HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1995/12/19
/'11::' "
, !
, , " ,~" <, "! 1!11
('-~'
Tuesday, December 19, 1995 -;"~, [", of; . /:- " "J ,,",,; on Council Chambers
6 ,00 p.m. t, :; :c:; / ~ #12_. '.':. :.. ,k-.'~ _"Public Se",ic"", Building
Regular Meeti~'g of'the City of Chula Vista i(:~ouncil
CALL TO ORDER
1.
ROLL CALL:
Council members Alevy _, Moot _, Padilla _, Rindone _, and
Mayor Horton_.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None submitted.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Oath of Office: Elizabeth Karin Cox - Youth Commission.
b. Boys and Girls Club of Chula Vista's recognition of the American Golf Company for their
assistance in Club's golf tournament fund raising event. Stephen Melvin, Board President, will
present a recognition plaque to Ric Crochet, Golf Course Manager.
*****
Effective April 1, 1994, there have been new amendments to the Brown Act. The City Council must now
reconvene into open session to report any final actions taken in closed session and to adjourn the meeting.
Because of the cost involved, there will be no videotaping of the reconvened portion of the meeting. However,
final actions reported will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office.
*****
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 13)
The staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by
the Council by one motion without discussion unless a Councilmember, a member of the public or City staff
requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a
"Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete
the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to
the staff recommendation.) Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Board and
Commission Recommendations and Action Items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNTCA nONS:
a. Letter from the City Attorney stating that to the best of his knowledge from observance of
actions taken in Closed Session on 12/5/95, Council deliberated on the compensation
structure for middle manager positions, unrepresented positions and executive manager
positions. Council voted to grant to middle managers and members of the unrepresented
group hired prior to 1/1/95 and continuously employed thereafter, a stipend of $200, and to
grant to executive managers a day off with pay to be used or lost during 1996. There were
no actions taken in Closed Session on 12/12/95. It is recommended that the letter be received
and filed.
Agenda
-2-
December 19, 1995
b. Letter of resignation for Andrew Delgado - Mobilehome Rent Review. It is recommended that
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.
c. Claim against the City: Claimant - Charles Keith Hawkins, 476 Berland Way, Chula Vista, CA
91910. Due to remote liability on the part of the City, it is recommended by the City Attorney's
Office and Risk Management that the Claim be denied.
6. ORDINANCE 2657 AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 2.60 OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING LOST AND STOLEN PROPERTY
(second readin!! and adoDtion) - Currently the Municipal Code does not
provide for the donation of property to charitable organizations. The
amendment will allow for such in the future. Staff recommends Council place
the ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Chief of Police)
7. ORDINANCE 2658 APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE II (EASTLAKE I
EXPANSION) PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS
(LAND USE DISTRICT MAP ONLY) AND CONSIDERING AN
ADDENDUM TO FSEIR-86-04 (B) (second readinl! and adoDtion) - The
purpose of the amendments are to relocate two neighborhood park parcels,
expand the area available for community purpose facilities, transfer densities
among parcels within the SPA, adjust land use and parcel boundaries and
designate parcel R-26 for low income housing in accordance with the recently
adopted EastLake Affordable Housing Program and EastLake Greens Affordable
Housing Agreement. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on second
reading and adoption. (Director of Planning)
8. RESOLUTION 18161 ACCEPTING FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS MADE A V AILABLE BY THE
VIOLENT CRIME CONTROL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT OF
1994 (THE CRIME BILL) - On 2/28/95, Council authorized the City Manager
to submit appropriate COPS AHEAD applications. As a result, the City has
been awarded $300,000 to fund four peace officers for the period of 4/1/95
through 3/31/98. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Chief of
Police)
9. RESOLUTION 18162 APPROVING THE AGREEMENT WITH ESGIL CORPORATION TO
PROVIDE PLAN CHECK ENGINEERING SERVICES, AND
AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME - The agreement provides
staff with a necessary resource of engineering expertise for projects which
require complex engineering analysis. Staff intends to utilize the consultant's
services for those projects requiring advanced engineering skills for plan review.
All fees are generated by the payment of plan check fees borne by the applicant.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Building and
Housing) 4/5th's vote required.
Agenda
-3-
December 19, 1995
10. RESOLUTION 18163 APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERST ANDING WITH THE
CITY OF SAN DIEGO AND THE SAN DIEGO TECHNOLOGY
COUNCIL TO WORK COOPERATIVELY TO IMPLEMENT THE
ACTIVITIES OF THE SAN DIEGO DEFENSE CONVERSION
PROGRAM WHICH INCLUDES THE BORDER ENVIRONMENTAL
COMMERCE ALLIANCE (BECA) - A condition of the Federal Economic
Development Administration grant for BECA requires the City of Chula Vista,
City of San Diego, and the San Diego Technology Council to execute a non-
financial Memorandum of Understanding. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Community Development)
1l.A. RESOLUTION 18164 REJECTING LOW BID FOR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S
DISADV ANT AGED AND WOMEN OWNED BUSINESS PROGRAM
REQUIREMENTS FOR "CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALK RAl\1PS ON
V ARIOUS STREETS IN THE CITY, FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 PROGRAM
(ST -513)" - Sealed bids were received on 10/25195. The work to be done
consists of removal of curbs, gutter, and sidewalk and the construction of
sidewalk ramps on various streets. Staff recommends approval of the
resolutions. (Director of Public Works)
B. RESOLUTION 18165 ACCEPTING BIDS AND A WARDING CONTRACT TO THE SECOND
LOW BIDDER FOR "CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALK RAMPS ON
V ARIOUS STREETS IN THE CITY, FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 PROGRAM
(ST -513)" AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO INCREASE QUANTITIES TO
EXPEND ALL A V AILABLE FUNDS FOR THIS PROJECT
12.A. RESOLUTION 18166 APPROVING FINAL MAP OF TRACT 88-3A, EASTLAKE SOUTH
GREENS UNIT 4 ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC THE
PUBLIC STREETS DEDIC A TED ON SAID MAP, REJECTING ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY THE OPEN SPACE LOTS GRANTED ON SAID
MAP, ACCEPTING 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 - On
7/18/89, Council approved the Tentative Subdivision Map for Tract 88-3,
EastLake Greens. On 8/16/94, Council approved Tentative Map 88-3A and
imposed additional conditions of approval. The amendment to the tentative map
covers the area south of Clubhouse Drive which is designated as EastLake South
Greens. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public
Works)
B. RESOLUTION 18167 APPROVING SUPPLEMENT AL SUBDIVISION Il\fPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT FOR EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS UNIT 4 REQUIRING
DEVELOPER TO COMPL Y WITH CERT AIN UNFULFILLED
CONDITIONS OF RESOLUTIONS NUMBER 15200 AND 17618, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
Agenda
-4-
December 19, 1995
13. RESOLUTION 18168 ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF A PORTION OF
CERT AIN DRAINAGE, SEWER AND ACCESS EASEMENTS IN LOT 10
OF MAP 13176, TRACT 90-02, RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill - Rancho del
Rey Investors, L.P., in care of McMillan Project Services, Inc., has requested
vacation of a portion of certain drainage, sewer and access easements. The
easements have no public facilities within them and will be superseded by
relocation of the utilities originally intended for the easements. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to
speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City
Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete
the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per
individual.
14. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION OF REFUSE COLLECTION RATE ADJUSTMENT
RELATED TO INCREASED DISPOSAL COSTS AT THE COUNTY
LANDFILL FOR THE RESIDENTIAL, RESIDENTIAL Y ARDW ASTE,
AND COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS - On 11/14/95, in response to a request
from Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc., Council directed staff to evaluate the need
to amend the Municipal Code in order to allow Laidlaw to fully recover charges
incurred in the disposal of refuse at the County landfill, and to recommend any
necessary rate adjustments based on unrecovered costs. Staff recommends
Council adopt the urgency ordinance and approve the resolution. (Director of
Finance) Continued from the meeting of 12/5/95.
A. ORDINANCE 2656 AMENDING SECTION 8.23.090 B.3. OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO
ALLOW THE REFUSE COLLECTION FRANCHISE TO FULLY
RECOVER LANDFILL PROCESSING COSTS THROUGH CUSTOMER
BILLING RATES (url!encv) - 4/Sth's vote required
B. RESOLUTION 18146 APPROVING INCREASES IN THE LANDFILL/PROCESSING COST
RATE COMPONENT FOR THE RESIDENTIAL, THE RESIDENTIAL
Y ARDW ASTE, AND THE COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS EFFECTIVE
JULy 1, 1995, WITH THE RATE PAYERS BILLING RATES TO BE
ADJUSTED BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 1996
IS.A. PUBLIC HEARING PCM-96-07;CONSIDERATIONOFAMENDMENTSTOTHEEASTLAKE
GREEN SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN PUBLIC
FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN - The amendments to the Public Facilities
Financing Plan involve minor statistical and development phasing changes and
language reinstating EastLake's previous agreements to construct a previously
deferred community center. Staff recommends Council approve the resolution
and accept the report. (Director of Planning) Continued from the meeting of
12/12/95.
RESOLUTION 18169 APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE GREENS PUBLIC
FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN COMPONENT OF THE EASTLAKE
GREENS SECTIONIAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN
B.
REPORT
EASTLAKE PARK ISSUES - The report addresses an unresolved park issue
associated with the processing of amendments to the EastLake Greens Public
Facilities Financing Plan (as identified in the GDPISP A Plan Amendment). The
main focus of the report is to ensure that the community center identified in the
EastLake Park Agreement is financed and constructed by the EastLake
Development Company.
Agenda
-5-
December 19, 1995
16.
PUBLIC HEARING
REVIEWING AND ADOPTING THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
INTEGRA TED WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND COUNTYWIDE
SUMMARY PLAN AND SITING ELEMENT - Staff recommends the oublic
hearinl! be continued to 1/16/96. (Conservation Coordinator)
17.
PUBLIC HEARING
PCS-96-02; TENT A TIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR THE EASTLAKE
GREENS UNIT 12, TRACT 96-02, INVOLVING 92 SINGLE FAMILY
LOTS, TWO PUBLIC OPEN SPACE LOTS AND A PRIVATE PARK
PARCEL ON 21.5 ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER SOUTH
GREENS VIEW DRIVE - EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - The
applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map known as EastLake Greens
Unit 12, Tract 96-02, in order to subdivide 21.5 acres in 92 single family
detached lots, 2 open space lots, and a private park. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Director of Planning)
RESOLUTION 18170 APPROVING AND IMPOSING CONDITIONS ON THE TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR EASTLAKE GREENS PARCEL R-12, TRACT
96-02
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject matter within the
Council's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda for public discussion. (State law, however, generally
prohibits the City Council from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to
address the Council on such a subject, please complete the yellow "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications
Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak,
please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up action. Your time is limited to three
minutes per speaker.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMEND A TIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
None submitted.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by
the Council, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered individually by the Council
and staff recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak, please
fill out a "Request to Speak II form available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
Public comments are limited to five minutes.
18. RESOLUTION 18171 APPROVING A SEWER SERVICE CHARGE REFUND TO THE
SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE FOR THE PERIOD FROM OCTOBER 21,
1993 THROUGH JULY 21, 1995; AND APPROPRIATING AN
ADDITIONAL $64,600 THEREFOR - On 9/29/95, the City Manager
approved a sewer service charge variance for Southwestern College. The
Municipal Code allows for a refund retroactive to ninety days prior to the date
the variance application was submitted, which was 1/11194. It is recommended
that Southwestern College receive a sewer service charge refund of $64,575.87
for charges paid during fiscal years 1993/94 and 1994/95 which were in excess
of the revised method of billing approved in the variance. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
Agenda
-6-
December 19, 1995
19.
REPORT
CONTINUATION OF THE JOINT-USE AGREEMENT WITH THE
SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR USE OF THE
LIBRARY FACaITY AT EASTLAKE HIGH SCHOOL - The original
three-year agreement with Sweetwater Union High School providing for joint
use of the EastLake Library will expire in June 1996. The current agreement
allows for an extension of the nominal term. Staff recommends Council accept
the report and direct staff to negotiate a renewal for Council's approval.
(Library Director)
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent Calendar.
Agenda items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Councilmembers.
Public comments are limited to five minutes per individual.
OTHER BUSINESS
20. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
21. MA YOR'S REPORT(S)
22. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council member Rindone
a. MTDB: Contract ratification of bus operators' new agreement.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the Regular City Council Meeting on January 9, 1996
at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
A meeting of the Redevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the City Council Meeting.
Agenda
-7-
December 19, 1995
*****
CLOSED SESSION
Unless the City Attorney, the City Manager or the City Council states otherwise at this time, the Council will
discuss and deliberate on the following items of business which are permitted by law to be the subject of a closed
session discussion, and which the Council is advised should be discussed in closed session to best protect the
interests of the City. The Council is required by law to return to open session, issue any reports of final action
taken in closed session, and the votes taken. However, due to the typical length of time taken up by closed
sessions, the videotaping will be terminated at this point in order to save costs so that the Council's return from
closed session, reports of final action taken, and adjournment will not be videotaped. Nevertheless, the report
of final action taken will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office.
23. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING:
1. Existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9
. Chammas vs. the City of Chula Vista.
. Christopher vs. the City of Chula Vista.
. MCA litigation.
SALE AND DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
. Purchase of property from R.E. Hazard Contracting Company, 1855 Maxwell Road, Chula Vista,
CA.
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
. Agency negotiator: John Goss or designee for CVEA, WCE, POA, IAFF, Executive
Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
Employee organization: Chula Vista Employees Association (CVEA) and Western Council of
Engineers (WeE), Police Officers Association (POA) and International Association of Fire
Fighters (IAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
24. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
*****
December 14, 1995
FROM:
The Honorable Mayor and City coun~l
V, '. L 'f\ \
John D. Goss, City Manager=):c\ ~)\ '::J~' \
City Council Meeting of Decemb~r)19, 1995
TO:
SUBJECT:
This will transmit ~he agenda and related materials for the regular
City Council meeting of Tuesday, December 19, 1995. Comments
regarding the written Communications are as follows:
5a. This is a letter from the City Attorney reporting observance
of actions taken in the Closed Session of December 5, 1995,
the City Council deliberated on the compensation structure for
middle manager positions, unrepresented positions and
executive manager positions. The council voted to grant to
middle managers and members of the unrepresented group hired
prior to January 1, 1995 and continuously employed thereafter,
a ~tipend of $200, and to grant to executive managers a day
off with pay to be used or lost during 1996. There were no
actions taken in the Closed Session of December 12, 1995 which
are required under the Brown Act to be reported.
5b. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE RESIGNATION OF ANDREW DELGADO FROM
THE MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW COMMITTEE 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.
5c. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY FILED BY
CHARLES KEITH HAWKINS BE DENIED.
JDG:mab
~J~
L~-:
~~~
--
---
OlY OF
CHULA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Date:
December 13, 1995
From:
Bruce M. Boogaard, city
City councfjl,n
Attorney I ~'MJ
To:
The Honorable Mayor and
Re:
Report Regarding Actions Taken in Closed Session
for the Meetings of 12/5/95 and 12/12/95
The city Attorney hereby reports to the best of my knowledge from
observance of actions taken in the Closed Session that at the
Closed Session of December 5, 1995, the City Council deliberated on
the compensation structure for middle manager positions I
unrepresented positions and executive manager positions. The
Council voted to grant to middle managers and members of the
unrepresented group hired prior to January 1, 1995 and continuously
employed thereafter, a stipend of $200, and to grant to executive
managers a day off with pay to be used or lost during 1996.
There were no actions taken in the Closed Session of 12/12/95 which
are required under the Brown Act to be reported.
BMB:lgk
C:\lt\clossess,no
,SLl- -)
276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691
~ECEIVED
MEMORANDUM
"95 lEe 12 P 2 :52
It li~,~AO~~~C
December 12, 1995
TO: Vicki Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk
FROM: Alicia Gonzalez, Administrative Office Assistant" C\ 0.
SUBJECT: Resignation of Andrew Delgado - Mobilehome Rent Review
Commission
Vicki, I'm sending you this memo to let you know that Member Andrew Delgado
from the Mobilehome Rent Review Commission resigned. The reason being is that
he no longer resides in the City of Chula Vista as of December 1, 1995.
ag
[AG\C:\ WPWIN\ALlCIA \MEMOS\DELGADO. MEM I
(~
, ,~.'RI1TE~J
/).,~ /:
~ 1>-5 /j/u~ ( i/
ck 21~
(,:/ / /)
. !/~~ ;:/C P
,::OM ,- . U~~"i~';;~ ~. '.A ~,~(d .
.. h /.y;/p;~
~-/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
5;;..
Meeting Date: 12/19/95
SUBMITTED BY:
Claim Against the City
.....-
Director of Personnel l t:'
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No~
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager
, " I'"
I
I
7dl
Claimant:
Mr. Charles Keith Hawkins
467 Berland Way
Chula Vista, CA 91910
On October 23, 1995, Mr. Charles Keith Hawkins filed a Claim Against the City ofChula Vista
alleging damages within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court in connection with his disability retirement
from the City; specifically, he alleged he was entitled to restoration and/or reimbursement of various
leave/vacation pay and other benefits. The claim was deemed insufficient and an Amended Claim was filed
on November 29, 1995.
Due to remote liability on the part of the City, it is the recommendation ofthe City Attorney's
Office and Risk Management that the Claim be denied,
RECOMMENDATION: Deny the above Claim.
J
5c-/
COONCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEK t /,;,Z/
HEETrNG ~~ ~5 ~~(-
ITEM TITLE: Ordinance cJ.&5'l. Amending Chula Vis~~~?niciPal Codes
2.60.020, 2.60.030 and 2.60.150 ~ ~~
SOBMITTED BY: Chief of pOlice~~ ~~\~\~G
~ O~v
REVIEWED BY: city Manager~~~ (4/5th's Vote: Yes__No Xl
As currently constructed the Chula vista Municipal Code does not
provide for the donation of lost or stolen property to charitable
organizations. The proposed ordinance amends Chapter 2.60 of the
Chula vista Municipal Code to provide for such donat~ons.
RECOMMENDATION:
Place the Ordinance on first reading.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: NjA
The Chula vista police Activities League was formed in January 1992.
The mission of the police Activities League is to improve the quality
of life in Chula Vista by establishing a union between youth and the
community. This is to be accomplished by leading youth to positive
life choices through affirmative interaction in academics, recreation
and social events. Some of the goals of the Police Activities League
are to strengthen the decision making skills of youth: to offer
constructive leisure alternatives, to provide positive role models to
the youth of Chula vista and to collaborate with other youth servicing
agencies to ensure services are maximized to their fullest extent.
The police Activities League has set about accomplishing these goals
through numerous chari table ~vents and programs. Notable among the
successful programs administered by PAL and related organizations are
the Midnight Basketball program involving "at risk" teenagers in the
community; the athletic programs provided by the Otay Golden Hands
Boxing Club, whose programs are funded almost solely with PAL money:
the 1994 Holiday Toy and Food Drive, which benefited over 1000
children and 300 families and numerous social events such as off-road
races and sporting events to which children have opportunities to
attend at no cost.
The 1994 Holiday Toy and Food Drive was successful in part because we
were able to provide bicycles to needy children who otherwise would
not have received such an expensive gift. The 15 bicycles which were
donated were selected from bicycles which had been in impound for
approximatel~ three months. All of the bicycles had been kept for the
required per10d of time and were designated for auction. The bicycles
are generally auctioned at a fraction of their true value and net the
City's general fund a minimal amount of money.
t .,/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
PAGE 2, ITEM
~
MEETING DATE
12-12-95
The recommended amendments to the Municipal Code, would enable PAL to
select from the stock of police impounded bicycles set for auction
throughout the year enabling PAL to choose from a much larger pool of
bikes for distribution to needy children in the communi ty . The
ability to distribute these bicycles would strongly emphasize the
Pol ice Department and the City's commitment to community Oriented
policing and strengthen the bond between the Police Department and the
youth of the City of Chula vista. The donation of bicycles last year
required a special act of City Council. These amendments would make
it unnecessary for City Council to take special action each year.
Bicycles would be distributed at the direction of the PAL board of
directors to needy children in the City of Chula Vista. The police
Activities League would be designated to oversee and control the
distribution of the bicycles. P.A.L. has received a commitment from
Laidlaw to provide a storage container for the selected bicycles at no
cost. We also have a space donated by Cal-stores in the 900 block of
Broadway, adjacent to the SVPP satellite office, to place the
container.
steps have been taken to ensure that the city will not be subject to
claims for injuries incurred by youth ridl.ng donated bikes. The
Automobile Club of Southern California bicycle mechanics inspect the
bicycles to insure they are road safe. All families receivin~ bikes
sign a release of liab1lity form relieving the City of Chula V1sta of
responsibility for injuries sustained by riders of the bikes. These
forms will be maintained by the PAL Board of Directors. Additionally,
each individual receiving a bicycle is also provided with a new
bicycle helmet.
Copies of the proposed amended city ordinances (Attachment A) and the
Acceptance and Acknowledgement forms (Attachments B and C) are
attached to this report. PAL is currently working with the City
Attorney to develop a release of liability form that the recipient
will be required to sign on acceptance of a bicycle.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Bicycles typically bring an average of $18.00 each at auction. In
fiscal year 1994-1995 16 bicycles were diverted to P.A.L. by council
action, for a total impact of $288.00. Staff anticipates similar
donation levels in the future. The number of bicycles which are of
quality to be donated comprise a small percentage of the total
bicycles impounded. Therefore staff sees no need to limit the number
of bicycles which can be donated.
cym
t~
:\\O~
'iJO'?
~~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CH~~~VISTA
AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF CH!l~~ 2.60 OF
THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL COD~ ~ARDING LOST
AND STOLEN PROPERTY/\;;\~V
''0''''
':)\;
ORDINANCE NO.
:2&5?
The City Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby
ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That section 2.60.020 of the Chula vista
Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
2.60.020 Holding period-Bicycles and perishable material-Sale
permitted when.
Unclaimed perishable property may be sold at public auction or
transferred in the manner set forth in this chapter for personal
property other than perishable property prior to the expiration of
the six-month period. Bicycles may be sold at public auction in
the same manner. or donated to a non-profit. charitable
orqanization desiqnated by the chief of police after being held by
the police department for a period of at lenst ninety days.
SECTION II: That Section 2.60.030 of the Chula vista
Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
2.60.030 Sale-Procedure generally.
After holding such unclaimed property for the period described
herein, the same shall be sold by the chief of police or his duly
authorized representative, at public auction to the highest bidder
or, in the case of unclaimed bicycles onlY. may be donated to a
non-prof it. charitable orqanization desiqnated by the chief of
police. Anv donation of bicycles shall be made pursuant to
department policy for desiqnation of eliqible non-profit,
charitable orqanizations which shall set forth standards includinq,
but not limited to: that the recipient orqanization will use the
bicvcles for donation to vouths determined to be "at risk" or of
special financial need and that donations of bicycles will not be
made to members of the police department or their respective
families. Alternatively, pursuant to the provisions of section
2.60.035 said unclaimed property may be transferred to the city.
SECTION III: That Section 2.60.150 of the Chula vista
Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
2.60.150 vesting of title to unclaimed property in finder.
A. Valuation of Twenty-five Dollars or More.
~'?
If the reported value of the property. is twenty-five dollars
or more and no owner appears and proves his ownership of the
property. within ninety. days, the police department shall
cause notice of the property to be published at least once in
a newspaper of general circulation. If, after seven days
following the first publication of the notice, no owner
appears and proves his ownership of the property and the
person who found or saved the property. pays the cost of the
publication, the title shall vest in the person who found or
saved the property unless the property was found in the course
of employment by an employee of any public agency in which
case the property shall be sold at public auction. Title to
the property shall not vest in the person who found or saved
the property or in the successful bidder at the public auction
unless the Required Fee(s) is first paid to the city, county,
or city and county whose police department caused the notice
to be published.
B. Valuation of Less Than Twenty-five Dollars.
If the reported value of the property is less than twenty-five
dollars and no owner appears and proves his ownership of the
property within ninety days, the title shall vest in the
person who found or saved the property, unless the property.
was found i~ the course of employment by an employee of any
public agency, in which case the property shall be sold at
public auction.
C. Exception - Bicycle.
If the found or saved property is a bicycle, if no owner
appears and proves ownership of the bicycle wi thin ninety
days, the tItle shall not vest in the person who found or
saved the bicycle. All such unclaimed bicycles shall be sold
at public auction or donated for charitable purposes pursuant
to this chapter.
SECTION IV: 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 form by
Richard P. Emerson, Chief
of Police
c: \ or\ chap260
t'(
A'l TACHMENT A
r77' !""'~-~
.. . r:~ '. . - ... '"
. .'.. \ . '
r,.: ~,
' '
, ,
r ' I
I I
r.,
..----.. ,......,..~.~r.~
:. .'..J.~
,.' I
,~ " ,,' '-. . I I
~ ~D!NANCE'""N~
~ ,!
r-j
f: 'J
' .
!l' .~.
W
MEETING DATE: 12-12-9:
ATTACHMENT A
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS
OF CHAPTER 2.60 OF THE CHULA VISTA
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING LOST AND STOLEN PROPERTY.
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as
follows:
SECTION I: That section 2.60.020 of the Chula vista Municipal
Code is amended to read:
2.60.020 Boldinq period-Bicycles and perishable material-Sale or
Donation permitted wh~n.
Unclaimed perishable property may be sold at public auction or
transferred in the manner set forth in this chapter for personal
property other than perishable property prior to the expiration of
the six-month period. Bicycles may be sold at public auction in
the same manner. or donated to a non-profit. charitable
oraanization desianated by the chief of police after being held by
the police department for a period of at least ninety days. (Ord.
2098 Sl (part), 1985; Ord. 1067 Sl (part), 1967; prior code S2.38).
SECTION II: That section 2.60.030 of the Chula vista Municipal
Code is amended to read:
2.60.030 Sale or Donation-Procedure qenerally.
After holding such unclaimed property for the period described
herein, the same shall be sold by the chief of pOlice or his duly
authorized representativeT at public auction to the highest bidder
or. in the case of unclaimed bicycles onlY. may be donated to a
non-profit. charitable oraanization desianated bY the chief of
police. Any donation of bicycles shall be made pursuant to
department policy for desianation of eliqible non-profit.
charitable oraanizations which shall set forth standards includina.
but not limited to: that the recipient oraanization will use the
bicycles for donation to youths determined to be "at risk" or of
special financial need and that donations of bicycles will not be
made to members of the police department or their respective
families. Alternatively, pursuant to the provisions of Section
2.60.035 said unclaimed property may be transferred to the city.
(Ord. 2098 Sl (part), 1985; Ord. 1067 Sl (part), 1967; prior code
S2.39) .
ATTACHMENT A
~~
~TTACHMENT A MEETING DATE: 12-12-9
PAGE 2
ATTACHMENT A
SECTION III: That section 2.60.150 of the Chula Vista Municipal
code is amended to read:
2.60.150 vesting of title to unclaimed property in finder.
A. Valuation of Twenty-five Dollars or More.
If the reported value of the property. is twenty-five dollars
or more and no owner appears and proves his ownership of the
property. within ninety. days, the police department shall
cause notice of the property to be published at least once in
a newspaper of general circulation. If, after seven days
following the first publication of the notice, no owner
appears and proves his ownership of the property and the
person who found or saved the property. pays the cost of the
publication, the title shall vest in the person who found or
saved the property unless the property was found in the course
of employment by an employee of any public agency in which
case the property shall be 'sold at public auction. Title to
the property shall not vest in the person who found or saved
the property or in the successful bidder at the pUblic auction
unless the Required Fee(s) is first paid to the city, county,
or city and county whose police department caused the notice
to be published.
B. Valuation of Less Than Twenty-five Dollars.
If the reported value of the property is less than twenty-five
dollars and no owner appears and proves his ownership of the
property wi thin ninety days, the title shall vest in the
person who found or saved the property, unless the property.
was found in the course of employment by an employee of any
public agency, in which case the property shall be sold at
public auction.
C. Exception - Bicycle.
If the found or saved property is a bicycle, if no owner
appears and proves ownership of the bicycle within' ninety
days, the title shall not vest in the person who found or
saved the bicycle. All such unclaimed bicycles shall be sold
at public auction or donated for charitable ourooses pursuant
to this chapter.
SECTION IV: 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 form by:
Richard P. Emerson,
Chief of
Erik R. Basil,
Acting Assistant
City Attorney
r' r"~~~'~.i'J
I
.-'
d".
I .
t ~
"
tj~,~.
. .'
~-~
, : ~
~ \;;.A.......J'- ~ W
ATTACHMENT A
-
-~----
AU.\C-IDiENT B
MEETING DATE: 12-12-~
ATTACHMENT B
!HAPPY HOLIDAYS/ FELICES DIAS DE FIESTA!
The police Activities League wishes you a Merry Christmas, and
hopes you will enjoy your bicycle. Ridin~ bicycles is a lot of
fun, but as with all recreational activit1es, accidents can and
do occur. We want you to be careful and ride safely. Please
read each section of this agreement carefully and ask questions
if you don to clearly understand any part of it.
Please
initial:
ATTACHMENT B
1. I understand that all riders (adults and
children) should wear a bicycle helmet whenever
riding a bicrcle. I promise to wear my helmet
whenever I r1de my bike.
2. I understand that this bicycle is subject to all
the laws of the road, .and that I have to obey
traffic rules when I ride it.
3. I have been instructed in the use of brakes and
gear shifting mechanisms, and in the use of brakes
and gear shifting mechanisms, and in the use of all
quick release mechanisms (wheels, seatposts, and
brakes) as well as any wheel retention devices on
this bicycle.
4. I understand reflectors are a safety item
installed on the bicycle and should not be removed.
5. I understand that the bicycle I am receiving is
a "used" bicycle, is not brand new, and is not
waranteed or guaranteed by the police Activities
League or the City of Chula vista.
6. I understand regular maintenance is required to
keep this bicycle operating ~roperly and that if I
don't take care of my bike, 1t may be unsafe to
ride. I know that "regular maintenance" includes
frequent inspection of all quick release mechanisms
and wheel retention devices. I also understand that
maintaining appropriate tire pressure at all times
is essential for the safe use of this bicycle. The
recommended tire pressure is marked on the tire.
7. I understand that lights are required by law
when operating a bicycle at night.
By initialing each item on the above checklist, I
have indicated my complete understanding of each of
these points, and I acknowledge my responsibilities
regardin~ the contents. As a parent, I also agree
to expla1n the points on this checklist to my child.
X
Parent or Guardian Signature
~,?
'TTACHMENT C
,
MEETING DATE: 12-12-S
ATTACHMENT C
!HAPPY HOLIDAYS/ FELICES DIAS DE FIESTA!
La Liga de Actividades policiaca les desean una Feliz Navidad, y
que disfruten sus bicicleta. Correr una bicicleta es muy
divertido, pero como cualquier actividad recreacional, accidentes
pueden ocurrir. Nosostros queremos que tengan precaucion y
corran sus bicicletas con cuidado. Favor de leer cada secci6n de
este acuerdo cuidadosamente y hagan preguntas si tienen alguna
duda.
Favor
inicial:
ATTACHMENT C
1. Yo entiendo que cada ciclista (nino 0 adulto)
deber usar un casco al correr su bicicleta. Yo
prometo usar mi casco cuando al correr mi bicicleta.
2. Yo entiendo que esta bicicleta esta sujeta a
todos las leyes de la carretera, y yo tengo que
obedecer las leyes 'de transito.
3. Yo he sido instruido en como usar 105 frenos y
mecanisme de cambio, asi como el asiento y las
llantas.
4. Yo entiendo que los reflectores son instalados
para mi seguridad y no deben ser removidos.
5. Yo entiendo que la bicicleta que voy a recibir
es "usada", no es nueva, y no esta garantizada por
la Liga de Actividades policiaca 0 la Ciudad de
Chula Vista.
6. Yo entiendo que mantenimiento es requerido para
mantener esta bicicleta operando apropiadamente y si
no la cuido, sera peligrosa al correr. LO entiendo
que el mantenimiento incluye la inspeccion de frenos
y llantas. Yo tambien comprendo que mantener la
presion adecuada en las llantas es esential para la
seguridad de esta bicicleta. La presion recomendada
est a marcada en la llanta.
7. Yo entiendo que luces son requeridas por ley al
operar una bicicleta en la noche.
Al iniciar cada articulo, yo he indicado m~ completa
comprension de cada punta y yo reconozco m1
responsabilidad con relacion al contenido. Como
padre/madre, yo tambien acepto explicar estos puntas
a mi hijo/hija.
X
Firma del Padre/Madre
~'Z/
ITEM TITLE:
~;\I
I~' '/
RJ, ,.1'1"''1,<'
"'!w' J )- i
11 ,I jr,l
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
7
)
J7?:'/'.I.~O " -
/7 --'.
))
Item
Meeting Date
Public Hearing: PCM-96-07; Consideration of amendments to the
EastLake II General Development Plan (EastLake I Extension), EastLake
Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, Planned Community District
Regulations, Air Quality Improvement Plan, Water Conservation Plan
and Public Facilities Financing Plan.
Resolution /8'l5?Approving the EastLake II (EastLake I Expansion)
General Development Plan, EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area
(SP A) Plan, EastLake' Greens Air Quality Improvement Plan, EastLake
Greens Water Conservation Plan and Eastlake Greens Public Facilities
Financing Plan.
, ~ ~\O~
Ordinance .2/...';)6 Approving Amendments to the Eas~t&'~oqy
(EastLake I Expansion) Planned Community District ~ti3ns (Land
Use District Map only). St..CO~'O ~t.
~'
Director of Plannin~ ~ .
City Manage....fl ~ A (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No-Xl
The EastLake Development Company has requested amendments to the EastLake II General
Development Plan (EastLake I Expansion), EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA)
Plan, Planned Community District Regulations, Air Quality Improvement Plan, Water
Conservation Plan and Public Facilities ,Financing Plan. The purpose of these amendments is
to:
. Relocate two neighborhood park parcels,
. Expand the area available for community purpose facilities (PQ)
. Transfer Densities among parcels within the SPA
. Adjust land use and parcel boundaries
. Designate parcel R-26 for low income housing in accordance with the recently adopted
EastLake Affordable Housing Program and EastLake Greens Affordable Housing
Agreement.
The docwnents affected by the amendments, as proposed to be revised, have been provided for
your consideration and approval (see Sections 4-8).
~7//
Page 2, Item /5'//
Meeting Date 12/12/95
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that no new or supplemental EIR is
neces3ary and has prepared an addendum to FSEIR-86-04 (B), EastLake Greens, which must
be considered by the City Council prior to a decision on the project (see Attachment 4).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
On November 29, 1995, the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that the City
Council approve the proposed amendments to the EastLake II (EastLake I Expansion) General
Development Plan and EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan in accordance
with resolution PCM-96-07.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt the attached resolution and ordinance approving the proposal based
on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
DISCUSSION:
The EastLake Greens Planned Community is located on the south side of Otay Lakes Road
between Hunte Parkway and the future alignment of the SR-125 Freeway (see Locatnr/
Exhibit A).
The proposed GDP and SPA amendments consist of relocating two neighborhood parks
(parcels P-3 & P-5), transferring densities among parcels within the SPA, expanding the
acreage available for community purpose facilities (PQ) and designating Parcel R-26 for low
income housing in accordance with the recently adopted EastLake Affordable Housing Program
and EastLake Greens Affordable Housing Agreement (see Section 5 Appendix A).
The General Plan Designations for the parcels involved are Residential Low Medium Density
(3-6 dulac) and Residential Medium High Density (11-18 dulac). The Greens, however, is
planned to be developed at about 4.5 dulac. The non-residential parcels are designated Parks
and Recreation (P) and Public & Quasi-Public (PQ).
The existing EastLake Greens GDP and SPA are not consistent with the Housing Element of
the General Plan. However, the proposed amendments would bring these documents into
conformance.
The following paragraphs discuss each of the proposed amendments in more detail:
~ 7/.;2
Page 3, Item /519
Meeting Date 12/12/95
General Development Plan Amendment (Section 4)
The General Development Plan text, map and statistical tables are proposed to be amended to
reflect the proposed land use designation boundary adjustments and the following land use
designation modifications which represent the requested density transfers and park relocations:
Parcel
Change From
To
R-lO
R-12
LM (Low Medium 3-6 dulac)
M (Medium 6-11 dulac)
M (medium 6-11 dulac)
LM & P (Low Medium 3-6 dulac
and Park and Recreation)
R-18
R-20
R-21
R-23
M (Medium 6-11 dulac)
M (Medium 6-11 dulac)
MH (Medium High 11-18 dulac)
MH (Medium High 11-18 dulac)
LM (Low Medium 3-6 dulac)
No change
DELETED
LM & P (Low Medium 3-6 dulac and
Park & Rec)
MH (Medium High 11-18 dulac)
(Removes Interim Designation)
PQ (Public Quasi-Public)
LM (Low Medium 3-6 dulac)
R-26
LM (Low Medium 3-6 dulacj
(Interim Designation)
P (Parks and Rec)
P (Parks and Rec)
P-3
P-5
The proposed changes, which include a reduction in the total number of dwelling units from
6660 to 6527 (-133), are illustrated in the proposed GDP Plan (see Exhibits B-1 & B-2).
EastLake Greens Sectional Planninl!: Area (SPA, Plan Amendment (Section 5)
The SPA amendment includes the relocation of two neighborhood parks, density transfers, land
use boundaries adjustment, expansion of the community purpose facilities land use designation
(PQ), minor refinements to the Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP), and designating parcel
R-26 for low income housing.
Neighborhood Parks Relocation
The neighborhood park identified as P-3 in the site utilization plan is presently shown
on the east side of EastLake Parkway, partially within the southerly utility easement
(see Exhibit C). The park site contains 11 acres, but 4.7 acres are within the SDG&E
easement located along the south end of the parcel. Thus, the net usable park land is
about 6.3 acres. The park is proposed to be moved to the 10 acre site presently
identified as R-21. This parcel, which is targeted for 120 units, would be deleted and
the acreage transferred to the public quasi-public parcel PQ-2 (see Exhibit D). Although
the gross acreage of the new park location is smaller, the net usable park land acreage
provided for the EastLake Greens increases by approximately 3.7 acres.
~
0__ 7
/ ~
/
Page 4, Item /.t':tJ
Meeting Date 12/12/95
The three acre private neighborhood park identified as parcel P-5 (see Exhibit C) is also
proposed to be relocated to the southwest comer of South Greens View Drive and
Hunte Parkway (see Exhibit D). The park acreage remains the same but the new
location provides better exposure and linkage to the open space lot and trails located
directly across South Greens View Drive.
The relocation of the park parcels (Parcel P-3 and P-5) respond to final master plan
refinements intended to improve the Planned Community's recreational facilities and
add to the quality of living at EastLake.
Density Transfers
The density transfers and parcel boundary adjustments are market based changes and
planned community plan refinements intended to improve the quality of the
neighborhoods. These changes will result in a reduction of 133 dwelling units without
significant change to the original EastLake Greens Planned Community design.
For tPe purpose of this report, the density transfers can be categorized as minor and
major. Minor density transfers are those that involve an increase or reduction of 12 or
less units and do not include changes in the GDP Land Use Plan designations or in the
residential type. The following list reflects the proposed minor density transfers:
Parcel R-3 -10
Parcel R-4 + I 0
Parcel R-6 -12
Parcel R-12 -1
Parcel R-15 -I
Parcel R-22 -2
Parcel R-24 +2
Parcel R-27 -4
Parcel R-28 -9
The acreage and target densities have changed slightly on these parcels but the unit type
and GDP land use designation remain unchanged (see Exhibit C).
Major density transfers, which are those involving more than 12 units and which require
changes in the GDP and Land Use District Designations, are as follows:
~~/r
Page 5, Item /51)
Meeting Date 12/12/95
Parcel 16: The acreage on this parcel increased from 10.5 to 10.9 (+ 0.4 ac) and the
number of units increased from 83 to 109 (+26 units). The target density has also
changed from 7.9 to 10 dulac which is consistent with the existing GDP designation of
Residential Medium Density.
Parcel 18: On this parcel the acreage does not change, but the number of units is
reduced from 87 to 54 (-33 units). Consequently, the density is reduced from 8.8 to 5.5
and the GDP designation change from Medium Density (6-11 dulac) to Low MediUIJl
Density (3-6 dulac).
Parcel 20: For this parcel, the acreage is reduced from 15.7 to 14.3 (-1.4 acres) and
the number of units reduced from -.146 to 109 (-37 units). The overall result is a
reduction in density from 9.0 to 7.6 dulac. which is consistent with the existing GDP
designation of Medium Density (6-11 dulac)
Parcel 21: This parcel is deleted and the acreage transferred to parcel PQ-2 (-10 ac
& -120 units).
Parcel 23: The acreage on this parcel is increased from 15.8 to 20.3 (+4.5 ac), but
the dwelling units h~ve been reduced from 214 to 72 (-142 units). The reduction in
units results in a decrease in density from 13.3 to 3.5 dulac, a change in land use
designation from Medium High Density (11-18 dulac) to Low Medium Density (3-6
dulac), and change in residential unit type from Residential Condominium to Residential
Estates.
Parcel 26: The acreage on this parcel is increased from 13.3 to 17 acres (+3.7 ac)
and the number of units from 60 to 260. The density increases from 4.5 to 19.5 dulac
(+15 dulac) which changes the GDP land use designation from Interim Low Medium
Density (3-6 dulac) to Medium .High Density (11-18 dulac). The increase in density
would allow EastLake to implement the recently adopted EastLake Greens Affordable
Housing Program.
The proposed density transfers result in an overall reduction of density (133 dwelling
units) without a significant change in the original master plan design. The site
utilization plan is proposed to be amended to reflect the proposed General Development
Plan and SPA Plan changes (see Exhibit D).
Boundary Adjustments
As a result of the relocation of the park sites and the density transfers, the configuration
of Parcel 10 has been modified, and the acreage reduced from 45.4 to 34.6 acres (-10.8
acres). The number of units, however, remains the same (246). The overall result is an
~
"
./
/' -~)
Page 6, Item 1M
Meeting Date 12/12/95
increase in density from 5.4 to 7.1 dulac which changes the GDP land use designation
from Low Medium Density (3-6 dulac) to Medium Density (6-11 dulac) (see Exhibits
B-1 and B-2).
The reconfiguration of Parcel 10 and other parcels discussed in the Density Transfer
Section of this report do not change the original development pattern and circulation
system of the EastLake Master Plan. These boundary adjustments would be
incorporated in the EastLake Greens Master Tentative Map through a separate lot line
adjustment process.
Expansion of the Community Purpose Facilities (PQ) land use designation
Section 19.48.020 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code requires that all planned
community (PC) districts designate land for community purpose facilities at a rate of
1.39 acres per 1,000 population. The current EastLake Greens SPA plan, with 2,871
dwelling units, provides a total of 17.1 acres in two separate parcels (PQ-l and PQ- 2),
or about 2 acres per 1,000 population (see Exhibit C).
The proposed amendments reduce the acreage on Parcel PQ-l from 12.3 to 10.3 (-2
acres), increase the acreage on Parcel PQ-2 from 4.8 to 15.8 (+ 11 acres) and reduce
the total number of dwelling units from 2871 to 2738 (-133). With the reduction of
133 dwelling units and the added acreage, the ratio would be inc!eased to 3.2 acres/
1,000 population.
Although the gross acreage provided for community purpose facilities exceeds the
Chula Vista Municipal Code requirement, a total of 15 acres are either used for other
purposes or have limited use. Parcel PQ-l (10.3 ac.) is presently occupied by an
existing water storage tank and 4.7 acres of the expanded Parcel PQ-2 are within a
utility easement. Thus, the net usable acreage is about 11.1 acres which represents about
1.37 acres per 1,000 population. This ratio is more in keeping with the CVMC
requirement. It is important to note, however, that the area within the utility easement
could be used for outdoor type uses in conjunction with a community facility and that
the excess acreage could potentially be used when the EastLake' s southerly adjacent
land is master planned.
Designation of Parcel R-26 for Low Income Housing
The EastLake I General Development Plan (EastLake I extension) designates parcel
R-26 Residential Low Medium Density (3-6 dulac). However, in December 1993, the
City Council approved an amendment to the General Plan to increase the density of
parcels R-9 and R-26, and reinstated a previously deferred requirement to provide 10%
of the approved housing units as affordable to low and moderate income households.
~
...
'--' /
/ J?
Page 7, Item 15'4
Meeting Date 12/12/95
To comply with this requirement the City Council approved, in July of this year, an
Affordable Housing Program for the EastLake Greens as well as the remaining
undeveloped portions of EastLake.
The Affordable Housing Program implementation strategies identify parcel R-26 as the
first low income housing site within the Greens, and it is expected that this site would
provide the bulk of the Greens low income housing commitment. To enable this to
occur, and consistent with the General Plan for this site, the land use designation is
proposed to be changed from Low Medium Density (3-6 duJac) to Medium High
Density (11-18 duJac), and the allowed number of units increased from 60 to 260. The
above mentioned Affordable Housing Program is being incorporated as part of the
EastLake Greens SPA (Section 5 appendix A)
EastLake Greens Planned Community District Reeulations Amendment (Section 6)
The Land Use District Map in the Planned Community District Regulation document is
proposed to be amended to reflect the above mentioned density transfers, land use boundary
adjustments and park relocations. More specifically the Land Use District Plan amendments
are as follows:
Parcel 21
From RC-15, Residential Condominium to
RS-5, Residential Estates
Parcel 23
From PC-IS, Residential Condominium to
OS-4, Open Space
Parcel P-3
From OS-4, Open Space to
YC-3, Village Center
Parcel P-5
From OS-4, Open Space to
RP-8, Residential Planned Concept & OS-4, Open Space
The existing and proposed land use district designations are illustrated on Exhibit F and G.
EastLake Greens Water Conservation Plan. Air Quality Improvement Plan. and Public
Facilities Financin~ Plan (Section 7)
As a result of the proposed amendments, minor statistical amendments to the EastLake Greens
Air Quality Improvement Plan, Water Conservation Plan and Public Facilities Financing Plan
are being proposed to reflect updated project data.
The Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP), however, In addition to nunor statistical
amendments and project phasing changes, includes new language reinstating EastLake's
previous agreement to construct a previously deferred community center and bond $700,000
~ 7//
Page 8, Item /.5/1
Meeting Date 12/12/95
for that facility (see Specific language in Section 8). The background rationale and justification
for the amended PFFP Parks language is addressed in a separate attached report from Parks and
Recreation.
ANALYSIS
The proposed GDP and SPA amendments incorporate the recently adopted Mfordable Housing
Program and identify a parcel to implement the previously deferred requirement to provide
10% of the total units contained within the SPA as affordable to low and moderate income
households. The amendment also brings the GDP and SPA into compliance with the Housing
Element of the Chula Vista General Plan.
The expansion of the Public/Quasi-Public land use designation would reinstate the community
purpose facilities (PQ) acreage taken by the existing water tank and allow the establishment
of more traditional community services, such as churches, day care centers, assembly halls, etc.
in the remaining PQ acreage.
The proposed density transfers, which will result in a reductior of 133 units, will also allow
the developer to respond to present housing market demands and provide land use changes that
complement the existing planned community recreational facilities and quality of life at
EastLake.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons noted above, staff recommends approval of the project in accordance with the
attached Planning Commission resolution.
FISCAL IMP ACT: The applicant has paid for all costs associated with the processing of
these amendments.
Attachments
1. Council Resolutions and Ordinances
2. Exhibits:
3. Planning Commission Minutes and Resolutions
4. FSEIR-86-04 (B) Addendum
5. Disclosure Statement
6. EastLake Park Issues Report
(M:\H0ME\PLANNINGILUIS/PCM-9607,113
~ F7--~
ORDINANCE NO.
,(~r
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE II (EASTLAKE O\.\O~
I EXPANSION) PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULA!).~\
(LAND USE DISTRICT MAP ONLY) AND CONSIDERING AN ~~~UM
TO FSEIR-86-04 (B). ~~\)\\
CO~\)
S~
I. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the properties which are the subject matter of this ordinance are
diagrammatically represented on Exhibit E and F attached hereto and incorporated
by this reference, and located within the EastLake II (EastLake I Expansion)
Planned Community Area of the City of Chula Vista ("Project Site"); and
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on September 29,1995, the EastLake Development Company
("Developer") filed an application requesting amendments to the EastLake II
(EastLake I Expansion) Planned Community District Regulations (known as
Document No. _ on file with the Jffice of the City Clerk) Land Use District
Map and Land Use District designations of certain areas within the EastLake
Greens Planned Community ("Project").
C. Prior Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, the Project Site has been in part the subject matter of a Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) Plan previously approved by City Council Resolution No.
15199 ("EastLake Greens SPA Plan") and Planned Community (P.e.) District
Regulations previously approved by City Council Ordinance No. 2317
(EastLake II-EastLake I Expansion-Planned Community District Regulations) on
July 18, 1989.
D. Planning Commission Record on Applications
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on said
project on November 29, 1995, and voted to recommend that the City Council
approve the Planned Community District Regulation Land Use District Plan
amendment in accordance with the findings listed below.
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at
their public hearing on this Project held on November 29, 1995, and the minutes
and resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incnrporated into the record of
this proceeding.
~
;-, C}
/.- I
E. City Council Record on Applications
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City
Council of the City of Chula Vista on December 12, 1995, on the Discretionary
Approval Application, and to receive the recommendations of the Planning
Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to same; and,
F. Discretionary Approvals Resolution and Ordinance
WHEREAS, at the same City Council meeting at which this ordinance was
introduced for first reading (December 12, 1995), the City Council of the City
of Chula Vista approved Resolution No. by which it imposed
amendments on the EastLake II (EastLake I Expansion) General Development
Plan, East Lake Greens Sectional Planning Area SPA Plan, EastLake Greens Air
Quality Improvement Plan, EastLake Greens Water Conservation Plan, and
East Lake Greens Public Facilities Financing Plan.
II NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine and ordain
as follows:
A. CERTIFICA TlON OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that no new supplemental
EIR is necessary and has prepared an addendum to FSEIR-86-04 (B), EastLake
Greens, which must be considered by the City Council prior to a decision on the
project.
B. INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council does hereby find that in the exercise of their independent review
and judgement, the addendum to EIR 86-04 in the form presented has been
prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act, the state EIR guidelines and the Environmental Review procedures of the
City of Chula Vista and does hereby adopt same.
C. FINDINGS FOR P-C PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONE AMENDMENTS
The City Council hereby finds that the proposed amendment to the EastLake II
(East Lake I Expansion) Planned Community District Regulations Land Use
Districts Plan are consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan, and public
necessity, convenience, the general welfare, and good zoning practice support the
amendments.
~
'7-- / &
., -?i1.-a.'i
D. APPROV AL OF ZONE AMENDMENTS
The City Council does hereby approve the Planned Community District
Regulation amendment to the Land Use District Map as diagrammatically
represented in Exhibit F.
III. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Ordinance is dependent
upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated;
and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined
by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this
resolution shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect
ab initio.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after
its adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
---z..- ,
&rUce M. Boogaard
C~ey
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
M: \sharcd\planning\pcm96-07 .cco
~ /"1/
ttHIS PAGE BLANK
.~ '7/);2..
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM
MEETING DATE
r
12/19/95
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution / 8"1 ~ I Accept Federal Grant Funds
Made Available by the violent Crime Control and
Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (the Crime Bill) and
Authorize Transfer of Funds Between Accounts.
SUBMITTED BY:
Chief of Police 1-'--/
\
,^?, \ t \
ci ty Manager \ i\,\~, 't 4/5th I s Vote: Yes_ No---1L)
REVIEWED BY:
On February 28, 1995, city Council authorized the City Manager to
submit appropriate COPS AHEAD applications (attachment A) in
response to federal grant funds made available by the violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (the Crime Bill).
As a result of the COPS AHEAD Appl ication Kit submitted by the
police department, the City of Chula vista has been awarded
$300,000 to fund four peace officers for the period April 1, 1995
through March 31, 1998. The current request is to accept the
amount awarded to fund four peace officers for fiscal year
1995-96.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution accepting the
three year grant award of $300,000 in COPS AHEAD funds and
authorize the transfer of funds between accounts to correct
fiscal year 1995-96 appropriation to reflect actual expenditures
as detailed in attachment B.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A
BACKGROUND: As part of the fiscal year 1995-96 budget process,
the police department requested an additional four peace officers
utilizing matching funds made available by the violent Crime
Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. The COPS AHEAD
Application Kit submitted by the police department was approved
by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented
Policing Services (COPS) in May 1995.
~-/
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date
r
12/19/9')
DISCUSSION: Community Oriented Policing has been a cornerstone
of the police department for many years. An action plan, based
on a formalized Problem Oriented Policing strategy, is in the
final stages of development. Personnel funded through the
violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, along with
city matching funds, will be utilized to successfully implement
this strategy.
Specifically, the police department will use these four officers
to enhance the department's ability to use non-traditional
community based partnerships in response to the unique needs of
our city. Community Oriented Policing and Problem Solving
prevents and solves crime by creating partnerships between police
officers and the residential and business communities.
The original budget request was developed many months in advance.
Actual charges that will be needed have been identified, and, in
order to have the budget figures compare to the federal grant
figures, we are requesting that funds be moved between accounts
to more accurately reflect the actual expenditures.
The police department has also submitted a COPS MORE grant
application in response to the federal funds made available by
the Crime Bill, to request funding for the Computer Aided
Dispatch/Records Management System/Mobile Data Terminals
automation project. The COPS MORE application is in process and
no information on project funding has been received.
FISCAL IMPACT: A total of $300,000 has been awarded by the u.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services (COPS). This amount will be matched with city funds
over the three year grant period.
Community Development Block Grant monies, in the amount of
$80,000, were approved by City Council in July 1995 (attachment
C) to be used as the city cash match for the first grant year
period, which encompasses FY 1995-96. As part of the Community
Development Block Grant process in subsequent years, staff may
also request additional CDBG funding for the cash match. ci ty
cash match funds for grant year two, FY 1996-97, and grant year
three, FY 1997-98, will also be requested as part of the
operating budget process.
BB:bb
~.r dl-
RESOLUTION NO.
J~/ ~ I
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS MADE
AVAILABLE BY THE VIOLENT CRIME CONTROL AND LAW
ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1994 (THE CRIME BILL)
WHEREAS, on February 28, 1995, the city Council
authorized the city Manager to submit appropriate COPS AHEAD
applications in response to federal grant funds made available by
the Violent Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (the Crime
Bill); and
WHEREAS, as a result of the COPS AHEAD Application Kit
submitted by the Police Department, the City of Chula vista has
been awarded $300,000 to fund four peace officers for the period
April 1, 1995 through March 31, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the current request is to accept the amount
awarded to fund four peace officers for FY 1995-96.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby accept the $300,000 in Federal
Grant funds made available by the Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act of 1994 (the Crime Bill).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said funds are hereby
authorized to be transferred between accounts to reflect actual
expenditures as set forth in Attachment B.
Presented by
Bruce M. Boogaa ~
Attorney I
Richard Emerson, Chief of
Police
c: \ I's\gl'ant. cop
'5'"-:; f -1
ATTACHMENT A
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEM:ENT
Item
Meeting Date 02/28/95
ITEM TITLE:
Report: City Application for Funds Made Available by the Violent Crime
Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (the Crime Bill).
O-IV
Chief of Police ~
SUBl\1ITTED BY:
REVIKWED BY: City Manager
(4/5th's Vote: Yes_ No..xJ
Staff is concerned with the time-lines established by the Department of Justice for receipt of
Crime Bill grant applications. Both the COPS AHEAD and COPS MORE applications are
requiring a maximum six-week turnaround. Due to the grant's complex requirements it will be
difficult to develop complete and effective applications and process the applications through the
customary City Council approval process within this time constraint. It is anticipated that the
competition for both programs will be intense. By accepting this recommendation, the City
Council will enable staff to focus on the development of effective Crime Bill grant applications.
RECOi\1MENDA TIONS:
1.
Authorize the City Manager to submit the appropriate COPS AHEAD and COPS MORE
applications.
2. Direct the City Manager to bring forward a detailed Crime Bill Funding Implementation
Plan for City Council review and approval prior to the acceptance of any grant award
resulting from these applications.
BOARD/COl\1MISSION RECOl\11Y1Et-rDA TION: N/ A
As you are aware, Congress is considering amendments to the Crime Bill. Although many
provisions of the Crime Bill and its total funding may be altered, the most recent information
available from the League of California Cities, the Police Executive Research Forum, the
International Association of Chiefs of Police, the Department of Justice and Congressman
Filner's office is that the core law enforcement related components of the COPS AHEAD and
COPS MORE programs will remain in tact.
Based on information received from the Sources listed above, Police Department staff will
continue to develop applications for both the COPS AHEAD and COPS MORE programs. You
may recall that Chula Vista has already received tentative approval to hire four (-~) police
officers through the COPS AHEAD program (see attachments), The COPS MORE program is
designed to underwrite technology enhancements that will have the effect of providing more
officers for community policing. COPS MORE would provide funding for up to 75 % of the
cost of equipment and other reimbursement-eligible costs. COPS MORE could potenti,;Jly
provide a partial funding source for the Public Safety Communications Project (Capital
Improvement Program PS-115), PS-115 \,'i!l implement JrHegrarcd computer-aided dispatch,
records management and mobile compute; communications systems for the Police and Fire
Departments, A. Request for Proposals has been issued a.nd staff anticipates bringing fOf\vard
~,-5'
Page 2, Item_
I\1eeting Date 02/28/95
a detailed report on the project's scope, time-line and funding as part of the FY 1995-96 budget
process.
However, staff is concerned with the time-lines established by the Department of Justice for
receipt of Crime Bill grant applications. Both the COPS AHEAD and COPS MORE applications
are requiring a maximum six-week turnaround. Due to the grant's requirements that the City
develop a grant specific community policing plan and coordinate its response with a variety of
criminal justice agencies on the state and local level, it will be difficult to develop complete and
effective applications, and process the applications through the customary City Council approval
process, within this time constraint. Moreover, amendments currently under consideration may
dramatically reduce the restrictions on the use of Crime Bill funding and potentially render the
applications being developed by staff at this time obsolete.
Therefore, staff is recommending that the City Council:
a) authorize the City Manager to submit COPS AHEAD and COPS MORE applications;
b) direct the City Manager to bring forward a detailed Crime Bill Funding Implementation
Plan for City Council review and approval prior to the acceptance of any grant award
resulting from these applications.
It is anticipated that the competition for both programs will be intense. By accepting this
recommendation, the City Council will enable staff to focus on the development of effective
Crime Bill grant applications.
Police Department staff will continue to closely monitor all bills affecting the Crime Bill
funding. Specific questions regarding Crime Bill applications can be directed to Kevin Hardy,
Principal Management Assistant at 691-5144.
FISCAL Il\.1PACT:
Keeping in mind the potential impact of pending legislation, a summary of the current potential
grant funding associated with these two programs and the associated City match requirement
estimates are summarized below. The COPS Program Application Guidelines authorize agencies
to fund their match requirement through the General Fund, the Community Development Block
Grant program or other funds including De\'elopment Impact Fees.
S231,033 has been previously appropriated from the Police Facilities DIF to PS-1l5, the Public
Safety Communications Project. These funds are available as a potential source for a portion
of the City match requirement associated with the COPS MORE Program.
Grant Title
COPS AHEAD
COPS i\fORE
POTEi'rTIAL IMP ACT
Gnmt F.:.~ll1din~
S 300,000
S 1,006,500
S l,336,500
j\rlltch Requirement
S 33 1 ,000
S 336,000
S 667,000
Att.1.::hments -- Previous Coun::i I In fOml:lCion Items Re ference the Cri me Bi II (2)
~,.~
ATTACHMENT B
Chula Vista COPS AHEAD Funding as Approved by City Council
4.0 Peace Officers
Account #
219-2197-5101
219-2197-5103
219-2197-5141
219-2197-5142
219-2197-5143
219-2197-5144
Account Description
Salaries & Wages
Overtime w/o Pers
Retirement Contribution - City
Employee Benefit Plan
Medicare
Workers' Compensation
Total
tF~? /<j~~
Original
$144,510
$4,990
$35,010
$22,710
$2,090
$10,690
$220,000
Revised
$157,857
$0
$38,160
$21,893
$2,090
$0
$220,000
~~~
~
~~-
----
----
ATTACHHENT C
C1lY OF
CHUlA VISTA
/
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
July 18, 1995
Police Department
Rick Emerson, Chief of Police
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Emerson:
SUBJECT: Community Development Funded Project(s) - Conditional Approv..ill
1. COPS I Grant Program
$ 80 ,000
2.
$
3.
$
4.
$
I am pleased to inform you that the project(~) listed above and the budget amount(s)
have been approved by the Chula Vista City Council. Community Development staff
is presently undertaking the environmental review necessary for the project(s), I v./ill
notify you in writing when all environmental review and procedural requirements have
been met and you may legally obligate the CDBG funds. Until then, please note that
grant funds obligated prior to or without my written authorization will not be allowed.
It is anticipated that all environmental review/procedural requirements will be met for
the listed project(s) by August 4, 1995
If you have any questions regarding this matter please call Juan Arroyo at 691-5047.
Sincerely,
~~,
Cllris Salomone
Community Development Director
CS/JA:ag
S'~I h -Ie)
: -.:: ::- 0 ,) R......., c.. \ E C,..... ,-,I ~;.. \ ~ -:. ::::.... _ ::- C :: ~" :. :-. ~ -:' -: ~~. ~;.' -:.: .: -
(AG B'\COND.APPROVAl L TRI
DISK ~6
~!."""-~~=":"::."
._"_'__,.!:.,"=:~:::' ~.,,,...,,.__...'.=":"':.,~~...... '..':.~",=:!:~~=~::::::;~,"""'~'" .~..,=:,-=:> L. _~""",,:,,. _.,. ,...,...,~=: " _ ,''''1'Il''''' ... ..4;;.
Attachment B
Chula Vista COPS AHEAD Funding as Approved by City Council
4.0 Peace Officers
Salary
Benefits
Salary & Benefits
Federal Share
Federal Share %
City Matching Funds
City Matching Funds %
Year 1
$144,514
$42.534
$187,048
$107,048
57%
$80,000
43%
Year 2
$159.328
$46,-156
$205,484
$102.742
50%
$102.742
50%
Year 3
$175,659
$62.349
$238,008
$90,205
38%
$147.803
62%
Total
$479.501
$151.039
$630,540
$299.995
48%
$330,545
52%
~---
:5
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No.:
9
Meeting Date: 12/19/95
ITEM TITLE:
RESOLUTION / $'1 t tfl... APPROVING THE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN ESGIL CORPORATION AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
TO PROVIDE PLAN CHECK ENGINEERING SERVICES
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of Building and Housin~ \<&V
REVI EWED BY:
City Manager ,;1 I
i /1
(4/5ths Vote: Yes~ No->
Background: On June 3, 1992, City Council approved Resolution No. 16530 approving
the agreement between the Esgil Corporation, 9320 Chesapeake Drive, San Diego and
the City to provide plan check engineering services for the Department of Building and
Housing on an as-needed basis. The contractual agreement between Esgil and the City
was a two-year agreement which expired on June 30, 1994. Due to the need for
technical engineering support services on projects of unique structural complexities, staff
prepared a Request For Proposals (RFP) on August 24, 1994 to select a vendor to
perform such engineering services and distributed the RFP to five interested vendors.
Of the five vendors which responded, the top three vendors were interviewed by the
Selection Committee who ascertained that the Esgil Corporation be selected to continue
the engineering technical support services for the City.
During the previous fiscal year only one project was submitted of such technical
complexity that it required the services of an outside plan review consultant. That
project, the Wal-Mart Store, had a highly complex foundation system consisting of a
combination of post-tensioned slabs supported by a caisson/slab structural foundation.
This projects was plan checked by Esgil Corporation. An additional reason for a
reduced need for outside consultant services during this period was that fact that the
Plan Check section was fully staffed (two plans examiners and a supervisor).
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt the Resolution approving the
agreement with Esgil Corporation for plan review engineering services, appropriating
$25,000 for FY 96, to the Department of Building and Housing from the General Fund
Unappropriated Fund Balance as the source of funding for the contract, and authorizing
extension of agreement for FY 97 for not to exceed $50,000 and FY 98 for not to exceed
$50,000 contingent upon" continued compliance with the Agreement and appropriation
of funds in FY 97 and FY 98.
'/-,/
Plan Check Engineering Services
Esgil Corporation
Item No.: 1
Page 2
Boards/Commissions Recommendation: N/A
Discussion: This agreement provides the Department of Building and Housing with a
necessary resource of engineering expertise for projects which require complex
engineering analysis. The Department intends to utilize the consultant's services for
those projects requiring advanced engineering skills for plan review or to meet
unforeseen circumstances. Projects anticipated in the near future that may qualify for
outside plan review include the MCA Amphitheater, Cinema Star Theater Complex at
Rancho Del Rey as well as several custom and production dwelling units that need to
be reviewed during the upcoming end of year furlough period. As such, the specific
annual dollar amount to be spent on these services is difficult to assess. The projected
costs for these services is identified under the Fiscal Impact portion of this report.
During the course of the past several years, the Department has dramatically reduced
the number of projects sent out for consultant review as illustrated by the attached graph
(Attachment A). This reduction was premised primarily upon the addition of a third Plans
Examiner which has enabled staff to process a greater number of projects internally. In
addition to the graph illustrating the fees paid to plan review consultants over the last
seven years the Department has prepared the Cost Comparison Worksheets mandated
by Council Policy 102-05.
The proposed contract has been reviewed by the City Attorney and has been approved
for form. Staff recommends approval of a one year contract with two (2) one year
options (total of three (3) years) with Esgil Corporation for the 'not to exceed' amounts
as specified in the Fiscal Impact portion of this report. A multi-year contract extending
through FY-98 is being recommended in an effort to avoid the staff costs associated with
the preparing of a request for proposal, administering the selection process and
amending the contract. The Agreement is structured to allow the City, at its sole
discretion, to terminate the agreement at any time after having given 30 days notice to
Esgil Corporation. The decision to use the services of Esgil Corporation for any or all
plan review rests solely with the City and will be made on a case-by-case basis by the
Building Official.
The Selection Process: The Selection Committee, as appointed by the City Manager,
was comprised of:
*
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Shauna Stokes, Principal Management Assistant
Brad Remp, Assistant Director of Building and Housing
*
*
9-~
Plan Check Engineering Services
Esgil Corporation
Item No.: '1
Page 3
The Committee diligently performed a comprehensive review of the proposed vendors
responding to the August 24, 1994 Request for Proposals (RFP) to perform such plan
review engineering services for the City. Esgil Corporation was selected as being not
only professionally competent, but competitive in their proposed rate structure. Staff has
had extensive contact with Esgil Corporation since 1987 and has concluded that their
structural, mechanical and electrical engineering capabilities are extremely competent,
thus insuring the highest quality plan review for our projects. This firm also provides
comprehensive plan reviews for compliance with all State of California Energy Standards
and California State Building Code, Title 24, Disabled Access Standards.
Upon receipt of the vendor's responses to the City's Request For Proposals, the
responses were reviewed by each member of the Selection Committee independently
using a preestablished list of evaluation criteria. Criteria evaluated included the
professional qualifications of employees, experience in reviewing complex structures,
and cost of services. A complete list of the evaluation criteria is attached (Attachment
B). Each firm was given a score of 1 - 5 points (1 being lowest/5 being highest) in each
of twenty-one (21) selected categories for a maximum total of 105 points possible (cost
breakdown was considered separately). With the preestablished evaluation listing results
tabulated, the Selection Committee invited three vendors to participate in the formal
interview process.
The five engineering firms were rated on their technical qualifications as follows:
Company Location Total Points
1. Esgil Corporation San Diego, CA 99/105
2. BSI, Inc. San Diego, CA 84/1 05
3. Willdan Associates San Diego, CA 74/1 05
4. VanDorpe Chou Assoc. Orange, CA 68/1 05
5. Star Consultant Poway, CA 43/105
Cost Comparison - An example of the cost of services that would be charged by each
of the companies based on an assumed commercial project of $50,000 valuation is
identified in the table below.
Company
Esgil Corporation
Fee for Service
$215.54
1,3
Plan Check Engineering Services
Esgil Corporation
Item No.:
9
Page 4
BSI Consultants $203.11
Willdan Associates $269.43
VanDorpe Chou Associates $175.13
Star Consultant $223.84
The Esgil Corporation was the unanimous choice of the Selection Committee based on
their outstanding qualifications, reputation in the region, highly successful experience in
prior service to the City of Chula Vista and the competitive rate charged for their service.
Fiscal Impact:
All costs for plan review services, whether performed in-house or by the City's consultant
are borne by the applicant in the form of plan check fees. The plan check fee provides
sufficient revenue to cover both the cost of the plan review service provided by the
vendor and the Departments administrative overhead costs. There is no additional cost
to the permit applicant beyond the normal plan check as a result of having their plans
reviewed by the City's plan review consultant. As previously stated, the Department of
Building and Housing determines at the time of submittal those projects, due to their
unique conditions, that will be transmitted to the plan check consultant for review.
The projected expenses for these services over the next three fiscal years is as follows:
FY 95-96 (0.50 year remaining)
FY 96-97
FY 97-98
- Up to a maximum amount of $25,000
- Up to a maximum amount of $50,000
- Up to a maximum amount of $50,000
Staff believes that these proposed amounts will not be exceeded based on the historical
trend of the past four years and an estimate of proposed projects for plan check
submittal.
Attachments:
(A) Bar Graph Depicting Consultant Fees Paid (FY-88 to FY-95)
(B) Plan Review Evaluation Sheet
BWR:bwr
(e :\WP51 \BUDGET\ESGI LAPR)
9-'1
RESOLUTION NO.
/8"/~~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AGREEMENT BETWEEN ESGIL
CORPORATION AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TO
PROVIDE PLAN CHECK ENGINEERING SERVICES, AND
AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, the two-year agreement with Esgil Corporation to
provide engineering technical support to the Department of Building
and Housing expired on June 30, 1994; and
WHEREAS, due to the need for technical engineering
support services on projects of unique structural complexities,
staff prepared a RFP to select a vendor to perform such engineering
services; and
WHEREAS, a Selection Committee performed a comprehensive
review of the five vendors responding to the August 24, 1994
Request for Proposals to perform such plan review engineering
services for the City; and
WHEREAS, Esgil Corporation was selected as being not only
professionally competent, but competitive in their proposed rate
structure.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve the Agreement between Esgil
corporation and the city of Chula vista to Provide Plan Check
Engineering Services, in the form presented with such minor
modifications or clarifications that may be required by the City
Attorney, 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 of Chula vista.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the amount of $25,000 is
hereby appropriated from the unappropriated fund balance of the
General Fund to Account 408-4014-DB001.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Kenneth G. Larsen, Director
of Building & Housing
~
C:\rs\esgil
'l'~/1-+
I ..
...
CD
0
111
m
en
G> -
-
r-
()
0
:D
'1J
.
D
~
-
r-
r-
C
)>
Z
)>
en
en
0
()
.
DOLLARS
(Thousands)
I\)
CJ1
..
~ ~ '
CJ1cg
OOCJ1
9- 7 fr-~
"A"
ATTACHMENT
0
m
\J
-- )>
::D
-i
-US:
~m
zZ
O-i
IO
~"
^OJ
Oc
0-
zr
enO
c-
rZ
~G)
z)>
-;Z
~CJ
m:c
(/)0
C
en
-
Z
G)
ATTACHMENT "B"
PLAN REVIEW SERVICES EVALUATION
1. BSI CONSULTANTS
2. ESGIL CORPORATION
3. STAR CONSULTING
4. V ANDORPE-CHOU ASSOCIATES
5. W1LLDAN ASSOCIATES
Score: 1 (Low) to 5 (High)
Category Con....ltant. Remark.
1 2 3 4 5
1. Errors & omissions insurance
2. Conflict of interest
3. Plan checking as specialty
4. Plan checkers as generalists or specialists
5. Scope of disciplines
6. Plan checker certificationsl1icenses
7. Experience in full spectrum of projects
8. Plan checkers access to co-workers
9. Plan checkers as full-time employees
10. Access hours compatible with City work schedule
11. Knowledge of Building Official's role
12. Technical library availability
13. Participation in Building Official organizations
14. Supplemental data sheet
15. High workload capabilities
16. Financial stability
17. Availability of references
18. Plan pick-up and delivery
19. Cost breakdown:
Cost covers all plan corrections
Hourly rate for design changes
% of building permit fee
% of partial plan revi_ (structural only)
% charge for repetitive plan checks
% for priority check
Additional charge for e1ectrical/mechanical
20. Customer based service evaluation program
21. Expedited plan check time frame
22. Free training for City staff
.- 'A
-
'1 'i r; /0
Parties and Recital Pages
Agreement between
City of Chula vista
and
Esgil corporation
for Plan Review Services
This agreement ("Agreement"), dated January 1, 9996 for the
purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last
executed unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 1 is between the city-related entity as is indicated on
Exhibit A, paragraph 2, as such ("city"), whose business form is
set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 3, and the entity indicated on
the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4, as Consultant, whose business
form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of
business and telephone numbers are set forth on Exhibit A,
paragraph 6 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the
following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, City desires to employ the services of a contractor
to provide Building Inspection Department services involving
providing plan checking of proposed building construction plans;
and
Whereas, City desires to implement a high level of
professional and technical Building Inspection Department
services at a cost less than the fees paid by the permit
applicants; and
Whereas, city does not wish to increase staff size where
equal or better services can be provided at a lesser cost to the
City by using contractor services provided by the private sector;
and
Whereas, city does not wish to risk having to fund deficits
incurred in the operation of the Building Inspection Department
during low periods of activity in the cyclical construction
industry; and
Whereas, city wishes to contract with a firm directed by
persons having experience and knowledge in the interpretation and
application of complex regulations providing for protection of
the public; and
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil corporation
Page 1
f-' /1
Whereas, City desires to contract with a firm presently
successfully providing plan review services to building
inspection departments; and
Whereas, City wishes to avoid conflict of interest problems
by contracting with corporation that performs no work for the
priva~e sector and provides services exclusively to government
entities; and
Whereas, Consultant's founding director's are both
registered Professional Engineers in the state of California and
they have served fifteen and thirteen years, respectively, in
high level regulatory management positions in local government;
and
Whereas, Consultant is willing to enter into a contract with
the City to provide building inspection department plan check
services to the City in accordance with this contract; 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;
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil Corporation
Page 2
9~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city and Consultant
do hereby mutually agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
Consultant shall perform all of the services described on
the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 7, entitled "General Duties";
and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "General
Duties", Consultant shall also perform all of the services
described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled" Scope of Work and
Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according
to, and within the time frames set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph
8, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein,
time being of the essence of this agreement. The General Duties
and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and
SC'hedule 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,
frum time to time reduce the Defined Services to be performed by
the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and
Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose
of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation
associated with said reduction.
