HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1996/02/13
Tuesday, February 13, 1996
6:00 p.m.
"I deCl(JrC '.!TLkr ~,"'cnr)ty ot perjury that I al't1
emr~jQ''''D~ by t(.~, 1,~-~:'l c! ~'>U:<'l \/iata in the
O;'j";cc' (,;- tJ',c C':~':: f'~r' .~.,,~ :jF,:t i f/,}2/.cd
this f\r,;n,~:,,,f,.~;-.;~j::;2 C';; 'j,:; l~,,:Lr~::l b:':':J. Gt
the PulJlic i.er.v;~.~e.g C~(k.:in_': "n;.i.at C~~)" H.:H on C.I Cb be
. ,\ I:. ,- ",:, _ _~":" U''''--' .( /' /<< rr ouncl am rs
DAl ED'I ~ .'",_ S,l,,\.t.D~. /./,";.f - -- Public Services Building
, /',
Re1!ular Meetim! of the City of Chula Vista City Council
CALL TO ORDER
I.
ROLL CALL:
Council members Alevy _' Moot _' Padilla _' Rindone _' and
Mayor Horton _"
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
February 6, 1996 (Regular City Council Meeting), February 6, 1996
(Joint Meeting of the City Council Redevelopment Agency), and
February 6, 1996 (Special Joint Meeting of the City
Council/Redevelopment Agency)
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Slate of the City Address by Mayor Horton.
h. Proclamation recognizing McMillin Companies upon the groundbreaking of the Tour
d'Elegance. The proclamation will be presented by Mayor Horton.
*****
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 9)
The staff recommendations regarding the foLLowing items Listed under the Consent CalenrLar 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 CalenrLar 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 COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Leiter from the City Altorney slating that as a result of deliberations that occurred in Closed
Session on 2/6/96, the City Council authori7.ed settlement of a claim the City had in
connection with the Leo Alhert Estate in the amount of $50,000. Except for the foregoing,
there was no other observed reportable action laken hy the City Council in Closed Session.
It is recommended that the letter be accepted and tiled.
b. Leiter from Bettie Warren requesting that the City Council overturn a decision of the Risk
Management Division to deny her request for reimbursement of a $150 tree removal bill.
It is recommended that Ms. Warren's request be received and filed.
Agenda
-2-
February 13, 1996
6. ORDINANCE 2663 AMENDING SECTION 10.48.030 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE,
INCREASING STATE LAW SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN AREAS AND
ESTABLISHING A SPEED LIMIT OF 35 MPH ON NORTH
GREENSVIEW DRIVE FROM CLUBHOUSE DRIVE TO HUNTE
PARKWAY AND ADDING THIS LOCATION TO SCHEDULE IX (first
readinl!) - Construction in the EastLake Greens subdivision has created several
miles of new streets to be opened to the public. The City Engineer has
detennined the need to establish a posted speed limit on North Greensview Drive
between Clubhouse Drive and Hunte Parkway. Staff recommends Council place
the ordinance on first reading. (Director of Public Works)
7. RESOLUTION 18208 APPROVING THE TRANSFER OF REAL PROPERTY TO THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA FROM THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO - On 9/12/95,
Council considered a report which discussed the property transfer from the City
of San Diego of 7 parcels totaling 57.40 acres of real property using grant funds
from the State Coastal Conservancy. The State Coastal Conservancy requires
the property traosfer be done by resolution. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
8. RESOLUTION 18209 APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF ONE APPLICATION FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR 1996/97 2% NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) AND TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX
(TRANSNET) FUNDS - The City annually submits an updated list of projects
for inclusion in the seven-year implementation program of the non-motorized
element of the Regional Transportation Improvement Program. Official
applications must be submitted to SANDAG in order for projects to be
considered by its Board of Directors for funding. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
9.A. RESOLUTION 18210 APPROVING FINAL MAP OF TRACK 96-02, EASTLAKE SOUTH
GREENS UNIT 12, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC THE
PUBLIC STREETS DEDICATED ON SAID MAP, REJECTING ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY THE OPEN SPACE LOT 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 SAME - Council approved
the Tentative Subdivision Map for Tract 96-02 on 12/19/95; the Tentative
Subdivision Map for Tract 88-3 on 7/18/89; and the amended Tentative Map 88-
3A on 8/16/94 and imposed additional conditions of approval. Staff
recommeods approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works)
B. RESOLUTION 18211 APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT FOR EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS, UNIT 12
REQUIRING DEVELOPER TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN
UNFULFILLED CONDITIONS OF RESOLUTIONS NUMBER 15200,
17618 AND 18170 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
SAME
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
Agenda
-3-
February 13, 1996
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 Fonn" available in the lobby and submit it to the City
Clerk prior to the meeting. (ComRlete the green fonn to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete
the pink fonn to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per
individual.
CONSIDERING ENACTING A GAMING PLAN PURSUANT TO
CHAPTER 5.20 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE - On 11/28/95, Council
approved certain amendments to Chapter 5.20 of the Municipal Code regarding
cardrooms. The changes allow any form of gambling in Chula Vista that is
allowed at any other location within the state subiect to further retulation under
a Chula Vista Gamin!! Plan. Staff recommends approval of t e resolution.
(Chief of Police, City Attorney, and Director of PlanDlng) Continued from the
meeting of 1/23/96.
RESOLUTION 18212 ADOPTING A GAMING PLAN WHICH WOULD ALLOW PAl GOW
AND SUPER PAN 9 TO BE PLAYED AT CARDROOMS SUBJECT TO
CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS, AND MAKE OTHER CHANGES IN THE
HOURS AND DA YS OF OPERATION, MAXIMUM BETS INCREASING
BUSINESS LICENSE T AX, AND ALLOW ABLE HOUSE CHARGES PER
TABLE
10.
PUBLIC HEARING
11.
PUBLIC HEARING
12.
PUBLIC HEARING
REVIEWING AND ADOPTING THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTING OF THE
COUNTYWIDE SUMMARY PLAN AND SITING ELEMENT - The final
draft of Countywide Summary Plan and the Countywide Siting Element must be
a~proved by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) prior to
distribution to and approval by local jurisdictions. SANDAG has postponed
their approval to provide an opportumty for additional public comment. The
documents are expected to be approved for distribution in March of this year
and could be noticed for review and approval by the cities and the County of
San Diego in April. Staff recommends the item be Dulled and re-noticed when
SANDAG approves distribution. (Conservation Coordinator)
DRC-94-24, APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO
DENY THE INSTALLATION OF A 3 FOOT HIGH, 16 FOOT WIDE
GATE ACROSS LA COSTA AVENUE DIVIDING THE EASTLAKE
GREENS NEIGHBORHOODS KNOWN AS MASTERS COLLECTION
AND BRISTOL WOOD, BREHM INVESTMENTS INC. - The appeal
requests permission to install a 3 foot high gate across La Costa Avenue to
prevent continuous vehicular circulation between the EastLake Neighborhoods
known as Master Collection and Bristolwood, and reduce potential liability for
Bristolwood homeowners. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Director of Planning) Continued from the meetmg of 2/6/96.
RESOLUTION 18206 DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION
TO DENY THE INSTALLATION OF A 3 FOOT HIGH GATE ACROSS
LA COST A A VENUE, A PRIVATE STREET WITHIN THE EASTLAKE
GREENS PLANNED COMMUNITY
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
Fonn" 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,
Agenda
-4-
February \3, 1996
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council will consider items which have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
None submitted.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by
the Council, staff. or members of the general 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" fonn available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
Public comments are limited to five minutes.
13. RESOLUTION 18213 APPROVING INCREASE IN ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT
(PARAMEDIC) SER VICE RATES FOR HARTSON MEDICAL SERVICES
IN THE CHULA VISTA EXCLUSIVE OPERATING AREA - The existing
agreement with Hartson Medical Services allows Hartson to request rate
adjustments on an annual basis, subject to certain limitations. The last
adjustment was approved on 10/22/91. Hartson is requesting an 8% increase
in their rate schedule, effective immediately, and Hartson is advising that the
"Assessment Only" component has been voluntarily reduced by 55.6%. The
resulting rate structure would still maintain Chula Vista/Bonita Base and Mileage
rates a..<; the lowest Hartson charges in San Diego County. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Director of Finance and Fire Chief)
14. RESOLUTION 18207 EXECUTING AN AGREEMENT WITH EQUITAX FOR ENERGY
AUDITING SERVICES AND WAIVING THE BIDDING
REQUIREMENTS - As part of the City's ongoing efforts to save energy and
cut costs associated with the City's energy usage, staff is recommending
contracting with a utility auditing firm to identify potential areas of savings
through utility bill overcharges or rate structure changes. The services are set
up on a contingency basis, so there is no up-front cost to the City. Staff
recommend<; that this item be continued until comoletion of discussions
between the Citv and the water districts and local utilitv comDanies.
(Environmental Resource Manager) Continued from the meeting of 2/6/96.
15.A. REPORT CONSIDERATION OF COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENTS TO
COUNCIL POLICY 570-02 "SEWER SERVICE TO PROPERTY NOT
WITHIN THE CITY BOUNDARY" -In 1993, several requests were received
for sewer connections on Acacia Avenue and in the Proctor Valley area.
Circumstances surrounding those requests raised a number of issues regarding
the Sewer Connection Policy and the delivery of sewer service by the Spring
Valley Sanitation District to unincorporated areas within the Sphere of Influence.
Staff recommends Council accept the reports and approve the resolution.
(Director of Public Works and Director of Planning)
B. REPORT CONSIDERATION OF A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT WITH THE
SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT REGARDING THE
MAINTENANCE, OPERATION AND USE OF SEWERS IN ACACIA
A VENUE AND PALM DRIVE
C. RESOLUTION 18214 ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENTS TO COUNCIL POLICY
570-02, AND AUTHORIZING THE MA YOR TO EXECUTE ON BEHALF
OF TIlE CITY THE CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT WITH THE
SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT
Agenda
-5-
February 13, 1996
16. RESOLUTION 18215 APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PORTION
OF THE SALT CREEK SEWER LINE AND ADDING A NEW PROJECT
TO THE CIP BUDGET - San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) is in
the process of constructing a new high pressure gas line known as Pipeline 2000
to serve the south portion of the County. Part of the line is to be constructed
within the Salt Creek basin on Otay Ranch. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Public Works) 4/5th's vote required.
17. REPORT SAN MIGUEL RANCH AD HOC CITIZEN'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE;
SAN MIGUEL RANCH GOALS AND OBJECTIVES - The resolution
approving the San Miguel Ranch General Development Plan requires the
establishment of an Ad Hoc Citizen's Advisory Committee to provide input into
the planning process for subsequent plans and approvals. In addition, City staff
and the project applicant have prepared a draft set of Goals and Objectives for
future planning of the project. On 11/21/95. Council directed staff to advertise
for additional members for the Ad Hoc Committee, and also requested additional
information regarding goals and objectives. Staff recommends that Council
appoint the Committee, approve guidelines for the operation of the Committee,
and approve a revised set of Goals and Objectives. (Director of Planning)
Continued from the meeting of 11/21195.
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
18. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTCS)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
19. MAYOR'S REPORT(Sl
a. Ratification of appointment to the Youth Commission - Jim Perondi.
20. COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the Regular City Council Meeting on February 20,
1996 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Couocil Chambers.
Agenda
-6-
February 13, 1996
*****
CLOSED SESSION
Unless the City Allorney, the City Manager or the City Council states otherwise at this time, the Council will
discuss arul deliberate on the following items of business which are pennilled by lnw to be the subject of a closed
session discussion, arul which the Council is advised should be discussed in closed session to best proteetthe
interests of the City. The Council is required by lnw to return to open session, issue any reports of final action
taken in closed session, arulthe votes taken. However, due to the typical length of time taken up by closed
sessions, the videotaping will be tenninated at this point in order to save costs so that the Council's return from
closed session, reports of final action taken, arul 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.
21. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING:
I. Existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9
. Chula Vista and nine other cities vs. the County of San Diego regarding solid waste
issues (trash litigation).
. SNMB, L.P. vs. the City of Chula Vista (MCA).
2. Anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9
. EastLake Development Company prospective mediation regarding EDC's park
obligations.
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
. Agency negotiator: John Goss or designee for CVEA, WCE, POA, lAFF, Executive
Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
Employee organization: Chula Vista Employees Association (CVEA) and Western Council of
Engineers (WCE), Police Officers Association (POA) and International Association of Fire
Fighters (IAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
22. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
*****
February 8, J.996
FROM:
The Honorable Mayor and cit~ counci~ .
John D. Goss, City Manager,Jl4vY\~~
city council Meeting of Februart-i3, J.996
TO:
SUBJECT:
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular
City Council meeting of Tuesday, February J.3, J.996. Comments
regarding the Written communications are as follows:
5a. This is a J.etter from the City Attorney reporting that as a
result of deliberations that occurred in Closed Session on
February 6, 1996, the City Attorney reports that the city
council authorized settlement of a claim in connection with
the Leo Albert Estate, in which the city will receive $50,000.
Except for the foregoing, there was no other observed
reportable action taken by the city Council in Closed Session.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS LETTER BE RECEIVED AND FILED.
5b. This is a letter from Bettie Warren requesting that the city
council overturn a decision of the Risk Management Division to
deny her request for reimbursement of a $150 tree removal
bill. Ms. Warren did not call the City's 24 hour emergency
number but called a private tree service instead and incurred
the $150 charge. While it is unfortunate that Ms. Warren had
to pay for this service, the City does publish the emergency
number in the phone directory and the telephone operators also
have this information. Therefore, Ms. Warren received a
rejection notice from the Risk Management Division on
J.2/12/95. This has been standard practice for the city in
cases similar to this one. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT MS. WARREN'S
REQUEST BE RECEIVED AND FILED.
JDG:mab
JDG:mab
r----
I
i.j, .--"\
, ,\
State of the City Address
r
1996
~~f?
~ ~
CllY OF
CHUIA VISfA
MAYOR SHIRLEY HORTON
February 13, 1996
40.. -I
Good Evening. Thank you for joining us, It is an honor and a privilege tonight, to present Chula Vista's
State of the City Address.
Despite a lingering recession, 1995 was an exceptionally exciting and successful year for this City. The
projects and programs we've completed, and the many accomplishments we achieved, have helped place
Chula Vista at the crossroads of change. And many of us, I believe, find change hard to accept.
There was an article in one of our local newspapers, a couple 01 weeks ago, about America's richest
man, Bill Gates, the founder and owner of Microsoft. The article said, that, central to his vision, is the
power of change and that change is not really an optional thing, and that, we are changing faster than
ever before. He emphasized that our strength, the United States strength, has been that we have
embraced change, Those who don~, will be left behind.
Our economy is emerging from its worst downturn in 60 years-- a downturn that has required nearly all
of the State's major industries to retool for greater competitiveness in a global marketplace. Government
has had to do the same.
In our efforts to provide the services and facilities to meet the needs of our community, we too, have
undergone tremendous change, becoming leaner and more efficient in response to our social, economic
and environmental needs, We are undergoing change of such scale and significance that it is literally
redefining how we live and do business. If we are to build a strong, vibrant economy and ensure a high
quality of life for the next generation and the generations to come, we have to be willing to recognize
changes in technology, assess our future needs and to plan, accordingly.
Our achievements this past year have primarily been due to this City's ability to recognize and respond
to change. We have done this in parity with our ability to utilize the benefits of creating partnerships.
Together these two key component~ give us the tools that have brought Chula Vista into a position of
prominence not only within our region, but in the State and the Nation.
We have accomplished a great deal for a city 01 our size, and a lot of that credit goes to the individuals
who work for the City 01 Chula Vista,
I would like to thank our City Manager, John Goss and his staff and all the individuals who work for this
City, for carrying out the policies set by this Council. We are very fortunate to have such talent here at
City Hall.
A few years ago, Chula Vista set an ambitious goal to enhance our local economy in a manner consistent
with advancing the quality of our environment. Last year, we received a $2 million dollar grant from the
U.S. Department of Commerce for our Border Environmental Commerce Alliance program, commonly
known as BECA. BECA officially opened its doors, this past October when California's lieutenant
Governor Gray Davis came to Chula Vista to help us celebrate the grand opening of BECA's Border
Environmental Technology Resource Center and the Environmental incubator. BECA is a regional
coalition of United States and Mexican border-oriented public and private partners sharing the common
goal of encouraging and assisting the growing environmental industry through the development and
commercialization of emerging environmental technologies, thereby, generating both economic and
environmental benefits, for the entire international border region.
After just a few short months since the grand opening of BECA, we have 8 companies which have passed
our comprehensive screening process. By the end of the year, we hope to have all 24 start-up tenant
spaces occupied. We also want to assist over 200 walk-in clients through the Technology Resource
Center,
L/a. -d-
Besides protecting the environment, our goal is to see BECA become a self-supporting nonprofrt
organization-- and to convince businesses to locate and expand their operations in Chula Vista. To
facilITate this, Council has directed staff to develop incentive programs to help us meet our goals.
Our staff is already at work on a major loan guarantee program to assist with real estate financing and
they are also working on a MicroLoan program to help start-up companies with "gap financing" for
working capital and equipment.
As a Nation, we face a critical challenge to build our economy and renew our communities while
protecting and enhancing our environment. Chula Vista's efforts to advance sustainable environmental
development is now being recognized on a national level; evidenced by the selecli.on of Chula Vista as
a Founding Community Leader of the Clinton Administration's Nali.onal Challenge Campaign. Last week,
Chula Vista, along with Chicago, Baltimore, Portland and Orlando became part of the White House's
National Environmental Technology Strategy.
This is a national project that will create partnerships between environmental technology users and
manufacturers and promote the use of innovative environmental technologies in communities across
America. Innovative environmental technologies can reduce costs, create jobs, increase exports and
create a competitive advantage for American business. There are currently more than 60,000
environmental technology businesses in the United States employing more than one million workers. The
growing global environmental technology markets are expected to reach $500 billion by the turn of the
century and the industry will employ an additional one million plus Americans over the next decade.
I'd like to share with you other reasons why Chula Vista is becoming a leader in providing environmental
solutions and in creating jobs within the environmental industry. Chula Vista is one of 14 cities aroune'
the world developing local action plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We are the first city in
California to have developed a comprehensive Carbon Dioxide Reduction Plan to reduce the consumption
of C02 below 1990 levels. Chula Vista is the ::rst city in the country to offer financial rebates to
businesses to use electric vehicles in their fleets.
We have opened two Telecenters, in partnership with CalTrans and UC Davis, which bring work to the
workers, rather than the other way around. This has eliminated hundreds of vehicle miles traveled per
week as well as reducing freeway congestion and air pollution. Many of our citizens are now taking
advantage of having the nearby work stations with computer and telecommunication technologies,
including satellite- based video conferencing.
We were the only city in 1995 to receive an "Environmental Leadership Award" from the County of San
Diego. We also received an award from SDG&E for being one of its top 40 energy conserving customers
as a result of our retrofitting 30 City facilities. Remember, energy savings in City buildings translate into
savings of your tax dollars.
Chula Vista is also committed to becoming a "Smart Community." We intend to provide our businesses
and residents with access to the best on-line technologies available which, in turn, will reduce the need
to put cars on our roadways. Chula Vista will be the model from which California will develop a guidebook
on how government can better serve, the taxpayer, through interactive on-line communications.
We are also delighted to announce a very exciting demonstration project that Chula Vista is planning to
undertake in partnership with Ballard Power Systems out of Canada, and Science Applications
International Corporation here in San Diego. Chula Vista will be placing 3 City buses into operation that
will utilize an incredible new fuel-cell technology that produces absolutely no pollutants and generates its
own independent power source. The potential of this technology is truly amazing.
- 2 -
Yt..-3
The only thing that will come out of the tailpipe of these buses is water! And to use this power source
you do not have to "plug anything in" or "fill anything up!"
These projects showcase our role in building model programs for providing a connection between
environment, economy and building cleaner communities.
A discussion of economic development would not be complete without a look at our City's Redevelopment
Agency, which also enjoyed major successes in 1995; creating new job opportunities for our residents,
and helping revitalize our commercial and industrial districts as well as generating more revenues for our
General Fund. Among these successes were the grand openings of Walmart, Mervyn's, the Palomar
Trolley Shopping Center, and the Chula Vista Auto Park.
Another landmark was the approval of the 20,000-seat MCA Amphitheater. In addition to providing our
community with a valuable entertainment venue, MCA-Universal Studios has pledged to contribute
$150,000 annually to the City's performing arts programs.
In total, the Redevelopment Agency's assistance to these projects resulted in more than 3,650 new full-
time jobs, and $4.6 million in annual tax revenues for 1995.
Most of you know that Chula Vista is the second largest city in San Diego County. We have a population
of just under 160,000 and we cover some 35 square miles of land. Those numbers are going to change
dramatically with the upcoming annexation of a large portion of the Otay Ranch. The first phase of the
annexation process took place last week when LAFCO approved a majority of our Sphere of Influence
plan.
The complexion of our City is undoubtedly going to change with the growth of Otay Ranch. One of the
things I want to make sure of, is that we don't lose the feeling of community and neighborhoods that helps
make Chula Vista such a special place. That is why it is important for the City of Chula Vista to be
successful during this annexation process, so that we will be in "ontrol of our own destiny.
And, while we're on the subject of the Otay Ranch project, I would also like to comment on the university
site designated on our approved General Development Plan. During Greg Cox's term as Mayor, his vision,
was to have a university in this area of the region. He appointed a university subcommittee, to research
and evaluate the possibilities, of having the State Board of U.C. Regents, designate Chula Vista, as a
future location for a university. My goal is to make sure that we do not lose the opportunity to keep the
university site as we had envisioned it in the General Development Plan.
In the next few months, I will reappoint the original subcommittee to revisit the university issue, with an
objective, to make our dream become a reality.
As Mayor, I am not just concerned with putting up houses and buildings, but rather, about creating a
community. I am committed to the vision shared by the men and women who founded this City, 'to create
a community where hardworking people can relax, raise a family, and build a future.' Building a healthy
future is a big part of why Chula Vista is known for being a progressive city with a real spirit of innovation.
This past summer our commur.ity had the opportunity to celebrate the grand opening ofthe Arco Olympic
Training Center, the largest warm weather training facility in the United States. Our goal is to make sure
that we take advantage of this community resource.
We have an agreement with the Training Center to bring Olympic-caliber athletes into our classrooms and
recreation programs, to meet and work with our young people.
- 3-
4~-4
This year we are going to build a new gymnasium. Our aim is to tie this facility in with the Olympic
Athletic Program and have a first rate gym for kids to put their enthusiasm and energy to use. Boys and
girls wiil have a chance to get to know men and women who are the best in their field of sports and this
interaction, wiil help them make, the most of their skiils and abilities.
Too often, girls and young women have not really been encouraged to take part in athletic competnion,
and I'm happy to see that's changing. Last week, over 1,200 of our young women participated in a variety
of sports venues at the Olympic Training Center. This spring, the Olympic Torch is going to come through
Chula Vista, as part of the kick off events of the Atlanta Olympic games.
Having the ARCO Training Center in our community wiil also make Chula Vista a draw for the tourist
industry. Once the Center is completed, 500,000 visnors are expected to come and enjoy this
one-of-a-kind facility. We expect thousands of visitors during this summer's Republican National
Convention, and when Chula Vista plays host to the 1996 Tour d'Elegance which wiil be held this July.
The Tour d'Elegance wiil feature seven custom-built, million dollar homes, all on one street in the Rancho
del Rey development. We expect the Tour to draw over 60,000 visitors to Chula Vista.
In these difficult financial times, we still found a way to design and construct our dramatic new Library--and
won the AlA's top architectural award as well as the Grand Orchid award along the way. This award
winning Library can become the centerpiece of the neighborhoods surrounding it, serving as a gathering
place for cultural events, a means of tapping into the Internet, and it will be a multifaceted resource for
young and old.
An issue of great concern is public safety-- critical to everyone who lives or works in our community. 'As
Mayor I will work closely with Council to provide you with the safest possible environment.
In that regard, we are fortunate to have a Fire Department that stays ahead of the curve in responding to
important changes in technology.
We've finalized an agreement for a new fire station to be added to our Cny in Rancho del Rey, and 1995
saw the delivery of two new fire fighting vehicles to our fleet; including a 105-foot aerial ladder truck. We
are well-served by the brave men and women of this department.
We are also firmly committed to our Police Department, and have raised our police personnel to 175
sworn officers and 82 civilian personnel. We have an excellent Police Department and crime statistics in
our City are dropping in every category.
Violent crimes like homicide, rape and robbery have dropped 12 percent in 1995. Property crimes have
dropped steadily since 1991, and we had 13 percent fewer incidents of burglary, larceny and vehicle theft
between 1994 and 1995. In vehicle thefts alone, we had 748 fewer cars reported stolen in 1995 than in
the previous year.
One of the reasons we are able to be so effective is with the help we receive from the 261 volunteers who
gave us over 71,000 hours of their time this past year. Their efforts are paying off.
A recent study published in "TIME" magazine indicates that community policing is playing a significant role
in reducing crime in cities all across the nation.
Chula Vista is an exceptional example of just how true that is! State Attorney General Dan Lundgren
recently cned Chula Vista as having the best community policing program in the state and that's
something we're very proud of!
-4 -
4A-5
The State Attorney General singled out Chula Vista's Senior Vol~nteer Patrol Program for several reasons.
First, the 66 men and women who serve our community donated over 15,000 hours to our City in 1995.
Our Senior Volunteer Patrol Program is a direct link to Ollr Police Department notifying them immediately
if they see or hear anything suspicious. And second, 60% vf the funding for this program came from
private sources, from businesses in our community.
This program was adopted by our Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, and local businesses offered the
funds which provided uniforms, painted patrol cars, supplied equipment and provides the maintenance
of the equipment. Even their storefront office down on Broadway is donated.
So when you see one of our white Senior Volunteer Patrol cars driving down the street in your
neighborhood or when you see one of our Senior Patrol Officers walking around our commercial districts,
remember that very little of your tax dollars went into this public safety program and that it was made
possible by the many individuals who gave generously of themselves. This is a true public and private
partnership. This is a program for other cities to emulate.
Ladies and gentlemen, I would like you to join me in recognizing our very dedicated Senior Patrol Officers.
This program would not be the success it is today if it hadn't been for one special individual who came
to me all excited about the idea of having our local businesses contribute their services, facilities and cash
to fund this public safety program.
In recognition of this individual's hard work, his dedication and his commitment, I would like to present
the first-ever "Mayors's Leadership Award for Excellence in Community Service" to a man who is one of
this City's greatest assets, my friend and former City Council colleague, Len Moore.
Len, will you please come forward and accept this award.
During the last month, the City of San Diego and the County of San Diego gave their Annual Addresses
and in both presentations they emphasized that this was the year that they were going to focus on our
children. And I thought to myself, you know, we have been making our children our priority for years.
Chula Vista has collaborated with the school districts in providing after school programs in all of our
elementary, and we have several in our middle, and high schools. We have formed partnerships to share
resources with the school districts and other agencies to provide needed facilities such as a new library,
performing arts center, community building and this year we will be breaking ground on a new gymnasium
next to Otay Elementary School on school property. Our Police Department has been involved in several
different programs, helping youth at risk.
These are just some of the programs in which the City is involved. And even though Chula Vista has been
very proactive in building a healthy community for our children, we can't stop here.
You must realize that every 13 seconds an American child is abused or neglected. every 26 seconds a
child is born to an unwed mother, every 30 seconds a child is born into poverty, every 59 seconds a child
is born to a teen mother, every five minutes a child is arrested for a violent crime, and every two hours
a child is killed by a gun. Every day 1,234 children run away from home, 2,660 see their parents divorce,
100,000 children are homeless and 1.2 million latchkey children come home to houses in which there is
a gun. These are alarming statistics, but it is a clear reminder of what our job is.
As we begin our budget deliberations, we must insist on providing opportunities for our children that will
keep them away from drugs, gangs and crime.
- 5-
4 A.-/P
The State Attorney General noted in a speech given recently that crime levels have fallen in every age
group, except for those under age 18. Surprisingly, most of these crimes are committed between the
hours of 3:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.
Children need after school programs and recreation centers where they can learn and play without the
threat of at.use, violence, or crime. When children do not have healthy, supervised outlets for their
energy, they often fall prey to high risk behavior.
So as part of the City's continuing effort to enhance the partnerships for children, ~ is my goal this year
to work with the school district to provide after school intramural activities in all of our middle schools. This
goal will help fill a void for young teens who are currently not being offered the same after-school
opportunities given to kids of other ages.
As we continue on our course; creating a strong vibrant economy and building a healthy city, our vision
is to mobilize this entire community. It will take a un~ed effort to meet the needs of our youth and their
families. Together, we must encourage all youth to have high expectations of themselves, hope for their
futures, and a sense of their responsibilities. The youth are a resource deserving of preservation and
protection. They are also critical to community development and to the future.
We must always remember that our children are our future.
- 6-
4t..-1
~~~
:--- ..-;-:
~~~~
~~=-~
CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
Date:
February 7, 1996
From:
The Honorable Mayor and City CO~~il
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorne' ~~
Report Regarding Actions Taken i Closed Session
for the Meeting of 2/6/96
To:
Re:
The purpose of this letter is to announce that as a result of
deliberations that occurred in Closed Session on February 6, 1996,
the City Attorney reports that the City Council authorized
settlement of a claim the City had in connection with the Leo
Albert Estate in the amount of $50,000.
Except for the foregoing, there was no other observed reportable
action taken by the City Council in Closed Session.
BMB: 19k
C:\lt\clossess.rep
h'J
276 FOURTH AVENUE, CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 691-5037 . FAX (619) 585-5612
;-;,.,Posr~~P_
'_..,
i .1
j;[J!,
IU' U~:
I 'i
',--------
,r,l,' i",'1 ((' I' ~
,'J II,) )[; j ",i, II, I
11: (l
! II; i
FfB -? ~ 'IJJ
COUNCil Of flCfS J I
CHULA VISTA ci.
January 31, 1996
City Council
Chula Vista, CA
Dear Council:
I filed a claim against the City of Chula Vista on November 27,
]995 in the RJnount of "150.00 ",hj"h HRS npnipn.
The claim Has filed for reimbursement of my having to have a
tree removal service remove a very hugh limb that fell across
the road in front of my house causing us to be unable to get
out or in.
This happened about 4 o'clock in the morning, on a Saturday.
Thinking the City Street 11aintenance Dept. would be closed I
did not know what to do as we had to get in and out to our
home. All I knew to do as it ,,,as an emergency was call a
private tree removal service which cost $150.00.
I understand now that the city provides a 24 hour service but
I was not aware of that at the time or I certainly would have
been glad to use it instead of paying out of my own pocket.
How many citizens in this town are aware that you can get
City Naintenance to come to your house at 5 or 6 o'clock in
the morning on a week-end ~remove a tree limb in order that
you can get dmm the street. 99% of the population of Chula
Vista is not aware of this.
This tree is on city property in front of my house at 89 First
Jive., wIdell is (i naLLOW JiLL L'OEU:1 lJlaking it impossible to get
around the tree limb with a car.
I wish to appeal this decision and ask that the City Council
reconsider this decision nade by your Risk Management Division
and reimburse me this amount.
Thank you.
Respectfully,
6.<.~i C) . U I~'-r-Y...c .-./
Bettie J f \,arren
89 First Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
~\"!""'l~,r, t'
," >
~ \;.j
,"-::']-
\,.-.'1,
r;r""n ~
i:. ~'
;'). t: u \.,-
5,6 - /
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item_ ~
Meeting Date2/13/96
Ordinance .2/."3 Amending Schedule IX, Section 10.48.030 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code - Increasing State Law Speed Limits in
certain areas and establishing a speed limit of 35 MPH on North
Greensview Drive from Clubhouse Drive to Hunte Parkway and adding
this location to Schedule IX
SUBMITTED BY: Dlrcetor of PUbliC. work~...r
REVIEWED BY: City ManageU11JiA'., 1~.._
:) /_ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_Nol)
Based on the provIsIons of the California Vehicle Code Section 40803, and pursuant to
authority under the Chula Vista Municipal Code section 10.48.030, the City Engineer has
determined that in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and traffic congestion, and for the
promotion of public safety, there is a need to establish a speed limit on North Greensview
Drive between Clubhouse Drive and Hunte Parkway. This street has recently been completed
and opened to traffic serving major portions of EastLake Greens. An engineering and traffic
survey as required by state law has been conducted and it has been determined that the
appropriate speed limit in this area is to be posted at 35 M.P.H.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the Ordinance establishing a 35 MPH speed limit on North Greensview Drive from
Clubhouse Drive to Hunte Parkway.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The Safety Commission, at their meeting of 1/11/96, voted MSC 6-0-0-1, with Commissioner
Smith abstaining due to conflict of interest, to support staff's recommendation and recommend
that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending Schedule IX, Section 10.48.030 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code and establishing the speed limit on North Greensview Drive from
Clubhouse Drive to Hunte Parkway at 35 MPH.
DISCUSSION:
Construction in the EastLake Greens subdivision has created several miles of new streets to
be opened to the public. The City Engineer has determined the need to establish a posted
speed limit on North Greensview Drive between Clubhouse Drive and Hunte Parkway This
is necessary to comply with the California Vehicle Code Section 40803 Speed Trap Evidence.
Section 40803 requires evidence that a Traffic and Engineering Survey has been conducted
within five years. There has not yet been a speed limit posted on this portion of roadway and
&'''/
Page 2, Item c;,
Meeting Date2/13/96
it is currently subject to a state law prima facie 55 M.P.H speed limit. An engineering and
traffic survey as required by state law has been conducted for this roadway segment.
North Greensview Drive in this area is a 48' to 60' curb to curb residential collector street 0.98
miles in length with no direct access to the residential property which lines the street on both
sides of the roadway. There is a golf course which fronts a major portion of this street. North
Greensview Drive in this area is striped with a combination of striping patterns which generally
delineate one lane of traffic in each direction. There is basically no on-street parking allowed
with the exception of the area adjacent to Augusta Park The design speed is a minimum of
40 M.P.H The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) is 5,060 on North Greensview Drive in this
area.
The above-mentioned engineering traffic survey shows an 85th percentile speed of 39 M.P.H.
The accident rate is 0.368 accidents per million vehicle miles (A VM) which is lower than the
statewide average of 2.07 A VM for similar roadways in the State of California. Based on the
above data, it has been determined that the speed limit should be posted at 35 M.P.H in order
to comply with the California Vehicle Code requirements or else this roadway is considered
a speed trap and police radar enforcement of the posted speed limit cannot be conducted.
Based on the above data, it has been determined that the appropriate speed limit should be
posted at 35 M.P.H in accordance with the California Vehicle Code requirements. This new
current survey will expire on December 17, 2000. It is recommended that the City of Chula
Vista Municipal Code be revised as follows
10.48.030 Schedule IX - Increased Speed Limits in Certain Areas
Name of Street Beghming At Ending At Proposed Speed LioU(
N. Greensvie\v Drive Clubhouse Drive Huote Parkway 35 M.P.H.
This item was posted as a public notice as an agenda item as required by law.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to replace signs and pavement legends is $150.00.
Attachment: Area Plat
Engineering and Traffic Survey
DMW:dmw
(!\1:\IIO!\lli\1:NGINEER\AGENDA \NGREENSV .DMW)
File No: 0760-95-CY029
t ".2...
ORDINANCE NO. JJ,(,:J
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 10.48.030 OF THE
CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE, INCREASING STATE
LAW SPEED LIMITS IN CERTAIN AREAS AND
ESTABLISHING A SPEED LIMIT OF 35 MPH ON NORTH
GREENSVIEW DRIVE FROM CLUBHOUSE DRIVE TO HUNTE
PARKWAY AND ADDING THIS LOCATION TO SCHEDULE
IX
WHEREAS, based on the provisions of the California
Vehicle Code section 40803, and pursuant to authority under the
Chula vista Municipal Code section 10.48.030, the city Engineer has
determined that in the interest of minimizing traffic hazards and
traffic congestion, and for the promotion of public safety, there
is a need to establish a speed limit on North Greensview Drive
between Clubhouse Drive and Hunte Parkway; and
WHEREAS, a traffic and engineering study, as required by
State Law, has been conducted for this roadway segment and it was
determined that a speed limit of 35 M.P.H. is the appropriate
speed; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission at its meeting of January
11, 1996 voted 6-0-0-1, with commissioner smith abstaining, to
support staff's recommendation and recommend that the City Council
adopt an Ordinance increasing the speed limit.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula vista
does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Schedule IX of section 10.48.030 of the Chula
vista Municipal code, Increasing State Law Maximum Speed Limits in
certain Areas, is hereby amended to include the following changes:
10.48.030 Schedule IX-Increased Speed Limits in certain Areas
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Proposed Speed
Limit
N. Greensview Clubhouse Hunte Parkway 35 M.P.H.
Drive Drive
SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full
force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption, or when the
appropriate signs are erected giving notice of the maximum speed
limit, whichever occurs last. ) \
Presented by
Approved
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
~:_1~_",,-_ V
I '
, Bruce M.
1,. ;7~~f
,
C:\or\speed.inc
(
..
.
c
"€J ~
.
..
..
~
, .
. I
~'..5
...
<(
.J
a..
<(
IJJ
a:
<(
.!
I
~
c:i
It)
01
....
...
(OJ
....
(OJ
...
..
..
aI
C
.
.
~
Q
SPEED LIMIT -- ENGINEERING/TRAFFIC SURVEY:
STREET:
LIMITS:
North Greensview Drive
Clubhouse Drive - Hunte Parkwav
Existing Posted Speed Limit:
NP
MFH
SUMMARY OF SPEED SURVEYS
Segmenf.:
Date Taken:
Number Vehicles on Sample:
85th Percentile Speed:
Range of Speeds Recorded:
Block No.:
ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Clubhouse Drive - Hunte Parkwav
December 7. 1995
100
39 MPH
24 -4'; MPH
1000 - 1300
Width 48' - 60'
Horizontal Alignment
Vertical Alignment
feet Number of lanes for both directions
Minimum Radius. 770'
600' V.C. Gl. 4.0%. G? -4,4%. Desi~n speed. 40 MPH
2
TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS
Average Daily Traffic 5,060
On-Street Parking No parkin~ allowed except alon~ Au~usta Park.
Special Conditions No direct driveway access to homes. Golf Course
Accident History The accident rate at this se ment (0.368 accidents er million
vehicle miles) is lower than the average accident rate 2.07 for similar roadways
in the State of California.
SURVEY RESULTS
Study was Prepared by
Leonardo Hernandez
Date
10/18/95
Recommendation Establish speed limit at 35 MFH, based on low accident rate,roadway
characteristics. and 85th percentile of less than 40 MPH.
6'~
Date recommendation approved: 12/15/95
By ?-........:,.. ~ ><. 1?:w4/U:J'-
Approved speed limit: 35 MFH
Per CVC 40803. Survey Expires: 12/7/2000
SEGMENT UNDER STUDY
DAlE 1'1.171'15
. ,
TIh. ,TART /:00
CI1Y OF CHUlA VISTA. VEHICLE SPEED SURVEY
N. (;r-D D /'t.5I/;P_IAJ 0..-: ue {cJl/,b~ Ol,4!.2.. Dr: v-e.
, SURVEYSmYine 'T:s/~"J Cril/'€..-
~ 11ME END ~:OO ~
to K,...+~ P~vJp.v
/
POSlED SPEED N P
WEAlHER Our
MPH
DIRECTION tJf3 -0 ~8 -/ roM.
N\1MBER OF VEHla.ES TOTAL '" '"
. II II .
.
0 ~ / /D~
1
"7 '.2..
0 J - 2-
"\ ')7 - :; ,.
(' / ( to 7~
/./ ./ / ..
-'-' "fi./// 0 0
~ (') ./ /' ./ /1/ / ) 'I
'" t -;; 7/',/ ./ ./ '0 /0 /;,0
/ ./ ./ ./ ./1./ ./ 9 '1 f)('J
///././ 7 - (
II )[777 A ~ L
r 1./ ./ u
II' JFJ ./ ./ l ~ -'!:>
in? 7 :: I~ '9'
11"'\ ;- // , .::~
"'-
II' 'Fi 7 .: ,-
77[7 . ~
.., ./ . "
:;t 2 ~
j I I
0 0 r
..
43
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
33
34
33
32
31
30
~
~
2b
27
:u
2.'
24
:l3
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
13
14
13
12
II
10
9
,-'
6
3
RECORDER: 'J,A. Wol e.
_......._or......... /00
t-7
.llMOWrlINOUGIJtI~..1
THIS PAGE BLANK
~-r
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 02/13/96
7
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution J If.2..tJ8''' Approving the Transfer of Real Property to the
City of Chula Vista from the City.oJ; San Diego
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of Parks and Recre'!lklty: .l..
City Manager '(,\ \ )\;,\ ,;ij\\
'--.J. ..,~/;\
(4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No -X.J
REVIEWED BY:
On September 12,1995, the City Council approved a report to transfer 11.2 acres of property from the
City of San Diego to the City of Chula Vista. The property was purchased by the City of San Diego as
part of an overall joint powers effort with the City of Chula Vista and the County of San Diego to plan
and establish a regional park in the Otay Valley.
The land was purchased with State Coastal Conservancy funds for the sole purpose of resource protection
and enhancement. The total amount of land purchased by San Diego is 57.40 acres. San Diego officials
have requested that 11.2 of the 57.40 acres be transferred to the City of Chula because the property is
located within the City's jurisdictional boundaries. This transfer would eliminate San Diego's
requirement of having to pay property taxes on the land located in Chula Vista (Council Report and
Minutes attached as "A" and "B").
Staff has now been informed, by the City of San Diego, that the procedure for property transfer requires
the recordation of the title and the recordation documentation must be by Council Resolution. This
ministerial duty was not known when the item was first presented to the Council last September.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve the Resolution to authorize the City Manager to
execute, for and on behalf of the City of Chula Vista, a grant deed, for the acceptance of two parcels of
real property.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION: As the Council considered and approved the transfer of property at the meeting of
September 12, 1995, the action of approving the Resolution is administrative in nature to meet the
requirements of the State Coastal Conservancy to legally effectuate the property transfer.
FISCAL IMPACT: None for the action of approving the Resolution.
Attachment: "A" - Council Report dated September 12, 1995 regarding real property transfer /h
Minutes of City Council meeting of September 12, 1995 #/5-
"B" -
[Network: Al13 - proptran,a13 -02/01/961
7-;j7-:Z
RESOLUTION NO.
I Y;l./J Y
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE TRANSFER OF REAL
PROPERTY TO THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FROM THE
CITY OF SAN DIEGO
WHEREAS, on September 12, 1995, the City Council
considered a report which discussed the property transfer from the
city of San Diego of seven parcels totaling 57.40 acres of real
property using grant funds from the State Coastal Conservancy; and
WHEREAS, staff has now been informed, by the City of San
Diego, that the procedure for property transfer requires the
recordation of the title and the recordation documentation must be
by Council Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve the transfer of real
property to the city of Chula vista from the City of San Diego.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby
authorized to execute, for and on behalf of the city of Chula
vista, a grant deed for the acceptance of two parcels of real
property.
Presented by
oved a to fo m by
~
Jess Valenzuela, Director of
Parks and Recreation
Bruce M.
Attorney
G:\rs\propxfer
?-'J!l-V
Attachment A-1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
I tern ti5""
Meet;nJ: Date~
Report: Real Property proposed for transfer to the City of Chula Vista from
thl' City Of San Diego
SUB!\IITTED BY:
/1
Director of Parks and Recrczat'~L-
Director of Planning(~'
~ "1.-_
City Manager d I 1G
(4/5ths Vote: YeL-NlLX)
REVIEWED BY:
In December 1993. the City of San Diego, in cooperation with the Otay Valley Regional Park
Planning Team. acquired seven parcels totaling 57.40 acres of real property using grant funds from
the State Coastal Conservancy. The grant was for the expressed purpose of acquiring wetland and
riparian habitat, within the Otay River Valley between Interstate 5 and Interstate 805.
The Otay Valley Regional Park planning staff utilized the Resource Enhancement Plan as a basis
in prioritizing and selecting the sites most suitable for acquisition. The Resource Enhancement Plan
was developed by the consulting firm of Wallace, Roberts and Todd through a contract with the City
of Chula Vista. The consulting contract was financed through a State Coastal Conservancy grant
award. The St"lte required that the study be consistent with Chapter 5 of the State Resource Code
(31251 - 31271) addressing the enhancement of coastal resources.
Two of the parcels acquired by San Diego arc within the City of Chula Vista. 1n accordance with
the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement, staff is recommending that the City accept both parcels,
which total 11.2 acres. This action will bolster ongoing and future interjurisdictional efforts to plan,
acquire and manage land within the proposed Otay Valley Regional Park. Furthermore, by owning
the two parcel' in Chula Vista, San Diego must pay property taxes.
Although the California State Constitution (Article 13, Section 3) exempts local jurisdictions from
taxcs for properties owned within a city's boundary, propcrty owned outside of their jurisdictional
boundaries are not exempt from paying property taxes. This mandate is also contained in Revenue
and Taxation Code Section 4986, 5081, and 5082.1.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Manager be authorized to execute, for and on bchalf of thc
City of Chula Vista, a grant deed, for the acceptance of two parcels of real propcrty, as described
in Exhibits A, B, C & D, attached.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A.
DISClISSION: In ordcr to understand the context of this polic)' decision, it is important to review
th(' sequ('nce of historical milestones achieved in planning the proposed Otay Valley Regional Park.
Joint Exercise of Powers Acreement: Recognizing the need to preserve the South County'svanishing
open space, the City of Chula Vista, in 1988, started preliminary discussions with thc County and
the City of San Diego to plan a regional park. Chula Vista, under the leadership of former Mayor
,I' lan'F'& R - A 113-QVRPprop trf2]
""
7:>
Attachment A-2
Page 2, Item / Y
Meeting Dat~
Greg Cox. developed a formal mechanism which legally committed the affcctedjurisdiction to share
in the responsihilities of developing the Regional Park.
In ] 990. a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreemen! was adopted by thc Cities of Chula Vista, San Diego,
and the County of San Diego. The Agreement enahles the affected agencies to coordinate, acquire,
plan, and design the Park. The agreemqH stipulates that a Policy Committee (PC) consisting of
three elected representatives (appointed by their appropriate legislative body) be created. The
primary purpose of the PC is to set policy for park planning. In addition, the Agreement called for
the formation of a 30-member Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) comprised ofmembcrs from thc
community, community organizations and property owners. The CAC advises staff and thc PC on
issucs related to the proposed Regional Park. The CAC is appointed hy the members of the Policy
Committee. The thrce jurisdictions formed a staffing team, also known as the "Joint Staff," to
oversee the activities of park planning and development. Thc Agreement does not address
maintenance and operation.
The Resource Enhancement Plan: The first opportunity to formally analyze the river valley was in
I 99Cl, when the City of Chula Vista received approximately $90,000 from thc California State Coastal
Conservancy. The grant required the formulation of a resource enhancement plan for the Otay
Valley heginning at the mouth of San Diego Bay and ending at Heritage Road to the east. On
Octoher 27, ] 992, the City Council accepted the Otay River Valley Resource Enhancement Plan.
Phase I and II of this study determined the viability of the river valley's natural resources and its
potential for restoration and preservation i.e., wetlands and riparian hahitat.
For example, the Wallace, Roberts & Todd (WRT) Resource Enhancement Plan identified areas
in the Valley that contain highly sensitive undisturhed resources, areas that contain moderately
disturhed resources (due to urban encroachment of uevelopment) and areas that have either been
developeu or highly disturheu as a result of industrial or commercial uses. The resource data
collecteu (hydroloh'Y, hiolo);/ anu cultural resources) served as the foundation for the San Diego's
acquisition of the seven parcels. The resource information will also serve as a basis for future land
acquisitions in the Otay River Valley.
It is important to point out that the environmental information collected for the Otay River Valley
will also have significant utility in purchasing property for active recreation. As a matter of fact,
since the study was financeu hy the State, there coulu he some cost savings in the park site selection
process. This is attributed to the extensive resource information that was inventorieu in the WR T
Resource Enhancement Plan. However, thc work conuucted by WRT should not be eonsidercu the
environmental impact report for the regional park. This will occur when more precise park planning
is undertaken.
The Planning Area: The Otay River Valley spans three jurisdictions (Chula Vista and the County
and City of San Diego) and has regional significance as a wildlife corridor and major river course.
Because of its diverse resources, park planners envisioned a park serving multiple functions:
resource enhancement, preservation of existing resources, and development of active recreation.
Moreover, Chula Vista approached this planning effort as a way to complete the city-wide greenbelt
(per thc City's General Plan) anu mitigate some park acreage deficiencies in the southwestern part
of the City. The planning area encompasses the lowcr Otay Lakcs Dam area and traverses westerly
along the rivcr corridor anu enus at the southerly reach of San Diego Bay.
i n,nl'& B-I\ 111-0VHIJplUplr!~)
~
'J..."
Attachment A-3
#
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 2 95
On May] S, ] 993, the City Council approved a Focus Planning Area (FPA) and Special Study Area
for thl' Regional Park planning process. The FPA boundary traverses Chula Vista and the County
;lJld City of S:ln Oil-go jUII,dictl<"l:l1 linl's. Th\' I.TA broadly foeu,es on the Park's sphnc- of
Iflllul'llcl'. For l'xamnk'. all significant open space intcrfc:.ccs. trail linkages, and cnvir.;:mml'ntal
,,'nsitive areas will be analyzed in relationship to the valley. The Special Study Areas included
Poggi. Wolf, and Salt Creek Canyons and the area around Otay Lakes.
Since Council's approval ot the FPA, Joint Staff has becn developing the plan to the .next level of
planning entitled the Concept Plan. The Concept Plan begins to identify primary issues of the Park
houndary, the core wne (tloouway ! flood plan), staging areas, potential recreation use areas and
:I regional trail network. The Draft Concept Plan has been reviewed by the Citizen Advisory
Committee and Policy Committee. Further public input is needed before the plan proceeds to the
Council.
Property Acquisition: When Chula Vista received its planning grant, the City of San Diego received
a grant in the amount of $].5 million from the same state agency for the acquisition of wetland and
riparian habitat (Attachment "A"). San Diego's grant award was contingent upon Chula Vista's
completion of the WRT Resource Enhancement Plan. Joint Staffworked closely with the California
State Coastal Conservancy to identify and evaluate potential parcels. Staff selected and presented
30 potential sites to the California State Coastal Conservancy staff. Coastal Conservancy provided
comments on the sites after their field lrips to the properties under consideration. The resource
information noted earlier and the Coastal Conservancy requirements for acquisition served as a
guide in determining which parcels to procure.
The parcels identified were grouped into two liers (Attachments "B" & "C"). Because most of the
parcels were loeateu in San Diego. the Policy Committee requested assistance of the City Property
Department in the valuation. appraisal and acquisition of the parcels.
The properties located in Chula Vista were acquired in both tiers (totalling 11.2 acres), These
properties contain wetland and riparian habitat, and will be subject to restoration and preservation.
The pmperties arc consistent with preliminary plans for the proposed Otay Valley Regional Park
and the draft Multiple Species Conservation Plan (MSCP).
The subject parcels were cnvironmentally assessed by the City of Chula Vista and a negative
declaration was issued hased on the data collected through the WRT Resource Enhancement Plan.
In addition, the California State Coastal Conservancy required that all properties proposed for
acquisition by San Diego be environmentally assessed prior to its purchase.
The preservation, restoration and revitalization of the subject properties, as well as others within the
river valley, will result in enhancement of open space which has deteriorated over time. These
properties will serve as the cornerstone of property acquisition for the ultimate Regional Park,
Future Plans: By approving the property transfer, Chula Vista will send a positive message to all
affected parties anout its continued commitment to the Otay Valley Regional Park.
Although no formal action is necessary at this juncture, a final policy issue that has yet to be
answered deals with future acquisition and long-term management of the Park. With respect to land
[PlanP&h-Al11-0\'RPproplrf2]
tyJ
?-?
Attachment A-4
Page 4, Item ~
Meetin~ Da~
"cquisition, the challenge ahead for "II jurisdictions i.s the ahility to acquire land hefore it's lost to
i.,ther U~l'S or further fl'SOUrCl' ocgradatinn occurs. St<ltfwill seck funds for land purchases thruu~h
gr:mts :md foundations, donations of land from property owners, or land exactions through the
lkH'lopml'nt process to the extent of actual impact on park I1L'eds. The "ltimatc goal of this long-
range planning process is to successfully link adjaccnt parcels together until the valley becomes a
comprehensive regional park for our communities to enjoy in perpetuity.
