
lD64 JACQUELINE WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
619D811100
6191422200
6190605800
6191410400
6190811900
6191422100
6190811000
6191410100
MITCHELL CHARLES W&PATRICIA A
161 W NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
.
6191410600
ALCANTARA CAMILO G&ERLINOA A
137 W NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191410500
DElGADO ELlA
153 KEARNEY ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
619D812200
CAUTHON CHARLES E JR&ROSE M
lD88 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190902200
RUIZ ElVA A
1096 KAREN WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
619141030D
REYES RICARDO C&ARCELIA
151 W NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
619141D200
MERCADO JOHN J&TRACY L
157 W NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
61914126DO
PAHOWIAK ALBIN F&MERCEDES E
1112 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
619D810700
HARRIS LOREN R&N RUTH
3244 ORCHARD HILL RD
BONITA CA 91902
"
6191422700
ROBERTS GLEN KÐEL M
1116 1ST AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
619151D500
WOOD GERALD S&MARGARITA P
HWJT'WOOD DANIEL G&LYNDA M
1123 1ST AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191422800
ROBERTS GLEN KÐEL M
1116 1ST AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
619151160D
MCLAIN JAMES A REVOCA8LE 1993 FAMIL
1128 DIXOH DR
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
619D820700
COCHRAN CORA S
1097 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191510600
GUARIN DEMETRIO U&EILEEN P V TRS
3212 BONITA WOODS DR
BONITA CA 91902
619081D800
BEASLEY NEWTON J&DORIS M
1074 JACQUELINE WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191511700
GARCIA JUAN S&AURORA
1134 DIXON DR
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
~ J~tS
6190S12S00 6191420900 6190S121r""'"
; RODRIGUEZ RAMON E&RITA 0 METIVIER SYLVIO R&MARIA M MOL LEY JOHN S&LEONORA C
10S8 JACQUELINE WAY 1122 1ST AVE 1092 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190S10900 6191423000 6190812000
TAYLOR JEAN S EDELEN ALGERNON W&CLARA P TRS FLESCH WILLIAM S&FLORENTINA E
1070 JACQUELINE WAY 1113 ALPINE AVE 1097 JACQUELINE WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191322600 6191422900 6191510700
BUFFINGTON SELMA A TR EOELEN ALGERNON W&CLARA P TRS ELLISON DENNIS M&JOOI A
169 W NAPLES ST 1133 ALPINE AVE 1133 1ST AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191412500 6191421000 6191410700
ALMARAZ FAUSTINO&RUTH METIVIER SYLVIO R&MARIA M ANDERSON JAMES O&AOOIE L TRUST 11-2
1118 ALPINE AVE 1122 1ST AVE 1109 ELM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190603700 6191511800 6191322500
TAYLOR IRA W&ROSINA M TRS GARCIA JUAN JR&RHONOA L TANAKA STEVEN S '"""\
C/O PAUL MILLER CO 1138 OIKON DR 173 NAPLES ST
272 CHURCH AVE #4
CHULA VISTA CA 91910 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191520900 6190812900 6191322400
PROIA RICHARD HORNER KEITH 0 TANAKA JESSE F
1143 OIKON DR 1098 JACQUELI NE WAY 177 NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191412400 6191320200 6190810300
HUTH NORMAN L&ARLENE F SAUCEDO CARMEN KELLAR R08ERT F&ROBERTA G
1120 ALPINE AVE 183 W NAPLES ST 217 W NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191421100 6191510800 6190S10400
ALVAREZ SALVADOR N&CONCEPCION R MURRIETA ELVA JONES GORDON E&GEORGIA N
1134 1ST AVE 1139 1ST AVE 211 W NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CMULA VISTA CA 91911
"'"
,
~ /~f,.?
,,;(4
.
DITTO ROBERT II
1117 ELM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
CASTORENA FAMILY TRUST
1101 2ND AVE
CNULA VISTA CA 91911
6191410800
6191320100
61913223DO
RASMUSSEN NARVEY A&DOROTHY D TRS
1112 ELM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
FERGUSON ANN L EST OF
C/O NANCY TRAVERS
1126 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
V_BANUELOS
1123 ELM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191412300
EULALIO&VEYNA MARIA
6191410900
DIA2 FRANCISCO&ESPERANZA
1111 2ND AVE S
CNULA VISTA CA 91911
619132030D
6191412200
PEREYRA HELIODORO R&VIRGINIA H
1128 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
SAMPLES MARILYN A
181 CORTE MARIA AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 9191D
.
619142130D
6191421900
GARNETT MARY H 1992 TRUST
1137 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190604100
MUSARACA FRANK A
4112 GOLF VIEII CIR
URBANDALE IA 50322
6191521000
MCCALL DOROTHY E TR
1147 DIXON DR
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
61914212DO
BREIIER DEVEREAUX II
1138 1ST AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191421800
SANTANA VICTOR M&PATRICIA
1139 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191312600
ALVAREZ JOSE L&CORINTA I
203 NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
619151200D
ANOERSON RAY T&OIMPLE D
1148 DIXON DR
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191411000
SULLIVAN EARL V JR
NSNS16.1X.SULLIVAN EARL V&MARGARET
15155 SEGOVIA CT
SAN DIEGO CA 92129
~t?
619D810200
ESPINOZA FELIX P&LETICIA L
223 II NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
61915119DD
CELICEO 1990 TRUST 01-15-90
1545 SONORA DR '232
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
619081010D
GUTIERREZ JOHN B&ANGELITA
227 II NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190603800
FRANZEL ELMER M TR
1093 DEL MAR AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191510900
ROBERTSON EUGENE M&MOLLIE
1143 1ST AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191322200
HALL DONNA
NSNS1/4'HALL DAVID L
2096 NORTHSHORE DR 'F
CHULA VISTA CA 91913
6190604000
IECK CHARLES L&MARGARET C
258 II NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190602100
CASTORENA FAMILY TRUST
1101 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
.::?<Z
6191421700
GUERRERO GILOAROO&ROSARIO
1141 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190602000
WALTOH LUCILLE <AKA WALTON MINNIE
280 NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191322100
NEELEY LLOYO L&MARY L
1120 ELM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191310100
GAPS REVOCABLE TRUST 12-30-93
POBOX 814
BONITA CA 91908
6190605900
LEE ELIZABETH C
745 3RD AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
6191423400
DEGOOOY JOAD C&REBECA B
1581 SKYLARK WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191422400
HUGHES THOMAS&MARIA
112 EMERSON ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6192011700
SMITH DAVID R&KATHRYN A
MWJT'JOHNSTONE FRANKIE L
474 NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6190601600
WAPNER SIDNEY&FRIDA
58 VIA DE LAURENCIO
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
6191312500
FAST LIVING TRUST 07-10-90
485 E ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
6191511000
KEATING JOHN L&MAE S
UWJT'KEATING GAIL P
1149 1ST AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191320400
OAY LORENA E TR
1115 2HD AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191411100
SULLIVAN EARL V&MARGARET V FAMILY T
15155 SEGOVIA CT
SAN DIEGO CA 92129
619131240D
SUTTON GLENN
UWJT'OAY LORENA E
1116 2HD AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191320500
VILLANUEVA BENITO
NSJT'PENA RITA M
1119 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191423200
SANCHEZ ROMULO S&EVA
128 EMERSON ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
~5/by'
61906039"",,",\
MARQUEZ JONN S&CAROLE G TRS
POBOX 3103
CHULA VISTA CA 91909
RAITT LEE E&MARIE E
C/O GUS PAPPAS ESQ
203 CHURCH AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
PIANTEDOSI JOSEPH
1132 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
DEGODOY JOAD C&REBECA B
1581 SKYLARK WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
GLEDHill JOHN G
414 WINDROSE WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
CAMPBELL MARIANA
1122 ELM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
GARCIA VICTOR M
1129 ELM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
KINSEY ROBERT M&SHARON
42629 M 56TH ST W
LANCASTER CA 93536
6192012000
6191412100
6191423500
6192011BOO
"'""
6191322000
6191411200
6191412000
~
;?C/
.
6190602900
KOBACKER CO THE
POBOX 16751
COLUMBUS OH 43216
6191312300
ARDAGNA NED A&JANET K
1120 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191320600
RUBINOWSKI JOHN L&LORENA G
1123 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191321900
BUSSE DAVID A
UWNS50X#MARTINEZ KATHERINE A
1128 ELM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
.
PIERCE ANDREW J
1520 LAW ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92109
61913122DO
619132070D
WHITE NORMAN M&ALICE A
1127 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191312100
VALDEZ JORGE T&CONSUELO
751 BRIGHTWOOD AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 9191D
619141170D
BECERRA PABLO G&SILVIA A
140 EMERSON ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
.
\
6191222800 6191423100
MEEK VIRGINIA M GIL GILBERT M JR&SILVIA M
235 NAPLES ST 1145 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
61912227DO 61906D3000
MEEK VIRGINIA M KOBACKER CO THE
235 NAPLES ST POBOX 16751
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 COLUMBUS OH 43216
6192011600 6191411300
COOP DAVID J HORN DENNIS R&ELSA
1155 1ST AVE 1135 ELM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191222500 6191220100
OROZCO SERGIO A&BERTHA G PAGE ELIZABETH
245 W NAPLES ST 1101 OEL MAR AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191922300 6191411900
AKINA WILLIAM K C&MARIAN P CARRANZA CONCEPCION
103 EMERSON ST 1144 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191411500 6191411800
MAGUIRE ROBERT W JR&MARLYN BAUMGARTNER MELBA R
152 EMERSON ST 146 EMERSON ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191321800 6191922200
JAUREGUI JESUS
PEREZ JESUS&PATRICIA SMNS1/3#JAUREGUI ERNESTO*MMS01/3'OL
1541 PETERLYNN DR 1154 1ST AVE
SAN DIEGO CA 92154 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191411400 6191320800
HORN DENNIS R&ELSA DAY LORENA E TR
535 BERLAND WAY 1131 2ND AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 9191D CHULA VISTA CA 91911
~~/
~LL
BOWMAN DOUGLAS M&ANGELA B TRS
1151 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
JONES THERESA L
1138 elM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
MARES WALTER J&GERDA
1155 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
RIVAS CESAR A&PAQUITA E
470 WEISSER WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191920100
6191321700
6191920200
6191411600
6191321600
POWELL HERBERT W JR&lONETA K
1142 ELM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
NEITZKE RONNIE L&KIM R
141 EMERSON ST
CHUlA VISTA CA 91911
HUBlI T TOM L
147 EMERSON ST
CHUlA VISTA CA 91911
HOLDER SHEILA
1134 2ND AVE
CHUlA VISTA CA 91911
619191Z200
6191912100
6191311800
6191212500
WILLIAMS REBECCA
764 DENNIS AVE
CHUlA VISTA CA 91910
619192Z100
ROORIGUES ANTONIO F&RITA P
1156 1ST AVE
CHUlA VISTA CA 91911
6191212900
KAKAYI AMIN A&KHALOIE A
287 NAPLES ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191912300
GODWIN FRANK J SR&VIRGINIA
5430 SW 69TH ST
AUBURN KS 66402
6191922000
COOK AARON E&MARGARET E
1160 1ST AVE
CHUlA VISTA CA 91911
6191920300
MONTANO ARNOLOO A&GLORIA G
POBOX 121617
CHUlA VISTA CA 91912
6191213100
MARTlN ROBERT L
NSTClt2#ARGOUD GEORGES TRUST 06-13-
1109 3RD AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191321500
"ARGIS RITA L LIVING TRUST 10-06-92
1146 elM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
~ 6' 70
STORTON ALBURTIS N TR
1128 2ND AVE
C"ULA VISTA CA 91911
61913120 ~
6191320900
FELIX GEORGE W JR&VIRGINIA E
1137 2ND AVE
C"ULA VISTA CA 91911
VAlEN RICHARO M&MARY
1106 DEL MAR AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
HOLMERUD JON W&ROBERTA B
3354 BONITA WOODS DR
BONITA CA 91902
V J&ASSOCIATES INC
1037 BROADWAY #F
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
OEFLORES ELISA R
SWJT#RUELAS RAQUEL F
4397 ZINNIA CT
SAN DIEGO CA 92154
MAGDALENO FRANK C&XOCHITL G
180 EMERSON ST
CHUlA VISTA CA 91911
LIMON JOSE L&BLANCA
SMJT#LIMON ARTURO
153 EMERSON ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191212300
6191311900
61912102~
6191210100
6191321400
6191910300
""""
t9r,t
.
6191322700
MAGOALENO FRANK CIXOCHITL G
3040 CAVE
NATIONAL CITY CA 91950
6191910200
DELATORRE RAMONA P LIVING TRUST 04-
157 EMERSON ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191912500
CONFORTH DOUGLAS J
1162 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191910400
MIKKELSON FRANKIE
1161 ELM AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
r.' ZAN'KIEIf/ICZ
III' ToBIAS [)~.
CH/./L.d 0STA, CA '1/~//
.
6191920400
NIETO ROBERT SILINDA L
11581 PARK LN
GARDEN GROVE CA 92640
6191910100
SCHUE MAKER MILES DICAROL L
163 EMERSON ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
6191822300
RAMOS RUBEN A'REBECCA L
169 EMERSON ST
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
RASE, 114s!L G.
/198 ALPIAlt AV6N'/JP
t'JltJLA I>1S1A, CA 91911
JAC~ L. S7,4rFQIU>
820 JEFFe.est>N' AvE.
CII/./lA 05T.4, ~A ~/9//
6191321000
UPTEGROVE GARY M
792 LORI LN
CHULA VISTA CA 91910
6191912400
COMFORTH JOHN A TR
NSJT'CONFORTH PHYLLIS M TR
"60 ALPINE AVE
CHULA VISTA CA 9'91'
6191911900
VANVRANKEN BRYAN KIMARTHA V
',85 MELIX WAY
CHULA VISTA CA 91911
MAIl'l S. 81~AlA'U)'I
I(,mIL4E1I A. &flN,4RP,/
/(}'15 JA&fJIIELlItIE WAY
ClluLA 0S1'A, CA ~/9/1
ytrJS-7!
negative declaration
PROJECT NAME Vacation of a Portion of Moss Street
PROJECT LOCATION Moss Street between Naples Street and Alpine Avenue
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO' Not applicable as streets fall under the non-assessed tax roll
PROJECT APPLICANT
San Diego Country Club and Country Club Villa Estates
CASE NO' IS-94-01
DATE: September 27, 1993
A. Proiect Sening
The project sening consists of a 30,800 square foot seclion of Moss Street immediately east of
the westerly smb street of Alpine A venue and immediately north of the intersection of First
A venue and Naples Street. Immediately south of the above described section of Moss Street is
a vacant 8,322.98 square foot triangular piece of vacant land. Single family homes are located
to the west across Alpine A venue and to the south across Naples Street. The San Diego Country
Club, a golf course with club house facilities, is located to the immediate north of Moss Street. .
To the east of the proposed project is neighborhood shopping.
B. Proiect Descriotion
The project description consists of the vacation or closing of a 30,800 sq. ft. section of Moss
Street east of Alpine A venue and west of First A venue. The northern portion of Moss Street will
become part of the holdings of the San Diego Country Club and the southern half would be added
to the triangularly shaped parcel to the south. Discretionary actions that are required for this
include the finding of General Plan Consistency and the action for approval of the closing of
Moss Street. The applicant's evenTUal plan is that the San Diego Country Club will quit-claim or
transfer title of their portion of Moss Street to the Country Club Villa Estates in consideration
of the Country Club Villa Estates installing the missing curbs and gutters on the San Diego
Country Club side of the Street - the remaining portion of Moss from Third Avenue to the
realigned Moss smb street of Alpine. Access to the property will be allowed along Naples;
however, access on Moss Street will be limited to one driveway at a location determined to
provide safe ingress and egress as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant
evenTUally plans to apply for a tentative parcel map for 4 units or subdivide the property into 5
units.
C. Cornoatibilitv with Zoninl! and Plans
The evenTUal plans to apply for a tentative parcel map for 4 units or a subdivision for 5 units will
be in compliance with the zoning and General Plan designation for the project site, which is
single family residential.
,~"'1(P
~Vt-
--.-
.........~....~
~~~~
.
city of chula vista plaMlng department Cl1Y OF .?!
envlronmenta' review .ection CHULA VISTA \{}
\
.
.
.
D
Identification of Enviromnental Effects
An initial study conducted by the City of Chula Vista determined that the proposed project will
not have a significant enviromnental effect, and the preparation of an Enviromnental Impact
Report will not be required. A Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Traffic
Traffic Engineering has detennined several traffic measures should be implemented relating to
the proposed vacation of Moss Street. The applicant must allow for an increase of right-of-way
on Naples and Alpine Street adjacent to the southern parcel on Moss Street in accordance with
the City of Chula Vista roadway design standards. The applicant is proposing to install curb and
gutters within a 3 year period from the transfer of property subsequent to the approval of the
street vacation. The project will include stop sign controls at Moss Street and Naples Street and
attendant warning devices as deemed necessary by the City Traffic Engineer. A stop sign will
be installed on Naples at Moss Street to create a three-way stop controlled intersection. The
applicant must provide a 52' roadway which will be.an expansion from the existing 20' roadway
These traffic measures enhance traffic safety and provide more efficient flow of traffic within this
area adjacent to the project.
E.
Water
Due to recent drought conditions, as a condition of project approval, the applicant must agree to
no net increase in water consumption or participate in whatever water conservation or fee off-set
program the City of Chula Vista has in effect at the time of building pennit issuance.
F
Mitil!ation necessarv to avoid sil!nificant effects
As no significant effects are expected mitigation measures are not necessary
G Mandatorv Findinl!s of Sil!nificance
Based on the following findings, it is detennined that the project described above will not have
a significant enviromnental impact and no enviromnental impact report needs to be prepared.
1. The project bas the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the enviromnent,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to P1imlnAt.. a plant or
AnimAl community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or AnimAl, or P1lmlnAte important examples of the maJor periods of California
history or prehistory.
The proposed project. the vacation of Moss ~treet does not have the potential to degrade
or reduce any existing habitat as the project consists of the closing of a street and has
therefore been denuded of any habitat long ago.
-2-
/3/;7
IH/
(p
"
2.
The project has the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the
disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
-.
This project is consistent with the general plan and does not have the potential to achieve
short term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long term environmental goals with
guidelines.
3. The project has possible effects which are individually limited but cwnuIatively
considerable. As used in the subsection, "cwnulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of an individual project are considerahle when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects.
This project does not have the potential to have effects which are individually limited but
cumulatively considerable. The main concern raised by residents was in regard to traffic
flow The traffic engineers who reviewed the project have determined that the inclusion
of: stop signs on Naples at Moss Street to create a three-way stop controlled intersection,
and provision of a 52' roadway which will be an expansion from the existing 20'roadway
will enhance traffic safety and provide a more efficient flow of traffic within this area.
Staff are confident that, based on this determination, the project does not have
cumulatively considerable impacts.
4. The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly.
-...
The proposed project will not cause a substantial adverse effect on human beings either
directly or indirectly as it must meet all Code requirements and requirements of various
City departments.
H. Consultation
1 Individuals and Or2anizations
City of Chula Vista:
Roger Daoust, Engineering
John Lippitt, Engineering
Cliff Swanson, Engineering
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering
Bob Sennett, Planning
Frank Herrera-A, Planning
Martin Miller, Planning
Steve Griffin, Planning
Ken Larsen, Director of Building and Housing
Alex Saucedo, Building Departtnent
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Rod Hastie, Fire Departtnent
Captain Keith Hawkins, Police Departtnent
Mary Jane Diosdado, Police Departtnent
Martin Schmidt, Parks and Recreation Departtnent
.......,
-3-!y ?~
.
.
.
Barbara Reid, Planning
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
Applicant's Agent: San Diego Country Club and Country Club Villa Estates
2. Documents
Chula Vista General Plan
Safety Commission Report, 9/9/93
Speed Limit - Engineering/Traffic Survey. Naples Street (Third Avenue-First Avenue)
Naples Street (First Avenue-Hilltop Drive)
Memorandum from Hans Giroux to Barbara Reid, 10/22/93
3 Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any comments
received on the Initial Study and any comments received during the public review period
for the Negative Declaration. Further information regarding the environmental review
of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth
Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010.
\MOSS.ND
-4- ;5 7;
iJ; -"
,
Case No. 94-01
APPENDIX I
-.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
(To Be Completed By Lead Agency)
Background
1. Name of Proponent: San Diel!o CountrY Club & CountrY Club
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 250 Bonita Glen Drive Estates
Chula Vista. CA 91910
3. Date of Checklist: SeDtember 27. 1993
4. Name of Proposal: Vacation of a Domon of Moss Street
5. Initial Study Number: 94-01
Environmental Impacts
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO
a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in
geologic substructures? 0 0 .
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or ~
overcovering of the soil? 0 0 .
c. Change in topography or ground surface
relief features? 0 0 .
d. The destruction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical features? 0 0 .
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or off the site? 0 0 .
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach
sands, or changes in siltation, deposition
or erosion which may modify the channel of
a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake? 0 0 .
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud
slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? 0 0 .
""'"
/ y g'O
Page 1
\CHECKLST.MOS
Comments:
. As the site currently is developed as a road and the proposal is to vacate the road, there are
no changes in conditions expected that could lead to an increase in wind or water erosion.
2. Air. Will the proposal result in: m MAYBE NQ
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality? 0 0 .
b. The creation of objectionable odors? 0 0 .
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
temperature, or any change in climate,
either locally or regionally? 0 0 .
Comments:
The project is in conformance with the existing Air Basin Plan.
3. Water. Will the Proposal result in: m MAYBE NO
a. Changes in currents, or the course or
direction of water movements, in either
marine or fresh waters? 0 0 .
. b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of
surface runoff? 0 0 .
c. Alterations to the course or flow or
flood waters? 0 0 .
d. Change in the amount of surface water
in any water body? 0 0 .
e. Discharge into surface waters, or any
alteration of surface water quality,
including but not limited to temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity? 0 0 .
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of
flow of ground waters? 0 0 .
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters,
either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception of
an aquifer by cuts or excavations? 0 0 .
. h. Substantial reduction in the amount of
water otherwise available for public
water supplies? 0 D .
\CHECKLST .MOS J~8/ Page 2 ( ~<b
i.
Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding or
tidal waves?
.
........,
o
o
Comments:
This project is not in the Coastal Zone and there are no rivers or wetlands or other sensitive
aquatic resources within the immediate area that could be impacted by the project.
The Threshold/Standards Policy does not apply to this project.
4.
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
YES MAYBE NO
a.
Change in the diversity of species, or
number of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic
plants)?
o
.
o
b.
Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of plants?
.
o
o
c.
Introduction of new species of plants into
into an area, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species?
o
o
.
d.
Reduction in acreage of any agricultural
crop?
.
-...
o
o
Comments:
The project is in an urbanized area of the City and the site is developed as a road. The
project will not result in any changes in diversity of plant or animal species.
5.
Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
~ MAYBE NO
a.
Change in the diversity of species, or
numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals including reptiles, fish and
shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)?
o
o
.
b.
Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of animals?
o
o
.
c.
Introduction of new species of animals
into an area, or result in a barrier to
the migration or movement of animal_?
o
.
o
d.
Deterioration to existing fISh or wildlife
habitat?
o
.
o
'"'"
ICHECKLST.MOS
) Y f);J...
Page 3
.
.
.
Comments:
The project is in an urbanized area of the City and the site is developed as a road. The
project will not result in any changes in diversity of plant or .n;m.l species.
6.
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
m MAYBE lill
a.
Increases in existing noise levels?
o
o
.
b.
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
o
o
.
Comments:
It is expected that the traffic that currently travels on Moss Street will begin to use
Naples. As a result of this change, the homes on the westerly stub street of Alpine
Avenue would experience less traffic and noise. The homes along the south side of
Naples may experience additional noise from additional travelers along that route.
However, discussion with our acoustician has determined that the additional traffic
will not bring the noise to a level of significance.
7.
Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce
new light or glare?
m MAYBE NO
o 0 .
Comments:
There may be additional light along Naples Avenue as a result of the vacation of Moss Street
but is not expected to be above the level of significance.
8.
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
m MAYBE lill
o
o
.
Comments:
The vacation of Moss Street will improve traffic circulation and the land use will
coincide with the surrounding residential1and designation in the general plan.
9.
Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
m MAYBE lill
a.
Increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources?
o
o
.
Comments:
No natural resources are expected to be impacted. The proposal, therefore, is not
expected to increase the rate of the use of natural resources.
10.
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
m MAYBE lill
a.
A risk of an explosion or the release of
hazardous substances (including, but not
limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident or
upset conditions?
o
o
.
/~rJ
Paso 4
.. /
')I}
!
\CHECKLST .MOS
b.
Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or an emergency evacuation
plan?
o
o
.
,-.,
Comments:
No hazardous materials or substances will be stored on site. Therefore, there cannot be a
risk of an explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset
conditions.
11.
Population. Will the proposal alter the location
distribution, density, or growth rate of the human
population or an area?
YES MAYBE NO
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project involves the vacation of Moss Street and will not involve the
construction of more residential units. The population will not increase. A tentative parcel
map or subdivision map for the division of the project site into no more than 5 parcels may
be submitted in the future. This future proposal for the use of the site will increase
population, but the impact of five families would be below the level of significance.
12.
Housing. Will the proposal affect existing
housing, or create a demand for additional
housing?
YES MAYBE NO
o
o
.
Comments: -.,
The proposed project will not involve the construction of any new housing and will not create
a demand for more housing in the project area. A future project may involve the building
of a small number of homes but this would not place a significant demand on current services
and natural resources in the project area.
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO
a. Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement? 0 0 .
b. Effects on existing parking facilities,
or demand for new parking? 0 0 .
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems? 0 0 .
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? 0 0 .
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air
traffic? 0 0 .
.....,
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 0 0 .
\CHECKLST.MOS J5~rY Page 5
.
g.
A "large project" under the Congestion
Management Program? (An equivalent of
2400 or more average daily vehicle trips
or 200 or more peak-hour vehicle trips).
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project will shift traffic from Moss Street to Naples Street. However, impacts
to traffic and circulation are not significant. The proposed project street improvements will
improve circulation and safety at the intersection of Moss Street and Naples Street.
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services in any of the following areas:
m MAYBE ~
a. Fire protection? 0 0 .
b. Police protection? 0 0 .
c. Schools? 0 0 .
d. Parks or other recreational facilities? 0 0 .
e. Libraries? 0 0 .
. f. Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads? 0 0 .
g. Other governmental services? 0 0 .
Comments:
.
Traffic Engineering staff recommends that the roadway be expanded to 52 feet, that access
to the property be allowed along Naples but limited on Moss Street to one driveway at a
location determined to provide safe ingress and egress as determined by the City Traffic
Engineer. The project will include stop sign controls at Moss and Naples and attendant
warning devices as deemed necessary by the City Traffic Engineer. A stop sign will be
installed on Naples at Moss Street, to create a three-way stop controlled intersection. These
traffic measures enhance traffic safety and provide more efficient flow of traffic within this
area adjacent to the project. The street improvements would require an increase in City
right-of-way in accordance with City of Chula Vista street design standards, by the property
owner of the proposed project. These street improvements will address the traffic concerns
of residents and improve traffic circulation in the project area. The proposed project is a
street vacation and will not create any impact on public services. The Fire Department and
Police Department have not noted any Fire or Police protection in relation to this project.
The project site may be developed in the future as single-family housing. This possible
development will be no more than 5 parcels and the population increase will not place a
significant impact on public services in the project area.
/~/r~
Pas" 6 17lt"
\CHECKLST .MOS
15.
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
YES MAYBE NO
a.
Use of substantial amount of fuel or
energy?
-
o
o
.
b.
Substantial increase in demand upon
existing sources or energy. or require
the development of new sources of
energy?
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project will not involve any energy use and will not create any energy
demands.
16.
Thresholds. Will the proposal adversely impact
the City's Threshold Standards?
YES MAYBE NO
o 0 .
Comments :
As described below, the proposed project does not adversely impact any of the seven
Threshold Standards.
A. FirelEMS
The Threshold Standards requires that fire and medical units must be able to respond
to cal1s within 7 minutes or less in 85 % of the cases and within 5 minutes or less in
75 % of the cases. The City of Chula Vista has indicated that this threshold standard "'""
wil1 be met, since the nearest fire station is 1-114 miles away and would be associated
with a 3 minute response time. The proposed project wil1 comply with this
Threshold Standard.
Fire Department access is not compromised and use of existing fire hydrant is not
compromised.
B. Police
The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84 % of Priority
1 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority
1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units mnst respond to 62.10 % of Priority 2
calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority
2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold
Standard.
C. Traffic
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must operate at a Level of
Service (LOS) "C" or better. with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D"
may occur during the peak two hours of the day at sigroa 1i7ed intersections.
Intersections west of 1-805 are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No
intersection may reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday peak hour. .........
Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this Standard. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
ICHECKLST.MOS
)->~~?
Page 7
.
The proposed project intersection is currently at level of service. A. and will remain
at . A. after the project is completed.
D.
Parks/Recreation
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/I ,000 population. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
E. Drainage
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and volumes not exceed City
Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master PJan(s) and City Engineering Standards. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
The proposed project will not significantly impact storm water flows and is consistent
with the Drainage Master Plan.
F.
Sewer
.
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed City
Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed
project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
The proposed Moss Street vacation will not have a significant impact on sewage
volumes and is consistent with Sewer Master Plan.
G. Water
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and transmission
facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quality
standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. The proposed project
will comply with this Threshold Standard.
Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever water conservation or fee
off-set program the City of ChuJa Vista has in effect at the time of building permit
issuance.
The proposed project will not jeopardize water quality standards because future
construction will not be significant.
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: lE MA~E m2
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health? 0 0 .
. b. Exposure of people to potential health
hazards? 0 0 .
\CHECKLST .MOS
)yY7
Page 8
/
,,,~
i'"
Comments:
The proposed project will not create any significant health hazard. The traffic shift will not
create any health hazards due to its close proximity to the Moss Street vacation. --"
The additional few homes that may be developed on the site in the future will be aesthetically
more pleasing than the public street that currently exists on site.
18.
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in:
m MAYBE NO
a.
The obstruction of any scenic vista or view
open to the public, or will the proposal
result in the creation of an aesthetically
offensive site open to public view?
o
o
.
b.
The destruction, or modification of a scenic route?
o
o
.
Comments :
The Moss Street vacation will not allow for the possible development of no more than five
units in the site.
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an m MAYBE NO
impact upon the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opportunities? 0 0 .
Comments: -.
The proposed project will not significantly impact recreational opportunities. Parks and
Recreation did not note any concerns.
20. Cultural Resources. YES MAYBE NO
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration
of or the destruction or a prehistoric or
historic archaeological site? 0 0 .
b. Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building, structure,
or object? 0 0 .
c. Does the proposal have the potential to
cause a physical change which would
affect unique ethnic cultural values? 0 0 .
d. Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? 0 0 .
e. Is the area identified on the City's ~
General Plan EIR as an area of high
potential for archeological resources? 0 0 .
ICHECKLST.MOS /p-g--~ Page 9
.
Comments:
The proposed project is in an urb~ area of the City and will not impact any cultural
resources.
Paleontological Resources. Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destrUction of paleontological
resources?
21.
m MAYBE ~
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project site is in an urb~ area and will not result in the determination of
paleontological resources.
22.
Mandatory Findings of Significance.
~ MAYBE NO
a.
.
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause
a fish or wildlife population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
animal or eliminate important examples or the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project, the vacation of Moss Street does not have the potential to degrade or
reduce any existing habitat as the project consists of the closing of a street and has, therefore,
been denuded of any habitat long ago.
Comments:
.
b.
Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-
term, environmental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one which occurs in
a relatively brief, definitive period of time,
while long-term impacts will endure well into the
future.)
o
o
.
The City Traffic Engineer has found that the requested vacation, along with the
recommended conditions of approval, would meet the General Plan Circulation Element street
standards, and would enhance traffic safety by eliminating the acute angle at which Moss
Street now intersects with Naples Street. The Circulation Element diagram shows Moss
Street intersecting with Naples Street near First Avenue and/or Alpine Avenue and thus the
proposed configuration would be consistent with the General Plan. The project complies with
long-term environmental and land use goals of the City.
c. Does the project have impacts which are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (A project may impact two or
/y%9
Page 10
,rlh'
, '
\CHECKLST .MOS
more separate resources where the impact on
each resource is relatively small, but where the
effect of the total of those impacts on the
environment is significant.)
~,
o
o
.
Comments:
This project does not have the potential to be individually limited but cumulatively
considerable. The main concern raised by residents was in regard to traffic flow. The traffic
engineers who reviewed the project have determined that the inclusion of: stop signs on
Naples at Moss Street to create a three-way stop controlled intersection and provision of a
52' roadway which will be an expansion from the existing 20' roadway will enhance traffic
safety and provide a more efficient flow of traffic within this area. The street improvements
will improve circulation and safety at the intersection of Moss Street and Naples Street and
will address the traffic concerns of residents. Staff are confident that based on this
determination, the project does not have cumulatively considerable impacts.
d.
Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project will not cause a substantial adverse effect on human beings either
directly or indirectly as it must meet all Code requirements and requirements of various City
departments. ........
........
\CHECKLST.MOS
!.5/}{/
Page 11
. ,.
APPUCATlON CANNOT I.. ACCEPTED UNLESS SITE
PLAN IS FOLDED TO FIT INTO AN 8-112 X 11 FOLDER
.
INITIAL STUDY
For Office Use OnlJ
Case No. IS- qij. - I .
DpSL Amnt. . DO
Jteceipt No.
Date RcC'd.. .
AcceplCdby
Projcct No. .FA-
DpsLNo,DO-IJ!>/
CIPNo.. .
Rela1Cd Case No.
City of Chula Vista
Application Form
BACKGROUND
1. Project Title vacation of a Dortinn of Mn~1=: ~+"'AA
2. Project Location (Street address or description)
MossStreet between Naples Street and~Alpine Avenue
A.
Assessors Book. Page &. Parcel No. Legal -description attached
Brief Project Description Vacation of a portion of:;Moss Street
between Naples Street and Alp1ne Avenue
3.
4.
Name of Applicant San Dieco Cnuntry Clnh ..nil Cnnnt-ry Cl nh Vi 1 "~tates -
Address 250 Bonita Glen Drive Fax# ---
City t:t}lila 17ista State CA
Name of Preparer/Agent Greg Cox
Address 3130 Bonita Rd, Suite 200
Cuy Chula Vista
Relation to Applicant Consultant
Indicate all pennits or approvals and enclosures or documents required by the Environmental
Review Coordinator.
.
s.
6.
Phone ---
Zip 91910
Fax# 691-9854
State CA
Phone 585-7007
Zip 91910-3263
a. Pennits or approvals required.
_ General Plan Amendment
_ Rezone/Prezone
_ Grading Pennit
_ Tentative Parcel Map
_ Site Plan &. Arch. Review
_ Special Use Permit
_ Design Review Application
_ Tentative Subd. Map
_Redevelopment Agency OPA
_ Redevelopment Agency DDA
_ Public Project
Annexation
-
_ Specific Plan
_ Cooditional Use Permit
Variance
= Coastal Development
x Other Permit
-
Street vacation
If project is a General Plan Amendment and/or rezone, please indicate the change in designation from
Not Anplic~hl~ to
b. Enclosures or documents (IS required by the Environmental Review Coordinator).
.
_ Grading Plan
_ Parcel Map
_ Precise Plan
_ Specific Plan
_ Traffic Impact Report
_ Hazardous WISte Assessment
Arch. E1evalillllS
- , .",t'lC'ope Plans
= Tentative Subd. Map
Improvement Plans
= Soils Report
_ Geotecbnical Report
Jp-<J/
_ Hydrological Study
BioloJical Study
- Arc;baeOIogical SllIdy
- Noise AssesSV'ent
- Other Agency Permit
IOther Si te plan
.01(;
i i{lj
Pqel
~..............~Ol,~(W.IG:IC.t3I(lol.Im.Pl)
. .
B. PROPOSED PROJECT
~
1.
approx. .30 800
Land Area: square footage ' or acreage
H land area to be dedicaled. state acreage and purpose.
purposes.
..,..n~d/
a.
City of Chula Vista or@sentlv ha~ ~n ~~~~rn~n+
Tnr r"h1i,..
b. Does the project involve the construction of new buildings. or will existing structure be.
utilized? /Jo
2.
Complete this section if project is residential or mixed use. not applicable
a. Type of development:_ Single Family _ Two Family _ Multi Family
Townhouse Condominium
b. Total number of structures
c. Maximum height of structures
d. Number of Units: 1 bedroom
2 bedroom
3 bedroom
4 bedroom
Total Units
e. Gross density (OU/total acres)
f. Net density (OU/total acres minus any dedicalion)
g. Estimated project population
h. Estimated sale or rental price range
i. Square footage of structure
j. Percent of lot coverage by buildings or structures
k. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided
I. Percent of site in road and paved surface
~
3. Complete this section if project is commercial or industrial or mixed use. not applicable
a. Type(s) of land use
b. Floor area Height of structUreS(s)
c. Type of construction used in the structure
d. Describe major access points to the structures and the orientation to adjoining properties
and streets
e.
Number of on-site parking spaces provided
Estimated number of employees per shift
Number of shifts Total
Estimated number of customers (per day) and basis of estimate
f.
.......
g.
)yJe2
Paac2
WPc.F~ClISTtlIUiIN~-A.93 (aoI. IO:ZO.93) (lot 11122.93)
. .
h.
. i.
j.
k.
1.
Estimated number of deli venes per day
Estimated range of service area and basis of estimate
Type/extent of operations not in enclosed buildings
Hours of operation
Type of exterior lighting
4. If project is other than residential. commercial or industrial complete this section.
a. Type of project Street vacation
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
. h.
b. Type of facilities provided none
Square feet of enclosed structures n / a
Height of structure(s) - maximum n / a
Ultimate occupancy load of project n/ a
Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided n/a
Square feet of road and paved surfaces existina asnhal t wi 11 b~ TAmnved
Additional project characteristics
Proiect will result in <th,::. r4:llmnv~l nf ApP"',nY;m:=tl~~'Y
30,800 square feet of asphalt.
C. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
1. Will the project be requiIed to obtain a permit through the Air Pollution Control District (APeD)?
No
2. Is any type of grading or excavation of the property anticipated? Not at this time
If yes. complete the following:
a. Excluding trenches to be backfillec\. how many cubic yards of eanh will be excavated?
.
b.
How many cubic yards of fill will be placed?
How much area (sq. it. or acres) will be pded?
What will be the: Maximum depth of cut
Average depth of cut
Maximum depth of fill
Average depth of fill
c.
d.
/5'-93'
\c,t{
""03 '"
WI'C~CI'STCRB7II02I""'" (Ilol. 1020.") (Rol. lcm.9Sl
3.
Describe all energy consuming devices which are pan of the proposed project and the type of
energy used (air conditioning, electrical appliance, heating equipment, etc.)
None
-,
4. Indicate the amount of natural open space that is pan of the project (sq. ft. or acres)
None
S. If the project will result in any employment opportunities describe the nature and type of these
jo~. Temporary construction jobs for public improvements
6. Will highly flammable or potentially explosive materials or substances be used or stored within
the project site? No
7. How many estimated automobile trips, per day, will be generated by the project?
8.
Auto trios will be elimina~~n nn pn~~;nn n~ MnQQ ~TT~Q~ ~n
be vacated.
Describe (if any) off-site improvements necessary to implement the project, and their points of
access or connection to the project site. hnprovements include but not limited to the following:
new streets; street widening; extension of gas, electric, and sewer lines; cut and fill slopes; and
pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
See attached.
-,
D. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SElTING
1.
Geolol!V
Has a geology study been conducted on the property?
(If yes, please attach)
Has a soils report on the project site been made?
(If yes. please attach)
No
No
2.
Hvdrolol!V
Axe any of the following features present on or adjacent to the site? "'"
(If yes, explain in detail.)
a. Is there any surface evidence of a shallow ground water table? lJg
---
)5~7Y
WI'C-.F,~Oll.A.9) (1to{. 102D.93) (1to{. 1022.93)
P.,e4
.
.
.
.
Axe there any watercourses or drainage improvements on or adjacent to the site?
No
c. Does runoff from the project site drain direct1y in to or toward a domestic water supply.
lake, reservoir or bay? No
d. Could drainage from the site cause erosion or siltation to adjacent areas?
No
b.
e. Describe all drainage facilities to be provided and their location. None vet
3.
Noise
-
a. Axe there any noise sources in the project .vicinity which may impact the project site?
No
b. Will noise from the project impact any sensitive receptors (hospitals. schools. single-
family residences)? Possibly
4.
Biolol!v
a. Doe~ the site involve any Coastal Sage Scrub vegewion? No
b. Is the project site in a natural or partially natural SUIte? No
c. If yes, has a biological survey been conducted on the property?
Yes No X (Please attach a copy.)
d. Describe all trees and vegewion on the site. Indicate location. height. diameter. and
species of trees, and which (if any) will be removed by the projecL
Site is currently an existing road. It has been
covered with agph~l~ ~nr y~~rQ
S. Past Use of the Land
a. Axe there any known historical or archeological res0utCe5 located on or near the project
site? No
b. Axe there any known paleontological resources? No
c. Have there been any hazardous materials disposed of or scored on or near the project site?
No
d. What was the land previously used for? Presentl v used AS; It nnh 1 ; ~ 'r"''''d.
/Y7~
131/
_ _._ ____ ...... . _ _-1 u._.....,,.J IM"- iD'l\
p.,eS
6.
Current Land Use
a. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on the project site.
Asphalt
......
b. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on adjacent property.
North Golf course
Sou~ Sinale familv dwel1inas
East Neighborhood sh9Pping
West Single family dwellings
7. Social
a. Axe there any residents on site? No If so, how many?
b. Axe there any current employment opportunities on site? No
If so, how many and what type?
8. Please provide any other information which may assist in the evaluation of the proposed project.
Vacation of this portion of Moss Street will
eliminate the dangerous and awkward traffic
intersection at Moss Street and Naples Street.
Traffic circularinn will h~ ;mpTnu~n
""'\
-
l~-1 C;;
WPC::F,~'NINGISTOIUilN021.A.93 (Rd. 10:10.93) (Rd. 1ll22.93)
Pile 6
1HE c.. .f OF 0iULA VIn'A DlSQ..OSURE 5". ."E:MEI-rr
.are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of ccnain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign
ibutions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the pan of the Ciry Council, Planning Commission, and
all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. Ust the names of all persons having a financial interest in the propeny which Is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
Nita V. Ferreira
Stephen V. Ferreira
Gregory R. Cox
COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES
Phillip P ~~r~~;rA
2. If any person" identified pursuant to (1) above Is a corporation or pannership, listtbe Dames of aU iDdivlduals owning
more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any pannership iDterest iD !he pannership.
Nita V. Ferreira
Stephen V. Ferreira
Gregory R. Cox
COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES
Phillip P. Ferreira
3. Ir any person" identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person
serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trusL
.
N/A
4. Have you had more than S2S0 wonh of business transacted with any member of the City starr, Boards, Commissions,
Committees, and Council within the past twelve months' Yes_ No..!... Ir yes, please iDdicate person(s):
S. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees. consultants, or iDdependent contractors who
you have assigned to represent you before the City in this maner.
GREGORY R. COX
JAMES ALGERT
6.
Have you and/or your olficcrs or agents, ill !he awerte, contributed more wn $1.000 to a Couucllmember in the
current or preceding election period' Yes_ 1'10_ U yes, state wllich Coundlmember(s):
· · · (NO'IE: Anach addilioul pap as
,e:
JULY 1, 1993
GREGORY R. COX, CONSULTANT
/ ~~ q Print or type Dame of contraClorJappUcant
I COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES
. ~ilbfi1wJlIZ: -AnyirwlnVl&&Al,finn. ~".."...w"joinI~ Al r'.':~.a.Jdub,""""-.- :.....:, CDI7'O'8Don....,.. ......,'1"J:_u
this Mi ..,. tIfhIIt -".), oily Mi .-.D). ciI).IIUltIi<ipa/il), ....... ",. tIfhIIt po/iIiUJ ..w;.uion, ",. ..,. tIfhIIt "., ",. ......." .....,.. · unit.
'l1iE CTTY OF 0iUI.A VISTA DlSa...oSURE STA~'T
. You are, requirO'l to file a Statem of Disclosure of certain O\l>'Ilership or Incial interests, paymenu, or campai,n
ciJntributions, on all mailers which will require discretionary action on Ihe part of the CilY Council, Plannin, Commission, and
all other official bollies. The 101l0win, inlormation must be disclosed:
I. List the names of all persons havin, a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or Ihe ~
contract, e.!:., owner, applicant, contractor, subconlractOr, malerial supplier.
COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES
Stephen V. Ferreira
Nita V. Ferreira
Gregory R. Cox
Phillip P. Ferreira
2. Irany person" identified pursuant to (1) above is a a>rporation or pannership,listlhe names of all individuals ownin,
more lhan 10% of Ihe shares in lhe corporation or ownin!: any partnership interest in lhe pannership.
COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES
'Stephen V. Ferreira
tHtll v Fprr,:dr;'\
GreQorv R. Cox
Phillip P Fprrpiro
3. If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit or!:anization or a trusl, list lhe names of any person
serving as director of the non-profit organization or as lrustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trusL
N/]>
-.
4. Have you had more than 5250 worth of business transacted wilh any member of lhe Cil)' slaff, Boards, Commissions,
Commillees, and Council within lhe paslt""elve monlhs? Yes_ N02Iryes, please indicate person(s):
S. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultatiu, or independent a>ntractors who
you have ~signed to represent you before the Cil)' in this ;"aller. .
GREGORY R. COX
JA!>'J.ES ALGERT
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregale, a>ntributO'l more than $1.000 to a Couaci1member in tbe
current or preceding election period? Yes_ No-X If yes, state which Counci1member(s):
. . . (NOTE: Attach additioDal pa:cs as Deczssuy) . . .
Dale:
JULY 1, 1993
"'""
of contraClorlapplieant
tHTA V. FERREIRA
Print or l)'Pe name of a>ntraClor/applicant .-..
. F~o" is defined 1lZ: -An;\' iNli,VIIu:I!,ftnr.. ~~.ip,jDiN,~ &DO-:........__ 6tICilII duhd'IUIII'nIAl_,._ ......:..." ct:1f1'O"lIIion. CIIGIC, ~ 1t:CCtC'. ~
or... G11d Gn)' 0lhIr CD""'); ciI)' mid CDWUI)', ciI)' ~; tliltriC4 '" 0lhIr politittlllUbdi.Uion, M Gn)' oIhcT pup M combWI:ion IICTinz lIS . "",,'
JS- --/#17
TIlE 'Y OF onJlA VISTA DISCLOSURE ~ \TEMENT
You arc r~uired 10 file a Statement of Disclosure of tenain DV-'IIership or financial interests. payments, or campaisn
.Iributions, on all mailers which will r~uire discretionary action on Ihe pan of Ihe Cily Council. Planning Commission, and
other official bodies. The following informalion must be disclosed:
1. LIst Ihe names of all persons havinS a financial interest in Ihe propert)' wbich is Ihe subject of Ihe application or thc
oontract, e.g., O\lo'llcr, applicant, oonlfactOr, subcontraClor, malerial supplier.
SAN DIEGO COUNTRY CLUB
2. If any person" identified pursuant to (I) above is a oorporation or pannership,UsI the Dames of aU individuals o\lo'lling
more Ihan 10% of tbe shares in tbe oorporation or O\lo'IIing any pannership interest in the pannership.
N/A
3. If any person" identified pursuant 10 (1) above is non.profit organization or a truSl, Ust the Dames of any person
serving as director of tbe non.profit organization or as Ifustee or beneficiary or trustor of tbe trusL
N/A
.
4. Have you had more than S2S0 wonh of business transacted with an)' member of the City stalt, Boards, Commissions,
Commillccs, and Council within tbe past twelve months? Yes_ No~ If yes, please indicate person(s):
,
S. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, ooDSultants. or independent ooniractors who
you have assigned to represent you before the City in tbis mailer.
GREGORY R. COX
JAMES ALGERT
6. Have you and/Or your officers or .gents. 10 the .wegate, CODtributed more thaD $1.000 to . CouDcllmember 10 the
current or preceding electioD period? Yes_ No-!, If yes. state which Couilcllmember(s):
· · · (NOTE:
ArtacIl additional pap .s ~ "1)')...
~ L G..",.,; L
Signature of ~Dtrar:tor/applicant
LARRY E. CUNNINGHAM, PRESIDENT
Date:
JULY 1. 1993
.
. / f'/ !./J / . Priol or ~~ name o~ oonttactor/aPPlican~~,....
. Penon;,.,.,.-.: .An)'indil~Jirm.~~'joINtl'II'IU'Ct ~r --.-.a.IdIIb,fMIIrNIl-.- --~~..,~~,,,. .
lNI!lIl4...,. oW:r COlW); cil)' tI1J4 <OWUI); oiI)'~, ~", othJ:r poIiMe1...wn.......", ...,.othJ:r rwP"'~"" ~... "",,'
STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
~
I, Stephen P. Oggel, declare as follows:
1. I am an attorney at law and a principal in the firm of
Friedman, Jay & Cramer. I represent San Diego Country Club
("the Club").
2. The Club has been working with Greg Cox of Cox &
Associates in an effort to transfer the Club's reversionary
rights to land beneath Moss Street to clients of Mr. Cox. In
exchange for that transfer, the Club is to receive
consideration in the form of the assumption of the Club's
responsibilities to make certain street improvements along
Moss Street.
3. It has become necessary to complete forms and take
other administrative and administerial actions with the City
-.
of Chula Vista to accomplish the purposes described in
paragraph 2 above. In order to accomplish those purposes, I
hereby delegat~ to Greg Cox the authority to deal for and on
behalf of the Club in all such transact~~ns
Dated: June 25, 1993
I
St hen P. Oggel
-.
/~~/fJd-
.
.
.
APPENDIX III
CITY DATA SHEET
PLANNING DEPAR~NT
CASE NO. IS 91"()1
J. Current Zonin2 on site: R-I Sin2le-Familv Residential
North Public & Ouasi Public
South R-I Sin2le-Familv Residential
East CN-Retail Commercial
West R-I Sinale-Familv Residential
Does the project confonn to the current zoning? Y es
II. General Plan land use designation on site: Sin2le-Familv Residential
North Public & Ouasi Public
South Sin_le-Familv Residential
East Retail Commercial
West Sin_Ie-Familv Residential
Is the project compatible with the General Plan Land Use Diagram? Yes. The Citv Traffic En_ineer has
found that the reauested vacation. alon_ with the recommended conditions of aaaroval. would meet the
General Plan Circulation Element street standards. and would enhance traffic safetv bv eliminatin_ the acute
an21e at which Moss Street now intersects with Nanles Street. The Circulation Element diaaram shows Moss
Street intersectin_ with Nanles Street near First A venue and/or Alnine A venue and thus the nrooosed
confl_uration would be consistent with the General Plan.
Is the project area designated for conservation or open space or adjacent to an area so designated? No.
Is the project located adjacent to any scenic routes? No
(If yes, describe the design techniques being used to protect or enhance the scenic quality of the route). -
III.
Schools
If the proposed project is residential, please complete the following: Not Applicable
School
C..acitv
Enrollment
Units
Prooosed
Generating
FactOrs
Student!.
Generated From
Proiect
Elementary
Junior High
Senior High
.30
.29
.10
IV.
Remarks: The General Plan Land Use Element would not be affected bv the street vacation. The General Plan
~resentlv d;simates the oro;:.;;n: as Low-Medium Densitv Residential (3-6 dulacl. and the nronertv is zoned R-I
.=Ie Famil; Resid-;;ntial~ 7:000 sa. ft. minimum lot size). The additional develooable IIC1'elI2e created bv the
v ion could oatv be devclooed in accordance with the nresent General Plan desimation and zonin2.
'-ri ~g,./~ \.t>~o~.J )
Director 0 Plannin Rcprescn ive ,.
~d.cl']. 199.;:?
Date '
Jf'-itJ /
ys - qr
tlSe No. ::rs- 9"--01
G. IHGINEERING DEPARTMENT
""'"'
1. prl1naoe
a.
Is the project site within a flood plain? IVC)
If so, state which FEMA Floodway Frequency 'Boundary NIA
b.
What is t~e location and
drain~e facilities? ~/~
!;JI{jI.A - or 11., JtJf'j n A....
description of existing on-site
D~AI.,Ac........ r/Glvl -10 -1,,<-
.
c. Are they adequate to serve the project? ~FI
If not, explain briefly.
d. What is the location and description of existing off-site
drainage facn ities? A/OJv eo.
.
.. Are they adequate to serve the project? A//14
If not, explain briefly.
2. TranSDortat1on
""'"'
a. What roads provide primary access to the project? ~oss
S71(u.~
b. What is the estimated number of one-way auto trips to be
venerated by the project (per day)? ...v / A
.
c. What is the AnT and estimated level of service before and after
project completion?
Before After
~A.D.T. ~. o~o N/A
L.O.S. 11 A
If the A.-D. T. or L.O.S. is unknown or IIOt applicable, explain
briefly. . N /'"
d.
Are the primary access roads adequate to lerve the ;roject? If
not, explain briefly. <</A
.-.
-
)Y/fJ~
WPC 1459P
-14-
.
Case No. :TS- 9y.(1/
e. Are there any intersections at or near the ,otnt that will
result in an unacceptable LevIl of Servtce (LOS)? .
If so, 1denttfy: Locatton ~/A
Cumulattve L.O.S.
Is there any dldtcatton requtred? AI/A
If so, ,lease spectfy.
f.
,.
Is therl any Itreet wtdentng requtred? N /14
If 10, ,llase Ipectfy. '
h.
Are therl any other Itrelt illproVllllntl required? ~~ A
If 10, pll..e Ipectfy the ,enlral nature of t e IIlclSury
improvements.
3. Soil s IJ /" . .
I. Are there any anttctpated adverse geotechnical condtttons on the .
project stte?
. b. If yes, Ipectfy these conditions.
c. Is a soils report necessJry?
4. J.1nUmI
a. What ts the average natural Ilope of thl Itte? ;2 /.
.
b. What ts the .axtmum natural Ilope of thl sttl? '3 '/.
5. ~ N//I
Are there any trafftc-rl1ate,d noise lIVlll illPacUng thl IUI that
Ire stgnificant enough to 3ustify that a 1I0tll analYltl be requtrld
of the applicant?
t. ,~ute Ceneration ",/14
How _ch solid and liqutd (I.agl) Wlste' will be ..nlrated by thl
,roposld project per day?
19W
J.1mI.bt
.
,
What is the location and .tze of extlt1l1g sewer lines on or
downstrlam from thl lite?
-
Arl thlY adlquatl to Slrvl thl ,ropostd ,rojtct?
/5'/ tll
UDr ClnQP
-15-
Case Ho.rs- 9"-01
7. Ramarks
-"'"
Please identify and discuss any remafnfng potentf.l adverse impacts,
1I1tfgation IlIISUreS, or other bsues. # /11
.
-.
-"'"
-
J~//tJ
VPC tnlP
-16-
.
.
.
ROUTING FORM
D~E: August 11. 1993
'l'O; K.n Lar.on, Building & Bou.ing
John Lippitt, Bngineering (EIR only)
Cliff SWan.on, .ngineering (.IR only)
Bal Rosenberg, .ngineering (.IR only)
Roger Daou.t, .ngine.ring (IS/3, .IR/2)
Richard Rudolf, As.i.tant City Attorn.y (.IR only)
Carol Gove, Fir. Departm.nt
Harty Schmidt, Park. & R.creation
Crime pr.vention, Polic. Department (H.J. Dio.dado)
current Planning
t:ordon Howard, Advance Planning
Bob Sennett, city Landscape Archit.ct
Bob Leiter, Planning Director
Chula Vista Elementary School Di.trict, Kate Shurson
sweetwater Union H.S. Di.trict, Tom Silva (IS & EIR)
HBureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR)
Other
~
FROM:
Barbara Reid
.nvironmental s.ction
SUBJECT: Application for Initial Study (IS- 94-0~FA-~/Da 031 )
Checkprint Draft EIR (20 day.) (EIR- /FB- _/Da )
Review of a Draft EIR (EIR- _/FB- _/DP J
Review of Environmental Revi.w Record FC- ERR- )
The Project consists of: Vacation of a 30.800 sq. ft. portion of Moss
Street between Alpine Ave. and First Ave.
Location: Moss Stre~t between Alpine Ave. and First Ave.
Pl.... revi.w the dOCWll8nt and forward to .. any co...nt. you h.v.
by 8/25/93 . cJ. 8
.t"J"I""...-L (: ~ _ ~~ v.t- ~.J(.. ~ ~\
Comment.: (;1'Qo. VO\ v..... . r _
~ ~U~ CAr~~ c:J2,
~~~
T~ /5'//1 <;,
.
,
.
. ,
ROUTING FORM """
DATE: AU9ust 11, 1993
,-!'&t Ken Larson, Building , Housing
Fro/'rf'b John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only)
Clitt SWanson, Engineering (EIR only)
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only)
Roger Daoust, Engineering (ISI3, EIRI2)
Ricbard Rudolt, Assistant city Attorney (EIR only)
Carol Gove, Fire Department
Harty Scbmidt, Parks , Recreation
Crime Prevention, police Department (H.J. Diosdado)
CUrrent Planning
Gordon Howard, Advance Planning
Bob Sennett, city Landscape Arcbitect
Bob Leiter, Planning Director
Chula vista Elementary School District, Kate Shurson
SWeetwater Union H.S. District, Tom Silva (IS' EIR)
Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR)
Other
_~I4QH J 70S 6rbara Reid) Environmental section -.,
SUBJECT: Application tor Initial Study (IS- 94-01lFA-~/DO 031 )
Cbeckprint Dratt EIR (20 days) (EIR-_IFB-_IDQ )
Review ot a Dratt EIR (EIR-_IFB-_IDP )
Review ot Environmental Review Record FC- ERR--l
The Project consists ot: Vacation of a 30,800 sq. ft. portion of Moss
Street between Alpine Ave. and First Ave.
Location: Moss Street between Alpine Ave. and First Ave.
Please review the document and torward to me any co_nts you bave
by 8/25/93 .
COJllJllents:
'l'\&- ~ OA.. ~ ~~ ~ ~f-.::t-...t".M. ~U"..JL
~ ~ ~ ~ k./~ ~ C~?~..t{"."17
1~'6/ltt I 'I( g~o5. /5---) /;L
"""
-, .
.
LETTER OF TRANSMln ""L
SWEETWATER AUTHORITY
POST OFFICE BOX 2328
CHULA VISTA. CALFOIlNIA 112012
{II III 420-1413
1._
.::
-.
,
Date:
<3....fI'~
-,-
? 19'93
.
'"
To:. M... \)"'...~\~. G?...~.Q
c. : \..7 ~\: ~L~, \... v~'" ~-
~___." _~ '":b.p~.
7-"'<' ~w#-~ A...J.
C~~\.. V."~-\. ~A -.\q/D
,
Ref: :I:"SO.- qo.(.O I
Gentlemen:
We are forwarding:
~Mail
o By Delivery
o By Pick-Up
o By HtInd
No. of Copies
Originals
. (
Description:
<.s.c. JA
I ~ ~~r jL.... "' ~ .., I-z.. "-- ( "l 3.
The above is sent to you for: ,0 Action ~ Requesttrd
o Review
o Comments
o Checking
Comments:
o Approval ·
~mation
o Revision
o Other
o Please send location and size of your existing and propclltd facilities.
o Pleaie re-submit copies of revised prints for checking.
o Please re-submit copi.. fA revi8ed prints and one original far c:hecIdng and signature.
~ . 'r' _ .. .. '\. r.. ,. ...~ b....bJ 'f ~ ~ "... '-- "i-1... ~.... ~ r
---"'''''l +r.._ E_-:::_.-"':'_~ "'lS.,\-.
/~..) / J
Received by:
Date:
12/1983
", ...;...- .
',- ~WEETWATER AUTHORI.
-
,
SOS G"RRETT "VENUE
POST OFFICE BOX 2328
CHUV. VIST.... c...LIFORNI" ""2-2328
(61') .20-'.'3
F"X (61') .25-7.61
DOl'" . JG eoAIItD
"~.CH""'lm
aID PQCICLJNOTON. w::E CM....1...
~J. STEELE
OEC')NM: M. VM1ERS
-,,-....
_a. WOLNEWICZ
CI#fY F. WIIlIIOKf
--
~
July 22, 1993
'PIIE......-p
_.1._
1ICN1''''''.V 1ST'M1M. AlOE
Mr. John Hardesty
City of Chula Vista
Engineering Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, CA 91910
Subject: PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF MOSS STREET
AT NAPLES STREET
SWA Gen. File: Vacations (Street, Alley, Right-of-way)
Dear Mr. Hardesty:
This letter is in response to your notice of a proposed vacation of
a portion of Moss Street at Naples Street. Sweetwater Authority
presently has a 30-inch steel water main located on the north side ~
of Moss Street in this area. This is a major transmission facility
for conveying water in the City of Chula vista.
The Authority requests that the above-described water facilities be
exempted from this vacation. We request that a 20-foot wide
permanent easement centered on the main be granted to us for the
purpose of installing, operating, maintaining, replacing and
repairing said facilities and service pipes and the right of
ingress and egress for such purposes. Also, no buildings and/or
strUctures will be .erected, walls constructed, fences built,
changes of grade, nor trees planted upon the area of the easement.
Enclosed is a copy of 1/4 SEC. 120 map which show these facilities.
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Russell Collins at
420-1413, ext. 239.
Very truly yours,
SWEETWATER AUTHORITY
~.~m~A
~~!~gLChief Engineer
k:\I...I.(\wp51~..ltr
-...
enclosure:
photocopy of 1/4 SEC. 120 map
pc:
Russ
Collins, Sweetwater Authority ) ~'-/)1
A Pwblic A,onu,r.
Servi", NlltioMI Cit;y, 0.,,111 Visttl 11M S"rrollMing A_s
.
... .' ~.
.=1 i
Il,tii,ii ~ J -It .-' L A. ~
I _i~~ W...l..'.- Jo",!"., ~:""~"~H .:.~~"' -., u: ~
1-.. ."""..D I I I I ~ .....' 'iii //
I . ;:~ . . ~v~! 8 ~ pi R, 8 i i ~.I \' I'~ \ ; l.' ~-------_.
. 5'! ~ Ii i ! 1\ I S r Hr I: '\ r/\l~ ~i:l ~ ~ I'~
6 Ii , I~ =1'/"'....1'. ~ .;4' 'd'-
~ ~ I;; l-S ~: - K'A ~ N /.. ;:~~.l t,t7
;~~~ I;:; I'"' : ~ il~;"~VV;J"
Sr i "~I · w. .Ll~ ~ -/f
. : 'i/-i(\'~ .." t,
;; ~o;m. - -7 j I =" a. 'I ."y
I 'I' : i .\. t:'1 ~ld~"; e citon f~!Y,~ T ~
..1 ;.~ J~'.L~', ..'::L,,"-lo...L,~_,,:~', ~'U(l..l:::tiO~~-' ~~ ,,,/4 llc N ,'"
l,~ ~t-.., .\:, 'On "".r~ . Jj '_ 1<;,0
~!:"rri~, i !o'!fJcS csflt'l11 ~ .!fe~ ~ ::::~. .I' ~
Jl~if'T1 l W rk ng ay1 ~r"~~~t. '~13j: ~ , ''I ~I);-
~'~ !! I I ~ ' ~ ~- II>
~ "" ""lAP '7 2 ...i,., -, t. ..;;.......
: ; ~~ I@ I ~-~ - "'8 9 E _ .!...... ~ ~- I
~ lJ len ':'...ta == IL ~
~iO"11 :t ~.
f Z & i !I I ! I ii i li"
!. I A V ~. 8 s !;; 1- 0 ...... A
......,. w...;,.,.11 I I I I
I -;- 'i ...1T -I I I I
~~ i~"
5 ~ I
;;b:: ~
fl "r _ e
I I Ei Ei , I R I I I
.!J r~ et ~V r::! f
II. & I I I
jSC< _ '7.1 f.... '~".I'I I
-..
i
I . .
/
_..:.
~
~.
.. oe ~ - ~" -,J t_
~J..,- C2 .
.- - 11 Q
! ~ Gi fT1
i... a..--------~---~----------5!--~------"'-----
:,.. . '" ,
I I ~ . l!
I fp--~~.. -=:::-~ ~-----------
~i I I I i I I ~ I ~ : .' '. ~ .. g.
.~ 0 % c
.id i lR; U;j;f i i I :~ 'I i:I{
~ ... r.:o;~;&.,.:..d.....:.. ",",0__1 I I t ;f
.
.
It~1 f l I ~f\l! HI I I . Jy/I/f'~
!,. e : IJI :=::! -- .__:;:... -J ::~,.
; ~ i '" i! II i r II i~ r I r I r iF II . ~ ".~ !.~.._ _::'~_'~ "0_- .':: 0..,
~ ~ ~
:! . ~
I R ~~
2 ~ ~= I
t."
,,'
,~
-.
. .J.
.-=:C~-'9~; l.JED 10:~3 CHLILA '...'IS;TA SCHOOI_ 11!ST.
P.0..;:
1l0ARD OF EDUCATION
JO$E?~ 0 CWt.4lNGS PtlD
LAHRY CUNNlt~Gl-lI\M
~"ON G~ES
PATilC. A JUilll
G"EG il SAN:)OVAL
SUPERINTENDENT
UBi'" S. Ga.. Prl 0
CHULA 'VISTA ELEl\IEl\1"fARY SCHOOL DISTIUCT
84 EAST "J' STREET. CHULA VISTA, CALlFOR....HA ~U1l0 . 09 4~5,960<l
----- ....--- EAcn'cHILD IS A."li~jjiVmijAi~OFGREATWORiiT-'-- ---
'}
October 20 1993
Ms Barbara Reid
Enwunmen!a! Re'.'iew Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE. Initial Study, Vacation of portion of Moss Street
Dear Ms Reid
Thank you fm providing the opportur;lty tor H,(' Dishct te CCI,llne!"! en tile
propo:;ed vacalion of a portion of Moss Street
"
While there is no construction associated with tl)is action st-.ould
reSidential ul1ils be proposed in the fut..Jre for the approJ<,n,ate;y 30,800
square foot rarcel, the additioral childrer. net anllcip13tcd lJased on the
proporl/c wrrent UE8 would e,(a~erl:1c<t(. alrFFI,1}' S"", inlj~ ~r.hnol
over crowdIng In the area.
It is requested trial approval of Ihi!> aJ,:,~i!ca\o:I;1 b", cc,r,':!lt,:;ned to requiru
futule deveiopmentto fully r:1,tigate impacts c,n schoel faCilities,
If ycu 'lave any questIons, plea!;;E:! call me
Sincerely,
~1:. =>\r-.\.\.~",
Kate Shurson
Director, Planmng & Facil,lIes
KSdp
cc Tom Silva
,
7a mo~
/5/// ?
.
Sweetwater Union High School Disbict
ADMINISTRATION CENTER
"30 Fll1h Av.nu.
Chul. VIII., Callfornl. 8'8"-2188
(811) 111-5500
DIvI.lon of Planning end Fecllltl..
r-~-'-- --.
~ --.. .--
A'..J~' "f'" ,,..
~ ~. ;t:~
August 12. 1993
P ~(l : 1\ .
...-
Ms. Barbara Reid
Environmental Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
EnvirOllmental Sc.; lion! Planning Ikpt.
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista. CA 91911
Dear Ms. Reid:
Re: Moss SL Street Vacation: IS-94-01
.
The SweetWater Union High School District does not object 10 the ",oposed vacation of that potion of
Moss Street between Alpine A venue and First Street. Pursuant 10 our Director of Transportation.
eastbound and westbound buses will use Naples.
If you require any additional infonnalion. please do nOl hesitate to ca1l me at 691-5553.
Thomas Silva
Assistant Director of Planning
.
)Y/17
Giroux & AaaocOtltes
Environmental Con. .aU1ts
f\\O SS
-.,
MEMO
O ", r
J. {..
r- ....i ,I" (, "_
TO:
Barbara Reid, City of Chula vista
FROM:
Hans Giroux; Giroux & Associates
RE:
Naples/Alpine Noise Monitoring
October 22, 1993
DATE:
In anticipation of possible changing traffic volumes at the Naples/
Alpine intersection in conjunction with proposed intersection
realignment, a baseline noise survey of existing conditions was
conducted on October 19-21, 1993. Measurements were made at 129
Naples at a location under the picture window facing Naples. Along
Alpine, noise was measured at a landscaping bush in front of 1094
Alpine near the lot line with 1098 Alpine. Larson-Davis Model 700
integrating sound level meters were used for these measurements
with the meters calibrated before and after the monitoring. The
meter records the sound level eight times per second, converts the
readings to an energy equivalent level (Leq), and stores the data
in an internal memory at preselected intervals. Hourly data were
used in this study.
Attachment A summarizes the results of around fifty hours of
measurements. Data from different days was almost identical.
Afternoon rush hour noise levels on three days were almost
identical at each location (within 1 dB at Naples and 1.5 dB at
Alpine). Throughout the day, from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., the noise
level was never lower than 64.0 dB or higher than 66.5 dB along
Naples on each day of measurements. As a rule of thumb, people do
not perceive a noticeable difference in noise exposure when levels
differ by less than 3 dB. There is therefore no noticeable
difference in traffic noise along Naples for around 13 hours of the
day.
A noise level of 65 dB is generally the threshold level where
speech interference becomes noticeable in that one has to raise
one's voice to overcome the traffic noise. Noise levels along
Naples at the closest point of residential occupancy are therefore
right at this threshold for most of the day.
-.,
""'"
/J/-/!~
11144 Sky /Wi On:i; Suite 210. /niIw. Ca/ilomitI927/4 . ~ (1/4) ISI-Mt>> . Fa (1/4) 1S1-U12
~
.
.
.
'-
-2-
In order to account for changing noise sensitivity throughout the
day, noise/land use compatibility criteria use a descriptor called
the community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). CNEL takes the hourly
noise levels, adds a 5 dB penalty for noise from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m.,
and a 10 dB penalty from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., and then averages the
24 hour period. CNELs were calculated for each of the days and
each of the sites monitored with the following result:
Date
129 Nanles
1094 Alnine
10/19-20/93
10/20-21/93
65.9 dB(A)
66.4 dB(A)
57.8 dB(A)
57.8 dB(A)
The city standard at any exterior recreational use (patio, pool,
etc.) is 65 dB CNEL. Along Alpine, the standard is met with a wide
margin of safety. Project-related changes in traffic volumes will
not cause the City standard to be exceeded. At the homes nearest
to the Naples/Alpine intersection, side yards or parts of the
backyard of several homes closest to the intersection are near the
standard. Because project implementation may incrementally
increase existing levels already at the recommended maximum, noise
protection for the yards of the homes nearest the intersection
should be considered. A 6-foot, side yard block wall would insure
that the project does not reduce the ability to comfortably use
exterior space at these homes.
Exterior noise increases may also impede the maintenance of an
acceptable interior level (normally 45 dB CNEL). structural
attenuation with closed windows is around 25 dB such that exterior
levels would need to exceed 70 dB CNEL before meeting interior
standards becomes impossible. As long as the closest homes have
the option to close their windows to shut out street noise, meeting
the interior standard is not a problem. An ability to close
windows requires supplemental ventilation. We did not evaluate
floor plans and ventilation systems to cSeteraine whether any
structural mocSifications are necessary to insure that interior
levels are within the stancSarcS.
In summary, our fincSings were as follows:
1. Noise levels along Naples at the nearest point of residential
exterior use are at the city's stancSard.
/5//1;
-3-
"""'
2. Any incremental increase due to the project can be offset by
a side yard wall at homes closest to the intersection.
3. Noise levels along Alpine are sufficiently low as to not be
impacted by project-related changes in traffic volumes.
4. Adequacy of interior noise protection should be evaluated.
.......
.......,
/~~/ ) c2tJ
.
ATTACHMENT A
mISE DI!ORIIG RESULts
(Jourly levels in dBl LIlll
129 laples
1094 Alpine
10/19
10/20
10/21
10/19
10/20
10/21
00-01 50.0 54.5 46.0 48.5
01-02 49.0 49.5 45.5 46.5
02-03 43.5 48.0 41.5 44.5
03-04 44.5 47.5 45.5 44.5
04-05 47.0 47.0 45.0 45.5
05-06 56.5 56.0 50.5 50.5
. 06-07 61.0 62.5 54.0 54.0
07-08 65.0 65.0 56.5 59.0
08-09 65.5 65.5 56.0 56.0
09-10 64.0 64.0 56.5 53.5
10-11 64.0 64.5 53.0 55.5
11-12 65.5 65.0 55.0 56.5
12-13 65.0 65.0 53.5 53.5
13-14 65.5 66.0 61.5 56.0
14-15 65.5 65.5 56.5 54.5
15-16 66.0 66.0 55.5 55.0
16-17 66.5 66.0 58.0 55.0
17-18 66.5 66.5 66.5 55.0 57.0 56.0
18-19 65.5 65.5 66.5 55.5 55.5 57.0
19-20 64.0 64.5 53.5 54.5
20-21 63.0 64.0 52.5 53.5
21-22 62.5 63.0 52.5 53.0
22-23 59.5 58.0 50.0 51.0
. 23-24 54.5 57.5 49.5 49.0
J:5--:/dL /
.
I
..
\
.
Case No. /5-91-01
APPENDIX IV
-...
Comments
Received During the Public Review Period
-.,
_ No Comments Were Received During the Public Review Period
.......
/5'>/;2;Z
.
WPC,,"IHOMEIPI.ANNIN<022.93 (lief. 1021.93) (lld. 1020.93)
.
.
.
t '
,.
Auqust 27, 1993
Mr. and Mrs. Alan Willingham
122 Moss street
Chula vista, CA 91911
John Goss-City Manager
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Goss:
We are writing this letter in reference to the planned project of
vacating a portion of Moss street between Alpine and First Avenues.
We understand that the site in question may be used for future
development of a few new home sites. We are delighted to learn
about this drastic improvement to the unsightly lot in our
neighborhood which becomes a dumping site at times for unwanted
household items. Most of all, this plan will eliminate the
dangerous intersection that causes a lot of traffic accidents on a
monthly basis. This intersection is going to cost someone their
life in the near future if something is not done about it. (If it
hasn't already)
We urge you to support this plan in behalf of the entire
neighborhood that uses this intersection on a daily basis. Thank
you for your understanding and time in regards to this matter. If
there is anything we can do to help this plan become a reality,
please contact us at 279-2042.
Sincerely, _ .
~U~~----
Alan Willingham .
~.~~
Dottie Willingham
cc: Barbara Reid - Associate Planner
Jim Hater - Mayor
/~/if3
AUG ;:. 7933
r,_l.. I , r......
...;\. \i...,
.
Dr '1/)' - ~
U ( jY r) ,
lJ[ :J~ U
I j ~ .,-
i, I: "'... . .. "-
CITY MANAGER'
;~JUlA VISTA, ('-.
ItUG 25 1993,
.-..
r- __
" ..-:...- ._~-~- ~=.J
.
",
Case NOI Is-94-01
Project Locationl Moss Street between Alpine Ave. and First Ave.
Project Applicantl San Diego Country Club &: Country Club Villa. Estates
Environmental Review Coordinator
POBox 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
Gentlemen I
Please recheck the traffic pattern of Moss Street and Naples Street.
The traffic on Moss Street has increased 100% in the last six years
that we have lived here, due to the fact ~hat Naples is now a th:ro
street to Medical Drive. Many people use Naples Street instead of
Telegraph Canyon and L Street.
Our small street of Alpine Ave in the 1000 block cannot handle all
the traffic from Moss Street. It is too narrow to start with and many
people do cross the empty lott instead of using the street.
On a Friday afternoon there are as many as eight cars at the stop sign
on Moss Street and First Ave. at one time and many do use Alpine to
get to Naples, which also has very heavy traffic at all times.
Since Chula Vista has grown so much in the last few years SO has the
traffic.
"""'"
Sincerely, _
(1)t;J::r~~ -fft2-t<.{.I.:t--V
&~a~
Albert C. Cabella &:
Corinne A. Cabella
1098 Alpine Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91911-:nOl
~~..(~ Itf~
"""
l~/;L(
.
August 24,1993
,
j
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
Att; Douglas D Reid
t. i ; 1', (
.~""" tw '~
pi L""
-n.l\:I\i1\...;
Dear Sir:
We wish to comment on the initial study of the request for vacation
of a 30,000 sq. ft. portion of Moss St between Alpine and First Ave.
It just don't make sense to divert traffic to Alpine which would
affect First Ave., a residentual neighborhood to accommodate a
Country Club. Our street is narrow with no sidewalks and since
Naples St. was opened up going East, we have been experiencing much
heavier traffic with speeding vehicles especially pick-ups.
.What will happen to the trees along north side of Moss?
We have lived in our h~~e on First Avenue for thirty-nine years
and have seen many changes and noticed that the former owner of the
property mentioned above had tried to use or sell that land and was
turned down by the City. Then we heard the City of Chula Vista had
purchased the parcel and again a friend told us a former Mayor
was part owner now. Should we think this is political?
Thank you,
Aaron E. Cook
Margaret E. Cook
1160 First Ave.
Chula Vista, Ca. 91911
P.S. We are having difficulty with long waits at our stop on First
trying to get on Naples now.
.
/y/25
--
-.,
October 11, 1993
Chula Vista Planning Department
Public Services Building
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
c. ,
r
:-
",
'~.........
Re:
Case _ PCM-94-09/IS-94-01
Vacation of a 30,000
sq. foot portion of Moss
St. between Alpine and
Fest Aves.
To Whom It May Concern:
As residents at 1094 Alpine Avenue, in the area of the proposed
vacation of Moss Street, we hereby file the following protests,
with you, against this vacation:
1. Traffic on Moss and Naples from Broadway to Hilltop
Drive, and beyond, is quite heavy. Most of the time cars come
through these sections at high rates of speed. With the closing
of Moss Street there will be that much more traffic on Naples
Street. To say nothing of the increased traffic in front of our
residence.
-.
2. Traffic at Moss where it intersects Naples is sometimes
backed up, going East, siK to eight cars deep. Traffic will be
backed up trying to get onto Naples from Alpine many cars deep if
this proposed vacation is passed. The air quality caused by this
back up will be very eKtensive.
3. Alpine Avenue where all this traffic would have to
divert is only 20 feet wide at the present time' At the Safety
Commission Meeting it was conceded that this street will be
widened to accommodate the foreseen traffic.
4. Closing off Moss Street at Alpine would create a
"dogleg" of 90' which will be quite dangerous wi"th the rate of
speed the cars traveling Moss Street are doing at present.
5. The corner of Moss Street where it intersects Naples is
not a dangerous corner (no accidents are attributed to this
corner), as shown at the Safety Commission hearing. This is the
reason given by the San Diego Country and Country Club Estates as
the reason for vacation. The danger will come when this vacation
occurs on Moss Street and traffic is diverted to Alpine Avenue.
-.
/YJ:2~
.
The Safety Commission agreed that there would be a three way stop
erected at this intersection. The traffic on Naples is so heavy
that cars, even now, have problems moving onto Naples from either
the 1000 block or the 1100 block of Alpine. If this vacation
occurs the traffic on Naples could be doubled and the traffic
coming off of the 1100 block of Alpine Avenue will have the stop
heading North, turning onto Naples - then going West they will
have to stop once again, within 90 feet! THIS is a dangerous
situation to say nothing of the almost impossibility of moving
into the West bound traffic of Naples.
6. Speaking of dangerous - what about the dangerous
condition of elementary school children walking to school along
Naples Street on non-existant sidewalks with 12,000 cars, trucks,
buses, and ambulances a day speeding past, if this vacation
passes' They walk along there now with 6,000 cars, trucks,
buses, and ambulances (which is dangerous enough).
.
7. We recommend that a very THOROUGH study of the traffic
pattern in this area be made and also the cost to the city of
widening Alpine and installing the necessary stop signs (it
should be a stop light) at Alpine and Naples before any approval
is give to the closing of Moss Street between Alpine and First
Avenue. A recent automobile count was conducted at the 1100
block of Alpine. This count wasn't started until AFTER the
morning rush hour traffic had finished. How does this give an
accurate count? Please - have someone (a person or persons) come
out to this area and observe, for a few peak hours, to see the
traffic pattern as it REALLY is, at it's BEST!
8. Furthermore, as citizens, we are concerned with the
"waiver" which has been requested by the San Diego Country Club
and the Country Club Villa Estates that the curbing and sidewalks
along Moss Street from Third Avenue not be installed because of
hazards from the Golf Course. If a study were made it would show
that the "hazards" (golf balls) rarely fall along the fence -
they usually land in the street, in the lawns, in the empty lot,
or on the cars on the South side of Moss Street. 1 can show you
a,recent broken window in my house caused by an errant golf ball'
9. As taxpayers we wonder what compensation the San Diego
Country Club and the Country Club Villa Estates plans to pay for
this 30,000 square foot piece of prime real estate (overlooking a
country club)? At today's prices this should be a nice "chunk of
change" to add to the City's coffers.
10. The Safety Commission Meeting of September 9, 1993
.
J~/;27
.
~
regarding this vacation of Moss Street was a joke. The
Commission did not listen to any of the many residents who came
to the meeting and voiced their concerns - There was no
discussion. They had already made up their minds. There were a
couple people on the Commission (Mr. Pitts and Ms. Braden) who
seemed to listen to our speeches and tried to get a dialog going
but Mr. Thomas, who was the Chair (and who seemed very bored with
the whole thing), was too busy having an aside discussion with
Mr. Padilla to pay any attention. He called for a vote of the
Commission without the least discussion of any of our concerns.
Is this the way our city of Chula Vista runs all of it'.
hearings?
Thank you for this opportunity to voice OUR protests. Does it
REALLY do any good~
Sincerely,
MrQ/fcf~~
Mill, l)?(~~
-M1:. D. P. Coughlan
1094 Alpine Ave. ~
Chula Vista, CA 91911-3301
CC: Tim Nader, Mayor
~
)S>);Lf
,.
"'0
August 23, 1993
f.J~ (
w
.
DouglaS D. Reid
Environmental Review Coordinator
P. O. Bo)( 1087
Chula Vista, California 91912
RE: Vacation of a 30,000 sq.
ft. portion of Moss St.
between Alpine and First
Avenues.
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your "Notice of Initial Study" letter of August 18,
1993.
As residents at 1094 Alpine Avenue and having read the complete
application for the Initial Study filed in the Planning
Department we hereby submit the following comments:
1. Our residece is located on the corner of Moss and Alpine
and therefore one of the two most affected households in regards
to this proposal of the vacation of the portion of Moss between
Alpine and First.
.
2. Traffic on Moss, all the
quite heavy. The portion of Moss
Avenue is probably the heaviest.
section at high rates of speed.
way from Broadway to Naples is
from Third Avenue to First
At times cars come through this
3. Traffic at Moss where it intersects Naples is sometimes
backed up, going East, five and si)( cars deep (usually at rush
hour). What will the back up be on Alpine if this section of
Moss is closed? I hate to think. The fumes from these cars will
certainly affect our standard of living on this section of
Alpine.
4. Alpine Avenue (in front of our dwellings) where all this
traffic would have to divert is only 20 feet wide! This is
hardly enough room for one car, let alone cars going in both
direction. Many times a car turning into this section of Alpine
from Naples would have to wait until the car leaving Alpine left!
This portion of Alpine would have to be widened to accommodate
the traffic which would be diverted.
~. Closing off Moss Street at Alpine would create a
"dogleg" and whatever the Country Club Villa Estates planned to
put up at this location would be in dire jeopardy. Perhaps a
solution to this would be to deadend Moss at Alpine and close off
this section of Alpine? Then we'd have different problems.
.
6. The corner of Moss Street where it intersects Naples is,
JP~/;2 /
indeed, a dangerous corner.
San Diego Country Club would
trimmed at this intersection
Looking right from this stop
the view is quite clear.
We are very aware of that. If the
continue to keep the high bushes
the danger is reduced considerably.
sign is a bit "neck stretching" but
~
7. If Moss Street is closed between Alpine and this
intersection the corner of Alpine and Naples WILL BE the MOST
dangerous corner in Chula Vista unless the city installed a three
way stop sign or light at this intersection. This would make it
safe and also make Alpine traffic accessible to Naples. The
traffic on Naples is so heavy that cars, even now, have problems
moving onto Naples from this section of Alpine.
We recommend that a very thorough study of the traffic pattern
in this area be made and also the cost to the city of widening
Alpine and installing the necessary stop signs at Alpine and
Naples before any approval is give to the closing of Moss Street
between Alpine and First Avenue.
Thank you for keeping us informed in this matter.
Sincerely,
J~t~:~: ~~a~~
-
-
Mr. D. P. Coug lan
1094 Alpine Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91911-3301
-,
lY/JtJ
. I
· - . \ __~ ._.' ii~~.-.~~
. RJ;:.I.,..>- V.:.D ClTV MANI.GER
~ W~ ~ '-m~" :IIJ1AVISTA,o;
'-' IJ _ 33 AUG 2 5 1993
~ . ~LANj\;W' -*"" _'
V!tJ.-l:..., ~~
. _~~='. Q->~.J1,~. <J - ; -: :~...",--fu.Q: - ,:t
_ ~(..di,".~~_.. d1~A~ ~
_ f~Ck'!'D .W.Q..,~~IQ-~.~
__J..U )~. -- ~~ -
· - .~ "il.9.-..D .~ ~
s{ :'t~~~u~. ....-~-~ .-
. ~ ~ . ~. ~._. QcR,.k'yt .'-U o...~ "-t; __
~~ ~~tA'9'ASU)
~~"D~ ~:" ~A.. ~~&~
"",J) ~ W~.~ 1;..~t> ...e..... . o_.JJL.....~ .
~~~~~-tu..c~..o .
- ~~ ~~-$U - - ---
.~ ~.~\A~._'- -. - .,
_~__ ~+_~~-LlJnw~_-
.-' ~ ~
- ~----~ : - -~-<y -----f~-.---~
.~~~ ~~~~.
~ dJ 4.5 . - ~.....RtSH'" ,
(~(?~ to Q 0 ~~~ . ~)~{)
~~A:~ .' ....~~~IJ/
;
)
. . -
"""'\
.
t...6 f'Nl ('. 1\
-."
tf
.
.
~\
Q
l.
.
I
I
I
{
" ~ ~ .....~... ~
t ~ ,,\ ~ lr7 " ~ ~ ~ ~ "' i-Ci
o ~ ~ ~~\9 ~ f-~ C'\~ ~~
f\( ~ )" '} , bo ~ \I) I \ , I'\. ,
8:: ~ lI\I:I "l m '} " ... ~ "" . ~
t<.t~~~a~I\l~~.g.~~
~ c'I ~ ~ 'f\.~
o 7-
...
-
f4
- ,
~-.... ~ l '
0- ~ ...
- ~ V\ .....
~ 0- <:t:: ~
~- ;i 1 ~ "ill ~
~ () r l: Ct g "~ Q.. ! ~ ':t
~ v~ ri~ ~~~ ~~
.i!' ~ g::l -,c. "" ~ ~~ ~~
~ ~ ~ "::c- 1ll>ii
-..; r~ ~ ~ .,;-- \., \" ;:: ~ Q, '''OJ
T~ ()-ro~~::: ~ ':-
0- < t-. ~ c'l .Q ~ " ~~
oz~""', ~__
- '"
,
~
~
JP~/J)
,
\
;
f; ~ 0:::> )
- . ()
t.Q~}
~..o
r)o '
1::...8
... . .J
...).0.
.
EK..H I BI T
11-08-94
\\ "
J
PAGE
DESCRIBE FIGURE BEARINGS 7
POINT BEARING DISTANCE NORTH
COORDINATE
----- ------------------ --------------- --------------
11 -43.5746
N 03 46 22.308 E 2780.0000 (RADIAL)
2 CURVE CENTER 2730.4004
S 01 02 16.994 E 2780.0000 (RADIAL)
12 -49.1433
S 71 23 00.000 W 204,.4213
14 -114.4017
N 18 37 00.000 W 15.0000 (RADIAL)
15 CURVE CENTER -100.1866
S 71 29 04.523 W 15.0000 (RADIAL)
16 -104.9500
N 18 30 55.477'W 64.7257
11 -43.5746
CIRCULAR CURVE
CENTRAL ANGLE =
CHORD DIRECTION =
IIUS'=
TH =
T GENT '"
CHORD '"
EXTERNAL '"
MIDDLE ORDINATE =
CIRCULAR CURVE
CENTRAL ANGLE =
CHORDPIRECTION =
RADIUS '"
LENGTH '"
TANGENT '"
CHORD '"
EXTERNAL '"
MIDDLE ORDINATE '"
.
11
4
S 88
2 12 L
48 39.303
37 57.343 E
2780.0000
233.4264
116.7818
233.3579
2.4518
2.4496
AREA '"
AREA 7 I
14
90
N 63
15 16 R
06 04.523
33 57.739 W
15.0000
23.5885
15.0265
21.2319
6.2320
4.4028
~11
'>
<
\U
,
<
MoSs S1:
2
EAST
COORDINATE
46.2305
229.1582
279.5219
85.7969
81.0084
66.7848
46.2305
8321.1022 I
~'\.
r1\"e,f::J
l'1"'~
~ /5-/)'(
\, , I
**************************~){*~J*~J*JC:**~******************************
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
.FIDELITY
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS DEEMED RELIABLE BUT IS NOT GUARANTEED *
Copyright TRW REDI 1986, 1991 *
* *
*******************************************************************************.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
e
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
it
NATIONAL
TITLE
INSURANCE
CO
10/25/94 San Diego County
Pr.pared for:
R.qu..t.d By:
R.p:
Sa1.s updat.d Through: 10/21/94
>>> PROPBRTY INFORMATION <<<
OWner Nam.: COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES
Situs Address: SITUS PENDING CHULA VISTA
Mailing Addr.ss: 270 BONITA GLEN DR;CHULA VISTA
L.ga1 D.sc: T 505 B L 15 U
CA 91910-3113
Parcel Number:
Zoning:
City Code:
OWnership Type:
Y.ar Built:
Units:
~ol:
ruBi;Code:
"Yeatures:
619-100-23-00
1
CV
Square Peet:
Lot Size:
Lot Sqft:
Bedrooms:
Baths (P + B):
Total Rooms:
A
.15 *
r6534~~
*
*
*
*
*
, ",~.- - :J~:"t'~*
-.' ,
Og~~~ACANT - RESIDENTIAL
la I ~
, '"
>>> SALES INFORMATION <<<
Last
Sale
Doc.
Sale Date:
Price:
# / Type:
08/02/93
497353/0D
,
.... ,r,::..'tLj, '
Lender: 'A.t
1st Trust Deed:
Other Loans:
Price per Sqft:
1st Prevo Sale:
Amoun t:
>>> TAX INFORMATION <<<
Bxemption:
Improv_ent Value:
Land Value:
Total A....s.d Val:
NONE
Annual Tax:
Improv_ent 'I
Tax Rate Area I
$892.5
$86,000
$86,000
01001
.K-:1 J5-/]t
:~~~.. . :.~~~~ ~::\,,~:: . . : :~.. .
~~ ... ...~...... .~.", ~~-~;; . '. .
~~... . .,...,,, .at.. _....,
. ~#::' - . . ~ . ...... ~ ~. --;"
41J... ~...;.\ _ ,do ('o~ _
.......'-' ""L.~ .e.. .."" ,_, ..
i..('i~ \~;,,,,,,:. <;~..:....,; ~ <:.
......~~ ~~..9:.. ~""'.' ~
.-t~~:i'~~.~.: ,: --"', , . ~.
.... ~- .;. .;1.,....,., _, '__.~.~ .;.~_
; ":;:-':'.) 't.......... . 'L
.; ,~
.~~ ....'~....
. .' ; 't-:< Z :-~. c;r ,"
--.. ..~ -lo"
- :r':.. ..'~
~ .....,". ..~<...-;-._-
. ...;. ~~~~._~,~-:..~ ~~~.. ~ -:~~ ~'"
-.:: ~. 4::.__ .....
;'
..~ _....~
.,
.,
..,
,"1;.
CB
.....
...
--J
--
-
\l)
-
:r;
')f
La
CB
.
f
. - "-
<Bi -klC9 JS:J)'
'*
; ~~
t,. ".
f
,
I
I
I
101
~,
~I
~I
I
I
II)
L_
.. - - --
,
I
",
~,
~I
"'I
"I
'I
(II
..,
I
I
I
J
I
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- .NIsno z~
(\,j
~
~e
..
~0
..
"
. . -
- . .
. .
r~o
'" 4-
~ .,~."
~;: t
S "
"'.,
../ ct
. I-
U)
-
>
ct
CBi ..J
:;)
:J:(\/
()~
. . co
.. . ,~
I !
i: .
It)~
, ~ oco
Ill; It)r-
ii' ~
'" 11.1II
'!.
l"' ~ eta
~a:
~ ~
N ~
@"!
~ '"
\ ~
is
- --
,~ a
- --
~ I&l :
N ~~
@",
N ..; i::
!!!
@
.;.
'€. _ i
......
.'
.
~'
@~
-'~.
~
~
1lI
~
Ii\N
\:!I..
"
- .tVlrp7:;)
'NIS'D7:;J
@
"
~
~
~
08
..
v
08
..
e
e ~
'cl
"
I\j
III
~
.
t
i
~
co~
It
.
i'
!
Ii
.
"'1.
t 11-
, .J
o _
.. <(
: 'ti
'0
r
. .
hi
8~.
II;
I lie!!
Mli
D.-,-
" EP,
. .
.
.
.
E-Xl-llf>l i""
\ 1M /J
FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE
2763 Camino Del Rio South
San Diego, California 92108
P.O. Box 85589,S.D., CA 92186-5589
INSURANCE COKPANY
Phone(619) 295.7332
North County 748.4110
727-1852 & 753.6321
(AKENDED)
PRELIKINARY REPORT
COX & ASSOCIATES
245 "E" Street
Chula Vi.ta, California 91910
Attention: Greg Cox
Your No.
Our Number 930ll55-SK
Date: AuCU.t 30, 1993
Copie. to: Country Club View E.tates
250 Bonita Glen Drive
Chula Vi.ta, California 91910
Attn: Greg Cox
In response to the application for a policy of titl. insux'ance referenced
herein, FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY hereby reports that it is
prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of the date hereof, a Policy or
Policies or Title Insurance describing the land and the estate or interest
therein hereinafter set forth, insuring against loss which may be sustained by
reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an
Exception herein or not excluded from coverage pursuant to the printed Schedules,
Conditions and Stipulations of said Policy forms.
The printed exceptions and exclusions from the coverage of said Policy or
Policies are set forth in Exhibit A attached. Copies of the Policy forms should
be read. They are available from the office which issued this report.
This report (and any supplements or amendments hereto) is issued solely for
the purpose of faciliuting the issuance for a Policy or PoUcies of title
insurance and no liability is assumed hereby. If it is desired that liability
be assumed prior to the issuance of a policy of title insurance, a Binder or
Commitment should be requested.
The form of Policy or Policies of title insurance contemplated by this
report is:
CLTA STANDARD COVERAGE POLICY-1990
CLTA Owners X
Loan PoUcy
Binder
ALTA LOAN POLICY (10.17.92) WITH A.L.T.A. ENDORSEMENT FORK 1 COVERAGE
SCHEDULE OF EXCLUSIONS FROK COVERAGE
ALTA Loan Policy
ALTA.R
ALTA Extended Owners
Dated as of AUIU.t 20, 1993 at 7:30 A.M.
MARTINE CARDIN-ALLEN
Subdivision Title Officer/rap
Page 1
FNTC Form No. 27-089-92
~ J~/)itJ
"
PRELIKINARY REPORT
PAGE NO. 2
ORDER NO. 9301155-SK
..........
The estate or interest in the land hereinafter de.cribed or referred to covered
by this Report i.:
A FEE
Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vasted in:
.
SAN DIEGO COUNTRY CLUB, INC., a corporation, as to Parcell, and COUNTRY CLUB
VILLA ESTATES, a California general partnership, as to Parcel 2
NOTE: It is our understanding that title to said estate or interest in said
policy is to be vested in:
COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES, a California general partnership
The land referred to in this report is described as follows:
SEE ATTACHED DESCRIPTION
'1
At the date hereof exceptions to coverage in addition to the printed exceptions
and exclusions contained in said policy form would be as hereinafter shown.
1. General and Special taxes, a lien not yet payable, for the fiscal year
1993-94.
2. The lien of supplemental taxes, if any, assessed pursuant to the provisions
of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 75) of the Revenu. and Taxation Code of
the State of California.
3. An eanment or right of way for the cons truc tion and maintenance of flumes,
canals or aqueducts, conveyed to the Kimball Brothers Water Company, by deed
dated June 9, 1869 and recorded in Book 7, Page 124 of De.ds.
The route thereof across said land is not ..t forth in .aid document.
4. An .a....nt for public road and purpose. incidental thereto, in favor of
San Diego Lands, Inc., a corporation, recordad F.bruary 19, 1921 in Book 845,
Page 87 of D.eds.
Aff.cts Parcell.
Refer.nc. is hereby made to said document for full particulars.
Said .asement has been granted and reserv.d in various deeds of record.
'"'"
~ )5/)'1/
.
.
.
PRELIMINARY REPORT
PACE NO. 3
ORDER NO. 9301155-SM
5. An easement for public road and purposes incidental thereto, in favor of
San Diego Lands, Inc., a corporation. recorded March 29, 1921 in aook 845, Page
348 of Deeds.
Affects Parcel 2.
Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars.
Said easement has been grant~d and reserved in various deeds of record.
6. An easement for County highway and purposes incidental thereto, in favor
of the County of San Diego. recorded January 12, 1956 in aook 5937, Page 312 of
Official Records.
Affects a portion of Moss Street as set forth in said document.
Reference is ,hereby made to said document for full particulars.
Said instrument additionally grants the privilege and right of to extend
drainage structures and excavation and embankment slopes beyond the limits of the
above described right of way, where required for the construction and maintenance
thereof.
Affects Parcell.
7. An easement for public street and highway purposes and purpos.. incidental
thereto, in fsvor of City of Chula Vista, a municipal corporation recorded March
13, 1958 in aook 6992 . Page 349 of Official Records.
Affects a portion of Moss Street as set forth in said Document.
Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars.
Affects Parcel 2.
8. A Deed of Trust to secure an indebtedne.. of $38,500.00,
December 23, 1983 as File No. 83-469764 of Official Records.
le~~ (,(
record,) ,_",4
Dated:
Trustor:
Trustee:
aeneficiary:
December 19. 1983
FRANK E. FERREIRA, a married man
CALIFORNIA-WORLD TITLE COMPANY, a California corporation
ALICE STROIlMEYER, a widow
~ - -.... -
(l-~
~;1{~
,. ,4./
said indebtedne.. should be \ "
~
The amount due, terms and condi tions of
determined by contacting the owner of the debt.
Affects Parcel 2.
9. A Notice of Consent to Use Land (Civil Code No. 813), recorded June 4, 1981
as File No. 81-174913 and March 20, 1990 as File No. 90-148154, both of Official
Records .
Affects Parcel 2.
~ )~'il;L
PRELIMINARY REPORT
PAGE NO.4
~
ORDER NO. 9301155-SM
10. NOTE: This Company will require a copy of the 1990 FERREIRA Family Living
Trust Agreement and any amendments thereto, together with a written verification
by all Trustees that the copy of the Trust and any amendments thereto is a true
and correct copy, that it is in full force and effect and that it has not been
revoked or terminated, at least 1 week prior to the close of escrow.
.
11. The requirement that...n affidavit of death of Co-Trustee be recorded prior
to close of escrow.
Affects: Judith Ann Ferreira's interest as Co-Trustee under the 1990
Ferreira Family Living Trust.
12. NOTE: The requirement that this Company be provided a complete and current
copy of the Partnership Agreement for the COUNTRY CLUB VIEY ESTATES Partnership,
'together with a ratification or statement by the partners that the terms,
covenants and provisions are still in full force and have not been modified or
corrected other than as disclosed to this Company, at least 1 week prior to close
of escrow.
13. NOTE: The requirement that this Company be provided a complete and current"",",,
copy of the Partnership Agreement for the COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES Partnership,
together with a ratification or statement by the partners that the terms,
covenants and provisions are still in full force and have not been modified or
corrected other than as disclosed to this Company, at least 1 week prior to close
of escrow.
~'":
14. NOTE: Information in possession of this Company indicates the possibility
of a division of land ownership If such division is in fact contemplated the
transaction would appear to fall within the purview of tha Subdivision Map Act.
As a prerequisite to the issuance of a final title evidence, compliance
with one of the following provisions of the Subdivision Map Act w11l be required:
(1) The recording of a Subdivision Map in compliance with statutes or
related local ordinances, or
(2) The recording of a Parcel Hap in compliance with .tatutes or related
local ordinances, or
(3) The recording of a Certificate of Compliance. a. provided by statute,
or submission of satisfactory evidence of compliance with or of non-violation of
the Act.
""'"
~)~JU
.
..
.
PRELIMINARY REPORT
PACE NO. 5
ORDER NO. 9301155-SM
1992-93 TAX INFORMATION:
Code Area:
Parcel No.
1st Installment:
2nd Installment:
Based on Land:
1001
619-100-23
$43.90 POSTED PAID 12/12/92
$43.90 POStED PAID 04/12/93
$6,918.00.
Affects Parcel 2.
Code Area:
Parcel No.
1st Installment:
2nd Installment:
Based on Land:
1001
619-100-22
$53.62 POSTED PAID 12/13/92
$53.62 POSTED PAID 04/09/93
$8,354.00
Affects Parcell with other property.
NOT!: If taxes are posted paid less than 45 days, the Company will hold
the tax amount plus delinquency amount until 45 days has elapsed. If taxes have
been paid through an impound account and we are furnished written confirmation
of same or you can provide us with a copy of the cancelled check, this
requirement will be waived.
If a monthly payment of any existing Deed of Truat is mad. within 30 days
of closing, the Company will hold an amount equal to that payment until 30 days
has elapsed. If a cancelled check can be furnished for this payment, then this
hold policy will be waived.
The charge for a policy of title insurance, if issued through this Title
Order, will be based on the basic insurance rate.
~ /5'//117
,~~~
~ ~ ,t>
'(i- ~\f
'\,
.~
.}~~~
J t''1
~\~~ C'
'\J ,r}
PRELIKINARY REPORT
PAGE NO. 6
~
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ORDER NO. 9301155-SK
PARCEL 1:
That portion of Lot 15 in Quarter Section 120 of CHULA VISTA, in the City of
Chula Vista, County of San Diego, _tate of California, according to Hap thereof
No. 505, filed in the Office of tlie County Recorder of said San Diego County,
Harch 13, 1888.
Together with a portion of the Westerly Half of Fifth Avenue, as vacated,
adjoining said Lot 15 on the East, described as a whole as follows:
Commencing at the Northeasterly corner of Robinhood Subdivision No.2, according
to Hap No. 3488, on file in the Office of the County Recorder, San Diego County,
California, being also a point on the center line of Hoss Street, said point
being on the arc of a 2,740 foot radius circle, the center of which bears North
4'47'51" East, a distance of 2,740 feet from said corner; thence Southeasterly
along said arc, a distance of 32 59 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence
continuing along the arc of said circle, a distance of 383.63 feet to a Point of
Intersection with the Northerly line of Naples Street, formerly known as Sixth
Street, as shown on said Hap No. 505, said point having a radial line which bears
North 3'54'21" West; thence North 71'23' East along .aid North line of Naples
Street, 179.5 feet to a point in the arc of a 2,700 foot radius curve, concave
Northeasterly., concentric wi th said 2,740 foot radius curve; thence Northwesterly
along said 2,700 foot radius curve to a radial line of said 2,740 foot radius
curve bearing Northeasterly from the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence
Southwesterly along said radial line to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
""'\
EXCEPTING any portion lying Easterly of the center line of said vacated Fifth
Avenue adjoining Lot 15 on the East.
PARCEL 2:
That portion of Lot 15 in Quarter Section 120 of CHULA VISTA, in the City of
Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Hap thereof
No. 505, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of said San Diego County,
Karch 13, 1888, described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeasterly corner of Robinhood Subdivision No.2, according
to Hap No. 3488, on file in the Office of the County Recorder, San Diego County,
California, being also a point on the center line of Hoss Street, said point
being on the arc of a 2,740 foot radius circle, the center of which bears North
4'47'51" East, a distance of 2,740 feet from said corner; thance Southeasterly,
along said arc, a distance of 32..59 feet t.o the Northerlv Drolonution of the"
~asterl line of Al ine Avenue be OINT OF BEGINNING, thence
continuing Southeasterly along t e arc of said circle, a distance of 383,63 feet
to a Point of Intersection with the Northerly line of Naples Street, formerly
""'\
~: Jf'--/I~
.
.
.
PRELIHINARY REPORT
PACE NO. 7
LECAL DESCRIPTION
ORDER NO, 9301155-SH
known as Sixth Street, as shown on said Hap No. 50S, said point having a radial
line which bears North 3"54'21" West; thence South 71"~West along said North
line of Naples Street to the Eisterly terminus of a 5th radius curve concave
Northea.terly in the Easterly bounaary of Alpine Avenu s described in deed'to
the City of Chub Vista recorded August 22, 1956 in Book 6230, Page 2S3 of
Official Records; thence Northwesterly along the arc of said 15 foot radius curve
23,50 feet; thence North IS"31' West tangent to said curve to the TRUE POINT OF
lEcINNINC.
AMENDED
OS/30/93
rmp
~
IY/'/~
EXHIBIT A
(CONTINUED)
AMERICAN LAND TITlE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLICY (10.11.92)
WITH A.L.T.A. ENDORSEMENT. FORM 1 COVERAGE AND
AMERICAN LAND TiTlE ASSOCIATION LEASEHOLD LOAN POLICY (10.11.92)
WITH A.L.T.A. ENDORSEMENT. FORM 1 COVERAGE
SCHEDULE OF EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE
TtIt foIlowinl fNIMPl lit fSP"",I, P\.c'...o.d "om I~ CCM'r.,,~ 01 ;h" pollC\ .~ Ihf Comp.l"",
will not PlY 'o5i or """If. co.". .n"""", , '"'" 0' f'\Pf'I\"", .....tI,ch ,"W bl. fl'.~n 01
I. wI Any"', MINlne. 01 p~f'r\fMnUI resul.lton uncludl"1 bul nof l,m,1f'd 10 bl.J1ld'"J
.net loninallWJ, ordiNncf'\. 0' ,,",ul.lloni ItftlllC"tlnl. Pf'Otllb'IIl"l1 or ~I."n, 10 II'
Iht occupancy, UN'. or ento\o~l oitlw LInd: lillihe- (....'.C1.', dune''''lOI''li 01 Ioc."ol'l
of.ny ImptOlIC'me"hl now or tw"',,"f'f t'M1ed Ol'l rht-l.nd, 1111" ~"l'on in CM'~r\hlp
01 . chin.. in 1M dlrnen.ion. or .ft'. of 1M a.nd 01 '1'1Io p"Cf'1 ot whiCh llw wnd
i. Of.... a Pin; or Cwl f"...ifOl'lmPl'll.1 PfO'f'Ction. or tlw eoi'f'C'1 of,rr. \ 101'110" oi I~
I.WI.. OtdiNlncft Of l~rnmP,,~1 ,..",1'110"'. '\(fPIIO tht .\Itonlln., .. "01I,p oi fh('
e"fO~mPnl I~ or .. nollct 01 .. d"-Kl. I.." or f'nCl.lmbrilncf' !'Mulllnp: lrom .
vtOl.l;o" Of .1. YlOlit,OtI .H<<1I"1 thto "nd hi.. tlftn f'f'Cotd<<:i In 1M- publIC ft'(~
'1 O.leo of Policy
Cbl Any IOIIfrnmeonl.1 policeo ~r nol ~c1udfod ~ 1.- .i'o.~. f"Ct'rIIO Itwo t'\1t'nllt'l.r
. notict of Ihr hl'rCIK' theort'C' or , "OIlCt' of. df'ft<1. lito!'! or t'flCun,br,nrt' ~ul"nl
'rom. yiolJlIOt'l, or III~ v.olaltQn .HK'IlnIJheo I.,\d ha~ been ft'Cordf<l "' tht' P\lbliC
.-..coreb .1 Dllt' of PohC\.
2. RIll'tn ol t'mif'tt'nl dom.in unleou norict' of lhe- t'...eorCiiof' ft\t-reoof I'w, bHn rl"Cordf'C! In
theo publIc ff'Cord~ It Olleo oi Polu:y bul nol ..e1ud1r'l8 ilom C()l,"!.8~ ."\' I.l,ng y..h,ch
h.t~ occurl'f'd pllor 10 O.'eo oi Pollc... which WIOuld tx> b'~lnil QI'lIht' rIghI, 01 i purch.~r
for vlluf wilhout knO\".If'd8t'
3. o.ff'C1S. lie,". fnCUl'nbr.nct'\. otd~rw cl"m~. or Oll'l..r m,ntf',
"I crUlfd. ~ufft'rf'Cl. 'numeod or 'IrHd 10 b.' tht' Ir'I\urf'C! cl"m.nl
Cbl nolltnown 10 lt1f Compi,.,." not fKoldf'd In lhe- pub:I' r",ord\ '1 Dilt oi Pol,,,
but knoor.'n to lhe- iniureod cl'lfninl ,nd nOt dliel~ In ....rilln' 10 Ita- Comp.tn-. b.
tM innlff'(j cl,unlnt p'lor 10 Iht cU,1C' lhe' Iniurfld Cl.,m,nl beoumt .n ,"'ulf'Cl unOtr
this polic...;
Ie) mu)Unl in no Iou Ot dJrNllf' 10 tM in,ul'l'd e1.im,n!;
."",
lell .niKhinK or CR'ilf'd iubMoQ~nllO Oil" or '01,(\. or
le, ,,",ulltnl'n 'cK, or (Umilt .....tllch "'01ol10 P'lO: k#.. Mot,,,, \U!Ulntd lllht Inwff'(l
cl'I"'.nl h.ad Pild VlI~ lot Ihf ftlit" or '"I"~lln.utf'O t). m,~ pol,C\
.. UM'nlorct'.b.ll~ of It... Itf'n of ttw l"iUff'd fnOl":,.'t' !:w<.u..,. 01 'ht' ,rwb,lI" or 1.,1"",
of lhe- In..uf'fld.1 0.." oC Pol,,,,. or ft Irwb,I,l\ 01' ""Iu,," of."" ~ubwoqu"nl ~nt..
01 the' Indri\Ilf'dl~U. 10 compl~ .Im .apphc.bIt' dOl"' bu'I'l'W'\~ I",",,, 01 1M- ,,,,Ut' 'r'I
Vo'hlch rtw l,and " 5ilu"f'CI.
S. lnr...hdlfY or III'W'ftiortf.billl\' oiltw I.." oiltw '"iUrpd rnon,.!l't. O' e1...m lhf'ttoof. ....h,Ct-
.f1M-\ OUI of ttw t"nwC1ion ....JCkoncf'd b. tht' jn~ul'f'd mo1":f.~t' .nd " b.1wod Up..)I
1,1"," or .~. con~u,",,' cJt'd11 Pl'Otf'(110l"l or ,.....th In /tond,,,,, I",",
6 "'"" ""lLJIOt"I ttt"fl for Wl'\'icfo\. Labol Ot" ""''''''w!+ 'or Ihf' c1.t'" CW ptlOM" or."Y ""MO"
I"," for ..rvic~. Labor or INIt'rl.l, ~r Iht' IIf'fl 01 rtw- .n,,,,'fId mor:",.,,1 .,i~inf: irol'fl
." lfnp'~tntnl Of wor" ",l.Ilt'd 10 In. l.nc:I ",hick I~ conlt.n..c 10' .nc:I CDmmeof\(KI
wbwcIut'nllO DIlt' of PohC\' and if nor Tirwncf(\ In Yohol~ or In Pol" b, procHeh 0'
thf' 1nc:lf'bltdM''' \Kuttd ~.Iht' in\.,~ ~"'f'.... hich.1 0.:, 01 FbIIC\ dw in,uTf'CI
...~ .d\'.nceod Of i\ oblil"lf'd to .o\'"Ct'.
7. A'" cl.lm .....hich .riloe'\ 01,11 01 tht It,)nWCttDn C"'.!t~1 ,ht ,t\IPI'f'\I (II tht fnOf'I$.!=f'I'
in"uft'Cl btt. thi5 policy, bt. ruson oi'ht' opprallO'l OIlfodrr.1 b.1nll""tplC'\, ~It' inlOh""",.
or ~Imll.1 CtedllOrs' til"I' lfy.". lhat i\ twwc on:
III lhe lI.n...Cllon cre.lin. tht inlt't~1 of li"ot ,n'lJrf'd mo"J:i~fIf bfrn. dftn'M'CI ..
f'.ud""it'nl C~..nct' 01 i"udul"nl U.n~it"r' or
1111 Ihf' \ubordin.lion Of Iht intfl'ftl of thp :n,utf'd mo+':~ft"C' .~ . ",",11 Ol' It"'
.pphUllon of ,he- docUlrw oi 'CIIJ~..blt' Wbo"CII'Il:lon Of
li.H 1M It.nwn,on C"""'I.1 tht int."",' 01 r.-p In.u,", rnort~~"' bt'i", df'Pmf'd .
prt"K'It'nll.1 ".nloft', ",,"pI ",ht'~ 1hf pft'ft'Ip"'lll,r tt.n,ifol fh.lu ifOm lht' ililUlt.
~l 10 IltM'lv f'fCOfd It\f InSU\ltnt'nl of Ir.nt'f'r or
Iblof wc:h f'fCOI'dition 10 dnJNn noIi,eo 10. pc.rrchl5oeo1 lOr \i1IUf' or . ;udllM'nl or
I",n credilor.
AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLICY (10.11.92)
AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LEASEHOLD OWNER'S POLICY (10.11.92)
SCHEDULE OF EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE
""'"
Tht' io!k>Nlnl fNInt'f1o 'N' npreouh t''\Cludf'O irom Iht' c~r.~p O! It\J~ pollC'\ ,nd lhp Comp.a""
wit! nol~' Lou or dI"",.t. CtKI\, .no'nt"r S 1ftS 01 "\Pt'n~~. ",,"'eh .,,;eo b. ~.jo(!r'I 01
1. wI Any 1Mo.'. ordlNlnceoo, ,o..mfl'W'nt.1 ~l,/'.llon unci...d,!'!!t bul nol limited 10 blJlldln~
.nd ronina IIW!>. ordirwnct'\. 01 "'llul.uon\ 1~IIICltnll- prOhtb,llnFt or ",l.llnlt 10 ..!
Iht' OC'C"'PolI'IC"r'. t./W'. or C'nloo..rntnl of lhe- I,nd, UIlI'"'.' "',.'.>>C'lt.. Olnl("n~,ont o.lO("illon
of.ny Impr~meonl noo" Of !wort'.""r Prt'C1f'd on I'"'t' 1.1'Id. ;U1J. "p,i~.'Ion In CMt'II..,..,n,p
or I (tI.nlf" In 1M dlmfn"ons 01 .,.. ollne I.nc O' .'" p""f"1 u' ""h,ch Iht' I.nd
is or W.Io, Pol": or IWI t'n+.'I'on1"lpnt.1 prott'(1'Un. Of ....~ t'1!t'(1 0""" \1010'111(1'" Oll"'t".~
~. orc:hrwnce'~ or aO\.'""lt'n:,1 ""ul.tion< ,,\ct'~: 10 I~t ""It'nr ,n;., . nol'C" ()I' !he
~forc"meonl thf'reool or . nO:lCt' 01 . ~eoCl. Iltn or "/"I(V"'bfl~'CP If'luht"" 110m.
viol",on or .II<<'1'd vlOl.lton .nfC1inllht' J.nd hi; bftn rKOrat'Ci i"'l the publIC 1'f'C0rC~
" 0"" or Policy.
tb) Any ~mfNn..1 policeo ~..' no! ftCludtd b\.' Ii) I~, ~C"P' to ,he 1h.1,,"1 t!wt
. noIic" oi 1M '-'l(iH the-~ Of. notice' oj I MifC1. Itt'" 01 .I"I('O/rnbr.n,. ff'\ul1ln1
from, vioJ"ionor .1I.,.d \ioI.tlOn .Ht-clinIIM I'ne" +w~ bfton re'C'Ordf'd In thfo pubhc
""ord, it o.lf of FbI,C\
2. Ri,h" of ""in,nl do,.".," unl",,1o "OUC" Of Iht f\t"rc,~ InprtOf h.. bc.of'n reocOfOf'd In
the publiC f'fCOtds II 0.1t' oi Poli".. ~ nol....c1udln. t'C:TI COlo.r..~(..~ "'Inll whIch
has OCCU".,a prior 10 0'1t' or 'Ohey which .ot.Ikf bt' blnCh"1 on Itw fllhts 01 . purttwlw,
for ..Iw wilhol.rllLncM'II'd,eo.
J Orrf"CH. Ii,"). t'ncumb"ncf>l.. ad\.rw d.lf"'., or Otht'. "....~t'...
iii ctf.leod, wtiPrN, .numf'd or "1fIK 10 b. the In,ul't'C cl.,"!":.n::
lbl not "nov.'n 10 tht' Comp,a"... no! fKO"Ot'C In lhf' piObhC tfoo:o'd. .1 0.1t' 01 Fbhn
blJlll"I(M'n 10 the> Iniurt'd cl<>>inwnl.1'I(I rIOl Cl'.cl~ In "Itl'~)ll[l:h(o Comp,ln<. I"
lh(' Irttlol'''od c1.I"~nl pUOI 10 Ifwo cUle' 11'1" In,..,,<I d"lnloln~ tIIrl. .In". ,n Inwft"d ",neit"
Ih.. pollC').
IC' !hullln8 in no 10\\ 0' dim.,t' 10 Iht' Ir...:~t"C C!.'m.l~~
Id '~'fhrn~ d. creil('(\ "U&.f'QUf'nl '0 Olilt 01 Fbi,c' O'
If I ~loItl.nJ I"~, or cWfTW~ ~hlch MOVle~: n",t' blof'... ;':':.l~ II fhco ,"),UIP(;
cI.rm.nt N, p.ld \..Iueo 10, Iht' ~I.!t' 0' II":'t't'i: l!'l~Ur.c: :t'. :!':I' OOilC'l.
4. An. (w,m wNch.riK'-. OUI 01 thf' tf,l'tWC':iOI' \"':::-:, In the 1.,.I.''l''d I'l'W ftUIt' Ot 1"1t"!Pol
iMUf'fCl brr Ihi, pohcv. ~ "'.~ of rtw opt'~:~ '" Ifdt'r.! b.1"1ll'\J;NC\. SUlt'insolwnc)
or ,imil.r Cted,IOf1o' rilhb I~,. tNl If biif'C 01'1'
III rhf' ".".aCtion crutin, Itw f'SWf. 0' i"lt'r~lln'l.IrN bo. Ihj~ pol:C\ bt'lnlOttmeod
. ~uduttnl C'On\....na or fr,ud...~1 tf"'Wpr: 0'
(". fhto t"nlolC1ion C""inlllhf HI"t' 01 '''ll."!"!! i"lkirtC tt. dlj, pol,,,, bf'inCdfttM'C'
. Pfl"Plf'fttwllr,"'r ~fC)I ....'hf'r~ ''''t' pr-.If'"'f'r:.:..! ".nslt. '....,lh iro", Iht iiiluI"
&1110 Imwlr 1I'COI'd" ins""",,,", 0' Iran_I': 0' .b' or WCh fl'CO-:Wllon 10 '"'PI" no",..
10 . PUf'tNWI fot VII.,. or . tud'fnf'nl or j f:t Cfl'C!.IOI
lht' Abc:Mo ALl'" pohC\ form\ ~. btt iiwtd 10 nord f'ilht', Su,,*rd Cor.ef. or Eu.nded
CcMor.... In ldcIiltQn 10 Ihe.~ hclJAioM irorn CcMotqt. 1ht' lllUPltons hm C~..
in . SUindard Cooelllf poliC\' will . incIucIf .. toIlowtna c.n.,.1 baptions:
SCHEDULE 8
EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE
This policy don f'IOI insure Allin" Lou 01' .""1' find Iheo Com~m. will not ~. COSU. 1ftOmrt... ... Of flt.pt'MtII which .,i., D,- '"IOn oi:
"'IT 1
1. TlIOtI Of fiMlimefllS whictl.re not shown" Dllllnlli.n, b,- thto rKOrdi oi.".,. &l1\lnl 3. ~ Iient orencumbrances. 01' cl,ai:'nS~, whiCh ~ not ihown by Iht ~
.UIhorlry thai ~"'" 11...... or "M'S''''''nl$ on re,l proPf'rty Ot ~ tht P\lbllc fIKOItI, l'tCord,. ,
PtoC'ftdinp b,o . publiC 'I"'""'" whIch rN\' ,"uh in I...... or iliwnrneonllo, 01 noIiCf>i, .e. DiKl'f'Pilncift. conflicts In boUnc:lIl'\ &j,....,.. 'no.,.~t' in ."'., ""frwC'hnwnl"- Co . >
01 wch PfOCetdlflll'. "'''''''eor or not $tovn ~. Tnt r",orocls Of MlC'h .lpnC\, or 0.' Iht' Ofhtr ",n, wttich . COffK'1 Mt!Wlo ....oU;C caclo;t'. .nd Y.hl('t! .IP noI ~'n by th('
public ""old". punllc tKotd",
2. Any fllcu. fiJhK. intt'ff'I" Of cJ.im, ",hich.", nol ~hO\\n btt, Tn. publiC ff'('ord, bY! S. I.! Lnp,trnted minin. Claims: lbl f'I'lof'~'I:!O!'IJ. or ~t'p:'or\j in p"lt'nlS or in Act~
which CCM.Ild btt 'Kt'n.ll''fd b.' In InspecllOtl 0; Itw I.nd Of Yo hl,h rN\' be uwn<<l .ulhonll"' ttw iuuanCt' ,ht'red; leI ""'Itt'r ",,",n. cl.llmi or tillt' 10 "''''''. wht'rheor or
~ Pl'lIOIIs in posleUlon the-reo!. nD1Jheo man"" hCeP'ed ",,*r wJ. IbJ. or C' .,. 5hown I:rt.Jheo public fKolcb.
~ /~/'17
.
[)(ki\oit- N
ADDENDUM TO 15-94-01 VACATION OF A PORTION OF MOSS STREET
PROJECT NAME: Vacation of a portion of Moss Street
PROJECT LOCATION: Moss Street between Naples Street and Alpine Avenue
PROJECT APPLICANT: San Diego Country Club and Country Club Villa Estates
PROJECT AGENT:
Greg Cox of Cox and Associates
CASE NO.:
IS-94-0 1
I. INTRODUCTION
.
The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the Environmental Review
Coordinator (ERC) to prepare an addendwn to a Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact
Report, if one of the following conditions is present:
1. The minor changes in the project design which have occurred since completion of the
Final EIR or Negative Declaration have not created any new significant environmental
impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative Declaration;
2. Additional or refined information available since completion of the Final EIR or
Negative Declaration regarding the potential environmental impact of the project, or
regarding the measures or alternatives available to mitigate potential environmental
effects of the project, does not show that the project will have one or more significant
impacts which were not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative Declaration.
This addendwn has been prepared in order to amend the project description to include additional
requirements that will improve traffic circulation . These minor changes are improvements to the
project and will further reduce the potential of any significant environmental impacts. As a result of
this analysis, the basic conclusions within the negative declaration have not changed. All impacts are
found to be less than significant. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA
Guidelines, the City has prepared the following addendwn to the negative declaration for the vacation
of a portion of Moss Street.
n. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
.
The proposed project originally consisted of the vacation or closing of a 30,800 sq. ft. section of Moss
Street east of Alpine Avenue and west of First Avenue. The northern portion of Moss Street will
become part of the holdings of the San Diego Country Club and the southern half would be added to
the triangularly shaped parcel to the south. Discretionary actions that are required for this include the
~ if'~){~ .
fmding of General Plan Consistency and the action for approval of the closing of Moss Street. The
applicant's eventual plan is that the San Diego Country Club will quit-claim or transfer title of their -"""\
portion of Moss Street to the County Club Villa Estate's partnership in consideration of the Country
Club Villa Estate's partnership installing the missing curbs and gutters on the San Diego Country Club
side of the Street. Access to the property will be allowed along Naples; however, access on Moss
Street will be limited to one driveway at a location determined to provide safe ingress and egress by
the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant eventually plans to apply for a tentative parcel map for 4
units or subdivide the property into 5 units. Under the original project description, the applicant was
required to widen Alpine A venue from the current 20 feet to 52 feet. The developer will install curb
and gutter, and pavement along the north side of Moss Street between Third Avenue and Alpine
Avenue. The installation of street improvements on the east side of Alpine Avenue between Moss
Street and Naples Street and pavement, curb, and gutter on the north side of Naples Street, between
Alpine Avenue and the current intersection of Moss Street and Naples Street will be a requirement
of the development of the triangular parcel. The amended project description includes a stop sign
installed on Naples at Moss Street, to create a three-way stop controlled intersection and attendant
warning devices as deemed necessary by the City Traffic Engineer. These traffic measures enhance
traffic safety and provide more efficient flow of traffic within this area adjacent to the project. These
street improvements were included to address the traffic concerns of residents.
III. PROJECT SETTING
The project setting consists of a 30,800 square foot section of Moss Street immediately east of the
westerly stub street of Alpine A venue and immediately north of the intersection of First Avenue and
Naples Street. Immediately south of the above described section of Moss Street is a vacant 8,322.98
square foot triangular piece of vacant land. Single family homes are located to the west across Alpine
Avenue and to the south across Naples Street. The San Diego Country Club, a golf course with club
house facilities, is located to the immediate north of Moss Street. To the east of the proposed project
is neighborhood shopping.
""'"
Ill. IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Traffic
The negative declaration analyzed potential environmental effects of the project and found that all
impacts could be mitigated to a level below significance. Some of the concerns raised by residents
subsequent to the negative declaration being posted with the County of San Diego on September 27,
1993, included concerns of: (1) Increased traffic and high speed, (2) Stacking of traffic on Alpine
going onto Naples, (3) Air Quality, (4) Safety of children going to school and (5) that the closing of
Moss Street at Alpine would create a knuckle of 90 degrees which would be dangerous. Engineering
staff responded as follows:
(1)
Increased traffic and hilZh sneed - The proposed project intersection is currently at Level of
Service (LOS) "A" and will remain at "A" after the project is completed. Traffic flow will
improve in the area. Conflicts with other vehicles will be reduced from the widening, which
will allow separate turning lanes. Traffic will also slow down with the installation of a stop
sign on Naples at Moss Street, creating an all-way stop.
"""
~ )S--/ij7
'. (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
. V.
.
Stackine of traffic on Aloine eoine on to Naoles - The requirement that the applicant install
an all-way stop at the North end of Alpine will reduce the queuing effect caused by motorists
waiting for an adequate gap in traffic. The street section of Naples that the applicant will be
required to construct would adequately handle the expected traffic in the area.
Air Oualitv - Concern was raised about the air quality at Moss where it intersects with Naples
as a result of traffic that is sometimes backed up, going east six to eight cars deep. Staff
consulted with an Air Quality expert who stated that the project is in conformance with the
existing Air Basin Plan.
Safety of Children - Residents stated that it would be dangerous for elementary school children
to walk to school along Naples without.a sidewalk. The addition of a stop sign insta1led on
Naples at Moss to create a three-way stop controlled intersection and attendent warning devices
will improve the safety of the area. If the applicant does proceed at a later date with plans for
a subdivison, then the applicant would be required to fund the construction of sidewalks within
the subdivision and may be required to fund some of the offsite infrasture as well.
Closine of Moss Street creatine a "DOIzlee" - Concerns were raised that the closing off of Moss
Street at Alpine would create a "dogleg" of 90 degrees which would be quite dangerous with
the rate of speed the cars traveling on Moss Street. The traffic engineering staff will review
the proposed plans when submitted and will apply applicable City and State roadway standards.
CONCLUSION
Traffic impacts are found to be less than significant and within the acceptable range of LOS C or
better in accordance with the City of Chula Vista's General Plan. Pursuant to Section 15164 of the
State CEQA Guidelines and based upon the above discussion, I hereby find that the project revisions
to the proposed project will result in only minor technical changes or additions which are necessary
to make the Negative Declaration adequate under CEQA.
REFERENCES
General Plan, City of Chula Vista
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
City of Chula Vista Environmental Review Procedures
EIR-89-11
Memorandum from Hans Giroux to Barbara Reid, 10/22/93 and telephone conservation re: Air Quality
~/~---/f()
negative declaration
~
PROJECT NAME
Vacation of a Portion of Moss Street
PROJECT LOCATION
Moss Street between Naples Street and Alpine Avenue
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO' Not applicable as streets fall under the non-assessed tax roll
PROJECT APPLICANT.
San Diego Countiy Club and Country Club Villa Estates
CASE NO' IS-94-01
DATE. September 27, 1993
A. Proiect Setting
The project setting consists of a 30,800 square foot section of Moss Street immediately east of
the westerly stub street of Alpine A venue and immediately north of the intersection of First
A venue and Naples Street. Immediately south of the above described section of Moss Street is
a vacant 8,322.98 square foot triangular piece of vacant land. Single family homes are located
to the west across Alpine A venue and to the south across Naples Street. The San Diego Country
Club, a golf course with club house facilities, is located to the immediate north of Moss Street.
To the east of the proposed project is neighborhood shopping.
""""
B. Proiect DescriDtion
The project description consists of the vacation or closing of a 30,800 sq. ft. section of Moss
Street east of Alpine A venue and west of First A venue. The northern portion of Moss Street will
become part of the holdings of the San Diego Country Club and the southern half would be added
to the triangularly shaped parcel to the south. Discretionary actions that are required for this
include the finding of General Plan Consistency and the action for approval of the closing of
Moss Street. The applicant's eventual plan is that the San Diego Country Club will quit-claim or
transfer title of their portion of Moss Street to the Country Club Villa Estates in consideration
of the Country Club Villa Estates installing the missing curbs and gutters on the San Diego
Country Club side of the Street - the remaining portion of Moss from Third Avenue to the
realigned Moss stub street of Alpine. Access to the property will be allowed along Naples;
however, access on Moss Street will be limited to one driveway at a location determined to
provide safe ingress and egress as determined by the City Traffic Engineer The applicant
eventually plans to apply for a tentative parcel map for 4 units or subdivide the property into 5
units .
C. Comoatibility with Zoninl! and Plans
The eventual plans to apply for a tentative parcel map for 4 units or a subdivision for 5 units will
be in compliance with the zoning and General Plan designation for the project site, which is
single family residential.
~ IS/)5?
~
~ {rt..
-fJ-
==~~....,.
-
city of chula vllta planning department CI1Y OF
environmental review Hcllon CHUIA VISTA
.
.
.
D.
Identification of Environmental Effects
An initial study conducted by the City of Chula Vista determined that the proposed project will
not have a significant environmental effect, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact
Report will not be required. A Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Traffic
Traffic Engineering has determined several traffic measures should be implemented relating to
the proposed vacation of Moss Street. The applicant must allow for an increase of right-of-way
on Naples and Alpine Street adjacent to the southern parcel on Moss Street in accordance with
the City of Chula V ista roadway design standards. The applicant is proposing to install curb and
gutters within a 3 year period from the transfer of property subsequent to the approval of the
street vacation. The project will include stop sign controls at Moss Street and Naples Street and
attendant warning deyices as deemed necessary by the City Traffic Engineer A stop sign will
be installed on Naples at Moss Street to create a three-way stop controlled intersection. The
applicant must provide a 52' roadway which will be an expansion from the existing 20' roadway
These traffic measures enhance traffic safety and provide more efficient flow of traffic within this
area adjacent to the project.
E.
Water
Due to recent drought conditions, as a condition of project approval, the applicant must agree to
no net increase in water consumption or panicipate in whatever water conservation or fee off-set
program the City of Chula Vista has in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
F.
Mitil!ation necessarv to avoid sil!nificant effects
As no significant effects are expected mitigation measures are not necessary.
G. Mandatorv Findinl!s of Sil!nificance
Based on the following fmdings, it is determined that the project described above will not have
a significant environmental impact and no environmental impact report needs to be prepared.
1.
The project has the poteutial to substantially degrade the quality of the eoviromnent,
substantially reduce the babitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below selfoSllllh.lnlnlf levels, tbreateo to ..un.lnate a pIant or
animAl community, reduce the IlUIDber or restrid the J'lIIIIl! of a rare or epdAlllered
pIant or animal, or ooIlmlnate Important eumples of the ~or periods of California
history or JIfthlstorY.
The proposed project, the vacation of Moss Street does not have the potential to degrade
or reduce any existing habitat as the project consists of the closing of a street and has
therefore been denuded of any habitat long ago.
-2-
y-s- )5'///,;L-
2.
The project bas the potential to achieve short-term enviroomental goals to the
disadvantage of long-term enviroomental goals.
""'"
This project is consistent with the general plan and does not have the potential to achieve
short term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long term environmental goals with
guidelines.
3. The project bas possible effects which are individually limited but cumulatively
considerable. As used in the subsection, "cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects.
This project does not have the potential to have effects which are individually limited but
cumulatively considerable. The main concern raised by residents was in regard to traffic
flow The traffic engineers who reviewed the project have determined that the inclusion
of: stop signs on Naples at Moss Street to create a three-way stop controlled intersection,
and provision of a 52' roadway which will be an expansion from the existing 20'roadway
will enhance traffic safety and provide a more efficient flow of traffic within this area.
Staff are confident that, based on this determination, the project does not have
cumulatively considerable impacts.
4.
The enviroomental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly.
""'"
The proposed project will not cause a substantial adverse effect on human beings either
directly or indirectly as it must meet all Code requirements and requirements of various
City departments.
H. Consultation
I Individuals and Orl!anizations
City of Chula Vista.
Roger Daoust, Engineering
John Lippitt, Engineering
Cliff Swanson, Engineering
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering
Bob Sennett, Planning
Frank Herrera-A, Planning
Martin Miller, Planning
Steve Griffin, Planning
Ken Larsen, Director of Building and Housing
Alex Saucedo, Building Department
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Rod Hastie, Fire Department
Captain Keith Hawkins, Police Department
Mary Jane Diosdado, Police Department
Martin Schmidt, Parks and Recreation Department
1
~ /5--)~;;
.
.
.
Barbara Reid, Planning
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
Applicant's Agent: San Diego Country Club and Country Club Villa Estates
2. Documents
Chula Vista General Plan
Safety Commission Report, 9/9/93
Speed Limit - Engineering/Traffic Survey: Naples Street (Third Avenue-First Avenue)
Naples Street (First Avenue-Hilltop Drive)
Memorandum from Hans Giroux to Barbara Reid, 10/22/93
3 Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any comments
received on the Initial Study and any comments received during the public review period
for the Negative Declaration. Further information regarding the environmental review
of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth
Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010.
\MOSS.ND
~ /5"~ /Sf
-4-
Case No. 94-01
........"
APPENDIX I
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
(To Be Completed By Lead Agency)
Background
Environmental Impacts
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: m MAYBE NO
a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in
geologic substrUctures? 0 0 . ~
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil? 0 0 .
c. Change in topography or ground surface
relief features? 0 0 .
d. The destrUction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical features? 0 0 .
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or off the site? 0 0 .
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach
sands, or changes in siltation, deposition
or erosion which may modify the channel of
a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake? 0 0 .
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud
slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? 0 0 .
..........
~Y/f~
ICHECKLST .MOS Page 1
. Comments:
As the site currently is developed as a road and the proposal is to vacate the road, there are
no changes in conditions expected that could lead to an increase in wind or water erosion.
2. Air. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE ~
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality? 0 0 .
b. The creation of objectionable odors? 0 0 .
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
temperature, or any change in climate,
either local1y or regionally? 0 0 .
Comments:
The project is in conformance with the existing Air Basin Plan.
3. Water. Will the Proposal result in: YES MAYBE ~
a. Changes in currents, or the course or
direction of water movements, in either
. marine or fresh waters? 0 0 .
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of
surface runoff? 0 0 .
c. Alterations to the course or flow or
flood waters? 0 0 .
d. Change in the amount of surface water
in any water body? 0 0 .
e. Discharge into surface waters, or any
alteration of surface water quality,
including but not limited to temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity? 0 0 .
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of
flow of ground waters? 0 0 .
g. Change in the quantity of ground w~ters,
either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception 'of
. an aquifer by cuts or excavations? 0 0 .
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of
water otherwise available for public
water supplies? ~ J5'/I3'iP 0 .
ICHECKLST .MOS Pase 2
i.
Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding or
tidal waves?
"""
o
o
.
Comments:
This project is not in the Coastal Zone and there are no rivers or wetlands or other sensitive
aquatic resources within the immediate area that could be impacted by the project.
The Threshold/Standards Policy does not apply to this project.
4.
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
m. MAYBE NO
a.
b.
Change in the diversity of species, or
number of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic
plants)?
o
o
.
Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of plants?
o
.
o
c.
Introduction of new species of plants into
into an area, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species?
o
o
.
d.
Reduction in acreage of any agricultural
crop?
""""
o
o
.
Comments :
The project is in an urbanized area of the City and the site is developed as a road. The
project will not result in any changes in diversity of plant or llnimlll species.
5.
\CHECKLST.MOS
Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
m. MAYBE .1:iQ
a.
Change in the diversity of species, or
numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals including reptiles, fish and
shellfISh, benthic organistns or insects)?
o
o
.
b.
Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of llnimlll.?
o
o
.
c.
Introduction of new species of llnimllls
into an area, or result in a barrier to
the migration or movement of animals?
o
o
.
d.
Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat?
o
.
o
.........
~JY/.s-?
~
Page 3
.
.
.
Comments:
The project is in an urbanized area of the City and the site is developed as a road. The
project will not result in any changes in diversity of plant or animal species.
6.
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
m MAYBE lill
a.
Increases in existing noise levels?
o
o
.
b.
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
o
o
.
Comments:
It is expected that the traffic that currently travels on Moss Street will begin to use
Naples. As a result of this change, the homes on the westerly stub street of Alpine
Avenue would experience less traffic and noise. The homes along the south side of
Naples may experience additional noise from additional travelers along that route.
However, discussion with our acoustician has determined that the additional traffic
will not bring the noise to a level of significance.
7.
Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce
new light or glare?
m MAYBE lill
o 0 .
Comments:
There may be additional light along Naples Avenue as a result of the vacation of Moss Street
but is not expected to be above the level of significance.
8.
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
m MAYBE lill
o
o
.
Comments:
The vacation of Moss Street will improve traffic circulation and the land use will
coincide with the surrounding residential land designation in the general plan.
9.
Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
XES MAYBE l:iQ
a.
Increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources?
o
o
.
Comments:
No natural resources are expected to be impacted. The proposal, therefore, is not
expected to increase the rate of the use of natural resources.
10.
RIsk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
XES MAYBE l:iQ
a.
A risk of an explosion or the release of
hazardous substances (including, but not
limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident -or
upset conditions?
o
.
o
~ /5- /5'r
/'
Pqe4
\CHECKLST .MOS
b.
Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or an emergency evacuation
plan?
o
o
.
-"'"'\
Comments:
No hazardous materials or substances will be stored on site. Therefore, there cannot be a
risk of an explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset
conditions.
11.
Population. Will the proposal alter the location
distribution, density, or growth rate of the human
population or an area?
m MAYBE lill
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project involves the vacation of Moss Street and will not involve the
construction of more residential units. The population will not increase. A tentative parcel
map or subdivision map for the division of the project site into no more than 5 parcels may
be submitted in the future . This future proposal for the use of the site will increase
population, but the 'impact of five families would be below the level of significance.
12.
Housing. Will the proposal affect existing
housing. or create a demand for additional
housing?
m MAYBE lill
o
o
.
~~: ~
The proposed project will not involve the construction of any new housing and will not create
a demand for more housing in the project area. A future project may involve the building
of a small number of homes but this would not place a significant demand on current services
and natural resources in the project area.
13 Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: m MAYBE lill
a. Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement? 0 0 .
b. Effects on existing parking facilities,
or demand for new parking? 0 0 .
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems? 0 0 .
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? 0 0 .
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air
traffic? 0 0 .
~
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 0 0 .
\CHECKLST,MOS }H-2 /5- /Jij Page S
.
g.
A .large project. under the Congestion
Management Program? (An equivalent of
2400 or more average daily vehicle trips
or 200 or more peak-hour vehicle trips).
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project will shift traffic from Moss Street to Naples Street. However, impacts
to traffic and circulation are not significant. The proposed project street improvements will
improve circulation and safety at the intersection of Moss Street and Naples Street.
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services in any of the following areas:
, m MAYBE l::lQ
a. Fire protection? 0 0 .
b. Police protection? 0 0 .
c. Schools? 0 0 .
d. Parks or other recreational facilities? 0 0 .
e. Libraries? 0 0 .
. f. Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads? 0 0 .
g. Other governmental services? 0 0 .
Comments :
.
Traffic Engineering staff recommends that the roadway be expanded to 52 feet, that access
to the property be allowed along Naples but limited on Moss Street to one driveway at a
location determined to provide safe ingress and egress as determined by the City Traffic
Engineer. The project will include stop sign controls at Moss and Naples and attendant
warning devices as deemed necessary by the City Traffic Engineer. A stop sign will be
installed on Naples at Moss Street, to create a three-way stop controlled intersection. These
traffic measures enhance traffic safety and provide more efficient flow of traffic within this
area adjacent to the project. The street improvements would require an increase in City
right-of-way in accordance with City of Chu\a Vista street design standards, by the property
owner of the proposed project. These street improvements will address the traffic concerns
of residents and improve traffic circulation in the project area. The proposed project is a
street vacation and will not create any impact on public services. The Fire Department and
Police Department have not noted any Fire or Police protection in relation to this project.
The project site may be developed in the fulUre as single-family housing. This possible
development will be no more than 5 parcels and the population increase will not place a
significant impact on public services in the project area.
(~ J5~/t/(J
PIle 6
\CHECKLST.MOS
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: ~ MAYBE NO
Use of substantial amount of fuel or ""'"
a.
energy? 0 0 .
b. Substantial increase in demand upon
existing sources or energy, or require
the development of new sources of
energy? , 0 0 .
Comments:
The proposed project wilI not involve any energy use and wilI not create any energy
demands.
16. Thresholds. WilI the proposal adversely impact m MAYBE NQ
the City's Threshold Standards? 0 0 .
Comments:
As described below, the proposed project does not adversely impact any of the seven
Threshold Standards.
A. FirefEMS
The Threshold Standards requires that fire and medical units must be able to respond
to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85 % of the cases and within 5 minutes or less in
75 % of the cases. The City of Chula Vista has indicated that this threshold standard """"
wilI be met, since the nearest fire station is 1-1/4 miles away and would be associated
with a 3 minute response time. The proposed project wilI comply with this
Threshold Standard.
Fire Department access is not compromised and use of existing fire hydrant is not
compromised.
B. Police
The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84 % of Priority
1 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority
1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.10% of Priority 2
calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority
2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The proposed project wilI comply with this Threshold
Standard.
C. Traffic
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must operate at a Level of
Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D"
may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections.
Intersections west of I-80S are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No
intersection may reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday peak hour. ~
Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this Standard. The
proposed project wilI comply with this Threshold Standard.
~ J,-;;--/~I
Page 7
ICHECKLST.MOS
.
.
.
The proposed project intersection is currently at level of service . A. and will remain
at . A. after the project is completed.
D.
Parks/Recreation
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/I ,000 population. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
E. Drainage
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and volumes not exceed City
Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master PJan(s) and City Engineering Standards. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
The proposed project will not significantly impact storm water flows and is consistent
with the Drainage Master Plan.
F.
Sewer
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed City
Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed
project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
The proposed Moss Street vacation will not have a significant impact on sewage
volumes and is consistent with Sewer Master Plan.
G. Water
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and transmission
facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quality
standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. The proposed project
will comply with this Threshold Standard.
Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever water conservation or fee
off-set program the City of ChuJa Vista has in effect at the time of building permit
issuance .
The proposed project will not jeopardize water quality standards because future
construCtion will not be significant.
17.
Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
m MAYBE NQ
a.
Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health?
o
o
.
b.
Exposure of people to potential health
hazards?
o
o
.
\CHECKLST .MOS
~
)~./)~,J..,
J>a8e 8
Comments:
The proposed project will not create any significant health hazard. The traffic shift will not ""'"
create any health hazards due to its close proximity to the Moss Street vacation.
The additional few homes that may be developed on the site in the future will be aesthetically
more pleasing than the public street that currently exists on site.
18.
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in:
XES MAYBE lID
a.
The obstruction of any scenic vista or view
open to the public, or will the proposal
result in the creation of an aesthetically
offensive site open to public view?
o
o
.
b.
The destruction, or modification of a scenic route?
o
o
.
Comments:
The Moss Street vacation will not allow for the possible development of no more than five
units in the site.
19
Recreation. Will the proposal result in an
impact upon the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opportunities?
m MAYBE lID
o
o
.
Comments: ,.....,,,
The proposed project will not significantly impact recreational opportunities. Parks and
Recreation did not note any concerns.
20. Cultural Resources. m MAYBE lID
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration
of or the destruction or a prehistoric or
historic archaeological site? 0 0 .
b. Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building, structure,
or object? 0 0 .
c. Does the proposal have the potential to
cause a physical change which would
affect unique ethnic cultural values? 0 0 .
d. WilIlhe proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within lhe
potential impact area? 0 0 .
e. Is the area identified on the City's """"
General Plan EIR as an area of high
potential for archeological resources? 0 0 .
\CHECKlST.MOS JS---/~ J Page 9
cN--tti
.
.
.
Comments:
The proposed project is in an urbanized area of the City and will not impact any cultural
resources.
21.
Paleontological Resources. Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction of paleontological
resources?
m MAYBE HQ
o
.
o
Comments:
The proposed project site is in an urbanized area and will not result in the determination of
paleontological resources.
22.
Mandatory FIndings of Significance.
~ MAYBE rm
a.
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment. substantially reduce
the habitat of a ftsh or wildlife species, cause
a ftsh or wildlife population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
animal or eliminate important examples or the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
o
o
.
Comments .
The proposed project, the vacation of Moss Street does not have the potential to degrade or
reduce any existing habitat as the project consists of the closing of a street and has, therefore,
been denuded of any habitat long ago.
b.
Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-
term, environmental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one which occurs in
a relatively brief, defmitive period of time,
while long-term impacts will endure well into the
future.)
o
o
.
Comments:
The City Traffic Engineer has found that the requested vacation, along with the
recommended conditions of approval. would meet the General Plan Circulation Element street
standards, and would ..nha""-C traffic safety by etiminahng the acute angle at which Moss
Street now intersects with Naples Street. The Circulation Element diagram shows Moss
Street intersecting with Naples Street near First Avenue and/or Alpine Avenue and thus the
proposed configuration would be consistent with the General Plan. The project complies with
long-term environmental and land use goals of the City.
c. Does the project have impacts which are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (A project may impact two or 1 ~ J
J..? - t
Pa&e 10
\CHECKLST.MOS
more separate resources where the impact on
each resource is relatively small, but where the
effect of the total of those impacts on the
environment is significant.)
"""
o
o
.
Comments:
This project does not have the potential to be individually limited but cumulatively
considerable. The main concern raised by residents was in regard to traffic flow. The traffic
engineers who reviewed the project have determined that the inclusion of: stop signs on
Naples at Moss Street to create a three-way stop controlled intersection and provision of a
52' roadway which will be an expansion from the existing 20' roadway will enhance traffic
safety and provide a more efficient flow of traffic within this area. The street improvements
will improve circulation and safety at the intersection of Moss Street and Naples Street and
will address the traffic concerns of residents. Staff are confident that based on this
determination, the project does not have cumulatively considerable impacts.
d.
Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
o
o
.
~omments.
The proposed project will not cause a substantial adverse effect on human beings either
directly or indirectly as it must meet all Code requirements and requirements of various City
departments. """
'""'\
\CHECKLST.MOS
~
~/k3
Page 11
. \. Al-'PUCATION CANNOT.l. ACCEPTED UNLESS SITE
.PLAN IS FOLDED TO FIT INTO AN 8.1{2 X 11 FOLDER
INITIAL STUDY
City of Chula Vista
Application Fonn
For OffICe U~ 0nlt3'
Case No. IS- q4 - I
DpsL AmnL. . DV
iRcccipt No.
'DIleRcC'd.
Acc;epted by
Project No. FA-
DpsLNo.DO-()~1
CIP No. .
'Jle1aIed Case No.
A. BACKGROUND
1. Project Title Vacat.ion of a nortion nr Mnt=t= ~+r~~
2. Project Location (Street address or description)
MossStreet between Naples Street and~Alpine
.
Avenue
Assessors Book, Page &. Parcel No. Legal -description attached
Brief Project Description Vacation of a portion of:;Moss Street
between Naples Street and Alp1ne Avenue
3.
4.
Name of Applicant San Dieco Cotlntcry Cl nh Ann Cnnnt-ry ("1 nh vi 1 'lltates .
Address 250 Bonita Glen Drive Fax# ---
City t:tllila vista State CA
Name of Preparer/Agent Greg Cox
Address3l30 Bonita Rd, Suite 200
Cny Chula vista
Relation to Applicant Consul tant
Indicate all pennits or approvals and enclosures or documents required by the Environmental
Review Coordinator.
.
s.
6.
Phone ---
Zip 91910
Fax# 691-9854
State CA
Phone 585-7007
Zip 91910-3263
a. Permits or approvals required.
_ General Plan Amendment
_ Rezone/Prezone
_ Grading Penmt
_ Tentative Parcel Map
_ Site Plan &. AJch. Review
_ Special Use Fermit
_ Design Review Application
_ Tentative Subd. Map
_Redeve\opmellt Alene)' OPA
_ Redevelopl""'" Agency DDA
Public Project
- ADDeUtiOD
-
_ Specific Plan
_ CooditiODal Use Permit
Variance
= Coastal Development
x 0Iber Permit
-
Street vacation
If project is a General Plan Amendment andIar rezone, please indicate the change in cIcsisnarlon from
Not. 8npli~Ah'~ to
Enclosum or documents (u required by the Enviranmental Review Coordinator).
Arch. E1evllioos Hydrolopcal Study
- ,,,"ds(",p<! Plans - BiolOJical SllIdy
= Tentative Subd. Map - ArchaeOIOJical SllIdy
JJnprovement Plans - Noise ....ses......ut
- Soils Report - 0lJIer AJeDC)' Permit
= Qeotechnical Report JC 0Iber Site plan
~/~-)~?
b.
.
_ Grading Plan
_ Parcel Map
_ Precise Plan
_ Specific Plan
_ Traffic Impact Report
_ Hazardous WUte Assessment
___.____........ & _ _..... Ul'Il'.\M\ tR.I'. UIZ1S'3}
""1
. .
B. PROPOSED PROJECT
""""
1.
a.
approx. .30 800
Land Area: square footage ' or acreage
If land area to be dedicaled. sw.e acreage and pwpose.
purposes.
Tn.,- pnnl;,.. .,.t"'\~d/
City of Chula Vista Dresen~lv ha~ ~n _~Q~mAn+
b. Does the project involve the construction of new buildings, or will existing structure be
utilized? /Jo
Complete this section if project is residential or mixed use. not applicable
a. Type of development:_ Singl~ Family _ Two Family _ Multi Family
_ Townhouse _ Condominium
Total number of structures
Maximum height of structures
Number of Units: I bedroom
2 bedroom
3 bedroom
4 bedroom
-
Total Units
Gross density (DUttotal acres)
Net density (DU/total acres minus any dedicalion)
Estimated project population
Estimated sale or rental price range
Square footage of structure
Percent of lot coverage by buildings or structures
Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided
Percent of site in road and paved surface
3. Complete this section if project is commercial or industrial or mixed use. not applicable
a. Type(s) of land use
b. Floor area Height of suuetures(s)
c. Type of construction used in the structUre
2.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
""""
i.
j.
k.
1.
d. Desaibe major ICCCSS points to the structIIrCS and the orientation to adjoining properties
and streets
e.
f.
Number of on-sire parking spaces provided
Estima1ed number of employees per shift
Number of shifts Total
Estimated number of customers (per day) and basis of estimate
"""\
g.
_~ J'p~/rf, ')
WI'C:F~nl..uJ(RoI.IO_)(RoI.Imu3) /
P.,.2
. h.
i.
j.
k.
1.
Estimated number of deliveries per day
Estimaled range of service area and basis of estimale
Type/extent of operations not in enclosed buildings
Hours of operation
Type of exterior lighting
4. If project is other than residential. commercial or industtial complete this section.
a. Type of project Street vacation
b. Type of facilities provided none
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
. h.
Square feet of enclosed StlUctures n / a
Height of StlUc:ture(s) - maximum n/ a
Ultimale occupancy load of project n/ a
Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided n/a
Square feet of road and paved surfaces existina asohal"'- will be r..mnved
Additional project characteristics
proiect will result in ~he T~mnv~l nT ~pp~nY;m~~~'y
30,800 square feet of asphalt.
C. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
1. Will the project be required to obtain a pencit through the Air Pollution Control District (APeD)?
No
2. Is any type of grading or excavation of the p.opert)' anticipated? Not at this "'-ime
If ycs~ complete the following:
L Excluding trenChes to be bacIdiIled. how many cubic: yards of eanh will be excavated?
.
b.
How many cubic yards of fill will be pllc:ed?
How much area (sq. it. 01' acres) will be lfaded?
What will be the: Maximum depth of cut
A velllC depth of cut
Maximum depth of fill
Avenge depth of fill
c:.
d.
. ~ /5-)i->r
~011....." (Iof. 1000.PS) (101. 1m.PS)
.... 3
3.
Describe all energy consuming devices which are pan of the proposed project and the type of
energy used (air conditioning, electrical appliance, heating equipment, etc.)
None
"""'"
4. Indicate the amount of natural open space that is pan of the project (sq. ft. or acres)
None
S. If the project will result in any employment opportunities describe the nature and type of these
jobs. 'Temporary constructi,on jobs for public improvements
6. Will highly flammable or potentially explosive materials or substances be used or stored within
the project site? No
7. How many estimated automobile aips, per day, will be generated by the project?
Auto trios will be elimina+pn nn pn~+;nn n~ Mn~~ ~~~~O. ~n
be vacated.
8. Describe (if any) off-site improvements necessary to implement the project, and their points of ""'"
access or cOMection to the project site. hnprovements include but not limited to the following:
new streets; street widening; extension of gas, electric, and sewer lines; cut and fill slopes; and
pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
See attached.
D. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL S~G
1.
Geolol!V
Has a geology stUdy been conducted on the property?
(If yes, please attach)
Has a soils report on the project site been made?
(If yes, please attach)
No
No
2.
Hvdrolol!V
Are any of the following features present on or adjacent to the site? t,l"
(If yes, explain in detail.)
a. Is there any surface evidence of a shallow ground water table? t1"
""'"
~J~/~9
WPC-~O:U.AJ13 (Rof, 1020.93) (Ild. 102U3) ,
P.,.4
.
.
.
Are there any watercourses or drainage improvements on or adjacent to the site7
No
c. Does runoff from the project site drain directly in to or toward a domestic water supply.
lake. reservoir or bay7 No
d. Could drainage from the site cause erosion or silwion to adjacent areas7
No
b.
e. Describe a1.I drainage facilities to be provided and their location. None vet
3. Noise
a. Are there any noise sources in the project .vicinity which may impact the project site7
No
b. Will noise from the project impact any sensitive receptors (hospitals. schools. single-
family residences)7 Possibly
4.
Biolol!v
a. Doe~ the site involve any Coastal Sage Scrub vegetation7 No
b. Is the project site in a natUral or partially natUral state7 No
c. H yes. has a biological survey been conducted on the property7
Yes No X (please attach a copy.)
d. Describe a1.I trees and vegetation on the site. Indicate location. height. diameter. and
species of trees, and which (if any) will be removed by the projecL
Site is currently an existing road. It has been
covered ~i~h aRnh~'~ Tnr y~~r~
S. Past Use of the Land
a. Are there any known historical or archeological resources located on or near the project
site7 No
b. Are there any known paleontological resources'? No
c. Have there been any hazudous materials disposed of or stored on or neu: the project site7
No
d.
'What was the land previously used for? Present:.lv URAd All It """h1; ~ rn"d.
~ /5~/70
.... 5
6.
Current Land Use
a. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on the project site.
Asphalt
-"""\
b. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on adjacent propeny.
North Golf course
80um Sinale farnilv dwel1inas
Eut Neighborhood shopping
West Single family dwellings
7. Social
a. Are there any residents on site? No If so, how many?
b. Are there any current employment opportunities on site? No
If so, how many and what type?
8. Pleue provide any other information which may assist in the evaluation of the proposed project.
Vacation of this portion of Moss Street will
eliminate the dangerous and awkward traffic
intersection at Moss Street and Naples Street.
Traffic cir~ula~;nn wil' h,:. ;mpTnn~n
~
'""""
~ J~-/7/
P.,06
WPC:Fi'1I01,IIN'!-""'NING'SI'ClREDID21.A3! ca.r. 1020.93) ca.r. 1\l22.93)
. E. CERTIFlCA nON
I, as owner/owner in escrow"'
Print name
or
I. consuklnt or agent"'
Gregory R. Cox
Print name
.
HEREBY AFFIRM, that to the best of my belief, the statements and infonnanon herein contained are in all
respects lJUe and correct and that all known information concerning the project and its setting has been
included in this application for an Initial Study of possible environmental impact and any enclosures for
anachments thereto.
Owner/Owner in Escrow Signarure
or
~~,!~
August 2, 1993
Date
.
"'If acting for a corporation, include capacity and company name.
~ /YJ}Ci-
WK:~~.....n (IoI.1_")(IoI.lmn)
PIp 7
Response to Question No.8
Initial Study
Vacation of a portion of Moss Street
~
In consideration of the San Diego County Club (SDCC) deeding over any
reversionary interest that the SDCC may have in the portion of Moss Street to be
vacated, Country Club Villa Estates bas agreed to install all missing curbs,
gutters, streetlights and necessary asphalt on the SDCC property between Third
Avenue and where the realigned portion of Moss Street will intersect with Naples
Street. These improvements will be installed within three years of the date of
transfer of the property from SDCC to County Club Villa Estates. A Request for
Waiver has been submitted simultaneously with the Request for Right of Way
Vacation to relieve the SDCC from any future requirement to install sidewalks on
the above referenced portion of Moss Street, as long as the SDCC continues to
operate as a golf course. The Request for Waiver is an integral part of the Request
for Right of Way Vacation. When plans are submitted for future development of
the enlarged parcel which would be created by the approval of the requested
.........
vacation, it is anticipated that full street improvements would be required as a
condition of approval.
.........
~ )-0-/73
nm c.. ./ OF 0nJLA. VJSTA DlSc..osURE S". .'EMEJ.rr
.are required 10 file a SLllement of Distlosure of ccnain OWIlenhip or linlnc:ill inlerests, payments, or campaign
'butiollS, on III mallen whith will require discretionary attion on Ihe pin of the City Counc:il, Planning Commission, and
III other offic:ial bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. Listlhe names of all penollS having a financ:ialinlerest in the property whith Is Ihe subjCl:\ of Ihe appJiation or Ihe
contratt, e.g., owner, appJiant, contrattor, subcontratlor, materialsuppJier.
COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES
Stephen V. Ferreira
Gregory R. Cox
Nita V. Ferreira
Phi"ip P ~~rr~;r~
2. If any person. identified punuantlo (1) above Is a coiporalion or pannenhip, Uslthe IIImes of aU individuals owning
more than 10% of Ihe shares in the corporation or owning any pannership inleresl in the pannenhlp.
COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES
Stephen V. Ferreira
Gregory R. Cox
Nita V. Ferreira
Phillip P. Ferreira
3.
If any penon. identified punuant 10 (1) above Is non-profit organization or a trust, list the Dames of any penon
serving as dirCl:\or of the non-profit organization or as trustee or benefic:iary or truslor of the trusL
.
N/A
4.
Have you had more than S250 wonb of business lransatted witb any member of the City starr. Boards, Commissions,
Commillccs, and Counc:il witbin tbe past rwelve months' Yes_ NoL Ir yes, please iIIdicate person(s):
s.
Please identify cath and every penon, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contratlors wIlo
you have assigned 10 represent you before tbe Cil)' in this maner.
GREGORY R. COX
JAMES ALGERT
6.
Have )'Ou and/Or )'Our ofllc:ers or .,ents, In the .we,rle. contrfbuted more diaD $1.000 to . ColIDc:llDlember In the
Cllmel or preceding electiOD period' Yes_ No_ If,., Slale wbicb Counc:llDlember(s):
· · · (NOTE: AnacII 8dditioul .... ·
-:
JULY 1, 1993
GREGORY R. COX, CONSULTANT
/ P"'/ 7 f ~ - Prinl or type IIIme of conuattorlappllanl
. tm!!!lilMJlnMc: .A1r).Nit~Jltm,-,.-rIUp,joirot- J ...-.__~~.:.5..I:.,~'y';~":~:.:;~,.,-"'"",
IIW ... ..,.... aIUIIl); ciIy... COUII1I); ..,. ............/0). ~ ......,.,.............. ....,....,., .. -n.....- ...,.. ......'
iHE CITY OF CHUI..A VISTA DlSa..oSURE STAn::ME!'\"T
You arc r~uired 10 file a Slatem of D~closure of "nain O\lollership or 'ncial intercsts, payments, or campai!:n
cOntributions, on all maners which will require d~c:rctional)' aClion on Ihe pan of Ihe City Council, Plannin!: Commission, and
all other official bodies. The followin!: information must be disclosed:
1.
List Ihe names of all persons havin!: a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.!:., owner, applicanl, contractor, subcontraclor, maleria! supplicr.