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 time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the
"Rate Schedule" referenced in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (C), unless
a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon. All compensation
for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil corporation
Page 3
tJ~/?
E. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement,
whether Defined 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
subconsultants employed by it in connection with the Services
required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss
by the following insurance coverages, in the following categor-
ies, 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 set forth in the
attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9.
Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business
Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit
A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied separately to each
project away from premises owned or rented by 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 set forth in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, unless Errors and Omissions coverage is
included in the General Liability policy.
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 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.
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil Corporation
Page 4
9'/~
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.
H. Securitv for Performance.
(1) Performance Bond.
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 17, indicates
the need for Consultant to provide a Performance Bond (indicated
by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding
the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Consultant
shall provide to the City a performance bond by a surety and in a
form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney
which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term,
"Performance Bond", in said Paragraph 17, Exhibit A.
(2) Letter of Credit.
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 17, indicates
the need for Consultant to provide a Letter of Credit (indicated
by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding
the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant
shall provide to the City an irrevocable letter of credit
callable by the City at their unfettered discretion by submitting
to the bank a letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that
the Consultant is in breach of the terms of this Agreement. The
letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and
amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which
amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Letter of
Credit", in said Paragraph 17, Exhibit A.
(3) Other Security
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 17, indicates
the need for Consultant to provide security other than a
Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark
in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph
entitled "other security"), then Consultant shall provide to the
City such other security therein listed in a form and amount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney.
I. Business License
Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City
and to otherwise comply with Title 5 of the Chula vista Municipal
Code.
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil Corporation
Page 5
9-/f
2. Duties of the city
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose
of reviewing the progress of the Defined Services and Schedule
therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance to
achieve the objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit
access to its office facilities, files and records by Consultant
throughout the term of the agreement. In addition thereto, City
agrees to provide the information, data, items and materials set
forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, and with the further
understanding that delay in the provision of these materials
beyond 30 days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a
basis for the justifiable delay in the Consultant's performance
of this agreement.
B. Compensation
Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant
submitted to the City periodically as indicated in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 16, but in no event more frequently than monthly, on
the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 16, City
shall compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consult-
ant according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 11, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship
indicated by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement.
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 indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 (C) to be
charged upon making such payment.
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract
Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 12, as said
party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to
represent them in the routine administration of this agreement.
4. Term.
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have
complied with all executory provisions hereof.
5. Liquidated Damages
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil Corporation
Page 6
f//~
The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages
Rate is provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 13.
It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the
essence in the completion of this Agreement. It is difficult to
estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in per-
formance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a
reasonable amount to compensate for delay.
Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted
time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the
following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess
of the time specified for the completion of the respective work
assignment or Deliverable, the consultant shall pay to the City,
or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated Damages
Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 13 ("Liquidated Damages
Rate").
Time extensions for delays beyond the consultant's control,
other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in
writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior
to the expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time,
when granted, will be based upon the effect of delays to the work
and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work
unless it can be shown that such delays did or will delay the
progress of the work.
6. Financial Interests of Consultant
A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer.
If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 14, as
an "FPPC filer", Consultant is deemed to be a "Consultant" for
the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and
disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the
City Clerk on the required statement of Economic Interests in
such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 14 of
Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the
City Attorney.
B. Decline to Participate.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant shall not make, or participate in making or in
any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a
governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to
know Consultant has a financial interest other than the
compensation promised by this Agreement.
C. Search to Determine Economic Interests.
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil Corporation
Page 7
1,/7
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant warrants and represents that Consultant has
diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's
economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations
promulgated by the Fair Political Practices commission, and has
determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's
knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with
Consultant's duties under this agreement.
D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant
will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest during
the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of
interest as prohibited by the Fair Political Practices Act.
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant
will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if Consultant
learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result
in a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political
Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder.
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests.
Consult:nt warrants and represents that neither Consultant,
nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant's
employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any
interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property
which may be the subject matter of the Defined services, or in
any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries
of any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined
services, ("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 14.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise
of future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or
other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant
Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this
Agreement. Consultant promises to advise city of any such
promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or
for 12 months thereafter.
Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not
acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this
Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this'
Agreement, except with the written permission of City.
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil Corporation
Page 8
9'lr
\
\
". ~ y.
-:t^,
Revised Paragraph for Page 9-19
7. 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 othcro of theirs 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 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 which is covered bv the scope of
this indemnity, Consultants' indemnification of City shall not
be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the
Consultant.
The parties further aqree that Consultant shall be entitled to
assert any and all immunities and defenses under the California
Tort Claims Act to any third party claim for those acts performed
under this aqreement.
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil Corporation
Page 15
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any
party to this Agreement, or for any third party which may be in
conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement,
except with the written permission of City.
7. 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 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.
8. 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 shall, at the option of the
City, become the property of the City, and Consultant shall be
entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work
satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up
to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the
amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by
Consultant's breach.
9. 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
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil corporation
Page 9
9-(1
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.
10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
city may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any
reason, by giving specific written notice to 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 shall, at the option of the City,
become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is
terminated by City as provided in this paragraph, 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.
11. 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 interert in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City.
City hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the
Defined Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the
subconsultants identified thereat as "Permitted Subconsultants".
12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms,
designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or
properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and
exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties
produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be
subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by 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.
13. Independent Contractor
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil Corporation
Page 10
9 "~j7
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 solely responsible for the payment of
same and shall hold the City harmless with regard thereto.
14. 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 ~hall meet and confer in
good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute
over the terms of this Agreement.
15. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in
litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be
entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense
of the claim, including costs and attorney's fees.
16. Statement of Costs
In the event that 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.
17. Miscellaneous
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil Corporation
Page 11
7~/
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consult-
ant shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind City
to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15 is marked, the
Consultant and/or their principals is/are licensed with the State
of California or some other state as a licensed real estate
broker or salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that
neither Consultant, nor their principals are licensed real estate
brokers or salespersons.
C. 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 united States mail, addressed to such party,
postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt
requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of
business for each of the designated parties.
D. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document
referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement
and understanding between the parties relating to the subject
matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof
may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an
instrument in writing executed by the party against which
enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
E. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and
represents to the other party that it has legal authority and
capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this
Agreement, and that all resolutions or other actions have been
taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement.
F. Governing 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
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil Corporation
Page 12
9~~
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.
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil corporation
Page 13
9~J
Signature Page
to
Agreement between City of Chula vista and Esgil Corporation
for Plan Review 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:
Shirley Horton, Mayor
Attest:
Clerk
Dated:
Esgil corporation
By:
Richard James Esgate, President
By:
Exhibit List to Agreement
( ) Exhibit A.
( ) Exhibit B:
Plan Review Services Agreement
December 6, 1995
Esgil Corporation
Page 14
9'~1
Exhibit A
to
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
Esgil Corporation
1. Effective Date of Agreement: January 1, 1996
2. City-Related Entity:
(X) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of
the state of California
() Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a
political subdivision of the state of California
( Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula
vista, a
(
other:
("City")
a
3. Place of Business for City:
City of Chula Vista,
276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula vista, CA 91910
4. Consultant:
Esgil Corporation
5. Business Form of Consultant:
( ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
(XX) Corporation
6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant:
Esgil Corporation
9320 Chesapeake Dr., suite 208
San Diego, CA 92123
Voice Phone (619) 560-1468
Fax Phone (619) 560-1576
Plan Check Services
December 6, 1995
Exhibit A to Esgil Corp. Agreement
Page 1
9"~5/
7. General Duties:
Consultant shall provide professional services for the review
of proposed building plans for conformance to regulations
contained in state mandated building, plumbing, mechanical and
electrical codes, as those codes are amended by the CITY;
provisions of aCCf""ss to buildings by persons with disabilities
and provisions to attenuate noise in buildings; to perform
additional work when requested by CITY; and to perform all the
described work in accordance with the terms and conditions
hereinafter set forth.
8. Scope of Work and Schedule:
A. Detailed Scope of Work:
1. Perform traditional initial plan review submitted
plans for the above project to determine compliance
with City adopted:
Uniform Building Code
Uniform Plumbing Code
Uniform Mechanical Code
NatiQnal Electrical Code
California State Title 24 (Energy Conservation;
Disabled Access; and Noise Attenuation)
2. Provide the applicant's designee and the City a
typed list of items needing clarification or change
to achieve conformance with the above regulations.
3. Perform all necessary lia~son with the applicant's
designee, either by telephone, mail or meeting in
Esgil Corporation's main office, and perform all
necessary rechecks to achieve conformance to the
regulations.
4. Perform all necessary liaison with the Building
Official or his designee, either by mail, telephone
or in Esgil corporation's office, to insure
compliance with UBC sections 105 and 106 and to
insure compliance with local interpretations.
5. Perform plan reviews of revisions to plans that
have previously been approved for permit issuance,
or perform plan reviews of major changes to plans
prior to such approval, when such major changes are
not required to achieve code conformance.
6. Attend meetings related to proposed building
Plan Check Services
December 6, 1995
Exhibit A to Esgil Corp. Agreement
Page 2
'l'~
projects at the request of the Building Official at
locations other than Esgil Corporation's Plan Check
Office.
B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services:
(X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement
( ) Other:
C. Dates or time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables:
Esgil corporation agl'ees to provide adequate resources to
achieve the following service delivery goals for timely
performance of the work over which Esgil corporation has
decision authority.
I. Buildings less than four stories and of normal
complexity
SERVICE GOAL: Complete initial plan review in
fifteen work days or less.
II. Buildings four or more stories in height or of
unusual complexity
SERVICE GOAL: As agreed by the CITY'S Director of
Building and Housing
.
D. Contractvr Performance Documentation
Esgil Corporation shall note on the initial plan check
correspondence:
1. The day of the week and the date the plans were
received:
2. the day of the week and the date the initial plan
check was completed;
3. the day of the week and the date the applicant's
designee was notified the initial plan check was
completed: and
4. The calculated number of work days to complete the
initial plan check
Plan Check Services
December 6, 1995
Exhibit A to Esgil Corp. Agreement
Paae 3
CJ~'< ?
E. Final Decision Authority
The CITY'S Director of Building and Housing shall have
final decision authority over the results of the plan
check by Esgil Corporation and all work performed by
Esgil Corporation shall be to the satisfaction of the
Director of Building and Housing.
9. Insurance Requirements:
(X) statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance
() Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000.
(X) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000.
() Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included
in Commercial General Liability coverage).
(X) Errors and Omissions Insurance: $250,000 (not included
in Commercial General Liability coverage) .
10. Materials Required to be Supplied by city to Consultant:
A. Obtain from the applicant, at the time of the project
submittal, the necessary items to allow plan checking to
be completed in the shortest overall time frame.
Necessary items include, but are not limited to, complete
plans, construction specifications, designated contact
person and similar items that may be unique to a
particular project.
B. Provide the valuation for the proposed construction or
instruct Esgil Corporation to calculate the valuation in
accordance with the method used by the CITY.
C. Provide Esgil corporation with copies of any CITY
ordinances that modify the regulations adopted by the
State of California
D. Collect sufficient plan check fees or deposits from
project applicants to ensure the CITY will not suffer a
loss if the applicant decides to abandon the permit
process after Esgil corporation has completed the initial
plan check.
E. CITY shall regularly consult Esgil Corporation for the
purpose of reviewing the progress of the Work Plan and to
provide direction and guidance to achieve the objectives
of the project. The CITY shall permit access to its
office facilities, files and records by Esgil Corporation
throughout the term of the Contract.
Plan Check Services
Dece~~er 6, 1995
Exhibit A to Esgil Corp. Agreement
Page 4
if~r
11. Compensation:
A. Compensation for each plan review under Section 8 A 1.
shall be 80% of the Plan Review Fee calculated per
Section 304 of the 1991 Edition of the Uniform Building
Code for each building plan checked. The above
compensation rate shall be applicable until January 1,
1997, after which time compensation will be 80% of the
Plan Review Fee calculated per Table 1-A of the 1994
Edition of the Uniform Building Code. This rate shall be
applicable until the CONTRACT expires.
The construction valuation shall be based on the
valuation table adopted by the City of Chula vista. The
value to be used in computing the building permit and
building plan review fees shall be the total value of all
construction work.
Not withstanding the above, the minimum CONTRACTOR fee
for any proposed project shall be one hundred dollars
($100.00) .
Plan check fee for repetitive identical buildings shall
be 80% of the plan check fee as noted above for the
first, or basic building, and 20% of the plan check fee
as noted above for each additional building.
B. compensation under section 8A(5) shall be calculated
ei ther the same as 11A, or shall be based on Esgil
Corporation's current labor rates schedule. The method
to be used will be at the discretion of Esgil
corporation.
C. Compensation for work performed under 8A(6) shall be
based on the attached Labor Rates Schedule (Attachment A)
as modified each January 1 and July 1st.
D. Esgil corporation shall submit on the first work day of
each month the invoice for initial plan reviews performed
during the prior month. Payment of approved items on the
invoice shall be mailed to Esgil Corporation prior to the
twenty-fifth (25th) day of each month the invoice was
submi tted. Payments not made wi thin the above time frame
shall, when paid, be increased one and one-half percent
per month, or portion of a month, for each month the
payment was delayed.
12. Contract Administrators
City:
Kenneth Larsen, Director, Department of Building
Plan Check Services
December 6, 1995
Exhibit A to Esgil Corp. Agreement
Page 5
'l'~9
and Housing, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth
Av., Chula Vista, CA 91910, (619) 691-5007
Consultant:
Richard Esgate, President, Esgil corporation, 9320
Chesapeake Dr., suite 208, San Diego, CA 92123,
(619) 560-1468
13. Liquidated Damages Rate:
( ) $ per day.
( ) Other:
Plan Check Services
December 6, 1995
Exhibit A to Esgil Corp. Agreement
Page 6
9:J~
14. statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting
categories, per Conflict of Interest Code:
(XX) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer.
( ) FPPC Filer
( ) Category No. 1. Investments and sources of income.
( ) Category No. 2. Interests in real property.
( Category No. 3. Investments, interest in real
property and sources of income sUbject to the
regulatory, permi t or licensing authority of the
department.
(
Category No.
and sources
development,
sale of real
4. Investments in business entities
of income which engage in land
construction or the acquisition or
property.
( Category No.5. Investments in business entities
and sources of income of the type which, within the
past two years, have contracted with ~he City of
Chula vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide
services, supplies, materials, machinery or
equipr:.ent.
( Category No.6. Investments in business entities
and sources of income of the type which, within the
past two years, have contracted with the designated
employee's department to provide services,
supplies, materials, machinery or equipment.
( Category No.7. Business positions.
( ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property
within 2 radial miles of Project Property, if any:
15. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
16. Bill Processing:
Plan Check Services
December 6, 1995
Exhibit A to Esgil Corp. Agreement
Page 7
9'JI
A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following
period of time:
(XX) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
( ) Other:
B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing:
(XX) First of the Month
( ) 15th Day of each Month
( ) End of the Month
( ) Other:
C. City's Account Number: 408-4080-DB001
17. Security for Performance
( ) Performance Bond, $
( ) Letter of Credit, $
( ) other Security:
Type:
Amount: $
( ) Retention. If this space is checked, then
notwithstanding other provl.sl.ons to the contrary
requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant
sooner, the City shall be entitled to retain, at their
option, either the following "Retention Percentage" or
"Retention Amount" until the city determines that the
Retention Release Event, listed below, has occurred:
( Retention Percentage: %
( Retention Amount: $
Retention Release Event:
( ) Completion of All Consultant Services
( ) Other:
Plan Check Services
December 6, 1995
Exhibit A to Esgil Corp. Agreement
Page 8
9/;1;1.
~sGiI Corporation
Projtll[onm PIDH Rft./Ww Artgt1lHn
I~ABOR RATl:S SMttnUL~
CLASStFlCA TION
UGT1t.AR
BAn-
PRJ'.nRR~n
BAn*
Division Manager
Superviling Structural Engineer
Civil. EIKtri~a1. RoC.S
Electrieal Engineer. E.E.
Fire Protection Engineers. F.P.E.
Mechanical Engineer. M.E.
Structural Engineer. S.E.
BnerS)' Plans Examiner. C.B.C.I
I.C.B.a. Plans Examiner
Supervising Building Inspector
Building Inspc~tor
Permit Specialist
Word Procossing
Clerical Suppon
Corporate Attomey
$157.S0
148.43
115.50
IIS.S0
115.50
115.50
129.88
115.50
98.70
105.00
89.25
80.85
S5.6S
37.80
280.35
$111.6S
112.00
87.1S
87.15
87.15
87.15
98.00
87.15
74.S5
78.7S
67.20
60.90
42.00
28.35
210.00
1.
NOTES:
Labor rates are on I)' used (or work when requested b)' oW' clients, where a Buildina Code
plan r.vi.w {c. is not appli"blc or appropriate.
-Hourly
2. Pref'eZTCd rates arc used for all clicntjurisdictionJ where EsSil Cofl)OratiOD has . current
approved plan review contract in placo. .
3. The rates do not include expensel resulting froin transportation, meals. todaina and similar
COltl when ElgiJ Corporation is providins servicel ouUide the areater San Dieao County
area.
(Rates are evaluated each Yeaf.)
&IDATAIt.AUATII,
~ 9,- JJ
"20 Cbcupcakc: Drivc, Suite 208 . San Dlcso, CaUtomll 92123 . (619) 560-1-468 . Pax (619) 560.1576
Z 'EOVd
9LSt09S6t9
NO I.LVl:lOdHO:l 1 IOS! OS : E t (IlU) S6. L t "AON
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item /?J
Meeting Date 12/19/95
Resolution / S/ ~ 3 Approving the Memorandum of Understanding between
the City of Chula Vista, the City of San Diego and the San Diego Technology
Council to work cooperatively to implement the activities of the San Diego
Defense Conversion Program which includes the Border Environmental
Commerce Alliance (BECA).
c_S ·
SUBMITTED BY:
Chris Salomone, Community Development Director
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager 1\ l"
,
r \ :
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
Council Referral No.
BACKGROUND:
On February 15, the U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration (EDA)
awarded the City a $2,000,000 grant, matched by a $100,000 Defense Adjusting Matching grant from the
California Trade & Commerce Agency to implement the Border Environmental Commerce Alliance
(BECA). The BECA program is an extension and satellite of the San Diego Defense Conversion
Program, an EDA funded county-wide economic conversion initiative developed in response to the
defense spending cutbacks and related negative impacts upon San Diego region businesses. The City of
San Diego was also awarded an EDA grant to implement the San Diego Defense Conversion Program of
which the San Diego Technology Council (SDTC) was given the responsibility to oversee several
components including the San Diego High Technology Resource Center, the San Diego World Trade
Center, the San Diego Technology Incubator, and the San Diego Seed Capital Fund.
As a condition of the Chula Vista EDA grant, and prior to the release of ED A funds for the BECA
program, the City must execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City of San Diego
which delineates the responsibilities of coordinating the Defense Conversion Program to avoid
duplication, leverage available resources and maximize the Program's impact. The MOU specifically
addresses establishing communication and networking mechanisms, coordinating service
referrals, sharing of computer and electronic resources, conducting joint outreach and
promotions, and securing representation on advisory boards.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council adopt the resolution approving a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of
Chula Vista, the City of San Diego, and the San Diego Technology Council to work cooperatively
together on the implementation of the San Diego Defense Conversion Program.
/tJ~/
Page 2, Item / tl
Meeting Date 12/19/95
DISCUSSION:
EDA A ward to the City of San Diego
In January, 1994, the U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration awarded
the City of San Diego a $4,779,000 grant to implement the San Diego Defense Conversion Program. One
of the major objectives ofthe Program is to assist in the creation of new jobs in non-defense related
industries throughout San Diego County. The City of San Diego along with the San Diego World Trade
Center, EmTek Seed Capital Fund, San Diego Technology Council, San Diego High Technology
Resource Center, San Diego Economic Development Corporation, the San Diego City College - Center
for Applied Competitive Technologies, University of California San Diego Extension and San Diego
State University are implementing the San Diego Defense Conversion Program.
The San Diego Technology Council (SDTC) under agreement with the City of San Diego is responsible
for overseeing several Program components including the San Diego High Technology Resource Center,
the San Diego World Trade Center, the San Diego Technology Incubator, and the San Diego Seed
Capital Fund. SDTC's responsibilities include the ongoing policy formulation, resource use, oversight,
and development of regional economic technology related programs. The SDTC is currently being
reorganized into the San Diego Regional Technology Alliance. All of SDTC' s responsibilities including
the implementation of the San Diego Defense Conversion Program components will be transferred to the
San Diego Regional Technology Alliance once approved by the City of San Diego and the EDA.
EDA Award to the City ofChula Vista
The EDA Awarded a three-year $2,000,000 grant to the City ofChula Vista for the BECA program in
February, 1995. The BECA program is an extension and satellite of the San Diego Defense Conversion
Program providing technical and business development assistance to small and medium sized
environmental companies including innovative "start-ups," facilitating the transfer of new environmental
technologies to existing industry, and providing specialized services in cross border trade development to
businesses throughout the San Diego region. The key components of BECA are the Border Environmental
Technology Resource Center and the Border Environmental Business Cluster.
Purpose of the MOU
As Council has been made aware, a condition of the City ofChula Vista EDA grant is that prior to any
release of EDA funds for the BECA, the City execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the
City of San Diego which delineates the responsibilities of coordinating the activities of our respective
defense conversion programs to avoid duplication, leverage available resources and maximize the
Program's impact. On June 27,1995, and amended on August 22,1995, Council appropriated the
FY 1995/96 (Year I) BECA budget from the General Fund with the understanding that the City would be
reimbursed quarterly by the EDA. General Funds are currently being advanced to fund BECA until the
EDA monies are released as previously approved by Council subject to MOU approval.
MOU Elements
Elements addressed in the MOD include establishing communication and networking mechanisms,
coordinating service referrals, sharing of computer and electronic resources,
/tJ-e2..
Page 3, Item / IJ
Meeting Date 12/19/95
conducting joint outreach and promotions, and securing representation on advisory boards. These
areas are briefly summarized below.
1. Communications & Networking
· San Diego and Chula Vista staff will conduct periodic meetings, including Chula Vista BECA staff
attendance at the bimonthly Executive Directors' meetings attended by directors of all Defense
Conversion Program partners, the weekly High Technology Resource Center Partners' meetings, and
other Defense Conversion Program partners' meetings as appropriate.
· San Diego and Chula Vista staff will routinely interface electronically through the Internet and other
on-line communication systems.
2. Service Referrals
. Chula Vista's (BECA's) primary focus is to provide specialized services to San Diego region
environmental technology-based businesses that are seeking to commercialize their products and
explore cross border trade opportunities, as well as to provide assistance to all types of San Diego
region businesses wishing to utilize new environmental technologies in their companies. San Diego
and San Diego Technology Council will refer appropriate clients and prospective tenants to Chula Vista.
. San Diego's primary focus is to provide coordinated business and technical assistance to emerging or
established high technology, manufacturing, or defense conversion businesses in the San Diego region.
Chula Vista will refer appropriate clients and prospective tenants to San Diego and the San Diego
Technology Council.
. The San Diego and Chula Vista programs will use similar intake and consulting forms and will utilize
a shared database of client services and referrals to best track assistance efforts.
3. Sharing of Resources
. When feasible and appropriate, San Diego and Chula Vista staff will provide full access to each
other's computer resources.
. San Diego and Chula Vista staff will facilitate interaction with each oftheir respective service
provider partners as appropriate and feasible.
4. Outreach and Promotions
. San Diego and Chula Vista staff will coordinate events, forums, workshops and other program
activities through frequent interfacing and the use of a master calendar.
. San Diego and Chula Vista staff shall attempt to leverage and optimize respective resources by
jt) /;3
Page 4, Item I j
Meeting Date 12/19/95
partnering on marketing, outreach, and promotional activities whenever appropriate and feasible.
Joint marketing efforts shall include cooperative advertising, joint participation in conferences and
forums, and partnering on business outreach.
· Whenever possible and within respective budget constraints, San Diego and Chula Vista staff will
participate and/or have representation at each other's program activities and functions and will lend
assistance with major events.
· San Diego and the San Diego Technology Council will include reference to Chula Vista as a partner
in all appropriate promotional materials. Chula Vista will also include reference to San Diego and the
San Diego Technology Council as partners whenever appropriate.
5. Advisory Boards
. To coordinate policy issues, Chula Vista will be represented on the San Diego Technology Council
Advisory Board as a voting member.
. San Diego via the San Diego Technology Council will be represented on the BECA Advisory Board
as a voting member.
FISCAL IMP ACT:
The proposed MOU is non-financial in nature but does require that the Cities and San Diego Technology
Council work together to avoid duplication and to maximize the EDA and matching San Diego Defense
Conversion resources.
As previously mentioned, the City of Chula Vista is required to have in place an executed MOD with the
City of San Diego before any EDA funds are dispersed to the City. Currently funding for the BECA
program is being advanced from the General Fund. On June 27, 1995, Council approved the FY 1995/96
(Year I) BECA budget appropriating $956,536. On August 22, 1995, Council amended the Year I BECA
budget increasing the total General Fund advance to $991,619.
To date, approximately $170,000 has been expended from the General Fund for the BECA program. A
request for reimbursement for BECA's first quarter expenditures was sent to the EDA with the other
required quarterly financial and narrative reports on October 31, 1995, and will be processed as soon as
an executed MOU is in place. The Federal reimbursement process will take approximately 30 to 60 days.
I~-Y
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOD)
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO, AND
THE SAN DIEGO TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL
This MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING is entered into effective as of this day of
1995, by and between the City of Chula Vista, a municipal corporation, the City
of San Diego, a municipal corporation, and the San Diego Technology Council with reference to the
following recitals:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, effective January I, 1994, the U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic
Development Administration ("EDA") awarded the City of San Diego ("San Diego") a $4,779,000 grant
to implement the San Diego Defense Conversion Program, Project/Award No. 07-49-02681; and
WHEREAS, an objective of the San Diego Defense Conversion Program is to assist in the
creation of new jobs in non-defense related industries throughout San Diego County; and
WHEREAS, the San Diego Technology Council ("SDTC") under the EDA grant agreement with
the City of San Diego will be responsible for overseeing several components of the San Diego Defense
Conversion Program including the San Diego High Technology Resource Center, the San Diego World
Trade Center, the San Diego Technology Incubator, and the San Diego Seed Capital Fund; and
WHEREAS, on February 15, 1995, the U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development
Administration, awarded the City ofChula Vista ("Chula Vista") a $2,000,000 EDA grant to implement
the Border Environmental Commerce Alliance ("BECA") component of the San Diego Defense
Conversion Program, Project/Award No. 07-49-04062 ; and
WHEREAS, the BECA program is an extension and satellite ofthe San Diego Defense
Conversion Program providing technical and business development assistance to small and medium
sized environmental companies including innovative "start-ups," facilitating the transfer of new
environmental technologies to existing industry, and providing specialized services in cross border trade
development to businesses throughout the San Diego region; and
WHEREAS, two key components ofBECA are the Border Environmental Technology Resource
Center and the Border Environmental Business Cluster; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the EDA, the City of San Diego, the San Diego
Technology Council, and the City ofChula Vista to work cooperatively together to avoid duplication,
leverage available resources and maximize the program's impact.
Page 1
/d',5
WHEREAS, the parties desire to work cooperatively to implement the San Diego Defense
Conversion Program including BECA.
NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree to the following:
DEFINITIONS
San Diego Defense Conversion Program: In 1993 the San Diego Economic Adjustment Program
(SDEAP) was developed in response to the drastic defense spending cutbacks and related devastating
impacts upon San Diego region businesses. The SDEAP document was accepted by EDA as an overall
Economic Development Plan to support EDA funding of a county-wide economic conversion
implementation grant, also known as the San Diego Defense Conversion Program. The major objective
of this Program is to assist in the creation of new jobs in non-defense related industries throughout San
Diego County. The City of San Diego along with the San Diego World Trade Center, EmTek Seed
Capital Fund, San Diego Technology Council, San Diego High Technology Resource Center, San Diego
Economic Development Corporation, the San Diego City College - Center for Applied Competitive
Technologies, University of California San Diego Extension and San Diego State University are
implementing the San Diego Defense Conversion Program. The City ofChula Vista is implementing the
BECA extension of the Program.
Border Environmental Commerce Alliance CBECA ): The BECA program, being implemented by the
City of Chula Vista, is an extension and satellite of the San Diego Defense Conversion Program.
BECA's three major purposes are: 1) to provide technical and business development assistance to small
and medium sized environmental companies including innovative "start-ups," 2) to facilitate the transfer
of new environmental technologies to existing industry, and 3) to provide specialized services in cross
border trade development to businesses throughout the San Diego region. The key components of
BECA are the Border Environmental Technology Resource Center and the Border Environmental
Business Cluster.
San Diego Technology Council (SDTC): Under the EDA grant agreement with the City of San Diego,
the SDTC is responsible for overseeing the San Diego High Technology Resource Center, the San Diego
World Trade Center, the San Diego Technology Incubator, and the San Diego Seed Capital Fund
components of the EDA funded San Diego Defense Conversion Program. SDTC's responsibilities
include the ongoing policy formulation, resource use, oversight, and development of regional economic
technology related programs. The SDTC is currently being reorganized into the San Diego Regional
Technology Alliance. All of SDTC's oversight responsibilities of the San Diego Defense Conversion
Program components will be transferred to the San Diego Regional Technology Alliance once approved
by the City of San Diego and the EDA.
Program Partners: Program Partners refers to all organizations, both EDA funded and non-EDA funded
organizations, that support and contribute to the implementation of the San Diego Defense Conversion
Program .
Page 2
/tJ,~
1. Monitoring Responsibilities.
For all administrative, financial, and technical matters under this Agreement, the parties are represented by:
San Diego Technology Council:
City of San Diego, Economic Development Services:
City of Chula Vista, Economic Development
Kirk Mather
Kurt Chilcott
Cheryl Dye
Each party reserves the right to replace its designated representative hereunder upon written notice to the
other parties.
2. MOU Administration.
This MOU shall be administered in accordance with the applicable provisions of:
Chapter III, 13 Code of Federal Regulations
Economic Development Administration
15 Code of Federal Regulations
Department of Commerce
Office of Management and Budget, Circular A-87
Cost Principles for State and Local Governments
Office of Management and Budget, Circular A-II 0
Uniform Administrative Requirements for Non-Profits
Office of Management and Budget, Circular A-112
Cost Principles for Non-Profits
Any and all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations, rules and policies.
Nothing in this MOU shall be construed to alleviate the parties from their responsibilities under their
respective grants/financial assistance awards from the EDA.
3. Communications & Networking.
The parties support the coordination and exchange of information when implementing the San Diego
Defense Conversion Program. The parties agree as follows:
3.1 Program Communication. The parties will conduct periodic meetings. SDTC and San
Diego will include Chula Vista staff in the bimonthly Executive Directors' meetings attended by
directors of all EDA partners, the weekly High Technology Resource Center Partners Program
meetings, and other EDA partners' meetings as appropriate. This regular communication will
help promote coordination, foster joint program development and project planning, enhance
Page 3
liP'?
service delivery to business clients, and provide opportunities to share general program
information to most efficiently use each organization's resources and avoid duplication of
efforts. Parties will routinely interface electronically through the Internet and other on-line
communication systems.
4. Service Referrals.
The parties encourage the coordination of service when implementing the San Diego Defense
Conversion Program. The parties agree as follows:
4.01 Referrals to Chula Vista. Chula Vista's primary focus is to provide specialized services to
San Diego region environmental technology-based businesses that are seeking to commercialize
their products and explore cross border trade opportunities, as well as to provide assistance to all
types of San Diego region businesses wishing to utilize new environmental technologies in their
companies. Emphasis will be placed on small and medium sized companies including start up
businesses. San Diego and SDTC, in conjunction with the High Technology Resource Center,
Technology Incubator, and World Trade Center, will direct appropriate clients and prospective
tenants to Chula Vista.
4.02 Referrals to San Diego and SDTe. SDTC and San Diego's primary focusis to provide
coordinated business and technical assistance to emerging or established high technology,
manufacturing, or defense conversion businesses in the San Diego region. Chula Vista,
specifically the Border Environmental Technology Resource Center and the Border
Environmental Business Cluster, will direct appropriate clients and prospective tena"ts to San
Diego and the SDTe.
4.03 Service Tracking. The parties will use similar intake and consulting forms and will utilize
a shared database of client services and referrals to best track assistance efforts.
5. Sharing of Resources.
The parties encourage the coordination of San Diego Defense Conversion Program resources to avoid
duplication, increase leveraging ability and maximize resources. The parties agree as follows:
5.01 Electronic Databases and Computer Resources. The parties, when feasible and
appropriate, will provide full access to each's computer resources which include, but are not
limited to the following: On-line databases and networks such as the California Small Business
Network and Commerce Net, facilities at the Software Resource Center, and limited resources at
the San Diego Supercomputer Center.
5.02 Access to Partners. The parties will facilitate interaction with partners as
appropriate and feasible. This shall be achieved through providing lists of resources and
tlusiness contacts, and if necessary, facilitating meetings with partners.
Page 4
It}.. ~
San Diego & SDTC partners include: California Trade and Commerce Agency, Center for
Applied Competitive Technologies, Community Development Corporation, San Diego
Community College, Center for Applied Competitive Technologies, San Diego Consortium and
Private Industry Council, San Diego Economic Development Corporation, San Diego State
University College of Extended Studies, San Diego Supercomputer Center, San Diego Unified
Po;1 District, Science Applications International Corporation, Small Business Finance
Corporation, Southwest Technology Transfer Center, University of California San Diego -
CONNECT, and World Trade Association.
Chula Vista partners include: Business Cluster Development, California Business Incubator
Network, California Energy Commission, California Environmental Business Council,
California Environmental Protection Agency, California Trade and Commerce Agency, Chula
Vista Chamber of Commerce, Chula Vista Economic Development Commission, Environmental
Business International, Greater San Diego Chamber of Commerce, Rohr, Inc., San Diego
County Department of Environmental Health, San Diego Gas and Electric, San Diego Unified
Port District, Science Applications International Corporation, South San Diego County
Economic Development Council, Southwestern College Small Business Development and
International Trade Center, U.S./Mexico Border Progress Foundation, University of California
San Diego, and Western Maquiladora Trade Association.
6. Outreach and Promotions.
The parties support the coordination of publicity and outreach when implementing the San Diego
Defense Conversion Program. The parties agree as follows:
6.1 Marketing Activities - Master Calendar. Parties will coordinate events, forums,
workshops and other program activities through frequent staff interfacing and the use of a master
calendar. It is the responsibility of each party to update the master calendar and inform and/or
work with staff counterparts to increase program participation, avoid duplication, and effectively
utilize resources.
6.2 Marketing Activities - Joint Ventures. The parties shall attempt to leverage and
optimize respective resources by partnering on marketing, outreach, and promotional activities
whenever appropriate and feasible. Joint marketing efforts shall include cooperative advertising,
joint participation in conferences and forums, and partnering on business outreach. Whenever
possible, the parties will participate and/or have representation at each other's program activities
and functions and will lend assistance with major events such as Grand Opening celebrations.
6.3 Marketing Materials & Press Releases. San Diego and SDTC will include reference to
Chula Vista as a partner in all appropriate promotional materials. Chula Vista will also include
reference to San Diego and the SDTC as partners whenever appropriate. A best faith effort will
be made by each party to provide press releases and collateral materials to the other organization
prior to release for review and approval where appropriate.
Page 5
1& ' ~
7, Advisory Boards.
To further maximize resources and coordinate policy issues, Chula Vista will be represented on the
SDTC Advisory Board, and San Diego via the SDTC will be represented on the BECA Advisory Board
as voting members.
8. Matchin~ Share.
None of the activities of the parties hereto (or their respective EDA partners) shall be claimed to satisfy
any in-kind local matching share requirement under the other parties' respective EDA grant/financial
assistance award.
9. Right to Terminate.
This agreement shall remain in effect for so long as the EDA funded San Diego Defense Conversion
Program remains in effect; provided, however, that either party may terminate this agreement upon the
material default of the other party in the event, after written notice of default, the default remains
uncured for 30 days.
10. City of San Diego to lndemnify City of Chula Vista.
The City of San Diego and the SDTC shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City of
Chula Vista, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damage,
liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the conduct of the
City of San Diego or the SDTC, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, or others in connection with
the execution of the work covered by this MOU including, without limitation, any and all conduct at or
around the program sites. This indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees
and liability incurred by the City ofChula Vista, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against
such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further, the City of San Diego and the SDTC
at its own expense shall, upon written request from the City of Chula Vista, defend any such suit or
action brought against the City of Chula Vista, its officers, agents, or employees.
11. City of Chula Vista to Indemnify City of San Diego.
The City of Chula Vista shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City of San Diego and
the SDTC, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damage,
liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out ofthe conduct of the
City of Chula Vista, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, or others in connection with the execution
of the work covered by this MOU including, without limitation, any and all conduct at or around the
program sites. The City ofChula Vista's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses,
attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the City of San Diego, the SDTC, its officers, agents, or
employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further, the
City of Chula Vista at its own expense shall, upon written request by the City of San Diego, defend any
such suit or action brought against the City of San Diego, the SDTC, its officers, agents, or employees.
Page 6
/f}~/J:1
12. Assignability.
This Agreement may only be assigned upon the written approval of the EDA and the non-assigning
party; provided, however, only EDA approval will be required to penn it an assignment of this
Agreement by the City of Chula Vista to BECA if BECA becomes independent and/or a nonprofit
organization, or by the City of San Die[,o to SDTC/San Diego Regional Technology Alliance in the event
the SDTC/San Diego Regional Technology Alliance becomes independent from the City of San Diego.
13. City of San Diego Responsible for SDTC Perfonnance.
In the event that the SDTC fails to perfonn any ofthe obligations hereunder, the City of San Diego shall
be responsible therefor.
14. Remedies.
In the event of a default hereunder the non-defaulting party shall have any and all remedies provided at
law or in equity.
[End of page. Next page is Signature Page]
Page 7
/CJ " I(
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT D ID:236-6512
DEC 07'95
14:51 No.003 P.Ol
Signature Page to Memorandum of Understanding between
the City ofChuJa Vista, the City of San Diego and the San Diego Technology CouDcil.
IN WIlNESS WHEREOF, the parties have entered into this MOU effective as of the date written above: .
City of Chula Vista
,
. .
By:
Shirley Horton, Mayor
By:
Kurt Chilcott, Director
Economic Development Services
Attest
City Clerk
San Diego Technology Council
.-.
By:
Kirk Mather, Executive Director
Approved as to form by:
Bruce Boogaard
City Attorney
Page 8
/~ ,,/:2
RESOLUTION /g /{,3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO,
AND THE SAN DIEGO TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL TO WORK
COOPERATIVELY TO IMPLEMENT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SAN
DIEGO DEFENSE CONVERSION PROGRAM WHICH INCLUDES
THE BORDER ENVIRONMENTAL COMMERCE ALLIANCE (BECA).
WHEREAS, effective January I, ] 994, the U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development
Administration ("EDA") awarded the City of San Diego ("San Diego") a $4,779,000 grant to implement the San
Diego Defense Conversion Program, Project/Award No. 07-49-0268]; and
WHEREAS, an objective of the San Diego Defense Conversion Program is to assist in the creation of
new jobs in non-defense related industries throughout San Diego County; and
WHEREAS, the San Diego Technology Council ("SDTC") under the EDA grant agreement with the
City of San Diego will be responsible for overseeing several components of the San Diego Defense Conversion
Program including the San Diego High Technology Resource Center, the San Diego World Trade Center, the
San Diego Technology Incubator, and the San Diego Seed Capital Fund; and
WHEREAS, on February 15, 1995, the U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development
Administration, awarded the City ofChula Vista ("Chula Vista") a $2,000,000 EDA grant to implement the
Border Environmental Commerce Alliance ("BECA") component of the San Diego Defense Conversion
Program, Project/Award No. 07-49-04062 ; and
WHEREAS, the BECA program is an extension and satellite of the San Diego Defense Conversion
Program providing technical and business development assistance to small and medium sized environmental
companies including innovative "start-ups," facilitating the transfer of new environmental technologies to
existing industry, and providing specialized services in cross border trade development to businesses throughout
the San Diego region; and
WHEREAS, two key components of BECA are the Border Environmental Technology Resource Center
and the Border Environmental Business Cluster; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the EDA, the City of San Diego, the San Diego Technology
Council, and the City ofChula Vista to work cooperatively together to avoid duplication, leverage available
resources and maximize the program's impact.
WHEREAS, the parties desire to work cooperatively to implement the San Diego Defense Conversion
Program including BECA.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby
find, order, determine and resolve to authorize the Mayor to execute the Memorandum of Understanding
between the City of Chula Vista, the City of San Diego, and the San Diego Technology Council to work
cooperatively to implement the activities of the San Diego Defense Conversion Program which includes the
Border Environmental Commerce Alliance.
CL C:;Cc~._
APPROVED AS TO F
/1 A>4
I~ 1ft.
PRESENTED BY:
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
IP.,J.J
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item J I
Meeting Date 12/19/95
ITEM TITLE: 1/
A. Resolution / 8"'/ ~ 7 Rejecting low bid for non-compliance with the City's
Disadvantaged and Women Owned Business Program Requirements for
"Construction of Sidewalk Ramps on Various Streets in the City of Chula Vista,
California, FY 1995-96 Program (ST -513)"
B. Resolution /8/ ",.5'" Accepting bids and Awarding Contract to the Second
Low Bidder for "Construction of Sidewalk Ramps on Various Streets in the City of
Chula Vista, California, FY 1995-96 Program (ST-513)" and authorizing staff to
increase quantities to expend all available funds for this project.
SUBMITTED BY: Director o[Public Work~~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager'} \,Y \ j\\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
At 2:00 p.m. on October 25, 1995 in Conference Room 2 in the Public Services Building, the
Director of Public Works received sealed bids for the "Construction of Sidewalk Ramps on Various
Streets in the City ofChula Vista, California, FY 1995-96 Program (ST-513)." The work to be done
consists of removal of curbs, gutter, and sidewalk and the construction of sidewalk ramps on various
streets in the City.
The apparent low bidder, A. H. Builders failed to provide supporting documents confirming their
compliance with the City's Disadvantaged and Women Owned Business (DBE) Program
Requirements (See Attachment A). These requirements were set forth in the specifications for the
contract and are required by the project's funding source. The second low bidder has complied with
these requirements.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1) Declare the apparent low bidder as non-responsive
[failure to comply with the City's DBE requirements] and reject the bid; 2) accept bids and award
contract to the second low bidder, Star Paving Corporation - San Diego, in the amount of $28,210;
and 3) authorize staff to increase quantities to expend all available funds for this project.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Funds for this project were budgeted in FY 1995-96 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget.
This is an annual program funded with Community Development Block Grant Funds (CDBG). Its
purpose is to construct sidewalk ramps at various locations throughout the City. The locations are
generally near schools, shopping areas, or in many cases, where we have had specific requests by
property owners to install the ramps (Attachment B).
Bids for this project were received from nine contractors as follows:
1/-/
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date 12/19/95
Contractor Bid Amount
1. A. H. Builders - Chula Vista $24,923.00
2. Star Paving Corporation - San Diego 28,210.00
3. Fox Construction - San Diego 31,280.00
4. Basile Construction, Inc. - San Diego 33,946.73
5. Camino Irvine, Co. - San Clemente 35,790.00
6. Hammer Construction, Co. - Chula Vista 38,475.00
7. Portillo Concrete - Chula Vista 41,125.00
8. West Coast Construction - Corona 48,935.00
9. Weir Construction Corporation - Escondido 73,750.00
After receipt of the bids, and in accordance with City procedures, the apparent three low bidders are
required to submit additional documents that show how they plan to meet the City's DBE Program
requirements. The apparent low bidder, A. H. Builders, failed to submit the supporting
documentation, even after it was required verbally and in writing by staff (Attachment C).
The second low bid, submitted by Star Paving Corporation is below the Engineer's estimate of
$43,530 by $15,320 or 35%. Staffs estimate was based on average unit prices received on similar
work completed just last year. Because of the current economic conditions, and the number of
bidders, the City received excellent bids. Star Paving Corporation just recently completed an alley
project for the City and their work was quite satisfactory. Staff, therefore, recommends the contract
be awarded to the second low bidder, Star Paving Corporation. Star Paving Corporation's bid is
$3,287 higher than that submitted by A. H. Builders ($28,210 vs. $24,923). Nevertheless, staff
believes that the second low bidder's amount is an excellent bid for this contract and results in a
$10,114.55 fund balance, which staff recommends be utilized to construct additional ramps.
The contract, as awarded, will complete the installation of 41 new ramps. Due to the excellent bids,
it is estimated that an additional 12 ramps can be installed.
Disadvantage Business Enterprise Goal
The bid documents set forth participation requirements per Federal regulations for meeting the
Disadvantaged and Women Owned Business Goals. Juan Arroyo, Housing Coordinator, has
reviewed the bid documents submitted by the three lowest bidders, and determined that only the
second low bidder, Star Paving Corporation meets the City's requirements for DBE participation.
Staff also reviewed Star Paving Corporation eligibility status with regards to Federal procurement
programs and the status of State contractor licenses for the contract as well as his subcontractors.
Neither the contractor or any listed sub-contractors are excluded from Federal procurement programs
(list of parties excluded from Federal procurement or non-procurement programs as of August 11,
1995). Contractor licenses for Star Paving Corporation are current and in good standing.
1/':1.
Page 3, Item /1
Meeting Date 12/19/95
Disclosure Statement
Attached as Attachment D is Star Paving Corporation's Disclosure Statement.
Environmental Status
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the work involved in this project for the ADA
curb cuts and has determined them exempt under Section 15301 (c), Class 1 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Minor Alterations of Existing Public Improvements or Public
Structures).
Prevailing Wage Statement
The source of funding for this project is Community Development Block Grant Funds. Prevailing
wage scales are those determined by the Federal Department of Labor.
Financial Statement
FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. Contract Amount $28,210.00
B. Staff (Design & Inspection) 11,400.00
C. Additional \Vork 8,114.55
D. Contingencies 2,000.00
TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION $49,724.55
FUNDS A V AILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. 1 996/ADA Curb Cuts Annual Program (ST-513) $49,724.55
TOT AL FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION $49,724.55
FISCAL IMP ACT: The above action awarding of the contract will authorize the expenditure of
$49,724.55 from budgeted CIP project (ST-513). After construction, only routine City maintenance
amounting to mainly sweeping, will be required.
Attachments
A - Memo from Housing Coordinator
B - Ramps Locations to be Installed
C - Letter to A. H. Builders
D - Disclosure Statement
SLH:sb
M :\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA \SlDEW ALK.SLH
File No: 0735-IO-ST513
/1* J fF1
A TTf+cHIIJENT Pr
MEMORANDUM
November 15, 1995
From:
Cliff Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Juan P. Arroyo, Housing Coordinator ~
Minority and Women Business EnterortJ Construction Proaram .
Construction of Sidewalk Ramps on Various Streets in the City of
Chula Vista, California - FY 1995-96 Program (ST 513)
To:
Subject:
A review has been conducted of the bid proposals presented by A.H. Builders, Star
Paving, Inc., and Fox Construction regarding the above referenced project
compliance with the City's Minority and Women Business Enterprise Construction
Program.
Due to a lack of supporting documents and claim of compliance, I am unable to find
A.H. Builders' proposal qualified under the Minority Business Enterprise northe Women
Business Enterprise requirements.
Star Paving, Inc. has provided the necessary documentation to indicate that their
proposal complies with the City's goals for Minority Business Enterprise and the
Women Business Enterprise participation.
Fox Construction has verbally confirmed their written claim not to comply with the
Minority Business Enterprise nor the Women Business Enterprise requirements, thus
I am unable to find their proposal eligible.
In sum, I find Star Paving, Inc. 's proposal as the only one of the three to adequately
indicate compliance with the City's Minority and Women Business Enterprise
Construction Program.
JA:ss
cc: Chris Salomone, Community Development Director
Roberto Saucedo, Senior Civil Engineer
Shale Hanson, Civil Engineer
.:sheri1Imwbe1195
11~5 )1--6
H TT l:tc rl /Vlfr"N T fi
lLJ
--.J
CD
<x:
J-
>- e co ~ ~ ~ ~
~ @ ~
~ gs ~ ~ ~ co ~
- I'
0::: e @ @ ~ ~
0 ~ ~ (~ ~ I'
- @ ~
0:: Ie @ ~
CL ~ ~
<z
0:: - -
Z:=l 2 2
- -
-~ I' " ~ ~
::I:L.&..J N N N N
!=O:: I I I I
3=
CD C> C> C> C>
~ e::::
O:=l
ZU
lO co co ~ ~ ~ - ~ co co co
U N N N N N ~ N N N N
0"> L.&..J I I I I I I I I I I ::r:::r:::r:::r: ::r:
I :z C> C> C> C> C> C> C> C> C> C> (.)(.)(.)u u
c(<<< <
lJ") LAJ 1....1&..... LAJ LAJ
0"> CON~N -
- - ~
0"> co co ~ ~ co ~ ~ co
U N N N N N N N N
~
L.&..J I I I I I I I I
>- U1 C> C> C> C> C> C> C> C> -
co
~ N__
lI'en-
C>NN~
I co co en ~ GO co en co Ci::"1 I I Z .
U N N N N N N N N 2~~~~
3: I I I I I I I I c( Q.. Q.. Q.. 0:: <
0:: :E :E:E ti; ~
U1 U1 C> C> C> C> to:) to:) C> C> z<c(< LAJU
0:: 0:: 0:: 0 <
a.... ~zzz LAJo..
~ ~<c(< 0..0
~Ci:Ci:Ci: ~Ci5
<x: GO GO en en en en en - en GO GO 0'-'-'- 0
U N N N N N N N ~ N N N LAJ V) VHn V)
0:::: . ..... .......... 0::-
3= I I I I I I I I I I I a..OOO :J:
..... LAJ LAJ ~.-
Z C> C> C> C> to:) C> C> C> C> C> C> · Q.. a.. 0.. 2
~ .. :::>z
c(b:aLb zO
....J ~ ~ 0:: .- 0::: ..J ..J . ~ ~ ~ ~ · · · · ..JC/)
<x: .- 0 0 V) 0 ~ ~ ?c ~ > LAJ ..... LAJ LAJ < ~
..... L6J < < 0.. Q.. a.. a.. b <
3= 0:: VI < <
LAJ LAJ c( a.. a..J
0:: e- LAJ ~ 0:: 0 c5 ..... ~ ~ ~ tg ~ ~i=~ ~ e-o::
L.a.J .- V) ~ 5 .- !:=; 0 i >
V) 5 V) 0::: ~ < 0 0
(:) .- Z ..J < C 0:: ~ ~
Cl e- ~ L6J % 2 L6J ..... ~ ~
b . V) !Z C V) ~ ~
- Z < a: >- V) :IE >- L6J 0::0::0::0::
. 0 ..... ~ 2 ....................
U1 0 L6J ......; ~ =- :::> 0 2 2
0 Z zS U :a zzzz
- z < Zo Zo Z L6J 2 Z .e ~ 0 0 0::0::0::0::
~ < 2z OZ 00 ~~ 0 0 ~ 00 Z % 0000
L6J -< -z -z ~ c( c( c( UUUU
< ::) e-< .- . tic( ~ Z :IE .-<
L6J z U (.)0:: uZ C ~ ..... ~...: tif .-ti;e-ti;
u ::) ..... . .....0 ...... CI) L6JC ~ lii tif Iii
z L6J V) 0:: V)LAJ V)o:: :Q~ t; ...: ~V) V)L6JV).....O
0 > 0:::0 0::0 < V) V) 0:::
....J >-..... >-oC IS..... 0::0:: L6J 0:: ..... ~V) >- t-V) >- ~~ >-c( >-< ~~L5~~
~~ ~~ .....0 e-o.. t- ~~ ~ c( V) ~~ <2 ~
zo '-::r: ~o CI) i.- ~~ ~~ %~ ~-' ~e ~g ::r:::r:::r:::r:2i
.- 18 -;-~ ~V) .- ~~ e- o.. >~ -a.. LAJ 0.. 0.. L6J e-~.-So
IV) I~ I~ 1;3 1< I~ >< 1< I~ 1< ~Os02
0:: IV) :IE ~~ Ci:Z Z a..
~C::: ..... ~% e-5 .-5: .-% ...~ .....J .-a..J ...&oJ .....J zZV)V)
~V) oW: ...~
~ I I I I I
:3~ - N ,.,., ~ L.I') L.I') Lf) (.0 r-..... r-..... r-..... r-..... r-..... CO CO UUUU2
LAJ~LAJ~
a.. %%V)CI)
11- ,..,
ft r T 1k Ii '" I t;-N T
e
>- @ @ ~ ~ $5 ~
t- @ @ @ ~ @ @ @) @
-
a:::: @ @
0 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
- @ @ @ @
a:::: @ @
V1 ~
0... <z
~ . a::::
<(>- z::::>
o::t::: -t- (7) (7)
::I:UJ CJ') CJ') ao - - (7)
0:: t-a:::: N N N ' I I N
V') V')
~O 3= I I I U U I
> >
---I - CD C) C) C) u u C)
<(0:: t- a::::
3=0... o ::::>
ZU
u.J~
Oz (7) CJ') ao CJ') ao (7) (7) (7)
U N N N N N N N N
V1-
3: UJ I I I I I I I I
---,0 :z: C) C) C) C) C) C) C) C)
<(---I
Z---l CJ') CJ') (7) (7)
oe CJ') CJ') CJ') CJ')
U N N N N N N N N
UJ I I I I I I I I
I-- (/') C) C) C) C) C)
-u.J C) C) C)
O::c:
01--
<( U CJ') (7) (7) CJ') (7) (7)
N N N N N N
..z 3= I I I I I I
w- U1 C) C) C) C) C) C)
---'0
CDu.J
<(I-- (7) (7) ao - ao (7)
U N N N ", N N
~(-' 3= I I I I I I
<(=> :z: C) C) C) C) C) C)
>0::
<(I-- < L4J .
>- .....: ~ L4J
V1 ....: ::) ...; >
~ ~ en z ~ .....:
u.Jz u .....: ~ > u
.....: ~ z en L4J ~ Z >-
a:: => ~
Cl:::o L4J U U >< ~ ~ z z 0 ~ L4J
Q.. ~ ::i :2 Z ~ ...... ~ V) ~ (..)
<(u V') L4J :E L4J ~ 0 ....: > :s a:: z
~ 0 ~ :E: U en en ~ L4J ~ L4J a:: a::D:: a::
:z: ~ ~ >- L4J a:: 0 ~ &... >
~ ::) 0 ...... en U ~ ~i ~ La.. en 0 L4JL4JL4JL4J
0 z2 V) L4J :zz:zz
V1w 0 0 zU :zz ZO ~ z~ a:: zO z~ Z> za:: a::D::a::D::
OCD t- z z Q.!d o~ 0:Z oL4J 0 0 r= Qo Qo Qo oQ.. 0000
~ ~ t=. -~ t=o t=c G,~ ;:::::0 uuuu
<{ .... . .... . ~ 0 ....z ....z ....z
Z L4J ...; U.... u.... u.... UZ ~~ t3~ t3~ t3~ u z
U > > L4Jen L4JV') l.AJen L4J~ z L4J~ ~""....""
=>0 ~ ~ V)~ en~ en< V') V'l en ~ ~.... V) . V') en . en en V) V') en
0 D::a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: a:: . ~ ~~ ~~ fg~ a:: .... a:: .... a::~ a:: . <L4J~L4J
l.1....1-- -J >- L4J >- L4J L4J.... L4J.... L4J.... L4JL4J L4J V) L4J V) L4J V) L4JL4J L4J~L4J~
~C) <C) ....en ....> ~ ~~ ~~ ~ .... .... ....>
....en ....en z~
~z ~z ~z ~z ~z ~~ zen Z V') zen z< ::I:::I:::I:::I:
-0 >-::I: -L4J -~ -~ t-~t-t-
< ~ L4J I~ L4J en IV) In! ~
l...L. I~ I a:: I~ a::D::=:)=:)
Iii: lei: I a:: ~t: I I a.. I a.. IV) 0000
0 a:: ~~ ~ ~ < < < a::
- ~L.J ~...; . . ~&.J --'- zZenU'l
~L4J ~L4J < La.. ~.. ~. ....:2 .... Z .... Z .... z ....r=
~ I I I I
:3~ m m 0 0 0 ~ N 1'1') 1'1') ~ ~ ~ L{") lD uUuu
L4J~L4J~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ....-- Z z en en
a...
j. Jr'
u.J
---1
CD
<(
I--
J
/1- T'T Ftc HI'YI ~N T ~
~~~
L~~:
~~~....,.;
----
----
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
November 30, 1995
File # ST-513
A.H. Builders
895 Palomar Street
Suite B-3
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Attn: Mr. Tony Hernandez:
CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALK RAMPS ON VARIOUS STREETS IN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA FY 1995-96 PROGRAM (ST513)
On Wednesday, November 15, 1995, Roberto Saucedo and Shale Hanson of my staff met with
you concerning the award of subject contract. They discussed your lack of a proper contract
license for you to perform the work. At that meeting you indicated that you would be taking an
exam shortly to obtain the proper contractors' license. To date, you have yet to provide us with
proof that you posses the proper contractors license to perform the work.
In addition, I have attached a letter from Mr. Juan Arroyo, Housing Coordinator, concerning the
information you provided with your bid on the Minority and Women's Enterprise Program. It
is my understanding that Ms. Sherry Shot, (phone # 691-5263) who works for Mr. Arroyo has
tried to contact you on several occasions, as has Mr. Hanson, so that you can provide them with
the information they needed to see if your fIrm qualifIed to perform the work. To date, neither
Ms. Shot nor Mr. Hanson has received any information from your fIrm concerning the minority
business enterprise program.
This letter is being sent to notify you that you have until 5:00 p.m., Monday, December 4,
1995 to provide the City with all necessary information to qualify your rmn for meeting the
Minority and Women's Business Enterprise Program and also provide evidence that you
have obtained the proper contractor's license. Otherwise the city will have no other choice
but to award the contract to the second low bidder for construction of the project.
If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact Mr. Shale Hanson, of my staff
691-5114. ~
~. SWANSON
DEPUTY DIRECTOR PUBLIC WORKS/
CITY ENGINEER
SLH:dh
c: Bruce Boogaard, City Attorney
M:\HOME\ENGINEER\DESIG~ 13.SUI
11- r /
276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5021
H T '[ Ii ( H IV) t... N T l j
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
,~Me required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign contributions,
'.JI mailers which will require discretionary action on the pan of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official
"~~' TIle following infonllation must he disclosed:
List the IlaIlleS of all perSOIlS having a financial interest in the property which is the suhject of the application or the Contract
. q!.. owner, applicam, Contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
If any person" identitied pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the es of all individuals owning more
than 10 % of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership illlerest in the partnership.
If any person" . elllitiecJ pursualll to (I) ahove is non-protil organizalion or a trust. list the names of allY persoll serving as
Jm:dor of the lIon-prolil organizatioll or as trust~ or hc:neliciary or trustor of the trust.
Hove you had more than $250 worth of husiness transacted with any memher of the City staff, Boards. Commissions,
Committees, and Council within the past twelve month? Yes _ No ..)(!f yes, please indicate person(s):
Please identify each and every person, including any agellls, employees, consultants, or independent Contractors who you
have assigned to represem you ht:fore the City in this matter.
I I
tTw/E/(', L/7Mt:NFZ-..
Have you and/llf your officers or agellls. in the aggregate. cOlllrihuleu more than $1,000 to a Councilmemhc:r intht: current
IIr pfcn:ding dCClioll pt:rillll" Yes _ No ~ If yes, state which Coullcillllelllhcrs(s):
'0 ..{<'/T "'!i.:-x' 2. 6f /9 ~~
necessary) ,4.
/ ~
./
or Applicant
157m2 P/N/ N? .L.'/vt! -/?/fat/E/ ~19N.ZJE Z-..
Print or type name of Contractor/Applicant
* * * (NOTE: Attached additional
./~-
fu'/lIJ is defined as: "Any individual, firm. co-pannership, joint venture, association. sucial club. fraternal organization,
',"urution. estate, trust. receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city or country, city municipality, district, or other political
'':ill.\lOn. ur any other group or combination acting as a unit.
46
J! -/ !
-
'-
5
fr
8
=
\
~
on
~
~
~
u
\
m
!a
o
~
:i
J! Fe l'
:RSITY :
All rQGETI-fR -
\
~
RESOLUTION NO.
/8' J~y
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA REJECTING LOW BID FOR NON-
COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S DISADVANTAGED AND
WOMEN OWNED BUSINESS PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS FOR
"CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALK RAMPS ON VARIOUS
STREETS IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, FY 1995-96 PROGRAM (ST-513)"
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on October 25, 1995 in Conference
Room 2 in the Public Services Building, the Director of Public
Works received sealed bids for the "Construction of Sidewalk Ramps
on Various streets in the City of Chula vista, california, FY 1995-
96 Program (ST-513); and
WHEREAS, the work to be done consists of removal of
curbs, gutter, and sidewalk and the construction of sidewalk ramps
on various streets in the City; and
WHEREAS, the apparent low bidder, A. H. Builders failed
to provide supporting documents confirming their compliance with
the City's Disadvantaged and Women Owned Business (DBE) Program
Requirements; and
WHEREAS, said requirements were set forth in the
specifications for the contract and are required by the project's
funding source.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
Ci ty of Chula vista does hereby rej ect the low bid for non-
possession of required contractor's license and non-compliance with
the City'S Disadvantaged and Women Owned Business Program
Requirements for "Construction of Sidewalk Ramps on Various Streets
in the city of Chula vista, California, ~19 5-96 Pr gram (ST-
513)".
presented by ~oved ~ t fO~
~~ Booga \
Attorney
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
//;1" /
RESOLUTION NO. /8"lt5
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING
CONTRACT TO THE SECOND LOW BIDDER FOR
"CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALK RAMPS ON VARIOUS
STREETS IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, FY 1995-96 PROGRAM (ST-513)" AND
AUTHORI ZING STAFF TO INCREASE QUANTITIES TO
EXPEND ALL AVAILABLE FUNDS FOR THIS PROJECT
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on October 25, 1995 in Conference
Room 2 in the Public Services Building, the Director of Public
Works received the following nine sealed bids for the "Construction
of Sidewalk Ramps on Various Streets in the City of Chula Vista,
California, FY 1995-96 Program (ST-513) .":
Contractor Bid Amount
1. A. H. Builders - Chula Vista $24,923.00
2. Star Paving Corporation - San Diego 28,210.00
3. Fox Construction - San Diego 31,280.00
4. Basile Construction, Inc. - San Diego 33,946.73
5. Camino Irvine, Co. - San Clemente 35,790.00
6. Hammer Construction, Co. - Chula Vista 38,475.00
7. Portillo Concrete - Chula Vista 41 , 125.00
8. West Coast Construction - Corona 48,935.00
9. Weir Construction Corporation - Escondido 73,750.00
WHEREAS, A. H. Builders has been disqualified for reasons
explained in Resolution No.
WHEREAS, the second low bidder, Star Paving Corporation,
has complied with these requirements and its bid is below the
Engineer's estimate of $43,530 by $15,320 or 35%; and
WHEREAS, staff, therefore, recommends the contract be
awarded to the second low bidder, Star Paving corporation; and
WHEREAS, staff believes that the second low bidder's
amount is an excellent bid for this contract and results in a
1181'/
$10,114.55 fund balance, which staff recommends be utilized to
construct additional ramps; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
reviewed the work involved in this project for the ADA curb cuts
and has determined them exempt under section 15301 (c), Class 1 of
the California Environmental Quality Act (Minor Alterations of
Existing Public Improvements or Public Structures).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby accept bids and award contract to
the second low bidder for "Construction of Sidewalk Ramps on
Various Streets in the city of Chula Vista, California, FY 1995-96
Program (ST-513)".
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
contract for such quantities of ramps as may be attained in order
to permit full utilization of the appropriated amount for and on
behalf of the city of Chula vista.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby
authorized to increase quantities to expend a available funds for
this project.
City
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:lrslsidewalk.bid
I/B'v:2
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /~
Meeting Date 12/19/95
ITEM TITLE: /I, Resolution /8' It" Approving Final Map and Subdivision
Improvement Agreement for Chula Vista Tract 88-3A, EastLake South
Greens, Unit 4.
15. Resolution / %/ V 7 Approving Supplemental Subdivision
Improvement Agreement for EastLake South Greens Unit 4 Requiring
Developer to Comply with Certain Unfulfilled Conditions of
Resolutions No. 15200 and 17618, and Authorizing the Mayor to
Execute Same.
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of Public Worf..~, f
" \
." '\\
, ." 'I., \
)1 \ "-'",
City Manager, ," ,
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_Noll)
REVIEWED BY:
On July 18,1989, by Resolution 15200, the City Council approved the Tentative
Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 88-3, EastLake Greens. On August 16, 1994, by
Resolution 17618, the City Council approved the amended tentative map for EastLake
South Greens, Tentative Map 88-3A, and imposed additional conditions of approval. The
amendment to the tentative map covers the area south of Clubhouse Drive which is
designated as EastLake South Greens. The final map for EastLake South Greens, Unit
4 is now before Council for approval.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolutions approving the final map,
subdivision improvement agreement and the supplemental subdivision improvement
agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The project is generally located northerly of North Greensview Drive and westerly of
Silverado Drive and consists of 114 lots for single family residential units and 5 lots for
open space.
The final map for EastLake South Greens, Unit 4 of Chula Vista Tract 88-3A, has been
reviewed by the Public Works Department and found to be in substantial conformance with
the approved tentative map. Approval of the final map constitutes acceptance by the City,
on behalf of the public, of South Hills Drive, Pleasant Valley Place, Grove Park Place,
Annadale Way, Sun Valley Road, Harbour Town Place and portions of Alisal Lane and
Silverado Drive. Approval of the final map also constitutes acceptance on behalf of the
/~-/
Page 2, Item / ~
Meeting Date 12/19/95
City the following easements: a 5.5 foot tree planting and maintenance easement along
said streets; and a 10 foot general utility easement within open space lots A, B, C, D and
E.
At this time, the City is rejecting the dedication of Lots A, B, C, D and E for open space and
other utility purposes. However, under Section 66477.2 of the Subdivision Map Act these
offers of dedication remain open and subject to future acceptance by the City. These five
open space lots will be maintained by the EastLake Homeowners' Association (HOA)
unless the City determines that the level of maintenance does not meet City standards.
In that event, Council may, by resolution, accept the offer of dedication on behalf of the
City. The City accepts offers of dedication in fee for open space lots only when City
resources will be used to maintain these lots. Since the HOA maintains all open space
within the development, under this procedure the HOA retains fee ownership of the open
space lots until such time as the City decides to assume maintenance responsibilities for
these lots. This has become a standard procedure for all unit development within
EastLake.
The developer has executed a Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SSIA)
to satisfy the following conditions:
1. Condition No. 30 of Resolution No. 15200 requires the Developer to enter into an
agreement whereby the developer agrees that the City may withhold building
permits for any units in the subject subdivision if traffic on Otay Lakes Road,
Telegraph Canyon Road, EastLake Parkway, or East "H" Street exceed the levels
of service identified in the City's adopted thresholds.
2. Condition No. 32 of Resolution No. 17618 requires the Developer to enter into an
agreement to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any claims, actions or
proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by the
City with regard to the subject subdivision.
3. Condition No. 33 of Resolution No. 17618 requires the Developer to enter into an
agreement to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any liability for erosion,
siltation, or increased flow of drainage resulting from the subject subdivision.
4. Condition No. 34 of Resolution No. 17618 requires the developer to enter into an
agreement with the City relating to the provision of franchise cable television
services.
In addition, the SSIA contains a provision that allows the City to withhold building permits
for this unit until off-site sewer facilities required to serve this unit have been constructed.
The Developer submitted a bond in the amount of $130,000 to guarantee construction of
said facilities prior to approval of the final map for EastLake South Greens Unit 6.
/~.,~
Page 3, Item /;J,..,
Meeting Date 12/19/95
On July 25, 1995, by Resolution No. 17982, Council approved an Affordable Housing
Agreement for the EastLake development, which included certain milestones to implement
the Affordable Housing Program. The agreement requires the developer to have 112 low
income housing units under significant construction by June 1, 1998. However, prior to
issuance of a building permit for the 2,55Oth unit of the Greens, the developer is required
to commence construction on 160 low income housing units (the total affordable housing
obligation for the Greens). After issuance of the 2,55Oth unit, the City will have the right to
withhold issuance of additional building permits until significant construction has been
completed on the 160 affordable housing units. With the approval of the 114 residential
lots for EastLake Greens Unit 28, the current cumulative total of approved units within the
Greens is 1,555.
The developer is involved in discussions with the City to clarify the type and timing of park
facilities to be provided with the EastLake Greens and EastLake III developments. There
is a companion item on tonight's agenda dealing with the Eastlake Park issues. A
Provision has been added to the SSIA herein submitted for your approval that obligates
the developer to participate with regard to these units in whatever solution the City
implements to resolve the issue regarding required park facilities. All other conditions of
approval relative to this final map have been satisfied.
The developer has also executed a Subdivision Improvement Agreement for this map and
provided bonds to guarantee construction of the required public improvements (CV
drawings 95-451 through 95-458) within the subdivision. The developer has paid all
applicable fees and has provided a bond to guarantee the subdivision monumentation.
A plat is available for Council viewing.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. All Staff costs associated with processing of improvement plans
and final map will be reimbursed from developer deposits.
Attachments:
Exhibit A - Plat - EastLake South Greens Unit 4
Exhibit B - Disclosure Statement
Exhibit C - Minutes of 7/18/89 (Reso 15200) & 8/16/94 (Reso 17618)
LMC
(M :IHOMEIENGI NEERlLANDDEVlELG04FM. LMC)
File: 0600-80-ELG04
),k J f)-'f
CHUAL VISTA TRACT NO. 88-3A,
EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS
~2
4J
~~
~
68
46
67
~7
48
.1 ~9
.
;:)- . 50 ~
~ ! 65 89
I 51 "b
-
~ 52 I 6,(
...
.
~
'? 5J
... ~~ $.(
~
~ 55
1,2~5
---Y..I
UNIT 4
L / -~ .-
~
/~
--
~aI
'':M.It'1ll.''--
--- ---
t- \ '.
r (.i -
I.
,r
.
.
1HE Cm'" OF CHUIA VISTA DISCLOSURE SfAlEMENT
You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign
contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and
all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
10 List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
EastLake Development Company
2. If any person. identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning
more than 10% of tbe shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
Boswell Prooerties. Inc.
The Tulago Company
3. If 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 trust.
N/A
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions,
Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ No~ If yes, please indicate person(s):
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who
you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
Bill Ostrem; EastLake Development Co.
Tom Adler, EastLake Development Co.
Marwan Younis, The May Group
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Councilmember in the
current or preceding election period? Yes_ No_ If yes, state which Councilmember(s):
Date:
November 7, 1995
· · · (N01E: Attach additional pages as Decessary) · · ·
\L~~ f-
AJ~
/;2" 7
Signature of contractor/applicant
Thomas E. Adler, Project Manager
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
· Penofl is defined as: "Any individua~ finn, co-partnership, joint veruure, ". ociation, social club, fratmuzl organization, corporation, estate, trUSt, ~cdva, .syndicate,
this Qfld Ql~ other county, city 01u1 cowlI1); city murlicipality, district, or other political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit..
III nutf:S
- 0 -
IJUIY 10, I:;JO~
ORDINANCE OFFERED 'By MAYOR COX, as amended, the reading of the
text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved with EXHIBIT C
Councilman Malcolm abstaining on the Country Club portion of the
zoning ordinance.
15 PUBLIC HEARING
a. RESOLUTION 15197
PUBLIC HEARING
b. RESOLUTION 15198
c. ORDINANCE 2317
d. RESOLUTION 15199
e. RESOLUTION 15200
f. RESOLUTION 15201
g, RESOLUTION 15202
CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-86-4 - EASTLAKE
GREENS (Director of Planning)
EASTLAKE
CERTIFYING FINAL EIR-86-4
GREENS
PCM-87-7 - CONSIDERATION OF EASTLAKE II
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, PLANNED
COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGUlATIONS( EASTLAKE
GREENS SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA SPA) PLAN,
EASTLAKE GREENS PUBLIC FACILITIES
FINANCING PLAN, EASTLAKE. GREENS DESIGN
MANUAL; EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
EASTLAKE
II
GENERAL
APPROVING THE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE EASTLAKE I
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS TO
ADD EASTLAKE II TO SAID REGULATIONS
FIRST READING
APPROVING THE EASTLAKE GREENS SPA PLAN,
PUBLIC F A C I LIT I E S FINANCING PLAN , AND
DESIGN MANUAL
MAP
APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION
PCS-B8-3 FOR EASTLAKE GREENS
ADOP~ING CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR EASTLAKE
GREENS
ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
FOR EASTLAKE GREENS, EIR-86-4
This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Cox declared
the public hearing open.
Planning Consultant Doug Reid explained that a Master EIR for all
the EastLake development (including EastLake Greens/Trails) was
completed in February of 1982. In addition, 392.1 acres of
Eastlake Greens were reviewed in an EIR prepared for EastLake I in
January 1985. This presentotion contains additional information,
and covers effects on the environment which are not specific to
the EastLake Greens/Trails site and those that were not previously
addressed as significant effects.
c.-)
/.2" 9
~; ; Ti u t t: $
- 9 -
July 18, 1989
Mr. Reid th~n introduceD Jeanne Munoz, ERe Envirunmental and
Energy Services, who presented conclusions in the final EIR and
also the findings on the CEQA related documents.