FISCAL IMPACT: The grantee is ohligated to use, manage, operate and maintain the real property
for the State Coastal Conservancy as future areas for restoration of wetland and riparian hahitat,
pursuant to California State Coastal Conservancy Grant Agreement No. 92-034 (see attached Exhihit
"C'). The fiscal impact to the City of Chula Vista would include the loss of property tax income of
approximately $165 annually. Since the parcels arc classified as natural open space, minimal
maintenance would be required. Periodic clearances and litter ahatement will he conducted
coordinated hetween all jurisdi,.tions. This has already occurred twice since thc parcels were
acquired.
Exhihits:
A. Legal Deseription
B. Decd Restriction
C. Standard Agreement
D. Locator Map
Attachments:
"A"-
Otay River Valley Enhancement Implementation
First Tier Acquisitions
Second Tier Acquisitions
Initial Study & Negative Declaration
Resolution
Grant Deed
"BPI _
"C" _
"0"-
PE" -
"F" -
il'lanl'&K-A1U-OVKl'l'rop ,,!2i
7,Y
Attachrnen t A- 5
SAN DIEGO PROPERTY TRANSFER
LAND PARCELS
Parcel A & B $68,178
622-190-16
Parcel C1 $60,386
629-040-19
1% + 12.8% = $165 Annual Property Tax
[JV:tt.A13.SDPropTr.Lst-Septemtler 8. 1<:/95J
?,..?
Attachment A-6
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Parcel A:
The South half of Lot Five (5) Of Faivre Homestead Tract, in the
City of Chula vista, County of San Diego, state of California,
according to Map thereof No. 10, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of said san Diego County, September 27, 1880.
Excepting therefrom the interest in the West twenty-five (25)
feet of a strip of land forty-five (45) feet wide across the East
side of said South half of Lot Five (5) 'of Faivre Homestead, as
deeded to National city and otay Railway company, a corporation,
now San Diego and Arizona Railway company, a corporation, for
railroad purposes by deed recorded in Book 243, Page 232 of
Deeds.
Parcel B:
That portion of Lot six (6) of the Faivre Homestead Tract, in the
City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California,
according to Map thereof No. 10, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, September 27, 1880,
described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Lot six (6); running
thence East along the South line thereof 10 chains to the
Southeast corner of said lot; thence North along the East line of
said lot, 3 chains; thence West. parallel with and 3 chains
distant from the South line of said lot to the West line thereof;
thence South along the West line of said lot, 3 chains to the
place of beginning.
Parcel A & B - Assessor Parcel Number 622-190-16
Parcel C1
Block 4 in Brimhall's Addition to Otay, in the City of Chula
Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map
thereof No. 598, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of
said San Diego County, May 4, 1889.
Together with the East one half of Ninth Street lying adjacent to
and West of said Block 4, as vacated by Resolution of the county
Board of Supervisors by instrument recorded in the Office of the
County Recorder of san Diego County on March 2, 1934 in Book 281,
Page 376 of Official Records.
Excepting that portion of said Block 4 which lies Easterly of the
Westerly line of the right of way for public highway described in
deed to the State of California, recorded May 8, 1934 as File No.
26887 in Book 288, Page j01 of Official Records.
Reserving unto Grantor, only, that portion of said vacated Ninth
Street for ingress and egress until such time as alternate
permanent access is established.
Farcel Cl - Assessor Parcel Nu~ber 629-040-19
7 -It?
Attachment A-7
EXHIBIT "B"
DEED RESTRICTIONS
] . The real property was acquired by the grantor pursuant to a grant of funds from the State
Coastal Conservancy, an agency of the State of California, for the purpose of the Otay
River Valley Enhancement Plan, Phase I and IT, as it may be amended from time to time,
and no use of the real property inconsistent with that purpose is permitted, except by
specific act of the legislature.
2. The real property (including any portion of it or any interest in it) may not be used as
security for any debt without the written approval of the State of California, acting
through the Executive Officer of the Conservancy, or its successor.
3. The real property (including any portion of it or any interest in it) may not be transferred
without the approval of the State of California, through the Executive Officer of the
Conservancy, or its successor.
4. The grantee is obligated to use, manage, operate and maintain the real property as
described in the 'USE, MANAGEMENT, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE" section
of California State Coastal Conservancy Grant Agreement No. 92-034, as it may be
amended from time to time. Specifically, the grantee shall use, manage, operate and
maintain the real property in a mann~; consistent with the purpose of the acquisition; and
shall assume all management, operation and maintenance costs associated with the real
property, including the cost of ordinary repairs and replacements of a recurring nature,
and costs of enforcement of regulations. The Conservancy shall not be liable for any cost
of such management, operation or maintenance. The grantee shall refrain from
developing or otherwise using any other property it owns or controls in the vicinity of the
real property in such a way as to interfere with or inconvenience the use, management,
operation or maintenance of the real property or to detract from the purpose of the
acquisition. The grantee may be excused from its obligations for management, operation
and maintenance only upon the written approval of the Executive Officer of the
Conservancy or his or her successor
5. If any of the essential deed provisions stated above are violated, all of the grantee's right,
title and interest in the real property shall automatically vest in the State of California for
the benefit of the Conservancy or its successor, upon acceptance of the real property and
approval of the Public Works Board; provided, however, that the State, through the
Executive Officer of the Conservancy, or its successor, may designate another public
agency or a nonprofit organization to accept the right, title and interest, in which case
vesting shall be in that agency or organization rather than in the State.
mC:rc
2-15-95
J,IWPO\CRA YTONlEXB.RES
7-}/
.ANDARD AGREEMENT- ~~~~~~~~~.:..~ O! ~ i I ca"...'or..,....R "'NO.
m..m.v....,1 1 92-034
, ro/ L _ I G lAXPAVlA'S Ftwu.llW\..OYtA a~~ fI.IWlR
HIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this_ cK.' da~.lL (I a~I/../LL"'-} .19 I~ 95-6000776
,!he State of Call!omia. by and between State of Cali!ornia. Ihrough ita duly elec:te.dor oppointed. qualified ond actinl
lLE OF O~aR ACTlNG FOA STATE AGENCY
Executive Officer State Coastal Conservancy .bcra!u::calledtheStat..ond
:lHTRAC'l'OR'S NAME
City of Sa n Oi ego ..ht:rcahe: called the ConlrUlOr.
IITNE.S SETH: That me Con_ for ond in c:cmsiclcradon of 1he coYmIIl1J. .....dili<ms. apa:rncntS. ond IlipWaDODI of Ibc Stale b=ina!... cxprustd
.ocs h=by apee 10 furnish 10 Ill. SlaI& ac:rviccs ancl materials as foUows: (SlII/orIA "",i&. Il1 be nndued. bJ ~" -- to hi paid C01l1Tat:lOr:
:me Jor p.rformtUl&e or _/elion, and Dltadl pllJ1U arid spe&,iflUllions. if ""y.) .
SCOPE OF AGREEMENT
Pursuant to Chapter 6 of Division 21 of the California Public Resources Code,
the State Coastal Conservancy ("the Conservancy") hereby grants to the City of
San Diego ("the grantee") one million four hundred ~ixty-eight thousand
dollars $1,468,000 for the following specific purposes, subject to the terms
and conditions of this agreement, toward implementation of the Otay River
Valley Enhancement Plan, Phases I and II ("the plan"), adopted by the
Conservancy on October 3D, 1992. Specifically, the grantee shall:
1. To the extent feasible, acquire real property ("the first tier properties")
located in the County of San Diego, State of California, (County
Assessor's Parcel Nos. 622-171-09, 622-171-04, 622-182-01, 628-051-02,
628-051-12, 628-050-17, 628-050-51, 628-050-53, 628-050-55, 629-220-07,
and 631-020-21, as shown in Exhibit A, which is incorporated by reference
and attached.
(Continued on the following pages)
ONTlNUED ON SHEns. EACH BEARING NAME OF CONTRACTOR AND CONTllACT NUMBER.
The p""'isions en the rev.... side hereof eonstiNle a pan of lhis apumCllL
~WInlESS WHEREOF. this spement has been uecuted by !he ponies heze1o.1IpOIl1he dale fim ~ wrillOl1.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
AC);OR
.I
_Il ..~-.}
GENC'I
state
AIH'nD NAME OF SaN
Peter G enell
ml
Executive Officer
. Recreation
....OUNT E....c:u.tI.ERE.D IV 'THIS
>CCUIlENT
$ 1,468,000.00
'AOQIlla"~T&GOR"f (CODE AND 11Tl.S)
Other Ca ital Outli
lD"1CHAI. U&E)
Cta River Valle
II'Ql
3760-806-748
"CTAl. AJJ~ ~JOJMI!E"n '!o
'A'll c&.IECT OF UPl:NDllVRE (CClOE AND TInE)
$ 1,468,000.00 Enhancement
1 hMel>y 0Irtify upon my own ~rsDMI knowf_rlQ_ INI budg_lIKIfIJrrtJa
.,. ....,l#Ie for tie period and purpose oltl_ _rpendlnn e~IIKI_.
iGlU.TUIU OF ACCOUNTNG OFFICER
> "_: C"_
-
202 C Street. Ma 11
1UlD~
F&WHEF
RIOA AIrolOUN1' EHC:l.Ao'IEUD FOR
llIlI CClN1lIACT
$
--
89/90
Stn. 9-8, San Di ego 92101
Do,..,...,,' III Generel5el"llcee
UN Only
I certify that this grant
is exempt from Department
of General Services
approval. ../.
JII} -~J ~"
IAIIO.
o CONlIIACTOA
DIU'll
o DE"". OF GEH. &Ell 0 ClIH1-.tEA
? ---/..2.
2-
o
Attachment A-8
Exhibit C_2Attachment A-9
. .
city of San Diego
Grant Agreement 92-034
Page 2
SCOPE OF AGREEMENT (Continued)
2. Develop site-specific improvement p1an~, consistent with the plan, for the
enhancement and protection of natural resources on the first tier
pro pert i es. . The total, collect i ve cost of the improvement plans shall not
exceed fifty thousand dollars ($50,000). .
3. In accordance with the work program to be approved under this agreement,
prepare appraisals for any or all of the real properties ("the second tier
properties") located in the County of San Diego, State of California,
(County Assessor's Parcel Nos. 621-030-20 & -18, 621-120-18, 622-151-04,
622-152-04, 622-161-04, 622-162-02, 627-100-13 &-16, 622-190-15 &-16, 629-
070-01, -02, -03, -12, -13, -14, -21, -22, -23, -24, -25, & -26, 629-211-
05,_629-220-01,631-020-20, & -36, 624-071-01, 644-050-02, -07, & -09), as
shown in Exhibit S, which is incorporated by reference and attached.
4. To the extent feasible, acquire the second tier properties, subject to
prior approval by the Conservancy of the specific properties to be
acquired.
CONDITIONS REGARDING ACOUISITION, COMMENCEMENT OF PROJECT AND DISBURSEMENT
The grantee shall not acquire any real property or commence any other aspect
of the project, and the Conservancy shall not be obligated to disburse any
funds under this agreement unless and until a resolution has been adopted by
the City Council of the grantee authorizing the execution of this agreement
and approving its terms and conditions.
A. Additional Conditions Precedent to Acquisition of Real Property
The grantee shall not acquire any real property and the Conservancy shall not
be obligated to disburse any funds under this agreement relating to
acquisition of real property unless and until the following additional
. conditions precedent have been met:
1. The Executive Officer of the Conservancy ("the Executive Officer.) has
reviewed and approved in writing:
a. All title and acquisition documents pertaining to acquisition of
the particular real property to be acqUired, including appraisals
preliminary title reports, agreements for purchase and sale,
escrow instructions; and instruments of conveyance.
b. The number, location, design, and wording of signs and placards to
be placed on the specifiC real property consistent with the
.SIGNS' section of this agreement.
2. The grantee sha 11 not acqui re any second tier pro pert i es witho"t
/-1';
Attachment A-IO
Exhibit C-3 '.
. .
City of San Diego
Grant Agreement 92-034
Page 3
obtaining prior approval by the Conservancy of the specific property
or properties to be acquired. .
B. Additional Conditions Precedent to Site-Improvement Plans and Certain
Appraisals
In addition to providing the resolution required above, prior to the
Conservancy's disbursement of any funds for specific site-improvement
plans or further appraisals of second-tier properties, the grantee shall
submit for the approval of the Executive Officer of the Conservancy ("the
Executive Officer") the names of any contractors, a work program, budget,
and schedule for the proposed particular site plan or appraisal.
C. Additional Conditions
1. The purchase price of any interest in land purchased under this
agreement may not exceed fair market value as established in an
appraisal approved by the Executive Officer.
2. The deed or other instrument by which the grantee takes title to each
property shall include the elements contained in the "ESSENTIAL DEED
PROVISIONS. section, below.
3. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this agreement, no Conservancy
funds shall be available for acquisition:
a. Of first-tier properties, except with respect to those properties'
for which, pursuant to this agreement, a purchase-and-sale
agreement has been entered into by December 31, 1993.
b. Of second-tier properties, except with respect to those properties
which have been specifically approved for acquisition by December
31. 1993, by formal action of the Conservancy.
. .
','.
,OST AND DISBURSEMEHI
Upon determination by the Conservancy that all relevant provisions of the
"CONDITIONS REGARDING ACQUISITION, COMMENCEMENT OF PROJECT AND DISBURSEMENT"
section of this agreement have been met, the Conservancy shall disburse a
total amount not to exceed one million four hundred sixty eight thousand
($1,468,000), as follows:
1. Acquisition of Real Property
The purchase price. plus closing costs consisting of escrow, recording and
title insurance fees to the extent not included in tbe purchase price,
shall be disbursed directly into an escrow account established for the
.
~)i
txnlDlt L-q
Attachment A-II
.
City of San Diego .
'Grant.Agreement 92-034
Page 4
,OST AND DISBURSEMENT (Continued)
particular acquisition.
The grantee shall request disbursement for the particular acquisition by
sending a letter to the Conservancy. The grantee shall include in the
letter the name and address of the grantee, the number of this agreement,
the date, the amount to be disbursed, and a description of the items for
which disbursement is requested.
Additionally, for each property the letter shall include the name, address
and telephone number of the title company or escrow holder and the escrow
account number to which the funds will be disbursed. The letter shall be
signed by an authorized representative of the grantee. Failure to send
the required letter will relieve the Conservancy of its obligation to
disburse funds.
2. Other Disbursements
The grantee shall request disbursements for items other than acquisition
by filing with the Conservancy fully executed "Request for Disbursement"
forms (available from the Conservancy). Disbursements shall be made on
the basis of costs incurred to date, less ten percent, upon the grantee's
satisfactory progress in accordance with the approved work program and
upon submission of a "Request for Disbursement" form, which shall be
submitted no more frequently than monthly but no less frequently than
quarterly. Disbursement of the ten percent withheld shall be made upon
the grantee's satisfactory completion of project implementation,
compliance with the "PROJECT COMPLETION" section of this agreement,
submission of a fully executed final "Request for Disbursement" form and
upon the Conservancy's acceptance of the project.
The grantee shall state on each form the name and address of the grantee,
the number of this agreement, the date of the submission and the period of
time covered, the amount of the invoice, and a description of the items
, for which disbursement is requested. The forms shall be signed by an
'. authorized representative of the grantee. Failure to fully execute and
. submit a "Request for Disbursement" form, including attachment of
supporting documents, will relieve the Conservancy of its obligation to
disburse funds to the grantee unless and until all ~eficiencies in the
form are rectified.
lIBM OF AGREEHENI
This agreement shall be deemed executed and effective when signed by both
parties and received in the offices of the Conservancy together with the
resolution described in "CONDITIONS REGARDING ACQUISITION, COMMENCEMENT OF THE
PROJECT AND DISBURSEMENT" section of this agreement. An authorized
rif
Exhibit C-5Attachment A-12
'.
city of San Diego
.Grant Agreement 92-034
Page '5
JERM OF AGREEMENT (Continued)
representative of the grantee shall sign the first page of the originals of
this agreement in inK.
The term of this agreement shall run from its effective date through
December 31, 2015 ("the termination date").
~OMPLET10N DATE
The grantee shall complete acquisition of the real property no later than
December 31, 1993 ("the completion date").
Prior to the completion date, either party may terminate this agreement for
any reason by providing the other party with seven days notice in writing.
lf the Conservancy terminates prior to the completion date, the grantee shall
take a'l reasonable measures to prevent further costs to the Conservancy under
this agreement. The Conservancy shall be responsible for any reasonable and
non-=ancelable obligations incurred by the grantee in the performance of this
agreement prior to the date of the notice to terminate, but only up to the
unpaid balance of funding authorized in this agreement.
~UTHOR1ZATIOH
The signature of the Executive Officer on the first page of this agreement
certifies that at its October 30, 1992 meeting, the Conservancy adopted the
resolution included in the staff recommendation attached as Exhibit C. This
agreement is executed pursuant to that authorization.
" '-.
7-/t
Atlachm~nt ,0\-1)
City of San Diego
Grant Agreement 92-034
Page 6 .
Standard Provisions
ESSENTIAL DEED PROVISIONS
The deed or other instrument of conveyance by which the grantee obtains title
to each parcel of real property, or another recorded instrument acceptable to
the Executive Officer, shall set forth the following essential provisions:
1. The real property was acquired by the grantee pursuant to a grant of funds
from the State Coastal Conservancy, an agency of the State of California,
for the purpose of the Otay River Valley Enhancement Plan, Phases I and
II, as it may be amended from time to time, and no use of the real
property inconsistent with that purpose is permitted, except by specifiC
act of the legislature.
2. The real property (including any portion of it or any interest in it) may
not be used as security for any debt wi~hout the written approval of the
State of California, acting through the Executive Officer of the
Conservancy, Dr its successor.
3. The real property (including any portion of it Dr any interest in it) may
not be transferred without the approval of the State of California,
through the Executive Officer of the Conservancy, or its successor.
4. The grantee is obligated to use, manage, operate and maintain the real
property as described in the .USE, MANAGEMENT, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.
section of California State Coastal Conservancy Grant Agreement No. 92.
034, as it may be amended from to time.
5. If any of the essential deed provisions stated above are violated, all of
the grantee's right, title and interest in the real property shall
automatically vest in the State of California for the benefit of the
Conservancy or its successor, upon acceptance of the real property and
approval of the Public Works Board; provided, however, that the State,
through the Executive Officer of the Conservancy, or its successor, may
'.. designate another publ ic agency or a nonprofit organization to accept the
right, title and interest, in which case vesting shall be in that agency
or organization rather than in the State.
~IGNS
The grantee shall erect signs identifying the acquired lands for publiC use.
The number, design, wording and placement of the signs shall be submitted to
the Executive Officer for review and approval prior to .the acquisition of the
real property. The grantee shall incorporate into this signing program a .
7-/7
Exhibit C-7 Attachment A-14
.'
City of San Diego
Grant Agreement 92-034
Page 7
SIGNS (Continued)
placard to be provided by the Conservancy acknowledging the Conservancy's
funding assistance, unless the grantee incorporates this acknowledgement into
other signage in a manner approved by the Executive Officer.
USE.'MANAGEMENT. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
The grantee agrees to use, manage, operate and maintain the real property in a
manner consistent with the purpose of the acquisition. The grantee further
agrees to assume all management, operation and maintenance costs associated
with the real property, including the costs of ordinary repairs and
replacements of a recurring nature, and costs of enforcement of regulations.
The Conservancy shall not be liable for any cost of such management, operation
or maintenance. The grantee shall refrain from developing or otherwise using
any other property it owns or controls in the vicinity of the real property in
such a way as to interfere with or inconvenience the use, management,
operation or maintenance of the real property or to detract from the purpose
of the acquisition. The grantee may be excused from its obligations for
management, operation and maintenance only upon the written approval of the
Executive Officer of the Conservancy or his or her successor.
PABILITY
The grantee shall be responsible for, indemnify and save harmless the
Conservancy, its officers, agents and employees from any and all liabilities,
claims, demands, damages or costs resulting from, growing out of, or in any
way connected with or incident to this agreement, except for active negligence
of the Conservancy, its officers, agents or employees. The duty of the
grantee to indemnify and save harmless includes the duty to defend as set
forth in Civil Code Section 2778. This agreement supersedes the grantee's
right as a public entity to indemnity (see Gov. Code Section 895.2) and
. contribution (see Gov. Code Section 895.6) as set forth 1n Gov. Code Section
8?S.4.
The grantee waives any and all rights to any type of express or implied
indemnity or right of contribution from the State, its officers, agents or
employees, for any liab1lity resulting from, growing out of, or in any way
connected with or incident to this agreement.
AUPITS/ACCOUHTING/RECOROS
The grantee shall maintain standard financial accounts, documents,
and records relating to the acquisition, use, management, operation and
?-)y
Exhibit C-8 Attachment A-is
.
City of San Diego
Grant Agreement 92-034
Page 8
~UDITS/ACCOUNTING/RECORDS (Continued)
maintenance of the real property. The accounts, documents, and records
related to acquisition of the real property shall be retained by the grantee
for three years following the date of disbursement of funds for the
acquisition by the Conservancy under this agreement, and shall be subject to
examination and audit by the Conservancy and the Auditor General during this
period. The accounts, documents and records related to use, ~anagement,
operation and maintenance of the real property shall be retained by the
grantee for three years following the year to which they pertain, and shall be
subject to examination and audit of the Conservancy and the Auditor General
during this period. The grantee may use any accounting system which follows
the guidelines of "Generally Accepted Accounting Practices" published by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
tiONDISCRIMINATION CLAUSE
During the performance of this agreement, the grantee and its contractors
shall not unlawfully discriminate against any employee Dr applicant for
employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry,
physical handicap, medical condition, -marital status, age or sex. The grantee
and its contractors shall insure that the evaluation and treatment of their
employees and applicants for employment are free of such discrimination. The
grantee and its contractors shall comply with the provisions of the Fair
Employment and Housing Act (Government Code Section 12900 et seq.) and the
applicable regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section
7285.0 et seq.). The regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing
Commission regarding Contractor Nor-discrimination and Compliance (Chapter 5 of
Division 4 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, are lncorporated
into this contract. The grantee and lts contractors shall give written notlce
of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they
have a collective bargaining Dr other agreement. This nondiscrimination
clause shall be included in all contracts entered into by the grantee to
.perform work provided for under this agreement.
,
,
The grantee, and the agents and employees of the grantee, in the performance
of this agreement, shall act in an independent capacity and not as officers or
employees Dr agents of the State.of California.
?~9
Exhibit C-9 AttachmentA-16
.
-City of San Diego
Grant Agreement 92-034
Page 9
ASSIGNMENT
Without the written consent of the State, thi$ agreement is not assignable by
the grantee either in whole or in part.
]IHELINESS
lime is of the essence in this agreement.
AMENDMENT
No change in this agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed
by the parties to the agreement.. No oral understanding or agreement not
incorporated in this agreement shall be binding on any of the parties.
lOCUS
lhis agreement is deemed to be entered into in the County of Alameda.
.
, ~-.
?-~
- -l- -'---
_ ...:
_,_ _ _I _ .
.--- --
"
"
"
,I
:1
,I
'I
.J I
I
'"
..
~
-'
ii
PROJECT
LOCATION
o
MAIN STREET
'"
<l
j
a
u
<l
.,
1 '
~
1
1
t
I
I
,
1
-
- 1 .....,--..;._._.~
~ ~..~_~ __ ~--.;;j--~;,;,:~';:~r:--:~';':;'T
< :-~~_-;c>_':~{}~~;;~~~;Ez~<
. 'CtlULA
SAN
_.~ .~
-
C,lY
CITY
Of
/
--t
---
CAli IU I L. U
r......~--.,--T--,....
: 1
1
,
,
I
1
,
,
-f
t-
V>
:r
~
...
,
\
,
,
,
,
ru- .-
I
\
EXHIBIT - D
,
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR ~: City of Chuto Visto, Ca. PROJECT DESCIlI"llON:
C) MISCELLANEOUS
~: 276 Fourth Ave. Request: Real property proposed for transfer to ihe
City of Chula Vista from ihe City of San Diego.
SCALE: ftL! Nt" \BEll:
NORTH 1. - "00' fI..'M.9S.18
7....)../
Attachment A-17
Attachment B
Minutes
September 12, 1995
Page 3
--J
10. RESOLUTION 18029 APPROPRIATING $47,912 FROM THE GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED
FUND BALANCE TO PA Y FOR THE UNISYS LICENSE AGREEMENT - On 8/15/95, Council approved the
renewal of the software license agreement for the City's Unisys mainframe. Council expressed a preference for
paying the renewal in cash instead of financing. The motion approved was to amend the resolution to approve the
contract to pay the entire cost in cash. It did not include appropriating the funds to do so. Staff reconUltend,
approval of the resolution. (Director. Management & Information Services) 4/Sth's vote required.
II. RESOLUTION 18030 ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE "INST ALL A T10N
OF CURB AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF ORANGE A VENUE
BETWEEN THIRD A VENUE AND FOURTH A VENUE (STL-222)" - On 8/2/95, bids were received for the
installation of curb and sidewalk improvements along the north side of Orange Avenue between Third Avenue and
Fourth Avenue. The project involves the installation of Portland Cement Concrete curbs, gutters, sidewalh.
driveway approaches, cross-gutter, pedestrian ramps, reinforced concrete pipes. construction of a curh inlet.
adjustment of manholes, excavation and grading, street lighting, asphalt concrete paving, and other miscellaneous
work. Staff reconunends Council approve the resolution and award the contract to Basile Construction, Inc., San
Diego, in the amount of $156,449.50. (Director of Public Works)
12. RESOLUTION 18031 INTENTION TO VACATE A CERTAIN PORTION OF ORANGE AVENUE
ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF 121 ORANGE AVENUE AND SETTING A DATE FOR A PUBLlC
HEARING THEREON - A request has been recoived to vacato an excess portion of Orange Avenuo right-of-wa)
along tho frontage of the Don Luis Mobile Estates mobilehome park. Luis Cacho, the owner of the park, would
like to utilize the area to beautify the park. Staff recommends Council approve the resolution and set October 3.
1995 at 4:00 p.m. as the date and time for the public hearing. (Director of Public Works)
13. REPORT REAL PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR TRANSFER TO THE CITY OF CHULA VIST A
FROM THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO - In Decembor 1993, the City of San Diego acquired seven parcels totaling
57.40 acros of real property using grant funds from the State Coastal Conservancy. The grant was for the expressed
purpose of acquiring wetland and riparian habitat within the Otay River Valley between Interstate 5 and Intorstate
805. The Otay Regional Park planning staff utilized the Resource Enhancement Plan as a basis in prioritizing and
selecting the sites most suitable for acquisition. Two of the parcels acquired by San Diego are within the City of
Chula Vista. Staff recommends that the City Manager be authorized to execute, for and on behalf of tho City, a
grant deed for the acceptance of the two parcels of real property. (Director of Parks and Recreation and D"oclor
of Planning)
Mayor Horton questioned why the City of San Diego would co~t;nue to pay property taxes.
Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks & Recreation, responded that if the item was approved the City of San Diego
would no longer pay property taxes on the property. "
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
14. PUBLIC HEARING PCM-95-16; APPEAL FROM PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF A
REQUEST TO SELL GASOLINE 24 HOURS A DAY AT 1495 MELROSE AVENUE IN THE C-N
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONE - ROBERT H. LEE & ASSOCIATES FOR UNOCAL - Tho
applicant requested authorization to conduct gasoline sales 24 hours a day at the existing service station located at
1495 Melrose Avenue, in the C-N Neighhorhood Conunercial zone. The C-N zone restricts hours of busine..;...;
operations to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. unless otherwise authorized by the PlonDlng
Conunission. On 7/26/95, the Planning Commission voted 4-3 to deny the request by Robert H. Lee & Associales
for Unocal for 24-hour gas sales. Staff rocommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning)
RESOLUTION 18032 GRANTING THE APPEAL OF UNOCAL FROM THE DECISION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION AND ISSUING A PERMIT CONDITIONALLY APPROVING 24-HOUR GAS
SALES AT 1495 MELROSE AVENUE IN THE CoN NEIGHBORHOOD CO~fMERCIAL ZONE
? ' ,2. ;J..
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item ~
Meeting Date 2/13/96
Resolution 18" .2.p7 Approving the submittal of one application for
the FY 1996-972% Non-Motorized Transportation Development Act (TDA)
and Transportation Sales Tax (TransNet) Funds
REVIEWED BY:
Dlfector of PUbliC. W. .0. r. kS.~ :
CIty ManagerJA h~\;Y1\\
\
(4/Sths Vote: Yes_NoX)
SUBMITTED BY:
Thc City of Chula Vista annually submits an updated list of projects for inclusion in the 7-year
implementation program of the non-motorized element ofthe Regional Transportation Improvement
Program. SANDAG regulations require that official applications be submitted to SANDAG in order
for projects to be considered by its Board of Directors for funding. In order for the application to
be official, Council must approve a resolution authorizing submittal of the FY 1996-97 Bicycle
Project application for available Transportation Development Act (TDA) and Transportation Sales
Tax (TransNet) Funds. Both funding sources form a single pot with annual allocations totalling $2.5
million for the San Diego region.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve a resolution authorizing the submittal of one
application for the FY 1996-97 2% Non-Motorized Transportation Development Act (TDA) and
Transportation Sales Tax (TransNet) Funds for sidewalk improvements along the north side of
Orange Avenue. from Fifth Avenue to Fourth Avenue.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Annually, the 2% Non-Motorized Transportation Development Act (TDA) Funds are made available
for the regional planning and construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. TDA funds currently
contribute about $1.5 million per year to the implementation of non-motorized projects in the San
Diego region. Also, with the passage of Proposition A in 1987, an additional $1 million of TransNet
revenues per year is available for the implementation of said projects that are submitted annually by
the Cities and the County. The following is a description of the project application that we propose
to submit to SANDAG for FY 1996-97 funding:
Installation of sidewalk improvements along the north side of Orange Avenue, between
Fourth and Fifth Avenues to improve pedestrian safety and accessibility to the City's new
library.
A substantial amount of pedestrian traffic will be attracted to the vicinity of the proposed
project by the new City library at the southeast corner of Orange and Fourth Avenues. In
8"/
Page 2, Item_
Meeting Date 2/13/96
combination with recently completed sidewalks in the area, this project will provide a safe
walking route for students and other pedestrians between the neighborhoods in the vicinity
and the library.
The total cost of the project is estimated to be $246,300. The grant request as shown in the
application is $133,500, and covers all items eligible under the TDA program. The ineligible items
totalling $112,800 are proposed to be financed with the City's FY 1996/97 Gas Tax allocation.
Eligible items include the removal of existing improvements, grading work, installation of sidewalk,
pedestrian ramps, and pavement. Eligible items also include traffic control, protection and
restoration of existing private improvements and contingencies covering Design and Inspection.
Ineligible items include curb and gutter work, installation of driveways, street lighting, and drainage
improvements.
Projects submitted to SANDAG must meet at least the following criteria:
1. Projects musl be included in an adopted regional plan.
2. If bikeway projects, they must follow the CalTrans bikeway standards.
3. Each project submitted must contain appropriate cross sections.
Projects are also subject to prioritization criteria such as elimination of safety problem areas, service
to high use activity centers, connection to and continuity of longer routes.
The FY 1996-97 application will be reviewed by the Bicycle Facilities Committee which is
composed of representatives from each SANDAG member agency. Based on the Committee's
recommendations. the SANDAG Board of Directors will authorize allocation of the available TDA
and TransNet funds.
A copy of the application is located in the City Clerk's Office for Council review.
FISCAL IMPACT: Potential total revenues to the City of $133,500. The actual amount is
dependent on which projects are approved for funding by the SANDAG Board of Directors. The
project also requires City funds in the amount 01'$112,800. $64,000 of this amount was included in
the City's 1995/96 CIP budget as project number STL228. The remaining $48,800 is proposed to
come from the Gas Tax food in the proposed FY 1996/97 CIP Budget.
SMN:smn
File No.. 0690-20-KY036
m:.... ,<:ngineer\agenda\"["j)^claim.97
r.. .;L
RESOLUTION NO.
/ g" .).t19
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF ONE APPLICATION
FOR THE FY 1996-97 2% NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) AND TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX
(TRANSNET) FUNDS
WHEREAS, annually, the city of Chula vista submits an
updated list of projects for inclusion in the 7-year implementation
program of the non-motorized element of the Regional Transportation
Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, SANDAG regulations require that official
applications be submitted to SANDAG in order for projects to be
considered by its Board of Directors for funding; and
WHEREAS, in order that claims for the projects may be
considered for funding by the SANDAG Board of Directors, Council
must pass a resolution authorizing submittal of the FY 1996-97
Bicycle Project applications for available Transportation
Development Act and Transportation Sales Tax (TransNet) Funds; and
WHEREAS, the following is a description of the project
application to be submitted:
Installation of sidewalk improvements along
the north side of Orange Avenue between
Fourth and Fifth Avenues to improve pedes-
trian safety and accessibility to the City's
new library
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the city of Chula vista does hereby approve the submittal of one
application for the FY 1996-97 2% Non-motorized Transportation
Development Act (TDA) Fund and Transportation Sales Tax (TransNet)
funds. I )
Presented by APpr~*ed aSI to ,. ~~rm
~~L~ V:" /.~
I, ,.. .
by
(:
r/
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
ruce M. Booga
Attorney
-/.
c: \ rs\2%NONMOT
lr':J
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item~
Meeting Date 2/13/96
Resolution \~~\D Approving Final Map and Subdivision
Improvement Agreement for Chula Vista Tract 96-02, Eastlake South
Greens, Unit 12, and authorizing Mayor to Execute Same.
Resolution \~ ~\ \ Approving Supplemental Subdivision
Improvement Agreement for Eastlake South Greens, Unit 12 Requiring
Developer to Comply with Certain Unfulfilled Conditions of Resolutions No.
15200, 17618 and 18170 and Authorizing the Mayor to Execute Same.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of PUbliC. wo~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager,,-J'\ \':>v\ ~\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NolO
On December 19, 1995, by Resolutio~'~81;0~ the City Council approved the Tentative
Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 96-02, Eastlake South Greens, Unit 12. 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. All three resolutions
contain conditions of approval applicable to Eastlake South Greens Unit 12. The final map for
Eastlake South Greens, Unit 12 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 west of Hunte Parkway and south of South Greensview Drive
at the intersection of said streets. It consists of 92 lots for single family residential units, two (2)
lettered lots for open space, and one lettered lot for a private park.
The final map for Eastlake South Greens, Unit 12 of Chula Vista Tract 96-02, 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 Shoreacres Drive, Palm Beach Street, New Seabury Way, Myrtle Beach Way, and a
portion of Hunte Parkway, Approval of the final map also constitutes acceptance on behalf of
the City the following easements: a 5.5 foot tree planting and maintenance easement along said
streets; a 10 foot future street, tree planting, sidewalk and general utility easement along Hunte
Parkway; a 5.5 foot tree planting and sidewalk easement along South Greensview Drive; a ten
~-l
Page 2, Item_
Meeting Date 2/13/96
foot storm drain easement; a general utility easement over open space Lots A and B; and a 20
foot landscape easement along future East Orange Avenue, and rejection of open space Lots
A and B, all as shown in the final map.
At this time, the City is rejecting the dedication of Lots A and B 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 open space lots
will be maintained by the Eastlake master 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 and maintain the lots
through an open space district. This has become a standard procedure for development within
Eastlake Greens.
Condition NO.3 of Resolution No. 15200 requires construction or a guarantee for construction
of East Orange Avenue from Hunte Parkway to the westerly subdivision boundary, Hunte
Parkway from South Greensview to East Orange Avenue, and East Palomar Street from SR-125
to Eastlake Parkway with the development of Phase 3 of Eastlake Greens. Since the map now
before Council is a subdivision within Phase 3 of the original phasing plan for the Eastlake
Greens tentative map approved by Resolution 15200, the requirements must be satisfied prior
to approval of this map or an alternate construction phasing plan must be approved by the City
Engineer as authorized by Condition of Approval NO.2 of said tentative map. Staff has reviewed
an alternate phasing schedule proposed by Eastlake Development Company(EDC) for
construction of said improvements and recommends approving deferral of construction until
there is greater traffic demand for the facilities thereby preventing pavement deterioration due
to lack of use. The following terms are Staffs' recommendation for guaranteeing the future
construction of the required improvements:
1. Eastlake shall submit or grant the following prior to approval of the final map for
Eastlake Greens, Unit 10, or the City's issuance of any permit for construction of
the improvements described below:
a. Submit bonds to guarantee construction of full street improvements for East
Orange Avenue, Hunte Parkway to westerly subdivision boundary. The
amount of bonding shall be 110% times a construction cost estimate
approved by the City Engineer if improvement plans have been approved
by the City, 150% times the approved estimate if improvement plans are
being processed by the City, or 200% if improvement plans have not been
submitted for City review..
b. Submit bonds to guarantee construction of Hunte Parkway, South
Greensview to East Orange Avenue. The amount of said bonding shall be
110% times a construction cost estimate approved by the City Engineer.
qw~
Page 3, Item_
Meeting Date 2/13/96
c. Grant irrevocable offers to dedicate (IOD's) right of way and temporary
construction easements necessary to construct East Orange Avenue,
Hunte Parkway to westerly subdivision boundary and Hunte Parkway,
South Greensview to East Orange Avenue.
2. Construct interim improvements for East Orange Avenue, Hunte Parkway to
westerly subdivision boundary including, but not limited to, median island curbs
and site drains, street lights, 20-foot wide pavement on either side of the median
island, curb inlets, asphalt concrete swales directing drainage to curb inlets, and
provide for median island landscaping and irrigation, when one of the following
events occur: a final map is approved for the Eastlake Greens II Expansion Area
as shown on the Eastlake Greens Public Facilities Financing Plan Project
Components plat; construction has commenced for SR 125, from Otay Lakes Road
to East Orange Avenue; construction has commenced for East Orange Avenue
from SR 125 to the Eastlake Greens westerly subdivision boundary; or five years
have elapsed from the date of approval of the SSIA for this subdivision.
3. Construct remaining full street improvements for the north half and an additional
12-foot travel lane on the south half of East Orange Avenue, Hunte Parkway to
westerly subdivision boundary, if traffic on said street exceeds capacity for a
residential collector street (ADT>12,OOO) or if five years have elapsed from the
date of approval of the SSIA for this subdivision.
4. Construct full improvements for Hunte Parkway, South Greensview to East
Orange Avenue, concurrently with construction of interim improvements for East
Orange Avenue from Hunte Parkway to the Olympic Training Center or East
Orange Avenue from Hunte Parkway to the westerly subdivision boundary,
whichever segment is constructed first or if five years have elapsed from date of
approval of the SSIA for this subdivision, whichever event occurs first.
5. Submit bonds to guarantee construction of and enter into an improvement
agreement to construct East Palomar Street within Eastlake Greens prior to
approval of the final map or issuance of any permit for development for Eastlake
Greens, Unit 26, the proposed Affordable Housing site (R-26).
The Developer, Kaufman and Broad, and Eastlake have executed a Supplemental Subdivision
Improvement Agreement (SSIA) which includes a provision reflecting the above listed
recommended terms for deferral of improvements. If Council wishes to change the above listed
street improvement construction phasing requirements, the relevant provision in the SSIA will
need to be amended.
Eastlake has reached agreement with the City to clarify the type and timing of park facilities to
be provided to satisfy the Eastlake Greens parkland and improvements requirements per
'\-.3
Page 4, Item_
Meeting Date 2/13/96
Conditions 38 & 39 of Resolution 15200 and Condition No. 25 of Resolution 18170. Previous
SSIA's for units in Eastlake South Greens obligate Easktlake to participate with regard to these
units in whatever solution the City implements to resolve the issue regarding required park
facilities. Although there is no final resolution yet regarding the community center, this SSIA
contains provisions in which Eastlake agrees to meet a grading and construction schedule for
the 10-acre (useable) public park (P-3) and the 3.3 gross acre private park adjacent to Unit 12.
The provision also obligates Eastlake to process an update to the Public Facilities Financing
Plan to reflect this requirement. Eastlake will submit bonds in the amount of $1,949,000 to
guarantee the construction of the public park improvements and will submit, by separate
document, an irrevocable offer of dedication for the public park site (P-3) prior to noon Tuesday,
February 13.
The SSIA also includes provisions 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 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. 31c of Resolution No. 15200 requires the Developer to enter into an
agreement wherein Developer agrees to not protest formation of an assessment district
for the construction of street improvements to connect Orange Avenue and Palomar
Street to existing improvements to the west of the subdivision.
3. General Condition "C" of Resolution No. 18170 requires the Developer to comply and
remain in compliance with all previously adopted conditions of approval pertinent to the
project.
4. Condition No. 14 of Resolution No. 18170 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 volumes exceed the levels of service identified
in the City's adopted thresholds.
5. Condition No. 15 of Resolution No. 18170 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.
6. Condition No. 16 of Resolution No. 18170 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.
~-y
Page 5, Item_
Meeting Date 2/13/96
7. Condition No. 17 of Resolution No. 18170 requires the developer to enter into an
agreement with the City relating to the provision of franchise cable television services.
8. Condition No. 30 of Resolution No. 18170 requires the developer to enter into an
agreement with the City to provide a noise study addressing noise impacts generated by
major streets surrounding the project and to implement any measures necessary to
mitigate noise impacts to acceptable levels prior to issuance of building permits.
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 Eastlake to have 112 low income housing units
under significant construction by June 1, 1998. However, prior to issuance of a building permit
for the 2,550th unit of the Greens, Eastlake is required to commence construction on 160 low
income housing units (the total affordable housing obligation for the Greens). After issuance of
the 2,550th 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 92 residential lots for Eastlake Greens Unit 12 approval, the current cumulative
total of approved units within the Greens is 1,647. All other conditions of approval relative to this
final map have been satisfied.
Kaufman and Broad and Eastlake have also executed a Subdivision Improvement Agreement
for this map. Eastlake has provided bonds and Kaufman and Broad will also provide bonds prior
to noon Tuesday, February 13, to guarantee construction of the required public improvements
(CV drawings 95-470 through 95-476) and the monumentation within the subdivision. All
applicable fees have been paid.
If the park bonds and irrevocable offer of dedication of parkland required from Eastlake and the
improvement and monumentation bonds required from Kaufman and Broad are not received by
noon Tuesday, February 13, staff will request that this item will be continued for one week. 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 12
Exhibit B - Disclosure Statement ~ ~
Exhibit C - Minutes of 7/18/89 (R15200), 8/16/94 (R17618), & 12/19/95 (R18170)
~~
EAF
(M:\HOME\ENGI NEER\AGENDA\ELG12FM3.EAF)
File: 0600-80-ELG12
~
I
,
,
,
I
I
--
j
21
Ii
~
/II !!!!!.-__
/
_._.~C!!!!!'~.._
_.~ CRlfNSVIEW ~
~
11 " TO 9 8
7 5 5
. J
".!,{lIr! PAR'
New
Sl~!.!~-'C-
(2 6,' \ 64 \ 65 66 r;7
I
17
/8
..." 59 58 67 56 55 54
61 ~
19
BEACH
~.
20
22
80 19 78 T7 76 75
82 81
2J
2<
~
~
838485868
08
25
25
SHO"fAE'Q---- ----
27
-~
---
28
CtlST
-"-..---...
---
--.--_____~NCC
Lor A
--
A~~
.'f'
~---j /
~----J
'----------
CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 96-02
EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS UNIT NO. 12
~ - f.,.
EY!+t 51/15
THE CIIT OF CHULA VISTA PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters
which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other
official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the contract, i.e" contractor,
subcontractor, material supplier.
EastLake Development Company
, If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership
interest in the partnership.
Boswell Properties, 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.
Ha~e 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
con!ractors who tOU have assigned to rej:lresent you before the City in this matter.
B1ll Ostrem, astLake Development Co. Ro<;cr Bh:J.toi:J., Rick -Engineer-ing
Tom Adler, EastLake Development Co. '-, po)" (' ) COffiparq
Gail Crocenzi, EastLake Development Co.
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 ):
~ is defined as: "Any individual, Jiml, co-pannership, joint venTUre, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation,
l'Jill/e, ImS!, recci\'er, syndicate, this and nny other count)', city and COUNI'1)', CifY, municipality, district or other political subdivisio/l,
or 1711)' other group or combination acting as II unit."
(NOTE: Anach additional pages as necessary)
Date:
January 19, 1996
1\.; I ;.\0ISCLOSE.TX11
Gail Crocenzi, Asst. Project Manager
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
t3 ~ I q -"1 f1lcv;,ed, II/Ju,"O}
,. I IJ i.O l.t.: ~
- 0 -
oJ U I"y Ie, 1;10;:1
ORDHlANCE OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, as amended, the reading of the
text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved with
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)
CERTIFYING FINAL EIR-86-4
GREENS
EASTLAKE
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
APPROVING THE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
EASTLAKE
GENERAL
I I
ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE EASTLAKE I
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS TO
ADD EASTLAKE II TO SAID REGULATIONS
FIRST READING
SPA PLAN,
PLAN, AND
APPROVING THE EASTLAKE GREENS
PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING
DESIGN MANUAL
APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION
PCS-88-3 FOR EASTLAKE GREENS
MAP
ADOPTING CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR EASTLAKE
GREENS
AOOPTING THE MITIGATION ~10NITORING 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 presentation 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-I
q -~
Fli fiU tt! S
- 9 -
July 18, 1989
Mr. Reid then introduced Jeanne Munoz, ERC Environmental 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 quality impact if
the project has not been included in the SANDAG Series 5 and 6
Growth Forecast. EastLake Greens and EastLake Trai 1 s were not
incl uded 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 it i son 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 quality 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 revi sed Ai r Qual i ty Management Pl an, thi s 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 Pl an and the EastLake Greens SPA
Pl an; Tom Bandy from Wi 11 dan woul d be presenting the EastLake
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-si te and off-side. the estimated costs, the method of
financing, and the phasing of facilities.
c- ;;l
q-9
Principal Planner l.ee presented his report on the project, noting
t.he proposed subdivision encompasses 830 acres of land located in
the eastern porti on of the Ci ty 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, condomi nium 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.
Council discussion followed regarding lot sizes, density, family
~i zes; affordabil ty of the homes; possibly imposing a moratorium
lf development came to outstrip public facilities, water
mana~ement plans, and land use patterns.
Bob Santos, President, EastLake Development Company, 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
eveni ng. They wi 11 only request densi ty above that 1 evel if 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
sl ides 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 fi rst 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 ~lap #37: requires equal access to Cable TV
franchises. This issue is best dealt on a City-wide basis.
They ~Ii 11 be applyi ng for a Cabl e TV franchi se and because of
thi s they request that Council modify the conditi on to make
EastLake subject to any ne\~ City-wide ordinance or resolution
of thi s issue. They wi 11 be subject to thi s at the time 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 publ ic money to maintain and EastLake
believes it should be included in the Public Facilities
Financing Plan, not as a Tentative Map condition.
L-3
ct-ID
Mi nutes
- 11 -
July 18,1989
3. Tentative Map #38G: Currently states that residential
construction tax may be waived for excess park improvements.
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 '.lap #44/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 guidelines until the effect of the analysis
on the General Plan Policy Section 6.2 and 6.3 as they relate
to the fi nal density of the fi ve high density parcel s 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 Counci 1,
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 Northshore Drive;
Jackie '1etcalf, 546 Port Harwick; Larry Rehlander, Victory
Lutheran Church; Peter Watry, speaking for CROSSROADS, 81 Second
Avenue; Fran 0 Meara, 1858 Gamay Terrace; Josepn ",ownack, 1891
Gamay Terrace; Scott Ullmann, 2l34-C Northshore Drive; Bob
DoC 0 n n e 11; 20 7 2 Ii ate r bur y C i r c 1 e ; J 0 s e p h C u mm i n g s , 1 848 It hac a
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 Trail s; shou1 d stick to target density and approve
condition #13, which embodies the Planning Commission's
recommendati on 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 abil i ty to procure funds necessary to
construct EastLake Project; EastLake is the best communi ty 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 chos.:!n to reduce the density; insulated
community - can give back to community in the form of good
nei ghbor:; and citi zens; EastLake go:d project but there is some
concern over private v. publ ic parks; woul d 1 ne to gi ve density
transfer to keep from pay,ng upkeep of parks.
C-'-I
q-II
Speaking against was Joe Garcia, 484 Fifth Avenue, 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
basi s because a certification woul d 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 is 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
waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved by the following
vote to wit:
AYES:
Cox, r~oore, McCandl i ss
NO:
Malcolm, Nader
RESOLUTION B OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was
waived by unanimous consent.
Counci 1 woman '1cCandl i ss asked if si nee the bulk of her concerns
were on the Tentative Map, would it be possible to adopt the
General Development Plan then possibly, with removing the actual
targ~t number for the area, continue the Tentative Map until after
the 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.
Di rector Kremfl responded that they coul d consi der 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:
AYES:
NO:
Cox, Moore, McCandliss, Nader
Malcolm,
C- --s-
q ~ Id-..
"j "... "c.:;)
- l..) -
uUIJ IUt 1.J0.:1
RESOLUTION 0 OFFERED 3Y MAYOR 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 port of the Chula Vista General Plan.
Mayor Cox asked if this would be more suitable under Item E - the
Tentative Map
Di rector Krempl responded that it coul d be pl aced under whatever
action they felt comfortable with.
MOTION RESTATED
10 amend the resol uti on to state that EastLake woul d agree with
whatever Growth Management Element is added into the General Plan;
it woul d become part of the agreement that the development will
conform with the Growth Management Element that will eventually be
adopted as part of the General Plan.
Councilmember ~loore questioneathe --re;:;s used; "a-gree" as opposed
to" con for m . " L/"-. _ ,'\., 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 req~irement 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 ~ader withdrew his motion as to Item 0 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.. ON THE MOTION, Item 0
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.
L-G
~-13
Councilwoman McCandliss stateJ that what she would like the
committee to deal with transfers and bonuses and come back to
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 provlslon 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 project 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
Phas\ng Plan, or the Growth Management Plan.
VOTE ON THE MOTION
The motion to continue failed by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
McCandl i ss, 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 iss) Condition 79 - the development be subject
to the Growth Management Element of the General Plan in the
Transportation Phasing Plan 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.
tlOTION
(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 Counci 10 s concern of equal access - it coul d 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.
C--:t-
q./~
1',1 n U l:e 5
- I ~ -
JUlY Ib, I~b~
AMENDMENT TO MOTION
Councilman Malcolm amended his motion to delete the word
"City-wide"
The motion carried unanimously.
Co unci lman Mal col m al so stated he had a probl em wi th the gol f
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
publ ic. He asked the City Attorney if Council coul d 1 eave a
condition where EastLake has to be willing to open up to some type
of public use, to be determined by the City of Chula Vista at a
later date by the Parks & Recreation staff and other golfing
faci 1 i ti es in EastLake to come back wi th some type of
recommendation.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf, in response to Councilman
11alcolm's question noted that if that condition would be
consistent with what was already approved in Resolutions S, C, and
D; if that issue is not already addressed in those provisions,
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 Club 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
communi ty-a t-l arge use. There wi 11 be a CUP for the gol f 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) Conditi on #81
Commission's 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 -~
q~ls
...
'" U I J I U, I ;?V;I
RESOLUTION F OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the readi ng of the text was
'waived by unanimous consent, pa$sed and approved with Councilman
Malcolm voting no and Councilman Nader vot1ng no on the Statement
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 0,1 traffic studies
in future developments.
Director of Publ ic Works Lippitt responded that a traffic study
was done for this plan in the EIR and one will be done when 'Sunbow
and other major developments come in. The City is automatically
following through on its policy.
Mr. Kremp1 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 Counci 1 shoul d try to make a commi tment to
have this issue resolved in the next 60 days.
16. ORAL Cml~1UrJJCATlONS - Opportunity for the public to speak to
the City Counc1l on any subject matter within the Council's
jurisdiction but not an item on today's agenda. Each
speaker's presentation may not exceed five minutes.
a, Mr. Wade R. Guiliani, s2l4 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.
MSUC (Cox/t~oore) to refer this petition to staff for a report and
evaluation to come back to Council.
b. Joseph Garcia, 484 Fifth Avenue, Chu1a 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 capabil ity and equipment ready to be used when
needed.
c. Paul Green, 141 Lotus Drive, Chu1a 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
Chu1a Vista Historical Society consider trees as part of Chu1a
Vista's history. He cannot get information on certain trees
in the area.
C-Cj
q-I'"
Minutes
August 16, 1994
Page 3
Y.