"""'"
~;
Nita V. Ferreira
Stephen V. Ferreira
Gregory R. Cox
COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES
Phillip P. Ferreira
2. If any person' idenlified pursuant 10 (1) above is a corporation or pannership, lislthe namcs of all individuals owning
more than 10% of the sharcs in the corporation or ownin!: any pannership inlercsl in the pannership.
COUNTRY CLUB VILLA ESTATES
'Stephen V. Ferreira
N;t~ V F'prrpir;<\
Greoorv R. Cox
Phillip P F'prrp;r~
3. If an)' person' identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit or!:aniution or a trust, lisl the names of any person
servin!: as director of the non-profit organizalion or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of Ihe trusL
N I~
~
4. Have you had more Ihan S250 wOrlh of business lransaeled with any mem~er of the Cil)' staff, Boards, Commissions,
Comminees, and Council within Ihe pasl twelve monlhs? Yes_ No~ If yes, please indicale person(s):
S. Please identify each and every person, including an)' agents, employees, collSultatilS, or independenl conlractors who
you have ~signed to represent you before Ihe Cil)' in this :..aner. '
GREGORY R. COX
JAYJZS ALGERT
6. Have you and/or your officers or agenlS, in the aggregale, contn'buted more than $1.000 to a CoUDci1member in the
ClItTenl or preceding election period? Ycs_ No-K If yes. state which Councilmember(s):
. . · (N01:E: AttacII ad4itiolW pap as Decessary) . . .
Date:
JULY 1, 1993
~
of CIOntraClortapplicanl
tllTA V. FERREIRA
. F=M'U~w4~ '~'Nh~f!:j](~-uM-.fr:~:~ ~:~~::::::::~IJ;r.'~
IT... 11114 "">' oIIwr _; ciI)' _ <OWlO)', ciI)' ~; tIim... or oIIwr poIJziclll &Jb4nVior., or "">' - F""P or .....v.;"",;II/'I linin: '" . ..u:.'
~
1HE 'Y OF 0i\Jl.A VlS"TA DISa.oSURE ~ ITEM:ENT
You are required 10 file a Stalement or Disclosure or cenain ov.'Ile"hip or linancial inlerests, payments, or campai&n
.ributions, on all malic" which will require discretionary aClion on Ihe pan of the Oty Council, Planning Commission, and
_ther official bodi~. The follolloing informalion mllSl be disclosed:
]. List Ihe names or all pe"ons having a financial inlerest in Ihe property which is tbe subject or the application or Ihc
conlract, e.g., Ollo'ller, applicant, conlraCIOr, SubCXlnlraCIOr, material supplicr.
SAN DIEGO COUNTRY CLUB
2. If an)' person. identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or pannership,lislthe Dames of aU individuall ov.lIing
more Ihan ]0% or Ihe shares in Ibe CXlrporation or owning any pannership inleresl in tbe pannership.
N/A
3. If any person' identified pu"uant to (I) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the Dames of any person
serving as director of the non-profit or&anization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trusL
.
N/A
4. Have you had more than S250 wonh of bllSinw transacted with an)' member of tbe 01)' starr, Boards, Commissions,
Commillccs, and Council within tbe pastlWClve months? Yes_ No~ If yes, please indicate person(s):
,
S. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent coniractors wbo
you bave assigned to represent you before the 01)' in this mailer.
GREGORY R. COX
JAMES ALGERT
6. Have you and/or your olficers or agents, iD the agrepte, CODtributed more than $1,000 to a CouDcllmember iD the
eurrent or preceding electioD period? Yes_ No~ If yes. state Mticll Couildlmember(s):
· · · (NOTE:
Anadl additional paJCS . ~ -')')...
~ L (,."....L
Sipature of~ntractortaPplicant
LARRY E. CUNNINGHAM, PRESIDENT
Date:
.
JULY 1.
199~
. ~ J ~/ 7 ~ Print or :_Dlme o~ contractortaPPlicant~,._.
. fmR!lutlefinM..: 'Nt)'Ito4iIw.u.J,JInrI,_""""',JoW- -......o.JdMb.~.... - '-"""~.-""'~~"" .
INs 11M ~'oWt -"'>~ ciI)'.M .......,., ..,.~; IIioN4 Of ...1JOIiIic1ll1WMli>VicltI, Of~'''' ",." Of ....--... .....,.. · IItIlt
STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
'""""'
I, Stephen P. Oggel, declare as follows:
1. I am an attorney at law and a principal in the firm of
Friedman, Jay & Cramer. I represent San Diego Country Club
("the Club").
2. The Club has been working with Greg Cox of Cox &
,
Associates in an effort to transfer the Club's reversionary
rights to land beneath Moss Street to clients of Mr. Cox. In
exchange for that transfer, the Club is to receive
consideration in the form of the assumption of the Club's
responsibilities to make certain street improvements along
Moss Street.
3. It has become necessary to complete forms and take
-"'"
other administrative and administerial actions with the City
of Chula Vista to accomplish the purposes described in
paragraph 2 above. In order to accomplish those purposes, I
hereby delegat~ to Greg Cox the authority to deal for and on
behalf of the Club in all such transact~~ns
Dated: June 25, 1993
I
St hen P. Oggel
~.
~/~/7?
LEGEND:
Gol.r.i"co- %Z
f,~;,,;,,'.'J.:1 - 51REET VACATION
PAPC.E L p.J l2: 1 - O. Z8 k.
fill! 11- 5112.EET VAcAi,'ON
PARCEL t-.j2.- Z -0.44Ac.
~"[ ~ ~ .~ /
.. oteUO ~
~o. GI.u6 F:t
SITE 0
,""oSs ,"[ ~
wI>f>l.ES ~"l SCALE: ,".100'
\ -
... ~
~
VICINITY MAP MAP 1J2.- 50S
(N"TS) 15
~, "
e
MAP N!,
1'52.
N4-oc.,''s!')UE
40.00'
.
P~EF"AP.ED 6'(:
AL.GERT ENGI",eE~ING. INC.
A%.e 1!>ROAPWAY
Cl-IUl.A. VISiA, CA. qZOlo
((,01"1) AZO-'Oo.O
/
)5'- /7 g'SAMES 1-1. A\.GEfl:T. RCE' I"lO'?'
CIT"< OF OolULA "ISlA
,
,....",
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
FOR
THE VACATION OF MOSS STREET
BETWEEN ALPINE AVENUE AND NAPLES STREET
PARCEL 1 AND 2
PARCEL 1:
A PORTION OF LOT 15 IN QUARTER SECTION 120 OF CHULA VISTA, IN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO.SOS, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, MARCH 13, 1888, DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOW, :
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF ROBINHOOD SUBDIVISION NO.
2, ACCORDING TO Y~P NO. 3488, ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BEING ;~SO A POINT ON THE
~ENTER LINE OF MOSS STREET, SAID POINT BEING ON THE ARC OF A 2,740
FOOT RADIUS CIRCLE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 4047'51" EAST,
A DISTANCE OF 2,740 FEET FROM SAID CORNER; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ,....",
ALONG SAID ARC, A DISTANCE OF 32.59 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ~~NG THE ARC OF SAID CIRCLE, A
DISTANCE OF 383.63 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF NAPLES STREET, FORMERLY KNOWN AS SIXTH STREET, AS
SHO~~ ON SAID ~~ NO. 505, SAID POINT HAVING A RADIAL LINE WHICH
BEARS NORTH 30 54' 21" WEST; THENCE SOUTH 71"23' WEST ALONG SAID
NORTH LINE OF N~~LES STREET, A DISTANCE OF 143.80 FEET TO A POINT
~ ON THE ARC OF A 2,780 FOOT RADIUS CIRCLE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS
NORTH 1002'17" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2,780 FEET FROM SAID POINT;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CIRCLE, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF ..; 0"; 8 ' 3 9", A DISTANCE OF 2 3 3 . ..; 2 FEET; THENCE NORTH
18031' WEST, 43.2" FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
"""
PAGE 1 OF 2
~ /~-/7/
.
.
.
PARCEL 2:
A PORTION OF LOT 15 IN QUARTER SECTION 120 OF CHULA VISTA, IN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 505, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, Y.ARCH 13, 1888.
TOGETHER WITH A PORTION OF THE WESTERLY HALF OF FIFTH AVENUE, AS
VACATED, ADJOINING SAID LOT 15 ON THE EAST, DESCRIBED AS A WHOLE AS
FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF ROBINHOOD SUBDIVISION NO.
2, ACCORDING TO MAP NO. 3488, ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BEING ALSO A POINT ON THE
CENTER LINE OF MOSS STREET, SAID POINT BEING ON THE ARC OF A 2,740
FOOT RADIUS CIRCLE, TnE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 4047'51" EAST,
A DISTANCE OF 2,740 FEET FROM SAID CORNER; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY
ALONG SAID ALONG SAID ARC, A DISTANCE OF 32.59 FEET TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CIRCLE,
A DISTANCE OF 383.63 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF NAPLES STREET, FORMERLY KNOWN AS SIXTH STREET, AS
SHO~~ ON SAID MAP NO. 505, SAID POINT HAVING A RADIAL LINE WHICH
BEARS NORTH 3054'21" WEST; THENCE NORTH 71"23' EAST I'.LONG SAID
NORTH LINE OF NAPLES STREET, 179.5 FEET TO A POINT IN THE ARC OF A
2,700 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, CONCENTRIC WITH
SAID 2,740 FOOT RADIUS CURVE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID 2,700
FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO A RADIAL LINE OF SAID 2,7'0 FOOT RADIUS CURVE
BEARING NORTHEASTERLY FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE
SOUT~'ESTERLY ALONG SAID RADIAL LINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
,
EXCEPTING ANY PORTION LYING EASTERLY OF THE CENTER LINE OF SAID
VACATED FIFTH J>.VENUE ADJOINING LOT 15 ON THE EAST.
PAGE 2 OF 2
~/~-/crtJ
r'\) r'O
80' "t>
?.
Cl\
o. ALPINE AVE.
1;.
C/)
-1
::0
01
01
-1
lZl FIRST AVE.
o.
..
BO'
<:
l:>
'1)
r-
rT)
C/)
Cl\
. o.
/ -/
- 00'
D D D
~J~5~/~/
::c
I'T'l
c:
I'T'l
::c
~
o
Z
-4
o
C'"
CI
c:>
c:>
::c
I'T'l
c:
I'T'l
::c
~
o
Z
-4
o
>-
CI
-
2
25
z
C")
"'t:I
>-
::c
c:>
I'T'l
r-
I'T'l
~
C'"
=
z:
C)
"'t:I
>-
::c
C">
I'T'l
r-
.
.
.
APPENDIX III
CITY DATA SHEET
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CASE NO. IS 91-01
I. Current ZoninR on site: R-I SinRle-Familv Residential
North Public & Ouasi Public
South R-I SinRle-Familv Residential
East CN-Retail Commercial
West R-I SinRle-Familv Residential
Does the project confonn to the current zoning? Yes
11. General Plan land use designation on site: Sin2le-Familv Residential
North Public & Ouasi Public
South SinRle-Familv Residential
East Retail Commercial
West SinRle-Familv Residential
Is the project compatible with the General Plan Land Use Diagram? Yes. The City Traffic EnRineer has
found that the reauested vacation. alonR with the recommended conditions of cDroval. would meet the
General Plan Circulation Element street standards. and would enhance traffic safm bv eliminatinR the acute
anRle at which Moss Street now intersects with NaDles Street. The Circulation Element dia2l'am shows Moss
Street intersectinR with NaDles Street near First Avenue andlor AlDine Avenue and thus the DroDosed
confiRuration would be consistent with the General Plan.
Is the project area designated for conservation or open space or adjacent to an area so designated? tl!h
Is the project located adjacent to any scenic routes? No
(If yes, describe the design techniques being used to protect or enhance the scenic quality of the route). _
III.
Schools
If the proposed project is residential, please complete the following: Not Applicable
School
~
Enrollment
Units
Prooosed
Cienerating
F"""'"
Students
Oenerared f!!!!!!
fme
Elementary
lunior High
Senior High
30
.29
.10
IV. Remarks: The General Plan Land Use Element would not be atrected bv the _ vacation. The General Plan
nresentlv desimates the nrooertv as Low-Medium Density Residential 13-6 dulacl. and the nronertv is mood R-]
lSin21e Familv Residential. 7.000 sa. ft. minimum lot size), The additional develooable ~De .-at"'" bv the
vacation could only be develooed in ~ftNII with the nresent General Plan deshmation and mnin2.
'7'5' ~"' _J ~ I..J) ~Q~.J )
Director 0 Plannin Represcn ive .,
.hd.O)'7. /9'i,y
Date '
~ Jy/lf:L
ys - or-
tlSe No. :rs- 9Y-o/
G. ~NGJNEERJNG DEPARTMENT
~
1. J)ra1ftlot!
a.
Is the project site within a flood plain? IV"
If so, state which fEM floodwl1 frequency }oundary N/A
b.
What ts t~e location and
drain~e facilities? ~/~
!;N{jtA - of' I)" R("J ~ AY'
description of existing on-site
t)~AI.,Ae....... r/o~, "0 .,.,,<-
.
c. Are they adequate to serve the project? ~Ft
If not, explain briefly.
d. What is the location and description of existing off-site
drainage facn ilies? .-vON c..
.
e. Are they adequate to serve the project? .N / A
If not, explain briefly.
2. Jrlns~ortat1Dn
.........
a. What roads provide primary access to the project? ~oss
S77fu.~
b. What ts the estimated number of one-way auto trips to be
venerated by the project (per day)? N / A
c. What ts the ADT and esUllated level of service before and after
project completion?
Before After
~A.D.T. ~. (;)!;O N/A
L.O.S. 1'1 If
If the A.-D. T. or L.O.S. ts unknown or 80t applicabl., explain
briefly. . N /14
d.
Are the prillary ecc.ss roads .dequat. to .ery. the ;roj.ct? If
not, explain briefly. A(//\
-;
-
IIPC 1459P
~ )5-/Y3
-14-
.
Case No. :rs- 9y.(;J/
.. Are there any inters.cttons at or IIl1r the ,otnt that wnl
result tn an unacceptable Level of Servtc. (LOS)?
If so, identify: Location AlIA
Cumulative L.O.S.
Is then any dedication required? AlIA
If 10, ,lease Ipecify.
f.
,.
Is there any Itreet widening required! N IA
If 10, pl.ase Ipecify.. .
II.
Are there any other Itreet il1prov....nts required? ~A
If so, pl.as. Ipecify thl ,Ineral "ature of t. "eelssary
il1lprovements.
3. Soil 5 loll" . .
a. Are there any anticipated adverse geotechnical condittons on the .
project site?
. b.' If yes, Ipecify these conditions.
c. Is a soils report necess)ry?
4. J..w1.l.ml
a. What ts the average natural Ilope of the lit.? ::r. /.
."
b. What is the lIlaXilllum natural slope of the lit.? '3 /.
5. Noise NIA
Are there any traffic-rllat..d IIoisl l.v.ls i.acttng tll. Ittl tllat
ar. significant .nough to Justify tllat a IIois. anal)'sts be requirld
of the applicant?
I. Mash Cenerlt1Dn ",/A
.
flow IIlIch lolid and ltquid (Itwag.) wast. .nl be "",rat.d .)' the
,roposed project"r day?
3a1id
~
.
.
What 11 the location .and Itze of existtng ....r U...s on or
downstrlam from thl sit.?
__ Arl they adlquate to lervl tile ,ropos.d ,roj.ct?
~ JS-Jr-r
UD~ A.~DD -15-
tlSe No.:rs- 9Y'ol
""""
7. 'I!marks
Please identify and discuss any remaining potenUa' adverse il1pacts,
1I1Ugat1on Masures, or other bsues. ;.- /~
.
""""'I.
1
-
~
~/5~/7j?
-16-
VPC tnlP
.
.
.
ROUTING FORM
DJCrE: AU9ust II, 1993
fa; K.n Larson, Building 6 Housing
John Lippitt, Bngin..ring (EIR only)
cli~~ SWanson, Engin..ring (EIR only)
Hal Ro..nberg, Engin.ering (EIR only)
Roger Daoust, En~in.ering (IS/3, EIR/2)
Richard Rudol~, bsi.tant city Attorn.y (EIR only)
Carol Gove, Fir. Department
Harty Schmidt, Parks 6 Recreation
Crime Prevention, Police Department (H.J. Diosdado)
CUrrent Planning
Gordon Howard, Advance Planning
Bob Sennett, City Landscape Architect
Bob Leiter, Planning Dir.ctor
Chula Vista Elementary School District, Kate Shurson
SWeetwater Union H.S. District, Tom Silva (IS 6 EIR)
Haureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR)
Other
,
FROM:
Barbara Reid
Environmental Section
SUBJECT: Application ~or Initial Study (IS- 94-0l{FA- 632 /Da 031 )
Checkprint Dra~t EIR (20 days) (EIR- IFB-_/DO )
Review o~ a Draft EIR (EIR- /FB- _/DP )
Review o~ Environmental Review Record FC- ERR--l
The Project consists o~: Vacation of a 30,800 sq. ft. portion of Moss
Street between Alpine Ave. and First Ave.
Location: Moss Stre~t between Alpine Ave. and First Ave.
Pl.... r.vi." th. dOClUl.nt and ~orward to .. any COIIIIent. you bey.
by 8/25/93 . cJ. 8
COllll8nts: fl(f!Li-.(~ _ ~~~ ~4(.. ~ ~\
~ ~U~ (.q--.~ C-2,
TfCl-~ ~ v..Q.Q.r
~ /y/~ <;~
.
. ,
-.....
ROUTING FORM
DATE:
August 11, 1993
~
FroWl'b
Ken Larson, Building , Bousing
John Lippitt, Bngineer1ng (EIR only)
Clitt swanson, Bngineering (BIR only)
Bal Rosenberg, Bngineering (BIR only)
Roger Daoust, Bngineering (ISI3, BIRI2)
Ricbard Rudolt, ASsistant City Attorney (BIR only)
Carol Gove, Fire Department
Harty Schmidt, Parks , Recreation
Crime Prevention, police Departllent (H.J. Diosdado)
CUrrent Planning
Gordon Boward, Advance Planning
Bob sennett, City Landscape Arcbitect
Bob Leiter, Planning Director
Chula Vista Elementary Scbool District, Kate Shurson
SWeetwater Union B.S. District, !rom Silva (IS' EIR)
Haureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR)
Other
,
FoRO" , 7Q S
~rbara Reid">
Environmental Section
........
,
SUBJECT: Application tor Initial Study (IS- 94-01,tFA-~/DQ 031 J
Cbeckprint Dratt BIR (20 days) (EIR-_IFB-_IDQ J
Review ot a Dratt BIR (EIR-_IFB-_IDP)
Review ot Bnvironmental Review Record FC- BRR--l
!rbe Project consists ot: Vacation of a 30,800 sq. ft. portion of Moss
Street between Alpine Ave. and First Ave.
Location: Moss Street between Alpine Ave. and First Ave.
Please review ~e docu_nt and forward to .. any co...nts you bave
by 8/25/93 .
COJllJllents:
"l'\&- ~ OA. -&- (l4~ A c!l'f'_i:t-ht"..u. ,-u..-'L "'"
O.('<.c.."l. ().A..cll ~ ~ k./a..u- ~ C~?'VO-f4,,"A_;JJ
14a1 " gao5. ~ /5"-/07
. .
LETTER OF TIlANSMl'n ~L
SWEETWATER AUTHORITY
POST OFFICE lOX 2328
CHULA VISTA, CALFClANIA 112012
(1I1111.2IH.13
i..
.:
-.
Date:
cs.......~
? 1~~3
,
_.-
",
To:. M". Ua..J~\"''' Ci?=-tO
C! .7 \..7.!1\~ l!.LL' \... v., -\...
~___.' _~ ":b.p~.
"2.,-,c:. ~u"..~ A.....
C"u\.. V,'~~. ~4 -.,q,r')
I
Ref: :t'$. - q 0..( - 0 I
Gentlemen:
We are forwarding:
~Mail
C By Delivery
C By Pick-Up
C By Hand
No. of Copies
.Originals
Description:
I
"St, JA
IQ.. ~-Lr .Q.-",~
.., !"Z.. "L- ( "l 3.
The above i. sent to you for:C Action ~ Reque.-l
C Review
C Comments
C Checking
Comments:
C Please send location .nd .ize of your existing .nd propand facilitie..
C Plea.re..ubmit copie. of ...vlsed prints for checldng.
C Please .....ubmit oopi.1 afmrl..lfprintl.ndoneoriglnalbcheddng.nd8lgnst....
~. y_. ..'\.". r"''''~'r ~~V~ '-- "'h...~... ~
--":a"'( +r.._ e~~:_.....;,-~ "'JS_...~
C Approval ·
~.tlon
C RevI.ion
C Other
.. ,-/ g/g/
J..? -) Received by:
~ Dete:
.. ...- .
,
" lWEETWATER AUTHORI.
-~
1
50S GARRETT AVENUE
POST OfFICE BOX 2328
CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA "1'2.2328
(a"l .20-'.'3
FAX (6"1 .25-7."
~
July 22, 1993
004Wll IrlGIOtIIO
..........".Ctrl'lllf.~N
aEt POOQ r1:FTOM. va CM....d""
_ J. SlUI.l
.... M. M.TEJIIS
-...-
_..~
-,-
--
,....,.---
_J._
.-r""".- IITMTNE NOE
Mr. John Hardesty
City of Chula Vista
Engineering Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, CA 91910
Subject: PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF MOSS STREET
AT NAPLES STREET
SWA Gen. File: Vacations (Street, Alley, Right-of-w~y)
Dear Mr. Hardesty:
This letter is in response to your notice of a proposed vacation of
a portion of Moss Street at Naples Street. Sweetwater Authority ~
presently has a 30-inch steel water main located on the north side
of Moss Street in this area. This is a major transmission facility
for conveying water in the City of Chula vista.
The Authority requests that the above-described water facilities be
exempted from this vacation. We request that a 20-foot wide
permanent easement centered on the main be granted to us for the
purpose of installing, operating, maintaining, replacing and
repairing said facilities and service pipes and the right of
ingress and egress for such purposes. Also, no buildings and/or
strUctures will be' .erected, walls constructed, fences built,
change. of grade, nor trees planted upon the area of the easement.
Enclosed is a copy of 1/4 SEC. 120 map which show these facilities.
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Russell Collins at
420-1413, ext. 239.
Very truly yours,
SWEETWA~ A~O;:Y
~. smif?t
~~~~gLChief Engineer
k:\I...l.'\wp51~..ltr
~
enclosure:
photocopy of 1/4 SEC. 120 map
~
J~--/~~
pc: Russ Collins, Sweetwater Authority
A Public ~.
._" _. . tr.... ~I!"_
-
.. ..
~:_- ..-.....
~'Ii' :~. ~. il ( :) I ~ t --\ /
II. ___ .
] . I I I I I.l a-" CA I. I. \",.c
,,:., ..........~... ._ .............""OT '":),.,. .:.~~ :\. ~ ;:
I! ~ ,. p ~! h r:' lV~ l:l "ii ..f ~
Iii _, _ ~.~~ ;('..,0
.;;- ~ r~= @ =!::- ~ ~I'l" _ A ~
j. ~. I". .. r: WO~:t 'J'.
I =~ ii .. . i ; VJJ. ;T\.~ ~ ',,~ ~
I .. ~ I-! =~ ~,,'t
L1 ~ i i ~\J~" ~~! ~~ 'n~fJ cJt On f~ !Y.~ . ~ :: .
..,1,:. I.... ... ':~-~~~:.J.,,~ ':,,:~~~ . -, = ~. l N Ie 0
n..~ 1\ i l<it 'c! '~~t~li' b fiE ~I --l .J~ ~.,..
, ~: irr1 ~ j P w rkV1g raY~;;'~ ~"FO( ~J . .13;~~""V. "1 ~ .;;,;^;-
Il '7 II I rllXc ,...!b..~) . ~)
n I::=,. - . -... ~ ~ .
_ . I"T1: = MFI ~ a I "'~' -! · I:: ............. ...
t'" il~ i ,-lD ::: I': /;. ~ E _ __. ~~ I '
1(1) ,..... 1= j" ,- --=:::
~iO " -r J,.
r~~ i t ~ C ! I it i B. ... - 1- I ~
lm- ,\ I:' 8 s ! ~ i 1- 0 ~ ^
._'1:1 wo .".. I I I 1 I J. ~
";1 ~ nf & I - ~... 07! '
'II' ~ I I d II ~=~ J
.. .. f-- ..... ~. , :z
;;1= '-'" .. - 01', ~ t
1 "r _ e t 1.. i_ ~,". 0
II ~il U II II 1'- - l\i GO r.i
!J · -1,..-------~---~---------9--~ ------"',-----
I .r~ 1.1 I I' ~ . v
II .nl" r ."7~ ~. ,~m I I I I "l. :.. ~ I ,
~i I I I I I It I ! I I ~ ~-~~::: -=:::-~O' ~----------
If ~ .~ I c.n 0
~ . 'C C
j= - i II _ ; U iJ If i I! :~. . D ~
... =.~~~..d..~ .....!._ I; t !, ! ~
, .
n\! l I I I ~ # I P ! I
~ _ : _ _ i I _t tL~ p: &.
.
..
.....,.:
"-"- ~ :F)Y/c;C ~ :.;
.__.... '._.. ._ _ .__ n -:.....,-.-
..-" .. ^,y ..
....
.
. _ ::.. (":~ _ 9 "!; l.J E J) 1 €I : 73 2> C H LI L ~ V I ~; T A S C HOD 1_ 11! S; T ..
P.0..
1l0ARD OF EDUCATION
Jost:~f- D CLMAlNGS PI-D.
l.AHRVCWNNIt~GtolJ.M
s..A'lC'N G~, ES
PAT~C' A JUilO
G~EG R SI.~:lOVAl
SUPERINTEHDrNT
!..191'S.GiL,PrlP
CHULA VISTA ELE!\IEr'IoT'fARY SCHOOL DISTHICT
84 EAST "J' STHF.ET . CHtrLA VISTA, CALIFOR."'I.'\ ~i910 . flO} 4:!-5.96011
----- ,on -- f:Acn'cHILD IS A.~INi5iVIDijAt~OF GREAT woiill-o-- 0'_
'J
October 20 1993
Ms Barbara Reid
Envirunmen!a! Re'/Iew Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE. Initial Study, Vacation of Portion of Muss Street
Dear Ms Reid
Tnank you for providing the opporturdty tor n,(' Oist'ict te COI ,1rn~;n! on tilE:
propo~ed vacallOn of a portion of Moss Street
J
While there is no construction associated with t";s actiC'n should
residential units be proposed in the fut.Jre for the approXln-'ste;\1 30800
square foot r5rcel, the addilic,ral childrerl not anticipated l,ased on It',e
prop.:Jrl/c current UE& would e.(ar.ert:>~t(- 8Irp;:I>1, ~"'I intIS sr.hool
ovel crowding In the area.
It is requested U';at appfoval of thi!:> a~'\J'!cat'~\:1 be- l:t,r"j:!,::;r>ed to requite
tutUIS de...eiopment to fully r:1ltigate impacrs c,n schoel fac:Pties
If yc:u '1ave any questions, pleaSE:! call me
Sincerely,
~1:. =>~\.\.~,
Kate Shurson
Director, Planmng & Facihlles
KSdp
cc Tom Silva
')
7a ftlotr.;
~/.5"'--i/1
.
Sweetwater Union High School District
ADMINISTRATION CENTER
1130 Fifth .....nu.
Chula Vlala, California 81811.Z186
(618) 881.5500
Division of Planning and Facllltl..
r-r'.'. .-.
~ _... ~....-
/J:f:' .
..~.
",....-......
,~
I.......
August 12. 1993
P~tU:':, .....
Ms. Barbara Reid
Environmental Coordinator
City ofChula Vista
Enviro.ln.ental Sc.:tiull/I'lanlling Ikpt.
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Dear Ms. Reid:
Re: Moss SI. Street Vacation: IS.94.OI
.
The Sweetwater Union High School Disaict does not object 10 the ptupOSed vacation of that potion of
Moss Street between Alpine Avenue and First Street. Pursuant 10 our Director of Transponation,
eastbound and westbound buses will use Naples.
If you require any additional infonnation. please do nOl hesitate to call me 81691.3353.
Thomas Silva
Assistant Director of Planning
.
~ /5-/9d-.
Giroux & Aasoci,tes
Environmental Com .(&IlU
~\OSS
""""
,
MEMO
O ,-' r
J. (.
r- ...., d' 1\ ,_
TO:
Barbara Reid, City of Chula Vista
FROM:
RE:
Hans Giroux; Giroux , Associates
DATE:
Naples/Alpine Noise Monitoring
October 22, 1993
In anticipation of possible changing traffic volumes at the Naples/
Alpine intersection in conjunction with proposed intersection
realignment, a baseline noise survey of existing conditions was
conducted on october 19-21, 1993. Measurements were made at 129
Naples at a location under the picture window facing Naples. Along
Alpine, noise was measured at a landscaping bush in front of 1094
Alpine near the lot line with 1098 Alpine. Larson-Davis Model 700
integrating sound level meters were used for these measurements
with the meters calibrated before and after the monitoring. The
meter records the sound level eight times per second, converts the
readings to an energy equivalent level (Leq), and stores the data
in an internal memory at preselected intervals. Hourly data were
used in this study.
Attachment A summarizes the results of around fifty hours of
measurements. Data from different days was almost identical.
Afternoon rush hour noise levels on three days were almost
identical at each location (within 1 dB at Naples and 1.5 dB at
Alpine). Throughout the day, from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., the noise
level was never lower than 64.0 dB or higher than 66.5 dB along
Naples on each day of measurements. As a rule of thumb, people do
not perceive a noticeable difference in noise exposure when levels
differ by less than 3 dB. There is therefore no noticeable
difference in traffic noise along Naples for around 13 hours of the
day.
A noise level of 65 dB is generally the threshold level where
speech interference becomes noticeable in that one has to raise
one's voice to overcome the traffic noise. Noise levels along
Naples at the closest point of residential occupancy are therefore
right at this threshold for most of the day.
~ J~---Jl;J
...~~ &'1-. ....... ~. 0....". ",n ........:.-- r.1i1'MDi.a 02714 . ---I7J4J ISJ-M1/9 . Fa (1/4) ISJ-I6J2
~
.
.
.
l
-2-
In order to account for changing noise sensitivity throughout the
day, noise/land use compatibility criteria use a descriptor called
the community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). CNEL takes the hourly
noise levels, adds a 5 dB penalty for noise from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m.,
and a 10 dB penalty from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., and then averages the
24 hour period. CNELs were calculated for each of the days and
each of the sites monitored with the following result:
Date
129 NanIes
1094 Alnine
10/19-20/93
10/20-21/93
65.9 dB(A)
66.4 dB(A)
57.8 dB(A)
57.8 dB(A)
The City standard at any exterior recreational use (patio, pool,
etc.) is 65 dB CNEL. Along Alpine, the standard is met with a wide
margin of safety. Project-related changes in traffic volumes will
not cause the city standard to be exceeded. At the homes nearest
to the Naples/Alpine intersection, side yards or parts of the
backyard of several homes closest to the intersection are near the
standard. Because project implementation may incrementally
increase existing levels already at the recommended maximum, noise
protection for the yards of the homes nearest the intersection
should be considered. A 6-foot, side yard block wall would insure
that the project does not reduce the ability to comfortably use
exterior space at these homes.
Exterior noise increases may also impede the maintenance of an
acceptable interior level (normally 45 dB CNEL). structural
attenuation with closed windows is around 25 dB such that exterior
levels would need to exceed 70 dB CNEL before meeting interior
standards becomes impossible. As long as the closest homes have
the option to close their windows to shut out street noise, meeting
the interior standard is not a problem. An ability to close
windows requires supplemental ventilation. We cUd not evaluate
floor plans and ventilation systems to determine whether any
structural modifications are necessary to insure that interior
levels are within the standard.
In summary, our findings were as follows:
1.
Noise levels along Naples at the nearest point of residential
exterior use are at the city's standard.
~ 13-/97
-3-
'""'"
2. Any incremental increase due to the project can be offset by
a side yard wall at homes closest to the intersection.
3. Noise levels along Alpine are sufficiently low as to not be
impacted by project-related changes in traffic volumes.
4. Adequacy of interior noise protection should be evaluated.
""'\
'""'"
~J5/)1~
.
ATTACRMEMT A
mISE Dl10RIIG IISUL!S
(Iourly levels ill dill LIlll
129 laples
1094 lipine
10/19
10/20
10/21 .
10/19
10/20
10/21
00-01 SO.O Sf.5 46.0 48.5
01-02 49;0 49.5 45.5 46.5
02-03 43.5 48.0 41.5 44.5
03-04 44.5 47.5 45.5 44.5
04-05 47.0 47.0 45.0 45.5
05-06 56.5 56.0 SO.5 SO.5
. 06-07 61.0 62.5 54.0 Sf.O
07-08 65.0 65.0 56.5 59.0
08-09 65.5 65.5 56.0 56.0
09-10 64.0 64.0 56.5 53.5
10-11 64.0 64.5 53.0 55.5
11-12 65.5 65.0 55.0 56.5
12-13 65.0 65.0 53.5 53.5
13-14 65.5 66.0 61.5 56.0
14-15 65.5 65.5 56.5 Sf.5
15-16 66.0 66.0 55.5 55.0
16-17 66.5 66.0 58.0 55.0
17~ 18 66.5 66.5 66.5 55.0 57.0 56.0
18-19 65.5 65.5 66.5 55.5 55.5 57.0
19-20 64.0 64.5 53.5 54.5
20-21 63.0 64.0 52.5 53.5
21-22 62.5 63.0 52.5 53.0
22-23 59.5 58.0 SO.O 51.0
. 23-24 54.5 57.5 49.5 49.0
~ /~-/1~
.
I
.,
Case No. /s-ql.o/
APPENDIX IV ~
Comments
Received During the Public Review Period
""'"
_ No Comments Were Received During the Public Review Period
""'\
~ /y/9?
.
WfC:r.\HOME\I'I.ANNINGISTOItEIN02J.93 (lid. I02U3) (Ild'. 1020.93)
e
.
.
t -
August 27, 1993
Mr. and Mrs. Alan Willingham
122 Moss street
Chula Vista, CA 91911
John Goss-city Manager
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Goss:
We are writing this letter in reference to the planned project of
vacating a portion of Moss street between Alpine and First Avenues.
We understand that the site in question may be used for future
aevelopment of a few new home sites. We are delighted to learn
about this drastic improvement to the unsightly lot in our
neighborhood which becomes a dumping site at times for unwanted
household items. Most of all, this plan will eliminate the
dangerous intersection that causes a lot of traffic accidents on a
monthly basis. This intersection is going to cost someone their
life in the near future if something is not done about it. (If it
hasn't already)
We urge you to support this plan in behalf of the entire
neighborhood that uses this intersection on a daily basis. Thank
you for your understanding and time in regards to this matter. If
there is anything we can do to help this plan become a reality,
please contact us at 279-2042.
Sincerely, ~ .
~ U~~~
Alan willingham _
~'#~
Dottie Willingham
ec: Barbara Reid - Associate Planner
Jim Nater - Mayor
~ /~/1Y
A"G <-
U I. ~ 7933
.
0()1) ',-J
(,. II 'I I
lJ~ r.)~ J
1 j ~ .,.
i.e."........
CITY MANAGER'
,tJULA VISTA, ('-.
II.UG 25 1993
~
~ - p
J ~_:... -~~ ~-""""\
u_ _ .
--~-
(. L ' , ,
- ""\. \:,3
,
., ~ ~
Case NOI 1s-94-01
Project Locationl Moss Street between Alploe Ave. and first Ave.
Project Applicantl San Diego Countzy Club" Countzy Club Vllla Estates
Environmental Review Coordinator
POBox 1087 .
Chula Vista, CA 91912
Gentlemen I
Please recheck the traffic pattern of Moss Street and Naples Street.
The traffic on Moss Street has locreased 100% 10 the last six years
that we have lived here, due to the fact il-hat Naples is now a thru
street to Medical Drive. Many people use Naples Street lostead of
Telegraph Canyon and L Street.
Our small street of Alploe Ave 10 the 1000 block cannot handle all
the traffic from Moss Street. It is too narrow to start with and many
people do cross the empty 10U instead of using the street.
On a Friday afternoon there are as many as e~t cars at the stop sign
on Moss Street and first Ave. at one time and many do use Alploe to
get to Naples, which also has vezy heavy traffic at all times.
Since Chula Vista has grown so much 10 the last few years so has the
traffic.
"'"'
Slocerely. _
fll'/"!' --? ..g tz.t~..l(4./
&~MC.~a ~
Albert C. Cabella "
Corinne A. Cabella
1098 Alpine Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91911-'JOl
~~.(~ 11f~
"'"
~ J~-/C;C;
.
August 24,1993
,
j
..~... -
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
Att: Douglas D Reid
Dear Sir:
We wish to comment on the initial study of the request for vacation
I.i;'; <
.v...... I", '..
pi L'",
...,..,,1\ I \,i\...;
of a 30,000 sq. ft. portion of Moss St between Alpine and First Ave.
It just don't make sense to divert traffic to Alpine which would
affect First Ave., a residentual neighborhood to accommodate a
Country Club. Our street is narrow with no sidewalks and since
Naples St. was opened up going East, we have been experiencing much
heavier traffic with speeding vehicles especially pick-ups.
~at ~~ll happen to the trees along north side of Moss?
We have lived in our h~~e on First ftvenue for thirty-nine years
and have seen many changes and noticed that the former owner of the
property mentioned above had tried to use or sell that land and was
turned do~~ by the City. Then we heard the City of Chula Vista had
purchased the parcel and again a friend told us a former Mayor
was part owner now. Should we think this is political?
P.S. We are having difficulty with
trying to get on Naples now.
Thank you,
Aaron E. Cook
Margaret E. Cook
1160 First Ave.
Chula Vista, Ca. 91911
long waits at our stop on First
.
~ /5'-.;.tJ()
--
"'"
October II, 1993
Chula Vista Planning Department
Public Services Building
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
L.
......... ~
,
:-
--
-"
Re: Case. PCM-94-09/IS-94-01
Vacation of a 30,000
sq. foot portion of Moss
St. between Alpine and
Ft.st Aves.
To Whom It May Concern:
As residents at 1094 Alpine Avenue, in the area of the proposed
vacation of Moss Street, we hereby file the following protests,
with you, against this vacation:
1. Traffic on Moss and Naples from Broadway to Hilltop
D.rive, and beyond, is quite heavy. Most of the time cars come
through these sections at high rates of speed. With the closing
of Moss Street there will be that much more traffic on Naples
Street. To say nothing of the increased traffic in front of our
residence.
""""
2. Traffic at Moss where it intersects Naples is sometimes
backed up, going East, six to eight cars deep. Traffic will be
backed up trying to get onto Naples from Alpine many cars deep if
this proposed vacation is passed. The air quality caused by this
back up will be very extensive.
3. Alpine Avenue where all this traffic would have to
divert is only 20 feet wide at the present time' At the Safety
Commission Meeting it was conceded that this street will be
widened to accommodate the foreseen traffic.
4. Closing off Moss Street at Alpine would create a
"dogleg" of 90. which will be quite dangerous wii:h the rate of
speed the cars traveling Moss Street are doing at present.
~. The corner of Moss Street where it intersects Naples is
not a dangerous corner (no accidents are attributed to this
corner), as shown at the Safety Commission hearing. This is the
reason given by the San Diego Country and Country Club Estates as
the reason for vacation. The danger will come when this vacation
occurs on Moss Street and traffic is diverted to Alpine Avenue.
"'"'I
~/~.).{J/
..
.
The Safety Commission agreed that there would be a three way stop
erected at this intersection. The traffic on Naples is so heavy
that cars, even now, have problems moving onto Naples from either
the 1000 block or the 1100 block of Alpine. If this vacation
occurs the traffic on Naples could be doubled and the traffic
coming off of the 1100 block of Alpine Avenue will have the stop
heading North, turning onto Naples - then going West they will
have to stop once again, within 90 feet' THIS is a dangerous
situation to say nothing of the a,lmost impossibility of moving
into the West bound traffic of Naples.
6. Speaking of dangerous - what about the dangerous
condition of elementary school children walking to school along
Naples Street on non-e~istant sidewalks with 12,000 cars, trucks,
buses, and ambulances a day speeding past, if this vacation
passes' They walk along there now with 6,000 cars, trucks,
buses, and ambulances (which is dangerous enough).
.
7. We recommend that a very THOROUGH study of the traffic
pattern in this area be made and also the cost to the city of
widening Alpine and installing the necessary stop signs (it
should be a stop light) at Alpine and Naples before any approval
is give to the closing of Moss Street between Alpine and First
Avenue. A recent automobile count was conducted at the 1100
block of Alpine. This count wasn't started until AFTER the
morning rush hour traffic had finished. How does this give an
accurate cou~t? Please - have someone (a person or persons) come
out to this area and observe, for a few peak hours, to see the
traffic pattern as it REAL LV is, at it's BEST!
8. Furthermore, as citizens, we are concerned with the
"waiver" which has been requested by the San Diego Country Club
and the Country Club Villa Estates that the curbing and sidewalks
along Moss Street from Third Avenue not be installed because of
hazards from the Golf Course. If a study were made it would show
that the "hazards" (golf balls) rarely fall along the fence -
they usually land in the street, in the lawns, in the empty lot,
or on the cars on the South side of Moss Street. I can show you
a,recent broken window in my house caused by an errant Golf ball'
9. As ta~payers we wonder what compensation the San Diego
Country Club and the Country Club Villa Estates plans to pay for
this 30,000 square foot piece of prime real estate (overlooking a
country club)? At today's prices this should be a nice "chunk of
change" to add to the City's coffers.
.
10. The Safety Commission Meeting of September 9, 1993
~5'~~t);;-
.
'""'"\
regarding this vacation of Moss Street was a joke. The
Commission did not listen to any of the many residents who came
to the meeting and voiced their concerns - There was no
discussion. They had already made up their minds. There were a
couple people on the Commission (Mr. Pitts and Ms. Braden) who
seemed to listen to our speeches and tried to get a dialog going
but Mr. Thomas, who was the Chair (and who seemed very bored with
the whole thing), was too busy having an aside discussion with
Mr. Padilla to pay any attention. He called for a vote of the
Commission without the least dis~ssion of any of our concerns.
Is this the way our city of Chula Vista runs all of it'.
hearings?
Thank you for this opportunity to voice OUR protests. Does it
REALLY do any good?
Sincerely,
Mr~f~~
ltfA 1)? (" 0lA!i ~
-M1:. O. P. C6ughlan
1094 Alpine Ave. """"
Chula Vista, CA 91911-3301
CC: Tim Nader, Mayor
..........
~ l,0oZtY Y
...
.
August 23, 1993
I.J2 (
Douglas D. Reid
Environmental Review Coordinator
P. O. Bo)( 1087
Chula Vista, California 91912
RE: Vacation of a 30,000 sq.
ft. portion of Moss St.
between Alpine and First
Avenues.
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your "Notice of Initial Study" letter of August 18,
1993.
As residents at 1094 Alpine Avenue and having read the complete
application for the Initial Study filed in the Planning
Department we hereby submit the following comments:
1. Our residece is located on the corner of Moss and Alpine
and therefore one of the two most affected households in regards
to this proposal of the vacation of the portion of Moss between
~ Alpine and First.
2. Traffic on Moss, all the
quite heavy. The portion of Moss
Avenue is probably the heaviest.
section at high rates of speed.
way from Broadway to Naples is
from Third Avenue to First
At times cars come through this
3. Traffic at Moss where it intersects Naples is sometimes
backed up, going East, five and si)( cars deep (usually at rush
hour). What will the back up be on Alpine if this section of
Moss is closed? I hate to think. The fumes from these cars will
certainly affect our standard of living on this section of
Alpine.
4. Alpine Avenue (in front of our dwellings) where all this
traffic would have to divert is only 20 feet wide! This is
hardly enough room for one car, let alone cars going in both
direction. Many times a car turning into this section of Alpine
from Naples would have to wait until the car leaving Alpine left!
This portion of Alpine would have to be widened to accommodate
the traffic which would be diverted.
~
5. Closing off Moss Street at Alpine would create a
"dogleg" and whatever the Country Club Villa Estates planned to
put up at this location would be in dire jeopardy. Perhaps a
solution to this would be to deadend Moss at Alpine and close off
this section of Alpine? Then we'd have different prOblems.
6. The corner of Moss Street where it intersects Naples is,
~ J.>-o<?JY
indeed, a dangerous corner.
San Diego Country Club would
trimmed at this intersection
Looking right from this stop
the view is quite clear.
We are very aware of that. If the
continue to keep the high bushes
the danger is reduced considerably.
sign is a bit "neck stretching" but
~
7. If Moss Street is closed between Alpine and this
intersection the corner of Alpine and Naples WILL BE the MOST
dangerous corner in Chula Vista unless the city installed a three
way stop sign or light at this intersection. This would make it
safe and also make Alpine traffic accessible to Naples. The
traffic on Naples is so heavy that cars, even now, have problems
moving onto Naples from this section of Alpine.
We recommend that a very thorough 'tudy of the traffic pattern
in this area be made and also the cost to the city of widening
Alpine and installing the necessary stop signs at Alpine and
Naples before any approval is give to the closing of Moss Street
between Alpine and First Avenue.
Thank you for keeping us informed in this matter.
Sincerely,
.
--.
Mr. D. P. Coug lan
1094 Alpine Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91911-3301
""'"
"'""'I
~~:2CJ~
- 1?
/:.lJ1
. _ . \ l/ I f't/-' . I
. iie~...~i
~ "'-""\ W. () l'..~ '-t"",.. RE:C, n-- \' Iiu .CITY MANI,GER
\oJ..o ~ ~ '.I \ - 4Ul A VISTA. 00
~ ,. - 33 AUG 251993
~ . Ji?LAr~r\ir~" ~
~~=.)Q.. ~ &VlD~..p~ ~ ../J .;.-A- n _" ,i!'t:
_ _' ..4"U _, ~ "x,{.A ~6t .
_ ~ J."'o::. .. c1l.l.~ ~
. F~(l.J'D.W..(2...~~)_Ch~.~
___w \~.. ~~ -
· - .~ " f - ....... -t;. tC.....
. ~ ~ . ~.~.. QcR .,.ky' .. ~J 9... 6 . . .. ~ --
~~ ~~I.'S'.SU)
~~..,,~~~~A.~~~
~'" ~ w~ 1;LJf> ~'c.... t o~~~ .
-... ~:::;&'.:~-tr.<o ~'.dC6 -
~~f~ --.
_~ ~"uill - --- -- - ·
_~ _ ' . rt-_~~J,IJF\Vv~--
- ... . . - .- .~t€~~-~~~~~~'b-'----
~ .-~. ----. "'-~.:f- "'. -
..~~~ l'~~~~~~~~~~~
~.c- n n JF.2~~
~ c::V 45 . cD...v\ .....tf IS> ...1 #- 5~
(~a-" QO . ~~~ . ~)~{>
~~^-~~~~~~
..
. . '
~
.
.
fi
~\
o
.
t
"'~ ~....~ ~
o t ~ ~\ ~ l.rJ " ~ ~ ~ ~ ......~.
f\( f ')) ~ 'f ~ ~ tn ~ \ ~ ~~
\l::. ~ l& ~ "1 Ill':',:" " ~ "" . ~
J:'.~~"t.~Oll\\l~:':{;l.~~
~ (I ;. ~ ~ ~.....
...
...
~
- ,
~: ~ \'
~;k r ~~v\~
.... :> ~ ~ ,,~ ~
~ ~ o.,:a ~ :-~-..;;!
.i! ~ ~ ~ ~~ . ~~~ tl ~
aJ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ +- .... Iv, ;:: :: C-- . il\..'j
'T t ~ ro '" "'l :::: ~ ~ Vi -..
o-<~ ~~O~..... ~''"'
o Z ~ "" _ ~~
- '" .....
~ 11 ~
:t7
0'" 3~
c...:; v ~ ~
J
t:J
~
/5>c:2CJr
\
E. CERTIFICA nON
.
I. as owner/owner in escrow"
Print name
or
I. consukent or agent"
Gregory R. Cox
Print name
.
HEREBY AFFIRM. that to the best of my belief. the statements and information herein contained are in all
respects true and correct and that all known information concerning the project and its setting has been
included in this application for an Initial Study of possible environmental impact and any enclosures for
aaachments thereto.
,
"
Owner/Owner in Escrow Signature
or
~Aa!~~
August 2, 1993
Date
.
"'If acting for a corporation. include capacity and company name.
WI'C-~~I.A.l!l(lol.102Il.9.I)(Iol.ICIl2.9.I)
Jy/7f/5-~tJq
i . if
PII"" !
./
Response to Question No.8
Initial Study
Vacation of a portion of Moss Street
-,
In consider ion of the San Diego County Club (SDCC) dee . g over any
est that the SDCC may have in the portion of oss Street to be
b Villa Estates has agreed to ins
gutters, streetlights and ecessary asphalt on the SD
property between Third
Avenue and where the reali ed portion of Moss S et will intersect with Naples
Street. These improvements Wl be installed .thin three years of the date of
transfer of the property from SDCC y Club Villa Estates. A Request for
Waiver has been submitted simultane ly with the Request for Right of Way
Vacation to relieve the SDCC from
the above referenced portion of oss Street, a long as the SDCC continues to
operate as a golf course. The equest for Waiver is integral part of the Request
-.,
for Right of Way Vacatio . When plans are submitte or future development of
vacation, it is ant" Ipated that full street improvements WOll be required as a
. ch would be created by the app oval of the requested
the enlarged parcel
'.
""""
.
'"
~x ~b; +
o
..
From
the Office of the City Attorney
City of Chula Vista
Memorandum
. I" "11
,.......t '"" ~!~
... .." 22
t......
Date:
November 10, 1994 /.J. ~
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney J~~
Honorable Mayor and ~ouncil
Moss and Naples Vacation
Solitication of Legal Opinion on Adverse Possession
From:
To:
Re:
Purpose and Assianment:
.
At the City Council meeting of November 11, 1994, when
setting the hearing on the vacation of Moss street at Naples, the
Council has asked our Office to research the question of whether
the public may have acquired rights by adverse possession
(easement by prescription) to the "small triangular" piece of
property south of the City's road easement at Moss and Naples.
The small triangular piece is owned by the Ferreira interests.
The persons claiming to have acquired the fee or easement by
adverse possession are "the public" users of the triangle--not
the City.
Brief Reauirements of Adverse Possession Law:
The law of adverse possession is an old common law rule the
reason for which is somewhat obscure. Some authors suggest that
it arose because it conformed to the manner in which title was
obtained--based on usage and without the formality of documents.
Other authors suggested that the rule was designed to complement
the right of private persons to own property by implementing a
social policy against allowing land to lay fallow and encouraging
the full utilization of land. Under either explanation, the rule
basically requires a landowner to tend to his property or else
risk losing it by an adverse user.
Despite the frequently repeated requirement that the adverse
possessor have the "exclusive" use of the property, the public in
general has been held to be able to acquire easements by
"prescription," also sometimes called "adverse possession."
.
The qualifing trespassing use has to be (1) "open and
notorious" in order to give notice, actual or constructive, to
the true owner; (2) "adverse and hostile" to the will of the true
owner to prevent one from getting title from their landlord or
other permitting host; (3) "continuous" and "uninterrupted" for 5
years (the statutory period to evict a trespasser); and (4) the
~ /~--...<)tJ
" ,!
V
I '~.l
iD/
..........
new user has to have paid the taxes for the statutory period if
the estate was taxable.
The parking of a truck in the claimed easement one day a
year to interfere with the "continuity" requirement is a piece of
evidence that could just as easily prove that the trespassers use
was adverse as it could non-continuous.
In order to acquire the fee by adverse possession, the
trespassing users have to pay the taxes if assessed. Because
easements are not typically aasessed by an assessor, there are no
taxes to pay so that an easement by presecription could be
acquired by the public without the payment of taxes.
Once the rights spring to life, they can be confirmed to
exist with a court action to "quiet title". This doesn't vest
the rights, it only gives title insurance companies comfort with
the risk. But once acquired, they are not lost except through
sale, gift, reacquisition by adverse possession, condemnation, or
other similar divestment act.
Thus, although Mr. Ferreira recorded a Notice of Consent
under Civil Code Section 813 in 1981 and again 9 years later in
1990, such notice only operates to prevent future claims hostile
occupation by giving constructive notice of permission to cross. ~
The language of Section 813 states that it is only applicable to
"subsequent use", not use prior to the recording of the notice.
The cover letter from (presumably) Mr. Ferreira's attorney states
the same thing.
Moss Street itself--the trapezoidal parcel staff recommended
for vacation--is a publicly owned right of way, and no one may
take publicly owned property by adverse possession. Therefore,
the only questionable parcel subject to possible prescriptive
easement parcel is the "small triangular" parcel owned by the
Ferreira interests.
Did the Public Acauire a PrescriDtive Easement Over Ferreira's
Small Trianale?..
My advice in this matter is: we should abstain from
rendering a legal opinion on whether the public acquired a
prescriptive easement over Ferreira's small triangle for the two
fold reasoning that the City doesn't want the parcel, and we
would be giving the public gratuitous legal advice without fully
researching the history of public use, and have the risk of being
wrong.
1. The City, at least as manifested by staff recommenda-
tion, doesn't want the small triangle parcel--in fact, they want ~
to give the larger roadway back to the adjacent owners. At least
staff is not recommending it and the Council has not sponsored
any desire to acquire the small triangle for a Moss alignment
correction. The issue before the Council is abandoning the road,
~ ;S-'-2//
..
.
.
not realigning the intersection. If we chose not to abandon the
road way, we would not necessarily support realignment of the
street. Unless we're prepared to take the portion of the small
triangle used for left hand turns over the years for a road, we
should not be put in the position of rendering a legal opinion
that the Ferreira's have surrendered an easement to the public
for left hand turns.
2. Unless we wanted to actually acquire the portion of the
"small triangle" previously used as a road for alignment
purposes, we would be, by rendering a legal opinion, using the
authority of our government to'affect private property rights of
individuals unnecessarily. '
3. The persons affected have a judicial remedy to keep
their rights alive. They can go to court to quiet title. My
opinion as to the chances of their success could be incorrectly
interpreted by the parties and Court.
4. The correctness of whether a prescriptive easement has
been acquired by the public will depend on significant and time
consuming factual research regarding usage for long periods of
time. It will take a lot of resources and time to do that
discovery and render those opinions in a matter where we have no
expressed interest in using the parcel. This is a matter for
litigation between the affected parties, better funded by the
participants whose rights are being advanced or diminished by the
outcome.
The dispute that exists is a semi-private dispute between
the "public users" of the small triangle and the Ferreira
interests. It does not involve the City unless we intended to
acquire and develop it for a road.
Nevertheless, if you wish me to proceed to render a legal
opinion on this matter I would need to take sworn evidence from
public observers and Mr. Ferrero and his family members and
workers going back possibly 20 to 30 years.
Recommendation:
It is my recommendation that you withdraw any request for a
legal opinion as to whether the public has acquired any rights by
prescription.
I will, of course, proceed as instructed.
~ J5'd./rJ--
IV) /
'-"
LAW OFnCES
.JOM Wtl. ON .ROWN
LAW NC T DOl.lGMERTY
.JtAO . EOGUIS
....FlAy C FITZFlAHIICK
J...~ts HItNR'!' "0.11
GAR" t. 'RIEO..."N
GtR....:.p L GOlltMA,."
GAtGO'R'l' /,.. +-tAROH.E
WILLIA N JENKINS
DONA/,.D . KIDDER
IrIlARk It USE
CAVID S. I,. It
."'uCt' .J." CCO,..AI.D
AIllTHUA O. INAOO
ALAN R. FIt.
MICHAEL ._ '"0 NOPt
RAND K. SI-fOTW LL
C"VID fit SNYOt
Ill. GENt STEU~tC
J"MES R. STERNa
LISA UN"''''UNO.TUA
JENKINS 8 PERRY
Dear Frank:
.....NCHO ."'..,. ,~ O""CI:
1:1. ~OAT'U.O ~"$CC 01:I.Ie,,",5
.05T OFf CE .Oll< ~2"
....."'C'"'O .,;",,,,. "c C"I.'''O''''',,,, .2~67
I". '1'50.,1..
"""'"
A ""O,It..IO"'AI. CO"'"OIllAT'ON
lliCO CENTRAL. FEDERAL TOWt~
225 BROAOWA""
5.'\~ DlEGO, CALIFOk~l.-\ ~)~10J
[?I"; 231-2500
May 21, 1981
'.
Mr. Frank E.
250 Bonita Gl
Chula Vista, C
erreira
Drive
ifornia
92010
Re: Recordation f Consent to
As you requested I have prepared a "No ice of Consent to Use
Land" concerning your iangular property a Moss and Naples Streets """""
in Chula Vista. I have repared the enclo ed form containing the
legal description of the roperty along w th the Assessor's Parcel
Number for recordina purp es.
Also enclosed is a copy ode section 813 which
explains the legal effect of iling t is "Notice of Consent." In
-- a nutshell, the recording of t 's co sent form prevents any claim
that the public received a pres ip ve easement right to travel
over your property. ~fuile we ca change past history as to the
number of members of the public w have traversed your land, the
recording of this Notice will mak ear from this point forward
that any entry on the property w 11 . by consent of the awner and.
as you know, when there is cons nt by e owner, no prescriptive
rights in the public can be cr ted. I is doubtful that members
of the public will assert suc rights whi h may have ripened in the
past at the time when you des're to develo the property. Upon
reviewing Civil Code section 13, I find it 's not necessary for
you to post a sign on the pr perty because as matter of law, the
recorded notice provides "c nclusive evidence" at any use of the
property was with the owne 's consent thereby can elling out any
prescriptive rights claims If you have any furth questions,
please call.
MBP: jk
4058.0~/enclosures
~
Yet .lz (Ut In h~iKht ..!thin J5
"ounuar)" line. and such rll'ht.
prOLected by .<I"'II&ble proceed_
~k~d' !~.;u:n1an Utl4) :$I Cal.Hptr
nar) In.'l../rI('I!on may /It 10 protect
t ~I e..emf-or, or anIni I ob.
er l! or for abutenlent of nul.
nlllllllH..d b)' .l,:,'h Ob!ltruC'tJon.
\\<11111 (/:l5t, ;:91 P.211 (j!l IU
,
Ilrl:..r. &Cllon ....11.111.' dtr.nd&lll
ron'l~riJ'7tM . "nce aetou road
,Herl 1_)' ~l:flfrlaJ "uhllC', inL'II:(llllli;'
({I" Inc.,.. thlt: 3~ )'.ar!l. II Vo'IiIIi
use u! ,Jlscr('lil1n to IT&r:t a pre-
'Jun~.t:oll. Id.
,
-;~. f': ',",If'1) .J.~. ;$!; I t I ust..-. , '\J:J
Ifllal/" aCllon III d~5Irl-:t CO~r: in
I'll ('Jllrl mi~t.1 onsldl"r ll!"'....n.
llll~lf'. C'('1:!d il'1 ,/11; disC'"etl'.:m
ilon ut ('allturnJa ('Ourt on 1.5.:>lJt'9
III IlltKalJOn there pen,JJIl~ Hf'1
Jf "'ornrnunu\, Sl"n'lces J II~t v
I::n"'rf'rl."e~ lIe, l" .\ 1!r7%) :.S2
"rtl.)t,l~: ~h'nle,f:'5 S l't. l.ol3'J, HiJ
' L..t..j 2d 40.
,.n_."nOI b. m... '."hout
1po UPon .;.en",..,t 1(>f1t>M1t-.H
:lOn&a IlUt) 3t Cal.Rptr" US,
tiO" i" ,.neral
.nlenl or easement b)' aban.
~",""(f'd by concurrence or
l~ II) nonu.,pr, (2) inll'r.tlon
an,l f21 dfl:r.:alo:f :,,) va.ner of
'flVra ~e, a.!a Irr [.II:;;! .
,.1'~~~t'orj.l, 11:~I) :~ CaIR..:r
... ..~~
Ilt t)' grar.1 ;a) t,e lost h,;:
'"Klll"lhed I,"""r".:," L\ nDI;1J~t-r
'\"~r I'I! 10.1'1 1.I1' IbanJollflll:llf
~ PO~.t<..~!'lon d
fll ~.r prucrlPllon In u.. or
r ar.o!hcr', land. one. .e.
: neC'euarlly 1011 by method
U~lent ~."Iale l'ub'e<1Uenll,.-
o e","4"1 I h. I pr"I,erty b Prl.
HarrIson v 8curJa UUI)
J C,A.2d 110.
" &1',0'I(!one4 ro.d a"ro~,. d...
!""d,"llll' to hICh"'''I' an)' riJ:h:
~an1." !lAd 10 IIbutl""', ea!'.e"
"Jth :ht'lr 1<'1t 1I0t': and
.. ("oul1 not be t'Otenllnh ot
~s 'and ""llh ad/Oinln.. land.
he)' could depr ,.t adJolninlll'
f'."t'ment . ('rOlt. their p,roJ)-
IPlion. PCPOI'lch Y. 0 Su,1
Plr 211" .2U C.4.:d 153.
",t.nt with ...."'.,.t
"IiUile or excu.lve UI. ot
.ot "umclent to r"\llt In
)r torreltur. ." the .....
'IJunc(lo~ I. 1.1\. ,roper rem.
':u~. OCluld (11$) I!), P,Jd
~U"cf.n of ,,"wl."t ..t.t.
,,_t p.nitnt ..tat. i. in_
i c . in domln.nt ".
u &.lenient &n4 .ub.
b 1c,munant proPfrl,..
'.hl ltdil b. JlllJlllled it
I Un may not b.: ..v. red
Idclitlon, by Imenclment
and prohJbhed. CrJrnlTlin. 'Ii Oould tUS7)
lu& ....2d 7~' 1U t' A.2J 3~'.
t. Ab'ndon,,".nt or nonUatr
Th., IJ ""Ill;/.: alllJ Il,UHI\"1 It",'l' uf I.' :11'''.
rar)' h..d/.:,. ,:,J I.'->l l''''lt.l!~ :" .. 'Ill'" 11:,;.1.
dtJrllllent or "I:l'l\.l~" ut "'."'Il"'''1 Alld ".: IltJI
!'n'Ulll" ...,),./; II III~"-,, t.. II,. ,>I' : I,.. !~,
j,;1I ,. "\1 III" .... f",. I II<' ri~ t. 10 101' ,,'I! 1~
"";I'~'I.I jt ,t "Herr"It'd ""Ill. r"II..',I',,1I1.
I."" I,)' 1l""'I'CfI')t uf rot'r t'Il~"lIli'l.;. \'1".:
l.ud,." ""'I. ":.n!t,oI ...oj Olll.lr;llIIil".tJ WlIIlOU:
.1,\ Illtt:'I"'Oll o~ itlt t....ClIll'nr " I.o,'rn,a:,t"'!
lh,:urf' IhH'"hnpr I' J(Jn.. (I~I;., 3;:, Ca..
H~'!r 2~'" ;(2\ (' A2d 127
\\ ',~r,: all "3.~"llll'llt i.. ('r...h.tl hy ",raIl!
")1' .l:'ui~hm,",:' 1.\ "'I"""~(;:'I'H.,)I ,.. ..,;.. I :
,~. ,,1'.' '" rf. r. r l' ~ R . A'" "I+- , ~! '.\",'
;~:.;':,'r :;'!I~.i,"'nl.~.,.! ::;',~,'::.:t. :~.' :." ll~:
~.'.~ r. . ': 1\ ,I
.1~. I: '" I
.j... "r ;,.,k', i. "'11 vf ".I,~"lr ,....
\'.. ~., J rr J '<, I ... h.. .~!r.f'.. I "j,;.,.r ( Jr:,
'!~'ll 3C (Il H;,:~ ,... 2;:~ {'A;;,j ~~
^, of p:tr",,!'l :Jl;~-.Plj~ ;1': "CI'''''l:' I In
IHII d:r,-!.. ~!,,~,I' '~allll."ro~" r,a~11 (.f ~!'f'L.'('d
r( :l"W,1.}' C""IIII'I,! did II,.I '''IL:".! II. t~I"l.':l:'
Ina f:l"'n!"n\ ".... abal,dClT'lvtl. \\'/;"r(' II. J-':lle
"'a~ 1(111 ill Ih,. ~.!I 'h'\'..rt,. I \'.J:, (.,.
t I.;'" :!~ I'" 'i: .. r :,~ :' I" I , .j
I """" , , ..1 I, j,:r:Ir" I I 1.1
nh'f., .~'I ';.,'r I'al"~, I.,.., .\I.~' ".~ I ,I.
I \' ~ ., 'rl I (, :!" j) ,I' ~ I :l~;'i 3.:! J :'.J 'i!.
11Z ,\ CA. 3:,)
"".Irt'lI rf"~e~r.' "a:I~~: th...: L, t!1~',r ;1'
Il.~", or ta.$t'lI:(llol In !O:'''\II\~' dvn; 'lar,1
fl'llt':llf'n: O.~"'r" had al'1\',d"Hl"d r:~hl ot
"......r~W!" dId not C'on..tllule .. I"klfl/: ot
theIr prOPt'rt). ,,'ahout dut' I'troC'ua. \lvtn
tho'l.ct'h Ih~ ."!I('ml!nt appur1enunt to lach
ter1f:ll11'nt ""aL,S Ii 1'.luat)l" ril:ht. Crimmins
v GOUld t135~J 3i'1fl l' 21.1 aG. 149 C.A.:d
18:1
Artl')T1 or I'."'''r. (,r IIUll1U:I'LLf f".:.... ~.~
InfO ,'xtel1.1lrllt fOaJ\I"') "'1., '1'\ ':ad 1""'1
C"rt'.Lt<d on ...r"'lIle P.OI'erL.\" 10 E.>..:l:i.('
rtr".., ~r. !.rllt.:\J;:' :l a.. f.ul.... AIII.to:. .,.d
.:;(,WII.t' OWl (lr!! Qf ..JJo,'n:T1r r...,...r ....!'".;..h
dJJ not "'''''Ill'!!, 111't-.t tll Yll;. rn.dw&)' lJ1
I"r.~'1 or r"'ell;~rl"llon. 10 ('orl'le~'!, "'I:h
roaJ"Il\' ..... f'C!ro",\,'d. . lluH.r '(r~PI r:,.'l.
r.llI~ 1t('rUlI!l ..jjo:nlnl: l,arl't; re~llllt'd In
''\,'':01 '>nn1< r'! IJ~' !~,I~ll~(' or ":I-..r""':1 :.. l 'f'
roaJ.-.v Id
'Wht'r~ rallr"",\:! .. hictJ ht'ld ,1~t-,1 Df ....,.
quil('lalmflc! rll;1! of ".)' dur.na &,Ie','od in
CIVIL CODE
~ 813
which railroad ..s lu.lnl' ria-hi CoIr "'.y due
10 at-ar".! ,'.Ir.e':l. '",;hllt ul railroft.tJ." I'ran.
t.... wer.. f":ltUlCUI't.~fl u&,Ion Ill.. e:a:~U'all"n
u~ I~,,, p.. .l!U III wfllt'h rltc'I'I18 ""~re 'ClSI by
","11010"',1",.1 U!".hlMI'd Hea'l)' \:0. .,.
, '1\ ,.r ~ I' H.d"...1 t I""';) 2'..,., J'':<I 1.', l'
C ~,J lit,
7 Int.nt 10 ..b..ndon
1'01' ~11l ,'a",,'lrle"l t.u"I.llrHI toy J:rJl':1 II' I.,
l')l',t I,>" 1.11:;"""1: II must I.l' .C'('OIllE.>~Il;t'",t'd .'tll
"~VrtS,1 or ImpUre.! In~t-'II/('>n Clr .blindon.
tnf'nt. Ha.e)' ". 1.01 An.:elp.t> L'ou'lI)' )o~lood
('('1I1r"ll ''I'" Illlf,!I, 34;( r2d 47~ Ii:.! (' \
~(I ~~.',
t. Judgf"ent term,n.';n; ...."'....,
"-',. II I' In I, I',\'j. , , : ':..:.'
',. ":"'11 \ j 10\...,. l.Ih~"'lor""J :I~
I," , .,.,'" 1 J
1',1'" ,. ,'01.'1....'.. 'II \Ill'
d ",.1 t .. ,~ "1/ "" " ~ tt. ~..
.. "iI.'''' ;\.1\ ur j."'''''I''ll' L"""',rlll
'1' " r",,;,1o ~ r.' !;11.) :1 r>lnlna: 'I,ll...
".'."""'r,! 'dll ,,' Ih.' r"'ph,,,,. r,.I".' I".
tL., ,i,"'!;,rdlj"" I/J:d d.Ir.IIl.;',1 ..
,.11 ':,." 1;(, !',t':J:,'r 1':"1 na:l.t I., 11'.
Wt",;., f'e .Jllt,rllplr ('r/'lllllll.,
. I " '; 1 31.~ 1 ~d ";. f;. 1 ;:, t ,\ ,~d J ,.;
"""11
'..<
"r,.1
,,:.L.
'.'.u
9 -:. ""rre :.rIIJ'r 1.'1.,
1,.1: , I I I ,." 'dr. ~ .1;"
"I'"' :"'UI I J,-".d, I (1'1-'1 fI'. l!'"".t 'fo('!:1
!OJ.' !n;..n 1 '.' I, I,q".!" .:t! "vr "\':.1.'1:1"1' 0..
! '. . (q '~'r.. I. t :" 1". : ,.... .j II) 1.''''~'!H;1t rt..
'/"<":I"n" 1'.('''1:'' p:,~~ r''''!li'llI,n... "11
1" ..' I:"r."l!;l>''','~ inr1Lhlr,~c: f'lr"oI"\'I.~"",r.~ H;
I't'./,.!,! ,d ,,\\/,(lr.. cot "I.nl"n, 11'))'.1'1.11;:.
,.'.\ 1:1 r.. Or ,I('nllllant I"""'.,enl ("oulll r,,'1 f'fl.
f,.r,'c. Luil,!inM rt''IlrllIH>7'!1\ 1I...'\lnl"1 "I\"::pr..
"r Ilt.n'l(:nt 1I:r.rmr.1\t \\hollr. eJlltr tll../ I.o'!'q,.
. t't\' j':Il'I'(.'1 1\t'I'1: tr~('I'" I.ack t" ,It'fo,l "f
"'II:,'!.:t'.., ;" !nl"If'fo" "",I.. ""hiI'll ;I".~ (rr.,.
r "',;j' :.. ,..f'l \ lllld..~ >Jllll 11...1 Iv :"\','1.
" '-.01"1 ..:. I:. I~: I.Jall .,( r. .,
~, \ :-'1I1""'rt< n:"i\) :1/ l.at
I~,. '; \, ','1 ..;:
I; '.1 ,.,.: .... d....,J IIf IIU.,: (;, :'UII
.01 J'I :H;'t,.c" "'a It- art,'r ,J';~:lL c.r
1:1;0.1..: 1"" \lr ItI,I' "':.,'1 dt,;lr:vl".n :,'1 J
'I':"f r...',.r 1;1: .,r Ila.II.... III ,I..f"l. h,,:,'!j.
,1'.. :,.. :.,~ ;l~ l.o:o<'l;:"I'r :It lrll...~(...,. ,:11.
'(.," J."rn!ll_." 'n Ir'l"ltl'~".<: d... d, ~u''lUl~.,,! Illl,
~.. f' frvHl , illll;.&Llt" 'pnHuJ,,1'i (.Ir I.u;:.!;r.a:
!'I."tll('llIm.<; w!'lIC'I, "'fOr', r"('ur.lt'd f.r ':..,':
d,.\'O'j"p'.r ;1'~"".:lI!nl t" r"t'ur':lng ,.f J..".I
r Irl:"1 J.,
J'
"
U tll:?, 812..5 fh.."ufecr by Stah.1980. r IO~O. P -.It 1.:1
~UI,.'f'(.t mAlto., ,.r 11:t' r"p\h~..J l'if:',.th.I, :11
1 ,,\Ii 11'("'lt..,] ;I~ r"Il'I\\'''I
RtpulleCl !iecllo" Slreets and MIgh...,hl
Ccge Itct'o"
"'12
,:~. ~,
1;3.';3
13." -37.1J
S'''!''IJ()n 81:' r" :t,lth",1 1,.1 :'B.III Int..' 13111.
I' ~913, ~ 1 r(llal..,1 Iv Illp "Ml':tlj..r "'
IlI.andculln"I~' "f III IIIt"""1 or hhth\\":t~ lht'
"'llr.ru...'hnh_111 nt """'Ie' "...meont.. ..ft.
1113, c.".._t t. ule .f 'Indi recordation ot notlee; revoeatlon
Tht, holll"r nr I'C'I-n,',1 tilll' fn IllIll' lllll\' I""'u/'.I ill till' "trh'I' ..f IIII' """""1'lI.'r of ~ln)'
''''IIUlIy Jf! whit-II ;lIIr Ilal" lIr till' 1:11I11 j", "'111:,II".I,:t . . . .I""""'il,rlull tlf "::1;1'
1:I'tll :11111 :1 U"tif'" I'f'adi'll: ..1I1....!lP.fi~t1I.\ ;1": 1',,110,,"": .'''''11' "11:11. lit flu' "u"'h" IIr 1111,\'
;::;;;i;-'j" 111,,1/';., 1111," II",' \\'1';II......~I.r III' tl~I' aho\'!. Ih"wtlh"I' 1:lIHI ..r IIn)' 1..tliull
ii7;:;l:;;'- . . . fulllpl' 111;11I nil.\' II.... "X,II'I'..:"I>' :lIlu,\~,>, a \'.filll'lI fir n'('Urdl"l'
Ilia fl. lll!I'l'PlIu'llr, ,11'I'i1 "" .h'.li";llilllll i.. I.,. 11l'l'lIli"jll'l, lllll! "111111'1'1 III 1"011f!'"I. "r
---- , .
U\\"II"I' ~"I"illll ....,:1. C'j\'i1 ("",h'"
Till' 1"1"'011'11",1 1I"fh'l'. . j" l'IIIWlq,i,., 1'\ ill, 111'1' 'Ii:.1 ..ld'....'/II'1l1 1I......t IIII'
1:1r,,1 0/1/1 ill;: 1/11' fll,1I' "11"11 /1"1,, " I' III t fr....l ,'\ 1I.t' [1.,1.1... "I' :11.\ "",'r rur. .
:1111 :"111"1'" ,,,'I,,,, 111;11 :111\ ~~'_'::",:~"",h_ _~: '\..d ~,\ ._~\!~I~::~~'~.~::~~.2:.~~
A!<I.rl\k~
. . IndICAte "deh'Uoni by amendment
~
219 J
/~~d-) /
J
~ 813
CIVIL CODE
I
" I
fi;
t
"J
,
.
..
,If
AC're('nu~nt, dl'Pd fir dt"l:liclltiolll Is lK'rlllillsh'p and \\"ffh Clln)4('nt In nnJ' J'liJi('jaJ
,)rO<'('l:'dinJ;' jll\'oh'iuj: tit... j~!'lllt' II." to "'hNhe,' nil ur :111,\' pol'Unn ot I'uch hued I,a..
~n dl"(IiCRh.'d to IHI"lie list' or \\'hL'lhe>r tin,\' ll~'r Iln~ n p!"('OIcriptln' ri.t:ht In ~1:Cl.
land (Ir :illY pllrtion tI.t'l't'o(. Tht' IlfJlkl' . lIIur be rnokC'd l.l~' tlil! holdf'r '-'~
J"t.'cord tjl~ rLoc.ll'tJillJ,:' ;l "otiC"!> fIr r~"lwatillll In tll(' ottiC'(! ot the record('r w)ll'rl'jl.
the nOliC'l' . . '" h. rl'('un:I"1. .~fl(>r 1'1'C'Otl/illl: n ooli('(' '1IJrSllnnt to this ~rt:(j:.
Rnll prlnr In Illl,\' t't.'\'OC:triull rlll'I'I'n( th" IIwnl'r ",lInll lIot pre,'ent an)' pUblIc 1:-;"
8j)j;j.";;""P~IH'rt.to 11,\' 1)Il,\'skaJ Hh...trncti,,". Jwrit'\.' or otherwise.
"
~
".
~
In th(' e\'ent ot Ulie b)" atht'f thaw rhe- gellf"ral public, All" '\It.1l noth'f',;; t() ~".
@tfPCth'I', ~hl1l1 ai.l;to he' 5en'C'tJ II,)' ff'gis{I'l"NI Ulail (.111 the user
'l'he Ncol'dinl: ot tl 1I0tJC'(>.- . . IltJr"n:tnt to Utls SPC'tion ~hll:l IIot ue r1(-l.':"..
to atft,<,{ !"i,l:111.;; \"t-Rr"d at '.111' tilllP 'if n'l',,jdJnj;!'
'1'11" pt'I'IU1",,,,,,,U f',1" Illlldj,' 11-" ,,'" I',';d Jlrop, n,\' J1I'O\'id.,d r'lr ill ..ll{'!l it l'l'C'OI'l!I'l:
notic't,' 111;1,\' hI' "Ulldltiolll'd HI"1I1 J'I'II"'dl.lld.' J'l"HH,'[iullS 011 tll~ tnllt' Idul't, ;111.)
manllt'!" of :>11('11 pullllc 11..", :lnd 1," 11'1' jll \juLllioJli ur !'otlch l'l',..trittitlIIS shall lie \,,;,
~ldt'l'{'d pllhlic 11-" lor 1111l'JI"Sl'''' ot 11 filldiJI~ nt illlJlliC'd tl~djcutlt)n.
(Adlh,tl U)' St;U'S,J9G.'I, C, 73~. I), li.J9, I), AlIu,'lllJed by St::tts.J!)i), c, lJ.iJ, p, lS.r.
11)
Section. 3. .., of StaU.H1J. c. itl. p. litS.
pro\"ldt:,~ .
.S('(" 3. Thl~ lln lh.i11 nul I... ..an"'lr.....ol
10 anwllJ or a((,,,'1 Iht' ~r';\"l8Ion," 0:' ...:..,
liOns IHJ..~ ar,J IHI 1 of th.. Bll~tr:o:':i!!
anJ PrO;.....'lon~ ('o"e or :<~"Ijon a:'~ l of lht'
FI,!;h an.j aanl~ t"oJ<o nor st,nll II dlJlllni_h
an)' ~ut.>lJ~' rlChl" of aC~'~'slll III na, llrltt,l~
"'at~r, eon(err~d b)' ~cclton 2 of Arll,'I~
XV of thf' C:lUfornla C'c.n,UltUtlCln nor ~hll:J
It dimJnt!\h an)' publiC" rJ~hts to fj.h from
or Upon Ih~ publk land. of thf' .Ial~ or In
the "'at~rJ thert'of conferred by SeC"tlon
25 of ArtIcle I nr Ihe California COllslitu
lion nor .hall thl, act be C'f'IISU'ut-d to 1Id-
(1'("1, 11In:nl:~h or ('xltn"'Jj.~h Mr,)" !'IJrhl ,r
tlChl!! \'bl'l'-d as of tht- ,.(t@C'IJ\'(' d"l'!' h~.""
uf bv rC.UOIl of ~\pr~!l,.. or 11ll~llt. dt',Il,'"
lion, or 'Jlht'rwi~f'
"Sf'('. In ~bt' t'\'~r:1 all)" r':,,, i!li.:.." 0'
Ihl>> an 1$ h~111 In\'atu t,~. It. (11"1 ju!I.:
mf'nt or "(!("r~t' of an 1l1JPtoJI.,te ourt ~"
Ihls sllltt' or of the t:nited ~!llt..S, thIs pn.
fJt"! a("t, ".fth Ihe '!xct'ptJon of this jI;('('tldn
Ilhall be In"alld and Inoperative for An)"
pUrP'l'~ In "nch ev.nt an)' L1J11e or ('on,
Unued utI' b\' the pub'lt' of prh'atel). o~\"l1ed
real prOP'.r". thai would Olh"'twi'f' hI' "r
tectf"d t.)' Ihi", '(,1 .fl~r il~ ,,(teetht' dllt(-
and prl\.Ir 10 Ih.. ,1.,,, of 'ueh jUthl-I:,1 .Il',
t..tnllnatl'!n. IIlhall be condll~j""'h' pr....ulll....l
10 bf' wit" Iht" perm!a"ion of Ihe ownH of
'uch pro!'''rly and lurh USt ,hall not I'on-
"llIult (','h!fonce nor b~ admlsliblfl Ill' ""i-
denct' In an\' 1('(I('In broulthl II') fo...t""'I~h
a \'t!M..,f ria-hi on behalf of lht" puhllr nr
an,.. jro'.f'rnmenlal lIody or unit 10 ("onUnut
to make .urh u_e pp.rmanenll)" Thl, ,ec-
lion .hall nOI .PPI)' to rea) propf'r1)' tlt'-
lI('rllH'd In .ubdh-t.,on (.J of SeCllon 1(1(19
01 th. Ch'JI Cod. durinr 'ueh time thAI
1M owner ba. aot C'OmplI~d "-l1h the pro
vl.lon. of .ubdJvi'ion (0 of that "'("lIon,
.
+
.;i
.
~
<"
!
f.
~
.
"71 Am'ndme"t, R~t\'rOI'~ as Ihe prt'l.
ent fir,.l antJ l@:"lJnu paralCrOlph... Ihe (;rsl
..,a/:l,t:"laph \\'hiC'h. .s original!,. add~d, rt.ll,!
;I", (oJ'OWa;: "The holc1er o( rll:,'orl1 Iltl~ L
l:ln,j 11111.)' rl'\"'ord In Ihe office of the reC',",r,1
er of :In)" count) In wl'1lch AllY part of 11'1...
land t.. situated, . nollC't (if .:onunt 10 th..
U!!~ of hll land, or any portion Ihereof, fer
Itl~ purpose described In the nOIlC'e,
rf'cor,!f.d nOlice of consti!n . ., ,
...to ~" t~,P
hold..r of rt'rord titl~ ~- reCordjnl: & nOll, t'
"r No'nr"t(C1n In thl' office or th" tti!C'or,it'r
\\'ht'I".'ll the nOII("~ of ('on,cent Is rteorJ",,!
Th.. &1ll...nJlllfont alao 'ull~tjtuled Iho'
\',}rJ 'pul'lll..a~t to thl. ,.,cuon' for 'o~
c(,ns~.~.t" in tht' present fourth (.arartar-t,
and n,1Jed the fifth para,raph.
F'orl""ll: See Wesl', CalIfornia
J.'urm.a, <':1\,11.
Law Iqevte...,. COlnmetttariu
nackKroulld and gent'ral etr'-cl of UC3
IldJIt.,ltl. fliUI!B S Unr J Gh,
DOI'!rin" of Im~Jie,1 dedlC'lItlon IIlld itl 81.'
P'k~ti'!"l to C'll.llfornia baachel, l1i7JJ H
SO,L'al L H. 11.192.
III on , ("'JI)' of SAnlA ("'rut-wh(<r~ do Wf-
1:0 from hue! Jay L. Shaulaon O,7Z) ._
:oi.J;:lrJ H:a.
tmpl fod dedl('allon II I h....a I to oWnt'r~
ot It-IIlrf-llne (li71) 11 SDnt" Clara L. 3:1':'
Jmpht'd dt'dlcatlQn; ef(f-ct on CaUfornilt
C'oll!llhne properl)' a.'ner ,1371}.. Lo)ola
I...Re,' US,
N'ee I'uva 'J"llIh Ia.t: Public accea. 10
htonC'hl">1 )ljcha~1 ll. Uercer (1811) 8 C,\\'
L..R. 1:'.
~
Underline Indlcat" Chang" Dr additions by amendm.nt
~)~rj2J;
92010
. ~; .~: ,.J
. . .
flF 5 " .
AR 3
MG I
::':;
i-;
"
,
..,(
Space Above for Recorder's Use
Assessors Parcel No. 619-100-23
NOTICE OF CONSENT TO USE L~~D
(Civil Code 813)
'-
.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 813 of the Civil Code,
as follows:
(a) The undersigned is the holder of record title to the land
hereinafter described;
(b) The land herein referred to is described as follows:
That portion of Lot 15 in Quarter Section 120 of
CHULA VISTA, in the City of Chula Vista, County
of San Diego, State of California, according to the
Map thereof No. 50S, f.iled in the office of the
Recorder of San Diego County, March 13, 1888, lying
Northeasterly of the most Easterly line of
ROBINHOOD NO. 2 according to the Map thereof No, 3488,
filed in the Office of the Recorder of San Diego
County, August 9, 1956. and lying Southerly of the
following described center line of an 80.00 foot
road:
,
.
Beginning at the intersection of Third Avenue and
..
~ ro.,
. ..... .'
.:: ~;"~ .;~~~.".
'.>
.:,"'" ~
..
':..
'.
..' ")4
........,
PARCEL "B":
.,...
/y;2} ')
~
}" " ,~
- ",' '1'-'
,1-,':: '.
," .;.
~ ,"
;'; ...~:,
,'':1:~~i': j,,'.: .;
, " . ..,.J. ._,(
"; ..
.
, 0"
"
~~;,
1,'.1
.. dlr~
'b~'I:'" . ~~., ~:.. \.
r:.. ....' ...,,,
~';:t.t;1i;-
.~.. "
~. i'"
'.~ .
.
.
<. ....~:...
,...t.
o!l.!
....: ", ," \ ~~".;.{ .,.",1"."':";-' .~...r., .~"'. t\<i .!. ,:. ~-.... ,..' H .:@ ~ ~:
~J....';' <f'~ ~.. $I ~:~~.."~l":1J."'" 'p t , ,~..~",. :. ~r ',...~~.. .~
~.~f-''''~'Il''-''''',';.ijfb/' '.:ff.~~" ,.'!.. . ' .
~ . . , "'7 . " . .~ . ',' ",.,:." . .. '.,.. >> ..
" . ,..., 'I' .>>. ~ .., .' 'f t:. ". . .' . I '.
. ,~,.:::.J,I~ . !~. JI,~';7~,,~~ -:;,~ .r-j~'14~~ r~"'~:i~wtNL,tf~.;..,f..'f. t~ ~; ~~~~~~~~.., \ . :r~, ~"'1'r.~;' ....: ~: '1/" !.'::
'. '...'" ,t, '. - . , .. ,', ...". :''';~~i . '~.., . .."iit" .~;.,' ~~
...;'"....:, ....../~:,t;1'.~'.,....:!" -,-j.,.~S':':: c~..... )1'1 :.:.'Y ~~";:-'~~"r',~""~:'-"'f";': ~"t"",,'~;.:',.-t. ,,"",""."" '.. I
'j- ':" "~' .,.,. .... . ~. 1.<1' ... ..... " .,......~Ill-".., ......,:1.. ,." i" >":.-.-
','.., ~ .:.::..::.. ~-:.",:~"'+ \ ~~., ,,~~t t'l ... "",t.. :: ;~'? ~ ..,\~' {, ~. : :',,>;.Io...~-:":. ~r, ~","f~.........;t~ ,,1"'~ >>:~"' I ~.: .~ :~;+ll;;..].it~ ,..... .
. 0.1' . ~& "i ;..,~. ~ ....) ....:.: 1 ...,' I' ....:r..~ ~ r1..1,' ", ;,~'I;.,.:.j , .i..'.... #' ~ ~ . .. !..,t ~". ,....10;;'." t -s. -4 -,... .l.:~r.. .....
, . ;.~ ~4. ''''''~ ~\ . " , . '; ", J 12 8 .~' ~\~ ~ '~.":, ~ ' ~'~';;"-,'"
Recorder of San Diego County. be'ing'also a point O~i.t~:..:" .':iV~~i': fY',," "
the center line intersection of Moss street and" ",. ~/;~.~~~.;' ;f'4k".J'!:~'
Alpine Avenue. said point being on the arc of a'~~"~"~;~"~ !;.-~},~.:c. " ~~"""!:"-
2740.00 foot radius circle, the center of which "'H "
bears North 40 47' 51" Ea~t a distance of 2740.00
feet from said corner; thence Southeasterly along
the arc of said circle a distance of 17.74 feet to
the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNI~G; thence continuing along
the arc of said circle,a distance of 14.85 feet to a
point of intersection ~ith the prolongation of the
Easterly line of Alpine Avenue; thence South 180
31' 00" East along the prolongation of the Easterly
line of Alpine Avenue, said line being parallel and
30.00 f.c.t distont fror.; the Eanerlv line of said
RCBl\~:O...):1 Sl BDl' ~Sl(l\ t\C,. 2, a dist~:1ce of 52.23
feet to ." peint; th.nce :-';orthweslerl" along the
Easterly line of Alpine Avenue, as dedicated by Deed,
recorded in the Office of the Recorder of San Diego
County August 22, 1956, Document No. 117331, Book of
Official Record. 6230, Pa.. 2B . " d!.tan.e of 60,00
fert to t!le TR L PUI"!' L,F b~l.,)l'~.",),
~.
. .
(C) The rig~t of rh. public or a~) p.rson to ~a~e use whatsoe,er of
t'1;' ab.'\e describ~d Innd or ,lny porti...;r thereof (other thRn any use
e:;pre~:ily allo'Ned by a ...nittcn or re...::::-rdl.c.! map, a~r~l'ment, d~ed, or
dedication) is b\' p~rr.1jssi01=11 and SU:,il.ct t,) control, of o\o.'T1er;
S<otio I 813. Ci ,,1 Cod,,; ace'
tV) lht: Cl'i1::'l.:"llt lWTl."'in ~.; o,.J!!t~u 1 ,,'rr.i:;-;i'.'t'
b) tilt:" L:1dt'rsig:1I.:d at an\ ti .,~ in a':L::l d~i1H':= '.dth
I
DAh;~~;.-'-L -< t, 1"1 ~()
nl.;
Id\;..
3:1~ may t.~ l'eV~r.~
,
Frank E. Ferreira
OW!>ER
/5/2/P/
";:~
STATE OF CALIFORSIA) 55.
CO~NrY OF SA!> DIEGO)
Un '?~ 0:2(;, - /99P . bei"re me, the undersigned. a Notary Public in n J
for said County and State. personally appeared FRA~~ E. FERREIRA. known tc
me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and
~.c~~o.:~:~~~ that he executed the same. ~ _,~" ;
'7~ . __ -' - . _ ,,:> " ';::~F' '
r~ /~,,_.-
I ,,:".'
! . . Nutary PF-O;~c/~ :#~';,o~ ~,,:d,CO~;Z.~~.~....,
. "~h.'!"" ~tate (,,,,. ~ I'_~. .... ("'oI,,,:~...~~t~.~tr~.~.
", . ~ ~~,~~~. . ~ . :$......,.. '(':~. ..:',":~.4,::~..:-..~~~,;,;~'::~~f
. ":.." l"r . ;"'~:~.lt..." .'. . .:-t:.\.~.,;::o.~.~~:;,:"~~" .J;..~.:.?
~3-" .-...., .... ,. 1"i~"''''jI.,.;t'~*.:...-
;: ~,~!;.',;,', ";~." .~:. ;'$i'.(~~-t,.Y.~~I..1:" ~'i..; .~.".~' .;~.,.~:~. .~;.
. ! _:JJ t.. " ':J' 'Iol~' j ....,l.. '-f'o ,-' . : ..... ' r :" . , ~ .4,..... . ..' .
:;""~..Il'_,... ,,~,~"'A';l....'~'~~ .~.. . ..'~ I"",,,L'_' ,:,lj,.
Ct"1Q.t.I. $l.l"l
FEnN N1MON
NOT IoP.Y P\J8UC . c.L.JFC)IfCA
POII>;CIPAI. OFFICI ..
.,'.... .... 011OO COUNTY ,: '\..~i.
Mr CGIIlllilslll. -,1IIn:II II. It80
'V(
.....
~' .
.,".'L' "
'.' '.t. ~
~Y~1~:~' ~_ l
"",,'.
-
I""
,,1;:.
,,.,
~"..:
{\.,:
..... ~.,
.~
,
i,
;:,:
:?\
r"
r';
1"::
"
"
. ~.
J'"
,,',
,.~..
"
"
\
<.~
40:;8.06/M,P7A
. ,
1:tCJ'J
i ~ ,i ~. . :'. ,I
FILE 1f't.GE ~ '"717~9.:t3 ..1:
'oaK le~1 ".' ,~
R:COHt)'.::O 'Rt:l\J.JEST OF ~ . 'c,
r=;",<;\g 1;:' Fi::f'rcll~--(
Jut! ~ 3 32 r~ 181 ~!;
Recording Rt:qll~::;t.~d by:
t
.
I
o
o
o
o
I
I
.
i
V
0":: ::.', F,ECOROS
SAN D.< ~~ COUHiY. CA,';
":t:A L,l'fLE
nECCii'dlt:n
Fran1< E. Ft:rr...~j.rL,
~ .~. ,;... .r...'
~;. ~'-""~:
.~~ ('
'r,:: _,:;".f..
.:,t, ,.t
I.~" . ~. ~,i;;@
"r ; )..-,-
) .,;,.', f 'I..}, SLa
. -', I"~-~'~'
.. .' . '~
;, ~'. {." 5" ~:
" , i' t'::;'~
:; "" . '\ ""...J-'
Space Above For Recorder I S ,Use -:.:',
~ j 'f'. .~ ~ b:,
. -:: ~J'.~~~
AsseSSOl'S Parcel No. 6197'100-23: t ~.]',;:
NOTICE OF CONSENT TO USE Ll-1W '
l('lvil Coa~ ~a~J! ~
wtlen Recorded j'lai J 'to:
Frank E. Ferre~ra
250 Bonita Glen Drive
Chula VJ.~t,~. C/" ,.2U10
"
<
,
"
"
NOTr'~2 I. ]:,", .,'1 GJV;::;, , pl,n;;ldJ,t t.o S,=,cbon 813 of 'the Civil
Code I <<.::.; f,,;:.. ,_,\):...;
It.n(.~
(a) The und~'l::.;,";.l q!:(.'d
"""""
is the 1.,0] del of .:.ecord t.i'tle to the
h~1:.;._.:1...O~:L........::-.. ;"
(b j l'~. !~. ~.. u.. 1 ~.....: l!
.
r~fe~~ed ~o i~ d~~cllbed a~ follt)ws:
',~'!'. 1- (" ,_
~'...;. (I;~ _,1.
I . r ., t ll" (,.,~ t'''",- ..... "C.';O'" , <lO
...v_ .L~ .'~ ,:x:'Li.l_L. .. ...t.:~ 1,.... !. ..."'-
-i,I. ":lle ..~'."" t}. cf CJI:~.L.,:. V.lS'tu:
:i J...:(~;" '. r. ;'~ ......1 "!..'.. it. r ;:... i.o .
i.... ~ I.' i .:
'/ ',I '~ l I I
,
','
~ .;
r l J.(~:.1
c "
, ,
, - ~.
, ,',i
1 I \:~~
. ...~ ~T
'. ,
lr:C'
~'.)D
".,
~
, ;1
.'~",,!... ..J. '..,.
t t;!.: j.....:
.:5i:, 1~Jf.:d
~)~::Jl Dj (:'~JO
:;".)uti~(;:rl J
,
:-.).:.. :\..'
..;.
- .
,~'l _ :.:
i..t'
~,
~.' ,~ .
,.i r:: 1. ~I .. ~.i
, I'
,:,.....::,,-..
,
:' ~ ~, ., ...
:..de ~,_ CoB
. '.; . ~
B;.:..q ;! "j ~~: j !..: ~llt.('.J:~e(., I lCI~i of Th~rd I\vCHU~
..:... .... l..; t_,,'"L. ub _.,1';"1,..)>...1; O..i l:!J'.:' ;.."id. Nc.ip of
(:lh:_ _" "4.1 ,~.."t l.!ienCe SOi.Jt;H~i:tst.e.rl}' along the
'"' -..~ ~';""" te. the l'.ighl' h,.VJl J a l',nlius
........1' 4':,: ;;, ~~.., . f~Chl . ...id
\. ~ I 1-' "': .'; ft:~t to
II .
.1 .;. Av..... .:t.:.'j
...!. ~':'"
..ild
"""""
. W.lg
nav
,~.. L.....J.
~; -.~- /+.;.: ~
t, ,
..., -,
.~ C.o\
J5'-d/ /
, "
. ~'
4058.06/MBP7A
'.
radius bearing North 230 20' East, 2740.00
feet from said last mentioned point, for a
distance of 1498.4 feet to the intersection
of the center line of Fifth Avenue and sixth
Street.
EXCEPTING FROM the property described
above, that portion thereof lying within the
boundaries of the following described
exception Parcels u}." and "B":
Parcel "A":
.,
.
Beginnin3 at the Southeasterly corner of
ROBINHOOD NO.2, according to the Map
No. 3488, filed 1n the OrUce of the Recorder
of San Diego COllnty, said pUllll belllg a point
on the cente1' line of Naples street; thence
North 71 0 23 I East along the center line of
said Naples Street, a distance of 45.10 feet;
thence North 180 37' West a distance of 40.00
feet to a point on the Northerly line of said
Naples Street; thence Northwesterly along the
arc of a circle of 15.00 foot rad1us, whose
center bea1's N01'th 180 37' West 15.00 feet
from said point on the Northerly line of
Naples Street, a distance of 23.59 feet;
thence North 180 31' West tangent to said arc
a distance of 55.77 feet to the beginning of
a tangent curve to the left with a radius of
130.00 feet; Ulence along said curve a dis-
tance of bO. 09 feet to an illtersection with
the center line of Moss Street as shown on
Nap No. 3488, said center llne being on the
arc of a 2740.00 foot radius curve whose
center beal's North 40 25' 33" 'East 2740.00
feet from said lntel'section; thence Westerly
along said 2740.00 foot radius curve a dis-
tance of 17.74 feet to an intersection with
the EasteI'ly line of that portion of Alpine
Avenue as shown on Map No. 3488; thence
South 180 31' East along said Easterly line a
distance of 175.80 feet to the point of
beginning.
,
Parcel "B":
.
Commencing at .the NOl.theastel'ly corner
of ROBINHOOD SUBDIVISION NO.2, according to
the Map thereof No. 3488 on file in the
~ J~e:2~
-2-
,
Office of the Recorder of San Diego County,
being also a point on the center line inter-
section of Moss Street and Alpine Avenue,
said point being on the arc of a 2740.00 foot
radius circle, the center of which bears
North 40 47' 51" East a distance of 2740.00
feet from said corner; thence Southeasterly
along the arc of said circle a distance of
17.74 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
thence continuing along the arc of said
circle a distance of 14.85 feet to a point of
intersection with' the prolongation of the
Easterly line of Alpine Avenue; thence South
180 31' 00" East along the prolongation of
the Easterly line of Alpine Avenue, said line
being parallel and 30.00 feet di stant from
the Easterly line of said ROBINHOOD SUBDIVI-
SION NO.2, a distance of 52.23 feet to a
point; thence Northwesterly along the
Easterly line of Alpine Avenue, as dedicated
by Deed, recorded in the Office of the
Recorder of San Diego County August 22, 1956,
Document No. 117331, Book of Official Records
6230, Page 283, a distance of 60.09 feet to
the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
(c) The right of the public or any person to make any use
whatsoever of the above described land or any pOl'tion thereof
(other than any use expressly allowed by a written or recorded
map, agreement, deed, or dedication) is by permission, and
subject to control, of owner; Section 813, Civil Code; and,
4058.06/MBP7A
.
..
::/. ;,
"
;
"
..
.1
'..
~
(d) The consent herein granted is ~ermissive only, and may
be revoked by the undersigned at any time ~n accordance with law.
Dated:
\tv\,
'2.,
(~f ,
~ ~ ~ '
, ..........l .. t . _.~
'--.E.La k E. Ferreil'll
OWNER
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
SS.
r
'-
,
, '
. '
. .1.
,
!'o. J!o. .'
On ' .'{ ':i..., ?7 I~}: before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for aaid
County a~d State, personally appeared FRANK E.FERREIRA, known to me to be the
person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that
he executed the same. -1 1".(' ,
_.. I~' . .)J.... l. 1...~....: .,,) . .~
Notary Publit in and for said County and State
r- ---- - -. -.""".....,.~.:..~l
i "..-. OFFICI,\! SE^'-
~ ~ ~~'r~(}~ G[e ;:.! OVl/11\1
[SEALj~. " .~ :,:~ p.,:Oli':.liY PUo'"'' l^: Ii" IlPJ~^ )
,~- / $1," l; , 'I',
,~ '~ t.!)' to~l~l '~~~;:.: 'Ci: I 1 :.:n
} .......;.~;. ........':' -.; - - .~ .-;00<;,..-.:." . '.."",,.', .'~
-3-
~ J--002c2-/
l", hLbif P
Minutes
November 1, 1994
Page 3
"
9. RESOLUTION 17702 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF
TURF TRACTORS AND MOWING EQUIPMENT - Bids were received 011 9/19/94 for the following equipment
for Parks and Recreation: (I) ODe Turf !netor with froDt mouoled mower; (2) ODe Turf mower, four-wheel drive;
aDd (3) Oae Turf mower. two-wheel drive. Staff recoauDeGds COUIlcil approve the resolution awarding the CODtract
for Item I to Pauley Ford. Item 2 to Bob Hicks Turf. aDd Item 3 to California Turf. (Director of Public Works.
Director of Finance aDd Director of Parks and RecreatiOll) N1ed from the Consent c.Iendar.
CouDcilmember RiDdone stated the resolution ad recolll-w.tiOll by staff 011 the aaeoda were DOt the same as
listed in the report. Item 3 should be .California Turf" DOt .W_ Turf" as listed.
MS (RindonelFox) to lUIIend Resolution 17702. Item 3 to lad: wc.Ilfomia Turf'" and approge the resolution
as lUIIended.
Jerry Foncerada. Deputy Director of Parks. respooded that COUDci1member RiDdone was correct. It should be
.CaIifornia Turf" in both the agenda recoauDeGdatiOD ad resolution.
VOTE ON MOTION: appro9ed unanimously.
10. RESOLUTION 17703 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF
CAB AND CHASSIS WITH DUMP BODY - Bids were received OD 10110/94 for a Cab and Chassis with dump
body for Public Works Operations. Staff recommends COUIlcil approve the resolution awarding the CODtracI to Dion
IDlemational Trucks. IDc. (Director of Public Works and Director of Finance)
,
. . END OF CONSENT CALENDAR · ·
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED )ll'.li:OLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
II PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERING THE V ACA TION OF THE PORTION OF MOSS STREET
FROM ITS INTERSECTION WITH NAPLES STREET WESTERLY TO ALPINE A VEIIo'UE. NORTH OF
NAPLES STREET - CouDtry Club Villa Estates, OWDer of the triangular piece of property between Moss ad
Naples Streets westerly of the juncture of those streets. bas requested that the City vacate the portion of Moss Street
between Alpine Avenue and the aforementioaed illtersection. ID accordance with the California Streets and
Higbways Code. on 10/4/94, CouDcillel the uaociated public bearing for 1111/94. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) Time .-Ifk at or after 6:00 n.m.
RESOLUTION 17704 ORDERING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF MOSS STREET FROM
ITS INTERSECTION WITH NAPLES STREET WESTERLY TO ALPINE A VENUE. NORTH OF NAPLES
STREET
I
Mayor Nader stated the City Allorney _ ~g a poAible defect ill the ~cillg thaI could require a
contilluance of the public bearing. He ~ take _II ud opeD the bearinl aDd If the A_y's .-.arcb
_Iuded that the City bad to continue the item the teltimoDy tak. ww1d be iDcorporated illto the record.
JoIm Lippill, Director of Public Works, pve a brief beI:qnNDd of the project ud staff _.........tiODs. Staff
bad reviewed the Jetter IUbmilled by the c-illee 10 Save Moaa Slreet ad bad briefly reviewed it. The
8CCOUlltillg of the square footap _ incomcl ...ardilll the $6.000 for the _er.. .. ,t, wtlicb was actually
11.500 "I. ft. Therefore, the full value _ $18.306 X $5.00wtlicb _ $91.530 ad the COlt of the balfvalue of
the "I. ft. would be $11.500 X 52.SO wtlicb _ $28,750 for. -' of $120.280. 1be valuatioa based OD the
_lysis ill the staff report _ out 10 be the _. Staff felt it _ . policy clecisioa as to the iDstaUatiOD of
improvemenll on Moss between Third ud Alpine or if thole fiInda abould be differently. 1be issue bad been ~f?re
the Safety Commission, Pluutina Commiuion, ud Resource ColIIerYatioa Commission. The Safely COIIlID1SSlon
and Planning Commissioa ftlC('......-r~ed conditiona that bad been iIIcluded ill the staff recommendations.
) 5' ~ c::t- J)--..
.;p;:r
MiDutes
November I, 1994
Pase 4
Mr Goss recommended thaI the $ I 00,000 referred to iD the report be utilized for curbs and JUtters or if that was
DOt cbosen, thaI the money be PUI iDlo the area, i.e. the oeiShborbood revitaliutiOD prosram established iD thaI
lleiSbborbood as there would probably be a need for capital improvemeots as thaI prosram evolved.
Mayor Nader staled be bad beeo informed by the City AltOI'Iley that it was his opiniOD that the notice of the public
beariDS was defective aDd, therefore, the public beariDS would have to be CDlltiDued.
-;
MS (NaderlFox) to continue the hearina to 11121/94 to pro.!de lea" notice, those speakers prmaIt would be
Ii.en the opportunity to speak and ban their comments incorporated into the record when action was taken
on 11121/94 or mum on 11121/94 to speak on the issue.
v
,
Mr BooSaard iDformed Council the notice did not have the Ian,...,e required by CEQA that specified the specific
discretionary action that the Council would have to CDIISider or the aicnificant impacts thaI were mitisaled by the
mitisaled DOsalive declaratiOD. The public was eatitJed to know the eavil'OllJllelltal impacts in order to properly
decide whetber to voice their concerns.
Mr Lippill iDformed Council thaI notificalion could be mailed oul OD Wednesday which would allow the 20 days
required nOlice.
VOTE ON MOTION: apprond unanimously.
Couocilmember Moore stated that part of the scbool route OD Naples had incomplete aidewalks.
Mr. GoSs responded thaI the improvements on the north side of Moss did not iDclude sidewalks, only curbs and
pllers. He lUegested thaI it be up to the Nei,hborhood Revitaliution Commillee to decide bow thal.money would
be spent.
]
Councilmember Moore stated if the project adversely affected A1piDe, Moss, and Naples that the money should be
used on A1piDe, Moss, and Naples and if there was anything left over it could be prioritized by the NeiSbborbood
Revitalization Commillee.
Mayor Nader questioned if the Plaooin, COmmiSSiOD had recoouneoded that the item be deferred until there was
a specific development proposal.
",
Mr. Lippill responded thaI the Plaooio, CommissiOD's recommendation was that the issue ofvacatiOD be CDIISidered
in conjunction with the proposed development of the property. Therefore, a condition had beeo added that Council's
action would not become final until it was determined bow the property would be developed.
Mayor Nader fell the PlaooinS Cnmmission recommendation was that Council should... the whole paouse when
coosideriDS the vacation. He questiODed if it was part of the proposaJ that the VK&led property be livea to the
private properly owoer.
Mr. Lippill responded that half of the IIlreet on the trianJUlar side would revert to the property _ and the other
half of the _ would revert to the solf course. As a CDIIdition, either the improvemeots would have to be put
in on Moss or the owoer/deve1oper would have to pay the City $100,000.
Mayor Nader ~0Ded wbetber $100.000 was the fair market value of the property.
Mr. Lippill nopooded that it was hued on the _lysis of usiDS $5.00 aq. ft. hued on compuables in the area.
There was also a reduced value because there was a 20 ft. water line ..se_t on Moss Aveaue in that area.
Mayor Nader questioned whether the Safety Commission recommendation to widea Alpine Avenue was included
in the staff reconuoendation.
]
~ /S--/c2.?;J
Minules
November I, 1994
Page S
"
Mr Lippill respoDded thai was correcl, the developer would be respoasible for those costs. All the improvemenls
around the developmeDt were DOt part of the $100,000, they WDuld be required in coojunclion with the development
of their property
Council member RiDdoDe questioned if the Counlry Club would ..II the land thai reverted back 10 them 10 a
developer.
Mr. Lippill respoDded thai when the road was vacated the DOrth half of the road reverted 10 the Country Club and
they bad an &lreemenl 10 ..II the property 10 the developer.
Councilmember RiDdone stated be did DOl ~ where the Counlry Club would relUrn the value of the land 10 the
City
M r Lippill staled il was a lotal package. Tbe Cily would vacate the roadway for coasideralion of the improvements
off-site OD Moss or $100,000. UpoD fulfillmenl of either of thoae condilions they would be relieved of havini 10
put in the improvemeDts in the future aloDa thai portiOD of Moss off-site.
CouDcilmember Rindoile queslioDed if the fair markel value for the land of $ 120,000 was oDly for the southern half
of the land or for bolh halves.
M r Lippill respoDded thai il was for the Iotal property, both halves.
Mayor Nader stated there was a reference in the letter rellardina a bicycle lane on Naples and he queslioned whelher
that was being dODe.
,
Mr Lippill staled he would have 10 report back 10 Council.
Mr. Goss staled that as a lleneral policy, III&IlY bicycle lanes were marked with sips ODIy and 001 striping.
Mayor Nader thought the City was aoina 10 lanes. If staff oeecIed Council directiOD CIIl thai issue he requesled that
il be aaeDdized.
. Grea Cox, 3130 BODita Road, Suile 200, Chula Vista, CA, npreaeolina Counlry Club Villa Estates, stated
they supported the staff recom"""'<lJlioos. 1be coodilion rellardinll the prohibilion of access 10
Alpine A venue from the applicants property was ODe thai staff was retollllllelldina Ihal discretioD
be liven 10 staff based on the site plan beinll preaeoled. They felt the coodilion by staff Ihat
Council aclion Dol be final unlil there was an acceptable site plan mel the coocems of the Planning
CommiSSiOD. Tbey were prepared 10 move forward upon action by Council. Tbe)' bad worked
oul an allreemeal with the Counlry Cub thai if they were successful in vacalinll the portiOD of
Moss, the Counlry Club would live tide 10 their porUCIIl of the llreel to his clieDI and in
consideralion for thai they would take CIIl the oblillation for the curbs and p\lerS, aome road....a)'
improvements, and street JilhlS for the Ilretch of Moss loinll from Alpine all the way back 10
Third Aveoue, which was valued at approximately $130,000. 1bey preferred pulling in the
missinl imp_IS rather tbao liviDa the City $100,000.
Mayor Nader qUestiooecl if they inteodecl that when a ipeCific develop_t plan was IUbmittecl that il would be
within the existiDll GeoeraJ Plan clesiptiClll.
Mr. Cox respoadecl thai was correct.
.
Stepbell OaaeJ, III Elm SINet, SaIl Dieao, CA, r...,.-linll the SaIl Dielo Couolry Club, staled he
WDuld speak al the 11122/94 _ing. .
Alberti Cabella, 1098 Alpine Aveoue, Cbula Vista, CA, llaIed he would speak at lbe 11122/94 _mg.
,
.
~JY.2~i
--
M iDutes
November I, 1994
Pale 6
'1
~.
. Jean Taylor, 1070 Jacqualine Way, Cbula Vista, CA, _ted the literature stated it was 8,322 sq. ft. but
in cbecking with the title compally and the County Map DivisioD they stated it was ODIy 6,3534
sq. ft.
Mr Lippitt .tated that was the triangular parcel, but that was Dot being vacated. He would report beck to Council
OD 11/22/94.
Ms. Taylor recommended that as an alternative that COUDcil allow the exteDsiOD of Moss over into the Country Club
and make a tum at First Aveaue. The land could then be traded for doing the curbs and improv_ts over to
'Third Aveaue. Sbe was agaiDst the closing of Moss Street.
. Ramona Estabrook, 1103 DixOD Drive, C1ula Vista, CA, Ilaled she was agaiDst the closing of Moss Street
and expressed CODcem regarding the access of emergeacy vehicles and iDcreased traffic belweeD
Naples and Moss. Sbe bad Dot received Dotice of the poteatial vacatiOD of Moss Street. Sbe
questioDed why the City bad Dot maintained Naples Street.
. Robert Gans, 129 Naples Street, Cbula Vista, CA, stated be would speak at the 11/22/94 meeting.
. Charles W Mitcbell, 161 Naples Street, Cbula Vista, CA, spoke in oppositioD to the closiDS of Moss
Street. He expressed CODcem for the safety of childree walkinS to school due to the Darrow width
of Naples and street deterioratioD. He said there bad Dever beea an accideat at the intersection
of Naples and Moss Streets. He further expressed his CODcem regarding the safety of a .dog-leS.
intersection.
Mayor:Nader stated the staff report indicated there bad beea three accideats witbiD the last four years that were the
result of drivers eastbound OD Moss failinS to yield the right-of-way to traffic eastbound OD Naples.
Clifford Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works/City Ensineer, responded that the informatioD in the staff report
was correct.
~
. Raul Castorena, 1101 Second Aveaue, Cbula Vista, CA, stated be would speak at the 11122/94 meetinS.
. JeaeDe L. Boyd. 115 Naples Street, Cbula Vista, CA, stated she would speak at the 11/22/94 meeting.
. Jobo Krahacher, 147 Naples Street, Cbula Vista, CA, spoke in opposition to the staff recommendatiOD.
He stated the 10/4/94 staff report referred to the low Dumber of accideats at the intersection and
that those accidents mentioned did Dot appear to be attributable to the intersection. The report also
referred to the people that used Alpine going DOrth and tbea cut through to Moss Street and vice-a
versa. Now, the prescriptive right issue bad arisea whicb staled it could be COSIly to the City to
defend it and the property OWDer Ilated be blocked the property at least ooe day per year since
acquiriDS the land thus precludiDg the taking of the easement by prescriptive rights. He submitted
204 signed statements from the residents in the Deigbborbood that said they bad Dever ~ a
barricade 00 the property. Therefore, be felt court actioo was eminent. He questiooed whether
Council could discuss that and let them Iatow if they bad legal rights, what would bappea, what
it would COSI, bow they would go about it, e1c.
Mayor Nader Ilated that Council aeaerally discuased poteatia1 Iitigatioo in cIoeed -roo because if it was done
before the public the attorneys 00 the other side of the i_ would bear the City's -gy and coofideatial advice.
It could be put on for a closed _ion if the City AttOrDey felt it was worth pursuing.
Mr. Jloopard Ilated be would review the issue and if be fell it apprllpl';ate would acbedule a c10sed -.ioo for the
the -mg of 11122/94. He Ilated the documeats would be kept -..re in the Clerk's Office.
Mr. lCrabecber Ilated due to the Ilate......ts made in the report regarding prescriptive rigbts be q_iODed if somoone
did Dol have to say SOIIIeODe was rigbt and someone was wrong. By them proving their case it would move the
proposed intersectiOD up to align Alpine and Alpine.
~
,
1
~/5~d;L~
~
M iDlltes
November I, 1994
Page 7
"
Mr. Boogaard stated the prescriptioo was not part of what was beiDg proposed to be vacated. It bad not been
evaluated before because staffs recolDlMDdation was to vacate and DOt litigate a prescriptive easement over a private
parcel. If staff was prepared to recoDIIDCDd a redesien of that _tion it would be relevant.
Mayor Nader IlIUested the City Attorney review the iasue with staff to _ if that information would cbange the
staff recommendatioo and if the recoDIIDCDdation was that the City did Dol wanl the easement then it wOllld not
matter Staff would review the iasue and report back at the 11122/94 meetiDg.
. Robert MacNear 121 Naples Street, Chula Vista, CA, stated be was OD the Castle Park Improvement
Committee, and spoke in oppositioo to the staff recoDIIDCDdatiODs. He bad brougbtllp the issue
of it beiDg a public access 'road iD the past and the City Attorney stated be would iDvestigate the
matter and DothiDg more IIad been cIoDe. If il was public access land it belonged to the people.
He expresaed CODcern regardiDg the deteriorating cooditiOD of Moss Street and the additional
tnffic created by the project.
Mayor Nader stated the City bad voted subslantial amounts of money for street resurfaciDg programs. He agreed
witb the comments that the street bad not been maiDtaiDed adequately. He wanted staff to take tbe money
appropriated for that purpose and use il because it was iD the budget. HaviDg been at that iDlersection common
sense said that goometrics lead to the accidents iD the area. SometbiDg needed to be done regardiDg safety at the
iDtersection regardless of wbat was built.
,
ColIDcilmember Moore stated the CIP program prioritiz.ed the street projects and that information should bave been
given 10 the Revitalization Committee for review. He reqllested that staff notify COIIDcil as to the projected date
for major pavement improvement on both Naples and Moss from the Hilltop 10 Third Avenlle area. He requested
that iDformation be presenled at the 11/22/94 meetiDg.
. Carolyn F.J. Butler, 97 Bishop Street, Chllla Vista, CA, spoke a.aiDsI the closiDg of Moss Street. When
the area was brought iDto Chllla Vista the sidewalks, curbs, and autlen were to bave been fixed.
Sbe wanted to know why the golf coune did not bave to fix their curbiDg OD that comer. Sbe
suggested thai a stop Iigbt be placed 00 Moss after Hilltop.
ColIDcilmember Fox questioned fuNre plans for streel widening or repair work in the vicinily of the subjecl area.
He was concerned that some of the east/wesl streels were in danger of 1osiD. their residential cbaracter
Mr. Swanson responded that there were DO currenl plans on the east/west _. Staff was studyiDg the east/west
llreels iD the soutbem part of the City and priortizing the work. That should be cIoDe iD time for the next CIP
budget. Naples Street was Dol 00 the seven year plan. The area was lIDder study, at the current lime tbere were
DO plans to widen or improve Naples.
Mr. Lippitt stated in the area of Castle Park staff bad been wodting on the revitaliDtion area and developiDg cost
estimates to improve the streets. That was still at a preliminary stage.
Mayor Nader stated be was talking about overIayiD. Naples.
Mr Swanson responded thaI staff was studyiD. thai with the Neipborbood RevitaliDtiOD Committee. When that
study was completed il could put il on a lU.ber priority.
ColIDcilmember RiDdoae -nested that staff address in the C1P budpllbe IlliDimum of ODe major east/west street
for improvement. The report iDdicated lbat staff believed thaI most of lbe _ of lbe cilizeos could be
mitigated by: I) a Ilop sien at Naples Street ad Alpine Aveaue; and 2) bave ColIDcil approve development plans
for the trianaular parcel prior to recordiD. the rerolution of VacatiOD.
,
~
J~/d;2!r
~
J~)j
COMMITTEE TO SAVE MOSS STREET
A~~~~ ~~;t~~= ._~~ =~~~~~l ~;e-=3 St~-arr:~rt ot lr-4-;C frc~ -he ~-;_-~e~:-; ~
De=)r~~~~~! -eg5~d_n; ~~e V3C3~1or =1 ~=S= S~~~:-. we ;ff=~ ~~e f=_:0Wl~;
C:OlT.!ih::f'itS.
In ~e~~~arv :Q98 inst3113tlon of ~~provement$ on th~ No~t~ s~~e :f ~os~ ~--~a.
were ~ot m~ce - ~t ~a$ ~=term1~ed, by the City. They we~e ~n~e~cec to ~~
im~o$ed at the time the oerm~nent Club house W~$ build on "L" St. This w;s
not mace a condition of the bU11d~~g perm~t. 5a~ D~ego Cour.t~y Clw= com~~tte~
to oart1cloata in ~r=3 imprcv~men~s ~hroug~ ~ssassment Dis~r:c~.
Se~ms eVery t1me the C=untry Club ~ants something fr~m ~he :1~V 1. ge~s :~.
Li~e when the temporary club house was on Naples Street - ~~ere .~s a ~w~~
la~e on the street ~ithin days" Naples has just been posted as a bi~e ~atn -
ho~ long w~ll it take tor the b~ke lane to be painted on the street~
No~ c~ce has the developer c~ntacted the people most attected by his
devel~pme~~ pl~~. To m=e~ w~th ~$ ~nd tell us what the p13ns ar~ fo~ t~lS
tr~an~le ;iece of lard ;~d hc~ It cowld ~~~rove our neighb~~hooc.
~~~rt~# ::_= t~~~:~ ~S~~~~S m~de an offar t~ San D~e~~ CJw~tr~ Clu~ ~~~~ :f
~i~y V;~3~~= Moss S~~~~~ bet~~en Al~~~e arc Naoles~ ~t '0 C~ST. :~e ==~=l~=c~
~~uld l~s.all curb ~nc g~t~=~ ~nd p~vement ~long the ~ort~ $lCe ot ~oss~ 3~d
~ imcrove~=~ts along N;=les a~d Alcine.
~
Existi~; =~rcel cc~t;~~s o~ly 83:3 3~ua~= feet (~~ 924.9 s=. yarcs - !~ ac~e =
4,840 S~. y;rds) %o~~n; ~itMin the Gen~ral Plan ~s in the l~w derslty r3~;e of
3-6 dwell~~g u~its per acre. Withcut the vacateC st~eet the developer would
have enough room to bw~ld one dwelling unit. With the vac;t~on of Moss Street
the area ~~~ld gro~ to 39,126 square teet' Th~s is 4.7 t~mes the original
sqware f~ct~g=. W~AT A DEAL'
~atar :~~e ~~~h ~~5a~e~t =1 accr=~~ma~€:' 6,000 $=. feet wi:~ be _~Lse~=:e ~y
the acol~=~nt - tMerefo~e 1t is based on 501 of fwll value o~ .2.~C oer ~.f.
Why was t~e vacata= ~r.wseable l~nd listed as 11,500 s.f.~ ShDulc~'t it ~:
6,000 s.t.~ This is a ditterence ot 5,550 s.t. or $13,759' Let's
~ecalc~late this whole thing:
Existing lot:
Vacation CC
Vacation parcel
TOTAL LAND WITH VACATION
Less Alpine Easement
TOTAL
Less water e~sement
TOTAL
Less ex~st~ng lot:
COST tull value
COST 1/2 value
TOTAL MOSS ST. VACATION
8,323 s.t.
12,259 s.t.
18.544 s.t.
39,129 s.t.
1.000 s.t.
38,129 s.t.
6.000 s.t.
32,129 s.t.
8.323 s.t.
23,806 s. t.
6.000 s.t.
29,806
X $5.00 s.f. =
X $2.50 5.f. =
$11<;>,030
15.000
TOTAL COST OF VACATION TO APPLICANT SHOULD BE:
$134,030
/5/.2.2~
-
A0d at t~at the developer is gett~ng a bargain. The developer is ~~:l~ng
g~ve t~e C~ty $100,000 ~o~th of construct~on 310ng the North s~je of Moss
Street (that should have been done years agol. Generous man'
--
.V
-"
1
What ~ill be the cost of street vacation along the ex~sting Alp~ne Avenue ~f
it is closed? Will ~e also get the low purchase price of $5.00 a s.f.,
because of the odd configurat~on of the land?
Clos~ng Moss at Alpine and leaving the "dog leg" street, called Alpine Avenue,
is the most illog~cal p13nning we've ever encountered - all to satisfy one
developer? Unbelievable' The closure of Moss Street, as proposed by Chu13
Vista Villa Estates creates an ~ntersection that will be, by far, more
dangerous than that of the existing juncture of Moss and Naples. In so
changing the intersection to that proposed by Chula Vista Villa Estates, the
City AND Chula Vista Villa Estates will be liable for ~ny accident occurring
there.
The noise impact which "may cause the new residences on the triangle parcel to
require a noise wall" could also apply to many resident along Naples Street.
Wouldn't that be nice for our neighborhood - all houses with "noise walls" in
front where graffiti artists will have a f~eld day.
Our ne~ghbors mentioned that for all these years our uns~ghtly "back yard" to
the Country Club has been left to accumulate debris and the triangle lot to
g~o~ unchecked for years on end. All the sudden there is a "concern" about
the area and the triangle lot is being cleaned occasionally. This prOJected
project has turned neighbor aga~nst ne~ghbor, those in favor of the closure
(mostly along Moss Street) where the owners feel there will be a significant
decrease in traffic and their property will gain in value (without thinking
about their neighbors who will be facing more traffic and a decrease in
property values) and those opposed who feel that things should stay as they
are. Fix what's broken first - like the curbs, gutters, sidewalks along
Naples Street and Moss Street'
-
Our intention, last year, was to bring to the Planning Commissions attent~on
the huge amount of traffic on Naples Street and the unsafe conditions for
children walking to and from school. We never intended that it should be
interpreted that the absence of sidewalks along the North side of Moss Street
impacts the children to use Naples. Children walking on Moss Street use the
sidewalks on the South side of the street. Our main concern is for the
children along Naples Street and the lack of sidewalks on the South side of
the street and on portions of the North side of the street, the increase in
traffic from the closure of Moss Street, we believe there will be more than a
5':( increase.
We believe the City has right-of-way for ~lignment of Alpine Avenue on the
North side of Naples Street with the existing portion on the South Side. An
easement should be obtained by the City for this alignment. The property
owner claims that the this area has been blocked at least one day a year since
acquiring the land. As long time residents in this area ~e declare that the
area has been used daily as a short cut from the South side of Alpine across
the lot to meet Moss Street, by long and short time residents. This area has
NOT been block~ fo::?ev~ oJ!! ~~rain or shine - t9?9foh~bit or restrict
this access. ~..6L.- ~....t?'(;.. {!#,utv.- c..U. '/J?~
j('~ C~~~ ' . ae./,,~/ ~Ca,5t;u;f4' J5'''02;2Q
~~fG'. ~~1A--' aa.."J ~ fr~ y~ ~GjJ /
R~i=. /'-(~-,. .1'-.
"
-- ~---
k-n /5 !! ~
,
- =-
November 19, 1994 ;~ I .,.
n
~ rrI
".F. <
Tim Nader, Mayor ~. i1 .,.
276 4th Ave. l ~ 0
Chula Vista, CA 91910 ~
-
Re:
Moss Street~losure
Dear Mayor Nader,
In 1949 when my wife and I purchased the lot on the Southeast
corner of Naples and Alpine, the land West of Alp1ne (between
Moss and Naples) was a large vegetable field. The "jog" on
Alpine was a part of the plan of Bob Casey's Robinhood
Subdiv1sion. Tha1/r "jog" has been the reason for the past
controversies of the "pieshaped" piece of land and the proposed
clos1ng of Moss Street. After several attempts by Bob Casey to
build on the plot, he sold it to Frank Ferre1ra.
When the late Pete DeGraaf was Mayor and the area South of Naples
Street was st111 County this same problem came before the C1ty
Council and for "safety reasons" was defeated. The last t1me Mr.
Ferreira was turned down on h1S proposal, he publicly offered h1S
land to the C1ty for a "park". If this were made into a
"greenbelt park" the ne1ghbors would probably take it on as a
community project to beaut1fy and improve our neighborhood.
No action had been taken until last October and November when the
Country Club Villa Estates proposal came up before the Safety and
Planning Commiss10ns. The last recommendations of the Planning
Commission were that there be no act10n on the closure of Moss
Street until the developer submitted plans for the development of
the property.
Now, we are here for the 6th or 7th time. The car count, taken
last year, by the City was over 13,000 veh1cles daily on Moss and
Naples Streets. If Moss Street is closed, we will have 10,000
plus vehicles daily on Naples Street. If the proposed plan of
Country Club Villa Estates is approved this w111 put add1t10nal
traffic eX1ting onto Naples - causing more hazard. Added to this
the proposal of Country Club Townhomes for development of the
property on Northwest quadrant of H111top Drive and Naples Street
wh1ch will also exit onto Naples causing horrendous traffic
problems for our area.
Naples Street is a major East-West route for City Buses,
Sweetwater Un10n High School D1strict Buses, Hartson's Ambulances
(to and from Sharp Chula Vista Hosp1tal), de11very trucks, etc.
The South side of Naples is in great need of upgrading plus curbs
and sidewalks. If the Council votes to close Moss Street we w111
have one of the biggest bottle necks in Chula Vista at the
intersection of Alpine and Naples Street.
/5/c230
Please keep Moss Street Open.
cc: Mayor Elect Shirley Horton
Chula Vista City Council
Sincerely,
9?J.
Frances M. Gans
~~
Robert E. Gans
129 Naples Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Jfr-e2J/
cL.&. V~L C. ~-^7 /J
.j ~~
7r~ Jz! . .~~ :!77
?2~/' J;t --,,~.4 ---L<- ~/ ~
~~rz---t--"'~~~--<- r ~
~;fe~~ .
~~
~/ ;hl;lo~
/1;1C n~E-. -)~
~~~/ 7J~JC~/,
'71 ill
....
..
~ t P
> .~
~ : !
C II Ii
/5'/cl);L
::Ln/7 IS //-~/)-9i
~. ~k ~....d 7-.~ ~r;- "ICJt?
~ " ~ 4, . ,/ ~ ~(?.,z~~A~-d-
--------- --1:-:.~~-~-d-j// ~.----
_______ '/.A' ~ PA, _ __n
__ __2V~ _:.__E~~ _JiH~J2./ ~__E) ~ ~k~_2V -=-~~ -7-....-- -~..
11'# p f'.i! .tE~~~~/-_i:?~~C_Qf~ E ~~_ J:S -~y - 1>/
. O.nv ~~~LLY~j_'i_2_y'_aZt:..~~.t:r:.;r~.
-_=_____ 1_ _ ~--~~tt~~-
. ~-~~I1f.......-6P(}~ P
~~ ~~:~.. -' :
~ ~tt4-e~-fp.~~
~ t'~:~L
~
-7PXJ
~,_._-----~-_.__._._':---------"-----
I
I ~ .
-----..---- .._#..
I...J.:-")~ _ .I -+-:: '. f)
___, _._____,.'_.~ n_'_ _!~.,____.~_,_.__.___~_...
~ /f'Z- .P-?
---~-
~.?;~~ F -.
. . ~
t-c- . -~~.
. -~~~-!;~j~~
~ ~ -:;'1.JJ:J.s-~_pt:_d2.~n
~ .. _ ~tf.,A"^!U-~_~'_
- --.-..'---or-' -
.:1,.. ~
.
-
c9, .
~..
i!.ll-:::.;;; i:: Je::::;' ~ ~
.xA~ . ?~
-0--
c::Q. ~_..
_:z..-::1_fL-__
. ..._J'Jtk~__ .- - ~
;t;; tA.e ~ '1>_______________
__ ___j~?:pl___.
--- .-----.-
-~----
..
:s: .
.._~_.
.-rr:- _0 --+-J _ ~
.~--~------
kvt-
--- -r----
--
I'll r'll
18 eo'
. -
-ii-
~I ,
--
a! ~ , ..
. .
=
ji ~ ALPINE AVENUE
(! ~ I
= .
~ e:
~ '~
-
. j > ~ . \!\\ .
, . ...! '-\) ~"
0 < s. Ai.PINE AVENUE
- ~ ~ ~
~ 'JJ F
J: ~ .. lr, ~
0 > \"' "
C'I.l \\ \J\
C'I.l -= Z
~ ~ ~ ~ t~~ ~ f
>
" 2 ,\ -t vI ~
t!I!J 2 I ",~o.o
t!I!J - .. ~
~ 2 I:D II ... \\
':_~,'i, ...
C'l \~::~ ...
I ~::-: , ... \fl
' .- ...
= - :. \.. "-t\
~ ~ n n ill:i
-=
~
~ -I I tit
I"l" f'l "
~$. ~ $1
's ~i ;!I
i"~ ~
~ - ;!II
..
2 \ FIRST AVENUE !
-.- ~
{II. .
i - ·
.-
o . , I
.e - ;
- ..
iil~
)5/ J-J 80' ~
IiI:: l~
,
J'~
...
'\
REVISED
.
.:
I
,tJ
.,.. .. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
'.J. BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
.. .' CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
. .,_' iJ
. iL ",.,
~1 .....' . ..,;;
NO};' IS. liERE GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE
. C CO{}NCIL I{hula Vista, California, for the purpose of considering a request for
vacation .oft;~t right-o~-way for a portion o.f M~ss Street. between Alpine Avenue and First
Avenue In addance with ~8333 of the Califorma and Highways Code, a street or ponion
thereof may bfvacated by the City Council after a public hearing is held to consider the matter.
The vacation request was filed by Cox and Associates, representing Country Club Villa Estates.
Details are available in the Department of Public Works, Engineering Division.
..
~"
.
.
..
An ~ial Study, IS-94-01 of possible significant environmental impacts has been conducted by
the ~vironmental Review Coordinator. A finding of no significant environmental impacts, and
a recommendation to adopt a Negative Declaration is going before the City Council on
November 22, 1994, and the Initial Study, completed Negative Declaration and the following
referenced documents are on file and available in the offices of the Planning Department at 276
Fourth Ave., Chula Vista. Referenced documents include: (I) General Plan, City of Chula
Vista Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code, (2) City of Chula Vista Environmental Review
Procedures (3) EIR-89-11 (4) Memorandum from Hans Giroux to Barbara Reid, 10/22/93 (5)
Speed Limit - Engineering, Traffic Survey: Naples Street (Third Ave. - First Ave.) Naples Street
(First Ave. - Hilltop Dr.).
.
Any petitions or comments on the Negative Declaration to be submitted to the City Council must
be received by the City Clerk's office no later than noon of the hearing date.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this matter in court, you may be limited to raising
only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or
in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to the public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL, in accordance with.
Council Resolution of Intention No. 17681, on Tuesday, November 22, 1994 at or after 6:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, Civic Center Complex, 276 Fourth
Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED:
November 2, 1994
PUBLIC WORKS, ENGINEERING DIVISION
FILE NO. PV-D57
J.5',)J6
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / "
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Public Hearing: PCM-94-20/PCA-94-02; Consideration of amendments
to the City Landscape Manual and associated amendments to the
Municipal Code - City initiated
/j.
Ordinance .2.1,1J. Amending Sections 17.10.050,19.14.485,19.14.030
and 19.14.486 of the Municipal Code relating to the revised Landscape
Manual and approval of landscape plans
Resolution J77..1hdopting the revised Landscape Manual of the City
of Chula Vista, superseding the State Model Code, and repealing Council
Policy Number 476-04
lJ.
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No.lO
The proposed revisions to the Landscape Manual incorporate the water conservation measures
called for by Assembly Bill 325, the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act. The manual has
also been updated to include standards for public landscape installations, and to formally
incorporate current landscape practices from its last revision in 1978. Technical and procedural
amendments to the Code which are associated with the revisions to the Manual are reflected in
the attached draft ordinance.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has concluded that the project is exempt from
environmental review as a regulatory measure designed to enhance the quality of the
environment, Class 8 exemption under CEQA.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the Resolution and Ordinance approving the
revised City Landscape Manual, and associated amendments to the Municipal Code.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission (by a vote of 6-0 on September 28, 1994), the Resource Conservation
Commission (by a vote of 5-0 on July 25, 1994), and the Parks and Recreation Commission (by
a vote of 6-0 on July 21, 1994), have all endorsed the revised Manual and associated code
amendments.
/t- /
,{tP
Page 2, Item / ~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
DISCUSSION:
In 1990, the California State Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 325, the Water Conservation in
Landscaping Act. AB 325 requires cities and counties to adopt a "Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance" or be governed by a draft "Model Water-Efficient Landscape Ordinance" developed
by the State Department of Water Resources. According to AB 325, the model water efficient
landscape ordinance automatically went into effect in all communities that had not adopted their
own ordinance by January 1, 1993.
The Landscape Manual has been revised to include the water conservation measures called for
by AB 325, the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act. A copy of the draft Manual was filed
with the State in September, 1992, and a representative of the State Department of Water
Resources has acknowledged the City's compliance with AB 325. The Manual has also been
updated to include standards for public landscape installations, and to formally incorporate
current landscape practices from its last revision in 1978. Additionally, paving requirements for
pedestrian access through planter areas have also been added within Part One.
New sections include "Public Landscaping", "Drought Tolerant Plantings", "Fire Retardant
Plantings", "Water Management for Landscaping", a sample Water Management Plan, and other
minor miscellaneous provisions. Certain technical and procedural amendments to the Municipal
Code to reflect the revised provisions in the Manual are included in the attached ordinance.
Water Conservation Measures
The water conservation measures within the Landscape Manual can be summarized as follows:
1 A Water Management Plan is required for all industrial, commercial, and multi-family
projects. The Water Management plan is prepared by the property developer and
provided to the City as part of each Landscape Plan submitted for approval. The Water
Management Plan must include specific water conservation methods and any expected
water savings on each project. A sample water management plan has been provided
within the revised Manual to guide applicants.
2. Where available, reclaimed water use is required for all industrial, commercial, and
multi-family projects, and all developer-installed landscaping within single-family
projects. Where reclaimed water is not available, potable water is allowed to be utilized.
3. All landscape installations subject to the provisions of the Landscape Manual are required
to be certified for completion by the project Landscape Architect, Civil Engineer, or
Architect, prior to building occupancy or turnover to the City. Post-installation
/" ..,,;..
Page 3, Item ~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
certification will ensure proper and complete landscape installation in accordance with
approved plans.
4. New landscape design criteria have been added that support low-water use landscape
design and efficient water-use irrigation design. These criteria include promoting the use
of efficient irrigation components to ensure state-of-the-art irrigation design.
5. A public information and education program on water conservation is required for single-
family projects. This program will require developers to provide written information on
water conservation techniques to all new homeowners. In addition, at least one home
within each model complex is required to physically demonstrate landscaping
emphasizing drought tolerant plantings. Signs are required to direct the attention of
prospective purchasers to drought tolerant features within the landscape design.
Droul!ht Tolerant/Fire Retardant Plantinl!s
In addition to those sections which address water conservation, a new section on "Fire Retardant
Plants and Drought Tolerant Plants" has been added to bring the text of the Manual into
conformance with Council Policy 476-04, which mandates the use of drought tolerant and fire
retardant plantings. This policy has been implemented by staff since its adoption in 1988.
These modifications will incorporate the measures into the text of the Landscape Manual and
allow repeal of the policy.
Public Landscaoinl!
The new Public Landscaping section addresses public works projects, including civic facilities,
parks, open space, and streetscape installations. This section also implements the authority of
the Director of Parks and Recreation set forth in Chapter 17.10 of the Municipal Code. The
specific topics covered include submittal requirements, graphic and standard requirements,
design standards and criteria, landscaping, irrigation, and trails. An appendix outlines suggested
plant material.
The Public Landscaping section is consistent with current City ordinances with the exception of
the design and size of parking stalls. The City requirement for a standard 90 degree parking
stall is 9' wide x 19' long, and a compact stall 7'-6" wide x IS' long, both with 24' wide back-
up area/drive lanes. The proposal for park installations is 10' wide x 18' deep, with no compact
stalls considered, and back-up area/drive lane 26' wide.
The rationale for having a different standard is that the park users typically have larger vehicles
with more people and additional supplies and equipment. The larger parking stall dimensions
provide more space between vehicles for doors to be opened completely, and greater width in
/J,'J
Page 4, Item 1L
Meeting Date 11/22/94
the drive lanes for ease of movement throughout the parking lot. The parking lots at Terra Nova
Park and Rohr Park have been designed and installed using these dimensions.
Miscellaneous Amendments to the Manual and Code
The most significant of the miscellaneous revisions to update the Manual to current practices and
miscellaneous code amendments are as follows:
1. The Municipal Code (19 14.485) currently requires that a site be improved and brought
into current conformance with the Landscape Manual when any remodeling or site
improvement exceeds a dollar value of $10,000 (other than single family). The dollar
value is recommended to be increased. This amount has not been reevaluated or updated
for 12 years, since 1978. The recommended increase to $20,000 provides a reasonable
adjustment based on inflation. The degree of site improvements will be determined once
a project application has been submitted for review, and depending on the degree of
remodeling, landscape improvements will be required.
2. The Manual now reflects the fact that the inspection responsibility for the City's Open
Space districts has been transferred from the City Landscape Architect in the Planning
Department to the Parks Landscape Architect. This transfer of responsibility occurred
in 1989 when the Parks Department created a staff Landscape Architect position.
3. A requirement has been added to require water efficient, drought tolerant landscaping
within private open space areas other than those used for recreation.
The amendments to the Landscape Manual require certain technical and procedural amendments
to the Municipal Code. These are included in the attached draft City Council ordinance.
Review of the Manual
The draft of the revised Landscape Manual has been reviewed by the California Native Plant
Society, Sierra Club, Chamber of Commerce, Crossroads, local water districts, and SANDAG.
To date, the City has not received any adverse comments or suggestions from these outside
groups. The local chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects has also reviewed
and endorsed the document in concept.
A workshop was held on April 25th to receive input from representatives of the McMillin,
Baldwin, Gafcon (Sunbow) and Eastlake development companies. As a result of the workshop,
some minor changes were made to the Manual.
It''!
Page 5, Item ~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
As noted earlier in this report, the draft Landscape Manual has been reviewed by the State
Department of Water Resources and found to be in compliance with AB 325. The Department
of Water Resources is requesting for their records a copy of the final Council approval,
resolution, and revised Manual.
The City Council resolution reflects the fact that the amended Manual is consistent with the two
regional water conservation measures recommended in the Regional Growth Management
Strategy (RGMS). Those measures are: 1) the use of reclaimed water, when available, and 2)
the "efficient use of water" in landscaping.
Coordination with Otav Water District
On March 18, 1992, the Otay Water District adopted their own ordinance regarding water use
in landscaping. The district approaches water conservation through a "water allocation"
program, which establishes a maximum amount of water to be used within a project area. An
area of interface between the City and the water district could occur if, for instance, an applicant
had estimated a total water use over the amount that Otay would allocate, thus requiring a
redesign and recalculation. City staff and representatives of the water district are currently
discussing a way in which this can be accomplished in a cooperative and coordinated manner.
Otay has reviewed this final draft, and fmds this revised Manual to be very complete and
supportive in the effort to conserve water, and has given their endorsement of this revised
Manual.
State Model/Comnarison
Staff has considered the state Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and has effectively
utilized most but not all of its provisions as evidenced by the following matrix. The Water
Conservation in Landscaping Act provides that "to the extent feasible, local agencies shall
consider the provisions of the Model Code". The following is a comparison of the State Model
and the City Landscape Manual:
It -f
Page 6, Item JL
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Applicability
City Manual
State Model
Industrial/Commercial . .
Multi-family . .
Single Family
Developer installed (models) . .
Owner installed/common areas . .
Duplex
Developer installed . .
Owner installed . .
Triplex
Developer installed . .
Owner installed . .
Certification Required . .
Water Management Plan .
Water Audit/Budget .
Use of Reclaimed Water . .
Special Meter requirements .
Public Information program . .
Except for the "Water Audit/Budget" and "Special Meter Requirements" provisions, all other
State Model provisions are within the Manual. Provisions for "water budgeting" are provided
by local water districts. Water budgeting means that a specific "quantity" or amount of water
(determined by the water district) will be provided for landscape irrigation. "Special meter
requirements" require separate landscape water meters; one for building water use and one for
landscape water use. Provisions for "special meter requirements" would be a regulatory
provision of a water district, since they deliver and sell water.
Conclusion
The amendments to the Landscape Manual and associated Municipal Code amendments will
facilitate water conservation and fire safety, and update the Manual with respect to current
practices and procedures. The Fire Marshal will be adding some text, regarding policies or
procedures for Brush Management, to the Manual. This new text will be minor in nature and
will be "folded into" the Manual at a later date. The City Council resolution provides the
Zoning Administrator the authority to approve periodic adjustments to plant material lists inside
the Manual. As a result, we are recommending approval in accordance with the attached
resolutions and ordinance.
If,'" "
Page 7, Item / /,
Meeting Date 11/22/94
FISCAL IMPACT: All costs of implementing the Manual will be covered through the City's
processing fees. Information provided in the Manual will help reduce the number of public
inquiries and provide for efficient interdepartmental interactions on all development projects.
Attachments:
1. Draft City Council Ordinance.
2. Draft City Council Resolution.
3. Planning Commission Resolution PCM.94.20/PCA.94..Q2. /,' " ~
4. Minutes from the Planning Commission meeting of September 28, 1994. If
5. Minutes from the Resource Conservation Commission meeting of August 8, 1994. /I
6. Minutes from the Parks & Recreation Commission meeting of July 21, 1994 I)
7 Letter from Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, dated August 31, 1994 II
8. Current City Landscape Manual.
9. Revised City Landscape Manual.
(m: \home\planning\landscape.l13)
J~-7//"-U_
.
.
.
J(;:- /:6
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION PCM-94-20/PCA-94-02
_~ /t-i
RESOLUTION PCM-94-20IPCA-94-02
"""\
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE REVISED CITY
LANDSCAPE MANUAL AND A COMPANION ORDINANCE,
CONTAINING ASSOCIATED AMENDMENTS TO THE
MUNICIPAL CODE, AND REPEAL OF CITY COUNCIL
POLICY #476-04
-
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 325 (1990), the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act,
requires cities and counties to adopt a water efficient landscape ordinance or be governed by a
Model Code developed by the State Department of Water Resources; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department and Parks and Recreation Department have
prepared amendments to the City Landscape Manual and associated amendments to the
Municipal Code which would implement the water conservation measures called for by AB 325,
.to include specifications and requirements unique to Public Works projects; and which would
'also update the Manual to current practices from its last revision in 1978; and
WHEREAS, such amendments were so extensive it was desirable to completely replace """\
the existing Manual with a revised Landscape Manual, and
WHEREAS, a representative of the State Department of Water Resources has reviewed
the Landscape Manual and concluded that its provisions incorporate all matters required by the
Model Code (now in effect by operation of law), and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the amended
Landscape Manual is exempt from environmental review as a regulatory measure designed to
enhance the quality of the environment (Class 8 exemption under CEQA), and a Notice of
Exemption was filed with the County Clerk on August 5, 1994; and
WHEREAS, on July 21, 1994, the Parks and Recreation Commission voted 6-0 to
recommend approval of the public landscaping section of the Manual; and
WHEREAS, on July 25, 1994, the Resource Conservation Commission voted 5-0 to
recommend approval of the amended Manual and associated code amendments; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a bearing on said
amendments and notice of said hearing together with its purpose, was given by its publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least 10 days prior to the bearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advenised, namely 7:00 p.m., '1
September 28, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission
and said hearing was thereafter closed, and
_~ /~ ~/O
.
.
.
RESOLUTION PCM-94-20IPCA-94-20
Page 2
WHEREAS, SANDAG, serving as the Regional Growth Management Strategy (ROMS)
Review Board, has prepared a RGMS which includes a self-certification process to ensure
consistency between the strategy's recommended actions and relevant plans, policies and
ordinances of local jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the RGMS calls for a water reclamation and water efficient ordinances, or
equivalent, to be adopted by local jurisdictions for all new constnlCtion (other than single
family); and .'
".~
.
WHEREAS, Chula Vista has completed a Consistency Checklist and has found the
Revised Chula Vista Landscape Manual to be consistent in meeting the intent of AB 325, and
in achieving the Quality of Life Standards and Objectives contained in the RGMS.
NOW, lHEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends
that the City Council; (1) adopt the attached Draft City Council Resolution approving the
Revised Landscape Manual, superseding the current Landscape Manual and State Model Code,
and repealing Council Policy No. 476-04, and (2) adopt the attached Draft Ordinance enacting
. the associated Municipal Code amendments, both based on the findings contained therein;
BE IT FURlHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY lHE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF mE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 28th day of September, 1994, by the following vote, to-
wit:
AYES: Commissioners Fuller, Martin, Moot, Ray, Salas, Tuchscher
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tarantino (excused)
~p"'
ArrEST: William C. Tuchscher n, Chairman
WI'C F:\HOMIl\PLANNING\I48l.93
~ 1/;-)/
"'"""
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
September 28, 1994
I
~
'1
~ /& ---J:2..
.
Excemt from Planninl! Commission Minutes of 9/28/94
ITEM 3.
PUBUC HEARING: PCM-94-20/PCA-94-02; CONSIDERATION OF
AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY LANDSCAPE MANUAL AND ASSOCIATED
AMENDMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE - City initiated
Landscape Planner Williams stated that this item had been continued from the meeting of
August 10, 1994, in order for the development community to have additional time to review and
comment on the fmal draft of the Manual. Various comments bad been received which had
resulted in some minor changes in the text. The overall format and information remained
consistent with the August 10 Planning ColllII1ission packet. Staff had received endorsement
from the Chamber of Commerce and Otay Water District; the local chapter of the American
Society of Landscape Architects endorsed the Manual in concept. However. some minor
technical clarifications expressed by ASLA would be resolved prior to Council adoption, and an
additional requirement to address brush management would also be added. Mr. Williams
continued by describing the components of the Manual. He noted that the Manual had been
reviewed by the State Department of Water Resources and found to be in compliance with
AB325. Mr Williams introduced Landscape Architect Marty Schmidt of the Parks and
Recreation Department, who was available to answer questions.
.
. Commissioner Manin stated that there was a real problem in the shopping center on the comer
of Founh and "F". He was uncomfonable driving his car there because of the inability to see
around the landscaping.
Assistant Planning Director Lee replied that there were two components to landscape plans. the
original installation and maintenance. There were maintenance agreements with various
developers, but other than some type of problem occurring or something brought to staffs
_ attention. an area is not reviewed. Staff would be happy to review the problem with the
shopping center owner.
Commissioner Moot asked about the "watering window, " regarding the comment that some of
,
the developers of EastLake and Baldwin felt that it would increase or add some additional
irrigation meters with some fiscal impact to them. He wanted to know how it was resolved.
Landscape Architect Schmidt stated the .watering window. was required of the development
industry by the Parks and Recreation Department. The criteria was established due to the time
restraints within which staff is able to irrigate both the parks and open space areas. As a result,
those timeframes were incorporated into the manual so that when parks and open space areas
are designed and intended for tum-over to the City for maiDIenance. they would be designed in
such a fashion that staff would have irrigation systems that functioned and met the design and
time parameters that the City must adhere to. Mr. Schmidt stated there would be an increase
in cost of the systems over the cost of systems which did DOt have a rim;", system, but it was
necessary for City mll;nt"'~.
.
Commissioner Moot asked if this was different from the way it was done before the Landscape
Manual. Mr. Schmidt said there was no set criteria in the current 'Jlnd""'PC Manual. The / t -/' 7'
Landscape Manual bad not been revised since 1978, and since that point in time there bad been ./
more development within the central and eastern portions of Chula Vista with additional acreage
of open space and turn-key parks which bad been developed. This was a situation which bad
evolved with the type of development which was occurring. Staff was responding and trying
to establish some type of criteria and parameters within which to develop these new communities """"
and master planned residential areas.
Commissioner Fuller asked if some of those open spaces would have to be retrofitted with
additional irrigation meters. Mr. Schmidt answered negatively; those areas had been turned over
to the City, and systems that were designed and installed and subsequently turned over to the
City would have to be retrofit and revised through the City's capital improvement process or
would have to be maintained with the devices available to the City.
Commissioner Ray asked about the comparison between the City Manual and the State model,
and why two items were not included in the:City Manual which were in the State model--the
water audit budget and the special meter requirements. Mr. Williams stated that the City was
not in the business of selling water The Otay Water District had its own ordinance which
addressed those two areas. They required separate water meters for new landscaped areas.
Since this was something already covered by the water purveyor, staff did not feel it was
appropriate to go into the Manual. The intent of the Manual was to set up more definitive and
more stringent design criteria which a professional would be able to use to create a design that
would conserve water It was not staffs role to police the use of water, and it was already
addressed and covered in Otay Water District's ordinance.
:Replying to Commissioner Ray, Mr. Williams stated that during the development of the Manual,
staff had been working with the Otay Water District who was developing their own water
ordinance. They saw the effort of conserving and managing water as a cooperative effort by the """'\
City and any local water purveyor.
Commissioner Ray concluded that this was being set up as a guideline, and the enforcement of
it was being left to private enterprise. Mr. Williams stated the City would be enforcing any
requirements and standards set forth in the Manual; however, if Otay Water required separate
water meters, it was something the City staff would be looking for when plans came through for
plan check. Typically, many of the projects were required to be approved by Otay Water prior
to City approval
Commissioner Ray stated that at worst case, if anything were to change with the Water Districts,
the Water Districts would impose a stricter guideline. Mr. Williams concurred.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing
to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSC (FuIIerlMartin) 6-0 (Commillcioner Tarantino excused) to adopt Resolution
PCM-94-20 and PCA-94-02 recommending that the City Council approve the amendments
to the City Landscape Manual and associated amendments to the MwlidpaI Code in
accordance with the rmdings contained in the draft City Council Resolution and Ordinance.
Chair Tuchscher congratulated staff on a long, tedious, drawn-out process which had been done
well. """'\
~ /[,-/1
AGBNDA
"""\
Resource Conservation Commission
Chula Vista, California
6:30 p.m.
Monday, August 8, 1994
Council Conference
City Hall Building
276 Fourth Ave. Chula Vista
Excernt from Minutes of Auaust ,. 199..
2. city Landscape Manual
Staff Presentation - Mr. Reid reminded members that they had
review this item some months ago in conjunction with the
Negative Declaration. He stated that the city Attorney had
since ruled that this project is exempt from environmental
review. Landscape planner Garry williams stated that there
had been numerous revisions to the document, including input
form two developer workshops.
Commi ttee Discussion - Member Ghougassian stated that the
current manual is a definite improvement over the previous ~
document; other members concurred. Member Xracha disagreed
with the generalities regarding eucalyptus trees on page 27,
noting that many species are hazardous. He also stated that
while contractors are required to install trees with a minimum
3" girth, the city does not appear to adhere to this.
(Member Ghoughassian left the meeting at 7:30 p.m.)
MSUC (Hall\Kracha) (4-0) to recommend adoption of the
landscape manual. Member Myers commented that she did not
find the wording regarding use of drought-tolerant planting to
be strong enough.
~
~/cf-/~
"""'"
Excerot from the Parks & Recreation Commission Minutes of 7/21/94
c. Landscaoe Manual
Landscape Architect Martin Schmidt briefed the Commission on minor changes that have been
made to the Landscape Manual. .
Motion to approve the amendments to the Landscape Manual.
MSUC Wll..LETT/PALMA '-0
"""'"
~/;;: ~ /~
""'"
.
.
.
LETrER FROM CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
dated A~gust 31, 1994
;JYJt-/)7
AN
'NVESTMENT IN
THE FUTURE
BOA:'.r C.F DIRECTORS
Prf'i>.,j~n:
'"': '.- ~ ..-
~e= oo:~- E~e':'!
~ "\ ,d::
".~.,. ;"t j. -'i -,:5-
G e: :
"'E.', '" .~ s.'
J=. ~ ....;.
-.
"'~r.b~'5
- -
-o:'._,~ ::.~ -~::.
Me--~€' =:'E
...:-e"'-'f . :....~..
S,P.E ......, ..,:..
~::"e'" Si: ",i-
S..:.:. -fU,f'.
...3" _,:.,-..."..
- ':"'" ~
-._.. ., :. ,:' 1"'"1', ~
S" 'j- I.
,
;...,: ~,~ :. eo-'.f' ~"J
;. c' :'-
;,..) - - .:- ;
~I~' Pr..Ii1enl
- t.;. G8..'a-.a...~~
~e:Jt 'It Dir.ctor
.;....5
CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
--- ------ --..--
August 31,1994
,
Garry B. Williams
Landscape Planner
Planning Depanment
City of Chula Vista
276 Founh Avenue
Chula Vista. Calif 91910
Dear Mr. Williams:
First, lei me introduce myself. I am Rod Davis the new - since I April,
1994 - executive director of the Chamber.
] sincerely appreciate the opportunity to review the City of Chula Vista's
Landscape Manual. It is certainly an impressive work and looks to be direct
and to the point. ]t should go far in silencing those who have criticized our
City's landscaping requirements as subjective and capricious. With a
definitive guide in hand, which is available to both applicant and planner,
any questions as to requirements should be easily answered by citing
chapter and verse.
When the manual is printed, the Chamber would like to have several copies.
Sincerely yours,
Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce
-
.' 4---:c::c--<. ~
I{~~d' F. Davis
Executive Director
RFD:ce
cc: John Goss
George Krempl
7 /~/.2{}
ACCREDITED
C~.".l":"'''!'='
........, ,.""""
........"......
""'"
""'"
:' f:C_\".c..~AVE"-uE.CHUlAVISTA.,CALIFORNIA8"'C.TEL (6")'201103
.""",
(existing City Landscape Manual)
.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
LANDSCAPE MANUAL
""'"
Approved by Planning Commission Res. PCM-75-B on July 9, 1975
Adopted by City Council Res. 785B on August 5, 1975
Amended by City Council Res. 9235 on August 22, 1978
""'"
~/t~;22-.
.
.
.
J.a.hdSC~QJ
.
Yt'\Q.Y\UQ. \
INTRODUCTION
It is with considerable pleasure that the Chula Vista Planning
Department submits this municipality's recently adopted Landscape Manual
to the people, design professionals, and contractors of the Chula Vista
Planning Area. While the ~ew manual incorporates much of the technical
information embodied in the old manual, it places a greater emphasis
upon landscape design, and the emerging role of landscaping as an
environmental planning art.
Landscaping can no longer be regarded as botanical decoration.
It also can no longer be limited to the remedial role of tempering
poor building designs, ineffective land plans, or insensitive highway
plans. Acceptable landscaping must meet the public's demand for orderly
growth, improved amenity, aesthetic quality, and environmental progress.
Cities are the masterpiece of man, and their comprehensive landscape
must conform and promote his highest ideals.
In terms of landscape planning, the City is responsible for the
protection of two inherent values of the existing landscape and future
changes in the landscape.
The first and most commonly thought of reason for landscaping is
its aesthetic value. Visual qualities are protected by minimum
planting requirements and good landscape design.
A second, and by no means less importan~value is that plants are
the least expensive and most appropriate form of erosion control.
When new development or redevelopment takes place, it usually involves
the disturbance of natural slopes and the destruction of some topsoil.
~ Jtf,--~:J
/
, '
I" ,
i
Replanting of graded slopes accomplishes the following:
o Checks wind erosion
o Checks water erosion
o Rebuilds the soil
o Enhances the appearance of the area
The alternative to planting is, of course, paved slopes and the
excessive use of paved channels.
Planting to enhance and protect the cityscape is a simple, logical
approach to conservation of the quality environment desired by all.
"""
""'\
~
7;?
/~ /~i
.
.
.
1. GENERAL LANDSCAPE STANDARDS
1.1 Single family and two family dwellings. The construction of
single family homes or duplexes on an individual lot with no graded
slopes does not require the submission of a landscaping plan; however,
planting and irrigation plans are'required for those areas zoned P.U.D.
(Planned Unit Development) or P (Precise Plan) wherein specific land-
scaping requirements are part of the approved plan. In addition, the
.
creation of any s.lope areas which require a grading permit will
require planting and irrigation plans. An irrigation system will be
required on all slopes over 6 feet in vertical height. The general
standard for those lots not requiring complete plans will be one street
tree per lot. Each lot with a width of 60 feet or less will provide
one street tree. Lots wider than 60 feet shall provide a street tree
every 40 feet. Trees shall be planted in the public right of way or
in a tree easement. No plan is required; however, tree sizes and
species must be in accordance with the City requirements for street
trees (see Chapter 12.32 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code). Location
of trees must be verified and approved by all utility companies.
1.2 Development other than single family and duplex construction.
The following projects will require the submission of complete land-
scape plans, including planting and irrigation plans. (See Sections
4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 for processing)
o Multiple family
o coornercia 1
o Industrial
o Planned Unit Development
o Unclassified uses
_~ /t---.2S-
~.~ ,. i
o Remodeling over $10,000 for the above uses
o Developments with Precise Plans
o Parking lots with five or more stalls
o Graded slopes
2. LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS
2.1 Grading. All grading shall, conform to City grading standards.
(See Chapter 15.04 of the Municipal Code.)
2.2 Planting. All areas of the site on which new grades have been
created or vegetation has been disturbed will be planted. One of two
types of planting will be required.
Type I plantings are those which require an ongoing water treat-
ment which is greater than natural rainfall. Generally, all
visible areas adjacent to the right of way will be Type I
plantings. The City Landscape Architect may designate any
other areas as Type I if required to maintain the aesthetic
quality of the community. Included in Type I planting will
be fire resistant strips necessary between structures and
natural open space.
Type II plantings are defined by the characteristic that, once
established, the plants will survive and grow with only
natural rainfall. For example, Type II plantings could
consist of hydro-seeding with native vegetation which is
irrigated until materials are established.
2.3 IrriQation. Irrigation either by a permanent automatic sprinkler
system or manually controlled sprinkler system shall be installed as
appropriate to the type of planting served. Generally Type I plantings
will require a permanent automatic sprinkler system. Type II plantings
2~ /~~~?
~
~
"
.
.
.
will require a temporary sprinkler system. A few small plantings of
either type may be served by a hose bibb if the hose bibb is no further
than 50 feet from any point in the planting area.
2.4 Decorative Landscaping. The use of architectural features, paving,
fences, walls, mounds, boulders, gravels, lighting, water and inert
ground covers is encouraged in conjunction with landscape plantings, if
they are well designed and compatible with community aesthetic values.
2.5 Earthen Mounds. Mounds which are used as screens and/or to
receive plant material shall have a slope no steeper than 2:1.
(Example: a 2-1/2 foot high mound with a rounded top would require a
minimum planter width of approximately 14 feet.)
3.
LANDSCAPE PLANS
3.1 General Requirements. Landscaping and irrigation plans shall be
prepared by a registered landscape architect or by a person who demon-
strates to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning or his designated
representative by the completeness and content of his plan that he has
sufficient knowledge of irrigation systems, characteristics of plant
materials, design principles, planting techniques, soil characteristics
and grading principles, to cause the landscape plan to achieve its
Objective (such as erosion control, screening of a storage area, beau-
tification of the development, etc.) without causing such problems as
uprooting of sidewalks, loss of sight distance, or death or deterioration
of the plant materials. In general, a higher degree of professionalism
shall be required of the larger landscape projects than of the smaller
ones.
3.1.1 Plans shall include the name, address, phone number, date,
and signature of person who prepared the plans.
~ ;i--2?
!
1,,1
3_
3.1.2 Plans shall be prepared in such a manner as to delineate
all proposed improvements in a clear, accurate, and complete
manner. All existing utilities and structures shall be shown.
