HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994/09/06 Agenda Packet
/'1 dec~are wn~er pena'ty 01 peclury that tam
c~:;lo "ej b" "c>e :-H:' Df ~,::;u:a Vis~a in the
C'-'~:;::e or ~:-:e .,it,;. '_;ie~',_ ~;n:,: t~:3t J pos::ed
t~'Js Agen;:::Jjr"\lodce on the Bulletin Board at
the Public s.QImJ!s Buildina and at City Hall 01\..,
Tuesday, September 6, 1994 ,- ',-;oeD, REVISED - SIGNED _ <-,9uncil Chambers
4:00p.m. '9 "j~Y ~~.ollll' Services Bmldmg
/v'- / t:? ./~
Re~ular Meetin~ of the Cltv of Chula Vista City Co cit'
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:
August 16, 1994 and August 23, 1994.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Oath of Office: Bracken Ellis - Youth Commission.
b. Report from Port Commissioner Robert Penner. (Time certain - 6:00 D.m.l
c. Proclaiming Saturday, October 1, 1994, as "SWEATER SA TURDA Y." The proclamation will
be presented to Pat Barnes, Government Representative of the San Diego Gas & Electric
Company, South Bay District Office, by Mayor Nader.
d. Proclaiming Friday, September 16, 1994, as "NATIONAL POWIMIA RECOGNITION
DAY." The proclamation will be presented to Robert McCauley, Veterans Advisory Commission
representative, by Mayor Nader.
""""*""*
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 a4joum 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 availoble in the City Clerk's Office.
*""""""*
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through 19)
The staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by
the Council by one motion without discussion unless a Councibnember, a member of the public or City staff
requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a
"Request to Speak Form" availoble in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete
the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to
the staff recommendation.) Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed tifter Board and
Commission Recommendations and Action Items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter requesting Council adopt a resolution in opposition to an initiative that would amend
the County's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance to allow a landfill in the Pala/Pauma area
of Northern San Diego County. Pam Slater, Chairwoman, Supervisor, Third District, San Diego
County Board of Supervisors, 1600 Pacific Highway, Room 335, San Diego, CA 92101-2470.
11 is recommended that this request be referred to staff for evaluation and review.
Agenda
-2-
September 6, 1994
b. Letter requesting Council adopt a resolution in opposition to Proposition 188, a measure
repealing all State and local tobacco control laws, sponsored by Phillip Morris, which will
appear on the November hallot. Debbie Kelley, American Lung Association of San Diego and
Imperial Counties, 2750 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103. It is recommended that the
resolution be approved.
RESOLUTION 17633 OPPOSING PROPOSITION 188 - THE PHILLIP MORRIS
lNITlATlVE
c. Letter requesting Council reconsider installation of traffic signal lights at the intersections
of Olay Lakes Road and Ebnhurst Street and Otay Lakes Road and Gotham Street. Joseph
M. Conte, Superintendent/President, Southwestern College, 900 Otay Lakes Road, Chula Vista,
CA 91910. It is recommended that staff be directed to communicate with Southwestern College.
6. ORDINANCE 2598 AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT WITH THE
BOARD OF ADMlNlSTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND RESCINDING
ORDINANCE NUMBER 2591 (second readilll! and adontionl - On 5/3/94,
Council adopted Resolution 17467, declaring the City's intent to amend its
contract with the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) to include the
optional benefit known as Military Service Credit as Public Service for local
miscellaneous and local safety members. On that same date, an ordinance was
placed on first reading to begin the amendment process, then placed on the
5/10/94 agenda for adoption. PERS law requires a period of at least twenty
days between the first reading and adoption of an ordinance to amend the
contract. In order to amend the contract, as agreed with the employee
associations, Ordinance 2591 must be rescinded and a new ordinance placed on
first reading, then adopted at least twenty days later. Staff recommends Council
place the ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Director of Personnel)
7. RESOLUTION 17634 APPROVING THE 18TH AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH
THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT FOR GROUNDS AND
COMFORT STATION MAINTENANCE AT THE "J" STREET MARINA
BAYSIDE PARK AND ADJACENT LANDSCAPE MEDIANS - In 1993,
Council authorized the 17th Amendment to an agreement with the San Diego
Unified Port District for grounds and comfort station maintenance at the "J"
Street Marina, Bayside Park, and the landscape medians on Tidelands. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation)
8. RESOLUTION 17635 AUTHORIZING STAFF TO APPLY FOR STATE DEFENSE
ADJUSTMENT MATCHING GRANT FUNDS - The California Defense
Adjustment Matching Grant Program is designed to provide up to $100,000 in
matching funds for communities seeking Federal funding of defense related
economic adjustment strategies and programs. Chula Vista will be seeking funds
to help pay the operational costs of the Border Environmental Technology
Resource Center. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of
Community Development)
Agenda
-3-
September 6, 1994
9. RESOLUTION 17636 AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE
CALIFORNIA STATE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR FUNDING UNDER THE
BUILDING EQUITY AND GROWTH IN NEIGHBORHOODS
PROGRAM; THE EXECUTION OF A STANDARD AGREEMENT IF
SELECTED FOR SUCH FUNDING AND ANY AMENDMENTS
THERETO; AND ANY RELATED DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO
PARTICIPATE IN THE BEGIN PROGRAM - The California Department
of Housing and Community Development (Department) has made available
Federal funds for the BEGIN Program. BEGIN is operated as a model program
with funding from the Home Investment Partnerships Program authorized by the
Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of 1990. The Department
is providing BEGIN funds to cities and counties for use as assistance for low-
income first-time homebuyers. BEGIN funds may be provided to homebuyers
for (1) down payment assistance, (2) closing cost assistance, andlor (3) second
mortgages. Staff seeks approval to compete for the funds which, under the
Notice of Funding Available, makes $5.7 million available for distribution State-
wide. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community
Development)
10. RESOLUTION 17637 ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE
"CONSTRUCTION OF OTA YTOWN AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS,
PHASES II AND m (RD-204)" - During the Fiscal Year 1993/94 Capital
Improvement Program budget process, Council approved additional funding for
the Otay Town Neigbborhood Revitalization Program (NRP). The program
basically had the goal of providing basic public improvements to the Otay
Community. The additional funding represented the third and final
implementation phase of the NRP. In the course of designing the improvements
for the project, staff met with the property owners on 6/8/94 to brief them on
the proposed improvements, address any concerns and take recommendations on
various aspects of the project. All the property owners in attendance supported
the City's efforts in gelling the project done. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Public Works and Director of Community
Development)
II. RESOLUTION 17638 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR AN INTERCHANGE
TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENT AT INTERSTATE ROUTE 80S AND
EAST ORANGE A VENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT - The California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) has completed a project report for the subject
interchange traffic signal improvement. Caltrans is now prepared to enter into
a cooperative agreement with the City to share the cost for the design,
construction, and maintenance of the proposed signal project. The construction
of the project is scheduled to commence in August of 1995. The project report
is the basis for the cooperative agreement in determining work to be done,
design specifications, and construction and associated project costs. SYdI
recommends this item he continued to 9/13/94. (Director of Public Works)
Agenda
-4-
September 6, 1994
12.A. RESOLUTION 17639 APPROVING A DEFERRAL AND LIEN AGREEMENT FOR THE
PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH AT 940 HILLTOP DRIVE (APN 619-040-11)
AND AUTHORIZlNG THE CITY ENGlNEER TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY - The Presbyterian Church has
requested a deferral and lien agreement for the installation of public
improvements at 940 Hilltop Drive. Policy 505-<l3 allows staff to approve liens
up to $32,200 as of 8/15/94. This lien is estimated at $35,600 and, therefor,
requires Council approval. The church has also requested that they not be
required to have the property appraised as required by Policy 505-<l3. Staff
recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Worlcs)
B. RESOLUTION 17640 AMENDlNG COUNCIL POLICY 505-03 BY ADDlNG AN EXCEPTION
TO ITEM 6B ALLOWING THE WAIVER OF AN APPRAISAL AND
SUBMITTAL OF A LOTBOOK REPORT lNLIEU OF A TITLE REPORT
FOR NON-PROFIT PUBLIC SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS
13. RESOLUTION 17641 APPROVING FlNAL MAP OF TRACT 93-03, TELEGRAPH CANYON
ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD 1 UNIT 3, ACCEPTlNG ON BEHALF OF
THE PUBLIC THE PUBLIC STREETS DEDICATED ON SAID MAP,
AND THE EASEMENTS GRANTED ON SAID MAP WITHlN SAID
SUBD1VISION, AND APPROVING SUBDMSION iMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT FOR THE COMPLETION OF iMPROVEMENTS
REQUiRED BY SAID SUBDMSION, AND AUTHORIZlNG THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT - On 1/19/93, Council
approved the Tentative Subdivision Map for Tract 93-<l3, Telegraph Canyon
Estates. The seventh final map for said tentative map are now before Council
for approval. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public
Works)
14. RESOLUTION 17642 EST ABLISHlNG DATES FOR PROPERTY OWNERS TO BE READY TO
RECEiVE UNDERGROUND SERVICE ANDREMOV AL OF POLES AND
OVERHEAD FACILITIES WITHlN UNDERGROUND UTILITY
DISTRICT NUMBER 117 ALONG BROADWAY FROM "I" STREET TO
"L" STREET - On 12/10/85, Council approved establishing Underground
Utility District 117 along Broadway from "I" Street to "L" Street. In
accordsnce with Section 15.32.150 of the Municipal Code, Council shaIl, by
subsequent resolution, fix the date upon which the affected property owners
must be ready to receive underground service and the date by which poles,
overhead wires and associated structure shall be removed. The conversion of
overhead utilities to underground has been completed within Pbase 1 which
extends from "L" Street to Moss Street. The resolution covers Phase II only,
which extends from "I" Street to "L" Street. Staff recommends Council: (1)
Set 12/1/94 as the date by which property owners shaIl be ready to receive
underground service; and, (2) Set 4/3/95 as the date by which poles, overhead
wires and associated structures shaIl be removed. (Director of Public Works)
15. RESOLUTION 17643 AMENDlNG SCHEDULE vrn, SECTION 10.52.400 OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH DIAGONAL PARKlNG-
PERMITTED ON EAST PARK LANE FROM "F" STREET TO 100 FEET
SOUTH OF THE SOUTH CURBLlNE OF DAVIDSON STREET
AFFIRMlNG TRIAL TRAFFIC REGULATION - The City Engineer has
determined the need to establish diagonal (perpendicular) parking along the west
side of East Park Lane. It is in response to complaints from the area businesses
and residents that there is a great demand for on-street parking. Vehicles are
currently parking perpendicular on most of East Park Lane. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
Agenda
-5-
September 6, 1994
16. RESOLUTION 17644 AMENDING SCHEDULE VI, SECTION 10.52.340 - PARKING TIME
LIMITED ON CERTAIN STREETS ESTABLISHING A TWO-HOUR
TIME LIMIT ON EAST PARK LANE 133 FEET NORTH OF THE
NORTH CURBLINE OF "F" STREET TO 177 FEET NORTH OF THE
NORTH CURBLINE OF "F' STREET AFFIRMING TRIAL TRAFFIC
REGULATIONS - The City Engineer has determined the need to establish time
limited, two-hour parking along lhe west side of East Park Lane. It is in
response to complaints from lhe area businesses and residents lhat lhere is a
great demand for on-street parking. Vehicles were being parked for long
perioda of time. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of
Public Works)
17. RESOLUTION 17645 AMENDING SCHEDULE VI, SECTION 10.52.340 - PARKING TIME
LIMITED ON CERTAIN STREETS ESTABLISHING A ONE-HOUR
TIME LIMIT ON THE 100 BLOCK OF BROADWAY AFFIRMING
TRIAL TRAFFIC REGULATION - The City Engineer, wilh a
recommendation from the Police Department's Traffic Division, has determined
lhe need to establish time limited, one-hour parking along lhe west side of
Broadway. It is in response to complaints from the area businesses lhat vehicles
are parked on the street for lengthy perioda of time. Staff recommends approval
of lhe resolution. (Director of Public Works)
18. RESOLUTION 17646 AMENDING SCHEDULE II, SECTION 10.52.030 FOR SPECIAL STOP
REQUIRED - THROUGH STREETS AND STOPPED INTERSECTIONS
AT ALLEN SCHOOL LANE AND ALLEN SCHOOL ROAD AFFIRMING
TRIAL TRAFFIC REGULATION - The City Engineer has determined the
need to establish an all-way stop at lhe intersection of Allen School Lane and
Allen School Road for the promotion of public safety and to reduce traffic
hazards and congestion. The intersection is adjacent to Ella B. Allen
Elementary School and a significant number of school aged children cross the
street to access the school. Additionally. lhe intersection has somewhat
restricted sight distance caused by natural topography which is not easily
corrected. Staff recommends approval of lhe resolution. (Director of Public
Works)
19. REPORT "NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF DRAFT LOSS PERMIT" AND
"DRAFT LOSS PERMIT" (CSO-95-01) FOR RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill-
The Director of Planning has issued a Draft Loss Permit for lhe impact to 256
acres of Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub wilhin SPA III of Rancho del Rey. In
accordance with Ordinance 2602, the permit is being submitted for
consideration. Staff recommends Council accept lhe Loss Permit as drafted.
(Director of Planning)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
Agenda
-6-
September 6, 1994
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by low. If you wish to
speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Form" availoble in the lobby and submit it to the City
Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete
the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per
individual.
20. PUBLIC HEARING PCM-92-17: CONSIDERATION OF REVISED DESIGN MANUAL - CITY
INITIATED; AND PCA-95-01: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO
SECTION 19.14.582 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF A BROADER RANGE OF PROJECTS
SUBJECT TO DESIGN REVIEW - CITY INITIATED - In October 1992,
Council approved the Permit Streamlining Workplan and Implementation
Schedule which, among other measures, called for revising the City Design
Manual to include more concise and objective design guidelines with additional
illustrations, and providing the administrative (staff) approval of a broader range
of projects subject to design review. Staff recommends Council place the
ordinance on first reading and approve the resolution. (Director of Planning)
A. ORDINANCE 2603 AMENDING SECTION 19.14.582 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO
ALLOW FOR ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DESIGN REVIEW OF
ADDITIONAL CATEGORIES OF PROJECTS (first readim!l
B. RESOLUTION 17647 REPEALING THE EXISTING DESIGN MANUAL AND APPROVING
THE REVISED DESIGN MANUAL FOR THE CITY
21. PUBLIC HEARING GPA-90-9(A): CONSIDERATION OF STATE-MANDATED REVISIONS
TO THE 1991 HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE CITY GENERAL PLAN -
CHAPTER 1451, STATUTES OF 1989, RELATING TO THE
PRESERVATION OF SUBSIDIZED HOUSING AT RISK OF
CONVERSION - On 5/15/92, the State Department of Housing and Community
Development (RCD) issued a letter finding the City's adopted Rousing Element
update in compliance with the State Rousing Element Law. That same letter
noted, however, that select portions of the Element would soon lapse from
compliance given changes in the State Rousing Element Law which were to
become effective 7/1192. Those changes regard the preservation of existing
subsidized low-income housing units which could be converted to non-low-
income use. Staff has since worked with RCD in the preparation of necessary
revisions and has received written response from RCD that the proposed
amendments will comply with the revised State law. Pursuant to Section 65585
of the State Government Code, it is now necessary for the City to formally
adopt the amendments as part of the Rousing Element, and to subsequently
forward the adopted amended Element to RCD to obtain full legal compliance
status. Staff recommends Council: (1) Consider the Negative Declaration (IS-
92-D8) and Addendum thereto (IS-92-D8A); and, (2) Adopt the proposed
amendments to the Rousing Element of 1991. (Director of Community
Development and Director of Planning)
RESOLUTION 17648 ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
ELEMENT OF 1991 REGARDING THE PRESERVATION OF AT-RISK
HOUSING AS REQUIRED BY STATE HOUSING ELEMENT LAW
Agenda
-7-
September 6, 1994
22.
ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR OTAY VALLEY
ROAD - In order to construct the Olay Valley Road widening project, the City
needs to obtain a portion of the property owned by SNMB, L.P (a Delaware
Limited Partnership). The property is located at the easterly end of the project
and consists of about 1.0907 acres. The right-of-way acquisition consultants,
Ryals & Associates, have exhausted their efforts to obtain the dedication on a
friendly basis. Due to time constraints, staff cannot wait any longer and must
begin eminent domain proceedings. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Public Works) Continued from the meeting of
8/23/94. 4/Sth's vote required,
RESOLUTION 17649 DETERMINING PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR
ACQUIRING AND AUTHORIZING THE CONDEMNATION OF
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD
STREET WIDENING PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE
COMMENCEMENT OF CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS BY
OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO ACQUIRE RIGHT-OF-WAY
PUBLIC HEARING
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject matter within the
CouncU's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda. (State law, however, generally prohibits the City
CouncUfrom taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to address the Council
on such a subject, please complete the yeUow "Request to 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 wiU consider items which have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
23. Letter asking the Mayor to send a letter to local elected representatives to support "National
Character Counts Week" (October 16-22, 1994) and urging each area representative to become c0-
sponsors of the "Character Counts Joint Resolutions" effort. Harriet Acton, Chairperson, Board of
Ethics, 265 Nixon Place, Chula Vista, CA 91910.
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 wiU be considered individually by the CouncU
and staff recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak, please
flU out a "Request to Speak" form available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
Public comments are limited to five minutes.
24. REPORT
UPDATE ON SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ISSUES - An oral report will be
given by staff.
A. REPORT
EVALUATION OF CANDIDATE SITES FOR TRANSFER STATION AND
MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY - On 7/19/94, Council approved
contracting with John Sexton/Chula Vista Sanitary for the first phase of a
transfer station and materials recovery facility to include siting, conceptual
design and permitting. As the initial step in that process, the report addresses
Agenda
-8-
September 6, 1994
the methodology for evaluating 14 candidates sites within the City and
recommendations for further action. Staff recommends Council accept the
report and give direction to proceed with an in-<lepth evaluation (including cost
information) of the two highest rated sites, and to report back regarding further
recommendations on acquisition. (Deputy City Manager Krempl and Director
of Planning)
B. REPORT
EVALUATION OF THE SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY'S PROPOSED
NON-MEMBER CONTRACT RATES AND VIABILITY OF
ALTERNATIVES - On 8/11/94, the San Diego Solid Waste Authority
approved a menu of differential tip fees for non-member agencies which were
proposed to go into effect at the region's landfills on 10/1194. Aside from the
option to join the Authority and receive the rate proposed for member agencies,
the Authority has presented three rates differentiated by contract terms and
conditions. The Authority has directed that contracts be executed by 9/15/94.
On 8/23/94, Council directed staff to communicate specific concerns about the
Authority's process, options and deadline, and to request a prompt reply. The
report discusses the options presented and subsequent responses. The issue is
also discussed in light of the viability of other short-term disposal alternatives
being explored by staff and Council. Staff recommends: (I) That Chula Vista
not execute any of the Authority's proposed contract options; (2) That, at the
9/15/94 meeting of the Authority, the City request a response to the 8/29/94
letter and recommendations contained therein; and, (3) That staff report back to
Council on 9/13/94 as to any actions taken by other non-member cities (4 other
jurisdictions will be meeting on or before 9/13/94). (Deputy City Manager
Krempl)
SANDAG REGIONAL OPEN SPACE STRATEGY - SANDAG recently
released for public review its draft Regional Open Space Strategy, which is a
component of the overall Regional Growth Management Strategy. Staff has
reviewed the SANDAG report, and has prepared comments. Staff recommends
Council give authorization to forward the comments to SANDAG. (Director of
Planning)
25. REPORT
UPDATE ON CLEAN WATER PROGRAM ISSUES - An oral report will
be given by staff.
26. REPORT
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council will discuss iJems which have been removed from the Consent Calendar.
Agenda iJems pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Counci1members.