Mr. Goss stated staff could look at doing that, but there was also equipment that had to be acquired that was fairly
expensive.
Mayor Nader questioned if Woodward-Clyde bad laboratory facilities in the region.
Clifford Swanson, Deputy Director of Public WorkslCity Engineer, responded they did.
RESOLUTION 17617 OFFERED BY MA YOR NADER, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved
unanimously,
· · END OF CONSENT CALENDAR · ·
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
II. PUBLIC HEARING PCA-94-04; CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 19.64
OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW THE REPLACEMElIo'T OF DAMAGED CONDOMINIUMS
WHICH ARE NONCONFORMING WITH RESPECT TO DENSITY - CITY INITIATED - Recently, potential
buyers of an individual condominium unit could not obtain financing because the project within which lhe unit is
located is nonconfonning with respect to present density limitations. Therefore, the same number of units could
not be rebuilt if lhe project was more than 60% destroyed per Section 19.64. ISO of the Muoicipal Code. Staff
believes tbis is a problem unique to condominiums which should be addressed by amending the code to allow
replacement in such cases. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on first reading. (Director of Planning)
ORDINANCE 2599 AMENDING SECTION 19.64.150 OF THE I\fiJNICIPAL CODE AND
ADDING SECTION 19.64.155 TO MODIFY THE NONCONFORMING USES REGULATIONS
PERT AINING TO THE REPLACEMENT OF RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS (first readin~l
Mayor Nader stated he owned and lived in a condominium and had been advised by the City Attorney that be should
abstain from participation.
Councilmember Rindone stated he owned apartments and felt he should also abstain from participation.
Bruce Boogaard, City Attorney, stated it was a matter of caution. The exception was whether or DOl the matter
affected the public generally or if the affect was distinguishable on the Councilmember from the public geDerally.
Mayor Nader stated he would trail the item until Councilmember Horton arrived.
This being tbe time and place as advertised, the public h""ring was opened hy Mayor Pro Tern Horton. Mayor
Nader and CounciJmember Rindone left lhe dias. There being no public testimony, the public bearing was closed.
ORDINANCE 2599 PLACED ON FIRST READING BY COUNCn..MEMBER MOORE, reading of the text
was waived, passed aDd approved 3-0-0-2 with Nader aDd Rindone abstaining.
12. PUBLIC HEARING PCZ-94DIPCM-94-24IPCM-94-27IPCM-93-61PCS-88-3A; CONSIDERATION
OF PREZONING AND INCORPORATING APPROXIMATELY 22.7 ACRES OF LAND WITHIN
EASTLAKE GREENS AND AMENDING THE EASTLAKE II (EASTLAKE I EXPANSION) GENERAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN, EASTLAKE GREENS SPA PLAN, EASTLAKE II (EASTLAKE I EXPANSION)
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS, EASTLAKE GREENS AIR QUALITY
IMPROVEMENT PLAN, EASTLAKE GREENS WATER CONSERVATION PLAN, AND EASTLAKE
GREENS MASTER TENTATIVE MAP (TRACT 88-3). EASTLAKE DEYELOPMENT COMPANY. The
EastLake Development Company bas requested amendments to the EastLake II General Development Plan, EaslLake
Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA), EastLake II Planned Community District Regulations, EastLake Greens Air
Quality and Water Conservation Plan, EaslLake Greens Master Tentative Map, and a prezoDe and addition of
approximately 22.7 acres of unincorporated land to the existing EastLake Greens SPA area. The purpose for the
request is to: (I) Incorporate into the planning and regulatory framework of the EastLake Greens SPA Plan those
C- -/ /
q -/1
Minutes
August 16, 1994
Page 4
parcels of the EastLake Greens General Plan Amendment which lake access from the internal circulation of the
EastLake Greens Planned Community (northeast of the SDG&E transmission lines); (2) Improve the spatial and
functional relationship of residential density/product distribution within the EastLake Greens Planned Community
area; and (3) Update the Eas.Lake Greens SPA Plan and supplementary documents to reflect current statistics and
t&hnical refinements based On site plan approvals and market considerations. Staff recommends Council place the
ordinances On first reading and approve lbe resolution. (Director of Planning)
A. ORDINANCE 2600 APPROVING THE PREZONING OF 22.7 ACRES OF UNINCORPORATED
LAND TO P-C PLANNED COMMUNITY AND ADOPTING MITIGATED IIoEGATlVE DECLARATION
ON 15-94-19 AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM THERETO (first readin~)
B. ORDINANCE 2601 APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE n (EASTLAKE I
EXPANSION) PLANNED COMr.flJNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS (LAND USE DISTRICT MAP ONLY)
AND ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON IS-94-19 AND MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM THERETO (first readin~)
C. RESOLUTION 17618 APPROVING AND IMPOSING AMENDMENTS AND CONDITIONS ON
THE EASTLAKE U (EASTLAKE I EXPANSION) GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, EASTLAKE
GREENS SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN, EASTLAKE GREENS AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMEJI.'T
PLAN, EASTLAKE GREENS WATER CONSERVATION PLAN A"'D EASTLAKE GREENS MASTER
TE"'T A T1VE SUBDIVISION MAP AND ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGA T1VE DECLARATION OF IS-94-
19 AND MITIGATl9N MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM THERETO
Ken Lee, Assistant Director of Planning, summarized the issues involved with the proj&l. Condition 8C of the
ordinance referred to lbe north side of parcel R27 (trail system) and should be corrected to read the north side of
Clubbouse Drive.
· · · Councilmember Horton arrived at 6:26 p.m. · · ·
Mayor Nader stated the Resource Conservation Commission minutes should have been included in the packet. He
had read lbe minutes which refl&ted a 5-0 vote for lbe mitigated negative declaration.
This beina the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
. Bruce Sloan, 900 Lane Avenue, #100, Chula Vista, CA, representing EastLake Development Company,
concurred with lbe staff recommendations.
Thee< ~ing no further public testimony, the public hearing was closed.
ORDINANCES 2600 AND 2601 PLACED ON FIRST READING AND RESOLUTION 17618 OFFERED BY
COUNCll..MEr.mER HORTON, readi~ of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously.
13. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION OF PROGRAM CHANGES OF RESIDENTIAL YARD
WASTE RECYCLING SERVICES FROM AN OPTIONS PROGRAM TO A UNlYERSAL MANDATORY
RATE STRUCTURE. The City's residential yard waste collectiOn program began 1/1/94 as a unique .options.
program which allows single-family residents the choice of how they will participate. based on their own assessmeDt
of lbeir yard waste needs. A review of lbe participation, costs, and novenue of the first six months of the voluntary
.options. program show lbat costs are far exceeding revenue and continuation of lbe program is dependent upon
a rate adjustment 10 cover collection and processina costs. Letters were received from Laidlaw requesting
consideration of an amendment 10 lbe yard waste fee structure effective 9/1/94 which would involve a change to
a universal mandatory rate structure to be spread to all single-family residents. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Deputy City Manager Krempl)
RESOLUTION 17619 APPROVING A UNIVERSAL RESIDENTIAL YARD WASTE
COLLECTION RATE CHANGE TO $1.48 PER SINGLE-FAMll..Y HOME
C-Id-
q -l~
...
.
.
.
Minutes
December 19, 1995
Page 9
1015 (HortonlMoot) based upon the recommended of the City Attorney to declare an urgency regarding
polentiallitigation and to meet in Closed Session to oblain legal advice.
Mr. Sloan stated a gooeral contr"""tor was select..<! for the project and they bid out eacb of the sub-trades. It was
all publicly bid, the bids were reviewed by staff, and he did not want the City to have the impression that the park
was built turn-key with the costs submitted. There was extensive staff involvemeot. The change in scope occurred
when the EastLake Greeos Development Agreement and the EastLake III Development Agreement were brought
forward. At that time deferment of the gym had been discussed. EastLake was trying to get Council resolution
to the issue. If that was not possible and the City wanted to send the issue to an outside third party they were
amenable to that. If Council made a decision they would live by that. EastLake would not start filing lawsuits
against the City, they had avoided that in the past and did not expect to do that in the future. In times past they
had appeared before Council hand in hand with staff.
Mr. Boogaard stated that mediation or arbitration was an acceptable proceeding under the Brown Act to permit
discussion of the issue in Closed Session.
Councilmember Moot stated he had met with Mr. Sloan to discuss the issue and it was his understanding that Mr.
Sloan had met with other Councilmembers regarding the issue. During that meeting Mr. Sloan had identified a
particular contractual document that EastLake was relying on in support of EastLake's positions for numbers I, 2,
and 3(a). He request that Mr. Sloan identify the document.
Mr. Sloan responded that was correct. It was the EastLake Greens Development Agreement which was approved
by Council in 1990. The last line of Item 3(b) hinted toward the tone of the staff report. EastLake had suggested
that the obligation of other development companies in the City that had paid or would pay park funds could be a
source of funds. Short of that, EastLake anticipated that there would be park development fees that would be
generated through the development of certain portions of future property within EastLake that could also be used.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously.
. . . Council met in Closed Session at 7:10 p.m. and reconvened at 7:55 p.m. · · ·
Mayor Horton reported th.t Council voted in Closed Session to direct staff to meet with EastLake to reach an
agreement on the issue. The item would be continued to 1/16/96.
Mr. Boogaard slated it would be starrs recommendation to go forward "ith the amendment to the PFFP as
recommended by slaff with the underslanding that SlalT would be pursuing, in good faith, negotiations with
EastLake to settle the parks dispute, hopefully, by the end of January,
RESOLUTION 18169 OFTERED BY MAYOR HORTON, reading of the text was waived, passed and
approved unanimously.
16. PUBLIC HEARING REVIEWING AND ADOPTING THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO INTEGRATED
WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND COUNTYWIDE SUMMARY PLAN AND SITING ELEMENT - S!l!!!
recommends the Dublic hearin" be continued to 1/16/96. (Conservation Coordinator)
M5UC (Rindone/Alevy) to continue the public hearing to the meeting of 1/16/96.
17. PUBLIC HEARING PCS.96-G2; TENTATIVE SUBDMSION 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 SOUTJJWEST CORNER SOUTH
GREENSVIEW DRIVE. EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - The applicant bas 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 detacbed lots, 2 open space lots, and a privote park. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director
of Planning)
c-\>
't-19
-
Minutes
'December 19, 1995
Page 10
RESOLUTION 18170 APPROVING AND IMPOSING CONDITIONS ON THE TENT ATIVESUBDIVlSION
MAP FOR EASTLAKE GREENS PARCEL R-l2, TRACT 96-02
Mr. Boogaard stated Item 17 was consistent with the SPA Plan and PFFP component and su.ff recommended
approval of the resolution.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. There being nO public testimony,
the public hearing was declared closed.
RESOLUTION 18170 OFFERED BY COUNCll..MEMBER RlNDONE, reading oBhe text was waived, passed
and approved unanimously.
ORAL COl\fl\flJNICATIONS
. Dennis Rowley, 209 Sea Vale Street, Chula Vista, CA, stated the issue of independent expenditures had been
raised more than two weeks ago and he felt it was too important to the citizens to be ignored. The present
regulations allowed persons outside of the City to make significant expenditures to influence the outcome of a Chula
Vista election which he felt was unethical. The issuance of a 30 day moratorium prior to election day would stop
last minute independent expenditures or require full and immediate exposure of all contributions.
Councilmember Rindone stated the issue of independent expenditures was referred to staff and he questioned when
it would be returning to Council.
Mr. Boogaard responded that staff hoped to have it before Council by the second meeting in January.
BOARD AND COlin-fiSSION RECOMMENDATIONS
None submitted.
ACTION ITEMS
18. RESOLUTION 18171 APPROVING A SEWER SERVICE CHARGE REF1JND TO THE
SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE FOR THE PERIOD FROM OCTOBER 21, 1993THROUGH 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 1111/94. 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 tbe variance. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
Councilmember Rindone stated he concurred with the staff recommendation, but questioned if there were similar
issues with other public agencies and schools within the water district.
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, responded that there were similar issues with other agencies. The City tried
to use the student ratio as opposed to the water usage as a base. Separate irrigation meters were being installed in
the newer schools to avoid the problem. There were DO pending applications witb any other schools.
RESOLUTION 18170 OFFERED BY COUNCll..MElIIBER RINDONE, reading of the text was waived, StalT
to look at all similar public agencies and schools within the water district to detennine whether there was a
similar problem and, if there was, to bring the issues to Council for resolution.
~unciJmember A1evy questioned ;;the older schools would be installing the separate meters.
c-\t..f-
Cf-dP
RESOLUTION NO. /r.< I~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING FINAL MAP OF CHULA VISTA
TRACT 96-02, EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS UNIT 12,
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 LOT 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 96-02, EASTLAKE SOUTH GREENS UNIT 12,
and more particularly described as follows:
Being a subdivision of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map No. 17644,
in the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of
California, filed in the office of the County Recorder of
San Diego County, January 26, 1996 as File No. 1996-
0041318 of Official Records.
Area: 21.192 acres
Numbered Lots: 92
No. of Lots: 95
Lettered Lots: 3
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 upon receipt by the
City of Chula vista of all improvement securities described in the
Subdivision Improvement Agreement,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said Council hereby accepts
on behalf of the public the public streets, to-wit: Shoreacres
Drive, Palm Beach Street, New Seabury Way, Myrtle Beach Way, and a
portion of Hunte Parkway, and said streets are hereby declared to
be public streets and dedicated to the public use.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Lots A and B 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
1
9/1-/
of ingress and egress for visibility and street tree planting and
maintenance of drainage facilities and sewer facilities, general
utility easement within Open Space Lots A and B, all as granted and
shown on said map within said subdivision, subject to the
conditions set forth thereon.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk of the City of
Chula vista be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to
endorse upon said map the action of said council; that said Council
has approved said subdivision map, 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, drainage
facilities and sewer facilities, 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 she is
hereby directed to transmit said map to the Clerk of the Board of
supervisors of the county of San Diego only upon the acceptance by
the City of Chula vista and its city Attorney of the improvement
securities described in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that that certain Subdivision
Improvement Agreement dated the day of , 1996, 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
CL-- ~~ ~
Bruce M. Boogaard, city
Attorney
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\elsg12.fIl
2
14' .).
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 Kaufman and
Broad of San Diego, Inc., a California corporation, 12626 High
Bluff Drive, suite 400, San Diego, California 92130 and EastLake
Development Company, a California general partnership, 900 Lane
Avenue, suite 100, Chula vista, California 91914, a California
corporation, hereinafter referred to collectively as "Subdivider".
!YITN1;~~1;T!!l.
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 Chula
vista Tract 96-02, Eastlake South Greens unit 12, 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 al ternati ve 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
-1-
94"J
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 the public
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 No. 18170, approved on the 19th day of
December, 1995 ("Tentative Map Resolution"); and
WHEREAS, complete plans and specifications for construction,
installation and completion of said public improvement work have
been prepared and submitted to the City Engineer, as shown on
Drawings Nos. 95-470 through 95-476 inclusive, on file in the
office of the City Engineer; 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 Eight Hundred
Twenty-Eight Thousand Dollars ($828,000).
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 and/or land development work required to be done in and
adjoining said subdivision ("Improvement Work"); 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
-2-
?4'Y
said Improvement Work as set forth hereinabove, or that portion of
said Improvement Work serving any buildings or structures ready for
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
city 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 sum
of Four Hundred Fourteen Thousand Dollars ($414,000), 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 sum
of Four Hundred Fourteen Thousand Dollars ($414,000) 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
City 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 sum
of Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000) 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 fU'ly paid, the whole amount, or any part thereof
-3-
?~,>
not required for payment thereof, may be released to Subdivider or
its successors in interest, pursuant to the terms of the
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 cov~r 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 and employees, harmless from any and all claims,
demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because
of or arising out of acts or omissions of Subdivider, its agents or
employees, or indemnitee, r,~lated to this agreement; provided,
-4-
9,-1"~
however, that the approved improvement security shall not be
required to cover the provisions of this paragraph. Such
indemnif ication and agreement to hold harmless shall extend to
damages to adjacent or downstream properties or the taking of
property from owners of such adjacent or downstream properties as
a result of the construction of 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
provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code of the
State of California.
[Next Page is Signature Page]
-5-
7~"J
Signature Page to Subdivision Improvement Agreement for
Eastlake South Greens unit 12
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove set
=orth.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBDIVIDER:
KAUFMAN AND BROAD OF SAN DIEGO,
INC., a California corporation
Mayor of the city of Chula
vista
By:
Name:
Title:
City Clerk
By:
Name:
Title:
ATTEST
Approved as to form by
EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY,
a California general partnership
(A^_~~
City Attorney
By: BOSWELL PROPERTIES, INC., a
California corporation,
General Partner
B'"
, .
Name:
Title:
By:
Name:
Title:
By: THE TULAGO COMPANY, a
California corporation,
General Partner
By:
Name:
Title:
By:
Name:
Title:
(Attach Notary Acknowledgment)
-6-
919- ...g--
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit "A"
Improvement Security - Faithful Performance
Form:
Bonds from Kaufman and Broad
Amounts: $402,828.50
$ 11,171.50
Exhibit "B"
Improvement Security - Material and Labor:
Form:
Bonds from Kaufman and Broad
Amounts: $402,828.50
$ 11,171.50
Exhibit "C"
Improvement Security - Monuments:
Form:
Bond from EastLake
Amount: $ 20,000
Securities approved as to form and amount by
city Attorney
Improvement Completion Date:
Three (3) years from date of
Council approval of the
Subdivision Improvement
Agreement.
c: \ag\SIA\ELSG.12
-7-
91'?'9
~.-~
RESOLUTION NO, I? ,),11
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR EASTLAKE SOUTH
GREENS, UNIT 12 REQUIRING DEVELOPER TO COMPLY
WITH CERTAIN UNFULFILLED CONDITIONS OF
RESOLUTIONS NO. 15200, 17618 AND 18170 AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, the developer for Eastlake South Greens unit 12
has executed a Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement
(SSIA) which includes a provision reflecting the recommended terms
for deferral of improvements; and
WHEREAS, if Council wishes to change the above listed
street improvement construction phasing requirements, the relevant
provision in the SSIA will need to be amended; and
WHEREAS, the developer has reached agreement with the
city to clarify the type and timing of park facilities to be
provided to satisfy the Eastlake Greens parkland requirements for
this Property per Conditions 38 & 39 of Resolution 15200 and
Condition No. 25 of Resolution 18170; and
WHEREAS, previous SSIA's for units in Eastlake South
Greens obligate the developer to participate with regard to these
units in whatever solution the city implements to resolve the issue
regarding required park facilities; and
WHEREAS, although there is no final resolution yet
regarding the community center and gym, this SSIA contains
provisions in which the developer agrees to meet a grading and
construction schedule for the 10-acre (useable) public park (P-3)
and the 3.3 gross acre private park adjacent to unit 12; and
WHEREAS, the provision also obligates the developer to
process an update to the Public Facilities Financing Plan to
reflect this requirement and the Developer has submitted bonds in
the amount of $1,949,000 to guarantee the construction of the
public park improvements and has submitted, by separate document,
an irrevocable offer of dedication for the public park site (P-3);
and
WHEREAS, the SSIA also includes provisions to satisfy the
following conditions (the recital of said conditions herein is not
intended to modify or interpret the same):
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
1
9tJ-/
units in the 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. 31c of Resolution No. 15200 requires the
Developer to enter into an agreement wherein Developer agrees
to not protest formation of an assessment district for the
construction of street improvements to connect Orange Avenue
and Palomar street to existing improvements to the west of the
subdivision.
3.
General Condition "c" of Resolution No. 18170 requires
Developer to comply and remain in compliance with
previously adopted conditions of approval pertinent to
project.
the
all
the
4. Condition No. 14 of Resolution No. 18170 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 volumes exceed the
levels of service identified in the city's adopted thresholds.
5. Condition No. 15 of Resolution No. 18170 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.
6. Condition No. 16 of Resolution No. 18170 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.
7. Condition No, 17 of Resolution No. 18170 requires the
developer to enter into an agreement with the City relating to
the provision of franchise cable television services.
8. Condition No. 30 of Resolution No. 18170 requires the
developer to enter into an agreement with the city to provide
a noise study addressing noise impacts generated by major
streets surrounding the project and to implement any measures
necessary to mitigate noise impacts to acceptable levels prior
to issuance of building permits.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve the Supplemental
Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Eastlake South Greens unit 12
requiring developer to comply with certain unfulfilled conditions
of Resolutions No. 15200, 17618 and 18170, a copy of which is on
file OR the office of the city Clerk as Document No.
(/1'
2
? lf~.l
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
O---~ ~
Bruce M. Boogaard, city
Attorney
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
c:\RS\elsg12.FM
3
9P-;J /rtJ-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. )
)
)
)
Developer )
)
)
Above space for Recorder's Use
SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
(General Condition .c" and "D". Conditions 4. 14. 17. 22. 25 28.
29 and 30 of Resolution 18170; Conditions 3. 30. 31. 38 and 39
of Resolution 15200)
This supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement
("Agreement") is made this _ day of , 1996, by and
between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, California ("City" or "Grantee"
for recording purposes only) i Kaufman and Broad of San Diego, Inc.,
a California corporation, 12626 High Bluff Drive, suite 400, San
Diego, California 92130 ("Developer" or "Grantor") and EastLake
Development Company, a general partnership ("EastLake") with
reference to the facts set forth below, which recitals constitute
a part of this Agreement:
RECITALS
1
90-5
1. 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").
For purposes of this Agreement the term "project" shall mean
"Property". The Property is part of a land development project
owned by EastLake and is commonly known as EastLake South Greens.
2. Developer is the owner of the Property.
3. EastLake is the beneficiary under a deed of Trust for the
Property, recorded January 31, 1996 as File No. 1996-0049973 of
Official Records, and is the holder of certain repurchase rights
and such other rights under agreements recorded January 31, 1996 as
file Nos. 1996-0049972 and 1996-0049998, both of Official Records.
4. EastLake has applied for and the City has approved a
Tentative Subdivision Map commonly referred to as EastLake South
Greens. unit 12 Tract 96-02 ("Tentative Subdivision Map") for the
subdivision of the Property.
5. The city has adopted Resolution No. 15200 and subsequent
Resolutions No. 17618 and 18170 pursuant to which it has approved
the Tentative Subdivision Map subject to certain conditions as more
particularly described in said Resolutions. The description of the
conditions in this recital section of this Agreement is intended
only to summarize and paraphrase such conditions in the
Resolutions, and is not intended herein to modify or explain them,
and is not intended as a basis for interpreting them.
A. Condition No. 3 of Resolution No. 15200 requires
developer to guarantee construction of improvements prior to
approval of a final map for each phase and to construct the
improvements prior to issuance of any building permits for a
subsequent phase. specifically, condition No. 3 requires the
construction of East Orange Avenue from Hunte Parkway to the
westerly subdivision boundary and Hunte Parkway from South
Greensview to East Orange Avenue.
B. 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.
c. condition No. 31 of Resolution 15200 requires
developer to agree to not protest formation of an assessment
district for the construction of street improvements to connect
Orange Avenue and Palomar Street to existing improvements to the
2
98-1-
west of the subject improvements as projects in the Eastern
Territories Development Impact Fee system.
D. Condition No.s 38 , 39 of Resolution 15200
requires developer to construct park facilities and dedicate park
land for the EastLake South Greens development of which unit 12
is a part thereof.
E. General Condition "c" of Resolution 18170 requires
developer to comply with all unfulfilled conditions of approval of
the EastLake Greens Tentative Map, Chu1a vista Tract 88-3
established by Resolution No. 15200 approved by Council on July 18,
1989 and amending Resolution 17618, and to remain in compliance
with and implement the terms, conditions, and provisions of
EastLake Greens 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 and
implementation procedures as the city may require, assuring that
after approval of the Final Map, the developer shall continue to
comply with, remain in compliance with, and implement such plans.
F. General Condition "D" of Resolution 18170 requires
the developer to install public facilities in accordance with the
EastLake Greens Public Facilities Financing Plan ("PFFP") and 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 te, dedication of parkland, the
construction of community center and gym, and such other park
improvements.
G. Condition No. 4 of Resolution No. 18170 requires
the developer to construct or guarantee to construct East Ora,.ge
Avenue, from Hunte Parkway to the westerly boundary of the SDG&E
easement westerly of the subdivision.
H. Condition No. 14 of Resolution No. 18170 requires
the developer to enter into an agreement with the City whereby:
1. The developer agrees the City may withhold
building permits for any units in the subject subdivision if any
one of the following occur:
a. Regional development threshold limits
set by the East Chula vista Transportation Phasing Plan have been
reached.
b.
public utilities and/or
threshold standards.
Traffic volumes, levels of service,
services exceed the adopted City
3
90'1
2. 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. 3 and Table I of Resolution 15200 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 Engineer.
I. Condition No. 15 of Resolution No. 18170 requires
the 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 attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City,
including approval by its Planning Commission, city Councilor
any approval by the city, including 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.
J. condition No. 16 of Resolution No. 18170 requires
the developer to hold the city harmless from any liability for
erosion, siltation or increase flow of drainage resulting from
this project.
K. Condition No. 17 of Resolution No. 18170 requires
the developer to 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 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 operation of cable television
companies as same may have been, or may from time to time be
issued by the City of Chula vista
L. condition No. 22 of Resolution No. 18170. requires
developer to 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
conditions may be applicable to this development.
M. condition No. 25 of Resolution No. 18170 requires
developer to submit a detailed construction phasing schedule for
the construction of private and community parks to the Directors
4
9g;~
of Parks and Recreation and Planning for review prior to issuance
of the first building permit for the Property.
N. Condition No. 28 of Resolution No. 18170 requires
developer to submit landscape plans for Lot C and water
management guidelines to the city for approval prior to approval
of thG park grading plan.
O. Condition No. 29 of Resolution No. 18170 requires
developer to submit a landscape design for East Orange Avenue and
Hunte Parkway and obtain approval from the Parks and Recreation
Landscape Architect prior to or concurrently with approval of the
first site plan for the Property.
P. condition No. 30 of Resolution No. 18170 requires
developer to take action as required by a noise study approved by
the city to mitigate noise to acceptable levels prior to issuance
of building permits.
There are certain other unperformed and unfulfilled conditions
of said Tentative Map.
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,
5
98-1
will not jeopardize the completion of the improvements or other
obligations remaining under this Agreement. If the City determines
that the release will not jeopardize said obligations, the City
shall execute a quitclaim releasing the Burden of this Agreement
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. Release on Guest Builder Assignments. If the
owner of the Property assigns any portion of the project, the owner
may have the right to obtain a release of any of the owner's
obligations under this Agreement, provided the owner obtains the
prior written 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 owner 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. If the owner of the property
assigns any portion of the Project subject to the Burden of this
Agreement, upon request by the owner 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
remainder of the Burden will not be completed.
2. Compliance of Conditions.
2.1 General Condition "c" of Resolution 18170. In
satisfaction of General Condition "c" of Resolution 18170 the
Developer and EastLake agrees to comply with and remain in
compliance with all unfulfilled conditions of approval of the
EastLake Greens Tentative Map Chula vista Tract 88-3 established
by Resolution No. 15200 approved by Council on July 18, 1989 and
amending Resolution 17618, and to comply with and remain in
compliance with and implement the terms, conditions, and
provisions of EastLake Greens 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 and implementation procedures as the City may
require, assuring that after approval of the Final Map for the
6
9[J-J~
Property, the Developer and EastLake shall continue to comply
with, remain in compliance with, and implement such plans.
2.2. General Condition RDn of Resolution 18170. In
satisfaction of General Condition "0" of Resolution 18170
EastLake hereby agrees to abide by any subsequent amendment to
the PFFP made by the city that addresses the park improvement
obligations of EastLake and the Developer agrees to abide by the
same with respect to unit 12, including but not limited to,
dedication of parkland, the construction of Community Center and
Gym, and such other park improvements. EastLake further agrees
to process an amendment to the PFFP within six (6) months from
execution of this Agreement to reflect the terms of this
Ag~eement (paragraphs 2.3 and 2.6) with respect to the
installation of public facilities.
2.3. condition No.3 of Resolution No. 15200. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 3 of Resolution 15200, EastLake
shall do all of the following:
a EastLake shall provide all of the following
items to the city by the earlier of: a) the approval of the final
map for EastLake Greens unit 10; or b) upon the City's issuance
of any permit or approval for the construction of any of the
improvements described below:
1. Bond(s), approved by the city Engineer
to guarantee construction of full street improvements for the
segment of East Orange Avenue from Hunte parkway to the westerly
subdivision boundary ("East Orange Ave Segment"). The amount of
said bond shall be 110% times a construction cost estimate
approved by the City Engineer if improvement plans have been
approved by the city, 150 % times the approved cost estimate if
improvement plans are being processed by the city, or 200% times
the construction cost estimate approved by the city Engineer if
improvement plans have not been submitted for City review; and
2. Bond(s), approved by the city Engineer,
to guarantee construction of full street improvements for the
segment of Hunte Parkway from South Greensview to East Orange
Avenue ("Hunte Parkway Improvement"). The amount of said bonding
shall be 110% times the construction cost estimate approved by
the city Engineer; and
3. An irrevocable offer(s) of dedication
(IODS) for right of way and temporary construction easements
necessary to construct the East orange Ave Segment and the Hunte
Parkway Improvement.
7
9lJ~l/
b. EastLake agrees to commence construction of
interim improvements for the East Orange Ave Segment upon the
earlier of: a) final map approval for the EastLake Greens II
Expansion Area, as shown on the "EastLake Greens Public
Facilities Financing Plan Project Components Plat"; or b)
"construction commencing" on the segment of SR125 from Otay
Lakes Road to East Orange Ave; or c) "construction commencing" on
the segment of East Orange Avenue from SR125 to the EastLake
Greens westerly subdivision boundary; or d) within five years
from execution of this Agreement. (For purposes of this
paragraph, the term "construction commencing" shall mean when a
construction contract has been awarded for the improvement.) The
interim improvements EastLake is required to construct shall
include but not be limited to the following; median island curbs
and site drains, median landscaping and irrigation, street
lights, 20-foot wide pavement on either side of the median
island, curb inlets, and asphalt concrete swales directing
drainage to curb inlets. EastLake shall complete construction of
said interim improvements within three (3) years after commencing
construction on the same.
c. EastLake shall commence construction of the
remaining full street improvements on the north half of the East
Orange Ave Segment and an additional twelve (12) foot lane on the
south half of said Segment by the earlier of: a) traffic on said
street exceeding 12000 ADTs (average daily trips); or b) within
five years from the execution of this Agreement. Developer shall
complete construction of the remaining full street improvements
and the 12 foot lane within three (3) years after commencing
construction on said improvements.
d. EastLake shall commence construction of the
full street improvements for the Hunte Parkway Improvement upon
the earlier of: a) "construction commencing" on the segment of
East Orange Avenue from Hunte Parkway to the Olympic Training
center; or b) "construction commencing" on the segment of East
Orange Avenue from Hunte Parkway to the westerly subdivision
boundary; or c) within five years from execution of this
Agreement. Developer shall complete construction of the full
street improvements within three (3) years after commencing
construction on said improvement.
e. EastLake shall commence construction of East
Palomar street prior to the approval of the final map for
EastLake Greens, unit 26 (the proposed affordable housing site)
or the issuance of any development permit for Unit 26, whichever
occurs first. EastLake shall complete construction of East
Palomar Street within three years after commencing construction
on said improvement. EastLake shall provide the City with
improvement securities approved by the City Engineer to guarantee
8
98'1,2
the construction of East Palomar street prior to the city's
issuance of any permit for construction of said improvement.
2.4. Condition No. 30 of Resolution 15200. In
satisfaction of Condition No. 30 of Resolution 15200, Developer
and EastLake agrees that the City may withhold building permits
for any units within the project 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.
2.5. Condition No. 31 of Resolution 15200 - Formation
of Maintenance District - In satisfaction of Condition No. 31 of
Resolution No. 15200, Developer and EastLake agrees not to
protest the formation of an assessment district for the
construction of street improvements to connect Orange Avenue and
Palomar street to existing improvements to the west of the
subject property and not to protest the inclusion of the subject
improvements as projects in the Eastern Territories Development
Impact Fee system.
2.6. Condition 38 , 39 of Resolution 15200 and
Condition 25 of Resolution 18170. In satisfaction of Conditions
38 & 39 of Resolution 15200 and Condition 25 of Resolution 18170,
EastLake shall deliver to the city, simultaneously with the
execution of this Agreement, an irrevocable offer of dedication
for 10 net usable acres of parkland for public use, as usable is
determined by the city, located within EastLake Greens, Phase 3
at the site identified as the P-3 Community Park ("P-3 Park").
EastLake further agrees to construct park improvements for the P-
3 Park in accordance with the requirements of the city's
Landscape Manual and as approved by the Director of Parks and
Recreatiun ("P-3 Park Improvements"). EastLake shall provide by
March 1996, for the Parks and Recreation Director's approval, the
estimated cost for construction of the P-3 Park Improvements,
adjusted for the compounded effect of inflation as measured by
the 20 City Average building cost prices recorded in the National
Engineering News Record construction Cost Index for three years
commencing March, 1996 ("Estimated Costs").
EastLake agrees to provide the City, with improvement
securities, in accordance with the schedule describe below, in an
amount of 125% of the Estimated Costs of the P-3 Park
Improvements, from a sufficient surety, whose sufficiency has
been approved by the city. EastLake shall deliver to the city,
simultaneously with the execution of this Agreement, an
improvement security in an amount calculated as the product of
the number of net acres of parkland required (10) times the
parkland and improvement costs per acre of $155,900 per acre
multiplied by 1.25. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer
9
98-/;]
shall post any additional improvement securities required to
equal 125% of the Estimated Costs of the P-3 Park Improvements by
March 31, 1998.
EastLake agrees to complete grading of the P-3 Park
site by March 31, 1996 and complete construction of the P-3 Park
Improvements by March 31, 199~. EastLake agrees to commence
construction of said improvements by March 31, 1998. If the P-3
Park Improvements are not completed within the time specified
above, the sums provided by the improvement securities for such
improvements may be used by the city for the completion of P-3
Park Improvements. EastLake agrees to pay the city any shortfall
between the total costs incurred to complete the work and the
proceeds from any improvement securities, which includes but it
not limited to, to cost of design, administration of
construction, and attorneys' fees and court costs incurred by the
City in order to obtain such shortfall amounts.
EastLake further agrees to complete grading of the 3.3
gross acre private park (P-5) no later than March 31, 1996 and
complete construct of improvements for said park by the earlier
of the issuance of the 1,666th building permit for EastLake
Greens or March 31, 1997.
2.7. Condition 4 of Resolution 18170. Developer and
EastLake has satisfied Condition 4 of Resolution 18170 through
the satisfaction of Condition 3 of Resolution 15200 in this
Agreement.
2.8. Condition 14 of Resolution 18170. In satisfaction
of Condition 14 of Resolution 18170 Developer and EastLake 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.
2.9. condition 15 of Resolution 18170. In satisfaction
of Condition 15 of Resolution 18170 Developer and EastLake agrees
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
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 pursuant to section 66499.37 of the Map Act provided
the city promptly notifies EastLake of any claim, action or
proceeding and fully cooperates in the defense.
10
~~
2.10. Condition 16 of Resolution 18170. In
satisfaction of Condition 16 of Resolution 18170 Developer and
EastLake agrees to hold the City harmless from any liability for
erosion, siltation or increase flow of drainage resulting from
this Project.
2.11. Condition 17 of Re~olution 18170. in
satisfaction of Condition 17 of Resolution 18170 Developer and
EastLake 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 and EastLake 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 and EastLake's
construction schedules so that it does not delay or impede said
construction schedules 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 ~egulating 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
and EastLake 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.
2.12. Condition 22 of Resolution 18170. In
satisfaction of Condition 22 of Resolution 18170, Developer and
EastLake agrees to 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
conditions may be applicable to this development.
2.13. Condition 28 of Resolution 18170. In
satisfaction of Condition 28 of Resolution 18170, Developer and
EastLake agrees to submit landscape plans for Lot C and water
management guidelines to the city for approval prior to approval
of the private park (Lot C) grading plans.
2.14. condition 29 of Resolution 18170. In
satisfaction of Condition 29 of Resolution 18170, Developer and
EastLake agrees to submit a landscape design for East orange
Avenue and Hunte Parkway and obtain approval from the Parks and
11
w~
Recreation Landscape Architect prior to or concurrently with
approval of the first site plan for the Project.
2.15. Condition 30 of Resolution 18170. In
satisfaction of Condition 30 of Resolution 18170, Developer and
EastLake agrees to take action as required by a noise study
approved by the City to mitigate noise to acceptable levels prior
to issuance of building permits for Project.
2.16. Satisfaction of Conditions. city agrees that the
execution of this Agreement constitutes satisfaction of Developer's
and EastLake's obligation of Conditions 3, 3031, 38 and 39 of the
Resolution No. 15200, and Conditions General Condition "C" and "D",
4, 14-17, 22, 25, 28, 29, & 30 of Resolution No. 18170.
2.17. Compliance with Unfulfilled Conditions.
Developer and EastLake agrees to comply with all conditions of the
Tentative Subdivision Map applicable to the Property which remain
unperformed or unfulfilled at the time of the filing of the Final
Maps.
3. Recording.
prepared by either or
the parties.
This Agreement, or an abstract hereof
all of the parties, may be recorded by any of
4. No Waiver of Park obliga~ions. The signing of this
Agreement and the approval of this Final Map shall not be
considered a waiver of the positions held by either the City or
EastLake with respect to the park improvement obligations of
EastLake, 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 EastLake may have assumed the obligations thereof.
5. Miscellaneous.
5.1. 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 the
parties 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 mail, return receipt 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 parties.
Facsimile transmission shall constitute personal delivery.
12
98,,/t
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attn: Director of Public Works
Developer:
Kaufman and Broad of San Diego, Inc.
12626 High Bluff Drive, suite 400
San Diego, Ca. 92130
EastLake:
EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
900 Lane Avenue
suite #100
Chula vista, California 91914
Attn: William T. Ostrem
Vice President
A party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph
by giving written notice of such change to the other parties in the
manner provided in this paragraph. Facsimile transmission shall
constitute personal delivery.
5.2 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.
'5.3 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 exprescly noted.
5.4 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 the parties participated equally in the
preparation and/or drafting this Agreement.
5.5 Recitals; Exhibits. Any recitals set forth above
are incorporated by reference into this Agreement.
5.66 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.
13
9JJ'I?
signature Page to Supplemental Subdivision Improvement
Agreement for Eastlake South Greens unit 12
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
agreement to be executed
forth.
the parties hereto have caused this
the day and year first hereinabove set
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBDIVIDER:
KAUFMAN AND BROAD OF SAN DIEGO,
INC., a California corporation
Mayor of the City of Chula
vista
By:
Name:
Title:
city Clerk
By:
Name:
Title:
ATTEST
Approved as to form by
EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY,
a California general
partnership
City Attorney
By: BOSWELL PROPERTIES, INc.,a
California co~poration,
General Partner
By:
Name:
Title:
By:
Name:
Title:
By: THE TULAGO COMPANY, a
California corporation,
General Partner
By:
Name:
Title:
By:
Name:
Title:
(Attach Notary Acknowledgment)
14
'It-IY
EXHIBIT "A"
Legal Description
Chula vista Tract No. 96-02
EastLake South Greens, unit No. 12
Parcel 3 of Parcel Map No. 17644, in the city of Chula
vista, county of San Diego, state of California, filed
in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego
County, January 26, 1996 as File No. 1996-0041318 of
Official Records.
EXHIBIT "A"
9iJ-/~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. / P
Date 2/13/96
ITEM TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING: REVIEWING AND ADOPTING THE COUNT OF
SAN DIEGO INTEGRA TED WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
CONSISTING OF THE COUNTYWIDE SUMMARY PLAN AND SITING
ELEMENT
SUBMITTED BY: Michael T. Meacham ,-\
REVIEWED BY :::'7~:::=(:i"~~iJ~\
The final draft of the Countywide Summary Plan and the Countywide Siting Element must be
approved by the San Diego Association of Governments, (SANDAG) prior to distribution to and
approval by local jurisdictions SANDAG has postponed their approval to provide an
opportunity for additional public comment. The documents are expected to be approved for
distribution in March of this year and could be noticed for review and approval by the cities and
County of San Diego in April.
4/5th Vote: Yes No.x
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the item be pulled and re-noticed when
SANDAG approves distribution
I~-/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM:
MEETING DATE:
11
2/13/96
PUBLIC HEARING: To consider enacting a Chula vista
Gaming Plan pursuant to Chapter 5.20 of the Chula
vista Municipal Code.
Resolution \~,~\~ Adopting a Chula vista
Gaming Plan which wOULd allow pai Gow and Super Pan
9 to be played at cardrooms subject to certain
restrictions, and make other changes including the
permissible hours and days of operation, maximum
bets, allowable house charges per table, and tax
rates per table.
SUBMITTED BY: Richard Emerson, C~~f of Police ?,\\~~
Robert Leiter, Dir2\tpf of PlannfhgJ ~t:
. ...,......~-..REVIEWED BY: City ManageV1 \)~~2J,\,~~sthS Vote: () Yes --(ij--Nc)
At the meeting on November 28) 1~5, Council approved certain
amendments td Chapter 5.20 of the Municipal Code regarding
cardrooms. These changes allow any form of gambling in Chula vista
that is allowed at any other location within the state subiect to
further requlation under a Chula Vista Gaminq Plan. This staff
report will only address Council's direction on a defined portion
of the proposed gaming plan, cardrooms. The recommendations and
alternatives identified were the result of a review of the gaming
policies of other jurisdictions in our region and staff analysis
associated with the City of Chula vista's cardroom procedures.
ITEM TITLE:
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council 1) conduct the public hearing and 2) approve the
resolution adopting a Chula vista Gaming Plan which would allow pai
Gow and Super Pan 9 to be played at cardrooms subject to certain
restrictions and make other changes in the hours and days of
operation, maximum bets, allowable house charges per table, and tax
rates per table.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None.
DISCUSSION:
As of November 28, 1995, Gaming Ordinance 5.20 of the Chula vista
Municipal Code was amended to encompass all gaming allowed in the
State of California, subject to adoption by Resolution of a Chula
vista gaming plan. This action prevented the preemption of local
decision-making authority by the state (via SB 100) and allowed the
city the opportunity to address some concerns of an existing
cardroom operator.
On October 11, 1995, Mr. Harvey Souza, the owner of the Village
Club Cardroom at 429 Broadway, Chula Vista, submitted a letter to
\J -\
Item , Page 2
Meeting Date 2/13/96
the Chief of Police requesting several changes to the current
regulations. Mr. Souza's requests are based upon his inability to
compete with the region's Indian reservation casinos. His concerns
covered hours of operation, types of gaming, maximum bets and house
charges. Staff concurs with some of Mr. Souza's requests and
recommends certain changes via the Gaming Plan that should enhance
his ability to remain a viable business. These changes should also
provide South Bay residents an opportunity to participate in state-
approved gaming without leaving the South Bay.
The issue of determining to what extent cardrooms should be part of
Chula vista has been a long standing discussion in this
community. The Cardroom Ordinance has been amended by Council on
six different occasions since 1977.
___._....__._From the Police Department's perspective, the quality of. life for.
our citizens is paramount, and staff feels that the recommended
changes will have a minimal impact on the community. Nevertheless,
most changes that are proposed in this Gaming Plan must also be
evaluated through a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process. The CUP
for each site would take into consideration land use compatibility,
noise, parking and other factors. Other conditions included in the
gaming plan, such as limits on the number of tables and players and
the groundrules under which the games are played, further mitigate
any potential impacts of the recommended changes.
Backqround: Number of Licensed Cardrooms
The Municipal Code allows one eight-table cardroom license for each
40,000 residents or fraction thereof. Thus, with a population of
approximately 155,000, Chula vista currently has 4 cardroom
licenses. A fifth would be licensable once the population hits
160,001 (Which would probably occur in 1998). Of these licenses,
no more than two are permitted to be held by a single owner, with
each two consolidated licenses granting use of 12 card tables.
Two of those licenses are held by Mr. Souza. He is currently
operating under one license at the Village Club, primarily because
his location at 429 Broadway is too small to accommodate a 12 table
operation. He has been operating this business since approximately
1963. Since this preceded the City's CUP requirements for
cardrooms, his operation at this site is "grandfathered." Unless
there is a significant change in the nature of the operation of the
Village Club, a CUP is not required. Some of the policy changes
recommended tonight, however, would require a CUP were Mr. Souza to
seek to implement them at this current site (e.g. additional day or
longer hours). These CUP requirements are discussed in more detail
below.
The other two licenses are purported to be held by an entity
controlled by the Commerce Club. This company operates one of the
larger cardroom enterprises in the Los Angeles area and is not
\\-r
Item , Page 3
Meeting Date 2/13/96
currently operating a cardroom .n Chula vista under either license.
If this entity is able to establish legal ownership of the
remaining two licenses, it too could operate a maximum of 12 tables
in Chula vista.'
Reauested Chanaes and Recommendations
After reviewing all Mr. Souza's requests, current municipal codes
and the proposed games, and meeting with him on several occasions,
staff recommends the following changes. Except as noted, Mr. Souza
concurs in these recommendations. A matrix (Attachment 3)
summarizes the current and proposed regulations, along with similar
information for surrounding cardroom and gaming facilities and
other cities throughout the state.
..-_--~_._-----_. ---- -------.- "------
A. GAMES PERMITTED
CURRENT ORDINANCE: All card games which have been
determined by the Attorney General to be permissible,
subject to local licensing by California cities, may be
played in any licensed cardroom, except that pai Gow,
Super Pan 9 ("Super Pan"), California 22 and panguingue
may not be played.
REQUEST: Mr. Souza requested the city allow all games
legal in the State of California be played at his club,
but has indicated a willingnes~ to add just pai Gow and
Super Pan.
BACKGROUND: Under the authority currently granted by the
state and City of Chula vista, the Village Club currently
offers Texas Hold 'Em, Omaha (each with Hi and Lo
variations) and Seven Card Stud.
pai gow and super Pan are very different games but
operate on a similar principle to blackjack. Players
place a bet first, and then try to put together
combinations (of dominoes or cards, respectively) which
will beat the dealer's hand. pai Gow is already a very
popular game, with super Pan showing the potential to
join it in popularity.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Add pai Gow and super Pan only.
After reviewing other cardrooms wi thin the county and
elsewhere in california, it was found that these two
1 There is some legal dispute currently as to whether these
licenses have been properly transferred, under the requirements of
the city's ordinance, to the Commerce Club. Staff is currently
analyzing this issue and will report back to the council as soon as
possible.
\\-3
Item , Page 4
Meeting Date 2/13/96
games are very common and popular in card clubs, and
police agencies in jurisdictions where they were allowed
(See matrix; Attachment 3) did not report additional
problems for law enforcement.
An article which is attached details some of the other
relevant history of California cardrooms and the
potential for illegal activity. However, in light of the
limited number of tables in question in Ch~la vista (a
maximum of 3 pai Gow tables per two-license cardroom),
the recommended six and twelve month review periods, and
the opportunity for further changes in the Gaming Plan,
fines for non-compliance and ultimately revocation of
licenses should problems persist, police staff feel
comfortable that the new games would be sufficiently
regulated to control any such problems..
For additional protection, however, based on the
popularity of the new games, Police staff recommends
mandatory uniformed private security for each cardroom
location. At least one security guard will be dedicated
at all times to pai Gow and Super Pan tables. Mr. Souza
has agreed to staff's security requirements.
As discussed under Item D. (Number of Players), pai Gow
and super Pan would not be allowed at the present
location of the village Club and would be subject to a
CUP at a new location. Furthermore, authorization for
these games would require a separate "Class II" license,
with conditions specified in the gaming plan concerning
license transfer, license termination, and other terms.
B. HOURS AND DAYS OF OPERATION.
CURRENT ORDINANCE: All cardrooms shall be closed each
day from 1:00 AM to 9:00 AM. No cardroom shall be open
on Sunday except from midnight until 1:00 AM.
REQUEST: Mr. Souza requested that the City allows
operation seven days a week and 24 hours a day. In lieu
of that, he has indicated an interest in being open seven
days per week, 8 a.m.- 4 a.m.
BACKGROUND: Police staff feel that the issue of hours is
of three-fold significance: 1) Does the time the patrons
leave impact the quality of life in the neighborhood?; 2)
If the facility were open 24 hours per day, would there
be a potential for disorderly conduct problems with
people who wouldn't leave?; and 3) would promotion as a
24 hour gaming site be inconsistent with the image and
culture that Chula vista wants to preserve and project.
\\-4
Item , Page 5
Meeting Date 2/13/96
staff feels it is important for some shut-down time to be
preserved and, therefore, does not recommend 24 hour
operation. Regarding what time of the morning (e.g. 1
a.m. currently, 4 a.m. proposed) has the least impact on
the surrounding neighborhood, staff proposes to monitor
this via CUPs and six and twelve month review periods
following implementation of any change in hours.
Regarding sundays, police staff sees little difference
from a policing perspective between operations on Sundays
and operations any other day of the week. From a
Planning perspective, additional days or hours would
require a CUP, and this would be reviewed for each
cardrooms site.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: staff- recommends allowing seven_
days per week operation and operation from 8 a.m. to 4
a.m. Each of these changes would be subject to approval
of a CUP and thus would not be allowed by right at any
given site. They would also be subject to the
recommended six and twelve month "trial period" reviews
discussed below. If any problems occur, Planning and
Police staff would retain the right to re-review the CUP,
revoke the CUP if appropriate, and/or bring the issue
back to Council to curtail the allowable operating hours.
Allowing sunCuy operations at the current hours would be
an increase from 96 to 112 hours per week (an increase of
17%). Together with the change in hours to 8 a.m. to 4
a.m., hours of operation would increase from 96 hours per
week to 140 (an increase of 46%).
C. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF TABLES
CURRENT ORDINANCE: No more than eight (8) tables shall
be permitted at any cardroom, except that at cardrooms
operating under two consolidated licenses, twelve (12)
tables shall be permitted.
REQUEST: No request for a change.
BACKGROUND: The important issue regarding the number of
tables is the effect this has on the number of players.
This is especially significant with pai Gow and super
Pan, which can each have as many as 28 players per table
(seven seated, the remainder standing).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that no more than
one quarter of licensed tables (no more than 2 of 8, or
3 of 12) are to be used for Pai Gow or Super Pan. This
restriction applies to both games together (i.e.
licensees shall not be allowed to operate 3 tables of pai
\. \ -s
Item , Page 6
Meeting Date 2/13/96
Gow and 3 of Super Pan).
would not be allowed at
location.
As stated above, these games
the Village Club's current
By maintaining a small number of tables and an even
smaller number of pai Gow or Super Pan tables, it is
staff's intent to preserve the small-business nature and
history of Chula vista's cardrooms and to keep the level
of gaming activity within manageable limits.
D. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF PLAYERS PER TABLE
CURRENT ORDINANCE: No more than eight (8) players shall
be permitted at anyone card table.
REQUEST: Mr. Souza requested that no limit be placed on
the amount of players per table, but in lieu of that has
indicated an interest in limits of nine (9) players per
card table generally (Le. poker), twenty-eight (28)
players per super Pan table and twenty-eight (28) players
per Pai Gow table.
BACKGROUND: pai Gow tables accommodate seven seated
players and three side bettors per player, for a total of
28 players. Super Pan seats 7-8 players and can also
accc;lmodate side bettors. By allowing pai Gow and Super
Pan (at a maximum of three tables) and increasing the
poker tables to 9 players, the maximum number of players
in a two-license cardroom would increase from 96 to 165
(a 72% increase).
The current site can only accommodate approximately 64
players and has less than the standard amount of parking-
--it has approximately 35 spaces (47 total shared between
it and another business), rather than the standard number
of one per every 1.5 players and employees (77 people
total) or 51 spaces. The Village Club is allowed to
operate with this non-conforming amount of parking due to
its operation having preceded the City's CUP requirement.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff concurs in the proposal for
poker tables at nine (9) players per table, and super Pan
and Pai Gow at twenty-eight (28) players per table. This
would result in a maximum of 165 players. Staff proposes
requiring any facility offering pai Gow or super Pan or
allowing nine players per poker table to have sufficient
on-site parking (at a rate of one space per 1.5 players
and employees) and these games and higher player limits
would thus not be recommended at the current Village Club
location. Such conditions would be enforce via CUP.
\\-Ie-
Item , Page 7
Meeting Date 2/13/96
E. MAXIMUM BETS
CURRENT ORDINANCE: No bet or wager in any game shall
exceed the sum of thirty dollars ($30), and only table
stakes shall be permitted. No jackpots shall be allowed.