3.1.3 Planting and irrigation plans will be submitted on
24" x 36" blueline or blackline copies. When planting and irriga-
tion plans are required by the Department of Public Works, they
shall be prepared in ink on a'standard Chula Vista "D" sheet linen
(24" x 36" overall dimensions) which is available in the Engineering
Division. An alternate method of preparation is to draw the plan
in pencil on a standard Chula Vista "D" sheet vellum (also 24" x 36").
Upon final approval of plan, however, a mylar reproduction shall be
provided by the applicant.
3.2 Planting Plan Requirements.
3.2.1 Installation and size and location of plants.
3.2.2 Symbolic representation of mature size of proposed plants.
3.2.3 Botanical and common names of all plants including seeds
or stolons to be planted.
3.2.4 Specification of quantity, quality, and installation of
plants, seeds, soil amendments, herbicides, insecticides, and
fert il i zers.
3.2.5 Details of various landscape features as required to
clearly define the intended finished installation.
3.3 Irrigation Plan.
3.3.1 Static water pressure available at the meter.
3.3.2 Meter size and location.
3.3.3 Point of connection to water source.
3.3.4 Type, size, and location of backflow device(s) proposed.
3.3.5 Type, size, and location of control valves.
~ /;1. ~ 2;S
4
"'"'"
"""\
"""\
.
.
.
3.3.6 Type, size and location of automatic controller, if applicable.
3.3.7 Type, size, class and location of all pipes.
3.3.8 Type and size of all conduits or chase pipes.
3.3.9 Type, size and location of all irrigation heads.
3.3.10 Elevations sufficient to calculate head (psi) gain or loss
in any given circuit and to determint the need for pressure
reduction, pressure relief or air release devices when elevation
variations create a head (psi) gain or loss of ten (10) pounds or
more.
3.3.11 Provide model (s)/brand(s) of irrigation equipment specified
or complete description of equipment as a material and performance
spec ifi cati on.
3.3.12 Show all existing underground and overhead utility lines.
3.3.13 Refer to the sample irrigation plan and/or consult the
City Landscape Architect if necessary.
3.4 Other Plans (if applicable)
3.4.1 Outdoor lighting plan.
3.4.2 Special grading for decorative purposes (mounds, waterways.
etc.) .
3.4.3 Shop drawings of entrance signs, directional signs, land-
scape furniture, etc.
4 PLAN REVIEW PROCESS
4.1 Slope Planting and Irrigation. The procedure for processing slope
planting and irrigation plans is as follows:
4.1.1 Submit four (4) copies of all required slope planting,
irrigation plans, and other plans, if applicable, to the Engineering
Division. (See Section 3.1.3 for map size.)
-~ /~'--.)...7
. '
III
f'
4.1.2 Submit three sets of plans to the local utility companies
for review.
4.1.3 Plans will be reviewed by the Planning, Public Works and
Parks and Recreation Departments for compliance with applicable
ordinances.
4.1.4 When plans have been ~hecked, applicant will be notified
so that he may pick up plans and make necessary corrections.
Four (4) copies of the corrected plans and the check prints will
be resubmitted to the Engineering Division for further checking.
If corrected plans are acceptable, they will be approved by the
Directors of Planning, Public Works, and Building and Housing,
(and Parks and Recreation, if an Open Space Maintenance District
is involved).
4.1.5 Following approval, the applicant shall furnish the
Engineering Division with four (4) blueline or blackline copies
of the signed plans. If the plans were prepared on vellums,
applicant will also furnish one complete set of mylar reproductions.
4.2 New Construction. The procedure for processing planting and
irrigation plans for new construction (see Section 1.2) shall be as
follows:
4.2.1 Submit three (3) copies of planting or irrigation plans
to the Building Department with all required building plans.
(See Section 3.1.3 for map size.)
4.2.2 Submit three sets of plans to the local utility companies
for review.
4.2.3 Plans will be reviewed by the Planning and Public Works
Departments for compliance with applicable ordinances.
6
~ /~r3t:J
'""
-"""\
""""
.
4.2.4 When the plans have been checked, the applicant will be
notified so that he may pick up the plans and make the necessary
corrections.
4.2.5 Three (3) copies of the corrected plans and the check
prints will be resubmitted to the Engineering Division of the
.
Public Works Department for further checking.
4.2.6 If corrected plans are acceptable, they will be approved
by the Planning and Public Works Departments.
4.3 Inspection. All open space districts which require the installa-
tion of planting and irrigation must be inspected and certified in
writing by a registered Landscape Architect that the project is complete
. according to the approved plans. Certification must be received by the
City of Chula Vista prior to the inspection and approval by the City
Landscape Architect or designated representative.
5. LANDSCAPING WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OR A TREE EASEMENT
5.1 Upon approval by the Department of Public Works, shrubs or plants
attaining more than two feet in height upon maturity may be planted in
the public rights of way, provided that they are not planted within 30
feet of any intersection of the public right of way.
5.2 Street trees are designated and/or approved by the Department of
Public Works. Any inquiries concerning street trees should be directed
to the Department of Public Works.
5.3 An encroachment permit is required for any irrigation system
within the right of way.
5.4 Tree sizes and species must be approved and in accordance with
the City requirements. (See Chapter 12.32 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code. )
_~ /;;.~J/
./
~,r,
t /
1"
.
5.5 All trees shall be a minimum of 15 feet from any fire hydrant,
light standard or utility pole.
5.6 Plants and other landscape features which may pose an unusual
health or safety problem are not acceptable.
5.7 A landscape plan will be required for any landscape improvement
beyond street tree planting and lawns with gradients of five (5%)
.
per cent or less.
6.
PARKING AREAS
6.1 Any parking lot for 5 or more vehicles shall require a landscape
strip (10 feet minimum) between the parking area and the public right of way.
This strip shall effectively screen the parking lot from the public
right of way to a minimum height of 3-1/2 feet. Any approved combina-
tion of planting, mounds, walls and/or decorative features, which are
visually compatible with community aesthetic values, may be utilized.
6.2 A 6 foot wide side yard landscape strip shall be required in
commercial and industrial lots where they abut a residential or insti-
tutional zone or land use where a zoning wall is not required. A 5 foot
minimum decorative masonry wall or chainlink fence or approved equal
type fencing with vines in combination with tree planters may be
considered in lieu of a planting strip.
6.3 A minimum of 10 per cent of the interior of any parking area
shall be devoted to landscaping. The 6 foot landscaped strip and the
10 foot landscaped strip mentioned above will not be included in the
10 per cent figure. Pleasing decorative paving of brick, stone or tile
will be considered in lieu of a plant ground cover although one tree
in a minimum sixteen square foot cutout for every 100 square feet of
decorative paving will be required.
_~ /~--3.2-
-
"""\
~
"'"'"
.
6.4 Planters, walls and fences in the parking areas shall have a
protective 6 inch curb to protect against damage to plants and irriga-
tion heads. (See Detail Ill.)
6.5 Protective concrete curbs or standard concrete wheel stops are
required where walls and fences abut driveways and parking stalls.
6.6 Planting areas which abut vehicle stalls will have a minimum
paved strip 18" wide to provide for access to and from parked vehicles.
6.7 Parking lots will require a landscape submittal, including
planting and irrigation plans.
7. POLE SIGN PLANTERS
Planting areas will be required at the base of all freestanding pole
. signs. Planter sizes will be according to the following dimensions:
Sign Height
in Feet
Planting Area
in Square Feet
Minimum Width"
in Feet
1.10
10-20
20-35
20
40
100
3
5
9
"Inside dimension.
Minimum cover of soil over footings should be 18" in order to provide
adequate room for small shrubs and ground cover root growth.
8. EROSION CONTROL SLOPE PLANTING
All slopes which are created by grading or otherwise denuded of vegeta-
tion during construction shall be planted with one of the two planting
types defined in Section 2.2. In addition, slopes over 6 feet in
. vertical height shall be enhanced with one (minimum) l-gallon container
size tree or shrub per 100 square feet or 4 liners per 100 square feet.
These plants should be placed to create a pleasing aesthetic arrange-
ment.
-~ Jf,-}}
"""'\
9. MAl NTENANCE
9.1 All landscaping required in connection with the construction of
multiple family, commercial, industrial, Planned Unit Development,
and unclassified uses shall be maintained by the owner. A copy of a
valid landscape maintenance contract or an affidavit of the person
responsible shall be filed with the Planning Department. Contract copies shall
be refiled upon renewal. Affidavits of the responsible person shall
be refiled upon change of responsibility. Overall appearance of the
landscape shall be neat, healthy and free of weeds and debris.
Individual plants shall show vigorous growth typical of their species.
If at any time, in the opinion of the City Landscape Architect, the
maintenance level drops below the level described above, he will notify
the owner in writing. The owner shall have sixty (60) days beyond notice
to correct the condition or the City shall clean and maintain the devel-
opment and bill the owner(s} for such services.
9.2 All new construction under Section 1.2 above shall conform to
~
the requirements of Section 9.1 above and, in addition, shall be
subject to a one year landscape installation guarantee (by owner as to
material and workmanship). The installation shall conform to the City
approved landscape plan. All planting and irrigation equipment shall
be guaranteed by owner for one full year after the installation is
accepted by the City Landscape Architect. The rate of growth and
establishment of all planting will be monitored by the City Landscape
Architect. If plants do not grow in a manner typical of their species
under the site conditions, he may require remedial measures such as
additional planting or replanting, weeding, additional fertilizer or
other adjustments. The City Landscape Architect has the option to
~ /?-ytj
1
......
.
extend the one year period in order to achieve normal plant growth and
establishment. (See Section 13 for bonding requirements.)
10. DECORATIVE LIGHTING
If decorative lighting is used it must be installed to the manufacturer
specifications and all applicable ~odes and the layout must appear as
part of the landscape ~lans for approval by the City Landscape Architect.
Conventional security and functional lighting is not considered decora-
tive for the purposes of this manual.
11. SPECIAL STANDARDS FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS
.
These standards supplement the specific standards above and do not
replace them (see also PUD Policy, para. 6).
11.1 Level areas (5% grade or less--see PUD Policy) shall be
predominantly covered with a ground cover such as grass, to promote
recreational use.
.
11.2 A minimum of two trees per dwelling are required exclusive of
street trees and slope trees. These trees may be installed anywhere
as required to effect a good design.
11.3 At least 15 per cent of the trees shall have a minimum caliper
of 3" if standards, and 2" if 1I1J1tiple trunks, unless otherwise
approved by the City Landscape Architect.
11.4 At least 25 per cent of the trees shall be a minill1Jm of 1-112"
caliper if standards and 1" if 1I1J1tiple trunks.
11.5 The balance (60 per cent maximum) shall be 5 gallon size unless
otherwise approved by the City Landscape Architect.
11.6 Additional trees shall be required in open space areas; they shall
be a minimum of 5 gallon unless otherwise approved by the City Land~cape
-~ /t-J'~
"-,
'l
Architect. A variety of trees shall be utilized to effect interest:
columnar, wide and medium spreading, etc. Additional 5 gallon shrubs ~
and trees shall be used throughout the project in adequate number to
accept open areas, buildings and screen parking areas.
11.7 Additional specimen materials shall be utilized near the entrance
to the project and along dedicated streets. Street trees shall be a
minimum of 15 gallon container si~e and shall be a minimum of 6 feet
tall with a 1-1/2" caliper when planted, and double staked.
11.8 A preliminary landscape plan is required at the time of filing
the tentative subdivision map and a final landscape plan is required
at the time of submitting a grading plan.
12. SPECIAL STANDARDS FOR MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS
The required planting for usable open space as defined by the Chula
Vista Zoning Ordinance shall consist of turf grass or an equal ground-
cover which can be used for recreation or leisure use. For required
dimensions and maximum slope allowed, please refer to the City Zoning
Ordinance.
,
13. BONDING
Bonds in the amount of 100% of the estimated cost of planting, irriga-
tion and maintenance are required with the submittal of grading plans
for a grading permit and/or prior to the recording of any final subdi-
vision map. Prior to submitting an estimate, it is recommended that
the Planning Department be contacted.
14. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
14.1 Weed Abatement. The method of weed abatement shall be specified
in the landscape plans and subject to the approval of the City Land- ,
scape Architect.
-?~/tr5?
12 ~ v .
.
14.2 Plant Material. All plant material specified shall be according to
American Standard for Nursery Stock as adopted by the American Association
of Nurserymen.
14.3 Plant Pits. (See table on Standard Drawing Sheet 1.) Larger plant
materials shall have a pit size that will clear the original root ball by
a minimum of 12" on all sides and \he bottom. All backfill shall be a
minimum of one third organic soil amendment and thoroughly mixed with
native soil.
14.4 Staking. See Standard Drawing Sheet 1.
14.5 Ground Covers. All species planted from unrooted cuttings shall be
planted on maximum 9" triangular spacing. Rooted ground covers shall be
planted on a maximum of 12" triangular spacing. Carpobrotus edulis may
. not be used without the approval of the City Landscape Architect.
14.6 Hydroseeding. The specification of the hydroseed mix is the respon-
sibility of the applicant or his landscape architect. Required informa-
tion is:
e
,. Seed species by botanical name.
2. Application rate in pounds/acre of each species.
3. Purity and germination percentage if available.
4. fertilizer type and application rate per acre. (Soil analysis
may be required.)
5. Soil stabilizing chemical, if used, by brand name and applica-
tion rate per acre.
6. fiber mulch material by brand name and application rate per acre.
14.7 Soil Preparation. All fill slopes, 3:1 or steeper, shall have a
minimum of one cubic yard per 1000 square feet of organic soil amendment
incorporated into the top 3" and compacted prior to planting or seeding.
All other planting areas shall require either new friable top soil, an
-~ /~~37
,
.~
organic soil amendment, or a graded sand amendment. The specified insta11a- ~
tion method shall be subject to approval by the City Landscape Architect.
14.8 Fertilizers. All planted areas shall be fertilized with a complete
commercial fertilizer (nitrogen, phosphate, potassium). It must also con-
tain iron or a separate application of iron must be made. Slow release
fertilizers shall be applied during plant installation and at the end of
the one year guarantee period. In addition, individual plants shall be
fertilized with the same type of fertilizer or a 21 gram balanced tablet
at the following rates:
1 gallon 1 tab
5 gallon 2 tabs
15 gallon 4 tabs
All other types shall be applied at least 3 times at no greater intervals
than 3 months. The fertilizer application rate is subject to the approval ~
of the City Landscape Architect.
15. IRRIGATION
15.1 Material Standards.
15.1.1 Pipes.
Acceptable pipes include the following:
(a) Polyvinyl Chloride Pipe:
(1) Type of material: PVC type I and/or type II,
manufactured in accordance with commercial standards,
CS-256 or CS-207.
(2) Identification: All pipe and fittings have
markings which indicate the manufacturer's name,
production control number, class or schedule number,
type and grade of material, pipe size.
."",
14~ /~ -J8
.
.
(b) Galvanized Iron Pipe:
Type of material: Hot dipped galvanized steel conforming
to the specifications of A.S.T.H. Designation A-l20,
Standard Weight (Schedule 40).
(c) Asbestos Cement Pipe: (4" minimum size)
(1) Type of material: Pipe shall conform to requirements
of the latest revision of A.W.W.A. Standard Specification
C-400 as to material, workmanship, strength, methods of
sampling, markings, inspections and test.
(2) Unless otherwise specified, all pipe shall be Class
150.
(3) Cast iron fittings for asbestos cement pipe shall
conform to the requirements for A.W.W.A. Standard
Specifications for Short Body, Class 250. All cast iron
fittings and valves shall be cement lines and seal coated.
(4) Identification: All pipe and fittings shall have
markings which indicate the pipe size and class and/or
working pressure.
Cd) Aluminum Pipe:
Type of material: Pipe shall be of a commercially
manufactured type with steel couplings, valves and
fittings.
(e) Copper Pipe:
Type of material: Pipe shall be a minimum Type "L".
.
-7/(,-7Y
15
I)
/
(f) Pipe Schedule:
Permanent Systems Above Ground Underground "'"'
Pressure Pipe Copper-Type "l" PVC-Class 315
PVC-Sched. 40
Copper-Type "l"
Asbestos-Class 150
Fitti ngs Copper-Type "l" PVC-Sched. 40
Copper-Type "l"
Cast iron-short body
Class 250
latera 1 Pi pe Ga1v.-Sched. 40 PVC-C1ass 315
Copper-Type "l" PVC-Class 200
PVC-Sched. 40
Copper- Type "l"
Asbestos-Class 150
Ga1v. Sched. 40
Fittings Galv.-Sched. 40 PVC-Sched. 40
Copper-Type "l" Copper- Type "l"
Cast iron-short body
Class 240
Ga1v. Sched. 40
"'""\
.
Temporary Systems Above Ground Underground
Pressure Pipe Ga1v.-Sched. 40 Same as permanent systems
Copper-Type "l" plus Ga1v. Sched. 40
PVC-C1ass 315
PVC-C1 ass 200
Alum.-C1ass 150
Fitti ngs Same as permanent Same as permanent systems
systems plus
PVC-Sched. 40
A1um.-C1ass 150
lateral Pipe Same as permanent Same as permanent systems
systems plus
PVC-Class 315
PVC-Class 200
Fittings Same as permanent Same IS permanent systems
systems plus
PVC-Sched. 40
"""
~ /(P-'10
16
.
.
.
.
15.1.2 Sprinkler Heads. Sprinkler heads shall be a commercially
manufactured type acceptable to the City Landscape Architect. Plastic
heads are not acceptable, except for temporary systems or upon approval
by the City Landscape Architect.
15.1.3 Automatic Control Valves (Electric & Hydraulic). All auto-
matic control valves (electric) shall be globe or angle pattern, elec-
trically controlled, hydraulically operated, normally closed type.
Valves shall automatically close in event of electrical power failure.
All contrql wire shall be of the Underwriter's Laboratory type UF
(underground feeder), single conductor, solid copper, plastic insulated,
600 volt rated for direct burial application.
All automatic control valves (hydraulic) shall be normally
closed type. Control tubing shall be of a commercially manufactured
type acceptable to the City Landscape Architect.
Electrically controlled irrigation systems shall comply with the
requirements of the 1971 National Electrical Code, Article 725.
15.2 Irrigation Design Criteria. The following criteria are to be com-
plied with in the design of slope irrigation systems:
15.2.1 Precipitation Rate. Application of water for sprinkler heads
shall be from 1/8 inch (0.125") per hour to 1/4 inch (0.250") per
hour unless otherwise approved by the City Landscape Architect.
Calculation of precipitation rate:
Precipitation Rate (Inches/Hour) .. 96.3 x S.PJ!.
S xL
96.3 - constant
G.P.H. .. Gallons per minute for sprinkler head selected.
S _ Spacing between sprinkler heads (feet)
L _ Spacing between rows (feet)
It--t{!
-~~
/
, >,
'}.!
15.2.2 Velocity of Flow. The system shall be designed to operate
at a water velocity not to exceed five (5) feet per second.
'""'"
Velocity c G.P.M.
2.45 x Oia 2
G.P.M. c Gallons per minute flow through pipe
2.45 = constant
Oia 2 = Inside diameter (inches) of pipe squared.
15.2.3 Spacing Requirements.' Maximum spacing requirement for
sprinkler heads are the following:
(a) Rotary, impact and rotary stream spray type: 50% of
sprinkler head coverage diameter.
(b) Stream spray type: 50% of sprinkler head coverage diameter.
(c) Shrub or lawn spray type: 60% of sprinkler head coverage
diameter.
(d) Use pop-up heads along all walks and passage ways.
15.2.4 Backflow Protection. Backflow protection must be provided
for all irrigation systems. Approved backflow devices and their
~
installation requirements are as follows:
(a) Atmospheric Vacuum Breaker. Installed a minimum of six
inches (6") above the surrounding ground and above all of the
heads so at no time will the vacuum breaker be subjected to
back pressure or drainage. No valve of any type may be installed
on the discharge side of the vacuum breaker, nor shall it be
used under continuous pressure. Atmospheric vacuum breakers
may be an integral part of the irrigation control valve.
(b) Pressure Vacuum Breakers. Installed a minimum of twelve
inches (12") above the surrounding ground and above a majority
of heads so at no time will the vacuum breaker be subjected to '""'"
back pressure or drainage. Irrigation control valves may be
installed downstream from the vacuum breaker.
~ /?~~
18
.
(c) Reduced Pressure Backflow Protection. Insta11ed at a
location where the relief valve is ~ subject to flooding.
.It may be installed under continuous pressure service and may
be subjected to back pressure. Locate out of lawn areas.
15.2.5 Line Drainage Erosion Control. Line drainage erosion
control shall be indicated on the plan or in the specifications
..
wherever applicable. Acceptable methods of erosion control are the
following:
(a) Anti-drain valves - installed under heads or in line as
necessary.
.
(b) Double layered jute matting or an acceptable substitute.
(c) Redwood board downdrain (1" x 4").
(d) Lined ditch downdrain (2" concrete or air blow mortar).
15.2.6 Miscellaneous Design Criteria.
(a) Gate valves are to be used as emergency shut-off valves
and ~ as manual control valves for sprinkler systems.
(b) Sprinkler circuits shall run parallel or as close to
parallel to the contour lines as is practical.
(c) Sprinkler heads within a circuit shall have a uniform
precipitation rate. To achieve this, the following are
recOl1lllended:
(1) Sprinkler head types (i.e., impact, stream spray
and shrub spray) should not be mixed within a circuit.
(2) Independent circuits should be used when watering
from the top of slope downhill and the toe of slope
uphill on slope 6 feet and greater in height.
(3) operating pressure differential on anyone circuit
should not exceed the limits of the sprinkler head used.
_~ /~-7'~
,
.
J
(d) Every lot shall have an independent irrigation system
unless otherwise specified by the City Landscape Architect.
(e) Watering across property lines shall not be allowed
unless permission has been granted by the City Landscape
Architect.
""""
(f) Swing joints shall be installed on lines at all abrupt
changes of grade.
(g) Pressure regulators, pressure relief valves, thrust
blocks and other irrigation appurtenances shall be required
at the discretion of the City Landscape Architect.
15.3 Installation Procedures.
15.3.1 Pipe Installation. The following are minimum criteria to be
complied with for pipe installation.
(a) Trench Width and Depth Schedule:
PCV and COPPER
PIPE
GALV. IRON
PIPE
A.C.P.
'"'"
(Pressure)
Trench Depth 18"* 24" 18" 24"
(Non-Pressure)
Trench Depth 12" 18" 6" 24"
on slopes
Width Dia. + 4" Dia. + 12" Dia. + 4" Dia. + 12"
*May be shallower if supplemental protection is provided.
(b) Staking and Risers.
(1) All pipe .used above ground shall be staked every
fifteen feet, or less, with stakes made from metallic or
nondegradable materials. Minimum length of stake: Thirty
inches (30") on fill slopes, 24" on cut slopes.
(2) All fasteners shall be "Punch-Lac," Plumber I s tape,
worm screw type, galvanized wire Or equivalent.
""""
20~ /b~l/!f
.
15.3.2 Flushing and Testing. After all new irrigation piping and
risers are in place and connected and prior to the installation of
irrigation heads and/or quick coupling valves, the systems shall be
flushed and made ready for testing. To insure proper functioning of
the system, all pressure irrigation piping shall be hydrostatically
tested.
15.3.3 Installation of Direct Burial Control Wires. All direct
burial control wire shall be installed in a trench and to the side
or below any pipes in the same trench. Minimum trench depth when
installed without pipes is 18" unless supplemental protection is
provided. (Section 339-3C NEC)
Whenever direct burial control wires are to be installed under
.
new or existing improvements such as curbs, sidewalks, and/or pave-
ments, they shall be installed in a polyvinyl chloride conduit of
the size noted on the plans, which shall extend one foot beyond each
side of the improvement. The letter "E" shall be stamped or chis1ed
on the improvement directly above the conduit. All wire splicing
shall take place in the valve boxes and/or pull boxes. All splices
shall be made with a mechanical connector encased in a self-curing
epoxy resin or equal, which provides a permanent watertight connection.
15.3.4 Installation of Control Tubing. All control tubing shall be
installed in a trench to the side or below any pipes in the same
trench. Minimum trench depth when installed without pipes is 12".
.
- ~ /,A(~
.1 '
;' r
(,..,
21
GLOSSARY
ATMOSPHERIC VACUUM BREAKER (A.V.B.) - A device that prevents the reverse
flow of water. The device is normally downstream of the control valve and
above the highest head of the circuit served.
CIRCUIT _ Commonly used to describe all of the heads controlled by a common
control valve.
CONTROLLER - Most common term used to describe an automatic device which
signals remote control valves to open or close. Controllers are sometimes
called "clocks."
CONTROL VALVE - Commonly used to describe the valve that operates a single
cjrcuit of sprinkler heads.
HYDROSEEDING _ Commonly used to describe the method of applying seeds, mulch,
fertilizer and soil stabilizers to slopes or to other areas which have no
natural plant cover.
IRRIGATION LINES - Most commonly used to describe any pipes used exclusively
for sprinkler systems as opposed to other domestic uses. Sometimes refers to
only those lines downstream of the control valve in a sprinkler system.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT _ One who arranges land and objects upon it for human use
and enjoyment and is licensed by the State to practice landscape architecture.
Specific services are consultation, investigation, reconnaissance, research,
design, preparation of drawings and specifications, and responsible supervision
during construction.
LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR - Licensed (C27) by the State to install plants, irriga-
tion equipment and other landscape features as specified by the owner or a
State licensed landscape architect. Landscape contractors are not licensed
by the State to prepare landscape plans for sale.
LATERAL LINE - Most common term for irrigation lines downstream of the control
valve. Sometimes called "irrigation lines." ~ Jj,-~
'"
'"
""""
~ MA~UAL CONTROL VALVE (M.C.V.) - Term used to describe the control valve but
defines operation by hand.
NURSERYMAN _ Refers to both the producer and the seller of plants or seeds
usually for ornamental purposes. Nurserymen are not licensed by the State to
prepare landscape plans for sale.
PRESSURE LINE _ Most common term for lines upstream of the control valve.
Sometimes called "supply lines."
PRESSURE VACUUM BREAKER (P.V.B.) - A device that prevents the reverse flow
of water. The device is located on the pressure side of the control valve(s).
Unless otherwise specified by the manufacturer, this device is located above
the highest head of the circuit served.
REMOTE CONTROL VALVE (R.C.V.) - Term used to describe the control valve but
~ defines automatic operation by connection either hydraulically or electrically
to a controller or clock.
SUPPLY LINES _ A common term for any line that is constantly under pressure
whether carrying or just holding water.
.
~~
16...11-1
I
.-1
,
ft~
STANDARD DRAWINGS
,......,
Sheet
1 Street Tree Planting and Staking
lb Tree Planting and Staking
2 Shrub Planting
2a Shrub Planting in hardpan conditions
3 Typical Overall Sprinkler Installation
4 Typical A.V.B., R.C.V., & Gate Valve Installation
5 Typical A.V.B. & P.V.B. Manifold Installation
6 Typical Pressure Backflow Preventer Assembly
7 Pressure Relief Valve Installation
8 Typical Impact Head
8a
Typical Impact Head Assembly using flex-risers
.......
,
9 Typical Nozzle Line Installation
10 Typical Pop-up Lawn Head and Pop-up Lawn Head with Swing Joint
Assembly
lOA Typical Pop-up (Rotor or Impact) Lawn Head Swing Joint Assembly
using flex-riser~
11 Planter Concrete Curb
,......,
-Y 16-yg
24
.
.
.
Introduction
~m:~~:;:::m::::mK$. .
lw.~.
,m
By Resolution No. . the Chula Vista City Council approved this updated and expanded
Landscape Manual and repealed its predecessor. The City Ordinances that implements this manual
are located within Titles 17 and 19 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. This revised manual
addresses issues specific to site development, landscaping and irrigation, both for private
development and for public projects. The design and implementation of a project's landscape
should address all functional and aesthetic sit~ specific design issues, in addition to integrating the
project into the immediate surroundings and adjacent properties. The Manual also specifies
materials that will assist the City and its residents in achieving long range durability and cost
effectiveness.
Because of the semi-arid climate that Chula Vista is located in, and the increasing demand for
limited imported water resources that serve Southern California, the principles of drought tolerant,
or xeriscape landscaping, are emphasized. The ability to conserve water while establishing and
maintaining landscape installations is a primary concern for the future of the landscape industry and
the region in general. This effort is not only desirable, it is a legal requirement of the State of
California, as set forth in Government Code Section 65590 et. seq. (AB325 1990), and the State
Department of Water Resources Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.
With these concepts in mind, this landscape manual outlines the process, requirements, and support
information necessary for the review and approval of a project being processed through the City of
Chula Vista.
The manual is comprised of three main components. Part One - General City Requirements,
addresses the overall requirements and processes for a project. Part Two - Private, addresses items
specific to private projects such as residential subdivisions and commercial centers. Part Three -
Public which is divided into six (6) section, addresses the requirements and criteria of public projects
including parks, open space and streetscapes (whether a City Public Works project or a private
"turnkey" project). These Public Projects are further implemented by Standard Project specifications
available from the Parks and Recreation Department.
The policies and requirements described in this manual are minimum standards. Projects must meet
or exceed these standards. If any specific questions regarding a project require clarification, please
contact either the Planning Department for private development projects, or the Parks and
Recreation Department for public projects.
Planning Department
(619) 691-5101
Parks and Recreation Department
(619) 691-5071
-~ )t,-J(i
j"
Part One
General City Requirements
?J:-:mm~:::ti.::::;:';~:$J::m::~:.w;:;::~::m::~:::::~::n::.;1::t.J::;:.::::~;:1.;.~:x.~:::::::::::~:;;H~m::=:;;;m:$:.~4B:~~~ >>':'l.~:. ::':r"~W;;::":::::WA::m:'~
'!Wf.::~~mf.t~:&t.:::m::i:3>~::
1. APPLICABILITY.
All building permit applications for industrial, commercial, civic, or multi-family residential
buildings or structures; residential developments with common areas; development ofparklands,
recreation facilities, maintenance districts, street medians; and all discretionary permit
applications for the aforementioned types of land uses regulated in any manner by the
provisions of Titles 17 and 19 of the Municipal Code shall be subject to review and approval
in accordance with the provisions of this City Landscape Manual. Interior remodels or minor
modifications to building exteriors constituting a valuation of less than $20,000 are not subject
to the provisions of this Manual.
2. PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS.
2.1 Applicants for the following types of projects shall submit and obtain approval of
Landscape Plans prior to the issuance of the applicable permit or other discretionary
approval.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Multiple family (CYMC 19.14.485)
Commercial (CYMC 19.14.485)
Industrial (CYMC 19.14.485)
Planned Unit Developments (CYMC 19.14.485)
Unclassified uses (CYMC 19.14.485)
Remodels with a valuation of $20,000 or more for the above uses (CYMC
19.14.485)
Projects requiring Precise Plans (CYMC 19.14.485)
Parking lots with five or more stalls (CYMC 19.14.485)
Graded slopes (CYMC 19.14.485)
Parks and open space (CYMC 17.10)
Model home complexes for single family and/or multi-family projects shall submit
a landscape plan for at least one model home. Construction of single family
homes or duplexes on individual lots are not normally required to submit a
landscape plan. In addition, developers of single family residential projects with
5 or more units shall provide written information on designing, installing, and
maintaining water efficient landscapes, to all new homeowners. At least one
model home shall post a sign directing the attention of prospective purchasers to
drought-tolerant features within the landscape design.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
2.2 Plan Review Process: The procedure for processing all Landscape Plans shall be as
follows:
"""
~
2.2.1 Submittal/Application: Submit four (4) copies of the Landscape Plans, to the
Zoning Administrator (herein referred to as the ZAlDirector) (Private Projects)
or Parks & Recreation Department Landscape Architect (Public Projects), as the """
case may be, and simultaneously submit three sets of plans to affected local utility ,
companies for review.
~: ~: . ;~m:.w~,:;w~e...~~s;w;:mm;;;:;%~<<
Me M:\bome'f'lalUliDs\lndscap\dfah3
. *::r,>>."t~
Page 2
l
~J?-30
.
.
.
J!II\
Jm):''''.t*:::::-...~' u ~m.~
'~L
t~~
2.2.2 Distribution/Review/Comment. The ZNDirector shall distribute the Landscape
Plan for review by the Public Works Department and City Landscape Architect,
and Parks and Recreation Landscape Architect for compliance with applicable
ordinances, this Landscape Manual, and any other applicable manuals, procedures
or policies. Which department the plans are distributed to will depend on the
project type.
2.2.3 Consideration of Comments. The ZNDirector shall conduct an appropriate
proceeding pursuant to CVMC fi 19.14.030, taking into consideration advice and
comments received from other departments, affected utilities, and the City
Landscape Architect. The.Landscape Plan may be approved or conditionally
approved if in compliance with all applicable requirements including this Manual.
The Landscape Plan shall be denied approval if not in compliance.
2.2.4 Notice of Decision: The ZNDirector shall notify Applicant in writing of the
decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny approval. The applicant may
appeal denial or conditions imposed upon approval, per Section 19.14.486 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code.
2.2.5 Submittal Following Final Approval: Following approval, the Applicant shall
furnish the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department with four (4)
blueline or blackline copies of the Landscape Plans as finally approved. Applicant
will also furnish one complete set of 3 mil. photo black line mylars for City
records. In the case of an application for a building permit, and where landscape
plans are required per City code, the applicant shall furnish three (3) blueline sets
of landscape plans to the Building and Housing Department.
2.2.6 Following landscape plan final approval, the Applicant shall implement the
Landscape Plan only in accordance with the approved plan.
3. GRAPHICS.
3.1 General: To insure consistency and clarity, the following graphic standards apply to all
Landscape Plans submitted for processing, and are to be adhered to in the preparation of
those plans. These apply to all new development projects, renovation projects, plan
revisions, and "as-built" drawings.
3.1.1 Conceptual Landscape Plan and Master Landscape Plans are to be on sheet size
no larger than 32" x 40", unless approved by Staff prior to preparation.
3.1.2 If a project requires more than one sheet, a key map is to be included on all
sheets.
3.1.3 All Landscape Plan(s) are to be done on City mylar "D" sheets with the
appropriate title block modifications with the exception of building permit
processing. which also can be prepared on a different title block, however the
mylar size shall be no smaller than 24" x 36".
3.1.4 All plans are to be done at a scale no smaller than 1" - 20'.
WPC w,1I->....Wq\IoJllIMap_f13
'~ /t~>l
iJ
Page 3
~.
y~)"
1)"-'
ct
~:m:;;:;;::;;.::::::';:::::*::::;:;;tm;::;;::;;:;W:::.'W:::::::.:.%m:@Wk,;:m;::?.:W'..m@~:m:;:;:s.:~*::;:::m:m~l.::'~:::;:;:;*:;;;:mmmm::s.~~*"'-:::::::::'6"~o/~~U:.: ~~~~::;:;:~a~
3.1.5 Graphic symbols are to be easily discernable; clarity is imperative.
"""
3.1.6 All Landscape Plan(s) sheets are to be issued City sheet numbers, in addition to
providing the following for each sheet type in a separate number block:
C - Civil Engineer Sheets
HC - Horizontal Control Sheets
LC - Landscape Construction
LI - Landscape Irrigation
LP - Landscape Planting
3.2 Final Workine: Drawine: Preoaration:
Note: Some or all of the following items are to be included for each pl~n or sheet,
contingent on the specific project and the existing or proposed conditions at the project
site.
3.2.1 Title Sheet:
This sheet shall always be numbered "T-1" and is to include the following:
3.2.1.1 Vicinity map showing nearest arterial intersection, street names, north
arrow, and project location.
3.2.1.2 Index of Sheets
-.,
3.2.1.3 Title Block:
a. Project Title
b. Developer's name, complete address and phone number (if
applicable)
c. Date plans prepared
d. Seal of Registered Landscape Architect, signed and dated, including
expiration date of license
e. Tract/parcel map number, tentative tract number or project address
f. Revision block
g. Sheet number of of
h. Permit number
i. Signature block for approvals by the following individuals and/or
agencies:
. Director of Parks & Recreation
. City Landscape Architect
· Local water purveyor and County Health Department if
reclaimed water is being used.
3.2.2 Grading Plan:
Shall include (but not be limited to):
""'"
. ;~.tZ:LL. U
wpe W,Ibolo.\pIa__pldnof13
y /~-~.)
j.m:,:,:
Page 4
.
.
.
jj
lV~:
. ~~E~::ta;:~~m~$.i;::::
~-m.u
Ul
3.2.2.1
Grading Plans for projects that require grading shall conformto the
Grading Ordinance Chapter 15.04 of the Municipal Code, and the Street
Design Standards (current edition).
3.2.3 Layout and Construction Plan:
Shall include (but not be limited to):
3.2.3.1 Graphically indicate and identify:
a. Walls
b. Fences
c. Walkways
d. Pathways
e. Signs
f. Si te furnishings
g. Structures
h. Recreational facilities
i. Parking lots
j. Site or landscape lighting
3.2.3.2 Construction details.
3.2.3.3 General construction notes.
3.2.3.4 Specifications.
3.2.3.5 Any aspect of the landscape construction (including but not limited to
those items above) shown on either any architect's or engineer's plans,
shall have information regarding those items indicated on the Landscape
Plans and referenced as to plans and sheet numbers.
3.2.3.6 Plans that include construction items requiring building permits per the
current Uniform Building Code shall be noted to require said permit and
shall state the party responsible for obtaining the permit. If the permit
number is known, it shall be referenced on the plan.
3.2.3.7 Reference City plan numbers for all existing and proposed improvements.
Show and note depth of any utility line that may interfere with the
proposed construction. References shall include the type of
improvement and responsible party for the improvement.
3.2.4 Irrigation Plan:
Shall include (but not be limited to):
3.2.4.1 Graphic presentation of all components of the system.
/)5
wpe M,\Ilam.IpIa...mtJa......pldnf13
-~ /~~".?J
PageS
m%~$:~~;~~::~&.,.:::::::mM:N:$.::;<<,:i;:$."~:{;%';:.<?:;;::.:;:;:;:;:$.~~;~%::t==;{;;~$::::::$.:;:::;:;*;::~:~~~~~~::a..w ~:~{;~~:
3.2.4.2 A legend showing all symbols stating the manufacturer, precipitation ""'\
rate, gpm's, radii of each head type and detail reference call out as well
as all pertinent data for materials used in the system.
3.2.4.3 Irrigation details.
3.2.4.4 Description and location of the water service/meter( s) including:
a. Domestic vs. reclaimed service
b. Installation requirements and responsibilities of the water purveyor
and the Contractor
c. Available static-water pressure at P.O.C.
d. Design pressure
e. Peak flow through water meter (GPM)
f. Total area served through the water meter in acres or square feet
g. Yearly demand in acre/ft.
3.2.4.6 General irrigation notes.
3.2.4.7 Specifications.
3.2.5 Planting Plan:
Shall include (but not be limited to):
........,
3.2.5.1 Location and spacing of all plants.
3.2.5.2 Plant material species, container size, quantity, minimum ground and
aerial setbacks, and spacing requirements.
3.2.5.3 Standards for tree caliper, height and spread shall be specified.
3.2.5.4 Location of all existing and proposed surface structures.
3.2.5.5 AIl existing easements shall be indicated and labeled.
3.2.5.6 Seed mix information (including but not limited to):
a. rate
b. mix
c. mulch
d. binder
e. fertilization
f. inoculation
3.2.5.7 Planting details.
3.2.5.8 General planting notes.
~
3.2.5.9 Specifications.
l~
wpe M:\bomc\plliuiDJ\laadlClp\dnft3
~~n
~/&--Pj/
:::<<-
Page 6
.
.
.
~*~,*::m.~W&:f:'~:::-t'Z:':;:::;:;~i%:..';*.i:,~w:::*%fu.~m~~;:;.~~:mm.i,:;:tm
3.2.6 Public: See pages 37-44 for additional information.
Jt >>-
'm~M.~:
WPCM'-."'Ia"'""""_p.....l13
-~
Page?
,,1
)d'
t"
~~~~E~~:::?:B";:;:m-:i:;:.B;:z%:r':;~1:.-:::.@;:m%:::~:r.:;:wm~::::;;.%?:;;:;:&:*:fWm.&Wim-~%:Z~;:;:;'~~~~;:"W~~3:~.:IDS:.m::$'z..@.:::;&.-.:::;;;:,*W.;:,.':;::;;r.,*;
4. LANDSCAPE PLANS CONTENTS. (PRIVATE)
4.1 General:
"'"
Planting, irrigation, and water management plans are elements that are mandatory for all
required landscape plans. Other elements are required, as applicable.
4.2 Preoarer Oualifications:
Landscape Plans shall be prepared by a registered landscape architect or by a person who
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City by the completeness and content of the plan
that the pre parer has sufficient knqwledge of irrigation systems, characteristics of plant
materials, design principles, planting techniques, soil characteristics and grading principles,
to cause the landscape plan to achieve its objectives (such as erosion control, screening
of a storage area, beautification of the development, etc.) without causing such problems
as uprooting of sidewalks, loss of sight distance, or death or deterioration of the plant
materials. In general, a high degree of professionalism shall be required of all projects.
4.3 Certification of Installation Prior to Occuoancv:
Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for all private projects which require the
installation of planting and irrigation, the project Landscape Architect must certify, in
writing, that the project is completed in accordance with the approved set of plans. The "'"
certifier shall provide evidence of a laboratory soils analysis and that the recommendations
were taken into consideration in the amendment, fertilization and drainage specifications.
Any changes that occur in the field due to site conditions or plant material availability
must be submitted to and receive approval of the City Landscape Architect.
4.4 Elements
4.4.1 Plantinl! Element:
4.4.1.1 Graphic representation of mature size of proposed plants.
4.4.1.2 Botanical and common names of all plants including seeds or stolons to
be planted.
4.4.1.3 Specification of size, quantity, quality, and installation of plants, seeds,
soil amendments, herbicides, insecticides, and fertilizers.
4.4.1.4 Details of various landscape features as required to clearly define the
intended finished installation.
4.4.2 Irril!ation Element:
4.4.2.1 Static water pressure available at the meter.
""'"
~. IJj.!m.l ~W"*:,::.. UUJl
WPC M:\bome\pirlDDiq\laDdsc:lp\draft3
lU
::=.:m.UXs
Page 8
~/b~
.
.
.
X' Je:;.'
4.4.3
'::=.::U:1
II
.::::J;ll!af~.t:%.: .:.:lUlJlm:r~
4.4.2.2 Meter size and location.
4.4.2.3 Point of connection to water source.
4.4.2.4 Type, size, and location ofbackflow device(s) proposed.
4.4.2.5 Type, size, and location of control valves.
4.4.2.6 Type, size and location of automatic controller, if applicable.
4.4.2.7 Type, size, class anp location of all pipes.
4.4.2.8 Type and size of all conduits, sleeves, or chase pipes.
4.4.2.9 Type, size and location of all irrigation heads.
4.4.2.10 Elevations sufficient to calculate energy gradient gain or loss in any given
. circuit and to determine the need for pressure reduction, pressure relief
or air release devices when elevation variations create a head (psi) gain
or loss of ten (10) pounds or more.
4.4.2.11 Provide model( s )/brand( s) of irrigation equipment specified or complete
description of equipment as a material and performance specification.
4.4.2.12 Show all existing underground and overhead utility lines.
Water Management Element:
A water management plan shall be submitted as part of the landscape plan and
shall address water management procedures, equipment, and their application to
plant materials and seasonal use. The element shall be in substantial compliance
with the "Sample Water Management Plan" (Attachment 1) and shall consist of the
following elements: Statement of Site Conditions; Water Requirements; Water
Delivery System; and Summary of Water Conservation Methods and Water
Savings. A sample water management plan is provided within this manual to assist
in the preparation of Landscape Water Management Plans. It is intended to be
used as a guide for the applicant. It is not intended to be merely copied.
The owner shall be responsible for the implementation of the water management
plan.
4.4.3.1
Reclaimed Water:
When reclaimed water is available within the basin containing the project
site or when a reclamation master plan indicating the availability of
reclaimed water in the future has been adopted by the water purveyor
which governs the territory of the proposed project, the Applicant shall
incorporate the use of reclaimed water into the project design except in
the vicinity of any location where food is served or consumed.
4.4.3.2 Declared Water Shortage:
WPCM:_.'PIa__p......f13
-~
/t-f'?
.$:.
Page 9
l
,
i" (~""l
,rC'
~>>~;;::(::2J':W::':;::?:::~,*~~~:;:;:;:
*,m~r:1'l
"il!
In the event of a declared water shortage, mandatory and/or voluntary """"
water conservation measure, the project shall comply with all water
allocation programs adopted by state and local government authorities.
In the event of any conflict between such programs and these regulations,
the stricter conditions shall apply.
4.4.4 Other Elements: (if aoolicable)
4.4 4.1 Landscaping within the Public Right-of-Way or Tree Easement
For landscaping Within the Public Right of Way, approval by the
Department of Public Works is required. See Chapters 12.32 and 18.32
of the Chula Vista Municipal Code for further information.
4.4.4.2 Parkin!!: Areas:
. Any parking lot for 5 or more vehicles shall include a landscape strip
(10 feet minimum) between the parking area and the public right of
way. This strip shall effectively screen the parking lot from the public
right of way to a minimum height of 3-1/2 feet. Any approved
combination of planting mounds, walls and/or decorative features,
which are visually compatible with community aesthetic values, may
be utilized.
"""'"
. A 6-foot wide side yard landscape strip shall be installed in
commercial and industrial lots where they abut a residential or
institutional zone or land use where a zoning wall is not required. A
5 foot minimum decorative masonry wall or chain-link fence or
approved equal type fencing with vines in combination with tree
planters may be considered in lieu of a planting strip.
. A minimum of 10 % of the interior of any parking area shall be
devoted to landscaping. The 6 foot landscaped strip and the 10 foot
landscaped strip mentioned above will not be included in the 10 %
figure. Pleasing decorative paving such as: brick, stone or tile, will be
considered in lieu of a plant ground cover although one tree in a
minimum sixteen square foot cutout for every 100 square feet of
decorative paving will be required.
. Planters, walls and fences in the parking areas shall have a protective
6 inch curb to protect against damage to plants and irrigation heads.
Planting areas which abut vehicle stalls will have a minimum concrete
paved strip 18" wide (including curb) to provide for access to and
from parked vehicles. Appropriate paving should be used where
pedestrians are likely to cross landscaped areas.
· Protective concrete curbs or standard concrete wheel stops are """'"
required where walls and fences abut driveways and parking stalls.
j . .:.:Hi:i:il
wpe M'\IIome'j>..lUUDa\Ia......pldnof13
~ /t-JY"
ji
Page 10
.
.
.
.l::m.:tm:~~$Wf.:$.:;:rr.x:.:::~:w.:.t.:.:,11r~i:*.:.:.*~:::m:. .:.:.l ill!~
4.4.4.3
4.4.4.4
4.4.4.5
.:.:.:~~::::
. Parking lots will require submittal of landscape, planting and
irrigation plans.
Pole Sign Planters:
Planting areas are required at the base of all freestanding pole signs.
Planter sizes will be according to the following dimensions:
Minimum Width in
Sign Height in Planting Area in Feet
Feet . Square Feet (inside dimension)
1-10 20 3
10-20 40 S
20-35 100 9
Minimum cover of soil over footings should be IS" in order to provide
adequate room for small shrubs and ground cover root growth.
Erosion Control Slope Planting:
All slopes which are created by grading or otherwise denuded of
vegetation during construction shall be planted with one of the two
planting types defined in Section 2.2. In addition, slopes over 6 feet in
vertical height shall be enhanced with one (minimum) I-gallon container
size tree or shrub per 100 square feet or 4 liners per 100 square feet.
These plants should be placed to create a pleasing aesthetic arrangement.
Decorative Lighting:
If decorative lighting is used it must be installed to the manufacturer
specifications and all applicable codes, and the layout must appear as
part of the landscape plans for approval. Conventional security and
functional lighting is not considered decorative for the purposes of this
manual.
-~ )~-~I
.1'"
01
1 ~."
d'<'"c
WPC w,_.\p.".....JllaDClsaopldnl13
Page 11
~E,*::;;;m:"?:-::;:::;:~%~.ml~l:-mm;i$;;:.;:::;.:m~:::::'%-mf.,:;~:$Z*:::'%'W~~~:;:;:-:8:'B . llJ:.~@~~"*W':::;.!Jll.:.:..*%'W~ :~ll**: .~:.:. ~
. W%r::::.:::t,;::.:'*~~
4.4.4.6 Special Standards for Planned Unit Developments:
"""
These standards supplement the specific standards above and do not
replace them.
a. A preliminary landscape plan is required at the time of filing the
tentative subdivision map and a final landscape planting and
irrigation plan is required at the time of submitting an improvement
or grading plan (CYMC 19.56.150). Prior to the issuance of any
building permits, at least one model home landscape, plan addressing
the use of water efficient and drought tolerant landscape practices
shall be submftted to and be approved by the City Landscape
Architect.
b. Level areas (5% grade or less) shall be predominantly covered with
a ground cover such as decorative turf, to promote recreational use.
. c. A minimum of two trees per dwelling are required exclusive of street
trees and slope trees. These trees may be installed anywhere as
required to effect a good design.
d. At least 15 per cent of the trees shall have a minimum caliper of 3"
if standards, and 2" if multiple trunks.
e. At least 25 per cent of the trees shall be a minimum of 1-1/2" caliper ~
if standards and 1" if multiple trunks.
f. The balance (60 % maximum) shall be 5 gallon size.
g. Additional trees shall be required in open space areas; they shall be
a minimum size of 5 gallon. A variety of trees shall be utilized to
effect interest: columnar, wide and medium spreading, etc.
Additional 5 gallon shrubs and trees shall be used throughout the
project in adequate number to accept open areas, buildings and
screen parking areas.
h. Additional specimen materials shall be utilized near the entrance to
the project and along dedicated streets. Street trees shall be a
minimum of 15 gallon container size and shall be a minimum of 6
feet tall with a 1-1/2" caliper when planted, and double staked.
4.4.4.7 Special Standards for Multi-Family Developments:
The required planting for usable (recreational) open space as defined by
the Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance shall consist of turf grass or an equal
ground cover which can be used for recreation or leisure use.
"'"
1
\We M:\boIIIe....lIIliq\IIIacDc:.p\draft3
~ J~~~C
Page 12
.
.
.
m~:;:.wJ:m*..:::::4:;.::*:'.:.:::.:.:mU~m:'4~j.:m.~** ' .~*~ .
=
JU.:m:: U l ~..iJ~lU"Ul
*ljUjJ.U.!M:.m~
4.5 Maintenance:
4.5.1 Private:
All landscaping required in connection with the construction of multiple family,
commercial, industrial, Planned Unit Development, and unclassified uses shall be
maintained by the owner. A copy of a valid landscape maintenance contract or an
affidavit of the person responsible shall be filed with the Planning Depanment.
Contract copies shall be refiled upon renewal. Affidavits of the responsible person
shall be refiled upon change of responsibility. Overall appearance of the landscape
shall be neat, healthy and free of weeds and debris. Individual plants shall show
vigorous growth typical of their species. If at any time, in the opinion of the City
Landscape Architect, the maintenance level drops below the level described above,
the City Landscape Architect will notify the owner in writing. The owner shall have
sixty (60) days after notice to correct the condition or the City may initiate
litigation procedures, and/or where landscape easements exist.clean and maintain
the development and bill the owner(s) for such services.
4.5.2 Public:
All new construction shall conform to the requirements of this Manual and, in
addition, are subject to at least a one year installation guarantee for both
landscape and irrigation. The installation shall conform to the City approved
Landscape Plan. All planting and irrigation equipment shall be guaranteed by
owner for one full year after written acceptance of the installation by the Parks
Landscape Architect. The rate of growth and establishment of all planting will be
monitored by the Parks and Recreation Landscape Architect. If plants do not
grow in a manner typical of their species under the site conditions, the Parks and
Recreation Landscape Architect may be required remedial measures such as
additional planting or replanting, weeding, additional fenilizer or other
adjustments. The Parks and Recreation Landscape Architect has the option to
extend the one year period in order to achieve normal plant growth and
establishment.
5.
LANDSCAPE PLANS CONTENTS. (PUBLIC)
See Pan III .Public Section" of the Landscape Manual for specific information and
requirements relative to Public improvements.
6. ATTACHMENTS.
6.1 Sample Water Manal!ement Plan:
Introduction:
The purpose of this landscape water management plan is to provide the Owner and/or the
Irrigation Manager with the means to operate and manage the landscape irrigation system
on a continuing basis. This document provides information and instructions necessary to
achieve this goal and includes the following:
^vH!
WPCM'_"pl,nw..\Ja.....pldrof13
. ~
Page 13
A
nl')
;J~r
_~ I~---JI
~~t.::~:;;:m:~::::;~.:i:::4:;;:~::::-:-,:~::;:1:>.~M$.:m~.::::t:::r:$~*':::'~:::-$>1':::$w;:;:::;::m:~:mr~~<:;:*.!iM;,:m~*J.:~.t:m '~@:j:~.:; ~lrL~
a.
Goal of the water management plan.
1
b. Description of the existing soil and climatic conditions.
c. Annual precipitation rates (annual rainfall).
d. Anticipated ET (evapotranspiration) - (the measurement in inches of soil moisture
consumed by the plant and evaporated from the soil not to exceed 80% of the
annual evapotranspiration rate).
e. The proposed water source ,and quality.
f. The annual anticipated landscape irrigation water requirements and soil
percolation rates.
g. A description of the water delivery system and the precipitation rates (actual water
applied in inches per hour) of each type of sprinkler head nozzle.
g. A final soils report, which shows the percentage organic matter within the soil
texture. Also, a measurement of pH and total soluble salts.
h. Water Delivery Systems
i.
Water Savings
1
j. Irrigation Schedule
Goal:
The goal of this water management plan is to conserve water by combining water
conserving design practices with guidelines for the landscape irrigation manager. This plan
will provide the owner with the necessary information to maintain systems in peak
performance, and make decisions on when and how much to irrigate.
This landscape water management plan provides information for the irrigation manager
to implement the following water conservation concepts:
a. Irrigation systems should be maintained to distribute water as uniformlv as
DOssible.
b. To assure adeauate irril!ation of all areas the system should be operated only long
enough to apply water to a sail depth that the plants' roots utilize. Verify with soil
probe.
c. The irrigation system is designed for maintenance and operation to avoid surface
runoff.
l
fill, m::~**mr... j l~ u:m ..
wpe W'_'f'Ia""""""adKopldnro
~ ;""?;2.
*;~
P"lle 14
.
.
.
,.,-:::t:::.m-:;:;:;:;i;:wt:;;;:;:ti;W;':;:,'::'4t~:::-.:i:~..mmr~~:;:;:;:~;i:J m:.i:!.*.";,t
.u:::m
iJmh~ r;E
Soil and Climatic Conditions:
a. Soil Conditions are widely variable for the project area. The soil ranges from silty
sand and decomposed granite to rocky granitic concentrations.
b. Climatic Conditions - The site, though located in a Southern California thermal
belt, is influenced by south coastal cloud, fog and wind conditions, and sometimes
experiences Santa Ana winds from the desert.
Annual Precipitation Rates - (Rainfall in Inches per Year):
The annual "historical" precipitation rate (average from 1940 to 1991) is 9.45 inches per
year Currently San Diego County is in a drought mode and the historical precipitation
rate may not apply For this reason the annual precipitation rate for 1991 is possibly more
indicative of current precipitation rates.
a.
Anticioated ET (evaootransoiration) - the measurement in inches of soil moisture
consumed by plants and evaporated from the soil: (San Diego County Water
Authority, Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and City of Chula Vista
Landscape Manual limits the ETo to 80% of the measured ETo for calculations
in each locale).
Again, due to current drought conditions both ETo (historical ETo) and ET for
1990 are shown below'
ETo
(Historical
Month Reference ) ETo - 1991
January 2.2 2.65
February 2.65 2.44
March 3.42 2.95
April 3.78 3.94
May 4.88 6.32
June 4.88 7.20
July 5.13 7.96
August 4.88 6.78
September 4.49 5.87
October 3.42 4.65
November 2.36 3.53
December 1.95 2.80
Annual Averages: 3.67 4.75
For updated ETo and precipitation figures for this area, contact the Department of Water
Resources, Office of Water Conservation, P. O. Box 942836, Sacramento, California
94236-0001. Upon your request, they will furnish you with California Irrigation
Management Information Systems (C.I.M.I.S.) daily weather data from Station No. 74,
San Diego or 1-800-339-9954 (24hrs.).
-
-~-
"L'--.... ..__
) rt ---t;;
(
n~
;-,..,1
:)j
wpe ",_.\pIaWq\Jo_IdnIt3
Page 15
~$@$:~H:;:;.::.::.?"m:;r.~*=;f:~*m~m$:mtBW'::'~W.M$.@t..~t~~~'%~~$::ma
*.tr%Li
Ilhn .1'....1!J
Water Source and Quality:
1
The irrigation water source will be tapped from an existing and functioning on-site potable
pumped ground water system. This system is operated and maintained by fire station
personnel.
Precipitation Rates - Planted Areas:
The precipitation rates for each variety of planted, irrigated area are as follows (they are
listed by plant type and the sprinkler nozzle servicing them operating at 40 psi).
.
Trees, Shrubs and Ground Cover:
Series, Low Gallonage, Matched Precipitation Rates, Pressure Compensating Nozzles;
xx' Coverage Radius (full)x.xx PR
xx' Coverage Radius (half)x.xx PR
xx' Coverage Radius (quarter)x.xx PR
Summary of Water Conservation Methods:
The irrigation design and water management program described utilizes known and
documented water conservation principles.
1
The irrigation equipment and layout in the design reflect the water conservation methods
that have been a standard in the industry, including: an automatic controller with multiple
daily run times, the use of moisture sensors and a rain gauge to interrupt the automatic
programming of the controller when necessary, "head to head" sprinkler layout to increase
distribution uniformity (DU), matched precipitation rate nozzles to increase DU, low
precipitation rate nozzles to decrease the probability of surface runoff, separate irrigation
stations according to: sun exposures; slopes (top and bottom); turf and shrub areas.
The planting plan utilizes hardy native and drought tolerant plant species, adjunct to
existing native areas. Ground cover-type plant masses act as living mulches to shade and
cool soil temperatures and reduce moisture loss. Decorative turf areas are not designed
into this project.
Water Requirements:
The annual anticipated water demand has been estimated in inches, gallons, and acre feet.
Please note that the figures below were arrived at by utilizing 1990 C.I.M.I.S. data, and
the water demand in non-drought years may be lowered by twenty percent. The City of
Chula Vista is adopting the State Department of Water and Power mandate an ETo @
80% of the yearly average ETo. The values shown below will reflect this mandate as
water consumers in the Chula Vista area.
'"
r :.1'.
\\'PC M:\bomelpJailllliq\laodselp\dnft3
l~/trr
~
1*
Page 16
.
.
.
WPC M:_.\pIa..............pldralt3
;l.~~.:lll
'li.!'i.:m: ;H~~~~
.:.!. .u.: :;jj=.:~
1941nI"L'E
Annual Anticipated Water Demand Inches Gallons Acre Feet
sq. ft. of trees, shrubs &
ground covered require:
Water Delivery Systems:
The type of irrigation system utilized for this project consists of an automatically
controlled, PVC, pop-up spray system. Many water conserving principles have been
applied in the design, such as: .
. An automatic irrie:ation controller that has the capability of being set for multiple
run times in one day for each station, thus reducing run-off by only applying the
amount of water that the soil can absorb at anyone time. Also, the irrigation
manager can set the run times to reflect the current C.I.M.I.S. data.
. Sprinlder head lavout is "head to head", meaning that each sprinkler's coverage
radius reaches to the next sprinkler head in the system, thus providing the best
distribution uniformity (DU) possible.
.
Matched precipitation rate nozzles have been utilized. By matched precipitation
rate it is meant that a designer can mix in the same irrigation station nozzles with
varying spray patterns (ie; 90' s, 180's, and 36O's) and still have even precipitation
rates throughout the area, again providing better distribution uniformity. This
project analysis allows for low rate irrigation application for trees, shrubs and
ground cover, depending upon soil percolation rate.
. Low precipitation rate nozzles have also been utilized to reduce the amount of
flow on all slopes 10% or greater. (In comparison to conventional or standard
gallonage nozzles which emit considerably more water in the same amount of time,
increasing the probability of water waste by runoff.)
. Irrie:ation stations (the area that one irrigation valve services) have been separated
to conserve water as follows: sun and shade exposures are separated; slopes are
separated from flat areas; turf and shrub areas are separated. All the areas listed
have different watering requirements, and run times are to be scheduled
individually to reflect current C.I.M.I.S.data and the runoff characteristics of each
station by the Owner or Irrigation Manager.
Lb/J,5'
-~
.
Page 17
,)
.,3'
d'
~~n";:~::;:;::m:::Mm%:;:;:;:$::::.::;:i:::::::;t.;;m:;:$:$'%%*:;:;;:;:::.::;:::*r@:;:::@m:g*~~Y4:::;~:W.m>>.1~~ft:r4W~;.:.:,l,l.M
.. .ZI!( SM'ftrJ:'1'1:
Water Savings:
"'""\
The exact quantity of water savings cannot be established in a new installation (as
compared with the water auditing program described by The Department of Water
Resources for existing irrigation systems). The principles described within this landscape
water management plan represent a substantial water savings over conventional irrigation
designs and management procedures.
We have conservatively estimated what a comprehensive landscape, irrigation, and water
management plan could provide in water savings:
Description Water Savings (%)
Irrigation Design and Management
Rain Gauge + CIMIS Info
Native Drought Tolerant Plant Materials
Estimated Thtal Savings
(Total Landscaped and Irrigated Area of this ft.
Project = Approx.)
Actual Savings:
Estimated Minimal (induding turf)
Design Consumption for One Year acre
Estimated Maximum (excluding turf)
Design Consumption for One Year acre
Total Estimated Savings
""'"
~
. i
WPCM,Ibom.\pIa_""""pldraf13
Jt-.~i?
-~
Page 18
.
.
.
Im:ti-*itW::::.~.:m~~xi'_~
~h:;E
.~jj.~;~H*
'W
:t:::~~
Irrigation Schedule:
The following irrigation schedule outlines the probable timing of the controller. Each
month the irrigation times must be evaluated and corrected. It is not sufficient to set the
controller and walk away. It is important that on-site personnel become familiar with the
plant materials in order to proficiently operate and maintain the system.
(Sample)
IRRIGATION STATION REOUlREMENTS
(System Evaluated For Average 1"/Week Application)
Average P.R.. System
Running Time
Valve/Station# InJHr. GPM Hours
1 0.82 4.6 1.22
2 0.95 11.6 1.05
3 1.03 14.0 0.97
4 1.08 12.4 1.08
5 1.03 7.0 0.97
6 0.84 5.8 1.19
7 1.06 11.4 0.94
8 1.85 10.0 0.54
9 1.06 12.8 0.97
10 1.85 12.6 0.54
11 1.03 10.4 0.97
12 1.03 2.4 0.97
13 1.03 8.6 0.97
· P.R. = precipitation rate in gallons per minute
Note: Refer to the attached calendar of possible operation times for each system.
Rnle of'rbumb: 1" P.R. Represents 6"-12" water penetration into the soil, i.e., clayey-sandy loam
(always verify with soil probe.)
wpe ..,"""".'foIo........._pldnlt3
Liz ---~ :;
~-
Page 19
a/
17/
I)'"
ere'
~W!.;.~:;:;:m;:;~~i"*$:;:*":::::$::;:;@,*;~'Z'~~$:%r:::w:;::%Wg';::;:::;:W,:K$:%~:::;:~~*$~~"':~ ll.L~a,<< . ;z::.:::. it:;::m
.Jk..yh"L'E
ONE IRRIGATION CYCLE
DURATION TO APPLY 113 INCH WATER
(EACH. REPRESENTS 4 MINUTES APPLICATION TIME)
'1
STATION #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
........
.
.....
...
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
CONCLUSION:
Under the Summer and Fall conditions, it is critical that native plant materials be kept much closer 1
to the dry end of the spectrum or bell curve of moisture content, than to the moist and wet end.
Paying close attention to ET observations will give guidance to irrigation application rates (see
summary). Contrary to customary belief, it is not proper horticultural practice to keep the soil
surface in an artificially wetted condition. Optimum field moisture displaces oxygen needed for
creation of biological gasses and nutrients required for healthy root, stem and crown growth.
Nature in its mysticism will always outwit man. It is essential that we avoid trying to be too good
to the flora and accept the natural signals given off by the subject genus or species. As an example,
a broad leaf evergreen may start to curl its leaves as the sun rises hotter in the sky; does this mean
the leaves are drying out? Chances are the opposite is true; Le., the leaf may curl to reduce its
surface area to keep from getting too much light and/or reduce the actual evaporation rate. Keep
in mind that steady winds cause evaporation also even under cloudy conditions.
The true test of this or any other system as designed is the ability to observe plant behavior before
drowning the plant with water. It does not make sense to irrigate native plants during a rainy season
because native plant materials thrive on seasonal rainfall only; even during times of installation of
the plants, it is unnecessary to maintain optimum moisture for an extended period of time to
guarantee survival. In fact, survival can pretty well be guaranteed by prudent use of a soil probe and
diligent inspection, maintenance and operation of the irrigation system.
The advent of winter and spring conditions will provide ample moisture to the native plant material
for the first season after transplant and may only need minor supplemental (customary psychological)
irrigation, when in reality the native plant material will perform better on neglect.
"""
J.~
\We M:\bome'flla..msuaUsc::.p\dn.ft3
~ /~ -J':r
m::;~
Page 20
e
.
.
.:~l3~J2::. . . ',,'
ti:i:i. .:.:.lrliW:::~
6.2 Glossarv:
For the purpose of this Manual, the following terms shall have the meaning set forth
below:
"anti-drain valve" or "check valve": a valve located under a sprinkler head to hold water
in the system so it minimizes drainage from the lower elevation sprinkler heads.
"application rate": the depth of water applied to a given area, usually measured in inches
per hour.
.
"applicant": any person or business, requiring a construction permit per City code
requirements. This person or business shall apply for and receive any and all permits from
the Building and Housing and/or Engineering department(s).
"automatic controller": a mechanical or solid state timer, capable of operating valve
stations to set the days and length of time of a water application.
"backtlow prevention device": a safety device used to prevent pollution or contamination
of the water supply due to the reverse flow of water from the irrigation system.
"C.I.M.I.S.": the California Irrigation Management Information System. This is a system
administered by the California Department of Water Resources, which maintains weather
stations throughout the state which records the daily ET numbers.
"common area": that area which will be maintained by a homeowners association, County
service area, or other form of cooperative organization. For purposes of these regulations,
"common area" does not include open space which cannot legally be disturbed.
"drought tolerant plant": a container or seed propagated plant that has the ability to
endure prolonged periods of dry weather after establishment.
"ecological restoration project": a project where the site is intentionally altered to
establish a defined indigenous historic ecosystem.
"emitter": drip irrigation fittings that deliver water slowly from the system to the soil.
"established landscape": the point at which plants in the landscape have developed roots
into the soil adjacent to the root ball.
"establishment period": the first year after installing the plant in the landscape.
"Estimated Total Water Use": the annual total amount of water estimated to be needed
to keep the plants in the landscape area healthy. It is based upon such factors as the local
evapotranspiration rate, the size of the landscape area, the types of plants, and the
efficiency of the irrigation system.
"ET acljustment factor": a factor of 0.8, that, when applied to reference evapotranspiration,
adjusts for plant factors and Irrigation efficiency, two major influences upon the amount
of water than needs to be applied to the landscape.
., (
,Jr
,-~~.>: .
WPCW'-''foIo...u.,lla_pldralt3
--Y 16-k,i
Page 21
~~~~oom.::;::~~
*~l~~l
~'f~~~,:
A combined plant mix with a site-wide average of 0.5 is the basis of the plant factor
portion of this calculation. The irrigation efficiency for purposes of the ET Adjustment """'"
Factor is 0.625.
Therefore, the ET Adjustment Factor (0.8) = (0.5/0.625).
"evapotranspiration rate": the quantity of water evaporated from adjacent soil surfaces and
transpired by plants during a specific time.
"flow rate": the rate at which water flows through pipes and valves (gallons per minute or
cubic feet per second).
-
"groundcover": low plants, either herbaceous or woody, or mulches, that cover the soil
surface.
"bardscape'" patterned paving material (Le" tile or mortared pavers, wood timbers,
colored patterned concrete providing a tile, brick or stone appearance), or an integral
continuation of 'patterned paving material with enhanced concrete such as exposed
aggregate, colored or salt finish.
"hydroseeding": commonly used to describe the method of applying seeds, mulch, fertilizer
and soil stabilizers to slopes or to other planting areas.
"hydrozone": a portion of the landscaped area having plants with similar water needs that
are served by a valve or set of valves with the same schedule. A hydrozone may be """"
irrigated or non-irrigated. For example, a naturalized area planted with native vegetation .
that will not need supplemental irrigation once established is a non-irrigated hydrozone.
"infiltration rate": the rate of water entry into the soil expressed as a depth of water per
unit of time (inches per hour).
"Landscape Architect": means a person registered by the State, who performs professional
work in physical land planning and integrated land development, including the design of
landscape planting programs and irrigation systems.
"Landscape Contractor": licensed (C27) by the State to install plants, irrigation equipment
and other landscape features as specified by the owner or a State licensed landscape
architect. Landscape contractors are not licensed by the State to prepare landscape plans
for sale.
"landscape plans": for the purposes ofthis manual, landscape plans shall mean, any plans
or drawings required to satisfy landscape requirements within the Chula Vista Municipal
Code. The plan may consist of one or in-part the following types of drawings: planting,
irrigations, constructions, lighting. grading and other drawings and landscape items, details
or specifications. At minimum, landscape plan shall mean and include a planting.
irrigation, and water management plan.
"landscaped area": the entire parcel less the building footprint, driveways, non-irrigated
portions of parking lots, hardscapes, such as decks and patios, and other non-porous """"
ru.
WPC ..,_....."'""a\Io......pldnlt3
~/t- ?O
~
Page 22
.
.
.
l.::..::m.:;::::;,*W~cmll
ItJ
~::::::.}-~*h'W
areas. Water features are included in the calculation of the landscaped area. Areas
dedicated to edible plants, such as orchards or vegetable gardens are not included.
"lateral line": the water delivery pipeline that supplies water to the emitters or sprinklers
from the valve.
"main line": the pressurized pipeline that delivers water from the water source to the valve
or outlet.
"mined-land reclamation projects": any surface mining operation with a reclamation plan
approved in accordance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975.
"mulch": may be any organic or inorganic material such as leaves, bark, straw or other
materials left loose and applied to the soil surface for the beneficial purpose of reducing
evaporation.
"native plant species": A plant that is indigenous to the area and/or plant species native
to the region, which once established is capable of sustaining growth under local climatic
conditions.
f .
WPC >4,~."'Ia_""'pldnf13
/d--2/
-~-
('),~ 3 '
,
Page 23
~?:m.:::~m;::*,=*~:~@W'~?::$:f'@':.::m~ lU.Z"i:K:;;.;m;~';:f~m:::lY.*t::UjU::.:::;:;m:m::: *: j~:.;~:.;.:Jm::~W;"x.m;:'j Uj;:.;:m3:%:$;'f.
"opera I t~ng .pressdure"'hthebPressure at which a system of sprinklers is designed to operate, "i
usua ly Indicate at tease of a sprinkler.
"overhead sprinkler irrigation systems": those with high flow rates (pop-ups, impulse
sprinklers, rotors, etc.)
"overspray": the water which is delivered beyond the landscaped area, wetting pavements,
walks, structures, or other non-landscaped areas.
"plant factor": a factor that when multiplied by reference evapotranspiration, estimates the
amount of water used by plans for purposes of this ordinance, the average plant factor of
lower water using plants ranges from 0 to 0.3, for average water using plants the range is
0.4 to 0.6, and for high water using plants the range is 0.7 to 1.0.
"rain sensing device": a system which automatically shuts off the irrigation system when
it rains.
"record drawing" or "as-builts": a set of reproducible drawings which show significant
changes in the work made during construction and which are usually based on drawings
marked up in the field and other data furnished by the contractor.
"recreational area": areas of active play or recreation such as sports fields, school yards,
picnic grounds, or other areas with intense foot traffic.
"recycled water," "reclaimed water," or "treated sewage emuent water": treated or recycled ~
waste water of a quality suitable for non-potable uses such as landscape irrigation; not
intended for human consumption.
"reference evapotranspiration" or "ETo": a standard measurement of environmental
parameters which affect the water use of plants. ETo is given in inches per day, month,
or year, and is an estimate of the evapotranspiration of a large field of four- to seven-inch
tall, cool-season grass that is well watered. Reference evapotranspiration is used as the
basis of determining the Maximum Applied Water Allowances so that regional differences
in climate can be accommodated.
"rehabilitated landscape": any re-landscaping project that requires a permit.
"run otT': water which is not absorbed by the soil or landscape to which it is applied and
flows from the area. For example, run off may result from water that is applied at too
great a rate (application rate exceeds infiltration rate) or when there is a severe slope.
"shrub": a woody perennial plant with single or multiple basal stems.
"slope": the inclined exposed surface of a fill, cut or natural terrain.
"soil moisture sensing device": a device that measures the amount of water in the soil.
"soil texture": the classification of soil based on the percentage of sand, silt, and clay in '"""
the soil. ,
rr
wpe M:\Jlome'fdaDDiDtJaadsc::.p\dnft3
~/~~?:L-
~
Page 24
.
.
.
:K::m~.,.;::" ., "t~ .m:;: m~.l
II
"'~:@:.::-.m.~%
"sprinkler bead"; a device which sprays water through a nozzle.
"static water pressure"; the pipeline or municipal water supply pressure when water is not
flowing.
"station"; an area served by one valve or by a set of valves that operate simultaneously.
"tree": a perennial woody plant with one or more well defined stems or trunks which can
achieve heights of 15' or greater.
"turf'; a surface layer of earth containing mowed grass with its roots. Annual bluegrass,
Kentucky bluegrass, Perennial ryegrass, Red fescue, and Tall fescue are cool-season
grasses. Bermuda grass, Kikuyu grass, Seashore paspalum, St. Augustine grass, Zoysia
grass, and Buffalo grass are warm-season grasses.
"valve"; a device used to control the flow of water in the irrigation system.
"xeriscape"; water conservation through creative, appropriate landscaping and water
management. The concept has seven basic aspects. Planning and design, practical turf
areas, efficient irrigation, soil analysis, mulches, low water use plants, appropriate
maintenance.
_~b-7)
i
Page 2S
I {'
.tV)
:J"I~
WPC ""-'lpIaaWq\Jo_pldnf13
wm-~~~$:;:;:.uW~IDm.:mm:::r~~;:;:;:;::-Bw..;:;~r~~; um.: '::.U~i:::'llif'~~~~~~:::-m..~.::;.~
6.3 FIRE RETARDANT and/or DROUGHT TOLERANT PLANTS.
(.South Coastal Zone, including Chula Vista)
l
Where the provisions ofany applicable code, policy, or this Landscape Manual require the
use of Fire Retardant and/or Drought-Tolerant plants for private projects, any of the
following mav be used, and shall be shown on the Landscape Plans. This list is not a
complete list or intended to be interpreted as a mandatory list. Rather, this is suggestive
of the kinds of plants conisdered within these catagories. Where applicable, consult the
Fire Marshal for acceptable fire-retardant plants. For the Recommended Plant Material
List for open space and/or public projects, see Appendix Section Three, Appendix A.
Rntani... 'Narn..
rnrnrnnn 'Narn..
o TREES:
Ceratonia siliqua
Rhus lancea
Schinus molle
Umbellularia california
Washingtonia spp.
Quercus agrifolia
Carob Tree
African Sumac
California Pepper
California Laurel
Fan Palm
o SHRUBS:
Artemisia caucasia
Atriplex cuneata
Atriplex nutalli
Atriplex lentiformis
Atriplex semibaccata
Callistemon citrinus
Cistus villosus
Cotoneaster dammeri crispus
Heteromeles arbutifolia
Nerium oleander
Prunus lyonii
Rhamnus alaternus
Rhus integrifolia
Rosmarinus officianalis 'prostratus'
Caucasian Artemisia
Saltbush
Gamer Valley Saltbush
-;
Creeping Australian
Weeping Bottlebrush
Rockrose
Prostrate Cotoneaster
Toyon
Oleander
Catalina Cherry
Italian Buckthorn
Lemonade Berry Sumac
Creeping Rosemary
o HERBACEOUS PLANTS: (2round cover annuals and nerennials\
Achillea tomentosa
Agave americana
Aloe Spp.
Arctotheca calendula
Cerastium tomentosum
Crassula spp.
Delosperma alba
Gazania hybrid
Lampranthus spp.
Potentilla vema
Santolina chamaecyparissus
Satureja montana
Yarrow
Century Plant
Aloe
Cape Weed
Snow.in.summer
NCN
White trailing iceplant
Trailing Gazania
Bush Ice Plant
Spring Cinquefoil
Lavender Cotton
Winter Savory
l
lill 1 ~~r" U "t
WPC M:\hcmc"'aaiq\lalWbcap\dnft3
_.
~ /~-/?
;[Jl~*
Page 26
.
.
.
~~~g#;m;:::;:m::~4:m.:;:;:;:~~~~l.!l:<<ll::mK~~ ~
~;!;:r:
j::).:m;!M-. : iJ.~lU,~~.t:~~
Solanum jasminoides
Tecomaria capensis
Verbena peruviana
Vinca spp.
Wisteria spp.
Potato Vine
Cape Honeysuckle
Peruvian Verbena
Periwinkle
Wisteria
6.4 DISCOURAGED PLANT LIST:
These plants tend to be invasive and dominate when established in either riparian or coastal sage scrub
plant communities. These plants shall not be proposed for use in the open space or parks. Where these
have established in project areas, a eradication program is to determined, approved and implemented.
Arundo donax
Carpobrotus edulis
Cortaderia selloana
Cytisus scoparius
Pennisetum setaceum
Tamarix chinensis
Giant Reed
Hottentot Fig
Pampas Grass
Scotch Broom
Fountain Grass
Tamarisk
-~-?~
::
Page 27
"1 '
rI'
:J
WPC M,Ikom.\plon.....'Ia"",,",p\d<af13
Part Two
Private
~j:::-.:::B;:;:::;@~:@:::=.:::w:::~::::.:t"*;,::::?:$.:::;:;:.:::f.~m@.@.x:':l?::?::...~~.Ma:mf~&~~,:;::.",*v:m;~
Mi.
'r r~#l~:::U:~M.%
1
1. STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO REOUlRED LANDSCAPING.
All landscaping required by City regulations for landscape plan approval whether building
permits, grading permits, or other regulations shall meet the following minimum standards and
requirements.
1.1 Landscaoe Elements:
1.1.1 Grading: All grading shall conform to City grading standards. (See Chapter 15.04
of the Municipal Code.)
1.1.2 Planting: All areas of the site on which new grades have been created or
vegetation has been disturbed will be planted. One of two types of plantings listed
below will be required:
a.
Type I plantings may require supplemental irrigation which is greater
than natural rainfall, to ensure a manicured and healthy appearance.
Generally, all visible areas adjacent to the right-of-way will be Type I
plantings. Included in Type I planting will be the controlled use of "fire
retardant/drought tolerant" planting strips necessary between structures
and to be selected from the "FIRE RETARDANT PLANT AND
DROUGHT TOLERANT PLANT " list.
'"'"
b. Type II plantings are drought tolerant and do not require supplemental
irrigation and, once established, will survive and grow only with natural
rainfall. Type II plantings could consist of "hydro-seeding" with drought
tolerant and selected containerized native vegetation which may require
temporary irrigation until materials are established.
1.1.3 Materials: Shall include the planting of combinations of trees to provide Solar
energy conservation and utilization, ground cover, shrubs, vines, flowers, or limited
turf varieties with the plant materials consisting of native species and/or drought
resistant plant materials. In addition, when appropriate for the site and intended
use, the landscaping may include natural features such as rock and stone, and
materials, and structural features including but not limited to fountains, reflecting
pools, art work, screens, walls and fences.
1.1.4 Fertilizers: All planted areas shall be fertilized with a complete organic or
inorganic commercial fertilizer (nitrogen, phosphate, potassium). It shall also
contain iron or a separate application of iron must be made (contingent on
recommendations made by soil analysis laboratory). Slow release fertilizers shall
be applied during plant installation and at the end of the one year guarantee
period.
1.1.5 Decorative Landscaping: The use of architectural features, paving, fences, walls, '1
mounds, boulders, gravel, lighting, decorative water features, inert ground covers,
t ~:Ul* ~
WPC M:\bomclp18IUliDJ\biDdscap\dl'llft3
~/i,- 71r
:;:::.:
Page 28
.
.
.
-;
ill
....~=<<<<'~
and organic mulches (3" deep) is encouraged in conjunction with landscape
plantings, if they are well designed and compatible with community aesthetic
values. Recirculating water shall be used for decorative water features.
1.2 Irri~ation Elements:
1.2.1 General: Irrigation either by a permanent automatic sprinkler system or manually
controlled sprinkler system shall be installed as appropriate to the type of planting
served.
1.2.1.1 Material Standards; All pipe shall be made from N.S.F. approved, type
I, Grade n PVC, conforming to ASlM resin specification 0 1784. All
pipe shall meet requirements set forth in Federal Specification PS 22-70.
1.2.1.2 Sprinkler Heads: Sprinkler heads shall be a commercially manufactured
type and shall be selected for proper area coverage, application rate,
operating pressure, adjustment capability, and ease of maintenance.
1.2.1.3 Automatic Control Valves (Electric & Hydraulic). All automatic control
valves (electric) shall be globe or angle pattern, electrically controlled,
normally closed type. Valves shall automatically close in event of
electrical power failure. All control wire shall be of the Underwriter's
Laboratory type UF (underground feeder), single conductor, solid
copper, plastic insulated, 12 or 14 gauge minimum, 600' volt rated for
direct burial application.
Electrically controlled irrigation systems shall comply with the
requirements of the 1990 National Electrical Code, Article 725.
1.2.1.4 Backflow Protection: Backflow protection must be provided for all
irrigation systems and shall conform to all local water purveyor codes and
requirements.
1.2.2 Miscellaneous Desil!ll Criteria:
2.1 Gate valves are to be used as emergency shut- off valves and not as
manual control valves for sprinkler systems.
2.2 Sprinkler circuits shall run parallel or as close to parallel to the contour
lines as is practical.
2.3 Sprinkler heads within a circuit shall have a uniform precipitation rate.
2.4 Within subdivision lot development, every lot shall have an independent
irrigation system unless otherwise specified by the approved plans.
2.5
Pressure regulators, pressure relief valves, thrust blocks and other
irrigation appurtenances shall be required.
WPC W,_lpIouiqlla....pldnof13
/6----72
-~-
poge 29
"
nlf:
r
m:M:ll:m:;.::&,=::;:;:;;;;;m::m:"t~:::::::::::~:m~~;;ww.$'~~~w. :l
. ;~:;:::;~~::m.
.,
ll~*~~$~
1.2.3 Installation Procedures:
"""
3.1 Pipe Installation: The following are minimum criteria to be complied
with for pipe installation:
.1 Trench Width and Depth Schedule: All non-pressurized lateral pipe
shall be placed at a minimum depth of 12" and a minimum of IS" for
pressurized pipe. The trench width shall be the pipe diameter plus
4" (minimum).
.2 Flushing and Testing: After all new irrigation piping and risers are
in place and connected and prior to the installation of irrigation
heads and/or quick coupling valves, the systems shall be flushed and
made ready for testing. To insure proper functioning of the system,
all pressure irrigation piping shall be hydrostatically tested.
,3 Installation of Direct Burial Control Wires: All direct burial control
wire shall be installed in a trench and to the side or below any pipes
in the same trench. Minimum trench depth when installed without
pipes is IS" unless supplemental protection is provided. Whenever
direct burial control wires are to be installed under new or existing
improvements such as curbs, sidewalks, and/or pavements, they shall
be installed in a PVC conduit of the size noted on the plans, which
shall extend one foot beyond each side of the improvement. The
letter "E" shall be stamped or chiseled on the improvement directly """"
above the conduit. All wire splicing shall take place in the valve
boxes and/or pull boxes. All splices shall be made with a mechanical
connector encased in a self-curing epoxy resin or equal, which
provides a permanent watertight connection.
.4 Installation of Control Tubing: All control tubing shall be installed
in a trench to the side or below any pipes in the same trench.
1.3 Plant Grouoinl!S:
Plantings which are decorative in nature, and having similar water use, shall be grouped
together.
.,",,+
wpe M,_.Ip..uiq\Ia......p......ft3
J~ ~ ?6"
~
~
Page 30
.
.
.
Part Three
Public
~.
1. INfENT.
The Parks & Recreation Department developed this part of the City's Landscape Manual in
response to the need for a document that addresses the important aspects of design, installation
and maintenance of the City's parks, recreation facilities, open spaces and streetscapes. The
intent is to establish criteria to provide. the City and the citizens with the highest quality
facilities and landscape installations.
The desire for all landscape projects is to carefully integrate community needs, environmental
conditions and natural resources into a network of functional and aesthetic parks, trails, open
space areas, and streetscapes that require appropriate amounts of maintenance and
supplemental irrigation.
2. APPLICATION.
Part Three applies to all public and private developments requiring submittal ofIandscape plans
for development permits including, but not limited to the following projects:
. Public Parks and Recreational Facilities
. Open Space Maintenance Districts
. Street Medians and Parkways
3. FORMAT.
Part Three is divided into six (6) sections:
. Submittals (Section I)
. Graphics and Standards (Section II)
. Design Standards and Criteria (Section III )
. Landscaping (Section IV)
. Irrigation (Section V)
. Trails: General Use & Recreation Trails (Section VI)
The Submittals section (Section I) informs the applicant as to:
1. What types of submittals are required.
2. The iBteBt of requiring the submittal.
3. Who shall prepare the submittal.
4. What the graphic format shall be.
5. What the COBteBts shall be.
6. Who the approving authority shall be.
WPCM'-.\pIa_....,.........
)"-79
~~
Page 31
f)(,ll
I,ll'
m:;~m..~$':f.4%*:::::::%~'i,;:;:;:;;;:;~;:;:::::;:;m:;:;~-::~4Bw.;:;:;:;:;;;:;w:::~%~~m:;;;;;;::;:;@~:~~~;:;:;:%.:t~r.*,~.<<.:::::.~~~~~~m>':;:;::::.:::;:;M~--::.;:;;~:m::;:m;:-;i!:
The Graphics and Standards section ( Section II) informs the applicant about:
1. The various aspects of a construction document package.
"'"
2. The necessary plans and requirements for each section.
The Design Standards and Criteria section (Section III) informs the applicant about:
1. The specific requirements are for each aspect of site planning, hardscape, landscape,
irrigation, and recreational facilities.
The Landscaping section (Section IV) informs the applicant about:
1. The design and maintenance requirements for landscaping are for parks, open space, and
streetscape installation.
The Irrigation section (Section V) informs the applicant about:
1. The design and components required for a public works installation, specifically parks,
open space and streetscape installations.
The Trails section (Section VI) informs the applicant about:
1. The design and detailing required for a public works installation. Specifically what types
of trails planned and their requirements. ""'"
2. Who to contact to determine if a trail is to be provided in a certain area of the City
D. Conflicts with Other Documents:
Project, specific standards and guidelines, such as those contained in sectional planning area
(SPA) plans and planned community district regulations, shall take precedence when in conflict
with the following provisions.
"'"
~~.lLl
WPCM,lIoome'l>la_Ddxapldnlt3
~~g-{2
Page 32
.
.
.
~l
~
Section One
Submittal Requirements:
1. GENERAL.
The Parks & Recreation Department requirements for submittals varies relative to the type of
project and the phase of work being addressed. Specifically, the basis of the submittal is
contingent on whether the project is a.park, open space or streetscape installation. It is
recommended that the owner and/or consultants meet with Staff to review the scope of the
project prior to initiating work on any of the required submittals. Early communication between
the applicant and the City will help clarify the actual scope and product of the project.
The following information is an overview of the park and open space development process and
the specific products required for submittal. This framework and process has been developed
to benefit the AppliCant and staff by streamlining the review and approval time required for
each type of project.
2.
PARKS.
. Concept Plan:
The Concept Plan is the initial phase in the park design process. Work product relative to this
phase includes, but is not limited to: meeting with staff to discuss the project and the desired
uses, site analysis, program development of site features and components: development of
various schematic alternatives to evaluate site planning options; determination by staff of the
preferred alternative; preparation and submittal of the refined concept plan.
. Master Plan:
The Master Plan phase is the refinement of the Concept Plan to bring the park design to a
detail and graphic level acceptable for presentation to the Parks & Recreation Commission and
City Council. The plan(s) are to be colored renderings, mounted on foam-core. All Master
Plans will be retained by the Parks & Recreation Department for presentation purposes and
archival data.
. Design Development:
This phase focuses on the refinement of the Master Plan, to a level of detail sufficient to move
into the Construction Document Phase. The determination of materials, finishes, colors, plants,
quantities, etc. are to be analyzed and determined.
. Construction Documents:
The Construction Document phase consists of the preparation, review and approval of all plans
necessary for utilization by the contractor for the installation of the project. Typical sheets may
include: Planting, Irrigation, Construction, Grading, Layout, and related Construction Details.
WPC "'_.\pllluiqIla-.,_
},b --'r /
-~
Page 33
I
~
';;
:;"J
~':'~~~:tr%;$.~J':::::::~~W%:.::??<;:3%~::;::::-;::mr:;&mw~~**,":*:;;;::W,*~~J:;:$.*,~:;:~~~*,:&r:;:.-x.%.~m=*.~4m,*~~~r
~W~~:t.~~M:umf.:::::
3. OPEN SPACE.
""""
. Concept and Analysis Plan:
The Concept Plan for an Open Space project shall serve as a comprehensive plan identifying
the following aspects: analysis of the existing conditions, and the mitigation of any impacts
generated by the proposed project; existing features on-site and any sensitive plant, habitat or
wildlife existing on-site that might be impacted; identification of the various Open Space lots
being proposed for turnover to the City by letter designation; the level of modifications or
improvements to be installed relative to the "Code" system utilized by the City; gross area of
each lot and the total area of all Open Space lots, proposed or existing adjacent land uses; and
other proposed improvements such as trails, kiosks, signage, walls, etc.
. Master Plan:
The focus of this submittal is to graphically indicate the location of the project, the types and
locations of improvements, relationships to the adjacent land uses and the benefits that will be
derived from the prQject by the City and its citizens. The plan shall be at an appropriate scale
to allow for accurate analysis. This plan shall be a rendered plan, mounted on foam-core and
will be retained by the Parks & Recreation Department for presentation purposes and archival
data.
. Construction Documents:
The Construction Document phase consists of the preparation, review and approval of all plans "'""
and documents necessary for utilization by the developer and contractor for the installation of
the project. Typical sheets may include: planting, irrigation, construction, grading, layout, and
related construction details.
Based upon the scope and type of project, staff will identify the quantity of sets to be submitted
for review. Four sets of plans will typically be required for routing to other City Departments.
4. STREETSCAPE. (MEDIANS & PARKWAYS)
. Master Plan:
The focus of this submittal is to graphically indicate the location of the project, the types and
locations of improvements, relationships to the adjacent land uses and the benefits that will be
derived from the project by the City and its citizens. The plan shall be at an appropriate scale
to allow for accurate analysis. This plan shall be a rendered plan,
. Construction Documents:
The Construction Document phase consists of the preparation, review and approval of all plans
and documents necessary for utilization by the developer and contractor for the installation of
the project. Typical sheets may include: planting, irrigation, construction, grading, layout, and
related construction details.
Based upon the scope and type of project, staff will identify the quantity of sets to be submitted ""'"
for review. Four sets of plans will typically be required for routing to other City Departments.
Ji...
wpe ""_....._adoaopldnof13
~t-8':J-
~
Pase34
.
J *U%t
.:a::.*:)~
:J:::
Section Two
Graphics & Standards:
1. GENERAL.
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
.
1.5
1.6
1.7
.
To insure consistency and clarity, the following standards apply to all projects submitted to the
Parks & Recreation Department. These are to be adhered to in the preparation of construction
documents utilized in the implementation of a park or open space project, whether publicly or
privately constructed. These standards shall apply to all new development projects, capital
improvement renovation projects, plan revisions, and "as-built" drawings.
Concept and Master Plans shall be on sheet size no larger than 32" x 40", unless approved
by Staff prior to preparation.
If a project requires more than one sheet, a key map shall be included on all sheets.
All Construction Plans are to be done on City mylar"D" sheets with the appropriate title
block modifications.
All plans shall be done at a scale no smaller than 1" - 20'. Prior departmental approval
is necessary if projects require a smaller scale to fit onto sheet size. If additional detail
is required, a smaller scale is to be utilized to provide sufficient clarity. Open Space plans
shall at 1" - 40' for large scale areas. For more detailed planting and irrigation, 1" - 20'
scale plans shall be required (verify with staff).
Graphic symbols are to be easily discernable; clarity is imperative.
Provide bar scale on all plans to verify actual scale of plans.
All Construction Plan sheets shall be issued City sheet numbers, in addition to providing
the following for each sheet type in a separate number block:
C - Civil Engineer Sheets
HC - Horizontal Control Sheets
LC- Landscape Construction
U - Landscape Irrigation
LP . Landscape Planting
1.8 Matchlines are to be labeled to provide adequate reference for identification and cross
indexing to other sheets.
1.9 North arrow with scale shall be shown on all plans. North orientation of plan to be to the
top or to the left of each sheet.
1.10 Label streets that are adjacent to the project or within the project's immediate sphere.
1.11 All areas deemed to be maintained by the City shall to be clearly identified on the plans
(Open Space requirement).
- ~ /~~~
t
P"'
?,>
WI'C ..,_...IUIiD&IIo......p_
Page 35
$~ft:*;m":;;;;;;?,;;:;;%~@>/::::~:$.~~>>.N&:r~::$;W:;K*.mffi.~%~~+.*u
~ u;
.~:;t:?:::.~~:m::.:;.:;:;;;:r~;
2. FINAL WORKING DRAWING PREPARATION.
'1
Note: Some or all of the following items shall be included for each plan or sheet, contingent
on the specific project and the existing or proposed conditions at the project site. All
Construction Plans shall use City of Chula Vista "D" Sheets.
2.1 Title Sheet:
The title sheet shall numbered "T-l" and is to include the following information:
2.1.1 Vicinity map showing nearest arterial intersection, street names, north arrow, and
project location.
2.1.2 Location map showing the following:
a. Street configuration within, or adjacent to the tract or project
b. Street names
c. ~orth arrovv
d. Match lines, if applicable
e. Project limits
f. Tract boundaries
g. Scale
2.1.3 Index of Sheets
'1
2.1.4 Title Block:
a. Project Title
b. Developer's name, complete address and phone number (if applicable)
c. Landscape Architectural firm, complete address, phone number
d. All other consultant's, complete address, phone number
e. Date plans prepared
f. Seal of Registered Landscape Architect, signed and dated, including
expiration date of license
g. Tract/parcel map number, tentative tract number or project address
h. Revision block
i. Sheet number of
j. Permit number
k. Signature block for approvals by the following agencies:
. Director of Parks & Recreation
. City Landscape Architect
. Otay Water District (if reclaimed water for irrigation)
. County Health Department (if reclaimed water for irrigation)
""""
::::;
WPC",,_.lpla__pldnolt3
- ~ )~-i?
.~
Page 36
.
U 2
-
2.1.5 General Notes:
The following general notes are provided to give directions to the Contractor. The
City Engineer's signature on these plans does not constitute approval of these
notes and the City will not be responsible for their enforcement.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
.
h.
i.
j.
k.
I.
m.
.
WPCW:_'t>Ia__pldnlt3
Contractor shall verify with owner's representative that plans are current
and approved.
Work shall be in accordance with the requirements of the City of Chula
Vista Landscape Manual (most recent edition) and the San Diego
County Handbook' for Public Works Construction. Whenever special
requirements conflict on any matter, the City Engineer or his
representative shall determine which special condition or code shall
govern.
These plans are based on improvements by dated
The Contractor shall comply with the Engineering Soils Report
recommendations as they relate to his work.
The Contractor shall obtain all necessary and/or required permits ad pay
all related fees and/or taxes required to install the work on these plans.
The Contractor shall be appropriately licensed as required by the State
of California.
A separate plumbing permit and inspection will be required from the
Building and Housing Department for the installation of irrigation
systems shown on this drawing.
The contractor shall notify the Engineering Inspection Division prior to
beginning work and shall be responsible for coordinating with the owner,
Landscape Architect, governing agencies and other trades.
Contractor shall notify the Engineering Inspection Division immediately
of any errors, omissions or discrepancies in existing conditions or with the
plans orior to beginning the work.
Unit prices for all improvements shall be established as a part of the
contract with the City, prior to beginning work, to accommodate
additions and/or deletions of material and/or labor.
Determination of "equal" substitutions shall be made only by the
Landscape Architect.
Landscape Architect and/or Engineering Inspection Division shall be
notified no less than 4 hours in advance of the start of construction, any
site observations, or meetings.
Site observations shall include, but not be limited to:
Main Lines
a. Trenches complete
b. Hydrostatic pressure test
c. Backfill and compaction
Control Lines
a. Trenches complete
b. Wires, connections and pull boxes in
c. Backfill and compaction and circuit test
Lateral Lines
a. Trenches and sleeves
b. Pipe, fittings, swing joints-spotcheck . ~
/k ---3".7
-~
;}?1
,
Page 37
~~M:?:@?:W'@:;W..;Mmm~~~--::::Bmm',:;:.;m:t'0.:;:;:;:.::m;:r$i$:t~~~:;:m:;~~~~~. :ti..! zm:;:r#.;%.~~:t.::W.~
c. Backfill and compaction ""'"
Note: "Landscape" shall refer to all improvements within this set of
documents that have been designed by the City or bid out in this project
as a component of the project.
n. Site observations by the Landscape Architect during any phase of this
project does not relive Contractor of his primary responsibility to
perform all work in accordance with the plans, specifications and
governing codes.
o. The Contractor shall provide full maintenance of all landscape areas for
a minimum of 90 days after initial written City approval. All open space
areas which will ultimately be maintained by the City of Chula Vista,
shall be maintained for a minimum of one year after initial written City
approval.
p. The Developer shall provide a "non-exclusive easement" when public
trails or sidewalks occur outside the public right-of-way.
q. The Developer shall provide easements for public utilities that occur
outside of the public right-of-way.
2.2 Grading Plan:
Shall include (but not be limited to):
2.2.1 Grading Plans for projects that require grading shall conform to the Grading ""'"
Ordinance #1797. ,
2.2.2 Existing and proposed grades with flow lines.
2.2.3 All existing and proposed surface structures, improvements, underground drainage
systems and utility lines with depths noted.
2.2.4 Elevations at curb returns and control points.
2.2.5 Reference to City plan numbers for all existing and proposed improvements within
and adjacent to the project boundary. Reference shall include the type of
improvements and responsible party for the improvements.
2.3 Lavout and Construction Plan:
Shall include (but not be limited to):
2.3.1 Graphically indicate and identify:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Walls
Fences
Walkways
Pathways
Signs
Site furnishings
Structures
~
l~.:.:,*.*m~::&
wpc M:~'foIolUliq\la"""p\dnf13
-~ /tt.--?'~
)i
Page 38
. ~. ;;Ul:i~UUt :Uli.*:; ~
h. Recreational facilities
i. Parking lots
j. Site or landscape lighting
2.3.2 Construction details.
2.3.3 General construction notes.
2.3.4 Specifications.
2.3.5 Any aspect of the landscape J:X>nstruction (including but not limited to those items
above) shown on either any architect's or engineer's plans, shall have information
regarding those items indicated on the Landscape Plans and referenced as to plans
and sheet numbers.
2.3.6 Plans that include construction items requiring building permits per the current
UnifOrm Building Code shall be identified as requiring permits and state the party
responsible for obtaining the permit. The permit number (if known) shall be
referenced on the plan.
.
2.3.7 Reference to City plan numbers for all existing and proposed improvements.
IdentifY the location and depth of any utility line that may interfere with the
proposed construction. References shall include the type of improvement and
responsible party for the improvement.
2.3.8 All sleeves and other construction items requiring coordination between other
phases of work shall be included in plans and details.
2.4 Irril!:ation Plan:
Shall include (but not be limited to):
2.4.1 Graphic presentation of all components of the system.
2.4.2 A legend showing all symbols stating the manufacturer, precipitation rate, gallons
per minute (gpm), radii of each head type and detail reference call out as well as
all pertinent data for materials used in the system.
2.4.3 Irrigation details.
2.4.4 All systems shall have their equipment sized, their control valve size and station
number given, and their gallon per minute (gpm) stated. Pipe sizes shall be
indicated numerically (i.e. 3/4", 1", etc.)
2.4.5 Description and location of the water servicetmeter(s) shall include:
.
a.
b.
c.
Domestic or reclaimed service
Water meter size and address
Installation requirements and responsibilities of the water purveyor and
the Contractor
WPC M:\It.-e"'aaiaa\Ia~~ ~~~f13
-~ Jt~t~
:
Page 39
"' f
;.01
~'i:;~;oom*;;:m;;:;~~:;:.~~ww.w$m;;:::~~ @"l W ,h>.1;!;~;j..!J.:::W:W.W
;~J,,:::.:m.&:::, ~. ~'W..m::::
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
Available static water pressure at point of connection (POC)
Design pressure
Peak flow through water meter (GPM)
Total area served through the water meter in acres or square feet
Yearly demand in acre/ft.
Irrigation program that documents the system as designed provides
sufficient supplemental irrigation based on the precipitation rate of the
specific head(s), and the irrigation coverage of the site can meet the
highest demand monthly ETo within the following watering window:
.~
.
.
Parks
Open SpacelStreetscapes
4 day, 8 hr window
5 day, 9 hr window - for
Code 1, 2 & 3 areas
10 p.m. - 6 a.m.
9 p.m. - 6 a.m.
2.4.6 Pressure loss calculations for each point of connection. Calculations shall show
pressure loss for the system with the highest pressure requirement.
2.4.7 Description and location ofthe electrical service which shall include:
a. Point of connection to the electrical service
b. High voltage line to the electric meter
c. Electric meter type, location and address
d. Installation requirements and responsible parties
2.4.8 Booster pump locations (if required).
~
2.4.9 Location of all existing and proposed surface improvements and structures.
2.4.10 Reference to City plan numbers for all existing and proposed improvements.
Identify the location and depth of any utility line that may interfere with proposed
construction. References shall include the type of improvement and responsible
party for the improvement.
2.4.11 Location of existing trees and requirements for performing work around them.
2.4.12 General irrigation notes.
2.4.13 Specifications.
2.4.14 The following requirements pertain to reclaimed water projects. These notes shall
be included on all plans for irrigation systems using (or designed for) reclaimed
water:
A. The installation of the reclaimed system shall conform to the rules and
regulations for the construction of reclaimed water system within the
Otay Water District.
~
l~:.t~:t.:!Jt~ :J ...~.l;l.Llt*"
WPCM'~.~"_"""p\dnlt3
~/t-~r
Page 40
.
.
.
-(.:.:>: .$~':':,t,~l .~^:lmm.
~~U~~.~':::.**.:i:,**.3.:Uj~l:':lUlr1tll
^4
B.
The Otay Water District shall be notified two days prior to the start of
construction at (619) 670-2222 and each workday thereafter until
completion of the project.
C. All on-site constant pressure reclaimed and potable water main line
piping installed on this project shall be identified in accordance with the
district's regulations and the irrigation specifications.
D. Detectable warning tapes shall be used on all constant pressure main line
piping carrying either reclaimed or potable water.
.
E. Warning tapes shall be a minimum of 3" wide and shall run continuously
for the entire length of all constant pressure main line piping. The tape
shall be installed in the trench 6" above the top of the pipe at the top of
the sand bedding material.
F. Warning tape for the constant pressure potable water piping shall be
BLUE in color with the words "CAUTION BURIED WAlERLINE
BELOW' imprinted in minimum I" high letters black in color.
Imprinting shall be continuous and permanent.
G.
Warning tape for the constant pressure reclaimed water piping shall be
PURPLE in color with the words "CAUTION BURIED WAlERLINE
BELOW" imprinted in minimum I" high letters black in color.
Imprinting shall be continuous and permanent.
H. All pressure main line piping from the reclaimed water system shall be
installed to maintain 10' minimum horizontal separation from all potable
water piping. Where reclaimed and potable water pressure main line
piping cross, the reclaimed water piping shall be installed below the
potable water piping in a PVC Cl 200 pipe sleeve which extends a
minimum of 5' on either side of the potable water piping. Provide a
minimum vertical clearance of 6".
I. Contact the Otay Water District and the City of Chula Vista Parks &
Recreation Department to arrange for a coverage test and a system walk-
through.
2.4.15 Exterior drinking fountains must be shown and called out on the reclaimed water
irrigation plans. If no exterior drinking fountains are present in the design area,
it must be specifically stated on the plans that none exist.
2.5 Plantinl! Plan:
Shall include (but not be limited to):
2.5.1 Location and spacing of all plants.
WPCM:-''foIo__Idnofl3
/6 --gy
~~-
Page 41
, '
:ft7
v
I
a.~~*~;;;::;;:~:;;;;;;::;i:;;;;;:i:~;;;:;::::m:.m;;;;~.:::m~%%:i~%,:;:;:::,;;;;::::~;%~;~m~;r:::%~$:$;;'$:::%1*:'~:;;.~$.:U~%~.,.@*~:::m:*h:mm:mm~~~:t:,m~;>>'--:;0~i:;
2.5.2 Plant material species, container size, quantity, minimum ground and spacing --..,
requirements.
2.5.3 Standards for tree caliper, height and spread shall be specified.
2.5.4 Location of all existing and proposed surface structures.
2.5.5 All existing easements shall be indicated and labeled.
2.5.6 Edge of buildings on all adjacent properties (if applicable for solar access).
2.5.7 Reference to City plan numbers for all existing and proposed improvements.
Locate and identify depth of any utility lines that may interfere with proposed
construction. References shall include the type of improvement and responsible
party for the improvement.
2.5.8 Seed mix information (including but not limited to):
a. rate
b. mix
c. mulch
d. binder
e. fertilization
f. inoculation
"""\
2.5.9 Planting details.
2.5.10 General planting notes.
2.5.11 Specifications.
2.6 Electrical Plan:
Shall include (but not be limited to):
2.6.1 Location and spacing of all light fixtures, pull boxes, transformers and other
components.
2.6.2 Light Fixture Schedule indicating the manufacturer, product number(s), light
source type, etc.
2.6.3 Panel Schedule that conveys all information relative to each control panel.
2.6.4 Location of all existing and proposed surface structures.
2.6.5 All existing easements shall be indicated and labeled.
2.6.6 Edge of buildings on all adjacent properties (if applicable for solar access).
~
!
wpe M.\Ioome'f>.......\Ia....pldnlt3
=
y /t -90
:;
Page 42
.
.
.
~:!:::~~~r::::::":"@m~"?':W*~~l ~ ~~_~:;.~'f~tKUGl
;.l::!:tR
;.:,;,'
~* jj . t~jj; Jj Mlli:.LliE ~~~:m;::;
2.6.7 Reference to City plan numbers for all existing and proposed improvements.
Locate and identify depth of any utility lines that may interfere with proposed
construction. References shall include the type of improvement and responsible
party for the improvement.
2.6.8 Installation details that indicate the installation of all components specified.
WPCM,_.IpIo__p\Clro1t3
-pr;
/~ -:7/
.....d:.! JL ~
Page 43
I
"
.",
.,
...~ I;'
,,"
.(j
~~:;:M~mmm~:;;::f~;;:::::-r:;:mw<<;m.':=::;.m.<::=';;::::M*m:;:MmW&;.;%rA~~..m$~:m.
'l:;;;:~tUm.:mmM~~~~&;:-mt:::
Section Three
~
Park Design Standards & Criteria:
1. GENERAL.
The following design standards and criteria address functional and aesthetic issues for park
design, and are to be referenced and utilized during the formulation of conceptual designs,
design development and final working drawing preparation. The specified items are
requirements and shall be followed.
2. PARK DESIGN.
2.1 Site Planninl!:
2.1.1 Park site planning is a dynamic process that can vary greatly contingent on the site
context, existing conditions, size, scale, proportion, program and concept.
Appropriate site design includes the identification and controlling of views, the
organization of site components; recreation features, paths, roads and parking;
structures and maintenance facilities, along with the types of furnishings necessary
to support passive and active recreational activities.
Planning must include analysis and integration of off-site features such as bicycle
and pedestrian trails, open space areas and joint-use of adjacent schools to assist ""'"
in providing for the recreational components, while maximizing the passive use
areas.
2.1.2 Refer to the Parks & Recreation Master Plan for specific issues when analyzing
and evaluating the above mentioned site planning issues for a new park design.
For existing sites, coordination with Staff is required to come to resolution for site
planning.
2.1.3 All areas of every park are to be designed to be handicapped accessible, as per the
latest requirements as set forth in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
2.2 Hardscaoe:
2.2.1 Primary walkways in City parks shall be concrete: 6" thick x 10'-0' wide, minimum.
Secondary walkways shall be 4" thick x 6'0" wide, minimum. Walkways should be
located around turf areas to provide a transition from turf to planting areas.
Locations of walkways at park perimeter(s) and at the parking lots are to be
located to provide a logical, convenient and aesthetic means of accessing the park.
Mix design shall be 564 - D - 3000 for enriched paving. 520 -C - 2500 for basic
walkways.
2.2.2 Decomposed granite (D.G.) paths may be proposed or required as a secondary or
tertiary component of a park circulation element, in addition to recreation trail.
These walkways shall be retained on both sides with a 2 x 6 redwood header as a ~
minimum, or preferably with a 6" concrete mow curb. D.G. to be a minimum of
j u.t::..:~.m : ~~;::: l~U~
wpe M'\bame~"'"'"'aIJa_pldnof13
~/b---;/?-
*"*.:W:.
Page 44
.
.
.
~~$...~:$."$~'$.:~~m:r~~~~,~: jj l::i:t ll~~
WPC M:\Iaome'ftlalllliq\1a...p\dra1t3
~~.
.:.:~~~:::;;
6" thick. Trail width requirements are contingent on the proposed use. If the trail
is for recreational use and maintenance vehicle access, the width shall be 10' wide
minimum. Park use requires a minimum width of 6'. Recreation use requires a
minimum width of 10'.
2.2.3 Group use or pooling areas should be designed with enriched paving that is
consistent with the design theme, colors and site concept. Provide sufficient
information regarding the proposed paving for Staff to evaluate the proposed
types, patterns, materials, etc.
2.2.4 All benches, tables, trash and hot-ash receptacles are shall be installed on concrete
pads. Pads shall to be installed at a gradient no steeper than 1 %. Paving can be
enriched or detailed for emphasis of site features.
2.2.5 Concrete mow curbs shall to be provided to separate all lawn areas from planting
areas, under all chain link fencing, as an integral component of any wall (both at
the top and bottom where lawn areas exist) and where directed by the
Department. Widths will vary depending on condition and location.
2.3
Recreation Facilities:
The following is a partial listing of potential recreational facilities that may be required
or desired for inclusion in the development of a park design, contingent on the specific
park site, scale, existing facilities in adjacent parks and the Parks Master Plan. Specific
recreational amenities will be determined by the department based on a needs analysis.
The Department will also take into consideration existing or proposed amenities within
the Parks and Recreation Planning Area.
2.3.1 Basketball Courts:
Basketball courts shall to be 94' x 50', with an additional 10' wide perimeter band
of concrete. Court orientation shall be north - south. Courts shall be constructed
of 6" thick concrete, with reinforcing as required (based on the soils report),
minimum of #3 rebar at 18" o.c. each direction. Rebar dowels are to be provided
at the mid-court joint. Resilient court surfacing and striping to be provided.
Color(s) to be blue field, white striping and green
If lighting is provided, then the court lighting recommendation is (4) - perimeter
30' poles with (2) - 400 watt metal hallide luminaries on each pole. Soils testing
and structural calculations are required for submittal relative to the steel
reinforcing and the footing details for the light poles. Coin meter boxes may be
required for operation of the lighting.
Site features related to a basketball court shall include a drinking fountain,
bench(es), trash receptacle and bike rack. Backboard supports are to be arching
precast concrete components set on a concrete footing. Backboards shall be milled
aluminum with ribbed reinforcement, primed and powdercoated white with an
orange "box". The shape is to be a "fan" product. Rims are to be orange, spring-
loaded with metal chain nets. Three (3) point lines shall be painted white at the
19' - 9" distance (NCAA standards).
-~
~;-/~ -9J
Page 45
!i' >-
"",
..
,
w:;@uu;;:;~:~~n::*;.~;::::;:m:n~w::::;;:;un:;..:::::..;;H@:r~;%:m;:;;f.;;;;W:::~;:;:~~$j,,~'*W;:;;~~wJ:"*~:::m;:::i:;:;;;;;:-t):::::$$-W.wA~~mm':;:$tt4~<<:::~W;~.t:;:mr.@%m.:rm:~:::BWn:;:::
2.3.2 Tennis Courts:
""""
Tennis courts shall be 120' x 60' in paved surfaced area, and 78' x 36' in actual
court area. Courts shall be constructed of 6" thick concrete, with reinforcing as
required based on the soils report, minimum of #3 rebar at 18" o.c. each direction.
Rebar dowels shall be provided at the mid-court joint. Resilient court surfacing
and white striping shall be provided.
If lighting is provided, then the court lighting recommendation for each court is
(8) - 20' poles with (1) - 400 watt metal hallide luminaire on each pole. Soils
testing and structural calculations are required for submittal relative to the steel
reinforcing and the footing details for the light poles. Coin meter boxes shall be
required for operation of the lighting. Site features related to a tennis court shall
include a drinking fountain, bench(es), trash receptacle and bike rack. Court
orientation shall be north - south.
12' high green vinyl coated chain-link fencing with windscreen fabric shall be
provided around entire court perimeter.
2.3.3 Swimming Pool:
Swimming pools are shall be a minimum of 25 meters x 15 meters. Preferred size
is 50 meters x 20 meters. Specific facilities and site detailing to be coordinated
with, reviewed and approved by the Parks and Recreation Department.
""""
2.3.4 Softball Field:
Softball fields shall be designed and sized to accommodate men's professional
league games. 60' baselines and 300' radius outfield.
If lighting is provided, then light poles are to be a maximum of 65', tapered
galvanized steel poles. Soils testing and structural calculations are required for
submittal relative to the steel reinforcing and the footing details for the light poles.
Each field is to be switched independently. Orientation shall be home plate facing
north, or as determined by the approved project Master Plan.
2.3.5 Soccer Field:
Soccer fields can vary in size from 165' x 300' minimum to 225' x 360' maximum.
The actual field layout shall be as directed by staff based on the land area
available.
If lighting is provided, then light poles shall be a maximum of 65', tapered
galvanized steel poles. Soils testing and structural calculations are required for
submittal relative to the steel reinforcing and the footing details for the light poles.
Each field shall be switched independently. Orientation shall be north/south.
2.3.6 Volleyball Court:
........
mm.l~ll~l:a;;l~~l ;<<-: . ~m ~..
Me M:\Iaome~IaJUliaJ\laad5c:.p\dn.ft3
1m
/, 13 /1.-9~
~
l ::&;
Page 46
e
e
e
WPCM:\bame'q>lo.......-_p.....ll3
llUl~
. ~%:Jm:~i1: : t:.l :
l:mmm..l!. L U . Ul
l:ml ~i~
Volleyball courts shall be 60' x 30', with a 10' wide clear area around the court
perimeter. Courts shall be constructed with sand, 12" thick, minimum. The actual
court layout is to be defined by nylon rope, secured at the corners by metal stakes.
Orientation shall be north/south.
2.3.7 Comfort Station!Maintenance building:
For all new park sites and facilities undergoing renovation, a comfort
station/maintenance building will typically be included in the project program.
.1 Comfort station in. active parks shall contain three (3) separate storage
areas, sized to have sufficient room to allow for a small utility vehicle (if
ballfields are at site). Rooms to have adequate shelving,' lighting,
ventilation and have drains to allow for hosing out. AIl rooms to have
separate locking doors, sized to allow for access and removal of
applicable league equipment.
.2 Interior of all comfort station toilet areas shall be constructed and sealed
to prevent the potential for bacterial growth.
.3 AIl areas including floors, walls and ceilings shall be sealed and graffiti
coated.
.4
AIl toilet fixtures shall be low flow and sink fixtures shall be low-flow
with automatic water shut-off fixtures.
.5 AIl stainless steel fixtures shall be pre-approved.
.6 Metal mirrors will be installed in lieu of glass.
.7 Electric hand dryers shall be utilized in lieu of paper towel dispensers.
.8 Toilet paper dispensers shall be vandal proof with two or more roll
storage capacity
.9 AIl toilet partitions shall be solid poly material, "Santana" of equal, with
sturdy installation hardware.
.10 AIl floors to be designed and constructed with adequate drainage to
allow for high pressure cleaning.
.11 Any skylights designed into the facility to be designed to prevent break-in
access. Mesh or bars in the interior shall be included.
.12 AIl restrooms shall be equipped with locking doors that have concealed
locking mechanism which do not detract from the building aesthetics.
.13
AIl facilities shall be handicapped accessible and conform to all
applicable ADA guidelines and requirements, including necessary
signage.
.di =ltL 16 - 95
~~
Page 47
"J
:,r~
,-
:SZ:%%'$~~*"*:B?:;:;:;:;;~;@:::-$s::"-.::m:$$:B";$:::::::::@%r:-~:i;:~:;;~:;:m:;;%r@:;;~:::z.::~~z.::r:;Q:;?,:::~::::~~:$:~~:;;:::@:m~~-$~:B*.:::.'?.m@:::l;~%";:..::;::*;.<<m~m:.'%Y~~;$Wt~:::::::?k~~~,$.;$.e:iWt.;;:";:
.14
Building shall be well lit, both exterior and interior, with vandal resistant
light fixtures.
-..
,
.15 Design of the building is to relate to the aesthetics of the site, with no
concealed areas.
.16 For parks and sites with league activities, a vending area may be
required, including electrical, sewer, water, service window, and other
components as determined by staff.
.17 Utility area for staff shall be sized sufficiently for equipment and supply
storage. Shelving and hanging components shall to be included.
Adequate electrical and phone service shall be provided.
2.4 Lil!htinl! & Electrical Svstems:
All park sites and parking lots shall to be designed and provided with security lighting as
a required feature of the project. The types of poles, luminaries, light fixtures and
installation shall be per the specific project design and requirements. The minimum
amount of lighting along walkways and in the parking lots shall be 1 foot candle.
All electrical components shall be installed in stainless steel, vandal proof, outdoor
enclosures, unless installed in an interior application such as a maintenance facility. If
in the open space, and a remote irrigation controller is being installed, then a back-to-back """"
enclosure that also houses the electric meter shall be provided.
2.4.1 Lighting system designs shall be developed for all park projects by a licensed
electrical engineer. Conduit and pull-boxes shall be installed in the first phase,
even if the light poles and fixtures are not installed until subsequent phases of the
project.
2.4.2 The power source to be utilized for all park lighting and power requirements is not
to exceed 120v / 208 watt power. Transformer location(s) to be coordinated with
SDG&E.
2.4.3 Additional conduit and pull boxes are to be installed to the furthest use
component or area, to allow for future demands or replacement of failed circuits
or where future lighting or fixtures are to be installed.
2.4.4 Security lights shall be mounted on 14 - 18' poles. Poles to be either precast
concrete or spun aluminum with handholes at the base. Color shall be consistent
with the project accent color. The fixtures shall have a IES classification of type
IV semi-cutoff or non-cutoff. The refractor shall be U.V. stabilized, prismatic
acrylic or polycarbonate.
2.4.5 Lighting for all courts and sport fields shall be with metal hallide fixtures. Security
and parking lot lights shall be high pressure sodium (HPS). Minimum foot candles
shall be provided are as follows: .~
2.4.5.1 Tennis Courts:30 foot candles
J2l.~ ~;;m;.Ej:.:. ~:.:. .
WPC M:\bome'Plalllliq\lladsc:lp\draft3
~/b/;?f
=.
J%
Page 48
.
* ~:;w.,*.m:%~~mr,i;'i[~@~* lilm~.m Jt!:!!lm
K::t~~:
2.4.5.2 Basketball Courts:20 foot candles
2.4.5.3 Ball/Soccer fields: 40 foot candles - infield
25 foot candles - outfield
2.4.5.4 Security Lights:l foot candle - minimum
2.4.6 Each court, field, parking lot and security system shall be individually switched.
2.4.7 Each court may be required to have a separate coin meter wired through the
electrical panel. Each court shall be lighted independently with each coin meter
being located on the respective court.
.
2.4.8 City maintenance vehicles must have access to court facilities to maintain light
fixtures for relamping and maintenance. A 10' wide clear path shall be provided
to all light fixture locations.
2.4.9 Irrigation heads shall be located equidistant in respect to the light pole locations.
Light fixture locations shall be shown accurately on the lighting plan.
2.4.10 All underground conduit shall be Sch. 40 PVC. Minimum size to be 1". Conduit
running parallel to hardscape features shall run adjacent to the hardscape and not
underneath the paving.
2.4.11
. 2.4.12
2.4.13
2.4.14
2.4.15
Above grade conduit is to be galvanized rigid steel, 3/4" minimum size.
Provide a pull box fuse and fuse holder at each light standard. Each feeder going
up the pole shall be fused with a waterproof fuse.
All light standards in lawn areas will have a concrete base/mow strip installed as
per San Diego Regional Standard Drawing(s) L-5.
The anchor bolts and nuts for all light standards shall be grout covered.
Manufacturer's metal base covers are not acceptable.
All park lighting shall be operated through a lighting controller. Unit to have an
adjustable light sensor and be completely programmable relative to "on" and "off'
time settings.
2.5 Parkin!! Lots:
.1 Drive lanes shall be a minimum width of 26',
.2 Minimum stall size shall be 10' wide x 18' deep.
.3 Minimum handicapped stall size shall be 10' wide x 18' deep with a 5' wide off-
loading lane adjacent; Two (2) stalls can off-load onto one (1) 5'lane.
.
.4
A geotechnical test is to be conducted and provided to provide for a paving section
design for the parking lot and all vehicular access paths.
WPCM,_.lpIauiq\Jo_pldnlt3
~~ ~ /~-97
-~,
Page 49
/'
oi,
f')0~
,r
~~m~:;::::::}:~:m1t::~:::;:;:H:~:;:;m;:::;r.:~:,~:%%%-:m;:;.:::;:;:~~$.:::;:~:::":::~@:;:::;:;:i=:::~1~m;:Um~%$';::~.;:m:::..$m:;::.;.~*m..~*%~@::;~::::::.~m~m~::::..:ill3;:r:m.::::..;:;*,::::*:;:~
.5
12" concrete step-offs shall be provided in all planting islands where adjacent to
a parking stall.
""""
.6 Security gates shall be provided at the entry to the parking lot. Site design is to
allow for the prevention of vehicles circumventing the gates when closed (i.e.
bollards ).
.7 Signage and bollards are to be provided as required and directed by the Parks &
Recreation Department.
.8 25 - 50 stalls shall be provided for neighborhood parks, with 50 - 80 + stalls to be
provided for community parks. Quantities may vary based on actual types and
quantities of recreational components and size of park. Verify with Staff.
.9 Security lighting shall be provided. A minimum of 1 foot candle of illumination
throughout the parking lot is to be provided. Luminaries are to be High Pressure
Sodium (HPS).
.10 Gradients in parking lots shall be sufficient to provide for positive drainage (1 %
minimum) but also allow for the acceptable installation of handicapped stalls.
Cross gradients shall not exceed 4% at handicapped stall and access areas.
.11
Dumpster enclosures shall to be located in the parking lot areas. Final location
shall be reviewed and approved by staff. A heavy vehicle load paving section for
the drive lane and the concrete apron shall to be provided at the head of the
enclosure. Minimum size of the concrete apron shall be sufficient to allow refuse
vehicle access to the trash containers. Specific dimensions and design shall be
reviewed and approved by the Department.
"""\
.12 The paint utilized for striping and mark-outs shall be consistent with CalTrans
Specification quality. Paint color shall be "white". For handicapped stalls and
areas paint color shall be "blue". For fire access areas and no parking zones, color
shall be ''yellow''.
.13 See Part II for additional parking lot requirements.
2.6 Gradine:. Drainae:e & Landform Contourine::
The modification of a site to allow for the preparation and installation for the construction
of a park site or Open Space is critical to the success of the specific project. Geotechnical
testing, analysis and recommendations are required. A registered soils engineer or a
person under the supervision and direction of a registered soils engineer should to be on-
site continuously during grading operations. The Civil Engineer will be required to attest
to the completeness and accuracy of the work as designed and installed. The Department
will be involved in determining and reviewing all proposed grading and landform
contouring plans prior to final development and approval of any Concept Plans, Design
Development and Construction Plans.
Grading, Horizontal Control, Irrigation and Planting Plans shall show the proposed finish .~
contour grades on the base sheet, at a 50% screen.
jUL;m:;:;:t<<.@*~~~~ UL
WPc M:\bome\p"DAiDa\la~p\dn:ft3
~ /~~frg
~%
Page 50
.
.
.
~::;;$:{::%i:.%:::41~~<m:~ll~*::.*li,~l..m::';:i:li:,~~l~:x.t* ~~
.:.:t
~;:::.;.~:
2.6.1 All projects will have positive drainage and provides the necessary components and
drainage as required by the City Subdivision Manual for the design of drainage
facilities. Indicate spot elevations at corners, critical locations and as necessary to
properly and adequately indicate the proposed grading of the project site.
Drainage arrows and sheet flow gradients shall be indicated. Drainage is to be
directed away from buildings, electrical enclosures and irrigation controllers.
Design is to provide for drain inlets, catch basins and underground piping as
required to meet above referenced criteria. Open drainage swales may be
considered where deemed appropriate by the Department. Site grading and
drainage shall also confo~ to the following minimum requirements:
2.6.1.1 Sport Field Areas:2.0% min. and 3.0% max.
2.6.1.2 Open Play Areas: 2% min. and 5% max.
2.6.1.3 Lawn Areas: 2% min. and 4:1 max. gradient
2.6.1.4 Parking Lots: 1 % min. and 4% max. Handicapped Stalls to meet current
Title 24 requirements
2.6.1.5 Hardscape Areas: 1% min. and 3% max. cross-slope. Paving not
adjacent to streets shall meet current Title 24 requirements
2.6.1.6 SoftballlBaseball Fields: 1% - 1.5% grading away from home plate,
Crowned from the pitcher's mound and home plate and sloping towards
1st and 3rd bases
2.6.1.7 Mulched Planting Areas (P.A.): 2% min. and 3:1 max. gradient
2.7 Trails:
The various trail components within the City of Chula Vista include pedestrian, bicycling
and hiking/equestrian trails. If the park site is adjacent to, or located along a existing or
proposed trail component, then this feature shall be integrated into the park design. The
General Plan also identifies trails as being the component to connect all city parks and
schools, as well as open space areas.
User group safety is of the utmost concern when locating and designing trails for inclusion
in the City-wide and regional network. Trails should intersect all crossings at 90" if
possible. Motorcycle or vehicular access onto the trail is to be prevented through proper
design and detailing. Do not allow curbs or vertical features within 5' of the edge of the
trail. Active sports shall not be closer than 20' to the trail. Do not locate any valve boxes,
vaults or drain inlets in the trail. No obstructions will be allowed in any trail, and a
minimum overhead clearance of 12'- O. shall be provided and maintained for both built
and natural features. All trails are to be installed with City standard signage for the
specific trail type. Trail signage shall be located at the beginning. end, and as required
by CalTrans standards not to exceed 500'.
2.7.1 Pedestrian:
WPCM:_....__p....113
it 'lk /" - q 9
-.:hY -
Page 51
, t'"
:;1i
~m.;;:;:;:,wmf.::;:$i;:;:;:;:;::~'i~:m::::$.:::;:;:r~;:;:H:::.m;;:;~:;::**::?~:;:;::mmoo"::::.~.:.:
*t.~~-::>&:.~** vW'^:X:" ~ll=.u.M" ~~:::::::.%m::
2.7.1.1 To be as per the description above in Section 2.1 "Hardscape".
"""\
2.7.2 Bicycling:
2.7.1.1 To be as per the description above in Section 2.1 "Hardscape" , or as
approved by staff.
2.7.1.2 A minimum centerline radius of IS' shall be maintained with appropriate
signage identifying any hazardous or changing condition, and a
continuous 3" wide dashed yellow strip shall be provided.
2.7.3 HikinglEquestrian:
2.7.2.1 To be as per the description above in Section 2.2 "Hardscape".
2.8 Walls & Fences:
The following are the primary wall or fence types that may be required or desired for
inclusion in the design of the specific project: Concrete masonry unit (CMU), cast-in-
place concrete, CMU with a stucco finish, and hand-set precast-concrete block modules.
Fencing types are wrought iron, chain-link and post and rail wood fencing.
2.8.1 Walls:
"""\
All walls are to be treated with an anti-graffiti coating as per the Department's
specification. Safety railings as per code requirements are to be installed at the
top of all walls that exceed 18" in height.
2.8.1.1 Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU):
.1 Shall be designed and implemented to utilize the flexibility and other
positive aspects of CMU products and features while addressing the
intended design application for the project.
2.8.1.2 Cast-In-Place Concrete:
.1 May be proposed when the massing and character of a design project
merits its consideration. Design of walls and detailing shall be
effective, yet feasible to construct.
2.8.1.3 CMU with Stucco Finish:
.1 For use in project areas where a higher level of detail and design
character is desired or called for relative to the use of standard
CMU. Design shall reflect the project concept, theme and detailing
in order to merit use of this wall type.
2.8.1.4 Precast-Concrete Block:
"""\
" ~
/~ j'J /~ - /00
~
m:m:::
Page 52
WPC M'~\P"..u.,IIo"""pldnlt3
.
.
.
m.,,:a.~,:.:.:nm:.<<;:::.;;:~w~.@z.4-.:m:.~~.:;s,.i:::..-.l~;;;li
iOOl
llil
J.l~uD$.:~
.1 Typically utilized in Open Space areas, this product may also be
utilized in park projects where appropriate. Acceptable areas are
low-use areas of parks.
2.8.2 Fences:
2.8.2.1 Galvanized Steel (wrought iron):
.1 Used primarily in open space view fence conditions, galvanized steel
fences may also have appropriate uses in park projects contingent on
the project concept, proposed use and site detailing. All components
shall be fabricated from galvanized steel.
2.8.2.2 Chain-Link Fence:
.1 Varies in height and detailing as per the specific site feature use(s)
and requirements. Galvanized or vinyl coated installations shall be
specified on the construction plans.
2.8.2.3 Post and Rail Fence:
.1 To be a minimum of 42" high, with the posts a maximum of 8' o.c.
Fences are to have (3) rails and shall be installed as per CVSD 16.
2.9 Sil!llal!e:
The inclusion of signage for a park or open space access point, at the appropriate location
(Le. entry to project, primary visual point) is required.
2.9.1 Monument Sign:
The entry monumentation signage for all projects shall be designed to emphasize
the design and theme of the specific park and/or open space. The scale of these
components shall be sized to be an appropriate element in the landscape, and to
provide a feature of correct mass and proportion for which to mount the project
name and identification. The City logo shall be included in the monument sign
design, and shall be per City requirements.
The monument sign and component(s) shall be constructed of materials that will
provide for the longest lasting Imost durable installation. Materials shall be
considered for use include Concrete Masonry Units (CMU). cast in place or pre-
cast concrete or stucco over CMU. Wood features with signage may be acceptable
for use at open space trail head locations. Verify with staff.
2.9.2
Dedication Plaques:
Dedication plaques shall be provided for each new park project as a required
component of the park development. Plaque shall be wall mounted where on
appropriate building exists or on a dedication plaque podium. Verify with staff.
WPCM'_...._-..1dno1l3
~fr _)rf,
/ c??J /6 -/0/
Page 53
.,
f(}'J
,r
~: .
%...~%*~**:r:m*;;i;;M~;:::;~::::.:S"'M.?:OO>.-::::":;:::~~:;:;:$%*:':;:::::;:';:;~:';:;:$;:,%:::fu.~;~%~m:m]::::~m.::W~@W;';::;;;,.-::::::'~@U.lJl.:.:. ~'.: .$::::~~::mm:~W.1&*~*$:~,::,$:;:r:::::
2.9.3 Miscellaneous Signage:
""'\
A signage program shall be developed for each park site based on the specific
facilities that are identified for inclusion in the project scope. All areas that are
designed for handicapped access or use shall be identified as such to the
requirements of the ADA. Other signage aspects shall include, but shall not be
limited to:
a. Handicapped Parking
b. Park Rules and Regulations
c. No Parking ( Red Curb)
d. Court Regulations { Where Applicable)
""'\
""'\
~~ ~* j =. . .:!$UUZ
\\'PC M:\IIora.e'Plauiq\lllDdscap\dnft3
J~ -J~}-
~
;~~.:
Psge54
.
.
.
jmW~'lls::~~~W~;;[~..;
jj lU**^ ~. Ut~ ~ lJ.ll~H.:m::.:~~
Section Four
Landscaping:
1. GENERAL.
Every project is unique in terms of site location, adjacent land uses, design constraints, positive
and negative views, etc. The functional, aesthetic, soil moisture, and maintenance requirements
of all proposed plant material are issues that must be taken into consideration in the
development of landscape designs and wans.
The following design guidelines address issues relative to maintenance and site design. It is
the responsibility of the design consultant to design the landscape and make plant material
recommendations that address all relevant site issues and constraints.
Selecting and matching plant material into specific condition areas or 'hydrozones', that have
similar requirements (water and maintenance) is to be emphasized. Native or low water
requiring plants are to be situated away from turf areas, either by distance or elevation. Turf
areas shall be separated from planting areas by walkways or concrete mow curbs.
. 2. PARKS.
2.1 Plantine: Desie:n:
2.1.1 Turf:
2.1.1.1 The type of turf grass to be utilized on a park site is dependant upon the
type of activity proposed for the specific area. Common Bermuda shall
be utilized for passive use areas, 'Tifgreen' Hybrid Bermuda shall be
utilized for sport field (softball, soccer, baseball, etc.) applications.
2.1.1.2 The quantity and configuration of turf shall be determined primarily on
the park uses, needs and scale (to a lesser degree in consideration of the
irrigation design). This in an effort to maximize the efficiency of the
irrigation system and the on-going maintenance of the project
installation.
2.1.2 Trees and Shrubs:
2.1.1.1 Plant material locations and spacings for shrub plantings shall be
determined based on 75 -100% of mature plant size. Spacing shall allow
for proper plant development without crowding, and for basic trimming.
(min. one plant per 100 S.F.)
2.1.1.2 Prostrate spreading shrubs, in conjunction with shredded mulch, shall be
used for groundcover in medium and large scale planting areas. Only in
areas of high visibility will annual, perennial or succulent groundcovers
be proposed and/or considered.
WPCM,-.\pIo_odoapldnlt3
)~ ~/O~
~
II!!
Page 55
'I"~
)
W~;:;:;:::~;:;:'~;~%::::)~8:::8~;::::@~::~;:;:;::;:::;;;8~~:~;:mB*;:;:H~:~;:;:~::;;~~*%:B$:;:;~:;:::'~H:::::::$:;:;*,:n:K4:~;;;;::z~:m,.~~'*:t:::-=*.;:;.:;:;:::::i::-mAA;::~;;;.:m.:::::i;:.~:;:::..t:&'%:ms::::::r.$~mB;~,*..f:8m~::::
2.1.1.3 Plant material selection is to emphasize the use of plant that are """\,
relatively pest and disease resistant and require minimal maintenance.
2.1.1.4 Dense groves of trees shall not be located in turf areas. Grove features
shall be in planting areas, with a 3" minimum layer of shredded mulch or
wood chips as a ground cover.
2.1.1.5 Security and safety shall be a primary consideration in the development
of the plant palette. All plantings along perimeter streets, parking lots
and maintenance walkways shaH be selected to allow for visibility into the
site.
2.1.1.6 All non-planted areas shall be covered with a layer of shredded mulch,
wood chip product or decomposed granite to prevent erosion, control
dust and allow for use of the area. The type of cover is to be determined
based on intended use of the area.
2.1.1. 7 If the existing configuration or grading of the site creates moist or dry
conditions, then the planting design and selection of plant types shall
emulate these situations.
2.1.3 Drought Tolerant and/or Native Landscapes: Utilize drought tolerant and/or
California native plant material in all planting area applications. This is in an
effort to emphasize reduced water consumption and maintenance requirements.
High water need or high maintenance planting designs are not to be developed
unless the project program or site specific conditions make such a proposal
justifiable. Verify with staff.
"""\,
2.2 Maintenance:
2.2.1 Site Maintenance:
Landscaping shall be designed and plant material selected to allow for ease of
maintenance throughout the park site. Specifically'
2.2.1.1 The planting design shall be designed in close coordination with the
irrigation system design to assure that the coverage of the irrigation will
not be affected or compromised upon completion of the installation, nor
in the future when the plant material matures.
2.2.1.2 No shrub shaH be located within one-half of the mature spread of the
plant to the nearest irrigation head or to the edge of any hardscape
surface (Le. walkways, mow curbs, parking lots, etc.).
2.2.1.3 All trees located in lawn areas shaH be kept a minimum of 10' apart, and
15' away from adjacent hardscape or site furnishings to aHow for mowers
to circulate between trees.
2.2.1.4 Trees and irrigation system designs shall be coordinated with one another
to prevent having coverage shadows from either tree trunks or canopies.
"""\,
. ~ :m..:;:w>>.;:::~:m:m:; ~lmh
\We M:\bome\pialllliD&\1aDdscap\dl1lft3
lUt. 1
~ /~-/PJf
;~~
Page 56
.
.
.
m:m.mm~~.m::m.*-~m:mE.:m::.
.' ,*-.... li.:;
~m^U*.U.l
~&'1~
3. OPEN SPACE.
3.1 General:
The City's open space maintenance districts are identified and budgeted for using a
"Coding" system. The five (5) different codes are as follows:
. Code 1: Ornamental and high maintenance landscape areas
. Code 2: Lawn areas
. Code 3: Irrigated and erosion control slopes
. Code 4: Non-irrigated native or drought tolerant areas
. Code 5: Undisturbed native habitat
This Coding System is the basis on which the contracts in the Landscape Maintenance
Districts are awarded and administered. With the growth of the City and the installation
and subsequent "turnover" of open space acreage to the Parks & Recreation Department,
effective management and use of both staff and resources is a high priority.
To this end the Parks & Recreation Department, in conjunction with plant ecologists,
biologists, and environmental planners, supports the concept of reestablishment of native
plant communities in the City of Chula Vista open space areas. The revegetation and
establishment of the indigenous native plant communities is beneficial to the wildlife, while
providing many benefits for the City, the citizens and the environment.
The City of Chula Vista is located in the coastal zone of Southern California. The existing
coastal sage scrub and riparian habitat that occurs throughout the City is hoe to several
endangered plant and wildlife species. A balance must be achieved to allow for planned
development and habitat preservation. In addition to this condition is the static supply
of imported water, and the minimal amount oflocal water supplies. A growing population
and demand of water also adds to the pressures of this decision making process. A
sensible approach must be developed to respond to this sensitive equation.
The City is also responsible for establishing the Landscape Maintenance Assessment
Districts that collects the fees to pay for the materials and maintenance of these areas,
which, when landscaped and irrigated using typical plant material and irrigation, consumes
precious natural resources and in turn requires a higher level of maintenance.
In response to this situation, The City of Chula Vista is a proponent of utilizing the
concept of native habitat revegetation. This provides numerous benefits, among which
include:
.
The deletion of the need to provide long term irrigation to support the new
installation
The blending and integration of the newly installed landscape into existing,
undisturbed areas
The recreation of habitat for the indigenous and endangered plant and wildlife
species that occur in this region
The reduction in the cost of assessments and demand for contract maintenance
personnel for extensive areas of open space within the City.
The cost and energy savings realized by having native habitat.
.
.
.
.
wpe ..,_..."""'aIIa-.....1I3
- afF~ : /k .:...~ _co PageS7
~-' 7 /6 -ru...:J
-1"1/
'), '
,1'
3.2 Revel!etation Guidelines:
~$~::::~-:;:::::\@M:;::m:.:::~';:;:W;;:::;;;;;:~K::,-:;:.;;s;~@-m:::r:;;;:~%%m::::~i;::%m.g:::.t;;;mr@:?::.~i:;~ii.~:$s~W..Jjz:.~:.: .J.: ~~ ~l;~~~~W~~$r.;;:';:j;;1i
-...
3.2.1 Drought Tolerant and/or Native Landscapes: Utilize drought tolerant and/or
California Native plant material in all planting area applications in an effort to
emphasize reduced water consumption and maintenance requirements.
Native and Naturalized Plantings: The restoration of natural plant communities
in areas that have been disturbed by site development is encouraged in transitional
areas and in open space areas. These installations are to be designed such that
minimal maintenance will be required and that irrigation systems mayor may not
be installed. Plant material is to be selected to provide 'seamless" transitions from
undisturbed areas to the restoration areas.
These installations shall also to be designed to emulate a natural succession of
plants that will provide an initial cover and surface stabilization, with a sequential
establishment of long term and environmentally correct plant materials and
communities for the specific location.
Basic Components of a Revegetation Program:
Shall include (but not be limited to):
.1
Site Description:
.2
Conceptual Proposal:
Identifiable features of the site
Model sites with native vegetation (same
environmental conditions)
Complete description of climatic conditions
Description of topographic, geologic, and soil
conditions
Existing vegetation survey and diversity
analysis (method utilized) along with
photographs
Description of changes generated from site
grading
-...
Important principles, planning,
implementation and maintenance to be
observed by the project
list of plants to be introduced
Propagules of each species
Schedule for all significant project activities
Plans for any mid-course corrections
Schedule and approach for project monitoring
Estimate of project total cost(s)
-...
:*
\We M:~c"f'IIIIUlia&\1aDdKap\dnft3
Hl.t
)b-/tl6
~
m
Page 58
.
.
.
* H*:~:,W~~H!:fl
*J.!;l:;.::~U u:.:~.m;~;j%;_:.U!im.:m!j
~
.3
Technical Specifications: Detailed Schedules for activities
Final Plant List
Kinds of propagule for each plant species
Means of seed collections and container plant
production
Procedures for any plant salvage
Collection, storage, and re-application of top
soil
Introduction of beneficial microorganisms
Methods of applying seed
Methods of installing container or salvaged
plants
Methods of treating the soil surface
Methods of caring for seeds and plants
The following is provided for general information. A complete list shall be
prepared by the project consultant for submittal and review by staff prior to
proceeding with the development of the revegetation plan.
The revegetation guideline provides a recommended standard for the design of
projects that are within one of the following categories:
.
.
.
City maintained and/or owned open space properties
Initial landscape installations of open space and park transition areas
Open Space Landscape Maintenance Districts or Assessment Districts
4. STREETSCAPES.(MEDIANS& PARKWAYS)
4.1 General:
.
The street medians and parkways are important components of the overall landscape
image for the City and its citizens. While the roadways provide safe and efficient
circulation through the City, the streetscapes weave the landscape fabric into the overall
vehicular interface throughout the City. Gateways at key entries signify the entrances into
Chula Vista and are "anchors "for the beginning and exits for the City's circulation
component.
As identified in Section One, an overall Master Plan is required to be prepared for all
new and renovation streetscape projects in the City. For new streets, this plan is to be
prepared by the developer for review by staff. For street renovation projects, this plan
shall be prepared by staff or by the consultant contracted for the project.
The specific street types that will require landscape planning are as follows:
.
.
.
.
Expressway
Six Lane Prime Arterial
Six Lane Major
Four Lane Major
^.;:il ;.!i
WPcw_...................p.....ft3
~uWr
/~ -/D 7
~/-' / ~?
Poge S9
..... ' '
1"'\" tv;
I!
" ~,
/"~ ~
""7-
~$:.s~t,*m::;:'*';itm;:;:;:;..~;:;:;;;:'::;:;:i:m:~~.:;:;:.mw-~;..:m::.@~;;;::.aW4.:.-*.::::~m;~ww.:.<?~ 1:;':;['"'
*.Eti:$. liUm~~:;:''r@~;::>$':;;~:
In addition to addressing the landscape issue, planning at this phase shall address the
inclusion of trails or bike lanes as a component of the layout and the cross section, as per
the City General Plan. See Section Six, "General Use and Recreation Trails" for specific
information.
""""
4.2 Specific:
4.2.1 Medians:
4.2.1.1 Street medians in the City of Chula Vista are required by ordinance to
conform to the 60/40 ratio of hardscape to planting area. Within the
medians the plant material is to be comprised of trees, shrubs and
groundcovers. No turf is to be proposed or installed in center medians.
4.2.1.2 Specific plant material shall be as proposed in the master plan of the
project. When developing the plant palette, consideration shall be given
to the location of the project (i.e. bayfront, valley, riparian, mesa, inland,
etc.). Plant selection should reinforce or emulate the climatic and
locational aspects of each street segment.
4.2.1.3 Hardscape for the medians shall reinforce and be consistent with the
theme or concept that is being proposed with the plant palette. Actual
layout and relationship of landscape to hardscape can be flexible based
on the location and proposed design concept.
4.2.2 Parkways:
"'"
4.2.1.1 Parkways adjacent to the major roadways specified above shall reinforce
the concept and image being created by the median design and plant
palette. The minimum width of a parkway is 5', with a maximum width
of 30'. When sufficient area is available or if a project planning
document requires, a 10' wide recreational trail in a meandering layout
shall be provided. This will provide for a sense of movement and create
opportunities for the design of "drifts" or "masses" of plant material.
4.2.1.2 Specific plant material shall be as proposed in the master plan of the
project. When developing the plant palette, consideration shall be given
to the location of the project (i.e. bayfront, valley, riparian, mesa, inland,
etc.). Plant selection should reinforce or emulate the climatic and
locational aspects of each street segment. Turf can be proposed at
intersections or in areas that merit the consideration of turf in
relationship to adjacent projects.
"'"'"
jJti:t >. :::::*ll~, t:t
wpe M:\bome\pJaIllliq\lliDdscap\dnh3
*:.m
)t -)()$
~
J,r':::::i%
Page 60
.
.
.
~~WiiW.
T ~t t ~:~jJ._'::.l* ~~ J.t
mt:.
., ~~~~~~
Section Five
Irrigation:
1. GENERAL.
The City of Chula Vista is primarily serviced by two water agencies, the Sweetwater Authority
and the Otay Water District. The Sweetwater Authority services the western portion of the city,
and the Otay Water District services the eastern portion of the city. With the large scale
development and construction occurring in the east, and Otay Water District being the
purveyor, the design requirements relative to volume, for the City, are based on the Otay Water
District allocation standards.
The Parks and Recreation Department has the responsibility of reviewing the designs and plans
for parks, open space, and streetscape, irrigation installations. One of the primary
considerations is to aSsure that these irrigation systems will be able to meet the time constraints
placed on the operation of these systems within the prescribed "windows of operation" or
quantity of water available during the course of the year.
Therefore, the design of irrigation systems for both parks, open space and streetscape areas is
of extreme importance, for the efficient distribution of water to all landscaped areas and getting
correct application of water to the subsurface depths for the specific plants being irrigated. The
issue of preventing any surface runoff or waste of water in the process of operation of any and
all systems is also a strict requirement.
The Parks and Recreation Department has developed irrigation design criteria and a list of
irrigation components that have been deemed acceptable for use on parks, open space and
streetscape installations. The following design requirements address issues relative to the design
and installation of irrigation systems.
Refer to the Section One of the Landscape Manual for a detailed description of the City's
requirements relating to irrigation water use and the water management plan.
2. IRRIGATION DESIGN.
Any irrigation system that is in a park, open space or streetscape that is to be turned over
to the City must be designed and installed to meet the following requirements:
2.1 P.O.C.:
2.1.1 All projects shall to be analyzed to determine the size of the water meter and
pressure mainline relative to the scale of the irrigated area at the project site.
Lt
WPc..,-..Jo.......,.._pl,dnlt3
/(,.-/09
)~ /'tfJ ~
- /~~-
c
,0':;)
I'
.:'
Page 61
~~~~~:.::;ml;,m:.:.:.,;,:;::m;m.~~~~:mK<:::~~-:mm;. ;.uU::3.}:::;::Um. ::&\2''''
~, U1
~*''*
2.1.2 The system must be able to apply the volume of water necessary to achieve the '"""\
ETo for the highest demand month within the following criteria:
Parks: 8 hours per day, 4 days per week
Open Space/Streetscape: 9 hours per day, 5 days per week for Code 1,
2, and 3 areas
Streetscape: 9 hours per day, 5 days per week
2.1.3 The water meter and pressure mainline shall be sized to match the flow capacities
of each, (i.e. 2" meter and 3" mainline, 1-112" meter and 2-112" mainline, etc.).
2.1.4 All systems shall be designed to operate at a water velocity not to exceed five (5)
feet per second.
2.1.5 A reduced pressure backflow preventer is mandatory per code requirements. The
installation is to include an expanded panel stainless steel enclosure set on a
concrete pad.
2.1.6 A master valve shall be provided directly after the backflow preventer. See below
for additional information.
2.1.7 Each POC shall have only one irrigation controller. Maximum amount of stations
per controller is (40) stations.
2.1.8 All POC's shall be located in planting areas, NOT in lawn areas.
'"""\
2.1.9 Gate valve( s) shall be provided wherever pressure mainlines branch off in different
directions and on mainline runs of 250' maximum.
2.2 Controllers:
2.1.1 All irrigation controllers shall be installed in stainless steel enclosures on concrete
pads. See irrigation material list for manufacturer and Standard Drawing(s) 11
and 12 for installation.
2.1.2 Enclosures shall be installed at approved locations. Location to allow for
observation of area serviced by controller.
2.1.3 A master controller and slave controllers can be installed, when more than one
controller is required for a specific project installation. The master controller will
provide for remote access to program all the controllers that are "hard wired" to
the master. The access to program the controllers shall be through either radio
or telephone. Verify with staff for correct components and feature requirements.
2.1.4 In remote locations, the enclosure can be a frontlback unit that allows for the
installation of the electric meter for the controller.
""'\
WPCM:_..Ia_..............,
)tf., ~/c9 J /6-//0
~
Page 62
.
.
.
l:m:m;:.w~
w.~~,:::m
*"
2.1.5
Parks: Controllers to be located in maintenance building or approved location.
Open Space: Controllers to be located at approved location, adjacent to P.O.C.
Street Medians: Controllers to be located in parkway, adjacent to P.O.C.
2.3 Valves:
Master Valve:
2.3.1 Each master valve shall be installed in a "jumbo" valve box.
2.3.2 Master valve shall be wired independently and have a separate station at the
irrigation controller. The master valve shall be open only during periods when
RCV's for the P.O.C. are programmed to be operating.
2.3.3 Master valve shall be located directly after the backflow preventer. Valve box to
be located in a planting area.
2.3.4 The master valve can also function as a pressure reducing valve in conditions
where the static PSI is greater than 75 PSI.
Remote Control Valves:
2.3.5 Each remote control valve shall be installed in its own valve box.
2.3.6 Remote control valves shall be installed in a manifold. Each manifold is to be
isolated by a gate valve. Remote control valves shall be installed with the largest
valve and GPM flow installed first on the manifold, with smaller valves and
capacities transitioning from there. The line size of the stub-off feeding the
manifold shall be the same size as the mainline.
2.3.7 Remote control valves shall be located in planting areas only. Valve boxes shall
be set parallel to each other, and perpendicular to adjacent paving or concrete
curb.
2.3.8 All remote control valves should be set and installed in planting areas where
possible.
2.3.9 Each remote control valve shall operate area(s) that are sequentially correct. i.e.:
top of slope-initially , mid slope-next, bottom of slope-last higher elevations-
initially, mid elevations - next, lower elevations-last
2.3.10 Maximum valve size is 2". Maximum design flow through valve is 80 GPM.
2.3.11 Heads that irrigate ballfield areas shall be on separate valves than adjacent areas.
Quick Coupler:
2.3.12 Each quick coupler valve shall be installed in its own valve box.
WPC w,-'IpIa__p\dnlt3
/6 -iL'CZ /'--//1
-/C-Y
Page 63
o "j'
;;~O"'"
W*..wi::t$B,*.m,*.;::;~;~:f:m:.:;:.~m~~~':;:::;:W~~d*';%;i;:m:::wE::[~::;:w.:~::.:::~::;:;:;~:~jt,:::;:~~
2.3.13 Locate quick couplers at remote control valve manifolds, or at a maximum spacing
of 200' O.c. """'"
2.3.14 All quick couplers shall be double lug, 1" size units with a swivel
2.3.15 All quick coupler valves shall be set and installed in planting areas or as directed.
2.3.16 All quick couplers shall should be isolated with its own ball valve.
2.3.17 Minimum line size supplying a quick coupler is 1-1/2".
Gate Valves:
2.3.18 Each gate valve shall be installed in its own valve box. Gate valves to be used for
line sizes of 2Y2' to 6".
2.3.19 Gate valve( s) shall be provided wherever pressure mainlines branch off in different
directions and on mainline runs of 250' maximum.
2.3.20 All gate valves shall be full port design only.
2.3.21 All gate valves should be set and installed in planting areas where possible.
Ball Valves:
2.3.22 Each ball valve shall be installed in its own valve box. Ball valves to be used for
line sizes 1" to 2".
""""'
2.3.23 Ball valves shall be used only on manifolded sub-mains or on lateral lines.
2.3.24 All ball valves shall be set and installed on level areas.
2.3.25 All ball valves should be set and installed in planting areas, where possible.
2.3.26 All ball valves shall be full port design only.
2.4 Irrieation Heads:
2.4.1 Every irrigation head, regardless of change in elevation, shall have an integral or
in-line check valve as a component of the head installation.
2.4.2 All turf heads shall be pop-up heads. Spray heads to be 4" or 6", depending on
turf type and mow height. Stream rotors shall have a 4" minimum pop-up height.
2.4.3 All turf stream rotors shall have stainless steel risers.
2.4.4 All shrub heads at top and toe of slope shall be pop-up heads. Also any heads to
be deemed in a "accessible area" or prone to vandalism, as determined by staff
shall be pop-up heads. ""'"
H*. '. .M!;': )r:;:mf.f!J.:.t:;:H':::'::::..m:mmw..$:~.:m~. :.: t~~
wpe M:\Iaome\plaIllliDJ\laaclscl.p\draft3
m;,,*.
~" -//L
Ul.~r$:
Page 64
.
.
.
~:::::.:OO::l&::.:::::~~.:m.~.Mu.:.:%:;; v
-*
;jM, =*~W
,~.:J:;;.*ll~
2.4.5 All heads directly adjacent to any walk, curb, parking area, or pedestrian accessible
area shall be a pop-up head.
2.4.6 All heads are to have a "shut-off' valve integral with the swing joint assembly.
2.4.7 All irrigation heads are to have an anti-theft device integral with the swing joint
assembly
2.5 Trenchin!!:
2.5.1 No shared use of trenches will be allowed between various trades and for
incompatible uses. Potable water lines for drinking fountains shall be in a
designated trench. Electrical conduit shall be in a designated trench. Pressure
mainline and lateral lines will only be allowed in the same trench when a minimum
trench width IS" is provided.
2.5.2 No pipes are to be installed directly over one another. A minimum of 6"
horizontal shall be provided between parallel lateral lines to allow for accessing all
pipes.
2.5.3 Sand bedding is required for all pressure mainline.
2.5.4 Detectable warning tape is required for all pressure mainline.
2.6 Pioin!!:
2.6.1 All pressure mainline for pipe 1-1/2" or smaller shall be Sch. 40 PVC.
All pressure mainline for pipe 2" - 3" shall be CI. 315 PVC.
All pressure mainline for pipe 4" - 6" shall be CI. 315 PVC, AWWA rated, bell
gasket type pipe, with Sch. SO or cast iron fittings.
2.6.2 All lateral non-pressure pipe shall be sch. 40 PVC.
2.6.3 All end runs, regardless of head type shall be 3/4" line size minimum, I" if the
head inlet is I".
2.6.4 Lateral lines on slopes are to be laid parallel to the slope contours.
2.6.5 No on-grade piping is allowed.
2.7 Wirin!!:
2.7.1 A minimum of two (2) spare wires control wires shall be run along each mainline
branch to the furthest valve manifold. Bundle and tape 10' of additional wire and
install in a pull box adjacent to the valve manifold.
2.7.2 Control wires runs under paving shall be installed in Sch. 40 PVC. See wire
schedule for size of sleeve per quantity of wire.
2.7.3
All control wires shall be color coded. Submit a proposed color coding schedule.
J tk -49
- ~ (" d>-::
',")
'll; .'
(.I
,
WPC ",,_.lploaoiD&\la_pldnol13
Page 65
~*m-:;:t:~~~:;:~:~~:;:;::;:;';:1~:;;;;;:;m:~S:::-i;:l:~::;:;:;:*:;:,::;:;;;,:;:*~::;-':?':~:::::::;:::r#~';:1:mu.w:$.t$.~r:::.:..<:?J:;;;:;~%f:;:;:::r@;:;m:$*~;::'~:::':;:r':::':;:;'.~m:.m::~%m:;;*-mm"Wr.f.:Wh:;;$:::;:;!;:.f::;;;;
2.7.4 No splices will be allowed on runs ofless than 500'. On runs of greater than 500', """'\
splices are to be made with an approved splice unit, and to be installed in a
concrete pull box. Identify on Irrigation Plans were splices and boxes are required.
2.8 Miscellaneous:
Booster Pumps:
2.8.1 A booster pump will be required to be provided when the static PSI available at
the POC does not provide sufficient pressure at the furthest head to effectively
operate that station.
2.8.2 The pump and all related equipment are to be installed in a protected enclosure
on a concrete pad.
2.8.3 Location and access to the equipment will be as determined by staff.
2.8.4 Booster pump to be located directly after the backflow preventer and before the
master valve.
""'"
m ~& ~j ~l:l:.:.:m. . Ul~~ ,U.:;;,wmmf ,~
WPC M:\Iaome'l'b1Il1li1lJ\laadlclp\dnft.1
I/~
~b - b::)
~
-.
Ht*.Jm:
. m:m:.~
Page 66
.
.
.'
.m:m.llm.w'~~:mr~~ u.u~
ml
Ul
U.::::..:.:
Section Six
Trails: General use and Recreation Trails
1, GENERAL
As identified in the City General Plan, the identification of trails is to be considered in all
projects, is to be considered, Trails shall be included to provide connections from parks, schools
and public facilities to each other, in ad~tion to accessing city open space areas and trails,
Trails provide for the use of alternative modes of transportation, as well as recreational
activities. Two types of trails are used within the city and open space areas, They are the
"General Use Trail" and the "Recreation Trail".
This section addresses the two (2) types of trails to be considered, in addition to the design
requirements and cOnstruction detailing.
2, TRAIL TYPES,
2.1
General Use Trail:
A general use trail is a trail that is synonymous with pedestrian sidewalk, with the main
differences being the size and detailing, A general use trail shall conform to the CalTrans
"Bikeway Planning and Design Criteria" (7-1000) design standards and to be constructed
as follows:
2,1.1 A minimum of 10' wide x 4" thick, concrete with #8 wire mesh throughout,
minimum. Trail shall be constructed on compacted subgrade and designed to be
accessible for physically disabled individuals.
2.1.2 A post and rail fence shall be provided along the side of the trail when a down
slope condition higher than 5' exists within 5' adjacent to either side of the trail.
2.1.3 A minimum overhead clearance of 12'-0" shall be provided and maintained.
2.2 Recreational Trail:
A Recreation trail is a trail that is more rural in character and material. A recreation trail
shall conform to the Caltrans "Bikeway Planning and Design Criteria" (7-1000) design
standards and to be constructed as follows:
2.1.1 Trails shall be constructed with decomposed granite (dg.), 6" thick, minimum and
may be contained on the edges with either a redwood header or a concrete mow
curb.
2.1.2
A post and rail fence shall be provided along the side of the trail when a slope
condition higher than 5' exists within 5' adjacent to either side of the trail.
/1'5
/J,'~
- ?P-F-
-/'
Iii
," .
,.~~
t
WPcw,_\1>III_......pldnh3
Page 67
~.:oo8>'*"':::>':8~:>.::;:~J.:>.::r.r=*:$.;~:r.~;::::t$!:::;:'ffi:;r,$$;%:::m:::;:;;::t;>.:t:;:::;:::::,~::::*\:::W~'t~~~~$.w..,:;.:;:-,:m;.~~':::$W;:N:;:-B:;:t8::;:;;;:K~S?~:mm:..m3~@~:m;$;>.%~!
2.1.3 A minimum overhead clearance of 12'-0" shall be provided and maintained.
1
~
~
.m:.,~~:$.U::;U:: ':!ii:(
WPC M:\bcae'91aIllliD&\laladlcap\draft3
J b -/If
~
m@*:,:l~
Page 68
.
Wi. m:::'v.:-:.
"".
ms* . ~.J;::.il~.U'
i.:iS L~ijU. L~
Appendix "A"
Recommended Plant Palette
Botanical Name
Common Name
TREES:
.
Acacia baileyana
Aesculus californica
A1bizia julibrissen
AInus rhombifolia
Araucaria heterophyUa
Arbutus unedo
Bauhinia variegata
Brachychiton populneus
Callistemon viminalis
Calocedrus decurrens
Cassia leptophylla
Cedrus atlantica 'Glauca'
Cedrus deodora
Ceratonia siliqua
Cercidium floridum
Cercis occidentalis
Cinnamomum camphora
Cupaniopsis anacardioides
Cupressus:
forbesii
sempervirens
stephensonii
Erythrina coralloides
Eucalyptus:
citriodora
ficifolia
lehmannii
nicholii
polyanthemos
rudis
sideroxylon 'Rosea'
Feijoa sellowiana
Ficus rubigioosa
Fraxinus oxycarpa 'Raywood'
Geijera parviflora
Hymenosporum flavum
Jacaranda acutifolia
Juglans californica
Koelreuteria:
bipinnata
paniculata
Ligustrum lucidum
Liquidambar styraciflua
Lithocarpus densiflora
Bailey's Acacia
California Buckeye
Silk Tree
White Alder
Norfolk Island Pine
Strawberry Tree
Purple Orchid Tree
Bottle Tree
Weeping Bottlebrush
Incense Cedar
Gold Medallion Tree
Atlas Cedar
Deodar Cedar
Carob Tree
Blue Palo Verde
Western Red Bud
Camphor Tree
Carrotwood
.