Public comments are limiJed to five minutes per individual.
OTHER BUSINESS
27. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT IS)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
b. Governor's Veterans Home Site Selection Committee Meeting on 9/1194.
Agenda
-9-
September 6, 1994
28. MA VOR'S REPORTISl
a. Trash disposal rate payer survey.
b. Ratification of appointments:
Charter Review Commission - Linda Brown and B. Rosie Bystm;
Economic Development Commission - Arthur D. Sellgren;
lnternational Friendship Commission - Paul Catanzaro;
Human Relations Commission - Mary P. Slovinsky;
Parks and Recreation Commission - Margaret J. Helton; and,
Youth Commission - Manuel Martinez.
29. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Horton
a. Ratification of appointment to the Economic Development Commission - Geoffrey S. Bogart.
aa. Consideration of City incentives for hightech corporation - EastLake Business Center.
Councilmember Moore
b. Discussion and possible action regarding B/C/C members absenteeism excused/unexcused
(reference page 12 of B/C/C handbook). Members with attendance of 75 % and members with
unexcused absences of over 25 %. Continued from the meeting of 8/23/94.
c. Consideration of in-house/staff training vs. conferences. Continued from the meeting of
8/23/94.
d. Illegallbootleg signs, etc. in residential areas; along side City streets, etc.; and enforcement action.
Councilmember Rindone
e. Ratification of reappointment to the Mobilehome Rent Review Commission - Andrew Delgado.
CLOSED SESSION
Unless the City Attorney, the City Manager or the City Council slates otherwise at this time, the Council wiU
discuss and deliberate on the following items of business which are pennitted by law to be the subject of a closed
session discussion, and which the Council is advised should be discussed in closed session to best protect the
interests of the City. The Council is required by law to return to open session, issue any reports of final action
laken in closed session, and the votes taken. However, due to the typical length of time laken up by closed
sessions, the videotaping wiU be tenninated at this point in order to save costs so that the Council's return from
closed session, reports of final action laken, and adjournment will not be videotaped. Nevertheless, the report
of final action taken will be recorded in the minutes which wiU be available in the City Clerk's Office.
30. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Govenunent Code Section 54957.6
. Agency negotiator: John Goss or designee for CVEA, WCE, POA, IAFF, Executive
Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
Employee organization: Chula Vista Employees Association (CVEA), Western Council
of Engineers (WCE), Police Officers Association (POA), and lnternational Association
of Fire Fighters (IAFF).
Unrepresented employee: Executive Management, Mid-Management, and Unrepresented.
Agenda
-10-
September 6, 1994
31. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - Anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.9
. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9: 1.
. City vs. Solid Waste Management IPA (differential rate structure and transfer station
legal issues).
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION - Pursuant to Government Code Section
54957
. Title: City Attorney
32. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8
. Property: West end of Otay Rio Business Park.
Negotiating parties: John Goss or designee.
Under negotiation: Purchase price and terms of payment for corporation yard.
. Property: School District property next to Community Hospital Medical Center.
Negotiating parties: John G088.
Under negotiation: Potential acquisition of site for Veterans Home.
33. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the Regular City Council Meeting on Septemher 13,
1994 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamhers.
A Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency will he held immediately following the City Council Meeting.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Yc.
Meeting Date' 9/06/94
ITEM TITLE: Proclamation - Proclaiming Saturday, October 1, 1994 as
SWEATER SATURDAY
SUBMITTED BY:
Mayor Tim Nade~/p
(4/5ths Vote: Yes___ No~)
sweater,saturday is jointly sponsored by San Diego Gas & Electric, Vons,
KGTV/San Diego's 10 and KSON for the purpose of collecting sweaters and
sweatshirts for people who truly need them in a single day - October 1,
1994.
The proclamation declaring Saturday, October 1, 1994 as SWEATER SATURDAY
will be presented by Mayor Tim Nader to Ms. Pat Barnes, Government
Representative of the San Diego Gas & Electric South Bay District
Office.
Form A-113 (Rev. 11/79)
Yc-!
PROCLAIMING SATURDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1994 AS
SWEATER SATURDAY
IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, many elderly, needy, children, families in crisis and those homeless
will struggle to keep warm during the upcoming cold season; and
WHEREAS, last year, San Diego Gas & Electric, Vons and KGTV Channel 10
collected 300,000 sweaters and sweatshirts which were distributed to those with limited
or no financial resources including the elderly, disabled and/or handicapped, the
homeless; and
WHEREAS, numerous community groups have pledged their support including
Burnham Pacific Properties, The Junior League of San Diego, Inc, Girls Scouts San
Diego-Imperial Council; Boy Scouts of America Desert Pacific Council; Rotary clubs of
San Diego and Imperial Counties; Kiwanis Clubs of San Diego County, and United
Way/SAVY (Students Actively Volunteering for You):
NOW, THEREFORE, I, TIM NADER, Mayor of the City of Chula Vista, California,
do hereby proclaim Saturday, October 1, 1994 as SWEATER SATURDAY in the City of
Chula Vista, California and encourage our citizens to participate in this endeavor by
donating usable sweaters and sweatshirts. Donations can be made at all Chula Vista
City Fire Stations and Vons Grocery Stores throughout the County of San Diego.
a:\sweaterday
'-/ c - c:J..
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item~
Meeting Date 9/06/94
ITEM TITLE: Proclamation - Proclaiming Friday, September 16, 1994 as
NATIONAL POW/MIA RECOGNITION DAY
SUBMITTED BY:
Mayor Tim Nade~~lp
(4/5ths Vote: Yes No~)
The proclamation declaring Friday, September 16, 1994 as NATIONAL POW/MIA
RECOGNITION DAY will be presented by Mayor Tim Nader to Robert McCauley,
Veterans Advisory Commission representative.
Form A-113 (Rev. 11/79)
~oI-l
September 1, 1994
SUBJECf:
The Honorable Mayor and Ci: Courp
John D. Goss, City Manage\..~l ~ ~\
City Council Meeting of September 6, 1994
TO:
FROM:
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council
meeting of Tuesday, September 6, 1994. Comments regarding the Written
Communications are as follows:
5a. This is a letter from Pam Slater, Chairwoman of the County Board of
SupelVisors, requesting that the City Council adopt a resolution in
opposition to an initiative on the Fall ballot that would amend the
County's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance to allow a landfill in the
PalalPauma area of the County. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS
REQUEST BE REFERRED TO STAFF FOR EVALUATION AND
REVIEW.
5b. This is a letter requesting Council to adopt a resolution in opposition to
Proposition 188, a measure sponsored by Phillip Morris and appearing
on the November ballot which would repeal and supplant all State and
local tobacco control laws and preempt future local tobacco regulation.
The letter was received from Debbie Kelley, American Lung Association
of San Diego and Imperial Counties, 2750 Fourth Avenue, San Diego,
CA 92103. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT COUNCIL ADOPT THE
ATTACHED RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION TO PROPOSITION
188.
5c. This is a letter from Joseph Conte, SuperintendentIPresident of
Southwestern College, requesting that Council reconsider installation of
traffic signal lights at the intersections of Otay Lakes Road and Elmhurst
Street, and Otay Lakes Road and Gotham Street. The traffic signal at
Gotham Street and Otay Lakes Road has been awarded and the
contractor has been authorized to proceed and should be completed in
8 to 10 weeks. Because the traffic pattern is expected to change
dramatically after the signal is in operation, which would reduce the
need for a signal at Elmhurst, and because two signals on Otay Lakes
Road only 600 feet apart would be detrimental to the flow of traffic on
Otay Lakes Road, staff does not recommend installing a signal at
Elmhurst at this time. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT STAFF BE
DIRECTED TO COMMUNICATE THIS TO SOUTHWESTERN
COLLEGE.
JDG:mab
PAM SLATER
CHAIRWOMAN
I
--....-.
,=--~;
SUPERVISOR, THIRD DISTRICT
SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Tim Nader, Mayor
City of Chula Vista
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
!I!! ~
-<-<
p~ ;II! =-
me-) III IYI
~::r: (')
.c:: N IYI
C/)r~ N _
o:Jo. <
:::Is :g IYI
~ ':7 0
GREGORY CANYON LANDFILL AND RECYCLING COLLECTI~ C~R
INTITIATIVE
August 10, 1994
RE:
Dear Mayor Nader:
As you may be aware, Servcon-San Marcos, Inc. has qualified an initiative for the Fall ballot
that would amend the County's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance to allow a landfill by
right in the Pala/Pauma area of Northern San Diego County.
As Chairwoman of the Board of Supervisors for San Diego County, I ask that your City
Council adopt a resolution in opposition to this initiative. Regardless of the merits of the
proposed project, amending the local General Plan and Zoning Ordinance by initiative to
support a private project is not consistent with our responsibility for land use decisions as
elected officials. This circumvention of the process does not provide for adequate analysis
of the potential impacts of such a decision.
I am asking for your support in informing the voters of this County that such initiatives
circumvent a process developed specifically to protect the people. Thank you for your
consideration of this issue.
1:::tJ~
PAM SlATER
Chairwoman
PS/JM/jh
cc, ~1;;;- (<I) WlmEN COMMUNICATIONS
i:2:;:;11~ ~A '-r /^ ~/;J7
~, ~~~'~'~C HIGHWAY. ROOM '35 SAN IllEGO, CA~470 (619) 531-5533 TOLL FREEBOO-a52-7334
~~~~. mP'IC'!"dOn!eCY"ledpapa'~t:1...J
r~'=----f:~-~i~~'" ,~.~ -----.-."'~~;-L~~::l
i' n) .r ,. :" I
l j :. il""""'~"~.; '.'~ ',,' 'j
,"J ' . 'I
!; ",'; ~ i :: 1
I:i;: !lUG 251994 ;;,'
. ~.JI.J IT .-., ~ I
L_,__"_"".,""c--_J
. rY C0ur"c.;,.:L (t, i~:r-S
CHUL' ViSTA. CA
2750 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, California 92103
P.O. Box 3879, San Diego, CA 92163-1879
(619) 297-3901
FAX (619) 297-8402
] 10] Airport Road, Suite E, Imperial, California 92251
(6]9) 353-LUNG
AMERICA
SOCIA TION of San Diego and Imperial Counties
The Christmas Seal People@
@
August 19, 1994
Richard Wenrick, President
Jack E. Damson, M.A., M.P.H., Executive Director
I!
-c-<
PSfl
mC"')
~:::r:
.C
v>.
0"'"
." <: ;a
.,,- -
~;! ~
Proposition 188, sponsored by Phillip Morris, the largest cigarette
manufacturing company in the world, will appear on the November
ballot. The measure, if passed, will repeal all state and local tobacco
control laws; they will be replaced with a weak statewide law which
would permit smoking in every restaurant and workplace in the State,
California's new Smoke-Free law, which goes into effect Jan, 1, 1995,
would be nullified, Furthermore, the initiative would prohibit local
governments from passing tobacco control legislation in the future,
.
~
se
=-
'"
n
.....
-
<
.....
o
The Honorable Tim Nader
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor Nader,
The Coalition for a Health California is requesting your city to pass a
resolution opposing the Phillip Morris initiative, The Cities of EI Cajon, Del
Mar, Solana Beach, along with San Diego County have already done so,
In addition, we would like to place your name on our list of those
opposed to Proposition 188,
We are planning a press conference in the Fall featuring representatives
from all local cities that have joined us to defeat the Phillip Morris
initiative, We [lope that trle City of Chula Vista will be able to participate
in this event,
Enclosed please find a copy of the initiative, a sample resolution, and a
brochure from the Coalition for a Healthy California, Also enclosed is a
blue card, which you may return to join our list of individuals opposed to
the Phillip Morris initiative,
Sincerely,
::{))~'~tk ,WRllTEN COMMUNICATiONS
Debbie Kell;f/ cc: ~ '7~ (~ A Yo/:Jj
EnClosu'es J:?7~~ 5b -/ ~
Christmas Seals@ Fight Asthma, Emphysema, Tuberculosis, Air Pollution and Lung Cancer ~
Comon""~thA""",,,,,,c.1,",
RESOLUTION NO.
17~JJ
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA OPPOSING PROPOSITION 188 - THE
PHILIP MORRIS INITIATIVE
WHEREAS, tobacco use is responsible for the death of over
400,000 people every year and is the number one cause of death in
the United States; and
WHEREAS, Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) has been
categorized as a cancer causing substance by the Environmental
Protection Agency; and exposure to sidestream or secondhand smoke
kills an estimated 53,000 persons every year; and
WHEREAS, every day 3,000 children take up smoking and
join the ranks of those addicted to nicotine; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 188 will appear on the November,
1994 ballot and if passed, will repeal all state and local tobacco
control laws; replace them with a statewide law which would permit
smoking in every restaurant and workplace in the State; and
prohibi t local governments from every passing tobacco control
legislation in the future; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 188 will repeal AB-13, a state law
supported by a coalition of health organizations, the California
Restaurant Association and the California Hotel Motel Association,
that will make all restaurants and most workplaces and public
places smoke-free beginning January 1, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the ventilation standards adopted in the
initiative for application to indoor smoking will remove the odor
of smoke from the air, but they will not eliminate the cancer
causing substances which pose the threat to public health; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 188 is sponsored by Philip Morris,
the largest cigarette manufacturing company in the world; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 188 proponents have been
misrepresenting the purpose of the initiative in an attempt to
deceive the voting public and have received multiple warnings from
the California Secretary of State regarding these deceptive
tactics.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby oppose Proposition 188 and
urges residents to vote against the initiative on the November
ballot.
John D. Goss, City Manager
'I
5;...3
to
Presented by
city
c: \rs\prop.188
Sample Resolution Against Proposition 188 - The Philip Morris Initiative
Official Title: Smoking and Tobacco Products, Statewide Regulation, Initiative Statute
(Cities, professional organizations, businesses, health agencies or other use)
WHEREAS, tobacco use is responsible for the death of over 400,000 people every year and is the
number one cause of death in the United States;
WHEREAS, Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) has been categorized as a cancer causing substance
by the Environmental Protection Agency; and exposure to sidestream or secondhand smoke kills an
estimated 53,000 persons every year;
WHEREAS, every day 3,000 children take up smoking and join the ranks of those addicted to nicotine;
WHEREAS, Proposition 188 will appear on the November, 1994, ballot and if, passed, will repeal all
state and local tobacco control laws; replace them with a statewide law which would permit smoking in
every restaurant and workplace in the State; and, prohibit local governments from ever passing tobacco
control legislation in the future;
WHEREAS, Proposition 188 will repeal AB-13, a state law supported by a coalition of health
organizations, the California Restaurant Association and the California Hotel Motel Association, that
will make all restaurants and most workplaces and public places smoke-free beginning January 1, 1995;
WHEREAS, the ventilation standards adopted in the initiative for application to indoor smoking will
remove the odor of smoke from the air, but they will not eliminate the cancer causing substances which
pose the threat to public health;
WHEREAS, Proposition 188 is sponsored by Philip Morris, the largest cigarette manufacturing
company in the world;
WHEREAS, Proposition 188 proponents have been misrepresenting the purpose of the initiative in an
attempt to deceive the voting public and have received multiple warnings from the California Secretary
of State regarding these deceptive tactics;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the opposes
Proposition 188 and urges residents to vote against the initiative on the November ballot;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the will do what it can to
inform the public of the impact of Proposition 188 on the community and will forward a copy of this
resolution to Chief Executive Officer, Philip Morris Companies, Inc., 120 Park Avenue, New York, New
York, 10017.
Note: Please send a copy of your resolution to Debra Kelley, Coalition for a Healthy California,
American Lung Association, 2750 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA, 92103.
G:IPROGRAMlDEBBIEIPUBPOLlST A TEINI\ORGRESOL.SMP
5b-'j
Proposition 188 - The Philip Morris Initiative
(Official Title: Smoking and Tobacco Products. Statewide Regulation.
Initiative Statute)
Attached is the official wordingfor this initiative.
Proposition 188
Sponsor:
Philip Morris, maker ofMarlboro@ cigarettes and the
largest U.S: tobacco manufacturer.
Proposition 188
Opposition:
(partial list )
Coalition for a Healthv California, the same group
responsible for raising the tobacco tax, whose
members include:
American Lung Association
American Heart Association
American Cancer Society
California Ass'n of Hospitals and Health
Systems
California Dental Association
California Medical Association
PTA
Planning and Conservation League
and many other organizations.
Ill' Are you interested in helping us "Crush" Prop 188? Call the Coalition for a
Healthy California at 297-3901.
:I: AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION..
I of San Diego and Imperial Counties
2750 Founh Avenue. P.O. Box 3879
San Diego, CA 92163-1879
Phone: (619) 297-3901
F." (6]9) 297'''Sb -.5'
INTI1ATIVE MEASURE TO BE SUBMl'ITED DIRECTLY TO THE VOTERS
The Attorney General of California has prepared the following title and summary of the chief
pW"pll'ie and points of the proposed measure:
SMOKING AND TOBACCO PRODUCTS. STATEWIDE REGULATION.
INTI1ATIVE STATIlTE. Establishes statewide smoking and tobacco regulations. Repeals California
Indoor Clean Air Act of 1976. Repeals and preempts IocaI smoking and tobacco regulations. Bans public
smoking with significant exceptioos. Pennits smoking sections in restaw"ants and employee cafeterias. Bars
not regulated. Pennits smoking in private offices, and business COnference rooms with occupants' coru;ent.
Exempts from smoking reguIatioos gaming clubs, bingo establishments, racetracks, sports facility private
boxes and smoking lounges. Regulates Iocatioo of tobacco vending machines and billboards. Increases
penalties for tobacco purchases by minors. Pennits amendment of to!>acco regulatioos by two-thirds vote
of~1ature. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Fmance of fiscal impact 00
state and local governments: Unknown effects 00 public-sector health care costs and state tobacco tax rev-
enues, depending on the extent there are changes in the consumptioo of tobacco products and/or exposure
to second-hand smoke. State costs to enforce the measure would be around $1 million annually; local
enforcement costs would probably not be significant.
TO THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA
We, the undersigned. registered, qualified voters of California, residents of County (or City and County), hereby propose
amendments to the Business and Professions Code and the Penal Code and uncodified statutory provisions related to the regulation of smoking and
tobacco products and petition the Secretary of State to submit the same to the voters at California for their adoption or rejection at the next succeed-
ing general election or at any special statewide election held prior to that general election or otherwise provided by law. The proposed statutory
amendments and provisions read as follows:
SECTION 1. The People of the State of California find and declare that:
(a) The current regulation of smoking in public in California is inadequate
in that there are insufficient statewide standards for regulating smoking
in restaurants, office buildings, and other public places.
(b) There is a wide variance in the local regulation of smoking. Some
localities provide little or no protection to those who wish to avoid sec-
ondhand smoke in such places, while others overregulate to the extent
that in at least one city a person may be fined for smoking on the side-
walk or in the street.
(c) There is a clear need for unjform statewide regulation of smoking in
public to assure those interested in avoiding secondhand tobacco smoke
have the same protections wherever they go in the state and that those
who do smoke have fair notice of where smoking is prohibited.
(d) There must be stricter statewide controls to curb the illegal sale of
tobacco products to minors, including the regulation of tobacco products
vending machines. Further, the advertisement of tobacco products near
schools must be restricted.
SEC. 2. To accomplish the goals set 10l1h i,l Section 1, the People
enact this measure to provide for the statewide regulation of smoking in
restaurants. other public places and the workplace, and lor statewide
restrictions on the marketing and distribution of tobacco products
through the regulation of sales to minors, tobacco products vending
machines. and billboard advertising near school grounds.
SEC. 3. This act shall be known and may be cited as the California
Uniform Tobacco Control Act.
