HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1994/07/12
Tuesday, July 12, 1994
6:00 p.m.
. \, "
"I declare under penalty of perlury that I arn
employed by the City of Chula Vista in the
Oifice of the C~ty Cler:\ and that I posted
tilis Agen~"/No j~e on the Bdlletin Board at
the PUDhc :.0v!rs Bu:lding ~md_~t City 11"0 ;,? Council Chambers
DAlEO: 7 s: Ji,SIGNED ./ '~PublicServicesBuilding
/ / L '
Rel!Ular Meetin~ of the City of Chula Vista Citv Council
CALL TO ORDER
1.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Fox _, Horton _, Moore _, Rindone _, and
Mayor Nader _'
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
June 7, 1994 (Joint Meeting of the City Council and Redevelopment
Agency); June 13, 1994; June 14, 1994, June 20, 1994; June 21, 1994;
and, June 30, 1994.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Presentation by Deric Prescott, Chairman, Chula Vista Youth Commission, of the "Reach for the
Stars" scholarship to Michelle Milanio Rodriquez.
b. Introduction by Nancy Taboada, Chair, International Friendship Commission, of students going
to our Sister City, Odawara, Japan from July 14th - August 3rd. Students are: Audra Baxter,
Walter Estrada, Sean Kwiatkowski, Cristina Sanchez, and Barbara Steele.
c. Oath of Office:
Commission on Aging - Anne Fabrick and Ted Kennedy;
Board of Appeals - Marshall Compton;
Child Care Commission - George Hartman;
Cultural Arts Commission - Archie McAllister, Coleen Scott, and Lee Wheeland;
Economic Development Commission - Patty Davis;
Growth Management Oversight Commission - Charles Peter;
Human Relations Commission - John Allen and Elsie Hashimoto;
International Friendship Commission - James Baker and Nancy Taboada;
Library Board of Trustees - Peggy Donovan and Jose Viesca;
Otay Valley Project Area Committee - Archie Hall;
Planning Commission - Tom Martin and John Moot;
Resource Conservation Commission - Cindy Burrascano and Joe Ghougassian;
Southwest Project Area Committee - Allen Jones and Edward LaGuardia;
Town Centre Project Area Committee - Jack Blakely; and,
Youth Commission - Christian Holmes.
*****
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 avairoble in the City Clerk's Office.
*****
Agenda
-2-
July 12, 1994
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 15)
The staff recommendations regarding the foUowing items listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by
the Council by one motion without discussion unless a Councilmember, a member of the public or City staff
requests that the item be puUed for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fiU out a
"Request to Speak Fonn" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete
the green fonn to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink fonn to speak in opposition to
the staff recommendation.) Items puUed from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Board and
Commission Recommendations and Action Items. Items puUed by the public will be the first items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter requesting surplus equipment from the City - C. Hector M. Noriega Hdez, Comandante
Operativo Mpa!., Radio Brigada De Auxilio Ed La Republica Mexicana A.C., Tijuana, B.C. It
is reconunended that this request be referred to staff for determination of available resources, and
recommendations regarding policy action on the distribution of these resources.
b. Letter requesting entry signs into the City - Roderick F. Davis, Executive Director, Chula
Vista, Chamber of Commerce, 233 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910. It is recommended
that this item be referred back to staff with direction to meet with Chamber staff to further discuss
the most appropriate type of sign and possible locations.
c. Letter requesting support for an advisory measure on the November 1994 ballot to give local
government jurisdictions the legal authority to decline to implement a program mandated by
the State or Federal government without the full funding necessary to perform the mandates
service, and discontinue a program mandated by the State or Federal government when all
funds provided by the State or Federal government for such a mandate have been expended -
Pam Slater, Chairwoman and Dianne Jacob, Vice Chairwoman, Board of Supervisors, County of
San Diego, 1600 Pacific Highway, Room 335, San Diego, CA 92101-2470. It is recommended
that Council take a position to support these items and approve the resolution.
RESOLUTION 17552 SUPPORTING AN ADVISORY MEASURE ON THE NOVEMBER
BALLOT TO GIVE LOCAL GOVERNMENT JURISDICTIONS
THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO DECLINE TO IMPLEMENT A
PROGRAM MANDATED BY THE STATE OR FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT WHEN ALL FUNDS PROVIDED BY THE
STATE OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR SUCH A
MANDATE HAVE BEEN EXPENDED
d. Letter requesting attendance at first meeting to be held on 7/13/94 at the Richard J. Donovan
Correctional Facility on Otay Mesa regarding recycling facility at the prison - G. Kevin
Carruth, Deputy Director, Planning and Construction Division, Department of Corrections, P. O.
Box 942883, Sacramento, CA 94283-0001. It is recommended that Council authorize the City's
Conservation Coordinator to attend the 7/13/94 meeting to observe and report back.
6. RESOLUTION 17553 RECITING THE FACT OF THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
HELD ON JUNE 7, 1994, DECLARING THE RESULT, AND SUCH
OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW - Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (City Clerk)
7. RESOLUTION 17554 RESCINDING PRIOR COUNCIL APPROVAL OF CONTRACT FOR
ASPHALTIC CONCRETE, AND AWARDING CONTRACT TO
CALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CORPORATION - On 6/14/94,
Council awarded the fiscal year 1994/95 contract to provide asphaltic concrete
to Sim J. Harris. Staff subsequently discovered an erroneous assumption made
in evaluating the bid of California Commercial Asphalt. Staff now recommends
awarding the contract to California Commercial Asphalt and approval of the
resolution. (Director of Finance)
Agenda
-3-
July 12, 1994
8. RESOLUTION 17555 APPROVING SOUTH CHULA VISTA LffiRARY CHANGE ORDER
NUMBER SEVEN - Change Order Number 7, totaling $45,709, is composed
of various components: 1) lighting; 2) sound insulation; 3) structural elements;
and 4) other miscellaneous changes including application of bronze finish to
skylights, doorframe modifications, and upgrade of fire extinguisher cabinets.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Library Director and Director
of Public Works)
9. RESOLUTION 17556 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED
PORT DISTRICT FOR POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES FOR FISCAL
YEAR (FY) 1994/95 THROUGH FY 1996/97, AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME - The City has been negotiating with the San
Diego Unified Port District on an agreement for the provision of City police and
fire services to non-tax paying properties on the tidelands. The proposed
agreement covers the next three fiscal years. The City will receive
approximately $360,000 annually from the Port. Staff recommends approval of
the resolution. (Management & Information Services)
10.A. RESOLUTION 17557 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
FOR FIRE DISPATCHING SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT - Chula Vista currently has
agreements with the cities of National City, Imperial Beach, and the Bonita-
Sunnyside Fire Protection District to provide fire dispatch services. The
proposed agreements, which are virtually identical, replace the existing dispatch
contracts and the dispatch related components of the 1989 Bonita-Sunnyside
automatic-aid agreement. The proposed agreements have no operational impact,
authorize the City Manager to adjust the related fees on an annual basis, and
minimize the potential for City liability associated with the provision of fire
dispatch services. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Fire Chief)
B. RESOLUTION 17558 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF IMPERIAL
BEACH FOR FIRE DISPATCHING SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
C. RESOLUTION 17559 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE BONITA-SUNNYSIDE FIRE
PROTECTION DISTRICT FOR FIRE DISPATCHING SERVICES, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
11. RESOLUTION 17560 AMENDING THE 1993/94 AND 1994/95 HOME PROGRAM
DESCRIPTIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE
AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT - The City annually receives an allocation of Home
funds from the federal government. Every year the City submits a program
description which describes the estimated use of those funds. An amendment
to the program description is required whenever a change to the original
description is necessary in order to accommodate a specific project. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development)
Agenda
-4-
July 12, 1994
12. RESOLUTION 17561 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH HUNSAKER AND ASSOCIATES
TO PREPARE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH, TOPOGRAPIDC MAPS AND
A RECORD OF SURVEY FOR THE TELEGRAPH CANYON CREEK
FROM TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD TO FOURTH A VENUE AND
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF MAIN STREET FROM INDUSTRIAL
BOULEVARD TO FOURTH A VENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME - The fiscal year 1993/94 Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) includes project DR-118 with the purpose of
preparing the preliminary improvement plans for the Telegraph Canyon Creek
from Telegraph Canyon Road to Fourth Avenue. A critical activity of the
project is the preparation of aerial photographs, topographic maps and a record
of survey of the project area. The CIP program also includes the preparation
of the improvement plans for the widening of Main Street from Industrial
Boulevard to Fourth Avenue (CIP Number ST-961). Due to the magnitude,
expertise, and equipment necessary to perform the aerial mapping and the
Record of Survey, staff considered it necessary to retain an outside consultant
and requested proposals from qualified engineering firms. Staff received three
proposals and has determined the firm of Hunsaker and Associates to be the
most qualified. Staff recommends that Hunsaker and Associates be retained for
a fee of $63,138 and approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
13. RESOLUTION 17562 APPROVING TEMPORARY CLOSURE ON PALOMAR STREET AT
THE MTDB SOUTH LINE GRADE CROSSING - The Metropolitan Transit
Development Board (MTDB) has awarded the "South Line Grade Crossing
Improvement Project, LRT -652A" at Palomar Street to Herzog Contracting
Corporation. To complete the necessary work, within the railroad right-of-way,
the contractor has requested approval of two temporary weekend road closures
at that location. The project will provide for smoother railroad crossing by
motorists. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public
Works)
14. RESOLUTION 17563 AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE OWNER'S CERTIFICATE
ON BEHALF OF THE CITY CONSENTING TO THE FILING OF
TENT A TIVE MAP 94-02 - Sunland Communities, a guest builder for McMillin
Development, is processing a tentative map for a residential development at the
southeast comer of Rancho del Parkway and Rancho del Rey Boulevard in
Rancho del Rey. As part of the map, a land swap is proposed between
McMillin Properties and open space lots owned by the City. Since the lots are
shown on the tentative map, the ownership legend on the map is required to be
signed by the City as owner. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Director of Public Works and Director of Parks and Recreation)
15. REPORT IMPLEMENTATION OF OFF-SITE MITIGATION MEASURES FOR
IMPACTS TO THE CALIFORNIA GNAT CATCHER AS A RESULT OF
RANCHO DEL REY SPA III - McMillin Communities is currently proceeding
with the preparation of final maps, improvement plans, etc. for Ranch Del Rey
SPA III, which was approved by Council on 1/15191. As a part of the
development process, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP) is being implemented. Numerous mitigation measures regarding the
loss of Coastal Sage Scrub and its impact to the California Gnatcatcher were
included in the Final EIR for the project and the MMRP. McMillin
Communities is in the process of acquiring off-site mitigation land to comply
with the mitigation measures, and has requested a letter from the City stating
that O'Neal Canyon is acceptable off-site mitigation land for the project. Staff
recommends Council accept the report. (Director of Planning)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
Agenda
-5-
July 12, 1994
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to
speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City
Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete
the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per
individual.
16.
PUBLIC HEARING
CONSIDERATION OF RATE INCREASE FOR COLLECTION AND
DISPOSAL OF REFUSE - The County of San Diego and the newly-formed
Solid Waste Authority have recently approved an increase in landfill tip fees
from $43 per ton to $55 per ton effective 7/1/94. Accordingly, and consistent
with Section 8.23.090 of the Municipal Code, Laidlaw has requested a rate
increase in the landfill component of the current rate schedules. The proposed
rate schedules do not include any changes in the operational costs due to the CPI
increase, the franchise fee component, or the curbside recycling charge. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Deputy City Manager Krempl)
RESOLUTION 17564 APPROVING RATE SCHEDULES FOR COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
OF REFUSE EFFECTIVE JULY I, 1994
17. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATIONS FILED BY CHARLES TffiBETT
FOR 0.67 UNINCORPORATED ACRES LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BONITA ROAD AND L YNWOOD DRIVE -
A) GPA-94-03 AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN FROM OFFICE
COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL VISITOR;
AND B) PCZ-94-B PREZONING TO C-V-P, COMMERCIAL VISITOR
PRECISE PLAN - The application requests an amendment to the General Plan
and prewning for 0.67 unincorporated acres at the southwest corner of Bonita
Road and Lynwood Drive. The proposal is to redesignate the site from Office
Commercial and Residential Low Density to Visitor Commercial and prezone
the parcel C-V-P, Commercial Visitor with Precise Plan. Staff recommends
Council place the ordinance on first reading and approve the resolution.
(Director of Planning)
A. ORDINANCE 2595 AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OR MAPS ESTABLISHED BY
SECTION 19.18.0100F THE MUNICIPAL CODE PREZONING THE 0.67
ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
BONITA ROAD AND LYNWOOD DRIVE TO C-V-P, COMMERCIAL
VISITOR PRECISE PLAN (first readim!l
B. RESOLUTION 17565 AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN AND PREZONE 0.67 ACRES
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BONITA ROAD AND
LYNWOOD DRIVE FROM OFFICE COMMERCIAL AND
RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY TO COMMERCIAL VISITOR
18. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERING TESTIMONY ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ZONE E
WITHIN EASTLAKE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NUMBER ONE, FOR
THE PERPETUAL MAINTENANCE OF TELEGRAPH CANYON
CHANNEL - On 5/24/94, Council declared the intention to establish Zone E
within EastLake Maintenance District Number One (ELMDl) to provide for the
maintenance of Telegraph Canyon channel. The public hearing will consider
testimony for assessing benefitting properties within EastLake Maintenance
District Number One for their pro rata share of the costs. The second hearing
is set for July 26,1994. StatTrecommends this item he continued to 7/19/94.
(Director of Public Works)
Agenda
-6-
July 12, 1994
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. (State law, however, generally prohibits the City
Councilfrom taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to address the Council
on such a subject, please complete the yellow "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications Form" available
in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your name
and address for record purposes and follow up action. Your time is limited to three minutes per speaker.
BOARD AND COMMISSION 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" form availllble in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
Public comments are limited to five minutes.
19. RESOLUTION 17566 RATIFYING THE SALE AND TRANSFER OF THE CARDROOM
LICENSE HELD BY FRAN AND ROSEMARY BURGER TO HARVEY
SOUZA, APPROVING THE CONSOLIDATION OF THE TWO
INDEPENDENT LICENSES HELD BY THESE PARTIES INTO A
SINGLE LICENSE, AND, RECOGNIZING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF
THE SECURITY INSTRUMENT UPON WHICH THE SALE AND
TRANSFER ARE CONTINGENT AS ARE NECESSARY AND
APPROPRIATE TO PROTECT THE CITY'S REGULATORY
INTERESTS - The City currently bas four valid cardroom licensees and two
operating cardrooms. The resolution would approve the transfer of the license
currently held by Fran and Rosemary Burger, doing business as the Vegas Club,
to Harvey Souza who does business as the Village Club. The proposed transfer
would result in the consolidation of the two operating cardrooms, and tbeir
respective independent licenses, into a single consolidated license. Additionally,
the item would recognize certain provisions of the Security Agreement upon
which the sale and transfer are contingent. Based on unresolved land-use issues,
the proposed resolution does not authorize the applicant to operate additional
card tables. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Chief of Police)
20. REPORT STATUS OF MID-BAYFRONT NEGOTIATIONS - On 4/5/94, tbe status of
negotiations with Mid-Bayfront developer, William Barket, was discussed and
staff was directed to report back in sixty days as to whetber substantial progress
had been made towards completion of a Development Agreement (DA). Staff
has made substantial progress including the development of a Pre-Construction
Phasing Plan and Draft DA, including resolution of all but several negotiating
issues which are outlined in tbe report. At the request of the aDDlicant. staff
recommends this item be continued. (Director of Community Development)
Continued from the meeting of 6/21194.
21. REPORT UPDATE ON SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ISSUES - An oral report will be
given by staff.
Agenda
-7-
July 12, 1994
22.
REPORT
UPDATE ON CLEAN WATER PROGRAM ISSUES - An oral report will
be given by staff.
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council will discuss items 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
23. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTCSl
a. Scheduling of meetings.
24. MAYOR'S REPORTCSl
a. Ratification of appointments:
Commission on Aging - William Lane;
Child Care Commission - Jeanne Humes;
Safety Commission - John Liken and Cindy Miller; and,
Youth Commission - James Joseph Alfaro.
b. Ratification of fe-appointment:
Library Board of Trustees - Bill Alexander;
Youth Commission - Julia Wubenhorst; and,
Safety Commission - Scott Bierd.
c. Solicitation of determination of ability to discuss in closed session the Amphitheater at Otay Rio
Business Park property. Continued from the meeting of 6/21/94.
d. Fee charged for Couocil minutes. Continued from the meeting of 6/21/94.
e. Environmentally safe, state-of-the art air conditioning. Continued from the meeting of 6/21/94.
f. Discussion of information from Urban Ore, Inc. Continued from the meeting of 6/21/94.
25. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council member Moore
a. Appointment of Council representative to the Inter-Agency Water Task Force.
Councilmember Horton
b. Establishing subcommittee of major retailers to discuss the affects of NAFTA on local business
including, but not limited to, representatives from the Chamber of Commerce, Price Club,
Jerome's, Home Depot, K-Mart. Continued from the meeting of 6/21/94.
c. Use of PERS fund savings to balance City funds.
Agenda
-8-
July 12, 1994
Councilmember Fox
d. Review of Cox Cable charges for additional outlets and non-standardized rates charged to
subscribers.
e. Consideration of a Chula Vista inlergenerational facility.
CLOSED SESSION
Unless the City Attorney, the City Manager or the City Council states otherwise at this lime, the Council will
discuss and deliberate on the following items of business which are permitted by law to be the subject of a closed
session discussion, and which the Council is advised should be discussed in clased session to best ~rotectthe
interests of the City. The Council is required by law to return to open session, issue any reports of nal action
taken in closed session, and the votes taken. However, due to the typical length of time taken up by closed
sessions, the videotaping will be tenninated at this point in order to save costs so that the Council's return from
closed session, reports of final action taken, and adjournment will not be videotaped. Nevertheless, the report
of final action taken will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the City Clerk's Office.
26. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING:
1. Existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9
. Christopher vs. the City of Chula Vista.
. Hummell vs. the City of Chula Vista.
27. 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 Employee Association (CVEA), Western Council
of Engineers (WCE), Police Officers Association (POA), and International Association
of Fire Fighters (IAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
28. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8
. Property: Potential acquisition of Bayscene Mobilehome Park, 110 Woodlawn Ave,
Chula Vista, California.
Negotiating parties: Richard HalllHall Company, Community Development, and the City
Attorney's office.
Under negotiation: Purchase price and terms of payment.
29. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to the Regular City Council Meeting on July 19, 1994 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers.
An Adjourned Special Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the City Council
Meeting.
Ju 1 y 7, 1994
TO:
The Honorable Mayor and City counJ~l ~
John D. Goss, City Manager (7'G 'zt V
City Council Meeting of July 12, 1994
FROM:
SUBJECT:
This will transmit tne agenda and related materials for the regular City Council
meeting of Tuesday, July 12, 1994. Comments regarding the Written Communications
are as fo llows:
Sa. This is a letter from the Mexican Radio Brigade requesting the donation of
surplus equipment from the City. A translation of this memo is attached
for your information.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS REQUEST BE REFERRED TO STAFF FOR DETERMINATION
OF AVAILABLE RESOURCES, AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING POLICY ACTION ON THE
DISTRIBUTION OF THESE RESOURCES.
5b. This is a letter from Rod Davis, Executive Director of the Chamber of
Commerce, requesting entry signs into the City. Staff has considered the
issue of City entry signs since I985. Several locations along 1-5 and 1-
805 within and outside the Caltrans right-of-way were investigated. Not
many suitable sites were found and Caltrans would not allow the signs
within the freeway right-of-way except at the E Street loop (new on/off
ramp configuration at the northwest quadrant of 1-5 and E Street).
The following non-Caltrans locations, on a preliminary basis, seemed the
most suitable locations and were investigated further.
1. Adjacent to the E Street/l-5 southbound off-ramp on E Street or on
the Agency's property (formerly the Merziotis parcel). This
property is located at the gateway to the Bayfront.
2. City owned property on the east side of 1-5 and south side of L
Street adjacent to the freeway. This site is immediately adjacent
to a residential neighborhood and mixed industrial and commercial
uses. It is not designated as a City Gateway.
3. West side of 1-805 at the Sweetwater river crossing on or near the
bluff overlooking the valley. The area is expansive and would
require a very large sign to be noticed.
4. West side of 1-805 at the H Street southbound off-ramp on the City
owned tree farm site.
5. Use of the existing bi llboard site on the Davies property in
conjunction with the auto park readerboard sign at 1-805 and Otay
Valley Rd.
The entry sign has not been a high priority recently because of other
redevelopment work items and budgetary constraints. The CIP for this
project currently has approximately $25,000 remaining. A monument entry
sign as originally proposed could cost upwards of $200,000. A sign
displaying service organization logos as suggested in the Chamber's letter
may be less costly, but inappropriate for a freeway location because of
the amount of written material and speed of passing cars.
IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS ITEM BE REFERRED BACK TO STAFF WITH DIRECTION
TO MEET WITH CHAMBER STAFF TO FURTHER DISCUSS THE MOST APPROPRIATE TYPE OF
SIGN AND POSSIBLE LOCATIONS.
5c. Th i s is a 1 etter from Pam Slater and 0 i anne Jacob, members of the San
Diego County Board of Superv i sors. request i ng support of a Countywi de
advisory measure and a statewide statutory constitutional amendment which
would give local jurisdictions additional protection from unfunded or
under-funded state mandates. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT COUNCIL TAKE A
POSITION TO SUPPORT THESE ITEMS. Although the League of California Cities
has not taken a position on this particular constitutional amendment
proposal, they have supported similar legislative attempts to strengthen
local protection from state mandates.
5d. This is a letter from the Department of Corrections requesting attendance
by an elected official and appropriate staff at a meeting to discuss the
City's level of interest in the proposed CDC/PIA project at Donovan
Correctional Facility. This project seeks to negotiate contracts within
the next five months for 25-year flow commitments of municipal solid waste
which would feed the proposed materials recovery facility (MRF). Inasmuch
as the City is currently evaluating its future materials recovery
activities through ongoing and planned recycling programs and potential
for a City-owned transfer station, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT COUNCIL
AUTHORIZE THE CITY'S CONSERVATION COORDINATOR TO ATTEND THE 7/13/94
MEETING TO OBSERVE AND REPORT BACK. Council may wish to also designate a
representative to attend.
mab
City Administrator
City of Chula Vista
Dear Sir:
I am pleased to send affectionate regards and at the same time to thank you for your
positive response at the Council meeting of June 7, 1994 in which we were requesting
donations of equipment.
As you know, the municipalities of the City of Chula Vista and Tijuana have found
themselves going through some difficult times in the area of budgeting, and also for us,
in the area of Policing.
We have professional staff in the area of Electronics who are capable of repairing our
radios, sirens, towers, antennas, etc. Therefore, we are requesting donations for any
equipment that you would be able to donate relating to police, public services and
rescue.
Also for any parts used for radios, sirens, hand radios, antennas and any other parts that
are no longer of any use to you. We would fix them or use them as parts.
For example: we have old motorola radios of Motrac which have been discontinued and
we are unable to obtain parts for them. Attached is a list of equipment which, if possible,
you could consider donating, we would be extremely grateful.
I remain your faithful servant.
C. Hector M. Noriega Hdez
ASISTEtiCIA PI{IVADA
(ItOZ AHBAIt A.I'.
RADIO BRIGADA DE AUXILl~~N'EllllJCA MEXlCANAAC
DELEGACIOrr-rUUANA B.C
R.cC. CAP901031 UTA 0
"94 .11116 P2 ~-
1m OF CHUlA VIST A
aTV CLERK'S OFFICE
J. Ad,inis~~~1~r
(::i.::\.---:;.(1 '-~e ';~Lll 'list':> C:'_clif.
? res e n t e.
;'~ e
e'~ ~!0tJ 2nvi:~rle ll~
-.fectll,)' ) ~.::': 1u/_0 y
r'esJue~t~ _)0siti.v~'
1
2l S1]/) ti ") Y',-, .::c'~ 1'1. ,? 6 e ~.,~ t -:::- ~a:!n ') su.
1_;~ T" '':.In i 'jn ('J s -~ b i l:::) ,'1.e 1 ,3 i:3 7 (; e .JuDi) () e 1 ;}re 3 C~ "lte :~) ,~:.) ~; (1 1:-'
(;':l--'l ~::-C)l-jcit">-:1);c) 21 e:--;ui)) 'Y:="r-~, :")TI:-::'ci')n.
;'):~) Ustc,1es s::;')z""'1J '3!~ ''''lniciJi:) ~~,e l,p CiU(~i;~'.d (J.e
P_~hul<:' list,~~: y e1 (Je l'ijLF~n,':', se I?"lC1J~~ltr(-~;1_ paS8i1~') l)r U~1-)~3 tie:'!1-
-pos 'nuy 'C:i..ficiles en ~1... ~:r'(:::S:_ ('81 )r ~iU)~,J_::,~,t:)s. ;,.'\1JXl "F'~J Gn 1;;1 ::;:rE:c'
de '~(:;~1)..ri'2 f~ ..:~ub"Lic::; C?)lj cie), ,Y'r~~ n__J'-:~f)tr')s
Nosotros tener:l1S )ers~n?;:; )r,)fE:c:i.rJn;:"lei~ ,?n. ,~l r;::;'
':8 ':~lsctr"".L1.ic'::', -;-'J.E nop::?1'.' ~;:.:l::~n tl''''':) 1) ~iue G RF:-~i)s, Siren<;~s,
T'Jrret3.s, Anteu.:::..s .:~tc. _lr 10 ~d.s:~),) ,::;st;. ):.:'~ .-~)l.ici'::: nc:1) t )(<) ,~, ~upl
equ~pl) iU€'1')SiU8C.?TI :"-.'):r~r r'~ :":..;'.ci~n,:;.d) sIn 1.101i.ci2 ySc,yvici')s
0."1
')j_ren.?s, '2::"
':1.0 les sirv~).
9"rte2.
2ar?8efic0S y 7e R sc~te.
T8.'Tlbis_i1. t,)(1:::o 8 --:'-:.urel ~ ,S"s )'-'~rtes ~1S;:=J{~~?'.:2: __1..':;'.'1_03,
i') f3 ? e.-n::'i;1.'1, ~ :'1ten8 s, y tJ ~B 3 .~ "1.1e 11" s ):-::r ':;I:;:3'.:.ue Y8
ustedes. "'T)s'JtrJs 0 1;;:;8 8:C"T'e,3'1..2'~'Ie;=3 ') l~s \15:--"'^i')S 8'l
~je':l:.)l'): n)C~:)tr0s tener!l,)p :c,,::o(1:i.Js,'n:)t)r')18;~ viej:Js
~e ~~0trac 108 cU91es ~~t~n 0esc)~tinu~ld~s y 1~8 )?rt.'s n0 se pue-
-~01 CJ~8e:uir'. Del llism~ ~~~o le~ in?nd'~80s 18 liat8 ~ne~R~s de
C')S?3 utj si e,c~ )Jsibl.e l~) c,;!1.eci')n c1e 8ste se 108 e'::-T~;'~~8cer'(Y1)S
~Err;deciel1.t ff-su,,-?t'2.;'lci')n ,-:l 1e .rese'1te !11e m~~1.i-
-fiesta co:no su ntento SP/ vl,lor.
(~Jm~~'l ;~?
~: E
ri jU3ns. ? Ofs. ., 15 Junia 1934
rj. H~ct<)
::'T ,)'~ 1.
~~~ l'-\)
\!~\~
~~~\~~ \
~~'- ~~~
'\,,""-0\,9\0
jW"'='I"""~'""''' n
' :.'Il"!...,f) ". ., "... -. t'~~,,\'1
, "?.i "l,j I, ~:.:""""l
lll' fI:~.IiIo li rd ,-" tN.. ",;; .....
(f't"'J;; A1~ lI.~U" ~"ii!.@'IIA TIOfY<<"
t'~:J ':"jU IHll!iJI!\=. 'IF4f.',l
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SURPLUS EQUIPMENT
One 1970 Jeep converted from a mail truck suitable for a
communications supervisor.
One 1975 International Harvester step van formerly used as a
communications van by the City of Chula Vista.
Various oblosete radios. including Motorola Motrac models.
Various antennas. both high band and low band
Various surplus portable radios. including several 1.5 watt
single-channel.
Battery chargers for portable radios.
Various obsolete Unitrol siren amplifiers.
Various lightbars. including Jetsonir. units and parts.
Various microphones for police radios and PA systems.
s~... ol..
AN
INVESTMENT IN
THE FUTURE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Pres!dent
Diane F:int
President Elect
Jim Weaver
Vice Presidents:
Greg Cox
Ch~is i._8Wis
Mary Anne 8tro
Dave Ward
Members:
Pa,nCi3 Barnes
Renes Buts
Joar::H.3 Clayton
Steve Co!ii!lS
ChUCk Day
Robe1 Garcia
Susan Herney
Cath! JaL'Tdson
Tin L8W1S
Scon !v\osher
Rebert Penner, MD
F rar~k Scott
[)(;n Trwnlas
BradWI:son
Past President
T" Pc/ Ca,,'anaugh
Execu~ive Director
Rc<:: Davis
~~~ L'\)
~~\~
'~""-''-'''~\
CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE
~...'n......
[ I:,)
f: '
;j,'
,.
i!JUN 2 7 '
"-'-'-.,
ACCREDITED
C_..'.O~CO''''''':llCl
~: ....w...: .":, ;~~ ~:~;:
?J3 FOURTH AVENUE' CHUlA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910' TEL (619) 420-6603
I
I c
'--."
June 22, 1994
The Honorable Tim Nader
Mayor of Chula Vista and
Members of the Chula Vista City Council
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Dear Mayor Nader and Members of the City Council:
We understand that on December 12, 1984, the City Council set aside
$53,000 in account #995-9950-BF25 for entry signs into the City. The
issue has been subsequently discussed, however, without resolution.
The Chamber of Commerce would like to see signs on non-Cal Trans
property, but readily visible from the freeways, that welcome visitors to our
City. The signs should also identify, in a uniform and aesthetically pleasing
manner, the service organizations that make Chula Vista a better place to
live, work and play.
The Chamber is ready to assist staff in whatever way is necessary to
accomplish this goal.
Sincerely yours
CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
'. '-'~'i" T---'
l~f,/'r;A;.--,
'ROOeric F. Davis
Executive Director
RFD:ce
W~I"iT!EN ~'MUNICAl1ONS
Qlount~
of ~an
;!El lego .'
I
.-..~-~,.~.~~...,,~.~_._~..-. """I
~D~/.i; c, "
111 JUN27i~A
coL
C;j, ,
Ci"
,'''''
,,0
',I
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY. ROOM 335. SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101-2470
June 20, 1994
The Honorable Tim Nader
Mayor
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
Dear Mayor Nader:
On behalf of the Board of Supervisors of San Diego County, we urge you to unite with the
County behind a State Constitutional Amendment that will once and for all make it clear
that local governments need not carry out State and federal mandates unless they have been
fully funded by Sacramento or Washington.
As you know, local governments are bearing the deep financial burden of unfunded State
and federal mandates. It is time to end the current practice of the State and federal
governments to pass on the cost of services to local governments through unfunded or
underfunded mandates.
On May 19, 1993, many of you participated in a meeting to develop a common strategy for
combating the proposed property tax shift. It is time for the next step.
The County of San Diego requests your support for an advisory measure (Attachment A)
which will be on the local November 1994 ballot. Local agencies are not in a position to
ignore their constitutional responsibilities, nor can they submit a constitutional amendment
directly to the voters. We can, however, provide an opportunity for the voters of this county
to cast an advisory vote which our State elected officials must heed.
In addition. we ask that you contact your State Delegation Members and urge them to place
a proposed statutory constitutional amendment (Attachment B) on the statewide November
1994 ballot. The Board of Supervisors has sponsored this proposal, and your help is needed
in urging our State Delegation carry this measure forward.
~~Il'~m"'"EN
lI::.,:,k. '"f ',;~ '< l(~,::, '. .- ':.,
,,.; 'Q! ,j,r.~",:..i i:J . ~ .
CO'^,MUN1CA TeONS
s;.-J
',')
./ h\v' cc\,'\' ~. \'. \,\
The County is requesting the other 57 counties in California to place our advisory measure
on their local November ballots, and to work with their local jurisdictions to generate
support for our proposed constitutional amendment.
We must unite to guarantee local government revenues for locally-determined purposes and
to demand relief from unfunded State and federal mandates. By placing both an advisory
measure on the ballot in each county, and by urging legislators to place a constitutional
amendment on the statewide ballot in November 1994, we will give the people in California
a voice on this extremely important issue.
Chairwoman
Sincerely,
4~t~~
Enclosures
:~'\\~ct;". l~)
's\" \~\."
.... "'--\ ""\.,\"
,-,'--- \ ,~-- ""'\.
. \~''',.:;.,.~\ \\\;f~
". .' . ,~':c".
.'" '..J'J""-I-f\j',C'~ \""';)--"
s;:...). /5c.-6
Attachment A
PROPOSED ADVISORY BALLOT MEASURE
NOVEMBER 1994
Should the California Constitution be amended to give local government jurisdictions the
legal authority to (a) decline to implement a program mandated by the State or federal
government without the full funding necessary to perform the mandated service, and (b)
discontinue a program mandated by the State or federal government when all funds
provided by the State or federal government for such a mandate have been expended?
5c.~J
Attachment B
PROPOSED CONSITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That the Legislature of the
State of California at its 1993194 Regular Session commencing on the seventh day of
December 1992, two-thirds of the members elected to each of the two houses of the
Legislature voting therefor, hereby proposes to the people of the State of California that
the Constitution of the State be amended as follows:
First That Section 6 of Article XIIIB is amended to read:
SEe. 6. (a) Whenever the Legislature or any state agency mandates a new
program ef, higher level of service, or increased cost on any local government, the state
shall provide a subvention of funds to reimllllrse suek pay the local government for the
eosts of suek program or iHcrcased !eyel of service, except tkat tke Legislatme may, but
Heed not, llrovide sHck subvention of fHllds fer the following malldates:
(a) Legislative mandates reqHested by the loeal ageney affeeted;
(b) Legislatioll defining a Hew erime or ckanging lffi existing defiHitioR of a erime;
6f
(e) Legislative maRdates eHacted prior to JaRHary 1, 1975, or exeeHtYle orders or
regulatioll5 initially implementing legislation enaeted prior to January 1, 1975. any cost of
. that program. higher level of service. or increased cost regardless of whether the
mandate applies to public or private entities other than local government. However. the
Legislature may. but need not. provide a subvention of funds for any cost arising from a
new program. higher level of service. or increased cost imposed by any of the following:
(1) A statute requested by the local agency affected.
(2) A statute. executive order. or regulation implementing a federal law or
regulation. to the extent that the federal law or regulation specifically requires the state
without discretion to mandate a new orogram or higher level of service on any local
government.
(b) Any statute that disclaims or waives any obligation imposed on the state by
this section is invalid. Any statute that requires any local government to waive its right
to reimbursement under this section or its right to decline performance of any mandate
because of insufficient funding as provided by this section is invalid.
Second That Section 6.1 is added to Article XlIIB thereof, to read:
SEe. 6.1. Whenever the Legislature or any state agency mandates a limitation on.
or exemption from. a charge. fee. assessment. or tax levied by local government or a
.s;...~
Page 2
decrease or redistribution of state subventions or other state funds to local government
which is not offset by an equivalent reduction in the mandated costs of the local
government. the state shall reimburse the local government for the amount of the
revenue loss to the local government arising from the mandate.
Third That Section 6.2 is added to Article XIIIB thereof, to read:
SEe. 6.2. (a) Notwithstanding Section 6. a local agenG)' is authorized. upon
making a finding adopted by majority vote of the governing body that no funds have
been provided by the State for a mandated program. to decline implementation of such a
mandate.
(b) Notwithstanding Section 6. a local agenG)' is authorized. upon making a finding
adopted by majority vote of the governing body that insufficient funds have been
provided by the State for a mandated program. to discontinue i~mplementation of the
mandate at such time as all funds provided by the State have been expended.
(c) In either event. the duty of local government to incur the cost shall be
suspended and any cost incurred shall be voluntary.
Fourth That this measure shall be inteq>reted liberally to carry out the intent to
preserve the limited financial resources of local government by requiring the state to
fund at commencement and continuously thereafter every new program. higher level of
service. increased cost. or revenue loss mandated by the Legislature or a state agenG)'.
Fifth This measure is also intended to overrule the case of County of Fresno vs.
State of California (1991) 53 Cal.3d 482 holding that authorization granted to a local
government to levy service charges. fees. assessments. or taxes sufficient to pay for a new
program: higher level of service or increased cost satisfies the requirements of Section 6.
6.1 or 6.2 of Article XIIIB.
~,~
RESOLUTION NO. 17ff,J...
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CouNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA SUPPORTING AN ADVISORY MEASURE ON
THE NOVEMBER BALLOT TO GIVE LOCAL GOVERNMENT
JURISDICTIONS THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO DECLINE
TO IMPLEMENT A PROGRAM MANDATED BY THE STATE
OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHEN ALL FUNDS PROVIDED
BY THE STATE OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR SUCH A
MANDATE HAVE BEEN EXPENDED
WHEREAS, the County of San Diego is requesting the City
of Chula vista's support for an advisory measure which will be on
the November, 1994 ballot; and
WHEREAS, the following is the proposed advisory ballot
measure:
Should the California Constitution be amended to give
local government jurisdictions the legal authority to (a)
decline to implement a program mandated by the state or
federal government without the full funding necessary to
perform the mandated service, and (b) discontinue a
program mandated by the State or federal government when
all funds provided by the State or federal government for
such a mandate have been expended?
WHEREAS, local governments are bearing the deep financial
burden of unfunded State and federal mandates and it is time to end
the current practice of the State and federal governments passing
on the cost of services to local governments through unfunded or
underfunded mandates.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby support an advisory measure on the
November, 1994 ballot to give local government jurisdictions the
legal authority to decline to implement a program mandated by the
State or eral gove ent when all funds provided by the State or
federa go rnment f r such a mandate have been expended.
y
C:\rs\advisory
~-7
HAlE OF CAlFOftNlA.--VOUTH AND ADULT COAI=IECTIONAl. "'GENCY'
,'PETE WILSON. __
UEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
P.O. Box 942883
Sacramento. CA 94283-0001
G
July 5, 1994
~ '~
-<-< ::lI
no r: I'll
,'"
mn (')
;TJ....... ....
:>'<"'" ~ ,.,
..c _
cnr- <
0)>- " I'll
-n<:
:!:Iv; w, 0
n..... I.:J
m. ~
r~1
ihe Honorable Tim Nader
Mayor of the City of Chuta Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
_, ChulaVlsta, CA 919.10-2.2.31
.-....
-.-....... ..,"
.. "~'-""'"
ff'/""'.II..,...~.,. ~.'7: ?,r"
r'''''''I~
'"
Dear Mayor Nader:
As you are certainly aware. the California Department of Corrections (CDCI and
the Prison Industry Authority (PIAl would like to build end operate a reevcllng
facility in a new prison immediately adjacent to the Richard J. Donovan
Correctlonel Feclllty on Otay Mesa. This facility, as envisioned, would process
municipal solid waste (MSWI currently going into the OUlY landfill.
Obviously, to embark on such a project requires long-term contractual
commitments to provide MSW to be sorted at the new prison. At the
recommendation of the San Diego Solid Waste Management Authority. we are
contacting those cities whose waste is currently dumped Into the Otay landfill to
datermlne their level of interest end willingness to make a commitment to the
proposed facility (approKlmately 26 years).
If your city Is interested in seriously considering making a long-term commitment
to have the recyclables removed from your waste stream, then hopefully you will
accept our invitation to participate in the first of a series of meetings and
negotiating sessions.
The first meeting will be held on July 13, 199481: the Richard J. Donovan
Correctional Facility on Otay Mesa (see enclosed map). We Intend to discuss an
extensive agenda which will be provided to you prior to the meeting. At this
time It is envisioned that the meeting will begin at 8:30 a.m. and may take ell
day.
LL :
(y) WRITTEN COMMU~C~~~S
S"~, J
The Honorable Tim Nader
Page 2
It is our Intent at the first meeting/negotiating session to determine each
jurisdiction's level of Interest so that we can identlfy those cities most interested
end willing to make a commitment to thlll project. We then pllln to continue to
Invite those Jurisdictions to meet and negotiate On this project.
\'1
You or one member of your Council are Invited to attend and we encourage you
to brIng staff with a technical solid waste background to the meeting. In order
to be admitted onto the grounds of the prison we will need the full name. date of
birth, social security number, and California driver's license number of each
person attending the meeting so that we can obtain prison gate clearances In
advance. Please provide the necessary information on the enclosed form by
Monday, July 11, 1994. Our fax number Is (9161 322-5717.
~ '.'." -.:....,..,--.. ..;.,.\,-,...... -.-..--.<..-.......,....
~f'/"'lifle is lif tile essence for this new prison project. We believe this prison will be
authorized and funded by the legislature this session, I.e., by August 31, 1994.
Therefore, we will need to have l!l signed MSW contract(s! by December " 1994
for the recycling facilities In order to keep the prison project on schedule. If we
do not have signed contracts by December 1 the prison will proceed without B
recycling facility. Obviously, we would prefer to build and operate a recycling
facility which would serve some or all of the cities currently using the Otay
Landfill.
nr-'"',:"
At this first meeting we wlll.expect you or your representative to articulate your
city's level of Interest In this project and Its willingness to make a long-term
contractual commitment.
This and future meetings will be chaired by the COCo At this first ~eting we
will make a thorough presentation of the project in its conceptual fo{m. We will
then work through our agenda l!lnd close with II discussion about items that we
should consider for future agendas. .
This Invitation Is not meant to convey any obligation or expectation on our part
that Bny city needs to participate or attend this meeting. We are Interested In
meeting with cities that have a very serious Interest In participating in this
project.
f/-~
The Honorable Tim Nader
Page 3
If you hlllve any questions or concerns, please conteot me at 19161 445-7112 or
Kathryn Manzer. Manager, Government and Community Relations. fit
19161 445-3724.
Sincerely,
:r
'"oj,
.C~i?
~
G. KEVIN CARRUTH
Deputy Director
Planning and Construction Division
".".~
,. ...._,.... .,~h~ , _.._...... :"'_""~,,,
'P"t^nClOsure' ~"
:'''....11
cc: . '.John D. Goss, City Manager
5~~3
(
IUtlWll> J. tamAN
a:ilRfX:Tlaw. FACILITlC AT
KlC!\ IIOONTlUN
480 Alta Reed
&an Diego, CA un9
\6191 661-6500
:;)
,~, ; .
~i
"
l
~'I='/''''''';.<,C'"l,
"~.."}."
( fl..'
.
10
i
--
,....._ c. ~,. .w~~.
~e'i!.ic"
n........I~
. ,.
J!O'I'I'r .<;fll7l'El.S.
sUr Oust Hotel
950 /iotal Cu-cl.. North
san Dleqo, CA 92108
(619) 298-0511 .
.,
Taoln , Ceuntr.l Hot..l
500 Ilotel Cuel.. llorth
san Die<30, CA 92108
(619) 291-7131
1l8nalel Hotel
2270 Hotel Ci reI.. llorth
S&n Diego, CA 92108
(619) 297-1101
La ~nta
150 Bon1ta _
Cbula Viata, CA 92010
(6191 691-1211
N!Sl'AlIlWl1'S :
B1ac:l< Anr;/Us
707 E Street
0lUl.. Vista. CA
(619) 42'-9200
JIwr;jry IIuntu
1~4 Pal.. A_
~al hach, CA
(619) 423-0953
llurri_s
5170 Bcn1 ta 110IIII
Bonita. CA
(6191 .79-8024
IlaInadaInn
91llcnita _
Cbula V'.ista. CA 92010 I '. / /
(619) 42S-9'99 J.r'
nay. Inn
215 If. Bay Blw.
Chula Viata, CA
(9161 425-8200
'mMIl l.<dge
44SO ~ Valley _
ChWa Viata, CA
(9161 422-2600
l
A\J;julit 1988
.
.5t;f'i
The following information Is necessary to obtain prison gate clearance:
NAME:
CALIFORNIA DRIVER'S LICENSE NUMBER
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER
DATE OF BIRTH:
FAX TO (9161 322-5717 BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS JULY 11. 1994.
The following Information is necessary to obtain prison gate clearance:
,
NAME:
..,.~ . ....,.,.. ,"...
..... ._.... ._....................... ,..~......4-...
__u. ...~.~..-...,__,:..... ___. __
~c- ,,~.."''''' . -.~"
.:J CAL1FORNIA DRIVER'S LICENSE NUMBER
r:-11"'Y"!'
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER
PATE OF BIRTH:
FAX TO KATHRYN MANZER AT(916) 322-5717 BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS
JULY 11. 1994.
The following information Is neclIssary to obtain prison 9ate clearance:
NAME:
CALIFORNIA DRIVER'S LICENSE NUMBER
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER
PATE OF BIRTH:
FAX TO KATHRYN MANZER AT (9161322-5717 BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS
JULY 11,1994.
.
f t:J7.. ~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. YOUlH AND ADULT CORRECTIONAL AGENCY
PElEWllSON, Gcw.nor
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
P.O. 80K 942883 ,
Saoramento, CA 94283-0001
,..' ,
~
V
ffi ro (l;ffi ~ \:1 .~..'
D V; -- '---~11
i"
fJUL - 5 \894 .
.,.
i\",
FAX TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEE'(
.- PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION DIVISION
I
rp/(\"'"",:,~ ~.'7:,:"\"
""''''1-
,.,f .
. Date:
~\\I 51_1~4
Time:
1;30
..
To: ~.&a2r.ah\~
Phone:
Fax ,: ((gfl)585 :-5~".:
From: G. ltEVIN CARRDTH. DEPUTY Duu:Cl'OR
Phone:916-44~7112
Fax .': 916-322-5717
Number of pages (including cover sheet): ~
Subject/Comment: -rh.l~ is a +imJI... '":lU'ISi+i~ doc.\.l~.
If there are any problems with this transmission. Please call:
Name: n...t"lnl!l
Phone: 916-445-7112
s ~-' t,
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
/,
7fP/Y;;'
I
Meeting Date
ITEM TITLE:
1755.3
Resolution Reciting the Fact of the General Municipal Election
held on June 7, 1994, declaring the result, and such other matters as
provided by law. '\
Beverly A. Authelet, City Cler~[,L-
SUBMITTED BY:
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No_l
A General Municipal Election was held on June 7, 1994. Results of the election have been
certified to us by the County Registrar of Voters. Before Council is a Resolution declaring the
results of that election.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council declare the results of the
General Municipal Election which was held on June 7, 1994 for the purpose of electing a
Mayor and members of the City Council for Seat Nos. 1 and 2.
BOARDS AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable
BACKGROUND: On March 8,1994, the City Council approved Resolution 16913 calling a
General Municipal Election to be held on June 7, 1994 for the election of a Mayor and
members of the Council for Seat Nos 1 and 2.
This was the first election to be conducted under the 1992 Charter amendment which states
that, "a candidate is deemed elected upon receipt of a majority of the votes cast for the
particular seat or office. If no one receives a majority of votes, then a special runoff election
shall be held in November."
Results of the election which were certified to us by the Registrar indicate that Shirley Horton,
the candidate running for Mayor, received a majority of the votes. Council candidate, Jerry
R. Rindone, also received a majority of the votes for Seat NO.1. However, there was no
candidate which received a majority of the votes for Seat No.2. Therefore, a special runoff
election will be held in November between Steve Padilla and Carmen Sandoval.
The Registrar of Voters has canvassed the ballots for the June 7, 1994 election and has sent
us the certified results which is attached to the Resolution.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
attach. - Resolution
~-0-J;
RESOLUTION NO. /7553
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, RECITING THE FACT OF THE GENERAL
MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD ON JUNE 7, 1994, DECLARING
THE RESULT, AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY
LAW
WHEREAS, a General Municipal Election was held and conducted in the City of Chula
Vista, California, on Tuesday, June 7, 1994, as required by law; and
WHEREAS, notice of the election was given in time, form, and manner as provided by
law; that voting precincts were properly established; that election officers were appointed and
that in all respects the election was held and conducted and the votes were cast, received and
canvassed and the returns made and declared in time, form, and manner as required by the
provisions of the of the Elections Code of the State of California for the holding of elections
in charter cities; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 16913 adopted March 8, 1994, the Registrar
of Voters canvassed the returns of the election and has certified the results to the City
Council. The results are received and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A"
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the number of ballots cast at the polls was 15,866 with 5,767 absent
voter ballots for a grand total number of ballots cast in the City of 21,633; and
SECTION 2. That the names of the persons voted for at the election for Members of the City
Council are as follows:
Names of Nominees for Mayor
Shirley Horton
Penny Allen
Bob Piantedosi
Wayne Thomas Tucker
Names of Nominees for Seat No.1
Jerry R. Rindone
Thomas "Tom" Dougherty
Names of Nominees for Seat No. 2
Steve Padilla
Carmen Sandoval
Frank A. Tarantino
SECTION 3. That the number of votes given at each precinct and the number of votes given
in the City to each of the persons above names for the respective offices for which the
d,-J
Resolution * * * * *
Page 2
persons were candidates were as listed in Exhibit "A" attached.
SECTION 4. The City Council does hereby declare Shirley Horton elected as Mayor by a
majority vote and Jerry R. Rindone elected to Seat 1 by a majority vote.
SECTION 5. The City Council does also declare that Steve Padilla and Carmen Sandoval did
not receive a majority vote and will, therefore, be in a run-off election scheduled for November
8. 1994 for Seat No. 2.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall enter on the records of the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, a statement of the result of the election, showing the whole number of ballots cast in
the City.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this * day of July, 1994.
Presented by
[)
Beverly A. Authelet
City Clerk
Bruce M. Boogaar
City Attorney
~,~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item L
Meeting Date 07/12/94
XTEM TXTLE:
Resolution J 7.5> ~ Rescinding prior council
approval of contract for asphaltic concrete
Director of Financ~
City Manage~ ~~
(4/5THS Vote: Yes___No-K-)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
At its meeting of June 14, 1994, Council approved Resolution No.
17523 awarding the contract for asphaltic concrete (AC) to be used
by Public Works/Operations during the period July 1, 1994 through
June 30, 1995. Attached is a copy of the council Agenda statement
dated 6/14/94 accepting bids and awarding contract for asphaltic
concrete. The contract was awarded to sim J. Harris Company, San
Diego, but has not yet been executed, and is therefore revocable.
The contract is non-exclusive and binds the City only to the prices
bid when materials are requested.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council rescind Resolution No. 17523 and
award the contract to California commercial Asphalt Corp.
BOARDS , COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable
DISCUSSION:
During the evaluation of bids received, staff inadvertently did not
notice that California Commercial Asphalt corp. proposed to furnish
the AC from their plant on Hollister Street instead of the Carroll
Canyon Plant.
Bids were requested for the following:
ITEM
MATERIAL
ESTIMATED
USAGE
1
2
3
4
5
Type III-F-AR-4000 asphaltic concrete (sheet asphalt)
Type III-D-AR-4000 asphaltic concrete (3/8" max. aggregate)
Type III-D-SC- 800 asphaltic concrete (cold mix)
Type B2-AR-4000 asphaltic concrete (3/4" max aggregate)
Type III-AR-4000 asphaltic concrete (3/8" fine)
500 Tons
2,000 Tons
5,000 Tons
1,000 Tons
500 Tons
7.../
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 07/12/94
7
Four vendors submitted the following bids:
PRICE PER TON
ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM lOTAL BID BASED
BIDDER ...L -.L -L --L --L ON EST. USAGE
Sim J. Harris Co $23.00 $19.00 $23.00 $19.00 $20.50 $90,250
San Diego
Lakeside Asphalt 22.00 21.00 21.50 19.00 21.50 93,500
Lakeside
Calif Commercial Asphalt 23.25 21.00 23.50 19.00 21.00 94,875
San Diego
Industrial Asphalt 27.75 21.50 25.50 21.25 22.00 101,875
San Diego
The bid specifications called for pick up of the material at the
vendor's plant. This way, the job site could be prepared while
trucks were on route to pick up hot material and application made
on their return.
The low bidder Sim J. Harris Co. is located at the junction of
Highway 163 and 1-15. The driving distance round trip is 34 miles.
The second lowest bidder, Lakeside Asphalt, is located 3 miles
north of Lakeside, off Highway 67. Driving distance is 63 miles
round trip. The third lowest bidder, California commercial Asphalt
is located at 387 Hollister street, San Diego. Driving distance is
8 miles round trip.
The normal pick up of materials is 7 tons per load. The current
city dump truck rate is $12.00 per hour and driver $17.26 per hour.
The cost per load is shown below:
VENDOR TRAVEL TIME TRUCK DRIVER TOTAL COST
RT - HOURS COST COST PER LOAD
California Commercial Asphalt .75 9.00 12.95 $21.95
Sim J. Harris Co. 1.5 18.00 25.89 43.89
Lakeside Asphalt 2.25 27.00 38.84 65.84
?.."l
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 07/12/94
7
Based on the estimated usage and 7 ton load average, 1,286 trips
are projected during the year to transport the material. When the
cost for the city to transport the material is added to the bids
submitted, California commercial Asphalt becomes the most
economical bid. A representative of the apparent low bidder, Sim
J. Harris Co., has been informed of the intention to consider
transportation costs in the overall evaluation, and has registered
no complaint. sim J. Harris Co. was awarded the Fiscal Year 1993-
94 contract as the second lowest bidder based on consideration of
transportation costs.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds for this contract are provided in the Fiscal Year 1994-95
budget for the Gas Tax Fund. This action will increase contract
expenditures by approximately $4,625, but avoid more than $28,000
in related transportation costs.
AGENDA\ASPHAlT.2
6/94
7~;J /1- tj
RESOLUTION NO.
/75f'l
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA RESCINDING PRIOR COUNCIL APPROVAL
OF CONTRACT FOR ASPHALTIC CONCRETE, AND
AWARDING CONTRACT TO CALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL
ASPHALT CORPORATION
WHEREAS, at its meeting of June 14, 1994,
approved Resolution No. 17523 awarding a contract to Sim J.
for asphaltic concrete to be used by Public Works/Operations
the period July 1, 1994 through June 30, 1995; and
Council
Harris
during
WHEREAS,
Company, San Diego,
revocable; and
the contract was awarded to Sim J. Harris
but has not yet been executed, and is therefore
WHEREAS, the contract is non-exclusive and binds the city
only to the prices bid when materials are requested; and
WHEREAS, during the evaluation of bids received, staff
inadvertently did not notice that California Commercial Asphalt
Corp. proposed to furnish the AC from their plant on Hollister
Street instead of the Carroll Canyon Plant; and
WHEREAS, the bid specifications called for pick up of the
material at the vendor's plant so that the job site could be
prepared while trucks were on route to pick up hot material and
application made upon return; and
WHEREAS, the low bidder Sim J. Harris is located at the
junction of Highway 163 and I-15 with a round trip driving distance
of 34 miles; the second lowest bidder, Lakeside Asphalt, is located
3 miles north of Lakeside, off Highway 67 with a round trip driving
distance of 63 miles; and the third lowest bidder, California
Commercial Asphalt is located at 387 Hollister Street, San Diego
with a driving distance of 8 miles round trip; and
WHEREAS, based on the estimated usage and 7 ton load
average, 1,286 trips are projected during the year to transport the
material; and
WHEREAS, a representative of the apparent low bidder, Sim
J. Harris Co., has been informed of the intention to consider
transportation costs in the overall evaluation, and has registered
no complaint and Sim J. Harris Co. was awarded the Fiscal Year
1993-94 contract as the second lowest bidder based on consideration
of transportation costs; and
WHEREAS, when the cost for the city to transport the
material is added to the bids submitted, California Commercial
Asphalt become the most economical bid.
7' .5
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby rescind Resolution No. 17523
awarding the contract to sim J. Harris Company and awards the
contract for asphaltic concrete to California Commercial Asphalt
Corporation.
Presented by
Robert W. Powell, Director
of Finance
c: \RS\REBID.AC
?,(,
Bruce M.
Attorney
J =:0
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 06/14/94
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution J'J'~~ Accepting bids and awarding
contract for asphaltic concrete
c- OffY\ I
Interim Finance Administrator~~YIJ
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager
(4/5THS Vote: Yes___No-X-l
Bids were received and opened at 4:00 pm on May 31, 1994, in the
office of the Purchasing Agent for furnishing asphaltic concrete to
the city for use during the period July 1, 1994 through June 30,
1995.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept the bids and award the
contract to Sim J. Harris Co.
BOARDS , COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable
DISCUSSION:
Bids were requested for the following:
mM
MATERIAL
ESTIMATED
USAGE
1
2
3
4
5
Type III-F-AR-4000 asphaltic concrete (sheet asphalt)
Type III-D-AR-4000 asphaltic concrete 13/8" max, aggregate)
Type III-D-5C- 800 asphaltic concrete (cold mix)
Type B2-AR-4000 asphaltic concrete 13/4" max aggregate)
Type III-AR-4000 asphaltic concrete (3/8" fine)
500 Tons
2,000 Tons
5,000 Tons
1,000 Tons
500 Tons
Four vendors were mailed bid proposal forms with the following bids
received:
PRICE PER TON
ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM ITEM lOT AL BID BAS8J
BIDDER -L -L -L -L -L ON EST, USAGE
Sim J. Harris Co $23.00 $19,00 $23.00 $19,00 $20.50 $90,250
San Diego
Lakeside Asphalt 22.00 21.00 21.50 19.00 21.50 93,500
Lakeside
Calif Commercial Asphalt 23.25 21.00 23,50 19.00 21.00 94,875
San Diego
Industrial Asphalt 27,75 21.50 25.50 21.25 22.00 101,875
San Diego
7,7
-
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 06/14/94
The bid specifications called for pick up of the material at the
vendor's plant. This way, the job site could be prepared while
trucks were on route to pick up hot material and application made
on their return.
The low bid of Sim J. Harris meets
to the Director of Public Works.
follows:
specifications and is acceptable
The FY 93/94 unit prices were as
ITEM 1
ITEM 2
19.50
ITEM 3
24.00
ITEM 4
19.50
ITEM 5
24.00
19.50
I'ISCAL IMPACT:
Funds are provided for in the Gas Tax Fund for the FY 1994/95 and
awarding of this contract is contingent upon approval of the
budget.
OATA\A113.ASPHALT
01"
7"Y
-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
l?ff.5'
Resolution Approving South Chula vista Library
Change Order No.7 with Douglas E. Barnhart, Inc.,
for lighting, sound insulation, structural elements
and other miscellaneous changes
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Work~Aj/
Library Director~ ~
REVIEWED BY: City ManagerJ4~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes___No-X-)
On November 2, 1993, Council aJjrde~ the construction contract for
the South Chula vista Library to Douglas E. Barnhart, Inc.
Construction of the South Chula vista Library is being monitored
jointly by the project management firms of Starboard, Inc. and
Project Solutions, Inc. as well as by the city's Building Projects
Supervisor. They have worked with the California State Library,
the contractor and the architect to insure that the changes
included in Change Order No. 7 are necessary and advisable and that
the City achieves the greatest possible value. Since the Library
Construction and Renovation Bond Act grant provides for
reimbursement for 65% of the building project, including change
orders, all change orders must also be approved by the State Bond
Act Manager.
MEETING DATE
ITEM r
Julv 12, 1994
ITEM TITLE:
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve Change Order No.7 inclusive.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable
DISCUSSION:
Change Order No.7, as approved by the State Bond Act Manager,
totals $45,709 and incorporates a number of elements. The lighting
changes, which encompass over 70% of this Change Order, are being
proposed; a) in order to ensure the lowest on-going maintenance
costs possible, and b) to meet lighting requirements of individual
tables and carrels in a different way than originally proposed.
Other proposed changes are a combination of value-added items which
provide a higher initial cost but lower operational cost, and
technical items that will insure efficient constructability. This
is a normal part of construction in a complex building project when
multiple professionals are reviewing and fine-tuning work in
progress. The scope of work is as follows:
Liqhtinq
1. Add back originally specified light fixtures. During the
value engineering stage of this project, an $18,000
credit was taken when the Project Team projected that
~../
~
"
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM
MEETING DATE:
7", PAGE L
Julv 12. 1994
alternate fixtures could be used throughout the project
at a reduced cost. However, after considerable
discussions with the Public Works Department and the
state Library, it was agreed that it would be to the
City's best interest to purchase the highest quality
light fixtures to ensure the lowest possible on-going
maintenance costs. The state Library Bond Act Manager
has indicated that unless lighting meets certain
specified levels, he will not formally close out the
project and release the 10% retention money to the City.
Add:
$16,144
2. At the time the building was bid, all furniture was to
have integrated task lighting which provides reading
lights for each individual desk or carrel. However, when
the furniture package was bid, some integrated task
lighting had to be removed from tables and carrels for
functional and design reasons. This is one factor for
the furniture bids coming in $176,597.79 under budget.
It is now necessary to add these lighting elements back
into the project as part of the construction costs rather
than as part of the furniture costs. The Project Manager
indicates that the City is seeing an overall cost-savings
by moving this lighting from the furniture to a wall or
ceiling. The state Library Bond Act Manager has
indicated that unless lighting meets certain specified
levels, he will not formally close out the project and
release the 10% retention money to the city.
Add:
$16,192
3. Delete six underwater light fixtures in the Reading
Courtyard area because lighting in the courtyard was
adequate to meet both functional and architectural
consideration. Additionally, the Public Works Department
has requested that fountain lights be kept to a minimum
due to high maintenance costs.
Deduct: $750
Sound Insulation
1. During the course of review, the Audio Visual vendor
recommended sound insulation be increased in conference
and meeting rooms to ensure complete soundproofing.
Add: $1,002
~;~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM
MEETING DATE:
~, PAGE ;L
Julv 12. 1994
2.
Delete concrete pad which supports
literacy and support the unit on a
steel skid shock absorber system and
drywall to the space below to
transmission.
the HVAC unit in
more conventional
add two layers of
minimize noise
Add: $1,894
Structural
1. Provide flat stock to bridge steel hip tubing at twelve
pyramid hips to provide additional structural support and
ensure continuous roof flashing to prevent leaks.
Add: $1,091
2. Install additional wall footing at south side door
opening due to inadequate detailing on the drawings.
Under the coordination of the Project Manager, this work
was done as a force account in order to keep the project
on schedule.
Add: $599
3. Provide wood framing for three sets of rolling gate
tracks.
Add:
$3,300
4. Install 4 inch expansion j oint in mezzanine slab to
minimize concrete cracking.
Add:
$212
5. Provide additional wall in Children's story Hour Room to
accommodate duct work.
Add:
$1,060
Miscellaneous
1. Provide frame modifications and one new door for opening
#157.
Add: $952
~,)
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM
MEETING DATE:
7, PAGE L
Julv 12. 1994
2. Upgrade fire extinguisher cabinets to flush mounted.
Add: $423
3. Rework cabinetry and remove electrical outlets in staff
lounge to ensure proper coordination between vendor
allocated equipment and building infrastructure.
Add: $646.
4. After studying the masses and configuration of the
building, the architect recommended providing a factory-
applied bronze finish to twelve pyramid skylights and
twenty-five circular skylights in the Children's story
Hour Room to enhance the overall architectural intent.
Add: $2,944
As required by the Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act,
the elements in Change Order No. 7 have been approved by the
Library Bond Act Manager.
Previous Chanqe Orders
Previously approved Change Orders 1 - 6, for a wide variety of
elements, have totalled $154,593.46 and included:
change Order No. 1 was a reduction in the scope of work and reduced
the bid amount by $464,783. This Change Order did not impact the
contingency fund and is not included in the overall tally.
Change Order No. lA, totalling $7,302.46, was for Builder's Risk
Course of Construction Insurance and removal of concrete footings.
Change Order No.2, totalling $4,910, was for additional conduit,
revised glu-Iams and two junction boxes.
Change Order No.3, totalling $22,182, was for landscaping and
irrigation installation. Funding for a portion of this change
order (18,682) was provided by the Public Works Department.
Change Order No.4, totalling $9,588, was for a variety of
elements.
Change Order No. 5 for City initiated, utility or code required,
HVAC coordination and force account work totaled $93,416.
Y~'I
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM
MEETING DATE:
~, PAGE ~
Julv 12. 1994
change Order No.6 totaled $17,195 and added an exterior fountain
in the entrance courtyard. The entire Change Order was funded by
the Friends of the Chula vista Public Library.
Future Chanqe Orders
with the building now more than 50% complete, the project Manager
continues to indicate that it is his belief that no more than fifty
percent of the contingency budget will ever be needed for this
project. The Project Team, which includes the project Manager, the
Public Works Department, the Architect, the Contractor and Library
staff, has currently identified two potential small scale change
orders. One might be to add four additional lights to the browsing
area, per the state Library's request, and another might be to add
additional security lighting to the entrance courtyard.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed change Order No.7 totals $45,709. Funding is
available in the South Chula vista Library project's contingency
fund. The Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act grant
reimburses 65% or $29,711. The City's share is 35% or $15,998.
The total aggregate of change order work funded with library
construction funds (#1 through #7, inclusive) is $200,302 or 2.59%
of the bid award. There has been a $35,877 increase in the
contingency funds due to monies coming from the Public Works
Department for public right-of-way improvements and from the
Friends of the Library for the exterior entrance fountain.
The remaining balance of the library's contingency fund will be
$444,784.52 after the deduction of Change Order No.7.
r-.s!1J-b
RESOLUTION NO.
1755~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING SOUTH CHULA VISTA
LIBRARY CHANGE ORDER NO. 7
WHEREAS, on November 2, 1993, Council awarded the
construction contract for the South Chula vista Library to Douglas
E. Barnhart, Inc.; and
WHEREAS, construction of the South Chula vista Library is
being monitored jointly by the project management firms of
Starboard, Inc. and Project Solutions, Inc. as well as by the
City'S Building Projects Supervisor; and
WHEREAS, Change Order No.7, as approved by the State
Bond Act Manger, totals $45,709 and incorporates a number of
elements including lighting changes necessary to meet State Library
requirements, improved sound insulation, as well as some structural
and miscellaneous elements; and
WHEREAS, the project management firms have worked with
the California State Library, the contractor and the architect to
insure that the changes included in Change Order No. 7 are
necessary and advisable and that the City achieves the greatest
possible value.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby approve South Chula vista Library
Change Order No. 7 with Douglas E. Barnhart, Inc. in the amount of
$45,709 for lighting, sound insulation, structural elements and
other miscellaneous changes.
aJ
Presented by
David Palmer, Library
Director
C:\rs\library.co7
8" 1
STATE LIBRARY INITIATOR # 7
PROJECT NO. P86-032
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CHANGE IN CONTRACT
CHANGE ORDER NO:
DATE:
JOB #
CONTRACT:
CONTRACTOR:
007
June 29, 1994
LB-125
South Chula Vista Library
Douglas E. Barnhart Inc.
The following addition
executed September 22,
Douglas E. Barnhart Inc.
shall be made to INCREASE the contract
1993 between the City of. Chu1a Vista and
REMARKS AND DETAILS: Changes in plans and specifications at an
agreed upon pr ice. Change order # 007 includes several proposals
which are all requested by either City staff or by the Architect to
enhance the remodel project at the South Chula Vista Library. An
itemized breakdown follows:
SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENTATION
CHANGE ORDER #007 SUM:
$
45,709.00
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT
$ 5,973,201. 00
$ 154,593.46
$ 6,127,794.46
$ 45,709.00
$ 6,173,503.46
PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS TOTAL
PREVIOUS CONTRACT AMOUNT
THIS CHANGE ORDER NO.007
REVISED TOTAL CONTRACT
It is agreed
performed and
contract and
hereto.
by the undersigned that all extra work
mater ial furnished in accordance with the
in accordance with the statement, if any,
shall be
original
attached
APPROVED BY:
APPROVED BY:
John P. Lippitt
Director Of Public Works
City Of Chula Vista
Douglas E. Barnhart
Owner
Douglas E. Barnhart Inc.
!i;1-$;
Dick Th~
City Of Chula Vista
Building Project Supervisor
8'~
GENERATED BY:
fw.~d~
Project Manager
Starboard Construction Inc.
ORDERED BY:
SUMMARY OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 007
1. During the value engineering stage of the project a credit of
$18,000 was taken as a line item goal to seek alternative light
fixtures. After considerable investigation, in order to not
affect the quality level of the lighting, a minor credit was
taken on one light fixture. It is the opinion of the design team
to keep the other fixtures as specified to provide the City with
the highest quality product.
ADD $16,144.00
2. Due to layout considerations of the furniture in respect to the
location of windows in the library, it was decided to credit
task lighting from the furniture budget and add ceiling and wall
fixtures into the construction budget to accommodate these
lighting requirements.
LITERACY:
CHILDREN'S:
CHILDREN'S:
ROOMS 123 & 124:
8 type M light fixtures,
14 type C light fixtures,
Revise fixture types F & T,
7 type C fixtures
ADD $2,961. 00
ADD $4,530.00
ADD $6,762.00
ADD $1,939.00
3. Delete six (6) underwater light fixtures at the reading
courtyard fountain area.
DEDUCT $750.00
4. Provide frame modifications and one new door for opening>> 157
ADD $952.00
5. Upgrade fire extinguisher cabinets to stainless steel flush
mounted.
ADD $423.00
6. Provide flat stock to bridge steel hip tubing at the twelve
pyramid hips.
ADD $1,091.00
7. Upgrade insulation at conference rooms >> 116, 117, 119, 120,
122, and 133.
ADD $133.00
8. Install additional wall footing at South side door opening
(Force Account)
ADD $599.00
8"1
9. Provide wood framing for three (3) sets of rolling gate tracks.
ADD $ 3,300.00
10. Rework cabinetry and move electrical
area.
outlets at staff kitchen
ADD $646.00
11. Install 4" felt expansion joint at at mezzanine. slab to minimize
cracking.
ADD $212.00
12. Provide additional wall at childern's story hour room to
accommodate ductwork.
ADD $1,060.00
13. Provide a factory applied bronze finish at 12 pyramids skylights
and 25 circular shylights in the childerns story hour room.
ADD $2,944.00
14. The H.V.A.C. unit for literacy is supported by a concrete pad on
the roof and has a dual function to reduce noise within the
space below. The slop of the roof caused the H.V.A.C. unit to
exceed the parapet height. The proposed solution is to delete
the concrete pad and support the unit on a more conventional
skid system and use two layers of drywall on the space below to
minimize noise transmission.
ADD $1,894.00
'ir'/CJ
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY
FISCAL INFORMATION
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY
Original Contingency Allowance:
Net Change All Previous Change Orders:
Contingency Allowance Ballance Available:
BUDGET INCREASE FUNDING SOURCE
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ($18,682.00)
BUDGET INCREASE FUNDING SOURCE
FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY ($17,195.00)
Net Change This Change Order #007
New contingency Allowance Balance:
~,,//
$609,210.00
<$154,593.46>
$454,616.54
$473,298.54
$490,493.54
<$45,709.00>
$444,784.52
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
/7fft
Resolution Approving an agreement with the San
Diego Unified Port District for police and fire services for FY 1994-95
through FY 1996-97
Shauna Stokes, prin~il'\~ Management Analyst ;rY'
City Manage~ \)>.6 ~\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NolO
Item '1
Meeting Date 7/12/94
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The City has been negotiating with the San Diego Unified Port District (Port) on a multi-
year agreement for the provision of City police and fire services to the non-tax paying
properties on the tidelands. The agreement under consideration covers the three fiscal
years 1994-95 through 1996-97. Under the proposed agreement, the City will receive
$360,013 for police and fire services in FY 1994-95, with adjustments in subsequent
years to cover increases in City costs. The proposed reimbursement of $360,013 is
roughly $60,000 more than the $300,000 revenue estimate included in the FY 1994-95
budget, which was adopted by Council on June 21, 1994.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution approving the multi-
year agreement with the Port.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
During FY 1990-91, Chula Vista, in conjunction with the other member cities of the Port
District, successfully renegotiated the reimbursement agreements for police and fire
services provided by the cities to the non-tax paying properties of the tidelands. In FY
1990-91 Chula Vista received a total reimbursement for public safety services of $95,000.
Under the renegotiated agreement, Chula Vista received a total reimbursement for public
safety services of $391 ,030 in FY 1991-92 and $463,667 in FY 1992-93. It is important
to note that reimbursements for FY 1991-92 and 1992-93 were based on: 1) estimated,
rather than actual, service levels and costs, and 2) a disputed methodology used by the
City which, in addition to valuing direct services, also incorporated a factor to account
for the hours needed to staff a beat 24 hours per day, regardless of whether the beat
officer was engaged in direct services. It was understood by the parties that the
reimbursement agreement would be renegotiated after the Port was able to audit service
levels and costs and establish baseline data.