Tecate Cypress
Italian Cypress
Cuyamaca Cypress
Naked Coral Tree
Lemon-Scented Gum
Red-Flowering Gum
Bushy Yate
Nichol's Willow-Leafed Peppermint
Silver Dollar Gum
Desert Gum
Red Ironbark
Pineapple Guava
Rustyleaf Fig
Raywood Ash
Australian Willow
Sweetshade
Jacaranda
California Walnut
Chinese Flame Tree
Goldenrain Tree
Glossy Privet
Sweet Gum
Tan-Oak
wpe w,-.\pIoomiqlla_pIAroft3
117
) &' -ttt,~
Page 69
4
)0 .
~:m$*t.:;;:';::$;g::~*t~'%l:t-$W::gmmt:f.t':::ffi'~*~~*$.'r~~.;if~..g:
Botanical Name
Lyonothamnus floribundus 'asplenifolius'
Magnolia grandiflora
Melaleuca:
linarifolia
quinquenervia
Metrosideros excelsus
Olea europaea 'Fruitless'
Parkinsonia aculeata
Pinus:
canariensis
halepensis
pinea
torreyana
Pittosporum:
rhombifolium
undulatum
Platanus:
acerifolia
racemosa
Podocarpus gracilior
Populus fremontii
Prunus:
cerasifera 'Krauter Vesuvius'
lyonii
Psidium littorale
Pyrus:
calleryana'Bradford'
kawakamii
Quercus:
agrifolia
chrysolepis
engelmannii
ilex
suber
tomentella
Salix:
gooddingii
hindsiana
lasiolepis
Sambucus mexicana
Schinus molle
Sequoia sempervirens
Tabebuia chrysotricha
Tipuana tipu
Tristania conferta
Umbellularia californica
::;m:.'
.'
Common Name
il ~*,ll ~,~
Fernleaf Catalina Ironwood
Southern Magnolia
Flaxleaf Paperbark
Cajeput Tree
New Zealand Christmas Tree
Olive
Mexican Palo Verde
Canary Island Pine
A1eppo Pine
Italian Stone Pine
Torrey Pine
Queensland Pittosporum
Victorian Box
London Plane Tree
California Sycamore
Fern Pine
Fremont Cottonwood
Purple Leaf Plum
Catalina Cherry
Strawberry Guava
Ornamental Pear
Evergreen Pear
Coast Uve Oak
Canyon Live Oak
Engelman Oak
Holly Oak
Cork Oak
Island Oak
Black Willow
Sandbar Willow
Arroyo Willow
Mexican Elderberry
California Pepper
Coast Redwood
Golden Trumpet'Tree
Tipu Tree
Brisbane Box
California Laurel
.!:::......-. . ;~ ,~~.*.u.: ~:m.
WPC M,\bameIpla_DdKapldnofl3
/6 -;I/r;?
~
',~-r.@::::-::;g::
~
~
""""
iI
Page 70
. <<.:-:~~$W&.~~~ * ;;::nUlt:::'Ul~l~~* :~;;:~~$.:
Botanical Name Common Name
PALMS:
Archontophoenix cunninghamiana King Palm
Arecastrum romanzoffianum Queen Palm
Beaucarnea recuIVata Bottle Palm
Brahea armata Mexican Blue Palm
Brahea edulis Guadalupe Palm
Butia capitata Pindo Palm
Chamaerops humilus Mediterranean Fan Palm
Cycas revoluta Sago Palm
Dracena draco Dragon Tree
Jubaea chilensis Chilean Wine Palm
Livistona chinensis Chinese Fountain Palm
Phoenix:
canariensis Canary Island Date Palm
dactylifera Date Palm
reclinata Senegal Date Palm
roebellenii Pygmy Date Palm
Trachycarpus fortuneii Windmill Fan Palm
Washingtonia:
filifera California Fan Palm
robusta Mexican Fan Palm
. SHRUBS:
Abelia grandiflora Glossy Abelia
Acacia:
cultriformis Knife Acacia
longifolia Sydney Golden Wattle
redolens Prostrate Acacia
AIyogyne huegelii Blue Hibiscus
Arbutus unedo 'Compacta' Dwarf Strawberry Tree
Archtostaphylos species Manzanita
Artemisia californica Coastal Sagebrush
Baccharis species Coyote Brush
Bougainvillea species Bougainvillea
Buxus microphylla japonica Japanese Boxwood
Ca1Iiandra haematocephala Pink Powder Puff
Ca1Iistemon citrinus Lemon Scented BottIebrush
Carissa grandiflora Natal Plum
Ceanothus species Wild Lilac
Cercocarpus betuloides Mountain Mahogany
Cistus species Rockrose
Cneoridium dumosum Bushrue
Cocculus laurifolius Snail Plant
Comarostaphylis diversifolia Summer Holly
Convolvulus cneorum Bush Morning Glory
Coprosma species Mirror Plant
Cotoneaster species Cotoneaster
. Dendromecon species Bush Poppy
Dietes vegeta Fortnight Lily
Dodonaea viscosa Hopseed Bush
Echium fastuosum Pride of Madeira
Encelia californica Coast Sunflower
.a, ;,L/ ii(~j / .,. 4Y
1" '
WPC Y,_.loaoUoa\la.....,.....f13 - /I~. Page 71 ;-
, ,
Botanical Name
.~w::~t:::::::r.r@$:t:;::..:::;:;~;;:::m;:::..:::'m':$m:::~lli:~.J.:o/~*m::r,~~~&%.lJl' =:W:$.:$:Z.:::t}:.::t~:~J::..::i~Jl:... .:J;'~~~j.@*ri;:,..~W$~:%
~
Eriogonum species
Escallonia species
Euryops pectinatus
Fremontodendron species
GaIvizia speciosa 'Firecracker'
Garrya elliptica 'James Roof
Grevillea species
Grewia occidentalis
Heteromeles arbutifolia
lsomeris arborea
Iva hayesiana
Juniperus species
Lavatera assurgentiflora
Lantana species
Laurus nobilis
Lavandula species
Leptospermum species
Ligustrum species
Mahonia species
Melaleuca nesophila
Myrica californica
Nandina domestica
Nolina species
Photinia species
Pittosporum species
Prunus ilicifolia
Raphiolepis species
Rhamnus species
Rhus species
Ribes species
Rosmarinus species
Santolina species
Simmonsia chinensis
Sollya heterophylla
Trichostema lanatum
Viburnum species
Xylosma congestum
Zauschneria species
SUCCULENTS:
Agave:
americana
attenuata
Aloe species
Crassula species
Dudleya species
Echeveria species
Ferocactus viridescens
Haworthia species
Lampranthus species
Sedum species
.I ill ,~.
wpe .,olbom.lpb.......\Jaadoaopldnol13
Common Name
Buckwheat
Escallonia
Euryops
Flannel Bush
Island Bush Snapdragon
Coast Silktassel
Grevillea
Lavender Starflower
Toyon
Bladderpod
Poverty Weed
Juniper
Tree Mallow
Lantana
Sweet Bay
Lavender
New Zealand Tea Tree
Privet
Mahonia
Pink Melaleuca
Pacific Wax Myrtle
Heavenly Bamboo
Nolina
Photinia
Pittosporum
Hollyleaf Cherry
India Hawthorn
Coffeeberry
Sumac
Currant
Rosemary
Santolina
Jojoba
Australian Bluebell Creeper
W ooly Blue Curls
Viburnum
Xylosma
California Fuchsia
Century Plant
NCN
Aloe
Jade Plant
Dudleya
Hen and Chicks
Coast Barrel Cactus
Haworthia
Ice Plant
Stonecrop
/1-' ~.I/ 9- /~O
~
~
""'"
,
""'\
1:1t;,....}
Page 72
e
.
.
~~;::~$~~"':;:;:~;. .:.:.:::.m;W.m~ll%.
Botanical Name
PERENNIALS:
Agapanthus africanus
Begonia semperflorens
Bergenia species
Hemerocallis species
Heuchera species
Hunnemannia fumariifolia
Kniphofia uvaria
Umonium perezii
Lobelia species
Mimulus species
Pelargonium species
Phormium species
Romneya coulteri
Salvia species
Senecio species
Strelitzia species
Yucca species
VINES.
Beaumontia grandiflora
Bougainvillea species
Cissus species
Clytostoma callistegioides
Combretum fruticosum
Distictis species
Ficus pumila
Gelsemium sempervirens
Hardenbergia violacea
Hibbertia scandens
Jasminum species
Lonicera species
Macfadyena unguis-cati
Mandevilla 'Alice Du Pont'
Pandorea pandorana
Parthenocissus tricuspidata
Passiflora species
Pyrostegia venusta
Rhoicissus capensis
Solandra maxima
Stephanotisfloribunda
Tetrastigma voinieranum
Thunbergia species
Trachelospermum species
Wisteria species
GROUNDCOVERS:
***~
Common Name
lily-of-the-Nile
Begonia
Bergenia
Daylily
Coral Bells
Mexican Tulip Poppy
Red-Hot Poker
Sea Lavender
Lobelia
Monkeyflower
Geranium
New Zealand Flax
Matilija Poppy
Sage
Dusty Miller
Bird-of-Paradise
Yucca
Easter lily Vine
Bougainvillea
Cissus
Violet Trumpet Vine
NCN
Trumpet Vine
Creeping Fig
Carolina Jessimine
lilac Vine
Guinea Gold Vine
Jasmine
Honeysuckle
Cat's Claw
Mandevil1a
Wonga-Wonga Vine
Boston Ivy
Passion Vine
Flame Vine
Evergreen Grape
Cup-of-Gold- Vine
Madagascar Jasmine
Tetrastigma
Thunbergia
Jasmine
Wisteria
;.U;l;.:-.:m. JJJl
:;:::
Groundcover plants are identified in either the shrub, perennial or annual section listed above.
WPc..,_"..........._p....lt3
/i.-/.2./
4 [~t!
-,..4' )'
Page 73
r t~
^
v
ORDINANCE NO. ,,) /, /?
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDING SECTIONS 17.10.050, 19.14.485, 19.14.030 AND
19.14.486 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE
REVISED LANDSCAPE MANUAL AND APPROVAL OF
LANDSCAPE PLANS
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 325 (1990), the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act,
requires cities and counties to adopt a water efficient landscape ordinance or be governed by
a Model Code developed by the State Department of Water Resources; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department and Parks and Recreation Department have
prepared amendments to the City Landscape Manual which would implement the water
conservation measures called for by AB 325, include specifications and requirements unique
to Public Works projects; and which would also update the Manual to current practice from
its last revision in 1978, and
WHEREAS, such amendments are so extensive it is desirable to completely replace the
existing Manual with a Revised Landscape Manual; and
WHEREAS, said amendments to the Landscape Manual require certain technical and
procedural amendments to the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the amended
Landscape Manual is exempt from environmental review as a regulatory measure designed to
enhance the quality of the environment (Class 8 exemption under CEQA), and a Notice of
Exemption was filed with the County Clerk on August 5, 1994; and
WHEREAS, on July 21, 1994, the Parks and Recreation Commission voted 6-0 to
recommend approval of the public landscaping section of the Manual; and
WHEREAS, on July 25, 1994, the Resource Conservation Commission voted 5-0 to
recommend approval of the amended Manual and associated code amendments; and,
WHEREAS, on September 28, 1994, the City Planning Commission voted 6-0 to
recommend that the City Council adopt the revised Landscape Manual, enact the associated
amendments to the Municipal Code, and repeal Council Policy #476-04 in accordance with
Resolution PCM-94-20IPCA-94-02; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hMrlng on said revised
Landscape Manual and associated amendments to the Municipal Code, and notice of said
hearing together with its purpose was given by its publication in a newspaper of general
circulation in the City at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
/~If"/
".,.i
/,
t
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m.,
November 8, 1994, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and
said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby fmd,
determine and ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning
practice justify the amendments, and that the amendments are consistent with the City of Chula
Vista General Plan.
SECTION II: That Section 17 10.050 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended
to read as follows:
17.10.050
Park Development Improvements - Specifications - Appeal.
In addition to the dedication of land as required in Section 17.10.040, it shall be the
responsibility of the subdivider to develop all or a portion of such land for
neighborhood or community park purposes to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks
and Recreation 8fl~ the Parl,s ana Reereatiea CSBUliissies is aeeefEianee -.vitk the
fellewiBg eriteria. In...~~!i~~~Ij:t~!m:_~~_I!_~ljt~!~g'i~.
l~t_ill_~i~il_lllf~m~j~Wml9'IBt~~~~~
A. Pa!'Idllflas are ta he gfllaea BnI~!/~ in accordance with 8 plBB ,':aiea
:::_\~~~1ii~i~i~\.;:1..ii;_;~;~;~.
B. ".11 skeet ilRpravemeBts saiHI he iBstallea. .gylP~.I~Ug!M~~i
II ..............?!j)fl!.i'!!!!i~:.~~~;.
~;; ..',..fi'!lt~~t~B~i~pI~;
~i..~g!9t~!!IinP@;
fl';~I~!!il!ll\i
~;"::B!!Iil..il.i
~
i;;._Ulig!_!~I~i~;;lII1i;_i;.i~l{
f:\homc\planning\ 1490. 93
/6,4 ..~
Page 2
$; .ii.......~M~#qS~i~9Pi:!i!XB.
~; ..........i~,!ij!~teg~~f~w1Y
Uli
.I...inanms............~. !!.ra.llrll[lr_;llr~i_I_~
be.. .iliillli1..... ....leiL.. ...
.................. .... .....
"H , ." _',"
. ".
.............,'........,'.',.........,.'........,'.......
ll;.~.'I~~;.~:p~g!l:llt~!I:..~[t\.iI~~t~~Il~~~;
.g; .....:............wne............. ~g.I'.#..~. :.~......... _~fI~9.:tniil!'~.~~Iq.!I'~iqII'9r
llil1 II. .. .... ;I
.........!!.......9......R~~1;.
I! .:.......~F_~IIf.'~1I~y;!lq...rl~y;m6jR~pl~;
b; ....:i....It,:l#~~lti_m~~...I~'l~pt9YJ~~t\~ye5'......?,~99
~9pl~,
~; ......i..../g~..~j#g!!l9~I~!!...~m9'ii~...iI~IY...?i~qP!WP1~;
it.. ..........i...Qll#i~li~!g.lP!iml4~~.rl~~~P#~~:..~qp!~;
C. All utilities shall be extended to the property line.
D. ~A..n aatsmatie iffigatieB system sHall 13e iRsHillea.
E. THff shall !le iH~Hlllea.
F. Lanasea]3iag, iBel1:lsiBg !fees, slL~s ana etfier plant' material, skall Be ]31antea
iB aeesraanee "dEli the City's L8Iisse8f3e ~fanaal.
G. /'" eeaerete ..va.J.l(7.~' system skall he iBstallea.
H. Parle HnftlfeS, saeR as sigBage, taBles, heRekes, tfash. ree~meles, drifllaRg
fetlffi8iHS ana !like Plltlks, sftllH !le ifl5ftlllea.
I. .~.. 8Fainage system shall Be iRstalles, if Beeessary.
J. Pl~' areas, -sitli etttHlllBeftt fer illS seBeelers ana I'rimary seBesl age ehil8feB
Mall !le inMellea.
K. SeelH'ity IigkftRg Hllues shell be l'reviaea.
L. Ofte pienie shelter shell he "revises fer e";ery 1,QQQ l'esfJle.
11. ORe termis eewt shall he J3f8"lissa far e-,ery 2,909 I'SSllle.
f:\home\planning\ 1490.93
/J/I'J
Page 3
}-I. Oae easeBall.'sdhll Heltl saall Be J3Fe',iEleEl fer eyeFY 5,99B J3eeJ3le.
O. ORe a:ndti fJHfJ38se es1::iR far easkethaU eewt \'elley-l3all, ana eaElmiBteB shaH Be
iastilllea J'fe~;iaea fer e"/ery 5,999 pesf31e.
P. ORe saeeer Held shall Be e8~etea fer every IQ,QQQ J1esple.
D In addition to those items listed above, the following facilities shall be required
in a community park:
Q.~; One 50 meter swimming pool with related facilities, such as Elfessiag
~~~. rooms, will Be eeastflleteEl .~~:mqy!~ for every 20,000
~2; One community center and gymnasium, ~~4~Qli!j\4_~~~WA;
will Be eeastflleteEl shall be provided for every :i4,tJ<j() peol'le~ .. .. ..
&$; One lighted softball field shall be Ele',eleJ3ea P!'.pi{\~ for every 5,000
people. ......................
+,jf; A restroo~g~~.F facility saRli Be eeasiFaetea 8~~~~~~S
!9~qlill9~~!l!f#P~n'!i;~$J~ in t!'iefY" ~ community park anEl ffiay
eel" esastmeted iB Belgk~e.t4t88ii parks. .p. ...
SECTION III: That Section 19.14.485 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended
to read as follows:
19.14.485
Landscape plan approval-Purpose-Required when.
The purpose of landscape plan approval is to determine compliance with this title and
the provisions of the landscape manual of the city. Landscape plan approval shall be required
for the following projects: Multiple-family, commercial, industrial, planned unit development,
unclassified uses, remodeling over left ~.. thousand dollars for the above uses,
developments with precise plans, parking 10tsWlth five or more stalls and graded slopes.
SECTION IV: That Section 1914.486 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended
to read as follows:
19.14.486
Landscape plan approval-Application-Accompanying documents-Fee~
;0;......'"
~,~,
!; Application~ for landscape plan approval shall be made to the eeetef ef
J31an.-Hag.!lM1J!i_i\!i~ and shall be accompanied by the drawings and information
prescribeclby tI1eiiiiiclscapemanual. Each application shall also be accompanied by the
Required Filing Fee(s).
/~/I'" 'I
f:\Jlome\planning\ 1490. 93
Page 4
$J~~j
SECTION V: That Section 1914030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended
to read as follows:
19.14.030 Zoning administrator-Actions authorized without public hearing.
The Zoning Administrator is authorized to consider and to approve, disapprove or
modify applications on the following subjects, and/or issue the following required permits
without setting the matter for a public hearing:
A. Conditional use permit: The Zoning Administrator shall be empowered to issue
conditional use permits, as defined herein, in the following circumstances:
1 Where the use to be permitted does not involve the construction of a new
building or other substantial structural improvements on the property in question.
2. Where the use requiring the permit would make use of an existing building and
does not involve substantial remodeling thereof.
3. For signs, as defmed herein, and temporary tract houses, as limited herein.
4 The Zoning Administrator is authorized to consider and to approve, deny, or
modify applications for conditional use permits for carnivals and circuses. The
Zoning Administrator shall set the matter for public hearing in the manner
provided herein.
5 Churches.
6. Establishments that include the sale of alcoholic beverages for off-site use or
consumption, located in the CoN zone. The Zoning Administrator shall hold a
public hearing in accordance with Sections 19.14.060-19.14.090 upon giving
notice thereof in accordance with Sections 19.12.070-19.12.080. A conditional
use permit shall not be granted unless the Zoning Administrator or other issuing
authority finds in his or her sole discretion, and based on substantial evidence
f:\home\planning\1490.93
Jt. ~ '..5'
Page 5
in view of the entire record, that all of the facts required by Section 19.14.080
exist, and that approval of the permit will not result in an overconcentration of
such facilities. Overconcentration may be found to exist based on (1) the
number and location of existing facilities; (2) compliance with State Alcohol
Beverage Control overconcentration standards in effect at the time of project
consideration; (3) the impact of the proposed facility on crime; and (4) the
impact of the proposed facility on traffic volume and traffic flow. The Police
Department or other appropriate City departments may provide evidence at the
hearing. A permit to operate may be restricted by any reasonable conditions
including but not limited to limitations on hours of operation.
The City Council shall be informed of the decision on each such permit by the
City Clerk when the decision is filed in accordance with Section 19.14.090. The
decision of the Zoning Administrator may be appealed.
Such appeal shall be directed to the City Council, rather than the Planning
Commission, and must be filed within ten (10) days after the decision is filed
with the City Clerk, as provided in Section 19.14.100. If appealed within the
time limit, said appeal shall be considered in a public hearing conducted by the
City Council, in the same manner as other appeals pursuant to Sections
19.14.120 and 19.14.130, except that the Council must make the same written
findings required of the Zoning Administrator herein, in order to grant the
permit.
B. Variances: The Zoning Administrator shall be authorized to grant variances for limited
relief in the case of:
1 Modification of distance or area regulations;
2. Additions to structures which are nonconforming as to side yard, rear yard, or
lot coverage, providing the additions meet the requirements of the zoning
ordinance affecting the property;
3. Walls or fences to exceed heights permitted by ordinances. Modifications
requested in said applications for relief to be administered with the requirement
for a public hearing shall be limited to deviations not to exceed twenty percent
of the requirements imposed by ordinances.
C.
~~i ~~8ft e=o~~:~c::~!~:!!'~!f;!P;~~:~al .t_f"'~i;
approval as provided herein.
D.
Performance standard procedure. The zoning administrator shall be authorized to issue
a zoning permit for uses subject to performance standards procedures, as provided
herein.
/{,1'9 -&
Page 6
.P I'
f:\home\planning\ 1490. 93
E. Home occupations. The Zoning Administrator shall be authorized to grant permits for
home occupations, as defined and regulated in Section 19.14.490.
F Fees. A fee, in the amount as presently designated or as may be in the future amended
in the Master Fee Schedule, shall accompany each application for a variance or
conditional use permit or modifications thereto consider.ed by the zoning administrator
without a public hearing.
In regard to applications on any of the aforementioned subjects, the Zoning
Administrator shall set a reasonable time for the consideration of the same and give notice
thereof to the applicant and to other interested person as defined in this title. In the event
objections or protests are received, the zoning administrator shall set the matter for public
hearing as provided herein.
SECTION VII. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect on the
thirtieth day from and after its adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to from
~
1)
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
ruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
/~/I. 7
f:\home\planning\ 1490. 93
Page 7
RESOLUTION NO.
/773/
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPI'ING THE REVISED LANDSCAPE
MANUAL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
SUPERSEDING THE STATE MODEL CODE,
AND REPEALING COUNCIL POLICY NUMBER 476-04
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 325 (1990), the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act,
requires cities and counties to adopt a water efficient landscape ordinance or be governed by a
Model Code developed by the State Department of Water Resources; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department and Parks and Recreation Department have
prepared amendments to the City Landscape Manual and associated amendments to the
Municipal Code which would implement the water conservation measures called for by AB 325,
to include specifications and requirements unique to Public Works projects, and which would
also update the Manual to current practices from it's last revision in 1978; and
WHEREAS, such amendments are so extensive it is desirable to completely replace the
existing Manual with a revised Landscape Manual; and
WHEREAS, a representative of the State Department of Water Resources has reviewed
the Landscape Manual and concluded that it's provisions incorporate all matters required by the
Model Code (now in effect by operation of law); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the amended
Landscape Manual is exempt from environmental review as a regulatory measure designed to
enhance the quality of the environment (Class 8 exemption under CEQA), and a Notice of
Exemption was filed with the County Clerk on August 5, 1994; and
WHEREAS, on July 21, 1994, the Parks and Recreation Commission voted 6-0 to
recommend approval of the public landscaping section of the Manual; and
WHEREAS, on July 25, 1994, the Resource Conservation Commission voted 5-0 to
recommend approval of the amended Manual and associated code amendments; and
WHEREAS, on September 28, 1994, the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend
that the City Council approve the revised Manual and companion amendments of the Municipal
Code and repeal Council Policy #476-04 in accordance with Resolution PCM-94-20/PCA-94-02;
and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said amendments and
notice of said hearing together with its purpose was given by its publication in a newspaper of
general circulation in the City at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m.,
November 8, 1994, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and
said hearing was thereafter closed; and
IJ lJ - /
Resolution No
Page 2
WHEREAS, SANDAG, serving as the Regional Growth Management Strategy (RGMS)
Review Board, has prepared a RGMS which includes a self-certification process to ensure
consistency between the strategy's recommended actions and relevant plans, policies and
ordinances of local jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the RGMS calls for water reclamation and water efficient ordinances, or
equivalent, to be adopted by local jurisdictions for "all new construction" (other than single
family); and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista has completed a Consistency Checklist and has
found the Revised Chula Vista Landscape Manual to be consistent in meeting the intent of AB
325, and in achieving the Quality of Life Standards and Objectives contained in the RGMS.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby find that the
revised Landscape Manual contains provisions for water reclamation and efficiency measures,
and that adoption of the Revised Landscaped Manual and associated amendments to the
Municipal Code will bring the City into conformance with AB 325 and the Regional Growth
Management Strategy, and is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the revised
Landscape Manual on file in the City Clerk's office, Document Number
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Zoning Administrator is given the authority to
approve periodic adjustments to plant material lists in the Landscape Manual.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the revised Landscape Manual, as amended, shall
supersede the current Landscape Manual and the State Model Code, and shall become effective
when the companion ordinance changes become effective.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council Policy No. 476-04 is hereby repealed,
effective when the companion ordinance changes become effective.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
J
SJ
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
WPC F:\HOMEIPLANNlNG\1484.93
Itp'.2
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item J 7
Meeting Date 11/22/94
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing on Adoption of the Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer
Analysis and Establishment of the Salt Creek Sewer Basin Development
Impact Fee
Ordinance ..z q /7Establishing the Salt Creek Sewer Basin Development
Impact Fee to Pay for Sewer Improvements within the Salt Creek Sewer
Basin
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works~
REVlEWED BV, Ctiy -.."Jj b ~ (41S.. v..., V~-"..xJ
The Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer Analysis was prepared by Wilson Engineering to
recommend sewer improvements necessary to convey sewage flows from the Salt Creek Sewer
Basin to existing or proposed downstream sewerage facilities. Based on the Analysis, a
Development Impact Fee of $284 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) should be established to
pay for these facilities.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council conduct the public hearing, place the Ordinance on the
fIrst reading, and authorize the Mayor to sign the attached letter to the San Diego County Board
of Supervisors.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission
voted 4-0 to approve the Negative Declaration for this project at its meeting on October 10,
1994.
DISCUSSION:
Preparation of the Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer Analysis (Report) by Wilson Engineering was
completed in November 1994. This Report includes an estimate of sewage flows, recommends
the type, size and location of improvements needed to transport basin flows to downstream
facilities, and establishes a "BenefIt Area Fee" to fInance the construction of these
improvements.
The study area of the Report includes four "properties" located within the Salt Creek Sewer
Basin and portions of the Otay Lake Sewer Basin. Flows from EastLake and portions of Salt
Creek Ranch and Otay Ranch are tributary to the Salt Creek Sewer Basin. These flows will be
pumped into the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin until facilities are available in the Salt Creek
)7~1
Page 2, Item 17
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Sewer Basin. The Telegraph Canyon Pumped Flow Report provides for the construction of
interim facilities in the Telegraph Canyon system if they are needed to carry these flows. Flows
from adjacent properties and portions of Salt Creek Ranch and Otay Ranch are located within
the Otay Lake Sewer Basins. Since the Otay Lake Sewer Basins drain naturally into the Lower
and Upper Otay Reservoirs, development within these basins will require the permanent pumping
of sewage into the Salt Creek Sewer Basin. These pump stations are not included in this Report
and should be fInanced in accordance with Sewage Pump Station Financing Policy No. 570-03.
The Report recommends the construction of the Salt Creek Interceptor within the Salt Creek
Sewer Basin to transport sewage flow from these properties to future downstream transmission
and treatment facilities. The interceptor would begin just south of Proctor Valley Road and
continue south adjacent to Salt Creek and then west to terminate approximately 1500 feet east
of Otay Valley Road. Since there are no existing downstream City of Chula Vista facilities
capable of handling the flow, three options for downstream facilities were considered: 1)
Construction of a new Otay Valley Water Reclamation Plant, 2) Construction of an additional
trunk sewer, parallel to Main Street, which would discharge to the existing Metro Interceptor
located adjacent to Interstate 5, and 3) Connection to the City of San Diego's Otay Valley Trunk
Sewer/Prison Line. City of San Diego staff have indicated that they would be willing to
consider selling permanent capacity in the Otay Valley line, although they would probably not
agree to rent capacity on a temporary basis pending construction of other facilities. The
feasibility of Options 2 and 3 would depend on the availability of capacity in the Metropolitan
Sewerage System.
The Salt Creek Interceptor was broken down into nine segments (referred to as "reaches" in the
Report). Reaches 1 through 8 include the proposed sewer line from the southern end of Salt
Creek Ranch to approximately 1,500 feet east of Otay Valley Road and have an overall
estimated construction cost of $ 8,170,678. Reach 9 connects Reach 8 to the Metro interceptor
and has an estimated construction cost of $9,897,189.
Reach 9 will not be needed if the Otay Valley Water Reclamation Plant is constructed or if
Reach 8 can be connected to the City of San Diego's Otay Valley Trunk Sewer/Prison Line.
Since Reach 9 is a regional facility which would probably receive flows from other basins, it
is recommended that its construction be fInanced through the regular Chula Vista sewer capacity
fees.
The Report assumes that construction of Reaches 1 through 8 will be fInanced through the
enactment of a Development Impact Fee (Fee) payable by all developers located in the benefit
fee area (Exhibit 1). The fee per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) was calculated using three
methods. Method One utilized the total cost estimate for construction of these portions of the
interceptor. The cost per EDU was calculated based on the total ultimate number of EDUs
requiring sewer service in the Otay Lake and Salt Creek Basins. Under this method, all
properties would contribute the same fee per EDU regardless of where their flows enter the Salt
Creek Interceptor. Under Method Two, the percentage of projected flow from each of the fIve
properties was estimated for each reach of the interceptor. The costs were distributed in
accordance with these percentages, and a separate cost per EDU was calculated for each
J?"'~
Page 3, Item 17
Meeting Date 11/22/94
property. Method Three utilized the projected flows that would contribute to each reach of the
interceptor. A cost per BDU per reach was calculated by dividing the total number of BDUs
contributing to each reach by the total cost of construction for each reach.
Method 1 is recommended as the most equitable method to fund the construction of the Salt
Creek Interceptor. This method provides for a uniform cost per BDU to all developments within
the study area regardless of where the flows enter the interceptor. Since all developments would
be provided with the same service, it is equitable for all developments to be charged at the same
rate.
The Fee was calculated to be $284 per BDU, based on a total of 28,737 BDUs discharging to
the interceptor and a total cost of $8,170,678 including contingencies. This rate was based on
the assumption that an BDU is equivalent to the discharge from a single family residence or 250
gallons per day (gpd). This flow rate per BDU was used for fee purposes in order to be
consistent with the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows DlF.
This fee would be payable at the time that building permits are issued and would be in addition
to the existing sewer capacity charge of $2,220 per BDU. The fee will be adjusted annually
to reflect the varying cost of construction and inflation and to reflect any changes in proposed
development within the basin.
We provided the EastLake Development Company and the Baldwin Company with information
on the Report preparation at various stages. Their comments were considered in the preparation
of the fInal Report. A copy of the Report was sent to the BastLake Development Company, the
Baldwin Company, San Miguel Partners, the Olympic Training Center and the Construction
Industry Federation for their information and review. All other known developers and property
owners were notifIed by a letter dated October 5, 1993 that a copy of the Report was available
for review.
A public meeting was held on October 18, 1993 to discuss the Report and staff recommendations
for establishing the fee. Although all known developers and property owners were notifIed of
this meeting, only the BastLake Development Company was represented at the meeting. Their
major concern was indicated to be the possible double billing of developments for the Salt Creek
Sewer Basin and the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Fee.
This issue was resolved by providing the option of a Letter of Credit for the applicable amount
of the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Fee in lieu of paying the fee in cash. This letter
of Credit would be placed on deposit with the City at or prior to the time a subdivision map is
approved by the City for a unit of development subject to the Fee. It was acknowledged by
BastLake that the Salt Creek Basin Fee would need to be paid in cash because the Salt Creek
Interceptor (Reaches 1 through 8) will be constructed as long as any development occurs in the
Salt Creek Sewer Basin, whereas the Telegraph Canyon Pumped Flows improvements will not
be constructed if facilities in the Poggi Canyon and Salt Creek Sewer Basins are available.
/7...J
Page 4, Item /7
Meeting Date 11/22/94
An Initial Study application was med with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department in
accordance with CEQA requirements. Initial Study No. 94-24 was used as the basis for the
Negative Declaration which is being submitted with the proposed ordinance for Council approval
at this time. The initial study determined that the proposed project will not have a significant
environmental effect, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report was not required.
Additional environmental review will be necessary when the exact location of the sewer
interceptor has been determined.
Several developments and/or parcels in the Otay Lake Basin are within the unincorporated
portion of the County of San Diego. These parcels would be potentially affected by the
construction of the Salt Creek Interceptor, since it would be the only available sewer service in
the area. If these parcels were to be developed, sewer connection would probably be required,
and annexation to the City of Chula Vista mayor may not be feasible at the time sewer service
is needed. It is proposed that an agreement between the County of San Diego and the City be
prepared prior to construction of the Salt Creek Interceptor in order to resolve annexation and
sewer capacity issues. The Salt Creek Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee was based on this
County area participating in the program.
If the County elects to not cooperate, the fee will need to be increased by approximately $3.00
to $287.00 to reflect a lower number of EDU's. Because of design considerations no reduction
in the size of facilities would be realized.
At a meeting on November 2, 1994 with County of San Diego personnel, City staff discussed
the applicability of the Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer Analysis to properties within the
unincorporated County area. County staff requested that a letter be sent from the Chula Vista
City Council to the County Board of Supervisors. This letter (attached) requests that County
staff be directed to cooperate with City staff in the preparation of an agreement regarding
County use of the Salt Creek Interceptor.
FISCAL IMPACT: Passage of this ordinance will result in revenues of approximately $8.17
million. The Fee will be adjusted annually to reflect the varying cost of construction and
inflation and to reflect any changes in proposed development within the basin. These revenues
would be specifically used for construction of sewer improvements in the Salt Creek Sewer
Basin.
Attachments:
Exhibit 1. Salt Creek Basin Benefit Fee Area
Exhibit 2. Minutes of the Resource Conservation Commission Meeting October 10, 1994J01of SMNf.Je~
Exhibit 3. Negative Declaration IS 94-24
Exhibit 4. Minutes of Regular Meetings of the City Council, March 8 and March 15, 1994 Nflr CC"'N"~D
Exhibit 5. Ordinance No. 2582: Telegraph Canyon Pumped Flows Development Impact Fee " .
BVH/ST -003
(M:Ib'"""....~/ogendal_..13)
/7',/
ORDINANCE NO.
c2/,/'}
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA ESTABLISHING THE SALT CREEK
SEWER BASIN DEVELOPMENT IMP ACT FEE TO
PAY FOR SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE
SALT CREEK SEWER BASIN AS A CONDITION OF
ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS
WHEREAS, developers of land within the City should be required to mitigate the burden created
by development through the construction or improvement of sewer facilities within the boundaries of
the development and either the construction or improvement of sewer facilities outside the boundaries
of the development which are needed to provide service to the development in accordance with City
standards or the payment of a fee to finance a development's portion of the total cost of the public
facilities; and,
WHEREAS, all development within the City contributes to the cumulative burden on various
sewer facilities in direct relationship to the amount of population generated by the development or the
gross acreage of the commercial or industrial land in the development; and,
WHEREAS, the Salt Creek Sewer Basin (Gravity Basin) is that area of land within the City of
Chula Vista and the County of San Diego from which wastewater will flow by gravity from Salt Creek
into the Otay River Valley. The Otay Lake Basins are those areas of land within the County of San
Diego from which wastewater will flow by gravity into the Lower and Upper Otay Lake Reservoirs,
a portion of which will be pumped into the Gravity Basin. These areas are shown on the map attached
hereto as Exhibit "A", Salt Creek Sewer Study Map. This map is also included as an attachment to the
Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer Analysis; and,
WHEREAS, Wilson Engineering has prepared the Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer Analysis
("Report") dated November 1994; and,
WHEREAS, the Report has determined that new development within Upper and Lower Otay
Lake and Salt Creek Basins will create adverse impacts on the City's existing sewer facilities--to wit,
that there are no existing sewers which can serve gravity sewage flows expected to be generated from
new development within these Basinsnwhich must be mitigated by the financing and construction of
certain sewer facilities identified in this ordinance; and,
WHEREAS, said Report includes an estimate of ultimate sewer flows anticipated from the Otay
Lake and Salt Creek Basins, recommends sewer facilities needed to transport these flows, and
establishes a fee payable by persons obtaining building permits for developments within these basins
benefiting from the construction of these facilities; and,
WHEREAS, on October 18, 1993 a public meeting was held with the owners and developers
of properties located within the Gravity Basin to discuss the Report and city staff recommendations for
establishing the Salt Creek Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee; and,
,.-
/7.,j
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial Study, IS-94-24, of
potential environmental impact associated with the proposed Project and has concluded that there would
be no significant environmental impacts, and recommends adoption of the Negative Declaration issued
on IS-94-24; and,
WHEREAS, on November 22, 1994 a Public Hearing was held before the City Council to
provide an opportunity for interested persons to be heard on the approval of the Report and
establishment of the Salt Creek Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council determined, based upon the evidence presented at the Public
Hearing, including, but not limited to, the Report and other information received by the City Council
in the course of its business, that imposition of the sewer facilities development impact fee on all
developments within the Salt Creek and Otay Lake Basins in the City of Chula Vista for which building
permits have not yet been issued is necessary in order to protect the public safety and welfare and to
ensure effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amount of the fee levied by this ordinance
does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the public facilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
Environmental Review
That the Project will have no significant environmental impacts, and the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista hereby adopts the Negative Declaration issued on IS-94-24.
SECTION 2.
Approval of Report.
The City Council has independently reviewed the proposed Report herewith presented,
finds that it is fair, reasonable and equitable to all parties, and herewith adopts same in
the form on file with the City Clerk as Document No. , and on file in the
Office of the City Engineer.
SECTION 3.
"Facilities" .
The facilities which are the subject matter of the fee herein established are fully described
in the Report at page 10, Table 5 thereof, and the locations at which they will be
constructed are shown on Exhibit "A", Salt Creek Basin Sewer Study Map, which is
included in the Report, all of which facilities may be modified by the City Council from
time to time by resolution ("Facilities"). The City Council may modify or amend the list
(M:home\engineer\agenda \sa1t.dif)
Salt Creek Basin DIP
Page 2
J?-t,
SECTION 4.
SECTION 5.
SECTION 6.
SECTION 7.
SECTION 8.
SECTION 9.
of projects herein considered to be part of the Facilities by written resolution in order to
maintain compliance with the City's Capital Improvement Program or to reflect changes
in land development and estimated and actual wastewater flow.
Territory to Which Fee Is Applicable.
The area of the City of Chula Vista to which the Fee herein established shall be
applicable is set forth on Exhibit" A", and is generally described as the Salt Creek Sewer
Basin, that portion of the Upper Otay Lake Basin north of the Salt Creek Sewer Basin,
and that portion of the Lower Otay Lake Basin east of the Salt Creek Sewer Basin.
Purpose.
The purpose of this ordinance is to provide the necessary financing to construct the Salt
Creek Interceptor within the areas shown in Exhibit "A".
Establishment of Fee.
A Development Impact Fee ("Fee"), to be expressed on a per Equivalent Dwelling Unit
("EDU") basis, and payable prior to the issuance of a building permit for a development
project within the Territory, is hereby established.
Due on Issuance of Building Permit.
The Fee shall be paid in cash upon the issuance of a building permit. Early payment is
not permitted.
Determination of Equivalent Dwelling Units.
Each single family detached dwelling or single family attached dwelling shall be
considered one EDU for purposes of this Fee. Each unit within a multi-family dwelling
shall be considered 0 75 EDU Every other commercial, industrial, non-profit, public
or quasi-public, or other usage shall be charged at a rate calculated in accordance with
the method for estimating EDUs set forth in Exhibit "B", EDU Conversion Factors For
Financial Analysis, and is included as Table 6 in the Report.
Time to Determine Amount Due; Advance Payment Prohibited.
(M:bome\eogineer\agenda\sa1t.dit)
Salt Creek Basin DIP
Page 3
/7-7
The Fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance
and shall be the amount as indicated at that time and not when the tentative map or final
map was granted or applied for, or when the building permit plan check was conducted,
or when application was made for the building permit.
SECTION 10.
Purpose and Use of Fee.
The purpose of the Fee is to pay for the planning, design, construction and/or fmancing
(including the cost of interest and other financing costs as appropriate) of the Facilities,
or reimbursement to the City or, at the discretion of the City if approved in advance in
writing, other third parties for advancing costs actually incurred for planning, designing,
constructing, or fmancing the Facilities. Any use of the Fee shall receive the advance
consent of the City Council and be used in a manner consistent with the purpose of the
Fee.
SECTION 11.
Amount of Fee; Amendment to the Master Fee Schedule
The Fee shall be calculated at the rate of $284 per EDU. Chapter XVI, Other Fees, of
the Master Fee Schedule is hereby amended to add Section C, which shall read as
follows:
"C. Salt Creek Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee.
This section is intended to memorialize the key provisions of Ordinance No._
, but said Ordinance governs over the provisions of the Master Fee Schedule.
For example, in the event of a conflict in interpretation between the Master Fee
Schedule and the Ordinance, or in the event that there are additional rules
applicable to the imposition of the Fee, the language of the Ordinance governs.
a. Territory to which Fee Applicable.
The area of the City of Chula Vista to which the Fee herein established shall be
applicable is set forth in Exhibit "A" of the Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer
Analysis dated November 1994, and is generally described as the Salt Creek
Basin, that portion of the Upper Otay Lake Basin north of the Salt Creek Sewer
Basin, and that portion of the Lower Otay Lake Basin east of the Salt Creek
Sewer Basin.
b. Rate per EDU.
The Fee shall be calculated at the rate of $284 per EDU, which rate shall be
(M:home\eogineer\agenda\salt.dit)
Salt Creek Basin DIP
Page 4
l'l-Y
adjusted from time to time by the City Council.
c. EDU Calculation.
Each single family detached dwelling or single family attached dwelling shall be
considered one EDU for purposes of this Fee. Each unit within a multi-family
dwelling shall be considered 0.75 EDU. Every other commercial, industrial,
non-profit, public or quasi-public, or other usage shall be charged at a rate
calculated in accordance with the method for estimating EDUs set forth in Table
6 of the Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer Analysis, "Flow Rates and Equivalent
Dwelling Unit Factors".
d. When Payable.
The Fee shall be paid in cash not later than immediately prior to the issuance of
a building permit. "
The City Council intends to review the amount of the Fee annually or from time to time.
The City Council may, at such reviews, adjust the amount of this Fee as necessary to
assure construction and operation of the Facilities. The reasons for which adjustments
may be made include, but are limited to, the following: changes in the costs of the
Facilities as may be reflected by such index as the Council deems appropriate, such as
the Engineering-News Record Construction Cost Index (ENR-CCI); changes in the type,
size, location or cost of the Facilities to be financed by the Fee; changes in land use on
approved tentative maps or Specific Plan Amendments; other sound engineering,
fmancing and planning information. Adjustments to the above Fee may be made by
resolution amending the Master Fee Schedule.
SECTION 12.
Authority for Accounting and Expenditures.
The proceeds collected from the imposition of the Fee shall be deposited into a public
facility financing fund ("Salt Creek Sewer Basin Benefit Area Fee Fund", or alternatively
herein "Fund") which is hereby created and shall be expended only for the purposes set
forth in this ordinance.
The Director of Finance is authorized to establish various accounts within the Fund for
the Facilities identified in this ordinance and to periodically make expenditures from the
Fund for the purposes set forth herein in accordance with the facilities phasing plan or
capital improvement plan adopted by the City Council.
(M:homo\eogineer\agenda\salt. dif)
Salt Creek Basin DIP
Page 5
/7-1
SECTION 13.
Findings.
The City Council finds that collection of the Fees established by this ordinance at the
time of issuance of the building permit is necessary to ensure that funds will be available
for the construction of facilities concurrent with the need for these facilities and to ensure
certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for growth impacted public facilities.
SECTION 14.
Fee Additional to other Fees and Charges.
The Fee established by this section is in addition to the requirements imposed by other
City laws, policies or regulations relating to the construction or the financing of the
construction of public improvements within subdivisions or developments.
SECTION 15. Mandatory Construction of a Portion of the Facilities; Duty to Tender
Reimbursement Offer.
Whenever a developer of a development project is required as a condition of approval
of a development permit to cause a portion of the sewer system which is the subject
matter of a Facilities enhancement planned for improvement under the Basin Plan to be
constructed to accommodate the sewage flow generated by the development, the City may
require the developer to install Facilities according to design specifications approved by
the City. Such improvements shall have the size or capacity necessary to accommodate
estimated ultimate flow as indicated in the Basin Plan and subsequent amendments. If
such a requirement is imposed, the City shall offer to reimburse the developer from the
Fund either in cash or over time as Fees are collected, at the option of the City, for costs
incurred by the developer for the design and construction of the Facility not to exceed
the estimated cost of that particular Facility as included in the calculation and updating
of the Fee. The City may update the Fee calculation as City deems appropriate prior to
making such offer. This duty to offer reimbursement shall be independent of the
developer's obligation to pay the Fee.
SECTION 16. Voluntary Construction of a Portion of the Facilities; Duty of City to Tender
Reimbursement Offer.
If a developer is willing and agrees in writing to design and construct a portion of the
Facilities in conjunction with the prosecution of a development project within the
Territory, the City may, as part of the written agreement, grant credits against the
Developer's obligation to pay the Fee, and may thereafter, use the proceeds of the Fund
to reimburse the developer from the Fund either at the time the expenditures are incurred
or over time as fees are collected, at the option of the City, for costs incurred by the
(M:home\engineer\agenda\sak.dit)
Salt Creek Basin DIF
Page 6
J?-/P
developer for the design and construction of the Facility not to exceed the estimated cost
of that particular Facility as included in the calculation and updating of the Fee, and in
an amount agreed to in advance of their expenditure in writing by the City. The City
may update the Fee calculation as City deems appropriate prior to making such offer.
This duty to extend credits or offer reimbursement shall be independent of the
developer's obligation to pay the Fee.
SECTION 17.
Procedure for Entitlement to Reimbursement Offer.
The City's duty to extend a reimbursement offer to a developer pursuant to Section 14
or 15 above shall be conditioned on the developer complying with the terms and
conditions of this section:
a. Written authorization shall be requested by the developer from the City and issued
by the City Council by written resolution before developer may incur any costs
eligible for reimbursement relating to the Work.
b. The request for authorization shall contain the following information, and such
other information as may from time to time be requested by the City:
(1) Detailed descriptions of the Work with the preliminary cost
estimate.
c. If the Council grants authorization, it shall be by written agreement with the
Developer, and on the following conditions among such other conditions as the
Council may from time to time impose:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(M:home\engmeer\agenda\salt.dif)
Developer shall prepare all plans and specifications and submit
same to the City for approval;
Developer shall secure and dedicate any right-of-way required for
the Work;
Developer shall secure all required permits and environmental
clearances necessary for construction of the project;
Developer shall provide performance bonds in a form and amount,
and with a surety satisfactory to the City;
Developer shall pay all City fees and costs.
The City shall be held harmless and indemnified, and upon
Salt Creek. Basin DIP
Page 7
17-//
(M:home\eogineer\agenda\sa1t.dif)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
demand by the City, defended by the developer for any of the
costs and liabilities associated with the construction of the project.
The developer shall advance all necessary funds to design and
construct the project.
The developer shall secure at least three (3) qualified bids for work
to be done. The construction contract shall be granted to the
lowest qualified bidder. Any claims for additional payment for
extra work or charges during construction shall be justified and
shall be documented to the satisfaction of the Director of Public
Works.
The developer shall provide a detailed cost estimate which itemizes
those costs of the construction attributable to the Work. The
estimate is preliminary and subject to [mal determination by the
Director of Public Works upon completion of the Public Facility
Project.
The agreement may provide that upon determination of satisfactory
incremental completion of a Facility, as approved and certified by
the Director of Public Works, the City may pay the developer
progress payments in an amount not to exceed 75 percent of the
estimated cost of the construction completed to the time of the
progress payment but shall provide in such case for the retention
of 25 % of such costs until issuance by the City of a Notice of
Completion.
The agreement may provide that any funds owed to the developer
as reimbursements may be applied to the developer's obligations
to pay the Fee for building permits to be applied for in the future.
When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the City,
the developer shall submit verification of payments made for the
construction of the project to the City. The Director of Public
Works shall make the final determination on expenditures which
are eligible for reimbursement.
After final determination of expenditures eligible for
reimbursement has been made by the Public Works Director, the
parties may agree to offset the developer's duty to pay Fees
required by this ordinance against the City's duty to reimburse the
Salt Creek: Basin DIF
Page 8
J 7"/ ~
developer.
(14) If, after offset if any, funds are due the developer under this
section, the City shall reimburse the developer from the Fund
either at the time the expenditures are incurred or over time as
Fees are collected, at the option of the City, for eligible costs
incurred by the developer for the design and construction of the
Facility not to exceed the estimated cost of that particular Facility
as included in the calculation and updating of the Fee; or the
developer may waive reimbursement and use the amount due them
as credit against future Development Impact Fee obligations.
SECTION 18.
Procedure for Fee Modification.
Any developer who, because of the nature or type of uses proposed for a development
project, contends that application of the Fee imposed by this ordinance is unconstitutional
or unrelated to mitigation of the burdens of the development, may apply to the City
Council for a modification of the Fee and the manner in which it is calculated. The
application shall be made in writing and filed with the City Clerk not later than ten (10)
days after notice is given of the public hearing on the development permit application for
the project, or if no development permit is required, at the time of the filing of the
building permit application. The application shall state in detail the factual basis for the
claim of modification, and shall provide an engineering and accounting report showing
the overall impact on the DIF and the ability of the City to complete construction of the
Facilities by making the modification requested by the applicant. The City Council shall
make reasonable efforts to consider the application within sixty (60) days after its filing.
The decision of the City Council shall be final. The procedure provided by this section
is additional to any other procedure authorized by law for protection or challenging the
Fee imposed by this ordinance.
SECTION 19.
Fee Applicable to Public Agencies.
Development projects by public agencies, including schools, shall not be exempt from
the provisions of the Fee.
SECTION 20.
Assessment District.
If any assessment or special taxing district is established to design, construct and pay for
any or all of the Facilities ("Work Alternatively Financed"), the owner or developer of
a project may apply to the City Council for reimbursement from the Fund in an amount
(M:home\cngineer\agenda\salt.dif)
Salt Creek Buin DIP
Page 9
J?,'/J
equal to that portion of the cost included in the calculation of the Fee attributable to the
Work Alternatively Financed. In this regard, the amount of the reimbursement shall be
based on the costs included in the Basin Plan, as amended from time to time, and
therefore, will not include any portion of the financing costs associated with the
formation of the assessment or other special taxing district.
SECTION 21.
Expiration of this Ordinance.
This ordinance shall be of no further force and effect when the City Council determines
that the amount of Fees which have been collected reaches an amount equal to the cost
of the Facilities.
SECTION 22.
Time Limit for Judicial Action.
Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this
ordinance shall be brought within the time period as established by Government Code
Section 54995 after the effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION 23.
Other Not Previously Defined Terms.
For the purposes of this ordinance, the following words or phrases shall be construed as
defined in this Section, unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is
intended.
(a) "Building Permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the Uniform
Building Code as adopted by reference by this City.
(b) "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development.
(c) "Development Permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or approval
for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision ordinance of the
City.
(d) "Development Project" or "Development" means any activity described in Section
65927 and 65928 of the State Government Code.
(e) "Single Family Attached Dwelling" means a single family dwelling attached to
another single family dwelling, with each dwelling on its own lot.
(M:home\eogineer\agenda\salt.dif)
Salt Creek Basin DIP
Page 10
J7~Jf
SECTION 24.
Effective Date.
This ordinance shall become effective sixty (60) days after its second reading and
adoption.
Presented by
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works
Exhibits:
A. Salt Creek Basin Sewer Study Map NOr ;,,udl/J() tf:D
B. EDU Conversion Factors For Financial Analysis
November 14, 1994
(M: home\eagineer\agenda\salt.dif)
Salt Creek Basin DIP
Page 11
17--J/
EXHIBIT B
EDU CONVERSION FACTORS FOR FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Land Use Sewage Flow Rate EDU Factor
Residential - SFD 250 gpd/DU 1.00/DU
Residential - Multi-Family 187 gpd/DU 0.75/DU
Commercial 2,500 gpd/acre 10.00/acre
High School * 20 gpd/ student 0.08/student
Junior High School * 20 gpd/student 0.08/student
Elementary School * 15 gpd/student 0.06/student
Park 500 gpd/acre 2.00/acre
O.T.C. Training Facility 250 gpd/DU 1.00/DU
O.T.C. Residential Dorms 80 gpd/person 0.32/person
O.T.C. Support Staff 80 gpd/person 0.32/person
O.T.C. Visitor Center Acres 4,000 gpd/acre l6.00/acre
CPF 2,500 gpd/acre 10.00/acre
O.T.C. - Olympic Training Center
CPF - Community Purpose Facilities
* If number of students is not provided, use 1000 gpd/acre or 4 EDU/acre
(M:home\engineer\agenda \salt.dif)
Sak Creek Basin DIP
Page 12
/7-1 ?
.
.
.
,/;t:, /?
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
TIM NADER
~\It-
~--
~~~-~
-0:-
em OF
CHUlA VISTA
November 24, 1994
File Number ST-003
Honorable Pam Slater, Chairwoman
Board of Supervisors
County of San Diego
1600 Pacific Highway
San Diego CA 92101
Dear Chairwoman Slater:
SUBJECT: Development Impact Fee for the Salt Creek Sewer System
Chula Vista City Council has placed an Ordinance on the first reading providing for the
collection of Development Impact Fees for the Salt Creek Sewer Basin. These fees are intended
to cover the cost of providing a sewer system to serve land being ~eloped in the southeastern
portion of the City of Chula Vista and adjacent unincorporated County territory.
The area of development is generally known as the Salt Creek Basin, and includes portions of
land which drain by gravity into the Upper and Lower Otay Lakes, as well as into Salt Creek.
These areas are shown on the attached exhibit.
Some of the areas which may be served by this sewer system are located within unincorporated
territory. Because of this potential for service by the proposed sewer facilities when the
properties are developed, sewer capacity for them has been included in the planned system.
Fees associated with this provision of capacity have been tentatively included in the plan for
financing the facilities.
Collection of those fees would be accomplished by the County. Consequently, we believe that
it is necessary to enter into an agreement between the County and City in which the terms and
conditions associated with the use of the sewer system by County properties is spelled out.
It is therefore requested that your Board direct County staff to cooperate with ChuIa Vista staff
in the preparation of an agreement providing for the joint use of this sewer system and fmancing
its construction through the collection of Development Impact Fees.
Please contact Elizabeth Chopp, Civil Engineer, at 691-5258 if you have any questions.
TIM NADER
MAYOR
:: Griay, Ou- ofPublk w;:;; of;; ~;7 /1 7-18
")
.1 '
.)J/
EXHIBIT 1
.. "'?-
. . !';
{r . ," ~
. ..
'~
. ~..t
., .,~
-,
. ,
...... . .....
. \., ,'<, . ."
.. ..... . "..',. . '. /, '. ',.
", 'T' . _", ~
..... .......~. '. , .:.." ,";
.,., It .., '_I
-.... . . ~
;. ;l.:.... "\"J'
,.~'.~'r;;:.:~~. ..~ ~~~:
"" ~ :1, :," .,'.!,!. ,', ~
.....' ......,' '\ 1 -. '.
". ,~Y"t 0.. .." . .
I I ..;.... 'I.~' ..."....". 0'
. " ~ ""......~'( ,.. .. i;'t'., 0'
~~. .... ~ ~. . .,.<t.,;;.,~..
I.fGEND '. .. ,.
'.
!
'.
.
:.!] ~nr.~.--
".
I" . ,0'
r . tJ
I " \
IN. ..'
'.~
';:;".
i
'. M
'.'~
"
.
I.
.......
..... MS." .... .rnJtCP'nNI
.. ..... __ AlII aliI
""'Mf ~ .......,
....
-- --
IIltO.1ZeT !l.'ITLE
DUn nl A. STEVENS
~':.I FEBRUARY 25, 1994
SALT CREEK BASIN
BENEm FEE AREA
~ J7~Fl
/7- J.Z
.
.
.
4820682
EXPRESS SECRETARIAL
~Xfl' 13 rr ;;..
589 P02 OCT 12 '94 19:56
MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED REGULAll MEETING
Resource CoIIIervation CommIaion
CIa1Ia VJIta, CaIif'omia
6:30 p.m.
Monday, Oc:tober 10, 1994
Cowoeo' Coaference Room
City Hall Building, Chula VISta
CALL ~ClNG TO OlU)E.RJ1lOLL CALL: Mw"l wu caI1ed to order with a quorum at
6:40 p.m. by ChaIr BurralC-"O. City Staff'EnviroDmeDtal Review Coordinator Doua B.eid called
roD. PreHnt: CommlJsI.OIlefS Ba11, Marquez, Fisher. A motion had already been made to excuJe
0b0upssIan &om toIliJht'. IDIC-I, Ouerrelro has been uMlCCUaed for the third Itraight
mnt1,. Staff ReId will c:aIl him reprdiDg biJ ItatuI with the commission.
APPR.OV AL OF MINUTBS: It wu MSUC (HI11IMarquez) to approve the minutea of the
moetini of September 26, 1994 with two correctlona: No. 2, para. 2, the IIIIDe in the last
le'tteftu mould be corrected to reed "Yllher." Pile 2, No.3, the 5th lellteDCe Ihould read. "Ha\I
also ulced if'any of the ll'ftdi"i wu for the 125 ton road." Vote: 4-0, motion carried.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None.
NEW BUSINESS: The lIenda wu taken out oforder to accommodate the guests.
1. BiItOrical Site ##44, 644 Second Ave., Deletion of Permit Control RequirementA: The
applicant wu present to IJISWeI' any llueationa of the commission. After. very brief'review,
it was MSUC (HaIlIFilher) to pDt. removal of the lite permit control requirements from
biJ property, 4-0, motion carried.
2. Staff'Meacham prelel'rt'Ocl biJ report on addiDs WOIOl CIIII and empty Iteel COIIIainerI to
ruid.-lal curbaide recy_ llaicleats were dlncted to contact APTBC, 235-2111, for
proper diapolll of such items. He explained that 110 additional colt would be Incwred by the
rate payers or to the city. It wu MSUC (Ra1II.fIaher) to recommen4 acoeptance of'the ItI1I'
report and authorize ItI1I'to add empty am'OIOl contll... to the lilt ofitems conected in
the mid-n.! curbaide recyc:liDa proaram; wee: 4-0, motion carried. FoIlowlns the vote,
the eoJ"miuion wu updated about the B.ocydiDa Public Educatlon P1m, as well as the
aunmt IOlicl waste JlI'OIfIIIlI.
3. SIJt Creek. Neptive ])eel-ration 15-94-24: It was MSUC (MarquezlHall) to mon...........
Idoption oCthe oeptive declaration to eIUbIiah the Salt Creek Balin DeveIopmeal Impact
Fee to pay for __ improvementI within the Salt Creek Sewer Balin; wte 4-0, motion
cmied.
...
Ji!DviroDmeatal Imprch.wcnt :aecoJDll-",tlon BeYIew -110 di~'rl--. No'" wu
mIde to the content, but typos were corrected. It wu MSUC (Ha1lIMarquez) to approve
the ~ODI as comctecl. ChaIr Burrucuso will make the corrections for
po IItIltlelon to Couftcl1.
~ }7~;2!
exlf.8rr 3
. negative declaration
.
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT WCATION:
Salt Creek Gravity Basin Sewer Analysis
Salt Creek Basin (West of the Otay Lake Reservoirs and
along the Otay River Valley) and portions of the Otay Lake
Basin.
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:
Parcels in Assessors Parcel Books: 595, 624, 643, 644,
and 645
PROJECT APPLICANT:
City of Chula Vista - Engineering Department
CASE NO: IS-94-24
DATE: lun~ 29, 1994
.
A.
Proiect Settin!!
The project setting is the Salt Creek and Otay Lake Drainage Basins, which are located
west of the Otay Lake Reservoirs, along the Otay River Valley within the City of Chula
Vista's General Planning Area and the Proctor Valley Drainage Basin.
B. Proiect DescriDtion
The project is the determination of the ultimate size of the Salt Creek Interceptor based
on projected peak flows and the creation of a Benefit Area Fee to fund construction of
the interceptor. The study area of the Analysis includes five "properties" located within
the Salt Creek Basin and portions of the Otay Lake Basin. Flows from EastLake and
portions of Salt Creek Ranch and Otay Ranch are tributary to the Salt Creek Basin.
These flows will be pumped into the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin until facilities are
available in the Salt Creek Basin. The Telegraph Canyon Pumped Flow Report provides
for the construction of interim facilities in the Telegraph Canyon system. Flows from
Hidden Valley Estates, adjacent properties and portions of Salt Creek Ranch and Otay
Ranch are located within the Otay Lake Basin. Since the Otay Lake Basin drains
naturally into the Upper Otay Reservoir, development within this basin will require the
permanent pumping of sewage into the Salt Creek Basin.
The Salt Creek Basin Gravitr Sewer Analvsis was prepared by Wilson Engineering for
the Baldwin Company to recommend sewer improvements necessary to convey sewage --7 }
flows from the Salt Creek Basin to existing or proposed downstream sewerage facilities. / I-".J-
The Analysis recommends the construction of the Salt Creek Interceptor in the Salt Creek
Basin and Otay River Valley to transport sewage flow from these development~~Mlt- ,
downstream transmission and treatment facilities.' Since there are no existing downs~ /} '!. !'
City of Chula Vista facilities capab\n&f IJN1dJieLthe.J18,w ,~~ti.9~J,~rJ~~ . .
facilities were considered: 1) Construction of a new Otay Valley Water Reclamation
Plant, 2) Construction of an additional trunk sewer which would discharge to the existing ~
Metro interceptor located adjacent to mterstate 5, or 3) Connection to the City of San
Diego's Otay Valley Trunk Sewer Prison Line. The feasibility of Options 2 and 3 would
depend on the availability of capacity in the Metro interceptor
Reach 9 will not be needed if the Otay Valley Water Reclamation facility is constructed
or if Reach 8 can be connected to the City of San Diego's Otay Valley Trunk
Sewer/Prison Line. Since Reach 9 is a regional facility which would probably receive
flows from other basins, it is recommended that its construction be finanr;ed through the
regular Chula Vista sewer capacity fees rather than by this DIF.
The Analysis assumes that the interceptor construction (Reaches 1 through 8) will be
financed through the enactment of a Development Impact Fee (DIF) payable by all
developers located in the benefit fee area (Exhibits I and 2). The method recommended
for the determination of cost per EDU follows. The cost per EDU was calculated based
on the total ultimate number of EDU's requiring sewer service in the Otay Lake and Salt
Creek Basins. Under this method all properties contribute the same fee per EDU
regardless of where their flows enter the Salt Creek Interceptor. Since all developments
would be provided with the same service, it is equitable for all developments to be
charged at the same rate.
The DIF fee has been calculated to be $240 per EDU to be consistent with the definition
of an EDU provided in the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows DIF as shown in .........
Exhibit 3. This fee would be payable at the time that building permits are issued and
would be in addition to the existing sewer capacity charge of $2,220 per EDU. The fee
will be adjusted annually to reflect the varying cost of construction and inflation and to
reflect any changes in proposed development within the basin.
The size of the interceptor was determined to be 36" for Reaches 6-9, 30" in Reach 5,
21" in Reaches 3 and 4, and 18" in Reach 2 and 15" in Reach 1. Several developments
and/or parcels in the Otay Lake Basin are within the unincorporated portion of the
County of San Diego. These parcels would be potentially affected by the construction
of the Salt Creek Interceptor, since it would be the only sewer service in the area. If
these parcels were to be developed, sewer connection would probably be required and
annexation to the City of Chula Vista mayor may not be feasible at the time sewer
service is needed. It is proposed that an agreement between the County of 'San Diego
and the City also be prepared prior to construction of the Salt Creek Interceptor in order
to resolve annexation and sewer capacity issues.
Additional environmental review will be required when the exact location of the sewer
interceptor has been determined.
The discretionary action associated with this item is the adoption of an ordinance to
determine the boundary of and establish the Salt Creek Basin Development Impact Fee
to pay for sewer improvements within the Salt Creek Sewer Basin. ."""\
.:\SCB.ND
~)7-c2(
Page 2
.
.
.
C.
Comnatibilitv with ZoniDlZ and Plans
Reaches 3-8 are within the Otay Ranch. The enactment of a district to collect fees is in
compliance with the goal established in Part n, Chapter 5 of the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan to "provide a healthful and sanitary sewerage collection and disposal
system for the residents of Otay Ranch and the region.
Reaches 1, 2 and 9 are within the City ofChula Vista City Boundaries. The enactment
of a district to collect fees is in compliance with 5.2 of the Public Facilities Element of
the General Plan. Objective 4 states, "Costs of improvements which are necessary to
serve new development, such as extensions of service and pump facilities, shall be
financed by the developer. This policy does not preclude the use of assessment districts
or similar mechanisms to finance improvements. "
D. Identification of Environmental Effects
An initial study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including the attached
Environmental Checklist Form) determined that the proposed project will not have a
significant environmental effect, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report
will not be required. This Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
E.
Consultation
1. Individuals and Onzan;7J1tions
City of Chula Vista:
Barbara Reid, Planning
Roger Daoust, Engineering
Cliff Swanson, Engineering
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering
Bob Sennen, Planning
Ken Larsen, Director of Building & Housing
Carol Gave, Fire Marshal
Crime Prevention, MaryJane Diosdada
Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation Dept.
Rich Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
Applicant's Agent: City of Chula Vista, Engineering Department
2.
Documents
Chula Vista General Plan (1989) and EIR (1989)
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
B:ISCB.ND
~ /7-;25
Pase3
Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Otay Subregional Plan, 1993
Otay Ranch General Development Plan Final Program EIR, 1992
"""'\
3. Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any
comments received on the Initial Study and any comments received during the
public review period for this Negative Declaration. The report reflects the
independent judgment of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding
the environmental review of this project is available from the Chula Vista
Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910
-;6' fr'-/ ~ /J~)
ENVIRONMENTAL REVlE COORD A TOR
EN 6 (Rev 5/93)
""'"'"
'"""-
B,ISeB.NO
~ /7r--c26
."
Page 4
.
Case No. 1S-94-24
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1.
Name of Proponent: City of Chula VISta - Engineerina Department
1.
Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Chula VISta
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula VISta, CA 91910
3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista
4. Name of Proposal: Salt Creek Gravity Basin ADalysis
5. Date of Checklist: June 20, 1994
-....
-.... - ... ....
- .- - N.
. - ........ - -
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or 0 0 0 1m
zoning?
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or 0 0 0 1m
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project?
c) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.. 0 0 0 1m
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses)?
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arranJeDlent of an 0 0 0 III
established community (includina a low-income
or minority community)?
Comments: This proposal does DOt result in alteration of present or planned laud uses. The proposal
is a result of previous action to establish residential and other laud uses in a previously unzooed area.
n. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regioual or local 0 0 0 1m
. population projections?
b) Induce substantial arowth in an area either 0 0 0 1m
directly or indirectly (e.a.. throuaJt projects in
an undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
~/?~,2? I
,) ..
'WPC M:\IIOME'\JIIANNINO\2I.M Pase 1
-
- - JA. ....
- v_ - N. '"'"
- ........ - -
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable 0 0 0 IllI
housing?
Comments: The requirement for payment of an impact fee by developers of land within the City will
not alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the population or create a demand for
..:Iditional housing but will assist in the mitigation of development impacts.
m. GEOPHYSICAL. Would rile proposal resull in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic 0 0 0 IllI
substructures?
b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or 0 0 0 IllI
overcovering of the soil?
c) Change in topography or ground surface relief 0 0 0 IllI
features?
d) The destruction, covering or modification of any 0 0 0 IllI
unique geologic or physical features?
e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, 0 0 0 IllI
either on or off the site?
t) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, 0 0 0 IllI '"'"'
or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a river or
stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay inlet
or lake?
g) Exposure of people or property to geologic 0 0 0 IllI
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud
slides, ground failure, or similar hazards?
Comments: The establishment of Salt CreeIc: Basin Development Impact Fee to fund sewer
improvements within the Salt CreeIc: and Otay Basins is a legislative llCl and as such will have no
impacts on the earth. Once development plans have been submitted and a specific location for the
interceptor identified, environmental analysis of the impllCl of the coDStruction and placement of the
interceptor will be undertaken.
IV. WATER. Would rile proposal resull in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, 0 0 0 IllI
or the rate and amount of surface runoff?
b) Exposure of people or property to water re1ated 0 0 0 IllI
hazards such as flooding or tidal waves?
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration 0 0 0 IllI
ofaurface water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oXYlen or turbidity)? ~
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any 0 0 0 IllI
water body?
~ /7--027'
wtC M:\IIOME\PIANNINCI\2ID.94 Pas- 2
. -
- - ... ....
- .- - N.
- ....... - -
e) Changes in currents, or the coune of direction [] [] [] IBI
of water movements, in either marine or fresh
waters?
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either [] [] [] IBI
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through inten:qrtion of an aquifer by cuts or
excavations?
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of [] [] [] IBI
groundwater?
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? [] [] [] IBI
i) Alterations to the course or flow of flood [] [] [] IBI
waters?
j) Substantial reduction in the amount of water [] [] [] IBI
otherwise available for public water supplies?
Comments: As the project does not include grading or reconstruction, there win be DO impacts to
water.
. V. AIR QUALITY. Would rhe proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to [] [] [] IBI
an existing or projected air quality violation?
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? [] [] [] IBI
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, [] [] [] IBI
or cause any change in climate, either locally or
regionally?
d) Create objectionable odors? [] [] [] IBI
e) Create a substantial increase in stationary or [] [] [] IBI
DOn-stationary sources of air emissions or the
deterioration of ambient air quality?
Comments: As the project does not include grading or reconstruction, thel'e will be DO imJlll'?ls to air.
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would
the proposal resull in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic coqestion? [] [] [] IBI
b) Hazards to safety from design featurs (e.g., [] [] [] IBI
. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
c) Inadequate emergency lICCesS or IcceIS to nearby [] [] [] IBI
uses?
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or otf-aite? [] [] [] IBI
~ ) 7-.2 7 > p~ t
"'r;";
-....
- - 1.- .... ~
- v.. - No
- - - -
e) Hazards or baniers for pedestrians or bicyclists? 0 0 0 IllI
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting 0 0 0 IllI
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? 0 0 0 IllI
h) A "large project" under the Congestion 0 0 0 IllI
Management Program? (An equivalent of 2400
or more average daily vehicle trips or 2CO or
more peak -hour vehicle trips.)
Comments: No traffic will be generated as a result of the establishment of this ordinance. Temporary
traffic impacts will result from the construction of the project and these will be analyzed at the time
development plans have been received.
VB. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, sensitive species, species of 0 0 0 IllI
concern or species that are candidates for
listing?
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? 0 0 0 IllI """"\
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.&, oak 0 0 0 IllI
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vernal 0 0 0 IllI
pool)?
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration conidors? 0 0 0 IllI
f) Affect regional habitat preservation planning 0 0 0 IllI
efforts?
Comments: There is no impact to plant or animal life as the project is the adoption of an ordinance.
Analysis of impacts to plant and animal life will be canied out when development plans have been
submitted and a specific location of the interceptor detennined.
VDI. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would
the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 0 0 0 IllI
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and 0 0 0 IllI
inefficient manner?
c) If the site is designated for mineral resource 0 0 0 IllI """"\
protection, will this project impact this
protection?
WPC M:\HOME\PlANNlNO\2Dt'D.9r4
~ /7-;JC/
Pac- 4
-
_ _ a-....
- ~ - No
- - - -
Comments: The proposal which determines the ultimate size of the Salt Creek Inter'oeptor, based on
projected flows, will not result in an increase in demand upon energy sources.
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous substances (including, but not limited
to: petroleum products, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation)?
b) Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
c) Tbe creation of any hes1th hazard or potential
hes1th hazard?
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of
potential hes1th hazards?
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable
brush, grass, or trees?
Comments: Tbe creation of a benefit ares free will have no impact on construction.
.
IX. HAZARDS. Would th~ proposal involve:
.
x.
NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels?
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
[]
[]
[]
IBI
[]
[]
[]
IBI
[]
[]
[]
IBI
[]
[]
IBI
[]
[]
[]
IBI
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
IBI
IBI
[]
[]
Comments: No noise or light will result from the creation of a Benefit Area Fund to construct the
interceptor.
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an
ttlfect upon, or result in Q need for new or altered
government services in MY of the following WeDS:
a) Fire protection? [] [] [] IBI
b) Police protection? [] [] [] IBI
c) Schools? [] [] [] III
d) Maintenance of public faclIities, including [] [] [] IBI
roads?
e) Other governmental services? [] [] [] IBI
.
Comments: No new covernmental services will be teqIIired as a result of this project. At the time
development plans are submitted, analysis of the impacts to fire services, police protection, schools,
psrks, libraries, maintenance of public facilities and other JOvernmental services will be carried out.
~ J7~J/
,/-
")
Pau.~
-
-
-
-
-
u_
.......
w. ....
-
-
No
-
"""\
XII. Thresholds. Will the proposal adversely impact the
City 's Threshold Standards?
o
o
o
IllI
As described below, the proposed project does not adversely impact any of the seen Threshold
Standards .
a) FirelEMS
o
o
o
IllI
The Threshold Standards requires that fire and medical units must be able to respond to
calls within 7 minutes or less in 8S" of the cases and within S minutes or less in 7S" of
the cases. The City of Chula Vista has indicated that this threshold standard will be met,
since the nearest fire station is I mile away and would be associated with as-minute
response time. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
Comments: At the time development plans are submitted, staff at the Fire Department have asked that
they be notified if any road closures or water main shutdowns are necessary.
b) Police
o
o
o
IllI
The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84" of Priority 1 calls
within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority I calls of 4.S
minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.10" of Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes
or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less.
The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. "'""
Comments: None.
c) Traffic
o
o
o
IllI
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must operate at a Level of Service
(LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) OD" may occur during
the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. Intersections west of I-80S are
not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No intersection may reach LOS "E" or
"F" during the average weekday peak hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps
are exempted from this Standard. The threshold standards for traffic do not apply to the
proposed project, as there is no development associated with it at this time.
Comments: None.
d) Parks/Recreation
o
o
o
IllI
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 .:res/I ,000 population. The
Threshold Standards for Parks and Recreation do not apply to the proposed project as there
is no development associated with it at this time.
Comments: None.
"'""
'~
WPC W:\HOME\Pl..AHNINO\2O.94
3-tC) 17-;1;2.,
Page 6
.
-
-
-
-
-
.-
-
..--
-
-
...
-
e) Drainage
c
c
c
IBI
The Thresbold Sta:Ddards require that IIIorm water flows lIIlCI vollllllCS not exoeed
City ED&iDeerinll Standards. IDdividual projects will provide aece&nry
Improvements ooasistent with the DniDage Master PIaD(s) lIIlCI City ED&ineerinll
Standards. The Thresbold Standards for clraiDage do not -Wly to the proposed
project as there is DO developmeot at this time.
Comments: At the time of ooDStruction, the developer must obtain a NPDES IIIormwater permit for
IIIormwater discbqes associated with ooDStruction activity.
t) Sewer
c
c
c
IBI
The Thresbold Standards require that sew&lle flows and volumes DOt exoeed City
Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary Improvements
coasistent with Sewer Master Plan(s) and City En&ineerinll Standards.
Comments: The future construction of the Salt Creek Gravity Sewer interceptor will increase sanitary
sewer capacity.
.
g) Water
c
c
c
IBI
The Thresbold Standards require that lldequate IIIol'lllle, treatment, lIIlCI transmission
facilities are ooDStructed concurrently with planned llrDwth lIIlCI that water quality standards
are not jeopardized durinll growth and coDStruction. The Threshold Standards for water do
not apply to this project as there is no coDStruction included with this project.
Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever water coaservation or fee oft'.set
prollf8Jll the City of Cbuta Vista bas in eft'ect at the time of buildin& permit issuance.
Comments: Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever water coaservation or fee oft'-
set prollf8Jll the City of Cbula Vista bas in eft'ect at the time of buildinll permit issuance.
XIll. UI1LITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would
the proposal resull in /J need for new systems. or
subsUllltial allerlJtions to the following utilities:
a) Power or naturalllU? C C C IBI
b) Communications systems? C C C IBI
c) Local or re&ional water treatmeot or distribution C C C IBI
facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks? C C C IBI
. e) Storm water clraiDage? C C C IBI
t) Solid waste disposal? C C C IBI
Comments: The proposal is the first step in providin& additional sewer S<<vice for an ares yet to be
developed.
~ 17~::J
.... j
r) 17j
~)
,e
-
- - a.. ....
- u.... - N. -...
- ......... - -
XIV. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal.
a) Obstruct any scenic vista or view open to the 0 0 0 IllI
public or will the proposal result in the creation
of an aesthetically offensive site open to public
view?
b) Cause the destruction or modification of a scenic 0 0 0 IllI
route?
c) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? 0 0 0 IllI
d) Create added light or glare sources that could 0 0 0 IllI
increase the level of sky glow in an area or
cause this project to fail to comply with Section
19.66.100 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code,
Title 19?
e) Reduce an additional amount of spill light? 0 0 0 IllI
Comments: As the project does not involve development, there will not be obstruction of any scenic
vista or view.
XV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: -...
a) Will the proposal result in the alteration of or 0 0 0 IllI
the destruction or a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
b) Will the proposal result in adverse physical or 0 0 0 IllI
aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic
building, structure or object?
c) Does the proposal have the potential to cause a 0 0 0 IllI
physical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values?
d) Will the proposal restrict existing religious or 0 0 0 IllI
sacred uses within the potential impact area?
e) Is the area identified on the City's General Plan 0 0 0 IllI
EIR as an area of high potential for
an::beological resources?
Comments: As there is no construction or development involved in this project, there is no potential to
impact cultural or paleontological resources.
XVI. PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Will the 0 0 0 IllI
proposal resull in the alleration of or the destruction
of paleonrological resources? ""'"
Comments: See comments under cultural resources above.
- ~/?-J1
WPC M:\HOME\PIANNlNO\2CNIQ.94 Page 8
.
-
-
-
-
-
u-.
-
'- ....
-
-
No
-
XVII. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for Deipborhood or C C C
re&ional parks or other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? C C C
IllI
IllI
c) IDterfere with recreation parks & recreation C C C IllI
plans or programs?
Comments: As there is no development involved, there would be no impact upon the quality or
quantity of existing recreational opportunities.
.
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:
See Negative Declaration for rnondatory findings of
significance. If an EIR is needed. this section
should be completed.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade C C C IllI
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to e1iminRte a
plant or animal community, reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important examples
of the major periods or California history or
prehistory?
Comments: As there is no construction or development involved with the creation of a Benefit Area
Fee to fund construction of a sewer interceptor, the project does not have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment.
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals?
Comments: Policy 5.2(4) in the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan requires that the "costs
of improvements which are _.o.ry to serve oew deveJopmellt, such as cxtellsions of servi~ pump
facilities, shall be financed by the developer." This poUcy doa not preclude the IIIe of ._smellt
c1istricts or similar mechanisms to fiDance improvements.
C
C
C
IllI
The project compUes with that poUcy. A$ such, the project doa not have the poteDtiaJ to acIIieve
ahort-term Coals to the disadvantaae of lone-term eavironmeotaJ aoaJs.
.
c) Does the project have impacts that are C C
individually Umited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("CumuJatively considerable"
means that the incremeotaJ effects of a project
are considerable whell viewed in OODDection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable _ /'
future projects.) ~ J 7 " J~
C
IllI
'i
,.~ ~
",.1>;".)
1::1I..__4
-
--
-
-
-
.-
........
~ ....
-
-
N.
-
"""""
Comments: The project does not have the potential for cumulatively considerahle impacts as the
ordinance "",endment is to set up an assessment district to collect fees. Future construction will require
additional environmental review.
d) Does the project have environmental effect 0 0 0 Il!I
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Comments: The creation of a Benefit Area Fee to fund construction of the interceptor does not have
the potential to cause adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly.
"""""
~
'WPC M:\IIOME\PlAHN1NO\2IMi9.04
3~ /7~3~
- .
Pas. 10
.
.
.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or .Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as
indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
o Land Use and Planning
o Population and Housing
o Geophysical
o Water
o Air Quality
o TransportationlCin:ulation
o Biological Resources
o Energy and Mineral Resources
o Hazards
o Public Services
o Utilities and Service Systems
o Aesthetics
o Cultura1 Resources
o Recreation
o Noise
o Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least
one effect: I) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier droIT"""t pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a 'potentially significant impacts' or 'potentially
significant unless mitigated.' An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it
must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
~
.0
o
~~'-'/ I'.--z"-CI 0~
Enviro tal Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
~M. ,;lP, /99Y
Date
~ 17-:17
1,,,,U
Poa. "
WW' u-\NntoIP\PLA.WNJNCJ\2Q69_94
APPENDIX m
CITY DATA SHEET
"""'\
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
I. Current Zonin2 on site: PC
North PC
South PC
East PC
West PC
Does the project conform to the current zoning? Yes. as the Droiect will involve the construction
of an inceDtor and has no imDact on zonin2.
n. General Plan land use designation on site: ODen Snace
North ODen Snace
South ODen Snace
East ODen Snace
West ODen Snace
Is the project compatible with the General Plan Land Use Diagram? Yes.
Is the project area designated for conservation or open space or adjacent to an area so designated?
Yes. The Droiect area is 2enerallv desi2nated as ooen sDace in the General Plan.
Is the project located .adjacent to any scenic routes? Yes. The Droiect is 2enerallv adiacent to the
Otav Vallev Road and Olav Lakes Road which are scenic I!atewavs.
"""'\
(If yes, describe the design techniques being used to protect or enhance the scenic quality of the
route) This Droiect does not aDDlv to this issue as it is a DrODosed inceDtor for the salt creek basin.
As the sewer will be under2round. desi2n techniaues to enhance the scenic aualitv of the route are
not necessarv.
III. Schools
If the proposed project is residential, please complete the following: Nt A
School
CaDacitv
Enrollment
Units
Prooosed
Gene~g
Factors
.30
.29
.10
Students
Generated
From Proiect
Elementary
Junior High
Senior High
IV. Remarks:
. ~ ~",':I / re .&~ -1
Director of lanning 0 Represen tive
~ AI .:2 p-;. 19 C;Y
,
Date
~
Page 1
~J7~36
.
.
.
APPENDIX IV
Comments
Received During the Public R
IS-94-24
Case No.
,c
No Commen ere Received During the Public Review Period
/
~ 17---)';
wpc~O=-93 1JoI, 102ln) 1JoI, 1020,93) c
.
YS,-5&:f6
Case No. IS-q"l-.2.'1
INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENT SHEETS
.-..,
J.
A. project site within a flood plain? "'0. IJ,,-r (/<.1 ~.A-MA~ Ff..rr>H::'t ~IN .
If so, e which FEMA Floodway Frequency Bounduy. ~IA.
B.
location and description of existing on-site drainage facilities? S"FlJ't::" LIA11=
C. Axe they adequlle serve the project? ~A
If not, please explain riefly.
D.
Transtlortation N/4. ~ IS ~ 5ew~ L.tNE
Wlc...t.. /0./0"- (;,e;.JazA7E- ~
A. What roads provIde pnmuy access to the proJect.
Axe they adequate to serve the projce !)
If not, please explain briefly.
NM
.
.-..,
D. . tion of existing off-site drainage facilities? 51. L,.. t"t:>"'>=r _
E.
~-nl!>>l RZode::r ~NJ::>
r T'f;.A.F=FIG. /MFJA.c.rr:; .
B.
What is the estimlled number of one-way auto trips to be g
by the project (per day)?
c.
What are the Average Daily Tnft"1c (A.D.T.) volumes on the,primary
after project aJmpletion?
Street Name Before
ro8ds before and
"'-
~.
Do any of these volumes exl*d the City's LeveI-of.Service (L.O.S.) .C" design ADt
volume? If yes, please specify. """
~ J7/Y(?
WfC~022.IIJIJW.lazl.JJ)IJW,I_lIJf
.... 2
.
.
.
.
Ys-sq~
Case No. n; -4~"''::Llf
If the A.D.T. or L.O.S. "e" design volume is unknown or not applicable. explain b,lffly.
.D.
Are the primary access roads adequate to serve the project?
If not, please Cltplain briefly.
E.
Would the project create unacceptable Levels of Service S) lit intmeetions Idjacent to
or in the vicinity of the project site?
If so, identify: Location
Cumulative L.O.S.
Is the proposed project a "large project" under Congestion Management Program? (An
equivalent of 2400 or more average daily ve . Ie trips or 200 or more peak-hour vehicle
trips). If yes, a Traffic hnpact Analysis ) will be lUluired. In this case the TlA will
have to demonstrate that the project will t create an unmitigatable adverse impact, or that
all related traffic impacts are not mitig to a level of non-significance.
Yes N
F.
The following questions apply if a Traffi hnpact Analysis is not lUluired.
G. Is traffic mitigation lUluired I reduce traffic impacts thllt will sault from implementation of
the proposed project? / Yes No
If yes, please describe. .I
I
/
H. Is the project . tent with the criteria established in the City', TImspoItIItion Phasing Plan,
General Plan IC Element, II1d all other peninent traffic 1C\Jd-.s? PIeue 'Iefcrence any
other ttafti~/~act stUdies foe midway aepnenu that may lie illlplCteCJ by the proposed
project.
/
L
J.
/_.
/ .
Is a traffIC stUdy lUluired?
Is there any dedication lUluired?
If so, please specify.
Yes
No
~ / ?/~!
___.___---...--.___.__ _J..'_'M.~"J Ifl'WllM.\
....e 3
.
K.
Y.> -S'1b
Case No. IS -4'1 -.2'-{
Is there any street widening required'!
If so, please specify.
~
L. Aze there any other street improvements required'!
If so, please spec~ the general nature of the necessary improvements.
"
Aze there any anticipated adv~\geotechniCal conditions on the project site'! UrJ/t:N.oWN.
If yes, specify these conditions. /J/A
Is a Soils Repon necessary'! YES\~&>IZ. 'T?> -n+E I~IJCE ~ G~'DiN6.
ANdlo CoI../<3muc.T"<OI>J ~rrs.
Land Form \
"
What is the average natural slope of the si~.!" (,'" 'bI"~r /:F R.DW If) ~ .;:.I.~ r~-FY)
What is the maximum natural slope of the si~\ 5o/{(srl>E ~-">Ao::C ,.,r ~l-rU"'".)
\
'\
\
M.
m.
Soils
A.
B.
C.
IV.
A.
B.
V.
Noise
\
,
.
\
.
\
Will the project and\ related public improvements provide satisfactory traffic lervice for
existing conditions an~ future bui1dout General Plan conditions'! (please provide a brief
\ .
explanation). \,
'\
\.
\
,
'*
""""
\~
,
Aze there any traffic-related noise levels impacting the site that~ significant enough to justify that
. noise analysis be required of the applicant'! IJ 0 . \
'.
VI. Waste Generation NA... ~"f'flue:nc,.J CF 514/.-rcpl"E./<. ~VIT'Y SFH"W' I~
1II1LJ- IN<'~E;~ ~r~Y S;t!wlE=t1t- ~~t\,1TY. .
How much solid and liquid (sewer) waste will be Ieneraled by the ..."~ project per day'!
Solid
Liquid
What is the Iocarion and size of existing sewer lines 011 or downstream from Ibe lite?
........
Aze they adeqUate to serve the proposed project? (If no, please explain)
~p /7-J/r?
WI'C~m93~.llDl.93)(Iol.ID2U3)
.....
y~ -S::t"-
.. CueNo.~
VD. ~arional Pollutant Discharl!e Elimination SYStem CNPDES) Stonnwater Reauirements ,.,/
,
Will the applicant be required to file a Notice of Intent with the State Water Re
for coverage under an NPDES Stonnwater Permit?
s Control Board
.
pemiit(s) IIId explain why 11\ NPDES
M/JS.,-
. is requiJed. AN NPz.C~
#;/
Will a Stonn Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requiJed for the proposed project?
X Yes No
Additional comments
. VD. Remarks /
Please identify and discuss any remaininl potential -'verse impacts. mitiaation meuures. or other
issues. MoNt':. . I
,
I
/
/
/
/
/
/
;'
I
/
I
-I
.
~-
City ~eer or Representative
~
____._.__ .____~_.~_ _____ ..____.._J ._.....,
y4/~
Date
J?~tf3
.
.... 5
.
A. What the distance to the nearest fire station'] ~ wbal is the fire Department's estimated
reaction . e'] -J ",j Ie J ") m ir"l.
Case No. 15-q~-~<f
"""'"
:
B. Will the Fue . ment be able to provide 11\ IdcqUlle level 01 m protection for the
proposed facility . out III inc:ruse in equipment or pmonnel,] II '" ..."
I
S:. [h;n/1; 1.1,--
. Marshal
"""'"
c. Remarks I ('
. -
- .
04- ;).I'q,~
Dale
\
"-
\.
\.
'"
'""
,
,.~.
---
"""'"
1itCS~~~m""'.ICI")1Iot IDSJ~~ )7 -- ~tj
"'6
.
.
e
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Case No. /5- qq.- ~f
//
~/'
A. Is project subject to Parks and Reaution Threshold requirements?
If not, please explain. ~ · .... ~ ,
'B.
c.
e
e
How many acres of parkland are DeCeSSAT)' 10 Ierve die proposed
?
D.
Ale existin, Deiahbadlood and community parks Dear die
population increase resultin, from Ibis project?
Nei,bboJtlood
Community Parks
If not, are parkland dedications or other mitiSation u part of the project Idequate
to serve the population increase?
Neigbbomood
Community Parks
To meet City requirements, will appUcan
Provide land?
Pay a fee?
Remarks:
E.
f.
I
~ c::: !r:.~ .
"~-I r- ........
q.1."L,~
Dale
Parks and ReauDllII Director or Represenladve
.~
~/?'tf.5
,
-... ..
2885 Echo Valley Road
jamul, CA 91935
April 16, 1994
-..
Mr. Do'uglas D. Reid
EnvirO~ental Review Coordinator
City of ula Vista Planning Department
276 Fou h Avenue
Chula Vis ,CA 91910
ible that you would consider putting my home,
which is in jamul d on the eastern side of the Urban Limit Line, In
the benefit area for he Salt Creek Sewer Interceptor. Must I remind
you that is the opinio of the jamul Dulzura Planning Group that the
sewer is growth-indue g and completely incompatible with the rural
life style my neighbors nd I enjoy?
What I find most disturbin is the overriding attitude that we in
Echo Valley will ultimately under the sphere of influence of the
City of Chula Vista. I also won er if it is coincidence that your
deadline for comments Is the d before the next meeting of the
jamul Dulzura Community Plann! Group.
My only options are 1) to make the unty Board of Supervisors
aware of your intention to include my ighbors in the service fee
area for this sewer 2) Have a response fo ou from the Planning
Group after the next meeting, 3) be sure neighbors are aware of
the Implications of your actions, and 4) cons . er legal action If you
proceed with this course of action.
Thank you for your time.
~
c.c: D. jacob, County Supervisor
-..
,
,
,
~/7-~
.
.
.
,.
Dulzura Community Planning Jiroup
P.O. Box 613 /
Jamul, CA 91935 /
April 30, 1994
Jamul
Mr. Douglas D. Reid
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista Planning Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Reid,
, ~ ,
..... ['
The Jamul Dulzura Community PIa ing Group met on April 26, 1994
and authorized me to submit this 1 ter by a vote of 8 Yes, 0 No, 0
Abstain.
The Jamul Dulzura Commun' y Planning Group historically and
currently oppose bringing se ers past the Urban Limit Line.
We also feel that Chula ista should not process projects outside of
their sphere of infIuenc if the reach of the tributary area shown in
the Salt Creek Basin enefit Fee Area map is the benefit area
boundary. drawn, must conclude
Please correct the boundary lines priQr to processing.
S;'''''.IY~
~o Ph.D.
Chair, JDCPG
P.S. If ou wish to contact me, or address the Planning Group, feel
free to call me during business hours at 450-2025, or at home at
669- 77.
I
/
L
c.c: Supervisor Jacob
Mayor Nader
~/7/2/?
- --
,
-..,
Ma y 6, 1 994
i.1C:t..ic.:;!e:= [I. f..elD
En~lronmeMta1 Fevlew Coorclnator
F . c... :be::<
1\.'0,'
';... -JU I ~
....l'::t.a,.
\
CA
.:. ~
".. -<.\:
;;.,'E ~'-""..'_i. ",~_:_.C.'_ 0.. .',~ ,:-~_...- ;-,l't,18.1 Et.uc. -tOt- oet:i?t-'rr;lii2l.t.lor ClT
E.:~ :--"'f,' L"-,,,.lc. :::,e;WE,- lc,,,e-'-CE'otc:>..- =<"0
....; ;"- ~.' :~. t:." - :?_\ t.-- ";Ur\;.J -:"iE c.:..:..nE':t-uCt. 1 Dr-, c.-f tne ~.e~..?~"'
li':,'- :-.e';::'... .-_'ru \
\
,;1;:...[; :."';j::'L:.,~eS \?r:'"..ul in t!iE? tr~olltar" ef.ea t)oui;darv
;i:;C.....1r.I;: 'til~t. C'LH" C~i'!.i!TIur1i1.\,1 ~'lil OJ benefit frc.rr: trlJS
::-"_.E~t-'-CE'::I~~'.ulr-. j::.nul \s i,i cOm!pl.lrllt.V ti1:~t oeOerlCilE: on ~.eptic
E~St:er-~ an~ 25 ~ resi~~t. as Ever, otner Jamul resident,
::.: ",C; I t~,-,e;~ H: "tram t-'\ lCltE'-'cE~tor.
~. ~e~~~(lr~ of 5~we~ 1 lne5\~re Qrowtn l~jucinQ a'ld do imoact
't: E E':". It.'cnIT,,;:-rlt.. SeI,oJE-?t-S ~~j 1 O~~ -tor the mal: i~lum gr'owth ~nCl
m'::'f"'€:.o ~r"ie~-'s:':o:':~; C2.,I,Sliig 't.he '~=trl..tctlO!l 01- senEltlve rl..tra..l
2.r'p:.,\:.~ 0 \,.
'rJs ==",'m'_,rlt:. Dl"nrnr,~ ....'e,,\ O~'~'OSECl to sewer E"tenslon
~~~o tJ~r Dlannlng ar~ao The Cl Y OT Chula VIsta should not
~=::':~Ir.~E- C":_Ii'"" C,::llTtITIUnl'tv wlll belie-f I To maIntaIn our rural
commU~:l~v ctla~actero e:~tensl0n oi ewer is ocoosed nere.
TMere'to'.'E. CIty o-f CnLl1 a Vista snou" d not even consIder
2s~lrl~ uS to helD oa~ +or the Interc tor WhICh is to
c~n2~lt ~r!~ Citv o-t Chula Vis~s and i~of NO Deneflt to our
"
-....
~o~ l'Th.Jl"1 ~ r. \' 0
\\
0,\
~lnc:el""'ei v. "'-,
~ l ff.t~'lb Ha
2835 Echo Valley ~
.Jt:lfnU 1 ~ CA 9193':,
QoC;-J.5iC7
""""'.
t:c.-
Boaj~o 0+ Sucervlsors
----"""
~ /?-f'Y
.
.
.
Hay 18, 1994
Jay A. Haron, Ph. D.
2883 Echo Valley Rd.
Jamul, CA 91935
Dear Dr. Haron:
~~~
~
01Y OF
CHULA VISTA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
,
,
I
,
This letter is intended to provide you ,iith some additional
information relevant to the Salt Creek Basill/Gravity Sewer facility
and its Initial Study (IS-94-24). Public ~otices are by necessity
brief and not intended to present a full ~1cture of a proposal. In
this case notice was given to an area w~ll beyond properties that
would be effected by the proposal to iQClude other property owners
that could have some interest in the Jroposal.
Attached is a map that shows seve~l things including the Chula
Vista sphere of influence. The community of Jamul is not located
in the Chula Vista sphere and th.Salt creek Sewer Basin analysis
does not state that Jamul is w~thin or that it is proposed to be
within the sphere.
Because the sewer line will ~ used to serve properties within our
sphere of influence and within the Otay Lakes Basin all known
property owners wi thin th,e otay Lakes Basin were notified even
though additional capacity in the interceptor is not proposed for
any parcels in the Jamul 'area.
Also it should be note~'that the study for the sizing of the sewer
did not include was~water from presently developed properties
within the drainage,~asins.
If you have any 9rE~ral questions please call me at 601-5104 or if
you bave any tech ical questions please call Hs. Elizabeth Cbopp in
the Engineering; ivision at 691-5021.
/
Sincerely, /
s D. Reid
onmental Review coordinator
CI\wp51\lupe\Jamul.dr
~ JJ~'iJ
r-
'"""\
MEMORANDUM
April 29, 1994
File No. ST-003
SUBJECT:
D04glas D. Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator
ROg~ L. Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer f-A.JIJ
\
Eliza M. Chopp, Civil Engineerp"
Informati n on the Mr. Jay Haron letter regarding the Salt Creek Basin Gravity
Sewer sis
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
This memo is in response to e issues addressed by Jay Haron in a letter to the City of Chula
Vista dated April 16, 1994, re rding the Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer Analysis (Analysis).
The study area for the Analysis' udes projected wastewater flow from three drainage basins,
Salt Creek, Otay River Valley and y Lake. Jamul is located in the upper portion of the Otay
Lake Basin. There is no gravity sewbr service currently available in the Otay Lake and Salt
Creek Basins. The nearest gravity sewe system to Jamul is located in Rancho San Diego and
operated by the Spring Valley Sanitation istrict. The Spring Valley Sanitation District may """"
provide a gravity sewer system as far east a the Jamacha Valley in the future.
,
,
The Analysis does not include wastewater flow ~om presently developed properties within the
three drainage basins. Existing developed prope~s in the study area would not be charged for
sewer service unless 1) a septic system fails, a graVity... sewer system is available and they choose
to connect to it, 2) these properties are redevelopea.~t a higher density which would require
sewer service because of inadequacies in a septic systepl, and 3) an agreement providing for
sewer service in the Chula Vista system is prepared with t!je County of San Diego for properties
outside the City of Chula Vista.
The proposed alignment of the Salt Creek Interceptor will be l~ted southeast of the Chula Vista
city limits. A portion of the Otay Ranch Property lies within the Qtay Lake Basin and the sewer
system constrUCted for Otay Ranch could presumably be extendedtQ other parcels in the Basin.
All known parcels in the Otay Lake Basin were therefore notified about the Analysis, even
though additional capacity in the interceptor was not provided for any of the parcels in the Jamul
area. Any excess capacity in the line will exist by virtue ofavailability of pipe in specific sizes.
The boundary of the Chula Vista Sphere of Influence in the eastern portion of.~. City is shown
on the attached map. The community of Jamul is not located within the ChuIa Vista Sphere of
Influence. The Analysis does not state that Jamul is within or will be included in the ChuIa Vista
Sphere of Influence.
"""'\
All known developers and property owners, including Mr. Haran, were notified by a letter dated
October S, 1993 that a public meeting was to be held on October 18, 1993. It was stated that
~ /7---..5P
.
.
.
a copy of the Analysis was available for review at the City of Chula Vista Engineering counter.
City staff receiveq about five telephone inquiries from residents in the area of Jamul. No record
was kept of who tJlose parties were. However, Bruce Sloan of the EastLake Development
Company was ~e ~y person to attend the meeting.
If you have any que~~. please contact Ben Herrera at extension 3057.
Attachment
(lVIDISAL TIA Y.MEMl
\
\
\
'",:,
"
,\
\
'\
"
,
'\
,
\
'\.
~j7-SI
.
I
I
,- ..
';'
.
, ! !
-~-
.1
i
i
e """"
I ~
I
I
I I
~
~
fii
~
"""\
.i
. APPUCATION CANNOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS SITE
PLAN IS FOLDED TO FIT INTO AN 8.1(2 X 11 FOLDER
A.
.
INITIAL STUDY
:~Office UIIe oUIy""i
.c-No.~..
<J)pst.Amnt. ...- ..
:ltcceiptNo.- ..
DlieRcl:'cl. fl.. -IJ6f
j\!lCql(ed by I.~P ..
.~No.FA. 141
~ ~~~DQ.:",
Itel.,.... C.- No.
.-
""~
City of CluIa Vista
Application FonD
BACKGROUND
1. Project Title 5tJt C~ l5u.iW'\ GtW~ ~ A~~i$
2. Project Location (Smer IddJess 01' ~on) s..tt ~cc.l Ot'.....,t. &.si... ""'i..k.
i~ \OCAt.J ~~ ""u.t of itte. ot~ I.A4. ~,,~ol"~ ...~..(
o.l~ ~c.. ~ ~Ifcor "..ll~
Assessors Book. Page & Parcel No. $c<. o.tQc.A 5
Brief Project Description 10 clc.f~...",illc... i'k 1l1-lilMA.t" !>iu. .f{.. 5rJ ~ a..-l~
~r\fvOlf.fo,.. Itw-l Of\. pl'OJechof peak .f/olllS ().k.A -10 ~ 0.. &.d.f
Ayu' fie. to.f.w,J eo..tltt'Vc/iot< of -fie, 1:+.fwOl(M.
Name of Applicant e:t of (!..k.J... V;~tA.. - u.,i"cU'I'., DI"l,'$ItW/
Address ~1"';" 1M- Fax' IA'. Sl71 Phone .". S;lS'f
City 0.11...1.. '/i.tA.. State-M.-Zip "lI'o
Name of Preparer/Agent ~cr L. OA,..,,~t
Address91~ F'o";& - Aw.... Fax' J!J/- 51' I Phone "fl. S~
City ~I.. Vif>t,.,. State CA Zip "f'b
Relation to Applicant 'lMf1ojC.t. - ~'or c.'..,; I ~""",,,
Indicate III pennits or approvals and enclosures or documents required by the Environmental
Review COOIdinator.
3.
4.
s.
6.
a. Pennits or approvals required.
_ CeDeI'll Plan AmeIIdment
_R~JPrezone
_ GrldiDa Permit
_ Taltative Parcel MIp
_ Site Plan a: Arch. Review
_ Specill Use Permit
_ Desip Review Applicltioo
_ TeDII1ive Subd. MIp
_ltedevell,-.- AJeut;y OPA
1tedem,'P"- AJeut;y DDA
~ Public Project
_ A,.,....tirwt.
_ Specific Plan
(>wwfitiono' Use Permit
= VIriuIce
_ CDIstaI Development
Otber Permit
-
.
Ifproject is a General Plan Amendment lMIor NlZOIIe. please indicate the chIIIF ill daipltion from
to
b.
_ Clndin& Plan
_ Pln:el Map
Precise Plan
= SpecifIC Plan
_ Trlf['1C Impact Report
_ Huardous WlSte Allt--'
Enclosures or documents (IS required by the Enviranmenta1 Review Coordinator).
_ ArdL Elevllioos _~ Study
_I """"'P" Plans _ BloIo&ical Study
_ Tealltive Subd. MIp _ ArdIieo1oIical Study
-...u-...n P\IIIs Nolle Aim......"'
_ =~ Report /7/5} = ApDCy r.mIt
.-.. .... ---
B. PROPOSED PROJECT
Land Area: square footage ilJ~ ooo.f.f" or acreage
If land area to be dedicated. stale ICI'elIge IIId ~ose. A '-".ft ",Me..
bsc..W1fNl+ ~~ ~c.vJe.r liMe. 1",..t...,/A!ft'ol1.
Does the project involve the constrUCtion of new buildings, or will existing structure be
utilized? "...~iwf i~"o've~ ~ inv>~
2. Complete this section if project is residential or mixed use. tJ jA
3. Complete this section if project is commercial or industrial or mixed use. N I If-
a. Type(s) of 1IIId use
b. Floor area Heiiht of structures(s)
c. Type of constrUction used in the ItIUc:tIR
WIr~ ...~ftl'Wl:hl021 ........, ad.ln aat. 1mt3)
I.
,
L
b.
L
Type of development=- Single Family _ Two Family _ Muhi Family
Townhouse Condominium
- -
Total number of structures
Maximum height of structures
Number of Units: I bedroom
2 bedroom
3 bedroom
4 bedroom
Total Units
Gross density (DU/total acres)
Net density (DUltotal acres minus lilY dedication)
Estimated project population
Estimated sale or rental price rIIIge
Square footage of structure
Percent of lot coverage by buildings or structures
Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided
Percent of site in road IIId paved surface
-.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
I.
d. Describe major ICCCSS points to the IUUc:tUI'eS IIId the orientmon to adjoining properties
and streets
e.
Number of on-site puking spaces provided
Estimated number of employees per shift
Number of shifts Total
Eslimated number of c:ustomers (per day) IIId buis of estimate
f.
"""
I.
..2-~
/7~5f/
/
....e 2
.
4.
c.
d.
e.
f.
. I.
h.
h.
i
Estimated number of deliveries per day
Estimated ranle of service area and basis of estimate
"
j. Type/extent of opentions nOl in enclosed buildings
2.
1. HOIII'S of opention
L Type of exterior lishting
If project is ~ residential. cornrnacial or ind;tt complete Ibis section.
L Type of project ('vb/it:. .fUe,.'" Stt-let'"' 1~f'I'I'C.~.
b.
Type of facilities provided
~ i mfY't1'1UV1~
Square feet of enclosed structures 11/",
Height of structllJ'e(s) - nwUmumJr'lIiJ will be /A.",Je..r,....vnd
Ultimate occupancy load of project '" IIr
Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided '" IIr
Square feet of road and paved surfaces II! 1.+
Additional project c:haracteristics Ail IT
wj4
C. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
1. Will the project be requiIed to obtain a permit through the Air Pollution Control DislriCl (APeD)?
"D
.
Is MY type of pding or excavllion of the jKopeny Iftticipated? _Ye~
If yes. complete the following:
L Excluding aenches to be bId:filled. how man}' cubic yards of earth will be excavated?
"""(..:1//1 ~Jt44Va/1D" ,s~ unh~ ,I.p;'~~~
b. How many cubic yards of fill will be placed? IV /IJ
c. How muc:h Ilea (aq. It. or acres) will be pIIIed? 1//,1,
d. What will be the: MaxinMJm depth of cut ""i~ ",;" he.. cItJvm;rteJ "'1oIt'J~ ~"'.
AverIF depth of cut II
Maximum depth of fill I I
AverIF depth of fill II
,3-33 /7/ if
3.
Describe all energy consuming devices which are part of the proposed project IIId the type of
energy used (air conditioning. electricalllppliance. heating equipment. etc.)
N/A
..........
... Indicate the lIIIount of natural open space that is part of the project (sq. ft. or 8C1'eS)
"'/A
5. If the project will resuh in any employment opportunides describe the natuJe and type of these
jobs. V~~ A~..t ODI1&tvvc::f'iOI1 of & ".I",t~
6. Will highly flammable or potentially explosive materials or substances be used or stored within
the project site? No
7. How many estimated automobile trips. per day. will be genel'llled by the project?
o.~-tt.mDbile.& lAli\! he Yleuled tllVV"., t!WI$rV"Uc..hOvl.
~
8. Describe (if any) off-site improvements necessary to implement the project. and their points of
access or cOMection to the project site. Improvements include but nOllimited to the following:
new streets; street widening; extension of gas. electric:. and sewer lines; cut and fill slopes; and
pedestrian and bicycle facilities. ~f-~i+e i~ vl11 ihclllk. +/.te. ~.- "'1'Ie.S
~t will c.oMl1ed' to 4e.. M~ ~ 1lle. oI0v0M~ ~ ew.l o.f #li~ o'
",ill vlfi~t eo\'l~ ~ ... ~ M .L' e.-t~ -&r;t~
i\ll" ~ or rtNj-- 0 ~ "Wle.!> to . ~ A t4
4>uPpk-wle..l .
D. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMEtITAL SE'ITING
1.
Geolo2V
Has a &eology study been conducted 011 the !)u)perty? Je:>J O~ '-'l.1UJ,.i.,J &,....f Vol. :m:
(If yes. please attac:b)
Has a soils report on the project aite been lIIIde? ~ Db ~ ~c.l ~t ~o ~ K
(If yes. please attac:b)
2.
Hvdrolo2V
An any of the following features present 011 ...ldjacent to the lite? ':fe:>)~V''';~ ~i~.
(If yes. explain in detail.)
L Is there lilY surface evidence of a shallow water table?
t~ 0 ~~cl1e.e.t..~ic... t Yo I n
WFC:P.~OZI_IU. _.93IIU.~ ) 7 ~
""'"
.... 4
..
.
.
3.
b.
Are them any wateJCounes or dnin~e.improvements on or IdjlCellt to 1he lite'?
'/e.~ J of~ tz;~e.r ~
Does runoff from the project site ~ directly in to. or ~'t'1I'CI . domestic ,water s9PPly.
lake. reservoir or bay'? !>>.~ OI~O ~ .JIG... 'fh(.. ~ f;.1JW ",.\",-,
Could drainage from the lite cause erosion or ~ to Idjacent IRIS'?
0"" c4\Hi~ 6M~tV'~Orl
Describe all dninage facilities to be provided and their location.
1/,*(" brDie.cf ;~ .... 5A.~"~ S~I ~ .pv",/I... 'i...e,
, ~
c.
d.
e.
~
L Are theR any noise IOIIJ'CIeI in the project vicinity which may impact the project site'?
NO
Will noise from the project impact any ~itive receptors (hospitals. aools. single-
family Rsidences)'? ~) 0"" "'WI., CAVlsfyvv/1olll
b.
4.
Jiolol!v
.. Does the site involve any Coastal Sage Scrub vegetation'? ~I ot, ~ 1irJ-ic6/ ~ ~(%
b. Is the project site in a natural or partially natural state'? iJ"',..
c. If yes. has a biological survey been conducted on the propeny'?
Yes v No (Please attach a copy.) (01A" f-4 ltJ."1e..[ ~...tVo' 1i:-
d. Describe all tRles and vegetation on the lite. Indicate Joc:ation. height. diameter. and
species of tRles. and which (if any) will be Rlmoved by the project.
~ ot~ ~ 1&~~i~1- \1'01 .nz:.
s.
Past Use of the Land
.. Are theR any known historical or IJCheolop:al resources 1ot-ate04 on or near the project
lite? Oi~'su~4 i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '1/.' :II:.
b. Are there any Irinown JIleontologica1 resources'? 17i" '.tS~ ;1/'1 . choj
fZ..lII ~ -rc.e.l1~I'C4' ~ V., ':II.
Have there been any hazardous IIIIIerials dispoIe4 of or 1lOnCIll9 or near the project site'?
Oi{,~II5!"el i\ll ~ ~.,h ~",u.1 f1efw1 Vol :I:
c.
d.
What was 1he 1and pnlviously ased for'? r-j 1>>1.( 16tH.. ,.....,'~
'-.( i. v..,1u...J~.
~ J7~;:?
...' .
6.
Current Land Use
L Describe aU stnlctum and land uses currently existing on the project lite. NtTt/e-
"'"
7.
Describe all stnlctum and land uses c:umntly C}dslPIg on adjacent propertY..
Nonh oa... ~ f'UO'l~$~~'lV'I) ot~ ~~ ~o.zse..' ~...,,~ 8t/1'/Jiy.
South e;:r Q.JArl' 5J:;..fj" c... g,~.,i ~ ""~
East 01 Yk ic... 'ell" t. "" __ IleA:
West ~ ~
Social , I.
L Are there any residents on site? "0 If 10. how many? "fA-
b. Are there any current employment opportunities on site? No
If so. how many and what type? 11M
I
b.
8.
Please provide any other infonnation which may assist in Jhe evaluation of the proposed project.
Su.. tLrtAdted 6vt'pJe.m..-rt .
"'"
""""
~ /75g
WIC:f'.~02I_(W.IG.R)(W.I_)
"'6
..E. ~RTIFlCAnON
L IS owner/owner in escrow.
Print name
or
L c:ansuhant or agent.
10afll L OItOv!or
5fiJlo~ edIt. ~JJQ,/"G~fL
Print name
. HEREBY AFFIRM. that to the best of my belief. the statements and information herein contained are in III
respects tNe and correct and that all known infonnation concerning the project and its letting has been
included in this Ipplication for an Initial Study of possible environmental impllCt and any enclosures for
IltaChments thereto.
Owner/Owner in Escrow Signature
10/91
. Date
.If ICtin& for . cmpontion. include caplcity and company name.
-3-~"- / 7/3;
-- .!!I-
~
SUPPLEMENT
The Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer Analysis (Analysis) was prepared by Wilson
Engineering for the Baldwin Company to recommend sewer improvements necessary to convey
sewage flows from the Salt Creek Basin to existing or proposed downstream sewerage facilities.
The Analysis includes an estimate of sewage flows, recommends the type, size and location of
improvements needed to transport basin flows to downstream facilities, and establishes a wBenefit
Area Fee W to finant'.e the construction of these public improvements.
The study area of the Analysis includes five wpropertiesw located within the Salt Creek
Basin and portions of the Otay Lake Basin. Flows from EastLake and portions of Salt Creek
Ranch and Otay Ranch are tributary to the Salt Creek Basin. These flows will be pumped into
the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin until facilities are available in the Salt Creek Basin. The
Telegraph Canyon Pumped Flow Report provides for the construction of interim facilities in the
Telegraph Canyon system. Flows from Hidden Valley Estates, Adjacent Properties and portions
of Salt Creek Ranch and Otay Ranch are located within the Otay Lake Basin. Since the Otay
Lake Basin drains naturally into the Upper Otay Lake Reservoir, development within this basin
will require the permanent pumping of sewage into the Salt Creek Basin.
The Analysis recommends the construction of the Salt Creek Interceptor in the Salt Creek ~
Basin and Otay River Valley to transport sewage flow from these developments to future
downstream transmission and treatment facilities. Approximately 9,000 feet of the northern
section of the Salt Creek Interceptor will be located within the EastLake Development Property.
The Interceptor will then extend 30,500 feet within the Otay Ranch Property from the southern
end of the EastLake Development to approximately 1,500 feet east of the Otay Valley Road.
The approximate location of the Interceptor is shown on the enclosed map. The exact
location of the Interceptor will be determined during the design phase. The exact environmental
impacts of the sewer construction will be more easily identified at that time.
A public meeting was held on October 18, 1993, to discuss the final Analysis and staff
recommendations for establishing the fee. Although all known developers and property owners
were notified of this meeting, Bruce Sloan of the EastLake Development Company was the only
representative to attend.
The copy of the Analysis provided with this application is curreutly being updated. The
Gcneral Plan for the Otay Ranch was adopted on October 28, 1993. This Analysis was prepared
in September 1993 and therefore will be revised to reflect die Land Use information adopted in
the General Plan.
~
(aYIQISUPP.IS)
~ J?-&tJ
_~_' -1~.-
.... ~ . .. ..
e
.....
--.
...
~. ., -'-.. .-'. -... 'I""'-"~
..... .._..................~.-.--.'-......
.
OT A Y RANCH TECHNICAL REPORTS
Volume I
.City of Chula Vista General Plan and EIR
.County of San Diego General Plan and Subregional Plans
Notices of Preparation (NOP) of Environmental Impact Reponi Public
Comments on NOP (November 9 and December 13, 1989)
Otay Ranch Goals. Objectives. and Polices (December 11. 1989)
Otay Ranch Citizens' Advisory Committee Recommendations, to
Interjurisdictional Task Force (June 1992)
Otay Ranch Issue Papers
6.1 Road System Issue Paper (July 23.1991)
6.2 Village Character Issue Paper (August 1. 1991)
6.3 Roads Crossing Otay Valley Issue Paper (October 7. 1991)
6.4 Otay Valley Regional Park Issue Paper (December 10.1991)
6.S Development Around Lower Otay Lake Reservoir Issue Paper
(February 7, 1992)
6.6 Central Proctor Valley Issue Paper (February 7.1992)
Volume II
1.
2.
3.
4.
S.
6.
7. Otay Ranch New Town Plan (October 30. 1989)
. Volume III . Water Resourcl!s Infrastructure
w'
-
...
.
.0 22.
23.
--...,/ 24.
2S.
--
ltfllll~MtO
8. Lower Otay Reservoir Urban Runoff Protection Repon (May 1990)
9. Otay Ranch Upper and Lower Otay Reservoirs Hydrology Analysis for the
Urban Runoff System (March 21,1990) .
10. Draft Master Plan of Reclaimed Water (May 1990)
11. Draft Master Plan of Water and Sewer (March 1992)
12. Otay Ranch Master Drainage Study (August 1991)
· Appendices
Volume IV . Biology
13. Biological Resources Survey Repon (September 1989) .
14. Sensitive Faunal Elements oflhe Vemal Pools ofOtay Ranch (May 6.1990)
15. Sensitive Plant Species Survey Repon (August 24,1990)
16. Botanical Resources Report. Rare Plant Survey. Sprhig 19.90
(December 13. 1990)
17. Biological Resources Inventory Repon (February 20, 1991)
18. Responses to Data Gaps (November 1991)
19. Report on the FloraofOtay Ranch Vernal Pools (March 12.1992)
20. Wildlife Corridor Study: Phase I Repon (January 1992)
21. Raptor Management Study (July 1992)
Volume V
Otay Ranch Resource Sensitivity Analysis (June 12. 1991)
Otay Ranch Resource Management Plan (July 1992)
Long Range Master Plan for Educational Facilities (March 1992)
Hazardous Substance ConUlmination Investigation (April 4,.1989)
~ 17;--"/
1
..........
-'~~
.-.-" ..-
.._---. .....-.
.... ~ .~. --~"--
-"""'\.
....-...
"""\
Volume VI
....
26. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation (December 30. 1987)
Volume VII
27. Otay Ranch Implementation Plans (June 1992)
Volume VIII
:i8. Maximizing Eco-nomic Sustainability (October IS. 1990)
29. Macroanalysis of the Three Development Alternatives for the Otay Ranch
(February I, 1991)
30. CulruraJ ResoW'Ces Technical Report (July 1992)
Volume IX
31. Transponation Technical Report (July 1992)
......
,
, ,
~-
· These documentS are available for review at the following locations:
Chula Vista Public Library
Otay Ranch Project Office
County of San Diego Department of Planning and Land Use Library
Bonita-Sunnyside County Library
Casa De Oro County Library
Spring Valley County Library
Rural Fire Protection Disoict, Jamul
""'"
-'
""'"
"
~ /7--j,.;2
110150010
2
E. utes
8, 1994
ge 4
~ xh.i.W ~
CouDcilmember Fox questiooed if it was !be City's inleDt to defer aoa II !be PllDaiDg ComIIIiuioa level.
Robert Leiter, Director of PllDaiDg. respooded lbal!bey _ted !be Board to defer aoa uotilllaff bid aD
opporlUDity to co_t to !be PIaDDiD. Commiuioa so lbe CO_Is could be iDcorponted into !be record.
CouDcilmember Moore stated a Ietler 10 Supervisor Bilbrey and !be Chair would be appropriale.
. . END OF CONSENT CALENDAR · ·
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RF.l ATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
10. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERING ORDINANCE ESl'ABLISHING TELEGRAPH CANYON
SEWER PUMPED tLOWS DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (Dm TO PAY FOR SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER BASIN AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE
OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER BASIN - On
10120/92, !be City established lbe Telegrapb Canyon Sewer DeveloplDellt Impact Fee. Baaed OIl the 'TeJagrapll
CanyOll Sewer Buin ImprovelDellt and FiDancing Plan .u-dlDelltlllcorporaling Pumped Plows" a fee of $560 per
pumped Equivalent Dwening Ullit (EDU) should be _blisbed. Staff recom...-d. CoUDcil place !be ord;..."r~
OIl first reading. (DireclOr of Public Works) Continued from the meetin& of 1/15/94.
ORDINANCE 2582 ESI' ABLlSHlNG THE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER PUMPED tLOWS
~VELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTINGENT CONSTRUCTION OF SEWER
WmtOVEMENTS WITIUN THE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER BASIN IF SEWAGE IS DIVERTED
FROM SALT CREEK AND POGGI CANYONS AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING
PERM""S FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER PUMPED tLOWS BASIN
(lint readirur)
Jolm Lippitt, Director of Public Works, gave a brief review of lbe project. The item bid been continued _ani
times and starr bad met wilb !be developers on the project. Starr folt it was a planlbal would work and DOl iDcIease
lbe cost 10 the existing property owoers.
Councilmembar Moore refened to page 1-2, fourtb parIIgrspb, ".... about a mile and one quarter of _ line is
being required. and stated that staff bad indicated it was a CODtin,ency plan.
Mr. Lippitt stated it meantlbal lbose lines would bave to be built to lbal exleDd should !be otber lilies DOl come
forward as lbe areas were built.
Councilmember Moore Cj1*lioaed if lbere would be an _lDeIIt to !be r-t property 0WD0rII.
Mr. Lippitt mponded tbIl it was not an _t, it would eitber be a fee paid by the devoIoper or a Iett<< of
credit. Staff felt because tbere were oaIy two or three developers in tbIl _ it would be a Ietler of credit
mecballiSlll and tbere really would DOl be a fee paid.
This bein,!be time and place as advertised, !be public bearin, was declared open. There hein, DO public leslilDODY,
!be public bearing was closed.
ORDINANCE 2581 OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, nacIiIIc of tile text was wai.., pused
and appro.. .....1 with Nader absen&.
..
II. PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED FORMATION OF OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NUMBER 31,
TELEGRAPH CANYON ESI' ATES - On 1125/94, Council approved !be Eosin-'s Report OIl !be proposed Open
Space District Number 31. ToIepph CanyOll Estates and eel 3/8/94 and 3/1S/94 as !be dales for !be public bearin,s
~.A"==I/7'--" ;J
\
Minutes
March IS, 1994
Paee 4
e
"""\
expertise would contribute materially, 10 solicit their input on the issues that were raised by the SDG&E
project.. .
Mayor Nader felt the inteot was to lake a position that those concerns needed to be addressed in a manner consistent
with protectine the quality of life of the citizens before the project was allowed to eo forward. The City was not
lakine a position qaiost any project by SOO&E reeardless of what they may be able to do to address the concerns.
The City would be lakine a position that there were concerns they wanted the EnerllY Commission to address before
proceedine with the project.
Councilmember Moore felt the motion was primarily to obtain appropriate data sufficient to make a policy position
reeardine the particular project as it affected the City and its property owners and occupants.
Councilmember Rinclone felt the emphasis of the letter sbould be on the local issues. It was bis understandine that
SDG&E had temporarily withdrawn their application with the PUC and part of that may be that they were exploring
other options. If there were other alternatives or methods the City needed to focus attention on that.
Mayor Nader stated he was unaware of what the alternatives or methods would be and so bis intent was to aeod a
lelter right away explicitly describing what the issues were and asking the PUC to address those and that there would
be follow-up comments to the Preliminary Assessment. The thrust of the lelter was to bighlighlthe three areas of
concern listed in the motion.
VOTE ON MOTION: appl'O.ed unanimously.
'"'"
· · · Council recessed at 9:45 p.m. and recon.ened at 9:56 p.m. . . .
6. ORDINANCE 2582 ESrABLISHING THE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER PUMPED FLOWS
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTINGENT CONSTRUCTION OF SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER BASIN IF SEW AGE IS DIVERTED
FROM SALT CREEK AND POGGI CANYONS AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF BUD..DING
PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER PUMPED FLOWS BASIN
(second readinl! and adoDtionl - On 10/20/92, the City established the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Development
Impact Fee. Based on the 'Teleeraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement and Financing Plan Amendment
Incorporating Pumped Flows' a fee of $560 per pumped Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) abould be establiabed.
Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Director of Public Works)
7. ORDINANCE 2590 AMENDING SCHEDULE X, SECTION 10.48.050 OF THE MUNICIPAL
CODE. DECREASING STATE LAW MAXIMUM SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN AREAS AND
AFF1RMING A SPEED LIMIT OF 30 M.P.H. ON OXFORD STREET FROM BROADWAY TO THE CUI.-
DE.SAC AT THE WEST END, AND ADDING THIS LOCATION TO SCHEDULE X enn! readiMl _ In
response to a request from the Police Department and in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and DOGeestion
for the purpose of the promotion of public safety, the City Eneineer determined on the basis of Traffic Engineerine
studies that there was a need to post a speed limit of 30 MPH on Oxford Street from Broadway to the Cul-de-Sac
1,335 - of Broadway. Staff recom""'Dd. Council place the ordinance on first readine. (Director of Public
Works)
8.A. RESOLtrrlON 17414 TERMINATING LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE ASSEMBLY RULES
COMMITTEE AND APPROVING LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE SENATE RULES COMMITTEE OF
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE LEASING OF LEGISLATIVE OFFICE SPACE (SUITE B) TO
SENATOR STEVE PEACE. A two-year acreement for office space (Suite B) leased to the Asaembly Rules
Committee (for Steve Peace) i. acheduled to expire in November 1994. With the recent election of Mr. Peace to
the California State Senate, tbe lease ae_t for bis office space needo to be chaneed to the Senate Rules
"""\
~ J7-~?Y
IE 1hi.bi.+ 5
.
ORDINANCE NO. 2582
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
ESTABLISHING THE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER PUMPED
FLOWS DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PROVIDE FOR THE
CONTINGENT CONSTRUCTION OF SEWER IMPROVEMENTS
WITHIN THE TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER BASIN IF SEWAGE
IS DIVERTED FROM SALT CREEK AND POGGI CANYONS AS A
CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR
CONSTRUCTION INTHETELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER PUMPED
FLOWS BASIN
WHEREAS, developers of land within the City should be required to mitigate the burden
cr.ated by dev.lopm.nt through the construction or improvement of sewer faciliti.s within
the boundari.s of the d.velopm.nt and either the construction or improvement of sewer facili-
ties outside the boundaries of the development which ere needed to provide IIrvice to the
d.velopment in accordance with City standards or the payment of a fee to finance a
development's appropriate portion of the totll cost of the sewer facilities; and,
.
WHEREAS, all develoPl1lent within the City contributes to the cumulative burden on
various sewer facilities in direct relationship to the amount of population generated by the
development or the gross acreage of the commercial or lncIustrial land in the development;
and,
.
WHEREAS, the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Besin (-Pumped Flows Besin-)
is that area of land shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit -2- (Exhibit 1 omitted)
which map is generally comprised of those portions of Poggi Canyon and Salt Creek drainage
basin within the City of Chula Vista, or its sphere of influence, from which wastewater will
be collected and pumped into the Talegraph Canyon Sewer Besin (-Gravity Besin-); and,
WHEREAS, the City d.slres and desired to oversize the Gravity Besin sewer faciliti.s
as a backup plan in order to accommodate sewage flow from the Pumped Flows Besin in the
event that flows from the Pumped Flows Besin, in combinetion with the Gravity Basin flows,
exce.d the capacity of the Gravity Besin sewage system before adequate altemete sewage
facilities (gravity drainege, treatment plants, reclamation plants, ate.) are aveilablein the Salt
Creek and Poggi Canyon drainage basins to handle the Pumped Flows; and,
WHEREAS, this wes and Is Intended to be a -backup plan- Inasmuch as the City
axpects that the fiows in the Pumped Flows Besin will, with the construction of the nec....ry
sewer faciiities (-Poggi CanyonlSalt Craek Facilities-', eventually drain by gravity flow into
the Poggi Canyon and Salt Creak Sawer Basins (-Poggi CanyonlSalt Creak Sewer Gravity
Besins-', and then into the Otay Valley; and,
WHEREAS, at such time as it appears, in the sole discretion of the City Council, that
such Poggi CanyonlSalt Creek Facilities are imminent of construction, It is the intention of the
City Council to terminete the impositlon of this Development Impact Fee, and further, et such
time and in such manner as the City Council, in its sole discretion, determines to be fair and
~ /?-~~
.Ordinance No. 2582
Page 2
"""'"
equitable return any unused funds to the property owners existing at that time of the
properties for which the fee was collected initially; and,
WHEREAS. on February 25. 1992 the City Council passed Resolution No. 16518
approving an amendment to the agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Willdan
Associates for preparation of said Backup Plan. therein referred to as the "Amended Plan";
and.
WHEREAS. on February 25, 1992 the City Council passed Resolution No. 16519
approving the First Amendment to the Telegraph Canyon Basin Sewer Monitoring and Gravity
Basin Usage Agreement to provide that EastLake should pay for tha praparation of the
"Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement and Financing Plan Amendment Incorporating
Pumped Flows" ("Backup Plan").
WHEREAS. pursuant to said agreement with Willdan, Willdan Associates have prepared
a proposed Backup Plan dated June 9. 1993 for approval by the City Council (herewith done);
and,
WHEREAS, on September 21, 1993a public meeting was held betwean Staff and the
developers of developments located within ttle Pumped Flows Basin to discuss the final
Backup Plan and City Staff recommendations for establishing the Telegraph Canyon Sewer
Pumped Flows Basin Development Impact Fee; and,
WHEREAS. on December 7, 1993 a Public Hearing was opened but not completed
before the City Council to provida an opportunity for interested persons to be heard on the
approval of the Backup Plan and establishment of the Telegraph Canyon Sewar Pumped Flows
Fee; and,
~)
WHEREAS. said hearing was continued various times the final one of which was to
February 15, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the "Public Hearing"); and,
WHEREAS. the proposed Backup Plan determines that new development within the
Pumped Flows Basin will create adverse impacts on the City's axisting sewer facilities within
the Gravity Basin (to wit. that the sewagaaxpected to be generated from new development
within the Pumped Flows Basin. when combined with the sewage flows from the Gravity
Basin. will exceed the capacity of tha current sewer system In the Gravity Basin). These
impacts must be mitigated by tha financing and construction of certain sewer facilities
identified in this ordinance; and,
WHEREAS, seid proposed Backup Plan (1 ) includes an estimate of ultimate sewer flows
anticipated from the Pumped Flows Basin; (2) recommends Improvements to handle the
combined incremental increases of sewage flow anticipated from the Pumped Flows Basin and
from the Gravity Basin; and (3) establishes a fea payabie by persons obtaining building permits
for developmants within the Pumped Flows Basin benefiting from Gravity Basin trunk sewer
Improvements; and.
'"""\
~ / )-~?-
Ordinance No. 2582
Page 3
.
WHEREAS. sewer improvements and a fee to be levied on new development in the
Pumped Flows Basin have been justified in the proposed Backup Plan; and.
WHEREAS. the City Council determined. bend upon the avidence presented et the
Public Hearing. including. but not limited to. the Backup Plan and the various raports and other
information received by the City Council In the course of its business. that imposition of the
sewer facilities development impact fee on all developments within the Telegraph Canyon
Sewer Pumped Flows Basin In the City of Chula Vista for which building permits have not yet
been issued is necessary in order to protect the public sefety and welfare and to ensure
effective Implementation of the City's General Plan; and.
WHEREAS. the City Council has determined that the amount of the fee levied by this
ordinance does not exceed the estimeted cost of providing the public facilities.
NOW. THEREFORE. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
Approval of Backup Plan.
.
The City Council has independently reviewed the proposed Backup Plan
herewith presented. finds that it is fair. reasonable and equitable to all
parties. and herewith adopts seme In the form on file with the City Clerk as
Document No. , and on file in the Office of the City Engineer.
SECTION 2.
"Facilities" .
The facilities which are the subject maner of the fee herein established ere
fully described in the Backup P1en at page 24 thereof. and the locations at
which they will be constructed are more fully described on Plates 1 through
14 under the section thereof entitled "Improvement Locations", all of which
facilities may be modifiad by the City Council from time to time by
resolution ("Facilities"l. The City Council mey modify or amend the list of
projects herein considered to be part of the Facilities by wrinen resolution
in order to melntain compliance with the City's Capital Improvement
Program or to reflect changes In land development end astimated and actual
westewater flow.
SECTION 3.
Territory to Which Fee Is Appliceble.
,
.
The area of the City of Chula VISta to which the Fee herein established shall
be eppliceble Is lit forth II an ExhIbit to the Backup Plan. entitled
-Developmenta Subject to Pumping (Pumped Flows Besinl. Telegraph
Canyon Sewer Besln, Improvemant end Financing Plan Amendment.
Incorporating Pumped Flows," shown as being "Prepared: June 23. 1893"
not yet revised. ahell be referred to herein II the "Territory" or alternatively
~J?-t?
Ordinance No. 2582
Page 4
~
,
"Pumped Flows Basin" and is generally described as that area to the East
of the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin, within the Salt Creek and Poggi
Canyon Basins.
SECTION 4.
Purpose.
By Ordinance No. 2533, the City Council approved a plan ("Gravity Basin
Plan") for the financing and construction of the sawer-related facilities
necessary to serve only the sewage transmission demands for the EDU's in
the Gravity Basin. The purpose of this ordinance is to provide the necessary
financing to oversize such sewer-related facilities in the Telegraph Canyon
Sewer Gravity Basin, as defined in Ordinance No. 2533, Section 2, Tarritory
("Gravity Basin"), to accommodate sewage flows pumped into the Gravity
Basin from the Pumped Flows Basin.
SECTION 5.
Establishment of Fee.
A development impact fee ~"Fee"), to be expressed on a per Equivalent
Dwelling Unit I"EDU") basis, and payable prior to the issuance of a building
permit unless security therefora by Letter of Credit, as herein permitted, is
on deposit with the City, for a development project within the Territory, is
hereby established.
i
I
SECTION 6.
Due on Issuance of Building Permit; Exception for Letters of Credit
Procedure.
A. When Payable. The Fee shall be paid in cash upon (early payment is not
permitted) the issuance of a building permit, except as provided in
subparagraph B.
B. Letter of Credit. A building permit may Issue without the payment of
the Fee in cash if (use of the following procedure shell herein be raferred
to as the "Letter of Credit Procedure") the Property owner of the
property for which the building permit is sought, or her/his predecessor
In Interest. has pieced on deposit with the City Engineer at or prior to
the time a final subdivision map is approved by the City for the units
which would otherwise be subject to the Fee on the Issuance of a
building permit. a letter of credit in a form accepteble to the City
Attorney and which. at a minimum. provides for the following:
(1 )
The Letter of Credit shell be irrevocable until releesed in writing
by tha City In the manner herein provided. It shell also
apecifically provide that a change of ownership of the property
for which the Fee Is payable shall not be a besis for releasing or
~
~J7-~~
Ordil\ll1Ce No. 2582
Plge 5
.
cancelling the Letter of Credit.
(2) The Letter of Credit shall be for I term not less thin 3 yelrs
unless a shortlr term Is allowed by the City Attorney in
conjunction with the City Engineer.
(3) The Letter of Cradit shall provide that at the axpirltion of the
Term, the bank Issuing the Letter of Credit shall PlY the full
amount over to the City unless the Term thereof is extended or
the obligltion excused by written direction of the City Attorney
and City Engineer.
(4) The Letter of Credit shall provide that the City mlY
unconditionelly drlw on III or pert of the Amount on demlnd by
the City by written notice thereof Ind without offering Iny other
justifiCltion or documentltion (Authority for drlws on the Letter
of Credit IS between the City Ind the Beneficilry is hereinbelow
provided).
.
(5) The Letter of Credit ahell initillly be in I minimum Imount IS
determined by Ipplying the rite of the Fee times the number of
Equivllent Dwelling Units ("EDUs") within the territory of the
Finll Mlp. Such amount shall be increlsed or decrelsed from
time to time IS the rete of the Fee il Idjusted by the City
Council.
C. Right of City to Drlw on the Letter of Credit. The City mlY exercise its
right to drlw on the letter of credit in Iny of the following
clrcumstlnces.
.
(1) The property owner who would otherwile be responsible for
Plying the Fee hereunder fails to maintain the Letter of Credit in
the minimum amount required by thil Ordinlnce, in which clSe
the full Imount of the Letter of Credit may be drlwn upon by the
City.
(2) The City determinel, in Its sole discretion, that all or I portion of
the Letter of Credit" neC8lS1ry to plen, dellgn or construct, or
otherwise essist in the planning, design or construction of, III or
I portion of the Facllitiel, In which case the City "Iuthorized to
drlw, for aach such FICility, or portion thereof, from time to time
.. pllMing, design Ind construction proceedl, an Imount which
repraaenu the antire actual cOlt of the Flcillty, Including extrl
work Ind overruns, timll I friction, the numerltor of which
equall the utimlted coati of the Flcility to be borne by the
Pumped Sewlr Flows, II set forth in the Ietest Engineer'l Report
updlting the DIF, and the denominator of which represents the
~ /7-t-(
Ordinance No. 2582
Page 6
~
total cost of the Facility as estimated in the latest Engineer's
Report updating the DIF.
(3) The property owner otherwise responsible for the payment of the
Fee tekes any act or suffers any act, or the bank on which the
Letter of Credit is drawn takes any act or suffers any act, which,
in the sole opinion and discretion of the City, creates a
raesonable risk that the Letter of Credit may not be honored on
demand by the City, in which case the City is authorized to draw
on the Letter of Credit in such an amount as the City datermines
is necessary to avoid the risk of loss.
D. Release of the Letter of Credit by City. The City shall issue to the Bank
written relaase of the Letter of Credit, or such appropriate portion
thereof, in any of the following circumstances:
(1) The beneficiary has constructed, or caused to be constructed, to
the satisfaction of the City, the Facilities or portion thereof
agreed to by the City in accordance with the procedures for
developer construction hereinbelow set forth in Sections 12 and
13. ·
(2)
The City Council has determined, in its sole discretion, that such
Poggi CenyonlSalt Creek Facilities are imminent of construction.
~
E. Remedies of City if Letter of Credit procedure violated. In the event that
a draw on the Letter of Credit is not honored on demand as herein
provided, the beneficiary (e.g., the Developer) of the Letter of Credit
shall immediately deposit with the City the full amount thereof in cash,
which shall be deemed to be a debt immediately due and payable of the
beneficiary, and upon the failure to do so, the City is authorized among
other remedies, to institute litigation and to withhold approval of any
additional permits or other entitlements.
SECTION 7.
Determination of Equivalent Development Units.
Each single family datached dwelling or single family attached dwelling shall
be considered one EDU for purposes of this Fee. Each unit within a multi-
family dwelling shall be considered .75 EDU. Every other commercial,
Industrial, non-profit. public or quesi-public, or other usege shall be charged
at a rate calculated in accordance with Figure &, Page 9 of the Backup Plan.
SECTION 8.
Time to Determine Amount Due; Advence Payment Prohibited.
Unless the Lettar of Credit Procedure is used, the Fee for each development
~
~)7~?f)
Ordinance No. 2582
Page 7
.
shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance and shall be the
amount as indicated at thlt time and not when the tentative map or final
map was granted or applied for, or when thl building permit plan check was
conducted. or when application was made for the building permit. If the
Letter of Credit Procedure Is used, the amount of the Latter of Credit shall
be determined at the time the Final Map is approved and shell be adjusted
from time to time as the City determines appropriate.
SECTION 9.
Purpose and Use of Fee.
The purpose of the Fee is to pey for the planning (including preparation of
the Beckup Plan), design, construction, repair, maintenance, and/or
financing (including the cost of Interest and other financing costs as
appropriate) of the Facilities, or reimbursement to the City or, at the
discretion of the City if approved in advance in writing. other third perties
for advancing costs actually incurred for planning. designing, constructing,
or financing the Facilities.
.
SECTION 10. Amount of Ae; Amendment of Mister Fee Schedule.
The Fee shall be calculated at the rate of .560 per EDU. Chlpter XV of thl
Master Fee Schedule is hereby amanded to add Section 8. which shall read
as follows:
.8. Telegraph Canyon Sewar """'ped Flows Development Impact Fee.
This section Is intended to memorlaliza the key provisiOns of
Ordinance No. _, but seid Ordinanca governs over the provisions
of the Master Fae Schedule. For elCllmple, In the avent of a conflict
In interpretation between the Mester Fea Schedule end the
Ordinance, or in the avent thet additional rules applicable to the
imposition of the Fee. the language of the Ordinance governs.
.
a. Tarritory to which Fee applicabla.
The erea of the City of Chula Vlata to which the Fae herein
established shell be applicable Ia set forth as an Exhibit to the
BackUp Plan, antitled -Developments Subject to Pumping
(Pumped Flows Basin), Telegraph Canyon Sewer Besin,
Improvement and financing Plan Amendment, Incorporating
Pumped Flows. - ehown as being -Prapered: June 23. 1993. not
yet revised, shell be referred to herein IS the -rerritory. or
alternatively -Pumped Flows Basin- and Is generally described as
that area to the East of the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Besin,
within the Salt Creek and Poggi Canyon Basins.
.-5-.?f )7-?/
Ordinance No. 2582
Page 8
b. Rate per EDU.
"'""'\
The Fee shall be calculated at the rate of .560 per EDU. which
rate shall be adjusted from time to time by the City Council.
c. EDU calculation.
Each single family detached dwelling or single family attached
dwelling shall be considered one EDU for purposes of this Fee.
Each unit within a multi-family dwelling shall be considered .76
EDU. Every other commercial. industrial. non-profit. public or
quasi-public. or other usage shell be charged at a rate calculated
in accordance with Figure 6. Page 9 of the Backup Plan.
d. When Payable.
The Fee shall be paid in cash not later than immediately prior to
the issuance of e building permit. except that a Letter of Credit
Procedure is permitted for this Fee in the adopting Ordinance. as
same may. from time to time. be amended."
,
The City Council intends to review the amount of the Fee annually or from
time to time. The City Council may. at such reviews. adjust the amount of
this Fee as necessary to assure construction and operation of the Facilities.
the reasons for which adjustments may include. but are limited to. the
following: changes in the costs of the Facilities as may be reflected by
such index as the Council deems appropriate, such as the Engineering-News
Record Construction Index; changes in the type. size. location or cost of the
Facilities to be financed by the Fee; changes in land use on approved
tentative maps or Specific Plan Amendments; other sound engineering,
financing and planning information. Adjustmants to the above Fee may be
made by resolution amending the Master Fee Schedule.
'""""
I
SECTION 1 1.
Authority for Accounting and Expenditures.
The proceeds collected from the imposition of the Fee shell be deposited
into a public facility financing fund I"Telegraph Canyon Sewer Besln
Pumped Flows Development Impact Fee Fund". or eltematively herein
"Fund" or "TCSBPF DIF Fund"' which is hereby created and such proceeds
shell be expended only for the purposes lit forth in this ordinance.
The Director of Finance is euthorized to esteblish verious account. within
the Fund for the Facilities identified in this ordinance and to periodically
make axpenditures from the Fund for the purposes lit forth herein In
accordance with the facilities phasing plan or capital improvement plan
adopted by the City Council.
'""""
I
~/?~?;2.
.
SECTION 12.
.
SECTION 13.
SECTION 14.
.
Ordinance No. 2582
Page 9
Revision and Refund of Fees.
A. Suspension. At such time (-Gravity Access Point In Time"' as e percel
of property within the Territory 1a.1n the opinion of the City Engineer.
able to obtein ..wer ..rvice by virtue of gravity ..wer ..rvice available
In the Salt Creek or the Poggi Canyon Basins. the Fee for such parcel
ahall be suspended.
B. Refund. If the Fee has .Iready been paid in cash for the percel. the Fee
ahall be returned to the owner or owners of the property .t the time tha
Council paases . written resolution cartifying the completion of the
entira planned PoggiJSalt Creek F.cilities for the PoggiJSalt Creek Sewer
Gravity Basin system. and then to each owner In . manner deemed fair
and equitable by the City Council. In the .b..nce of an alternative
determination of fairness by the City Council. . refund which divides the
remaining unused balance by the EDU's which contributed to the Fund
ahall be deemed a fair method.
C. Release of Letters of Credit. "the cash payment of the Fee has been
avoided by . devaloper by the deposit of a Letter of Credit pursuant to
the Letter of Credit Procedure herain .uthorized. the Letter of Credit
ahall be ralea..d either (1'.t such time thet the City Council certifies by
written resolution thet the entire PoggIJS.1t Creek Sewer Gravity Basin
Facilities exists for all paru of the Salt Creak .nd Poggi Canyons or (21
.t such sooner time .s the City Council datermines that the total
balance of the letters of credit Is not nec....ry to complete the
planning. design .nd constrUCtion of the F.cilities (i.e.. In Telegraph
Canyon Sew.r Basin). certifies the amount needed to complete
construction of the Facilities. and authorizes the release of 75 '" of the
remainder by written resolution. specifying the recipients of such
raleased Letters of Credit In . fair .nd equitable meMer.
Findings.
The City Council finds that collection of the Fees established by this
ordinance .t the time of the building permit Is neca...ry to ensure that
funds will be .vaileble for the construetlon of f.cilities concurrent with the
need for tha.. f.cllities and to ensura certainty In the capital facilities
budgeting for growth Impacted public facilities.
Fee Additional to other Fees and Charges.
The Fee established by this section Is In addition to the requirements
Impoeed by other City laws. policies or regulations relating to the
~/?~?J
Ordinance No. 2582
Page 10
i
construction or the financing of the construction of public improvements
within subdivisions or developments, and is specifically intended to be in
addition to a development impact fee for the construction of the Poggi
Canyon and/or Salt Creek Sewer Gravity Basin Facilities, such that a payor
of this fee may also be required to pay any development impact fea charged
for such facilities.
SECTION 15.
Mandatory Oversizing of Facility; Duty to Tender Reimbursement Dffer.
Whenever a developer of a development project in the Territory of the
Pumped Flows Basin is required as a condition of approval of an entitlement
(e.g., General Plan Amendment, Pre-zoning, General Development Plan, SPA
Plan, etc.) to cause a portion of the sewer system which is the subject
matter of a Facilities enhancement planned for improvement under the
Gravity Basin Plan to be oversized under tha Backup Plan, the City may
require the developer to install the Facilities according to design
specifications approved by the City, that being with the supplemental size
or capacity in order to accommodate estimated ultimate flow as indicated
in the Basin Plan and subsequent amendments. If such a requirement is
imposed, the City shall first grant credits against the developer's obligation
to pay the Fee, and, as to any excess, offer to reimburse the developer from
the Fund either in cash or over time as Fees are collected, at the option of
the City, for costs incurrad by the developer for the design and construction
of the Facility not to exceed the estimated cost of that particular Facility as
included in the calculation and updating of the Fee, and in an amount agreed
to in advance of their expenditure in writing by the City. The City may
update the Fee calculation as City deems appropriate prior to making such
offer. This duty to extend credits or offer reimbursement shall be
independent of tha developer's obligation to pey the Fee.
""'"'
SECTION 1 7.
Voluntary Construction of a Portion of the Facilities; Duty of City to Tender
Reimbursement Offer.
If a developer is willing and agrees in writing to design and construct a por-
tion of the Facilities in conjunction with the prosecution of a development
project within the Territory (-Work-I, the City may, as part of the written
agreement, grant credits against the Developer's obligation to pay the Fee,
and may thereafter, use the proceeds of the Fund to reimburse the
developer from the Fund either at the time the expenditures are incurred or
over time as Fees are collected, et the option of the City, for costs incurred
by the developer for the design and construction of the Facility not to
axceed the estimated cost of that perticular Facility as Included In the
calculation and updating of the Fee, and in an amount agreed to In advance
of their expenditure In writing by the City. The City may update the Fee
calculation as City deems appropriate prior to making such offer. This duty
~
~ /7-?Y
Ordinance No. 2582
Page 1 1
.
to extend credits or offer reimbursement ahall be independent of the
developer's obligation to pay the Fee.
SECTION 18. Procedure for.Entitlement to Reimbursement Offer.
The City's extension of e credit or e reimbursement offer to e developer
pursuant to Section 15 or 16 above ahall be conditioned on the developer
complying with the terms and conditions of this section:
A. Written authorization shall be requested by the developer from the City
and issued by the City Council by written resolution before developer
may incur any coats eligible for reimbursement relating to the Work.
B. The request for authorization shell comaln the following information, and
such other Information as may from tima to tima be requestad by tha
City:
(1) Detailed descriptions of the Work with the preliminary cost
estimate.
,
.
C. If the Council grants authorization, it ahall be by written agraement with
the Developer, and on the following conditions among such other
conditions as the Council may from tima to time impose:
(1) Developer shall prepare ell p1ens and specifications and submit
same to the City for approval;
(2) Developer shall secure and dedicate any right-of-wey required for
the Work;
(31 Developer shall secure all required permits and environmentel
clearances necessary for construction of the project;
(4) Developer shall provide performance bonds In a form end
amount, and with a surety satisfactory to the City;
.
(51 Developer shall pay all City fees and coats.
(6) The City shall be held harmless and indemnified, and upon
demand by the City, defended by the developer for any of the
coats and liabilities associated with the construCtion of the
project.
(7) The developer shall edvence all necessary funds to design and
construct the project.
~ /?-?~
Ordinance No. 2582
Page 12
"""\
(8) The developer shall secure et least three (3) qualified bids for
work to be done. The construction contract shall be granted to
the lowest qualified bidder. Any claims for additional payment
for extra work or charges during construction shall be justified
and shall be documented to the satisfaction of the Director of
Public Works.
(9) The developer shall provide a detailed cost estimate which
Itemizes those costs of the construction attributable to the Work.
The estimate is preliminary and subject to final determination by
the Director of Public Works upon completion of the Public
.Fecility Project.
(10) The egreement mey provide that upon determination of
satisfactory incremental completion of e Fecility, as approved
end certified by the Director of Public Works, the City may pay
the developer progress payments, or grant incremental credits,
in en amount not to excaed 75 percent of tha estimeted cost of
the construction completed to the time of the progress peyment
but shall provide in such cese for the retention of 25% of such
costs until issuance by the City of e Notice of Completion.
(11) The egreement mey provide thet eny funds owed to the
developer es reimbursements mey be epplied to the developer's
obligations to pey the Fee for building permits to be epplied for
in the future.
~
(12) When ell work hes been completed to the utisfection of the
City, the developer shall submit verificetion of peyments me de
for the construction of the project to the City. The Director of
Public Works shall make the finel determinetion on axpenditures
which ere eligible for reimbursement.
(13) After final determination of expenditures eligible for
reimbursement hes been mede by the Public Works Director, the
perties mey egree to offset the developer's duty to pey Fees
required by this ordinance ageinst the City's duty to reimburse
the developer.
(14) If, efter offset If eny, funds ere due the developer under this
Hction, the City shell reimburse the developer from the Fund
either et the time the expenditures ere incurred or over time es
FHs ere collected, et the option of the City, for eligible costs
Incurred by the developer for the design and construction of the
Facility not to exceed the estimated cost of thet particular
Facility as included in the calculation and updating of the Fee; or
the developer may waive reimbursement and use the amount due
~
~J?-?;' .
.
SECTION 18.
.
SECTION 19.
Ordinance No. 2582
Page 13
them as credit egainst future Development Impact Fee
obligations.
Procedure for Fee Modification
Any developer who. because of the nature or type of uses proposed for e
development project. contends that epplicetion of the Fee imposed by this
ordinance is unconstitutional or unrelated to mitigation of the burdens of the
development. may epply to the City Council for e modification of the Fee
end the manner in which it Is calculated. The epplicetion shall be made in
writing and filed with the City Clerk not later then tan 11 01 days after notice
Is given of the public hearing on the development permit application for the
project. or if no development permit Is required. at the time of the filing of
the building permit application. The application shall state In detail the
factual basis for tha claim of modification. end shall provide an engineering
end eccounting report showing the overall Impact on the DIF and the ability
of the City to complete construction of the Facilities by making the
modification requested by the applicant. The City Council shall make
reesonable efforts to consider the applicetion within sixty (601 days after its
filing. The ~ecision of the City Council nil be finel. The procedure
provided by this section is additional to any other procedure authorized by
law for protection or challenging the Fae Imposed by this ordinance.
Fee Applicable to Public Agencies.
Development projects by public agencies. Including schools. shall not be
exempt from the provisions of the Fee.
SECTION 20. AlSlssment District.
.
If any assessment or special taxing district is established to design.
construct end pay for eny or ell of the Facilities (-Work Alternatively
Financed-'. the owner or developer of e project may apply to the City
Council for reimbursemant from the Fund In an emount equal to that portion
of the cost Includad In the celculation of the Fee ettributable to the Work
Alternatively Financed. In this regard. the amount of the relmbursament
shall be based on the COltllncluded In the Backup ....n. .. emended from
tima to tlma. and therefore. will not Include any portion of the financing
cQltl ...ociated with the formation of the ,""Imant or other special
tllxing district.
~ /7~77
Ordinance No. 2582
Page 14
--""\
SECTION 21.
Expiration of this Ordinance.
This ordinance shall be of no further force and effect when the City Council
determines that the amount of Fees which have been collected reaches an
amount equal to the cost of the Facilities.
SECTION 22. Time Limit for Judicial Action.
Any judicial action or proceeding to attack. review. set aside. void or annul
this ordinance shall be brought within the time period as astablished by
Government Code Section 54995 after the effective date of this ordinence.
SECTION 23.
CEOA Findings for Statutory Exemption.
The City Council does hereby find that the Fee herein imposed is for the
purpose of obtaining funds for capital projects necessary to maintain service
within existing service areas. The Council finds that the proposed Facilities
are in existing rights of way parallel to or replacing existing sewer lines.
Therefore. the City finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is statutorily
axempt under the provisions of Public Resources Code Section 21080 (bl
(81 and CEOA Guidelines Section 15273.
~
SECTION 24.
Other Not Previously Defined Terms.
For the purposes of this ordinance. the following words or phrases shall be
construed as defined in this Section. unless from the context it appears thet
a different meaning is intended.
A. wBuilding PermitW means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the
Uniform Building Code as adopted by reference by this City.
B. wDeveloperw means the owner or developer of. development.
C. -Development PermitW means any discretionary permit. entitlement or
approvel for e development project issued under any zoning or
eubdivision ordinance of the City.
D. -Development ProjectW or wDevelopmentW means any activity described
in Section 65927 and 65928 of the State Government Code.
E. -Single Family Attached DwellingW means a aingle family dwelling
attached to another single family dwelling; .ach on their own lot.
~
~ /7~7r-
.
SECTION 25.
Presented by
I
Effective Date.
Ordinance No. 2582
Page '5
This ordinance shall become effective sixty (601 days after its second
leading and adoption.
- .
ohn P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works
.
.
Bruce M. Boogaar
City Attorney
.
~ /7/7/
Ordinanca No. 2582
. Page 16
PASSED. APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chuta Vista.
California, this 15th day March, 1994, by the following vote:
"""'"'
AYES: Councilmembers: Fox, Horton. Moore, Rindone. Nader
NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
- ~- -~
r.. ~
-
Tim Nader. Mayor
ATTEST:
,
/ '
~ 'L~
Beverly A Authelet, City Clerk
""'"
STATE OF CALIFORNIA I
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO I ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA I
I. Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista. California. do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 2582 had its first reading on March 8. 1994. and its second
relding and adoption at a regular meeting of said City Council on the 15th day of March.
1994.
Executed this 15th day of March. 1994.
~(J 6Ld/&
Beverly A Authelet. City Clerk
11
~ 17-%V
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FIN AL
SALT CREEK BASIN
GRAVITY SEWER ANALYSIS
November 8,1994
Prepared for:
The Baldwin Company
11975 EI Camino Real
Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92130
Prepared by:
Wilson Engineering
703 Palomar Airport Road
Suite 300
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Job Number:
605-122
/ 7~?( /
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALT CREEK BASIN GRAVITY SEWER ANALYSIS
Introduction
This study provides a sewer analysis for the Salt Creek Drainage Basin which
is located just west of the Otay Reservoirs and east of the City of Chula Vista.
A gravity sewer interceptor is proposed within the basin and in the Otay River
Valley to ultimately convey flows to either the future Otay Valley Water
Reclamation Plant to be located on the Otay Ranch's, Otay River Valley Parcel
or to the existing Metro sewer system.
The original concept of collection and disposal of the Salt Creek Basin sewage
flows was to construct a temporary connection to the existing City of San Diego
Otay Valley Trunk Sewer! State Prison Line located along the southerly edge of
the Otay River Valley. The idea was to lease the available capacity in this line
from the City for a specified time period and then construct a new line to
convey flows to the proposed water reclamation plant or the Metro sewer
system. However, a financial agreement with the City of San Diego could not
be reached. Therefore, this report presents the recommended sewerage
facilities necessary to convey flows from the upstream portion of the Salt Creek
Basin to the existing 72-inch Metro sewer interceptor along the coast.
The City of Chula Vista has 19.2 million gallons per day (mgd) capacity in the
Metro Sewer System. Based on discussions with City of Chula Vista
Engineering, the existing average daily flow from Chula Vista is 11.5 mgd;
therefore, Chula Vista has approximately 7.7 mgd available capacity in the
Metro Sewer. This report shows that ultimate average daily flows from future
development in the study area are estimated at 7.8 mgd which is greater than
the available Chula Vista capacity in the Metro System.
The study area for this report consists of the Salt Creek Basin as well as a
portion of the Otay Lake Basin surrounding the Otay Reservoirs. Development
within the Otay Lake Basin will require permanent pumping of sewage flows
I
) 7~Y)-'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
into the Salt Creek Basin. Exhibit A at the back of this report identifies the
boundaries of the study area and the proposed alignment of the Salt Creek
Interceptor.
As can be seen, the properties within the study area anticipated to convey flows
to the Salt Creek Interceptor are as follows:
1) Salt Creek Ranch
2) Eastlake (Business Center, Greens, Woods, Vistas, Trails and
Olympic Training Center)
3) Otay Ranch (Otay River Valley, Proctor Valley and San Ysidro
Parcels)
4) Adjacent Properties
The purpose of this report is to determine the ultimate size of the Salt Creek
Interceptor based on projected peak flows from the above properties and
determine a pro rata cost share for the contributing properties. It is expected
that this information will be used by the City of Chula Vista to create a Benefit
Area Fee to fund construction of the Salt Creek Interceptor.
Desilm Criteria
The design criteria utilized for analysis of the proposed Salt Creek Interceptor
are in accordance with those used by the City of Chula Vista. Table 1 presents
the generation factors used to project sewage flows from the study area.
2
17~?5)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 1
Sewage Generation Factors
R e siden tial
Single-Family
Multi-Family
280 gpd/ unit
210 gpd/unit
2,500 gpd/ acre
Commercial
Schools 1
Elementary
Jr. & Sr. High School
15 gpd/ studen t
20 gpd/ student
2,500 gpd/ acre
500 gpd/ acre
Churches
Parks
I Schools planned for Olay Ranch utilized 1,000 gpd per gross acre.
The peaking factor curve (CVDS 13) provided in the City of Chula Vista
Subdivision Manual was used to convert average daily flows to peak wet weather
flows; a copy of CVDS 13 is contained in the Appendix.
All new gravity sewers have been designed to convey peak flow. For pipes with
a diameter of 12-inches and smaller, the sewers have been designed to convey
this flow when flowing half full. For pipes with a diameter of IS-inches and
larger, the sewers have been designed to convey peak flow when flowing three-
fourths full by depth. All new sewers were designed to maintain a minimum
velocity of two feet per second at design flow to prevent the deposition of
solids. The analysis to size the proposed Salt Creek Interceptor utilized
Manning's equation with an 'n' value of 0.013.
3
/7'Y--Y
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Proiected Sewa2e Flows
This section presents the projected sewage flows from the study area based on
the criteria established in the previous section. The latest land use information
for all contributing properties was used in estimating projected flows in the Salt
Creek Interceptor. Table 2 presents a summary of the projected sewage flows
from the contributing properties in the Salt Creek Basin study area.
Table 2
Projected Sewage Flows From Salt Creek
Basin Study Area
Salt Creek Ranch
Otay Ranch
Otay River Valley Parcel
Proctor Valley Parcel
San Ysidro Parcel
""......".,..,.._,_._,-,-,-_.."
"-"":,-:,_,,::_,,,:,::-,'-,,,::":,,";:-,;,;,-,:,'..-",
. Average<
Flow;gpd
319,585
4,410,140
1,254,910
249,280
Eastlake
Business Center
Greens
71,400
340,750
171,640
219,380
384,410
282,532
Woods
Vistas
Trails
Olympic Training Center
87,920
4
J7~Y5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Information on projected flows from Salt Creek Ranch was taken from the
Wilson Engineering, Master Plan of Sewerage for Salt Creek Ranch, dated
January 1993. Information on projected sewage flows from Otay Ranch were
taken from the October 28, 1993 Master Plan of Sewerage for Otay Ranch
prepared by Wilson Engineering.
The Wastewater Master Plan prepared for the Eastlake Development Company
by NBS/ Lowry dated May 1990 was used for Eastlake. A site utilization plan
was used to revise the portion of flows in Eastlake Greens and the Business
Center tributary to the Salt Creek Basin; a copy of this map is included in the
appendix. Note that the NBS/ Lowry Master Plan flow projections for Eastlake
were revised for this report to match the residential sewage generation factors
presented in Table 1; the May 1990 Eastlake Wastewater Master Plan utilized
80 gpcd and population densities ranging from 1.7 to 3.0 persons per unit.
The Issue Paper Project Team Proposal (dated January 8, 1992) was used for
the adjacent properties around Otay Ranch and Salt Creek Ranch expected to
contribute flow to the Salt Creek Interceptor; a copy of this is included in the
Appendix. The calculations used to project sewage flows within the study area
are contained in the Appendix at the back of this report.
5
) Jr%,y
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
AnalYsis and Results
The Salt Creek Interceptor was broken down into a total of nine reaches from
the southern boundary of Salt Creek Ranch to the existing 72-inch Metro sewer
interceptor as shown on Exhibit A. An attempt was made to divide the reaches
at points of slope change and where a significant amount of sewage flow from
the properties would be contributed.