SEC. 4. Division 10 (commencing with Section 25800) is added to the
Business and Professions Code, to read:
DIVISION 10. REGULATION OF SMOKING
CHAPTER ,. GENERAL PROVISIONS
25800. For purposes of this division, the following definitions shall
apply:
(a) -ASHRAE Standard 62-t989- means the standard approved by the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers, Inc. in 1989 as ASHRAE Standard 62-1989, "Ventilation for
Acceptable Indoor Air Quality" and approved by the American National
Standards Institute in 1991. The standard is also designated
-ANSI/ASHRAE 62-1989.~
(b) -Bar" means an area that is devoted to the service of alcoholic bever-
ages for consumption on the premises and in which the serving of food,
if any, is incidental to the consumption of alcoholic beverages. When a
bar is located within a building in conjunction with another use, including,
but not limited to, a restaurant, only the area used primarily for the con-
sumption of alcoholic beverages shall constitute a bar. The dining area
shall not constitute a bar, even though alcoholic beverages may be
served therein.
(c) "Private office" means a room within a building in which no more than
one person works that is enclosed by floor to ceiling walls and an opera-
ble door.
(d) "Public place" means any enclosed indoor area open to the general
public, including, but not limited to, a theater, educational facility, health
facility, retail services establishment, retail food production and market
establishment, gymnasium, health spa, library. museum, and gallery.
"Public place~ does not Include a workplace, restaurant. or bar.
(e) "Restaurant" mealls any coffeeshop, cafeteria. short-order cafe, lun-
cheonette, diner, sandwich shop. soda fountain, and any other eating
establishment which gives, sells, or offers for sale food to the general
public lor consumption on the premises. "Restaurant" does not include
a "bar" as defined in this section.
(f) "Workplace" means any enclosed indoor area in which one or more
individuals are employed on a full-time basis and to which the general
public does not have access, except by specific invitation.
Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, "workplace~ does not include a
prison, jailor other correctional facility and does not include a work area
in a private residence other than a licensed family day care home during
its hours of operation and in those areas where children are present.
CHAPTER 2. RESTAURANTS
25806. Smoking is prohibited in any restaurant, except as otherwise
provided in this chapter.
25808. (a) The prohibition of Section 25806 shall not apply to any
restaurant to which both of the following apply:
(1) Smoking is confined to designated areas not exceeding 25 percent of
the seating capacity.
51/ ., t.
(2) Ventilation is provided In accordance with the recommended ventila.
tion rates specified for dining rooms and cafeterias in Table 2 of
ASHRAE Standard 62-1989 or in accordance with the requirements of
the indoor air quality procedure described in ASHRAE Standard
62-1989. If a restaurant electS to provide ventilation in accordance with
this paragraph, the restaurant shall keep on the premises a written certi-
fication, provided at least once a year by the contractor who maintains
the ventilation system. that the system meets the applicable provisions
of ASHRAE Standard 62-' 989.
(b) Any restaurant permitting smoking shall post a sign on the exterior of
the building at each point of public entrance stating that smoking and
non-smoking sections are available.
25810. The prohibition of Section 25806 shall not apply to rooms in
restaurants being used for private functions.
25812. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent the owner
of any restaurant from prohibiting smoking entirely on any premises
under his or her control.
CHAPTER 3. WORKPLACES
25814. SmokinG is prohibited in any ....,orkplace, axcapt as ritherwise
provided in this chapter.
25816. (a) The prohibition of Section 25814 shall not appiy to any work.
place that is any of the following:
(1) Any private office or, with the consent of aU occupants. any confer-
ence room if ventilation is provided to that office or room in accordance
with the recommended ventilation rates specified for offices in Table 2 of
ASH RAE Standard 62-1989 or in accordance with the requirements of
the indoor air quality procedure described in ASH RAE Standard
62-1989.
(2) Any employee cafeteria where smoking is confined to a single area
not exceeding 25 percent of the seating capacity of the cafeteria, and
ventilation is provided in accordance with the recommended ventilation
rates specified for dining rooms and cafeterias in Table 2 of ASHRAE
Standard 62-1989 or in accordance with the requirements of the indoor
air quality procedure described in ASHRAE Standard 62-1989.
(3) Designated smoking lounges if ventilation is provided in accordance
with the recommended ventilation rates specified for smoking lounges in
Table 2 of ASHRAE Standard 62-1989 or in accordance with the
requirements of the indoor air quality procedure described in ASHRAE
Standard 62-1989.
(b) If an employer elects to provide ventilation in accordance with subdi-
vision (a), the employer shall keep on the premises a written certifica.
tion. provided at least once a year by the contractor who maintains the
ventilation system, that the system meets the applicable provisions of
ASH RAE Standard 62-1989.
25818. Smoking is prohibited in any company vehicle unless all those
present in the vehicle consent.
25820. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent an employ-
er from prohibiting smoking entirely on any premises under his or her
control.
CHAPTER 4. PUBLIC PLACES
25822. Smoking is prohibited in any public place, except as otherwise
provided in this chapter.
25824. Smoking may be permitted in no more than 25 percent of the
concourse area of any bowling alley and the lobby areas of any hotel,
motel or other lodging facility.
25826. The prohibition of Section 25822 shall not apply to any of the
following places:
(a) Hotel and motel rooms rented to guests, unless they are designated
non-smoking rooms by management.
(b) Establishments devoted primarily to the retail sale of tobacco prod-
ucts or to the operations of a manufacturer of tobacco products.
(c) Hotel and motel conference or meeting rooms, and public and private
assembly rooms, while these places are being used for private func-
tions.
(d) Gaming clubs registered pursuant to Chapter 5 (commencing with
Section 19800) of Division 8, facilities used to conduct bingo games pur-
suant to Section 326.5 of the Penal Code, racetracks, and private boxes
and separate smoking lounges in indoor and outdoor sports arenas.
25828. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent the owner
or lessee of any public place from prohibiting smoking entirely on any
premises under his or her control.
.
CHAPTER 5. SIGNS
25836. Smoking and non-smoking areas designated pursuant to this
division shall be clearly indicated by the posting of signs.
CHAPTER 6. VENDING MACHINES
25840. It is unlawful to sell tobacco products at retail through a vending
machine unless the vending machine is located in one of the following
areas:
(a) In an area of a facto:y, busines5. office, or other place that is not
open to the general public.
(b) On any publiC premises, as defined in Section 23039, to which per-
sons under the age of 21 years are denied access pursuant to Section
25665.
(c) On other premises to which persons under the age of 18 years are
not permitted access.
(d) In any other place, but only it the machine is operated by the activa-
tion of an electronic switch by the licensee, or by an employee of the
licensee, prior to each purchase.
25842. The person liable for a violation of Section 25840 is the person
authorizing the installation or placement of the tobacco products vending
machine upon premises he or she manages or otherwise controls and
under circumstances in which he or she has knowledge, or otherwise
should have grounds for knowledge. of the violation.
CHAPTER 7. BILLBOARDS
25844. No person shall advertise or cause to be advertised tobacco
products on any outdoor billboard located within 500 feet of any public
or private elementary school. junior high school, or high school. This
prohibition shall not apply to advertisements erected or maintained at
street level and affixed to business establishments selling tobacco prod-
ucts at retail.
CHAPTER 8. ENFORCEMENT
25850. The provisions of Chapter 3 shall be considered occupational
safety and health standards under the California Occupational Safety
and Health Act of t 973 as amended and shall be enforced as standards
under that act.
25852. Except as provided in section 25850, every person who smokes
in violation of this division, every person in charge of a place where
smoking is prohibited by this division who knowingly permits smoking in
violation of this division, every person who fails to post a sign required
by this division and every person who violates any other prohibition in
this division. shan be guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine not to
exceed one hundred dollars ($100) for a first violation, by a fine not to
exceed two hundred dollars ($200) for a second violation within one
year, or by a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500) for a third
violation and for each subsequent violation within one year.
SEC. 5. Article 1 of Chapter 10.8 (commencing with Section 25940) of
Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code is repealed.
SEC. 6. Section 25949.6 of the Health and Safety Code is repealed.
SEC. 7. Section 308 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
308, (a) (1) Every person, firm or corporation that knowingly sells,
gives, or in any way tumishes to another person who is under the age of
18 years any tobacco. cigarette, or cigarette papers, or any other prepa-
ration of tobacco, or any other instrument or paraphernalia that is
Jb;7
designed for the smoking or ingestion of tobacco. products prepared
from tobacco, or a controlled substance, is subject to either a criminal
action for a misdemeanor or to a civil action brought by a city attorney, a
county counsel, or a district attorney, punishable by a fine of five hun-
dred dollars ($500) for a first violation, one thousand dollars ($1,000) for
a second violation within two years of the flrst violation, two thousand
dollars ($2,000) for a third violation within two years of the second viola-
tion, and two thousand dollars ($2.000) for any violation within two years
of a violation subsequent to the third violation.
(2) A flne imposed on a person, firm, or corporation for a violation of this
subdivision that is a first violation or that occurs more than two years
after any other violation of this subdivision shall be waived and any sub-
sequent violation of this subdivision shall be deemed a first violation if
the person, firm, or corporation clearly establishes that he, she, or it
acted in good faith to prevent the violation and that the violation
occurred despite the exercise of due diligence by the person, firm, or
corporation. For purposes of this paragraph, a person, firm, or corpora-
tion shall be deemed to have exercised due diligence if the person, firm,
or corporation complies with subdivisions (d) and (e).
(3) Notwithstanding Section 1464 or any other provision of law, 25 per-
cent of each civil and criminal penalty collected pursuant to this subdivi-
sien shaH be paid to the office of thtl city attorno.!Y, C<:'Iunty couns~l, or
district attorney, whoever is responsible for bringing the successful
action, and 25 percent of each civil and criminal penalty collected pur-
suant to this subdivision shall be paid to the city or county for the admin-
istration and cost of the community service work component provided in
subdivision (c).
(4) Proof that a defendant. or his or her employee or agent, demanded,
was shown, and reasonably relied upon evidence of majority shaH be a
defense to any action brought pursuant to this subdivision. Evidence of
majority of a person is a facsimile of or a reasonable likeness of a docu-
ment issued by a federal, state, county, or municipal government, or
subdivision or agency thereof, including, but not limited to, a motor vehi-
cle operator's license, a registration certificate issued under the federal
Selective Service Act, or an identification card issued to a member of
the armed forces.
(b) For purposes of this section, the person liable for selling or furnishing
tobacco products to minors by a tobacco products vending machine
shall be the person authorizing the installation or placement of the
tobacco vending machine upon premises he or she manages or other-
wise controls and under circumstances in which he or she has knowl.
edge, or should otherwise have grounds for knowledge, that the tobacco
products vending machine will be utilized by minors.
(c) Every person under the age of 18 years who purchases or receives
any tobacco, cigarette, or cigarette papers, or any other preparation of
tobacco, or any other instrument or paraphernalia that is designed for
the smoking of tobacco, products prepared from tobacco, or any con-
trolled substance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of five
hundred dollars ($500) or 100 hours of community service work.
(d) Every person, firm, or corporation that sells or deals in tobacco or
any preparation therecf, shall post conspicuously and keeo so posted in
his, her, or their place of tJusiness, at each point of purchase within the
premises, a sign, no smaller than 8 1/2 by 11 inches, stating the follow-
ing in no smaller than 28 point type:
NOTICE-SECTION 308 OF THE PENAL CODE PROHIBITS THE
SALE OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS TO PERSONS UNDER 18 YEARS
OF AGE AND THE PURCHASE OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS BY PER.
SONS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE.
Any person failing to do so shall upon conviction be punished by a fine
of one hundred dollars ($100) for the first offense and two hundred dol-
lars ($200) for each succeeding violation of this provision, or by impris-
onment for not more than 30 days.
The Secretary of State is hereby authorized to have printed sufficient
copies of this act to enable him or her to furnish dealers in tobacco with
copies thereof upon their request for the same.
(e) Every person, firm, or corporation that sells, or deals in tobacco or
any preparation thereof, shall notify each individual employed by the
person, firm, or corporation as a retail sales clerk that state law prohibits
the sale of tobacco products to any person under 18 years of age and
the purchase of tobacco products by any person under 18 years of age.
This notice shall be provided before the individual commences work as a
retail sales clerk or, in the case of an individual employed as a retail
sales clerk on the date when this subdivision becomes operative, within
30 days of that date. The individual shall signify that he or she has
received the notice required by this subdivision by Signing a form stating
as follows: ~I understand that state law prohibits the sale of tobacco
products to persons under the age of 18 and the purchase of tobacco
products by persons under the age of 18. I promise, as a condition of
my employment, to observe this law: Each form signed by an individual
shall indicate the date of signature. The employer shall retain the form
signed by each individual employed as a retail sales clerk until 120 days
after the individual has left the employer's employ. Any employer failing
to comply with the requirements of this subdivision with respect to any
employee shkU upon conviction be punished by a fine of one hundred
dollars ($100) for the first offense and two hundred dollars ($200) for
each succeeding violation of this subdivision, or by imprisonment for not
more than 30 days.
(1) For purposes of determining the liability of persons. firms, or corpora-
tions controlling franchises or business operations in multiple locations
for the second and subsequent violations of this section, each individual
franchise or business location shall be deemed a separate entity.
(g) In addition to other efforts to ensure compliance with this section,
every county sheriff, city police chief, and other head of a law enforce-
ment agency responsillle for enforcing subdivision (a) <,hall at least
annually conduct unannounced inspections at randomly selected ioca-
tions where tobacco products are sold or distributed. A person under
the age of 18 may be employed to test compiiance with subdivision (a)
only if the testing is conducted under the direct supervision of a peace
officer acting within the scope of his or her official duties and written
parental consent for the person's participation has been obtained.
Except as provided in this subdivision, every person who, lor the pur-
pose of testing compliance of another with subdivision (a), soiicits,
employs or otherwise aides a minor in the purchase or attempted pur-
chase of any tobacco, cigarette, or cigarette papers, or any other prepa-
ration of tobacco, or any other instrument or paraphernalia that is
designed for the smoking of tobacco, products prepared from tobacco,
or a controlled substance, is guilty of a misdemeanor,
(h) The Attorney General shall prepare for submission annually to the
Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human
Services the report required by Section 1926 of Subpart II of Part B of
Title XIX of the federal Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. See,
300x-26).
SEC. 8. Consistent with the finding in Section 1 of this act, the Peopie
find and declare that the need for uniform statewide regulation, as set
forth in this act, is a matter of statewide concern and uniform statewide
regulation of smoking in public places, bars, restaurants, and work-
places. as well as the sale, distribution, advertising, sampling, promo-
tion, or display of tobacco products, is required to maximize public
awareness of and compliance with this act and is warranted because
these activities do not vary from county to county or city to city. This act
shall apply, without limitation, to a city, county, and city and county,
including a charter city, charter county, or charter city and county. It is
the People's intent to regulate the subject maner of this act comprehen-
sively and to occupy the field to the exclusion of local action.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no ordinance or regulation of
any city, county, city and county, including a charter city, charter county,
or charter city and county, or other political subdivision of this state, or
any local ordinance or regulation adopted by the use of an initiative or
other ballot measure. shall in any way attempt 10 regulate the sale, dis-
tribution, advertising, sampling, promotion, or display of tobacco prod-
ucts, or smoking in public places, restaurants, bars, or workplaces.
SEC. 9. The amendment of Section 308 of the Penal Code by this act
shall not be construed to in any way affect other statutory prohibitions
before or hereafter enacted on the distribution of controlled substance
paraphernalia to minors or possession of such paraphernalia, including,
but not limited to, Sections 11364, 11364.5 and 11364,7 of the Health
and Safety Code.
SEC. 10. This act may be amended by a statute passed by a two-thirds
vote of the membership of each house of the Legislature.
SEC. 11. If any provision of this act or its application to any person or
circumstance is held invalid. this shall not affect other provisions or
applications of this act that can be given effect without the invalid appli-
catfon and to this end the provisions of the act are severable.
SEC. 12, This act shaH become effective on the first day of July of the
year fOllowing its enactment.
5J;,%'
We can stop Philip Morris
and defeat Prop. 188
Vote NO on Prop 188
The Sacramento Bee
June 6, 7994
Yes, I'll help defeat Prop.188 with
my contribution of:
o $500
0$188
o $100
o $50
o $250
0$100
0$75
0$25
"The whole Philip Morris campaign is
a study in disinformation"
loin "Club 188" with your special contribution
of $188!
Enclosed is a check for $
payable to Coalition for a Healthy California.
Contributions are not tax deductible.
State Headquarters
Coalition for a Healthy California
5750 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 561
Los Angeles, CA 90036
STOP PHILIP MORRIS
Your local contact is:
Name*
~mPIOyer'Bus, Phone
\
'-De>ccupation*
1=
AMERICAN
LUNG
ASSOCIATION..
of San Diego and
Imperial Counties
Coalition for a
Healthy California
Home Address
2750 Fourth Avenue, P.O. Box 3879
San Diego, CA 92 J 63-1879
Phone: (619) 297.3901
Fax: (619) 297-8402
American Cancer Society, California Division
American Lung Association of California
California Medical Association
California Dental Association
Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights
California PTA
American Heart Association
California Assn. of Hospitals &; Health Systems
California Common Cause
Planning and Conservation League
*partiallist
Home Phone
Yes, I am willing to...
o Endo"e No on Prop. 18B-Stop Philip Morris
o Join the Coalition for a Healthy California
o Allow public use of my name
o Host a fundralser for friends &; nelghbo"
o Participate in Speakers Bureau
o Write lelt"" to the Editor
o Volunteer
To help defeat Prop 188
and stop Philip Morris,
call1-800-ACS-2345
Working to Defeat Prop. 188
City, State, Zip
*Califomia law requires this information for fNery contribution.
Coolition for a Healthy California, No on 188,
a committee of health, environmental and
educational organizations.
1-800-ACS-234S
Call for information and
to make a donation
What is Proposition 1881
Prop. 188 is the tobacco industry's plan to roll
back successful efforts to create smoke free
environments, and prevent any future progress
in limiting our exposure to dangerous second
hand smoke. Prop. 188 replaces strong anti-
smoking laws with a weak statewide measure
that permits smoking in restaurants, workplaces
and public places.
"~~rnlng: Proposition 188 is hazardous to your health. Philip Morris ... is spending
millions of dollars to pass Proposition 188 to protect industry profits. It should be called
the 'The Tobacco Industry Protection Act.''' c. Everett Koop. MD
Surgeon General
US Public Health Service, 1987 -7 989
Prop. 188 Contains
"Phony" Protections for Children
CIties and Counties
Oppose Prop. 188
These cities and counties passed resolutions
against Prop. 188.
. Increases exposure of workers and the pub-
lic to cancer-causing secondhand smoke.
. Repeals California's new statewide smoke-
free law and the California Indoor Clean Air
Act of 1976.
. Permits smoking in restaurants (25% of
seating) if ventilation standards are met
and signs are posted.
. Permits smoking in workplaces: private
offices, conference rooms and 25% of
employee cafeteria space if certain ventila-
tion standards are met
. Ventilation standards require removal of the
smell of smoke, not the harmful chemicals.
. Increases some penalties for selling tobacco
to children, but eliminates key investigation
and enforcement techniques.
. Bans tobacco billboards within 500 feet of a
school, but billboards are best viewed from
that distance. No restrictions on tobacco
marketing to children at "eye level." Joe
Camel window displays can be anywhere.
. Prohibits community groups from conduct-
ing "sting" operations to test compliance
with laws against tobacco sales to minors.
Requires already overburdened police to
enforce teen tobacco laws.
Prop. 188 Sacrifices Public Health
Prop. 188 Costs Money and Lives
Studies show that Prop. 188 will have enormous
health and Financial costs.
. 1,400 additional smoking-related deaths
per year
. 1 million more workers exposed to second-
hand smoke
. $110 million in increased direct medical
costs per year due to smoking
. $1 million per year in costs to the State of
California to administer 188
Prop. 188 Outlaws Local Control
. Eliminates 300 local anti-smoking ordi-
nances covering a majority of cities in
California.
. Prohibits local communities from passing
any tobacco control ordinances in the
future.