In March 1994, Port staff completed an audit of police and fire services provided by the
City to the non-tax paying properties on the tidelands. Based on the audited workload
and cost data and the City's patrol staffing model, a revised baseline reimbursement
level of $360,013 was agreed to, commencing in FY 1994-95. Important points to note
about the revised agreement are:
9-/
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date 7/12/94
. although final negotiations are still on-going between the Port and several
of the other member cities, the revised reimbursement total for Chula Vista
is in line with adjustments being renegotiated with all of the cities;
. the new baseline total of $360,013 is still $65,000 more than the $295,000
which had been budgeted for FY 1993-94 reimbursements (in anticipation
of the pending renegotiation); and $60,000 more than the revenue estimate
of $300,000 which was included in the FY 1994-95 budget.
. the Port initially required that the new reimbursement agreement (Le.,
reduced payments) commence in FY 1993-94, the year in which the audit
was completed. City staff successfully argued that the Port was
responsible for audit delays and that the FY 1993-94 reimbursement should
be based on prior formulas and factors. As part of the overall negotiations,
the Port agreed to reimbursements totalling $479,493 for FY 1993-94
(approved by Council on March 15, 1994). As noted above, this amount
exceeded budgeted levels and was used to help offset revenue reductions
which had occurred in other areas;
. for the first time, the new methodology incorporates an agreed-upon factor
valuing the "reserve capacity" associated with both police and fire services;
. as with previous agreements, the Port can elect to take over responsibility
for any of the police and fire services currently provided by the City.
However, the new agreement, by reformulating the charges for specific
services, has greatly reduced the economic incentive for the Port to
perform these services in-house and has reduced the potential financial
impact to the City should the Port ever elect to do so. The added revenue
stability for the City is one of the most important aspects of the new
agreement;
. lastly, the agreement calls for adjustments to the baseline reimbursement
level of $360,013 in subsequent fiscal years, to reflect increases in City
costs.
It is anticipated that at the end of this three-year agreement the Port will conduct another
audit to establish new baseline data for use in future agreements.
Perhaps the most important outcome of the current negotiations was the mutual
agreement between Port and City staff as to an appropriate methodological framework
for valuing these City services. By establishing a mutually acceptable basis for
calculating the value of these services, staff has eliminated what had been a highly
contentious issue between our organizations. We believe the new agreement will help
pave the way for increased cooperative efforts in the future.
9-;2.
Page 3, Item 1
Meeting Date 7/12/94
FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed agreement calls for a reimbursement of $360,013 in
FY 1994-95 for police and fire services provided by the City to the non-tax paying
properties on the tidelands. The projected revenue is roughly $60,000 more than the
$300,000 revenue included in the FY 1994-95 budget, which was adopted by Council on
June21,1994.
It should be noted that the City also receives reimbursement from the Port for
maintenance of parks at the J Street Marina area under a separate agreement.
9, J /q-1-
RESOLUTION NO.
I ?f5?
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT FOR POLICE AND
FIRE SERVICES FOR FY 1994-95 THROUGH FY 1996-
97, AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, the City has been negotiating with the San Diego
Unified Port District on a multi-year agreement for the provision
of City police and fire services to non-tax paying properties on
the tidelands; and,
WHEREAS, the agreement under consideration at this time
covers the fiscal years 1994-95 through 1996-97; and,
WHEREAS, the city will receive a total of $360,013 from
the Port for police and fire services in FY 1994-95, with
adjustments in subsequent years to cover increases in City costs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby approve an Agreement with the San
Diego Unified Port District for Police and Fire Services for FY
1994-95 through FY 1996-97, a copy of which is on file in the
office of the City Clerk as Document No. (to be completed by
the city Clerk in the final document).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
agreement for and on behalf of the City of a vista.
y
Presented by
aara
Shauna Stokes, Principal
Management Analyst
C:\rs\portdist
9'> /9-6
THREE-YEAR AGREEMENT FOR POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES
The parties to this agreement are the city of Chula Vista, a municipal
corporation, hereinafter called "CITY," and the SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT
DISTRICT, a public corporation, hereinafter called "DISTRICT."
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the DISTRICT desires to contract for the provision of
police and fire services to the non-ad valorem tideland trust property
located on the CITY's tidelands, and;
WHEREAS, the CITY has the capacity to provide police and fire
services to said DISTRICT property, and;
WHEREAS, the DISTRICT has an obligation to adhere to a principle
of reimbursement for services provided to non-ad valorem tideland trust
property, wherein the cost bears a relationship to the services
provided, the reimbursement is substantiated by an auditable record,
and for which the reimbursement is reasonable and falls within the
trust purposes of the DISTRICT, and;
WHEREAS, the DISTRICT may authorize the disbursement of money for
specified and approved categories of reimbursement to the CITY
providing such services are based upon records kept in the normal
course of CITY business;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree:
1. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED
A.... This agreement covers reimbursement of the cost of police and
fire protection services to be provided by the CITY upon the DISTRICT's
filled tidelands and property within CITY's limits which do not
generate ad valorem tax revenues. Those properties include but are not
limited to non-dedicated streets, parks and other open space, unleased
developed properties, leased properties wherein the lessee is not
subject to ad valorem taxes (with the exception of properties leased to
the CITY,) and unleased vacant land (see Attachment B). Nothing herein
contained shall give CITY the right to use or occupy any DISTRICT real
or personal property, or to otherwise use the services of the DISTRICT
or its employees.
~ CITY shall provide police, fire and emergency medical
services as contained in the Statement of Reimbursable Expenses of this
agreement, attached hereto as Attachment A and incorporated by
reference as though fully set forth herein. Only expenditures
authorized herein shall be eligible for reimbursement, unless approved
in writing by the DISTRICT.
1
'I'?
~ For Police Services, the CITY shall provide services to the
same extent and in the same manner as such member city actually
provides or may be required by law to provide to an ad valorem tax-
generating property. DISTRICT and CITY shall, to the extent
practicable, meet and confer as needed to discuss deployment of
resources cooperatively in an effort to avoid duplication of services.
!k. For Fire and Emerqencv Medical Services, the CITY shall
provide, to the same extent and in the same manner as such member city
actually provides or may be required by law to provide to an ad valorem
tax-generating property, responses to all calls for fire suppression
services by the fire department; and responses to all calls for
emergency medical services, to such extent as the county, state or
federal government requires the CITY to provide. The parties agree
that emergency medical services shall be limited to first responder
services.
E.... The activities and services authorized for reimbursement
shall only be those which have occurred and been rendered on or after
July 1, 1994, and which are in furtherance of the San Diego Bay
tideland trust for the accommodation of commerce, navigation,
fisheries, and recreation on said trust tidelands for the benefit of
all of the people of the State of California.
2. PERIOD
This agreement shall cover services rendered for the three-year
period from July 1, 1994 to June 30, 1997; provided, however, either
party may term~nate this agreement at the end of a fiscal year provided
written notice is given at least six (6) months prior to the end of the
fiscal year.
3. CONSIDERATION
~ In consideration of the foregoing performance of services by
the CITY, the DISTRICT shall pay to the CITY a sum not to exceed Three
Hundred Sixty Thousand and Thirteen Dollars ($360,013) per fiscal year.
If during the three-year contract period the CITY'S~eqotiatedlcosts
for police and fire department salaries and benefits c ange, CITY shall
give the DISTRICT written notice and furnish documentation satisfactory
to DISTRICT to substantiate the changes. The resulting increase or
decrease in cost will be included when establishing the annual
consideration to be paid commencing with the next fiscal year covered
by this agreement.
~ Payments shall be made upon written request to the DISTRICT
and may be submitted on a quarterly basis at any time during the
quarter for the fiscal year in which services are performed. DISTRICT
agrees to reimburse the CITY for any and all expenses within thirty
days of receipt of a properly prepared request for reimbursement,
subject to the not to exceed sum specified in 3.A., above. DISTRICT
agrees to reimburse the CITY before the last day of the fiscal year for
2
9'8"
the fourth quarterly payment provided the DISTRICT receives a properly
prepared request for reimbursement at least thirty days before the end
of the fourth quarter.
~ Payment shall be for reimbursement of expenses to conduct the
services specified in this agreement. Proof of both incurrence and
payment shall be kept on file by the CITY for review by the DISTRICT
for a period of two years after the last day of the fiscal year.
4. TYPES OF REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
a... For Police Services, reimbursement shall be based on services
provided, such as, responses to calls for service from persons other
than CITY's sworn officers; calls for back-up service; preventive
patrol, which may include taking appropriate action on routine
incidents encountered where no arrest occurred and/or no report was
made (for example, routine vehicle impounds and traffic stops); opening
and closure of parks and security patrol as requested in writing by the
DISTRICT; calls by Harbor Police for CITY police assistance;
reimbursement for consumption of supplies; storing evidence; actual
expenditures in terms of time, material and overhead in the case of
calamities; activities of support staff, for example, investigating,
supervising, and dispatching; a reasonable allocation of overhead as
determined for each category of work; and other activities or events
which call for the deployment of public safety officers. All costs
reimbursed shall be based on services rendered for which the cost is
reasonable and substantiated by data that is auditable to support that
level of service.
~ For Fire and Emerqencv Medical Services, reimbursement shall
be seven percent (7%) of the direct costs and overhead, representing a
reasonable pro-rata portion of the cost, to operate one of the fire
companies in the CITY's Fire station No.1, the primary responder to
tideland emergencies.
5. STATEMENTS OF EXPENSES
Beginning with March, 1997 and every third year thereafter, CITY
shall provide DISTRICT with a statement estimating DISTRICT
reimbursements due for services to be provided to the DISTRICT during
the next three fiscal years for purposes of reaching mutual agreement
on a new contract, if a~Plicable. Said statement shall be based on the
costs incurred in provi 1 police, fire and emergency medical services
during the previous fis al year. The estimate for police services
shall include but not limited to the number of calls for service,
investigations, repor arrests, or other particulars on police
actions performed. ere applicable, the estimate for fire and
emergency medical s vices shall include the number of calls for
service. The estima es for police, fire and emergency medical services
shall include, but ot be limited to, direct labor and other operating
costs, details of allocations of actual support staff costs or
departmental over ead and general CITY overhead costs based upon
3
~'e;
reasonable and generally accepted accounting principles. The CITY
shall ensure that all data used in said estimates is supported by an
audit trail that readily traces to underlying authoritative source
documents.
6. DISTRICT FIRE AND POLICE SERVICES
The DISTRICT shall maintain its current level of police and fire
services within the CITY tideland area, and reserves the right to
augment those services in the following fiscal year provided written
notice is given at least six (6~ months prior to the end of a fiscal
year. Said augmentation may result in a reduction in the future CITY
services that otherwise might have been reimbursable under this
agreement.
7. RECORDS
~ At the request of the DISTRICT, and upon reasonable notice,
the CITY shall make available documentation supporting the request for
reimbursement. Such documentation, if reasonably available, may include
but is not limited to time cards, contracts, receipts, original
invoices, canceled checks, payroll documentation, calls for service
records, dispatch records, police and fire budget data, other budget
data used to calculate citywide overhead factors, the CITY's police
staffing model, and other periodic logs maintained by police and fire
staff. The DISTRICT shall have the right to review and make copies of
documents, insofar as confidentiality requirements can be reasonably
maintained.
~ No less often than monthly, CITY agrees to forward to the
DISTRICT copies of any periodic logs, calls for police service, or
other police, fire or medical emergency incident reports describing
incidents occurring on non-ad valorem tideland properties covered by
this agreement. Where available, exact street addresses should be
listed in the logs and calls for service to assure that only actions on
non-ad valorem properties are included. Quarterly statistical reports
detailing the number and types of incidents on non-ad valorem tideland
properties may be substituted.
8. ASSIGNMENT
CITY shall not assign this agreement or any right or interest
hereunder without express prior written consent of DISTRICT, nor shall
DISTRICT assign this agreement or any right or interest hereunder
without express prior written consent of CITY.
9. TERMINATION FOR CAUSE
DISTRICT may terminate its entire obligation upon reasonable
notice to CITY if the CITY violates any of the terms of the agreement.
CITY may terminate its entire obligation upon reasonable notice to the
DISTRICT if the DISTRICT violates any of the terms of the agreement.
4
9....1f)
Prior to termination, said parties shall meet to attempt to resolve the
issuers) and/or shall utilize the dispute resolution process described
in Paragraph 14 below, "Dispute Resolution."
10. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
It is expressly understood and agreed that this agreement
constitutes the entire agreement between the CITY and the DISTRICT and
in no event shall the CITY be entitled to any compensation, benefits,
reimbursement or ancillary services other than as expressly provided in
this agreement. There aLe no other written or oral understandings
between the parties. No modification or amendment to this agreement
shall be valid unless in writing and signed by the parties hereto.
11. HOLD HARMLESS
A.... CITY agrees to indemnify and hold the DISTRICT harmless
against and from any and all damages to property or injuries to or
death of any person or persons, including employees or agents of the
DISTRICT, and shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the DISTRICT,
its officers, agents and employees, from any and all claims, demands,
suits, actions or proceedings of any kind or nature, of or by anyone
whomsoever, in any way resulting from or arising out of the negligent
or intentional acts, errors or omissions of the CITY or any of its
officers, agents or employees, except where claims or damages arise
from the sole negligence or intentional acts, errors or omissions of
DISTRICT, its officers, agents or employees.
.!h DISTRICT agrees to indemnify and hold the CITY harmless
against and from any and all damages to property or injuries to or
death of any person or persons, including employees or agents of the
CITY, and shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the CITY, its
officers, agents and employees, from any and all claims, demands,
suits, actions or proceedings of any kind or nature, of or by anyone
whomsoever, in any way resulting from or arising out of the negligent
or intentional acts, errors or omissions of the DISTRICT or any of its
officers, agents or employees, except where claims or damages arise
from the sole negligence or intentional acts, errors or omissions of
CITY, its officers, agents or employees.
12. INSURANCE
A.... Throughout the duration of this agreement, the CITY shall
maintain self-insurance or comprehensive general liability insurance
covering bodily injury, personal injury and property damage arising out
of the CITY's operations provided for in this agreement. The CITY shall
also maintain self-insurance or auto liability insurance covering
bodily injury and property damage arising out of the CITY's operations
provided for in this agreement. At all such times as the CITY has in
effect comprehensive general and auto liability insurance, the CITY's
5
9,//
policies shall be endorsed to add the DISTRICT, its officers, officials
and employees as additional insureds up to the full limits of coverage
provided by all primary and excess liability policies. Additionally,
the CITY's comprehensive general and auto liability insurance shall be
primary for all purposes.
lh Prior to commencement of this agreement, the CITY shall
furnish to the DISTRICT a letter of self-insurance, or, certificates of
insurance evidencing that all required policies are in full force and
effect and providing at least thirty days' written notice be given to
the DISTRICT prior to cancellation or reduction of any coverage.
13. DISPUTED REIMBURSEMENTS
A. If the DISTRICT or the CITY discovers, independent of an
audit, that the annual reimbursement amount made under this contract is
greater than or less than the agreed upon amount, the parties shall
meet to attempt to resolve the issues prior to the end of the fiscal
year in which the reimbursement is being disputed. The CITY shall
refund such overpayment and the DISTRICT shall remit such underpayment
only if both parties mutually agree that an error was made and agree
upon the disputed reimbursement amount.
B. If the DISTRICT conducts an audit of the CITY records for the
affected fiscal years, and if the DISTRICT or the CITY discovers that
the annual reimbursements appear to be overpaid or underpaid, the
parties shall meet to attempt to resolve the issues. The CITY shall
reimburse the DISTRICT for an overpayment and the DISTRICT shall
reimburse the CITY for an underpayment only if both parties mutually
agree that an error was made and agree with the disputed amount.
C. If such disputes arise, the parties agree to utilize the
dispute resolution process described in section 14 of this agreement.
14. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
If a dispute arises out of or related to this agreement, or either
party alleges a breach thereof, and if said dispute cannot be settled
through negotiation, the parties agree first to try in good faith to
settle the dispute by mediation under the Commercial Mediation Rules of
the American Arbitration Association, before resorting to arbitration,
litigation, or some other dispute resolution procedure.
15. ATTORNEY'S FEES
In the event any suit is commenced to enforce, protect or
establish any right or remedy of any of the terms and conditions
hereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to have and recover from
the losing party reasonable attorney's fees and costs of suit.
6
9"'/.)..
16. NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES
This agreement is made and entered into for the benefit of
DISTRICT and CITY only, and it is not intended for the benefit of any
third party or any other person, and no such third party or any other
person shall be a third party beneficiary to this agreement or
otherwise have the right to enforce any provisions of this agreement.
17. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE DISTRICT
The Administrative Services Division of the District is designated
as the DISTRICT's Contract Administrator of this agreement and shall
receive and process all reports and requests for payment. All
correspondence shall be sent to the following address:
San Diego Unified Port District
Bruce B. Hollingsworth, Treasurer
Post Office Box 488
San Diego, California 92112 (Phone: 686-6212)
18. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATORS FOR THE CITY
& For matters concerning fire services, all correspondence with
the CITY shall be sent to the fOllowing address:
Dan Beintema, Principal Management Assistant
Chula vista Fire Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910 (Phone: 691-5277)
B. For matters concerning police services, all correspondence
with the CITY shall be sent to the following address:
Kevin Hardy, Principal Management Assistant
Chula vista Police Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910 (Phone: 691-5144)
DATED:
, 1994.
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
By
Port Director
CITY OF
By
JOSEPH D. PATELLO
Port Attorney
7
9~/J
ATTACHMENT A
POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES AGREEMENT
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
FISCAL YEARS 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
EXHIBIT P................................... 2
EXHIBIT P-l................................. 3
ATTACHMENT 1, PART 1........................4
ATTACHMENT 1, PART 11.......................5
EXHIBIT V, ATTACHMENT 1, PART 111.........6-8
EXHIBIT VI.................................. 9
EXHIBIT VII, ATTACHMENT 2, PART 11......10-13
9-1t(
,
y
SUMMARY
TOTAL POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
FISCAL YEARS 1994-95, 1995-96 AND 1996-97
Total Police Services
Total Fire Services
Exhibit P
Exhibit VII, Attachment 2, Part II
PAGE 1
9--/5
$279,175
$80,838
$360.013
Exhibit P
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
POLICE COST
TIDELANDS AREA - NON TAX PROPERTIES
ESTIMATED FOR THE YEAR ENDING JUNE 30,1995
Description Reference Amount
Beat Officer Cost:
No. officers required (FTE) Exhibit P-l 1.68
Annual cost per officer Exhibit V $66,853
Total beat officer cost Officers required X cost $112,313
Support Staff Cost:
Ratio of support staff to officers Attachment 1, Part II 1.1
Number of support staff required Ratio X officers required 1.85
Annual cost per support staff Exhibit V $67,417
Total support staff cost Support staff required X cost $124,721
Sub- Total Beat Officer & Support Staff Cost $237,034
Overhead Cost:
City overhead % Exhibit VI 17.77837%
Total overhead cost % X Sub- Total $42,141
Total Police Cost
$279.175
PAGE 2
9-/(,
Exhibit P-1
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
NUMBER OF BEAT OFFICERS REQUIRED
TO STAFF SERVICE DEMAND FOR TIDELANDS AREA
NON- TAX PROPERTIES
Description Reference/Formula
94-95 Estimated calls for service (CFS),
in hours Attachment 1, Part 1
94-95 Estimated non-calls for service (NCFS)
hours for preventive patrol/officer initiated Negotiated formula
activities/reserve capacity
Total estimated hours CFS + NCFS
Average beat officer hours available per year
for field activities Provided by CV
Number of officers required (FTE) Estimated hours / available hours
for CFS + NCFS
PAGE 3
9-/'}
Amount
97.6
2356.7
2454.3
1460
1.68
ATTACHMENT 1: POLICE SERVICES - MULTI YEAR AGREEMENT
BASED ON FY1992-93 DATA UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
PART :I:
PEACE OFF:ICERS NEEDED
B. Beat Officer Time
1. All data is based upon Chula vista's patrol staffing model.
This workload model assesses staffing needs based on the time
required for various patrol officer functions. The model,
developed in 1986, was cited by the International City
Manager's Association (ICMA) as one of the ten best studies of
police operations. CFS volume is based on data samples for
Calendar Year 1991. Other CFS values are based on the FY1993-
94 patrol staffing study update (see attached Exhibit II).
Average CFS handling time =
54.1 hours
35.86 min * 91 CFS = 3,244 min/60 min =
54.07 hours = 54.1 hours
Average "backup" time = 26.1% CFS require
backup at an average total backup time of
28.1 minutes =
11. 2 hours
91 CFS * .261 = 24 CFS requiring 1 or more
backup units @ 28.1 minutes per average backup =
28.1 minutes * 24 = 674.4 min/60 min =
11.24 hours = 11.2 hours
Average report time =
28.9 hours
100 CFS generate 81 reports, with an average
report time of 23.4 minutes =
91 CFS * .81 (% requiring reports) =
74 reports * 23.4 min = 1,732/60 min =
28.9 hours
Average prisoner transport time =
3.3 hours
100 CFS generate 3.4 arrests with an
average transport time of 1.12 hours =
91 CFS * .034 (Tideland CFS generating
arrests) =
3 arrests * 1.12 hours = 3.36 hours = 3.4 hours
TOTAL CFS TIME:
97.6 hours
PAGE 4
9-/r
ATTACHMENT 1: POLICE SERVICES - MULTI YEAR AGREEMENT
BASED ON FY1992-93 DATA UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
PART II: SUPPORT STAFF NEEDED
The support staff ratio represents the number of non-beat
officer staff (other sworn staff such as investigators, watch
conunanders, etc. and non-sworn staff such as dispatchers) that
are needed within the police department to support one beat
officer. As detailed below, the department-wide support staff
ratio for FY 1992-93 was 2.17. The City and District have,
however, agreed to use a lower, negotiated factor of 1.1
support staff per beat officer for purposes of this agreement.
Thus, for 1.68 peace officers needed, 1.85 support staff are
needed. (1.68 * 1.1 = 1.85).
SUPPORT STAFF NEEDED
Position
Ratio per Patrol Officer
Lieutenants/Sergeants/Agents
conununity Service Officers
Dispatchers (Conun Operators)
Auxiliary Services*
Support Services*
Investigations*
TOTAL
70/70 =
11/70 =
26/70 =
9/70 =
23.5/70 =
12/70 =
1.00
.16
.37
.13
.34
.17
2.17
*The numbers are less than the budgeted positions for that
division to avoid double counting of certain positions
previously counted, such as Agent, Dispatcher, and Lieutenant.
PAGE 5
'1'/1
EXHIBIT V:
ATTACHMENT 1: POLICE SERVICES - MULTI YEAR AGREEMENT
BASED ON FY1992-93 DATA UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
PART III: PEACE OFFICER AND SUPPORT STAFF COST CALCULATIONS
A. Beat Officer (Peace Officer) Direct Costs
1. Salary
Budgeted salaries for budgeted number of officers in
Uniform Patrol Division/nUmber of officers =
$3,087,250/70 = $44.104/officer
2. Benefits
Budgeted funds in Employee Benefit Plan account of
Uniform Patrol Division/total number of positions =
$571,900/131 = $4.366
3 . Medicare
Budgeted funds in Medicare account of Uniform Patrol
Division/total number of positions =
$42,960/131 = $328
4. Bilingual Pay
Budgeted funds in Differential account for bilingual pay
for POA (Police Officer Association) members =
$16,800/97 (number of POA members in Uniform Patrol
Division, which includes 70 officers, 12 agents, 10
sergeants and 5 lieutenants) = $173
5. Uniform Allowance
Per POA's Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), each officer
receives $200 allowance = $200
6. Retirement (PERS)
Per Fringe Benefit Calculation included in the Budget
Manual for staff, retirement for police officers = salary
x .19063 + $24 Survivor's Benefit = $44,104 x .19063 =
$8,408 + $24 = $8.432
7 . Overtime
Budgeted funds in Overtime account in the Uniform Patrol
Division/nUmber of employees budgeted = $426,000/131 =
$3.252
PAGE 6
9 -.2.1/
8. Education Pay
Budgeted funds in the Differential Account of the Uniform
Patrol Division for education pay = 30 POA members @ $40
per pay period and 10 POA members @ $80 per pay period =
(30 x 40 x 26.0893) + (10 x 80 x 26.0893) = $31,310 +
$20,870 = $52,180/97 POA members = $538
9. Worker's Compensation
Budgeted funds in Worker's Comp account of the Uniform
Patrol Division/number of employees = $255,180/131 =
$1. 948
TOTAL = $63,341
TOTAL PEACE OFFXCER PERSONNEL COST = $63,341
B. Non-Personnel Officer Costs
1. Training
Auxiliary Services Division budgets all officer training
in Training account = $550/officer
2. Vehicles
Per the City'S Vehicle Replacement Schedule, all pOlice
pursuit vehicles are replaced every two years. Per the
Police Department's Principal Management Assistant,
$8,300 per year per vehicle is budgeted in the Equipment
Replacement account of the Uniform Patrol budget.
Because there are three shifts, there is one vehicle for
every three officers (shifts). $8,300/3 = $2.767
3. Ammunition
Auxiliary Services Division budgets all ammunition costs
for officers = $130/officer
4. Miscellaneous Supplies
other Commodities account of Uniform Patrol budget =
$6,700/(97 POA + 6 Community Service Officers) = ~.
TOTAL NON-PERSONNEL PEACE OFFXCER COST = $3,512
TOTAL PEACE OFFXCER COST = $66.853
PAGE 7
9",2./
C. support Staff Cost
Approved Police Department Budget for Employee Services =
$14,102,997
Number of Beat Officers = 70
Total Beat Officer Cost = 70 x $63,341 = $4,433,870
$14,102,997
- $ 4.433.870
$ 9,669,127
Number of Support Staff = 234.50 budgeted positions - 70
officers = 164.50
Support Staff =
Average support staff cost = $9,669,127/164.50 = $58.779
TOTAL SUPPORT STAFF PERSONNEL COST = $58,779
D. Non-Personnel support Staff Costs
Approved Police Department Budget for Supplies and Services =
$1,666,820
Average Non-Personnel Officer Cost = $3,512
Number of Beat Officers = 70
Total Beat Officer Cost = 70 x $3,512 = $245,840
Support Staff = $1,666,820
- $ 245.840
$1,420,980
Number of Support Staff = 234.50 budgeted positions - 70
officers = 164.50
Average support staff cost = $1,420,980/164.50 = $8.638
TOTAL NON-PERSONNEL SUPPORT STAFF COST = $8,638
TOTAL SUPPORT STAFF COST = $67.417
PAGE 8
9~';J-
EXHIBIT VI
FY 92-93
CITY OF
C H U L A V I l T A
INDIRECT COST RATE
MAJOR GaP/ACTIVITY INDIRECT DIRECT CQtlENTS
----------..- ...--------- ......-.........._.. ---..........--........--......-..
COHHUIIITY PROMOTlOH 522,200
IDS & CQtlISSIOHS 552,350
CITY ATTORNEY 590,000 5615,620 Ind: Other Speelollzed Legol Svo_
Dlr: E""loyee lvs. plus direct s&S.
CITY CLERK 1214,180 178,900 Dlr: City Clerk only
CITY lDJIICIL 171,010 1247,510
ADMINISTRATION 11,071,226 1152,124 Dir: City Monoger only
MANAGEMENT SVS_ S',063,96O
PERSONNEL 1853,391 178,849 Dlr: Risk Manager only
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT '1,121,390
FINANCE 11,250,633 5113,917 Dfr: Ffnence Director only
PLANNING 11,800,680
INSURANCE 5607,538
NOH-DEPARTMENTAL 1313,640 1150,060 Ind: ludget less direct portion
Other Refunds, end PERS Credit
POLICE 114,101,340
FIRE 56,365,830
BUILDING & HOUSING 1160,823 51,118,_ Ind: Communi.etions division
,flI//ENGINEERlNG 11,261,330 17,362,630 Ind: Custodiel/Maintenance divisions
PARK & RECREATIOH 13,531,873
liBRARY 12,201,610
PARKING METERS 1258,200
BAY FRONT CONSERVANCY 1255,850
-----....-----...... --....--..------....
SUB TOTALS 17,032,283 139,555,267
BASE INDIRECT COST RATE: 17,032,283 I 139,555,267 . 17.77837X
less: PERS Credit of
11,261,170 (1190,371) (11,070,799)
16,841,912 I 138,484,468 s 17 . 77837X
Unless otherwise noted, direct costs represent depertlllent ..terin .nd ..ages
and indirect costs represent the overheec:f deperttents' budgets less ...,ipnent
repl-=-nt, capitol outloy end O"y Identified direct portion.
PAGE 9
7'-2;>
EXHIBIT VII
ATTACHMENT 2: FIRE SERVICES - MULTI YEAR AGREEMENT
BASED ON FY1992-93 DATA UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
PART II: FIRE COMPANY COST CALCULATIONS
Annual operating costs for one fire company
A. Fire Personnel Costs
Fire Suppression Division has budgeted 21 captains, 24
Engineers and 32 Firefighters.
Staffing at 6 stations =
*
stations #2-4, 6 =
2 Captains, 3 Engineers and 3
Firefighters = 8 x 3 shifts = 24
1 Captain, 1 Engineer and 1 Firefighter x
4 stations x 3 shifts = 36
1 Captain, 1 Engineer and 2 Firefighters
= 4 x 3 shifts = 12
*
station #1 =
*
station #5 =
*
Total
= 72
However, 77 positions are budgeted. There are 5 extra
firefighters to ensure that there is round-the-clock staffing
at all times at all stations. 5/72 = .0694 which represents
the Full staffing Factor. Therefore, to account for this
Factor, station #1 has 24 x 1.0694 = 25.67 positions, or 6
captains, 9 Engineers and 10.67 Firefighters.
station #1 with two fire companies:
1. Salary
Salaries = Budgeted funds for the position/# of people in
position =
6 Captains
=
$1,126,380/21 = $53,637 x 6 =
$321. 823
$1,100,860/24 = $45,869 x 9 =
$412.821
9 Engineers
=
10.67 Firefighters= $1,262,370/32 = $39,449 x 10.67 =
$420.921
Total
=
$1.155.565
PAGE 10
9',;,t(
2. Benefits
Benefits budgeted less the benefits for the three
Battalion Chiefs budgeted here, as per the Fringe Benefit
Calculation = $336,800 - (3 x $6,060) = $336,800 -
$18,180 = $318,620/77 positions = $4,138 x 25.67
positions = $106.222
3 . Medicare
Medicare budgeted/positions budgeted = $15,090/80 = $189
x 25.67 = $4.852
4. Bilingual Pay
Bilingual Pay budgeted per Fire's (lAFF) Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU)/lAFF positions = $7,200/77 = $94 x
25.67 = $2.413
5. Uniform Allowance
Per lAFF's MOU, each member receives $200 = $200 x 25.67
= $5.134
6. Retirement (PERS)
Per Fringe Benefit Calculation, retirement for lAFF =
salary x .19063 + $24 Survivor's Benefit = $1,155,565 x
.19063 = $220,285 + (24 x 25.67 = 616) = $220.901
7. Overtime
Overtime budgeted - Battalion Chief overtime - Montgomery
station overtime/lAFF positions = $263,340 - ($7,305 +
$7,442 = $14,747) - $20,313/77 = $228,280/77 = $2,965 x
25.67 = $76.103
8. Worker's Compensation
Amount budgeted/number of positions = $390,650/80 =
$4,883 x 25.67 = $125.347
TOTAL PERSONNEL COSTS = $1,696,537/2 companies = $848.269
B. Non-Personnel ,Costs
1. Supplies and Other Services
Total Supplies and Services budgeted in Fire Suppression
budget/# fire companies = $338,145/7 = $48.306
PAGE 11
9-.25
C. Support salaries and Benefits
.5 Principal Mgmt Asst =
1 Fire Chief =
3 Battalion Chiefs =
1 Training captain =
1.3 Clerical =
Retirement =
Benefits =
Medicare =
Worker's Compensation =
PARS =
Differential Pay =
(Training Captain)
TOTAL
$587,588/7 companies =
TOTAL =
Portion allocated to non
tax-paying properties
(negotiated factor)
Annual value of fire protection
and emergency medical services
Citywide overhead (.1777837)
TOTAL FIRE SERVICES
$ 29,370*
$ 93,960
$217 , 100
$ 53,990
$ 42,630**
$ 91,733
$ 38,460
$ 1,086
$ 14,879
$ 330
$ 4.050
$587,588
$83.941
$848,269
$ 48,306
S 83.941
$980,516
~
.07
$ 68,636
S 12.202
$ 80,838
*A 1.0 Principal Management Assistant is budgeted; however, this
position was not filled, so we continued to use the .5 management
assistant that is shared with Police.
**A 1.8 Clerical position was budgeted in FY1991-92. However, .5
of it was transferred to Disaster Preparedness.
PAGE 12
9 ,. .,2 (,
. . ' ,
supporting Documentation for support Benefits-Fire Services
Retirement
.5 Principal Mqmnt Asst
1 Fire Chief
3 Battalion Chiefs
1 Training captain
1.3 Clerical
TOTAL
.14532 x $29,370 = $4,268
.14532 X $93,960 = $13,654
.26063 x $217,100 = $56,583
.19063 x $53,990 = $10,292
.14532 x $47,730 = $6,936
$91,733
Benefits
Benefits account in Administration - .5 Principal Management
Assistant + 3 Battalion Chiefs Benefits in Fire Suppression
Budget + Training captain Benefits from Training Budget =
$19,830 - $3,030 + ($6,060 x 3) + $3,480 = $38,460
Medicare
Medicare account in Administration - Medicare for .5 Principal
Management Assistant + Medicare for 3 Battalion Chiefs +
Medicare for Training captain = $900 - $380 + ($15,090/80 x 3)
+ $0 = $1,086
Worker's Compensation
Worker's Comp account in Administration - Worker's Comp for .5
Principal Management Assistant + Worker's Comp for 3 Battalion
Chiefs + Worker's Comp for Training Captain = $390 - $160 +
($390,650/80 x 3) + $0 = $14,879
PAGE 13
9-.2 7
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item J {)
Meeting Date 7/12/94
C.
R I. I ?557A . A . h h C' f
eso uUon pprovmg an greement Wit t e lty 0
National City for fire dispatching services.
Resolution / 75.J'~pproving an Agreement with the City of
Imperial Beach for fire dispatching services.
Resolution /7 f'f'9 Approving an Agreement with the Bonita-
Sunnyside Fire Protection District for fire dispatching services.
Chief of pOlici;'t ~
Fire Chief ?sl,r
t, 1cK1 ~.
City Manager~ U .
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
ITEM TITLE:
A.
B.
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Chula Vista currently has agreements with the cities of National City and Imperial Beach to
provide fire dispatch services. The City also provides fire dispatch services for the Bonita-
Sunnyside Fire Protection District under the auspices of a 1989 automatic-aid agreement. The
proposed agreements, which are virtually identical, replace the existing dispatch contracts and the
dispatch-related components of the 1989 Bonita-Sunnyside automatic-aid agreement. The
proposed agreements allocate the costs of providing fire dispatch services to each of the
participating agencies. The proposed agreements have no operational impact, authorize the City
Manager to adjust the related fees on an annual basis, and minimize the potential for City liability
associated with the provision of fire dispatch services.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Resolutions.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None
DISCUSSION:
National City and Imperial Beach
Chula Vista provides fire and emergency medical dispatch services for the cities of National City
and Imperial Beach, and the Bonita-Sunnyside Fire Protection District. Chula Vista's fire dispatch
center, known as South Bay Fire Dispatch, is an element of the Police Department's Dispatch
Center. In 1992, South Bay Fire dispatched 13,273 calls for fire department services, nearly 70%
of which were for emergency medical aid.
Chula Vista has been providing fire dispatch services for the cities of National City and Imperial
/i/"j
Page 2, Item:
I()
Meeting Date: 7/12/94
Beach since the late 1970s. These services have been provided under a series of Council-
approved agreements. The existing agreements with Imperial Beach and National City, which
were approved by Council on August 13, 1991, call for fees based upon a percentage of selected
dispatch center staff costs applied to the proportion of calls for service dispatched for each agency.
Additionally, the existing contracts provide for such fees to be updated by the City Manager
annually to reflect increasing employee services expenses. In FY 1992-93, the dispatch
agreements with National City and Imperial Beach generated approximately $72,000 in General
Fund revenue. The City also has automatic-aid agreements with both National City and Imperial
Beach.
Bonita-Sunnyside Fire Protection District
Chula Vista currently provides fire dispatch services for the Bonita-Sunnyside Fire Protection
District (District) under an automatic-aid agreement approved by Council on October 17, 1989.
The District includes much of the unincorporated territory bordered by State Route 54 on the
north, Chula Vista on the south, and Chula Vista and San Diego on the east. In addition to
conventional provisions for automatic-aid coverage, the agreement specifies payments to be made
by the City to the District through FY 1991-92 and stipulates that the City provide fire dispatching
services at no cost to the District until June 30, 1992.
History of the City's Automatic-Aid Agreements with the District. In 1979, the City of Chula Vista
and the Bonita-Sunnyside Fire Protection District entered into the initial automatic-aid agreement.
The purpose of the initial automatic-aid agreement was to the reconcile the increasing urbanization
of the region served by the City and District. Regional urbanization had two significant impacts
with respect to the provision of fIre protection services. First, the demand for fire protection and
emergency services increased over 232% in the decade between 1979 and 1989. The City's and
District's initial agreement, along with the subsequent agreements that replaced it, helped to
ensure that, in the effort to maintain an appropriate level of fire protection service, the region's
existing fire service resources were used as efficiently as possible. The cooperative effort to
maintain appropriate levels of fire service throughout the region continues today. City Fire
Stations #4 and #6 and District Station #1 all have "first-in" response areas that include territories
of both the City and the District. Additionally, the District and City Fire Departments continually
strive to improve operational efficiencies through joint fire, emergency medical service and
disaster planning and training exercises.
Another significant impact of urbanization, and other factors, was contemplated by the 1979
agreement: the annexation of District territories by the City. Annexations of District territory by
the City reduced the District's property tax revenue base, therefore, placing a financial burden
upon the District. In order to mitigate the effects of the property tax losses associated with City
annexations of District territory, the initial automatic-aid agreement provided for the City to pay
the District for fire protection services rendered by the District within the City of Chula Vista.
These payments continued under the auspices of amended automatic-aid agreements until FY
/&~:l.
Page 3, Item:
;t!
Meeting Date: 7/12/94
1988-89. The initial 1979 agreement called for payments of $24,000 per year, and by FY 1988-
89 the annual payment was $49,400.
The final component of the initial automatic-aid agreement, and each of the amended agreements
that were executed subsequent to 1979, was a stipulation that the City would provide fire
dispatching services at no cost to the District.
Phase-Out of Payments to the District and No Cost Fire Dispatch. In June of 1989, the City
Council directed staff to enter into negotiations with the District to develop a phase-out of the
automatic-aid agreement's payment for services and no cost fire dispatch provisions. In
November 1989, Council approved a new automatic-aid agreement which included a three-year
phase out of the payment for services provision. The 1989 agreement required the City to pay the
District $35,000 in FY 1989-90, $20,000 in FY 1990-91 and $5,000 in FY 1991-92.
Additionally, the 1989 agreement enumerates the conditions under which the District remains
entitled to free fire dispatching services. Specifically, the 1989 agreement states that after June
30, 1992, the District shall be entitled to no cost fire dispatch services only in the event all three
of the following specific conditions are met: 1) the planned City fire Station in Salt Creek is not
in operation; and 2) the Bonita-Meadows Estates annexes to the City; and 3) the District provides
fire protection into the Bonita-Meadows Estates area.
Staff from the City and District concur that, upon the opening of Fire Station #6, the agreement
obliges the District to begin paying for fire dispatch service (Station 6 opened on May 29, 1993).
The City opened Station 6 in the Eastlake Development in lieu of the planned Salt Creek station
referenced in the agreement. Fire Station 6, while not in the Salt Creek development, replaces
the "planned Salt Creek station" because it meets the need contemplated by the existing agreement:
adding an engine company near the eastern end of the District. Moreover, Bonita Meadows
Estates has not annexed into the City of Chula Vista, and while the District does provide fire
protection services into the Bonita-Meadows area, it is still a territory of the District.
The District's Board has agreed that it is appropriate to begin payment for dispatching services.
The proposed agreement provides for such payments by the District at rates calculated using the
same basis as the other agencies for which the City provides fire dispatching services. Based upon
the existing Automatic-Aid Agreement, the District owes the City remuneration for dispatching
services provided in FY 1992-93 and FY 1993-94. Such charges amount to $11,019 for FY 1992-
93 and $10,419 for FY 1993-94.
The City and District engaged in good-faith negotiations for over eighteen months on the proposed
Joint Dispatching Agreement. This process became protracted as a result of the District's
misinterpretation of the provisions of the previously agreed-to Automatic Aid Agreement relating
to commencement of payment, by the District, for dispatching services provided. Specifically,
J/)"3
Page 4, Item:
/0
Meeting Date: 7/12/94
the District believed that the three conditions referenced above were independent of eac~ther and,
therefore, if one of the conditions was met, then the District would be entitled to free dispatching.
However, the language clearly states that only if all three conditions are met would the District
receive dispatching services at no cost. At the conclusion of the negotiations, while the District
agreed with the City's interpretation of the language, they requested that the City consider a partial
waiver of the first year fees, to somewhat mitigate the amount of funds owed to the City.
In an effort to maintain the exceptional working relationship with the District, and to "close the
deal" and therefore move ahead, City staff agreed to propose a waiver of 50% of the first year
fees, amounting to a credit of $5509.50. It is staff's recommendation that this waiver be
approved, and it has been included in the Fiscal Impact cited at the end of this report.
Proposed Fire Dispatch Agreements
The proposed agreements described below do not affect the automatic-aid provisions of the City's
existing agreements with the District or either city, and therefore, have no impact upon the
operations of Chula Vista, National City, Imperial Beach or the Bonita-Sunnyside Fire Protection
District. Each of the proposed agreements include the following provisions.
o Term: The agreements are for a term of five (5) years.
o Termination for Convenience: The agreements may be terminated for convenience by
either party to the agreement with ninety (90) days written notice.
o Services Provided by Chula Vista: Chula Vista has agreed to broadcast the facts of the call
for service, the type of service requested (i.e., fire or emergency medical), the location
of the call and other relevant information related by the requesting party.
o Duties of the Other Agencies: The other agencies have agreed to own, operate and maintain
in good working order the radio equipment necessary to receive dispatch information
broadcast by the City. Additionally, the other agencies have agreed to adequately staff,
supervise, train, equip, supply and maintain the equipment necessary to respond to calls
for service dispatched by the City.
o Service Coordination: All parties agree to exchange information and meet as necessary to
effect the agreed upon services.
o Payment for Services and Equipment: The other agencies agree to make quarterly payments
to the City based upon each jurisdiction's proportion of total calls for service dispatched.
The quarterly cost calculation reflects direct labor costs related to providing fire dispatch
services proportionally spread to each jurisdiction plus appropriate full cost recovery
(FCR) program charges (see Attachment A). Using direct salaries plus appropriate full
IIP,i
Page 5, Item:
Jf)
Meeting Date: 7/12/94
cost recovery program charges as the basis for each jurisdiction's fees, the quarterly cost
calculations automatically reflect changing personnel costs and associated non-personnel
expenses. Each agency's costs are contractually adjusted on an annual basis.
Conclusion
The staffrecommendation will standardize and improve the City's fire dispatch relationships with
each of the participating agencies. The recommended agreements do not affect existing automatic-
aid procedures and result in no operational impact upon Chula Vista, either participating city, or
the District. The recommended agreements will provide for an equitable distribution of the true
costs related to providing fire and emergency medical dispatch services among all agencies
dispatched by South Bay Fire. Moreover, the fees associated with these agreements will be
updated annually through the City's Full Cost Recovery Program to reflect the actual costs of
providing such services. Using this methodology, specific Council action to revise fees will not
be required. Finally, as compared to the existing fire dispatch and automatic-aid agreements, the
recommended agreements reduce the City's liability exposure through the specific delineation of
each parties duties and by employing the most advantageous indemnification mechanism applicable
given the types of services to be provided.
FISCAL IMPACT: Fire dispatch revenue for FY 1994-95 is projected to be $93,850 for fire
dispatching services provided to all three contracting jurisdictions in FY
1994-95. Additionally, the District will remit a total of $15,928.50 for fire
dispatching services rendered in FY 1992-93 and FY 1993-94. Total FY
1994-95 fire dispatch revenue is estimated at $109,778.50 (which is in
excess of the budgeted estimate of $100,000 for this year).
)&.5'
Attachment A
Quarterly Cost Calculation
Fire Dispatching Services Contract Calculations FY 1994-95
3.0 Communications Operators I $90,960
Fire Dispatch Costs Including FCR Program: $233,214
Fire Incidents Dispatched by South Bay Fire in 1993: 13,722
Fire Incidents Dispatched for National City -- 1992: 3288
Proportion of Incidents Dispatched: 23.96%
Chula Vista Quarterly Compensation: $13,970
Annual Cost of Fire Dispatch Services: $55,882
Fire Incidents Dispatched for Imperial Beach -- 1993: 1652
Proportion of Incidents Dispatched: 12.04%
Chula Vista Quarterly Compensation: $7,019
Annual Cost of Fire Dispatch Services: $28,077
Fire Incidents Dispatched for Bonita F.P.D. -- 1993: 582
Proportion of Incidents Dispatched: 4.24%
Chula Vista Quarterly Compensation: $2,473
Annual Cost of Fire Dispatch Services: $9,891
Total Fire Dispatch Revenue: $93,850
/tJ~ ~
RESOLUTION NO.
J7557
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY FOR FIRE
DISPATCHING SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve an Agreement between the
city of Chula vista and the city of National city for fire
dispatching services, a copy of which is on file in the office of
the City Clerk as Document No. (to be completed by the City
Clerk in the final document).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the city of
Chula vista be, and he is hereby authorized and direc ed to execute
said Amendment for and on behalf of the City of Ch a vista.
F:\home\attorney\NCfiredp
by
Presented by
Bruce M. Boogaar
City Attorney
Richard P. Emerson
Police Chief
/h?-j /IM-Z
JOINT DISPATCHING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY.
THIS JOINT DISPATCHING AGREEMENT is made and entered into on July 1, 1993,
by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (hereinafter referred to as "Chu1a Vista") and
THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY (hereinafter referred to as "National City") . Chula Vista and
National City may hereinafter be collectively referred to as the "Parties." This Agreement is
made in reference to the following recitals:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Parties are empowered by Government Code ~ 6500 et seq. to provide
fire control services; and,
WHEREAS, radio dispatch services and facilities are necessary to performing such fire
control services; and,
WHEREAS, National City desires to contract with Chula Vista for the performance of
National City's fire dispatching services by and through Chu1a Vista's Police and Fire
Communications Center.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, the Parties agree as
follows:
I. Powers.
This Agreement is made pursuant to the provisions of Article 1, Chapter 5, Division 7,
Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California, Sections 6500 et seq. The
Parties represent and warrant that it possesses the powers referred to herein.
II. Pur.pose
The purpose of this Agreement is to exercise the Parties' powers jointly to provide a
single dispatch system to serve Chula Vista and National City.
III. Term.
This Agreement shall become effective upon execution by the Parties and shall continue
in full force and effect for a period of (5) five years. The services to be provided under
this Agreement shall commence and payment made on October 1, 1993.
fire2.ib
July 7, 1993
CV - 1B Dispatch Services Agreement
Page 1
ItJ/J .::?
A. Termination for Convenience.
Notwithstanding the foregoing term, the Parties may terminate this Agreement at any
time and for any reason, by giving specific written notice and specifying the effective
date thereof, at least (90) ninety days before the effective date of such termination. The
notice must set forth the reason for requesting such termination, and the Parties agree to
meet at least once during the (90) ninety day period to attempt to resolve any issues
contained in the notice in a manner mutually satisfactory to the Parties.
If the Agreement is terminated by either Party, City shall be entitled to receive just and
equitable compensation for any services rendered prior to the effective date of such
termination.
IV. Services to be Provided by Chula Vista.
Chula Vista shall cause its Communications Center employees to broadcast on Chula
Vista's assigned fire dispatch radio frequencies requests received by telephone, either
through the 9-1-1 System or directly on telephone number 691-5151, for fire protection
and/or emergency medical services to locations within the territorial limits of National
City. Such broadcast shall include the fact of the request, whether the request is for fire
protection or emergency medical services, the location at which the service is requested,
and other relevant information related by the requesting party.
V. Duties of National City.
National City shall own, operate and maintain in good working order, the radio
communication equipment necessary to receive dispatch information broadcast by Chula
Vista. Said radio communication equipment shall remain properly tuned to Chula Vista's
assigned fire dispatch radio frequencies and shall be continuously monitored twenty-four
(24) hours per day, seven (7) days a week. As a duty owed exclusively to Chula Vista,
and not for the benefit of any third party, National City shall adequately staff, supervise,
train, equip, supply and maintain the equipment necessary to respond to all calls
dispatched by Chula Vista.
VI. Service Coordination
A. Information. The Parties agree, to the maximum extent reasonably possible, to
timely share information effecting the services provided herein.
B. Meetings. The Parties agree to meet as needed for the purpose of considering
information effecting services provided herein, including without limitation, procedures,
operations, equipment performance and improving service. The Parties further agree to
encourage other fire agencies in Zone 5 (Imperial Beach, Bonita-Sunnyside, and
Coronado) to attend such meetings.
fire2.ib
July 7, 1993
CV - IB Dispatch Services Agreement
Page 2
IP/j-i
VII. Payment for Services and Equipment.
7.1 Ouarterly Charge. For each quarter year during the term of this Agreement,
commencing on October 1, 1993, and continuing thereafter of each subsequent quarter
year (January 1, April 1, and July 1), National City agrees to pay to Chula Vista for the
preceding quarter year of dispatch service, according to the following formula:
1. National City's Portion of Current Quarter's Direct Labor. The total salary
cost for 3.0 Communication Operator I positions budgeted for fire dispatching
services in Chula Visfa's account number 1000-1050-5101 ("Salaries") for the
current fiscal quarter shall be multiplied times a fraction the denominator of
which is total dispatch calls for the preceding calendar year, and the numerator
of which is the dispatch calls for the preceding calendar year for service to the
National City territory. The product of that calculation shall be known as
"National City's Portion of Current Quarter's Direct Labor."
2. Qverhead Factor. National City's Proportion of Current Quarter's Direct
Labor shall then be multiplied by then current applicable Chula Vista Full Cost
Recovery Factor, or a proportion thereof, as determined to be appropriate by
Chula Vista as same may be set by or under the direction the Chula Vista's
Finance Director and amended from time to time. The current applicable Full
Cost Recovery Factor is 2.56393.
3. Quarterly Compensation. The product of that calculation shall be the "Chula
Vista's Quarterly Compensation for Dispatch Services".
7.2 Ouarterly Billing. Chula Vista shall bill National City for Chula Vista's
Quarterly Compensation for Dispatch Services within 30 days after the end of the fiscal
quarter for which compensation is due under the provisions of this agreement, and
National City shall pay said billing within 30 days after receiving Chula Vista's billing.
7.3 Equipment. In the event that Chula Vista is required to obtain special equipment
and incur related expenses necessary to dispatch to National City, National City shall pay
Chula Vista separately for installing and maintaining said special equipment.
7.4 Disputed Charges. In the event National City disagrees with a quarterly billing,
or any other charge herein authorized, it may appeal said dispute to Chula Vista's
Manager, or his designee, whose determination, made in good faith, shall be final.
7.5 Late Pa'yments. Regardless of whether National City disputes any charge, a
failure to make a timely payment will entitle Chula Vista to the payment of interest at
a rate of 10% annually plus the cost of collecting such payments and any accrued
interest, including, without limitation, attorneys' fees.
fire2.ib
July 7, 1993
CV - 15 Dispatch Services Agreement
.page 3
IP/J -,5"
VIII. Indemnity.
Each party agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the other, their officers and employees
harmless from any and all liability, claims, costs (including reasonable attorneys' fees),
damages, expenses and causes of action in any way resulting from or arising out of
dispatch services or the response of a party thereto, except to the extent of the negligence
or intentional acts, errors or omissions of the other party or of their officers or
employees.
IX. Notices.
All notices and demands shall be given in writing by personal delivery or first-class mail,
postage prepaid. Notices shall be addressed as appears below for the respective Party;
provided that, if any Party gives notice of a change of name or address, notices to the
provider of that notice shall thereafter be given as demanded in that notice. Notices shall
be deemed received seventy-two (72) hours after deposit in the United States mail.
Chula Vista: Fire Chief, Chula Vista of Chula Vista
447 F Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
with copy to: Police Chief, City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
National
City:
Fire Chief, City of National City
333 East 16th St.
National City, CA. 91950
X. Construction of Agreement.
A. Caotions And Headings. The captions and headings in this Agreement are solely for
purposes of convenience, are 'not part of this Agreement, and may not be used to
interpret this Agreement.
B. Invalidity. If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this Agreement is held
by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder
of the provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be
affected, impaired or invalidated thereby.
C. No Strict Construction. This Agreement shall not be strictly construed against any
party hereto.
fire2.ib
July 7, 1993
CV - IB Dispatch Services Agreement
Page 4
/I//J.t
D. Entire A!!reement. This Agreement supersedes any prior agreement and contains
the entire agreement of the Parties on the matters covered. No other agreement,
statement or promise made by any Party or by any employee, officer or agent of any
Party that is not in writing and signed by all Parties shall be binding.
E. Prior A!!reements Superseded. This Agreement supersedes any prior
understandings, or written or oral agreements, between the Parties with respect to the
subject matter of this Agreement to the extent that any such understandings or agreements
conflict with any provision hereof.
F. Amendment. This Agreement may only be amended by the written consent of all
of the Parties at the time of such amendment.
G. Authority. Chula Vista and National City represent that the individuals signing
this Agreement have full right and authority to bind their respective Parties to this
Agreement.
H. Best Efforts And Coooeration. The Parties promise to use their best efforts to
satisfy all conditions to this Agreement and to take all further steps and execute all
further documents reasonably necessary to put this Agreement into effect.
I. Waiver. The waiver by one Party of the performance of any covenant, condition
or promise shall not invalidate this Agreement, nor shall it be considered a waiver by
him of any other covenant, condition or promise. The waiver by either or both Parties
of the time for performing any act shall not constitute a waiver of the time for
performing any other act or an identical act required to be performed at a later time.
The exercise of any remedy provided in this Agreement shall not be a waiver of any
consistent remedy provided by law, and any provision of this Agreement for any remedy
shall not exclude other consistent remedies unless they are expressly excluded.
XI. Governin!! Law.
This Agreement has been executed in and shall be governed by the laws of the State of
California.
(End of Page. Next Page is Signature Page.)
fire2.ib
July 7, 1993
CV - IB Dispatch Services Agreement
Page 5
/LJA' 7
Signature Page
to
JOINT DISPATCHING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement on the date and
year first written above.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Dated
By:
Tim Nader, its Mayor
Attest
Beverly Authelet
City Cl k
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
Dated: 7- J 3- tt'3
By: . AtL . . ,..u.t (~./~."";)
George Waters, Its Mayor
Attest:
, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
George H. Eiser III, City Attorney
fire2.ib
July 7, 1993
CV - IB Dispatch Services Agreement
Page 6
/tJ.I9. <6
RESOLUTION NO.
/ ?55Y
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE CITY OF IMPERIAL
BEACH FOR FIRE DISPATCHING SERVICES, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby approve an Agreement between the
City of Chula vista and the city of Imperial Beach for fire
dispatching services, a copy of which is on file in the office of
the city Clerk as Document No. (to be completed by the City
Clerk in the final document).
Presented by
ved a~to
the City of
ed to execute
a vista.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor
Chula vista be, and he is hereby authorized and dir c
said Amendment for and on behalf of t city of C
Richard P. Emerson
Police Chief
by
Bruce M. Boogaar
city Attorney
F:\home\attorney\IBfiredp
/tJ!3 -j j;()I3-L
JOINT DISPATCHING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND THE CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH
THIS JOINT DISPATCHING AGREEMENT is made and entered into on
1993, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (hereinafter referred to as "Chula Vista")
and THE CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH (hereinafter referred to as "Imperial Beach") . Chula
Vista and Imperial Beach may hereinafter be collectively referred to as the "Parties." This
Agreement is made in reference to the following recitals:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Parties are empowered by Government Code ~ 6500 et seq. to provide
fire control services; and,
WHEREAS, radio dispatch services and facilities are necessary to performing such fire
control services; and,
WHEREAS, Imperial Beach desires to contract with Chula Vista for the performance of
Imperial Beach's emergency fire dispatching services by Chula Vista through Chula Vista's Fire
Department's Communication Center.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, the Parties agree as
follows:
I. Powers.
This Agreement is made pursuant to the provisions of Article 1, Chapter 5, Division 7,
Title I of the Government Code of the State of California, Sections 6500 et seq. The
Parties represent and warrant that it possesses the powers referred to herein.
II. PUq>Ose
The purpose of this Agreement is to exercise the Parties' powers jointly to provide a
single dispatch system to serve Chula Vista and Imperial Beach.
ill. Irnn.
This Agreement shall become effective upon execution by the Parties and shall continue
in full force and effect for a period of (5) five years. The services to be provided under
this Agreement shall commence and payment made on October 1, 1993.
fire2.ib
August 5, 1993
CV - IB Dispatch Services Agreement
Page 1
/~8-J
A. Termination for Convenience.
Notwithstanding the foregoing term, the Parties may terminate this Agreement at any
time and for any reason, by giving specific written notice and specifying the effective
date thereof, at least (90) ninety days before the effective date of such termination. The
notice must set forth the reason for requesting such termination, and the Parties agree to
meet at least once during the (90) ninety day period to attempt to resolve any issues
contained in the notice in a manner mutually satisfactory to the Parties.
If the Agreement is terminated by either Party, City shall be entitled to receive just and
equitable compensation for any services rendered prior to the effective date of such
termination.
IV. Services to be Provided by Chula Vista.
Chula Vista shall provide, through its Fire Department's Communication Center,
dispatching services for Imperial Beach. Such services shall include the notification for
the dispatch of fue/ambulance service, the appropriate location and other relevant
information for responses by Imperial Beach to all areas within the service area of
Imperial Beach.
V. Duties of Imperial Beach.
Imperial Beach shall own, operate and maintain in good working order, the necessary
radio communication equipment properly tuned to the broadcasting signal used by Chula
Vista for dispatching, and continuously monitored twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven
(7) days a week. As a duty owed exclusively to Chula Vista, and not for the benefit of
any third party, Imperial Beach shall adequately staff, supervise, train, equip, supply and
maintain the equipment necessary to respond to all calls dispatched by Chula Vista.
VI. Service Coordination
A. Information. The Parties agree, to the maximum extent reasonably possible, to
timely share information effecting the services provided herein.
B. Meetim!s. The Parties agree to meet as needed for the purpose of considering
information effecting services provided herein, including without limitation, procedures,
operations, equipment performance and improving service. The Parties further agree to
encourage other fire agencies in Zone 5 (National City, Bonita-Sunnyside, and Coronado)
to attend such meetings.
VII. Payment for Services and Equioment.
fire2.ib
August 5, 1993
CV - 1B Dispatch Services Agreement
Page 2
/1/8.1
6.1 Quarterly Char~e. For each quarter year during the term of this Agreement,
commencing on October I, 1993, and continuing thereafter of each subsequent quarter
year (January I, April 1, and July I), Imperial Beach agrees to pay to Chu1a Vista for
the preceding quarter year of dispatch service, according to the following formula:
1. Imperial Beach's Portion of Current Quarter's Direct Labor. The total salary
cost for 3 0 C.ommunication Ooerator I DOsitions budgeted for fire dispatching
services in Chu1a Vista's account numbers 1000-1050-5101 ("Salaries") for the
current fiscal quarter shall be multiplied times a fraction the denominator of
which is total dispatch calls for the preceding fiscal year, and the numerator of
which is the dispatch calls for the preceding fiscal years for service to the
Imperial Beach territory. The product of that calculation shall be known as the
"Imperial Beach's Portion of Current Quarter's Direct Labor."
2. Overhead Factor. Imperial Beach's Proportion of Current Quarter's Direct
Labor shall then be multiplied by then current applicable Chula Vista Full Cost
Recovery Factor, or a proportion thereof, as determined to be appropriate by
Chula Vista as same may be set by or under the direction the Chula Vista's
Finance Director and amended from time to time. The current applicable Full
Cost Recovery Factor is 2.56393.
3. Quarterly Comoensation. The product of that calculation shall be the "Chula
Vista's Quarterly Compensation for Dispatch Services".
6.2 Quarterly Billinl1. Chula Vista shall bill Imperial Beach for Chula Vista's
Quarterly Compensation for Dispatch Services within 30 days after the end of the fiscal
quarter for which compensation is due under the provisions of this agreement, and
Imperial Beach shall pay said billing within 30 days after receiving Chula Vista's billing.
6.4 Eq)Jipment. In the event that Chula Vista is required to obtain special equipment
and incur related expenses necessary to dispatch to Imperial Beach, Imperial Beach shall
pay Chula Vista separately for installing and maintaining said special equipment.
6.5 DisDuted Char~es. In the event Imperial Beach disagrees with a quarterly billing,
or any other charge herein authorized, it may appeal said dispute to Chula Vista's
Manager, or his designee, whose determination, made in good faith, shall be final.
6.5 Late Payments. Regardless of whether Imperial Beach disputes any charge, a
failure to make a timely payment will entitle Chula Vista to the payment of interest at
a rate of 10% annually plus the cost of collecting such payments and any accrued
interest, including, without limitation, attorneys' fees.
fire2.ib
August 5, 1993
CV - IB Dispatch Services Agreement
Page 3
IP!J'..s
Each party agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the other, their officers and employees
harmless from any and all liability , claims, costs (including reasonable attorneys' fees),
damages, expenses and causes of action in any way resulting from or arising out of
dispatch services or the response of a party thereto, except to the extent of the negligence
or intentional acts, errors or omissions of the other party or of their officers or
employees.
IX. Notices.
All notices and demands shall be given in writing by personal delivery or first-class mail,
postage prepaid. Notices shall be addressed as appears below for the respective Party;
provided that, if any Party gives notice of a change of name or address, notices to the
provider of that notice shall thereafter be given as demanded in that notice. Notices shall
be deemed received seventy-two (72) hours after deposit in the United States mail.
Chula Vista: Fire Chief, Chula Vista of Chula Vista
477 F Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
with copy to: Police Chief, Chula Vista of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Imperial
Beach:
Fire Chief,
Imperial Beach
825 Imperial Beach Blvd.
Imperial Beach, CA. 91932
X. Construction of Al!reement.
A. ClIPtions And Headinl!s. The captions and headings in this Agreement are solely for
purposes of convenience, are not part of this Agreement, and may not be used to
interpret this Agreement.
B. Invalidity. If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this Agreement is held
by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder
of the provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be
affected, impaired or invalidated thereby.
C. No Strict Construction. This Agreement shall not be strictly construed against any
party hereto.
fire2.ib
August 5, 1993
CV - IB Dispatch Services Agreement
Page 4
/~a,t
D. Entire Al!reement. This Agreement supersedes any prior agreement and contains
the entire agreement of the Parties on the matters covered. No other agreement,
statement or promise made by any Party or by any employee, officer or agent of any
Party that is not in writing and signed by all Parties shall be binding.
E. Prior Al:reements Suoerseded. This Agreement supersedes any prior
understandings, or written or oral agreements, between the Parties with respect to the
subject matter of this Agreement to the extent that any such understandings or agreements
conflict with any provision hereof.
F. Amendment. This Agreement may only be amended by the written consent of all
of the Parties at the time of such amendment.
G. Authority. Chula Vista and Imperial Beach represent that the individuals signing
this Agreement have full right and authority to bind their respective Parties to this
Agreement.
H. Best Efforts And Coooeration. The Parties promise to use their best efforts to
satisfy all conditions to this Agreement and to take all further steps and execute all
further documents reasonably necessary to put this Agreement into effect.
I. Waiver. The waiver by one Party of the performance of any covenant, condition
or promise shall not invalidate this Agreement, nor shall it be considered a waiver by
him of any other covenant, condition or promise. The waiver by either or both Parties
of the time for performing any act shall not constitute a waiver of the time for
performing any other act or an identical act required to be performed at a later time.
The exercise of any remedy provided in this Agreement shall not be a waiver of any
consistent remedy provided by law, and any provision of this Agreement for any remedy
shall not exclude other consistent remedies unless they are expressly excluded.
XI. Governing Law.
This Agreement has been executed in and shall be governed by the laws of the State of
California.
(End of Page. Next Page is Signature Page.)
fire2.ib
August .5, 1993
CV - 1B Dispatch Services Agreement
Page 5
/IJ[J"' ')
Signature Page
to
JOINT DISPATCHING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND THE CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement on the date and
year first written above.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Dated
By:
Tim Nader, its Mayor
Attest
Beverly Authelet
City Clerk
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH
By: AuAv ~
Mike Bixler, Its Mayor
fire2.ib
August 5, 1993
CV - IB Dispatch Services Agreement
Page 6
/p{],y
RESOLUTION NO.
J 75.5'1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE BONITA-SUNNYSIDE
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FOR FIRE DISPATCHING
SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
SAID AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby approve an Agreement between the
city of Chula vista and the Bonita-sunnyside Fire Protection
District for fire dispatching services, a copy of which is on file
in the office of the city Clerk as Document No. (to be
completed by the city Clerk in the final document).
F:\horne\attorney\bSfire
the city of
d to execute
vista.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of
Chula Vista be, and he is hereby authoriz and direc
said Amendment for and on behalf of th ity of Ch
Presented by
Richard P. Emerson
Police Chief
Bruce M. Boogaar
city Attorney
/tlc- /me-z
JOINT DISPATCIDNG AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND THE BONITA-SUNNYSIDE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT.
THIS JOINT DISPATCIDNG AGREEMENT (Agreement) is made and entered into on
by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (hereinafter referred to as "Chula Vista") and THE BONITA-
SUNNYSIDE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (hereinafter referred to as "The District") . Chula Vista and
The District may hereinafter be collectively referred to as the "Parties." This Agreement is made in reference
to the following recitals:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Parties are empowered by Government Code ~ 6500 et seq. to provide fire control
services; and,
WHEREAS, radio dispatch services and facilities are necessary to performing such fire control services;
and,
WHEREAS, The District desires to contract with Chula Vista for the performance of The District's fire
dispatching services by and through Chula Vista's Police and Fire Communications Center.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, the Parties agree as follows:
I. Powers.
This Agreement is made pursuant to the provisions of Article 1, Chapter 5, Division 7, Title 1 of the
Government Code of the State of California, Sections 6500 et seq. The Parties represent and warrant
that they possess the powers referred to herein.
11. Purpose
The purpose of this Agreement is to exercise the Parties' powers jointly to provide a single dispatch
system to serve Chula Vista and The District.
III. Term.
This Agreement shall become effective upon execution by the Parties and shall continue in full force
and effect for a period of (5) five years.
A. Termination for Convenience.
Notwithstanding the foregoing term, the Parties may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any
reason, by giving specific written notice and specifying the effective date thereof, at least (90) ninety
days before the effective date of such termination. The notice must set forth the reason for requesting
such termination, and the Parties agree to meet at least once during the (90) ninety day period to attempt
to resolve any issues contained in the notice in a manner mutually satisfactory to the Parties.
If the Agreement is terminated by either Party, City shall be entitled to receive just and equitable
compensation for any services rendered prior to the effective date of such termination.
/OC-J
IV. Services to be Provided by Chula Vista.
Chula Vista shall cause its Communications Center employees to broadcast on Chula Vista's assigned
fire dispatch radio frequencies requests received by telephone, either through the 9- I -1 System or
directly on telephone number 691-5151, for fire protection and/or emergency medical services to
locations within the territorial limits of The District as defined by Addendum 1 to this Agreement. Such
broadcast shall include the fact of the request, whether the request is for fire protection or emergency
medical services, the location at which the service is requested, and other relevant information related
by the requesting party.
V. Duties of The District.
The District shall own, operate and maintain in good working order, radio communication equipment
necessary to receive dispatch information broadcast by Chula Vista. Said radio communication
equipment shall remain properly tuned to Chula Vista's assigned fire dispatch radio frequencies and
shall be continuously monitored twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days a week. As a duty
owed exclusively to Chula Vista, and not for the benefit of any third party, the District shall adequately
staff, supervise, train, equip, supply, and maintain the equipment necessary to respond to all calls
dispatched by Chula Vista.
VI. Service Coordination
A. Information. The Parties agree, to the maximum extent reasonably possible, to timely share
information effecting the services provided herein.
B. Meetins:s. The Parties agree to meet as needed for the purpose of considering information
effecting services provided herein, including without limitation, procedures, operations, equipment
performance and improving service. The Parties further agree to encourage other fire agencies in Zone
5 (National City, Imperial Beach, and Coronado) to attend such meetings.
VII. Payment for Services and Equioment.
A. Ouarterly Charge. For each quarter year during the term of this Agreement, the District agrees
to pay to Chula Vista for the preceding quarter year of dispatch service, according to the following
formula:
1. The District's Portion of Current Ouarter's Direct Labor. The total salary cost for 3.0
Communication Operator I positions budgeted for fire dispatching services in Chula Vista's
account number 100-1050-5101 ("Salaries") for the current fiscal quarter shall be multiplied
times a fraction the denominator of which is total dispatch calls for the preceding calendar year,
and the numerator of which is the dispatch calls for the preceding calendar year for service to
the District's territory. The product of that calculation shall be known as "the District's Portion
of Current Quarter's Direct Labor."
1&9 c-1'
2. Overhead Factor. The District's Proportion of Current Quarter's Direct Labor shall then be
multiplied by then current applicable Chula Vista Full Cost Recovery Factor, or a proportion
thereof, as determined to be appropriate by Chula Vista as same may be set by or under the
direction the Chula Vista's Finance Director and amended from time to time. The applicable
Full Cost Recovery Factor is 2.56393.
3. Ouarterly Comoensation. The product of that calculation shaH be the "Chula Vista's
Quarterly Compensation for Dispatch Services".
B. Ouarterly Billing. Chula Vista shaH bill The District for Chula Vista's Quarterly
Compensation for Dispatch Services within 30 days after the end of the fiscal quarter for which compen-
sation is due under the provisions of this agreement, and The District shall pay said billing within 30
days after receiving Chula Vista's billing.
C. EQuipment. In the event the District purchases new dispatch, radio or related equipment which
makes the City's dispatch equipment inoperable or ineffective and the City is required to obtain
equipment and incur related expenses necessary to dispatch to the District pursuant to the terms and
conditions of this agreement, the District shall pay City separately for any expenses related to the
acquisition, installation and/or maintenance of said equipment, and the integration of said equipment
into the City's dispatch and radio system.
All fire dispatching equipment changes shall be coordinated in accordance with Section VI of this
agreement.
D. Disnuted Charges. In the event The District disagrees with a quarterly billing, or any other
charge herein authorized, it may appeal said dispute to Chula Vista's Manager, or his designee, whose
determination, made in good faith, shall be final.
E. Late Payments. Regardless of whether The District disputes any charge, a failure to make a
timely payment will entitle Chula Vista to the payment of interest at a rate of 10% annually plus the
cost of collecting such payments and any accrued interest, including, without limitation, attorneys' fees.
VIII. Indemnity
Each party agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the other, their officers, and employees harmless from
any and all liability , claims, costs (including reasnnable attorneys' fees), damages, expenses, and causes
of action in any way resulting from or arising out of dispatch services or the response of a party thereto,
except to the extent of the negligence or intentional acts, errors, or omissions of the other party or of
their officers or employees.
It}) c ~..>-
IX. Notices.
All notices and demands shall be given in writing by personal delivery or fint e11t33 ffiail, prepaid
postage Pfejlaitl. Notices shall be addressed as appears below for the respective Party; provided that,
if any Party gives notice of a change of name or address, notices to the provider of that notice shall
thereafter be given as demanded in that notice. Notices shall be deemed received seventy-two (72)
hours after deposit in the United States mail.
Chula Vista:
Fire Chief, City of Chula Vista
477 F Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
with copy to:
Police Chief, City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
The
District:
Fire Chief, Bonita-Sunnyside Fire Protection District
4900 Bonita Road
Bonita, CA 91902
X. Construction of Agreement.
A. Caotions And Headinl!s. The captions and headings in this Agreement are solely for purposes
of convenience, are not part of this Agreement, and may not be used to interpret this Agreement.