For each reach, the tributary area is shown to identify the properties which
contribute flow to that reach. Although not shown, the eastern portion of the
Otay Ranch, San Ysidro Parcel is included within the Reach 2 tributary area.
Table 3 presents a summary of sewage flows by reach from the various
properties.
Table 3
Summary of Sewage Flows for The Salt Creek Interceptor
1 319,585 625,540 157,220 87,920 1,190,265
2 878,650 579,180 2,648,095
3 112,000 733,712 3,493,807
4 361,960 3,855,767
5 227,420 4,083,187
6 1,582,275 5,665,462
7 453,340 6,118,802
8 1,673,145 7,791,947
9 7,791,947
6
17.'67
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It is anticipated that flows from the northern section of the Otay Ranch Proctor
Valley Parcel and the adjacent properties will be pumped around the north end of
Upper Otay Reservoir through Salt Creek Ranch and into Reach 1. The remainder
of the Proctor Valley Parcel and San Ysidro Parcel of Otay Ranch will be pumped
around the north end of Lower Otay Reservoir and into Reach 2.
The Eastlake flows were input into Reaches I, 2 and 3 based on information in the
NBS/Lowry Master Plan. The only flows added from Reach 4 to 8 are from the
Otay Ranch, Otay River Valley Parcel. Reach 9 is proposed as a parallel line to
the existing City of San Diego line and would only be built if flows must be
conveyed to the Metro sewer system via a new trunk sewer.
Table 4 presents the Salt Creek Interceptor analysis. The minimum slope for
Reaches 1 through 4 was estimated using USGS, 2000-scale, 7.5 minute series
quadrangle maps based on the natural topography; the slope of 0.23 percent used
for Reaches 5 through 9 is the minimum slope of the existing trunk sewer through
the Otay River Valley. It is possible based on final design of the interceptor that
actual slopes may allow a decrease in the line size of some of the reaches.
Table 4
Salt Creek Interceptor Analysis
.. ...,.",-",,,..,,. .",.",......."...
",',,",. "..,'", ..'."," ''',,''''','''' ...".".. -"..
..",."......"",_,..""........""". ,_",n"....""........."..... ,.
...Average.. .Peakbi.g...
. FIow;mgd . . Factor ...
":_":'""""_'_""""_"',"":_>.'" 'c,:_,:::",,_,,'_"''''',,_,;:_:,_;_;;::';';'';':':';',','",:'::':.,..
. . Peak ... ...Requh'ed. .
Flow~mgd.. . Size
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0.70 1.19 1.84 2.19 15"
1.10 2.65 1. 70 4.51 18"
0.78 3.49 1.68 5.86 21"
0.95 3.86 1.66 6.41 21"
0.23 4.08 1.65 6.73 30"
0.23 5.67 1.63 9.24 30"
0.23 6.12 1.62 9.91 30"
0.23 7.79 1.62 12.62 36"
0.23 7.79 1.62 12.62 36"
7
J7~r6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The results of our analysis are shown on Exhibit A with the required size shown
adjacent to each reach. The recommended sizes range from 15 to 36-inch. Note
that the required sizes shown for each reach except Reach 1 have sufficient excess
capacity to handle the 1.2 mgd fail-safe capacity which the Otay Water District
needs for their reclamation ponds located north of Salt Creek Ranch. Reach I
would need to be an 18-inch line in order to convey the 1.2 mgd fail-safe capacity
and satisfy the depth to diameter ratio criteria (0.75); however, this report
recommends a 15-inch line which can accommodate the peak flow (2.19 mgd) plus
the 1.2 mgd fail-safe capacity based on a depth to diameter ratio of 0.80.
Citv of San Diel!o Otav Mesa Transmission Svstem
As mentioned in the introduction to this report, the City of San Diego was
contacted in 1990 regarding the purchase of capacity in the existing Otay Mesa
Transmission System. The Otay Mesa Transmission System consists of the Otay
International Center (OIC) Trunk Sewer/Pump Station and the Otay Valley Trunk
Sewer/Prison Line.
Although a financial agreement could not be reached in 1990, a "Sewage
Transportation Agreement" between the City of San Diego and the Spring Valley
Sanitation District dated July 14, 1992 indicates that the alternative to connect
Reach 8 to the Otay Valley Trunk Sewer/Prison Line could be pursued. In order
to utilize these facilities, a "Sewage Transportation Agreement" would have to be
entered into with the City of San Diego to obtain capacity in these existing
facilities.
The cost to purchase capacity in the Otay Valley Trunk Sewer/Prison Line is
calculated based on $805.88 per EDU plus 6 percent compound interest from March
12, 1994 as shown on Exhibit "B" (see Appendix) of the July 14, 1992 agreement
with Spring Valley Sanitation District. These reimbursement charges are
established in the Otay Mesa Facilities Participation Agreement adopted September
30, 1985 by the City of San Diego per Resolution No. R-264173. There are
additional costs for transportation charges and repair costs which would apply to
the portion of the sewerage system utilized. Such an agreement could be entered
into with the right to disconnect from the trunk lines provided a thirty-day notice
is given to the City of San Diego. However, it is not likely that the City would
8
/7-1)/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
agree to temporary capacity in the Otay Valley Trunk Sewer/Prison Line and,
therefore, there would be no refund for EDUs disconnected.
Financial Analysis
The Salt Creek Interceptor is a facility necessitated by growth and should be borne
by future development. A straightforward approach toward financing the future
construction of the Salt Creek Interceptor is to create a Benefit Area Fee for each
benefiting equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) which will contribute flow.
It is anticipated that the Salt Creek Interceptor will be constructed and accordingly
financed in phases. Reaches I and 2 are located within the Eastlake Woods and
Trails and are likely to be built with development of these projects prior to the
construction of the downstream reaches. Flow in Reaches I and 2 will be
temporarily pumped into the Telegraph Canyon Basin. Reaches 3 through 8 are
located on the Otay River Valley Parcel of Otay Ranch and probably will not be
built until either a) the Otay Valley Water Reclamation Plant is scheduled for
construction, b) Reach 9 is constructed, c) an agreement is reached with the City
of San Diego for use of the Otay Valley Trunk Sewer/Prison Line or d) the
Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer is over capacity.
The intent of the Benefit Area Fee is to establish a dollar amount per EDU to
finance construction of the Salt Creek Interceptor. The developments which
temporarily pump flows into the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer must pay their
share of Benefit Area Fees up front. This will create monies which will assist the
developer or developers required to construct the interceptor when the Telegraph
Canyon Trunk Sewer is at capacity or the reclamation plant is constructed.
Table 5 presents a cost estimate for construction of the Salt Creek Interceptor with
a pro rata cost distribution based on the five different properties expected to
contribute flow. Approximately two-thirds of the total cost is attributable to Otay
Ranch with the remaining one-third split among the four remaining properties.
9
/7- 90
10
Table 5
Salt Creek Interceptor
Pro Rata Cost
Distribution
Salt Creek IR h
ka
.. . ..
X... . .
m.. l..c
oft .....
......
itxcls J
Pi P. rtjft��z
0 0
..
wh - .
.. .. ...
...
Tell
Reach I
%
26.8
52.6
13.2
74
15
4,500
100
430,000
$
120,600
236,700
59,400
33,300
Reach 2
%
12.1
56.8
27.8
3.3
19
4,500
115
517,500
$
. 62,618
293,940
143,865
17,077
1
Reach 3
%
9.1
46.3
42.1
2.5
21
4,000
125
500,000
$
45,500
231,500
210,500
12,500
Reach 4
%
8.3
51.3
39.1
2.3
21
4,900
125
600,000
$
49,800
307,800
228,600
13,800
Reach 5
%
7.8
54.0
36.0
2.2
30
4,700
150
705,000
$
54,990
380,700
253,800
15,510
Reach 6
%
5.6
66.9
25.9
L6
30
4,500
150
675,000
$
37,800
451,575
174,825
10,8()0
Reach 7
%
5.2
69.4
24.0
1.4
30
7,500
150
1,125,000
$
38,500
780,750
270,000
15,750
Reach 8
%
4.1
75.9
19.9
1.1
36
5,0()0
200
1,000,000
$
41,000
759,000
189,000
11,000
1
Reach 9
%
4.1
75.9
18.9
1.1
36
27,000
250'
6,750,000
$
276,750
5,123,250
1,275,750
74,250
Subtotal.
I I I
741 5 i . 1-:-
-1: 8,565
2,505,740
., 1 . %
20,5v':
15% Engineering,
112,134
1,294,782
420,861
30,598
1,849,375
Inspection, Surveying
25% Contingency
214,923
2,462,500
906,650
58,646
3,542,719
TOTAL
1,074,615,
11,372,497
4,ti33,231
493,231
17,71 ;,591
2% City Administration
21,492
246,251
80,665
5,865
354,273
GRAND TOTAL
12 '55 1
113
!.gq
�4
518,067,g67
Unit cost higher
due to
existing street.
10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
As can be seen, the total estimated cost for all nine reaches is $18.1 million; this
cost estimate includes a 15 percent allowance for engineering, inspection services
and surveying, a 25 percent contingency and two percent for City of Chula Vista
administration. The unit costs used in Table 5 are estimated for Ductile Iron (DI)
pipe and are based on discussions with pipe manufacturers and a review of
construction costs of recently completed gravity sewer line projects in new roads;
these costs are based on an ENR-CCI Index for Los Angeles of 6549 (August
1994). Ductile Iron pipe is recommended for structural integrity in anticipation
of significant pipe depths and corresponding earth load which may be encountered
to facilitate gravity flow. Approximately one-half of the cost is for Reach 9 which
would have to be installed in existing roads and, therefore, has a higher unit cost
associated with construction of this reach.
Land uses for each property are converted to EDUs for the financial analysis only
using the factors provided in Table 6. Table 7 provides updated EDU projections
for each property based on these factors. The EDU projections for Otay Ranch
were updated based on their approved development plan. Tables 8 and 9 provide
a cost per EDU comparison with and without Reach 9 for construction of the
interceptor based on three methodologies.
The first methodology utilizes the cost estimate for construction of the interceptor
and calculates a cost per EDU based on the ultimate number of EDUs from all five
properties. This methodology provides that all properties would contribute the
same amount regardless of where their flows enter the Salt Creek Interceptor.
The second methodology utilizes the information in Table 2 to calculate a cost per
EDU for each property. Based on the total pro rata cost share for each property,
a cost per EDU is calculated. The third methodology utilizes information in Table
3 which lists the cumulative average flow in each reach of the interceptor. Based
on the total cost for each reach, including contingency, the cost per EDU and the
cumulative cost by Reach is shown to reflect the actual cost to developers who
would connect to each Reach.
11
)7-7;2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE Ii
EDU CONVERSION FACTORS FOR FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Residential -SFD
Residential - Multi-family
Commercial
High School
Junior High School
Elementary School
Park
OTC Training Facility
OTC Residential Dorms
OTC Support Staff
OTC Visitors Center
CPF
TABLE 7
1.0 EDU IDU
0.75 EDUIDU
10 EDUI ACRE
0.08 EDU I Student
0.08 EDU I Student
0.06 EDU I Student
2 EDUI Acre
I EDU IDU
0.32 EDU/Person
0.32 EDU I Person
16 EDU I Acre
10 EDU I Acre
EDU PROJECTIONS FOR FEE CALCULATIONS
.....'.-,;,.....,........'.'...',.,....
........$!i!~....i....
Pt~K\
Ralli!W
1,015
Single Family Residential
Multi-Family Residential
Commercial
High School
Jr. High School
Elementary School
Park
Olympic Training Center (OTC)
Community Purpose Facilities (CPF)
TOTAL
28
44
70
1,157
9,825
5,113
5,087
200
200
360
345
736
21,866
Based on approved GDP/SRP land use plan.
2 City of Chula Vista projections revised per SPA plan amendment.
12 / 7 ~ ~ J
2,454
314
1,373
150
104
96
75
1,108
40
5,400
314
28,737
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 8
COST PER EDU COMPARISON FOR SALT CREEK INTERCEPTOR
INCLUDING REACH 9
Methodology 1
Cost Per EDU Based on Total Cost
Methodology 2
Cost Per EDU By Property
",'-'-"""-""-'--'
n".".".....",...",.",..",.."....
."-C,-,',-,-.'.-,-.',-,",','-,-,-.",-',"",',"',"'-,'......-,.."-,....
.... .1t:~1:h:r~~t:..
Salt Creek Ranch
1,157
1,096,107
12,558,748
4,113,916
299,096
947
574
762
953
Otay Ranch
Eastlake
21,866
5,400
314
Adj acenl Properties
Methodology 3
Cost Per EDU By Reach
1
2
3
4
..-,_.,..,.,...:,.-,:;.-,.;.;;:............._,_.'
.......iP'4;p,!!~t,'!'~...i.
.......Q#~{...~.~r...Jt~:Q.........
.............(Pe.f..geacJj(.........
930
780
702
645
583
515
468
395
4,394
9,760
12,921
659,813
758,784
733,125
879,750
1,033,707
989,719
1,649,531
1,466,250
9,897,188
150
78
57
62
68
47
73
51
344
14,254
5
6
7
15,091
20,915
22,583
28,737
28,737
8
9
344
13
J7~71
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 9
COST PER EDU COMPARISON FOR SALT CREEK INTERCEPTOR
EXCLUDING REACH 9
Methodology 1
Cost Per EDU Based on Total Cost
Methodology 2
Cost Per EDU By Property
.. " ,.
""".",.."..,,,,,..
.".,.."...,..-,._...,...,-....,-.-.-,...,-,....,-.-.-.-.."..
...,...,-,..,-,:."-....-...-.:...,......,,..'.:,.,..:..,"",',:,','-:,",:,".','-'.
t..'J;ii~~I..~...9!~..
...iQ~.!.$)!~if~;~i.....
690,322
5,046,781
22,243,348
190,227
597
231
415
606
Salt Creek Ranch
1,157
21,866
5,400
314
Otay Ranch
EastIake
Adjacent Properties
Methodology 3
Cost Per EDU By Reach
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
'-'::'"::;.,.:,;.:,.,;.,.-,:,-;-,-:-;-:-;-,,,.-;.,--,---,..........'-,,-:'........;
.. . . . Cumiilative. ..
.Ciist PerEDU .
.. ... Per Reach. . .
586
436
358
301
239
171
124
51
4,394
659,813
758,784
733,125
879,750
1,033,707
989,719
1,649,531
1,466,250
150
78
57
62
68
47
73
51
9,760
12,921
14,254
15,091
20,915
22,583
28,737
14
/'
J>7.)?
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Conclusions and Recommendations
The following is a list of conclusions and recommendations reached as a result
of our study of the Salt Creek Interceptor:
I) Based on the projected flows and minimum slopes presented in this
report, the proposed Salt Creek Interceptor ranges in size from 15
to 36-inch; the recommended line sizes may change depending on
final design which will determine the actual slope of the gravity
sewer line.
2) The estimated cost of the Salt Creek Interceptor is $8.2 million for
Reaches 1 through 8. Reach 9 should be excluded from the total
cost as it will not be needed if the Otay Valley Water Reclamation
Plant is constructed or if Reach 8 can be connected to the City of
San Diego's Otay Valley Trunk Sewer/ Prison Line. If Reach 9 must
be constructed, it should be financed as a regional facility through
sewer capacity fees.
3) It is recommended that the construction of the Salt Creek
Interceptor (excluding Reach 9) should be financed by establishing
a "Benefit Area Fee" based on Methodology 1 (Table 7); this
methodology provides for a uniform cost of $284 per EDU to all
development within the study area. This methodology would be the
most equitable since all properties essentially receive the same
service.
15
/;-//:1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BIBLIOGRAPHY
City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual, City of Chula Vista.
Master Plan of Sewerage for Salt Creek Ranch (Final), Wilson Engineering,
January 1993.
Wastewater Master Plan for Eastlake Development Company (Final),
NBSI Lowry Engineers & Planners, May 1990.
Mast.er Plan of Sewerage for Otay Ranch (Final), Wilson Engineering,
October 28, 1993.
16
17-17
.
'I
~
~
II
'1
,
':1
I '
II'
~'I
~I!
IJi
I r
I!
1 !
. I
, I'
oO . ~
.1
I
I
-II
I
I
I
-.J
~~
~~
-...Ji::
l(~
~~
~~
~~
~~
Ct))..
Q::
~~
~~
~~
~....:
~~
~1lJ
W~
~~
ll..~
~~
()~
j:::~
~!ti
~~
Reviud
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CVDS
13
- _. .- - - . ..-
- -~ ---
'\
\
I U
I iT
....
~ I q
J ~ E
\I) \j
:. / 1/ ~~
~ ~
... "
~ ~ ~.~
\ 'ii~
l/ N
'I';:
M
~
/
1 /
7 ,
V/ S
1-f7
4
r7
/
~ 3
-I
2
/-
f.
l/
(
~ ~ ~ ~ .... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , , ~ , , ,
RATIO OF PEAK TO AVERAGE FLOW
Drawn JJl/fI Date 10-10-12
Apprond Date ,5' -/8 78
I r./ (7 12r4n.v' /7- J,
PEAK TO AVERAGE
SEWAGE FLOW
Director of 'ublic Works
(,000
500
400
300
zoo
I
'I
"
'.
!
'0'
~lI)
100 l::)
~<:
C"l;
lI)
-q-~
~~
50 ::t
l-:
40-0
e~
30 ....
"
/l
"
t
1
1 II
.l 'I
"
"
~ ;!
,
~ I
~ II
'I
~
20 ~
....
-q:
-..I
'O~
0..: Cl..
....s:>
Cl:
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EXHIBIT "B"
from
Spring Valley Sanitation District
Sewage Transportation Agreement
with City of San Diego
/7/'10 (
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
III
s
o
'"
....
.jJ
III
Q)
'"
Q)
.jJ
l::
..-l
'tl
l::
::s
o
a.
s
o
tl
..
~\D
Z
fillll
ffi.:1
tIla.
!S~
III 0
::E:f"l
H
f"l'"
~Q)
a.
f"l
ZO
HO
..:I.
o
tJlt>
H....
0<1>
~
1-1
III
1-1
==
X
fil
.
<
....
CXl
......
N
....
......
M
....
CXl
~......
ZN
fil....
~;:;-
tIl
!S5
Ill'"
::E:....
1-1
fil.jJ
~1Il
Q)
~'"
filQ)
~.jJ
f"ll::
tIl..-l
:<:'tl
S3
~o
~a.
s
><0
filtl
..:I
..:I..
<
:>\D
><1Il
<::s
~..;
Oa.
O~
~fil
f"l'"
ZQ)
1-1 a.
..:I
o
zo
o.
tIlO
1-1 It>
~....
l1.<I>
It>
Cll
.....
o
M
.....
0\
S
o
l-<
....
.jJ
III
Q)
l-<
Q)
.jJ
l::
..-l
'tl
l::
::s
o
E<a.
ZS
filO
::E:U
fil
Ul..
!So
Ill....
::E:
1-1 III
fil::S
~....
a.
Z
O~
1-10
E<fil
<
E<l-<
Ulal
a.
~
~~
~.
....
tJO
I-IN
0<1>
.
t.l
! ? -'i~ ;J--
.
III
~"NM~~~~=mO"NM~~~~=mOMNM~
CXlO\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O~~OOOOOOO""""""""""
""""'" ,""""""
00000000000, ~OOOOOOOOOOOO
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
"""""""""""'"
0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\
0000000000000000000000000
fil
~
tJ
><
~
1-1
tJ
<
l1.
(j
::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:
0000000000000000000000000
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~E<E<E<~E<E<~E<~E<~E<E<E<E<~~~~~~E<~~
tIlUltllUlUlUlUlUlUltllUltlltllUlUlUlUltllUltllUltllUltlltll
filfilfilf"lf"lfilf"lfilfilf"lf"lfilfilfilfilfilfilfilf"lfilf"lfilfilfilf"l
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.~~~~~~~
filfilfilfilfilfilf"lfilfilfilfilfilfilfilfilfilfilfilfilfilfilfilf"lfilfil
~~~~E<~~E<~~~~~~~~E<~~~~~E<E<~
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ:Z;ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
1-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-11-1
..................................................
0000000000000000000000000
....................................................................................................
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
ONIt>\DO\It>~""NIt>""OCXlN~N""CXl\D~""~\DCXlIt>
~MOM~M~OMm~=~~~m~=O~M=N~~
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
M~MN~M~M~~N~mMM~Nn~~~M~=m
O~mM~N~Mm~~NMNM~m~O==o~om
NMM~~~~~~~=mOnNM~~=mn~~m"
000000000-00<1)0 .. ... ... .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
f""fr-lr-lr-lf""lrofnMNNNNM
<1><1><1><1><1><1><1><1><1><1><1><1><1>
a
><
~r-INM~~~~=mOr-lNM~~~~=mOr-lNM~
CXlO\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\OOOOO 000 00....................
mmmmmmmmmmooooooooooooooo
MMMMMMMMMMNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
~MNM~~~~=mOMNM~~~~=mOMNM~
~O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\OOOOOOOOOO""""""""""
"""""""""""'"
NNNNNNMNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
........................~........................................................................
"""""""""""'"
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
0000000000000000000000000
::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:::E:
0000000000000000000000000
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~E<E<E<E<~~E<~~E<~~~~E<~~~E<~~E<~ ~
UltllUlUlUlUltlltllUltlltlltlltlltllUlUlUltlltlltlltlltlltlltlltll b
filfilfilf"lf"lf"lf"lfilfilf"lf"lfilfilfilfilfilf"lfilf"lf"lf"lfilf"lfilfil H
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~
~E<~E<E<E<~~~E<~E<E<E<E<~E<~~~~~~~~ ~
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ H
~~HHHHHHH~H~HHHHHHHHHHHHH ~
f"l
t!l
~
tJ
><
~
1-1
tJ
<
l1.
<
tJ
*************************
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
OMM~=M=MO~~~~~OO==~M~~~~~
O~NN=N~=~~~~~~N=~=OMNONN~
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RO~~O~~~~~=M~~~M~~=N~~OO=~
~~n~O~O~~~~M=~~NNnNM~~OM=
~~~~==~~OO~NNM~~~~=~OMM~~
00000000~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M~MMMMMMMMMMNNNNN
00000000000000000
~
0<
f"l
><
~MNM~~~~=~OnNM~~~~=mOMNM~
=~~m~mmmm~ooOOOOOOOOMMMMM
~mmm~mmm~~ooOOOOOOOOOOOoo
MMMMMMMMMMNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
2;
:::.:>
......
....
:.:
~
H
~
ow
l'-4
N
0'>
Q~
-
.....
~
....J
=>
...,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WILSON ENGINEERING
SA/..' Ca.u..<- BASIN
Se.~A"G 6..o<-.J Pd!o.rGc. T"'ON$
I) SA...r CR.E.O<L I€.A r-JC-H
z) OrAl' RANCH
.3) EAsr LAKe
I{) Arl'rAc.E:NT f'({OPtc:R.TlcS
SAL.-r C~gEZK ~Af>JCH
. F&M J;,"'VN<7 1993 /VIAsrGA.. f/L.NJ o~ 5Gt..<J~~.(;:
(s€.G. Nt;..><r P/J6G.)
SAL.-r C~K. B/1SIN
Orll7 LAkes 81'1.s,,v
sue ro r>"h..
19/, 9", S ::;pd.
/17/ 32-0 :yJ
3091 '2-B5 jPeI.
)j;: 'pL.l.JS R.E.v/.5~ CHr..MLCII (c.P~)
Seo,./",,,t ","IV ,:"<.10"-,, 2.,500
(7"c..@ Z,SOO = I~ SIlO - 7/z.o0)
1.11'
-
/0,300 "1/'d
:)"..,.. c", ew", TO TA L-
3/91 SB5 :Jt>J.
NOre: FI.-o-..J FIf2.OJVf Bo~ ~ASINS IS
ItVc..vot!.O IN R.e.ACH I FI.-ovJ.5.
/7//c1/
~08 ~o BY
SU8JECT
"I OAH .1 sl(?;T~O
I I
Ill.
I
..
I
..
.~
I.
--.
..
-..
fa
'I
'I
~
..
'I
~
~
~
II
II
II
II
II
. FIlOM "JIoiAST€,f. P'-AN OF
Se""U,Ac.e 1=0{2.
SA L. T Ceee... Tl-A,..CM "
1/'t3
Table 3-1
Salt Creek Ranch Sewage Flows By Basin
..,-..,....,., .
.-,....'..........-'-...
..../~e~~D.t.of...
i;i~jly#lopmeDt
Sewage.
Generati!ln
,-,... ......
Filctgt( .
Proctor Valley
Residential 713 units 280 gpdl unit 199,640
School 459 students 15 6,885
gpdl student
Park 7 acres 500 gpdl acre 3,500
Fire Station 1 acre 280 gpdl acre 280
Telegraph Canyon
Residential 888 units 280 gpdl unit 248,640
Salt Creek
Residential 611 units 280 gpdl unit ( 171,080
(..0" U
School 459 students 15 6,885
(~~It.) gpdl student Z8E:I>Vs)
Park 22 acres SOO gpdl acre
Church 3 acres
Otay Lakes
Residential
280 gpdl unit
113,120
l 0 SDV
404 units
4 acres
9
)7-/(J~
Z/2.7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
N A-srea.
FOIL OrA-r f<-..,CH" Oa 2B J I,'n
P"AN
O~ S~~GoE
TABLE 4-1
PROJECTED WASTEWATER FLOWS
FOR THE OTAY RIVER PARCEL
............,....-.-.
.. . . .......
.. . ......... ,..., ......
.-....,..'.....-,-......,.....
""""D..""'.'n....""'"
))we urg",
."'."/./Uilit$.\\
.... .
.,.......... .............,., '.....
.. .... .... . . ......... -.-. ...
. ...-............... .......----.",-.......""....
...'ll:,~&..,..,;..'...~f::i~~~:~1
........-.......... .,.........-,.......
.llil~~lil~II'\11
... "............"".
... ................
.--_....-...--.--._---..............
l)~.Ds. it.";..','. (
rt))uiA~."i'(.
VILLAGE 1
LM 99.8 3.0 299 280 gpd/unit
LM 32.0 4.5 144 280 gpd/unit
LMV 328.6 40 1,314 280 gpd/unit
MH 870 18.0 1,566 210 gpd/unit
CPF 12.3 2,500 gpd/acre
Commercial 11.4 2,500 gpd/acre
School 10.0 1 ,000 gpdl acre
Park 17.5 500 gpd/acre
VILLAGE 2
LMV 330.2 3.5 1,156 280 gpd/unit
LM 53.6 2.5 134 280 gpd/unit
LM 444 1.5 65 280 gpd/unit
MH 58.6 100 586 210 gpd/unit
CPF 9.2 2,500 gpd/acre
Commercial 18.7 2,500 gpd/acre
School ro.O 1,000 gpd/acre
83,720
40,320
367,920
328,860
30,750
28,500
10,000
8,750
323,680
37,520
18,200
123,060
23,000
46,750
10,000
VILLAGE 3'
LM 136.2 4.5 613 280 gpd/unit 171,640
MH 12.8 10 0 128 210 gpd/unit 26,880
CPF 3 4 2,500 gpd/acre 8,500
Commercial 5.3 2,500 gpd/acre 13,250
Park
15
/7-/tJ(,
'312.7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 4.1 (Continued)
PROJECTED WASTEWATER FLOWS
FOR THE OTAY RIVER PARCEL
iiI" .....l'illi ;lilil~lli~~~~;~~~::;~~I~lilrll~~~~i&11
VILLAGE 4
L
L
LM
LM
LMV
156.1
1.0 156 280 gpd/unit 43 ,680
2.5 173 280 gpd/unit 48,440
2.0 68 280 gpd/unit 19,040
4.0 50 280 gpd/unit 14,000
4.5 85 280 gpd/unit 23,800
2,500 gpd/acre 7,500
2,500 gpd/acre 7,500
1,000 gpdl acre 10,000
691
34 1
12.6
18.8
CPF
3 0
Commercial
3.0
School
10.0
VILLAGE 5
LMV 280.6 4.5 1,263 280 gpd/unit 353,640
MH 89.7 18.0 1,615 210 gpd/unit 339,150
CPF 10.2 2,500 gpd/acre 25,500
Commercial 6.0 2,500 gpd/acre 15,000
School 10.0 1,000 gpd/acre 10,000
VILLAGE 6
LMV 206.3 4.8 990 280 gpd/unit 277 ,200
MH 69 0 18.0 1,242 210 gpd/unit 260,820
CPF 8.0 2,500 gpd/acre 20,000
Commercial 46 2,500 gpd/acre 11,500
School 10.0 1,000 gpd/acre 10,000
Park
16
/7-'j07
'-tj,..7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 4.1 (Continued)
PROJECTED WASTEWATER FLOWS
FOR THE OTAY RIVER PARCEL
!~i:'~ti ;li~W~iil !iii~~~i~~~=~~i~l~~
11!11~~igl";li~'i
VILLAGE 7
LMV
MH
CPF
210.6
30.9
5.0
1,053
448
280 gpd/unil
210 gpd/unil
2,500 gpd/acre
2,500 gpd/acre
1,000 gpd/acre
294,840
94,080
15,750
18,000
85,000
4,650
14.5
6.3
7.2
85 0
9.3
Commercial
School
Park
VILLAGE 8
LMV 85.4 3.5 299 280 gpd/unil 83,720
LMV 30.0 4.5 135 280 gpd/unil 37,800
LMV 122.2 4.8 587 280 gpd/unil 164,360
MH 30.1 14.5 436 210 gpd/unil 91,560
CPF 5.6 2,500 gpd/acre 14,000
Commercial 13 4 2,500 gpd/acre 33,500
School 10.0 1,000 gpd/acre 10,000
VILLAGE 9'
L 56.9 2.0 114 280 gpd/unil 31,920
LMV 138.1 4.5 621 280 gpd/unil 173,880
MH 56.1 18.0 1,010 210 gpd/unil 212,100
CPF 6.3 2,500 gpd/acre 15,750
Commercial 8.7 2,500 gpd/acre 21,750
Sc hoo I 10.0 1,000 gpd/acre 10,000
Park 8.8 4,400
17
/7---!O?
5/7..;
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
VILLAGE 10'
LMV 91.5
M 67.9
MH 18.7
CPF 44
Commercial 20.0
School 35.0
TABLE 4-1 (Continued)
PROJECTED WASTEWATER FLOWS
FOR THE OTAY RIVER PARCEL
:!b~~ilii ............~~l~::~1 r~~:~;~~=i;~~;~illllll~.~~:~i~~l:~r;
4.5
6.0
14.5
412 280 gpd/unil 115,360
407 280 gpd/unil 113,960
271 210 gpd/unil 56,910
2,500 gpd/acre 11.000
2,500 gpd/acre 50,000
1,000 gpdl acre 35,000
-.....
VILLAGE 11
LMV 165.5 4.5 745 280 gpd/unil 208,600
MH 25.3 12.0 304 210 gpd/unil 63,840
MH 48.1 14.5 697 210 gpd/unil 146,370
CPF 6.6 2,500 gpd/unil 16,500
Commercial 10.4 2,500 gpd/unil 26,000
School 60.0 1,000 gpdl acre 60,000
Park 9.9 500 gpd/acre 4,950
PLANNING AREA 12 (EUe)
EUC 70.1 37 I 2,500 210 gpd/unil 525,000
CPF 9.2 2,500 gpd/acre 23,000
Commercial 261.2 2,500 gpd/acre 653,000
School 10.0 1,000 gpd/acre 10,000
Park 45.0 500 gpd/acre 22,500
PLANNING AREA 18a
Industrial 215.8 2,500 gpd/acre 539,500
18
) 7~/{)1
1.-/7..7
I
I
TABLE 4-1 (Cootinued)
I
PROJECTED WASTEWATER FLOWS
FOR THE OTAY RIVER PARCEL
~lll'11111/Iilllll-liilli[J;! ... !!llill;llll illll~~fJJIII~ If:iiiiillllillillliliiili',.t1!
I
PLANNING AREA ISb
I
Industrial 69 7
~1r~1I~~'*~i~I~~g~ii~L
2,500 gpd/acre
174,250
ii;til;68';iiiiiiiii';iii\~i;'li!i;j!~t;i;1';t1Iti;71~~~1~~tilj~Jii
I
1 For the City of Chula Vista, residential development is the secondary permitted land
use in Village 3 . the primary use is industrial. If the primary use is utilized, 165.7
acres would be developed as industrial resulting in a Village 3 sewage generation factor
of 2,500 gpd/acre.
I
I
2 As an alternative to the development presented in this report for Villages 9 and 10,
a four year university has also been proposed for this area. The sewer facilities
proposed in this report are sized adequately to serve either the proposed development in
Villages 9 and 10 or a four year university.
I
3 A description of the various residential land use categories is as follows:
I
VL
L
LM
LMV
M
MH
Very low density
Low density
Low-medium density
Low-medium village density
Medium density
Medium-high density
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
19
17-//0
I
7/2.7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 4-2
PROJECTED WASTEWATER FLOWS
FOR THE PROCTOR VALLEY PARCEL
:-:....:..:...-,:..,-.:.,-.:.:,:,_..,.;;'...:-,...
fP\iOeljji&~\
/tIiiih;i
~~~~~iii~~~~~lj li;i;;~~~\i~ii;1
.........._ . ,n
........,-"-....,,,. ,
t:;~:~I)
VILLAGE 13
L
130.5 2.0 261 280 gpd/unit 73,080
256.2 3.0 769 280 gpd/unit 215.320
28.4 8.0 227 280 gpd/unit 63 .560
54.9 10.0 549 210 gpd/unit 115.290
42.1 15 0 632 210 gpd/unit 132,720
9 6 2,500 gpd/acre 24,000
10.0
LMV
M
MH
MH
CPF
Park
VILLAGE 141
L
L
LMV
M
MH
CPF
190.0 1.0 190 280 gpd/unit 53.200
478.2 2.0 956 280 gpd/unit 267,680
51.8 3.0 155 280 gpd/unit 43 .400
43 7 6.0 262 280 gpd/unit 73.760
10.0 15.0 150 210 gpd/unit 31,500
7.6 2,500 gpd/unit 19.000
2.9 2,500 gpd/acre 7,250
10.0 1,000 gpd/acre 10.000
Commercial
School
PLANNING AREA 16
VL
VL
169.5
5474
99
280 gpd/unit
280 gpd/unit
27,720
291
81,480
PLANNING AREA 19
VL
20.0
1.0
280 gpd/unit
5,600
20
~OTAL~ii6c'iQltY;tLriE:Y~~k~}ji ...;~;$61.....I;/..........i. ...
,.. ,.......... ""',' .,.".,..;.c;,..:;'..;'::':';';;':'
.-..,."...,.....-...,....w.,w.-.... ._.. ..._._.....,...
"':-:-'-'-:-': :::::.::::::t;:::;;:;::::::::t::)):;::":~:::W:::l;a5if;'!J;;q~\::::
I The County of San Diego plan permits an additional 10 residential units on 20 acres in'
Village 14
20
/7 --- / )1
8/2..7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 4-3
PROJECTED WASTEWATER FLOWS
FOR THE SAN YSIDRO PARCEL
~5; '.':,:;;:~i ,:::;U;:~::,~~' 11!~~~il!~I'lllill~i~11
VILLAGE 15'
VL 739.2 0.7
M 33.9 70
CPF 5.6
Commercial 3.3
School 10.0
Park 7.9
516 280 gpd/unit 144,480
245 280 gpd/unit 68,600
2,500 gpd/acre 14,000
2,500 gpd/acre 8,250
1,000 gpdl acre 10,000
3,950
:.t~~.).....~.\... ~;:I,~;'iitJ.'i:gAittSl;t
." .. .......-.--.._,-,.,.,...,-. . .
:I::fr::!~:j::::j!::!!!:jii:::i::i!i~~!jj1!:::~::~[ijI:j~~~:iI:f::!~:1!i:j~~1t*~~fJ~f'{~~~~~;;J:~}:1~:~$:1jf:-
1 The City of Chula Vista has an optional land plan for Village 15 which would allow for 516
residential units on the same acreage. The County of San Diego land plan for Village 15
permits 433 residential units.
2 Planning Arca 17 is also within the San Ysidro Parcel, but this arca is proposed to be
served by septic sewer systems.
Table 4-4 summarizes the projected average sewage flow at buildout for the Otay
Ranch project by parcel from Tables 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3. As Table 4-4 shows the
projected buildout sewage flow for the Otay Ranch project is 9,009,280 mgd.
21
) 7--) /;L
9/~1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fro"", 10/'3
TABLE 4-5
PROJECTED SEW AGE FLOWS
BY DRAINAGE BASIN
OTAY RIVER PARCEL SALT C~EEI(
ORI 1,268,960 gA-SIIII T~18~r141l
(Telegraph Canyon) A~E.A
OR2 1,825,990
(Poggi Canyon)
OR3 1,673,145 ~ EAO,/ 8
OR4 453,340 ~ 6'A~ H 1
OR5 1,582,275 ~ s: 4(.H (,
OR6 227,420 ~ EA(.H S
OR7 361,960 ~fAGH ~
OR8 112,000 ~ f AGH :s
PROCTOR VALLEY PARCEL
PVI
PV2
PV3
PV4
PV5
PV6
PV7
PV8
PV9
PVI0
PVll
shtiiotak ..
71,960
14,560
62,720
31,640
20,440
249,020
129,000
46,200
346,260
194,930
88, 180
~ EA(.H 1.-
TbrA-L'" ,ZS/S'io
&PO
~EAGI-i Z.
~ 6A'-H 'L
~ E AU'l ~
23
/7'1/3
lo/-z.7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 4-5 (Continued)
PROJECTED SEW AGE FLOWS
BY DRAINAGE BASIN
$'04t.r '-REEk. <<AS''''
,-P-14uT'l"It y 4A.EI-
SAN YSIDRO PARCEL
SYl 11,200 P- tAai Z
SY2 39,760
~EI\:.H ~ ;0 r4L
SY3 195,240 11IIGL.VO'",' n,(o/IOII
SY4 3,080 (JMrE = g7B,'-so
SY5 0' 6PD
SY6 O'
SY7 O'
SY8 0'
1 Developmcllt ill Ebb 4raill_'0 buiD ia propolOd to be served by ICpctc .".tem..
24
)7}/1
"/2.7
-.. ....
- - ,
,
,
t.:
'-
"
L_;____-
1.
)
:!
r~~~,. ......r
-;,. .~ - - -
d _r-CC '-- "-'" r
~ ,/ ( \ :. -J .-.,....
,"" , <r""" _-"...r~
"
---.
LEGEND
--
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
SUBBASIN BOUNDARY
arM' ({A'NCH
/ ?---///r:
FIGURE 4-2
DRAINAGE BASIN MAP-
- 12/2.7
~
N
I
SCAlE' 1"
. =5000'
, "
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WILSON ENGINEERING
EDU PtQ.O.rEZ-C-77arJS :
O"t~ ~~~ tJq.v~l~f ~ T(",~v~ n ~ " \ T C. rt ~ K .z;.. t<-<"<..l1l1'v1.
Vtl'6.j~ SFtJ M FP ~ IMItl""'-, "..IY ,S'c.kQO 1 "~r "- CIF
J..W'\"u~t"k"\-t.
()u. av. Ac.I"<~ A<.= Ac..f<!S I'K"-S
(r,A Y RIV~f<. P.A~ c.E.L-
Z. S-/1. I 3'11- 1'1 - 2S ~
3 G.I3 1"18 $".3 - e $.'f
y .n1- - 1.0 10 (e:L) ,"/.3 3.0
1 10 (~..) C/.3
gS3 I.jL{B 7.1 z.s ( :r...) 6. "!.
e 1,01.' '(3<- '3.'( 10 (EJ-) fd,8 S.~
~ 735 1,010 97 10 ( e..) 8.9 (..3
1'0 1)'1'1 ;ZO.O 10 eel.) 3"/-3 '{.'t
21/ Z S (.:JL)
II 7'i~ 350 /0.'( 10 tel.) - ,. Co
~o (HS) I
PAIL - 2, So '35" '0 fE,l.) LfS' ~,l
I
I
)81\ - - 2/S.11 I - - -
IS B ~ - i>'l.7 - - ~
5 Ud l"O TAl- r;: In I.' 5", Y 8.l SOZ.S 17_0 I',ns c:?l.8_
E.DU FAC.I<)IO.. 0) (0.75) (10) (4) (2-) (/0) _
SIJan>"""- 'l 583"/ 41 II 'i 5/01-S 080 287 508
(eoo). I
-. .--
~ L""".,I. VSe i" 1'0 f~ /aha/'u fI14srec PI_ 0 ( 5e...,..... kol OT~y R...",,-I..
I -I /7-1/~ .13/l'o/'d l'th7
JOB NO " SUBJECT OATE SHEET NO.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WILSON ENGINEERING
Or"".., teAN~" DeIlEt/-OPMENT" -r:e..,8lJT~Y ro SAL.r C.ELC,", r'..n-.EA.~r:
(<::0"'7: )
V,U.AW: 51=1> ~I'= COMMIXN{) S~-.. PI/ILl< CPF
(DV.) (f)v. ) (Ae4..tS) (A e.) (If c.) (A")
PI<Oc..rol'l- 01L.I-E.Y PAItLC.€'I-
13 1,257 1118/ - - 10 9. c..
1'1 116(,3 /50 2.9 10 (B-) 10,7 7G.
I
I
"LA"'~/N6
AI't.&A I" 390 - - - -
-
PI-AlvNIN(.
A~ /9 20 - - - -
-
::5vd:ro~~ .3 2.30 t, 3~, '2..'1 10 20.7 17. '2.
(lU:>u f'A~n>i2.) (I) (0.7$) (10) ('-I) (2) (,O)
sus"'..... ecu. :3,230 "'~ z.~ 40 '12- ,7Z
5AII/ y' $1 j),e.O P AIZ. Ct:. I-
16 7(e,/ - .3.'3 10(1;.<) 7/'} s r..
I (I) ((J.7 s) (10) ('I) (2.) (10)
(@V I"I/e_) I
i
S\J81l:>""~ lEolJs I 7G./ - .33 40 1(,. 5G.
t:.DU,s
TOTAL 9,82.5 0,1/3 50B7 7(.,0 31.16 73(p
I
(or,.,.., R""""")
I I /7/)/'7 .I,m .1 ~;~T:~
,roe ...0 " SU'''ECT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WILSON ENGINEERING
R."<:..(,, 2. I~
1r<.~31'
}r<EMIt 11
JOII t.lO BY
EIISTLiH:fO' rt..Ov.J Pfl,OJEcTioN5
(i=",^", s/ti. W~J<.y1/'~ pI..... "-1 Ne;;If-~1i
Se.t; A'T1JtIct/{.{) R.eV'Se.!) sli~rs)
t<.~ i Y2 (.n)"~ W""..{S) P()/{'T. 60',""5 ~'t'<-t
R~ ...
("sTi"K~ fr., ':;, p,,,t-r, GI'~"": I V.. INoecl:
f,e. v~ J
f.HI,fC< V,:",/ 0 re; p"n-r. &""''-'~s
Y2 ["'HI,"- Woo.!: 0 8~, 82.0 3fol (T' ,Ie ,;-?)
~"srl,l~ Ir., Is 0 38'1, '110 '1fd (T " " ,)
f",~.("nl>i<-< (,r<,-, 0/08,9:;;0 1t) (;- (( ,/-:1
57', /80 9 f'\ =? 1<.u.<.A z. c """ bu' '''-'
lOurl.I<< Vi. ,.... 2''1,380 , (.1 ( T~.!,< A.-S)
i' "-siP;.. ['c. o rL 2 '04, S3.l Jf" ( \~ ,Ie ,
,"'-':l/
p..-r 'f, ("",id<, &-......, 2.31 goO ~J. (T~ () ~ ,-. )
I
733,712. """" CJ R.(.~t~ :; ,....~r ."rih-
.
'lz.. EA>r~,,~. ....000$ = 85, Bz.o 5p.t (-rA(J~ A -J)
~"'. 8US/NEU c.....75<< :- 71,400 51'.,( (r........ ,.-..3)
J 5 7 22.0 3 pel =? ~<I' 1.. "."....""8....n......
TOrn.... (/h-L. R.yt.~HE'S)
/,470, /12 Vd.
.
I I
S" IT (ws:,,,!~ -t(AO'ft'ri ) 7 ~ ).,.2 ~I "" I ~:!.~?
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0 , , L
\
I-R 0 \ 3 1.2 ac
\75du
I-R
28 8 ac
BUSINESS 0
CENTER
o
I
I- 15 1 ac
"-
\
\
\-
LM @
44.9 ac 0 L
265 du /" .- _. __
/- I f.:;\
/~/@I PO ~ 23
I 9.6 ac P / 12.5 ac 8(
....... ,,(ES) 7 1
..........
LM "....... 11 0
36.8 ac TRAILS "(:'C
22100 ;^, f6\ '1 4 ac
; '- I..V
.....
/ .....
/
PO
49.2 ac
o (HS)
11 4 ac
8400
LM
74 ac
183 du
"
",-" cB
I LM '\ a
I 13.3 ac" ,,' "
L
30.7 a
92 dl
@
@J)-
12.3 ac
SAL.. CUE"'-
BASIN
1'i,.6 c.l1'A1t-,
BoVJV~'1
E A S'TLAK€
*' Sire. ..."....':a.Ano,.J PL.AN
U SESL:> 8... ....s /1...0........'1
felL ........SrE:......Ar€..,..P
MA.., 1'1'10 17/1-7
/7~/;2/
..: .j\'J.~.t't\~-,'\";':" --
!r~;l\ TION
I
'* FR.-OM IMPitOIlE:M~r P...."wS
Fot1. ~STL.A"E:, 0...."1 '-"...~s
ROhO ~MPOI2M'f L- IF, SrA n.,...
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~DEX
1 DESCRJPllON
w
>
<
w
z
<
...
~m)
RESERVOIR
, "'-\
.-.J
.,..
<
~
>0::
II:
'<
A.
~
~
~ 'g,",.~"
RESERVOIR
W
>0::
<
...
I-
'"
<
w
~ PUMP STATION
SERVICE AREA
7
LOCATION MAP
NOT TO SCALE
"
/ 7--/ 2-::2..,
18/27
II
.,
.,
~
I
,I
.-
.1
II
II
)1
)1
)1
)1
II
11
II
.
I.
I
TABLE IV-I
EASTLAKE
W ASTEW ATER FLOWS
TOTAL DWELLING TOTAL AVG.
PROJECT ACRES UNITS POPULATION FLOWS (gpd)
GREENS 830.5 3,609 9,088 Illli~~~:~I~11 I I 0 0
'. ,-..,:.-,..,.:.,.:.,':....
\:?)}::{jf,;;::\} ......'....
..
TRAILS 299.0 1,260 3,547 i!:5~~:ei~~:~]~~:~ 3! Lj
::::,::;,::,:;',.;.:.:}:;: .... .....:::,;;.;
...
WOODS 234. 1 438 1 ,3 14 I I I
BUSINESS CENTER 159.2 255 765 3. 1
VISTAS 210.3 942 2,509 Z I I
OLYM. TRAINING 236. 8 281 2,248 7-~
CENTER (1)
"'," .. ,.
TOTALS >(Ii~J.?}1 tl]!Ii~~~ I&~~! ~'~!~}i!~rll! 2- I 3
"'1350
YIO
I
1,"'10
,'iOQ
3Bo
2.,53'2..
~O,'2../2...
NOTE:
(1) INCLUDES ADJACENT COMMERCIAL
DEVELOPMENT.
Narc (PI> :r:1l-2.,'3 "'''''.0 A-I ,2.,31'-1)
-
-
TAi3/...€:S FdOM I.-D<....u2..'7 61'0
MA-S"rG./l- P'~ [2e.VIS€ 0 'TO
/2.[;; F <..Ccr
IZ-es Oo..-^,T1- 5~GG
F<.-u,-, /Z../I'reS OF
2.eo 5t'al p......
UN&OT"' FeI'L SlrJ(..(,....~ F-,I\-.I'\lt...~ .-D
-z.o ,:, p../. ~ roll4 ,vi vt..-..... -1'-1>111<.-'1
IV-2
/7-/.27
/Q/2.7
II
II
1.1
~.
II
,.
~.
,.
'I
III
1:1
I
,
I
.
.
I
I
I
I
TABLE IV-2
EASTLAKE FLOWS
TRIBUTARY TO SALT CREEK
NODE
QAVG.
(gpd)
SOURCE
DESCRIPTION
99
W}~1{g~~
3 51 ~ &ll'i13i'tm%
',ro~.:~
GREENS, TRAILS,
VISTAS AND OTC.
TOTAL AVG. FLOW
TO NODE 90
GREENS, WOODS
AND BUSINESS CTR.
TOTAL A VG FLOW
TO NODE 99
90
TOTAL:
hllit'II, 'IS 7,813
TABLE IV-3
EASTLAKE FLOWS
TELEGRAPH CANYON SALT CREEK & POGGI
WATERSHED WATERSHEDS
Q AVG. Q AVG.
PROJECT (gpd) SOURCE (gpd) SOURCE
., ..,....,...-.".-. ....-.,.,-....-...-..
GREENS GREENS (NO) HUNTE PKWY (NO),
SALT CREEK.
GREENS HUNTE PKWY (SO),
SALT CREEK.
GREENS ESTLKE PKWY (SO),
POGGI CANYON.
TRAILS 3 8'1, TRAItS
EASTLAKE III BUS. CTR. BUS. CTR.(P ARTlAL' -'
. WOODS, VISTAS,
OLYM. TRNG. CTR.
",n.,' ..,.... i~t.;'I'!!
:: ~:]tu~g~~~tM:~:~1jf
TOTAL: 41~;41!lI'
", "iOo~ rot.:
IV-3
1,"i57,el3 (5"...... ~"K..
15"'.,.... 0"'..")
J7~ jJ- (
"=tZ.7
I
I
II
i
TABLE A-1
EASTLAKE GREENS WASTE WATER FLOWS
-=-==---=.=a........============..
land Total People toUl
Parcel # Use Acres DUlAC D.U. Per DU People
.---.--. -_.......---
I" Res.. 19.7 2.7 54 3.0 162
1-2 Res. 14.7 2.9 43 3.0 129
1-3 Res. 21.8 3.8 *10'1. 3.0 249
1-4 Res. 24.0 4.3 104 3.0 312
1.5 Res. 23.0 4.6 105 3.0 315
1-6 Res. 17.4 5.1 88 3.0 264
1-7 Res. 10.7 .6.1 65 3.0 195
1-8 les. 16.4 6.0 99 3.0 297
1-9 Res. 8.5 6.0 51 3.0 153
1-10 Res. 27.9 6.0 _z.'i(' 3.0 501
1-" Res. 14.6 6.3 'Ie 87 3.0 276
1-12 Res. 14.3 6.5 93 3.0 279
1-13 les. 22.6 6.6 149 3.0 447
1-'4 Res. 11.4 7.4 84 2.5 210
1-15 Res. 11.6 7.6 88 2.5 220
1-16 Res. 10.5 7_9 83 2.5 208
1.17 Res. 29.7 8.2 243 2.5 608
1-18 Res. 9.9 8.8 87 2.5 218
1-19 Res. 14.9 12.0 179 2.5 448
1-20 les. 13.6 12.1 164 2.5 410
1.2- Res. 10.0 12_0 120 2.5 300
1-22 Res. 10.8 13.5 _'''11 2.5 365
1-23 Res. 13.7 15.0 Hi 21'1 2.5 513
1-24 Res. 5.0 22_0 110 2.2 242
1-25 Res. 7.4 22.0 163 2.2 359
1-26 Res. 13.3 22_0 293 2.2 645
1-27 Res. 8.9 31.9 _'1'1 1.7 483
1-28 Res. 6.1 27.4 167 1.7 284
.....-----
412.4 - -
bP'S:1{DU
Flow
Factor
)1
~I
Students
280 as III",a/d
80 g/ca/d
2.80 88 .1 aa: d
~eo 89 ~ ~_:d
80 g/ce/d
~8o IQ J/n/II
80 g/ca/d
80 g/ca/d
280 so JI.I/II
2.80 19 I;__;J
Z.60 SO )/la:1t
2. eo a9 ./aa/"
80 s/ca/d
80 a/ca/d
80 s/ca/d
2.10 sa .:sa:d
210 eo .',a/II
2.10 80 ~'e.I"
80 g/ca/d
80 g/ca/d
2..10 ao 1#' !!.t.; s
2.10 !t'll/n.'.
2.10 ." g'-v-/d
80 g/ca/d
80 s/ca/d
80 g/ce/d
210 aD I/!la/lf
80 a/ca/d
II
II
1-
, I
II
I-
I_
,-
,-
II
o
NOTE
ParceL Nunbel"'s and Nurt>ers Of Dwell in; Units
were obtained from The Site UtiLization Plan
For Eastlake Greens dated: 2116/89
II
I
I
I
I
/"
/ 7-/.2-5
A-I
II
Toul
Avg. Flow
(spell
p~,. (.".)
WI'fIt."" SAitS
C.uA!oc. 8"'6''''
~ 151''1.0 (100"1..)
10,320
.;9;'Rll 28, s(.o (50"_)
~ ,"1,.2.0 ('50'.)
25 ,200
~ 1.'i, c."I0 (30"")
15,600
23,760
~ l'i,~80 (100'1.)
~ <'8, 8~0 (100 ,.)
~ ,'1,3"0 (,oo'l'..j
~ 2f., 0'10 (100"0)
35,760
16,800
17,600
~ 11, '/30 (1007..)
0&r6flIl $,.030 (Coo.,.)
~ '8,2.70 (100'7.)
35,800
32,800
~ 2.5,1.00 (1001.)
~ 7."',1.10 (100'7_)
~ LI'/I ,.,0 (So.,.)
19,360
28,688
51,568
~ "l, l.'iO (1007.)
22,712
7-11,,,01
( CONT"I...UE/:>
N ~T" P,^",E.)
2.1/1.7
fI
~I
I
,I
.1
I
Parcel #
VC-'
po-'
PO-2
S-l
S-2
Po'
P-2
P-3
P-4
P-5
OS-'
OS-2
OS-3
OS-4
OS-5
OS-6
OS-7
:1
,
il
"
'\
1:1
,.
I
I
";
,il
II INOTE:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE A-1 CONT.
EASTlAKE GREENS WASTE WATER FLOlIS
--=--- --..---=-
-
Land Total
Use Acres
VLG CTR 19.6
PUBlQUASI 12.3
PUB/QUASI 4.8
NIGH SCH. 49.2
ELM. SCH. 10.0
PARK 15.1
PARK 3.0
PARK 11.0
PARK 4.5
PARK 3.0
OPEN SP" 2.9
OPEN SP" 1.1
OPEN $P. 1.9
OPEN SP_ 7.8
OPEN SP. 6.3
OPEN SP. 4.9
OPEN sp_ 5.9
CLUB H 4.0
GOLF CRCE 156.4
MAJOR CIR. 88.4
FUT" UNB. 6.0
418.1
DUlAC
People Total
O.U. Per DU People
percel Nuti;)ers and NLDtler'" Of Dwell ing Units
were obtained frOM The Site Utilization Plan
For EastLake Greens dated: 2/16/89
A-2
Students
2400
800
3200
Flow
Factor
2.500 sfec/d
1.500 sfec/d
1.500 sfac/d
20 sfst/d
15 sfst/d
500 a/ac/d
500 a/ac/d
500 a/ac/d
500 sfac/d
500 a/ec/d
o a/ec/d
o a/ec/d
o sfec/d
o a/ac/d
o a/ac/d
o sfec/d
o sfac/d
2.500 sfac/d
o a/ac/d
o sfac/d
o sfec/d
Totat
Avg. Flow
(apell
49.000
18.450
7.200
48.000
12.000
7.550
1.500....
5.500
2.250
1.500....
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
10.000
o
o
o
162.950
PE.ile~.,. (?)
W'T"H.,.., SA...r
c:.lZ.~_ 8AS'~
(100'0)
('00",,)
TQT"A L-
( SA....,. C.e."E.1C.
SA"''''' 0,.,...1)
3"0,750
~pd.
17- /;2 ~
22/'1..7
.
.
.
.
i.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I
.
.
=K:-
... -.- ._~
Fro-. Le \je.1 TO Gk"I~ Vis ~
Fflr"1^^ e...nIA/{e., 1../<; /,'1
SALT CR.E:~T( BASIN GRAVITY S:e:~R ANALVStS
Sewer seMce to the Salt Creek Basin wlthln the !astLake Greens
Project In currently provided by the Otay Lakes Road Lift Station
(loCated at Otay Lakes Road and Salt Creek) and the Telegraph Canyon
Trunk Sewer. The proposed EastLake Greens Ceneral Development
Plan and f::a Amendment affects the followlng parcels within the Salt
Creek Bas .
Parcel Existing Units Proposed Units Inereue+ /
Oecrease-
R.-3(80uth) 42 51 9
R.-10 167 246 79
Roll 92 87 <5>
R-22 1<46 141 <5>
R,-23 205 214 9
R-27 40 44- ..
Net Chan:e In Units 91
The flow generated by the additional 91 dwelling units (based on 250
GPO per CU) Is 15.8 GPM. This amount represents an increase of
1.4% over the 1100 GPM flow rate assumed to be renerated by the
!utLake Project within the Salt Creek Basin (see Telegraph Canyon
Sewer Basin Improvement and Financing Plan Amendment
Incorporating Pwnped Plows, Flgwe 8, Page 11). The operation of the
Ofay Lakes Road Lift Station and Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer
should not be significantly impacted by the rel~tive1y minor increase in
the flow rate.
) 7- /2 7
7.3/1..7
- TABLE A-2
-
-
-ow
EASTLAKE TRAILS ~ASTE ~ATER FlO'JS
- a===_:========================...
. Toul
-ow land TouL People Total Flow Avg. Fl,.ow
Flarcel :I Use Aeres DUlAC D.U. per DU Peopl e Students Factor (gpd)
~
. .......... .....-........ --........-- ......_--.... -..-..-..--...
~ 1 COMH 15.0 2,500 g/ac/d 37,500
2 CHURCH 4.0 2,500 g/ac/d 10,000
~ 3 OS 5B.0 o g/ac/d 0
. 4 R'lH 25.B 5.6 3.0 432 '2..80 89 1/...,'4 ~ '-/o,3~O
~ 5 R'H 21.7 10.3 2_5 55B 2-10 88 ~/I.oG,d "-;6QQ ~c.., B3C>
6 R-lH 36.B 6.0 3.0 663 2J30 88 >>, '-., ~ ~ ....',880
- 7 OS '.1 o g/ac/d 0
. B R'lH 44.9 5.9 3.0 795 ZSo ag J:4.1./d ~ 7'"1,7.0c>
~ 9 R-MH 13.B 17.7 2.5 610 ZIO 89 .: ~&/4 ~ S', 2."10
'0 R-l 23.7 3.0 3.0 213 z,.t30 80 3/":. ~ 1~/e8o
. 11 OS 1.4 o g/ac/d 0
12 R-l 30.7 3.0 3.0 276 ;2.50 an 9'--'d ~ 20$,7....0
-
I 13 PARK 9.6 SOD g/ac/d 4,BOO
I 0.0 o g/ac/d 0
14 paCeS) 12.5 BOO 15 g/st/d 12,000
........--.... --............. ....................
I 299.0 3547 BOO jJ,8.8!O 38"1,""0
~
.
Ii TABLE A-3
-- EASTlAKE \ICXXlS ~ASTE ~ATER FlOllS
===.=.===-=...=====.=..~a&::'"
Toul
I~ land Total People TotaL Flow Avg. Flow
Parcel :: Use Aerl!S DUlAC D.U. pet" OU People Students Factor (gpd)
-....---..... -..----.... .....--......... ................. ---..---..--
, a R-l 4B.1 2.4 3.0 34B Z80 89 ~/.....,'J ~ 32.,..,eo
II ' b R-l 55.0 2.4 3.0 396 z.Bo &EI ::1/'.:. ~ 3'-, ~'" 0
2 PQ(JHS) 20.0 1300 20 g/st/d 26,000
3 a R-l 26.2 2.5 3.0 195 z.eo SO '/:'10,'5 ~ 18/2.00
3 b R-l 0.0 g/ac/d 0
)1 3 c R-l 5.0 2.0 3.0 3D Z:80 IQ ~I :.../d ~ 'Z I Boo
R-l 0.0 g/ca/d 0
4 PQ(ES) 10.0 BOO 15 g/st/d 12,000
5 PARK 7.0 500 g/ac/d 3,500
II 6 a R'l 43.3 2.4 3.0 315 z.So 89 ;,. (./;.,' d ~ 2.i I ~oo
6 b R-l 4.5 2.2 3.0 3D ~'v 89 g/ea/d ~ "2, eo>o
7 PARK 15.0 500 g/ac/d 7,500
II .......-..... ...------ ---.....--......
234.1 1314 2100 ~ .71,....,0
)1
)1
)1 )7//2~
)1 A-3
2'1/2.7
I
I
I
I
I,
I
i
II
III
III
III
)11
1~
I.
I I
II
II
I~
:1
: I
11
II
Par~el '#
Parcel '#
Parcel #
Land Total
Use Acres
I a
I b
I 0
2
3 a
3 b
4 a
4 b
I'R 17.5
I-R 32.1
I.R 7.5
I-R 16.7
I-R 15.9
I-R 12.9
R-LM 18.6
R-LM 6.0
R-LM 0.0
R-LM 32.0
I-R 0.0
4 0
159.2
Land Toul
Use Acrllts
I a
I b
2 a
2 b
3
4
5 a
5 b
R-L 0.0
R-L 36.5
R-L 0.0
R-M 30.6
R-MH 25.8
R-L 36.0
R'L 47.0
R-L 34.4
210.3
L.and Total
Use Acres
I a
I b
1 0
1 d
2 a
2 b
2 0
R-N 8.9
PRO.! ADM 3.2
VIST .cn. 14.8
RETAIL 7.0
OT'RES. 138.0
OT-SUPP. 12.0
OTeft". Fac.
3
0.0
0.0
PARK 43.4
227.3
People/
Acre
43.7
TABLE A-4
EASTLAKE BUSIHESS CEHTER VASTE VATER FL~JS
==========s==================~.===========
OUIAC
4.5
4.5
4.5
O.U.
People
I'Or DU
3.0
3.0
3.0
TABLE A-5
Total Flow
People Students Factor
252
81
2,500 s/ao/d
2,500 S/ao/d
2,500 s/ao/d
2,500 s/ao/d
2,500 s/ao/d
2;500 S/ao/d
Zeo S9 J/u/d
Zeo 89 ,..../eI
s/oa/d
'2,SO 89 1:'l;ld
s/ao/d
432
765
o
Total
Avg. Flow
(spd)
43,7'50
80,250
18,7'50
41,7'50
39,7'50
32,250
29, '~e
~
o
~
o
.
2.3,5'0 ('00',)
7, :5 Co 0 ('00'0)
'10,3'0 (/00'71>)
317,;,e& 3"Z..'I~OO
W "e~ c.""",,,e.. s 110..........
1'0.... s..t...... c.a.e e....
BAS'''' TltllS"........ AttLA
("iI,'1005p.l)
EASTLAKE VISTAS VASTE VATER FLOVS
====================-============
DUlAC
2.0
8.5
14.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
O.U.
People
I'Or DU
3.0
2.5
2.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
TABLE A-6
Toul Flow
People Students Factor
o
219
80 s/oa/d
Z60 a9 SI.....;4
s/oa/d
ZIO 10 I/ea/d
'2.10 IQ J/ea/d
z.eo as ':It....." d
650
935
216
282
207
~ aD ,I.a/d
~ a9 l/lil/'iiI
2509
o
EASTLAKE OLYMPIC TRAIHIHG CENYER VASTE VAYER FLOVS
==.cza....=....~.aaE.......-=..===....~..aaa==..
DUlAC
16.9
O.U.
i1.:...
-';-'.
;' I
Peepl e
per OU
2.2
3.5
Total Flow
People Students Factor
330
'Z.,o 8e glealll
2,500 s/ao/d
4,000 s/ao/d
2,500 g/ao/d
80 s/oa/d
80 s/oa/d
-z.,eo SO g/ea/d
s/ao/d
S/ao/d
500 s/ao/d
1000
524
283.5
A-4
2138 0
/7-/;2~
Total
Avg. Flow
(spd)
o
~ 7.0,"1'10
o
~ :5'1,1.00
74-;-8&& 78. S ,/0
1iL;-29& 2-0,' l. 0
~ .z.c..,3Z.0
~ ",3LO
2ge,~9 21'11380
ToUl
A....g. Flow
(gpd)
~
8,000
59,200
17,500
80,000
41,952
~
o
o
21,700
279',1.:2
31/, SOD
Z'L, Coeo @
Z 62 '532-
\
7-'>/17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WILSON ENGINEERING
Ar:,rI'lCElvT fRofiE~n (S
. BME"O DN /ssvE PAPER. PP..O:stcT rE:l'\..... MOf.SA~
31'1 VN".:! x "loSO trPP/u(>J,r = 87, '17.0 ~Po/
/7-/JtJ
JOB ~O -IllY I
SUBJECT
I OATE ,I ~t{~7
,
f
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
''"''"""
TABLE 6B
Density Yield Assumptions for Adjacent Properties
(Revised to reflect a total of -2000 units)
Land Use Alternative Net Densityl Potential Units on2
(du/acre) Adjacent Properties
Baldwin Submittal 4.0 627
Phase I Progress Plan 3.5 552
Issue Paper Project Team Proposal 1.9 314*
Project Team Alternative 1.8 299
Low Density Alternative 0.8 150
"
1 Net density' Density calculated based upon approximate residential development acrealJ:e only
2 Based upon 397.5 acres of property adjacent to Central Proctor Valley, Assuming net density for
areas of under 25% slope (approximately 149 acres), and County General Plan (1 du/8 acres) for
areas of over 25% slope. .
) 7 ~ / J / 2-.7/11
.'l""'l"-'-.-'
. ~. ,. ~"'F>"~ .^', __,~.....-:.....--r.--~~.----.---..........._-,.",.....~---
'~~"""-,."".
. .
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM: It
MEETING DATE:11/22194
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Considering Abating the Scheduled 1995 Business License
Tax Increase to Retain Business License Taxes at the Current Calendar
Year 1991 Level
/J. Resolution 17?~~ating the Scheduled Calendar Year 1995 Business
License Tax Rates for One Year and Retaining Business License Taxes in
Calendar Year 1995 at the 1991 Level, as Provided for in Ordinance
2408, with the Exception of Taxes on Specific Businesses Which were
Adopted by Council Ordinance After January 1, 1991.
Related Item: not Dart of the public hearin!!:
lJ. Ordinance ~{'I(mending Chapter 5.60 of the Municipal Code Related
to Business License Taxes and Regulations of Vending and Amusement
Machines
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Finance IIfn^
REVffiWED BY: City ManagerJs ~ tJWJ (4/5ths Vote Yes_ No.J0
Public Hearin~ and Tax Abatement Resolution - This public hearing is being conducted to
discuss the advisability of abating the business license tax increase scheduled for Calendar Year
1995. On October 25, 1990 the City Council passed Ordinance 2408 which adopted increased
business license tax rates which were to be phased in from 1991-1993, with annual increases of
6% to occur in subsequent years, beginning in 1994. Ordinance 2408 also provided Council
with the ability to abate the scheduled business license tax increase during any year, for a one
year period only, to any level chosen as long as the tax rates did not fall below the 1991 level.
Due to the economic downturn, the City Council abated the scheduled tax increases in 1992,
1993 and 1994. Thus the current tax rate for the majority of businesses has remained at the CY
1991 tax levels. The revenue estimates contained in the current FY 1994-95 budget reflect an
abatement of the scheduled CY 1995 tax rates to retain taxes at their current level. If Council
does not pass an abatement resolution prior to January 1, 1995 tax rates for the majority of
businesses will more than double. Staff may return to Council with a report prior to adoption
of next year's budget recommending some increase in tax levels for CY 1996 , if the revenue
outlook for FY 1995-96 does not improve.
Notification of the public hearing and copies of this report were sent to the Chamber of
Commerce, the Broadway Business Association, the Downtown Business Association and the
Bonita Professional Association.
17'1
;
,
Page 2, Item It'
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Ordinance Amendinl: Cha.vter 5.60 of the Municipal Code - The proposed ordinance change
to amend Section 5.60 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is intended to clarify responsibility
for the payment of license taxes for vending and amusement machines. This taxation ordinance
is administrative in nature and will not increase taxes on any licensed businesses. Passage of
this ordinance will enable the City to collect taxes and ensure licensure of unlicensed vending
and amusement machines located in Chula Vista. Passage of this ordinance will also exempt
laundry machines and newsracks from business license taxes, making the Code consistent with
state and federal laws.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council:
3)
Conduct the public hearing;
Adopt Resolution /77.J"abate the scheduled CY 1995 business license tax
increase for one year, retaining taxes at their current levels, and instruct staff to
send a letter to all business with their license renewals, informing them of
Council's decision to abate the 1995 tax increase;
That Council place Ordinance .211 /~ its first reading, making necessary
administrative and legally-advised changes to the Business License Ordinance.
1)
2)
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
On October 25, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2408, approving a business license
tax increase. The new tax rates were to be phased in over a three year period, beginning in
1991; with 6% increases in subsequent years to account for inflation. This schedule was adopted
to provide businesses with the flat rate/per employee tax structure they requested, while at the
same time ensuring that tax rates were not eroded in the future due to inflation, necessitating
large future adjustments. To allow maximum flexibility Ordinance 2408 also provides Council
with the ability to conduct a public hearing and abate all or a portion of the tax rate for a one
year period, to no less than the CY 1991 tax rate. If Council does not abate the tax in any given
year, the taxes for all business will automatically be increased to the level specified in the
Master Tax Schedule for that calendar year.
In 1991 the first year of the tax increase went into effect. However, shortly thereafter the
economy experienced a substantial downturn. As a result, Council abated the scheduled tax
increases in CY 1992, CY 1993 and CY 1994 in response to the continued economic recession
18""~
Page 3, Item / p:
Meeting Date 11/22/94
and concerns expressed by local businesses. Therefore, current business license tax rates for
the vast majority of businesses have not increased since 1991, and are currently set at the CY
1991 levels as shown in Table I. If Council does not abate the scheduled CY 1995 tax increase
via resolution, taxes for the majority of businesses would more than double, due to the
abatement of the scheduled increases the three previous years. Table I shows the impact this
tax increase would have on a typical business as well as on City revenues. For example annual
taxes on the two most common business types would be affected as follows:
o The tax rate on a general business would increase from $52.50 plus $6.50 per
employee to $117.97 plus $14.60 per employee
o The tax rate per professional would increase from $105 to $235.95
TABLE I - Impact or Scheduled 1995 Business Ucense Tax Increase on Various Businesses and City Revenue
Manufacturer:
with 20 employees
with 5 employees
Current Taxes CY 1995 Scheduled
(CY 1991 Level) Taxes
78.50 176.49
117.50 264.25
68.75 154.54
105.00 235.95
25.00 56.18
IN-CITY BUSINESSES - A veral!e Tax
Regular business (average 4 employees)
Professional
New business (reg & mfg w/ under 5 emp.), new professional I
FY 94-95 BUS LIC TAX - REVENUE ESTIMATE
Estimated increase in revenue
900,000.
+0
1,605,400
+705,400
*Current revenue estimate
Although the City of Chula Vista has one of the lowest tax rates in the County and State and
should eventually move to increase the tax to account for the drain from inflation over a long
period, now is probably not a good time to raise these taxes. Unlike most cities whose business
license taxes are based on a business' gross receipts, Chula Vista's tax is based on a flat rate
plus a per employee increment. Gross receipts-based tax structures automatically adjust for
recessionary and inflationary periods. Flat rate structures must be frequently adjusted to account
for inflation or other economic changes. While the ordinance has built in protections against
J g", J
Page 4, Item JL
Meeting Date 11/22/94
ill - .' -~ eroeiling the tax rate, only through abatement can the tax rate be adjusted to account for
I . ons. If the rate is not adjusted accordingly, the relative tax burden on a business will be
highest during poor economic times and lowest during prosperous times. Once the economy
picks up staff can provide the Council with various options to phase in the tax increase at a
slower rate based on local economic conditions and Council policy direction.
Business license tax revenues have increased in spite of the current business climate. Even
though the number of businesses in the City has not increased substantially and tax rates have
not been raised business license revenues were over $300,000 more in FY 1993-94 than in FY
1990-91. These revenue increases are due to the successful implementation of the business
license enforcement program which has targeted out-of-City contractors and unlicensed City
businesses. Staff believes revenues can be maintained at current levels or possibly somewhat
increased during CY 1995, even without a tax increase as current enforcement efforts continue
and efforts are expanded in the area of vending and amusement machine licensing.
The Ordinance proposing language changes to Section 5.60 of the Municipal Code is designed
to affix responsibility for amusement and vending machine licensure to the establishment where
the machine is located. The proposed revisions also specifically exempt from taxes any vending
machines for which 80% or more of the receipts go to a non-profit agency. Lastly, the
ordinance revisions bring the City's Municipal Code into conformance with State and Federal
laws requiring the exemption of laundry machines and newsracks from business license taxes.
Passage of this ordinance should result in additional General Fund revenues of over $5000 per
year due to enhanced enforcement abilities related to licenses covered by Section 5.60 of the
Municipal Code.
Alternatives
If Council does not wish to abate the tax to the current tax level (CY 1991 rates), the tax can
be set at any rate between the current CY 1991 tax rates and the scheduled CY 1995 tax rates.
Table II, on the following page, presents 5 alternatives and the impact adoption of a particular
alternative would have on common businesses as well as General Fund revenue.
Ootion #1: Retain the current tax rate (which is the CY 1991 base tax rate which has
remained in effect for the vast majority of businesses from January 1991 until
now)
Ootion #2: The current tax rate (the CY 1991 base tax rate) is increased by the estimated San
Diego Consumer Price Index (CPI) for CY 1994 which is 2.6%
1~"'1
PAGE 5. ITEM ~
MEETING DATE 11/22/94
~
= ~I~ ~~
e:
~ ~ "'~ ~ 00 "'r- - - '" gl@
t ~ N '" - O'!'" r- r- oo
i~! -D ~~ '" -D r- . <<i <<i -
r- '" 0- '" ...:+
.e- - N- N '" _N '" '" -
..
.. 0
U
-g ...,~ 88
8 8:;:: 8 8 NN
= Il:li 8 88 8 8 0000
~ i~" r-: vir--: 0 0 -D00 0 0 ~ ~~
'" '" '" -
~ - N- N '" 0\ - '" '" - ...:+
..
.. ....~ ~~
tIl
= 8 8:;:: 8! '"
r::Q Iii 8 88 8 8 N ~~
00 r-:<<i '" .,.; \CioO ?:i 0 00 --
e: .... - r-o '" 0 N'"
~ c::5~ - -- - '" 0\- '" - ...:+
..
S ~ ~~
.....
....B~ ~'" ~tf'i'
0\ N 00 0\", '" ~ ~ ~~
e: ii~ '" . 00 00 '" O'!oo '"
Q -D 0\ . '" r-: '" . -D 0\
N'" - 00\ '"
tIl 00 _r- - N -- - '" r-
e:
Q
.. ...
... +
Cl.
0 ~ ~.~
..
= ","'0
Il!ti. ~ "'~ '" :2 or- 0\ 00 r- '" '"
e ,.. '" ":,,, t-: "'~ '" r- oo NN
i1!ei 0 o . r- '" ocioci '" 0 '" 0\+
NO 0
~ ~;:; 00 _r- - N 0\ - - '" r-
d..
~ +
.."" ~~
= .... B =: c c.... g g gg g g g
E-c Il".:s .... lIlr- ~
i!~ oC r-- . iii iii i~ iii C ~ i
_00 c
~ r-- _\0 - N - <'l
fl Q.
.. ~
~
tIl
~ 'ill :::!!
e: = ~
C>
.. '0;
tIl ,..... ,
= ! .!! ~
r::Q I '" ~
tIl al '" e ><
= .9'~ g. .!! >< 'a
Q i ~ ~.!! E ~
.. c.._
5 ~ 8 ~ II
"" i =
~ ~ '" 8 <'l
0'" ,..... OS '"
... c. - , e
N '" .. -
... t i c.. t
= oS oS '" c >< ~
.~ .~ 0'" ~ e
... .... r-'"
~ II
~ .. II C i
Cl. II .5 .,!,~ u..
..... "Cl ::3 ~
~ = II ] ~-
'" l>
rl .:. ~ = [g~ 'j
~ rl .. 'a ~
= '" ] E !l
.. rl .. =
=:I '" 'ill .:l.~ ... ::I 0' =:I .. ~
= ::I ::I E il
.c = = II ~1 ....13
~ ~ -g C> '0; l>Il i ~1;j
j .. ::I
... '" = ~
::I .!! .c .. III - .... 0\8
! ~ ~ "Cl ::I ::I , i:81
~ ~ = E file ~
:l -<~ ~ -< ='s ;>
Jr~
Page 6, Item
Meeting Date 11/22/94
If
OptiQn #3: The current tax rate (the CY 1991 base tax rate) is increased by the cumulative
increase in the San Diego CPI for 1991, 1992, 1993 and estimated CPI for 1994,
or 10.3%
Option #4: Replace the current tax rate (1991 base tax rate) with the scheduled 1992 base tax
rate
Option #5: Replace the current tax rate (1991 base tax rate) with the scheduled 1993 base tax
rate
Ootion #6: Replace the current tax rate with the 1995 scheduled tax rate (the original 1993
base tax rate X 1.06 X 1.06) (6 percent is the 1994, 1995 and subsequent
calendar year rate increase per the Master Tax Table)
FISCAL IMPACT: The revenue estimates in the current FY 1994-95 budget were calculated
with the assumption that business license tax rates would remain at the current CY 1991 levels.
If the Council decides not to abate the tax, or to only abate a portion of the tax, the City's
general fund revenue for this fiscal year would increase. For example, allowing the tax to go
up to the scheduled CY 1995 level would result in an estimated increase in General Fund
revenues this fiscal year of $705,400.
Abatement of the tax to current levels will have only a minimal impact on next fiscal year's
revenues since the vast majority of business license revenues are collected between January and
April of each year. Staff may come to Council during the FY 1995-96 budget process with a
report which outlines various options for increasing business license tax revenues in CY 1996
to receive Council direction.
/8"~
RESOLUTION NO.
J773~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ABATING THE SCHEDULED CALENDAR
YEAR 1995 BUSINESS LICENSE TAX RATES FOR ONE
YEAR AND RETAINING BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES IN
CALENDAR YEAR 1995 AT THE 1991 LEVEL AS
PROVIDED IN ORDINANCE 2408, WITH THE EXCEPTION
OF TAXES ON SPECIFIC BUSINESSES WHICH WERE
ADOPTED BY COUNCIL ORDINANCE AFTER JANUARY 1,
1991
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2408 passed by Council on
October 25, 1990 offers Council the ability to abate the scheduled
business license increase during any years, for a one year period
only, to any level chosen as long as the tax rates did not fall
below the 1991 level; and
WHEREAS, due to the economic downturn, the City Council
abated the scheduled tax increases in 1992, 1993 and 1994 and the
current tax rate for the majority of businesses has remained at the
CY 1991 levels; and
WHEREAS, the revenue estimates contained in the current
FY 1994-95 budget reflect an abatement of the scheduled CY 1995 tax
rates to retain taxes at their current level.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby abate the scheduled Calendar
Year 1995 Business License Tax rates for one year and retain
Business License Taxes in Calendar Year 1995 at the 1991 level,
with the exception of taxes on specific businesses which were
adopted by Council Ordinance after January 1, 1991 as provided for
in Ordinance 2408.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that staff is directed to send a
letter explaining Council's action to all business with their
business license renewal forms.
Robert Powell, Director of
Finance
ed as
~
Presented by
C:\r8\buslicen.tax
IrA ,/
ORDINANCE NO. .J.f/lr
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDING CHAPTER 5.60 OF THE CHULA VISTA
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO BUSINESS LICENSE
TAXES AND REGULATIONS OF VENDING AND AMUSEMENT
MACHINES
SECTION I: That Chapter 5.60 of the Chula vista
Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
Chapter 5.60
VENDING, WEIGHING, MUSIC.L AMUSEMENT,-
AND VIDEO MACHINES .Mfa NEWSlU'.ClKs28
sections:
5.60.010
5.60.020
5.60.030
5.60.040
Vending, weighing, music, amusementT and video
machines aBd BeWSFaeks- License Tax-Reeeip~sLicense
to be attached to machine.
Repealed.
Repealed.
Repealed.
5.60.010
Vending, weighing, music, amusementT and video
machines aBd BewsFaeks-License Tax-Reeeip~BLicense
to be attached to machine.
Every person eSfla1:1etiflEj, maRaEjiflEj or earryiREj eR the.
slioincca af eporat.iflEj SF maiRtaiRiflEj allY who ooerates a
business which has. on the premises on which the business is
located. a vending, weighing, music, amusement, or video
machines SE' Re\lsE'acks operated by a coin or a slug shall pay
a tax as presently designated, or as may in the future be
amended, in the Master Tax Schedule, section 5.60.010, in
addition to any other license tax required by this Chapter.
This tax is separatelY assessed as a business license tax
independent of the primary business conducted on the premises.
Postage machines. newsracks and laundry machines are exempt
from license taxes. as are vendino machines for which at least
eiohty percent of the proceeds from the operation of the
machines are made available to a non-profit oroanization. and
are shown to the satisfaction of the City Finance Officer to
be available to a non-profit oroanization and are labeled to
the satisfaction of the city Finance Officer as dedicated to
a non-profit oroanization.
The City Finance Officer shall issue a separate
E'eeciptlicense for each such machine, which shall be attached
/8'/J' /
to and maintained thereon for the full term for which the
rccciptlicense is issued.
5.60.020 Music machines-License fee-Receipt to be attached
to machine.
(Section repealed by Ordinance No. 2408 Sl (part), 1990;
Ord. 1801 S12 (part), 1978; prior code S18.53).
5.60.030 Amusement machines-Licenses fee-Receipt to be
attached to machine.
(Section repealed by Ordinance No. 2408 Sl (part), 1990;
Ord. 1801 S12 (part), 1978; prior code S18.54).
5.60.040 Other coin-operated vending machines-License fee.
(Section repealed by Ordinance No. 2408 Sl (part), 1990;
prior code S18.55).
SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in
full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption.
Presented by
form by
Robert Powell, Director of
Finance
, city
C:\or\chap560
/~8~~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item11-
Meeting Date 11/22/94
ITEM TITLE: Resolution J 7?lb Approving an agreement between the City, The
Environmental Trust, Inc. and Bonita Long Canyon Partnership for purchase of
land as wetlands mitigation for two City projects and AT&T's project at 865
Third Avenue and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement on behalf of
the City
SUBMITIED BY: Director of Public Works
Director of Planning
REVIEWED BY: City ManageLt1 (4/Sths Vote: Yes_ No X )
This i m was continu fr m m f N v mber I 4 R Cons r n
.Commission fRCC) had not vet made a recommendation. The RCC will meet on Mondav Novemberr
21. Conncil will be notified of their action. The winter storms of 1993 caused damage to a number of
locations within the City of Chula Vista. Restoration work was or will be accomplished for two City
projects and one private project. As a result of work completed or to be completed by the City and
proposed work by American Telephone and Telegraph (AT&T) at 865 Third Avenue, the Department
of Fish and Game (DF&G) required wetlands mitigation. The City has been working towards obtaining
land to mitigate the two City projects. The DF&G suggested that the City and AT&T combine
mitigation so as to provide a larger area rather than three smaller sites. This proposed agreement is the
result of negotiations to obtain land as wetlands mitigation for both City projects and the AT&T site.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the agreement to purchase land for wetland mitigation and authorize
the Mayor to execute same on behalf of the City
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission (RCC)
will review this agreement on 11-21-94 A report will be prepared for the City Council regarding the
RCC action and placed on the dais.
DISCUSSION:
Backl!round
The environmental section of the Planning Department has been working with the Department of Fish
and Game (DF&G) to find suitable mitigation for two City projects which the DF&G determined
required wetlands mitigation. One project was the remedial repair of washed out areas within Telegraph
Canyon Creek (TCC), the other was a similar situation within Bonita Long Canyon Creek (BLCC). The
TCC project was funded through the City CIP program and the BLCC project will be funded by a CIP
with the possibility of a partial reimbursement by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
The TCC project required 0.2 acres of mitigation and the BLCC project will required approximately 0.54
acres of mitigation for work being accomplished.
11-/
Page 2, Item lL
Meeting Date: 11/22/94
In addition to the two City projects, AT&T had a proposed project adjacent to 865 Third Avenue in
which mitigation was required by the DF&G. That project required 0.4 acres of mitigation.
COMBINED PROJECTS
The combined projects are proposed to be mitigated through the purchase of two parcels with a total
acreage of 2.47 acres. The DF&G has indicated that the two parcels contain 1.25 acres of wetlands.
The three projects indicated above require 1.14 acres of wetland mitigation. Therefore in addition to
providing mitigation for the projects, DF&G indicated that the City would have 0.11 acres available for
future mitigation ( see the DF&G Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA) 5-766-93, item 5). The
DF&G also indicated that the land would have to be enhanced. Enhancement is anticipated to include
removal of invasive plants and replanting with wetland species within the 1.25 acres. The Environmental
Trust Inc. (TET) will discuss the necessary enhancement with the DF&G after approval of this
agreement.
The total cost to purchase the property including escrow costs is not expected to exceed $35,000.
Enhancement of the parcel is required by DF&G. Enhancement costs are anticipated to range from
$10,000 to $30,000. Therefore, the total cost is anticipated to range between $45,000 and $65,000.
Since the AT&T $30,000 plus any interest will be used fIrst (see City Assumption of AT&T Mitigation
below), the City cost will range between $ $10,000-$35,000. Reimbursement from FEMA for
approximately 30 percent of the cost for the BLCC project could occur. If this happens, the City could
be reimbursed approximately $10,500 in which case the City's cost could range between $0 and $20,000.
CITY ASSUMPTION OF AT&T MITIGATION
The AT&T project required 0.4 acres of mitigation. The DF&G suggested to AT&T that they combine
their mitigation with the City's to end up with a larger mitigation site. AT&T obtained an estimate from
PacifIc Southwest Biological Services (PSBS) to mitigate for their project. The estimate came to
approximately $30,000.
The City agreed to assume AT&T's mitigation responsibility if the total cost of mitigation did not exceed
$30,000 plus any interest earned on the money (see letter dated May 26,1994). The DF&G revised the
SAA to reflect our commitment except that no upper limit was indicated. Consequently, staff did not
execute the agreement even though AT&T provided the $30,000. AT&T subsequently agreed in a letter
dated October 5, 1994 to provide an additional $15,000 as security for any overrun of costs. In
addition, they agreed in their letter to pay any additional costs that can be associated with their portion
of the project after discussing with DF&G solutions and receiving authorization from AT&T. The initial
$30,000 provided by AT&T will be used to obtain the land with the City providing any additional costs
unless it can be shown that the AT&T portion of the mitigation should be higher Staff has indicated
to AT&T that items 4 and 5 of their letter were not acceptable in that the property would be granted
directly to The Environmental Trust Inc. (TET) leaving both the City and AT&T out of the chain of title
and all the mitigation work would be done by TET making it unnecessary to require the items indicated
in Item 5 In discussions with AT&T they have agreed to the deletion of Items 4 & 5. Prior to the
signing of the purchase agreement, a revised letter from AT&T will be received deleting Items 4 & 5.
1'1'.2
Page 3, Item 19
Meeting Date: 11/22/94
Since the land deal had been reviewed by DF&G and indicated verbally that it appeared to be acceptable
as mitigation for the two City projects and AT&T's project, the City executed the SAA 5-648-93
(AT&T) so that the work could begin before this winter Subsequent to that time the DF&G executed
SAA 5-766-93 which indicated that the land was acceptable as mitigation for the three projects.
TERMS OF PURCHASE AGREEMENT
The purchase agreement before Council tonight provides for the purchase of two parcels of land from
the Bonita Long Canyon Partnership (BLCP) which total 2.47 acres of land. The land will be purchased
for $20,000 and will be transferred through an escrow to TET who agree to maintain the land in
accordance with the DF&G requirements. The agreement provides for TET to be paid $10,000 for
providing maintenance. The DF&G has reviewed the agreement and indicated in the most recent SAA
(5-766-93) that the land will be acceptable as mitigation for the two City projects and AT&T's project
with enhancement. Section 3.3 of the agreement requires TET to obtain a determination from DF&G
that the property satisfies the Cities' requirements to provide off-site mitigation prior to close of escrow
There is a $2,500 deposit to be made to the escrow holder by the City which is non refundable if the
deal is not completed for any reason other than the sellers default or the non-fulfillment of the conditions
contained in paragraph 3 of the agreement. Paragraph 3 requires approval of a title report, a biological
study and government acceptance by the DF&G as wetland mitigation and permanent open space. If the
deal is consummated, the $2,500 goes towards the purchase price of the property. Designation of who
pays escrow costs are contained within the agreement with the costs essentially being split between the
seller, BLCP, and the City except BLCP will pay the entire realtor fee associated with this deal.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City's cost could vary from $10,000 to $35,000. Total cost is not expected to exceed $65,000 of
which AT&T has deposited $30,000 and pledged another $15,000 if their proportionate share of the
purchase requires the money to be paid by them. AT&T has also indicated they would provide
additional funds in excess of the $45,000 indicated if it can be shown to relate to their proportionate
share of the total cost. Funds are available in Project DR122, $2900; Project DR 118, $32,100.
Reimbursement from FEMA for approximately 30% of the mitigation cost for the BLCC project could
occur. That could amount to about $10,500 based upon a proportion of the anticipated total cost of
mitigation for the BLCC project.
WAUl PG-482
Attachments:
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Exhibit 0
Exhibit E
Exhibit F
Mitigation property location
SAA 5-630-93 Gunite Project TCC
SAA 5-648-93 AT&T Project TCC
SAA 5-766-93 BLCC project
Letter dated May 26,1994 N.r $(!A...,}€()
Letter from AT&T dated 10/5194 Npr St'ANiAJ~'p
M:\homc\enginccr\agcnda\ATTAGR. Wall
19-3 /19-1
RESOLUTION NO. 17710
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE ENVIRONMENTAL ~RUST,
INC. AND BONITA LONG CANYON PARTNERSHIP FOR
PURCHASE OF LAND AS WETLANDS MITIGATION FOR
TWO CITY PROJECTS AND AT&T'S PROJECT AT 865
THIRD AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, the winter storms of 1993 caused damage to a
number of locations within the City of Chula vista and restoration
work was or will be accomplished for two City projects and one
private project; and
WHEREAS, as a result of work completed or to be completed
by the City and proposed work by American Telephone and Telegraph
(AT&T) at 865 Third Avenue, the Department of Fish and Game (DF&G)
required wetlands mitigation; and
WHEREAS, the City has been working towards obtaining land
to mitigate the two City projects; and
WHEREAS, the DF&G suggested that the city and AT&T
combine mitigation so as to provide a larger area rather than three
smaller sites; and
WHEREAS, this agreement is the result of negotiations to
obtain land as wetlands mitigation for both City projects and the
AT&T site.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby approve an agreement between the
City of Chula vista, the Environmental Trust, Inc. and Bonita Long
Canyon Partnership for purchase of land as wetlands mitigation for
two City projects and AT&T's project at 865 Third Avenue, a copy of
which is on file in the office of the city Clerk as Document No._
___ (to be completed by the Clerk in the final document).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
agreement for and on behalf of the City.
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\AT&T
/9~f /ICJ-;'~
-
.
.
.
~~ \'\ l2:,adl '1' ~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ltemL
Meeting Date 11/8/94
ITEM TITLE: Resolution J 7 7/1/ Approving an agreement between the City, The
Environmental Trust, Inc. and Bonita Long Canyon Partnership for purchase of
land as wetlands mitigation for two City projects and AT&T's project at 865
Third A venue and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement on behalf of
the City
SUBMITI'ED BY: Director of Public WO'"2J~
Director of Planning Pi
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ ~\, )
The winter storms of 1993 caused damageU a ~mber of locations within the City of Chula Vista.
Restoration work was or will be accomplished for two City projects and one private project. As a result
of work completed or to be completed by the City and proposed work by American Telephone and
Telegraph (AT&T) at 865 Third Avenue, the Department of Fish and Game (DF&G) required wetlands
mitigation. The City has been working towards obtaining land to mitigate the two City projects. The
DF&G suggested that the City and AT&T combine mitigation so as to provide a larger area rather than
three smaller sites. This proposed agreement is the result of negotiations to obtain land as wetlands
mitigation for both City projects and the AT&T site.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the agreement to purchase land for wetland mitigation and authorize
the Mayor to execute same on behalf of the City
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission (RCC)
will review this agreement on 11 -7-94 A report will be prepared for the City Council regarding the
RCC action and placed on the dais.
DISCUSSION:
Backl!round
The environmental section of the Planning Department has been working with the Department of Fish
and Game (DF&G) to find suitable mitigation for two City projects which the DF&G determined
required wetlands mitigation. One project was the remedial repair of washed out areas within Telegraph
Canyon Creek (TCC), the other was a similar situation within Bonita Long Canyon Creek (BLCC). The
TCC project was funded through the City CIP program and the BLCC project will be funded by a CIP
with the possibility of a partial reimbursement by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
The TCC project required 0.2 acres of mitigation and the BLeC project will required approximately 0.54
acres of mitigation for work being accomplished.
In addition to the two City projects, AT&T had a proposed project adjacent to 865 Third Avenue in
which mitigation was required by the DF&G. That project required 0.4 acres of mitigation.
)Yr /9~/
Page 2, Item 1 -
Meeting Date: 1] /08/94
~
COMBINED PROJECTS
The combined projects are proposed to be mitigated through the purchase of two parcels with a total
acreage of 2.47 acres. The DF&G has indicated that the two parcels contain 1.25 acres of wetlands.
The three projects indicated above require I ]4 acres of wetland mitigation. Therefore in addition to
providing mitigation for the projects, DF&G indicated that the City would have 0.11 acres available for
future mitigation ( see SAA 5-766-93, item 5). The DF&G also indicated that the land would have to
be enhanced.
The total cost to purchase the property including escrow costs is not expected to exceed $35,000
Enhancement of the parcel is required by DF&G Enhancement costs are anticipated to range from
$]0,000 to $30,000. Therefore, the total cost is anticipated to range between $45,000 and $65,000
Since the AT&T $30,000 plus any interest will be used first (see City Assumption of AT&T Mitigation
below), the City cost will range between $ $10,000-$35,000 Reimbursement from FEMA for
approximately 30 percent of the cost for the BLCC project could occur If this happens, the City could
be reimbursed approximately $10,500 in which case the City's cost could range between $0 and $20,000
CITY ASSUMPTION OF AT&T MITIGATION
The AT&T project required 0 4 acres of mitigation. The DF&G suggested to AT&T that they combine
their mitigation with the City's to end up with a larger mitigation site. AT&T obtained an estimate from
Pacific Southwest Biological Services (PSBS) to mitigate for their project. The estimate came to
approximately $30,000
'"'"
The City agreed to assume AT &T's mitigation responsibility if the total cost of mitigation did not exceed
$30,000 plus any interest earned on the money (see letter dated May 26,1994) The DF&G revised the
Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA) to reflect our commitment except that no upper limit was
indicated. Consequently, staff did not execute the agreement even though AT&T provided the $30,000
AT&T subsequently agreed in a letter dated October 5, 1994 to provide an additional $15,000 as
security for any overrun of costs. In addition, they agreed in their letter to pay any additional costs that
can be associated with their portion of the project after discussing with DF&G solutions and receiving
authorization from AT&T The initial $30,000 provided by AT&T will be used to obtain the land with
the City providing any additional costs unless it can be shown that the AT&T portion of the mitigation
should be higher Staff has indicated to AT&T that items 4 and 5 of their letter were not acceptable in
that the property would be granted directly to The Environmental Trust Inc. (TET) leaving both the City
and AT&T out of the chain of title and all the mitigation work would be done by TET making it
unnecessary to require the items indicated in Item 5 In discussions with AT&T they have agreed to the
deletion of Items 4 & 5. Prior to the signing of the purchase agreement, a revised letter from AT&T
will be received deleting Items 4 & 5
Since the land deal had been reviewed by DF&G and indicated verbally that it appeared to be acceptable
as mitigation for the two City projects and AT&T's project, the City executed the SAA 5-648-93
(AT&T) so that the work could begin before this winter Subsequent to that time the DF&G executed
SAA 5-766-93 which indicated that the land was acceptable as mitigation for the three projects. "'""'
~ Jl-~
.
.
.
Page 3, Item ~
Meeting Date: 11/08/94
TERMS OF PURCHASE AGREEMENT
The purchase agreement before Council tonight provides for the purchase of two parcels of land from
the Bonita Long Canyon Partnership (BLCP) which total 2.47 acres of land. The land will be purchased
for $20,000 and will be transferred through an escrow to TET who agree to maintain the land in
accordance with the DF&G requirements. The agreement provides for TET to be paid $10,000 for
providing maintenance. The DF&G has reviewed the agreement and indicated in the most recent SAA
(5-766-93) that the land will be acceptable as mitigation for the two City projects and AT&T's project
with enhancement. Section 3.3 of the agreement requires TET to obtain a determination from DF&G
that the property satisfies the Cities' requirements to provide off-site mitigation prior to close of escrow
There is a $2,500 deposit to be made to the escrow holder by the City which is non refundable if the
deal is not completed for any reason other than the sellers default. If the deal is consummated, the
$2,500 goes towards the purchase price of the property Designation of who pays escrow costs are
contained within the agreement with the costs essentially being split between the seller, BLCP, and the
City except BLCP will pay the entire realtor fee associated with this deal.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City's cost could vary from $10,000 to $35,000. Total cost is not expected to exceed $65,000 of
which AT&T has deposited $30,000 and pledged another $15,000 if their proportionate share of the
purchase requires the money to be paid by them. AT&T has also indicated they would provide
additional funds in excess of the $45,000 indicated if it can be shown to relate to their proportionate
share of the total cost. Funds are available in Project DR122, $2900; Project DR 118, $32,100
Reimbursement from FEMA for approximately 30% of the mitigation cost for the BLCC project could
occur That could amount to about $10,500 based upon a proportion of the anticipated total cost of
mitigation for the BLCC project.
WAUl PG-482
Attachments :
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Exhibit D
Exhibit E
Exhibit F
Mitigation property location
SAA 5-630-93 Gunite Project TCC
SAA 5-648-93 AT&T Project TCC
SAA 5-766-93 BLCC project
Letter dated May 26,1994
Letter from AT&T dated 10/5/94
M:\homc\cnginccr\agcnda\ATIAGR. wan
~ /9-;
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 177/t)
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE ENVIRONMENTAL TRUST,
INC. AND BONITA LONG CANYON PARTNERSHIP FOR
PURCHASE OF LAND AS WETLANDS MITIGATION FOR
TWO CITY PROJECTS AND AT&T'S PROJECT AT 865
THIRD AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, the winter storms of 1993 caused damage to a
number of locations within the City of Chula vista and restoration
work was or will be accomplished for two City projects and one
private project; and
WHEREAS, as a result of work completed or to be completed
by the City and proposed work by American Telephone and Telegraph
(AT&T) at 865 Third Avenue, the Department of Fish and Game (DF&G)
required wetlands mitigation; and
WHEREAS, the City has been working towards obtaining land
to mitigate the two city projects; and
WHEREAS, the DF&G suggested that the City and AT&T
combine mitigation so as to provide a larger area rather than three
smaller sites; and
WHEREAS, this agreement is the result of negotiations to
obtain land as wetlands mitigation for both city projects and the
AT&T site.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby approve an agreement between the
city of Chula vista, the Environmental Trust, Inc. and Bonita Long
canyon Partnership for purchase of land as wetlands mitigation for
two City projects and AT&T's project at 865 Third Avenue, a copy of
which is on file in the office of the city Clerk as Document No._
___ (to be completed by the Clerk in the final document).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execu said
agreement for and on behalf of the City.
Presented by
as It f
by
Bruce M.
Attorney
C ty
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\AT&T
~ )9~~ )
.~. __ _':_.L_~.. .._
", .~
. .~..:_._~.-
, . -"
~BJ
~
?\)
!T1
~
~
.....
m
^
:r:
-
t]J
-
-\
,
,
~,
....
<:
.
,
,
CALIFORNIA DEPARTKDlT OF FISH AND QAXB
330 Golden Shore, Suite 50
Long Beach, California 90802
"'"
Notification
Page -L of
No.S-630-93
....L .
-4
AQRBBXBN'1' RBaARDINQ
PROPOSED STRKAX OR LAJtB ALTERATION
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into between the State of California, Department of Fish
and Game, hereinafter called the Department, and Roberto Saucedo of City of Chula
Vista: 276 Fourth Ave.: Chula Vista. CA 91~10: (619) 422-0750, State of
California, hereinafter called the Operator, is as follows:
WHEREAS,pursuant to Section ~ of California Fish and Game Code, the Operator,
on the ~ day of October,~, notified the Department that they intend to
divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or change the bed, channel, or bank of, or
USe material from the streambedls) of, the following water(s): Telearaoh Canyon
Creek, San Diego County, California, Section ~ sections 121.122.140 Township ~
Range ~.
WHEREAS, the Department has determined that such operations may
adversely affect existing fish and wildlife resources including:
aauatic resources and wildlife in the area
substantially
sonabirds. and all
THEREFORE, the Department hereby proposes measures to protect fish and wildlife
resources during the Operator's work. The Operator hereby agrees to accept the
following measures/conditions as part of the proposed work.
If the Operator's work changes from that stated in the notification specified
above, this Agreement is no longer valid and a new notification shall be submitted
to the Department of Fish and Game. Failure to comply with the provisions of this ~
Agreement and with other pertinent code sections, including but not limited to Fish '
and Gam~ Code Sections 5650, 5652, 5937, and 5948, may result in prosecution.
Nothing in this Agreement authorizes the Operator to trespass on any land or
property, nor does it relieve the Operator of responsibility for compliance with
applicable federal, state, or local laws or ordinances. A consummated Agreement
does not constitute Department of Fish and Game endorsement of the proposed
operation, or assure the Department's concurrence with permits required from other
agencies.
This Aareement becomes effective the date of Deoartment's sianature and terminates
Januarv 31. 1994 for Droiect construction only. This Aareement shall remain in
effect for that time necessary to satisfy the terms/conditions of this Aareement.
"
~
i f__~
I I \ \.
~ /7-~j/
"
.
.
.
Page ...L of ...l.-
STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION NUMBER:
5-630-93
1. The following provisions constitute the limit of activities agreed to and
resolved by this Agreement. The signing of this Agreement doea not imply that the
Operator is precluded from doing other activities at the site. However, activities
not specifically agreed to and resolved by this Agreement shall be subject to
separate notification pursuant to Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 et seq.
2. The Operator proposes to alter the streambed to gunite approximately 4000 square
feet of stream banks, located between Fourth Avenue alOil Hilltop Park, in the City of
Chula Vista.
3. The agreed work includes activities associated with No.2 above. The project
area is located in Teleiraph Canyon Craak in San Diego County. Specific work areas
and mitigation measures are described on/in the plans and documents submitted by the
Operator and shall be implemented as proposed unless directed differently by this
agreement.
4. The Operator shall not impact more than 4000 square feet of stream
(approximately 0.1 acre) .
5. The Operator shall enhance (with exotics removal and seeding/planting with
natives to discourage the reintroduction of exotics) 0.2 acres of stream immediately
adjacent to the project. The Department strongly recommends the enhancement work be
a part of the future long-term planning for Telegraph Creek Channel.
6. The Operator shall submit a final mitigation plan for Department review and
approval within 60 days of signing this agreement. The plan shall include a map
showing the area for creation/enhancement and plant palette.
. 7. The mitigation shall be installed by March 31, 1994.
8. Disturbance or removal of vegetation shall not exceed the limits approved by the
Department.
9. The Operator shall not operating equipment in wetted areas (including but not
limited to ponded, flowing, or wetland areas) .
10. Preparation shall be made so that runoff from steep, erodible surfaces will be
diverted into stable areas with little erosion potential. Frequent water checks
shall be placed on dirt roads, cat tracks, or other work trails to control erosion.
11. Water containing mud, silt or other pollutants from aggregate washing or other
activities shall not be allowed to enter a lake or flowing stream or placed in
locations that may be subjected to high storm flows.
12. Structures and associated materials not designed to withstand high seasonal
flows shall be removed to areas above the high water mark before such flows occur.
13. Raw cement/concrete or washings thereof, 'asphalt, paint or other coating
material, oil or other petroleum products, or any other substances which could be
hazardous to aquatic life, resulting from project related activities, shall be
prevented from contaminating the soil and/or entering the waters of the state. Any
of these materials, placed within or where they may enter a stream or lake, by
Operator or any party working under contract, or with the permission of the
Operator. shall be removed immediately.
14. Any equipment or vehicles driven and/or operated within or adjaeent to the
stream/lake shall be checked and maintained daily, to prevent leaks of materials
that if introduced to water could be deleterious to aquatic life.
.
~ /f~..2>
/
"'!
. .
. .
Page ..l.. of ..l..
STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION NUMBER: 5-630-93
15. Staging/storage areas for equipment and materials shall be located outside of
the stream/lake.
""""
16. No debris, soil, silt, sand, bark, slash, sawdust, rubbish, cement or concrete
or washings thereof, oil or petroleum products or other organic or earthen material
from sny logging, construction, or associated activity of whatever nature shall be
allowed to enter into or placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff into,
waters of the State. When operations are completed, any excess materials or debris
shall be removed from the work area. No rubbish shall be deposited within 150 feet
of the high water mark of any stream or lake.
17. The Operator shall comply with all litter and pollution laws. All contractors,
subcontractors and employees shall also obey these laws and it shall be the
responsibility of the operator to ensure compliance.
18. No equipment maintenance shall be done within or near any stream channel or
lake margin where petroleum products or other pollutants from the equipment may
enter these areas under any flow.
19. The Operator shall provide a copy of this Agreement to all contractor.,
.ubcontractor., and the Operator!. project .upervi.or.. Copies of the Agreement
.hall be readily available at work .ite. at all time. durin; period. of active work
and must be presented to any Department personnel, or personnel from another agency
upon demand.
20. The Operator .hall notify the Department, in writing, at lea.t five (5) dey.
prior to initiation of con.truction (project) activities and at lea.t five (5) day.
prior to completion of con.truction (project) activitie.. Notification shall be
sent to the Department at 330 Golden Shore, Suite 50, Long Beach, CA 90802, Attn:
ES.
"""'"
(
21. The Department reserves the right to enter the project site at any time to
ensure compliance with terms/conditions of this Agreement.
22. The Department reserves the right to suspend and/or revoke this Agreement if
the Department determines that the circumstances warrant. The circumstances that
could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. Failure to comply with the terms/conditions of this Agreement.
b. The information provided by the Operator in support of the
Agreement/Notification is determined by the Department to be incomplete, or
inaccurate.
c. When new information becomes available to the Department representative(s)
that was not known when preparing the original terms/conditions of this Agreement.
d. The project as described in the Notification/Agreement has changed, or
conditions affecting fish and wildlife resources change.
CONctnlRENCE
(Operator'. name)
California Dept. of Fish and Game
~fgLd~_k-
( ign ure)
11-3<' '~f
(date)
.
,{~~ I~~\V
(signature) (date)
.,s""r C :../ ':;"'OU-<..o/
(t tle) (/
Environmental SDecialist III
(title)
""""
~ /9~..2?
.
.
.
CAI.IrOUIA DZPAIl.'l'DJl'f OF rUB AIlIl aaJII
330 Golden Shore, s~ite SO
Long aaaeh. California 90802
Notification No.5-'48-93
.age ..... of J....
AQRKDmllT UGAJl,DXIlO paoPOIKll .ftKAX oa toUt. ALTWaATION
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into betwaen the Stata of. california. Department of
.ish and Game, hereinafter called the Department, and Mario Gatee of AT&T:
~~~~ ~o~!~~~~ ~r R~~m ~~ga~ ~;ea,an~~~ ~ ~~~~~~,and ~lifford Swanson.
~~~;~ ~ire~i~~ ~f ~~~}i~ ;~~95 0 ; i'l; ; Viata: 276 Fourth Ave,: Chula
V:..____ __ ___-0.:. (~___ _2_..___7: ('_9__1S-6471: (619' 477.!)33; State of
ealifornia , hereinafter called ~he Operator. I 18 .5 follows:
WHBREAs.p~ra~ant to Section ~ of california Fiah and aame Code, the
Operatora, on the ~ day of November, li!l. notifi~d the pepartment that
they intend to divert or ob.truct the natural flow of. or change the bed.
channel, or bank of, or ~ae material from the atreambed(sl of. the following
waterlal: Telearaoh Canvon Creek, San D11'o county. California. Section --
Township __ Ranga --'
WHEREAS, the Department hee determined that such operations may sub.tantially
adveraely affect exi8ting fish and wildlife resources incl~ding: aonabirde and
all .au_tie resouroe- And wildlife in the ar...
THEREFORE. the pepartment hereby proposa. mea.ures to protect fi.h and wildlife
reeo~rcea d~ring the Operator'. work. Tha Operator hereby agrees to accept the
following measuree/condition. a. part of the proposed work
If the Operators' work change. from that atatad in the notification specif~ed
above. this Agreement ia no longer valid and a new notification shall be
8ubmitted to the Oepartment of 'ish and Game Failure to comply with the
provisions of this Agreament and with other pertinent code sections, including
but not limited to .iah end aame Code sections 5650, 5652, 5937. and 5948, may
re8~lt in prosecution.
Nothing in this Agreement .~thorize. the operators to trespa.s on any land Or
property, nor doee it relieva the Operatora of responsibility for compliance
with applicable federal, 8tata, or local lawa or ordinance. A consummated
Agre".l"ent does not constit~ta Department of Fi8h and Game endoreement of the
propoaed operation, or asaure the Plpartment'a conc~rrence with permits
re~irad from other ageneiaa.
r:~;i;~~~::~;~~ri::i:~!:~~~::;~:~~~ s=~;:~~~~!!~;:;~t~:' :;~~~~~~~~;~~. e~fl.l
t.hi. Aor..ment.
Ii'
frff )f-.,2?
0'
.
Page ...1... of --L.
STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION NUMBER: 5-648-93
1. The following provisions constitute the limit of activities agreea to ana
resolvea by this Agreement. The signing of this Agreement aoes not imply that the
Operators are precluaea from doing other activities at the aiee. However,
activitiaa not specifically agreed to ana resolved by this Agreement ahall be
subjsct to separate notification pursuant to Fish and aame Code Sections 1600 et
seq.
2. The Operators propose to alter the streambed to construct concrete
channelization for 450 lineal feet, impact ins 0.4 acrea of stream. The project is
located at 865 Third Avenue in the City of Chula vista.
3. The agreed work includes activities aa.ociatad with No.2 above The project
area i. located in Telegraph Canyon eraat in .en Diago County Specific work areas
and mitigation measures are described on/in the plana and documents submitted by the
Operators and shall be implemented as propoaed unless directed differently by this
agr..ment.
4. The Operators shall not impact more than 0.4 acrea Of atream.
5. The Operators' submitted estimated cost of riparian habitat enhancement/creation
for 0.4 aCres is $30.000.
AT.T shall place $30,000 into a dedicated account with the City of Chula Vista
Thia money, plus all intsraat. shall ~ be uaed for the mitigation of this
project's impacts. The Operators shall submit auch documentation to the pepartment
prior to initiation of project construction and prior to any project impacts
occurring from the channelization project. .0 ;.pacts ahall Occur until the
Department receive a this docuaentatioD.
The &Ltisation ahsll be inatalled DO lat.r than rabruary 1, It,S.
6. The City of Chula Vista ahall aelect either option "a" or "b" in writing to the
Oepartment at the t~ of aigning tbi. Agr....nt.
a. The long-t.rm plan (draft mitigation plan with impacte, channelization design,
mitisation location and amount) for Telegraph creek Channel ahall ba aubmitted to
the Department for review and approval no later than 'eptamber 30, 1"4 by the City
of Chula Viata. The mitisation eball be inatalled no later than February 1, 1995,
and ahall include the mitigation for the 0.4 acres of impacts by this project,
applying the $30,000 plus interest in the dedicated account.
or
.
b. The City of Chula Vieta ehall mitigate off-site with 0 4 acrae of riparian
habitat enhancement/creation no later than F.bruary 1, 1995. The City ahall aubmit
a draft attigation plan for Department review and approval (including a map ehowing
the area for creation/enhancement, work proposed, revegetation, plant palette,
maintenance, monitoring, etc ) prior to initiation of projact conatruction and prior
to any projact impacta occurring frea tbe cbenn.liaation proj.ct.
7. The City of Chula Vista shall be r.sponsible for tha planning. installation,
mainteftance, monitoring and Bucceaa ot the mitigation for thie prOject.
B. Diaturbance or ramoval of vegatation shall not exceed the limits approvad by the
Department.
9. Installation of bridges. culverta, or other etructures shall be euch that water
flow ia not impaired Bottoms of temporary culverts ahall be placed at stream
channel grade and bottoms of permanent culverta shall be placea at or below .tream
channel grade.
~ J/'-';<~
~
~
"""
.
I'age -L of ...i...
STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDXTIONS FOR. NOTIFICATION NUMBER:
5-648-93
10. The operators shall not operating equipment in wetted areas (including but not
limited to pondad, flowing, or wetland areas) .
11. When work in a flowing stream ia unavoidable. the entire at ream flow shall be
diverted around the worK araa by a barrier, temporary culvert, or new channel.
LOcation of the upatream and downstream diveraion pointa ahall be approved by the
Department. construction of the barrier and/or the new chsnnel shall normally begin
in the downstream area and continue in an upstream direction. and the flow ahsll be
divarted only when construction of the diveraion is completed. Channel bank or
harrier construction shall be adequate to prevent seepage into or from the work
area. Channel banks or barriers ahsll not be made of earth or other sUbstancea
subject to erosion unless firat enclosed by sheet piling, rock riprap, or other
protective material. The enclosure and the supportive material shall be removed
when the work is completed and removal shall normally proceed from downstream in an
upstream direction.
.
12. Preparation ahall be made so that runoff from steep, erodible surfaces will be
diverted into atable areas with little erosion potential. Frequent water checks
shall be placed on dirt road a , cat tracks, or other work trails to control erosion.
13. Water contsining mud, silt or other pollutants from aggregate washing or other
activities shall not be allowed to enter a lake or flowing stream or placad in
locations that may be subjected to high storm flows.
14. Structures and aaaociated materialS not designed to withatand high seasonal
flows ahall be removed to areaa above the high water mark before such flows occur
15. All planting shall have a minimum of 80' survival the first yaar and 100'
surviVal thereafter and/or shall attain '5' cover after 3 years and 90' cover after
5 years for the life of the project. If the survival and cover requirement8 have
not been met, the Operators sre reaponsible for replacement planting to achieve
the.e requirements. Replacement plants shall be monitored with the same 8urvival and
growth requirements for 5 years after planting
16. spoil sitee shall not be located within a stream/lake, where spoil shall be
washed back into a stresm/lske. or where it will cover aquatic or riparian
vegetation.
l' Any equipment or vehicles driven and/or operated within or adjacent to the
"~L...",/l..k." ,,1...11 \:,,!: Chflcked and maintained deily, to prevcnt lC:1ko Of m:1toriala
that if introduced to water could be deleterious to aquatic life.
lB. Raw cement/concrete or washing8 thereof, asphalt, paint or other ooating
material, oil or other petroleum products, or any other aubstances whicr. could be
hazardous to aquatic life, resulting ~rom project related activities, ahall be
prevented from contsminating the soil and/or entering the watera of the atate Any
of thes. materiale, placed within or where they may enter a stream or lake. by
Operators or any party working under contract, or with the permission of the
Operator., shall be removed immediately.
19. Staging/storage area. for equipment and materials shall be located outaide of
the stream/lake.
20. NO debris, soil, ailt, sand, bark, slash, sawdust, rubbish, cement or concrete
or washings thereof, oil or petroleum products or other organic or earthen material
from any construction, or associated activity of whatever nature shall be allowed to
enter into or placed where it may be waehed by rainfall or runoff into. watars of
the State. When operatiOns are completed, any excess materials or d.brie shall be
removed from the wOrK area. No rubbish shall be deposited within 150 feet of the
high water mark of any stream.
.
~ /1-~7
.
"""\
page ...L of J-
STREAMBEP ALTERATION CONPITIONB FOR NOTIFICATION NUMSER: 5-648-93
21. The Operators sha~l comply w1th all 11tter and pollut10n laws. ~ll
contractors. subcontractors and employees shall also obey these laws and it sha~l be
the responsibility of the operator to ensura compliance.
22. No equipment maintenance shall be done within or near any straam channel or
lake margin where patroleurn products or other pollutants from the equ1pment ~y
enter these areas under any flow.
23. The OperatorS sha~l provi4a a COpY of thia Agreement to all contractora.
a~contractore. and tha Operators' project aupervieors. Copiea of tba Agreement
ahall b. r.adily availab~. at work ait.a at all tim-a during partods of activa work
and must be praeented to any Department personnel. or personne~ from another agency
upon de~nQ
24. The operators shall notify the Pepartmant. in writing, at l.ast five (5) days
prior to initiation of construction (project) aotivit1es and at 1.aMt five (5) daya
prior to c~l.tion of construction (projeot) activiti.S. Notification shall be
eent to the Department at 330 Golden Shore. Ste SO. ~ong Beach, CA 90802, ~ttn: ES
25. The Department reserves tbe right to ent.r the project site at any time to
ensure compliance with terms/conditions of this Agreement.
26. The Pepartment reserves the right to suspend and/or revoke this Agreement if
the Department determinea that the circumstances warrant. The circumstances that
could require a reeva~uatiOn include. bue are not limited to. the fo~lowing:
a. Failure to comply with the terms/conditions of thie Agreement.
b. The information provided by the Operators in support of the
~re.ment/NotifieatiOn is determined by the Dapartment to be incomplete, or
1naccurate. """\
c. When new information becomes availab~e to the Department representative(s) that '
was not known when preparing the original terms/conditions of this Agreement.
d. The project as dascribed in the Notification/Agreement has changed. or
conditions affecting fish and wildlife resources change.
CONCURRENCE
(Oparators' names)
California pept. of Fiah and Game
j1/.t~/ f{~
~1eff~
.d~~~t~
(signature
\~9t
( ate)
Jnvirn~M.ntal SOAcialiat lIt
(title)
II~~ -Mlf
(signatureI ( tel
~... 6 ~ .;,f~
(title)
~
~J:J-/3{)
.
.
.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
330 Golden Shore, Suite 50
Long Beach, California 90802
Notification No.5-766-93
Page J of ....L.
AGREBMBNT REGARDING PROPOSED STRKAK OR LAltE ALTERATION
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into between the State of California, Department of
Fish and Game, hereinafter called the Department, and John P. Liooit of ~
of Chula vista: 276 Fourth Ave.: Chula vista. CA 91910: (619) 691-5021: (619)
691-5097; State of California, hereinafter called the Operator, is as
follows:
WHEREAS,pursuant to Section ~ of California Fish and Game Code, the
Operator, on the 28th day of December,~, notified the Department that
they intend to divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or change the bed,
channel, or bank of, or use material from the streambed(s) of, the following
water(s): Lena Canyon Creek. tributarv to the Sweetwater River, San Diego
County, California, Section __ Township __ Range __'
WHEREAS, the Department has determined that such operations may substantially
adversely affect existing fish and wildlife resources including: sonabirds and
all aauatic resources and wildlife in the area.
THEREFORE, the Department hereby proposes measures to protect fish and wildlife
resources during the Operator's work. The Operator hereby agrees to accept the
following measures/conditions as part of the proposed work.
If the Operator's work changes from that stated in the notification specified
above, this Agreement is no longer valid and a new notification shall be
submitted to the Department of Fish and Game. Failure to comply with the
provisions of this Agreement and with other pertinent code sections, including
but not limited to Fish and Game Code Sections 5650, 5652, 5937, and 5948, may
result in prosecution.
Nothing in this Agreement authorizes the Operator to trespass on any land or
property, nor does it relieve the Operator of responsibility for compliance
with applicable federal, state, or local laws or ordinances. A consummated
Agreement does not constitute Department of Fish and Game endorsement of the
proposed operation, or assure the Department's concurrence with permits
required from other agencies.
This Aareement becomes
;~~i~~;~i~ci~b:~f~;t
of ~his Aareement.
effective the date of Deoartment's sianature and
1995 for oroieet construction only. This Aareement
for that time necessary to satisfy the terms/conditions
t
,
,t
J
~/9-J /
'J;:r
Page -L- of ....L-
~
STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION NUMBER: 5-766-93
I. The following provisions constitute the limit of activities agreed to and
resolved by this Agreement. The signing of this Agreement does not imply that the
Operator is precluded from doing other activities at the site. However, activities
not specifically agreed to and resolved by this Agreement shall be subject to
separate notification pursuant to Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 et seq.
2. The Operator proposes to alter the streambed to construct a gabion-lined
channel, 26' x 900', impacting 0.54 acres of stream. The project is located at
south of Bonita Road and east of Otay Lakes Road, and is bounded by Acacia Avenue to
the north and Fallbrook Court to the south.
3. The agreed work includes activities associated with No.2 above. The project
area is located in Long Canyon Creek. tributary to the Sweetwater River. San Diego
County. Specific work areas and mitigation measures are described on/in the plans
and documents submitted by the Operator and shall be implemented as proposed unless
directed differently by this agreement
4. The Operator shall not impact beyond a width of 26' or beyond a length of 900'
5 The Operator shall mitigate with the acquisition and enhancement of the 2 parcels
(total of 2 parcels is 2.5 acres; approximately I 25 a~res is wetlands) as described
in the submitted documents by Environmental Lana S~"UC10nS, dated August 31, 1994,
in a phone conversation with same, August 25, 1994, and in a phone conversation with
the Operator dated August 20, 1994.
The parcels are located near Rancho del Rey, adjacent to Otay Lakes Road, in the
City of Chula Vista.
The enhancement plan for the site shall be submitted for Department review and ~
approval (including a map showing the area for enhancement, work proposed, plant
palette, maintenance, monitoring, etc.) no later than December 31, 1994 and shall be
installed no later than February 1, 1995. Documentation demonstrating the site's
protection status (eg permanent biological open space easement) shall be submitted
to the Department no later than February I, 1995
It is understood that this mitigation site is serving as off-site mitigation for
three projects: 5-766-93 (this project) - 0.54 acres; 5-648-93 (Telegraph Canyon
Creek at Third Street with AT&T) - 0.4 acres; and 5-630-93 (Telegraph Canyon Creek
between Fourth Street and Hilltop Park) - 0.2 aCres. This leaves approximately 0 11
acres available as mitigation for a future project Any future projects shall be
subject to separate notification per Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 et seq.
6. Disturbance or removal of vegetation shall not exceed the limits approved by the
Department.
7. . Installation of bridges, culverts, or other structures shall be such that water
flow is not impaired, Bottoms of temporary culverts shall be placed at stream
channel grade and bottoms of permanent culverts shall be placed at or below stream
channel grade.
8. The Operator shall not operating equipment in wetted areas (including but not
limited to ponded, flowing, or wetland areas) .
.........
~/J~J;2
.
Page -1- of ~
STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION NUMBER:
5-766-93
9. When work in a flowing stream is unavoidable, the entire stream flow shall be
diverted around the work area by a barrier, temporary culvert, or new channel.
Location of the upstream and downstream diversion points shall be approved by the
Department. Construction of the barrier and/or the new channel shall normally begin
in the downstream area and continue in an upstream direction, and the flow shall be
diverted only when construction of the diversion is completed. Channel bank or
barrier construction shall be adequate to prevent seepage into or from the work
area. Channel banks or barriers shall not be made of earth or other substances
subject to erosion unless first enclosed by sheet piling, rock riprap, or other
protective material. The enclosure and the supportive material shall be removed
when the work is completed and removal shall normally proceed from downstream in an
upstream direction.
10. Preparation shall be made so that runoff from steep, erodible surfaces will be
diverted into stable areas with little erosion potential. Frequent water checks
shall be placed on dirt roads, cat tracks, or other work trails to control erosion.
11. Water containing mud, silt or other pollutants from aggregate washing or other
activities shall not be allowed to enter a lake or flowing stream or placed in
locations that may be subjected to high storm flows
12 Structures and associated materials not designed to withstand high seasonal
flows shall be removed to areas above the high water mark before such flows occur
.
13. All planting shall have a minimum of BO' survival the first year and 100'
survival thereafter and/or shall attain 75' cover after 3 years and 90' cover after
5 years for the life of the project If the survival and cover requirements have
not been met, the Operator ia responsible for replacement planting to achieve these
requirements Replacement plants shall be monitored with the same survival and
growth requirements for 5 years after planting.
14. Spoil sites shall not be located within a stream/lake, where spoil shall be
washed back into a stream/lake, or where it will cover aquatic or riparian
vegetation.
15. Any equipment or vehicles driven and/or operated within or adjacent to the
stream/lake shall be checked and maintained daily, to prevent leaks of materials
that if introduced to water could be deleterious to aquatic life.
16. Raw cement/concrete or washings thereof, asphalt, paint or other coating
material, oil or other petroleum products, or any other substances which could be
hazardous to aquatic life, resulting from project related activities, shall be
prevented from contaminating the soil and/or entering the waters of the state. Any
of these materials, placed within or where they may enter a stream or lake, by
Operator or any party working under contract, or with the permission of the
Operator, shall be removed immediately.
17. Staging/storage areas for equipment and materials shall be located outside of
the stream/lake.
18. No debris, soil, silt, sand, bark, slash, sawdust, rubbish, cement or concrete
or washings thereof, oil or petroleum products or other organic or earthen material
from any construction, or associated activity of whatever nature shall be allowed to
enter into or placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff into, waters of
the State. When operations are completed, any excess materials or debris shall be
removed from the work area. No rubbish shall be deposited within 150 feet of the
high water mark of any stream.
.
~J70)
l~,
Page ...!... of ...!... "'"'\
STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION NUMBER: 5-766-93
19. The Operator shall comply with all litter and pollution laws All contractors,
subcontractors and employees shall also obey these laws and it shall be the
responsibility of the operator to ensure compliance.
20. No equipment maintenance shall be done within or near any stream channel or
lake margin where petroleum products or other pollutants from the equipment may
enter these areas under any flow.
21. The Operator shall provide a copy of this Agreement to all contractors,
subcontractore, and the Operator's project supervisors. Copies of the Agreement
shall be readily available at work sites at all times during periods of active work
and must be presented to any Department personnel, or personnel from another agency
upon demand.
22. The Operator shall notify the Department, in writing, at least five (5) days
prior to initiation of construction (project) activities and at least five (5) days
prior to completion of construction (project) activities. Notification shall be
sent to the Department at 330 Golden Shore, Ste 50, Long Beach, CA 90802, Attn ES
23. The Department reserves the right to enter the project site at any time to
ensure compliance with terms/conditions of this Agreement.
24. The Department reserves the right to suspend and/or revoke this Agreement if
the Department determines that the circumstances warrant. The circumstances that
could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. Failure to comply with the terms/conditions of this Agreement.
b. The information provided by the Operator in support of the
Agreement/Notification is determined by the Department to be incomplete, or
inaccurate.
c. When new information becomes available to the Department representative(s) that
was not known when preparing the original terms/conditions of this Agreement
d. The project as described in the Notification/Agreement has changed, or
conditions affecting fish and wildlife resources change.
"'"'\
,
CONCURRENCE
(Operator's name)
California Dept. of Fish and Game
(signature)
(date)
(signature)
(date)
(title)
Environmental Soecialist III
(title)
""""\
.
~ H-JY)Q-.3'l
~""I'J'I'I<I
. ~ il') I I
II '-'l....ll'.
'''_ "...; l ,.). _~., ~
'-'
-:;
.
~u?-
~
0lY Of
CHULA VISTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
May 26, 199<4
PO-482
MI. Terry Dickcnon
Environmental S~slilt, ill
DEPAltTMENT OF FISH.u.."'D GAME
330 Golden Shore, Sui= SO
Lon& Beach, CA 90802
SUl!JECT: Streambed Alternation NotiflC1tion No 5-648-93
86S Third Avenue, Chula Vilta, CA 920~0
Dear M.s. Dicm-aon:
.
We have been worlcini with AT&T and their rcpresc:ntatives on the above mentioned project,
The project plans have been approved for construction and a i:rading permit is ready to be
iuucd. It u our unclerst&l1ding that AT&T will have to mitigate for the impacts cau~ by
constructini the concrete lined channel
The City of Chula Vista is currently worldne with your Department on plans to improve the
remainder of Te.lceraph Canyon Creek. in the vicWty of this project. Pacific Southwcst
Bioloi:ica1 Services. Inc. haJ been working with the City to develop ideas for mitigation of
anticipaU:d impacU wllli:h will occur with the construction of improvcmenU for the Telegraph
Canyon Crcclt.
AT&T would lih to provide the City with a cash bond to be wed in the mitigation of the
ovc:all Telegraph Canyon project in lieu of m.itlg:ltion for their individual projcct to provide
for the impa.cu caused by their project. This money ___'ill be used by the City in conjunction with
fundi buageU:d by the City for mitigation and/or enhancement work. The cash bond provided
by AT&T will be put in separa~ a.ccount '" that it will not be usod for other purpCl5e.\. We are
cu=tly in the early sta&~ of the desien fOT the City project and at the pn:xnt time do not have
fundin& .vv.ilAble for construction Therefore, it could be . number of ycan before the City
ptoj eet could a.ctu.a.lly be b l.lil t
Enclosed i. an catimate of the cost to restore an ~ of land in the Swcetwa.t:a" River prcpan:d
by Kyle Ince of Pacific Southwest BiolO~cal Service! Inc. TIlat estimate was for 0.4 a.c:I'U of
m.ititation. Therefore the $30,000 proposed by AT&T assumes a 1: 1 wetlands mi~ation with
no land acquistion fur the AT&T site. The City is willing to a=pt the fut\lre~nsibility for
AT&T's mitiration '" ione u the requirements do not axed tljc: value of the a..sh bond ph:s
acetuM int_..t....
,
.
.
M I?-J~
,
2'711 ,,"()III'~H ^'Jr.'Cr1lllA VISTA f:AI '~O'~NI"" ~l~lOI\t'I'Ql e~\.~'C'l:'>'
/'"
...... r !'j
I .1 11 ,11'1\." " _,I"
"..J..J_ I l:...>.......
-.I
-'
-""\
ATI
2
May 26, 1994
IfFiah and Game is in agrc.cmcnt with this proposal, AT&T I'CqUC3U that you to amend the
CIX.btinJ Sttcambed Alteration Permit to reflect the propow.
If this is a.ccepblble to Fish and Game, please let me know 10 that an Q8rttment can be prepved
to a.ssure that the money will be utiliz.ed for wetland. mitig~tion and to IWUfe lha1 the mitiiation
will nol cost more than the fundJ available from AT&T'. ca.sh bond. If you have any qu~tions
pl_... amtact Bill Ullrlch at 691-S261.
~~~
Deputy Director of Public WorbJ
ory Enilneer
WAUfB7-ATI'MIT
c:
Mario Oatm, AT&T
Tony Wonse&ki, Project Design Comultants
Kyle lnee, P&c:iEc Southwe!t Bloloj;lCAl S~, Inc.
~
'''''''\
~ /?~Jf
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
.
.
.
PC;; 4('7 Z-
AT&T
-
10/05/94
2" West Monroe
Phoenix, AZ 85003
The City ofChula Vista
Engineering Department
276 Fourth A venue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Clifford L. Swanson, City Engineer
Dear Mr. Swanson,
The propose of this letter is to set forth the teams upon which AT&T agrees to pay to the City of Chula
Vista ("City ") any and all costs incurred hy the City in connection with that certain Agreement Regarding
Proposed Stream or Lake Alteration Notification No. 5-648-93 ("Streambed Agreement") by and between
the California Department ofFish & Game, and AT&T Corporation (AT&T) and the City
I The City agrees to complete certain mitigation activities as required by the Streambed Agreement for
work being performed by AT&T on property located at 865 Third Avenue, Chula Vista.
2. AT&T has already deposited $30,000.00 with the City for use by the City in completing these mitigation
activities. To the extent that the actual cost of such mitigation exceeds this $30,000.00 amount, AT&T shall
be responsible for the payment of such costs, not to exceed $45,000. In the event that costs are estimated
to exceed $45,000, City agrees to (I) advise AT&T, (2) discuss solutions with Fish & Game; and (3)
proceed with additional work only after authorized to do so by AT&T.
3. In order to secure this obligation, AT&T agrees to post with the City a cash deposit, a Performance
Bond, or some other form of security acceptable to the Cil), in the amount of $15,000.00 within 30
calendar days from the date of this letter.
4. City agrees to require the seller of any property acquired for this mitigation work to represent and
warrant that there are no hazardous wastes or other contamination of the property.
5. City agrees that all mitigation work will be performed by independent contractors, based on competitive
bids. City will require all independent contractors to provide evidence of insurance for public liability,
personal injury and property damage, automobile liability insurance, as well as workmen's compensation
and employers liability in amounts typically required by the city AT&T will be named as an additional
insured to be provided with notice of cancellation.
6. AT&T agrees to protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City and any and all of the City's
employees or officials from and against any and all damages, liabilities or costs (Including attorney's fees)
which may arise in connection with the City's conduct of the mitigation activities described herein;
provided, however, that AT&T is not required to indemnify City against damages resulting from its own
negligence.
7 If deemed necessary by the City, AT&T agrees to enter a more detailed agreement to memorialize its
obligations set forth herein.
~(~
~
I-
~/I/ 37
.
AGREEI'1ENT FOR PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERH
AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
Escroyv No
Opening of Escrow
,1994
To' Grossmont Escrow C(I ("Escrow Holder")
4757 Palm Avenue
La Mesa, California 91941
At tenti on: Norma Verbeck
ThiS Agreement for Purchase of ReBl Property and Escrow Instructions
(" Agreement ") is dated as of September 26, 1994, for reference purposes
only. and is by Bnd tletween Bonita Long Canyon, a General partnerst'lip,
MeJlillin Development, General Partner ("Seller") and Hie City of Chula
Vista ("PByor") with Tt1e Environmental Trust receiving title to HIE'
property.
RECITALS
. A. Seller H; Hie owner of c.ertain reBl property, 10cBted in the City of
Chula VistB, San Diego County, Califor-nia, consisting of two parcels Hlat
total BPproxlmately 2.47 acres (the "Property")
6 The Environmental Trust, tnc, a California non-profit benefit
corporation (the "Environmental Trust") will help with negotiating with /"
the CalifornIa Department of FIsh I>. Game (the" Agency") for Clcceptance
by said agency of the Property, os on environmentCll wetland open space
preservE' in satIsfaction of certClin off-site mitigatlon requIrements of
the Payor. The Environmental Trust will toke title directly from the
seller to MId end menage the property in perpetuity.
C. Peyor desires to buy end Seller desires to sell the Property for
wetland mitIgation, beIng Assessor's Percel Nos 593-140-13 end 14. A
legal description will be submitted to Escrow Holder by Seller prIor to
Close of Escrow.
.
pege 1 of 14
~ .2.3 --? J1~) J
"
..2
TERI'l':, AND rOND IT IONS
"""\
I PURCHASE AND SALE OF THE PROPERTV
1 I Purchase Price Subject to the terms and conditions of this
Agreement, Payor agrees to pay Seller a purchese price of Twenty
Ttiousand Dollars ($20,00000) ("Purchase Price"), and Seller agree~. to
sell to tI"itJ Environrnental Tru~;t, the Property
1.2 DeDosit blJ PalJor. Payor s~lall deliver to Escrow Holder
ImmedIately upon OpenIng of Escrow, a city Of Cl1ula VIsta cl"leCk for
$2,50000 ("Deposit") which sum sl"lall be held by Escrow Holder for tM
benefit of Payor TM Deposit S~Hlll becorne non-refUndat,le as liquidated
damages pur~.uant to Section 64 of this Agr-eement, unless this Agreernent
has been ter-rninated by Payor pur~.uant to itE. terrns If Escrow closes, t~le
Deposit will tie applicable to the Purchese Price
2 OPENING OF ESCROW
Escrow Stlall be deemed open 'NI"len a SIgned copy of tl11E. Agreernent """"
is delivered to Escrow Holder
3 CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO PAVOR'S FERFORI'lANCE.
The Obligation of Payor to pay for the Property Is SUbject to the
satisfaction of all the conditions set forHI below (inclUding the approval
of certein matters) within the tIme perIod specifIed, If any, If any of
these conditions ere not satisfIed within the applicable time period
provided below, If any, or prior to the Close of Escrow (inCluding any
extensions) If no time period is specified, Payor may terminflte this
Agreement under pflrflgraph 6.2. Pflyor may wfllve In writIng any or all of
the conditions, in whole or In part.
3 I Approval of TItle Report
3.1 I The Envlronmentfll Trust will receive a current
Preliminary Title Report on the Property issued by Commonwealth Title
Insurance Company ("the Title Company"), Order No ("tl18
Title Report") ""ithin ten (I 0) dElY~, after receiving the Tit Ie Report, the
Page 2 of 14
l
~)~-1/C
.
.
Environmental Trust may disepprove the THle Report by written notice to
Seller ("Notice of Defect") specifying the matters shown in the Title
Report, if any, VI'hich are disapproved by the Environmentel Trust
("Disapproved Exception(s)") and stating the specific reason for eac~1
disepproval The fa11ure of Seller to receive the Notice of Defect within
the ten (10) dey peri od shall be conclusively deemed to constitute the
Environmentel Trust's approvel of the THle Report.
3 1.2. Within five (5) days after receiving a Notice of Defect,
Seller shall deliver to the Environmentel Trust notice as to whether Seller
will cure the Disepproved Exception(s). If Seller w111 not cure the
Disapproved Exception(s), Payor may terminate Hcro'VI' by delivering to
Seller written notice within the (:') days after payor's receipt of Seller's
notice in wl"lich cese, any monies, instruments or documents delivered to
Escrow Holder and/or Seller by Payor shall be returned to Payor
313 If Seller notifies tl)e Environmental Trus;t in writing,
as provided eMve, thet it w111 cure the Disapproved Exception(s.) end
Seller fails to cure the Disepproved Exception(s) by Close of Escrow, after
us;ing best efforts to do so, Payor, in addition to any other remedy
availeble at law or equity, may elect to cancel Escrow Notwithstanding
any other provi si ons in thi s Agreement, if Payor el ects to cancel Escrow
as provided in this Agreement, Seller and/or Escrow Holder shall return to
Payor any monies, im;truments or documents delivered to trlem,
respectively, under the terms Of HliS Agreement.
3 1 4. A Dis;approved Exception specified in a Notice of Defect
shall be considered to have been cured if the T1tle Compeny shall agree to
issue the Title Policy described in paragraph 5 4, without the matter being
reflected as an exception.
3.2 6i010QiC~1 survev. The Environmental Trust shall have thirty
(30) deys from the Opening of Escrow to obtain and review a biological
survey of the Property so as to determine the suitability of the Property
for mitigation purposes. The Environmental Trust shall notify Escrow
Holder in writing 6S to epproval or disapproval of the biological survey
within such thirty (30) day periocl.
. 33 Government AcceDtance. Prior to the Close of Escrow, Payor
Page 3 of 14
~ /?-L/j
sl'lall otltain a determination from the Celifornia Depertment of Fisrl t.
Game that Hie Property will be accepteble as (1) dediceted r1errnanent """
open space and (2) that the Property satisfies Payor's requirement~ to
provide off-site wetlend mitigation as stipulated in the issued 5treamt'ed
Alteration Permits Numbers 5-648-93 (the AT&. T proJect), 5-530-93
(Telegr-aph Canyon Improvements) and the Gabion Chennel Long Canyon
under Initial Study Number 94-18 Payor shall notify Escro'w Holder in
writing as to approval or disapproval of this condition.
34 Issuance of Title Policy. The Title Company shell be in a
position at Close of Escrow to issue the Title Policy described in
pare graph 54.
35 Deliveru of Documents. Seller shell heve Signed, acltnov'lledged
al"lI:1 delivered all documents and instruments to Escrow Holder as required
in peragraph 5 3
4 CONDIT IONS PRECEDENT TO SELLER'S PERFORMANCE
The obligetion of Seller to sell the Property is subject to the
setisfaction of all conditions set forth below within the time period 1
specified If any of these conditions ere not satisfied witl1in the
applicable time period provided below, Seller may terminate this
Agreement under paragraph 6.2 Seller may waive in writing any or all of
the conditions, in whole or in part, with prior notice to Payor No waiver
of a condition shall constitute a waiver by Seller of any of its rights or
remedies, at law or in equity, if Payor shall be in default of its covenant~"
repre~;entations or warranties under this Agreement
4.1 Delivery of Documents. Payor shall have signed,
acknowledged and de11vered all monies, documents and instruments to
Escrow Holder as required in paragraph 5.2.
5 CLOSING OF ESCROW
5 1 Closinr;J Date
5 I 1 Escrow shall close on or before December 1, 1994 or
within 15 days following the receipt of the approvals set out in paragrapt"1
Page 4 of 14
""'"
~ /9-1)-
.
.
.
33, if tho';e approval s heve not been received pri or to DecemtJer 1, 1994
5 1.2. The terms "Close of Escrow", "Closing Date" end/or
"Closing" are u~;ed in this Agreement to mean the time the Grant Deed 1S
filed for record by Escrow Holder in the Office of the San Diego County
Recorder
52 Denosits to be made blJ PalJor:
At or before 12:00 o'clock noon on the last business day
immediately before Close Of Escrow, Payor shell del1ver to Escrow Holder
5.2 1 Immediately avallatlle funds in an amount equal to the
Pur-c:hese Price, le~,s any depclslt held by Escrov\" Holder
5.2.2 Any additional funds and/clr Instruments (~,lgned end
ac~:nowledged by Payor, if approprIate) as mey be nece~,sary to comply
with thIs Agreement
53 DPDOSitS to be made blJ Seller.
At or before 12'00 o'clock noon on the last business dey
Immediately before Close of Escrow, Seller shell del1ver to E~,crow Holder
53 1 A Grent Deed ("Grant Deed") of fee SImple SUbject to
condition subsequent that if the Environmentel Trust ever dissolves, the
title will go the California Department of Fish and Game with covenants
of Open Space, in a format ecceptable to Payor, signed and acknowledged
by Seller, conveying the Property to The Environmental Trust and SUbject
to matters shown in the Title Report;
53.2. Covenants, provIded, sIgned and acknOWledged by the
Trust and acceptable by Payor, that restrIct the use of the property for
Open Space, held, operated and maIntaIned to the same standards currently
set for the City of Chula VIsta Open Space, In Perpetuity that shall be
recorded concurrently wIth the Grant Deed, and
5.3.2, Any edd1tlonal funds and/or Instruments (signed and
acknowledged by Seller, if approprlete) as may be necessary to comply
Page 5 of 14
~ Ji-,t/)
l,k'
with t.hi~. Agreement
"""\
5 4 Title Policy
5 4.1 At. Close of Escrow, the Title Company shell issue end
deliver to The Environmentel Trust, with e copy to Seller and to peyor, its
C.LT.A. Owner'~. policy of title insurence with lietJllity in ttle amount. of
the Purctl8se Price, covet-ing ttle Property and insuring fee simple title t.o
the to Open Space vested in The Environmental Trust, free of
encumt1rances, except.
(e) All nondelinquent generel fmd special real property
taxes end a~;sessment.s and any supplement.al ta;<:es (peyor is tel: exempt.
propert.!d non-as~;e~.sed at close no proration of t.a/:es),
(tl) Any senior eesements, encumt1rances, covenents.,
condit.ions, rest.rictions, reservetions., right~.-of-'Nay and oH,et- rnat.ters of
record of whatever kind or nat.ure as ~.M'Nn on n,e Title Pepor-t. under
peragraph 3 1 atlove es epproved tJy Payor, end
(c) Cit\.! of Chule Vl~;ta eesement. for drainege end
drein;:lge and management ees;ement
~
6 TEP1'11NATION AND CANCELLATION OF ESCPO'lI'
6 1 If Escrow feils to close 'when and as provided in pereQreph 5 1
of this Agreement, Escrow shell tJe canceled upon wrltten notice t.o
Escro\'1' Holder from either Payor or Seller Except as otherwise provided
in peragraph 54, Escrow Holder is instructed to return all funds and
documents then in Escrow to the party depositing the same with Escrow
Holder Terminetion of this Agreement and cancelletion of Escrow, as
provided in this Agreement, shall tJe irrevocatJle tJy either party without
prejudice to whatever legal rights Payor or Seller may have against each
other erising from this Agreement,
5.2 If any condition referred to in this Agreement which is sutJject
to the approval tJy either Payor, Seller or a third party is disapproved or
deemed di~.approved in the manner provided for in t.his Agreement, ttl8t
party may elect to terminate Escrow and all otJligations of the part.ies
Page 5 of 14
"""\
~ J9~~:I
.
.
.
under nli~. Agreement st'lall terminate, and nei nler- party ~.hClll have any
furnler obligation to the oHler under nli~. Agreement Unle~;s otherwise
provided in this Agreement, Escrow Holder sl'lall return all funds and
documents then held in Escrow to the party depositing ttle funds and/or
documents, subject to the provisions of Section 64.
63 If the Close of Escrow fails to occur because of einler party's
default, the defaulting party shall be liable for all Escrow cancellation
and Title Company charges If Close of Escrow fails to occur for any other
reason, Payor and Seller shall each pay one-half (1/2) of any Escrow
cancellation and Title Company charges
64 IF Payor FAILS TO COMPLETE THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY'
AS PROVIDED IN THIS AGREEI1ENT FOR AN't' REASON OTHER THAN SELLER'~,
DEFAULT AND/OR THE NON-FULFILLMENT OF THE CONDITIONS TO PAVOR'S
PERFORriANCE SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPH 3 ABOVE, SELLER SHALL BE
RELEASED FROri ANV OF ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THIS AGREEI1ENT AND
SHALL BE ENTITLED TO RETAIN THE DEPOSIT AS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES, IT
BEING EXPRESSLV UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED BV THE PARTIES THAT THIS
SUri IS A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF THE EXTENT TO WHICH SELLER WOULD
BE DAMAGED BV PAVOR'S FAILURE TO CONSUr'1IiATE THIS PURCHASE, IN
LIGHT OF THE DIFFICULTY' THE PARTIES \iv'OULD HAVE IN DETERI'11NING
SELLER'S ACTUAL DAMAGES AS A RESULT OF SUCH A BREACH, THIS
RETENTION OF THE DEPOSIT AS LIQUIDATED DM1AGES SHALL BE SELLER'S
EXCLUSIVE REMEDV 6V INITIALING BELOW, THE UNDERSIGNED
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEV HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD THIS PARAGRAPH
64, AND THAT EACH PARTV WAS REPRESENTED 6'1' COUNSEL WHO EXPLAINED
THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS PARAGRAPH TO THEM.
PAVOR: ( )
t t,f (1."Mlf~~"~
7, ESCROW PROVISIONS,
SELLER. (
)
1}
7 1 Disbursement of Net Proceeds, From the net proceeds of sale,
efter payment of ell dellnquent property texes end payment of Seller's
costs, and peyment of those commissions provided for in this Agreement,
the balance of the net proceeds shall be peid by Escrow Holder directly to
Seller
pege70f14
~ /')~~~
,
,'"t
'1,'7
7.2 General Provisions Nol''I'/iUlstanding anyllw-II~ to Hie
contrary containecl in Hlis Agreement, Payor" and Seller agree to execute
the General Provi~,ions of Escrov\' Holder, if any, to the extent Hley are not
Inconsistent with the pr"ov1sions of this Agreement If Hlere Is any
Incons1~,tency between the provisions of those General Provisions and any
of the provisions of Hlis Agreement, the provision:, of U'lis Agreement
st-Iall control. If any requirements relating to the dutie~; or otll1gations of
Escrow Holder are unacceptable to Escrow Holder, or if Escrow Holder
requires additional instruction, the parties agree to ma~e any deletions,
substitution:; and additions as coun~;el for Payor and Seller sl1all mutually
approve and which do not materially alter Hie terms of Hils Agreement
Any supplemental instruct ions shall be signed only as an accommodation
to Escrow Holder and sMll not be deemed to modify or amend the rights of
Payor and Seller, as betv\'een Payor and Seller, unless those supplemental
instructions expresslu so provide
73 Payment of Costs. Seller sMll pay the documentary transfer
taxes, if any, the cost of the Title Policy, one-rlaH (1/2) of all other
Escrow costs and fee~, and any other costs customar-ily paid by Seller
Payor shall pay the cost for recording tl1e Grant Deed, if any, one-l"IfIlf
(1/2) of all Escrow costs, and any costs customarily paid by Payor
74 Escrow Holder Authorized to Comolete Blanks. If necessar\.j,
Escro'w Holder is authorized to insert the Closing Date as the date of the
Grant Deed
75 Recordation of Documents When all the conditions of
paragraphs 3 and 4 have been satisfied or waived, Escrow Holder shall
cause the recordable or filing instruments to be recorded in the Office of
the County Recorder of San Diego county, California
76 Performance by Escrow Holder. Escrow Holder IS to be
concerned only with those paragraphs under this Agreement where Escrow
Holder 1s g1ven Instructions to perform certain acts or with those
paragraphs where escrow holders generally and reasonably would be
expected to act.
Page 6 of 14
~ )/-y;)
"""'\
~
"""'\
.
.
.
B REPRESENTATIONS Arm 'viARRANTIES OF SELLER
In addition to any other representations and warrantie~, conteined in
this Agreement, Seller makes the following repre~:entetions end
werranties, each of which (i) is meterial and is being relied upon by peyor,
and (i1) is true in all respects es of the dete of nli~; Agreernent end shell
be true in all respec.ts es of the ClOSing Date
B I Authoritu to Sell. Seller repr-esents and werrents thet the
signing of this Agreement, its delivery by Seller to the Envir-onmental
Trust, Seller's performence and the transactions cClntempleted In this
Agreement have tleen duly authorized by the requisite action on the part of
Seller, end constltute velld end binding obligationS of Seller, enforceatlle
under the terms of thi s Agreement.
9 REPRESENTATIONS AND 'vI"ARRANTIES OF PAVOR
In addltion to eny other representations end werranties conteined in
this Agreement, Payor mekes the following representations and
werranties, each of which (1) Is materiel end is being relied upon by
Seller, and (11) Is true in all respects a~, of the dete of tl1is Agreement. end
st1all tie true in all respects as of the Closing Dete
9 I Authoritu to EluU peyor and the individuals signing thi~,
Agreement on bet!fllf Of Payor represent and werrant thet the signing of
this Agreement, its delivery by Payor to Seller, Payor's performance and
the transoctions contemploted In Hlis Agreement have been duly
authorized by the requisite action on the part of Payor, and constitute
valld ond t'inding obllg0tions of payor, enforceable under the terms of nlis
Agreement
9.2 r-lo Encumbron~e. poyor sholl neither encumber nor cause any
Hens to be created against the Property in eny way, nor record this
Agreement before Close of Escrow without the express prior written
consent of Seller
10
ENTRV ON PROPERTY
Unt 11 Escrow IS terminated, Payor and payor's employees and agents
Page 9 of 14
~ /c;~tj7
I
/
J
shall helve a limited license to enter upon Hie Property to conduct
reasonable engineering studies and soil compaction tests, so long a~. n,e
activitie~. do not impair the drainage of or otherwise damage the Propert!:!
After any entry, Payor shall immediately restore the property to the same
condition as before Payor entered on the Property This limited license
shali be deemed revoked upon termination of this Agreement peyor ~;helll
indemnify, defend end hold Seller harmless from and against ell claims,
loss, liability, damage or expense (including, without limitation,
attorneys' fees) arising from or releting to Payor's entry on the Property.
11 CONDITION OF PROPERTY
The Environmental Trust agrees (a) that it is acquiring the Property
on an "AS IS" basis and based onl y on its own I nvesti gat i on of the
Propert y, (b) thet Seller ha~. made no warranties, representet ions or
guanlntee~., expressed, implled or statutory, written or orel, concerning
the Property or any plens relating to the Property, and (c) that Seller ha~
made no werranties, representations or guarantees, with regard to eny
land use control, governmental limitation or restriction, or the absence
thereof pertaining to the Property, or 'VI'ith regard to the physical
condition of the Property, including any latent defect or subsurfece soil
conditions Seller further ma~;es no representations or warranties as to
any land use controls or other la\,\'s, rules, end regulations of any
governmental agency having jUrisdiction applicat,le to the Property. The
Environmental Trust shell tie solely responsible for complying with ell
land use controls and other le",~/s, rules and regulations
I"
.:..
ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES
All disputes arising under this Agreement will be resolved by
submis;sion to binding arbitration pursuant to the rules of the American
Arbitration Association (AAA) The parties agree thet arbitration must be
initiated within one (1) year after the claimed breech occurred and that
the fe1lure to initiete arbitration wlthin the one (1) year period
constitutes an absolute bar to the institution of any new proceedings The
aggrieved party can initiate arbltretion by sending written demand for
Arbitration by registered or certified mail pursuant to the aforesaid AAA
rules
Page 10 of 14
~ /l'-Y'Y
"""'
,
"'""\
"'"'
.
.
.
NOTICE BY INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELO'll, YOU APE AGREEING TO
HAVE AN't DISPUTE ARISING OUT OF THE MATTERS INCLUDED IN THE
"AF:EiITRATION OF DISPUTES" PROVISION DECIDED BY NEUH'AL
ARBITRATION AS PROVIDED BY CALIFORNIA LAW AND YOU ARE GIVING UP
ANY RIGHTS YOU MIGHT POSSESS TO HAVE THE DISPUTE LITIGATED IN A
COURT OR ..JURY TRIAL BV INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELOW, YOU ARE
GIVING UP YOUR JUDICIAL RIGHTS TO DISCOVERV AND APPEAL, EXCEPT AS
SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED IN THE "ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES" PROVISION,
YOU tlAV BE COI'lPELLED TO ARBITRATE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE
CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. YOUR AGREmENT TO THIS
ARBITRATION PROVISION IS VOLUNTARY
WE HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE FOREGOING AND AGREE TO
SUBtllT DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF THE t1ATTERS INCLUDED IN THE
"ARBITRATION OF 'DISPUTES" PROVISION TO NEUTRAL ARBITRATION
PA'tOR ( ) SELLER. (
U f,'~{n,3/11 1-c..J
13 COMI'lISSIONS/CONSULTING FEES
)
131 f.rokerflQE' Cornmission Seller egrees to pey e reel estete
broker e commission of Ten Percent (10%) of Hie Purchese Price, if and
only if Escrow Closes Seller directs Escrow Holder to pey 5% of seid
commission to Smith Properties and 5% to Independent Realtors of Sen
DIego, upon Close of Escrow
13.2 Trus;t fndowment Fee. Payor agrees to pay a one time fee of
$10,00000 to fund the endowment for the maintenance and menagement of
the property upon Close of Escrow. peyor directs Escrow Holder to pay
seid fee directly to The Environmentel Trust and Peyor is to heve no
continuIng ObllgetiOn or responsIbility as to the melntenance or
menegement of seld property.
14. GENERAL PROVISIONS
14.1 AssI\jnment. ThIS Agreement shell be bIndIng upon Clnd shell
inure to the benefit of peyor Clnd Seller end their respective heirs,
personel representetives, successors and esslgns This Agreement mey be
essigned by Peyor upon written notice to Seller and Escrow Holder
Pege 11 of 14
"
~ Ii -f7
/ ~-
'li
)
f
142 Att.on1E'Y~: Fees In eny ectlon t1e!.'tveen the pf.lrtle~. to enforce
f.lny of H,e terrns or provisiom. of Hlis Agreement or tl"ie Escrow, or in
connection wiH, tl"ie Property, tl"ie prevailing party in tl'ie ection SMll be
entitled, in adljition to damages, injUnctive relief or other relief, to its
reesoneble costs and expenses, including, without limitation, costs end
reesonable 8ttorneys' fees fixed by the court.
1
14.3 ADorovels and Not! ces. Any approvel, di sapproval, demend,
document or other notice ("Notice") which either perty mey desire to give
to Hie other party or to Escrow Holder must be in writing end mey be given
by personel delivery, Federel Express or by US mail registered or
certlfied mall, return receipt requested, to Hie perty to wl"iom the Notice
is directed at tl1e eddres.s of the pertw set fortl1 below, or et anw oHler
- -
address. as Hie perties mey leter designate, end will tie deemed to be
received upon personal delivery or deposit in the US meil
To Payor The City of Ctlula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chule vlste, CA 91910
Attn: City Manager
1
To Seller McMillin Development
2727 Hoover Avenue
National City, CA 92050
Attn: Don Knox
14.4 Intemretat Ion. ThIs Agreement stlall be construed under the
laws of tM Stete of Ca1ifornie. The parties consent to Ule jurisdiction of
the California courts wittl venue in San Diego County
14.5 litles and CaDtlons. Titles and captions are for convenience
only and shall not constitute a portion of thIs Agreement.
14.6 Gender and Number. As used in this Agreement, masculine,
feminIne or neuter gender and the singular or plural number shall each be
deemed to include the others where and when the context so dictetes
14.7 No Waiver. A waiver by either perty of a breach of any of the
Page 12 of 14
1
~ J/?--?J
,
.
.
cO\lenElnt.~" condition:: or agrt?t?ment~, under Hli~, Elgreerflen1 to be perforrfled
by the oHler Pi:ll-ty ~,hElll not. be con~;tn.led ElS a waiver of Elny succee,jing
breac.h of t.f"te same or oU1er covenant.s, agreement.s, re~,trictiom, or
condi ti on of Hli~, Agreement
146 1'10dificalions Any alteretion, cl18nge or modification of or to
this Agreement, in ordet- to become effective, shell be mede in writing end
in eactl instence signed on behalf of each party
14.9 Sp.verabilitlJ If any term, provision, conditic,n or covenent of
this Agreement or its eppllcetion to eny party or circumst.ence Shell be
held, to eny extent, invelid or unenforceeble, Hie remeinder of Hlis
Agreement. or tM applicetion of the term, proviSIon, condition or
covenent to person~, or circumstences other thEln those es to wl10m or
which it is held invalid or unenforceat,le shElll not be affected and shell be
velid and enforceeble to Hie fullest. extent permitted bl.llew
.
14.10 t1erQer of Prior AQreements end Undersl end! ngs. Thi s
Agreement conteins the entire understending between the pertie~, relating
to the transection contemplated by this Agreement All prior or
contemporeneous agreements, understandings, represent.etions end
stotements, orel or written, are merged in this Agreement. ond shell be of
no furU1er force or effect.
14.11 Time of Essence. Time is expressly made of the essence
with respect to the performonce by Payor and Seller of eoch end every
obligetion and condition of this Agreement
14.12 rountemarts. This Agreement mey be signed in multiple
counterparts which, when signed by all perties, shell each constitute e
bInding egreement.
14.13 ComDutotion of Time. The time in which ony act is to be done
under this Agreement is computed by excluding the first day (such os the
dey Escrow opens), cmd including Hie last day, unless the last day is 0
holidey or Saturdey or Sunday, end then that day is also excluded.
14.14 Other Dc.cuments Each party agrees to sIgn any oHler and
. furtMr instruments find documents as mflY be reesonebly necessary or
Page 1 3 of 14
~ /J~/'
E
"
':j
t'
, '
proper in oreler to accomplisl', the intent of Hlis, Agreement
14.15 Duration of Offer. Any obligation peyor mey heve uneler trlis
Agreement shall be renelereel null anel voiel if this Agreement is not
executeel by Sell er anel returneel to Payor on or before October 12, 1994.
PAVOR:
The City of Chula Vista
By:
01=-(&6/ 1(, 1-~J.
SELLER
Bonlte Long Cenyon, a Generel Pertners~lip,
McMi 11 in Development, General Partner
By
RECEIVER.
The Environmentel Trust, fI California Non- Profit
Corporat ion
By
Pege 14 of 14
~ /9-5)-
""'"
"""
"""
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
November 22, 1994
i
Honorable Mayor and City Council
John Goss, City Manager ~
Bob Leiter, Director ofLg ;!l,,/L
Resource Conservation Commission Actions Relative to Items 19 and 24 on
November 22 City Council Agenda
On November 21, 1994, the Resource Conservation Commission held a special business meeting
to consider two items which are scheduled for consideration by the City Council at your
November 22 meeting (copies of the draft minutes are attached):
Item 19
Item 24
(F7\n:c1l21.m)
Resolution Approving an Agreement with the Environmental Trust, Inc. and
Bonita Long Canyon Partnership for Purchase of Land as Wetlands
Mitigation for Two City Projects and AT & T's Project at 865 Third Avenue,
and Authorizing the Mayor to Execute Said Agreement on Behalf of the City
The Resource Conservation Commission voted 4-0 to approve the resolutioQ.
Report on Multiple Species Conservation Program Focused Planning Area
Alternative
The Resource Conservation Commission voted 4-0 to accept Alternative # 5
(Multi-habitat Planning Area Map) as an alternative, but requesting that each of
the alternatives be prepared with overlays on a vegetation map in the draft EIR
for final determination. The Notice of Preparation of the EIR shall be brought
to the Commission for input on the content of the draft EIR. This action does not
constitute endorsement of the fifth alternative.
/1~ 5)
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING
Resource Conservation Commission
Chula Vista, California
r~"~~ ..
H )j' t!, ~~
~j V\r~ J
j
7:00 p.m.
Mondav. November 21. 1994
Conference Rooms #2 and #3
Public Services Building
CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: The meeting was called to order at 7:04 by
Chair Burrascano.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT.
Chair Burrascano, Commissioners Hall, Fisher, and Marquez
Commissioners Guerreiro, Ghougassian
STAFF PRESENT:
Staff present: Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid,
Associate Planner Barbara Reid, Planning Director Robert Leiter,
Principal Planner Duane Bazzel
MSUC (Hall/Fisher) (4-0) to excuse Commissioner Ghougassian due to a business commitment.