. Prohibits local communities from regulating
tobacco advertising aimed at children.
Beverly Hills Menlo Park San Francisco
Burlingame Monterey San lose
Davis County San Luis
Del Mar Moorpark Obispo
EI Cajon Oakland County ,
Fremont Ojai Santa Clara ~
Gilroy Pasadena Santa Clara
County ,
Huntington Rancho ~
Park Mirage Santa Cruz
Laguna Beach Rohnert Park Santa Cruz ~
Lodi Roseville County
Long Beach Sacramento Sunnyvale
Los Angeles Sacramento Union City
County Walnut Creek
San Diego
The League of California Cities is urging No on
7881 Before it's over, hundreds of communities
will reject Prop. 188 and the tobacco industry's
attempt to prohibit local control.
...plus $65 million In extra profits
for the tobacco Industry
"This initiative is a deception, plain
and simple, a fraud upon the public ...
a sham to be scorned and rejected."
Los Angeles Times
April 77, 1994
Add your city or county's name to
the list. For a sample No on Prop.
188 endorsement resolution, call:
1-800-ACS-2345
Coalition for a Healthy California
c/o American Lung Association
2750 Fourth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92103
Attention: Debbie Kelley
It's Time t() nUht l3at:k...And Crush the T()bat:t:() Vat:k%
o Please place (name of individual or
organization) on your list of those who are opposed to the Philip Morris initiative,
entitled Smoking and Tobacco Products. Statewide Regulation.
o I am enclosing/sending a contribution of $ for the Public Education Campaign.
o Contact me with more information on how I can help out.
Name
Title
Street Address
City
Day Phone
Organization
FAX
State CA
Zip
5/:;..//
~'t.
~~
SouthwEstern
College
~-"''''-'~' ,.,..,_.".~. -,
P /5\ r; ,1'7 f; ;'~1
[rj 1.~~~.1.6~~:'] W I
. ctry' Cl~~~\~!~l r;". "Ie\.,
CH~llA It,S fA. CA
Josepf1 M Conte
Supennten deilt /Prcsident
,
"ECEIVED
.,. U 31 P 3 :.40
IH [~~~~~~~t AUGUST
\'
23/ 1994
GovernIng Board
Augie BOr9rlt>
Bill BlanK, J D
G Gordon Browf'I'llig. DN,D
JcrryJ Griffith
rl.oriO Neves-Permo.,
THE HONORABLE TIM NADER, MAYOR
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 FOURTH AVENUE
CHULA VISTA, CA 91910
DEAR MAYOR NADER:
FOR THE PAST SEVERAl, YEARS I HAVE INDICATED TO CITY OFFICIALS THAT THE
INTERSECTIONS OF OTAY LAKES ROAD AND ELMHURST STREET AND OTAY LAKES
ROAD AND GOTHAM STREET ARE EXTREMELY DANGEROUS, NOT A SEl1ESTtR PASSES
WITHOUT AT LEAST ONE SERIOUS VEHICULAR OR PEDESTRIAN ACCIDENT OCCURING
AT BOTH LOCATIONS. THESE ACCIDENTS DO NOT ONLY INVOLVE COLLEGE STU-
DENTS, BUT LOCAL RESIDENTS AS WELL.
AGAIN, TODAY, A VERY SERIOUS VEHICULAR AtCIDENT TOOK PLACE AT THE
INTERSEC1'ION OF OTAY LAKES ROAD AND ELMHURST S1'REET, THE ACCI Df,NT
INVOLVED 1'HRl-;E VEHICLES AND INCLUDED DRIVEI( INJURIES / !<.S 'tli;U. AS
SEVERE VEHICULAR DAMAGE.
AS I HAVE REPEATEDLY SAID TO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND ClTY
STAFF I BOTH THE EU1HURST AND GOTHAl1 INTERSECTIONS ARE "ACC I DENTS
WAITING TO HAPPEN." THE COLLEGE COMMUNITY APPRECIlI'fED YOUR EFFORTS TO
ATTEMPT EMERGENCY ACTION REGARDING THE INSTALLA'rION OF A SIGNAl, LIGH'l'
AT OTAY LAKES ROAD AND GOTHAM STREET; HOWEVER, IT IS BECOMING In-
CREASINGLY APPARENT 'fRAFFIC LIGHTS ARE NEEDED AT BOTH THE ELMHJnST AnD
GOTHAM STREET INTERSECTIONS. ---
Cc
IN THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC SAFETY I IMPLORE YOU AND THE ME~lBERS OF THF:
CITY COUNCIL 1'0 RECONSIDER AND MOVE POSTHASTr: TO INSTALL TRAFFIC
SIGNAL LIGHTS AT THESE TWO INTERSECTIONS TO PREVENT FUTURE SERIOUS
ACCIDENTS AND THE POSSIBLE r.oSS OF HUI,IAN LIFE,
: . _ ('1)4CERELY /
~ r;y.-- . . ~ - I' ( ~
. ~ . ... . , O!~,,-I1A.. VWA-
(;-- h ? tP~J'lIRr" . ~l". ' , ~. ~~~.~.. N~EN~~~~7PRESIDENT
~~~:A~EMBERS OF ::E GO!!~~~ B~9MMUNICATIOI~S
MEMBERS OF CHULA VISTA CITY -:&:-, ~
COUNCIL c::/- ( '7 ~ A .
CHULA VISTA CITY MANAGER ,/,,:9';/
STAR-NEWS
f'~ .. /
482-6301
900 OIOY lakes Rood .Chulo Vista, CA 91910. (619) @l-&7-OO >AX (619) 421.0346 . Southwestern Cornrnuc, tv College D"tri~/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
~I
~/
&II
~_/
,
ITEMf"J'lE: ORDINANCE 2598
~/
~/
VI
Q_!
~
r:Jt; SUBMITTED BY: DIRECTOR OF PERSONNFf \ I
REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAGER~ ~~\ (4/5th Vote: Yes_ No.X">
This is a clean up item to correct a procedural error in the adoption of Ordinance
2591. On May 3, 1994, the City Council adopted Resolution 17467, declaring the
City's intent to amend its contract with the Public Employees' Retirement System
(PERS) to include the optional benefit known as Military Service Credit as Public
Service for local miscellaneous and local safety members. The City had agreed to
provide this benefit in the Memorandums of Understanding with all bargaining units.
On that same date, an ordinance was placed on first reading to begin the amendment
process, then the ordinance was placed on the May 10, 1994 agenda for adoption.
PERS law requires a period of a least twenty days between the first reading and the
adoption of an ordinance to amend the contract. The Personnel Department was
notified of the deficiency by letter from PERS on July 26, 1994. In order to amend
the contract, as was agreed with the employee associations, Ordinance 2591 must
be rescinded and a new ordinance placed on first reading, then adopted at least
twenty days later.
ITEM (p
MEETING DATE .~YaY9t 9. 1334 q 1<t.(41
Rescinding Ordinance 2591 of the City of Chula
Vista authorizing an Amendment to the Contract
Between the City of Chula Vista and the Board of
Administration of the California Public Employees'
Retirement System.
RECOMMENDATION: Rescind Ordinance 2591 and place the attached ordinance on
first reading. The second reading will be on the September 6, 1994 agenda. The
amendment will take effect on October 7, 1994.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION: Personnel staff is unaware of any pending retirements where an
employee would be adversely affected by this delay in implementation. Personnel has
notified the employee associations of the delay and its cause.
FISCAL IMPACT: Was discussed in May 3, 1994 staff report. This benefit is
intended to be funded entirely by the individual employees using it. There is a
potential for a negligible increase or decrease in future unfunded liability due to
actuarial variables.
[A"3\RES.ORl
l.::, - I
MEMORANDUM
DATE;
July 27, 1994
JOHN GOSS, CITY MANAGER
CANDY BOSHELL, DIRECTOR OF PERSONNE~
TERRI MCFARLAND, RISK MANAGER~
PERS AMENDMENT - MILITARY SERVICE AS PUBLIC SERVICE
TO:
VIA;
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The 1993-94 MOUs contained a provision that the City would adopt
the above contract amendment prior to the end of last fiscal year.
The item was addressed by the City Council at their meeting of May
3, 1994. Unfortunately, the city Clerk placed the adoption of the
ordinance on the May 10 agenda rather than the May 23 agenda.
PERS notified the City on July 26, 1994, that the ordinance was
defective because less than 20 days had lapsed between the first
reading and the adoption. The ordinance needs to be rescinded and
a new ordinance adopted.
The Risk Manager has consulted with the City Clerk and they have
scheduled the first reading for August 9, 1994 and the adoption for
September 6, 1994. The amendment would then be effective on
October 7, 1994.
We are unaware of any employee who has been adversely affected by
this delay in amending the contract. The associations have been
notified of the delay by letter.
amendmem
Ie:, .. ;l
~
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 27, 1994
TO: All Bargaining Units & Mid-Managers
FROM: Candy Boshell, Director of Personnel qy-
SUBJECT: PERS AMENDMENT FOR MILITARY SERVICE AS PUBLIC SERVICE.
The Personnel Department presented this contract amendment to the City Council on
May 3, 1994 with an intent to have the amendment take effect on June 24, 1994.
Unfortunately, we were advised by PERs on July 26, 1994 that the Ordinance was
unacceptable to PERS because of the timing of the first reading and the adoption of
the ordinance.
This error was due to a lack of communication between this department and the City
Clerk's office. It is not believed that any bargaining unit member has been adversely
affected by this error.
The item has been placed on the Council agenda for August 9th and September 6,
1994. The new estimated effective date is October 7, 1994.
IA 113\RES.ORJ
~-3
I
ORDINANCE NO. 2598
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE BOARD
OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND RESCINDING
ORDINANCE NO. 2591
The city Council of the City of Chula vista does ordain as
follows:
Section 1. That an amendment to the contract between the city
Council of the city of Chula vista of the City of Chula vista and
the Board of Administration, California Public Employees'
Retirement system, known as document number C094-066, a copy of
which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, is hereby
authorized and by such reference made a part hereof as though
herein set out in full.
section 2. The Mayor of the City of Chula vista is hereby
authorized, empowered, and directed to execute said amendment for
and on behalf of said Agency.
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect thirty day.s after
the date of its adoption, and prior to the expiration of fifteen
days from the passage thereof shall be published at least once in
the Chula vista Star News, a newspaper of general circulation,
published and circulated in the City of Chula vista and thencefcrth
and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
candy Boshell
Director of Personnel
~..'f
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 2-
Meeting Date 09/06/94
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution: /7/,J"I Approving the 18th Amendment to the Agreement
between the City Chula Vista and the San Diego Unified Port District for
grounds and comfort station maintenance.
Director of Parks and Recreati~..:r:t!.
City Manager.j~ ~ ~'"\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes _ No.xJ
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
On September 7, 1993, the City Council approved Resolution No. 17244 which authorized the 17th
Amendment to an agreement with the San Diego Unified Port District for grounds and comfort station
maintenance at the "J" Street Marina, Bayside Park, and the landscape medians on Tidelands.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution to approve the 18th Amendment to the
agreement, and authorize the Mayor to execute the Amendment to the agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: The "J" Street Marina and Bayside Park FY 94/95 budget of $234,220 was approved
and adopted by Council on June 21, 1994. A copy of the proposed budget was sent to the San Diego
Port District Maintenance Division. In reviewing the budget, the Port District staff requested two
adjustments. First, a reduction in the City's EquiDment Maintenance Account (5269) of $8,330 because
a new tri-plex mower was approved to replace the existing mower incurring excessive maintenance cost.
Secondly, the Port requested the Department to investigate the estimated cost of the new tri-plex mower.
The cost of a tri-plex mower was adjusted from $18,000 in the approved budget, to $17,360, reflecting
a savings of $640. The two reductions reduced the operating budget to $224,720. The Port District
approved the agreement, with the revised budget, through Port District Resolution No. 94-260 on July
26, 1994.
The agreement for FY 94/95 provides the same level of maintenance with an administrative overhead
charge of $63,960. The overhead amount is included in the maintenance agreement for a total contract
of $288,680.
The agreement requires the Port District to reimburse the City the approved budget amount on a quarterly
basis beginning on July I, 1994.
Exhibit "A" of the attached contract includes a copy of the budgets approved by Council for FY 92/93
and FY 93/94, and the new fiscal year budget approved on June 21, 1994; and the agreement to cover
the 12-month period from July I, 1994 through June 30, 1995.
FISCAL IMPACT: The revenues from this agreement will fully reimburse the City's operating
expenditures of $224,720 and administrative overhead of $63,960 budgeted in FY 94/95.
Attachment:
18th Amendment to the Agreement
A:\JERRY\MARINA,A13
August 31, 1994
7~1
RESOLUTION NO.
I 'J(,JIf
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE 18TH AMENDMENT TO
THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT FOR
GROUNDS AND COMFORT STATION MAINTENANCE AT THE
lIJlI STREET MARINA BAYSIDE PARK AND ADJACENT
LANDSCAPE MEDIANS
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 17244 authorized the 17th
Amendment to an Agreement with the San Diego Unified Port District
for grounds and comfort station maintenance at "J" Street Marina,
Bayside, and the landscape medians on Tidelands during fiscal year
1993-94; and
WHEREAS, the new agreement for FY 1994-95 was reviewed by
the Port District Manager who recommended approval to the Port
District Commission for adoption at its July 26, 1994 meeting; and
WHEREAS, the agreement for 1994-95 provides the same
level of maintenance with a mutually-agreed administrative overhead
(full cost recovery) of $63,960, which the City receives into the
General Fund.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the city of Chula vista does hereby approve the Eighteenth
Amendment to an Agreement between the City of Chula vista and the
San Diego Unified Port District for grounds and comfort station
maintenance at the "J" Street Marina, Bayside Park and adjacent
medians in San Diego Unified Port District Property, 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
Chula vista be, and he is hereby authoriz and dir
said Agreement for and on behalf of th~ ci Y of C
"t O=:J
of the City of
t.ed to execute
a vista.
Presented by
Booga
Jess Valenzuela, Director of
Parks and Recreation
C:\Rs\Port.18
7-';'"
EIGHTEENTH AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT FOR
GROUNDS AND COMFORT STATION MAINTENANCE AT THE 'J' STREET
MARINA, BAYSIDE PARK AND ADJACENT MEDIANS IN SAN DIEGO
UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT PROPERTY
THIS AMENDED AGREEMENT, made and entered into this _ day of ,1994
by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called 'CITY', and
THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT, a political subdivision of the State of California,
hereinafter called 'DISTRICT';
W !IN g~~gI H~
WHEREAS, the San Diego Unified Port District and the City of Chula Vista executed an
agreement for maintenance of Port District property at the "J" Street Marina on September 28, 1977, and
WHEREAS, said agreement provided for the extension and amendment of the agreement when
mutually consented to by the parties, and
WHEREAS, both parties mutually agree to extend said agreement and to expand the maintenance
area.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED by and between the
parties as follows:
1. MAINTENANCE TO BE PROVIDED
See attached Exhibit A.
2. AREAS TO BE MAINTAINED
See attached Exhibit B.
3. EXCEPTIONS TO DUTIES
It is understood and agreed that the cost for maintenance as set forth in Paragraph 1 of
this agreement does not cover materials, or labor, or repairs of the structures, building
or landscaping as a result of major vandalism or destruction from any cause whatsoever.
Such repairs or replacement shall be considered to be over and above ordinary
maintenance and will be performed by City forces only after approval by the District and
actual costs for material and labor involved in such repairs will be billed to the District.
Major vandalism shall be defmed as anyone-time cost (including material and labor)
amounting to more than $500.00
4. CONSIDERATION
In consideration for the City's maintenance of the area defined in attached Exhibit B for
fiscal year 1994 - 1995, the District shall pay to the City $288,680. Payment to be made
quarterly on July 1 and October I, 1994 and January I and April I, 1995.
?;J
5. TERM AND TERMINATION
The term of this amendment shall be for the fiscal year from July I, 1994 to and
including June 3D, 1995, provided, however, either party may terminate this agreement
at any time by giving the other party notice in writing sixty (60) days prior to the date
of termination. It is further provided that said agreement may be renewed each fiscal
year subject to the same sixty (60) day termination provision and subject to mutual
agreement between the parties as to the annual consideration to be paid by District for
said services for said fiscal year. In the event that employee salaries have not been
established for the fiscal year, the parties agree that the consideration shall be adjusted
retroactively from July 1 to the time salaries are established. Said retroactive adjustment
shall be effective upon written notice by the Director of Parks and Recreation to the Port
District.
6. HOLD HARMLESS
District agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Chula Vista 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.
City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the San Diego Unified Port District 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.
7. INSURANCE
A. District shall, throughout the duration of this Agreement maintain comprehensive
general liability and property damage insurance covering all operations hereunder
of District, its agents and employees including but not limited to premises and
automobile, with minimum coverage of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000)
combined single limits. Evidence of such coverage, in the form of a letter
indicating self-insurance shall be submitted to the City Clerk at 276 Fourth
Avenue.
Said Policy or policies shall provide thirty (30) day written notice to the City
Clerk of the City of Chula Vista of cancellation or material change.
City shall, throughout the duration of this Agreement maintain comprehensive
general liability and property damage insurance covering all operations hereunder
of City, its agents and employees including but not limited to premises and
automobile, with minimum coverage of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000)
combined single limits. Evidence of such coverage, in the form of a Certificate
7,"/
of Insurance and Policy Endorsement which names the District as Additional
Insured, shall be submitted to the San Diego Unified Port District, P.O. Box
488, San Diego, CA 92112.
Said Policy or policies shall provide thirty (30) day written notice to the San
Diego Unified Port Dist.rict of cancellation or material change.
B. City shall also carry Worker's Compensation insurance in the statutoty amount
and Employer's Liability coverage in the amount of $500,000; evidence of which
is to be furnished to District in the form of Certificate of Insurance.
8. ATTORNEYS FEES
In the event of any dispute between the parties, the prevailing party shall recover its
attorney fees, and any costs and expenses incurred by reason of such dispute.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed the day
and year first above written.
.. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
Mayor of the City of Chula Vista
by: Assistant Port Director
ATTEST
City Clerk
Approved as to form by
Approved as to form by
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney
Joseph D. Patello, Port Attorney
A:\JERRY\AMNDMNT.PRT
July I, 1994
7,5
EXHIBIT' A'
MAINTENANCE PROVIDED FOR 'J' STREET MARINA, BAYSIDE PARK, LANDSCAPE
LANDSCAPE MEDIANS
I. Employee Services 1992-1993 1993-1994 1994-1995
5101 Salaries & Wages $112,395 $111,810 $113,860
5103 Overtime 1,800 1,720 2,180
5105 Hourly Wages 11,240 11,130 11,130
5131 Sick Leave Pay-in-Lieu - 390 390
5141 Retirement Contribution 16,333 17,310 17,470
5142 Employee Benefit Plan 22,296 21,090 21,620
5143 Medicare Contribution - City 883 910 930
5144 Worker's Compensation 230 - -
5145 PARS Contribution - City 422 420 420
I TOTAL I 165,599 I 164,780 I 168,000 I
ll. Supplies & Services 1992-1993 1993-1994 1994-1995
5252 Telepbone 250 220 220
5253 Trash Collection 4,500 5,140 5,140
5268 Service to Maintain Other Equipment 390 390 390
5269 Equipment Maintenance - City Forces 12,340 14,740 5,990
5281 Laundry & Cleaning Service 660 660 660
5298 Other Contractual Services 8,830 7,980 7,980
5302 Janitorial Supplies 2,220 2,200 2,200
5304 Wearing Apparel 360 360 360
5341 Small Tools 210 210 210
5351 Landscape Supplies 7,940 7,940 7,940
5362 Materials to Maintain Buildings, Street & 10,470 6,270 6,270
Grounds
5398 Other Equipment - - -
TOTAL 48,150 46,110 37,360
A:IJERRY\PRTMAINT.594
July I. 1994
?-/,
ID. Capital Equipment I 1992-1993 I 1993-1994 I 1994-1995
I 5568 Other Equipment I 1,090 I -! 19,360 !