Ms. Munoz noted essentially, the one significant unmitigable
impact would be on paper only: air quality. The reason being that
it is in non-conformance. In the San Diego area, a project is
considered to have a significant cumulative air ~uality impact if
the project has not been included in the SANDAG Series 5 and 6
Growth Forecast. EastLake Greens and EastLake Trails were not
included in those forecasts. At the time at which they become
included the project will be in compliance and conformance and it
will no longer be an unmitigable air quality impact.
Councilman Nader noted the unmitigable impact on air quality (on
pap e r) i s are a 1 air qua 1 i ty imp act and i tis 0 n 1 yon pap e r t hat
impact will disappear if SANDAG revises it projects and the
implementation plan for meeting quality air standards is revised.
He questioned the existing inadequate implementation plan and the
need to revise it to be stricter and asked how it is that we
anticipate the implementation plan and the SANDAG forecast will be
revised and therefore, on paper, the air qual ity impacts
unmitigated will go away and somehow remove the same amount of air
pollution that was an unmitigated impact on the EIR.
Ms. Munoz responded that it is confusing, but that what it is, is
that once the SANDAG Series 5 & 6 forecasts are incorporated into
the revised Air Quality Management Plan, this project will be in
compliance with the predictions made in that plan. It will not
change air quality at all, but it will be in compliance and
performance. The point needs to made however, that in large part,
the problems with air quality in San Diego County are a result of
the air quality problems in Los Angeles and there is nothing we
can do about that.
Mr. Bud Gray, City Consultant, noted he would be discussing the
EastLake II General Development Plan and the EastLake Greens SPA
P 1 an; Tom 8 a n dy fro m Wi 1 1 d a n w 0 u 1 d be pre s en tin g the E a s t L a k e
Greens Public Facilities and Financing Plan and Principal Planner
Ken Lee from the Planning Department would be presenting the
Tentative Map.
Tom Bandy reported on the Eastlake Greens Public Facilities
Financing Plan. He noted that the plan has four key features. It
describes the public facilities needed to serve the project,
on-site and off-side, the estimated costs, the method of
financing, and the phasing of facilities.
C-d.--
/,1-Jt!
EXHIBIT t
Principal Planner 'u e presented his report 0 .c h e project, noting
the proposed subdivision encompasses 830 acres of land located in
the eastern portion of the City east of 1-805 and south of Otay
Lakes Road, He noted the General lotting of the area including;
standard lots, small lots, attached product lots, townhouse
product lots, condominium product lots, high density condominium
lots. Mr. Lee also noted a letter from Kent Aden of EastLake
referring to proposed clarifications to conditions for EastLake
Greens.
EXHI BIT C
Council discuss i on followed regardi ng lot si zes, densi ty, family
sizes; affordabilty of the homes; possibly imposing a moratorium
if development came to outstrip public facilities, water
management plans, and land use patterns.
Bob Santos, President, EastLake Development Co~pany, 900 Lane
Avenue, addressed the issues about the General Plan policy as it
relates to achieving density higher than target density shown in
the General Plan. He noted that EastLake, before the Planning
Commission, voluntarily reduced the density of the EastLake
Greens, EastLake II proposal that was before Council this
even i n g . They wi 11 0 n 1 y r e que s t de n s i ty above that 1 e vel i f the
City's newly adopted policies are revised and situated to provide
for EastLake's ability to do that.
Katie Wright, Project Manager, EastLake Development presented
slides and transparencies on the EastLake Neighborhood and family
characteristics associated with the EastLake Project. She noted
statistics on buyers, famil ies, needs and household sizes. Al so
noted were the percentages of first time buyers, move up buyers
and chief reasons why those buyers selected Eastlake.
Kent Aden from EastLake noted that there were now over 90
conditions imposed on the SPA Plan and tentative map. He noted
that in the spirit of cooperation EastLake would live up to the
majority those conditions. He requested consideration of
alternative wording and modification to six of those conditions:
1. Tentative ~1ap #37: requires equal access to Cable TV
franchises. This issue is best dealt on a City-wide basis.
They wi 11 be app1yi ng for a Cabl e TV franchi se and because of
this they request that Council modify the condition to make
EastLake subject to any ne\" City-wide ordinance or resolution
of thi s f ssue. They will be subject to thf s at the tfme at
which it is adopted.
2. Tentative Map '64/SPA '2: in regard to the pedestrian
bridge. They don't know if the bridge is warranted or not, it
will require substantial public money to maintafn and EastLake
believes it should be included in the Public Facilitfes
Financing Plan, not as a Tentative Map condition.
\~~ -3
J,2~//
Minutes
- 11 -
.1 y 1 8, 1 989
3. Tentative Map #38G: Currently states that residential
con s t r u c t ion t a x may b e wa i v e d for e xc e ssp ark imp r 0 v e men t s. EX HI BIT '--
EastLake is committing to excess park improvements, therefore
would like a commitment from Council to waive the RCT
accordingly.
4. Tentative Map //46/SPA 6: Conflicting conditions regarding
church sites. EastLake would like to clarify they are
currently showing a 4.8 acre site in EastLake Greens for
churches. In addition, there are 12.3 acres in EastLake I and
II. In total, 22 acres will eventually be planned for the
EastLake community.
5. Tentative ~'ap /l44/SPA #9: relating to low/moderate income
housing. These items must be deferred at this time if Council
accepts the Planning Commission recommendation. EastLake
cannot meet these guide1 ines until the effect of the analysis
on the General Plan Policy Section 6.2 and 6.3 as they relate
to the final density of the five high density parcels is
determined.
6. Planning Commission Item SPA Condition 13: regarding the
deferral of the density. EastLake supports this condition but
is asking that Council adopt this with a 30 day time frame in
mind with the Task Force to come back with recommendations to
be adopted by Council.
With this in mind, EastLake asked that the project be adopted with
the General Plan Policies as they were adopted last week.
Speaking in favor of the EastLake project were:
Richard Esslinger, Postmaster, Chula Vista, 2134 Horthshore Drive;
Jackie Metcalf, 546 Port Harwick; Larry Rehlander, Victory
Lutheran Church; Peter Watry, speaking for CROSSROADS, 81 Second
Avenue; Fran 0 Meara, 1858 Gamay Terrace; uosepn "ownack, 1891
Gamay Terrace; Scott Ullmann, 2134-C Northshore Drive; Bob
O'Connell; 2072 ~~aterbury Circle; Joseph Cummings, 1848 Ithaca
Street; Richard Stahley, 30 Woodlawn Avenue.
Collectively, their remarks included the following: Crossroads
does not intend to concede one additional unit to EastLake Greens
and EastLake Trails; should stick to target density and approve
condition #13, which embodies the Planning Commission's
recommendation and EastLake's proposal; Post Office in process of
negotiation budget, if project is put off for any length of time
it may detrimentally affect ability to procure funds necessary to
construct EastLake Project; EastLake is the best community ever
seen; has distinctive neighborhood and lifestyle; courteous
corporation to work with for land site for churches; EastLake has
changed Chula Vista's poor image; increased City revenue and
increased number of businesses; various amenities are offered;
homes are affordable; large yards; many of the neighbors have
grown up in Chula Vista and moved to Cottage because they could
afford them and still are near their families; pleased that
EastLake has voluntarily chosen to reduce the density; insulated
community - can give back to community in the form of good
nei ghbors and ci ti zens; EastLake good project' but there is some
con c ern 0 v e r p r i vat e v. pub 1 i cpa r k s; w 0 u 1 d 1 i k e tog i ve den s i ty
transfer to keep from paying upkeep of parks.
/~,/~
-~
lJ""'tJ IV, tJU,,/
Speaking against \ Joe Garcia, 484 Fifth lenue, Chula Vista.
He stated that he was concerned about the water situation. He
asked if the water situation has been addressed.
Mayor Cox responded that it would be addressed on an incremental
basis because a certification would have to be done by the Otay
Water District that they would be able to provide the water
service for this project. The Mayor also noted that Councilman
Moore has put together a Water Task Force and that all property
owners are working with the water districts; the Task Force meets
on a monthly basis. The Otay Water District fs coming out this
week with water allocations so that the developers know that they
have certain restriction and cannot go beyond that with guaranteed
water rights. .
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was
closed.
RESOLUTION A OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was
wa i ve d by una n i m 0 use 0 n s e nt, pas sed and a p pro v e d by the f 011 0 w.f n g
vote to wit:
EXHI BIT \....
AYES:
NO:
Cox, Moore, McCandliss
Malcolm, Nader
RESOLUTION B OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was
waived by unanimous consent.
C 0 u n c il w 0 man t4 c Can d 1 i s s ask e d i f sin c e the b u 1 k 0 f her con c ern s
were on the Tentative Map, would it be possible to adopt the
Geneial Development Plan then possibly, with removing the actual
targ~t number for the area, continue the Tentative Map until after
he Task Force reviews that section and bring it back within 30
days. Or, if there was a desire to amend the tentative map, would
they have to go back and amend the SPA Plan, Facilities Financing.
Director Kremf' responded that they could consider the General
Development P an and the SPA Plan and reserve decision on the
Tentative Map. He noted that if the Tentative Map changed, as far
as density or location of product types, for the most part the
structure would still be relevant. The Task Force could review
the Land Use Element of the General Plan within a 60 day period of
time.
The Resolution B passed by the following vote:
AYES:
NO:
Cox, Moore, McCandliss
Nader, Malcolm
ORDINANCE C OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was
waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved by the following
vote to wit:
AYE S:
NO:
Cox, Moore, McCandliss, Nader
Malcolm,
:--s-' j:2'I}
. , I ,~.... ,.;; ,J
_v.IJ I\"...., I-'U.......
RESOLUTION D OFFERED 3Y MA" 1 COX
MOTION
Nader/ to amend the resolution to include an agreement that the
development will conform with the Growth Management Element to
eventually be adopted as part of the Chula Vista General Plan.
Mayor Cox asked if this would be more suitable under Item E - the
Tentative Map
Director Krempl responded that it could be placed under whatever
action they felt comfortable with.
MOTION RESTATED
10 amend the resolution to state that EastLake would agree with
whatever Growth Management Element is added into the General Plan;
it would become part of the agreement that the d.evelopment will
conform with the Growth Management Element that will eventually be
adopted as part of the General Plan.
Council member Moore qUestione-a-the -re;-;~ used; "a-gree" as opposed
to" con form. II ". / " ........-v-. -- ">\... J""'1,A..!J
Councilman Nader clarified that EastLake could decline the
agreement but then the project woul d not go ahead, so in effect.
it is a requirement that EastLake conform.
Discussion ensued regarding the agreement. Mr. Santos noted that
this is the appropriate legal document to make that kind of
commitment. but suggested it be addressed at that point in time.
In answer to Councilman Nader's question. Mr. Santos responded
they did have a problem in that Council is asking them to take a
considerable risk. as they have done in the past.
Councilman Nader withdrew his motion as to Item D and noted he
would resubmit it as to Item E. but that it should be make clear
at some point tonight that Council is doing this.
VOTE ~N THE MOTION. Item D
The motion carried with Councilman Malcolm voting no.
RESOLUTION E OFFERED BY MAYOR COX as read.
MOTION
(McCandliss/ Nader) that the resolution be continued and returned
at the Council meeting with the report on the General Plan.
Councilman Nader asked for a clarification of the motion.
(-cP
/,,2-11
EXHIBIT l
"'''''J .""". IJItJJ
Councilwoman McCa.. liss stateJ that what te would like the
committee to deal with transfers and bonuses and come back to EXHIBIT C.
Council before approval of the tentative map
Mr. Santos stated they were interested in moving ahead, but
concerned about the feelings that EastLake had a lack of
commitment. He suggested that the provision of a tract map
condition that requires the development agreement for the project
make EastLake subject to the Growth Management Policy that will be
adopted by the City in the future. Secondly, that a track map
condition on the ~roject requires that EastLake cannot exceed on a
cumulative basis in the eastern territories 7,426 dwelling units
until such time as the City has updated their Transportation
Phasing Plan, or the Growth Management Plan.
VOTE ON THE MOTION
The motion to continue failed by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
McCandliss, Nader
Cox, Malcolm, Moore
Mayor Cox noted there was one amendment he would like to make.
MSUC (Cox/Malcolm) that before recording of the final map there
would have to be an agreement executed by the City and by EastLake
resolving the outstanding issues on the public v. private parks as
they relate to EastLake I and EastLake II.
MSUC (Nader/McCandl i ss) Condi ti on 79 - the development be subject
to the Growth Management Element of the General Plan in the
Transportation Phasing Pian to be adopted by the City.
Councilman Malcolm noted that he had no problem with item 37 where
EastLake is subject to any new City-wide resolutions regarding
cable television and no problem with item 44 - that conditions
related to low and moderate income housing shall be deferred and
evaluated as a factor in the analysis of the General Plan policies
6.2 and 6.3 as they relate to parcels R-24, R-25, R-26, R-27 and
R-28.
MOTION
(Malcolm/Moore) to amend 37 and.44 as per EastLake's request.
Director of Public Works Lippitt noted that Item 37 was put in
because of Council's concern of equal access - it could be changed
- he recommended taking out the word .City-wide" because we don't
know what the ultimate solution is going to be and it may be
different from the western portion of the City in EastLake.
'\ L
\.- -. T
/,1"//
t:lnULt::S
- I::> -
J IJ I Y I (:l, I ::Jd::J
AMENDMENT TO MOTION
Councilman Malcolm amended his motion to delete the word
II City - wid e "
EXHIBIT C:.
The motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Malcolm also stated he had a problem with the golf
course. He spoke to Eastlake and they agreed to do something
other than a private golf course; the general public ought to have
a right to use the open space; EastLake has an obligation to the
public. He asked the City Attorney if Council could leave a
condition where EastLake has to be willing to open up to some type
of pub 1 i c use, to bed e t e r m i n e d by the City 0 f C h u 1 a Vis t a a t a
later date by the Parks & Recreation staff and other golfing
fa c i 1 i tie sin E a s t L a k e to corn e b a c k wit h 5 0 me ty p e 0 f
recommendation.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf, in response to Councilman
Ma1colmls question noted that if that condition would be
consistent with what was already approved in Resolutions B, C, and
D; if tha tis sue is not a 1 ready addressed in those provi si ons,
then this condition would be inconsistent.
It was noted by Mr. Gray that this would not be inconsistent with
anything Council has acted upon thus far because nothing in the
plans really speak to the private v. public nature of the golf
course.
Mr. Santos noted that EastLake Country C1 ub is envisioned to be a
privately owned and operated Club; it is not a municipal course.
When it is opened in 1991, it will be open for public play for a
period of time which has not yet been determined. The community
has expressed a desire to have this available for a
community-at-1arge use. There will be a CUP for the golf course
permit and at that time the whole concept of the public v. private
play can be addressed.
MOTION
MSUC (Malcolm/Nader) to add this as Condition '80 - prior to any
operation of the Golf Course that an a~reement between the City of
Chula Vista and Eastlake regarding publlC play be entered into, to
be considered as part of the procedure with the Conditional Use
Permit.
MSUC (Nader/Moore) Condition '81
Commissionls recommendations.
to incorporate the Planning
VOTE ON MAP
RESOLUTION E OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, as amended, the reading of the
text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved with
Councilman Nader and Councilwoman McCandliss voting no.
c-~
/).rIJ
- ,u -
,",yl:J 10, I~O;;1
RESOLUTION F OFFl .0 BY MAYOR COX, the reI 'ng of the text was
waived by unanimous consent, pa$sed and afProved with Councilman
Malcolm voting no and Councilman Nader vot ng no on the Statement EXHIBIT (:..
of Overriding Considerations.
RESOLUTION G OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was
waived by unanimous consent passed and approved with Councilman
Malcolm voting no.
Councilman Moore questioned the Council policy on traffic studies
in future developments.
Director of Public Works Lippitt responded that a traffic stUdy
was done for this plan in the EIR and one will be done when ~unbow
and other major developments come in. The City is automatically
following through on its pOlicy.
Mr. Krempl noted that on the Task Force, while indicating that it
may take 60 days, they woul d be tryi ng to get the group together
as soon as it was authorized by Council and proceed to do it in
the shortest time possible.
Mayor Cox noted the Council should try to make a commitment to
have this issue resolved in the next 60 days.
16. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - Opportunity for the public to speak to
the City Council on any subject matter within the Council IS
jurisdiction but not an item on today's agenda. Each
speaker's presentation may not exceed five minutes.
a. Mr. Wade R. Guiliani, s214 J Street, Chula Vista addressed the
issue of the 706 and 706A buses, the Chula Vista Trolley. He
noted that seniors and handicapped individuals that are having
difficulties accessing those buses. He suggested that perhaps
a study be done to correct these buses to be adequately used
by these individuals.
M S U C ( Cox /f~ 00 r e) tor e fer t his pet i t ion to s t a f f for are po r tan d
evaluation to come back to Council.
b. Joseph Garcia, 484 Fifth Avenue, Chula Vista, suggested City
invest in a 54 or 60 inch television monitor with a VCR to be
installed in the Council Chamber. City Manager Goss noted the
City has that capability and equipment ready' to be used when
neeaed.
c. Paul Green, 141 Lotus Drive, Chula Vista, addressed concerns
regarding an informational item dated February 15, 1989. The
City Manager noted he will send another copy of the response
to his letter that had been sent.
d. Rick Short Tan, 55 Oxford Street, Chula Vista, requested that
Chula Vista Historical Society consider trees as part of Chula
Vista's history. He cannot get information on certain trees
in the area.
" Q
'- - I
/~'J7
Minutes
August 16, 1994
Page 4
EXHIBIT ('..
parcels of the EastLake Greens General Plan Amendment whicb Lake access from the iotemaJ Circulat.iOD of the
EastLake Greens Planned Community (northeast of the SDG&E transmission lin~); (2) Improve the spatial and
functional relatioDShip of residential deosity/product distribution within the EastLake Greens PlanDed Community
area; aDd (3) Update the Eastl Jlke Greens SPA PlaD aDd supplementary documents 10 reflect cuneot ltatistics and
aecbnical refiDemeots based OD lite plaD approvals and market CODSiderations. Staff recommends Council place the
ordiDaDces OIl first radio, aDd approve the resolution. (Director of Plannin,)
A. ORDINANCE 2600 APPROVING THE PREZONlNG OF 2.2.7 ACRES OF UNINCORPORATED
LAND TO P-C PLANNED COMMUNITY AND ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
ON JS.94-1' AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM THERETO (first readil12)
B. ORDINANCE 2601 APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE n (EASTLAKE I
EXPANSION) PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULA TlONS (LAND USE DISTRICT MAP ONLY)
AND ADOFfING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON 15-94-19 AND MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM THERETO (first readilU!)
C. RESOLUTION 17618 APPROVING AND IMPOSING AMENDMENTS AND CONDITIONS ON
THE EASTLAKE II (EASTLAKE I EXPANSION) GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. EASTLAKE
GREENS SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN, EAST LAKE GREENS AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
PLAN. EASTLAKE GREENS WATER CONSERVATION PLAN AND EASTLAKE GREENS MASTER
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP AND ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF 15-94-
19 AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM THERETO
Ken Lee, Assistant Director of Planning. summariud the issues involved witb the project. Condition Be of the
ordiDaDce referred to the DOrth side of parcel R21 (trail system) and mould be corrected to read the DORb side of
Clubhouse Drive.
. . . Councibnember Horton arrived at ':2(>> p.m. · · ·
Mayor Nader iUlted ihe Resource Conservation Commission minutes should bav: !=en included m !he ;=.eke!. He
bad read the minutes whicb reflected a 5-0 vote for the mitia:atc:d neaative d<<:laralion.
This beina the time and place as advertised. the public bearina was declared ~.
. Bruce Sloan. 900 LaDe Avenue, '100, Chula Vista. CA. ~n=senlina: EastLake ~velopment Company,
CODcurred with the staff recommendations.
There beiDa DO further public testimony. the public bearing was cJo~.
ORDINANCES 2600 AND 2601 PLACED ON FIRST READING AND RESOLUTION 1"18 OFTERED BY
COUNCn.MEMBER HORTON. readine or the text was waived. passed and approved unanimOlW)'.
13. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATIONOFPROCRAM CHANGES OF RESIDENTIAL YARD
WASTE RECYCLING SERVICES FROM AN OPl'IONS PROGRAM TO A UNIVERSAL MANDATORY
RATE STRUCTURE -The City'. residential yard waste collection pro,ram be,M 111194 U I umque -ophoos-
proaram which allows sm,le-family resideats the choice of bow iMy will panicipate. hINd on Ibc:ir OWD ~t
of their yud waste Deeds. A review of the participation, costs. Iftd mreaue of Ibc: first IillDODtbs of the vohmtary
-optiClDS- proaram Ibow dW costs are far elceediD. reveoue and continuation of the pro,ram is dependent upon
I rate adjustmeDt to cover COUectiOD and processio, costs. Letters wens received from Laidlaw nq...uo,
coosidera1ion of an ameadment to the yard waste fee stnICtuf'e effective 9/1194 which would involve. cbanae 10
I UDi\Wal-....'tory rate ItrUCture to be spread 10 IUIiD,le-family _dents. Slaff ncommeads II'Pf'OvaJ of the
naolutiOll. (Deputy City Manaaer Krempl)
RESOLUTION ."t9 APPROVING A UNIVERSAL RESIDENTIAL YARD WASTE
COLLECTION RATE CHANGE TO $1.. PER SINGLE-FAMn.Y HOME
;;.*'/3'
RESOLUTION NO.
/ 8"'/ tf, ~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING FINAL MAP OF CHULA VISTA
TRACT 88-3A, EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS UNIT 4
ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC THE PUBLIC
STREETS DEDICATED ON SAID MAP, REJECTING ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA THE OPEN
SPACE LOTS GRANTED ON SAID MAP, ACCEPTING 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
The City Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
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 88-3A, EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS UNIT 4, and
more particularly described in Exhibit IIAII attached hereto and
incorporated herein as if set forth in full, 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.
Area: 22.6 acres
Numbered Lots: 114
No. of Lots: 119
Lettered Lots: 5
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said Council hereby accepts
on behalf of the public the public streets, to-wit: South Hill
Drive, Sun Valley Road, Harbour Town Place, Annadale Way, Grove
Park Place, Pleasant Valley Place and a portion of Alisal Lane, and
said streets are hereby declared to be public streets and dedicated
to the public use.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Lots A, B, C, D and E are
hereby rejected for Open Space.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said Council hereby accepts
on behalf of the city of Chula vista the easements with the right
of ingress and egress for visibility and street tree planting and
maintenance, general utility easement within Open Space Lot A, and
the storm drain easement, all as granted and shown on said map
wi thin said subdivision, subj ect to the conditions set forth
thereon.
1
/c2~' -if
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk of the City of
Chula vista be, and is hereby authorized and directed to endorse
upon said map the action of said Council; that said Council has
approved said subdivision map, and that said public streets are
accepted on behalf of the public as heretofore stated and that said
lots are dedicated for Open Space and other public uses and are
rejected on behalf of the city of Chula vista and that those
certain easements with the right of ingress and egress for the
construction and maintenance of street tree planting, general
utility easement and storm drain easement, as granted thereon and
shown on said map within said subdivision is accepted on behalf of
the city of Chula vista as hereinabove stated.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk be, and 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 the day of , 1995, for
the completion of improvements in said subdivision, a copy of which
is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof, the same as
though fully set forth herein be, and the same is hereby approved.
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 of Chula vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Cl__ 'l1WN ~
Bruce M. Boogaard, ci y
Attorney
2
/ ") /1 _ t"\
/ ~/7 oL
EXHIBIT "A" - LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PROPOSED CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 88-3A
"EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS UNIT No.4"
BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP No. 17476, IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SAID PARCEL MAP HAVING BEEN FILED IN
THE OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY RECORDER ON JANUARY 26, 1995, SAID PORTION BEING
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE ON THE
BOUNDARY OF MAP No. 13180, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY RECORDER ON
JANUARY 17, 1995, DESCRIBED THEREON AS "NORTH 42045'37" WEST 117.35' ", SAID
COURSE BEING ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY SIDELINE OF "SOUTH GREENSVIEW DRIVE", A
72.00-FEET-WIDE STREET SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE SOUTH 42045'37" EAST 119.87
FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 85006'47" EAST 74.46 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 9011'46" EAST 10.77 FEET; THENCE NORTH 29001'42" EAST 72.25 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 43042'17" EAST 79.32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 52057'03" EAST 60.41 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 62054'36" EAST 61.97 FEET; THENCE NORTH 66057'26" EAST 57.96 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 77>23'41" EAST 325.34 FEET; THENCE NORTH 78018'10" EAST 246.62 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 68057'45" EAST 83.57 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 43003'31" EAST 83.49 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 14012'24" EAST 81.49 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 10004'50" WEST 114.26 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 0058'24" WEST 206.03 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 05026'25" EAST 73.83 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 20010'14" EAST 261.01 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24054'17" EAST 46.31 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 31020'10" EAST 217.35 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 39054'02" EAST 83.94 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 57>54'04" EAST 42.48 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 73OS4'26" EAST 59.51 FEET
TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF
360.00 FEET, WITH A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARING
NORTH 70028'12" WEST; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 17>02'24" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 107.07 FEET; THENCE TANGENT FROM SAID
CURVE SOUTH 2029'24" WEST 237.42 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE,
CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.0 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY,
SOUTHWESTERLY, AND WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
EXHffiIT "A" - PAGE 1 OF 2
J;2~ ~J
94001'27" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 32.82 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE WITH A
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 818.00 FEET, WITH A RADIAL
LINE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARING SOUTH 6030'51" WEST; THENCE
NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2039'23" AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 37.93 FEET; THENCE NON-TANGENT FROM SAID CURVE
NORTH 69046'46" WEST 16.49 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE
NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 815.00 FEET, WITH A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE
THROUGH SAID POINT BEARING SOUTH 10018'31" WEST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG
SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3051'22" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 54.85 FEET;
THENCE NON-TANGENT FROM SAID CURVE NORTH 85044'49" WEST 16.49 FEET TO A POINT
ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 818.00
FEET, WITH A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARING
SOUTH 15018'10" WEST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 31056'13" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 455.96 FEET; THENCE TANGENT FROM
SAID CURVE NORTH 42045'37" WEST 1220.64 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THE HEREINABOVE-DESCRIBED PARCEL CONTAINS 22.625 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
I~~
Michael Anderson L.S. 6312
MA Y Group San Diego
MA:ma Rev: 11/29/95
(0025\OOI-OILG)
EXHIBIT "A" - PAGE 2 OF 2
) c2~.J / t,1
Recording Requested by:
CITY CLERK
When Recorded, Mail to:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula 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
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
, 199__, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a
municipal corporation, hereinafter called "city", and Eastlake
Development Company, a general partnership, 900 Lane Avenue #100,
Chula vista, California 91914, hereinafter called "Subdivider".
~ITll~~~~Ttll-
WHEREAS, Subdivider is about to present to the City Council of
the City of Chula vista for approval and recordation, a final
subdivision map of a proposed subdivision, to be known as Eastlake
South Greens, unit 4 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 relating
to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision map; and
WHEREAS, the Code provides that before said map is finally
approved by the Council of the City of Chula vista, Subdivider must
have either installed and completed all of the public improvements
and/or land development work required by the Code to be installed
in subdivisions before final maps of subdivisions are approved by
the Council for purpose of recording in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, or, as an alternative thereto,
Subdivider shall enter into an agreement with City, secured by an
approved improvement security to insure the performance of said
work pursuant to the requirements of Title 18 of the Chula vista
Municipal Code, agreeing to install and complete, free of liens at
Subdivider's own expense, all of the public improvements and/or
land development work required in said subdivision within a
definite period of time prescribed by said Council; and
WHEREAS, Subdivider is willing in consideration of the
approval and recordation of said map by the Council, to enter into
this agreement wherein it is provided that Subdivider will install
and complete, at Subdivider's own expense, all tne public
-1-
//;2A -?'
improvement work required by city in connection with the proposed
subdivision and will deliver to city improvement securities as
approved by the City Attorney; and
WHEREAS, a tentative map of said subdivision has heretofore
been approved, subject to certain requirements and conditions, as
contained in Resolution Nos. 15200, approved on the 18th day of
July, 1989, and 17618, approved on the 16th day of August, 1994
("Tentative Map Resolution"); and
WHEREAS, complete plans and specifications for the
construction, installation and completion of said public
improvement work have been prepared and submitted to the City
Engineer, as shown on Drawings Nos. 95-451 through 95-458
inclusive, on file in the office of the City Engineer ("Improvement
Work"); and
WHEREAS, an estimate of the cost of constructing said public
improvements according to said plans and specifications has been
submitted and approved by the City in the amount of One Million,
One Hundred Ninety Four Thousand Dollars ($1,194,000).
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED AS
FOLLOWS:
1. Subdivider, for itself and his successors in interest, an
obligation the burden of which encumbers and runs with the land,
agrees to comply with all of the terms, conditions and requirements
of the Tentative Map Resolution; to do and perform or cause to be
done and performed, at its own expense, without cost to city, in a
good and workmanlike manner, under the direction and to the
satisfaction and approval of the City Engineer, all of the public
Improvement Work and/or land development work required to be done
in and adjoining said subdivision; and will furnish the necessary
materials therefor, all in strict conformity and in accordance with
the plans and specifications, which documents have heretofore been
filed in the Office of the City Engineer and by this reference are
incorporated herein and made a part hereof.
2. It is expressly understood and agreed that 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. It is expressly understood and agreed that Subdivider will
cause all necessary materials to be furnished and all Improvement
Work required under the provisions of this contract to be done on
or before the third anniversary date of Council approval of the
Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
4. It is understood and agreed that Subdivider will perform
said Improvement Work as set forth hereinabove, or that portion of
said Improvement Work serHing any buildings or structures ready fC",-
-2-
/~~/J-?
occupancy in said subdivision, prior to the issuance of any
certificate of clearance for utility connections for said buildings
or structures in said subdivision, and such certificate shall not
be issued until the city Engineer has certified in writing the
completion of said public improvements or the portion thereof
serving said building or structures approved by the City; provided,
however, that the improvement security shall not be required to
cover the provisions of this paragraph.
5. It is expressly understood and agreed to by Subdivider
that, in the performance of said Improvement Work, Subdivider will
conform to and abide by all of the provisions of the ordinances of
the City of Chula vista, and the laws of the State of California
applicable to said work.
6. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the
ci ty of Chula vista, simul taneously 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 Five Hundred Ninety-Seven Thousand Dollars ($597,000) which
security shall guarantee the faithful performance of this contract
by Subdivider and is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and made
a part hereof.
7. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the
ci ty of Chula vista 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 cum
of Five Hundred Ninety-Seven Thousand Dollars ($597,000) to secure
the payment of material and labor in connection with the
installation of said public improvements, which security is
attached hereto, marked Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof and the
bond amounts as contained in Exhibit "B", and made a part hereof.
8. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the
Ci ty of Chula vista, simul taneously 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 Twelve Thousand Dollars ($12,000) to secure the installation of
monuments, which security is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "C"
and made a part hereof.
9. It is further agreed that if the Improvement Work is not
completed within the time agreed herein, the sums provided by said
improvement securities may be used by City for the completion of
the Improvement Work within said subdivision in accordance with
such specifications herein contained or referred, or at the option
of the City, as are approved by the City Council at the time of
engaging the work to be performed. Upon certification of
completion by the City Engineer and acceptance of said work by
City, and after certification by the Director of Finance that all
costs hereof are fully paid, the whole amount, or any part thereof
not required for payment thereof, may be released to Subdivider or
its successors in interest, pursuant to the terms of the
-3-
/07/;1/ 7
improvement security. Subdivider agrees to pay to the City any
difference between the total costs incurred to perform the work,
including design and administration of construction (including a
reasonable allocation of overhead), and any proceeds from the
improvement security.
10. It is also expressly agreed and understood by the parties
hereto that in no case will the city of Chula vista, or any
department, board or officer thereof, be liable for any portion of
the costs and expenses of the work aforesaid, nor shall any
officer, his sureties or bondsmen, be liable for the payment of any
sum or sums for said work or any materials furnished therefor,
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 Chula
vista Municipal Code.
11. It is further understood and agreed by Subdivider that
any engineering costs (including plan checking, inspection,
materials furnished and other incidental expenses) incurred by City
in connection with the approval of the Improvement Work plans and
installation of Improvement Work hereinabove provided for, and the
cost of street signs and street trees as required by City and
approved by the City Engineer shall be paid by Subdivider, and that
Subdivider shall deposit, prior to recordation of the Final Map,
with City a sum of money sufficient to cover said cost.
12. It is understood and agreed that until such time as all
Improvement Work is fully completed and accepted by City,
Subdivider will be responsible for the care, maintenance of, and
any damage to, the streets, alleys, easements, water and sewer
lines within the proposed subdivision. It is further understood
and agreed that Subdivider shall guarantee all public improvements
for a period of one year from date of final acceptance and correct
any and all defects or deficiencies arising during said period as
a result of the acts or omission of Subdivider, its agents or
employees in the performance of this agreement, and that upon
acceptance of the work by City, Subdivider shall grant to City, by
appropriate conveyance, the public improvements constructed
pursuant to this agreement; provided, however, that said acceptance
shall not constitute a waiver of defects by City as set forth
hereinabove.
13. It is understood and agreed that 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 acts or omissions
of Subdivider, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to
this agreement. Subdivider further agrees to protect and hold the
City, its officers Rnd employees, harmless from any and all claims,
demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort including
attorneys' fees, because of or arising out of acts or omissions of
Subdivider, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to this
agreement; provided, however, that the approved improvement
security shall not be required to cover +:he provisions of this
-4-
/e2/J-Y
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 adj acent or downstream
properties as a result of the construction of said subdivision and
the public improvements as provided herein. 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 City, by said approval, be an
insurer or surety for the construction of the subdivision pursuant
to said 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 the acceptance by the city of the improvements.
14. Subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
the City or 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, appeal board, or legislative body concerning
a subdivision, which action is brought within the time period
provideQ for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code of the
State of California.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove set
forth.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBDIVIDER: EASTLAKEDEVELOPMENT
COMPANY
SEE ATTACHED SIGNATURE PAGE
Mayor of the City of Chula
vista
ATTEST
City Clerk
Approved as to form by
fJfl~ (J1 'CA-"7 4-~
ci torney /
(Attach Notary Acknowledgment)
-5-
/~/J - c:;
/
By: EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COM:P ANY,
a California general partnership
By: Boswell Properties, Inc., By: The Tulago Company,
a general partner a general partner
By: /~~- By: b~
Paul G. Nieto, Vice President Paul G. Nieto, Vice President
By: y:
J.2/J-/O'!JIt -1/
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
No. 5907
State of California
County of San Diego
On December 7, 1995
DATE
before me,
Silvana C. Brazell, notary publiy
NAME, TITLE OF OFFICER - E.G., 'JANE DOE, NOTARY PUBLIC"
personally appeared Paul G. Nieto and Curtis J. Stephenson
NAME(S) OF SIGNER(S)
6(] personally known to me - OR - 0 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 ac-
knowledged 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.
J. SllVANAC. BRAZEll. I
-- . ~. COMM. #1011951 ~
~ .' NOT ARY PUBLIC-CALFORNIA
: SAN DIEGO COUNTY
, , My Commission Expires .....
J . .....,. FEBRUARY 12,1998 _ .1
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
.dj{)~,,~~f!::~
OPTIONAL
Though the d~ta below is not required by law, it r..ay prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent
fraudulent reattachment of this form.
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER
o INDIVIDUAL
o CORPORATE OFFICER
DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
TlTLE(S)
o PARTNER(S)
o LIMITED
o GENERAL
o ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
D TRUSTEE(S)
D GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
D OTHER:
NUMBER OF PAGES
DATE OF DOCUMENT
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTTTY(lES)
Boswell Properties, Inc.
..T.hP Tnl i'! ga Campi'! n y
SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE
01993 NATIONAl NOTARY ASSOCIATION' 8236 Remmel Ave.. P.O. Box 7184' Canoga Park, CA 91309-7184
/e2~J -//
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit "A"
Improvement Security - Faithful Performance
Form:
Bond
Amount: $597,000
Exhibit "B"
Improvement Security - Material and Labor:
Form:
Bond
Amount: $597,000
Exhibit "e"
Improvement Security - Monuments:
Form:
Bond
Amount: $ 12,000
Securities approved as to form and amount by
@?):rr;H/1 c- /J",-/ ~ ~~
L \. {/ ci ty Att rrey
Improvement Completion Date:
Three ( 3 ) years from date of
Council approval of the
Subdivision Improvement
Agreement.
C:\ag\sia\ELSG.4
-6-
/:-</~ - / .2
RESOLUTION NO. / S-/" ?
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS
UNIT 4 REQUIRING DEVELOPER TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN
UNFULFILLED CONDITIONS OF RESOLUTIONS NO. 15200 AND
17618, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, on July 18,1989, by Resolution 15200, the city
Council approved the Tentative Subdivision Map for Chula vista
Tract 88-3, EastLake Greens; and
WHEREAS, on August 16, 1994, by Resolution 17618, the
City Council approved the amended tentative map for EastLake South
Greens, Tentative Map 88-3A, and imposed additional conditions of
approval which amendment covers the area south of Clubhouse Drive
which is designated as EastLake South Greens; and
WHEREAS, the developer has executed a Supplemental
Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SSIA) to satisfy the following
conditions:
1. Condition No. 30 of Resolution No. 15200 requires
the Developer to enter into an agreement whereby
the developer agrees that the City may withhold
building permits for any units in the subject
subdivision if traffic on Otay Lakes Road,
Telegraph Canyon Road, EastLake Parkway, or East
"H" Street exceed the levels of service identified
in the City's adopted thresholds.
2. Condition No. 32 of Resolution No. 17618 requires
the Developer to enter into an agreement to
indemnify and hold harmless the City from any
claims, actions or proceedings against the City to
attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by
the city with regard to the subject subdivision.
3. Condition No. 33 of Resolution No. 17618 requires
the Developer to enter into an agreement to
indemnify and hold harmless the city from any
liability for erosion, siltation, or increased flow
of drainage resulting from the subject subdivision.
4. Condition No. 34 of Resolution No. 17618 requires
the developer to enter into an agreement with the
City relating to the provision of franchise cable
television services.
WHEREAS, in addition, the SSIA contains a provision that
1
j'7[J-/
r--.. --' /
allows the city to withhold building permits for this unit until
off-site sewer facilities required to serve this unit have been
constructed and the Developer submitted a bond in the amount of
$130,000 to guarantee construction of said facilities prior to
approval of the final map for EastLake South Greens unit 6; and
WHEREAS, the SSIA contains a provision that provides that
Eastlake South Greens unit 4 shall be assessed or charged its pro
rata share of whatever is necessary to implement the decision
reached by the city with respect to the park improvement obligation
as described therein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby approve Supplemental Subdivision
Improvement Agreement for EastLake South Greens Unit 4 requiring
Developer to comply with certain unfulfilled conditions of
Resolutions No. 15200 and 17618, a copy of which is on file in the
office of the city Clerk as Document No.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula Vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula vista.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
\,- y' \/!\ _ t.' (~. -. v
Bruce M. Boogaard, City
Attorney
!/
V" -(..:,1/\
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:lrsIELSG.Un4
2
/;)8'~
City Clerk
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Above
Space for Recorder's Use
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula 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.
Developer
SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
(Conditions 30, 32, 33, 34, 39)
This Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement
("Agreement") is made this _ day of , 199 , by and
between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, California ("Ci ty" or "Grantee"
for recording purposes only) and EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, a
general partnership ("Dc;veloper" or "Grantor"), with reference to
the facts set forth below, which recitals constitute a part of this
Agreement:
RECITALS
A. This Agreement concerns and affects certain real property
located in Chula Vista, California, more particularly described on
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein ("Property").
The Property is part of a project commonly known as EastLake South
Greens unit 4 ("proj ect ") . For purposes of this Agreement the
term "Project" shall mean "Property".
B. Developer is the owner of the Property.
c. Developer has applied for and the City has approved a
Tentative Subdivision Map commonly referred to as EastLake Greens,
1
1:;217...,'(
.' LJ '.J
Tract 88-3 ( "Tentative Subdivision Map") for the subdivision of the
Property.
D. The city has adopted Resolution No. 15200 and subsequent
Resolution No. 17618 ("Resolution") pursuant to which it has
approved the Tentative Subdivision Map subject to certain
conditions as more particularly described in the Resolution. The
description of the conditions in this recital section of this
Agreement is intended only to summarize and paraphrase such
conditions in the Resolution, and is not intended herein to modify
or explain them, and is not intended as a basis for interpreting
them.
E. Condition No. 30 of Resolution No. 15200 requires
Developer to enter into an agreement whereby the developer agrees
that the City may withhold building permits for any units in the
subject subdivision if traffic on otay Lakes Road, Telegraph Canyon
Road, EastLake Parkway, or East "H" Street exceed the levels of
service identified in the City's adopted thresholds.
F. Condition No. 32 of Resolution No. 17618 requires
Developer to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its
agents, officers and employees, from any claim, action or
proceeding against the City, or its agents, officers or employees
to attach, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City,
including approval by its Planning Commission, City councilor any
approval by its agents, officers or employees with regard to this
subdivision provided the City promptly notifies the subdivider of
any claim, action or proceeding and on the further condition that
the City fully cooperates in the defense.
G. Condition No. 33 of Resolution 15200 - Guarantee of
Construction. Prior to the approval of any final map for any lot
or unit, the Developer shall guarantee the construction of all
improvement work (streets, sewers, drainage, utilities, etc.)
deemed necessary to provide service to such lot or unit in
accordance with City standards.
H. Condition No. 33 of Resolution No. 17618 requires the
Developer to hold the city harmless from any liability for erosion,
siltation or increase flow of drainage resulting from this Project.
I. Condition No. 34 of Resolution No. 17618 requires the
Developer to insure that all franchised cable television companies
("Cable Company") are permitted equal opportunity to place conduit
and provide cable television service to each lot within the
subdivision and as more particularly set forth in Condition 34.
Developer further agrees to restrict access to the conduit to only
those franchised cable television companies who are, and remain in
compliance with, all of the terms and conditions of the franchise
and which are in further compliance with all other rules,
regulations, ordinances and procedures regulating and affecting the
2
/c2/J /1//
operation of cable television companies as same may have been, or
may from time to time be issued by the City of Chula vista.
J. This Project requires offsite sewer improvements to serve
Lots 1 through 16 and 94 through 114. The City shall withhold
building permits for Lots 1 through 16 and 94 through 114 until
said offsite sewer improvements have been construr;ted to the
satisfaction of the City Eng ineer on or before the Improvement
Completion Date set forth in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement
between the City and Developer as to EastLake South Greens, Unit 4
and in accordance with plans and specifications to be submitted for
approval to the City Engineer.
K. Park Obligations. Condition No. 39 of Resolution 15200,
the EastLake Park Agreement, EastLake Greens Development Agreement
and the Eastlake Greens III Development Agreement requires the
Developer to dedicate parkland and to construct park improvements,
including but not limited to, the Community Center, Gym and such
other improvements as set forth in said agreements.
L. City is willing, on the premises, security, terms and
'conditions herein contained to approve the final map for which
Developer has applied as being in substantial conformance with the
Tentative Subdivision Map described in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in exchange for the mutual covenants, terms
and conditions herein contained, the parties agree as set forth
below.
1. Agreement Applicable to Subsequent Owners.
1.1 Agreement Binding upon Successors. This Agreement
shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors,
assigns and interests of the parties as to any or all of the
Property until released by the mutual consent of the parties.
1.2 Agreement Runs with the Land. The burden of the
covenants contained in this Agreement ("Burden") is for the benefit
of the land owned by the City adjacent to the Property, described
as EastLake Community Park, more particularly described as Lot 2 of
Map No. 12544, recorded January 26, 1990. The Burden touches and
concerns the Property. 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 Property upon the sale of any lot improved
with a residence, provided however, the City determines that the
effect of such release, or in conjunction with previous releases,
will not jeopardize the completion of the improvements or other
obligations remaining under this Agreement. If the City deter~ines
that the release will not jeopardize said obligations, the City
shall execute a quitclaim releasing the Burden of this Agreement
3
1c2[5 rS
from the title to any such lots. As to any lots which have not been
released, the Burden of this Agreement shall continue to encumber
such lots and shall be binding upon, and run with, the ownership of
such lots until such lots are released.
a. Developer Release on Guest Builder
Assignments. If Developer assigns any portion of the Project,
Developer may have the right to obtain a release of any of
Developer's obligations under this Agreement, provided Developer
obtains the pr ior wr i tten consent of the City to such release.
Such assignment shall, however, be subject to this Agreement and
the Burden of this Agreement shall remain a covenant running with
the land. The City shall not withhold its consent to any such
request for a release so long as the assignee acknowledges that the
Burden of the Agreement runs with the land, assumes the obligations
of the Developer under this Agreement, and 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 Project which is being acquired by the Assignee.
b. Partial Release of Developer's Assignees.
If Developer assigns any portion of the Project subject to the
Burden of this Agreement, upon request by the Developer or its
assignee, the City shall release the assignee of the Burden of this
Agreement as to such assigned portion if such portion has complied
with the requirements of this Agreement and such partial release
will not, in the opinion of the City, jeopardize the likelihood
that the remain~2r of the Burden will be completed.
2. Condition No. 30 of Resolution No. 15200 - Building
Permits Not to Issue While Thresholds Deficient. In satisfaction
of Condition No. 30 of Resolution No. 15200, Developer agrees that
the City has the right to withhold building permits for any
dwelling units on the Property at such time as the traffic volumes
on otay Lakes Road, Telegraph Canyon Road, EastLake Parkway, or
East "H" street exceed the level of service identified in the
City's adopted thresholds.
3. condition No. 32 SUbdivision Map Indemnity. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 32 of Resolution No. 17618, the
Developer agrees that, on the condition that City shall promptly
notify the Developer of any claim, action or proceeding and on the
further condition that the city fully cooperates in the defense,
the Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City,
and 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 any approval by the City,
including approvals by its Planning Commission, City Council, or
any approval by its agents, officers, or employees with regard to
this Project.
4
j,}[f ~ ~
4. Condition No. 33 of Resolution 15200 - Guarantee of
Construction. Prior to the approval of any final map for any lot
or unit, the Developer shall guarantee the construction of all
improvement work (streets, sewers, drainage, utilities, etc.)
deemed necessary to provide service to such lot or unit in
accordance with City standards.
5. Condition No. 33 of Resolution No. 17618 - Erosion and
Drainage Indemnity. In satisfaction of Condition No. 33 of
Resolution No. 17618, the Developer agrees that, on the condition
that City shall promptly notify the Developer of any claim, action
or proceedings, Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold
harmless the City, and its agents, officers and employees, from any
claim, action, or proceeding against the City, or its agents,
officers or employees, related to erosion, siltation or increased
flow of drainage resulting from the Property. ci ty agrees to
reasonably cooperate with Developer in the defense of any such
action, claim or proceeding.
6. condi tion No. 34 - Cable Television Easements. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 34 of Resolution Nol 17618, the
Developer agrees to permit all cable television companies
franchised by the City of Chula Vista equal opportunity to place
conduit to and provide cable television service for each lot or
unit within the Project. Developer further agrees to grant, by
license or easement, and for the benefit of, and to be enforceable
by, the City of Chula Vista, conditional access to cable television
conduit within the properties situated within the Project only to
those cable television companies franchised by the City of Chula
vista the condition of such grant being that (a) such access is
coordinated with Developer's construction schedule so that it does
not delay or impede Developer's construction schedule and does not
require the trenches to be reopened to accommodate the placement of
such conduits, and (b) any such cable company is and remains in
compliance with, and promises to remain in compliance with, the
terms and conditions of the franchise and with all other rules,
regulations, ordinances and procedures regulating and affecting the
operation of cable television companies as same may have been, or
may from time to time be, issued by the City of Chula Vista.
Developer hereby conveys to the city of Chula vista the authority
to enforce said covenant by such remedies as the City determines
appropriate, including revocation of said grant upon a
determination by the city of Chula vista that they have violated
the conditions of the grant.
7. Satisfaction of Conditions. In satisfaction of the
offsite sewer improvements required to serve Lots 1 through 16 and
94 through 114 of this Project, Developer agrees that the City may
withhold building permits for Units 1 through 16 and 94 through 114
until said offsite sewer improvements have been constructed to the
satisfaction of the City Eng ineer on or before the Improvement
Completion Date set forth in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement
5
/cJ!3~/ ?
between the City and Developer as to EastLake South Greens Unit 4
and in accordance with plans and specifications to be submitted for
approval to the City Engineer. city agrees that the execution of
this Agreement constitutes satisfaction of Developer's obligation
of Condition 30 of Resolution No. 17618.
8. Park obligations. In satisfaction of Condition 39, of
Resolution 15200, Eastlake hereby agrees that the Property shall be
assessed or charged its pro rata share of whatever is necessary to
implement the decision reached by the City with respect to the park
improvement obligations of the Developer including, but not limited
to, the dedication of parkland, the construction of the Community
Center and Gym or such other park improvements as set forth in
Condition No. 39 of Resolution 15200, the EastLake Park Agreement,
Eastlake Greens Development Agreement, Eastlake Greens III
Development Agreement and such other agreements that Developer may
have assumed the obligations thereof.
9. Recording. This Agreement, or an abstract hereof
prepared by either or both part ies, may be recorded by either
party.
10. Miscellaneous.
10.1 Notices. Unless otherwise provided in this
Agreement or by law, any and all notices required or permitted by
this Agreement or by law to be served on or delivered to either
party shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly served,
delivered, and received when personally delivered to the party to
whom it is directed, or in lieu thereof, when three (3) business
days have elapsed following deposit in the U.S. mail, certified or
registered ma iI, return rece ipt requested, first-class postage
prepaid, addressed to the address indicated in this Agreement. A
party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph by
giving written notice of such change to the other party. Facsimile
transmission shall constitute personal delivery.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attn: Director of Public Works
Developer:
EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
900 Lane Avenue
suite #100
Chula Vista, Ca. 91914
Attn: William T. Ostrem
Vice President
6
/:2/3 - J//
A party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph
by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the
manner provided in this paragraph. Facsimile transmission shall
constitute personal delivery.
10.2 captions. captions in this Agreement are inserted
for convenience of reference and do not define, describe or limit
the scope or intent of this Agreement or any of its terms.
10.3 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the
entire agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter
hereof. Any prior oral or written representations, agreements,
understandings, and/or statements shall be of no force and effect.
This Agreement is not intended to supersede or amend any other
agreement between the parties unless expressly noted.
10.4 preparation of Agreement. No inference, assumption
or presumption shall be drawn from the fact that a party or his
attorney prepared and/ or drafted this Agreement. It shall be
conclusively presumed that both parties participated equally in the
preparation and/or drafting this Agreement.
10.5 Recitals; Exhibits. Any recitals set forth above
are incorporated by reference into this Agreement.
10.6 Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any dispute
arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing party in any action
shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees in addition to any
other costs, damages, or remedies.
7
/ df] ~1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
Agreement to be execute the day and year first hereinabove set
forth.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
*EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY
By
Mayor
*PLEASE SEE ATTACHED
SIGNATURE PAGE
Attest:
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Date:
C:\Ag\SIA\ELSG4.sup
8
/ '>f! r/O
, 0."~ /
EXHIBIT "A" - LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PROPOSED CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 88-3A
"EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS UNIT No.4"
BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP No. 17476, IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SAID PARCEL MAP HAVING BEEN FILED IN
THE OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY RECORDER ON JANUARY 26, 1995, SAID PORTION BEING
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE ON THE
BOUNDARY OF MAP No. 13180, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY RECORDER ON
JANUARY 17, 1995, DESCRIBED THEREON AS II NORTH 42045'37" WEST 117.35' II, SAID
COURSE BEING ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY SIDELINE OF "SOUTH GREENSVIEW DRIVEII, A
72.00-FEET-WIDE STREET SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE SOUTH 42045'37" EAST 119.87
FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 85006'47" EAST 74.46 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 9011'46" EAST 10.n FEET; THENCE NORTH 29001'42" EAST 7,.25 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 43042'17" EAST 79.32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 52057'03" EAST 60.41 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 62054'36" EAST 61.97 FEET; THENCE NORTH 66057'26" EAST 57.96 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 7r23'41" EAST 325.34 FEET; THENCE NORTH 78018'10" EAST 246.62 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 68057'45" EAST 83.57 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 43003'31" EAST 83.49 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 14012'24" EAST 81.49 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 10004'5011 WEST 114.26 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 0058'24" WEST 206.03 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 05026'25" EAST 73.83 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 20010'14" EAST 261.01 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24054'17" EAST 46.31 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 31020'10" EAST 217.35 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 39054'02" EAST 83.94 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 5r54'0411 EAST 42.48 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 73034'2611 EAST 59.51 FEET
TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF
360.00 FEET, WITH A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARING
NORTH 70028'12" WEST; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 1 r02'24" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 107.07 FEET; THENCE TANGENT FROM SAID
CURVE SOUTH ~29t2411 WEST 237.42 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE,
CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.0 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY,
SOUTHWESTERLY, AND WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
EXHIBIT "A" - PAGE 1 OF 2
/1r?lJ -- / I
94001'27" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 32.82 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE WITH A
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 818.00 FEET, WITH A RADIAL
LINE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARING SOUTH S030'51" WEST; THENCE
NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF ~39'23" AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 37.93 FEET; THENCE NON-TANGENT FROM SAID CURVE
NORTH 69046'46" WEST 16.49 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE
NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 815.00 FEET, WITH A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE
THROUGH SAID POINT BEARING SOUTH 10018'31" WEST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG
SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3051'22" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 54.85 FEET;
THENCE NON-TANGENT FROM SAID CURVE NORTH 85044'49" WEST 16.49 FEET TO A POINT
ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 818.00
FEET, WITH A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARING
SOUTH 15018'10" WEST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 31056'13" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 455.96 FEET; THENCE TANGENT FROM
SAID CURVE NORTH 42045'37" WEST 1220.64 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THE HEREINABOVE-DESCRIBED PARCEL CONTAINS 22.625 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
t~~
Michael Anderson L.S. 6312
MA Y Group San Diego
MA:ma Rev: 11129/95
(OO25\OOI-OILG)
EXHIBIT "A" - PAGE 2 OF 2
/.28,/:2-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item /;?
Meeting Date 12/19/95
/~/~r
Resolution Ordering the Summary Vacation of a portion of certain
drainage, sewer and access easements in Lot 10 of Map 13176, Chula Vista
Tract No. 90-02, Rancho Del Rey SPA III
~
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public W ork~
City Manager 't-f~
*oJ
Rancho Del Rey Investors, L.P., c/o McMillin Project Services, Inc., has requested vacation by the
City of a portion of certain drainage, sewer and access easements. The easements have no public
facilities within them and will be superseded by relocation of the utilities originally intended for
these easements.
REVIEWED BY:
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoJL)
Section 8333 of the California Streets and Highways Code allows the City Council to summarily
vacate a public service easement when the circumstance stated above exists.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve the subject resolution ordering the summary
vacation of a portion of certain easements in Lot 10 of Map 13176, Chula Vista Tract 90-02, Rancho
del Rey SPA III.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: No consideration is necessary by any of
the City's boards or commissions.
DISCUSSION:
On Lot 10 of Subdivision Map 13176, easements for access, drainage and sewer were granted to the
City. An easement for water and access, coincident with the City's easement area was simulta-
neously granted to Otay Water District on said map. (See Exhibit "A ".)
Rancho Del Rey Investors obtained approved mass grading plans to develop Lot 10 on 7/1/92. As
the grading was progressing, Rancho Del Rey Investors developed a concept for an affordable
housing project which could be ideally situated on a northerly portion of Lot 10. On 6/14/95,
Rancho Del Rey Investors initiated parcel map proceedings with the City to subdivide Lot 10 and
create a separate parcel on this northerly portion of Lot 10.
In order to better situate the affordable housing project's buildings and appurtenances on this
proposed separate parcel, Rancho Del Rey Investors proposed to reconfigure the alignment of the
northerly portion of said City and Otay Water District coincident easements. The realignment is an
acceptable location for the corresponding utilities, since they will not cross through the proposed
new parcel.
Consequently, this northerly portion of the original coincident easements is no longer needed, and
is thereby recommended for vacation. (See Exhibit "B".)
The City and Otay Water District have approved the proposed new location for the utilities and will
receive appropriate new easements. As a clean-up matter, the old easements may be abandoned.
13-;
Page 2, Item J;l
Meeting Date: 12/19/95
It should be clearly noted that under this proceeding, the City will, upon approval by the City
Council, be vacating the City's access, drainage, and sewer easements only. Otay Water District
must go through a separate proceeding to release all claim to their access and water easement.
Although the construction change was approved, physical placement (actual construction) of either
the City's or Otay Water District's utilities has not yet occurred within the realignment, nor were
utilities ever placed in the original alignment. This means that Streets and Highways Code Section
8333 may be utilized, which states that the Council may summarily vacate an easement which has
been superseded by relocation and which has no other public facilities located within it. Section
8334.5 states that it cannot be summarily vacated if public facilities are in place and would be
affected by the vacation. Otay Water District, as well as other agencies that might be affected, were
contacted and have no objections to the request.
Rancho Del Rey Investors is currently processing the parcel map which subdivides Lot 10, creating
a separate parcel at the northerly extent of Lot 10 for the affordable housing project. On this map,
easements will be granted to the City and Otay Water District to cover their respective facilities
along the realignment.
In compliance with Streets and Highways Code Subsection 8335(b), the resolution ordering the
vacation must state the following:
1. The vacation is made under Chapter 4 of the Streets and Highways Code.
2. The name or other designation of the public service easements and a precise description of
the portion vacated are attached. (See Exhibit "e".)
3. The summary vacation is made under certain facts (That the easements were never utilized
and will not be needed in the future).
4. From and after the resolution's recording date, the vacated City access, drainage and sewer
easements no longer constitute easements. Otay Water District shall undergo a separate
proceeding to vacate their access and water easement.
FISCAL IMP ACT: The realignment of facilities causes no new or additional construction. The
cost for the City to process the vacation is covered under a standard deposit account associated with
such requests. The costs for processing the parcel map and obtaining permits to develop the
affordable housing site are borne by similar type deposit accounts.
Attachments: Exhibit" A" - Plat showing Lot 1 0 from an excerpt of Map 13176
Exhibit liB" - Precise Description of Portion to be Vacated
Exhibit "C" - Plat showing original alignment and realignment
JA / File: 0740-70-PV-065
M:\HOMEIENGINEER\AGENDA\V ACA 9002.JGA
/ :3 - .:J...
RESOLUTION NO.
/~/ty
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF A
PORTION OF CERTAIN DRAINAGE, SEWER AND ACCESS
EASEMENTS IN LOT 10 OF MAP 13176, CHULA VISTA
TRACT NO. 90-02, RANCHO DEL REY SPA III
WHEREAS, Rancho Del Rey Investors, L.P., c/o McMillin
Project Services, Inc., has requested vacation by the City of a
portion of certain drainage, sewer and access easements; and
WHEREAS, the easements have no public facilities within
them and will be superseded by relocation of the utilities
originally intended for these easements; and
WHEREAS, section 8333 of the California Streets and
Highways Code allows the City Council to summarily vacate a public
service easement when the circumstance stated above exists; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby order the summary vacation of
a portion of certain drainage, sewer and access easements in Lot 10
of Map 13176, Chula vista Tract No. 90-02, Rancho Del Rey SPA III,
more particularly descr ibed in Exhibit "B", attached hereto and
incorporated herein as if set forth.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city Clerk is hereby
directed to record this resolution after the above conditions have
been met, and from and after the date the resolution is recorded,
the easement vacated no longer constitutes an easement.
Presented by
Approved as to ,/fdrm by
. J ~ I 'I
~l1 /,1 . t,i
I ~ N"'^-<...
"Bruce M. Boogaard, C ty
Attorney
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:lrslvacate.sum
13:J)9~i
LOT 8
MAP 13170
LOT I
M4P gllO
-
o
,,<<J
~
s
~~
/,
~
LOT 2
MiJP e110
LOT 10
RANCHO DEL REY SPA //1
iJ1AP NO. /3176
ACCESS" DRLJ/NIICf IWD
SEWER EJJSEMGNT 70 CiTY
PER M/JP NO. /3/70
WATER AND 4CCESS
EASEMENT 70
014 Y WillER f)IST/.;~/CT
PER MdP NO. 13ilG
StAtE /"= 101'
c.XJ-/IBIT ~'I
):J-~ I/J~r;
.' . '" <l\' .
'.:~ I
J-12322-H
EASEMENT VACATION
That portion of that certain easement granted to the City of Chula Vista for access,
drainage and sewer and granted to Otay Water District for water and access as shown
on Lot 10 of Map No. 13176 in the City of Chula Vista, on file in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, State of California described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Lot 10; thence South 17051 '06" East
along the Easterly line thereof 368.00 feet; thence leaving said line South 72008'54"
West 91.00 feet to a point on the Westerly sideline of said easement and the TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING; thence Northerly, Westerly, Easterly and Southerly along the
sidelines of said easement the following courses: North 17051 '06" West 328,90
feet; thence North 72048' 19" West 139.89 feet; thence South 81 056'03" West
28.80 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent 428,00 foot radius curve concave
Northwesterly, to which a radial line bears South 70051 '56" East; thence
Northeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 05039' 51" a
distance of 42.31 feet; thence South 72048'19" East 182,19 feet; thence South
17051 '06" East 344.50 feet; thence leaving the Easterly sideline of said easement
South 72008'54" West 30.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Contains 0.36 acres.
c ~ )) C L/tf .tn ~,q
Chris D. Ciremele L.S, 5267
c><'HIBlr ''8''
/3-7 (/3 ~~
..-.-
MAP !317b
4.SJ
/....,29'5r
; ? 0/'
. '- 6" JI'47
- - - - ~(R)
>0- - - -
~ - '.J1'$6"', -
- - - '?:CIi)
LOT 8
POB-
LOT I
MAP NO, 8 I :
NSg'4(J45'E 254.47'
LOT L
EL RANCHC J~' ilL
UNIT No~ 3--WEST
MAP NO ~ 8 j 10
KCESS. DRNNAGE AND
SEWER EASEMENT
GRAJ./TED TO THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA
PE R MAP NO. 13176
TO BE VKATED
WATER AND KCES~
EASEMENT GRANTELJ T
OT AY WATER DISTRICT
PER MAP NO. 13/76
TO BE VPCATED
(f'
&~"
()~,
I\-.~"
~;'
PROPOSED WATER AND
!\CCESS EASEMENT TO
3E GRANTED TO OT AY
/rATER DISTRICT
REFERENCE DRAWINGS
MAP NO.13fT6
MAP NO. 7396
MAP NO. 8/10
BASIS OF BEARINGS
THE BASIS OF BEMINGS FOR THIS MAP IS
BETWEEN 5T AT/ON 'SD 190' AND 'SD 193"
PER SM DIEGO COUNTY CONTROL.IL..
N86'5O'34'E
LEGEND
r:~ INDICATES POFfTION OF EASEMENT TO
l~_~'-J BE VKATEo. MEA. 036 PeRES
INDICATES MAP BOUNDAAr
Ur) INDICATES RNJIAL BEMING
I
L
~
------- -
-------
--- ---
---
LlJ
I:;
o
0::
Lu
~
tn
0:::
LlJ
~
TELEGRAPH
VICINfTY MAP
NO SCALE
.
lC)
a
q:)
'._""~11 ''''
INDICATES POINT O~E~i!j RI I"" 't."
INDICATES TRUE r$ir1J'!',;/J,/'ll'fNG ) ~::-/(j
r\,",,'~".'" ;;-[
~
POB
10' T POB
ITEM TITLE:
/
/ ,J
/If / .
l~~ hi,/-/
I 1/
Public Hearing to consider Ordinance .lt~~
amending section 8.23.090 B.3. of the Chula vista
Municipal Code to allow the Refuse Collection
Franchisee to fully recover landfill processing
costs through customer billing rates, and for
consideration of refuse collection rate adjustment
related to in~reased disposal costs at the County
Landfill for the Residential, Residential
Yardwaste, and Commercial Contracts.
Item
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Meeting Date
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution /~/r~ Approving changes in the
landfill/processing cost rate component for the
Residential, the Residential Yardwaste, and the
Commercial Contracts effective July 1, 1995, with
ratepayers billing rates to be adjusted beginning
January 1, 1996.
Deputy city Manager Krempy} {/
Finance Director ~
City Manager (4/Sths Vote: Yes~ No___'
REVIEWED BY:
On November 14, 1995, in response to a request from Laidlaw Waste
Systems, Inc., the City Council directed staff to evaluate the need
to amend the municipal code in order to allow Laidlaw to fully
recover charges incurred in the disposal of refuse at the County
Landfill, and to recommend any necessary rate adjustments based on
unrecovered costs.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council:
1. Adopt Urgency Ordinance Amending Section 8.23.090
B.3. of the Chula vista Municipal Code to allow the
Refuse Collection Franchisee to fully recover landfill
processing costs through customer billing rates.
2. Conduct the Public Hearing.
3. Adopt Resolution approving changes in the
landfill/processing cost rate component for the
Residential, the Residential Yardwaste, and the
Commercial Contracts effective July 1, 1995, with
ratepayers billing rates to be adjusted beginning January
1, 1996.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A
~/ .I
Meeting Date
12/05/95
Page 2
BACKGROUND:
The basic refuse collection rate consists of three components;
operating costs, landfill costs, and franchise fees. Landfill
costs are incurred by Laidlaw on a per ton basis at the otay
Landfill. These costs are currently passed through to the
ratepayer based on 1991 estimates of the tons collected per
household/business.
The Municipal Code section governing modifications to the landfill
cost portion of the refuse collection rate is 8.23.090 B.3., and
reads as follows:
"The proportion of modification to the Landfill Rate Component
shall not exceed the proportion of change since grantee's last
rate increase in the rate charged by the County of San Diego
to Grantee for "tipping fees" at the otay Landfill, or if the
otay Landfill has been closed, at the next closest operating
landfill, for the latest twelve-month period."
simply stated, this code section limits increases in the landfill
rate component of the customer billing rates to changes in the
actual per ton processing rates (tipping fees) charged at the
County landf ill. It has been Laidlaw's contention that the
ordinance should allow not only changes in the landfill tipping
fees to be passed through to the ratepayers, but also any increased
landfill costs due to changes in the actual tons collected per
unit. The ordinance was written in this fashion because staff was
concerned with their inability to verify that volume/weight
increases per household/busineFs are actually attributable to Chula
Vista customers. Although we can review tickets from the County
Landfill indicating that the driver of the truck had indicated that
the refuse originated in Chula vista, there is no failsafe way to
verify that the trucks actually contain refuse from this City.
Therefore, there does not appear to be any reasonable alternative
to accepting Laidlaw's data for this purpose.
During the November 14 Council discussion, Council determined that
the intent of the ordinance was to allow Laidlaw to recover all
landfill processing costs by passing them through to the
ratepayers. The ordinance presented for approval tonight therefore
amends the municipal code to clarify that intent as follows:
"The proportion of modification to the Landfill Rate Component
shall not exceed the proportion of change since grantee's last
rate increase in the ~ costs charged by the County of San
Diego to Grantee for IItippil'\lJ feca" processinq at the otay
Landfill, or if tflc otay Lal'\afill flaa BCCA cloDcd, at tflc Acxt
oloocDt opcrating landfill, for the latest twelve-month
period."
~
'1
, j / 'j
..../ C'--
Meeting Date
12/05/95
Page 3
The ordinance is being presented as an urgency item, requiring four
votes, in order to implement the rate modifications as soon as
possible so as to minimize the monthly impact to the ratepayers.
According to Laidlaw, during their 1995 fiscal year, the landfill
rate billed to residential ratepayers was based on estimates of
0.13600 tons/month per residential unit. Again, according to
Laidlaw, actual landfill costs were incurred at the rate of 0.13653
tons/month per residential unit. Therefore, Laidlaw incurred
landfill costs under the Residential Contract totaling $2,273 in
excess of what had been collected from the ratepayers for this rate
component even though the landfill tipping fee did not change. Per
Laidlaw, the weight per unit can vary because of numerous factors
such as purchase practices, the economy, and the weather. Laidlaw
has also shown that they have absorbed unrecovered landfill costs
totaling $67,161 under the Residential Yardwaste Contract and
$381,245 under the Commercial Contract during their 1995 fiscal
year. staff has reviewed the monthly data provided by Laidlaw and
has found no reason to dispute the figures as presented.
Laid:aw is requesting that the la.1dfill cost rate component be
increased in the three impacted contracts to enable them to recover
the previously-incurred fiscal year 1995 costs over a twelve month
p=riod (1/1/96 - 12/31/96) and to enable them to recover current
fiscal year 1996 costs over the remaining six month period
beginning 1/1/96, based on updated tonnage estimates. This
treatment for the 1996 costs would be consistent with the operating
cost increases recently approved by Council. They have also agreed
to evaluate these costs on an annual basis along with operating
costs and to recommend not only increases, but decreases based on
actual tonnage, if warranted. Exhibit I details the basic
recommended rate adjustment in addition to the "surcharges" for
both unrecovered fiscal year 1995 and 1996 landfill/processing
costs based on updated tonnage data.
For comparison purposes, Exhibit II displays the annualized rates
(using the basic adjusted rate only) for Chula Vista, assuming
staff recommendations are adopted, with other jurisdictions' rates
in San Diego county. The rates for Chula vista have also been
adjusted to reflect the 2.5% operating cost increases approved
recently by Council. The table shows that our overall residential
billing rate, including recycling and yard waste, will remain the
lowest in the County. This ranking is due to the large decreases
put into effect in July, especially in the Recycling and Yardwaste
programs. The comparison also shows that our Commercial 3 yard bin
billing rate ($78.78) will be the ninth lowest out of the seventeen
cities in the County, and is $2.49 or 3% less than the average rate
for the other sixteen cities.
_~ / ii'
I
"
Meeting Date
12/05/95
Page 4
FISCAL IMPACT:
The impact to residential ratepayers would be an increase over
current rates of $0.17 per month per household for the period
January 1, 1996 through June 30, 1996, an increase over current
rates of $0.18 per month per household for the period July 1, 1996
through December 31, 1996, and a decrease below current rates of
$0.02 per month per household from January 1, 1997 forward as the
result of staff recommendations.
The impact to the typical commercial ratepayer (13 yards/month)
would be an increase over current rates of approximately $12.74 per
month for the period January 1, 1996 through June 30, 1996, an
increase over current rates of $8.84 per month for the period July
1, 1996 through December 31, 1996, and an increase over current
rates of $3.90 per month from January 1, 1997 forward as the result
of staff recommendations.
~i/~I'
~
.
..
': !
~ 1.5
t:S>-=
..
~ll
o:::!
...=-
V'l
~ ~!
~
>
~
"I
>-
- -
'1 w l
~ ]~~
u
~. -
~ J DO 5
!3 ~.5 l
en ~i.E
~ a~8
en
<
~
~ ~ I
~ j~!
~
i I!
Pi
i
I
,
· t'
~LO
~~S~~
~~!iE
-
~ ~ '^ - ..
'. fW'l ~ '" Q
N V'i ..0 ..0 W"i
f"""4 .. ... ... ...
-...... ..
~ ;; ~ ~ ~
;; g a ~ ;;
~ ;:; ; 8 ~
. _ N N -
~MM""
Cl"I.,.. ~ N
c;f"'l N ClC
N -- - -
~ .. .. M
I
.. ~
.- w ~
~! g
Ii
.5
r--. ~ I"'- \C N .,..
c; \C ClC ClC \C "':
M - 0 - N ~
...... ~ ... .. - -
_MM.... ..
l.O
~ l ~ '" ~ ~
S~S~ii: ii:
~
> ~ ~. i ~ :1
~l~ ! ! ~ I
~
DC
E
c
..
.n
-
..
~
a
c w
.- -
"'Be
II
.-
8 ~
! E
~ 8 S ~
E i ! i
'" 10
'" 10
.0 V'i
- -
.. ..
~ I ~
..0 .. ..
- - -
.. .. ..
10'
IC
0\
-
.. .
~8 ~~~~
;;~ ;;a~~
~ !
;; a
8 ;;
N -
.. ..
IC IC
N f"'l
~ g
C> ~
- ClC
;:; i
~
z
12
a
~
c w
.- !
II
.-
- \C
I"'- ~
N V'i
- -
.. ..
DC
-e:
N - fW'l
- - -
.. .. ~ ..
z
I"'- '"
- -
~ ~ I I
~ I
s ~
~ Q
I ~
- -
i5. .r::
~
S ~ < l!
~ i~ ! I
fa ~= ~ ~
Jrf
-..--' ~-
.'1/' L,
/ "/
-
-e:
-
=
ta ~ g
...0 W"i
;;.. ;;
8
a
~
-
r::
EXHIBIT II
I 8
E E
~ ~
.c .c
~ =
t'i ~ ~
.. V'i a' .. ..0
..... - ~
.. .. ....
~ ~i~ ~ =
a aa;; a a
s ~
g ~
~ ~
N ~
M ..
,.
~ ~
;; a
N -
~ "':
- -
M ..
~ ~,~ : ~
N "".c..o 0; N
- ....- .. -
.. .. ..
I ~
- -
r:: :::
'" '"
~ ~
- -
r:: r::
~
I
I
3! ~
II) II)
~
=
,a i
EXHIBIT 1I
DRAFT COMMERCIAL LETTER RE
SOLID WASTE CHANGES
TO CHULA VISTA BUSINESSES:
This letter is to advise you of some changes to your trash bill. As
background, in 1994 your bill was increased several times due to rate
increases at the County landfill which were not under the control of either
the City of Chula Vista or Laidlaw. Thus, in the first half of 1995, the rate
for a three-yard container with once-a-week refuse service was $91.35. Due
to some subsequent cost reductions at the landfill, the average monthly rate
for a three-yard container with once-a-week refuse service was reduced to
$76.79 on July 1, 1995. Now, effective January 1996, the rate will again rise
$14.82 to $91.61, but drop on July 1, 1996 to $86.64 and drop again on
January 1, 1997 to $81.76.
Q. What are the changes?
One change is a 2.5% inflationary adjustment for Laidlaw effective July 1,
1995. The City Council approved the request in recognition that Laidlaw's
last inflationary adjustment was July 1992 and costs have increased.