PRESENT A nON OF PROJECTS
1. Recommendation to Council approving an agreement between the City, The
Environmental Trust, Inc., and Bonita Long Canyon Partnership for purchase of
land as wetlands mitigation for two City projects and AT&T's project at 865 Third
Avenue.
Associate Planner Barbara Reid introduced the project, advising the Commission that the
proposal was for the purchase of land to be utilized as off-site wetlands mitigation for three
drainage projects. She described the drainage projects, and the location of the proposed
mitigation property.
Mr. Jim Carter from Environmental Trust described the functions of the Trust, which maintains
and manages mitigation properties in perpetuity, therefore providing for the long-term viability
of the properties. Commissioner Marquez asked how the properties were selected; Mr. Carter
responded that preliminary biological surveys were done to determine appropriate sites for
mitigation. Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid pointed out the proposed mitigation
properties on an aerial map, noting the adjacent properties. In response to questions by
Commissioner Fisher regarding present habitat on the proposed mitigation sites, Mr. Carter
explained the current species on site as well as revegetative plans.
Ms. Reid noted that the proposed drainage projects being mitigated have degraded wetlands.
She indicated that while the Telegraph Canyon Creek project consists of temporary
improvements, the AT&T project is of a permanent nature and will include concrete
channelization due to engineering requirements related to water velocity.
Ms. Marquez asked if the one-to-one ratio had already been approved; Mr. Carter responded
that it had. Ms. Marquez asked about success criteria. Mr. Carter indicated that while the fmal
program was not yet in, the Department of Fish & Game would provide the fmal criteria. Ms.
/1--5'1
Resource Conservation Commission
-2-
November 21. 1994
Marquez indicated that she was still unsure as to how the mitigation properties had been chosen;
Mr. Carter reviewed the mitigation properties, indicating that the sites adjacent to Dtay Lakes
Road would abut existing open space areas in Rancho del Rey.
Commissioner Fisher stated that he was concerned with the proximity of two of the sites to Dtay
Lakes Road, stating that habitats near roads typically have lower densities of species than areas
further away. Mr. Carter responded that these properties would create more of a buffer for the
adjacent open space area, adding that the larger parcel could potentially be developed with three
to four residential units otherwise. Mr. Fisher asked if biological surveys of the mitigation sites
were available; Mr. Carter responded that they were not.
MSUC (Marquez/Hall) (4-0) to recommend approval of Resolution 17710
2. Recommendation to City Council/Planning CommillSion regarding MSCP plans for
further environmental analysis.
Planning Director Robert Leiter provided a general background on the Multiple Species
Conservation Plan process, reviewing the work conducted over the past three years by
consultants in conjunction with an MSCP working group to create standards and criteria and
identify core biological areas for an MSCP to be reviewed and approved by the U.S. Fish &
Wildlife Service. Mr. Leiter described the maps prepared which identified distinct areas of
biological resources and linkages throughout San Diego County. These maps are a part of the
draft MSCP framework plan which includes four alternatives.
Mr. Leiter pointed out and described the various maps. He reviewed the first alternative, known
as the biologically preferred alternative, which includes approximately 187,000 acres of the most
important biological resources; the second alternative, known as the multiple habitats alternative,
includes 150,000 acres of various resources; the third alternative, known as the Coastal Sage
Scrub alternative, includes 90,000 acres focused on CSS habitat; and a fourth alternative,
submitted by the Alliance for Habitat Preservation (a group of major developers and property
owners), which presented heavy use of publicly owned lands and designated open space areas,
and included Miramar. Mr. Leiter noted, however, that the Navy had not agreed to be included
in the MSCP.
Mr. Leiter indicated that recently, the City of San Diego under Mayor Golding had presented
a fifth alternative plan which attempted to create a compromise between the other four. This
plan looks at publicly-owned lands which would be viable preserve options, and attempts to
refme the identification of individual jurisdictions' open spaces as well as biological resources.
In June, the Chula Vista City Council endorsed the proposed criteria for the fifth alternative, and
directed staff to assist in preparation of this alternative.
The evaluation process was reviewed; Mr. Leiter stated that an EIR will be prepared to evaluate
all five alternatives, and will quantify the strengths and weaknesses of each; at a regional level,
jurisdictions within the MSCP plan will then evaluate ways to fill in the gaps if necessary. Mr.
Leiter added that the EIR will include an economic analysis, and should be out by July or
August. After the plans have been completed, the framework plan will be adopted on a regional
/9~ fP"
Resource Conservation Commission
-3-
November 21. 1994
level, after which each jurisdiction will amend their General Plan and Zoning Ordinances as
needed to implement the MSCP.
Commissioner Marquez asked what will be protected by the proposed plans that is not already
planned for preservation; Mr. Leiter explained current discussion relating to the proposed San
Miguel Ranch project as an example of new preserve areas being planned, as well as plans to
create mitigation banks. Mr Reid added that Rancho del Rey had purchased 360 acres of
O'Neal Canyon for off-site mitigation. Mr. Leiter stated that the new plan will make many
reserve systems permanent, and will ensure the long-term fmancing and maintenance of preserve
systems. Commissioner Fisher asked if this plan would interact with SANDAG's; Mr. Leiter
responded that it would.
Mr John Brown of Dudek & Associates noted that Dudek is working with the County to identify
preserve areas, adding that SANDAG's and the County's plans will be consistent. Mr. Fisher
questioned the blank (white) spots within the County areas (east) on the City of San Diego's
proposed map. Mr Leiter stated that Ogden had performed the evaluation, and had presented
the maps based on their evaluation of biologically valuable areas. Mr. Brown concurred,
explaining the various models that had been used by Ogden, Dudek, and other consultants and
experts to arrive at the Habitat Evaluation model. He stated that the white areas referenced
probably had low concentrations of CSS.
Mr. Fisher expressed concerns that some species were not yet identified or well-researched.
Mr. Leiter pointed out that the white areas were not necessarily designated by the County's
General Plan for urban development, and that much is planned for low density and agricultural
usage. Mr Fisher questioned references by others to the map boundaries as "hard lines". He
felt that if the boundaries indicated were truly hard lines, with development unrestricted by
biologically sensitive areas outside of these lines, there was too much habitat outside that had
not been analyzed sufficiently. Mr. Leiter stated that he did not believe that the County would
adopt the map as shown with the intent to permit urban development in the white areas, but
noted that the question should be directed to the County. He added that staff could follow up
on this issue. Mr. Brown reviewed the process by which the boundaries had been defmed,
stating that he did not believe that the subject of hard lines was a serious issue at this point.
Mr Fisher also noted that it was difficult to get a feel for the areas depicted on the various
maps. Mr. Brown stated that SANDAG maps included acetate overlays that provided
clarification of the different resource areas. Chair Burrascano suggested that overlays be
provided to more accurately depict the various resources on one map for the Em review.
Commissioner Marquez expressed concern that Fish & Wildlife staff have not provided input
on the information presented and that it is unclear how that agency's staff members feel about
the issues. She stated that the agency's formal position will be unknown until the plan is fully
completed. Mr. Fisher asked about the "no project" alternative; Mr. Brown stated that it will
be presented, and would address current piecemeal mitigation. Mr. Fisher reiterated his
concerns regarding the lack of information presented for the white areas, primarily in the
easterly portions of the County, as it pertains to identification of potential species. Mr Leiter
responded that this plan would not preclude opportunities relating to the identification of species
in the future.
)9/5~
.
Resource Conservation Commission
-4-
November 21. 1994
Chair Burrascano questioned the areas where linkages do not exist between identified core areas
(e.g. at SR 125 crossing) She also pointed out that the revegetation taking place at the Otay
River Valley area is not depicted on the map.
Commissioner Marquez stated that she found the fifth alternative to be a far cry from the first
two alternative maps. She felt that resource-wise, the fifth map is lacking, as it shows land that
is already protected and does not seem to add much. Commissioner Hall felt that alternative #5
should be combined with the others somehow, and not omitted although it should not stand
alone. Commissioner Fisher stated that he felt that the overlays were necessary before he would
be comfortable voting on a recommendation. Mr. Leiter suggested that the commission could
make a recommendation to allow the process to move to the EIR stage, at which time the
Commission will have more information with which to make a judgement. He noted that any
motion could include an indication that the Commission is not endorsing a particular alternative.
MSUC (HalI/Burrascano) (4-0) to accept alternative #5 (Multi-habitat Planning Area Map)
as an alternative, but requesting that each of the alternatives be prepared with overlays on
on a vegetation map in the draft EIR. The Notice of Preparation of the Environmental
Impact Report on the MSCP shall be brought to the RCC for input on the content of the
draft EIR. This action does not constitute endorsement of the fifth alternative.
Mr. Leiter advised that more information on this project would be brought to the Commission
prior to review of the draft EIR.
STAFF COMMENTS
Mr. Reid advised that the next regular meeting would be December 12, 1994 rather than
November 28, and that there would not be a meeting on December 26.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9.13 p.m.
Patty Nevins, Recorder
J'l~?
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
SUBMITTED BY:
Final Review of the Growth Management Oversight Commission's
(GMOC) 1993 Annual Report, and Consideration of Work Program
Responses for Implementing Report Recommendations
Director of Planning ~{
CRy -rIP
(4/Sths Vote: Yes_NoX)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
On May 26, 1994, the City Council held a workshop to consider the Growth Management
Oversight Commission's (GMOC) 1993 Annual Report regarding compliance with the City's
Quality-of-Life Threshold Standards. At that workshop, Council received and discussed the
Report, and directed staff to follow-up with a work program on the actions recommended by the
GMOC. Staff has completed that follow-up, and is returning to Council with a work program
report.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council,
1. Adopt the 1993 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations contained therein;
2. Direct staff to implement those recommendations in accordance with the work program
responses presented in Attachment C; and
3. Approve the attached Statements of Concern and cover letters for signature and issuance
by the Mayor regarding the Water and Air Quality Thresholds as presented in
Attachment D.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
At the May 26, 1994 workshop, the Council undertook considerable discussion with GMOC
regarding the conclusions and recommendations of their 1993 Annual Report on Threshold
Standard compliance. Given the thoroughness of the Report, and the number and diversity of
recommendations, staff recommended that Council accept the Report and direct staff to follow-
up with an evaluation and report on work program actions necessary to implement the various
recommendations of the GMOC.
,1#,/
t;
'"
Page 2, Item ~()
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Council gave that direction, and on June 16, 1994, staff of affected departments initially met to
review the recommendations in greater detail, and to discuss the needed work program input.
Since that time, staffs of the Public Works 1 Engineering, Planning, Police, Fire, Library, and
Parks and Recreation Departments have further evaluated GMOC recommendations relevant to
their department, and have prepared work program responses. A summary of those responses,
along with any necessary Council actions is contained in Attachment C.
As can be seen through review of Attachment C, it has been determined that many of the
GMOC's recommendations can be implemented through existing, ongoing work efforts of the
individual departments, and/or through the course of those department's normal annual threshold
evaluation and reporting efforts to the GMOC.
There are, however, several recommendations where implementation involves project efforts
which fall outside the scope of annual GMOC reporting activities, and thereby require further
consideration as to the timing of their completion in responding to the GMOC. Those efforts
are indicated on Attachment C and include Transportation Phasing Plan (TPP), TransDIF and
related Growth Management Program (GMP) monitoring and phasing policy updates (item 10.1,
pg. 10), and preparation of a Greenbelt Master Plan (item 11.3, pg.ll). Staff of the Public
Works Department, Engineering Division will be submitting a CIP proposal for budget
consideration in Spring 1995 to undertake the TPPITransDIF updates. The Planning Department
will similarly be preparing work programs for Council consideration in early 1995 regarding the
GMP monitoring and phasing policy updates, and preparation of a Greenbelt Master Plan.
In accordance with Council's fInal adoption of the GMOC's 1993 Annual Report and
recommendations, it is now appropriate to authorize issuance of the Statements of Concern to
the two local water districts and the Air Pollution Control District. Staff has prepared draft
cover letters and statements for issuance by the Mayor as presented in Attachment D
FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time. Fiscal impacts associated with any additional work
programs necessary to implement GMOC recommendations will be identified when those work
programs are brought forward for Council consideration.
Attachments:
A. Minutes of the May 29, 1994 City Council / GMOC workshop meeting.
B. Chairman's cover memo and 1993 GMOC Annual Report.
C. 1993 GMOC Recommendations / Proposed Departmental Work Program Summary
D. Cover letters and Statements of Concern for the Water and Air Quality Thresholds./V4r S~ItNIJJ t>
(A:\GMOC-93\FWRKPROG .Ai3)
o?~~;"'/,J.tJ -II
.
'.
b:-
c.""" e.,e-, ,-
/~)
="'U
.
ATIACHMENT A
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF SPECIAL WORKSESSION
May 26, 1994
.
.
./ :2&~3
'.
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL WORKSESSION/MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Thursday, May 26, 1994
4:18p.m.
Council Conference Room
Administration Buildini
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROLL CALL:
PRESENT:
Councilmembers Horton (arrived at 4:19 p.m., left at 5:02 p.m. and returned
at 5:43 p.m.), Moore, Rindone, anJ Mayor Nader
OMOC ~embers Hubbard, Hyde, Peter, Dull, and Kell
ABSENT:
Councilmember Fox
OMOC Members All"", Annbrust, Martin, and Langius
ALSO PRESENT:
John D Ooss, City Manager and Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk
.
2. REPORT REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT
OVERSIGHT COMMISSION'S (GMOC) 1993 ANNUAL REPORT. The OMOC's 1993 Annual Report on the
City's compliance with the Quality-of-Life Thresholds Standards focuses on the period from 7/1/92 to 6/30/93.
Issues identified in the second half of 1993 and early 1994 are also discussed. The Chainnan's cover memorandum
to the Report provides a summary of the OM OC's findings and recomm""dations. Staff recommends Council: (1)
Accept the 1993 OMOC Annual Report and recommendations contained therein; (2) Direct staff to rerum to Council
in July with an analysis and work proiram to undertake actions necessary to implement those recommendations as
presented; and, (3) Direct staff to prepare the necessary Statements of Concern for issuance by the Mayor re,ardin,
the Water and Air Quality Thresholds. (Director of Planning)
Commissioner Hubbard stated it was their overall observation that growth had not impacted the levels of service
within the City. The Commission found that schools, lihraries, sewer, drainaie, fiscal, traffic, and parks and
recreation services were all within compliance, of the original thresholds as established by Council. The police and
fire emergency services were not in compliance but the OMOC did not feel that ,rowth bad been responsible for
Dot maintainin, the level of compliance. They recommended that consideration be liven to writinll Statements of
Concern to water and air quality service agencies. He then reviewed the individual recommendations for the
individual areas of service.
Police and Fire Threshold:
.
Mayor Nader questioned whether the Commission had made a specific recommendation for the threshold standard
for police response.
Commission Hubbard responded that the Commission fell that once an improved reporting system was in place that
consideration to a revised threshold should be considered. That would only be if a revised system was implemented.
They were not sayin, that the existing threshold was bad, ,ood or indifferent, but that it was implemented in 1987
and it millht be time to look at it.
Councilmember Rindone stated there was a small percentage of calls for fires in relation to calls for other services
and questioned if there bad been consideration to usin, a weighted factor in evaluation of services.
Commissioner Hubbard responded that it had not been considered.
* * * Mayor Nader left the meeting at 4:48 p.m. * * *
/ c:2(}-!
Minutes
May 26, 1994
Page 2
Ed Batcbelder, Associate PI8JUler, stated last year during GMOC review there had been discussion as to whether
or not that thresbold may ultimately be split into separate fire and emergency medical services components. It was
agreed at that time, based on ongoing changes in the region, to wait two to three years before considering it again.
"'""\1
Water and Air Oualitv Thresholds:
Councilmember Moore questioned bow Otay Water District could do more as all they did was buy and sell water.
Commissioner Hubbard respuoded that any effort that could be made on the part of any water district in terms of
reclamation and storage would be supported.
Schools Threshold:
Councilmember Rindone questioned whether the schools threshold included the community college.
Commissioner Hubbard responded the GMOC did not review the community college.
Mr. Batchelder stated at the present time the threshold standard only applied to elementary and secondary schools.
MS (Rindone/Moore) to have the schools threshold standard (next year) apply to community colleges, so all
levels of education would be reviewed, especially as appliCllble to air pollution.
Counoilmember Rindone stated if there was no accommodation for a transit center the increased population of the
eollelle would be a llreat contributor of air pollution.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Moore, agreeable to the Maker of the Motion) to direct starr to review and
present Council with the pro's and con's of adding community colleges to the schools threshold.
"'""\
Councilmember Moore stated be did not like to see an excellent program grow, he liked to see excellent programs
stabilize if they were doing wbat they were supposed to do.
VOTE ON MOTION, AS AMENDED: approved 3-0-2 with Fox and Nader absent.
Councilmember Moore questioned the use of "full mitigation" and the implication that the City was the reason the
scbools were overcrowded. The City should not be the bad guy that was trying to solve the schools problems when
the school was not solving its own problems. The past history of actions taken by the schools should be reviewed
to see wbat the impact was on overcrowding. It was not the City's responsibility to "fully mitigate" impacts. He
had a major problem in the way scbools were financed.
Robert Leiter, Director of PI8JUling, stated staff had used the Source Point study to address a number of the issues
that had been raised. Staff focus bad been to get the study completed and the information out to both the Council
and two district boards whicb would allow them to look at the policy implications and trade-offs.
Councilmember Rindone stated there was not a school in the City that did nol have more classrooms located on their
property than five or ten years ago. Tbe other eoncern was that the options for expansion and innovalion was
limited to two approacbes, i.e. Mello Roos Districts or bonds which required a 2/3rd's Vole. Many of the schools
were between thirty to fifty years old and were beyond Iheir reasonable life expectancy.
Councilmember Horton fell il was important to support comment #4, i.e. support of Proposition 170, to reduce the
Z/3rd's VOle to a simple majority.
""'"
~ 02C-Y;
.
..;
'.
Minutes
May 26, 1994
Page 3
Commissioner Hyde slated the two most prominent thresholds in the minds of the citizens in the community were
traffic and schools. The recommendation was really sponsored by the school districts and the GMOC supported
them. Because the school districts in the real world were not able to mitigate the problem themselves, the
recommendation said not that there be no rezoning, but that the schools were over capacity and if the City was going
to rezone property to a higher density and generate more students to serve the interest of a developer, it was only
fair that the developer be required to mitigate or provide for capacity for those students his project would generate.
The Commission did not feel that was an unreasonable position to slart from. Everyone agreed the burden should
be on the schools, developer, Slate, and City.
Councilmember Horton slated 'no one would discount the recommendations regarding the schools but she felt the
City needed to work with the school districts regarding the issue. She felt the districts also needed to look at
different alternatives, i.e. multi-year tracking, etc, not just have the burden on the City.
. . . Mayor Nader returned at 5:02 p.m. and Councilmember Horton left at 5:02 p.m. · · ·
Mayor Nader felt 'full mitigation' would mean mitigation that would reflect the true impact of a development on
the school system. Therefore, if there were a certain number of people that moved into a development that were
not new impacts, and should be excluded from the formula utilized to 'fully mitigate' a development.
Mr. Batchelder stated staff had been looking at mitigating 'net' new increases as a result of zone changes.
Librarv Threshold:
.
Councilmember Moore questioned the rationale of tbe recommendation to review the Library Threshold.
Commissioner Hubbard responded that the curren I threshold was based on square foolage and it was their
understanding tbat library square footage may nol be important in the future due to advances in media.
Sewer Threshold:
No questions asked.
Drainalle Threshold:
Councilmember Rindone questioned if the GIS system would help to assist in the area of drainage.
City Manager Goss responded that was correct.
Youal Threshold:
.
Councilmember Moore questioned if the threshold dealt with the developers impact fees or the overall fiscal well
beiDg of the City.
Mr. Batchelder responded that recommendation 9.1, the annual review/update efforts performed for eacb of the
DIF's be expanded to also include a S-year projection of needs/revenues, based on the Planning Department's 5-7
year growth forecast, dealt with tbe D1F, 9.2, to refer the item 10 the Finance, Public Works and Planning
Departments for evaluation and report back to Council and GMOC, could begin to expand outside of the D1F.
-~CJ~?
Minutes
May 26, 1994
Page 4
""""\
Councilmember Moore stated the Commission was not to look al th< ov<rall w<1I being of the City, that was done
by the Council. He did not see that as part of the purview of th< Commission. Their task was related to the D1F,
i.e. did the City collect enougb, was it to mucb, was it spent for th< right purpose, etc.
Commissioner Hubbard stated wben they received the fiscal report from staff one of the questions asked was if the
one time monies were not available next year would services be impacted and the answer was yes. They were
ataling that the Council may want to look at the continued use of one time monies to maintain service levels so the
thresbolds were not violated.
Mayor Nader stated be felt the GMOC duties included in a gen<ral sense recommendations on growth management
policy. He interpreted the recommendation as not so much being r<lated to the overall bealth of the City, but to
a specific growth management aspect of fiscal policy. He ~ould support review of operating expenses as well.
Trame Thresholds:
Mayor Nader questioned if the Commission had looked at th< proposed improvements with the Palomar Trolley
project.
Commissioner Hubbard stated the major concern was thalth<r< had re..n a deterioration from Level "C" to Level
"0" over the last year at that intersection. Future projects were not reviewed by the Commission.
Mayor Nader questioned if there was any mitigation measure on Otay Lak<s Road.
Commissioner Hubbard responded there was no conversation regarding mitigation. but that it was an ara of concern
as the threshold levels were in jeopardy during certain times of th< day
""'"
Park.. & Recreation Threshold:
Councilmember Moore felltbat whatever land was left for in-filling for parks was probably not suitable. He fell
for recreation the City would be beller off by becoming full partners with th< high schools, under contract, to utilize
their facilities. The City should not only pay their fair share of operation and maintenance, but buy into the
program with upgrades to the facilities. He felt that would be more economical to th< City and help more people
in the community
Commissioner Hubbard that the Commission had recommended thatth< Park Impl<mentation Plan be pursued and
implemented as soon as possible. He fell Councilmember Moor<'s comm<nts were appropriate.
Mr. Batcbelder stated the Park Implementation Plan would be before Council towards the end of 1995. Work had
been started and it was estimated that the work would take tw<lv< to <ight<<n months as the work was being done
in-bouse.
Councilmember Moore questioned if the City bad the staff expertise to do the report in-bouse.
Mr. Goss responded that staff did bave the expertise and it was being done in-house with a team approacb. The
problem was a work load issue.
Mr. Leiter Slated staff would return to Council with a mid-term report dealing with some of the issues regarding
Ilandards and short term issues raised by the GMOC. Staff would deal with some of the issues before that twelve
month time frame.
Councilmember Moore stated bis comments were two years old regarding contracting with the school districts and
be felt something should be done. He wanted to s<< a contracl belw<<n th< <Iected officials of the two agencies.
""'"
?:2o-?
.
..,
..
Minutes
May 26, 1994
Page 5
Mayor Nader questioned if there were contracts with the schools receiving COBG monies.
Mr. Valenzuela stated the City had contracts with East Lake High School, Community Youth Center, Chula Vista
Higb Scbool, and were entering into a use agreement with the Otay Elementary Scbool. They were being done on
a site by site basis because eacb site bad various constraints and opportunities.
Mayor Nader stated Councilmember Moore's comments were directed toward one overall contract with eacb scbool
district that divided up the ability to make use of whatever facility was there and without that umbr~l!. contract
.etting into micro-management of eacb focility at each site, provide .eneric joint use to address the concerns
regarding the shortage of public parklands. .
Mr. Valenzuela felt that could be ICCOmplished.
. . . Councilmember Horton returned at 5:43 p.m. · · ·
Councilmember Rindone stated Council would be meeting with the tbree scbool districts and recommended that sucb
a contact be ploced <;>n tbe agenda for discussion. He felt the point was that it would provide continuity
Councilmember Moore referred to tbe Greenbelt Master Plan and questioned wbat tbe cbecks and balances were
for the Sweetwater River.
.
Mr. Leiter stated there were certain portions that were controlled by the County, but the western part lent itself to
more of an urban park setting. Staff was looking to see how new developments would relate to that as well as use
of the existing levy for bicycle trails.
Councilmember Moore felt the biggest issue to ensure optimum use was the coMection between Otay and
Sweetwater. He questioned if there was something reserved.
Mr. Leiter responded that in the General Plan there was a designation wbicb was then included in the Specific Plans
for those individual projects. He felt they should go forward witb more specific plaMing re.arding trails and other
amenities that would be in a greenbelt master plan. It would have to be coordinated witb the Multiple Species and
other planning being done for the larger open space in the east. Staff felt it should be pursued in the coming fiscal
year.
Mayor Nader questioned if Council took action on last years GMOC recommendation to amend tbe tbreshold.
.
Mr. Goss stated they bad DOl.
Mayor Nader felt it should be agendized for discussion in tbe future. There had been discussion last year about
the inclusion of joint scbool focilities and Otay Valley Rellional Park as part of the park plan that would be figured
into the determination of whether the City was meetinll that tbreshold. He questioned wbether it had been reviewed
if those types of focilities and land had been included in tbe calculation.
Mr. Batchelder alated that had not been done. That was part of the early Phase I oflbe Parks Implementation Plan.
Commissioner Hyde alated the General Plan included a comprehensive clescription of the Green Belt, but was
unaware of any existin. map that showed the Green Belt. He suggested that an overlay be developed that would
visually portray the Green Belt over the General Plan map.
Mr. Leiter alated that an overlay could be done, but staff felt there needed to be more expansion of the plan to
explain the locations of trails and details that could not be inferred from the General Plan. He recommended that
Council occept the report and direct staff to return witb a work program on follow-up to the octions recommended
by the GMOC.
.y ;20-~
Minules
May 26, 1994
Page 6
Mayor Nader queslioned if thaI meanl adopt the recommendations or acknowledge that the report had heen received.
"",,\1
Councilmember RiDdone recommended that Council receive the report and refer 10 staff for follow-up with a work
program on the aclions recommended by the GMOC.
. Dick Reynolds, SOS Garrell Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, General Manager, Sweetwater Authority,
commended the GMOC on their work and effort 10 understand water issues. They agreed wilh Ihe majority of the
Iindings. He then reviewed the slrenllths of the Sweetwaler Authority in water storage. He felt a dislinction should
be made by adding the San Diego Counly Waler AUlho,.;'Y. which was Ihe imported waler agency, 10 the chart
sbowinll the thresholds. It was the Counly and Melropolitan Water AUlhority that could nol always supply the waler
needed. Sweetwater Authorily had the facilities to cover up Ihe weaknesses of the importing alleneies. They had
nol purchased water for one and ooe-half years and did not plan on purchasing water for anolher one and one-half
years. They were also working on a demineralizatioo faeility'lhat would provide about 2S'IIi of their waler supply.
In future years he recommended thaI the GMOC and Council look al the strengths of the waler agencies.
3. REVIEW OF DEPARTMENTAL BUDGETS
as lime permits.
Personnel, Fire, and as many carry overilems
Mr Goss suggested Council review.the Nature Center (NC/BCT) budget due to a conflict with Ihe Direclor's
schedule for the next week.
MS (MoorelNader) to conceptually approve the NC/BCT's budget.
Councilmember RiDdone queslioned the percentage of cost recovery due 10 admissions.
Steven Neudecker, Direclor, responded staff had projecled $125,000 which would have heen Ihe first year of
projeclions for revenues, they were currently at $45,000. The general museum market in lourisl allraclions in San
Diego had reported an average 37'11i decrease in attendance due 10 the markel economy They hoped for a better
summer and slronger economy
"""'\
Councilmember RiDdone queslioned if staff had reviewed Ihe approach of package deals or memberships with other
allractions.
Mr. .Neudecker responded that staff was exploring Ihat with several other agencies.
* * * Councilmernber Horton left the meetinj( at S:SS p.m. * * *
VOTE ON MOTION: approved 3-0-2 wilh Fox and Horton absenl.
......
MSC (NaderlRindone) to continue the balance of the Redevelopmenl Agency agenda and Council agenda to
the Budget MeetinglWorkshop on June I, 1"4 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room. Approved 3-0-
2 with Fox and Horton absent.
ORAL COMI\WNICATJONS
None
.......
.
~ .20-1
.~
M mutes
May 26, 1994
Page 7
'.
OTHER BUSINESS
4. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTISl - None
5. MAYOR'S REPORTISl - None
6. COUNCn. COMMENTS. None
. ADJOURNMENT
ADJOURNMENT AT 5:56 P.M. to a Special Worksession/Meeting on Wednesday, June I, 1994 at 6:00 p.m. in
the Council Conference Room and thence to the Regular City Council Meeting on June 7,1994 at 4:00 p.m. in the
City Council Chambers.
Respectfully submiued,
BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk
by'
). \1.
Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy
,
.
.
0&~J()
ATTACHMENT B
1993 GMOC REPORT
~~tJ-//
..
.
..
MEMORANDUM
May 4, 1994
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Growth Management Oversight Commission
SUBJECT. 1993 GMOC REPORT
,
It is again with pleasure that the GMOC presents its 1993 Report to the Mayor and City
Council. The Commission members are sensitive to their responsibility to provide the
Mayor and Council with' a succinct report, consistent with adopted threshold standards,
In the process of providing orientation to new commission members, with regard to the
purpose and intent of the Commission, it was our perception that several of the thresholds
are due for review and possible revision. That perception was reinforced as we heard
from, and conversed with, City staff and external agencies providing reports to the
.commission. The need for change is based largely on the fact that; (1) the City's
population has grown from approximately 90,000 in 1985 to 147,500 today due to the
Montgomery annexation and growth, (2) the threshold standards are seven years old, and
(3) there have been significant technological advances which impact the delivery and
measurement of services. Therefore, the GMOC encourages the City Council to direct a
review of the Police, Fire, Air Quality, Library, and Parks and Recreation thresholds.
As an overview of the 1993 Report conclusions, the following identifies those thresholds
found to either be complying or non-complying, and provides a brief summary of pertinent
-' issues in each respective threshold area:
1. The City is in compliance with the following Thresholds:
Schools
Libraries
Sewer
Drainage
Traffic
Fiscal
Parks and Recreation
On the basis of the school districts' indication of sufficient capacity to house new
students, given the City's 12-18 month growth projections, the distripts were found
to be in compliance. The GMOC remains concerned, however, aboUt compliance
over the longer-term, and has therefore outlined in Its recommendations several
actions necessary to address continued overcrowding and future growth. The City
~ .2(}--JA
1.
Ai
,/
Hubbard/GMOC
-2-
May 4, 1994
1
and districts need to continue to work cooperatively to achieve full and equitable
mitigation of growth's impacts upon schools, particularly in western Chula Vista
where opportunities for expansion are limited due to existing development.
With the planned completion of the 37,000 square foot South Chula Vista Library,
the City will meet and surpass the library threshold. Significant changes are being
brought about in the present and future delivery of library services through the use
of technology. This technology has the potential to bring about profound effects in
citizens library access, and in the storage and retrieval of information. The GMOC
therefore feels it relevant and timely for the Library Board of Trustees to provide
input on the relationship of such changes to the library threshold standard.
Under the new San Diego Area Wastewater Management District (SDAWMD), the
City's future sewerage treatment capacity rights are not presently guaranteed as
they were under the prior Metro system. It is therefore being recommended that the
City retain its consulting team to guide the important decision to remain in, or leave
the SDAWMD, which must be made by July 1, 1994 That decision could
significantly affect the City's future approach to providing adequate sewerage
treatment capacity and water reclamation.
The GMOC continues to draw attention to the roughly 80 needed drainage
improvements west of I-80S, which under current funding conditions would take over ""'"
20 years to complete. Similar to the identification by the Engineering Department
of the present 15 top priority projects, the City needs to establish an ongoing annual
program of prioritization and funding to assure timely completion of all 80+ projects.
Such an effort is envisioned as necessary to ensure continued threshold
compliance.
The GMOC has identified 5 locations where potentially serious traffic threshold
compliance problems could occur within the next 5 to 10 years. Of those locations,
"H" Street both east and west of 1-805 continues to be of particular concern. It is
recommended that a focused study of these locations be conducted as described
in the report, with recommendations for proposed actions to ensure continued
threshold compliance over the longer-term. That report should be available to assist
the GMOC's review commencing in October, 1994.
~
,
The City has established a well-functioning Development Impact Fee (DIF) program
which has enabled maintenance of service levels commensurate with growth. The
GMOC, however, is concerned about the continued recession and ongoing State
budget cuts, and their implications to future staffing and service levels. In order to
identify those implications, it is recommended that a report be prepared to evaluate
the current reliance on one time revenues to balance the City's!:ludget, and to
identify the potential short range impacts to services if such revenues are not
available, and the current economic climate continues.
~
As endorsed by the City Council in 1992, the GMOC continues to encourage timely
~;<{}~/3
..
.
.
Hubbard/GMOC
.3-
May 4, 1994
adoption of a revised Parks and Recreation threshold standard to achieve 3 acres
of parkland per 1000 population both east and west of 1-805. The GMOC is
concerned that despite demonstrated need, no parkland has been added in western
Chula Vista since inception of the Growth Management programs in 1987. It is
recommended that the City complete and act upon the Parks Implementation Plan
(PIP) currently being prepared by staff. The PIP is crucial to the ultimate provision
of needed facilities and services, and to completion of a revised threshold standard
for adoption.
2. The City is not in compliance with the following Thresholds:
Police
The threshold for Priority I (emergency) calls for service (CFS) was not fully met for
the third consecutive review period, although the shortfall was slight. Overall, CFS
volume has risen by more than 20% in the last three years. Reports indicated that
the present record keeping systems do not enable data management which can
quantify whether these CFS increases are growth related. Without a good handle
on the patterns and other aspects of increased CFS, it is difficult for the Police
Department and the GMOC to determine whether threshold performance issues will
continue to exist, or how to best structure and manage police resources in
combating crime and maintaining appropriate service levels. It is therefore
recommended that the City Council support timely implementation of the proposed
Computer Aided Dispatch and Records Management System (CAD/RMS), to
provide for proper management of police resources, and to enable the GMOC to
identify and quantify growth's impacts on the delivery of police services.
FlrelEMS
Data indicates that the Fire Department has not met the minimum threshold
standard, however, other factors exist (beyond those originally included in
formulation of the standard) which alter the appearance of actual performance I
compliance. To resolve these inconsistencies, and the GMOC's concerns, it is
again recommended, as with police services, that the City Council support timely
implementation of the CAD/RMS system which is a joint proposal of the Police and
Fire Departments.
3. The GMOC recommends that the City Council issue Statements of Concern for the
following threshold standards:
Water
Despite increased coordination and cooperation between the City ana the two major
local water districts, the GMOC remains concerned about long-term water
availability, dependance on imported water supply, and the need for development
of adequate future storage, and reclamation and other alternative water sources to
-~ .:20-/7
J,j
:/'
Hubbard/GMOC
-4-
May 4, 1994
"'"""
meet the needs of future growth. Consistent with the many issues outlined in the
report, the Inter Agency Water Task Force (IAWTF) continues to provide an
excellent forum in which to address these matters of mutual concern.
Air Quality
Although the San Diego Region continued to experience improvement in overall air
quality during 1993, an acceptable level of air quality has not yet been achieved.
Implementation of the APCD's adopted Regional Air Quality Strategy (AQS) and its
various measures such as the TCM and TOM Plans, and a forthcoming Indirect
Source Reduction Plan are crucial to continued air quality improvement, and should
be encouraged and fully supported by the City. Additionally, and based on repeated
input from the APCD, it is recommended that the air quality threshold standard be
revised to achieve better coordination with the APeD and SANDAG, and in
implementing provisions of the AQS. The City Council should authorize formation
of a task force to develop a draft revised standard for GMOC consideration with its
review commencing in October, 1994.
:The GMOC commends the School, Water and Air Pollution Control Districts, and the
various City departments for their continued cooperation in working with the Commission
We are most appreciative of the outstanding support from the Planning Department, and "'"""
in particular Ed Batchelder
Sincerely,
j: -/~$~V
Tris HUDbard
Chairman, GMOC
(GMOC.13\RPT -cOVR.MEM)
"""'"
~ .;LC-/3;0.t'J -/t
.
ATTACHMENT C
1993 GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
ANNUAL REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS -
IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS SUMMARY
AND
DEPARTMENTAL WORK PROGRAM RESPONSES
.
.
~ ;2{J ~/b
. .
t/)
Z
0
~
Z
W
::E
::E
0
fd
a:
....
a:
~
W t/)
a: W
...I t/)
~ Z
~ ~
Z
Z e( t/)
e( ::E W
a:
g ::E
::l ::E
t/) ~
::E t/)
.Cl Z Cl
.z 0 0
. 0 i= 01 a:
Ci5 0 zQ.
e( e(:ll::
t/) a:
i Cl i
::E Z
0 i=
0 Z ...I
W e(
!i: ::E ....
W Z
Cl ...I W
Ci5 11. ::E
a: Ii l;:
W
~ :
W
.... 0
Z
W
::E
W
Cl
:J
~
~
a:
Cl
. C"l
Gl
Gl
....
01
=~mc1ii
.... -1a.2 l:: tJ)
0.... mOl:: 1::
t/) 001 .- .-
W i~!!~lj~ Oi 8.
_t/) _oc <<Ie: ~Gl1ll61ll!!
t/)z Cl)CJ)-.- O!!~ -=m;:=-Ci
Z~ ~ . ~-g 'C ta 4l o't-~I!=::::I
III ~'lij 10 lij II:: ~ OCll8.;tC
Ot/) Ice "Oc:
8. 01 Q, Cll~ ~ C . O,cO-1O
-W ~ c.- ~ en
tia: 'O~C Ie
E= :0=1:0 "Beno""
- ...-
e(::E c..D cSm- I JI !~ I
en:g~~.;g~~
~~ ~~~~1l~"e!
...Q,GlC_~
-Cl 00> "'-~o; GlE,gOoGl
""0 < T"" Q. >,= ._ "Co- ..._'"0
Za: U ~ l!! "' ;t 1!!.5 'i1i,SIO.e:ll1
~Q. 01 IO~E'-~ 81: OIl 01-
.c.", . Glu.<(
-.....!!vu;"'C Q)-C C:.,c
W:ll:: ~ccO>>>c~ =::J- ~:!::::
...I a: ~~O>",IO' 'ji~1u;t1'-
11.0 > T""Q) () ~~'~-18~
Ii~ E! 1:: 1:: '.c. El .c.
c.mca~-~:- ",,,Cl'O ::E
Q,Q,Q, -OJ U) c: ..:
0...1 IO~GlEIOQ. -"'elO Clll
_ o~= 01 ~ !~ f ~~ ~
We( .- C
UI!!Gl ~~.-
t/).... $'-'=0 ~.l!i i 01 ~'O ~ 0
~Z oL1.u.. 10~ c:
U'O'O~Q, ;t 01 C -ca-c
OW cc 'uCll2:-E ~oenlO .~.-
a:::E . ~101OQ.:;::'2_Gl '2::Eifl-Gl
Q.l;: UBElU.f6Q,~g> ElIOO:' ._CCll
... -c- U5CD~
Gl Gl.:,-o:",en",~ . c08.:;::"'!i
: ::E f3.00c'->>1!! 010<( Bl!!
Q..a.. m=:.a c.cu c..'U)OOU)Q.
W ...
0 0
Z ~ "!
III ~ ~
~
"0
J:: 01
~ Ol
C .c.
'6 ...-
J:: " "'l5
.... t; ~ C
. .5 0
E '2:;::
lOB
01 'OC
2:-0; CGl
~>>. BE
Z "' "'
C enJ!
0 .- 0 'OQ,
-C/).-
i= 1::::E- -E
8.0: g 0.-
C!i .c.o
c.o = "'-
" <( 10 l!!_
Z "'U'O f3.~
W o C "
::E -~IO if
01 "'
::E " 01
0 .5 8." Q."
0 1: e .E" 01"'
W 8Q,C :6'"
a: _Gl~ 'l5!.
'us-
C'l5 01 ~ .
g " C lo~
8c'6 2:-~
::E ~,g~ -01"'
Cl u~~ 10_
~.~~
W ~~lll
~ xI!:
_OIl 'Iii ~o
lOCi.
f3..5 f3. Q, <(
II. IOU
~ "!
"':1 ~ ~
~ ..2&-)7
,
....
,
c
n
,
:{"
0 "Ci en U) ... - '1
- 1ii Gl r::r:: ~.e r::
....::.::: - c: :5 c: Gl.- Gl
Cl)UJ:!OQ) "C'- =EUUl E=
"C(Q:J .cenc:I",. '" ~ 5 >-t:: g
0 r::.c~"-"''''Gl .s c: Q):;:; ra ftI ::J
~ C:... - 8:5 <>.al <>'0
W ~&.-fi8.~~;ij.!!! Xl ..,o.r::Glu
_0
WZ - UlUlO:aGl~ ::JOiCD:;CQJ
gl!!",l!!>-e>- ,s.~1t:: ~al~:5
Z~ c: m Q.~ .~
~1!:;:;"C'ii u"g 8O.!!!1ii~~S
00 cumli-cCDCUQ) r::en ii~ Xl
-'W i5E:o"5I~i ~'" -
be: cn>..eO~m
E.-~,,::l8. ~ "'_ '" ~.c"&.
4(:& Gl III .iij .0; en '2 Om OJ2:J
.&:. :.1 :5 c: '0 Q.'C . r:: a.
j:i;'.r::.-" ::l
C)~ -lll O.,;r::<_ . _::J c: IlJ U)
... .cUm :2:.1 U::l.5"':5::l
~8 .!!'6jb"':2~8 0- ~ _
!'- ---:Jm ",~eng=1:!.!!!
_ .e",.a . ~ :!: :!2 ca-CI) .- en
!Ze: .r:: 1;.r:: u.g
ju..50~'" ~ It:: -lilJ!!Gl.!.!
e-m .c
~o.. CI)~:;:;.9! ~~ g'! -lJl~.51ii-lJl~~
w~ ~<'O-fil~"'e~ eg~~>~~
...Ie: 0_ .r::
0..0 ~Glli;~U;~-~ ~ ~ .M E .!!! ",~
~== mQ)~.!
!I.~ m- 0)- cu 8 ",::l r::._
..... 0 E 0 - Gl3:: !. 5.!!O.s'e
.~_ c:_...~~
C..J ~"!"':2~~ Gl !~:;:;O)m6Q.
~:! ... en::J:;:; 8 2-.&:. ce.5oc:O
00<~r:: __. :;:; ~ -
- ::l rl'O.!! ~8l.!!!::l "'Gl
~z i:UU.~~}5~ ~ II) c: en:::::li
~ E g:fl<,s
OW EO~= ._.r:: bli; 2 r::
.e: i! i5Gl~<~ilullll;j g:50;1u;~8
Q.e: ~ - =O:::::li... .c r::;S r::.-_
Gl .0 Gl Gl Gl ~:!: l;j.iij ::l0 8.M=
~ ~~J::.cJ:: e>:s..c a.E", ;S '1
---... -
W _'0 N
C ,
N " N C')
.'" ..; .
'" -.:..
g't:: S . '" .5 ~
.- '" ~~ ",.(g
"E<>. -",,-"" r:: .e >- '" e~i
""'Gl '" U Gl ::l ~" .91 Gl r::o
~~:5 .- ~
r:: ~.r:: 8.- m 2'.r:: ~ ~91 :ll!.!!8.
Ill. ~ ~ .~ -
~ t:: ", t1)'tSCI) -- ill.5 e
l!!", r:: ~l!!
"t:: UJ 0 ::J Gl 8. r:: .91 '" '" Gl r::li;<>.
8. t:: .., - .r:: u -r:: e>
~U)Q) ~l!!::l r:: ", Gl "'.- ~t 8:5Gl
<>. E~ ",'" Glr::" ~~ ~ ~0:5
::lGll!!.r:: ~.~.~~
CI) C) .~ ~.r:: r:: "'~....:. Gl ::lo '" " ",
Z "Ci c:~.c:: c::!:~ ~~<>'5 Ul .!!!. - <- r:: r::
r:: .- ;S Gl ;S l!! - E r:: ~'" ~;tl~
0 "'~<>. :t - Gl Tii-c:!20 ~Bl!! 9l ~~
~ Gl=1iitl ...6:2 l!! r::::l 0 l!! "''''.5-
!.e c: 'Cb .!!13~ .!!"'~~ r::Gl~ <>. ",> Ul ~
~e> r:: r::
::I CD.2 'ti5 Q. '="'8 r::t:: . ~:5<>. '" .- '" 8
8:5j!!'6g. .- 8..r::o 5~ t-s li;
z - u E~.!i iJ
-~~'" CI)"Ci... .. ~ <>.:E Ie O~~
w is ~... :51e.e~ i ill ;S en 8'" ; ~ 8Gl
:& o Gl S .~ i5 ~~ ~'15:'!
b~,,;S- --r:: ~~l
::E Gl._r::_; l!!.f! ~ I o i.- ~ .a ~.~
0 ~-"'B Gllll- = g'"5.l 0;'" .!! s,g
0 'Q~~ ~ i::l . .Ei3'iii ~ ~;e.52> ~
W lll"'-~ ftJ=c ~ 2
S~,g~ "E~~ iJ~.~
e: 'B '" .0; :5 8. E'6~ ~i ! ju;
~1~il.5 C)...o~ ...~cac. r::~
g ~ .~.e8~ i l!!:~ ill ;SIll ",8r:: ~ ", r::
(J _"C1l: -Q)'ii~ -gjO ~,g- '018 :I .= .!!
;1:' _Olio =~1;j ca=cn.!! '" '0 g <>.
:& r:: :i;''''- '" -
j . br::,:( ~ .e - OJ ~~ ; "'Gl~ S "'r::
CI U",~S:r:: ~<g ", C._ ... .=5 I~ I ~.~ !I~~ '1
II: 1.5 c.().g - r:: 'is.~.s .!! 8'Qc.
- -:IE .-
j!! -"E~CDIl: .!~C)E o = ca co -r::o . ~ !.-o ~mll
0;8~:5~ QlGl~E ~oQl I!!Er::
; GloGl[ ~" Gl ~Eii .!!!s Gl",
~ Gl_ Gl .j 9l1ii a.:5en
ca"CO"C ca:::u.== "'.., u'"
"! ~ '-! "! J..!}~/g'
- - - - - N
N N N N N N N
..;1 ..; ..; ..; ..; ..; ..; ..;
4b-
1: (/) ~
~:E ~ 1~
0::.8
m _0
Cl.Os
-< .s.s
....eI) 'jul: EO
el)Z 1:'-
~og ~p:
zf 15 ~
Oel) :~:E U~
-w ~1l~
bD: '0
1:: -.I: .tl<
<C. Ul_
!.&o j.5
i~ 81:-
ca1::
1=8 J !"fi 8. 01
rL-e!
~D: ca-
ca . 'C ca "gCl.
.0. ~I:g
t~ ~ .s.!!!1: ;! .
~ 0ca cat:
5l ca ~ ,:lUlGl
'C.-
!.i N-Gl GluE
I: ..:,g=
8. -EGl
5lUl..... ~ -
C..J Ul ! 0 Gl .!II .!!!
! 1:j!:1:: ~'C0
~~ .s 8. <V lii ca
Ul 'C Cl. ~l~
Oz ~ !511ll
o.w J!! C>
O. ! .s 8. ri ~!;:;
:f.~ 5l ~ 12 .-
:m Q.:!i ,... c,Q)g
:ll E >,- CD Q):; ::::I
~ is: .- I:.!!! '" j!:.....o
(f) co en ...... oU
C
~ N ~
N N ..;
~ Gl
lX .8 =
~ .s
:!i!o E
I: 0-
.1:_ fl .
oS Ul I: I:{l
~ ca . !Gl
'1: E j!:" 8'1:
~~ !Ie -
.....Ul
1= 0'-
0.>- 0
a Cl.Ul iriS .tl~
ca0 Ul I: oS
!~~ i~
~ "g:E =:ll0
caO::
. -25 0>- .!!!>-
Gl:E
.~ ~t3 .115 ~ 0g
!'C
il In .;l Ii
a:: ~f
g 8~ 12'0 8~
8:1:
I ~- ca~ ~lii
uS! 1:_ ~i
8j!1: D!
Gl cai!~
~I =g' I!!
~~ ai~Q. ;
j!: S.E ~0
~ N ~ .20~1/
...1 N N ...1 ..;
.
.
.
-~
.
N
I
t
t)
'I)
f3
_(I)
Z
~.~
0(1)
t=w
ua:
<IE
i~
-C)
....0
Za:
~Q.
WlII::
Ka:
Ii
O..J
We
(I)....
Oz
Q.w
02
a:....
,Q. a:
, ~
W
o
Z
o
t=
t!
Z
W
IE
IE
o
fd
a:
8
IE
C)
>-
'0 ~ ~_
ll/,l5.<: ,"=
,,-.- "en CIlU~'<:
~&:~-;!.91:'i [
.s=. co .... Q) ~ ..~
~ii)JI!- ~CIl e... "'CIl W
.e-u.<: CIl"Et::Ol.S:.<::5
-QJuU)ocoO)U)t-
1ii >-'~'- cu Q. T"" j >-
.-"C2+' I:CIl 0.0
~::I ~~ ~-c QiJ:b"C
en-~....o .o"C'cCV
~ .eGib"'e I: 01:
.... - > 'C: c: fa s::. ~
1.~s::."CQ)o'E~ :;
c; ~ - C "C.s=. c: 0)_
_c:...ta__," I:....CIl
C'U - 0 .=::J - C,- ... 1S..
>-~LL<(~<(Il.I:;gJ!le
'"_ O=~CIl.-::Ij.-
E s:. = ~ .e s :; ~m Z.1!i
cDJ!Q....,cnm ._"D c:
~,g e ~~ ~1.S'1l fij ~~ ~
:5~I:R~riel!fen",t::
. Ul:t::lOeno<:,"U:CIl.s:l:l
OT,ij)- .- '<:-CIl
c: 4)'- 0.15...'0 en .- i"C
'--' &; E c: .g c:.5: cn"C e
-fi2~CIlI:Ul>-1l.S:fij 2l
il CLm ~ ~ .~"i en 2 -m'~
... i"E~-~ CI).5a!~= ~
J2Q)G)'i6:2...o"O Uie
.cEo::JC. m - -
~= c: 'I: 0 E CI) C>'E e c:
';: 0 2 g, ~ l5 CIl - 'E CIl - ~
€!'~fd ~B~Ul I'd ~~~~
8.eCll,,!Ilo<: ~'-'":;CIl
CL::J CD Q.) ~:g.~ m ~:it-U) ~
OC:5.cQ.c:5cbWC!"D
e
l'!
'"
N
,.;
==
:1:'
I:
o
~
II::
~
;
.<:
"
:c
"C '" ~ CIl
c: .5 en:5
mij.81'1c:
)( Q)'-
g'CIl!Z'2'CIl
:i2.ElVc.5
'-1:" ...,
::1._ e '- u
1Il",~.e.E
'Cc___cn
1:;:; I: ~'lll
COftJCI)C:~
,--oc:
l!f ~.l!l:5'-
'--c c:3~
LL.-8....~
.- .... Q.
c>>ocaQ)::J
1::... -II)>.
'E CD en m...:t::'
l:=e.!J!lt>
~~l::ll;~
-~ (IJ C'O
"'_ 0
'E en .s en c
~1:~~i~
15>l!!'-CIle,"
c.e~--Q):::J
Wl:l~e"CCT
CIlCll1:~CIle
:5C~llllll!
.9 '" ~ ~ CIl
~.s:S!el:~
..!g:CD:::J'-.I:.
"0>0-t::
W CIl I: "" 0
ct:J:"CCIl"1:
~ ~ :fi
.!!~m ~
C~Q) ~
~~CIl Ul
J!l>~'jij1l
~ i:J 2.s!'~
> I: ~ 2
gCll "'~b
~S.e ~ c.
.....<:2:.<: ~
,-(.)o-:::J
Q) Q)._ > 0 I/)
.c1:.cc.......
--~.-OQ)
lC1l.<:.!Il'C'lii
::1= ~m fij ~
9.'CIl28. .-g
.. ~~=~c~
'~.ge2;l~
Ulb .ao,-
-l!: '15 .e " Gi c:
.,g.c:::cu~i)o
S'$cno'C~
.!.! <( '" = !II I:
:c...[u~m
.r~~g~l
'O.l!:<(t>eCll
iJi~~i
.- CIlU.~-~e
c'<: I:
-~
CD"Ocn:;==c
i!: fij~ g ~~
...
,.;
,.;
CIl 2lUl
5 5i.-.6
- "CT,'<:
.2~C:i)~
- - 8.'~ ~
iii~CIlKb
_ "6 'C "I:
o C .... 0
_::I CIl CIl.<:
.-nU--
U ~ ::::J m :=
5 tJ)"i ~ or(
0-8.... c:;U
U c:::I_
0_,"2~
- _ U en,,:;
c:o'<:.<:31
.2 _.!.! Ul '"
-I:j'-'"
~ ll~ ~
co .0:5
I:'ii. <(~~
~ii -
III : ~~l! ~
CDsl ~8.S
:12 ",0 Ul 2'"
~ .S: ls.!l ~J
~~ 'C ; '"
">1: .S:
"".S: '"iil
!i~i~1
~ 8.::1 e lll.....
._2lil'~e!CIl
C c..! 0 c..S
...
N
,.;
CIl.!ll
:5~
0.21
-e
-g
i~
.e::
CIl CIl
.0:5
_ 0
~.c:::
"'''''
. ~
e I:
20
.e'iii
LL::I
~~
~.e
CIlUl
'<:-l!:~
i~r-!
::I '"
oge
-.cCll
_::J:t:'
lllll. ~
0- CIl
~0"C
n ~ I:
"0 ::I
~- -g
.!II ~_
i!:i5g
""\
I
"i
"""\
...1
'"
N
,.;
"'"
,
c2?J--;z.O
~
.
I
.
d)
_W
cnZ
.~~
-II)
tit!
ol(..
il
i~
..a.
w.~
-a::
ii
Q .
w'"
cn~
~ffi
.~.l!
A a::
. ::
w
Q
.
Z
Q
~
Z
w
:E
:E
8
w
<<
.8.............
I ~
~
a:
C
Gl ra
:6'C
c:
S:!l,
E<
~=
c: "
8g
'l5U
Gl
1::6
j~
9J1:
-g~
rati
:l~
Gl<
- c:
~.-
Gli
1h
m~
&. 0....
e'!! 55
0.0 ~
91~E
i=<en
~
-i
~
:.(
Gl
.<::
-
S
~
c:
o
u
'l5
i
Gl
E...-
enO
raU
11.
~~
.!IIE
~.!II
80
uE
~8
GlC:
:6 .S!
~i
~
.1 -i
.~ ~ ~ S
l!!-g.8Xl .g.5~
8 ra E e~ l!! ~ ;I
~ .9! ~ 1: 'E 1;j S'1V
Cl~~~.gXl16:6
g>ri~'l::~'<::~lK
E~15!"~~~
~ i. g ~11: ~ i
~8i'l5~'E~~-g .
'l5 :.~~.a ll~ ~~
i.8:i'C ra.!l ~.~ I
o.E" 16 R-Ol~.!II ~
Xl t! 8Clll'~'> ~'i5
.~ .< 0:16 C:II::."
1: g.o is ii: W l! 0.
~.5e~S ...'C~
1: Ol Olen c ~.<:: Ol
!,g g . ~ ,g u g> g
c::d3.;:l!!l!e:I:
. Q).cCL Q.G)= CU-c
~~<< ~~;i'l5<
. 8C: '0.10:1 Gl
2 cuOCUts 6=
~~Ill~~ll'Bl!e.!l
Gl i5,",~eiil!!!:ll!
$:. "GlGl-C:--
I- o..!:6 'C 8 8 ~]
N
-i
~
.iI!
.<:: c:
lIl'- >-
'C..
Jacm
ra '"
ll(jo
.1 <c .!::
l!!>o<
z-
.8<ll!
en.S!
i-g2'
-grail:
~8~
11.-
~<o
.l!!~~
!j:~
~ 0.
!!~.! .
o!-c;;
~i' !~
c:-
~ ~i
~I!~
N
-i
-- 4:!l/
.!II j
ill ;t~f
en 1;j Ol~ ~ ""
ll_ ~:5-'- "S
~~.~~ ii!~
e:!l,ra -~ Ifj
:6ll! Gl 'Elh!:g!ll
(j i .If) j en .. j; l:
C5 ~ i8st
z~slll"'SXlE
<~ flO- 8
en Cl 0 2>.: 5i 51
m O~<1: 1&
.-= 1;j 11. 0._,- i c:
""c:<..ra.. .S!
i.~~:g.~i: ~:s!
~Il:~:tla:~ ~.~~
!l!~'i~,"Il:6.c l!!
E !;"'oll....E.<::
'l5 .S! .-u c g 8 -
.8 --c.. -
j ~ ~ B:; .~fl ~ B
ra J!! ~ l!! g c: ~.- 5
...C:8","J!!ralZo
.zQ) flJCQ._8.....
5 E c: ra.S! c: 0
fii !'g ~.~ ~ j ~ ~
= .5 1;j s 0..8 l!! i :6
oJ,
I
,20 -- ,). /
".
1 \~
, U
rfi
...U)
z
.~..~
QU)
.~W
,0 D:
<(:E
~~
-8
ffiD:
:ED.
Wlll:
~D:
D.o
I~
c~
tg;3
Oz
D.w
~:E
D.~
~
W
C
z
o
j::
~
ffi
:IE
:IE
o
fd
D:
o
o
:IE
<:)
.
-
01
::IE
..
'D
'0
z:
~
~
b
.. '"
::::J Q) >'.
.Q",~"O.~
>-.:::Jft5
21.... i; 'Iii 2
Q.r::~"O.c
>0'0 Q..Q) cP
"CQ.=_u..
.a9l'-.!!!>-
III ~ ~ Q..c
::> .. E r::
r::o'U80
o lIl'r:: .-
:;::I 1;)<<1)-==
"'=.-",1:
2>'- "0 ~ CIl
~~- :5!
:E i;- 8 iii ~
i~~.~ ~
E -g .8= .!/! .12
-::::II .c =
_ -u
i"g'CCI)5
E '" r:: Ul 0
=.CV!u
2 ~...."O
c:(.)c"CQ)
w5Q)cu:5
-8{!.921
8 '" -fi .12
-fi ~ :lr:c .2:
IIl"OC~CIl
c~C)c:.o
'0 'I: .5 0 'C
'- 0 c: CI) '31,()
Q):C'ii)OQ)
z:::>"''''",0I
t-mC:.oU)~
~
Lri
~
X
CJ
III
'"0.19
r::Ul
"'.-
>
'" '" '
.5_ en
a::>-
0'" 8
"OU'"
"'Ebl
.5 Q) ....
_UJG>
U -
'r:: !l1 Ul
-",'"
Ul CIl
Ci .S: u..
_Ul"O
8glii
-fi-fi8'
III Ul._
~'Oa::
J!lr::l!!
r::o..
~.-
Ul::>
r::0'
.!!! ~1Il
W)(J!l
> CIl.!/!
(j g>>
Q):e~
=!I!.!!!
_ E::>
.~..9:! .Q
III Q. t:
<.~ ~
CIl
'"
-
.egJ
'lll~ ~
.J!l~r::
"'.9 ~
CIlUl-g
:S!CIl...
> ::> ..
~f~
ij!lt
~lZE
::> ::>
- lll'-
en._ _
-g"05i
O.9~
r:: {l2
~ E 5i
.8 ,!/! CIl
ca"C:5
!l!g"O
=",r::
'lll "',
-g CIl "'...:
Q..!:.5 ii
0-1 E
lll"O Q.
r:: 0
~"'~Gi
r::~~ii
QUo"O
'"
Lri
Ul'"
r:: r::
m=
CIl ::>
E-g
21-fi
o Ul
Q.CIl
)( >
Q)~
b~
CIl 0
> r::
,- r::
&J~
0'"
-::>
CIl2
::>'"
r::-
-c::n
r:: r::
8'-
.91 .
Ul ~ III
E~5-
en 0,-
._ r::
"0-'"
18~
fi-
1/l-g
CIl..
CD :m fIJ
=j!'8
CIl-'"
12''''11
=>>SE
'"
Lri
-~
,
.5 II) CD
",Ul ,c:
t:.!!! ~
~ 5 '
c:s~.~s:. 32
o.!/!:'" i;j "" 5
r::>".!;!l~ '"
.2", 5l';e >--g Ul
&J;Sr::E"''''-fi
'" 0 i! .-
iijUr::.!lCllal
r:: E CIl.1l! -g'iij
'"' 'l;iQ.::>"~
:sz.!l.!:! 2 >-a.!!!.E
o en "C c."C en
:E ~.s: i.a'6l!
:'I:::c:u>...05e
~ ,- r:: .12 i"" Q.
o en.2 f/)
'''--'iiQ) '-c:
. ~ lll..2:S! E ::l.Q
&.",~'-.ci;j
n>~'EQ.1t7)
C)~C1JQ.Q).!:"
'" Q.- l5 E - 'E
b-J!l = CIl
Ul5i~ui2:S!t1
::>EE-r::>ll
.QQ.r::8C1l2E.
> 0 or."2 0.._ Q)
!Qj'=~lS=-::::J
Q.>i!: r::'!iolZ
U)cPQ)c! _'-
~~"O &.",:E 5i.!/!
"'CIl::>""oE'"
~'E i;j Ul 21 ~ Q. -CIl
U~'~-&J ~ dl2:
CIl'- Q.o::>>o
,c:Ul E.coCllUl
~ 21 "'._ '" III "0 21
'"
Lri
-
,!!oCl)
.E ~'E
(J~.g"C
E CIl r:: r::
Q)'EScv
_'-(/)(1)
Ul~ _
!pO"O'"
~ ~e::>
r::.-.fi :if
.- en v. "C
>>r::21",
't:~=-=-
~~,~~
Q..& 'Iii-
>- 'x CIl
r:: CIl::>
C'aii__"C
CIl 0 ==
r:: 3l r:: ::>
om 0 en
~~ii~
or::>""
_.-I!~c:
"C alII) 0
Ul - "''2; .-
C::::J cv 0-
:B ~ 0 '" .~
rl r::u;;;;
=-fiUl"E
8::z: IS Q)
..~c"O:c
::> CIl '"
~J!l ]i""
l!l5~21i
::l ,;u;~d~ ~
CIl
'"
-
21
i
.2:
"OLri
-01
501
"'~
.. ,
"O~
r::"
'" 2
r::.c
.12 If
Q;>-
Q..c
E r::
8.12
",e
r:: CIl
'r:: "0
:g'iij
r:: r::
..8
.- ~
>-.12
-g~
usg
CIl::>
~8
"'"
Lri
iB CI) ~
'01.cc:
",-CIl
iMfi
8."O:S! ii
2E:o'C
~"'-
CD~c:l\!
= J!l'O;:
r::1l. CIl
'0 CIl~:S!
r:: E ::> ~
ILtlblc.!li
Q.>"O g 8
~~ lii.~~
b~.fliij:?;
!l!Uj;=U
EQ)UJcc
=""-OI&.
-C:S!
ir::f~~
ilJlIlll
.9 '" 8'
! f~'O ~
~4J5i'O
r::"O.- Q."O
8er::Er::
::>;:).- ..
'!i
Ilij
7ii
~
~
.,;1 Lri
~
'[
Q.
-
II
lD"O
CIl"O
='"
eb
0-
.a
~21
.12 '"
-
..'"
..Q.)
0::>
5l' .18
r::
Ul
ale
::>0
r::'"
=lll
r::
8i;j
'"
z:-
"'21
::> ::>
2",
~5i
""'"
It)
Lri
c9
iij
=
r::
CIl .
~-g
21 .~
2
'" Q.
lie:
E,g
,gi;-
lD
{lCll
[=
E.5
.- -
-r::
Ii
'O~
:8~
l'GJ!
;S'5i
E:S!
:2~
215
"5 c
:if "0
a::lii
"""'\
It)
Lri
.!!!~ g' - C
.- tP .... o .= .2 i:'.l!l .
'E.c,!! lii "" 1l'i .Ul
ft) !! ca::cu =:...j!c ~~c ~.,,-i:'
W .,,! ~.E E .!!! ~tc ~ ~... ~ ~.2i~~
....ft) ~ Il . C"'Ill!'I:: ",-BUl" E...
~~ I .c.l!l
ft)Z ~=~ :8Ul!"'ll OCC~. !!!_
E~.l!1l ~o
Z~ i~ . l!'" '" .!l ,g ~~Il!i!C
-,/!.!!! tJ!;='~
Oft) ii'" ... .g i.- i:'
_ >-'" C~_ ~ ~ ~ ~~ I. ~
j:W l~~ ...'" 8 Il'"'sll!
~o:: CD g. .c. -." .c .".- Ii." C
CIl 1: i'I) _ =_ol;l Ci;.c...-
l! uo..... ~~ ~~~g~.
'0 1ij i:' ."c "'.l!l en .. Il
e~ ~j!:J J='!!!~ 1ijC.c.E=
Z E ~.c = ~~ g'o .l! l~ g'_,g::E Bj
~8 :s . Il gllU"" -'-1~(!) ."
0~LL. =Il~ -, jf~ti u t! .tI ., .e :;
wo:: enUl>- -. :5!"o~f j!: c.
.!!!.c UlJ=1l ,gii.c. 1l -8.
1l'11. 1UlC .l! :;s2 .!:! 'li5'" Ul ...Ul'$ C ~
~..:ll:: 11i C 5l ~=cacca ~x.5~=li ~ s
~.5i 2! .5.!9w og
11.0:: UlUl1ijC . =l!>. uiO~.~.~
Ii "'Ul :8::E'I::
Ul 2- .c.-. 8. J! f2!-!'-:S'E
i.l! ~'5 .cc.,,(!) ,e'g ""~-~M'~
Q...l ... 8: C 15o,gEIl2! I~c;~lsc
Wc 5." 8 '1::1 i~ ~c~.E=:s! 0~i1i:'~t~t
~... >-0" ll.!:l€ '-~=i C"c 0
"D_J2 o '-J.c
:s 31- Ul
l1.ifi 0'5=0 .!l~_m i.2:s~~~ .. 'g~l!., c.~
::J= Ilg'''' ,e~."..
Oil _'- c:: "'lJl~c
cj :s .~.- i~ ",_ Il 1'-B-5.i.e52!
f~ '0 0 .-c.5]!"'1ij
--co .Ii ~.~ 1Il ......-2. .c 'E a:S >-1 i ."
1l8.1l .,8,' >-UlE ~ t. ~ ~ g
c j!:5~:t!lii
0: j!::s= ll. = c..c
W
Q
co ,... ~ N
lci lci <0 <0
=Q)U) ., "'J!
->~
o C"''S E~ fiLe
_ :S.c
"11 .c Ul l.e .~
... CD >"&) Ul'-
.- C.
-'" !€ '2'~ E ~rl II "g'u
." C
:=(0 1l.2C._., ~S31 2.E C
~b ii....c.l!= "':s t'E::E~
:2(3 ...:gu-o U)c.!o
Ul c~_ . o"'(!)E
2!1l .s::. .c. ftI. en.!Q .- C
'g .- 'E'g"8
Z ,.c g:!:dl::U'" 8 ~.2 .2.
c- ~~=~
0 go "'~"'Il8.~ :I: i:'i:'
~ -Ul ll::'g~= C ~ lD~S~
1ijc ~"'UUl~1l .2~._ ~~~ I
Q E:B ~""~~c C._-
::l--
ifi u.." C r~
,g-lll =cnrnc .m ~~ I'~
.".-! 1ij c.
Il g''''' eno_l=o cen ~ i:' Ul
Ii! ;em ~~.e"'1.~ l!.c ~!.....
0 ::lei . "'.2' lbs!
(,) ~~j "':I:
III t1 ~I .r! ~il ...~ 1(
0:: IE", ..E .~i .~ l~
~ !i~~i~
8 1!' E~S ...s." 8.1.,,1 .
i i~i Iii..W
I ~}Olll~.e Iii ~ti~ 6s11~
~ i'~j U g'~:Sg' W U o'c ~
~ .- r- i2 ., :s., ~ ~ ~~!
..... E~C ~I"" E ~ =.!~g'
~~ ~ ""
::c -:s 'fi 1ij C Ul ~
CJ .! -II ~~c.il2!1 lD ~ltc~ j!:6~ g
II) :l IlO."
co ,... .1 ~ N
llil lci lci <0 <0
- - ;20 -~3
.
.
.
~
i'
~
I
"1"
y....
",
,,> ,
,/
,~ i i
.s m~ .s J!l 3J -g .s j
~ .. ,..'" 1:: """"
'1:- U'J e e ClJ m i .><1:1: -g~ 8.
U I!! 0.1: CD CD 0 J:: ~ UI cu.-
:3E'--UI - em e
en Gl...eGl~o I: .. 1:: a. o~"Ce'- ","'B I!!~
W :S::1l:Sgg> ""8.21::0 oem! c:: ~ e CD U'J-
_en ... .- c: 'C 8 ~,~ ~~ l(l~m!! .".~ 111: .~ :S fa
enZ .e . f!! - ~ ." !....::I- .s::. ~'>~iii I:~ ..~:S'" 1::
z~ ..,~lll,,;Cl1l ~"il.e .. I: B.!./-g~~g~ .- o.="ll
I: ,.._ . UI "C CD E ll..,i<..
Oen m OCD"ii :~~i lij E
~.w :1 j.s::..s::..- :c=c::g!2 Jc!llij ~~."
.' UI -- o ~'e -g ~ ~:::JgGl" ."
0.'0 I!! o.lii .
oa: o :B-1:: n.:::J"'~GlGl j~.t1;'~~l
e(IE l!~iF.><8.~ ~:3 a..a i .., _ 0 < .. ~.s::.
cOU.... -
Gl Gl~ .... 'c"Co oij ."....GlB~~'O :::J~Oal!5ClI!!
~.~ "C-== S'Q)_ :BI: -
CUCCI)"C to:s.EU 1:: .. I:~'-
.s."."l!!Gl.s::.." m ftiCl)_
~g .0 -:::J .= ",.2 :::J l!! l:i..,GlGlell 8,gcnoE:S~
>.~ 1i :::i E"C C g> ,I: I :S ~ .-'- I:.s::.:s ca.go(f)j,Sc
g_ ~ "" I: lij UJC C::I .l90.,,- Gl"
Za: o CI) c: m .,g 8.., I!! Gl~'6,g>,,;,'" .0- CD i
~Q. 15-==8U1U1 ~~~:S_i..,
eUlU_ -:=: -cC c: F :::J .- "'g
J::mso:=m'O COCD"OftS g> "e'E!5 . u.=_~o
w~ ~fl81:!iE1:: ~E:2'5", .- 'i.s::. .,,-~ (I) _ Q) C .&;
...I a: 1::'-COC 1l:g11~~~Cl Eo:s:c~e..
11.0 CD; ,2=a.m II Gl ,_.s::. 'I: I: .- 0. I!!
.J:.UlCDftictl~c.. ~....o '!!!U) CUI-CD ~.2~ ~ I!!1lF
!~ c!l3J---
-~J::....1iiClJUI 'S'u'c ,-:s::O_OJJ::
'-J!!-~ >m EO ~CC-
.. I: 0 ca ma.Q)'_J:: Gli~"'--....
0...1 2 UI fti.- ~~ UI"ii~5E Gl~ 0.0 E~" ' .., -." = E
~Gl:S~l!! .:2 I: '-:B ." ~
We( i!:E~Uiiin. -_I-a. ;tt:: :3 "C "C_
en~ _:g..,~,e~~ ~I: :::J- 1:E.><lii.Q ~8. liiElijo-l!!cn
Oz iii I: ~ .... ..J 'g :c "'in.I:U .ll!,g.s.s!l!:c I!! ~-g.s"1l~'"
Q.W ,S i ii ~~15~ uJ!l _I:i :3 ftS Q) ctI
O:IE = ,- .U'" "~"1!!0ii:.s::.:2 c::J UI 6 E CD.E
liiI!!E"'E.E~ .gt> E Gl g>1;j c: CD_ mU'JO iGl'-o.3JE
a:~ 8 :::J .' 1l.s::. jI:E!i.208
'EGlEf!!'l:lill!! Q.::I[!!=._~ .., ,= I!! ~.... ~
11. a: .., ~ 0 Q)J::-.a CD .".- "" '5l Gl.s::..s::.
~ '0 o>~J!!Gl-.o CDc: SOJCD Fj8.a&~~F UlJ!!C'c>-t::
, c;m Q)'E-'- F8 1:1:.s::. < I!! 8.2.~'O.e
>-- _J:: '- ,_ o...J a.._ 0 _
I:
W 0
0 U "'"'\
~ I
N ~ N '" co
cO r-- r-: r-: I
Q),E iii", ~Gl
,- I:
.s::. U._ .- .s::.
.0-
"'- - I:'E l~ lii
1:_ I: ~."
.- 0 Gl
-g..E oo:.~." ..,-
.a-o. I:~
I: 0 1!1:1!! Gl."
bGlGj .s::.
~ E > .- 2< ~.;~
Gl Gl C.. 0
.s::.."lil'
",,~"'ni lil'" . C~
.- U
Z -E- _ c:._- ~ 1;''''
~ ~,g5 'OGlOO
0 EI:~ iiialt>
~ '-"C en ctI Ei~< ii:s~
01: -
~ ..."t>i J GlO
I: ." GI:::JI:
g .. o.U Gl .,,:s~ E~ 8 .
Z Gl E ""_-g1;'
W ~'- E .s::. I: :g
~ ClJB - CL'-. !i:i
:IE ~ ~,~ :c :! -i .9- 'liS
~ > J::._
_:::J1;j~ I!!Glf!!O
~ ~lil'1: "'1l- I~f~
M -ml:8. .so I:
_EGl
IX Gl~:2:::J GlJ!lGlE
= :::J 0." .~I:E~ '6~f5
-I: :S j; 'liS
8 81:.s> 'E~ ~c .! ~~1:
j 8 :::J.-."
'OE'" ..o~ 1.l900:.!!!
:Ii ~I:'" .. .s 0.
III ~~B~ 8 I: .... > !5
Cl) w U._ ..u U OGl
il2 it. ..,.. Gliii.") ~~I:;
Q)mUlj
~ ! :Sa.... :S lil'~ U.s::. E
~iim _-U1;j 16U<~ """
al ~i~~
::i F....O
III .ecn
coil ~ N '"
...:1 r-- r-: r-:
~ dLJ~1
.
.
fa
_1'1)
I~
01'1)
-w
to:
<1(.
i~
-8
liD:
.ll.
W!ll:
....0:
ii
6:1....
I'I)~
Oz
ll.w
~.
,ll. Ii:
f
W
c
z
o
i=
<
c
ai
.
.
o
fd
0:
8
.
e
.
U
o
ci ~
c Cl
- '!5 g>
'i '2 'E
c~~ ~
.~ g:: "
~..~~~
o>.gll~o>
c en.......
.ccnrat:....~
~~u 8.1:
.-..Ol!!E
~~~~~
'1I>".c~
c:_ccnc
l!! 1Il .. l!! .-
~~'Gj!:8
ll-g~II>5i
2l~u ~~
...~ .s'il! 8
~~I~;
g;1::1!~
..,... 8. E U
~~l!!1::~
II> ~ " ll.-
j!: 5 ffi 2l ~
~
<Xi
Iii
CI
:I
~
Cl
~ 1ii~
c .. c
c'il! E c.-
.2-c.!:B0
.!/l_Il!'l91
i5~:d!~ .
C):;,SQ)(JC
'2 U It) E.E !11
1I>1ii:5lX~a
1I>.c , II> .. .S!
.E ~ =,J::. ~ Q)
g> o-!I1>
w!S-~:a~
..5i!B~lii~
ii~lQ~~c
.e-!.8~.s
!E"~' II>
ili:i!S-6
>-~ IS c
I :;'lj E ~ B
c')(.s.s!
1< II> .!/l'
..~~-g ..
...c.......
:g~~Jjjill>
~ftI~cn.el::
~ ~~:>.lol!
1iil~~~~
j!: ,,"" U 8..c
~
llil <Xi
g>
i 'go.
~ .au
8:~!Sl!!
..~c~
lQ.!o! ~
.c:Oo-'=
",,_'l!'
c a. ~
"~~'E .
.._.- !1::
.. - .0
='Oc8 '=
~ .Ell>
:i~jll
1I>.g,!~e..
= ~ ill ... 0>
ll'~i5 1O.~
fi Ol~ c
o Q) C'- 0
~='5ii c
G)_CD t1I
o C 0) en
J:oN';;, C'-
en c:'C I/)
"5w""-
.2"" " j!:
? .".. C
~ C C C'CIi .
....- ~ ..
g~1::~1
"o.ll"e
8u2lg...
N
<Xi
~ ~
oE.c
'~j -:
1t)".E
~I."
D.c.E
0.- 'C
- c
1I>.l!l.a
.c c
-II>."
!I! E.E
~Q)1ii
o ~'a,
i ... e
".E 8:
Ii lea
-c'E
I~I
gil.1i
81,,~
'Olii
~-Jj..
U:!!!!/l"
II> :> 5
ii~ g
.c .c..
I- U..
N
<Xi
-~
- .
..."
=c
~'g
'~~Jf1
--
11>'" 0
=:i1::
ji;ll
'&. '0 lQ
" ..
.s~~
~ N.?
c!E'Q
'E'C
i~lt:
E 0>= 8.
"'!ii'O l!!
~~g~
~!<~.c
II> ~ Cl ~
.8.!Ii ~ j!:
....-
N~9111>
<Xi-'C ~
c ~ Q,.5
.- c "'l!!
~~i~
era "C c
II! c c c
<0....
<"l
<Xi
g>'C
CUm 'E CD
""'0; E
l!! CEil>
Ii; ~
"''0 <0 .E
.e ~-
cII>"
".2_""
G)-me.
i.l'3.~~
'6~Pl!!
II> is. "
!:2li;a
'Cl~.g
~ g> ~i ~
!~Ij~
g>!!i.st
"C t~ . c
r . 8
';;,' ~ Ie;:
C_;! ...u
we. _
~ ~ g>;! ~
1iil-'C~
j!:iil~~o.
g
I~ ;
-~u
~.s.E (;'
~ 31 8..1
~ 8.l!! ~
:S~~0l
'i "l~
~~j!: ~
i~~ ~
~jil..8~
c ~ fI)~ ~
.-~=Cl .
~~~~!E~
.. 1:: .. ."
cftlQ.c8
~!lQ~~
o ~ c
lsg>~5'-
r~ ~~ ~
is ~.!/l:s! ~
II>"=~E
j!:ffia88
~
oj
c:b
I
.:.i
~
In
Ii:
~
'0'0 t
licJ;
II> ..
.g' 'E
i ~~
e:Bll
.g .h 2l
8."g>
Sli
11>._ a.
ji~
'&. c
Iii
!!Ji""'
~! c I
:_.. ~.E
:!!:iIl.c
~~11
: :!I ;
c2.(7~ ,;2p
",I
'7'
rn
W
_rn
rnZ
Z~
Orn
j:w
Ua::
<:Ii
i~
!is
wa::
:Ii~
W.:lIl:
..Ja::
~
Ii
O..J
~~
Oz
~w
0:&
ti::1-
A a::
~
w
o
Z
o
j:::
c
o
Z
w
:&
::IE
o
o
ILl
a::
o
o
::IE
(:)
'"
.....
GlGl",
_.c_
~.- t)
~oO .
1Il1::!!(ll;
:!!lIlm'"
Q."" ~
b Gl-
.- fI) ...
t)1Il=.8
Gl'-ClE
.cGlI:
-:::'1: Gl
.ccu:s(.)
'iE"C~
,fa c: c:
c.c 0 .-
:fl-;;;~~
c 0 Q) c:
::It):2 EGl
.~ '"
I: 0 I: E
8:!! 8 8
I: (9 '-
._~ G) .e .s
~ = 1: Gl
I: 0 8.-
1Il- U
.5"C t!! ~
u.1:"C~
'08.0 "91
'" .c >
6 !! en!
--!
lil '"' .c g>
c:~t-._
is -- E
Gl ~ .~ ~
~0u.::I
'"
cri
~.
1:'
..
o
~
....
C
(.)
(I)
i:i:
-'-
1:8. t!! I: i!
q::~o
t!! Glaiol:
co .co m
~-=Cl)'"
t!!.-1ll8.=.2
~1~ 11)"0 CD
Cl) c: c: ca c: :J
aO-8.ccu:e
oD).-UQ)c
-.5"C~:C8
al~~l/l~S
-.....~lS~
~OQ)._m!!
._III.g>2:CS!l!
"C.2::131I:""
.8g.c 0 1DJ!l
~cn-j;;=,
1: c..~J!! m u
Glc'-ulllGl
E lilt) ~::I]j
i!Si!EI:<Il
Q.U-'-~"CI
~i!~:g,~~
~-';;j~-gB
~B.lll"SUl~
.5~0.c!C'iir!
Ll...1ij-cnur ca
i!~m]ii6"~~
- ... - c..OC")
_'51:1: ..
...-~B~s:!o
~it!!8...al;:;;
~
",.8
lD6S
=""1:
,5 g 8. ~
"il-;;t!!1-
g~~(ll;
Gl.c'"
1===....
::I 0 ~ Gl
.;a~al=
Gl!."Co
=",-5J!l
IDI:-
I,ll) ~ .- :s
f .c Gl '"
, -.o!
"C'i=Gl
"1:'i=
~ 8. I: I:
" Gl 0 0
It:0::''''t)
.l!!-"O
'" ~ e:!! .
CI 1:.2 (9 E
_ c c m
.... <.- CD ro-
I: Ul .c 2'
3l...._-~
.5g:~SIl.
g>~ ,"C CI
W _'" al Gl'2
ut)!5'Eo
tEo:-ra:!::
:!!~i!6
~(9:2.2:!!
~
o
~
'" - .c
1l,E ~ ~~ .!I!~
""-EUl Z1:~ ~E
-~~E J:~ll. ..@ GlGl
~ cGl ;"8.- I"!! lG ~~ IS g 2': .. 6 = -g.
_ ~~ ..' 0.-0
g, '" g>ll. CI e ~ j 0:: ~ - ~ 1: I
oS! ~ '1: _ '2 ~..2 ll. ! IS.~ 8. ~'>
Gl~O"OGlSCl """&i"''''t!!
-"" ""Gl~,-"c: .5"'....
+>uI:E Q....U;Gl Gll"!! CI
~ :g ~ :g, ~ ~:g ~ = 1l ~ = g .~
~1l._~"C.;lIl.Il..!!EI:1!!:!!s:!
~.. Gl Ul Gl I: I"!! Q.8 Gl(915.
r~ E:!!~~=~ 2~il ~i!::I
m is...c CD..... ~ > D) c: - ro-
== CloS! ~ ~o:: CI 8 Gl "C .- 0 'a;
Q..5 ~ Gl (1)'2 8. I: "C ..6 '" - = .=
EI:Gl o",.-"C B"C '"
8c:'C(!)'5'E:t::cOCtDcaQ)~CD
.m rn='~5!-~C:'B.c'c:""
:s!ll.al-__~ EI-u> 6,'1-::1 ~::>...:
o Gl"C,E,"n Gl9>... "C1l
.c=I:t)""Glal=.nlll 3l 1:e
~ - ~ Gl 1i! ="C 9> .15 ::> Gl Q. 8.~
=~~=~oil(t;n.e=!!
U"C CIS 1: ><.. .c 0 lil:s!
~ B'2.5 ~ 8. Gl '&..~CS ~.91 Oi ~.5
_g[C fnS:J:s-g e=cnt>>
CI t!!.2......I:.8"C....Gl.it!!.5
.5.8 Q.! ~ al.2 O!!: Oi g>~ CI~ g
'E:s! Gl 8.E""'6.!!lC >'1: .5 Gl
~::I.c l5::1 ~ "C .. f! ~ 8..<:: I: tt1 E
.!!~~ g g~ ~~ I"!! Q.t!! gj I"!! E8
..... II) ,.._"C.__ ~t- ftI Q.cn c.t-
Gl
1;;al = '-
li~ - ..
t!!.~c;31 ~
GlE!.S;E 1( :s!
.cQ."COGlGl 0
-~C-.oco.c:
.50.<!J!l"C - ~
"C~GlI:"38f!.c
B ~= ~~:!!.2~
g-;;;~~",(9~ljij:",.-" ~:!i! lil.b
c:>-~c.:J-
.2"C{E '" oOi.c
-.;l' .-t!!-""'i
~'" alGlali
~~~~~l~j .
= ~!~~ Q.,g Q.e
~1:.!!. ~.8.2~B
t!! l!.E'~ ClS'!:!1i! g>
'aJ!!:.!!ual1:"C;;oS!
~ 2'~iu 8.~:51!
8'~ 'S'K;iSi
~._ !~'O.5~B ~
g>.2.. "'~ . I"!! '"
~ W ~ CI"C.!l! lii "Iii 'E
:5 I: 1:1(.c 1:..
1ii~~'ill ~lS{lli!~
~s~a~~Q.~-II
(j
it
~
~
~
o
~
02/J r c:2 ~
~
I
o
....
I
~
:1
'"
cri
~
.
.
.
rIJ
11.I
_rIJ
rlJZ
zO
OD..
_rIJ
...11.I
00:::
e:(:E
~~
-C)
i~
~D..
II.Il1l:
KO:::
Ii
Q..J
We:(
rIJ...
gifi
0::::E
D..~
- ~
11.I
Q
Z
o
~
Z
11.I
:E
Ii
o
fd
0:::
i
C)
~.!!!
m Q.. 0 ..~
a..c::;; (!I;:5
Ol Ol '"
.s::. CD - CD...... C)
::=1i-g.c..:i'E
0'0.... m=.8.!a::l
t::c:l!!Ul~Eil;"C
!!!OOli!:"C~"u
-.-:= '" c: = 0
Kl15 "'Ea.. '" l!!:;
c. Ol - "CC)
"C_c:.c:....c:
GJCUo-m.-CUC1)
~~~~""'C::2=
g .8.'2o~~.e
.-t::'CD~N....O)
1:~~Ol~Olc:"2
Ol"'"COl:2.e-c:
_ ._.oU)m
'ei!:"gl!!80C: -~
,. I) '" 8 8 c: Ol
'E~ - .....2 a
"'~"2KlC:o,2'UOl
"Ca.._", "'.0
c-cu~ ==
.!P;.;U"06g~=
U)C~ffi'~5'g:l
:!2J!:! U"O'-U.:::J-C .
oa..",C:Eo~..9!
.s::. SElD()mU
lllC:2~U)o-S_-g(')
". 'iij"CUOO",
=E..ooc:-nUi~
'2 Iii >-~.2 "2 "3 "C'>
;;E+:;QJ'tU-cno~
.- 5j.EQ)~~..c:
>~CI)-""CI) U)v
e1c.e1Ol~OlOle1'"
<c.E 0.=" a.~=~
~
~
~
o
~
c
w
II:
(,)
w
II:
Q
Z
c
i
c
II.
-
Ul
Ol
c: ~
O"C
:.;:; c
~~
'" Ul
Ol'"
o::Ol
"C:5
l5.8
Ul '
i!:~
"'.-
a.."
~~
_U
"Cb
C:c.
~li
"'0
15-
c:'E
::J '"
8"g
J!!
~CIl
U"C
Ol-
.c:,g
- Ul .
i6e1:g
~~~
::1
'"':
~
~
~
"'~ a..
Ul'" c::
",a.. =
c: "C l!!
.12 ffi (/)"0
i!! Ol~ Ol
I.E ll:::5
ESe
.!!lCll
en Q. . 5
e:CI)~i
a.. = -, Q.
Ol 0 (!I; E
:5.,~8
"2~~1l
[~~i
Q. Q.-.Q
cu~:fic
>-oE'"
"C~t::"C
:RcoCQc
.....s::. Q. (Q
1ii- CD -
Ulc:Oi!:
ftI'- c 0
~i~~
sK~g~
o .,., Ol Ol '"
u'E;'O:: E~
Olo"CE=
.c:'C: c: 8 '"
~ c.. ca LL.
N
~
~
Ol '"
:5 .sa 'C
-a..C:
0_ '"
c:a.. .,
.2 Ol i!:
'1i;.t::. ca
",-a..
c.-
E"'"C
8.c: c: ,
-"'"C
Ole1Oll5
:t::! i.5: L..-
"2cC:cu
i5.CD 16 CD
)( "0 - >-
Olc:a..1(
o ftI GJ CD
- ..t::. C
~~~!
., a.. _
-.,~
'Uc:E,2
e1 J!! l!!
=e; Q. ~~
13 c: 15. Ol
e.2 E
8i~i
~..9!~~
Oc..-C
E c: 0
!I! '-;:l
:5- '"
~:Ee1
~~.~&
"!
~
~
-~
l!~,., 0
..~ -
liil5'g "C
910sUl.Sl"2Ol
C:S.!!U'- C.!!l.&:.
"':5_""~il;-
.,'uO -e1"0
~ J!! Ol (!I; c.iij t::
E6~~1:.ell
l!!16'5':"C '" Kl
g>e10~~;Ec:
I5.~Ol~~~.2
i!:~~ 'E~M
i,2 0 ~ ~'O
a..l!!'2.E,! c:
c::.g~t::.,~s
OlJ!!a1 8."2'>U..;
:5 ~ . e1 ." e1 .e ~
....-c:~"2~:t"C;
.....(1)"0- mmc
....."ii c: O=.....1:.c
.~"'c:l!!J!lOlc.
E::J1ijOl"C'-lllCll
Ol<T.c: "
~ CI):2:: as ~c...E
....-oo-.c -
Cl)O..c lO::::JQ....
-g- en c::5'T:1.5 8-
::J~~,g"Cu1:e1
"2 c. - ~ i~ 'E ,Ul
'0 .e "2 :2 ._ ,n ~ (,)
CQ)fnf/)!:i!""'cO
>.:;:C:-Q,Jim:E
.:2~e18l5:51ijC)
'"
~
~
UlOl
'ii)=~
"'c:-
.rJ.- c
C'D 'E'-
e,g ~
.e Q.~
::J
;:-"2
~ c: ::J
Ol c:
.c: E.-
.!.l 81:
'i",8
a.. 'is."C
- ....-
~,2~
.c:"Co
_Ol_
O~E'E
.,.- l!! '"
_ "C ~"C
c: c:
OlOl .l1!
c.o Q,0
8.'E~'2
E'" il5
~l .~
::JUl'2
., '2 i!' '"
!l!.i1l~~
s~~,g
-"'e1C.
"'~,20
~,2",1il
'"
~
~
02o~.;2 7
1:
'i
"CJ!i
c: c:
'" Ol ~
(l)ES
i!:t::lt)
'" ll~
a..~~
~"2~
li~j
::I....uO"
U)CDs,-
8~8~
"Co'"
.S: t6 _::E
...r.,E'ij
C:""'l!!.o
lI!'" ~c:
€~ c.~
~,g i!: C)
0.01)'"
::J~_
01 a.. 0
.S: .. ca c:
2 6 g>.l2
.!!l16:;:;i!!
a..e1'"''''
Ol~,gc.
~o::iil~
....
I
....
....
I
~
~
b
~~
"'0
"g~
"'::J
c: E .
j!::Jlfl
"'E"
t::._ 2
.c.~
~O~
::Je1c.
1: iil.~
c:16i6
.!!l0e1
a.._!.!
~ a.. l!!
~-"C
III a.. c:
:e~~
1i~ll
!i~
c:1l
ca.- c
'!9'E~
~~C)
....
~
~
:/l
./
"
o
w
....0
fl)Z
Z~
Q0
...W
CD:
c(:E
..~.~
~8
WD:
:ED..
W~
..JD:
D..O
!~
O..J
Uf~
Oz
D..W
i:li!
D..~
, ~
W
o
Z
o
~
Z
W
:Ii!
:&
o
fd
D:
8
:&
C!l
~.. ~
6-02 'S;
'OJ' c Q) Q) I!!
"'0 ~
E ... E: ~ - g>-g en
j Q) co en ._ .. .c
- c-
c..r.t::.car=",E
Q)C:_=C'UQ)~
cUQ).8uo:""o.
oQ)E 5 :~"
"''0 '0 ,., 0 n
C'- C.Q(J C ij...'"
~~~lo,g_U
!;)C<( -eoo
:lEc alQ)u:=;
b~.!!lI!!1::~OCl~
'Euo.:g 8.c:=;~o>
9lQ)i!!"I!!SCl-~
I!! = Q)1: Q).e"'~ g>~
c. ...Co.J:J -'C.Q
..a!!I--....Q)"E
.-"C~ =~cn"CQ)
-'E,.,:C ~ rc.. r5
:Ii S ~ iil.f! 0 8:"E 0
E ....0-....
1::1;j>'-=_= lir.5
cu.s=....::::::cu.J::..i...
o._Q)Q)Q)'" Q)'"
Q)c....'O :1:== &::
O.-!!! c:g.e.. :C'U
_0,2!P..c:.c1i).cS
"'I~ cu ~ - - ....
.~~ ~Clo ~~.5 E
~~~~~J!l~~~
~!.!Q)!ES!.!"'"
Q).!l!.:t'E .!l!.o."'.!I!
.cee.Q):ielPeu
t- o...J:2 0 0.0 o.i5'
..,
~
~
,;,;
-
C:
o
~
z
o
~
W
It:
U
W
It:
Q
Z
<(
rn
:.::
It:
::
_ '0
-..c
1:-"
clll..,
~ 8.5jl
Cle-
o.c
~ 8l
:21l~
VI .~ &;
c e Q)
S 0..0
- ...
bCO
-1Il'O
.2 $'E
.BuS
II:: "'v
.l!!.5..,
..~It:
~.~~
=so~
g~E
""~
8 s.~
"'Q)'O
=s::.CU
U-'O
~.E i
= ~.E
.. ":E! .
~ .;l'j "?
o
1::
..
0.
.!!!
J!l'B
c c
~ 5
1::U
llli
~al
.e .~
EO
e=
"
[;"
..
J! .~
>
UI!!
llo.
.!i; E
c e
~~
00.
'Ei!:
Q) 0
E ~
0.0.
.2-
Q)o.
~Q)
0=
co
~
~
.B
~
!j5
~.!!l
u"
._~
iu
E E
e~
~~
0.
C
J! .~
i~
.!i;~
c c
..S
Q)-
_c
~ ~
U1::
~ll.
o"l/l
~U!
,.,ci!:
""I!!"
u._ 0.
Q)",.,
~ ~ II
~
~
~
i
e
0.
Q)
~
-
-
o
~o. Q)
E- E
.l!!c;S
ES'S
,,~ 0
EOQ)
~'E=
c!6
li 8. "2
cEll;
.2 S.2l
'!!!i!: Q)
2ii
0. E
....
.!!! .!!!1:
~ -
'u.l!!=
.l!!'!!! ~
>..
c .. c
.2"3 0 .
m.s::.:a;m
~u'O ..
~ECb
Q)~lll
.!c;;ElO
roQ)RU>
.~~a;Q.
0..5 It: 0:
I'-
~
~
..
:!
1:=
'u
J2.l!!
" c
~.Q
ii
5~
"Q)
--
""
0'[
Eo
Q)
r~
c~
- ..
~1l"E
'2''' Ol
o.OlE
bl!~
.- 2 Ol
E 0. ~
J!!0'O
:e-cu
g~=
._ c
! ii
I'-
~
~
~ c2CJ ~,)..f5
E'O
!cu
~.~
c=
.- "
, ..
~b
l~
.- I!!
,E 0.
01
U:
c Ol
.!!~
..-
'C-
0.0
K'E
o.Ol
.. c
0l8.
= SE
o
-..
c ..
~.;;; .
0U;=
15 ~
..~8
~Oli
"""
::1
..,
~
~
"'!
~
~
I
N
....
I
......
.!!l
0"
-~
Q)u
~ E
-s
c ..
S ~
3lc
".-
0,
~..
"i!:
1:!
~'2
rE
.!!lo
jl
~~
It:~
'08:
Iii..
~~
....
0... .
!I~
"""
"'!
~
~
.
.
.
MEMORANDUM
May 4, 1994
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Growth Management Oversight Commission
SUBJECT: 1993 GMOC REPORT
It is again with pleasure that the GMOC presents Its 1993 Report to the Mayor and City
Council. The Commission members are aensitive to 'their responsibility to provide the
Mayor and Council with a succinct report, consistent with adopted threshold standards.
In the process of providing orientation to new commission members, with regard to the
purpose and intent of the Commission, It was our perception that several of the thresholds
are due for review and possible revision. That perception was reinforced as we heard
from, and conversed with, City staff and extemal agencies providing reports to the
Commission. The need for change is based largely on the fact that; (1) the City's
population has grown from approximately 90,000 In 1985 to 147,500 today due to the
Montgomery annexation and growth. (2) the threshold standards are seven years old, and
(3) there have been significant technological advances which Impact the delivery and
measurement of services. Therefore, the GMOC encourages the City Council to direct a
'review of the Police. Fire, Air Quality, Library, and Parks and Recreation thresholds.
As an overview of the 1993 Report conclusions, the following identifies thoae thresholds
found to either be complying or non-complying. and provides a brief summary of pertinent
issues in each respective threshold area:
1. The City is In compliance with the following Thresholds:
Schools
Ubrarles
Sewer
Drainage
Traffic
Fiscal
Parks and Recreation
On the basis of the school dlstricla' Indication of sutllclent capacity to house new
students. given the City's 12-18 month growth projections, the districts were found
to be in compliance. The GMOC remains concemed, however, about compliance
over the longer-tenn, and has therefore outlined In Ita recommendations several
actions necessary to address continued overcrowding and future growth. The City
_~ . .20./.;2.')
I'
",l"'-i
J"
;1\
Hubbard/GMOC
-2-
May 4,1994
and districts need to continue to work cooperatively to achieve full and equitable
mitigation of growth's impacts upon schools, particularly In westem Chula Vista
where opportunities for expansion are limited due to existing development.
""'"
With the planned completion of the 37,000 square foot South Chula Vista Library,
the City will meet and surpass the library threshold. Significant changes are being
brought about in the present and future delivery of library services through the use
of technology. This technology has the potential to bring about profound effects In
citizens library access, and in the storage and retrieval of Information. The GMOC
therefore feels it relevant and timely for the Library Board of Trustees to provide
Input on the relationship of such changes to the library threshold standard.
Under the new San Diego Area Wastewater Management District (SDAWMD), the
City's future sewerage treatment capacity rights are not presently guaranteed as
they were under the prior Metro system. It is therefore being recommended that the
City retain its consulting team to guide the important decision to remain in, or leave
the SDAWMD, which must be made by July 1, 1994. That decision could
significantly affect the City's future approach to providing adequate sewerage
treatment capacity and water reclamation.
The GMOC continues to draw attention to the roughly 80 needed drainage
improvements west of 1-805, which under current funding conditions would take over
20 years to complete. Similar to the identification by the Engineering Department """"
of the present 15 top priority projects, the City needs to establish an ongoing annual
program of prioritization and funding to assure timely completion of all 80+ projects.
Such an effort is envisioned as necessary to ensure continued threshold
compliance.
The GMOC has identified 5 locations where potentially serious traffic threshold
compliance problems could occur within the next 5 to 10 years. Of those locations,
"H" Street both east and west of 1-805 continues to be of particular concem. It is
recommended that a focused study of these locations be conducted as described
In the report, with recommendations for proposed actions to ensure continued
threshold compliance over the longer-tenn. That report should be available to assist
the GMOC's review commencing in October, 1994.
The City has established a well-functioning Development Impact Fee (DIF) program
which has enabled maintenance of service levels commensurate with growth. The
GMOC, however, Is concemed about the continued recession and ongoing State
budget cuts, and their implications to future staffing and service levels. In order to
Identify those implications, it is recommended that a report be prepared to evaluate
the current reliance on one time revenues to balance the City's budget. and to
Identify the potential short range impacts to services If such revenues are not
available, and the current economic climate continues.
As endorsed by the City Council in 1992, the GMOC continues to encourage timely """'\
.
~02tJ-3{/
. Hubbard/GMOC
-3-
May 4, 1994
adoption of a revised Parks and Recreation threshold standard to achieve 3 acres
of parkland per 1000 population both east and west of 1-805. The GMOC is
concemed that despite demonstrated need, no partdand hes been added in westem
Chula Vista since inception of the Growth Management programs In 1987. It is
recommended that the City complete and act upon the Parks Implementation Plan
(PIP) currently being prepared by staff. The PIP Is crucial to the ultimate provision
of needed facilities and services, and to completion of a revised threshold standard
for adoption.
2. The City is not in compliance with the following Thresholds:
Pollee
.
The threshold for Priority I (emergency) calls for service (CFS) was not fully met for
the third consecutive review period, although the shortfall was slight. Overall, CFS
volume has risen by more than 20% in the last three years. Reports Indicated that
the present record keeping systems do not enable data management which can
quantify whether these CFS increases are growth related. Without a good handle
on the pattems and other aspects of Increased CFS, it Is difficult for the Police
Department and the GMOC to dete""ine whether threshold perfonnance Issues will
continue to exist, or how to best structure and manage police resources In
combating crime and maintaining appropriate service levels. It Is therefore
recommended that the City Council support timely Implementation of the proposed
Computer Aided Dispatch and Records Management System (CADIRMS), to
provide for proper management of police resources, and to enable the GMOC to
identify and quantify growth's impacts on the delivery of police services.
FlrelEMS
.
Data indicates that the Fire Department has not met the minimum threshold
standard, however, other factors exist (beyond those originally Included In
fo""ulation of the standard) which alter the appearance of actual perfonnance I
compliance. To resolve these inconsistencies, and the GMOC's concems, It is
again recommended, as with police services, that the City Council support timely
Implementation of the CADIRMS aystam which Is a joint proposal of the Police and
Fire Departments.
3. The GMOC recommends that the City Council lasue Statements of Concem for the
following threshold standards:
Water
Despite increased coordination and cooperation between the City and the two major
local water districts, the GMOC remains concemed about Iong-te"" water
availability, dependance on Imported water supply, and the need for development
of adequate future storage, and reclamation and other altematlve water sources to
.
-~ .:2tJ/}/
III
1), I
),
Hubbard/GMOC
-4-
May 4, 1994
'"'"
meet the needs of future growth. Consistent with the many issues outlined in the
report, the Inter Agency Water Task Force (IAWTF) continues to provide an
excellent forum in which to address these matters of mutual concem.
Air Quality
Although the San Diego Region continued to experience Improvement in overall air
quality during 1993, an acceptable level of air quality has not yet been achieved.
Implementation of the APCD's adopted Regional Air Quality Strategy (AQS) and its
various measures such as the TCM .and TOM Plans, and a forthcoming Indirect
Source Reduction Plan are crucial to continued air quality improvement, and should
be encouraged and fully supported by the City. Additionally, and based on repeated
input from the APCD, it is recommended that the air quality threshold standard be
revised to achieve better coordination with the APCD and SANDAG, and in
Implementing provisions of the AQS. The City Council should authorize formation
of a task force to develop a draft revised standard for GMOC consideration with its
review commencing in October, 1994.
The GMOC commends the School, Water and Air Pollution Control Districts, and the
various City departments for their continued cooperation in working with the Commission.
We are most appreciative of the outstanding support from the Planning Department, and
in particular Ed Batchelder. "'"
Sincerely,
~-
-/~f ~1::Y
Tns Hu bard
Chairman, GMOC
(IlMOC II\.'IIPT .aI\IR.MEM)
'"'"
r 020/J/A
.
(
.
IUBMITTI;Q.
,.,A y 1994
.
-/ :;LfJ - 3)
)J ,,~
""',
~,
,
"'"
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
1993 REPORT
Commission Members
Tris Hubbard, Chairman (Education)
Elizabeth Allen, Vice Chairman '(Montgomery)
Will T. Hyde (Environmental)
Chuck Peter (Business)
Thomas Martin (Planning Commission)
Mike Armbrust (Center City)
James Langius (Development)
James Kell (Eastern Territories)
Carol "Lynn" Dull (Sweetwater)
""""
Staff
Edgar Batchelder, Associate Planner
May 1994
""""
,
~ d-c;?- J;/
F";
"
i
.
.
.
TODlc
Introduction
Process
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Development Forecasts
Threshold/Annual Review Summary
Annual Review of Thresholds
Police
Fire
Water
Air Quality
Schools
Libraries
Sewer
Drainage
Fiscal
Traffic
Parks and Recreation
ADDendlx
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
Police Department Memorandum I.
Fire Department Memorandum
Water District Communications J.
APCD Convnunicatlons
School DIstrict Communications K.
library Memorandum
Engineering Sewer and Drainage Reports
Engineering Traffic Reports
e.sm
1
2
2
5
6
9
11
16
20
28
30
33
35
38
42
Finance Department
Memorandum
Parka and Recreation
Department Memorandum
Development Forecast
Report
.--
- ~ .;L()/ 3~
"
1-1)
""'""
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
1993 REPORT
May 1, 1993
INTRODUCTION
In November 1987, through the input of citizens and developers. the City Council adopted
the Threshold/Standards Policy for Chula Vista. Eleven public facility and service issues
are addressed by the Policy, and each is discussed in terms of a goal, objectives,
"threshold" or standard, and implementation measures. The Standards form the backbone
of an overall growth management program for the City which has evolved since 1987
through adoption of a Growth Management Element of the General Plan in 1989, and a
Growth Management Program document and Implementing Ordinance in 1991. Adherence
to these Citywide Standards is intended to preserve and enhance public facilities and
services, the environment, and the quality-of-Iife of Chula Vista residents as growth occurs.
. To provide an independent annual City-wide Threshold/Standards compliance review, a
Growth Management Oversight Committee (GMOC) was created. The Committee was
appointed by the City Council in the summer of 1988. It is composed of nine members
representing a geographical balance of residents as well as a cross section of interest ""'""
including education, environmental, business and development. There Is also
representation by the Planning Commission. In April of 1991, the City Council changed
the designation of the Committee to the Growth Management Oversight Commission. As
Commission vacancies occur they should be filled reflecting the geographic or special
interest designation which they represent.
The responsibilities of the Commission in conducting its annual review include the
following:
a determination of whether the thresholds have been complied with on both a
project and cumulative basis over the prior year;
whether compliance is likely to be maintained based on both short-term and long-
term development forecasts;
whether each threshold is appropriate for its goal;
whether any new thresholds should be adopted for any Issues;
whether any new issues should be added to or deleted from the threshold group;
whether the City has been using developer fees for the Intended purpose;
what the fiscal impact of threshold compliance may be; and
whether the means of compliance are appropriate and being achieved.
Development projects in Chula VISta are required to demonstrate that the Threshold
Standards will be maintained as growth occurs. Each project Is reviewed, and
appropriately conditioned to assure that needed facilities and eervices are In place In ""'""
advance of. or concurrent with proposed development. This .concurrency" policy
# .;!.O~
.
(
.
.
promotes the continuation of a high quality-of-life for existing as well as future city
ntsidents.
PROCESS
The Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) held a series of 8 meetings from
December 1993 through April 1994. The Commission spent the first meeting reviewing the
City Council's actions on the 1992 GMOC Report and ntcommendations, and in ntviewing
the established thresholds and Commission ntsponsibilities as an orientation for new
members. The next 5 meetings went spent ntviewing the growth fontcasts and the
threshold policies, and in determining compliance with those policies based on reports
which were submitted by both individual City departments and extemal agencies.
Presentations of the reports were made by ntpresentatives of the Sweetwater and Otay
wlter districts, Chula Vista Elementary and Sweetwater Union High school districts, the
San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, and City staff including Engineering, Tratlic
Engineering, Parks and Recreation, Library, Fire, Police, Finance, and Planning. The
, GMOC reviewed each threshold and determined whether or not it was appropriate to issue
a statement of concem or make other ntcommendations regarding that threshold,
Following completion of the individual threshold ntviews, the GMOC prepared, ntviewed
and adopted this annual ntport to the Planning Commission and City Council.
The GMOC's review Is structured around a fiscal year cycie, whentby the Commission is
scheduled to commence activity in October (ntviewing the prior fiscal year), and completing
In annualntport in about February. This particular ntview cycie is intended to allow the
GMOC ntport to be available concurrent with the commencement of City budget
deliberations for the coming fiscal year. Such an Ipproach accommodates consideration
by the City Council of any GMOC recommendations which may have bUdget implications.
The otlicial review period for this ntport is July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. However,
any issues Identified during the second half of 1993 and early in 1994 ant also addressed
in this report as appropriate. The next GMOC ntview period will begin in October, 1994,
and address the period from July 1, 1993 through June 30,1994.
DEVELOPMENT F08ECASTS
The Threshold/Standards Policy calls for City staff to pntpant both short-range (12 to 18
month) and mid-range (5 to 7 years) development fontcasts at the beginning of the annual
GMOC ntview process. Complimentary to thntshold performance evaluation over the prior
year period, these fontcasts serve to provide a common basis by which the GMOC, staff
and extemal agencies can identify and addntss futunt potential thntShold concems before
a problem arises. The fontcasls were prepared In July 1993 in coordination with
SANDAG's Series 8 Regional FOntcast efforts, and distributed to the ntSpective agencies
and City departments for evaluation and ntport back to the GMOC. A copy of the Planning
Departmenfs fontcast ntport is included as Appendix K
(
-~ ;20'J7
2
,
f),
?\~
Ail
~
12-18 Month Forecast
In response to the ongoing recession and current economic climate, the forecast figures
consist of a range with a low end and high end. The low end is based primarily on a 24-
month trend analysis of prior construction activity during the last half of 1991, all of 1992,
and the first half of 1993, and forecasts ~ dwelling units to be permitted for construction
and ID dwelling units to reach occupancy over the 18 month period from July 1993
through December 1994. The high end forecast primarily reflects the local development
community's anticipated construction schedules, and projects 1.696 dwelling units to be
permitted for construction and 1.ZZQ. dweHing units to reach occupancy over the same
period. The apparently large variant in the forecast range reflects the continued
uncertainty as to the pace of recessionary recovery, the regaining of consumer confidence
in an unstable job market, and the availability of development I construction financing in
the wake of the S & L failures. By comparison, residential development activity levels in
both 1992 and 1993 were. about one half of average annual levels experienced during the
later 1980's. Local economists are predicting only a modest increase In housing unit
authorizations on a county-wide basis during 1994, as compared to 1993.
5-7 Year Forecest
As noted earlier, a new mid-range forecasting methodology consistent with the SANDAG
draft Series 8 forecast model, has again been used for this forecast. The City's intent in """'"
coordinating the mid-range (5-7 year) forecast with Series 8, is to further improve
forecasting methodology consistent with the regional and sub-regional models, and to allow
for easier and more consistent updates of these forecasts. In doing so, the same
assumptions utilized in the Series 8 forecast for projecting future growth and development
in the region are applied locally to the City's forecast. These assumptions include, but are
not limited to, population trends, economic trends, and infrastructure needs.
The Series 8 model also considers the remaining development potential of all lands, both
vacant and infill, within the greater San Diego Region and its subregions. Because of this,
local planning efforts, such as those related to public facility planning, will benefit from the
City's forecast being linked to the regional forecast, as it provides the City the ability to
consider the Impact of all projects within and adjacent to our Planning Area. This revised
local forecasting approach will also enable the City to more accurately anticipate Iong-
range public facility needs, and to address necessary preplanning by the development
community in concert with the policies of the City and other affected govemment agencies.
The forecast publication is attached as an Appendix K to this report, and provides a full
description of this improved approach.
Similar to the 12-18 month forecast, a low and high-end range were again used. City-wlde,
during the next five to seven years, the average annual number of dwelling units expected
to be completed ranges from a low of ~ to a high of~. These annual averages
refleet increased activity levels In the latter years of the forecast (post 1995) associated
with a general shift in county-wide development pattems, and the projected ,
commencement of construction In Otay Ranch. This forecast also takes into consideration
~c20<5Y
.
.
.
known facility capacity limitations, particularly those related to traffic circulation and the
proposed State Route 125 phasing and financing ltudy.
While a majority of the forecast is attributable to growth in eastern Chula VISta, the figures
do reflect approximately 150 dwelling units per year of infill development in western Chula
Vista based primarily on an analysis of historic trends.
-,.rr: ..2IJ ~ 3;
..
,
/
(
'I
t1F
~
i
.
:;)
en
~
~
0:
...
e
:;)
z
.,z
Ie
....
en
Q
0:
~
z
t!
en
9
o
:z:
en
w
0:
~
-'9 Q
e wZ
~OClW
z:Z:z.
1!!1t)!~
o~uu
o.j: ~
It)
QUWW
z~it~
CU_~
~:!G-'
goco.
c~l=8
u..
ol=~o W
... Gl"'~U
zZu;>\ijz
~ffizu-~
~!~~~~
liiu~c U
OW
-,u
o~...
:z:-W
It)-'..
wo.-
!XI!
j:8
........
11)1
it' ~
I I I i I
W ::)
W P I J
::)
It) g II ~
fa
J I IJlui
"0 ~ I
.. ~
0. It Ii .Ii C Ii .Ii
0 ........
N ... . lIS . ..: . .; .,;
... ... ...
~ ~t?-L/?/
.
-ANNUAL REVIEW OF THRESHQLDS-
DtRESHOLDS REFLECII~G SlATEMENTS OF CONOERN, OR NONooCOMPLlANCE
a POLICE -
THE GM9C FINDS IHA T THE CITY IS NOT IN c;OM!'JJANCE WITH THI; POLICE
IH"E~HQLD STANQARD. ALTHO!.LG!:t tHE SHQ81FALL "AS IUGI1T. ANp
PERFORMANCj: ,S SIGN,IFICANTL Y IMPROVED OVER LAST YEAR. THE CITY
SHOULD CONTINUE TO CLOSELY MONITOR THIS TH"9!:tQL.D IN THE NEAR
FUTURE.
.
When.the GMOC reviewed the threshold standard last year. the Police Department
had recently corne under new administration, and a variety of operational and
managerial changes designed to Improve performance were being Implemented.
In large part, those changes were In respon~ to the two prior years of non-
conformance with the threshold standard (Fiscal Years '90-'91 and '91-'92). At that
time, the GMOC recognized that It would take time for the changes to bring about
Improvement In threshold performance. Those changes have now been operational
for approximately 18 months, and based on this year'. performance (FY '92-'93),
appear to be working. However, despite Improved performance, the Department
again did not achieve full conformance with the standard. While both measures for
Priority " Calls for Service (CFS) were met, only one of the two measures for
Priority I CFS was met as follows:
Priority I Calls for Service (PI CFS)-
The threshold for Priority I (emergency) CFS requires that 84% of these calls
be responded to within 7 minutes, with an average response time of 4.5
minutes or less measured annually. The actual performance for FY 1992-93
Indicates that 84.2% of all Priority I calls were responded to within 7 minutes,
but with an average response time of 4.7 minutes (5.2% below the standard).
As a measure of Improvement, the performance ligures for FY '91-'92 were
81.2% of PI CFS within 7 minutes, with an average response time of 4.9
minutes.
.
Priorltv " Calls for Service (PII CFSl-
The threshold for Priority II (urgent) CFS requlntS that 82% of these calls be
responded to within 7 minutes, with an average ruponse time of 7 minutes
or less measured annually. The actual performance for FY 1992-93
Indicates that 84.2% of all PII CFS were ntSponded to within 7 minutes, with
an average response time of 8.33 minutes. The data Indicates that the
threshold for PII CFS Is being met.
-~ cRj -1//
/
~01
,
While the GMOC considers the shortfall to be a modest deficiency, we none-the-
less remain concemed since this Is third consecutive year in which Police
performance has been very near, or below, the minimum acceptable standard.
Additionally, It is difficult for the GMOC to pinpoint causes and recommend remedial
actions, as no conclusive evidence exists to indicate that matter is attributable to
growth. The Departmenfs written and verbal reports indicated that the present
record keeping systems do not enable data management in a fashion which can
readily quantify whether increases in CFS are growth related. Overall, CFS volume
has risen by more than 20% over the last 3 fiscal years, with a trend in annual
increase between 5% and 9%.
Without a good handle on the pattems and other aspects of increased CFS within
the City, It is difficult for the Police Department and the GMOC to determine whether
threshold performance Issues will continue to exist, or how best to structure and
manage police resources in combating crime and maintaining appropriate service
levels. In these regards, the Department has emphasized the importance of
technological enhancements through a Comp,uter Aided Dispatch and Records
Management System (CADIRMS). The proposed CADIRMS system provides
numerous benefits, and would also serve the Fire Department. Such systems have
been successfully implemented in other jurisdictions within the San Diego Region,
and have shown to be an invaluable tool. City staff have been working on the
present CADIRMS project proposal since 1992, and are currently preparing the final
benefit/cost analysis. Additionally, staff is developing altemative project funding
sources and financing methodologies for review by the City Manager. Staff expects
that the City Council will receive a Supplemental Budget Report in late May, 1994,
discussing a wide range of policy considerations associated with system
implementation, along with staffs recommendations on how to fund and finance the
proposed project. Therefore, the GMOC recommends:
. That the City Council support timely Implementation of the
proposed CAD/RMS system, including neeusal)' funding
tachnlques and allocations. The CAD/RMS system wil" for the
first time, enable the GItfOC to Identify end quantify growth's
Impacts on the del/vel)' of pollee service.
The GMOC highlights the importance of the proposed CADIRMS system to the
Mure of managing police service and response times. If only existing techniques
I systems remain in place, the GMOC foresees continuation of the present inability
to identify and quantify growth's impacts on the delivery of police services. In
addition. given the post-implementation time window necessary for any new system
to produce worthwhile indicators and/or measurable results, the GMOC also
recommends:
. That re-eva/uation of the Pollee Thruhold Standard occur
approximately one year subsequent to implementation of the
CAD/RItfS eystem. It Ie entJclpated that at INst one year of
7
-y co2!) ?y.;2
~
'""'"
"""\
.
(
CADlRItfS mtIstIcs will be neceaa'Y to determine " current
/aUN Influanclng poIlc. performance cen be aolved through
ma".gerlal technlquN, or" an alteration of the current Standard
,. warranted. Aaumlng th. CADIRItfS ayatem ,. In plac. by th.
end of 1114, th. GMOC would cona/tler the th"""old mndllrd
lor ,.vlalon In their annual ,.vlew commencing October, 1195.
Beyond the CADIRMS proposal, the Police Department Is also embarking on a
multi-faceted proactive policlng et'rort under the well grounded philosophy that It Is
more effective in the long run to prevent crime than to respond to calls for service.
Examples of such efforts include:
.
The Street Team comprised of 5 sworn otlicers devoted to preventing street
crimes such as robberies and drug dealing;
The Gang Unit comprised of 4 swom officers to provide enhanced police
presence within the gang community by patrolling places gang members are
known to congregate;
The Regional Auto Theft Task Force (RA1/) and the Tactical Action Cargo
Theft Team (TACT) comprised of 1 sergeant and 2 agents speclalizing in
reducing auto thefts and the theft of trucking industry cargo;
4) The School Resource Officer (SRO) Program that assigns swom otIicers to
local high schools on a full-time basis; and
2)
1)
3)
5) The Police Activities League (PAL) which provides youth with a variety of
healthy altematives to criminal behavior and/or gang membership.
The Department has also implemented a Swom Statling Overhire Program, which
qualifies recruits before they are needed. This enables the Department to come
closer to fully staffing existing positions during the course of the year given the
amount of tumover that occurs In a department with more than 240 persons. Taken
together. the Department projects that the previously noted efforts will result In
Improved response time data. and attainment of threshold compliance for the next
reporting period (July 1, 1993 through June 30, 1994).
.
y- ~tJ';~J
8
~
"
~-t
~[{'
a
FIRElEMS .
THE GMOC FINDS THAT THE CITY IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE
FIRElEMS THRESHOLD STANDARD. IT APPEARS. HOWEVER. THAT THIS
t40N-COMPLIANCE IS A REFLECTION OF A CHANGE IN THE MANNER OF
DATA COLLECTION. A"D NOT A REDUCTION OF FIRE SERVICE I.EVELS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 1992.93
The threshold standard requires that 85% of all emergency fire and medical calls
be responded to within 7 minutes. Response statistics presented for Fiscal Year
1992-93 indicate that only 78% of all emergency calls were responded to within 7
minutes. Although this data appears to Indicate that the Fire Department has not
met the minimum threshold standard, other factors exist (beyond those originally
included in formulation of the standard) which alter the appearance of actual
performance/compliance .
There are three major components of response time: Dispatch time; Tumout time;
and Travel time. Disoatch time is the time required to receive a call for service (call
intake time) and to dispatch an emergency vehicle to the incident. Tumout time is
the time required by fire personnel to leave the fire station after receipt of the
dispatch instructions. Travel time is the time taken to drive to the Incident location.
When the 7 minute threshold standard was developed in 1987, the Fire Department
had a semi-automated computer dispatch system which did not record call intake
or call dispatching times. During call intake (which is a sub-c:omponent of Dispatch
time), the time needed to gather relevant Information varies considerably from call-
to-call. Thereby, staff could not establish a meaningful call intake time, and that
component was therefore not included in the threshold standard. Conversely, there
is generally only a small degree of variance in the time needed to actually dispatch
(via radio transmission) a call to the station. As such, a fixed dispatch time of 30
seconds was established as part of the 7 minute standard. The remaining 6
minutes and 30 seconds was ascribed for tumout and travel time, based largely on
the then average time taken for these two components; the intent stemming from
the public consensus that current service levels were adequate, and should not be
allowed to deteriorate.
In July, 1992 (the beginning of the present threshold review period), new
communications equipment was Installed In the Dispatch Center. The system now
captures the actual total dispatch time, Including the call Intake component. The
resulting effect to threshold performance measurement is that available statistics
now Include time factors In the overall response time statistics which were not
Included In the current threshold standard. These are call Intake time frames which
were never included, and actual dispatch times VB. the ftat 30 seconds. As a result,
the GMOC has concluded that It does not have before It statistical performance
measurements consistent with the threshold standard's present structure. In this
light, the Fire Department was able to effectively show that tumout and travel times
9
~ ~tP~L/i
'"""\
........,
.'"""'\
.
l
remain largely unchanged from prior years, Illustrating that delivery of fire and
emergency medical services has not deterioreted.
Toward resolving this statistical Inconsistency, the FIre Department has Indicated
that the present dispatch system Is not technically capable of separating out the call
Intake and dispatch components. They are, however, presently working In
conjunction with the Police Department on Implementation of a new Computer Aided
Dispatch and Records Management System (CADIRMS). The CADIRMS system
will provide a weaith of operational and managerial enhancements which will directly
benefit overall response times, Including the ability to statistically separate all
components of overall response time, and for the first time. allow the direct
evaluation of growth's Impacts on the delivery of services. City staff have been
working on the present CADIRMS project proposal since 1992. and are currently
preparing the final benefit/cost analysis. Additionally, staff is developing altemative
project funding sources and financing methodologies for review by the City
Manager. Staff expects that the City Council ",iii receive a Supplemental Budget
Report in late May, 1994. discussing a wide range of policy considerations
associated with system Implementation. along with statrs recommendations on how
to fund and finance the proposed project. Therefore, the GMOC recommends:
.
That the City Council approve, and """'ate neceaary funding for,
the propcned CADIRMS aptem which will Improve aervlces, and enable
the Fire Department to evaluate Ita tupOnae tlme performance In
conwctlng present atatlstlcal Inconslatanc/ea, and In determining
whether any changes to the Threshold Standard are needed.
The GMOC highlights Its understanding that If only existing systems remain in
place, there will be a continuation of the present Inability to evaluate threshold
performance consistent with the provisions of the current standard. Given the post.
Implementation time windows typically necessary for any new system to produce
worthwhile indicators and/or measurable results, the GMOC also recommends:
.
.
. That a comprehensive review of the Fire Threshold be undertaken
approximately one year subsequent to Implementatlon of the CADlRMS
sptem. It /a antlc/pated that at leaat one INr of CADlRMS atatlat/cs
will be nacaaaary In resolving present mauurement inconsistencies,
and In determIning " any alteration of tha currwrt atandard /a
warranted. Asaumlng the CADlRIIS spfMJ /a In place by the end of
1'84, the GMOC would consider tha threshold atandard for rev/alon In
thalr ann..' review commenclng OcfQbar, f"5.
In the interim, It will be Important to maintain full atatIing In the Communications
Center to ensure maximum efficiency during peak demand periods for both fire and
police calls.
-~ ffi'-~
,
"
H
<
"""\
a WATER-
THE GMOC FINDS THAT BOTH THE SWEETWATER AUTHORITY AND OTAY
WATER DISTRICT .HAVE SUFF=ICIENT WATER SUPPLY AND AVAILABILITY TO
MEET THE NEEDS OF LOCAL qROWTH OVER THE NEXT 12 TO 18 MONTHS.
AND ARE THEREFORE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT ASP~CT OF THE WATER
THRESHOLD STANDARD.
THE GMOC. HOWEVER. BEMAINS CONCERNED ABOUT. LONG-TERM WATER
AVAILABILITY. PEPENDANCE ON IMPORTED SUPPLY. AND THE NEED FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF ADEQUATE FUTURE STORAGE. REC~MATION AND
OTHER ALTERNATIVE WATER SOURCES. AND 8ECOMME~DS THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL ISSUE A 'TATEMENT OF CONCERN TO BOTH THE
'WEETWATER AUTHORITY AND THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT.
While the GMOC is concerned about the potentially serious situation regarding
longer-term water supply, we want to acknowledge both Otay Water District and
Sweetwater Authority for their responsiveness in addressing prior GMOC concerns
regarding shorter-term supply and storage issues, and for their continuing efforts in
these regards. Of particular note is the ongoing development of very positive
coordination and cooperation with the City to mutually address water matters
through the Inter Agency Water Task Force (IAWTF). .........
Both the Sweetwater Authority and the Otay Water District again provided the
GMOC with thorough written and oral reports, and individually and jointly are
undertaking a variety of efforts toward planning for sufficient delivery and storage
systems to meet the demands of forecasted growth. Some pertinent highlights of
those efforts are:
1) Both agencies continue to promote and develop water conservation
programs applied to both existing users and new development.
2) Sweetwater Authority is continuing to work closely with the City on the
Bayfront project to ensure appropriate Infrastructure planning and upgrades
occur.
3)
Sweetwater Authority continues to work toward diversifying Its supply and
storage programs to reach a 50% norHfependance goal on Imported water
through several efforts including: a brackish groundwater desalinization
project within the Lower Sweetwater Valley for which an EIR is presently
being prepared; studying, through the CWA, the storage of surplus water In
groundwater aquifers by using Injection/extraction wells In the San Diego
formation; and evaluating Increase of the storage capacity of Sweetwater
Reservoir. Otay Water District is also participating In the funding of the CWA
study of the San Diego formation for groundwater or recharge potential. .
"""\
_~ .;2tJ~t/~
t.
4)
Both agencies continue to coordinate with the CWA on the construction of
Pipeline No.4, expected to be completed by January 1997. This second
pipeline to serve the South Bay will increase the treated water delivery
capacity to Otay Water District, and generally provide additional water
delivery reliability to both districts In the Instance of planned or unplanned
shutdowns of the present one pipeline.
5) The CWA Is undertaking a variety of efforts to improve the reliability of the
region's water supply system In the Instance of repeated drought, or
sustained delivery Intenuptions from the Metropolitan Water District (MWD).
Part of this Includes MWD's acquisition of a large reservoir site In the
Riverside County area.
6) Otay Water is continuing to develop a sutlicient storage and supply network
to meet the demands of new development. and In accordance with CWA
goals, to sustain a 10 day independen~ in the event that potable water
deliveries by CWA to Otay are Intenupted by planned or emergency
aqueduct l5hutdowns. Otay has completed a study entitled "Emergency
Water Supply Options" outlining the following potentially viable options:
an agreement with the City of San Diego for storage and treatment
capacity in Lower Otay Reservoir;
.
an agreement with Helix Water District for treatment capacity at their
Levy facility in conjunction with the CWA and Padre Dam Municipal
Water District;
7)
storage in San Vmcente Reservoir and paper transfer agreements
with CWA and Helix between San Vincente and EI Capitan Reservoir;
a cooperative agreement which could allow Otay Water to use
Sweetwater Reservoir as an emergency lOurce of supply.
Sweetwater Authority has prepared a report dated May 1989 outlining
requirements and costs to accomplish such. Additionally, the two
districts are continuing to explore development of a conjunctive use
groundwater project In the Middle Sweetwater River Basin which
could yield as much as 1000 acre feet per year of storage capacity for
Otay Water. '
Otay Is presently updating lis District Master Plan which will Incorporate the
above concepts of water storage and supply from neighboring districts, along
with other proposed capital Improvements designed to meet the needs of
projected local growth. A draft of that plan ahoulcl be available In summer
1994.
.
12
Y ,2I)~'17
I
('
~\?
8) Regarding reclaimed water, Otay continues to pursue the development of
reclaimed water facilities and piping networks in new developments, and
supports the construction of the reclaimed water treatment plant proposed
in the Otay River Valley. That plant was originally included as part of the
Clean Water Program, and slated for start-up in 1998, although the City of
San Diego has since indefinitely postponed work on all reclamation plants in
the Clean Water Program. \he Otay Valley plant is a significant local facility
in that it would provide reclaimed water for these newly built distribution
facilities.
Relatedly, Sweetwater Authority is not currently considering the use of
reclaimed water due to the probability that it will not be available In the
foreseeable future. However, they would support a treatment plant such as
that proposed in the Otay Valley. The GMOC Is concemed with such a
position in that the future reality of reclaimed water is largely contingent on
the proactive efforts of concemed parties to make it a reality. Efforts are
needed to establish and coordinate common goals and strategies among the
two local districts and the City regarding the future of reclaimed water use.
The IAWTF presents an excellent forum in which to accomplish such.
Otay Water's 30 million gallon underground reservoir in Eastlake Greens is
scheduled for completion in summer 1994. Regarding concems expressed
last year over the location of proposed reservoirs within the City, the
previously noted District Master Plan will serve to coordinate future siting.
The need for such coordination Is necessary In order to resolve
environmental concems, and to maximize the opportunity for other land uses
which could be precluded by the reservoir facilities.
The District has also drilled an approximately 900 foot deep exploratory well
at the Eastlake Greens reservoir site. This well may produce about 50
gallons per minute.
10) Representatives of both Districts are continuing to meet with the City and
other interested parties to address issues of joint concem through the
IAWTF, including state-wide water matters which may Impact development
within Chula Vista.
9)
""'"
.........
As previously noted, despite these exemplary efforts of both water districts to ensure
adequate water supply and delivery to meet the needs of short-tenn growth, and to reduce
dependency on imported water supplies, Iong-tenn water supply for Chula Vista remains
an issue which merits a Statement of Concem. Even with last year's pronounced end to
the drought, the amount and reliability of imported water for Chula VIsta and Southem
Califomla is still a problem given the tenuous nature of the Colorado River and State water .........
projects. In fact, early reports seem to Indicate that we may be entering another "droughf'
year given less than average snowfall in the Sierra and southem Rocky Mountains,
~ YO-17
.
(
coupled with decreasing allocations from ArIzona. Therefore, the GMOC recommends the
following actions be taken relating to this issue:
. That the City Council actively encourage and support, and accordingly
allocate ." time to, effott8 Involving the development of php/cal and
operational programs on the pIIrt of the CWA and both local Wllter
districts which reduce dependance on Imported Wllter supply. Such
current e"orts would Include:
'.
. Reldndllng support and planning 8Ctlv1ty for a s..water
demlnerallutlon plant which would provide a 8fNdy alternate
WIIter supply within San Diego County.
.
Direct that ." of the City Public Worlrs Department continue
ava/uatlng the "'slblllty of Chu/a Vista and other Interested
pIIrtJes financing, detllgnlng ,nd constructing the proposed
reclamation plant In the Otay Rlver Valley which has been
Indefinitely postponed undar the C/..n Water Program. This
vn.1 plant would provide a steady supply of reclaimed Wllter for
us. In landscape Irrigation and other appropIWte applications
which reduce current potable Wllter use.
. Refer to the IA WTF the matter of developing and coordinating
common goals and snteg/es among the two Wllter districts and
the City l'8flardlng the development of reclaimed Wllter, with a
report beck to the GItfOC for consideration with the threshold
review cycle commencing In October 1'94.
.
. Actively support development of local groundwater projects,
such as that presently being proposed by the SWII8twater
Authority within the Lower SWII8twater Valley, and others by Otay
Water District.
.
Also of concem for the City of Chula Vista is the provision of water storage for emergency
purposes. While positive activities were previously noted, both the County Water Authority
as a whole and the OIay Water District are still lacking adequate emergency water storage
facilities at this time. Of particular lsaue with the GMOC Ia OIay Water's present 1o-day
emergency storage policy. That policy calla for 5 days to be achieved through cooperative
arrangements with neighboring districts, and 5 days In covered reservoirs. It has come to
the GMOC's attention that the 10 days ..sumes a maximum of 50% voluntary
conservation by water users, and thereby etrectlvely results In the Dlatrict only planning for
2 peak days of new reservoir storage. The remainder of the 5 days results from the
inclusion of operational storage as part of emergency storage. '1'he GMOC was not
praviously aware of this, and believes others may not be as well. Although not water
planning authorities, the GMOC Ia concerned In that we believe prudence would dictate
14~ ,;2bJ-Y7
(
"')'
IX
that a full 5 days of storage be planned, and not conservation down factored. In this way, _
should a major problem such as earthquake occur, the area could then sustain a longer ~
outage by applying conservation to take us beyond the 5 days. If the cost of new
reservoirs is a significant force behind the District's present policy approach, then perhaps
the District .may want to consider altering their present 5/5 policy to consider a greater
emphasis on cooperative arrangements with neighboring districts.
The GMOC recommends that the City Council take the following actions relating to
emergency storage issues:
. Refer to the IAWTF the matter of Otay Water DIstrict's p,..ent
emergency aforage polley for eIIscuM/on and clarification. As part of
that discussion, consider the benef1tsldetrlment. of altering the
District's p,..ent polley decision to provide for only 2 days of new
emergency storage In covered reservoirs as part of Its 10 day goal.
. Request that the Otay Water District continue to worle closely with the
City during the preparation of the District's p,..ent master plan update,
particularly as It relates to the evaluation of future sites for proposed
emergency storage reservoirs within the City's General Plan Area.
.
Urge the Otay Water District to actively s.. through to completion
efforts to diversify Its storage and emergency supply options through
the previously noted cooperative effom with other districts.
. Continue to urge the County Water Authority to speed construction of
emergency storage reservoirs In San Diego County.
~
While not a concem directed at supply or storage, last year the GMOC noted the City
needs to increase coordination with the Sweetwater Authority regarding advance planning
. of water facility upgrades to support rezonings and infill development, particularly in the
northwestem quadrant of the City. Currently, many smaller developers and property
owners are faced with insurmountable costs when informed by the District at the building
permit review stage of the often substantial improvements necessary to replace existing
small diameter cast iron pipes to meet the required fire flow demands. Better advance
coordination would facilitate an applicant's understanding of improvement costs, and ways
to address them early in the development review process. While the Authority notes
communication has improved somewhat, the GMOC recommends:
. That the City Council refer this matter to the Engineering, Planning,
Rre, and Sullellng and Housing Depertmem. to ensure that a consistent
proceu of early re,."., to SWHtwlIter Authority Is In place for proJecm
which will Increase demands on water aupply Infrastructure In the
northwestern quadrant of the City.
""'"
15
,~ 02-tJ.-s1J
.
.
a AIR QUALITY -
THE GMOC FINDS THAT DESPITE ONGOING IMPRO~MENT OF THE
REGION'S OVERALL A"'~IENT AIR QUALITY. THE REGIC>>J 'TILL DOES NOT
MEET STATE AND EEDERAL STANQj.RDS FOR AIR QUALITY. AND
RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COU~CII.ISSUE ASTATlMENT OF CONCERN
TO THE AIR POLLUTION CONT&QI. DISTRICT.
THE GMOC ALSO FINpS. BAaeD ON THE 8E.PEATED INl'UT OF THE APCD.
THAT THE CITY'S PRESENT AIR QUALITY THRESHQLD STANDARD IS ~OT
ENTIReLY FUNCTIONAL. AND RECOMMENDS THAT THE STANDARD BE
BEVISED TO ACHIEVE BETl~R COORDINATION W1IH THJ: APCD AND
SANDAG. .
The Air Pollution Control Disbict (APCD) on~ again provided the GMOC with a
voluminous and thorough written and oral reports. The materials consisted of a
variety of handouts on pollution sources, violators and enforcement actions in Chula
Vista during 1993, APCD's 1992 Annual Report on air quality and 1993 Scorecard.
the APCD's 1993 Annual Progress Report on the Regional Air Quality Strategy
(AQS), report on the change in smog designation for the San Diego Region.
employer bip reduction regulation, January 1994 AlrNews publication, and a copy
of AB2008 (Alpert) regarding smog check requirements for Mexican vehicles used
in commuting to the San Diego area.
The San Diego region again continued to experience improvement in overall air
quality In 1993, primarily from industry controls (reducing stationary emissions from
industrial and commercial sources), and engine technology (better motor vehicle
pollution controls). Despite these Improvements, however, an acceptable level of
air quality for the San Diego region has not yet been achieved. As the effect of
industry controls and engine technology have virtually been exhausted, the APCD
indicates that the most significant future air quality Improvements will result from
programs addressing mobile sources (such as automobiles) through strong public
transit and other efforts. As an illustration, the region's largest air quality problem
continues to be too many vehicle trlpslmiles driven. The number of miles driven per
year continues to grow at a rate almost double that of population growth, and motor
vehicles account for about 80% of the region's smog-forming emissions.
.
As a yardstick of Improvement; the region exceeded the Stllte clean air standard for
smog on only 90 days In 1893 compared to 97 days In 1892. WIth regard to
Federal standards, which are less sbingent that StIlle smog standards, the region
was in excess on 14 days in 1893 compared to 19 days in 1892. In terms of air
pollution components, Stllte standards were met for carbon monoxide, nitrogen
dioxide. sulfur dioxide and lead, but not for ozone or Inhalable particulates. All
similar Federal standards were met, except for ozone. Unique meteorological
conditions, such as EI Nino and the 1991 MI. Pinatubo eruption, appear to have had
~~ ,2,&<5"'/
,
10\\1'
~
less impact on air quality in 1993 than in the previous two years. It was also noted
that Chula Vista continues to enjoy some of the best air quality of any area in the
region, with State standards being exceeded on only 12 days in 1993.
Several significant matters were addressed in APCD's materials regarding last
year's Statement of Concem, and the current activities of APCD as they may affect
the City in the future, as follows:
1) APCD is in process with both State and Federal EPA to achieve
downgrading of the San Diego Region's smog classification from -severe" to
-serious". If granted, the doWngrade would have a direct impact on local air
quality programs, actually resulting in a lessening of some currently proposed
requirements such as employer trip reduction under the Transportation
Control Measures program.
The proposed downgrade is based upon refined APCD analyses of the
sources of regional air pollution which show that smog transported from Los
Angeles was the cause for exceeding State standards on 51 (57%) of the 90
days the region was non-complying in 1993. This Influence from the Los
Angeles area is significant, and although they are Implementing aggressive
air quality programs, the APCD indicates that meteorologically, the Los
Angeles area will always affect our region's air quality. Therefore, even
though local contributors to air pollution may lessen, the region's air quality --.,
situation cannot be fully addressed without considerations toward import
pollution from Los Angeles.
2) The APCD continues to develop and Implement programs to achieve
provisions of the Regional Air Quality Strategy (AQS) adopted in June, 1992.
The AQS contains several major Implementation measures developed in
conjunction with SANDAG including the Transportation Control Measures
Plan (TCM Plan), the Model Regional Transportation Demand Management
Program (TOM Plan), and an Indirect source control program. The TCM and
TOM Plans were adopted In May, 1991, and among other measures, will
require businesses with 60 or more emplOyees (such as the City of Chula
Vista) to boost the average vehicle ridership of their momlng commuters
from a countywide average of 1.18 commuters per car to an average of 1.5
commuters Rer car by the year 2000, through use of a variety of Incentives
and decentives.
A draft of an Indirect Source Reduction Program will be ready for review by
December 1994. That program will propose establishment of local
regulations and conditions regarding the siting and approval of land uses
which are traffic Intensive.
3)
As part of the regional transportation planning efforts, the DMV has been
collecting a $2.00 registration fee on motor vehicles with the proceeds
""'\
~
.~ dtJ-5':I
.
.
available to fund altemate transportation efforts. To date, the City has
received approximately $270,000 to fund several projects Including electric
vehicles, altemate fuels development and a telecenter.
4) Industry controls continue to be implemented including those for utility boilers
which will atrect the South Bay Power Plant, a solar water heater program
for new residential develQpment and retrofitting, and a small business
assistance program to hel~ with the financial side of Installing air pollution
control equipment and other aspects of complying with regulations.
5) The APCD continues to wol1t with SANDAG to Increase flexibility in the
expenditure of federal transportation development monies allocated under
the Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficiency Act (ISTEA).
6)
Previous efforts through the DMV to regulate Mexican vehicles did not wol1t.
AS 2008 (Alpert) is now law and requires all Mexican vehicles used for
commuting to wol1t in Califomia to meet state smog regulations. However,
it is not currently being enforced, as implementation mechanisms are still
being developed.
Regarding the CEQA review process on individual development project
proposals, the APCD has presently stopped commenting as a matter of
available staffing, and in light of the fact that their comments have been
largely ignored in the past.
7)
8) The APCD would be happy to wol1t with the City to revise the threshold
standard so it Is worttable. The AQS Is based on SANDAG growth
projections, and the threshold standard should recognize this.
The GMOC also discussed the APCD's recommendation to change the threshold
standard to coordinate review of the City's annual growth forecast with SANDAG's
regional forecasts which are the basis for air quality planning. This Is the second
consecutive year that the APCD has commented regarding their reliance (by law)
on regional growth forecasts produced by SANDAG for the purposes of air quality
planning and management. The present threshold stBndard requires APCD to
review the City's 12-18 month growth forecast and provide comments regarding that
forecasfs Impacts on current and future air quality management programs. Given
APCD's reliance on SANDAG, they are not functionally able to perform that task.
Therefore, the GMOC does not have before It Information sutliclent enough to form
conclusions regarding compliance with that aspect of the threshold stBndard, and
subsequently recommends:
.
.
That the Air Quality thruhold "'ndard be revtaed fo achieve better
coordInation with the APeD and SANDAG, and In implementing the
provlalon. of the Regional Air Quality Sht~y (AQS).
~(),53
~-':J
.. - ~I
,
'}
\'>1
J i
Given the limited ability of the GMOC to focus on preparing such a revision during """
the short time we are annually convened to review thresholds, we also recommend:
. That the City Council .uthorlz. the PI.nnlng Departm.nt to ....mbl.
.nd facllltat. . T.sk Forc., consisting of on. or mo,. m.mbers of the
GMOC, APCD, SANDAG .nd other City Department(s) .s deem.d
.ppropriate, to develop . d,.tt ,.vls.d _ndard over the next four
months for GMOC consld.ratlon with our next .nnu.' ,.vl.w
comm.nclng In October, 1994.
Toward assisting that Task Force. Itle draft revision should focus on establishing
standards to measure local response on individual projects and other programs to
ensure that the City is complying with regional requirements, and on imposing
appropriate air quality mitigation measures on projects. Examples of the focus for
such revisions include:
1. considering whether the, City's development policies and
procedures relate to, and/or are consistent with Federal, State
and Local air quality regulations and programs;
2. reviewing whether the City Is in compliance with relevant
Federal, State and Local regulations regarding air quality; and
conducting a review to determine If local development projects
were conditioned by, and implemented, measures designed to
foster air quality improvement.
The GMOC would also like to emphasize the strong correlation between traffic flow
and localized air quality deterioration ("hot spots"), and the need to focus on
appropriate traffic control measures to reduce or eliminate this problem. Continued
focus on transportation planning designed to foster the free flow of traffic Is a crucial
means to avoiding traffic congestion and localized air quality problems.
3.
~
~
~ ;)(} / ft(
.
(
a
.
.
1I'~ES WHERE THR~SH9LDS ARE MET
SCHOOLS .
!HE GMOC FINDS. BA15ED ON THE CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
A~D SWE~ATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL D~TRICTS' RESPONSES TO THE
IeITY'S 12.18 MONTH GROWTH FORECAST. THAT THE SCHOOLS
lltBESHOLD JTANDARD IS BEI~G MET.
..
~hula VIsta Elementarv School District
Based upon the City's 12 to 18 month growth forecast, the Chula Vista
Elementary School District has estimated that it will need to accommodate
25 new students west of 1-805, given tile 82 residential units forecast for
completion there from July, 1993 through December, 1994. It should be
noted that the 82 units reflects the high-end, or worst-case forecast for
housing unit completions, and construction activity will likely be somewhat
less given the continuing recession. Currently, most of the schools west of
1-805 are at or over capacity, ahhough some capacity does exist in certain
schools at various grade levels. As of January, 1994, a total of 302 chilclren
from around the District were being bused to relieve overcrowding. Of those
children, 192 were from schools west of 1-805.
VVhile additional growth will contribute to further exacerbation of this situation,
the District has indicated that It can accommodate the projected new
students whhin existing facilities. In addition to continued busing, the District
can accommodate additional atudents by revising classroom space use.
Such potential revisions include dismantling computer labs, relocating
resource teachers, and reconfiguring classes (combination classes, pairing
schools, etc.) Many schools have already taken such steps. It should be
noted that several opportunities continue to exist for the possible expansion
of existing schools in westem Chula Vista, particularly Vista Square and Rice
which have adequate land to permit expansion, or Feaster School where
additional adjacent vacant land could be acquired. Lack of funding, however,
continues to be an obstacle to progress.
East of 1-805, the District estimates It will need to accommodate
approximately 506 new ltudenta, given the 1888 new residential units
fl:)recast for completion there from July, 1993 through December, 1994. The
majority of these units are in the Eastlake and Rancho Del Rey planned
communities. The DIstrict Indicated that this estimated growth In school
enrollments can be accommodated by existing schools and schools which
are being planned and financed through the present five Mello-Roos
Community Facilities Districts (CFD). Eastiake School Is currently using
~ _ ~()~S3
/
~J)
relocatable classrooms to accommodate new students until the new
elementary school in the EasUake Greens project opens. That school is
tentatively scheduled to open In July, 1995, on a year-round single track
calendar. Discovery School, located in Rancho Del Rey, opened on a year-
round single-track schedule in July 1993. The District will continue to work
with developers to establish additional CFD's to address future Impacts
involving the Salt Creek Ranch, Otay Ranch and Rancho San Miguel
projects.
""""
The District has previously raised, and continues to raise, the issue of
additional indirect student generation from non-residential development. To
this end, the District, Sweetwater Union High School District and the City are
currently involved in a study of the Impacts various types of development,
and demographic changes have on school facilities. The study is being
conducted by SourceP.oint, the non-profit arm of the San Diego Association
of Govemments. The results of that study, anticipated for completion by
July, 1994, will be used as a basis for developing appropriate and equitable
mitigation strategies.
The report from the Chula Vista Elementary School District also provided
thorough responses to each of last year's Statements of Concem, and
described a number of activities the District is undertaking to keep abreast
of changing conditions as follows: ........
1) The District continues to be interested in expanding Feaster School
through acquisition of the four acre parcel adjacent to the east which
is for sale. However, as with the other noted candidate schools (Rice
and Vista Square), financing is the impediment. For the Feaster site,
financing only appears available through the imposition of mitigation
on the proposed Baytront project. The District is concemed as it has
not been advised of activity on the Baytront project for over a year.
Whatever development eventually occurs there, it must be required
to fully mitigate all impacts to school facilities.
2) To date, 24 schools have prepared growth plans, and all plans are
reviewed annually. By next year all schools will have begun the
process of developing or updating such plans. Several schools' plans
contain a multi-track component to be analyzed when the school
reaches 120% of capacity. While the District continues to evaluate
multi-track as an enrollment management technique, there presently
is still substantial opposition from parents and staff to multi-track
scheduling. As previously mentioned, the District is Implementing
other techniques designed to effectively accommodate existing and
short-term (1-2 years) projected enrollment.
.""",
~__ ;2j)-5?
.
(
3)
4)
.
5)
.
Additionally, new legislation to revamp the State's School
Construction Program is being sponsored by Assemblywoman Eastin.
Part of that legislation calls for elimination of the multi-track
scheduling incentive now used in calculating district eligibility for State
funds. If successful, the District's eligibility for construction funding
would increase.
The District's decision. to purchase rather than lease its 95 relocatable
classrooms was made years ago, and has proven to be financially
sound. Effective January 1, 1994, relocatable classrooms that were
owned for at least 20 years no longer count In the State's eligibility
program for construction funding. Of the District's relocatable
classrooms, 67 are older than 20 years, and state funding eligibility
should thereby increase by 2,010 students.
Proposition 170, which would have reduced the required vote for
general obligation bonds to a simple majority, failed in November
1993. Similar legislation has been introduced this year.
To date, the District has not been successful in obtaining full
mitigation of all project's schoollmpacls in westem Chula Vista, even
for those requiring legislative acls such as general plan amendments
and/or rezonings. The District hopes the City will assist in achieving
the goal of full mitigation on all projecls, as endorsed by the City
Council through GMOC Statements of Concem issued to the District
for the past three years.
6) The joint School Enrollment Impact Mitigation Study with SourcePoint
is progressing, and should be completed by July, 1994. The resulting
data should be extremely useful to the districls and the City in
projecting school facility needs baaed on projected residential and
non-residential development, and demographic changes. Having
Identified these Impacls, potential methods for mitigation will
subsequently be analyzed and a proposal prepared for City
CounciVschool board consideration.
7)
Full mitigation of schoollmpacls (both residential and nOlHUidential)
from the Bayfront Project is critical to the overcrowding altuation In
westem Chula Vista. The District appreciates the City's a..istance
In assuring that full mitigation will be provided, and requests the
mitigation be structured to expand existing school sites In westem
Chula Vista, preferably Feaster School, to aOCOI...lOdate children from
the Bayfront project.
The District continues, with a variety of ongoing activities, to plan
proactively for growth and Improvement of school facilities. Such
I
8)
~ - ..UJ-5?
~'l-3
activities include development tracking and phasing monitoring,
conducting school growth planning studies, boundary/attendance area
adjustments, residency verification, requests for City assistance,
responses to notices of proposed development, participation in the
State Modemization Program, and utilization of COBG funding for
playground improvements.
\lVhile the GMOC found the District in compliance with short-range threshold
standard requirements, we remained concemed over the continued provision
of adequate school facilities to meet the needs of future students, and
recommend that the City Council and the school district take the following
actions to address longer-term threshold compliance:
. As the overcrowding altuatlon has not changed, assist the
School District In adopting and Implementing expansion of
schools In westem Chu/a Vista, particularly Vista Square, Rice,
and Feaster Schools.
. Urge the School District to continue to actively explore means to
alleviate school overcrowding through Innovative scheduling
methods and techniques. The School District acknOwledges that
much of the overcrowding problem In westem Chu/a Vista
schools would be relieved by implementing a multi-track year-
. round schedule for schools, but such a solution has not been
pursued by the School Board at this time because studies
Indicate It is not supported by the community.
. Deny applications to rezone any property In westem Chu/a Vista
which would Increase alloweble density or intensity of use
unless no aggravation of existing threshold standards related to
schools will result due to full, adequate and equlteble mitigation.
The City should s..k achievement of full mitigation In the long-
term for all intlll development In the westam portion of the City,
regardless of whether rezonings or other legislative acts are
Involved.
.
Continue to support timely completion of the cooperative study
underway batMen the City, the DIstrict, Sweetwater Union High
School District and SourcePolnt to identify the Impacts of new
residential and non-tMldentJal development, and demography
upon City schools. ....ed upon the study's ....ults, direct that
staff expedite development of proposed mitigation .6.tegl.. for
consideration and adoption by the City Council and both school
boards.
~-~~5'i!'
.
~
"'"
\
"""
.
Through flnn condItJons of approval ..rly In the process, requIre
full mitigation of school Impacts from both ruldentlal and non.
resIdential development In the Seyfront project, and recommend
to the school district that thIs mitigation m..sure be
Implemented by upending existing schools In the northwest
quadrent of Chu/a w.te. ReInforce this condit/on by requlrlng
that any Disposition and Development Agreement for the project
ensure full mitigation of all school Impacts.
. In addition to the Bsyfront project, the GIIOC recommends that
school enrollment Impacts resulting from e/l non-resldentlal
development be fully mitigated to the mutual sstJsfection of the
City and elementary school district The previously mentioned
}oint enrollment Impact study beIng conducted by SourcePolnt
will provide e bes/s from which equIYble epproeche. to
mitigating non-res/dentJel de~opment Impacts csn be devised.
.
.
The District also drew specific attention to llChools planned for the Baldwin
Company's Salt Creek Ranch project and adjacent Salt Creek I project. Presently,
there are no schools to serve either project, although the Salt Creek I project is
already under construction. Pursuant to adopted facilities plans, students from Salt
Creek I, along with those from Salt Creek Ranch are to attend schools to be located
in Salt Creek Ranch. In July, 1993, Community Facilities District (CFD) proceedings
were formally abandoned by the developer who has yet to resume planning
activities with the District. In the interim, Salt Creek I students are attending other
area schools which are already Impacted. It takes some time to form a new CFD
and to generate adequate revenue to finance construction of a new llChool. If
mitigation is to be in the form of a CFD, it is ....ntial that formation occur well in
advance (2-3 years) to assure facilities will be available when children begin to
arrive. Presently, several Final Subdivision Maps for the Salt Creek Ranch project
are before the City for review and approval, and the GMOC understands processing
has been inactive since approximately August, 1993. In order to avoid further
exacerbation of overcrowding at other area llChools, It Is imperative that the
developer resume discussions with the District. Therefore, the GMOC also
recommends:
. That the City encourege the Salt Creek Rench developer to
resume negotiations with the District, end withhold further
processing of final lit"". for the S111t Creek Ranch project until
such lime.. the school dlstrlct noIIfIes the CIty thet they have
INched understanding with that developer .. to the method{s)
end 1I11tlng for the pIOVIsIon of pIsnnad schools.
.
~- ,2tJ -PI
/
1J.p
.........
IL. Sweetwater Union Hlah School District
The Sweetwater Union High School District reported an enrollment of 28,818
students throughout the district, a 70 student (0.2%) increase over 1992
enrollment. 14,452 of these students, or 50.5% of the total, attend the five
high schools and four junior high schools In Chula VISta. As a comparison,
enrollment in Chula Vista schools grew by 343 students over that in 1992,
while the overall District grew by only 70 students. This reflects the drop in
enrollment at several schools'throughout the District.
Overall, however, the District Is still operating above capacity, including
relocatable classroom space. Presently, four of the five high schools serving
Chula Vista are between 113% and 115% of capacity, while the junior
high/middle schools are between 74% and 100%. Eastlake High School (the
fifth high school) is not included In these figures as It is still in the final
phases of construction. Approximately 1100 students currently attend school
there in the phase I portion of construction which was completed in
September, 1992. Upon completion of phase II in Fall, 1994, the school's
capacity will be increased to 2400 students. This could help reduce present
overcrowding levels at the other area high schools.
Given the 12-18 month forecast provided by the Chula Vista Planning
Department, the District projects an increase of 514 students in Chula Vista
Junior High and High Schools in the 1994-95 school year. This increase,
which is based on worst-case growth of 1770 dwelling units between July,
1993 and December, 1994, is generally consistent with previous years, which
have averaged approximately 500 new students per year. The majority of
this growth will come from the Eastlake and Rancho Del Rey communities.
Most of the junior high/middle school grade levels will not be significantly
Impacted, however, all high schools, with the exception of Eastlake, will
continue to be overcrowded.
.........
The report from the Sweetwater Union High School District also provided
responses to last year's Statement of Concem, and described other activities
the district Is undertaking to address school planning and construction as
follows:
1)
The District presently focuses on site based management techniques
to alleviate overcrowding, whereby each school principal Is annually
provided with estimated enrollment projections which are used to
develop the master schedule and room utilization plans. Additionally,
attendance boundary adjustments have successfully been used to
reduce enrollment pressures at specific school sites. The institution
of multi-track scheduling at the secondary school level presents a
complexity of problems which make It difficult to implement.
.........
~ ~t?-~O
.
.
.
2) Proposition 170, which would have reduced the required vote for
general obligation bonds to a simple majority, failed In November
1993. Similar legislation has been introduced this year.
3) The District has consistently requested full mitigation of residential
project school impacts where legislative acts are Involved, and the
City has complied where appropriate. Regarding impacts from non-
residential development, the District, the City and the Chula Vista
Elementary .,school . District are conducting a study through
SourcePoint on the impacts of new development and demographic
changes upon school enrollment. The study should be complete by
July, 1994. The issue of proposed developments'lmpacts remains of
concem to the District, and the City's continuing support is
appreciated.
The previously noted joint study between the City and both school
districts being conducted by SourCePoint will provide a direct basis for
developing appropriate mitigation mechanisms.
Although a mitigation strategy has been developed for the Bayfront
project, It has yet to be solidified and implemented. This is still a
concem of the District.
4)
5) In the Fall of 1993, the San Diego City Council lifted the development
moratorium on Otay Mesa. The District can now proceed with final
school planning activities. The District has tentatively targeted
September, 1999 as the opening date for the high school to be
located near Dillon Trail and 1-905.
.
6) The Eastlake High School library joint-use agreement is In place, and
the community has access to the library during non-school hours.
The City hires students as shelvers, and two positions have been
funded for this year.
7) In August, 1992 the District received unfunded approval from the
State for the Rancho Del Rey and Eastlake Middle Schools. The
District's 50% funding match from Eastem Territories Mello-Roos fees
Increased the schools' statewide priority to receive funding.
Architectural finns have recently been solicited for proposals for the
design and engineering of the Rancho Del Rey Middle School, and
selection should occur In the very near future. The school is
projected for opening in 1997.
The District continues to establish MeUo-Roos Facility Financing
Distrlcls for new development In the Eastem Territories, to participate
In the state Iease-purchase program for new schools, to conduct
8)
~ ..20~t:,./
,
.~
\,/1
.h.f'
.'
ongoing review and adjustment of attendance boundaries, and to
perform residency verification.
9) The District is continuing its cooperation and preplanning review with
the City of all development proposals, General Plan amendments and
rezonings.
"""\
While the GMOC found the District in compliance with short-range threshold
standard requirements, we remained concemed over the continued provision
of adequate school facilities to meet the needs of future students, and
recommend that the City Council and the school district take the following
actions to address longer-term threshold compliance:
. Urge the School DI.trlct to continue to actlv.'y explore m.an. to
allevlat. school ov.rcrowdlng through Innovatlv. scheduling
m.thod. and technlqu.s.
.
D.ny applic.tlons to rezone .ny property In W.stem Chul. Vista
which would Incre... .1I0wabl. den.ity or 'nt.n.'ty of use
unl.ss no .ggrav.tlon of existing threshold sand.rds related to
schools will result due to full, .dequ.t. .nd eqult.bl. mltlg.tion.
Achiev.ment of full mltlg.tlon In the long-term for all Inflll
development In we.tem Chul. Vista should be sought,
regardless of wh.ther rezonlngs or oth.r legls/.tlve .cts .re
Involved.
""'"
. Continue to support tlm.'y completion of the cooperative study
underway between the City, the District, Chul. V1st. Element.ry
School District and SourcePolnt to identify the Impacts of new
residential .nd non-resldentl.1 developm.nt, and demogr.phy
upon City .choo/s. Based upon the study's results, direct that
staff exp.dlte dev./opment of propos.d mltlg.tlon strat.gles for
consideration .nd .doptlon by the City Council .nd both school
boards.
. Through firm conditions of approval ..rly In the process, require
full mltlg.tlon of school Impacts from both res/dentl.1 and non.
,..,dentl., development In the Bayfront project, .nd recommend,
bas.d on the DIstrict's Input, th.t this mitigation measure be
Impl.m.nted by expanding existing schools In wutem Chula
Vista. R.lnforce this condition by requiring that any Disposition
and Development Agreement for the project ensure full mitigation
of .11 school Impacts.
In addition to the S.yfront proJ.ct, the GMOC recommend. that
school enrollment Impacts resulting from all non-res/dentl.1
.
""'\
~ ~t/,j,;L
.
~
development be fully mltlgeted Co the mutuel aatlmctlon of the
City and high school district. The pNVIously mentioned }oint
enrollment Impact study being conducted by SourcePolnt will
provide a be.,. from which equlteble epproechea Co mitigating
non-rNIdentlal development Impact. an be devised.
Similar to the elementary lChool district, the high school district is also
concerned with the present "status of lChool Implementation for the Salt
Creek I and Salt Creek Ranch developments. Consistent with the discussion
on page 24 of this report, the GMOC, therefore also recommends:
. That the City encourage the Salt CNeIr "-nch developer Co
tuume negotiation. with the DI.trlct, and withhold further
proceaalng of final mapa for the Salt Creek "-nch project until
such time a. the school district notlflN the City that they hsve
ruched understanding with that developer a. Co the method{.)
and timing for the provl.'on of planned school..
. a
LIBRARIES .
THE GMOC FINDS THAT THE CITY IS IN COMPUANCE WITH lltE UBRARY
IHRESHOLD STANDARD. BASED ON THE AtrrlCIPATED COMPLETION OF
THE SOVTH CHULA VISTA UBRARY It!I D~CEMBER. 1894.
The threshold standard for libraries requires that 500 aquare feet of library space
(adequately equipped and staffed) be provfcled per uch 1,000 population. Based
on an estimated City population of 147,293 as of June 1, 1993, a total of 73,647
aquare feet of library space is required. Currently 67,329 aquare feet Is provided
through the Chula Vista Public Library at 365 oF" Street with 55,000 aquare feet, the
Eastlake Library at 1120 Eastlake Parkway with 10,000 aquare feet, and a
combined 2,329 square feet in two small branches, Castle ParklOtay and Woodlawn
Park. This results in a present shortage of 6,318 aquare feet of library space under
the threshold standard. Both the library threshold and the J..lbrarv Master Plan of
mz recommend that the City supplement the main library at 365 wF" Street by
providing new library facilities In the uch of the major community arus defined in
the City General Plan Including MonfgomerylOtay, Sv:eetwater/Bonlta and the
Eastern Territories.
.