TOTAL I 1,090 I -I 19,360
IV. Administrative Overhead 1992 - 1993 1993 - 1994 1994 - 1995
(.56171 x 113,860) 87,971 87,514 63,960
GRAND TOTAL 302,810 298,404 288,680
A:lJERRY\PRTMAINT.~94
July 1,1994
7-7
. I
..
.
.1
I
,. -
-)
'.
"
.1\
:'" it
. H STRE=
. ~ III
o .."
c.' "=
.. ...J;i . 0" rn
.... < rn
. '. :. ~ ~, ~
.. c -<
. .-.
1TT1.I .
S.D. UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
?,,~
ExHIBIT "B"
.
. - ..
~IHADID AuAIINDICATZ
_AI~TIlfANC. A~U~ .
F STRErI
.
-.-. .
;
.
-.-. .
.
.
.
.
. ._-
.-="
~
. .
c ::!
c
-= ." :m
=a ,..
m. . >
== Z
. c
WAY en
. .
'.
-' .
.
.
.'
...1\.
Cla,o
.I.Y
.
STnE:T
MARINA
V1IW -
'ARIt
.
.
DUWN JY
MFS
DAlI
1115/92
..
o'
.
. .
. '.
,
.
.
. .
..
.
30751
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
DATE:
.Iu 1 Y 11. 1 q q 4
AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT FOR GROUNDS AND COMFORT
STATION MAINTENANCE AT THE "J" STREET MARINA, BAYSIDE PARK AND
LANDSCAPED MEDIANS OF TIDELANDS AVENUE BETWEEN SANDPIPER WAY
AND WEST "J" STREET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994/95
AGENDA SHEET
NO.
/J
I
SUBJECT:
FACTUAL BACKGROUND:
Since 1977 the District has had an annual Agreement with the City
of Chula Vista to provide for Grounds and Comfort Station
Maintenance at the "J" Street Marina. In Fiscal Year 1985-86,
maintenance for the Bayside Park and Tidelands Avenue median
landscaping between Sandpiper Way and West "J" Street was added to
the Agreement. The total of last year's Agreement was an amount
not to exceed $298,404.
This proposed Board action is not subject to CEQA, as amended.
ANALYSIS:
The City of Chula Vista has satisfactorily provided grounds and
comfort station maintenance at the "J" Street Marina, Bayside Park
and the Tidelands Avenue median landscaping between Sandpiper Way
and West "J" Street. Staff recommends the Contract be extended
another year. The Contract for the 1994/95 fiscal year is an
amount not to exceed $288,680.
The cost for providing the same level of service this year is
approximately $10,000 less than last year. The real savings are
approximately $30,000 because of $19,360 in new capital equipment
that was not in the FY93/94 budget. Most of these savings occur
from the revision of their administrative overhead rate from 0.7827
to 0.5616.
Funds have been provided in the 1994-95 budget.
PORT DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution authorizing Amendment to the Agreement with the
City of Chula Vista for Fiscal Year 1994/95 to provide landscaping
and maintenance services at the "J" Street Marina, Bayside Park and
the landscaped medians of Tidelands Avenue between Sandpiper way
and West "J" Street, in an amount not to exceed $288,680.
ACTION TAKEN: 07/26/94 - Res. 94-26Q
7.,9
UPD FORM NO. 021 C (:i/131
I
Re Authorization to Enter Into ]
]
Eighteenth Amendment to Agreement ]
]
with The City of Chula Vista. . . ]
]
RESOLUTION 94-260
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Port Commissioners of the
San Diego Unified Port District, as follows:
That the Port Director or his authorized representative is
hereby authorized to enter into an Eighteenth Amendment to Agree-
ment, on behalf of the District, with the City of Chula Vista
for grounds and comfort station maintenance at the J Street Marina,
Bayside Park, and adjacent landscape medians of Tidelands Avenue
between Sandpiper Way and West "J" Street, Chula Vista, for the
One (1) Year period commencing 1 July 1994 and ending 30 June
1995, for an amount not to exceed Two Hundred Eighty Eight
Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Dollars ($288,680.00).
ADOPTED this 26th day of
July
, 1994.
Presented By:
DON L. NAY, Port Director
BY/~~
SSISTANT FuRT DIRECTOR
Approved:
JOSEPH D. PATELLO, Port Attorney
caP~
sw
7/21/94
7~/tJ
I
San Diego Unified Port District
Office of the Clerk
CERTIFICATION OF VOTE
Passed and adopted by the Board of Port commissioners of the San Diego
Unified Port District on
July 26.
1994. by the following vote:
Commissioners
Yeas
Nays
Excused
Absent
Abstained
Clifford W. Graves
--1L
Susan Lew
x
J. Michael McDade
Ro:bert Penner
--1L
--1L
--1L
X
Paul H. Speer
Frank J. Urtasun
Jess Van Deventer
--1L
AUTHENTICATED BY:
.
'1- \. \ r
',M\le .(~~
Chairman ~\ the Board of Port Commissioners
CHRISTINE M. STEIN
Clerk of the San Diego Unified Port District
By: gO~r
rY? JUJ/h ~ jJ
Deputy Clerk
(Seal)
Resolution Number: 94-260
or
Ordinance Number:
Adopted: 07/26/94
?~I/
UPD Form 022 (Rev. 1/94)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item r-
Meeting Date 09/6/94
Resolution 17 b..:J5AuthoriZing staff to apply for state Defense
Adjustment Matching Grant funds
Community Developme?:?irector {_S.
City Manager~ ~ ~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes No Xl
Council Referral Number: N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
On July 19th, 1994 the City Council directed staff to prepare an application to the federal
Economic Development Administration (EDA) for funding of two Border Environmental
Commerce Alliance (BECA) initiatives - the Border Environmental Business Cluster and the
Border Environmental Technology Resource Center - and to seek matching State Defense
Adjustment Grant monies.
The Defense Adjustment Grant Program requires the submission of a resolution by Council
authorizing application for these state funds.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution authorizing staff to apply for
California Defense Adjustment Matching Grant Funds and to enter into a related agreement
with the California Trade and Commerce Agency.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Economic Development Commission
endorsed an application for EDA and related funds for the BECA on July 6, 1994. (vote 5-0-
2, with Brene Patrick and Liz Lebron absent, 2 vacancies)
DISCUSSION:
The California Defense Adjustment Matching Grant Program is designed to provide up to
$100,000 in matching funds for communities seeking federal funding of defense related
economic adjustment strategies and programs. Chula Vista will be seeking funds to help pay
the operational costs of the Border Environmental Technology Resource Center.
FISCAL IMPACT: The City is requesting $100,000 in state matching funds to supplement the
federal EDA grant. The state grant requires no direct City contribution. (The fiscal impact of
the overall EDA grant application will be addressed in a staff report that will accompany the
final EDA application, pending further EDA input and negotiations with Rohr, Inc., regarding
the incubator facility).
[C,IWP51ICOUNCIL\113SISTATE-1.113]
B'''I
RESOLUTION
17~:15'
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING STAFF TO APPLY FOR STATE DEFENSE ADJUSTMENT
MATCHING GRANT FUNDS
WHEREAS, the Border Environmental Alliance (BECA) program initiated by the
Chula Vista City Council is a regional program that is designed to encourage the development
and commercialization of environmental technologies and the start-up and expansion of
environmental companies; and
WHEREAS, the BECA initiatives, including a Border Environmental Technology
Resource Center and a Border Environmental Business Cluster (Incubator), will support and
expand the San Diego area's ongoing economic defense conversion efforts; and
WHEREAS, BECA programs have been endorsed by numerous state and local
governments, academic institutions, private environmental businesses, Chambers of
Commerce, and environmental and economic development organizations; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista is working with the City of San Diego to
secure federal Economic Development Administration funds for these programs; and
WHEREAS, the federal Economic Development Administration application
requires matching funds and the BECA program meets all of the requirements of the Defense
Adjustment Matching Grant Program and is consistent with its goals of job creation and
economic conversion to mitigate the impacts of defense cutbacks.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does
hereby find, order, determine and resolve that the Community Development Director is hereby
authorized and empowered to apply, approve, sign, and execute in the name of the City of
Chula Vista any documents necessary for applying for funding under the California Trade and
Commerce Agency's Defense Adjustment Matching Grant Program and for entering into an
agreement, including any amendment thereto, with the Trade and Commerce Agency in the
event that funding is awarded under that program in such form as is approved by the City
Attorney.
~~
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
,,"~tf:'~;d ~
City Attorney
PRESENTED BY:
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
IC:\WP51\COUNCIL\RESOS\STATE-1.RESI
'1''';1...
MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Wednesday, July 6,1994
12:00 Noon
Conference Rooms 2&3
Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 12:10 p.m.
DRAFT
Chair Tuchscher introduced the newest member on the Commission, Mr. Glen Lewis. Mr. Lewis
was appointed as an ex-officio member. Mr. Lewis gave a brief summary of his qualifications
and experience.
PRESENT:
Chair Tuchscher; Members Davis, Compton, Peter, Read, ex officiis Sutherland,
Sellgren, Munch, Councilman Moore
ABSENT:
Members Patrick (unexcused), Lebron; ex officio Clark (unexcused)
OTHERS:
Principal Planner Griffin, Public Infonnation Coordinator Gulbransen, Economic
Development Manager Dye, CD Specialist II Valenzuela
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 4 and June 1, 1994
MSC (Davis/Peter) to approve the minutes as submitted (5-0-4; Patrick, Lebron absent; 2
vacancies).
2. NEW BUSINESS
a. Border Environmental Commerce Alliance Update
Cheryl Dye described the efforts currently underway to develop an Economic Development
Administration (EDA) grant application. She explained that staff will present the draft
preproposal to the City Council on July 19 for their approval. The application has two major
components: the BETRC (Border Environmental Technology Resource Center) and the BEBC
(Border Environmental Business Cluster). The Chula Vista EDA application is being developed
so as to build on efforts in the City of San Diego. The City of San Diego has received
approximately $6,000,000 in EDA support for a regional economic development program. The
major areas that the City of San Diego is pursuing include the following: a high-tech council, a
high-tech resource center, a world trade center, a high tech incubator and a seed capital fund.
There are two major components of Chula Vista's program. The BETRC, which is going to
expand San Diego's efforts geographically by creating a satellite technology resource center to
South Bay businesses and to provide specialized environmental technical support county-wide.
A unique feature of this technology resource center would be its ability to further cross-border
relations and the potential for exports. The BECA is also closely aligned with San Diego's
regional efforts. It will be an incubator facility to house 20 - 25 start-up businesses that have
been in business for less than two years and that qualify as an environmental business.
Generally, qualification means that a business would 1) create products which help the
environment, 2) provide services to business which help the environment or 3) utilize
environmentally sound processes in manufacturing.
Ms. Dye further went on to explain some of the details contained within the EDA application.
She stated that the application will be for roughly $2.6 million in funding. This would support
two to three years of the program. The application is not only a local effort but brings together
various other entities state, regional and local to make this effort possible. The $2.6 million
request requires that the City provide a certain level of matching funds. That funding can be
cash or in-kind services. One in-kind source is the state, which has agreed to provide access to
the environmental technology clearinghouse as well as to provide training to the program's
businesses in the areas of pollution prevention. The City of San Diego's high tech incubator
will be cross referring interested parties to our incubator and vice versa to service the high tech
industry as well as the environmental industry. Southwestern College has also agreed to
provide business development assistance through their Small Business Development and
~':J
Minutes, EDC
2
July 6, 1994
International Trade Center. UCSD Connect will provide access to various venture capital
sources.
DRAF
The City is also pursuing a state defense adjustment matching grant of $100,000. The
probability of our receiving this funding is very high because of how well our program matches
the objectives of their program. The program is designed to match Federal monies coming into
the area for conversion of defense industries into other commercially viable businesses. Finally,
a critical component of this application is the donation of a vacant Rohr facility to house the
BETRC & BEBC.
<
Ms. Dye further explained that staff will be seeking conceptual support from the San Diego High-
Tech Council on July 14. We need to obtain their approval of this program before submitting a
final application to the Economic Development Agency.
Discussion between various members of the Commission ensued regarding the types of cash
and in-kind funding available. Ms. Dye explained that two sources of potential cash match
include Community Development Block Grant funding and rental revenue from the incubator
facility which will be set at a lower than market rate. Staff will evaluate various options before
making any recommendation to Council in this regard.
Commissioner Read requested that staff explain how the $100,000 CDBG allocation, from Fiscal
Year 1993/94, was being used. Ms. Dye explained that Council authorized $100,000 allocation to
develop the Border Environmental Commerce Alliance by retaining the services of a director.
Council subsequently authorized using $20,000 of the funds to retain two consultants who serve
as the interim directors for the program currently and the City Manager authorized $4,800 for an
additional consultant who is providing assistance in preparing the EDA application. Fifty
thousand dollars was made available to fund these activities immediately and another $50,000
was to be made available when matching funds were obtained from outside sources. Currently
approximately $55,000 remain unencumbered in this fund.
Chairman Tuchscher clarified that the support being sought by staff is conceptual approval for
the program and the application that is being developed.
MOTION
(Peter/Compton) to recommend that Council direct staff to move forward with the development /
of an application to pursue EDA funding as well as related endorsements and contributions. .........
Mr. Read questioned the motion, stating that it sounds like the EDC is endorsing the final
application.
Chair Tuchscher explained again that the EDC is recommending that Council pursue the
completion and development of an application.
Mr. Read asked if staff had the appropriate talents and time to be able to do this without any
additional expenditures of money. Ms. Dye responded that this is being handled as a Council
priority.
VOTE ON MOTION:
The motion passed !HI-4 (Patrick & Lebron absent; 2 vacancies).
<
b. Design Review
Steve Griffin, Principal Planner reported that Council had directed staff to start on a program to
update the design manual and the process of streamlining, that is, to amend the code to allow a
greater number of projects to be considered by staff as opposed to always using the Design
Review Committee. This would be a shorter, less expensive process. He was asking for
endorsement of the Design Review Manual from the EDC.
Mr. Read commended the Committee on the manual. His only concern was to ensure staff's
increased flexibility. He noted they have spent many g..";~ing to maintain a "user friendly"
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY:
Item ,
Meeting Date 09/06/94
Resolution 17t.1 ~rebY authorizing the submittal of an application
to the California State Department of Housing and Community
Development for funding under the Building Equity and Growth in
Neighborhoods (BEGIN) Program; the execution of a standard agreement
if selected for such funding and any amendments thereto; and any related
documents necessary to participate in the BEGIN Program.
Community DevelOpmr(~irector L, S J
City Manager..l1 bA ~)
U (4/5ths Vote: Yes No---.X)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) had made available
federal funds for the BEGIN Program. BEGIN is operated as a model program with funding
from the Home Investment Partnership Program authorized by the Cranston-Gonzalez National
Affordable Housing Act of 1990. Staff is seeking approval from the City Council to compete
for this funding which, under this Notice of Funding from the State, makes available $5.7
million state-wide.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt the resolution authorizing the submittal of an application to the
California State Department of Housing and Community Development for funding under the
BEGIN Program.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
State HCD is providing BEGIN funds to cities and counties for use as assistance for low-income
first-time homebuyers. BEGIN funds may be provided to homebuyers for (1) downpayment
assistance, (2) closing cost assistance, and/or (3) second mortgages.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City in applying to the State for BEGIN funding, could receive an estimated $100,000 to
$500,000 in funding for first-time homebuyers.
9-//1- Z,
RESOLUTION
1763 (,
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
HEREBY AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE
CALIFORNIAST A TE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FOR FUNDING UNDER THE BUILDING EQUITY AND GROWTH IN NEIGHBORHOODS
PROGRAM; THE EXECUTION OF A STANDARD AGREEMENT IF SELECTED FOR
SUCH FUNDING AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO; AND ANY RELATED
DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE BEGIN PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista, a political subdivision of the State of
California, wishes to apply for and receive an allocation of funds through the Building Equity
and Growth in Neighborhoods Program (BEGIN); and,
WHEREAS, the California Department of Housing and Community Development
has issued a Notice of Funding Availability for the BEGIN Program and is authorized to approve
funding allocations which will be made available directly through the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to be used for the purpose set forth in Title II of the
Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, the implementing regulations set
forth in Title 24 of the code of Federal Regulations, part 92, and Title 25 of the California Code
of Regulations commencing with section 8200; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista wishes to submit an application to obtain
from the Department an allocation of BEGIN funds;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA does hereby find, order, determine, and resolve as follows:
I. The City of Chula Vista shall submit to the Department an application to
participate in the BEGIN Program in response to the NOF A issued on July
26, 1994 which will request a funding allocation for the funding of a first-
time homebuyers program in the City of Chula vista.
2. If the application for funding is approved, the City of Chula Vista hereby
agrees to use BEGIN funds for eligible activities in the manner presented
in the application as approved by the Department of Housing and
Community Development and in accordance with regulations cited above.
It also may execute any and all other instruments necessary or required by
the Department of Housing and Community Development or HUD for
participation in the BEGIN Program as are approved by the City Manager
and City Attorney.
3. The City of Chula Vista authorizes the Community Development Director
to execute in the name of the City of Chula Vista, the application, the
?..:J
Standard Agreement, and all other documents required by the Department
or HUD for participation in the BEGIN Program, and any amendments
thereto in such form as is approved by the City Attorney.
Submitted by
A"Z th. TJJ
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
'1,,1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item /,p
Meeting Date 9/6/94
Resolution 17 t. J? Accepting bids and awarding contract for the
"Construction of atay Town Area Street Improvements, Phases II & III
in the City of Chula Vista, CA (R -204)"
Director of Public Wor t;.
'-~ ;;:;
City Manager--JG (j ---7 (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No_XJ
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
At 2:00 p.m. on August 3, 1994, the Director of Public Works received sealed bids for the
construction of Otay Town Area Street Improvements, Phases II & III (RD-204). The work to
be done includes the installation of street lights, monolithic curb, gutter and sidewalks, asphalt
concrete paving, new driveways, and other work as may be necessary to render the above
improvements complete and workable.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution accepting bids and awarding
contract to ABC Construction Co. in the amount of $343,990.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
During the FY 1993-94 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget process, Council approved
additional funding for the atay Town Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP). This
program basically had the goal of providing basic public improvements to the atay Community.
The additional funding represented the third and final implementation phase of the Neighborhood
Revitalization Program.
In the course of designing the improvements for this project, staff met with the property owners
on Wednesday, June 8, 1994, to brief them on the proposed improvements, address any
concerns and take recommendations on various aspects of the project. All the property owners
in attendance supported the City's efforts in getting this project done.
Bid Results
This project was advertised for competitive bidding for a one month period beginning July 9,
1994. During this period, 22 sets of plans were purchased and on the bid opening date, bids
were submitted by 4 contractors. The bids received are as follows:
/~ ., /
Page 2, Item /1)
Meeting Date 9/6/94
Contractor Bid Amount
1. ABC Construction Co. - San Diego, CA $343,990.00
2. L. R. Hubbard Construction Co. - San Diego, CA 417,794.32
3. Wier Construction Corporation - Escondido, CA 439,896.94
4. Carolyn E. Scheidel Contractors - La Mesa, CA 443,735.00
The low bid by ABC Construction Co. is below the engineer's estimate of $397,535 by $53,545
or 13.47 percent.
In reviewing the bids, staff had two major concerns:
1. That the contractor satisfactorily met the project's Disadvantaged Business Enterprises
(DBE) requirements which includes both minority and women-owned business
enterprises, and;
2. That the contractor demonstrated to staff that they have constructed similar projects
satisfactorily.
Staff has conducted a background and past performance evaluation and determined that the low
bidder, ABC Construction, has met these requirements and has the resources to complete the
project on schedule and within budget. We have reviewed the bid and recommend awarding the
contract to ABC Construction, San Diego. A copy of Contractor's Disclosure Statement is
attached.