B. Invalidity. If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this Agreement is held by a court
of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions hereof
shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated thereby.
C. No Strict Construction. This Agreement shall not be strictly construed against any party hereto.
D. Entire Al:reement. This Agreement supersedes any prior agreement and contains the entire
agreement of the Parties on the matters covered. No other agreement, statement or promise made by
any Party or by any employee, officer or agent of any Party that is not in writing and signed by all
Parties shall be binding.
E. Prior Al!reements Suoerseded. This Agreement supersedes any prior understandings, or written
or oral agreements, between the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement to the
extent that any such understandings or agreements conflict with any provision hereof.
F. Amendment. This Agreement may only be amended by the written consent of all of the Parties
at the time of such amendment.
/~C' ?
G. Authority. Chula Vista and The District represent that the individuals signing this Agreement
have full right and authority to bind their respective Parties to this Agreement.
H. Best Efforts And Coooeration. The Parties promise to use their best efforts to satisfy all
conditions to this Agreement and to take all further steps and execute all further documents reasonably
necessary to put this Agreement into effect.
I. Waiver. The waiver by one Party of the performance of any covenant, condition or
promise shall not invalidate this Agreement, nor shall it be considered a waiver by him of any other
covenant, condition or promise. The waiver by either or both Parties of the time for performing any
act shall not constitute a waiver of the time for performing any other act or an identical act required
to be performed at a later time. The exercise of any remedy provided in this Agreement shall not be
a waiver of any consistent remedy provided by law, and any provision of this Agreement for any
remedy shall not exclude other consistent remedies unless they are expressly excluded.
XI. Governing Law.
This Agreement has been executed in and shall be governed by the laws of the State of California.
(End of Page. Next Page is Signature Page.)
/pc- '/
Signature Page
to
JOINT DISPATCHING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND THE BONITA-SUNNYSIDE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement on the date and year first written
above.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Dated
By:
Tim Nader, its Mayor
Attest
mJ2
BONITA-SUNNYSIDE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Dated: C:, I fIf 19 t./
By:~fl~~
Its Chairperson, Thomas . Pocklington
Clerk of the Board
as to form:
-----
, Its Alto
Enrique Munoz
/&C~~
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY:
I ?5'. IP
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY'S 1993/94 and 1994/95
HOME PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE
SUBMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE U. S. DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Community Developm~~irector C;; ,
City Manage~ b-;\ ~\
U (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No.lL)
Council Referral No.
Item 1/
Meeting Date 7/12/94
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME Program) is a federal housing program
which allocates funds by formula directly to state and local governments to promote affordable
housing. HOME funds may be used to provide affordable rental housing and home ownership
through new construction, acquisition, rehabilitation, and tenant-based rental assistance.
Participating jurisdictions are able to provide this assistance to both for profit and non-profit
housing developers or directly to qualified home buyers or renters. The assistance may take the
form of grants, loans, advances, equity investments, and interest subsidies.
Over the past three years the City has been allocated a total of $1,895,000 of HOME funds.
Last year the City spent $610,000 of these funds for the development of a short-term housing
facility for homeless families. Every year HUD requires the City to prepare the HOME Program
description, stating how it intends to use the HOME allocation and how it will comply with
various HOME regulations. Past year program descriptions have split the funds evenly between
three categories; new construction, substantial rehabilitation and acquisition.
If the City Council wishes to amend the HOME program description it may do so at any time.
For example, if the Council should decide to do more rehabilitation or acquisition rather than
new construction, it can amend the HOME program description by resolution. HUD approval
is not required.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt the resolution amending the 1993/1994 and the 1994/1995 HOME
Program descriptions by increasing the acquisition category to reflect the availability of sufficient
funds to undertake an affordable housing project.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The City Council in Closed Session at its meeting on May 17, 1994 directed staff to explore the
//,/
Page 2, Item II
Meeting Date ~'i
feasibility of acquiring 2.01-acre property located at the northwest corner of Ada and Industrial
Boulevard for the potential development of a for-sale housing development and childcare center.
The site would be developed by a team of non-profit organizations. At present, Habitat for
Humanity and Episcopal Community Services are working on a proposal.
Negotiations with the property owners have been underway and soon it will be necessary to open
escrow on this project. Procedurally, in order to be prepared to use the HOME funds, it will
be necessary to amend the current 93/94 and 94/95 program distribution of funds by increasing
the homeowner property acquisition category to reflect the availability of sufficient funds
necessary to undertake a housing project. This can be done by increasing the homeowner
property acquisition category. Fund balances in the other development categories will be shifted,
and the total HOME grant amount will remain the same.
FISCAL IMPACT: The amendment of the HOME Program description does not create any
fiscal impact to the City.
[SS/MISC/DISK#5/HOME.aI3]
I j.,;L
RESOLUTION
/?5't,p
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AMENDING THE 1993/1994 AND 1994/1995 HOME PROGRAM
DESCRIPTIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE
AMENDMENT TO THE U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista has been allocated a total of $1,895,000 of
HOME federal housing funds; and,
WHEREAS, the HOME program regulations require a participating jurisdiction
to submit a program description each year describing the proposed use of funds; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to amend the 1993/1994 and 1994/1995 HOME
Program descriptions to respond to an opportunity to help provide affordable home ownership
opportunities to lower income residents; and,
WHEREAS, the HOME Program will enable the City to meet the housing needs
of lower-income residents.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA does hereby find, order, determine and resolve to amend the 1993/1994 and
1994/1995 HOME Program Descriptions by increasing the homeowner property acquisition
category to reflect the availability of sufficient funds necessary to undertake the development of
the Trolley Terrace, a for-sale housing project and child care center on property located at the
northwest corner of Ada and Industrial Boulevard, and authorize the Mayor to submit the
amendment to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
~,
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
PRESENTED BY:
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
[SS/Misc/Disk#5/HOME. rsol
/ /- J /II-if
CITY COUNCIL: ITEM #11
MEMORANDUM
July 12, 1994
TO:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
John D. Goss, City Manager S.
Chris Salomone, Community Development Director l .
VIA:
SUBJECT:
Continuation - City Council Item #11
Staff requests that Council continue the item to its meeting of Tuesday, July 19, 1994 as
additional information has been received and will be incorporated into the staff report.
[C:IWP51 ICOUNC1LIMEMOSIINF09417 .MEM]
/ / --- _5
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /.,2.
Meeting Date 7/12/94
Resolution ) 7....>' ~ I Approving an agreement with Hunsaker &
Associates to prepare aerial photographs, topographic maps and a record of
survey for the Telegraph Canyon Creek from Telegraph Canyon Road to Fourth
Avenue and aerial photographs of Main Street from Industrial Boulevard to
Fourth Avenue and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement
Directo, of POOli, wo,~
City ManagerJG\, ~\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
The FY 1993/94 Capital Improvement Program includes project DR-118 with the purpose of preparing
the preliminary improvement plans for the Telegraph Canyon Creek from Telegraph Canyon Road to
Fourth Avenue. A critical activity of this project is the preparation of aerial photographs, topographic
maps and a record of survey of the project area. This will provide the basic information to proceed
with the preliminary design, which is being prepared by City staff. The CIP program also includes
the preparation of the improvement plans for the widening of Main Street from Industrial Boulevard
to Fourth Avenue (CIP No. ST-961). Color aerial photographs, to be used during design of this
project and property owners/Council meetings, need to be prepared early in the design process. Due
to the magnitude, expertise and equipment necessary to perform the aerial mapping and the Record
of Survey, staff considered necessary to retain an outside consultant and requested proposals from
qualified engineering firms. Staff received three (3) proposals and has determined the firm of
Hunsaker & Associates to be the most qualified and cost effective of the three firms responding to our
request for proposals. Therefore, staff recommends that Hunsaker & Associates be retained for a fee
of $63,138.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution and authorize the Mayor to execute said
agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
I. Contract Obiectives
The scope of work of the contract consists of the following tasks:
Task 1:
Preparation of 100-scale aerial photographs and 40-scale topographic mapping
with I-foot contours of a 400 feet strip of land (200 feet at each side of the
creek) along the Telegraph Canyon Creek from the existing culvert at Telegraph
Canyon Road to the beginning of the existing concrete channel (between Third
and Fourth Avenue). The total length of the project is approximately 8,400 feet
J02..' I
Page 2, Item I J-
Meeting Date 7/12/94
(see Exhibit A). This portion of the creek is surrounded by urban development.
Property owners have planted trees, built retaining walls and other improvements
along its banks, and sometimes encroaching into the channel area. In addition,
the creek is largely covered with heavy natural vegetation
The topographic maps will provide the necessary information to determine the
final horizontal and vertical alignment, select the type and size of the channel
cross-section and prepare the preliminary design plans for the project including
cost estimate and construction phasing. The same topographic maps
supplemented with additional information will be used during the design of the
final improvements. The improvements will be designed to accommodate the
additional drainage flow that will be generated by the ultimate development of
the Telegraph Canyon Basin
The IOO-scale aerial photographs will be used during design and property
owners/Council meetings.
Task 2:
Preparation of a Record of Survey (ROS) along the Telegraph Canyon Creek
(same project limits as task I).
The purpose of the ROS is to locate all existing streets right-of-way, property
boundaries, channel easements and rights-of-ways and identify any boundary
anomalies which may exist. The ROS will be recorded and will provide a solid
basis to tie the final channel horizontal alignment and prepare the legal
descriptions of the additional right-of-way necessary to accommodate the
proposed improvements.
Task 3:
Preparation of 100-scale aerial photographs of Main Street from Industrial
Boulevard to Fourth Avenue. The photographs will be used during design and
property owners/Council meetings (see Exhibit B).
II. Discussion of Alternatives
Before advertising the Request for Proposals (RFP) for the proposed contract, staff explored
the following alternatives to the RFP process
Alternative 1 - "Work verformed hv City staff"
The end product of this contract requires the use of specialized equipment and sophisticated
electronic devices. As noted on Attachment A, "Cost Comparison Worksheets - Contract
Consultants vs. in-house staff," it is shown that staff does not possess the capability nor the
expertise to produce such products. While staff could contract for a plane and pilot, and some
of the equipment could be rented, training of staff on the use of these equipments is required.
Some of the equipment required to perform these services are shown on the following listing:
/ :l.. - .2..
Page 3, Item /.2.
Meeting Date 7/12/94
Topographic Mapping Equipment Listing
Aerial ground control surveying equipment
Specialized aerial survey vehicles
Aerial camera
Point transfer device
Aerotriangulations software
Stereoplotters
Graphic edit stations
Photo lab
Translations intergraph computers and plotters
Alternative 2 - "Use GIS aerial maooinf! oroducts"
The project team proposed by Hunsaker & Associates includes Merrick and Co. and San-Lo
Aerial Surveys. Currently, Merrick and Hunsaker are working in the City of Chula Vista GIS
aerial mapping (contract amount = $572,128).
Under this alternative, staff would utilize aerial mapping products from the Merrick/Hunsaker
contract with the City for the GIS aerial mapping. This alternative was abandoned due to the
following reasons:
. Mapping Scale - GIS mapping scale (100 scale and 2 foot contour in the urbanized
area) is too small for design purposes. The Telegraph Canyon project requires larger
scale maps ( 40 scale) with I foot contour interval providing the detail and information
necessary for preparing drainage plans. Forty-scale mapping requires taking
photographs at a lower altitude and a denser vertical/horizontal ground control network.
In addition, a large amount of field work is necessary to supplement the
aerophotogrammetry in those areas of obscure topography (heavy vegetation or steep
relief) in order to obtain the accuracy and detail required for design. It would have
been cost prohibitive to do the GIS mapping at the scale required for design.
. Record of Survev (ROS) - The required ROS needs to show all property lines, right-of-
way and drainage easements in the project area. This is critical to exactly locate the
drainage improvements and prepare the documents for the additional right-of-way
necessary to accommodate the new improvements. The ROS to be prepared for the GIS
will show the City's control network (1 st and 2nd order monuments), but will not
include the specific information required for the Telegraph Canyon project.
/ ,). .. .J
Page 4, Item 12
Meeting Date 7/12/94
Alternative 3 - "Chanze order to the current GIS mavvinz contract"
Initially staff thought that either utilizing a change order to the GIS contract or negotiating a
sole source contract with Merrick and Co., the GIS mapping contractor, might be feasible.
Merrick submitted a proposal to prepare 40 scale maps at a cost of $24,127, however, their
proposal was at a lower overall accuracy and did not meet all of the requirements of the
project. That proposal also did not include the following key tasks, due to the fact that there
are no similar activities within the scope of the GIS contract:
. Preparation of a Record of Survey (see discussion for Alternate 2).
. Supplemental field surveying in obscure areas (because of heavy vegatation or steep
relief) to achieve the accuracy and detail necessary for design purposes.
Staff originally estimated these activities to cost approximately $45,000. Due to the lack of
adequate cost data for the above activities, staff did not feel comfortable negotiating a scope
of work on items that were nearly double the value of the items within the scope of the GIS
contract. Also, staff did not feel comfortable doing a change order or negotiating a sole source
contract for an amount that high and considered it prudent to follow the RFP process.
III. Proiect Selection Process
Public Works - Engineering Division staff followed the City Municipal Code Section 2.56,
Ordinance 25 I 7, and Council Policy 102-05 in the Consultant selection process. As required,
a Request for Proposal (RFP) was prepared by staff in accordance with the above mentioned
Municipal Code, ordinance, and policy. The Request for Proposal was sent to 14 professional
firms specializing in aerial photographic mapping and a notice was published in the Star News
and the San Diego Union. Twenty-six firms responded to the invitation and requested the RFP
documents.
The RFP included a description of the project limits, mapping specifications and the
deliverables to be provided. Each firm was asked to provide: I) a statement of general
qualifications; 2) names and qualifications of all key personnel to be used in the project,
including any sub-consultants; 3) the location of the office where the work is to be performed;
4) experience in successfully managing a project of similar scope and magnitude, ability to
complete the project on schedule and within budget, and 5) ability to work with agency input,
review, and properly coordinate into the overall project completion.
The RFP also indicated that the City will rank the proposals based on the following criteria:
1. Past record or performance (Reference Evaluation).
2. Evaluation of personnel qualifications, including sub consultants if so indicated.
3. Capacity and resources to perform the work
/-2--'1
Page 5, Item /,7
Meeting Date 7/12/94
4. Fee proposal and pay schedule.
5. Proximity of office to San Diego County.
A copy of the City standard two-party agreement was also included in the RFP. The deadline
for responding to the Request for Proposal was April 25, 1994. Three firms formally
responded to the RFP. They are as follows:
Consultant Cost
William A. Steen & Associates $64,800
Project Design Consultant $50,450
Hunsaker & Associates $78,630
IV RFP Evaluation Process
The selection committee as appointed by the City Manager in accordance with the City
Municipal Code Section 2.56 consisted of the following five members:
Fred Wong, Geographic Information Systems Manager
Vance F. Breshears, District Surveys Engineer, CaITrans District II
Jerry Foncerrada, Deputy Parks Director
Clive Hopwood, Land Surveyor
Lombardo DeTrinidad, Civil Engineer
The committee members were provided with individual copies of each one of the three
responses and each member was charged with rating the proposals in accordance with the
evaluation criteria
On May 17, 1994, the Committee interviewed the three firms. Each firm had 45 minutes for
the interview of which 5 minutes were for set-up and introduction, 20 minutes for the
presentation, IS minutes for questions and answers, and 5 minutes for a closing statement. At
the conclusion of the interviews, the Committee ranked the consultant firms as follows:
Ranking Firm Total Points
(max. 500 points possible)
I Hunsaker & Associates 436
2 Project Design Consultant 377
3 William A. Steen & 341
Associates
/.2. -f
Page 6, Item I;"
Meeting Date 7/12/94
The selection of Hunsaker as the most qualified firm for the job was based on: I) better
knowledge of the scope of work and site conditions; 2) excellent references; 3) presentation
in the interview; and 4) strongest project team.
Project Design Consultant (PDC) and William A. Steen & Associates received a much lower
rating than Hunsaker because their I) limited experience in similar projects; 2) limited
references; 3) insufficient understanding of the scope of work; and 4) limited knowledge of
existing site conditions.
After the Selection Committee determined that Hunsaker & Associates was the most qualified
firm for the job, staff became concerned about the proposed cost of $78,638 which was 56%
higher than the proposal submitted by the second ranked firm, Project Design Consultant. Staff
met with Hunsaker to discuss the scope of work and obtain a better understanding of the work
proposed by Hunsaker. As a result of these discussions and clarifications, Hunsaker agreed
to reduce their fees from $78,638 to $63,138 (20% reduction) without making any changes to
the original scope of work. Even though the new fee is still $12,688 higher that the fee
proposed by the second ranked firm, Project Design Consultant, staff recommends hiring
Hunsaker based on their better qualifications for this job, especially the following factors:
. Knowledge of the Scope of Work and Site Conditions - The project
specifications require a high order mapping accuracy and detail that
precisely depict the existing conditions of the project area, e.g.,
elevations, buildings, drainage improvements, etc. This is critical for
designing a project that effectively corrects the drainage problems of the
area. In order to prepare a good proposal, it was essential to adequately
research the existing information and site conditions. During the
proposals evaluation and interviews, it was evident that only Hunsaker
had a good understanding of the job and sufficient knowledge of the
project site (they were the only firm that inspected the entire project).
Project Design Consultant was deficient in this respect.
. Consultants References - Hunsaker references were excellent. The
reference check gave lower ratings to Project Design Consultant for jobs
performed in Rancho del Rey SPA III and Palomar Trolley Center.
. Proiect Team - Hunsaker is proposing a technically stronger project team
(Hunsaker & Associates, Merrick and Co. and San-Lo). This again will
ensure the quality and adequacy of the mapping. Hunsaker will perform
all the land surveying work; Merrick (the GIS contractor) will perform
the topographic mapping and San-Lo will carry out the aerial
photography. Project Design Consultants proposed to perform all the
land surveying work and to subcontract with San-Lo to carry out the
aerial photography and topographic mapping.
1-2 .-~
Page 7, Item /,;...
Meeting Date 7/12/94
The following table summarizes the work to be performed by each consultant included in the
proposed contract.
Portion of Total
Company Activity Contract
Hunsaker & Associates Land Surveying 80%
Merrick and Co. Aerophotogrammetry 15%
San-Lo Aerial Service Aerial Photography 5%
V. The Al1.reement
The proposed agreement (attached) with Hunsaker & Associates uses the City's standard two-party
agreement. Under this contract, they agree to perform the Scope of Work as outlined in Exhibit A for
a single fixed fee of $63,138. This section details what is required of the firm. This section is
extremely precise in order to insure that all of the City requirements are included in the base fee.
Finally, the Engineering staff has worked closely with the City Attorney's office to formulate the
proposed agreement.
The final negotiated fee of $63, 138 is lower than the quoted p~ice in the firm's RFP response. Payment
will be in phased amounts as detailed in Section 11A of Exhibit A of the contract.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available in projects DR-1l8 ($62,138) and ST-961 ($1,000) of the FY
1993/94 Capital Improvement Program.
Attachments:
Project Location
Cost Comparison Consultant vs. City Staff
Agreement
LdT/AR-046
WPC M:\home\engineer\ageuda\hunsaker.ldt
J,).. ?/I:2 - r
RESOLUTION NO. 17ft I
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH
HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES TO PREPARE AERIAL
PHOTOGRAPH, TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS AND A RECORD OF
SURVEY FOR THE TELEGRAPH CANYON CREEK FROM
TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD TO FOURTH AVENUE AND
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF MAIN STREET FROM
INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD TO FOURTH AVENUE AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, the FY 1993/94 Capital Improvement Program
includes project DR-118 with the purpose of preparing the
preliminary improvements plans for the Telegraph Canyon Creek from
Telegraph Canyon Road to Fourth Avenue; and
WHEREAS, a critical activity of this project is the
preparation of aerial photographs, topographic maps and a record of
survey of the project area which will provide the basic information
to proceed with the preliminary design, which is being prepared by
city staff; and
WHEREAS, due to the magnitude, expertise and equipment
necessary to perform the aerial mapping and the Record of survey,
staff considered it necessary to retain an outside consultant and
requested proposals from qualified engineering firms; and
WHEREAS, staff received three proposals and has
determined the firm of Hunsaker & Associates to be the most
qualified of the three firms responding to the RFP, and staff
recommends that Hunsaker & Associates be retained for a fee of
$63,138.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve an agreement with Hunsaker
& Associates to prepare aerial photographs, topographic maps and a
record of survey for the Telegraph Canyon Creek from Telegraph
Canyon Road to Fourth avenue and aerial photographs of Main Street
from Industrial Boulevard to Fourth Avenue, a copy of which is on
file in the office of the City Clerk as Document No. (to be
completed by the City Clerk in the final document).
the city of
xecute said
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to
Agreement for and on behalf of the city
Presented by
o form by
~
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\hunsaker
102-,11 J. -/1)
.
Parties and Recital Pagels)
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
Hunsaker & Associates
San Diego, Inc.
for Land Surveying and Aerial Mapping Services
This agreement ("Agreement"), dated for
the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last
executed unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 1 is between the City-related entity as is indicated on
Exhibit A, paragraph 2, as such ("City"), whose business form is
set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 3, and the entity indicated on
the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4,as Consultant, whose business
form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of
business and telephone numbers are set forth on Exhibit A,
paragraph 6 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the
following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the City is desirous to prepare:
a. Aerial photographic maps, topographic maps, and a
record of survey for the Telegraph Canyon Creek
from Telegraph Canyon Road to Fourth Avenue in the
City of Chula Vista; and,
b. Aerial photographic maps of Main Street from
Industrial Blvd. to Fourth Avenue; and,
Whereas, the City desires to retain a consultant engineer to
prepare said photographic maps, topographic maps and record of
survey; and,
Whereas, ConSultant warrants and represents that they are
experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can
prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City
within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this Agreement;
(End of Recitals. Next Page starts Obligatory Provisions.)
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 1
/.2 -/1
.
Obligatory provisions Pages
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant
do hereby mutually agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
Consultant shall perform all of the services described on
the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 7, entitled "General Duties";
and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "General
Duties", Consultant shall also perform all of the services
described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled" Scope of Work and
Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according
to, and within the time frames set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph
8, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein,
time being of the essence of this agreement. The General Duties
and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and
Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services".
Failure to complete the Defined Services by the times indicated
does not, except at the option of the City, operate to terminate
this Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
City may independently, or upon request from Consultant,
from time to time reduce the Defined Services to be performed by
the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and
Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose
of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation
associated with said reduction.
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set
forth, City may require Consultant to perform additional
consulting services related to the Defined Services ("Additional
Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the
scope of services offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform
same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the
"Rate Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (C). unless a separate
fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon. All compensation for
Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 page 2
/ ,;.. ~ /.l.
,.
E. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement,
whether Defined Services or Additional Services, shall perform in
a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily
exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under
similar conditions and in similar locations.
F . InSUL-ance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and
subconsultants employed by it in connection with the Services
required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss
by the following insurance coverages, in the following categor-
ies, and to the limits specified, policies of which are issued by
Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V" or
better, or shall meet with the approval of the City:
Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's
Liability Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in the
attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9.
Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business
Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit
A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied separately to each
project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which
names City and Applicant as an Additional Insured, and which is
primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry
("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City
and Applicant in the same manner as members of the general public
("Cross-liability Coverage") .
Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, unless Errors and Omissions coverage is
included in the General Liability policy.
G. Proof of Insurance coverage.
(1) Certificates of Insurance.
Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein
required, prior to the commencement of services required under
this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance
demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may
not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days written notice
to the Additional Insured.
(2) policy Endorsements Required.
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 page 3
1,,2'IJ
..
In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured
Coverage, Primary Coverage and Cross-liability Coverage required
under Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy,
Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City
demonstrating same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the
Risk Manager.
H. Security for Performance.
(1) Performance Bond.
In the event that Exhibit A, at paragraph 19, indicates
the need for Consultant to provide a Performance Bond (indicated
by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding
the subparagraph entitled .Performance Bond"), then Consultant
shall provide to the City a performance bond by a surety and in a
form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney
which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term,
"Performance Bond", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A.
(2) Letter of Credit.
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates
the need for Consultant to provide a Letter of Credit (indicated
by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding
the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant
shall provide to the City an irrevocable letter of credit
callable by the City at their unfettered discretion by submitting
to the bank a letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that
the Consultant is in breach of the terms of this Agreement. The
letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and
amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which
amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Letter of
Credit", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A.
(3) Other Security
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates
the need for Consultant to provide security other than a
Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark
in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph
entitled .Other Security"), then Consultant shall provide to the
City such other security therein listed in a form and amount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney.
I. Business License
Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City
and to otherwise comply with Title 5 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code.
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 4
/:2. /'1
-'
2. Duties of the City
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose
of reviewing the progress of the Defined Services and Schedule
therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance to
achieve the objectives of this ~greement. The City shall permit
access to its office facilities, files and records by Consultant
throughout the term of the agreem~nt. In addition thereto, City
agrees to provide the information, data, items and materials set
forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, and with the further
understanding that delay in the provision of these materials
beyond 30 days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a
basis for the justifiable delay in the Consultant's performance
of this agreement.
B. Compensation
Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant
submitted to the City periodically as indicated in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 18, but in no event more frequently than monthly, on
the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, City
shall compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consult-
ant according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 11, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship
indicated by a "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement,
subject to the requirements for retention set forth in paragraph
19 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of
pocket expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12.
All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain
sufficient information as to the propriety of the billing to
permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable
thereunder is proper, and shall specifically contain the City's
account number indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 (C) to be
charged upon making such payment.
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract
Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 13, as said
party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to
represent them in the routine administration of this agreement.
4. Term.
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have
complied with all executory provisions hereof.
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 5
I,;. .1/
.
5. Liquidated Damages
The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages
Rate is provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14.
It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the
essence in the completion of this Agreement. It is difficult to
estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in per-
formance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a
reasonable amount to compensate for delay.
Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted
time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the
following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess
of the time specified for the completion of the respective work
assignment or Deliverable, the consultant shall pay to the City,
or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated Damages
Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14 ("Liquidated Damages
Rate") .
Time extensions for delays beyond the consultant's control,
other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in
writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior
to the expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time,
when granted, will be based upon the effect of delays to the work
and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work
unless it can be shown that such delays did or will delay the
progress of the work.
6. Financial Interests of Consultant
A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer.
If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as
an "FPPC filer", Consultant is deemed to be a "Consultant" for
the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and
disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the
City Clerk on the required Statement of Economic Interests in
such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 15 of
Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the
City Attorney.
B. Decline to Participate.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant shall not make, or participate in making or in
any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a
governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to
know Consultant has a financial interest other than the
compensation promised by this Agreement.
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 6
1.2. -I/,
~
C. Search to Determine Economic Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant warrants and represents that Consultant has
diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's
economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations
promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission, and has
determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's
knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with
Consultant's duties under this agreement.
D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant
will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest during
the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of
interest as prohibited by the Fair Political Practices Act.
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC
Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant
will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if Consultant
learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result
in a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political
Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder.
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests.
Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant,
nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant's
employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any
interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property
which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in
any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries
of any property which may be the subject matter of the.Defined
Services, ("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 15.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise
of future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or
other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant
Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this
Agreement. Consultant promises to advise City of any such
promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or
for 12 months thereafter.
Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not
acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 7
/..2~/'l
Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this
Agreement, except with the written permission of City.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any
party to this Agreement, or for any third party which may be in
conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement,
except with the written permission of City.
7. Hold Harmless
Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold
harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and
employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability,
cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees)
arising out of the conduct of the Consultant, or any agent or
employee, subcontractors, or others in connection with the
execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for
those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful
conduct of the City, its officers, or employees. Consultant's
indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses,
attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers,
agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether
the same proceed to judgment or not. Further, Consultant at its
own expense shall, upon written request by the City, defend any
such suit or action brought against the City, its officers,
agents, or employees. Consultants' indemnification of City shall
not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the
Consultant.
8. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a
timely and proper manner Consultant's obligations under this
Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants,
agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the
right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to
Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date
thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such
termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents,
data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other
materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the
City, become the property of the City, and Consultant shall be
entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work
satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up
to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the
amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by
Consultant's breach.
9. Errors and omissions
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 8
~~~
.
In the event that the City Administrator determines that the
Consultants' negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance
of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City
greater than would have resulted if there were no such
negligence, errors, omissions, Consultant shall reimburse City
for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein
is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions of this
agreement.
10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any
reason, by giving specific written notice to Consultant of such
termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least
thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination.
In that event, all finished and unfinished documents and other
materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City,
become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is
terminated by City as provided in this paragraph, Consultant
shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for
any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other
materials to the effective date of such termination. Consultant
hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or
compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth
herein.
11. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and
Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and
shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City.
City hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the
Defined Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the
subconsultants identified thereat as "permitted Subconsultants".
12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms,
designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or
properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and
exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties
produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be
subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant
in the United States or in any other country without the express
written consent of City. City shall have unrestricted authority
to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions
of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use,
copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports,
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 9
/';'-/1
,
studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties
produced under this Agreement.
13. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and
Consultant shall perform as an independent contractor with sole
control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to
reject or accept Consultant's work products. Consultant and any
of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for
all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and
shall not be deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them
shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are
entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement
benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave or other
leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold state or
federal income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax,
and Consultant shall be solely responsible for the payment of
same and shall hold the City harmless with regard thereto.
14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this
agreement, against the City unless a claim has first been
presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by
the City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter
1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to
time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this
reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and
procedures used by the City in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in
good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute
over the terms of this Agreement.
15. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in
litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be
entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense
of the claim, including costs and attorney's fees.
16. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document,
or participates in the preparation of a report or document in
performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall include, or
cause the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement
of the numbers and cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 10
/~-~O
.
subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or
document.
17. Miscellaneous
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consult-
ant shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind City
to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 is marked, the
Consultant and/or their principals is/are licensed with the State
of California or some other state as a licensed real estate
broker or salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that
neither Consultant, nor their principals are licensed real estate
brokers or salespersons.
C. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted
to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All
notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be
deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served
or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party,
postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt
requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of
business for each of the designated parties.
D. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document
referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement
and understanding between the parties relating to the subject
matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provisi~n hereof
may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an
instrument in writing executed by the party against which
enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
E. Capacity of parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and
represents to the other party that it has legal authority and
capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this
Agreement, and that all resolutions or other actions have been
taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement.
F. Governing Law/Venue
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 11
102 -~ l
,
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action
arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only
in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State
of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as
close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and
performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
[end of page. next page is signature page.]
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 12
/~ -..2~
.'
Signature Page
to
Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Hunsaker and Associates
San Diego Inc.
for Land Surveying and Aerial Mapping Services
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this
Agreement thereby indicating that they have read and understood
same, and indicate their full and complete consent to its terms:
Dated:
,19_
City of Chula Vista
by:
Tim Nader, Mayor
Attest:
Clerk
vi
B
Dated:
Hunsaker & Associates
San Diego Inc.
By: ~)~
Ja 111, Vice President
By:
;.--.
Exhibit List to Agreement
( X) Exhibit A. with attachments 1,2 and 3
.." -~
,.
( ) Exhibit B:
2pty9.wp Standard Form Two Party Agreement (Fourth Revision)
November 2, 1993 Page 13
/..2 '.l;J
,A
Exhibit A
to
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
Hunsaker and Associates
San Diego, Inc.
1. Effective Date of Agreement:
2. City-Related Entity:
(X) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of
the State of California
( Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a
political subdivision of the State of California
Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula
Vista, a
) Other:
[insert business form]
a
("City" )
3. Place of Business for City:
City of Chula Vista,
276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910
4. Consultant:
Hunsaker and Associates San Diego, Inc.
10179 Huennekens Street
San Diego, CA 92121
5. Business Form of Consultant:
( ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
(X ) Corporation
6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant:
Hunsaker and Associates
10179 Huennekens Street
San Diego, CA 92121
San Diego, Inc.
2PTY9-A.wp
November 2, 1993
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 1
/,,2. - .). tf
.
Voice Phone (619) 558-4500
Fax Phone (619) 558-1414
7. General Duties:
Consultant shall provide:
a. Aerial photographic maps (100 - scale) and topographic
maps (40 - scale) for the Telegraph Canyon Creek from
Telegraph Canyong Road to Fourth Avenue in the City of
Chula Vista.
b. Aerial photographic maps (100 - scale) of Main Street
from Industrial Blvd. to Fourth Avenue.
c. Record of survey for the Telegraph Canyon Creek.
All the work shall be performed in accordance with the Mapping
Specifications. (Attachment 1)
8. Scope of Work and Schedule:
A. Detailed Scope of Work:
See attachment No. 2
B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services:
(X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement
( ) Other:
C. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables:
See attachment No. 3
D. Date for completion of all Consultant services:
20 weeks after notice to proceed (see attachment No.3)
9. Insurance Requirements:
(X) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance
(X) Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000.
(X) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000.
() Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included
in Commercial General Liability coverage) .
(X), Errors and Omissions Insurance: $250,000 (not included
2PTY9-A.wp
November 2, 1993
Exhibit A to Standard -Form Agreement
Page 2
I~~~~
~
in Commercial General Liability coverage) .
~o. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant:
None
11. Compensation:
A. (X) SingJe Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For performance of all of the Defined Services by Consultant
as herein required, City shall pay a single fixed fee in the
amounts and at the times or milestones or for the Deliverables set
forth below:
Single Fixed Fee Amount: $63,138 payable as follows:
Milestone or Event or Deliverable Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee
See attachment No. 3
B. ( ) Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For the performance of each phase or portion of the Defined
Services by Consultant as are separately identified below, City
shall pay the fixed fee associated with each phase of Services, in
the amounts and at the times or milestones or Deliverables set
forth . Consultant shall not commence Services under any Phase, and
shall not be entitled to the compensation for a Phase, unless City
shall have issued a notice to proceed to Consultant as to said
Phase.
Phase Fee for Said Phase
1. $
2. $
3. $
C. () Hourly Rate Arrangement
For performance of the Defined Services by Consultant as
herein required, City shall pay Consultant for the productive hours
of time spent by Consultant in the performance of said Services, at
the rates or amounts set forth in the Rate Schedule hereinbelow
2PTY9-A.wp
November 2, 1993
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 3
),). .. ,;. "
..
according to the following terms and conditions:
(1) () Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials
Arrangement
Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of
time and materials in excess of said Maximum Compensation
amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant will perform
all of the Defined Services herein required of Consultant
for $ including all Materials, and other
"reimbursables" ("Maximum Compensation") .
(2) ( ) Limitation without Further Authorization on
Time and Materials Arrangement
At such time as Consultant shall have incurred time
and materials equal to ("Authorization
Limit"), Consultant shall not be entitled to any addi-
tional compensation without further authorization issued
in writing and approved by the City. Nothing herein
shall preclude Consultant from providing additional
Services at Consultant's own cost and expense.
2PTY9-A.wp
November 2, 1993
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 4
/,)-;1. ?
Rate Schedule
Category of Employee
of Consultant
Name
Hourly
Rate
(See Attachment 4)
) Hourly rates may increase
rendered after [month], 19
services is caused by City.
by 6\ for services
, if delay in providing
12. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement
For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant
in the performance of services herein required, City shall pay
Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below:
(X) None, the compensation includes all costs.
Cost or Rate
() Reports, not to exceed $
() Copies, not to exceed $
() Travel, not to exceed $
() Printing, not to exceed $
() Postage, not to exceed $
() Delivery, not to exceed $
() Long Distance Telephone Charges,
not to exceed $
( Other Actual Identifiable Direct Costs:
, not to exceed $
, not to exceed $
2PTY9-A.wp
November 2, 1993
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 5
/,2. ,,.llr
~
13. Contract Administrators:
City:
Roberto Saucedo, Senior Civil Engineer
Public Services Building
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
(619) 691-5033
Consultant:
Jack Hill, Vice President
Hunsaker and Associates San Diego, Inc.
10199 Huennekens Street
San Diego, CA 92121
(619) 558-4500
14. Liquidated Damages Rate:
( ) $ -0- per day.
( ) Other:
15. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting
Categories, per Conflict of Interest Code:
(X) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer.
) FPPC Filer
( Category No.1. Investments and sources of income.
) Category No.2. Interests in real property.
) Category No.3. Investments, interest in real
property and sources of income subj ect to the
regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the
department.
( Category No.4. Investments in business entities
and sources of income which engage in land
development, construction or the acquisition or
sale of real property.
( ) Category No.5. Investments in business entities
and sources of income of the type which, within the
past two years, have contracted with the City of
Chula Vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide
services, supplies, materials, machinery or
equipment.
( Category No.6. Investments in business entities
2PTY9-A.wp
November 2, 1993
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 6
/,,2 ":2.1
.
and sources of income of the type which, within the
past two years, have contracted with the desi~ated
employee's department to provide serv1ces,
supplies, materials, machinery or equipment.
( Category No.7. Business positions~
( ) List "Consultant Associate!>" interests in real property
within 2 radial miles of Project Property, if any:
16. ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
17. Permitted Subconsultants:
Merrick & Company
San-Lo Aerial Surveys
18. Bill Processing:
A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following
period of time:
) Monthly
) Quarterly
X) Other: After reaching each milestone
B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing:
( First of the Month
( 15th Day of each Month
( End of the Month
( Other:
C. City's Account Number:
19. Security for Performance
(X ) Performance Bond, $63,138.00
( ) Letter of Credit, $
( ) Other Security:
Type:
Amount: $
(X Retention. If this s~ac:e is checked, then
notwithstanding other prov1s1ons to the contrary
requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant
2PTY9-A.wp
November 2, 1993
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 7
/,2 . J C1
.
sooner, the City shall be entitled to retain, at their
option, either the following "Retention Percentage" or
"Retention Amount" until the City determines that the
Retention Release Event, listed below, has occurred:
(X ) Retention Percentage: 10\
( ) Retention Amount: $
Retention Release Event:
(X ) Completion of All Consultant Services
( ) Other:
(p:\hoae\engin..r\aa.in\HDHSAKR2.2PT
2PTY9-A.wp
November 2, 1993
Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement
Page 8
/J.' J I
A~"'~'" 1
~v?-
~
~ ~ :.- ~-
~ ~ -=-
ellY OF
CHUlA VISTA
ST ATE OF CALIFORNIA
MIlJP]PIDmg ~mcUi(8
~
/,).. , ;1 ,2.
TOPOGRAPmC MAPPING SPECIFlCA nONS
,
A. Responsibility of the Consultant
The Consultant shall be responsible for all surveys, including mapping, necessary to comply with
the Scope of Work. This will include, but not be limited to, 40 scale topOgraphic mapping (with
one-foot contours), 20 scale topographic mapping (with one-foot contours), and aerial
photography (including a loo-scale overview of area). All surveys must be done in the following
manner.
1. Standards
All surveys shall be perfonned in accordance with accepted professional surveying
standards as approved by the City. The minimum standard of survey quality shall be that
of similar surveys performed by the City.
In addition to the requirements herein, photogrammetric mapping shall conform to
requirements of Appendix A.
Surveys performed by the Consultant shall conform to the requirements of the Land
Surveyors Act In accordance with the Act, "responsible charge" for the work shall reside
with a pre-January I, 1982, Registered Civil Engineer or a licensed Land Surveyor, in the
State of California.
2. Basis of Consultant's Surveys
Vertical control must be related to the 1988 NA VD system.
Horizontal control for existing street right-of-way and property lines must be established
from record maps, deeds and other survey documents. The consultant will be responsible
for performing his own research for these items.
."
If any anomalies exist in property boundaries and right-of-way limits then the consultant
will be responsible for obtaining the relevant title reports to resolve those anomalies.
3. Monument Markings
The Consultant shall identify Consultant-established monuments by tagging or stamping
the monuments with the license or registration number of the Consultant's surveyor who
is "responsible charge" of the work, in accordance with City approved standards.
4. Deliverables
a. Survey points, lines, and monuments shall be established, marked, identified and
referenced, as required to comply with the scope of work in accordance with
accepted professional surveying standards and the requirements herein.
1;1 .J J
b. Survey notes, drawings, c:a1culations and other documenWmaterials shall be
completed as required to complete the design of the project, in BCCOrdance with
accepted professional surveying standards and the requirements herein.
c. A copy. except as otherwise specified in Appendix C, of all original survey
documents resulting from this contract (including original field data, adjustment
calculations, final results, and apPlopriate intermediate documents) shall be
delivered to the City and shall become the property of the City. The original (or
a copy. if the original is to be provided to the City) survey documents shall be
retained by the Consultant for future reference.
d. The final results of an surveys shall be delivered to the City in the fonnat
specified below.
(1) Horizontal Control- Alpha/numeric bard copy point listing with adjusted
California Coordinate System northings and castings and appropriate
descriptions. NAD 83 datum is to be used.
(2) Vertical Control- Alpha/numeric bard copy listing with adjusted elevations
on the 1988 NAVD.
(3) Topography, including photogrammetric mapping - Topography symbology
shall conform to the CalTrans "Drafting and Plans Manual". All
deliverables, shall be in the following fonnat:
Alpha/numeric bard copy listing
Reproducible mylars. 0.004" polyester type plastic film (size to be
approved by the City). The area of the project to be shown in each
sheet is to be determined by the City.
Digital Terrain Model. Shall be provided in 5-1/4" high density
diskettes using DXF format files compatible with Autacad V.12
and Softdesk (Addcad). The layers shall be defined as follows:
1 - Contour lines shall be in one separate layer
2 - All record boundary information (property lines, easements,
etc.) and existing channel easements shall be in a separate
layer.
3 - Text shall be in a separate layer.
4 - All other featureS may be combined in the same layer
(4) Photogrammetric Mapping Rel.t..t Materials - See Appendix C.
(5) Others - As directed by the City.
P.8I1iIB'CIlG1HEEIl\I517.93
/.2~3t.(
.
PHOTOGRAMMETRIC MAPPING STANDARDS
Table of Contents
1.00 SCOPE OF WORK ................................................. 1
2.00 FIELD SURVEYS AND PREMARKING ................................. 1
3.00 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY ........;.................................. 1
4.00 AEROTRIANGULATION............................................ 3
5.00 MAP COMPILATION............................................... 3
6.00 MAP ACCURACY ................................................. 5
/02-;15'
1.00 SCOPE OF WORK
-
1.01 Work shall consist of furnishing all photogrammetric mapping necessary to complete the design
of this project
1.02 The work will include planning, photo-control surveys, premarking, aerial photography,
eerotriangulation, digital map compilation, drafting, and ..,pi oductions.
2.00 . fIELD SURVEYS AND PREMARKING
2.10 Project Control- Vertical control must be related to the 1988 NAVD.
Horizontal control for existing street right-of-way and property lines must be established from
record maps, deeds and other survey documents. The consultant will be responsible for
performing his own research for these items. If any anomalies exist in property boundaries and
right-of-way limits, the consultant will be responsible for obtaining the relevant title reports to
resolve those anomalies.
It is not necessary to complete the Record of Smvey included in the Scope of work prior to
preparing the aerial topographic map unless any major discrepancies in boundary infonnation are
exposed during research. If no major discrepancies are found then it will be sufficient to show
record boundary infonnation on the aerial topographic map, with a common basis of bearing.
2.20 SUPPLEMENTAL PHOTO CONTROL
2.21 Number and Position - The contractor will establish a minimum of three (3) horizontal and
vertical control points plus one vertical only control point per model by field methods. Vertical
points will be placed near the four comers of the model. All points will lie within a radius of
S inches (S") from the center of each picture. When the mapped area is a narrow strip through
the model, the four comer points will be placed outside or near the border of the mapping area.
2.22 Accuracv - The position of all horizontal control points will be established to third order of
accuracy, or better. The elevation of all vertical control points will be establiihed to an accuracy
of-Kl.Ol foot of true elevation.
2.23 Any alternate control plans that do not meet these specifications must be approved in Idvance,
by the City.
2.30 PREMARKING
2.31 All control points, both project and supplemental photo control points, Iha1l be premarlted.
Project control points outside of the photo coverage will Dot have to be pmnarked.
2.32 Premarks shall be centered exactly OD the survey point and shall Dot deviate from the point by
more than 0.02 fOOL
2.33 Premarks shall be of a pattern used by CaItrans for similar mapping.
l/,2"J?
2.34 It shall be the responsibility of the Consultant to obtain permission to premark and 10 dispose of
the premarks in a satisfactory manner.
2.35 Photo identification of control points will not be allowed unless permission is specifically granted
by the City.
3.00 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY
3.10 CAMERAS - Aerial photography shall be taken with one of the following types of cameras or
equivalent: .
Wild RC 8 or RC 10 with a 6-inch Aviogon lens
Zeiss RMK 15/23 with a Pleogon lens
Zeiss LMK 15/2323 with a Pleogon lens
3.11 CAMERA CALffiRA TION - A calibration repon shall be provided for the camera used. The
repon shall be prepared by United States Geological Survey (USGS) or the camera manufacturer
within the last two years. .
3.20 FLIGHT HEIGHT AND PHOTOGRAPHY SCALE
3.21 Photography scales to be used for mapping and flight heights must suppon the mapping
requirements in Task 1 and 2 of Section 5 of the Request for Proposals and Section 6.00 of these
specifications.
3.30 FLIGHT TOLERANCES - Flight tolerances shall be as follows:
3.31 COVERAGE - The mapping limits and control for the flight shall fall within the central 7 inches
of the photography.
3.32 FORWARD OVERLAP - Forward overlap shall not exceed 65 percent or be less than 55 percent
and shall average 60 percent.
'.
3.33 CRAB - Crabbing measured from the line of flight through the principal points shall not exceed
10 degrees between any two consecutive photographs and shall not average more than 5 degrees
for any single flight line. .
3.34 Tn.. T _ Tllt deftned as the depanure of the optical axis of the camera from a plumb line shall not
exceed 5 degrees on a single photograph and shall not average more than one degree for a single
flight line. Relative tilt between two successive exposures shall not exceed 6 degrees.
3.35 TIME OF PHOTOGRAPHY - Photography shall be taken when the ground is not obscured by
haze, smoke, dusl, clouds or cloud shadows, or snow. Photography shall be taken only when the
sun angle is greater than 30 degrees above the horizon.
3.40 AERIAL NEGATIVES - Fine grain aerial negative film on polyester base such as Estar or equal
shall be used. Exposing and processing shall be done in conformance with the manufacturer's
recommendations and with accepted photographic practice. Negatives shall be clear and sharp
in detail with normal density and contrast. Negatives shall show no streaks, static marks,
2 /.1.J?
chemical stains, or other defects which would interfere with their intended use. There shall be
a 3-foot leader and trailer on all aerial film used for mapping.
3.50 EDITING - Aerial negatives and control photographs shall be edited according to standards
adopted by Caltrans.
3.60 CONTACT PRINTS - Three sets of contact prints on resin-coated paper shall be furnished to the
City. one showing control and two extra sets.
3.70 DIAPOSITIVES - Diapositives shall be on 0.13-inch thick glass. printed emulsion to emulsion.
One set of diapositives shall be furnished to the City.
3.80 PHOTO-INDEXES - Photo-indexes shall conform to the standards adopted by Caltrans. Photo-
index negatives and two prints of each photo-index shall be furnished to the City.
3.90 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY NEGATIVES - The original negatives of all photography shall be
furnished to the City.
4.00 AEROTRIANGULATION
4.10 IMAGE RESIDUALS - The standard deviation of "unit weight" shall not exceed +0.0075
millimeter.
4.20 HORIZONTAL CONTROL RESIDUALS - The root-mean-square-error of the xy vector shall
not exceed +0.085 foot and no single point shall deviate more than 0.24 fOOL
4.30 VERTICAL CONTROL RESIDUALS - The root-mean-square-error of z shall not exceed +0.15
foot and not single point shall deviate more than 0.36 fOOL
4.40 POINT TRANSFER HOLES - The maximum drill hole size shall be 0.050 millimeter for
marking points on the diapositives.
4.50 RESIDUAL USTINGS - A compiled listing of resultant residuals for the tillal aerotrangulation
shall be furnished to the City.
5.00 MAP COMPlLA TION
5.10 MAPPING UMITS - The mapping limits shall adequately cover the project as required to
complete the design of this projecL (See Scope of Work)
.
5.20 CONTOUR INTERVAL - The contour interVal shall be one foot for 40 and 2O-scale mapping.
5.30 MAP CONTENTS
5.31 COORDINATE GRID - All sheets shall be laid out in accordance with the map plan and shall
be based on the NAD 83 plane coordinate system of the State of California, Zone VI. in which
the area lies.
/.2 .. J ~
3
The California coordinate system shall be represented by border ticks on the manuscriPL Spacing
of these ticks shall be 10 inches. The intersection of the lines, representing the grid lines, shall
be shown by a cross tick.
In its southeast (or lower right-hand corner), each manuscript map sheet shall have a legend
giving "Map Scale, Date of Flight, Flight Height, North Arrow, Project Name or Number, and
Name of ConsultanL" Each sheet of a set shall be numbered in sequence (Example: Sheet 1 of
5), with numbering progressing along the route of mapping from west to east, or from south to
north.
5.32 MATCH LlNES - Match lines shall be provided for the map sheets so that each sheet may be
joined accurately to those IdjacenL
5.33 PLANIMETRY - The maps shall contain all planimetric features which are visible or identifiable
on, or are interpretable from, the photography, including land use features, as buildings, canals,
ditches, reservoirs. trails. roads (highways), railroads, quarries, borrow pits, cemeteries, orchards,
and individual, lone, large trees that can be recognized as such; and the trace of telegraph and
electric power transmission lines and their poles and towers, underground cables, pipe lines and
sewers, fence lines. billboards, rock and other walls, and similar details of land use. Structures,
such as bridges, culverts, retaining walls, transformer and other substations, oil, water, and other
storage tanks, and the like. The map shall also show curbs, sidewalks, parking snips, driveways,
hydrants, manholes. lamp posts, existing improvements within the channel or flowing into the
channel, and similar features.
Buildings and similar dimensionable objects shall be correctly outlined and oriented on the maps,
and shall be to actual scale, except that building die dimensions smaller than representable by
one-tenth (1/10") inch at map scale shall be symbolized one-tenth (1/10") inch in size. Minor
irregularities in building outlines not representable by one-twentieth (1/20") inch at map scale
shall be ignored.
The map shall also show all boundary information (property lines, easements, etc.) in accordance
with Section 2.10 of this appendix and Assessor's Parcel Number, property owner, and address
of all properties within the project area. Existing channel easements and right-of-ways shall also
be shown. The consultant shall be responsible for performing his own research to perform this
activity.
The principal point, or nadir point, of each photograph used in the mapping shall be shown on
the maps.
5.34 SPOT ELEV AnON _ Spot elevations determined photogranunenica1ly shall be shown on the
maps in proper position at water level on the shoreline of lakes, reservoirs, ponds and the like;
on hilltops; in saddles; at the bottom of depressions; at the intersection of well-traveled roads;
principal streets in cities, railroads, and highways; and on the centerline at each end of bridges
and the like structures of importance in highway engineering. In areas where the contours are
more than three (3") inches apart at map scale, spot elevations shall also be shown and the
horizontal distance between the contours and such spot elevations or between the spot elevations
shall not exceed two (2") inches at scale of the delivered maps.
4 J.l" J~
5.35 TOPOGRAPHY - Maps shall contain all representable and specified topographic features which
are visible or identifiable on, or are inteIpretable from, the aerial photography. Within accuracy
requirements, contours shall be delineated to represent true elevation above mean sea level and
the exact shape of the ground. Wherever they exist, topographic features required on the maps
are all drainageways of draws, creeks, rivers, and tributary streams, springs, falls and rapids, and
glaciers; waterbodies of ponds, lakes, and oceans; swamps, marshes, bogs, and flood plains;
ledgerock and cliffs; and other essential topographic features the contracting authority will require
for design purposes.
Where they exist, and if anyone of their surface area dimensions at ground level is larger than
representable by one-tenth (1110") inch at map scale, large surface boulders and boulders
protruding from the ground shall be outlined on the maps in their correct position to shape and
size, properly labeled, and their height above ground given.
The elevation of all slabs, top of walls and building fmished floors etc. shall also be shown on
the maps.
5.40 STEREO-PLOTTERS - Optical train type photogrammetric plotters shall be used for map
compilation. Projection-type plotters will not be allowed.
6.00 MAP ACCURACY
6.10 MAP GRIDS - The position of all grid ticks and all monuments shall not vary more than 0.01
inch from their coordinated position.
6.20 PLANIMETRY - At least 90 percent of all well-defined planimetric features shall be within
0.025 inch of their true position, and all shall be within 0.050 inch of their true ground position.
6.30 CONTOURS
40 Scale MaDS with I foot Contours. At least 90 percent of all contours shall be within 0.50 foot
of true elevations, and all contours shall be within one foot of true elevations.
,
20 Scale MaDS with 1 foot Contours. At least 90 percent of all contours shall be within 0.25 foot
of true elevations, and all shall be within 0.50 foot of true elevations.
If any areas are obscured from the air due to vegetation, etc., the consultant must perform
field work to supplement the aerial topography as necessary to obtain the specified
accuracy and detail.
Contours shall reflect the crown or cross slope of all paved areas including paved ditches, and
the accuracy tolerance allowed for contours shall not affect this requiremenL
6.31 SPOT ELEVATIONS
40 Scale MaDS with 1 foot Contour. At least 90 percent of all spot elevations shall be within
0.25 foot of true elevations and all shall be within 0.50 foot of true elevation.
/;....o/tJ
5
..
20 Scale MaDs with I foot Contour. At least 90% of all spot elevations shall be within 0.13 foot
of trUe elevations and all shall be within 0.25 foot of trUe elevation.
6.32 In addition to the accuracy specified above for contours and spot elevations. the following shall
apply:
The arithmetic mean of contours and spot elevations in open areas shall not
exceed plus or minus the following values for the points tested on each map sheet.
No. of Points Tested Max. Arithmetic Mean
20 +0.20 contour interval
40 +0.15 contour interval
60 or more +0.10 contour interval
6.33 Any contour which can be brought within the specified vertical tolerance by shifting its position
0.025 inch shall be accepted as correctly compiled.
6.34 Elevation of all slabs. top of walls. and building finished floors shall be within IIlOth of a foot.
Existing drainage improvements within the channel or flowing into the channel shall be within
lllOOth of a foot.
F:'ifO~1NEER\l517.93
.'
/.,2-'/1
6
AnACHMENT NO.2
Detailed Scope of Work
Telegraph Canyon Creek Project
Task 1
Preparation of 100-scale aerial photographic maps and 40-scale topographic maps with
1-foot contours of a 400 foot strip of land (200 feet at each side of the creek) along
Telegraph Canyon Creek in the City of Chula Vista from the existing culvert at
Telegraph Canyon Road to the beginning of the existing concrete channel (bstween
Third and Fourth Avenue). The maps shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the
upstream and downstream project's limits.
Survey:
Aerial Control:
Hunsaker & Associates San Diego, Inc. (H&A) will set 12 (Alternate 1) or 16 (Alternate
2) aerial targets appropriately marked for photogrammetry. These targets will be
surveyed using conventional or G.P.S. (Global Positioning System) methodology. This
aerial target control network will be tied into the City of Chula Vista Control Network
currently being established. NAD'S3 coordinates and NAVD'SS elevations will be
established on all aerial control points. If possible aerial control points will be existing
cadastral monuments such as centerline well monuments. The horizontal accuracy will
be third order or better and the vertical accuracy will be sufficient to control 40' scale or
20' scale mapping according to National Map Accuracy Standards. (elevations will be
stated to 1/1 Oath of a foot but the absolute elevation will not be the accuracy of:t
1/10Oth of a foot).
Existing Monument Recovery:
Hunsaker & Associates will compile a "Record" map which will show the location of
property lines, right-of-way lines and easements which show on maps of record, within
200 feet of the centerline of Telegraph Canyon Creek. Any significant "anomalies" in
record data will be reported to the City. H&A will not be responsible for resolving any
such anomalies under this contract. At the time the aerial control survey is performed,
H&A will commence a survey to recover any monumentation that may be within the
area to be disturbed by the Telegraph Canyon Creek improvement project. Only
monuments within the potential disturbed area will be surveyed and no attempt will be
made to establish boundaries of entire parcels by locating property comers which are
not with potential disturbed areas. The location of all found monuments shall be plotted
and the "Record" map will be adjusted to conform to "Found" locations of monuments.
Any significant anomalies or areas of occupation which are obviously different from
record data will be reported to the City. Again, H&A cannot be responsible to resolve
any anomalies or questions of occupation or ownership under this contract. It is
anticipated that this surveyed data combined with record data will be sufficient to
determine areas and extent of right-of-way acquisitions as well as enable legal
descriptions to be written and plats prepared.
..._ _.IIl..fTT .4Ic
......,. .....
I). . i,,2-
Map:
.
Based on record data and recovered monumentation by field survey, H&A will prepare
a map which shows the control for the project, recovered monuments, property lines,
right-of-way lines within the area of potential alignment of improvements. This will be
prepared at 100 scale so as to provide an overlay for the 100 scale color aerial
photographic map.
Anomalies:
At this time it will be possible to determine which (if any) parcels require further action
to resolve any boundary question, lines of occupation questions or other potential
conflicts which the survey has identified. H&A will recommend a course of action to
resolve any such anomalies. If requested by the City to do so, H&A will work toward
resolving said anomalies under a separate contract with the City of Chula Vista.
Photogrammetry and Topographic Mapping:
Step 1 . Acquire Aerial photography
1. Merrick shall utilize color photography at a negative scale of either 1" =
250' or 1" = 150' to complete the aerial photography mission. The 1" =
250' film would be used for the 40 scale mapping; while the 1" = 150' film
is proposed for the 20 scale mapping. Aerial photography shall conform
to industry standards for weather conditions, processing, camera
calibration, film type, forward and side lap, cloud coverage image motion
compensation, and sun angle.
2. The following flight characteristics apply for the 1" = 250' photography:
Negative Scale:
Mapping Scale:
Flying Altitude:
Forward Lap:
Side Lap:
Direction:
Number of Exposures:
1" = 250' (1 :3,000)
1" = 40', 1 foot contours
1,500' above mean terrain.
60%
30%
Along creek channel
13
3. The following flight characteristics apply for the 1" = 150' photography:
Negative Scale:
Mapping Scale:
Flying Altitude:
Forward Lap:
Side Lap:
Direction:
Number of Exposures:
1" = 150', (1:18,000)
1" = 20', 0.5 foot contours
900' above mean terrain
60%
30%
Along creek channel
25
4H:MI_"'~"f' A40c
---
/.,2 .. If ;J
4. The aerial photography shall be flown on, or near, the date designated by
Merrick/City of Chula Vista project managers following the completion of
control targeting, weather permitting. .
5. Merrick shall subcontract the photography to San-Lo Aerial Surveys of
San Diego, California.
6. Following processing, Merrick's certified photogrammetrist will then
inspect the film and generate a "navigation report" which validates that
the photography conforms to specifications. The navigation report and
indices will be forwarded to the City of Chula Vista for approval.
7. A rectified mosaic at 1" = 100' will be produced for each site (color).
Step 2 . Fully Analytical Aerotrlangulatlon (FAAT)
1. Merrick will utilize analytical, first-order stereo plotters (Zeiss P3) to
perform the FAAT measurements.
2. FAAT will generate the coordinate base (x, y, z) from the control points on
each photograph and supplemental positions.
3.
4.
MllIl_,,~lI._
-...." ......
This process simultaneously corrects image displacement caused by
earth curvature, atmospheric refraction, camera lens distortion and
aircraft inconsistencies.
Adjustments will be performed in-house using Rapid Analytical Bundle
Adjustment Triangulation System (RABATS) and Bundle Rapid Analytic
Triangulation System (BRATS) to generate the final project coordinates.
Merrick's analytical measurements require that diapositives have two
tiepoints per stereo model to relate adjacent flight lines, and that each
stereo model contains not less than six passpoints.
5.
During the "reading" of diapositives on the Zeiss P-3 analytical
stereoplotter, independent model solutions are computed, and refined
photo coordinates are verified to ensure that no point exceeds 10 microns
of error.
6.
Approximately 5% to 10% of the control points may be withheld from the
initial solution as a quality assurance check. The results of both solutions
will be provided to the City of Chula Vista for review.
7.
A FAAT report of the final results of the FAAT exercise will be submitted
to the City of Chula Vista. This report will be inspected and signed by
Merrick's certified photogrammetrist.
I,)"~i
Step 3 . Perform Model Orientation
1. This step performs internal relative and absolute positioning of each
photo.
2. A least-squared analysis of each model will be executed to obtain
orientation residuals.
3. Inspect all residuals to ensure all conform to accuracy standards.
Step 4 . Load AdJacent Model Data
1. This step merges digital data collected from adjacent photographs to
verify that information on the edge of each photograph matches on each
image, resulting in a "seamless database".
2. Referencing all models during this step greatly enhances "snapping" of
features on adjoining photographs during stereo digitizing, and eliminates
the need for model-to-model edgematching during later editing stages.
Step 5 . Photog ram metrically Collect Planimetric Data
1. All visible and readily identifiable features will be collected using
photogrammetric compilation techniques. Korl< mapping software is used
for the real-time data acquisition and entry coding. A macro file exists for
each entity to be collected, enabling consistent coding and collection
which is operator and machine independent.
2. Merrick creates an intelligent database during data capture by uniquely
coding each feature and by typing/classifying these features. For
example, structures can be categorized as residential, commercial and
industrial. Merrick's intelligent data capture methods allow the City to
start building GIS attributes early in the conversion process.
3. Edgematch each model during stereo-digitizing to form continuous
database.
4. In order to maximize the intelligence of the final database, Merrick's
compilation procedures could be modified based on the ARC/INFO GIS
system selected by the City. This would make this data 100% compatible
with the City's GIS project.
Step 6 . Create Planimetric and Utility Databases
1.
Utilize in-house software to convert Korl< data to database files for initial
processing and editing.
....~A._IWI'._
_ ",J175 .....
/.2 r If~
2. Planimetric data will be layered, attributed and symbolized for each
feature based on the specifications and pre-defined database design.
3. Merrick utilizes in-house software to automatically create layers, clip
contours to buildings, edgematch, annotate, and "close" all would by
polygons. Merrick understands the cartographic, topologic and database
implications when creating and editing digital data. that is, data products
are more complex than conventional maps, therefore, advanced computer
expertise, such as that found at Merrick, is essential to the City for a
successful project implementation.
4. Merrick's processing software develops 3-D files, patterns lines (e.g.
trees, drains, trails, etc.) and places blocks based on client standards. An
existing drawing file from the City of Chula Vista is requested to facilitate
matching styles, layers and fonts.
Step 7 . Photogrammetrlcally Collect Digital Terrain Model (DTM)
1. A DTM is used for the production of the contour and digital orthophoto
products. Merrick will create the DTM by scanning parallel rows on each
model using precision stereo-plotters.
2. The three dimensional (3-D) digital terrain model (DTM) will be collected
by Merrick by scanning parallel elevation profiles on each model at a
constant spacing between profile lines at finished map scale. The
distance between scan rows (profile lines) will be 3 rows per inch at final
map scale.
3. Merrick creates the DTM in four standardized steps:
a) Collect 3-D discontinuity lines along all terrain breaks, such as
road edge, apparent road centerline, drainage, ridges, etc.
b) Scan and create elevation profiles in parallel rows on"each model
at three (3) rows per inch at map scale.
c) Stereo-digitize spot elevations of all high-low points, such as toe
and crests, saddles, buttes, etc.
d) Create obscurity lines (closed areas) where terrain data may be.
obscured by dense vegetation or shadow.
4.
Verify accuracy and completeness of terrain model using Merrick's
proprietary software. This software and procedure inspects that scan
lines conform to the predetermined National Map Accuracy Standards.
....._A..,..Ntl1.doc
_-.vrl 11III4
/,2. ,~t.
5. The final step is to process the DTM into an irregular triangulated {letwork
and create the contour layers using Merrick's proprietary contour
interpretation software (CIP). This process is used to validate the
computerized contouring.
6. As requested, the DTM will be delivered to the City.
Step 8 . Create Topographic Design FUes for DTM Validation
1. Following compilation, Merrick utilizes in-house software to convert Kork
data to Intergraph for initial processing and editing. All data will be edited
on Merrick's 10 Intergraph workstations.
2. Generate contour plots to validate DTM. Add spot elevations to
independently analyze the computerized interpolation and DTM.
3. Over-plot ridge and drain features such as road edge and centerline to
guarantee cartographic placement of contours and accuracy/density of
DTM. These plots are edited by the Photogrammetric Supervisor and the
Project Manager to guarantee that the database conforms to the City of
Chula Vista's standards.
4. After the initial verification has been completed, Merrick shall send PSI
DTM's to generate the digital ortho products. Merrick will then continue
with the in-house quality control and data acceptance testing procedures.
Step 9 . Perform Final Database Quality Inspection
1. Simultaneous to the digital ortho production, Merrick shall perform final
automated and visual inspection of the DTM, planimetric and topographic
data.
2. Validate that the DTM, planimetric and topographic data conforms to City
of Chula Vista specifications.
3. Create color verification plots of all datasets.
4. Compare a representative sample of data to photographic enlargements
and inspect completeness of data.
Step 10 . Clip Databases Into Sheets and Generate Final Data FUes
1.
Using the predetermined sheet layout provided by the City of Chula Vista,
"clip" continuous data into individual sheets.
2.
The City of Chula Vista will be responsible for providing Merrick with
coordinates for the origin of the sheet comers. A final sheet layout for
both scales will then be mathematically projects from this point.
....~_A~l.._
_ ...,.,. .....
/,,2. ,. 'I?
3. At the request of the City of Chula Vista, Merrick will provide planimetric
and contour data in AutoCAD format. the DTM will be provided as either
a point coverage or DXF, in addition to the ASCII format.
Step 11 . Submit Maps and Databases to the City of Chula Vista
1. Ship all color ac maps and data products to the City of Chula Vista for
verification and inspection.
2. Merrick and City of Chula Vista shall devise an incremental delivery
schedule which meets the requirements of the City.
Step 12. Verify Dellverables by the City 0' Chula Vista
1. Perform quality control on sample maps and data products.
2. Provide Merrick with written review comments.
3. Discuss comments with Merrick and incorporate comments (if necessary)
into procedures and final products.
Step 13 . Submit Final Maps and Data to the City 0' Chula Vista
1.
Incorporate City of Chula Vista comments into final map and data
products.
2.
Ship deliverables to the City of Chula Vista.
3.
Acceptance of products by the City of Chula Vista within 30 days of
submittal.
...~__ ....lli\oIlT.-c
_..3t75 MIt4
),). 'J/~
listing of Deliverable Products
The following outlines the deliverable products produced by Merrick.
Photographic Products
1. One (1) set of original 9" x 9" black and white film negatives of the aerial
photography (1" = 150' or 1" = 250').
2. One (1) set of paper 9" x 9" contact prints of the aerial photography (1" =
150' and 1" = 250')
3. One set of aerial photography indices on mylar for each scale of
photography.
4. Valid USGS Calibration Report for San-Lo's aerial camera.
5. Navigation Report summarizing the quality of each scale of photography.
6. Rectified color mosaic of Main Street area and Telegraph Canyon at 1" =
100'.
Fully Analyllcal Aerotrlangulallon (FAAT) Products
1. FAAT diapositives.
2. FAAT results report and computations.
3. ASCII file of coordinate values of all triangulation points including:
control; pass, drop; tie; and QC points.
Digital Terrain Model
.
1. Digital terrain model in a ASCII format. Breaklines, mass points, spot
elevations and ridge/drain lines will be separated.
2. Topographic (contour) databases will be in 3-D AutoCAD DXF format.
Planimetric and Ullllty Databases (1" = 40' or 1" = 20')
1.
Planimetric databases in AutoCAD DXF format.
2.
Color paper quality control check plots.
3.
Reproducible Mylars
.ItNl_A_'" J r._
_"'3116 eII/t4
/,,2. , '11
Task 2
Preparation of 100 scale aerial color photographic map of a 200 foot strip of land (100
feet at each side of the centerline) of Main Street from Industrial Boulevard to 200 feet
easterly of the intersection with Fourth Avenue. Procedures are included in Task 1.
Cost is listed separately.
MM:_A._Nl'.M
_".76 .......
/,2 ~f'c;
Task 3
.
Preparation of a Record of Survey along Telegraph Canyon Creek from Telegraph
Canyon Road to Fourth Avenue.
Hunsaker & Associates will prepare a Record of Survey which will show all found
monumentation as described in Task 1 as well as property lines, right-of-way lines and
easement lines for parcels which are adjacent to the existing creek or potentially
affected by its realignment. Not withstanding the exhibit entitled "Telegraph Canyon
Creek Record of Survey Limits" in the RFP, it is not our intention to survey the entire
area outlined in said exhibit. It is our int~ntion to survey only those parcels and
monuments immediately adjacent to the creek alignment so as to provide the most cost
effective survey for the City while still providing the data necessary for design and
preliminary right-of-way acquisition documents.
The record of survey will show ties to the City Control Network, including NAD'83
coordinate values for said points and additional survey points at a maximum of .25 mile
intervals. New control points will be established, monumented, and shown on the ROS
in areas that will not be disturbed by construction but would be useable for future
control, if no suitable existing monument is available.
This proposal does not include any title company work. Only easements which show
on record maps will be shown on the ROS. Title work should be performed after
preliminary design determines which parcels will be affected. The cost of acquiring a
title report for each parcel at this time and plotting all existing easements on each
parcel would not seem to be cost effective.
.IU*_A.~.F' Adoc
_..,.71 ~
/,2 '5')
Attachment No.3
,
City of Chula Vista
Schedule of Deliverables and Payables
Telegraph Canyon Creek Project
Completion
Deliverable In Weeks
Retention Event after Notice
GPS Control Net for Aerial Control & Conv. Survey Amount (10%) Payment to Proceed
Reconnaissance & Premark Targets.
GPS 4-man Crew
GPS Session Planning & Coordination
GPS Processing
Final Report for Aerial Control
. Aerial Photography $ 750 $ 75 $ 675 +4
. Photo Products $ 1,500 $ 150 $ 1,350 +4
. 100 -Scale Aerial Photographic Map $ 1,000 $ 100 $ 900 ; +4
. Aerial Control & GPS Work $ 11,500 $ 1,150 $ 10,350 +4
Conventional Survey
L.S. Coordination of field survey
Research all data. maps. city records
Prepare Record Data Base Map
Prepare Package for Survey
Coordinate Survey & Meet with City
Monument recovery & tapa verification
Plot of Raw Survey Data & Notes
. Conventional Survey Work $ 17,500 $ 1,750 $ 15,750 +8
Preparation of Base Map
Reduce Field Notes
Survey Analysis
Create Base Map for Control & Prop. Cor. Locations
Coordination and Meet with City .
Additions. Changes. Corrections
Deliver Final Base Map
. Base Map $ 14,000 $ 1"'00 $ 12,600 +12
. Aerotrlangulatlon & Stereo Compilation $ 8,660 $ 866 $ 7,794 +12
. Map editing & Final Sheet Preparation $ 1,728 $ 173 $ 1,555 +12
Prepare and Process Record of Survey
Prepare Title Sheet. Index Map & 12 Map Sheets
Process. Changes & Corrections
. Submit Record of Survey $ 8,500 $ 850 $ 5,850 +20
. Recordation of Record of Survey $ 8,314
Contract Total $ 83,138 $63,138
Total Contract Retention $6,314
. Deliverable event
Page 1 /'
/). ".;).)..
ATTACHMENT NO.4
RATE SCHEDULE
Hunsaker and Associates San Diego, Inc.
Catel!orv of EmDlovee
Standard Office Time
Licensed Land Surveyor
Registered Civil Engineer
Principal
One-Person Survey Crew
Two-Person Survey Crew
Three-Person Survey Crew
Three-Person GPS Survey Crew
Four-Person GPS Survey Crew
Merrick and Company
Catel!orv of EmDlovee
Project Manager
Assistant Project Manager
CADD Technician/Drafter/DCA
Draftsperson
Clerical
Photo Lab Technician
Photograrnmetric Technician
Photograrnmetrist
Camera/Plan/PilotlPhotographer
Project Professional Land Surveyor
Professional Land Surveyor
Survey Technician
Survey Party Chief
Two-person Crew
GPS Receiver (per unit per day)
Two-person Crew, OSHA Health & Safety Trained
Three-person Crew, OSHA Health & Safety Trained
Court Appearances and Depositions (per day)
Mileage (per mile)
Equipment and Materials (cost plus)
Wl'C W,___iaoor\2Ol5.94
).2. -.5':J j; 2 -5'-1-
Hourlv Rates
$72
90
90
110
100
139
174
270
360
Hourlv Rates
$75
60
40
35
25
35
35
40
375
62
48
38
45
65
125
75
110
750
0.35
+ 15.0%
tXIST.ING IMPRovt"'tNTS
APPROXIMATE A~IGHMENT 01' TE~EGRAPH CANVON CREEl<
TELEGRAPH CANYON CREEK
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS a TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS
/ .). ...>5
-E 'u'" 15.T" A.