In accordance with that master ptan, the 10,000 aquare foot library In conjunction
with Eastlake High School opened In 1993, and the 37,000 aquare foot South Chuta
Vista Library Is scheduled to open In December, 1994. WIth the opening of the
South Chula Vista Library, the City will surpass the threshold requirement by over
28,000 aquare feet, based on a projected City population of approximately 148,730
at the end of 1994. This fOrthcoming compliance is consistent with the threshold
standard which requires that solutions to deficiencies be commenced within three
~- ~t7-~;J
/
~, J'
~
years of their identification. Furthermore, even when considering a projected City
population of 175,766 in the year 2000, the City will still exceed the threshold
requirement by .pproximately 14.700 Iquare feet based on construction of the
South Chula Vista Library.
Regarding the recently opened Eastlake Library. the GMOC expresses Its
.ppreci.tion for the City's efforts in completing this unique joint-use .rrangement
which has also afforded students a work experience opportunity. Continuing in that
spirit. the GMOC recommends:
. That the City and the SMI8twater Union High School DIn1ct explore
opt/ons to write a grant for library funding to capitalize on the unique
East/ake High School library Joint-use arrangement.
During this year's review, the GMOC became aware of the significant changes
being brought about in the present and future delivery of library services through the
use of technology. As an example, such technology will eventually enable citizens
to access books and other media through . home computer without having to
actually make a trip to the library. According to staff. currently contemplated
technology has the potential to bring about profound effects. In view of the present
threshold provision of .....dequately equipped .nd staffed facility..... the GMOC _
concluded that such technological developments may affect future interpretation of '
threshold standard. and therefore .Iso recommends:
. That the City Council direct the Ubrary Board of TlVateN and City staff
to review the Ubrary threshold standard for possible changes, with a
report to be forwarded to the GMOC for conslderat/on with next year's
review cycle commencing In October, 1914. The review" Intended to
take Into account slgnlflcant technologIcal changes In the area of
library services.
The City has .Iso previously been allocated $200.000 in Capital Improvement
Program funds for .rchitectural services for a 29.000 Iquare foot library to be
located at the comer of East .H. Street .nd Paseo Ranchero in the
SweetwaterlBonlta Community Area. This project will be funded by Development
Impact Fees. .nd Its timing will be dependant on the collection of fees to cover the
estimated $9.5 million needed to construct. furnish .nd equip the facility. Although
not the oflicial n.me. this library is referred to as the Rancho Del Rey library.
""'\
~ 2o~~f
,
.
.
.
a '~R .
THE GMOC FINDS THAT THE CITY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SEWER
ItIRI;SHOLD STANDARD ON BOTH A PROJECT AND CI,!MVLATIVE BASIS.
There were no significant instances of the threshold standard for sanitary lewers
being exceeded as a result of new Srowth during the reporting period. City design
standards for sewers limit the flow In sewers up to 12" in diameter to 50% full, and
to 75% full for sewers larger than 12". The City has also allowed flow up to 75%
full in S", 10", and 12" diameter sewers If it can be shown that ultimate development
has already occurred In the area lerved by that sewer.
The Engineering Departmenfs report outlined leveral significant activities either
recently completed, or underway, to address the provision of adequate sewer
facilities and maintenance of threshold compliance:
,
The Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement and Financing Plan,
prepared by Willdan Associates, was completed In 1992. In October, 1992,
the City Council approved the Plan and established a Sewer Development
Impact Fee for new construction in the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin to
proportionately share the cost of upgrading the system. An amendlld plan
Incorporating out-of-basin pumped flows from the Eastlake and Salt Creek
Ranch developments, and additional projected flows from the Kaiser Hospital
and Medical Center was completed in June, 1993. Council accepted this
amended plan on March 15,1994, and adopted a fee of $560 per equivalent
dwelling unit (EDU) for out-of-basin pumped flows.
2) The Proctor Valley Sewer was constructed In 1992 to IeM the Salt Creek
I, Salt Creek Ranch, Rancho San Miguel and Bonita Meadows developments
as well as other adjacent parcels. The sewer connects to the County's
Frisbee Trunk, for which a trunk sewer usage agreement Is currently being
prepared with the County.
1)
3)
A lewer analysis has been performed for the Salt Creek Sewer Basin. The
planned line will lerve the Salt Creek Ranch, Eastlake, Hidden Valley
Estates (in the unincorporated area ..st of Mt. Miguel), and Otay Ranch
developments. Recommended Improvements and a financing plan are
expected to be preeented to the City Council for approval In m1c1-1994.
,
The parallel sewer along Industrial Blvd. has been completed, and should
alleviate prior capacity problems In this area, and the expecI8d Impacts from
the Palomar Trolley Center development In the sewer line In Industrial Blvd.
between Palomar St. and Anita St. Ongoing monitoring Is occulTing, and it
Is anticipated thet a parallel eewer south of Main St. will eventually be
needed.
4)
~~ ;It) -~~
,
.;\
IA~
5)
The City's flow monitoring program has identified several problem sites,
including the Palm Canyon area where a parallel sewer is scheduled for
construction in 1994. Additional portable monitoring equipment is proposed
for acquisition in FY 1995 to improve accuracy and to expand the metering
program.
"""'"
6) The City's sewer TV inspection crew continues to monitor problem sites in
order to determine If the condition of the sewer Ones has affected the flow
Phase IV of the program provided for rehabilitation of 1506 lineal feet, ,and
replacement of 389 lineal feet of sewer mains in 1993. An additional 41,793
lineal feet were televised durlog 1993 for Phase V of the program which will
rehabilitate another 1!51 lineal feet, and replace another 240 lineal feet in
1994.
7) All new developments must address the adequacy of sewers to serve their
needs. Remedial actions are required ",here necessary to accommodate
added flows.
Sites identified through the above methods may be considered for inclusion in the
Capital Improvement Program or the Sewer Rehabilitation Program. New
developments will be required to pay a proportionate share for the construction of
needed new sewers.
Toward assuring that adequate sewers are provided as the City continues to grow, """'\
the GMOC again expresses its concem regarding the potential impacts of
development in eastem Chula Vista on sewer facilities in older westem Chula Vista.
The GMOC therefore recommends:
. That the City continue to closely monitor the timely funding and
phasing of necessary upgrades and ,..",acementa of the .ewer .ystem
to avoid negative Impacts from development In Hstem Chu/a Vista
upon western Chu/a Vista.
San Dieao MetroDolitan Sewer AuthoritvlSan Dieao Area Wastewater ManIJaement
District
At present, the City's total daily wastewater flow Into the Metropolitan Sewage
System (Metro) is approximately 10.987 million gallons per day (mgd), well within
our current contract capacity of 19.2 mgd. This Includes 8.749 mgd of metered
flows discharged direcUy to the Metro sewer line, and 2.229 mgd of metered and
non-metered flows discharged through the Spring Valley Sewer outfall. Annual
wastewater flows have changed at a rate much less than predicted due primarily to
the recent building slowdown and water conservation efforts. In comparison to last
year, it appears that total daily flows have actually decreased by 0.501 mgd. The
City has verified adequate capacity In the Metro system to serve growth for the
'""""'\
~ c2 0 -- t?t/.
.
coming year, and based on current projections, the 8.222 mgd of remaining contract
capacity beyond current flows should serve the City until approximately 2010.
However, the San Diego Wastewater Management District (SDAVVMD) took effect
on January 1, 1993. Under the SDAVVMD, capacity rights may not be treated in the
same manner as they have under Metro. The SDAVVMD effectively replaces Metro,
and includes representatives from most Metro agencies. It will manage construction
and operation of Metro and Cleah Water Program sewage transportation and
treatment facilities. Member agencies may presently withdraw from the SDAVVMD
until June 30, 1994, without obligation to pay a proportionate share of the District's
debts outstanding at the time of detatchmenl The City has retained a team of
technical, financial and legal consultants to develop a policy regarding membership
in the SDAVVMD, and discussions are ongoing in this regard. In order to assure
that adequate ..wer capacity will be available to meet the needs of local growth,
regardless of the entity the City deals with, the GMOC recommends:
.
That the City continue to retain the fNm of Nchn/ca/, tlnanc/al
and legal consuIYnfs to develop a recommendation regarding
the City's ongoing membership In the San Diego Area
Wastewater "anagement District (SDAWMD). This
recommendation Is besad upon the uncertainty which exists
regarding the ability and costs of receiving adequate future
sewerage treatment capacity and services through the SDA WMD.
As also discussed in the water section of this report, the proposed 6 mgd Otay
Valley Water Reclamation Plant proposed as part of the Clean Water Program and
scheduled for start-up in 1998, has been indefinitely postponed by the City of San
Diego. At present, however, It appears that the SDAVVMD may be willing to
consider construction of this facility. Other South Bay cities have also recently
expressed some interest. As the timing of construction will be a consideration in the
development of the southem and eastem portions of Chula VISta, the GMOC
continues to feel it is critical to recommend:
.
. That City .,." be directed to continue eveluatlng the possibility
for Chu/a Vista, a combination of South Bay cities, and/or the
SDAWMD to finance, design and COMfrUct a local water
reclamation plant In the South Bay, such .. the Otay Valley Plant
originally proposed through the Clean Water A~.
.
~ ~tJ-~?
(
.,{,"
l~' :I ~
""
,
'"""\.
a DRAINAGE.
tHE GMOC FINDS THAT THE CITY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE DRAINAGE
THRESHOLD STANDARD ON BOTH A PROJECT AND CUMULATIVE BASIS.
During the review period, no major problems conceming the threshold standard for
drainage can be directly attributed to new growth In the City. One reason for this
Is that developers have constructed detention basins so that downstream flows are
not increased. Each new subdivision is required to construct all drainage facilities
to handle storms of a 10 to 100 year magnitude, depending on the facility and size
of the drainage basin. The Environmental Impact Report for each development
must address any possible drainage problems either on-slte or off-site. The
developer is required to implement mitigation measures, If necessary. It is the
GMOC's understanding, however, that at present, the Engineering Department is
unable to present quantifiable datalevidence that new growth in eastem Chula Vista
is not negatively lmpacting older facilities in westem Chula Vista. Based on the
GMOC's previously expressed concems in this 'regard, and the need to definitively
resolve whether such conditions exists, the GMOC recommends:
. Th.t the Engineering Department develop a monitoring system
which will:
(1) identify wh.t current drainage flows (volumes) exist from
are.s e.st of 1-105 to western Chu/a Vlst., and
'"""'\
(2) monitor flows from the umelocations at periodic Interv.ls
to Identify If, over time, any Increases In flow h.ve been
experienced due to new development
Such monitoring ,. nec....ry In order to facilitate the
Commission's future ability to Imow If new growth In eastern
Chul. Vista Is neg.tlvely Impecting facilities In WNfem Chul.
Vlst., and to enable specific recommendations to be m.de to the
City Council In these regards.
In addition to the construction of drainage facilities, developers must now obtain a
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Construction Activity permit for
each grading operation affecting an area of five acres or more. This permit program
requires a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan which is specifically develOped for
each construction site In order to prevent pollutants from reaching drainageways.
These permits are issued by the State Water Resources Control Board, the
Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the City. Developers will be required to
dedicate land and construct facilities necessary to aerve their proposed
developments. Facilities benefiting an extensive area with muitiple owners may be
financed through assessment districts. """\
~ d-{)~i-~
.
.
(
In general, the City experienced fewer drainage problems and flooding In 1993 than
in 1992. In addition to less rainfall, this Is also attributable to the fact that the long
duration storms of January 1993 primarily impacted the larger, regional drainage
facilities, not the smaller localized drainage facilities. The Engineering Department
cited a number of activities undertaken by the City and private developers in 1992
and 1993 which have reduced the potential for flooding and hazards in both the
newer and older areas of the City.
~
1) Ordinance ~384 established an Impact fee for new development In the
Telegraph Canyon Creek Drainage Basin to fund Improvements to the
Telegraph Canyon Creek east and west of 1-805. Improvements east of 1_
805 have been completed. Interim Improvements to the channel between
Hilltop Park and Fourth Ave. were completed at the end of 1993, and
consisted of gunlting the most eroded ..ctions of the creek. Permanent
improvement of this segment of the channel will be funded and completed
over the next 5 to 10 years as development in the Otay Ranch occurs.
Additional interim facilities may be required during this time.
2)
Four drainage projects were completed under the CIP at an approximate
cost of $1,230,000, to correct some outstanding deficiencies in the City's
older areas. These include: Sierra Way between Broadway and Colorado
Av.; Oxford St. between Second Av. and Del Mar Av.; Guatay Channel north
of Naples St. near Hilltop Dr.; and Crested Butte St. between Broadway and
Welton St.
.
3) A major upgrade in the lower section of the Central Drainage Basin west of
Broadway and south of "G" St. Is currently under construction at an
approximate cost of $1,500,000. An additional 66 Inch pipe was included
from "L" St. to Naples St. as part of the Broadway reconstruction project.
That facility will help in the alleviation of flooding in the vicinity of Woodlawn
Av. and Moss St.
.
4) Repair has been approved, and funding partially obtained, for the erosion,
siltation and other damage caused to the City's major rivers and creeks as
a result of the January 1993 storms. Most notable among these Is loss of
the Otay Valley Rd. bridge crossing the Otay River.
Despite the.. many etrorta, the GMOC remains concerned over needed, but
unfunded drainage improvements throughout westem Chula VIsta. In May 1992,
the City Council accepted an engineering Department I8poI't which Includes
proposals for construction of drainage facilities to correct deficiencies, and
establishes a priority list of needed drainage Improvement projects. That list
contained a total of 84 needed but currently unfunded Improvements with an
approximated coat of $23.025,000. Considering an inftation rate of 4% per year,
funding of $1,895,000 per year for 20 years would be neceaaary to complete the
projects. In conjunction with this year's threshold report, the Engineering
~ ~I/'-/;J
'"
, ,
~"? .
.........
Department presented a select list of the top 15 priority projects, totaling
$6,920,100, and reflecting necessary new budget appropriations through FY 1999-
2000 to accomplish them. Therefore, the GMOC recommends:
. That the City Council accept and endorse the top 15 priority
projects list of needed drainage Improvements In wutem Chu/a
Vista, and worlc toward appropriating funding for them as soon
as possible.
In order to ensure that the remaining 60 or so needed but unfunded drainage
projects from the May 1992 report also get constructed in a timely manner, the
GMOC further recommends:
. That the Engineering Department be directed to prepare a
subsequent priority list, along with Identification of potential
funding sources, from among the approximately .0 remaining
Identified projects, to be used for future Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) considerations.
a
FISCAL -
ltiE GMOC FINDS THAT tHE CITY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE FISCAL
THRESHOLD STANDARD ON BOTH A CUMULATIVE AND PROJECT BASIS.
NEW GROWTH HAS GENERALLY PRODUCED SUFFICIENT REVENUES TO
fUND CURRENT. RELATED FACILITIES AND SERVICES.
"""
The Fiscal threshold standard addresses the impacts of growth on the City's fiscal
well being, particularly the collection and expenditure of impact fees from new
'development. The Fiscal threshold calls for the preparation of a report to the
GMOC which evaluates the fiscal Impacts of growth on operations and capital
improvements over both the previous 12 months, and the coming 12-18 month
period, including an analysis of development impact fee collection and expenditure
over the previous 12-month period.
A report prepared by the City's Interim Finance Administrator indicated that the
City's Development Impact Fee (DIF) Programs for Public Facilities, Transportation
and Drainage are In sound financial shape, and the programs are generally working
as planned. According to the report, the DIF's. along with the various special
assessment and financing districts required of major new developments, appear to
be generating sufficient revenue to fund current projects and services. This Is true
despite the lingering recession, lince under the DIF's, the need for most fBcilities
Is triggered when development reaches a certain number of units or level of traffic
generation. If development slows, then the need for a fBcility Is delayed, and -......
conversely if development accelerates. In addition. some developers elect to fund
and construct fBcilities In advance. and are given a credit against DIF payments.
~ c20-7V
.
Most of the major master planned projects have prepared Fiscal Impact Analyses
to address creation of a positive revenue picture, an4 which must be periodically
lipdated to reflect actual conditions and occurrences. In addition, under the Growth
Management Program, all major projects are required to prepare Public Facilities
Phasing and Financing Plans (PFFP) to ensure the timely provision of needed
facilities and services consistent with the threshold standards.
i
In summary, the following FY 1992-93 major DIF activities were outlined in the
report: -
1) Completion of Phase III of the Telegraph Canyon Rd. 1000y Lakes Rd.
widening and improvement project under the Transportation DIF.
In addition, the City recently approved an update to the Transportation DIF
based on the January 1994 Trans DIF update study, and enacted an
additional fee related to funding the pre-interim SR125 roadway facility to
become effective January 1, 1995. r
Under the Administration and Civic Center Expansion portions of the Public
Facilities DIF, relocation of some City ollices to the EI Dorado Building was
completed ($44,000), and efforts are currently underway to purchase
property on "F" St. for the Civic Center Parking Expansion Project.
2)
.
3)
4)
.
A $1.4 million dollar "loan" from the General Fund for the police building
expansion will be repaid from the Police Facility portion of the Public
Facilities DIF in FY 1993-94.
A $110,000 debt service payment was made on the Library Automation
Project. DIF funds will also be used, in FY's 1993-94 and 1994-95 toward
construction of the South Chula VISta Library.
The City's fire training facility in Rancho Del Rey was completed ($146,000),
as well as Interim Fire Station tEl in Eastlake. That station was constructed
by Eastlake Development who will receive future DIF credits.
Installation of the City's Geographic Infonnation System (GIS) continued
($78,000), and debt service payment was made on the Mainframe Computer
Expansion project ($42,000). Installation of a voice mall processing system
for the City was also completed ($93,000).
7) On April 20, 1993, the City completed its 1993 update of the Public Facilities
OIF, keeping the fee for residential land uses at $2,150 per dwelling unit, and
reducing the commerciallindustrlal fee to $10,750 per acre.
An annual DIF funds financial report is prepared to review the funding status of
each DIF and its projects, and to update the associated costa for these and any
5)
6)
~- ;2.0'-7/
"c
, 'J,
lAd
,
"""""
new facilities necessary to support future development. The reports analyze the
apportionment of costs to projected development in order to adjust the OIF's to be
applied to new development. The GMOC Is Impressed by the ongoing
sophistication of the overall Development Impact Fee (OIF) program, and Its
periodic updates, to ensure funds are available commensurate with facility and
service needs. However, in order to further enhance the process to address
continued facility planning success in what has become an increasingly complex
financial environment, the GMOC recommends:
. That the annual review/update efforts performed for Nch of the OIF's
be expanded to also Include a 5-y..r projection of needs/revenues,
besed on the PlannIng Department'. 5-7 year growth foreca.t, to ensure
auffic/ent lead times utat to eddlU$ any Identified lasUN before they
become a problem. The addition of auch an advance plannIng
I'8qu/rement Is also envi.loned as aIding the management of the OIF
funds, particularly where Interlm loans between the OIF'. are being
made or considered.
Regarding overall fiscal health. the State's continued budget balancing activities
again impacted the City. $1.5 million dollars of the City' $51 millon dollar FY 1992-
93 budget was lost due to State cuts. The State's transfer of property tax increment
to school districts impacted the City's Redevelopment Agency by an additional '1
$652.655. Beyond State reductions, the City also experienced reduced General
Fund revenues from the prolonged recession. Sales tax revenue actually dropped
by 1% ($205.610) from FY 1991-92 levels, when in non-recessionary times it
generally increases between 4% and 8% annually. License and permit revenues
were only about 40% of normal. totalling $1,700.696 in FY 1992-93. Fees for
services including zoning. plan checking, subdivisions and inspections were down
$32,000 over last year.
In spite of the above, the City was able to end FY 1992-93 with a General Fund
balance of $8,337,802. which would be considered healthy under normal
circumstances. Given the continuing recession, however, and the likelihood of
further budget deficit ilS$ues at the State level, there will be continuing pressure on
the City administration and staff to develop creative techniques to avoid large-scale
budget cuts and the related deterioration of service which has been experienced in
many cities throughout the State over the last 2-3 years. Part of Chula VIsta's good
fortune has resulted from the use of .one-time. revenues as budget ofISets. Those
one time offsets totaled $2,699,000 for FY 1992-93. These one time revenues,
however, will not always be available to combat continuing fiscal Issues. The
GMOC Is concemed that continued dependance on one-time revenues to balance
the City's budget, could lead to relatively harsh cuts in stafling and/or services when
those revenues are no longer available. In such a scenario, the GMOC envisions
the potential for implications to threshold standard maintenance as stafling and or
services must be cut, and therefore recommends: """
~/ ;2[)~7J--
.
(
.
That the Finance Department be directed to ",.".,. a report which
.",,'uate. the current practice of alng on.tlme ,.vanUN to be/ance
the City' a budget, and ldentlfle. the potential ahorl-range Impacts to
"",/ce. auch a. police, tI,. end parlea, "auch ,.""nUN a,. not
available and the current economic climate and Stete cuts WIt,. to
continue for another 2 to 3 run. Such a report ,. necNN'Y for the
GMOC to detennlne "futu,. threahold cona."uenCN could ,.ault from
tlacal condition., and ahould be available for cone/deratlon during the
next review cycle commencIng In October, 1'1U.
a TRAFFIC.
THE G~OC FI~DS THAT THE CITY IS IN COMPUANCE Y(I'[tf 1t:I~ TRAFfiC
Il::IRESHOLD STANDARD ON BOTH A CUMULATIVE AND PROJECT JASIS.
.ttOWEVER. THE GMOC HAS IDENTIFIED FIVE LOCAtlO"S WHERE
POTENTIi'LL Y SERIOUS THRESHOLD COMPl..lANltE PROBLEMS COULD
OCCUR WITHIN THE NEXT FIVE TO TEN YEARS.
.
As amended In 1991, the threshold for traffic requires that Level-of-5ervice (LOS)
-C" or better as measured by observed average travel speed on all signalized
arterial segments, except that during peak hours a LOS of -0- can occur for no
more than any two hours of the day. Those signalized intersections west of 1-805
which do not meet the above standard, may continue to operate at their current
1991 LOS, but shall not worsen.
This threshold represents a change from the original Intersection Capacity Utilization
(ICU) method which analyzed the performance of intersections only, to the Highway
Capacity Manual (HCM) method which analyzes conditions over whole roadway
segments, and is a more comprehensive measurement as It considers the overall
-driving experience" in terms of time delay.
.
1993 Traffic tJlonltorina proaram
The 1993 Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP) presented to the GMOC summarizes
the results of analysis performed through actual avel time and apeed surveys of
all the arterial streets in Chula Vllta during the AM peak hour period (7 am to 9
am), as conducted from March 1993 to m1d-July 1993. Because the necessary
HCM field study work Is labor Intensive, avel studies for the three peak periods
(AM. Mid-Day, and PM) are to be apread out over time. The PM period was
evaluated In the 1992 1MP, the AM period this year (1993 1MP), the Mid-Day will
be presented next year, and then back to the PM period the following year, ...ultlng
In a complete cycle of analysis every four years. Additionally, any segments found
to be operating at LOS -C" In any year would be anaJyzed along with the following
year's period to determine if potential problems exist, ao that any necessary
operational changes can be addressed.
~ .2-(!)~/3
,,;,\
"i
\'
The 1993 TMP results show that all arterial segments studied during the AM peak """\
period were found to operate at LOS "C" or better. Five (5) arterial segments were
found to be operating at LOS "CO, in at least one direction, and will be reevaluated
with the 1994 TMP which will assess the Mid-Day peak period for all arterial streets.
With regard to the nine (9) arterial segments found to be operating at Los "C" during
the PM peak period by the 1992 TMP, and which were re-studied by the 1993 TMP,
two (2) could not be assessed (one on Broadway and one on H Street) due to road
construction projects, five (5) continued to operate at LOS "C", and the other two
(2) experienced a deterioration from LOS "C" to LOS "0" in one direction of travel.
Those 2 segments were northbound Otay Lakes Rd. between Telegraph Canyon
Rd. and East 'H' Street, and eastbo.und Palomar Sl between 1-5 and Broadway.
It should also be noted that the 1993 TMP again shows that arterial interchange
segments at the 1-5 interchanges, in general, are experiencing reduced Ievels-of-
service. This is due primarily to the close spacing of the signals, signal timing at
the ramps which is controlled by CAL TRANS, and the high volume of vehicles
entering and ex",ing the freeway. This is especially true of the short segment of
westbound "H" Street between Woodlawn Ave. and Bay Blvd. A related concem
remains with the trolley crossing gates at "E", "H" and Palomar Streets which
interrupt flows every 5 to 7.5 minutes, and the need to continue to urge the
Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) to eventually construct grade
separations.
During last year's review of the 1992 TMP, the GMOC noted its continuing concem, """\
as expressed in both its 1990 and 1991 Annual Reports, regarding potentially
serious future "H" Street traffic problems both east and west of 1-805. As the
principal arterial for many of the large approved but not yet buih master planned
communities and other projects, "H" Street's current configuration and capacity must
adequately meet these future traffic demands over the next 20+ years as buildout
occurs. Recent traffic models developed in conjunction with land use approvals
such as Kaiser Hospital and the Rancho Del Rey Commercial Center, indicate that
"H" Street will need to operate at or very near its maximum capacity to meet the
traffic threshold standard, providing little, if any, reserve capacity to address actual
future conditions not foreseen by the traffic models. The lack of reserve capacity
also limits the City's future flexibility to consider other project proposals like Kaiser
or Rancho Del Rey which may prove beneficial over the next 20 or more years.
In its 1992 Annual Report, the GMOC amplified these concems, and requested that
a comprehensive re-evaluation of traffic conditions in the "H" Street service area be
conducted, with a report back to the GMOC regarding any potential threshold issues
along with remedial strategies. Such a report has not been produced, and as stated
in the finding for this year's review (1993 TMP), the GMOC has identified 5 locations
where potentially serious threshold compliance problems coulcl occur within the next
5-10 year. Those areas are:
1.
"H" Sl east of 1-805.
"""\
~ eJo-?f
.
2. "H" St. west of 1-805 to 1-5.
3. Otay Lakes Rd. between East "H" at and Telegraph Canyon Rd.
... Palomar St. between Broadway and 1-5, and
,5. SR-125.
In the spirit of prudence, and to allow for sut'licient pre-planning to avoid what the
GMOC continues to see as an inevitable future moratorium condition affecting one
or more of these locations, the GMOC recommends:
. That the City Council refer the noted 5 locations to the engineering
o.partment for .rudy In tenns of projected traffic volumes, system
(street) capacity, and the fundIng, phasing and construct/on of needed
Improvements to meet the demands of projKted growth. The ruults
should be embodied In a report to be provided to the GAfOC next year
(October, 1194), and IncludIng potential solutions to demonstrate
continued compliance with traffic thtuhold _ndards over the long
tenn.
.
The GMOC requests that the following issues/recommendations be addressed in
that report with regard to each of the 5 noted locations:
~w Street East of 1-805-
As the principal arterial for many of the large, approved but not yet built
projects in eaStem Chula Vista, East "H" Street's current configuration and
capacity must meet related traffic demands over the next 20+ years as
buildout occurs. As additional signals are added between 1-805 and Otay
Lakes Rd., and projects continue to build, the GMOC is extremely concemed
that the street will become overtaxed, and result in the need for a
development moratorium. In order for the GMOC to clearly understand the
potential for a moratorium, and to thereby accordingly advise the Council, the
City Traffic Engineer's report should comprehensively analyze all existing
and currently approved future land uses within the East "H" Street service
area to determine If any land use or other modifications are needed to
correct potential problems before they necessitate a moratorium.
"H" Street West of 1-805 to 1-5-
.
Given the known physical and economic constraints to major future
modifications of "H" Street west of 1-805, the impacts of currently proposed,
and/or anticipated, major development or redevelopment projecbl should be
scrutinized and tailored to the Hmltations of the street. Recognizing the
street's limitations, and already contemplated projecblsuch as ScrIpps and
the Chula Vista Center expansion, any further development has the potential
to overtax the street. Existing and projected tratlic volumes on "H" Street
should be evaluated to determine what level of development can be
?~ _ .2tJ~?5
/
JJ!
"=-
.All
supported by employing remedial measures such as signal timing, no left
tums, etc. If a threshold problem will eventually exist, then the report should
also identify at what point land use limitations or other similar measures
would be necessary to maintain threshold compliance.
Otav Lakes Rd. Between East wHw St. and TelearaDh Canvon Rd.-
Although presently operating within the Standard, this section of Otay Lakes
Rd. is a concem as it has deteriorated from LOS 'C' to '0' since last year.
That segment should therefore remain a focus In all subsequent TMPs In the
form of an annual status report. That status report should address the
effectiveness of the interim signal timing adjustments proposed In the 1993
TMP (or other remedial measures), as well as the schedule for related
funding under the TransOIF for construction of the needed six-lane facility.
~
Palomar St. Between Broadwav and 1-5-
,
Although presently operating within the Standard, this section of Palomar
Street is a concem as it has deteriorated from LOS 'C' to '0' since last year.
That section should therefore remain a focus in all subsequent TMPs in the
form of an annual status report. That status report should also address the
effectiveness of the proposed improvements as identified in the 1993 TMP.
SR125
"""'\
The importance of SR 125 to supporting buildout of the projects in the City's
General Planning Area consistent with the Traffic Threshold has been
previously established by both the City's Growth Management plans and the
Eastem Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan. In light of the uncertainty
of CAL TRANS and CTV to construct SR125 in a timely manner, the GMOC
supports the SR125 Interim facility planning efforts contained in the HNTB
report, but recommends that further and more detailed study of the San
Miguel and Sweetwater road segments of that plan occur. This effort is
necessary to ensure adequate community Input and publicity, and avoid
potential adverse reaction which coulcl delay Implementation due to various
neighborhood Impacts and school safety Issues.
In closing, the GMOC notes that monitoring Improvements have resulted from the
TMP and Its associated methods of measurement under the HCM threshold
standard. The effort produces very thorough results which enable potential issues
to be identified in advance. thereby allowing sufficient time to resolve them before
they become problematic.
'"'"
~>>- ?I-
.
a PARKS AND RECREATION.
ItIE GMOC FINQ'. BAS~D ON THE PRESE~I f'tANDARD. THAT THE CITY IS
IN COMPUANCE WITH TtfE ~~~KS AND RE~REATION THRESHOLD ON BOTH
A CUMULATIVE AND PRO.,!ECT BASIS.
The Parks and Recreation threshold is a population-based standard calling for 3.0
acres of neighborhood and community park land to be provided for every 1.000
residents east of 1-805. This standard has been met as of June 30. 1993, as
Illustrated by the following table:
Acres of Acresf Acre $hortfall
Area PODulation Parks 1.000 Of Excess
East of 1-805 41,243 190.50 4.82 +66.77
West of 1-805 106,052 129.45 1.22 -188.71
. City-Wide 147.295 319.95 2.17 -121.94
Standardfldeal 147,295 441.89 3.00 -121.94
.
While demonstrating compliance (based on the present standard apply east of 1-805
only), this table also reveals the continuing shortfall in ptIrk land both for westem
Chula Vista and for the City as a whole. For each of the last five years, the GMOC
has recommended that the Parks Threshold Standard be amended to apply city-
wide, and to be measured both east and west of 1-805. In 1992, Council endorsed
making such revisions, but requested that a potential credit ayatem (equivalency
factor) for active recreation facilities such as pools and gyms be developed which
would provide for threshold calculating credit for more land area than the facilities
actually occupy. Th~ equivalency factors, In ptIrt1cular. were aeen as necessary
before the final language of a revised threshold standard could be prepared for
adoption.
Development of such a credit system has been Incorporated as ptIrt of the proposed
Parks Implementation Plan (PIP), for which a work program was nlC8ntty authorized
by the City Council. The proposed PIP would address possible ptIrk equivalency
factors. land availability. and other matters In westem Chula VIsta. and serve as a
foundation for developing a 2D-year master plan to correct existing deficiencies
toward meeting the goal of 3 acresf1000 population west of 1-805. As the threshold
standard therefore presently remains unchanged. the GMOC recommends for the
fifth consecutive year:
~;-- >>~)?
I
,
,
,--
,'PI
"
.
That the City Council amend the Parks and Recreation Threshold
Standard to apply City-wide, both ..st and weat of 1-805.
"""
The GMOC is becoming increasingly concemed that this matter still remains
unresolved since 1992, and that the PIP is projected to take another 18 months to
complete. Completion of the PIP is critical to a variety of parks issues, particularly
Council's inquiries regarding a credit system for major facilities such as swimming
pools, and other matters which must be resolved before the final language of a
revised City-wide standard can be completed for adoption. In this ">>lard, the
GMOC also recommends:
. That the City Council direct _" to expedite completion of the Parks
Implementation Plan (PIP), and ensure that the PIP Is a priority In the
work programs of the Planning and Parks and Recreation Departments
for the next year; and,
. That thos~ sub-components of the PIP which will form a basis for a
revised standard be directed for placement up-front In the
aforementioned work program to avoid continued delay In the adoption
of a revised standard.
In addition, although not directly tied to the PIP, is the need to complete preparation
of the Greenbelt Master Plan called for by the City's 1989 General Plan Update, and
to develop the related, comprehensive Bike and Hiking Trails Plan. "is the """'"
GMOC's position that the longer the Greenbelt Master Pian goes uncompleted, the
greater the potential for erosion and/or non-realization of one of the most significant,
and well publicized components of the updated General Plan. Therefore, the
GMOC recommends:
. That a Greenbelt Master Plan be undertaken and closely coordinated
with the PIP to ensure optimum use of the Greenbelt for park and
recreation purposes.
This is especially important for those Greenbelt areas west of 1-805 due to the
deficiency of parkland In that part of the City. Additionally, and as previously
mentioned, the lack of a Greenbelt Master Plan leads to uncoordinated planning
which could result in erosion of attaining the circumferential Greenbelt concept as
prescribed by the 1989 General Plan. This potential for erosion, or non-realization,
Is particularly great in areas that are not receiving comprehensive attention through
major planning project efforts, such as the SR54 corridor between 1-805 and 1-5.
The GMOC Is aware of several individual project proposals being considered In that
corridor which have the potential to directly impact realization of the Greenbelt. In
this regard, the GMOC also recommends:
~~'
';20 ~ Jg/
"""\
.
(
.
That the CIty Council direct"'" to fully COMIder Greenbelt laue. In
the counte of Nvlewlnll currwnt project propo.." within and .cqacent
to the SR54 corridor betwHn 1405 and 1-5.
.
One of the ongoing hurdles noted In I'8IIlizing the G....nbelt, or other new park sites
In westem Chula VISta. has been funding the costs of land .cquisltion .nd facility
construction. operation .nd maintenance. The GMOC would like to suggest use of
the "exceptional and extraordinary benefit" provisions of Section 6.2 of the General
Plan Land Use Element. Those provisions allow new developments to reach higher
density yields where such benefiti to the larger Chula Vista community can be
demonstrated. Perhaps .ssistance to the City, monetary or otherwise. in resolving
parks and recreation issues In westem Chula VISta could be considered as
demonstrating such a benefit.
During the review "period, the Parks and Recreation Department completed many
positive efforts which were highlighted in their report, and should also be noted:
Approved a joint-use agreement with the Sweetwater Union High School
District for facilities at Chula Vista Community Park and neighboring Eastlake
High School.
Approved the master plan for the McCandliss Memorial at Halecrest Park.
Approved a State grant application for stage improvements at Memorial Park.
Approval of funding for restroom renovation .t Los Ninos Park.
Accepted a Small Business Tree Planting Program Grant from the Califomia
Department of Forestry.
Completed Phase I of the Play Equipment CIP.
Completed Chula Vista Community Park at Eastlake G....ns. adding 12.9
acres to the City's park system.
Established the Youth Action Program at select high .nd middle schools.
Formed the Youth Co.lltion in cooperation with major youth-providers in the
City. .
Conducted the Youth Summit to collect information on needs for middle and
high school aged youth.
Initiated Phase II construction .t Rohr Park.
Initiated the Otay Park M.ster Plan .nd joint-use program.
Developed . jolnt-use .g....ment with the 4-H Club of San Diego to provide
latchkey services In the Montgomery .rea.
Completed .ppraisal of the property .t Third .nd "L" St. for possible park
.cquisltion.
The P.rks Department report .Iso provided responses to e.ch of last year's GMOC
concerns. Based on the present status of .cthiltles in addressing many of those
concerns. the GMOC makes the following addltion.1 recommendations. many of
which echo previous concems:
.
.M, ~ 11) - :W-?i
y.:~'i'
.
Th. City .hould creet. .n Impect fee progrem which will require n.w
.perlment con.truction In Westem Chul. VI.ta to pey perk fee.. P.rk
Acqul.ltion & Dev.'opment (PAD) ,... .re currently coIlect.d only for
.ubdlvl.lon., Including condominium projects. It .hould be not.d th.t
compl.tion of the PIP I. .'.0 nec....ry In order to ..tab/I.h .peclflc
propos.d Improv.m.nts .nd .ree. of benefit, upon which equltebl.
Impect fees c.n be collect.d from newepertm.nt developm.nt .. well.
""""
. New multi-f.mlly projects In watem Chul. Vim should be required to
provld. . ..t .mount of prlv.te recreetion facilities within the
development G.nerel provi.'on. regerrllng .uch feclllti.. .re Includ.d
In the propos.d City Dalgn Revl.w lI.nu.' being drefted by the
PI.nnlng Dep.rtm.nt. However, thos. provl.lon. .mount to only bro.d
guld.lln.., .nd more In-depth study I. nec....ry to develop. work.bl.
progr.m. Prep.retlon of the PIP provides .n opportunity to .ddress
.uch . .tudy, .nd the PIP .hould determine . minimum ree.on.ble
proJ.ct .Iz. to which .uch . requirement .hould .pply.
.
Th. P.rks .nd R.cre.tion Depertm.nt .hould contInu. to ....ss the
.ppropri.t.n.ss of wmlnl-perksw In west.m Chul. VI.ta. Whll. .uch
perk. .re more expenslv. In per-ecre costs to develop .nd m.lntaln,
th.y provld. . more Intim.t. .c.l. for loc.' neighborhoods, end m.y
be the only m.thod by which Ioc., perk deficiencies In westem Chul.
Vlst. c.n b. rem.dl.d without .'gnlflc.nt condemn.tion of exl.ting
d.v.lopm.nt. Ag.ln, this re-ess...m.nt Is pert of the PIP'. work
progr.m.
"'
In closing, the GMOC would like to acknowledge the City for cooperative
recreational program funding such as that for the Youth Action Program, and also
acknowledge the schools, YMCA, and Boys and Girls club for their efforts in forming
a coalition to address human service needs. Presently, the Parks and Recreation
Department, YMCA, and Boys and Girls Club are administering a variety of youth
programs with the noted funding. The GMOC believes continuation of this spirit of
cooperation and efficiency in resources is necessary to tackle many of the parks
and recreation issues facing the City as growth occurs.
~1HL.,l\N\/.RPT)
~~~2"tJ
.
"'
.
.
.
.
ATTACHMENT D
COVER LETTERS AND STATEMENTS OF CONCERNS
TO
WATER DISTRICTS AND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
~- ..2()~ r/
.
.
.
November ,1994
Mr. Cary F. Wright, President
and Members of the Board
South Bay Irrigation District
505 Garrett Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91912
Dear Chairman Wright and Members of the Board:
RE: Chula Vista Growth Management Oversight Commission 1993 Annual Report, Statement
of Concern
On November 22, 1994, the Chula Vista City Council took final action on the 1993 Annual
Report from its Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) regarding the City's
Quality of Life Threshold Standards. As evaluated from written and oral presentations by
Sweetwater Authority staff, that report contains an overview of water availability, planning and
service matters as they relate to the provision of adequate water supply to meet the needs of
existing and future customers within Chula Vista.
Based on its review of the GMOC report, the City Council approved a Statement of Concern
for the Water Threshold as required under the City's growth management ordinance. The
Statement of Concern regarding the Sweetwater Authority is enclosed.
The intent of this year's Statement of Concern for Sweetwater Authority is to emphasize the
need to continue to work cooperatively in the exploration and development of alternate water
supply sources, to continue to promote conservation, and particularly to consider development
of capital facilities and programs for reclaimed water use within the Authority's service area.
In these regards, we believe the City and the Authority share common objectives in ensuring the
ability to meet future water demands, and reduce dependence on tenuous imported water
supplies. We commend the Authority for its cooperative endeavors with the City and other
water agencies, and encourage continued attention to completing and implementing water
planning activities as they are essential in atta;nil1g our common objectives. We believe the
Inter-Agency Water Task Force affords an excellent opportunity to assist one another, and to
the extent City land use decisions and policies affect water availability and delivery, your input
on any changes we might make is always welcome.
~ .:0-"ZS,;?-.,
Mr. Cary Wright, President
and Members of the Board
Page 2
~ovember , 1994
"'"
The City appreciates the work of Richard Reynolds and Hector Martinez in providing
information to our Growth Management Oversight Commission. We look forward to working
with you in these matters, and to continuing our cooperative relationship with your Board and
Sweetwater Authority staff.
Sincerely,
Tim ~ader
Mayor
A:\GMOC-9l\GMSOC9l.SW A
T~/EB:eb
""'"
cc: City Council
City Manager
Richard Reynolds, General Manager
........
~- ;2tJ~~
e
e
e
CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION (GMOC)
1993 STATEMENT OF CONCERN REGARDING WATER
[SWEETWATER AUTHORITY]
The GMOC recognizes the efforts of the Sweetwater Authority to work cooperatively with the
City and other water agencies in responding to GMOC concerns, and in ensuring adequate, cost
effective water supply, including the following:
I,..
a. continuing to promote consetVation.
b. considering cooperative agreements with Otay Water District which could
assist Otay in attaining their 10 day storage/emergency supply goal.
c. exploration of developing alternate water supplies, including the present
brackish water desalinization proposal in the Lower Sweetwater Valley.
d. infrastructure preplannirtg in conjunction with the Bayfront project.
e. ongoing coordination with the City on water planning issues within the City's
General Plan Area.
e. participation on the Interagency Water Task Force.
.1.
CONCERNS:
Despite the above noted efforts, the GMOC has concluded that:
a. There is still concern about dependence on imported water supply, and the need
to focus on efforts to increase the availability and reliability of future water
supplies through development of reclamation and other alternate water sources
which can reduce dependence on importation. The City proposes to work closely
with the Sweetwater Authority through the Inter Agency Water Task Force to
focus on developing, where feasible, reclaimed water useage particularly for new
large projects like the Bayfront development, and for existing uses such as golf
courses and open space areas.
b. Existing small diameter cast iron pipes, particularly in the northwestern quadrant
of the City, may be inadequate to meet fJre-flow requirements for new
development. The City should work closely with the Sweetwater Authority to
establish a consistent process of early referral on projects which will increase fJre
flow demand in that part of the City. Such a process will assist in addressing
what are often insurmountable costs to many small developers to mitigate the
situation to receive building permits.
B:\GMOC-93\GMSOC93.SW A
~- dLJ ,-g-y
Page 1
II.
RECOMMENDA nONS.
""'"
The GMOC recommends that the Sweetwater Authority work with the City to:
a. Actively encourage, support, and accordingly allocate resources to efforts
involving development of physical and operational programs on both the local and
regional level which reduce dependance on imported supply, including:
cooperative efforts to rekindle support and planning activity for a seawater
demineralization plant. within the county.
continuing to urge the County Water Authority to speed construction of
emergency storage reservoirs within San Diego County.
continuing feasibility evaluations of Chula Vista and other interested
parties fmancing, designing and constructing the proposed reclamation
plant in the Otay River Valley which has been indefInitely postponed
under the Clean Water Program.
working with the City and Otay Water District to develop and coordinate
common goals and strategies regarding the development of reclaimed
water """'\
implementing local groundwater project proposals such as that presently
being proposed in the Lower Sweetwater Valley.
b.
Encourage continued cooperation with the Otay Water District to accommodate
Otay's efforts to attain emergency supply and storage goals through possible use
of Sweetwater Reservoir, and development of the Middle Sweetwater River Basin
conjunctive use project.
",'
c. Devise a mutually acceptable advance planning program for water facility needs
for infill development, particularly in the northwestern quadrant of the City.
""'"
B:\GMOC.93\GMS0C93,SW A
~- d~-Y;
Page 2
.
.
.
November ,1994
Mr. Mark Watton, President
and Members of the Board
Otay Water District
10595 ]amacha Blvd.
Spring Valley, CA 91971
Dear Chairman Watton and Members of the Board:
RE: Chula Vista Growth Management Oversight Commission 1993 Annual Report, Statement
of Concern
On November 22, 1994, the Chula Vista City Council took final action on the 1993 Annual
Report from its Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) regarding the City's
Quality of Life Threshold Standards. As evaluated from written and oral presentations by your
district's staff, that report contains an overview of water availability, planning and service
matters as they relate to the provision of adequate water supply to meet the needs of existing and
future customers within Chula Vista.
Based on its review of the GMOC report, the City Council approved a Statement of Concern
for the Water Threshold, as required under the City's growth management ordinance. The
Statement of Concern regarding the Otay Water District is enclosed.
The intent of this year's Statement of Concern for the Otay Water District is continued
expression of the City's concern over adequate long-term water availability, and the need for
dynamic planning efforts to provide sufficient storage capacity, and to develop alternate water
sources. In these regards, we believe the City and the District share common objectives in
ensuring the ability to meet future demands, address emergency supply situations, and reduce
dependency on tenuous imported water supplies. We commend the District for its cooperative
endeavors with the City and other water agencies, and encourage continued attention to
completing and implementing water planning activities, as they are essential to attaining our
common objectives. We believe the Inter-Agency Water Task Force affords an excellent
opportunity to assist one another, and to the extent that City land use decisions and policies
affect water availability and delivery, your input on any changes we might make is always
welcome.
~ ~/f)?
Mr. Mark Watton, President
and Members of the Board
Page 2
~ovember ,1994
""""
The City appreciates the work of Keith Lewinger and Tim Stanton in providing information to
our Growth Management Oversight Commission. We look forward to working with you in these
matters, and to continuing our cooperative relationship with your Board and District staff.
.~
Sincerely,
Tim ~ader
Mayor
B,IGMOC-93IGMSOC93.0W
T~/EB:eb
""'"
cc: City Council
City Manager
Keith Lewinger, General Manager
.'
""""
~ ;2/?'" ~ ?
.
.
.
CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION (GMOC)
1993 STATEMENT OF CONCERN REGARDING WATER
[OTAY WATER DISTRICT]
The GMOC acknowledges the activities of the Otay Water District in responding to prior
concerns of the GMOC, and in cooperatively working with the City and other water agencies
to ensure adequate, cost effective water supply including the following:
a. continuing to encourage conservation.
b. continuing to explore cooperative agreements with other water agencies
for emergency storage and supply.
c. construction of water storage and delivery facilities, including reclaimed
water facilities in new development.
d. initiation of a comprehensive District Master Plan update.
e. ongoing coordination with the City on water planning issues within the
City's General Plan Area.
f. participation on the Interagency Water Task Force.
I.
CONCERNS:
Despite the above noted efforts and progress, the GMOC remains concerned about long-
term water availability, dependence on imported supply, and related potential impacts to
local planning and development. More work needs to be done on the regional and sub-
regional level to continue, and see through to timely completion and implementation,
planning efforts to increase the availability and reliability of future water supplies through
provision of adequate storage and treatment facilities, and development of reclamation
and other alternate water sources which can reduce dependence on importation.
II.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The GMOC recommends that the Otay Water District work with the City to:
a. Actively encourage, support, and accordingly allocate resources to efforts
involving development of physical and operational programs on both the local and
regional level which reduce dependance on imported supply, including:
working to rekindle support and planning activity for a seawater
demineralization plant within the county.
continuing to urge the County Water Authority to speed construction of
emergency storage reservoirs within San Diego County.
B:\GMOC.93\GMS0C93.0W
Page 1
~... ...2t? ~
continuing feasibility evaluations of Chula Vista and other interested """"
parties financing, designing and constructing the proposed reclamation
plant in the 0tay River Valley which has been indefinitely postponed
under the Clean Water Program.
work with the City and the Sweetwater Authority to develop and
coordinate common goals and strategies regarding the development of
reclaimed water.
implementing local groundwater project proposals such as those presently
being evaluated within the San Diego Formation.
b Continue to actively pursue and see through to completion, efforts to diversify the
District's storage and emergency supply options, including those with the
Sweetwater Authority, City of San Diego and the Helix Water District.
c. Clarify through the Interagency Water Task Force, and as appropriate make
adjustments to, its present emergency storage policy.
d.
Coordinate preparation of its present Master Plan update, particularly as it relates
to the evaluation of sites for proposed emergency storage reservoirs within the
City's General Plan Area.
-...
""""
B,\GMOC.93\GMSOC93.0W
-~- ;;"o~)S1
Page 2
.
.
.
November , 1994
Ms. Pam Slater, Chairwoman
and Members of the Board
San Diego County Air Pollution Control District
9150 Chesapeake Drive
San Diego, CA 92123
Dear Chairwoman Slater and Members of the Board:
RE: Chula Vista Growth Management Oversight Commission 1993 Annual Report, Statement
of Concern
On November 22, 1994, the Chula Vista City Council took final action on the 1993 Annual
Report from its Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) regarding the City's
Quality of Life Threshold Standards. As evaluated from written and oral presentations by Air
Pollution Control District (APCD) staff, that report contains an overview of the current regional
air quality situation, several of the San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy's (AQS) proposed
implementation measures, and other recent activities aimed at improving ambient air quality
within the San Diego Region.
Based on its review of the GMOC report, the City Council approved a Statement of Concern
for the Air Quality Threshold as required under the City's growth management ordinance. The
Statement of Concern regarding the Air Pollution Control District is enclosed.
The intent of this year's Statement of Concern to the APeD is to express the City's continued
interest in ongoing work with the APeD to address longer-term maintenance and improvement
of the ambient air quality enjoyed by the citizens of Chula Vista. Despite continued
improvement in the region's overall air quality in 1993, an acceptable level of air quality has
not yet been achieved. The largest contributing factor remains too many vehicle trips/miles
driven. The number of miles driven per year continues to increase at a rate almost double that
of population growth, and motor vehicles account for about 60% of the region's smog forming
emissions. The City recognizes that focus toward decreasing automobile use through strong
public transit and other programs is essential to continued future improvement of the region's
air quality. We compliment the APCD on its efforts to establish trip reduction strategies, and
continue to stress our position on the importance of expeditiously completing and implementing
subsequent AQS measures including the Transportation Control Measures Plan, the Model
Regional Transportation Demand Management Program, and the Indirect Source Reduction Plan.
~~- ..2tJ --90
Ms. Pam Slater, Chairwoman
and Members of the Board
Page 2
November ,1994
~
In this regard, we support the APCD in its present efforts through both State and Federal EPA
to achieve downgrading of the region's smog classification from severe to serious, in recognition
of the impact that air import from the Los Angeles area has local air quality.
We have also accepted the suggestion that.the City work with the APCD to revise our Air
Quality Threshold Standard to better measure local growth impacts consistent with provisions
of the AQS We propose formation of a task force with representation from the City, APCD
and SANDAG to facilitate those revisions, and will be contacting APCD staff in the near future
to discuss staffing and scheduling.
The City appreciates the work of H. Paul Sidhu and Paul Davis in providing information to our
Growth Management Oversight Commission. We look forward to working with you in these
matters, and to continuing development of our relationship with your Board and the APCD staff.
Sincerely,
-...
Tim Nader
Mayor
A:\GMOC-93\GMSOC93.APC
TN/EB:eb
cc: City Council
City Manager
Richard Sommerville, APCD
-~-
.;z[j~1 /
""""
.
.
.
CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION (GMOC)
1993 STATEMENT OF CONCERN REGARDING AIR QUALITY
[AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT]
The GMOC continues to recognize the progressive improvement of the region's overall air
quality, and acknowledges the activities of the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) in
responding to concerns of the GMOC, and in working toward attaining an acceptable future level
of air quality for the region including the foJlowing:
a.
continued provision of information on local air pollution sources and enforcement
activities in Chula Vista.
ongoing development and implementation of regional programs to
implement provisions of the San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy.
ongoing work with SANDAG to increase flexibility in the expenditure of federal
ISTEA funds.
technical and funding assistance to the City on several air quality improvement
efforts including acquisition of electric and CNG vehicles, alternate fuels
development, and a telecenter pilot project.
passage of AB 2008 (Alpert) to require Mexican vehicles used for
commuting to work in California to meet state smog regulations.
b.
c.
d.
e.
I. CONCERNS.
I. Despite the above noted progress, the GMOC remains concerned about longer-
term maintenance and improvement of ambient air quality enjoyed by Chula Vista
citizens. While trends for reducing air pollution are favorable in some respects,
continued growth in population and automobile miles driven make attainment of
air pollution reduction goals more difficult. Emphasis is necessary on seeing
through to timely completion and implementation, current planning efforts to
lessen the need for individual automobile trips and increase transit availability and
usage.
2. The GMOC is also concerned over the APCD's repeated input that the present
structure of the City's Air Quality Threshold is not entirely functional,
particularly as it relates to the request for APCD's review of the City's annual
growth forecasts. Toward enabling better measurement of local growth and other
activities' affect on the improvement of air quality, the GMOC recognizes the
need to amend the threshold standard to achieve better coordination with the
APCD and SANDAG, and in implementing the provisions of the AQS.
B:\GMOC-93\GMSOC93.APC
Page 1
~~ ...2CJ~J;L
n. RECOMMENDATIONS:
The City recommends that the APCD:
a. Expeditiously proceed with efforts regarding the development, review, adoption
and implementation of the Air Quality Strategy's subsequent implementation
measures including the TCM and TDM Plans, and an Indirect Source Reduction
Plan.
b. Work with the City and SANDAG through a task force, to develop revisions to
the City's Air Quality Threshold Standard regarding coordination of annual
growth forecast reviews, and the development of evaluative standards based upon
the provisions of the Regional Air Quality Strategy and its implementation
measures.
B:\GMOC-93\GMSOC93.APC
Page 2
~ .),tJ.-'7)
""'"
--..
""\
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item .J I
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Report: Discussion of options for Abating
Transient Occupancy Tax Rate from Ten Percent to a
Not Less Than Eight Percent during Calendar Year
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Finance~
REVIEWED BY: city ManagecS7 (4/5THS Vote: Yes___No-X-)
At its meeting of October 25, 1990, the city Council adopted Ordinance
2407 which established a maximum Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) rate of
ten percent, and provided for annual abatement hearings at which time
the maximum tax could be lowered, to not less than the current rate of
eight percent. since setting the rate at 10% in October 1990, the
city council has held public hearings and abated the tax to 8% for
calendar years 1991, 1992, 1993 and 1994; the same rate it has been at
since 1978.
ITEM TITLE:
the
Rate
1995
On December 20, 1994 there will be a public hearing to consider
abating the TOT rate to a rate below 10 percent, but not less than the
current rate of 8%. After the public hearing is conducted Council may
abate the 10% tax to 8% for the entire year, take no action and allow
the TOT rate to increase to 10% on January 1, 1995, or abate the tax
rate to any level between 8% and 10% for all or a portion of CY 1995.
Staff has reviewed TOT revenues, TOT rates in neighboring cities and
apparent impacts from rate increases in other cities. Staff would
like to meet with the Chamber of Commerce, the Hotel/Motel Association
and interested motel owners to get their input regarding various
abatement options prior to developing a recommendation for abatement
of TOT rates. Staff I s recommendation and input received from
interested parties would be available to Council prior to the December
20, 1994 public hearing.
A copy of this report was sent to the Executive Director of the Chula
Vista Chamber of Commerce and the President of the local Hotel/Motel
Association.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council accept the report and instruct staff to meet with the
Chamber of Commerce, the Hotel/Motel Association and interested motel
owners to discuss various options for abating/increasing the TOT rates
for Calendar Year 1995. Subsequent to these discussions, that a
public hearing be scheduled and held on December 20, 1995 at which
time Council will hear public testimony and set the TOT rate for 1995
at a rate of not less than 8% nor more than 10%.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
since adopting a TOT rate of 10% in October 1990, the Council has held
the increase in abeyance, allowing the rate to remain at 8%; the same
rate Chula vista has maintained since 1978. The increases were abated
r:J.) - I
({
Page 2, Item :21
Meeting Date 11/22/94
due to a slow economic recovery and a desire by the Council to keep
TOT rates at the level of other local cities competing for tourist
dollars.
TOT is a tax that provides support for City services from non-
residents of Chula vista. The tax is a percentage applied to the
rates charged to guests at City motels, campsites and recreational
vehicle parks when their length of stay is less than thirty-one
consecutive days. TOT revenues have been flat and over the years, TOT
revenue support of public services has eroded. In FY 1989-90 TOT
revenues supported 2.9% of general city services. By last year, FY
1993-94, TOT revenues supported only 1.8% of general services.
All three cities which are located nearby, with motels offering
similar rate structures to those in Chula Vista, namely Imperial
Beach, National city and San Diego, have raised their rates to 10% or
more in the past four years. Table I shows TOT rates for neighboring
cities and other cities with populations over 50,000 throughout San
Diego County.
TABLE I
CURRENT TOT RATES
SELECTED CITIES
CITY RATE
Chula vista - current 8%
Chula vista - proposed 10%
Carlsbad 10%
Coronado 7%
El Cajon 10%
Encinitas 8%
Escondido 10%
Imperial Beach 10%
La Mesa 10%
National City 10%
Oceanside 10%
San Diego 10 1/2%
San Diego County 9%
Santee 6%
vista 10%
A review of the impact rate increases have had in other cities based
on discussions with their staff and review of revenue data, has
resulted in no evidence to support a correlation between increases in
TOT rates and decreases in motel occupancy rates.
~/- :L
Page 3, Item ~ I
Meeting Date 11/22/94
FISCAL IMPACT:
TOT revenues are estimated at $1.2 million in the current budget.
Each 1/2% increase in the TOT rate would generate approximately
$37,500 in additional revenue this fiscal year, and $75,000 in
additional general fund revenue in subsequent fiscal years.
If the TOT rate were to increase to 10% on January 1, 1995, an
additional $150,000 in revenue could be expected this fiscal year, and
an additional $300,000 in revenue could be expected in future fiscal
years.
.J. J -J /;.1-'1
f7T/1 0</
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION
RESOLUTION NO.
) 7?>y
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING ABATEMENT OF THE
TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX FROM A RATE OF TEN
PERCENT TO PERCENT FOR CALENDAR YEAR
1995
WHEREAS, at its meeting of October 25, 1990, the City
Council adopted Ordinance No. 2407, Option 1, amending the
Municipal Code regarding Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) by
establishing a maximum TOT rate of ten percent and providing for
annual abatement hearings at which time the maximum tax could be
lowered; and
WHEREAS, in 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993, the City Council
held abatement hearings and set a TOT rate of eight percent for the
subsequent calendar year, the same rate it has been since 1978; and
WHEREAS,
November 22, 1994,
ten percent to
as percent.
the City Council, at a public hearing held on
considered the reduction of the TOT rate from
percent and voted to maintain the TOT rate
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the city of Chula vista does hereby approve the abatement of the
Transient Occupancy Tax from a rate of ten percent to percent
for calendar year 1995.
Robert Powell, Director of
Finance
as to
~
Presented by
c: \rs\S%TOT
c:< /-3
"
COUNCIL AGENDA SfA1EMENT
Item: .!.2..
Meeting Date: 11/22194
ITEM TITLE: Report: Update on Chil~ Safe Haven Program
SUBMITI'ED BY: Director of Parks a~d R eat~
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No..lL)
~
At the July 19, 1994 City Council meeting, staff was directed to develop recommendations regarding
coordination of a Children's Safe Havens Program with local churches and other organizations.
Staff presented the Safe Havens concept to a number of Community groups and organizations,
including the Child Care Commission, Youth Commission, Youth Coalition, and the Commission on
Aging. Presentations are also planned for the Chula Vista Human Services Council and the
Ecumenical Council. The intent of this report is to discuss the organization of a Safe Havens
Program.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept this staff report, and:
1. Support the promotion of existing youth-serving agencies and programs as "Safe Havens" for
children in need, (e.g., Boys & Girls Club locations, South Bay Family YMCA program sites,
City-operated afterschool playground programs, public libraries, fire stations, police
department, City recreation centers, etc.);
2. Support the coordination of efforts with programs offered by Domino's Pizza and 7-11's
"Project Safe Place" and the Chula Vista Human Services CounciVChula Vista Postal Service's
"Child Link";
3. Support the provision of on-going training for staff and volunteers (e.g., City-operated Vista
afterschool playground program staff) to help them be more effective in working with at-risk
children;
4. Support staff facilitation of a small working group of volunteers and representatives from one
or two churches interested in developing "pilot sites" for a church-based Safe Havens
Program.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: Presentations on the Safe Havens concept
have been made to the Child Care Commission, Youth Commission, and the Commission on Aging,
and the Youth Coalition. Copies of the minutes from these meetings are attached to this report
(Attachments A-E). A summary of the individual Commissions' comments is provided below:
A Youth Commission: Commissioners voted unanimously 6-0 to support the Safe Havens
concept, with the recommendation that consideration be given to ensuring that there are
adequate resources for youth in need (e.g., shelter, food, clothing), services for runaways, and
locations of Safe Havens facilities.
[SM. A113 . SAFEHA VN.113]
1 .2.~ -/
Ll
4- ~ ...
'.
Item: ..2 .1
Meeting Date: 11/22/94
B. Commission on A!!ifil!: Commissioners voted unanimously 6-0 to support the Safe Havens
concept, and felt that the program could be a part of the Senior Center's outreach program.
C. Child Care Commission: Commissioners voted unanimously 6-0 to support the concept of the
Safe Havens Program, with the recommendation that careful consideration be given to days
and hours of operation, how the program would be promoted in the community, training for
staff and volunteers, and coordination with existing programs and services (e.g., playground
programs, the schools, etc.).
D. Youth Coalition: Members discussed the Safe Haven concept in relation to the U.S. Postal
Services "Child Link" project. Coalition members were supportive of the concept, but
expressed reservations regarding liability issues.
DISCUSSION: A children's "safe haven" is most commonly dermed as a facility, that a child in
trouble would feel comfortable and secure going to, in order to have someone to talk to, to share a
problem, or to seek refuge if they are in danger. The facility and its staff/volunteers would respond
by providing immediate attention to the child's needs by offering security, reassurance, and contacting
appropriate services, as needed. Although there are varying definitions of what constitutes a Safe
Haven, each community typically tailors their program to their individual needs.
Federal funding for local Safe Havens Programs was made available through the Department of
Justice and the Department of Education during the summer of 1994. It is anticipated that funding
for demonstration projects will continue to be available in future years.
As defined by the Department of Justice and the Department of Education, a "Safe Haven" is a
multi-service center, (preferably located at schools), where a variety of youth and adult services are
located in a highly visible and accessible facility that is secure against crime and illegal drug activity.
The facility should be open from early morning through the evening, and the services should be
provided by highly experienced personnel. If a school site is not available, then other sites such as
churches or community centers could be considered. Safe Havens brings together law enforcement,
community services, basic and continuing education, health, recreation, employment, and other key
sectors to provide opportunities, skills, and recognition for young people, their family members, and
other residents of the community in a safe environment. A special emphasis is placed on drug abuse
education and prevention.
Safe Haven Tvoe Services Presentlv Available in Chula Vista
In Chula Vista, a variety of programs, services, and activities are currently in place (or are being
developed) in the schools, recreation programs, and youth-serving agencies in response to the need
for a comprehensive, coordinated "child safety net." The Parks and Recreation Department, for
example, currently offers supervised afterschool recreation programs at each of the city's 25
elementary schools. Supervised activities at the City's three community centers (Lorna Verde,
Lauderbach, and Parkway) are also available as alternatives to parents and children.
[SM. A1l3 - SAFEHAVN.1l3]
2
.2~ -~
Item: .2 )...
Meeting Date: 11/22/94
Domino's Pizza and 7-11 convenience stores in San Diego County have also teamed up to offer
"Project Safe Place" for local youth in trouble. The program is based on a model that was developed
in Louisville, Kentucky, and was brought to San Diego County in 1990. In cooperation with the
YMCA of San Diego County's Human Development Services and San Diego Youth and Community
Services, these businesses have been working with local schools to train youth to look for a clearly
identifiable logo displayed in store windows. If a teen is in trouble, they can go into one of the stores
displaying the logo to seek help. Employees at Chula Vista's two Domino's Pizza stores and fifteen
7-11 convenience stores have been trained to identify the situation and make the appropriate call or
referral to one of the five teen shelters located in the County.
"Child Link" is a program developed by the U.S. Postal Service, and is similar in many respects to
PROJECT CARE (the City's senior safety net program). Children are shown how to find a
uniformed letter carrier to help them when they are in trouble by looking for the "Child Link" logo
displayed on the letter carrier's vehicle and uniform. Letter carriers are trained to provide protection
and reassurance to children who are lonely and afraid. A pilot program is underway in the City of
Oceanside but not yet available in Chula Vista. In Chula Vista, the Chula Vista Human Services
Council, Boys and Girls Club of Chula Vista, the South Bay Family YMCA, and businesses are
working on adapting the "Child Link" concept. At this point in time, it is too early to evaluate the
program's success.
Chula Vista Safe Havens Workin!! Group
The response of the Boards and Commissions to the Safe Havens concept has been favorable. Efforts
to involve local churches in these child safety activities was also supported. A proposed timeline with
action steps is submitted as Attachment F.
Initial Contacts have been made with four churches (Pilgrim Lutheran Church, EastLake Community
Church, Evangelical Free Church of Chula Vista, and St. Rose of Lima); in addition, contacts were
made with three interested volunteers recommended by the Mayor and City Manager. Four
additional volunteers from the Youth Reach Network, Bella Bonita, Chula Vista Connection, and the
Chula Vista Elementary School District have agreed to work on the project. It is envisioned that staff
will facilitate the planning process. However, it will eventually be the responsibility of the designated
group, (church or volunteer group), to implement and perpetuate the Safe Havens service.
The first meeting of this Working Group was scheduled for Friday, November 4, 1994. The
discussion focused on the suggested process to facilitate the working group's efforts (i.e.,
concentrating on creating a "vision" of a Safe Havens Program best suited for Chula Vista), reviewing
existing resources and services, and identifying other groups and organizations to invite to participate
in the working group. The next Safe Havens working group meeting is scheduled for Friday,
November 18, 1994. A list of invitees is submitted as Attachment G. It was agreed that the working
group would continue meeting every other week.
The Safe Haven's working group's charge is to develop a stronger "safety net" for the city's children
and youth. The working group is not committed to any particular "safe haven" concept or definition,
and has been asked to work on designing and implementing a program that addresses the needs of
Chula Vista.
[SM - A1l3 - SAFEHAVN.1l3l
3
.2..2~]
Item: ,). )...
Meeting Date: 11122194
FISCAL IMPACT: Parks and Recreation Department staff would be available to facilitate the start
up of the program, including the possibility of identifying one or two local churches to serve as pilot
program sites. It is envisioned that a church or community group will implement and maintain the
program's operation. No additional budget funding from the General Fund is required other than
staff time to facilitate the process.
If additional Federal funding is made available for Fiscal Year 95196, the City could encourage
appropriate community agencies to submit grant proposals to support the local Safe Havens effort.
AlTACHMENTS:
A
Minutes from the September 12, 1994 Youth Commission
meeting.
B.
Minutes from the September 14, 1994 Commission on Aging
meeting.
C.
Minutes from the September 6, 1994 Child Care Commission
meeting.
D.
Minutes from the August 15, 1994 Youth Coalition meeting.
E.
Minutes from the September 22, 1994 Youth Coalition
meeting.
F. Proposed Project Timeline and Action Steps.
G. List of Individuals Invited to Participate in the Safe Havens
Working Group.
[SM - A113 - SAFEHAVN.113]
4
.):2 -'/
~
~
~
~
~
~
11'1*
,"" .
.
. '"' ~
!- :s
is 0
..
~ oS
:E ~
0 ~ 00 '"
::E !:! ...
.,
e ~ - ~ on
e - ~
e .,.. ....
~ .,.. ~ .u 0 N ..,
< ~ ~ .u 00 0 ... ~~
~O -0 al .,~ on on on
--0 -- ' ~ ~ 0\
!: - , _0 ~ >N --
-0\ -- .,- - - ..,
.
:E
~
~~
",i:
0000
iSz
>0
~~
!::=
<z
00<
Vlr..l
~5
~~
0=
<r..l
!-(IJ
ra~
>i
:S'"
;;;l
o
.
~
~
~
<
t-
oo
o
<
~
..l
..
o
~ ~
~~-
c: 0'-
~ - g
.. .. :s
8 !a 0
ut;;U
'0; ~
rJ:J (1)._
::c<u
~
-
>
!:
U
<
tlll
C
'~
al
::E
go
~
tlll
C
~
o
~
~
~
..
o
"'i:;~
~~-
.5 .s 'u
~ - 5
o !a 0
8t;;U
'0; ~
tI) rI),_
::c<u
..
o
1:0 ~
~~-
.5 .s '0
-g .. !3
o !a 0
O..U
U '"
'0; ~
tI.l tI)._
::c<u
go
.~ ~
>tlll
as.5
=~ rI)
..c 0 .,
U ~ c
"'s::: ~
tS.- "'0
.. ., 'S
if;: bO
yO ~
'" > '" '" ~
8.5.~ B ::;J
o (I) 'U; ~
~~-o ~og
.- ... ~ - .:: - ....
e; tlll ,. 'is. ., 'is. '"
~ s. ~~ ~] ~
",,,,..'E g.ctb
:::s 0 Q) Q) ... G) 0
..o_....c-o 0....
., .l:: 2 '"
~50'" v-
tlll 13 ~~ tlll~ go
c:: Q).-.- c:.--
.- Q) C 'S .- -;;: Q)
..::.c ... 4) Q) ..::.c Q) >
...00"0"'0 "'''00
~<__ ~_o
,~"
:2:1-5
~
..
o
1:0 ~
~::E_
c 0 '0
.- - c
"E - :s
o '" 0
o"u
u.~ >-
-- '" .....
rJ:J rJ)._
::c<u
'"
tlll
.5
..
.,
.,
::E
go
~
tlll
C
:-"i
..
o
~
~
.,
.~
,.
'"
..
"
..,
!3
..
5
..,
5
'"
"
..,
"':;:: a
.- U ii
'" c .. !a
., ,. ""-
1300'"
8 U .. tlll
"'",
1l ~ bI)'-
y c e;
c.'- .- ...::..:
:s ~,~ a
e rJ) :: e
~c",,,,
bI) ., 0 0
ce--
.- :s Q) G)
~:I:~~
g....oo
... 0 ,
e;
.,
13
g
'"
8
.5
..
c
8
go
~
tlll
C
:-"i
..
o
~
'"
c
'60
.,
.&>
s:
'"
~
...
~
o
..
::
:;:
~
..
tlll
o
..
=-
~
~
,f;/
/1,",,'
Attachment G
CHULA VISTA CHILDREN'S SAFE HAVENS PROGRAM
PLANNING GROUP INVITEES
~
Pastor Armstrong
EastLake Community Church
900 Lane Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91914
W Scott Mosher
Executive Director
Boys & Girls Club of Chula Vista
1301 Oleander Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Senior Pastor Gary Bowman
Evangelical Free Church of Chula Vista
795 East" J" Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Renee Perry
439 Ridgeview Court
Bonita, CA 91902
Sister Dolores
SI. Rose of Lima
293 "H" Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Judith A. Pidgeon, Ph.D
20 Pepper Tree Road
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Todd Durrance
Youth Reach Network
POBox 1351
Bonita, CA 91908
Emerald Randolph
P.O. Box 17
Jamul, CA 91935
Gabi Evia
5812 Central Avenue
Bonita, CA 91902
Sophia Sanchez
South Bay Community Services
315 Fourth Avenue, Suite E
Chula Vista, CA 91910
"""""
Steven Harris
713 Brookstone Road #204
Chula Vista, CA 91913
Elizabeth Stillwagon
Executive Director
Chula Vista Connection
73 North Second Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Sergeant Don Hunter
Chula Vista Police Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Nancy Kerwin
Chula Vista Elementary School District
84 East "J" Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910-6199
Tina Williams
Executive Director
South Bay Family YMCA
50 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Clorinda Merino
South Bay Community Services
315 Fourth Avenue, Suite E
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Pastor Alan Wyneken
Pilgrim Lutheran Church
497 "E" Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
"""""
SAFEHAVN.RST
11108/94
"
.v-'.
,4~,- -
~
Attachment A
.
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE l~UTH COMMISSION
Parks and Recreation Conference
Room City Hall
Meeting was called to order at 6:30 F~ by chair Keservy.
Roll call was taken.
September 12, 1994
Members Present:
chair Keservy, vice Chair
WUbenhorst, Co=:issioners
Alfaro, Ellis, Ja:ieson and
Noble
Mechers Excused:
Members Unexcused:
None
co~issione~s Cetallos,
Christian F.~l~es
Guests Present:
Rosemary Brodbeck, Parks and
Recreatlon, Chuck Pugsley, Chula
Vista poliee Department
Mayor Tim Nader and Councilman
Len Moore, Jennifer Ayer
(commissior.er next month)
APPRO~L OP EZCUSED/NONEXCUSED MEMBERS
Roll was called and the absences of commissioners Ceballos
and Holmes were discussed. Neither commissioner made
contact with one of the appropriate people. Commissioner
Alfaro voted on unexcused absences fc~ the two seconded by
Commissioner Bracken.
Staff Present:
.
APPRO~L OP MINUTES
A motion to approve the August minutes was done by
commissioner Alfaro. This was seconded by Commissioner
Noble.
HEARING OP PUBLIC REMAR~S - None.
OLD BUSINESS
A. youth commleeloD pamphlets (sUb-comaittee iDput) -
This vill be discussed during the October ceeting by Chair
Meservy.
B. TeeD Court - JOD Jamie.oD's follow-up - Commissioner
Jamieson contacted an individual in E: Cajon regarding the
Teen Court. That individual gave a n~me to commissioner
Jamieson for additional information. He has not been able
to contact her. commissioner Jamieso~ also talked to
~erald Randolph, CAST, on imple:enti~g Teen Court in
Chula vista. As soon as he gets the ~nfor:ation from El
cajon he will present at october's meeting.
.
~.2-/
YOUTH COMMISSION
2
September 12, 1994
~
Advisor Brodbeck told the co~ission that she had a video
from El Cajon YMCA that had info~ation on Teen Court.
This also will be available next :onth.
c. Youtb in Government Day - subcomaittee formed -
Commissioner Meservy and Advisor Brodbeck met last month-
to reimplement Youth and Govemeent Day. Youth and
Government Day provides an opportunit~ for high school
students to have an idea of the funct10ns of day-to-day
city operations. Applications will be the first step 1n
this project. The applications ~ould go to all the high
schools. One designated administrator would give the
applications to students who ~ould be interested in 1/2
day participation. The month of April is the goal for
Youth and Government Day.
Chula vista did have a Youth and Government Day in 1989
and was highly successful. The idea is to have a student
"shadow" the city manage!:lent.
The objective is to assign a student to each mecber of the
department head. Another goal objective is to have
Advisor Brodbeck or one of the Youth Co~issioners find a
restaurant that will sponsor a dinner for the department
heads as well as the students.
Advisor Brodbeck passed out an application on Youth and
Government Day and asked the Co~issioners to take action
on this agenda item with a month in mind.
The application is a rough draft, boxes and lines will be
added so when the ap~licant reviews it, they would check
first and second cho1ces.
Agent Pugsley asked that Chief Ecerson be put on the
agenda.
Councilman Len Moore recomcended adding a "Public at Large
Pro and Con".
Chair Meservy asked for the opinions of the Comcission.
Advisor Brodbeck revealed how the co~ission will be
involved. The Youth Co~ission will help her organize
this project. She will devise a "do" list that will help
quide the Youth commission. Later when goals and
objectives are discussed, this will be a project that can
be annually done. Eventually she hoped to turn the
project over to the Chair and Vice Chair in the following
years while still overseeing it.
Chair Meservy encouraged the comcission to speak up and
communicate during the meeting.
~
-...
.;?..< - 6
YOUTH COMMISSION
3
September 12, 1994
.
commissioner Noble asked if the whole point of people
getting into the positions is to learn ~hat the people do.
Advisor Brodbeck said that was part cf it but the main
function was to show hoW local goverr;ent operates. Youth
and Govern=ent Day will have a seqmer.t where the Youth
Commission help applicants devise a "mock" City council .
meeting. A planning phase will go with this project.
This will probably be in the eye of the cedia, so Advisor
Brodbeck recommended a "practice Saturday" if the plan was
adopted. The main focus will be going over the "mock"
aqenda.
councilman Len Hoore helped with plar~in9 the aqenda. If
concerns are with a library, subjects could revolve around
libraries. other suggestions were t~e homeless, the youth
etc.
commissioner Noble asked that a brief narrative of each
department head or council seat be ad~ed to the handout.
That way each applicant will know what each position does
and they can choose the top three they would like to
"shadOW".
.
Advisor Brodbeck let the Commission ~~ow that a letter
will be sent with the applications t~at is an overview.
It will describe what the Youth Commission is trying to do
and include application with a brief suc:ary of each
position.
Commissioner 3amieson asked if these ~ere going to all the
schools. Advisor Brodbeck reconfirme~ just hiqh schools.
He asked about the process of pickinq the applicants.
Advisor Brodbeck told the Commission that it was up to
them. The Dean of Students could be assiqned. Advisor
Brodbeck recommended that the Youth Commission monitor
each high school to check on the amo~~t of applications
filled out.
Councilman Len Hoore asked what happe~ed if four
applicants wanted one position. Advisor Brodbeck said
that there will be a choice of three ~or positions. The
Youth commission would interview each applicant or if the
Dean was involved, then the Dean woul~ s~mit five from
each school. Aqent Puqsley recommended that the Youth
Commissioners pick each position to go with a school and
then rotate annually. Not only would each position be
filled but one school could be "the p:-o/con debaters".
commissioner Jamieson asked about the distribution of the
applications. Advisor Brodbeck said she could mail them
or each Youth commissioner could drop the~ off at their
schools.
.
>>'-7
','
YOUTH COMMISSION
4
Se~te~er 12, 1994
'""'\
Chair Meservy asked if there was an o~tline on
qualifications to be given to the Dean since favoritism is
shown at times. Councilman Len Moore said that instead of
the Dean a government class in school could be the focal
point. Commissioner Alfaro recommended the best scholar.
out of each grade with seniors being picked in twos.
Commissioner Bracken recommended that since a lot of
people don't have the governcent class and are in lower
grade levels the applications should be circulated through
the English classes where everyone gets the inforDation.
A
Advisor Brodbeck asked if the commission wanted to
these applications to the History/English teachers
faculty members in general. Co~issioner Jamieson
recommended to hand them to the principals to hand
out to the teachers and then pass it to the dean.
The final decision was to have the letter and application
go to the principals' office. A motion to accept the
Youth and Government Day was made by Co~~issioner Jamieson
and seconded by James Alfaro.
direct
or the
them
Advisor Brodbeck will have additional infOrDation in
October.
councilman Len Moore reco~ended that Advisor Brodbeck
send a memo to council to choose a month on the Youth and
Government Day.
Chair Meservy asked for a motion to have the Youth and
Government Day in April. co:=issioner Noble motioned to
pass it, seconded by Commissioner Jamieson.
D. DiscussioD of Park Safety Questionnaire - Chair
Meservy presented the questionnaire t~at was made by
ex-commissioner Jocelyn castillo on t~e safest parks in
Chula Vista. He asked for an approval on the
questionnaire. Copies were passed out to new mecbers.
""""
commissioner Jamieson asked if this was
principle as the school questionnaire.
that it was.
The Commission approved the questionnaire. Chair Meservy
asked Advisor Brodbeck to take it to the print shop.
These will be passed out to the schools after Advisor
Brodbeck hand carries or devises a letter to the person
who handles all the publicity for the Sweetwater Union
High School District and Chula vista School District. If
the schools approve, these will be passed out.
on the sace
Chair Meservy said
Commissioner Jamieson asked if this will be aimed at the
high schools only. Chair Meservy said that not only would
it be the high schools but the junior colleges too.
""""
02,2 -8
YOUTH COMMISSION
5
Septenber 12, 1994
.
.
Commissioner Noble questioned Part I, question '2. He
said that this will vary ~here the person lives. As the
parks move further away from downtown area, they tend to
be not as well maintained, less veqetation, etC. He asked
if there was a way to i~prove the parks, perhaps takinq
the questionnaire to the Parks and Recreation division sd
they understand how the youth feel about the parks.
AdvIsor Brodbeck said that the results would not only be
given to Parks and Rec but also the schools.
Advisor Brodbeck commented that she will run the
questionnaire past Parks and Rec and both school
districts. Aqent Puqsley recommended sendinq a copy to
the Chief's office.
commissioner Noble motioned to approve the questionnaire
and it was seconded by co:missioner Alfaro. Advisor
Brodbeck will report back to the commission in October.
Chair Meservy informed the Commission that Advisor
Brodbeck wanted to add two additional aqenda itecs be
added under new business. One will be "Safe haven" the
other will be the Youth sucmit. He asked for a motion to
be made to approve putting them on the agenda.
commissioner Alfaro motioned to put the ltems on this
month's aqenda seconded by Vice Chair Wubenhorst.
MEW BOSINESS
A. youth summit - Advisor Brodbeck asked Chair Keservy to
brief all the commissioners on the Youth Summit. He said
that the Youth summit last year had chosen youth fro. the
city that go to the meeting. It was held at the YMCA on
Fourth Avenue. It discussed problems in Chula Vista and
ways to solve them. Chair Meservy felt that it was a
great experience and asked for volunteers to go to the
summit.
The Summit will be in early January and multi agencies
become involved. Not only is the YMCA involved but the
Boys and Girls Club, south Bay community Services, the
police Department, and Parks and Rec. It is an
opportunity to get the youth toqether and deal with issues
they are concerned with. The agencies involved mediate
and solve the problems. It is over a short period of time
that sub-committees are developed from each agency. A
final meeting is held where the results were communicated
to the City council. A solution process is developed
where the agencies expedite whatever needs to be done and
formally is referred back to the council.
.
)..2 ... 9
'.
YOUTH COMMISSION
6
.
September 12, 1994
""""
Agent Pugsley encouraged the Commission to attend the
meeting because the input of the youth is definitely
needed. A teen night club is in the process of being
completed which is a result from last year's Summit
meeting.
B. Safe BaveD - Advisor Brodbeck said that the department
was given a council referral. The council referral is
something that the department needs to look into, respond
and send back any information that was gathered to the
council. A safe haven is a concept where someone can qo
when they are in trouble. City Council asked if Parks and
Rec shou d become involved in the awareness of a safe
haven.
Commissioner Jamieson asked about resources. For example,
CAST references send do~estic violence victi~s to a house
that would provide shelter, food and clothing.
commissioner Jamieson asked if troubled youth would be on
the same wave length. Advisor Brodbeck said that after
the Mayor had met with a colleague in her department he
wanted to reinvent the safe haven concept by qettinq the
churches involved. If a youth was in trouble, what would
be the youth'S options.
Advisor Brodbeck said that this was an info~al
introduction to be run past the Commission to qet their ~
support. Later somebody will come back to all the City
Commissions to devise a criteria of what a safe haven will
be, who will it consist of, who all the players are, etc.
Right now a vote to reinstitute the concept of a safe
haven is needed. Again, this issue will be presented to
all the City Commissions.
commissioner Jamieson asked about "runaways", kids that
are havinq problems at home. Advisor Brodbeck said that
will be addressed once a safe haven concept is approved.
Commissioner Nobel said that location must be considered
with this project.
Commissioner Jamieson made a motion to accept and enhance
the safe haven concept. This was seconded by Commissioner
Noble.
C. vista Youth Commi..ioD - Vista invited the Youth
Commission to come up and qo swimminq and have a pizza.
The swimminq was postponed due to arrivinq late. Vista
and San Marcos Youth commissions met the Chula Vista Youth
Commission and talked about Chula vista's qoals and future
plans. They covered past projects which included Youth
and Government Day, Youth Sucmit and Teen Court. If the
Youth Commission ever needed their help they welcomed it.
.~
;/;2 - 10
YOUTH COMMISSION
7
Septe~er 12, 1994
.
Advisor Brodbeck ~assed out a survey that the Vista/San
MarcoS Youth commlssions passed out to their co~unit~.
They thought the Chula Vista Youth Cor.~ission would llke
some information on what they are doing.
D. Goal. and objective. with the Youth commission -
Advisor Brodbeck asked that each Commissioner brinq to the
October meetinq ideas on qoals and objectives that the
Commission would accomplish this year. Her suqqestion is
to limit the Commission to qoals. Perhaps a break down on
short term, mid term and lonq term qoals. One of the lonq
terms would be youth and Government Day and short term
could be the Youth Summit.
z. Questionnaire for colleqe, hiqh school and junior biqh
_ Chair Heservy will pass this information out at the next
meetinq.
S:OMMOllICATIONS
A. commission Remarks - Chair Heservy presented a letter
from councilman Hoore. The letter asks that the Youth
Commission take soce money from the budqet and donate it
to a qraffiti recoval section.
Councilman Hoore let the Commission know that the city of
Chula vista spends rouqhly $200,000 a year for qraffiti
eradication. $125,000 is in cash and $75,000 is "soft
money" which is 5' of time in one department, 10' in
another, etc. Councilman Hoore told the police Activities
Leaque (PAL) that when they try and raise money for the
youth, it is a cocpetition aqalnst all PAL board remembers
since it consists of members from the YMCA, Parks and Rec,
Boys and Girls Club etc. councilman Hoore felt that it
was easier to ~et the $125,000 reallocated. The council
passed the POllCY and PAL said they would do the oversite
coordinatinq. In order to qet the Youth Co~ission
involved, and reach out to the youth in the co~unity, PAL
would like to have a volunteer from the Youth Co~ission.
Commissioner Jamieson volunteered to sit in on the PAL
board for this month.
a. Written communications - none.
.
MONTHLY REPORT
A. Park. and Recreation Department - None.
a. police Department - Aqent Puqsley let the co~ission
know that he sits on the Advisor Committee and Ganq
Prevention which discusses problems in the schools and how
to make schools safer.
.
J.,2 ~ 11
YOUTH COMMISSION
8
September 12, 1994
'.
Motion was made by Commi~sioner Jamieson to ad~ourn the
meeting, seconded by Co~issioner Alfaro. Motlon carried.
Adjournment to the regularly scheduled meeting on October ~
10, 1994 at 6:30 pm. '
Respectfully,
Cathy Miller, Youth Co~ission Secretary
"""'"
..........
,)) -12
.
.
.
Attachment B
.'
Minutes of a
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
COMMISSION ON AGING
Norman Park Center
Conference Room
Wednesday 3:00 p.m.
September 14, 1994
1. ROll. CAll.
Members Present: Commissioners Fabrick, Grindle, Kennedy, Lane, Scrivener and
Valdovinos
Members excused: Commissioner Hagedorn
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the June 8, 1994, meeting were approved as distributed.
MSUC Fabrick/Lane 6-0
3. REPORTS FOR INFORMATION ONLY
a. HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL. no report
b. OUTREACH COMMITIEE . no report
c. SOCIAL SERVICES
Sharon Morioka, Human Services Coordinator, gave an update of the Social
Services programs. She passed around pamphlets to the Commissioners that
outline the services that are available at Norman Park Center.
d. NORMAN PARK CENTER
Meredith Riffel, Recreation Supervisor II, reported on the variety of acthities
available to senior adults at Norman Park Center. The intergenerational
programs will be expanded by two new ones: 4.H and seniors at Lauderbach
Center and 10 Friends at Norman Park Center.
4.
ACTION ITEMS
UNFINI~HED BUSINESS
J.l- 13
'''''-'''......''-.......~J .....""..... y.....
2
Conference Room
Januat')! 12, 1994
"
a. Star News Subscriptions
Commissioner Valdovinos introduced Mr. Tomas R. Agosto, Jr., Circulation Director """"
for the Star News newspaper. To give senior adults a discount on a subscription to
the Star News, Mr. Agosto is proposing a charge of $1 per year (usual subscription
rate is $39.21 per year) to residents of mobile home parks. This agreement will be
renewed yearly with each mobile home park. Mr. Agosto would need from the
manager of each mobile home park a list ofresidents that would like a subscription.
A minimum of 60% of the residents in a park would need to subscribe and 80% of
the mobile home parks in the city would need to participate for this program to go
into effect. The papers would also be picked up to be recycled when the residents
are finished with them. There will be an agreement berween each mobile home
park and the Star News for this program. Existing subscriptions would be extended
for a year.
Motion to accept this program as offered by Mr. Agosto for the Star News.
MSC Lane/Kennedy 5-0 (Fabrick abstain due to conflict of interest)
NEW BUSINESS
a.
Safe Haven
~
Sr. Recreation Supervisor Beardsley explained to the Commission the Council
Referral concerning the Safe Haven program. This is a program that v.'ill establish
safe sites for children to go to if they are in need of help.
The Commission felt that this program could be a part of the Norman Park Senior
Center outreach program.
Motion to support the Safe Haven program.
MSUC ValdovinoslFabrick 6-0
b. Goals and Objectives
Sr. Recreation Supervisor Beardsley went over the Goals and Objectives that were
compiled at the Commission's workshop that was held on September 7,1994.
There was discussion concerning having an intern work at Norman Park Senior
Center. Commissioner KeMedy supervises interns through SDSU and USD and his
knowledge will help with this objective.
""""
..2.). --14
.
.
~
.
Wednesday 3:00 p.m.
January 12, 1994
Norman Park Center
Conference Room
3
There was funher discussion and revisions made.
Motion to accept the Commission's Goals and Objectives as revised.
MSUC ValdovinoslFabrick 6-0
c. School Naming
Chair Grindle explained that Commissioner Scrivener had suggested that the
Commission suggest a name for a new school in the Chula Vista Elementary School
District. Chair Grindle felt that it was not the Commission's place to make this
suggestion, however it Would be acceptable if each commissioner wanted to
individually.
6. COMMUNICATIONS
a. Written Communications
Sr. Recreation Supervisor Beardsley reviewed the "Dear Crossing" anicle the
Commissioners had received and it was decided to put this item on Action Items for
the October's meeting agenda.
b. Commissioners Remarks
The Commission decided to invite Mr. Bill Gustafson, Transit Coordinator, to the
October Commission meeting to address weekend transponation options for seniors.
Commissioner Scrivener asked whether a new committee would be formed to
allocate spaces upstairs at Norman Park Senior Center. Sr. Recreation Supervisor
Beardsley answered that there is no extra space available, but that a volunteer could
work in an area not being used at the time the volunteer would need it. Ms.
Beardsley explained that there would be no new committee, that the existing
committee would continue and their role is selecting and evaluating agencies. Sr.
Recreation Supervisor Beardsley suggested that space issues would need to be
discussed with the Human Services Coordinator. One of her duties is aIlocation of
space for second story social service agencies.
Commissioner Lane informed the Commission that he will not be at the next
Commission meeting because he will be on vacation.
d-.:L - 15
Wednesday 3:00 p.m.
January 12 1994
4
Norman Park Center
Conference Room
""'\
7. STAFF REPORT
She also informed the Commission about the White House Conference on Aging that
will be held May 1 - 5, 1995, the A.S.A. membership structure and the game room
addition to the shuffle board court building. She also praised the work of Sharon
Morioka, Human Services Coordinator and Meredith Riffel, Recreation Supervisor
II. The bad news she had for the commission was the removing of two sick
Eucalyptus trees in Norman Park. These trees had been in Norman Park since the
early 1900's.
ADJOURNMENT to the regularly scheduled meeting of October 12, 1994.
Respectfully submitted,
--.,
Julia Lindsey
""'"
."z.;2. .......16
.
.
.
Attachment C
",
DRAFT
MINUTES OF A
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CHILD CARE COMMISSION
TUESDAY, 6:30 PM
SEPTEMBER 6, 1994
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
CONFERENCE ROOM
********************.*********
CALL MEETING TO ORDER - 6:30 P.M.
1,. ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chair Hartman, Commissioners Gish, pidgeon,
Randolph, Stillwagon and Humes
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Commissioners Cavanah, Johns, Miehls and
Tressler
Mr. Morris indicated that he had heard from Commissioners Cavanah,
who is on vacation, and from Commissioner Tressler, who is sick.
It was MSUC (Humes/Stillwagon) to grant Commis.ioners Cavanah and
Tressler excused from the September 6, 1994 meeting.
Commissioners Johns and Miehls will have their absences recorded as
unexcused.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
It was MSUC (Stillwagon/Humes) to approve the August 16, 1994
minutes as submitted.
ORAL COMMUNicATIONS
NONE
REPORTS - FOR INFORMATION ONLY
3. Child Care Element Work Program
Mr. Morris explained that this will not be reported to the
Commission tonight. The Department's portion has not been
finalized to date. This item will be brought back before the
Commission at the next meeting. The Forum date will be finalized
at the next Commission meeting.
;/).. - 17
.
CHILD CARE COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 6, 1994
2
AC~'ION ITEMS
Unfinished Business
"""'\
4. Maintaining Availability of Child Care Facilities
(Council Referral #2864)
Mr. Morris provided a brief summary of the Council Referral. He
explained that the Commission's response may be directed to Council
in the form of an Information Item.
Commissioner Randolph does not believe that it is the Commission's
place to try and find funding for child care in the City. She
feels that it is the school district's responsibility to find their
own funding.
The Commission would like the Sweetwater Union High School
District's child care programs to continue and the District look
into different sources of funding.
Commissioner Gish does not want it thought that the Commission is
an information center for funds.
It was MSUC (Humes/Hartman) that this Information Item be sent to
Council.
New 'Business
5.
Children's Safe Haven Program
""
(Chair Hartman requested that a thorough synopsis be included in
the minutes of this item.)
Sharon Morioka, Human Service Coordinator for the City, presented
the Safe Haven program to the Commission. This is a high priority
item of Mayor Tim Nader and he referred this to Parks and
Recreation for follow up. This is a concept that promotes programs
that provide comprehensive school, health and education components.
The idea is to have a place where youth and other community
residents can go to seek services or in the case of young children,
a safe place to go where there is staff available to help them.
The RFP defines a safe haven as "a multi-service where a variety of
youth and adult services are located in a highly visible and
accessible facility that is secure against crime and illegal drug
activity". The preferable location in the RFP is a neighborhood
school. The mayor would like to see churches used for safe havens.
The direction the Department is taking at this point is to present
this item to commissions and other groups for their thoughts on
this program. Ms Morioka stated that 7-11 convenience stores and
Dominos Pizza stores have a program where children can ask for
assistance. Also, the Post Office is wanting to start a program
""
.,2.,2 -18
.
.
.
'.
3
CHILD CARE COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 6, 1994
called Child Link that is similar to postal Alert that is for
seniors and the disabled. Ms Morioka felt it was important to
coordinate all the different programs together.
Commissioner Randolph wanted to know what days of the week and
hours of the day this program would be run. She pointed out that
7-11 and Dominos pizza could do it seven days a week, but churches
may only be available 5 days a week. There may be different times
during the week that these places could be used. She also
questioned where volunteers would be recruited.
Chair Hart asked how children would be made aware of this program
and what schools would be involved.
Ms. Morioka stated that it would be distributed through different
medias. The mayor prefers churches to be used, but at some point
schools would also need to be looked at.
Commissioner pidgeon asked about the 7-11 and Dominos program and
what they provided. She was wondering how these two businesses can
provide services.
Ms. Morioka explained that their employees have been given a very
basic training. These businesses are only a sanctuary for children
and they do not offer substance abuse education.
Commissioner Randolph pointed out that if the RFP was not submitted
and the grant not received, then the City is not bound by the
restrictions of having an inter-generational program. It could be
started with just a sanctuary aspect. She questioned whether the
Mayor wanted the full program started from the beginning.
Ms. Morioka explained that the Mayor is interested in getting a few
church sites started as a pilot for use as both a sanctuary site
and substance abuse education. Training for the volunteers is an
issue that will need to be addressed.
Commissioner Humes related to the Commission the problems she has
encountered with the Child Care Center she works at Cook Elementary
School. If the parents are not at the bus stop when the preschool
children are dropped off, the children are brought to her child
care center. More and more children were being brought to her
facility as well as older children. Staff at her facility had
grievances taking care of so many children. They had to implement
a policy that after three times of being brought to the child care
center, the child could not ride the bus any longer.
Commissioner Randolph can see problems with the Safe Haven program
and asked Ms. Morioka which level she felt most comfortable
implementing at this time. She offered to go with Ms. Morioka to
the Mayor and point out some of these problems.
.J~ - 19
"
4
CHILD GARE COMMISSION
SEPTEM2ER 6, 1994
Ms. Morioka felt the pilot program at the churches would not be
able to start within the next month. She asked the Commission the
following question to get a consensus of their feelings concerning ~
this program. What is the Commission's feeling about the basic
concept of developing a Safe Haven Program, whether it be church
based or school based. The basic concept being a safe, convenient
place for children to go to.
Chair Hartman does not think the churches would work with this
program because he feels if the church is not directly on the
child's way home from school, the child will not stop there if
needed. In addition, the volunteers at the church may get
discouraged because no children are showing up.
Commissioner Gish thought that perhaps this program could be run
wi th the Parks and Recreation Department Afterschool Program.
There would have to be training for the staff at these sites as
well as the information being made available to students at the
schools.
Commissioner Randolph felt that going through the schools and
Afterschool Recreation Program would be the easiest route to
establish the safe haven program.
Commissioner Humes also felt that using the Afterschool Program
would be a way to start the program.
Ms. Morioka felt the Mayor's priority with working with the ~
churches would be the same, but that a recommendation could come
from the Commission for other sites. Her concern was having
different programs essentially doing the same thing and who would
be pulling this all together.
Commissioner Stillwagon suggested that volunteers from the
Neighborhood Watch program be used at the school sites for children
who need help and these volunteers could transport these children
to designated sites.
Chair Hartman felt that the Safe Haven program would only be
effective if it were a school based program. He also felt that if
there is a problem between children, that both parties would need
to be included in resolving the problem.
Ms. Morioka told the commission that presentations concerning this
program would also be made before the following groups: Human
Services Council, Ecumenical Council, Commission on Aging, Youth
Coalition and the Healthy Starts groups.
The coneeneue of the COJIlIIIieeion wae that the concept of this
program ie a good idea.
........
~j -20
.
.
.
.
5
CHILD CARE COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 6, 1994
6.
Amendment to 4-H Latchkey Agreement
Mr. Morris gave background information about the 4-H programs at
Lauderbach Center and Loma Verde Center. A formal agreement was
signed,last year and this year they are bringing to the City an
amendment to that agreement. The amendment is for $23,425 and
needs the Commission's endorsement.
It wa. MSUC (Gish/Humes) to endorse and support continuation of the
4-H programs.
7. Initiating Public Relations
Commissioner Randolph stated that for the Child Care Commission
become better known within the City, that commissioners should
visit other commission meetings, as well as invite other
commissions to visit Child Care Commission meetings. This would
help the different commissions become aware of the other groups in
the City and what issues each group discusses. The other
commissioners felt this was a good idea. She requested Mr. Morris
send a schedule of all the commissions, boards and committees
meeting times to each Child Care Commissioner.
Mr. Morris also recommended that the commissioners attend the
Boards and Commissions Banquet.
OTHER BUSINESS
8. Written Communications
The following were received and passed around for the commissioners
to review: Childcare Communique for Sept/Oct 1994, Chula Vista
Leadership sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce and Profession
Development Institute for California City/County Child Care
Coordinators on October 26 -28, 1994 in Monterey, California.
9. Commissioner's Remarks
Commissioner Humes would like to see the City look into child care
for City employees, possibly using buildings that would otherwise
be demolished with the expansion of the employee parking lot.
Commissioner Pidgeon was introduced to the commission.
Commissioner Stillwagon had to leave and since that did not leave
a quorum, the meeting was adjourned at 8:15 pm.
).2 - 21
.
.
CHILD CARE COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 6, 1994
ADJOURNMENT TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF OCTOBER 4,
H94.
6
'"""
Respectfully submitted,
Julia Lindsey, Recording Secretary
'"""
""'"
)..2 - 22
,
Attachment 0
e
August 15, 1994
To:
Youth Coalition Members
Subject:
Minutes of Youth Coalition-August 15, 1994
Attendance:
Scott Mosher/Jim Robinson(Boys and Girls Club), Diane
Carpenter(ROP/Adult Educ.),Sue Manglallan (4-H), Nora
McMartin(Library, Frank Long(Red Cross), Diana Chavez/Clorinda
Merino(South Bay Comm. Services), Beth Robinson/Mary Jo
Buettner(Chula Vista Elem. Sch. Dist.), Annette King/Michelle
Perrenoud(YMCA) and John Gates/Sharon Morioka, Rosemary
Brodbeck, Sunny Shy(Chula Vista Parks and Recreation).
Guests included George Hutchinson(Regional Project Director National Civilian
Community Corp.) and David Richardson(Assistant Regional Project Director NCCC).
Don Hunter was representing Chula Vista Police Department.
The following reflect the information and issues covered at the August 15, 1994 meeting.
Any additions or corrections can be made at the next meeting to accurately reflect
. decisions and directions that were made at this meeting.
I. National Civilian Community Corp
A. David Richardson provided a brief overview of the program which
described the program to include 4 geographic training sites in Colorado,
South Carolina, Maryland and California.
B. San Diego's Navy Training Center is the training sites for 12 western states.
C. The program is designed for participants age 18yrs. to 24yrs.
D. The first class will begin Sept. 7th with participants graduating on October
1st.
E. The goal is for teams of 10 to provide meaningful service to communities
while receiving learning experience from recipient community agency.
F. The tearns provide focused community service for one to three months with
ability to extend project as required.
.
G.
George Hutchinson provided information on application process for
participants.(See Attachment)
H. The Short Form is the preliminarY process that provides NCCC with
Project Abstract(2 paragEiphs providing and overview including:
):L-..2 '}
.
I.
objectives/goals, methods, demonstrable results, corps members' tasks)
A Long Form will be required if the agency project is given a high priority.
~
,
J. Questions were answered regarding joint/multiple agency submittal.
II. Youth Coalition Goals and Objectives-1994-95
A. Coalition members were asked to review the Goals and Objectives
prepared by sub-committee. The goals were based on Youth Summit
information and were broken down into three areas:(l)Agency
Goals,(2)Goals Requiring Additional Financial Resources and(3)Goals
Needing Systems Change.
B. Discussion focused on how the NCCC program could facilitate several of
the Goals. It was decided that the CoaFtion would submit three proposals
including:
oCommunication system for providing information to youth through
schools (Beth Robinson, Lauren Tarantino)
o Mentor Program through 4-H model(Sue Manglallan, Annette
King, Mary Jo Buettner
o Youth Employment Brochure(Diane Carpenter, Sharon Morioka,
Sunny Shy)
c.
The Consensus of the members was to accept the Goals and Objectives
1995. The sub-committee will provide draft report on providing
organization to the Youth Coalition.
""""
Ill. Fall Special Event
A. John Gates reported the next special event had been planned for October
1st, however, one of the Battle of the B::mds winner was not available.
Tentatively the new date will be October 8th.
B. Additional Coalition members were requested to work on this sub-
committee.
IV. Child Link
A. Scott reported that a meeting had occurred with Youth Coalition members
and representatives from the Fire Department, Police Department, Post
Office, Laidlaw, SDG&E and Vista Square School.
B.
As presented at the July meeting, this program would provide postal
carriers as a safe person for children to come to if in trouble.
,
C. The City provides a similar program (Project CARE) for seniors which also
24
eJ.;)-c2Y
.
.
VI.
.
"
includes Laidlaw, SDG&E and Postal carriers.
D.
The Youth Coalition has been asked to provide an overview of how such a
program could be developed in this community, including working with
existing programs that our available through Dominoes Pizza and 7-,11
Stores.
E.
Several of the Coalition agencies had problems with having so many
uniformed persons identified as "safe" people unless there was
fingerprinting or other ways to ensure these people were indeed safe.
F.
Several of the Coalition will meet as a sub-committee to provide the
information during the next two weeks. These include Scott Mosher, Beth
Robinson, Sue Manglallan, Annette King and Sunny Shy.
G.
It was also discussed that the Mayor wishes to establish a "Safe Haven"
concept in Chula Vista. The discussion included the fact that Chula Vista
has this concept established in many agencies and organizations. Sharon
Morioka will meet with the Mayor this week and bring back further
information.
Other Business
A. The City of Chula Vista's Park and Recreation Department in
collaboration with the YMCA was the r~cipient of one of 10 grants given
in the state for a Learn and Serve Program. The program will provide
$37,000 to provide a needs assessment through the PRYDE Middle
Schools on potential community service activities and begin implementing
those activities. The grant is for one year with possible extensions for the
2nd and 3rd year.
B. The Park and Recreation Department also submitted a proposal for a
CANFit grant for $58,000 that would provide nutrition and fitness activities
at the PRYDE Middle Schools, MAAC Otay Center and the Whiz Kidz
programs. Additional information has been requested and final
information on funding should be available by next meeting.
C. The Youth Coalition congratulated and thanked Sharon Morioka on her
success in writing and receiving grants that focus on the collaboration and
purpose of the Youth Coalit;on.
D. Sharon is currently meeting with Coalition staff to set up focus groups for
the next Youth Summit.
E.
Sharon received support and consensus to submit a Grant from Park
and Recreation for the Y~th Coalition for National Healthier
.:22- ';3
.
Cities Award which awards $10,000 to grant recipients.
~
F. Dina reported that she is working on ~ Conflict Resolution training that
will be available to all agencies and Sl:e has arranged for Jackie Riley to
provide a training in October on Child Abuse/Neglect.
G. Frank reminded all members of the Healthy Kids Fair on August 27th at
Vista Square. All agencies were encouraged to provide display information
on their agencies activities/information.
H. Sunny provided all members with a copy of the current Youth Recreation
Brochure and requested that agencies review information for updates,
changes or corrections.
THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE HELD THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 22.1994 AT 10:00
A.M. AT THE OLEANDER BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB.
~
~
chJ- 26
Attachment E
.
.
September 22, 1994
To: Youth Cc~lition Members
Subject:
Minutes of Youth Coalition-September 22, 1994
Attendance:
Scott Mosher/Jim Robinson(Boys & Girls Club), Mary Jo Buettner(Chula
Vista Elem.Sch.Dist.),Ruben Mendez/(MAAC),Clorinda Merino(So.Bay
Comm.Serv.),Juan Cervantes(Police Dept.),Jim Cartmi11(Campus
Life/Sweetwater H.S.Dist.), Loren Tarantino(Sweetwater H.S.Dist.),Carlos
Carrillo(Boys Scouts),Sue Manglal1an1Michel1e Castagnola(4-H)Nora
McMartin(Library) Annette King/Michel1e Perrenoud(YMCA),Sharon
Morioka/Joyce BeardsleylRosemary Brodbeck/Sunny Shy(Parks &
Recreation).
Guests included Susan Hiltbrand, Grant Writer for So. Bay Community Services, Nancy Kewin
replacing Beth Robinson from the Elementary School District, Denise Sardina from Adult Education,
Richardo Anguiano MAAC Project Gang Intervention, Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks and
Recreation and Mayor Tim Nader.
The fol1owing reflects the information and issues covered at the September 22, 1994 meeting. Any
additions or corrections can be made at the next meeting to accurately reflect decisions and directions
that were made at this meeting.
.
1.
Youth Coalition Operating Guidelines
A. A sub-committee has been working on Coalition Operating Guidelines to formalize the
coalitions working ability.
B. Scott reviewed the Guidelines and expressed the fact that the original Mission
Statement had not been reviewed and changed to reflect the new direction the coalition
has taken regarding all age youth.
C. Points that were discussed included whether youth representatives were included in the
Composition of the Coalition. Because of the meeting times, youth have been
involved in sub-committees and the Youth Commission receives agendas and minutes
of meeting. In the future it is envisioned to have youth representatives attend
coalitions as a sanctioned school meeting.
D. The length of term office was also discussed in order to assure experienced board
members.
E. It was the consensus of the membership to approve the final Operating Guidelines
with new Mission Statement at the October meeting.
F.
Other discussion included the possibility of charging members for mailing costs.
Additional suggestions included having different agencies doing the mailings and using
up to 5% of the $5,000 Coalition revenue to off set administrative fees. It was the
consensus of the members to use this funding for administrative expenses.
.
>>- 27
/
.
The sub-committee was ash;:: to provide members at the October meeting, a
description of the duties of :;lOspective board and sub-committee positions. Also to
be included is an estimated time commitment. At the October meeting it will be
determined how the nominations of this board will occur
""""
G.
II. Teen Crisis Line
A. Todd Durrance was unable to make this meeting but wil1 provide information at the
October meeting.
III. Tobacco Education Grant
A. Information on the Tobacco Grant planning grant including major funding priorities.
1 Reduce Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke
2. Reduce youth access to tobacco products
3. Counteract pro-tobacco influences in the community
B. Sharon explained the Letter of Intent had to be submitted for the grant with 30-40
Community Grants receiving funding from $50,000 to $100,000 funding.
C. The following agencies wish to be included as panners in this funded grants proposal.
1.
2.
3.
4
5
6.
7.
Boys and Girls Club
YMCA-PRYDE Program
Parks and Recreation Centers -Whiz Kidz
TLC Programs
SBCS Gang Prevention Program
High School Happenings
Campus Life
.........,
D. Sharon requested that all agencies that wish to be included in the grant must provide
her with a one page summary of how the agency wil1 implement this program using
given criteria and how much staff and non-personnel expenses wil1 be required to
operate the program. This must be to her no later than Frida\" October 7th.
F. Sharon also provided members with Mini-Grant information available for Tobacco
grant money.
IV. Grants Update
A. The Criminal Justice Grant was not pursued due to information received regarding the
significance of including a larger community base outside of Chula Vista.
. B. The long form has been submitted to NCCC for one of the Coalition requests to
produce two pamphlets of job opponunilY for Chula Vista youth. One showing jobs
available that have government subsidy and the other showing agency job information.
-"""\
".p. -,;2 y
~
.
C. A letter of intent was also submitted for NCCC assistance in facilitating youth focus
groups for Youth Summit.
.
D.
Sue Manglallan reponed the 4-H did not submit for proposal for mentor program. but
will submit at a later date if high school students can be brought into the program.
E. The application for NCCC to develop a communication network system for youth was
also not submitted but the High School District and Elementary School District would
like to pursue at a later date.
V. Fall Dance
A. The Fall Dance will feature the two winners from the Battle of the Bands and two
other Christian bands.
B. The dance is scheduled for October 22nd. the youth advisories will be meeting with
staff on October 3rd.
C. The Boys and Girls Club. So. Bay Comm. Services and Parks and Recreation will be
providing staff for event.
VI. Child Link-Child Safety Project
A.
. B.
C.
D.
E.
F
G.
H.
Scott provided information regarding the status of this project.
At the joint meeting of potential panners in this project the coalitions recommendation
was considered but it was to decided to proceed with multiple panners not with a pilot
mail carrier project.
Scott reponed that the Child Link panners would assume the liability of their
employees and funher dialogue would be on-going regarding screening employees.
It was hoped the project could be staned by October.
Discussion included the concept of Safe Havens and Child Link being provided to
youth at one time.
The coalition still has reservations regarding multiple companies being involved and
children being told they are all safe people to go to.
Park and Recreation provided a logo for Child Link committee to consider.
Mayor Nader provided information on his State of the City proposal to provide Chula
Vista's youth with Safe Haven areas including churches where a child could go for
friendship and suppon with and where additional referrallhuman service information
could be given.
I. Park and Recreation is working on implementing this concept with the churches.
. VIII. Other Business
.J.:J..' 29
"
,
-,'
.
A.
Flyers for he Conflict Resolution Training were provided. The training is scheduled
for Saturday, September 24th from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Many coalitk'l members
will not se,'o staff due to involvement with the Bonitafest. The Boys and Girls Club
will send .0 staff and Parks and Recreation is sending approximately 85
~
B. Sue has set up a training for Child Abuse issues on November 16th. More
information will be available at the next meeting.
C. Sharon requested a review with each agency and a youth advisory member to discuss
the Youth Summit. The meeting will take place on October 18th, 3:30 p.m.
Agencies will be contacted concerning location of meeting.
D. The Parks and Recreation Department prepared an informational pamphlet on the
Youth Coalition and ACTION Plan. This will be taken to Washington DC. for a
conference and Capitol Hill meeting. The pamphlet will be made available for an
coalition agencies.
THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE HELD THURSDAY OCTOBER 20.1994 AT 10:00 A.J\I.AT
THE OLEA]\l,'DER BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB.
~
~
..<..2 -}O
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~~
Meeting Date "-22-94
REVIEWED BY:
Status of Negotiations with Baldwin Builders Regarding
Affordable Housing and Community Purpose Facilities
Obligations Including Requests to Amend Conditions of
the Tentative Map and Subdivision Improvement
Agreement Relating to Same
Community Develop~..n.1Pirector C .s.
Planning Director /~ I
City Manager-J~ bQ~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes
Council Referral No.
NoX
N/A
ITEM TITLE:
REPORT:
SUBMITTED BY:
BACKGROUND: Telegraph Canyon Estates Project, a Baldwin Builders development of 344
single-family dwelling units, has been conditioned to require the delivery of 17.210w-
income housing units, 17.2 moderate-income housing units, and designation of 1.5 acres
with Community Purpose Facilities (CPF) Zoning. Both the affordable housing units and
the CPF zoning are proposed to be provided by Baldwin off-site in SPA One, Village Five of
the Otay Ranch Project. Council has directed staff to negotiate an agreement for Baldwin
to deliver the affordable housing and CPF-zoned sites taking into consideration the
possibility of providing these obligations off-site.
After substantial negotiations, staff and Baldwin have reached impasse on significant
issues in such an agreement. Baldwin has offered a draft agreement (see Attachment A)
which it characterizes its final position and has requested that staff bring the issue to the
Council for resolution. Baldwin has indicated that it has non-specified corporate exigencies
that require that the Council consider this item at the November 22 meeting.
Staff is not prepared to support the offered draft agreement and has significant concerns
about several terms in the draft agreement that should be addressed in further
negotiations. For example, the land offered by Baldwin for collateral for their deferred, off-
site satisfaction of the obligations has just been identified to staff, and the specifics of that
land call for additional analysis and negotiation that have not been able to be accomplished
in the timeframe available (due to the fact that the land was just identified) To the degree
Baldwin is responsive, staff will continue to attempt to successfully negotiate a mutually
acceptable agreement prior to the Council meeting.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council consider the report and provide direction to staff
regarding further negotiation with Baldwin Builders regarding affordable housing and
Community Purpose Facilities zoning requirements for Telegraph Canyon Estates.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: N/A
DISCUSSION: The draft agreement proposed by Baldwin addresses the affordable housing
site obligation and the CPF zoning site obligation for Telegraph Canyon Estate by offering
those sites in the future in Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area One, Village Five and by
offering interim security for the delivery of those sites. This report will discuss the
b). ~ -\
'1
.\ ~ '
vo^.,
Page 2, Item.;:)3
Meeting Date 11/22/94
proposed terms for delivery of the two sites and will discuss the concerns of staff and the
City Attorney on a number of issues. Attached for information is a memorandum to
Council, the City Manager, and the affected department heads from the City Attorney
regarding his concerns with the proposed agreement (see Attachment B). His concerns
entail the adequacy and salability of the offered collateralizing land, the need to address
the fact that the location of the proposed three-acre dedication for housing is not currently
in the City, the fact that Baldwin wants to defer delivery of the housing and CPF-zoned
sites for five years, and the general impacts of negotiating such agreements in a City
Council Meeting. His recommendation is that the Council not approve the agreement as
proposed by Baldwin and that the Council give staff general direction on negotiation points
and send both parties back to the negotiation table.
Affordable Housing Site:
Overview: The City's Housing Element requires that subdivisions larger than fifty dwelling
units provide 5 percent of those units as affordable to low-income households and 5
percent of those units as affordable to moderate-income households. When applied to the
344 units in Telegraph Canyon Estates, that requirement is for 17.2 low-income units and
17.2 moderate-income units. Given the character of the Telegraph Canyon Estates
development, it was determined that the densities required to make low-income housing
feasible could be more easily met in the Otay Ranch project. As a result, the Council
approved Condition No.6 of the resolution approving the SPA Plan, which offered the
option, at the Council's sole discretion, of accepting the dedication of a minimum of three
off-site buildable acres for the provision of the low- and moderate-income housing
obligation. Condition No.6 recognizes that the off-site contribution could be in the Otay
Ranch project, but does not stipulate it. It also leaves open the Council's authority to
require performance on-site or through other means, such as in-lieu fee payment.
Aareement and Issues: The proposed agreement calls for a contribution of three buildable
acres in Village Five of SPA One of the Otay Ranch Project. The three acres must be
delivered by Baldwin within five years of the date of the agreement. To secure the
obligation in the meantime, Baldwin would provide the City with Deeds of Trust on
unencumbered property elsewhere in the Otay Ranch Project. When the affordable
housing site in Village Five is delivered, the Deeds of Trust on the substitute property
would be conveyed. If Baldwin Builders did not provide the site within the five year
period, the City could foreclose on the Deeds of Trust and use the proceeds to effect the
affordable housing in some other way at some other location. The three acres would
satisfy both their low-income and moderate-income housing obligation.
The significant issues pertaining to the proposed agreement and Telegraph Canyon Estates
obligations in general are as follows:
1 . Timing of Delivery of the Affordable Housing Site and the CPF-Zoned Site.
Baldwin Position: Sites to be delivered within five years.
Staff Position: Sites to be delivered within three years.
The Housing Element calls for the affordable housing units in a development to
be delivered at roughly the same time as the market units. This cannot happen
d-3" .;L
Page 3, Item~ '3
Meeting Date 11/22/94
under the terms of the Baldwin-proposed agreement, since the proposal is to
provide the affordable housing site in Village Five of SPA One of the Otay
Ranch Project. SPA ONE of Otay Ranch is not annexed into the City at this
time and does not possess development entitlements. The projected schedule
for obtaining those entitlements is three to five years. Baldwin Builders
indicates that there are no practical alternatives available to them for
contributing the required housing and CPF-zoned sites off of the Telegraph
Canyon Estates property; they own no unencumbered property other than the
property offered for security, and they are financially unable to acquire other
property in the Eastern Territories.
It is staff's position that Baldwin should be given a reasonable period of time to
deliver the required units in Village Five, and that if they do not perform in that
timeframe, the security asset should be foreclosed on and the revenues used to
develop the housing in some other manner Baldwin indicates that it could
reasonably be five years before the multi-family sites in Village Five, the first
village to be developed, would be buildable. However, it is staff's position that
five years is too long to wait for the Telegraph Canyon Estates performance
obligations. The City's Otay Ranch Project Team estimates that the Otay
Ranch Village Five schedule for development has a range of three to five years
from now Staff feels that the low end of that range would be an appropriate
delivery date, thereby motivating Baldwin to address the provision of the
affordable housing and CPF zoning.
2. Amount of Developer Contribution to Delivery of Affordable Housing Units.
Baldwin Position: The three-acre site is more than adequate to value to deliver
the required 17 2 low-income and 17.2 moderate income housing units.
Staff Position: Staff concurs with the Baldwin position.
Council-Expressed Concern: Is the contribution of three acres of land sufficient
to deliver the required units without additional subsidy from the developer?
When the previous subdivision maps for the project were approved by the
Council, Council members questioned whether the dedication of three acres of
land by Baldwin was sufficient to accomplish the required affordable housing,
or if additional subsidy should be required of Baldwin or would be necessary
from the City A number of pro forma have been run to answer this question.
The conclusion of the analysis is that the land contribution alone would allow
the development of a low-income apartment project or a moderate-income for-
sale project. However, the projects analyzed are at the top level of those
afford ability categories. In other words, the rental rates are affordable to
families right at 80 percent of Median Income, but not much below that level,
and the for sale project does not extend substantially down into the moderate
income band. In fact, the rents in the apartment project would not be
substantially different from market rents.
d.3,3
Page 4, Item~3
Meeting Date 11/22/94
In order to make a real contribution to affordable housing, most subsidized low-
income affordable housing projects today attempt to serve families in the range
of 50 percent to 60 percent of Median Income, which is typical of a project
receiving low-income tax credits. To reach that affordability level, which staff
feels is important for a project developed in pursuit of public policy goals, it is
necessary to extend public subsidies. Extrapolating from a pro forma analysis
of another, much larger, low-income tax credit rental project under study,
where the land is contributed by the developer at no cost, it could be assumed
that additional public contribution might be required in the range of $400,000
to $500,000 to build a 54-unit development (roughly $7,400 to $9,300 per
unit, respectively), which would be a reasonable project size for a three-acre
site. The public subsidy amount is not an exceptional level for projects of this
type.
Staff feels that the dedication of the three-acre site by Baldwin is a substantial
and reasonable contribution for two reasons. First, the Housing Element
contemplates a partnership between the developer and the City to bring all
available resources to the delivery of affordable housing. The developer has the
absolute obligation to deliver the required affordable housing. The City has the
good faith obligation to assist with resources as available. It is reasonable to
expect the City to bring its specialized housing assistance funds to the project,
especially in light of the fact that the participation of such funds will help to
alleviate negative price impacts on the market rate units which could result
from a higher burden on the developer to deliver the affordable housing units.
Second, the dedication of three acres by Baldwin significantly exceeds their
affordable housing obligation. Telegraph Canyon Estates needs to provide 17.2
low-income units and 17.2 moderate-income units, for a total of 35 (rounded
up) affordable units. It is likely that the dedicated affordable housing site
would be able to accommodate 50 to 60 units, and the land contribution would
create the opportunity to develop a truly affordable low-income rental project of
that size. Additionally, some of the product types being sold at Telegraph
Canyon Estates are priced in a range that they constitute moderate-income
affordable units anyway
3. Quality of Interim Security/Land Offered to Collateralize Performance.
Baldwin Position: Security land is adequate and salable collateral
Staff Position: Security land was very-recently identified and its character
raises issues that need further analysis and negotiation.
This concern is discussed below, since the security pertains to both the
housing site and the CPF-zoned site.
Other Considerations: It is important to note three other considerations. The first is that
although the site would be dedicated to the City, it would be possible and likely that the
City would contribute the site to a non-profit housing developer to facilitate a desired
future project. Owning the property at the inception of negotiations with such a developer
d.~ -~
Page 5, Item~
Meeting Date 11/22/94
would give the City a desirable level of control and would allow the City to meet the
requirements for local government matching contributions involved in some subsidy
programs.
The second consideration is that satisfaction of the affordable housing obligations of
Telegraph Canyon Estates in the Otay Ranch Project does not impact the affordable
housing obligations of the Otay Ranch Project. Otay Ranch has its own performance
requirements of 5 percent low-income and 5 percent moderate-income housing (1,489
low-income units and 1,489 moderate-income units based on a working number of a total
of 29,773 units) that will not be affected, and sufficient multi-family density exists in Otay
Ranch to accommodate the Telegraph Canyon Estates and the Otay Ranch obligations.
The third consideration is that there is no guarantee that the Otay Ranch SPA One will be
annexed into the City of Chula Vista, and therefore that the affordable housing site (and
the CPF-zoned site) will occur in the City of Chula Vista. If the affordable housing units
were developed in the jurisdiction of the county, rather than in the city, Chula Vista would
not get the credit for those units in its Regional Share performance, which performance
the Housing Element Affordable Housing Program is designed to address through the 5%
low-income and 5% moderate-income requirement for subdivisions over 50 units. It is
essential that an incentive to annex to Chula Vista is created by including in the final
agreement that it would be a condition of default of the agreement if the annexation of
SPA One is not diligently pursued or is denied. That condition of default would accelerate
the duty to perform and the City would have the right to sell the collateralizing land and
use the proceeds to pursue the satisfaction of the housing and zoning obligations.
Community Purpose Facilities Site:
When the Sectional Planning Area Plan for the Telegraph Canyon Estates project was
approved, the developer was required, in accordance with the City's Community Purpose
Facility (CPF) Ordinance, to designate 1.5 acres within the project as a site for Community
Purpose Facilities, such as churches, schools, community centers, and the like. In
conjunction with approval of the Tentative Map for this project, the CPF requirement was
modified to allow the applicant to either provide the CPF site within the Telegraph Canyon
project, or to provide it within the first village of the Otay Ranch project. The applicant
was further required, as a condition of the tentative map, to record a Covenant against an
appropriately-sited 1.5 acre parcel within the Telegraph Canyon Estates parcel to restrict it
to use as a CPF site in conjunction with the recording of the fourth final map on this
project; said Covenant has been recorded.
The applicant is now requesting that the Tentative Map condition (Condition No. 68) and
corresponding Subdivision Improvement Agreement be modified to allow the applicant to
secure future designation of a CPF site in the first village of Otay Ranch through the same
Agreement referenced above in regard to their affordable housing obligation, and thereby
allow them to remove the Covenant from the 1.5 acre parcel within the Telegraph Canyon
Estates project. The applicant is proposing that the same parcel on Otay Ranch be used to
secure both the CPF and affordable housing obligations.
~~-s
Page 6, Item d.3
Meeting Date 11/22/94
Quality of Interim Security:
The property that is offered through Trust Deed to secure Baldwin's delivery of the
affordable housing site and the CPF-zoned site is Parcel 3-1 of Otay Ranch Village 11 (see
map, Attachment C). It is an undeveloped parcel of 109.84 acres. It contains coastal
sage scrub and is habitat for observed gnatcatcher, cactus wren, and sage sparrow.
Given the environmental constraints, the property is anticipated to be undevelopable, and
it is identified in the Otay Ranch GDP/SRP for inclusion in the permanent reserve system
that entails over 11,000 acres of Otay Ranch and a total of 35,000 acres is a proposed
preserve/corridor system.
The property has been appraised for Baldwin by Dore and Curry, Inc., on October 27,
1994, utilizing Brian J. Curry, MAI,SRA. The appraised value is $900,000, based on use
as mitigation lands. The appraiser uses the sales comparison approach and arrives at a
mid-range value of $8,200 per acre. The appraisal is available for Council inspection at
the Community Development Department. The prevailing value of the three-acre
affordable housing site is estimated at $200,000 per acre, or $600,000 The value of
CPF-zoned land is more difficult to estimate in that the applicant is only required to
designate the site through appropriate zoning as a CPF site, and not to donate it. Staff
has estimated the cost of this obligation at approximately $100,000 This CPF value is
arrived at based on the following presumptions: improved, buildable residential land in the
area, which would be the source of land to be rezoned to CPF if the Otay Ranch site were
not delivered and had to be obtained elsewhere, is valued at approximately $200,000 per
acre; the CPF-zoned site is required to be 1.5 -acres, which would therefore have a total
residential land market value of $300,000; if the City had to rezone existing residential
property to CPF zoning in some other subdivision, that developer would have to be
compensated for lost value, the fair market value of CPF-zoned land is not readily
identifiable, with opinions ranging from commensurate with residential value to one-half or
less of residential value; a "safe" assumption has been made that the value loss in
converting residential property to CPF-zoned property would be about one-third, which on
the subject 1 5 acres would be $100,000. The $100,000 cost identified above, then, is
the amount of compensation that the City would have to pay to a property-owner required
to rezone to CPF to satisfy this external requirement. Therefore, the combined value of
the Baldwin obligations for the housing site and the CPF zoning is $700,000.
It is felt that the collateral property should exceed the value of the obligation by a
minimum of 1 30 percent in order to protect the City from potential market-value erosion
over the three-year period of collateralization. That would require the collateralizing
property to have a fair market value of $910,000. Given the appraised value of
$900,000, the subject property is judged by staff to be adequate.
However, issues remain to be explored and negotiated regarding the actual salability of the
property and the impact of selling the property for mitigation by the City on the Otay
Ranch Project. The subject property has been identified as the most likely, highest priority
property to be conveyed to the City as permanent open space in the anticipated
Conveyance Plan of the Resource Management Plan (RMP) As anticipated, the subject
property would have to be dedicated to the City as open space in order to satisfy the RMP
requirement to obtain the entitlements to SPA One, including Village Five. This creates the
distinct possibility that the collateralizing encumbrance on the subject site would have to
be transferred to another property for the developer to obtain the entitlements that would
d. 3> -{p
Page 7, Item ~:l
Meeting Date 11/22/94
allow the delivery of the affordable housing site and the CPF zoning. No other candidate
collateral sites have been identified by Baldwin. Alternatively, Baldwin would have to
identify another property that would be acceptable as the open-space contribution required
to comply with the RMP to obtain entitlements to develop Village Five. Additional
negotiations need to establish and memorialize the ineligibility of the 1 09-acre site for
conveyance through the RMP and identify the opportunities for substitute RMP sites.
Summary:
Negotiations between staff and Baldwin have made significant progress on a difficult
issue. Staff has been responsive throughout the process. However, as illustrated above,
substantial staff concerns remain which make the proposed draft unacceptable to staff and
the City Attorney, and last minute proposals by Baldwin raise questions that have not yet
been able to be answered. Staff is optimistic that the issues could be positively resolved
between the parties and that impasse is not necessary in the context of a deliberate,
timely negotiation environment. Rather than negotiating the agreement in the City Council
meeting, it is staff's recommendation that the Council give direction on the significant
issues identified and direct staff and Baldwin to return with a fully-negotiated agreement.
At the same time, staff is continuing to attempt to make progress with Baldwin in working
out solutions to the outstanding issues with the goal of possibly providing a mutually
acceptable agreement to bring forward at the Council meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT: The draft agreement proposed by Baldwin would create the obligation
on Baldwin Builders to dedicate a three-acre affordable housing site currently valued at
$600,000 and to process a CPF-zoned site valued at $100,000. Collateral would be given
to the City which is currently valued at $900,000 If the City ultimately participates with
a non-profit developer in the development of affordable housing on the site, it is estimated
that the City would likely have to contribute the property to that development and make
an additional financial contribution of $400,000 to $500,000
Attachments
IBBIC:IWP51ICOUNCILI1 1 3SIBALDWIN.1 131
d. ~ _"'/~3 -I J..
.SENT BY: LFH&S SO
;11-17-84 ;10:36AM ,
(618)235-3541'"
6184765310,# 2/ 6
ATTACHMENT "A"
AGREEMBNT TO CONVEY AFFORDABLB HOUSING
SrrB AND
PROCESS COMMUNITY PURPOSE FAcn..m:es SITE
(Telegraph Cwiyon)
1biJ Aplemem to Convey Affordable Housioa Site and Process ('~unity Purpose
Fac:lI.Itiea Site (hcRmtcr "Agreement") is made thfs day of .
1994. by and between lHB CITY OF anJlA VISTA. Califomfa ("City" or "Grantee" for
rcoording purpolleS onIJ) and Baldwin Builders, a Califom/a COl p.alltion ("Developer" or
"Gnmtor"), w.Ith reference to the facts set forth below, which reci1a1a constitute a part of thls
Agreement.
RECITALS
A City and Otay Vista AssoclatC8, a Califomfa limited partnc:nbfp ("Otay Vista")
entered in10 that certain Supplemental Subdivision ImprD\'ell1el1t Agreement, datod_
. 1993 ("T~ Asreoment") regarding certain real p1c.pe1 ty kx:atod
in Chula VIsta, Califomla, lllI dcsa.ibcd therein ("Property"). The Properly is now owned
by Developer, III SUCCC88Ol' in interest to Otay Vista, and is part of a project CX)t\Tmnnly
known as Telegraph Canyon Eltatea CTelegraph Canyon Project").
B. Among ather obligations, Condition No. 68 of the Imp.rovmnent Agreement
requiJes tho owner of the Property to process an application Jeeklng the (re)zcnfng of real
property 81 a Communily Purpose Facilities Sfte.
C. On August 25, 1992, the City adopted Resolution No. 16768 ("Reao1ution")
regarding the Telegraph Canyon Project which, umODg other things, approved and impaled
amendments and WndftlO11ll 00 the Telclfllph Canyon Sectional PIA~ Area Plan. Under
Condition No. 6 of the Rll8Olution 8J e.....n<lcd (''Condition No. 6j, Dew:1oper is required
to reach an aJRlCllDent with the City regarding the provision of affordable housing prior to
the approval by City of the final IUbdiviJfon map for the Telegraph Canyon Project.
D. Developer Blso 0WIIIl and iJ currently proceasing with the Cily entitlements for
the development of real property commonly known as the "Otay Ranch Project," located
within the County of San Diego (the "County"). The applUY~ Otay Ranch Project General
Development Plan contemplates and autborizal the eventual development of a Cnnnnunity
PUIpOSCJ Facllitica Site witbfn SectfonaI Planning Area One thereof.
B. The partlca now dcalre to provide a means to satisfy in the Otay Ranch Project
the Dove1opc:r's (i) affordable holl8lns obJigatiODJ as set forth In Cnndltfon No. 6 or the
Reso1u1ion, and (n) obligations with respect to Condition No. 68 of the Improvement
Agreement.
11/10/94
.;).s ..~
SENT BY:LFII&S SO
:11-17-94 :10:36AM ;
(619)235-3541-+
6194765310;# 3/ 6
NOW, THERBFORB, In excbange for the mutual COYf:IIlIJI.1I, terms and conditiODll
herein contained, the paIiieI agree III Bet forth below:
1. S~tiafgP.tloQ of A fl'nrtboble HouRI", Ob1/....ticm. Dcvc10pcr .ba1Illltisfy
Condition No.6 of the Resolution by dedicatiq to the City not leu than tbree (3) buildable
acres of real property within the Otay Ranch Project SectIonal flAnn/'ll Area One, VllJase
Five in a lacat[on and of B character J'CIIIOIIabIy satisfactory to the City (the . Affordable
Housing Site" or "Site"). The Aft'ordable HOlJIIna Site shall be conveyed to the City In B
roush sraded c:onditlon with ltubbed utlIitiea provldcd at the She boundary. at Developer's
lICllc COlt and ~1ICl, not D10nl than five (5) years foDowing the date of this Agreement
("Site Conveyance Date"); prorided that in the lllICIIt the City appnM:ll llJI Affurdablc
Housing Plan for ScctionalI'laJuJing Area One, Village Five which contemplates conveyanc:e
of the Affordable Housing Site on a date subsequent to the Site CoDVCl)'llJlCC Date, the tC1'Dl8
and conditions of the Affurdable Houaing Plan sha11 govern.
2. Satisfaction ofImmovement A2rec'1)cnt Condltlon No. 68. Developer
shaD IlItislY Improvemellt Agreement Condition No. 68, as set forth in Paragraph 15 of the
Improvement Ajreelnent, by mAking application with appropriate government agencies
Including the City, and ~t1y processing (i) the lIlUlf:IBtion to the City of the Otay Ranch
Project Scc:tional PlaDnJng Area One, ViI1age Five, (Ii) pre-mning for Sr...tlonaJ plAnning
Area One, ViIIap Five, and (iii) Sectional Planning Area One approval In a<<Ol'dance with
the approved Otay Ranch General Development Plan, the Community Purpose Fac:lHtiea
Site within SectloDal Phmnlng Area One, VIllage Five shall be not leu than 1.5 llCmI
appropriately "-'pted and configured in a location and of B character rCllllonably
aatJstactory to the City. If Sc:c:tIonal PI8miing Area One IllUI110t be lIJ1IIeXCCI to the City, then
the Davetoper may be given the option, at the City'llllO]C discretion, to satisJ)' Condition No.
CiS b)' providing a Community PuJpoae FaclUtiel Slte in the IlIIIIIC location under the
jurisdiction of the County.
3. SecurIty for Perfi:mnanlle of Ob]lptlons. To ICCure the pcrfonnanee
of the Developer'. obligations contalnfld in Sectious 1l11lC12 above, Developer &haJl record
one or more "Deed of Trust and ,.~-qJeDt of Rent&," subItantially in the fonn attached
hereto 81 ExbIbit -AD (hareaftcr "Trust Deed(s)''), against lots within the Otay R8DIlh Project
descrlbed on ExhIbit ''8" attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Sec:ured Loti").
Developer ahaIl provide the Citywith a preliminllJ)' title report and appraisal for the Secured
Lots. The value of the Secured Lo1l shaD be sutIic:ient to adequately secure the
performance of Developer's obllgationa herein in the sole discredon oftbe Qty. Developer
may record multiple Trust Dccd(1) on diffe11mt 1ot(1) to separately secure its obligations
under Sections 1 and 2 hereof. Bach Trust Deed lCCu&dt.d aban expressly state the
performAnce obliptioa it is Intended to secure. Altematlvely, DeveJoper may record a
&Jnalc TrUlt Deed and ~l'lllilV'"te the particular loti intcDded to secure pcrfonnanc:c of the
distinct obliptions con1aiMd In ScGtiona 1 and 2 bcn:oL Upon the wrltten request of the
Developer, the City shall ClOIIIClDt to the transfer of the Trust Deed(s) to other lot{s) owned
by Developer wfthln the CIty provided that the rcp]allClDent lot(s) adequately secure(s)
2
11/10/94
~s-9
-SENT BY :LFH&S SD ;11 -17 -94 ;10 :37AM ; (619)235 - 3541- 6184765310 ;# V 6
rmance of Developer's unsatisffed obligations hereunder in the solo dismv ion of the
4. EWM of The Trust Dead(s) recorded io setae performance
of the Developer's obligation with respect to Condition No. 6 of the Resolution shall be
released and reconveyed, or partially released and reconveyed in the event a single Trust
Deed secures the performance of multiple obligation&, promptly following the conveyance
to the City of the Affordable Housing Site in accordance with Section 1 above. The Trust
Deed(s) recorded to secure performance of the Developer's obligadon mth respect to
Improvement Agreement Condition No. 68 shall be released and raconveyed, or partially
released and reconveyed m the event a single Trost Deed secures the performance of
multiple obligaftuk Promptly following the approval by the City of My Ranch Sectional
Planning Area One and its Mention iwto the City in accordance with Section 2 above.
5• Developer shall be in default of this Agreement by
its failure to (0 Process necessary application(s) and make all reasonable efforts to convey
to the City the Affordable Housing Site in accordance with Section 1 hereof, and/or (ii)
Process necessary application(s) and malts all reasonable efforts to secure annexation to the
City and approval of Sectional Planning Area one, village Five of the Otay Ranch Project
in accordance with Section 2 hereof. In the event of defauh, the City shall provide the
Developer with written notice describing the nature of the default Developer shall have
thirty (30) days from receipt of said notice in which to cure the default or, in the event the
default cannot be cured within the thirty (30) day period, to promptly mate an reasonable
efforts and diligently pursue the cure following the expiration of the thirty (30) day cure
period. In the event the Developer faib to cure the default in a timely fashio% the City may
Pursue all rights and remedies afforded under the terms and conditions of the applicable
Deed of Trust(s) given to secure performance of the defaulted obligation. In the event of
default and subsequent foreclosure by the City pursuant to the Deed of Trust(s), the parties
shall review the effect of the foreclosure upon the Developer's compliance with the Otay
Ranch Resource Management Plan Developer shall take appropriate action, if necessary,
to maintain Sill compliance with the Resource Management Plan.
6. B9105e of Cwt Promptly following the execution of this
Agz=mca4 the parties shall execute and record such instruments and take an reasonable
steps necessary to remove from title that certain'Declaration of Covenant Running with the
land" dated May 3, 1994, and recorded May ]2, 1994, in the Office of the San Dien
County Recorder as Document No. 440316513, by and between the parties hereto which
currently encumbers the Telegraph Canyon Project.
7. Ajadjag&& No modification, waiver, amendment, discharge, or
change of this Agreement shall be valid unless the same is in writing and signed by the party
against which the enforcement of such modification, waiver, amendment, discharge or change
Is or may be sought
1 IT'
�.3 -10
SENT ay: I...FH&S SO
;11-17-84 ;10:38AM ;
(619)235-3541'"
6184765310;# 51 6
8. Aftn""""" F- In the lMl1It either party Ihall irlRitute any aedoJt in
c:onnectfcn with this Agreemcmt, the prevallIaJ puty ahaD. be cntl&d to recover from the
other party aU of ita costl of action. inc:luding without limitation reuw-bJc a~too1oJa' foeI.
9. Satfsfactlon of Resolution Omdition and ~ment .Alrreernent
Condition. The part/IlrI agree that the performance and utlnAMinn by Developer of the
terms of this Aareemcmt IIhaD ~ full and eomp_ latlsfac:don of (i) DIlveloper'I
affordable housm, obHptkml pumant to t"'nadition No. 6 of the RCI01uticm, and (ll)
Condition No. 68 of the Imp.ovoment ~t. CIty qrc:c;a to provide written
wrification of Dcvdopcr'a ..tJafaction of the oblfptfo.ns set forth in Sections 1 and 2 hereof
promptly upon the lIllt:isfactIon of each condition.
10. Nntl...... UnIcu otbe1wl8e provided herein, amttoI and adminiatration
of tbfs Agreement BhaII. be vClled in the DJreaor of Cnrnmunity Deve10pment of City III to
CJty'. interest herein. Any cxmnnnnlcationa relative to the terms or conditions or IlII,Y
l!Mllp thereto or any DOtk:e or notiCOl provided for by this Aarccmcot or by law to be
given or served upon eitbec parIy hereunder may be given or aervecl by peIIODIIl delivery or
by certf6ed or resiltcred mall, depositecl in the United StateI mail, poIta&c prepaid and
return receipt requClted, or by F~ Expr_ or other mnilar ovemlaht dellvety service
and addressed to the party for whom intended, sa foJ1owB:
To City at:
City of Clula Villa
Community Development Department
276 Fourth A~
Cnlla Vlsta, CaIfornia 91910
Attu: Director of Community Dcveloptucnt
To Developer at:
Baldwin Builders
11975 Bl Camino RcaI, Suite 200
San DIego, Callfornla 92130
Attn: Teteerapb CDyon Project MATlAlJ'"
Any party bercto may from time to time, by written notice to the other, .........,."te a different
addtcu whid1 shaI1 be substttuted for the one above specified. UnIea otherwlle speclfloaJly
pnJYfded for herein, aU notices,. payments, demands or other tromJIIUIlir.atloIII given
hetoundor abaIl be in wrIting and shall be deemed to have been duly given and recelved (i)
upon pcrlIOIIIIl delivery, or (u.) sa of the third blldn...JI,ll day after 1IUIrn.,g by UDitcd StatCl
regiaten:d 01' certiflcd mail, retum receipt ~ pol. prepaid, IIddRlIIIICd sa set fOrtl1
above, 01' (fif) the im~cJy Bl~ bn.mess day after deJXll!t with Federal Ellpreaa
or other equivalent overnight deIiveIy I1'tem.
4
11/10194
d-5..11
~ BY:LFH&S so
:11-17-94 ;10:38AM ;
(618)235-3541->
6184765310:# 61 6
11. ~ m ~'r-f~ All termII of thlIl Agreement sbaJI be
bindina upon, inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the partiea hereto and their
auc:cenom and 8up
12. BntlreA,rccmcnt ThIa AareementcontaiDa the entire agreement
between the psrtfClll relattna to the trllDl8Ctiona contemplated hereby and all prior and
contemporaneous agreements, 1IIIdentandiDp, Jepi : fllllltatiolll.nCJOtial;lonl and ltatementa,
onl1 or written, are bcrc:by mpeneded and merged. Into tbIs Aareemeat.
13. Goveminl!' Law. This.Agreement ahall be perned by and
conatrucd under the !awl of the State of CaIifol'Dia. This Agreement 8baD be deemed made
and entered Into In San Diego County.
14. ~hlll\J. In the _t that lID)' phrase, c1aUlC, sentence,
parBIJ1lpb, section, Brtic1e or other portion of tbfs Agreement sbaIl ~'Be illegal, null or
void or againat public policy, for any reIIIOD, or shaD be held by any court of competent
juri8dictloD to be mepl null or void or aphl8t pub& policy, the remaining portions of thls
Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in folCll and effect to the ruDest
extent pel'DlillJ'ble by Jaw.
1S. CountemllrtL This A8r~t may be executed in c:ountcJpar1s,
each of wbiclI, when taken together, shall constitute fully e:lCCUted orlglftOlJ$.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have aaUllCd thls A&reement to be
eecqfed 81 of the day and year ffrat hereiDalxJvc set forth.
CITY:
By: av of Clula Vista
DEVELOPER.:
BAlDWIN BUILDERS, a CaIifmnla
corporation
'11m Nader, Ma,or
By;
Name:
Title:
Attest:
By:
Beverly Authelc;t, City Cert Name:
ntle:
AppnM:d 81 to Form:
Bruce M. Boopard, City Auorncy
s
11110194
~ ~ - Jd--.
t-t.,.
r ~ I Ifi! ~ I ~ nil I !I nd nl i liP; i
if
f ~ llQ ~ i'
Q [= E I~ dl [I I d-J 1:
lP J ~
?' ~ I i in
f i ~
I
l
~i.r
Roo I
t i .t
~~!;
i'
II
..
~
.":-
& ~~ ...- "'1 .. f
~ .....u. i ~ ~~~ -- ~ I I ~~ 0
~~I I I I _~oo ;::;8 :!
l '" ....
::I",
-r ~I r-
;;; -... ..,
i .. ~= ~ 0
~ t "'t"
!' - ;; ,i' ;ll>
..
~ >2
",=
tole: :l
..'"
~ I, ... ..~ - ." .;.tol fit'
...... - - '$ ~-~ f .. li'
00 00'" ... - '" I I I I I I I 00 ..8.. ."K "''''
'" , .....= .. '" - o~ ...
.0 ...
.... ~o-! .:.
t< "'..
~I tol",
!1' -. "'o-!
... i= i "'..
'" ("l
00 ;;,i' ... t!'"
>
2
~ I, ... ~~
'b ... .... '" f
00-, .. - , , , , . N OGUIN
'" , ..... , .... = , , , . , 1M _~....a '"
.
.""
l:<
~I r.t~
~ ii-a
...
~ ;;'j'
~~ - 00 ~_ ...
P:- f
'b "'''' ;::; - ~ -eoo - ... - .. -- i;; 1s:~~
00 ~~~ '" - i~~ ;::;8 0
00 .. ..c _ Ul ....a ... = ... ... 00
o-!!
[~:
-"
~I .. !::l ~ g.
~ :::; ;; ,i'
...
d.-3 - r~
ATTACHMENT "B"
From the Office of the City Attorney
ci ty of Chula vista .
Memorandum
From:
Bruce M. Boogaard, city Attorney
~
Date:
November 17, 1994
To:
Honorable Mayor and Council
John Goss, City Manager
Chris Salomone, Community Development Director
Bob Leiter, Planning Director
Baldwin's Proposed Telegraph Canyon Estates
Affordable Housing and Community Purpose Facility
Re:
This is a summary of my legal concerns with the proposed draft
Baldwin prepared agreement. Included are proposed solutions.
1. Promise of acreage is vague.
The promise of acreage is not site specific and is therefore
vague; it is probably not specifically enforceable.
There is no duty to provide any specific site, just a
general agreement to provide three acres somewhere in Village 5.
It will not be specifically affordable, so where is the security
to require performance?
Solution:
Give City adequate security.
2. The Security Land May Not be Salable.
The property they propose to give us as security (109 acres
of coastal sage scrub and protected habitat) for the duty to
provide the low income acreage is and will only have mitigation
value of about $.25 per square foot.
By the Otay Ranch GDP, it is already encumbered with a open
space dedication requirement for which they will claim credit in
the otay Ranch Project. If we were forced to foreclose on it, we
could only sell it for mitigation land, and only if the US Fish
and wildlife Service and/or Fish and Game will recognize it as
having a potential for off-site mitigation.
Because it is dedicated in the Otay Ranch Project as open
space preserve, it will essentially be unsalable for mitigation
credits elsewhere because the USFWS will say it has not
additional value not already imposed on it.
;)'a --1,/
Solution to Worthlessness Problem:
This could be remedied if this parcel is removed from the
encumbrance of the Otay Ranch Resource Management Plan's
Conveyance Program before it is given to us as security.
Baldwin would have to come up with another 109 acres of CSS
property elsewhere at their own expense unless we release it
from the duty to convey it to us.
3. If remedied, the Security Land is Barely Worth the Cost of
the Obligations to Build Housing and Dedicate CPF Land.
That value of the 109 acre Security Land, per a Baldwin
appraisal, is about $900,000 now. We assume, for now, that is
true. The duty to provide 17 low income housing units is a cost
of about $600,000 (17 units times $35,000 per unit). The
approximate cost to provide the Community Purpose Facility site
is about $100,000. The total cost of their duty is about
$700,000.
If there is a default in either the low income housing
promise or the CPF promise, we would sell the mitigation land to
a developer who wants to develop elsewhere in the County, and use
the proceeds to subsidize the housing and buy the CPF site in
town. If the market for mitigation land slides, or the cost of
producing the 17 low income housing units and buying the CPF site
increase, the 109 acres may not be able to "fetch" enough money
to subsidize the construction of units elsewhere.
Comparing the costs of the obligations now to the current
value of the Security Land, there is a 77% "loan ($700,000) to
value ($910,000) ratio, which for the purposes of this
transaction, is probably adequate, although "thin" in the
commercial lending market place. I would suggest that if Baldwin
could obtain a commercial loan on the security of this land, the
lending institution would probably require a 60% loan to value
ratio, or less.
Staff is prepared to accept 77% as long as Baldwin doesn't
jeopardize the value of the security during the 5 subsequent
years. The value could be jeopardized by failure to pay taxes,
permit priority (mechanics, etc.) type liens against the
property, or by reducing its mitigation value by removing CSS
accidentally, etc.
Recommendation as to Market Slide Risk:
We should accept the 77% LTV ratio of the offered Security
Land, but make it a default of the agreement, requiring
immediate compliance with the obligations, or payment of a
Note, if the equity of the Security Land is compromised in
any way so that the equity drops below $910,000.
d3~J~
4. Non-annexed Land.
The property on which they are going to perform is not in
the city, and may not end up in the city.
The three acres they propose to use to build the affordable
housing will be in County territory. If the value of the
security is less than the cost of the obligations, it will act as
a disincentive to them to annex Village 1 and 5 to Chula vista.
Solution: It should be a condition of default in the
agreement and the right to sell the Security Land that if
the parcel is either not prosecuted for annexation or is
denied annexation to Chula Vista, the duty to perform is
accelerated they would be more quickly in default. This
will act as an incentive to annex.
5. Duty to Provide Acreage is deferred for 5 years.
The duty to provide the acreage is deferred 5 years into the
future; state law implies a duty contemporaneous with the
construction of new units; but is vague.
The deferral may be the basis for an independent third party
contending that our general plan is internally inconsistent, or
that this project is an approval inconsistent with our general
plan, and all building permits could be enjoined.
Solution:
and reduce
years.
Require adequate security as herein recommended
deferral of duty for only three years, not five
Neaotiatina Aareements From the Dias
Finally, as a general matter of dealing with staff and third
party applicants having business with the city, I urge the
Council to discourage developers and others having business
before the Council from negotiating these complex, technical and
generally City-protective deal points on the floor of the Council
meeting.
The product that's developed generally will be internally
inconsistent with other provisions in the agreement. But more
importantly, floor negotiations do not permit staff time nor
circumstances to advise a lay council in the fine particulars of
the negotiations and the law. We are hesitant to layout in
public the adverse risks in brutal detail that may develop and
against which the City needs to be protected.
In this case for example, no one wants to suggest that
Baldwin will not perform on their promise to give over three
acres of land; yet the City needs to have adequate security,
after giving up irretreivable entitlements (144 subdivided units
in this case) that the city will get the benefit of their
~3"11.?
bargain. No one wants to suggest in public that when the cost of
the obligation to build low income units becomes more expensive
than the value of the Security Land, the most intelligent
economic choice for Baldwin is to "walk away" from the, Security
Land. These are things that are best dealt with at the
negotiating table so that such "bad" impressions don't have to be
aired publicly, and create publicly held sentiments either of
distrust toward Baldwin, or to the belittlement of staff.
In this case, we asked Baldwin to diligently meet and confer
with Staff in August for a Low Income Housing Agreement rather
than wait to the last minute when the market demand for their
Telegraph Canyon Estates housing required them to make this an
"emergency". In this case, Baldwin did not exhaust their good
faith at the negotiating table, and now have essentially demanded
placing their version of this agreement before the Council for
approval, and in a form that is not acceptable to staff, and at a
time when they have not exhausted normal negotiating procedures
with Staff.
As a general matter, if an applicant for City entitlements
complains that Staff or the City Attorney's office is making a
deal "too" difficult at the negotiating table, they should be
entitled to discuss the general philosophy or policy of the deal
points before the Council. But, in such cases, we would ask
Council to give philosophical or policy direction on negotiating
the agreement to staff, and send both parties back to the table,
and not negotiate the agreement from the Council floor.
Recommendation
We would ask Council not to approve Baldwin's version of
this agreement because it is not adequately protective of the
City's interests. We recommend that Council comment on the
"sticking points" as set forth in this memo as possible
"solutions", and send both parties back to the negotiating table
with such policy direction to work out the details.
d-~ - /7
Planning Area 1
(otay Valley)
Legend
us_
[!g ........ --.........
m .......,........
.............
[!]-
[!2] P\ltllCoO y 1l'''''''ciIifr
Key Map
~ ...-_".......... EZl 0,--
~ '-.......VY1.,.~...1lInQIf ~ s..;....a-SulrNM
0--......... fj ----.....
[!E) ~...o-ilJ......1I [2] ......1aol~U.
~DCW. 0--
@-,,- ~.......__....
~ C--W-a-1 0 ......
[!!] Co.. ::.tI........-..."........ e c--,.rw.
E> Ml..........
_"Col)'oIChuIo \IIsta
Nole: Cif)' of Chul~ Villa und U$es Shown.
Refer \0 led lot COUnty und u~
52
ATTACHMENT "C"
~ffi
........--..---
,
@) ,....Ml..,...
@) ......~,m--r
<3 rvta.w.',-,
SP&OAL .............
B-
~ s,.wc.w._c...
~M1"'u..
~ &-.\.IftMc.-
""u TM~"",_"~''''IO
~ It u.i.... TIlit....." ___..
=t...IO.u.-~S.~
c.-c.r'~~"""'lWlk.'"
~~~
-.-
...___ _.4
-
-
Planning Area 1 (Ctay Valley)
1994 Sphere of Influence Update Study
~3 ~ I~ Exhibit 20
-
CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
Agenda Item No. 23
RESOLUTION NO. 17737
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AGREEMENT TO CONVEY
AFFORDABLE HOUSING SITE AND PROCESS COMMUNITY
PURPOSE FACILITIES SITE, AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR
TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, Otay vista Associates has received tentative map
approval to develop the Telegraph Canyon Estates on certain terms
and conditions; and
WHEREAS, City and Otay vista Associates entered into a
certain Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement on certain
terms and conditions; and
WHEREAS, one such condition required the owner of the
Telegraph Canyon Estates to process an application for rezoning of
real property as a community purpose facility site; and
WHEREAS, Condition No. 6
Associates to reach an agreement
affordable housing; and
requires City and Otay vista
regarding the provision of
WHEREAS, City anli otay vista Associates have now reached
an agreement to provide for affordable housing on the Otay Ranch
and to designate certain acreage on the Otay Ranch for community
purpose facility sites as an obligation of the development of
Telegraph Canyon Estates Project (and not as a obligation of the
development of the Otay Ranch).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Agreement with otay
vista Associates entitled "Agreement to Convey Affordable Housing
site and Process Community Purpose Facilities site", a copy of
which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk as Document No.
(to be completed by the city Clerk in the final document).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
.Agreement in such form as is finally approved by the city Attorney
with such minor and technical corrections as the City A torney may
recommend for inclusion therein.
Chris Salomone, Director of
Community Development
ved ~'
City
Presented by
C:lrsITCE.AHA
,)3 - /1
'"'
\..,Ce
~\,
SENT BY: I..flI&S SO
;11-22-84 ;11:36AM ;
(619)235-3541"
6195855612;# 6/13
AGREEMENT TO CONVBY AFFORDABLE HOUSING
SITE AND
PROCESS COMMUNrrY PURPOSB FACILlTIBS SITE
(TcJesrapb Canyon)
This Aarccmcnt to Convey Affordable HousiDg Site and Procc:. C'hmmunlty Pmpose
FaclIitica Site (bcreafter "Agreement) is made thiI day of .
1994, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, C8JifDmIa ("City" or "Grantee" for
rerording purpclIeI 0Dly) and Baklwin BullderJ. a CaHfnrnia corporation ("Developer" or
"Gnmtor''), with reference to the mas IIClt forth below, which rceitall oonstitute . part of this
Ap=ement.
RBClTALS
. .:o.'!...., .;t,.~".t" ~~_
c,.,- ,,., "'t, -_""_'O,~, + City and Otay ~t.Alf,QCfals, a C'aI:iforlilliIiiJifled'~ ("otaYVlStany
- entered into that c:enaIn Supplemental Subdiviaioo Improvement Asreement, dated _
. 1993 ("Jmprovoment A,reement") regarding certain real property located
in Ctula Vuta, Califomla. as described therein ("Propcrtf). The Property Is now owned
by Developer, a8 ..uccessor in interest to Otay Vista, and ill part of a project commonly
known as TelegraJ'\1C'an)un Estates <;reJesr,apb Canyon Project").
B. AmcmS other obIiptiolll, Condition No. 68 of the Improvement Agreement
requires the owner Of the Property to proc:elISan application _king the (re )zoning of real
property 81 8 Comrmmity PulpOIC FaciHtlea Site.
C. On Ausust 25, 1992, the City adopted Resolution No. 16768 ("RcsolutiOIl")
regardirlg the Telegraph <::an.Jon Project wbidJ, amotJg other thinp, approved and imposed
amcndmenu and conditku on the Telegraph Can)cn ~lonaI Planning Area Plan. Under
Condition No.6 of the RCIOIution as amended ("Condition No. 6"). Developer is required
to reach an qreement with the CIty reaardfos theprovialon 9f affordable housing prior to
the appnwaJ by City of the finallUlxlMsion map for the Telegraph Canyon Project..
D. Developer aIsQ 0W11S and ill currently pt~ing with the City ent:it1cmcnts for
the development of real prol"" I:)' commonly kDown fill the "Otay Ranch Project," located
within the County of San Diego (the "~. The approved Otay Ranch Project Gen"ral
Development Plan contemplates and authorizes the eventulll development of a Community
Purp<lICJ FacilitIes Sito within Sectional Planning Area One thereof.
B. The parties now desire to provide a means to IlltWy in the Otay Ranch Project
the Developer's (1) affordable hrn1Sing obllptlons as set forth in (:ondiUon No. 6 of the
Re80lution, and (if) oblir~ with respoc:t to ConditlOll No. 68 of the Improvement
Agreement.
11122/94
02 J; ;2.C)
I ':\
v
SENI' BY:LPH&S so
;11-22-94 ;11:37AM ;
(618)235-3541"
6185655612;# 8/13
NOW, THEREFORE, in ClICM'!F for the mutual CO\I'eD8Qts, terms and c:onditious
herein contained, the plIl1Jea ~ as set forth below:
1. SRtMl1od;nn of Affordable HomInR ObHlIBtlon. Developer shall satisfY
Condition No.6 of the Resolution by --+Ut, to the City not bs than three (3) bl.JJmble
acres of real property within the Otay Ranch Project Secdona1 PJAn1)lng Area One, Village
Five in a location and of a c:baraeter tel/0Q1IfIb]y latilfactary to the Oty (the "Affordable
Housing Site" or "Site"). ne A.ffmdab1e Housinj Site sbal1 be ~ to the City in a
rough graded c:oncIition with stubbed udUde8 provided at the Site boundaIy, at Developer's
sole cost and mpe.ose, not more than three (3) yeaII followill8 the date of thU Agreement
("Site Conveyance Date'?; provided that in the ~ the at)' approves an Afronlab1c
Housing Plan for Sectional P~Area One, Vl1lage PM: which contemplates eanveyance
of the AtIordable Housing Site on a date sublequent to the Site Couwyance Date, the terms
8!Id conditiOQll at. the AlIordable Housing Plan IhaJ1 gcmru; provided further that in no
event shall BakIw.in CCIl'lICy tbeAffordable'Hrmd'1gSite later thanfive(S) ~ :fJ;Qm~"
"",- "v~Qf~Agreemcnt, ~ctll':dlMermsofW~nmDJc;HOUIlngPlan;'
2. Satisfaction of ~1MII1t .AllreemMot ("'.onditlon No. 68. Developer
shall satlsf,y Improvement A,reement Condition No. 68. u let forth in Paragraph 15 of the
Improwment Agreement, by .....lrf1\l application. and re-applkation in the event of dcniaJ.
with appl'O}Jriate "JVVcmment ageocies inc:l\Idini"t1Ie Cl9', ~ diJicently pl"OCe'..ms (I) the
annGltfOn to the Otyof the ~J Ranch Pfoi.c:tSCCtioQaI Phumin, Area One, ViIlagc FIVe,
(n) prezonhll for Sc:ctionaJ I'IaDntna Area.Ooe, ViJla&e Five, and (iH) ScdIOlllll PJmmfng
Area One appmval. In aecon:Iancc with theapprovcd Ofay Ranch GeDeral Development
PIan, the Cnnummity Purpose Filellitica Site within ~ PlAl1m", Area One, Village
FIve IbaU be not 1csa than 1.5 acres appropriatdy d""igrMAd and configured in a locatiml
and of a cbarac:tcr reuonably satisfactory to the Oty.
3. Seau:lty for Performance of ObQptlonL To secure the perl'ormanc:c
of the DevellJllC1"s obJ/ptions &:OJltaioecl in ~ 1 and 2 above, Developer JbaII record
one or more "Deed of Trust and ~lDe'ltOf Rents," IUbstantlally in the form atN"bed
hereto as Exhibit -A" (hereafter"Truat Dccd(1)"), apinIt loll wJthin the Otay Ranch Projeet
dcaen'bed on Exhibit "8" aftal'Mt hereto IUld iw:Qrporated bereiD (tbc "Secured Lots").