Disadvanta~ed Business Entell'rise Goals
The bid documents for this project requires the contractor to have Disadvantaged Business
Enterprises perform 15 % of the work or show a good faith effort by the Contractor to solicit
such participation. Juan Arroyo, Housing Coordinator, has reviewed ABC Construction's effort
to meet DBE participation requirements for the Dtay Town Area (Phases II & III) Street
Improvement Project. ABC Construction Company's proposal included 17 % DBE participation.
His conclusion is that ABC Construction Co. has met the DBE participation goal.
This project is funded by various CDBG funds. The prevailing wage scales as those determined
by the Federal Department of Labor Relations are applicable to the work to be done. The
Contractor is obligated to pay the federal wage determination (hourly rate plus fringe benefits)
for each craft of classification.
Environmental Status
The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this project is categorically
exempt under Class 1 Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act.
/~ .,~
Page 3, Item II?
Meeting Date 9/6/94
Financial Statement
Funds Required for Construction
A. Contract Amount $343,990.00
B. Contingencies (approximately 10 % ) 52,805.30
C. Staff Costs (approximately 10%) 34,400.00
D. Relocation of Water Facilities (approximate) 44,200.00
E. Electric Services for Street Lights 60,000.00
Total Funds Required for Construction $535,395.30
Funds Available for Construction
A. Otay Neighborhood Revitalization Program Funds - RD-204 $535,395.30
The funds required for the relocation of water facilities are for the one-half share of these costs.
Sweetwater Authority is responsible for the other one-half share of cost. The funds required for
the electric service for street lights will be paid to San Diego Gas and Electric to pay our costs
of the new service required for the street lights.
FISCAL IMPACT: The primary source of funding for this project is Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Funds. Additional funding for this program was budgeted from
Redevelopment Agency Low and Moderate Project Funds. The construction of this project
represents the final phase of the implementation of the Neighborhood Revitalization Program.
Upon completion of the project, it will require routine City maintenance involving street
sweeping, replacement of street light bulbs, etc.
SA:File:AO-089
m:\home\engineer\agenda\RD204.ac
/P~;J
RESOLUTION NO. 17/';)?
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING
CONTRACT FOR THE "CONSTRUCTION OF OTAY TOWN
AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS, PHASES II & III IN
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (RD-204)"
WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on August 3, 1994, in Conference
Room 2 in the Public Services Building, the Director of Public
Works received the following four sealed bids for "Construction of
otay Town Area Street Improvements, Phases II & III in the City of
Chula vista:
Contractor Bid Amount
ABC Construction Co. - San Diego, CA $343,990.00
L. R. Hubbard Construction Co. - San Diego, CA 417,794.32
Wier Construction Corporation - Escondido, CA 439,896.94
Carolyn E. Scheidel Contractors - La Mesa, CA 443,735.00
WHEREAS, the low bid by ABC Construction Co. is below the
engineer's estimate of $397,535 by $53,545 or 13.47 percent; and
WHEREAS, in reviewing the bids, staff had two major
concerns:
1. That the contractor satisfactorily met the project's
Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) requirements
which includes both minority and women-owned business
enterprises, and;
2. That the contractor demonstrated to staff that they have
constructed similar projects satisfactorily.
WHEREAS, staff has conducted a background and past
performance evaluation and determined that the low bidder, ABC
construction, has met these requirements and has the resources to
complete the project on schedule and within budget and recommend
awarding the contract to ABC Construction, San Diego; and
WHEREAS, the bid documents for this project requires the
contractor to have Disadvantaged Business Enterprises perform 15%
of the work or show a good faith effort by the Contractor to
solicit such participation; and
1
11).,1
WHEREAS, ABC Construction Company's proposal included 17%
DBE participation and staff has concluded that ABC Construction Co.
has met the DBE participation goal; and
WHEREAS, this project is funded by various CDBG funds and
the prevailing wage scales, as determined by the Federal Department
of Labor Relations, are applicable to the work to be done with the
Contractor being obligated to pay the federal wage determination
(hourly rate plus fringe benefits) for each craft of
classification; and
WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has
determined that this project is categorically exempt under Class 1
section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, ORDER AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
section 1. That the
determination that this project is
1 section 15301 of the California
City Council concurs in the
categorically exempt under Class
Environmental Quality Act.
section 2. That the city Council does hereby accept the
bid of ABC Construction as responsive.
section 3. The City Council finds that ABC Construction
has clearly made good faith effort to comply with the DBE
participation goals required by Federal regulations for projects
using CDBG Funds, and has therefore satisfied the DBE participation
requirements and has complied with the City of Chula vista goals.
section 4. That City Council awards the contract for the
Otay Town Area Street Improvements, Phases II & II to ABC
Construction in the amount of $343,390, the lowest responsible
bidder which submitted a responsive bid to the approved
specifications.
section 5. The Mayor of the City of Chula vista is
hereby authorized and directed to execute said contrac for and on
behalf of the city of Chula vista.
Presented by
A pr vedA 'j)
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Bruce M.
Attorney
c: \rs\otaytown
2
1~,,5
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign
c:'- ;mtions. on all matters which will require discretionary action on the pan of the City Council, Planning Commission, and
al er official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
I. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
tJo.\I"''' Cz.'-'.'l;>e,,"Q., ll"€,,,d 'xl
\Q.c>\'erl c..~1<'oef"c..." ~,c:.e PfE"
'Wl()."~ C~....'o€"."",i, Se<.r-eTu1"\
fte-""'n~l~ (i ~,",'b€"""'1I.\ Tr'fa.~uV'<f f. )tf~"a'1e r
.
2. If any person' identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning
more than 10 % of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
wc......" e",,,-,,..,,,,,,,, T 6'ft&lcl...,,-r
\ ~
~~be'l"T (!z.,-,,-be'(~G.1 V'Cf' (?f'€s.
,
\N\ "'- '" ~
~z..",,-he ....-.,.,.a. T s,"f'C: r-e.ICcf''i
, t
IJe.")o'J"W\eT\.... c..'C.4\g-€Y'~~1 Tl"eo..~).<<'('t'r Wa.-no..c.er
J ) I
3. If any person' identified pursuant to (I) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving
as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
.,.,14
f
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions,
Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ NojL If yes, please intlicate person(s):
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who you
have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
t.\) or ~ e.
'W\c.r'l
c,z....\o..,,'Yt"- ,
fr" side","
t'Q,ob'€y1 ~,4\'e''''Q.T
,
V If' € r",.. '>.
c...........\,.."'''n'''1
!,€cr-..Ta.,,,
I ,
I~ ~ ."",~.,..\,. C <-1.<. \,'f r"'c.. T ) Tree. ~l<r..f'\ "''''''''-'7'' f
6. Have you andJor your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Council member in the
current or preceding election period? Yes_ NoJL If yes, state which Council member(s):
* * * (NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary) * *
r
Date:
8"-~-'1 q
/O..?
of contractor/applicant
""1lL~"< c.Z-......I:>€r.,,~..., 1fl~~sldE-,,'l
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
'" .f!!l!2!l is defined as: ~Any individual, firm, co-parmership, joint \lm-rure, association. social club, jraltmal organization, corporation. eslDle, rrust, rtcaver.
syndicate, this and any other county, city and counrry, city municipality, district, or other political subdivision, or any other group or combiMlion acting as a
unil. "
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item /)
Meeting Date 9/6/94
Resolution J 7' .3 Y Approving an agreement with the California
Department of Transportation for an interchange traffic signal improvement
at Interstate Route 805 and East Orange Avenue and authorizing the Mayor
to execute said agreement
Director of Pu~liC Work~
City Manage~ 1) ~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X )
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The California Department of Transportation (CaITrans) has completed a project report for the
subject interchange traffic signal improvement. CalTrans is now prepared to enter into a cooperative
agreement with the City to share the cost for the design, construction, and maintenance of the
proposed signal project. The construction of the project is scheduled to commence in August of
1995. The project report is the basis for the cooperative agreement in determining work to be done,
design specifications, and construction and associated project costs. Staff is, however, finalizing the
report and the agreement with Caltrans.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council continue this item to the meeting of September 13, 1994.
ZO:BR-050
WPC M:\home\engineer\agenda\orangeav.con
Il, J
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /.:t
Meeting Date 09-06-94
,,(,I/P
ITEM TITLE: 8. Resolution Amending Council Policy 505-03 by adding an exception
to item 6B allowing the waiver of an appraisal and submittal of a lotbook
report in lieu of a title report for non-profit public service organizations.
,q. Resolution I /~1u~lOriZing the City Engineer to approve a Deferral and
Lien Agreement for the Chula Vista Presbyterian Church at 940 Hilltop
Drive (APN 619-040-11) and to execute said agreement on behalf of the
City subject to a finding of sufficiency of equity based on a lotbook
report.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of pu~I~C work,!
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~J)6 (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X)
The Chula Vista Presbyterian Church has requested a deferral and lien agreement for the
installation of public improvements at 940 Hilltop Drive. Policy 505-03 allows staff to approve
liens up to $32,200 as of August 15,1994. This lien is estimated at $35,600 and therefor
requires Council approval. The church has also requested that they not be required to have the
property appraised as required by Policy 505-03.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve the resolutions which:
I. Amend Council Policy 505-03 by adding an exception allowing the waiver of an
appraisal and use of a lotbook report in lieu of a title report for non-profit public service
organizations, and;
2. Authorize the City Engineer to approve the deferral and lien agreement and to execute
said agreement on behalf of the City, based on staff's evaluation of information in a
lotbook report if that report indicates that the amount of debt indicated by trust deeds on
the parcel is such that the parcel contains adequate value to obviously provide enough
remaining equity to cover the lien amount.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS: N/A
DISCUSSION:
The City is currently processing Building and Grading permit applications for the construction
of a 9951 square feet Assembly Hall/Offices building at 940 Hilltop Drive. During the Design
Review, the Engineering Division required the installation of public improvements along the
west side of Hilltop Drive, adjacent to the subject property, in accordance with Section 12.24.04
of the Municipal Code. The improvements consist of street widening, a new street light, removal
and replacement of monolithic curb, gutter, and sidewalk, one curb inlet, and one driveway.
J,).' I
Page 2, Item J';'
Meeting Date 09/06/94
The church has requested that the improvements be deferred and that they be allowed to place
a lien on the property to secure the deferred improvements.
The City Engineer has determined that the deferral of public improvements is warranted. The
amount of widening is minimal, only two feet, the remainder of the section of Hilltop is not
widened, and it makes more sense to do it as an overall project. The issue of accepting a lien
in lieu of cash is required to be considered by Council in accordance with Policy 505-03 if the
lien requested exceeds $30,000 plus an increase in accordance with the Construction Cost
Index. The amount in which Council must consider the lien is $32,220 as of August 15, 1994.
The estimated value of the improvements is $35,600. Consequently the approval of a lien
agreement must be considered by Council. Attached is a copy of Council Policy 505-03.
The Church also requested waiver from obtaining an official appraisal of the property stating that
an appraisal might not be needed for the Church to obtain its construction loan, and it would not
want to incur the cost to provide the appraisal if it were not needed for their loan. In addition,
no title report was submitted. Instead, a copy of a Full Reconveyance of the Deed of Trust by
Synod of Southern California recorded in 1976 and a $10,000 mortgage payoff dated June 1982
were submitted. This apparently was an indication by the church that all outstanding loans on
the property had been paid off. Without a current title report or lotbook report, staff can not
assure Council that there are no additional trust deeds on the property.
Policy 505-03 specifically states that for the City to even consider accepting a lien, the total lien,
plus all indebtedness against the property shall not exceed 75% (80% for single-family
residential) of the value of the property. Policy 505-03 requires the applicant to provide a title
report issued within 60 days of application submittal and an appraisal showing the current value
of the property.
Staff proposes that an exception to the requirement to provide an appraisal be included in Policy
505-03 for any organization that is non-profit and providing a community service and that a
lotbook report be required in lieu of a full title report. Staff feels that a lotbook report is the
absolute minimum information necessary to determine if there is enough equity in the property
to provide security to assure the improvements can be installed. Lotbook reports cost
considerably less than a title report. They provide ownership and trust deed information and
nothing more. Such a report will indicate all major debt on the property. It will not list liens
so not all possible encumbrances will be indicated, but staff feels that a lotbook will be sufficient
in circumstances involving non-profit, community service organizations that have been in the
community for a substantial period of time and will allow staff to make a better estimation of
the equity in the property. Staff proposes that Council consider this exception on a case by case
basis in the future.
Staff recommends that item six of Council Policy 505-03 be amended to add a new subsection
C which reads as follows:
IJ.~~
Page 3, Item J)...
Meeting Date 09/06/94
C. In case of non-profit public service organizations the Council can, on a case by
case basis, waive the requirements contained in 6A and B, above and in lieu
thereof accept a lotbook report which provides ownership and trust deed
information. In making the decision to waive the requirement contained in 6A
and B the Council shall consider the type of organization, the length of time they
have been providing a service to the community and their stability of future
continuance of that service.
Staff feels that this is appropriate because those type of organizations are providing a community
service, have usually been in the community for a period of time, and are, therefor, a stable
group that can be considered a good risk.
FISCAL IMPACT: Standard fees have been received by the City to process Staff-approved
deferrals.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - Letter from the church
Attachment B - Plat showing location of improvements
Attachment C - Policy 505-03 NOT SCANNED
WAU
File: PD-185
M:\HOME\ENGINEER\PERMITS\A.113. W AU
J;'~J
Ii rTACHNEtJr A
."' ,_, '.. ~; ..-;;:' r-
..- 1 ~::-:..:. _. _ ;......'.
Chula Vista
Presbyterian
Church
,CC!, ',"'( 20 pll 2, 47
'0i~"1 ,t". 'i
May 17, 1994
City of Chula Vista
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: request for deferral for Chula Vista Presbyterian Church
Gentlemen:
The Chula Vista Presbyterisn Church requests a lien in lieu of a cash bond. Our understanding is that
Hilltop Drive is not scheduled to be widened for a very long time-perhaps decades. We are willing to
accept this lien.
We also request a waiver of the appraisal of the property due to its land and known value. Weare
told we may not need an appraisal for our loans and hope, therefore, not to incur this unneeded cost.
Our addition will not increase the flow of traffic on Hilltop Drive.
Chula VISta Presbyterisn Church
/;2-'/
l' ','
Fax (619)426-4373
,Pt)- /8t;
940 Hilltop Dtlve Chula Vista, California 91911-2299 (619)426-2211
,
\:;
~
LEGEND
~xislinJ CI- ;'5. 07 rorrecf !vca.-f"on
0"1 a((O/",-Il:rl'fCe w,-Ih. f)w.g. 67.3.
o SuSJG'CT PROPfFR7Y 80UA/OARY
- eJ<IS':-'"/NG J="ACE OF Cl../IU3
~ S,....P€tT U/iDFiV/It/G
,?Z~
472'
n.'
~'-f
..
-L
1$11'
'0' R.C.
"-
lu
lu
~ "Lf- "".~... n..
# ~ I~'. CL--=-
~.. "". U' .
'"
SO'
==---T
"".
....
er.
]--l
'-J
4'
SO'
'"
,"x,snN(;
D'
~
CLASS II COLLECTOR STREET
( DIlY /N 0ffE/.1PEIJ AREAS /EST OF /-805 )
If/DEN STTIEFT /NTERSECT/iN AS _ /tHEN /NTERSECrrNB A
CLASS // COLLECTOR STREET OR H/6/fR.
EJIH/6/T "6"
322'
;tIIU TOP
'"
~
)2l
~
3
\<:>
:s
-\-
oj
iJ/?IVE
~
jJiJ-/f3~
A TTRc..f-fM ENT (..,
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBJECT:
POLICY
NUMBER
505-03
16979
EFFECTIVE
DATE
2/23/93
DATED:
PAGE
NUMBER
Deferral and Lien Agreements
ADOPTED BY: Resolution No.
Page 1 of 2
2/23/93
BACKGROUND
Whenever an owner develops his land in the City, he or she must install any missing public
improvements in accordance with current standards as required by Section 12.24.040 of the
Municipal Code. In certain cases, however, those improvements may be deferred due to the
existing conditions surrounding the property. At the time the ordinance providing such deferrals
was adopted, security for the future completion of the improvements by the owner/developer
could be in the form of cash, surety bond, pass book, or a lien against the property in favor of
the City.
The Council previously delegated authority to the City Engineer to approve deferrals and to
accept liens on the property to secure the deferral. The report recommended that security be
only in the form of cash bonds or, in the case of demonstrated hardship, the City accept a lien
against the property being developed.
After this authority was shifted, the department found that it was relatively easy to make a
determination of demonstrated hardship for an owner wanting to build a single family home,
remodel or add to his/her existing single family dwelling and, on his/her authority, accept a lien
in the place of the cash bond. In the case of all other types of development (i.e., multi-family
residences, industrial and commercial buildings), since these uses are all "for-profit" ventures,
it was generally much more difficult to make the necessary determination of financial hardship.
As a result of this, liens were, as a general rule, not allowed for these latter uses based solely
on staff s authority.
PURPOSE
It is the purpose of this policy to provide a means of streamlining the deferral process and
curbing the number of appeals appearing on the Council's docket.
/,,1 , t
SUBJECT:
Deferral and Lien Agreements
POLICY
NUMBER
EFFECTIVE
DATE
505-03
2/23/93
PAGE
NUMBER
Page 2 of 2
ADOPTED BY: Resolution No. 16979
DATED: 2/23/93
POLICY
The following Deferral and Lien Agreement Policy is hereby established:
1. Only after all other efforts have been made to acquire a cash bond and failed, will
the City consider accepting a lien on the property.
2. Staff may approve deferral and lien agreements up to an amount of $30,000 for
any deferral granted by staff, whether residential, multi-residential, industrial or
commercial property.
3. That the above amount of authority is to be increased or decreased annually
beginning on the first of January of the year following the date of adoption of this
policy. The increase or decrease is to be determined by the Construction Cost
Index factor as presented in McGraw - Hill's national publication Engineering
News Record. (Construction Cost Index Value - 5059.07, Dec. 1992)
4. Council is to consider deferral and lien agreements which exceed those authorized
to be approved by staff.
5. In order for the City to consider accepting a lien, the total of the lien, plus all
indebtedness against the property shall not exceed: a) 75 % of the value of the
property in the case of commercial, industrial or multi-family residential and; b)
80% of the value of single-family residential.
6. Before the City can agree to accept a lien, the applicant is to provide the
following items:
A. A title report issued within 60 days of submittal showing all indebtedness
and encumbrances against the property.
B. An appraisal showing current value of the property
7. Whenever a deferral and lien is approved, the standard deferral and lien
agreement prepared by the City Attorney (copy attached) shall be utilized.
8. Staff shall forward a report to Council in the month of January of every odd-
numbered year. Said report is to include the total number of deferrals and the
comparison of the dollar amounts of liens versus cash bonds.
I,), ~ 7
RESOLUTION NO.
/'1(,:17
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A DEFERRAL AND LIEN
AGREEMENT FOR THE CHULA VISTA PRESBYTERIAN
CHURCH AT 940 HILLTOP DRIVE (APN 619-040-11)
AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO EXECUTE
SAID AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, the Chula vista Presbyterian Church has
requested a deferral and lien agreement for the installation of
public improvements at 940 Hilltop Drive; and
WHEREAS, Policy 505-03 allows staff to approve liens up
to $32,200 as of August 15, 1994; and
WHEREAS, this lien is estimated at $35,600 and therefor
requires Council approval; and
WHEREAS, the church has also requested that they not be
required to have the property appraised as required by Policy 505-
03.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the city council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby approve a Deferral and Lien
Agreement for the Chula vista Presbyterian Church at 940 Hilltop
Drive (APN 619-040-11), 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 City Engineer is hereby
authorized to execute said Agreement for and on be if of the City
of Chula vista.
tj)y
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director
of Public Works
C:\rs\lien.agr
I~A -I
Recorder: Please index as,
"Agreement N only
Recording requested by and
please return to:
City Clerk
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
This instrurueut benefits
Property Owner. Recording
Pee required.