REQUEST: Mr. Souza requests no limit on wagers, or in
lieu of that, a new limit of eighty dollars $80 per bet
for poker, no limits for Pai Gow and Super Pan, and no
limit poker tournaments once every thirty days. He does
not request any change in the limits on table stakes or
jackpots.
BACKGROUND: "Table stakes" limits wagers during any
given game to the chips each player has before them.
"Jackpots" refer to side pots divided between the highest_
scoring players; these pots are currently prohibited by
both state and City law. These rules are neither
proposed nor recommended to be changed.
Other than restrictions on table stakes and jackpots,
wagering is also limited by some dollar amount, which
represents the maximum that can be bet at any given time
(although in the course of a game, a player could bet
that amount each time they draw a card or call on another
player's bet).
Historically, Chula vista operated without any betting
limit. In 1970 a $20 limit was established, with this
limit rising to $30 in 1981.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Unlike poker, in which players may
wager the maximum bet several times as play continues
around the table or as additional cards are dealt, pai
Gow and Super Pan involve placing bets before the deal
(similar to blackjack). Due to this lack of betting
rounds, the pre-deal bet is much more significant than a
simple poker ante. As a result, these games typically
operate without a set limit.
Although such no-limit games are different from those
currently allowed in the city, staff recommends that they
be allowed in their no-limit form. Mr Souza requested
this provision to assist in his competition with other
area cardroomsjIndian reservation casinos. Police staff
views this as a reasonable request and one which can be
granted without any affect on the community's quality of
life.
Staff does not recommend returning to the policy of
having no limits on poker or having no-limit tournaments.
However, with no limits recommended on pai Gow and super
Pan, staff does see a certain inequity in keeping the
\ \-1,
Item , Page 8
Meeting Date 2/13/96
poker bets arbitrarily lower. Thus, staff recommends the
poker limit be raised to $80 subject to the six and
twelve month reviews. This higher limit would be allowed
at the current village Club location without a CUP
requirement. Mr. Souza concurs in this recommendation.
The operation and impacts of these changes would be very
closely scrutinized, especially during staff's
recommended six and twelve month review periods
(discussed below) and in light of some of the potential
criminal impacts that any broadening of gaming operations
could bring (See Attachment 6).
F. MAXIMUM HOUSE CHARGES PER HAND
CURRENT ORDINANCE: No charge
and a half cents ($.375) per
collected from any player
participating in any games.
in excess of thirty-seven
hand per player shall be
for the privilege of
REQUEST: Mr. Souza requests that the maximum charge be
lifted, or in lieu of that, the charges for poker be
restructured to a flat rate per table which would be more
manageable than the half-cent charges. Based on eight
players per table x the current $.375, he recommends a
maximum charge of $3 per table, rising to $4 per table in
1998.
Based on the no-limit nature of pai Gow and super Pan, he
requests that the charge for these games be structured as
1% of the amount wagered.
BACKGROUND: The City established the $0.375 charge as a
compromise in 1992, when there had been a request to
raise the charge to $0.50. As Mr. Souza argues, this
works well when there are exactly 8 players and the
charge equals $3 per table, but it is rather unwieldy if
a table has an odd number of players.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff concurs in Mr. Souza's
request to change the $.375 poker charge per player per
hand to a flat rate per table. It is recommended that
this rate be set at a maximum of $3 per table per hand.
This change would be effective with adoption of the
gaming plan and would not be contingent upon the Village
Club moving to a new location. Regarding the $4 charge
per hand, staff recommends that this be irrplemented
effective 1/1/98 subject to further review by the Police
Chief and shall be chargeable only in connection with an
increase in the flat rate table tax for poker to $4,000.
\\ ..<g
Item , Page 9
Meeting Date 2/13/96
For Pai Gow and Super Pan, staff recommends that house
charges be established by the cardroom owner at rates not
to exceed one percent (1%) for each one hundred dollars
($100) bet. A copy of the charges established by each
house shall be submitted to the Police Department and
shall also be clearly posted in each licensed cardroom.
G. LICENSE TAX
CURRENT ORDINANCE: The license tax per card table is
currently $1,500 per quarter.
REQUEST: No request for a change.
BACKGROUND: As Mr. Souza looks to relocate and expand to_
a 12-table cardroom and add Pai Gow and Super Pan, or as
the other license holders look to activate their
licenses, staff sees the license tax as a means of
providing the additional resources necessary to properly
moni tor the new games' operations, review operators'
financial data, and enforce City regUlations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the other changes in
cardroom regulations (particularly the 46% increase in
hours and the 72% increase in players), staff recommends
either a flat rate or a percentage of gross revenues,
according to the following terms:
Flat Rate for Poker or other Qames2: $1,500 per table
per quarter for six-day per week operations. Otherwise,
the rate would be $1,750 per table per quarter (17% above
the current rate--an increase proportionate with the
addition of sunday hours). This rate would increase to
$2,500 (67% above the current rate) for any consolidated
two-license operation.
Effective 1/1/98, as discussed above, cardroom operators
would have the option to charge in excess of $3 per hand
(up to a maximum of $4 per table per hand), subject to an
increase in the flat rate per table per quarter to $4,000
(equivalent to a 4.5% tax rate on the increased charges).
Flat Rate for pai Gow and Super pan2: $4,000 per table
per quarter.
Gross Revenues Rate: In each case, if revenues per table
per quarter exceed $60,000, the tax s'.lall be either the
flat rate or a percentage of the quarterly gross
2 As outlined in the Resolution, flat rates would be
applicable to all tables authorized under each active license.
\\-'\
Item , Page 10
Meeting Date 2/13/96
revenues, whichever is greater.
recommended at:
These rates are
Gross revenues/table UP to:
Tax rate:
$70,000
$80,000
$100,000
7.00%
7.25%
7.50%
with an additional 0.25% for each additional
$100,000 in revenues, up to a maximum rate of 10%.
The structure of these tax rates allows for the effective
rate to drop as low as 4.1% and to keep the flat rates in
effect as long as the revenues per table are below
$60,000 per table per quarter. (NOTE: Revenues at the-
village Club are currently estimated at $40,000 per
quarter.) Once the operation grows beyond $60,000 per
quarter, the tax rate increases as well. Mr. Souza has
accepted these changes.
Anticipated Effects of Proposed Chanqes
with the addition of pai Gow and Super Pan and being open on
sundays, Mr. Souza hopes to recoup some of the clientele he has
lost as preferences have shifted toward the round-the-clock casinos
of the area Indian reservations.
As the attached matrix shows, Pai Gow is currently cffered locally
at sycuan and Viejas.3 Although Chula vista cardrooms might have
a somewhat wider draw for these games, the proximity of San Diego
(3 cardrooms, with a total of 21 tables; 10 other 7-table licenses
not currently active) and Oceanside (2 cardrooms, expanding to a
total of 90 tables), will continue to command a large portion of
the local market. with the aggressive marketing by area
reservations, there should continue to be effective competition for
regional gaming.
,
As a result, it is unlikely that Chula vista would stand out from
the crowd in the gaming field in San niego county. with these
changes, however, Chula vista cardroom owners should be able to
recapture some of the local market share they report losing.
3 oceanside does not prohibit pai Gow, but does not currently
have any pai Gow tables. This will likely change as the city's
cardrooms expand to the new limit of 45 tables per cardroom.
\\ ..\0
Item , Page 11
Meeting Date 2/13/96
Review Periods
staff recommends these changes be enacted with scheduled six and
twelve month review periods in order for Police staff to determine
the impact of the new gaming plan and whether the new games and
rules should continue or whether the gaming plan should be further
amended. If problems occur, staff would reserve the right to
continue the review period for an additional six months. A report
and recommendations to council would follow each staff review, at
which time further changes, additions or deletions could be made in
the gaming plan.4
The goal in developing a gaming plan was to regulate specific types
of wagering in Chula vista. The changes made in this gaming plan
should not affect the quality of life to the citizens of Chula
vista, but will enhance the ability of a cardroom owner to maintain-
a long-standing business while attempting to keep pace with the
changing market.
with the recommended percentage-based table tax, staff will also be
receiving quarterly financial reports that should assist in
tracking the overall level of activity at Chula vista cardrooms.
This data should facilitate understanding and consideration of the
new games' impacts on the businesses' profitability and increase
the analytical value of the six and twelve month reviews. For
comparison purposes, staff has also requested a set of current
financial reports and ongoing data to include those games (i.e.
poker) on which a percentage tax is not applied.
Conditional Use Permit
All cardroom operations are subject to approval of a Conditional
Use Permit. The current site of the village Club preceded this
requirement and is therefore "grandfathered" unless there is some
significant change in the operation. For example, if the number of
players increased, that would increase the number of parking spaces
required and could trigger a CUP. A CUP at this or any other site
would also deal with such issues as noise and impacts on
surrounding land uses.
Mr. Souza has pursued obtaining another property near his current
location as a substitute or expansion site. However, with the
additional parking that pai Gow would require, this site would not
accommodate his needs either and he has indicated that he is
looking at other sites in the city.
4 since the gaming plan is adopted by Council resolution, it
may also be amended by Council resolution at any time, and this
authority would not expire with or be limited to the timing of
scheduled six or twelve month review periods.
\ \... \ \
Item , Page 12
Meeting Date 2/13/96
Once Mr. Souza or another licensee identifies a site, it would be
subject to staff processing of a CUP and Planning commission
consideration.
other Chanqes
For ease of administration, staff has also incorporated various
sections of the existing Ordinance into the text of the Gaming
Plan. These sections are intended to provide a single, reference
document and to clarify certain provisions addressed in both
documents.
Additional changes not dealing with gaming itself concern license
transfer procedures, licensing procedures (including definition of
Class_I and Class II gaming), and sanctions available to the _city_
for enforcement of the regulations. Although not detailed here,
the text of these changes appear in the attached Gaming Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Currently the city charges $1,500 per quarter per table, for a
total of $48,000 per year. In the short term, that revenue is not
anticipated to change, since issues of CUPs and various state
approvals must be resolved prior to most gaming expansions.
When any expansion occurs in hours or days or via consolidation of
licenses, the city would receive a flat rate of $1,750-$2,500 per
table per quarter for poker and ~4,000 per table per quarter for
pai Gow and Super Pan. These changes could yield an increase in
annual City revenues from the current level of $48,000 (with only
8 tables licensed) to either $56,000 (with the same 8 tables at
seven days per week) or $138,000 (with 9 poker tables and 3 pai Gow
tables under Mr. Souza's two licenses).
If the gross revenues per quarter per table exceed $60,000 for any
given class of games (with pai Gow and Super Pan comprising a
separate class), then the tax would be either the flat rate or a
percentage (from 7%-10%) of the quarterly gross revenues, whichever
is greater.
Assuming the current pOker-only 8-table operation and revenues
below $50,000 per table, this gross revenues tax may not be applied
at all. However, based on a 12-table operation with three pai Gow
tables and the peak operation at those tables approximately 12
hours per day, this City revenue is estimated at $265,000 for poker
and $745,000 for pai Gow or Super Pan, for a total of approximately
$1 million per year.
Based on less-than-24-hour operation, Mr. Souza has also indicated
he may pursue a poker-only twelve table operation. The City
\\ -I~
Item , Page 13
Meeting Date 2/13/96
revenue associated with this type of operatio', is estimated at
$350,000.
wi th the current revenue at $48,000, the net impact of these
changes would be an increase of as much as $950,000 for a 12-table
consolidated two-license cardroom. Since Mr. Souza holds only two
of the four licenses currently allowed by ordinance, the activation
of the other two could effectively double this fiscal impact. It
should be noted, however, that as these estimates precede the
actual operation of the new games or any 12-table cardrooms, it is
difficult to assess the precise revenue impacts.
Attachments:
1. Resolution; Gaming Plan
2. Municipal Code, Chapter 5.20
3. Matrix: Current Ordinance, Request, Staff Recommendation, and
Comparison data for other jurisdictions
Letter from Mr. Harvey Souza
Minutes, Council Meetings of 11/21 and 11/28
Gaming Article, California Lawver, 12/95
4.
5.
6.
c:\wp51\analyses\cardrm.113
RPE/AM/JY
\\-l3
RESOLUTION NO.)'~ d. , do-
ATTACHMENT #1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ADOPTING A CHULA VISTA GAMING PLAN WHICH WOULD ALLOW PAI
GOW AND SUPER PAN 9 TO BE PLAYED AT CARDROOMS SUBJECT TO
CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS, AND MAKE OTHER CHANGES INCLUDING
THE PERMISSIBLE HOURS AND DAYS OF OPERATION, MAXIMUM
BETS, AND ALLOWABLE HOUSE CHARGES PER TABLE
WHEREAS, at the City Council meeting on November 28, 1995
Council approved certain amendments to Chapter 5.20 of the
Municipal Code regarding cardrooms; and
WHEREAS, these changes allow any form of gambling in the
City that is allowed at any other location within the state upon
the adoption of a gaming pl.an (the "Chula vista Gaming ,Plan") which
regulates such formes) of gambling; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to letters dated November 13, 1995 and
January 17, 1996 the ownerloperator of the Village Cardroom has
proposed changes to the City regulations governing cardrooms; and
WHEREAS, City staff has evaluated such proposal and
drafted a proposed Chula vista Gaming Plan which incorporates some
of the village Cardroom's proposed changes, and certain other
changes, on the terms and conditions set forth therein; and
WHEREAS, staff submitted the propose~ gaming plan to the
City Council for its consideration with comments and
recommendations from the Chief of Police and the City Manager that
the Gaming Plan be approved; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 5.20.001 of Municipal
Code, a duly noticed public hearing was held on such gaming plan on
February 13, 1996; and
WHEREAS, the City Council duly considered all public
on the proposed gaming plan prior to taking action
comments
thereon;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby adopt the Chula vista Gaming Plan
in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, with such minor wording
changes or clarifications as may be required or otherwise approved
by the City Attorney.
'\
Presented by
APr::gJed
form
bye!
)
/
c:..~~,:
)r-"
: (~
Richard
Police
/'
~ i (': t., ., c. .', .\ ' ' ,
it~~on~'~{chi~~f~ ~f'-~ , '
/-
\,
i>
" .\-t"",..._
.----'
(
Bruce M.
Attorney
/1'11
Page 2
CHULA VISTA GAMING PLAN
In accordance with Chapter 5.20 of the Chula vista Municipal
Code (the "Gaming Code"), this document shall serve as the gaming
plan for the city of Chula vista (the "Gaming Plan"). This Gaming
Plan was adopted on February 13, 1996, after a public hearing,
pursuant to city council Resolution No.
Effective upon its adoption, this Gaming Plan shall implement,
in its entirety, Subchapter 2 of the Gaming Code. In the event of
any inconsistency between this Gaming Plan and the Gaming code, the
terms and conditions of this Gaming Plan shall govern. Except to
the extent that this Gaming Plan expressly modifies or is otherwise
inconsistent with the Gaming Code, the Gaming Code shall remain in
full force and effect.
This Gaming Plan is intended to deal only with the subject of
Cardrooms. No other types of gaming permitted by the Code, subject
to the adoption of a gaming plan with respect thereto, shall be
permitted or governed hereby. To be permitted, such other types of
gaming must be the subject of further action by Resolution of the
City Council to amend or add to this Gaming Plan.
CARDROOMS
1. Cardroom Defined.
For the purpose of this Gaming Plan, a "cardroom" is defined
to be any space, room or enclosure furnished or equipped with a
table or tables used or intended to be used, either exclusively or
in conjunction with another business or activity, as a card table
for the playing of cards and similar games, and the use of which is
available to the public.
2. Licensinq.
2.1 License Reauired to Operate Cardroom
Licensee's Must be 21 Years or Older.
Individual
A license from the City issued pursuant to the Gaming
Code or this Gaming Plan, is required for any person, group of
persons, partnership, corporation, or any other entity or
organization (each a "Person" hereinafter) to engage in or carry
on, or to maintain or conduct, or cause to be engaged in, carried
on, maintained or conducted, any cardroom in the City. Any such
activity conducted without such a license, or otherwise in non-
compliance with the terms of the Gaming Code, this Gaming Plan, or
./
J!~(~
Page 3
any and all other applicable federal, state and local laws and
regulations shall be unlawful. No license shall be issued to any
individual Person under the age of twenty-one years.
2.2 Number of Lic~nses Permitted -- Existinq Licenses.
The number of licenses authorized to be issued or held,
in the aggregate, under the provisions of this Gaming Plan shall be
limited, based upon the population of the City according to the
certified determination thereof by the state Department of Finance.
The number of licenses so authorized may not be more than one per
for~y thousand (40,000) residents or any fraction thereof. All
such licenses shall be issued and held in accordance with the
provisions of this Gaming Plan; provided, however, any Person
holding a license or licenses to conduct cardroom operation upon
the effective date of this Gaming Plan may continue to hold such
license or licenses subject to the terms and conditions set forth
herein. For purposes of determining the number of licenses which
are authorized to be issued by the City hereunder, any two licenses
which are "consolidated" pursuant to section 2.6 hereof shall still
be treated as being two separate licenses counted against the total
number authorized.
2.3 Tvpes of Licenses -- Class I and Class II.
2.3.1 There shall be two types of cardroom licenses:
Class I and Class II. The characteristics, rights, obligations and
limitations attributable, respectively, to a Class I or Class II
licenses are set forth throughout this Gaming Plan. subject to all
such provisions, in general, (a) a Class I license shall permit the
playing of all games permitted by the State Attorney General as of
December 31, 1995 to be within the permissible subject of local
licensing by California cities, except Super Pan 9, pai Gow,
California 22, Panguingue, and any and all similar games; and (b)
a Class II license shall permit the playing of all games permitted
under a Class I license, and shall also permit the playing of Super
Pan 9 and Pai Gow.
2.3.2 All licenses issued by the City shall initially be
Class I licenses. In order to convert a Class I license into a
Class II license the holder of a Class I license (a) must have
continuously operated a cardroom under its Class I license within
the City for a period of three (3) years at a fixed location; and
(b) must apply with the city and receive prior approval from the
City for such conversion in accordance with the application
procedures set forth in section 2.4 hereof, below.
2.4 Application/Issuance Procedure.
2.4.1 Any Person desiring a cardroom license must submit
an application therefor to the Chief of Police. Such application
N.,lb
Page 4
shall be on a form issued by, or otherwise approved in advance by,
the Chief of Police. Such application shall include, in addition
to any other information required by the Chief of Police, (a) the
true names and addresses of any and all Persons currently, or
contemplated to have a "financial interest" in the cardroom
operation proposed to be licensed; (b) the past criminal record, if
any, of any and all such' Persons; (c) the fingerprints of any and
all such Persons; (d) the proposed location of the cardroom; and
(e) a non-refundable fee, as presently designated, or as may in the
future be amended, in the Master Fee Schedule, to cover the cost of
processing the application and of any required investigation of the
applicant. Upon the issuance of a cardroom license, the Chief of
Police may authorize the refund of the investigation portion of the
application fee to any Persons who were not subject to investiga-
tions.
2.4.2 Each cardroom license application shall be totally
independent and unassociated with any other application being
submitted for the purpose of obtaining such a license. No
applicant requesting a license pursuant to this section may have a
financial interest, or any other interest (as described in section
2.4.3 hereof) in any other cardroom license, or application pending
therefor.
2.4.3 For purposes of this section 2.4 and the Gaming
Plan, the term "financial interest" shall mean any and all direct
or indirect ownership, creditor or other interests in a cardroom
license, the cardroom business operated thereunder, the assets
thereof, or the revenues generated thereby. Such an interest shall
include, without limitation, any and all interests held by building
owners, landlords, tenants, equipment or fixtures owners, lessors
or lessees, creditors, lenders or guarantors related in any way to
the ownership, financing or operation of the cardroom; and (b)
a parent, spouse, sibling or child of an individual Person holding
a direct, majority or controlling ownership interest in a license
or cardroom shall also be deemed the holder of a "financial
interest" for purposes of this section and this Gaming Plan.
2.4.4 Any new or revoked cardroom license otherwise
qualified for issuance may be issued during the period of May 1
through June 30 following the availability or revocation date of
such a license. After the expiration of this period no further li-
censes shall be issued until the following May 1 through June 30
period. In the event that there are applications in excess of the
number of licenses available in accordance with the limitations set
forth in section 2.2 hereof, a license may by issued to the most
qualified of such applicants in accordance with a procedure
established by the city. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the city
shall decide, in its sole discretion, as to whether to issue any
cardroom license authorized hereunder, and whether or how to
condition such an issuance; furthermore, the City reserves the
)/-/7
Page 5
right, for any reason whatsoever, to reject any and all
applications for a cardroom license hereunder.
2.5 Transfers.
2.5.1 Any license issued pursuant to the Gaming Code or
this Gaming Plan, a cardroom operated thereunder, or any direct or
indirect interest therein, may be transferred, but only in strict
accordance with the terms and conditions of this Section 2.5.
Transfers governed by this section shall include, without
limitation, any and all sales, leases, conveyances, assignments,
grants, pledges, gifts, devises, donations andlor similar transfers
by a Person of any or all of such Persons, direct or indirect,
ownership interest in a license or cardroom operated thereunder,
or "financial interest" in a license or cardroom operated
thereunder, as such concept is defined in Section 2.4.3 hereof.
Such transfers shall include, without limitation, (a) a transfer of
all or any shares by a shareholder in a corporate licensee; (b) the
transfer of all or any partnership interest by a partner in a
partnership licensee; (c) the transfer of all or any portion of a
controlling shareholder or partnership interest in an entity which
itself holds a direct or indirect ownership or financial interest
in a lice!nse or cardroom; and (d) a transfer of a substantial
portion of the assets of a Person holding a license or a cardroom
operated thereunder.
2.5.2 A license may only be transferred to a Person that
submits an application for approval by the city and receives
approval from the 'City in accordance with the procedures set forth
for the issuance of a licenses set forth in section 2.4 hereof.
2.5.3 Any and all proposed cardroom license transfers
must receive (a) prior written approval of the Chief of police,
which approval may be withheld in the sole discretion of the Chief
of police, and (b) the ratification of the city council, which
ratification may be withheld in the sole discretion of the city
Council. Such approval andlor ratification may be conditioned as
the acting parties deem appropriate, and may be based, but is not
required to be based, entirely or in part on the assessment by the
Chief of Police or, as applicable, the city Council, of the
character of the proposed licensee, or on the opinion of the
approving or ratifying entity, that there appears to be good cause
why such Person should not operate a cardroom. Notwithstanding the
foregoing in the event of a transfer directly caused by the death
or divorce of a Person holding a financial interest in a license,
the "prior approval" requirement, above, shall be amended to
require that approval of the resulting transferee be obtained by no
later than sixty (60) days following the death or divorce causing
such transfer.
2.5.4 with the exception of those licenses which have
been issued prior tc September 1, 1992, no lj~ense may be
//..../~
Page 6
transferred unless and until the holder thereof has been operating
a cardroom governed by such license for three (3) years at a fixed
location in the city. Licenses issued prior to September 1, 1992
may not be transferred unless and until the holder thereof has been
operating a cardroom governed by such license for one (1) year at
a fixed location within the city.
2.5.5 In the event of a purported transfer of a license
which does not comply with the terms ,of this section (a) the
purported transferror shall be subject to monetary penalties as
provided in section 4.2 hereof; (b) the purported transferee shall
have no rights to operate a cardroom in the City under the
authority of such license; (c) the license involved shall be
subject to revocation by the city as provided in section 4.3
hereof; and (d) the transfer may otherwise be declared null and
void.
2.5.6 Upon transfer of a Class II license, the Class II
license so transferred shall immediately revert back to a Class I
license. A Class II license so reverted may be converted back to
a Class II license, but only in accordance with the provisions of
section 2.3.2 hereof.
2.6 Consolidation.
2.6.1 Notwithstanding any other section of this Gaming
Plan to the contrary, the holder of a Class I or Class II license
may acqu~re one, but only one, additional Class I or Class II
License, subject to the consolidation rules and procedures of this
section 2.6. Under no circumstances may any Person acquire or hold
more than two licenses.
2.6.2 In order to acquire an additional license, an
existing license holder (a) must have continuously operated a
cardroom under its existing license within the City for a period of
three (3) years at a fixed location; and (b) must apply with the
City and receive prior written approval from the City for such
acquisition in accordance with the rules and procedures set forth
in section 2.4 hereof regarding the initial issuance of licenses.
If the additional license is to be acquired from another existing
license holder, such application shall also be made in accordance
with the rules and procedures governing license transfers set forth
in section 2.5.3 hereof
2.6.3 If an application for the acquisition of an
additional license is granted, the two licenses held by the
applicant shall become "consolidated". In addition, licenses shall
be deemed to be "consolidated" in the event that the same Person
holds, or comes to hold, a "financial interest" (as defined in
section -- hereof) in such licenses or the cardrooms operated
thereunder. Under a consolidated license, the maximum number of
tables permitted to be operated is twelve (12), subj ect to any
II ~ /1}
Page 7
additional or contrary terms
3.5 andlor other provisions
operated under a consolidated
location.
and conditions set forth in section
of this Gaming Plan. All tables
license must be operated in the same
2.6.4 In the event that a Class I license is
consolidated with a Class II license, the full benefits and burdens
hereunder of Class II status shall apply to all the card tables
operated under such consolidated license.
2.7 License Tax.
2.7.1 In General. There shall be a license tax imposed
on any licensed cardroom within the City in accordance with the
terms of this section 2.7. The license tax is imposed for purposes
of generating revenues to the general fund of the city and is not
imposed for purposes of regulation. The tax shall be imposed
against the number of tables licensed, based upon the Class of
license issued with respect thereto, regardless of the number of
tables which may be operated on any given day or the Class of game
conducted thereon.
2.7.2 Amount of Tax -- Greater of Base or Gross Revenues
Rate. The license tax to be assessed and collected on each
licensed cardroom shall be the qreater of the applicable "base
rate" tax per table, or the applicable "adjusted gross revenue
rate" tax per table, if any, determined as follows:
2.7.2.1 Base Rate:
a. Class I -- Non-consolidated: The base
license tax for card tables licensed under a single, non-
consolidated Class I license shall be (1) $1,500 per card table per
quarter for a cardroom authorized to operate six (6) days per week;
and $1,750 per card table per annual quarter for a cardroom
authorized to operate seven (7) days per week.
b.
license tax for card tables
license shall be $2,500 per
Class I -- Consolidated: The base
licensed under a consolidated Class I
card table per annual quarter. '
c. Class I -- Greater Than $3 charge Per
Hand: Notwithstanding the foregoing, at such time that this Gaming
Plan approves and the licensee charges in excess of three dollars
($3.00) per table per hand, the base license tax for such Class I
card tables shall be $4,000 per card table per annual quarter.
d. Class II: The base license tax for
each card table licensed to play Class II games under a Class II
license shall be $4,000 per table per annual quarter. For example,
if - single non-consolidated Class I li cense is converted to a
/I-i?~
Page 8
Class II License, the base rate for 6 of the 8 licensed tables
shall be determined by the applicable Class I rate, and the base
rate for the remaining 2 tables shall be the Class II base rate.
Notwi thstanding the foregoing, in the event that no games are
conducted at a table operated under a Class II license for an
entire quarter, that table shall be treated as a Class I table for
purposes of this section 2.7.
2.7.2.2 Adjusted Gross Revenues Rate:
a. Calculated for Both Class I and Class
II Tables: If the mean average "adjusted gross revenues" (defined
below) per quarter per table for Class I tables, on the one hand,
or Class II tables (if any), on the other hand, exceeds $60,000 per
table, an adjusted gross revenues tax per table per quarter shall
be determined for each Class of tables with such an average, based
upon the following rates:
Gross revenues UP to:
Tax rate:
$70,000
$80,000
$100,000
7.00%
7.25%
7.50%
With an additional 0.25% tax for each additional
$100,000 or fraction thereof in adjusted gross
revenues per table per quarter, up to a maximum
rate of 10%.
Any applicable rate shall be applied on the aggregate amount of
adjusted gross revenues generated p~r table; in other words, the
applicable rate shall not be applied in combination with other
rates as a marginal rate.
b. Revenues Not Attributable to a Class
I or Class II Table: In any case in which a portion of the
adjusted gross revenues cannot be allocated directly to either
Class I or Class II games, these revenues 'shall be divided between
the two classes based on the proportion of maximum allowable
players per class of games as licensed at that establishment. For
example, if a cardroom has nine poker tables (Class I) and three
pai Gow tables (Class II), the maximum number of poker players
would be 81 and the maximum number of pai Gow players would be 84.
Thus, in this case, the Class I tables would be allocated 49.09% of
the non-game-specific adjusted gross revenue and the Class II
tables would be allocated 50.91% of the non-game-specific adjusted
gross revenue.
c. Definition of Adjusted Gross Revenues:
Adjusted gross revenues shall be defined to include all revenues
received by the license holder from per hand money collected, seat
rental fees, and any and all other revenues generated from or
II ' ;)./
Page 9
attributable to card play, except fees charged to players that are
returned to the players through approved direct promotions, subject
to any applicable state andlor city restrictions on such
promotions. Adjusted gross revenues shall be calculated separately
for Class I and Class II Games. Notwithstanding a.1Y other
provision in this section 2.7 to the contrary, any table which is
not in use at any time for an entire quarter shall not be
considered in the calculation of adjusted gross revenues per table
per quarter for the other tables and shall itself be assigned an
adjusted gross revenue figure for that quarter of $0.
2.7.3 Procedures for payment of Tax.
2.7.3.1 Advance Payment. The license tax
assessed hereunder shall be payable quarterly in advance by no
later than the day falling fifteen (15) days prior to the first day
of each calendar quarter. For the first three (3) quarters of any
cardroom operation, the minimum advance payment amount shall be the
applicable base license tax applicable thereto. For each quarter
thereafter, the minimum advance payment amount shall be the mean
average of the license tax amounts which were determined by the
city to be ultimately due and payable to the city with respect to
the most recent previous two quarters for which such data is
available.
2.7.3.2 Reconciliation Payment. By no later than
the date falling thirty (30) days after the expiration of each
calendar quarter, a licensee hereunder shall submit to the Finance
Director, in a form approved thereby (a) a verified statement of
the adjusted gross revenues generated during such quarter, and (b)
licensee's request for reimbursement from thq City, or licensee's
payment of any additional amounts owed, as appropriate, determined
by licensee based upon such statement of adjusted gross revenues.
The Finance Director shall have the authority to designate an
alternate payment procedure to ensure timely collection of all
amounts due.
2.7.4 Audi t Rights. In the event that the City
disagrees with any verified statement of adjusted gross revenues
submitted pursuant to section 2.7.3.2, above, the city shall notify
licensee in writing of such disagreement and, at City's request,
licensee shall submit to an independent audit by the City, or its
designee, of licensee's accounting records in order to verify such
statement. In the event that the city determines that licensee's
verified statement understates adjusted gross revenues, licensee
shall be immediately required to submit payment of the difference
to the city. If such discrepancy exceeds a factor of five percent
(5%), then (a) licensee shall be deemed to be in violation of the
Gaming Plan, and (b) in addition to licensee's obligation to
immediately pay the discrepancy, licensee shall be required to pay
the City's costs in conducting its audit hereunder.
/I-:~,
Page 10
2.7.5 Tax Receipt. The Finance Director shall issue a
receipt for each licensed cardroom and such receipt shall be
displayed on the premises during the full term for which such
receipt was issued.
3. Operatinq Limitations and Conditions.
3.1 city Land Use Requ1ationsShal1 Control.
All cardrooms and card table operations shall be subject
to the city's land use regulations. Notwithstanding any provision
in this Gaming Plan to the contrary, no cardroom operations shall
be permitted without the prior acquisition of any and all necessary
approvals and permits from the City in connection therewith, and
any cardroom operation with such approvals and permits shall
operate in strict compliance with any and all terms and conditions
thereof.
3.2 Games Permitted.
3.2.1 Class I License: subj ect to the terms and
conditions of this Gaming Plan and the Gaming Code, the holder of
a Class I cardroom license shall be permitted to opera~e a cardroom
which conducts all card games which were determined by the Attorney
General as of December 31, 1995 to be within the permissible
subject of local licensing by California cities, except that Super
Pan 9, pai Gow, California 22, Panguingue and any and all similar
games may not be played. The games permitted under this section
shall be referred to herein fro~ time to time as "Class I Games".
3.2.2 Class II License: Subject to the terms and
conditions of this Gaming Plan and the Gaming Code, the holder of
a Class II cardroom license shall be permitted to operate a
cardroom which conducts all card games permitted by a Class I
license (as described in section 3.2.1, above,) plus super Pan 9
and pai Gow. Super Pan 9 and pai Gow shall be referred to herein
from time to time as "Class II Games".
3.2.3 posting of Permitted Games -- Game Being Played.
There shall be posted in every cardroom in letters plainly visible
from all parts thereof, signs stating which games have been
approved for play at said cardroom. In addition to the foregoing,
each table shall identify by prominent sign located thereon the
game which is currently being played at said table.
3.3 Game Rules.
3.3.1. In General. No permitted game may be played in
a cardroom unless and until a written set of rules ("Games Rules")
for such a game has been submitted to the Chief of Police and
approved thereby. Said approval may be amended, conditioned or
revoked from time to time in ~ne sole discretion of the Chief of
// - c}3 '
Page 11
Police. Each and every permitted game must, at all times, be
played strictly in accordance with the approved and posted Game
Rules applicable thereto. variations of a game, unless
specifically described in the Game Rules, shall not be allowed.
3.3.2 posting of Game Rules. A copy of the approved
Game Rules showing thereon the approval of the Chief of Police
shall be posted in the cardroom in a conspicuous place readily
available to the patrons or prospective patrons and visible from
any seat at any card table on the premises.
3.4 Hours and Davs of operation.
Licensed cardrooms may operate seven days per week,
except that no cardroom shall be operated, and no card table
licensed under the provisions of this code which is maintained or
operated in connection with any other business shall be used for
any card game, from four o'clock a.m. to eight o'clock a.m. of any
day; and
3.5 Maximum Number of Tables.
3.5.1 Class I
of tables permitted under
license shall be eight (8).
Non-Consolidated. The maximum number
a single, non-consolidated Class I
tables
twelve
3.5.2
permitted
(12) .
Class I -- Consolidated. The maximum number of
under a consolidated Class I license shall be
3.5.3 Class II -- Non-Consolidated. The maximum nur"ber
of tables permitted under a single, non-consolidated Class II
license shall be eight (8); however, only two (2) of the eight (8)
licensed tables shall be permitted at anyone time to conduct Class
II Games.
3.5.4 Class II -- Consolidated. The maximum number of
tables permitted under a consolidated Class II license shall be
eight (12); however, only three (3) of the twelve (12) licensed
tables shall be permitted at anyone time to conduct Class II
Games.
3.6 Maximum Number of P1avers Per Table.
3.6.1 Class I Tables. No more than nine (9) players
shall be permitted at anyone card table conducting Class I Games.
3.6.2 Class II Tables. No more than seven (7) seated
players with three additional standing players per seat, for a
total of twenty-eight (28) players per table shall be permitted at
anyone card table conducting Class II Games.
I; "'dt
Page 12
3.7 Maximum Bets and Bettinq Rules.
3.7.1 Class I Games. No bet or wager in any Class I
Game shall exceed the sum of eighty dollars ($80). Only table
stakes shall be permitted. No jackpots shall be allowed.
3.7.2
or wagers in any
be permitted.
3.8 Maximum House Charqes Per Hand -- Postinq Required.
Class II Games. There shall be no limit on bets
Class II Game except that only table stakes shall
3.8.1 Class I Games. No charge in excess of three
dollars ($3.00) per hand per table shall be collected by a cardroom
operator from any players for the privilege of participating in any
Class I Game. Notwithstanding the foregoing, effective January 1,
1998, the maximum charge allowed shall be increased to a maximum of
four dollars ($4.00) per hand per table for Class I Games.
3.8.2 Class II Games. No charge in excess of one
percent (1%) of each one hundred dollars ($100) wagered shall be
collected from any player for the privilege of participating in any
Class II Game.
3.8.3 posting Required. A copy of all schedules of
house charges shall be provided to tne Police Chief and shall be
clearly posted in each licensed cardroom.
3.9 Work Permits and Identification Badqes Required For
Manaqers and Emplovees.
3.9.1 Work Permit Required. Prior to commencing work at
a cardroom, each proposed manager or employee of a cardroom, if
such Person is other than the Person or Persons whose names appear
on the application for the cardroom license, must obtain a work
permit from the Chief of Police.
3.9.2 Application Process. Each proposed manager or
employee shall submit an application for the required work permit
to the Chief of Police. Such application shall be on a form issued
by, or otherwise approved in advance by, the Chief of Police. Such
application shall include, in addition to any other information
required by the Chief of Police, (a) the past criminal record, if
any, of such Person; (c) the fingerprints of such Person; and (d)
a non-refundable fee, as presently designated, or as may in the
future be amended, in the Master Fee Schedule for cardroom
applications, to cover the cost of processing the application and
of any required investigation of the applicant. The work permit,
when issued, shall be valid for one (1) year. Any renewal must
also be approved by the .Chief of Police.' The Chief of Police may
deny the initial approval or renewal of a work permit ~f, in the
Chief or Police's opinion, (1) in the case of - proposed manager
/"
.// /d~
Page 13
the applicant therefor should not be permitted to act as manager or
employee in lieu of management by the licensee of the cardroom; and
(2) in the case of a proposed employee the applicant therefor
should not be permitted to be employed in a cardroom.
3.9.3 Identification badges to be worn. Every manager
and employee of a cardroom shall, at all times when present in such
cardrooms, wear an identification badge containing such Person's
photograph, age, address and description of such individual.
3.10 Drinkinq of intoxicatinq beveraqes prohibited.
The drinking of any intoxicating liquor in a cardroom by
any Person in the cardroom is prohibited. The licensee of a
cardroom shall take all necessary and appropriate steps to assure
compliance with this section.
3.11 Minors prohibited from patronaqe or emp1ovment.
No Person under twenty-one years of age shall be
permitted to play any game at any card table in the city. No
person under twenty-one years of age shall be employed where any
card table is maintained in the city.
3.12 Siqns to be Posted.
Licensee shall comply at all times with the sign
requirements set forth in this Gaming Plan including, without
limitation, sections 3.2.3, 3.3.2 and 3;8.3 hereof, and any and all
other signage or posting requirements contained in applicab.1e
federal, state or local laws, rules and regulations
3.13 Class II Games to be P1aved On1v at Cordoned off Tables.
All cardroom areas to be used for Class II gaming shall
be roped, cordoned or otherwise physically segregated from the
Class I gaming areas. All individuals within such Class II gaming
areas other than cardroom employees, City regulatory or enforcement
staff or uniformed security personnel who are working within the
scope of their employment shall be considered players at the table
for purposes of compliance with the maximum number of players
allowed provisions of Section 3.6 hereof.
3.13 Licensee Responsible for Compliance and supervision of
operations.
The licensee of a cardroom shall be responsible for
assuring that any cardroom operated under such license is operated
in strict compliance with the terms of this Gaming Plan, the
provisions of the Penal Code of the State of California and any and
all other applicable federal, state, and local law', rules,
J; , (:;b
Page 14
regulations, or permits. All cardrooms andlor card tables shall be
supervised by the operator or an employee of the operator of the
cardroom, to assure such compliance. Any violation of the cardroom
operating limitations and conditions in this section 3, or
elsewhere in the Gaming Plan, whether or not caused by the licensee
or any employee thereof, shall be considered a violation by the
licensee of the terms and conditions of its license, and therefore
subject to the City's enforcement rights and policies set forth in
section 4 hereof.
4. Enforcement.
4.1 In General.
It is unlawful and a violation of this Gaming Plan to
obtain, transfer or consolidate a cardroom license, or to operate
a cardroom in violation of any of the regulations and rules set
forth in the Gaming Code, this Gaming Plan, and any and all other
applicable federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations or
permits.
4.2 Monetarv Fines.
4.2.1 Amounts of Fines. For any violation of the terms
of this Gaming Plan, the City shall have the right to impose a
penalty of up to $l,OvO per day for each day the licensee is in
violation. In the event that a licensee is cited for a violation
(not necessarily the same violation) more than three (3) times
within a 6 month period, upon the fourth such citation, and with
respect to any occurrence thereafter, the City shall have the right
to impose a penalty of up to $5,000 per day the licensee is in
violation.
4.2.2 Imposition of Fine Not Election of Remedies. The
pursuit of monetary fines against a licensee or the receipt of
payment therefor shall not constitute an election of remedies on
the part of the City and thus shall not preclude any other course
of action such as may be available including, without limitation,
the revocation of the cardroom license held or issued hereunder,
the revocation of any and all permits or approvals permitting the
operation of the cardroom, and any and all other remedies available
to the City at law or in equity.
4.3 Revocation and Suspension.
4.3.1 city Right to Revoke or suspend. Any cardroom
license issued or held hereunder may be revoked or suspended by the
city, after a public hearing, upon the determination by the City
Council and the Chief of Police that with respect to the license
andlor cardroom operated thereunder, there has been a material
violation, or repeated violations of this Gaming Plan or any or all
// -'d?
Page 15
other applicable federal, state or local laws, rules, regulations
or permits.
4.3.2 Material Violation. The City shall determine, in
its sole discretion, what shall constitute a material violation for
purposes of revocation or suspension under this Section 4.3.
Material violations may include, without limitation, the following:
(a) A misrepresentation or exclusion on any
application for approval, report or statement of revenues required
to be submitted under this Gaming Plan or under any other
applicable federal, state or local law, rule, regulation or permit.
(b) A non-complying purported transfer of a
cardroom license held or issued hereunder.
(c) Allowing persons other than those named in the
application on file with the City to own an interest in, or have
direct management of a cardroom.
(d) Maintaining a greater number of tables than the
number permitted by the license.
(e) Failure to strictly comply with any and all
federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations and permits
applicable to the holding of a license or the operation of a
cardroom hereunder, including, without limitation local land use
and other code provisions.
(f) Failure to pay. when due, the amount of license
tax owed pursuant to section 2.7 hereof.
(g) citation of five (5) or more minor violations
of this Gaming Plan within any twelve (12) consecutive months.
(h) The conduct of criminal or dangerous activities
at or attributable to the licensed cardroom.
(i) Failure to pay, when due, the amount of any
monetary fine imposed pursuant to Section 4.2.1 hereof.
(j) Refusal to permit City access to a cardroom for
purposes of auditing or inspecting same.
4.4 Audit and Inspection Riqhts.
The city shall have the right, at any time, without
notice, to enter into any cardroom operating within the city and to
conduct a reasonable inspection of all areas of such cardroom,
andlor any or all fixtures, equipment, accounting materials or
documents contained therein, in ?rder to determine whether or not
1/'019
Page 16
such cardroom is being operated in accordance with this Gaming
Plan.
5. General Provisions.
5.1 Definitions.
Except as otherwise expressly defined herein, capitalized
terms, and terms otherwise requiring definitions for proper
interpretation, shall have the meanings ascribed thereto by the
Gaming Code.
5.2 section Headinqs.
section headings contained herein are for reference
purposes only and shall not be deemed to govern, limit, modify or
in any manner affect the scope, meaning or intent of the provisions
of any section hereof.
5.3 Gaminq Plan Amendments.
This Gaming Plan may be revoked or amended, in whole or
in part, at any time, after a public hearing, by approval of the
City council.
5.4 Inteqrated Plan.
All provisions of this Gaming Plan are intended to be
integ~al parts of a comprehensive regulatory scheme. In the event
that any material provision hereof is finally determined to be
invalid, then, as of the date of such determination (a) the entire
Gaming Plan shall, ab initio, become void and of no effect, and (b)
the Gaming Code provisions otherwise implemented or superseded
hereby shall become effective.
5.5 Aqreement of Licensee to Accept Validi tv and Abide bv All
provisions.
Each license which holds or is issued a license
hereunder, in order to legally operate a cardroom within the city
must first enter into a written agreement with the City whereby
such licensee agrees, on behalf of itself, any successors or
assigns thereof, aad any and all parties with a financial interest
in the license or the cardroom operated thereunder, that such
Persons (a) shall abide by any and all provisions of the Gaming
Plan; (b) acknowledge that all provisions of the Gaming Plan are
valid and enforceable by the city against such Persons; and (c)
waive and agree not to pursue any and all claims or other action
against the City that any or all provisions of the Gaming Plan were
not legally adopted, valid or enforceable with respect thereto.
I/-d(
/1 r.' '" ,. c. "
ATTACHMENT #2
ORDINANCE NO. 2655
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AMENDING CHAPTER 5.20 TO ALLOW IN CHULA VISTA
ANY FORM OF GAMBLING ALLO\NED AT ANY OTHER
LOCATION WITHIN THE STATE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF
AND OUALIFICA TION UNDER A GAMBLING PLAN ADOPTED BY
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 5.20 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sections:
'Chapter 5.20
GAMBLING"
Subchapter 1. Chula Vista Gaming olan
5.20.001 Gaming Plan Adopted by Resolution.
5.20.002 All Gaming Allowed Subject to Gaming Plan
5.20.003 Effect of Adoption of Gaming Plan.
5.20.004 Inconsistencies with Chula Vista Gaming Plan
5.20.005 Savings Clause
Subchapter 2. Cardrooms
5.20.010
5.20.020
5.20.030
5.20.035
5.20.040
5.20.050
5.20.060
5.20.070
5.20.080
5.20.090
5.20.100
5.20.110
5.20.120
5.20.130
5.20.140
5.20.150
5.20.160
5.20.170
5 ?0.1S0
~.20. 190
Cardroom-Defined.
License.Required-lssuance to person under certain age prohibited.
license-Number permitted and transferability.
Consolidation-Permitted.
license-Initial issuance procedure.
license-Tax and attaching of receipts.
License-Applications required.Contents-lssuance prerequisites.
Work permits required-Application contents-Investigation fee
Issuance.Period of validity.
Identification badges to be worn.
License-Grounds for revocation.
Rules and Regulations generally.
Games permitted-conditions.
Hours and days of operation.
Drinking of intoxicating beverages prohibited.
Minors prohibited from patronage or employment.
Maximum number of players per table.
Maximum number of tables on premises-Arrangement.
Supervision of game playing.
Sets and wagers permitted when
';!&arges f", game playing-Ml:ximul'!l desig"ated.
11- atJ
Ordinance 2655
Page 2
5.20.200
5.20.210
5.20.220
Subc',apter 3.
5.20.230
Subchapter 4.
5.20.240
Subchapter 5.
5.20.250
Subchapter 6.
5.20.260
Subchapter 7.
5.20.270
Signs to be posted in cardroom.Contents
License-Revocation criteria.
License-Additional grounds for revocation.
Horse and Dog Wagering
On.Site and Satellite Horse and Dog Wagering
Sports Book
Sports Book Allowed Subject to Gaming Plan
Casino Gaming
Casino Gaming Allowed Subject to Gaming Plan
Video Gaming
Video Gaming Allowed Subject to Gaming Plan
Other Gaming
Other Gaming Allowed Subject to Gaming Plan
Section 1. Chula Vista Gaming Pion
5.20.001
Gaming Plan Adopted by Resolution.
In addition to the gaming, and regulatory controls that otherwise exist in relation to
gaming, allowed in Chula Vista specifically by this chapter, the city council is hereby
authorized to adopt by resolution after public hearing, and from time to time amend by
resolution after public hearing, a gaming plan ("Chula Vista GJming Plan", or alternatively
"gaming plan") which gaming plan shall contain such provisions and regulations as the city
council shall deem appropriate. including but not limited to. the following:
1. Types of gaming allowed, including but not limited to card games. on-site horse
and dog wagering. sports book. casino games, video gambling, etc.,
2. Hours and days of operations.
3. Location of gaming.
4. Auditing of gaming establishments.
5. licensing fees or other charges, including charges on a percentage of gross
receipts basis, in an amount Council deems appropriate.
6. Maximum number of players per table.
7. Bets and wagers permitted.
8. Charges for gaming.
9. Licensing, including number of licensees and consolidation.
10. Drinking of intoxicating beverages.
11. Maximum number of tables on premises.
12. Every aspect of operation of gaming establishments.
However, the Chula Vista Gaming Plan shall not allow any form or type of gaming
within the city which is not alll' .ved at least at one other locati('ln lInywhere wittn the State
11_ :>,
( . ,,;)../
Ordinance :Lbbb
Page 3
of California, or federal or Native American enclave or reservation located within the
jurisdictional boundaries of the state.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no gaming plan may be approved b( the council
without receipt and consideration by the council, at a put-lic hearing, of the comments and
recolnmendations of the chief of police and the city manager; /'.nd no permit or license
thereunder may be issued without the concurrence of both the chief of police and the city
council. The gaming plan shall have, at a minimum, a provision that requires permits to be
issued to specific operators and makes it mandatory that the permit issuing authority is vested
in both the chief of police and the city council jointly.
5.20.002
All California Gaming Allowed Subject to Gaming Plan
Notwithstanding anything else to the contrary herein contained. all gaming lawfully
allowed to exist at any location in the State of California, including but not limited to, any
federal enclave or Native American reservation contained therein, shall be, and is hereby
declared to be, lawfully conducted in the City of Chula Vista and shall be and is permitted, on
the condition it complies with, is consistent with, and is permitted by and under the Chula
Vista Gaming Plan, as same may be adopted and amended by resolution from time to time.
5.20.003
Preeminence and Priority of Gaminl; Plan.
Notwithstanding anything else in this chapter to the contrary. all gaming and any
operational controls thereon which may be allowed pursuant to the Chula Vista Gaming Plan
shall be deemed to be allowed by this chapter of the Municipal Code, and by the enacting
ordinance without further amendment of said code or ordinar:ce as if same were contained
herein.
5.20.004
Inconsistencies with Chula Vista Gaming Plan
Any inconsistencies between the provisions of this chapter and the Chula Vista Gaming
Plan shall be governed by the provisions of the Chula Vista Gaming Plan.
5.20.005
Savings Clause
If any part of this chapter is held for eny reeson to be iIIegel, it is the intent of the
council and city that each and every remaining provision hereof not held illegal shall be legal
and remain in full force and effect despite the declaration of illegality IS to such part.
5.20.006
Characterization of Gaming Plan
The Chula Vista Gaming Plan, when and if adopted, shall not be deemed to ba an
ordinance of the city, but ir.,tead shall. for all intents and purposes. ba deem9d to be a
resolutior of the city.
/J j -3J-.
Ordinance 2655
Page 4
Subchapter 2. Cardrooms
5.20.010
Cardroom-Defined.
Unless otherwise expanded by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan. for the purpose of this
chapter, 8 "cardroom" is defined to be any space, room or enclosure furnished or equipped
with a table used or intended to be used as a card table for the playing of cards and similar
games, and the use of which is available to the public. (Ord 21 12 t 1, 1985; Ord 1305 12
(part), 1970; prior code 19.101).
5.20.020
License-Required.lssuance to person under certain age prohibited.
Unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, it is unlawful for any
person, for himself or for any other person. firm or corporation, to engage in or carryon, or
to maintain or conduct, or cause to be engaged in, carried on, maintained or conducted, any
cardroom in the city without first having secured a license from said city so to do, according
10 each and every requirement of this chapter or without complying with each and every
regulation pertaining to such cardroom. Unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming
Plan, it is unlawful for any person to maintain or operate any card table in connection with any
cigar store, pool or billiard hall or any :lther business, ('r a room in which card tables are
maintained in the city without such person first having obtained from the council a license
authorizing such person to maintain and operate such card table or tables or card table
business. Unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, no license shall be
issued to any person under the age of twenty-one years. lOrd. 1305 t2 (part), 1970; prior
code !9.102(1ll.
5.20.030
License.Number permined and transferability.
Unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, the number of licenses
authorized for issuance under the provisions of this chapter shall be limited, based upon the
population of the city as shown upon the population certified by the state Department of
Finance. Unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan. the number so authorized
shall be one per forty thousand residents or any fraction thereof. Unless otherwise allowed
by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, all such licenses shall be issued in accordance with the
provisions of this chapter; provided, however, unless otherwise provided by the Chula Vista
Gaming Plan, those persons holding a license to conduct cardroom operation upon the
effective date of this section may continue to hold such licenses subject to the revocation
provisions set forth in this chapter. Unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming
Plan, any license issued pursuant to this chapter may be transferred upon the approval of the
chief of police to a person meeting all of the requirements for the initial issuance of such a
cerdroom license. subject to the ratification of the city council which approval may be
withheld in the sole discretion of the chipf of police and which ratification may be withheld
in the sole discretion of the city council. and such approval and ratification may. but is not
required to, be based entirely or in part on the assessment by the chief of police or, as
applicable, the city council, of the character of the proposed licensee, or when, in the opinion
of the t:>proving or ratifyi"g entity, there a:",pears to be good cause why such person should
not or-3rate a cardroom' provided. however. that, unless otherwise provIded by tha Chula
, ,
//'-3.3
Ordinance 2655
Page 5
Vista Gaming Plan, with the exception of those licenses which have been issued prior to the
effective date of the ordinance set forth in this section and Section 5.20.040. no license may
be so transferred unless the holder thereof has been operating a cardroom for three years at
a fixed location in the city. ror the purpose5 of this section. unless otherwise p.ovided by the
Chula Vista Gaming Plan, it shall be deemed to be a transfer of a license requiring approval
of the chief of police and ratification by the city council if a shareholder of a corporate
licensee transfers any shares in the corporate licensee. Unless otherwise provided by the
Chula Vista Gaming Plan. it shall also be deemed to be a transfer of a license requiring ap-
proval of the chief of police and ratification by the city council if a partner of a partnership
licensee transfers all or any portion of his or her partnership interest. lOrd. 2528 ~ 1 (part),
1992; Ord. 2347 ~1, 1930; Ord. 2150 ~1 (part). 1986; Ord. 1738 ~1 (part), 1977; Ord.
1305 ~2 (part), 1970; prior code ~9.1 02(2)).
5.20.035
Consolidation.Permitted.
Unless otherwise expanded or provided by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan,
notwithstanding the provisions of Section 5.20.160 regarding the maximum number of tables
on premises, the city council may, in their sole discretion, grant one additional license, but no
more than one (unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan) to a person having
an interes' in or holding a license to any cardroom in the city but then only in accordance with
the procedures set forth in this chapter or the Chula Vista Gaming Plan and only if the total
number of licenses issued, including consolidated licenses as two separate licenses, does not
exceed the maximum permitted by Section 5.20.030 or the gaming plan. If such application
for an additional single license is granted. the maximum number of tables permitted in the
consolidation of two cardrooms is twelve (12) unless otherwise provided by the Chula Vista
Gaming Plan. No licensee may obtain or have issued more than two licenses unless otherwise
provided by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan. Unless otherwisl. provided by the Chula Vista
Gaming Plan. a person shall be deemed to have an interest in, or hold, an existing license if
said person is a designated licensee, if they are presently married to an existing licensee, if
they are the parent or child of an existing licensee, if they own shares in a corporation that
owns a license or has a partnership interest in a license, if they own a partnership interest in
a partnership that has a license or owns shares in a corporation that owns a license or if some
other relation as specified in the Chula Vista Gaming Plan exists.
Unless otherwise provided by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, consolidation occurs
whenever a cardroom licensee or 8 person having a financial interest in 8 cardroom obtains
a license to operate an additional cardroom or acquires a financial interest in an additional
cardroom.
lOrd. 2528 ~ 1 (part), 1992; Ord. 2364 11, 1990; Ord. 234 7 ~ 1, 1990; Ord. 2015 11 (part).
1982).
5.20.040
license.lnitial issuance procedure.
Unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan. all licensees shall comply
with the provisions of this ( .'1a~ter or such other provisions set forth ;~ the Chula Vist::
Gaming Plan. Any applicant! requesting a license as permitted in Section 5.20.030 sh&1I p;.y
/ ),~~'t
Ordinance 2655
Page 6
a nonrefundable fee as presently designated, or as may in the future be amended by
resolution, in the master fee schedule, Section 5.20.040, or the gaming plan, to cover the
cost of investigation. Unless otherwise provided by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, no applicant
requesting a license pursuant to this section may have any financial tir other interest as set
forth in Section 5.20.035 in any other cardroom license. or application pending therefore.
Unless otherwise provided by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, each application shall be totally
independent and unassociated with any other application being submitted for the purpose of
obtaining such a license. The initial period for issuance of new cardroom licenses shall be the
month of May, 1977, and in the month of May in subsequent years should there be additional
licenses available. After the termination of the open period in May. no further licenses shall
be issued until the succeeding open perioa unless otherwise provided by the Chula Vista
Gaming Plan. Unless otherwise provided by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, in the event that
there are applications in excess of the number of licenses available in accordance with the
limitations set forth in Section 5.20.030, based upon population, the chief of police shall
conduct a public lottery to select those applicants who shall be investigated to determine if
they are qualified to be issued any available cardroom licenses as approved by the chief of
police, subject to ratification of the city council.
Upon the issuance of available cardroom licenses, the chief of police shall authorize the
refund of any application fee to any persons who were not subject to investigations unless
otherwise provided by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan.
(Ord. 2528 ~1 (part), 1992; Ord. 2506 ~1 (part). 1992; Ord. 2408 ~1 (part), 1990; Ord.
2015 ~1 (part). 1982; Ord. 1961 ~1 (part), 1982; Ord. 1738 ~1 (part). 1977; Ord. 1305 ~2
(part), 1970; prior code ~9.1 02(3)).
5.20.050
License-Tax and attaching of receipts.
Unless otherwise provided by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, the license tax for
maintaining or operating any card table or card table business in the city is payable quarterly
in advance and fixed at a sum as presently designated, or as may in the future be amended,
in the Master Tax Schedule, Section 5.20.050. or the Gaming Plan. Unless otherwise
provided by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan. the city finance officer shall issue a receipt for each
separate card table license as in this section required, and such receipt shall be attached to
such card table and preserved thereon during the full term for which such receipt was issued.
lOrd. 2408 ~1 (part), 1990; Ord. 1305 ~2 (part). 1970; prior code ~9.102(4)).
5.20.060
license-Application requlred.Contents-lssuance prerequisites.
Unless otherwise provided by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, an applicant for a cardroom
license shall submit his application to the chief of police, which application shall be under
oath, and shall include, among other things. the true names and addresses of all persons
financially interested in the business. The past criminal record, if any, of all persons
financially or otherwise interested in the business shall be shown on such application. The
term 'persons financially interested" shall include all persons who share in the profits of the
+'usiness, pn the basis of gross or net ~evenue, inclucf;"'g 'andlords, lessors. lessees, the owner
or r .mers oi the building. fixtures or equipment. The epplicetiol' shall elso be e"companied
/J " 55'-"'
Ordinance 2655
Page 7
by fingerprints of persons financially interested. (Ord. 2528 ~ 1 (part), 1992; Ord. 1969 ~ 1
(part), 1982; Ord. 1 305 ~2 (part), 1970; prior code ~9.1 02(5)).
5.20.070
Work permits required-Application contents-Investigation fee.
Issuance.Period of validity.
A. The manager of a cardroom. if he is other than the person or persons whose names
appear on the application for the cardroom license, must obtain a work permit from the
chief of police. He shall submit his application for such work permit to the chief of
police, which application shall be under oath and shall include. among other things. the
past criminal record. if any, of the applicant and shall be accompanied by the
fingerprints of the applicant. An application for a manager work permit shall be
accompanied by the required feels) or the required renewal feels). The work permit.
when issued. shall be valid for one year. The chief of police may deny such work
permit. if, in his opinion. the applicant therefor should not be permitted to act as
manager in lieu of management by the licensee of the cardroom.
B. Employees in cardrooms must obtain a work permit from the chief of police.
Applications for such work permits shall be submitted under oath and contain such
information as may be deemed by the chief of police to be necessary to determine
whether the applicant is a proper person to be employed in a cardroom. The chief of
police may deny such work permit if, in his opinion, the applicant therefor should not
be permitted to be ~~ployed in a cardroom. Ea"h application for a work permit ";,all
be accompanied by the required feels), or the required renewal fee(s). Such permits
shall be valid for one year.
C. The provisions of this section may be modified by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan.
(Drd. 2506 ~ 1 (part), 1992; Ord. 2408 ~ 1 (part). 1990; Drd. 1969 ~ 1 (part), 1982; Ord.
1961 ~1 (part), 1982; Award 1680 ~1 (part), 1976; Drd. 1305 ~2 (part), 1970; prior code
~9.1 02(6)).
5.20.080
Identification badges to be worn.
Every manager and employee of a cardroom licensed according to the provisions of this
chapter shall. at all times when present in such cardrooms, wear an identification badge
containing his photograph. age. address and description of such individual. The provisions of
this Section may be modified by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan. lOrd. 2005 11, 1982; Ord.
1305 ~2 (part), 1970; prior code ~9.102(7)).
5.20.090
Llcense.Grounds for revocation.
Licenses for card rooms may be revoked in the manner and for the reasons set forth in
Section 5.02.180 et seq. of this code and for the further reason consisting of a violation of
any of the provisions of this chapter, or fN allowing persons other thr:'l those named in the
apr :i;:ation on file with the city council t I own an interest ir, or have direct management of
~ I
~.(.:';7
Ordinance 2655
Page 8
such cardroom; provided however. that direct management of such cardroom may be
accomplished by the employment of a manager pursuant to the provisions of Section
5.20.070; for maintaining a greater number of tables than the number set forth in the
application; or for maintaining such cardroom business upon premises which are or have
become unsuitable or an improper place therefor. The provisions of this Se::tion may be
modified by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan. (Ord. 1305 ~2 (part). 1970; prior code ~9.1 02(8)).
5.20.100
Rules and regulations generally.
It is unlawful to operate a cardroom in violation of any of the regulations and rules set
forth in the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, or Sections 5.20.110 through 5.20.20C herein, unless
otherwise allowed or regulated by the chula Vista Gaming Plan. (Ord. 1305 ~2 (part). 1970;
prior code ~9.1 03 (part)).
5.20.110
Games permitted.conditions.
Effective upon adoption of a Chula Vista Gaming Plan that addresses the subject
matter of this section. but only to the extent allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan if more
restrictive than the provisions hereof, all card games which have been determined by the
attorney general to be within the permissible subject of localli~ensing by California cities may
be played in any licensed cardroom on the following conditions, except that pai-gow, super
pan, California 22 and panguingue may not be playect IJnless they are permitted to be played
under the terr..;;; and conditions set forth in the Chula Vista Gaming Plan:
1. A written set of rules ("games rules") for a proposed card game are on file with the
city and have been approved, in writing, by the chief of police at the time of playing
the game. Said approval may be amended, conditioned or revoked from time to time
in the sole discretion of the chief of police.
2. A copy of the approved game rules showing thereon the approval of the chief of police
are posted in the cardroom in a conspicuous place readily available to the patrons or
prospective patrons and visible from any seat at any card table on the premises.
3. The game is played strictly according to said game rules. Variations of the game.
unless specifically described in the game rules, shall not be allowed.
lOrd. 2528 ~1 (part). 1992; Ord. 1305 ~2 (part). 1970; prior code ~9.103(1)).
5.20.120
Hours and days of operation.
Effective upon adoption of a Chula Vista Gaming Plan that addresses the subject
matter of this section, but only to the extent allowed by the chula Vista Gaming Plan if m<.lre
restrictive than the provisions hereof. licensed cardrooms may operate seven days a week.
24 hours per day. Until adoption of the Chula Vista Gaming Plan. no card table licensed under
the provisions of this code which is maintained or operated in connection with any other
business she" be used for anv card game from _De o'clock a.m. to o.Ine o'clock a.m. of any
I '
I ' :-) 1
Ordinance 2655
Page 9
day and all places which are devoted exclusively to the operation or maintenance of a card
table business shall be kept closed each day from one o'clock a.m. to nine o'clock a.m; and
no card table shall be used for any card game on Sunday except from midnight until one a.m.
(Ord. 2528 ~ 1 (part). 1992; Ord. 1305 ~2 (part), 1970; prior code ~9.1 03(2)).
5.20.130
Drinking of intoxicating beverages prohibited.
Unless otherwise ellowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, no license shall permit the
drinking of any intoxicating liquor in the premises licensed under the provisions of this code.
lOrd. 1305 ~2 (part), 1970; prior code ~9.1 03(3)).
5.20.140
Minors prohibited from patronage or employment.
No person under twenty-one years of age shall be permitted to play any game at any
card table in the city. No person under twenty-one years of age shall be employed where any
card table is maintained in the city unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan.
lOrd. 1305 ~2 (part), 1970; prior code ~9.1 03(4)).
5.20.150
Maximum number of players per table.
Effe('~ive upon adoption of a ...hula Vista Gaming Plan that addresses the subject
matter of this section, but only to the ,extent allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan if more
restrictive than the provisions hereof. there shall be no limit on the number of players
permitted at anyone card table in any game. Until the adoption of the Chula Vista Gaming
Plan. no more than eight players shall be permitted at anyone cr.:d table. lOrd. 1 :;l05 12
(part), 1970; prior code 19.103(5)).
5.20.160
Maximum number of tables on premises.Arrangement.
Unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, no more than eight (8)
tables shall be permitted at any premises licensed as a cardroom pursuant to this chapter,
except that at cardrooms operating under two consolidated licenses, twelve (12) tables shall
be permitted, and said playing area shall be located on the ground floor and the tables shall
be arranged so that the playing surface of each table shall be visible from the sidewalk or
public walk immediately adjacent to the cardroom, unless otherwise allowed by the Chula
Vista Gaming Plan. The holder of a cardroom license may appeal the visibility requirement to
the zoning administrator. lOrd. 2528 11 lpart). 1992; Ord. 2347 13, 1990; Ord. 1305 12
(part), 1970; prior code 19.103(6)).
5.20.170
Supervision of game playing.
All cardrooms and lor card tables licensed under the provisions of this chapter shall be
supervised by the :>perator or an ~ .nployee of the op..Tato~ of the cardroom. to assure that
games plaved on said tab' 's are played strictly in ac...ordance with the terms of thIS chapter
I 1/
-,/
-,x
..~ ..:t. 'I
Ordinance 2655
Page 10
and the provisions of the Penal Code of the state of California. The provisions of this Section
may be modified by the chula Vista Gaming Plan. (Ord. 1305 ~2 (part). 1970; prior code
~9.103(71).
5.20.180
8ets and wagers permitted when.
Effective upon adoption of a Chula Vista Gaming Plan that addresses the subject
matter of this section, but only to the extent allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan if more
restrictive than the provisions hereof, there shall be no limit on bets or wagers in any game.
Until adoption of the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, no bet or wager in any game shall exceed the
sum of thirty dollars, and only table stakes shall be permitted. and no jackpots shall be
allowed unless otherwise allowed. (Ord. 2528 ~1 (part). 1992; Ord. 1952 ~1 (part). 1981;
Ord. 1305 ~2 (part). 1970; prior code ~9.1 03(8}).
5.20.190
Charges for game playing-Maximum designated.
Effective upon adoption of a Chula Vista Gaming Plan that addresses the subject
matter of this section, but only to the extent allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan if more
restrictive than the provisions hereof. there shall be no limit on the charge which may be
collected from any player for the privilege of participating in any game. Until the adoption of
the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, no charg" in excess of thirty.seven ::ld a half cents ($.375) per
hand per player shall be collected from any player for the privilege of participating in any
game. (Ord. 2528 ~ 1 (part), 1992; Ord. 1952 ~ 1 (part). 1981; Ord. 1305 ~2 (part). 1970;
prior code ~9.1 03(9)).
5.20.200
Signs to be posted in cardroom.eontents.
Unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, there shall be posted in
every cardroom in letters plainly visible from all parts thereof, signs stating which games have
been approved for play at said cardroom by the chief of police or chula Vista Gaming Plan,
and stating the charge per hour exacted from each player for the privilege of playing. In
addition to the foregoing, each table shall identify by prominent sign located thereon the game
which is currently being played at said table unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista
Gaming Plan. (Ord. 2528 ~ 1 (part), 1992; Ord. 1305 ~2 (part), 1970; prior code
!9.1 03(1 0)).
5.20.210
License-Revocation criteria.
Licenses for cardrooms may be revoked in the manner and for the reasons set forth in
Section 5.02.180 et seq. of this code or the chula Vista Gaming Plan, and for any violation
of any of the provisions of this chapter or the gaming plan. The city may, but is not required,
to impose a fine in lieu of revocation or institute such other remedy as is permitted in the
Gaming Plan. lOrd. 2528 ~1 (part). 1992; Ord. 782 (part), 1962; prior code ~9.21).
J' " jt
..) !
Ordinance 2655
Page 11
5.20.220
License.Additional grounds for revocation.
Unless otherwise allowed by the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, additional grounds for
revocation shall include:
A. Allowing persons other than those named in the application on file with the city council
to own an intarest in, or have direct management of. such cardroom;
B. Maintaining a greater number of tables than the number set forth in the application;
C. Maintaining such cardroom business upon premises which ara or hava become
unsuitable or an improper place therefor.
D. Violation of the provisions of the gaming plan.
(Ord. 782 (part). 1962; prior code ~9.22).
Subchapter 3.
Horse and Dog Wagering
5.20.230
On-Site and Satellite Horse and Dog Wagering
Notwithstanding anything else to the contrary herein contained, all horse and dog
wager, whether on-site or by satellite, lawfully ellowed to exist at any location in the State
of California, including but not limite:: to, any federal enclave or Native American reservation
contained therein, shall be, and is hereby declared to be, lawfully conducted in the City of
Chula Vista and shall be and is permitted. All such horse and dog wagering, before it may be
occur in the City of Chula Vista. shall be conducted under the auspices of a licensee who has
received a rarmit fr:>m the city to engage in sports book wagering and be conducted pursuant
to the rules and regulations of the city as may be set forth in the Chula Vista Gaming Plan.
as same may be adopted and amended from time to time by resolution after public hearing.
The gaming plan shall further define horse and dog wagering if same is regulated thereunder.
Subchapter 4. Sports Book
5.20.240
Sports Book Wagering Allowed Subject to Gaming Plan
Notwithstanding anything else to the contrary herein contained, all sports book
wagering lawfully allowed to exist at any location in the State of California, including but not
limited 10, any federal enclave or Native American reservation contained therein, shall be, and
is hereby declared to be, lawfully conducted in the City of Chula Vista and shall be and is
permitted. All such sports book wagering, before it may be occur in the City of Chula Vista,
shall be conducted under the auspices of a licensee who has received a permit from the City
to engage in sports book wagering and be conducted pursuant to the rules and regulations of
the city as may be set forth in the Chula Vista Gaming Plan, as same may be adopted and
amended from time to time by resolution after public hearing. The gaming plan shall further
define sports book wagering if same is regulated thereunder.
,
'"
Ordinance 2655
Page 12
Subchapter 5. Casino Gaming
5.20.250
Casino Gaming Allowed Subject to Gaming Plan
Notwithstanding anything else to the contrary herein contained, all casino gaming
lawfully allowed to exist at any location in the State of California, including but not limited to.
any federal enclave or Native American reservation contained therein, shall be, and is hereby
declared to be, lawfully conducted in the City of Chula Vista and shall be and is permitted.
All such casino gaming. before it may be occur in the City of Chula Vista, shall be conducted
under the auspices of a licensee who has received a permit from the city and be conducted
pursuant to the rules and regulations of the city as may be set forth in the Chula Vista Gaming
Plan. as same may be adopted and amended from time to time by resolution after public
hearing. The gaming plan shall further define casino wagering if same is regulated thereunder.
Subchapter 6. Video Gaming
5.20.260
Video Gaming Allowed Subject to Gaming Plan
Notwithstanding anything else to the contrary herein contained, all video gaming
lawfully allowed to exist at any location in the State of California. including but not limited to,
any federal enclave or Native American reservation contained therein, shall be, and is hereby
declared to be, lawfully conducted in the City of chula Vista and shall be and is permitted.
All such video gaming. before it may be occur in the City of Chula Vista, shall be conducted
under the auspices of a licensee who has received a permit from the city and be conducted
pursuant to the rules and regulations of the city as may be set forth in the Chula Vista Gaming
Plan, as same may be adopted and amended from time to time by resolution after public
hearing. The gaming plan shall further define video gaming if same is regulated thereunder.
Subchapter 7. Other Gaming
5.20.270
Other Gambling Allowed Subject to Gaming Plan
Notwithstanding anything else to the contrary herein contained, all gambling lawfully
allowed to exist at any location in the State of California, including but not limited to, any
federal enclave or Native American reservation contained therein, shall be, and is hereby
declared to be, lawfully conducted in the City of Chula Vista and shall be and is permitted.
All such other gambling, before it may be occur in the City of Chula Vista, shall be conducted
under the auspices of a licensee who has received a permit from the city and be conducted
pursuant to the rules and regulations of the city as may be set forth in the Chura Vista Gaming
Plan, as same may be adopted and amended from time to time by resolution after public
hearing. The gaming plan shall further define such other gambling if same is regulated
thereunder. . ,
~PP'~ ", ~, ' b"
, ~)\
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
Presented bY:.!') , _ a~
y::...ltj.<(J I G(~__
Richard P. Emerson
Chief of Police
I
1/
Ordinance 2655
Page 13
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of chula Vista.
California, this 28th day of November, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers:
Alevy, Moot, Rindone, Horton
NAYS:
Councilmembers:
Padilla
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
None
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers:
None
~~
Shirle Horton, Mayor
ATTEST:
'-I2~J4 () rlrt tj
Beverly . Authelet. City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 2655 had its first reading at a regular meeting held on the 21st
day of November, 1995 and its second reading and adoption at a special meeting of said City
Council held on the 28th day of November, 1995.
Executed this 28th day of November, 1995.
I~
'"
Q)
Cl
c:
ell
.r:
U
E
o
o
-0
~
ell
U
"
Q)
'"
o
a.
o
~
ll.
~
o
-
x
.~
-
to
~
" ~ ~ ~ ~!
N Q) - Q) ~
- c: ,., ~ a. ll>
... al al a. II)
,... .r::: 0. 0 " :c O'O:C
'" ~ ~ 0 0 c: al o C"CU
<h CD z <'i '" - . as.....
0. Q) .r::: ~.r:::
a. Co')
Q)
:c ~
~ a>
~t::
~~
00'
o ~
"?2t
...
...
CD "
:c '- B 5
ctSQ)OLL.
:~o......
Q) co: 0 c
0.::>.0'"
o 0" C\I (5
o~...
02t~t5
N c..Q
... CD
Q)
~~
~~
00'
~&
...
...
~ '0 '"
~:S~~ tn
8.ii!!l'1'~~
~a.cr5io~
8. _~ ._' a; [L '-C) 0
28.g-8,'k'7
:lS~o",ll.~
..,jfa~\I) ,...
~-V)-s 5
-
Q) 0 '" CD 0 '" Q) 0 '"
:c c: - - :c c: - :c c: -
0 ~ 0 8.
'" .,; a. '" .,; a. '" .,;
- - ...
. a> I - Q) I - ~ ~
0-'" -'" 0 0-'" t5
'" al c..> Z <Xl al Os c..>
"~ .~ <Xl '"
...t> ...t> 64 Cf,l. '-
<Xl
<Xl
o
"0,,
Q) '" Q)
'" 0 '"
0'0
(38(3
...
o
,.,
'"
"
c:
::>
en
'"
1 Q)
-0 c:::::J
.~~~'~N
-C)....::JC\I
:2 I ~ ~..!.
e a; :I ctI Cd
ll.ll.enll.U
'"
...
'"
>N
"'~
:;'"
.r:::
U
Q)
E
'"
en
-
~
o
Z
,.,
'"
"'''
~ c:
::> ::>
,gen
... c:
N ~
o
,.,
""
"''0
Q) Q)
E l:;:
~'E J!l
~ al
;( ~Ci)
,.,
"" '"
" N
CD ::>
- 0
gJen
5-...:
Q)~
a:
"
Q)
.r::: ...
_ al
'i :E
<Xl NO
... '"
_c:
8
<Xl
~ 0
<Dtjg
~ Q) 0
Cis"'1
,.,00
"'-0
"U...
I'- 0
'"
I CD
i; c::::J
S!:CUC>
.~ 00..:.5 N
-C'....::JC\I
:E1~ClI
e ';;ij ::J ~ (ij
ll.ll.enll.U
... '"
'" -
~c:55
(f}~".S_
8.50-3
~c.>.Q~
ll. U
i
c:
g
"
CD
e--
.- -l1l 5l
co~=c:
N lil 8
,... C'-
-8-
~
~o
~)!
o "a
11.11.
"'""
N
",.
CD
CD';;;
~ 5l
~.!2
"U
I'-
'"
I
c
.. ~ ~
~,,~-~
'5 ~ I
i5::>0l
<\1)11.
- c: _
'" 0 -
" =- .~
Q)"'>
8. ~ .!!!
o ~ ::>
...~.r:::
ll..cU
/. r ~ ~', (
ATTACHMENT #3
li-.il;)
I' I \
,f ,-'."'-'
CD
'"
I
C
'"
...,
I
,...
...
-
o
'"
'"
'"
-
'"
c
'"
0)
o
c
'"
.<::
o
E
o
o
~
-0
~
'"
o
-0
0)
'"
o
0-
o
~
ll-
~
.E
.~
tii
::;:
Q)g~Q)
o oci 5 :is
E~.<::;g
o C
zJl!
-
~ 0)
0):0
t: '"
'" -
:J~
0'0
(j;'"
ll-0
-
'E
:J
o
z
0)
'" '"
0) Iii
:gg
- ~
.... 0)
0-
to
o
-00
0) to
",0
o I
58
..,.
'"
>-
.c
"'-0
0) 0)
E :::
~'E l!!
_was
<( c. en
o >-
0_
0) -
._ C
Cl 0)
~
C ~
'" :J
en'-'
~ ~
0) 0)
0-0-
x
~oroE
---en
~o'"
f!MQ.)
(\1*:0
oB~
~ c."'"
~::::>~
.E
-o!2.
0) '"
"'0 -0
_ C
oci5
Q; ~ ~
0- _~
0-0",
~;ac.
~J::
0)
:0
;g
a;
0)
>-
~
0)
0-
~
0)
0-
o
o
0.
'"
~
-
'E
:J
o
z
'" Q)
Q) ~
:0 Q)
Sg
'" ~
..,. ~
to
o
1:)0
0)0
"'~
o '
58
'"
o
o
>-0
",,,,
1:)~
C I
:JO
en~
o
>-
.c
"'1:)
Q) 0)
E :::
as .- CD
o>E-
- a; <<s
<( c. Ci5
~>-
'w +:
c C
'" ~
Q) ~
'-' :J
0'-'
~ 1ll 0
~Eo
o -~
U")-g~
<h"'0
J::
'"
'"
0) e
D ~ 0>
~~o
(j; >- ~
~~~
'" ,
~
~
~ 0
Q)(!l
-'"
8.'a;
~ll-
~&
'" '"
E ~
o Q)
o 0-
",0
~~
~
'" Q)
0) ~
:0 0)
~g
'" ~
'" ~
....
'"
~~
'" 0
1:)J::
......,.
'"
>-
.c
"'1:)
Q) 0)
E :::
'" .-
e>E.!
- (j; '"
< C1. U5
o~
c C
~ ~
~ ~
LL. ~
~~
o -
01:)
.C
~ 01
~J::
~
Q)
>-
01
0.
~
en
'" Q)
<l:l ~
:0 0
01 E
- ~
~ 0 ~
~:o
~ 01
,....o-~
o
gq ~
"''''
~~
:Jl
e
0>
'0
~
.E '"
x Q)
'" E
E 01
00>
~a;
~
'" Q)
Q) ~
:0 Q)
Sg
~~
to
'"
'" ~
>-:J
01 0
'OJ::
......,.
'"
>0
.c
"''0
Q) Q)
E :::
01 .-
e>ES
_(j;0l
:;;( c..Ci5
0) >-
"';::;
o C
.., 0)
C ::
01 :J
en '-'
~~~
~
0'001
o C
,....=c..
~J::
Q)
:c.... ~
S Q) 0
t: c,
~....-
0'00
'if.
'"
cO
~
~
o ~
8~
N
~
~
o
~ (!l
.E ~ .~
1ll Ell-
E 01 C
o 00
o -
~a;~
o
Z
'" Q)
Q) ~
:0 Q)
Sg
~~
to
'"
~~
01 0
'0'<::
......,.
'"
>0
.c
"''0
Q) Q)
E :::
01 .- Q)
o>E_
_(j;0l
;( 0.00
~as_>-
= "0 >-;:;.
?<l:lE-C
C g ~
Q) ctS 0 l,..,.
E-o:J
w~ (.)
~ ~
~~O)
0'0:0
OcOl
. 01 -
~J::
Q)
:c;
'"
- '"
~~
Q) c,
e>'if.
0lC')
J:: ~
'-'
o
Z
-
'E
:J
o
z
tna>'i'
Q) '" 0
:c;c(!l
01 Q) I
- g"iij
~,-a.
~ ~~
~
~ ~
~.~ 0
~:J9
co 0 "ca
Zll-
'"
'" ~
>o:J
01 0
'OJ::
......,.
'"
>-
J:>
:g'O
E J1l
01 .-
o>E!
~ 01
<( ~ii5
~~>-
~5;
~ 0 a3
(!)Ot:
-a;<~
m:::!.
CD
en
I
C
01
..,
I
....
~
-
o
'"
01
01
-
01
~,
,
/ ; "-I!f
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Q) Q) Q)
Q) c. Q; Q) c. ~ Q) c. ~
c. c. Q) c. Q)
0 -0 >- 0 '0 >- 0 '0 >-
'" '" '"
U) c: C. U) c: C. U) c: C.
.,} '" .", .",
.c: ~.c: ~.c:
<C
Z
<C
Z
<C
Z
-
'E
:J
o
z
-
'E
:J
o
Z
-
'E
:J
o
Z
~ ~ -'" ~ ~
Q) 0 C) (ij 0 m (ij 0
-"'(!) '" 0 (!) I - (!)
o I 'IZ I c: 0 I
C. .- in I- 'e;; '" I- 'e;;
0'" .... a.. a.. 0 a..
....0.. '" '" '" .... '"
CD '" 0
~ z
m m m
CI) CI) ~
Ol ~ Ol ~ '"
>- OJ >- OJ >- OJ
'" 0 '" 0 '" 0
'0 .c: '0 .c: '0 .c:
'" .... '" .... '" ....
'" '" '"
CI)
(ll
C>
c:
'"
.c:
U
E '" CI) CI)
0 '" Q) '"
0 E E E
~
'0 '" '" '"
~ C> C> 0>
'"
U <( <( <( '"
"0 m
I
'" c:
CI) OS
0 ...,
c. >- :z:. >- I
0 c: '" '"
~ ~ '" ~
a.. OS c: '" E c: c: ~
~ OJ '" 'Q) Q) 0 Q) '0
C) ~ ::: ~ ~
.E >- ~ :> '" ~
en OJ OJ co OJ CI)
X C) C) C) '"
.'" Ii ,---- os
- -
os , , os
:::0 / -..,.} 0
c
Village Club Card Room ATTACHMENT #4
429 Broadway Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910
619/426-4542
January 17, 1996
Chief of Police Richard P. Emerson
Chula vista Police Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: Application for modification of Chula vista Municipal Code
as to cardrooms
Dear Chief Emerson:
By letter dated November 13, 1995 to you, I applied for
changes to the Chula vista Ordinance which regulates cardrooms.
since that time, I have met with you, your staff, and other
city staff. We have discussed your concerns and the concerns of
other city staff members. Finally, we have reached a compromise
which I understand adequately addresses all concerns.
Enclosed is a table which shows, in regard to the items for
which I requested changes, the 9/92 Chula vista ordinance, my
request, and in the bottom two rows a compromise for the property
where my cardroom is currently located and for a new location
where I could operate a larger cardroom, should I be able to
locate such a lo~ation and move.
This compromise is acceptable to me. However, if there is
any change, I would like the opportunity to reconsider my
application.
If there is any question, please contact me or my attorney,
Michael A. Green.
Sin~:~elY, y
$77r
HARVEY SOUZA
Encl.
~' i /,
lv'
~
OIl
~
"
..c
U
~
~
c
8
::i
~
"
OIl
"
~
8
"
8
'~
::0
11
:0
~
o
:z:
~
o 8.
:z: ~
to< ~ (1)
ell Cl:I--::::
.,.--
.......s
..
...
~
rr
"
o
:t:
]
.~
~
~
"
C
"0
a
..c
~ ~
8.~
"
",-
'" c..
,... ~
....8.
~
"
t
!!!I
0-
~
8.
"
~
-
8.
8
"!.
-
...
i
.
...
li
.~
.. 0
:0 c
S -
_ 11
~~
... ..
... .
._;:: c::I
N 51 0
- a '=
.,;8~
...
...
8~
.. !l
"il"''''
IS 8 -
- .. 8
u-.
.; 5'
....ll.
.. 8. ..
"il " . 6'0
] U) ~ .5
.~ '- =
... -;._ OIl
e 0 -; fa
Q,. tlOU c..
s
.~ 8
> OIl a
..! N'.,s c
:2 0'\ CI)'-
O - .- "0
'" .. -
_..0
]
o
:z:
u -
't: 2
!!!I OIl
0-...
~ !!
8.-
.t>
..!! 0
.t>-
:~
8. .
~
~~"O
N_!l
... c..~
]
~
~
"
'"
]
o
:z:
...
-i
~ "
"'"
~ ~
N 0
]
:E
:E
e ~
c.."
--;;
g E
.....
~$'
li
"
!
"
:0
S
~ .
8.~
~ ~
z.i8.
~Cl
"'....
- 0
c -
.- - ~
8 .~,!.!
. .t> >
~ ~ ~
~
"
't:
!!!I
0-
~
8.
"
:c
s
8-
o
'"
"'.
-
...
~
..
"
:0
S
o
00
...
*
-5 oJ
~ !t.:
Ei..c ...
....~~
~'s '"
=.- -
~ ~ c
11 c.9
~ .-a
8.] s
i'~ g 8
.- -" a
~-..>
c5 g .~ -g
00 c
:; .,8
.t>. g
~-;;;
" .-
",-5
00
~ ~...
"ilq-o~
IS 8 . C
-u" 8 ::J
-.'"
..:.. 5'
~....
.. 100 U
"8 8. . 6'0
.'":.:.:! N =
.r:J ..,~ N .-
,_ ...::J
..c -;._ OIl
eo::;; a
Q.. tlOU c..
~
's -
~J.~
e Q,-
o .. 1'1
u~~
8 ..
..; 8.
... "
t:' :0
" oJ
" - e
... ~
~8.:O
~
8.
~
OIl
....
o
~
s
Ii
, ~
I .... ~ "" u
'"' u 0 4.) c..
~ ~ .~ ~ :
Q.. l;l"' Q., tr *
"
~
-
8.
8
'"
N
...
11
:5
..
"
:0
S
o
...
...
*
N
-
o
00_ 'll
- - .. ~
4) os II,) C
~:-::O8
...."'s:=
8
1~
o.;,:~
N
.. N U
"8.!!! 6'0
,,= e c
~ J2 '5
..c ._ eo
e - a
.... d Q,
~
's
e ~ c
c.. u .2
e C -
0_1'1
u42]
~
~Cl
"'.... 0
- 0 C
C - ,
.- ... ~ :t
8~ ,!.! g, ,,;
. - >.- t::
~ 1;1 ~ ~;.::
..
1:..
"
~
~
8.
~
..;
...
-5 oJ
c ~.s
Q " ..
c..c ...
~~~
~'s '"
C._ -
,,-
Ci 0 ~
t) C .-
~ .-a
8.] '""
>..... '';: "
~s 8 u
:=..ca
" - >
F 0'-"0
o c :l as
...
N
~
o
OIl
'; *
....*
...
!]
~ g
8."8 1
ill .~ il
11.- u
.";;;::
il .5 '0
o c ~
.!!!' S ~:o
~ a.~ s
.,
"j
/
. I
.E
1:>l
~
u
.E
...
o
...
]
8.
B
>>
~
'E
'&;
...
o
-
'"
...
<;::
ll)
-5
-
:i
'"
~
tU
'"
tU
,g >. 13
cl:::
-0 ::3 'Vi
:i 0
o ::J
~u_
.. 0 u
.~ ClIl,g
.c .~
E-Cl:E
'"
.; 1ii 0
:OCll~
.IS="'"
.- 1ii
~ E _
-goo
=...N
0-00
~~~
.c '"
... ClIl
~.5 ~
r::sVi.o
-.- E
c. >< '"
ll) ll) =
.c >> ...
;; ~ ll)
c. .c
.- c ....0
.c .-
U _ ll)
ll) l! E
-5-~
]~6
U ... ll)
lI<v:::C
ll) ~ .IS
:E 0 .
",- -
o ll) &
u.o
'"
t$:Eb
.0"'>>
ll) 0 tU
01~-s..
c.~ 0\
'Vj E
0,- -5
_.- e 0
z.~ ~ e ~
.t:ll) ...~
8 :€. s ~
O. ~. ll) >>c.._
00 >l 01'~ ::2
Vt ~casVi
~~c:.a'"'"<<I
as = ~ ... '"
U ~.- 8 ~]
><_-U~
GJ":::: GJ <<I bCI:E
"'0'-=.0(/)5=
_~""'~Q:lo
g~:i2E~
u_ot:'" Q)
......u='"O~
,g tUO\ c.:i,c
~.E ~ tl ~ E-
c.o- ~ l.t=o .
= 'E- '"'" V) V)
._ '"'" 0 fI) ~
fI)._ "l.... 0 0
o::c.~o'':::
z2tlo ~
* ll) .~* 0
.c * C'I:l * '"'"
_ * 0.* Q..
'"
...
ll)
>>
tU
-s..
B
.?:;>
~
:a
13
E
'"
-
~
~
-
tU
.c
-
'"
...
ll)
>>
tU
-s..
B
13
ClIl
:a
.c
U
'" ,,;
Jl ~
=
'" ll)
'" >
= ~
'E =
ClIlO
.E 1
E tU
~.c
Minutes
November 21, 1995
Page 15
ATTACHMENT #5
and the prospect that those accounts loaned to would have the prospective of paying the loans back. When it was
a major account with on-going deficits and large deficits it was appropriate to apply those safeguards. 'That should
have been identified to Council and be boped that would never happen again. Council sbould be apprised and given
options to consider. The reserve funds were for a specific issue. The ,!uarterly financial reports should include
any negative balances and statrs RCOmmendations to future proj.:<:tions. That should also be included in the budget
analysis.
Councilmember Padilla stated in the aggregate the City did not lose money and the overall financial balances of the
City were not in the red. He felt it was a big deal in some regards because of what it was indicative of. It was
obvious from some of the answers supplied that some of the funds were not done so they could be pooled for a
greater rate of return. A situation was in place wbere there was unlimited authority for the manager to move funds
between accounts. Therefore, the Council was not aware of what was going on and did not have the opportunity
to decide bow to allocate the funds. It was indicative wh~re the Redevelopment Agency was concerned of
unreasonably spending beyond what was reasonably expected in revenues in certain funds. 'That was deficit
spending. The report lICknowledged that there was a problem and it needed to be fixed. Therefore, Council was
being asked to look at taking reserve funds to correct the situation. He questioned what would happen if the City
did not have a reserve fund and what the impact would be nn the general fund.
Mr. Powell responded that the next alternative would be to seek a source of funds outside of the City on a loan
basis. Given the Agency's fiscal status be did not feel the City would be able to obtain sucb a loan without the
General Fund as a co-signer, it would be an expensive loan.
Councilmember Padilla stated if the Agency defaulted nn the loan the general fund would be responsible for the
loan. There was some exposure to the general fund due to over spending in large accounts in :he Redevelopment
Agency. It could be corrected and be unJerstood wbat was being done and the magnitude of the problem. The
relationship of the Redevelopment Agency fiscal picture to the general fund was the real problem.
Mayor Horton did not feel that iDter;:retation was correct.
Councilmember Padilla responded that was his opinion. The Council could not solve problems until they agreed
what they were. It was important to acknowledge the relationship between the Agency and general fund and what
the potential impacts were. If it was not a problem the item would not bave been brougbt forward to Council with
RCOmmended changes. He commended Mr. Powell for bringing the item forward to Council. He did not
appreciate being put in the position of hav;ng to take from a restricted fund to correct a situation that should have
never bappened.
Councilmember Moot stated Council bad been going over the Redevelopment Agency issues for over half the time
he had been on the Council. He understood it the first time and that it was something that needed to be corrected.
He also understood that the item before them was a symptom of that same issue. He felt all Council understood
that it needed to be corrected and that it was serious. There was a continuing obligation for bonds on Town Centre
I and II of over $1 million/year for 20 years. That created a debt, the economy turned down, and redevelopment
projects dried up. It bad to be dealt with and the Council bad developed a plan to deal with it and he felt they
needed to move on.
RESOLUTION 18074 OFFERED BY COUNCll..MEMBER MOOT, reading of the text was waived, passed
and approved 3.2 with Padilla and Rindone opposed.
0/ 25.1 ORDINANCE 2655 AMENDING CHAPTER 5.20 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW IN
CHULA VISTA ANY FORM OF GAMBLING ALLOWED AT ANY OTHER LOCATION \\1THIN THE
STATE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF AND QUALmCA nONS UNDER A GAJ\ffiLlNG PLAN ADOPTED
BY RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCll.. (first readirtl!l . It bas come to the attention of the City Attorney that
the State bas adopted SBlOO which will become effective on and after 1/1196 and whicb proports to prohibit cities
from amending their gaming ordinance to expand gaming in that jurisdiction for at least three years. This
prohibition on local control of gaming will probably be extended beyond 1999 if a comprehensive scheme for the
regulation of gaming is allowed in the State. Staff rOC"mmends Council place the ordinance on first reading and
sc' :dule a special meeting for the second reading. (( ,ty Attorney)
I h. Boogaard stated lbere were two proposed amendments to the ordinance before Council. The first amendment
would allow the manager and police chief 10 bave mandatory input to any gaming plan or amendments to it lbat
! ~,,/
..' /r....
November 21, 1995
Page 16
Council would consider. No gaming plan could be considered except after a public bearing and receiving comments
from the police chief and city manager. Under the gaming plan it would be mandatory that the chief of police
would bave veto authority over the permittee. The second change would add text under Section 5.20.010 similar
to the text for sports book, casino gaming, and video gaming to on-site and satellite borse and dog wagering. The
ordinance was a provision to protect the Home Rule provision of the City to license and regulate gaming and until
a gaming plan was adopted it could not go into effect. Provisions of SBIOO were brougbt to staff's attention by the
current licensee requesting various expansions of the cardroom ordinance to allow them more tables, greater bours,
greater Dumber of players per table, and larger wa~... In order for the ordinance to go into efiect Council would
bave to place it on first reading with a second reading before the end of November so the 30 day referendum period
following the adoption of the ordinance would allow it to become effective prior to 1/1/96. After reviewing the
proposed changes with the cardroom licensee, they bad asked for a sligbtly less risk amendment to the ordinance
in five categories they bad been soliciting changes in. Compromise language stated .The gaming plan would bave
to specifically address the subject matter of the section and then, only to the exleDt allowed in the gaming plan, if
the gaming plan was more restrictive than these provisions". The City Manager concurred that the change was
acceptable and did not pose any greater risk to the City and be concurred. The applicant wanted to add to Section
5.20.010 five things the gaming plan should try to address. He did not bave a problem with the expansion of the
list, but wanted the language of Section 5.20.010 to be amended to read .Whicb gaming plan shall contain sucb
regulations as Council deems appropriate including, but not limited to, the following elements ....... That would
give Council greater authority to expand or contract sucb regulations as they felt appropriate.
Councilmember Rindone questioned if the proposal by one of the licensees was a place bolder so that if a gaming
plan was developed those five items would be considered for inclusion.
Mr. Boogaard responded that the difference between tbeir proposal and his proposal required a subsequent adoption
of a gaming plan that specifically autborized more players per table. Their proposal attempted to enact that change
at the present time, but it would not become effective until a gaming plan was adopted. The gaming plan could,
if Council wanted, be more restrictive. Under their plan it was an ordinance change that allowed the expanded
rights at the present time, but would not be effective until the galT';ng plan was adopted at a later date. The
proposal delegated authority to regulate gaming by a subsequent resolution whicb could expand their rigbts. It was
a technical enhancement of his proposal and reduced the argument that the licensee's ..gbts were enhanced by the
ordinance befo.~ the effective date of SB I 00.
. Rod Davis, 233 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, representing the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, stated
the business community was concerned witb anotber run at Home Rule by the State. He felt it was a situation
where the State was setting itself up as the one and only licenser of gaming in the State and taking the revenues.
The Chamber supported the control of gaming by the people wbo bad t~ live with the consequences and would
receive the benefit. Personally. he preferred not baving to go outside of the City in order to gamble.
. Michael A. Green, 535 "H" Street. Chula Vista. CA, representing Village Club Cardroom (Harvey Souza),
stated the language submitted was to make sure that they preserved their rights. The law stated that there could be
DO amendment to an ordinance which would expand gaming. He hoped staff would return on 12/19 with a gaming
plan for Council review so they could bave something in place so they could be certain they avoided any problem
with SB100 as it regarded cardrooms.
Councilmember Rindooe questioned if action by Council at that time would be an ordinance and, therefore, require
a 30 referendum period before becoming effective.
Mr. Boogaard responded that under the authority of the ordinance the Council would adopt a resolution instituting
a gaming plan and would be able 10 amend that with a resolution. Any rights granted the third week in December
would be done by a resolution. but be was uncertain that met with the schedule as set forth by the Police Chief.
Mr. Goss stated the present cardroom ordinance specifically limited the number of tables and questioned if the
Dumber of units would be limited in the future or based upon the present formula.
Mr. Boogaard replied that any amendment or additional number of units would be set forth in the gaming plan.
Tbe Dumber of tables could be expanded by the resolution in the gaming plan.
Councilmember Padilla stated be was Dot comfortable with any ordinance that expanded gaming within '':Ie City.
He understood Mr. Green and b', client's perspe<,tives in terms of business and competitioo. It wi.< clear that
'/ ,'/[1
j '---'i /
Minutes
November 21,1995
Page 17
SBIOO would limit competition. He further understood the mechanism that would be employed in order to preserve
control for the next three years and possibly beyond on a Statewide level if the State approved gaming or expanded
gaming. He would not be surprised to see moves by the State to remove the cities land use authority and other
authority cities had regarding gaming establishments. He was very concerned regarding the potential nf having the
City tie it's economic hcpes to gaming or gambling becaw;e he would not support the expansion of cardrooms.
casino gambling. video gambling, etc. at any time. He did see the utility of the issue regardin..: Home Rule versus
the State talcing the local authority away. In cases of major expansions of gaming within the State be questiODed
if Council would support language, if a measure was presented to the citizens, a concurrent ballot questiODed asking
the public if they wanted gaming expanded within the City. That would allow for Home Rule and also let the
citiz.ens affected by major expansions of gaming to decide what they wanted for their community.
Counci/member A1evy stated he respected Counci1member Padilla's concerns. He supported the item in order to
maintain Home Rule. Whether any of them were on the Council at the time, the issue of a major casino in Chula
Vista. would require public discussions and hearings and would not be automatically passed.
Mayor Horton stated no Councilmember was supporting a Las Vegas type of atmosphere for Chula Vista.
Councilmember Moot slated gaming was the top issue at the League of California Cities meeting. There was no
doubt at a Slate level that they wanted to have total control and revenues generated. He felt there would be a great
debate as to whether the Slate would adopt casino gambling. It was only prudent for the City to not leave those
decisions in the hands of other people. The Council needed to protect their ability to control what was good for
the City.
Councilmember Padilla Slated if the State was going to take control from local jurisdictions they were going to do
it and nothing was going to prevent it from happening. By talcing action the Council was not absolutely secu.u,g
local control over gaming issues. In terms of SBlOO, Council was doing what they had to do, but it would DOl stop
the Slate from talcing action. He would feel more comfortable with language that stated if there was legislation
passed that approved wide-spread gaming that it go '0 the voters of the City and not just require three votes by the
Council.
Mr. Boogaard slated if Council wanted greater control they could require a super-majority vote of Council, multiple
public hearings, etc. He recommended Council amend the proposed ordinance by changing Section 5.20.001
to read in the first paragraph "Which gaming plan shall contain such I't'gulations as the Council deems
appropriate including, but not limited to, the following 12 items: 1) types of gaming allowed, including but
not limited to card games, on-site horse and dog wagering, sports book, casino games, video gambling, etc.;
2) hours and days of operations; 3) location of gaming; 4) auditing of gaming establislunents; S) licensing fees;
6) maximwn nwnber of players per table; 7) bets and wagers pennitted; 8) charges for gaming; 9) licensing,
including nwnber of licensees and consolidation; 10) drinking of the intoxicating beverages; 11) maximwn
nwnher of tables on premises; and U) every aspect or operation of gaming establislunents". Amend Section
5.20.230 to include the language in his supplemental memo of 11/17 dealing with on-site and satellite horse
and dog wagering. Amend Section 5.20.110, UO, ISO, 180, and 190 as set forth on the Wonnation
distributed to Council incorporating the proposed consensus language that the City and existing IiceDSee
agreed upon.
ORDINANCE 2655, AS AMENDED BY THE CITY ATIORNEY, PLACED ON FIRST READING BY
COUNCILMEl\ffiER ALEVY, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-1 with Padilla opposed.
Mr. Boogaard stated a special meeting would be required for the second reading of the ordinance.
Mayor Horton stated a special meeting would be called on 11/28/95 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in order
to consider the second reading of the ordinance.
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
Items pulled: none. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order.
~/
,v
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF TIlE CITY COUNCIL
OF TIlE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Tuesday. November 28, 1995
6,05 p.m.
Council Chamben;
Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
I. ROLL CALL:
PRESENT:
Counci1members A1evy, Moot. Padilla, Rindone and Mayor Horton
ALSO PRESENT:
John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Auorney; and Beverly
A. Authelel, City CIeri<
2. PLEDGE OF >\(,LEGIANCE TO TIlE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
BUSINESS
3. ORDINANCE 2655 AMENDING CHAYTER 5.20 OF TIlE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW IN
CHULA VISTA.o.'Y FORM OF GAMBLING ALLOWED AT ANY OTIlER LOCATION WITHIN TIlE
STATE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF AND QUALIDCA TIONS UNDER A GAMBLING PLAN ADOPTED
BY RESOLUTION OF TIlE COUNCIL (second read;"" and adontion) . It has come to lbe atteDtion of the City
Attorney that the State has adopted SBlOO which will bec<:me effective nn and after 111196 and which proports 10
prohibit cities from .",endu,g their gaming ordinance to expand gaming in that jurisdiction for alleasl three years.
This prohibition on local control of gaming will probably be extended beyond 1999 if a comprehensive scheme for
.he regulation of gaming is allowed in the State. Staff recommend, Council place the ordinance on second reading
and adoption. (City Attorney)
Councilmember Moo! stated it was his understanding that the gaming plan would be brought back to Oluncil in
different stages.
Richard Emerson, Chief of Police. responded that there was a desire to have the gaming plan cardroom component
brought to Oluncil before the end of the year. Staff would be looking at that, but were uncertain that it could be
completed in that short of a time frame. No other portion of the gaming plan would be brought forward al that
time.
OlUI!cilmember Moot stated that everything wou1d then remain status quo for the foreseeable futUre except for some
changes to the existing cardrooms in Cnula Vista.
Chief Emerson respond:>d that was correct and there would be public bearings on anything that WIIS brought forv.ard
to Council for consideration.
ORDINANCE 2655 PLACED ON SECOND READING AND ADOPTION BY COUNCn.MEMBER ALEVY,
reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-1 with Padilla opposed.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
,} I
~
RA"-.:)A..l..l 0 HU83ARD-
De~ to h.ts frlends-is i1 man
who m",kes no lade plans
wd dispenses money with
an unstintlng h.nd, After
amassing a fortune in auto-
mobile glass nunuf.cruring,
Hubbard was .ble to indulge
a lifelong passion for horse
racmg !-Ie spent S20 nullion
in 1991 renovating Ingle-
wood's Hollywood Park
Racetrack. Three yem later
he .dded . S25-million
casmo, the fint ever located
at a track. Its mammoth
neon sign, v.ith "CASI:-";O"
spelled out in 30-foo< letters,
is visible from an altltude
of four miles,
The complex includes
karaoke suites, three restau-
rants, a massage room, a
baromhop, and large, c1osed-
circuit television screens that
allow card players to wager
at any track in California or
Hong Kong, With 60,000
square feet of floor sp.ce
and roughly 150 tables, the
casmo is the tlurd iaJ ,;est in
the state, one of the best
managed, and easily the
most ecumenical. Its popu-
lar AsIan games, for instance,
are calJed Califomio Casino
Games and are played in a
room "ith ethnicalJy neutral
an deco decor instead of the
traditional red wall. and
lucky dragons.