SHEEr NO. I OF 3
~ f
"
'.
"'-0'"
""""0
..
APPROXIMATE A~IGHMENT OF TE~EGRAPH CANYON CREEK
,,,
TELEGRAPH CANYON CREEK
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS a TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS
E~...,,, IT /)to
SHEET NO.2 OF 3
1..2 ... .5't,
.~
't
~
""
"
..
!"
\
:.
,
...... ' EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS
APPROXIMATE A~IGNMENT OF TE~EGRA"H CANYON CREEl<
TELEGRAPH CANYON CREEK
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS B TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS
/). '->7
E)(H ISIT /it.
SHEET NO./:3 OF, :3
'.
rtlT I \ II - 'I'L
~~\\ I::'"
1~ ... ...
I
. .~....! \\ \
\... ; ~\\'
no, : . ;'
.' I' .
,l-
II
.. . .-\.......
.. -.
I
....:......;
.... .......,............. .,
'\......
.,....
e"...
..I
r PROJEctUMH . : :
)
]~L~
J I I
[111 \
J
Ib-
-
-
:::r=
hE I;:
\ w \ : i i
" .,
Jll' .,
" "
~. i . :;-:. .~.::J."""
1- ----4 ~.- - i r..,y 'Y
'If . _ I ,," ..
,I.-
. ..!
.'~'-'
....
I ....~
/' ~__n
...
--
r"
~ 1-"-' u~
~ - -,
I I
\- :'-::-=--. \
\ \
. ," .. ~
~.
,
,
,
.
:;;\ III "11'11\ -'~~ r~
1\\11\ "
'I' 1IITIlIIID.' ,
1 CIIIIIIl i ..
rr- '
1 \!l II I: IU I P-
,!I "-
.,.
" ~
.........' ....
: I
I ,
": ........ ~... ~. '!' I
~ . : '
'~
.. -
.i\
.. \\ \. \....
~ .............
- - - .....\ \I
y\ .." --- -- ------
,.. -, OlU?
,~~~
' \'
, ,
/' \\"
\\
~U1J1I1 'IIi A \C'\ II J.ULJIIIIIII
:3 f:::F:lJ ".-\ r- .cu..""\1 I I
/ ~ \~ - -...; T .
,- "". /'~.::r ~ t:JJ
i ~~ 7T'- tt~ ~ ",,'0 __
II' r\"': I ~'-,l.J,..,:, .t::If-
... --- -..... ~,-:':- ,......-
I
NORTH
SCALE I: I'"~ BOO'
-
-
---
MAIN STREET
PHOTOGRAPHIC MAP LOCATION
Ex.~'1J" e
SHEET NO. I OF I
J;;.... f'y
ATTACHMENT A
COST COMPARISON WORKSHEETS
CONTRACT CONSULTANTS VS. IN-HOUSE STAFF
The following forms are to be used for comparisons of the cost of hiring consultants to the cost
of using in-house staff. Please answer the following questions and complete the attached Cost
Comparison Worksheet. If you have any questions regarding these forms, please contact the
Revenue Manager.
GENERAL:
1. Describe the task(s) to be peiformed.
The scope of work of the contract consists of the following tasks:
Task 1:
Preparation of lOO-scale aerial photographs and 40-scale topographic
mapping with I-foot contours of a 400 feet strip of land (200 feet at each
side of the creek) along the Telegraph Canyon Creek from the existing
culvert at Telegraph Canyon Road to the beginning of the existing
concrete channel (between Third and Fourth Avenue). The total length
of the project is approximately 8,400 feet.
The topographic maps will provide the necessary information to determine
the final horizontal and vertical alignment, select the type and size of the
channel cross-section and prepare the preliminary design plans for the
project including cost estimate and construction phasing. The additional
improvements will be designed to accommodate the additional drainage
flow that will be generated by the ultimate development of the Telegraph
Canyon Basin.
The lOO-scale aerial photographs will be used during design and property
owners/Council meetings.
Task 2:
Preparation of a Record of Survey (ROS) along the Telegraph Canyon
Creek (same project limits as task 1).
The purpose of the ROS is to locate all existing streets right-of-way,
property boundaries, channel easements and rights-of-ways and identify
any boundary anomalies which may exist. The ROS will be recorded and
will provide a solid basis to tie the final channel horizontal alignment and
prepare the legal descriptions of the additional right-of-way necessary to
accommodate the proposed improvements.
/~'51
Page 1
WPC F:\home\engmeer\2000.94
\.\'
Task 3:
Preparation of I DO-scale aerial photographs of Main Street from Industrial
Boulevard to Fourth A venue. The photographs will be used during design
and property owners/Council meetings.
2. What is the expected duration of the project/task (number of weeks, months, etc.)?
5 months.
3. How frequently does the City need to do this project (times per month or year, times per
development, etc.)?
The City rarely engages in this type of work. Aerial mapping is needed only for certain
special projects like the GIS mapping and the I-80S interchange modifications design,
currently being prepared.
4a. Are there any in-house employees who could perform the task? What classification of
employee(s)?
No. Currently, the City does not have the staff nor the equipment to perform this type
of work. This project requires highly specialized equipment (aerial ground control
equipment and aerotriangulation software) and knowledge of aerial survey and
aerotriangulation.
4b. If there are such employees, why shouldn't they be utilizedfor this project?
N/A.
4c. If such employees would not be used due to workload, what work would be displaced if
the task were to be performed in-house?
N/A.
4d. If workload is a factor, could staff of lower classification be hired to handle extra work
so that staff of higher classification could concentrate their time on the project? Explain.
N/A.
5. Would the project take more or less time for in-house stqff versus a consultant (e.g.,
consultant has pre-prepared boiler plate materials, software, etc.)?
It cannot be done in-house.
6. Are there any qualitative reasons to choose either a consultant or in-house staff (e.g.,
special expertise, knowledge of City operations)? Explain.
Yes, the City does not possess the equipment, the expertise or special staff to perform
the services required of the consultant. Also, the need for this type of service is so
WPC F:\home\engineer\2000.94
1,2 "'4> t:J
Page 2
infrequent that in-house expertise cannot be developed and is not cost effective since this
type of work is not routinely required.
CONSULTANT AGREEMENT:
7. Base Contract Cost:
Fixed Fee of $63,138.
8. Applicable rates (including travel, word processing, hourly or daily charges, clerical
support, meeting attendance, sales tax, etc.), estimated units per rate, and resultant costs
(e.g., five trips from LA @ $50/trip = $250).
The base contract cost covers any work necessary to accomplish the job, as outlined in
the scope of work, regardless of the hours required. (Fixed Fee)
9. Method and Terms of Payment.
Single fixed fee with phased payments.
10. Peiformance guarantees (e.g., withholding of payment for unsatisfactory work,
termination of contract, etc.).
Ten percent retention of fees until completion and acceptance of project. $1,000,000 in
errors and omissions insurance.
11. Is consultant licensed to do business in the City?
Yes.
Note: H a draft agreement is available, please attach a copy.
Agreement will be based upon the City's Standard Two-Party Agreement and on the
Scope of Work called for in the RFP (attached).
WPC F:\home\engineer\2000.94
I,;.,,/,/
Page 3
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CONSULTANT COST COMPARISON WORKSHEET
CONSULTANT COST IN-HOUSE COST
Base Contract Cost $63,138.00 Full-Time Equivalent N/A(l)
Employee Hourly Wage
Consultant Hourly Rate N/A Estimated Actual Hours
Estimated Actual Hours N/A Total Base Cost
Additional Rates N/A
(Aggregate Cost)
Total Base Cost $63,138.00
FCR BASED COSTS* FCR BASED COSTS
Contract Division
Monitoring/Support Costs FCR Factor
Subtotal Subtotal
(Base + Support Costs) (Base x FCR Factor)
OTHER OTHER
Supplies, Furniture, and Supplies, Furniture, and
Equipment Equipment
Business License Tax
Other Applicable Tax Other Applicable Tax
TOTAL COST $63,138.00 N/A
see note (1)
(1) Currently, the City does not possess the staff or the equipment to perform this
type work. In order to perform such work in-house, the City will have to engage
additional professional staff with very specialized skill in the area of
photogrametry. The City will also have to purchase equipment such as airplane,
very sophisticated aerial camera, computer equipment, and digitizers. Because the
City seldom engages in this type of work, it is not cost effective to the City to
perform this work in-house.
WPC F:\home\engineer\2000.94
I.;. ./,2.
Page 4
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1.3
Meeting Date 7/12/94
SUBMITTED BY:
I 75/,.2.
Resolution Approving temporary closure on Palomar
Street at the MTDB South Line grade crossing
Director of Public Wor,k~
City Manager~ ~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) has awarded the "South Line Grade
Crossing Improvement Project, LRT-652A" at Palomar Street to Herzog Contracting
Corporation. To complete the necessary work, within the railroad right-of-way, the contractor
has requested approval of 2 temporary weekend road closures on Palomar Street. This project
will provide for smoother railroad crossings by motorists.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the resolution which approves 2
temporary weekend street closures on Palomar Street at the MTDB south line grade crossing
subject to certain conditions.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Herzog Contracting Corporation has submitted a request to the Public Works Department
requesting permission to temporarily close the street/trolley crossing at Palomar Street so that
the trolley crossings can be improved. These crossings are in need of repair to eliminate the
severe jolt experienced by motorists as they cross the railroad tracks and this project will
provide a smoother railroad crossing by all vehicular users. The trolley crossing work consists,
in general, of removing and replacing the at-grade crossings on the South Line at Palomar
Street. Existing asphalt and timber roadbeds, trackwork and trackbed at each crossing will be
removed and replaced with new ties and heavier cross-section rail. A Hi-Rail rubber crossing
system will be placed at the street crossing surface and asphalt will be used to fill in areas
surrounding the rubber crossing. Heavy duty deflector shields will be placed on the ends of
the new crossings. If disturbed during construction, existing sidewalk will be replaced. Work
on this roadway area also needs to be done due to the impending roadway improvements due
to the construction of the Palomar Trolley Shopping Center.
It is being requested that the temporary street closure be from 8:00 p.m. Friday to 6:00 am.
Monday for two weekends starting this August 5 and ending by August 15. This work requires
one weekend per track with two tracks per crossing. The work will only be done during the
weekend to keep traffic detours at a minimum. The trolley will have continuous service
J J"I
Page 2, Item fl
Meeting Date 7/12/94
throughout the construction period, but will be sharing one track through the construction area.
Staff has reviewed the plans for this work and recommends temporary closure subject to
similar conditions with revisions which Council approved on August 4, 1992 for work on F,
H, J and Anita Streets:
I. The closure be limited to those hours as previously approved by the City Council on
August 4, 1992. Each closure will be from 8:00 p.m. Friday through 6:00 a.m.
Monday, a period of 58 consecutive hours.
2. An approved traffic control plan be submitted to the Chula Vista Department of Public
Works at least two weeks prior to the commencement of the closures.
Staff has received the traffic control plans and has tentatively approved them subject
to City Council approval of the roadway closure.
3. All detour signing to be maintained by the contractor throughout the length of time that
the street crossing is closed to through traffic.
4. The contractor is to notify the Chula Vista Star News, San Diego Union Tribune,
CaITrans, and the California Highway Patrol, Chula Vista Police Department, Chula
Vista Fire Department, Chula Vista Transit and the Chula Vista Public Works
Department at least 48 hours in advance of each road closure. In addition, the
contractor shall place an advertisement in the Chula Vista Star News with a map
showing the closures, dates, times and alternate routes of travel in advance of each
closure.
5. The contractor is to work with CaITrans and obtain any necessary permits needed to
allow for the placement of any traffic control detour signing within CalTrans right-of-
way.
6. The contractor will make available to all listed above in number 4, 24-hour emergency
telephone numbers and names of contract personnel.
7. No closure shall be made until the traffic control plan has been approved by the City
and signs are erected at least 48 hours in advance notifying the public of the closure in
accordance with California Vehicle Code Sections 21101 and 21103.
8. If work is completed early, then the roadway will be opened to through traffic as soon
as practically possible.
The construction work will take place within the 58-hour weekend closure period. Staff has
looked at the traffic counts for these crossings and has found that volumes are approximately
10% lower on the weekends than on weekdays and Harborside Elementary School is closed
for the summer recess. Therefore, it is anticipated that having the closures on the August
weekends and providing two alternate routes will pose less of a hardship to area businesses and
/3~"'-
Page 3, Item n
Meeting Date 7/12/94
delivery drivers. Palomar Street just east of Industrial Boulevard IS to be closed for a
maximum of two weekends, one weekend per track.
Staff does not recommend that any portion of the roadway be maintained open to traffic due
to the type of work involved in the area. In order to maintain either one direction of traffic,
or two-way traffic on one-half of the roadway, the work would take twice as long and involve
more cutting and welding of the rails. Vehicular traffic cannot be diverted to share the
opposite side of the roadway with opposing vehicular traffic, since there will be no crossing
gate to protect the motoring traffic from the trolley and the freight train. Also, if the area is
partially left open, pedestrian and bicycle access must also be provided. If partial vehicular
access is maintained, the length of work at this location will be increased from 2 weekends to
4 weekends. Due to the proposed hours of work and the lower volumes of weekend traffic,
the detour route does not appear to represent a major traffic problem to staff. With the on-
going construction at the Palomar Trolley Shopping Center (south side of Palomar Street
between Industrial Blvd. and Broadway), staff will also be coordinating with the developer so
that construction impacts over the weekend will be minimized.
Conclusion
Staff recommends that City Council approve the resolution to temporarily close the Palomar
Street railroad crossing just east of Industrial Boulevard to all traffic for a period not to exceed
two weekends subject to the conditions listed above A similar procedure was approved by
City Council Resolution 16742 on August 4, 1992 for the work on F, H, J and Anita Streets.
Representatives from Herzog Contracting Corporation, Mr. Charles R. Clark, Project Engineer
has informed staff that he and Mr. Frank Storbakken, Project Manager will be in attendance
to answer any questions that the City Council may have regarding this project. The Chamber
of Commerce has been informed of this construction project and Council meeting. The
principal of Harborside Elementary School, Mr. Henry V. Manriquez has also been notified.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
FXR:CY-029
Attachments:
Area Plat / ~
California Vehicle Code Secti and 21103
Letter from Herzog c~~ orporation with Map
Resolution #167~O\.
WPC M:\home\engineer\agenda\1901.94
13-3//3-1
RESOLUTION NO.
/ 7.56 )..
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING TEMPORARY CLOSURE ON
PALOMAR STREET AT THE MTDB SOUTH LINE GRADE
CROSSING
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transit Board (MTDB) has
awarded the "South Line Grade Crossing Improvement Project, LRT-
652A" at Palomar Street to Herzog Contracting Corporation; and
WHEREAS, to complete the necessary work, within the
railroad right-of-way, the contractor has requested approval of two
temporary weekend closures on Palomar Street, which project will
provide for smoother railroad crossings by motorists; and
WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code 521101 authorizes the
city Council to adopt a resolution establishing rules and
regulations for the requested temporary closing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve a temporary closure on
Palomar Street at the MTDB South Line Grade Crossing subject to the
following conditions:
1. The closure be limited to those hours as previously
approved by the City Council on August 4, 1992. Each
closure will be from 8:00 p.m. Friday through 6:00 a.m.
Monday, a period of 58 consecutive hours.
2. An approved traffic control plan be submitted to the
Chula vista Department of Public Works at least two weeks
prior to the commencement of the closures. (Staff has
received the traffic control plans and has tentatively
approved them subject to City Council approval of the
roadway closure.)
3. All detour signing to be maintained by the contractor
throughout the length of time that the street crossing is
closed to through traffic.
4. The contractor is to notify the Chula vista Star News,
San Diego Union Tribune, CalTrans, and the California
Highway Patrol, Chula vista Police Department, Chula
vista Fire Department, Chula vista Transit and the Chula
vista Public Works Department at least 48 hours in
advance of each road closure. In addition, the
contractor shall place an advertisement in the Chula
vista Star News with a map showing the closures, dates,
times and alternate routes of travel in advance of each
closure.
5. The contractor is to work with CalTrans and obtain any
necessary permits needed to allow for the placement of
13'5
any traffic control detour signing within CalTrans right-
of-way.
6. The contractor make available to all listed above in No.
4, 24-hour emergency telephone numbers and names of
contract personnel.
7. No closure shall be made until the traffic control plan
has been approved by the City and signs are erected at
least 48 hours in advance notifying the public of the
closure in accordance with California Vehicle Code
sections 21101 and 21103.
8.
If work is
opened to
possible.
completed early,
through traffic
then the roadway will be
as soon practically
Presented by
t" "=:1)
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaa
city Attorney
c: \RS\MTDB
1:J...t,
--,\...
""0
~'\ \~W3..A- \I'
\\ ~'C:~c::.....- '\\' \ m
-; ~~~ ~~
\ :ro_W__..-'l ...
yx-\ ), \1
, '\"
~~
\~~
.l\ ~ "r\
\Y:\ V ~.
~R
~ ~'~
,~ ~L
.' ,~\j
?\I
. ~:-{..
Subject Location . ..,'1" . \ ~
. r \-\ \. \'~\'\~~~~
~ '0~,~J:\~
I '\ l;bt ~1rr ~ i
T :~.; / ...---..\~.1-~
( .u t C" I' \
, ' ! ' T- ...--,--.. ........ .
" ,: . ,--. :. .' -....
'\ U' ._, ,:...-; \' ') i
; '. \ \ 1
n" ;'; IL 1':\- j
" I' 1\\
).'" ~
.-
---
;j .
~~~~~\
(\&:3~~#~
~~~~~ nu
\~~ IIV'
;::...- .'
\ :?0 ~>~ ~
e::::2 ~ .
.~;~
....;~
~
- ....-..
/-'1
>
~
.
--- ~ "'
Ai ('" ~.,
r--~, \~k3~'
ll:~\\\.\ " Imt . ..
~, '~1, \1 0/
dll ii1~\\ \ v, V ' L ""'\
llJll f!'T : ml IT i "\'
: r PlY w ..L~
H/ _ r4-L
\\]:: :::: ~~
\ I \ I IU:~
~ \1=
rr
~,'
'L'
~. . --i...____
.
n ~__
I ~
.......
I
, : -~
. !
!
,
,
,
,
~ \. \
, '
, \.
] r\,\~
'I..J 1\ )
~~ /1 11
"'\1' ~
:.
~.-~_n_l ~u__
. ,
'. .
. .-....
.; I .
. -- ['
\.~
r-:...
~.._...
,
,
, '
.. _ L .. _ _. - -,-...- -- -:-. .:. . ~:--
:.
::
Ii': J
: : --' ; I
. : ; '.:., 0
I
..,----
v'"
\\
aJL-
1 T
..L J
-
==
~ TT ~
-b!
PLAT
---.-..
~~T~'/~'lj1'L _
TIT L E
JJ-7~~~R~A
.T
, . '. .LlR4WN BY. OM""
------------
the size and nature ot the streets ot Ul~ f,;uy iIlUU. ......H.. ..................... ~... .........
cbaracteri'" - and nature of the city itself, adopt rules and regulations by
ordinanCe esolution on the following matters: . .
(a) Regwating the size of vehicles used on streets under their
..-'-':-in
~~~: .
(bl Regulating the Dumber of vehicles permitted on streets .lInder
their jurisdiction. .
(c) Prohibiting the operation, OIl streets under their jurisdiction, of
designated classes of vehicles.
(d) Establishing noise limits, which are different from those prescribed
by this code, for vehicles operated on streets under their jurisdiction and
prohihiting the operation 01 vehicles which exceed such limits.
(e) Establishing a maximum speed limit lower than that which the
local authority otherwise permitted by this code to establish.
This section shall not apply to vehicles of utilities which are under the
jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Commission while engaged in
maintenance and construction type service work.
Added A.. I" Slab. 1971. FJr<ct.... ....... 7. 1913.
AI'IW!ndecI Ca. .. Stats. 1974. mective Januuy 1. 1975.
.~._. IJM ., HWA-.'"
21101. Local authorities, for those hillhways undcr their jurisdiction,
may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or rcsolution on the
following matters:
(a) Closinll any hillhway to vchicular traffic when. in the opinion of
thc legislativc body having jurisdiction, the hillhway is no longer needed
for vehicular traffic.
(b) De5illDatinll any hillhway a. a throul\h hillhway and requiring that
all vehicles ob5crv.. official traffic control devices before entering or
crossinR the highway or designatinR any intersection as a stop
intenection and requiring an vehicles to stop at one or nwre entrances
to the intersection.
(c) Prohibitinll the use of particular highways by certain vehicles,
except as otherwise provided by the Public Utilities Commission
pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section IOJI) of Chapter 5 ~f
Part I of Division I 01 the Public Utilities Code. No ordinance which 15
adopted pursuant to thi. subdivision alter November 10. 1969, shall apply
to any state hillhway which is included in the National System of
Interstate and Defense Highways, except an ordinance which bas been
approved by the California Tran5pOrtation C.ommission by a Four-fifths
vote.
(d) Closing particular streets during regular school hours for the
purpose of conducting automobile driver training programs in the
secondary schools and colleges 01 this statc. .
(e) Temporarily closing a ""rtion of any street for celebra~
parades, local special events, and other purposes when. in the op.mon
local authorities having jurisdiction, the closing is nece558ry for the safety
and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the street
during the temporary closing.
(I) Prohibiting entry to. or exit from, or both, from any street by
means of island5, curhs, traffic barriers, or other roadway design featuf'CS
to implement the circulation element of a general plan adopted ~~:
to Article 6 (commencinll with Section 653."(0) of Chapter 3 of DivisiC."'zed
01 Title 7 of the Government Code. The rules and rellUlations. autofhorl \ocOI
by this subdivision shall be consistent with the responsibilIty
government to provide For the health and safety of its citizens.
Amended a.. 764. Slab. 1965. _.. J.... 30. 1961\. ond (,;..
Amended Ch. 1365. Slats. 1989. Effecti"~ NO\-embtor 10, 1989. Supenedes Ca. 135 '".&0
.... ..-
.......- A.. 7.. Stab. ,902. _We Soptembe< A. ,_ l>l' ....... of .. ...,.",
Supenodeo A.. 681
"
""
,
~
.., r-......~ .......- ,,,..., .......". !.>uo.. !:..IIa.u",e JIUIUIll)' t. i~.
Amended OL 291. Stats. 1983. FJredive January I. 19M.
_ A..~ ,. - ,,.,.
21101.2. Local authorities may adopt rules and regul lions
ordinance or resolution to provide that if a peace officer as defined -;:;
Chapter 4.5 (comme~cing with Section 830) of TItle 3 -;J Part 2 of the
P~nal Code, dete~lOes that the traffic load on a particular Street or
highway, or a portion thereof, is such that little or no vehicular flow is
occumng and,. additionally, if the peace officer finds that a significant
number 01 vehicles are not promptly moving when an opportunity arises
to do so, then the peace officer may divert vehicles excepting ublie
safety or e,!,ergency vehicles, from that street or highway. or ~rtion
ther~, subject to traffic congestion until such time as reasonably flowing
traffic IS restored.
Added Ch. 710, Stals. 1982. ER'ective September a. ._ by tenaI fA... 1Upncy....
locel A"""H,. n.u..", ., G.IH
21101.6. Notwithstanding Section 21101, local authorities may not
pia"" gates or other selective devices on any street which deny or
restnctlhe access of certalO members of the public to the street, while
permlthnll others unrestricted access to the street
. ~is section is no~ intended to make a chanRe 'in the existinR law but
IS II1tcnded to codIfy the decision of thc Court of Appeal in Ciiy of
Lafa~elle v.. Countr of Contra Costa (91 Cal. App. 3d 749). .
ThIS section .hal becomc operative on January I, 1990.
Rf"IK'alrd and Adckd Cia. NIt, SIals. 19117. Oper..ive J........,. I. .910.
I_I AIIIIHHHy ,. a... -
21102. Local authorities may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance
o~ resoluhon .closlOg ~o. ~ehicular traffic that portion of any street or
hl~h~ay crossmg or ~tvl~mg .any school ground or ~rounds when in the
opinion of the legislative body having jurisdiction such closi" is
necessary for the protection of persons attending such school or sctool
grounds. The closing .to vehicular traffic may be limited to such hours
and d~ys as the leg~sla~lVe ~y may specify. No such ordinance or
resoluhon shall be effectIVe unh~ appropriate signs giving notice thereof
are posted along the street. or hIghway affected, nor in the case of state
hIghways. unhl such ordmance or resolution is approved by the
Department of Transportation.
,",mendtd 0\. MS.Stals. 1974. EKrctive January 1. 1m.
s;pn. ...",-
211OJ. . No ordinance or r<"SOlution enacted under Section 21\01 shall
be effective untIl SIgns gIVing notice of the local traffic laws are posted at
all entrances to the highway or part thereoF affected.
A~nded Ch. 9tf1. ~.ls. 1965. Eff<<tlvr September 17. 196&.
Amended Ch. 78, Stah. 1973. F.1feclive January I, 1914.
Amended 01. 671, St.ts. 1980. Effective January .. 1981.
A,proWII of ".. .~~ ~rum
21104. No ordinance. or resolution proposed to be enacted under
Section 21101 or sulxhVlSlOn (d) of Section 21100 is effective as to any
hIghway not under the exclusive jurisdiction 01 the local authority
enact~ng the same. except that an ordinance or resolution which is
submItted to the Department of Transportation by a local legislative
body 10 ~mplete drart form fo~ approval prior to the enactment thereof
15 effective as to any state h.ghway or part thereof specified in the
wntten approval of the department. No such ordinance or resolution
e~acled under subdivision (c) of Section 21101 which applies to any state
~.ghway mcluded m the national system 01 interstate and deFense
Ighways, shall subsequently be disapproved until such disapproval has
HERZOG COnTRRCnnG !cORP.
CA uC. NO. 383493
2115 I-lANCOCK STReET
SAN DIEGO. CA 92110
'lUEPI-IONE (619) 49?-059?
FAX (619) 49?-O304
W1UJAM E. HERZOG. PRESlOENT
July 7, 1994
T .cUef No: 553-046
City of Chula Visla, Engineering
Traffic Control Dcpart.w.ent
276 4th Avenue
Chulll Vista, California 92010
Attention: Mr. !;nmk Rivera
SUBffiCT: PAT .OMAR ST~CT WEEKEND CLOSURE
RE: LRT-553, CCO NO.7
Dear Sirs.
We noW wish to IC-CI,DSlIUCt thc Palomar SllcCI Trolley CrlJsswg onlhc weekends of August 5-8,
1994, and AugLlSt 12-) 5, 1994. Wc fed that we ClUl complete the prujecl ill one weekend,
however, we would like to ask for both weekends, in case there is some unforeseen delays. We
will be happy to allend the City Couneil meeting to answer any questions that arrise. Please keep
lIS infonned, so thai we can schedule our attendance.
Thank you for your time and consideration. If you have any qlleslilJns please call.
raIIk StorbakkCll
Project ManagCI
cc:
Job Files, UtT-553
Martin HlIll. PBCS/Wilsoll & Co.
/3' ?
~ .. ~ SEE 1329 MAP ,::::2':- COPYRIGlT 1993 7hmtu7J1N-.. .. @
is _- ----I~ - II" ~ y;;r._i li";/ _~;~ l~
~.~ i~:: ~ 10 -o:~ _ J) I ~'I/H3Y,L..y,,_......__,,/L/d~~~~i~A~
O^lBr )" lS~~-l-/- -.... ~
~':. ~J>.'^,"=i"illr //~;::" ~",~,I"'~" ,"".!'I'd 00110~iO'" .i" ..-- ....~~;\:
';;::" . u::~ , \--<-- '(-'-~. '-;/~' -"><~. "I" RNVS" ~ ,<'- \ll""~ .
"'&'1.. "#"~ );: l~ l^V~~l~ RD.. ~ \\; ~S\,
R ~ I I [:l J . if ~ ..... "... I,'l ~ ~ '.7 \. g
"{> ~ I'-... It-\'dj L~- - ~ / ,~~" ~ S \ I 'ft\ n- ~
~ 'IT. "'.. rR 'rf' /l>~ J-' . ~"I'\~ ~ ""''), .< ""." ~ '" ~
<<:l,r - 310- d ~.. ~ '!.
~". l~~-r;'tl" I~ _ ~1"" Ov~' ~,'Il1;,"''- ~'''' ",,:-v""',, "
! ;::;~... 1"-=1:::! VIJMl !;j;! _~~l ~ta' to'" ~~; f#! '1l\ ~ \v. v"~ ..~
8 ~ ~ ~ ____-+-- -. 1 sa '" '5' . ~ '~ \". ~ ~ ~ fo1 ~ ",\."J
lS~3 ~~grri~ I ~ O^lll C3H1 ~ ij,,~~s, ." ~.. "~u" 0, ~~~ 1~~ "'~,);\,~
/q ,<~;:':,,-~~ I ~ > ~~ -..-- ~"><L'~' ~fi'" ~ ~ ',... ':"< ,'< ~~~
.x "' '"'~.~, Ii. ,;k~ q" ""~- '" .~~..),. "" ~"E'< ~~ ___
/j\"'::;" firij~ \ ~,,~~ '. \"'\ ~~if;;" ~"..", il ':< ~"':. ff
~....-X " "" I~' ~ . \.\ " ~..x- ~ ";~ "'...~ ~
,:1~'",~1'~! ~ ~ V>)> ~\ 7~ t ~ 1\ /&d,,~~.\..~: \ \~1~\~ \ l),~ :.~.~~~\ ~ ~~'fii<
.". ~~~ , Vi..... I-- j;-h f- _".\~a ~ "'~ /9,': .. V
.,!J~ ~ ~ ~)!i ~~';; Z ~ '" ~Jf .IiI'l~~",1':. - ~,. '" (jlI..< ~\
","'" .:~ . [j'q~, '" H,I. '" f",.,!,:\~ ~" .4'.< :....u
~ a · < < ~~,~ I -w- ~ .~~ ~ -rP ~~. a \'1' '*
" . ;;pc.~ ' 1Ul~ ~ ~ l=~"".. 0. ~' 1).'. ~'<"":,,::J
." ~ ~ ~ < i /~~Dv~TiII...~", ~~.... . . ;,:;"",0.. ~,..,\.. k;;>>..} ,'" ~'\. ,'"
, \~r.1I1 , .; iM-i !!!!!),/"lOIV . '~. ':>\'1>.' ,~:: w~'\ 0+"
. "' ""'" (j) ~ '5 ~I '1::) -2\\ . ~~ . ~...t;: ,
OM. II ~ ~ 0 ~) I, 8 8 "' ,.-""';, . C~ . f;;""~ . ~\,
~,:~HJlIO ~ i ~~. "'~ : ~ .....a. 1"( "'J. ' :...?::j\) "':ll T=.~ ;. '"
I--~----~I?>' I j,./ M' = ::::r\', 1.1">.<..- '<",,' . ~~
"~. ~L~~ / ~ ," I. f'" 130 ~ [\'\..i.-- -- \.c.... _ ~ .< ,t""~ ~\~.
- :'4 ,-..-
~ :-~.~'Y:~'l'~iA .""'t ",\.>/ "!~'" '"'''' ~"i>l "~~.i. !I';" '$~.,.".,~: ~\t.\i\
1'1, ~~~ __.+". ~~~. T.>-f\~.... ::\~,r. "-o~':\':<Il~o\.,\'l.<"" \,-".
"",,0 -. ~ )1/ 1- """,. ....,,, -C-:,~!l\i'~'_ ;;''df~\~ -r ' ..'.~
W lJO ~JnW/llf\lO .., { ~ ...... ;-~ ~ \ \'A':-'~"'~~.~}\.0Rllm' ~ ~j,.,
:.g ~ i"m"'''''' Ii t::", 'J . ~,. \~i' ~~"'t': "1:-"'1 ~D';'~"0"'";;: lK' }-'\",\,Q. ~
,,~'L= .': 11/ 1J "'.I~~;; . E~ :~I \ # ~. .,... \'\'\~.. ~~~N'"r,"-' .~~ i
"U !Z 1 AY : I/F~ ooz-]i '" 21:-o[ C\,,;,:, ... .')~')H~/Q.'\:;''(~-~~ ~-.
B "" "."'~" " L,. -~ is "'" . ',1'" "::;...... "C,' '@ t;'>t' .....l'. . ",\,:\\~ ,\~~ ;;0 >,.;;i'\ "~
.;~ "^/o,o~ ; \ ",~:' / _ -J ~ ~~ (~:"dSY, :11~ \ e'~.~_'~~'$~~ :-\-~~ :~\ ~ ~~~ ~\:~ ~'
lo o~~.. Ii~ ql~~ "'0.., '~~'. , ~",,,"'''',,,,l\\\ ~.\ '''''"so'
~ ~'i~ a:::: [v II: is N1 It<=--~1J1;c u_'''lj' ~1 iI' ~ ~\) 1-,\,,'4 ~
. . r"" \~ V!NOS:::: ~f5 ~. ;:I~ ~lo i. ~ ,,'4 ota w; It': ~~.
" -,,,Ci,m""" " "(',Vj89, ~ ~ ,~1 <iiii^'~;.'i<''ii'^ "'..1 ,iii', ;<r""~
AV SOIlI --. 5i ~ f\ fl\~ ,,'4:'~~ r I,~ -... "". '1 ~
~^V IMlI'.q^.~ r fl_ ~+ ~ 0..-' ~:;. Iii ~ ~ A'I ~ :"~ C), "<:~-. ....t ~~~~~ \~.,. ~ ,,," ~
I:---..,""",,~":C: ! !l-~" '''' I~.J; ~',~' t;;~~ \~' -' d.,<<t5"'......~~h~~
~,J-<it '''-'!,. 'l. _v ~ .'>: Dv. :i^, ~r ..,,_,.,' - "'~~
,~.~,~ i_"$jt:T~; WY r~ "ll\~":I':: Rif<;l',3 bl~.~I' <~ "" Yl1..jj;;\ ~ ~,""\ ~:~'-''''''.< '" ~.?>" '~
-",1$. ~ S 14 OlIill' $,/ ~~'(tI. 1~...\'l.... .....__ "....
"'1 ~~ % -, ~t: . '1, OJ ,,'I ~. t ~~ \ I"~ ""'~ ... !:l
'l'P'I!:1 ~. ~\: ~ i~~7~ ~Q~ ~ : 1<; ~:IlI "''1.,.11 "":" j~.~/.." ..~<;t ~ \ '000
INLAN7D'; ~~ ~t'__F~~~ ;" ~d~ Oll~~' ~~~O:' ^';,~!;:'''~' "~\ ;'-h
\ \ ~i'};'m;;;jQ; p~~~~, ,'<. !\"....il.-li:?i
I II ..'. --i" ~- ".L.\"o 11 "i "'7/0'
~---- ---,- ----;----r--- /~~~ .....' ", "':;''j .~)i ""', ~ (~~ .. ""'.':\""" .. ~.. I ~
, \~---"-\\t:; I "I ~ . ~I '~. Fl' ~\.,:<\ i...'';'\ . . '" ~'
~ \ ,r (-- -1' III I . ,.'4 ",~' " :i i' ::":"'~"\. I!!I. ~
\ ~ . I 'l fi, ".....! ;.., ~h~" : :::" ... , :>,."
.... \ I.... \ F "'''13 I/V.ONWll"" II"'.. ,," "''''''~;:,.i. \ :" ...if '['...L. :...::....~l.J ~" ,t,
\.... ~ rr1' '- ,',," ,,-1 " ~ .,' , \ ',' .... ',' ..... .' ...,
! . '\_/C, r;!:'"';H'" . . ~";I . n \> '; j"...; ".c! e .'1''' i
/., I \. u.... 14 II, .~ \ 1'- :,..........: ~ s ;I.
!C5 \ \ q:!l:!l' :;,_, :!l'" cr \ \~ j............. :.....,.~:.;. ' !l...._ i -;J.
/ \ I " '" 'g"': ~i. .:; '. "''''''0 ' ~ \ ~\ \::.!.::;.\ ~.,. ~ ~~!I'/mi';I(!" (f
~--- J~,---\ \ c "o:l,Jif(lI III . ~ ~ . "'''''''~ir \ ::' \ ... ". .. g ~~ SI~ t,>
_.L._,___ ~[:!) CO' I ~~~~i~ I \) j'\ \\.....& ~ ~ ~.., IpAS .
"-- ------ I' /41 I 1! t ~~a<!!li!!<!!l j ~ /"'" i'" ". <::: ~ ...... I
- .~_~ ]\ 1../ _-...J.. !:l!a!:lV; 1'.3' _... ... E!f'S~!i I "~{. ...... ........ i!...,.:" ,.., 'Ot. 1---1
~~ "'--.., I "'-1 ~ ., ..,. .. g!:l!:lQQQ I. ..i'":,, .... ......'...... ",,~":.,.'''~: . ': .. W
. . ,.. /~~';~11'/.;; /"~ ,~~;, . , . .~?'.~:5
I I I I ,ru,-u=--- =
~
1'1
~
W
~
o
.~
RESOLUTION NO. 16742
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING TEMPORARY CLOSURES AT VARIOUS STREETS
CROSSINGS FOR THE MTDB SOUTH LINE GRADE CROSSING
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) has awarded the
"South Line Grade Crossing Improvement Project, LRT-299", which will be affecting
the San Diego Tr,oJley railroad crossings at the intersections of: "F" Street,
"H" Street, "J" Street and Anita Street; and, ' ',', '
, \
WHEREAS, to complete the necessary work within the railroad right-of-way,
the contractor, National Projects, Inc., has requested approval of temporary
weekend road closures at these four locations; and,
WHEREAS, thi s project wi 11 provi de for smoother rail road crossings by
motorists.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby approve temporary closures at the intersections of "F" Street,
"H" Street, "J" Street and Anita Street and the San Diego Trolley railroad
crossings subject to the following conditions:
I, The closure be limited to those hours as stated in their letter of
June 18, 1992. Each closure will be from 8:00 p.m. Friday through
6:00 a.m. Monday, a period of 58 consecutive hours.
2. An approved traffic control plan be submitted to the Chula Vista
Department of Public Works at least two weeks prior to the
commencement of the closure for each location.
3. All detour signing to be maintained by the contractor throughout the
length of time that street crossing is closed to through traffic.
4. The contractor is to notify the Chula Vista Star News, San Diego
Union Tribune, CalTrans, the California Highway Patrol, Chula Vista
Police Department, Chula Vista Fire Department, Chula Vista Transit
and the Chula Vista Public Works Department at least one week in
advance of each road closure.
5. The contractor is to work with CalTrans and obtain any necessary
permits needed to allow for the placement of any traffic control
detour signing with CalTrans right-of-way.
6. The contractor will make available to all listed above in number 4,
24-hour emergency telephone numbers and names of contact personnel.
7. No closure shall be made until the traffic' control plan has been
/3"11
Resolution No. 16742
Page 2
approved by the City and signs are erected at least one week in
advance notifyi ng the pub 1 i c of the closure in accordance wi th
California Vehicle Code Sections 21101 and 21103.
8. If work is completed early. then the roadway will be opened to
through traffic as soon as practically possible.
!
Jo n P. Lippitt
o rector of Public Works
A
Presented by
Bruce M. Boogaard
Ci ty Attorney
J3--/;J-
Resolution No. 16742
Page 3
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Ci ty Council of the Ci ty of Chul a
Vista, California, this 4th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
YES: Councilmembers: Grasser Horton, Malcolm, Moore,
Rindone, Nader
NOES: Counei 1 members: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
fi/l4~/
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
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. 16742 was duly passed, approved,
and adopted by the City Council held on the 4th day of August, 1992.
Executed this 4th day of August, 1992.
/3'13
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item L
Meeting Date 7/12/94
Resolution n 5Q3 Authorizing the Mayor to sign the owner's
certificate on behalf of the City consenting to the filing of Tentative Map
94-02
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works
Director of Parks & Rec
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ ~ ~
Sunland Communities, a guest builder for McMillin Development, is processing a tentative map
for a residential development at the southeast corner of Rancho del Rey Parkway and Rancho
del Rey Boulevard in Rancho del Rey. As part of the map, a land swap is proposed between
McMillin properties and open space lots owned by the City. Since these lots are shown on the
tentative map, the ownership certificate on the map must be signed by the City as owner
consenting to the filing of the map.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the
owner's certificate on behalf of the City consenting to the filing of Tentative Map 94-02.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
Sunland Communities, as a guest builder for McMillin Development, is in the process of re-
subdividing Lot 119 of Rancho del Rey Phase 6 Unit No.2 (Map 12504), located at the
southeast corner of Rancho del Rey Parkway and Rancho del Rey Boulevard (see attached
Exhibit "A"). As part of the proposed development, McMillin proposes to grant to the City land
within Lot 119 in exchange for a portion of Open Space Lot B.
Section III of the Subdivision Manual requires owners' signatures on all tentative maps
consenting to the filing of the map. The action before Council will authorize the Mayor to sign
the ownership certificate on the tentative map for CVT 94-02 on behalf of the City as owner of
Open Space Lot B. This action will not approve the tentative maps but will acknowledge that
City property is included in the proposal. The signature on the ownership certificate of the map
does not indicate approval of the map, nor does it change the City's ability to make changes or
add conditions in the future. The map filing is still subject to all the discretionary hearings and
actions required by the tentative map approval process.
The land swap proposal involves the City granting 0.162 acres of open space to the developer
If-I
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date: 7/12/94
and the developer granting 0.704 acres to the City for open space or other purposes. The swap
is requested by McMillin and Sunland Communities to provide better lot configuration for the
proposed residential development.
Impact of this land swap will be analyzed prior to the tentative maps being considered by the
Planning Commission and the City Council. Council and Staff will be able to approve,
conditionally approve, or deny this land swap with consideration of the tentative map. The City
would also be required to sign the final map as an owner of property included in this
development prior to Council approval of the final map. Staff will request that Council
authorize the Mayor to sign the map on the City's behalf at the time the final map is presented
to Council for approval.
The property owners within the affected open space maintenance district will be notified of the
proposed land swap and be invited to provide input during the public hearings considering the
tentative map. If the development is approved, the tentative map conditions will require the
developer to revise the open space district maps to reflect the proposed swap.
A plat is available for Council viewing.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. Sunland Communities is paying all processing fees. If the land
swap is ultimately approved there will be a minor increase in open space area resulting in a
negligible increase in maintenance costs.
Attachments: Plat of proposed property exchange
File: EY-390
EAF:lmc
(m:\home\engiueer\agenda\sunland.lmc)
1~~2
~Xl1lJH 1 A
CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 88-01, MAP NO. 12504
RANCHO DEL REY PHASE 6 UNIT 2 LOT 119 AND LOT B
POR r/4 see. 70
RANCHO or lA "-'4CION
(/,lAP NO lU
!
LOT 119
,-,o'r >>
r
LEGEND
~ / / / A PORTION TO BE
GRANTED TO CITY
TOTAL AREA: 0.704 ACRES
IV".."h1 PORTION TO BE
GRANTED TO DEVELOPER
TOTAL AREA: 0.162 ACRES
VICINITY !.lAP
-,.""'"
FILE NO. EY-390
DWN BY: LMC
DATE: 6/27/94
SUNLAND IN RANCHO DEL REY
LOT 119 MAP 12504
1t.f~3
'I
RESOLUTION NO. /'1...5&3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE
OWNER'S CERTIFICATE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
CONSENTING TO THE FILING OF TENTATIVE MAP 94-
02
WHEREAS, Sunland Communities, a guest builder for
McMillin Development, is processing a tentative map for a
residential development at the southeast corner of Rancho del Rey
Parkway and Rancho del Rey Boulevard in Rancho del Rey; and
WHEREAS, as part of the map, a land swap is proposed
between McMillin properties and open space lots owned by the City;
and
WHEREAS, since these lots are shown on the tentative map,
the ownership legend on the map is required to be signed by the
City as owner.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City
of the City of Chula vista does hereby authorize the Mayor
the owner's certificate on behalf of the City consenti
filing of Tentative Map 94-02.
C:\rs\tenmap94.2
Council
to sign
to the
Presented by
:v
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
N.~~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1..5'
Meeting Date 7/12/94
ITEM TITLE: Report Regarding Implementation of Off-site Mitigation Measures for
Impacts to the California Gnatcatcher as a Result of Rancho Del Rey SPA
III
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning ~I
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~ 'cJ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No_XJ
McMillin Communities is currently proceeding with the preparation of final maps, improvement
plans, etc. for Rancho Del Rey SPA III, which was approved by the City Council on
January 15, 1991. As a part of the development process, the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP) for Rancho Del Rey SPA III is being implemented. Numerous
mitigation measures regarding the loss of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) and its impact to the
California Gnatcatcher were included in the Final EIR for the project and the MMRP.
McMillin Communities is in the process of acquiring off-site mitigation land in O'Neal Canyon
to comply with the mitigation measures in the FEIR and MMRP. McMillin Communities has
requested a letter from City stating that the City concurs that O'Neal Canyon is acceptable off-
site mitigation land for this project.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize staff to send a letter to McMillin Communities concurring
that O'Neal Canyon is acceptable off-site mitigation land for this project.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
Background
The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for Rancho Del Rey SPA III was certified by
the City Council on January 15, 1991, at which time the project was also approved. The FEIR
for Rancho Del Rey SPA III identified significant biological impacts including impacts to Coastal
Sage Scrub (CSS) and California Gnatcatchers. The FEIR included mitigation measures that
allowed the impacts to the CSS to be mitigated off-site if acceptable land could be found.
On January 2, 1992 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USF&WS) issued a letter to McMillin
Communities that constituted a "pre-listing agreement" between the Service and McMillin. The
agreement anticipated the listing of the gnatcatcher which in fact did occur on March 21, 1993.
The January 2, 1992 letter agreed upon mitigation that consisted of four options including three
1..5"/
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 7/12/94
/5
alternatives for off-site mitigation and one alternative for on-site mitigation. These options were
contained in the Final EIR.
The four agreed-to mitigation options are:
1. On-site mitigation by preserving 70 acres of CSS within the specialty housing area for
a total of 148 acres of open space;
2. Off-site mitigation through the purchase of preservation of at least 187 acres of CSS
which supports at least 17 pairs of California Gnatcatchers;
3. Off-site mitigation through the purchase and preservation of at least 256 acres of CSS
which supports at least 10 pairs of California Gnatcatchers; OR
4. Off-site mitigation through the purchase and preservation of at least 256 acres of CSS
habitats which may support less than 10 pairs of California Gnatcatchers but which meets
or exceeds the conservation goals of options 1, 2 and 3 and meets 5 specific criteria for
acceptability (see Attachment 1, page 2, paragraph 4).
On June 12, 1991, the City Council adopted an Amended Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) for Rancho Del Rey SPA III. The Amended MMRP recognized that the
mitigation for biological impacts had been further refined based on the "Pre-Listing Agreement"
and that the language from USF&WS would be included in the MMRP.
Current Status
Staff has have been advised that McMillin Communities wishes to exercise option 4 of the pre-
listing agreement which in summary requires the acquisition and preservation of an off-site area
of coastal sage scrub habitat. The site must make a significant contribution to a regional open
space design benefitting the gnatcatcher, it must provide multiple species conservation benefits,
it must have the potential for gnatcatcher habitat restoration and enhancement through
management actions and the site must provide a critical ecological function for adjacent areas
of gnatcatcher habitat. In addition, a management plan shall be prepared and implemented for
both remaining open space on SPA III and the off-site mitigation location which shall be
approved by the City and the USF&WS.
McMillin Communities proposes to transfer and deed mitigation land to the "Nature
Conservancy", a regional habitat management organization that currently manages mitigation
property in O'Neal Canyon. Approximately 400 acres in O'Neal Canyon would be transferred
to meet the off-site mitigation requirements for Rancho Del Rey SPA III. The only
responsibility the City would have regarding the long-term preservation of this mitigation site
would be the review of the management plan. There would be no longer-term financial
If',).
/
Page 3, Item / j
Meeting Date 7/12/94
commitment. As stated in the April 25, 1994 joint letter from USF&WS and CFG (see
Attachment 1), the O'Neal Canyon site (see Attachment 2) meets the five criteria summarized
above and detailed in the joint letter. The USF&WS and the CFG have determined that the
acquisition and management of the approximately 400 acre subject site would fulfill the off-site
acquisition needs for the Rancho Del Rey SPA III.
Planning Department staff, after independent review of the requirements for mitigation and the
proposal from McMillin, concurs with the USF&WS and CFG that the transfer of O'Neal
Canyon by McMillin to the "Nature Conservancy" would fulfill the off-site acquisition
requirements. McMillin Communities will still need to submit a management plan for O'Neal
Canyon to USF&WS, CFG and the City of Chula Vista for approval.
FISCAL IMPACT: All staff time to implement this proposal would be reimbursed by McMillin
through the full cost recovery provision of the mitigation monitoring program.
Attachments
1. Joint Letter from USF&WS and CFG
2. Map of location of O'Neal Canyon
(f: \home\planning\oneal. rpt)
15'3/;5-+
~-7~N
.. ,.,-
'-'.'
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
2730 Loker Avenue West
Carlsbad, CA 92008
(619) 431-9440
FAX: (619) 431-9618
"
CA nept. of Fish & Game
1416 Ninth Street
PO Box 944209
Sacramento CA 94244-2090
(916) 653-7667
FAX: (916) 653.1856
April 25, 1994
Craig Fukiyama
McMillin Communities
2727 Hoover Avenue
National City, California 91950
Re: Rancho Del Rey Spa-3, Chula Vista, California
Dear Mr. Fukiyama:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and California Department of Fish
and Game (CDFG) have reviewed your proposal to mitigate for impacts to the
federally threatened California gnatcatcher (PolioDtila californica
californica; gnatcatcher) which are expected .to result from development of
Rancho del Rey Spa-3. We provide the following determination on the adequacy
of this proposed mitigation. This letter is based on information provided in:
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, Rancho del Rey SPA III,
November 1990; a letter to you from the Service dated January 2, 1992; a
letter from Barry Jones dated February 11, 1994; and a memo from Barry Jones
dated March 30, 1994.
Pro1ect Back~round
The proposed Rancho del Rey project involves development of residential units,
a school, and community facilities on a 403-acre parcel supporting 374 acres
of gnatcatcher-occupied coastal sage scrub. The site also supports coastal
cactus wren (CamDvlorhvnchus brunneicaDillus couesi), orange-throated whiptail
(CnemidoDhorus hvnerthvrus), San Diego barrel cactus (Ferocactus viridescens)
and snake cholla (ODuntia Darrvi var. sernentina), all of which are federal .
candidates for listing as threatened or endangered or State Species of Special
Concern. The habitat on-site is valuable due to its biodiversity and the high
density of gnatcatchers it supports. Gnatcatchers occurring coastally are
believed to occur in greater densities than those further inland (Mock 1993),
and very little coastal sage scrub remains in San Diego County that is as near
the coast as the Rancho del Rey site.
Approximately 256 out of 374 acres of coastal sage scrub on Rancho del Rey
Spa-3 would be directly removed by the proposed development. The resulting
reduction in habitat patch size and other indirect impacts of development such
as disturbance from humans and pets are expected to further reduce the
viability of the remaining habitat, thus the project is expected to impact the
entire 374 acres of sage scrub on-site. Approximately 17 pairs of
gnatcatchers are expected to be adversely affected by the project.
"
,.
/~f'
ATTACHMENT 1
Mr. Fukiyama
2
Mlt12ation Reauirements
After a series of discussions between McMillin, their consultant, the Service
and the City of Chula Vista in 1991 and 1992, an informal agreement was made
between the involved parties to implement one of four options as mitigation
for impacts to the gnatcatcher. The 1992 letter from the Service outlined
these mitigation options:
1. "that the developer acquire and preserve an off-site area of
costal sage scrub habitat encompassing at least 187 acres
which supports at least 17 pairs of California gnatcatcher;
or"
2. "acquire and preserve an off-site area of coastal sage scrub
habitat encompassing at least 256 acres which supports 10
pairs of California gnatcatchers; or"
3. "if an off-site mitigation area cannot be found, the project
proponent shall preserve the 70 acres of coastal sage scrub
habitat (of the 86 total acres) of the specialty housing
area on-site in addition to the 117 acres of coastal sage
scrub habitat proposed for open space (of the 148 total
acres of open space) as described in the Rancho Del Rey SPA
III EIR; or"
4. "acquire and preserve an off-site area of coastal sage scrub
habitat acknowledged by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
and the City of Chula Vista to equal or exceed the
conservation goals" of options 1, 2, and 3 above.
Specifically, "Acquire and preserve an off-site area or
areas of coastal sage scrub habitat which may have fewer
than 10 pair of currently resident California gnatcatchers,
but which meets or exceeds the conservation value of the
options listed above. The area or areas shall contain not
less than 256 acres of natural habitat but may contain more
acreage depending upon the site specific evaluation of
habitat values. Implementation of this option requires that
the off-site preservation location and plan be approved by
both the City of Chula Vista and the USFWS. The criteria
for acceptability of this option includes: 1) the site makes
a significant contribution to a regional natural open space
design benefitting the California gnatcatcher; 2) the site
provides multiple species conservation benefits; 3) the site
has the potential for California gnatcatcher habitat
restoration and enhancement through management actions; 4)
the site provides a critical ecological function for
adjacent areas of California gnatcatcher habitat (e.g.
corridor, dispersal area, buffer, etc.); and 5) an active
California gnatcatcher management plan shall be prepared and
implemented for both remaining open space on SPA III and the
off-site mitigation location(s). This plan shall be
approved by the City and the USFWS."
IY~
,
\:-
Mr. Fukiyama
3
It is our understanding that McMillin intends to use the fourth option to
fulfill the project's mitigation needs.
Several noteworthy events have occurred subsequent to the 1992 agreement: 1)
The State of California, under the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act
of 1991 (NCCP), instigated a program to conserve southern California's coastal
sage scrub and populations of its native animal and plant species in areas
large enough to ensure their long-term viability; 2) As anticipated at the
time of the Rancho del Rey agreement, the gnatcatcher was listed as federally
threatened in March of 1993; 3) In recognition and support of the NCCP
program, the Service published a special rule for the California gnatcatcher
under section 4(d) of the Endangered Species Act in December, 1993 (CFR
58:236). The special rule specifies conditions under which take of
gnatcatchers would not be in violation of section 9.
Participation in the NCCP program involves generation of long-term
conservation plans which would be developed by local governments under
guidelines provided through NCCP, and subject to approval by CDFG and the
Service. Since the City of Chula Vista is enrolled in the NCCP program, all
gnatcatcher impacts within the City's jurisdiction should be analyzed in terms
of consistency with the long-term conservation program being generated for the
coastal sage scrub ecosystem.
The Clean Water Program's Multi-Species Conservation Plan (MSCP), intended to
be an NCCP subregional plan, has involved generation of habitat evaluation
maps which are helpful in determining whether projects are likely to be
consistent with long-term conservation planning. These evaluations indicate
that the Rancho del Rey site consists of "high" and "moderate" quality habitat
under both the multiple habitat evaluation model and the California
gnatcatcher habitat evaluation model. The site was not mapped as having "very
high" quality habitat because it is relatively isolated from other habitat.
Although the site falls entirely within the MSCP's "preferred biological"
alternative preserve design, it lies outside of the "multiple habitat",
"coastal sage scrub", and "public landa" alternatives. NCCP data, independent
of MSCP, also indicate that the Rancho del Rey site has high or intermediate
conservation potential but may be relatively unsuitable for long-term
conservation due to its somewhat isolated nature (pers. comm., Pete Stine,
USFWS). Based on these evaluations, the Service and CDFG deem off-site
mitigation to be acceptable for this project.
A joint letter written by the Service and CDFG dated December 30, 1993,
clarifies the NCCP interim process for coastal sage scrub habitat loss. The
letter states that projects proposed in high and intermediate value habitats
are to be mitigated at a ratio of greater than 1: 1. While the Service and
CDFG must adhere to the NCCP process, the Service intenda to make a good faith
effort at honoring the informal pre-listing agreement made in 1992.
/y?
Kr. Fukiyama
4
Pronosed Miti2ation
To mitigate for project-related gnatcatcher impacts, KcMillin proposes to
acquire, in fee, a 358.6-acre parcel in O'Neal Canyon (see attached map). The
proposed site supports 257.86 acres of coastal sage scrub with approximately
five gnatcatcher pairs. Also on the site are 73 acres of chaparral, 17.3
acres of tecate cypress forest, 10.1 acres of disturbed land and 0.3 acres of
developed land. Several species which have been observed on the site are
federal candidates for listing as threatened or endangered or State Species of
Special Concern: Bell's sage sparrow (Amohisuiza belli belli), rufous-crowned
sparrow (Aimouhila ruficeus), tecate cypress (Cuuressus forbesii), San Diego
goldenstars (Muilla clevelandii), coast barrel cactus (Ferocactus
viridescens), and Otay manzanita (Arctostauhvlos otavensis). A seasonal
stream runs through the canyon from Otay Mountain to Otay River.
The proposed mitigation site has high long term conservation value in the
context of the subregional NCCP. The parcel links land owned by the Bureau of
Land Management, to the southeast, with open space on Otay Ranch, to the
northwest. The MSCP habitat evaluation model ranks the site as having very
high and high quality habitat, and this site is included in all four MSCP
preserve alternatives.
Adeauacv of Prooosed Miti2ation
The habitat to be acquired for mitigation is located considerably further
inland, has a lower density of gnatcatchers, and has a discernably different
assemblage of plants and animals than the Rancho del Rey SPA-3 site. However,
the 358.6-acre site meets the fourth option's requirement of acquiring at
least 256 acres of habitat, and the site supports good quality habitat for
multiple species in a regionally significant location. The Service and CDFG
are thus willing to accept the site as mitigation under the fourth option.
This would represent approximately a 1:1 mitigation ratio for direct impacts
to coastal sage scrub plus an additional 90.3 acres of chaparral and tecate
cypress forest. The proposed mitigation would thus be consistent with the
conditions of our January 2, 1992 letter as well as minimally meeting the NCCP
interim habitat loss requirement of a mitigation ratio greater than 1:1 for
intermediate and high quality habitat.
The fifth criterion under option number four of the 1992 mitigation agreement
calls for preparation and implementation of a California gnatcatcher
management plan for the mitigation lands. This plan is yet to be developed,
and is subject to approval by the Service and the City of Chula Vista.
In conclusion, CDFG and the Service concur that acquisition and management of
the 358.6-acre subject site would fulfill the off-site acquisition needs for
the Rancho del Rey SPA 3 development, given that the site proposed for
development does not appear to be a key component of a long-term conservation
strategy. We expect to be meeting with you and the City in the near future to
discuss the appropriate permitting or exemption process to pursue for this
project.
I'yr
Mr. Fukiyama
5
If you have any questions or comments, please contact Ellen Berryman of the
Service's Carlsbad Office at (619) 431-9440 or Dave Lawhead of CDFG's San
Diego office at (619) 688-0116.
Sincerely,
<~~ 1f
Larry Eng, PhD.
NCCP Program Manager
Department of Fish and Game
Sacramento, California
c. ~bz~~
Gail C. Kobetich, Supervisor
Carlsbad Field Office
u.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Carlsbad, California
/~7
~
-,
~
-{
v"""'="''''''''''''''~'''-
- /,,:'00
,
;
",
0<
/~~~:;:!~.'
'~/::::- ; rp~~'~;
~ ~ .~~/; ~.~
" (
~r,_ \':1,,~~~.o
3' _' '1:':'~1__~-;---c
.~ oOO~O," .Ira ~
. ,
,
o
~",=,,"':;''e~-
_~?S
~p
~>
M
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
~ APPLICANT: McMILLIN PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
COMMUNITIES RDR SPA m
ADDRESS: O'NEAL CANYON Mitigation Monitoring Program
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: MMP-91-04, DQ-069, FJ-004
NORTH NONE VARIOUS
/f'ilt'
ATTACHMENT 2
;r ~
y;1::;~';, .i.. ,/.:7
COUNCIL INFORMATION MEMO
July 11, 1994
FROM:
Th< Roo"""" M,yo, "'" City ~," f
John Goss, City Manager~ ~~~/
Ken Lee, Acting Director of Planning t1/'
TO:
VIA:
SUBJECT:
Correction in Council Agenda Statement for Rancho del Rey SPA m Off-Site
Mitigation
This agenda statement notes that McMillin is transferring the proposed mitigation property to
the "Nature Conservancy." This is not correct; the property is to be transferred to the
"Environmental Trust."
/ ~C; ~ n
Item
Meeting Date
/"
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
7/12/94
SUBMITTED BY:
PUBLIC HEARING Consideration of Rate Increase for
Collection and Disposal of Refuse
RESOLUTION 174~pprOVing Rate Schedules for
Collection and Disposal of Refuse Effective 7/1/94
Deputy city Manager Krempl ~ r- <1:L..
Principal Ma~agem1\t. Assistant snyderua
City Manage~ ()~\ (4/sths Vote: Yes_ NO..JL)
TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
The County of San Diego and the newly-formed Solid Waste Authority
have recently approved an increase in landfill tip fees from $43
per ton to $55 per ton effective 7/1/94. Accordingly, and
consistent with Section 8.23.090 of the Chula vista Municipal Code,
Laidlaw has requested a rate increase in the landfill component of
the current rate schedules. The proposed rate schedules do not
include any changes in the operational costs due to the CPI
increase, the franchise fee component or the curbside recycling
charge.
The adjustment for the 28 percent increase in landfill tip fees has
the effect of increasing the single-family residential rate from
the current cost of $14.43 per month to $16.17 per month, an
overall increase of 12 percent.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution approving the rate schedules
to be effective 7/1/94.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Rate Structure
For background, Council approved a methodology in August 1991 for
the calculation of refuse collection and disposal rates. With that
change, the rate is made up of several components:
o Landfill disposal fee
Paid to landfill operator for disposal; amount set by
operator.
o Franchise fee
Remitted to the City to offset public costs of
maintaining streets, etc.; amount set by city Council.
o Other costs
Laidlaw's cost of service, capital investments, etc.
It"'/
Page 2, Item J (,
Meeting Date 7/12/94
The Waste Management Franchise in the Municipal Code allows a pass
through of landfill disposal fees as long as the proportion of
change requested in that component does not exceed the proportion
of change in tip fees at the landfill. Tip fees were last
increased by the County effective 7/1/93 when the rate was set at
$43 per ton. Laidlaw's last increase request was based only on a
pass through of that tip fee increase and was approved by Council
at the 7/27/93 meeting as a rate change retroactive to 7/1/93.
The landfill component is the only part of the rate which is
addressed by this request and report. The franchise fee and "other
costs" components will remain unchanged at this time if the
recommended action is approved.
Attachment A presents the proposed residential and commercial rate
schedules reflecting the increase in the landfill rate component to
be effective 7/1/94. Examples of the impact on the rates are as
follows:
Tvpe of Service
Current Rates
as of 6/30/94
$14.43*
Proposed Rates
effective 7/1/94
Residential (Single family)
$16.17*
Trailer Parks & Motels
(Minimum per month)
$22.13
$23.97
Senior "Yellow Bag" Program
$52.54
$14.32
$58.91
$16.01
Commercial & Industrial
(One time weekly)
* Includes $1.10 for curbside recycling which is not
recommended to change as a result of this action
Future Rate Adiustments
The recent action taken by the County (and Solid Waste Authority)
to raise tip fees on 7/1/94 has been the catalyst for Laidlaw to
bring forward a rate modification request involving a number of
changes, including the landfill component, a 2.1 percent CPI
increase on the "other" component, adjustment of the single-family
recycling rate, etc.
The only rate increase being recommended at this time is the pass-
through cost of the landfill component. The other issues are being
discussed and reviewed at the staff level and will be the subject
of a future report when the appropriate justification is available.
//,~;J..
Page 3, Item ;I~
Meeting Date 7/12/94
FISCAL IMPACT:
For single family residential, the rate for refuse collection is
proposed to increase from $14.43 per month to $16.17 per month,
representing an overall 12 percent increase. The impact on all
rate payers is indicated in Attachment A.
It is proposed that the city's franchise fee remain unchanged at
this time. In addition, consistent with Council's action last
July, this recommended action will be "revenue neutral" with regard
to the City's total franchise fee collection. Laidlaw's higher
gross receipts (needed to offset the higher tip fee expenses) will
not result in additional franchise fees to be paid to the City.
Total franchise fees for FY 1994-95 are currently estimated at
$820,090. The franchise fee issue will be revisited with Council
later on when the CPI request is addressed.
It ~;!
RESOLUTION NO. 17564
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING RATE SCHEDULES FOR
COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF REFUSE EFFECTIVE
7/1/94
WHEREAS, the County of San Diego and the newly-formed
Solid Waste Authority have recently approved an increase in
landfill tip fees from $43 per ton to $55 per ton effective 7/1/94;
and
WHEREAS, according, and consistent with section 8.23.090
of the Chula vista Municipal Code, Laidlaw has requested a rate
increase in the landfill component of the current rate schedules;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed rate schedules do not include any
changes in the operational costs due to the CPI increase, the
franchise fee component or the curbside recycling charge; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on July
12, 1994 to consider the approval of the rate schedules.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve the rate schedules for
collection and disposal of refuse effective 7/1/94 set forth in
Attachment A, incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in
full.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is directed
to develop a notice to the ratepayers notifying them of the reasons
for the increase to be included with the bill for services.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
ilt I <d:/AJ /
Bruce M. Boogaard,
Attorney
George Krempl, Deputy City
city Manager
C: \ rs\ trashrate. inc
/6-+
FILE: CVRES794
16-28-94
iEX.IS,TIIIlGiI
WASTE
RATE"-T
fi0'30:"'114
COLUMN: IAl
, RESIDENTIAL UNITS:
SINGLE FAMILY
ADD
SETTlEMNT
YEAR:;' .AOJ
['1
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RATE TABLE EFFECTIVE 7-1 -94
RESIDENTIAL RATES
, UNADJusren,
WASlE
RATE AT
&;"30"'114
[A+8)
I FRANCHISE
.. ..FEIL.
Ie}
[DI
Mum LINTS AFT8'l ONE EACH ADDITIONAL UNT
$0.89 $5.85 $6.70
$0.67 $5.85 $4.07
MINIMUM PER MONTH
TWO TIMES WEEKLY
THREE TIMES WEEKLY
FOUR TIMES WEEKLY
DAilY PICK UP 6 llME~...
CENTRAL L
$0.21
$0.08
$0.09
$0.11
$0.13
OCAtION\;
$22.34 $1.60 $5.85 $14.891
$9.97 $0.62 $5.85 $3.50 !
$11.76 $0.76 $5.85 $5.15 !
$13.44 $0.89 $5.85 $6.70 i
$14.94 $1.01 $5.85 $8.081
TRAILER PARKS (INDIVIDUAL CAN SERVICE) PER UNIT;
ONE COllECTION WEEKLY . ,+ ....... $0.08 $10.59 $0.67 $5.85; $4.07
I TWO COllECTIONS WEEKLY $0.11 i $13.05 $0.86 $5.85 $6.34
I
SENIOR "YELLOW BAG' PROGRAM:
26 BAG PURCHASE
2fi BAG PURCHASE DEUVEAED TO HOME
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL:
UP TO 2) 40 GAL CONTAINERS
ONE TIME WEEKLY
TWO TIMES WEEKLY
THREE TIMES WEEKLY
~
,
(J)
$0.12
$0.22
$0.33
$14.44 $0.98 $5.63 $7.83
$25.93 . . $1.76 $10.09 $14.08
$38.25 ... $2.59 $14.90 $20.76
RATE
MODIFICATION
LANDFILL FEE
INCR27.0'%
IFI
ID X 27.11%]
$1.63
$1.631
NE'I(!
WASTE
RATE AT
7_1"'-0'4
I']
$0.891
$0.67
[HI
[D+F]
$7.481
$7.48
OTHER
RATE
1'1
[C+H+E)
.1
:::~~ . .... > ::
$1.63 $1.60 $7.48 $14.89
$1.63 $0.62 $7.48 $3.50
$1.63 $0.76 $7.48 $5.15
$1.63 $0.89 $7.48 $6.70
$1.63 $1.01 $7.48 $8.08
f- $1.631
$1.63
$1.57
$2.821
$4.16
$0.671
$0.86
$7.481 $4.07.
$7.48 $6.34'. !
$0.98
$1.76
$2.59
$7.20
$12.91
$19.06
$7.83 .
$14.08
$20.76
ENTlAE
RATE
IiDDIRCATION
[J-A]
I $1.74
I $1.71
$1.84
$1.71
$1.72
$1.74
$1.76
I $1.71
I $1.74
I $6.37
I $6.37
$1.69
$3.04
$4.49
:P-
M"
M"
'"
(")
::>
3
ro
:::l
M"
:P-
FILE: CVCOM794
6-28-94
RATE
LEVEL
'-.- ~
MINIMUM RATE 1 1 ~
MAXIMUM RATE__ 1 1 13
MINIMUM RATE 1 2 2.
MAXIMUM RATE 1 2 2.
MINIMUM RATE 1 3 39
MAXIMUM RATE 1 -~ ~
: MINIMUM RATE 1 4 52 !
MAXIMUM RATE 1 4 52
MINIMUM RATE 1 5 .5
MAXIMUM RATE 1 5 .5
MINIMUM RATE 1 6, 78
MAXIMUM RATE 1 6' 78
MINIMUM RATE 1 7 91
: MAXIMUM RATE 1 7 91
',-
MINIMUM RATE 2 1 2.
MAXIMUM RATE 2 1 28
MINMUM RATE 2 2 52
MAXIMUM RATE 2 2 52
MINMUM RATE 2 - 3 78
MAXIMUM RATE 2 3' 78
MINIMUM RATE 2 4 10.
MAXIMUM RATE 2 4 10.
I MINIMUM RATE 2, 5 130
MAXIMUM RATE 2' 5 130
MINIMUM RATE 2' 6 156 !
MAXIMUM RATE 2! 6 ~
MINIMUM RATE 2!7 182 i
MAXIMUM RATE 21 7 1821
SETllEllENT
YEARi',~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RATE TABLE EFFECTIVE 7-1-94
COMMERCIAL RATES
"""
I UNAbJUSrEo
WASTE i
flATEAT I FRANCHISE
O-:s,O-1l4LFE:E
oTHER
RATE
$0.34 l
$0.40 ~
$0.57
$0.68
$0.79
$0.95
$1.04
$1.24
$UB 1
$1.52 !
$1.53
$1.84
$1.82
$2.14
$73.42 S5,11 1 $24.90 $43.41
~_. $84.09 $5.96 : $24.90 $53.23
$126.90 $8.64 I $49.80 $68.47
$145.76 $10.14 $49.80 i $85.83
, $178.83 i $12.04 $74.69 $92.10
$207.04 $14.28 $74.69 $118.07
$235.84 .$15.84 $99.59 $120.40
$270.56 $18.61 $99.59 $152.36 i
$290.68 $19.48 $124.49 $146.71 1
$334.23 $22.94 $124.49 $186.79
$347.80 $23.29 $149.39 $175.12
$403.81 $27.75 $149.39 $226.67
$411.09 i $27.60 $174.28 $209.21
$469.70 $32.26 $17~.28 $263.15
'-....
0-..
I
0-.,
$133.69 $9.18 $49.80 $74.72
" $156.59 $11.00 - $49.80 $95.79 I
~_ $248.24 $16.83 $99.59 $131.82
$274.08 $18.89 $99.59 $155.60
$338.54 _$22.56 $149.39 $166.59
$379.81 ! $25.84 $149.39 $204.59
$441 .50 $2~.29 $199.18 $213.03
$492.80 i $33.37 ; $199.18 $260.25
'-
$552.00 $36.62 : $248.98 i $266.41
$601.41 $40.55 $248.98 $311.88
$670.69 $44.61 $298J7 : $327.32
$730.97 $49.40 $298.77 $382.80
$789.37 $52.59 $348.57 $388.21
, $853.93 $57.72 $348.57 $447.63 !