The other change approved by the Council is to fully reimburse costs to
Laidlaw from their use of the Otay Landfill. Previously incurred costs are
being reimbursed to Laidlaw for the fiscal year 1994-95 and the first half of
fiscal year 1995-96 and amortized over a 12-month period. Thus, the rates
are higher at the beginning of 1996 and drop lower throughout the year.
Q. What can my business do to help keep down future cost increases?
The most effective way to help is to reduce, reuse and recycle. The City
offers an easy way to recycle through curbside collection. Also, keeping the
trash as dry as possible helps reduce the weight impact. H you want to know
more about recycling and composting, call the City's Conservation
Coordinator at 691-5122.
John D. Goss
City Manager
NOTE TO COUNCIL: If the fiscal year 1994-95 retroactivity on the pass through is elhninated.
rates effective January 1, 1996 will be $86.73. If the fiscal year 1994-95 and first half of 1996
retroactivity is dropped altogether, the rate further drops to $82.85. If the cost of living
adjusbnent retroactivity is also dropped, the rate further drops to $81.76 on January 1,1996.
With the rates as stated in the body of the letter, we would be the fourth highest in the County
as of January 1996 and seventh as of July 1996 and January 1997.
I~ ptJPi/
DRAFT RESIDENT LETTER RE
SOLID WASTE CHANGES
TO CHULA VISTA RESIDENTS:
This letter is to advise you of some changes to your trash bill. As
background, in 1994 your bill was increased several times due to rate
increases at the County landfill which were not under the control of either
the City of Chula Vista or Laidlaw. Thus, in the first half of 1995, the
average monthly residential bill was $19.85. Fortunately, due to some cost
reductions and successful recycling efforts, the average monthly bill was
reduced to $12.41 on July 1, 1995. Now, effective January 1996, the bill is
being increased to $13.10 or $.69 per month. This is still the lowest monthly
rate of any jurisdiction in San Diego County.
Q. What are the changes?
One change is a 2.5% inflationary adjustment for Laidlaw effective July 1,
1995. The City Council approved the request in recognition that Laidlaw's
last inflationary adjustment was July 1992 and costs have increased.
Laidlaw had requested a 6.7% increase. A change also was approved by the
Council to fully reimburse costs to Laidlaw through its use of the Otay
Landfill. This amounts to $.17 of the total $.69 increase.
Q. What can I do to help keep down future cost increases?
The most effective way to help is to reduce, reuse and recycle. The City
offers an easy way to recycle through curbside collection. If you want to
know more about recycling and composting, call the City's Conservation
Coordinator at 691.5122.
John D. Goss
City Manager
NOTE TO COUNCll..: H the fiscal year 1994-95 retroactivity on the pass-
through is elhninated, rates effective January 1, 1996 will be $12.90. H the
fiscal year 1994-95 and the first half of 1996 retroactivity is dropped
altogether, the rate changes to $12.92. If the cost of living adjustment
retroactivity is also dropped, the rate further drops to $12.65 on January 1,
1996.
J(. tJ~t?
'2.5-16
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PROPOSED BILLING RATES
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNIT BILLING RATE:
1/1/96
BILLING
RATES
$12.41 I
WASTE RATE 7'1196
C.P.I. ADJUSTMENT
C.P.I. RETROACTIVE 7/1/f16 ADJUSTMENT
1996 LANDFILL WEIOHT ADJUSTMENT
1996 LANDFill WEIOHT 711/96 RETROACTIVE ADJ
1996 UNREIMBURSED LANDFILL COSTS
WASTE RATE PROPOSED 1'1196
.14.20
$0.188
$0.188
$0.026
.0,026
.0.007
.14.69
SS CURBSIDE RECYCLING RATE 7'1'96
C.P.1. ADJUSTMENT
C.P.1. RETROACTIVE 7/1/96 ADJUSTMENT
SS CURBSIDE REC RATE PROPOSED 1'1'96
1$2,431
$0.042
$0.042
($2.361
YARDWASTE RECYCLING RATE 7'1196
C.P.1. ADJUSTMENT
C.P.I. RETROACTIVE 711/95 ADJUSTMENT
1996 PROCESSINO WEIOHT ADJUSTMENT
1996 PROCESS/NO WEIOHT 7/1196 RETRO ADJ
1996 UNREIMBURSED PROCESSINO COSTS
YARD WASTE REC RATE PROPOSED 1/1196
$0.640
$0.061
$0.061
reO.0441
1$0.0441
$0.196
.0.86
SINGLE FAMILY RESI UNIT PROPOSED BILLING RATE:
$13.101
7/1/96 1/1/97
BILLING BILLING
RATES RA TES
.13.10. $12.85.
.14.69 $14.40
1.0.1881
reO.026)
'.0,007)
.14.40 $14,39
1$2.361 ($2,39)
'$0.0421
($2.391 ($2,39)
$0.86 $0.84
1$0.0611 I
$0.044
1.0.196)
$0.84 $0,66
.12.851 $12,651
COMMERCIAL WASTE RATE 11 3YD 1 X WK) *76.79, .91.61. ~6.64 .
C.P.I. ADJUSTMENT .1.086
C.P.I. RETROACTIVE 7/1196 ADJUSTMENT .1.086 1$1.0861
1996 LANDFill WEIOHT ADJUSTMENT $3.884
1996 LANDFill WEIOHT 711/96 RETROACTIVE ADJ $3.884 1$3.8841
1996 UNREIMBURSED LANDFILL COSTS ...884 '$4,8841
COMMERCIAL WASTE RATE PROPOSED $91.61. $86.641 $81.761
.. THE 1118. 111711Ans 00 NOT IlEFLECT ~TtHTIAL ADJUSTMENTS FOil LANDFIll. CPt. &IlECVCUNQ IlUULTS"
/ 'I ~t1
2
Should Council decide to disallow the reimbursement request as part
of the Landfill rate component, Laidlaw has also requested
reimbursement for these same costs as an "extraordinary cost,"
under Municipal Code section 8.23.090 B.9. Staff believes that
this code section only deals with the timing of rate change
requests and would not offer the franchisee another avenue to
recover otherwise unrecoverable costs. The code section is
reproduced here for your information:
"Frequency of Rate Increase Requests. No more than one such
increase may be implemented in anyone calendar year although
grantee shall have at any time the right to submit a request
to the City Council for additional rate relief at any time
extraordinary expenses are incurred."
ACCOUNTABILITY - VERIFICATION OF LAIDLAW WEIGHT DATA
Staff was requested to clarify the level of confidence that could
be attributed to weight data reported by Laidlaw, since this data
would be relied upon for future rate changes should the ordinance
be amended to allow such consideration.
Further discussions were held with Laidlaw and a visit to their
office was made to better acquaint staff with the accounting system
in place which accumulates and reports both weight and cost data by
jurisdiction. It was found that Laidlaw has a complex system of
route assignments, reporting by drivers, and County landfill
verification forms, which should provide a high level of confidence
in the cost and weight data generated. Route assignments are being
made such that only Chula vista trash is in any truck servicing the
City. In other words, the same truck is not simultaneously
servicing portions of other jurisdictions while servicing the city.
Routes are controlled by unique numbers which also are reconciled
with data received directly from the County landfill. This data is
verified and corrected, when necessary, by office personnel.
It should also be noted that Laidlaw has somewhat of a vested
interest in accurately reporting the source of waste taken to the
landfill, since according to County regulations, they could be
subject to an administrative fine should the County or state
determine that they are misreporting this information.
CUSTOMER NOTIFICATION
Council requested information as to how the rate changes would be
communicated by Laidlaw to the City's trash customers. Attached is
a draft letter for Council review and comment. Also attached is a
table which attempts to provide a simplified presentation of the
recommended rate modifications.
li?J
COUNCIL INFORMATION
DATE:
December 14, 1995
FROM:
.
Honorable Mayor and City Council /, \
,. ),d'\ \
. " " ; ''x'',
John D. Goss, Cl ty Manager._ . I' ,
Deputy city Manager Kremp~~
Robert W. Powell, Director of Finance~
TO:
VIA:
SUBJECT:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2656
AND RESOLUTION 18146 - TRASH RATES
When the attached item was considered by Council at the regular
meeting of December 5, 1995, Council directed staff to return with
additional information regarding the following areas of concern.
UNREIMBURSED LANDFILL COSTS FOR FY95 AND FY96
It has been staff's position for several years that the ordinance
only allowed for landfill component rate increases based on
increases on the actual tipping fees at the County landfill.
Conversely, Laidlaw has contended that the intent of the ordinance
was to allow them to pass through all actual landfill cost
increases, whether such increases were caused by changes in the
tipping fees or increases in the average weight per household or
business.
When this issue was discussed at the November 14 meeting (item and
minutes attached), it was staff's understanding that Council
supported Laidlaw's position, and directed staff to further review
Laidlaw's figures and to return with a recommendation for any
necessary clarification of the ordinance and a recommendation for
a reasonable amortization period for past unreimbursed costs.
The issue of whether or not to allow Laidlaw to recover the past 18
months worth of unreimbursed landfill costs is viewed by staff as
a policy issue based on the interpretation of the intent of the
existing ordinance. If it is reasonable to assume that the intent
of the existing ordinance is to allow all landfill costs to be
reimbursed, as Laidlaw contends, then it appears reasonable that
the retroactive reimbursement should be allowed. The currently
recommended ordinance changes would then be viewed as clarification
of the original intent. If, on the other hand, Council decides
that the intent of the existing ordinance is to only allow rate
increases for the landfill component based on tipping fee
increases, then it may be reasonable to conclude that any such
unreimbursed costs incurred by Laidlaw prior to the ordinance
changes may not be subject to reimbursement.
/~
ORDINANCE NO. J~~
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AMENDING SECTION 8.23.090 B.3 OF THE
CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW THE REFUSE
COLLECTION FRANCHISEE TO FULLY RECOVER
LANDFILL PROCESSING COSTS THROUGH CUSTOMER
BILLING RATES
The City council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain
as follows:
Section 1. That Section 8.23.090 B.3 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 8.23.090 Rates for Collection.
B. Rate Modification Procedure.
3. "Landfill Rate Component" Changes.
The proportion of modification to the Landfill Rate
Component shall not exceed the proportion of change
since grantee's last rate increase in the ra-:E-e
costs charged by the County of San Diego to Grantee
for "tipping fCCD" processinq at the Otay Landfill,
or if the Ot;1y lnndf i 11 h;1D bccn clowcd, at thc
ncxt clOwcot opcr;1ting l;1ndf ill, for the latest
twelve-month period.
Section II: The City Council hereby finds that this is
a matter of urgency affecting the public health and general welfare
because the rate modification is necessary in order to minimize the
monthly impact to the ratepayers and shall be effective immediately
upon its first reading and adoption by a four-fifth's vote.
AfgedJ
ft::'. B~09
Robert Powell, Director of
Finance
Attorney
Presented by
c: lor\823090.B3
/l
r-
I
/
#19~ /
RESOLUTION NO. IT/lit
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING CHANGES IN THE
LANDFILL/PROCESSING COST RATE COMPONENT FOR
THE RESIDENTIAL, THE RESIDENTIAL YARDWASTE,
AND THE COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS EFFECTIVE JULY 1,
1995, WITH RATEPAYERS BILLING RATES TO BE
ADJUSTED BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 1996
WHEREAS, Laidlaw is requesting that the landfill cost
rate component be increased in the residential, residential
yardwaste and commercial contracts to enable them to recover the
previously-incurred fiscal year 1995 costs over a twelve month
period (1/1/96 - 12/31/96) and to enable them to recover current
fiscal year 1996 costs over the remaining six month period
beginning 1/1/96, based on updated tonnage estimates; and
WHEREAS, Exhibit I details the basic recommended rate
adjustment in addition to the "surcharges" for both unrecovered
fiscal year 1995 and 1996 landfill/processing costs based on
updated tonnage data.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve changes in the
landfill/processing cost rate component for the residential, the
r~sidential yardwaste and the comme~cial contract effective July 1,
1995, with ratepayers billing rates to be adjusted beginning
January 1, 1996 as set forth in Exhibit I.
Robert Powell, Director of
Finance
J
Presented by
1/_;
'/ -
\ '
//
~"T'
Exhibit I
LANDFILL/PROCESSING RATE COMPONENT ADJUSTMENTS
(Presented on a monthly basis)
Residential Commercial
Residential Yardwaste (bv yard)
a) Basic Rate Adjustment $0.025 ($0.044) $0.300
b) Amortization of
unreimbursed costs for
first 6 months of FY96
over the period
1/96 thru 6/96 $0.025 ($0.044) $0.300
c) Amortization of
unreimbursed costs for
FY95 over the period
1/96 thru 12/96 $0.007 $0.196 $0.376
Effective rate adjustment
1/96 thru 6/96 (a + b + c) $0.06
$0.11
$0.98
Effective rate adjustment
7/96 thru 12/96 (a + c) $0.03
$0.15
$0.68
/j !? ,,>
~ /!;J~~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
-:;!:7,E'/) f /+-
-ff
Item
Meeting Date
11/14/95
ITEM TITLE: Report on City of Chula vista Rate Setting:
Financial Indicators for Solid Waste
SUBMITTED BY: Deputy ci ty Manage~emp*\e;
Director of Finance
REVIEWED BY: ci ty Manager~ ~~ J (4/stbs vote: Yes_ No-l-)
Earlier this year, in cooperati~ with Laidlaw, the City entered
into a contract with a consulting firm, Hilton Farnkopf and Hobson,
to develop solid waste financial indicators. The contract was
awarded administratively following an RFP process. The cost is
being paid by Laidlaw from a deposit account in the amount of
$6,885. The objective of the study is to develop financial
benchmarks to assist us in the rate review of any cost increase
proposals made by Laidlaw. The attached report represents the
study findings.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept the report directing staff
to continue to monitor and track the indicator changes over time
and advise Council as part of any future rate setting hearings.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
The consultant's report recommends that the City evaluate five
different financial indicators as part of our overall monitoring of
Laidlaw with the caveat, "By themselves, financial indicators
cannot be conclusive with regard to whether specific rates are
inadequate, adequate or more than adequate." As more fully defined
in the attached report, the primary indicators recommended are the
Expense Ratio and the Return on Assets, while the subsidiary
indicators recommended are the Operating Ratio, Sales on Assets
Ratio, and Debt to Worth Ratio. These specific indicators were
selected to assist the City in evaluating Laidlaw's management
effectiveness regarding matters that directly impact the rates paid
by City residents and businesses. They provide insight into the
management of expenses, assets, and debt.
Based on unverified data provided by Laidlaw, the calculated
financial indicators showed basically that their ratio of expenses
to revenues was relatively high when compared to other refuse
companies accross the country. These results would tend, to
indicate that either the billing rates are too low, that the
company is less than effective in managing operating expenses, or
a combination of both.
/1/'/
Meeting Date
11/14/95
Page 2
CONCLUSION: The indicators developed are helpful but are not a
substitute for analysis of actual company specific operational and
cost data fer any rate adjustment request. The limitations of the
indicators are that specific, consistent and objective information
is lacking for both Southern California and the Western Region.
While comparison with nationwide data is helpful, it may not
reflect results that may be more indicative of this region.
Second, currently there is no trend information to be able to
assess Laidlaw's position from year to year. Obviously, as the
indicators are compliled over time, this problem will be
alleviated. In addition, as noted, an indicator's position can be
explained by either rates not being high/low enough or operating
expenses not being managed efficiently. Thus, additional analysis
is required to evaluate each request.
staff believes that the indicators can be used to help focus the
area of analysis and if the analysis tends to support a Laidlaw
C.P.I. request, then the financial indicators can be looked at as
a further confirmation of that particular conclusion.
FISCAL IMPACT: The study has now been completed within the original
budget of $6,885. No additional fiscal impact is contemplated, and
Laidlaw will be able to provide us with the information needed
ongoing to determine the appropriate ratios. Measuring the
indicators periodically will provide the city with valuable
comparative information.
M:\HOME\ADMINIGKIUJOu' W.A13
/ 8"~~
/f
j
11(~.'~~~J ~i:~L
5HH133~94
,. - ". I"
tl .- 011 I.
PAGE 63
CD HlLTONFARNl<OPF &. HOBSON
,o,dvifa'Y ~ct$ to
Co: M\,Il\idr~1 M\IN~mtnt
~"nt
N-r<n ~
39350 Civic Centtr Orlve. Sulte: 100
F=nnnt. Calif<<nl.945)8.2331
Tclt~: 510'713.:mo
Fax, SlOI71).J29-4
October 25, 1995
Mr. George Krempl
Deputy City Manager
City of Chula V1Sta
Office of the City Manager
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, California 91910
Solid Waste Financial Indicators
Dear Mr. Krempl:
In accordance with our agreement, Hilton Famkopf &= Hobson (HF&H) is pleased to
present this final report to the Oty of Chula Vista (City).
)lat'lc:vnund
The Oty entered a Waste Management Franchise Agreement (Agreement) with
Laidlaw Industries (Company) to provide refuse collection and disposal and
recycling services to residents and businesses in the City through the yeat 2001. In
exchange for provicling these services, conducting a new operating senrice facility
and performing in accordance with the terr:\S and conditions of the Agreement, the
Company charges customers at rates determined by the City Council.
The CoWlci1 sets rates in accordance with the Agreement. The Agreement
disaggregates the rates into the following three components; Landfill Rate
Component; Franchise Pee Rate Component; and, Other Rate Component. The
Landfill Rate Component is adjusted in accordance with the change in the landfill
gate rate since the last time rates were adjusted. 11te Franchise Fee Rate
Component is adjusted in accord.anc:2 with the actual change in franchise fees since
the last time rates were adjusted. The Other Rate Component is adjusted in
aecordance with the change in the San Diego Consumer Price Index for all urban
customers since the last time rates were adjusted. However, the Other Rate
Component adjustment is not to exceed 6%, unless a public hearing regarding the
greater-than-6% ratei:nctease is conducted by the City Council.
-0-'
I~~ j/I--q
..
_~.E HILTON FARNKOPF & HOBSON
Mr. George Krempl
October 25, 1995
Page 2
The City staff and Council have expressed concern that the rate adjustment
method contained in the Agreement does not:
. Document the Company's performance;
. Provide a method for monitoring the Company's performance over time;
or,
. Allow the City to compare the Company's performance to other similar
companies.
For this reason, the City and the Company engaged HF&H, through a competitive
procurement process, to identify financial indicators that would allow the City to
document, monitor and compare the Company's performance to other similar
companies. Initially, HF&H proposed a broader scope of work at significantly
higher fees to perform the engagement. After discussions with and direction from
the City and Company staff, the scope of work was reduced to that described below
in order to more cost-effectively achieve the City's objectives.
Approach and Limitations
The procedures used in this analysis were the result of discussions with City and
Company staff. HF&H performed the following tasks related to the achievement
of the Cities objectives:
Task 1: Review background documents, identify alternative financial
indicators (based on our prior experience from similar engagements)
and document the advantages and disadvantages related to each
indicator. Obtain industry data regarding other company's
performance regarding these indicators and receive from the Company
its calculation of these indicators.
Task 2: Meet with City and Company staff to discuss the results of Task 1 and
review the materials for presentation to the City Council.
Task 3: Attend a City Council meeting to present the recommended indicators
and respond to questions. As with any approach, these procedures are
'OCt"Od 0 popo' -JS;2t~y / /1~fI
~ HILTON FARNKOPF & HOBSON
Mr. George Krempl
October25,1995
Page 3
As with any approach, these procedures are limited. The most significant
limitations are:
. The City staff were responsible for defining the City's objectives for the
engagement and approving the scope of work.
. The City and Company staff were responsible for providing HF&H with all
relevant background documents and information. (HF&H did not perform
any independent verification of the information provided by the City and
Company staff.)
. No procedures have been developed to adjust rates based on the findings
and conclusions resulting from the analysis of the indicators.
. Financial indicators are helpful in understandi!\g the results of operations
for a particular company. Also, they can be useful in developing insightful
questions regarding a company's operations. By themselves, financial
indicators cannot be conclusive with regard to whether specific rates are
inadequate, adequate or more than adequate.
Findings ar;.d Description
To be useful to the City, financial indicators have to be readily available for the
refuse industry, on a consistent basis, from an independent source. On the basis of
discussions with City and Company staff and our own knowledge, we found that
no San Diego-specific or California-specific financial indicator data has been or is
anticipated to be consistently available from an independent source. We did find
that an annual publication of nation-wide data has been and is anticipated to be
readily available from the independent firm of Robert Morris and Associates.
We found that two primary and three subsidiary financial indicators reported by
Robert Morris & Associates would best achieve the City's objectives of comparing
the Company's performance to companies of similar size in the refuse industry,
and to evaluating the Company's management effectiveness regarding matters
that directly affect the rates paid by the City's residents and businesses. These
financial indicators relate to the:
,.cyCl'. 0 piP<' -# rJ ~f' / ~ ~-
.
!::.-::t!fff HILTON F ARNKOPF & HOBSON
Mr. George Krempl
October 25,1995
Page 4
. Management of expenses;
. Management of assets; and,
. Management of debt.
Other financial indicators are available from Robert Morris and Associates.
However, they measure more specific indicators of performance (e.g.,
sales/working capital). While these indicators may be useful for more detailed
analyses, we believe that the reporting of fewer indicators which are more
representative of management's overall performance would be more useful on a
routine basis. The primary indicators are:
. Expense Ratio: This ratio measures a firm's ability to manage total expenses
in relation to its sales. A high ratio can mean either the management of
expenses is ineffective or prices for services are too low. A low ratio can
mean either the management of expenses is effective or prices for services
are too high.
. Return on Assets: This ratio measures a firm's rate of return on assets it
employs in the provision of service. A high return can men either an
effective use of capital or an under-capitalized operation. A low return can
mean either ~\ ineffective use of capital or an over-capitalized operation.
In order to help interpret the results of these two primary indicators, we
recommend that the City also evaluate three subsidiary indicators. The subsidiary
indicators are:
. Operating Ratio: This ratio measures a firm's ability to manage operating
expenses in relation to sales. A high ratio can mean either an ineffective
management of operating expenses or rates are too low. A low ratio can
mean an effective management of operating expenses or rates are too high.
. Sales on Assets Ratio: This ratio measures an operations ability to generate
sales in relation to total assets. When comparing companies within an
industry: the higher the ratio, the more effectively capital is used; the lower
the ratio, the less effectively capital is used.
tecvt1ed 0 plpel /8'A - ~
. HILTON FARNKOPF & HOBSON
-
Mr. George Krempl
October 25, 1995
Page 5
. Debt to Worth Ratio: This ratio expresses the relationship between capital
contributed by creditors and that contributed by owners. When comparing
companies with an industry: the higher the ratio, the greater the risk
assumed by creditors and the lower the firm's debt capacity; the lower the
ratio, the greater the risk assumed by the owners and the greater the firm's
debt capacity.
By using the subsidiary indicators, the results of the analysis of the primary
indicators can become clearer. For example, if the Expense Ratio is relatively high
the City can determine whether this results from an ineffective management of
operating expenses or assets. As another example, if the Return on Assets ratio is
relatively low the City can determine whether the Company has relatively too
many assets (low Sales to Assets ratio) or has too much debt (a relatively high Debt
to Worth ratio).
Data Results (Inte:r:pretations and Comparison)
The following table compares the ratios for the Company to those of other
companies in the industry.
Pl~.u\lIAR.Y:RATI OS
Ex ense Ratio
Return on Assets
..' .. .. OM A yJ'" .........
.. .....'... .... - . ..........."...
.--...-.......... . ..-......... .....
...............- . . ..-.-....,.....,'. ,".
, ... .-.- . .' ...-...-.......--,."...
................C.. . P.N.........,...........................
. .. " .... ..
._ . .d__""
". . ...... .
98.1%
2.9%
... ." .. N US y2........
""""""""""""""1 D TR .,..'.",.".
. ..- ..".. ....- ., --.. ,...,.....
................ - . ... ,_,dO"_'
... ........ . . . .."...........
....... .,." .d.........
.' . . . . .-_... .....
,- . .-" - ...... . .
93%
13.7% /7.0% /2.6%
94.5%
1.6
Not Currentl Available
Conclusions
On the basis of the comparison of the Company's financial indicators to those of
other comparable companies in the industry, the following conclusions appear
appropriate.
1 Reported by Laidlaw Waste Systems Inc., for the 12 months eDding August 1994.
2 Robert Morris Associates, Annual Statement Studies - Refuse Systems' 103 companies with $2-$10
million in assets. Where available upper quartile (best performing 25% of companies reporting),
median quartile (half of the companies reporting perform better, while half do not perform as
well), and lower quartile (75% of companies reporting perform better) results are reported.
'ecycled 0 pepe. ./. g;m . ....' ~
_ '-.LJ- ':;:'- -", ",,' ",--,
-r7~ / /~- /
dt!J) Hit TON FARNKOPF & HOBSON
Mr. George Krempl
October 25,1995
Page 6
. Because its Expense and Operating ratios are relatively high, the Company's
rates are either too low or it is relatively less effective in managing its
operating expenses.
. Because its Return on Assets ratio falls between the median and lower
quartile, either the Company's rates are too low or it is relatively less
effective in managing its assets. However, because the Sales on Assets ratio
is close to the median of companies in the industry, capital appears to be
effectively managed.
We believe these indicators can be used by the City to:
. Help determine whether a rate adju.stment may be necessary to bring the
Company in-line with the profitability of other refuse companies of similar
size;
. Help identify whether the apparent cause for such an adjustment relates to
operations, capital investment or debt management; and,
. Help to focus the evaluation of the Company's application for rate
adjustment on the key areas that mav be driving the apparent need for the
rate adjustment.
HF&H appreciates this opportunity to be of service to the City and Company and
look forward to the presentation of this matter to the City Council.
Very truly yours,
~j7~
Robert D. Hilton, CMC
Managing Partner
cc: Jim Weaver, Laidlaw Industries
Dan Higgins, Laidlaw Industries
recycled 0 pape' 1$11' r .' (/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
/g .&
Meeting Date
11/14/95
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing Consideration of Rate
Adjustment Regarding the Consumer Price Index (CPI)
for Collection and Disposal of Refuse, Residential
Curbside and Yard Waste Recycling.
Resolution 18 , l3 Approving a 2.5% increase in the
operating cost rate component for the Residential
Yardwaste contract, effective July 1, 1995.
SUBMITTED BY: Deputy City Manager Krempl~'~
Finance Director~~
REVIEWED BY: city Manager~ ~~'\'/5thS vote: Yes_ NoJ-1
On June 27, 1995 the City council approved a comprehensive set of
changes to the solid waste and recycling rates. The changes
amounted to a significant decrease in rates following a successive
number of increases in prior years due to ~he County incre~sing
tipping fees at the landfill. At the June hearing Laidlaw
requested, but was not granted, a 2.5% Consumer Price Index (CPI)
adjustment to the operat~ onal cost portion of the waste and
recycling rates. The request was referred back to staff for
further review and analysis. This report provides that analysis.
It also responds to an October 24, 1995 request by Laidlaw for a
larger, 6.7% CPI increase in place of the earlier request for an
increase of 2.5% in both the Residential and Residential Recycling
Contracts, and a request to be reimbursed for unrecovered landfill
costs totaling $450,679 (copy attached).
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Deny Laidlaw's request for rate increases in the
operating cost rate component for the Residential,
Residential Recycling, and Commercial Contracts.
2. Approve Resolution approving their request for a 2.5%
increase in the operating cost rate component for the
Residential Yardwaste Contract effective July 1, 1995.
3. Deny Laidlaw's request to be reimbursed for unrecovered
landfill costs, and direct staff to evaluate whether
there is adequate justification to recommend an amendment
to the Waste Management Ordinance to allow Laidlaw to
recover all landfill costs in the future.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A
.tt'&.~-l
/~/-
...
./
/
Meeting Date
11/14/95
Page 2
BACKGROUND:
When Council adjusted rates in June, 1995, the following changes
and savings were realized:
Type of Service Prior to Effective Monthly
6/30/95 7/1/95 Change
Residential (Single $19.85 $12.41 <$7.44>
Family) Avg. Monthly Cost
Senior "Yellow Bag" $12.00 $6.78 <$5.22>
Program Avg. Monthly cost
Commercial Avg. Monthly $91. 35 $76.79 <$14.56>
Cost
At the time, Laidlaw requested a 2.5% CPI adjustment based on the
change in the Consumer Price Index for San Diego County from
January 1 - December 31, 1994 (attached letter dated June 22,
1995). Staff's position on the CPI increase request was (and is)
that any increase must be justified by increases in actual
operating costs and limited by the increase in the local CPl.
Staff could not support the CPI request as they had not received
documentation substantiating Laidlaw's changes in operational costs
for the various contract programs. Council agreed and requested
staff to report back in 90 days (September 30, 1995). As we got
into the issues with Laidlaw, it became apparent that some
additional time was going to be needed to collect as well as review
all the data. Council was advised of the delay via an Information
Memo as we approached the initial deadline.
By letter dated October 24, 1995 (copy attached), Laidlaw replaced
their original request for a 2.5% CPI increase with a request for
a 6.7% CPI increase for the Residential and Residential Recycling
contracts and a 2.5% increase for the Residential Yardwaste and
Commercial contracts, as well as requesting to be reimbursed for
unrecovered landfill costs which totaled $450,679 during their 1995
fiscal year ($69,434 for Residential and $381,245 for Commercial).
The new request for 6.7% is based on the increase in the CPI over
the last three years, which is the limit allowed by the ordinance.
The legal framework for Laidlaw's CPI increase request is found in
section 8.23.090 of the Municipal Code--"Rates for Collection".
The text reads as follows:
B2. "The proportion of modification to the other rate
component [as opposed to the landfill rate component or
the franchise fee component) shall be limited by the
proportion of change since grantee's last rate increase
:i.l the San Diego arf"::t Consumer Price I'1dex for all urban
r865-d.-
/ // /
Meeting Date
11/14/95
Page 3
consumers as compiled by the united states Department of
Labor, Bureau of Labor statistics for the latest twelve
month period for which statistics are available. In no
event shall the amount of the increase exceed six percent
(6%) of the service rates.~
Laidlaw's last CPI increase was 3.~% in July, 1992.
In addition to the CPI analysis, staff has been working with
Laidlaw and a consultant, Hilton, Farnkopf and Hobson, to explore
the development of "financial indicators~ with which comparisons
can be made between Laidlaw's performance and other waste
management providers. Although of general interest, this exercise
was determined to be of little benefit in actually judging the
reasonableness of billing rates, due in part to the lack of
comparable data for similar companies in this region. A companion
report addresses that topic.
Also attached at Laidlaw's request is a copy of a report by
Laidlaw's auditor, Coopers and Lybrand, dated October 25, 1994,
basically attesting to the mathematical accuracy of Laidlaw's
computation of the Company's return on investment and net income as
a percentage of revenue related to the city of Chula Vista contract
for the twelve months ended August 31, 1994. It should be noted
that the auditor's opinion is based upon a review of workpapers
prepared by Laidlaw and that they disclaim any opinion as to the
appropriateness of the basis for the calculations performed on
those workpapers.
Finally, it is always of interest to note Laidlaw's rate
comparisons with other jurisdictions' rates in San Diego County.
The comparison is attached as Exhibit I, and shows that our overall
residential billing rate, including recycling and yard waste, is
the lowest in the County. This ranking is due to the large
decreases put into effect in July, especially in the Recycling and
Yardwaste programs. The comparison also shows that our Commercial
billing rate ($76.79) is the seventh lowest out of the seventeen
cities in the County, and is $4.48 or 5.5% less than the average
rate for the other cities.
DISCUSSION:
Before commenting on the data and our conclusions, it is important
to understand our assumptions and approach. We did not perform a
comprehensive rate review, which is very time consuming and entails
a level of expertise unavailable with City staff. Such a review
would include examining the efficiency with which Laidlaw manages
each program, from route SCheduling to vehicle maintenance and
replacement. A comprehensive rate review was last performed for
this franchise in 1991.
<-~-~~..
1"'/- //' /
~ ~
Meeting Date
11/14/95
Page 4
What we did do was begin by looking at actual cost information
provided by Laidlaw for all the programs combined and how they have
changed over Laidlaw's last three fiscal years, ended August 31,
1995. The information was provided for nine categories:
1. Operations, labor and fringe benefits
2. Franchise fees
3. Fuel, oil, tires and vehicle costs
4. Insurance costs
5. Vehicle Maintenance Costs
6. container maintenance costs
7. Depreciation expense
8. support services
9. Interest expense
It was subsequently concluded that it would be better to focus on
only the last two years (that coincides with the time period that
Laidlaw has been separating out all its records for just the City
of Chula vista as opposed to Chula Vista/Imperial Beach). Second,
it was decided to look at the cost changes for each of the four
contracts individually rather than all together and make
recommendations accordingly. The fOUT contracts are the
Residential Contract, the Residential Recycling Contract, the
Residential Yardwaste Contract and the Commercial contract. This
would pro~ide a picture of the cost justification for each contract
and more clearly allow an objective evaluation of any CPI increase
proposal. It is important to note that our review was limited in
scope to reviewing the reasonableness of reported operating cost
increases based solely on data provided by Laidlaw for this
analysis.
EVALUATION OF OPERATING COST DATA:
Residential contract
The cost data submitted by Laidlaw related to the Residential
Contract shows a decrease in operating costs in 1995 as compared to
1994 of $67,476. Therefore, no increase in the operating cost
component of the rate for this contract is recommended.
Residential Recvclinq Contract
The cost data submitted by Laidlaw related to the Residential
Recycling Contract shows an increase in operating costs in 1995 as
compared to 1994 of $74,371. When cost increases for those
categories for which we received inadequate justification are
excluded (support Services), the operating costs for this contract
increased by $60,698. Since this contract and the Residential
Contract serve the same customers, it would seem reasonable to net
this cost increase against the cost decrease in that contract,
arriving at a net decrease of $6,778 ($67,476 less $60,698).
Therefore, no increase in the operating cost component of the rate
for thie contract i~ recommended.
rt8-'f
/
--./
Meeting Date
11/14/95
Page 5
Residential Yardwaste Contract
This Contract as a mandatory program for residents completed its
first full year at the end of August, 1995. The initial year's
rates were established based on raw estimates of what Laidlaw
thought it would cost to operate such a program. Actual cost data
submitted by Laidlaw covering the first full year of operation, now
shows that the original estimates were somewhat low in the cost
categories of Labor and Support Costs. The overall operating cost
of the program based on the first year actual data exceeded the
estimated operating cost by 4.92%. Therefore, the 2.5% increase
requested by Laidlaw for the operating cost rate component for this
contract is recommended to be effective retroactive to July 1,
1995.
Commercial Contract
The cost data submitted by Laidlaw related to the Commercial
Contract shows a decrease in operating costs in 1995 as compared to
1994 of $156,546, or 8.45%. According to Laidlaw, these
substantial cost decreases are due in large part to their constant
attention to cost cutting measures. No increase in the operating
cost component of the rate for this contract is recommended.
LANDFILL PASS-THROUGH COSTS:
The Municipal Code section governing modifications to the landfill
cost portion of the waste hauling rate is 8.23.090 B.3., and reads
as follows:
"The proportion of modification to the Landfill Rate component
shall not exceed the proportion of change since grantee's last
rate increase in the rate charged by the County of San Diego
to Grantee for "tipping fees" at the otay Landfill, or if the
otay Landfill has been closed, at the next closest operating
landfill, for the latest twelve-month period."
It is important to understand that this component is integrated
into the unit rate structure by estimating the number of tons per
unit, since landfill tipping fees are charged on a per ton basis.
It is Laidlaw's contention that the ordinance should allow not only
changes in the landfill tipping fees to be passed through to the
ratepayers, but also any increased landfill costs due to changes in
the actual tons collected per unit. Staff's interpretation of the
ordinance is that it currently only allows changes in the landfill
tipping fees to be passed through as rate changes.
To illustrate, according to Laidlaw, during their 1995 fiscal year,
the landfill rate billed to residential ratepayers was based on
estimates of 0.13600 tons/month per residential unit. Again,
according to Laidlaw, actual landfill costs were incurred at the
rate of 0.1365.> tons/month per residential unit. T..erefore,
.~-=-s / .~ - /,,---3
Meeting Date
11/14/95
Page 6
Laidlaw incurred landfill costs in excess of what had been
collected from the ratepayers for this rate component even though
the landfill tipping fee did not change. Per Laidlaw, the weigh~
per unit can vary because of numerous factors such as purchase
practices, the economy, and the weather.
staff is requesting additional time to further examine this issue
before deciding whether a modification to the ordinance is
desireable.
CONCLUSION:
Although the local CPI has increased a cumulative 6.7% over the
last three years, based on the data provided by Laidlaw, their
operating costs for both Residential and Commercial waste
collection have remained relatively constant, and in many cases,
due to their active management, have actually decreased.
Therefore, for the Residential, Residential Recycling, and
Commercial Contracts we are recommending that their requests for
increases in the operating cost rate component based on the
increases in the local CPI be denied.
since we now have cost data covering one full year of operation for
the mandatory Residential Yardwaste Program, we can now adjust the
operating cost component of the rate to more closely recover the
actual costs of the program. We are therefore recommending
approval of Laidlaw's request for a 2.5% increase in the operating
cost rate component for the Residential Yardwaste Contract to be
effective 7/1/95. The July effective date is baspd on Council
direction given during the June 27 discussion.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The impact to residential ratepayers would be $0.60 per year per
household as the result of staff recommendations. If the actual
rate charged to ratepayers is implemented effective 1/1/96, this
will amount to an increase of $0.10 per month per household for the
remaining 6 months of the fiscal year. Assuming no other changes,
as of 7/1/96, the rate will decrease again to amount to only $0.05
per month per household for the subsequent full year period.
There would be no fiscal impact to Commercial ratepayers as a
result of staff recommendations.
A:\INCREASE,CPI
l~b /,1-./;/
M
I
"ii
'e ~
e"C~
~ ~.5
U>-~
-
~
.::;
...:! ~ is
<c"C
... :.:: . ..
O~~
I-~=::
V'l
~
00
<
l-
V,)
;; "C
< ~
~ ~ C
.::; QJ
U c C
~ ~ ~ &.
o .- ~ E
~ ~~ 8
-
U
...
QJ B
5~
-
C
n ~ QJ
- C C
"C.- 0
.u) U Q.
of ~ e
::I B 0
u..u
~
V,)
~
V,)
<
~
9 - -
:(.! is
>- cQJ8.c
~ ~ rIl
..,. . U) cE e
.... ~~8
o
2:
..J
U
>-
U
~
uf
V,)
::J
~
8
G)
>
~~
[JJQ
~ 5'
en
0\
r-
\0
r-
~
-
"I:t
N
-
iI"t
M
~
-
iI"t
~
o
~
M
~
N
~
I
r-
-
M
-
iI"t
V'l
~
-
t::
<
l-
V,) ~ 0
;> ~ ~
< V,) z
2,~ ~
ulu 8
r-
oo
r..:
0-
iI"t
"I:t
M
V'l
-
iI"t
-
00
o
iI"t
-
V'l
-
~
V'l
M
-
iI"t
0\
\0
-
-
iI"t
'lit
~
-
t::
N
o
o
0-
iI"t
V'l
M
\0
-
iI"t
M
M
N
iI"t
M
"I:t
N
~
0\
N
-
iI"t
r-
oo
o
-
~
V'l
~
-
-
-
r-
\0
V'l
00
iI"t
V'l
N
V'l
r-
iI"t
-
V'l
\0
-
iI"t
~
V'l
-
iI"t
M
00
o
iI"t
~
-
iI"t
o
~
N
iI"t
N
"I:t
-
~
N
00
-;
'p ~
- cU
QJ ...
e QJ
e rIl
si
...
.5
-
iI"t
\0
00
N
\0
N
-
~
-
-
iI"t
V'l
~
N
V'l
~
-
-
r-
~
tiS
Q
~
:(
U
..J
[JJ
0\
00
N
r-
iI"t
o
"I:t
V'l
-
iI"t
N
r-
o
iI"t
.5 ~
"C E
QJ QJ
"C rIl
.acE
(J QJ
.5 ...
M
0\
o
iI"t
V'l
r-
('f'l
-
iI"t
V'l
~
-
-
r-
V,)
<
I-
~
U
Z
~
o
o
00
\0
iI"t
V'l
N
N
r-
iI"t
('f'l
N
r..:
r-
iI"t
V'l
V'l
...0
-
iI"t
00
N
-
iI"t
o
o
N
~
o
-
-
iI"t
r-
-
N
-
iI"t
V'l
~
-
t::
<
V,)
~
<
..J
$\/~-
V'l
V'l
00
-
iI"t
00
00
V'l
-
iI"t
r-
oo
8
o
iI"t
-
iI"t
0\
\0
"I:t
o
o
W"!t
-
iI"t
00
N
N
~
00
M
o
W"!t
-
r-
N
-
iI"t
\0
"I:t
V'l
-
iI"t
"I:t
~
-
-
00
V'l
~
-
t::
o
8
~
o
u
V,)
[JJ
~
;2=
UJU
~~
\0
o
r'
0"-
~
\0
00
~
-
iI"t
r-
0\
o
iI"t
-
0\
-
iI"t
M
00
o
iI"t
V'l
-
-
-
iI"t
V'l
~
-
t::
~
~
o
z
o
~
..J
/ -
/ ,tiC.,'-'
/ "
r-
o
o
0"-
iI"t
"I:t
"I:t
V'l
\0
iI"t
V'l
00
~
-
iI"t
00
00
0\
-
iI"t
V'l
o
o
iI"t
o
r-
M
iI"t
o
r-
N
iI"t
<
-
z
<
-
z
.5 ~
"C E
QJ QJ
"C rIl
::IcE
U QJ
.5 ...
<
-
Z
00
~
M
-
iI"t
V'l
~
$
"I:t
~
00
~
U
~
Z
o
-
~.
<
Z
[JJ
8
V,)
~
LJJ
U
o
-
"I:t
-
00
iI"t
M"I:t
\00\
~oO
;;M
8
o
iI"t
V'l
~
-
t::
~
~
o
Q..
EXHl Bll I
\0
00
N
0\
iI"t
o
o
r..:
r-
iI"t
N
00
V'l
-
M
0000
0\0\00
~1I"it"i
.... ..... N
MiI"til"t
0\
r-
o
iI"t
V'l 0 0\
r-oo-
00"";
MiI"til"t
N
\0
o
iI"t
N
r-
M
iI"t
N
\0
o
V'l
N
iI"t
-
iI"t
0"-
r-
N
-
iI"t
M\OO\
O\O\M
r..:oO...o
il"til"t-
iI"t
"I:t
~
-
t::
\0
~
-
-
-
V,)
o
~
:E
~
V,)
~
V,)
EXHIBll I
00
r-
oo
\0
iI"t
"I:t
V'l
00
00
iI"t
N
"I:t
~
-
iI"t
r-
M
...0
-
iI"t
N
r-
o
iI"t
00
00
o
iI"t
"I:t
V'l
N
iI"t
\0
V'l
-
iI"t
N
('f'l
-
r-
-
iI"t
-
M
"I:t
00
0-
iI"t
N
N
N
-
iI"t
V'l
~
-
t::
V'l
~
-
-
r-
=
U
<
[JJ
~
<
~
..J
o
V,)
<
l-
V,)
;;
84'OGJ/4'Cl
LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS
October 24, 1995
lWS-1084
George Krempl
Deputy City Manager
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
George:
After three years of review and research using internal and external resources, it
is difficult to understand City Staffs preliminary position regarding the requested
adjustment by Laidlaw Waste Systems. We do appreciate your confirmation that
tne item will go before Council on November 14, 1995.
In your October 18th letter, you requested a response to Item Number 5,
regarding our CPI request accordingly to each business contract. Before doing
so I would like to confirm our conversation regarding Item Number 2 and the
Financial Indicators Report from Hilton, Farnkopf & Hobson. We appreciatp.
your concurrence to provide the final written report to Laidlaw upon receipt. . As
you know we did provide some language changes to the draft report which were
factual in nature rather than opinion. Contractual and other documentation
were provided to Bob Hilton of Hilton, Farnkopf & Hobson in our response to
support those facts.
Specific to item #5 we request CPI adjustments which follow. We believe our
request is supported by the industry financial indicators which were provided by
your selected waste industry consultant. Please understand that our CPI
requests are only to be applied to the Operational Component of our rate. The
overall effective rate requests are indicated on the data tables provided.
P.O. BOX 967 . Chula Vista, California 91912 · ~')19) 421-9400 · FAX (619) 421-0841
\~~c Recycled Paper
George Krempl
Deputy City Manager
City of Chula Vista
Page 2
RATE INCREASE REQUEST:
San Diego Area CPI:
1992
1993
1994
2.1 %
2.1 %
2.5%
Other Rate
Component
Overall Effective
Rate Impact
Total Rate
Increase Request:
6.7%
3.2%
RESIDENTIAL WASTE CONTRACT
FINANCIAL RA TICS SEPT '93-AUG '94 SEPT '94-AUG '95 HFHINDUSTRY
12 MONTHS 12 MONT~S STANDARD
Expenst: Ratio 109,8% 107.8% 93.0%
OperatinQ Ratio 103.9% 103.4% 91.0%
Financial Ratios Adjusted For CPI Rate Increase:
PROJECTED RATIO HFH INDUSTRY STANDARD
Expense Ratio 104.6% 93.0%
OperatinQ Ratio 100.2% 91.0%
OVERALL EFFECTIVE RATE INCREASE REQUIRED TO MEET INDUSTRY
STANDARD:
Expense Ratio
Operating Ratio
OVERALL EFFECTIVE
RATE IMPACT
14.8%
12.4%
..~..
;/ - //
George Krempl
Deputy City Manager
City of Chura Vista
Page 3
RATE INCREASE REQUEST:
San Diego Area CPI:
1992
1993
1994
2.1%
2.1%
2.5%
Operating Cost
Component
Overall Effective
Rate Impact
Total Rate
Increase Request:
6.7%
6.3%
RESIDENTIAL CURBSIDE RECYCLING CONTRACT
FINANCIAL RATIOS SEPT '93-AUG '94 SEPT '94.AUG '95 HFHINDUSTRY
12 MONTHS 12 MONTHS STANDARD
Expense Ratio 93.0% 101.5% 93,0%
Operating Ratio 83.0% 92,5% 91.0%
Financial Ratios Adjusted For CPI Rate Increase:
PROJECTED RATIO HFH INDUSTRY STANDARD
Expense Ratio 95.2% 93.0%
Operating Ratio 86.2% 91.0%
OVERALL EFFECTIVE RATE INCREASE REQUIRED TO MEET INDUSTRY
STANDARD:
Expense Ratio
Operating Ratio
OVERALL EFFECTIVE
RATE IMPACT
8.5%
1.5%
l~~~~
..
George Krempl
Deputy City Manager
City of Chula Vista
Page 4
RATE INCREASE REQUEST:
San Diego Area CPI:
1994
2.5%
Operating Cost
Component
Overall Effective
Rate Impact
Total Rate Increase
Requested:
2.5%
1.6%
RESIDENTIAL YARDWASTE CONTRACT
FINANCIAL RA TICS SEPT '93-AUG '94 SEPT '94-AUG '95 HFHINDUSTRY
12 MONTHS 12 MONTHS STANDARD
Expense Ratio 250.9% 110.4% 93.0%
Operating Ratio 249,0% 104,1 % 91.0%
financial Ratios Adjusted for CPI Rate Increase:
PROJECTED RATIO HFH INDUSTRY STANDARD
Expense Ratio 98.3% 93.0%
Operating Ratio 92.0% 91.0%
OVERALL EFFECTIVE RATE INCREASE REQUIRED TO MEET INDUSTRY
STANDARD:
OVERALL EFFECTIVE
RATE IMPACT
Expense Ratio
Operating Ratio
6.9%
2.6%
--
~~~-~-tJ
I
',-'- ;,.)
_,' .- / -/1'
George Krempl
Deputy City Manager
City of Chula Vista
Page 5
RATE INCREASE REQUEST:
San Diego Area CPI:
1994
2.5%
Operating Cost
Component
Overall Effective
Rate Impact
Total Rate Increase
Requested:
2.5%
1.4%
COMMERCIAL CONTRACT
FINANCIAL RATIOS SEPT '93-AUG '94 SEPT '94-AUG '95 HFHINDUSTRY
12 MONTHS 12 MONTHS STANDARD
Expense Ratio 91.7% 93.9% 93,0%
OperatinQ Ratio 86.5% 90,0% 91,0%
Financial Ratios Adjusted For CPI Rate Increase:
PROJECTED RATIO HFH INDUSTRY STANDARD
Expense Ratio 92,5% 93.0%
OperatinQ Ratio 88.6% 91.0%
OVERALL EFFECTIVE RATE INCREASE REQUIRED TO MEET INDUSTRY
STANDARD:
Expense Ratio
Operating Ratio
OVERALL EFFECTIVE
RATE IMPACT
(0.9)%
1.0 %
~~B"'~
/ /
,,/'
---
George Krempl
Deputy City Manager
City of Chula Vista
Page 6
If the CPI request is approved, the monthly residential impact will be 61 ~ per
household. A typical commercial customer requiring one (1) - 3 yard container
serviced one (1) time per week would be impacted $1.09 per month. Please
keep in mind that last July the residential rates were reduced by $7.44 per month
and the same commercial customer's rate decreased by $14.56 per month.
In addition to our CPI request for Operational Cost Increases, an adjustment is
requested for reimbursement of Landfill and Processing Fees. Laidlaw was not
fully reimbursed for Landfill Disposal and Yardwaste Processing Costs of
$450,679 in 1995 due to higher weights per unit. These are real costs that have
been incurred by Laidlaw because of the higher weight of the waste and
yardwaste disposed that have not been passed through to the ratepayers. The
Landfill and Processing Cost Components of the rates do not reflect the actual
weights being disposed.
The Franchise Ordinance as revised by Ordinance 2475 of September 3, 1991,
suppurts our request for the "pass through" of Laidlaw's actual landfill costs:
SECTION 9 Rates for Collection
9.2-1 Contents of Notice of Intention
The Notice of Intention shall demonstrate for each type of service
(residential, commercial), the existing rate; that portion of said rate
charged for the purpose of reimbursina the Grantee for Grantee's landfill
costs (Landfill Rate Comoonent)...
Our request for reimbursement is borne out by the Council Agenda Statement of
July 21, 1992. There, the City Manager noted:
DISCUSSION:
I. Previous Years' Rate Reviews
The procedure for rate review was initially established by ordinance in
1985 and allows for, among other things, a direct pass throuah of
landfill cost increases imposed bv the Countv of San Dieao...
~.. '.~:;;.='~
-f-~-~-~
,/ "..,.
//..'-/ - .//
~..-~,/
George Krempl
Deputy City Manager
City of Chula Vista
Page 7
Laidlaw requests that a rate adjustment be made for the unreimbursed 1995
Landfill and Processing Costs. Clearly, the ordinance supports our request that
these costs be a direct pass through. In the event Staff or the City Attorney does
not support our request for reimbursement of Landfill and Processing Fees, as
provided by the ordinance, Laidlaw is then submitting the rate increase request
as an extraordinary expense item which is also provided for in the ordinance.
The Franchise Ordinance as revised by Ordinance 2475 of September 3, 1991,
supports our request for reimbursement.
SECTION 9 Rates For Collection
9.2-9 Frequency of Rate Increase Requests
... grantee shall have at any time the right to submit a request to City
Council for additional rate relief at any time extraordinary expenses are
incurred.
Clearly the increasd in weight per unit above the weight provid'?d for with the
current Landfill and Processing Rate Components, qualifies as an extraordinary
expense incurred by Laidlaw. On September 29, 1995 Laidlaw provided Staff
with schedules that identify the Landfill Component billed to the ratepayers in
1995 and the Landfill Fees incurred by Laidlaw in 1995 and com..,are the Landfill
Component billing tons per uniVyard to the actual weights per uniVyard for the
twelve months ended August 31, 1995. Cost information to support our request
for reimbursement of the $450,679 is summarized below:
COST INFORMATION
RESIDENTIAL CONTRACT LANDFILL FEES NOT PASSED THROUGH:
1995 Landfill Fees Not Passed Through
$2,273
In 1995 Laidlaw incurred Landfill Fees of $2,273 that were not 'Passed
through"to the ratepayers. The portion of the rate billed to the ratepayers
for Landfill Fees in 1995 amounted to $2,778,484 and the Landfill Fees
incurred by Laidlaw in 1995 were $2,780,757. The
l~:8 -Jlf
_// .-;
George Krempl
Deputy City Manager
City of Chula Vista
Page 8
landfill Component billed was based on .13600 tons/month per
residential unit. The actual 1995 Landfill Fees incurred were .13653
tons/month per residential unit. The weight per unit can vary because of
numerous factors such as purchase practices, the economy, and the
weather. Landfill Fees of $2,273 were not passed through because the
landfill Component portion of the rates billed to the ratepayers was not
adjusted based on the actual weight of the Landfill Fees. The Landfill
Component was last adjusted based on the actual weight per residential
unit in 1991.
RESIDENTIAL YARDWASTE CONTRACT PROCESSING FEES NOT PASSED
THROUGH:
1995 Processing Fees Not Passed Through:
$67,161
In 1995 Laidlaw incurred Yardwaste Processing Fees of $67,161 that
were not passed through" to the ratepayers. The portion of the rate
billed to the ratepayers for Processing Fees in 1995 amounted to
$218,868 and the Processing Fees incurred by Laidlaw in 1995 were
$286,030. The Processing Component billed was based on .02559
tons/month per residential unit. The actual 1995 fees incurred were
.03344 tons/month per residential unit. Landfill Fees of $67,161 were not
passed through because the Processing Cost Component for billing the
ratepayers was based on a lower weight per unit.
COMMERCIAL CONTRACT lANDFill FEES NOT PASSED THROUGH:
1995 Landfill Fees Not Passed Through
$381,245
In 1995 Laidlaw incurred Landfill Fees of $381,245 that were not 'Passed
through-to the ratepayers. The portion of the rate billed to the ratepayers
for Landfill Fees in 1995 amounted to $2,711,168 and the Landfill Fees
incurred by Laidlaw in 1995 were $3,092,413. The Landfill Component
billed was based on .04459 tons/per yard. The actual 1995 Landfill Fees
incurred were .05089 tons/per yard. The
l~-:-'-lS.
I / ../f /,
/ 7' "./..:>
George Krempl
Deputy City Manager
City of Chula Vista
Page 9
weight per yard can vary because of numerous factors such as purchase
practices, the economy, the weather, and the waste density and
compaction. Landfill Fees of $381,245 were not passed through because
the Landfill Component portion of the rates billed to the ratepayers was
not adjusted based on the actual weight of the Landfill Fees. The Landfill
Component was last adjusted based on actual weight per yard in 1991.
We hope that logic and reasonableness is applied in granting the pass through
request. We don't control the County Landfill system, their rates, or the actual
weights of materials disposed of commercially or residentially. We are merely
looking to be reimbursed for what we have paid to the County for disposing of
the City of Chula Vista waste and for the landfill diversion credits we have
returned to the ratepayers - nothing more and nothing less.
We hope the same logic and reasonableness is applied in considering the CPI
request. We have researched and provided financial information employing a
variety of internal and independent external resources. The information must be
viewed in its entirety.., not selective compol"ents in isolation, By doing so, a fair
and equitable decision can be made.
We appreciate being an important part of the Chula Vista community and your
service partner. Again, we ask for your careful consideration and support of our
business request.
Sincerely,
~. tJ~
Ja s L. Weaver
ket General Manager
Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc.
JLW/mc
cc: Daniel P. Higgins, Market Area Controller
.R'~L, /~.
/1. /
c'/ // ,{
;;- ~//
.
:=d
cu,.... a..,....... LLP. Cl2 ~ "~hol.. (t1t) I25-Z3OO
Us
~ CdllrNa ~~ ...... ..'., a2N<<Io
.~ J't ft......&m
October 25.1994
lAr. Daniel P. JI"'Uim:
!rfaEbt Area Comroller
Llidlaw Waste S~ IDe.
1364 ~e,IKmt Mesa Boulevard
San Dieso. CaliComia 921 t 1
DeIr Mr. ,.rUnl:
We have applied the procedures IIDIJDt:l'ated Wow . raped to 1he .u,"bed Schedule or
:Return on IuvestmeDt - Oty of' CbuIa VISta CODttBCtS the twelve moatbs eDded August 31,
1994 of Laidlaw Waste Systems. Inc. ("Laidlaw.) prep by the IDIIDIgement or Laidlaw in
cmmection with the City of CbuJa VIJta Contracts. Th procedures. which were qreed to by
Laidlaw. wa-e performed IOlely to provide additioul iafo 'on ill COanec:tiOD with the contract
with the City of Chula VIItL This report is intended lIOl y for your iDformatioo and a.bouJd not
be ret"en'ed to or distributed for any purpose to ayone w is DOt. m~ of ~ or a
~e orb parties iDvolved in cletermiDing the
A. We compared the amOUDtl on the attICbed Schedule 0 Return on lDYeAement . City ofClula
Vista Contr&et to the "City ofCbula VlSta Ccmtracts turn on Jnv~llrent Workpapen. (the
ROT Worlcpapen) prepared by manaaemertt ad foUDd to be iD tgreemaIt.
B. We obtaiDecl from IDIIDIgement the llOI Workpapcrs r 1bc twelve mOJltbs eaded Au.pst 31.
1994_: '
1. Tested 1he mathemltic;al ~ oftbe
2. For the moD'thl orNOVIIDber, March, May and
L Coatnd Reva.e - We CO"Tared the
Return on Javestmeat Worlcpaecn to
.1.mtc.p Report- aDd fouDd them to be ill
b. Earai.Dp Before llleeme Tases - For cad1 clivilion iDt"1t,ded ill tbe 1101
Workpapen, we ~ other RYaIU mt aU apeases &om the tyItem
pneratod iraxDe ..temeDt to the p:aera11 ger . the J Jn~ Report and fouDd
'&ban to be in ..-mrnt. We 1ha1 caI d EamiDp Belore meome Ta:DI ad
compared 1be UDOUIIIIO tile !lor Wo ad fouDcl them to be in .-.--t
:m performms the pocechaes enumerated below, we
financial wormation of 1Aid1aw prepared by manag
~ent perIODl"-:L Our procedura aDd fiDdi"l" Ire
we pcdozmed the folJowmg:
0UIIlI lilted fbr each dMsion on the
paerI1 Iodp:r or T ~;d1aw . the
Clllol:IM. ~ L.L.",. ~..., IIIIlIIY ,..,,~. .."...IIm_
I ~ (Ii....rlMlllMl).
.1t'6- ";"'J!'J- /5'/ ~._;? ::.;
Mr. Daoic1 P. fIjgins
Laidlaw Waste SyItemS, IDe.
October 25, 1994
Page 2
c. (.'1arTaIt AaetI; AccOPts ~e; peI'ty. ftaDt..d J:q1dp1DCllt; ud
OtlIer AsseCs - W. comparod the amouma' on the aOl Workpapen to the
consolidated pm:ralled&er orLaidlaw aDd them to be ill ~
3. W. cliJCUased with maugemeat the methods to IIIip uICtI to the City of Chu1a
VISta comractIlDd DOted and pmfonned the rou wing:
a. Current Aueta were allocated CD the basis ChJla VISta co~ I'CftDUC to total
rwawe. We compared total reveaue the cIMsicmIl ~ It..~ at
August 31, 1994 used in the aUocstion compared ChuJa V... rcvaIUC ~ the
amoUll1S DOted in procedure B aboYe and than to be ill ~
b. Ar.cOUDb JleceMble were aDocated on ac.tua1 Cbula VIIta accounts
nceivlble to ICbJal total accomrts e Car the IDODtbs of Dec:emba' 1993
through May 1994 aDd 1uly 1994 tbrou August 1994. We compared total.
~unt5 receivable to the IWD of the DplAopriate JDOfItlt.. &om !be 1lO1
Workpapen and found 1hcm to be in e:IDIIJt. w. compared QnIla Vasta
~ rcoeivable to the JUm of tile appro riate moaths &CCOUDlf ~le hm
a lChedule prepared by management d COl2IrICt receivablcs aad bmd them
tobein~.
c. Propel1)', Plant, 8DCl Equipmeut C"PP&E.) d Other AJIIta were ~ed based
on Chula Vista PP&E and Other Assets total PPct.E and Other Assets at July
31, 1994. We compared Quila VlItI PP aod Otbm AJIets to the total of ·
tisting prepared by maoagement or Cbula iJta PP&.E and Other Aaet- whic:b
1peci~t'Jltty id",""RM PP&E and Other .ztributlhle to the Ch11a .Vam
coati'act and provided for lIlloc:ation of unu DOt IpSCifica1ly attributable to ·
reveaue source. We compared the total &E and Other AsselI to b un of
PfctE aDd Other Asset amouatI Jilted OD ROI Workpapen and found them to
bein~.
than III audit. tho objective of which
arm baDdaI ltaIemema of Laidlaw
.. opiniOl1. AdditiaDaUy. we clicl DOt
. perbmed on the It.eIum of
. OD OD 1he buia of the cebJ1tfiou.
tbr,our JJW'POICI.
Tbcsc agrccd-upon proccdurca are IUIP.,.;-tty leas in
b the ~eaiOD of an opDOIl OIl the CODI01idased IDd
CJd ita related catitia. As::t:ordiDrJ.y. we do DOt express
Muate the -t'F~~1. of the balil fbr die
Jnvestmcut Wolkpapen. ~, we .preIS DO
We also make DO repRW'tIltma as to the a4equacy of'tbe
~.-&,. ~
//1' /.;
, . I
I u,/ G"
Mr. Dani.elP. HiWnll
LaidlawWaste S~ lDe.
October 25, 1994
Pile 3 '
Bu~ on the application of the proccchua I~l~ to
""aM Ul1D beIieYe that the 8CCOI'Dp&DYiDs Sd1edu.1e or
Vasta ContracU requires adjustment. Had we performed
.. audit of ClODJOlidated and separate An.nr.i.t
accordaDce with pnera1I)' accepted auditing Itmdards.
attcnUon that would have ~ reported to you.
This report is iate:Dded to1cly far the iaf'OrmaUOD and of the ~ of Laidllw in
connection 'With the City of Cbl1la vista ContractllDd Ibo d DOt be used for fIIri other purpose.
DOthing (AIDe to our ~inn that
on IDvestmeI1t - City of Cbula
. .onal procecIureI or bad we made
of Laidlaw and ill related III~ in
matterI JDiabt haw ClOJD8 to our
Very tndy JQUfI.
~i
L.L f
, lG_~"l.A / ,. / ,;
-l,~:.L1 /7 -._x/
LAIDLAW WASTE SYS
SCHEDULE OF RETURN ON
crrY or CBULA VISTA
For the Twelve MoDtbI :Ended
Retmn em ~"utPlf!nt (Net JDcomcIAvaIIC Aucta)
Net IDCOf"O .. a Pa'ceDta8e oFlleYawe
t~%:e~
s,INC
/} ('"_I
--'<:<
.J.Z%
.lJ.%
TOTFL P. ff7
CD J:ULTON'FAl\Nl(OPF.. HOBSON
AdviI<XY S\:MCIS to
Co: t-CUl\k~1 M~
fR1nnnt
~1I't a.n.ch
,"SO Civic CcDttr 1)rIvc. Sulte 100
mmnnt, Califcrmla 94$)8.2331
1i:lcphocw: 510l71B270
ftx. 510/71,).]294
October 25, 1995
Mr. George ICrempl
Deputy Oty Manager
City of Chula VISta
Office of the Oty Manager
276 Fourth Ave.
Clu1a Vista, California 91910
Solid Waste FlnandallncUcators
OQar Mr. Krempl:
In ac:cordance with our agreement, HUton Famkopf . Hobson (HF&H) is pleased to
pmsent this final report to the City of Chula Vista (City).
la("~und
The Oty entered a Waste Management Franchise Agreement (Agreement) with
Laidlaw:ndustries (Company) to provide refuse collection and dispoSal and
recycling services to residents and businesses in the City through the year 2001. In
exchange for providing these services, conducting a new operating service facility
and performing in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement, the
Compar'Y charges customers at rateS determined by the City Council. .
The Council sets rates in accordanoe with the Agreement. The Agreement
disaggregates the rates into the following three components; Landfill Rate
Component; Franchise Fee Rate Component; and, Other Rate Component. The
Landfill Rate Component is adjusted in accordance with the change in the landiJl1
gate rate since the last time rates were adjusted. 'l1le Franchise Fee Rate
Ccnnponent is adjusted in accordance with the actual change in franchise fees since
the last time rates were adjusted. The Other Rate CompoX'ent is adjusted in
accordance with the change in the San Diego Consumer Price Index for aU urban
customers &ince the la8t time rates were adjusted. However, the Other Rate
Component adjustment is not to exceed 6%, unless a public hearing regarding the
greateMhan-6% rate increase is conducted by the City Council.
~ 0.....
~ j' /./.- -'Jc'j'
'7 .:7"", ./
e HILTON FARNKOPF" HOBSON
Mr. George Krempl
October 25, 1995
Page 2
The City staff and Council have expressed concern that the rate adjustment
method contained in the Agreement does not:
. Document the Company's performance;
. Provide a method for monitoring the Company's performance over time;
or,
. Allow the City to compare the Company's performance to other similar
companies.
For this reason, the City and the Company engaged HF&H, through a competitive
procurement process, to identify financial indicators that would allow the City to
document, monitor and compare the Company's performance to other similar
companies. Initially, HF&H proposed a broader scope of work at significantly
higher fees to perform the engagement. After discussions with and direction from
the City and Company staff, the scope of work was reduced to that described below
in order to more co~t-effectively achieve the City's objectives.
Approach and Limitations
The procedures used in this analysis were the result of discussions with City and
Company staff. HF&H performed the following tasks related to the achieve~ent
of the Cities objectiv~:
Task 1: Review background documents, identify alternative financial
indicators (based on our prior experience from similar engagements)
and document the advantages and disadvantages related to each
indicator. Obtain industry data regarding other company's
performance regarding these indicators and receive from the Company
its calculation of these indicators.
Task 2: Meet with City and Company staff to discuss the results of Task 1 and
review the materials for presentation to the City Council.
Task 3: Attend a Oty Council meeting to present the recommended indicators
and respond to questions. As with any approach, these procedures are
'"
..cyctea \..1 papo'
t.i' ~~'d-. / /1 :j' /1
e HILTONFARNKOPF & HOBSON
Mr. George Krempl
October 25, 1995
Page 3
As with any approach, these procedures are limited. The most significant
limitations are:
. The Oty staff were responsible for definirlg the City's objectives for the
engagement and approving the scope of work.
. The City and Company staff were responsible for providing HF&H with all
relevant background documents and information. (HF&H did not perform
any independent verification of the information provided by the City and
Company staff.)
. No procedures have been developed to adjust rates based on the findings
and conclusions resulting from the analysis of the indicators.
. Financial indicators are helpful in understanding the results of operations
for a particular company. Also, they can be useful in developing insightful
questions regarding a company's operations. By themselves, financial
indicators cannot be conclusive with regard to whether specific rates are
inadequate, adequate or more than adequate.
Findinp and Des~tion
To be useful to the City, financial indicators have to be readily available for the
refuse industry, on a consistent basis, from an independent source. On the basis of
discussions with City and Company staff and our own knowledge, we found that
no San Diego-specific or California-specific financial indicator data has been or is
anticipated to be consistently available from an independent source. We did fmd
,. that an annual publication of nation-wide data has been and is anticipated to be
readily available from the independent firm of Robert Monis and Associates.
We found that two primary and three subsidiary financial indicators reported by
Robert Monis & Associates would best achieve the City's objectives of comparing
the Company's performance to companies of similar size in the refuse industry,
and to evaluating the Company's management effectiveness regarding matters
that directly affect the rates paid by the City's residents and businesses. These
financial indicators relate to the:
-~:t~~ I ~-,_;;;/
8' HILTON FARNKOPF & HOBSON
Mr. George Krempl
October 25, 1995
Page 4
. Management of expenses;
. Management of assets; and,
. Management of debt.
Other financial indicators are available from Robert Morris and Associates.
However, they measure more specific indicators of performance (e.g.,
sales/working capital). While these indicators may be useful for more detailed
analyses, we believe that the reporting of fewer indicators which are more
representative of management's overall performance would be more useful on a
routine basis. The primary indicators are:
. Expense Ratio: This ratio measures a firm's ability to manage total expenses
in relation to its sales. A high ratio can mean either the management of
expenses is ineffective or prices for services are too low. A low ratio can
mean either the management of expenses is effective or prices for services
are too high.
. Return on Assets: This ratio measures a firm's rate of return on assets it
employs in the provision of service. A high return can men either an
effective use of capital or an under-capitalized operation. A low return can
mean either an ineffective use of capital or an over-capitalized operation.
In order to help interpret the results of these two primary indicators, we
recommend that the City also evaluate three subsidiary indicators. The subsidiary
indicators are:
. Operating Ratio: This ratio measures a firm's ability to manage operating
expenses in relation to sales. A high ratio can mean either an ineffective
management of operating expenses or rates are too low. A low ratio can
mean an effective management of operating expenses or rates are too high.
. Sales on Assets Ratio: This ratio measures an operations ability to generate
sales in relation to total assets. When comparing companies within an
industry: the higher the ratio, the more effectively capital is used; the lower
the ratio, the less effectively capital is used.
ft
~..,:". cyc...,\..1.p....~'
-~ - /
'._~- '-
e HILTON FARNKOPF" HOBSON
Mr. George Krempl
October 25, 1995
Page 5
. Debt to Worth Ratio: This ratio expresses the relationship between capital
contributed by creditors and that contributed by owners. When comparing
companies with an industry: the higher the ratio, the greater the risk
assumed by creditors and the lower the firm's debt capacity; the lower the
ratio, the greater the risk assumed by the owners and the greater the firm's
debt capacity.
By using the subsidiary indicators, the results of the analysis of the primary
indicators can become clearer. For example, if the Expense Ratio is relatively high
the City can determine whether this results from an ineffective management of
operating expenses or assets. As another example, if the Return on Assets ratio is
relatively low the City can determine whether the Company has relatively too
many assets (low Sales to Assets ratio) or has too much debt (a relatively high Debt
to Worth ratio).
Data Results <Intex:pretations an~ Comparison)
The following table compares the ratios for the Company to those of other
companies in the industry.
PRIMARY RA T1OS.<d <COMP ANyt...L .......... ." ... <INDUSTRy2 .... ........
Expense Ratio 98.1% 93%
Return on Assets 2.9% 13.7%/7.0%/2.6%
. SUBSIDIARY RATIOS .... ~... . ........ . i>
......:. ......
Opera ting Ratio 94.5% 91.0%
Sales on Assets 1.6 22/1."//1.0
Debt/Worth Not Currently Available .9/21/5.7
Conclusions
On the basis of the comparison of the Company's financial indicators to those of
other comparable companies in the industry, the following conclusions appear
appropriate.
1 Reported by Laidlaw Waste Systems Inc., for the 12 months ending August 1994.
2 Robert Morris Associates, Annual Statement Studies - Refuse Systems' 103 companies with $2-$10
million in assets. Where available upper quartile (best perfonning 25% of companies reporting),
median quartile (half of thf companies reporting perform better, while half do not perform as
well),;md lower quartile m'lt) of _'Ompanies reportin~ ~rform better) results'ilJ'e reported.
~ ..tYC..OOPlpe. / y.-
~r? .f'"";
.-: ,..L,
--'---....-j
e lUlTON FARNKOPF & HOBSON
Mr. George Krempl
October 25, 1995
Page 6
. Because its Expense and Operating ratios are relatively high, the Company's
rates are either too low or it is relatively less effective in managing its
operating expenses.
. Because its Return on Assets ratio falls between the median and lower
quartile, either the Company's rates are too low or it is relatively less
effective in managing its assets. However, because the Sales on Assets ratio
is close to the median of companies in the industry, capital appears to be
effectively managed.
We believe these indicators can be used by the City to:
. Help determine whether a rate adjustment may be necessary to bring the
Company in-line with the profitabihty of other refuse companies of similar
size;
. Help identify whether the apparent cause for such an adjustment relates to
operations, capital investment or debt management; and,
. Help to focus the evaluation of the Company's application for rate
adjustment on the key areas that may be driving the apparent need for the
rate adjustment.
HF&H appreciates this opportunity to be of service to the City and Company and
look forward to the presentation of this matter to the City Council.
Very truly yours,
~Jl~
Robert D. Hilton, CMC
Managing Partner
cc: Jim Weaver, Laidlaw Industries
Dan Higgins, Laidlaw Industries
\ ~~~di~ ~cyc"o? pipe'
/
RESOLUTION NO. / tJ"/ I J
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A 2.5% INCREASE IN THE
OPERATING COST RATE COMPONENT FOR THE
RESIDENTIAL YARDWASTE CONTRACT, EFFECTIVE JULY
1, 1995
WHEREAS, on June 27, 1995 the City Council approved a
comprehensive set of changes to the solid waste and recycling
rates; and
WHEREAS, said changes amounted to a significant decrease
in rates following a successive number of increases in prior years
due to the County increasing tipping fees at the landfill; and
WHEREAS, at the June hearing Laidlaw requested, but was
not granted, a 2.5% Consumer Price Index adjustment to the
operational cost portion of the waste and recycling rates; and
WHEREAS, the request was referred back to staff for
further review and analysis; and
WHEREAS, after a public hearing on November 14, 1995,
staff recommends that Council:
Deny Laidlaw's request for rate increases in the
operating cost rate component for the Residential,
Residential Recycling and Commercial Contracts.
Deny Laidlaw's request to be reimbursed for unrecovered
'landfill costs, and direct staff to evaluate whether
there is adequate justification to recommend an amendment
to the Waste Management Ordinance to allow Laidlaw to
recover all landfill costs in the future.
Approve Laidlaw's request for a 2.5% increase in the
operating cost rate component for the Residential
Yardwaste Contract effective July 1, 1995.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve a 2.5% increase in the
operating cost rate component for the Residential Yardwaste
Contract, effective July 1, 1995.
Presented by
/~
Bruce M.
Attorney
as
Robert W. Powell, Director of
Finance
C:\rs\yardwaste,inc
ffC~o /.:-/ - ,3 ~
'1'H15 PAGE BLANK
J$C- .k:?