Hubbard, CEO of Holly-
wood Park Operating Com-
pany, has brave hopes that the
publicly traded corporation
could become the Wal-Man
ofCahfornia gambling ",th . nem'ork of casinos statewide, "We
han' Compton-the Cr;.'stal Park Casino-under construc-
tion:- he .;.Jy~. uThe:re \\"4.$ a vote of the city council in Stockton
.appro\1ng J nc."\V card-club orciinance there. So we've more than
got our h.llld, tiill:.
RaceTrJck clu~ are the current fashJOn: The Santa Anita
track m Arcadaa is supporoni: a group of u:;veStors planning a
~
~
~
~
~
,
= ~ ~ C
'. i Z E C
~ \ ::
, -
~
ATTACHMENT #6
casrn() in nc'Jrby Irv.mcWe, and Golden Gate Fielili in Alban':
has r-ceived permission to open a club. At the begmrung of th~
year, Califc-:-nia had 2S 1 clubs and 5,429 table" eitht'r in use or
plm "d. According to Gaming and Wagering Businw, ~" .,
these clubs amount to S8.5 billion, or 91 percent of al'
c.un-room bets in the country. California ranks thlrd-
behind only Nevacl. and New Jersey-in ganung proceeds
with estimated .nnual wagers of S12,5 billion exclus:vt c'
lnd'an gaming,
.!Jut unlike Nevada .nd New Jersey, C.llforma r,,,
no statewide gaming comrnhsion. Some local ca.rd-rocrr.
ordinances don't require revenue audits, and none req'.ll.!es
the clubs to keep track of wagers. And that, accordang to
law enforcement, has opened the door to money laundenng,
embezzlement, and Joan sharking, much of it tied to As"n-
based crime syndacates known as tnads
"Are the clubs Iaundnes? There's no doubt about It," "")'
state Attorney General Daniel E. Lungren."The VaCuurr.
created by a lack of proper oversight is a ~mendou> seducoor.
for cnminal actiVlty because [gambling) involves cash,"
Adds Steve Telliano of the AG's office, "Califorrua care
rooms ha\'e been idemified by at least t\\"o national 50Ur'~-
the JUICce Department and the U.S, Treasury Depanmnt,
FinanciaJ Crimes Enforcemem Net\vork--as the best oppor.
tunicy to launder money in the Uruted SUtes. Let's Just s~y tn.e
opportuniry is huge, But we don't know the SlZe of the prob-
lem because we don't have the agents to tell u>,"
State prosecutors have been buildang . case for mcreasee
regulation since the early 1980s, when the Clucago crime
syndicate established a beachhead at the Cahforni. B,..l~
Card Club in the city of Bell, Seven inda\iduah linked to Cle
syndacate were indacted in 1984 by a federal grand Jut\' and
four were convicted of racketeermg, In 1987, H mda\1d\Lili
associated ,vith the Garden City Card Club in San Jose were
indicted for skimming approximately S4 milllon m club
revenues over an eight.year penod beginning in 1977, All
evenNalJy pleaded guilty or no contest to the charges, Ev,'r.
v,ithout beneS, of an oversight commmion, prosecutors h,l':e
indicted individuals recently at a half~dozen clubs in I.'JS
Angeles, Alamecl., and Santa Clara Counties.
The most significwt case involved the comiction of four
men in 1990 for laundering S12 million j, drug profits
by invesring in the Bicycle Club Casino, located in Bell
Gardens. U.S. v Kra"'tr (SD Fla., No. 879-CR-NCR),
Through asset seizure .nd forfeiture, the US M.rshals
Service ended up controlling 36 percent of the club and
operating it as a trustee, But the mmhals couldn't prevent
money laundering and loan sharlcing from going on under
their noses by indJ\iduals alJegedly tied to the Wo Hop To,
one of the Hong Kong triads that dominate ,he annual
S5-bilhon trade in "China white" heroin, A co-owner of
the club, George G, Hardie -: Las Vegas, w., mdlcted
in the underl),ng schemes last Jun,
CALIFOIl.N'A ...AwyER. 43 OECE""\BE~ ilJ95
.--
\.:FN '~~ I;}'~+ H.'~:~$;~.~~fp:~:Ft,O.F~~T._y.'N'ITY,~T1l,LA~t~Q. E ~,iJM~J~ E Y IN
'.l-', ..::~~. j _.) ~1:l~~'. -"~I ,/ . -~'"'!~~ r.", 0" " 'Lt...;._"'''' .,.-.~,-'" ,t;r- .~.'1:"'J-4'I~ .-:....-' - ..
. -, "" :'j~,';h' '~':'*S1~~;:<-':~/' i'.,',.;, : . ""', :,' "'~"".~iP'::'. '~, ':,',
Seeking legitimacy for their casin()s; many of the largest Gorden> and Artichoke Joe, in San Bnmo, most cud rooms' ,
owners J'ubli~y support LUIlgr~n'syush for a ~..pUng had just three or four ubles. "When I Was growing up in
, commissio,n. ';The card clubs, ~~ve,.b~e:n. o;o.'e,o<, less Southern California:', says .Lun~n. "I ~ought they were,
.,indeperidmt_,,,~ble to do,l, woJl't?zt, a,nyth!ng they want, but 'mom-and-popsrores. l'd.'eentheni by .t;he..sideofthe fr-oev."Y':'
close.:'S2)'> H5>PYWood Parlc'~ ~~bbard._ :'We'veprobab)Y ~l' and I'd n~ paid ~ at;=ti?n.':",;" .'; ,/ . :':.' ":
thel~dirig p~p?nem oflegis1aaon for,the last three Y='. . All that began to, chIDge m 1 ~~: whei:l the Huntmgton'
Wirhout .i"cTeased regul2tion, even the best card-tlub Park Casino anempted to introduce a game ~ed Texas
operators conc~de they can't keep money launderers gut. Hold'em, a variety of stUd poker. A municipal ordinance per- ,
Hollywood Park's director of marketing, Michael Alben, was mitted only draw poker and declared all other games illegal,
asked what would prevent someone from walking in the dpor The casino sought an injunction, arguing that Texas Hold'em
with $100,000 in drug proSts. only to emerge a shon time was really a form of draw poker.
later with a large and perfectly legal check that could be The club lost, but gambling consultant Rose took up the
mced no further? "Nothing," says Alben. "You can't stop cause in PoUr P/Jzy<r magazine and later as an expert witness in
something 1ike that.': \ dozeas of other court. cases. Rose conceded that Texas
,',. ..- Hold'em was a version of stUd pekd and aclaiowIedged that
THE NATION HAS EXPEFtIENCED THFtEE" GFtEAT W~VES thean.orn:ey g~nerallUd determined uJ_1947'that ..II srod
oflega1ized gambling, each separated by a generation. The first poker games were illegal under 'section 330. He contended.
began in the colonial period and lasted roughly into the 1820s. however, that the Legislature in 1885 banned only a single,
The second began after the Civil War and survived into the first specific game-stud-horse poker. whicb no one could
decade of the present century. Both ~ ~ back because of remember how to play. In Rose's view, all other forms ofstJd
widespread criminality at the casinos and the rampant bribery poker must be legal, even if the lawmakers a century befNe
of public officials. We are now experiencing the third wave. had never heard of them.
"Gambling always reO)"ins illegal as long as historical The argument slowly gained ground. In 1987 a supenor
memory lasts:' says !. NeIso,! Rose. a prof~or at Whittier ~ourt judge permined srod-poker games in Los Angeles
Law Scl>:ool ,!rl ~ Angeles :wbo, ~5:~~.?,for the gaming , Co'7"'Y' H'!~ti"gto" l..~k,r:::l~b .Corp. v City of H""ti"guo"
.h ~. dusrry. "In America, : ,,'! ," "',. ,;, '" , . ,,' :, .", '... Pork, No. C550991,
-;:.-""~ :'siorical memory lasts, Later. the First Appel-
""'-:,_:.1. ut 70 Y=':' .: . late District in San
':"J.;'~ ':;,Califonua was a gam_ Francisco ruled that the
. ~"~.l'ler's l'andise in the days starotory ban on srod-
the Bear Flag Republic. borse poker was not
-he state Constitution a blanket prohibioon
",~12-!0.p.J~. l~~"': Tlbbetu v V"" D< &mp
:sWev"r"'~ail<Hil.1872',, (1990) 222 Ch3d 389,
'~L~gtiia~e p~ohib: That caSe became the
f<td' :b~ag game( wedge Wt eventually
liye<! with cards aad l"fi'1;..d the Cantonese
"~..:plu~.JarO. monte. game of pai gow-
aleue. IarisquOnet, rouge traditionally pl:ryed ",th
t noire, "arid rondo. See domino-like ti1es-L'~
en C ~330. In 1885 shifted the battle book
t outlawed stud-horse to the state Legislature,
_ " _.-=- ker, tan. fan-tan, seven- "'You bad three fac-
~..'_ :,d-,a-hai!'. rwenty-o,ne, tions that cancelled
~' .' ~.~~~1<ey" " each other out when
~L"~,-,-W!,;...,,, :<.-P.ap,lf,,4~;.n ~~_ ~Tt (hey a-ied to lobby
'"::~~.:. i''''''!'''' "nC1O \lJe; ..~ the Legislature," saY5
,;....'~ . f 10ca1' governments to Rose. "The big club,
control card games not '. ., ' ,i'" ,r," _. .. wanted the Asian games,
specifically prohibited by sectio~~:;O. ~ Quh'v'~ the small clu~justw.nted to play cards, and law enforcement
Court, 48 CA2d 131. But for decades, casino owners continued didn't want "!'y gambling. Basically, they fought back ano
to offer only draw poker, and panguingue, a rummy-like forth over section 330 during the 1980., and tben Jaw
cud game from the Philippines. "w.ith the exception of a few enforcement j~ gave up. The clubs got together and pushed
supernurket-5ized clubs. such as, ~e,.Normandie Club'in through the ~ting of stUd-borse poker in 1991."
t
,
,
;
!
~
~
o
~
.
.
t)fCEMIE" 1'''5 44 CA\..tfOANIA LAWY~~.
. .j'_,__,.. - - :',' (1.-:3 :..~,. -'
k.b"",~~:;o"":,::l'l't."","!..~"-:;~~,"':;'=:j;,,,,.;,t'f~~'7t.'':io:~.:::JEii>~~'.:.;~~~.~j,V:~::?f~W:~';;~T:1!n~-:~
BY THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT AS
THE UNITED STATES."
~
,
1
Suddenly it w:lS boom times for the card-room owners.
"I began getting phone calli from ~'body involved with the
clubs," Rose says. "They'd soy, 'You mean we can play any
gam', that's not on the list" I said yes, It's aM'ays amazed me
how you can po)' millions of dollan to build a facility and net
know what you can do imide it,"
For ownen, the riming couldn't have been better, Proposi-
tion 13 taX limi~tions had been followed by a "'ave of factory
closings in the industrial belt south of Los Angeles, Card
clubs appeared to answer a cash-strapped city council's praye"
for income. "Getting [the council's) commitment is an old
game the card clubs play very skillfully," says Dr, Durand
Jacobs, a psychologist afliliated with Loma Linda University
Medical School who studies gambling addictlon and
itS causes. "They form close affiliations with a number of
councihnembe" who are desperate for more income without
raising taXes,"
NC'\'o' casinos soon opened in the Los Angeles suburbs of
Bell, Corroneree, and Bell Gardens, where fees and taXes paid
by the 170-~ble Bicycle Club Casino accounted for more than
half the municipal budget. The new clubs introdl1ced hybrid
games such as California Blackjack--the winning hand added
up to 22 rather than the forbidden 21. And with an eY" to the
growing Asian clientele, the owne" transformed panguingue
into Super Pan 9, a fast-paced, high-stakes casino game, In pai
gow, pOts of $70.000 are not unknown, and as many as
25 hands can be played i" an hour, AsIan games at the Bicycle
Club soon occupied 20 percent of the space and reponeelly
2ccounted for 60 percent of the profits,
,
I
1
'I
,\
~
~t
'I
;1
'j
d
I
,
\
I
!
.
I
,
,
!
,
,
I,
1
.
j
~
IF A STATE POlTS NO SPEED LIMITS ON ITS HIGHWAYS,
some people d:-ive recklessly; if it permits gambling, crime
occurs. According to a 1992 report by then-San Diego
County clisttict attorney Edwin L. Miller Jr" the introducoon
of high-stakes pai gow games soon attracted the attenD on of
the mW1 Hong Kong-based ttiads: the Wo Hop To, the Chiu
Chao, the 14](, and the BIg Four, as well as similar groups
based in Taiwan.
In the mid-1980s. Chu Kong-Yin, aka Alfred Chu, took
over the pai gow concession at the Key Club in Emeryville,
just north of Oakhnd. "The Key was where it s~ned," says
Sergeant Harry Hu, an Asian crime investigator with the
Oakland Police Department. "Chu was a Red Pole-an
enforeer---for the Wo Hop To. They recruited a bUllch of
guys from O>.kland md trained them to be deal.,. and loan
sharks." In the Bay Are2, the Wo Hop To soon displaced the
W.h Ching gang .s local crime lord, lea cling to . series
of murde" and reta!i.tions that extended intO the 1990..
While the Wo Hop To worked Northern California,
the Wah Ching evolved into the "most developed Asian crim-
inal group on the West Coast" with control of "most
i
.
i
.
;,
."
;
.
;~ ~
, .
1.' !
1 !
L, J. DeN. is 0 notionolly teCotnized investitcni.... reporter bosed in
/lroolUyn. New Yorlt,__ '
'. ~. .'. ./:.~':..
_. ~--s.c.;.1..y
:.:",>-
'., ,-#"'" .
.
of the leg.l .nd
illegal p.i gow
gambling at the
card clubs in
,he Los Angeles
area," according
to the sentenc-
ing memonndwn
filed by the U.S.
attorney in Los
Angeles for .
convicted loan-
shark operator at
the Bicycle Club.
Other interesting inclividuili tried their hand at ownmg ,
club. California fireworks king W. P.trick Moriarty .nd
Frank J. Sansone--a floor nunager of the MGM Grand U1
L.s Vegas who had ties to the Balistrieri crime famil~' of
Milwaukee-opened the $20-million Commerce Clu'o
Casino, the s~te's largest card room, in 1983. W,thin sevet
week5, the club closed bec.use of insolvency and alleged
poor business practices, Though the club reopened under
new owne"hip, Moriarry and S.nsone were mclicted for
bribing three Corroneree officiah to obtain their operaong
license, Moriarty pleaded guilty to wire fraud, Sansone wa,
comicted of mail fr.ud. and the officiah r'..ded guilty to
"bribery-related charges,"
The mounting number of cases prompted the LegtUtLJ"
to pass the only recent gambling control bill, the Ganu"?
Registration Act of 1984 (Bus & p C ~ 19800 et seq), The act
permits the AG's office to check the background of license
applicants, examine books, inspect premises, md seize illegal
equipment. But jurisdiction is clivided between local police
and the attorney general's Gaming Registration Program,
which has a staff of three to process card-room applicaoo"'
"ithin the required 180-day period.
"There are no state laws to oversee how the club~ ;IUd.;1
their accounts. and most of the local agencies don't have those
provisions," soys Debbie Wiley, former manager of the rege"
tration unit. "Basically, the clubs are .ble to run amok, If you
look at the way they are regulated, it's terrible. It's a joke"
Organized crime laughed hardest. In 1988 the K,'.
Club's Alfred Chu was arrested and convicted On imnugT"
tion viobtions. He was replaced by Chong Bing-Keung,
aka Peter Chong, another Wo Hop To member from Hong
Kong. In 1990 !Um Kwong Fung, a businessman with
.1Ieged ties to twO Hong Kong triads. .nd his wlfe
2ttempted to bribe a Department of Justice special agent to
help secure an operating license for Emeryville's King Midas
Club, Fung fled to Hong Kong; his wife was app..hendec!
and pleaded guilty to bribery.
In No;ember 1991 the U.S. Senate's Conuruttee on Go\'
errunenul Affairs f~und 'th~t uth.. 'Po Hop To is active u;
. :"1'~.:-~:.-,: ';:- '.' Continued on pa.ge 83
'. :-~: :,7.:~~;:.'\;'>:?:;~", '-,
C.A.1.1FORNIAtAWYER 45 DECEMBER 1995
,;
"
r:
Fast Shuffle
,
.
Continued from pale ..5
many of the 'legal' card clubs in
Emeryville. San Bruno, and San Jose."
Since then a specUI police task force Ius
scattered the Wo's Bay AIea operations,
but no one in law enforcement believes
its members have gone very far. In 1993
an Asian games contractOr at the Bicycle
Club Casino named Hollman Cheung,
who allegedly has ties to the Wo Hop To,
was convicted of running a loan-sharking
operation at the club, This year Bicycle
Club Casino co-owner Hardie was
indicted for money laundering, facili-
ating a drug tranSaction. and skimming
$11 million with Cheung's assistance.
"There are all kinds of ways to
scam or bounder money in a card-room
operation," sa)"s Wilcy, "If you can think
of five, there are probably 10 more."
:/
STATE AND fEDERAL LAW
emorcemem agents com end the possi-
bilities for crime at the clubs are almost
limitless. For instance, according to a
sheriff's deputy affidavit filed in 1988 for
a search warrant at the California Bell
Club, invesogaral'$ found imbalances at
the cashier's cage. relatives or consultants
on the payroll who performed no work,
Slacks of wonhless checks cashed for club
associates, and an employee who salted
drop boxes with e"'ra chips to inflate
able revenues. The affidavit alleged the
club included a phantom pai gow
department created by management in
1986 to skim profits, Partly as a result of
the investigations. the Bell was closed
and reopened as the Regency Card
Club and Casino, In 1992 the state
Department of Justice discovered the
new owner had fled the country with
money stolen from the club, and it was
closed again after e"'ensive litigation.
The most lucrative scams involve
the cashier's cage. At many clubs. the
cages operate as financial institu-
tions that conduct cash transactions,
accept money for depo,;t, cash checks,
extend credit, make wire transfers,
and rent safe-deposit boxes. These
activities are nomin:ally governed by
the federal Bank Secre~' Act (31 use
S5312(a)(2\(U)), but its provisions are
not uoifomily enf,!rced.
~
If skimming is easy, laundering mOney
is a snap, The clubs have little oppottUC
nity to monitor cash flow beause gam_
blers bet against each other, not the
house, "Let me sketch out how simple
naundering) is," Lungren say>. "Some-
one comes in with perhaps $ 1 0,000,
plays the game, and loses S500 inten-
tionally. He comes back to the cashier
with S9,500 and gets a receipt for his
game earnings. He's converted that
money from dirty to clean.
"Have you ever seen one of those
receipts?" asks Lungren. "It would prob-
ably have nothing on it except the guy's
first name and a brief description, 'Male
Caucasian, 35 years of age.' Boom.
There's no way you're going to identifY
somebody that way,"
Under the federal money-laundering
statutc:;s, card clubs are required to report
transactions ofSlO,ooo or more (see IRC
~60501). If an individual makes a
series of smaller trans.actions-called
structuring---<he club is required to file a
suspicious tr.m5.action ~port. But in the
absence of oversight, a complicit or negli-
gent management can fail to record such
transactions, Moreover, federal law does
not regard chips as money; if a manager
or careful launderer convertS cash into
chips and deposit> them at the cage, no
report is required. The owner of the
~e account will owe axes-the cost of
doing business-when he withdraw> his
alleged winning;,
One of the most recent scams makes
use of automated credit authoriza-
tions. Criminals using stolen credit
cards or account numbers forge checks
and deposit them in the cardholder's
account. "CHd companies credit
an account when a payment arrives.
without waiting for the check to clear:'
saY' ~e Waggoner, a u.s. Secret Service
agent in the Sane. Ana office. "So [the
criminals] send in 'booster checks: then
go down to the club, insert the card in
one of the [Comm-Check] machines,
and take the check to the cashier's win-
dow. They might have 10 cards they
play to the tune of S35,000 a pop. Then
they either toss the cards or declare
bankruptcy, If we follow this crail, we
could probably go deep into why card
clubs exist:'
"There are ceruin clubs in Southern
California that alwaY' come to pc' ce
attention in ter IS ofJoan slurkers. money
laundering, and fonow-home robbene;:'
"'Y' Sergeant Bill Park oftbe Los Ange:l"
Police Department's Asian Crimes J.nVC<-
tigation section. "Asian criminals a"
interested in California because there
are card clubs in CalifonW-the cnn1J-
n.Js have been here ever since the C:uh
established themselves,"
Gaming consultant Rose, hcwev(H
remains skeptical that a crime wa....e-
exists. "The [agents] walk in on th,
Asia.n games-where there's a tremen-
dous amount of money on the t4ble.
there's dic~d they soy, 'Whatever It
is, it's illegal: " Rose say>, "I would be
wary about saying that the clubs Iu'C ..
crime problem,"
"What the attorney gen..ai ani
other critics do is go back man)', mo.";,
years to find their examples." ,.." An&.
Schneiderman, in-house counsel at the
Corrunerce Casino, "We ~ a cum-nr;
tracking and reporting 'Y"em tn at v,-
believe is unparalleled in the sta"
We track any conversion of chIps U1tO
cumncy, we rarely issue checks, and ti-"
city's accounting linn has unanno'lIlcd
access to oU!' cage,"
"We just had the [state] Department
of Justice in here, t..king a loc,t;. a:
our internal controls, policies, ;l.r:~
procedures," says Rick Cole. .c :l:it:
general manager of Hollywood P"'K
Casino. "They were quite pleased
with what they found. It seem-d to
raise their c,,'T1fort level, if you will,"
But the clubs speak with mixe"
voices, "If the law isn't adequate, tha:--
the laws problem," saY' Harry RJdwd,
executive administrative officer and fed.
eral trustee of the Bicycle Oub C,,-,J.no
"If the law says I only have to takc
names of people in S10,000 tranSactions,
then that's what we do, If it saY' 1 don',
have to do i~ we don't,"
LUNGREN, ELECTED TO OFFICE IN
November 1990, was a latecomer to the
antigambling cause. During his cam-
paign he was the recipient of more than
$10,000 in contributions from the
Nevada gambling industry, including
$5,000 each from the Nevada Resc',-
Association and Circus Circus, Soon
afterward he began to warn against the
dangers of gambling closer to home, "I
did 1I0t support a commission in m)
first year because I thought it would
only enhance the .attractivene~:lo of
CALifORNIA l.AwYER .83 DECEI"':!E~ 19B
The Road to Commercial
Real Estate Starts Here.
Every month, the California Real Estate
Journal gives you more than Just the major
real estate news stories. You also get:
__:.r,;,.""
.;.'("V ~
.. ~ ;:.......1:>;;;; ~
'a;;'-"','~"~
- '
~~..;..:... I
--- " -. - .. :::'~":''",;.~;
. The most ir><lepth """"'€" of ltle commercial real
estate IndUStr; in ltle state.
. lj!llrfnmia Tran~on Reoort. a second seclJOO p-uv-dlng
ttle most extensrve hstlr"€S in the state on commeroal
lease, sale and finarlClal uansa:;tiOnS, a101'€ v.1th
iommercial property 1oredosures.
. Annual area updates on the state's m..~or markets.
. IrMlstJgative focuses 10 help keep )<>U up-l~te on
cl\af'il'i trends in the mdu~
. _ briefs on ltle people, c:orT1PlVlies and.....nts in the real estate oonvnunity,
. Califomia Skvline. 8 Quarterly guide to mal"'rj of the businesses and serYiceS
available to help )<>U,
California real estate professionals know they get more for
their money when they aubac::rtbe to the
REAi'FsrmlouRNAl ~
for .ubscrlptlon Information, call (213) 229.&412
For advertl.lng Information, call (213) 229.&427
CONSIDERING THE
PRICE OF AMUSEMENT PARKS,
WHAT'S $25 TO
KEEP THE ORIGINAL ONE OPEN?
~
Suifrider
Foundation
~"'IOo.~.-...:-.ftCJto
\1f1OJ114f.CMiII<fOJIIU.I..1U'I'1l '"
INfQ.l..lllEHTl.~"12
Think .bout It. Long
befort the d.1)'S o( neon-lit
thmu parks. rarkm~ lo~
I and fantu}'bnds, thrTe ""as a
I pue< 10' m..., (am,k ..mt
to sprnd a little' quallt)'
time. Tht brach. And now,
11ft" much "Cl:Jrcl. It ntrd,
rOut hdp. That's whr \lo't
cncourJgr )'OU to 10m
Sudndrr. An organlutlon
when ObJC'C'll,.t 1$ :-' kttp
DECEMBER 1995 84 C"'UfORNIA LAW'lER
rour beaches clean and uft
(or you and rour (amil),_
So r1u.Jt help. Brcawr.
all th,nl:s consldcnd. H'S a
small ,,'orld .ftC'f aU. To 1010 I
,&II J.800.7~3.SURF ~
gambling," Lungren .-yi. "It was only
after I began studying the issue that I
realized we have a boatload of gambling
in California,"
Lungren fought the expansion of
Indian gaming and cantinu.. to oppose
the placement of slot machlnel 1n
reservation casinos. In August J 989 the
attorney general's f"Jffice issued an
, opinion slating that jackpot paket, a
lTl2jor card-club aruaction, was a lottery
proscribed by both Perul Code section
319 and article IV, section 19 of the
state Constitution. Club owners were
advised they risked criminal prosecunon
if they continued to off'er it, "Rumor
had it I>w enforcement got ",ind of a
jackpot at the old Bell Club, and they
found out there had been no poker
game," Rose SOIYs. "Some insider
claimed somebody had won it and JUs:
took the money. It w..s too bad for the
rest of the clubs,"
The 0"'"'" sued the state and won a
judgment in 1992 that Jackpot poker "
an adjunct to poker and thus permitted
under section 330. Lungren appealed
the trial court decision. wmning. a
reversal last July tlut endorsed 'he Ie"';
grounds for his office's origiruJ acnon
Bell Gard,,,, Bicycle Club v Cal Dry', ~;
Justict, 36 CA4th 717,
To Lungren, the best way to shut
down the mon~y ~undries is to create a
gaming commission ",ith teeth, In 1993
Lungren's office wrOte legislation
proposing an independent cOrT'!11lssion
armed with some 70 investigators,
financed by per-table fees from the
industry, Sponsored by Assembl)man
Phil Isenberg (D-Sacramento), tho
bilI passed the Assembly 49 to 1(1
but was sent back to commlttee fo~
reconsider.aion on a technicalln
Senate President Pro Tern Bill Loc,,,'.r
(D-Ha~"\\drd)---5uspicious of Lungren's
political ambitions-never brought the
bill to a vote. "I've never been in a
g2me where I won 49 to 10 and went
home the loser:' Lungren .-yi,
Last June the Assembly passed a
re\ised version of the bill, AB 11, thl'
lime by a vote of 67 to 4, Lochertthen shelved it and commlssiuned
an agricultural economist, !\.1arilyn
\'Vhi01ey of the University of Caliiarrua
:1It Davis. to study the state's ennre
gaming industry, Whitney's report,
(''',mtinued on page 86
,
r
t
I I CI
'I .IV!
f:::~~~~~~E"'~.r:.l:~~~~;5~:r::iE:{~:;O:;:'{~~~ ._d:,.,;:..;~'1::~";y!;;;'\,.~O;;:~;.~j'r:;;:c~;: :E':,~~
,
,
Business Opponunities
India. one of the world's largest markets will accept
a multitude of products, services, finances,joint ventures,
whatever you can offer. Kindly fax your possibilities
for a grand beginning.
India sells aU - whatever your market requires,
Mr K Sood, President
Transworld International
No, 3, Yashwant Place, 1st Floor
Chanaky'apuri
New Deihl - ]]002]
Tel: 009].] J-67386,?"670748
Fax: 009]-11-611 ]"",7
TI.x: 031-72104 Tran In
We are weD connected providln2 100% ~te<d
liaison services to achieve mUlti.millloD dollar
contracts.
All business is kept strictly confidential.
CIRClE 24 ON READER SERViCE CARD
>~:"I'~~'. .-
- ,
:;_i.ii:.'~<:-":;:""" '~.'..
.
GREENBAUM end FERENTZ
.soo N.wport CerMr DrNoi, Second Fk:or ~3.50 La JoIlo Villoge Drivt, 51';';: 300
~rt &each, CA 92660 Sor'l D,~o. CA 9:2122
(714) 760.8866 (619)231'1388
CIRCLE ..5 ON REAOER SERVICE CARD
ASSET PROTECTION
Our law finn practices throughout California, exclusively In the field of
Asset Protection. With a proper1y structured plan, we can protect both
you and your clients by Insulating and shielding business and personal
assets from the threat of lawsuits and claims.
Please call our office and we will be glad to speak with you about
your particular circumstances, Or we can send you a complete package
of information on the services which we provide.
If you would like a detailed discussion of the most powerful and
creative Asset Protection strategies, you can purr:hase our new book
LAWSUIT PROOF at your local bookstore-or call our office and we will
errange to send YOU. copy.
Law Offices of
ROBERT J. MINTZ
1201 Camino Del Mar Suite 203
Del Mar, California 92014
(800) 223-4291
Relemll _ 1MI1lable In eoor:>1danoo wtlt\ Sla1Il Bar' ._
CIRCLE 1Q8 ON u.nlfR SERVICE CARD
DECi...IER 1''9S 86 CALIFORNIA LAWYER.
~~.;,:\~;.; ,,!~,~?:""]r'iT.~2.:>?;;;:, ;;dU.":!"~. :'!l.i;::,'.i"[:,'i.\..;;t:."Z,;;;',M;.;',lK-' I
'7
Fast Shuffle
Continued from page S4
released in September, concluded that
Indian gaming is growing at a faster
rate than that of the card clubs--,\Jut
the study didn't address the potential
for crime at casinos,
"Senator Lockyer has in his hands
a report that is totally irrelevant to
our legislation," Lungren com-
plained. "For those of us concerned
about the catastrophe about to take
over the card-room industry-the
catastrophe of crime-the report lS
absolutely silent,"
"People running for governor
routinely have these phases in their
lives where they're fighting crime,"
Lockyer said, ''I'm very skeptical about
a need to create new bureaucracies, new
commillions, filled v.'ith S100,000-,-
year political appointees." He use=
the report to kill the proposai in com-
mittee, calling it "a Cadillac solution to
a motor-scooter problem,"
In its place, Lockyer pushed throUf"
SB 100, a bill promoted by Hollyv.'oo3
Park ]ticetrack and sponsored by Sen>-
tor Ken '1addy (R-Fresno) QuickJ)
signed by Governor Pete Wilson, th,
bill declares a three-year moratoriurr
effective January 1996 on local e1ectio,"
to pass or ex-pand gambling ordmances
It also permits publicly owned race-
tI2cks to operate as well as own casinos.
which had been practically impossible
under the e>isting licensing rules,
The moratorium created the appear-
ance of bold action while in\'itlnf:
everybody to forget about card cluo,
until the eve of a new century. Card.
room-related special elections are
scheduled in more than a dozen
conununities before the law goes into
effect. And it adds no restrictions to
existing ordinances, which In2)' or flU)'
not include limitations on the numbe,
of clubs pennitted in the community,
"If Lockyer thinks this is a motor-
scooter problem, then he's given us
a pogo stick," Lungren says of the
moratorium. "Look, the problem 10
the clubs isn't going to go away, I
don't know how we'll do it, but we'll
get a commission bill through, This " ,
marathon, not;; sprinL" (-t
THIS PAGE BUNK
/ /- /.6
r" -----
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item: IJ
Meeting Date: 2/13/96
Resolution / t",;,/ .3 approving increase in Advanced Life Support
(paramedic) service rates for Hartson Medical Services in the Chula Vista
Exclusive Operating Area.
Director Of~i an.cet'f
Fire Chief tv, ilf57
c' I
City Manager /-;
/
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_Noll)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The existing agreement with Hartson Medical Services allows Hartson to request rate adjustments
on an annual basis, subject to certain limitations. The last adjustment was approved by Council
on October 22, 1991. Hartson is requesting an 8% increase in their rate schedule, effective
immediately, and Hartson is advising that the "Assessment Only" component has been voluntarily
reduced by 55.6%. The resulting rate structure would still maintain Chula Vista/Bonita Base and
Mileage rates as the lowest Hartson charges in San Diego County.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None
DISCUSSION:
The purpose of this report is to forward a request for rate adjustment from Hartson and, for
evaluation purposes, provide background on Hartson's performance and specific compliance with
the provisions of the current agreement.
Contract Background/ ComDliance
The current agreement between Hartson Medical Services and the City of Chula Vista (Agreement)
was approved by the Council in May of 1989, and included three, three-year options to extend.
The current extension was approved by Council in September of 1993, and expires April 3D, 1997.
The Agreement allows Hartson to request rate adjustments on an annual basis, subject to certain
limitations. Specifically:
The amount of the requested increase shall be limited to the greater of:
(1) The percentage increase in the San Diego Consumer Price Index since Hartson's last
increase, or;
(2) 75% of the Medical Consumer Price Index increase since Hartson's last increase.
In no event, however, shall the increase exceed 8%. (Contract excerpt
included as Attachment 'A'). I :J., /
Page 2, Item: / .3
Meeting Date: 2/13/96
Although the last adjustment to Hartson's rates was approved by Council on October 22, 1991,
requests for rate adjustment were made in November of 1992, and again in September of 1993.
The 1992 request was denied by Council "until such time as Hartson is able to provide certified
statements regarding their countywide rate of return on investment, profit and loss, and/or other
compelling evidence supporting a rate increase". (Staff review of rate increase-related
documentation provided by Hartson is discussed below.) The 1993 request, however, was
coincident with in-depth discussion between the City and Hartson regarding the continued
provision of both Advanced Life Support (Paramedic) and Basic Life Support (Emergency
Medical Technician) services on an exclusive basis. Hartson later agreed to allow an
amendment to the contract to remove Basic Life Support service exclusivity, and simultaneously
withdrew their rate increase request.
The 1989 Agreement spells out two major obligations on the part of Hartson which are briefly
discussed here in order to more completely evaluate specific contract compliance and overall
satisfaction with the services being rendered to our community.
1.) Resoonse Time for Emergencv Calls for Service
The Agreement requires Hartson to respond to 90% of all Advanced Life Support (ALS)
emergency calls for service in the Chula Vista Exclusive Operating Area (EOA) within 10
minutes. Hartson provides monthly reports to the City detailing each call for service. A
review of the last 3 years' reports indicate compliance with the response time
requirement; 93.72% of the calls have been responded to within 10 minutes, with no
single monthly report indicating less than 90%.
2). Community Education Proaram
The Agreement specifies that the community education program include infant/child injury
prevention, the EMS/911 system, a junior paramedic program, CPR training, and areas
of widespread health abuse (drunk driving, drug abuse, etc.) In response to the
Agreement criteria, Hartson has conducted educational programs focused on infant/child
injury prevention and the EMS system in general through the Chula Vista school system
(Junior Paramedic Program for elementary school children, and EMS demonstrations for
junior and senior highschoolers). CPR training has also been offered to various
community organizations and businesses. Demonstrations have been provided at the
Sharp Hospital Open House, the Fire Department Open House, Harbor Days, and Bonita
Fest. The combination of these programs emphasize community health issues including
drunk driving, drug abuse, use of automotive restraints and helmets, and "Pull to the
Right" training.
Overall, extremely few complaints have been voiced to the City by patients or their families
regarding Hartson services. The Fire Department has been well-pleased with the partnership
established with Hartson paramedics in responding to the emergency needs of the community.
/ 1,..2...
Page 3, Item:-1:l
Meeting Date: 2/13/96
Hartson Call Volume and Billing Category Structure
Service Category Service levels Provided Billing Rate % of Call
Categories Affected Volume
Advanced Life Support Medications administered, Base Rate 70%
(ALS) Treatment Defibrillation, and/or Night Rate (7pm- 7am)
Transport of Patient Oxygen
Mileage
Supplies used
ALS Assessment Only General Assessment of Assessment Only 4%
Patient, First Aid, Vital Signs (Flat Rate)
Minor Assessment Only General Assessment of Patient not Billed 18.6%
Patient, Minor assistance
Canceled Runs, No None Patient not Billed 7.4%
Service Provided at Scene
Total 100%
Hartson's Request to Adiust Rates
Hartson has submitted a request to adjust rates associated with provision of ALS services in the
Chula Vista EOA, effective upon Council approval. A summary of the current rates and those
proposed are provided below.
HARTSON RATE REQUEST COMPARISON
Description Current Rate Proposed Rate % Change % of All Calls
Base Rate for $338 $365 8.0% 70%
ALS Treatment
Mileage (per mile) $11.00 $11.88 8.0% 68%
Night Charge (7pm-7am) $48 $51.84 8.0% 21%
Oxygen $48 $51.84 8.0% 54%
ALS Assessment Only $338 $150 <55.6%> 4%
Change in a Typical Bill for Service
1,1'3
To illustrate the change in a bill for service that a user of the system might receive under the
proposed rate structure, a "typical" paramedic bill is used. This "typical bill" was composed of a
defined list of treatments which are representative of those emergencies normally encountered by
Page 4, Item: ~
Meeting Date: 2/13/96
Hartson (automobile accidents, fall victims, etc.) and includes charges for Base Rate, Oxygen,
intravenous set-up, medications, cardiac monitoring, miscellaneous medical supplies, and mileage to
medical facility. Some calls require more or less intervention on the part of Hartson paramedics and
those bills are adjusted accordingly (a minor injury could require less intervention, while a patient in
cardiac arrest or a patient with shortness of breath would likely require greater intervention).
Current Typical Bill Proposed Typical Bill % Change
ALS Treatment ALS Treatment
with Transport with Transport 8.0%
$473 $511
Assessment Only Assessment Only
$338 $150 <55.6%>
Staff Analysis of Rate Adiustment Request
The City requested that Hartson provide appropriate financial data which would enable City staff to
evaluate the rate increase request. Hartson submitted special purpose financial statements
prepared by Hartson for their Fiscal Years 1992, 1993 and 1994. Finance staff reviewed the non-
certified special purpose statements which included: 1) gross and net revenues, the collection ratio,
and net income for Chula Vista operations; 2) expenses for the entire San Diego County operation
broken down into eight major categories (e.g., operating payroll, operating expenses) with subsidiary
line item expenses within each category; 3) The methodology and mathematical formulas for
apportioning each line item expenditure to Chula Vista operations, and; 4) The total dollars in each
expenditure category allocated to Chula Vista operations.
After reviewing the financial statements in depth, Finance staff met and corresponded with Hartson
staff numerous times over several months to clarify and obtain further justification for the data
provided. After this long review process, staff believes that there is compelling evidence supporting
Hartson's rate increase request:
1. Finance staff's review of the data shows that while revenues and transports from Chula Vista
operations have remained relatively flat from FY 92 to FY 94, expenses have increased 10.5
percent over the same period. This was determined based on the following:
Staff did exclude two expense categories judged to be fixed costs and two specific line
item expenses which were inadequately justified. Expenses for San Diego County
operations and changes in expenses among years were generally reasonable and well-
supported by Hartson.
The methodology and mathematical formulas for allocating County-wide expenses to
Chula Vista operations were reasonable and consistent among the three years.
13-1
Page 5, Item: ~
Meeting Date: 2/13/96
Actual expenses allocated to Chula Vista operations were independently verified by
Finance staff based on allocation formulas provided and all increases and decreases in
expense categories were fully and justifiably explained by Hartson. The primary reason
for the increase in expenses allocated to Chula Vista were increases in labor costs due
to annual step increases for experienced staff assigned to Chula Vista and increases in
costs for providing employee benefits.
The methodology for allocating revenues and bad debt to Chula Vista operations was
proper and consistent.
2. The rate increase request is well within the language and intent of the rate increase provisions
in the contract.
From 1992 through 1995, the Medical Consumer Price Index (MCPI) has increased by
16.7%. 75% of this increase equates to 12.5%, which is greater than the increase in
the San Diego Consumer Price Index (which increased 8% between December 1991
and June 1995). Both consumer price indexes have increased equal to or greater than
the 8% cap. Hartson's request is to adjust rate components by 8.0%, and it therefore
complies with the rate increase limitations imposed by the 1989 Agreement.
3. Due to bad debt rates for the ambulance industry and the fact that Hartson accepts payments
from Medi-Cal and Medicare in full, even though these payments are below Hartson's current
rates, the net revenue Hartson will receive if the eight percent rate increase request is granted
will be below five percent.
4. Since it has been over four years since Hartson received a rate adjustment, the actual
increase requested averages out to be less than two percent per year.
Comparison of Rates to Other Areas
Attachment 'B' shows rates in other areas served by Hartson Medical Services. Under the proposed
rate adjustment, the Chula Vista EOA will continue to receive the lowest Base and Mileage rates in
Hartson's rate schedule. As a result of other providers being subsidized by the jurisdiction being
served, staff has been unable to obtain specific written data which details the financial relationships
for accurate comparison purposes. These municipally-operated/tax-supported ambulance operations
are listed in Attachment 'C'. The only other private provider of ALS services in the County is
American Medical Services, which has been under contract with the City of San Diego since 1993
and receives various subsidies in the form of equipment and housing from San Diego.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the City. If the proposed rate increase is approved, a
typical paramedic bill for persons treated in the Chula Vista EOA would increase by about $38 or
8.0%. Since Medi-Cal payments are accepted by Hartson as payment-in-full for services rendered,
individuals covered under Medi-Cal will experience no increase in the amount paid for services.
Due to the fact that some accounts are uncollectible, and that Medicare and Medi-Cal payments to
Hartson are fixed and less than the actual invoice, Hartson will likely experience an increase in
revenue of no more than 5% under the proposed rate schedule.
1.J-f/i3-~
RESOLUTION NO.
18':2) :1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING INCREASE IN ADVANCED
LIFE SUPPORT (PARAMEDIC) SERVICE RATES FOR
HARTSON MEDICAL SERVICES IN THE CHULA VISTA
EXCLUSIVE OPERATING AREA
WHEREAS, the existing agreement with Hartson Medical
Services allows Hartson to request rate adjustments on an annual
basis, subject to certain limitations; and
WHEREAS, the last adjustment was approved by Council on
October 22, 1991; and
WHEREAS, this overall rate increase request of 7.91%
maintains Chula vistalBonita rates at the lowest Hartson provides.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby approved an increase in Advanced
Life Support (Paramedic) service rates for Hartson Medical Services
in the Chula vista Exclusive Operating Area as follows:
Basic Rate
Treatment Only No Transport
Mileage
Night Charge
Oxygen
$369
$150
$ 12
$ 51
$ 51
Presented by
ApprOVed
.I
as to/form by
\, (.
I' '1-1:' i ^,,</
, I
Boogaa:rjd, City
James Hardiman, Fire Chief
Bruce M.
Attorney
,
I.
C:\rs\hartson.inc
I:J -1/;5-'6
'i~,~...:e.Z;.";,p;..~'":. - >.
HARTSON shall operate a billing and accounts receivable system that
is humane, ~Iell documented, easy to audit, and which minimizes the
effort requi red of patients to recover from thi rd party sources for
which they may be eligible. HARTSON shall be able to provide
quarterly and annual reports as specified by CITY's Director of
Publ ic Safety.
Allowable charges for patient billings as reflected in Exhibit "B,"
sllall be el igible to be automatically adjusted on each anni versary
date of this Agreement.
Begi nni ng on t1ay 1, 1990, Ha rtson may, upon fil i ng a noti ce of
intention sixty (60) days in advance with the Director of Public
Safety, annually increase fees as 1 isted in Exhibit "B" subject to
the following conditions and limitations:
a. The amount of increase shall be limited to the greater of:
(1) the percentage increase, since Hartson's last fee increase
in the San Di ego a rea consumer pri ce index for all urban
consumers as compil ed by the Uni ted States Department of
Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics for the latest 12 month
period for \'/hich statistics are availabl e, or
(2) Seventy five percent (75%) of the increase to the nedical
ConSUriler Price Index (~1CPJ) (for the San Diego area if
available, otherwise the U.S. City flCPI vlill be used).
b. In no event shall the amount of increase in a. above exceed
ei ght percent (8%).
c.
In the event that the consumer price index or
above shall no longer be published, then
generally recognized index may be substituted
the City.
t,KPI referred to
another simil ar
upon approval of
d.
Annual increases shall be subject to the review and approval of
the Di rector of Publ ic Safety. Changes or adjustments to major
cha rge ca tego ri es may be made I,i th appro va 1 of the Di rector of
Public Safety. The Director of Public Safety shall notify
Hartson in writing of approval of the increase within thirty
(30) calendar days of receipt of accurate and complete
i nfomati on, sati sfacto rily supporti ng any increase requests in
accordance with 3a. above.
The City Council shall have the unilateral right to require a
r.earing of any fee increase at its discretion. If the City
intends to require a public hearing, it shall notify Hartson
',;ithin said thirty (30) day period. In the absence of any
written communication from the 'Jirector of Public Safety or City
Council ylithin said thirty (30) days to the contrary, the
increase is deemed approved.
Excerpt from Agreement Between the
hula Vista and Ha son Medical ervices Dated: Ma 9 1989
J:J -1' 3-;()
ATTACHMENT 'A'
ft
m
~
I-
.. Z
c 0 0 0 '" '" '" w
u CO '"
'" .. ;h ~ ~ $ $ :E
rn '" .... ....
::E J:
0
0 ~ 0 0 ... ~ N c:(
C en c '" '" $ I-
'" 4> " ~
rn is 0 ;h ;;; I-
0 c:(
~
en
Z >. 0 0
c .!! N N 0
.;: ~ '" ;;; $ $
~ c. ~ ;h ;;;
0 rn
0
0 C 4>
0 > N 0 N 0 ~
C> E 0 ~ '" ;;; $
.. ;h ~
II> Cl ....
W ...J
-
C
'" N 0 N 0 ~
Z '" .. ~ '" ~ $
...J II> ;;; ....
<1: ::E
en
0::: ~ 0 0 N CO 110
0 .... ... '" ;;; ;h ;h
'" u ;h ~
LL z ....
en
w '" ..c ... 0 1
l- .;: u 0 0 $
II> '" '" '" ;;;
~ C. II> ;h ~
.5 al ....
W ~ - ~
0 '" 0 N 0 0
.. C N '" $ $
" '" ::> $ ;;; ;;;
Z 0:: w 0
<1: 0
..J
~ -
... c
m ~ , II> 0 0 '"
..: c "C 0 '" 0 0
:E rn 0 'in ~ ;;> ;;; ~ ~
0 Z II>
<1: 0::
Z
0
en
I-
0:::
<1:
::I: ..!! .:!I co co ~ co 1
::> '" '" ~ ;h
.. l4 l4 ....
..c :;:
0
-
c c
0 .$ II>
:;:: '" E ~
c. 0:: .. C 4> 4>
.;: .. 0 en - en
u II> II> '" ..c ..
.. .. .. ~ '"
II> '" .. .~ ..c
0 ED <( ::E z 0
1:]-/ / /3 -/3...
11l 0 0 ~ 0
Cl 0 0 0 ..,. lO ..,. lO N ~
l! <ri <ri ~ <ri ~ CO lO CO CO
11l ..,. 0 ..,. ..,. m m -<i r..: r..: ~
> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;%
c( '" '"
0 0
.:! 0 0 8 0 0
c:i c:i Q 0 0
iii UI c:i l1'i
:> ..,. 0 z m
11l ;% ~ N ~
.!! <fl-
tn -
CI) <:
- 11l <:
C'G ..., .. 0 0
.; 0 0 8
0:: <: Cl " 0 0 0 8
11l .. .;: c:i l1'i
n:: 11l N c:i c:i
UJ C 11l ~ <'l
CI) E E ;% ;;; ~ ~ ~
~ '"
CJ 0
~
-
> >-
... ~
..: .. .. 0 0 UI
CI) UI > <: Cl 0 lO <'l ,'l1 ..,. 0 0 5l 0 0
en ~ >- 0 <'i ..,. ..,. a. N co ~ ~ m
;;: 11l E 0; l1'i -<i 0- c:i N <'i <'i <'i <'i
<: J: .. ;% ~ r-- m :J ~ ~ ;% ~ ;% ~
CI) ~ - n:: '" UI '" <fl-
CJ 0 ~ +
J: ...,
C UI <:
C'G 11l 0 >- 0 0 8
~ " .. 0 0 0 8 0
- .. 11l ~ c:i c:i c:i 0 lJ)
:::::I UI m m
..., 0 0 lJ) 0 r..:
.c 11l ..., (l. ~ ~ N <fl- N ~
Cl ~ '" '"
E ~
.. ~
J:
<( " 11l 11l 0 0
~ ..., 8 8
11l .. .; 0 0 0
"'C ~ c:i c:i Q 0
.. ~ .<: N c:i c:i
lO lJ) Z
~ UI <: " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
11l 11l 0 <fl-
E ...,
0 <: .;
::I 11l
Co E ~ J: ~ 0 0
, c( 0 0 0
Co E <: - <: c:i Q Q
0 ~ ::I (l. c:i 0 Q
0 0 0 0 z m
:::::I z 0 ...., z z
" z u ~ ~
en 11l ~
UI .e
I 11l
>< J: UI
- 11l -
C'G - :;::; 11l 11l 8
0 '" ..., ~ c(
l- .; 0 c:i Q Q Q
~ ::I <: Ul - Q
- 11l 0
"'C <: E .>: .. U Z lJ) Z Z Z Z
11l E .. Ul '"
.s ..., 0 ...J
.; "
C'G ~ 11l 0
... UI
Q) - 11l :5! 0 0
.. J: 'C 0 0 0 0 0
Co J: - <: c:i c:i Q 0 0 0
- .E c:i c:i
0 UI 0 0 0 z :l!'
11l ..., " ~ ;% ~ ~
I 11l UI
11l W
~ !!:. ...,
'S:
- 0 0 0
C'G ~ <: 0 8
0- 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 8 8
Co i:ij N <'i <'i 0 0
UI '(;j' N c:i c:i c:i
.- 11l lO ..,. lJ) :l!' lJ)
CJ u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;% ;% ~
" '" <fl-
.- 's:
c ~
11l
:::::I UI ..., 0 0
~ ~ .. 0 0 0 0 8
0
- .c c:i g Q 0 0
UI l1'i
UI ;: lJ) z r..: l1'i
11l .. ~ ~ '" N ~
11l U '"
u..
<: -
0 11l <:
- 11l
:;::; .. E 11l 11l <:
0- n:: ~ Cl - Cl 11l
.;: UI .. J: ~ Cl
" 11l UI <: ~ Cl .. >-
UI UI 11l 0 Z J: ><
11l .. UI ::;: U 0
0 III UI
c(
ft
~
I-
Z
w
:E
::I:
o
e:(
l-
t-
e:(
I y", 1;1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. I (
Meeting Date 2/13/96
Resolution 18207 Executing an Agreement with
Equitax for Energy AUditing Services and Waiving
the Bidding Requirements
Environmenta,l. Resou, rce,~~tger
city M.n.q= )G, \'0 ~\
As part of the City's ongoing efforts to save energy and cut costs
associated with the city's energy usage, staff is recommending
contracting with a utility auditing firm to identify potential
areas of savings through utility bill overcharges or rate structure
changes. The services are set up on a contingency basis, so there
is no up-front cost to the City. Approval of this agreement was
continued from the meetinq of February 6, 1996.
ITEM TITLE
SUBMITTED BY
REVIEWED BY
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that this item be
continued until completion of discussions
between the city and the water districts
and local utility companies.
/1/" /
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
/'
Item~'>
Meeting DatE, 2/13L96
ITEM TITLE:
Report;
A.
Consideration of Comprehensive Amendments to
Council Policy 570-02 "Sewer Service to Property
Not Within the City Boundary".
B. Consideration of a Contractual Agreement with the
Spring Valley Sanitation District regarding the
Maintenance, Operation and Use of Sewers in
Acacia Avenue and Palm Drive
/1".1.P{
Resolution Adopting Comprehensive Amendments to Council Policy
570-02, and Authorizing the Mayor to Execute on Behalf of the City the
Contractual Agreement with the Spring Valley Sanitation District.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Wor r!(?ft,
Director of Planning
,
REVIEWED BY: City Manage0-i \\;')~~\
[n 1993, the City received several requestll' for sewer connections on Acacia A venue and in the
Proctor Valley area. Circumstances surrounding those requests raised a number of issues
regarding the City's Sewer Connection Policy, and generally, the delivery of sewer service by
the Spring Valley Sanitation District (SVSD) to unincorporated areas within Chula Vista's
Sphere of Influence. At that time, the City had already commenced preparation of our Sphere
of Influence Update Study in conjunction with the Local Agency Formation Commission
(LAFCO).