BAn::
!MPDIFICATION
LANDFILL FEE
INCFI.27;1l%
$6.95
~__.$6.95 I
$13.89 i
$13.89
$20.84
$20.84
$27.79
$27.79
$34.73
$34.73
$41.68 :
$41.68
$48.63
$48.63
$13.89
$13.89
$27.79
$27.79
$41.68 I
$41.68
$55.57
$55.57
! $69.46
$69.46
$83.36
1 $83.36
$97.25
$97.25
PAGE 1 of3
NEW
NEWRAlE COMPONENTs WASTE
FRANCHISE I LANDFILL OTHER RATE AT
FEE RATE RATE 7;.;..;,1'"':'94
$5,11 1 $31.84 $43.41
$5.96 < $31.84 $53.23
$8.64 $63.69 $68.47
$10.14 $63.69 $85.83
$12.04 $95.53 $92.10
$14.28 $95.53 $118.07
$15.84 $127.38 $120.40
$18.61 $127.38 $152.36
$19.48 $159.22 $146.71
$22.94 $159.22 $186.79
$23.29 $191.07 $175.12
$27.75 $191.07 $226.67
$27.60 $222.91 $209.21
$32.26 $222.91 $263.15
$9.18 $63.69
$11.00 ! $63.69
$16.83 $127.38
$18.89 $127.38
$22.56 $191,07
$25.84 $191.07
$29.29 $254.75
$33.37 $254.75
$36.62 $318.44
$40.55 $318.44,
$44.61 $382.13
$49.40 $382.13 !
r
$52.59 I $445.81
$57.72 $445.82
ENTIRE
RATE
M::lDIFIC"llON
1 $7.28
, $7.35
$14.47
$14.57
$21.63
$21.79
$28.82 '
$29.02
$36.01
$36.25
$43.21
$43.52
$50.45
$50.76
$14.50 i
$14.63 :
$28.90
i $29.04
$43.16
$43.39
$57.50
$57.77
$71.87
$72,13
$86.28
$86.62
$100.70
$101.06
FILE: CVCOM794
6-28-94
RATE iNO.lw~~,~
LEVEL !OlNSlplU .It.t.JNTH
MINIMUM RATE 3i 1 3.
MAXIMUM RATE 3 1 3.
MINIMUM RATE 3 2 78
MAXIMUM RATE 3 2 78
: MINIMUM RATE 3 3 117
MAXIMUM RATE 3 3 117 '
! MINIMUM RATE 3 4 1561
MAXIMUM RATE 3 4 ,.6
MINIMUM RATE 3 5 '"
MAXIMUM RATE 3 5 '"
MINIMUM RATE 3 6 23'
MAXIMUM RATE 3 6 23.
MINMUM RATE 3 7 273
MAXIMUM RATE 3 7 273
MINIMUM RATE 4 1 .2
MAXIMUM RATE i 4 1 .2
MINIMUM RATE ! 4 2 I.'
MAXIMUM RATE i 4 2 I.'
MINIMUM RATE 4 3 ,.6
MAXIMUM RATE 4 3 ,.6
MINIMUM RATE i 4 4 2.8
MAXIMUM RATE 4 4 2.8
MINIMUM RATE 4 5 26.
MAXIMUM RATE 4 5 26.
I MINIMUM RATE 4 6 312
MAXIMUM RATE i 4 6 312
MINIMUM RATE 4 7 36.
MAXIMUM RATE ! 4 7 36.
~
,
"-'1
~
I ~nuc~ml
YEAR Il'ADJ I
$0.88 I
$1.15
$1.40
$1.93
$2.25
$2.75
$3.15
$3.76
$3.98
$4.79
$4.88__
$5.82
$6.~_~
$6.85
$7_.]~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RATE TABLE EFFECTIVE 7-1 -94
COMMERCIAL RATES
UNADJusreo
WASTE
RATE AT FRANCHISE
&_~~_04 FeE
~]94.32 $13.27 $74.69 $106.36
$229.64 $16.08 $74.69 ' $138.87
$346.88 $23.22 $149.39 $174.27
$392.54 $26.85 $149.39 $216.30
$485.20 I $32.04 $224.08 $229.08
$586.91 $40.13 $224.08 I $322.71
$645.99 i $42.64 $298.77 $304.58
I $705.24 $47.35 $298.77 $359.12
I
$806.51 $53.22 $373.46 $379.83
$869.12 $58.20 $373.46 $437.46
$993.63 $65.92 $448.16 $479.56
$1,020.50 - $68..6 I $448.16 $504.29
$1,193.90 $79.66 i $522.85 $591.39
$1,227.05 $82.30 $522.85 $621.90
__ $255.49 $17.41 $99.59 $138.49
$300.52 $20.99 $99.59 $179.94 I
$443.20 $29.42 $199.18 $214.60 I
$501 .14 $34.03 $199.18 $267.93
$639.33 $42.11 $298.77 $298.45 i
$710.87 $47.80 $298.77 $364.30
$868.35 $57.41 $398.36 $412.58 .
$908.96 $60.64 $398.36 $449.96 i
$1,102.12 $73.09 $497.95 $531.08 '
$1,118.87 $74.42 , $497.95 $546.49
$1,336.33 $88.81 I $597.54 $649.99 !
$1,396',46 $93.59 $597.54 $705.33 I
$1,570.34 $104.51 $697.13 $768.70 i
!~!,63~.~~ $109.28 ! $697.13 $823.93 '
AATE
MODIFICATION:
LAND FlLLFEE
INCAtl:7.0'Ji;;
$20.84
$20.84
$41.68 i
$41.68
$62.52
e-. $62.52
$83.36
$83.36
$104.20
! $104.20
i $125.04
$125.04
$145.87
l $145.87
$27.79
$27.79
$55.57
e-- $55.57
$83.36
$83.36
$111.14
I- $111.14
$138.93
$138.93
$166.71
$166.71
1-- $194.50
$194.50
FRANCHISE
FEE
_ $13.27 !
$16.08 i
$23.22 :
$26.85
$32.04
$40.13
$42.64
$47.35
$53.22
$58.20
$65.92
$68.06
$79.66
$82.30
$17.41
$20.99
$29.42
$34.03
$42.11
$47.80
$57.41
$60.64
$73.09
$74.42
$88.81
$93.59
$104.51
$109.28 I
$95.53
$95.53
$191.06
$191.06
$286.60
$286.60
$382.13
$382.13
$477.66
$477.66
$573.19
$573.19
$668.72
$668.72
$127.37
$127.37
$254.75 '
$254.75 :
$382.12i
$382.12'
$509.50 :
$509.50 r
$636.87
$636.87
$764.25 ;
$764.25
$891.62
$891.62
$106.36
$138.87
$174.27
$216.30
$229.08
$322.71
$304.58
$359.12
$379.83
$437.46
. $479.56
$504.29
$591.39
$621.90
PAGE2of3
NEW
WASTE
RATE AT
7:..-1:..-94
ENTIRE
RATE
KlOIHCATION
$21.72
$21.91
$43.21
$43.46
$64.60
$65.18
$86.15 I
$86.48
$107.68 !
$108.03 !
$129.36 I
$129.50 !
$151.11 i
$151.28 i
i $114.90
, $115.12
$143.72
i $143.80
$172.54
$172.86
$201.35
$201.69
FILE: CVCOM794
6-28-94
PAGE 3 of3
.~
ENTIRE
RATE
/IIOJlFtCAOON
I $36.14
$36.44
$71.92
$72.22
$107.74
$107.79 i
$143.59 :
$143.78 i
$179.42 !
$180.06 '
$215.26 '
$216.14
$251.38
$251.57
$43.35
$43.70
$86.29
$86.58
$129.23
$129.51
$172.13
$172.56
$215.04
$215.84
$258.04
$259.27
$301.15
$302.44
,
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RATE TABLE EFFECTIVE 7-1-94
COMMERCIAL RATES
RATE
LEVEL
EXIST! NG UN~usr8)
WASTE ADD WASTE
RATE At SE:rnEIENT RATE AT FRANCHISE
6.,.-:30,...94 YeA.Aa.-DJ e"';~O-1l4 FEE
OTHER
RATE
/IollNTH~
5 1 ,
MINMUM RATE 65
MAXIMUM RATE 5 1 65
MINIMUM RATE 5 2 13.
MAXIMUM RATE 5' 2 13.
MINIMUM RATE 5 3 ,.5
MAXIMUM RATE 5 3 ,.5
: MINIMUM RATE 5 4 26.
1 MAXIMUM RATE 5 4 26.
MINMUM RATE 5 5: 325
MAXIMUM RATE 5 5 i 325
MINIMUM RATE 5 6 3..
MAXIMUM RATE 5 6 390 I
MINIMUM RATE 5 7 455 :
MAXIMUM RATE 5 7 455j
MINIMUM RATE 6 1 78
I MAXIMUM RATE 6 1 78
! MINMUM RATE 6 2 156
MAXIMUM RATE 6! 2 156
i MINIMUM RATE 6 3 234
MAXIMUM RATE ! 6 3 234
MINMUM RATE i 6 4 312
MAXIMUM RATE : 6 4 312
MINIMUM RATE ; 6 5 3..
MAXIMUM RATE ' 6 5 3..
MINIMUM RATE : 6 6 468
MAXIMUM RATE ; 6 6 468
MINIMUM RATE i 6 7 546
MAXIMUM RATE 1 6 7 546
$1.41....:
$1.71
$2.46
$2.76
$3.54
$3.60
$4.67
$4.86
$5.76
$6.40
$6.87
$7.75
$8.26
$8.45
$314.07 I $21.34 $124.49 ! $168.24
$368.73 -." $25.69 $124.49 $218.55
$563.60 i $37.54 $248.97 $277.08
$617.33 $41.82 $248.97 $326.54 I
, $54.14 I $390.44 ,
! $818.04 $373.46
, $827.59 $54.90 : $373.46 $399.23
$1,081.01 $71.41 $497.95 $511.65
$1,114.58 $74.08 $497.95 $542.55
$1,337.07 $88.14 $622.43 $626.50
$1,453.52 $97.40 $622.43 $733.68
$1,598.14 $105.26 $746.92 $745.96
$1,755.85 $117.81 $746.92 $891.12
$1,907.34 $126.21 $871.41 $909.72
$1,941.25 $128.91 $871.41 $940.94
""'-....
0--...
\
00
$372.55 i $25.26 $149.38 $19Z:~
$437.55 I $30.43 $149.38 $257.73
$674.00 ! $44.87 $298.77 $330.36
$724.09 ; ~~ $48.85 $298.77 $376.47
$970.44 . $64.08 $448.15 $458.22
$1,020.32 $68.04 $448.15 $504.13
$1,262.02 ! $82.90 $597.54 - $581.59
~~~.j -- $89.11 $597.54 $653.43
$1,556.96 $101.98 $746.92 $708.06
$1,6....5 . $113.36 $746.92 $839.67
$1,866.68 $122.25 $896.31 $848.13
$2,090.87 $140.08 $896.31 $1,054.48
$2,196.13 $144.08 $1,045.69 $1,006.36
I $2,428.81 $162.59 $1.045.69 $1,220.53
RATE
: MODIFicATioN
LAND FILL FEE
IN OR 27.11%
$34.73
$34.73
$69.46
$69.46
$104.20
$104.20
$138.93
I
$138.93
$173.66
$173 66
$208.39
$208.39
$243.12
$243.12
$41.68
$41.68
I--~ $83.36
$83.36
$125.03
$125.03
$166.71
$166.71
$208.39
$208.39
$250.07
f--. $250.07
$291.75
-- $291.75
NEW
NEW.RATECOMPGNENTS WASTE
FRANCHISE LANDFILL OTHER RATE AT
FE.E flATE RATE 7~ 1 ;,"J14
'-$21.34 $159.22
i $25.69 $159.22
$37.54 $318.44
$41.82 $318.44
$54.14 $477.66
$54.90 $477.66
$71.41 $636.87
$74.08 $636.87
$88.14 $796.09
$97.40 $796.09
$105.26 $955.31
$117.81 $955.31 i
$126.21 $1,114.53 i
$128.91 i $1,114.53
$25.26 $191.06 $197.90
$30.43 $191.06 $257.73
$44.87 $382.12 $330.36
$48.85 $382.12 $376.47
$64.08 $573.19 $458.22
$68.04 $573.19 $504.13
$82.90 $764.25 $581.59
$89.11 $764.25 $653.43
$101.98 $955.31 $708.06
$113.36 $955.31 $839.67
$122.25 $1,146.37 $848.13
! $140.08 $1.146.37 $1,054.48
l. $144.08 $1,337.44 $1,006.36
$162.59 $1.337.44 $1,220.53
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
17
Meeting Date 7/12/94
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Consideration of the following applications filed by
Charles Tibbitt for 0.67 unincorporated acres located at the southwest
corner of Bonita Road and Lynwood Drive.
a. GPA-94-03, Amend the General Plan From Office Commercial
and Residential Low Density to Commercial Visitor.
b. PCZ-94-B, Prezone to C-V-P, Commercial Visitor with Precise
Plan.
e Resolution /? ~~ding the General Plan for 0.67 acres located
at the southwest corner of Bonita Road and Lynwood Drive from Office
Commercial and Residential Low Density to Commercial Visitor.
~-
19. Ordinance :1'> i5Amending the Zoning Map or Maps established by
sections 19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code prezoning 0.67
acres located at the southW. est cO.~:;r~r of Bonita R.oad and Lynwood Drive
to C-V-P, Commercial Vi71l7: Precise PI~~~,
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning It !~ fer, ht,6 //)' /
REVIEWED BV, City M=", ji ~'j (4151b, Vore, V~_N"Xl
The applicant, Charles Tibbitt, has submitted applications for an amendment to the General Plan
and Prezoning for 0.67 unincorporated acres at the southwest corner of Bonita Road and
Lynwood Drive. The proposal is to redesignate the site from Office Commercial and Low
Density Residential to Commercial Visitor, prezone the parcel C-V-P, Commercial Visitor with
Precise Plan, in order to establish a full service carwash.
A Precise Plan for the proposed carwash received conditional approval by the Design Review
Committee on February 28, 1994, contingent upon approval of the General Plan amendment and
prezoning (see attachment 6). The proposal would also require a subsequent approval of a
Conditional Use Permit By the Planning Commission after the site is annexed to the City.
The Enviromnental Review Coordinator has conducted an Initial Study, IS-94-04, of possible
enviromnental impacts associated with the project. Based on the attached Initial Study (see
attachment 7) and comments thereon, the Enviromnental Review Coordinator has concluded that
there would be no significant enviromnental effects and, therefore, recommends adoption of the
Negative Declaration issued on IS-94-04.
/7-/
Page 2, Item n
Meeting Date 7/12/94
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the Resolution and Ordinance amending
the Chula Vista General Plan from Office Commercial and Residential Low Density and Prezone
to Commercial Visitor with Precise Plan.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
On February 28, 1994, the Design Review Committee voted 4-0 to approve the project design
subject to conditions and contingent upon approval of the General Plan amendment, prezoning
and annexation of the property.
The Resource Conservation Commission, on March 7, 1994, considered Initial Study 94-04 and
voted 5-0 to accept the negative declaration.
On May 11,1994, The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to deny the request based on traffic and
circulation concerns. However, at the May 18, 1994 Planning Commission workshop meeting,
the Commission agreed to reconsider the application to allow the applicant the opportunity to
clarify the operation of the facility, and address the traffic and circulation issues raised at the
meeting. On June 8, 1994, the Planning Commission, after reconsidering the request, voted 6-0
to approve the proposal (see attachment 4).
DISCUSSION:
The 0.67 acre site is irregular in shape and is located at the southwest comer of Bonita Road
and Lynwood Drive within the unincorporated Sweetwater Community Planning Area.
The property, which is the consolidation of an existing 0.50 acre frontage parcel with 0.17 acres
from the southerly adjacent residential lot, is presently vacant and relatively level, except for the
southerly 30-40 ft which contains a 40 ft. high slope that separates the site from a single family
dwelling located adjacent to the south. Adjacent land uses include commercial retail to the north
(across Bonita Rd.) commercial office and retail to the east (across Lynwood Drive), residential
to the south and 1-805 to the west across a flood control channel.
The present Sweetwater Community Plan Designations (County General Plan) are as
follows:
Site
Office Professional Commercial
Residential Low Density (2du/ac)
East (across Lynwood Dr.)
South
West
North (across Bonita Rd.)
Neighborhood Commercial
Residential Low Density (2.0 du/ac)
Public, Semi Public
Impact Sensitive Area
(see exhibit D attachment 2)
/7'~
Page 3, Item / ')
Meeting Date 7/12/94
The present City General Plan designations are as follows:
Site
Office Professional Commercial
Residential (2 dul ac)
Retail Commercial
Residential (2 du/ac)
Residential (2 dul ac)
Open Space
North (across Bonita Rd.)
South
East (across Lynwood Dr.)
West
(see exhibit B attachment 2
The present zoning (City and County) is as follows:
Site
C-30, Prof. Office (County)
R-R-l, Rural Residential(County)
North (across Bonita Rd.)
C-C, Central Commercial (City)
South
East (across Lynwood Dr)
West
R-R-l, Rural Res. (County)
C-32,Convenience Comml.(County)
Open Space (County)
(see Exhibit C attachment 2)
PUBLIC INPUT
On February 10, 1994, the Planning Department sponsored a public forum to familiarize the
residents of the immediate vicinity and the Sweetwater Community Group with the applicant's
request, the planning process and public hearing schedule.
The issues raised at the public forum involves primarily concerns regarding the additional traffic
and signal delays at the Bonita Road and Lynwood Drive Intersection. The residents pointed out
that the County had recently approved a church/school in their neighborhood, and since the
Lynwood area is served solely by Lynwood Drive, the proposed project would further contribute
to the deterioration of traffic conditions on Bonita Rd. and the traffic signal phasing (delays) at
the intersection.
In regard to the proposed land use issue (full service carwash) and the project design, the
residents in attendance stated that the project was attractive and offered a service presently
unavailable in the immediate vicinity (the nearest full service carwash is located at the northeast
corner of Broadway and "K" Street).
17"3
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 7/12/94
/?
There were no representatives of the Sweetwater Community Planning Group at the public
forum, but in a letter received by the Planning Department, the Group voiced the same concern
as residents regarding an increase in traffic along Bonita Road, and delay in the traffic signal
phasing at the Bonita Road Lynwood Dr.lPlaza Bonita Rd. intersection (see attachment 8).
On October 5, 1994, the applicant presented the proposed project to the Sweetwater Community
Planning Group. The Planning Group endorsed the project design and land use, but expressed
concerns about the existing traffic at the intersection of Bonita Rd. and Lynwood Drive (see
attachment 8).
ANALYSIS
In 1989, the City Council adopted a comprehensive update of the Chula Vista General Plan and,
by reference, adopted the Sweetwater Community Plan for all the unincorporated parcels within
this planning area.
The Sweetwater Community Plan encompasses the unincorporated areas south of Route 54, east
of I-80S, and north of the existing City boundaries (see Exhibit E, attachment 2). The
Community Plan shows office commercial designation for the site and contains design criteria
to guide the development of the area and maintain the community character.
For the most part, the existing commercial uses along both sides of Bonita Road consist of
specialty retail, service buildings and commercial offices.
In regard to the issue of compatibility, the land use designations found in the "Gateway" area
surrounding the Bonita Road and I-80S interchange range from Office Commercial to General
Commercial and Central Commercial (see Exhibit B and C). The land use designations on this
segment of Bonita Road are diverse and allow for a variety of businesses. Therefore, the
Commercial Visitor designation appears to be compatible with the established land use pattern
in the area and consistent with the commercial goals of the Sweetwater Community Plan.
The redesignation of 0.17 acres of the southerly adjacent residential property from Residential
Low Density (2 du/ac) to Commercial Visitor will result in a more suitable parcel for
commercial development and will allow access to and from Lynwood Drive. The lot split, which
is required and presently being processed by the County, will not affect the livability or the
amenities of the property in question because a similar size parcel located immediately adjacent
to the south will be consolidated to that parcel to retain approximately the same lot area.
It is important to note that the City recently rezoned 2.23 acres of property located at the
northwest corner of Bonita Road and Plaza Bonita Road from C- V, Commercial Visitor to C-C
Central Commercial with the inclusion of a specific plan to provide for flexibility and control
of certain land uses. The Specific Plan prohibits automobile-oriented uses such as service
17"1
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date 7/12/94
/7
stations, drive-thru restaurants, carwashes and other auto oriented uses. While that contradicts
the staff's recommendation for this project, the issues and constraints in the case of the northerly
parcel are substantially different. The principal factor that led the City to restrict automobile
related uses for that parcel was the larger size of the parcel, the traffic conditions along Plaza
Bonita Road, the relative proximity of the freeway on-ramp to the site, the street intersection,
and the site exposure that this parcel has from all angles.
On the south side of Bonita Road, the traffic pattern and traffic conditions are different.
Lynwood Drive does not have the traffic volume that Plaza Bonita Road has, and the freeway
off-ramp does not restrict access to and from Bonita Road. Based on this and the information
in the traffic report, the City Traffic Engineer concluded that the carwash can operate on the
subject site without the friction that the northerly parcel would have with a similar use.
Staff does, however, recognize the importance of this intersection, and has worked with the
applicant to resolve the traffic concerns that the Planning Commission and residents of the area
have expressed. The street will be widened and a deceleration lane will be added in order to
allow east bound Bonita Road traffic to exit the travel lanes before slowing down to enter the
carwash facility (see exhibit F-9). In addition, the conditional use permit, which is required for
the proposed land use in the C- V zone, will be conditioned to ensure that the operation will not
exceed activity levels and trip generation which is projected by and acceptable to the applicant.
Conditions may include a monitoring program, and restrictions in hours of operation and pricing.
A noise study was also conducted to determine the potential impact from traffic as well as from
operational aspects of the proposed land use. The study concludes that the project will increase
the existing noise levels by 0.2 db, which in the context of the existing 66 db noise level in the
area is considered negligible.
The existing land uses on this segment of Bonita Road generate relatively low traffic volume at
the Bonita Road and Lynwood Drive/Plaza Bonita Road intersection. However the existing
traffic at this intersection is very high and has been the concern of both the residents of the area
and the Sweetwater Community Group.
A traffic report was prepared to address the issue of traffic and signal delays raised at the public
forum and the Sweetwater Community Group. After reviewing the report,the City Traffic
Engineer concluded that the traffic generated by the carwash, although higher than office or even
retail shops, is spread fairly evenly throughout the day and, therefore as illustrated in the table
below, is not expected to create any significant changes to traffic or signal delays at the Bonita
Road and Lynwood/ Plaza Bonita Road intersection.
I?">
Page 6, Item I?
Meeting Date 7/12/94
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LEVELS OF SERVICE FOR THE
BONITA RD.lPLAZA BONITA /LYNWOOD INTERSECTION
CONDITION AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay(sec) LOS Delay(sec) LOS
Existing 24.0 C 26.6 D
Existing + Project 24.1 C 28.6 D
LOS = Level of Service
(sec) = in seconds
The following table also illustrates the traffic generated by three different land uses; an office,
a retail building and the proposed carwash.
Land Use Rate Intensity Daily trips Peak Hr
Trips/WOO Trips
sq. ft.
Carwash 900/site 250 car/day 900 41
Office 20 12,000 sq.ft 240 31
Retail 40 10,000 sq.ft 400 36
To ensure compatibility with area and conformance with the established community character,
staff has recommended the following Precise Plan Standards, which we believe would ensure
compatibility even if a use other than carwash occupies the site:
I. Development in this property shall be in conformance with the Sweetwater Community
Plan and Design Guidelines.
2. Development of this property shall be limited to a single tenant.
3. Building setbacks shall be as follows:
Bonita Road
Lynwood Drive
Rear (south)
Side (west)
20 ft.
20 ft.
25 ft.
Oft.
)7...(,
Page 7, Item 17
Meeting Date 7/12/94
4. Building height shall be limited to 2 1/2 stories or 45 ft., whichever is less.
5. A 20 ft. landscape buffer shall be provided along both street frontages.
6. Parking shall be screened from public right of way with dense landscaping, landscape
mounding, low walls or a combination of any of the above solutions.
7. Driveway along Lynwood Drive Shall be 28 ft wide.
8. Business identification signs shall be limited to a low profile monument type sign, wall
mounted signs and directional signs as permitted in the underlying zone.
9. A lighting plan addressing security and light spills onto the southerly adjacent residential
area shall be submitted as part of the building permit submittal package.
10. Developer of this property must agree to no net increase in water consumption, or to
participate in water conservation or fee offset program the City may have in effect at the
time of building permit issuance.
CONCLUSION
The redesignation from Commercial Office and Residential Low Density follows the pattern of
other parcels along this segment of Bonita Road, and is consistent with City Planning and zoning
at other freeway intersections.
The topographical separation (approximately 40 ft.) between the site and the residential
neighborhood above and to the south, the safeguards established in the form of precise standards
to address compatibility and the assessment of the City Traffic Engineer that the project will not
adversely impact existing traffic conditions, leads staff to recommend approval of the requests
in accordance with the findings and subject to the requirements and conditions contained in the
attached resolution and ordinance.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
ATTACHMENTS
f
~:
~ 7.
~8
City Council resolution and ordinance
Exhibits A-E and Development Proposal (Exhibit F-I Ibm F-lO)
Planning Commission Recommending Resolution
Planning Commission Minutes
Resource Conservation Commission Minutes
Design Review Committee Minutes
Initial Study with Disclosure Statement
Sweetwater Commnnity Group Input
(f: \home\planning\1u is \gpa-9403 .at3)
/7-7
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
County of San Diego:
I am a citizen of the United States and a
resident of the County aforesaid; I am over
the age of eighteen years, and not a party
to or interested in the above-entitled matter.
I am the principal clerk of the printer of the
STAR-NEWS, CHULA VISTA, a newspaper
of general circulation, published
TWICE-WEEKLY in the City of Chula Vista,
and the South Bay Judicial District, County
of San Diego, and which newspaper has
been adjudged a newspaper of general
circulation by the Superior Court of the
County of San Diego, State of California,
under the date of April 23, 1951, Case
Number 164327; that the notice, of which
the annexed is a printed copy ( set in type
not smaller than nonpareil), has been
published in each regular and entire issue
of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the following dates,
to-wit:
7/2/94
all in the year 1994
I certify ( or declare) under penalty of
perjury that the foregoing is true and
co rrec!.
Dated at CHULA VISTA
California, this 2nd day of July ,1994
Signature
~"""-'--~'--~'--"~'-'-'---'."~".',,,,,"'--'-- '--~--.
,'-"c,.-.r._,-.-";,'
?c:--;....;".',<,,'-
This space is for the Cour,ty Clerk's Filir,g Stamp
Proof of Publication of:
Notice
-------------------
CVO-l112
-------------------
/1-g
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEAR~
INO BY THE CHULA VISTA
CITY COUNCIL
CHULA VISTA.! CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS Ht:.REBY GIVEN
I THAT THE CHULA VISTA
CITY COUNCIL will hold a pu-
blic hearing to consider the 101-
lowing:
Considering application to
change present General Plan
desIgnation & Prezone 0.67
acres located at southwest
corner of Bonita Ad. & Lyn-
wood Dr. within Sweetvv'ater
Community Area of San Diego
County.
If you wish to challenge the
City's action on this matter in \
court, you may be limited to ra.
Ising only those Issues you or
someone else raised at the pu-
blic hearing described In thiS
notice, or in written correspon-
dence delivered to the City
Clark's Offica at or prior to the
publiC hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING
WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY
COUNCIL on Tuesday, July
12, 1994, at 6:00 p.m. In the
:ouncil Chambers, Public Ser-
,1\::95 Building.' 276 Fourth
II,venue, at which time any per-
,on desiring to be heard may
aPR:ear.
JATED: June 29, 1994
:V04112 7/2194 I
.'.:,.',-..
. " ,.<.:.r........
"."
-' ;- / J' i--"""
j. Ld-J..... /
,/'
ATTACHMENT 1
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE
J /~ Cj
ATTACHMENT 2
EXHIBITS
AND
CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
1'] -- 1 0
r:!
.
\ ,,"
"
"
"
;'
"
"
"
ICAL1:
~
\
EXHIBIT "A" ,
CHUlA VISTA PlANNING DEPARTMENT
I HEIEIY amfY THAT tHIS ZONINO MAP
WAS APPROVED AS A PART OF OIDINANCE
IV tHE 01Y (x)uNOL ON
I
"'_ I
-
--.J
..,
CAS( HUMID:
.aaEG:
Do\Tl:
CIIY GIll:
MIl
llMWN IV:
C9 ZONING MApJ.7--IJ
NORTH
ao
0&'-
/"WI(l(EO IV:
"\ ,,'"
,,'
"
/.
~
'"
'"
'"
4:lW~^~ L-
~~ l~
-
--
I
-__ I
-...J
..,
EXHIBIT .e"
( CBULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
C) APPLlCANT:Claartel Tibblt PIIOJECT DIICIIIPTION:
GPA.&-df'I- ~.. u IIIlI to ! 7 -l <-
ADD liE": IW..'" fA "lea ad. _"",,,,.1 I 1--1
ud 1.)"-" Dr. KZ...~" rvP. .....;.......w VIdtor
ICALE: Fc'lfAmf.~u... ~c .C_.ldMlaJ U. ...... fa .....au ·
1" - 200' PC~.9"'23 ..0 ..PVIr.e ......Ii.
---J
..J:::-
"
~
\,
ROJECT LOCATION
o
EXHIBIT
D
NORTH
NO SCAlE
WESTERN
AREA
COMMUNITY
PLAN
LEGEND
AE$IlENTIM.
I.
l.oOtJl.ZUAC
1 AESIlENM.
Z..llUrAC
IlESIl9lTW.
S. UllUtAC
AESIlENM.
t. _
......IUAC
n. OFFICE ...JBSIOM. lXMolE1lClM.
1t ~ ClllIiIIEJI:ML
11 GENEM. W- IlClM.
ESTA1E
11. I_UAC
22. ...w: IW-".1C
2t. M'llCT "",.:alIVE N8
I lIUIUl:!lIAC
::3
~
!~
8~
I -7 ---
!- I J
m
~
~
m.
:a
8
!:
~
c
z
~
i:I
r-
>
Z
>
JJ
m
>
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
(Exhibits F-1 through F-10)
/'
I /(.- ; 0
EXHIBIT F
;roo
.
I[~
e ~f~
'! ".t
III ~1!
u Itr~
i ,,,I~
c h~'
a: II"
g b
~ r...
o rfl~
~ ,.
I~
i
I I
I .Iii!
~ &II
I,~: t~1
.!ft rt
I! ~: i 1
I~.I di I
,"
~
.pi""'" ~,..o
~po'2J>
~~.----
:::;-:::;
I
\
\/-1 - 11
,
\
)
I I
t-
. a>;
i W'
illnl~l 511
~-!i lU
',\H1~l.h
~I
I
-.
I
.
\
.......
-------
..
~Z.:
B
~
.
I
.
I .
L-
--.
i.
I
." mt;_ .....1a1ii ,. '~
HSYM HYU11N08 .1
O.
..
.
hi!
~ ~r
,~'ii
, gr..,
Ji
<< c~;~ .
alie~
~I;
,
,
,
,
I
,
,
I ; 1
,
<< ~ I i
i I
!
1 ,
,
<
" I
~
.
, .
. -- ... ~: ~
~
~.---.
3?'--
i
\
,
\
.----.- .-
,
,'"
,.
" \; ~.
:; /.l
I
!
/
I
I
$:
'!
i
BONITA CAR WASH
_I = I!!!Y- -,ll:=
DU.A~"" sro.....
i
1
,
-.
r \:~ IT
I . . ~ I
. "
" ,
-.
.
1-: IV r~
. . .J..
..,~
I. . ;.
/" f.'.I.i '
\
~
'., .
'l
..
01_ _ "t_
"
J
<><:,\
\ '.
I
.
.
-.
\
of
. ;L.\.
. .......
';' .! ~ .
..~....:.f'-
'l' ~ \t"~
. ,..
...\
L~...
-...i
.
-
~
l\'~.
\ '.
:'.
~,\~, . '"
_. .r ,'!. .........
.,\,'
. '
:'
W 'i
Ch
'\' !I
! Ij
, ,
" ,
I
IS
s
1m
D:l
3g
~.
_II
z-
01
ID
re.
s
.
'0
. t,
:1.:
()
'II _
::;::
, : .l;..;f'
, A
CP
00
'3 .~ ~.
,':"/. ;
'_;]1_..." ,
" :'i~:..... "
.), e
; O~D t;.
'0 !",.,I.:
'-'.1'~'", .
"';,>if'-
. ','..'~'i;., .
, ',!.1
h; 4~
lF8 '
o o~ ~~-:.'
"
t
t' I'
-4:---
.-.., l;_~ .
'~"'.. &:i:
~.:'.,)
; 0 .~. '(",
~"y{ l"~ :
~.t ~. ....
!.-:\:~ .--;..... \.
..-g.....,.
. :-.-~7f.~~.. l~
.,....!',.., 'I .
...,;;. .... .
i. "') ~,..
-' '. '<~
I fi '~.;,:-. .
*....1) (,
C) , . .
", '..v
"~..
(
, .
J
CD,
-' ..---
r
: .Jt i
' 'I
~-~, -I
, , .L...J
i...:._ \ j
i
~
co
:r:
CJ)
~
2t
o
c
'"
cr
c
=
c
....
'"
Cl
\
I
9-91
. .
Il'~C)
,.-..q,'-
t
re
8i
1m
111:,
:~
z-
01
III
lit
. .
. .
anz
I~
u-.J
....0.
-a:
Eeo
~o
><..1
Wu-
C
Z
o
o
w
U)
o DO.
D~FT
.Dt5LJ
,.
. . .
"
'.
.Z '.' ....
.:if . .
a:
.Q
~".
O'
o
~
~
'"
..J
i=
. .
..
! .
-/0-
:::J
.
-~
~
.
J.
~
2 P
o ci
i=':~
ct.
II ~
~,~
D;~
.J N l
C( \..
~i I
I[
o
2
.;
,
-
..
'- ---".--
"~~~3~~~""",",", II"
"i.~~i'~'~ ~~~';
. if -.... '.. _~. _ ,:
~..- ._....--~ -. ~_..:..,.,;. h - _ _,
~~.. '~J~'lo ;~.~ ~
~'. &l. = ~ c
...-;:t=
as ~ a:: <co:
_z
%o<tw
)(ID(.)o.
W '0
Q..J
<C
:E
0:
,0
'~- z
,~ ,
r .~.'
, , ,
. '. C' ~
-j
~
....- .
-
,.
..
.
.
.~
I
!
t" .
~.
I
I
.I ~:
'. ,
,
i
I
" ! I
~.. i .c
, to &
......' . --
-,. .
i
-lDJ. . ,.
s. ;.. "L '
i-.;;; .... - .', j /. '!i.' '* . .:-,.
. ..,..::. ..... ."Iii' "'I." '. .," .
,1
1
i
,
. /1 - :.2 ~
'.
' ~ <. - ~~. ~: ;'. ~ ~'.,.; ., -'"
.. .." r ; 't ."~"h,,>:
-. .,.,....) ~'f l!~ ., '.,.' .
. ~. -: i H" t. '. L . ~ ~~'. ~
. ~ ". ,.. .oj ....... _._J ,'" ,,:-" 1 _ .," _:t;..
" .f."'.' ij'U ". ....;..1~; .~~~ .1.' , .:<:.#'.......",.,.'~., r- .A.
j.. ".~, .l'.' . '.' .~..,. '. ,
.... ; -'.. ~.~ ........ "...:)11 - _ .
i ~ ........J}~.. ~~.,~..,.!,-t::~:t~..;,~'.r;;'
· . ,.. ~ ,,,.:i,.. "', '~' . ~ ,t" " O~., __ _.
- ."..
.-
I.
.~
r-~'''''''-
. -'..
\.. . .
_.
CfS' -:-'
," ,.. t..
-.
~ .
.....'.....01
-.......
.~ .r~-::-:,.
....-;J
,. ..............,
I -..:.'"
'o' '(.J
;.<'.; r(j'
:-..: W
" ,..' -- :1
I''-.:'~'".'''
." ......~ t'"
., ....~.:"~. ''f;'!'
, ,
. ....,.. .""i ~41.
....::...~-..
.'r .
"
I.
I'
. ,
"'7.
...
; i
.. 4
;.....
,
..,....
..,
.. ~'.
. ". ,"
I='EAK HCUI
~ .
.
2Y'z- (VtrN.
,
~ij
-.......
CA'RS 'PeR \-touR == I GAR t:X'Tr:r1'J:S. evERY
.~.
.. '
...._'.-.-.
-~.
;
,
..
r
.
.,.
''1
.~
;'
.:"
. . I' ";'; 1~. .
'11':." I
..j; .,.~ "
'. ~I . .......
.:''ji(
. 'i'-:--
....}..
".",
..
<!.')
:~I
,
~r.:~
':'Ii'
a' ~ .
to ..
.,.
','r!l:'
':i. '~.~!,!1MI1~~I.",:INd: .
~~ 18T~.~IN. j
I
I"A~ I
,
" ~
'-' \':.t\.;.j ;."
,:),~ ',:i~t
":~ ~ ! EXHIBIT F-7 :"';~'
.,.;A.-i... BONITA ROAD '.Jltt.f.';iIt<
,.~ 0 CARWASH a
PEAK HOUR OPERA TIONl
,
~
""'...
~'
.. - .i,~.c'
." I "r\ll1
! \
I. ..
...
-.-.---.- .~_..'
. 1"""t...Io'"
--'
,I
A,
- l
If'
t. .
. MAXIMUM CAPACITY
~. r
.
. ._. ---.-"_ _. .6.
...r::-
..
--
-.J
p
, ~
A
\
.. .... f .,"
~ .. ..... .
"
I,:, .w..- '
" "If/: .
.,
. ,
,~ i>>:
:' ~ .,.q,:j.-
II .-.."
;.;. \...~~.::.::..-:'
" ,'.,;..... ...,'..
: ~. '\1 ,f: .....
'..: '.,:.~~' !';:.~-,"
. ,~. ~...
"f
...
. r'." ---;;.,
. ~
. .
1-..- " ,'"
.~ ' :.- ,
:t .r .' _ ..'J ~...
, '"t
. .
. "
J. "
'r. .,
'-
.
':". ':; ft.. :-- ;;', ';:0:". ':' ' ~
. ,'r.: .. .' "" ' ...,
. "VA'H\. .c..:t:i.'( Ib,C DRYINII/E)tIl'l"'O ~;. .. '. ' . .
~.',:~~~:.. ' ... - - ~..-t,-"- - _...-:".~ .
~ :~r'~"33 '.TACk... .~. u...~. _ ~~~.' EXH~~I,~" ~:~ ..
r4 .....
.
.
\
. ,-. ...~,-. ._.....
"
~_._..
_..~. .~...3....
-
....-.
.--~ -_._." -
o 0
OJ-
t
j
B
i'1 '0
~
N
''? j .
~/
-
'7 .'} ,~
( "=<..')"
III .
.
=
U\
~i!
a:1
~~
tal
z_
oli
ID
..
. . \..
,
.
) l- 2h
~
0". ~
!
IJ
EI
1:1
~
IJ
- 1\-
OW
,...a:
: I :)
u..1-
I ..~=-~ "-:- I- 0
,--".- W
1........_._
=.'-=---m
-.-- I-
---
. _._- -
-:::.=-" -
.==--- ~ ~
o -=-. >< 0
Wa:
c(
~
" €> Z
dg
-
:)
m
c
WI
tn
~I
01
a:
0.
l
f"
~.;I
C)
~I
I()
X'
~Cf)
-~~
;!3=
'z a:
0<(
.0
I()
ATTACHMENT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING RESOLUTION
II - -2 7
RESOLUTION NO. GPA-94-03 I PCZ-94-B
RESOLUTION OF THECITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
CO~JMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN AND PREZONE
0.67 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
BONITA ROAD AND L YNWOOD DRIVE WITHIN THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA FROM OFFICE PROFESSIONAL
COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY TO
COMMERCIAL VISITOR AND PREZONE C-V-P,
COMMERCIAL VISITOR PRECISE PLAN.
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a General Plan amendment and Prezoning
were filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on November 1, 1993, by Charles
Tibbett; and
WHEREAS, said application requested that the General Plan designation on
approximately 0.67 acres located at the southwest comer of Bonita Road and Lynwood Drive
within the unincorporated area of San Diego County be changed from Commercial office and
Residential Low Density (0-3 du/ac) to Commercial Visitor and that the parcel be prezoned C- V,
Commercial Visitor; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said
General Plan Amendment and Prezoning application and notice of said hearing, together with
its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and
its mailing to property owners within 1000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least
21 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely May 11,
1994, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Pbnning
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, based on traffic concerns and internal vehicular
circulation and stacking capacity, denied the project by a unanimous vote. Subsequent to that
meeting, the Planning Commission, at their May 18, 1994 workshop, agreed to reconsider the
item to allow the applicant the opportunity to address some of the issues that the Planning
Commission raised at their previous meeting; and
WHEREAS, notice was given of the hearing to be reconsidered on June 8, 1994, at 7:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said
hearing was thereafter closed; and
r7-2~
-/I,.
WHEREAS, The General Plan Land Use Element has not been amended more than three
(3) times this calendar year; and
WHEREAS, The Environmental Review Coordinator recommends adoption of the
Negative Declaration IS-94-04; and
WHEREAS, the Commission found that the project would have no significant
environmental impacts and adopted the Negative Declaration issued on IS-94-04.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
hereby recommends that the City Council amend the General Plan and prezone 0.67 acres
located at the southwest comer of Bonita Road and Lynwood Drive in accordance with the
attached City Council resolution and Ordinance.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
applicant and the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY.THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 8th day of June, 1994 by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
Chair Martin, Commissioners Fuller, Moot, Ray, Salas, Tarantino
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Commissioner Tuchscher
ABSTENTIONS:
None
; ,-','1.:'
__ _ l. I' I> _
~ .. u
/ i
/ _.1 l' .--;-: c_
/ I '-I ').;
I / ~.
/,..---,
Thomas A. Martin, Chairman
Attest:
, I .... ,/ ,
~ : /'.' f\, _, t ' ,
Nancy RiPley, Secretat)>
(f: Ibome\pIaDnin&Uu;,\iPa-9403 .per)
/1. ;;1.q
-1'1-
ATTACHMENT 4
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
I 7 _~ c)
UNOFF,CJAL MJ~UT!r;
EXCERPT FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF 6/8/94
ITEM 2.
PUBLIC HEARING; RECONSIDERATION OF THE FOLLOWING
APPLICATIONS FILED BY CHARLES TIBBETT FOR 0.67
UNINCORPORATED ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER
OF BONITA ROAD AND LYNWOOD DRIVE
A.
GPA-94-03: AMEND GENERAL
COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL VISITOR
PLAN FROM OFFICE
LOW DENSITY TO
B. PCZ-94-B: PREZONE TO C-V-P, COMMERCIAL VISITOR
Associate Planner Hernandez noted that this request was considered by the Planning Commission
on May II, 1994, and at that time the Commission, based on traffic concerns, denied the project
by a unanimous vote. Those concerns were primarily on-site vehicle stacking capacity,
delineation of an internal circulation system as it relates to the vehicle stacking capacity,
obstruction of Bonita Road traffic flow by carwash ingress and traffic, site drainage pattern,
assurance that the drainage was not going to end in the adjacent drainage channel, and the
concern that the overall result of changing the property from Office Commercial to Commercial
Visitor would be an increase in traffic at that intersection. Subsequent to that meeting, the
Planning Commission at their May 18, 1994, workshop agreed to reconsider the item to allow
the applicant to address some of the issues that the Planning Commission raised at their previous
meeting. Mr. Hernandez noted that the applicant and the applicant's traffic engineer were
present to respond to any questions the Commissioners had relating to traffic. Staff had no
additional information or analysis, and, as stated in the May 11 staff report, staff recommended
approval of the General Plan Amendment and Prezoning request in accordance with the fmdings
and subject to the conditions contained in the resolution and ordinance.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
(The next three speakers gave an organized presentation.)
Greg Cox, 3130 Bonita Road, Suite 200, Chula Vista, representing the applicants, introduced
Charles Tibbett, the owner of five carwashes in San Diego County, and Paul Magnotto, co-
owner of this project. Since the applicant had been granted the opportunity for the re-hearing,
they had hired an additional traffic consultant, Dan Marum, and had worked closely with City
Traffic Engineer Hal Rosenberg.
Paul Magnotto, 244 Camino Elevado, Bonita, gave a brief history of the project. Mr.
Magnotto stated that the surrounding residents supported the project; the project would provide
a service to the community, would be creating jobs and paying taxes, and beautifying a piece
of property which is an eyesore. He asked for the Commission's support. Mr. Magnotto then
presented slides which showed the architectural rendering of the project, traffic circulation in
and out of the project, and traffic flow inside the project itself. Mr. Magnotto stated that since
the last Commission meeting, they had approached the County who owned the property adjoining
- (q -
j 7. .3 I
PC Minutes
-4-
June 8, 1994
the subject property and asked if it was possible to obtain a deceleration lane off Bonita Road
which would help with the flow of traffic. The County had approved the lane, and the applicant
had received full staff support from the City of Chula Vista. Continuing with the slide program,
Mr. Ma6notto noted there was 300' between the exit ramp of their property, where the
deceleration lane would be located, the typical number of cars on the site at one time, the
number of cars on site at peak hour with circulation and stacking. He emphasized that the
carwash would be more expensive than the typical carwash, and because of that there would be
less washes. Mr. Magnotto then showed some slides of other carwashes in the City and their
stacking and drying capacity.
Dan Marum, Catalina Engineering, 8989 Rio San Diego Drive, San Diego, noted that the
previous traffic study was done by Darnell and Associates and reviewed by the Traffic Division
and approved. The years of analysis in the previous study were near-term 1993 and 1998 with
and without the project, and in 1998 a cumulative analysis with the inclusion of the development
of the Church and the School on Lynwood Drive. Intersection safety was also reviewed in the
previous report, review of the driveway impacts, and review of on-site circulation system. The
carwash was anticipated to wash between 125 and 250 washes per day. The on-site employee
count would be 7 to 10, and parking was provided for them on-site. He compared the peak
traffic for commercial office use to the carwash use, and mentioned that the percentage of traffic
using the automobile-type service areas was traffic that was already on the road and was not a
single-purpose trip to get a carwash. Traffic is spread throughout the day and a continuous use
of the infrastructure invested in the construction of a four-lane major road, the release of exiting
vehicles is controlled, the slowest hours of operation are in the first two hours of operation and
the last two hours of the day when Bonita Road would be at its peak, and the slowest period of
the year were the winter months when the carwash would be closing at 5 p.m. and surveys
showed that cars were washed less frequently during the winter months.
Regarding intersection safety, Mr. Marum stated that the addition of the right-turn-only lane (or
turn-out) addressed the issue of interruption of continuous flow in an eastbound direction on
Bonita Road because of people trying to get into the site. The Lynwood Drive access point onto
Bonita Road would be a controlled release of vehicles onto Lynwood Drive and would mix in
with the approach volume on Lynwood Drive in a northbound direction to the signal. Mr.
Marum said that the site had been designed in an optimal way to utilize the frontages, or the
tangent portions of the property lines, to hold the maximum amount of vehicles if it ever reached
that level. His understanding of the 18 vehicles approaching from Bonita Road and 11 vehicles
from the Lynwood Drive access was double the level of traffic activity that was tested in the
report; the holding capacity of the site was much higher than tested. The proposed site would
accommodate 41 inbound vehicles anticipated during the peak. The widening of the LynWood
access drive was a previous recommendation from the original report which had been
incorporated into the site design. Mr. Marum noted that the Bonita Road threshold standards
found that Bonita Road was operating at a good level of service in an area adjacent to the
interchange, based on the threshold standards that were analyzing travel time on the entire
segment of Bonita Road, east/west on either side of the interchange. It had been observed that
the modification of the phase length for the northbound, left through, and right movement off
- /9 .-
I 7,' .3 L..
PC Minutes
-5-
June 8, 1994
of Lynwood made by the County allowed for up to 15 vehicles in the queue being allowed to
move through on the same signal phase. The intent by the County was to provide relief to the
Lynwood Drive traffic, both during the morning and on Sundays during Church services.
Mr. Marum stated that the City was planning to implement a third lane toward the freeway on-
ramp between Plaza Bonita and the on-ramp to 1-805 in the northbound direction, which also
includes a raised median on Bonita Road which would enhance the traffic restrictions for traffic
turning right out of the site at the driveway access point on Bonita Road. The improvements
being required on Bonita Road on the frontage of the property allowed for the inclusion of a
standard bike lane and the sidewalk. Finally, Mr. Marum noted that the facility being classified
as a major four-lane facility in the General Plan was the type of facility that would allow for
driveway access as opposed to a six-lane prime facility where access is restricted. This type of
site would be in conformance with the overall plan of the General Plan. Mr. Marum stated he
was available for questions.
Chair Martin stated, with the build-out of the eastern portion of Chula Vista, the Growth
Management Oversight Commission had pointed out three areas of concern on "H" Street which
were really impacted by traffic, one of which was the Lynwood/Plaza Bonita intersection. Chair
Martin asked, if that continued to impact Bonita Road, did Mr. Marum anticipate the
Lynwood/Plaza Bonita Road intersection to have more than 700 vehicles per day?
Mr. Marum replied that in the long-range studies, both at the General Plan level and the more
intense Otay Ranch level of analysis, they had looked at Bonita Road as needing upgrading to
six lanes. That had continually been rejected by the Sweetwater Community, and the models
had not considered the six-lane capacity. The model looks at "H" Street--a six-lane facility--as
a better facility for quicker travel to the freeway than Bonita Road, while the demand for traffic
may be equal on both streets. Bonita Road is at or near the saturation point of a four-lane major
facility, carrying approximately 40,000 ~ehicles per day. The General Plan recommends 30,000
ADT for four-lane facilities, and with 32,000 or more, they would recommend a six-lane prime
facility to handle that type of flow.
Chair Martin asked if the travel time of the east traffic, going east from 1-805, would be
compromised by the turn-out lane. Mr. Marum stated that it slowed traffic a little where there
was not an exclusive deceleration lane, but the Traffic Engineer was briefed on the ability of this
site to create a 100' right-turn-only lane that could accommodate up to four vehicles in addition
to the eight vehicles that could be stacked along the western front of the property heading south
in an in-bound direction. The 100' de-acceleration turnout would give drivers the ability to pull
out of the through lane and get into the site. Answering Chair Martin, Mr. Marum stated that
the impedance would be much more valid if not for the stacking distance on the site where cars
would be able to go all the way in and stack before they got to the vacuum areas. It was his
opinion that the travel time studies would not be degraded because of this site,especially with
the provision of the 100' turn-out lane.
-)-v~
/733
PC Minutes
-6-
June 8, 1994
City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg stated that normally there was a 20' section between the curb
and the lane line which allowed enough width for a vehicle to slow down adjacent to the curb
without impeding traffic behind it. This particular driveway would not impair the existing level
of service, and the deceleration lane not only provided additional width normally found at a
standard driveway or normal intersection; it provided extra width that is not common.
Commissioner Tarantino asked if there were any plans being considered by CalTrans to create
a special ramp to get into Plaza Bonita, to bypass Bonita Road and go directly from I-80S into
Plaza Bonita, which had been considered at times. Mr. Rosenberg stated that CalTrans had done
an analysis and had determined that SR-54 would provide the adequate relief. They did not
anticipate much growth, the saturation level had been reached, and the developments in the
Eastern Territories would not exacerbate the current conditions.
Commissioner Salas noted that concern had been voiced at the last meeting by some of the
citizens in the area that there had already been some decline in the level of service in the area
since the Church had been built. She asked if there was a deceleration lane into Lynwood
Drive; she believed there was some improvement in the area just by slowing the cars by making
them aware of the deceleration lane into the carwash.
Mr. Rosenberg concurred. He pointed out that the dimension between the new curb which
would be constructed as part of the project and the lane line was approximately 17'. If a
motorist wished to turn right, there was room to move out of traffic to turn.
Commissioner Moot asked to be shown the curb lane referred to. Mr. Rosenberg noted that
there was a marked bike lane which was 5' wide, and adjacent to the bike lane was a 12' lane.
The motorist could still pass if a car was stopped or broken down.
Mr. Greg Cox noted that with the installation of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, there would be
an additional 4' beyond what presently exists.
Commissioner Moot was concerned about exiting the project onto Bonita Road. Sometimes th~
two left-turn lanes to get into Plaza Bonita were not sufficient to hold the traffic and there was
not a smooth flow in the lane before traffic is able to get into the double turn lane. He was
concerned that traffic turning right out of the carwash could cause stacking in the lane next to
it and not have any smooth traffic flow into the intersection.
Mr. Rosenberg stated that it was a controlled intersection; although the Vehicle Code stated an
exit could not be made without yielding to traffic, he thought the applicant would be willing to
place a stop sign--if not, the City would place a stop sign for him-at that exit and force the
traffic before the exit to stop. They would have to yield; if traffic was backed up, the motorist
would not be able to turn immediately and would have to wait for a gap in traffic.
- :J-( -
/7 3 Lf
PC Minutes
-7-
June 8, 1994
At Commissioner Moot's request, Mr. Rosenberg showed a slide indicating the de-acceleration
lane, the new curb line and sidewalk. Commissioner Moot noted there was actuaIIy an area
where a car could turn out and merge back into traffic into the right lane.
Mr. Cox stated there would be one car exiting approximately every 2-112 minutes, with the
option of exiting onto Bonita Road or Lynwood Drive. He reiterated that they wanted to work
with staff and the Planning Commission and if there was a desire to have the Safety Commission
look at the project, they were not opposed to that. Mr. Cox concluded there would be more
traffic trips if left designated for an office building than anticipated from the proposed carwash.
Commissioner Ray asked if there would be an exit lane from the carwash going east. Mr. Cox
stated it would be wider, but not an actual lane.
Ron Lane, 3907 Massachusetts Avenue, La Mesa, stated that the applicants had tried to make
this the best project for the site and for the applicant. He believed the phase lengths which had
been changed by the County had helped, and the back-up was not there. They had observed the
Church impacts, and since the phase changes, traffic moved smoothly. Peak Church traffic on
Sundays let out within 15 minutes of each service. He asked for approval of the project.
Charles Tibbett, 3907 Massachusetts Avenue, La Mesa, one of the owners of the carwash,
felt it was a good project for the site, and they felt they had answered the problems of traffic.
He asked that the project be approved.
Mrs. Lois Morera, 377 Camino Elevado, Bonita, a partner in the carwash, favored the
carwash and felt it would be an exceIIent project for the site.
Teresa Castro, 260 Camino del Cerro Grande, Bonita, a resident of Bonita and real estate
agent, believed the carwash at that location was a convenience and necessity for the community.
She was in favor of the carwash.
Salvador Castro, 260 Camino del Cerro Grande, Bonita, supported the project.
WIlliam Nelson, 4301 Lynwood Drive, Chula Vista, the owner and operator of a nursery and
tree farm across from the proposed carwash, spoke in favor of the project, felt it would enhance
the blighted entrance to Bonita, and would provide some needed revenue for the City.
Chair Martin asked Mr. Nelson if he felt the carwash would impact traffic going to his business.
Mr. Nelson believed it would enhance their business.
Commissioner Ray stated the frrst time the Commission had seen the project, there were some
concerns regarding parked vehicles on Lynwood Drive on the eastern side during either special
events or normal hours of the nursery's operation. He asked Mr. Nelson if he foresaw a
degradation in traffic on Lynwood as a result of the carwash and any impedance with those cars
leaving the carwash if vehicles were parked on the east side of Lynwood.
- :J-:J- -
;735
PC Minutes
-8-
June 8, 1994
Mr. Nelson was not aware of many cars parking on the east side of Lynwood, because of the
curvature of Lynwood. He did not anticipate a problem. The driveway would be further up the
road, which would allow exiting vehicles to get into the traffic flow going northward toward
Bonita Road from one of the exits. There were a number of cars which parked at the top of the
hill across from their entrance, but on the way up the hill cars rarely parked. In answer to
Commissioner Ray, Mr. Nelson said that it was 500' to 600' from the Lynwood entrance/exit
to the top of the hill.
Mrs. Nicholas Besker, 4346 Lyndale Lane, ChuIa Vista, speaking for herself and Mr. Becker,
was in favor of the carwash. She felt it would be an improvement to the comer and would not
impact traffic up the hill.
Eugene Kocherga, 3418 Valley Road, Bonita, would like to have a place to have his car
properly washed.
Ms. Margaret Gilpin, 3320 Lynwood Drive, ChuIa Vista, was concerned about traffic. She
was neither for nor against the carwash. She bicycles along Bonita Road and was concerned
about another access onto Bonita Road. As a motorist, she had not noticed any extended time
getting across the intersection.
Erina Fornataro, 3249 Holly Way, Chula Vista, was not opposed to a carwash, but was
concerned over safety. Some of the corrections coming off the freeway would probably be an
asset; however, no one had mentioned traffic coming out of Bonita Plaza. Making a left turn
onto Bonita Road from Lynwood Drive, there was a major problem with traffic coming out of
Plaza Bonita Road. She stated that drivers did not look at the traffic light and did not stop and
look before they turned right onto Bonita Road. There had been a number of near collisions
there. She had not noticed any difference in the traffic pattern. Her concern was the traffic
from both Plaza Bonita and traffic coming down Lynwood Drive onto Bonita Road, and how the
traffic would work coming out of the carwash. She said people make lanes where they don't
exist. They want to turn, and they turn wherever they feel like it. Plaza Bonita Road went from
two lanes, people created a third lane; now there are four lanes, and they make a fifth lane.
Roland Fomataro, 3249 Hony Way, ChuIa Vista, commented on some of the slides, and that
there was an error in the stacking distance. He said there never was a good answer on the
question as to whether there would be an acceleration lane or merge lane coming out of Bonita
Carwash. The road would be widened, but there would not be a full lane. Mr. Rosenberg
concurred. Mr. Fornataro said the comer should be dressed up; there was nothing wrong with
putting a carwash there. There was a problem coming from the carwash onto Lynwood. There
was not adequate room. There were trucks on the east side of Lynwood every week; there was
traffic there. There was parking near the Church and a lot of traffic.
Heather Martinez, 6510 San Miguel Road, Bonita, was in favor of the carwash.
_ ~:3-
)7-3fJ
PC Minutes
-9-
June 8, 1994
Greg Cox, having requested rebuttal time earlier, approached the podium and made some
closing comments. He believed the concerns raised by Mr. and Mrs. Fornataro were concerns
that were shared by people driving through that corridor every day. Mr. Cox noted that if the
project were approved, the conditional use permit would subsequently come back to the Planning
Commission, and they would be willing to work with staff during the interim. They could look
at some type of monitoring device; he felt the applicant would be willing to have some type of
trigger mechanism where staff could call for a review of how traffic could come out of the
Lynwood driveway with perhaps no left turn allowed on Lynwood.
Commissioner Ray asked if the applicant may consider an acceleration lane, or a further cut-out
between the entrance off Bonita Road down to Lynwood.
Mr. Marum believed the proximity of the access driveway point to the signal would be too close
to allow for an acceleration lane with the proper tapered length to get the vehicles traversing
back into the main stream of travel before the signal. At the design speed of Bonita Road, the
lane would have to be taken down on a very slow taper to get the traffic up to 40 mph and it
would be beyond the signal. For that reason, the right turn traffic out of the site exits at the
ultimate curb line. He pointed out that for the northbound, left-turn traffic on Lynwood Drive
where there is a conflict, the southbound traffic on Plaza Bonita has a red signal as the traffic
on Lynwood has a green arrow and a green ball to make either a left or right movement. He
had observed some of those conflicts. He noted that the City has a project which is timed within
the next fiscal year, within 12 to 18 months, to expand the curb line on the north side of Bonita
Road to create a third lane in front of the Pier I Imports; thus, the left-turn vehicles off
Lynwood Drive would theoretically have their own lane but would have the right to go all the
way across to get into the right turn lane to go northbound onto 1-805. Mr. Marum asked City
Traffic Engineer Rosenberg if there was some type of sign which could be placed at the signal
to tell drivers there was a split phase, so they would look not only to the east for westbound
traffic, but also straight across where someone has an actual green movement.
Mr. Rosenberg stated that the signal belongs to the County and the City does not have the
jurisdiction; however, he would alert the County Traffic Engineer to this problem. The solution
probably was to post a "No Right Turn on Red" to ensure that the conflict does not occur when
the northbound Lynwood traffic gets the green arrow or the green ball. Mr. Rosenberg agreed
with Mr. Fornataro that Lynwood did have a potential problem with the exit from the carivash
onto Lynwood. He had alerted the applicant to the problem and that intersection would be
monitored. If there was a conflict with cars exiting the carwash, insisting on trying to beat the
signal, driving into the intersection or into Lynwood, causing queuing back onto Bonita Road,
the City would restrict that exit onto Lynwood.
Assistant City' Attorney Rudolf noted that the issues being dealt with were issues that would
come back to the Commission for the Precise Plan and the Conditional Use Permit. If the
Commission approved the General Plan Amendment and the Prezoning and the application of
the "Po modifier, it would go on to Council. If the Council approved, the project would come
back to the Commission. The place to add the conditions would be in the Precise Plan and the
-;}f,
17 37
PC Minutes
-10-
June 8, 1994
Conditional Use Permit. They could not be added in the General Plan Amendment and the
Prezoning.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Salas commented that she felt the frustration of the people opposing the project,
but they were opposing a problem that already existed and not the actual carwash site. Also,
she believed the County was aware of the problems in that particular area, and so was the City's
traffic engineer, and they were working on a solution. Mr. Rosenberg concurred, saying it was
not a problem as a result of the carwash; it was existing, and the City was working with the
County to resolve the issue. Commissioner Salas stated that there would be an impact, whether
it was left Commercial Office or changed to Commercial Visitor. Their job was to determine
if the zoning was suitable for that piece of land.
Assistant Planning Director Lee commented that the approved plan by the County for an office
building would actually have the driveway closer to Bonita Road than was proposed for the
carwash. The applicant, in working with staff, was proposing to regrade the slope to the south
and actually expand the property so that the driveway would be moved further south. There was
some added stacking capability. It improved the situation over the access that was approved by
the County with the office plan.
Commissioner Ray clarified that the north and south lane of Lynwood Drive would be 17' wide,
with a total width of the two lanes of 34'. The currently striped median was proposed, with the
approval of the Pier I project, as an actual hard median. The City Traffic Engineer confirmed.
MS (Tarantino/Ray) to adopt Resolution GPA-94-02/PCZ-94-B recommending that the City
Council adopt the attached draft City Council Resolution amending the land use designation of
the General Plan from Office Commercial to Visitor Commercial; adopt the attached draft City
Council Ordinance prezoning the property to C-V-P, Commercial Visitor Precise Plan, in
accordance with Exhibit A, attached hereto.
Commissioner Ray said he understood that this would annex to Chula Vista. In the event of an
annexation of the comer to Chula Vista, wouldn't the signaling then revert to Chula Vista
authority?
Assistant Planning Director Lee stated that it depended on the limits of annexation which varied
in terms of what LAFCO would allow or request the City to do as far as adjacent road systems.
City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg replied that without knowing the limits of the annexation, he
couldn't tell, but it was possible that the City could end up with that signalized intersection.
Commissioner Ray asked what would have to happen for the City to control the comer.
- d-t'. 17.3r5
PC Minutes
-11-
June 8, 1994
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf said that in order for the intersection to come under control of
the City, it would have to be either a separate annexation or part of this annexation. He did not
know if the applicant intended to include that, or if the City would do it. The requirements of
LAFCO was not known in connection with the applicant's application for an annexation. It
might be it could only go forward if the intersection was included.
Commissioner Ray understood that annexation application would not occur until after the
approval of the Prezoning and the General Plan Amendment. Mr. Rudolf concurred.
Commissioner Ray asked Mr. Rosenberg if he would make a formal request to the County for
the "No Right Turn on Red" sign, or if he would ask for it in a telephone conversation. Mr.
Rosenberg stated it would be a formal written request, which would reflect the interest of the
Planning Commission in resolving the issue.
Commissioner Ray asked that he and the residents who had spoken regarding that issue be
copied. It was an existing problem, and whether or not the carwash was approved it needed to
be resolved. Mr. Rosenberg agreed.
Chair Martin was concerned about the designation of the property as Commercial Visitor, and
what might be put on the property if the carwash was not built.
Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that the Commercial Visitor zone was fairly restrictive
in that it authorizes basically hotel use and restaurant use without conditional use permits. All
the other uses provided in that zone require a conditional use permit. That would come before
the Planning Commission for consideration. The site was extremely limited in size, and would
not be practical for a hotel or restaurant.
Regarding the Commission's action, Mr. Lee reminded the Commission that their first action
necessary would be to approve Negative Declaration IS-94-04. The maker of the motion agreed
to include it in the motion. The second concurred.
Commissioner Ray questioned the indefinite continuation at the previous meeting of
consideration of the conditional use permit. Mr. Lee explained that the conditional use permit
could not be considered until the annexation moved forward.
Commissioner Ray confirmed that the Commission would be accepting the Negative Declaration
as previously brought before them, the General Plan Amendment and Prezone, but not approving
a project--strictIy a zoning issue. Mr. Lee concurred.
Commissioner Moot asked at what stage the issues of grading, etc. would be considered. Mr.
Lee answered that it would be at the conditional use permit and precise plan process. The
Design Review Committee is charged with that consideration; however, the Commission would
be apprised of any details regarding cross-sections, etc.
-;L6 -
/7.3;
PC Minutes
-12-
June 8, 1994
Commissioner Moot felt the applicants had satisfied a lot of the traffic concerns he had, but he
had a difficult time seeing how the project fit into such a small space. Mr. Lee noted the slope
would be regraded.
RESTATEMENT OF MOTION
Based on the Initial Study and the Negative Declaration, rmd that this project will have no
significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on 18-94-04;
adopt Resolution GPA-94-02/PCZ-94-B recommending that the City Council adopt the
attached draft City Council Resolution amending the land use designation of the General
Plan from Office Commercial and Residential Low Density to Visitor Commercial; adopt
the attached draft City Council Ordinance prezoning the property to C-V-P, Commercial
Visitor Precise Plan, in accordance with Exhibit A, attached hereto.
VOTE: 6-0 TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL (Commissioner Tuchscher excused)
Assistant Planning Director Lee advised the audience that this item would move forward to the
City Council for their consideration around the middle of July. They would receive notice.
-;21 -
/} itO
ATTACHMENT 5
RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
I 7 - ill
UN05=F~CHAl t{lt~~NUT!S
MINUTES OF A SCHHIJULED REGULAR ltWJ::;llNG
Resource Conservation Commi~on
ChuIa Vista, California
6:30 p.m.
Monday, March 7, 1994
Conference Room '1
Public Services Building
CAIL ltWJ::;UNG TO ORDER/ROlL CAIL: M~flg was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by
Chairman Xracba. City Staff Pnvironmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid called roll.
Present: Commi~.;oners Hall, Xracba, Ghoogl'tc;"n, Johnson and Burrascano. 'Ibe reasons for
Ibsence for Commissioners Myers and Guerreiro were not known at the time they called in to
be excused. It was agreed to vote on their acuse at the next meeting after t>earing from them.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was moved and seconded (HallIJohnson) to aPProve the minutes
of the meeting of December 4, 1993; 4-0-1 (Ghougassian abstained as he was not present at that
meeting). The minutes of the February 7, 1994 meeting could not be approved as there was no
quorum present from that meeting. This item will be added to the next agenda.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. IS-94-04: Bonita Car Wash-The applicant, Paul McDonald was present with his agent,
Mr. Tibbits to report on their project. They stated that residents were mostly concerned
about the traffic signals on the comer, which is an ongoing problem for them; however,
they were generally in favor of the project. The applicant anticipated about 125 customer
trips spread throughout the day, which would not significantly impact traffic. The
architect's drawing of project was shown to the commi~tion. Following a brief discussion,
it was MSUC (HallIBurrascano) to accept the negative declaration; vote carried S-O.
2. IS-94-1S: Food-4-I.ess-Architect for the project showed the FlimifUlt')' site plan and
explained how they met the criteria for traffic. After a brief discussion and clarification,
it was MSUC (Johnson/Ha1l) to accept the negative declaration; vote carried S-o.
3. Doug Reid presented some bids on historical site p1aquea. Tbere are 4S historical sites
designated and only 32 Qr 33 have plaques at this time. This item was origifUllly in RCC'.
budget, then withdrawn by the City Manaier. 11 was cSec;d.... they pursue alternative
fullding, however, no other options have been I" IVtM to date.
[Ghougassian left the meeting at 7:00 p.m.]
Doug Reid showed the video of the Council'. JIIeetlng wbae Xracba 1" wted the RCC'.
"Improving the Pnvironment" list. Council voted to accept the list, excluding 14 to hire a
recycling coordinator which was aIrady done; 113 on council'. responsibility for ovacrowded
schools; and '14 for building aesthetic guicl..Jin"'-'l.
Commissioners were assigned specific items to follow up on and be the contact penon with
Council: Burrascano: II-recycling; I6-brush mllnllgement, 17-I"ndtt'JIping, I12-Brown Field
/ ; 7. L(z.
-:1g-
, -
Resource Conservation Commission
Page 2
flight path. Kracha: l2-<:omposting, I3-pUJ'l'Jll.c;ng, I1G-city landscap\nglmu1ching. Hall:
IS-CUP'.,I8-parla. Gucrreiro: IU-quality of life, land uae. Johnson: 19-acbools involved
with env:ironmmtal c:oncems.
STAFF REPOR.T:
Reid reported he attended the meeting with the Secretary of the Interior-Babbitt, along with
Burrascano and Myers.
Reid will be absent next meeting.
CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS:
Kracha announced Disclosure Statements should be turned into City Clerk as 100II as possible.
Mir.h....1 Meacham represented the City at the recent Harbor Days Festival and received negative
comments from anti-recyclers. Kracha reiterated the importance of edl.....ring the public on the
City's recycling efforts and more concern for the environment.
COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS:
Johnson commented on the Council addressing classroom size limits and the favorable comments
as seen on the video tonight. As Kracha's presentation to Council was the first proactive move
by this commission, Johnson said he would work closely with the IChools in edv....rillg them
about environmental concerns.
Ball reported her involvement in CUP meetings. They are trying to differentiate with those
items that one-time uae and those that need continual follow-up.
Burrascano said she may be absent at uext meeri"g, but will be unable to call in ahead or time
as she will be in the desert and will have DO access to a telephone.
.
Kracha expressed his desire that the City of Chula Vista be known as a City which is
environmentally responsible. He will focus iniri..lly on edl1....rillglChool children.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeri"g was adjoumcd by Chairman lCraclIa at 8:16 p.m.
Bapectfully submitted,
EXPRESS SECRETARIAL SERVICES
'fLW~ ~~
Bubara Taylor /
~~1- ' 1'7- Lf3
ATTACHMENT 6
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
/ 7 i/ 1.1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF TIlE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMItTEE
Mond~. March 28, 1994
4:30 p.m.
A. )tOLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Conference Rooms 2 and 3
Chair Gilman, Vice Chair Spethman, Members Rodriguez
and Way
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Member Duncanson (with notification)
STAFF PRESENT:
Principal Planner Steve Griffin
Associate Planner Luis Hernandez
Community Development Specialist Miguel Tapia
B. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
Chair Gilman made an opening statement explaining the design review process and the
committee's responsibilities. She asked that all speakers sign in and identify themselves
verbally for the tape when speaking.
C. APPROV AL OF MINUTES
MSUC (GilmanlRodriguez) (4-0) to approve the minutes of the February 28, 1994
meeting, corrected on page two, paragraph five to add that signage approved in the first
sentence was for the Petmart building.
MSUC (Gilman/Spethman) (4-0) to approve the minutes of the March 14, 1994 meeting,
as presented.
D. PRESENTATION OF PROJECTS
1.
DRC-94-3S
Valerdi Office Buildin2
311 OF" Street
Office Expan$ion and Exterior Remodel
Staff Presentation
Associate Planner Luis Hernandez reviewed the proposed office remodel, indicating that
there will be an increase in height to allow for a greater ceiling height (but which will
not add a second story). The proposal also calls for a 630 sq.ft.lddition to the existing
building. Staff recommended approval subject to the conditions listed in the staff report.
Mr. Hernandez stated that the project did not include on-site parking but that an in-lieu
parking fee would have to be paid for the required parking for the Iddition (2).
However, contrary to what ws stated in the staff memorandum, the existing facility does
not have parking; therefore, the condition related to this needed to be modified to reflect
this n:as~~sment of the existing site. I 7 - i/)
t
PE.c;IGN REVIEW CQMMITIEE
-2-
MARCH 28. 1994
Committee Questions/Discussion
.
Member Speth man asked if the windows will be tinted; applicant Jorge Valerdi stated that
there would be a light tint. In response to questions, project designer Juan Quemado
stated that the window frames and the front doors will match the roof color, while the
loading door at the alley side will be painted to match the stucco color; additionally, the
projection of the existing roof overhang will be reduced to approximately 3'.