Minutes
November 14, 1995
Page 5
IS.A. REPORT RATE SETTING: FINANCIAL INDICATORS FOR SOLID WASTE - Earlier this year in
cooperation with Laidlaw, the City entered into a contract with a consultant, Hilton Farnkoph and Hobson, to
develop solid waste financial indicators. The objective of the study is an attempt to develop financial benchmarks
to assist in the rate setting review of any cost increase proposals made by Laidlaw. Staff recommends Council
accept the report and direct staff to continue to monitor and track the indicator changes over time and advise Council
as part of any future rate setting hearings, (Deputy City Manager Krempl and Director of Finance) (Related item
but not part of the public hearing),
B. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION OF RATE ADJUSTMENT REGARDING THE CONSUMER
PRICE INDEX (CPI) FOR COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF REFUSE, RESIDENTIAL CURBSIDE AND
Y ARDW ASTE RECYCLING - On 6/27/95, Council approved a comprehensive set of changes to the solid waste
and recycling rates. The changes amounted to a significant decrease in rates following a successive number of
increases in prior years due to the County increasing tipping fees at the landfill. At the June hearing, Laidlaw
requested, but was not granted, a 2.5 % CPI adjustment to the operational portion of the waste and recycling rates.
The request was forwarded back to staff for further review and analysis. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Deputy City Manager and Director of Finance)
C. RESOLUTION 18113 APPROVING A 2.5% INCREASE IN THE OPERATING COST RATE
COMPOl'l'ENT FOR THE RESIDENTIAL Y ARDW ASTE CONTRACT, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1995
George Krempl, Deputy City Manager, stated the financial indicators were an effort on the City's part, in working
with Laidlaw, to try to see if the rate setting process could be made easier and more straight forward in future
years. The indicators were not a panacea or an automatic indicator for changing rates up or do'Wll. They provided
benchmarks and additional information which staff fdt when taken into consideration with history, comparisons with
other cities, cost analysis, and the indicators as a package helped staff to get a better picture. Staff felt the cost
information would be key for the proposed increase as well as future increases.
. Bob Hilton, Principal, Hilton Farnkoph & Hobson, financial consultants, reviewed the rate setting financial
indicators, i.e. the objectives, primary/subsidiary ratios, and obs...-vations,
Mr. Krempl stated in June the rates were readjusted on a comprehensive basis due to a combination of the
elimination of the county surcharge. the lowering of the county tip fee, and adjustments to the recycling programs
due to success of the programs, At that time Laidlaw requested a 2 1/2 % across the board CPI increase for all their
contracts and it was referred back to staff to analyze and review the cost data, During that process Laidlaw
amended their request to 6.7% increase on residential and residential recycling and 2 1/2 % on yard waste and
commercial. Staff recommended a rate adjustment for the residential yardwaste contract but did not recommend
an increase on the other three contracts,
Robert Powell, Director of Finance, reviewed the analysis and conclusions. Laidlaw also raised the issue of
recovering their entire costs of the landfill processing costs (tipping fees). Staff recommended that they be directed
to further study that request with Laidlaw and return to Council with recommendations. Staff considered that totally
separate from the operating cost issue. He felt that issue would take and additional 1-2 months.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
Councilmember Padilla referred to the residential and residential recycling components and requested clarification
on the statement "Categories for which they had received inadequate justification or information...." and the
mechanism for combining or "netting" the cost increase against the cost decrease in both categories in arriving at
the fmal conclusion.
Mr. Powell responded the cost categories and Support Services (overhead) justification provided under residential
recycling showed a $1 increase, but the written justification and data for the $1 increase justified that they had
decreased costs in the area. Staff did not receive any justification for a $1 increase.
Council member Padilla questioned what specifically was missing,
Mr. Powell responded that staff was looking for an explanation of what costs had increased in that category. All
information received indicated decreased costs in that category. Under the residential contract Laidlaw showed an
operating cost decrease of $67,000 and residential recycling operating costs increase of $74,000. Since the amounts
were so close i>laff fdt they should be looked at together and considered a "wash" ::' the present time.
Council member Moot stated staff had determined that the contract permitted a CPI increase only if Laidlaw
demonstrated their costs had gone up, He ljuestioned if that was based on actual language in the contract.
Minutes
November 14, 1995
Page 6
Mr. Powell responded that Section 8,23.090 of the Municipal Code dealt with the Rate Modification Procedure.
Two sections later also stated "The proportion of modification to the other rate component shall be limited by the
proportion of change since the grantees last increase in the San Diego area CPI for all urban consumers for the latest
twelve month period.... ". The first section indicated that they had to have satisfactory justification for the rate
increase and the second limited it to the CPI increase in the area.
Mr. Krempl stated staff's interpretation was that the CPI increase set a cap that could not be exceeded but the CPI
adjustment could be from zero up to the cap based upon the information provided. Prior Council direction was to
have staff analyze the information provided by Laidlaw rather than an automatic pass-through or increase.
Council member Moot clarified that it was really past Council direction that superimposed a criteria to demonstrate
an actual increase in operating costs.
Mr. Krempl stated that was correct along with the language read by Mr. Powell.
Council member Alevy questioned if it was the assumption that either the billing rates were too low or that the
company was less than effective in managing their operating expenses.
Mr. Krempl responded that was correct.
Mr, Alevy referred to the survey of other cities in the county and noted Chula Vista was paying $2,01 less than the
next highest rate.
Mr. Krempl stated the survey information was helpful but noted that some cities had higher residential rates but
lower commercial rates. He felt they needed to be looked at in combination, In terms of the ordinance and the CPI
increase, the focus was on the operating cost component and the change in that component. It was staff's conclusion
that the operating costs were the same or had been reduced and there was no justification for tne CPI increase.
There could be other reasons for increases which had ~n illuded to with the landfill equity issue and pass
throughs. In tenns of the operating component and CPI it stated staff shall look at the operating cost change. Staff
had done that and only recommended ~:,e component that changed and increased. The City's rates should be lower
than some of the other cities in the county due to the location of a landfill within the City limits which resulted in
a shorter haul distance.
Those speaking in support of the increase for Laidlaw due to the community services provided, commitment
by Jim Weaver and all Laidlaw employees to the City, and trash services provided were:
. W. Scott Mosher, 909 Loma View, Chula Vista, CA, Executive Director, Boys and Girls Club of Chula Vista.
. Tina Williams read a letter of support from Pam Smith, Director, Chula Vista Social Security Office.
. Tina Williams, 50 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, Executive Director, YMCA,
. Rod Davis, 46 Center Street, Chula Vista, CA.
. Emerald Randolph, P.O. Box 17, Jamul, CA, Citizens Adversity Support Team (CAST).
. Brad Wilson, 249 "E" Street, Chula Vista, CA.
. Jim Weaver, 881 Energy Way, Chula Vista, CA. representing Laidlaw Waste Systems. hoped that after three
years of research utilizing internal and external resources that Laidlaw would receive Council support of their CPl
adjustment for 1992, 1993, and 1994. The CPI request was reasonable, In comparing their financial indicators
it showed that Laidlaw was far below industry standards and below levels of reasonableness. He referred to the
section of "Findings and Descriptions" which stated the expense ratio if high meant that either the management of
expenses was ineffective or the price levels were too low. It also stated that a high operating ratio could mean
either ineffective management of operating expenses or that rates were too low. The evidence clarified that the
latter was true, the rates were too low. Laidlaw had controlled expenses and decreased operational costs year over
year. He hoped the City realized that was a positive signal that they were trying to do everything possible to
provide the lowest costs possible to the citizens and businesses. Chula Vista had the lowest residential rate in the
county and the seventh lowest commercial rate. Even by supporting their request Chula Vista would continue to
retain the lowest residential rates. A reason given to not support the request was that Laidlaw had not demonstrated
that their costs had not increased year over year but had decreased. As the service provider he was disappointed
in the message. A CPI should not be based on demonstrating that they had made their costs go up. They felt their
role was to control their expenses and drive them down. While costs had been controlled they had experienced real
increases in their role of providing services. Fuel prices had increased by 13 % since 1992, tire prices increased
40 %, containers increased 20 %, container lids had increased 5,7 %. postage stamp rates increased 10%, SDG&E
rates increased 24 %. etc.
Mayor Horton questioned what costs had gone Jown k; the company,
/ /
, .
Minutes
November 14, 1995
Page 7
Mr. Weaver responded that they had gained savings through operational improvements, i.e. downsizing from two
to one driver on specific routes, reduction of service days for commercial accounts which resulted in frequency,
consolidation of stops on routes which allowed them to park trucks, etc. They looked for opportunities daily in
order to keep their costs down. It had been a long and extensive process over the last three years. He requested
Council consideration to the detail of the information, their commitment to the community, and assurance that the
City would continue to receive some of the lowest commercial and residential rates in the county. They had the
ability to control their business costs but did not have the ability to control their revenue. He requested Council
support of their CPI request. In their communication to staff they requested reimbursement of landfill rates paid
on behalf of commercial and residential customers, i.e. $450,679 in 1995 alone. It was an ongoing issue and had
been reviewed and documented with staff for over a four year period. Staffs request for further review was unfair
and unnecessary. Laidlaw was asking to be reimbursed for dollars they had already spent. The contract was
providing an adjustment equal to the percentage change in the gate rate. That did not allow for reimbursement of
all expenses and in some cases could even allow Laidlaw to be over compensated. Laidlaw believed that it was
Council's intent that the landfill portion of the rate be a pass-through as it was a rate imposed by a third party which
neither Laidlaw or the City controlled. A landfill adjustment should be revenue neutral, they were merely revenue
collectors for the county. Laidlaw sbould not benefit or lose from the investment. The problem was tbat the weight
based formula was from 1991, but the average rate per household and per yard had gone up since 1991 and as a
result Laidlaw had not recovered the fees they had paid to the county.
Councilmember Moot questioned how Laidlaw proposed being reimbursed the $450,000 pass-through.
Mr. Weaver presented a chart which included rate increase for 6 months, 12 months, and 18 months.
. Dan Higgins, 881 Energy Way, Chula Vista, CA" representing Laidlaw Waste Systems, stated they had
identified the variances for unreimbursed landfill costs, i.e. residential $2,300; residential yard waste $67,000; and
commercial $381,000, They had identified a number of different scenarios per unit or per commercial yard based
on the total amount not reimbursed to Laidlaw over the last 12 months over billing cycles of 2 to 18 months.
Councilmember Moot questioned if the material had been provided to staff for input.
Mr. Powell responded that staff had seen the dollar amounts but had not seen the breakdown and options presented.
Under the yard waste component, as of July 1, there was a 32C increase per month for processing costs. He was
unsure as to how that related to what was being presented.
Mr. Higgins stated the processing cost rate was changed effective July I but that only meant that they did not expect
a deficiency in 1996. The residential and commercial contracts land till costs had not been adjusted for landfill
rates. Therefore, Laidlaw could realize the same deficiencies in the landtill cost components if no action was taken.
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed.
Council member Rindone stated it was a difficult decision. He felt the City had made considerable progress which
benefited the rate payers. He was proud the City was the lowest in residential rates for the county. He stated
Laidlaw was the outstanding corporate citizen for Chula Vista and they would continue to be whether or not the
increase was passed. Laidlaw had been given a franchise, i.e. a regulated monopoly until 2001 and for that the
Council had the responsibility to ensure that the rate payers received the best rates. The key was, .was there a
reasonable rate of return" not whether they were a good corporate citizen, whether they reduced operating costs,
or whether it was reasonable to raise the CPI. He was disappointed in that he had not seen the question answered
anywhere in the report. Council needed an answer to that specitic policy issue as Council had the responsibility
to protect the rate payers. He supported the staff recommendation to provide a full pass-through of landfill costs
when the final figure had been determined.
Councilmember Moot stated it was his understanding that the unreimbursed landfill processing costs were a result
of an increase in the tipping fee.
Mr. Powell responded that was incorrect. It was caused by a factor of the weight of per unit pick-ups being higher
than estimated and what the rate had been based on. It was not based on increases in the actual tipping fees, those
had been passed through.
Councilmember Alevy stated the CPI had increased a cumulative a 6.7% over the past three years and questioned
if there was verbiage in the agreement with Laidlaw that tied their rate to the CPI.
Mr. Krempl responded that it was through the ordinance. The ordinance allowed for an annual in, 'ease up to the
CPI to be approved as an increase, it did not require it.
;"/7
Minutes
November 14, 1995
Page 8
Councilmember Alevy stated no matter where anyone went within the City for a public event Laidlaw was always
there as a sponsor. If Laidlaw added up the actual costs of employees. time, goods and services he felt their
philanthropic budget would be well into six figures. He felt it was a shame that a strong contributor to the
community was put into a position where they would have to say "no" once in awhile. Council was to protect the
interest of the rate payers but they were also to look at all the facts and to consider the business. If the City told
one of the top corporate citizens that they appreciated them and then refused to help them he did not feel Council
was doing their duty. National City and Imperial Beach were both close to the landfill and their rates were several
dollars higher than Chula Vista per month. He felt the City was questioning some things that should be granted.
He supported granting their request as the rate would still be about $1.40 less than the next highest residential rate
and well under the average for commercial rates. He supported Laidlaw's request and a 12 months repayment of
the pass-throughs.
Councilmember Padilla requested a response to the staff commentary regarding lack of justification and "netting".
Mr. Higgins responded that data had been supplied to City staff and it was the first time they had heard that the data
regarding support services had been inadequate. They had identified a number of items that had been increased that
were proportioned to the residential contract, i.e. property cost increased, receipt of payments at their facility and
as a result bank armory service, thefts and vandalism on the property in Otay Valley and as a result security service,
property utility increase, direct cost of invoicing, postal rates, and wages for support personnel.
Councilmember Padilla questioned if Laidlaw was disputing the conclusion of staff regarding residential recycling,
but did not dispute straight residential support service costs,
Mr. Higgins responded that they disputed it in terms of support provided because they identified cost increases.
In terms of "netting" between the two contracts, several years ago Laidlaw had been unable to identify what their
financial indicators were for all contract operations. Council had requested that they supply those numbers, so two
years ago they set out to identify specifically all of their costs and revenues for each of their contracts. They had
done that for 24-28 months. In terms of spreading the two or mixing them it had been very hard to separate the
costs and they really did not relate.
Councilmember Padilla questioned what the time line would be to provide the information requested to the
satisfaction of staff and clearing up any communication problems as to what was satisfactory and what was not.
In reviewing the staff report it showed, especially as regard to residential yard waste, the operating cost rate
component for that particular piece that showed there was an increase and Council was ready to move forward on
that. He was under the assumption that the landfill pass-through costs were related to the increase in the tipping
fee. The staff report indicated that Laidlaw did incur costs in excess of what had been collected by the rate payers
for the rate component even though the tipping fee had not been increased. He questioned if it was reasonable to
ask a private operator whether those changing factors should be accounted for by the operator. He further
questioned if those should not be factored into the cost of doing business in private enterprise.
Mr, Higgins responded in 1991 when the landfill rate components were set they were set by looking at what the
actual landfill tons per unit. Their history had not been reviewed over the past three years, With the increase in
landfill costs being SO significant commercial customers condensed their trash making it heavier which increased
their landfill costs. Therefore, the weight per unit had increased.
Councilmember Padilla stated it was not an issue of whether Laidlaw was a good corporate neighbor. He felt those
things did factor into how the City did business with Laidlaw and how c:ffective communications were between the
City and Laidlaw. There were parameters that were clear as to what Council should look at prior to a rate increase.
In a competitive market place. when costs were reduced and the product price was increased to the consumer. he
did not feel they could stay competitive. Laidlaw did have an exclusive agreement, i.e. monopoly, and for those
reasons Council had oversight for the rate payers. The mechanisms to gauge the request were in place and where
an increase could be justified, under the existing system, there would be recommendations to increase those rates.
Where that was not demonstrated it was reasonable to expect that the increases would not be granted. He did not
have a problem in examining the landfill pass-through but did have concerns on what that was based on and whether
the rate payers should be responsible for all or part of that. In the case of the 2,5 % increase on the yard waste
contract that it had been demonstrated. He also felt it was clear that the other requests were not demonstrated.
Mayor Horton questioned how much revenue would be generated with a 1 % CPI increase.
Cl'l1ncilmember Moot questioned when the last CPI increase was grant...~.
Mr. Weaver responded that it was in July 1992. $50,000 would be the revenues generated with a 1% CPI increase
on the non-landfill portion of the rate,
Minutes
November 14, 1995
Page 9
Councilmember Moot stated it was the second hearing on the issue he had participated in and his position was the
same as it was at the last hearing. He was not part of the Council when the directive was given to staff that tied
a demonstration in increase in actual costs to be granted a CPI increase. He respected prior Councils but he
disagreed with the policy. He did not feel in every instance to get a CPI increase they should have to establish that
their costs had gone up. He felt that provided a disincentive to cut costs and provide better selVices. He was
impressed as a rate payer with the selVices provided by Laidlaw. In reducing costs they had been able to provide
better selVices. The policy did not make any sense to him. A CPI increase should not be should not be automatic
every year but, they should not have to increase their costs in order to receive a CPI increase. Therefore, he
supported Laidlaw's CPI request.
Council member Rindone stated the direction of Council when the initial request came from Laidlaw was not that
they could not have the CPI increase unless they demonstrated an increase in costs, The direction was to have staff
provide reasonable assurance that Laidlaw did not have an unreasonable rate of return. No member of the Council
was advocating that there be a punitive effort on Laidlaw because they were improving efficiency of selVices or
because they decreased operational costs. The reassurance by staff had not been received. It was a regulated
monopoly and it was the Council's cbarge to protect the rate payers.
MS (Rindone/Padilla) to approve the staff recommendation, page 18B-l, approving Resolution 18113, direct
staff, if necessary, to process and ordinance so full processing costs could be passed through if appropriate.
Mayor Horton stated tbe motion denied the request for the reimbursement for the unrecovered landfill costs at the
present time. Council could approve reimbursing the landfill costs and direct staff to return with a mechanism to
move forward.
Mr. Powell responded that Council could do that. He hoped Council would not approve the amount presents but
direct staff to verify the amounts.
Councilmember Rindone stated he would accept that as a friendly amendment if the Mayor would agree to a report
to Council for information.
Mayor Horton requested that Council member Moot clarify his comments.
Council member Moot stated he was talking ahout a 2,5 % across the board which was what Laidlaw had asked for
at the previous hearing, The resolution proposed a 2.5 % increase on only one of the contracts. He did not support
the resolution, Market forces drove a business like Laidlaw, For Council to try to detennine their reasonable rate
of return and make adjustments accordingly was a calculation more suited to other economies and not the one that
operated in our country,
VOTE ON MOTION: motion failed 2-3 with Horton, Alevy, and 1\100t opposed.
MOTION: (Alevy) to approve at 2.5% increase for the operating cost component for residential, residential
recycling, and commercial; approve at 2.5% increase for operating cost component for residential yard waste
contract; and approve Laidlaw's request, pending verification of the figures, and subsequent report back to
Council on the unreimbursed landfill processing costs.
Mayor Horton stated it was difficult to put into the equation the contributions that Laidlaw had provided the
community, but she knew without a doubt that they ranked at the top of being a good corporate citizen and that
somewhere down the line the taxpayers would have to pay for some of the selVices Laidlaw provided. She did not
feel Laidlaw was a monopoly as they provided the best selVice for the lowest price. With the motion they would
still be providing the best selVice for the lowest price, Therefore, she supported the motion.
Councilmember Rindone fdt all of the Council supported Laidlaw and that had never been the issue. The motion
was a change in the policy direction of the Council in trying to adhere to the best public interest for all rate payers
the COlJncil represented. It was in effect a pass-through of 2,5 % and allowed a corporation to be a benevolent
monopoly. It was a pass-through of a new tax and Council had not done due diligence to ensure that it was in the
best public interest. Laidlaw needed to be responsive to the direction of the Council. He would not support the
pass-through of a new tax that would raise the rates,
Council member Moot stated it was not a tax, There was a contract provision in an arms h:ngth negotiated contract
with a business the City did business with. TIlt:: contract provision provided for a CPI increase which was part of
a contractual term. The City held the upper hand on the contractual term hut it was not a tax but a contract
provision. Laidlaw had been denied the increase for the last three years and during that time Laidlaw had cut their
costs, improved their selVices, and had been i good corporate citizen. At a certain point the City needed to reward
/y ~ -~/
Minutes
November 14, 1995
Page 10
the people they did business with. To refer to it as a tax was being unfair to Laidlaw and to Council. Council was
looking at a contractual term and stating that they felt it appropriate to grant it, nothing more or less.
Council member Padilla felt people had different perspectives on what was appropriate. Everyone should be allowed
to have opinions and have them be equally valid whether or not others agreed with them, The question was not the
structure of the agreement but whether or not they had met the criteria that Council had set. Not everyone would
agree as to whether or not that was met. When there were increased costs to business those were passed through
to the consumer, but it appeared that when there was a decrease in costs the Council did not want to pass those
through to the consumer. In the free market place open competition would force that to be the case. They did not
have that with Laidlaw because there was not open competition between providers. In that case the Council was
not doing their job because that was their charge. Therefore, he would not support the motion.
Mr. Boogaard stated staff needed to know the amortization period the costs would be recovered over and staff
assumed the motion was an amendment to the resolution.
Councilmember Alevy stated he had not included an amortization period as part of the motion but he was
comfortable with 12 months unless Council preferred to include as part of the verification process that staff make
a recommendation regarding the amortization period.
CLARIFICATION OF MOTION: (Alevy) Council would allow the request for the landfill processing costs
upon staff verification of the figures as well as recommending an amorti7.ation period.
Mr. Powell stated it was his understanding that the motion approved a 2.5 % increase in the operating cost
component for the basic residential, residential recycling, and the yard waste component.
Councilmember Moot stated it was his understanding that staff would analyze the unreimbursed landfill processing
costs and bring that back to Council with no preconceived indication by the Council as to what they would do at
that time. His intent was to pass the resolution expanded to include a 2.5 % increase across the board and have staff
bring back the issue of the unreimbursed landfill processing costs for Council review.
Mr. Boogaard stated there were three components to the fee, He clarified that the motion would grant a 2,5 %
increase to all four contracts in the operating component of the fee. The actual unreimbursed landfill costs were
subject to verification with staff returning with a proposal for rate increase along with the necessary ordinance
modification to amortize the unreimbursed landfill cost over a 12 month period to allow it's recovery in all four
contracts.
Mr. Powell stated there was not a landfill rate component in all four contracts, The recycling contract did not have
that so it would not apply.
Mayor Horton stated it would cover commercial and residential rates.
Mr. Krempl stated it was his understanding that the amortization period was left open,
VOTE ON MOTION: approved 3-2 with Padilla and Rindone opposed.
* * * Council recessed at 8:47 p.m. and reconvened at 9;00 p.m. * * *
19. Pl1BLlC HEARING PCC-90-25Mj REQUEST FOR FIVE YEAR EXTENSION TO AN EXISTING
COr-,'DITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN R V STORAGE YARD AT 1375 BROADWAY, WITHIN THE S-94
ZONE - BROADWAY PALOMAR RV STORAGE - The request is for a five year extension of an existing
Conditional Use Permit which authorizes a recreational vehicle storage yard at 1375 Broadway. Additionally, the
applicant is requesting the deletion of a condition to the original permit which requires payment of a parks in-lieu
fee to the City. Staff recommends the puhlic hearinl! he continued to 11/21/95. (Director of Planning)
MSUC (Horton/ Alevy) to continue the public hearing to the meeting of 11/21/95.
ORAL COM!\1UNICATIONS
None
/
/
PRESENTED BY LAIDLAW AT 11/14/95 MEETING.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA . // J)/
UNREIMBURSED LANDFILL/PROCESSING COSTS
nLE:LnJloo'llEM
U-t4-9S
RESIDENTIAL UNREIMBURSED LANDFILL COSTS
$2,273
RESIDENTIAL UNITS
28.500
UNREIMBURSED LANDFILL COSTS PER UNIT
$0.080
MONTHLY BILLING PER RESI UNIT:
BILLED OVER TWO MONTH CYCLE
BILLED OVER SIX MONTHS
BILLED OVER TWELVE MONTHS
BILLED OVER EIGHTEEN MONTHS
$0.040
$0.013
$0.007
$0.004
I RESI Y ARDWASTE UNREIMBURSED PROCESSING COSTS
$67,161
RESIDENTIAL UNITS
28.500
UNREIMBURSED PROCESSING COSTS PER UNIT
$2.357
MONTHLY BILLING PER RESI UNIT:
BILLED OVER TWO MONTH CYCLE
BILLED OVER SIX MONTHS
BILLED OVER TWELVE MONTHS
BILLED OVER EIGHTEEN MONTHS
$1 .178
$0.393
$ 0.196
$0.131
COMMERCIAL UNREIMBURSED LANDFILL COSTS
$381,245
COMMERCIAL YARDS (12 MOS AVG @ 8/31/951
84.458
UNREIMBURSED LANDFILL COSTS PER YARD
$4.514
MONTHLY BILLING PER YARD:
BILLED OVER TWO MONTHS
BILLED OVER SIX MONTHS
BILLED OVER EIGHT MONTHS
BILLED OVER TWELVE MONTHS
BILLED OVER EIGHTEEN MONTHS
$2.257
$0.752
$0.564
$0.376
$0.251
PRESENTED BY LAIDLAW AT 11/14/95 MEETING.
DISPOSAL PASS-THROUGH CALCULATION SAMPLE MODEL
Sample assumptions -
. Residential Service
. Monthly Rate - $10.00
. Monthly Average Weight Per Household · 100 Ibs
. Disposal Rate - $43.00 I ton
1. Sample Rate Components
. Landfill Rate Component............ $ 2.lS
$43.00/ton + 2000 Ibs = .021St lib
.0215t x 100 Ibs - $2.15
. Other Rate Component............... $.-1.J2
S10.00 - $2.15 -= $7.85
. Total Monthly Rate .................... $10.00
II. Assume landfill rate increases by 10% from $43.00 to $47.30
. If the monthly average weight per household also decreases to 90 Ibs the
landfill component will be .
$.47.301 ton + 2000 Ibs = .0237t lib
.0237 )( 90 lbs = ......................... $-2.JJ.
If the monthly average weight per household increases to ttO Ibs the
Landfill component will be .
$47.30 I ton", 2000 Ibs - .0237t lib
.0237)( 110 Ibs = ....................... S..k6l
.
. .r _........,................. .,..........- ,'t ,..,. f
NOV-13-1995 14:47
91%
P.02
PRESENTED BY LAIDLAW AT 11/14/95 MEETING.
Ill. Original Base Rate Components
Landfill Rate COmponent............... S 2.15
Other. ........... .............. ................... S~
Total......... ...... .......... ................. .... $10.00
Landfill 10% increaseS 2.1S + .21S~ = 2.37
Other ............................................. S 7.85
New Rate..... ..... ........ ..................... $10.22
. If weight household decreased to 90 IbsJ no increase would be in order as
the actual disposal cost per household went from $2.15 to $2.13. A .02t
credit would be in order.
. If the average weight per household increased to 110 Ibs a greater
increase is necessary to reimbmse for the actual disposal cost incurred by
Laidlaw as the actual disposal component would increase to 52.61 versus
the new component of only 52.37.
IV. Recommendation
. Our recommendation has always been to do as the contract is intended
and only PASS TIlROUGH the actual disposal cost. We believe that
Laidlaw should not benefit or suffer because of a mandated increase
imposed by a third party which neither Laidlaw << the City controls.
NOV-13-1995 14:48
91%
P.03
/)
./ /~
.///
CHULA VISTA RATE ANALYSIS
Total Residential Rate Commercial Rate
(Single Family) (1 - 3 yd /1 time per week)
6/30/95 Rate $19.85 $91.35
7/1/95 Rate $12.41 $76.79
1/1/96 Approved Rate (Cpr Adj) $12.93 $78.97
1/1/96 Proposed Rate (L/F Adj) $13.10 $91.64
7/1/96 Resulting Rate* $12.85 $86.64
1/1/97 Resulting Rate* $12.65 $81. 76
* These rates do not reflect potential adjustments for
Landfill, CPI and Residential Recycling Participation
Total Residential Rate
$19.85
$-
~2
~ I1l
;::::0::
<D1:l
0l>2
~ n. I1l
:::: n. 0::
~<
<0 ci. <IJ
~2ro
~o..O::
OJ
co .~ ...
(i) =:: OJ
~ ::J ~
~ II> co
t::::vO::
0::
OJ
r-- .~ i<
m =:: a.>
~::J~
~ II> I1l
::::cvo::
0::
.,.
$20
$15
$10
$5
Commercial Rate
$95
$90
$85
$80
$75
$70
$65
LJ)
Ol <IJ
oro
~O::
<D
$91.64
<D1:l
~ -5.. ~
:::: n. 0::
~<
$ g- 2
::;:: l- ro
:;;::a..n:
<D g>. ;.
0l:2<IJ
::::~ro
t:::: QJ 0::
0::
OJ
r-...... .S ...
Q) ~ Q)
~::J~
~ II> I1l
~QJO::
0::
/ Lj -'~7
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item j <;. ()
Meeting Date 12/19/95
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: PCM-96-07; Consideration of Amendments to the
EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan Public Facilities
Financing Plan.
Resolution I 8' / ~, r Approving Amendments to the EastLake
Greens Public Facilities Financing Plan component of the EastLake
Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan.
:./. ,:l
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning '~:
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~ p.;~\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No ~
On December 12, 1995, the City Counc{rJconsidered an application submitted by EastLake
requesting amendments to the EastLake II General Development Plan (EastLake I Expansion),
EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, Planned Community District Regulations,
Air Quality Improvement Plan, Water Conservation Plan and Public Facilities Financing Plan
(PFFP). The City Council, after hearing staff's presentation and public testimony, approved the
proposed amendments with the exception of the Public Facilities Financing Plan Amendment.
Consideration of this portion of the GDP and SPA Amendments was continued to the December
19, 1995 regular City Council Meeting.
The Public Facilities Financing Plan Amendment involves minor statistical and project phasing
changes in addition to new language reinstating EastLake's previous agreement to construct a
previously deferred community center and bond $700,000 for that facility (see Attachment 4).
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that no new or supplemental EIR is
necessary and has prepared an addendum to FSEIR-86-04 (B), EastLake Greens, which has been
previously considered by the City Council (see Attachment 5).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
On November 29, 1995, the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that the City Council
approve the proposed amendments to the EastLake II (EastLake I Expansion) General
Development Plan and EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, including the
Public Facilities Financing Plan, in accordance with resolution PCM -96-07.
'L:;./ /J" I
J- /7
c,. ...."1.
Page 2, Item I .::;. /"1.
Meeting Date 12/19/95
RECOMMENDA TION:
That the City Council adopt the attached resolution approvlllg the proposal based on the
findings contained therein.
DISCUSSION:
The EastLake Greens Planned Community is located on the south side of Otay Lakes Road
between Hunte Parkway and the future alignment of the SR-125 Freeway (see Locator/
Exhibit A). The SPA consists of approximately 830 acres and is planned for 2738 dwelling
units in addition to commercial and public quasi-public land uses.
The Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) Amendment involves minor statistical and project
phasing changes, and includes new language reinstating EastLake's previous agreement to
construct a previously deferred community center and bond $700,000 for that facility (see
Attachment 4). The background, staffs rationale and justification for the new language in the
PFFP and the Applicant's position with regard to this issue are addressed in the attached report
from Parks and Recreation Department
CONCLUSION
As a result of the amendments to the EastLake II (EastLake I Expansion) General Development
Plan and EastLake Greens SPA, minor statistical changes to the EastLake Greens Air Quality
Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan have been incorporated to reflect updated
project data and maintain the SPA internal consistency. Without an amended PFFP the SPA
would be internally inconsistent and would affect the Tentative Subdivision Map scheduled to
be considered following this item (PCS-96-02) and future Tentative and Final Subdivision
Maps presently being processed. For this reason, staff recommends that the PPFP be approved
as presented.
FISCAL IMP ACT: The applicant has paid for all costs associated with the processing of
these amendments.
Attachments
1.
Council Resolutions
Exhibits
Planning Commission Minutes and Rcsolutions
Public Facilities Financing Plan
FSEIR-86-04(B) Addendum
Disclosure Statement
^I
...
3.
4.
5
6.
c ,//::..<
RESOLUTION
/<g)~'1
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING AMENDMI-:NTS TO THE EASTLAKE GREENS
PUBLIC COMPONENT OF THE EASTLAKE GREENS SECTIONAL
PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN
I.
RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the properties which the subject matter of this resolution are
diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated by this reference, identified as the EastLake Greens SPA
Plan Area, ("Project Site"); and,
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WH EREAS, on September 29, 1995, the EastLake Development Company
("Developer") filed applications for an amendment to the EastLake Greens
Sectional Planning Area Plan ("SPA") Document No. C094-184 on file
in the office of the City Clerk, including the Public Facilities Financing
Plan component of the SPA, on file in the office of the City Clerk
("Project"); and,
C. Prior Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, the development of the Project Site has been the subject
matter of 1) a General Development Plan, EastLake II (EastLake I
Expansion) previously approved by City Council Resolution No. 15198
("GDP"); 2) the EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area Plan,
previously adoptee! by City Council Resolution No. 15199; (SPA), all
approved on July ] 8. ]989; ancl, 3) an Air Quality Improvement Plan
(EastLake Cireens Air Quality Improvement Plan) and 4) a Water
Conservation Plan (EastLake Greens Water Conservation Plan) and Public
Facilities Financing Plan (EastLake Greens Public Facilities Financing
Plan). all previously approved by the City Council on November 24,
1992, by Resolution No. 16898 and amended on December 12, 1995 by
Resolution No 18159 and Ordinance No. 2658; and,
D. Planning Commission Record on Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing
on said project on November 29, 1995, and voted to recommend that the
City Council approve the Project, based upon the findings listed below.
/~'5 ~ /
E. City Council Record of Applications
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the
City Council of the City of Chula Vista on December 12, 1995, on the
Discretionary Approval Applications, received the recommendations of the
Planning Commission, and heard public testimony with regard to same;
and,
WHEREAS, the City Council continued the public hearing on the Public
Facilities Financing Component of the SPA to December 19, 1995.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby
find, determine and resolve as follows:
11.
PLANNIN(j COM!\1ISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at
their public hearing on this project held on November 29, 1995, and the minutes
and resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of
this proceeding.
III.
CERTIFICATION OF COrv1PLIANCE WITH CEQA
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that no new supplemental
EIR is necessary and has prepared an addendum the FSEIR-86-04 (B), EastLake
Greens, which must be considered by the City Council prior to a decision on this
project.
IV.
INDEPENDENT JUDCjF:f\lENT OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council does hereby find that in the exercise of their independent review
and judgment, the addendum to EIR-86-04 in the form presented has been
preparecl in accordance 'kith the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act, the State \:1 R Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures
of the City of Chula Vista and does hereby adopts the same.
V.
SPA FINDINCS
A. THE SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN AS AMENDED IS IN
CONFORMITY V/lTH THE EASTLAKE II (EASTLAKE I
EXPANSION) CjENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE CHULA
VISTA (jENERAL PLAN.
The amended E.astLake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan Public
Facil i ties Fi nancing renects land use, circulation system, and public
facilities that are consistent with the EastLake II (EastLake I Expansion)
General Development Plan and the Chula Vista General Plan.
/~~rcJ
B. THE EASTLAKE GREENS SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN,
AS AMENDED, WILL PROMOTE THE ORDERLY
SEQUENTIALIZED DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVOL VED
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA
The Public Facilities Financing Plan as amended is consistent with the
amended phasing of internal and external infrastructure and consistent
with the EastLake II (EastLake I Expansion) General Development Plan,
Air Quality Improvement Plan, and Water Conservation Plan and will
therefore, promote the orderly sequentialized development of the
involved Sectional Planning Area.
C. THE EASTLAKE GREENS SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA)
PLAN AS AMENDED WILL NOT ADVERSEL Y AFFECT
ADJACENT LAND USE, RESIDENTIAL ENJOYMENT,
CIRCULA TION, OR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY.
The land uses within the EastLake Greens SPA area represent the same
uses approved by the EastLake II (EastLake I Expansion) General
Development Plan and will not adversely affect adjacent land use,
residential enjoyment, circulation, or environmental quality.
D. IN THE CASE OF PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH
USES, THAT SUCH DEVELOPMENT WILL BE APPROPRIATE IN
AREA, LOCATION, AND OVER-ALL DESIGN FOR THE PURPOSE
INTENDED; THA T THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS ARE SUCH AS TO CREATE A RESEARCH OR
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENT OF SUST AINED DESIRABILITY
AND STABILITY; AND, THAT SUCH DEVELOPMENT WILL MEET
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THIS TITLE.
The amendments do not involve areas planned for industrial or research
uses.
E. IN THE CASE OF INSTITUTIONAL , RECREATIONAL, AND
OTHER SIMILAR NONRESIDENTIAL USES, THAT SUCH
DEVELOPMENT WILL BE APPROPRIATE IN AREA, LOCATION
AND OVER-ALL PLANNING TO THE PURPOSE PROPOSED, AND
THAT SURROUNDING AREAS ARE PROTECTED FROM ANY
ADVERSE EFFECTS FORM SUCH DEVELOPMENT
The proposed amendments do not involve recreational or other similar
proj ects
F. THE STREET AND THOROUGHFARES PROPOSED ARE
SUITABLE AND ADEQUATE TO CARRY THE ANTICIPATED
TRAFFIC THEREON.
/.. t(/;'. ?
/1/ ..---' ~
The amendments do not involve changes to the existing circulation
system.
G. ANY PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CAN BE
JUSTIFIED ECONOMIC ALL Y AT THE LOCATION(S) PROPOSED
AND WILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE COMMERCIAL FACILITIES OF
THE TYPES NEEDED AT SUCH PROPOSED LOCATION(S).
The amendments do not involve areas planned for commercial uses.
H. THE AREA SURROUNDING SAID DEVELOPMENT CAN BE
PLANNED AND ZONED IN COORDINATION AND SUBSTANTIAL
COMPATIBILITY WITH SAID DEVELOPMENT.
The amendments are consistent with the previously approved plans and
regulations applicable to surrounding areas and therefore, said
development can be planned and zoned in coordination and substantial
compatibility with said development.
I. ADOPTION OF EASTLAKE GREENS PUBLIC FACILITIES
FINANCING PLAN.
In light of the findings above, the amended EastLake Greens Public
Facilities Financing Plan is hereby approved and adopted in the form
presented and attached as Exhibit A.
VI.
INVALIDITY ; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is
dependent upon the enforceability of each and every term provision and
conditions herein stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms,
provisions or conditions are determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to
be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed to be
automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
/
! I
. ,'"
) \.:
~,{". < \",.
I ..
. r(~\.
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
/ c;--~ l' /;7-5
(
_r\llllOy
~
EASTI.N<E
BUSINESS
~R
PROJECT
LOCATION
'--.-
\\
\ .
U
Lower Ol8y ReseNoir
.
EXHIBIT A
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT EASTLAKE DESCRII'IION,
~ APPUCANT, DEVELOPMENT CO. Miscellaneous:
PROJECT EastJake Greens RoqUMt: To amend the EaUake a_no SPA (SeclIonal Planning
ADDRESS,
Area> end the PFFP (pub6c Fecilltlea Financing PIIIn).
SCALf, FlU NUMBER<
NORTH No Scale PCM - 95 - 11
/!i-b
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-96-07
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE
AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE II (EASTLAKE I EXPANSION)
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, EASTLAKE GREENS SECTIONAL
PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN, PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
REGULATIONS, AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAJI,I, WATER
CONSERVATION PLAN AND PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN.
WHEREAS, applications for amendments to the EastLake II (EastLake I Expansion)
General Development Plan (GDP), EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA), Planned
Community District Regulations, EastLake Greens Air Quality Improvement Plan, Water
Conservation and Public Facilities Financing Plan ("Project") were f1Ied with the City of Chula
Vista Planning Department on September 12, 1995, by EastLake Development Company
(Developer); and,
WHEREAS, the propose GDP and SPA Plan Amendments consist of relocating two
neighborhood park sites (Parcels P-3 and P-5), expanding the area available for community
purpose facilities (PQ), adjusting land use designation boundaries, transferring densities and
designating Parcel R-26 for low income housing in accordance with the recently adopted
EastLake Affordable Housing ~"rogram and EastLake Greens Affordable Housing Agreement;
and,
WHEREAS, the Plannirg Director set the time and place for a hearing on said Project
and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by it publication in a newspaper
of general circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners within 1,000 ft. of the
exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that no new or
supplemental EIR is necessary, and has prepared an addendum to FSEIR-86-04 (B), EastLake
Greens, which must be consider by the Planning Commission prior to a decision on this project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
DOES hereby find that the addendum FSEIR-86-04 (B), EastLake Greens, has been prepared
in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR
guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends
that the City Council adopt the attached draft City Council Ordinance and Resolution approving
the project in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City
Council
/5 - f
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this November 29, 1995 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
Commissioners Davis, Ray, Salas, Tarantino, Thomas, Willett.
NOES:
ABSENT:
Chair Tuchscher
A TIEST:
John C. Ray
V ice-Chairman
Nancy Ripley, Secretary
m:\home\planning\luis\PCM-9607.RES
!
Excerpt from Draft Planning Commission Minutes of 11/29/95
ITEM 3.
PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-96-07; CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO
THE EASTLAKE II GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (EASTLAKE I
EXTENSION), EASTLAKE GREENS SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA),
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS, AIR QUALITY
IMPROVEMENT PLAN, WATER CONSERVATION PLAN AND PUBLIC
FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN
Acting Senior Planner Hernandez presented the staff report. Commissioner Salas questioned the
number of dwelling units per acre. Mr. Hernandez stated that the Medium High density ranges
from 11 to 18 units per acre.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing
to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MS (Willett/Thomas) to adopt Resolution PCM-96-07 recommending that the City Council
approve the proposal in accordance with the draft City Council Resolution and Ordinance
based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
Vice Chair Ray noted that the usable acreage was 1.37 because of the existing water tank and
acreage designated as an easement. Mr. Hernandez concurred.
Assistant Planning Director Lee stated that the easement could potentially be used for parking;
it was not entirely wasted. Mr. Hernandez had pointed out that the net usable acres complied
with the City standard.
Commissioner Salas stated that property currently being planned as part of the Otay Ranch
project west of SR-125 may require the extension of Palomar Road to connect to EastLake
Parkway between the parcels. She asked if that was being coordinated between the two
developers.
Mr. Lee replied that it was being coordinated and was a very significant issue because of the
importance of crossing the freeway. Baldwin recognized that because of the location of the high
school and the library, not having the crossing at that location would force the people on the
west side of the freeway to go to Telegraph Canyon Road or Orange Avenue. Staff felt the
crossing was very important and EastLake had concurred with that.
VOTE:
6-0 (Chair Tuchscher excused) to approve.
ATTACHMENT 4
PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN
EASTLAKE GREENS
PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN
11/17/95 Strikeout/Redline Draft
Text Rcmo'lcd/'JITe~~::lagit
EastLakc South Greens (Phascs 1, 2, and 3) Amcndmcnt
SlJRISPA::mUan:Anienumenl
....................................-....................-........ ...................
........ .........................-..... ............................................
.... ........... - -.. ......................
. ........................
Approved By:
Chula Vista City Council
Octobcr 17, 1995
Prepared by:
JAY KNIEP LAND PLANNING
(916)-541-1817
!
REVISION RECORD:
(19!17!9~fll~ifil)
#1
10/17/95
Comprehensive revision/update to reflect
completion of EastLake North Greens and
revised phasing for EastLake South Greens.
1I::::::!::::::I:::::::::t:::I:I:!!::::::!::::::!I:::::!:::!:I::::::::::j!::::::::::::::::UJif.it.9.8i::::::mi:::::mlllllll::J1J.iU:::iUiilBt
................................................ .......llflll.lll.lllll.rl..J.
plR:::lt7~~...............................................................................
....-..-.....................
i
-;
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN
-EASTLAKE GREENS-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
Page
I. Introduction
A. Background and Regulatory Context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. I
B. Purpose................................. 2
C. Key Assumptions ........................... 3
D. Consistency............................... 3
E. Regulation of Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
II. Public Facilities and Infrastructure Requirements for
Future Development
A. Needed Facilities ........................... 9
B. Summary of ~li:Wl%:Iprojects .................. 27
C. ~li'::~.:projcciPhaslng...................... 40
D. Summary of Costs to Buildout .................. 42
m. Public Facilities Phasing and Requirements for Development
A. ~IIJiA.:(EastLake Greens, Project Phasing .......... 43
B. Phasing Program for Regional Facilities ............ 43
C. Phasing Program for Parkland .................. 44
IV. Public Facilities and Infrastructure Financing
A. Overview............................... 45
B. Review of Financing Programs Available
and in Place in Plan Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 46
V. Implementation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
(19/17!9~f!!:!:k(f.~)
ii
- / //
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
FIGURES Page
1. Vicinity Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Project Components. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. EastLake North/South Greens. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
TABLES
l~. J!;~~~~~~!~;,!!i:i::iiIiI~i::::~::::::~:::i::~:::I~:i::i~:i:i::~::::::~:::::~:::::~::iiii~ii::i~iiii:~:::i:~:Iiii~::::::~:::I~~Iii~:i:iI~iI:::i:i:!=~
;!-4:. Improved Parkland Phasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 44
EXHIBITS
A. Circulation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10
B. Domestic Water Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12
C. Reclaimed Water Plan ....................... 14
D. Wastewater Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17
E. Stormwater Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18
F. Parks Plan .............................. 23
G. Trails Plan .............................. 24
MAPS
1. North Greens Improvements ................... 29
2. North Greens Improvements (cont'd) .............. 30
3. South Greens Improvements-Phase 1 .............. 32
4. South Greens Improvements-Phase 2 .............. 35
5. South Greens Improvements-Phase 3 .............. 37
6. EastLake Greens Regio8al,BflB Improvements . . . . . .. 39
7. EastLake Greens Phasingd:d~.d:d. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 41
(19/ 17 /9jl:~l!1lgJ)
iii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. BACKGROUND and REGULATORY CONTEXT
This Public Facilities Financing Plan ("PFFpIt) is a required element of the Planned Community
District Regulations adopted for the EastLake Planned Community. More specifically, the
District Regulations require that a Public Facilities Financing Plan be approved by the City of
Chula Vista prior to or concurrent with the adoption of a Sectional Planning Area ("SPA") Plan
for an area within the EastLake Planned Community.
Figures 1 and 2 are a Vicinity Map and a Project Component Map, respectively, illustrating the
location of the project in the City of Chula Vista and as part of the Eastern Territories of the
City of Chula Vista (that area generally easterly of Interstate 805).
On February 19, 1985, a Public Facilities Financing Plan for the initial development phase of
the EastLake Planned Community, known as EastLake I, was adopted by the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista as an element of the related SPA document. SPA #1 is EastLake I
(EastLake Hills and EastLake Shores) and SPA #2 is EastLake Greens. This document is
intended to address public facility needs associated with the EastLake Greens SPA Plan ~~II
g. ..
This document includes revisions to the PFFP originally prepared when the EastLake Greens
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan was approved in 1989. Since that time, development has
progressed in the northern portion of the SPA and numerous public facility improvements have
been made both on- and off-site. These revisions update the original PFFP and addresses only
those facilities which remain to be constructed in conjunction with development within the
southern portion of the EastLake Greens SPA (EastLake South Greens). This PFFP update also
reflects the minor amendment to the EastLake Greens SPA Plan (Figure 3) and related project
plans approved by the City Council on August 16, 1994 .:::::g::::lllfllli:jiit.j:~:ill9.1
iPii\iil:j:iiI:H::::1:i:::::::::::II:;r;:IIIII::iJ:i::i:t:I.
..........................................................................
Since 1989, the city of Chula Vista has developed a comprehensive approach to addressing new
development and the impacts it places on public facilities and services. What was previously
a project-by-project approach to facilities improvement and financing has become a
comprehensive city-wide policy. The original EastLake Greens PFFP incorporated several
project specific phasing and financing programs. These have since been replaced by the
comprehensive city-wide program which is utilized in this revised PFFP.
The adoption of the Growth Management Program and Implementing Ordinance (No. 2448) in
May 1991 formalized a comprehensive system to manage growth in the city of Chula Vista.
This system implements the Growth Management Element of the General Plan by directing and
coordinating future growth in order to guarantee the timely provision of new or expanded public
facilities and services to serve new development.
(10/17/9S:UUi(f!)
1
A key component of the Growth Management Program are the "threshold standards" used by
the City to evaluate the adequacy of public facilities and services. City Council Resolution No.
13346 approved threshold standards for eleven public facilities and services. The original eleven
categories, traffic, police, fire/EMS, schools, libraries, parks and recreation, water, sewer,
drainage, air quality, and fiscal impact, were subsequently augmented by adding civic facilities
and corporation yard. The condition of each of these facility/service systems is reviewed
annually by the City's Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) which makes
recommendations to the City Council regarding compliance with the threshold standards. Should
the thresholds be violated, the City Council shall take appropriate action to ameliorate the
situation by requiring facility/service improvement or restricting new development.
As noted above, the original EastLake Greens PFFP was adopted in 1989. Previous to that, in
1985, a PFFP for the initial development in the EastLake Planned Community, EastLake I (Hills
and Shores neighborhoods), was approved (see Figure 2). The project sequencing in this
EastLake Greens PFFP (beginning with project #53, as listed in the Summary of Projects
beginning on pg. 267) is a continuation of that from the EastLake I PFFP (which ended with
project #52).
B. PURPOSE
The purpose of the Public Facilities Financing Plan is to implement the City's Growth
Management Program and to meet the General Plan goals and objectives, specifically those of
the Growth Management Element. The Growth Management Program ensures that development
occurs only when the necessary public facilities and services exist or are provided concurrent
with the demands of new development. The Growth Management Program requires that a PFFP
be prepared for every new development project which requires either SPA Plan or tentative map
approval.
Regarding required public facilities, the Public Facility Financing Plan identifies a preliminary
cost estimate for each improvement as well as funding sources appropriate for the type of public
facility involved.
The Public Facilities Financing Plan is intended to be a dynamic and flexible document. The
goal of the Financing Plan is to assure adequate levels of service are achieved for all public
facilities impacted by the project. It is understood that assumed growth projections and related
public facility needs are subject to a number of external factors such as the state of the economy,
the City's future land use approval decisions, etc. It is also understood that the funding sources
specified herein may change due to financing programs available in the future or requirements
of either state or federal law. It is intended that revisions to cost estimates and funding pro-
grams be handled as administrative revisions, whereas revisions to the facilities-driven growth
phases are to be accomplished through a Public Facilities Financing Plan update process, as set
forth herein.
(101 17 19S:~:~!~~tm:$)
2'
- /
c. KEY ASSUMPTIONS
There are a number of key assumptions implicit to this Public Facilities Financing Plan. The
assumptions playa major part in determining public facility needs, the timing of those needs and
the staging of growth corresponding to the various facilities. Key land use and phasing
assumptions can be summarized as follows:
1. EastLake I SPA (SPA #1) and EastLake Greens SPA (SPA #2) are initial development
phases of the 3,200+ acre EastLake Planned Community to be developed within the city
of Chula Vista. Future development will be implemented in phases generally consistent
with the information utilized in the City's Transportation Phasing Plan. The EastLake
Planned Community is subject to future land use approvals and growth management
decisions by the various jurisdictions involved, such as the City's Growth Management
Program.
2. Land use allocation and intensity of development will be regulated by the EastLake
Planned Community (PC) General Development Plan, PC Distri~t~~~lllati()Ils, and the
EastLake Greens SPA Plan as amended on August 16, 1994 ili9!!i:miii:rm:m!iiiimiimimii::ii:mim.
D. CONSISTENCY
The provisions of the Public Facilities Financing Plan are, to the extent practical, consistent with
and reinforce certain other public documents. More specifically, consistency with the following
documents has been addressed in the context of this Public Facilities Financing Plan:
1. The PFFP adopted for the EastLake I SPA development and the originally adopted PFFP
for EastLake Greens SPA. It is also consistent with the improvement projects previously
completed or under construction as a part of the EastLake Planned Community.
2. The EastLake Greens Environmental Impact Report and subsequent CEQA documents
prepared for plan amendments. The various mitigation measures pertaining to public
facilities which remain to be constructed within the EastLake Greens SPA are incorporated
in the projects herein.
3. The PFFPs prepared for other eastern Chula Vista projects. Consistency with these
documents is with respect to area-wide facility plans and obligations.
4. The Chula Vista Growth Management Program including the thresholds standards, as
described above in Section A.
5. The city of Chula Vista Development Impact Fee (DIF) programs.
(1 0/17 /9S:Ut~!f=i~)
J
Rancho
Same Fe
"
\
Poway\
\
+
I
I
:+
I
,
o
~ EASTLAKE I
~
, EASTlAKE
GREENS
I
c
!
I
NO SCALE
"
~~
\
'"
o
~
o
VICINITY MAP
FIGURE 1
WI LLDANI SIMPSON
+-'Cf)
0........
Q)e
.~ Q)
")c
-0
LLo..
E
o
o
ocs
CD
~
......
o~
.e_
rne
W _~
~~o
<=.,
...J:X:"
I-....~
(I) ., CD
<o.:J
Wrna:l
CD
we.,
...... ~=
-- ~ cs
<......
...J ~ to-
t-(\I('I)
(I) cs cs
<0.0.
wrnrn
CD .,
Wcs"
~_o
<~o
...J>==~
0.:
t-~IO(/)
(I) cs cs 0
c( a. 0.1-
WrnrnQ
o
z
w
ffi
...J
.......
.......
.. . . . . ..
:.... e.e.
,.......1
;.......1
,.......
':::::::::::::1
e:::::::::::::l
...............
..............
...............
mnmmili.
z
o
en
z
~
X
W
w
~
4:
...J
I-
en
4:
w
t-
O
W
'"")
o
a:
Q.
Z
t-
O
z
r.~,J.. .--. .:'.--,if .. .-'! .2:.! .- .
''; ~.. .t.:~.....' . -"-';:J
.:~.: : : : : :.. ..:::::::::::::: ~ .::-~~.:: : ;;.;..
/. . . . . . . . . . . . .. ...................""--1.<':..... :.......
": (/):::::::::: ::: () :::::::::::::: :: ;.,;.;.......
I.. - .......... ... J- .............. ......
/ .. ..u........... ... . . . . . . . . . . . ........
r" ... ........... ... 0 ...........-
:: :: (I)::: : : : : : : :: :::....::: :.:.;.."-
,....- ........... ........".""",
r.' : :: > ::::::::::: :: :;.;---
......."........
~.......
I -... .'9....
.............
I~
0>
~
~ s;
if,
~j <{
u
~ 8
Cl ~
()~ I~
EJ It)lt)
~O>
"'.....
(\10
.M
co.....
CXl
>>
CIlCll
a: a:
d
u
.-
z
LLJ~
~~
'Iii
lni
~~
~.'I ~
Z
<C
.....J
a..
z
o
-
~
N
-
.....J
-
I-
::::>
W
f-
-
CJ)
-
"'..
~ ~~~~~~g~~~~~~~~~:!~~~
F::) ..... ~ C\I"""""" N .,..........
::>
U
mNCOCOOO- co
(")""'V,.....<O"'t1i) (")
~ N ...
N
--
_.. .....,....U)COCD..COV)C')~CO-('I')."..,.OU)U')O(D
=;N~....~~~~~~~~~g~~~~
Fa
o
III
oun...,.cnoC')..- :g
~("joioi~..;cO co
u)
..
.
a-
U
C
o
01
,.....,....moO...,....U)U')~ON~.m~cocn...C') ,....M-~MN- M
m.~.M~O~~..~N~~omoi.. ~o~~~~~ .
--NNN__- C')--N---N -- -N .,.... N
...
COMmNO-ocoU)om-mcoC')cn~.-
mo~~ci~M~.~N~~~~.~O~
.....--...,.-- .,.... (D=
..
f
u
c
>-
~. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~
ccU')U)U')V).".,....--------______ ___~.,,_
~~oooo6~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .~~~~o~
:e-<
llooooooooaoooooo~~~~~ ~~~~~o~
(ij~~
~ ..
C -. . O-N(,)"'~Cl)"'COOlO~C\l(,).~Cl)"'CO ii
m3~-~('I')...U')co.....com----------NNNNNNNNN -_0
\J = ~ ti;ci:ci:ci:ci:cCci:ci:ci:ci:.ci:ci:ci:ci:ci:.ci:ci:ci:ci:ci:ci:ci:ci:ci:ci:ci:ci:ci:
'en n.z .a
ID ~
0:
.~.2 - ~~~~
~~ g~OI1llllllll C
~n.n. n~~~~n. g
S~~_0n.OjO~"'...."'. ~
C==2>->-O OOOOOUOOO~"'~
"'::>::> ~~~ ~€0I010101010101 ~
00 -ilS ~a-oQ.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q. 0
",_ 0 c 0(/)(/)0000.
aQ~.E ~ ~.cccccccO~
OI-=~ ~a~~.~!.!",_O
a~~~~o~~~~&oogog&~~
.
- ..
as:;)
:;::0'0
Cc
IDOl
-o..J
-iii - ~ __N -N(")...,.:'CO,...
"'''.,1:) I I I ...... _I . I . . . . .
0:"" u E 00";'"'~";'"'~'?'r~0000000
, li::> n.l1.00a..a..a..l1.n.OOOOOOO
C n.z
o
Z
o
a..
-..
u,
o
u,
o
::>
U
co
t')
"
C\I
EJ'
'-I~!~
C '2;\
\J.....]~
Q..<
'0 r .
jj
o
C\I01
c.;:a
,;
1M
!
IQ)
f:s
f .Ql
IlL
f
o
III
C\I
c.;
It)
co
J I
~~f
j! '&
2~ i
I~ J
Jt 1
II ~ i i
i! t J ;
j ~ 0 I
.Ii: I
iii
;2
-
(J
C1l
'0
...
a..
LIJ 1Il .c; ~
~zI~
't1.L.l~
~I.L.I ~~
Iil~ ~
~<.!)
~.-I
E. REGULA TION of DEVELOPMENT
As referenced above, this Public Facilities Financing Plan is intended to serve as the basis for
reviewing public facility requirements associated with localized development phasing and,
thereby, provide a means to insure that public facilities are installed in a timely manner. With
this in mind, a series of development "phases" have been keyed to specific public facility
improvement projects such that public facility improvement sequence and related funding
assurances can be paced with growth within EastLake Greens and other nearby projects.
For each public facility identified, a certain status of implementation is specified for threshold
monitoring purposes. Generally speaking, public facilities located on-site and off-site must be
"committed" in the manner specified herein in a particular phase or increment of development
prior to building permits being issued for a subsequent phase.
When "Commitment" of required improvements necessitates condemnation of land off-site of
EastLake Greens, the obligation to start construction may be waived if improvement plans are
finalized for approval, a condemnation proceeding has been initiated and estimated funds for
right-of-way acquisition and construction have been deposited with the City in the form of cash,
bonds, a letter of credit or other acceptable form of financial guarantee.
Obligations to governmental entities other than the City (e.g., school district) will be considered
"committed" when the obligation has been satisfied as evidenced in writing from the entity.
In some instances, substitution of improvements may be appropriate. Where substitution is
contemplated, the threshold standards of the Growth Management Program will be used as the
basis for determining the acceptability of such substitution. Substitutions will be initiated only
upon written request to the Director of Public Works.
Before exceeding cumulative levels of development for any threshold standard, the required
improvements of the threshold must be committed to the satisfaction of the Director of Public
Works. The Director of Public Works shall have the ability to select from any of the following
options prior to building permits being issued for a subsequent phase:
1. Improvements must be completed or open to public use, whichever first occurs or,
2. Improvement must be subject to an awarded construction contract by a governmental
agency or,
3. Improvement must be committed by an agreement with the City which shall include,
but not be limited to, all of the following requirements to the satisfaction of the
Director of Public Works:
a. All discretionary permits must be obtained for construction of the
improvement;
( 10/17.'95:~Jl~im~)1-
b. Plans for the construction of the improvement must have all necessary
governmental approvals;
c. Adequate funds (i.e., letter of credit, cash deposit, or performance bond) must
be available such that the City can construct the improvement if either
construction has not commenced within 30 days of issuance of a notice to
proceed by the Director of Public Works, or construction is not progressing
towards completion in a manner considered reasonable to the Director of
Public Works.
(10/17!9S:~Jltfm$) g
-/
-J e'''
CHAPTER II
PUBLIC FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
REOUIREMENTS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
This chapter describes the public facilities required to support the development of the EastLake
Greens (SPA #2) as well as identifying the public facilities required to support the cumulative
development of EastLake and other properties in the Eastern Territories, pursuant to the Growth
Management Program.
A. NEEDED FACILITIES
Transportation
The public street system serving the project area is the responsibility of the Chula Vista Public
Works Department, except for County roads adjacent to the project area. Transportation system
projects required to support ultimate development of SPA #2, as well as adjacent areas, are
identified in the Traffic Analysis for EastLake Expansion, dated September 26, 1988, as
prepared for the City of Chula Vista by Willdan Associates, and subsequent similar studies for
nearby projects. The Traffic Analysis was performed in the context of Environmental Impact
Report preparation and, as a result, identifies measures necessary to mitigate transportation
system impacts associated with EastLake Greens (SPA #2) and EastLake Trails.
The transportation projects necessary to accommodate phased build-out of SPA #2, are of two
basic types:
1. Those facilities that provide for circulation within SPA #2 and which primarily
benefit the EastLake development. Circulation system components of this type yet
to be constructed include collector roads and local residential streets. These
improvements will be constructed to the ultimate City standards in accordance with
Subdivision Map Act exactions keyed, via tentative tract map conditions, to the
recordation of specific subdivision maps. (See Circulation Plan Exhibit A).
2. Those facilities that are necessary for SPA #2 development but which provide area-
wide circulation benefits to other eastern area developments as well, as identified in
the Eastern Area Transportation DIP program. Circulation system components of
this type which are yet to be constructed consist of major and prime arterials (i.e.,
Hunte Parkway and East Orange Avenue).
Regarding streets and highways of area-wide benefit, the City Council has recognized the
necessity for a Development Impact Fee (DIF) to provide a funding source for road projects of
regional significance in the area east of Interstate 805. The Eastern Area Transportation DIF
was established initially for the EastLake area only in 1988 and subsequently converted to
include the entire Eastern Territories. EastLake's SPA #1 and SPA #2 have been included
(10/17!9511r~Z~~)
9
: ~/
--, . '"
E ' <ell!
~ ii
._, OOO~
c '~a.
\J'-.!l.i
c..~ .
-gt
..-
..JJ
c
o
~
JQ::l ~
q
a:
o Ii:
s.:.. 10 10
0<:"
1I.
.
.! i I
:~ f ~
i; i~ I ~!
Q I:: '- Q ~&&. .
ct .~__._~:. ~ ~ ..
~p III ~ ~~
-..: -:I
~ t .
! ~
l! =;
t
.. ~-- =
~"
Is
1 :;
. p
~: ~;
.: a
: <(
.
; ......
! :0
. .-
. ..c
~ X
: W
;
"
;
10
!
j
!
I"
~!
~:
..",
!~
h
0:.
ii:
i;
~
o
..:
"
1
!
.
.
10:1
'C
I
10
;,
'I: ..
ii i.
f: sf
.; f
i!
I
i
.
w
W \\
\'
\'
\ ..
. I .f
. '.
1: '
1
/
(
01
I
Ju
i
WUl ~~
~Z i~-
Sl:Hn
~~<
Ul<.!)
;:i5
~
-_J'" _
-'::::--, .
// ,
d/ t;
'~ ,
......
.//
--- ./
---
".
"
/. .
-' ,
./"-,/
/;,..-'
//
////
l/~
/ /-.:..
u.
HI
......
within the area of benefit for the existing Transportation DIF. As such, development within the
SPA's will be responsible for Transportation DIF payments.
The obligation toward DIF program participation can be met in two ways, either by payment of
the fees in effect to the City of Chula Vista at the time building permits are issued or through
the construction of qualified DIF related projects. The former allows construction of required
facilities by the City of Chula Vista when sufficient monies have been collected or on a pay-as-
you go basis, while the latter allows the developer to construct the facility when needed in
exchange for a credit toward DIF obligations. Should a developer's cost to construct a DIF
project exceed the developer's fee obligation, reimbursement will be made as future fees are
collected by the City. The exact basis for reimbursement may be set by a future, separate
agreement, to be entered into between the City and developer specifying how the developer will
be reimbursed by those projects benefitting from the construction of DIF projects but who do
not contribute to their completion. Such an agreement will, among other things, specify the
maximum amount of DIF credit to be granted, consistent with the method of determining DIF
fees and reimbursements due under such calculation, if any.
In addition to the Eastern Area Transportation DIF, the City has established a DIF program to
finance interim improvements within the SR-125 corridor, known as the Interim SR 125 DIF.
The EastLake South Greens project is included in this program and will be required to pay the
fees in effect at the time building permits are issued.
SPA #2, will be required to participate in two levels of traffic signal improvements. The traffic
signals planned within the boundaries of SPA #2, are considered the sole benefit of SPA #2.
The new traffic generated by the development will also have an impact on the need for citywide
signals and signal upgrades. All development within the SPA #2 areas would also be liable for
payment of the current Traffic Signal Fee in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
Water
Both SPA #1 and SPA #2 are located within the boundaries of the Otay Water District (OWD),
which is responsible for providing local water service. OWD receives its water for the San
Diego Water Authority via the second San Diego Aqueduct.
Although described here for information, the manner in which EastLake will ensure the
adequacy of potable water from OWD shall be the subject of separate agreements between
developer and OWD. The water facilities (i.e., pumping, storage, piping, etc.) will be
constructed as planned, to conform with the current OWD Master Plan.
This provision of the Public Facilities Financing Plan sets forth the anticipated means by which
water service will be ensured for the EastLake I and Greens projects.
The area is currently served by two 980' zone 5 million gallon reservoirs and pump station,
(EastLake Pump Station). The backbone water lines constructed within the service area were
oversized to meet future water requirements and have the capacity to serve the SPA #2
development.
(lO/17/9S:lM~im?)
11
/1
'LEGEND
EXIST.
SOUTH GREENS PHASE 1 -.-.-
SOUTH GREENS PHASE 2 - _ _ _
SOUTH GREENS PHASE 3 .........
DOMESTIC WATER PLAN
-:F/~/
EXHIBIT B
-~. .r;T
RICK~CCtvfpANY
Based on an analysis of existing and proposed conditions, the following supplemental water
system improvements have been recommended ("*" indicates project completed):
1. Increase the pumping capacity of the Central Area Pump Station (711' zone) from
4,000 GPM to 8,000 GPM. *
2. Add 2 million gallons of storage capacity at the ID 22-1 Reservoir site located within
SPA #2 boundaries. *
3. Add a 4,000 GPM pump to the existing 980-zone pump station.
4. Install various transmission and distribution mains in accordance with the current
own Master Plan.
OWD Improvement District 22 (ID 22) has installed a number of improvements to provide water
for SPA #1 and #2 development. These include an approximately 3 million gallon reservoir to
serve the 711' pressure zone and the two 5 million gallon reservoirs to serve the 980' pressure
zone. own also completed an 8 million gallon reservoir to serve the areas to the west (Bonita
Long Canyon and Rancho del Rey). OWD has annexed SPA #2 to ID 22.
In addition to the existing ID 22 improvements, improvements required in conjunction with the
recently formed Improvement District 27 (ID 27) will also need to be funded. ID 27 includes
the developments of Rancho del Rey, EastLake and Rancho del Sur (Sunbow). A Master Plan
has been prepared by own to determine required facilities, cost, and financing mechanisms.
The most significant facility that will need to be provided is a terminal storage reservoir which
will provide terminal storage to meet demands of the participating developments within the ID
27 boundaries. A 30 MG reservoir is being constructed and nearing completion with financing
from ID 27.
The necessary area-wide improvements (e.g., pump station, reservoirs, etc.) to serve EastLake
South Greens have already been provided or financially committed in conjunction with previous
development within the EastLake Planned Community or other projects. The project is within
own Improvement District (ID) 22 and ID 27 which provide such facilities with special district
financing such as capacity fees or other means. The remaining local service water facilities will
be constructed as a part of local street improvements as a part of the subdivision exaction (see
Exhibit B).
Reclaimed Water
Reclaimed water is available for irrigation purposes from the Otay Water District's Ralph W.
Chapman Water Recycling Facility (RWCWRF). These facilities are currently capable of
producing 1.3 million gallons of reclaimed water per day meeting Title 22 requirements. At
present, Otay Water District is providing approximately 750 acre-feet of reclaimed water per
year for irrigation purposes.
(10 '17/9i:;::;;::'t;:;:~~)
I , :~:~:r~~H~I?:~
13-
r-;,
'LEGEND
EXIST.
SOUTH GREENS PHASE 1 -.-.-
SOUTH GREENS PHASE 2 - - - - .
SOUTH GREENS PHASE 3 ..........
j-I't401
EXHIBIT C
RECLAIMED WATER PLAN
f ~" /j
--... ~""
RICK EN;INEERll'G COvfpANY
The proposed reclaimed water distribution system within the SPA #2 area is shown on Exhibit
C. The reclaimed water distribution facilities (i.e., pumping, storage, piping, etc.) will be
constructed to conform to the current OWD Master Plan. The system backbone has been
planned to provide reclaimed water for landscape irrigation to the EastLake Greens golf course,
high school, community park and open spaces. These facilities will utilize the existing
production capacity of the RWCWRF's 1.3 million gallons per day plant capacity. Additional
capacity has been designed into the system to allow expanded reclaimed water irrigation usage
should the Otay Water District facilities be expanded to provide additional quantities of
reclaimed water.
A 20-inch reclaimed water supply line was constructed in phases within SPA #1 (i.e., Lane
Avenue) and extends from the terminus located at Telegraph Canyon Road to the Otay Water
District Use Area. This pipeline was constructed to provide water for grading operations and
landscape irrigation demands for the SPA #2 area and other portions of the region.
As with domestic water service, the off-site connections and major reclaimed water facilities for
EastLake South Greens have already been provided (golf course irrigation system is shown on
Exhibit C). Transmission and distribution pipelines for street landscaping remain to be
constructed. These will be included in the local street construction projects.
Sewer/Waste Water
The City of Chula Vista provides sewage collection through City-owned facilities. The sewage
is discharged into the City of San Diego Metropolitan Sewage System (METRO) for treatment
at the Point Lorna regional plant and disposal through the METRO Ocean Outfall.
EastLake SPA #1 and #2 is divided into five separate basins. These basins are (1) Telegraph
Canyon; (2) Proctor Valley; (3) Long Canyon; (4) Salt Creek and (5) Poggi Canyon.
The majority of EastLake SPA#1I#2 will sewer to the Telegraph Canyon basin through the
existing City of Chula Vista 15-inch trunk sewer in Telegraph Canyon Road. Additional sub-
regional sewage system facilities will be necessary to adequately serve SPA #1 and SPA #2 at
buildout. In the context of SPA #1 development to date, off-tract trunk sewer connections have
been completed to collection facilities within East "H" Street and Corral Canyon Road, and
along Proctor Valley Road.
These existing facilities are to be utilized to serve the needs of SPA areas within other basins
pending phased implementation of additional sub-regional sewer facilities. Existing trunk sewer
capacity needs to be closely monitored. Monitoring of the existing I5-inch sewer trunk line in
Telegraph Canyon Road is being provided by EastLake through the existing sewage monitoring
agreement with the City. Prior to the time that existing capacity limitations are reached, the
following public facilities must be implemented:
1. Install one or more of the following as necessary to serve a portion of the SPA #2
area as well as other future development:
(1O.'17/9S:~:M~%~$)
15
'i ,
-;/
a. Install a new trunk sewer parallel to portions of the existing Telegraph Canyon
trunk sewer, to provide additional capacity for temporary pumping from the
Salt Creek and Poggi Canyon basins.
b. Extend a new trunk sewer southerly along Salt Creek to the Otay River Valley
and then westerly to the City of Chula Vista's existing collection system. This
would gravity sewer to the Salt Creek basin portion of the property but still
require pumping of the Poggi Canyon Basin flow.
In 1990, the City entered into an agreement with EastLake Development Company whereby
EastLake would fund the preparation of an Improvement and Financing Plan for sewer
improvements within the Telegraph Canyon sewer basin in return for permission to pump flows
into the basin on a temporary basis. The plan was to allocate cost responsibility for providing
trunk sewer improvements and ensure that such improvements were provided in a timely manner
such that the capacity of the trunk sewer was not exceeded. A report was prepared which
identified the improvements necessary to accommodate gravity sewage flows generated within
the basin to build-out. Recognizing that further improvements within the Telegraph Canyon
sewer basin would be required to serve additional development in the Salt Creek and Poggi
Canyon basins, the report was revised to identify the improvements necessary to accommodate
the addition of pumped flows originating from selected development in those basins, including
EastLake South Greens. The report identified four phases of development to reach build-out
within the basin. According to the report, the existing system has sufficient capacity for
approximately the first three development phases. During phases III and IV the construction of
additional facilities will be required to accommodate all projected development. The City has
established a fee program for new development to finance such improvements. The report also
recommends monitoring of sewer flows as existing capacity is approached to assure improve-
ments can be provided when necessary.
The City has initiated a monitoring program to determine the impacts of additional gravity and
pumped flows to the existing facilities in the basin. The EastLake South Greens project, along
with other projects in the area, will contribute fees as they develop to provide financing for
Telegraph Canyon basin improvements when they are required. Since the monitoring and fee
program is in place to provide new facilities when required, any needed improvements to serve
the pumped flows from EastLake South Greens should be in place when required.
The planned wastewater collection system for SPA #2 is shown on Exhibit D. Interim pumping
to the Telegraph Canyon Basin is proposed for the portions of the project which ultimately drain
to the Salt Creek and Poggi Canyon basins. These pump stations will be abandoned or relocated
when one or more of the above referenced permanent alternatives is implemented.
(10/17/9SlJ:t!j.m:~)
1&-
i/
LEGEND
EXIST. .
SOUTH GREENS PHASE 1 -.-.-
SOUTH GREENS PHASE 2 ---_
SOUTH GREENS PHASE 3 .........
~UMP HOUSE . (!)
WASTE;WATER
COLLECTION PLAN
-
J-I'Z401
EXHIBIT D
-;: RIcK ar;INEERIl'-G COvfpANY
~
-r~
LEGEND
EX_ST.
SOUTH GREENS PHASE 1 -. -.-
SOUTH GREENS PHASE 2 - - - -
SOUTH' GREENS PHASE 3 ..........
DETENTION' BASIN ~
PROPOSED OUTLET -(
NIT 26 CONST. .....................
--
.. E.~s1'
.