8
]
*:
~:
:;:'
~
~~
t
$:
~!
~
~~
~~
t\
e:
,
.}:.'.m>>:<<,}:{<<",w.w;:;:>.'>>:;:;}:"'Wj:"'}:;:;:<v:*:;:'~>>~:"':"W":;:>...'?.:{;:.:':;:'>>:.:;}:.:,:;:;:;}:.}};;:;}:{.}}:.}}:;:;}:;:;}:{.:<<.}}:.,.}:",}:~.}}:.}:{.~}:{;}:"'}:{;:;}:;:'~,"'}:.,..jW;:{;:'}:.~}:;:;}:"''''':;}WM}WjR;}:{>}:{.}:{.}:;:.}:;:;:{;:;}:@:<<o:;:;:.:;:.:<<,-.:>...W~:"':;:",=*:;:':<<,:;:'~:"':*:''':;:>'':;:<
. This space for Recorder's use, only .
Assessors Parcel No. 619-040-11-00
PD-I8S
AGREEMENT FOR THE DEFERRAL OF THE INSTALLATION OF
CERTAIN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND LIEN SECURING THE FUTURE INSTALLATION OF SAID
IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY OWNED BY
CHULA VISTA PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
AND LOCATED AT 940 HILLTOP DRIVE
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of ,19_, by
and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), and CHULA VISTA
PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (hereinafter "Property Owner");
WIH!gH!HH
WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of this agreement is commouly known as 940
HILLTOP DRIVE, CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, is identified in the Couuty Assessor records as Parcel No.
619-040-11-00 and is legally described as:
In the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, being certain portions of Quarter
Section 121 of Chula Vista, according to Map thereof No. 505, recorded in the office of the Recorder of
said San Diego, March 13, 1888, consisting of the following two parcels:
Parcel I: The southerly 140.00 feet of the easterly 352.61 feet of Lot 20 of said Quarter Section 121.
Parcel 2: The easterly 352.61 feet of Lot 21 of said Qnarter Section 121.
(hereinafter "Property"); and,
WHEREAS, Property is owned by Property Owner; and,
Page I
/M~~
WHEREAS, Property Owner is desirous of constructing a warehouse, hereinafter referred to as "Building",
on the Property; and,
WHEREAS, Section 12.24.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code provides, generally, for the installation
of certain public improvements upon any dedicated alley, street or streets adjacent to a lot or parcel upon which a
structure or building is to be installed, erected, or moved upon; and,
WHEREAS, Property Owuer is obligated ("Improvement Duty"), by the above described authority to install
certain public street improvements ("Improvements"), on the street right of way abutting the Property to the
specifications set by, and designed, surveyed, staked and installed to the satisfaction of, the City Engineer, described
as follows;
Curb, gutter & sidewalk, consisting of approximately 402 linear feet to be built along the Property
frontage, two driveways cousisting of approximately 700 square feet to be built within the street
right of way, and approximately 820 square feet of A.C. paving, one street light and a curb inlet.
WHEREAS, Property Owner has applied to the City Engineer of the City for a deferral of the Improvement
Duty; and,
WHEREAS, Section 12.24.070 provides that if the City Engineer, in his discretion, feels that said
installation of Improvements would cause a defective condition to the property or it would be extremely impractical
to install or construct the same, then the City Engineer, upon finding that grounds for said deferral of the
requirements of Section 12.24.040, may grant said deferral, which may be limited to a specified period of time;
and,
WHEREAS, the City Engineer does hereby find that the grounds for said request for a deferral of the
Improvement Duty exist on the conditions set forth in this Agreement, and the granting of said deferral is in
conformance with the requirements of Section 12.24.070;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the parties hereto as follows;
A. Grant of Deferral: City Engineer hereby grants a deferral of the Improvement Duty until 30 days
after such time in the future that the City Engineer may submit a written demand upon the
Property Owner or successors in interest to perform the Improvement Duty, but in no event for
a period of time later than three (3) years from the date of execution of this agreement.
B. Agreement to Perform Imorovement Dutv: Property Owner, or successors in interest, in lieu of
installing the Improvements specified herein prior to final inspection or the giving of a Certificate
of Occupancy by the City, agrees, covenants and promises that Property Owner will perform the
Improvement Duty within thirty (30) days of written notice from the City Engineer to install said
improvements, or within three (3) years from the date of execution of this agreement, whichever
occurs first.
C. Agreement Runs with the Land: The burden of this covenant is for the benefit of the land owned
by the City adjacent to the Property. The burden of this covenant touches and concerns the
Property. lt is the intent of the parties, and the parties agree, that this covenant shall be biuding
upon both the current Property Owner, and upon the successors, heir, transferees and assigns of
the Property Owner, and run with, the ownership of the land which it burdens.
D. Grant of Lien: For the purpose of securing the faithful performance of the promises and
covenants herein contained, Property Owner hereby grants to the City of Chnla Vista a lien
Page 2
l.il9-;J
("Lien") upon the Property in an amount equal to Thirty Five Thousand Six Hundred and
00/100 Dollars ($.00) based upon the current Construction Cost Index Value of 5433 as
published weekly by the McGraw-Hill weekly periodical, Engineering News Record ("Index") and
which amount shaH be increased or decreased monthly in direct proportion to the increase or
decrease in the Index between the month in which the City forecloses upon said lien, and the
month in which this agreement was entered ("Lien Amount").
1. At any time during the period herein provided, Property Owner, may make a cash
deposit with the City in the then current Lien Amount to cover the total cost of the
improvements. If said cash deposit is made, the City shall rescind the Lieu granted by
this Agreement, and shall record a notice of rescission of same. The rescission of the
Lien shaH not constitute a rescission of other covenants and property interests herein
granted, and shall not constitute a basis for not recording this Agreement.
2. In the event that said Index is no longer published, the City shall have the right, upon
notice to Property Owner, to calculate the Lien Amount on the basis of any index which
it reasonably determines reflects the cost of living increases or decreases in the San Diego
County area between the date of this agreement and the date of foreclosure on the lien.
3. The Lien Amount shall operate as a maximum amount of the principal of this Lien,
exclusive of Attorney's Fees and Costs, and interest from the date of filing of the
foreclosure action on the Lien, which interest Property Owner agrees to pay at the rate
of ten (10%) percent per annum, compounded annually.
E. Grant of Conditional Easement: Property Owner hereby grants to City a conditional easement
over the Property to permit entry upon, design, survey, staking and construction upon, and
maintenance of, the Improvements which easement shall be conditional upon the refusal or failure
of the Property Owner, including Property Owner's successors, to perform the Improvement Duty
as herein required.
F. Remedies: Nothing in this agreement shall constitute a limitation on the remedies provided at law
or equity. It is understood, agreed and acknowledged by Property Owner that, upon failure of
the Property Owner to perform the Improvement Duty at the time and in the manner specified by
this Agreement, the City may, but is not required to, do any of the foHowing:
I. Install or construct said improvements by contract or otherwise, and permission is hereby
granted to the City or its contractors and contractor's employees to enter upon any
portion or portions of said property reasonably necessary for said construction, and the
entire cost and expense of said improvements shall be charged against said property and
said cost and expense shall be payable by Property Owner, his/her successors, heirs,
assigns or transferees, immediately upon completion of said improvements, and in the
event the same is not paid within thirty (30) days, the City may foreclose on said lien,
as provided by law for the foreclosure of mortgages, and Property Owner agrees that the
amount of said lien includes attorneys' fees which shaH be taxed as a cost in any suit or
foreclosure.
G. Direct the City Engineer to estimate the cost of the work required to complete said improvements,
and foreclose said lien in said amount.
1. Foreclose said lien as a mortgage.
Page 3
/;/'/I ,r
2. Pursue any other remedy, legal or equitable by law, for the foreclosure of a lien, and
Property Owner, his/her successors, heirs and assigns, shall pay reasonable attorneys'
fees and costs to be taxed as a cost in said proceedings.
Covenant to Coonerate in Imnrovement Petition: It is further understood and agreed that Property
Owner and/or hislher heirs, assignees or successors in interest shall not protest any proceeding
authorized under that chapter of Streets and Highways Code, commencing at ~ 5000, et al. (" 1911
Act Proceeding"), or that chapter of said Code, commencing at ~ 7000, et al. ("1913 Act
Proceeding") to provide improvements that include any of the works of improvements for which
Property Owner is obligated as an Improvement Duty under this Agreement.
H. Miscellaneous Provisions:
1. Authoritv of Citv: Property Owner further agrees that, and agrees not to protest the fact, that
the City is vested with the authority to require the Property Owner to perform the Improvement
Duty forthwith.
Notices: Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement or by law, any and all notices required or
permitted by this Agreement or by law to be served on or delivered to either party shall be in
writing and shall be deemed duly served, delivered, and received when personally delivered to the
party to whom it is directed, or in lieu thereof, when three (3) business days have elapsed
following deposit in the U.S. mail, certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, first-class
postage prepaid, addressed to the address indicated in this Agreement. A party may change such
address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving written notice of such change to the other
party. Facsimile transmission shall constitute personal delivery.
Citv:
City of Chnla Vista
276 4th Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Attn: Public Works, Engineering Division
Pronertv Owner:
Chula Vista Presbyterian Church
940 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, Ca. 91911
(A party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving written
notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided in this paragraph.
Facsimile transmission shall constitute personal delivery.)
2. Cantions: Captions in this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference and do not
define, describe or limit the scope or intent of this Agreement or any of its terms.
Page 4 ,--
/.2--9 -...;1
3. Entire Al!reement: This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties
regarding the subject matter hereof. Any prior oral or written representations, agreements.
understandings, and/or statements shall be of no force and effect.
4. PreDaration of Aereement: No inference, assumption or presumption shal1 be drawn from the
fact that a party or his attorney prepared andlor drafted this Agreement. It shall be conclusively
presumed that both parties participated equally in the preparation and/or drafting this Agreement.
5. Recitals: Exhibits: Any recitals set forth above are incorporated by reference into this
Agreement.
6. Attornevs' Fees: In the event of any dispute arising as to the enforcement of an obligation
created by this Agreement, but not as to any dispute arising as to a claim or defense of the validity
of this Agreement, the prevailing party in any action shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees
in addition to any other costs, damages, or remedies.
(End of Page. Next Page is Signature Page.)
Page 5
/;JfJ .,~
SIGNATURE PAGE FOR
DEFERRAL AND LIEN AGREEMENT
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed the day and year first
hereinabove set forth.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DATED: BY:
CLIFFORD L. SWANSON, DEPUTY PUBLIC
WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER
(City Clerk to attach acknowledgment.)
PROPERTY OWNER
DATED:
DATED:
(Property Owner(s) to attach notary acknowledgment.)
NOTES:
a. Each owner as reflected on the preliminary title report must sign.
b. Permittee is to submit a check or money order payable to County of San Diego in the amount of
$28.00 for recordation of this agreement.
BRUCE M. BOOGAARD
CITY ATTORNEY
Page /I
J.2.,e}'/
PAGE FOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
.
(Notary to attach acknowledgment.)
.
.
(City Clerk to attach acknowledgment.)
.
[M:IHOMEIENGlNEERIPERMITSIDEF&L1EN. FRM]
Page 7
J:J../I ' r
RESOLUTION NO.
/7t.J/~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING COUNCIL POLICY 505-03 BY
ADDING AN EXCEPTION TO ITEM 6B ALLOWING THE
WAIVER OF AN APPRAISAL AND SUBMITTAL OF A
LOT BOOK REPORT IN LIEU OF A TITLE REPORT FOR
NON-PROFIT PUBLIC SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS
WHEREAS, the Chula vista Presbyterian Church has
requested a deferral and lien agreement for the installation of
public improvements at 940 Hilltop Drive; and
WHEREAS, Policy 505-03 allows staff to approve liens up
to $32,200 as of August 15,1994, however, this lien is estimated at
$35,600 and therefore requires Council approval; and
WHEREAS, the church has also requested that they not be
required to have the property appraised as required by Policy 505-
03; and
WHEREAS, Policy 505-03 specifically states that for the
city to even consider accepting a lien, the total lien, plus all
indebtedness against the property shall not exceed 75% (80% for
single-family residential) of the value of the property; and
WHEREAS, Policy 505-03 requires the applicant to provide
a title report issued within 60 days of application submittal and
an appraisal showing the current value of the property; and
WHEREAS, staff proposes that an exception to the
requirement to provide an appraisal be included in Policy 505-03
for any organization that is non-profit and providing a community
service and that Council consider this exception on a case by case
basis.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby amend item six of Council Policy
505-03 to add a new subsection C which reads as follows:
C. In case of non-profit public service organizations the
Council can, on a case by case basis, waive the
requirements contained in 6A and B, above and in lieu
thereof accept a lotbook report which provides ownership
and trust deed information. In making the decision to
waive the requirement contained in 6A and B the Council
shall consider the type of organization, the length of
time they have been providing a service to the community
and their stability of future continuance of that
service.
I,).e ' I
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
I.J.{) "';J...
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /3
Meeting Date 9/6/94
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution J 7(, I.J / Approving Final Map and Subdivision
Improvement Agreement for Chula Vista Tract 93-03, Telegraph Canyon
Estates Neighborhood 1 Unit 3
Director of Public wOFJJ(
City Managu ~@\ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No_XJ
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
On January 19, 1993, by Resolution 16960 (Exhibit A), the City Council approved the Tentative
Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 93-03, Telegraph Canyon Estates. The seventh final map
for said tentative map are now before Council for approval.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution approving the final map and the
subdivision improvement agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The project is generally located on the northerly side of Otay Lakes Road and adjacent to the
western side of the proposed alignment for State Route 125. It consists of 112.4 acres which
are proposed to be subdivided into 344 residential lots and open space lots. The first six units
of the development, which were previously approved by Council, consisted of a total of 180
numbered single family residential lots and a total of five (5) lettered lots for open space and
other public purposes totalling approximately 70.3 acres.
The map now before Council for approval represents the last map for Neighborhood 1 of the
development. This map consists of a total of 19 numbered single family lots totalling
approximately 3.2 acres. Approval of the map brings the total number of approved lots for the
development to 199 numbered residential lots and 5 lettered lots for open space and other public
purposes. All conditions of approval applicable to this map have been satisfied. Condition No.
62 requires the developer to enter into an agreement to provide low and moderate income
housing. This condition was amended (Resolution No. 17475, Exhibit B) and must be satisfied
prior to approval of the map containing the 200th residential lot. Community Development staff
is currently negotiating this agreement with the developer.
The final map for Neighborhood I Unit 3 of Chula Vista Tract 93-03, Telegraph Canyon Estates
has been reviewed by the Public Works Department and found to be in substantial conformance
with the approved tentative map. Approval of the final map constitutes acceptance on behalf of
1:1- /
Page 2, Item I J
Meeting Date 9/6/94
the public a portion of Marquis Court and tree planting and maintenance easements all as shown
on the final map.
The developer has executed a Subdivision Improvement Agreement for this map and provided
bonds to guarantee construction of the required public improvements (CV drawings 94-01
through 94-20), has paid all applicable fees except for PAD fees, and has provided a bond to
guarantee the monumentation for said subdivision. A Supplemental Subdivision Agreement
applicable to this map has been previously approved by Council with approval of the first three
maps (Resolution No. 17279, Exhibit C)). A copy of this agreement and subsequent approved
amendments is attached along with the minutes.
Under the recent amendment to City Ordinance No. 17.10.100 approved by Council, the
developer must pay PAD Fees, or enter into an agreement with the City agreeing to pay PAD
fees, prior to release by staff of the final map for recording. In either case, the fees must be
paid no later than 60 days after Council approves the map. The developer has indicated that
PAD fees for this subdivision will be paid prior to release of the approved final map.
A plat is available for Council viewing.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. All Staff costs associated with processing of improvement plans
and final map will be reimbursed from developer deposits.
Attachments:
Exhibit A - Resolution 0 & Minutes of 1/19/93 (excerpt)
Exhibit B - Resoluti 475 & Minutes of 5/3/94 (excerpt)
Exhibit C - Resol 17279 & Minutes of 10/19/93 (excerpt)
Exhibit D - PI.~~ elegraph Canyon Estates Neigh. 1 Unit 3
Exhibit E - DlFI"osure Statement
Exhibit F - Approved Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement ./
File: BY-400
P:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA\tcenlu3.lmc
090194
I :J .. .;...
RESOLUTION NO.
17~ '1/
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING FINAL MAP OF CHULA VISTA
TRACT 93-03, TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES
NEIGHBORHOOD 1 UNIT 3, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF
THE PUBLIC THE PUBLIC STREETS DEDICATED ON
SAID MAP, AND THE EASEMENTS GRANTED ON SAID
MAP WITHIN SAID SUBDIVISION, AND APPROVING
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE
COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY SAID
SUBDIVISION, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City of Chula vista hereby finds that that certain map survey
entitled CHULA VISTA TRACT 93-03, TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES
NEIGHBORHOOD 1 UNIT 3, and more particularly described as follows:
Being a subdivision of a portion of Southwest Quarter of
section 34, Township 17 South, Range 1 West, San
Bernardino Base and Meridian, in the city of Chula vista,
County of San Diego, State of California according to Map
thereof No. 166, filed May 11, 1869 in the office of the
County Recorder of said County.
Area: 3.233 acres
Numbered Lots: 19
No. of Lots: 19
Lettered Lots: 0
is made in the manner and form prescribed by law and conforms to
the surrounding surveys; and that said map and subdivision of land
shown thereon is hereby approved and accepted.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said Council hereby accepts
on behalf of the public the public street, to-wit: portions of
Marquis Court (as shown on the final map) and said street is hereby
declared to be a public street and dedicated to the public use.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said Council hereby accepts
on behalf of the city of Chula vista the easements tendered with
the right of ingress and egress for visibility and street tree
planting and maintenance, all as granted and shown on said map
within said subdivision, subject to the conditions set forth
thereon.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk of the City of
Chula vista be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to
endorse upon said map the action of said Council; that said council
1
13'Y
has approved said subdivision map, and that said public streets are
accepted on behalf of the public as heretofore stated and that
those certain easements with the right of ingress and egress for
the construction and maintenance of street tree planting, as
granted thereon and shown on said map within said subdivision is
accepted on behalf of the City of Chula vista as hereinabove
stated.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk be, and she is
hereby directed to transmit said map to the Clerk of the Board of
supervisors of the County of San Diego.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that that certain Subdivision
Improvement Agreement dated the day of , 1994, for
the completion of improvements in said sUbdivision, a copy of which
is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof, the same as
though fully set forth herein be, and the same is hereby approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista be, and he is hereby authorized and directed to execute
said agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula vista.
Presented by
a. t~T
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
Bruce M.
Attorney
C:\rs\TCNeighl.3
2
J 3-,/
Recording Requested by:
CITY CLERK
When Recorded, Mail to:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, Ca. 91910
No transfer tax is due as this is a conveyance
to a public agency of less than a fee interest
for which no cash consideration has been paid or
received.