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
As a result, in May of 1993, LAFCO instituted a moratorium on routine annexation of properties
to the SVSD within Chula Vista's Sphere, pending the outcome of analyses by the City and
County regarding several sewer service issues including the overall service capacity of the SVSD
within the Bonita Valley, and which agency should proVIde sewer services on Acacia Avenue
and Proctor Valley Road. LAFCO also directed its staff to work with the City and the SVSD
to develop guidelines for the future provision of sewer service.
Since that time, and parallel to the Sphere of Influence Update effort, staff of the Public Works
and Planmng Departments have worked exhaustively with County and LAFCO staff and
administrations to resolve issues, mcluding those brought about by State legislative changes
effected in January 1994. Consensus has now been reached, and the resulting amended City
Sewer Connection Policy is being presented for Council consideration and action.
15'-/
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 2/13/96
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the proposed policy amendments
and contractual agreement are exempt from environmental review pursuant to section 15061 of
the State CEQA Guidelines.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the Resolution Adopting Comprehensive
Amendments to Council Policy 570-02, and Authorizing the Mayor to Execute on Behalf of the
City the Contractual Agreement with the Spring Valley Sanitation District.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
DISCUSSION:
1. Historical Background
In 1964, the City of Chula Vista joined the Metro Sewer system to provide for the
treatment of local sewage. Part of the collection system for existing and future Chula
Vista properties is connected to the Spring Valley Sewer Outfall (which traverses from
Spring Valley through the middle of the Bonita Valley to the Metro interceptor westerly
of 1-5 Freeway) (please see Attachment 1). The agreement provided that Chula Vista
could use the Outfall by paying a connection charge on an acreage basis as properties in
our City developed. We were then obligated to pay operation, maintenance and
replacement costs for the Outfall based on our proportion of the total flow in the line.
At the time (1964), it was anticipated that much of the Bonita Valley (Area 2) would
eventually annex to Chula Vista. In 1976, Chula Vista sold Spring Valley Sanitation
District (SVSD) I million gallons per day of capacity in the Metro system for the
Sweetwater Valley. The Spring Valley Sanitation District is a single purpose
governmental agency established for the sole purpose of providing sewer service to
select unincorporated areas of the County including Bonita, Spring Valley and portions
of the Rancho San Diego area. The Board of Supervisors acts as the District's Board of
Directors.
In 1977, CVand the SVSD entered into an agreement for the use of a sewer line in
Acacia Ave. built by a Chula Vista developer. This line entered Acacia Ave. at
Fallbrook Ct. and extended northerly in Acacia and Palm Ave, to the SVSD outfall
(please see Attachment 2). The Agreement provided that the portion of the line within
the city limits of CY would be owned and operated by CY and any connections made to
it from outside the City would be made by the city and be reimbursed by the district.
Any connections made to the sewer from city properties to a portion within the district
would be done by the district and be reimbursed by city. Areas could be annexed from
the district to the city. When the area was detached from the district that portion of the
line would become a city line.
15'2
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 2/13/96
In 1990, McMillin and EastLake constructed a line to serve Bonita Long Canyon and
EastLake I. This line entered the county at the southern tip of Acacia Ave. and traversed
northerly to eventually connect to the SVSD Outfall. This line was not under the terms
of the 1977 Agreement for shared use, and was considered by CV as a city line. Thus,
post 1990, there are two lines in Acacia; 1) a city line traveling the entire length, and
2) a district line extending northerly from Fallbrook Ct. (please see Attachment 2).
SVSD met with the developer and gave a permit to the developer to construct the "city"
I ine in AcacIa (County road). SVSD also purchased capacity rights from the developer
for 28 connections to the "city" line.
In 1992, the Chula Vista City Council revised a 1983 policy on sewer connections from
properties outside the city limits. The adoption of this policy was caused by sewer
service issues for both Proctor Valley Road sewer and the "city" sewer in Acacia. The
policy was very stringent for properties in Acacia to connect to the "city" line. If a
property owner requested a connection without filing a petition for annexation to the
City, and paying all the associated fees, he would have to enter into an "Annexation and
Disconnection Agreement" with the City. This agreement provided for the owner to file
for annexation as soon as such was logical. and to pay all applicable non-capacity charges
and the capacity fee, along with paying an additional charge equal to twice the capacity
fee. One-half of the fee for annexation is also required to be paid to the City as a deposit
which could be reimbursable at the time annexation is accomplished, based on deposits
made by other contributors at the time annexation is accomplished.
2. Overview of Circumstances Warranting Present Policy Amendment
a. Current Conditions and Service Issues
In late 1992 and early 1993, the City received several requests for connection to City
sewers from properties outside the City in the Acacia Ave. and Proctor Valley Rd. areas.
During the conduct of reviews. the following main areas of issue arose with respect to
making connections under the City's policy:
(1) whether the SVSD had sufficient capacity remaining in the Metro sewer system
through purchases from Chula Vista, to continue to extend service to properties
in the Bonita Valley area;
(2) whether the City's current sewer connection policy places unnecessary financial
hardship on property owners/residents faced with septic failures, particularly for
properties which cannot immediately annex, and thereby are required to deposit
large monetary securities with the City III exchange for service;
(3) whether the current policy's requirement to immediately annex individual lots
(where feasible) in exchange for service causes additional, unnecessary financial
/5:3
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 2/13/96
hardship, including indirect costs associated with establishing City pre-zoning as
an annexation pre-requisite; and,
(4) whether the accelerated annexation of individual lots creates differential zoning
provisions in existing unincorporated neighborhoods, particularly regarding the
keeping and raising of animals.
Pending review and resolution of these issues, LAFCO placed a moratorium on routine
annexations to the SVSD of territory within Chula Vista's Sphere of Influence, and
directed LAFCO staff to work with the SVSD and the City to develop guidelines for the
future provision of sewer service in the larger Bonita area. As noted in the introductory
section, the City had already commenced its Sphere of Influence Update Study with
LAFCO, and these issues were also seen to have a bearing there, since policies adopted
with the City's present Sphere of Influence (1985) provide for the SVSD to continue the
extension of service to existing development.
Staff of the three agencies (City, County and LAFCO) spent the next 18 months
evaluating a number of considerations regarding each of the aforementioned issue areas,
and in consultation with City and County administrations, reached the following points
of consensus. City staff and administration support these consensus positions which are
intended to resolve the aforementioned concerns to the best mutual benefit of the City,
County and residents alike. As such, they form the basis for proposed revisions to the
City's sewer connection policy as presented in greater detail in Section 3. of this report.
(1) The SVSD clearly has adequate capacity to continue to extend sewer service to
unincorporated properties in the Bonita Valley area.
The County Department of Public Works, Liquid Waste Division,
conducted a comprehensive estimate of their sewerage flows within the
Bonita Valley area covered under the 1977 agreement which transferred
1,000,000 gallons-per-day (1.0 MGD) of the City's Metro capacity rights
to the SVSD. The City's Department of Public Works, Engineering
Division, reviewed and evaluated those estimates, and in April 1994,
issued a letter generally concurring with the County's estimates, and
indicating that sufficient capacity exists for the SVSD to continue to
extend sewer services in the area. Of the 1.0 MGD of capacity purchased
from the City in 1976, approximately 0.5 MGD still remained, which
equates to approximately 1750 equivalent dwelling units (ED Us) of
additional connection capacity,
(2) It is no longer necessary for the City's policy to require large monetary deposits
to ensure funding is available to process future annexation of properties to which
services are extended.
/Y'/
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date 2/13/96
Under the provIsIons of ABl335 (effective Jan. 1, 1994), which is
discussed further in Section 2.b. of this report, any extensions of City
services beyond our municipal boundary must now be reviewed and
approved by LAFCO. Part of that review and approval requires the
property owner receiving the extended service to file an application with
LAFCO in anticipation of future annexation, and to deposit (in trust)
associated processing fees with LAFCO. The present City policy's
requirement to deposit these same fees with the City is now unnecessary,
and the proposed policy amendments indicate that those fees should be
paid to LAFCO.
(3) Similar to (2) above, under provisions brought about by the effect of AB1335, it
is no longer necessary for the City to require immediate annexation in exchange
for service extension.
Should financial hardship, and/or other conditions exist whereby
immediate annexation is not feasible or desirable, eventual annexation of
the property is now ensured by two means under the proposed policy
revls Ions:
(a) the property owner's filing of an annexation application and
associated processing fees with LAFCO at the time LAFCO
authorizes the service extension pursuant to State law (ABI335);
and,
(b) the property owner's execution of an Irrevocable Offer of
Annexation (lOA) to the City as a condition of the City's sewer
connection agreement. The proposed, amended policy requires the
lOA in any situation where City sewer service is extended to a
property in advance of annexation. The lOA is a recorded
document which runs with the land so that it must be honored by
any present, or future owner(s) of the property should annexation
not occur for a number of years.
This tlexibility to defer annexation to a future time at the City's
discretion, also relieves the need to immediately process a pre-zonmg
application and incur those additional costs.
It should be noted that staff has reviewed a recent Eugene, Oregon
appellate court decision which found usage of an lOA unconstitutional,
and has determined that use of the lOA in the context of the City's policy
and State annexation law is materially different, and legally defensible.
State Attorney General Opinion No. 93-407 (October 13, 1993) makes
15,f'
Page 6, Item
Meeting Date 2/13/96
similar findings regarding IDA's which run with the land, such as the IDA
required by the City's sewer connection policy.
(4) City prezoning of property in existing, unincorporated neighborhoods should be
approached in a comprehensive, logical manner, and accomplished through due
community input and planning processes.
The City has previously recognized the complexity of converting /
translating County-zoned properties to City zoning (prezoning) through
both the Montgomery Annexation, and comprehensive annexation attempts
in the Bonita area. Although conditions are different, in both instances,
the City proposed adopting County zoning as interim City zoning to allow
the City adequate time to evaluate and address the often complex
considerations which must go into such zoning conversions. In Bonita,
this is particularly true of regulations for the keeping and raising of
animals.
Under the terms of present Council Policy 570-02, prospective sewer
connectees must annex the property (if contiguous) in exchange for
service. In order to annex property, State law and LAFCO policy require
the annexing City to prezone the property. As a result, staff was faced
with having to apply City zoning to random, individual lots often along
the same street, in order to meet the terms of Council policy and
annexation requirements. This did, and can, result in the establishment
of differential property rights, absent a comprehensive review of City
zoning to ensure reasonable coordination with prior County zoning
provisions. As can be imagined, affected property owners were not happy
in the least.
For a street such as Acacia Ave., where only properties on one side of the
street abut City territory, good planning practice dictates that the approach
to such zoning conversions is most appropriately accomplished in a
comprehensive fashion, using neighborhood boundaries or other logical
planning units. Such an approach is entirely appropriate, and likely
beneficial, given the history of annexation and land use concerns in the
Bonita area. At present, however, the City's adopted zoning code
contains insufficient provisions to adequately complement County zoning
provisions for the area, particularly as regards the keeping and raising of
animals.
To address this Issue, the proposed policy revIsIons allow individual
properties to connecl to City sewers absent the need for immediate
annexation, thereby affording the City and affected residents the time
/ f' /,
Page 7, Item
Meeting Date 2/13/96
necessary to properly address zoning considerations. It would likely take
12 to 18 months to complete such a process, and adopt appropriate
amendments to City zoning provisions. To accommodate such an effort,
the proposed policy further states that the City will not consider initiating
annexations/prezonings until an appropriate number of contiguous lots in
any area (usually 10 or more) have been connected to the City sewer.
Given the current rate of connection requests, the Planning Department
antIcipates undertaking select neighborhood prezoning efforts within its
Fiscal Year 1997-98 work program. Should the rate of connections
increase to a point where it is perceived necessary to commence
comprehensive prezoning efforts earlier, the Planning Department will
apprise the Council and City Administration.
b. State Legislative Changes (AB1335) and LAFCO Authoritv
As mentioned previously, in January 1994, new State legislation became effective
(AB1335; Government Code Section 56133) which in part, expanded LAFCO's purview
over the provision of new or extended services (such as sewer) outside an agencies
boundarIes (a Council Information Memo was forwarded in December 1993, prior to
legislation's effect-- please see Attachment 4). This expanded LAFCO purview
necessitates changes to the present content of Council Policy No. 570-02, and in July
1994, the City received a letter from LAFCO outlining the effects of LAFCO's new
provisions under AB1335 on the City's sewer connection policy, and suggesting
necessary revisions (please see Attachment 5).
fn brief, AB 1335 gave new powers to LAFCO, among them regulatory authority over
agreements for the extension of services outside the City boundary. AB 1335 specifies
that a city or distrIct may provide new or extended services by contract or agreement
outside Its boundarIes, onlv if it requests and receives approval from LAFCO. LAFCO's
adopted procedures to implement the legislation generally require that:
(I) any extension of services outside an agency's boundaries be in anticipation
of a future annexation:
(2) the City request LAFCO approval of a contractual service agreement prior
to extending service;
(3) an annexation application be submitted (by the property owner) in
conjunction with the request for approval of a contractual service
agreement; and
(4) the applicant (property owner) pay the applicable processing fee upon
submittal of a contractual service agreement application.
The purpose of LAFCO's requiring the annexation application filing, and charging the
If'?
Page 8, Item
Meeting Date 2/13/96
annexation/detachment fee up-front is to ensure that the out-of-agency agreement is, in
fact, in anticipation of a related annexation/detachment as required by State law. This
concept of annexation guarantee was the same reason that the City's present policy
requires the deposit of substantial fees for connections in advance of annexation.
Because AB 1335 now establishes LAFCO as annexation guarantor, it is unnecessary and
problematic for the City's policy to continue to require payment of those fees to the City.
The proposed policy amendments are designed to coordinate with LAFCO's new role as
prescribed by State law.
3. Review/Discussion of Proposed Policy Amendments
The revised sewer service policy for properties outside city limits is proposed to take into
consideration several factors:
. City flows that enter county areas to discharge into the Spring Valley
Outfall. (Primarily in the Bonita Valley area)
. County flows that enter City lines. (Lynwood Hills, and Hilltop area)
. Developed areas vs. undeveloped areas in City's Sphere. (Proctor Valley
thru Rancho San Miguel)
. Lmes built by City or city developer that City and County agree should
be taken over by County for Operation and maintenance.
Staff has met with SVSD staff and come to agreement that both lines in Acacia Ave.
should be owned and operated by SVSD per formal agreement. The portions of the first
line built in 1977 that are outside City limits are already owned and operated by the
SVSD. The attached resolution and agreement would make the second line in Acacia also
owned and operated by SVSD under the terms of the Agreement.
a. Properties contiguous to the City boundary and connectin\! to a City Sewer
The proposed amended policy provides for the City to furnish sewer services to
properties within unincorporated territory through a City sewer under a connection
agreement after LAFCO has processed and approved an "Out Of Agency" agreement
for those services, and the owner has executed an Irrevocable Offer of Annexation to the
City. This sequence of actions would allow the owner to receive services from the City
after a minimum of formal actions, and then to annex to the City as part of a group
(after enough properties within that vicinity are similarly committed to annexation to
allow the processing costs associated with annexation and pre-zoning to be shared) and
realize a substantial savings. After the sewer lateral has been constructed by the City,
we would provide services, collect sewer service charges and pay appropriate Metro or
District charges.
b. Properties not contiguous to the city boundary and connecting to a City sewer.
1->' a'
Page 9, Item
Meeting Date 2/13/96
I n locations where the City boundary is not contiguous with the property for which
sewer service is being requested or a fronting street, the property owner would execute
an Irrevocable Offer of Annexation to the City, an Out of Agency Agreement with
LAFCO, and a connection agreement with the City. The City would then provide sewer
service and continue to operate and maintain the sewer main through which service is
provided.
c. Properties connecting to a Sanitation District sewer.
In locations where the property would receive sewer service through a District sewer,
the owner would annex to the District and pay all appropriate fees and charges to the
District. In the event that the District sewer discharges into a downstream City sewer,
the owner would also be required to execute an I rrevocable Offer of Annexation to the
City, and further if the City line discharges directly to the Metro system rather than the
Spring Valley outfall, the owner would need to execute a Grant Of Lien to the City in
the amount of twenty percent of the estimated cost of annexation and pre-zoning. The
District would then provide service and collect fees and charges. When an appropriate
number of contiguous properties has become el igible for annexation to the City, Chula
Vista or the owners may initiate annexation proceedings. Upon completion of such
proceedings, the City will release any outstanding liens on the involved properties.
4. Review/Discussion of Proposed Contractual Agreement
The proposed agreement will replace the City's existing agreement with the Spring
Valley Sanitation District for operation and maintenance of a sewer in Acacia Avenue
and Palm Drive, and will cover both of the existing sewers in Acacia Avenue ( the
original line was built with the Bonita Ridge Estates development and the newer line was
built by the Bonita-Long Canyon and EastLake developments. This agreement has an
undefined term and will run until terminated by either party, with a thirty day written
notice.
The agreement is intended to apply currently to only the Acacia Avenue and the Bonita-
Long Canyon sewers. As other sewers that the agreement should also apply to are
identified, the agreement is proposed to be amended to include them.
The construction of lateral connections to the sewers is to be accomplished by the City
in locations where the operation and maintenance is our responsibility. In areas where
the SVSD has that responsibility, that work will be done by individual contractors, as
is the case with other District sewers. All portions of lines being maintained by the
District will be considered "District Lines" within the meaning of City Policy 570-02.
The payment of fees and reimbursements by property owners is to be made directly to
the agency responsible for the operation and maintenance of that portion of the sewer
15''1
Page 10, Item
Meeting Date 2/13/96
I ine. In the event that a transfer of land from one jurisdiction to the other occurs after
the preparation of the tax roll, the agreement provides for the transfer of any collected
amounts to the proper party within sixty days of the receipt of those funds.
FISCAL IMPACT: Minimal. Under the proposed policy and agreement, future property owners
connecting to the sewer system will be required to pay all applicable City, County and LAFCO
fees associated with the connection. The City will experience minor incremental relief in the
costs associated with cleaning of the sewer I ine as portions come under District jurisdiction.
Attachments
I , Map of Areas Currently Atfected by the Policy
2. Map of Sewer Conditions on Acacia A venue
3. Decemher 1<)93 Council Information Memo on AB1335
4. July 1994 LAFCO Letter Recommending Policy Amendments
(M :\SHARED\PLANNING\SEW -POL.AI3:.
I>'/P
RESOLUTION NO.
/1"',,2.1 'I
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENTS
TO COUNCIL POLICY 570-02, AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY THE
CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT WITH THE SPRING VALLEY
SANITATION DISTRICT
WHEREAS, In 1993, the City received several requests for
sewer connections on Acacia Avenue and in the Proctor Valley area
which requests raised a number of issues regarding the City's Sewer
Connection policy, and generally, the delivery of sewer service by
the Spring Valley Sanitation District (SVSD) to unincorporated
areas within Chula vista's Sphere of Influence; and
WHEREAS, at that time, the City had already commenced
preparation of our Sphere of Influence Update Study in conjunction
with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO); and
WHEREAS, as a result, in May of 1993, LAFCO instituted a
moratorium on routine annexation of properties to the SVSD within
Chula vista's Sphere, pending the outcome of analyses by the city
and County regarding several sewer service issues including the
overall service capacity of the SVSD within the Bonita Valley, and
which agency should provide sewer services on Acacia Avenue and
Proctor Valley Road; and
WHEREAS, LAFCO also directed its staff to work with the
City and the SVSD to develop guidelines for the future provision of
sewer service; and
WHEREAS, since that time, and parallel to the Sphere of
Influence Update effort, staff of the Public Works and Planning
Departments have worked exhaustively with County and LAFCO staff
and administrations to resolve issues, including those brought
about by State legislative changes effected in January 1994; and
WHEREAS, consensus has now been
resulting amended city Sewer Connection Policy
for Council consideration and action; and
reached, and the
is being presented
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
determined that the proposed policy amendments and contractual
agreement are exempt from environmental review pursuant to section
15061 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby adopt Comprehensive Amendments to
1
/5'/1
Council policy 570-02, as- set forth in Attachment -2 - Proposed
Amended Sewer Connection policy.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is hereby
authorized to execute the Contractual Agreement with the spring
valley Sanitation District, asset forth in Attachment. 3,' afld on
file in the office of the City Clerk as Document No. (~o be
completed by the Clerk in the final documen~.
Pre"ented by ~v~: ~t~~r:;rY
John P. Lippitt, Director of Bruce M. Boog ard, City
Public Works Attorney ( ,
c: \rs\svsd.agr . /
"'----
2
15, 1.2.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE SPRING V ALLEY
SANITATION DISTRICT OF THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO FOR THE
MAINTENANCE, OPERATION AND USE OF A SEWER IN ACACIA AVENUE AND
REPLACING AGREEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND USE OF A
SEWER IN ACACIA A VENUE AND PALM DRIVE
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this _day of , _by and between
the City of Chula Vista, a municipal corporation sometimes hereinafter called "Chula Vista" or
"City" and the SPRING V ALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT, a County Sanitation District,
sometimes hereinafter called the "District".
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, on March 9, I 964, the City of San Diego, the City of Chula Vista, and the Spring
Valley Sanitation District executed an agreement entitled "AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO AND THE SPRING V ALLEY
SANITATION DISTRICT OF THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO FOR THE USE OF
DISTRICT'S OUTFALL SEWER" (County of San Diego Contract No. 2624-2125-R) to provide
for the discharge into the San Diego Metropolitan Sewerage System of sewage originating from
an area within Chula Vista and therein designated as the area to be served; and
WHEREAS, in connection with a land development project in Chula Vista, a sewer was
constructed in Acacia Avenue and Palm Drive ("Acacia Avenue Sewer") in the unincorporated
territory of the County of San Diego from the District's Outfall sewer to serve an area lying
within both the City ofChula Vista and unincorporated territory ofthe County of San Diego, and
an agreement (County of San Diego Contract No. I 2460-8440-A) between the District and Chula
Vista providing for the construction, operation and use of that sewer was executed on January 3,
1978 ("Original Acacia A venue Sewer Agreement"); and
WHEREAS, the term of that Original Acacia Avenue Sewer Aftgreement was to expire twenty
years after its above stated execution date, and
WHEREAS, in connection with further land development activity within Chula Vista an
additional sewer known as the Bonita-Long Canyon Sewer has been constructed in Acacia
A venue, paralleling the above mentioned Acacia Avenue Sewer, and it is contemplated that
sewers and sewer service may need to be extended in the future to additional areas and properties
within the City ofChula Vista or that may be annexed by the City ofChula Vista and within the
District; and
WHEREAS, it is further contemplated that any new sewer service using either or both of Acacia
Avenue and Bonita-Long Canyon Sewers will be proffered to properties within the jurisdictions
of both the District or other unincorporated County territory and Chula Vista in accordance with
1.5' 1 :3
the terms of Chula Vista City Council Policy No. 570-02 (Referred to as City of Chula Vista
Policy No. 570-02 and dated Feb. 6, 1996.
WHEREAS, it is further contemplated that all portions of the two sewers in Acacia Avenue lying
now or in the future within the jurisdiction of the District or other unincorporated territory will
be operated and maintained by the District and that all portions ofthe Acacia Avenue sewer lying
now or in the future within the jurisdiction of Chula Vista will be operated and maintained by
Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, it is further contemplated that Chula Vista will or may annex certain territory which
has previously been included within the District for which acreage fees have been paid to the
District; and
WHEREAS, this agreement is proposed to establish the rights, privileges and duties of the
parties concerning the use of the District's system, Chula Vista's system and the construction and
maintenance of connections to said systems now and in the future under these recitals;
NOW THEREFORE THE PARTIES HERETO MUTUALLY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
I. TERM OF AGREEMENT
This agreement shall take effect immediately upon the execution by the parties hereto and shall
continue indefinitely provided, however, that either party may terminate this agreement (pursuant
to Section 10). The agreement can be amended by mutual consent of the parties.
2. AMENDMENT OF ACACIA AVENUE SEWER AGREEMENT
This agreement replaces the Original Acacia Avenue Sewer Agreement and is to be effective
immediately following execution ofthis document subject to any prior termination as provided in
Section 1 of said original agreement or subject to termination only, as provided in Sections I and
10 ofthis agreement after execution of this agreement. All other provisions of that original
agreement shall remain in effect.
3. FUTURE AMENDMENTS
The provisions of this agreement shall apply currently only to those sewers identified herein as
(I) the Acacia Avenue Sewer and (2) the Bonita.Long Canyon Sewer. They are also intended
to apply to sewers at other, presently unknown, locations within the unincorporated territory of
the County of San Diego and future locations that may become annexed to Chula Vista. As other
locations become knOV.'l1, it is the intent of the parties to meet and confer regarding amendments
to this agreement to specifically incorporate those new sewers and locations into this agreement.
-2-
/.>=- / 'I
4. CONNECTION AND ENGINEER'S APPROVAL
(a) Chula Vista, at no cost or expense to the District, shall construct, install, maintain. repair,
replace and/or reconstruct as necessary all sewers within the public right of way connecting areas
within Chula Vista to the Acacia Avenue Sewer or the Bonita-Long Canycn sewer.
(b) District, at no cost or expense to the City, shall construct, install maintain repair, replace
and/or reconstruct all sewers connecting areas within the District to the subject sewer.
(c) The location, installation, construction, repair, (except emergency repair which, if the
circumstances justifY it, will not require joint approval but shall be done as closely as possible to
current specifications which have received recent joint approval of both parties), replacement
and/or reconstruction by either party of each and every sewer connecting to a sewer segment
under the control of the other party shall be according to plans and specifications approved
jointly by the District's engineer and Chula Vista's engineer.
(d) Each of the parties hereto shall construct or allow construction oflateral connections to
any sewer segment for which it is responsible in accordance with its established policy. For a
segment under Chula Vista jurisdiction, this means that City forces will construct the lateral and
connect it to the sewer main at the expense of the property owner as provided in the City's
Master Schedule of Fees, while for the District this means that the District will issue a permit for
a private contractor to construct a lateral and connect it to the sewer main at the property owner's
expense. Payment of any required fees or costs by the property owner shall be made directly to
the party having jurisdiction over the sewer segment to which connection is being made.l
(e) When responsibility for the provision of sewer service to one or more properties is
transferred from one of the parties of this agreement to tile other as a result of a jurisdictional
reorganization or agreement, equivalent capacity reservation in the San Diego Metropolitan
Sewerage System shall also be transferred to that party by the other, and the City of San Diego
shall be notified by the transferring party.
5. FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT
(a) Payment of permit fees, capacity charges or reimbursement of construction costs shall be
made directly from the property owner to the party having jurisdiction over the sewer segment to
which connection is made in accordance with any reimbursement agreement, ordinance or
resolution of the jurisdictional agency.
(b) In the event that one party assumes jurisdiction over an area served by the other party that is
I. Monthly revenues go to the public agency in whose jurisdiction the line lies.
-3-
1.1'''/5'
subject to a reimbursement agreement, it shall honor the reimbursement agreement in the same
manner as if it had been an original signatory to the agreement. Amounts collected from
subsequent users shall be forwarded to the beneficiary of the reimbursement agreement upon the
following January I or July I, whichever comes first.
(c) In the event that a transfer of land from the jurisdiction of one of the parties hereto to the
other after the tax roll has been printed, and the charges cannot be removed prior to the tax due
date, such collected amounts shall be transferred to the proper party within sixty days of their
receipt.
6. MAINTENANCE OF SEWER
(a) Chula Vista shall maintain and operate all portions of sewers lying within Chula Vista
and District shall maintain and operate all portions of sewers, including the Acacia A venue
Sewer and the Bonita-Long Canyon Sewer, lying within the District and other unincorporated
territory of San Diego County.' All portions of lines being maintained by District shall be
considered "District Lines" and all portions of lines being maintained by City shall be considered
"City Lines" within the meaning of City Policy 570-02.
(b) The boundaries of all annexations of unincorporated territory by either Chula Vista or the
District shall be adjusted to fully include the public rights of way or edsements within which the
sewer is located.
(c) Territory within the District which may be annexed by Chula Vista shall be withdrawn
from the District. Chula Vista will notify the affected agencies and property owners when this
has been effected.
(d) Any portion of District's sewer within previously unincorporated territory annexed by
Chula Vista shall continue to be maintained and operated by the District until such time as the
territory is detached from the District, after which it will be operated and maintained by Chula
Vista.
7. LIMITATION ON ACREAGE FEE CHARGES
In the event Chula Vista annexes any territory which has previously been included within the
District and for which acreage fees of $130 per gross acre have been paid to District as stipulated
in Section 11 of that certain agreement executed by the parties on March 9,1964 entitled
"AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO,
AND THE SPRING V ALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT OF THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
2. Duty to pay for the cost of the sewer service is with the party in whose jurdisction the
connection lies.
-4-
IY/~
FOR THE USE OF DISTRICT'S OUTFALL SEWER" (County Contract No. 2624-2125-R,
incorporated herein by reference), such fees shall not be charged again when that territory is
subsequently annexed by Chula Vista and detached from the District.
8. HOLD HARMLESS
Except as provided in Section 11, Chula Vista shall defend, indemnify and save the District free
and harmless from and against all claims, demands, liabilities or loss for injury to, or death of,
any person including employees of District, and damage to or property including, but not limited
to, property of District resulting in any manner directly or indirectly from or in connection with
any alleged defects in the work or services solely performed by Chula Vista or its agents
pursuant to this agreement
District shall defend, indemnify and save Chula Vista free and harmless from and against all
claims, demands, liabilities or loss for injury to, or death of, any person including but not limited
to employees of Chula Vista, and damage to property including, but not limited to, property of
Chula Vista resulting in any manner directly or indirectly from or in connection with any alleged
defects in the work or services solely performed by District or its agents pursuant to this
agreement.
9. SEWER SERVICE CHARGES
Periodic sewer service charges shall be paid by the property owner to the party having
jurisdiction over the sewer segment to which the property is connected. Such payment shall be
made in accordance with the procedure commonly used by the party, whether by inclusion on the
property tax bill, inclusion on a water bill, or by separate invoice by the jurisdictional agency.
In the event that the property is connected to a line for which City pays transportation costs to the
District based upon metered or estimated flows to the Spring Valley Outfall Sewer, City shall be
credited by the District for any sewage flows generated by property served by the District.
10. TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this agreement, the effective date of which termination shall be the
later of: (A) The thirtieth day following the date of written notice; or (8) The date the parties
mutually agree upon to provide for the continued use, maintenance and operation ofthe portion
or portions ofthe particular sewer line affected by the notice. Such termination shall only affect
the rights and duties of the parties as to future connections made after the effective date of such
termination; connections made prior to termination shall continue to be governed by the
provisions of this agreement such that the distributions of costs, revenues and risks herein
provided for shall continue to apply.
-')-
)~')7
11. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
The City of Chula Vista reserves the right to not defend, indemnify or hold harmless the District
with respect to work solely performed by the City upon that portion of the Bonita-Long Canyon
Sewer lying between the Spring Valley Outfall Sewer and the jurisdictional boundary of the City
ofChula Vista. This reservation of rights is made with respect to the fact that the City has
historically maintained the section that is within the District's jurisdiction only by default of
agreement because of the adverse effects upon the upstream properties within the City of Chula
Vista that would occur by non-maintenance of the lower section from the declination of the
District to provide such maintenance services. The City's past expenditures of funds have been
done without expectation of reimbursement under a mutual benefit theory, but the city has
expected and continues to expect in return that its assumption of a duty normally owed by the
District shall not thereby automatically confer full liability or a duty to indemnify District upon
the City for an obligation that is, or may be, subject to further negotiation and agreement between
the parties.
12. REPRESENTATIVES
The City ofChula Vista Director of Public Works shall represent Chula Vista in all matters
pertaining to the work and services rendered under this agreement. The San Diego County
Director of Public Works shall represent District in all matters pertaining to the work and
services rendered under this agreement.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by their
respective officials pursuant to Resolution No. adopted by the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista dated and by order of the Board of Directors of the Spring Valley
Sanitation District dated
-6-
15.../9"
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By
Shirley Horton, Mayor
Attest:
Beverly Authelet
c~:Y1erk} ,
!pptove AS~:O Form: 9
(/iA-- ,\. ~
j Bruce M. Boo
City Attorne
'--.--/
SPRlNG V A T~LEY SANITATION DISTRlCT
By
Approved As To Form:
Deputy County Counsel
RLD:rd
MISHAREDlACAClAAV,AG2 (Rev, 2/7/96)
KY 073
-7-
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT: SEWER SERVICE TO PROPERTY NOT
WITHIN THE CITY BOUNDARY
POLICY NO. 570-02
BACKGROUND
The City Council established the current version of Council Policy No. 570-02 with the adoption
of Resolution No. 16598 on June 2, 1992. This policy was intended to guide staff in providing
efficient and legal service to the public with respect to providing connections to the City sewer
system for properties not within the City boundary. However, since the adoption of the revised
policy, a number of properties have been required to pursue such connections because of the
failure of septic systems, but no connections have been made in accordance with its provisions.
PURPOSE
To establish a policy for the connection of properties outside the City to sewers which (1) are
presently part of the City sewer system or (2) are connected to County Sanitation District sewer
I ines which discharge into City facilities.
POLICY
The City Council, in cooperation with the San Diego County Board of Supervisors, hereby
establishes the following policy and procedures relative to the connection of properties outside the
boundaries of the City to City sewers or to a San Diego County Sanitary District sewer which lies
within the Chula Vista Sphere of Influence and discharges into a City sewer.
In the event that the Policy, when applied to a specific instance, would (in the opinion of the
property owner) result in the inefficient provision of service, the property owner may apply for
an exemption from the provisions of the Policy. In such an instance, the property owner shall pay
a non-refundable administrative fee of $1 ,000 to the City prior to the initiation of any staff work
in connection with the application.
The terms "adjacent", "contiguous", "City sewer" and "District sewer" as used in this policy
shall be defined as follows:
I, "Adjacent" is a location which lies closely to, but not necessarily touching or
having a common boundary with a specific feature.
2, "Contiguous" locations are those which directly abut City territory, or adjoin
streets which adjoin City territory.
This po~icy is referenced in an agreement entitled "Agreement Between the City of
Chula Vista and the Spring Valley Sanitation District of the County of San Diego for
the Maintenance, Operation and Use of a sewer in Acacia Avenue and Replacing Agreement
for the Construction, Operation and Use of a Sewer in Acacia Avenue and Palm Drive"
entered into on February 13, 1996, and on file in the Office of the City Clerk as
Contract No.
L
3. "City sewer" is a sewer owned by the City or a sewer owned by a County
Sanitation District, but operated and maintained by the City under an agreement with the
County Sanitation District.
4. "District sewer" is a sewer owned by a County Sanitation District or owned by the
City, but operated and maintained by a Sanitation District under an agreement with the
City,
The listed procedures are based upon the premises that a property which is connected to a City
sewer should ultimately be included within the City. If a property owner proposes connection to
a Sanitation District sewer which does not discharge into a City sewer, it should not be required
to seek annexation.
I. PROPERTIES CONTIGUOUS TO THE CITY BOUNDARY AND CONNECTING TO
A CITY SEWER:
A. Properties in this situation shall be required to execute an Irrevocable Offer of
Annexation to the City, or to complete annexation where appropriate, and pay appropriate
fees (Capacity'and ongoing Sewer Service Charges, along with a Connection Permit Fee
and Lateral Construction Charge) to the City.
B. The City shall construct the sewer lateral and provide such service under an Out
Of Agency service agreement, with Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) fees
paid by the property owner at the time the agreement is approved by LAFCO.
C. If the property is connected through a Sanitation District sewer or a long lateral
within unincorporated territory to a City sewer within incorporated territory, the property
owner shall also execute a Grant of Lien to the City in an amount sufficient to guarantee
a proportionate share of LAFCO, State and City fees and charges for future annexation
and pre-zoning in a specific amount, as estimated by the City to be adequate to cover that
share. Said proportionate share shall be assumed to be equal to twenty per cent (20 %) of
the estimated cost (at the time the property is connected) of said fees and charges for
annexation and pre-zoning of tbe individual property.
D. Thereafter, the City shall collect normal City sewer service charges, and pay
appropriate San Diego Metropolitan Sewerage System (Metro) and Sanitation District
charges
E. When an appropriate number of contiguous lots or parcels are annexable to the
City (normally in groups of 10 or more, but could be less in a particular situation), Chula
Vista, at its option, may require initiation of annexation proceedings. Annexation
proceedings may be initiated by property owner petition or by Resolution of Application
-2-
IS",),)..
adopted by the City Council. Upon payment of all related fees and charges by the affected
property owner(s) and completion of the annexation process, Chula Vista shall release any
outstanding lien on the affected properties.
IL PROPERTIES NOT CONTIGUOUS TO THE CITY BOUNDARY AND CONNECTING
TO A CITY SEWER:
A. Properties in this situation which are directly connected to, and receive sewer
service through a City sewer, shall be required to execute an Irrevocable Offer of
Annexation to the City, pay appropriate fees (Capacity and ongoing Sewer Service
Charges, along with a Connection Permit Fee and Lateral Construction Charge) to the
City and enter into an Out Of Agency agreement with LAFCO and a connection agreement
with the City for the provision of sewer service, with Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCO) fees paid by the property owner at the time the agreement is
approved by LAFCO.
B. Sections I.B, I.C, I.D and I.E are also applicable.
III PROPERTIES CONNECTING TO A SANITATION DISTRICT SEWER:
A. Properties in this situation, which are directly connected to (and receive service
through) a Sanitation District sewer, shall annex to the District and pay all appropriate fees
and charges to said District. In the event that the District sewer discharges into a
downstream City sewer, the property owner shall also execute an Irrevocable Offer of
Annexation to the City, Further, if that branch of the City's sewer system discharges
directly into the Metro system rather than discharging into the Spring Valley Outfall
Sewer, the property owner shall execute a Grant of Lien to the City in an amount
sufficient to guarantee a proportionate share of LAFCO, State and City fees and charges
for future annexation and pre-zoning in a specific amount, as estimated by the City to be
adequate to cover that share. Said proportionate share shall be assumed to be equal to
twenty per cent (20%) of the estimated cost (at the time the property is connected) of said
fees and charges for annexation and pre-zoning of the individual property.
B. Thereafter, the District shall collect normal District sewer service charges, and pay
appropriate Metro charges. If the District sewer discharges into a downstream City sewer
which, in turn, discharges directly into the Metro system, the District shall also pay
appropriate Metro charges to the City.
C. When an appropriate number of contiguous lots or parcels are annexable to the
City" Chula Vista, at its option, shall require initiation of annexation proceedings,
Annexation proceedings may be initiated by property owner petition or by Resolution of
Application adopted by the City Council. Upon payment of all related fees and charges
by the property owner(s) and completion of the annexation process, Chula Vista shall
release any outstanding lien on the affected property(ies).
-3-
15',;,3
D. Thereafter, the City shall collect normal sewer service charges and pay appropriate
Metro charges and, if the line discharges into the Spring Valley Outfall Sewer,
transportation charges to the District.
RLD:rd:c1r
M:\SIIARED\ENGINEER\SWRCONX3.POL REV. 1/30/96
-4-
15,,,2i
- - \ !, I,
_.Lj) i ~ /-:;1 "". f ' _
^\--- J. \._, , '-i;j \
.> ~ t:~ / '~"~~-"-';""'-t i \-:j.----'.'" 'I
' \ - "" , " ,';,
. , ! ".. 0, ~
' "'-. , " , '0'. . _' w
C.., r-....."., ,,' ,"" ~"':J I,; ".. "* .. 'J
/~" --':;-~''''-.~/ -' ~ )--"( >- It / ~' /" ,',l, _
/\' \ / '\, r '--~j ',;;~ CD '-l.;/ j_ . _ ' _
' , '. , . >' . .i. ~ "" _ '''' ,
7 ' v /'"."....0., , "! >, _ .: U~"~ !.J!.
.;.,-~' ", \ (-.' 0 -. ~~ /' , l ~
~~~~S;--'l.~ "J ~"")~' 'g ~,,! . . \
~:'~.-.:.~~"(;:'~ ' \ ... 0 \ N t
' .>, "l~ , ~ , .. ~ 7%, . ~
. , -.''''l', 0, , I _ _, .
;, '~ ' ,- ~ '1'"'" .:~~ t,O/,' : ~~ ';!~7,,~'i~':.
: ~ ~ ~ .<, - - '! -~~( / - \ ~!L~ r. \ / t, _ I H p.-
i ' , .~ -, ~ -'c'- ~----_, -"~'iP'1 Jill 1 ,
1:it,iV,<: -- -- -il\-L..~CD~~~>l!..f)'_' ll;""""<"--~i" ''V t ,.t~i\~
~- :>\' ."""" " ...~'" .. (l~ .,' i I r:';;> \: I '"
,..., , I.,'.r;~, u. ~.. - . ~ ~ O!~:.' . .,'-'-"t:. ",--..t.'_'::',":
i, " ~~~' >-;:- -; '-- -, ,t. ~,..:~~.....,,1}1 _ If" -J L _.~ f-[ " i 1~_
'. I-H'~r. 0, '-"""L.'::, R1,,, "',.. 0 ~ f""~~:(':--:':'-:"';:':'l:'/""" 't:":",.:\:,,=... ';'::':"" ":,._'J~,~ 1""
'. · " -. U , 0 .....ci' : "-"\__' , 'ft.;.- "f .... , ",', .'"" 'T ",.
' ., ,. , '."' U ' ",' 'I', ~ .,. ,
", I.. '-"'.... "'" t";< , .. . ',. " . " ~
. . .. ''''.. " , , ~ - .. ""'" "
-~'", ~ 'LV'" ...., .," ':" -., Ii ! "'f::J2' FO:':: f:':::,F/:,'l-"~
\\::::;;i '''.....:'': r ~', ,- "~ " '! "', e;:',r ;"A..,:/,
,,^, -""'-'"' /c'" Yl". '. '.0 W:>'
'" ' , "" 7'~'" · I ...., ,+_ H " "''''-''
,'Jt"-U, '\,,.,,, ~I), t.~., _..."
,,". ,,' ...- ",,-,,~.... ~' . , "\ ~ t () r - .J.....~~._
' , ( , \ \ , \ ,. I '\ _'" ...._~_~ .
~, ~ /,;;; " Ii ''', ~'!l c.: L'r-\--'t--~ ~Ii'r
~"~/(~"" ,. 'I?;.~ .. 'r !!:'" ! \ :"''':,''''',,1.,", ':
l\'-~~. .,"', ',~ /, '. --~~~'iIb'l . "'" ( , I '~i '';'' I 1
' ~ . , , ~ ' , ~; .- .-1--" L "'~ j
, Z'" , '~ ~ '.J " ~~ "" ""
o +0 .... r,". ! "".:"", .
' >= '"'" '0. -, c. ", '''''''' ''IF ,
)'! !l! <'.,. ',,,", ",p n ."..I.~ .. ,
,~ :J !.!. '. ' " "':z- @j 7 ~.. '"n.;' , ,fiJ _. ..
-:':~ ~~ ~ ~ ,'&i$,'J, \'~.k~~"~j.y"~ >~:/ ~.:'li
u, <II '" >! '" ,. "~ " / , ,_ 4'<. . , =- 1
- Q W <II!l1 II r' " '.J, '~ ,- , "" "'..' 'I I
. ..;0".. -' n "" -"II)' _ '" k., ':J'~
:n; ~ ~ :5: ~ i{.J :0: r;...:I~ " _;~.:.. -~)..., 2'1~'-l ~
..J ~ ::) '- r,;:; or....J?; ~..> '-, "ll\~, . ( I _". I,. ,
- -' ~ :I! ~w.. -. -=.:." "'" :l . .
"" < on " !!.!" 0 nIT"'""..",.,,,~, .. n'.
:[ > :> II. > Z (/) ~'-- t';;~y ~ ~J, \. };~' \\.., ...' 'lo\~\\....-\
:,;, " .. Q :l!!i < 'i':', ~ ,0:: " . '. .... ~
z -' -' W"" '. ',...
i ir ~ ~ ~!l: .. S" ".ll ' ~~ i:,D .
~ I ~ 0 13 ~ ')~ ',;: . '\ l~':- ATTACHMENT I
~i i g ~l;~. ~\:':.L ",
~ . . ~ \lll.\\-, '~R r.'\" , " .Jr 1'-'''
r .r!.~'.~\l.i~:l\~~~" l:\~L~L ,." \ .\~ .0.-
.." \.>i I .~ "\\'1, (\'\\ I' , ~ _ .__
~" r4-:-?-.
9
"
# ..
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
....\.
-----\ '.-"r-:::'" rJ \
.., I,.~~,o
-:\c
tl f"\,
"'" /
'---,
/ l__/'
,
\.
\,~
"
(
-"~.,,."-
",
2 '
OW
...J:r;
f'!:~
-2
20
0)-
~2
. <C
~()
y..v.'f-
Af'.,I'1'f'
"\\~,
~~
"0::
2UJ
0:>
...J"'"
;il:u.k
1-'rJ)
z;Z
00
[II>
_2'
",<C
i-~U
Q.j.>
1'~
~
, ~'>o:
.,~
.
.
. "._.~-...~..."...-..-....~ y?'
.- .
.::"
.
.
.
I/)
Z
ILl 2
::::)....
zc ~
ILIZ ~
z~o
~Cl:u
5_D::
~UILI
~CI:~
~UILI
~Cl:1/)
'\I'~~~
~ Zz
~ 5~~~
v'.
l.--"
a',
U)ffi~--
>:>'"
rJ);;.
~w
. cocn i
"
\
\
'/-.
Iff
f!
0)'
$
,,(.)
<(
(.)1
<(, '
'I i
-.
}'
.r
.
.
~.~"''''.I.-S-~''_'''. ..."1
. i ~ i
I "l.:............J
.
.
.
.. \ .~1...~
....~'\i" ..
~
'"
G
~
~
s::: ~
::0 ~
~
~
z
w
~
~I Q
~ Z
"
L ILl
J' ~ C)
J t<'J W
o ::::: ....
i:<
<(
o
z
~
o
co
~
(/)
>
::s
~
I
U
LL
o
~
u
>-.;,
t>:: "
<( ~
o ~
z "
~2
O~
COT
~
0-'"
o <.i
UJ
o
z
<(
U)
LL
o
~
z
~
o
u
10
I
~
/y.,;.J,
ATTACHMENT 2
1--1 t-t 0 ch r(\__x/y\::;/- 3
COUNCn. INFORMATION MEMO
~--
December 8, 1993
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: John Goss, City Manager
FROM: Robert A. Leiter, Director of Planning ~
SUBJECT: Impacts -- AB 1335, Out-of-Agency Service Agreement Review Procedures for
LAFCO
Pursuant to Council request, the following discussions provide a brief overview of the above
legislation's potential impacts on the City. Although lengthy and involved, AB 1335 is
essential1y comprised of two major components establishing new LAFCO authority and review
procedures:
Out-of--~encv Service A2Teements -- (effective January 1, 1994)
AB 1335 specifies that a city or district may provide new or extended services by contract or
agreement outside its boundaries, only if it requests and receives written approval from LAFCO.
The affected territory must be within the agency's sphere of influence, and the extension of the
service must be in anticipation of a later change of organization (such as annexation).
Exceptions to this new provision are (I) contracts or agreements between two or more public
agencies, (2) contracts for the transfer of nonpotable or nontreated water, and (3) contracts or
agreements solely involving the provision of surplus water to agricultural lands for conservation
purposes or to directly support agricultural industries. However, extending surplus water to
support or induce development will require the extending agency to receive advance written
approval from LAFCO.
LAFCO procedures to implement the new provisions are also established, along with new fees.
The procedures add new paperwork and a LAFCO Board consideration. The new fees amount
to a 30% surcharge on the associated annexationldetatchment application, and are born by the
applicant.
Examples of situations which would and would not impact the City are:
sewer service extensions to private properties under existing Council Policy
570-02, where annexation is not a concurrent requirement, would be affected.
Advance authorization would be needed from LAFCO, and the property owner
would pay the additional 30% surcharge.
/5 ~ .2 ?
The Honorable Mayor
and City Council
-2-
December 8, 1993
In cases of demonstrated public health, safety or welfare impacts (failing septic),
LAFCO's Executive Officer may administratively approve the out-of-agency
agreement, thereby streamlining the process.
Any other agreements/contracts for sewer service in the greater Bonita area
between the City and the Spring Valley Sanitation District meet the public agency
exemption.
automatic aid agreements for police and rue service would not be affected as they
involve two or more public agencies, and therefore meet the exemption.
services such as animal control do not entail future changes of organization (i.e.
a service district does not have to be formed, etc.) and faU outside the scope of
the legislation.
Beyond these examples, historically, the City has not provided other services outside its
municipal boundary, nor outside our sphere of influence, that would be impacted by the
legislation.
New LAFCO lnitiatorv Authoritv - Effective July 1, 1994
AB 1335 also creates new LAFCO authority to initiate proceedings regarding independent special
districts including consolidations. dissolutions, mergers. or establishment of subsidiary districts.
The new initiatory powers also apply to reorganizations that include any of these changes of
organization. LAFCO's initiation may only occur, however, subsequent to and consistent with
the recommendation / conclusions of a study. Furthermore, any alternate proposal submitted
which could affect LAFCO's special district proposal, must first be considered.
It is unlikely that these provisions will impact Chula Vista in that the only such districts that
exist within our Planning Area are the two water districts, and the Spring VaUey Sanitation
District which was discussed in the previous section.
Additionally, as the provisions are not effective for another six months, LAFCO staff is still in
the process of reviewing this part of the legislation in establishing an implementation plan. The
City will therefore be afforded an opportunity for further review once that implementation plan
is drafted, likely in April-May 1994.
QtIw:
AB 1335 also provides that where a subject area is uninhabited, aU owners within the area have
consented to the organizational changes, and the affected agencies that will gain territory as a
If'/' r
.
The Honorable Mayor
and City Council
-3-
December 8. 1993
result of the proposed change of organization or reorganization have also consented, that the
"conducting authority" (in our case the City Council) proceedings may be waived by LAFCO.
Many of the annexations / reorganizations which the City processes could meet these criteria.
As a result. the overall process could be streamlined without impact; typically the conducting
authority proceedings are entirely procedural in nature and require a considerable amount of
staff/applicant time in processing paperwork.
Conclusions
As the full legislative provisions do not become effective until July 1994, LAFCO staff is still
in the process of conducting an extensive review, and in devising a comprehensive
implementation planes). As such, the procedures adopted for the out-of-agency service
agreements are interim, and subject to change when a comprehensive plan is presented in June-
July.
Therefore, should the Council have additional concerns or questions, opportunity will be present
to more fully address those concerns over the next several months, prior to LAFCO's adoption
of comprehensive implementation provisions in July 1994.
(obI335,..;01)
15",). 9
..
,\, ,
I i-t
\ \'--j Lt,
i_)\il
LAFCO
Chairperson
Dr. Lillian M. Chiids
Helix Water District
Members
Dianne Jacob
County Board of
Supervisors
John MacDonald
County Board of
Supervisors
Leonard M. Moore
Councilmember, City of
Chuia Vista
Joan Shoemaker
Mayor, City of
EI Cajon
George Stevens
Deputy Mayor, City of
San Diego
John Sasso
President, Borrego
Water District
Dr. Unell Fromm
Public Member
Alternate Members
Brian P. Bilbray
County Board of
Supervisors
Julianne Nygaard
Councilmember, City of
Carisbad
Juan Vargas
Councilmember, City of
San Diego
Ronald W. Wootton .
Vista Fire Protection District
David A. Perkins
Public Member
Executive Officer
Michael D. Ott
Counsel
Uoyd M. Harmon, Jr.
1600 Pacific Highway. Room 452
San Diego, CA 92101 · (619) 531-5400
San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission
July 25, 1994
Ed Batchelder, Associate Planner
Planning Department
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
SUBJECT: City of Chula Vista Sewer Policy No. 570-02
Dear Ed:
As we discussed, because of recent legislation expanding LAFCO's
authority over the provision of services outside an agencies boundaries,
modification of Chula Vista's Sewer Policy 570-02 will be necessary. The
new legislation, AB 1335 (Government Code Section 56133) requires that
before an agency can provide services outside its boundaries, it must first
obtain approval from LAFCO. In December 1993 and in June 1994, LAFCO
adopted procedures to implement the legislation. In general, the
procedures require that: (1) any extension of services outside an agency's
boundaries be in anticipation of a future annexation; (2) the City request
LAFCO approval of a contractual service agreement prior to extending
service; (3) an annexation application be submitted in conjunction with the
request for approval of a contractual service agreement; and (4) the
applicant pay the applicable processing fee upon submittal of a contractual
service agreement application. I have enclosed copies of the LAFCO
procedures to implement the legislation.