;)
f
/
.Pi
STORM WATER
DRAINAGE PLAN
,J-I'Z401
EXHIBIT E
RIcK~Gavfi>ANY
-~~j
Drainaee
SPA #2 will be served by a series of on-site drainage facilities that will serve to collect and
convey the storm water runoff. Facilities will be designed to handle peak discharges in
accordance with City standards. These facilities consist of a series of surface conveyances,
desilting basins, transmission pipelines, and detention basins (temporary and permanent).
Stormwater runoff will be detained in on-site detention basins and discharged to off-site areas
in the Telegraph Canyon, Salt Creek and Poggi Canyon basins. The Baldwin Company, owner
of the adjacent property, has agreed to accept these flows and provide for the detention of peak
flows downstream within their project. The planned stormwater drainage system is shown on
Exhibit E.
As an alternative to the construction and maintenance of large basins, improvement of the
Telegraph Canyon Channel has been undertaken through the creation of a drainage district
funded by fees collected from all undeveloped properties within the boundaries of the district.
Since adopted, such fees are required from SPA #2 within the district boundaries.
Storm water runoff from the EastLake South Greens project will be detained in on-site basins and
discharged to off-site areas in the Poggi Canyon or Salt Creek drainage basins as shown in
Exhibit E.
School Facilities
SPA #1 and SPA #2 are both located within the Sweetwater Union High School District and
Chula Vista Elementary School District. In December 1986, EastLake Development Company
entered into Agreements with the Sweetwater Union High School District and Chula Vista
Elementary School District authorizing the formation of Community Facilities Districts for the
purpose of financing high school, middle school and elementary school capacity to serve the
EastLake Community, including SPA #1 and SPA #2. A Community Facilities District under
the Mello-Roos legislation is currently in place for financing all school facilities to meet the
needs of SPA #1 and SPA #2.
In compliance with the December 1986 Agreement between Sweetwater Union High School
District and EastLake Development Company, EastLake Development Company has provided
to the Sweetwater Union High School District a site for a senior high school of forty-nine gross
acres. SPA #2 shall not be subject to the payment of school impact fees for secondary school
facilities. (Reference is made to the Agreement between Sweetwater Union High School District
and EastLake Development Company dated December 11, 1986 and "Special Tax Consultant
Report" dated June 1986 for specifics.)
In accordance with the December 1986 Agreement between Chula Vista Elementary School
District and EastLake Development Company, EastLake Development Company has agreed to
sell to the Chula Vista Elementary School District four school sites of approximately ten (10)
net usable acres each within the entire EastLake development. The purchase price for such
property shall be the lesser of twenty percent (20 %) of the appraised value of the site or $23,000
per acre, adjusted annually.
(10i17i95~~Uk(~~)
19
j//
In September 1988, in partial satisfaction of this Agreement, the Chula Vista Elementary School
District acquired an elementary school site within the SPA #1 area. A second elementary school
site has been provided within SPA #2. In addition to the authorization of a special tax and
issuance of bonds, the Chula Vista Elementary School District has authorized a maximum impact
fee of $600 per residential dwelling unit, subject to annual escalation adjustment (currently
$780), payable at time of building permit. (Reference is made to the Agreement between Chula
Vista Elementary School District and EastLake Development Company dated December 9, 1986
and "Special Consultant Report" dated June 1986 for specifics.)
Parkland Dedication
Planned park and recreation uses within SPA #2 include the dedication of a 15.1 acre public
community park which includes approximately 1.1 acres of slopes. The other recreational
elements, which include three neighborhood parks totaling ~~*~ net acres, are enyisionedto
be privately owned and maintained. Also, att--H:~~:::::I}( acre public neighborhood park is
i~~P~~~ 01j~~~~~ ~i~~. c1~:~~:{o~c~:~~~~~~i!~~IIIII~.tc:~l::n~yai;~~~ ~~
private neighborhood parks, a Community Trail System wlH HprovideH a Hconnection between all
major focal points within SPA #2 and extend north into SPA #1 and east into EastLake Trails
(See Exhibits F & G). Park and recreation facilities within SPA #2 are listed in the table below
along with their ~~~ and credit acreage, per the adopted SPA Plan.
'J'~~iN9;1
PARK & RECREATION FACILITIES
Projected
Parcel#
Park Type
Net
Acres
% CreditI
Credit Acres
P-l
P-2
P-3
P-4
P-5
Public Community Park*
Private Neighborhood Park*
Public Neighborhood Park
Private Neighborhood Park!
Private Neighborhood Park
Golf Course/Public
Trails
12.9
3.2
&-+U.HO
3.iH
3.30
100%
50%
100%
50%
50%
12.9
1.6
&fInal
1.9...H
1.:ti
1.1
100%
--L.1
TOTALS
'1'" o.~~::::ri
:n:-:?'~~='i:;:l
~;I*~
*INDICATES COMPLETED FACILITY
IACTUAL PARK CREDIT WILL BE BASED ON UNITS DEVELOPED AND THE FINAL PARK PLANS TO BE APPROVED BY THE
~~~~
...........................
.....................H.H.......
.... . ..... ... ...
(10 /17 /95:~:~(~+m:~)
29'
~.., ---
"\' ,
The Parkland Dedication Ordinance (PDO) requires approximately ~g~sP acres of improved
parkland for the revised ~~I1~EastLake Greens project, according to th6Happroved SPA Plan.
EastLake Greens (SPA #2) is proposing a total of ~~~:f:~ net acres of usable public and private
improved parkland, however, ~~~~ acres is intended to consist of three private neighborhood
parks. These private parks may reCeive up to a maximum of 50% parkland credit. Therefore,
the ~??l~ acre total will be reduced per the table above. SP A #2 is projected to meet the
City's Parkland Dedication requirement, with a -!-;-3~;g acre surplus, according to the parkland
analysis provided in the revised SPA Plan. [However, it should be noted that for the EastLake
project overall there is still a deficit. Per the EastLake III Development Agreement in April
1990, EastLake is responsible for dedicating an additional 5 acres of usable, improved park area.
Also per the EastLake III Development Agreement, the developer is responsible for dedicating
an additional 2 acres of usable improved park area to make up for the loss of 2 acres in the
EastLake Greens Community Park.]
Parkland Improvement
EastLake is proposing to provide the City with fully improved parks as follows: Community
park (12.9 net acres), neighborhood park (&+fQ~P net acres), 3 private neighborhood parks
(10.2~~~ net acres at a maximum of 50% credit), plus trails, for a total of ~APS:~ acres of
usable improved parkland that may qualify for credit under the City Ordinance.
It shall be required that EastLake provide improvements at or beyond the above specified level
as turn key park facilities or pay park fees in lieu thereof. The determination of park
improvements, obligations and/or credit by the developer shall be based upon approval of
acceptable design and improvement plans for parks by the Director of Parks and Recreation prior
to recordation of the final map.
The Community Park was completed during the initial phase of SPA #2 (EastLake North
Greens). It was the responsibility of the developer to prepare a master plan that is acceptable
to the City Council, to grade the site according to that plan, and to install improvements. These
improvements included street improvements, turf and an automatic irrigation system,
landscaping, play areas and other amenities required by the PDO. The community park is
located adjacent to the high school site to provide the opportunity for joint maintenance by the
City and the Sweetwater Union High School District due to combined use of park and school
facilities.
~~~~::::~::(~9.1IRI:~::~:m1".::tR_.:::jlfm:::::::m$:.:~.a11i:~::::9tj::::m~:::j::!Rmlii!~y:~::::.I:::::j.I.!ml!:::j::I~:::::jlli
( 10.' 17 .'95flflmrt.$)
...................
21
/~._-~-:.J
Phasing of parkland improvements is alse-addressed in Chapter III.
All of the open space and public parks will be provided through select open space easements
and/or offer of dedication to the City of Chula Vista. Private parks will be subject to open space
easements which are intended to guarantee the City of Chula Vista that private parks will remain
as recreational amenities. Maintenance of the public community park and public neighborhood
parks will be provided by the City. Maintenance of the golf course and clubhouse facilities will
be the responsibility of the operator and will be independent of the Homeowner's Association.
Maintenance of private parks and open space areas will be provided by property owners through
Homeowner Associations, open space maintenance districts or similar mechanisms.
Street Liehtine and Landscape Maintenance
Funding for the maintenance of landscaped street medians, landscaped parkways and
supplemental street lighting within public right-of-ways or dedicated maintenance easements are
borne by the benefitted property owners through a Maintenance District established under the
provisions of the Lighting and Landscape Act of 1972 (Division 15, Part 2, Streets and Highway
Code).
Currently, all of SPA #1 and a portion of SPA #2 are within the boundaries of EastLake
Maintenance District No.1, approved and adopted by the City of Chula Vista December 17,
1985, which maintains street medians and parkways. The balance of SPA #2 will be annexed
to EastLake Maintenance District No.1.
A Homeowners Association has been formed in EastLalce Greens (SPA #2) to maintain
landscaping located on private common areas and open space not accepted by the City for
maintenance.
(1O/17/95Ut~1t~~)
.................. .
~.
.,/., ,.-::"
-
en-Q)
~~
L..c.
8!.(f)
c
2i
o
~ ~ ~
0( ;;; . I~
~ I)
lii
-I:: ~
..
t. Q.
1 I j ..
CJ
J ..J
~ ! 0(
b
$ l-
. ~
..
.a c(
~ ~
.. ..
'S C
e ~
PZl' ;;;~--- ;-
~.
E--.. ~.~ u..
, ~~ ~
~ i~ ~
....1 QO~.~ UJ
\J.e n .
0-<
-g f .
..-
.....;.1
I
li
l
- :
..
.= ..
>- ~
j ~
..
I
0 i:I
0 i:I
0 i:I
..
c:
.!!
Q.
c:
..
E
~
!
f
""
&
c:
..
<5
?
.!!
Q.
.=
..
.=
~
<3
~
:
~
~
\
\, ' .
I~ I
______~ I
/.
/
~~ LlJUl ~~
~zU
~LIJ u'O
.::I LIJ ~~
tn~ <-
;:;s~
~~--
/,--
/' ,
/.
-< /"
/h/
\,./
/
-J
/,
.- y
I
ii.
~ LLJ '-'l .~ ~
i~Zn
f ~LLJLLJ U
~ EU
i ln~ ~~
!;:;s(D
ii
/:;~,>' . ~ .::'
//h~~" ~i /./,d^<~~~~--Q6\
IIU ' <1'" · > . ,~~'" \,
Ij,(f Ifl'~ \ <><,'t:. ~i //~~""::.;t~"!o#;' \ . i
/!8"(~""' <>G~ ;l /./~~~ J' ...~~- "" ~>
Ii/I;) ~ I: \ ~if '~. ltif>"'- .' ,;/i!flv / _.0 ..,.~... '" ,1
If f9 :(~:r~(:&'-' ,...r~,,;;<"""'~~/Y"~' ,')";;'~;Q., ")..~~" \," ~ [
l: 10 _,(I ""' )~p/, ~a'tj..,-=---~~-" ; " "" ,", ", "i:.~'" ), \ ' '
II~ ",II: """,,,' "" 4~O'-~' ~. ,JF.'.' v.,~' ,/ "'~~ \ i~
" \ ,0 J \ ,I' :', ' /,#,(0 _ \ .,. . .;' , , ). '')1 ~f' I, ~' , Ie' ,,\, .% O~' ~ E &
\ '" I" :" s: . , _~/ V'- //~" L--_1-- ~ 'l/ 'f'.\.i!l c: ~
',.. \ ,,,,I ' .,.' _' ,_, ~ ". ' . . --' '0" ,'-' / "- V /..'''''' · 0
\\~ \' "II 'e' .Y, _'__/ _ ,i' y !," ,'-2ftif' '" ,. ' . J'" ___I"~o ' , >
t. I" I ai';" ' " ,'" ~,j ,\ ",..' ' o'
, ,,' ' ' :,/" \., i ' -~ I!I~ a \ -' l[
\J ~U. \\IIi id"" ",,1 ~ , ' ,","": ~'o' ,,','. /~ (0'))'-"'" ~)'(--lii\~ a
\", \ ,\f ~~\ ,'t p '11':' ~"~ _:' ':~ · '",' ' . f // . " '.. l'"
, \ a\~~"'''',J.\' c~. ,,0\'-' ,", ,'~ ,,6/'-' ' <' ~,v~,@c
c-, ~,I "'... ,< \ I"~. ' · '," .,',1 ~', ,," \
_ ' _, ,I " "'" (cA, ," ~ ' " ' ,\, ,', ?~, ~ ""
_~ \ J"'~ ,,,,,,,,, \,f" ,I ,,,v' "-, " ," \~ I /' c-< "'C.J.~~
\"l. ~ ' (~' ~~~.. 5"'~ \\ \\\~ II ,_ ~I:I l , " , ) L_ ,-~ ~r-/... ~
. \ " ' '0 ,---', '" ' _ ,I' u../' II( , ~ L. '
\ ?\ ' <,. c" "',; II.; ,,"""" ,__ d ! ~II [' 'r" ..?'i5" ~
"" ' ' ? .. .\ ' , \ I I ,-,,f;" " ""." I \ I ~ \, ' o. m.t~ I
~?\ .' \ "', ~\ '5' \ -" L P?' 0"11 r" \", , I, ,"fj"'" i,... \
\~ /~ ':~__~,~~, ^'~ ~!:'8 ~U'-ccl--ril { >,o.l',," , I~', \ '. .,.~'e r> )'(~ ~AOV "\
o 'e: '.. . "",:'''- ,", " (' 'lJ' ~ ..7 <ft-- .,,' , ',:-,' ...~ \ ,,)' ~
\~9..(",,~C7 ~~:~, "I "^-'~;:Jj5/':~: -(j7J-:f2~~~'~~ ~<P~ ' \
,,:VI" IN ~. ,-r' , ,d(',", ...;.4ffli
.~r .............," ,'!!lim......d...........O " . ." ,i"yV ^'~-
O:.R. ...... Q~:' /fo, liUi)Eltlljli~i pijiiii~...~~i!1>" ~'P/ --'---
~~' ~QA~!;J' 1.0 ' ..i!.....-... I(t.>"" ~
~>" ' . E~vOI--'''''. IlIO/ ~g. -'"
'. \ ,,0' , oo"58'B(foai;ii,,~.~ll <p-^OO~ I
\ . ". ";.0. ... ft, .... I
\ "',.. \ ~~ i 'P<'r;!P:'. !
\ . _ ~ "" , .' .. / 'I/. 'J;;Jf:jr..... J'
\' ,,,,,., " < .'_ ....err,'... --
//> ); "'t;, ; ce,,_I'\/" ~"
. _ __~ __-:~ "'1;:0t=~""'- 'I
__,' ---==---=-=~ ,,' Iii
_____________ ~nOlf . I i I
___-'=--"""""'=____ I!J
_-.:~~L.
I
c
ct1
([
J!1
.~
r=
g-
Cii
on
Ql
!'!':
c
~
'"
on
'>
Ql
en
a
u
o
(!)
:
o
o
o
o
Ii
if>.
..
==
.;;;
""
."
0-
1!~
2~
"5-;j Q;
"il I ~
Z en <<S~ Ui
CD ~ ~~ ~
c:~ >-~ 0
6<<S =u -
uE ~.!! >-
"=~ ~ ~ ~
~e 8~ ~
j _ III
W 0
IW 0
~ 0
~
c:
~
~
..
E
."
c:
..
..J
~
..
E
."
c:
.,
..J
c:
.~
0;
Ql
."
Ql
0.
~
m
::;
o
i::I
o
o
o
~.-~
..;
../
CJ
-
15
:E
x
w
I
.
t
.
3
J
i
& II) Il)~
.. ~ 0> '
.. en . C)
- --
c ' '
- --
10
~
EJ
Mass Transit
The EastLake Planned Community Transportation Plan (1982), based on analysis of proposed
land uses, expected travel demands and other characteristics of the area, concluded that public
transit demands could best be served through extension of the existing public bus system.
Extension of this system should occur as EastLake population growth generates sufficient
demands to justify additions to the Chula Vista transit system line haul.
Public mass transit is provided by Chula Vista Transit which operates a bus system within the
city of Chula Vista. The system has been extended to the EastLake Planned Community as
increased population and demand have justified. No service is currently provided to SPA #2.
The nearest service is within the EastLake Business Center, north of Telegraph Canyon Road.
Continued expansion of transit service is expected to occur as further development within the
vicinity warrants.
Library
Library facilities are provided by the Chula Vista Library Department. In 1991, the City
adopted a DIF program to pay for nine categories of public facilities including libraries. The
SP A #2 project is located within the boundaries of the public facilities DIF program and will be
subject to payment of the fee in effect at the time building permits are issued.
As an obligation of SPA #1, a one-acre library site shall be dedicated to the City of Chula Vista
if the City determines that a branch library site is appropriate within the EastLake Planned
Community area. If needed, the library site would be incorporated within the EastLake Village
Center area with the actual site to be determined by the City in the context of subsequent site
plan approval processes associated with the project area. Alternative locations within future
EastLake SPA's will also be considered.
As a further obligation, the Developer was required to provide the City of Chula Vista with up
to 4,000 square feet within the EastLake Village Center for interim storefront library purposes.
This obligation has been met through participation agreements for the joint city/school district
library on the EastLake High School campus. This experimental program began operation in
1993 at EastLake High School. This facility currently provides library services to the EastLake
project area.
Fire Protection
Fire protection services for SPA #1 and #2 will be provided by the City of Chula Vista. The
development of SPA #1 and #2 will require the construction of a 3,500 square foot permanent
fire station to serve the local area.
The previous Public Facilities Financing Plan for SPA #1 established provisions for the payment
of fees for the construction of a fire station to serve EastLake SPA #1 and a portion of SPA #2.
(101 17 .'9j:~:~n~(~m)
25-
The schedule for constructing and equipping the fire station to service the EastLake SPA #1
areas shall be in accordance with the City's Fire Station Master Plan.
Services to the EastLake South Greens project and surrounding area is served by an interim fire
station located within the EastLake Business Center which was provided by EastLake
Development Company. Location of a permanent station to serve the area will be determined
as development occurs within the response area.
Fire facilities are included in the Public Pacilities DIP program adopted by the City in 1991.
SPA #2 is located within the boundaries of the public facilities DIF program and will be subject
to payment of the fee in effect at the time building permits are issued. These fees may be off-set
by DIF credit granted for provision of the interim fire station.
Police Protection
The city of Chula Vista will increase police service levels as the service area continues to grow.
Expansion in the eastern territories has created, however, a need to improve communication
facilities. Two specific identified needs include a communications tower or antenna and an
improved computer-aided dispatching system. Costs for these are estimated at $24,000 and
$530,000, respectively. The police facilitates will be of overall City benefit and will require
City-wide financing.
Police facilities are included in the Public Facilities DIP program adopted by the City in 1991.
The EastLake South Greens project is located within the boundaries of the public facilities DIF
program and will be subject to payment of the fee in effect at the time building permits are
issued.
(10!17!9~r1.ll,jf,t~)
26-
B. SUMMARY OF SPi.:#!)PRO.JECTS
EastLake North Greens
Proiect # Amount Method of Financine
53* Construct EastLake Parkway as a $3,020,000 Subdivision Exactionl
4-lane Major between Otay Lakes Future Assessment
Road and SDG&E transmission District
easement
54* Construct Clubhouse Drive as a 4- $350,000 Subdivision Exaction/
lane Major between EastLake Park- Future Assessment
way and North Greensview District
55* Construct North Greensview as a 2- $2,600,000 Subdivision Exaction
lane Collector between Clubhouse
Drive and Hunte Parkway
56* Construct Neighborhood Park #1 $590,000 Development Impact
(Augusta Park, P-2) Fee for Parks
57* Construct EastLake Community Park $2,758,752 Development Impact
(P-l ) Fee for Parks
58* Construct Greensgate as a 4-lane $540,000 Subdivision Exaction/
Major between EastLake Parkway Future Assessment
and North Greensview District
59* Construct Clubhouse Drive as a 2- $1,566,000 Subdivision Exaction/
lane Collector between North Future Assessment
Greensview and Hunte Parkway District
60* Realign/construct Otay Lakes Road $4,575,000 Subdivision Exactionl
to a full section Major between Lane Transportation DIP/
A venue and Hunte Parkway Future Assessment
District
61* Construct Neighborhood Park $1,130,000 Development Impact
(Country Club Park, P-4) Fee for Parks
62* Construct EastLake High School, $12,209,000 Community Facilities
Phase 1 District # 1
* INDICATES COMPLETED FACILITY
(10!17!93!Jt~~~)
2/1"
EastLake North Greens (cont'd)
Proiect No. Amount Method of Financine
63** Construct OWD terminal storage $21,600,000 Improvement District
reservOir
63a Increase pumping capacity of N/AV General Obligation
EastLake Pump Station from 4,000 Bonds
to 8,000 GPM
63b* Add 2 MG capacity at ID 22-1 N/AV Subdivision Exactionl
reservoir site Assessment District
64+ Construct water reclamation plant, $3,000,000 Subdivision Exaction/
pump station and transmission main Future Assessment
connection to OWD reclaimed water District
system,
or
65+ Extend new trunk sewer southerly $7,650,720 Subdivision Exaction/
along Salt Creek to Otay River Sewer DIF
Valley then westerly to existing
Chula Vista System
66* Construct Hunte Parkway to a full $1,000,000 Transportation DIF/
width Major between Otay Lakes Assessment District
Road and Clubhouse Drive
NORTH GREENS TOTAL
$59,589,472
* INDICATES COMPLETED FACILITY
** INDICATES FACILITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION
+ PROJ. NO. 65 SELECTED; PROJ. NO. 64 NOT TO BE CONSTRUCTED & NOT IN TOTAL COST
(10/ 17 /9j'!:l(t,~m~)
2s-
/ ::.'
rJCi1ti
&~
_llIoIplor.____
1/13/Sg ~
EASTLAKE NORTH GREENS
PHASE ION-SITE IMPROVEMENTS
. //
I .
MAP 1
WILLDANI SIMPSON
~Ci1ti
&~
... ~ 010 ____
~~
~/~/8g I ~ I
EASTLAKE NORTH GREENS MAP 2
PHASE ION-SITE IMPROVEMENTS 'WILLDAN/SIMPSON
-'~/
EastI~ke South Greens - Phase 1
Proiect No.
67* Construct South Greensview Drive as
a 2-lane collector from Clubhouse
Drive to Unit 6 with utilities and
underground improvements
68a Grade Neigkborkood Park (City
Park, P 3)
69~*Construct Elementary School #2
SOUTH GREENS - PHASE 1 TOTAL
* INDICATES COMPLETED FACILITY
(1O/17/95JJtJ.1.ff.$,)
...................
31
Amount Method of Financin.:
$1,206,500 Subdivision Exaction!
Assessment District
$12,000 Park Fees
$4,975,000 Community Facilities
District #1
$6,193,500
~~:~II~i~
......................
tn
ctn
(1)0
CI).~
a.... 0
e>C:
~~
....., CD
-::J tn
OCU
.c:
Cl)a..'
w\Jl ;~
~Z~~
SitiU
tii~ <
Iii~
~~-I
-,
II
L. -., !~
t!'"
...... ~ 1 0>
._, :1>'. cr
~ -~
\J.S .~~ ..
" -
~1
.~;,.I. /-7
(\J
0..
CO
~
EastLake South Greens - Phase 2
Project # Amount Method of Financine
68b ImpfO'fe Neighborhood Park (City $1,088,000 Park Fees
Park, P 3)
141l Construct East Orange A venue $350,000 Subdivision Exaction
Sewage Pump Station
70a Construct Hunte Parkway as a 4-lane $938,000 Transportation D IF /
major from Clubhouse Drive to Assessment District
South Greensview
70b Construct Hunte Parkway as a 4-lane $700,000 Transportation DIF/
major from South Greensview to Assessment District
East Orange A venue (required with
improvement of East Orange Ave.
from Hunte to OTC or with Phase 2,
whichever occurs first)
71 Construct South Greensview Drive as $1,919,500 Subdivision Exaction/
a 2-lane Collector between Hunte Assessment District
Parkway and Silverado Drive with
utilities and underground improve-
ments
72a Grade Greens South Park (HOA $5,000 Park Fees/Developer
Park, P- 5) Contribution
73a Grade half-width East Orange Ave. $307,500 Transportation DIFI
from Hunte Parkway to the westerly Assessment District
SDG&E easement boundary with
storm drain improvements
73b Grade full-width and construct full- $5,000,000 Transportation DIF
width improvements for East Orange
A ve. to the westerly SDG&E ease-
ment boundary (as required by TM
condition, or as revised by City
Engineer and approved by Council)
(10/17/95:nt~im*,)
33
-,/~
EastLake South Greens - Phase 2 (cont' d.)
Project #
Amount Method of Financine
7~a Construct Silverado Drive from
Clubhouse Drive to So. Greensview
Drive per condition on TM
$500,000 Subdivision Exaction
or
7Sjh Construct that portion of So. Greens-
. view Drive included in Phase 3 per
terms of the Acquisition Agreement
$1,000,000# Subdivision Exaction/
Assessment District
SOUTH GREENS - PHASE 2 TOTAL
$10,808,000
~~~I~Jjm
..........................
......................... .
# cost included in Phase 3 total
(10!17/9S:~~t~1=nt.~)
34
'J :/"
tn UJUl ~~ ~
c:tn
cut) ~zi~ c.
CI).2!. 'tLU UQ ctS
a... 0 ~
C>C: ..... LU i 6
~Q::}
.J::N
... G> Ul<.!)
::Jtn
OCU ;:is
en-&.
~~-I
~
"'-0')
CD
(>)-2
<::.-(>)
'i-
~.
~ '"
'6 \V
Ct)
f'..
..0
~
~
\
~/-"\~. ._~
jl ",
-- /, ~',
==-__ -"2- __ ___ 'c.-.
---~ -- - --==-
~2~
II
r- ~ !~
_ ~re
~ ~ ~a;
........1 ::.IJ! Ir
""1.= -
t'i'~.:
\J ~>
sc:~'~
/ r. (' )
EastLake South Greens - Phase 3
Proiect #
72b Improve Greens South Park ~Ijj
m;~::lt.$l.'...'.
7~b Construct South Greensview Drive as
a 2-lane collector from Unit 6 to
Silverado Drive with utilities and
underground improvements
ii:::::.:~:::~:~:::lllI~::ag:::!lnt9y!:::I~!gnRB~m19
f.MtkJI.Glk~JPifk??R+g\
""""""""""""",J:""""",'~.J\""",:"""""""""~""""""""",,,l
76 Construct EastLake Parkway as a 4-
lane Major between the SDG&E
easement and the SPA #2 boundary
as needed to provide access to devel-
opment sites
SOUTH GREENS - PHASE 3 TOTAL
(10/17.'95:1:~niff.~)
36'
Amount Method of Financine
$595,000 Park Fees/Developer
Contribution
$1,000,000 Subdivision Exaction/
Assessment District
$,~:~~:~:m~1I 111:::1.
$860,000 Transportation DIF/
Assessment District
$2,455,000
3.....5... .5..5. ....0. ..00. .....
.. .. .
. ... . . ..
:,:"t.:.":.::,':'::,);".,:",.,.,,,.j.,
In
s::fn
(1)0
(1).~
~o
e>D:
..s:::::M
... CI)
~fn
~ CU
O.s:
(1)0...
UJ '" ~~
~Zig
'tUJ Uo
...IUJ ~~
t7i~ <
~<.!)
~~-I
==,
r- -, l~
- ~'"
l.. ~ ~Oi
'-I:J" a:
~ ",-
c:- -
\}~C
-;
II
, -;
L()
Q..
~
~
SPA #2 (EastLake Greens) Off-Sites
The following projects are regional in nature. The funding and timing of their construction is
controlled primarily by DIF programs. The listing below describes the anticipated contribution
to these programs by EastLake Greens.
Proiect #
77 Install traffic signal improvements on
Telegraph Canyon Rd. at Canyon
Plaza Shopping Center between 1-805
to Paseo del Rey
78 Re-time traffic signal improvements
along Telegraph Canyon Road
79 Construct/extend EastLake Parkway
as a 4-lane Major between the SPA
#2 boundary and East Orange A ve-
nue
80 Install eastbound dual left turn lanes
at I-805lTelegraph Canyon Road
interchange (*Phase 1 to provide
additional turn lane complete, Phase
2 to provide 1 additional eastbound
lane through the intersection)
81 * Construct reclaimed water distribu-
tion main from OWD Use Area to
existing main in Lane Avenue
82 Construct parallel trunk sewer in
Telegraph Canyon Road from Hunte
Parkway to a yet to be defined point
downstream
Greens - Off-Sites Subtotal
GREENS - PHASE 3 TOTAL
* INDICATES COMPLETED FACILITY
(1O.'17.'9SJ:~lf:if$l)
3!-
Amount Method of Financine
$110,000 Transportation DIFI
Traffic Signal Fund
$25,000 City Staff/Traffic Signal
Fund
N/ A V Transportation DIFI
Assessment District
$100,000 Transportation DIF
$750,000 Dedication by
Developer
$3,221,000 Subdivision Exaction!
Sewer DIP
$4,206,000
$7,482,900
!~itt:i.
.-'7
,
,
o
CO
L. ~~
~-:-,;/
00.
r:s UJI ^ .k~
5 ~Z ~g
tj 'l:LU ~~
~ ~LU ~5
~ ~^'-' ~~
~ iIl.....'O:
~;:;s(.l)
o ..~"
c:
o
i
o
o
...J
>> t'
::=gl
L~ ~
o~ ;
+I
(J
cu
"-
o
'-
~ EJ:1
~
c. $~~::W~EASTLAKE CREENS PHASING
The EastLake North Greens development phase of SPA #2 is complete except for residential
parcel R-22. The anticipated phasing for the EastLake South Greens project is expected to
include three phases as depicted on Map 7. A brief description of each phase is presented
below:
North Greens
EastLake North Greens includes a golf course, 1,175 dwelling units, 19.6 acres of commercial
development, a high school and community park, and two private parks.
South Greens
Phase 1
Phase 1 includes approximately 4G4$~1 dwelling units and site prep8:I'tltion f-or the elementary
school and adjacent public park, anddconstruction of the elementary school.
Phase 2
Phase 2 includes approximately =l49:1I:~. dwell~~~~~.~~~.~..~~P!?~.~.~~~.?!..~~~.p'~.~.!~~..~.~~~.~.?Ehood
park, site preparation for a private par..g~~j~~:jll:j~:::I~M:~IRny@~'::::::lwl.llgmgln:::j.I: and
construction of the sewage pump station.
Phase 3
~~iiq..:;~ :~r~:~~~~~~n ~:~~~Pp::~~I~~k~nits.~j::~~:~:!tIt::~~:'I!Yi~.Ij!j:~j::j9!=l~jjl;::::tiIU9
. . ... .....,............."...........
Future Phase
This phase inelude~~:!:i residential parcels which havci ail interim designation on the Site
Utilization Plan. It isdanticipated that theseii parcels will be. subject of a SPA Plan amendment
prior to development. Any necessary PFFP revisions would be included in that amendment.
Parcels in this phase are R-26, R-9, and FU (~. DU per current Site Utilimtion Plan).
Although geographically linked to the parcels with an interim designation, parcels Itlll PQ-l
and PQ-2 may be developed witll poolie/qHRsi poolie Hses as permitted by the adopted SPA Plan
and PC Regulations, once infrastructure is available to serve them (completion of project #76
in Phase 3). No PFPP projects are included in this phase.
(10/17.'95:1:~U!If.f)
40
C)
t:
tn .-
t: tn
Q) ns
Q)..t:
J..Q.
C>.....,
..t: g
.....,...--
~ 0
o J..
(J)Q.
L{)
..-
I
0:::
..:-::.
~
o
o
~
o
c
'-'
(")
I
0:::
U)
~CX)
O:::C\/
,
enn:::
~ Q) ..
Q) ~ ~
fJ) ro t
coa.n:::
J::
a.
-----t
-
~
o
L{)
<0
0..-
~r:i::
era;
0:::..-
;.:r:i::
I ..
0:::0
.. ..-
f'-. I
NO:::
I ..
0:::C\/
.. ..-
(/) I
N Q) n:::
Q) ~ CD
fJ) ro t
coa.n:::
J::
a.
u,
o
S~I'~S
-~---
'"
. u,
~ 0
~
r:i::
M
C\/
I
n:::
en
MQ)
Q) ~
fJ) ro
CO a.
J::
a.
=>
LL
CD
C\/
r:i::
Q) ..
fJ) q
CO 0:::
J:: ..
a. ~
Q) ~
.... ro
:::s a.
.....
:::s
u.
EJ ~
.-\~~.~
C:'H
\J.- ~j .
a,
..J,
f'....
0..
CC
~
UJ~U
~ LLI u~
SUJh
~~c(
Ul(D
;:is
"'~'I
2_
D. SUMMARY OF COSTS TO BUlLDOUT
North Greens
South Greens - Phase 1
South Greens - Phase 2
South Greens - Phase 3
South Greens Off-Sites
TOTAL
(lQ/17/9$f~f~!~I.)
$59,589,472
$6, 193 ,5001;:liii11t1
$10,808'~f~I:;~
$2,455 ,OOO?~!!I:~g
$4.206.000
$82,933,229
~*~~~q~.
42
- ,.-.....;'
..../
CHAPTER III
PUBLIC FACILITY PHASING REQUIREMENTS
FOR DEVELOPMENT
A. ~~~:.:~~~I~EASTLAKE GREENS) PROJECT PHASING
The EastLake Greens (SPA #2) on-site improvements by phase are summarized in Table
-t~ below:
Table No. l~
IMPROVEMENT PHASING STATUS
Phase
Proposed Development
SPA #1
Proiect No.
Page Number
North Greens
1,175 DUs, HS, Com-
munity & 2 Neighbor-
hood Parks, 19.6 Ac.
Commercial
53 to 66
26'829
~
South Greens
1
4G435l DUs, Elem.
School, gradc P 3 park
67, 68a;--69
34-3:S
30Mn
2
+49if:~ DUs, improve P
3 park, grade P-5 park,
construct sewage pump
station
6gb, 70 to 75
~i~:I:::ill~
~
R!r!~
3
438119 DUs, complete
P-5.par!4ji:jlllllililil
pa
~m~ DUs
72b, +5B, i41
m 76 ppp
39-4G
iif~~
Future Phase
None
B. PHASING PROGRAM for REGIONAL FACILITIES
Regional or area-wide serving facilities are generally included in the various DIF programs
(transportation, public facilities, Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin, etc.) and will be provided
as required with financing secured. The provisions of the Chula Vista Growth Management
(10/ 17 /95:Utlfm~)
43-
~
/
.' ')
Program, including the threshold standards for specific facilities and services will be the
overriding control on development, as noted in the introductory chapter of this plan.
C. PHASING PROGRAM for PARKLAND
Parkland is to be provided according to a 3 acres!lOOO population standard. Per the analysis
in the adopted SPA Plan, SPA #2 as whole may exceed this standard depending upon the
final resolution of credits for the proposed private parks and as qualified by the EastLake III
Development Agreement which requires additional park acreage in EastLake III. The
following table provides a phasing analysis of the provision of improved parkland using
parkland standards from the Park Dedication Ordinance, unit type assumptions from the
adopted SPA Plan, and phasing from this PFFP.
Table No. ~~.
IMPROVED PARKLAND PHASING
81':1\#2
Phase Res. DU
Park Req'd.
Parks Complete
Surplus!
Deficit
North 1,175
-l-h{}lQ.$acW
P-1 (12.9 credit ac.)
P-2 (1.6 credit ac.)
P-4 (1.9 credit ac.)
+5.4~ ac.
South
1 404fl$:t
3.~1 ac.
None
+H2.dl
2 i4~j4l
3 4~~'lS6
BQ."8
~l~$
P 3 (8.7 credit aC.)~RP~
I 3. 3n4?~:
+2.3ptp
~t~~~~f,g::sllit.:i9~')
P-5 (1.~$ credit ac.)
Golf Course!
Trails (1.1 credit ac.)
Future ~Il;i
1 M;.1.\: ac
~e~~ .
None
+ 1. 31:~~
TOTALS ~1.~iI~ ~#4~:~ ac.
~~:~o credit ac.
+ 1. 31:~1
(lO/17/95UtJ.lf.!1.$)
...................
44.
-
.$. ,...,.
} ./
CHAPTER IV
PUBLIC FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING
A. OVERVIEW
EastLake Development Company and the City will ensure the appropriate public facility
financing mechanisms are utilized to fund the acquisition, construction and maintenance of public
facilities required to support the planned development of the EastLake Greens (SPA #2) project,
in compliance with the city's Growth Management Program.
Public facilities are generally provided or financed in one of the following ways:
1. Subdivision Exaction
Developer constructed and financed as a condition
of project approval.
2. Development Impact Fee (DIF)
Funded through the collection of an impact fee.
Constructed by the public agency or developer
constructed with a reimbursement or credit against
specific fees.
3. Debt Financing
Funded using one of several debt finance mech-
anisms. Constructed by public agency or devel-
oper.
It is anticipated that all three methods will be utilized for the SPA #2 project to construct and
finance public facilities.
B. REVIEW of FINANCING PROGRAMS A V AILABLE and in PLACE in PLAN AREA
Subdivision Exactions
Neighborhood level public improvements will be constructed simultaneously with related
subdivisions. Through the use of the Subdivision Map Act, it is the responsibility of the
developer to provide for all local street, utility and recreation improvements. The use of
subdivision conditions and exactions, where appropriate, will ensure that the construction of
neighborhood facilities is timed with actual development.
The imposition of subdivision conditions and exactions does not preclude the use of other public
facilities financing mechanisms to finance the public improvements, where appropriate.
Development Impact Fee Proerams
Development Imp~ct Fees (DIP) are imposed by various governmental agencies, consistent with
State law, to contribute to the financing of capital improvements within the city of Chula Vista.
The distinguishing factor between a fee and a subdivision exaction is that exactions are required
(10!17!93~]t!1f.tp)
...................
45=
"
of a specific developer for a specific project whereas fees are levied on all development projects
within the benefit area, pursuant to an established formula.
The SPA #2 project, through policy decisions by the City and other governing agencies, is
subject to fees established to help defray costs of facilities which will benefit SPA #2 and areas
beyond this specific project. These fees include but may not be limited to:
1. Eastern Chula Vista Transportation Impact Fee - Street DIF established to provide
financing for circulation element road projects of regional significance in the area east of
1-805.
2. Public Facilities Development Impact Fee - Public Facilities DIF established to collect
funds for civic center facilities, police facility remodeling, corporation yard relocation,
libraries, fire suppression system, geographical information system, mainframe computer,
telephone system upgrade and a records management system.
3. Park Acquisition and Development Fees - PAD fee established to pay for the acquisition
and development of new park facilities.
4. Traffic Signal Fees - to pay for traffic signals associated with circulation element streets.
5. Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Fee - fee established to pay for sewer basin improvements
necessitated by increased flows from future development and pumping of sewage from
other basins into the basin.
6. Telegraph Canyon Pumped Sewer Fee - fee established to pay for system upgrades within
the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin to accommodate flows generated outside of the basin.
7. Salt Creek Sewer DIF - fee established to pay for sewer basin improvements necessitated
by increased flows from future development which gravity flow to the Salt Creek Basin.
8. Interim SR 125 DIF - fee established to pay for an interim transportation facility in the SR
125 corridor alignment.
9. Otay Water District Fees - It should be noted that OWD will require annexation to an
existing improvement district or creation of some other finance mechanism which may
result in specific fees being modified. As noted earlier, SPA #2 is within the OWD
Improvement Districts Nos. 22 and 27.
Debt Finance Proa:rams
The city of Chula Vista has used assessment districts to finance a number of street improve-
ments, as well as sewer and drainage facilities. The Dtay Municipal Water District has used
such improvement districts for water system improvements. Both school districts have
implemented Mello-Roos Community Facility Districts to finance school facilities.
(10!17!93l11~7~~)
46
Assessment Districts
Special assessment districts may be proposed for acqumng, constructing and/or
maintaining certain public improvements under the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913,
the Improvement Bond Act of 1915, and the Lighting and Landscape Act of 1972. The
general administration of the special assessment district is the responsibility of the public
agency.
Special assessment financing may be appropriate when the value or benefit of the public
facility can be assigned to specific properties. Assessments are levied in specific amounts
against each individual property on the basis of relative benefit. Special assessments may
be used for both publicly dedicated on-site and off-site improvements.
Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982
The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 authorizes formation of community
facilities districts which impose special taxes to provide financing for certain public
facilities or services. Facilities which can be provided under the Act include the purchase,
construction, expansion, or rehabilitation of:
1. Local park, recreation, or parkway facilities;
2. Elementary and secondary school sites and structures;
3. Libraries; and,
4. Any other governmental facilities that legislative bodies are authorized to
construct, own or operate.
Other Finance Methods
General Fund
The city of Chula Vista's general fund supports many public services throughout the city.
The facilities and services included in the general fund are those which benefit not only
a new project, but also the residents of the city in general. In most cases, other financing
mechanisms are more appropriate to initially construct or provide the facility or service.
The general fund would then be used to fund the on-going operation and maintenance costs
of the facility once it is accepted by the City.
State and Federal Funding
Although rarely available to fund an entire project, federal and state financial and technical
assistance programs are available to public agencies, in particular school districts which
receive significant funding from the state. EastLake High School was financed partially
with state funds. The city of Chula Vista has also received state funds to construct the
Montgomery /Otay Library.
(1O.'17!93J~n+m~)
47
, ~/
Dedications
Dedication of sites by developers for public capital improvements is a common financing
tool used to acquire land. In the case of SPA #2, the following public facility sites are
expected to be conveyed through dedication:
1. Public streets; and,
2. Public park, open space and trail systems.
Homeowner Associations
Community Homeowner Associations have beenlwill be formed to manage, operate and
maintain private recreation, landscape and open space.
Developer Reimbursement Agreements
Certain facilities that are off-site of the SPA #2 project and/or provide regional benefits
may be constructed in conjunction with the development of the project. In such instances,
developer reimbursement agreements will be executed to provide for a future payback to
cover the additional cost of these facilities. Other future developments will be required
to contribute their fair share of the costs for the regional facility which will provide funds
for the reimbursement.
Development Agreement
A development agreement can play an essential role in the implementation of the PFFP.
The PFFP clearly details all public facility responsibilities and assures that the construction
of all necessary public improvements will be appropriately phased with actual develop-
ment, while the development agreement identifies the obligations and requirements of both
parties, the City and developer. A development agreement has been entered into by the
city of Chula Vista and EastLake Development Company for the development of the
EastLake Greens SPA (SPA #2), including the EastLake South Greens project.
(1 0/ 17.'9~~~tt~im:l.)
48-
,"
^J ")
CHAPTER V
IMPLEMENT A TION
As stated earlier, this document is intended to further address public facility needs associated
with EastLake Greens (SPA #2).
The Public Facilities Financing Plan is intended to both identify the various public facilities
required to support planned development of the SPA #2 Plan and to insure that these public
facilities are provided at the time they are needed. In so doing, the Public Facilities Financing
Plan designates not only on-site public facility needs but also endeavors to address regional or
area-wide improvements needed to serve the adopted SPA Plans plus cumulative planned growth
within adjacent areas.
It is understood that assumed growth projections and related public facility needs are subject to
a number of external factors such as the state of the economy, the City's future land use
approval decisions, etc. It is also understood that the funding sources specified herein may
change due to financing programs available in the future or requirements of either state or
federal law. It is intended that revisions to cost estimates and funding programs be handled
administratively whereas revisions to the related facilities-driven growth "phases" are to be
accomplished through a Public Facilities Financing Plan update process.
(10!17!931JtJ.1.~$)
...................
49'
.. '//
ATTACHMENT 5
EIR-86-04(B) ADDENDUM
SECOND ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FSEIR 86-04 (B)
PROJECT NAME: EastLake Greens GDP/SPA Amendment
PROJECT LOCATION: Various parcels within the EastLake Greens SPA between Hunte
Parkway and the future SR-125 Row north of the future E. Orange
Ave.
I. INTRODUCTION
The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the Environmental
Review Coordinator (ERC) to prepare an addendum to a Negative Declaration or
Environmental Impact Report, if one of the following conditions is present:
1. The minor changes in the project design which have occurred since completion
of the Final EIR or Negative Declaration that have not created any new
significant environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR or
Negative Declaration; or
2. Changes in circumstances, 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 or more significant impacts which were not previously
addressed in the Final EIR or Negative Declaration.
3. The changes to the EIR made by the addendum do not raise new issues about the
significant effects on the environment.
II. PROPOSED PROJECT REVISIONS
The Amendments proposed can be grouped in the following general categories:
1. Park Relocations
2. Density Transfers and Parcel Boundary Adjustments
3. Removal of Interim Designation on Parcel R-26
1. Park Relocations
The Neighborhood Park (parcel P-3) in the adopted plan was partially within the
SDG&E easement and contained less than ten acres of net useable acres for park
use. The park is proposed by this amendment to be relocated southeasterly of
Second Addendum to FSEIR 86-04 (B)
2
Parcel R-20 and to contain 10.0 acres net useable for park uses (11.8 acres
gross). This relocation deletes former residential Parcel R-21. The former
location of the park is proposed to be converted to PublicI Quasi-Public as an
expansion of existing Parcel PQ-2. This additional 11.0 acres will be available
for Community Purpose Facilities.
A second park relocation involves Parcel P-S, which was a Private Neighborhood
Park between Parcels R-20 and R-21. This park is proposed to be relocated near
the intersection of South Greensview Drive and Hunte Parkway adjacent to Parcel
R-12. No significant change in acreage is proposed.
2. Density Transfers and Boundary Adjustments
Reductions in densities are proposed in eleven residential parcels. Increases in
densities are proposed in four residential parcels. The net result of these density
transfers is a 133 unit decrease in the overall residential density. Most of the
density transfers are minor adjustments that reflect units achieved in the tract map
and design review process. The following parcels are proposed to be changed in
a more substantive way (more than 10 du):
Parcel
Proposed Chan~e
R-6
R-16
R-20
R-21
R-23
R-26
-12
+26
-37
-120
-142
+ 200 (The Adopted Plan provided this
parcel with an interim density.)
Boundary adjustments occur primarily as a result of Park relocations and are
proposed to be reflected in the amended Tentative Tract Map. These adjustments
result in a net loss of 11.8 acres of residential land. An increase of 11.0 acres
has been added as Public/Quasi-Public (PQ) and the remaining 0.8 acres has been
added as Park.
The following shows the existing and proposed changes in land use and acreage
on the General Development Plan.
Second Addendum to FSEIR 86-04 (B)
3
Existing Proposed
RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL
Land Use Acres du/ac Units Land Use AcrG$ du/ac Units
I~ 250.5 ().3 7~ I~ 250.5 ().3 7~
LM LowIMedIum 389.6 C).6 2008 LM LowIMedium 381.0 o.e UI03
M Medium 242.2 .,1. 1875 M Medium 251.1 .". 2D23
MH MecliumlHigh 125.<4 11-18. 1684 MH MecliumlHigh 100.0 11-18. 13048
H High 11.0 18-27+ 250 H High 2<4.3 1&-27+ 510
S~ Total 1018.7 6660 S.TotaI 1006.8 6527
NON-RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL
Land Use Acres Land Use Acres
Retail 51.9 Retllil 51,Sl
Prof. & Admin. 6.8 Prof. & Admin. 8.8
Res. & Ltd. Mfgr. 135.8 Res. & Ltd. Mf"r. 135.8
Open Space 187.6 Open Space 187.6
Public/Quasi-Pub. 137.9 PubIicIQuul-Pub. 1<48.8
Parks & Re<:. 295.4 Parks & RIC. ~.2
Major Circulation 214.7 Major Circulation 21 <4.7
SuI> T otal 1030.2 SuI> Total 1042.0
[B[:JFuture Urban 72.9 ~Future Urban 72.9
Project Totals 2121 .8 6660 project Totals 2121.8 6527
3. Removal of Interim Designation for Parcel R-26
Parcel R-26 was given an Interim Designation on the Adopted SPA Plan. This
designation indicated that the density of 4.5 dufac would be subject to future
amendment to reflect the Chula Vista General Plan. The Interim Designation was
assigned to allow an Affordable Housing Program for all of Eastlake to be
developed. This program has proceeded and has designated this parcel as a site
to implement a portion of the Chula Vista Housing Eement requirement for
Affordable Housing. The incI;ease in density is proposed to allow this program
to be implemented.
<' i ~~
,
General
Development
Plan
~.\dOI)t.ed
RESIDENTIAL
MAX.
LN<<l USE ACRES D.JI AC LHTS
~~ 250.5 ~3 7.3
~ L_'......, 3au H 200e
E;j~ 2.22 e-" '175 fIQ
~~ 125. ,,-,a ,aa.c
~Hg1 11.0 '&-27 + 250
liLt>- T Olal 1011.7 eaao
N:lN - RESIDENTIAL
LNI:l USE ACRES
co ANI 111.1
~~~~ e.a
HI ~~acIlrng 13$.1
~ ClpIn"ce 117.6
~ PIac'~..-f'Idc '37.1
. ~...".., AmalD\ 285.
~ MaJCll' Cn:UIlIon 21.7
.....T_ '0302
~ FIan ~ 72.9
fInIjIct T_ 2121.1 ae ...0 clu
. ~,. Cfturcf\ ...
1Il1--.....- _ _'" - -- --
. .. _.... ..... .. o.a .,... ...... JIW\.
~ fASTLAKE
A PlANNED COMMUNITY IV EASTlAKE OEVE1.OPtIiNT CO.
~inti ,.,..,
l.8nd Plannina ~ J
_'-I ".._Ir"_ ~...
r-.~_.._
Exhibit 1
.
General
Development
Plan
PrOI)Osed
RESIDENTIAL
Land Use Acres du/ae Units
iLow
LM LowlMedium
M Medium
MH Medium'High
H High
Sub-Total
250.5 0-3 743
381.0 o.e 1903
251.1 So11. 2023
100.0 11-18. 1348
24.3 18-27+ 510
1006.9 6527
NON-RES IDENTIAL
Land Use Acres
Retail 51.9
Prof. & Admin. 6.8
Res. & Ltd. Mfgr. 135.9
Open Spece 187.6
Public/Quasi-Pub. 148.9
Plrks & Re<:o 296.2
Major Circulation 214.7
Sub-Total 1042.0
(![:JFuture Urban 72.9
ProjeetTotaIs 2121.8 6527
.. ~I. ~....
11)).-....-.--.-----
. .. __ .. .. c::IUI Vale ...... IIW\
~ fASTLAKE
A PlANNED ~lTY BY EASTLAKE 0EVEl.C)Pt/iNT CO.
~inti ~
Lond PIann. l J
...'-(.....~~ .. ...
r-.~_._
1'30/85
Exhibit 1
z-" .a
< :::;"',,': Jj .CGl.ItlClOIDItlID...MNIDItlM....lDIDC-.IDClO.O -
~ Itl.CCCClIDGl..ClGl.ClIDCl-ClItl.N._....ID.1D ...
~. -~~ ~ ~ N --~-N ~
I .......1
..... -11I1
Cl. ':::' Ii
~:: Ii ~~C!l':!~"':~lI!l':!~C!~l':!~~lI!~~~l':!C!"':l':!~~~lI!~ i
~II NNItl..",,,,,,,,,,,,,IDIDID...II>......ClOGlNCO)MGlO..Gl_
.. .. -- .. -
Z .'...1 ci
o
-
!c(
N
-
-J
-
t-
::>
Ii
......lDOO.....",.IDMID.ID",...GlGl...OClClO.MGl- -
~:~~~~~~ci~::~==g~m:~gg~~~ticici ~
.
Ii Ii
C\I
(')
In
III
J IDCO)ClNO-OO",OGl-GlClCO)OGl.-
~~.:g~~:.riN~~~~.~!~
If Jill1l
aU'fnnilUiij~
IrJ!fifi!!!!!!!J
11>",,,,"''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''',,,,,,,,,11>,,, ",
~~~~~..--------------------~-
ooooo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o~
:~
11oooooooooooooooQeQeee~eeeooe
1 ccccccc:ccc c
ca!i
- I 0
c~ oC-NM.",ID"'lDGlO-NM.ItlID...lD
~. ,_~~.~~~e~--________NNNNNNNNN
i I 1.....t......U..U........rn J
c:c
-a'
~]
1i5 ~I -N -NM.~ID'"
~ I . ~~;;;:h~~~i~8S88888
c
~
E~ I (
:!
~I ~
.a .T~ J
- 111
.... L
III
C\I
.Ii
(')i
I,!
') f
!, J
I~ I
Jt I
III J
= t J
J ~ I
LLI~ JOj
~z~
LLlU
Q::.c
Ul(,!)
~
~
Z ",;:: It .a
c:( ,~~ .~~I~~il~:~~1;8:~~! ~~:~!~~ ~
.:;r:~ ...~ N ~ ~ N ...... ... ~
..J I:::'
a.. ......., u
_'I ·
'::1 iJ- ~~",C!C!~C!ft)~~",,:f'!"'~C!"''''C!C! G!1I'!~G!onf'!~ i
.. 'I NN.. ..II)",II)....CIIft .....11)0....11)-.... . -cotClllClUD.. .
Z~; - - - - ·
o
-
~
N
-
...J
-
.-
::>
I .........OO.....ft).".ClN ..ClIIClII.ClII.tot
!:~:~~~~e~~~:=S~~~
Ii
~f'!"":CI!f'!CI!"": f'!
:211)....~ClII. ~
.
I .tot.NO-O.II)OClll-ClII.totClllClll.-
.N~mO~~~.~N~~~..~O~
c ................ ... ~C11
I It)1I)1I)ft)1I)ft)1I)1I)ft)ft)II)ft)II)ft)1I) Iftft)ft)~ 1ft
~~~~~...--------_...---- ----~~-
OOOoo~~~~e~~~~~~~~~~ .~~~~O~
~f Jilllllll....... I
aaJ!~ i 11Jl11J~.
~tl1. . . i!!!!!!~
:~c
IIQQQCQQQQQQQQQQQ~~~~~ ~~~~~Q~
_ 1_ ccccc ccccc c
~ I~ .
c: ~ . O_'Nl't.ft)co....eCllO-Nl't.ft)CO....CO ..
m- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I
W :g i a: a: a: a:cr a: a: a: a: a: a: a: a: cra:a:a:cra:cr a:a:a:cra:cra:cr .
.- ~ .
_ a:
cn~I';;..~~
~.
'.' I~/ ff?.
o .
,
f
I
- i
I
-
th
--+-
.s.' ;
..
s s
, . '
..,
-/
--.
..
.a
CI)
CO)
,...
N
E-, ~
~ i
....\..~
.., c-
\j.s:-n
....
]1
Ni
cw;i
I
I,! I
III 1
_, I I
I~ J I
)t 1 J
III 5 I
~~ ~ 6 i
Ii
N
cw;
It)
CI)
e
;2
-
u
CD
e-
o.
W~-I
~zl~
:SUJ~
II- W I~
r-:=~ c
Ul<.!)
~
~
r;:.r~ ., ::1 ~
~!',,~ t ... ji~
","" _ -:;:-.,,;:::j{'-.:
... '- '-~. ,:,;;;..-' I' '. '-'....-....
,I' '-" '-r:/" I --------
, ,... ~ ,.... "" ,,'/ ( IIC-n ...---.. _ -"
\\--z~ l,~. ~'y:~~"" ~l
, \ ,A. \ \,:::..:;-... J / I ~,,, '( "1~
~\\ .. I >J=d--L... '(~7~ ~,\" ':" II
\1""' \ f,{/ -~- - t/l~ 1 _II '~- '
':' ~~/ ;7..., \::'1~j #-:;.~ \ '\\ -- J; -. I
~ \.r1~~~~1 \ \\r"' -. Sir -.1 L-: J
\ ... j ""//-II/.~ -.: !.~1J \k-J('~~ 11- __I
(V ~Gf' ::.:'U)~\ \~~ ,,<~\~1
'--'if~ - ~ t' - \ \ \ \'_~ '\~ \\ I ..,
, "',,- .// \-\ -. \~, . 'I ---
\ __I ""'" I - \ - \\ Co, ...::; ;;E:"::: - ~~:--... --:,
?~- -- ,~ I~
~).:> I, \ ~~(~F;//-''----' ";'<~~J,~'
_= \ .-.;?./' \ I "'-:.::.~ '-., ) ~
FESlDENTIAL ...~~~ - );,) I L1 /-7~,~/:// //-..::::. ;:..'
B..-;..*,........ 'I k?""" I I ~ '/;L Co' "
......... -I a.taI "-~ :j I / ...........//.:::::: /~ -;'''-)-j (~ \.-............:::~.
........ a.... -I DII*t IIII! ""/", '-............-"'1 I I I fICo';' r---: .fICon J r::- \
.......... .... ".., - f I*lncl : I ~ I n ~ ,~/ I I I "-J I ~,
===~= 11:1'" \\_II\~.... I L~ {' - --..,', \
"'~.I \L_.J"-~ -J _ ....:\1 r-;;:: \
____......c....-al*lncl, I "-lr~ -....... ('...~~ ...
. t>. 11lI:.'.I~"--=-p... ...~4 ........... I~~
......::;,;::--~.= ... v f~ --. Jf-1I' I ~r',,;;:~'\\ 7' ':~..,
".L1JIlMl.........,-IID1Rtc1 I H _~,I-;~\ \ l -, l~7;\', \(~~./ '~I \
Mt-4tl Ile~AoI.........., - .. Clldtcl ~ r--. i I \\ \ ---::. , ~ ~ 10\: \. fICo" I( ... 1
'II - I \\ \~..... \ , \ -.::::: \: .
VLLJiGE CENTER ;1 -. '( fICo"\\ y- ~ \ \ \ <, ~~ ';.--~ )
I"" ,-.....-- Ii&...~' \. ~ ! \ 11- ) '-ir~ "'"
VC-2 ".... c.ne.. - .... ~ k -, I ", ~ -, \ \ I, /~71 \, -, \\
VC-I ~c....-'" '\/ ~ ~ ,)\.....1.../ / //'\_'1 \\ .
.... ~ V ./ ./'/ \ ~\.-
"" fICoM"~ ~10-'?'~
EI.JSIfESS CENTER ' " ~-::!;= ~ ~ \ \
" ~ _ "A"'" e,\ 17
I ec-, 1""-' c.... - ............ .... DId1ct -> " I ~A"
ec-2 ..... c.... - ........... .... DIRtc1 ~;-...:..(... ~"'d'
-"'~-
---::::;...?'
--
Land Use
Districts
L.\.dollted
::::::
,;,;,.
SPECIAL P\.A'OSE
'-' ..... - 111111rtel
o..n ..... - . DIIetc:l
o..n .... -I DIIetc:l
ClDIII .... - 4 DIItrIr:l
o,.n .... - . IIIIIrtel
o..n ..... - . IIIIIrtel
0Mft ..... - f IIIIIrtel
,.... &n.n DIItrIr:l
~ E"ASTLAKE
A PLAtHD ~ IV EASn.AICE DEVBOPM:NI' co
-..-...
-..--,
-..--
=-_~~-a..'
m Ci1ti .
~&~
,...... ~
Exhibit A
Land Use
Districts
'. PrOI)Osed
c~~f)1 ... Jt~
J'.."':....... - -:;:-:/ifl.......-V
~, ""~. - - ~ I '. ..---....
.II ~ """....'"-?"': /,"- I ~........... ....
~ a..' l-~~ ,~." ,,/ ( IlC-II r---.. --
\~.....~ \ __.~, ~'", II
:\\\ - ~/',?>=l[:'YA~~'9 ': ?/~
u'" \ {/,/ -~ ~/I'"" i -..'\ '\ ~- -'
.' '~"\./ I'''' (:.'1V~f #-:;'~'f1 \ '\\ - J -
l .. \"',1"""'/~,VlII 1.7"' - ;i -I-
.., ~.././ - ~e- \k-. I.l ~ 1\ __I
\ (1t~~~\r-~,\ ~~\~
.., .(/~ - ~.::::: - ~j' - \ ...'\\ -. \of? ))ec-.\\ 1_ -::: -;;;~
\ II... I \ - \\we.. ~- - ---~~ ..-'I~
\ )~? _ __...."'l:,~ I
:-,,-:> : \ ~~(~~-~-~'>'\~1'
-~ ..J~:: .I)) I ( ?1Y~.? // /7~ ,..
FESIDENTIAL T!. -<1+ I I Ij l k~ / I ~'<;;t -. ~
............-sa... ~~:: II /,................../f"~/.i\.;;;;- /"-H [' "l '~.........-::Y-,
..... ..... - S a.tcl III / 1/IlC-..ll...., '-......... ""I I I '1lC-~ ,,,, -=- J c-- \
......, .... "'- - 7 ClIIilrIct : II /r--; I ,-.............. I I J '-J I -........~
..............c...--.a... 11/..... \\_oa\1 ,;;;:, I LJ II - ~" \
........ O"'~a...-1O ClIIlrlcI _.~: ~ :1\ \ L_J~---1 _ .......-"'\11 ~ \
......,,..,. c.-.. - D ClIeft:l I I "-lr~,- r"..... -1 ~ ...
II 'r....... ~ - ,. DIelrtr:t ...' '" IIIC."'/'j;' ~h~.;) \ ............."j~
......... ~ - 22 a.tcl f f~y' J t-11 , /r--- -r'~, '\ :7 ,~ ..,
~T' ..1Il*",1-f''- -II i:MIlrlc1 II"" JI..... \\ \ l .., t'r-'" , \.r'~~. / '--J I \
A>t~AiIoIIoUIH''--''~1 '(---"'t'+--\\\ \ \------', ~' '\ .... (' ... I
II' - VC.3 J \ - ....."', '\ , , . ~ . '
VI.LJiGE CENTER ~. '/IIC-'~ ~ \ \ 'I ',~~ ~\./..: -;...." J
1__' ! ----- Iii r-~...... " ~v \ '\ I ... '\ '-~( .........~,
.....- ,,_ ___ ~ _{ '" ~ 'I, J ,...,,..0....-.. ","""
YC-' .... c... - ... ~ k -, './ ~.., \ \!, ./-'/- II '~\ .., , \
"....1 __ c... _ ... v (\j~ V 05.4 ~ 'J\..,L.../' / /f'\ -II \ \ ~
- - / ~ /' h:"" \ ~'-
BJSINESS CENTEFl ~,RS-S ~..IAC-~'7/\\
, , I _ "~\,,
I ec-, i --- c... - ............ ,.. DIelrtr:t ,,;-,', (' ~.A "
ec-, ...... c... -................ Dlatnl:l ..).<'...1 ~.i'd'
"'....~.
__~.;;ii'"
--
::::::::
SPECIAL PlJIlOSE
'-' ..... - , a.tcl
Qpeft ..... - I a.tcl
Qpeft ..... - I DIIMI:t
Qpeft ..... - 4 a.tcl
Qpeft ..... - . DleIrtI:1
Qpeft ..... - . a.tcl
___ ..... - 7 a.tcl
,.... ~ a.tcl
..4 EASTLAKE
A P1NND cc:Mo4HTY IV EASnAICE IJEVB.alM:NT co
_"__II
-..--.
-..--
=-_~~-&aeo1
m Ci1ti .
u&~
7.'.... ~
l/SO/15
Exhibit A
Second Addendum to FSEIR 86-04 (B)
ID. CHANGES IN IMPACT ANALYSIS
4
The project site has be graded for sometime and this minor shift in land uses and minor
modifications to densities will not result in any change in the natural environment. the
provision of public facilities was programmed in the original EastLake GDP/SPA at a
specific density. The minor reduction and density shifts that part of this proposal would
not significantly impact the provision of these services. the minor reduction in
population would result in a commensuration reduction in related impacts.
IV. CONCLUSION
,.
Pursuant to Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines and based upon the above
discussion, 1 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 previously
sited FEIR adequate under CEQA.
V. REFERENCES
EIR-96-04 EastLake Greens
EIR-96-04 (A) Addendum
IS-96-04 EastLake Greens GP A/SP A Modification
General Plan, City of Chula Vista
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
City of Chula Vista Environmental Review Procedures
~ :/I/f'.~
~ .."
. t _-. ~"',~-,..
. . f', 1-_
" ~":.. j.
... :[)rnirntrn to COIl\lllUllil~ gnl iN
OCTO
-1 199c:
/.) .
!.. L, Ii,
VIA FAX '91-5171
, U.S. Mail
10595 JAMACHA BOULEVARD, SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 91977
TELEPHONE 670-2222. AREA CODE 619
1995
Mr. Douglas D. Reid
Environmental Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912-1087
Re: Proposed Amendment to the Adopted BastLake II General
Development Plan (ODP), Related to the BastLake Greens
and an Amendment to the SPA Plan, and the Tentative Tract
Map (IS-9'-05).
Dear Mr. Reid:
The otay Water District (OWD) would like to have ample opportu-
nity to review and respond to any environmental documentation
(Negative Declaration or EIR) relating to the above referenced
project.
OWD may have site needs for the future 711-3 reservoir and other
water facilities as well, thus requiring the site(s) and pipeline
routes to be called out on any adopted EastLake II General
Development Plan (GDP).
Please contact me at 670-2293 or John Garcia at 670-2213 if you
need any information or have any questions with regard to water
facilities or service. We look forward to reviewing and res-
ponding to your completed environmental Initial study/Negative
Declaration or Draft EIR.
Sincerely,
~lm?:~'
Environmental Specialist
MFC:cp
cc: Tim Stanton
Jim Peasley
John Garcia
Chris Craven
Rebecca Patton
Sweetwater Union High School District
Administration Center
1 1 30 Fifth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91911-2896
(619)691-5500 <.-
Division of Punnin~ 3nd Ft1dlities
Ms. Barbara Reid
City of Chula Vista
Planning Departmfnt
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Ms. Reid:
Re: Proposed Eastlake General Development Plan Changes
The Sweetwater Union High School District does not object to the proposed
amendments to the EastLake II General Development Plan. CommunitY Facilities
District No. 1 (CFD No.1) was established to mitigate this project's impacts to
schools. However, thank you for the notification, It Is good that the district Is kept
Informed of these changes.
Sincerely
/
Thomas Silva
Direaor of Planning
TS/ml
'" ' /"
ATTACHMENT 6
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
10/17/1995 e9:1&
&19&915171
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PAGE e4
. .
no! crrY OF 0il11.A V1STA DISQ.OSURE rrATBMENT
" e required to file I Stalement or Dlt.Closure of cenaln ownership or IInanctal Int,rall. payments. or campalln
( . It'JutloftS. on aU mauers which wUl require dl,crctlonl'Y acllon on the pan or the Cta)' Council. Plaftnln, Commlulon. and
111 o,hcr omctal bodla. Thc rOllowin& Information mUSI be dJscl~:
.
I. Ust the "ames of a1l pcfWns bivin, I flnanellllnte,a' In the propert)'whlch II the lubJect or the application or lhe
IlDntract. &.,.. owncr. applicant, ClOnt,.aor, subcontractor, _tcrtal supplier. ·
. .
EASTLAD DEVELOPHEHT COHPARY
2. II In)' perlon- identified pUrluantto (1) lbove III corporation or partnersblp. '1st lhe .Imea or aUlftdMdu.a1l mmln,
more tban 10~ or the Ihara In the corporation or ownln,an)' pannersblp 'nterat In lhe pannenhlp.
BOSVELL PROPERTIES INCORPORATED
THE TOLAGO COMPANY
3, II In)' perlon- Idtntlncd pursuant 10 (1) IbOYe Is non.prone Of,lnlulIoft or , tMe. lilt tbe ".mea of an)' penon
"Mn, as dlrutof of the non.pront or'lnl%l\lon or as trustee or beneftdlry or trustor or the trUlt,
RIA
.. Have you hid more than usa worth or business tranucte4 wltb 1ft)' mtmber of the Clf)' "arr. BOlreSl, Commlsalonl.
Commluees. and Council wlltlln the past twelve months' Ya_ No sx It yea. please Indicate perlOn(I):
5. Plwe IdentIfy each ind every person. IncludinJ any alcnu. cmployea. coftSultlntl. or Independent coDtractors wtto
you have &nfgneCIlo represent you berore tbe City In t"lI matter,
GA~ Cinti. Cinti Laud PlanniuR
.
Gail Crocenzi. EastLake Development Co.
'R.ocrer "hAti.. tick 'EuRineerillR
"ill ORtrem. 'EastLake Develol'1Dellt Co.
6. Hive )'Ou and/Or JOur omeers or .,cnu. In .be IUrel.te, colUrlbuted more ,"an '1,000 to a Oouncllmember In the
current or precedfn& elecllon period? V__ No_ II,., state -'Ida Coundlmember(s):
. . · (N0T2: AUd IddltJDuJ .... ·
.
""te: 10- t r ~ &f c;-
nt
C..l r.~n~_ftF.iA A....~.ft~ Prnie~t ManaRer
PrI,,, or type DIme or ClODlractot/lppllcsnt
. ts!e1" *ftMI eJ: eA", ~"".. ~ ,....,., JoIN....... III r r '-'" --' cW.".,.,.. ",,.IIa'~"pol'" ~..........".......
flail .11I "" fJfIw --"Y, ., _1OWII'y. dIy ~1if1, ..... ", .". ""1I.,wr~ " "" .., ,." ., """"lIfl .... · , .- e
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. Lt
Date 12/19/95
ITEM TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING: Reviewing and Adopting the County
of San Diego Integrated Waste Management Plan and Countywide
Summary Plan and Siting Element
SUBMITTED BY: Conservation Coordinator
''\, ~~;
. -----
"
"
REVIEWED BY: City Manager,. 1 \t\\
j
4/Sth Vote: Yes_NoX
Staff recommends the public hearing be continued to the meeting of 1/16/96.
It-!
~J~
~~
~~~~
-- ----
CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
TELEFAX COVER LEITER
Telecopier No. (619) 585-5612
DATE:
j / /;!~/; ~~
/ /
TO: Star News Legal / Martha
FAX NO: (619) 426-6346
FROM: C~,~(ti
SUBJECf:
/""I ' I
/:.4-.- 0< ~-<~~)
/,
TOTAL NO. PAGES (including cover): ~
PUBUCATION DATE:
/ ~s;A: S-
/ /
If all pages are not received, please call Carla @ (619) 691-5041.
276 FOURTH AVENUE' CHULA VISTA' CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 691-5041
'* "'{#aIlW ""-'_
~J
. .(
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY
COUNCIL of the City of Chula Vista, California, for the purpose of reviewing and adopting the County
of San Diego Integrated Waste Management Plan. The Plan consists of the Countywide Summary Plan
& Siting Element.
The City of Chula Vista has prepared and transmitted staff comments on the preliminary draft of the
County wide Plan pursuant to Section 41750 of the Public Resources Code. The final comments
regarding the County Plan will be submitted to the County and subsequently the California Integrated
Waste Management Board for review and approval. Contact the City Conservation Coordinator at 691-
5122 if you have questions regarding the document.
Any petitions to be submitted to the City Council must be received by the City Clerk's office no later
than noon of the hearing date.
If you wish to challenge the City's action regarding the adoption of the Nondisposal Facility Element,
you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to the
public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday, December 19,
1995 at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at which time
any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED:
November 15, 1995
11-10-1995 04:15PM FROM
--W'<<A-;J. ,,"-,yya
P.O.BoxjZ07.':- 1279ThirdAVenUe
ChuIa Vistri. CA. 91912 Chula Vista, CA.91910
FaX# (619) 426.634~ Phone # (619) 427-3000
TO 5855512 P.01
Seed to: C/'7 6'" C. V"yl'"Z
CL
Atfn: C/rJt/../i
Machine Phone #: 5F:S'" -56/ ~
N~mber o~ pages.~entl counting this cover page:
. ...: :7?l#/tr/hl
.;>--
Sent by:
. .
:t;
"Just the
fax, ma'am'~
~i?:.~~--.:.~
,:,:.:;,.:;..__'t..,_-_
~--;;:"'..:..-..::==-~::::;
.~..:~.~
:r-.=--==-"::'=-=
ag;.~=-=-~
~-~.....::.~-:
~~~~~.:::=
~:::,::..!~_-:~
.~~-==:;
~..s.~=':~.iI:.~.;.;.:r
~~=..~~~
~
II it happens in
the Eouth Bay
it's neWI10 us
Message: '~~lT po;Fj S /6Aj
~ervR /Y 7i:; A1~ #-.r~
~~Nk..s
~
Th~; -, N
lA'!!:\r=_..~~S
"
~~
~. .
E[~........._u~ _...._... _ ~.. .. ......... _.''':'': __'. t._' ......_~. .'._": "r..:."':......~,..~-.~"!;--r.~:..<"-A':"':. n"'-~!.'~-"':"'!:_..':'-:" :~:.:'..:::'.~~.1:.':.~~:r'~~:....:~~.;~:"::.:'~~v...:..":"'r~.....';::~~:.~~..:..~ :'!.:;.:e:..:~~~.~~:' '.1~.;7!:~
s~~~~
. ;;';';~.:;:=;a
_'C::::..:..-=::.~
_~"':~_::=:=:A";'J
j!~-==r.:-
-'-~'-'--:r.o?
~..,...-.::-....=:=.~
~.i~.~~~;
:,:,~-;=::'=-.s~
}~
'. '
i,1 . /(~/
jl!IU .9'7 d/ 2~ t?l,jJ,Ar
n /; ;pY .Ji,l' Zl
;/Ie, 7 cr'" P ~) L
/ rJ~v:J ,~~
~-.([~ 1 ~J~ {Y
~-
/{ ~7/
NOTICE OF PUBlIC
HEARING BY THE CHULA
VISTA CITY COUNCIL
CHUlA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GI-
VEN THAT A PUBLIC
HEARING Will BE HELD
BY THE CIlY OOUNCL of
the City of ChuJa VISta. Cali-
fornia. for the wrpose of re-
vivwing and adOpting the '
County of San Pi!lgo inte- . /V} I. - /-
grated Was. ~ / /11.-:'.116 .f/"':.!."'" /
Plan. Tho PIM emnlS 0 . . c ,'} J , ,
the Coun~ mmaIY . ~~.'5 ,STS
Plan & Siting Element .
The City of Olula VISta
has pre~ and lnInSm~-
t8cl staff c:ommenl$ on Ih9
Dnll"lIIIinary ~ of the
tounty wide pum@flt
to Section 41 of the Pu-
bfic Resou"* Codo. The
final communts regarding
the County plao WiI\ bel .:
submit18d 10 the County and
6UbseqU80\lO California /';;.-
~::m~d fg~~ /(0~~5't'
approval. Contaet tho City
CrinselYation Coordinator at
~-5122 if 1,011 have 'lues-
lIOnS regardJng the docu-
ment.