Members discussed screening of the satellite dish. Member Rodriguez suggested that
some detailing for the screening be provided, but not necessarily duplication of the level
of building detail seen on adjacent structures; other members agreed.
MSUC (Gilman/Rodriguez) (4-0) to approve DRC-94-35 and forward a positive
recommendation to the Redevelopment Agency, with approval subject to the conditions
listed in the staff report, and with the direction to staff that the satellite dish have some
detailing to relate to the parapet.
MSUC (Gilman/Rodriguez) (4-0) to amend the first motion by modifying condition "a"
to read as follows: "An in lieu parking fee equivalent to the number of parking spaces
required for the new office floor space shall be paid prior to issuance of building
permits" .
2.
DRC-94-34
Furr's Cafeteria
1032-1/2 Third Avenue
Exterior Enhancements
Member Speth man excused himself from consideration of this item due to a conflict of
interest. Chair Gilman advised the applicant that with only three members available to
vote, a unanimous decision would be required for project approval.
Staff Presentation
.
Associate Planner Hernandez reviewed the proposal and the discussion at the previous
committee meeting. He noted that staffs recommendation with regards to the proposed
neon lighting remained that it be changed to an indirect accent lighting; staff
recommended that the committee consider the proposed awning color in context with the
new building color scheme.
Apnlicant Presentation
Project Architect Bill Suggs presented photographs of nearby properties, pointing out that
neon and numerous colors are present within the vicinity of the project site. He
suggested that the neon could be placed behind red translucent plexiglass as a lighting
alternative.
- ?;d -
17- 'fh
J>FSIGN REVIEW COMMI1TEE
-3-
MARCH 28. 1994
Committee Discussion
Chair Gilman stated that the red awnings would go well with the new color scheme, but
that the neon lighting would not; other members agreed. Member Way asked if the
applicant could consider changing the awning material to a type that could be illuminated
from within; Mr. Suggs stated that this could be done. Members agreed that this
solution was preferable.
MSUC (GilmanlRodriguez) (4-0) to disapprove the proposed neon, and to approve the
awnings as proposed or of a type that can be illuminated.
3.
DRC-94-15
Bonita Carwash
3048 Bonita Road
Full Service Carwash
Staff Presentation
Associate Planner Hernandez presented the development proposal, which is part of a
request to annex the subject property to the City of Chula Vista. He reviewed the project
and stated that staff supports the project, noting that recommendations have been made
relating to architectural detailing of the proposed building.
Committee Ouestions/Discussion
Chair Gilman asked how the residences behind the property will be accessed; Project
Architect Ron Lane stated that access is being re-routed to the other sides of the lots in
question. Member Way asked if the Sweetwater Planning Group had seen the project;
Mr. Hernandez responded that he had attended the group's meeting at which the item
was presented, and that they had been supportive of the project. Members felt that the
north facade of the building did not need a hip roof, but agreed with the first three
architectural recommendations made by staff. Member Spethman added that the trellis
element at the second story should be more substantial. Members also felt that the
second stucco color alternative should be utilized in conjunction with the first, and that
the colored concrete' should be lighter. The applicants concurred with these
recommendations.
Audience Discussion
I 7 II 7
Margaret Gilpen of 3320 Lynnwood Drive stated that she approved of the project design
but had concerns related to traffic issues. Erina Fornataro and Roland Fornataro,
property owners at 3240 Lynnwood Drive and 3249 Holly Way both stated concerns
about traffic, including the exit areas of the project which might create problems with
traffic backing up on the streets. Mr. Fornataro stated that stacking areas provided were
. inadequate, and that he would like to see access for traffic to exit easterly onto Bonita
Road. Mr. Lane stated that the current plan provides for both ingress and egress to
Bonita Road. Mr. Fornataro stated that the exit onto Lynnwood Drive could create an
accident, with traffic turning onto Lynnwood conflicting with cars exiting the carwash
..,.... -
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
-4-
MARCH 28. 1994
site. Principal Planner Steve Griffin noted that land use issues (e.g. traffic) will be
discussed at public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. Mr.
Hernandez added that a traffic consultant will be studying this issue, including impacts
created by the new school and church nearby.
Committee Discussion
MSUC (GilmanlSpethman) (4-0) to adopt Negative Declaration IS-93-23.
MSUC (Gilman/Spethman) (4-0) to approve DRC-94-15 subject to the conditions stated
in the staff report, with the following modifications and additions: "e" -delete the fourth
recommendation relating to the hip roof; add condition "g" - Minimum 6x6 posts to be
utilized at the second story trellis; add condition "h" - "The second color option shall be
included in walls, the multi color roof material shall be utilized, and a terra cotta colored
concrete shall be utilized in place of the red".
E. STAFF COMMENTS
Associate Planner Hernandez stated that the beautification awards committee field trip
would take place on April 4th.
Mr. Hernandez advised that the City Council had again continued the appointment of the
new member to the Design Review Committee.
F. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 5:47 p.m.
~~
Patty N . s, Recorder
- 33 / /7- L( 'l
ATTACHMENT 7
INITIAL STUDY
AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
/7 - (/1
17- S-u
l
negative declaration
)
I
I
I
Romer NAME: Bonita Car Wash
Romer LOCATION: 3048 Bonita Road
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 570-220-30
PRomer APPLICANT: Charles Tibben. 3907 MassacJ>'Iset.ts Aveuue. La Mesa CA 91941
CASE NO: IS 94-04
DATE: February 2. 1994
A. Proiect Settinl!
The project is proposed on a vacant 29.108 square foot (.67 acre) site located at 3048 Bonita
Road (the southwest corner of Bonita Road and Lynwood Drive) in the unincorporated area
of the County of San Diego. The project site bas an lverage graded slope of 5~ and a
maximum graded slope of 30%. Two single family dwellings are located IOI1th of the site.
Pier 1 Imports is located to the north across Bonita Road and "'mini.lrItive. office and
professional is adjacent to the east. The Rice Canyon flood control t'.h~"""'1 is imnv>diately
west of the project site and I-80S is imm..niately west of the flood control t'.h~n""l.
B. Proiect Descrintion
I
The project will involve the constrUCtion of I single two-story IlnIC1Ure incorporating a
1278 square foot commercial carwash bay. 245 sq. ft. office. 193 sq. ft. Jr'N'''~n;,.-tl room.
231 sq. ft. cashier area. 165 sq. ft. restrooms. and I 200 sq. ft loImge. The first-floor will .
contain the car detailing area, cashic;r. restrooms. ......"~n;t'.s room and the carwash bay. The
second-floor will have the office. loImge and I roof deck area. The access to the building
will be It the west end of the building. There will be six parting spaces. and an area for
drying and SlaCting (area Where cars enter and exit carwash bay). The proposed carwash.
will be open from Bam-6pm and there will be eight employees. five full-time and three part-
1ime. One hUDdred twenty five (l2S) 10 2SO customerS are ~1Ild per day. Tbere will be
two deliveries of supplies per momh.
The discretionary -.:tions ueoe"sary 10 imp~ the pr~ carwuh P'~ject will include:
an Amlexation, GeDeral Plan ~"",,"''''''IIt, I Prezone. Fa"dat Plan lIW'unI, 1be ...,....... of
I Conditional Vie Permit. I Oradin& Permit and an -""-10 1be uIItinc IeMI' IefVice
and aDDexation l&Ieement for this site (1If....- betwerD 1be City ofCllula Vis1a and Phil
Creaser. Georle M. Warwick and KeJmelh W. Baird. JuDe 19. 1990) or I Dew I&/ef-. .
The project consists of I proposaIlO amend the curreD1 City of CIIula Vim GeDeral Plan
land use designation from Residential Low (0-3 dwe1lin& units per acre) 10 O-....~ial
Visitor. The site is proposed 10 be prezOJlflll C-V (O-.....MCial Visitor).
/7-51
-31-
_.... __ _____ ~_._.._ _'_.at._ .......____.
~Vt-
-,,-
'"~
ftW .,.
In the Sweetwater Community Plan, Part xm of the San Diego County General Plan, the
site is designated Office, Professional and Commercial. The site is zoned C-30 in the County
of San Diego. The applicant is requesting that the City of Chula Vista anDeX the site and that
the General Plan be amended to designate the site as Commercial Visitor and prezone it as
C-V, in the City of Chula Vista, to accommodate the proposed project.
The physical development of tht project relating to the requirement of a grading permit will
involve excavation and fill of 2600 cubic yards of soil that is currently on the project site.
The project is considered to be in the floodplain and as such, the project, if approved will
have to comply with city adopted FEMA standards for building in a floodplain: that the
lowest floor elevation (to include basement) of nonresidential struCtures be elevated or to a
minimum of one foot above the regulatory flood elevation or that the project be
floodproofed.
The applicant will also be required to pay additional fees to the Spring Valley Sanitation
District pursuant to the City's agreement with the S.V. Sanitation District, for the use of the
District's outfall sewer. The applicant will be required to pay the following fees: public
facilities development impact fees, traffic signal fees, transportation development fees, sewer
capacity fees and fees imposed by the Spring Valley Sanitation District.
The applicant will be required to dedicate a sufficient area fronting Bonita Road to meet
requirements for a four-lane major with dual left turns (S4' centerline) and to provide street
improvements; curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveways, street lighting, drainage improvements and
A.C. pavement. A right-turn-only sign for the Bonita Road entrance will be a condition of'
project approval. The applicant will be required to widen the proposed 24' driveway on
Lynwood Drive to 28 feet. For ease of use, the applicant will also be required to provide
a 20' wide entrance and 20' wide exit on Bonita Road to meet Fire Department standards.
The project will employ eight individuals, generating a negligible impact on public services.
The impact is less than significant. However, the Chula Vista School District and
Sweetwater Union High School District developer fees will be ISsessed on the project in
accordance with state law that currently provides for a developer fee.
The proposed project site is located in a 100 year flood plain. It is not known what impacts
downstream ('hAn....! improvements to the Sweetwater River ChanDeI may have on the
floodplain elevation at the site. The existing on-site facilities allows lUdace flow
northwestward to Rice Canyon Creek, which is lmmfodiately west of the proposed project
site. The off-site drainage facility is the Rice Canyon Creek, which discb....ges to the
Sweetwater River ...h..n....t. ADalysis bas iJvI...""", that offsite drainage facilities iDcluding
the Sweetwater River ("h........l at the confluence of the Sweetwater River and the Rice
Canyon Creek are inadequate to aerve projected flows from this and other projects.
Engineering S1aff state that the requirement for the applicant to build the project one foot
above the floodplain will reduce any potential impacts to . level below ai&nificant.
c. ConmatibUitv with 'Phln~ .niI 7nninv
The project involves . proposed change of the current City of Chula Vista General Plan
designation of "Office Professional Commercial" (Sweetwater Cnmmtlnity Plan) to
WPC F:\IIOMElPLANNING\STOREDIICDO.9XRd. ICllI.93.ICIU.93)
....e 2
,
lIS?..
"Commercial Visitor." The site is proposed to be prezoned "C-V" (Commercial Visitor).
The property is currently located within the County of San Diego unincorporated area and
subject to land use controls established within the Sweetwater Community Plan. In July
1989, the City Council adopted a comprebensive update of the Cbula Vista General Plan and
referenced the newly-adopted Sweetwater Community Plan as the basis for land use
designations within the unincorporated portions of the Sweetwater Valley 1hat fall within the
City of Cbula Vista General Plan area. 'Ibis action was taken primarily due to the fact 1hat
the County was in the process of updating the Sweetwater Community Plan during the same
time period 1hat the Council was considering the adoption of the '\P"'RtM General Plan.
Property located to the east, across Lynwood Drive, also in the County, is desigroRtM "Office
Professional Commercial", and property located directly south and elevated above the level
of Bonita Road, is designated "Retail Commercial" and zoned "C-e" (Central Commercial).
The Sweetwater Community Plan does not directly Ilddress properties oriented to major
freeway access and the City of Cbula Vista bas, in many cases, designated developable
property at major freeway interchanges and "gateways" to the City as "Commercial Visitor"
in an effort to limit the range of land uses to those oriented to tourism and the travelling
public (e.g.. botels, motels,restaurants, car washes ,etc.) Proposed modifications to the Chula
Vista General Plan for areas located within the Sweetwater Planning Comlllllnity need to
consider the Sweetwater Community Plan fabric but at the same time land use compatibility
within areas currently located within the City of Cbula Vista General Plan. The proposed
General Plan land use designation change to "Commerica1 Visitor" and prezoning to "C-V.
(Commercial Vistior) is considered a compatible land use at Ibis location.
D. Identification of Environmental Effects
Traffic
The project will be conditioned to dedicate a sufficient area fronting Bonita Road to meet
requirements for a four-lane major with dua\left turns (54' centerline) to meet city street
design standards.
The Threshold Standards require 1hat all intersections must operate at a Level of Service
(LOS) "C. or better, with the exception 1hat Level of Service (LOS) "D" may occur during
the peak two bours of the day at signalized intersections. Intersections west of I-80S are not
to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No intersection may reacb LOS "E" or "F"
during the average weekday peak bour. Intersections of arteria1s with freeway ramps are
exempted from Ibis Standard. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold
Standard.
The proposed project approximately will increase the ADT (avenge daily traffic) by 900, per
a traffic analysis submitted by Darnell &. Associates, in beha1f of the projett applicant.
LOS"D" occurs for no more than two hours per day, thus complyina with the City's LOS
I1IDdards.
The conclusions of the City Traffic J:"g;n-r and the above cited traffic CODSUlllllt are 1hat
the proposed project is not expected to create any sipificant impacts to Boni1a ROId and/or
Lynwood Avenue traffic. The traffic generated by the carwasb is spread fairly evenly over
the day. This reduces the potentia1 for significant impacts occurring. The intersection of
Bonita ROId and Lynwood Drive is conttol\ed by the County of San Diego 1DIl1be applicant
WPC F:\HOMElPl.ANNINGISTOaEDIICIZO.9JJtd. 10l1.93.1ClZ2.93)
17- 53
PIle 3
will comply with county standards and requirements. The traffic study recommeDded that
the proposed 24' driveway on Lynwood to 28' for ease of use.
Bonita Road is currently classified as a four-Jane major roadway with bike lane. Sufficient
dedication is needed to meet half-width standards of said designation. Also, the applicant
will be required to widen the street to half-width standards along the project's frontage with
bicycle lanes and provide curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveways, street li&hting drainage and A. C.
pavement. Street improvements of Lynwood Drive will insure the project's compliance to
current County of San Diego and City of Chula Vista standards. This will allow for the
future buildout of Bonita Road as discussed in the General Plan Cin:ulation Element.
m
The Fire Department will be able to provide an adequate level of fire protection for the
proposed facility without an increase in equipment or personnel. The Fire Department
requires that the applicant provide a 20' wide entrance and a 20' wide exit on Bonita Road
to meet Fire Department standards.
E. Mandatorv Findinl!s of Sil!nificance
1. The project has the potential to substantially degrade the quaUty of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause
fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustAining levels, threaten levels,
threaten to f'lImlnate a plant or animal community, reduce the Dumber or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or .nlmAI, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory,
The project site is in an urbanized area and bas previously been cleared and no
sensitive vegetation exists. The proposed project, the construction of a commercial
carwash with an office, mechanical room and carwasb bay, does not bave the
potential to degrade or reduce any existing habitat.
2. The project bas the potential to achieve short-term envlronmentalgoaJs to the
disadvantage of long-term environmentalgoaJs.
This project will require an annexation, general plan IJIIeDlIment. . prezone (rezone),
. conditional use permit, . sewer 8&leement and . grading permit.
Concerns regarding potential envirOwJlental impacts raised by 11aff, """........nity
groups and citizens were the following:
Traffic
A traffic l1Udy provided by the applicant stated that the project traffic is DOt expected
to create any significant impacts to Bonita Road and/or Lynwood Drive, The
applicant will be required to dedr..\I' . sufficient portion of the lite to meet four-Jane
half-width requirementS, which will allow for future buildout of Bonita Road. As a
result of Engineering's requirement for the roadway dedication, the proposed project
will be consistent with the long-term conditions discussed in the Circulation Element
of the General Plan.
WPC F:\IIOME\PLANNINGISTORED\1020.~. 1021.93.1022.93)
..... 4
17- S l;
-30-
~
Noise levels are above current standards for the area at 66 db and the increase
created by the proposed project, .2db, is negligible. As 2.Odb would be considered
a significant impact, the estimated increase is below a level of significance.
The proposed carwash will be constructed in a cleveloped area, of which a majority
is designated as retail-commercial. The impacts of traffic and noise have been found
to be less than significant. City facilities will be adequate to serve the proposed
project and no new facilities will be required. Therefore. the project d oes not have
the potential to achieve shon-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-
term environmental goals.
3. The project bas possible effects wbIch are IDdiTidually Umltecl but cumulatively
considerable. As used In the subsection, "cumulatinly considerable" means that
the Incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when vieweclln
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects,
and the effects of probable future projects.
All impacts,both individual and cumulative have been fOUDd to be less than
significant. City facilities will be adequate to serve the proposed project and no new
facilities will be required. The project does not have the potential for individually
limited effects being cumulatively considerable.
4. The environmental effects of 8 project will cause 8 substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly.
The proposed project will not cause any significant impacts and it is in compliance
with threshold standards for fire. police. schools. libraries and other public facilities
as discussed in the threshold section of this document. As discussed, the proposed
project will not significantly impact air quality, noise levels and traffic in the project
area. The project will not cause adverse effects to humans, either directly or
indirectly.
F. Consultation
1. Individuals and OrRllni7J1tions
City of Cbula Vista: Susan Vandrew, PJ_nning
Barbara Reid, pl_nniflg
Ken Lee, PJ_nning
Duane Bazzel, PJ_nning
Ed Ba1Chelder. PJ_nning
Luis Hemandez. PJ_nning
Roger Daoust, Engineering
Cliff Swanson, Engineering
Hal Rosenberg, "l1gi-mg
Bob Sennett, PJ_nning
Ken Larsen, Director of Building It Housing
Carol Gave. Fire Marshal
WPC f,IIlOMElPLANNING\S'IOIlEll1l020.9XIld. 1021.93.ICI22.93)
1'7 - )S-
..... 5
Crime Prevention, MaryJane Diosdada
Marty Schmidt, Parks &: Recreation Dept.
Rich Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
App1icant's Agent: Charles Tibbett
2. Documents
Chula Vista General Plan (1989) and EIR (1989)
Title 19. Chula Vista Municinal Code
Undate of Geotechnical Reoon Bonita Car Wash (Reference: Repon of Geotechnical
Investigation, Jaric Office Building, Bonita Road and Lynwood Drive, Bonita,
California, April 19, 1990)
Addendum to 1990 Environmental Site Assessment Reoon. November 1993
Letter from Hans Giroux &. Associates, Environmental consultants, re:
BonitalLynwood Car Wash Noise Impact Potential, November 9, 1993.
Sweetwater Community Plan, Pan xm San Diego County General Plan
Traffic Renon For Bonita Car Wash, Darnell &: Associates, Inc., Transportation
Planning and Traffic Engineering, January 20, 1994.
Revised Traffic Reoon For Prooosed Bonita Car Wash, Darnell and Associates,
Transportation planning and Traffic Engineering, April 21. 1994.
3. Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on lhe attached Initial Study, any
comments received on the Initial Study and any comments received during the public
review period for this Negative Declaration. The repon reflects the independent
judgement of the City of ChuIa Vista. Further information regarding the
environmental review of this project is available from lhe ChuIa Vista Planning
Depanment, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910.
E~~~kR:~~'~~RDINATOR
EN 6 (Rev. 5/93)
WPC F:1II0ME1PI..ANNING\STOREllII020.9lIld. 1021.93.1022.93)
/7 - s (;
~~a_
PIle 6
\PPUCATION CANNOT B. .~c.'U.t'TED UNLESS SITE
PLAN IS FOLDED TO FIT INTO AN 8.112 X 11 FOLDER
City of OIuIa Vista
Applicazion Form
,Far Office UIe 0lIIy
;1~;~tJr~
)~No. /2G?VZ-
."J)I&e. . .... .Itet "d. ....
,:~' ".,' - ..
~ecIbWiE' .
'....~... .vjocl.No. .. . A.
'lri No.
.,....'.N. 0.....'. .......,..
;..taW .~No.
;,::::~:;::,.,-,;..:-::;.:._.:>:,:,::..,-.,,:::;..;,.:.:'-.,.,-:'.;-.,-
rnmAL SruDY
A. BACKGROUND
1. ProjectTJlIe BONITA CAE kJA&H
2. Project Location (Saeet IddJess or deaaiplion)
c...I-lD! A \l'~"TA (IA
.
~48 E:.o~ITA f21"'l.4.D
AssesSOIS Book, Page cl Parcel No.
3. Brief Project Description 'FOL-l- 1:>~IjIc..E C~WAS.UJ 1)E"TA!L Arr;~
.
4. Name of Applicant C~AR.L..6c::. TI Eb~ETT
Address..39QLMA'SSACHv:,t=:T1S AV6. Fax' Phone (pc17-7~(.. r
City y ME5A- State~ZiP...9lSiL-
5. Name of Preparer/Agent.:f?(') ~;=-
Address 3.90.) MA<;~AUJ. U<;ET'T '- tw. Fax' Phone 697-;;"::--
City J- A M::"b A State (lA- Zip qj~4-!
Relation to Applicant E#rr\r.yu
6. Indicate all penniu or IppI'Ovals and enclosures or documcnU sequired by the Environmental
Review Coordinator.
L Penniu or IppI'Ovals required.
..JC. 0eDeraI Plan A-t
~ RezoutIPrezone
Orldin Permit
- ,
_ TeDlative I'IrceI Map
..t:.. Site PIaD I: Arch. Review
_ Special UIe PlnDit
~ Desipl Review Applicalioo
_ TeDlllive Subd. Map
_ Redeve\op"""" Aprtt:y OPA
_Redev~.- Aprtt:y DDA
_ PabIic Project
~ ~ftIWI!9.titwI
.L.. SpecifIC PIaD
...:::.. (,on"mr...1 Use PlnDit
_ Variuce
_ 0---1 ~,_.~.t
0Iber I'InDit
-
Ifproject is . Genen1 Plan A-m-dlllllll aJlor aezoae, pJeue W1l"-lbe cbInF ill deIipIadon from
to
&cJos\IreS or cIucwI...dS (. ...q.dred by Ibe Ilaviranmlllllllteview Coanfinator).
_ Arch. ElevIliOlll .:t- Hy\RIoIIcII Study
I ..........1'" Plans ..........~.I Slud
- . _......- y
_ TeDlative S1IbcL Map ArdIliOoIoIIcaI Sludy
_Impoovemeat Plans =NoiIe Alm-t
-:r Soi1I Report _ Olber AJeIII:Y PlnDit
...A- Qeot_lmIt11 RepM 0Iber
i7) 7-
b.
_ OndiD, PIaD
_ Plrcel Map
_ Precise Plan
_ SpecifIC PIaD
Tnff'1C JmpICt Report
~ Hazardous Wille ,.--.
B. ~OPOSED PROJECT
1.
L
LInd Area: aquare footage ~ or aauge C). ~o5 Ac.
If land area to be de<Jit::....!. .. IaUP IIId purpose.
b. Does the project involve the COIIICrUCdoa of aew Iluildinp. or will aistinlllr\lClln be
...m....!'? NE.I..\ rn~L""IO\.\
'2. Complete Ibis ledion if project is leSidential or prlxed use.
M L Type of clevelopmen~ SinJle FlIIIi1y _ Two Family _ Multi FlIIIi1y
_ Townhouse _ Condominium
b. ToW number of IU\ICCUIeS
c. Maximum height of It1'\ICtlJft:S
d. Number of Units: 1 bedroom
-
2 bedroom
-
3 bedroom
-
'''-, .. bedroom _
" ToW Units _
e. Gross density (D'ultotatICJ'eS)
f. Net density (DUltotal'1CJ'eS minus lilY dedication)
,
I. Estimaled project population
h. Estimaled sale or nmw price rIIIF.
i. Square footage of SlNCtlII'e '
,
j. Percent of lot coverage by buildings or ~
k. Number of on-site parking IpICCS to be provided.
,
L Percent of site in road IIId paved surface "-
-.
".
3. Complete Ibis section if project is commercial or ildU!trial or pUxed use.
L . Type(s) of 1IIId use ('-^M~ r./ A L ('.A~
b. Floor area , \ B ~ IfeiIht of ..wc:tmCl(s) $?O
c. Type of CClIIStNCtion uud in the IIr\JC:IIR
~,,-t:. .
I.
::..~'~-;~ '=~IDId~
1LJ\wt (\u~~t"iI,,.c. ~-I'\rllr'~\..~. +- :~~ft...
=~:n:: :::m=;:: ~ ~ ~t~~i~t :~%~e
Number of Ihifts I Total A
EItimIted Dumber.DC c:ustomm ~ day) IIIIl bISis of acimIle ,2.'5
_~~~~ ,.,n 1::u~/' -'=-h.'l ~~?ric.., o~ "~~I;l.L
I 7 :51)
d.
e.
f.
_1
h. Estimated Dumber of deliveries per day .0 (p Z If\\otiI+.1;
. I.
i. Estimated nnp of ...ice area _ besis of............ 6. W'\:\. "'A.J.~ ,..c....C'
\:)::1<;.... A /,)r\ ,. o"'....,Ai'f"oJ2f (""(!.<,.t..':V('-^
.
j. TypelexteDt of operations DOt kI enclosed bllild~
"'DR-'rll:>l~ O~ t'MZc.....
k. Hours of ...-Ition --.J2. : 00 At:1-,j-o (0: Pt'1.
L Type of exterior Iiptin, ~~ \ ~I..D Eo b ~ .R
... If project is .sz!!aJhI!l m~l. ..<iul.._"w or industrial compldc dIis leCtioo.
N~ L Type of project
., .
b.
c.
d.
Type of flK'mne$ provided
e.
f.
I.
h.
Square feet of enclosed IUUCtUJa
Heisht of strUCtUre(s) - muimum
Ultimate occupancy load of project
Number of on-site JIIrldnI spaces 10 be provided
Square feet of road and paved swfaces
Additional project charlcteristics
.,
c. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
1. Wi1l1he project be required to obWn a permit through the Air Pollution Control District (APCD)?
~O
2. II lilY type of JI'Idin, or acavllion of tile I"~ 1IlticT'Iled'1 -1:E. ~
If YIlt compldc tile fonowin,:
L kludin, tIaICheI to be bIctfilled. bow many cubic yards of e.1h will be excavlled?
CDOi::a.JQoC.,., ~t..'" ~()D rt'i Arr~c,<; L.Y~
b. . How many cubic yards of fill will be plIced'1 .!::..I CD ~ t") C. V.
Co How much .. (Ill. ft. or ICIII) will bC pIded'1 · S e4lU",....
d. WbIl will be tile: ....1....... depth of cat (0'
A.... depth 01 cat 2.'
Mu;...- depth of fill 3'
Avenp depth of fill 2'
17 .5 7
...'
3.
<t.
5.
Describe all energy consuming devices which are part of 1be pau~ project IIId !he type of
energy used (air corwtit1lW1ing, eIectricallppJilnce., llaling eqIAir.~ etc.)
AI? (\nNt'l~IO\.hN.('1 J f'S cU'~~:""!:l\ "^~C".. r-- ~.k'(.J~~
....;,..,.. 1be alount of IIItInl open IpICC tbIl is part of die pro~ (Ill. A. ar 1CftS)
tS.k ~.n ~fl'Rf p Lbe. 4~~'.p'J - 5t.:.~O ~.1=".
W__~,~~--...typeb1:
jobs. ~:~ e: ..\.,~~) ..\"
~ .) .. /2..
6.
Will highly flammable or potentially explOlive mmrials ar IabltlnceS be ued ar ItOI'ed wilhin
1be project site7 ~O
7.
How many estimated automobile 1rips, per day, will be ae<,u1lCd by 1be project7 -1#:1>>'
--3~
8.
Desaibe (if any) off-site improvements necessary to implement 1be project, IIId their points of
access or connection to the project site. Improvements inchide but DOt limited to !he following:
DeW streets; street widening; extenSion of gas, eJectric. IIId sewer lines; cut IIId fill slopes; and
pedesuian and bicycle facilities. C\lrb r,u~ II~I, ..~I P\iW :J!'\# r<~
~n'l-b '?"S ~T ~~ ?~f'{
D. ~CRIPTION OF ~ONMENTAL S~G
1.
peoton'
Has a pology stUdy been conducted ClII1be pau~? ..:fr~
(If yes. ,han .,.-dl)
Has a lOils nport ClII the project . been 1lllde7 ~E~
(If yes. ,1m! ...-'l)
2.
Bvdrolo2V
Are lilY of 1be following feaIma peaent ClII ar adjlcent to die .? .J::?S
(If yes. Gplain in detail.)
L Is the.re lilY surface evidence of a Iba1low ground WIIIr table? ..J::JO
J 7 - (, 0
.__.___._. .. _,.J 1ft'lftM" ta.l. ICIZLIS) _ II ~ -
.... 4
b. Aze 1here lilY w8leJCOUrSCS or dninIp improvements 011 or atjacalt 10 !be lite?
YE':> J FLOOD ~o~"R-O~
c. Does runoff from !be project lite drain direc:dy in 10 or toward a domestic wlter supply.
lake. JeSerVoir or bay? - lJn "F' n-"\r-, c...t,W)\lF J
d. Could dninIp from !be lite cause erosiOll or .l1ttotl()ll to atjlcent IIUS?
t.Jl'>T' U~F- L'r"
e. Desaibe all drainIF &ciJities to be !,"voided and their 1oc::Iti0ll.
...J!.i..f.p, ...lr::lIh~lr ~ tt..-.A- wj Elf~TlI\J~ A.~ ~TQLVTt)Pt.
N.IJ. C. ~ OF ~,rc:.
3. ~
L Aze there any noise sources in !be project Yk:inity which may ~ the 1II'Oiect SDe?
..hi 0 .
b. Will DOise from the project impact any seDSilive receptors (hoIpUa1s. adlools. single-
family residences)? ~O
4. Jiolo2V
d.
Does Ibe SDe involve lilY Coastal Sap Scrub vegetation? NO
Is Ibe project site in I nerural or paniaIly IIItUrIl stIle?..1:J() - 'J?hR.T 1 ALlY
If yes. has I biological survey been conducted 011 the plerpe;rty?
Yes No X' (Please attacb. copy.)
Describe all trees and vegetation 011 the lite. Jnd;~" Jocootl()ll. beipt. diameter. rd
species of trees. and which (if lilY) will be removed by the project. '5'I~e. h::l
bun pr""';I"I...."'~ e.\C1::lI'~d t..\... ~\I'''' u~;}.n.-h.n-1
L
b.
c.
5. Past Use oflbe Land ~EE :..~\lIRPNME}fr,4L. CQITE ~"i>c;.E.'::>~I'tc:."'T.
L Aze there lilY mown histarica1 or 1ICheoJop:.l reIClmCCIlotlleCl 011 or near the project
lite? l-lO
b. Aze there any known paIeonIoloaica1 reIClmCCI? ~ 0
c. Have there been any baDrdous IIIIIeriIIs diapaIed of or Ilared CIII or near the project lite?
.1)Q
d. What was the IInd previously aed for? ~. F. R. .
$/7--01
6. CwTent Land Use ,
L Describe all suuaures Ift(\ IIIId Uses cumot1y aislinlllll the project ..
~.....\...."T'\ "-Ie.. ~ot.,.\I"ll "1::1\\ 'lU'\.l o;;..~~. p.,u....J..~~iDY\
,
~\n ~_u t'r, "",.. llc....r
b. Describe aD ICI\IClUI'eS Ift(\ IIIId uses ........dlY piatilllllllldjlccDt P'''I'"''ty.
North ..lllFI.\ 'P\e.&.J- ~ph:\
-~=~
East ~~O ~ ~ ~II" \
West _r~o..__('o\ ~h~"h' \ . ~'r'. Bee:>
,
7.
Social
L
b.
Aze there lilY re&idents 011 .'1 ~O If 10. bow many'?
Aze there lilY canent employment Oy~;';"" lIII .'1 -110
If 10. how many and what type'1
8. PIuse provide lilY ocher WonnaDlIII which may assist in the evaJuaDlIII of the P'upOSed project.
I~E. ~AR WA~H WILL R~c..L.Al),1 qSo", ~I= lllL.,.,d' I~...F:'\
~THe:. lJA'f..."'I)J~ OF- {Y~.I2<" .12n.JI!:l Q..4~<" t'~ .ijDIAR. S-r.l'
'E.xPEc...~ W~\u.1. .4\JERA4tE, APe,l?()'lLiMvlA-TC:L'I'" 1 (lAi.?
;:X I T r N b;J eVER. Y ~ Mili UTe: 5
J 1- ~ L-
WI'C:I'!--- ,AIlMDlCJ\fI'l102l..ulll& 11lIDJJ) lI& 1_)
-tfs'~
",6
Z. CERTIFICATION
I. . OWDtZ/awner in escrow.
~c.... ~.\I~~TT
Priat ume
or
I. c:oosultant or apnt.
Print name
HEREBY AFFIRM. dlat to the best of my belief, the ItIIemenlS and information brRin contained are in all
respects tnJe lUId correct and that all known infonnation concerning the project and its selling has been
included in this application for lUI Initial Study of possible environmental impact and lUIy enclosures for
aDaChments dlemo.
r:Ll t? ~p
Owncr/Ownl:z in Escrow Signature
or
QmsuItant ar Apnt Sipatl=
2 -zf"- 73
DIre
-If ICting far I corporadon, include caplCity and COIilpany ume.
17- b 3
________.._'!'J
.'
INITIAL STUDY PROCESSING AGREEMENT
MIme vi Awlblc C I1~LE. c::. ""..l.J". E.. F 7,..
Address: 3Qc.., MA!=.....Ac.:7~~ ~~"'" < AU.
City: LoA M E"!>4 SlIll: nA
NIme vi AaIhorized .... Lmrivc (if 1ipIiDry):
~
CIty Salle
~t DIle:
Depofil "-'t l/V"r}"-
'I1IiI.....acment r .....--1") 1Ien_ tbe City vi QuIa Villa,. ......... .laIIcipaI........alion rCity")
_ tbe benamed appIicA (or III JniIiaI Study r Awl;".qtj, eftectM . vllb& .....~lCIIl Dale lit tanh ~.
iI-se wiIh .......u to die foIIowin, facti:
Pbone ~~~ ~'ti-7~~
f41..!\ I \
Pbone
Zip
WbereIS, die Appliclntllls applied ID die CIty lor III JDiIiII Study vi die type ~...4..........4 ("Initial
Scudyj which die City bas required to be obcained as . CiOIIlIiIion to pamitlin,dIe Awlw-. to dneIop · plJ'CCl
vll"..,.eny; and.
Wheftas. die CIty will incur ......-cs in order to procell laid JniIiaI Study dlIuDJh die VIrious dr.p.thdllS
IIld before die wrious boan1s IIICI commissions vi die City rPl....-io.' Servicesj; IIld.
Wheftas. die purpoee or this _eaMIll dID reimbune die CIty lor aD e..peI_1t wID iDcar in CClIIMCtion
with pnMdin, the Processin, Services;
Now, thcRfore, die panics do ha'eby ap'llC. in achllllc (or die IIIIIlIIaI paII- IIaeln CIOIIlained. as
follows:
L Awlblt's Duty to Pay.
1bc Awlicantlhall pay all vi die City'. ..........e& u.........4 in pnMdin, Po....-ln, ServIce JeIated ID
applicant'. Initial Study, incIudinl all vi the City'. dinct IIld ~ CCllllIeIaIed thInto. 'Ibis duty vi
die Applicantlha1l be.acned 10 llaein.dIe "AppI;,.~t'. Duty 10 Pay."
A. Applblt'. Deposit Duty
M paniaI pcrfannIIICC vi the AppI",'''.'. Duty ID Ply, Ib& Aprl"-lllhall depalildIe amount
arcnrercmnced \Deposit"). '
I, nc CIty IbaI1 cIIqc ill 1awfaI.., .- ........... Ia I"V' Idk, Pi. l . oJ Senil:cs
apInst lbc AppIftad'. DIpoIIt u,... lbc ClIIIIClUlion vi ..." [ " tbe Awl;..."t'.
IIIitia1 Study ,lIlY ptlIIiaII vi tbe DepoIIl..... ....... Ib& CIty sIIaII....1aid IIIiIIIlce 10 tIIc
AppIftad widloal ... ___ u,lUIn& lbc 1'" . ,of tbe ~'. JniIiaI
Study,dIe..-ll vllbc DIpoIIt t.ec .. .. -~ or .....r- ~111bly to IIecomc
p'--" IIIlbc apInlon vi the City,aponllCllice vI_ by .. CIty, tbe AppII-ll sIII1I
blhwith I"vo/ide .. --- depaIIt . lie Clty sIIaII ... '- . JIll '"\ably
.... lIto CIIIlIIinue to I"vo/ide p" . II .... r r - ......, of lie AppIIr..Il ID
laIdaIIy cllpalitllld ID -'" -- laid depaIiI. IlIniD u,d-1l4 II1II1 III .... . tbe
"Applftad'. DlipoB'DaIy",
D. CIty'. Duty
TIIc CiIy shaI1, apon the CllI1dition .. .. ~Il illIIIlllllIrSI vi tbe AWL "''l'. Daly to Ply or die
App1iclnt'. DepoIIlDaty, _ JDOdfalth IDI"...ide I" [: J..,.rnv-III.....totbeApp'ItolOtt.. Initial
Study application.
/ 7 - b li
- +'1-'
....
~llZI_(W....,,)(W.I_)
A. ". City IhaIl haw DO liability ...._.cIer to tile AppI;.._1iar tile failare to poc:ea tile Applicant's
lllilial SlUdy lppIicaIion, or for fIilure to procell dle AppIjcaqt', IDiIiaI SlIIdy wiIhin tile lime
fnme requelled by dle AppI~ or IIIlimIIed by 1be CiIy.
B. ByeucatiOll oftllis ..--t. tile AppHr-l1lllD IIaw BD riaJd to direQ or odMnile iIIfJualce
lbe CIlIIIduct of dle IDiIiaI SlIIdy (or which lbe JIIPIkanl .. sppIied. ". City IhaIl ale Its
dbaetion ill evalUldnI dle AwIn.tt,,1IIitial SlIIdy 1IlP'v.- wiIboul repnt to die AJlpI~"
pomiIe to pay for lhe p.. '''1 Serlir or lbe ~-v.. of lbe Aw...-nL
m. JemedieI
A. SaIpenIion of P,( ~'1J
.. aMltl()l\ to 111 olber rilhts IIId 10011 ~;.. which die Clry IIIID odIIniIe IIaw It law or equity.
lbe City ... dle ri&htto ..jleIId lIIdIor withboId the .. . II of tbe IDiIiaI SlIIdy which is the
_jecl .... of this Aw4lelMll&, . WIll . dle IDiIiaI SlIIdy wbidI My be tbe _jeclllllller of
lilY olber Ptnnit which Applicant .... before the City.
B. Civil Co1Icction
In addition to 111 olber rilhlS IIld remedies whiclllbe City Ibal1 otIlcI'wiIe IIaYe 111"'" or equity,
the City has the rilhl to c:oUea 11111IIIII wbich _ or may become due ...._.cIer by civil Ktion,
IIld .. instilUtinllitiplion to coUect same. dle pm..uiII& s-tY Ibal1 be IIItided to nuanable
aaomey', fees had costs.
IV. MisCeUaneous
A. Notices
All notices. demands or requests provided for or pamiaed to be pwn ...-. to this Ap'eemenl
must be in writinl. A1111Olices. demIndJ IIld requests to be ~ to lilY .-nY IhII1 be dec:med to
have been properly liven or ~ if penonaUy ~ or deposited in the United SIIlC$ mail.
Idchmd 10 lIUCh p&rty, pllIlaF pnpeid, Jqistaed or 0IIItified, widI n&um receipt requested. II
dle Iddrcm I identified Idjlcenlto tbe sipatures of the ..1I.h"... lurted.
B. Govaninl LawIV-
1bis Apeement sha1l be perned by IIld ClOIIIlNed iIllCCC1'dance with the ~ of dle Stile of
Ca1ifomiL Any IClion .nsIn1 .. or I8IIIin& to tIIis Aw..ement IIlII1 be IIoulhl only in the
federa1 or .. courts kaIed ill SIll Dielo c-ty, .. of Ca\ifclIIIia.IIId if 1lJPI~. dle City
of Cbula Villa. or . '** tbento . paaIbIe. Veaae'" tIIis _ llf<1 of . pllfCllllllllCC
1lcnlander,IIlII1 be tile City of CbaIa Villa.
C. Multiple SiJllllDries
If IIlae _ mtiple .......to tIIis ""'11 yo .. beIIaIf of AWu-&. .. of.. ~
IIlII1 be joindy . lIWIIDy IiIbIe b tbe ...rc.._o[( of ~" ..... ... .. fonh.
D. 5ipIIory AaIharily
". Ji&nIforY to this....... IIInby .......... ...... "I tbIIlt II tbe daIy deIipUed...t
for dle AppticIIIlIlld .... been duly IIIlIlariIed by dle AppIjrMC to -- .. A.._t ..
behalf of the AppliclllL SipIrory Ibal1 be penonII11 IiIIlIe for ~" Daly to Pay IIld
AppIant', Duty to DIpoIlt ill dle ewDIlt..... been 1IIlI1ClIized to.lI~ dU A.l-*" by
tbeApp~L /7- G5
___C11
E. Hold Harmless
AppIic8nllhl11 dr:fend. iIIdemnify IIId IIlIId IIInnIea lhe CIty, ill eIecled IIId IpIICIinled officers
IIICI employees. from IIld apinIl all cIaimI for cIImIIea. lilbility, ClIIlIIId apIIIIC (iDcJudina
.withoullimilldan atImlCyI' lea) lrilina oat m W ''1' AppIil:ant'.1aiIiaI SllIIIy, acept only
for !bole t:IaimIlrilinafrom lhe _.._ ar _ wWfuI_ ~,... m lhe City, __..4 by
lhe City, ill offiM1........ ar~ ill defeollIn.....1IICII cIIimI. wIIDlher lhe .-ne
..,.oceed eo jDdpment ar lIIIC. FIrdIer, lhe AppS-'I&. . ill CIWII _ Of!. 1ha11, .. written
.-pst by lhe City. dr:fend ..y IlICb IlIit ar IClicln IIftIlIJht apinIt lhe CIty. ill ofticcn. ..ents,
ar employeel. AppIw-.t'. iIIdemIIlI::IIi m tile City Iha11 be IiIIIlled by .., prior ar lllbequenl
*dInIion by tile Appl;...'I!.
P. Mm-""'IIiw CIIimI ~ .. IIId Po.....4.eI.
No lllil ar ...lrIIioIt IIIaII be IIftIlI&bt .ulna oat m dIiI... .... ....lhe CIty .... . claim
lias tint been ......-s ill wriIiq IIId &led widt the City m 0uIa Villa IIId ctDd upon by the
Dty m OIuIa Villa iII_dala widt tile ............lI_ blIt iD ~ l~ m tile 0IuIa Villa
Municipal Code, . _ may from time eo time be IIIIeIIded. lhe .......iIians m wbich are
ir.alIparated by the reference u if IuUy III fardt hlreIn.lIId IlICIt polict.lIId procedtnI ued by
lhe City ill the implementaliOll m _. t1pOII ftlqlIeSl by lhe City, the ApplicInlIllall meelllld
CGllfer ill aood faith with the City for tile .....P'* m .-viD.., diIpule - tile.... m this
. Apemen!.
Now, therefore. the panies hereto. hama reId anti ....~ the ..... anti CllIlditiorlI m this apeemenl.
do hereby eqnas lheir COIIIeIII eo lhe _ hereof by lIlDna their band hereto 011 the - III blIt adjIl:enl thereIo.
City
Dty m ChuIa Villa
276 Fourth A_ue
OIuIa ~ 91910
By; L / C'L---'i;.-
n..ed; $. - Z 9'- "7 c.3
Applicanl (ar authorized ."l"'.....Atalive)
By:
By:
IlIIed:
~aat..ustlof.I_)tIof.I_) .
1706
-49-
... 10
.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PAIlTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
SlIlemenI fA *"1OIln fA CIIIIiR ""-Wil" "'. pI)'IIIllIIII. II' CIIIIpmJII ClllIlInlllJliOllS, 011111 maaen which
wID Ieq1Iire cIiaw~ ICIion 011 \he .., fA \he City ~I PIIMin& eo-...100l1Jll, IIId ID alher ofticiII bodies.
TIle faIIowin& information IIIIISl be IJl..Jo-I'
l. IJIt \he -.eI fA 1II.-_IIaYC. -.. iIIInII ill die .......1, Le.. ......... 1 .. ~....w
.."uer. '
~HAk?LE~ 12. T\'p...,f'"'-~l I _ l.rllc::. Mf"")PC.P~ ?AI'L D. "'''''l'''n'''I'''.,..,.......
""A~ foJlC::: A MA(.\Jf'1TTl') .. '
2. If III)' penon idallified .-_.1 10 (1) aIlcM II . ""'....~ II' ,.1l_41Jp. .. die -- fA III
llldividuall OWIIina men daIII1K fA tbe ..... ill die '*.....6... II' OwniIIalll)' .-'-Aip iIItIreIl in
die pdICrIhi .
~AR..LE:1'~ \,It:::.l!.~~.t;, n~c;, MOi"F.RA~.r/~ADL 'D MAr,."i,.rr.~.
J1AliLl''1':: . M~_ _____\S;(. .
3. If III)' penon idallified .-_IID (1) aIlcM II """"l"ufil arpnIDIion II' . lnIIt, .. 1he -- fA III)'
penon laVinall direclCl' oldie -..profil cqani&Idon II' II tnII* II' bcneficiIry II' tnII* of die \rUSt.
-
~-~ .
Have )'OlI had men IbIn 5250 worth fA baIineIs nnacted with III)' _ber fA tile City iliff. BoInIs.
Commislions. CGmmiaees IIICI Councu wilhin die pul twelve 1IIOII1IIs?
- lJ(l
4.
5.
PIcue identify ech IIICI every penon, iIIcIudina III)' tpIIS. lIIIpIoyees. ~II II' a.cIepcIIdcnt
contrIC\CI'I who )'OlI "ve aoolp"'" In ......*"1 you Wen die City in \his 1II1111l:!:
6.
Have )'OlI and/or )'1M' aftica'J II' qenll. ill tile IIJ1epIC. CIIIIIlrillueId men .... 51.000 to . CoancU
_ber in die c:umnt II' In*Iina eIer;lion period? Yea ( ] No N If yea, IIIIe wbich Counci1
_ber(s):
..-........: ._w..... , .......A-I--&.T.....~ . &.. ...w........... _ I AI.. . . -.-.
........... .' . ........,....-r,...,.....-r,.. ' .. ""',............. ..'... .., ... ......
.. . ..... ......
fDI'I.= ... Uta' -......
.,)
dd'pw
SiJIIIIIft fA ClIlIIInI:lIIrIv-u
DIte: i-Z,1-1;
c,"/.RLE~ TI~"e:>E'" T
PriDI II' type _ fA ClIllllIT ,-fatlpI~
/'7' (,7
"'11
~~.AJS~ JDJIJlCJot IlIIZ.fJl
~" ~j -
APPENDIX m
CITY DATA SHEET
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
I. Current Zonina. on site: C-30 Commercial (Countv of San DieR{'t ZOlluur)
North: CC
South: R-I
East: CO
West: ODen Saace
Does the project conform to the current zoning? No. Once the moiect lite is lIIIDexed. it will conform to
the current ZOninR for the Citv of Cbula Vista.
II. General Plan land use designation on site: Office. Professional Commercial
North: Retail & Service Commercial
South: Sin2le-Familv Residential
East: Administrative. Office & Professional
West: Flood Control Channel
Is the project compatible with the General Plan Land Use Diagram? Ves. Once the nrolect is annexed
:cd a 2eneral alan amendment is aaaroved. the aroiect is nrezoned. a nrecise alan is annroved and a
onditional use Dennit is issued. it wil1 confonn to the Chula Vista General Plan Use Diaaram.
Is the project area designated for conservation or open space or adjacent to an area SO designated? .A
flood control channel is located west of the arooosed nroiect site.
Is the project located adjacent to any scenic routes? Ves. Bonita Road &om I-80S to SR-12S is . scenic
route.
(If yes, describe the design techniques being used to protect or enhance the scenic quality of the route).
The nrecise alan orocess reauires a landscaoe buffer and RUidelines for the orientation of the huUdinl!.
which will arotect the scenic Dualil\' of the route.
III. Schools
If the proposed project is residential, please complete the following: Not applicable
Uaits 1\-- AlI~
00aeratiD&
Ii'.rfftft
Students
Oenented fIl1m
lmiSS
~
Cmacitv
F.motlment
ElemenlaJ}'
JuDior Hiah
Salior Hiah
.30
.29
.10
IV.
Remarks: The nroaosed nroiect will be in conformsnc::e with Chula Vista mnin2 mMi ftnI!ftJ DIm _ination
once the she is lIIlftexed and . eneraJ alan mumdment and 1U1JIlC is anmoved.
"":.fl? ffp, ~I (7B-~-<d )
Director f P1annina or R ive'"
~ ~. /er,"
Date
/7-::'Q
-51--
Bacqround
Case No. IS 94-04
APPENDIX I
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
(To Be Completed By Lead Agency)
I. Name of Proponent: Charles Tibbett
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 3907 Mas~achusetts Avenue. La Mesa CA 91941
697-7461
3. Date of Checklist: Januarv 26. 1994
4. Name of Proposal: Bonita Car Wash
5. Initial Study Number: IS 94-04
Environmental Impacts
1.
Earth. Will the proposal result in:
m MAYBE r!Q
a.
b.
c.
Unstable earth conditions or changes in
geologic substrUctures?
o
o
.
Disruptions. displacements. compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
.
o
o
Change in topography or ground surface
relief features?
.
o
o
d.
The destrUction. covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical features?
o
o
.
e.
Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils. either on or off the site?
o
o
.
f.
Changes in deposition or erosion of beach
sands, or chaDges in siltation, deposition
or erosion which may modify the ...ha"""'l of
a river or stteam or the bed of !he ocean or
any bay. iDlet or lake?
Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, iaDdslides, mud
slides, ground failure, or similar hazards?
o
o
.
o
o
.
g.
/7. ~ /
/
~52--
Comments:
The project applicant submitted a Soils Repon tbat was written in 1990. The Engineering
Department required an updated repon. The Undate of r.-.ntPrhnical Reoon-Bonita Car Wash was
completed in November 1993 and submitted to 1he pl2nn;ng and Engineering Departments for
review. The updated soils repon concluded tbat 1he recommendations and conclusions of the
original geotechnical investigation are still valid and appropriate for 1he proposed constrUCtion. The
repon calls attention to 1he stockpile of undocumented fill tbat was DOted in 1he original repon in 1he
DOrthwest comer of 1he property and west of 1he drainage swale tbat slopes down to Bonita Road and
recommends tbat 1he fill be removed and recompacted. Also, 1he repons DOtes tbat 1here was
evidence on site of a shallow surficial slope failure in 1he slopes above 1he existing remining wall
located along the eastern boundary of 1he present property. The plans may result in 1he area of the
failure being removed during planned excavations. If 1he final plans do not modify this area, this
slope failure will require repairs to restore its original configuration. The project will involve
excavation and fill of 2600 cubic yards of soil that is currently on 1he project site.
The original geotechnical repon did not cover 1he adjoining easterly property which is now proposed
to be part of the current project. The updated repon recommends tbat a geotechnical investigation
including subsurface exploration be conducted in this area to provide information on the foundation's
suppon characteristics and the parameters for lateral eanh pressure' tbat would be required by the
designer for retaining wall design.
The City Engineering department will require soils information described above prior to issuance
of a grading permit.
No unique geologic or physical features exist on site. Cutting and filling is involved in 1he proposed
project and as such the topography will change. As there are no unique geologic or physical features
on the site. this will not be a significant impact.
2.
Air. WiII1he proposal result in:
m MAYBE l:iQ
a.
Substantial air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality?
o
o
.
b.
The creation of objectionable odors?
o
o
.
c.
Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
lemperature, or any change in climate,
either locally or regionalJy?
o
o
.
Comments:
The project, if approved, will meet City .LOS. 1hreshold ItaDdards IDd geuerate an additional 900
AnT (average daily trips). The roadway currently has. 44,730 AnT. Nine huDdred (900) is not
. considerable increase in 1rIffic flow IDd will DOt significantly impact 1he air quality. The applicant
will DOt be required to obtain a permit 1hrough 1he Air Pollution Control District(APCD).
17- 70
WPC f,1II0ME\PLANNING\S1ORED\ID20.~. 1021.93.1021.93)
- ,,:3-"
PIIeZ
3. Water. Will the Proposal result in: m MAYBE ~
a. Changes in currents, or the course or
direction of water movements. in either
marine or fresh waters? 0 0 .
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of
lIIrface runoffl . 0 0
c. Alterations to the course or flow or
flood waters? 0 . 0
d. Change in the amount of surface water
in any water body? 0 0 .
e. Discharge into surface waters, or any
alteration of surface water quality,
including but not limited to temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity? 0 0 .
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of
flow of ground waters? 0 0 .
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters,
either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception of
an aquifer by cuts or excavations? 0 0 .
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of
water otherwise available for public
water supplies? 0 0 .
i. Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding or
tidal waves? 0 0 .
Comments:
The project is considered to be in the floodplain and. as lOCh. the project, if approved. will have to
comply with City-adopted FEMA Standards for building in a floodplain; that the lowest floor
elevation (to include basezrv!Ut) of DOD-residentiallt1'UCtUre5 be elevlled to a ",ini",,,m of one foot
above the regulatory flood elevation or that the project be floodproofed. SitHpecific: drainage
improvements will be required. The off-site drainage facility of the project si1e is die Rice Canyon
Creek, which discharges to the Sweetwater River Channel. ADalysis has indicated that offsite
drainage facilities including 1be Sweetwater River Channel at the confluenc:e of the Sweetwater River
and the Rice Canyon Creek are inadequate to serve projected flows from this and other projects.
/7 - 1 f
J>oae 3
WPC F,IIIONE1PLANNINGISTOREDUlIZO._. Iml.93. 1lll2.93)
Engineering staff state that the requirement for the applicant to build the project one foot above the
floodplain will reduce any potential impacts to a level below significant.
4. Plant LIfe. Will the proposal result in: m MAYBE ..liQ
a. Change in the diversity of species, or
munber of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic
plants)? 0 0 .
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of plants? 0 0 .
c. Introduction of new species of plants into
into an area, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species? 0 0 .
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural
crop? 0 0 .
Conunents:
The proposed site had been previously cleared and no sensitive vegetation exists. Since vegetation
is non-existent, the proposed project will not significantly impact any sensitive plant species.
5.
Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
m MAYBE ..liQ
a.
Change in the diversity of species, or
numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals including reptiles, fish and
shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)?
o
o
.
b.
Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of .n;m.ls?
o
o
.
c.
Introduction of new species of .nim.ls
into an area, or result in a barrier to
the migration or movement of .n;m.ls?
o
o
.
d.
Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat?
o
o
.
Comments:
Tbe site bad been previously cleared and as such has no wildlife habitat. Thus the proposed project
lite will not significantly impact fish or sensitive species.
6.
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
m MAYBE ~
a.
Increases in existing noise levels?
o
o
.
17- 7''-
WPC F:\HOMElPLANNINGISTOREDIlCDO.9nIf. 1011.93.1012.93)
.
Plae 4
- ~ ~- -
b.
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
o
o
.
Comment:
The existing noise level measured by a Sound Level Meter is 66 db (decibels). This measurement
was laken at 3:40 p.m. on January 14, 1994 at a point ucar 1he single family dwelling adjacent to
1be proposed project site. The carwast.. wilh lhe IU11IIeI parallel (per site plan) to Bonita Road. is
expected to generate an additional 0.2 db to lhe site. An increase in noise is perceivable if lhere is
a 2.0 db increase. The 0.2 db increase generated by 1be project is not significant. Thus. after
review of project characteristics. lhe acoustician has concluded lhat lhe proposed project will not
have a potential for a significant impact at 1he ucarest bomes and no lIlditional study is warranted.
7.
Ught and Glare. Willlhe proposal produce
new light or glare?
m MAYBE W
. 0 0
Comments:
The proposed car wash is already in a well lit. developed area. The project will incorporate
compliance wilh Chula Vista Municipal Code requirements relating to lights to minimi7" any impacts
to below a level of significance.
8.
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
m MAYBE t!Q
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project site is currently zoned C30 in 1he County of San Diego and designated office,
professional and commercial in the Sweetwater Community Plan in lhe County of San Diego. The
applicant intends to apply for annexation to the City of Cbula Vista, and apply for a General Plan
Amendment to the designation of Commercial Visitor and prezone to Commercial Visitor. An
approval of lhe annexation application, a general plan amendment and a rezone. conditional use
permit. sewer agreement and grading permit will allow lhe project to be in compliance with lhe
zoning and general plan designation and other requirements of lhe City of Cbula Vista.
9.
Natural Resources, Will the proposal result in:
m MAYBE W
a.
Increase in lhe rate of use of any natural
resources?
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project will not require an increase in 1he rate of any natural resources. The applicant
has stated lhat 95'; of water used will be recl.~, .tbus placing no 4J00m."'" on 1he current water
IUpply for 1be area. Air conditioning and five electric motors for the carwasb will be used. Since
the proposed carwasb is . small scale operation and tbe area is alrelldy developed. the energy use
of these devices will not significantly impact 1he uatura! resources in 1be area.
10. Risk of Upset. Will1he proposal involve:
m MAYBE W
a. A risk of an explosion or 1be release of
hazardous substanceS (including. but not
/7 73
Pqe5
'IIPC F:\HOMEIPLANN1NG\STOREDII02O.9J:Ref. l02l.93.um.93)
-j~ -
limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in tile event of an accident or
upset conditions?
o
o
.
b.
Possible interference witll an emergency
response plan or an emergency evacuation
plan?
o
o
.
Comments:
No highly fI.mmable or potentially explosive materials or substances will be used or stored witbin
tile project site, preventing a risk of upset on tile project site.
11. Population. Will tile proposal alter tile iocation
distribution, density, or growth rate of tile human
population or an area?
m MAYBE 1m
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed carwash which will employ eight persons people will not cause any increase or
distribution change in tile area population.
12. Housing. Will tile proposal affect existing
housing, or create a demand for additional
housing?
m MAYBE 1m
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed carwash will be employ 8 people on tile project site and it is expected tbat tIlese people
will come from tile community. No impact will result on tile local infrastructure and no new housing
demands will be created.
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will tile proposal result in: m MAYBE 1m
a. Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement? 0 0 .
b. Effects on existing parking facilities.
or demand for new parking? 0 0 .
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systemS? 0 0 .
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? 0 0 .
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air
traffic? 0 0 .
f. Increase in traffIC hazards to motor
vehicles. bicyclists or pedestrians? 0 0 .
)7 . 73 . ",6
'WPC ',IHONElPLANNINGISTOREDIl020.-'. 1021.93.1022.93)
_S-1-
g.
A "large project" under the Congestion
Management Program? (An equivalent of
2400 or more average daily vehicle trips
or 200 or more peak -hour vehicle trips).
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project will increase the average daily traffic by 900 per the traffic malysis submitted
by Darnell & Associates on behalf of the applicant. LOS "0" occurs for 110 more than two hours
per day, thus complying with the City's LOS standards. The S1Udyalso stated that the proposed
project is not expected to create any significant impacts to Bonita Road and/or Lynwood Drive
traffic. Traffic generated by the carwash is spread fairly evenly over the day. The intersection of
Bonita Road and Lynwood Drive is controlled by the County of San Diego and the applicant will
comply with county standards and requirements for the intersection. The Darnell & Associates study
did determine that the Lynwood Drive entrance should be widened from 24' to 28' for ease of use.
The requirement for a right-tum-only sign on Bonita Road will be a condition of project approval.
Bonita Road is currently classified as a four-lane major roadway with bikelanes required for the area
fronting Bonita Road to meet requirements for a four lane major with dual left turns (54' to
centerline). Also, the applicant will be required to widen the street to half-width standards along the
project's frontage with bicycle lanes on Bonita Road and provide curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveways,
street lighting. drainage improvements and A.C. pavement improvements on Bonita Road and
Lynwood Drive. The improvements on Bonita Road will meet City standards and improvements on
Lynwood Drive will meet County of San Diego standards. This will also allow for the future
buildout of Bonita Road as discussed in the City of Chula Vista General Plan Circulation Element.
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services in any of the following areas:
m MAYBE liQ
a. Fire protection? 0 0 .
b. Police proteCtion? 0 0 .
c. Schools? 0 0 .
d. Parks or other recreational facilities? 0 0 .
e. Libraries? 0 0 .
f. Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads? 0 0 .
g. Other governmental services? 0 0 .
Comments:
The proposed project will meet City Threshold staDdards and will DOt result in I need for new or
altered govel'll1Mntal services. State law does require the applicant to pay ICbool developer fees
prior to issuance of I building permit. Parle and Recreation fees do IIOt apply, since the project is
IIOt residential.
Jj 7~i
..... 7
WPC F,IHOMElPLANNINO\S1OREDII02O.9IRef. Ilnl.93.I1122.93)
..-v _
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
m MAYBE 1iQ
a.
Use of substantial amount of fuel or
energy?
o
o
.
b.
Substantial in::rease in demand upon
existing sources or energy. or require
the development of new sources of
energy?
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project will require electricity for five electrical motors and for air conditioning. The
. demand will be less 1han significant.
16. Thresholds. Will the proposal adversely impact
1he City's Threshold Standards?
m MAYBE :ill
o 0 .
Comments :
As described below, the proposed project does not adversely impact any of 1he seven
Threshold Standards.
A. FirelEMS
The Threshold Standards requires 1hat fire and medical units must be able to respond
to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85 % of the cases and wi1hin 5 minutes or less in
75 % of the cases. The City of Chula Vista has indicated 1hat this threshold standard
will be met, since 1he nearest fire station is 2 miles away and would be associated
with a 3 minute response time. The proposed project will comply with this
Threshold Standard.
The Fire Department will be able to provide an ldequate level of fire protection for
the proposed facility without an increase in equipment or personnel. The Fire
Department requires 1hat the applicant provide a 20' wide entrance and a 20' wide
exit on Bonita Road to meet Fire Department standards.
B. Police
The Threshold Standards require 1hat police units must respond to 84 % of Priority
1 calls wi1hin 7 minutes or less and m2mhlin an average response time to 111 Priority
1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.10% of Priority 2
calls wi1hin 7 minutes or less and m2m...in an average response time to 111 Priority
2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The proposed project will c:omply with this Threshold
Standard.
The proposed project will comply with 1he threshold 1lIIDdards. but 1he Police
Department identified 1hat 1hey do have an ingress and egress problem. The
requirement for a right-tum-ODly sign on Bonita should alleviate this concern.
WPC F:\HOMElP1.AIlNING\STOIlEll11020.9XJlol. 1021.93.1022.93)
/7- 7)
- s-'f -
..... 8
C. Traffic
The Threshold SlaDdards require that all intersections must operate at a Level of
Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "0"
may occur during the peak two hours of the day at 1\&1"'1i7"" intersections.
Intersections west of I-80S are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No
intersection may reach LOS "E" or OF" during the average weekday peak hour.
Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this SlaDdard. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold SlaDdard.
Time surveys in 1992 indicated that Bonita Road in the vicinity of the proposed
project performs at LOS "0" during no more than two hours during the peak period
of the day, which complies with the City's LOS threshold slaDdard.
A site specific analysis completed by a traffic consultant states that the ADT (average
daily traffic) anticipated to be generated by the proposed project is 900. The current
ADT between 1-5 and Plaza Bonita is 44,380 and after the project is 44,730. The
project traffic is not expected to create any significant impacts to Bonita Road and/or
Lynwood Avenue traffic. Traffic generated by the carwash is spread fairly evenly
over the day. This reduces the potential for lignificant impacts occurring.
The City of Chula Vista Traffic Engineering ~ivision reviewed the report by Darnell
& Associates. While the Traffic Engineering Division's conclusions are the same as
those of Darnell & Associates (no adverse traffic impacts result from the project), the
consultant's repon shows a lower vehicle trip generation rate than was noted in the
City's Initial Study repon. The consultant's trip rate value was based on employment
and estimated daily car washes. The Traffic Engineering Division's trip rate value
was based in a generic relationship between land use and land area.
O. Parks/Recreation
The Threshold SlaDdard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/I ,000 popu1ation. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold SlaDdard.
The proposed project is not residential and is not subject to Parks and Recreation
Threshold requirements.
E. Drainage
The Threshold SlaDdards require that storm water f10ws and volumes DOt exceed City
Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide uec:essary h.uy.ovements
coosistent with the Drainage Master P1an(s) and City f.IIaineeriD& Standards. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold SlaDdard.
The proposed project lite is lor--fIoit in a 100 year flood plain. The applicant is
required to build one foot above the floodplain. It is DOt known what impacts
downstream l'.hll"""'l improvements to the Sweetwater River O>ll"".,\ may have on the
floodplain elevation at the lite. The existing on-lite facilities allows surface flow
WI'C F,\HQME\PJ.l.NN.ING\SIOBED\laao,_. 1021.~. ,em.")
/7 7{; .
Pqe9
northwestward to Rice Canyon Creek, which is immediately west of the proposed
project site.
Analysis has indicated that offsite drainage facilities including the Sweetwater River
Channel at the confluence of the Sweetwater River and the Rice Canyon Creek are
inadequate to serve projected flows from this and other projects. Engineering staff
state that the requirement for the applicant to build the project one foot above the
floodplain will reduce any potential impacts to a level below significant.
F. Sewer
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed City
Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide uecessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master PIan(s) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed
project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
The existing sewer lines for the site are IS" PVC Rice Canyon trunk line and they .
are adequate to serve the proposed project.
The applicant will be required to pay additional fees to the City of Chula Vista
pursuant to the City's agreement with the Spring Valley Sanitation District for the use
of the district's outfall sewer and to amend the existing sewer service and annexation
agreement or to enter into a new agreement.
G. Water
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and transmission
facilities are constrUcted concurrently with planned growth and that water quality
standards are not jeopardized during growth and constrUction. The proposed project
will comply with this Threshold Standard.
Applicants will be required to participate in whatever water conservation or fee off-
set program the City of Chula Vista has in effect at the time of building permit
issuance.
The proposed project will reclaim a majority of its water and will not jeopardized
water quality in area surrounding the project site.
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
m MAYBE ~
a.
Creation of any health bazard or potential
health bazard (excluding ment2l health?
o
o
.
b.
Exposure of people to 90tential health
bazards?
o
o
.
/7- 77
PIle 10
WPC F:lIlllMEIPLANNING\STOItEI)\1020.9IItcl. 1021.93.10:12.93)
- & I -
Comments:
The noise and air analyses in the initial study found that project impacts will be less than significant
and therefore will not create any bea1th hazards. No other aspects of the project will impact bea1th.
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: m MAYBE HQ
a.
The obstruction of any scenic vista or view
open to the public, or will the proposal
result in the creation of an aesthetically
offensive site open to public view?
o
o
.
b.
The destruction, or modification of a scenic route?
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project site is located in a developed area and does not obstruct and scenic views or
modify a scenic route.
19.
Recreation. Will the proposal result in an
impact upon the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opportunities?
m MAYBE HQ
o
o
.
Comments:
The project site is not residential and does not impact recreational opportunities.
20. Cultural Resources. m MAYBE HQ
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration
of or the destruction or a prehistoric or
historic archaeological site? 0 0 .
b. W ill the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building, structure,
or object? 0 0 .
c. Does the proposal have the potential to
cause a physical change which would
affect unique ethnic cultural values? 0 0 .
d. Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? 0 0 .
e. Is the area identified on the City' a
GeDml Plan EIR IS an area of high
potential for archeological resources? 0 0 .
Comments:
The proposed project aite is located in a developed area and has previously been cleared. There is
DO evidence of any cultural resources on site. 177'1
WPC F:\HOMElPLANNINGISTOREDIICIlO.9XRd. 1021.93.1022.93) PqcJl
21. Paleontological Resources. Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction of paleontological
resources?
ns MAYBE 1m
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed site is in a developed area and there is no evidence of any paleontological resources.
22. Mandatory FIndings of SlgnJficance.
ns MAYBE 1m
a.
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause
a fish or wildlife population to drop below self
sustAining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or An;mal community. reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
lln;mA 1 or eliminate important examples or the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
o
o
.
Comments:
The project site is in an urbanized area and has previously been cleared and no sensitive
vegetation exists. The proposed project, the construction of a commercial carwash with an
office, mechanical room and carwash bay, does not have the potential to degrade or reduce
any existing habitat.
b.
Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-
term, environmental goals? (A shon-term
impact on the environment is one which occurs in
a relatively brief, deftnitive period of time,
while long-term impacts will endure well into the
future.)
o
o
.
Comments:
This project will require a annexation, a general plan amendment, . prezone(rez.onc), a
Conditional Use Permit, . Sewer Agreement, and. Grading Permit. Concerns regarding
potential environmental impacts raised by staff, community ~s and citizens were the
following:
Traffic
A traffic study provided by the applicant stated that the project traffiC is not expected to
create any significant impacts to Bonita Road and/or Lynwood Drive. The appJicant will be
~
Noise levels are above current standards for the area at 66 db and the increase created by the
proposed project. .2db. is negligible. As 2.Odb would be considered a significant impact,
the estimated increase is below a level of significance.
The proposed carwash will be constructed in a developed area. of which a majority is
designated as retail-<:ollUDeTCial. The impacts of traffic and noise have been found to be less
than significant. City facilities will be adequate to serve the proposed project and DO new
facilities will be required. Therefore. the project does not have the potential to achieve shon-
tenn environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-tern environmental goals.
c.
Does the project have impacts which are
individually limited. but cumulatively
considerable? (A project may impact two or
more separate resources where the impact on
each resource is relatively small. but where the
effect of the total of those impacts on the
environment is significant.)
o
o
.
Comments :
All impacts both individual and cumulative have been found to be less than
significant. City facilities will be adequate to serve the proposed project and no new facilities
will be required. The project does not have individual impacts which may be cumulatively
considerable.
d.
Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings. either directly or indirectly?
o
o
.
Comments:
The proposed project will not cause any signifICant impacts and it is in compliance with
threshold standards for fire, police. schools. libraries and other public facilities as discussed
in the threshold section of this document. As discussed. the proposed project will not
significantly impact air quality. noise levels and traffic in the project area. The project will
not cause adverse effects to .humans. either directly or indirectly.
J7
'60
WPC f:\IIOME1PLANNINGIS'IOItEDIIClZO.9J;bf. 1021.93.1022.93)
Paae t 3
Mitigation Measures
(To be completed by the Applicant)
I. as owner/owner in escrow.
Print uame
or
I. consultant or agent.
HEREBY AGREE to any mitigation measures required to avoid significant impacts.
Signature
Date
Determination
(To be completed by the Lead Agency. Check one box only.) *95 Choose N. MND or EIR
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
. I fmd that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
o I fmd that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
o I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and
an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
. ~1{'-d ~~,.A in:. j )
Envlf I ReVJe Coor tor
,,1J.le;y
, .
Date
"If acting for a corporation. include capacity and company uame.
);- 'X I
Pale 14
WPC F:\HOMElPLANNlNG\STOREDII02O.tnd. IOZI.93.Illl2.93)
- ~ S"_
Case No. IS-94-14
APPENDIXD
DE MINIMIS FEE DETERMINATION
(Chapter 1706, StaQ.\tes of 1990 - AB 3158)
. It is hereby found that this project involves no potential for any adverse effect, either
individually or cumulatively on wildlife resources and that a "CertifICate of Fee
Exemption. shall be prepared for this project.
o It is hereby found that this project could potentially impact wildlife, individually or
cumulatively and therefore fee in accordance with Section 711.4 (d) of the Fish and
Game Code shall be paid to the County Clerk.