De\leJoper 8haJl provide the aty with a pnHmiqary titIc report and appralsa1 for the Secured
Lots. The YBlue of the Secured Lob Iba1I 1I!laufflc:iont to adequately secure the
performance of DeYeJoper'1 obIiptlOlll herein in the IOle cliscretion of the aly. The
Secured Lots shaJlDOtbe submitted as part of the Otay Ranch Rcaoun:e:M'smllV"l1CDt Plan's
Couveysnce Prosram or any other mitigation prognun until Baldw.ln hat fully performed its
obligations in tbia Agreement. Upon the written req1lCft of thc Developer, the City Ihall
c:onIidcr thc transfer of the Trust Deed(s) to other lot(i) owned by Developer within the
aty pIOYidcd that the repko""1lleDt lot(s) adequately 1CCU1'e(.) pcllformunce of Developer'.
lI""lltisSecl obBptionll hereunder fD the sole discrotiQJl of the ~.
z
11/22194
;;'J~..21
SENT BY:l.flI&S SO
;11-22-94 ;11:38AM ;
(619l235-3541->
6195855612;#10/13
4. R.....BlI!I of UeQ. The Trust Deed(1) recorded to lIeCUre performance
of the Developor".oblfrtlQll with reapclct to CondJtion No. 6 of the Resolution sba]] be
releBled and 1'eCOIM:yIld, or ~ "Bled and I'ClCOIM:yed in the event a sJngle Trust
Deed IIeClIJ'eS the pe:rt'onnance of multiple oblf&atfons, pauouptly foJIowlng the <:oIlYCylUII:c
to the City of the Aft'ordab1c Housfng Site in accordance with ~ 1 above. The Trvat
Dced(s) remrded to :secure perCmmance of thc DeveIopcJ'I obliption with respect to
Improvement Aan:cmcnt Cmclltioo No. 68 shaII be re1~.nd and ~ or partially
releaaecI and ~ in thc event a single Trust Deed IeC\Jl'cs the pelfu.mance i::Jf
DllI1tlplc obligationl, prompdy foI1owmg the app:oval by the City of Otay Raneh Sectional
!'IAnni", Area One and its .....eutioa into the City in ac:c:ordance with Section 2 8bove.
S. Events ofDef1lnlt. Developer ahaIl be in default of this Agreement by
its t'ailun:: to (I) process JI~a1)' appHcadOD(I) and IIIlIIcc aU mISOJlabJe efforts to convey
to the City the Affordable Housing Site In aCCOldance with Section 1 hereof; and/or (ii)
proccn~nary ~~I),liIIJCl D1akO:aJlJ'MAODableeffortstofeCUJ'e8nn~to th~; ,
'"','- "V ,C!lY,~~approw1 of ~~n~~~;One, VfDlle'~ijf'ihc <>tay RauCh Project
' . 'in ac:ooidance with Sectlon 2 hereof: The parties agree that the dam~ tbat City will suffer
by Baldwin's default of the proIDiIc to perform as required in Section 1 of this agreement
are StiOO,ooo. Upon default and sale of the Secured Lots pursuant to the provisions of the
Deed of Trust and AIsipme:nt of Rents, after deductln& all COlts of sale in the manner
permitted by law, the City may retain. ibis s1mlfrom the proeeods of such forcclclsure sale
as rf<Jmllges for sucla default. ; :
' .,
" I ~ --t
The partIea further agree,thaHhe d8""'ges that City will suffer by Baldwin'.
default of the promise to perform .,,~inSectfon 2 of this IIp'eemcnt are $100,000.
Upon default and sale of the Secured Lots piirruant to the pmyWona of the Deed of Trust
and A.~mcnt of Rents, after dcdupting all CO$1J of ~ in the mlDDCr pCl'lDitted by Jaw,
the City may retain thi5 sum from the proceed. of sucb foreclosure sale u damages for IUch
default.
In the event the ~ talJs to Cure tbe default in a timely fashion as
provided by appJialble law, the Qty may purIUe aU riahts and remedies afforded under the
terms aJld COnditions of the applicable Deed of Trust(s) given to secure perfonnance of the
defaulted obJiption.
6. Relc8Iltl of ~t. Promptly following the execution of this
Agreement, the partieI shall cxeeute and record such instruments and take all rc:unnAblc
stepll nCCCSSll1y to remove Will title that certain "DceJaration of ~t Runnlng with the
Land" dated May 3, 1994, and recorded May 12, 1994, in the Office of the San Diego
County Recmdor as Doc:ument No. 94-0316515, by and between the partie. hereto which
IlWTCnt1y e:ncwnbcra the Telegraph Canyon Project.
1. Modificatino_ No inodificatlon, waiver, 8IDCDdmont. disc:hargc or
change of this Agreement ahaIl be valid uo1css the IBIIIC Is In wrltlng and signed by the party
3
1lJ22/94
:2:Jr ;2.J-
SENT BY:LfH&S SO
;11-22-84 ;11:36AM ;
(618)235-3541'"
618565561~;#11/13
against which the enforcement of such modiffcation, waiver, amendment, discllAtp or change
is or may be S01Jibt.
8. ~. F- In the event either party shall iDstIn1te any action in
connocUon with tbfs A,rccmcut, the ~ party Jhall be entitled to recover from the
other party all of its COJtJ of ac:tioD. including without limitatlon I1il8JODBbJe attomeyJ' fee8.
9. S8tt..~etinn of Resolution ConditIon and Jmnrr1VP.......m Aw-m"'1t
C'.nrvHrion The plIJ'ties agree that the performance and satfIfaction by Developer of the
terms of thiI Agreement JhaII oonstit..re full and c:mnpJetc I&tlIfactfon of (i) Developer's
affordable housing obtiptiollJ p1Jtl1llUlt to Con<fition No. 6 of the Resoluticm, and (h)
CondItion No. 68 of the Improvement A,grccment. Cty agreca to provide written
verification of De\IeIoper'J satft(actfon of the obligations set forth in SectioDJ 1 ami 2 hereof
promptly upon the satisCaction of each condition.
.~<.i..".. '~., ,I ~ ....tit:.~ ,.;.j,.. . . ,.c. ,"'." ..~.._..
"".., ,...... ""."'" <'''' 10. NO~~~~PI'OVil4:d.~'eol1troIllIId8dn'ijn1~tratIoil'f' i' '!
. . Of this Agreement IhaII be wated In tbe Dimctor of Community Development of City as to
City'J interest herein. Any communications rcJath,e to the terms or conditions or any
changes thereto or any notice or notices provided for by this .Agreement or by law to be
given or served upon either party hereunder may be Pen or JeMld by personal delivery or
by certifiad. or registered mail,del-ited in.the United States mail, postage prepaid and
retum receipt ~ or by Federal Expi8a or other :rimiIa.r overnight delivery serYice
and addressed to the party for whom in1Xmded, II foDows:
To City at:
City of ClnJla VUta
l'nl'l'lm..mity Dcm::1opment Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Quia V'18t8, California 91910
Attn: Director of Community Development
To DeYc10per at:
Baldwin BuiJderJ
11975 B1 n....fnn RcaI, Suite 200
San Diego, .CaJifornfa 92130
Ann: Telegraph €anyon Project Manager
Any party hereto may from time to time, by written notice to the other, dtcipAtea different
address which shall be subJtitutcd for the one above Jpeclficd. Un1eas otherwise Jpecifically
provided for herein, all notices, paymcntil, ~A""" or otber communialtionJ given
hereunder ahall be in writing and shall be deen1ecI to have been duly given and teeeived (i)
upon peI'I01l8l deHvery, or (ii) as of the third b....'" ess day after mam." by United States
4
11122/94
.2 '3 -- ;2 ;J
SOO BY:I..FH&S so
;11-22-94 ;11:38AM ;
(618)235-3541'"
6185655612;#12/13
reptcred or cc:rtlffed maD, return receipt requeated, postap prcpa1d, addRIssed as set forth
above, or (iii) tho iDuDediatcly II~"'I b.__ da)' a1'ler deposit with Federal &preas
or other equivalent OYIlmfsht delNeJy JYIlem.
11. Bin,,",... on ~---- , AD te1'lllll of thia Aareement sha11 be
biDding upon, lDurc to tho benefit of and be cofon:cablo by tho parties hereto and their
8UClCeISora and AU""",
12. BntircA_....L ThiIIApeemeut contains the entire agreement
between the parties I1lJating to tbe tmnaaetiaDs COI\1templated hereby and all prior and
contemporanc:ous agreements, undoDtJlnrlll'lp, rcpreaentatfoJu, negotiatiom and statements,
oral or written, IU'Cl hereby superseded and merged into thlI Aarcemcnt.
13. Govcmlnr Unr. This Agreement shaD be governed by and
coDStrucd UDder tho Iawa at: the ~tc: of CgJjf~ 1bfs A,reemCDt shall be deemed.made ..
- ,~.~,' ~ ' ~.~ ''"I U~i"'l !
,,,,.- ~..:~~intoinSan.DioF'~':'~"cl1 : (n!.~"~--,O"'--- ..
14. SeYembfiitr. In tho ownt that any phrase, clause, 8CJ1tence,
paragraph, section, article or other portion of this Agreement ahaIl ~ lIlop!, null or
void or against public poHc:y, fur any reason, or shall be held by any court of competent
jurisdiction to be iIlcgal null or YOid or, agahlst,pubIic policy, the remAl,.;ng por1iona of this
Aarccment BhaII Dot be affected thOl1lby andaJ1aD. rCmalnln force and effect to the fullest
euent pcrmfs.sJble bylaw.
(The nmAinder oftbls page intc:ntkmaDy left blaDk.]
,
11/22194
J.J r.21
r
SOO BY:LfH&S so
;11-22-94 ;11:40AM ;
(619)235-3541'"
6195855612;#13/13
15. CountAnvo...... Thia A,reament II1II)' be eu:cuted in counterparts,
each of which, when tBken together, ihBIl .......lftute fully lDCUted orfIinAl,.
IN WITNESS WHERBOP. the parlica hereto Iuml caused this Agreement to be
ClI8CIItcd as of the da,. IIDd year flnt bezW"abowIlOt forth.
CITY:
Tim Nader, Mayor
DBVELOPBR:
BAlDWIN BUILDERS, a CalIfornla
cotpoIa1ion
By;
Name:
Title:
By: City of Chula ViIta
Attest:
--~':. ..--'- I~'~
~~'. _" .-.ii.;:;,:
......" ,~_.. .;..'-,,, _.m
:""'-'~-' t-.", :- ~.)I"~. ~.--
~"_""-"RO(' 'J.~ ;":"'~~ ;
(~1""''''''';'''''-~''':''~._,.
~~ ;.~.j~"'I~'1
~, , <
By:
Name:
Title:
Beverly Authelet. CJty CJerk
Approved 81 to Form:
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attomoy
~"(', ~~--
IS
11/22/94
,)3-.25' /<n-.?~
~
The Baldwin Company
Craftsmanship in building since 1956
November 22, 1994
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: Telegraph Canyon Estates Affordable Housing and CPF Zoning Agreement
Agenda Item 23
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers:
The Baldwin Company supports the Staff recommendation as summarized III the
Community Development memo to Council of November 21, 1994.
I would like to pay special thanks to staff for their diligence and their willingness to work
with The Baldwin Company to finalize the outstanding issues in the agreement.
Sincerely,
~o~
Tim O'Gr~~y /'
Vice President
TOG/cc
;23 --;2~
11975 El Camino Real. Suite 200 . San Diego, CA 92130 . (619) 259-2900
MEMORANDUM
November 21, 1994
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council ..- (1"
John D. Goss, City Manager~ 'cr~J ()&
Chris Salomone, Community Development Director ~
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Telegraph Canyon Estates Affordable Housing and CPF-Zoning Agreement with
Baldwin---Item 23, November 22, 1994 Council Meeting
The agenda statement for Item 23 of the Council agenda for November 22, 1994, indicates
that staff and Baldwin had been unable to agree to certain key components of the subject
agreement, but that due to certain corporate exigencies of Baldwin, the item had been placed
before the Council. The agenda statement also indicated that staff would encourage Baldwin
to continue to meet and negotiate on those issues prior to the Council meeting. This memo
is to inform you that staff, the City Attorney, and Baldwin have met today and have reached
verbal accord on the outstanding issues and that staff and the City Attorney expect to be able
to recommend approval of a redrafted agreement to be provided to the Council at the meeting
of November 22. At that time, the Council will also be provided with an approving resolution.
In brief summary, the following outstanding issues were resolved at the staff level:
1. Timing of Delivery of Affordable Housing Site: This issue pertains to the period
of time the City would be willing to wait for the Telegraph Canyon Estates
affordable housing site to be delivered in Otay Ranch SPA One. Staff was
requiring three years. Baldwin wanted the delivery period to be five years. In
today's negotiation, the parties agreed to the following: if the Affordable
Housing Plan for Otay Ranch SPA One, which would identify the specific
affordable housing site for Telegraph C~nyon Estates in Village Five of Otay
Ranch SPA One and which Is currently being drafted, is not approved within
three years of the approval of the subject agreement before the Council on
November 22, the City will have the right to foreclose on the security interest;
if the SPA One Affordable Housing Plan is approved prior to the three-year
period, the buildable three-acre affordable housing site must be delivered within
five years of the subject November 22 agreement or the City will have the right
to foreclose on the security interest.
2. Quality of Security land Offered as Collateral for Performance: The staff
agenda statement indicated that additional analysis needed to occur to assure
the City that the collateral was viable and that it would not be offered to the
City by Baldwin for conveyance through the Resource Management Plan (RMP)
for Otay Ranch SPA One as open space, thereby "double-dipping." That would
make the security la\1d not salable by the City as mitigation land, the proceeds
from which would need to be used by the City to achieve the affordable
housing for Telegraph Canyon Estates not delivered by Baldwin. After further
analysis, staff is comfortable with the marketability and value of the security
land, and Baldwin will agree In the redrafted agreement not to offer the security
land as part of the RMP conveyance plan.
02Y-d-/
~ , ~--
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
-2-
November 21, 1 994
3. Failure to Annex a Condition of Default: Staff recommended in the staff report
that Baldwin's failure to prosecute or achieve annexation of SPA One to the
City would be a condition of default and the City could foreclose on the
security land and use the proceeds to accomplish the required affordable
housing. This position was predicated on the fact that the City could receive
no Housing Regional Fair Share credit if the affordable housing was developed
outside its jurisdiction. In today's negotiation, Baldwin has agreed that failure
to reasonably prosecute annexation of SPA One will be a condition of default,
but cannot agree to failure to annex (which is substantial outside of their
control) being a condition of default. Given Baldwin's apparent efforts to annex
SPA One, the tangible benefits to be derived from such annexation, and the
existence of the security land as collateral, staff finds just the condition to
reasonably prosecute sufficient.
The redrafted agreement to be provided at the Council meeting will incorporate the above
solutions proposed by staff and the City Attorney and agreed to by Baldwin.
IDGIDISK6IWPWINIA:TCECNCL.MMOI
.).J-;2Y
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ,).1
Meeting Date 11/22/94
ITEM TITLE: Report on Proposed Focused Planning Area Alternative for the Multiple
Species Conservation Program
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning &
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ ~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No.lO
On June 21, 1994, the City Council conce~al;endOrSed an approach to delineation of a fifth
alternative "focused planning area" (FPA) boundary to be considered for possible adoption as
part of the Clean Water Program Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP), in which the
City of Chula Vista is participating. Since that time, City staff has been working with MSCP
staff and consultants, as well as staff from other participating jurisdictions, to prepare the fifth
alternative.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council endorse the draft "Multi-habitat Planning Area"
(Fifth Alternative Focused Planning Area) map, as presented in this report, to be evaluated as
part of the final draft MSCP Plan and Environmental Impact Report.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission
reviewed the draft "fifth alternative" FPA map at its meeting on November 7, 1994, and raised
a number of questions requiring staff follow-up. The RCC has scheduled a special meeting on
November 21 to allow staff to respond to these questions, and provide the RCC with an
opportunity to provide input to Council on this matter. Staff will provide the RCC's
recommendations to the City Council prior to the Council meeting.
DISCUSSION:
As noted above, on June 21, 1994, the City Council received a report on proposed criteria for
delineation of a fifth alternative focused planning area for the MSCP (see Attachment 1.) This
report provided general background regarding the MSCP process, and the four alternative
focused planning area boundaries which had been prepared to date. As indicated in the report,
in April 1994, the San Diego City Council endorsed criteria for delineation of a fifth alternative,
which would start with the "Public Lands Alternative," which emphasizes use of existing
publicly owned open space, as well as areas which are designated in local general plans and
specific plans as open space. To these lands would be added habitat required for the protection
of all federal and state listed species, species proposed for listing, and Category 1 candidate
species which are considered to be likely for listing in the near future. The Chula Vista City
Council conceptually endorsed this approach, with the proviso that this approach be refined to
be more directly applicable to Chula Vista and other local jurisdictions.
Since that time, City staff has been working with the MSCP staff and consulting team, as well
as staff from other participating jurisdictions (City and County of San Diego, Santee, and
Poway), to refine these criteria and develop a draft fifth alternative FPA map As indicated
.1J/, I
Page 2, Item .ll/
Meeting Date 11/22/94
above, this map began with the Public Lands Alternative, which has been updated to accurately
reflect the City of Chula Vista's adopted General Plan and other approved plans (General
Development Plans, Sectional Planning Area Plans, and tentative maps.) In addition, in the case
of the San Miguel Ranch property, the property owner has proposed to designate the entire
northern parcel of the Ranch as 100% habitat preserve area (whereas the adopted General Plan
could allow up to 350 acres of this parcel to develop), while requesting some relatively minor
expansion of the developable area on the southern parcel. It is staffs understanding that this
change will significantly improve the performance of the fifth alternative in meeting the
biological goals. A copy of the draft fifth alternative map, which is entitled "Multi-habitat
Planning Area," is attached for your review (Attachment B). A color version of this map is
available for review in the City Council offices, as well as the Planning Department public
counter.
A preliminary biological analysis of a earlier draft "fifth alternative FPA" indicated that it did
not fully meet the biological goals which were established for it on a regional basis. However,
the draft which was reviewed has since been modified to include the changes to San Miguel
Ranch. which were referenced above, as well as other changes being made by other jurisdictions.
In reviewing the status of the fifth alternative with MSCP staff, they have recommended that we
go forward with the fifth alternative as drafted, in order that a more complete biological analysis
can be completed in conjunction with preparation of the fmal draft Plan and EIR. By taking this
approach, the completion of the Plan will not be further delayed, and the Plan can be further
amended to meet specific biological goals during the review period for the draft Plan and EIR.
City staff concurs with this approach, and will continue to work with the MSCP project team
and other jurisdictions to review the biological analysis of the fifth alternative, and recommend
further changes as necessary to meet the established biological goals.
It should be noted that the draft FPA map designates areas under various categories, based on
the percentage of those areas which is expected to be retained as open space in a manner
compatible with biological goals and standards. Areas within the Chula Vista Planning Area
have been designated either as "100% habitat preserve" or "90% habitat preserve." Those areas
designated as "100% habitat preserve" include Otay Ranch, San Miguel Ranch, and other master
planned communities with approved General Development Plans, in which well-defmed habitat
preserve plans have already been developed. Other areas which are not covered by adopted
General Development Plans, or where adopted GDP's provide for further planning evaluation
regarding permitted uses in designated open space areas, are shown as "90% habitat preserve."
It should be noted, however, that in the case of Otay Ranch, the approved GDP does make
certain provisions for active recreation uses within the preserve area, and the specific policy
language regarding these uses will be forwarded to the consultants to be considered in their
evaluation of the fifth alternative.
It should also be noted that staff is suggesting several clarifications and minor corrections to be
made to the "fifth alternative FPA" map. The most significant correction is to delete the FPA
designation from the "Lower Sweetwater" special study area. This area is designated on the
City's General Plan diagram as "open space" with a "special study area" overlay, and is
currently being evaluated for various land use alternatives which do not involve habitat
preservation. Other clarifications and minor corrections are noted on Attachment C. The
.). 'I" oJ..
)
, .'
<! '"
Page 3, Item J. L/
Meeting Date 11/22/94
overall intent of these clarifications and corrections is to accurately reflect existing General Plan
designations and policies, as well other discretionary approvals which have been granted by the
City on specific projects.
FISCAL IMPACT: City staff work on this project is being supported by the General Fund;
however, the Clean Water Program has continued to cover the consulting costs associated with
preparation of the MSCP Plan.
Attachments:
A) City Council Agenda Statement, dated June 21,1994. ""Dr 5(!;J~1II~,.
B) Draft "Multi-habitat Planning Area" (Fifth Alternative FPA) Map.
C) Clarifications and minor corrections to draft "Multi-habitat Planning Area" Map.
(F: \home\planning\mscpfpaS .113)
..2J/:] / ..;1.1- 8
ATTACHMENT A
.
COUNCIL AGEl'o.'DA STATEMENT
Meetine Date / 4
ICj
SUBMITIED BY:
Report on Proposed Focused Planning Area Criteria for the Multiple
Species Conservation Program
Director of Planning ;;f( 6
City Manager 1(; ? iJl (4/Sths Vote: Yes_NoX)
In January 1994, the City Council appointed Councilman Bob Fox to participate on a policy
committee for the Clean Water Program Multiple Species Conservation Program. On
February 28, the MSCP Policy Committee requested that the participating jurisdictions provide
input regarding recommended criteria for forming a "focused planning area," which would
define a study area for a future regional habitat reserve system within the Clean Water Program
service area. The purpose of this report is to obtain input regarding the draft focus planning
area criteria, as well as an alternative approach which was recently approved by the City of San
Diego.
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
RECOMMENDATION: That Council conceptually endorse the approach to delineation of a
"focused planning area" as recommended by the City of San Diego, and authorize its
representative on the MSCP Policy Committee to recommend that this approach be refined to
be more directly applicable to Chula Vista and the other participating jurisdictions.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On February 28, the MSCP Policy Committee referred the attached draft .Recommended
Criteria (policy Statement) for Forming a Focused Planning Area. to the local jurisdictions for
review (see attachment I). These criteria were prepared by a jurisdictional technical committee
made up of staff from the five jurisdictions which are participating on the Policy Committee
(City of San Diego, County of San Diego, Chula Vista, Poway, and Santee). The purpose of
these criteria was to provide policy direction in the preparation of a .fifth alternative,. to be
considered along with four other draft .preserve planning area" alternatives which have been
prepared and included in the working draft of the MSCP Plan. The other four alternatives are:
1) Coastal Sal!e Scrub lCSS) Alternative (84,900 acres) which was developed to meet the
minimum criteria for satisfying the State's Natural Community Conservation Program
...I~.2tf..f
~
Page 2, Item l? f q
Meeting Date ~
to/'l.'I'1'1
(NCCP) Conservation guidelines for CSS target species (California gnatcatcher, coastal
cactus wren, and orange-throated whiptaiJ);
.
2) Multiole Habitats Alternative (147,000 acres) was developed to meet preserve design
objectives for multiple habitats and species in addition to CSS;
3) Biolo~ically Preferred Alternative (185,700 acres) includes all the core biological
resource areas and linkages, as well as all public lands supporting valuable habitat;
4) Public Lands Alternative (147,000 acres) focuses on preservation of public lands and
existing and planned open space, and linkages between these areas. This alternative was
submitted for consideration by the Alliance for Habitat Conservation, an organization
representing several major property owners within the study area.
As drafted, the criteria for delineating a fifth alternative were intended to create a focused
planning area which would achieve a balance among biological, land use, and economic
objectives. With regard to biology, the criteria provide for formation of a multiple habitat
preserve system which would provide for the recovery of core populations of federal and state
listed animal and plant species, as well as linkages between these core populations land adjacent
biological resources. In addition, the criteria were specifically directed to include sufficient
coastal sage scrub and gnatcatcher populations to meet NCCP guidelines. In addition to
biological considerations, the criteria provide for consideration of land use and economic factors.
These land use and economic factors include utilization of public and private lands that are
already conserved as habitat or for open spaces, or are otherwise constrained from development.
In addition, these criteria provide for consideration of existing general plans and community
plans, as well as avoiding lands which are needed for public infrastructure and public facilities.
On April 12, 1994, the San Diego City Council considered a proposal by Mayor Susan Golding
to adopt an alternative approach to delineation of a focused planning area for Multiple Species
Conservation Program. Under Mayor Golding's proposal (Attachment 2), specific objectives
regarding amount of habitat acreage (155,000 to 165,000 acres within the MSCP study area,)
as well as numbers of species (41 priority species and 59 total species) would be established.
The process of drawing focused planning area boundaries to meet these species goals would start
with the .Public Lands Alternative.. Under the Public Lands Alternative, the emphasis is on
utilization of available public lands, as well as lands which are designated in local general and
community plans for permanent open space. To these lands, would be added habitat required
for the protection of all federal and state listed species, species proposed for listing, and
Category I candidate species which are considered to be likely for listing in the near future.
This approach was approved by the San Diego City Council on April 26, and was recommended
by them for consideration by other jurisdictions. On May 26, the MSCP Policy Committee
voted to refer the City of San Diego alternative approach back to the local jurisdictions for
~ ,21{..{,
..
.
Page 3, Item Ii I q
Meeting Date ~ ~/t.ll '1~
review, along with the previously described alternative which was prepared by the Jurisdictional
Technical Committee.
ANALYSIS:
The focused planning area criteria which were developed by the jurisdictional technical
committee provide a comprehensive approach toward the development of a focused planning
area. However, they do not establish specific habitat conservation goals, and would require
significant additional discussion and analysis in order to formulate a consensus regarding the
number of species which would actually be preserved.
In contrast, the City of San Diego alternative provides more specific goals regarding habitat
conservation criteria, as well as a more specific process for meeting those goals. In addition,
by starting with lands shown in the Public Lands Alternative, including all public and privately
dedicated habitat lands and linkages, as well as all lands shown as open space in updated or
existing community and general plans, and approved project plans, the planning process talces
advantage of lands which are known to be in many cases readily available to be included in a
habitat conservation plan. Furthermore, by focusing on the addition to the Public Lands
Alternative of habitat areas required for the protection of certain specific species, it would
appear to be a simpler process to actually define the focused planning area boundary under this
alternative. This approach appears to be preferable for communities like Chula Vista, where
general plans and specific plans have been adopted for the entire study area.
Therefore, staff would recommend that the general approach which is included in the City of
San Diego's alternative be pursued and supponed at the Policy Committee. It is recognized that
the language contained in the City of San Diego's alternative was specifically designed to deal
with the City of San Diego's General Plan Area, however, and staff should be directed to work
with the City of San Diego and the other jurisdictions to develop language that would apply
more generally to the City of Chula Vista and other panicipants in the program. Specifically,
there is a need to clarify the method by which habitat needs for species which are located in
multiple jurisdictions will be met, and how equity considerations among jurisdictions will be
addressed.
Also attached is a letter from the Endangered Habitats League, dated March IS, which suggests
a third approach to the delineation of focused planning areas. This approach is based on
consideration of a map included in the working draft MSCP Plan, known as the .Core Biological
Resource Area Map.. While staff agrees that the information contained on this map will be
useful in the preparation of a final MSCP Plan, we feel that the boundaries shown on this map
include numerous areas within the Chula Vista Planning Area and elsewhere which do not appear
viable for inclusion in a final preserve plan. In addition, this approach, as we understand it,
is similar to the Biologically Preferred Alternative, which is already contained in the Working
Draft MSCP. Therefore, while this information should be considered in the planning process,
~ .2'1-7
..1-'\ - ~C
.
Page 4, Item J ~ 19
Meeting Date ~
we feel that the approach suggested in the City of San Diego alternative is preferable at this time
in developing a "fifth alternative" focused planning area.
Response to Written Comments Received by City Council on May 24
This report originally appeared on the agenda of the City Council meeting of May 24. At that
time, an additional wrilten communication was received from Tricia Gerrodelte, representing
the Sierra Club (see Attachment 4).
The comments contained in this wrilten communication are similar to those included in the
previously referenced lelter from the Endangered Habitats League, dated March IS. As
indicated in response to that leiter, it is staff's position that the Biologically Preferred Alternative
in the working draft MSCP already reflects the "core biological resources areas and constrained
linkages" referenced in this lelter. A major purpose of the "fifth alternative" is to determine
whether an alternative which focusses on the use of areas already designated for preservation in
adopted General Plans and specific plans can meet multiple species preservation goals in a more
economically feasible manner.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
Attachments:
J. Recommended Criteria (Policy Statement) for Forming a Focused Plannin& Area
2. Mayor Golding's proposal to adopt an alt.:rnati ve apl>roach to delintation of focused planning area for Multiple
Species Conservation Program
3. Endangered Habitats League lener of March IS, 1994
4. Written Communication from Tricia G~rrodt:tt~. SitHiI Club, dattd May 24, 1994.
(f: \bame\planninJ \(pamKp . rpl)
~;;< ,?, 1. ~
ATTACHMENT 1
~. " .
.
2/28194
-.ECOMMENDED CRf1"EIUA (POUCY STA'ImdENTS) FOR
FORMING A FOCUSED PLANNING AnA
~: '!be fOUoMna criteria are aecolDJlllftlWl by tbc Jurisdiction Technical eommiu.ee
II) be _ ill cJeUncatir\a . Focu.... PIaNIiII& Ara. for tile draft MSCP Plan. ()Dcc. Foc\ISCd
fJarlftllll Ara. is drawn, . tpeeific IIII1yais of &be lrioJo&ical,land laIC and ec:onomlc effects will
k pn::parecl and illduded in tile public review draft of tile MSCP Plan. ne Foell.... plaMina
Area wiD aeed to achieve. balance 1let..illU biolo&ical, land laIC and IC'"IIC)1Ilic objectiveS, and
wm DOt be 1b1c to meet all of the crillria equally. ne Focu.... P1anDin& Ara.1ine.I in tile draft
)&SCP also do DOt oew.....uy Jd1ect ueas in wbicb specific CEQA lipificance deU:rmiDations
.. mi';VtlOQ nquiremCllts will be lmp0tr4 OIl dIve1opmeI1t projects. '
J--","'en~ A.mon: APPROVE tbc UIC of tbcse criteria by the local jurisdictions for
.,li..-tlf\& a Focused plannin& Area.
BIOLOGY
1. Fonn a multi-habitat preserve system that includes and assists ill tile ff#1'IU'J of the core
populations of federal and stale listed animal and plant species. iftc1udina by linb&es
bctweCn these core populations and with adjacent biolO&ical resources ill the n&ion.
2. Maximize thc inclusion of species that are candidates for Iistin& and 11ft babitats to
preclude the aec4 for future Jistinas of apecl~ u ~ or cndan&e:red.
3. Include sufficient coastalsaae ICNb and anatcatehcr populations II) meet tile stale'S
Natural Communities Conservation Propam (NCCP) luiddinCI and to eventually replace
tbc interim 4cS/NCCP iC&u1ations.
LAND USE AND ECONOMICS
.t. Beain buUdina the Focused plaMinI Ara. with public and private lands tba1 are already
IDIlscrved u babitat or for open IJlI= putpolCS.
5. JIIc1ude iIItbc Focused PJanninI Ara. lands wlUc1I ... l1re8dy 0CIIlItniDed by local
ncu1ations, IUCh u IIIICP slopes and fIooI'pl_III.. TbiI nr.1 r -~ -WI ~,_..ly SO"
fJl private lands in die -Y .....
6. ........901- wlIbiII tbc ~ PW't'1"I Nta privatelaDds ItIat wi1l be dr-.... dIroUIb
pltlll", land .. l1l'i".';""1..
,. ne FocQ~ P1INliDI Ala -.M avoid, .... , C 1sJ'-J,e. ... with l'"ur"U'" in II1II11
.. frqmCIltcd ownenbiPS aDd IhoIM _1001_1_ effd OIl IIiItinI ~ land uses.
.. Awld 1ands wlUc1I arc II ..~ for public ~ and public flcDities.
~~ ..2lf~'j
.. ."
.
JlIlcOmmcncSed FP A Criteria
fcbNll)' ~8. 1994
Pa&e ~
9. Select lands to minimize dle ..s to cbanae 1ocI1 (Jcneft1 and eommurdty planS and
...,evilopment PlanS and to minimize economic lmpICtS. while ncopizina that it may
lie cSesiftble to amend 1and use plans to meet saource aeeds,
1>ELINEA110N OF fOCUSED PLANNING AUA UNES
10. To provide the specificity and usurances III ~~ by dle ICI(N1'Ce lIencles to eventually
iasue permits. draw firmer Jines around public lands that are alreadY ~ or
deSilnated for open space. A commiuoc:nt to ...eV'Ve 90 . 95" of dlese &tread)'
conserved public lands should be feasible.
11. 'Include 100" of privately-owned lands that are already dedicated for open space.
1~. Provide more ftwbility in dle Jines for:
a. public lands that are ptanned for usban or active ncreation '*'
b. private lands that are ptanned for \Uban ,*" or which are ptanned for low
density development in the more distant future
,
13. !lefer to the four examples ~ (coasW saae. multi-habitat. biolopca1ly preferred
and public lands) as a belinninl for the Focused PlanninI A.zr:& cSdincation.
.
J7-~'"
-- ,
~ ,J~'/~
"-
ATTACHMENT 2
.
(I)
SUSAN GOLDING
11I.'10'"
J'
"..
April 15, 1994
.
Robert Leiter
Chula vista planning Department
276 Fourth Avenue 1401
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Ro))ert:
~he Multiple species conservation Program alternative I proposed at
city council on Tuesday, which was unanimously adopted, will return
~o council on April 26th.
I wanted to make sure you had a copy of ~e proposal and the
.pecific procedure I am recommending to create this alternative.
I believe that this is an environmentallY sound approach and one
~hat is sensitive to the business and economic needs of the region.
~he proposal will expedite the preservation of a comprehensive
.yste. of open .pace and habitat in ~e City of San Die;o and ~e
development of areas not determined necessary for ~e .ystem.
.
~he proposal recommends ~he preservation of all of ~e 41 priority
.pecies plus 18 other.. It is based on biology with overlay. of
existing public and private lands dedicated as open .pace
incorporated as well a. existin; plan., both community and ~e
General plan.. Economic ramification. vill also be an overlay and
together, ~he combination of ~ese ~ee .l.ents vill create ~e
pre.erve line.
I appreciate your interest and bope ~o keep .ovin; in ~e positive
direction ~at vas ..tablished ye.terday at council.
Sincerely,
SUSAN GOLDING
Mayor
City of San Die;o
~ .;.1/..//
.,.,p ""'.....- T ........,............. ..... .....-
. r .-~
Reflcc.fr
r_ ~~ It
DOCKET SUPPORTING INFORMATION
CITY 01' .AN DII:GO
sueJaCTI. .
Multiple species Conservation Prognm (MSCP) - Preserve Al\emative
ACKGROU"O: CDOU.~I: sPAcal
On April 12, 1994, Mayor Golding recommended a preserve alternative, which was approved by the Council
with the request that lang!l&ge be brought back to Council describing the proposal. The following represents
the Mayor's alternative, which is recommended for inclusion in a Public Review Dnft MSCP Plan.
GOAL: The mation of a preserve system that is biologically viable and economically feasible through the
following criteria:
1. Habitat acreage of 155,000 to 165,000 with a cost of $450-650 million. .
2. Preserving 70-809'0 of the biological core areas and 50-609'0 of the corridors.
3. Protecting 41 priority species and 59 total species. .
. . .
: PROCESS
4IV .rIAf<l-.:t ,,,
1. Draw hard lines around a preserve system within the City of San Diego~ N'!"!:...., lJifl.. lJ^tI, 41+/#,(',;. .5
2. Use the biological cores and linkages map as a reference.
3. Start with all land shown on the Public Lands Alternative, which includes all public and privately dedicated
habitat lands and linkages.
. Include all lands shown as open space in updated or existing community. general plans and proposed projer
plans. .
S. Add the habitat required for the protection of all Federal and State listed species, species proposed for listing
and, category 1 Candidate species.
6. Provide for contiguity and configuration through the application of specific sufficiency. standardlll< C S
7 K th 'red 1 d . . -ff'l"u{ 417 ~,y.., ",,,,.,;.,'/.
. eep e acqul an at a muumum.' "
8. Save major concentrations of species in step 5 and maximize restoration and enh~cement of habitat to
ensure the long term viability of those species.
9. Create a phasing plan with priorities for the acquisition of the habitat over time as funds become available
. with bi&hest prionty being the acquisition of coastal sage scrub habitat in private hands.
RESULTS
a. Preserve all priority species; Federal and State listed, proposed and category 1 Candidate species.
b. Protect the habitat of as many Category 2, Babital Indicators and State Species of Concern as possible. .
c. Piovide for sufficient contiguity and configuration of preserve.
.y~."1:1 CDtPU,.., CIT., .....'DCPT. ".ADIAVT.... ,",'1'."'....) ..
ONRAD/SCHLESINGE.R/Ml.B
~ .rJ.2
t,"Y.....N..... t
cpo. M..".OIl.IAr.. 011""."".""" ONI..I ,("
ATTACHMENT 3
MAA 2 , ~4
-
Dan SiMl' - c-dINtor
104A Santa Monica Blvd. 1592
L&II Anrles. CA ~210
TELIFAX 213.654.1456
ENDANGERED HAIITATS LEAGUE
II .. ,....... ,.,A.I... I(c-III "'" Scnlt'" Ol/wr ft.,A.AlIwl..rn.
Marcb IS, 1994
Mayor IIIId City Council
CitY of QuIa 'Vista
..0. Box 789
Qula Villa. CA 91910
ItE.: Multiple Species ConervationPav&fl!ll (MSCP) Focl'~ Plannin& Anas
Honorable Mayor and Counc:ilmembm:
11le Endangered Habitats Lel&ue is In ~on of Southem CaJifamia ~on
IfOIIPs and individUals dedicated to ecosystem ~on and i~ land use plannin&. We
flelieve that I successful Multiple Speties eonseMtion PaOCJIm Is lbIoMe1y euential to the
future economic bea1th and quality of life of she San Die&o reaion.
Delineation of Focused Plannilli Anas (fPAs) is I '*""P"Y first step for plan
implementation, and we ItI"OIlgly urae ~u to authorize she initiation of Ibis P'~ Because the
fP As will live di1'ection to aU future pi . . it is vital dlat the criteria you .. for their
.,e1opment be IOUIld. We would Uke to the cue tbalthe FPAs should be muhiple habitat in
tcope and bioIOSic:a1ly-based. And \bey should tI\COIII~ -lIS " ""rri~ dtfGiltd /llrurt
"oMi", -the -core biolo&ica1 resource areas and cons1:raJned JiDb&eS. . by dle M~CP
ICientific consultants as I result oftbeir twO yan ofltlldy.
III the MSCPWortirI& Draft. die care bio1o&icaI NIOIZI'Ce areas.. cIefiDed as ~
IUPPOf1ingl hi,h concentration of aensitive biolOSfca1.-ourc:es which. if lost or trqmenteeS.
cOuld not be nulialteeS ellewhere. On areas shoUld be the basis for desianinJ the .-'lC"Ve
system boundaries as part of the subarea planDin, ptOCltSS, Le.. UDhamenteeS ~ resource areas
should be included within she filial... I "'-/C boundlries. .
ncre ..1IMft11dvaftt1111 to JOU 1II1111b1ilbina dle" ~C)' tIIat dle Focv....
.....1.. ~ should be bued OIl dle cae llioIosJ.,.'II'IICIUnlI'" a1nidy I' .rifled:
. OII1y tbis ..........ch dells. dle .,.-..;rc __ oflllbitlllDd.. -'w
CIClIlilrvalion _1leYODd ceo--1 ..1CNb - wIlidI face UL
OII1y. Wo1O&lcaD~"" ru-It"1ft ~ die wDdtifc ....- die
8IIlI'III* 6ey Died to'" .-.olll for Jilted aDd as Jet "",;..... r-
a..1"'.. ..permits lI..".__...furA--tIJ pJ ofaa1tiple.. ~...
"_RM,,_
OII1y by lDcIudiDI the cae ~ 1'IICIUnlI'" wIddJI the Focun r JIIanJIini
=:,~=f.'=~~';:='-~"===
.
.
.
~
~ ,;J/-I.J
.
'Ibe best land Ult and economic decisions will be made Pili the core bio1ozica1
ceas u the swtin& point.
. We antieipa1e that indirect benefits of this ...... ...eh ...m include a more satisfactory
open Ip&te system for the public. with the best recreational nil system, the most
tcenic visw. and the ptest Clualit~ of life benefit.
We strOnZly Ul'Je you to adopt Focuted Plarmina Area criteria oJtJda '/of" 1eD4 to rapid
ftSIlhs in termS of a plan ~Ie to the wildUfe lIe:ncies and in termS of obtainin& the penn.its
for declinin& species which MU avoid future economic dinption. Suc:h criteria it......~ the
Ilest bioloaiCallCience.
'lbank you for considerlq our view..
.
With best ftiards.
~ rw<'?.
Dan Silver.
Coordinator
J;Z 't?
...-, ,
~ .2'1-/0/
.
~
ATTACHMENT 4
ENDANGRED H"
",..,'" to IItt 1'roI~/ii," of c..,.
TS LEAGUE
..-.4 OIltnn...,.,.", ~I"".
Dan Silver - Coordinator
1424A Sanla MonIcI Blvd. .592
Los Anse1es. CA 90069-f210
TEL/FA)( 213- 654 '14~
Testimony on Focused Planning Area Criteria for the MSCP
AcRMo..itero ~'b ~14,f, '~)Lf Sie.\'ra.. Cl~ o..ddd-i~\w
. J~ ~ 1 II, 1 P - Ccrnm e.t\t.s 01\ b:1.c.k.
HOIlOI"lIble Mc:mlll:r~ of the Policy Committee:
1M 'Endangered Habitats League is an organization of Southern California conservation
aroups and individuals dedicated to ecosystem protection and land use solutions. As decisions are
made on focused planning area (FPA) criteria for the Multiple Species Conservation Program
(MSCP), we urge you to consider the following:
A multiple babltat scope Is necessary
The adoption of a multiple habitat scope is critical for program success and for proteetion
from the future listing of numerous species as endangered. A multiple habitat approach is cost-
effective in the long term, and provides a superior reserve design. We should think ahead. Also,
it would be difficult if not impossible to go back and do a second or third round of planning in the
same geographic area - that is the opposite of the certainty we aU seek. Dependable fUWIcing
mechanisms which will achieve reserve goals should be set in place at the start, and if phasing of
the plan is necesSlIry, this should be done on a geographic rather than habitat-by-habitat basis.
The core blololtlcal resource areas are the best FPA
. The "~ biological resource areas and COII'strained Unkages. - as identified by the MSCP
scientists after yean of study - should be designated as the focused planning area. This is for two
ftasons. First, only a reserve based upon the on-the-ground ~iological realities will result in the
pre-listing assurances from the wildlife agencies which we all leek. Secondly, only a "build
Clown" approach which starts with the full range of conservation options. and gets reduced in size
OYffl time as ~ustified by scientific data, is consistent with the NCCP Conservation Guidelines. An
approach whIch starts small and builds up is inconsistent. These Guidelines are recognized by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as the best available information.
Aannlnl nexlbillty should be ..a~lmlnd
An FPA based upon the cOre blo1o&ical resource areas will retain maximum planning
flexibility for decision-makers 0Yf!l time. liaving aD these options available will also II1SIft that
the most cost-effective land use decisions can be made. Another advantalle ofbaving a broad FPA
II that mechanisms for ~operties to exit an FPA are much easier to adopt than are means 10 add
new lands into the planning area at a later date. 1be later type of uncenainty for property owners
should be avoided if all possible.
1
~ .11/-1S'
J..Pt -, \
Set b'iological standards first, then appl)' economic and land use factors
Land use and economic factors must, of course, be fully integrated into final reserve
design. The place for this integration is at the local, subarea planning level, where it is appropriate
to consider specific sites and specific projects. First. howt'~'t'r, it is necessary to st't biological
8(1als and standards within thr FPA. Biological standards on a regional scale are needed to guide
the preparation of subarea plans, to ensure their consistency with each other, and to provide an
objective basis for wildlife agency assessment and sign-off. Another positive result of these
standards will be a level playing field among jurisdictions.
Create quality of life and recreational opportunities
A comprehensive, multiple habitat plan will lead to the highest quality of life for the public.
Jt will provide the most significant open space benefits and will ma..imally enhance community
values. Such an approach will also lead to the most scenic vistas and the most satisfying
equestrian and bicycle trails, The FPA should be broad enough so as to allow the incorporation of
these compatible, recreational features. The "environmental infrastructure" of the MSCP is a very
wise investment in the future.
Work in tandem with the ,,'lIdlife ajtencies
Consultation with the wildlife agencies is aucial at this point to verify that we are on the
right track for obtaining assurances on species. We should ask their guidance on FPA aiteria.
Conclusions
So that many listings can be avoided in the future, the program should remain multiple
habitat in scope. The "core biological resource areas and constrained linkages" already identified
after intensive analysis should be designated as the focused planning area, Biological standards for
preservation within the FPA will then allow the final reserve to be "built down" during subarea
planning, Only this approach is consistent with ~e NCCP Conservation Guidelines. This
approach will also result in the greatest degree of planning flexibility. Mechanisms to exit a large
FPA will be available, and additional properties will 1IDT have to be added later. Site-specific land
use and economic factors will enter into the planning process at the subarea level. We urge you to
adopt focus planning area criteria and a planning process which reflect these conclusions.
'Iba.nk you for considering our views.
POU"'ll.L ilfL\o(. ~OU/\. but. ~ to i:ht.. p~ r\'\o..cL. ~
~~. Wi.. ~~ iho:l. th.t.. ~ ~LJ..o~ AL40W\.Ct
N\R,.QA frU.tA:t b.(. th... ~ ~ -the. FP4\4. 1l ~ 4I\.t. 1I.ot\ t'\u. ~n~
,f'~ 1Wt\.-'^i'P~ b~ lASH Ws. ~ b.L.&toi~ {~ ~ ~~~ tt> Lv.. .
~ ~~ b,e. A.. ~ w.u:n ~~fI..l. o..nd n\Ol\L~ cU\.cl ~ k Q..t\.
~ ~A~-1:Wn ~~ .lc~~ P.to..nN..T\d'
2 - .' r- _\~
'A'C.I.A. 1..r.l<1\,,'\P~
J~- I" - 0 . ~ ~ Lul.d ~
........ .,- , ~ ~
I ~ .2'1-/(,
'\"""'r~ 12-
..
A'ITACHMENT C
CLARIFICATIONS AND MINOR CORRECTIONS TO
DRAFf "MULTI-HABITAT PLANNING AREA" (FIFfH ALTERNATIVE) MAP
Otav Ranch
. 400 acres of active recreation within the Otay Ranch Resource Management Plan (RMP)
boundary (focused on Otay River Valley) should be assumed.
. Alta Road, Paseo Ranchero and La Media Road impacts to preserve should be
considered.
. Small area within Poggi Canyon and within Village I of Otay Ranch GDP, located
outside of RMP boundary, needs to be shown as development area.
. Limited Development Areas within Planning Areas 16 and 17 of the Otay Ranch GDP
should be depicted as 90% open space areas.
Other Areas
. Lower Sweetwater Valley property should be removed from open space designation in
this alternative.
. Salt Creek should be designated as 90% open space, as far south as the southerly
EastLake boundary, consistent with the Salt Creek area located north of Otay Lakes
Road.
. Designation of Otay Water District property, located north of Salt Creek Ranch, should
be refmed. Area located outside of "biological core" area should be designated as
development area in view of the existing two 5-mi1lion gallon potable water tanks, 10
reclaimed water ponds, and planned future water facilities.
. Slope bank at northeast comer of Otay Lakes Road and Telegraph Canyon Road should
be shown as development area.
. Boundaries of preserve areas in northeastern portion of Salt Creek Ranch need to be
refined, and shown as 100% open space.
. Areas designated in City General Plan as "open space," which do not currently have
discretionary planning approvals, may be allowed up to 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres,
based on General Plan policies.
(M: \home\planning\nancy\mscp5th.lst)
,(l/~/?
,.,
. i,l,
:.l\ '
.
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
November 22, 1994
Honorable Mayor and City Council
John Goss, City Manager ~
Bob Leiter, Director of ~ning 1,/ L
Resource Conservation Commission Actions Relative to Items 19 and 24 on
November 22 City Council Agenda
On November 21, 1994, the Resource Conservation Commission held a special business meeting
to consider two items which are scheduled for consideration by the City Council at your
November 22 meeting (copies of the draft minutes are attached):
Item 19
Item 24
(F7\n:c1121.m)
Resolution Approving an Agreement with the Enviromnental Trust, Inc. and
Bonita Long Canyon Partnership for Purchase of Land as Wetlands
Mitigation for Two City Projects and AT " T's Project at 86S Third Avenue,
and Authorizing the Mayor to Execute Said Agreement on Behalf of the City
The Resource Conservation Commission voted 4-0 to approve the resolutiOlJ.
Report on Multiple Species Conservation Program Focused P1l1nnlng Area
Alternative
The Resource Conservation Commission voted 4-0 to accept Alternative /I 5
(Multi-habitat .Planning Area Map) as an alternative, but requesting that each of
the alternatives be prepared with overlays on a vegetation map in the draft EIR
for final determination. The Notice of Preparation of the EIR shall be brought
to the Commission for input on the content of the draft EIR. This action does not
constitute endorsement of the fifth alternative.
)
;2f'-J(
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING
Resource Conservation Commi~!lion
Chula Vista, California
D~ ~-h ,.
~' ,A " P"~
, 'r\f'~r J
J
7:00 p.m.
Mondav. November 21. 1994
Conference Rooms #2 and #3
Public Services Buildinl!
CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: The meeting was called to order at 7:04 by
Chair Burrascano.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Chair Burrascano, Commissioners Hall, Fisher, and Marquez
Commissioners Guerreiro, Ghougassian
STAFF PRESENT:
Staff present: Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid,
Associate Planner Barbara Reid, Planning Director Robert Leiter,
Principal Planner Duane Bazzel
MSUC (Hall/Fisher) (4-0)to excuse Commissioner Ghougassian due to a business commitment.
PRESENTATION OF PROJECTS
1. Recommendation to Council approving an agreement between the City, The
Environmental Trust, Inc., and Bonita Long Canyon Partnership for purchase of
land as wetlands mitigation for two City projects and AT&T's project at 865 Third
Avenue.
Associate Planner Barbara Reid introduced the project, advising the Commission that the
proposal was for the purchase of land to be utilized as off-site wetlands mitigation for three
drainage projects. She described the drainage projects, and the location of the proposed
mitigation property.
Mr. Jim Carter from Environmental Trust described the functions of the Trust, which maintains
and manages mitigation properties in perpetuity, therefore providing for the long-term viability
of the properties. Commissioner Marquez asked how the properties were selected; Mr. Carter
responded that preliminary biological surveys were done to determine appropriate sites for
mitigation. Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid pointed out the proposed mitigation
properties on an aerial map, noting the adjacent properties. In response to questions by
Commissioner Fisher regarding present habitat on the proposed mitigation sites, Mr. Carter
explained the current species on site as well as revegetative plans.
Ms. Reid noted that the proposed drainage projects being mitigated have degraded wetlands.
She indicated that while the Telegraph Canyon Creek project consists of temporary
improvements, the AT&T project is of a permanent nature and will include concrete
channelization due to engineering requirements related to water velocity.
Ms. Marquez asked if the one-to-one ratio had already been approved; Mr. Carter responded
that it had. Ms. Marquez asked about success criteria. Mr. Carter indicated that while the fmal
program was not yet in, the Department of Fish & Game would provide the final criteria. Ms.
.2 tj ~ ;20
Resource Conservation Commission
-2-
November 21. 1994
Marquez indicated that she was still unsure as to how the mitigation properties had been chosen;
Mr. Carter reviewed the mitigation properties, indicating that the sites adjacent to Otay Lakes
Road would abut existing open space areas in Rancho del Rey.
Commissioner Fisher stated that he was concerned with the proximity of two of the sites to Otay
Lakes Road, stating that habitats near roads typically have lower densities of species than areas
further away. Mr. Carter responded that these properties would create more of a buffer for the
adjacent open space area, adding that the larger parcel could potentially be developed with three
to four residential units otherwise. Mr. Fisher asked if biological surveys of the mitigation sites
were available; Mr. Carter responded that they were not.
MSUC (MarquezlHall) (4-0) to recommend approval of Resolution 17710.
2. Recommendation to City Council/PI"nning Commiqion regarding MSCP plans Cor
Curther environmental analysis.
Planning Director Robert Leiter provided a general background on the Multiple Species
Conservation Plan process, reviewing the work conducted over the past three years by
consultants in conjunction with an MSCP working group to create standards and criteria and
identify core biological areas for an MSCP to be reviewed and approved by the U.S. Fish &
Wildlife Service. Mr. Leiter described the maps prepared which identified distinct areas of
biological resources and linkages throughout San Diego County. These maps are a part of the
draft MSCP framework plan which includes four alternatives.
Mr. Leiter pointed out and described the various maps. He reviewed the first alternative, known
as the biologically preferred alternative, which includes approximately 187,000 acres of the most
important biological resources; the second alternative, known as the multiple habitats alternative,
includes 150,000 acres of various resources; the third alternative, known as the Coastal Sage
Scrub alternative, includes 90,000 acres focused on CSS habitat; and a fourth alternative,
submitted by the Alliance for Habitat Preservation (a group of major developers and property
owners), which presented heavy use of publicly owned lands and designated open space areas,
and included Miramar. Mr. Leiter noted, however, that the Navy had not agreed to be included
in the MSCP.
Mr. Leiter indicated that recently, the City of San Diego under Mayor Golding had presented
a fifth alternative plan which attempted to create a compromise between the other four. This
plan looks at publicly-owned lands which would be viable preserve options, and attempts to
refme the identification of individual jurisdictions' open spaces as well as biological resources.
In June, the Chula Vista City Council endorsed the proposed criteria for the fifth alternative, and
directed staff to assist in preparation of this alternative.
The evaluation process was reviewed; Mr. Leiter stated that an EIR will be prepared to evaluate
all five alternatives, and will quantify the strengths and weaknesses of each; at a regional level,
jurisdictions within the MSCP plan will then evaluate ways to fill in the gaps if necessary. Mr.
Leiter added that the EIR will include an economic analysis, and should be out by July or
August. After the plans have been completed, the framework plan will be adopted on a regional
;2t/-- ;2/
Resource Conservation Commission
-3.
November 21. 1994
level, after which each jurisdiction will amend their General Plan and Zoning Ordinances as
needed to implement the MSCP.
Commissioner Marquez asked what will be protected by the proposed plans that is not already
planned for preservation; Mr. Leiter explained current discussion relating to the proposed San
Miguel Ranch project as an example of new preserve areas being planned, as well as plans to
create mitigation banks. Mr. Reid added that Rancho del Rey had purchased 360 acres of
O'Neal Canyon for off-site mitigation. Mr. Leiter stated that the new plan will make many
reserve systems permanent, and will ensure the long-term rmancing and maintenance of preserve
systems. Commissioner Fisher asked if this plan would interact with SANDAG's; Mr. Leiter
responded that it would. .
Mr. John Brown of Dudek & Associates noted that Dudek is working with the County to identify
preserve areas, adding that SANDAG's and the County's plans will be consistent. Mr. Fisher
questioned the blank (white) spots within the County areas (east) on the City of San Diego's
proposed map. Mr. Leiter stated that Ogden had performed the evaluation, and had presented
the maps based on their evaluation of biologically valuable areas. Mr. Brown concurred,
explaining the various models that had been used by Ogden, Dudek, and other consultants and
experts to arrive at the Habitat Evaluation model. He stated that the white areas referenced
probably had low concentrations of CSS.
Mr. Fisher expressed concerns that some species were not yet identified or well-researched.
Mr. Leiter pointed out that the white areas were not necessarily designated by the County's
General Plan for urban development, and that much is planned for low density and agricultural
usage. Mr. Fisher questioned references by others to the map boundaries as "hard lines". He
felt that if the boundaries indicated were truly hard lines, with development unrestricted by
biologically sensitive areas outside of these lines, there was too much habitat outside that had
not been analyzed sufficiently. Mr. Leiter stated that he did not believe that the County would
adopt the map as shown with the intent to permit urban development in the white areas, but
noted that the question should ~ directed to the County. He added that staff could follow up
on this issue. Mr. Brown reviewed the process by which the boundaries had been dermed,
stating that he did not believe that the subject of hard lines was a serious issue at this point.
Mr. Fisher also noted that it was difficult to get a feel for the areas depicted on the various
maps. Mr. Brown stated that SANDAG maps included acetate overlays that provided
clarification of the different resource areas. Chair Burrascano suggested that overlays be
provided to more accurately depict the various resources on one map for the EIR review.
Commissioner Marquez expressed concern that Fish & Wildlife staff have not provided input
on the information presented and that it is unclear how that agency's staff members feel about
the issues. She stated that the agency's formal position will be unknown.until the plan is fully
completed. Mr. Fisher asked about the "no project" alternative; Mr. Brown stated that it will
be presented, and would address current piecemeal mitigation. Mr. Fisher reiterated his
concerns regarding the lack of information presented for the white areas, primarily in the
easterly portions of the County, as it pertains to identification of potential species. Mr. Leiter
responded that this plan would not preclude opportunities relating to the identification of species
in the future.
d- t/~ ,).2.
.
Resource Conservation Commission
-4-
November 21. 1994
Chair Burrascano questioned the areas where lin1aiges do not exist between identified core areas
(e.g. at SR 125 crossing). She also pointed out that the revegetation taking place at the Otay
River Valley area is not depicted on the map.
Commissioner Marquez stated that she found the fifth alternative to be a far cry from the first
two alternative maps. She felt that resource-wise, the fifth map is lacking, as it shows land that
is already protected and does not seem to add much. Commissioner Hall felt that alternative #5
should be combined with the others somehow, and not omitted although it should not stand
alone. Commissioner Fisher stated that he felt that the overlays were necessary before he would
be comfortable voting on a recommendation. Mr. Leiter suggested that the commission could
make a recommendation to allow the process to move to the EIR stage, at which time the
Commission will have more information with which to make a judgement. He noted that any
motion could include an indication that the Commission is not endorsing a particular alternative.
MSUC (HalI/Burrascano) (4-0) to accept alternative #S (Multi-habitat Planning Area Map)
as an alternative, but requesting that each of the alternatives be prepared with overlays on
on a vegetation map in the draft EIR. The Notice of Preparation of the Environmental
Impact Report on the MSCP shall be brought to the RCC for input on the content of the
draft EIR. This action does not constitute endorsement of the fifth alternative.
Mr. Leiter advised that more information on this project would be brought to the Commission
prior to review of the draft EIR.
~
STAFF COMMENTS
Mr. Reid advised that the next regular meeting would be December 12, 1994 rather than
November 28, and that there would not be a meeting on December 26.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9: 13 p.m.
Patty Nevins, Recorder
) tj/).]
.
~ 8.1 .b
COUNCIL INFORMATIONAL MEMO
November 22, 1994
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: John Goss, City Manager
FROM: Jerry J. Jamriska,
Special Planning
SUBJECT: Chula Vista Sphere of Influence Update
Recommendation:
Staff requests permission to appear before the Board of Supervisors on November 29,
1994 to state and request the following:
"It is the position of the City of Chula Vista that it is premature for the County Board
of Supervisors to take action on the City's Sphere of Influence Study for the following
reasons:
1) the Final Sphere of Influence Study is not scheduled for completion until mid-
December;
2) the data contained in June, 1994 "Staff Draft" Report, that the County
Planning Staff is relying upon, was released only to a few agencies to determine if the
data contained within the "Staff Draft" was accurate and comprehensive. Several
changes are being made to the document based on County and other agency staff
comments. Staff has updated all of the data contained within the earlier "Staff Draft"
report;
3) the Environmental Impact Report will be completed in mid-December. The
"staff Draft" did not contain any environmental information. The EIR has not been
reviewed by County staff;
4) LAFCO and City staff are scheduled to hold a joint public forum on the
Sphere Report and EIR in early January, 1995. The Chula Vista Planning Commission
public hearing is scheduled for March 8, 1995 followed by the Chula Vista City Council
hearing on April 11, 1995. Submission to LAFCO will occur on April 14, 1995;
5) the City and County have established Joint Policy Subcommittees consisting of
two members of the Board of Supervisors and two members of the City of Chula Vista
City Council. County staff has not brought their recommendations to that committee for
action and consideration.
cJ7b -/
~.1
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
11/22/94
Page 2 of 7
6) the City of Chula Vista staff was only given 1.5 days to review the County's
Staff report, and no opportunity was offered to meet and discuss the report
recommendations.
Therefore, it is recommended that:
1) the Board of Supervisors take no action until they have all the necessary
information at their disposal, and
2) that the Joint City and County Policy Committee meet as soon as possible to
review, discuss and make a recommendation to their respective bodies."
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Board of SUDervisors ReDort:
The afternoon of November 16, 1994 a County employee delivered a copy of a staff
report to the Otay Ranch Project Team Staff. This report (attachment) was being
presented to the County Planning Commission on November 18, 1994 and to the Board
of Supervisors on November 29, 1994.
The report requests the Board to take a position on Chula Vista's Sphere of Influence
and annexation of the Otay Ranch to the City. The CAO makes the following five
recommendations to the Board and asks for direction to forward them to the City and
LAFCO:
1. Easterly Sphere Boundary should be the center line of the Otay Reservoirs.
2. Support inclusion of the Inverted "U and Watson property within the City's
Sphere.
3A. Exclude from the Sphere: Otay Landfill
Village 3 of the Otay Ranch
Nelson Sloan Rock Quarry
Otay Valley Regional Park
Otay Mesa Industrial areas
3B. The County will support inclusion of these areas if:
(a) the City enters into a legal agreement that prohibit the City from
imposing landfill host fees,
(b) the City agrees to amended the General Plan to eliminate the
Industrial designation on Village 3 and conform to the County's
alternative,
:27h-;L
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
11/22,/94
Page 3 of 7
(c) the City reimburses the County for administering the regional park
planning effort, and,
(d) the City amends the existing Sphere to delete land east of the
Lower Otay Reservoir.
4. Annexation of the Otay Valley Parcel be phased in accord with the Otay Ranch
GDP Village Phasing Plan.
5. County will support including the Otay Valley Parcel within the Sphere if the
Property Tax Agreement is settled before the Sphere is approved by LAFCO.
No advisory statements from the Otay Ranch Supervisors Subcommittee, Planning
Commission or community planning groups are included. The report recognizes Fiscal
Impacts are unknown because the FIND Model is being updated, and the information is
not available. Alternatives suggested include:
(a) Postponement until tax agreement is completed.
(b) Support the Sphere without the 3B conditions.
(c) Propose a sphere that is coterminous with the existing City limits
and leaves the entire Otay Ranch in the County.
(d) Support an alternative Sphere boundary ancVor support
recommendation 3A.
(e) Take no action.
County PlAnn;n... Commission Meet;n...:
The item on the County Planning Commission agenda was number 7 (attachment).
However, it was taken out of order and considered as the first item. County staff was
aware that Baldwin and City representatives intended to speak against the action.
Consequently, Baldwin and City representatives arrived after the public hearing portion
was closed.
The Planning Commission, by unanimous vote (6-0), approved the staff recommendation
with the following amendments:
1. Approved establishing the Eastern Sphere boundary as the center line of the Otay
Reservoir.
2. Approved the inclusion of the inverted "L" and Watson property in the City of Chula
Vista Sphere.
3A. Approved the following areas to be excluded from the Sphere:
Village 3 of the Otay Ranch
Nelson Sloan Rock Quarry
,;< 71r:]
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
11/2W94
Page 4 of 7
Otay Mesa Industrial Areas but
omitted any reference for the Otay Landfill and Otay Valley Regional Park
being added to City of Chula Vista Sphere under any circumstances.
3B. Approved the County offer to support adding the above three areas into our Sphere
if the City'
agrees to amend our General Plan eliminating the Industrial designation on
Village 3;
reimburses the County for administering the Regional Park planning effort;
amend our EXISTING sphere boundary deleting the land east of Lower Otay
Reservoir
but deleted any reference of a legal agreement on landfill host fees.
4. Approved phasing of annexation.
5. Approved supporting the Otay Valley Parcel being added to our Sphere if a Property
Tax Agreement is settled before the Sphere is approved by LAFCO and
subject to the above deletions from the Sphere.
(Note, this is normally a task to be completed after the Sphere is approved
but before the Annexation Process is concluded.)
Another piece of information that portrays the extent of the communication issue is as
follows:
JEPA Otav Valley Re.nonal Park:
At the November 18, 1994 Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) meeting for the Otay
Valley Regional Park, the Joint Staff presented recommendations concerning the
selection of the Preserve Owner Manager (PaM) for the Otay Ranch Wildlife Preserve.
The Joint Staff had requested from the County Otay Ranch Coordinator a Request For
Qualifications on the Preserve Owner Manager so that the Joint Staff could seek
direction from the Policy Committee or Executive Management Team on staffs role in
the POM selection. The Joint Staff wants the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement
(JEPA) to maintain the option of participating in the selection process and play an
active role in the planning and development of the Preserve. The Joint Staff
recommended CAC recommend to the Policy Committee the following:
that JEPA be a member of the POM selection committee; or
that JEPA be made a member of the board of directors of whatever owner
is selected; and
that the Policy Committee provide direction to CAC on what their role and
participation should be in the Otay Ranch Wildlife Preserve.
The CAC adopted the Joint Staff recommendations.
;27b~i
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
11/2z.'94
Page 5 of 7
This participation as recommended by the "Joint Staff' is not included in the General
Development Plan/Subregional Plan policies on the selection of the POM. The GDP sets
the membership of the screening committee as the property owner, the City and the
County with consultation from the resource agencies. The membership of the selection
committee is also determined in the GDP and does not include the JEPA. Raising
citizens expectations of participating in a process that has already been determined and
does not include them will only hurt future coordination and communication on the
implementation of both the Otay Ranch Project and the Regional Park. Better
communication within "Joint Staff" will ensure the City's position is coordinated.
Citv of Chula Vista Sllhere of Influence Study:
A comprehensive Sphere of Influence Study is being undertaken by the City of Chula
Vista with the cooperation of the Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCO). A
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) to the General Plan EIR and the
Otay Ranch EIR and all other environmental documents are being prepared under the
auspices of the City of Chula Vista.
On June 13, 1994 a pre-draft release of a "Staff Draft" Sphere of Influence Report was
released to a few agencies to determine if the data contained within the "Staff Draft"
was accurate and comprehensive. The report was incomplete, contained no fiscal data
and the City Council Subcommittee did not have an opportunity to review the data.
The final staff report and DEIR will be ready for public review and comment in mid-
December, 1994.
The purpose of the this Sphere of Influence Study is to determine a recommended
boundary for the City of Chula Vista sphere as it relates specifically to the Otay Ranch
Project Site. LAFCO, in reviewing requested sphere amendments, will analyze this
proposal based upon criteria established in the CortesE'/Knox Act and their specific
sphere guidelines. LAFCO's goals are to encourage compact development, to discourage
the premature conversion of open space and agricultural lands and to encourage the
orderly development and expansion of local agencies. The guidelines state that LAFCO
will consider including territory within a city's sphere that requires the city's services
now or within the next 15 years.
In addition, the following factors are important in determining an appropriate sphere:
. present and planned land uses;
. need for city services;
. capability of the city to provide services;
. social and economic communities of interest;
. cost of services;
. impact on adjacent agencies and areas;
. consistency with general plans; and
. natural boundaries.
d.7b~3
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
11/22/94
Page 6 of 7
Histon of City of Chula Vista Sllhere of Influence Ulldate Process:
San Diego LAFCO adopted the initial City of Chula Vista Sphere of Influence in 1985.
In 1992, LAFCO staff requested that the City of Chula Vista respond to a sphere of
influence evaluation to determine if a sphere update study should be initiated. Based
on that evaluation, on July 12, 1993, LAFCO approved initiation of a comprehensive
update study of the City of Chula Vista Sphere of Influence.
Sllhere of Influence PlAnn;ng Areas:
During the initial phase of the Sphere of Influence Study, five planning areas were
identified as candidates to be included within the City's sphere of influence
recommendation, as follows:
Sphere of Influence PlAnn;T1g Areas
Otay Vallev Planninl1' Area (1) 9 298.65 acres
Resort Planninl1' Area (2) 2,092.80 acres
Inverted "L" Plannine: Area (3) 457.00 acres
Otav Mesa Industrial Planninl1' Area (4) 870.30 acres
Special Study Areas and Sweetwater Parcel 897.96 acres
(5)
Total 13616.71 acres
Land Uses
A comparison of the number of housing units permitted by the General Plan for the
City of Chula Vista and the County of San Diego within each planning area is depicted
below:
Residential Land Uses
Area City Units County Units
Otav Vallev Planninl!' Area 18 946 19017
Resort Plannine: Area 2.340 2.311
Inverted "L" Planning Area 185
389
Otay Mesa Industrial Planninl!' Area Industrial Industrial
Snecial Study Areas and Sweetwater Parcel N/A N/A
21,675 21,513
Totals
After four and one-half years of planning and deliberations, on October 28, 1993, the
City and the County jointly adopted the Otay Ranch General Development
Plan/Subregional Plan (GDPjSRP). Otay Ranch constitutes 87% of the Sphere of
,)7b-?
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
11/22/94
Page 7 of 7
Influence Study Area. With the exception of Village 3 within the Otay Valley Planning
Area, the land uses permitted in each jurisdiction's land use plan are identical.
County Annexation Policies:
Board of Supervisors Policy I-55, "Annexation and Incorporations", generally encourages
annexation, if:
. the area is within an adopted sphere;
. the annexation represents an orderly extension of existing city boundaries;
. there is no natural geographic separation between the existing city and the area
to be annexed;
. the city can more efficiently provide services;
. the size of the annexed area is in scale with the existing city (Le., the existing
city is "sufficiently larger than the annexation);
. the community identity of the annexing area is compatible with the city;
. annexation will not be a detriment to a future incorporation; and
. annexation will not cause a significant adverse fiscal impact upon the County.
If additional information is desired, I can be reached at 422-7158.
Attachments:
c27b---?
.
. ,
Memorandum
DATE: November 22, 1994
TO: John Goss, City Manager
FROM: Jerry Jamriska, A.I.C.P., Special Planning Projects Manager
RE: Chula Vista Sphere of Influence Report
On November 16, 1994 Bill Healy delivered a copy of a staff report being presented to
the Board of Supervisors on November 29, 1994. We were also notified that the County
Planning Commission was going to consider this item on November 18, 1994. My memo
to you dated 11-17-94 reflects the County staff report.
The item on the County Planning Commission agenda was number 7 (attachment).
However, it was taken out of order and considered as the first item. County staff was
aware that I intended to speak against the action recommended by staff. Consequently,
Baldwin and City representatives arrived after the public hearing portion was closed.
The planning Commission by unanimous vote (6-0) approved the staff recommendation
with the following amendments:
1. Approved establishing the Eastern Sphere boundary as the center line of the Otay
Reservoir.
2. Approved the inclusion of the inverted "L" and Watson property in the City of Chula
Vista Sphere.
3A. Approved the following areas to be excluded from the Sphere:
Village 3 of the Otay Ranch
Nelson Sloan Rock Quarry
Otay Mesa Industrial Areas but
omitted any reference for the Otay Landfill and Otay Valley Regional Park
being added to City of Chula Vista Sphere under any circumstances.
3B. Approved the County offer to support adding the above 3 areas into our Sphere if
the City;
agrees to amend our General Plan eliminating the Industrial designation on
Village 3;
reimburses the County for administering the Regional Park planning effort;
amend our EXISTING sphere boundary deleting the land east of Lower Otay
Reservoir.
but deleted any reference of a legal agreement on landfill host fees.
J.?b- ?'
4. Approved phasing of annexation.
5. Approved supporting the Otay Valley Parcel being added to our Sphere if a Property
Tax Agreement is settled before the Sphere is approved by LAFCO and
subject to the above deletions from the Sphere.
(Note, this is normally a task to be completed after the Sphere is approved
but before the Annexation Process is concluded).
Another piece of information that portrays the extent of the communication issue is as
follows:
OTAY VALLEY REGIONAL PARK
At the November 18, 1994 Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) meeting for the Otay
Valley Regional Park, the Joint Staff presented recommendations concerning the
selection of the Preserve Owner Manager (POM) for the Otay Ranch Wildlife Preserve.
The Joint Staff had requested from the County Otay Ranch Coordinator a Request For
Qualifications on the Preserve Owner Manager so that the Joint Staff could seek
direction from the Policy Committee or Executive Management Team on staff's role in
the POM selection. The Joint Staff wants the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement
(JEPA) to maintain the option of participating in the selection process and play an
active role in the planning and development of the Preserve. The Joint Staff
recommended CAC recommend to the Policy Committee the following:
that JEPA be a member of the POM selection committee; or
that JEPA be made a member of the board of directors of whatever owner
is selected; and
that the Policy Committee provide direction to CAC on what their role and
participation should be in the Otay Ranch Wildlife Preserve.
The CAC adopted the Joint Staff recommendations.
This participation as recommended by the "Joint Staff" is not included in the General
Development Plarv'Subregional Plan policies on the selection of the POM. The GDP sets
the membership of the screening committee as the property owner, the City and the
County with consultation from the resource agencies. The membership of the selection
committee is also determined in the GDP and does not include the JEPA. Raising
citizens expectations of participating in a process that has already been determine and
does not include them will only hurt future coordination and communication on the
implementation of both the Otay Ranch Project and the Regional Park. Better
communication within "Joint Staff" will ensure the City's position an all issues is
coordinated.
Enc. County Staff Report
Jamriska's memo dated 11-17-94
County Planning Commission Agenda
2 .;2.7b-j
. .
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 17, 1994
TO: John Goss, City Manager
FROM: Gerald J. Jamriska, Special Planning Projects Manag
SUBJECT: San Diego County Staff Report on Chula Vista Sphere of Influence Study
The Otay Ranch Project Team has received a copy of a County Planning Commission Staff
Report scheduled for consideration on Friday, November IS, 1994. The report is also
scheduled for consideration by the Board of Supervisors on November 30, 1994. The report
ask the Board to take a position on Chula Vista's Sphere of Influence and annexation of the
Otay Ranch to the City. The CAO makes the following five recommendations to the Board
and asks for direction to forward them to the City and LAFCO'
1. Easterly Sphere Boundary should be the center line of the Otay Reservoirs.
2. Support inclusion of the Inverted "L" and Watson property within the City's
Sphere.
Otay Landfill
Village 3 of the Otay Ranch
Nelson Sloan Rock Quarry
Otay Valley Regional Park
Otay Mesa Industrial areas
3B. The County will support inclusion of these areas if:
3A. Exclude from the Sphere:
(a) the City enters into a legal agreement that prohibit the City from
imposing landfill host fees,
(b) the City agrees to amended the General Plan to eliminate the
Industrial designation on Village 3 and conform to the County's
alternative,
(c) the City reimburses the County for administering the regional park
planning effort, and,
(d) the City amends the existing Sphere to delete land east of the
Lower Otay Reservoir.
,).7)Y~)(}
'\
.!
I
',.
John Goss
November 17,1994
Page 2
.'
4. Annexation of the Otay Valley Parcel be phased in accord with the Otay Ranch
GDP Village Phasing Plan.
5 County will support including the Otay Valley Parcel within the Sphere if the
Property Tax Agreement is settled before the Sphere is approved by LAFCO.
No advisory statements from the Otay Ranch Supervisors Subcommittee, Planning
Commission or community planning groups are included. The report recognizes Fiscal
Impacts are unknown because the FIND model is being updated and the information is not
available. Alternatives include:
(a) Postponement until tax agreement is completed.
(b) Support the Sphere without the 3B conditions.
(c) Propose a sphere that is coterminous with the existing City limits and
leaves the entire Otay Ranch in the County.
(d) Support an alternative Sphere boundary and/or support recommendation 3A
(e) Take no action.
Otay Ranch Project Team Recombination:
The Otay Ranch Project Team requests permission to appear before the County Planning
Commission this Friday, November 18, 1994 and the Board of Supervisors on November
30,1994 to inform them of the following:.
It is the position of the City of Chula Vista that it is premature for the County to take a
position on the City's Sphere since the Sphere Study is not complete, the EIR is not finished
and neither of these documents have been reviewed by the citizens of Chula Vista or San
Diego County, the Chula Vista or San Diego County Planning Commissions or by the Chula
Vista City Council. County staff is making a recommendation to the Board based on an
incomplete City "staff" draft of the Sphere report. This report was sent to County staff for
their review to ensure the County information was correct. Several changes are being made
to the document based on County and other agencies staff comments but the revised
document is not ready for public review. The County's report is based on an incomplete
draft Sphere study report with no environmental or fisca1 data.
The Sphere Study and EIR are scheduled to begin public review on December 19,1994 with
a joint LAFCO/City public forum on the Sphere and EIR held in the first part of January,
1995. The Chula Vista Planning Commission public hearing is scheduled for March 8, 1995
followed by the Chula Vista City Council hearing on April 11, 1995. Submission to LAFCO
will occur on April 14, 1995.
Therefore, it is recommended that the Board of Supervisors take no action until they have all
the information available
CC: Sid Morris wi BIS Staff Report
,J7/?~/!
ctymgr3.mem
, .
FINAL AGENDA
SAN DIEGO COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting, November 18, 1994
Department of Planning and Land Use
Hearing Room - 9:00 a.m.
ROLL CALL
ADMINISTRATIVE
For further information regarding this agenda, please call 694-3816.
1. Director's Report to the Commission (8:30 a.m.)
Items to be discussed include:
Briefing on actions of the Board of Supervisors
Planning and Environmental Review Board/Action Sheet Report
(G. Cane)
Finances and Budget
Discussion on Scheduling a Workshop Regarding Private Inho1dings in
Public Lands (J. Chaga1a)
Request for the Planning Commission to Appoint a Representative to
the Fire Mitigation Fee Review Committee (K. Mallory)
2. Public Request to be Heard
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Commission on any
subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction but not an item on
today's agenda.
.
3. Approval of Minutes: September 16, and October 14, 1994
CONSENT AGENDA - 9:00 A.M. - TIME CERTAIN
NORTHERN SUBREGION
Reaulatory Pro1ects
4. P94-021
(Lassa1ine)
California Institute of
Technology/Palomar Observatory;
proposed Major Use Permit for the
addition of an approximately
2,500 square foot research
building to Palomar Observatory.
The application also contains
existing uses on the Observatory
site including telescope
buildings, museum/gift shop,
lodge, 13 residences for staff,
and a maintenance shop. Also
requested is a specific exemption
from the 35 foot maximum required
~~-~
Agenda
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS:
5. Economic Advisory (Hurlburt)
Board Sunset
Commission - Planning
and Land Use Committee
Recommendations
6. Economic Advisory (Vokac/Casey)
Board Sunset
Commission - Public
Works Infrastructure
and Waste Water
Review Commitee
Recommendations
-2-
November 18, 1994
by the height regulations for 3
telescope dome structures with
heights of 136 feet, 58 feet, and
47 feet, and a water tank with a
height of 100 feet. The zoning
for the property is S92 General
Rural. Palomar Mountain area.
The San Diego County Economic
Advisory Board, at the direction
of the Board of Supervisors,
appointed a Sunset Commission,
along with nine review
committees, to review all County
policies, ordinances, and
regulations to recommend for
deletion or change those that
negatively affect job creation
and/or retention. The Planning
and Land Use Committee is
presenting their recommendations
to the Commission, which will
ultimately be presented to the
Board of Supervisors. These
recommendations focus primarily
on the "Greenbook" and internal
Department of Planning and Land
Use procedures.
The San Diego County Economic
Advisory Board, at the direction
of the Board of Supervisors,
appointed a Sunset Commission,
along with nine review
committees, to review all County
policies, ordinances, and
regulations to recommend for
deletion or change those that
negatively affect job creation
and/or retention. The Public
Works Infrastructure and Waste
Water Review Commitee is
presenting to the Commission the
recommendations that the Sunset
Commission has approved and that
will be presented to the Board of
Supervisors.
J~~O
. .
Agenda
-3-
November 18, 1994
7. Chula Vista (Healy)
Sphere of Influence
Discussion and recommendation on
proposed Chula Vista Sphere of
Influence Boundary/Otay Ranch.
Administrative
8. Report on actions of Planning Commission's Subcommittees.
9. Designation of member to represent Commission at Board of Supervisors.~,r9{AP~~P
10. Discussion of correspondence received by Planning Commission.
Deoartment Reoort
11. Scheduled Meetings.
.J7};-11
"
~
.
~
ROBERT R. COPPER
D;HECrOR (Acting}
(6'9) 694.2962
<1Iountll of J$a:n ~i.cBo
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND LAND USE
5201 RUFFIN ROAD, SUITE B. SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92123.1666
INFORMATION (619) 694.2960
November 7, 1994
'I'o:
Planning Corr~ission
FROI1:
Department of Planning and Land Use
-J/
~\,: '
fJw
OTAY RANCH; CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY
The enclosed report is scheduled for consideration by the Boare
of Supervisors on November 30, 1994, and is being distributed --
the Planning Commission for information and comment.
The draft report has been placed on the November 18 Commissio~
agenda as a discus.cion item. Any response ~1' the Co=issi':l~ ca~
be provided to the Board in advance of the~r meeting on this
~::::::~..
In addition, December 2 ~i~l be Bill Healy's last day with the
County. Following Bill's departure, the management and work
responsibilities for implementing the Otay Ranch project will be
distributed among several staff persons, as shown in the
attachment. Future questions regarding the status of the projec~
can be addressed to either Gerry Hermanson or Dennis Verrilli.
WTH:
Attachment.
;2.7,0 ~J~
~ , J '
OTAY RANCK PROJECT COORDINATION
- staffing Responsibilities -
Effective December 1, 1994
project Management and Administration~
Subcommittee staffing~ Overall project
coordination~ Referrals~ other Miscellaneous:
Staff Allocation and Staff Management:
Overall Design Plan:
Sphere of Influence~ Municipal Annexations:
FIND Model~ Reserve Fund~ Tax Agreement:
Preserve Owner Manager Selection and Retention:
Resource Management program Phase 2 :
SPA Implementation Tasks; Miscellaneous:
Budget Management~ Billing Invoices:
H: \ORST?'.FF .1bh
11/9/94
)7}J ~/?
1/- '7
"~
Gerry Hermanson
Dennis Verrilli
Dennis Verrilli
John Desch
Chantal Saipe
Joan Vokac
Mike Evans
Anne Evdng
Chantal Saipe
Valerie Carter
"
~ ....,
'/. .:)
WJOOfAj~1J
CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/
OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
BOARD REPORT
ATTACHMENT 1 - CITY PROPOSED SPHERE BOUNDARY MAP
MTTASHMENT 2 - SPHERE PLANNING AREAS MAP
ATTACHMENT 3 - OTAY RANCH LAND USE PLAN
ATTACHMENT 4 - SPHERE EXPANSION AREAS OUTSIDE OTAY RANCH
ATTACHMENT 5 - ADDITIONAL SPHERE PARCELS WITHIN OTAY RANCH
ATTACHMENT 6 - INVERTED "L" AND WATSON PROPERTIES
ATTACHMENT 7 - STAFF CORRESPONDENCE TO CITY REGARDING REGIONAL
FACILITIES
kiTACHMENi E - SPHERE SCHEDU_E
COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVEr
CL.ERk Or THE BOARD MINUiE ORDER(S
BOARDll \DTP-.YRNCH iOC::':
J7JJ- /7
~lLjP\I~IlNIIII~I~ ~[~cg~lr
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
,-, , '"
, -1
DATE:
November 30, 1994
fii! fDi 0\ p:;?
I L: ; f ,,~, i..:, . = ,i
,-'! q "n' ,. .'
"'-""-,-:"....lW W
TO: Board of Supervi sors
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
(Districts 1 and 2)
SUMMARY:
Issue
What should be the ~Dunty's POSl:10n regarjing the C~ula Vista ~phare of
Influence and potential annexation area boundaries affect~ng the Otay
Ranch project?
Recommendation
CHIEF ADMINISTRA7:VE OFFICER:
The County Board of Supervisors hereby states its position on the Chula
Vista Sphere of Influence Study (Sphere), and directs the Chief
Administrative Officer to transmi: the following recommendations to the
City of Chula Vista and to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo):
~2.ste~lv Snher-e Bounoa""", Reaffinr. February S~ 1991 (#4), tentative
Boara aecision to align tne easterly Sphere bounaary with the San
Bernardino Meridian. which roughly passes through the center of the
lower Otay Reservoi~ It is further recommended that the Sar.
Bernardino Merid~ar. alignment bend slightly to follow the center of
the L;:;,kc: tz:~ccj"; thE :..ippar o.iid 1 ower i-c:3c:r'v'u~ r.). The t".::c.ommenat::o
.1;..........,"',...;.. lo.';"l"': _...,....j.. ..... "'..... r."--'" u.:,,___ .,... ''''---r~' .. ''''9' '.
.:...:0....._.... h", ;;:.......,.. III v...o..J '0.11\"11 '1IIQ~C: J..,J \I'\'C':>>V I,..J, WI'IC ~ l~
(Proctor Valley), Village 15 (San Ysidro West), Village 16 (Jamul
Rural Estate) and Village 17 (San Ysidro East Rural Estate)
remaining within the unincorporated County. with the Otay Lakes
forming the natural boundary between the City and the unincorporated
area.
2. Northerl\' Sohere Boundan: Support the proposed Sphere boundary
relocation to include the inverted "L" planning area and the
adjacent 'Watson property'. as these properties are separatea by a
canyon from Proctor Valley and relate better topograohically to the
adjacent Salt Creek Ranch development within the City o' Cr~la
Vista.
3A. Southerly Sohere Boundar\': Recommenc to the City of eh',la Vista and
to the LAFCo that the so~:herly Sohere Boundar) 5huuj~ ~xclude the
existing County Otay Landfill; ~ 2 \'ili 098 3 rrixed lane ~:e a',,,
the Nelson Sloan Rock Quarry area; the Otay Va 11 ey Ref' 0:,c. "ark
)71:r )cr
" l'
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
Area; and the industrial use areas located south of the Otay River
Valley (now within the jurisdiction orthe City of San Diego and
County of San Diego).
This revised sphere boundary alignment would result in portions of
Wolfe Canyon, all of Villages I, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,
Planning Area 12 (Eastern Urban Center), and Salt Creek Canyon
(portion of potential University site) to be included within the
City's Sphere.
3B. Substitute to Recommendation No. 3A Continaent upon City
Aareementrs); Notwithstanding Recommendation No. 3A above, the
County shall ;upport the City's proposed south~rly Sphere boundary,
which includes the Otay Landfill and the Otay Valley Regional Park,
if the City agrees to the following:
(a) A Development Agreement or another legal instrument acceptable
to County Counsel is entered into with the City of Chula Vista
that binds the City from imposing landfill host fees or other
fees for the use of the regional landfill, and which bars the
City from requiring any City permit for the use of the landfill
or for the expansion of the landfill, provided the expansion
area is within the boundaries of the existing landfill
ownership. This condition shall remain in effect regardless of
whether the landfill remains within the ownership of the County
of San Dieao or is transferred to the San Dieao Solid Waste
Authority or to any other regional authorityj-
(b' The City agrees to process a General Plan Amendment (GPA) for
Otay Ranch Village 3, consistent with the mixed land use plan
aoproved by the :ounty Board of Supervisors on October 28, 1993
rGPf.. 92-0~).
... \ T....... r~_" ....._......~ ........................... ....... ~.......... :....... ..." __.........
...... ,..;:. """.' ~~.c~..:......., '~IIII...U'.)C. 1,.11::; ....V""'II...J IVl Q.II ....v.)...~
...,..,...........;...~......: ............ ......... ....................___....;....... ....: ...l,.,_ n....... H...11_.. n_...~__..j
...................10;.... "I"'. ....~ W"'I""!''':'''I'''''''''''' VI ...1111;. "'''-~J ,Q,IICJ hC'::!IVIIQ,l
Park p 1 anni ng effort, if the County continues as an active
member of the Otay Valley Joint Powers Agreement (JEPA)
following City annexation of the Otay River Valley.
(c) The C it)' removes a 11 i anos i ocated easter'lY of the San
Bernardino Meridian (as amendec per Recommendation # 1 above)
from the City Sphere o~ Influer:e in ~ts application to the
LAFCo.
4 Annexation Phasino' The Board recommends to LAFCo that the
a~~exation of the Cta\ Va;;ev Parcel De phased in accordance with
t"e developmen- phasing olano approved by the COULty Board of
Supervisors as part of Board Polic) 1-105.
c27b - J;
1 \ I'
~
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
5. Prooertv Tax Distribution: The County shall support the City's
proposed sphere of influence, except as herein amended. contingent
upon the City Council and County Board of Supervisors reaching
preliminary agreement on the distribution of tax revenues prior to
Sphere of Influence approval by LAFCo.
Advisory Statement
None. Major issues have been discussed by the Board of Supervisors Otay
Ranch Subcommittee (Supervisors Bilbray and Jacob). The Subcommittee has
not taken specific action regarding the Sphere Doundaries. The Planning
Commission and the Jamul-Dulzura, Valle de Ora, Spring Valley and
Sweetwater Community Planning Groups will receive a copy of t~.s report,
and may wish to present comments at the time the Board conSl0ers this
item.
Fiscal Impact
Tax revenues and service costs resulting from the full build-out of Otay
Ranch, and the t4X distributions among annexing jurisdictions (Chula
Vista), the County, and the Rural Fire Protection District have not yet
been determined, but ~re expected to be substantial. A revisec Fiscal
Impact of New Development (FIND) model is now under review and will be
available before the Sphere is acted on by LAFCo.
State law requires that a property tax agreement be approved by the City
Council and Board of Supervisors prior to annexation, which will affect
the annual revenue distribution between jurisdictions. The adopted
General Plan reouires the establisnment of a Reserve Fund Program which
wili annuailv update tne revenue soarinG aareement to preciuoe operatinc
deficits for. either ju~isdic:ior cu~in~-prc~~:: bu~id-o~:. ~
A1ternc.tives
~ostPone <. oeC1S10n on tne Sonere oounoaries untii the impact of the
tax C1S:~~.U:'O~ agresmen: 1S Detter know~,
^
Support the Sohere boundary <.s proposed by the City of Chuia Vista
without the conditions set forth in Recommenoation 38;
Support ~ Sphere pounoary wnicn is coterminous witn tne existing
City oounoary. retaining ali of the developabie are<. of Dtay Ranch
within the unincoroorated Co~nty;
4. Support an alternative Sphere boundary other than recommended.
and/or support Recommendation #3A alone by eliminating
Recommend~tion #38: or
- .
Take no actior..
;27b/c2&
, ,
"
- .-.
j - !
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
BACKGROUND:
The Cortese Knox Act of 1985 requires that the Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCo) adopt a sphere of influence for each local jurisdiction.
The sphere plan outlines the appropriate physical boundary and service area
for that jurisdiction. Before territory can be annexed to a city or district,
the affected lands must be within the adopted sphere boundary.
Local guidelines established by the San Diego LAFCo state that only those
areas currently receiving, or that are projected to require city services
within the next 10 to 15 years, will be considered for inclusion within a
1 oca 1 sphere.
The C~ty of Chula Vista is seeking amendment to their sphere of influence
boundary whict> was f:stablished by LAFCo in 1985. At that time, the City's
sphe~e was amended to i~clude the Ctay Lakes Reservoir and some lands to the
south and west of the Reservoir. Per request of the County Board of
Supervisors, LAFCo removed the area which is no~ referred to as the Dtay
~alley Parce' of Dtay Ranch from the sphere, and designated it as a "special
study area" t. be jointly planned by the County and City of Chula Vista
(7/30/85 #49). An Interjurisdictional Task Force was established to include
the City of Chula Vista and the property owner (United Enterprises) in the
joint planning process.
The purchase of the property by the Baldwin Company in November 1988, led to a
formalized memorandum of understanding (MDU) between the City and County to
assure joint planning by ooth jurisdictions. This MOU, dated August 1, 1985.
included a proviSion reouiring that a "S~bere of Influence and Annexation
Agreement" oe processea concurrent with the General Plan Amendment, with a
aecision on the spnere agreement "expected to be executed prior to LAFCo
action on the Sphere of Influence". Even though the joint General Plan
Amendments were approved on Octooer 28, 1993 (GPA 52-04). a sphere agreement
was never preparec or decioec. Tn: ~1ty 1S now com~le:1ng a Sohere StUdY for
c:.niicioaieci suomitta- ol!"'e::-lj ~o LAFCc 1n Apr11. 1995. -Ine City's tentatiVE:
scnedule for the Sphere is orovided in Attachmen: 8.
7he City's Sohere Stuoy re:ommends that the ehtire Dtay Valley Parcel be
included in the S~here. l' ,luding the lands planned for industrial use located
south of the Ctay River \a;1ey currently within the municipal limits of the
City of San Diego; tnat the Sphere boundaries be extended easterly and
northerly of the Dtay ~akes to incluo& the Resort Village #13: and that the
entire sphere area be annexed all at once in its entirety, rather than phasing
the annexa, ,ons in accordance with the approved oevelopment phasing plan.
The City'; ~roocsec Sphere Doundary is snown in Attachment 1.
I",olicatio~~ and Analysis cf C~ty Sphere Proposal.
Department of ~lanninc anc cand Use staff have conferred with the Department
of Public Works LioL;c and Solid Waste Divisions. the Departmen, of Parks and
_ L _
J.7b/;2j
"
~ ~
: - "-
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF IN~LUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
Recreation, and the San Diego Regional Solid Waste Authority in assessing
potential County and regional interests affected by the proposed Sphere
boundaries. This assessment, however, is concerned primarily with the Sphere
boundary issues, And does not include an assessment of the fiscal implications
which will result from annexation.
A complete fiscal impact analysis will be available at the time the tax
distribution agreement is considered by the Board. Per the recommended Board
action, the City and County should reach preliminary agreement on the
distribution of tax revenues prior to obtaining County support of the Sphere
at LAFCo.
The issues applicable tn the City's proposed Sphere of Influence boundaries
are described below:
1. Easter'" Sph€'~e Bounda!"v. The ex,rt,ng sphere bo~ndary includes the
water area of the Otay Lakes, as wtll as some land area located south of
the Lakes The existing Sphere boundary currently bisects developable
port.ons CC Otay Ranch Vil~age 15 and portions of the proposed Otay RAnch
Open Space Preserve area, yet the City has not proposed a realignment of
this boundary to coincide win land use determinations resulting from the
recent General Plan Amendments. Splitting the developable area of
Village 1: with the Sphere boundary or potential annexation line is
unworkable. The City has not requested that Village 15 be located within
the City. It is therefore ~ecommended that the existing Sphere boundary
in this area be !"ealigned to exclude all of Village 15 from the Sphere
arEe..
: n acid i: i or,. :one C:'cy :-c.Kes rorrr. a na:ura 1 boundary between I. urban" anc
"rural' develoomen: ca::erns. ~A~Cc auidelines oromote the preservation
r.; f'ommur~-v iQ"n'!-~';"\ -n" pc,," ~'n" o,,-,'c'ci,'noc liCXCl"""';scc (I A:rc'<\
.... \.. II ......' . _,....... c..__ ,"'" ..._ _.... _. --~ .... -.-. -- ,-..'- -,
~owers :c encourage anc provide plannec. weli-oroerec. efficient urban
GeVelCDmen: patterns wltr aooropr,ate cons,oerat,on 07 preserv,ng open-
s:a:e lan:s w,:n,~ s~:r ott:ern:." ~x:ens~on O~ Llty serV1ces oeyan: tne
natural oounaaries of the Otav Lakes would be difficult at oest. If the
pattern 0: urbanization is not stopped at the natural boundaries of the
Dtay Lakes. tnere is no other physical feature which would limit easterly
expansior of :ne :~t} to demarK a II natural 'I division between the Cit) and
the :OL.:fl:'y un~ncorpo~atec area
The Chief Aom,r,istrative Officer'-s recommendation is to respect the Dtay
Lakes as the natural boundary between jurisdictions by realigning the
Soh ere boundary to be coterminous with the San cernardino Meridian, which
roughly passes through the middle of the Lower Dtay Rese~voir 'this
boundarj woulc shift s~ightly at the ~nters;ct;Jn of the u:p~- a~c 'ower
.- e . ~ ...~ ('''-I' '.n" thO c 'pp"'cy','''''-''e ce'.e~ 0:: ~-"'C '-....('"\
!-.;S rV01rs In creer...;,.: ......c... Wl.. 1n _ c.... ".I"C._ ','.... .~..I., ...d...=_).
The San Bernarcino Meridiar alianmen: is CO~s1sten: w1tr ~~e'~~:nar\'
Board action taken on Februarv ~. 1994 (#4) that tne 5ca~c 'wi - -
c2.7)J-~
"
"-, :~
" I
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
actively oppose any annexation east of lower Otay Lake, no further than
the San Bernardino Meridian".
The Resort Village 13, located east and north of the Lower Otay
Reservoir, is also included in the City's Sphere expansion area. This
village is proposed to accommodate a major resort with up to 800 rooms,
ancillary shops, restaurants, service commercial, championship golf and
tennis facilities, and single family and multiple family housing
opportunities.
City expansion across the natural boundaries of the Otay Lakes to include
the resort is an example of the "fiscalization" of land use, where city
boundaries are drawn not t.O represent the best development pattern but to
result in the ma:imum tax benefit to the annexing jurisdiction. In this
case, the region at large loses tax revenue to the City, which would
otherwise accrue to the entire re~ion. Notwithstanding the property and
sales tax revenue ar,ticipated from the build-out of Village 13, the
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) alone is estimated to exceed two million
dollars per year. The County TOT is distributed to regional benefactors,
such as the Balboa Park museums, the San Diego and North County
Convention and Visitors bureaus, the Greater San Diego Chamber of
Commerce and other regional interests; whereas, if the resort were to be
annexed to Chula Vista the TOT revenue would largely benefit local
interests rather than the region as a whole.
Service provision for the resort village is also an issue. Domestic
water will not be available until the area is annexed to the County Water
A"thority (CWA) (aion~ with acjacent unincorporated Village 15).
~oliowing CWA annexation, the are. would oe served by the Otay Municipal
~ater District, whether or net tn~ village is annexed to the City (the
:~ty currently obtains its water tnrough the use of independent water
districts; the Otay ~ater Distric: service area is roughly located east
cr the :-805 freeway, and the So"thbay Irrigation District serves
"roperties west of ;-805 anc nor:" of r. Street, extending east to the
Sweetwater Reservoir).
LAFCo must consider whetner municipal services wiil be potentially
available from the City prior :0 including an area within a Sphere; that
finding is improbable for the resort viilage since it is located outside
:ne County Water Au:hority bouncary and cannot be served by the CWA.
Metropolitan Water District approval and County Water Authority
annexation should precede Sphere extensiors to any area this far removed
from existing City services.
Sewer~nq :ne ~e~Jr: area if annexe~ :c t~~ :itv is also problemati:. The
City ha; officlal'~ 'withdrawn' f.om the Metro~olitan Wastewater
Distric:. leavin~ its Metro caoac::v in ouestion. Although the Cit, does
ne: curpent'y ow~ or operate sew'. ~-eat~ent facilities, the City's
Sphere Study concluaes that the :':y could own and operate the Oiay
- : -
.J 7.b ---~J
"
~.
: _ I,r
~
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
Valley treatment plant, or that the City could own capacity rights of the
plant while it is owned and operated by Metro. However, there are other
wastewater treatment and reclamation needs in the region, including
effluent from the Otay Mesa area which will likely use the Otay Valley
facility. Based upon recent information from the City of San Diego's
Metropolitan Wastewater Department, it is not likely that Metro would own
and/or operate the proposed Otay River Valley Wastewater Treatment Plant.
San Di ego's resources will be commi tted to three other pl ants already
existing or to be built in the system.
Another option for ownership/management of an Otay Valley plant would be
the formation of a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) between the City of Chula
Vista and the County of San Diego. Other poss~ble partners in the JPA
could be Otay Water District and the City of San Diego. Each of the
participating agencies would have a predetermined share of the capacity
in such a treatment plant.
The Wilson Engineering Company has recently developed a master sewering
plan for the Otay Ranch are~. This plan provides for a trunk sewer
extending from the eastern side of Eastlake, south through Salt Creek and
west through the Otay River Valley to the Metro Sewerage System.
Territories east of the recommended Sphere line (Villages 13, 14 and 15)
would have access to the proposed trunk line if they remain in the
unincorporated territory. A County Sanitation District would be
established to manage the wastewater collection and billing for those
a re as .
. Northe~lv Sohere Boundarv'
The City's proposed Sphere in~luoes a~ area locatee. west of Proctor
Valley. referred to as the "invertec ~' 0:; the Ota)' Ranch planning maps.
The City and County adopted General Plans allow tnis area to potentially
acco~~oaate UP to 95 aetacneo reSloentlal unlts. lts OUlloaOle area 1S
locatee on a smal I mesa, separatec troffi ~roctor val ley oy a canyon wn1cn
extends northerly towards San Miguel Mountain. Access to the "Inverted
L" is most feasibly taken across the adjacent "Watson' property and from
the Salt Creek Ranch develooment. which is within the City of Chula
Vist~. Because the access is exoected to be taken from Salt Creek Ranch.
and due tc the topograpnic elevation differences between this area and
Proctor Valley to the East, residences located on the Watson property and
the 'Inverted L" are likely to o~ient to the City of Chula Vista, rather
than to the Proctor Valley Village 14. The Chief Administrative
Officer's recommendation is therefore, to support the City's request to
include the "Inverted L" and Watson property within the Clty's Sphere.
027b~c21
"
SU5JECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
3. Southerlv Sohere Boundarv:
The City Sphere Study proposes that the potential southerly City boundary
include all of the Otay Valle) Parcel (Otay Ranch Villages 1 through 12,
including the Eastern Urban Center), in addition to the County's Otay
Landfill, the Nelson-Sloan rock quarry, lands within the Otay River
Valley, and the industrial lands located south of the Otay River
currently within the jurisdiction of the City of San Diego and the
unincorporated County. The implications of annexation for each of these
geographic areas are described below:
(a) Otay Ranch Villages 1 - 12; Otay Valley Parcel. The existing Chula
Vista City boundary surrounds the Otay Valley parcel on three sides.
Urban level services can be provided by the City of Chula Vista, and
the area north of the Dtay River Valley is a logical extension of
existing City boundarie,.
R?venues and service costs for Otay Ranch are currently being
update: to reflect revenue shifts made by the State. Preliminary
figures from the F ,seal imoact of New Development (FIND) model
developed by Ralph Ander:.n Associates, prepared when the General
Plan was processed, showec that the County would net about $7.2
million annually in the theoretical build-out year if the Otay
Valley parcel was annexed to the City and the remainder developed in
the County. An additio~al 51.3 million would accrue to the County
Road Fund. Even though these draft figures are subject to review
and revision, and that net revenue will be dependent upon property
tax agreements betwee~ the City and County prior to annexation, they
aemonstrate a positive 7iscal impact to tne County. The FIND model
is currently beine upcatec to reflect current revenue and cost
ailoeatior. factors uneer various annexation scenarios. The results
cf tr.;s analys4~ w~;~ ~~ avc~iabl; prio~ to the Sphere decision b:
LAFCc
~ J ' ::.r.i st i ns Coun~y Landr; i i . I ne l.1tj' s proposec Spnere rE:comrnenas
inclusion of the County's Ctay (Annex) Landfill. This landfill
handles approximately 370,000 tons of solid waste per year, serving
major portions of the unincorporated area as well as portions of the
City or San Dieco, tne cities of Coronado, Lemon Grove, Imperial
Beach, and other Souu, Bay commun i ties. The capacity of the Otay
landfill is estimated at II.S million tons, which is expected to
last another 30 + vears wit~ the same jurisdictions as users. If
jurisdictions -urrently using the landfill opt out of the Regional
Solid Waste A~~noritv and choose to haul their waste to more distant
locations, the life of the Otay landfill will be extended further.
Tr.\2 caDaci~\ of the lalld:ill is continaent upon Cl"s:.rt.!ct~on of a
ne~ 1 ,~er scheduled for comoletion by July 1995. If :or anj reason
:ne liner cannot be ir.stallee, the San Diego Solie waste Authority
estimates that the landfill will be filied to capaCity in 1995.
o _
-
:2 7~-:L~
, .
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
The City of Chula Vista is one of the ten cities who chose not to
join the Regional Solid Waste joint powers agreement. Chula Vista
is considering plans to construct a solid waste transfer station to
transfer waste from local haulers to long distance haulers. If this
transfer facility is constructed, Chula Vista will be able to charge
host fees to other users of the solid waste transfer facility.
Similarly, if the Otay landfill is annexed to the City, Chula Vista
could also demand host fees for use of the landfill. These host
fees create an unnecessary expense to the public by increasing their
trash rates.
In addition, once annexed, the City could exercise its regulatory
powers to prevent or condition expansions of the landfill (similar
to the County's experience with the San Marcos landfill). !f the
Otay landfill we~e to be restricted in a manne~ which would li~;t
its long term capacity. ~ll South bay users would be adversely
affected.
Potential i~position of landfill hos: fees anc regulatory
requirements might be resolved if Chula Vista would agree with the
County and/or the Solid Waste Authority, not to impose such host
fees, and not to impose restrictions or require City permits which
would in any way affect the use, expansion, or cost of operating the
Otay (Annex) Landfill. State law currently provides for the use of
development agreements which might be used to protect the region's
interest in the potential expansion and use of the Otay landfill, or
an alternative legal agreement found acceptable to County Counsel
could be aoorovec in lie" of retainino the landfill as
unincorporated area. This ootion fo~-consideration by the City of
Chula Vista is incluaec in Recommencation #3B.
"
Vil1aQe 3 Land US! v~~'aae 3 '$ tn~ 0n1\. m!jo~ area where the
ihlll;:; "v;~t;. :~-:-\i r,,"n,...~; =~ri +hp Rn::l.,..ri n:~ ,"r"u"'v';c:n,,",C' rHC'::.nrcu::.,; \&!~!~
....,.~ ,-~- _._~ ---..- _..- -..- -.-.- - --r-".--'- -.--,:;0----
regard to the planned land uses for Otay ~anch. The adopted City
plan proposes industrial use of Village 3, whereas the County
Subregional Plan proposes a mixed use village similar to the other
villages located on the Dtay Valley parcel.
The Board of Superviso~s did not believe industrial use of Village 3
to be the most appropriate use of the area for many reasons, ail of
which were extensively discussed during the Dtay Ranch Plan
hearings. Notwithstanding the Board's decision, the City Council
designated the area for industrial use, but included the mixed use
vi 11 age concept as a "secondary use ". contingent upon the in' ustri a 1
areas south of the Otay River Valle. being detached from the City of
San Dieoo and annexed to Chula Vista. or that a G?A be approved tc
increase the industrial acreage elsewhere on the C:ay Valley parcel
- 9
c27~ --c2?
, '
(-I ?,
, -
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
to compensate for the "lost" industrial acreage in Village 3
(Subregional Plan, page 68).
1n the Otay Ranch GPA deliberations, the County's action reflected
the concern that there currently exists abundant industrially
planned lands in the near vicinity (over 6000 acres on Otay Mesa
alone) and that additional industrial acreage on the Otay Valley
parcel was not needed. As a result, there now exists a conflicting
land use scenario for the use of Village 3, dependent upon whether
or not the area is annexed to the City. If Village 3 is left
unincorporated, its build-out would occur in accordance with Countv
and property owner recommendations as a mixed use villaae. .
Alternatively, the City could reconsider its General Plan to
classify the area as a mixed use village, or the City could succeed
in tne detachment of a portion of the industrial lands located in
San Diego, a~;Q.ing annexation of these properties to Chula Vista.
A pc~.ent i a 1 Ci ty or landowner hit i ated Genera I PI an Amendment to
rectify the land use plan dic:repancy between City and County is
included in Recommendation #35.
Although the City and County cannot predetermine the outcome of a
City GPA prior to conducting a public hearing and considering the
matter, such a revision may be supportable. When the City
originally considered the potential land use for Village 3 during
the Otay Ranch hearings, the Council split 3-2 on the issue. Since
that time, the Council composition has changed. The landowner
supports the mixed use village conce~: rather than additional
industrial acreage: ane w,th O:ay Mesa. there is more than enough
industrial land base ir the near vicinity to meet anticipated demand
for ~ ndust ~i a 1 use
ie, Nelson-Sloan ROCK Ouarry. The existing quarry operation is locateo
on tne ""st Sloe o. WOI.e ~anyon. oetween Vl I lage 3 ana tne Utay
r:~ve!'" \'r.., ley ~see At:.a:nment ~). lne qua!"':"',>, was not a part of tne
Otay Ranch GPA. It is planned to continue until the rock resources
expire. at which time alternative residential use would be
contemplated. Existing County zoning would provide for a yield of
:7 dwelling units. su:je:t to any constraints contained in the
quarry's ;.ecl arr.cti or, Plan (County RF 79-009). If the area were to
oe annexec, "leac agency" responsibil ity to oversee enforcement of
tne Reclamation p'an wo"ld puss to tne City.
This ouarrv area 1S not oelieved to oe critical to tne other
described Sphere boundary issues. and could be annexed or could
remain unincorporated at the d'scre:ion of LAFCo. If t~e City
Sphere boundary is to include this area. the alterna:ive
Re:o~:nendation #3B woule appiy. Annexa:ion of this area would
facilitate the planning, funding and construction of Rock Moun:ain
Road. ::>Y Dlacing :he road entirely within the Cit} of ::hul<: Vis:...
- 1 C -
:J.7-b--:2?
"
.~: -,Ll
, , I
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
(e) Otay Valley Regional Park (OVRP). On January 30, 1990, the County,
City of Chula Vista and City of San Diego entered into a Joint
Exercise of Powers Agreement (JEPA) for the planning of a new
regional park within the Otay River valley. The JEPA study area
includes the entire river valley, extending from the San Diego
bayfront to the northern and eastern extremities of the Otay Lakes,
and includes Wolfe Canyon, Poggi Canyon, and major portions of the
Salt Creek watershed area.
The JEPA is an agreement for coordination of acquisition, planning
and design of the Regional Park. Operation and maintenance of
acquired park land are not covered by the agreement. The JEPA does
not establish an authority to acquire. maintain or develop
parklands. When properties are acquired, title is to be held by the
acquiring public agency. The County Parks Department has the
administrative lead under the agreement for scheduling meetings,
preparing agendas, recording minutes and maintaining records for the
JEPA.
Given the limited authority of the JEPA, and the limited role of the
County Parks Department within the JEPA, it is not certain that the
County will have substantive influence over the development of the
area if it is annexed.
If the majority of the area within the OVRP focused planning area
falls within the Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego, the County may
want to re-think its participation in the JEPA which could be done
~hrough a seoarate agreement with the participating jurisdictions
If the area remains unincorporated, tne existing park planning
orocess would continue as currently envisioned.
runding for County Parks Department OVRP JEPA activities is from tne
General rune. cuture a::lvitles unaer tne aaopted worK program
1 nc", uce prep..ra t 1 on or a loncept Phn (oy st_ tf) and Program U~:
(consultant). It is anticipated that each jurisdiction will
contribute eaually for costs of preparation of the EIR. This may be
an area of neaotiation if the area is to be annexed (Recommendation
3B). -
(f) Industrial Lands South of the Otay River. The City Sphere proposes
Chula Vista annexation of O~ay Ranch planning area IS-A, which
includes approximately 216 acres of industrially planned lands on
Otay Mes... south 0: the Otay River. The majority of these lands are
currently within the jurisdiction of the City of San Diego; however,
a small, 30 acre area proposec for incustrial use is iocated east of
the proposed ali;nment of SR 125 within the unincorporated County.
c:27J? -:2r
"
- -
. ,_ I-
I ._
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
Annexation of the Otay Mesa :ands located within the City of San
Diego will require detachment approval from the San Diego City
Council, Although there is some precedence for realignment of the
two cities' boundaries further to the west, it is highly
Questionable that San Diego would give up developable industrial
acreage in this location, with close proximity to Brown Field and
other sites being developed as part of the Otay Mesa industrial
complex.
I: should be noted that a large portion of these lands located south
of the River are encumbered with sensit;ve habitat, i~cluding vernal
pools. There a~e many policies in the Otay Ranch Subre~ional Plan
which promote the preservation of these lands as part of the Otay
Kanch oper space preserv~ system. From a preserve management
standpoint. it wouid be oesirable that these vernal pool areas be
IOCi:e~ ~ithi' the same a~en:y having jurisdiction over the adjacent
Otay Valley open space preserve. The readily developable industrial
portirn could remain in the City of San Diego where facilities are
no~ or will shortly be mace availatle to provide necessary muni"ipal
services.
35. Substitute to Recommendat~on =3A fcontin:ent upon Cit\ Aareementsl:
The major issues described in the foregoing discussion could be
resolved dependent upon cer:ain actions and acceptances by the City
of Chula Vista For ins:ance, the potential impacts on users of the
Otay ~andfill COUIG be eliminated if the Ci:y were to accept a
~ev=ioomen: acreemen: o~ c:her ie:a' ins:rumen: :na: wo~lG oreciude
:he im~c5~~ioF of :~t~ hc~: fees,-as w~-1 2S the im~csition' of Ci:y
ianc USE regula:ions whicr may act to preciude the :oun:y O~ Solie
~'''s~= L::-nn,..~"'\ f,..nrr 1I.~i~~i"r' +h~ ';llii ....-1"'a....;+\. c-F' +n' w 'and:;l',
c:. ..._ ....... ~'..:" .....11;, .._.. '-"'::r _.._ .1,.;" _Co.... _... ., _ .. I .,
:~:e. Tn~ Ota) ~ancn Genera: Plan Village; inconsistency might De
~escivec .- ~ne ~~:\ werE ~o agreE ~c ~ general pian reconsiaeration
-or :n1: \~ I :a;e. :ne l:sue or iunc~n; LOUr.~y aa~lr.is~rative costs
for work on tne Otay Valley Regional Park may become moot if the
member aaencies aaree tha: the County should be reimbursed for those
cos:s. snouic :ne-area De annexed to. the City. And finally, the
jurjsdic:~ona~ issue over :ne resor: area would oe resolved if the
:i:y were :c agree :0 a Sanere bounaary realignment using the Otay
~aKes as :ne naturai Dounaary between City and unincorporated
Coun~'y
The Chier Ac~inis:~2:ive Qff~cer's recom~end2tion :0 limit the
S::>here boundary. per Recomme ~ation #3A would be rep. aced by full
r^U~~\' su~po~' 0': +ne r -II ~ec"es+". (' "h~ r....\ 2.""'rep"'s The
......., II...... t'" ,... ,..., ......J - ... 1,.., , ,j.,'" 'I;::; ..., -_ ...... .. ...
terms and ccndi:ions de$:~jp2: in Recommenca:ion #3S. :) the City
a::eDts, or ~~~~o reauire~ annexa:ior. p;.2s:ng as pe~ Kecom~endation
*4 (~ven thou;h tne Sphere wcu~t incluoE the entire !~~;\; 2nd (3),
j- the City anc County :an reach pre1irninary consens~! or. the tax
h
)7/;---,);
. .
,-, ,
i - ; lC
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
distribution agreement prior to the Sphere decision by LAFCo
(Recommendation #5).
4. Annexation Phasina:
Otay Ranch is expected to be built over a 30-40 year time span.
Board Policy 1-109 adopted a project phasing plan, prepared by the
Baldwin Company, which phases village development in accordance with
the anticipated rate of market absorption and the ability of the
local jurisdictions to provide services at the time of need. The
village phasing plan also serves as the guide for the preparation
and evaluation of the annual review and monitoring report required
DY the Subre9ional Plan Growth Management policies.
This adopted phasing schedule envisions the Otay Valley parcel to be
cuil~ in four phases. The first phase incluae~ Villages 1 and 5,
adjacent to Telegraph Road. Planning for these villages is now
underway, with Sectional Area Plans (SPAs) filed with the City of
Chula Vista in expectation of annexation. The second phase includes
Villages 2, 3 and 6, which are located west of Wolfe Canyon and
north of Birch Road. The third phase will include villages 4, 7 and
11, which will complete all development west of SR 125, with the
exception of Village 8. The final phase four will include Village
8, as well as the two potential university site Villages 9 and 10,
and the Eastern Urban Center (Planning Area 12).
At tne time of the Generai Plan preparation, it was anticipated tnat
annexation wouic be phased in accordance with the aevelopmen~
phasing plan, there~y allowing annexation tax agreements and the
fiscal analysis ~o be adjusted and keep current as development
pro:eeds over thE 30-40 year time soao.
Notw':hs~andinc the adopted development pnasing pian. the City's
Sphere Study recommends that the entire Otay Valley Parcei be
annexed all at once, prior to City approval of the first SPA.
The Sphere Study makes the assumption that infrastructure bonds and
other means of public finance would be facilitated if a larger base
were providea by annexing the Otay Valley parcel in its entirety,
yet tne draft study provides no data or analysis in support of that
conclusion. At question is whether the City would have sufficient
bonding capacity to provide services for such an expansive area.
Given the size of each villaae. and the fact that they will be built
and marketed independently in a-:ordance with the project's c'asing
schedule, projec: financing may not at ~-1 be dependent upon i
sing € annexation, Rather, the sale of ~~ncs woulc likely reflect
the an~icipated market a~sorption and the faCility construction
phas'ng as envisioned in the project phasing plan.
- 13 .
027):;--3&
. .
,-, 1'--;
! ~ I
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
Even if phased, the annexations will place tremendous demands on the
City to provide services commensurate with need. Phase one, for
instance, consisting of Villages 1 and 5, will add the need to
provide services for an additional 17,776 people. The entire Otay
Valley parcel will contain a build-out population exceeding 62,000
people, in addltion :0 the demands placed on the City for servicing
the four million square foot Eastern Urban Center.
Since LAFCo will assess the need for services and the City's ability
to provide them at the time of need. the careful phasing of the
annexation~ should be of major importance. The Chief Administrative
Officer s Recommendation #4 recuests t~at the Board recommend to
LAFCo that the annexation of the O:ay Valley Parcel be phased in
accordance with market demand. consistent with the development
p~asing plan acopted as part of coara Poi icy 1-109. This
rec~mmenda:i0n wouic also be more in keeping with local LA,Co
guidelines wh eh limits Sphere boundaries to urban development areas
expected to build out within the next 10 to 15 years.
5. P~eliminarv Tax Ac-aement:
A potential Sphere decision and annexation of this magnitude will
haVe major fiscal implications for the County and for the annexing
city. The resulting service costs and potential revenues from the
development are beino determined throuoh the use of the Fiscal
Imoact' of New Develooment (FIND) model: which is currently under
s:ud.Y .
Tne FIND mac:. ~aKeE into accoun: se~vice ccs:s anc an:icipated
revenue wnicn wi;; a::~ue basec or: various jurisdic:ional
alternatives The =IND analvslS wi,' then oe usee as information
for aetermining :ne :ax distribution agreemen:. Approval of the tax
igreemen~ wi~~ DE negotiate~ oetween tne City anc :ne ~ounty. ana
me)' uiiimatei,y affec"; :ne Ci:y ant c.oun:,y 00$1:10n$ or: tne fina-!
Sphere bounaaries.
~ven tnougn State iaw does not manaate tnat a final tax agreement be
signee un:;l tne time of annexatior.. a oreiiminary anaiysis and
c~aft agreemer.t couid be determined prior :0 LAFCo action on the
Sphere. Results from the prel iminary tax agreement could then be
used to suppor: or amend th~ County's position on the Sphere.
Tne Chief Adminis:rat've Officer's Recommendatior. #5 would reqUire
that a oreliminarv taa aereement be neeotiated prio- to L;FCo's
decis~on on :~ie S~~e~E. ~ather thar wa~tir: fc :nf :1r~:
annexation. The i~for",ation require: fc~ ~he tax a;reement will
soon be av,~~able anc a prelimin2~: agre~rnent coul~ be negotiatec
prior tc the .AFCo Sphere Qecisio~. without signi~i:antly im~actin9
the prcj:::'~ $:he~ulE.
"
1'"
02 7~ -- .3 J
. .
.-/ .r,
- j ~
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
ALTERNATIVES:
There are five alternative actions identified for consideration by the Board:
(1) postpone the decision until the tax implications are better known; (2)
support the City's requested sphere area; (3) support a coterminous sphere
with the existing City boundary; (4) support an alternative boundary than that
recommended (and/or including the deletion of Recommendation #3B); or (5) take
no action.
Each of these alternatives is discussed below:
1. Postpone Decision: This alternative would postpone a decision on the
County's position until the tax distribution agreement results are better
known, providing both the County and City with the advantage and comfort
of knowing the f;scal impact of annexation prior to committing support
for the Sphere.
Unfortunately, State law does not require the final tax agreement until
the time of annexation, well after the sphere has been decided by LAFCo.
The City could go forward ~ith a LAFCo decision on the sphere without
either support or input from the County Board of Supervisors. Postponing
a decision on the Sphere boundaries may be paramount to "no action",
unless the City agrees to oelay the Sphere decision until the tax
agreement has been decided.
The CAO's recommendation is to go forward with a County declslon on the
Sphere boundaries, but incorporating into that decision a reouest that a
preliminary tax agreement De reached prior to action on the Sphere by
.AFCo.
~
Support Chula Vista Spnere Recommendations: This alternative would
demonstrate County sucpor: of the Sphere bounaaries recommended by the
City, including all of the Otay Valley Parcel, tne Otay Landfill, the
Resort Area. tne Otav Rive. Valle'. and the industrial lands located
soutr. o~ tne Utay River Va; ,ey on'the Otay Mesa. This action would be
inconsistent with the prior action of the Board of Supervisors taken
February 9 199! (#4). witr regard to the resort village.
Support a coterminous Sphere with existing City boundary: This option
would ieavE: the Otay Valley Parcel in the unincorporated County.
Preliminary estimates of service costs and revenues resulting from build-
out under the County's jurisdiction does not favor this option, in
comparison to revenues to be obtained following tax negotiations, which
are required prior tc annexation
~ cotermincus Sphere would also leave open the possib4l'ty of a future
incorporation. which may not be practical based on recent State law whicn
provides that new incorporations cannot adversely affect County net
revenues.
, -
- .:.~ -
027b~ J;2
. '
,~ ~
/_ I_~
, ,
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
Finally, this option would cause the existing City Sphere boundary to
remain intact around the Otay Lakes, rather than provide the opportunity
to amend the boundary so that it does not split the development area of
Otay Ranch Village 15 south of the Otay Lakes.
4. Alternative boundaries: This alternative would envision a boundary
different than that either proposed by the City or recommended by the
Chief Administrative Officer. For instance, the Sphere boundary might be
limited to the firs: development phase of the Otay Valley Parcel,
consisting of Villages' 1 and 5; or it could include additional area but
less than that proposed oy the City (a boundary more inclusive than that
proposed by the City would not be part of the Sphere study nor covered by
its Environmental documentation).
This alternative could also include the elimjnatio~ of Recommendation
#' 3 E . & ' B " . . d + h L ' .. 11 V . . , . 0"
o , 1. ::;e care :nooses ~c. e>,- ill E: ~ e anaT1 , 1 .age,), .ay
Va 11 ey, eic. from the Sphere boundary wi thout provi d i I1g the : ity wi th the
opportunity to meet the speciflc conditions designed to protect County's
interests. as listed in this s~b:titute recommendation.
The implication of this approach is that there may be no practical way of
involving the County in the resol.:ion of the regional issues if
Recommendation #3B is eliminated. By not specifically listing the 38
conditions, the potential compromise for resolution is left at the
discretion of the City and LAFCo... there will be no County position as
to what compromises might be acceptable which would result in County
support of the southerly Sphere boundary. In lieu of removing
Recommendation #33 altoaetner. the Board could review the recommenaatior
carefullv and aae or remove conditions as necessar\ to enable Bvarc
support 'Of tne soutnerl y Spnere Doundary. -
The Boare could also aae or remove potential Sphere areas subject to
R~cornmenGation ;:.:,c. su:~ as ieavlnc :ne U:2\ Lanat~ i i as an
urlirl~orporaied is-2n~! rather tna~.SUPDor:l~; 1:$ lnClUSlon In tne Spnere
subject to the use and host fee agreements. The Board's recommendation
on this matter will be transm'tted tc LAFCc. but there will be no
'guarantee' that LAFCc's aecision will be approved pursuant to the
Board's recommendation
TaKe no action: The Board is no: recuirec to take a position on the
Spnere issues. Takin9 no positio~ will eliminate County input to the
Citv and LAFCo durine their deliberations and decisions. with the
exception of the action taken by tne Board on February ~. :994 (.~)
recom;nendi ng that the ea:7.erly Scnere boundary s"oul d gc roc furthe- than
the San Bernardino Meri:lar
This optior. however would be inconsistent with Soard Polic: !-::
"Annexations and Inccrporationsr whic~ states that the County wi~.
review significant recr~aniza:io~ proocsa1s tna: are s~b~~ttet ~c LAFCe
- I' ~
c2?h--3}
1- -:-,-.
I r----._
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
and provide comments at the LAFCo hearings on the consistency of
proposals to Policy I-55 and related County plans and policies.
Board Policy I-55 generally encourages annexations, but only if the
annexation represents an orderly extension of existing city boundaries;
there is no natural geographic separation between the existing city and
the area to be annexed; the size of the annexation is in scale with the
existing city (i.e., the existing city is sufficiently larger than the
annexation area); the community identity of the annexing area is
compatible with the city; the annexation will not be a detriment to a
future incorporation: and finally, that the annexation will not cause a
significant adverse fiscal impact upon the County.
Although the Board Pol icy primari"ly addresses annexation issoes, the; are
discussed here because the Sphere decisions will set the framework for
those potentlal annexations.
Each issue in Policy I-55 is addressed in the foregoing discussion. For
instance, the recommendation to limit the Sphere north of the Otay River
Valley and west of the Otay Lakes is consistent with the policy to
encourage annexations "if there is no natural geographic separation
between the existing city and the area to be annexed".
OTHER ISSUES:
The Chula Vista Sphere Study addresses some lands located outside the
boundaries of Otay Ranch. These lands are shown on Attachment 4 and includes
a 48 acre area iocated in National City adjacent to Highway (SR) 54: a 369
acre parcel iocated withir the :it) of San Diego west of Otay Ranch and withir
tne Otay River Valley: a 358 acre site which is primarily tidelands (salt
flats) of the San Diego Bay: and a steep, largely unbuildable. 130 acre parce
located alone the exis:inc no~tnerl) 50nere bouncar\'. south of the Sweetwater
Reservoir. - - -
All of tnese parcels are proposec to remain "special study areas" as
designated by LAFCo ir, 1985. witn tne exception of the "Sweetwater Parcel",
which is proposed to be inclUded in the Chula Vista Sphere as a correction to
a previous mapping error from tne previOUS Sphere determination. The County
staff has not identified anI concern reoardino the City's recommendations for
tnese .. speci ai stuoy areas ,- - - -
In addition, there are several parcels'prcposed to be iocated within the
Sphere, and which are located within the confines of Otay Ranch but are not
owned by the Baldwin Company. These properties are shown on Attachments 5 anD
E. With the exception of the County landfill previously discussed. the
in:lusic. of theSE prc~er:i2$ withln the City Sphere does not rai:a
significant County issues.
-'
c27!7 ~.:if
~ -
,- /~ I
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
Finally, County staff has reviewed the City's draft Sphere Study for accuracy
as it pertains to identified County interests, and has provided the City with
written comments on several occasions. Policy issues with regard to the
Sphere boundary issues are described in this report. The staff's most recent
response regarding the provision of Regional facilities and services, dated
July 19, 1994, is also appended for review and information (Attachment 7).
Respectfully submitted,
DAVID E. JANSSEN
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
By
~kRI SHEEHAN
DEPUTY CHIEF Aw~IN:STRATIVE OFFICER
- 18 -
),7/?/;I/
. .
,-- -
, , ...
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA ITEM
INFORMATION SHEET
SUBJECT: CITY OF CHULA VISTA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE STUDY/OTAY RANCH ANNEXATION
SUPV. DIST.: 1 & 2
COUNTY COUNSE~ APPROVAL: Form and Legality () Yes (X) N/A
( ) Standard Form () Ordinance ( ) Resolution
AUDITOR APPROVAL: (X) N/A
() Yes
4 VOTES: () Yes (X) No
FINANC!AL MANAGEMENT REVIEW:
() Yes
(X) No
CONTRACT REVrE~ PANEL:
) Approved
;X) t\/A
CONTRACT NUMBER(S): N/A
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOARD ACTION: Previous Board Action: 7/30/85 ,49),
Recommended to LAFCo that the Otay Valley Parcel be designated as a "Special
Study Area"; 10/28/93 (1), Adopted Otay Ranch GPA 92-04 and related documents,
including Board Polic) 1-109 establishing Otay Ranch Board Subcommittee and
adopting the Village Phasing Plan; 2/9/94 (4), Appointed Supervisors Bilbray
and Jacob to the Otay Ranch SUDcommittee, and took tentative action to oppose
any annexation east of the lower Otay Lake, no further than the San Bernardino
Merid1an.
SOnRQ POLICIES I.PPl.ICABLE. _-:: "Annexations and Inco-porations'. :-:09
"Subcommi:tee anc P;ans ::: Guice Deveioomen: of :he O:ay Kaner P""'cjec:"
~~Tl2.EN COM,.,ITTE.:. ~~hTEM::l\i: rwne
CONCURRENCES: Deoa-tmec: of cublic Works
Je~G;:men: of FarKs ant ~ecrEQtio~
ORIGINATING DEPARTHEhl: Department of Planning ane Lane Use
CONTACT PERSON: ~illia~ healy (550) 694-296E 0650
R?3ERT R. CODDE~. 0 P.ECT~R (ACTING)
DE?ARTMENT AUTnOR:: J REPRESENTATIVE
NOVEMBER 30. :9gL
MEETING DAE
BOARD1l \OTA YRNCh. ~ iT;. t f
;rlb~J?-
f
~
~ 'Ii
! eo t
i- {
=1 v..
:c rr
...:I _.
i; iE
file w.i
t.TTACHMENT 1
-25
..~
'~D
~~
i
I
I
I ~rcc:Cl:\'C:C:llHt\'lt:;.
~\f?
-.-..
. ~
-.---
:;:::ting Chula Vista Sohere and SpheiG St~::f Area Boundory
CITY 0,
CHULA VISTA
.27/? -3
S . ~T ~. '[T d
Dn"'r~ "'1 ...... "1"""'~'" Ip at",
. ......,1....... U .J,.1... J.~_.i...L__ \0.00
urat:: s.eDterl';oe~ 1E 19;.:
r.....
if. .
- !~ 7 .=
""' '! ~, ..
c .... c :1.
Q) !j ! J.
g' r"l":l.... /.'.':
~~~""""
',-
'.........
S;
....,f''' A-I
f~{~>, '\: ~ L..
· f'''''' 7: I
i e- t.~'~'.l..!:: :~' 'X~\ I
~ ~~ t-" e . _ ~ .,
: f 5 f'go ~ :: I; L. -J"~ ~ E
~ ~: ~~F ,,' :: o~ 1- I < .
t"; C 1;! t '.!!:" : t, E' ,_~" ~
r: ~ e~ ~. ~ : ~r _ .
C; !!.!.'''C' .. ...... '\ =::
" :.. ~ 0.= ..' .. ~
< " ~~ \ .J >. .' .' \ c:: ;:
t,_.l.\~- "H"f'?; -." . .....: .~\=:'....,.,..3
" ~... ~.' == ....\.......
' ! ,,.--'---v,... .- .._ ..~ \ '. ;'!I
to.:ro-t ~ ........_-:;-."'"'"""., \,' ~
'" I -: -. . ~ '. 1-
,r-L..__-4, ..' ....~ '{""-""...--.... ,. '", . ~
....-.,:...: .. ~""~":_"':" . ~X:I=.1
"'r..; -......_ ," r.'". ::
j-',.: '--" . ,... .""0 >'"
C' . .-",...... -:.- .. <',!;'t 'iI
&;..: \ --' ,~. Et '. \
['-:71, \_\ =~:J~ ;~" .... __~: \
H -c'" ~ .. . '\.' ." ~"." ;! ..,;;;
i='~"" \;';;?;:'>~~"'_':~""""""'II!
~~.' ..
/-... . \ . ,...... -..~
r ,,'j.: ,~ Li
\.. "'>' tf
'\ .....~ rr
" "..r I I
'" .,'...., , I
~! ...., ~''';..- . -j
" . .., 9
:0 _::: '\ ~'_.....
'. :.>.~~ ~~.a
~-~ ",-'" - \ I r
~f .. '\.. tt.~ _
Lz> v:;:' II !...
r' ..~.".- _I
r ~~
..L ~.~ - I .J
)\ .. r.d' ~
~... ,..,.,.,J
~~ j"::"J\.
\: ~
;r- :.,
\ !
\ ~
\ .5:: >- _____
o~ ....-
'-.--~
en
< "
f}
c::~
- .
.~ :::
}
d7b-JY
c ~
~..:=
< ::..
>-::;;
'C '"
::1 ~
en u
(1)2
(J '_
C.=
(I)....
::l ::
;:: ~
~ ~
(l)C/:
-
!!!
C.
V>
'~"I_'"
~\ :;:~~
"'IIIII"~
ATTACHMENT 2
~: - /
l-,,--
~
>
~
~
.s
::
~.._._-._-._---..-
-~~~~ r-nj
\ ':'-~":J~ , i
I ~T~ ~ I
..:~:~; :
',;;6.." I ';:J'
, 1:.' '~, ,
'c' "1"" '
- \ 1- _/ . .
~ ~. ':;~,r --.~---.:
-
,
- ~
,
-=-
1
~ ':.. ~ -.-:::
:; J-_
e:: -
r-.
'U III
'"
~; = '"
"C '"
c: .~
0
.....
c..
~
Vl -
...... '"
c.. ~
C ;<
~ ,;;
~
U
c:
0
~
>-
r;;
16
I
I
I
~i
'I" ZI
:-
__ II, <
~ II'
"Ii ,,1 ~I
,..J
l_
~
,
>
~
o
.
.
'"
~..~
r-il
-.'
,
..
/1
=,
-c..:-},' ,
... !
C'
i'
- .:.
=.:~.
HH;
-....':"
!h._
NtH
....
"
~
-<03;
~- -;:-- .
't- -!~_C;:.
' ....? ,t
.-'-
..~
~........~/
-----
. .
=:;
:"E
r. ;:
>.
.~ {
~ <.
>.
':;t,<,
:: >
c~7/?/5j
~7:~:~t.'=..r,- ow
. .
kiT ACHMEtlT 4
,.... ~/ I
, ~--..::;
.~ I
U~ I
~~
~~ :JIo. ...
Qj :s ~ 5.. 1..1-.-'""-'
_.,e: ...i I
.~;: u,
.; OJ ;~\..J ~! ,
~ 6 r- .. '-~.~ (~"J....rl""~ \
U) a.. I ,..Jl" ,-rV','\.. ,,~ ( l\--'
L L~ ~ 'Y '~.,) -
cJ ;~ ,',~:7'-- ..././ ", ,,:~f'l_j
I ~'7' . ./
n' x: . --- "" //'\ I
'--. ., , \. ~:', 'f"
~ j ........... ~,'~ :.:.~,._ \oC'" \
E '\ ,i'," ,._\: ;>:" "".!~ \
.!f: ....\..~/;. ".:,..-"" . \.~ ''''
~~ \,' ,I. ~/' ~~. ----.} \
;t.~ , ~~.~.... ,/~'-
'" '> , E'" - ';" . ...;"'''''' ....
/ /', ~:: , ~ _.."'~. ':~/ Qj
r ;' \ / :;. '.-~ ~"-' --- ." >
, '-J"~ ~ .-
~~~- t" .- ,.,. '-,,' . ~ c::.....
. -.._ .. ~. Co \ i --""""'\.-' "
" .,..-... r'--::' ~ _-: """"--Q)
._ ..... '1'. . _ .. \ ___ /_. ""..
" \~; .5 -;. ! .-.... .E 0
i " "'~~ 0 ; j- ~_ 0:>
. ~ " \., '~' '. ,_' ,--' ., ~.,,;:.~_____./ I
H ~ ~~ "\ \- - '-- <:/.......--/'~-
~ ~ E \ .~>;;- ..... ......-;::;..-....-- ...;
~ t; \ "\... 'v. ~.:-..~ir~.l-.. ~\ i
,< - \....... ". ,~-o
~-r .. '\., -',. ~l; \ /..~/~..::- l I ~
- ,,-?r~~~;::'.\:-.::-~~
-.77 ~;.._.~j.~:~-- - - ~ .~~{~-- ----J-.[-
r .." "0:""- ..,,~~~ _.-.... r
_.~:..''''1 -- ~~_..-- p ~:,;,,__.... - I I
.-:." ,1 ..___ '''''.. . ._ I
.-- )"\\ - _/'/ /'--;-;,.-"'.:~~~- - r.J I
- -- - ~ -~ ~ -- .
-",.----:: ::...>.3:.......-:. ......::....-- e--
~. \, ~:-.5 <';:';':r~~.~ " -- ~- g>
,.e...- ~--:~ ~.'._ ,___
o ~. ..., "" = 0
~ ~_\-: .." - ~'~.';j c: >-
...~. . ,;.:, 0 0 0
~ \. g, oN U) U) !Xl
en \ _ ~~ ___ "-.J
c
en
..~I
.-,
Z L...../ i
Slj
! '
!
.
,
- -;,..
;: -=:--..---
- ~ -~ --
~
;....,
~
V'
-
.~ -
-. -
, j I
I
.. ,
-
q'
~ \.I, ::...
- ~ :...-
-~
-.--.-
-::.-~
Special Study Areas
~ 99-1- Sphere of Influence 'C;-,:late Study
d.7b~i/t/
C:--' ....;
(HULA \'ISTA.
Oraf.: JJ.">: ~: i gg~
/, ~
V'
ATTACHMENT 5
Gerhardt Properly: ,'.'
1 i ,89 Acrs; 'C ~
lowtY1edlum and O;:len5.")~a::e ~
.;...c ous/ac .52 OlJS ..~/. /'
,~ ~
/ ///,
",
. /,,/
. /,
Oiay Landfill: 25C1.59 Acres V)"
Ooen S::>ace \
Waier Tank: 61 Acres
low Medium - 3-6 ous/ac
27aus
De Graff Parcel: 7.82 Acres
Open Space
1 du
Ross Parcel: 9 9 Acres
low Medium -:s.~ dus/o::
Ltous
\
\
,
.
\
"
c..
)
Rock Quarry: 136,47 Acres
~::>en S:>oce
South West Corner:
S.54 Acres Ooen Soo::e
Wcner Reservoi~' 1 C ,5~ ""=~e:
_Ow r>lle=l''':~ - :~ C;..I:;',' c:
co: ..... ,#
Key Map
-
~on'
.. -m
-- "
- --
I ~-=-' '--;
I -p
! 0.;.;... ,:.
I - -'
!
"Ol~."'''_'''''''''''~.__'
)oUurct:; ':U\ 0: ::n.."" ~,,;~
"'oll!';;:' ~. ~-n.... ";:,, ~l."'= ~!~t"o :.nfl~
;..elt'. I~ i...~ I.;' ~v~,-;~ ....",;; \01)1;:;
~\f?-
:--.,-
PlanninG Area 1 hdd::iona! Parcels
-
1994 Sph~ -e of bfluen.::e l.Jpdate StllCV
c27}-'I!
---
CITY or
CHULA VISTA
Ora!: June ~ 0 19B!.
Key Map
~
or
.
..,.-.-
<:.
-~~--
s.our" :1:"0' ':nU'~ ~'~:.
I-
"
r- - 9
, I--~
Planning Area 3
(Inverted "L")
ATTACHMENT 6
,,,,,,,,~,::>O""'-J
f'~Of': ~....'7'"
L
Nom
-,0:5
_U
..
Iii'
" I
--
-
_...u__.__.
~~'.......,.-
r- '-_
,.... ._liIp~
Plannino Area
Boundary
Legend
RESroE!'<o7~.....
...!:... ..................."'....~""""'-
-=-- ~.........,,~
..M ..._.-=~~~
'LI'V ......_~~..................'i<a>_
... _._r_..~...._..
~ ___ 'M__'"
COMMD.~...
.!:.... ~.......' ,-"""","""
t....D!..'$":'i..:......
"'Olt': ,
;...t".,., 1. ~~
_(,.;'" ..1."1:;: l.'H:~
'U~OU-l&I'
- ~...--...:.-.......
I",' 1'wlr;.ll.afo_"
~ CioI! CAne c.-....-..-
SPEaA:....:...\NAAU.:.
:,:""""-,,'''!~'~
_.~~-
:.:::: ._--......~
~~-
..!!!!.! ........'-
iWC~ ..... URIIll C-
-;- ......
:~ c..-.. i"a:,
u ~=~=:.."'=':--;{YI;
V_"..:III..u.....vlUul; :)C<,...
kMIClIL..:l.l..lMao__law.t-....:_
o.-,.~';:
:115 klllt.~fI<T
~ :"::::~.:: '--~!:: ~:1{'W'
~\r:-
-,-
.... ~
---
...... -
~-
CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
Planning Area 3 i1nvertec .~'
S,'" ,..", of hflnADr-A Tu'po'atA
..........._.. __ _ ~....J..... ~_ J.."-"_ _
c2 7/? --'Ljo7,
----'
Drat:: Jur":~ .~. ~e>-
,. .
,~
~~.1-' ~:~ :1 .. ~.I
~
(f!lunt~ of ~an ~ ieB!l
;.. -: :":ii~iENj 7
,-
L.UREh N WASSEFlW...""
oureTO_
nUl "'.:J"~
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND LAND USE
. I r ~:; (.", c [
)). V HI. ,.[.... c.fl.I.':
$UI.[ ,!or
~..... ....."':.c~
'.....1. ORhU. ~:i'OI"'.:i")'
I'IS, !o"I.ljl05:'
.....11> O"IC[
5201 RUFFIN ROAO SUITE S, SAN DIECO C.l.L.IFOANII. ':1:3 16it
1/''''OJa''TIClh I"'" "...;jI".t
July 19,
1994
F:.ic}- ?.~sale~
O~ay Ranch Proje=~ a~~ice
::5 Fc~~~~ ~venuc, S~i~=
:~~:a ;is~a, =al~=c=~~a
""'''
r.
~:s::
......-- ..
-::---..
..-";C'~:
'-'" --..
---.-.....-....
-.....- ~ -..
-- -.-.,-
S~:::;:..'
-==-
-'-....-
:.':C}::
:::::..:..:..:' v.__.. ~"ot:. ~c:.==... :'ues:::ay
a===ecia~e~ ~be opp==~~~.:..~~'
::ve=
e Sphe::-'2 S-:.::.::-.-
;-
=.ase::.
or:
.......-
---
"""'!t::e-"--
....---........:: ,
"':~e==
.v.~e.=e.
C:'o"''''c-:.i
--, --'--
ques'"::.c::s
a:1::'
:"55:15.5
=e.~a-=:':1~
-:.b-:
~==":::s:::::.
::::.:.::-:y se.::-\-::::es
'":h2..'":
;';2.S
::.-e.":::'=~"
~e.~ ....c.._:~
..-.
I, ...._.
'::::'5
_E":'":S.::'-
:'5
,~
::.-esp=::.se __
'":::'::5=
:"ss'..:.e5.
i.., ""_.,,__.....
\ -, ....--......;:
=a.:..::.-:.e:la=.::e
Fa=~:~~y E:eme~~ ?==~i~i=~E ~== o?e=a~i=~
-~ =a=~:~~~e5 :~=a:~ S;he=e s~~cy, pa;e Be):
:.~c.
-------
--~.__..-
-.=-~
:'5
----::..--
-------.
::::e
:~:.:::-:y/s
...
~ :;: ....
- ------
.:._=:::e.::-:
::'::E:=
- - - ---
-------
a:.::.:-e.ES
~::e.
=pe::.-a'":.:..:::-
=.::::
-----------
- - - -
...--.. --..-..--
- - - --
- --
----------,
a::::
3.=1::-::-.-_=::===
'":.:-~S.SE
:::::;,s-;..:;
- - - - --
----....-
~ -.
:--_u:.::s::-'...
:.:::.______o8s
-_:=:::~ =====:::.=~=
==::=-;.:.~~~:.~~a_ __~.~~~~_~~~ ~.
:...:_~
:.-e':=:-...:.e5
=.:.:a.:..:a::::"e
se:.-",',:" ::=-~:-=.,,':':::'::~
::::-=....-~=c:::
.......-.......---
::.a.....rE.
5 e"". e:::-e 2. ~-
=:::::-:s-:.:::-a.:..::e::
~._----
- _......._~ - ,
a=-:::
_=-__s
--- E'":a'":e~:.de S=~~'":~=::S,
-\f;:-.:'=:-~ 2.:::--=
-_..::
~::~
-....-- -
- -
-....---
-----
- - -
-- _... -. -
=_='":::e=:::::::-E
- .
':'::-.;: _€:7.e:-'":.:...-:
- -----
-- -."-- -
------
~ - --
- -----
:: -2:::-'':' =-=-::::- :,~"..:..:: e::-s
--':::'\-c
:::::-.5':"==::-
--- - ............
- .
--- --- -- -..-
~ .--
::::e::'2:..--:':":::::
--::::---,:::.-:::-.-=
...--.. --..--.....-
-- -. ..-
-.-- --
----------
--......- --.,-. -
------...--
--..---....-.. -..-
::'e:;-...:~::-e::
~':- --
----------
:=~~=a=~e~ ;a=a=e~~= se~:~=e~
:6;;) :
==2.:-:
:~=a=~ S~he=e S~uc:, =a=e
.....,..
------
- - .--
- -- ---
II,":::€-
:':'::'':'':-:'=:;::-?::=c.~e::.
a=-=.2.,2
-...::.,.
-..... '" ---
--,----
::
_....--::-::..::~€:.
-':::-':::""c..":;~-
.....-- .......----
se:-' _ :OS::;.
"
- -----c.....-
-.-------.
"-"2.:--:S'::~ !.:e::.:..=c.::'
- .
:::::6::-,,"':'':'::::'2
-_:-::-~:-"-:.-
____ e::-.e::-~=:-.::~
- -
-..-.....- ---
c.=.--~ -.=.::.:
--- ----
"'::lE: ;.;eS''":e::-:-
:\-:.=~-
- .
-;::........-
_._.-....~
'see
is
- -~~c.
":::=.-:
----- -...-
'--- ---.
-':;--c
_... - --
. .
..:.::.:.::==::-~::::-=.-:e=
:;:....::.:::.
:;:-.=. ...--
=2:-::e::-e::.
--.-
=:;~:::-2.=-=e=
- - - - --
.- _.
--- ---
---... --...
-- --
--- -....--.
J-7-b -'13
,~ -
Sp~e~e St.udy
-2-
1-:' C
Regardless, we believe this issue to be moot for Otay Ranch, in
that the ~roject's mitigation measures requires the preparation
of an Emergency Se=>-ices Xaster Plan to service the Ranch, to be
approved concurrent with or before the SPA. This Plan is
re~Jired to include provisions for funding emergency service
facilities as well as re~~irements to maintain the seven minute
response time in 85% of the cases for the urban communities (10
~i~utes for estate communi~ies). ~hese ~equirements are fixe=
whether or not the area is annexed to Ch~la Vista.
(3) Police and Fire Emergency Response (Draft Sphere study,
pages 1~6-lE5): Th~ p~ep~=a~~c~ and app~oval of si~ila=
E~e~;en=y Respo~se Plans a== re;uirec fo= both Police an= F:~e
se::-~..:..=€S, as _...._ er.1e=-9'e~=y ;.tec.=-=al a See CO~:1'ty S:r\?, ;c..ge 44~, c:-
---- S:=Da:-2":.~ 1l:;?S':"':::::'-= ::::.-:.:.:;:a-:.i.c:: ~e.ast:::-es" c.d=p~ed by -=:;e ::i~v.
~s _ =es~:- -- ~~e~s =e~~~~s=e~~51 ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~=l~e~e ~~e=e ~.:..:l
-- s.:.;r:.:::::?r::: e:-:-~:";:e~=y ::-es:;:=~se se::-vice c..:=:e=e~::es :c:: -:'~e
2'":ay Ra:-::::. ==:-"':.: ::~ C':: ~~e C:. -:.y I 5 5;:=:ere Study, rega==-less of
;=-:e~"':.~~_ e~~E~a~_=~.
c-:.c;~. ~~esa
pa~e ::~ __ ~~e ~~a:~ S;he~e S-:.ucv s-:.a-:.es ~ha~ f1~~
~~=~s~~~a~ =:an~~n; Area is annexed -:.= ~he Ci~y 0:
-- ~s a~-:.~=~~a-:.e= -:.ha~ -:.~e level 0= se~..ice ~o -:.~~s
::;.......-:--....-
...........- ---..,
:::-..::"2. ~,":'5-:'c.,
__ __ .~:=:.:.2.:. :::,e s::.=s~2.::-=:.a:..:..y ::i;~e:::- 't::.a:1 se:-'o"'i:::e ;~o.....i:::.e= =y 'the
.____" .'1 ~~~5 s-:.a-:.e=e::-:. :'5 :~}:e:v base~ C~ p~=x~=~-:.y -== ~~e
e:..:.:..s-:..:..~:; ?'=':::;
5-:;,':.:'::::5,
--,..': -....
c....... __
" .
-:.:le ;==posec.
""'.:-....
----:
_.c
~-
::h"..:.la
e-=:-~""-e
------.-- .
":::=
2.===-:.e:. Eas-: ~-:.ay Mesa S~e=~~.:..=
-::0-" ~ -::c
- -........----
... - ----
- - -
-- -----
..=v.
-- -:::,
s"':a"':.~:::: ;:e
==::s"':.=~=-=e~ ~e=-
-------...-.
-..---------.
:-:.a~' ~esa ~=a: a:::' ~:-:'2. ~=a=.
=::- -:.~a-= -:.he
-... .--..
:::::-::=2.::-:
se::-,.:::es ......:.. -:.:: ::'~e C.:.. ,,:y
Sa:-
:ie::=
se:-\':
-:.:-_=
:::=.5-: !-~e52.
;::-.:::.=
-- --.
_::e5E :le",'
. ....-
=a:::.,,;.:~.:..es
~-
()~ay Mesa ",.:.__
---."" --
.
-. --...-
--- ---
~
- -----
:=---'::'~C.- :..
-------.....--
S5:-'o-:.ca __ :::le
. - '-
:'::=::':'5::::-:' a_
---... _. -
. -
__c.l,....
" -=--
;==~_~e p=-:e~~~a_
se:-'o"~::e
~:lE
-.... .----- ----..
- -.... -....--. ....-- - -_.
____ ...._=~ -\-.::.:"~e'\
?=..::-::e_.
~~eSE se:-~~=es S~=~_=
::.:;}:::=...::'e=.~e::.
-:.::e
:.:..-:~-Is
=~a="':. S~~e::-e S~~=:.
?~=:~= ~=a~s~_ ;==~~Si=~5 (~=af~ Sphe=e S~ud:1 pa;e 19~):
=::-:.:-: '::=."":e::-~
-'.
....- - - --
- - -'-
- -- ---
-.....~-
:=--:.;::"
- -"
. ....---,
?::"2..:-.:-.:..::~
::..::-=.=-
- - -
-- -----
.--.......---------
-..-..---....------
----....... ~ -.-
-.......-........- -;: ,
-:.::e
;:::-:;"'o';.s.:..:::-
"-
--=:-e.........--:::-'--
---..-........- ---....-.
se::-':, =es
II::::.:.::'::' ;:,e
~.:..==.:..=:.::-:. S':"~=E -:.~e
-,"
....--.::.:.-=
5':'::':; 5e:-::::es
-:.~e
..~ .... ~......: --.11
.. ----..-...:
, ~
::: .....~.
.....-. ......~
-..----
- - ---
-... ---
, -
5:":';;::::--:'
s-:.a -:'5::'(e.::-:..
_.::e
--
.................---
-----. --
;::-::.::..===:
5'_;;,:..:.==a:-
-::..xe::.
"""""-c.
-......... --
5 e:::-:=-::e
-:.::e
::.:-'::
--
!'-~esa
....-=........
....--.-...
.;_...... '0 c. I
...:::...: -....
5:--:.==
-= ...-- - -_.
_ _ -=== :'aJ:-=:= :"::0:2:
__-:e::-s ":SE -:..:::..s
c......... r.._~_. '';:.
.-...... ....-
.... -- -. .-
. -
.- :::. - ::~- - - =:-
---.... -----
.-.-.....- _..-...::._~-:
e'.e-e-
-.,:---_'O.
-....-...-
- "-
-.....-......-.-
:;.:.. ".~e:-
-:.:--=
--.......-. --.
...-... --...,.... -'
. -
-.--- -..... "'-.' -'.
....::-- --:: ::._--=,;
a:;.::. F.a:- ==-_ Sa:-
::':>............
..........-...
- . .- -.... -
-.---.---
-.....--..
---. -
C:'.~-e-
- ... --...
5 €.:-;..=..::€
-:.::e
-.....--
..-...-..
-.- ....
v..... __....
------
- -
....-. --...---
.J7b rtj1/
,..,.._.
Sphere S':udy
-3-
r' __
1-'::'"
(5) Resort Area Schools (Draft sphere study, page 25(): The
Resort area is comprised largely of hotel and commercial
facilities, and support residential (likely second homes). These
land uses will not generate many school age children, rendering
this issue largely moot. For this reason, no elementary school
was proposed for the resort village. Nevertheless, Village 13
(Resort), village 15 (Estate South of the Lake), and about one-
half of Village 14 (Proctor Valley) are all located within the
Sweetwater High School District. Children from these areas will
at~end Sweetwater Dist~ict High Schools, regardless 0= Ci~y or
county land use jur~sdic~ion.
(6) Resort hrea Drainage
Dra~~ Sphe=e S~udy s~a~es
~. ....Q-
r__ ..,Co
~o ~he ~i~y ~= :~~la
(Draft Sphere Study, page 201): ~he
~hat ~nnexat~on 0= the rtesc~~ Pla~~inc
Y.:.sta .Io'.'ould "==~~::-::..=~-:.e ~o the c::-e2~':'c-
== 2 ~c~e i~~egra~e~ ~=a~~age syste~I'.
F_::-;-..:.a2.ly, -;ne 0:::)05:' -;e .; c: ::'lore a=c...:~a~e. Ever:.::..:: t::e o't 2. \. \~allev
~_~-_"e_' _'s e"e'l"'l-~':i'" a~~eve':' .;..j.,e C':_\- -''':1i S....~~l ........0 _;",\"c~ro-'1\"
....- - . . .. ~.."''''''c':_~ .....~.r:....., "-.,_ .-...... ___ ___._ w_ .t-'''''... __....c.___
-e-a---e~ ~., -ne .-',;,s an~ a -aJ~- car:"~- "'-c- -~e Reso-- a-e.
~ :' _c, _ _ -l -.... ....=.:._ _....., .." ...._ _._ oJ4.. __ ... _..4. _ _ _ Co.
~n~ess s~o~. wa~er ~~~c=f ~s p=oposec ~= be pu~ped ~o C~~la
\:s~a, i~ :5 ci==i=~~~ ~o see ho~ Reso~-:. a~ea s~==ace =~~=== ~~~_
e\'e= err:.s::" -=~e =:.. -;::.- cra:':la;-e sys-:.err..
~~e SRP/G~? ~e~~:..~es ~~a-= a~ ~~~a~ ~~~==: c:..~e=5i~~ sys~e= ~:
::.esiq::e::. -:.:: ;::-=-=e::-= -==:e ....:a-=e= g-...:.a:"i. -=y c: ~~e :"a}:es _ ':'~:..s
:::".,"5::-::::':::: sys~e.::-. .\.:.:.::. ==:e=,,: ~:::..::==:::-;::==a::.e= .:.:..:':';~es ::, :~ a::::
;:_:_ea_,.~.::.__:__-:.~_._:__=__ ~~=~_-_.=~_~-_:~.~.-=_:_~:'.a::~:~~.~~eas :o=~":ec ~:..-:.~::: -:.~e =::"a:..~=~:
- - -- _ -:. -...-:.__ :1::-:' :'.aKe se:1se ":.:: se;:a::-a-:.e -=:-..::
~:s==-= ~rsa's r~::=:: =~ye=s:.=:: 5ys":e~ ==== ":~= ::-=her z.==e::-:.e::
.':..:":"z.~es a:::: :;:~a:::-.:..~~ a:-eas
. ., '- - . . . ,
;.:::::::: ...::..:.._ =e::-.a:..:: ...:: -:.:::.:- -:.::e
.::--:.::::=::-;::::-a-=e=
.........--.
- - - - --
- ---- -
.~~._. ----
. - ,
~ - --- -- ..
--- -----
:::. -:.s~-::;c.:::
:-.c.c':'
.. ,
c.';'':''_ :,_c;r~i::._
. .. .
... :::-----:::-....-
---- -- --- ---.
re~a=~:.::~
:)epa::--:.:=;e::-='s
resp=::ses -=-= ":~ese
, C'=:"'::::
------ .
-' - -.=.....,::.
--.-----
.--
-;......~
::~:- ~
.s::.ee~a:-
-,.:.:.:.re.:- ~';css':;'::-::-.=.::-
J7~~Lj5
. . ~. .
ATTA:IiMENT 8
Chula Vista
sphere of Influence
Tentat~ve processing Schedule *
November, 1994
Cc~sul~ant subrnit~al
_&
~-
Aevi~;d FI1;D Model. . . . . . . November 4,
Cc~s~:tant Sub~~~t~:
~:
Scree~=he=}: :'E::~....... . NoveIr.ber 18,
D::::i=:. Re_~ased
Pu1:::l:..= Ee'..ie-;..-........... Decer.-j)er 9,
/::::
~-
day
'1- -:; --;
.-! ..~
19~4
1994
1994
DE:R Review Period Ends........ ..................January 23, 1995
D::-a::--:.
so~~issio~.....~a=ch 8,
Sphere S-::u::y,
-~
-~
:::an:-.':':1:;
:JE:F~
~::-=.=-:
.. -_.: ~ .
........r.:--___ ~.
c-.-c-....
....~..._-;.
.....;_..
....._.~- -.; .
-- ....-.---.
s-=:.:.=~-
.....~ -."
-- -
;.--.: -
. . . .... .r;..:--___
--,
Sub::,.:" -:-:=.:'
--
:....~_=c::. .
_.: _= ::ea::-:.::=
'e!:-::.::z.-:;=.
:..;..?:=
..".. .=-..:.:.y
--,
::s..,; :"c-v.-
-.......--
~ ~.._.. _..
~
~e~~a-::..ve sched~:e ~ase=.
e;;:-::.irna-:.es,
7/94.
..... --.
3-:2..:::
J.,?b -;/i-
1995
.cc::::
"00::::
-- --'
_:::'~::l
\
.
.
.
"'"
November 10, 1994
MEMO TO:
FROM:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
~.
Leonard M. Moore, Councilman
SUBJECT:
BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE LIAISON
Various members of our numerous commissions have voiced their desire for
Councilmembers to attend their meetings more frequently during a given year to improve
communications with those who appoint them. Through advance contact, a selected
meeting could be appropriately noticed for an exchange of communication to take place
in a proper and legal manner.
This recommended process has been held in obeyance for a number of years. It is
appropriate that this concept be given consideration at this time due to new members
on the Council.
I propose that our various commissions be divided into 4 groups; each group having
similarities (i. e. those meeting monthly vs. on call and with varied responsibilities). The
Planning Commission is deliberately excluded with the thought that the Council should
have a joint meeting in a workshop atmosphere on a annual basis with this and maybe
other commissions. The Mayor is not included to allow maximum flexibility of his/her
time.
Each of 4 Councilmembers would be matched with 1/4 of the City's Commissions with
the objective of attending a regular meeting at least once each year. A check and
balance system would be maintained by rotating the "groups" clockwise each January
giving each Councilmember a different group each year. St:E ATTACHED FOR
BJ:COMMENDED GROUPINGS.
This concept spreads Council visitations to all commissions without excessive demand
on part time elected officials who work for their family during the typical day and then
serves his/her City in the evening. The exchange of information should benefit our
commissions, staff, the City Council and our entire community.
I look forward to the approval and implication of this program through Council action
soon.
LMM:pw
Encls.
114
6<.9 Q - (
f
,/
I'D?
'?
'------
BOARD AND COMMISSION GROUPS J
Day ot Week Time Mtgs/month Lccation
GROUP I
(All Evenings)
Design Review 2nd & 4th Mon. 4:30pm 2 PSB Confnn 2&3
Board of Appeals/ADA 2nd Mon. 5:00pm PSB Cont nn 1
Veterans Advisory 3rd Tues. 6:00pm Pk & Rec Calf nn
Child Care 3rd Tues. 7:00pm Pk & Rec Calf nn
Youth Commission 2nd Mon. 6:30pm Pk & Rec Calf nn
Satety Commission 2nd Thurs. 7:00pm Cou1ciI Chamber
GROUP II
Board of Ethics On call Council Cont nn
Mobile Home Rent On call Council Chamber
Town Center PAC 1 at & 3rd Thurs. 8:30am 2 PSB Confnn 2&3
Int. Friendship 4th Mon. 4:00pm Fi8 Dept. Tmg nn
Cultural Arts 2nd Tues. 5:00pm Pk & Rec Call nn
Parks & Rec 3rd Tues. 6:30pm PS8 Conf nn 2&3
""'"
GROUP III j
GMOC On call PSB Conf nr. W
Inter. Agency Water On call Council Cont 1111
Southwest PAC 1 st Mon. 4:40pm PSB Cont nn 1
Human Relations 2nd Wed. 5:00pm Council Cont nn
Civil Service 2nd Thurs. 5:30pm Pk & Rec Calf nn
Resource Cons. 2nd & 4th Mon. 6:00pm PSB Cont nn 1
Caslle Patk Revitalization 4th Wed. 7:00pm PSB Conf nn 2&3
GROUP IV
(All Daytime)
Charter Review On call As noticed
Olay Valley PAC 2nd & 4th Mon. 8:00am 2 PSB Cont nn 3
Economic Dev. 1st Wed. Noon PSB Confnn 2&3
Cmsn on Aging 2nd Wed. 3:00pm Norman Center
Ubrary Board 4th Wed. 3:00pm Ub Cont nn 1
l,ouslng Advisory 4th Wed. 3:30pm PSB Ccnf nn 2&3
"'t
.,
J('fQ. - ~