. . . Any pell10ns 10 be submit-
.. . ,'; .. ted ID the CiW Cwrx;il mU$\
....;.; .'~' .: bo received by thO City ..
. .;- .:.. ' . '\ Clerk'S offICe no later 1han
'.. : ..... ..:.... .: noon of lho hearing elate. .
....; .' ; . . . If.Y.OO wish >> challenge /' L
:.:..': ,:'. .. the city's aG1ioIl en 1ft. ~ .D lA. .
..,..,.,....: . t<<IReew'...you may beUm- '\;::
. .:. '., ' . ited 10 raising only those is-
..- '. .. ...... sues tau or someone elso
\;' ?::~/ti ~~:d ~e~:~~~
. .,..:':' \:~i written eorTesP.;>ndane9 de-
, . :_' \.:: '.:'. livered b thevi1y Clerk's Of-
.... :..:. flCe at or prior to the public
houring.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING
WIll. BE HELD BY 1lE
CrTY COUNCIt. on Tue&-
day, December 19, 199$ at
6:00 p.m. in the Coundl
Chambel'$, PUbrlC Services
Building, 276 Fourth
Avenue. at which limo .any
person desiring b be heard
may~.
DATEO: Novembet 15,
,ggs
CV00859
.. '
t:,. .
: .:. ~i , ~. . ../': ':. :
.." ," ':.
..... .,..
, ~". .,
, .. ~~.' .
',', .
" .",' ....
;. " ..:"
':..:\.:'~:.:~" .:.~
,': ::: . ,:..: ~~
'," ".' .~
. M~, to' .... .~
'; :::-/~:;: ~
I'..:
;'.' , .
':.. ',' .... ::.':,:"J
:. ~::. \.:.'~ ': .~:
'I~'.~ \' .~~~:.;
...... "
Ow t,' ...
~.. ... ,.:.~: 'i ::: ~
::,'.i .~.::~' ;':: :..::.~;
: ,.: ' ': ~. '.:
". . t,'"
.. ...... .
" . ..'
. ... ". ~ . ',: :,' .
. :;~'. . ~~ :::-:.
:~~':;?.~.::/.:::
".. .
.... ", ....
.... . .
:... .. .
. '" ..
.... ...,
I ,..'.(, ..
" . ....: " .":..:
,.;'.', '
" '.
; :"
. .~. :' . . ~
/.>:. :~:. ,:>
.....:i~ ~:..~. '.~
. . ~ . .
,,', ~.-;" .' :
'. . :'~', f ,::. ~. .~.:
;}?:\~:.:: ~:..~
\:f.:.(.>;
. .-
. " .. . .
:~~::.:.~~.:.:';..~ :.;:~
~ '::.'. :;" - ': ~~~:f'
~. . . '
.i i", .':
. .... '.
""':-' ,.
.' '. .... ,.';
:. ".
..... :.
, '. .: ,~ .'
'.
, -.
. :" :, .. .,.
_. . .. .", ~ t..
11-10-1995 04:17PM
1 M5.95
FROM
TO
5855612
P.02
.
p/
, /4.. n
1 Yr
_ ref,,-,~1J~~(.J p~ __c~~7i~,.,j /7f' //!~.
/1 (., 1., '~.. J. J, ./:. Veil:le J? r
! i/~-lnct./.5)'?/'.5';C / ac,/.1 ~ /
, ~ -' .,
. . .~! '
':',i' :.'. "
<,.~~.' ~.:...'.,';"..,-'~~.... :.;~C " .~~"" :.-~ :~..,. ..' '. . .' '. ..."".' '
,: ":,.,>~j?~<T;,, ,',' ,
. . ~.. . ... ~ (....i ."'!'
_ _:--' _.___.M .. ." .... ~ _
',' ': " ~; d,;' f";"\d' ", ': ,:::,~1~~~!;g~;f\? ',:C,;,'::,T7;;;!.t::~0'~~
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS BY
THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY
PlANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Chula Vista,
(elli/ornia, for the purpose of considering a tentative subdivision map known as Unit 12 at
j,astlJake Greens, Chula Vista Tract 96-02 located at. the southwest quadrant of South
(jreensview Drive and Hunte Parkway within the EastLake Greens Planned Community. The
app I icant, EastLake Development Company, proposes to subd ivide 21. 5 acres into 95 lots and
make all required publ ic improvements. A copy of the tentative map is on file in the office of
the Planning Department.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project implements and falls
uJlder the purview of previous environmental analysis conducted under EJR-86-04 and
Addendum EJR-86-04B and that no further environmental review is necessary.
!\11Y written comments or petitions to be submitted to the Planning Commission and/or City
('()uncil must be received in the Planning Department no later than noon on the date of the
hearing. Please direct any questions or comments to Project Planner Luis Hernandez in the
Plannll1g Department, Public Services Building, Chula Vista Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue,
('hula Vista California 91910, or by calling 691-5090, Please include the Case Number noted
at the bottom of this notice in all correspondence.
11 you wish to challenge the City's action on this application in court, you may be limited to
[;lIslng only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearings described in this
notice. or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission and/or City Council
at or prior to the public hearings described in this notice. A copy of the application and
accompanying documentation and/or plans are on file and available for inspection and review
at the City Planning Department.
SAID PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HELD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON
Wednesday, November 29, 1995 at 7:00 p.m.
AND BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON
Tuesday, December 19, 1995 at 6:00 p.m.
130th hearings will be held in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, Chula Vista Civic
Center. 276 Fourth A venue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
Date:
Case No:
November 15, 1995
PCS-96-02
!: /4</ '4; 1J-,)/1
/1 il/. ~jO/J "'/f' i,;/~A,.
/:' f?~c" / ]i' /'J/~1
!. '2", / ../A <-v'
'/ . . .;/! 1'/
. / ~.4, ,
!p,frt - lrl
/ _~J (.
/'
,/
- ,10TICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS h &
THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY
PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Chula Vista,
California, for the purpose of considering a tentative subdivision map known as Unit 12 at
EastLake Greens, Chula Vista Tract 96-02 located at the southwest quadrant of South
Greensview Drive and Hunte Parkway within the EastLake Greens Planned Community. The
applicant, EastLake Development Company, proposes to subdivide 21.5 acres into 95 lots and
make all required public improvements. A copy of the tentative map is on file in the office of
the Planning Department.
The Environmental Review Coordinator bas determined that this project implements and falls
under the purview of previous environmental analysis conducted under EIR-86-04 and
Addendum EIR-86-04B and that no further environmental review is necessary.
Any written comments or petitions to be submitted to the Planning Commission and/or City
Council must be received in the Planning Department no later than noon on the date of the
hearing. Please direct any questions or comments to Project Planner Luis Hernandez in the
Planning Department, Public Services Building, Chula Vista Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista California 91910, or by calling 691-5090. Please include the Case Number noted
at the bottom of this notice in all correspondence.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this application in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearings described in this
notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission and/or City Council
at or prior to the public hearings described in this notice. A copy of the application and
accompanying documentation and/or plans are on file and available for inspection and review
at the City Planning Department.
SAID PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HELD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON
Wednesday, November 29, 1995 at 7:00 p.m,
AND BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON
Tuesday, December 19, 1995 at 6:00 p.m.
Both hearings will be held in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, Chula Vista Civic
Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA)
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the American With Disabilities Act, requests individuals who require
special accommodation to access, attend and/or participate in a City meeting, activity or service request such
accommodation at least 48 hours in advance for meetings and 5 days for scheduled services and activities. Please
contact Nancy Ripley for specific information at (619) 691-5101. California Relay Service is available for the
hearing impaired.
Date:
Case No:
November 15. 1995
PCS-96-02
SEE LOCATOR MAP ON REVERSE SIDE.
. ;
) - _rn~ 2:. L.' ,1 {--- ( t /{, L ,;1c,c,<---,
"
/
01-7.
PROJECT
LOCATION
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR ~~~: Eastlake Development Company PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) SUBDIVISION
PROJECT Eastlake Greens Request: Proposal of 92 single family lots in the Eastlake
ADDRESS:
Greens Unit 12, RP13 area.
SCALE: fIlE NUMBER:
NORTH No Scale PCS . 96 . 02
/
V't-."nwO"
:t=o"-.....r~
Z"'-lO......,
C <'0
o ;I:.;:l'(:.....
__U'.. c;;
'Tl"'Cl.Il'""O
C"ro._:;t~
\,.,JO"T'!-O
r- A.r C)
n z~
!>'"
-<V> I
.c ..
"-'~, .,
,...y.....I~
N~ <
...-crC
On
..
r
'"
~ ~
~
...
"
....
T
C
V'
-<
'" n\
" C'
...
>
'"
V'~n?./"":J'
~C""'_'r-J'
Z.rC:Z:!'..OJ
C c- c
-' ,... -:::.:-
_:J)oc"T"'.....C-
...,:':'T'~--rO
c-,(-cc.....
~""'CZC-::J
r-c c
n _poZ
J. r<-~
_fT"_-.
..(;w: c..-
""'" ,::,za
.... 2'- :L
o '" !>
a~""- r
...n
"'-.....; v
J"~ "0
'" C
"
....
V>
Zvrtt(1
rt':'.:>......~z.
2:cc:rl.,o.;
." 00
C:Zcr:t_
~rnlto_O
_rrZC
"'0 ...
~ C , t. C
mJO_CO
~""7-
n ,....
:rrrc
"'c::Jm
r2 It
..... V>
...
"''''
"
0'0
cr
a
..
....
c
o
V'I"Oa..a-
,.. ......
z.::JV'l1M
"'0
:::I""Omw
-c~c
mxzo
C- ...
OI-'V"lO
.l:-pr.,..;
r.,:Jf
,.. ...
.c r
N 0
~
...
"
("",,>..(:lTO'
:J:Ct:>~
CCLr.....
, -~
J:: r ,1,.0.
....0
<27.....
_(":""lT~
v C
~bol:..JO
,,," ".
,.,<
r "
.."r
>c
..cc"C
,..c~
.c m
..
... ....
1,.1'\ "':':';: C]-
.. .......
~. .:0"'''>
....c
:::'~~'~
-c ::a.c
nxZ......
~
lo-J'.Il~
~..c
:-')-,
, -
..(, ,r
N \::l
..
...
"
...
'"
..
)l(XXXX><
x)oCXXX)ol"
XX)(X)(X
)oC)o.}<)o(')(X
)(X)()()(X
,..,..XX)<,)I(
X)lO<')(Xx
XXX)ol"XX
XX)I(')(xx
)<)()<)c"X
><)I()(xx><
)<)()t>:xX
X"C.XX.XX
)or X >.)oC)<)o(
)()O()(XX)I(
)0')0;)0;')<>-><
)(XXXXX
)o;)t >.>.)<, >
xxxxxx
x>::).:x)o'X
><..:><x)o()O(
)oC,..)o;.)< >;)<
)(.xX)(XX
>r)o")o<x)r)<:
XXXXXX
)<)0)<>>>
XX)(XXX
,..JoC)('x)(''>'
x>(,<xxx
......................-.....
n
C
)()()o: >. Xx
x)(XXXX
)0'>>><><>
><X'xxxx
)<)0.)0. >-)0.>
xXxx)(X
)c.JoC)o"><>)c:
XXXXXX
)<)c:)()o.)c:)o:
xxxxxx
>->>>>>
xXX'l<XX
>.>>>>'>
xx,xxxx
)0>>>>>
xXxx>l')(
)0(''''')0"''''>)<'
xxxxxx
)0>')<')0:)0.'><
xxxxxx
>>>>)a'><
X><><X:o(l'(
>-)0.)<)-'>'>
)(,l'C.X:'<x,"<
)(>)o:,..>o::x
xxxxxx
x;" )o')o)<)r
)(x)<xx:>;
)0. > >->)0)<'
................v...........
yXXXXX
,...)o")or 't( >< >.
.o(XXXXX
x>>X)(X
X X)i'.XX"<
)<>)<)()o'>'
xxx.-:xx
)<')0><>>->'
)<xxxxX
>)t)o<)o::)I()c:
yVy"", _<;J<t'
>>>>>>
x><XXXX
)<')<.)<)<>>"
)()(XXXX
>>>)<')0')<.
Xlo(XXx'X
>,>xx>.>
XXXXX')(
>-x)r>">>
)(x')(xxx
>>>'>>->
..<.:<,,<xx'lo(
)<>)0.)0:)0)(
xX'Xxxx
)0<)0:.)<')0>,)<
XXXJ<J<'X
><X)r)l(X>
)(XX)I(XX
\t..""'\t'W'''W
n
C
)<>")t)t')oc:)(
xx><><xx
)<)C)c.x)<><
><)<xxxx
y)<",>r><.)C
xxxx><x
)<)<)<)<)d"
xXX>o<xx
)0)0)0)))<
xXxxxx
)o')<')r)<)r)<.
)(:xxx,Xx
)o.>)c)o.)o<>"
xx)c."XXX
)r)l")<)c.)o:)<
XX)(XX)I(
)o:)(>t)o'>t)l(
XXX)(XX
)t)()i()()or.)(
)(XX)(XX
)<)0:)<>,)0:)0:
X)i(XXXX
)c.)()<)t')c.)('
X,J()II()I(XX
)o:)oC)i()()C)(
XXXX)<X
)c:><)ocXX)(
)(XXxXX
)()c.)()<)i()(
")t()()()()(X
XXXXNr
X)ol")(XrT'1~
XXXXl.Ilc:D
>c)<><x ur
X)(XX
X)<)o()oC :
x')(x)(mo
xxxx.....c
)l(x><><r-o:
)(:>(.)10;)< IT
xxxXV"l~
x)r)(")tL:
xxX)C:C
)(>e)()oC_~
>t)()()(:r~
>:')0''''-''' L,."-
)()C:)(X01
>,..>)(7'04
XXX)(.T1.:!'
>>X)(rr-.
xxxxzu
>)o.)<)<V,,-
XX)(X
><>)c:.><C
)()lXXZ
)o..)c:)(.)o.-
XX)(X~
)t')c")<x
X'JoCXJo(I-"
)<XXX)c:)I(
Xxx><Xx
>>>>'>)<"
)r"')(XXXX
>>)<)<>><
X)( X")(")(')(
>' )( ,>:)r" >' x
XX;><XXX
)<)<)<.)o()o)(
XxXXXX
>>>).)c>
)(XXXX)(
>>>>>>
xxxx'<"x
>C)o>>->>
XXXXXX
><>>'>'>c>
XXXX.o<>(
>>)0..>)0>,
xxxxx:<
> >). >-). >-
XX,o(xxx
>>>>>)<
XX""':,X>(X
)< :x~>-')< >
Xx.-<xxX
>')<)c.>r> >
xxxx)o(')(
>- >-- >- >. > ;,
.............'V..,.....
')(X)e"XXX
>)t"x)<>>
xxx xxx
>><)...>>:,..
)('0(:)0(>(;<>(
>>>>>,>
XXX Xxx
)<)c.>'>>>
x)("x...,()C"'X
)<":>c > >"')of'
....."<x..",........-:
>>>>>>
X;xxxx><
>)0->0'>>;>
XxX><X>(
>>r>>)o:)<.
XxXXXX
>')()o('>>'.)r'
x')()(XX)(
>> y)o>>
)('XX)()()o(
,..>>>>>
xx o(,~ >()(
>">:)<>>)<
)ol..)()(X-,o(X
>'>t)or>t> >
xx><xxx
)o<x>o'>o'>O><
')I(x)('xxx
\o\o''W'W')I'"",
>:><>>)0)0'
xxXxxx
> y)oq"c>)<
XXXXXX
>>)or)ll.)oc.)o(
)(X><)(Xx
)<)<)0.)<)<)0.
xx><xx><
>>>)11'>>-
xx><xxx
)<)or)r')o'>)<;.
XX)(X)()(
)0<)<')11)0:)<')("
)(x)(XXX
)<)<)11")<)<)1'
JOC.'>><:X)(XX
)t)()(>"')il")(
XXX)(XX
)()c)of )-.)<)0:'
XX)I()()I(X
)lr)oC)('>r)()(
xxxx><)(
)o.)o:)o:)<;.)()t
XXX)()(JC
)()II")oC)oC)t)('
XX)I(XXX
)0:: ><> X)<.)(
><X)I(XXX
x)<)<)()ol)(
XX')()(XX
XXXX><X
xxX)(')("x
XXXX)(,,<
)0")( >()<)r")C
xxx')(XX
)()<)oC)or)o')l
XXX)(X')(
)(')('><)o(')("X
XXX XXX
)(.>)Il:)(.)(X
xxx...,(xx
)<)c)(>')o.X
)("x')(xxx
>)()<)<)c.X
xxx xxx
X>')c.)()<)or
xXXXXX
)0.)<)<)0)0;.)0.
xxxxxx
)0')<)0...><)0;.)(
xxx>(xx
)o.)ic')oC)c.)c)o.
XXX"X"lo(X
X>')II:>>:>
xxxxxx
>>>r>>>::
)l(XX)(X}O(
)o"'><>')c)(')<
xxxx">()(
-..........................
XXX)(>>
xxxxxx
)c)o)o>>)o.
xxxx>::<
>. >- >- > > >-
)c."XXXX'loC
X)<">X)<')c:
XXX)o('XX
)o.>)()<.)o;;.>
xxxxxX
>>>>>>
XXxXXX
)l:>>>)o>
xX'X"<XX
>>:>>>>
x,<'Xx)o{x
)< ,...>")<)<")11:
><xx"<Xx
)<>>)0.>)<
Xxxx,<x
)0.)<)0 >.,..)0.
x')(xxx)(
>'>>>>>
XX;< )i(XX
")0' )<-)C)or)()<'
XXA ..C',", x
>)<)o..>>)t
)(X'..<x'<x
)II> >)c:> )<
"'Wt.......,..........v
)orX)(X)(X
>':>'X)o:>,'X
><XX'll(X?"<
>'>->>.,..>-
XXXX'll(X
>)0'><'>'>)<
><'xX':>(X><
>><)<)<')0.>
XXXxxx
Y)c::>r')()c:)o"
X "(-,o(>()o('lol'
>)<>)<">)<
'><'X"XXX>(
)<)<.>")()<.)t'
XXX)(XX
>>.>X:><)o:
XXXX)(K
>,x)C")t'>t)(
XXX)(XX
)<.)0:>'>'>>
XxX)(X)(
)<>)0.)0:>>'
)(K ><..<x x
>>)<.>')0.>
X)(A'XX>i(
>>)()o;.>'>,
X')o(XXX'><
)oc)c")<"><>>c
XXJI(XXX
,,')r'W""''''w'
>>'>)t>.>
xxx xxx
>>')<)ot>e)<
)I(XXXX)(
)It)<)<)o..)o..)o(
)(X)(")()()(
)()<)<)()<)o.
xxx><><x
>>>>->'>
XX)(X.XX
)<> >O<>')ot
Xx...c.)(XX
)<x)<)c>'>
XX)(XXX
)o">C>,)()o')<
XXXXXX
)c)l'>-.)o)()(
XXXXXx
)f)c')t)c')()(
XXXXX)(
)r)<."")oC)ol:)c:
XX)(XXX
)ol)c:)()<>,)l{
)()(X)(X)l(
)<)c>)C)o')ol
XX)(X)(X
)ot')t)C')()oC)oC
XX)(X)(X
)i()c:)II"X)(X
')(xxx")t(X
x><'X)c'~
XJI()('><,....~
XXXXV1:,:)
>,Xxxur
XXXX
)c)ll" >- >< :
)( )()( x ,-nO:
)o()(")<)('.....o
)C)()(xr-:o
x)o;)<>C r..r
XXXXVt_
)()r:)<)(C
>C~><x-=
>- >c)<)o< -4""t'
xxxx:rn
x)<x)c v
XXxxC"I'
>,>-)<">-x..c
xx)(xrnfJ'
~~~~~6
)0:> > >vr'\..
xxxx
x>')<)<c
XX)(xZ
>>,>,>--
XX)o()o(~
>')0:)0:.>'
XXx)(~
')(X>..x>:;-x
>rXXXxX
>>')<)(>)<.
>- x'Xx,<x
> > >-)0->>
XXxXxx.
>C>)o.>)()<
)(xXX)t'x
)()o..>")<>;'>
XXXXxx
>>>'>'>>
xx)o: Xx,....
)0)0 > >- >)<
><)(XXXX
>>>")0>>'
x)( xXxx
,...>->)0.,...,..-
xxx""X'<
>)0,..)0 > >
xx >c'>< x 10(
>>>"'>>
'JoC X "< 'J( 'V' '<
>>>>>>
>o..'Io(XX:O<X
>y>.>>->'
xx<xxx
>,..".-,.. > >
>~ x)( >C ,><x
>>-x>>>-
""..,-w-........,..,
Y)(XXXX
>)<")(" )<">>
'>o()(>(XX)(
>'>>>x>'
x'>(x><xx
"'.)<)0)0. )<.)0:
XJI(X>(XX
>>>">>>-
XXXXXX
)or)<)<>>>'
:-- "",'JoC)o()o('<
>>>->>>
XX)(XXX
>-)< >)0'>'>
')(~XXXx
> >')c. X>)o'
)(XXXXX
')o()<)o:)o'>"x
X )( X X xx
>'>>->>>
)("XX)(X)(
>)< )o:>r>,)<
X~X'lo(X')(
)<)(>')<")<)1'
...r:XXXX><
)<>'>')0")<::)0(
XXXXXX
,...>0'><)<'""'>-
XXX)C'JI(')(
)t.........""''''......
)0)0')1')0.')0<)(
XXXXXX
)(.)o:.X)<)oc.x
XXX)I(XX
)O'")o:.)<)c)<)("
XX)(XX)(
)o.)o.)()c)o.)(
XX;IO('lIIC)<X
>>>>>>:
XXX xxx
)<)o<)c)(x)o(
x)(JIf(XXx
)<.)<)<)11')0..)0"
xxxXXX
)0. )l:)II")r)t')t
X:X)<(X-xX
)o;)o..)t X)c.')(
xxxxxx
)()t)()o:')t)C
X)II(XX)(X
>)o)()()t)c
><. x x x><.x
)1')<.)11")0:)0')0:
><.J<XXXX
')(X)(X)(,...
XX)( XxX
)()c.)c)t')oc)t
)()(XX)C:X
)oC)t)l")c.'><X
XXXX)(X
)
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~'L
Meeting Date 12/19/95
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: PCS-96-02; Tentative Subdivision Map for the
EastLake Greens Unit 12 Chula Vista Tract 96-02, involving 92 single
family lots, two common open space lots and a private park parcel on
21.5 acres at the southwest corner of Hunte Parkway and South
Greensview Drive - EastLake Development Company
Resolution /$lrteving Chu1a Vista Tract 96-02, a tentative subdivision
map for 92 single family lots, two open space lots and a private park
parcel on 21.5 acres at the southwest corner of Hunte Parkway and South
Greensview Drive
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning dJ(
//1L/
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager
...l i! l ..
. r:
) ., \ '
i
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No---.X.)
The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map known as EastLake Greens Unit 12,
Chula Vista Tract 96-02, in order to subdivide 21.5 acres into 92 single family detached lots,
2 open space lots and a private park parcel (see Exhibit A). The project site is identified as
Parcel R-12 in the EastLake Greens SPA (Sectional Planning Area) plan and is located at the
southwest corner of Hunte Parkway and South Greensview Drive (see locator! Exhibit B).
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project implements and falls
under the purview of EIR-86-04 and Addendum FSEIR-86-04(B) and that no further
environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt attached resolution approving Tentative Subdivision Map
EastLake Greens Parcel R-12, Chula Vista Tract 96-02, in accordance with the findings and
subject to the conditions contained therein.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: At its November 29, 1995 meeting,
the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of Tentative Subdivision Map
EastLake Greens Parcel R-12, Chula Vista Tract 96-02.
/7~/
Page 2, Item --.!?
Meeting Date 12/19/9:'
DISCUSSION:
Site Characteristics
The project site is a level development pad created as part of the South Greens mass grading
program. The relative elevation of the site to the street decreases from west to east and from
south to north towards the project's main access point. The project site is bounded on the
north by South Greensview Drive, on the south by Orange Avenue (located approximately 10-
15 feet below), to the east by Hunte Parkway (25-30 ft.below) and on the west by a vacant
residential parcel (see Exhibit A).
Lot C, which is identified as Parcel P-5 in the SPA Plan, is a 3.3 acre private park site located
at the northeast corner of the subdivision (see Exhibit B). The park site terrain includes 5: I
slopes along the east and west property lines, while the central portion slopes from north to
south.
Zoning and Land Use
Zoning
Land Use
Planned Community District
Land Use Designation*
Site PC (Planned Community) - Residential, Vacant
North PC (Planned Community) - Residential, Vacant
South PC (Planned Community) - Residential, Vacant
East PC (Planned Community) - Residential, Vacant
West PC (Planned Community) - Residential, Vacant
RP-13
RP..,8 / OS
(Otay Ranch)
RS-7
RP-8
* See EastLake Greens Planned Community District Regulations, Exhibit C-l.
Proposal
The proposed tentative map consists of 92 single family detached lots, 2 open space lots (lots
A and B) located along the three street frontages, and a private park lot (lot C) located at the
northeast corner of the subdivision.
The subdivision design consists of two loop roads connected by a single access point to South
Greensview Drive. The majority of the residential lots are 40-45 foot wide, except for those
lots with frontages along a street knuckle which are shown as 30-35 feet. However, these
parcels meet the minimum lot width when measured at the front setback line.
I?';l
Page 3, Item _ .j 7
Meeting Date 12/19/95
Analysis
An amendment to the EastLake Greens General Development Plan (GDP) and Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) Plan was considered and approved by the City Council on December 12,
1995. As part of this amendment, Parcel R-12 has been expanded from 14.3 to 18.2 acres and
reconfigured around a 3.3 acre private neighborhood park which has been incorporated as part
of this subdivision.
The added acreage and reconfiguration of this parcel is reflected in the proposed Planned
Community District Regulation Land Use District Plan (amended by Ordinance) and it is
expected to be in effect by January 16, 1996 after the second reading of the Ordinance. For this
reason, staff is recommending that approval of this project be contingent upon the PC District
Regulations Land Use District Plan (PCM-96-02) taking effect. Based on this contingency, the
analysis presented in this report assumes the new land use designation, parcel configuration,
acreage and designated number of units for this parcel.
Compliance with EastLake Greens General Development and SPA Plan
The EastLake Greens General Development Plan (GDP) designates Parcel R-12 as Residential
Low Medium Density, (LM) (3-6 du/ac) and parcel P-5 as Parks and Recreation (P). The
target density and number of units established in the SPA plan is 5.1 du/ac and 92 units. The
project, as conditioned, is in compliance with the GDP and SPA.
Compliance with Planned Community Regulations
The EastLake Greens Land Use District Plan designates the site as RP-13, Residential Planned
Concept (see Exhibit C-l). Within this land use designation lots are required to be 3,000 sq.
ft. with minimum dimensions of 38 ft wide and 50 ft. deep. The subdivision's average size
parcel is 42 ft. x 100 ft. with an average lot area of 4,200 sq.ft. Thus, the subdivision design
is in compliance with the lot standards contained in the Planned Community District
Regulations (see Exhibit C-2).
/7/3
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date
/1
12/19/95
Conclusion
With the approval of amendments to the EastLake Greens General Development Plan, Sectional
Planning Area Plan and Planned Community District Regulations as previously noted, this
project will be in compliance with all applicable regulations. Thus, staff recommends approval
of the project in accordance with the attached Planning Commission Resolution.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The applicant has paid for all costs associated with the processing of this tentative map.
Attachments
1. City Council Resolution
'1 Exhibits
3. Planning Commission Minutes and Resolution
4 Addendum to FSEIR-86-04(b)
5. Disclosure Statement
(m :\home\planning\luis\pcs9602.a] 3)
)?,'/
RESOLUTION NO. /0/ /7 c
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING AND IMPOSING CONDITIONS ON THE TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR EASTLAKE GREENS PARCEL R-I2, CHULA
VISTA TRACT 96-02
I. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject matter of this resolution is
diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference, and commonly known as Unit 12 of EastLake Greens Tentative Subdivision
Map, Chula Vista "rract 96-02; and for the purpose of general description herein consists
of 21.5 acres and located on the west side of Hunte Parkway between South Greensview
Drive and East Orange A venue. \vithin the EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area of
the EastLake Planned Community ("Project Site"); and,
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on September 8. 1995 EastLake Development Company ("Owner") filed a
tentative subdivision map application with the Planning Department of the City of Chula
Vista and requested approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map for EastLake Greens Unit
12, Chula Vista Tract 96-02 in order to subdivide the Project Site into 92 residential lots,
2 open space lots (lots A & B) and one park lot (lot C) ("Project"); and
C. Prior Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, the development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of 1) a
General Development Plan. EastLake II (EastLake I Expansion) General Development
Plan previously approved by City Council Resolution No. 15198 ("GDP"); 2) the
EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area Plan, previously adopted by City Council
Resolution No. 15199 ("SPA"); and]) a Tentative Subdivision Map, previously approved
by City Council Resolution No. 15200 ("TSM"), Chula Vista Tract 88-3, all approved
on July 18, 1989; 4) an Air Quality Improvement Plan, EastLake Greens Air Quality
Improvement Plan (AQIP); and 5) a Water Conservation Plan, EastLake Greens Water
Conservation Plan (WCP); both previously approved by City Council Resolution No.
16898 on November 24, 1992; and 6) a ClDP, and SPA amendment previously approved
by City Council Resolution No. __ on December 19, 1995; and
D. Planning Commission Record on Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project
on November 29. 1995, and voted (6-0) to recommend that the City Council approve the
I r->.-- I)
/ -
Project, based upon the findings and subject to the conditions listed below.
E. City Council Record of Applications
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before the
City Council of the City of Chula Vista on December 19, 1995, on the Project and to
receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony
with regard to same.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby find,
determine ancl resolve as follows:
II. PLANNING COl\lMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their
public heari ng on the Project held on November 29, 1995, and the minutes and
resolutions resu 1 ti ng therefrom. arl' hereby incorporated into the record of this
proceeding.
III. PREVIOUS EIR-86-04 AND ADDEl\'DUM EIR-86-04B REVIEWED AND
CONSIDERED; FINDINGS; APPROVALS
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista has previously reviewed, analyzed,
considered, and approved EIR-86-04 and Addendum FSEIR-86-04(B) and therefore no
further action by the City Council is necessary.
IV. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FINDINGS
A. Pursuant to (Jovernmcnt Code Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the
City Council finds that the Tentative Subdivision Map as conditioned herein for
EastLake Greens Unit 12. Chula Vista Tract No. 96-02 is in conformance with
the elements of the City's General Plan, based on the following:
a. Land Use
The EastLah~ C;recns General Development Plan designates parcel R-12
as Low/Medium density Residential (3-6 du/ac) and parcel P-5 as Parks
and Recreation (P). The target density is 5.1 du/ac with a maximum of
92 dwelling units. The project, as conditioned, is in compliance with the
GDP and SPA.
b. Circulation
All of the on-site and off-site public streets required to serve the
subdivision will be constructed or DIF fees paid by the developer in
accordance with the EastLake Greens Public Facilities Financing Plan and
, r7 / /,
- t./
Development Agreement.
The public streets within the Project will be designed in accordance with
the City design standards and/or requirements. The adjoining street
system was designed to handle the anticipated tlow of traffic from this and
other area projects.
c. Housing
The EastLake Greens Affordable Housing Program and Agreement has
been adopted and incorporated into the SPA Plan to ensure that a
minimum of 10% affordable housing including a mix of housing types and
lot sizes for single-family, townhouses, condominium and various
apartment densities will provide a wide spectrum of housing prices for
persons of various incomes.
d. Conservation
The Environmental Impact Report EIR-86-04 and Addendum FSEIR-86-
04(B) addressed the goals and policies of the Conservation Element of the
Cleneral Plan and found the development of this site to be consistent with
these goals and policies.
e. Parks and Recreation. Open Space
The EastLake Greens SPA Plan provides public parks, tfails and open
space consistent with City policies. The project will implement in paft
conditions of approval for the EastLake Greens SPA Plan requiring
grading and conceptual design of a :3 acre private park.
f. Seismic Safety
The proposed subdivision is in conformance with the goals and policies of
the Seismic Element of the General Plan for this site.
g. Safety
The Fire Department and other emergency service agencies have reviewed
the proposed subdivision for conformance with City safety policies and
have determined that the proposal meets the City Threshold Standards for
emergency scrv Ices.
I ---7 7
h. Noise
Noise mitigation measures included in the Environmental Impact Report
EI R -86-04 and Addendum EI R-86-04B adequatel y address the noise policy
of the General Plan. The project has been conditioned to require that all
dwelling units be designed to preclude noise levels over 45 dBA.
Additionally, all exterior private open space will be shielded by a
combination of earth. berm, wall, and/or buildings to limit the exterior
noise exposure to 65 dBA for all outside private patio areas.
1. Scenic Highway
The project site is located adjacent to a designated scenic highway and an
average 75' wide landscaped open space buffer and a decorative wall will.
be provided along the East Orange A venue and extended along Hunte
Parkway.
J. Bicycle Routes
Bicycle lanes have been incorporated within the EastLake Greens Planned
Community area design and are presently in use. The public streets
within the project are of adequate width to accommodate bicycle travel
within the interior of the subdivision.
k. Public Buildings
No public buildings are proposed on the project site. The project IS
subject to RCT fees prior to issuance of building permits.
B. Pursuant to Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the COllncil certifies
that it has considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the
region and has balanced those needs against the public service needs of the
residents of the City and the availahle fiscal and environmental resources.
C. The configuration, orientation and topography of the site partially allows for the
optimum sitting of lots for passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities
as required by Government Code Section 66473.1.
D. The site is physically suitable for residential development and the proposal
conforms to all standards established by the City for sllch projects.
E. The conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other entitlement herein
contained is approximately proportional both in nature and extent to the impact
created by the proposed devclopment.
'7_ X.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the Project
subject to the genera] and special conditions set forth below.
v. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The approval of the foregoing Tentative Subdivision Map which is stated to be
conditioned on "General Conditions". is hereby conditioned as follows:
A. Project Site is Improved with Project
Developer, or their successors in interest, shall improve the Project Site with the Project
as described in Tentative Subdivision Map Chula Vista Tract 96-02 and EIR-86-04 and
Addendum FSEIR-86-04(B) except as modified by this Resolution.
B. Implement I\-litigation l\leasures
Developer shall diligently implement. or cause the implementation of, all mItIgation
measures pertaining to the Project identified in the Final Supplemental Impact Report for
EastLake Greens E[I(-86-04 and Addendum FSEIR-86-04B.
C. Implement previously adopted conditions of approval pertinent to project
Unless otherwise conditioned, developer shall comply with all unfulfilled conditions of
approval of the EastLake (;reens Tentative Map. Chula Vista Tract 88-3 established by
Resolution No. 15.200 approved by Council on July 18, 1989 and Amending Resolution
17618, and shall remain in compliance with and implement the terms, conditions, and
provisions of EastLake (jreens Sectional Planning Area, EastLake Greens Planned
Community District Regulations. the EastLake Greens Development Agreement, the
Water Conservation Plan and the Air Quality Plan. Design Guidelines and the Public
Facilities Financing Plan as are applicable to the property which is the subject matter of
this tentative map. prior to approval of the Final Map or shall have entered into an
agreement with the City, providing the City with such security (including recordation of
covenants running with the land) and implementation procedures as the City may require,
assuring that after approval uf the Final Map. the developer shall continue to comply
with, remain in compliance with, and implement such plans.
D. Implement Public Facilities Financing Plan
Developer shall install public facilities in accordance with the EastLake Greens Public
Facilities Financing Plan ("PFFP") as amended or as required by the City Engineer to
meet threshold standards adopted by the City of Chula Vista. The City Engineer and
Planning Director may, at thei r discretion. modi fy the sequence of improvement
construction should conditions change to warrant such a revision. Developer further
agrees to abide by any subsequent amendment to the PFFP made by the City that
addresses the park improvement obligations of the Developer, including but not limited
to, the dedication of parkland, the construction of the Community Center and Gym or
r)_ Lj
/ I
/
such other park i I1lproveml'nts.
E. Contingency of Project Approval
Approval of this project is contingent upon the PC District Regulations Land Use District
Plan taking effect (PCM-96-07).
F. Design Approval
Developer shall develop the lots in accordance with plans which shall be submitted for
review and approval under the City's design review process prior to submittal for
building permits.
VI. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROV AL
Prior to approval of the final map unless otherwise indicated, the developer shall:
STREETS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND II'vlPROVEMENTS
1. Design and construct all streets. public sewcrs and storm drains to meet City standards
or as approved by the City Engineer. Submit improvement plans for approval by the
City Enginecr detailing the horizontal and vertical alignment of said streets, sewers and
storm drains.
2. Construct or agree to construct all improvements interior to the subdivision (streets,
sewers, drains, etc) deemed necessary to provide service to the subject subdivision in
accordance with City standards.
3. All storm drains serving this subdivision shall be connected to the existing 30" RCP
storm drain in East Orange A venue unless evidence satisfactory to the City Engineer is
presented to demonstrate available capacity downstream of proposed points(s) of
connection and the feasi bi Ii ty 0 f proposed storm d rai n al ign ment.
4. Construct or agree to construct East Orange Avenue, from Hunte Parkway to the
westerly boundary of the SDG&E easement westerly of the subdivision.
5. Provide an irrevocable oller to dedicate (100) oil site street right-of-way necessary to
install public street improvements for Hunte Parkway from Clubhouse Drive to East
Orange Avenue and East Orange Avenue from Hunte Parkway to the westerly boundary
of the SDG&E easement \vesterly of the subdivision boundary.
6. Grant on the final map along the I"rontage of the subdivision:
a) A 10 ft. wide easement for utilities along (Jreensview Drive
b) A 10 ft. wide easement for utility, side\valk purposes and future street easement
purposes along Hunte Parkway; entire area of said easement shall not exceed 5: 1
! """;7
j /
1,....-
<-. >
slope.
c) A 20 ft. wide landscape easement and 10ft. wide utility easement along East
Orange Avenue. Slope of said easements shall not exceed 5: 1 ratio.
7. Submit and obtain approval from Director of Planning and City Engineer for street
names.
8. Present written ventlcation to the City Engineer from Otay Water District that the
subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long term water storage
facilities.
GRADING
9. Obtain permission to grade: grade and install swales and/or ditches necessary to drain
future Unit R-IO away from the westerly boundary of this subdivision.
10. Provide an updated preliminary geotechnical investigation that addresses the proposed
earthwork shown on the Tentative Map, and changes in geotechnical references and
standards.
11. Submit and obtain approval of the City Engineer for an erosion and sedimentation control
plan together with grading plans.
12. Change grading plans to rcllect a cross section at top of slopes of open space lots
showing a minimum distance of 2' from the face of the perimeter wall to top of slope
and shows the back of the perimeter wall at the property line.
13. Submit a list of proposed lots indicating whether the structure will be located on fill, cut,
or a transition bet\veen the two situations.
AGREEMENTS
14. Enter into an agreement with the City whereby:
a The developer agrees the City may withhold building permits for any units in the
subject subdivision if anyone of the following occur:
]. Regional development threshold limits set by the East Chula Vista
Transportation Phasing Plan have been reached.
]]. Traffic volumes. levels of service, public utilities and/or services exceed
the adopted City threshold standards.
I '--7_
../ /
b. The developer agrees that the City may withhold building permits for any of the
proposed development if the required public facilities, as identified in the PFFP
and Condition No. J and Table I of Resolution 15,200 or as amended or
otherwise conditioned have not been completed or constructed to satisfaction of
the City. The developer may propose changes in the timing and sequencing of
development and the construction of improvements affected. In such case, the
PFFP may be amended as approved by the City Planning Director and City
Engi neer.
15. Agree to defend. indemni fy and hold harmless the City and 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 any approval by the City, including
approval by its Planning Commission. City Councilor any approval by its agents,
officers, or employees with regard to this subdivision pursuant to Section 66499.37 of
the Map Act provided the City promptly notifies the subdivider of any claim, action or
proceeding and on the further condition that the City fully cooperates in the defense.
16. Agree to hold the City harmless from any liability for erosion, siltation or increase now
of drainage resulting from this project.
17. Agree to insure that all franchised cable television companies ("Cable Company") are
permitted equal opportunity to place conduit and provide cable television service to each
lot within the subdivision. Restrict access to the conduit to only those franchised cable
television companies \vho are. and remain in compliance with, all of the terms and
conditions of the franchise and \vhich are in further compliance with all other rules,
regulations, ordinances and procedures regulating and affecting the operation of cable
television companies as same may have been, or may from time to time be issued by the
City of Chula Vista.
OPEN SPACE/ASSESSMENTS
18. Offer to grant in fee open space lot,; A and 13 on the final map for this subdivision.
19. Open space Lot 13 shall provide a minimum IS ft. wide area for landscaping between the
back of sidewalk and the subdivision perimeter wall.
20. Note on the final map for this subdivision the use of Lot C as a private park.
21. Submit a list of all facilities located on open space lots to be maintained by the existing
EastLake Open Space District No. I. This list shall include a description, quantity and
unit price per year for the perpetual maintenance of all facilities located on open space
lots to include but not be limited to: walls, fences, water fountains, lighting structures,
paths, access roads. drainage structures and landscaping. Only those items on an open
space lot are eligible for open space maintenance. Each open space lot shall also be
'r-:; ,I)
I... ./ ........
broken down by tile numher of acres of turf, irrigated, and non-irrigated open space to
aid the esti mat ion of a main tenanc:~ budget thereof.
22. Comply with the terms and conditions of the Acquisition/Financing Agreement for
Assessment District 94-1. CO 94-064, approved by Council Resolution R17483 as said
terms and cond i t i on s Illay be appl i cah 1e to tll i s development.
23. Make payment to reduce the debt on the subject property as the result of lower density
than assumed for the assessment district at the time of District formation. The amount
of said payment shall be determined by multiplying the difference between the actual and
assumed number of units multiplied by the estimated assessment (or principal
outstanding) per unit.
24. Pay all costs associated with apportionment of assessments for all City assessment
districts as a result of lot line adjustments and subdivision of lands within the boundary.
Request apportionment and provide a deposit to the City estimated at $25/unit!district to
cover costs.
MISCELLANEOUS
25. A detailed construction phasing schedule for the construction of private and community
parks shall be suhmitted to the Director of Parks and Recreation and Planning
Department for review prior to issuance of tile first building permit.
26. Tie the Boundary of the subdivision to the california System -Zone VI (1983).
27. Submit copies of tile Final r-.1aps and improvement plans in a digital format such as
(DXF) graphic file prior to approval of each final map. Provide computer aided design
(CAD) copy of the final map based on accurat~ coordinate geometry calculations and
submit the information in accordance with the City Guidelines for Digital submittal in
duplicate on 5- 114 HD floppy disk to the approval of each final map.
28. Submit a preliminary landscape plan for Lot C to the Parks and Recreation Department
Landscape Architect for review and approval prior to approval of the park grading plan.
Submit preliminary plans and water management guidelines for all landscaping in
accordance with the Chula Vista Design Manual. The landscaping format for the project
shall be in substantial conform,\!ll'e with Section 6.4 (General Landscape Concept) of the
EastLake Greens SPA.
29. Provide a landscape design and install landscaping in accordance with said plans for the
for the full length of Orange Avenue and Hunte Parkway. Said design shall represent
an average 75 1'1. from back of curb and shall be submitted for approval by the Parks and
Recreation Landscape Architect prior to or concurrently with the first site plan approval.
Incorporation of identi fication of a neighhorhood entry (Hunte Parkway and East Orange
Avenue) shall be included in thIS design.
/"7_ 1"(
30. Provide a noise study addressing noise impacts generated by major streets surrounding
the project (East Orange A venue! Hunte Parkway! South Greensview) and shall take
such action as is necessary to mitigate noise to acceptable levels prior to issuance of
building permits.
CODE REOUIREI\1ENT CONDITIONS OF APPROV AL
31. Comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Preparation of
the Final Map and all plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision
Map Act and the City of Cl1ula Vista Subdivision Ordinance and SUbdivision Manual.
33. Underground all utilities within the subdivision in accordance with Municipal Code
requirements.
34. Pay the following fees in accorddnce with the City Code and Council Policy:
A. Public Facilities Developmcnt Impact Fees.
B. Signal Participation Fees.
C. All applicable sewcr fces. including but not limited to sewer connection fees.
D. Interim Pre-SR-125 Impact Fee
E. Telegraph Canyon Se\',:n Pumped Flows Development Impact Fees
F. Salt Creek Sewer Basin Devclopment Impact Fee
Pay the amount of said fees in effect at the time of issuance of building permits.
VII. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur. or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of stich conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all apprO\als hercin granted, deny, or further condition issuance of all
future building permits, deny, revoKc, or furthcr condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals hcrcin granted, institute and prosecute litigation
to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City's approval
of this Resolution.
VIII. INVALIDITY; AUTOI\Ii\TIC REVOCATION
/ ,.-)
.'
/
.' /.1
...-.
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent
upon the enforceability of cach and evcry term, provision and condition herein stated;
and that in the event that any onc or more terms, provision, or conditions are determined
by a Court of compctent jurisdiction top be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this
resolution shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect
ab initio.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Lei ter
Director of Planning
,
() /"'-.--- 'n~m~ ~(~"--
Bruce 1\1. Booga(trd
City Attorney
m: \home\planning \11I is\pl' s9602 .l'l' 1'2
! '--)
,r
''7
/']/7 /rI
-- / /
ATTACHMENT 2
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AND RESOLUTION
/'/~ --- 7
-" -/..:;;.--,,- .
~~-~
~:_---
THIS PAGE BLANK
_....~
-.~"~
......_--:-
ExcelJlt from Draft Planning Commission Minutes of 11/29/95
ITEM 4.
PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-96-02; TENTATIVE SUBDMSION MAP FOR THE
EASTLAKE GREENS UNIT 12, CHULA VISTA TRACT 96-02, INVOLVING
92 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON 21.5 ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF HUNTE P ARKW A Y AND SOUTH GREENSVIEW DRIVE -
EastLake Development Company
Acting Senior Planner Hernandez gave the staff report, giving the project location and design.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing
to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MS (Willett/Davis) to adopt Resolution PCM-96-02 recommending that the City Council
approve the Tentative Subdivision Map EastLake Greens Parcel R-12, Chula Vista Tract
96-02, in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
Vice Chair Ray asked if the landscape design would be in accordance with the City Landscape
Manual. Mr. Hernandez assured him that it would be.
VOTE:
6-0 (Chair Tuchscher excused) to approve.
..----a.. -
;
- / /
THIS PAGE BLANK
- ~"
,",~..iiil ~'-
,..' ,', /')
/ / - ,-:' /: '
RESOLUTION NO. PCS-96-02
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR PARCEL R-12, CHULA VISTA
TRACT 96-02, WITHIN THE EASTLAKE GREENS PLANNED
COMMUNITY
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a tentative subdivision map was flIed with
the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on September 8, 1995, by EastLake
Development Company; and,
WHEREAS, said application requests approval to subdivide Parcel R-12, Chula Vista
Tract 96-02, within the EastLake Greens Planned Community; and,
WHEREAS, the property consists of 21.5 acres located on the south side of South
Greensview Drive west of Hunte Parkway, and the proposal is to subdivide the property into 92
single family detached lots and 3 open space lots; and,
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project
implements and falls under the purview of EIR-86-04 and Addendum EIR-86-04B and that no
further environmental review is necessary; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on the tentative
map and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the city and it mailing to property owners and tenants within
1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m.,
November 29, 1995, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has previously considered EIR-86-04 and
Addendum EIR-86-04B and, therefore, no further environmental action by the Commission is
necessary .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the attached draft City Council Resolution
approving the Tentative Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 96-02 in accordance with the
fmdings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
City Council.
~:=~
cr,
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 29th day of November, 1995, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
Vice Chair Ray, Commissioners Davis, Salas, Tarantino, Thomas, Willett
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Chair Tuchscher
John Ray, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
Nancy Ripley, Secretary
m :/home/planninglluis/pcs9602. per
. L::c..._.
~~.._,-
;r /) r:
- _,;~.'t,:::'l"i
- Jj
~._--+---
/ :>
ATTACHMENT 3
EXHIBITS
THIS PAGE BLANK
. cP.
~
/;/ .;;;1/"
" .
f
=
"'
I
/
" lb
~ ~
~
t\
~ ~
~
~ "
~~
" I~.
~\I .
.
C
t-
-
m
-
%
><
W
I
...
ICI ~ :
...
~ :t:
~ t\
)., ~
~ )."
::::i ~ "
l" C) ~
~ =-
't
i::
l'l
~
,
.
.
J
I
-4 /f~.~ I
/' /' ~0~j
EastLake Greens
Site Utilization Plan
, '
OI.l
PROJECT
LOCATION
-
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR ~~: lastlake Development Company ~ECT DESCRJPnON:
C9 SUBDIVISION
PROJECT Eastlake Greens Reques1: Proposal of 92 single family lots in the Eastlake
ADDRESS:
Greens Unit 12, RP13 area.
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: EXHIBIT B
NORTH No SCale PCS.96.02
-=-~-
, -; ,.~)
/
---.;,.,'''',
~ .
~... I ~
,-" . .~~ ~
,~~/./ I ... ...--...
\~' \~,~., '-'/ ( -- ~=::.='
\\ ~~ \... 'y:~~' '11 .
_\ \ ... /).~- ... /f'\~~'~ ~
\r."~ ~\ I ,,~v-.:: It{~~~. '\~ ':; /I~
~ ~ I~ __ .# ~V~ # -. ~ \,\\ ... .-
~ _ "'- ,'//.,;::l:~:\)i \~ c;~ ;-l
'\ ~- ~~r: ~,:~l.~~ h: ,
..z~ - ~""- - j,) IN --..\ \ ~~../~(l~l
...., ~J ... \\ -, '~~"~'\\ ..,
..' I .\-:. ,\ - ---
\ - \\... :g~:;'~L ~
)~;? -- ~~ I~
\\ ~~~(fU''/-~~''~'/''
....-r ....3..?' III I #-=~ ;' /~(
,., /1t~\ - ,'v' I.#~ i~.~/~/ ~ ..,
,;,."........ k.... I I ~ ..;' ~
J....C: II /1 ..........if....<<~ _",-,I I I ~ \ -, ");
I / ,.., -" , "')-( I \.....-... /Wl
. ,I' / I "M/,'-, '-.......~ I I l-~ I" _~"Y2 ...
'I~ r; '~/ " I '--11 --,~ \
11!1 ... \\-..\~ 1 LJ " - "-., \
"'~"I \ L._'"""-....'-' /I -/",,--1
I I ,-,r~ ... ,...~~... \
... ~\. 1-""1)~i!)~*:J~" ,,'"
I (',,-:X' 1t-11 , r-;-r'~" - '-.!~
In \: '1-- \\ ' I'" l -;\ \ ~ ^- :~..,
. n _n" -r \ I -~', "( ~. /' '--J) \
II' r---.::i VC.3) \\ \ ~ '\ ~\;~.... 'l'"
III - ,~, (_.~ ,;:::;:-_. \ , \ N~' ..;( 1
'&a. ,r-~, , ~. ~ \ 1 }... ~\:'?... ~ J
t'.1 k -,{ " ~ ~ \ q;-~, ~
V ~ v~s.~1l \v' lL/~~':"~\ -, ~
... ,. ~ ,// # \ \\
. BJSIESS CENTER "V, ..s..~~~~/\ h..
~' -...- c...........-...u... ~ '\ ' ( - - ~ \h
" C .
ec-2 -...- c..................... ~ - ~~_',,"I ~V "
"~L fl\RlOSE "'....~Io'"
.., """...... t ~ -~~
........-
a.-.... - . .....
a.- .... ... .....
......-......
.............
...... . , -
..... ..... -
Land Use
Districts
PrOI)Osed
AESIDENTlAL
::::::
VI..LAGE CENTER
;' .... c.....__
we-I .... c.nr .. ..
vc-a .... 0... .. 8IUrI
..:-
LEASTLAKE
c:cr.N.NTY If IASMICE DEVB.aMNT co
.-=_LL__.
~-
, r-..J
---..--...
..--,
-..---
==..~
C)~ ___I
EXHIBIT C-1
ae.idential Propertr De.elopaent Itandard.
Land UIUt Group
BE as III Be U
1. Lot area (in net OOO'a
aquare feet) 8 5 31 IP IP
2. Lot width (1n feet) '70 SO 38 IP IP
(attached producta in RP
diatr ict) 25
3. Lot depth (1n feet) 100 100 901..-11 IPSP
SOI..-UI
4. Lot coverage (percent) 40 50 IP SP SP
5. I'ront yard .etbacka
a) to direct entry garage 20 20 SP SP IP
b) to aide entry garage 20 15 IP IP IP
(ain;le atory garage in
RS diatrict) 10
6. To main re.idence 20 20 IP IP IP
'7. Side yard aetback:
.) to adjacent reaidential 15/5 10/52 IP IP IP
lot (min. total/one aide)
b) to adjacent atreet 10 10 10 IP IP
(corner lot)
3. Rear yard aetback 20 15 IP IP IP
9. Building height, maximum 283 283 283 45 45
(2 1/2 .tory max. RE, RS
, RP district.)
10. Parking .pace. per unit 2 2 2' 1.5 1.5
(gar.) (gar. ) 1 bcl1"ll\.1 bcl1"ll\.
unit unit
2.0 .51 2.0 .51
2 bcl1"ll\.2 bclrm.
unit unit
2.5.51 2.5.p
J bd%1ll. J bclrlll.
unit + unit +
.--------------
1 May be modified for attached unita with lite Plan approval
2 RS-S Diatrict only, 13/3 in RS-'7 Diatrict
J May be increa..d to 35 feet with lite Plan approval
, Two car garage for RP detached unite, one car garage aneS one carport for RP
attached unita
(3/1/89)
11-4
.,..-~ / -;l.
I .
EXHIBIT C-2
1,'?
~---,\
~J3-~
ATTACHMENT 4
FSEIR-86-04(B) ADDENDUM
THIS PAGE BLANK
.._fr,l =
-; "'-;
.- 'I .
SECOND ADDD\1>UM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FSEIR 16-04 (8) .
PROJECT NAME: EastLake Greens GDP/SPA Amendment
PROJECT LOCATION: Various parcels within the EastLalce G~s SPA between Hunte
Parkway and the future SR-l25 Row north of the future E. Orange
Ave.
I. INTRODUCTION
The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the Environmental
Review Coordinator (ERC) to prepare an addendum to a Negative Declaration or
Environmental Impact Report, if one of the following conditions is present:
1. The minor changes in the project design which have occurred since completion
of the Final EIR or Negative Declaration that have not created any new
significant environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Final ElR or
Negative Declaration; or .
2. Changes in circumstances, 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 or more significant impacts which were not previously
addressed in the Final EIR or Negative Declaration.
3. The changes to the EIR made by the addendum do not raise new issues about the
significant effects on the environment.
D. PROPOSED PROJECT REVISIONS
The Amendments proposed can be lrouped in the followin'lenc:raJ categories:
1. Park Relocations
2. Density Transfers and Pared Boundary Adjustments
3. Removal of Interim Designation on Parcel R-26
1. Park RelocatloDS
The Neighborhood Park (parcel P-3) in the adopted plan was partially within the
SDG&E easement and contained Jess than ten acres of net useabJe acres for park
use. The park is proposed by this amendment to be relocated lOutheasterly of
~-f:~~
'1
-', .r
, '
Second Addendum to FSEIR 86-04 (B)
2
Parcel R-20 and to contain 10.0 acres net useable for park uses (11.8 acres
gross). This relocation deletes former residential Parcel R-21. The former
location of the park is proposed to be converted to Public/Quasi-Public as an
expansion of existing Parcel PQ-2. 'Ibis additional 11.0 acres will be available
for Community Purpose Facilities.
A second park relocation involves Parcel P-5, which was:l PriVate Neighborhood
Park between Parcels R-20 and R-21. This park is proposed to be relocated near
the intersection of South Greensview Drive and Hunte Parkway adjacent to Parcel
R-12. No significant change in acreage is proposed.
2. Density Transfers and Boundary Adjustments
Reductions in densities are proposed in eleven residential parcels. Increases in
densities are proposed in four residential parcels. The net result of these density
transfers is a 133 unit decrease in the overall residential density. Most of the
density transfers are minor adjustments that reflect units achieved in the tract map
and design review process. The following parcels are proposed to be changed in
a more substantive way (more than 10 du):
Parcel
Proposed Chan~e
, ,
,
R-6
R-16
R-20
R-21
R-23
R-26
-12
+26
-37
-120. .
-142
+ 200 (The Adopted Plan provided this
parce1 with an interim density.)
... .
Boundary adjustments occur primarily as a result of Park relocations and are
proposed to be reflected in the amended Tentative Tract Map. These adjustments
result in a net loss of 11.8 acres of residentia1land. An increase of 11.0 acres
has been added as Public/Quasi-Public (PQ) and the remaining 0.8 acres has been
added as Park.
The following shows the existing and proposed changes in land use and acreage
on the General Development Plan.
~
// ./ ___ :iT~:
Second Addendum to FSEIR 86-04 (B)
3
Existinl Proposed .'
RESIOENTlAL. RESIOENTlAL. .'
!--'nd Us, Acres dulle Units Lind USI AerG" dullc Units
I~- 150.1 N JoG 1* .. N JoG
III.' N IDOl LM &.IiI. .... 1m .,.0 ... tl103
M Mec:IUft 242.2 ..". tm M IMdUn 25U ..tI. 2DZ3
MH~ t25.C t MI. tll4 MH~ too.O U-tl. tie
H High tI.O '~27. 250 H .. 2~.1 '..27. 1'0
.. TatII '0\1.7 M60 "T.. ,00&.8 1527
NON-RESIDENTiAL NON-RESIDENTlAL.
LInd Use Aeres Lind Use Acres
Retail 61.8 C RItIU 11.1
Prof. & Admin. ... CoO Prof. & AcIrnIn. ...
R".I LIeS. Mfgf. '35.' ~R R".I LId. Mfll. t...
Open Space 187.' 0 Open IpICIt '17"
P..tlIICJQUI"'P~ . 1)7.1 PQ P~""'6lb. ,.....
Parkll Rec. au P PattclI Rec. -~
Major CRulltion 2' ..., Major ~ 21~.'
Sub-Total 103-0.2 Iub-TeU! ,042.0
~Fl.Ill.lft Uttlen ~p [[JFlAln Uttlen '12.'
--
Plojeet T otall 2' 2~ ., t660 PNjtct TClIaII '212'.1 1527
3. Removal of interim Destination for Parcel R-26
Parcel R-26 was liven an Interim Designation on the Adopted SPA Plan. This
designation indicated that the density of 4.5 du/ae would be subject to future
amendment to reflcct the Chula Vista General Plan. The Interim Desilnation was
assigned to allow an Affordable Housina Propam for all of EastlaJce to be
deve1o~. This prOirant has proceeded and has desianated this parcellS I site
to implement a' portion of the Chula Vista Housin, Element requirement for
Affordable Housing. The increase in density is proposed to allow this proaram
to be implemented.
""""-ccL2 -'-
/ /~v
':
General
Development
Plar.
AdoIlted
"""
HI
AESIOENTIAL.
LAND~ .eNS
L W. IIQ.I
""" '--,......... ...
.. ....... leu
.. -.-.-, ,...
H ..,.. no
...,.., 10 'I.'
N:lN -RESOENilAL.
,
.
WJt 01
CIJIAt ~ \
~, ,.,
... lOOt .
." '"1 I PO
H-" .... . '\
I
"-J1. tIO '~
.'-I.~__ .
0"0 LM
11)) "
---
'po
.
LAND ~ ACIIIIE$
C...., .,..
~~.~ u
... =~~ '.1
o .J QIaoI"OI 11,..
po ~~ ",..
, '-" . ----. ,".
"'1IlI' ~ ""
...,.. ,C0Q.2
~ ,..,. '*"
...... ,.
7U
,,,,. -
IMO ..,
. ...... .... ...
...---.-.--------
. ..--------
.& E"ASTLAKE
A fl1.N.ND ~ITY IV EASTlAKE DEVE1.OPtt'fNT CO
_..fciL:-. / /-- ;;;;/
~tmj~
....., ,_iM ~ J
..-.._~. ~..
ra.~__
Exhibit 1
General
Development
Plan -
ProIlosed
RESIDENTIAL
Lind Use Acres du/.e Units
ILIw
LM LIw~
M Medium
MH MecliurWHigh
H High
~TCItII
250.5 0.3 7G
381.0 o.e 1803
25' " 1-". 2C23
100.0 H.". 13oC&
2..3 '8-27. &'0
'006.8 6527
NON.RESIDENTIAL
land Use Acres
c R.tail &U
COO Prof. & Admin. I.'
loR Rn & Ud Mfgr. 135.8
o Open Space 117.1
PC Public/Quali-Pub. 1.1.8
. P Parb & Rte:. _.2
MljOt Cir~\ion 21".7
~Total 'G42.0
~FlWe Urtlen '72.8
Project TaIaIs 212' .. IS27
. ....... --
..-....-.....- -- ....----
..-----....-
..4 E"ASTLAKE
A PL.NHD COM'd.HTY BY EASnAKE ~ co.
~:jy.-
~tmir-n
LA/'lll ,_iMl 1
...... t......-.. ......
,..~_..-
"lOtI'
>/
~
/--::;
Exhibit 1
z-= Jtl I
~ ~~ ~'~e!:~I:I~I~~~I~::~'12;:t~I:I..
...... ....... .. .. .. C\I" w.... ~~ ..
-'~
a.. e, J
~ I ~~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I
~: NN~..~~~~~...~~~~.O.Nftft.O....
Z ~ .. .... · .-
C) J ~h.OO.~.~..ft..Y~~..~.....ft... !
L-' ....ft~O..~..~..O...~OO~~~ft.. S
~ ...NNN...... .....H......H ......... · v
N
-
..J
;:::
::>
w
t
-
i
E...' I ~
~ I ..
~~
oil.fl ~
~~I
. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:,~~
~.:!=ft;.ftH--h~. ~
~I
i; J,I
.. 1)1
!'I
II.
Ii '.
111= J j
~-.-:.J--F' ~
~~...
~~"
WI6
w"
~c
iiS(!)
~
. "Il.
/
-/') /
/- /
_____I ~./
EJ I
~ll~
:11 I
1.1 I
III 1
1'1 I
II, I
)1 '
.. IP II
I" ~IJ'
., '~DI
-
Z~Ji I
I . ~ ~ · ~'I~!:I~t~=I:~:~11 1:':1':; .
.,. .,.j ~ ~~.. ~ ~.. - - .. S;
C. g.1} ~.... .~~~.lfI~~~lfI~.lfIlfI.~ ~lfI~.~.! I
'- .......-..--..........:.... :....,.. =
Z~
o I' -.
... ................~.......~ ~..-...N~ i
1-- ..-.~~O~.~..N--..... -O~~....
~ ~WN~.~~ ft~W-_.~ -- -_ ·
C:(
N
...
-'
i=
::)
I ...........lfI..-......
.~~.O~ft-.ftW--~..~I.~
....~ ~. .
'I JI!III
I ~.lfIlfIlfIlfI.lfI~lfIlfIlfllfl.lfI .lfl~~ ~
~~~~--~.~...-....~ ----~~~
....O...................~..
II
IIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOQQQQQQ QQQQ=OQ
ccccc ccccc ~
-
.! .
j II · ._~.lfI."."'2-...~.ltl."~ I
I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.~~~~~~~t
ICCCCCCcc CCCCCCCCCl:CCl:CCCCCCCcc
i j I ill
". . .
i t
.
.-. -, .."J I
-e;iL- -.~-
;/ /) /'
'--..1 . /'
..
I
~~n
Wl6
~!'
iij(D
~
--.......
---
--_.
Land Use
. Districts
. AdoIlted
fIESIOEHTlAL
----...... -
-
:::::::
-.
~ ........, - . DlIIrcI
~ ........, . - ......
VU.ACE CEN'TER
~' .... c..... _
~J w.ee c.... . ..
~. .... 0... . ...
;,;.
'. .
--.....,.....
......... --
......... --
......... --
.......... ....
..............
........., -
......... -
LFASTLAKE
. ca-MNTY Ii IASnNCE DEVB.ClfMNT co.
~d--
'--7-~:' <'
/ / I....
==:==:.~
-..--
M.....~-.-
f!!L. .
,..... r-..--l
Exhibit A
---..
---
---...
Land Use
Districts
".' Pro!losed
...
~
.....--..-
ad__-'_
:::::
..Ji .... ,..,. . , ....
..... ___ a....._
..... Cll..A4~..._
....... ......, o.&Jl .. _
c..
A _.wi 0... J -"" - II ~
"-:t;;1Q8/ ~ . a ......
......., ~... - . CIIIIrWt
~~~...-..~
YI.L.AGE ~
~' .... c..._
\IC-' .... c.. . ...
.0-. .... 0... . ~
.;.
........t_
ClIII.- ...... _
.......... -
ClIII.-.... .._
ClIII.- ... .._
.........-
........., -
......... -
..4 E"ASTLAKE
A flNND c:o.MHTY If wnm CI'VI..QfMNf CQ.
. ~~o:c~~
--- ...--..
-.-..-.,
----..--
ty)'S;"Il::l:\"" _._.
~
,.... ~
1110'"
~: /'
Exhibit A
Second Addendum to FSEIR 86-04 (B)
..
m.
CHANGES IN IMPACT ANALYSIS
~
The project site has be graded for sometime and this mirior shift in land uses and minor
modifications to densities will not result in any change in the natural environment the
provision of public facilities was programmed in the orilinaJ EastLake ODP/SPA at.
specific density. The minor reduction and density shifts that part of this proposal would
not significantly impact the' provision of these services. the minor Jeduction in
population would result in . commensuration reduction in related impacts.
IV.
CONCLUSION
...
Pursuant to Section IS] 64 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 previously
sited FEIR adequate under CEQA.
v. REFERENCES
EIR-96-04 EastLake Greens
EIR-96-04 (A) Addendum
IS-96-04 EastLake Greens GP A/SP A Modification
General Plan, City of Chula Vista
Title ] 9, Chula Vista Municipal Code -- ~
City of Chula Vista Environmental Review Procedures
,
-:c:~~
/ ~/. //r.
/ / /' I..
i
I
...:r>uli('nfrrl f(l Coc.,nlUnity grlL/('('
.. ~ IOULIWJtD. PMIG loN.L.EY. ~IA","
T1Lf~E f70.22Z2. MEA COOl '"
.~ ..... ,-. ...
.... :..' \ ,
..~ " ~tI. ::-f'.
...-... .
OCTO
4 199r:
/j -
(.~.;I: .
"'"
YIA ~AZ ..1-1171
, v.a. .al1
October 2, 1995
Mr. Douglas D. RiI!d
Environmental Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 11912-1087
.e. 'ropose4 amen4ment ~o ~be A4opte4 Z.ltLake II QeDe~al
Development 'lan (GD'), .el.te4 ~o ~be Z.ltLake a~eeDs
aDd an amen4ment ~o tbe I'A 'lan, an4 ~be ~ent.tl.e ~~act
)lap (18-"-05).
Dear Mr. Reid:
The Otay Water District (OWO) would like to have ample opportu-
nity to review and respond to any environmental documentation
(Negative Declaration or EIR) relating to the above referenced
project.
OWO may have site needs for the future 711-3 reservoir and other
water facilities as well, thus requiring the site(.)'~~d pipeline
routes to be called out on 'any adopted East!~ke II General
Development Plan (GOP). \~
Please contact me at 670-2293 or John Garcia at 670-2213 if you
need any information or have any questions with regard to water
facilities or service. We look forward to reviewing and res-
ponding to your completed environmental Initial study/Negative
Declaration or Draft EIR.
Sincerely,
~ f)7c-f1
Michael F. c~eman, AICP
Environmental Specialist
MFC: cp
cc: !'im Stanton
.Tim Peasley
John Garcia
Chris Craven
Rebecca Patton
~~
.
~~c--
,/f)
--. /"
Sweetwater Union Hlah School District
AdmlnlstrJdon Center
1130 Fifth Avenue
Chula VlstJ, Callfomla 91911-2896
(619) 691-5500
!. .
..;,...- .
DIvision Df Punnln'lnd Fldlldes
Ms. Barbara ReId
City of Chula Vista
Planning Departm(lnt
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Ms. Reid:
Re: Proposed EMt/ake Ceneral Development Plan Chanles
The Sweetwater Unton Hiih School District does not object to the proposed
amendments to the EastLake II General Devl!Jopment Plan. CommunItY Facllltles
District No. 1 (CFD No.1) was established to mitigate this project's Impacu to
schools. However, thank you for the notification, It Is lood that the distrIct Is kept
Informed of these changes.
Thomas Sliva
Director of PlannIng
15/ml
___, ~ ,J,
~---
'7 //" /i
/'-7,~
ATTACHMENT 5
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
- -")/1
'~d- }.~
'/
-:>
THE a. "F CHULA VISTA DJS<1OSURE STA. _€NT
. .
You are required 10 file a Statement of Disclosure of cenain OWDership or financial .iIIterests. payments, or campaign
contributions, on aU mallers which will require discretionary action on the pan oftbe City Council. PlanniDg Commission, and
, ,11 other official bodics. The foUowing informatloDmust be disclosed:
1. Ust tbe Dames of aU persons having a financial interest in tbe propeny which II tbe subject of tbe application or tbe
contract, e.g., owner. applicant. cx>ntractor, submntraClor, material supplier.
USI'LAD DEVELOPMENT COKPAMY
2. If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a corponatioD or pamershfp, list the umel of au IDdMduals owning
more tban 10% of the shares in the cx>rporation or OWDiDg any partDership iIlterest ill the plrtDershfp.
Boswell Properties
Tulago COIIIpauy
3. If any person- identified pursuant to (1) above is Don-profit organization or I trust. list the Dames of Iny person
lerving as director of the Don-profit organization or as trustee or beneficial)' or trustor of the trust
4. Hive you had more than S250 worth of business transacted with Iny member of the City staff. Boards, Commissions.
Commillees. and Council within the past twelve months? Y~_ No~ If yes. ple.aselndicate person(s): __
5. PJease identify each and every person. including any agents, employees. cx>nsultants, or independent contractors who
you have assigned to represent you before the City In this maller.
SB & 0, INC.: Randy Safino, President
6.
Have you and/or your officers or agents, ill the aggrel~te. CX>Dtributed more than $1,000 10 . CouDcilmember in the
cunent or preceding election period? Yes_ NoL If ye5, state which CoUDdlmember(s):
· · · (NOTE: Anacb addidoDaI ..&5 .
Date:
- ,~ if tlefinU tIS: -An)' iNJi~ /fmI, eo-ptI'fNI"Ihip, joiN ~ ..,a.,;" ..~ dMb,""'" ~_ ;'..Mon, ~ --... NCIMr, 1J"l1V~
Ihis .1Ii GrI)' oNr eGU1II)', dr)' tmIJ CCUIII). cily WUI1U&ip4JiIy, ~ tit ....1JOliIiul ~ tit My .... ray tit CltJlflbiMdtlfl .., tIS · ... -
~~t.~
/ 7-'}/;/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I ~/
Meeting Date 12/19/95
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution /8' J 7/ Approving a sewer service charge refund to the
Southwestern College for the period from October 21, 1993 through July
21, 1995; and appropriatin~ an.add,nal $64,600.00 therefore.
Director of Public W orks{:li ;Y
City Manager L: \ " \" \ (4/5ths Vote: Yes X No->
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
On September 29, 1995, the City Manager approved a sewer service charge variance for
Southwestern College. The Chula Vista Municipal Code allows for a refund retroactive to ninety
days prior to the date the variance application was submitted, which was January 11, 1994. It is
recommended that Southwestern College receive a sewer service charge refund of $64,575.87 for
charges paid during Fiscal Years 1993-94 and 1994-95 which were in excess of the revised
method of billing approved in the variance. Because of the magnitude of the refund and the need
for funds to be appropriated, this item needs to be approved by the Council.
RECOM.MENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution approving a sewer service
charge refund of $64,575.87 to Southwestern College and appropriating $64,600.00 from the
available balance in Fund 225.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On January 4, 1994, the Southwestern College formally requested a sewer service charge variance
from their current method of billing on the basis that a significant amount of water the college
consumes is used for irrigation and is not discharged to the sewer system.
Section 13. 14.130 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code states that any non-residential premises
subject to the sewer service charge may be granted a variance by the City Manager. A sewer
service charge variance can be justified by one of the following:
1. A non-residential user's wastewater contains a total suspended solids concentration
sufficiently low as to qualify for a different sewer service charge strength category.
2. The water supplied to such premises is not substantially discharged into the sewer system.
City staff based a proposed variance on information concerning Southwestern College's water
consumption history for a three year period, the number of students and staff members and the
/3",,1
Page 2, Item_/ g/
Meeting Date 12/19/95
number of school days per billing period, as provided by the college. The Otay Water District
provided the consumption history for Southwestern College for the years 1988 through 1993 and
1995 for the College's two water meters. Because of problems with the meter readings for some
of these years water consumption during the months of February and March of 1990, 1991 and
1995 was used to establish the variance rate. These two months generally had the lowest average
water consumption, would reflect the periods of lowest irrigation use, and consequently the
average sewer use. Staff also obtained the attendance records on student/staff populations and the
college calendars for each session during these same three years. The average wastewater
discharge rate per student/staff member for this period was calculated to be 6.16 gallons or .0082
hundred cubic feet (HCF) per capita per day.
The regular sewer service charge is based on total water consumption with an assumption that
90 % of the total water used is discharged to the sewer system. Prior to the approval of the
variance, Southwestern College was billed at the high volume commercial sewer rate of $1.37 per
HCF of water used. Since the charges under this variance are based on the total volume of
sewage generated calculated from the student/staff population figures and not the total water used,
it was necessary to adjust the sewer service rate to reflect the elimination of the irrigation. For
Fiscal Years 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96, the adjusted rate is $1.52 per HCF of wastewater
discharged.