'J6'~::";'/ 1:.' /J 1(&...../ )
Environmen Review oordinator
a./~/&i'l
Date
/7 ';{ L-
WPC F,IHOMEIPLANNINGISTORED\1010.9:tRor. Ill2I.93.11XU.93)
"'015
I I
ROUTING FORM
DMZ: September 1. 1993
!I'O: .,<<en .r.ancn, .uHding , Jioudng
~ohn Lippitt, Engin.ering (E1R only)
ClittS~anson, Engin.ering (E1R only)
Hal Rosenberg, Engin.ering (E1R only)
IIOg.r Daoust, Engin..riug (IS/3, E1R/2)
~ichard Rudoll, Assistallt city Attorn.y (EIR only)
€rOI GOV., Fir. DepertJUtnt
rty schmidt, Parks , ~cr.ation
im. pr.v.ntion, Poliet Departm.nt
rr.nt Planning
..,~..d..,,, Il..,~.rd, Advance Elanning j::c;..J I.F~
Job S.nnett, city Landscape Architect
Bob Lei ter, Planning DiJoector
Chula Vista El.mentary School Di.trict, Xat. Shurson
SWeet...ater Union H.S. District, rom SHva (IS' E1R)
Maureen Roeber, Library (Final E1R)
Other
FROM:
Doue Reid
____Environm.ntal s.ction
SUBJECT: Application tor Initial stud}' (15- 94_04IFA-~/DQ-035 )
Checkprint Draft E1R (20 dayt) (EIR-____/FS-----/DQ )
Revi.... of a Draft EIR (E1R-____/FS-----/DP)
Revie'" of Environmental Revi~... Record FC-____ERR-----J
rh. Project consists of: Full service cir wash with detail area, office and
lounge. The project will include prezoning and annexatiol
z.oc.t.ton: 3048 Bonita Road (The southwest corner of Bonita Rd
and Lynwood Dri,e.
Pl.... r.vi.... the document .nd torward to m. .ny co.-.nts you b.v.
by 9/10/93 .
ColDlUnts:
/7-i)3
-(,'7-
.
~~~
ROUTING FORM
F,':"r.~l' ,.- ,-,
..:....\..._t I '--
DK1'E:
.~~
c ~ -!. I ~ - .
E.~~:~: .:~..; ." ..
Xen Larson, BuillUn~ ~ Bousin~
JOM Lippitt, lrn~ine.dn~ (JrIR only)
clitt Stianson, .ngineering (JrIR only)
Bal Rosenberg, ~gineering (EIR only)
R~er Daoust, Jrn~ineerjn~ (IS/3, lrIR/2)
Richard Rudolt, Asdstant city Attorney (JrIR only)
Carol Gove, Fire Departlllent
IIarty scblllJ.dt, Parks ~ Recreation
cdllle Prevention, Police DeparUent (II.J. Diosdado)
current Planning
Gordon Boward, Advance Planning
Bob sennett, city Landscape Architect
Bob Leiter, Planning Director
Chula Vista Jrlementary School District, Xate Shurson
Stieetwater Union B.S. District, !'Olll Silva (IS ~ EIR)
Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR)
Other
FR~
~B~::
6~~~
Jrnvironmental Section
~
Application tor Initial study (IS-~/FA-~DO~ I
Checkpdnt Dratt EIR (20 days) (EIR- IFB- IDQ J
Review ot a Dratt EIR (JrIR- -1FB- IDp I
Review ot Jrnvironmental Review Record FC- JrRR- J
!'he Project consists ot:
Location:
Pleas, :jv~w the docament and tortlard to _ any ~ts you bave
b~ I~ tIf . . .
COllllll8nt. :
~i,,~t(...
) .r'~
ff ",'
. q.
\ \.
- (p ~ ...
17'---'{ (I
~~'\
ROUTING FOR.M
DATE: September 1 t 1993
i'O:
K.n Larson, Building , Bousing
John Lippitt, Engine.ring (EIR only)
Clill~~anson, Engine.ring (EIR only) ~
Bal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only) r
Roger Daoust, Engineering (ISI3, EIRI2) ~
Richard Rudoll, Assistart city Attorney (EIR onl~; -'
C.rol Gove, Fir. Department t,; .,
Harty Schmidt, P.rks , aecreation :~ ~
Crime Prevention, police Department . _:.:.:
CUrrent Planning r;
r~
Gordon Boward, Advance Planning _.-
Bob Sennett, City Landscape Architect .
Bob Lei tar, Planning DiJ'ector '.
Chula Vista Elementary School Distri~t......JC4t. Shur.on
(~sweetwater unlon H .3~'Dlstrrct "OID Silva (IS' EIR) .
aureen , (Flna
Other
'..)
w
I'ROH:
Doua Reid
Bnvironm.nt.l s.ction
SrJB.1EC'l': Application lor Initial Study (IS- 94-04IFA-~/DO-035 )
I
Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-_____IFB------IDO )
Revi.w 01 a Draft EIR (EIR-_IFB------IDP)
Review of Environmental Review Record I'C- ERR-_____)
,.h. Project consists of:
Full service car wash with detail area, office and
lounge. The project will include prezoning and annexatio.
z.oc.Uon:
3048 Bonita Roa~ (The southwest corner of Bonita Rd
and Lynwood Drive.
Pl.... revi.w the document .nd ~orward to .. any colllll.nt. you have
b~ 9/10/93 .
C'OlIIII8nt.:
~......'" ~ Ar'" L"'A...,..,....~~ ~,,. -~.... ~,m ~ '7D
Iff '1 ..r~'" 6M,:NJ- .".....".. .
-=- /. -A-
(t. fI'_~
-IP? -
17- ?SLt
'" -
!
.. ."....
. ......,.
MEMORANDUM
" DE.e 2 9 1993
J " '. .
w . "..,.
......;'1.:1
J)el-nher 16, 1993
File , ZA.050
SUBJECT:
!: Duane "''''''''1, pl.""'"2 Department -I
Clifford L. SwaDSOn. Deputy Public Works D'
City Ell&iJIeer
w;uw, \JIlrld>, ..... CM1 ~11
Harold Rosenber&. Traffic EII&'
Request for Zone ('hg"ge to CoDStrUct a Car Wash at 3048 Bonita Road
(PLZ-948)
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
'Ibe Public Works Department bas reviewed the subject p1oposal. We do DOt ptopo5C the
inclusion of any conditions of approval for the ZoIlC Chgl1le. However, we request that you
provide the applicant with the followin& list of items which will be rcqulred In conjuDction with
the BuUdiDa Permit uncr the authority of the Quia Vista Municipal Code:
1. Public improvementS may include, but DOt limited to, the followiD&:
a. Sidewalk 8 feet In width
b. Half of collCfCtc raised JDtdi." (may be deferred)
c. Three driveway approaches.
d. Street li&bt
2. A ccms1ruction pe:rmlt will be rcqulred for lIlY work .-~med In the -- riaht.-way.
JP:Ib
C1C: Ken Lee. p1.,,,,i~1 DcrpartIDeDt
.~cm ..__~.JP)
I "7- 'r) S
- '/0-
MEMORANDUM
November 2, 1993
File No. YS-577
/
FROM:
Douglas Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator
Roger L. Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer f,AJ1
TO:
SUBJECT: 1S-94-04 Bonita Car Wash - Sewer Service Agreement Revision
This memorandum is a follow-up to our Initial Study Review dated September 10, 1993 for
the subject project in which we indicated in Section vn that the Sewer Service and Annexation
Agreement dated June 19, 1990 (approved and adopted by City Council Resolution No. 15684)
may need to be updated. Upon further review of the agreement, we have determined that an
update will, indeed, be necessary for the following reasons:
1. When the agreement was entered into in 1990, the applicant proposed to construct an
office building on three consolidated parcels. The applicant now proposes to construct
a car wash. Also, it us our understanding that the applicant is in the process of
acquiring Idditional property in order to satisfy specific Planning Department design
requirements with respect to site layout and building orientation. These represent
substantial changes from the applicant's original proposai in 1990, upon which the
agreement was based.
2. Because the net area (gross area minus dedication) of the current proposal will be
greater than the 1990 proposal, the Transportation Development Impact Fee and P!1blic
Facilities Development Impact Fee, which are both based upon net area, will have to
be recalculated. In addition, these fees have increased &iDce 1990.
3. The Traffic Signal Fee, which is based upon ~ trip gea.eration, will have to be
recalculated because the expected trip generation for the ameDdy paopoaed use is
higher than the expected trip generation for the 1990 propelled use.
KPAlkpa
cc: Barbara Reid, Associate planner
..~~ys.m.ooll
- 1/- 17..<:j b
\
RECE\VED
MOV 1 0 1993
PLANNiNG
ys - es-17 fc.~
~ ~~l:o-->
(
..
ROUTING FORM
DxrE: N~,",,- 10 ) l~?
~}IO:
Xen Larson, Building ~ Bousing
John Lippitt, ~gineering (EIR only)
Cliff SWanson, Engineering (EIR only)
1" Bal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only)
~ Roger Daoust, Engineering (ISI3, EIRI2)
R1cbard Rudolf, ..udstant city Attorney (EIR only)
Carol Gove, Fire Department
Ifarty Schmidt, Parks ~ Recreation
crime Prevention, Police Department (If.J. DiosdadC?~
current Planning
Gordon Boward, Advance Planning :.t
Bob Sennett, City Landscape Arcbitect <.J ':.
Bob Leiter, Planning Director ,. "
Cbula vista Elementary Scbool District, Xate Sbur~ ' .
sweetwater union B.S. District, Tom silva (IS' EIR)
Haureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR)
other
, ,
-w: ~:
.
/3P.. be- ~ R.-uI J
Environmental section
SUBJECT: Application for Initial study (IS-~FA~~SjDQ ibM)
Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR--!FB- IDQ )
Review of a Draft EIR (EIR-_/FB-_IDP)
Review of Environmental Review Record FC- ERR--1
flhe Project consists of: FVlA- Se'II,C.E CAL WitrSH WrT'H ~"..~.I\~.,O~la,
AU'" U/IJ1o.IU- . -nte. ~~("'- ""~ ~~iJG.
#-#l~ ~....~,e;,J..
Location: 30"18 ~'$ f"'?~ (~W(.~.. 8.t,,.. f?GID ~l..YNMb J:l~:
..
1<~VI~D ~(~ "'PLAJ.
:;e~:tD~view ~e dOCUJll8nt and forward to .. any co~nt. you bave
(
COJIIIIIents: tr~lrJU~ t'I~Of.l ~'ftl.~"1lf/It'f'"A~ ~. ,_l""rrFCt2-TU~
f?E~ ~ ~ Wrn4 ~~"r ~ "Tlf~ ~MR.I'''''(;. 'DI1I1.$It>fJ
~R:>tJ~~ ~ "Tlfll" ~rc.r~ ~~ PtNJ AIlE '~ir;RIf:I;:> BY' A .
c.rr;n&. A~~ Tl-fl! QlJ~nQ#J/ rrliEM "'VM~..
17-'17
r"1__....
YS-S77
Case No.~Jf'f'O'U~Ii''''IS60
INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENT SHEETS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
1 Drain a I!e
A. Is the project site within a flood plain'! ~.
u: so, Stale which FEMA Floodway Frequency Boundary.lClr:> \IlO'.&.Jl!'. IT' I'" ~ I!.. .~. lV~r
~ ~~
B. ~t ne l~o~':~~ ~tr'~rtn~ micilities? ~l"--"" p '"'w
HI'J.TII L"~"" -h -r!) tl!./r.I ,.......y~ ,~,,~ WNI~ ,,, 'w"~ u..'I"'C'LV 1&Il5&!- JI'J_ TIt&.
.
1'IPb-"~z:J ~~.T' ~~.
C. Are they adequate to serve the project? ~.
If not. please explain briefly. ~I'I"IL- ~~"I/:. ............. ~- ItAP/&b'-".w!f& 1AI11......,
I2'1:"hJIb!E.T') .
D. What is the location and description of existing off.site drainage facilities? 12."~ ..A..........
Gf'eJ!t..&L JJUIGU "rLJu.a t!li -- <1ft) ~I!: ~A~L ttl\1M. C"",..,uW'I..-
.
Ot: TlfE
E. Are they adequate to serve the project? 1Jt.l.
If not. please explain briefly. i:"""'~ ,Ll.&......"tJMrC. t'~PALf'rV .'" ,~y'J ~""'V_d ~.e."
I ';I!c...,..,~'"
I. 1:>&.11#: 'PI2lA....efL\I ~ ~IAINCftlJ!!.~ ~~AI',.,." ~TGA.,..,..,-.c,.at ~ 1B1"'''.~ ^
sw,~nJA~ft t!J\I~1Z. ~IJ.O ~.,..~ t::.cJtH~,... 6.........~ ~'i.~~LI&"...... .tr- AHb
1Z-leE ~CZVC:ON C.~6E"1C.. "1'llUE 4:\A/'.e.l"r'Y po__. I!'".." NlI4 ~I'" ""~ K>w1t6 "'''''D
jransoo~on I 1~~"""/""'ACT&D'Il(TM1!. ~flt'fl"J:) .....,..&.T'.
D.
~fA
B.
What roads provide primary access to the project? .....1 rill ~ A 1:>
c.
What is the estimated number of one.way auto trips to be aenerated by the project (per day)?
gol':) 4",,- ~~t"MI"'W6LV~" iJ# 1lti1l,e.M ~- 'AU~~'" J/'Cc:'~"~ ~....
.
-r2I.:~-'!!!!:.AC: "1""1111. ~~'~rJ P'D^-""'~ Ie, ~....,....... "ft') - -~ ....., .~rr.cr~ol
.
What are the Average Daily TraffIC (AD.T.) volumes on the primary access roads before and3eoAl'r.
after project completion?
Street Name Before Akr
.. '.... IP~~
.JPf- ~
.
..,...,..,~.
.
Do any of these volumes ellcee'd the City's Leve1-of.Service (L.O.S.) "C" desiJn ADT
volume? If yes. please specify. v..;. IM-' ",~~ ""'\AI!!1- 'nMIl. &...lt~ 11.1 '''''2-
.
l"rxr.A~"" -nM,.,- -- I...... o~.&.I -nl1l ."I'.-6'rrY J!#~E." .p-s.r> ~~
-.:.~ ...,. ~ 'r:l' "DU.....~ &.l^ .. .~.. - ,....., -rI4ID ~.c.. tv J~ ~ ~"
l'~~ of''' J:iIoY, Wf4~t4 tor.v'&.c.~ WI'" "MfII. C ,.,.y ~ ~ TlIP.Uf/of" ~~.
~1n2." ".IIDln) ...,.102D.") PIle 2
- ?-3'_
17 - "if\{
.D.
E.
F.
Y$-577
Cue No.T.<;~~~ ~V1~
If the A.D.T. or L.O.S. ~C" design volume is unknown or nOllpplicable, explain briefly.
1J4.
.
Ale die primary access roads adequate 10 serve the project? tJn .
If not, please explain briefly.~rm.. ......." b -- a.l...r ""51!"T" opu"jl,(N(IoV-~ 1"4'1"IUt&:)
~~~ WtT1f ~II~"- ~ ar.,A-Okl.AY A.. ~ -1""""_ ~W~12... 4r-rv~~ MOt
.
~~ wpl!!Ilrr...",.~.....,,~ ~.".... .-N!:, A86 c:.o,#~.."""'" U~.
Would the project create Wlacc:eptable Levels of Service (LOS) It intersections adjacent to
. th ... fth . . A ~~.IUfa~eF ~"",lZl:>/~
or In e VlCUUt)' 0 e projeCt lile-r~."'" rra. LVAJU-"- 'D/!.. I S O!:."'~..I~~ ayTlt-S
If . if .~ ~TYOF ~ ~1f.O.A"'~IoCl,$r,Tlllr~V" v
so, ident y: Loca110n~ 1)"'"..~LY WI"'" ,.IV;;;;; = ~~ \iJe'~aaE_
Cumulative L.O.S. .. ~ /Uo./TS' 1#/L -me ''''''''W'''l~. .
r
Is the proposed project a "large project" WIder the Congestion Management Program? (An
equivalent of 2400 or more average daily vehicle trips or 200 or more peak-hour vehicle
trips). If yes, a Traffic Impact Analysis (TlA) will be required. In this case the TlA will
have to demonstrate that the project will not create an Wlmitigatable adverse impact. or that
all related traffic impacts arc not mitigated to a level of non-significance.
Yes )( No
The following questions apply if a Traffic Impact Analysis is nOl required.
@)
0\(/
o.~~f.. L
;.~. ~~ CD
~~I\' ~
~ ,{(C ~ ~"t<..,
~ 1,,- "tD~,~ ~.
,~~<<,)(,r,:Pt
H.
Is traffic mitigation required to reduce traffic impacts dill will result from implementation of
the proposed project?)( Yes No
If yes. please describe. WI ~Iti,&, 0,: . bIoI InL .. ~ A. ....,L 'nIlE -...~...,....
r::llA6..r~. AID ,~..,.. ~"a"l~ ~ 1anIJ,-nt. ~h ~-(",~ ~~:r
StTl! AAJt::l' NI:J L#.1fI'r'-n1n~~ ~ 'ElkA..~'- ~/"rE ~ ~'D.. ~~.
Is the project consistent with the criteria established in die City's TransponIdan Phasing Plan,
. .
General Plan Traffic Element, IIld all ocher patinent 1r8ffic st"die.? PItaIe ...ence any
ocher traffic impact llUdic. for roadway ICJlIICIIlIdIIl may be jlllr lCIed by die proposed
project. ....1,.... ..,.,..." ..."'"....I~ c..'I'I[. '~/!a' ~...-r.J.I - .~.~....... L!_.......v AZ; c:.a....l
b~ -- "~"'L.J.~'''' U~. 6I*ftI u...~ ..C'D..........~ . -rwA",,~ --.~.&..l1CJ1to1
~.,... 7Iaa -ec~ ..-.....,.fr c.,~....~ ~ ~......&,...-." ..-..~ .H/:Mr
Is a traffIC llUdy required? Yes ')( No J 7 ~ i r
Is dlere any dedication required? lI". "'Lal~ A-t- #-'" -"I --,~ ......0....., UfaolMoc:t..
If 10, please specify. .......''fJIl '~....,..,.... o--.....t:',1!r) ~. Gw.-' ......,~ ..........,.., .~........1 w""
.r"..........., iAI-n..E. b1"Y~ Aa-..._.... ...L.a'. SUA:IG.'~DIED'r~'Me.d ,e. _.-:'~tt.~,-z:.
~UT"" .......,...W/P'IH ~""1Ji/F 'i4IP ~.....'"~. CoM"'-'i W/T1f c-."T"'/ O~ SNJ
.",t:...,... "fJ'_f#b''''~.l.-:' JJ.1J.'t/. IIi:JrJlZ. &,.Vt.I:",....,..,., hiQ."...
.
K.
. L.
Ys,-'!in
Case No.IS~-oo( ~Vl~
Is Ihere IIIlY street widening required? Y~J ~1J.r:. -rU.E "bo>_T,;:nrl& cn-.-r,<=
If so, please specify. w,~.&, SOlllrft.. <CI'A..&,f) "T1) AAe~ ,k.LP'" J1ftDr"'H 6-s..~~r
--:uR.-(:~ AAA.~ ..~',tJ3~~t:~"'(,.r:''7'14 bvJ&J.rv bt: ~
~ere lIIly~street ~nts req ~ .Y~~~_
If so, please specify Ihe aeneral narure of Ihe nec:cssary improvements.
,. ..utll.4 t; l.J"n"IDI2 ~!.DE Lt&~ v btt11~f.. a. ~ ~ ...._JI..
, . . .
ME'.M-rwr. A.C .PAVE"M~ f!'Tt.
.
, &il!!"""'w~ >>.....-6.,...,....- IMPIl4>VE-
.
@ Willlhe project IIIld mated public improvements provkle satisfactory uatrlC lervice for
existing conditions IIIld future buildout General Plan conditions? (please provide I brief
explanation). ElCr;r"rl~ lnrJC>'T'I".jr;;.~ y~. / ,:u....-.. J R..J" PY>.ur-4P.'./l,If.t.-
,
"'A.A.' 1"~~c.~lJc. .MlIYS ~ IA/tU -~ lAI-~~ 'IIJ1tI RIf"l""tIil!:lC'
~r..oPM~r 'n)1'Nf! ~.""'~E ,ItA...,..... JAhu- BE u,,..,.....,...o rAl
m. ~oi1s CPN3'-l1JcneloJ W/TH.,.,.,.se: Df!.I/f!.~T'&.
Are Ihere IIIlY IIIlticipated advers~ geotechnical conditions on the project site? IJD .
If yes. specify these conditions. &.J fA .
.
Is a Soils Report necessary? loll}. uewr::JA&D j ~4r::1/16lJt;, ~ol&4 2':_'" ".,,4 TUE
,~ ~rrr! /'I(LIftr" ~~t:!:!J: MVS"r fur........ 1PE
.J-and Form ,.,~y ~lJ(Ur::> F1lD~, PIt,.A. 't'. us...,...ad. ..F
~"""rJ6 '~''f"'.
What is the average c:1i tlE:/'slope of the site? 5 %.
What is the maximum~ slope of the site? ~%
A.
B.
@
IV.
V.
A.
B.
Noise
Are there IIIlY traffic-related noise levels impacting the site Ihat are significllllt CllOUgb to justify Ihat
I noise lIIlalysis be required of the app1icllllt? .:iJE.G ,
VI.' "'asle Generation
How much solid and liquid (sewer) waste will be pncratcd by the J"o9OJCd project per day?
Solid 1f1>o WxJt.lf:1l',/OAY
. ,
Liquid .l"7v;' .......-.11' /~Y (I..';; _J~aI
.
What is the location IIId size of Cllistinl sewer lines OIl or cIowDSUum fram die .?
.L.B.:.J'V60 12Jt.E. J-.MJt/t!:NJ. -nIW"- LllJl&.a
Are they adequate to serve Ihe proposed project? (If no, please explain) YEE..
/7 - go
_ '1S"_
"4
~=-,,-..,.IIl"'JllW.IUJ.!3l
Ys-s-n
Case No.:U-'N-c;0.4 UVlfEC
YD. tlJtional Pollutant Dischane Elimination SYStem CNPDES) Stonnwater Reauirements
Willlhe applicant be required to file a Notice of Intent with !he State Water Resources Control Board
for coverage under an NPDES Stonnwater Permit? 1.J.o.
. If yes. specify which NPDES permit(s) IIld explain why III NPDES permit is required. Nb. .
Will a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be ~uired for the proposed project?
Yes )( No
Additional comments AI (I.. .
.
~ Remarks
Please identify and discuss any remaining patentiallllverse impacts. mitiaation measures. or other
issues. 6>~E.a. S.r:.LJI.Ia~ ALl" A-J.J#JIE)(,A.T'1t.>>..J A~_"e~_..""" ftA.~:J"'l.>>JE. ,ct. '4190
(rzE/.AO''''''""j Nt>. 1c:;e..~'9 ~\L~ ~TbaE UPD6..T"ET(es. ~u.e:'h ""fkp
~ ~ ~,t;,.,.--rr, bD~ ReiD ~ 1Jr\"~A8L 2" 14tCll'V.
~AJJ ~,--~ ~MIE"""'-i'D T'ME ~~ ~ ,..J~ ~~ ~ &.I2D2. I-VIJWso!:J
,~'\If!-.(~U"'rW~AN.-o "P6,4.,IJ ~.J"""'I! ~~ C,~)M'JSr ~ "I:lD^IIi~Ift:).
. ~;:~~:"' ~:;~~~:~~~~:::~.:-:::~=~
...r: """""..A~ IM---~'':i, ~r'--.'.... ......---,&.. hi: -n.E. &JaNLfIt/ ~~ ,.~
"'A'~4~"" ~..J_ e'~ Al-uh-J.. At...~J Tl.fl!!.. "'-=Vl~ ~"nIr~ ~II~~,
(. ~ . ~.ft lP-r1i ~fJlf.JAJLV .Ar~u...d-Jt ?A_-'~~ti I~ MAth!! ---~.( Id'b/~~.
~ ~--r
Cily En . eer or Representative
/7.~1
II JltJ!CYS
.
Date
MEMORANDUM
November 2, 1993
File No. YS-577
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Douglas Reid, Enviromnental Review Coordinator
Roger L. Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer (/J1
IS-94-04 Bonita Car Wash - Sewer Service Agreement Revision
This memorandum is a follow-up to our Initial Study Review dated September 10, 1993 for
the subject project in which we indicated in Section vn that the Sewer Service and Annexation
Agreement dated June 19, 1990 (approved and adopted by City Council Resolution No. 15684)
may need to be updated. Upon further review of the agreement, we have determined that an
update will, indeed, be necessary for the following reasons:
1. When the agreement was entered into in 1990, the applicant proposed to construct an
office building on three consolidated parcels. The applicant now proposes to construct
a car wash. Also, it us our understanding that the applicant is in the process of
acquiring additional property in order to satisfy specific Planning Department design
requirements with respect to site layout and building orientation. These represent
substantial changes from the applicant's original proposaf in 1990, ~n which the
agreement was based.
2. Because the net area (gross area minus dedication) of the current proposal will be
greater than the 1990 proposal, the Transportation Development Impact Fee and P!1blic
Facilities Development Impact Fee, which are both based upon net area, will have to
be recalculated. In addition, these fees have increased since 1990.
3. The Traffic Signal Fee, which is based upon upected trip seneration, will have to be
recalculated because the upected 1rip seneration for the currently p10p0sed use is
bigher than the upected 1rip generation for the 1990 J'lU~ use.
ICP Alkpa
cc: Barbara Reid, Associate planner
.__IAI'VI'1AN\ys-m.oo11
!)- e>; '-
- 7'1-
.
9-....-6 ~
. jew S"tL P1.PJ.-
atuw~
ROUTING FORM
D14'E:
1~'J
~~
Ilk
jJbr-1 :
X.n Larson, Building 6 Housing
John Lippitt, .ngineedng {.IR only}
CH~~ SWanson, .ngineedng {.IR only}
Hal Rosenberg, .ngin.ering {EIR only}
Roger Daoust, b1gineering {IS/3, .IR/2}
IUcbard Rudol~, ~dstant Cjty Attorn.y {.IR only}
Carol Gove, Fir. DepartJDent
Ifarty Scbm.idt, Parks 6 R.creation
Crime pr.vention, Polic. DepartJD.nt {1f.J. Diosdado}
CUrrent Planning
Gordon Boward, Advanc. Planning
Bob Sennett, city Landscape Arcbit.ct
Bob Leiter, Planning Director
Chula Vista Elementary School District, Xate Shurson
sweetwater union B.S. District, !rom Silva (IS 6 EIR)
Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR)
other
~
r If:
J2,~ba "n
.
~d.l
Environmental Section
SUB:1ECT :
Application ~or Initial Study {IS~/FA-'3~DO O~.!j
Cbeckpdnt Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-_/FB- IDO. )
Revi.w ot a Draft EIR (EIR- /FB- IDP I
Review o~ Environmental Revi.w Record FC- ERR- )
!rbe Project consists ot:
z.oc:aUon:
Pl....{~;rlg th. dOC'lUlent and forward to - any COIIII8nu you bav.
by 1/ . . .
Comments:
I; - ~ 3
- 'lg-
.
.
Cue No.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
A.
What is the distance to the ne~t fire stati7 ~ w~at is the File Depattment's estimated
leaCliontime7 d..~ I"fdfS 4~,^' ,2fS~ST
V
B.
Will the Fue Depanment be able to provide an adequate level of fire protection for the
propos~ facility without an increase in equipment or pelSOMe17 )/.c-..s
c.
Remarks
.)
/~mw./j~
fire Marshal
11/4/qj
Date
/7 - ill
-71-
",6
1nC~mn~.llal.t3)(Iol.ID2D.n)
ROUTING FORM
Df:C"
- ~ .-. 19
". 93
,.
DM'E:
rt:eCeY11 ~ /7/ Ie; 1 -:c;
D~
, ? 1993
--=
~:
Xen Larson, Building' Houdng
John Lippitt, Bngine.ring (EIR only)
Clitt SWanson, Engine.ring (EIR only)
Hal Ro.enberg, Engineering (EIR only)
Roger Daoust, Engineering (IS/3, EIR/2)
Richard Rudolt, Asst city Attorney (Dratt Neg Dec , EIR)
Carol Gove, Fire Depart.ent .
Harty Schmidt, Parks , Recreation
Crime Prevention, Police Department (H.J. D10sdado)
CUrrent Planning
Duane Bazzel, Advance Planning
Bob Sennett, city Landscape Architect
Bob Leiter, Planning Director
Chula vista Elementary School District, Xate Shurson
sweetwater union H.S. District, Tom silva (IS , EIR)
Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR)
r .al" R - If annexation is 1nvolved)
---
Other
.-
SUBJECT:
.s1A~ Y1 t4t t1dffW/ ~I"'b~ Environmental Sect10n
,ee,q' -
Application tor Init1al Study (ls-'t'f-tY1II'A-f/2.!>IDO 035,
Checkpr1nt Dratt EIR (20 days) (EIR- IFB- IDO ,
Revie'" ot a Draft EIR (EIR- II'B-_IDP ,
Revie'" of Environmental Rev1e", Record (I'C- ERR--1
Revie'" ot Draft Neg Dec (IS- II'A- IDQ- )
I
k;(.
/(/ .
'-- ~
- ..:
.
..
!'he Project cond.ts ot: t? ~tI SeVI/I~~~
7he 4e 1!Jh:t. 4If- ~. sr""'$fU Ye. ~ ..2D ~ ..A ...LJ.___
"'!'he ~ r IAA:fsh T c. i.!J> #:If :1L / ;''' r.;i' C7 -.-.-.r "t:.
is. tit ~e..:r:z- &Met I.vl-S' cr cA "'ll'L'Jr' ~I'~.
z.ocation: ~+f/' ~"rft;, /2 . ~. U' ~t ~L cAf~
PfePI,Se. l'er.He ~J-1n.v rr .. ~ ~~
'tU"''theY ~fo is r'~U(Y: .
:;e~~f}.".!irl,J~e document and forward to .e any colllllents you have
/7- ~S"
,i&;....... ,p;/ A - ~ S 7(J 15 f
couents:
~~,r %
2Ci fr.
ROUTING FORM
D~E: September 1, 1993
fa: Ken Larson, Building , Pausing
John Lippitt, Engin.ering (EIR only)
Cliff S~anson, Engineering (EIR only)
Hal Rosenberg, Engineer~ng (EIR only)
Roger Daoust, Engin.ering (IS/3, EIR/2)
Richard Rudolt, Assista~t City Attorn.y (EIR only)
Carol Gove, Fir. Depart~ent
~rty Schmidt, P.rks , ~cr..tion
crime Prevention, Policu Department
Current Planning
Gordon Howard, Advance Planning
Bob Sennett, City Landscape Architect
Bob Leiter, Planning Director
Chula Vista Elementary School District, Jtate Shurson
Sweetwater Union H.S. Di~trict, ~om Silva (IS' EIR)
Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR)
Other
FROM:
Doue Reid
.._Environmental Section
SrJB.1E~: Application for Initial Stud)' (IS- 94_04/FA-~/DQ-035 )
Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-_/FB-_/DQ )
Review of a Draft EIR : (EIR-_/FB-_/DP )
Review ot Environmental Revi~w Record FC-_ERR-_)
1h. Project consists of:
Full service Ca' wash with detail area, office and
lounge. The pr~ject will include prezoning and annexat1~
Loc.tion:
3048 Bonita ROad (The southwest corner of Bonita Rd
and Lynwood Dr;~e.
Pl.... r.vi.w the document .nd torward to me .ny .comments you beve
by 9/10/93 .
co...nts:
~ ~ ~. ~~
,bQ)~
17-. 4 ~
- &'1-
.
ROUTING FOR,..;
DJCrE: September 1, 1993
fa: Xen Larson, Building , Rousing
John Lippitt, EngineeriT; (EIR only)
Cliff ,~~anson, Engineering (EIR only)
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only)
Roger Daoust, Engineering (ISI3, EIRI2)
Richard Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney (EIR only)
Carol Gove, Fire Depart~ent '
Harty Schmidt, Parks , Recreation
t:rime pr.v.ntion, Polic. Depart..nt
~rrent Planning .
Gordon Howard, Advance Planning
Bob Sennett, City Landscape Architect
Bob Leiter, Planning Director
Chula Vista Elementary School District, Xate Shurson
Sweetwater Union H.S. Di!trict, Tom Silva (IS' EIR)
Haureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR)
Other
FROM:
Doua Reid
Environmental Section
SUBJECT: Application for Initial Stud}' (IS- 94-04/FA-~/DQ-035 )
Checkprint Draft EIR (20 day~I(EIR-____IFB-____IDQ )
Review of a Draft EIR (EIR-____IFS-_IDP)
Review of Environmental Review Record FC-____ERR-____)
The Project consists of:
Full service c~r wash with detail area, office and
lounge. The prJject will include prezoning and annexat101
.Location:
3048 Bonita RoeJ (The southwest corner of Bonita Rd
and Lynwood Drive.
PJ.... r.vi.w the document .nd forward to .. .ny comment. you b.ve
by. 9/10/93 .
comments:
i 7- C-)7
_ l?.;:L-
.
Cue No. L~-99'-~y
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
A.
Is project subject to Parks and Recreation 'I1ueshold ~uirements'l
If not, please explain. ,.or ~~
t->o.
B. How many ICI'eS of park1ancl are oeceSSI'Y to IeJ'Ve die proposed project?
C. Are existing Deighborl100d and community parts IleI1' die project edeqUIle to ~e the
populBtion increase resuhing from this project'l
Neighborl100d
Community Parks
D. If not, are parkll\lld dedications or other mitigation proposed IS pll't of the project adequate
to serve the population increase?
Neighborhood
Community Parks
E. To meet City ~uirements, will applicant be ~uired to:
Provide land?
Pay a fee?
F. Remarks:
~.~
q. z. .~">.
Parks Ind Recreation Director or Repraentative
DIIe
/7 - (?f
- 1'.3. -
...,.7
~D2UJ~.U1ZI,"I(W.IIDD.931
ROUTING FORM
D'-TE: 5e.p+e:rnber Sf "C; 13
ro:
Ken Larson, Building & Housing
John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only)
Clitt SWanson, Engineering (EIR only)
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only)
Roger Daoust, Engineering (ISI3, EIRI2)
Ricbard Rudolt, Assistant City Attorney (EIR only)
Carol Gove, Fire Department
Harty Schmidt, Parks , Recreation
Crime Prevention, police Department (H.J. Diosdado)
CUrrent Planning
8"..(1"" 11_. _H, Advance Planning
Bob Sennett, city Landscape Arcbitect
Bob Leiter, Planning Director
Chula Vista Elementary School District, Kate Shurson
SWeetwater Union B.S. District, Tom Silva (IS & EIR)
Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR)
other
Eel t3a.-tc..h elder
FROM:
Do ':5 (2.e ; d
Environmental section
SUBJECT: Application tor Initial Study (IS-CW Oi/FA~35/1>O .035)
Cbeckprint Dratt EIR (20 days) (EIR- _/FS- _11>0 )
Review ot a Dratt EIR (EIR- _IFB- _IDP J
Review ot Environmental Review Record FC- ERR-~
Tbe Project coz:sists ot: F~f (I ~v v ;c-.e Cet r:. iVa.sh U?rti) defq ~ I
arLT-/ I ofllce ahd LPUfJ.{j.e, 'The- pr't)j~d e,....){U ll)ciA..(de
pre 'CDn 1/1,.:} a..nd a./J11e:!x ~n - .
Locatio~: 3D-rg
b.n ,"fA 1201
~m:-lib (2a:JI;J ({~ 5'-i..L-tf,~ C.c?rI'YCr if
. ~ 6{niJ/PCc1 bnu~-
Pleas," re~w tbe document and forward to as any COJIIIIIents you bave
by Cf 10 ~ . .
I .
COJIIIIIents:
/7-1;
'i <.+_ -
'I
~
~~
1
I
!
\
0" .,
_.iULA VISTA POUCE DEP~ dENT
CRIME PREVENTION UNIT
.-
PLAN REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS
DAlE: 0/Z-Z../43
TO: ~ ~ ~j fiA,n",",,'j!
VIA: tie:t:t#.3, LJAf~' JAJi/.JU-d/ .
FROM: m r PH..n;'" Jr, €> US
PROreCT:.:z:-.s - '1 t.fo 'f .J::k (Q 3~ &.</JJI..S~ - ~i ~vJteJ
_ The Crime Prevention Unit does not have any comments relardiDl this project at this time.
_ Infonnation on the project., or within the p1ins. does Dot provide ROup detail to permit
aime prevention analysis.
V Please forward the followS infonnation to the Crime PreVCIIUOD Unit wileD available,
Elevations
V"
Floor Plans
l..o-""
Landscape and LiShtinS Plans
V"'"
-
Site Development Plans
CommeDts:
."/1/'1'1 fJ) J. b~ tD~ #uc:t. ~
Tf\~fii$r- ~ ~~ ~ ~a:i::L
cc: B~ver. SCA ~ UY7CQ.1!./) u" . ~ ~
17-/O-V ~ ~ J,-' .. .
__ _ . _ J;.~" .n...J.,D _ ,.../1)
.
f3r>1../_~ C~
PeY' D 11{1Y]&
B. Pro;ect Descriotion
(para. 2)
The project consists of a change to the current City of Chula
Vista General Plan land use designation from Residential Low
(0-3 dwelling units per acre) to Commercial Visitor. The site
is proposed to be prezoned C-V (Commercial Visitor).
Discretionary actions necessary to implement the proposed
project include: a General Plan Amendment, Prezoning, Design
Review approval and Annexation.
c. Comnatibilitv with Zonina and Plans
The project involves a proposed change of the current City of
Chula Vista General Plan land use designation from Residential
Low (0-3 dwelling units per acre) to Commercial Visitor. The
site is also proposed to be pre zoned C-V (Commercial Visitor) ,
which would allow land uses such as the proposed car wash. The
County's Sweetwater Community Plan designates the site as
Office, Professional and Commercial, and the current County
zoning consists of C-30 Commercial.
The existing Chula Vista General Plan land use designation of
Residential Low has been applied to the project site since
1970, at a time when the entire freeway interchange and
location of Plaza Bonita Road were configured differently.
Today Plaza Bonita Road intersects with Lynwood Drive at
Bonita Road, and the appropriateness of Residential Low at the
southwest quadrant of Lynwood Drive and Bonita Road requires
close consideration.
leoe'V'C d
b-4
'tIN /93 h/
I 7 - I 0 I
- !'tf:.-
CHULA viSTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT
84 EAST"J" STREET. CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 · 619425-9600
EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH
DARD OF EDUCATION
ISEPH D.~.N. September 8, 1993
LARRY CUNNINGHAM
SHARON GlES
PATRICK A..lJDO
GREG R. SANDOVAL
~R1NTENDEIfT
LBlA5.GL,N.
.:;
~-:
Mr. Doug Reid
Environmental Section
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: 15-94-04 I FA~35 I 00-035
Project: Car Wash, Detail Area, Office & Lounge
Location: 3048 Bonita Road
Applicant: Charles Tibbett
Dear Mr. Reid:
This is to advise you that the project, located at 3048 Bonita Road, is within
the Chula Vista Elementary School District which serves children from
Kindergarten through Grade 6.
District enrollment has been increasing at the rate of 3-4 percent over the
past several years, and this is projected to continue. Permanent capacity
has been exceeded at many schools and temporary relocatable classrooms
are being utilized to accommodate increased enrollments. The District also
buses students outside their attendance areas, both to accommodate growth
and assist in achieving ethnic balanca.
State law currently provides for a developer fee of $.27 for non-residential
area to be charged. The fee is split between the two school districts with
Chula Vista Elementary SchoOl District receiving $.121sq. ft. end Sweetwater
Union High School District receiving $.151sq. ft. to assist in financing
facilities needed to serve growth.
The District encourages developer participation in an alternative financing
mechanism to help assure that facilities will be eveilable to aerve children
generated by new construction. We ere ClMT8I'Itly utilizing Community
Facilities Districts (CFD's) as one method to help fund this deficit.
Participation in a CFD is in lieu of developer fees.
-~1-
17- io L
,
Mr. Doug Rel\J
Page 2
September e, 1993
-,
The subject project is located in the Allen School lIttendanc8 area. This
school is presently operating at or near capacity, and an alternative
financing mechanism, such as participation in or annexation to a CFD is
recommended.
If you have any questions, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
~ Sjk4t;~~_ J
Kate Shurson
Director of Planning & Facilities
KS:dp
cc: Charles Tibbett
w.w:C:".,--.'I
- ~$-
17- 103
.
Case No. /S-f'~-~Y'
APPENDIX IV
Comments
Received During the Public Review Period
_ No Comments Were Reaived During the Public Review Period
- g'l-
.
17-/O,-!
~022.JSIW.llRl.JJ)\W.I~)
,
.'.
cl3 roE 8:40
NRAD,OI 31 COIIPUTER SCI
FAX HO. CI9!:i!;: :;9
P.D2
. .
W~~TW A TER
Community
'lanning
Group
,.. October 1993
TO: Chula Vista Planning Department
Attn: Steve Griffin
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Sweetwater Community Planning Group
Preliminary Evaluation of the Proposed Car Wash, Bonita Road
west of L)'nwood Drive
,
-
,
The Sweetwater Community Planning Group has had the opponunity to rel/iew the
preliminary proposal for a car wash facility on the south side of Bonita Road west
of Lynwood Drive. The conceptual design appears to be within the envelope Of the
apprO\l8d Sweetwater Community Design Handbook guidelines adopted bl' the
Planning Group and the Board of Supervisors.
While It Is' unfortunate that the City Insists that this property be annexed to gain
access to sewer service (the Planning Group continues to question this need) we
recognize the proponents lack of choice of alternatives.
The traffic s/tuatI~ at this location Is of continuing concern and the design of this
project should take that Into account, It should be noted th3t ony traffic from this
project to Lynwood DrIve (for access to Bonita Road west or Plaza Bonita Road
north) will cause additional cycling of the signals. This will result In additional
conJeation for the eut/We5t flow of traffic through this complex Interaedlon.
&t\. ~
-'oM HImmond
ChIIrperson
~
- fo-
!7-/CJ5"
" ,
~'i
'''-' ;)-
, ..........--.-
P-" 0';> .",~ '..1'-~~O-I'~'"
+.'':" uar6a 4i'. ...~.. - MIL_
, EDvtrODIIICGW I'
.oveaber 9, 1993
-----~
--1"
Pl"'
, 2:4~\
\
,
i
City of Chula Vista
Atttn: Susan Vandrew
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, CA 91910
Re: 80ni ta/l.ynwo(")d Car Wash Hoise IlIlpact P
Dear Mt. Vandrew:
We have reviewed tho infonation you pro......ided relet-lve to the above
project's noise iJDpact potential on "djacent residential ulI'es. We
also llonltt'lTed noise levels at a _;.~pilr.I:..Ie" fi\,;1~it}. ,r..cu~tly
equipped wit.h a new blower/dryer SYSt.f'Illo ~e 'ce'.:i1l1at.ed 'oackgl'o.tn:1
IIOI.e levels due to Bonita R()ad traffic and U;"'II .uperillpos~ 0'11
possible on-site nois~ contribution upon the background. ~e~~se
of a lack of Site-specific data, we did not include any fre~w"y
cOfltribution eve,.. t.'louqh the freeway obviously a1.so affect!!;
~~e11ne conditions.
.
t.El~...l _- -,,- ,-
....,~... ~-----
'-'-
""I", no!::,.. data the applicant I-'rovided listed a noise level of 67 .:l!;
..t <)0 fa.,- from the equipment. We _asured 66 cSP 'tt: le", f..~.t ..1~:',.
th€, wcI"h' tunnel axis and 60 em at 100 feet p"llNndj~t:l.ar to '~.'(':
!lxis.')ur .e.surelllent agret:s .xactly ...it" t1i"~.,..i..', ,.' ';0
literatul'(> on car wash dryers.
lIiu:kgruund noise 1.ve18 due t.o ~raftic: on Bonita ROAd at Lbo.
ncareFot Lynwood Hil] residence were calculated to be 66.. JUL
the car va faced the hOlies it would add 60 r a
co t 67.!!. nc se. If the tunne s; p. c' 0
80n l1;;" as proposed, it woulcl huve a 54 dB blr ',,- ," a
.r.oJ..lJi~.~r: 66.8 dB level (a 0.2 dB .increase). .. ~l1n' '.:.'. _ .2
dn I '",l~('6se would not be detectable Viven the exist!,', ,'J ' . ad
l.vo8], particularly when the freeway backvround.is alao t4k... ,ute
aC'count .por an east.-west. orientat.ion of the 1:.unnel, and ...1 th
.&'c~sonl\b]e li.it.s on the hours of operation, we do not .Ueve1:.bat
ti'.El pntr;,;.: ia1 for a 8ignificant illl->act .,:.:ia,ts at ~... b"'.CCSt. -hoIMt1l
u1' t.h,.tlr,. Ac2~!tior..l study i. walcanted,
You expresl'le" sOlile conCf't'n about "~rl:)ye~ DoiEe O"i"'5ure. ,As I
indicated, tblit is an OSli/\ i.sul' ' "., r. ,t really a !'latter of code
".
-~/-
Tl--- rOb
-. ... ---
_ . _.... AI. ~I.
...._. . .....
I
,I
.J
'..-N 0"3 'S3 14:57 GIRCV':, ..;.SC":I';TES
".
-
P.2
.
-2-
compliance. I cUe:!, however, calculate th& allowable noise exposure
for a car wash employee working in close proximity to the blower
for any extende~ period of time with the following time limits to
aeet the OSHA allowable noise dose:
Distance from Blower
Allowable Time
3'
!i'
6'
7'
1 Hr 45 Din
5 Hr 2 1IIin
7 Hr 8 ain
Mo Lillli tation
Given that car wash employees only s~na brief periods in close
proxiJlli ty to the blower /dryel", I do no1. bel.ieve that noise
protectJon is an issue for this projeot. Please call me if you
have any questions.
Sincerely,
/~ /). 4..'..--1-
Hans D. Giroux '
Senior scientist
Giroux & Associates
HOG:ai
/7- /0 7
- 1d--
1_ J. AU' _h .
y--- .- - (
MEMORANDUM
January 27, 1994
File # YS-S77
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Susan Vandrew, Planning DepartmrJp
Harold Rosenberg, Traffic En~eeN'-
Bonita Car Wash Traffic Report
TO:
Subsequent to the information provided in the transportation section in the initial study (case
#15-94-04), a site specific transportation analysis was completed by a traffic consulting f1fD1,
Darnell and Associates Inc. While our conclusions are the same (no adverse traffic impacts
results from the project) the consultant's report shows a lower vehicle trip generation rate than
was noted in the City's initial study report. The consultant's trip rate value was based on an
employment and estimated daily car washes. Our trip rate value was based in a generic
relationship between land use and land area. We accept the consultant's procedure and fmd
his report to be complete.
DW:dv
cc: Kirk Ammerman
(F:1Mnt~.1. ...mc~..h.DW)
.
- 9a-
/7 - IO?
~ ..s-h- ~
mBmof'a"Jum
April 25, 1994
File: YS-577
TO: Luis Hernandez, Associate Planner
mOM:
Zoubir Ouadah, Civil Engineer
VIA:
SUB.JECT: Bonita Carwash Traffic Study
I reviewed the applicant traffic impact report regarding the proposed carwash on Bonita
Road prepared by Darnell and Associates, Inc., elated April 21, 1994, and fmd it to be
satisfactory.
Please forward a copy of this report to the County of San Diego, Public Works
Department for their review and comment since the intersection of Bonita Road and
Bonita PlazaILynwood Drive is under their jurisdiction. Please call me at 5180 if you
have any questions.
WPC ,:__DorIll7a.
-11-
17 - /07
,
Darnell & ASSOCIATES, INC.
TRANSPORT'" TION PLANNING. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
April 21, 1994
Mr. Charles R. Tibben
So-CaI CaIwash Services
3907 Massachusens Avenue
La Mesa, CA 91941
D&.A Ref. No.: 940103
Subject:
Revised Traffic Repon for Proposed Bonita Car Wash
Dear Mr. Tibben:
In accordance with your authorization, Darnell & Associates, Inc. (D&.A) has prepared this lener repon
addressing the five traffic items identified in the January 6, 1994 memo from Susan Vandrew. City of
Chula Vista Planning Depanment, regarding the subject project. The items to be addressed are:
1. Existing Level of Service (LOS) for the Bonita RoadIPlaza BonitalLynwood intersection with and
without the project.
2. Year 1998 LOS for the Bonita RoadIPlaza BonitalLynwood intersection with and without the
project.
3. Discussion of intenection safety with and without the project.
4. Proposed project driveway impact to Bonita Road and Lynwood Avenue traffic.
S. Discussion on the site plan circulation system.
In I114ition, this iteration includes the City's request to mcorporate the traffic: usoef..... with the San
Diego Calvary Cbapel in the project vicinity.
TRIP GENERATION
The firslltep In the lJIIIysis process Involves the esrimmon of vehicular trip5 ....-oded toffrom the
ploposed project site. The p,oposed Bonita Car WISh is p\lmled to.mce 125 to 250 wasbes per day.
A totsI of seven m employees will be 1ICeded and there will DOt be III)' psollne .mces provided. The
0WDtr anticipateS detailservic:es will be provided and are ICC(NDled for In the 125 to 250 wIShes per day.
Exhibit 1 is . reduced copy of the project lite plan.
1/ -/I 0
1202 KmNER'OU~VARD. SUITE'. SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92101
PHONE: '1'.233-8373 . FAX: '19.233-4034
~.""
Mr. Charles R. Tibbett
So-CaI Carwash Services
April 21, 1994
Page 2
. . .
Pursuant 10 the City's request, traffic generated by the project was -"'".'~ usiDg the San Diego
Association of GovermnentS (SANDAG) publisbed lIteS (October 1993) for a car WISh. The SANDAG
rate is 900 average daily vehicles (ADT) per lite. As awed above, the 0WDeI' auticipatea a ,",,~um
of 250 washes per day plus employee trips. Therefore. it is our opinion that the 900 trips per day
provides a worst-case analysis.
AM and PM peak hour traffic was then estimated based on published SANDAG rates. The AM peak
rate is 4 % of daily traffic and the PM peak rate is 9% of daily traffic, equally split between inbound and
outbound movements. The resulting project trip generation is as follows:
TRIP GENERATION
AM Peak Pariod PM Peak Period
Daily Out
Use Intansity Traffic In In Out
Car Wash 1 900 18 18 41 41
Project traffic was then assigned to the project driveways and the Bonita RoadILynwood Avenue
intersection. The resulting project related peak hourly volumes are shown on Exhibit 2.
EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) WITH It WITHOUT PROJECT
Existing AMlPM peak hour tOunts for the Bonita RoadIPlaza BonitaILynwood iDleraection were obtained
from the County of San Diego, collected in August 1993. ExhIbit 3 presm" the existing peak hour
volumes. The existing level of service was then calcul,'M utili"';." the Hipway Clpacity Manual
(HeM) procedures for Signalized lDtersections. The naults of this analysis show that the peak periods
will operate at LOS C in the morning and LOS D in the eveuiDg at this intenec:tlon. Tlble llU11l11W'izes
the results.
Project traffic was then added 10 existiDg traffic volumes. ExhIblt""'1I .'0 the at...." plus project
volumes. The LOS was then calcul,'ed usiDg the HCM -""""'OJ)'. The IIIdition of project traffic 10
the existiDg traffic naults in the Bonita Road/PlUa BoaitaILll...00d Uelmlion -....1.10 operate
at LOS C during the AM peak and LOS D in the eveuiDg peak. The nIUlts are rill y-_.a 011 Tlble 1.
/'7' lit
_ 9tf,-,-
Mr. Charles R. Tibbett
S<K:aI Carwash Services
Apri121, 1994
Plge 3
YEAR 1998 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) WITH &: WITHOur PRO.JECT
To estimate year 1998 traffic volumes, the existing 1993 volumes were iDcreISed 2" per year. Exhibit
4 pteSeII!S the results of this calculation. Project traffic was then Idded to the 1998 base volumes &lid
the results are presented on Exhibit 6. Level of service was then determiDed for 1998 ccmditions with
&lid without the project. The AM &lid PM peak hour calculations result in the Bonita RoadIP1aza
BonitalLynwood intersection openting at LOS D for both peak periods for 1998 c:oodilions with &lid
without the project. The results are also presented in Table 1.
YEAR 1998 CUMULATIVE LEVEL OF SERVICE
1n addition to the 2" compounded growth factor, D&A also analyzed traffic impacts associated with the
San Diego Calvary Chapel located south of the project. D&A obtained a copy of the Enttanco-Federhart
traffic stUdy performed for the Chapel and incorporated the trip generation &lid distribution into this
srudy. The Chapel facility consists of approximately 16,300 square feet &lid operates generally on Sunday
mornings and weeknights (6-9:3Opm). During the weekdays. a preschool operates from 8:00am-6:00pm,
enrol1ing approximately 95 students (50 of which are grades K through 6). According to the E.ntranco-
Federhan study. the preschool generateS 766 daily trips. 31 during the AM peak, &lid 60 in the evening
peak. The peak hour distribution of traffic is presented on Exhibit 7.
The peak hour volumes presented on Exhibit 7 were added to the base year 1998 plus proposed project
volumes. Exhibit 8 shows the cumulative peak hour traffic for this coudition. HCM analysis was
conducted on the cumulative volumes and the results are presented in Table 1. The intersection of Bonita
RoadIPlaza BonitalLynwood will opente at LOS D during both peak periods.
The HCM worksheets for al1 analyses conditions are included in Appendix A.
DISCUSSION OF INTERSECTION SAFE1Y WIlli &: WlllIOur PRO.JECT
Proposed project, existing, year 1998, &lid CQ1"I.I.tive volumes were ~....iIwIlS Wen IS die project site
plan to identify any safety problems associatetl with the project impleIP-..,.rion. Our review of the
project identified rwo potential safety coocerns.
The first potential problem is JIIl)tOlisIs desiriDg to leave tbe Bonita RaId ICCllIII .drive wou1d ClOSS rwo
traVel Janes' to enter die eastbouDd left U1I'II Janes to either 1IIrIlldt 0IIl0 PIua Bonita or IIIIke a U-curn
to go west on Bonita Road. This ccmdition could occur from my project developed OIl tbe lite.
However, a careful review of project volumes desiriDg to IIIIke these moves is very low &lid would not
be expect'Sd to create a problem.
17- If"?--
97-
Mr. Charles R. Tibbett
So-Cal Carwash Services
April 21. 1994
Page 4
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR THE
BONITA ROADIPLAZA BONITA/lYNWOOD INTERSECTION
AM Peak Period PM Peek Period
Condition Delay (secl LOS Deley (secl LOS
Existing 24.0 C 26.6 D
Existing Plus Project 24.1 C 28.6 0
Year 1998 25.3 0 34.9 0
Yeer 1998 Plus Project 27.5 0 35.2 0
Year 1998 Cumulative 27.5 0 36.6 0
LOS .. Level of Service
(secl .. in seconds
lbe second area involves the potential conflicts from motorists leaving the Lynwood access. Because of
the long signal cycle length. these motorists could block Lynwood Road southbouDd traffic while waiting
for the signal to change and serve Lynwood. .The relatively small project volumes IDli the low traffic
volumes on Lynwood would indicate that this will not be a problem.
PROPOSED PROJECT DRIVEWAY IMPACTS TO BONITA ROAD" LYNWOOD AVENUE
The project traffic is DOt expected to create any significant ~"'s to Bonita RoId aodIor Lynwood
A VCDUC traffic. Traffic geuerated by the car wash is spread fairly eveoly over the day. This reduces the
poteDlia1 for ligDificant impacts occurriDi. The site could be developed widi a more iDt-.., use with
higher traffic pneratiOD than the proposed project.
DISCUSSION OF ON SITE PlAN ClRCUUnON SYn'EM
'lbe lite plan depi=d on Exhibit IIDli project volumes pm--' 011 Elthibit 2 were carefully l1....inM.
The leuerallayout of the lite was found to be satisfactorY. The oo1y area of ....a;cm iDvolvel tbe vehicle
..('1M'll area at the vacuum area. For traffic arriviD8 via the Bonita !told acceu tbere II room for
approximately 14 vehicles to queue. From Lynwood. however. tbere is .,....\MfIg area for approximately
seven (7) vehicles ioc\udiDg the vacuum area. To cIeIerIDim tbe adI'quaCy of tbe .....IM"I from Lynwood.
tbe peak hour geueratiOD of 41 vehicles eoteriDS the lite was oow....inl!ld. Based 011 our aperieace with
/7 - 113
- 11....
Mr. Charles R. Tibbett
So-Ca.l Carwash Services
April 21, 1994
PageS
car washes. the 41 vehicle demand can be ICCC""'nvvl,'e<! without backing vehicles onto Lynwood or
blocking traffic exiting the site. The only recommended change to the plan is to widen the proposed 24
foot driveway on Lynwood to 28 feet.
I trUSt this revised letter repon adequately addresses the City of CIII11a Vista (.H...._~.
Sincerely,
DARNELL" ASSOCIATES,INC.
~E-~
Bill E. Darnell, P.E.
BEDlbh
0103CAR1.RPT/1l4-4
-1f~
17 -IJL!
/ )- 1/,)
_ In -
EXHIBITS 1-8
-..... ...
..-
\
is
~
:
Darnell.. ASSOCIATES. INC.
EXHIBIT 1
SITE PLAN /7- II to
/" /.-
~ .. .
c( 0
u ......
lI'l
0 C
z 0
CD
0 CO
N ...........
0 I"")
Bon ita CL t Road
4/9-
t 7/17
-, \ \ t r-
cD (J") -0 cD co co
- ............. 0 - ..........................
............. -.:T 0 ............. I"") -.:T
co ;: co
c
>.
--l
10/25 ~
14/32~
LEGEND
xx/yv - AM/PM Traffic
EXHIBIT 2
J7- 117
D $.,rll e 11 .. I,IlIOCIlTlS. INC.
~~~~,.", n'l:lT ''I''I:IT\ 'l'l:!Ali'Ii'Tr
L~ .- -
-t &-~
z
0
......,
.-
c I"")
a 0
CD Lf") N
0 'r--~
N :;,'
0 r--
- .- .-
Bonita 0... / ~ . L Road
\..
143/559 ~ L 15/49
846/1625 - -1217/1150
18/41 ---., r- 8/9
, ,
"\ 1 I /'
I
0Lf")~
-0 1"")'"
a ,Or--
a to
~ N.
~
.....I
LEGEND
xx/yy = AM/PM Traffic
EXHIBIT 3
Darnell .. A5SQCU.TES. INC. Id-If Y
EXISTING TRAFFI
I .
~~~
",Vl
\./ Z
... .
o
......
c: 1'0
o 0
m ~LD~
o ~ ~...........
~ ~ :;:- f'
Bonita CL..J ~ . l- '- Road
143/559 ~ ~15/49
850/1634 - -1217/1150
I 18/41 -, .- 15/26
'I '1/
""0
o
o
~
c:
>-
-l
<D 1'0 N
-.::t ~~
........... ........... ...........
-.::t1'0~
1'0 ~
LEGEND
XX/YY = AM/PM Traffic
Darnell.. JIIOCP..... lICe.
11' lie; EXHIBIT 4
. lm'STTNG PLUS PROJECT
~..- -.
WJ
. j~
Vl
-E 1-9
z
~
0
---
.-
C I"")
0 liJ
CD liJ
............ (0
0 liJCO~
N liJ..........................
0 ~ ~ CO
Bonita 0- .J ~ L Road
\..
157/615 -' L 17 /54
930/1788 - --1339/1265
20/45 -, r 9/10 -
,
"\ i I r
\
I"") <.0 liJ
U I"") .........................
0 ............. ~ co
0 O'l
~ N
~
-.l
LEGEND
xx/yy = AM/PM Traffic
. . .
. (a) Based on '993 count expanded to 2% per year
EXHIBIT 5 17 - 1:2 0
Darnell II ASSOCIATES. IIlC. (a)
YEAR 1998 TRAFFIC
.
- I ~.~ -
I .
~
<(
U
II>
.- -
z
0
......
c f"')
0 LC)
OJ LC)
,,.....c.o
0 LC)NV
N LC)"
0 ,.....c.oCO
CL -.J + l- Road
Bonita
157/615 ~ L 17 /54
932/1793 - -1339/1265
20/45 -, r 20/36
I t I
"'0 cocnco
LC)""""""
0 ,,"
0 c.ov
~ ,.....
~ ,.....
c
>.
-...I
LEGEND
XX/YY = AM/PM Traffic
'.
17- 1'2./
EXHIBIT 6
.~lftC. IIIC.
_ _ _ _. _'" ....T n... nnn n;ol"'''' 'I'"Q A li'FTr.
.. -
~
J ~5
~ (/)
,~
0
~
c
0
CD N
0 ...-
..............
N N
0
- ...-
Bonita CL t Road
28/26 -, t 5/5
"j t \ /
lONL.l.l
~ C'J"- "-
o .............. "- L.l.l
o co N
:;= C'J"-
~
-l
LEGEND
xx/yy = AM/PM Traffic
EXHIBIT 7 17- /L-<
Darnell I< JIIOIW'a. DIe.
CALVARY CHAPEL TRAFFIC
1-'1__
I
w
I ~5
~ Vl
,.IZ
.a .::
0
--
C rr)
0 L.[)
CD L.[)rr)CD
0 'rr).q-
N L.[)',
0 L.[)C()C()
..- ..-
Bon ita CL..; ~ ~ l-- Road
'-.
157/615 -' L 17 /54
932/1793 - -1339/1265
48/71 -, .- 25/41
'j t \ /
.q-"-rr)
"'0 COrr)N
0 '"
0 en co en
3: CD"'- ...-
5.-
-.J
LEGEND
XX/YY = AM/PM Traffic
/7 - i< 3
EXHIBIT 8
Darnell. AIIOCIAtIS. life. """"' non 'FFIC
.___. n _ nno ..'...,. J:'1:'Tf' 1JT TTC' I"TTUTTT All v... LB....
APPENDIX A
HeM Worksheets
I{ - 1.2. l/
_ /tJ9-
'Ro \IIl-tr 1-
1985 HCH: 11&NALl1EO lHTERIECTIOHS
SUMARY REPORT
~~!!1.111..LLLLLL1L1Lll~lLll11111111111111_11111111111111111_11_11111-1111
~ERSECTIOH..IONITA ROADIPLAZA IONITA/LYNWOOO"
AREA TYl'E.... .OTHER
AHALYST.......DARNELL/lPH
DATE..........1-20-94
TIHE..........AI PEAK
~"EHT.......lXlSTlNG ~OITIOHI
WLUIIES &EOHETRY
D III III .: D III III .
LT 143 1 26 7 : L 12.0 L 12.0 LTR 12.0 LT 12.0
TH 146 1217 0 1 : L 12.0 T 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
RT 11 15 7 141 : T 12.0 TR 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
U 2 2 0 14 : TR 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
------
ADJUITHEHT FACTORS
llIAOE HV AOJ PICG IUSES PHF PEDS PEO. IUT. AU. TYl'E
(X) <Xl Y/H NIl Nb Y/" .in T
. 0.00 2.00 " 0 0 0.90 50 Y 14.5 3
III 0.00 2.00 " 0 0 0.90 50 Y 14.5 3
III 0.00 2.00 " 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
58 0.00 2.00 " 0 0 0,90 50 Y 23.5 3
------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH - 125.0
PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EB LT X X NI LT X
TH X X TH X
RT X X RT X
PO X PO X
UlI LT X II LT X
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
PO X PO
lREEN 11.0 13.0 51.0 0.0 lREEN 24.0 7.0 0.0 0.0
YELLOW 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 YELLOW 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0
LlYEL Of SERVICE
INIE IU. ylt IIC DELAY LOS "". DELAY "". LOS
D L 0.1" 0.256 27.7 D 12.4 .
TIt 0.415 0.514 9.9 .
III L 0.060 0.011 39.7 D 33.7 D
TIt 0.970 0.416 33.7 D
LTIt 0.123 .0.200 "26.5 D 26.5 D
LT 0.081 0.064 35.6 D 20.7 C
R 0.173 0.320 19.1 C
lHTERSECTIOH: Delay - 24.0 (H./veIl) ylt - 0.571 LOS-C
/7 - I~ 'f
1985 HCM: SIGHA~IIED INTERSECTIONS
_RY REPORT
1~..!!!!11Ll1111LLL1LL1L1LL11LL11_11Ll1111111111__11111111111111.111111111
IRTERSECTION..IDNITA IOAD/PLAZA IONITAI~YNWOOD
AREA TYPE.....OTHER
AMA~YST.......~IIIIPH
DATE..........1-2D-94
TIRE..........'" PEAK
~EHT.......IXISTIM& CONDITIONS
_S .EOIlETRY
P lIB . 58: n lIB . 58
~T 559 9 30 42 ~ 12.0 ~ 12.0 ~TR 12.0 ~T 12.0
TH 1625 1150 5 7 : ~ 12.0 T 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
RT 41 49 4 503 : T 12.0 TR 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
RR 4 5 0 50: TR 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
---------
ADJUSTMEHT FACTORS
.WE MY ADJ !'KG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
(Xl (Xl Y/N N8 Nb Y/N .;n T
EB 0.00 2.00 M 0 0 0.90 50 Y 14.5 3
lIB 0.00 2.00 M 0 0 0.90 50 Y 14.5 3
. 0.00 2.00 M 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
58 0.00 2.00 M 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
PH-1
EB ~T X
TH X
RT X
PD
IIIl ~T
TH
RT
PD
&llfEN 1'.0
lW.DII 3.0
--------- -----
S1GNA~ SETTINGS CYC~E ~ENGTH . 125.0
PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
X MB ~T X
X TH X
X RT X
X PD X
X 58 ~T X
X TH X
X RT X
X PD
13.0 51.0 0.0 &RfEN 24.0 7.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 3.0 0.0 YEU,OW 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0
LIVE~ Of SERVICE
UIIE _. V/C ./C IE~Y LOS APP. IE~Y APP. LOS
EB ~ 0.777 0.256 36.1 I 24.6 C
TR 0.935 0.514 20.' C
IIIl ~ 0.067 0.011 39.7 I 30.7 D
TR 0.945 0.416 30.6 I
. LTR 0.143 '0.200 "26.6 I 26.6 I
58 LT D.4. D.lI64 39.0 I 25.5 I
R 0.617 0.320 24.1 C
INTERSECTlOM: DeLey - 26.6 (..e/vehl V/C - 0.174 LOS-I
- / II -
~N 'l P ,
/ 7- I 7- j;,"
1985 HCII: 1IlNALIUO INTERSECTIOlCS
_RY REI'ORT
~!~~!!_!_!!!1.111_111111111111111111111111111111111111111.1111111111111111
INTERSECTIOlC. .DUTA Illo\DIPLAlA _lTA/LI'HWOOO
AREA TYPE.....OTHER
AHALYST.......DARHELLIIPH
DATE..........1-20-94
TIHE..........AR PEAK
CDHHENT.......EXISTING+PROJECT
WLUIlfS IEOIlETRY
U lIB . II: U lIB . II
LT 143 15 34 7 : L 12.0 L 12.0 LTR 12.0 LT 12.0
TN 150 1217 3 , : L 12.0 T 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
RT 18 15 11 1'1 : T 12.0 TR 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
RR 2 2 1 l' : TR 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
ADJUSTIIENT fACTOllS
llRAOE NY ADJ ~ IUSES PHf PEDS PEO. BUT. ARR. TYPE
(X> (X> V/N Ne Nb Y/N .;n T
0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 V 1'.5 3
lIB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 Y 14.5 3
. 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
18 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
-----------
PH-1
U LT X
TN X
RT X
PO
lIB LT
TN
RT
PO
lREEN 18.0
'IEWlII 3.0
SlGHAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH . 125.0
PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH../,
X NB LT X
X TN X
X RT X
X PO X
X sa LT X
X TN X
X RT X
X PO
13.0 51.0 0.0 IlIEEN 24.0 7.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 3.0 0.0 YELL.OW 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0
LEVEL Of IERYlCE
LANE UP. V/C I/C DELAY LOS "'P. DELAY "'P. LOS
U L 0.199 0.256 'Z1.7 0 12.' .
TR 0.487 0.514 9.9 .
... L 0.112 0._ 39.9 0 33.7 D
TR 0.970 0.'16 33.7 D
.. LTR 0.176 0.200 26.a D 26.8 D
LT 0.111 0.064 35.6 D 21.0 C
R 0.173 0.320 19.a c
IrnRSECTIOlC: "~lI)' . 24.1 (...,_> V/C . 0.582 LOS-C
~ON'le ~1..
/7,/:<7
1985 Heft: SIGNALIZED IHTERSECTIOHS
_RY REPORT
_~~~~~~!11~......LLL_L_.L_.._Ll111111111_111_11111111111_111_111111__11111
IHTERSECTIOH..IDHITA IOAD/PLAZA IDHITA/LYHWOOD
AREA TYPE.... .00000R
AHAlYST.......IARHELLIIPH
OATE..........1-20-94
TIllE............. PEAK
CORMEHT.......IXISTIN6+PROJECT
WLUIIES 1E000ETRY
D . . II: D . . sa
LT 559 26 46 42 : L 12.0 L 12.0 LTR 12.0 LT 12.0
TM 1634 1150 13 15 : L 12.0 T 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
RT 41 49 12 503 : T 12.0 TR 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
IR 4 5 1 5D:TR 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
- -
ADJUSTMEHT FACTORS
lRADE MY ADJ PKG IUSES PHF PEDS PED. 1Ul. ARR. TYPE
(Xl (Xl Y/H Ha Hb Y/H .in T
D O.DD 2.DD H 0 0 0.9D 50 Y 14.5 3
llll O.DD 2.DD N 0 0 0.9D 50 Y 14.5 3
NB O.DD 2.DD N 0 0 0.9D 50 Y 23.5 3
sa O.DD 2.DD N 0 0 0.9D 50 Y 23.5 3
- -------------------
51GNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH " 125.0
PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EB LT X X NB LT X
TH X X TH X
RT X X RT X
PO X PO X
llll LT X 58 LT X
TH X TH X
RT X RT X
'0 X PO
lREEN 16.0 14.0 51.0 0.0 IREEN 24.0 1.0 0.0 0.0
YELLOW 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 YELLOW 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0
LlVEL OF SEIVICE
LAIIE lIP. ,It IIC DELAY LOS A". OELAY APP. LOS
D L 0.102 0.241 37.6 0 21.2 0
TR 0.967 0.561 25.0 0
llll L 0.171 0.096 39.5 0 3D.1 0
TI 0.945 0.416 3D.6 0
. LTI 0.251 'O.ZOO "27.3 0 27.3 0
II LT 0.512 0.072 31.6 0 25.6 0
R 0.617 0.320 24.1 C
JIlTEISECTlOH:
"lay" 21.6 (.../vell) 'fIC" 0.199
LOS"/)
-1/.3-
~O~N.e~ 1-
/'7- /2 Cj
1915 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
IUIIlARY RE~T
....!..........~...._...llllllllllllllllL1LLL1LLLL_1LLLLLL1111111111111111
INTERSECTION. ._ITA IlOAIl/PLAZA _ITAlLYIMlOD
AREA TYPE.....OTHE~
AHAiYST.......DARHELLIIPH
DATE..........1-20-94
TIME. . .. .. ....All PEAl<
COHHEHT.......IASE 1998
_ES 1E000ETRY
D lIB lIB 58: D lIB lIB S8
LT 157 9 29 1 : L 12.0 L 12.0 LTR 12.0 LT 12.0
TH 930 1339 1 1 : L 12.0 T 12.0 12.0 I 12.0
RT 20 17 1 155 : T 12.0 TR 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
II 2 2 1 16 : TR 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
-----
ADJUSTMEHT 'ACTORS
iRADE MY ADJ PKG BUSES PH' PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
IX) IX) Y/H NIl Nb Y/N .in T
E8 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 Y 14.5 3
0.00 2.00 H 0 0 0.90 50 Y 14.5 3
.... 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 y 23.5 3
sa 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
---------------------------
PH- 1
EI LT X
TH X
RT X
PD
VB LT
TH
RT
PD
iREEN 14.0
YELLOW 3.0
SIGNAL SETTINGS
PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
X NB LT
X TH
X IT
X PD
X 51 LT
X TN
X IT
X PD
13.0 55.0 0.0 GREEN
0.0 3.0 0.0 YELLOW
CYCLE LENGTH - 125.0
PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
24.0 7.0 0.0 0.0
3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0
LEVEL Of SERVICE
LM! IRP. VIC G/C HLAY LOS
D L .0.249 0.224 30.3 D
TR 0.533 0.514 10.3 1
lIB L 0.067 0.1III 39.7 D
TI 0.991 0.448 55.4 D
lIB LTR 0.131 0.200 26.6 D
S8 LT 0.092 0.064 35.6 D
I 0.210 0._ 21.1 C
IoPP. DELAY "". LOS
15.2 .
35.4 D
26.6 D
22.6 C
P>ON 1\ ~ ^" 1...