In reviewing Policy No. 570-02, it is recommended that the following areas
be revised to bring the policy into conformance with the legislation and our
procedures:
Section 1. Basic Policy--Annexation required:
It appears that this portion of the policy addresses instances in which
the property is eligible for annexation, and is intended to provide the
terms and conditions under which the City will connect the property
to a sewer line in advance of the completion of annexation
proceedings. Under the new legislation, LAFCO will have to approve
the extension of services prior to connecting the property. It is
If.J t/
Ed Batchelder
July 25, 1994
Page 2
suggested that this portion of the policy be amended to include a requirement that,
prior to connection, LAFCO must approve a contractual service agreement.
. Section 2. Prooerties Where Annexation is Beyond the Control of Proposed
Connectee:
The requirement that the City request that LAFCO approve a contractual service
agreement should also be reflected in this section of the policy. It is suggested
that the first paragraph be revised as follows: "... service may be permitted on
the condition that LAFCO approve a contractual service agreement, and the
proposed connectee shall enter into . . ."
. Subsection 2. (a) should be revised as follows: "The owner of the property seeking
connection shall agree in writing to file a formal petition and annexation application
with LAFCO, and diligently pursue annexation when LAFCO and/or the City
determines that annexation is logical. Said agreement shall be a covenant. . ."
Since LAFCO procedures require that a petition be submitted with the annexation
application, the last sentence of this paragraph should be revised as follows: "The
agreement may, to the extent permitted by law, also provide that the property
owner grant irrevocable power of attorney to the City to pursue the annexation at
a time deemed appropriate by the City." The City may want to give consideration
to including language in this section that discusses the possibility of activating the
annexation proposal by adoption of a Resolution of Application by the City Council.
. A new subsection should be added following Subsection 2.(c). The subsection
should read: "The property owner shall pay to LAFCO allLAFCO processing fees
prior to LAFCO consideration of a contractual service agreement. If a contractual
service agreement surcharge is in effect at the time annexation is pursued, the
property owner shall pay to LAFCO the appropriate surcharge amount."
. If the "annexation fees" discussed in Subsection 2.(d) refer to LAFCO fees, this
subsection should be revised to delete this requirement.
If you have any questions regarding the above comments or you would like me to review
a revised draft of the policy, please contact me at 531-5400.
Sincerely,
2 :/ --[ e~,-,~--~
/ '}SOE CONVERY /1
V Local Governmenlal Analyst
JFC:ih
Enclosures
lyJ/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / t
Meeting Date 2/13/96
/8';1.1.>
Resolution Appropriating funds for the construction of a portion
of the Salt Creek Sewer line and adding a new project to the crp Budget.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of PublIc Wor,ksJf
REVIEWED BY, Ci<y M'""'''0Ll ,F/~'i~\ (4l5th, V",,, V"XN'_I
San Diego Gas and Electric Company is in the process of constructing a new high pressure gas
line known as PipelIne 2000 to serve the south portion of the County. A part of this line is to
be constructed within the Salt Creek basin on the Gtay Ranch. The portion of their gas line
along Salt Creek coincides with the proposed alignment of the City's Salt Creek Sewer. Because
of the potential conflicts should the gas pipeline be constructed first it is desirable to construct
the Salt Creek sewer lIne as part of S.D.G. & E. 's pipelIne construction. Because of
S.D.G.&E.'s timing, this item adds a project to the CIP budget and appropriate funds for the
sewer construction. In future items Council will be asked to approve a joint use agreement for
the easement and a joint powers agreement for construction of the line under S.D.G.&E's
contract.
ITEM TITLE:
RECOMMENDATION: The the City Council add project SW210 - Salt Creek Sewer/SDGE
pipeline to the CIP budget and appropriate $600,000 from the available balance of sewer fund
number 222 - Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None
DISCUSSION: San Diego Gas and Electric Company has been working with the Baldwin
Company on the alIgnment of their Pipeline 2000 project through the Gtay Ranch. A portion
of the alignment selected runs along Salt Creek which is the same alignment proposed for the
Salt Creek interceptor sewer. Recently the Baldwin Company and S.D.G. & E. began working
with City staff to include the sewer line in S.D.G. & E. 's construction project to avoid future
increased costs in the sewer construction due to the presence of a high pressure gas line.
The parties involved are working out the details, however, basically the sewer line will share
the roadway being constructed by S.D.G. & E. for their gas line. Since both lines would be
constructed at the same time the cost of constructing the sewer line now are considerably less
expensive than doing so later when a contractor would have to work around an energized high
pressure gas line. In addition, constructmg the sewer now minimizes the environmental impacts
because the gas line construction already has environmental permits and our project can be
completed with a minimum of additional disruption. Later construction of the sewer line could
cause considerably greater environmental damage if the sewer would have to pioneer a new
alignment and service road to avoid the gas pipelIne.
/~-J
Page 2, Item /v
Meeting Date 2/13/96
S.D.G. & E.'s schedule for the gas line construction is extremely tight in order to stay within
their environmental permits. They propose to advertise the project on February 28, 1996 and
would award it April 19, 1996, Actual construction would begin on the project in less
environmentally sensitive areas about June 3 and would begin in the critical environmentally
sensitive areas, including Salt Creek, on August 15 after the end of the nesting season.
S.D.G.&E. has to be out of the environmentally sensitive areas by the beginning of the rainy
season (about November I, 1996). With this tight schedule City staff has been working with
the developers and S.D.G. & E. to facilitate the sewer construction. In order to charge staff
time to the project and avoid charges to the General Fund, a new CIP project needs to added
to the CIP budget and funds need to be appropriated. Attached as Exhibit A is a copy of the
proposed CIP detail sheet with a map.
A very preliminary cost estimate of the sewer construction is $480,000. Adding contingencies,
staff time, soil testing and other inspection costs to that amount a total of $600,000 needs to be
appropriated at this time. Funds are available in fund 222, the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve
Fund.
The City has adopted the Salt Creek Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee (SCSBDIF) to pay
for the costs associated with the construction of the Salt Creek interceptor sewer. Developments
that are, or will, pay into the SCSBDlF are Salt Creek Ranch (First Nationwide Bank), Eastlake
and Baldwin. Because the SCSBDIF was adopted only about one year ago (November 22,
1994), there has been very little development in the basin which has paid the fee to date and
insufficient funds are available to pay for the cost of this portion of the line. The adopted
SCSBDIF provides for payment for the construction of the Salt Creek Interceptor within the Salt
Creek Sewer Basin to transport sewage flow to future downstream transmission and/or treatment
facilities located just east of the MCA site. Downstream regional facilities (i.e.: sewer outfall
and/or treatment plant) would be paid for using Sewer Capacity fees. Staff is proposing an
alternative of a trade off in funding these improvements now with capacity fees (Fund 222) and
have the SCSBDlF fund an equivalent amount of downstream facilities. The developers have
agreed to this approach. Staff will return in the future with an amendment to the SCSBDIF to
accomplish that action.
Under this action the City Council is not binding the City to any expenditure of funds for the
construction of the sewer line. In future actions City Council will be asked to approve a joint
use agreement with S.D.G. & E. for the joint use of the easement to be granted to the City and
S.D.G. & E. by the Baldwin Company. That document is being finalized now and City staff
hopes to bring it to the Council for approval before S.D.G. & E. awards the contract. City staff
is also working with S.D.G. & E. on finalizing a joint powers agreement for installation of a
sewer pipeline and facilities which will permit the construction of the sewer and gas lines as part
of S.D.G.& E. 's project. This document, which would bind the City to spend the funds for the
purpose for which they are being appropriated, will also be brought to the Council for approval
in the near future. This later agreement WIll, however, contain provisions that allow the City
I~ ,;2..
Page 3, Item / "
Meeting Date 2/13/96
to back out of the expenditure should the bids for the work come in higher than is believed to
be reasonable.
FISCAL IMPACT: The construction of the sewer line as part of the S.D.G. & E. project is
estimated to cost approximately $600,000. These funds need to be appropriated from the Trunk
Sewer Capital Reserve Fund. If the City constructed the pipeline at a later time when funds are
available in the SCSBDlF and the line is needed, it is estimated that the costs could be as much
as $500,000 higher because of conflicts with the gas line requiring extensive shoring or dealing
with environmental mitigation problems if a different alignment had to be found to avoid those
construction impacts.
The Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund has balance of approximately $8 million in anticipation
of the need to construct major regional facilities. The required $600,000 for this project will
not jeopardize the construction of those future facilities.
Attachments:
Exhibit A - CIP detail sheet
m :\home\engineer\agenda\SCSewer. cis
/~ ~.J /;t-r
RESOLUTION NO. / ~ ;J..1,r
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A PORTION OF THE SALT CREEK
SEWER LINE AND ADDING A NEW PROJECT TO THE CIP
BUDGET
WHEREAS, San Diego Gas and Electric Company is in the
process of constructing a new high pressure gas line known as
pipeline 2000 to serve the south portion of the County; and
WHEREAS, a part of this line is to be constructed within
the Salt Creek basin on the Otay Ranch and a portion of their gas
line along Salt Creek coincides with the proposed alignment of the
City's Salt Creek Sewer; and
WHEREAS, because of the potential conflicts should the
gas pipeline be constructed first, it is desirable to construct the
Salt Creek sewer line as part of S.D.G.&E. 's pipeline construction;
and
WHEREAS, because of S.D.G. & E. 's timing, the city needs
to add a project to the CIP budget and appropriate funds for the
sewer construction now.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
ci ty of Chula vista does hereby appropriate $600,000 from the
available balance of Sewer Fund Number 222 - Truck Sewer Capital
Reserve Fund and add project SW2l0 - Salt Creek SewerlSDGE Pipeline
to the CIP Budget. '
APP~fed 'r t~)form n
i ,_,+\~J'I I, " /
/ ""-_ , \I ~ ~ .r---1}...A..-L/
. Bruce M. Bo
Attorney
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
(
C:\rs\SCSewer.$
~
I~ ,f j;t-f,
...J
;;:
I-
W
C
:;;
0:(
o:(~
I-Cl
III 0
-~
>0..
:)1Il
::::ll-
J:Z
UW
11.:;;
O~
~~
-0..
U:;;
Cl
z
ii:
w
w
z
(5
z
!!!z
"'0
"",
~z
~~
0-<.>'"
"'-u..
~....JLL.
",lll_
-:>...J
~Q.U
Ii.
Iii W
...J Cl
:> <
fil~~
:J:Z::E
u~t-
"'1-<.>
...J~w
<<..,
Efb~
~OD..
...J
0:(
l-
ii:
0:(
U
'"
w
ii:
o
wI-
zii1
::;~
~w
WI-
;;:z
w~
"'w
I-
"'"
w<
ww
~"
0<'><
~I-W
~...JD:::
;;:<<
"''''z
<
...J
a.
~
.. z
ci..~
z~~
11.....0
UI-O
o
<;>
'"
'"
~
o
'"
>-
u..
o
'"
'"
"I
~
'"
'"
~
>-
u..
o
'"
~
'"
..:.
'"
'"
~
>-
u..
o
'"
0-
"I
'"
'"
~
>-
u..
'"
"I
"'
'"
'"
~
>-
u..
'"
"'....
Zz
Ow
...Ji=D:::a::
c:(:g;D:::c:(
1-D::::Jw
oc.u>
1-0:>
~~
a.:J:
~I-
0 0 0
'"
....
<.>...J
w<
..,....
00
~I-
a.
0 0 0
0 0 0 '"
0 b 0 0 0
0 0 0 6 6
6 0 6 0 0 Cl
~ 6 0 <D <D C
<D '"
'" '" .Q
~
o
'"
0 0 0
0 0 :5
b 8 0
0 0 6
0, 0 6 6
0 0 0 IE
co 6 0 <D
" '" '" '" '"
~ '"
'"
'" ...J
...J ..
.. >--
>-- 0
~ ....
CJ
z
(.)
z
..
z
u:
c
rn ,Q
c 1"
'c w
c c C iJj
ro .g E
c: w
'in c "C "
>- '5 ,Q .. ~
'" " 0- U :>
1" u 2 " 0
w .. c ~
I- ro rn W '"
~ ~ "C in c c '"
l" c ID 0 ID Cl
ro <.> CJ ~
;:: a. ...J 0 Z
'" U w
w Z '"
.... < "
'" Z '"
0 - ~ :> u: >--
- -
<.> - -
/~ -?
o
'"
o
'"
o
'"
o
'"
o
'"
~'
"-
"
" "
lJ) ~ Ui
Q.l-c
..c: c: .-
I-~O
, >
Q) ~ a..
~o:::::
-'",'"
~ "N
"-'< ro
~..5 .~
UJ >- "
.Y:. 2.s 1:5
~O~~
"--..c:c
001--0
_.c "
ro'5>.o
(/)OQ)O
Q)t/)ro~
:5~>Q)
'+-:= >. c::
OE2'ID
6 ~ 0 .9-
€N <1.1 0-
o>.Ew
c...Q:) _ ell
rolUO(')
-E..cO
o 'x 15 (f)
c 2 C (1)
o c... lJ) :5
:u g-~ ..c::
E E:t:
lJ) C ~
C'o l{) >.
o o..~:;::::::
U ro o.s
~i'! Ii
OC2tl
U') Q) 0.. C
(II xc... 0
c Q.) ro ()
0-'<0
0"-
0" "
NOD
~ ~,~
.- ro Ul
(j)(/)Ql
.9- Q) "'C
0... :5 .~
~ .S ."'!::::_
.c _
c _ '"
?; .?;~
0",,,,
~Q)Q)
--
" " "
~~E
'" '" '"
(\] c c c
0')000
uU+,
Q) Q) Q) U
:;..c..o 2
~.s~~
~.~ = 0
0...0 III U
~8 ~~
ENQ):'::;::
3: ~:5.~
Q) :.::;:: "0 0-
C ~S (/)
ro._ 0_
OJ 0... ..c W
c_lIl06
.- 0 - (9
gc~o
L.. ell:.:(/)
1ilE'C_
CO>OO
o Q) 0 t
o (/J _ ro
0<( .!!! 0..
lJ) . C IJI
(J) >. Q) ro
Q) 1: 0 Q)
g 6 o...s
0..0'0 -.J
Q) Q) Q) ill
:5:5~;:
.S '0 ~ ~
.!:!! c ~.Y:.
w.2 ~
06 t:: . '-
(9~-5u
~:5~~
"<>OUJ
.. 0 >.
g~2~
+>:;50:
" c"
.~ ~.- 2
~ Q).s ti
CI) II) (/) C
::::I 0 ~ 0
""'_LLJU
0
,so N
<
C ~
0
~ i
:!;;
:c
'" ~
.c
i" E
.~
"
0-
i"
>>
'"
:;;
'"
rn
rn
>- '"
LL C
- 0
0 ~
Q; Q;
-e "-
ro 0
" Vi
0- -'<
- ~
~
"' s:
'" ,g
c
'" -"
(0 "
rn D-
rn >>
-"
>- "
u.. "
- c
'"
0 c
~ 2
"
-e c
'" ';;;
" E
rr
.c ro
-e S
" OJ
0 "
LL <>0
i=
o
:g
E
'"
c
o
o
.;..:
"
"
il:
W
-
"
i
o~
.0
'"
o
"
c
o
iJ
"
~
N '"
N C
N
'" Q;
C.c
~o
-c-~
C '"
~ cl
" C
2:t;
"2
'"
Q.l=
<>0 ~
2 (])-
"c.. E
ro+:J
0",
~ '"
,,-
" '"
" '
UJ ill
~ '0
C C
" "
~g>
"'
C
o
"
E
.
"
~
~
~
0'
.
~
<
,
"
.
u
~
~
,
<i
w
s: ill
w'"
~-5
<>0 C
f--;--
. .
;;
,;;
C C "tl ~~u.C;\~
0
l> ::J:l ::J:l P
-I l> :j ~Old30~3J.N1 o'lU3'"
m ~ <aI
0
z z
0
to
N -< 0 .
"TI
-.
..... s: C/)
-. m
CD c... ~
0) - m
::J:l
s: ,
l> , \
z ,
l>
C
(J) c...
l>
)> (")
r- m Jr;.
z
-I -I
"tl (") -l
l> JJ 0 ",...
::J:l m C) 'U :I:
l> .... ." -~. -
m =ti 'U,. D::I
r ""l mm.,
r " D -
m "'" r- Ct I, \ -I
r Z Z,-<
-I (J) C m m ~ '- I~ \\ ~ -'"
0 m .
." 'I \' ~
:e N~
C/) 00 ~3 !I \ :x:-
C 00 \," ." \
m C) ""
c;) 00 ,",' ,
~E ~
l2" JJ :x: .. .. \
"
m c:: - I t
- - -
C/) Z -
.... -
-
-I -
3! b -
-
m - I
"tl -
-
m JJ "' -
c: -
-
(") - a
Z .... -
en - I ~'l"C':! . ..l,......'-'
m m - ~
-
- i "., "" ~'o-:_>
N "'tI ""l -
-
0 -I b -
0 - I
- ',.~->.. \.
0 0 - ---- ~ '," f i ! "
- ~ \.'- i,'
- ~ ~"
JJ - 0 ~ J .
- , "
- f :r .::~- \, ,
- ;; ie'
- :r
r- - ( UI ... .
- ~-
- "" t
Z
<
m
z -
/t. ...
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item R
Meeting Date 02/13/96
ITEM TITLE: (Continued) Report: San Miguel Ranch Ad Hoc Citizen's Advisory
Committee; San Miguel Ranch Goals and Objectives
</,:/
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning 014
REVIEWED BY: City Manage"JC! L~c~ 03\\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No---.XJ
On August 22, 1995, Emerald Properties,-..(nc., submitted applications for a General Plan
Amendment (GPA), a General Development Plan (GDP) amendment, a Sectional Planning Area
(SPA) plan, and an Environmental Impact Report for the San Miguel Ranch property, a 2590
acre site located in the northeast portion of the Chula Vista planning area. A condition of the
previously-approved GDP for this property requires the formation of an eight member ad-hoc
citizen's advisory committee to provide input into the planning process for the project. In
addition, a document entitled "San Miguel Ranch: Draft Project Goals and Objectives" has been
prepared by the applicant and City staff for City Council consideration. The purpose of this
document is to identify the major issues to be addressed in the future planning of this project and
to state the overall goals and objectives of the City and the applicant in this planning effort.
On November 21, 1995, the City Council considered the appointment of an ad hoc citizen's
committee and the goals and objectives for the San Miguel Ranch project. The Council
determined that the committee should be expanded from eight to nine members, and the matter
was continued to solicit additional nominees for the committee, and to further study the proposed
goals and objectives. The City Clerk advertised for volunteers for the committee, but to date the
City has received only one application for the three vacant positions on the committee.
RECOMMENDATION:
I . Reduce the required number of ad hoc committee members from nine to seven, and
appoint the attached list of seven nominees.
2. Approve the attached proposed guidelines for the operation of the Committee.
3. Accept the attached revised Goals and Objectives for consideration in the future planning
of this project.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
)/ -I
Page 2, Item _
Meeting Date 02/13/96
DISCUSSION:
Background
On March 23, 1993, the City Council adopted Resolution 17049, approving the General
Development Plan (GDP) for the San Miguel Ranch property, and also approved an ordinance
prezoning the property. Subsequent to the approval of the GDP, the property ownership
reverted from San Miguel Partners to the financial institution, Banker's Trust, via the
foreclosure process. Banker's Trust, through its subsidiary, Emerald Properties, Inc. (EPC), has
now filed applications for a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and an amendment to the approved
GDP, as well as a Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan for the entire project site.
On February 2, 1996, EPC notified staff that they have decided to process only their GPA and
GDP amendment requests at this time, and to process SPA plans following action on the GPA
and GDP. In this way, EPC will obtain formal City Council direction on their development
concept without the expense of preparing SPA documents at this time. Staff anticipates hearings
on the GPA and GDP amendment in June or July 1996, with hearings on the SPA plan and a
master tentative map in late 1996.
The City has retained a project manager, as approved in the 1995-96 Budget, to coordinate the
processing of the project. Ultimately the project will require the approval of the following:
--General Plan Amendment
--Amendment of the San Miguel Ranch General Development Plan
--Sectional Planning Area plan
--Tentative Subdivision Map(s)
--Annexation of the property to the City
--Possible deannexation of the property from certain special districts
--Environmental Impact Report assessing each of the above proposals
Citizen's Committee
In conjunction with its action on the San Miguel Ranch General Development Plan, on April 13,
1993, the City Council approved Resolution 17057, which revised Resolution 17049 relative to
the formation of a citizen's ad hoc advisory committee. The City Council required the
establishment of such a committee in order to provide a formalized citizen's input process for
review of all SPA plans and subsequent discretionary permits for this project. The committee
is to consist of the following members:
Representative from the Sweetwater Community Planning Group
Representative from the Sweetwater Civic Association
Representative from the Endangered Habitat League
\"1- ;)-
Page 3, Item _
Meeting Date 02/13/96
Representative from the Sierra Club
Resident of adjacent Bonita area
Resident of adjacent Eastlake/Salt Creek area
Non-resident adjacent property owner
Two at-large members
The applicant has solicited nominees for each of the committee positions listed above, except for
the at-large and Bonita resident members who have yet to be chosen. Attached is a list of
individuals who have agreed to serve on the committee (Attachment 1). For the two at-large
members and one Bonita resident, pursuant to City Council direction the City Clerk published
an advertisement describing the purpose and duration of the committee, indicating which
committee positions are open, and inviting applications to serve. However, only one application
was received (from Barbara Gilman, a former member of the City's Design Review Committee
and various other planning committees). Lacking additional applicants, staff is recommending
that Council decrease the minimum membership to seven, in which case the nominees on hand
would be sufficient to create a viable and workable committee. Another option would be to re-
advertise for the positions at this time; however, this could delay the committee's review of the
project.
While Resolution 17057 requires the committee to review all SPA plans and subsequent
discretionary permits, no operational parameters for the committee were established at that time.
Neither the City Charter nor the Municipal Code spells out how such committees should operate,
so staff has prepared proposed guidelines for the operation of the committee for the Council's
consideration (See Attachment 3).
These guidelines include a description of the plan documents which will be reviewed by the
committee, which would include the GPA, GDP amendment, SPA plans, and Master Tentative
Map. In addition, the guidelines include quorum and voting requirements, and criteria for
ensuring that the committee's review of the project does not interfere with the overall public
hearing schedule established by the City.
Goals and Obiectives
As part of our preliminary work on this project, the applicant and City Staff have prepared draft
Goals and Objectives for the project (see Attachment 4). This document is intended to identify
major planning issues which will need to be evaluated during the future planning of this project,
and sets forth agreed upon goals and objectives for this planning effort.
The draft Goals and Objectives address four broad areas:
\"1- ~
Page 4, Item _
Meeting Date 02/13/96
1) Housing / Communitv Character / Land Use - these goals and objectives deal with the
character of the proposed development, including housing types, community design,
preservation of natural features, and compatibility with adjoining land uses.
2) Resource Conservation - these goals and objectives relate to preservation of sensitive
habitats and other environmental resources, as well as minimizing the impact of the
project on adjoining watersheds.
3) Communitv / Public Facilities - these goals and objectives address the timely provision
of schools, parks, and other essential public facilities and services in a cost effective
manner.
4) Circulation, Public Safetv. and Welfare - these goals and objectives address various
traffic circulation issues, including the alignment of SR-125, as well as issues related to
police and fire protection.
When the draft Goals and Objectives were first presented to the City Council on November 21
(see Attachment 7, Council minutes), it was pointed out that the application submitted by
Emerald Properties in August had proposed a General Plan Amendment and amended General
Development Plan that would allow a greater number of dwelling units on the Southern Parcel
than the previously approved plan. This request would result in a greater variety of housing
types on the Southern Parcel, but would also reduce the amount of low density "estate-type"
housing in the project. Preliminary plans prepared by the applicant propose 1,306 single family
dwelling units on lots of various sizes and 139 multi-family units on the Southern Parcel, up
from a maximum of 1,166 and 96, respectively, in the previously approved GDP for the
Southern Parcel.
At the same time, the application submitted in August would eliminate development on the
Northern Parcel, on which up to 357 one-acre estate lots had been conditionally allowed in the
previously approved GDP. The applicant indicated that the primary reason for eliminating any
development on the Northern Parcel was in response to concerns raised by Federal and State
wildlife agencies regarding the environmental sensitivity of this area, and their expressed desire
that the entire Northern Parcel be included within the regional preserve system being considered
in the Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP).
At the November 21 meeting, the City Council indicated that at least two issues associated with
the project were of concern: (1) the deletion of estate housing from the project, and (2) the role
that the MSCP will play in the planning of the San Miguel Ranch.
Regarding the first issue, it should first be noted that the reduction of estate housing
opportunities in the project plan submitted in August is a result of both the elimination of
development on the Northern Parcel, as well as proposed changes to the plan for the Southern
\l-~
Page 5, Item _
Meeting Date 02/13/96
Parcel which would reduce the area designated for "Low Density Residential." The applicant has
obtained market studies which indicate that the demand for such housing in the Chula Vista
market area is not adequate to support the number of estate housing lots which were included
in the previously approved plan.
However, the City Council expressed the concern that elimination of estate housing from the
plan, particularly on the Northern Parcel, would result in a less desirable project, and would
eliminate one of the few opportunity sites within the City's General Plan area in which high
quality estate housing projects could be constructed. In response to this concern, the applicant
has expressed a willingness to provide estate lots on the Northern Parcel.
Regarding the role that the MSCP plays in the planning of the San Miguel Ranch, it has long
been recognized that the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department
of Fish and Game (CFG) consider the 1,852 acre Northern Parcel to have very significant
regional biological value, and have indicated that the entire parcel should be acquired, protected
and included as part of the MSCP. During the ErR process for the original San Miguel Ranch
project, the USFWS stated that the property "supports one of the richest and most diverse
assemblages of unique and sensitive biological resources in Southern California." Recent
discussions with senior staff members from both agencies have reaffirmed the importance placed
by those agencies on preservation of the Northern Parcel.
Given the significance of this property to the overall regional preserve system proposed in the
draft MSCP plans, staff would recommend that a San Miguel Ranch plan alternative which
excludes development on the Northern Parcel continue to be evaluated. At the same time, in
recognition of the unique characteristics of the site which make it attractive for estate housing,
staff would recommend that a second alternative, which includes estate housing on the Northern
Parcel in accordance with the previously approved General Development Plan, also be evaluated.
It is also recommended that both options be evaluated in the formulation of a final MSCP
Subarea Plan for the Chula Vista General Plan area.
In making a final decision regarding whether to allow development on the Northern Parcel, the
City Council would be provided with the following:
1) further evaluation of environmental issues related to development on the Northern Parcel,
including both biological resources pertaining to the MSCP as well as other site specific
issues such as potential impacts of storm drainage runoff on the Sweetwater Reservoir;
2) further analysis of long term demand for estate housing in the Chula Vista General Plan
area, and further evaluation of all potential locations for such housing within the planning
area;
\,-S
Page 6, Item _
Meeting Date 02/13/96
3) evaluation of the feasibility of providing urban services (police, fire, public works, etc.)
to support residential development on the Northern Parcel;
4) evaluation of issues related to future annexation of the Northern Parcel, in relation to
adjacent SDG & E properties which are unincorporated.
A final decision regarding these issues could be reached in conjunction with the Council's action
on the revised GPA / GDP this summer, or could be deferred until the MSCP planning process
is completed later this year.
The draft Goals and Objectives have been modified to reflect this "alternatives" approach to the
issues discussed above, and also include other minor revisions which are highlighted in the text.
It is important to note that, while the draft Goals and Objectives are being presented to the
Council for review and acceptance as part of this report, this action in no way commits the
Council to any course of action on the project, nor are any final judgments being requested
regarding the merits of the project at this time. Staff will provide a complete analysis and
environmental review of the applicant's proposed plans prior to recommending action regarding
any General Plan Amendment or other discretionary approvals for this project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Creation of a citizen's ad hoc committee for San Miguel Ranch will result in additional staff time
devoted to working with the committee. However, staff costs on this project are recoverable
from the applicant's deposit account, so no additional costs to the City will result.
Attachments:
1. List of potential committee members
2. Resolution 17057 establishing ad hoc citizen's committee
3. Proposed guidelines and duties of the committee
4. Draft Goals and Objectives for San Miguel Ranch project
5. Vicinity map--San Miguel Ranch
6. Approved San Miguel Ranch General Development Plan
7. Minutes of November 21, 1995 City Council meeting
(a:\cilCOlllm5.rsml
\"\ -le,
POTENTIAL SAN MIGUEL RANCH AD HOC CITIZEN'S COMMITTEE MEMBERS
The persons on the following list have agreed to serve on the San Miguel Ranch Citizen's
Advisory Committee:
Sweetwater Community Planning Group
Michael Roark (426-4341)
Georjean Jensen (479-5437), Alt.
Sweetwater Valley Civic Association
Ray Ymzon (694-3163)
Endangered Habitat League
Michael Beck (765-1469)
Sierra Club
Craig Adams (299-1744)
Adjacent Property Owner
Jim Algert (420-7090)
Eastlake/Salt Creek Resident
Steve Gillis (685-6502)
At-large City Resident
Barbara Gilman (425-5007)
A TT ACHMENT 1
\"1-1
. .
RESOLUTION NO. 17057
RESOLUTI ON OF THE C!TY COUNe I L OF THE C!TY OF CHULA
VISTA AMENDING RESOLUTION 17049 FOR SAN MIGUEL RANCH
REGARDING CITIZEN INPUT INTO THE SAN MIGUEL RANCH SPA
PLAN AND PAYMENT OF COSTS
.
WHEREAS, on March 23, 1993, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
passed and approved Resolution 17049, approving the San Miguel Ranch General
Development Plan, Certifying the Final EIR for San Miguel Ranch, and approving
the Candidate CEQA Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and
Mitigation Monitoring Program; and,
WHEREAS, on March 23, 1993, the City Council also passed a motion adding
a condition of approval to Resolution 17049 which directs the creation of a
citizens ad hoc committee in order to obtain more formal public input at the SPA
level in regards to the plan, with staff to return with the make-up of this
committee for council approval in one to two weeks; and,
WHEREAS, the Developer has not yet fully reimbursed the City and its
Consultants for costs incurred in the processing of the Project;
NO~ THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista as follows:
Resolution 17049, is amended by deleting Condition D.13 and
replacing it with the following:
13. Establish a formalized citizen input process, in conjunction with
the City Planning Department, for review of all Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) Plans and subsequent discretionary permits. This process
shall include formation of an independent ad hoc citizen's advisory
committee, consisting of one member from each of the following
groups:
Representative from Sweetwater Community Planning Group
Representative from Sweetwater Civic Association
Resident of adjacent Bonita area
Resident of adjacent EastLake/Salt Creek area
Non-resident adjacent property owner
Representative from Endangered Habitats League
At-large member .
Representative from Sierra Club
Resolution 17049, is further amended by deleting section E. 7 and
replacing it with the following:
7. Notice of Determination
This action shall not become final until the Director of Financ
notifies the Environmental Review Coordinator that the Devel~per has
ATTACHMENT 2
\\~~
Re~olution No. 17057
Page 2
fully and completely paid the City all co~ts' incurred in the
proce~~ing of the Project for both ~taff and City Con~ultant~.
Sub~equent tothi~ notification, the Coordinator is directed to file
a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk of the County of San
Diego for posting.
Pre~ented by
Bruce M. Boogaard
Ci ty Attorney
////, / //-
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
\tQ
Resolution No. 17057
Page 3
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, California, this 13th day of April, 1993, by the following vote:
YES:
HOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers: Fox, Horton, Moore~ Rindone, Hader
Counc i 1 membe rs: Hone
Councilmembers: None
Councilmembers: Hone
f;..~ fi~/..
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly A. Authelet, City' Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 17057 was duly passed, approved,
and adopted by the City Council held on the 13th day of April, 1993.
Executed this 13th day of April, 1993.
,
'- .
~~, I.' ,: .,. / I
...... l ( "",!,.' !; (.. ~. I,
Beverly . Authelet, City Clerk
l\-'O
GUIDELINES FOR THE OPERATION AND CONDUCT OF THE AD HOC CITIZEN'S
ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE SAN MIGUEL RANCH PROJECT
1. The composition of the Committee shall be as indicated in Resolution 17049 dated
April 13, 1993, and as revised by City Council minute action on February 13, 1996.
2. The Committee shall perform the following functions:
a. Review materials related to the proposed amendments to the City of Chula Vista
General Plan and the San Miguel Ranch General Development Plan, and a new
Sectional Planning Area Plan and Master Tentative Map for the project
b. Make recommendations to the City Planning Commission and the City Council
on the proposals indicated in (a) above.
3. The Committee shall meet on an as-needed basis, meeting often enough to conclude its
deliberations in a timely manner. In no case shall the Committee's deliberations interfere
with the public hearing schedule set by the City.
4. A voting quorum of the seven-member Committee shall be four (4) members present and
eligible to vote. Four (4) affirmative votes shall be required to pass a motion.
5. Should the Committee fail to reach a majority decision, the matter shall go forward to
the Planning Commission and the City Council without a recommendation of the full
Committee. However, in any case, individual or minority opinions on the project, or
components thereof, shall be provided to the Commission and Council for their
consideration as part of their public hearing material.
6. The City Planning Department shall provide staff assistance to the Committee and shall
act as its secretary.
(\adhoccom,gui)
ATTACHMENT 3
\l-II
SAN MIGUEL RANCH
REVISED DRAFT PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
I. HOUSING/COMMUNITY CHARACTER/LAND USE
A. GOALS
Provide a balanced and diverse range of residential housing opportunities within
San Miguel Ranch,jlp4Iltll:\iisam~~im~i Create a llailt envirolHl1ellt tHat takes
advantage of the unique topography and visual character of the site.
B. OBJECTIVES
1.
a) an alwrnative whii:;h woul(!, if apPf()ved: (I). perntitll:\e
development of Up to 357 one-acre estate lots on a portion of the
Northern Parcel; (ll) preserve the remaining portion of . the
Northern Parcel in a manner consistent with the Multiple Species
Conservation Program; and (iii) allow the reconfiguration of
housing on the Southern Parcel, possibly resulting in an increase
in the number of dwelling units tHereon on that pan;el.
b)
Page 1 of 7
Revised February 2, 1996
Draft Goals
and Objectives
ATTACHMENT 4
\1- Id.
b)
further analysis of long term . demand forest:i.tebousing in the
Chula Vista General Plan area; . ..
c)
evaluation of the feasibility of providing IirbJinservlces(po1ice,
fire. public works. etc.) to supportresi_al~eJopm~t'onthe
Northern Parcel; .
d)
;::~:~o~ o~:::e: i:la:~1a~~il~~DGt;rr:;:e~w~~:
unincorporated. .'
Provide an appropriate number of estate-sized lots within tbeprojcpt;in
:x:=Y~~~O~i:~~:C:~~~rt~~:~~:~~~~:;~::ti~~~~d
relevant General Pian goals lu:ld policies.
3.
Develop land use patterns on San Miguel Ranch which provide appropriate
residential density transitions.
4.
Promote a balanced and diverse blend of residential housing types, styles
and densities which are compatible with other land uses in the surrounding
areas.
5.
Utilize Mother Miguel and San Miguel Mountains as unique visual
backdrops.
6.
Consider retaining Horseshoe Bend in its natural state as a project focal
point and an amenity.
7.
Evalllllle the feasibility sf proYillillg large estate type lots Sll the site
relative Ie shsrt teffil aad IOllg teffilmadcet demallEl fer sllell Ilellsiag.
7.
Incorporate an affordable housing component based upon the City's
Housing Element and provide appropriate locations for affordable housing
with reasonable access to activity centers such as parks, schools, public
transit and shopping facilities.
8.
Design the project, to the extent feasible and applicable, with the
objectives and policies of the Land Use Distribution Element of the
SANDAG Regional Growth Management Strategy.
Draft Goals
and Objectives
Page 2 of 7
Revised February 2, 1996
\ t - \3.
9. Consider the surrounding properties in the planning effort for the project.
10. Provide lot sizes and housing types on San Miguel Ranch near and
adjacent to the neighboring communities to achieve an overall reduction
of land use friction as required by Section 6.2 of the Land Use Element
of the General Plan.
11. Minimize grading quantities, large exposed cut or fill areas and
manufactured slope heights utilizing grading techniques which provide
slopes with more natural-appearing configurations.
12. Revegetate manufactured slopes and graded areas with plant species which
will create a native appearance.
13. Utilize on-site features such as rock outcroppings as site amenities.
14. Minimize disruption of ridgelines.
15. Create a series of small neighborhoods within larger neighborhoods.
16. Create focal points at project entries.
17. Design and integrate parks and open space areas into the community fabric
to maximize their benefits and enhance community cohesiveness.
18. Proceed with plans for developing the property which reflect the final SR
125 alignment of 8R 125 mp~ chosen by CalTrans.
II. RESOURCE CONSERVATION
A. GOAL
Contribute significantly to local, state and federal conservation efforts by
preserving, where possible, large areas that possess important biological value,
significant landforms as defined in the Chula Vista General Plan and other unique
resources. Provide for adequate conservation of water and energy supplies.
Draft Goals
and Objectives
Page 3 of 7
Revised February 2, 1996
\\-I~
B. OBJECTIVES
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
1.
Preserve Mother Miguel Mountain which is designated as a significant
landform under the City's General Plan.
Incorporate San Miguel Ranch into the City's greenbelt system.
Assist in the planning and development of on-site trail systems which
provide both local and regional connections in each direction.
Insure the long-term maintenance of trails and open space.
Develop a planned residential community in a manner which will
significantly contribute to ongoing regional multi-species conservation
planning efforts, such as the Multiple Species Conservation Program.
Encourage design features which promote energy and other resource
conservation efforts.
Minimize disruption of the valuable San Miguel and Mother Miguel
Mountain watersheds.
Develop a plan for fire resistive landscaping and brush management for
the transition areas between structures and native vegetation, particularly
in canyon and open space areas.
Prevent wastewater and urban runoff (as opposed to natural watershed)
from entering into the Sweetwater Reservoir.
10.
Identify, preserve and conserve significant biological and archaeological
resources.
11.
Provide Otay Tarplant preserves on both the north and south parcels.
12.
Conserve natural open spaces that are large enough to maintain their
ecological balance. .
Draft Goals
and Objectives
Page 4 of 7
Revised February 2, 1996
\,-\'S
III. COMMUNITY/PUBLIC FACILITIES
A. GOAL
Insure efficient and timely provision of public services and community facilities
to San Miguel Ranch consistent with City policies.
B. OBJECTIVES
1.
Provide an elementary school site within the project.
2.
Study the feasibility of co-locating a community park with recreational
amenities adjacent to the elementary school to facilitate joint use and
encourage a neighborhood setting. Also consider the feasibility of
providing a stand-alone community park.
3.
Consider providing a neighborhood park to serve the needs of residents
of the project.
4.
Phase parks in such a manner that will result in 3 acres of parkland per
every 1,000 residents.
5.
Master plan the neighborhood and community parks in a fashion which is
consistent with the Landscape Manual.
6.
Consider linking the neighborhood and community parks with a system of
recreational trails.
7.
Participate in the Eastern Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan
Study.
8.
Consider the results of a needs analysis in determining park and recreation
requirements.
9.
Satisfy the City's requirements for providing community purpose facilities
such as churches, child care facilities and private educational services and
facilities within San Miguel Ranch.
10.
Develop an appropriate component of the City's Greenbelt Master Plan and
implement said Plan on that portion which is located on the San Miguel
Ranch property.
Draft Goals
and Objectives
Page 5 of 7
Revised February 2, 1996
\'"\-1(.,
11. Provide the necessary public utilities and services to the project area,
including drainage, water, sewage, schools, police, fire protection, parks,
open space and recreation.
12. Minimize drainage impacts on downstream areas and provide for their
mitigation.
13. Satisfy the City's thresholds and standards for drainage, water, traffic, air
quality, fiscal conditions, sewage, police, fire protection, emergency
medical services, schools, parks, recreation, open space and libraries as
they apply to San Miguel Ranch.
14. Prepare a Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) which addresses the
phasing and financing of the public facilities identified above.
15. Create an implementation process which provides or assures public
facilities concurrent with the residential development in accordance with
City-approved PFFP schedules.
16. Identify and evaluate issues associated with the possible transfer of the
property from and between service districts and/or the City.
17. Develop a project which has an overall positive fiscal impact on the City
of Chula Vista.
IV. CIRCULATION, PUBLIC SAFETY AND WELFARE
A. GOALS
Provide a safe and efficient circulation system within the project area and the
region. Provide services beneficial to San Miguel Ranch and the surrounding
community.
B. OBJECTIVES
1.
Consider regional and local traffic circulation needs with regard to the SR
125 transportation corridor and the surface street connection from East H
Street to San Miguel Road in the project planning process.
2.
Create a project circulation system that adheres to community and regional
standards.
Draft Goals
and Objectives
Page 6 of 7
Revised February 2, 1996
\\- \1
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Provide road widths and alignments which minimize conflicts between
pedestrians and automobiles.
Provide road widths, grades and turnarounds that meet standards set forth
in the currently adopted edition of the Uniform Fire Code and all City
Amendments.
Provide street patterns that are easily traversed while not appearing to be
overly engineered.
Design individual subdivision street systems to interconnect with adjacent
developments.
Construct appropriate interim on- and off-site road facilities to provide
access to the project for emergency vehicles during early phases of
development.
Implement design guidelines and standards to protect against excessive
noise from the future SR 125 transportation corridor.
Minimize impacts of project-related traffic on adjacent and nearby
communities.
Phase the project and required public facilities so as to minimize impacts
on adjacent and nearby communities.
Design parks in a manner which will provide visibility from adjacent
streets to the park for police patrols.
Provide access points to open space areas to accommodate emergency
operations.
Draft Goals
and Objectives
Page 7 of 7
Revised February 2, 1996
\\-/8'
I". :;.../,
~~~~..'
,.'\~--._--
-~"~i':-'
_l.__ 'I' . .~. ..... . ~
o ':'._<~~_., '. -:,""._ ..'
,r_, , _,;.,_,:,' -_1 ....,.
, ,___-,,/~''"~J ~,'
" /, y-';..-t ."<
.,/: i ,-,-~,'l--.::. -~~
l- ..:---..,,!'~ "'1
.~I~t~~
..~t:--r>'" ~~~ OO;J-"'~',i ~-,-
't" ,. ..iio ',,1";::"
.,. .-'f'.1 "c. ;,~"l?..:
i
:::,,~l_
, ....:-.:-~.:;~---,
-'f ,~~-
~
, '-
.<_~:..
'.
. .
,-
-t."f
---..----------:----.---------;-~ ~--
EASTLAK~
"
,
.'
'--,-~
--~-'_./-
....
.;r\'.
-,.'
...'
- --::~-~.;;;~ ,......... '. '1
.... i'~'c _, " \ .' '~"--,,' "\ ."
""__ ~ --..........l .... ., '+... '. I
.-.- .'... ,l~,,~ DUI;~ I :-. > ,,"~,~;:'k~~~-' ~.\~~~;:i~ - -.- ~,
~"" "'" ;~ ""l'-U"~ .-.:.-? .-J- I.J'" . -~:''' \-"- ~ . ~ >-
!;'.~" ",;-:,,-,.J' .1(1-~- ,-:.;;w ;",.i."" "c..-'-<l
't~ - I -::~, ,..,." - , . -; - ... ,,--- "_.,:t?'_'fI b~~,\~
. , , " . <-=---:___":~_.:.2_R;-,"l.'~~~~~.,'~'-'~':~~1
_~___~__ / /-r- ~::,: :->r...r"I"~~,,~ll~-~"'~:i#=~?}i}~~~~'
\ -.. _" / . :-/'~i. ,~, -~,'.:.. j>.-:;~~ -4r' ~>~,%-' :, - ~
\ 7- _ . ... ._<>;,. ~~~. -;-,a_ ';"'-~""~ ,",j~: ; _ ."~W""',:
.~ --"- [."" '\--1 ~...., -: /,,-~...........: ~ --- .~,-,...,.' - ;>.-"~'
~\-.~, :::---""_ -:~.- -~:~;.''''_'::".'~".;.-<.'~.:.._Tr' - >~.- . .'''' ~ . ,--~ ~
. .' ~<=_~,~., ::'-::. ~,. -~~i~,J,..._'~-~~.
VICINITY MAP
SAN MIGUEL RANCH
\1.; 19
ATTACHMENT 5
STAT1STJCAl SUMMARY
-...
~
~
..-
IIESIDEHT1Al.
tElGI-eORHOOD A
c:= l..f:N.Ill0Q.J'acl
3571
'"
~
NElC'~B
l..f:N.I(0.5.3.0Q.Jlac)
LDNMEOI.JMt30-6.0Q.Jllc)
""~
,,:j
SUBTOTAL RESl)ENTLAL. OEVElOf'MENT AREA
5764
60
9395
COMMEAC'-.&.l
~ I'ElCrBQFIHOOD
IIIIIIllll VISITOR ICOl'f"ERENCf CENTER/RETREAT)
SUBTOTAL (;()tNEAC1AL AREA
f
"
'4,0
67
207
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ //
, /
tlOl ...lCI~ /-/
//
-/ /
~ /'"./
///
/
/ /
///
/ /
///
/~/ -
/ /
/ /
//
/ /
/ /
/ / ~-~
/ /
/ /
/ / -
/ /
~/./
/ /
/ /
//
W .
/ '
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
// /
/
.-:/
'---l
~1""";I/li COMMlNTY PMK"
1//,,''''''''''''''' SCHOOL'
207
11_9
, . I COIiNLHTY P\IiIPOSE'
~ II'ERMAHENT OPEN SMCE
GRAHl) TOTAl.
'5
16300
...o~
1"9
.~_~Il.ru
-' '~'~
-- ~.~
c
--~-
L__
--
-~
.--'
\
\
j
'''-.,
\
. '\
..-IDUICII \ =".t.~TDl /
\ / / /
/ / -
1//
1..-----'1//
- /r-
.".nWAlBIDI'TJICT
~
)
~\
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
LAND USE PLAN
SAN MIGUEL RANCH
ATTACHMENT 6
/
/ I
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
I /
/
/
/
n...~
Minutes
November 21, 1995
Page 11
23. REPORT SAN MIGUEL RANCH AD HOC CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMI1TEE AND SAN
MIGUEL RANCH GOALS AND OBJECTIVES - Emerald Properties, Inc. has submitted applications for a
General Plan Amendment, a General Development Plan (GDP) amendment, a Sectional Planning Area plan, and
an Environmental Impact Report for the San Miguel Rancb property. A condition of the previously-approved GDP
requires the formation of an ad-hoc citizen's advisory committee to provide input into the planning process. Staff
recommends Council: (I) approve the list of nominees; (2) appoint or solicit applications for the at-large and Bonita
resident members; (3) approve the proposed guidelines; and (4) accept the Goals and Objectives. (Director of
Planning)
Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, gave a brief background and status of the project and the need for the ad hoc
committee.
Paul Manganelli, Project Manager, reviewed the major planning issues identified and the goals and objectiv~ for
the planning process.
. Mark Faulkner, 9255 Towne Center Drive, San Diego, CA, representing Emerald Properties, owner of San
Miguel Ranch, stated they took over San Miguel Ranch in July 1994 and during that time evaluated the viability
of the project and the future of San Miguel Ranch. They had worked hard with staff regarding goals and objectives
for the project and requested Council approval. In addition, they were requesting approval of the members of the
citizens input committee they had recommended or recommended by the required organiutions.
Mayor Horton slated she had a problem with goal lA, i.e. the proposed elimination of the low density estate
housing approved for the area.
Mr. Falukner responded that the MSCP was one of the driving factors for the elimination of the eslate housing.
The 1852 acres in the northern portion of the property was the "most pristine biological area" in the Southbay
according to Fish & Game and U.S. Fish & Wildlife. They had been directed by those agencies to look favorably
to eliminate any developmen' 'n that ...ea. One of the original approvals and conditions of the development of the
357 eslate lots on the north was a tolal mitigation of any impact on Sweetwater Reservoir. The 357 large lot units
were in the water shed of the Reservoir and it was almost impossible to mitigate that condition. The topography
on the project was also extremely rough and expensive. It would be visually inappropriate for mass grading or
conventional development. In their evaluation they had labled that, but had not eliminated that possibility. He
recognized that the estate housing was important to Chula Vista and they were looking into other areas within the
plan to provide large lots, but not one acre lots.
Mayor Horton slated there was a need for one acre lots. She would have a hard time supporting congesting more
units into another area. It was her understanding that the environmenlal agencies were supposed to be working with
the City regarding the MSCP on approved plans. She questioned why the City would be giving up the eslate lots.
Mr. Leiter slated when the plan was approved, the approvals that were given on the northern portion were
conditioned on resolving a lot of the habitat issues because it was recognized that the northern portion had a lot of
issues that needed to be further evaluated. It had to be recognized that there were a lot of constraints and that
eliminating development in that area. while at the same time providing lower density and estate lots on the southern
parcel, might allow the resolution of the habilat issues and provide land uses on the southern side that the City
would find acceplable. They were trade-{)ffs that were being brought to the Council's attention as part of the
planning process.
Councilmember Rindone shared the Mayor's concerns for the Horseshoe Bend area. He did not feel there should
be an assumption that the elimination of the 357 estate lots would mean that they would be added to the southern
parcel. He was concerned about the density and community character.
Councilmember A1evy commended slaff and the applicant regarding the formation of the citizens committee. The
MSCP was not a "done deal" and he questioned if it was not approved if it would affect the project.
Mr. Faulkner slated if the MSCP was not approved they would have to revert back to the original approvals and
mitigation issues. They had been in close negot;ation wit" both the CA Fish & Game and US Fish & Wildlife and
they were extremely interested in San Miguell.mch. /--." one could answer whether the MSCP would succeed or
not.
ATTACHMENT 7
\1-~
Minutes
November 21, 1995
Par~ 12
Councilmember Alevy questioned if all development was south of the SDG&E property.
Mr. Faulkner responded that was a potential.
Mr. Goss informed Council that the citizens committee was an even number, i.e. 8 memLers. It appeared that 4-5
were not residents of Chula Vista. He questioned whether that was the balance the Council wanted on the
committee.
Counci1member Rindone responded that a second citizen-a! -large could be added for a former Councilmember such
as Len Moore who bad experience with the project.
Councilmember Alevy recommended an at-large appointment from the Planning Commission as they would have
the background experience with the project.
Counci1member Rindone felt after advertising the Mayor would retum with recommendations of people that bad
the expertise.
MOTION: (Rindone) to accept staff recommendations Nos. 3 and 4 (pg. 23-1) with staff to return with the
Mayor's recommendation for citizens-at-large (2) and a Bonita resident (1).
Mayor Horton recommended that the item be continued untiltbe other individuals were selected by Council. She
wanted to review the item more carefully as she had questions regarding several of the objectives.
MSUC (RindonelHorton) to accept the report, staff to advertise for two citizens-at-large positions and one
Bonita resident. Council to ratify appointments to the committee when the Mayor returned with her
recommendations.
. . . Council recessed at 8:48 p.m. and reconvened at 9:04 · · ·
24A. REPORT PROPOSED OT A Y RANCH UNIVERSITY SITE AND RELATIONSHIP TO MULTIPLE
SPECIES CONSERVATION PROGRAM (MSCP) AND OTHER HABIT A T CONSERVATION EFFORTS -
On 11/14/95, Council requested a report regarding the status of the Otay Ranch university site and its relationship
to MSCP and other related programs. Council also requested an evaluation regarding the need for consulting
assistance in monitoring these issues, as well as broader lobbying efforts regarding the university site. Staff
recommends Council accept the report and approve the resolution appropriating funds for retaining a consultant to
assist in monitoring habitat planning issues related to the university. (Assistant City Manager and Director of
Planning) 4/Sth's vole required.
B. RESOLUTION 18132 APPROPRIATING $10,000 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED GENERAL FUND
BALANCE
Councilmember Rindone questioned why the City needed to hire a consultant.
Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, responded that staff had been monitoring the various habitat conservation
programs and evaluating their impact on the university site. However, it was a combination of doing specific work
with regard to the university site to define the area being considered and looking at the specific environmental and
habitat issues. Staff felt that a consultant with specific expertise in biology and familiarity with the habitat
conservation programs would be beneficial.
Councilmember Rindone stated if it was a reoccurring issue, when there was a vacancy or staff realignment, staff
should look for someone with that background. He questioned if all work related to the siting of the university
would be done by the consultant.
Mr. Leiter responded that some of the work would be done in-house.
RESOLUTION 18132 OFFERED BY MAYOR HORTON, reading of the text was waived, passed and
approved unanimously.
\\-;Q..