The future variance rate will be subject to change as a result of changing costs of wastewater
treatment and maintenance of the City's sewer system and will be reviewed on a yearly basis. The
sewer service charge variance will not apply to the storm drain fee. The storm drain fee will
continue to be collected by the Otay Water District on these two water accounts.
In addition to the actual sewer service charge based on the sewage generation rate, the Master Fee
Schedule states that a special handling charge (at a minimum charge of $3.75 per building) may
be established to cover the cost of billing and inspections. This charge for Southwestern College's
67 buildings would be $251.25 for each billing period.
For Council's information Attachment I is the sample billing form that will be used to calculate
the sewer service charge for the variance in the future. The form also includes the billing charge
as stipulated in the Master Fee Schedule adopted May 22, 1993.
Section 13 .14.130 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code allows for a refund for a maximum period
of ninety (90) days preceding the date of filing the variance application. Since the application fee
was received on January 11, 1994, we propose that Southwestern College receive a refund for the
billing period beginning October 21, 1993 and extending through July 21, 1995 when they were
last billed. Under the variance the College will be billed twice a year with the next billing
occurring in January, 1996. The refund is the difference between the sewer service charges paid
on the basis of water consumption and the sewer service charges based on the variance for the
same time period. The storm drain fee is not included in the refund, since the charges and method
of billing are not affected by this variance. The total sewer service charges paid for this period
/~,~
Page 3, Item~ ~
Meeting Date 12/19/95
were $129,440.34, as shown on Attachment II. Based on the variance rate the charges would
have been $64,864.47, as shown on Attachment III. Therefore, Southwestern College will receive
a sewer service charge refund of $64,575.87 for Fiscal Years 1993-94 and 1994-95.
FISCAL IMPACT: For Fiscal Year 1995-96, $13,000 was budgeted for the Refund of Fees
account in the Sewer Service Revenue Fund (Fund 225). As of November 16, 1995, $7,492.46
remained in this account. It is anticipated that the current funds will be required for other sewer
service charge refunds during the fiscal year and an additional $64,600.00 from the available fund
balance in Fund 225 is proposed to be appropriated into account 225-2250-5420, Refund of Fees,
to cover this refund.
Attachments I, II, III
(M .IHOMEIENGINEERINGIAGENDAISWCAGEND .MEM)
File # 0790-45-LSOO6
(CLR6)
J~';J /fff-f
RESOLUTION NO. / %1 71
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A SEWER SERVICE CHARGE
REFUND TO THE SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE FOR THE
PERIOD FROM OCTOBER 21, 1993 THROUGH JULY 21,
1995; AND APPROPRIATING AN ADDITIONAL $64,600
THEREFOR
WHEREAS, on September 29, 1995, the City Manager, per his
authority in section 13.14.130 of the Chula Vista Municipal due to
irrigation water disclosure from the sewer system, approved a sewer
service charge variance for Southwestern College; and
WHEREAS, the Chula vista Municipal Code allows for a
refund retroactive to ninety days prior to the date the variance
application was submitted, which was January 11, 1994; and
WHEREAS , it is
receive a sewer service
paid during Fiscal Years
of the revised method of
recommended that Southwestern College
charge refund of $64,575.87 for charges
1993-94 and 1994-95 which were in excess
billing approved in the variance; and
WHEREAS, because of the magnitude of the refund and the
need for funds to be appropriated, this item needs to be approved
by the Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve a sewer service charge
refund to Southwestern College for the period from October 21, 1993
through July 21, 1995.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the amount of $64,600 is
hereby appropriated from unappropriated balance in the Sewer
Service Revenue Fund 225 into Account 225-2250-5420 to cover this
refund.
ed as
Ii
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:lrslswsewer.ref
/~,,~)~,~
(Attachment I)
SAMPLE
MEMORANDUM
Date
File # 0790-55-KY-098
TO:
Cheryl Fruchter, Revenue Manager
FROM:
Roger L. Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT:
SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE SEWER SERVICE CHARGE DETERMINATION
The following computation of sewer charges for the period of
to
, for the
session are based on the attendance records furnished to us by Southwestern College.
SEWER SERVICE RATE:
I. Sewer service rate per 100 cubic feet (HCF) of sewage generated = high volume commercial sewer
rate / 0.90
2. Sewage generation factor: 0.0082 HCF per capita per day
3. Sewer service charge determination:
A. 0.0082 HCF x x x $ !RCF
(days) (students) (sewer service rate)
B. 0.0082 HCF x x x $ !RCF
( day s) (classified staft) (sewer service rate)
C. 0.0082 RCF x x x $ !ReF
( day s) (academic staft) (sewer service rate)
4. Billing charge: ($3.75 x 67 buildings)
=$
= $
= $
= $ 251.25
TOTAL SEWER SERVICE CHARGE DUE
=$
BY:
ELIZABETH CHOPP, CIVIL ENGINEER
(CLR6\SWCOLL VR.A T 11
If" /? j~-g
.' I
.
TABLE I
SEWER SERVICE CHARGES
PAID BY
SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE
1. Otay Water District Account No. 914-0140-06
DA TES
AMOUNT PAID
WATER USAGE
10/21/93 -11 /18/93
11/19/93-01/21/94
01/22/94-03/22/94
03/23/94-05/20/94
OS/21/94-07/20/94
07/21/94-09/19/94
09/20/94-11/18/94
1 ]/19/94-01/23/95
0] /24/95-03/23/95
03/24/95-05/23/95
OS/24/95-07/21/95
$ 617.87
$ 854.88
$ 701.44
$ 611.02
$ 6,1 03.35
$11,069.60
$16,727.70
$ 2,678.35
$3,603.]0
$ 8,946.10
$ 7,795.30
451 RCF
624 HCF
512 HCF
446 HCF
4,455 HCF
8,080 RCF
12,210HCF
1,955 HCF
2,630 HCF
6,530 HCF
5,690 HCF
SUBTOTAL
$59,708.71
43,583 HCF
2. Otay Water District Account No. 914-0160-01
\ 0/21/93 -11118/93 $ 4,412.77 3,221 HCF
1\ /19/93-01121/94 $ 5,974.57 4,361 HCF
01/22/94-03/22/94 $ 6,329.40 4,620 RCF
03/23/94-05/20/94 $ 9,] 73.52 6,696 HCF
OS/21/94-07/20/94 $12,523.17 9,141 HCF
07/21/94-09/19/94 $10,960.00 8,000 RCF
09/20/94-11/18/94 $0.00 o HCF
11/19/94-01/23/95 $ 3,198.95 2,335 HCF
0] /24/95-03/23/95 $ 2,089.25 1,525 HCF
03/24/95-05/23/95 $ 4,774.45 3,485 HCF
OS/24/95-07/21/95 $10,295.55 7,515 HCF
SUBTOTAL $69,731.63 50,899 HCF
TOTAL (1 & 2)
$129,440.34
U'1.1{6\SWCAPPRIA TT)
J~~ I Iff- -/0
(Attachment II)
TABLE II
SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE
SEWER SERVICE CHARGES
UNDER PROPOSED VARIANCE
1. FALL SESSION 1993
No. of school days in session (from 10/21/93): 38 class days
Total Attendance: 15,814
Sewer Service Rate: $1.52/HCF
Sewage Generation Factor: .0082 HCF/CAPITAIDAY
Class Days:
.0082 HCF/CAPITAIDAY x 38 days x 15,814 x $1.52/HCF
Staff Only:
.0082 HCF/CAPIT AIDA Y x 1 day x 680 x $1.52/HCF
Classified Staff Only (January):
.0082 HCF/CAPIT AlDAY x 12 days x 286 x $1.52/HCF
Billing Carge:
($3.75 x 67 buildings)
2. SPRING SESSION 1994
No. of school days in session (to 6/3/94): 85 class days
Total Attendance: ] 6,303
Sewer Service Rate: $1.52/HCF
Sewage Generation Factor: .0082 HCF/CAPIT AlDAY
Class Days:
.0082 HCF/CAPITAIDAY x 85 days x 16,303 x $1.52/HCF
Staff Only :
.0082 HCFICAPITAIDAY x 4 days x 629 x $1.52/HCF
Billing Charge:
($3.75 x 67 buildings)
3. SUMMER SESSION 1994
No. of school days in session (to 7/28/94): 28 class days
Total Attendance: 6,431
Sewer Service Rate: $1.52/HCF
Sewage Generation Factor: .0082 HCF/CAPIT AlDAY
Class Days:
.0082 HCF/CAPITAIDAY x 28 days x 6,431 x $1.52/HCF
Page 1
I~-/I
(Attachment III)
$ 7,490.02
$
8.48
$
42.78
$
251.25
$ 17,272.05
$
31.36
$
251.25
$ 2,244.37
TABLE II
SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE
SEWER SERVICE CHARGES
UNDER PROPOSED VARIANCE
Classified Staff Only (June-l0 days, July/August-II days):
.0082 HCF/CAPITAIDAY x 21 days x 220 x $1.52/HCF
Billing Charge:
($3.75 x 67 buildings)
4. FALL SESSION 1994
No. of school days in session (to 12/1 7/94): 83 class days
Total Attendance: 16,325
Sewer Service Rate: $1.52/HCF
Sewage Generation Factor: .0082 HCF/CAPITAIDAY
Class Days:
.0082 HCF/CAPITA/DAY x 83 days x 16,325 x $1.52/HCF
Staff Only :
.0082 HCF/CAPITAIDA Y x 3 days x 631 x $1.52/HCF
Classified Staff Only (January):
.0082 HCF/CAPITAIDAY x 11 days x 290 x $1.52/HCF
Billing Charge:
($3.75 x 67 buildings)
5. SPRING SESSION 1995
No. of school days in session (to 6/2/95): 85 class days
Total Attendance: 15,933
Sewer Service Rate: $1.52/HCF
Sewage Generation Factor: .0082 HCF/CAPIT AIDA Y
Class Days:
.0082 HCF/CAPITAIDAY x 85 days x 15,933 x $1.52/HCF
Staff Only:
.0082 HCF/CAPIT AlDAY x 4 days x 627 x $1.52/HCF
Billing Charge:
($3.75 x 67 buildings)
Page 2
/i"~/,1
$
57.58
$
251.25
$ 16,888.41
$
23.59
$
39.76
$ 251.25
$ 16,880.06
$
31.26
$
251.25
TABLE n
SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE
SEWER SERVICE CHARGES
UNDER PROPOSED VARIANCE
6. SUMMER SESSION 1995
No. of school days in session (6/19/95 to 7/27/95): 28 class days
Total Attendance: 6,619
Sewer Service Rate: $1.52/HCF
Sewage Generation Factor: .0082 HCF/CAPIT AlDAY
Class Days:
.0082 HCF/CAPITAIDAY x 28 days x 6,619 x $1.52/HCF
Staff Only (June 5-16):
.0082 HCF/CAPITA/DAY x 10 days x 299 x $1.52/HCF
Billing Charge:
($3.75 x 67 buildings)
TOTAL (J ,2,3,4,5,6)
(CLI,6:\SWCAPPR2 ArT!
Page 3 / tf-, / J
$ 2,309.98
$
37.27
$
251.25
$ 64,864.47
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM P/ 19
-
MEETING DATE 12/ 19/95
ITEM TITLE:
Report on the Continuation of the Joint-Use Agreement with
the Sweetwater Union High School District for use of the
Library Facilitv at EastLake High School
SUBMITIED BY:
Lihrary Director Vh\~
./ l,i
Citv Manager J\\\,\\;l\\4JSth, Vot", Ycs~No-1L1
REVIEWED BY:
,
The original three year agreement hetween the City of Chula Vista and the
Sweetwata Union High School, providing for the joint use of the EastLake High
School Library, will expire in June 1996. Section 4.2.1 of the current agreement
allows for the extension of the Nominal Tenn. Library staff has conducted an
extensive evaluation of the project, including statistical analysis, sUlveys and public
iIl-put sessions, iIl order to detenlline tilt' project's success and to make an infonlled
recommendation about continuing this unique endeavor.
RECOMMENDATION: That City Council accept the report recommending that
the agreement between the City and the Sweetwater Union High School, providing
for the joint-use operation of the EastLake Library, be renewed for another three
year period and direct staff to negotiate such a renewal.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: At their met~ting of
December 6, 1995, the Library Board of Trustees unanimously voted to
recommend that the agreement between the City and the Sweetwater Union High
School District, providing for the joint-use operation of the EastLake Library, be
renewed for another three year period. (A IT ACHMENT A)
DISCUSSION:
In an Infonnation Memorandum to City Council dated October 4, 1995, the
Library outlined the issues and schedule of events related to the expiration of the
agreement between the City and the School District. (Attachment B) Included
in that memo was a discussion of an evaluation process. That process is now
complete.
The Library evaluated the project by:
* Conducting a thorough statistical analysis based on standard
library output measures.
* Hosting a Town Meeting on November 6, 1995 to solidt iIlput from
community members. Notice of the meeting was mailed to over 900
~r /9~/
"
ITEM~PAGE2
MEETING DATE 12(19/95
homes in the EastLake area and articles appeared prior to the meeting
in the Star News and EastLake area publications. (ATTACHMENT
C) Twenty-one people attended, included representatives from the
School District and EastLake Development Company.
*
Conducting a user survey at the EastLake Library, based on a fonn
developed by tlw Public Library Association, the week of October 30,
1995.
* Soliciting additional reactions at an EastLake (Development Company)
Community Meeting on November 7, 1995.
* Conducting a debriefing vvith the three individuals who have served as
the EastLake Senior Librarian during the last two and a half years..
* Analyzing operating costs.
A statistically valid non user survey was not conducted due to the prohibitive cost
of such a measurement instnunent. A summary package outlining the detailed
results of the evaluation process is included with this Agenda Statement
(Attachment D).
The Library evaluated the project on the following criteria:
EFFECTIVENESS OF THE TOINT-USE AGREEMENT:
Factors such as access, parking, support of collection development, custodial and
maintenance services, and the quality of the relationship with District and High
School staff were among the dements considered as part of the evaluation.
Relationship with District and High School
The written agn'ement lwtween the City and the School District has proven
to be a very practical document. I t has provided answers to most questions
and prevented any serious disagreements from occurring.
The Senior Librarians unanimously report that they have experienced an
excellent working envirorunent at the High School and that there is
considerable support f<)r the joint-use library by both school administrators
and faculty. Day to day working relationships have been cordial and
productive. Commlllucation is generally good, although the school does not
always provide public library staff with advance infonnation regarding
!P~-- ;9-02
17
ITEM~PAGE 3
MEETING DATE 12/19/95
weekcl\(l awl night use of t he campus which frequently impacts parking
availability.
Custodial and Maintenance
The Senior Librallans also report that the custodial service provided by the
District is excellent with verv good response to special requests.
Perhaps the single most common complaint frolll puhlic library staff has
been about the air tempnatlJre in the huilding. It is generally too cold.
Although this has been reported mllHtTOUS tillles, the school has been
unable to correct the situation.
A( Tess
The physical location of the library continues to he prohlematic.
Participants in the Town iv1ccring reported that the location needs to be
1lI0re visihle from the street and that there needs to be better sigtlagc.
Surprisingly, 121 out of 1')9 respondents to the user survey ranked the ease
with which they located the library on the campus on their first visit as
either a :) or a 4 (throughout this report, all rderences to the survey are
based OIl a scale of I to 4 , with I being low and 4 being high). Also, 14 out
of 20 respolHlents to the survey at the East Lake Development Company's
Community Meeting rated the case as a 4.
However, in tllt"ir written COIllIlH'Ilts, these very same survey respondents
frequently indicated that it was difficult to fiIld the library and complained
about lack of parking. It would be interesting to compare non-user
respondents to this question had we been able to conduct a scientific non-
user survey.
Directional signage to the library is quite good on Otay Lakes and Telegraph
Canyon Roads. There does need to be a large sigIl directiIlg library traffic
into the second (or Main) entrance into the campus. At that entrance there
is a map and a good direct (observable) path to the library. Those who take
the first exit into the campus (near the park and tennis courts) end up being
almost alwavs lost.
Awareness of the location of the Iihrary appears to be very high among
EastLake area residents. Based OIl a show of hands, over 90% of the
audience at the EastLake Community meeting knew about the library. This
is undoubtedly due, in part, to the excellent coverage the EastLake
~ )9--3
If
ITEM~AGE4
MEETING DATE 12/19/95
Development Company has given to the library in its various newsldters
and publications. Some 146 out of 160 respondents to the user sUIVey
rated the convenience of the library's location in the EastLake community
as a 'j or a 4. Additionally, 18 out of 20 respondents at the EastLake
Community meeting rated convenience as a 4..
Parking
Parking has been a continual problem on the campus. A number of Town
Meeting attendees commented on the lack of convenient, adjacent parking.
A suggestion was made to open up the fire lane and allow parking at the rear
of the library. Approximately one third (S lout of 160) of the individuals
who answered the Ilser sHIVey question regarding the adequacy of
convenient parking rated it either a I or a 2. Public library staff report that
on Saturdays, the lot is frequently full by the time they arrive to work due
to tests or other special events. The school has responded by allocating 24
parking spots near the front entrance as "Library Only Parking." However,
this parking is not monitored and is sometimes used for non-library
purposes.
Public Library Hours
The lack of day time hours has always been a major concem to Library staff.
During tlle Town Meeting, there were some questions as to why there was
no access to the library during school hours. EastLake High School
Principal Stan Canaris answered by describing the benefits of a dosed
campus as a student safety issue, which satisfied the audience. There were
suggestions for the library to be open until 9:00 PM and to open earlier on
Saturdays. There were nUIlwrous written comments from the user sHIVey
regarding the need t()r additional hours. It is highly unlikely that the School
District would ever allow the public to access the library during school
hours.
The user sUIVey found that 114 of the 157 respondents to tlle hours
question rated the convenience either a ~j or a 4.
Material Collections
The material collections at EastLake Library are to be jointly developed by
both the City and School District. The opening day collection was very
equitably developed by both parties, but during the last two years, the
School Librarian's annual allocations for discretionary purchases has
~ 19-tj
lTEMJ/;AGE 5
MEETING DATE 12/19/95
il\Trilged between SSOO ilnd S 1000. The City's materiilIs budget for
EilstLake in FY I 99S-9() is S24,)OO. Over the lilst two ilnd a half years,
t he District has pmchased II J) I ') and the Citv has pmchased 21,234
volumes for a total of ~2,R49 volumes.
The public indicates that this is the ilrea of their greatest COllCeDl.
PaJiicipants in the TmvlI Meeting repOlied that the size and caliber of the
collection did not meet the educational level of residents. They also
IlH'ntioned the lIeed f(l[ more titles in Spanish. The users survey found that
ollIy 4({){) of the respondents found the specific title (book, video, etc) for
which they were looking and thilt only 4W+b found something by a specific
author or on a specific subject. This is particularly poor fill rate (the
national average is approximately 70'Y!)). In their written conunents, survey
respondents frequcntly commcnted on the lack of materials. On the plus
side, 100% of the users who \vere just brovvsing found something to take
awav. The user survey also asked respondents to rate the quality of
collections, again on a scale of I to 4. This proved to be a mixed bag of
results, since 12 respondents rated the collections as a I; 24 as a 2; 63 as a
'~; and 4') as a 4.
COMMUNITY SUPPORT AND USAGE
The Library has collected standard olltput measures related to typical library use,
including check-outs, rderenct' qucstions answered, library visits, program
attendance, ete. We have also computed many of these statistics on a per capita
basis and compared those figures by branch. The Planning Department assisted us
in determining that EastLake scrves 19,067 residents, Civic Center/Main serves
74,34') and South Chula Vista serves 63,113.
\\1c have found that although lIsage is low compared to the other branch libraries
in the system, usagc is growing annually and continued growth can bc expected.
The Town Meeting and usn SllIVl'YS have uncovClTd a small, but loyal, committed
and vocal user group. AttadlllH'lIt D includes much of the following infoDnation
in table fODnat.
Circulation
EastLake circulation in FY I 99')-9() is projected to total 49,076. This fi6'l1[e
includes both school and public library homs. EastLake's circulation will
represent approximatdy'-L()'J1) of the system's total projected circulation of
1,360,196. (Civic Center/Main accounts for 69.7% of the system's
p'f 19,f
19
ITEM ~GE 6
MEETING DATE 12/19/95
circulation, while South Chula Vista accounts for 26.7%) However,
EastLake circulation has consistently increased year to year. It rose 34%
between FY 1993.94 and FY 1994-9'5 (from 30,819 to 41,561). The FY
1995-96 projected circulation of 49,076 will represent a 18% increase over
FY 1994-9S.
Based on a service level population of 19,067, the per capita circulation is
1.17 compared to 6.43 at Civic Center/Main (service area population of
74,345) and 2.87 at South Chula Vista (service level population of 63,113).
Unfortunately, circulation during the school day is e>."tremdy low, with
77.7% of the total circulation occurring during public library hours.
Reference Questions
Like circulation, the number of reference questions answered is small
compared to the other branches, representing only 2.31 % of the system's
total (this count is only for public library hours). Likewise, the number of
rderence questions per capita is low (.(n, compared to .93 at Civic
Center/Main and .50 at South Chula Vista. However, the number of
questions increased by a dramatic 144% between FY 1993-94 and FY 1994-
Q'') (from 1,868 to 4,5(2).
In-Library Use
Library staff report that on many nights the library is busy and tables are
occupied. Anecdotal evidence seems to show that many people come to the
library to study or "get away from it alL" Attendees at the Town Meeting
commented on the quiet atmosphere and the helpful staff (116 out of 156
respondents to the user survey rated the helpfulness and courteousness of
t he public library staff a 4).
The per capita in-house use of materials at EastLake rated a respectable
.46, which is much higher than the circulation, reference and program
attendance per capita figures for the branch.
Program Attendance
Program attendance has not been consistent and is, therefore, not a reliable
measurement tool. This is undoubtedly due to the numerous changes in
Senior Librarians which has effected the type and quality of programs being
offered. Changes in personnel also negatively impact the lead time
~~~ /9-(,
/'
ITEM ~PAGE 7
MEETING DATE 12/19/95
nccessary to develop quality programming.
Nevertheless, the per capita program attendance figures are consistent with
other output measures. EastLake is much lower than the other two
branches (.03 compared to .21 for Civic Center/Main and .14 for South
Chula Vista).
Friends of the Library
One way to measure community support is by tlle strength of each branch
library's Friends Chapter. Civic Center/Main, Soutll Chula Vista and the
Heritage Museum all have strong chapters. Unfortunately, it has proven
difficult to find the indigenous local leaders, with adequate free time, to
help establish such a group at EastLake. This may not be due to a lack of
support, but rather to the fact that most residents in the EastLake area are
of working age and Friends groups tend to be dominated by retirees.
COMPARATIVE COSTS
The Library compared the cost to operate the EastLake Library to tlle cost of
opcrating Civic Center/Main and South Chula Vista. In an attempt to compare
apples to apples, only direct operating costs where compared (staff as well as
maintenance and operational costs). Collection development, Administration,
Technical Services, Automated Scrvices and other system-wide overhead costs were
not included in the comparison. For this purpose, the FY 1995.96 budgets for the
three branches are:
Civic Center/Main
EastLake
South Chula Vista
$1,246,570
$ 133,3'30
$ 952,:nO
The Library then compared the cost on thft'e levels (I) cost per capita, (2) cost per
circulation, and (3) cost per open hour. In the cost per capita category, EastLake
was considerably cheaper ($6.99) than either Civic Center/Main ($16.76) or South
Chula Vista ($15.09). This was also tnit' in the cost per open hour category.
EastLake (because of the overhead services provided by the School District and th{~
small staff) costs only $93 per hour to operate, compared to Civic Center/Main's
$382 and South Chula Vista's $389. EVt~n EastLake's cost per circulation ($2.72)
was nearly comparable to SOllth's ($2.6'3). This infoffilation is also outline in chart
form in the Attachment Set.
Finally constnlction costs should be induded in this evaluation. EastLake cost the
/$"/
/7-7
)7
ITEM~AGE 8
MEETING DATE 12/19/95
City zero dollars compared to the S 12 million dollars to constmct and outfit South
Chula Vista (the State did contribute (),)(}6 towards all eligible costs)
CONCLUSION
There is considerable comllulIlity SUpp011 for t he joint-use library at EastLake.
Participants in the Town Meeting were vocal about its success. They particularly
liked the concept of the School District and the City working together to keep costs
down. Usage is indeed low when compared to the other two branches (even on a
per capita basis), however it is growing and should continue to do so with the new
constnlction in EastLake Greens. The cost to operate EastLake is extremely
reasonable, especiallv when considered on a per capita and cost per open hour basis.
However, even its cost per circulation is not out of line with the other branches.
Consideration of the renewal of the agreement between the City and the School
District is also tangentially related to the City's agreement with EastLake
Development Company. Under that agreement, the EastLake Development
company is paying tlte City S 7 1 (),2 7 S over four years (final payment due on June
:>,0, 19(7) in lieu of perfonning previously negotiated Public Facilities and
Financing Plans for interim library obligations. This payment is being used to offset
a portion of the general fund costs to operate the EastLake Library (over 70% of the
branch's direct operational costs). Additionally, the agreement with EastLake
Development Company calls for the City to make a decision within three years of
the start of tlw EastLake High School Library project as to whether a one acre site
reserved in Village Center W cst for a pennanent library "vill be needed. However,
there is a pruvision for the City to extend this three year decision period by up to
two years. If this proviso is exercised, a decision will not need to be made until June
1998.
In light of the fact that a decision about a penn anent library is probably years away,
there are only two other altentatives to the joint-use library. One would be to rent
space in the newly constnlCted EastLakt> Village Center. According to EastLake
Development, space is renting for between $1.85 and $2.35 per square foot, with
all additional operating cost of .30 to .:)") cents per month. At this price, the annual
rent t()f 4,000 square ti.'et would be over S 100,000. When you add in utility costs,
renting smaller but more visible, space would more than double the operating
budget for the library. In poor economic times, this in an unrealistic altenlativc.
The second choice would be to close dO\'\'Il the public library function all together.
However, EastLake Library docs implement one of the components of the Library
Master Plan and ensures that residents of the eastenl territories do not have to
drive as much as nine miles to another Chula Vista Public Library.
~r /}'-y
/9
ITEM ~AGE 9
lV1EETING DATE 12/19/95
After evaluating the above factors, staff recommClHJs that we renew the contract
with the Sweetwater Union High School District for an additional three years.
FISCAL IMPACT:
In FY 1995-()6, EastLake LibralY's (account 1770) approved budget is $133,330.
EastLake Development Company's annual payment in lieu of previously negotiated
Public Facilities and Financing Plans for interim library obligations will reimburse
the General Fund 595,125
The Library estimates that EastLake Library's FY] 996-97 budget will be
approximately $102,500. This decrease is due to the reduction of the full time
Senior Librarian to half time as part of the FY 1995-96 budget reductions vis-a-vis
the City's Training Coordinator position. EastLake Development Company will
make one final payment of 595,125 in FY 199()-97, accounting for over $90% of
the direct operating costs.
The Citv will absorb the entire cost of operating EastLake Library in FY 1997-98.
~ 1'-1)7'l{)
ATTACHMENT A
DRAFT MINUTES
LmRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
December 6, 1995
LmRARY CONFERBNCE ROOM
3:30PM
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Clover-Byram, Vice Chair Williams, Trustees
Alexander, Donovan and Viesca, Student member Aguilar
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Library Director Palmer, Principal Librarian Brown, Sr.
Librarian Diciedue, City Training Coordinator McKean
OTHERS PRESENT: Betty and Harry Roche, Robert Coye, Barbara Jones
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of October 25,1995
ll. CONTINUED MATTERS
A. EastLake Library
Director Palmer introduced Rosie Diciedue, Senior Librarian at the EastLake
Library. He then briefly reviewed some statistics that had been included in the
Trustees packet regarding the EastLake Library. Pointing out that EastLake
Development ComiJany is paying approximately 70% of direct operating costs in
this fiscal year.
Director Palmer explained that library staff had recently conducted a Public Library
Association designed survey of users who came into the EastLake library. Based
on information from the survey, other statistical analysis and input received during
an EastLake Town Meeting, Mr. Palmer recommended that the joint use
agreement for the EastLake facility with the Sweetwater Union High School
District be continued for another three year period.
Trustees discussed citizen response at the EastLake Town Hall meeting and also
the suggestion that the facility be open until 9 pm. Trustee Viesca asked about
the issue of shelving and signage. Barbara Jones, High School Librarian, discussed
issues of shelving and custodial assistance during public library hours.
MSUC (WilliamsIDonovan) that the Library Board supports continuing the
EastLake Joint Use Agreement for an additional three years.
jp.rJr /~~// )7-lcZ
ATTACHMENT B
INFORMA TION MEMORANDUM
DA TE: October 4, ] 995
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: John Goss, City Manager
FROM: David Palmer, Library Director
SUBJECT: Decision to Continue Joint-Use EastLake Library Project
The original three year contract between the City of Chula Vista and the Sweetwater Union High
School District, providing for the joint use of the EastLake High School Library, will expire in June
] 996. Staff has developed an evaluation process and time line which will ensure that City Council
may provide direction to staff regarding renewal of the agreement in time for development of the FY
1996-97 budget.
Section 4.2. I of the agreement between the City and the High School District allows for the extension
of the Nominal Term and further states that; "Each party agrees to use good faith and best efforts to
render a decision by November, ]995..." However because of the timing of the fall Library Board
meetings, a report to City Council with a staff and Library Board recommendation cannot occur
before mid-December. A December time frame will still provide adequate time for preparation of the
FY ] 996-97 budget.
The Board of Trustees will begin a preliminary review of statistical and other relevant factors at their
October 25th meeting and are scheduled to vote on a formal recommendation to City Council at their
following meeting on December 6, ]995.
The ultimate stafI7Library Board recommendation to Council regarding the renewal of the terms will
be based upon an analysis of a set of criteria or factors which were jointly developed by the Library
and the School District per Section 4.2.1 of the agreement. They include:
1. Effectiveness of the joint-use agreement, including
*
.
*
Access (adequate parking and signage)
Collections (security, no censorship attempts)
Facility Management (adequacy of maintenance and security staffs, adequate
lighting, heating, etc.)
./ ~ /7
;Y;::15 / / - /
Decision to Continue Joint-Use EastLake Library Project
Page 2
2. Community support and usage, such as:
*
*
Number of library visits, check-outs, reference questions (annual and per
capita)
In-library use and program attendance (annual and per capita)
Registration as percentage of population
*
Staff will also evaluate the project on a cost per circulation and a cost per hour basis.
During the week of October 30, 1995 the Library will conduct an in-library user survey (based on one
designed by the Public Library Association) to determine whether the library is fulfilling the needs of
the users through analysis of author, title, subject, and browser fill rates (materials availability.. .did
patrons find what they were looking for?). The survey will also allow users to indicate their overall
level of satisfaction regarding the joint-use library.
Finally, as called for in Section 4.2.1 of the agreement, the Library and Library Board of Trustees will
conduct a town meeting in the EastLake area to solicit user and non-user comments about the joint-
use library. This town meeting will be held the week of either November 6 or November 13, 1995.
Staffwill notify Council once the date and location of this m~eting has been set.
The Sweetwater Union High School District will also be informed of this evaluation process and
related time line. District officials will also be invited to attend the town meeting. The District may
concurrently evaluate the effectiveness of the agreement based upon their own perspective.
In making a recommendation, staff and the Library Board will utilize the factors listed above, analyze
the results, and apply them per standard hbrary practice to the eXIsting situation. The project will also
be evaluated within the context of reasonable alternatives (if any) and financial constraints.
Consideration of the renewal of the agreement between the City and the School District is also
tangentially related to the City's agreement with the EastLake Development Company. Under that
agreement the EastLake Development company is paying the City $716,275 over four years (final
payment due on June 30, 1997) in lieu of performing previously negotiated Public Facilities and
Financing Plans for interim library obligations. This payment is being used to offset a portion of the
general fund costs to operate the current EastLake Library. Additionally, the agreement with
EastLake Development Company calls for the City to make a decision within three years of the start
of the EastLake High School Library project as to whether a one acre site reserve in Vtllage Center
West for a permanent library will be needed. However, there is a provision for the City to extend this
three year decision period by up to two years. If this proviso is exercised, a decision will not need
to be made until June 1998.
If Council has any comments or suggestions regarding this process, please call Library Director David
Palmer at 691-5170.
~.pf' 19~/J/
ATTACHMENT C
(
~A-ST
'[OWN MEETINQ
JUNTA DE LA COMUNIDAD
To consider the future of
your public library
VENGA Y COMPARTA SUS IDEAS SOBRE EL FUTURO
Come and share your idea.s,
comments and suggestions.
Everyone welcome.
j
LUNES, NOVIEMBRE 6, 1995
Monday, November 6, 1995
7:30 - 8:30 pm
EastLake Librcny
EastLake High School Campus
1120 EastLake Parkway
619 656-0314
Special, Pbysical N~? We ~ p1cued
to assist you UDder
ADA Call 691-~ 163 or roD 476-~3~7
~~ NeceAd,d.oo.c especiales del ADA? Por favor l1uDe aI
~> /9-/J- 691.5163orroD476-53~7
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Attachment D
Attachment Set
Chart showing FY 1993-94 and 1995-95 Circulation
Chart showing FY 1993-94 and 1994-95 Library Visits
Chart showing FY 1993-94 and 1994-95 Reference Questions
Chart showing FY 1993-94 and 1994-95 Story Hour Attendance
Circulation per Chula Vista Public Library hour during the month of
September 1995
Average circulation per open Public Library hour during the month of
September 1995
Percent of circulation by residency
Map outlining branch service area with population figures
Per capita circulation statistics
Per capita reference statistics
Per capita library visiL statistics
Per capita in-library use of materials statistics
Per capita program attendance statistics
EastLake share of system activity in terms of circulation, reference que~jons,
library visits, in-library use of materials, program attendance, and open hours
EastLake share of system activity in terms of registered patrons and books and
media collection
Comparative costs, including per capita, per circulation and cost per open hour
EastLake User Survey Form
Materials Availability Survey Results
Summary Materials Availability Survey
Written comments on EastLake Survey
Notes from EastLake Town Meeting
EastLake (Development Company) CJmmunity meeting summary
p::,r719..17
It)
0)
0)(1')
~O)
,0)
M~
O)~
O)~
~en
(I) ::::J
(,) g>
;<
(1)'0
-- CD
'ta c:
...8-
en 0
~~
cu.s
.. .-
.Q-J
:J .Q
.0
Q) ::::J
Jll::o...
ca CD
::!~
(1)=
ca (f)
w&1
&l)~~~~~8~~~~l!3~8
~cx)CONCO""CO~~o)OO~~
'lit~~~~~~~~ ~~~fIi
m ~
'lit
en
(J)M
!::m
(J)~
>
>
a:
c(
a:
m
::i
~
:::@l~~~S~~~~ln
C\I(I')C\I(I')NNCO'lit&l)N
":":"':"':":~":"':":N
~
~ ~
CD CD
~.o.o
~ E E
o CD CD
'0 > 0
O 0 CD
ZQ
~
~lU.c
lU ::::J 0
::::J .a ~
~ CD lU
-,u...~
== >- CD
~ lU c:
0- 00::= ::::J
<.::-,
~
~
tii E
::::J.!
>-0>0-
- ::::J CD
~<(/)
~CO&l)&l)""""OO~N""O~
&l)N~COCON~CO(l')""O)'lit(l')CO
O)'litN~(I')&l)&l)'lit&l)O&l)""O)&l)
-icricric.Jcricricricricricricri~cri~
~ 'lit
~
Lt)Oe'litN'lit(l')ocnNCO~cn
'litO.... 'lit........cncncn....'litO....
0)(1')0 v........covv....O....CO
Mc.JN~c.JNNNNNriririci
Zm (I')
O~
~
:;)
o
a:
-
o
~ ~
~.8~
~ E E
.9 ~ B
o 0 CD
OZQ
~~
lUlU.c
::::J 2 0
c: .0 ~
lU CD lU
-,u...~
p~
== >- CD
~ as c:
0- 00::= ::::J
<.::-,
~
~
en E
::::JS
>-0>0-
- ::::J CD
~<(/)
/f~/1
-
Q)
ClO
(!j
p...,
~
~
(I')
CD
gJ
~
o
c:
'0
~
8-
e
-
o
c:
o
-.:;
(f)
~
-
(f)
(f)
~
-
o
E
~
CD
0...
.
.
~
~
co
....
o
0)
'lit
CD
gJ
e
g
c
o
~
'3
~
~o
abi
m'O
.....!e.
~~
-
o
C
~
CD
0...
&t)~~re~(f)o)~~O~~g}
0) N
~
~
a:
::;)
o
:E:
>
a:
eW.,..
Cl)0
wZ
,,<I:
<to
a:Z
WW
~~
.,..
tt~~~c;;C!rn(f)rn~O~~
cJJ
~
It)
0)
0)
~
I
C")
0)
0)
~
CI)
u
.-
...
en
.-
...
ca
...
en
~
ca
..
~
:::i
Q)
~
~
...
en
ca
w
~
~.8~~ ..8
!E_CU.c: 1i)E
~ w ~ 0 ~ ~
g >~.s ~=E >-~ >-015.
oocu~cua.cu~3~~
oz.,u.~<~.,.,<CJ)
~~""NN""('I')('I')""~('I')&t)
&t)NN~FJ~C!U;~~('I')C!g
en ~
CI)~
zen
oe
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
::;)cJJ
o~
W.,..
o
z
w
a:
w
II.
w
a:
~ ~
~!!
! E E
o ~ 8
'0 0 ~
ozo
...
~ !
CU.c: 1i)E
2u- CD ~S
.c ... "C >- c: >- 0 a.
~CUa.CU~3~CD
u.~<~.,.,<CJ)
.,..
N
CIl
bO
ell
p..
~Uf)
a:i'
.,..
~
.,..CD
~ ~
~ ~
o
CD
o
w-
e!) 0
<E
a: CD
w e
> ~
<a.
*-
en
.,..
.,..
&t)
-
o
CD
CI)
cu
~
o
c
N
N
~
&t).,..
~FJ
""cri
15.""
CD
CJ)
('1').,..
~~
.,.. -
oeD
~
<
.,..
CD
~
!
g
'5
E
~
~
a.
.5 CD
CI)~
C cu
o-J
... -
Cii ~
o.w
~ /? -:;'0
It)
en
en
....
I
M
en
en
....
o
CJ
.-
...
o ~
.- ;:,
... 0
ca:r:
...
(/)z[
~~
ca ~
.c8.
.- c:
..J 0
CI)~
~'3
j ,g
...0
0-
caS
W~
*'*'
vu:>
"N
r--:C\i
"N
" to to
('I') to"
ClOco
erieri
to
~
~
~
E
Q)
Q.
Q)
en
(/)
~
;:,
o
:r:
~
e!
.c
c::.JE
o ,2 a.
.~ :0 8
'3 ;:, ..
~a..('I')
o .~5
~ ~~
...J c: c:
1;) 0 0
~ ~~
ctI'3'3
- ~ ~
~ 00
>-
ctI
(/)
~
;:,
or;
>-
ctI
t:
:fm;rrffttt
.,..,.............,('1') ~ ('f) ('f) " (\/
t::::'::::::::::::::\::::Fi~ ~ ~ ~ " ~
.......,......'...................
.................
:::::;:::::;:::::;:::::::::;:;:::-
.~::::::::;;:::::::::::::::::::::
::~:~:j:~:rri:~~:~:~:i:~:~~
:~ W ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ :~~ :~~ ~ ~i~: i~; ~~ i:
j:~:!::I::!:i.I:~jllI1:
.:~~:~~:~:~:~:~:f~:;:;:~:j~:.
"x:' .:::::::::::.:::-::::::;~::::::..':'~:
I
.&l:g~lll~
N~('f)('f)~
('f)('f)OO)('f)
~~ ~
gm~(g~
....... ~ ..- ......
;:j::;':::.:::::::"::'::::':::::.::.:::::'::.::.!'::::::::il:j::::::::::i::.:il:j:::::::::i:::i:~ii ~ ffi ~ ~ C;;
-
~
c:
o
~
c:
;:,
I
~jlfjij~~itil~~!ji
~~:i~~;;~:i:~:~i:;:r:i~:::~:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<<<< <a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. a..
"coClO~N~N('f)VtOU)"
..... ..... .....
~ /?-~/
C""\
(IJ
bO
III
p..
0)
0)
"
o
N
~
v
o
0)
v
to
('f)
U)
~
co
co
('f)
~
('f)
('f)
m
-
~
10
N
Il)~
0') ~
0') :::::J
.... 0
II
M~
0') ctI
0') ~
.....0
:::i
~ .2
;15
en :::::J
.- Q.
... c::
5S-
t/) 0
~~
as 8-
.. c::
.c .Q
-'tiiLO
...J"3~
CDe..-
~.- ~
asU.8
...J CD E
... ~ CD
en~c..
as ~ CD
W<(W
-4"
Cll
bO
t1l
p...
N co co v
~ ci ~ &ri
v M ..-
~(1)
to
..-
1.0..-
~N
C\I
IOIOLOLO
""N"
N&riciN
MNNM
IOCO..-tq
"MVc:n
en N
M
M..-N"
MMMCO
en M
..- V
~~~iI
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<(<<(<(<(Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
"COc:nO..-N..-NMVIOCO"
..- ..- .....
~ /9;,2,l.
(/)
-
c
Q)
"0
'Ci)
Q)
a:
Q)
::&:
m
-I
Cii10
en~~
CJ >-..-
;:..o(j)
en c ..0
;.2 E
C'CS'tti~
(;)-SD.
~,g (~
~-u ~
C'CS Q) Cl
... ::&: :::::J
.c m e
._ -I ~
..JCii-
~~m
C'CSo"-
...J ... ~
... ~.8
en ~ 0
C'CS Q) U
W~O
10
V
,....
,....
-
(/)
-
c
Q)
"0
:::::J
-
en
(5
o
~
(/) 0
_en
c~
~ Cl
'Ci) I
Q) Q)
a:::&:
m m
--I
(/) -
:> ~
nsW
-s15
~z
u-
0)
10
M
..-
(/)
-
c
Q) (/)
'0_
:::::J C
- Q)
en "0
II) 'Ci)
.::J:. II)
ma:
-I,
- C
~ 0
wZ
1O..-CDU)..-C\IU)..-U),....U)M
C!C!..- ~U)..-,....O,....OU) 0
,....oci('l')cicicici-ciM~
~
II)
~
-
o
ns 0
'c -g -g
~..oc
g ~ e
m ns 0
uuu
~
~
Q)
al
ns
~ '':: ~
'r: ... Q) Q)
(5 ~ ~= ~
alw_O.gC3~
b b b b:o ~ 'Ci)
c c c c 5 0 fa
:::::J :::::J :::::J :::::J 0 ,- II)
o 008 {/)'ttioo
uuu wZ
~ /9-,,2.:;
S'S'
I ·
'0 '0
~ ~
1:: S
o 0
Z en
--
o 0
ClCl
,~ ,~
00
c c
ns ns
en en
10
~
CD
C\I
V'\
~
00
t1l
~
..
f/)
C.)
;:;
f/)
~
en
J!
-a
ca
o
r-
(I)
Q.
(I)
_m
o ~
(I) m
~ Q)
:::::J 0
(1)'-
m 2:
Q) Q)
E (I)
_"0
:::::J Q)
Q.C
-\t=
:::::J Q)
0"0
(;E \0
<Il
bO
t'\3
p..
>>
~
t'\3
~
00 ,t:l
<Il ..-t
..d ....:l
c.J"O
t:: 0 t'\3
t'\3..-t4J
~ ~ 00
,t:l<ll..-t
p.> LI"\
<Il 0'\
<Il <Il t'\3 0'\
<( ti:i ~..d....-l~
..d 4J ;:l
W 4J ..d ~
....I~ ell:
Iii ~ U <Il
....-l 0 ,t:l
]: ....-l1.l-l..dS
::J~ ~ t'\3 4J <Il
<Il ;:l 4J
<Il ~ 0 p.
J:- w ~ t'\3 en <Il
t'\3 en
u> P.CIlt::
S c.J <Il ..d
o..-t..dbO
c.J 4J ;J ;:l
00-0
o .~ ~
4J4JLI"\..d
t'\3 0'\ 4J
HILLTOP DRIVE ~ 4J0'\
~ <Il CIl~-
r..J "0 "0
E-l ~ <Il ....-l <Il
Z 0 00 ..-t t::
r..J <Il ~ <Il
U < t:: ..d p. P.
E-l 1-44J<0
U en
H 3rd AVENUE 1-4
> > of!:
1-4
U j
. . ;:J
4th AVENUE ;J::
U
w ti:i
ti:i ti:i ti:i ti:i ~ w
w w w w ~ ~
~ ell: ell: ~
Iii Iii ~
In In 0 Z
1.1. lj ]: .... ~ i
LI')
ta
e
ta
CD
U
~"'''''C'')
:iJ)8::
""0 .. a) M
,......CQ
C
o
i
'S
Q.
o -i
Q. 5
"C ~ J!
CD,! :J
1UCGl,c
eGl~o
__ ~ ;) ,l;
Wen :~ lQ ~
OW(/)
C")I'-I'-
......ClO
u:i";N
C")MO
0)0'"
000
OO)C")
ooco
rn~o~
0)
0)
...
~..oo
GlC")C")o
J:lCQ....
E - - -
GlS;CQ~
Q.N ...
Gl
U?
:e
$
It)CQI'-
0)..0
u:io~
It) ON
C")It)CQ
C")MO
aON~
I'-NClO
.. ...
It)""'"
.....ClO
C")1t)...
a)N~
CQ C")
",0) It)
....It)CQ
......CO
aO~M
It) C")
N
~
.-.. m
>,! "3
~C Gl,c
ta~~~O
... u ,l;
,.a'1I:: :i
__.C::: l'G 0
..JOW(/)
.!l
.!
Srn
ClIO)
:E~
'O~
Gl.8
III E
=Gli J!
t'Q.CGl.E
I!~~~O
~~-.u~~
_ .~ l'G 0
=_OW(/)
-
It)
0)
0)
...
i J
CJ:l '"
OE~ l'G
;::l S ,! "3
tai'CGl,c
-(/)Gl~O
;:, ,0 lq ,l;
~:e~-;:I:i
(3 ~~ ~ ~
en
C
0-
=~
cnO)
CD...
;:,~ 1!l
0.8 ~
CDE~ l'G
u,!,! "3
S:i'CGl.c
w(/)CI)~O
.e:E~~~
.! ~:O~ l'G 0
.._ W(/)
en
-
-;;
~ 19-.2 f
...M'"
NO...
000
MO)C")
...1'-'"
COC")&t)
~ ..
~
CD
u
Crn
tao)
"CO)
C'"
CD ~
=.8
c:CE~
eGlGl
Q.CGl.E
l!~~~o
~:e.Y~~
... ~.i!: l'G 0
a. 5.0 W CIJ
~
J!
en
(,)
.-
..,
en
;:~
ca 'S;
.., .';:
cn~
~E
ca~
.. U)
.D >-
._ (/)
...Ie
(,) CD
.- '- lO
-asm
.Q.cm
::::s(/)..-
D.~Q;
.e~E
en1;)~
.- as a.
>wO)
ca C) (/)
-.s 0
::::S~-
.c 0 "i::
oc7.i~
&;
q
I"- ..- ..-
co ..-
*-*-
0..-
~~
vmlO
..-L{)<O
VVCO
f8v""gf
N
(I)
c;
-.:
S
cu
:E
-
o
CD
en
::;)
~
cu
..
.c
:::i
c
~ as
e ~ u;
.0 as .-
::J,->
'-0) :Q ru
_...J:;
t:0).c
_Cl> ~ 0
uas.c
o~s
.S; as 0
OW(/)
CD
g>
-
c
0)
e
0)
a..
*-*-*-
<0 CO <0
.....NlO
oMu:)
I"- N
CI)
o
~
U)
:;
-
(/)
lOON
MlO<O
M. M_ O.
CON..-
I"-NCO
V ..-
c
o
;
cu
-
=
CJ
..
-
o
~ as
e ~ 1;)
.0 llS .-
:::::i,->
'-0) :f! as
_...J:;
t:CD.c
_Cl> ~ 0
uas.c
o~s
'S; as 0
OW(/)
co
M
I"-
~
E
0)
-
CI)
>-
(/)
as
-
~
l"-
V
1"-.
..-
co
<0
E
CD
-
CI)
>-
(/)
cti
~
'**-'*
lOCO I"-
~m~
..-NlO
<0 M
MmM
..-I"-V
co. M lO
I"- v""
CD
CJ
C
cu
"
c
CD
:::
ct:
E
cu
..
C)
o
..
0.
~ as
e ~ u;
.0 as .-
::J,->
CD :Q (\1
_...J:;
t:CD.c
~~O
o~.c
.- 1;) 5
.~ as 0
OW(/)
*-*-*-
m..-o
~M..-
f6N~
lOl"-lO
v.....co
ML{)..-
mNr-:
<0 M
(t)
c
o
-
..,
(I)
CD
=
o
CD
CJ
C
CD
..
-!
CD
0:
~ as
e ~ 1;)
.0 llS .-
:::::i,->
~ :f! as
~...J:;
t: CD .c
_Cl> ~ 0
uas.c
o~S
.S; as 0
OW(/)
lO
M
l"-
N
..-
E
0)
-
CI)
>-
(/)
cti
-
~
l"-
v
o.
m
o
..-
E
0)
-
CI)
>-
(/)
cti
-
~
~~~
~~~
VCOCO
<ONV
~
CD
CD
==
..
CD
~
(I)
..
=
o
:J:
c
CD
Q.
o
~ llS
e ~ 1;)
.0 llS .-
~'->
'-CD :e llS
_...J:;
CCD.c
~~O
o~.c
.- 1;) 5
.~ as 0
OW(/)
*-*-*-
1"-<01"-
lO~m
&5..-g
vog
MM
<ovv
r-:cticti
~ ~
s
"ii)
:;
~
CU
..
.c
:::i
~
~ ~S
.0 m .!!!
:it:>
'- .0 llS
~::J:;
C CD .c
_Cl> ~ 0
uas.c
o ~ 5
.S; as 0
OW(/)
?;;r~ /9 -J.5
,.....
Q)
bO
t1l
p..,
o
v
..-
E
0)
-
CI)
>-
(/)
cti
-
~
v
<0
v
ci
v
v
E
CD
-
~
(/)
cti
-
~
en
u
.-
...
.!a
...
ca
...
UJ
~
ca
..
.c
::i~
u~
.- ~
::s~
= E
o..~
S5r
enC/)
.- -
> 0
en
ca<c
- en
=-
.c,s
O~
***
{;)~~
<:ritOM
v..-('/)
(0..-(0
(\JO>(\J
(O(\J('/)
(0- M rD
('/).....(\J
CI)
c
o
..
-
&'IS
a.
"C
CI)
..
CI)
-
.!
en
CI)
a:
~ CU
e ~_
.0 _ o~
:::i~>
'- :e CU
~...J"5
c:: CD J::.
-~ ~ U
ucuJ::.
o~S
os; CU 0
UWC/)
10
V
(\J
as
I'-
E
CD
-
en
>-
C/)
"iij
-
~
***
(0(0(0
(0..-0>
to <:riM
(0 (\J
c
o
:=
u
Q)
-
15
o
.!
"C
Q)
:E
"C
C
&'IS
f)
.:.::
o
o
m
(\J(\JI'-
00>10
(o('/)v
MM"':
v ('/)(0
(\J
co
Q)
eo
ell
p..
.....
10
(0
i
('/)
E
CD
-
en
>-
C/)
"iij
-
~
~;;~ /9.,..;t
~ CU
e ~-
.0 ... o~
::J~>
'- :e cu
CD...J-
CCDi!
CD~U
ucuJ::.
o...J
0- c;; 'S
o~ CU 0
UWC/)
CI)
GI
~ 'E:
f!
I! .0
.o~
:J'fi
C
~ f!
::a~
::I 0
0. J!J
ftS :g
1;) ~
>~
ca ~
'5 0-
z; E
08
a-
<1J
C ClO
~ 0 ...-NM ...-" ...- ttl
CIl p...,
0- :g M"c.o - C>>M ...-
"':C'IiC'li CI) "':(")0;
- '5 0
CI) ~~~ 0 CX)C>>CX)
0 ~ M~M
0 (3 ~ ~
c.o
C>>
I
LI)
C>>
C>> f!
...- C CX)c.oN to "'itCX)CX)
i 0 "'it"" C>> ::::I c.oN.
1a NOeD ...- a:I 0 N"'it"'it
- cOmN 0 ~J: cvi~N
1 "5
~ "'it"'itc.o c.o C C
e C>> M M. < CIl
U ...- D-
o.. 0
c
o
;:
CIS
~
~
-
(.)
...
CD
Q.
...
en
o
(.)
vi
GI
o
.~
CIl
CI)
C
o
;l
as
E
.e
o .E
...
CD
C')
"tJ
::I
m
.s::.
u
c
l!
m
CO
en
.b
en
:')
~
..r
C
GI
E
GI
C)
as
C
as
E
~
'l:I
::::I
> U
lL .E
~
f!
.0
~ ~
as as
~ ~-
.0 ... .!!!
~~>
~ :e a:I
_...J'3
cCIl..c:
CIl..:.::O
O,S..c:
.~ U) '5
.2: as 0
owen
(ij
o
'c
..c:
o
ell
-
C
o
;::;
a:I
E
.s
::::I
as
C
o
;::;
~
C U)
o c
1ii 'f
"5 'l:I
~ . as J!J
'u ~ E OOCl)
;::;GI
.- - -
:5 ~O
::::ICI):;::I
'l:I GI 0
C'l:I.9!
as::::l-
GI - 0
000
C ~
C.- 0
aso CI)
i C CIl
-CI)o
.i ~ ~
Eo CI)
...
::I
o
:I:
c CI)
Q)":'::
Q.CIl
O~
... ..-
Q)LI)
Q.><
... f!
f/! ::::I
o 0
(.)::S
000
"Mlt)
~~~
COM(\!
vMLI)
CI.!....-C>>
...-
C
'i .2
- -
as as
E'S
;lO-
CI) 0
WQ.
~
~
,g
~ ~
a:I S
.c ~.!!!
~f!>
~,g ...
CIl .... -=
-.....::::1
CGI..c:
CIl..:.::O
~;I=
.- CI) ::::I
.2: as 0
owen
en
...
en
o
(.)
CU
...
Q.
CIS
(.)
...
CD
Q.
~
a:I
~
.0
~ ~
f! S
,g ~.!!!
~~>
~:e as
_...J"5
CelI..c:
CIl..:.::O
O,S..c:
0_-
.- CI) ::::I
.2: a:I 0
owen
t!
CI)
o
o
"cnC>>
"c>>o
cOcOU)
...- ~ ..-
~ ~
It)''M
"'it c.o ..-
MO..-
otioicvi
r--'I""'CO
It)
C\I
~
co
II)
..-
~
f!
.D.
~ ~
~ S
,g ~.!!!
~e>
~,g ...
CIl .... -=
-....::::1
CCIl..c:
CIl..:.::O
~;I=
'S; CI) ::::I
.- as 0
OUJCI)
~ /9~.)l
Offi~ u.. Only DATE:
1lME GIVEN OlTT:
EASTLAKE LIBRARY SURVEY
Chula Vista Public Libraries
October 30, 1995
Please fill Ollt this survey and retllrn it to the volunteer as you leave today. Many Thanks!
We are evaluating the effectiveness of the East Lake Library. We want to know how you feel
about this facility and if you find what you look for at this library.
I. My zip code is
II. Materials Availability
Do you find what you look for at the EastLake Library? Please list below what you looked for today.
Mark "YES" if you found it, and "NO" if you did not find it.
TITLE
If you are looking for a specific book, record,
cassene, newspaper, or issue of a magazine, please
write the title bele",'. Include any reserve matenaJ
picked up
NA.\1E OF WORK
(Example)
. Gone with the Wind
FOU!'<D?
All.....
v.. "0 aNncll
1.
2.
3.
4.
S.
SUBJECT OR AUTHOR
If you are looking for materials or information on a
particular subject or a special author today. please
note each subject or person below.
SuBJECT OR ACTHOR DID YOC FIND
(Examples) SOMETHING?
. how to repair a toaster ,...,
. any book by John D. MacDonald YEa NO aNncll
1 I
2. I
3.
4.
5.
BROWSING
If you were browsing and not looking for anything specific,
did you find something of interest?
YES NO
~"HER
Cht:...:k here if your visit today did not include any of the above activities.
(Example) using the photocopy machine.
PelLe Ie
over --->
III. Facility Access
For each item, how does EastLake Library rate compared to an "ideal" public library in this
community ?
Circle 1 (very low satisfaction) to 4 (very high satisfaction) for each item
1.
Ease with which you located the EastLake Library
on campus when you used the library for
the first time
Low High
1 234
2.
Convenience of the library's location in the
EastLake community
Low High
1 234
3. Adequacy of convenient parking
Low High
1 2 3 4
Low High
1 2 3 4
Low High
123 4
Low High
1 2 3 4
4. Convenience of library hours
5. Range of materials available
(books, magazine, computer software, videos, etc.)
6. Extent to which staff are helpful, courteous, and concerned
7. Please comment in detail on any item above:
8. Comment on any items you consider essential to EastLake Library's successful service to the
community.
C; IoulpUllcaltlal<e. SIJ r
~ I )1-,27
fJ)
...
~~
cu Q)
~a:
.c>
- Q)
..J ~
:J
UW
=~
.c=
::s:CLO
D. .~ ~
'" as..-
w > -
.:M::<O
CU fJ) M
..J-~
~ .~.8
en Q) 0
mcao
W~O
o
......
..-
"C
Q)
...
Q)
0..
E
8
~
~
:J
W
-
o
~
~
E
:J
Z
as
...
~
*-
LOm(O
COMv
"C
c:
:J
o
u..
... fJ)
~"CE
C>C:Q)
:J :J ~
o 0
wu..o
~ ~ ...
~~~
:J :J Q)
zza..
fJ)
Q)
+=
i=
*-
mcoco
......Mv
~
o
~
'5
~
Q)
:0-
:J
W
"C
c:
:J
o
u..
.1:.1:~
g> g> .!
00-
wWo
~ ~ E
~!Q)
E E ~
:J :J Q)
zza..
.-i
.-i
Q)
M
Cil
p...
*-
C\IC\1S
m m
..-
C>
c:
:2
...
~ -g
en 0 :J
Q) W 0
fJ) ~~
~ .- E
e -g Q)
m .- ...
_u..=
o l!! 0
CD Q) E
.0 fJ) Q)
E o~ ~
:J ~ Q)
zma..
C)
c:
.Ci)
?:
.J
:ii
~/9'JP
N
--<
V al
00
..c. (W) 0 ,.... 0 10 <0 cd
e> ,.... or- 10 <0 V or- P-l
:f or- T""
(W)
co
v
<0
(W)
C\I
10
~
(W)
<0
or-
(W)
C\I
(W)
C\I
or-
or-
(W)
(W)
C\I
(W)
v
C\I
,....
or-
~
o
...J
10
or-
(W)
co
or-
or-
or-
C\I
or-
C\I
c CD -
o . .::t:- O
~E aI ...
...J CD
aI'- ... u)
~- rn
.0'" aI 0
._ rn W CD
...J .:
- CD " rn
CD CD ..c. 'S; :;]
.::t:-..c. ... 0
> as... .~ e CD
...J~
0) 1;).9 as t::
~ c ~ :;]
:;] ~~ 0 0
~ U
Cf} CD~ e> 0
> U rn "5
.'!: ..c..o 0 c ~
... .- :i: CD -
:c ,,- rn a.
rn ~ ~ ~S Q;
CD CD as :;]
~ ii:5 -~ a. 0 .00. ..c.
~~ U" aI ... ..c. .~ E CD
00) ~ c ~ ~o ~
:Q CD as
-rn '2 as u_
ca rn :;]:;] CD ~ ~ rnrn lfij
... aI 0:;] .0
.a ..c. -CD ...
.;:: 10 >0 ... C .~c CI)
.- 0) en ..c.> - 0 - ~.- ..c."
..J ns en .2 c 0 U 0 CD~ .2 CD
or- ..c.CD CD CD nse>
CD ::!: T"" C\I (W) - V 10 <0 ..c.C
~ c:i ~ ~..c. ~ o~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ eas ~ ~~
~ ('f) ..c.~ c._ >- c _E
ca c c .~ c c ~ c CD c c OU
..J aI ~ 0 .'!: rn 0 c:;] 0 0 '2 0 0 0 ...c
E 0) ~:;] CDrn ...0
.., .0 +: +: ~E +: :;] .~ CD .~ +:
U) E 0 rn CD a. rn rn C'" rn > rn e>.::t:- rn CU
ca :;] t) CD mE 0) cE CD 0) 0) c CD cO CD CD"
:;] alai :;] 88 :;] " :;] 8 :;] alO :;] xc
w Cf} 0 0 wu 0 0 <( 0 0 a:E9.. 0 was
~ 19-31
COMMENTS
EASTLAKE SURVEY
October 30, 1995
*Parking is very limited for usage of the Public Library.
* Staff very helpfull
*Some of the materials in the library have been vandalized and some have whole section missing.
*Need pay phones.
*EastLake is a nice clean library with many items to access from.
* A good place to do research.
*During school hours the library is closed sometimes.
*1 like the fact that 1 can check out new and best sellers for 4 day period without charge.
*The library needs some kind of sign at the entrance of schooL 1 had to ask 2 people where the
library was
*Love the neighborhood library
* Adult magazine collection is very limited
* Staff was very nice and helpfuL
*Great children's selection. Wonderful staff! We love the computers
*1 wish you could have more time available during the day.
*Great difficulty in finding the exact route from parking lot-no signs.
*Very pleased with library and staff. Do homework with son while daughter practices. Only
problem is that can't always find "visitor parking" in front? Perhaps information on parking will
help?
* A lot of different materials at EastLake.
* Although the library is continually adding to its collection, 1 will appreciate it if you can
accelerate the additions to the collections.
*This is my first visit and 1 had a very difficult time locating the Library. Most of the buildings
look the same and in the dark they are hard to distinguish. Signs need to be put up detailing
where the library is. A neon sign, big'
*1 am impressed with the Library It is very clean and has many resources. 1 do not know the
extent of books available, but 1 think it is important to have as many books on as many subjects
available, the more intriguing, wacky, the better.
* Staff is very nice and helpful.
*maybe have more copies of a popular book.
* Very hard to find'
*More signs in walk way would help a lot'
*1 knew it was on campus but you needs signs.
*1 love the idea of the community and the high school sharing, very innovative!
* Signs needed to locate the Library once on campus.
*1 think that you should have, on some books, more than one copy available. On a few books, 1
found of interest, on the computer they were already checked out (sic)
*Need more signs posted to show location oflibrary, difficult to find.
*Many people can't find the library when 1 wan to meet someone here. It's too far back, there
should be a sign in front of the school signaling where the library is.
Page 13
~ If-;1)
Page -2-
*General great location in community, should have close parking to library.
*No comment'
* A place where you can get food while you get your book.
*The signs on the road are too far apart One of the sign leads to a real estate office and not to
the library.
*Your librarians are great! They are very helpful I
*The library needs more books
*The library doesn't have as much books as it should
*1 am not sure if the Library visitors are allowed to use the computer room. Ifno, more
computers in the library.
*Need better parking
*Insufficient parking in front of the building. Should be open all weekend.
*The employees are very nice'
*The employees are very nice! yeah I
*Staf'fwas nice, books however, did not follow decimal order so they are hard to find.
*very helpful staff
*The library hours are very adequate since they're open for so long
*1 was not sure if to come into campus because I never imagined the library being in a school
campus. Anyway other than that could have more parking, lot always full on Saturdays.
*Excellent Librarian staff.
*Organization and clean oflibrary "outstanding". (sic)
*Parking, maybe parking in rear and allow rear door entrance. Open further-most driveway gate
from street to allow rear parking.
*Library staff are very courteous and helpful I find it a pleasant experience on each visit.
* All materials have usually been available We use the library all the time'
*Great service from the librarians, we enjoy the reading time on Saturday mornings
* Should be open longer periods on Saturdays
*Need to expand range of materials. Some books are not available at this branch.
*The location is convenient to the EastLake community.
*1 am very happy with the cordial, helpful, friendly staff with the collection. I always find
everything I am looking for.
*It's big enough for our community. I love the friendly environment. I can always ask questions
with no hesitation. I come to the Library more often now that the Library is so close to my home.
*There are so many books not available at this branch.
*The library hours are good, but could be longer.
*1 like the people here.
*1 really like the staff they always help me find things.
*The staff is excellent and well versed in meeting the needs of myself and my children.
*Perhaps better exposure to the community through schools, community committees.
*Not too many books about photography- I think you need more books from this decade!
*It's very convenient for me.
~ //~5,/
Page -3-
*1 frequent this library and have always had great, courteous and professional assistance.
*y ounger librarians often not helpful, others very helpful.
*We wish the library could open 30 minutes earlier in the week. It would be more convenient to
the elementary school schedule.
*Needs better parking; lot more hours.
*The Children's reading time on Saturday is great.
*Continue children's programs (Pre-school).
*Need training classes on using computer system.
*More extended library hours especially AM hours.
*CDT for printers.
*It's hard for me to find this library. It's too far from the street and behind the school, so we can't
see its building.)
*First time here is some time- nice change- increase number of books- looking forward to regular
visits
*This is a wonderful library. I use the library often. It is great to have one in the EastLake
community.
*Considering the limitations- an excellent library and staff
*Very nice and clean library' Helpful worker'
*1 think the librarian are very helpful and doing a great job
*Gates out front being locked- both should be open not just one.
* Shortage of titles.
*1 would like to see more magazines and maybe more hours. Location is good same with
parking, maybe more books and computers for the Internet
*Not that many books.
*Increase the amount of books and articles in house library. (sic)
*The Public Library late after noon hours and the Friday closing is not too convenient, but the
idea of a combo school and public library makes so much sense, it's not a criticism, it's a long old
march from parking lot to library.
*More Goosebumps and Babysitter Club books.
*Staffwas very helpful.
*For the children's section, I'd like to see some story/cassette books.
*Storytime on Saturdays is good (guest entertainers are especially good), but could be improved
with more simple activities and variety like feltboard, choral reading, fingerplays, and little crafts
that lend themselves to the theme of the day. Storytime reader could read slower, with more
feeling and project her voice to "captivate" her audience.
*Parking was my only problem. I love the library being in my neighborhood.
*Recommend that after school hours all parking spaces be made available to patrons (ie. eliminate
privileged parking for school and library staff.)
*Public hours are too restrictive- please consider extending hours to 9 or 10 pm and remaining
open every day.
*Range is good but selection is limited- capacity could easily be doubled.
~
J~"~
Page -4-
* Staff has been exceptional in all areas.
*Extended hours.
*Computers with access to most data bases (on line services highly desirable).
*Multiple and varied CO Rom Titles
*Faster computers and more of them.
*Old fashioned \card catalogue for computer phobics and for when computer are down.
*Continued availability of financial references-especially "Value Line"
*Y ou need a sign.
*T ook forever to find the place without any signs to direct me.
*The location at the back of the school is a bit hard to find The library should be open Fridays.
*They are very courteous and helpful.
*More computers
*Need better directional aids in locating the Library.
*] really wasn't sure where the Library was located but] asked someone as they were leaving so it
worked out.
*The staff are helpful. 1 am impressed.
*Supposed to have the book, drove all the way from the E Street Library, can't find the book, its
been lost still shows its available in computer
*] didn't come in and browse The book] was looking for just happened to be located here. The
hours aren't convenient for me because 1 leave for work at 4:00 pm.
*In t~e library the photocopies need to be darker printed and larger
*COT for copying machine
*Would like to have seen a wider range of magazines How about a customer survey?
*Parking was hard to find sometimes
*1 would prefer more hours, but the current hours are adequate.
*Range OK- quantity and selection needs to improve- 1 guess that takes time
*I've only visited the library once, but 1 plan to visit it more often.
*Please keep our library open!
J~
} 7-;1Y
"-
~
l"
'v
Notes from EastLake Town Meeting
November 6, 1995
Community Relations
. Ideal relationship (cooperative) Good use of tax dollars
· Good, logical utilization of resources
· Retired here because of Library
. Needs to exist - Provides Eastern portion of City (with library services)
· Important for this community
. Introduce families to library locations via "Stamps" - use promotional techniques through the schools
. Community draw for children in nearby affordable housing
. What can EastLake community do to help continue library service?
. Encourage EastLake Development Company to continue support
. Discontinued library service will mean discontent in the EastLake community.
Location, Signage, Hours, Parking
. Location needs to be more visible from the street
· Help potential users find the location.
. Exterior signage inadequate for location
Page 14
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
........ .
'() .
(, .
~ .
Notes from EastLake Town Meeting
November 6, 1995
Services and Staff
Q: Hours - is there a risk during school hours to open to everyone (retirees, different work schedules)
A: School needs to maintain security - Community may not understand this issue
Hours - 9 pm, early Saturday i.e. 8 AM (Families start day at the library)
Hours during school intercession - expand hours during these times
Convenient parking - an issue
Parking - always find near flagpole
Where is the available parking?
Needs to open up parking lot at back oflibrary
Quiet atmosphere missing from other locations
Helpful staff
Used by families for school assignments
Circulation appears good for "best kept" secret
Use technological advances to make the facility "larger"
Dial-up Access
ISDN-need speed in electronic connection
Volunteers - need more
"-
~
~
'A
Notes from EastLake Town Meeting
November 6, 1995
Services and Staff
Materials
. Collection - high level of education in EastLake area, needs a higher level of library materials
. Higher level of materials need to be available
. Good supply of Spanish language materials
. Spanish collection limited and geared toward Mexico; expand to western hemisphere, original authors, need to
be individual, not just translations
. Transfers/getting daily material in a timely fashion is a problem, especially for newspapers
· Mail delivery needs to be examined
. No delivery on weekends - lose timeliness
EastLake (Development Company) Community Meeting Summary
EastLake 20 Surveys
Summary Sheet-Non Users
I Low 1 2 3 High 4 ~
Question #1
Ease with which you located the EastLake Library on
campus when you used the library for the first time. 1 2 2 14
Question #2
Convenience of the library's location in the EastLake
Community 0 0 2 18
Question #3
Adequacy of convenient parking 4 1 6 9
Question #4
Convenience of library hours 1 2 9 7
Question #5
"'-
~ Range of materials available
, (Books, magazines, compu1er software, videos, etc.) 2 3 8 4
~ Question #6
Extent to which staff are helpful, courteous 1 0 2 13
and concerned
9 8 29 65
Page 15
. San Diego Transit is},#
- An Operator In the Metropolitan Transit System ~
, .
100 16th ~Ireet
PO Box ..511
San Diego. CA 92 t 12
(619) 238.0100
FAX (619) 696.8159
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
December 5, 1995
TO:
Board of Directors
FROM:
Frank J. Shipman
RE:
Contract Ratification of Bus Operators New Agreement
We are pleased to seek ratification of a new collective bargaining agreement with the Bus
Drivers' Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1309.
Background:
The Board of Directors authorized the Management Negotiation Team to commence
exploratory talks with the negotiations team of the A.T.V. Local1309 Union in August.
Following those meetings, the parties commenced negotiations on Tuesday November 28, 1995
and reached te~tative agreement just three days later on November 30, 1995. Both parties were
dedicated to preserving the operating efficiency of our organization.
.
Term:
5 years - 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999,2000
.
Wages: .l22Q. .l221 l.22.H. .l.222 2QQQ
Bus Operators - 0 0 0 0 0
Clericals - 20~ per hr. all
classifications
effective 1-1-97
. One-Time Net Bonuses- lkLI996 Dec 1997 Dec 1998 Dec 1999 Dec 2000
Full-time Bus Operators $400.00 $500.00 $600.00 $600.00 0
Part-time Bus Operators 200.00 250.00 300.00 300.00 0
Full-time Clericals 320.00 400.00 480.00 480.00 0
Part-time Clericals 160.00 200.00 240.00 240.00 0
/') "l -/
,-"?\'~-~ (. -~
Contract Ratification of Bus Operators' New Agreement
December 5, 1995
Page 2
. New Hire Progression - 8 1/2 year progression for both FT and PT. Effective 1-1-96 at
50% oftop rate going up 2.777% each 6 months.
. New Operator Holiday Progression -
0-3 Years - New Years, Labor Day, Memorial Day, Fourth ofJuly, Christmas and
Thanksgiving.
After 3 Years - Presidents' Day, Martin Luther King Day, Easter
After 5 Years - Birthday, Floater, Floater
. Pension Tables Increased - Tables were moved up on average of 4 percent across the
board. Normal retirement is moved to a~e 63.
In 1998 a one-time pension window for operators 50 to 54 to obtain 5 years of age in
order to retire early.
. Delete: Attendance Bonus
Add: 50 percent buyback of sick leave accumulated above 150 days.
. Health & Welfare - $1.81 per hour worked based on 2,080 hours; operators no longer
pay $10 per week until the trust falls below $1,000,000, at which time that payment is
reactivated.
. Part-time Operators - Move from 15 to 20 percent over the term of the contract. New
floor of 425 full-time operators.
. Payroll Clerk - Removed from the bargaining unit.
. Pensioners -
Pensioners up to 1985 minimum
Spouses up to 1985 minimum
$500.00
250.00
. Schedule Clerk II will be promoted to Schedule Clerk I effective 1-1-96.
Additional Contractual Items are:
. Full-time Bereavement / Brothers and Sisters; 4 days
. Part-time Bereavement! Same as full-6ne; 2 days (4 hours each)
., '1
(7\".,,<(. -:c.. .
,
.~
Contract Ratification of Bus Operators' New Agreement
December 5, 1995
Page 3
. Casual vacation (breaking up one vacation week)
. Active employee death benefit increases in all levels, $1,000.00 each;
funeral expense allowance increase to $500.00.
. New designated beneficiary clause
. Sick leave runs for bid
. Transit Store lead clerk to receive $1.00/hour increase while supervising
. Karol Ferris - 9 month bridge
. Insert old letters of agreement into contract
. Union chooses Safety Committee representatives
. Relief bidding either division
. Increase in reports to 14
. Operator anniversary date to become floating holiday
. Clerical - Easter changed to floating holiday
. Direct deposit for regular employees and pensioners
. Clerical vacation year to begin January 1
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board ratify this contractual agreement between San Diego Transit
and Union Local 1309 Amalgamated Transit Union.
Vic~~~esources & Labor
FJS/de'
C) -J -' ')
,,.,(<7'--<1., .::