JNTERSECTlON:
DeLay - 25.3 (a../vaIl) VIC - 0.621
LDS-D
- 11"';-
J 7' 121
~ON t:t lb f \
'985 Heft: Sl&NAlJlED lNTERSECTlONS
IUIlIWlY REPORT
~~~_~!!!L_!L_Li_L_!L_!!LL!LLLL!!L_lL_llllll_ll_lllllll11111111111111111111
lNTERSECTlON. .lllHlTl IIDlD/PLlZl IllHlTlILYlNOOD
AREA TYPE.....OTKER
lHlLYST.......IAlNELLIBPH
D1TE..........'-20-94
TlHE..........PR PEAK
COIIlENT.......IlSE '998
_ES IECllIETRY
P III Ie 58: P lIB Ie 18
LT 615 '0 33 46 : L 12.0 L '2.0 LTR 12.0 LT '2.0
TH 1711I 1265 6 . : L 12.0 T '2.0 '2.0 R 12.0
RT 45 54 5 553 : T '2.0 TR '2.0 '2.0 R 12.0
RR 5 5 0 55 : TR '2.0 '2.0 '2.0 '2.0
'2.0 12.0 '2.0 '2.0
'2.0 12.0 12.0 '2.0
---------
ADJUSTHENT F1CTORS
IRADE MY lDJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
(X) (X) Y/H "" Hb Y/H .in T
E8 0.00 2.00 H 0 0 0.90 50 Y '4.5 3
lIB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 Y '4.5 3
IE 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
$II 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
----------
SlGNll SETTlNGS CYCLE LEHGTH . 133.0
PN-' PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
P LT X X NIl LT X
TH X X TH X
RT X X RT X
PD X PD X
lIB LT X S8 LT X
TH X TH X
IT X IT X
PD X PD
IREEN ".0 ".0 sa.o 0.0 IlIEEN 23.5 '0.5 0.0 0.0
YEu.OlI 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 YEu.OlI 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0
LEVEL Of SERVlCE
LANE IRP. VIC I/C DELAY LOS lPP. DELAY lPP. LOS
P L 0.970 0.226 sa.o E 36.7 D
11 0.998 0.602 29.5 D
'" L 0.097 0.061 44.2 E 54.4 D
11 o.m 0.444 54.4 D
Ie L1I 0.'75 '0.'" '29.6 D 29.6 D
18 LT 0.406 O.llI6 31.0 D 21.5 D
R 0.697 0.3'2 27.5 D
JllTEUECTlON :
"ley' 54.9 <_/..n) V/C' 0.959
LOS ..D
.....
II J -
11- /3 G
1915 HtM: SI&HAl1ZEO INTERSECTIONS
_RT REPOtIT
~.!11111111111111~1111111Rll11111111_111-111111111111-111111111111~1111111
ZNTERSEtTION..IONITA ROAO/PLAZA IONITA/LYHWOOO
AREA TYPE.....OTHER
AHALYST.......IARHELL/IPH
OATE..........1-2D-94
TIME..........AII PEAK
COHHEHT.......199B PLUS PROJEtT
VOLUIlES IEOlIETRT
E8 lIB Ie 58: E8 lIB Ie 58
LT 157 20 41 e : L 12.0 L 12.0 LTR 12.0 LT 12.0
TH 932 1339 6 6 : L 12.0 T 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
RT 20 17 14 155 : T 12.0 TR 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
RR 2 2 1 16 : TR 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
--------
ADJUSlHENT FAtTORS
lRAOE NY AOJ PKG IUSES PHF PEDS PEO. BUT. ARR. TYPE
(Xl (Xl T/H H. Hb TIN .in T
O.DD 2.DD H 0 0 0.90 50 Y 14.5 3"
lID O.DD 2.DD N 0 0 0.90 50 Y 14.5 3
NB O.DD 2.DD N 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
58 O.DD 2.DD H 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
----------------
PN-1
E8 LT X
TH X
RT X
PO
lIB LT
TH
RT
PO
IREEN 14.0
YELLOW 3.0
SIGNAL SmINGS
PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
X He LT
X TH
X RT
X PO
X se LT
X TH
X RT
X PO
14.0 54.0 0.0 IREEN
0.0 3.0 0.0 YELLOW
CYtLE LENGTH - 125.0
PH-I ,"-2 PH-3 PH-4
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
24.0 7.0 0.0 0.0
3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0
LlYEL Of SERVItE
INIE IRP. lilt ./t DELAY LOS
EI L 0.241 0.232 29.7 0
Tl 0.542 0.576 10.7 .
lIB L 0.137 0.D96 39.4 D
Tl 1.009 0.440 39.5 D
Ie LTl 0.224 0.200 .27.1 0
LT 0.140 0.064 35.7 0
R 0.205 0.296 21.3 t
APP. OELAY APP. LOS
13.4 .
39.5 .
27.1 .
22.6 C
ZNTERSECTION :
LOS-O
o.L." _ 27.5 (Me/velll lilt - 0.647
-II&--
~oNq~fA-';l
/7- 13!
'&N'i%fPt.
'985 HCll: Sl&NAL1IED JIITnSECTJOHS
_RY ItEPORT
.....LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL~LLLll11111111111111111111_111_111_1111111111
JIITERSECTJOH..IDHJTA IOAD/PLAZA IDHJTA/LYIIWOOD
AREA TYPE... oollTllER
AIW. YST. ..... ._ELLIIPH
DATE..........,~
TJKE..........PR PEAK
COMMEHT.......1... PLUS PROJECT
~ES IEOIIETRY
II III .. 18: II lIB .. 18
LT 6'5 36 51 46 : L '2.0 L 12.0 LTR '2.0 LT 12.0
TH 1793 1265 19 21 : L 12.0 T '2.0 12.0 a '2.0
aT 45 54 18 553 : T '2.0 TR 12.0 12.0 a 12.0
aR 5 5 2 55 : TR 12.0 12.0 '2.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 '2.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
------
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
lRADE IIY ADJ PK6 BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. AaR. TYPE
(X) (X) Y/H HII lib Y/N .in T
II 0.00 2.00 II 0 0 0.90 50 Y 14.5 3
lIB 0.00 2.00 H 0 0 0.90 50 Y 14.5 3
lIB 0.00 2.00 II 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
58 0.00 2.00 II 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
~----------------------------------
PN-1
II LT I
TH I
RT I
PD
III LT
TH
RT
PD
IREEN 1..0
YELLOW 3.0
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH' 133.0
PN-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
I liB LT I
I TH I
X aT x
x PD X
I SB LT X
X TH X
X RT X
X PD
11.0 51.0 0.0 IREEII 23.5 10.5 0.0 0.0
0.0 3.0 0.0 YELLOW 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0
LEY!L Of SEIIVJeE
LANE IIII'. VIe lie DELAY LOS A". DELAY APP. LOS
II L 0.970 0.226 51.0 E 37.1 D
"n 1.001 D.6D2 30.0 D
III L 0.349 D.D6I 45.. E 34.7 D
"n D.m 0.444 34.4 D
.. LTR 0.373 0.114 31.0 D 31.0 D
. LT 0.500 D.llI6 39.3 D 21.8 D
a 0.697 0.312 27.5 D
JllTUSECTJOH: Delay - 35.2 (_/veh) vie - D.'" LOS-D
17 . /3 '2.
II '1-
1985 HCII: SlIllAUUD IIlTERSECTIClN5
IUlllARY REI'OlIT
11Ll1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.11111111111
1JITER5ECTIClN..lllNlTA ~1PLA1A IllNlTAlLYlIIIOOD
AREA TYPE.....GTHER
ANALY5T.......IARHELL/lPH
DATE..........1-20-94
TIME..........~ 'EAK
CDHHEHT.......199&+CUHULATIVE
VOLIJIll5 _ETRY
D lIB lIB A: D lIB lIB 18
LT 157 25 69 1 : L 12.0 L 12.0 LTR 12.0 LT 12.0
TN 932 1339 11 11 : L 12.0 T 12.0 12.0 I 12.0
IT 41 17 19 155 : T 12.0 TR 12.0 12.0 I 12.0
RR 5 2 2 16 : TR '2.0 '2.0 '2.0 12.0
'2.0 12.0 '2.0 '2.0
12.0 '2.0 '2.0 '2.0
-------
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
BRADE MY ADJ PKG BUSES 'HF 'EDS 'ED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
(Xl (Xl Y/N N. Hb Y/N .in T
po 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 Y '4.5 3
0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 Y 14.5 3
NB 0.00 2.00 H 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
18 0.00 2.00 H 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
,11-'
o LT X
TN X
RT X
'0
lIB LT
TH
RT
PD
&IIEEN 14.0
'IELLOII 3.0
...-------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH - '25.0
PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-' 'H-2 _3 PH,""
X He LT X
X TH X
X RT X
X 'D X
X 5e LT x
X TH X
X IT X
X 'D
14.0 54.0 0.0 BREEN 24.0 7.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 3.0 0.0 'IELLOII 3.0 J.O 0.0 0.0
LEVEL OF SEIVICE
LNlE BIP. VlC IIC DELAY LOS AI,. DELAY AI'. LOS
EI L 0.24' 0.232 29.7 D 1J.5 .
TR 0.551 0.576 10.9 .
lIB L 0.171 0.D96 19.5 D 19.5 D
TR 1.1109 0.440 19.5 D
lIB LTR 0.J14 .0.200 .21.J D 21.J D
.. LT 0.257 0.064 16.2 D 23.6 C
I 0.205 0.Z96 21.J C
1JITEISECTIClN: "L.y - 27.5 (M./veh) V/C - 0.611 LOS-D
_11%-
lIJON '{~ Cf\
I}. 133
1985 HCll: lIIHAl.1ZED INTERSECTIONS
_V REP'ORT
~~!!!!!!!1!.!!!1!llllll!11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
INTERSECTION. .IOHITA IlOAD/PLAlA IOHITAlLYNWOOD
AREA TYPE.....OTHER
ANALYST.......DARHELLlBPH
OATE..........1-2D-94
TIME..........'" PEAK
COHHENT.......1991+CUHULATIVE
_UHEI 1E00ETRV
D . Ie 18: D lIB Ie ..
LT 615 41 14 46 : L 12.0 L 12.0 LTR 12.0 LT 12.0
TN 1793 1265 31 33 : L 12.0 T 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
aT 71 54 23 553 : T 12.0 TR 12.0 12.0 R 12.0
RR 7 5 2 55 : TR 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
--------------------
ADJUSTMEHT fACTORS
IWE MY ADJ P!CG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE
(X) (1) V/N Na Nb Y/N I;n T
D 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 V 14.5 3
. 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 V 14.5 3
Ie 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 Y 23.5 3
18 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 50 V 23.5 3
---------------------
SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH" 133.0
PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4
EI LT X X NI LT X
TN X X TN X
RT X X RT X
PD X PD X
lIB LT X II LT X
TM X TN X
RT X RT X
" X PD
IREEN 18.0 11.0 58.0 0.0 IREEN 23.0 11.0 0.0 0.0
YELL.OII 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 YELLOW 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0
LEVEL Of IERVICE
UIlE IRP. VIC IIC OELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS
D L 0.970 0.226 58.0 E 39.6 0
TR 1.016 0.602 33.5 0
lIB L 0.391 0.068 46.4 E 34.7 0
TR 0.975 0.444 34.4 0
Ie LTR 0.554 0.110 33.6 0 33.6 0
. LT 0.562 11.090 "40.3 E 21.8 .
R 0.611 0.316 27.1 .
lHTERIECTION :
Delay. 36.6 (a.o/vall) V/C" 1.031
LOS"'
-1/'1-
~ON ~~~
I 7 - I 3 II
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
17- i3S"
_ /d'-P-
~
WE CITY OF CH't]V. VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
You arc required 10 file a Slatcmcnt of Disclosurc of certain owner5llip or linancial interesls, payments, or campaign
alntribulions, on all maner5 wllicll will requirc discrelionary action on IlIe part of IlIc Cily Council, Planning Commission, and
all OIlier official bodies. The following information muSI be disclosed:
J.
Ustllle Dlmcs of all penoon. baving a linancial inlcreM in tile property wllich is Ihe suhject of IlIe applicalion or Ihe
contracl, e.I., owner, applicant, contractor. subcontraclOr, material supplier.
-.e.harl~c.., R. ~~TI
..l1A~~I~ A.
~A~/Jn"TO
-
LOI~ K.o~ ~A-
(-> AI,) L C. fv1A.c, ~OTT 0
2. If any person' idenliOed pUr5uantlo (I) ahove i. a corporation or partne~lIip,listllle names of all individuals owning
more Iban 10% of IlIe .harc. in Ihc corporation or owning any panner5llip inlerCSI in IlIe partnersllip.
C_~ A.,,...\' c;.. R, \1 ~~T"T 00% - 2 "%
~Olc;... k.cl'"~r~ :2.."S"%
Pau L'D !\1A{1N71T7:0 -
3. If any pen.on' identified pursuanl III (I) ahuvc is nnn.profit organiT...tinn nr a truM, liM IlIe names of any person
serving as direclor 01 IlIc nnn-profit organil.lltiun nr as trustee or benendary or truMor of IlIe trust.
-
4. Have you had more tllan S2~1l worth of husinc.., tran_acted with any memher of the City starr, Board.., Commission_,
Comminees. and Council wilhin IlIe pasl Iwelve montlls? Ycs_ No-X' I( yes. please indicale person(s):
S. Please idenlify eacll ind every person, including any agents, employees, consultanls, or Independent conlraclors who
you have assigned 10 represenl you before IlIe City in IlIis maner.
'1?" La.I1,_
6. Have you and/Or your officen. or agenls, In Ihe aggregale, conlrlbuled more Ihan S 1,000 10 a Councllmember In Ihe
currenl or precedinl cIccI ion period? Yes_ NuX. If yes. stale wllicll Couneilmember(s):
· · · (NO'IE
AnD addiliollll .... .~ry) · · ·
{~~~~
Signalure of coDIrac;lor/lppUcaDI
Dale:
8> - 2Cf-'3
~H4P 1..:E5. I? ~'1!:,~rr
Prlnl or type name Of contractor/lpplicant
17 1.3 {,
-/..< /-
, --
_ ,_ ~_._._.J_._ ..._.:......~..........IIli... "",,"~j" WItl,'I!ft&U'C'.8I<<_nn,6OCiMdwb,~......dMri""-rOI.11i""-'~~~,,,.ac-.
ATTACHMENT 8
SWEETWATER COMMUNITY GROUP INPUT
J7- 137
- .
THIS PAGE BLANK
..
/7- 13:/
_ /~d2--
....
d3 TUE 8:40
NRAD,Dl 31 COMPUTER SCl
FAX HO. C! 9SS'. ~S
P.02
WEETW A TEn
Community
'lannlng
Group
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
14 October 1993
Chula Vista Planning Department
Attn: Steve Griffin
Sweetwater Community Planning Group
Preliminary Evaluation of the Proposed Car Wash, Bonita Road
west of Lynwood Drive
,
-
,
The Sweetwater Community Planning Group has had the opportunity to review the
preliminary proposal for a car wash facility on the south side of Bonita Road west
of Lynwood Drive. The conceptual design appears to be within the envelope of the
approved Sweetwater Community Design Handbook gUidelines adopted by the
Planning Group and the Board of Supervisors.
While It Is' unfortunate that the City Insists tha1 this property be annexed to gain
access to sewer service (the Planning Group continues to question this need) we
recognile the proponents lack of choice of alternatives.
The traffic situatiqn at this location Is of corttinulng concern and the desIgn of this
project should tRke that Into account. It should be noted th3t ony traffic from this
project to LynwoOd Drive (for access to Bonita Road west or Plaza Bonita Road
north) will cause additionel cycling of the signals. This will result In additional
conjestion for the east/West flow of traffic through this complex Intersection.
6Lt \. ~
John Hammond
Chairper$OO
~
17 - (.3 I
_/;23-
~WEETWATEn
MINUTES 50CTOBER
1 9 9 3
The meeting wa.s called to order at 7:10 p.m. in the
Conference Room of the Bonita/Sunnyside Fire Station
by Chai%person John Hammond. Present at the start
of the meeting were Burkey, Hammond, Lasswell,
McDonald, Roark, Riess, H. Taylor, J. Taylor, Todus
and Werner. Excused: Jensen, Ingrassia, Watson,
Absent: Choppin.
Present from the County: Mike Evans, Habitat Planning Coordinator DPLU
Community
Planning
nroup
Agenda Item 1: Approval of minutes from 7 September 1993 Meeting.
A quorum wa.s not present so minutes were not taken.
Agenda Item 2. Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning
Group on any subject within the Planning Group's purview but
not on the agenda. Presentations liJnited to 3 minutes. No
action can be taken on items not on the published agenda.
There wa.s no public comment.
Mul tiple Species Wildlife Habitat and Open Space Conservation
Program; presentation/discussion.
Evans presented a slide show and discussed the 1991 Work Program for conserving native
habitat, the Multiple Species Conser.mtion Program. A more effective wa.y to conserve
habitat is sought and a wa.y to streamline development process occuring during planning.
City of San Diego is doing the mapping and it should be completed by December. Fish
and Wildlife has been very active this year in listing threatened and endangered species
and San Diego County received preliJninary listings for 18 species of plants and animals,
and has the highest list of sensi ti ve and endangered species of any county in the U. S.
There has been little consistency in planning between jurisdictions, but now the city
of San Diego, the county and other jurisdictions are working together to establish a
resource base plan at the local level. A rough draft map of the Sweetwa.ter area and
another map encompassing a much larger area were given to the Chairperson. Evans in-
dicated the solution is to integrate natural resource planning into land use planning
setting goals to try to conserve the biologic diversity, manage the network of natural
land and conserve large blocks of habitat. Evans will return in the near future if the
county is not forced to terminate his position due to budget constraints.
~enda Item 3:
Agenda Item 4: Bonita Car Wash; update.
Paul McNado presented the members with information and section sketches of the proposed
car wash which will be located across from the new Pier I on Bonita Road at the corner
of Lynwood Drive. The Spring Valley Sewer is 1 1/2 blocks to the east so in order to
hook up to the Chula Vister sewer the city is requiring the developer to annex. The
'l'lanning Group is very concerned that Chula Vista continues to approve projects which
r111 add traffic to a road where the LOS is F. Mr. McNado explained Chula Vista contends
traffic iJnpact is not heavy with a car wa.sh because the traffic is already there. The
I-80S/Bonita Road area is one of the worst in the entire county and Chuia Vista's logic
is very questionable. Mitch Beauchamp will design the landscaping which will have 32
trees. Their schedule is up in the air but he believes it will be four to six months
P.O. Box 460, Bonita, California 91908-0460
J7- UIO
:a,zE: ,..
S:P: ~~KcTES 3 Octobe~ 1993
~efo~e const~uction begins. He agreed there's no problem in designating it Chula Vista
~ar 'ash rather than Bonita Car Wash.
Lgenda =tem 5: SR123 report; discussion.
'!odus reported CTV is having a difficult time securing funding for the tOllway. CalTrans
:.s not considering viable options one of which is to construct Otay Valley Road across
to 1-5 but the response to that suggestion was CalTrans is mandated to build SR123 and
:.ot mandated to do anything else. Planning Group believes CalTrans is using 1950
technology to address the circulation problems of the 90's, and is ignoring alternatives
such as rail.
'!aylor reported that since the Sweetwater Valley Civic Association dropped its plan to
:-.ave an informational booth an SR125 at the BonitaFest, her husband and she compiled
factual information, obtained aerial photographs of the tollway area and set up photos
cf the Sweetwater Valley and proposed alignments and collected names of persons who are
c;>posed to the tOllway and willing to help cause its demise.
!::xius indicated that there is no comparable tollway anywhere in the world and this pro-
~osed road will be a sweetheart deal for CTV.
'!he Taylors will work on the formation 0~88t!i~~~~fations in the valley such as
the SVCA, Homeowner's Associations, Sweetwater Woman's Club, Bonita Valley Horsemen,
e~c. to stop the tollway thru the valley.
Chula Vista has indicated it now does not need SR125 because the developers in the
South Bay have started a fu.'ld to be used to widen Proctor Valley Road and build any ad-
c.:.tional roads needed to serve their developments.
~**
Agenda Item 6: Announcements.
The Board of Supervisors ruled the trail easement on the Jeremiah property is valid
a:A ordered Jeremiah to remove the fence which prohibited the riders and hikers from
using the trail. Jeremiah will appeal.
...................A letter was drafted and will be refined by the Chairperson to be sent to
S;~'DAG in response to its letter regarding the use of tax dollars for a portion of
the tolh-ay. The MarION (Taylor/I'aylor) Letter be sent to SANDAG in response to its
letter. PASSED - unamimous.
~:eeting adjourned 8: 50.
~tful1Y
~~~keY,
/7- ILl!
/,;2 .r'~
OCT-21-93 THU 10:26
NRAD,DIV 91 COMPUTER SCI FAX NO. 6195532969
:WEETW A TER
Community 2 November 1993 - 7:00 p.m.
PI nnl"n" ** Bonita-Sunnyslde Fire Station **
a ~ 4900 Bonita Road, Bonita
Group
PRELIMINARY AGENDA
1. Meeting canceled due to a lack of agenda items.
John Hammond
Chairperson
-
.~.
/]- fLlL
-/;:L!,-
PLO. Box 4.60. Bonita. Callfnmla D1GnLn4An
PUBLIC HEARING GIECK LIST
PUBLIC HEARlNG DATE: I Ill- 11f--t
'U'''CT ~ ~ ~~ lo~:r :=::: 6-P ~
bQC.'14QN: ~ O.:""i ~ ..Q,." _-h J .....,.- ~ ....j- u...' ...u.. .
~ RJ- '1 ;t'~ lli_. _ 71.':' .L..c~,_1M.. ~ .;~~
SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBLICATION -- BY FAX V'; BY HAND ; BY MAlL
PUBLICATION DATE I / ~ I q....j - -
, .
MAlLED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS pI'" ~ NO. MAlLED
PER GC ~54992 Legislative Staff, ConstrUction Indusny Fed, 6336 Greenwich Dr Suite F. San Diego, 92122
LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK 'io /2-'1/"14-
, J
COPIES TO:
Administration (4)
~'
Planning l-- /
Originating Deparrmenr
Engineering
.....--
Others
City Clerk's Office (2)
~
(,/2A !q'-/-
. j
POST ON BULLETIN BOARDS
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
7/93
-55-
j' '.,) / I, 'J
[' ---- '-/-,
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HLARING
BY THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CIIULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL will hold
a public hearing to consider the following:
Considering application to change present General Plan designation &
Prezone 0.67 acres located at southwest corner of Bonita Rd & Lynwood Dr.
within Sweetwater Community Area of San Diego County.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this matter in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this
notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk's Office at or prior to the
public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY 'IIII' CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday, July
12, ]994, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth
Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: June 29, 1994
/7- 14 q
~~~
::~~--:
~~~
-t.,~~
CllY OF
(HULA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
TELEFAX COVER LEITER
Telecopier No. (619) 585-5612
DATE:
C. /2q lev,;
TO: Star News LeS!:a1 / Sue
FAX NO: (619) 426-6346
FROM: ~ UuJ~ o~~
l DO
SUBJEcr. n LA . \,\~~.:. ~ I Cl't '. . ,
. ~.. .-,,~
.J
TOTAL NO. PAGES (including cover):
::2-
PUBUCATION DATE:
'7/7-/ar4
If all pages are not received, please call Lorna @ (619)691-5041.
f7-/4S
276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691.5041
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS BY THE
CITY COUNCIL OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY
COUNCIL of Chula Vista, California, for the purpose of considering an application to change
the present General Plan designation and Prezone 0.67 acres located at the southwest comer of
Bonita Rd. and Lynwood Dr. within the Sweetwater Community Area of the San Diego County.
The application, submitted by Charles Tibbett, requests the following:
1. Change the Existing General Plan designation from Commercial Office and Low
Density Residential (0-3 du/ac) to Visitors Commercial.
2. Prezone the Property C-V-P, Commercial Visitor with Precise Plan.
Copies of the proposed project are on file in the office of the Planning Department.
An Initial Study, IS-94-04, of possible significant environmental impacts has been conducted by
the Environmental Review Coordinator. A finding of no significant environmental impact has
been recommended to the City Council and is on file, along with the Initial Study, in the office
of the Planning Department. Copies of the proposed amendment and prezoning applications are
on file in the office of the Planning Department. Any petitions to be submitted to the City
Council must be received by the City Clerk's office no later than noon of the hearing date.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this General Plan amendment or Prezone, you may
be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearings
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior
to the public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION on
Tuesday, July 12, 1994 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building,
276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista, iu complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), requests
individuals who may require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City
meeting, activity, or service to request such accommodation at leastfarty-eight hours in advance for
meetings and five days in advance for scheduled services and activities. Please contact Nancy Ripley
for specific information at (619) 691-5101 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDD) (619)
585-5647. California Relay Service is available for the hearing impaired.
DATED:
CASE NO.:
June 28, 1994
GPA-94-03, PCZ-94-B,
17-140
.:aNl%T'NA""f'l:.!2-
~~
r-
-
-
...-
...-"'-
I
--_ I
--t
...,
"C"
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
C!) APPLICANT: Charles Tibbit PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
GP A .. Amend from office .. ftlldentlal to
ADDRESS: SW comer of Bonita Rd. mmmerclal
and L,"nwood Dr. PCZ.Prezone to CVP. Commercial VI.itor
SCALE: FILE NUMBERS: PCC.Conditlonal UH Permit to ooerate a
NORTH 1" - 200' GP A.94-02, PCl,.94.B full service carw..h.
PCC-94-23
17-)L;7
ORDiNANCE NO.
0(5'15'
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
THE ZONING MAP OR MAPS ESTABLISHED BY SECTION
19.18.010 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE PREZONING
THE 0.67 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF BONITA ROAD AND LYNWOOD DRIVE C-V-P,
COMMERCIAL VISITOR WITH PRECISE PLAN.
WHEREAS, property consisting of approximately 0.67 acres located at the southwest
corner of Bonita Road and Lynwood Drive and diagrammatically presented on the area map
attached hereto as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a Prezoning was filed with the Planning
Department of the City of Chula Vista on November I, 1993 by Charles Tibbett; and
WHEREAS, said application requested to prezone 0.67 acre parcel C-V, Commercial
Visitor; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department set the time and place for a hearing on said
prezoning application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners
within 1000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to the hearing;
and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m.
June 8, 1994 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission
and said hearing was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the Commission found that the project would have no significant
environmental impacts and adopted the Negative Declaration issued on IS-94-04; and
WHEREAS, from the facts presented to the Planning Commission, the Commission has
determined that the prezone is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan and that
public necessity, convenience, and good zoning practice support the prezoning to C-V-P,
Commercial Visitor Precise Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission found that the project would have no significant
environmental impacts and adopted the Negative Declaration issued on IS-94-04 and voted 6-0
(Tuchscher absent) to recommend that the City Council approve the prezoning of the parcel to
C-V-P, Commercial Visitor Precise Plan; and
NOW, THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find,
determine, and ordain as follows:
/ 7...? -!
SECTION I: Based on the findings and recommendations of the Environmental Review
Coordinator, the City Council does hereby adopt the Negative declaration issued on IS-94-04.
SECTION II: the City Council finds that the prezoning is consistent with the City of
Chula Vista General Plan and that the public necessity, convenience and general welfare and
good Zoning practice, support the prezoning to C-V-P, Commercial Visitor Precise Plan zone.
SECTION III: that the parcel located at the southwest corner of Bonita Road and
Lynwood Drive, as shown in the attached Zoning Map, be prezoned C-V-P, Commercial Visitor
Precise Plan.
SECTION IV: Pursuant to Section 19.56. 041 of the Municipal Code, the City Council
finds that the following circumstances are evident which allows the application of the .pH Precise
Plan Modifying District to the Subject site.
Commercial development is usually located adjacent to high density residential
development/zoning. In this case, the 40 ft elevation difference between the subject site
and the southerly adjacent residential neighborhood provide an adequate transition to
justify the coexistence of this two land uses. However, in order to ensure that
development on this property is compatible with the surroundings the following Precise
Plan Standards are necessary to allow the City sufficient control to achieve the desire
community character.
I. development in this property shall be in conformance with the Sweetwater
Community Plan and Design Guidelines.
2. Development of this property shall be limited to single tenant.
3. Building setbacks shall be as follows:
Bonita Road 20 ft.
Lynwood Drive 20 ft.
Rear (south) 25 ft.
Side (west) 0 ft.
4. Building height shall be limited to 2 1/2 stories or 45 ft. whichever is less.
5. A 20 ft. landscape buffer shall be provided along both street frontages.
6. Parking shall be screened with dense landscaping, landscape mounding, low walls
or a combination of any of the above solutions.
7. Driveway along Lynwood Drive Shall be 28 ft wide.
8. Business identification signs shall be limited to low profile monument type signs,
wall mounted signs and directional signs as permitted in the underlying zone.
/7,1 ,:;.
9. A lighting plan addressing security and light spills onto the southerly adjacent
residential area shall be submitted as part of the building permit submittal
package.
10. Land uses in this site shall not create noise levels exceeding 65db by day and
55db by night.
II. Development of this property must agree to not increase water consumption or
participate in water conservation or fee offset program the City may have in
effect at the time of building permit issuance.
SECTION V: thiS Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force the thirtieth day from
its adoption.
~IDXb
Presented by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
(f: \bome\planniD&\Iuia\gpa-9403 .ceo)
/7/).;3
RESOLUTION NO.
I ?fb,f'
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN AND PREZONE 0.67 ACRES
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BONITA ROAD AND
L YNWOOD DRIVE FROM OFFICE COMMERCIAL AND
RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY TO COMMERCIAL VISITOR
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a General Plan amendment was filed with the
City of Chula Vista Planning Department on November 1, 1993, by Charles Tibbett; and
WHEREAS, said application requested that the General Plan designation on
approximately 0.67 acres located at the southwest comer of Bonita Road and Lynwood Drive
within the unincorporated Sweetwater Community Area be changed from Office Commercial and
Residential Low Density to Commercial Visitor~and,
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said General Plan
Amendment application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners
within 1000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing;
and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised; namely, July 12,
1994 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Land Use Element has not been amended more than three
(3) times this calendar year; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator recommends adoption of the
Negative Declaration IS-94-04; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the project would have no significant
environmental impacts and adopted the Negative Declaration issued on IS-94-04.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the City
Council, the Council finds that this project would have no significant environmental impacts and
adopts the Negative Declaration issued on IS-94-04.
/7l3 - /
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council approves the amendment to the
Land Use Element of the General Plan designating the property "Commercial Visitor."
Presented by
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
(r: \home\plaoning\luis\GP A 94-02 .ccr)
J7!J'eJ-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
/1)'
Meeting Date 7/12/94
SUBMITTED BY:
Public Hearing to consider testimony on the establishment of Zone E
within Eastlake Maintenance District No. I, for the perpetual
maintenance of Telegraph Canyon channel
Director of Public wo~
City Manager~ ~~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
On May 24, 1994 Council declared the intention to establish Zone within Eastlake Maintenance
District Number 1 and set the first public hearing July 12, 1994. Staff is finalizing the report
and recommend that Council con t.inue the public hearing.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council continue the first public hearing to July 19, 1994 and
hold the second public hearing on July 26, 1994.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
JPL:SB/ENGlNEER/AGENDAIZONEE.CON
070794
18"--/
PUBUC HEARING GiECK UST
PUBUC HEARlNG DATE; I / L 'l.
,
:~:~:,,~~~ ;S'~ ':-;
~t.~k!- ~ 2. l- ~.~~..- ~l-C}- ~ .Q
SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBLlCATION .. BY FAX V; BY HAND ; BY MAlL
PUBLlCATION DATE <.0 /, <.0/ i c:r;~ -
. , I
-
~ ., I,er
I
~ b.Q~~'~fa~~ ~ ')
MAlLED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS
NO. MAlLED
PER GC ~54992 Legislative Staff, Construction Industry Fed, 6336 Greenwich Dr Suite F. San Diego, 92122
LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK ..;f /.J{./c,"
,
COPIES TO;
Administration (4)
,,/
,,/'
Planning
Originating Department
Engineering /
Others
City Clerk's Office (2)
/
~/l-I../&j~
, ,
POST ON BULLETIN BOARDS
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS;
7/93
.55.
17.--t 0
., ~)
RESOLUTION NO. 17504
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE FY 1994/95 SPREAD OF
ASSESSMENTS (ZONE E) FOR EASTLAKE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1,
DECLARING THE INTENTION TO ESTABLISH ZONE E FOR THE MAINTENANCE
OF TELEGRAPH CANYON CHANNEL, TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS
AND SET JULY 12 AND 19, 1994 AT 6:00 P.M. AS THE DATES AND TIMES
FOR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS
WHEREAS, on June 1, 1993, the City Council considered establishing Zone E within
Eastlake Maintenance District NO.1 (ELMD 1) to provide for the maintenance of section of the
Telegraph Canyon channel recently improved by the City which facility is more fully described
in the report ("Facility or Telegraph Canyon Channel"); and,
WHEREAS, Council directed staff to analyze alternatives in response to concerns of
assessing properties for new improvements and return to Council; and,
WHEREAS, staff has prepared five alternatives for Council's consideration and
recommends Alternative 1, which is as follows:
Alternative 1 excludes all residential properties within Eastlake 1 as these
properties preceded the need for maintenance of the channel. However
Alternate 1 does include ill! property owners in Eastlake Greens and the
Eastlake 1 Business Center within Zone E. Therefore this proposal will assess
all tributary, undeveloped properties within the basin in future districts and
assess all tributary properties located within Eastlake Greens and Business
Center beginning in FY 94/95.
WHEREAS, staff recommends Alternative 1 be utilized in the formation of Zone E for
the following reasons:
1. All property owners who were required to pay for construction of the channel because
their property drains to Telegraph Canyon Creek and whose property developed after
the Drainage DIF Ordinance was adopted will pay towards the maintenance of the
channel. This is the most equitable approach and is justified under the 1972
Landscaping and Lighting Act.
2. Properties that developed before the need for the channel are not proposed to be
assessed.
3. The disclosures which were provided to the buyers indicated that a maintenance
district was in place giving a potential cost for the district which ranged from $8/year
to $50/year. The assessment will be approximately $21/year ( $16.67 cost/EDU plus
$4.56 for the drainage portion) which is between the assessments indicated in the
disclosures but not significantly higher than the low figure disclosed. The proposed
increase due to Zone E is a minor burden to the property owners whereas if another
alternative is chosen, there will likely be problems in the future because different
owners would not be paying for maintenance of all the same improvements for which
they benefit.
4. The amounts to be assessed to the Business Center and the Greens is very low,
ultimately estimated at $5/year or less for the residential properties and only $1.24 or
less next fiscal year. The ultimate impact to the industrial and commercial properties
I ~ - LI
in the Business Center is also minimal, under $35/year/acre or less than $3/month/acre
(estimated).
5. It was not the intent of the agreement between EDC and the City to have EDC "pick
up" the cost for any residential properties in the Greens or the Business Center
properties if a district was formed.
6. This alternative allows Council the most flexibility in choosing an alternative because
it notices the most property owners of an assessment amount. This is important
because it allows the Council to adopt anyone of the five alternatives at the time of
the public hearing. This is the case because the law allows properties to be excluded
or assessments lowered but not added or raised at the time of the hearing which could
occur with the other alternatives. However, at the time of the hearing, it may become
difficult to choose Alternative 2 if the city is exempting some properties and not
others.
WHEREAS, staff recommends that all owners within ElMD1 be notified of the
proposed improvement and those who will pay the additional cost be notified of the proposed
assessment and estimated future cost pursuant to the landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCil OF THE CITY OF CHUlA VISTA DOES
HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, ORDER AND RESOLVE AS FOllOWS:
SECTION 1. Resolution Initiating Proceedings per 22585.
Pursuant to Section 22585 of the Streets and Highways Code ("Resolution
initiating proceedings; contents"). adopted by reference through Section 17.07
of the Municipal Code, the City Council does hereby propose the amendment
and reformation of Eastlake Maintenance District No.1, by creating a special
zone therein, to be referred to as Zone E, for the purpose of collecting and
paying for the maintenance, repair and replacement of the improved Telegraph
Canyon Channel above referenced, ("Improvements"). from the property
owners within the territory shown on the attached Figure 1 pursuant to
Alternative 1 as presented in the Council Agenda Report dated May 24, 1994
and entitled: "Council Agenda Statement" submitted by the Director of Public
Works ("Council Agenda Report").
SECTION 2. Direct Preparation of Engineer's Report.
The City Council does hereby accept the Council Agenda Report as the
engineer's report required by Section 22585(d). and notes that same is on file
with the City Clerk as required by Section 22586, and approves same as the
Engineer's Report, subject to such modifications as may be made after further
hearings and proceedings prior to formation of the Zone.
IJ - S
TABLE 1
ElAID1 FY 93/H FY 94195(2) FY 94/95 FY 94/95 TOTAL"
ASSESSMENT ASSFSSMENT ASSESSMENT COST REVENUE
WITH ZONE E
Zone A - Ell
Industrial $209/oc $279/oc $289/ae S340/ac N/A
Commercial $349/ac 465/ac 496/ac $ 567/ac N/A
Zone B
Eastlake
Greens $10.64 $14.08 $16.67 N/A
Zone EO)
Telegraph
Cyn Channel N/A 1.24131 1.24(31 2,386
,>)
,OJ
'"
Residential = $22.82/EDU Industrial = $34.24/ac. Commerical = $30.36/ac.
Table does not show aU Zones
Future assessment and cost is estimated at 54.56/0.20 EDU (S22.821EDU) upon turnover of Phases 2 and
3 of the channel
SECTION 3. Resolution of Intention per Section 22587.
Pursuant to Section 22587 of the Government Code. adopted by reference
under Section 17.07 of the Municipal Code, the City Council does hereby
declare their intent to reform and establish Zone E, hereinabove described, as
a special zone within the territory of EastLake Maintenance District NO.1 for
the maintenance of the Improvements hereinabove described, to levy and
collect assessments, and, as the Council may determine as necessary at a later
time, to issue bonds or notes, all of which is and shall be more fully described,
including the proposed assessments, in the Engineer's Report under the
alternative indicated therein as Alternative 1.
SECTION 4. Notice of Required Public Hearings.
Pursuant to Section 22590 of the Streets and Highways Code, and Section
54954.6 of the Government Code, the City Council does hereby fix as the time
and place for the required public meetings and hearings by the City Council on
the question of the formation of the Zone and the levy of the proposed
assessment as 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the business of the Council
permits, on July 12, 1994 and July 19, 1994, in the Council Chambers, 276
Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California, and directs the City Clerk to give notice
to the public hearing in accordance with sections 22551 of the Streets and
Highways Code, and Section 6063 of the Government Code, and in the manner
specified in the Council Agenda Report under the subsection thereof labeled:
"Notice and Public Hearings".
13 - C
SECTION 5. Evaluation of Agreement Modifications.
Without committing to the approval of same, Council will entertain proposals
to amend the Telegraph Canyon Channel Agreement between the City and
EastLake Development Company, dated August 2, 1988, and directs staff to
entertain discussions in this regard so as to permit a staff recommendation on
such proposed amendment.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
f It -
l
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this 24th day of May, 1994, by the following vote:
YES:
Councilmembers:
Fox, Horton, Moore, Rindone, Nader
NOES:
Councilmembers:
None
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
None
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers:
None
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA)
I, Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 17504 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by
the City Council at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 24th day of
May, 1994.
Executed this 24th day of May, 1994.
Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk
I ?r~ ;(
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM
MEETING DATE 7/12/94
/q
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution \\51...("", Ratifying the Sale and
Transfer of the Cardroom License Held by Fran and
Rosemary Burger to Harvey Souza, Conditionally
Approving the Consolidation of the Two Independent
Licenses held by these Parties into a single
License, and, Approving the Collateral Pledge of
the Transferred License as Security for the
Acquisition Financing on certain Terms and
Conditions
-,
Chief of police\l,i'~
city Attorney (as to legality and conditions to
transfer and pledge) GRG G- e,lM B
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~7 (4/Sth's Vote: Yes___ No~)
The City currently has four valid cardroom licensees and two
operating cardrooms. The two card rooms now in operation are the
Vegas Club and the Village Club. This item would approve the
transfer of the license currently held by Fran and Rosemary Burger,
doing business as the Vegas Club, to Harvey Souza who does business
as the Village Club. The proposed transfer would result in the
consolidation of these two operating cardrooms, and their
respective independent licenses, into a single consolidated
license. Provided that he first obtains the necessary Conditional
Use Permit, the consolidated license would permit Mr. Souza to
increase his card room operation from 8 tables to 12 tables. The
Chief of Police has no objection to the application to transfer and
consolidate these two operating cardroom licenses. Additionally,
the transfer involves the collateral pledge of the transferred
license by Mr. Souza back to the Burgers in order to secure the
Burger's seller financing of that transaction. The City Attorney
has reviewed the proposed transfer and pledge and has determined
that this transaction complies with the Chula vista Municipal Code
and therefore can legally be approved subject to certain
conditions. The city Council reserves the right to approve or
disapprove the proposed transaction in its sole discretion.
SUBMITTED BY:
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Resolution.
Background
The Police Department has oversight responsibility relative to any
gaming activities that occur within the jurisdictional limits of
the City of Chula vista. There are three types of lawful gaming
activity that occur in Chula vista: gaming sponsored by fraternal
/1-(
Meeting Date: 7/12/94
Page 2
organizations; bingo and casino parties sponsored by non-profit or
charitable organizations; and, card room gaming. Card room gaming
is the only lawful for-profit gaming activity authorized by the
Chula vista Municipal Code (the "Code"). The Code permits card
rooms to offer to their patrons all games legal in the state of
California except pai-gow, super pan, california 22, and
panguingue. Every lawful gaming activity requires that a permit or
license be issued by the city. Currently, there a four valid
cardroom licenses and two cardrooms in operation. The four valid
licenses are held by: 1) Fran and Rosemary Burger who operate the
Vegas Club card room; 2) Harvey Souza who operates the Village Club
card room; and, 3) the Chula vista Bay Club Partnership, Al
Zenedjian Principal Partner, which owns two licenses that have been
consolidated and are not currently in operation.
Last month, Harvey Souza contacted City staff to formally request
approval of the transfer by the Burgers to Mr. Souza of the
Burgers' Vegas Club license, the only other currently operating
card room license in Chula vista. The letter further indicated
that an "Agreement to purchase" had been entered into between the
parties contingent upon the approval of the city of Chula vista of
the transfer of the license. Mr. Souza's letter is provided as
attachment 1. Subsequent meetings wi th Mr. Souza, his
representatives and City staff, including the City Attorney, were
held to clarify the nature and terms of the proposed transaction.
city staff requested and Mr. Souza willingly provided the purchase
and financing documents to be used in the transaction. At Mr.
Souza's request, the documents provided did not include the actual
purchase price for the license in order to preserve the
confidentiality of the transaction. Through reliable sources,
staff believes that it nonetheless knows the purchase price being
paid by Mr. Souza for the Burger license. Staff also believes that
given the substantial purchase price being paid for the license,
Mr. Souza is likely to request a liberalization of the City's
existing cardroom regulations in order to allow him to expand his
operations and thereby facilitate his ability to finance this
purchase price.
Discussion
Staff's evaluation of the proposed sale and consolidation of these
two operating card rooms focused on the following issues:
1.
Does the proposed transfer of the Burger card
license to Mr. Souza satisfy the threshold
requirements for transfer under the Code?
room
legal
2. Does Mr. Souza meet the city criteria for operating a
19,2
Meeting Date: 7/12/94
Page 3
card room license?
3. Can the transferred license be pledged to secure seller
financing for the transfer. If so, what conditions
should be imposed?
4. What are the impacts of the Village Club card room
operating under a consolidated license?
5. What is the likelihood that, given the substantial
purchase price being paid for the license, Mr. Souza will
request a liberalization of the City's existing card room
regulations to permit more extensive and profitable card
room operations?
6. What possible bases exist that would support disapproval
of the proposed transfer?
~. Does the proposed transfer of the Burger card room ~icense to
Mr. Souza satisfy the thresho~d ~ega~ requirements for transfer
under the Code?
Chapter 5.20.030 of the Chula vista Municipal Code (the "Code")
sets forth the process and limitations associated with the transfer
of local card room licenses. The Code imposes two threshold legal
requirements upon applicants proposing to transfer local card room
licenses:
A.
only licenses held by persons
for three years at a fixed
eligible to be transferred.
who have operated a card room
location within the City are
Finding: The applicant seeks to acquire the license of Fran
and Rosemary Burger who have operated the Vegas
Club at its current location in the 400 block of
Broadway for more than three years.
B. The applicant(s) must meet all the requirements established by
the Code for the initial issuance of card room licenses. The
applicable requirements include:
i. Payment of a non-refundable $500.00 fee to cover the
expenses associated with investigating the application.
Finding: The applicant has submitted the appropriate
$500.00 fee.
1'1.3
Meeting Date: 7/12/94
Page 4
ii. Submission of an application to the Chief of POlice,
submitted under oath, that includes a variety of
information about the applicant and any other persons
having a financial interest in the card room business.
Finding: The applicant has submitted the appropriate
application.
Based on these criteria and findings, subject to city approval of
the character of the proposed transferee (discussed below), the
proposed transfer satisfies the threshold legal requirements of the
Code.
2. Do the Souzas Meet the City criteria for Operating a Card Room
License?
Chapter 5.20.030 of the Code also requires that the applicant meet
with the approval of the Chief of Police and City Council. Under
the Code, this approval is generally conditioned upon an evaluation
of the applicant's character and whether or not there is good cause
why the applicant should not be permitted to operate the card room.
Specifically:
A. The applicant(s) must obtain approval by the Chief of Police
of the application. The approval of any application may be
withheld in the sole discretion of the Chief of Police.
Finding: The Chief of Police has no objections to this
applicant. The applicant and his employees appear
to be of good character and there is no apparent
good cause why the applicant should not be
permitted to operate a card room. To date, the
applicant has conducted its existing card room
business at the Village Club in accordance with all
applicable laws and Mr. Souza has no criminal
history.
B. The applicant(s) must obtain ratification by the City Council
of the application submitted to and approved by the Chief of
Police.
Finding: Council ratification of the proposed transfer of
the Burgers' license to Mr. Souza is the subject of
this item and is hereby presented by staff for
Council consideration. Pursuant to the Code, the
City Council reserves the right to approve or
disapprove the proposed transaction in its sole
Iq - 'I
Meeting Date: 7/12/94
Page 5
discretion. possible bases for disapproving the
proposed transfer are set forth in section 6 of
this report.
3 . Can the transferred license be pledged to secure financing for
the transfer. If so, what conditions should be imposed?
In its current form, the Code does not expressly allow or disallow
the collateral pledge of a card room license. Nonetheless, City
staff believes that such a pledge can occur consistent with the
existing regulatory scheme provided that the transaction is subject
to the following conditions of approval:
(a) The parties that are the beneficiaries of the pledge (in this
case, the Burgers) shall have undergone an updated
investigation of their character and qualifications to operate
a card room pursuant to Code section 5.20.030. (The Police
Department has conducted such an investigation to its
satisfaction. )
(b) Notwithstanding the City's approval of the pledge, the pledge
of the card room license to the Burgers shall vest no rights
in the Burgers to hold and/or operate such license. In order
to obtain such rights, the Burgers would need to reapply with
the City for its approval of the transfer of the license back
to the Burgers. No action taken by the Burgers pursuant to
their financing documents which might result in their
reacquiring title to the card room license that they
transferred to Mr. Souza will be recognized by the City as a
valid transfer until the Burgers fully comply with the card
room license transfer requirements set forth in section
5.20.030 of the Code, or any others then existing transfer
requirements.
(c) The city shall retain its rights to amend the Code which
regulates card room license issuance, transfers, operations,
revocations, fees and any other matter in its sole discretion
and the City shall retain its right to revoke the pledged
license pursuant to Code section 5.20.090, or any other then
applicable laws or regulations, based upon the conduct of the
party actually holding and operating the license (in this
case, the Souzas) without regard to any actions taken by the
Burgers to prevent such amendment or revocation other than
through the normal political process.
(d) Any assignment by the Burgers of their collateral interest in
the transferred license shall itself be considered a transfer
{q- 5
Meeting Date: 7/12/94
Page 6
of a license subject to the prior approval of the City in
accordance with then applicable laws.
4. What will be the impact of the Village Club Card Room operating
under a consolidated license?
The result of the proposed transfer would be to consolidate two
independent licenses into a single consolidated license. A card
room operator holding a single license may operate no more than 8
tables seating 8 patrons each. A card room operator holding a
consolidated license may operate no more than 12 tables seating 8
patrons each.
As discussed above, the Burgers are currently operating 3 card room
tables at the Vegas Club Card Room, (although they are authorized
to operate up to 8 tables), and Mr. Souza is currently operating 8
card room tables at his Village Club Card Room. If Council
approves this transaction, the number of tables authorized to be
operated under the 2 involved licenses will decrease from 16 to 12.
The number of tables actually in operation is likely to increase
from 11 to 12. In order to operate the additional 4 tables that he
acquired through his acquisition of the Burger's license, either at
his current location or any other location, Mr. Souza will need to
obtain a conditional use permit pursuant to Code section 19.14.060,
et seq.
5. What is the likelihood that, given the substantial purchase
price being paid for the license, Mr. Souza will request a
liberalization of the city's existing card room regulations to
permit more extensive and profitable card room operations?
Given the substantial purchase price staff believes is being paid
by Mr. Souza for the Burger's card room license and based upon
staff's conversations with Mr. Souza, staff believes that there is
significant likelihood that Mr. Souza will request a liberalization
of the City's existing card room regulations in order to permit
further consolidation of outstanding licenses and/or otherwise to
permit more expanded and/or profitable card room operations.
Note: The Code does not expressly require that the purchase price
for a transferred card room license be disclosed to the City as
part of the City's approval process. In order to preserve the
confidentiality of the transaction, the Burgers and Mr. Souza would
prefer that such information not be disclosed. However, if any
Councilperson desires such information, staff will provide it upon
request. Regardless of whether or not the Council requests the
purchase price be disclosed for this transaction, in order to
!9-~
Meeting Date: 7/12/94
Page 7
assist the City in evaluating whether or not its existing
regulatory scheme and fee structure is sufficient to adequately
monitor and control card room activities, the City may wish to
consider requiring the disclosure of such information in the
future. If the city Council so desires, staff will evaluate this
issue and proposed appropriate changes, if any prove to be
necessary, to the current regulatory scheme.
6. What possib~e bases exist that wou~d support disapprova~ of the
proposed transfer?
An alternate to staff's recommendation to approve the proposed card
room license transfer could be supported by any of the following
bases:
a. The transfer would grant Mr. Souza an effective monopoly on
all current operating card room tables in the City. As a
result of such monopoly Mr. Souza's ability to dictate the
terms and value of gaming activities in the City would be
increased. A highly valued monopoly may also attract non-
local, corporate gaming interests to the city.
b. It is staff's belief that based upon the purchase price to be
paid for the Burger's license and the apparent intentions of
Mr. Souza, Mr. Souza's acquisition of the Burger license is a
first step towards his requesting that the City Council
consider liberalizing the existing card room regulations to
permit expanded and/or more profitable card room activities in
the City. Although the applicant has not requested any of the
following changes, such proposed liberalization might include:
(1) additional consolidation of licenses (i.e., permitting
Mr. Souza to acquire the Chula vista Bay Club Limited
Partnership's two outstanding [albeit inoperative] card
room licenses or permitting Mr. Souza to acquire any new
licenses that may be issued based upon an increase in
city population above 160,000 people);
(2) allowing the issuance of an increased number of licenses
(currently the Code permits the issuance of 1 license per
40,000 residents);
(3) expanding the variety of available games;
(4) increasing the bet limit (currently set at $30 per bet);
(5) increasing the allowable number of tables or seats at
tables (currently set at 8 tables with 8 seats per single
19-1
Meeting Date: 7/12/94
Page 8
license);
(6) increasing the game playing charge (currently set at
$.375 per hand per player);
(7) increasing the permitted days and/or hours of operation
(currently set at Monday through Saturday, 9:00 p.m. to
1:00 a.m.);
(8) permitting the on-site sale and/or consumption of
intoxicating beverages (currently prohibited) .
c. Any and all other social, economic or policy issues that city
council members may deem appropriate. Again, city council
approval or disapproval may be exercised in its sole
discretion.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Burgers are currently operating three tables at
the Vegas Club Card Room. Pursuant to Code section 5.20.060,
license tax revenue from these three tables is generated for the
City at the rate of $4,500 ($1,500 per table) per every three month
period (or portion thereof). until Mr. Souza applies for and
obtains the CUP necessary to activate the four card room tables he
has acquired by purchasing the Burgers' license, this license tax
revenue will stop and not be replaced. Mr. Souza has indicated
that he intends to apply for the required CUP within one year.
Therefore, the estimated fiscal impact of this action is an $18,000
reduction in General Fund revenue for FY 1994-95.
ICf~<t
.AitAc~Ma\+ ? 1
Village Club Card Room
429 Broadway Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910
619/426-4542
June 3, 1994
Chief Richard Emerson
Chula Vista Police Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Chief Emerson,
I am the sole owner of the Village Club Card room located at
429 Broadway Avenue in Chula Vista. I have recently signed an
"Agreement to Purchase" the only other currently operating card
room license in Chula Vista, The Vegas Club, which is under the
ownership of Fran and Rosemary Burger. The "Agreement to
Purchase" is contingent upon the approval by the City of Chula
Vista of the transfer of the license.
Through this letter, I formally request the City of Chula
Vista's approval in concept of the transfer of the Vegas Club card
room license to me. I understand that you have the current
information you needed to approve the transfer of the license. If
you need any additional information, or if there are any other
forms or materials you would like to have, please call me at 426-
4542. Thank you for your assistance.
S~"'Y~T'
Harve~/
The above is a true and accurate representation of Fran and
Rosemary Burger's intent to sell their existing City of Chula
Vista card room license to Harvey Souza, subject to City of Chula
Vista approva
Signed:
Date:
6- '3~ :;y
,
oLvU2- 3-/'I7c;
Signed:
Date:
Iq-~ /IQ-IO
RESOLUTION NO. Il S~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA RATIFYING THE SALE AND TRANSFER OF
THE CARDROOM LICENSE HELD BY FRAN AND ROSEMARY
BURGER TO HARVEY SOUZA, CONDITIONALLY
APPROVING THE CONSOLIDATION OF THE TWO
INDEPENDENT LICENSES HELD BY THESE PARTIES
INTO A SINGLE LICENSE, AND, APPROVING THE
COLLATERAL PLEDGE OF THE TRANSFERRED LICENSE
AS SECURITY FOR THE ACQUISITION FINANCING ON
CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS
WHEREAS, the City currently has four valid cardroom
licensees and two operating cardrooms in operation which are the
Vegas Club and the Village Club; and
WHEREAS, it is proposed to transfer the license currently
held by Fran and Rosemary Burger, doing business as the Vegas Club,
to Harvey Souza who does business as the village Club; and
WHEREAS, said transfer would result in the consolidation
of these two operating cardrooms, and their respective independent
licenses, into a single consolidated license; and
WHEREAS, provided that he first obtains the necessary
Conditional Use Permit, the consolidated license would permit Mr.
Souza to increase his card room operation from 8 tables to 12
tables; and
WHEREAS, the Chief of Police has no objection to the
application to transfer and consolidate these two operating
cardroom licenses; and
WHEREAS, the transfer involves the collateral pledge of
the transferred license by Mr. Souza back to the Burgers in order
to secure the Burger's seller financing of that transaction; and
WHEREAS, the City Attorney has reviewed the proposed
transfer and pledge and finds such transaction to be legal subject
to certain terms and conditions.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby ratify the sale and transfer of the
cardroom license held by Fran and Rosemary Burger to Harvey Souza,
an individual, approving the consolidation of the two independent
licenses held by these parties into a single license conditioned
upon Mr. Souza's acquiring a Conditional Use Permit in accordance
with the Chula vista Municipal Code.
1
ICl - II
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does approve
the collateral pledge of the transferred license as security for
the acquisition financing on the following terms and conditions:
(a) Notwithstanding the City's approval of the pledge, the pledge
of the card room license to the Burgers shall vest no rights
in the Burgers to hold and/or operate such license. In order
to obtain such rights, the Burgers would need to reapply with
the city for its approval of the transfer of the license back
to the Burgers. No action taken by the Burgers pursuant to
their financing documents which might result in their
reacquiring title to the card room license that they
transferred to Mr. Souza will be recognized by the city as a
valid transfer until the Burgers fully comply with the card
room license transfer requirements set forth in section
5.20.030 of the Code, or any others then existing transfer
requirements.
(b) The City shall retain its rights to amend the Code which
regulates card room license issuance, transfers, operations,
revocations, fees and any other matter in its sole discretion
and the City shall retain its right to revoke the pledged
license pursuant to Code section 5.20.090, or any other then
applicable laws or regulations, based upon the conduct of the
party actually holding and operating the license (in this
case, the Souzas) without regard to any actions taken by the
Burgers to prevent such amendment or revocation other than
through the normal political process.
(c) Any assignment by the Burgers of their collateral interest in
the transferred license shall itself be considered a transfer
of a license subject to the prior approval of the city in
accordance with then applicable laws.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
[;:"
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of
Police
ity
C:\rs\vegas.xfr
2
19 - I~
~J~
=-::
.-....;~~~
~.......~~
-~~-
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
July 11, 1994
FROM:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney '-~ ~> bUfg
TO:
RE:
Proposed Transfer and Collateral Pledge of Card Room
License - (Agenda Item No. 19)
The above-referenced agenda item submits for Council consideration
the transfer of the card room license currently held by Fran and
Rosemary Burger to Harvey Souza. The transaction includes a
collateral pledge by Mr. Souza back to the Burgers of the
transferred card room license in order to secure payment by Mr.
Souza to the Burgers of the card room license purchase price over
a period of years.
In reviewing this transaction, the City Attorney's office proposed
a number of conditions regarding the collateral pledge of the
cardroom license by Mr. Souza in favor of the Burgers in order to
preserve the City's unfettered regulatory authority over cardroom
transfers. After reviewing these proposed conditions, the Burgers'
legal counsel requested an amendment which would enhance the value
of the Burger's security interest in the cardroom license in the
event that the City revoked the license from Mr. Souza. In the
event that the city did elect to revoke the transferred licensed
from Mr. Souza, the amendment would give the Burgers a 90-day
period in which to apply for the transfer of the license back to
them. The city Attorney's and the Police Department feel that this
proposed amendment is acceptable and generally consistent with the
overall cardroom regulatory scheme. This proposed amendment is
reflected in the attached amended resolution for this item.
The City Council reserves the right approve or disapprove this item
in its sole discretion. In the event that the City Council elects
to approve the proposed transaction, staff recommends that the
amended resolution, attached, be the form of such approval.
BMB:GG:lgk
Att.
cc: John Goss, city Manager
sid Morris, Asst. city Manager
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of Police
Kevin Hardy, Principal Management Asst.
jfj-fJ
276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619} 691-0037
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA RATIFYING THE SALE AND TRANSFER OF
THE CARDROOM LICENSE HELD BY FRAN AND ROSEMARY
BURGER TO HARVEY SOUZA, CONDITIONALLY
APPROVING THE CONSOLIDATION OF THE TWO
INDEPENDENT LICENSES HELD BY THESE PARTIES
INTO A SINGLE LICENSE, AND, APPROVING THE
COLLATERAL PLEDGE OF THE TRANSFERRED LICENSE
AS SECURITY FOR THE ACQUISITION FINANCING ON
CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS
WHEREAS, the city currently has four valid cardroom
licensees and two operating cardrooms in operation which are the
Vegas Club and the Village Club; and
WHEREAS, it is proposed to transfer the license currently
held by Fran and Rosemary Burger, doing business as the Vegas Club,
to Harvey Souza who does business as the Village Club; and
WHEREAS, said transfer would result in the consolidation
of these two operating cardrooms, and their respective independent
licenses, into a single consolidated license; and
WHEREAS, provided that he first obtains the necessary
Conditional Use Permit, the consolidated license would permit Mr.
Souza to increase his card room operation from 8 tables to 12
tables; and
WHEREAS, the Chief of Police has no obj ection to the
application to transfer and consolidate these two operating
cardroom licenses; and
WHEREAS, the transfer involves the collateral pledge of
the transferred license by Mr. Souza back to the Burgers in order
to secure the Burger's seller financing of that transaction; and
WHEREAS, the city Attorney has reviewed the proposed
transfer and pledge and finds such transaction to be legal subject
to certain terms and conditions.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby ratify the sale and transfer of the
cardroom license held by Fran and Rosemary Burger to Harvey Souza,
an individual, approving the consolidation of the two independent
licenses held by these parties into a single license conditioned
upon Mr. Souza's acquiring a Conditional Use Permit in accordance
with the Chula vista Municipal Code.
1
rC;-ly
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does approve
the collateral pledge of the transferred license as security for
the acquisition financing on the following terms and conditions:
(a) Notwithstanding the City's approval of the pledge, the pledge
of the card room license to the Burgers shall vest no rights
in the Burgers to hold and/or operate such license. In order
to obtain such rights, the Burgers would need to reapply with
the City for its approval of the transfer of the license back
to the Burgers. No action taken by the Burgers pursuant to
their financing documents which might result in their
reacquiring title to the card room license that they
transferred to Mr. Souza will be recognized by the City as a
valid transfer until the Burgers fully comply with the card
room license transfer requirements set forth in section
5.20.030 of the Code, or any others then existing transfer
requirements.
(b) The City shall retain its rights to amend the Code which
regulates card room license issuance, transfers, operations,
revocations, fees and any other matter in its sole discretion
and the City shall retain its right to revoke the pledged
license pursuant to Code section 5.20.090, or any other then
applicable laws or regulations, based upon the conduct of the
party actually holding and operating the license (in this
case, the Souzas) without regard to any actions taken by the
Burgers to prevent such amendment or revocation other than
through the normal political process.
(c) Any assignment by the Burgers of their collateral interest in
the transferred license shall itself be considered a transfer
of a license subject to the prior approval of the City in
accordance with then applicable laws.
(d) In the event that the City revokes the transferred license
from Mr. Souza, prior to any reissuance of such license to a
third party, the Burgers shall be given ninety (90) days in
which, under then existings laws, they may apply with the city
for the transfer of such license to the Burgers. In the event
that the Burgers fail to apply for a license transfer during
such 90-day period, or the Burgers' application for transfer
is rejected, the City may dispose of the license as it sees
fit in its sole discretion.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Richard P. Emerson, Chief of
Police
Bruce M. Boogaard, city
Attorney
2
I Cl -
IS:
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ,).. 0
Meeting Date 07/12/94
ITEM TITLE: REPORT STATUS OF BA YFRONT NEGOTIATIONS
SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director cS.
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No...K.J
BACKGROUND: On April 5, 1994 the Q~: discussed the status of negotiations with the
Mid-bayfront developer, and directed staff to report back in sixty days as to whether
substantial progress had been made towards completion of a Development Agreement (DA)
(minutes attached). Staff has made substantial progress, including the draft development of a
Pre-Construction Phasing Plan and a draft D A. Several negotiating issues have been
resolved between staff and the developer, a number of issues have moved toward concurrence
but are not finalized, and three major issues remain unresolved. The developer wishes to
discuss the three unresolved issues with the Agency members.
RECOMMENDATION: At the request of the appl i cant, staff recommends thi s
item be continued to the meeting of July 19, 1994.
,2~" /
MEMORANDUM
May 13, 1994
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
VIA: John D. Goss, City Manager
FROM: Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks and Recreat~
SUBJECT: Intergenerational Facilities
BACKGROUND: In 1990, the Chula Vista 2000 Child and Adult Care Subcommittee
recommended that the City promote development of an intergeneration facility within the City
of Chula Vista. The Child and Adult Care Subcommittee introduced this concept as a way to
meet the demand for child care while, at the same time, meet the need to provide day care for
the elderly. A" one-stop" center was suggested where the parents would drop off their children
and elder parents at the same facility. In addition, it was presumed that an intergenerational
facility would provide the opportunity for the elderly to assist in the care of the young.
In 1992, the Chula Vista 21 Child and Adult Care Subcommittee recommended to support the
development of an intergenerational facility.
At the March I, 1994 City Council meeting, during their discussion of the proposed Child Care
Work Program, the subject of intergenerational facilities was mentioned. Council was informed
that the Commission on Aging felt that such a facility would not work and that there was no
interest expressed. Consequently the Council directed staff to provide the reasons why the
Commission did not support an intergenerational facility. Staff recently returned to the
Commission for a clarification on their position of supporting an intergenerational facility, The
Commission, expressed their interest in such a facility which is contingent upon definite
guidelines. In addition, the Council wanted the Child Care Commission's comments on this
subject as well.
DISCUSSION: At its April 13, 1994 meeting, the Commission on Aging defined terminology
to provide the Council with a clearer understanding of the Commission's recommendations.
Based on the following definition, the Commission on Aging supported an Intergenerational
Facility, and recommends that if such facility is developed, the Commission be represented in
its planning (Attachment A). NOT SCANNED
Intergenerational Facility - A "One stop" Center and joint use facility provides services for
children and seniors in seDarate sections of the facility, with each section meeting the licensing
requirements of the State of California for the care of a specific targeted population. Joint use
of designated common areas is allowed. The facility could be used for joint programs, but onlv
on a limited basis. The Center could also be used for Alzheimer's, Social or Adult Day Health
Care service.
lImw\<hild.."inlo,.en
,;,Se - /
Intergenerational Program - Where children and adults interact and share a program of
compatible activities, such as arts and crafts, history, etc. This is a time limited program. This
type of activity is supervised by licensed providers; however, seniors would .!1Q1 be surrogate
caregivers.
Licensed Providers - People who have met certain educational criteria, set by the State of
California, to care for various specific populations.
Adult (Social) Day Center - Adult Day Care centers are licensed, community-based programs,
that provide non-medical care to meet the needs of functionally-impaired adults. Services are
provided according to an individual plan of care in a structured cOl}lprehensive program that
provides a variety of social, psychosocial and related support services in a protective setting on
a less than 24-hour basis. The State of California licenses these centers as community care
facilities.
Adult Day Health Care - Target population of this type of care is the frail elderly with some
medical dysfunctions. Providers fall within the medical model of care such as nurses, dietitians,
and physical therapists. Volunteers operate under the supervision of medical providers.
Child Care Commission Comments
Intergenerational Facilities was discussed at the April 19, 1994 meeting of the Child Care
Commission (Attachment B). The Commission is presently focusing its energies on developing
a child care element to the City's General Plan. As a result they are not working on specific
programs such as an intergenerational facility.
The Child Care Commission believes that existing programs within the City of Chula Vista
provide adequate interaction between seniors and children. The Commission further believes
that this would not preclude considering inergenerational facilities sometime in the future, but
the Commission's consensus was that the intergenerational concept is not a priority at this time.
This memorandum is provided for Council's information.
IoonwI<lliWou\inII:.,en
02.S e -;;..,
.h
-
-
-
..
" ....V
Mark Weinish of the Planning Department handed out a chart showing the type of
licensed child care centers in the City 'by zip code. He also informed -the
Commission members about the KPBS Mister Rogers Wbrkshop to be held in Chula
Vista May ~4 at the Elementary School District.
Bob Morris reminded the Commissioners that in their packets is an item regarding
the Public Forum. Discussion ensued regarding who to invite and potential
topi cs. Due to the length of th i s agenda and the lateness of the hour, Mr.
Morris asked that the ~mbers review this list and call him with their input.
The Commission thanked Messrs. Fry and Weinish for their presentation and all the
work done by them.
4. CDBG 1994-95 Proposals
Inasmuch as Commissioner Stillwagon had a conflict on this item since she is an
applicant for Block Grant funding for the Chula Vista Connection, it was decided
to table Item 4 until Commissioner Johns' arrival in order to maintain a quorum.
5. Council Referral 12864 (Maintaining Availability of Child Care Facilities)
There is apparently some confusion abo~t this referral from the Council meeting
of March 1. Staff member Morris requested that the Commission seek clarification
from the Council on this item.
IT WAS MSUC (Miehls/Stillwagon) to contact the City Council for clarification of
their motion.
(Commissioner Johns arrived at this time, 9:45 p.m.)
6. Intergenerationa1 Faci1jties
The City Council has requested comments from the Commission on Aging and the
Child Care Commission regarding intergenerational facilities, a subject which was
addressed in the Chu1a Vista 2000 and Chu1a Vista 21 reports to Council in the
past.
Chair Hartman felt that the Commission is engaged in the process of trying to
develop a child care working program for the City and, at this point, the
Commission is focusing its energies on developing a general child care program,
not looking at specific programs like an intergenerationa1 faCility. The
Commission agreed that it was an expression of their position at this point that
existing programs within the City of Chula Vista provide interaction between
seniors and children and the Commission feels they are currently adequate. This
would not preclude considering such a facility sometime in the future when a
child care program has been developed, but the consensus was it should not be a
priority at this time.
7. Subscription Renewal (On the Caoitol Doorsteo)
IT WAS MSUe (Gish/Johns) to renew the COIIIIIission's subscription to this
pub Hcat i on.
>>e -.3
March 7, 1994
TO:
Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks and Recreation
~
Jim Thomson, Deputy City Manager!/
Teri Enos, Principal Management Asslstant~
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Inter-generational Care Facilities
*************************************************************************
At the 3/1/94 meeting during their consideration of the Proposed Child Care Work
Program (Item 12), Councllmember Fox requested a "copy of the reasons why the
Commission on Aging felt that t,he subject facilities would not work or why there
was no interest expressed."
Additionally he requested that you should also include comments from the Child
Care Commission regarding Inter-generational facilities.
\
TE:mab
r"
.:JSe ~ i
Wednesday 3:00 p.m.
Apri113.1994 .
.orman Park Center
.... Conference Room
5
B. ~GENERATIONAL CHILD CARE
Sr. Recreation Supervisor Beardsley gave the Commission a brief history of the
interaction between the Conunission on Aging and other advisory bodies within the
City of Chula VISta on this subject. In response to a question from the Commission,
Supervisor Beardsley explained that due to the ambiguity ofterms used in describing
intergenerational programs and intergenerational facilities when this question was
brought before them original1y, an apparent misinterpretation had occurred in the
communication of t11.e Commission's comments through the Chula VISta 2000/21
process. Due to this miscommunication, Council is requesting a clarification of the
Commission's views. It is, therefore, necessary for the Commission to consider this
and forward their recommendation to Council at this time.
Since the Commission had previously responded to a question of Seniors being YWl
as SUITo;rate carelrivers. Chair Dennison suggested that the Commission carefully
define terminology before discussing the feasibility of this type of program in order
to provide the Council with a clearer understanding of the Commission's
recommendations.
Intergenerational Facility - One stop shop - Joint use facility, however, services for
children and seniors are provided in different, seoarate sections of the facility with
each section meeting the licensing requirements of the State of California for the
care of a specific targeted population. Joint use of designated common areas is
allowed. The facility could be used for joint programs but 2DlY on a limited basis.
Could be used for A1zheimei's, Social or Adult Day Health Care type of service.
Intergenerationa1 Program - Where children and adults come together and share a
program of compatible activities, such as arts and crafts, history, etc. This is a time
limited program. This type of activity is supervised by licensed providers and
seniors would 1121 be surrogate caregivers.
U......ced Providers - People who have met certain educational criteria set by the
State of California, to care for various specific populations.
Adult (lW-i..l) Day Center - Adult Day Care centers are licensed, community-based
programs that provide non-medical care to meet the needs of functionally-impaired
adults. Services are provided according to an individual plan of care in a structUred
comprehensive program that provides a variety of social, phychosocial and related
support services in a protective setting on a less than a 24-hour basis. The State of
California licenses these centers as community care facilities.
Adult Day Health Care - Target population of this type of care is the frail elderly
with some medical dysfunctions. Providers are medical model, nurses, dietitians,
physical therapists. Volunteers function under the supervision of medical providers.
.25'e ..~
Wednesday 3:00 p.m.
April 13, 1994
6
. NonnanPark Center
Conference Room
Motion to communicate to the Chula VlSta City Council that based on the above
definitions. the CoTnTT'l;csion On Aging is in favor of Inter'l!:enerational Facilities. and
recommends that if discussion of such facilities goes forward, the Com'T';C~On
fwther strongly rec:omm.."ds the Comm;c~on on Aging be represented in any such
discussion.
MSC HAGEDORN/SCRIVENER S-O (FABRIOONUrE OUT)
4. CO~CATION~
W. Co ..
a. ntten mmmucallons
NONE
b. Commissioners' Remar~
NONE
c. Oral Communications
NONE
S. STAFF REPORT
Sr. Recreation Supervisor Beardsley advised the Commissioners that there will be
8 public hearing held on Apri114, at the Norman Park Center on Americans with
Disabilities Act. Senior representation is important at this meeting.
ADJOURNMENT to the regularly scheduled meeting of May 11,1994.
Respectfully submitted.
.;5 e - &>