Declarant
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this~day Of(2.~ ,.I'~ 199f; by
and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation, hereina er called "City",
and BALDWIN BUILDER, a California corporation, 11975 EI Camino Real, Suite 200, San
Diego, CA 92130.
hereinafter called "Subdivider";
~IINES.S.EIH~
WHEREAS, Subdivider is about to present to the City Council of the City ofChula Vista
for approval and recordation, a final subdivision map of a proposed subdivision, to be known as
Telegraph Canyon Estates, Neighborhood I, Unit 3 pursuant to the provisions of the Subdivision
Map Act of the State of California, and in compliance with the provisions of Title 18 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to the filing, approval and recordation of subdivision map;
and,
WHEREAS, the Code provides that before said map is fmally approved by the Council of
the City of Chula Vista, Subdivider must have either installed and completed all of the public
improvements and/or land development work required by the Code to be installed in subdivisions
before final maps of subdivisions are approved by the Council for purpose of recording in the
Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, or, as an alternative thereto, Subdivider
shall enter into an agreement with City, secured by an approved improvement security to insure
the performance of said work pursuant to the requirements of Title 18 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code, agreeing to install and complete, free of liens at Subdivider's own expense, all
of the public improvements and/or land development work required in said subdivision within a
definite period of time prescribed by said Council, and
-1- /3-..5'
WHEREAS, Subdivider is willing in consideration of the approval and recordation of
said map by the Council, to enter into this agreement wherein it is provided that Subdivider will
install and complete, at Subdivider's own expense, all the public improvement work required by
City in connection with the proposed subdivision and will deliver to City improvement securities
as approved by the City Attorney, and
WHEREAS, a tentative map of said subdivision has heretofore been approved, subject to
certain requirements and conditions, as contained in Resolution No. 16960, approved on the 19th
day of January, 1993 ("Tentative Map Resolution"); and
WHEREAS, complete plans and specifications for the construction, installation and
completion of said public improvement work have been prepared and submitted to the City
Engineer, as shown on Drawings Nos.94-20 through 94-01 inclusive, on file in the office of the
City Engineer, and
WHEREAS, an estimate of the cost of constructing said public improvements according
to said plans and specifications has been submitted and approved by the City in the amount of
Fifty-Eight Thousand Five Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($58,500.00).
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED AS
FOLLOWS:
1. Subdivider, for itself and his successors in interest, an obligation the burden of which
encumbers and runs with the land, agrees to comply with all of the terms, conditions and
requirements of the Tentative Map Resolution; to do and perform or cause to be done and
performed, at its own expense, without cost to City, in a good and workmanlike manner, under
the direction and to the satisfaction and approval of the City Engineer, all of the public
improvement and/or land development work required to be done in and adjoining said
subdivision ("Improvement Work"); and will furnish the necessary materials therefor, all in strict
conformity and in accordance with the plans and specifications, which documents have
heretofore been filed in the Office of the City Engineer and by this reference are incorporated
herein and made a part hereof.
2. It is expressly understood and agreed that all monuments have been or will be installed
within thirty (30) days after the completion and acceptance of the Improvement Work, and that
Subdivider has installed or will install temporary street name signs if permanent street name
signs have not been installed.
3. It is expressly understood and agreed that Subdivider will cause all necessary
materials to be furnished and all Improvement Work required under the provisions of this
contract to be done on or before the third anniversary date of Council approval of the Subdivision
Improvement Agreement.
-2-
/3.~
4. It is understood and agreed that Subdivider will perform said Improvement Work as
set forth hereinabove, or that portion of said Improvement Work serving any buildings or
structures ready for occupancy in said subdivision, prior to the issuance of any certificate of
clearance for utility connections for said buildings or structures in said subdivision, and such
certificate shall not be issued until the City Engineer has certified in writing the completion of
said public improvements or the portion thereof serving said building or structures approved by
the City; provided, however, that the improvement security shall not be required to cover the
provisions of this paragraph.
5. It is expressly understood and agreed to by Subdivider that, in the performance of said
Improvement Work, Subdivider will conform to and abide by all of the provisions of the
ordinances of the City of Chula Vista, and the laws of the State of California applicable to said
work.
6. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the City of Chula Vista,
simultaneously with the execution of this agreement, an approved improvement security from a
sufficient surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum of Fifty-Eight
Thousand Five Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($58,500.00) which security shall guarantee the
faithful performance of this contract by Subdivider and is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A"
and made a part hereof.
7. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the City of Chula Vista
simultaneously with the execution of this agreement, an approved improvement security from a
sufficient surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum of One Hundred
Fifty-Eight Thousand Five Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($58,500.00) to secure the payment of
material and labor in connection with the installation of said public improvements, which
security is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof and the bond amounts as
contained in Exhibit "B", and made a part hereof.
8. Subdivider further agrees to furnish and deliver to the City of Chula Vista,
simultaneously with the execution of this agreement, an approved improvement security from a
sufficient surety, whose sufficiency has been approved by the City in the sum of Two Thousand
Five Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($2,500.00) to secure the installation of monuments, which
security is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "C" and made a part hereof.
9. It is further agreed that if the Improvement Work is not completed within the time
agreed herein, the sums provided by said improvement securities may be used by City for the
completion of the Improvement Work within said subdivision in accordance with such
specifications herein contained or referred, or at the option of the City, as are approved by the
City Council at the time of engaging the work to be performed. Upon certification of completion
by the City Engineer and acceptance of said work by City, and after certification by the Director
of Finance that all costs hereof are fully paid, the whole amount, or any part thereof not required
for payment thereof, may be released to Subdivider or its successors in interest, pursuant to the
-3-
/3~?
terms of the improvement security. Subdivider agrees to pay to the City any difference between
the total costs incurred to perform the work, including design and administration of construction
(including a reasonable allocation of overhead), and any proceeds from the improvement
security.
10. It is also expressly agreed and understood by the parties hereto that in no case will
the City of Chula Vista, or any department, board or officer thereof, be liable for any portion of
the costs and expenses of the work aforesaid, nor shall any officer, his sureties or bondsmen, be
liable for the payment of any sum or sums for said work or any materials furnished therefor,
except to the limits established by the approved improvement security in accordance with the
requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the provisions of Title 18 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code.
11. It is further understood and agreed by Subdivider that any engineering costs
(including plan checking, inspection, materials furnished and other incidental expenses) incurred
by City in connection with the approval of the Improvement Work plans and installation of
Improvement Work hereinabove provided for, and the cost of street signs and street trees as
required by City and approved by the City Engineer shall be paid by Subdivider, and that
Subdivider shall deposit, prior to recordation of the Final Map, with City a sum of money
sufficient to cover said cost.
12. It is understood and agreed that until such time as all Improvement Work is fully
completed and accepted by City, Subdivider will be responsible for the care, maintenance of, and
any damage to, the streets, alleys, easements, water and sewer lines within the proposed
subdivision. It is further understood and agreed that Subdivider shall guarantee all public
improvements for a period of one year from date of final acceptance and correct any and all
defects or deficiencies arising during said period as a result of the acts or omission of Subdivider,
its agents or employees in the performance of this agreement, and that upon acceptance of the
work by City, Subdivider shall grant to City, by appropriate conveyance, the public
improvements constructed pursuant to this agreement; provided, however, that said acceptance
shall not constitute a waiver of defects by City as set forth hereinabove.
13. It is understood and agreed that City, as indemnitee, or any officer or employee
thereof, shall not be liable for any injury to person or property occasioned by reason of the acts or
omissions of Subdivider, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to this agreement.
Subdivider further agrees to protect and hold the City, its officers and employees, harmless from
any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, because of or arising
out of acts or omissions of Subdivider, its agents or employees, or indemnitee, related to this
agreement; provided, however, that the approved improvement security shall not be required to
cover the provisions of this paragraph. Such indemnification and agreement to hold harmless
shall extend to damages to adjacent or downstream properties or the taking of property from
owners of such adjacent or downstream properties as a result of the construction of said
subdivision and the public improvements as provided herein. It shall also extend to damages
resulting from diversion of waters, change in the volume of flow, modification of the velocity of
-4- JJ"T
the water, erosion or siltation, or the modification of the point of discharge as the result of the
construction and maintenance of drainage systems. The approval of plans providing for any or
all of these conditions shall not constitute the assumption by City of any responsibility for such
damage or taking, nor shall City, by said approval, be an insurer or surety for the construction of
the subdivision pursuant to said approved improvement plans. The provisions of this paragraph
shall become effective upon the execution of this agreement and shall remain in full force and
effect for ten (10) years following the acceptance by the City of the improvements.
14. Subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or its agents,
officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents,
officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City, advisory
agency, appeal board, or legislative body concerning a subdivision, which action is brought
within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code of the State of
California.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed
the day and year first hereinabove set forth.
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUBDIVIDER: BALDWIN BUILDERS,
a California Corporation
ATTEST
:~,O~} JJ
Mayor of the City ofChula Vista
ity Attorney
(Attach Notary Acknowledgment)
-5-
1.1-9
Exhibit "A"
.1lo.lNf,D
~O'tSC~"'"
Exhibit "B"
NO'tSC~F.D
Exhibit "C"
NOT SCANNED
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Improvement Security - Faithful Performance
Form: BOND
Amount: $58,500.00
Improvement Security - Material and Labor:
Form: BOND
Amount: $58,500.00
Improvement Security - Monuments:
Form: BOND
Amount: $2,500.00
~
City Attorney ,
THREE (3) YE M DATE OF COUNCIL
APPROVAL 0 SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
Improvement Completion Date:
-6-
/.J ' II/
s1:
,,~
~
AME~1
o
~
~
~4/~
STA1E OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF
SAN DIEGJ
}
}ss.
}
On
~~~~.rt
. before me,
JOAN aX>ZZQ
personally appeared
TDCmY J. O'GRADY
, personally known to me
{Ol ~16vGd to m~ Or! the ba3i~ of 3ati31ae:t6f) e;/iasAse) to be the person(s) whose name(~) is~
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he!ihi/tl:iiy executed the same
in his1l:igr1tl:1iir authorized capacit~), and that by his!l:1irlth9;' signatur~ on the instrument the
person~ or the entity upon behalf of which the personfst acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
f.--....-.........---3
- -- --
@ JO.~N CUOZZO
... . , COMM.11001288 r-
~ ". . NOTARY PUBLIC. CALifORNIA ~
...j . SAIl DIEGOCOUllTY _
-l.-..~.- ~~~~~~~~_'~'_'~'J
(This area tor official notarial seat)
Title of Document
Date of Document
Other signatures not acknowledged
No. of Pages
/3"'//
3008 (1/94) (General)
First American Title Insurance Company
~13
fc.s- '1'_03
ey~~
RESOLUTION NO. 16960
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF tHULA
VISTA APPROVING THE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
KLEGRAPH CANYON tsTATES, (HULA VISTA TRACT 113-03; AND
MAKING THE NECESSARY FINDINGS; READOPTING THE STATEMENT
OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND THE MITIGATION
MONITORING PROGRAM FOR EIR Ill-OS
:
"
WHEREAS, the property which is the subject ..tter of this resolution is
identified and describe~ on Chula Vista Tract 113-03, Ind is cOImOnly known as
Telegraph Canyon Estate~ (.property.); and,
WHEREAS, the Baldwin Vista Associates, Lillited, A California Partnership
(Developer) filed a duly verified application for the subdivision of the Property
in the form of the tentative subdivision ..p known as Telegraph Canyon Estates,
Chula Vista Tract 93-03, with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista
on September 30, 1992 (.project.); and, '
WHEREAS, said application requested the approval for the subdivision of
approximately 111.8 acres located on the north slde of Otay Lakes Road directly
east of Otay Lakes Lodge 1I0bile home park and directly south of Eastlake Shores,
east of the easterly terminus of Gotham Street, into 345 residential lots, open
space areas and one recreation lot; and, .
WHEREAS, the devel"pment of the Property has been the subject :IIIItter of II
General Development Plan ("GDP") and a Sectional Planning Area Plan ("SPA Plan")
previously approved by the City Council on August 25, 1992 by Resolution No.
16768 wherein the City Council, in the environmental evaluation of said GOP and
SPA Plan, relied in part on the Telegraph Canyon Estates General Development Plan
and SPA Plan Environmental I.,act Report No. 111-03, SCH No. 111071033 ("Program
EIR 91-OS"), a program environlental i~act report IS s.-e is defined in CEQA
Guideline Section 15168; and,
WHEREAS, this Project is a' subsequent activity in the program of
development environmentally evaluated under Progra. EIR Ill-OS that is in
substantial confoT'llance in all relevant respects, including lot size, lot
n&allers, lot configurations, transportation corridors, etc., to the project
descriptions in said f~~r environlental evaluations; Ind,
WHEREAS, the City Envirollllental Review Coordinator "as reviewed the
proposed Tentative Map and detenained that is in substantial confonaance with the
&OP and SPA Plan, therefore no aew environlental dOCUlents Ire necessary;
WHEREAS, the Planning COIIlIission held In advertised public hearing'on said
project en Deceaber 16, 11192 Ind voted to rec_nd that the City Council approve
the Tentative Map in accordance with the findings and conditions listed below and
readopted the Statelent of Overriding Considerations Ind the Mitigation
Monitoring Program; and,
.
E,;<h\ D\i- A
JJ~)J
~
~solution No. 16960
'age 2
,
\
'. .
'>>
WHEREAS, the City Council set the ti., Ind pllce for I public hearing on
.aid tentative subdivision ..p Ipplication Ind notice of said hearing, together
lith its purpose, was ,iven by its publication in I HWSpaper of ,eneral
:irculation in the City Ind its ..iling to property owners within 1.000 eet of
:he exterior boundaries of the property at lelst ten days prior to the "Iring,
Ind,
WHEREAS, the public hearing was held at the ti., and place IS advertised,
lamely 6:00 p.... January 12, 1993. in the Council Chlmbers, 276 Fourth Avenue.
lefore the City Council Ind said public hearing .as thereafter closed.
"OW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL finds, detenlines and resolves as follows:
iECTlON I.
iECTlON II.
mTl~ III.
CEQA Finding re Previously Exl.ined Effects.
The City Council hereby finds that the Project, IS a liter
Ictivity to that evaluated in the Program EIR II-OS, would
have no new effects that were not eximined in the preceding
Program EIR 91-05 (Guidelines Section 15168 (c)(2); and,
CEQA Finding re Project .ithin Scope of Prior Progr.. EIR.
The City Council hereby finds that (1) there were no chln,es
in the project from the Program EIR which would requ re
revisions of said reports, (2) no substantial changes have
occurred with respect to the circu.stances under which the
project is undertaken since the previous report; (3) and no
new infonlltion of substantial i~ortance to the project has
become available since the issuance and approval of the prior
report, Ind that therefore, no new effects could occur or no
new .itigation ..asures will be required in addition to those
Ilready in existence and currently ..de a condition for
Project illlplementation (Guidelines Section 15162). Therefore.
the City Council approves the Project as an activity that is
within the scope of the project covered by the Program EJR,
and therefore, no new enviro..ntal doc_nts are required
(Guidelines 15168(c)(2)). ·
'e
4.
Incorporation of All Feasible Mitigation Melsures and
Alternatives.
The City does hereby adopt and incorporate llerein as condi-
tions for all approvals herein granted all iii ti gati on _asures
and alternatives. if any. whfch it "S lIetenlined, .y the
findings ..de in the lOP and SPA Resolution. to be feasible in
the approval of the &enerll Dev.lOplltnt Plan and the SPA Plan.
nspectively.
.
/;1/)/
.
~
SECTION IV.
SECTION V.
Resolution No. 16960
'Ige 3
Notice with Liter Activities.
The City Council does hereby give 1I0tice, to the extent
required by law, that this Project is an activity within the
scope of the progra. approved earlier in the GOP and SPA Plln
Resolution and the Progr.. EIR adequately describes th~
activity for the purposes of CEQA (Guideline 15168 (e)).
6eneral Plln Findings--Confo~nce to the &eneral Plan.
Pursuant to €overlllltnt Code Section 66473.5, in the
Subdivision Map Act, finds that the tentative subdivision ..p
as conditioned herein for Telegraph Canyon Estates, Chula
Vista Tract No. 93-03, is in confo~nce with all the various
elements of the City's Genera' Plan, the Telegraph Canyon
Estates General Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area
Plln based on the following:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
./'
}J//)
Land Use _ The project is a residential community which
provides three lot sizes ranging between 5,685 square
feet and 8,350 square feet. The project density is
consistent with .idpoint of the Low Medium density
General Plan range and the approved GOP and SPA PlaD.
The project is also consistent with General Plan and SPA
Plln policies related to grading and landforms.
Circulation - All of the on-site and off-site publiC
streets required to serve the subdivision consist of
Circulation Elellltnt roads and local streets in locations
required by said Element. The developer shall construct
those facilities in accordance with City standards or
pay in-lieu fees fn accordance with the Telegraph Canyon
Estates Publfc Facilities Financing Plan.
Housing _ 'he developer is required to enter fnto an
agrenent with the City to provfde and illple.nt a low
and ~derate inco.e progra. off-sfte of the project or
an in-lieu contribution prtor to the approval of the
final Map.
Conservation and Open Space - The project provides
approxi..tely 26 acres of open .pacel 23% of the total
111.8 acres. Irading 'as Men If.fted on steep
hillsfdes and Irading plan approval will require the
revegetation of .lopes ill ..tural y.getatfon.
Parks and Recreation - The project will provfde 0.7 and
1.5 acre private project "creation areas and the
paylent of full PAD f.es. In addition, a public trail
syst.. will be provfded within the project.
~
)lution No. 16960
! 4
~CTlON VI.
--
Seismic Safety - No seis.ic faults have been identified
in the vic)nity of the property.
6. Public Safety - All public and private facilities will
be reachable within the threshold response tilleS for
fire and police services.
H. Public Facilities - The developer will provide all on-
site and off-site streets, sewers and .ater facilities
necessary to serve this project.
1. Noise _ Tht project will include nohe attenuation walls
as require~ by an acoustic study dated June 28, 1991
prepared for the project. In addition, all units are
required to lIeet the standards of the UBC with regard to
acceptable interior noise levels.
Scenic Highway - The roadway design provides wide
landscaped buffers along Telegraph Canyon Road, a scenic
highway. The development edge will be required to be
enhanced consistent with scenic highway policy.
Bicycle Routes _ Bicycle paths are provided within the
project and Otay Lakes Road has been designed to provide
bicycle lanes.
F.
J.
K.
.-
L.
Public Bui11ings - While no public building sites are
required of the subdivision, the project is subject to :
RCT and OIr fees.
Subdivision Map Act Findings.
A. 'alance of Housing Needs and Public Service Needs.
Pursuant to Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act,
the Council certifies that it has considered the effect
of this approval on the housing needs of the region and
has balanced those Meds against the public service
Meds of ~he residents of the City and the available
fhcal and environllental resources. The developllltnt
will provide for a Wlriety of single f..ily detached
IloIles and will ,rovide for low and .derate priced
housing off-site of the project COftsistent with relional
loals.
B. Opportunities for ..tural ...atinl and Coolinl
Incorporated.
The confiluration. orientation and topolraphy of the
sitt partially allows for tht opti_ siting of lots for
-
/7-/~
~
Resolution No. 16960
'age 5
passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities as
required by 60vernlent Code Section 66473.1.
C. .Finding re Suitability for Residential Development.
The site is physically suitable for residential
development and the proposal confonls to all standards
established by the City for such projects.
SECTION VII.
Conditional Approval of Tentative Subdivision Map.
A. Chula Yista Tract 13-03 Tentative Map is hereby
approved, subject t~ the following conditions, and on
occurrence of the f~llowing conditions, the City will
approve and authorize the recording of the Final Map for
the territory covered by said Tentative Map (unless
otherwise specified, all Conditions and Code Require-
.nts shall be fully completed to the City's
satisfaction for each unit or phase prior to the
approval of the corresponding Final Map. Unless
otherwise specified, 8dedicate" .ans grant the
appropriate easement, rather than fee title):
8. The developer shall:
~
" ~eneral/Prel~inarv
~
1. Install public facilities in accordance with the
'ublic Facilities Financing 'lan (PFFP) as
.-ended or as required by the City Engineer to
.et threshold standards adopted by the City of
Chula Yista. In addition, the sequence in which
i~rovelents are constructed shall correspond to
any future East Chula Vista Transportation
Phasing "an as ..y be U1ended in accordance with
the final HNT8 SR-125 Financing Study adofted by
the City. The Citl, Engineer and , anning
Director ..y, at the r discretion, IlOdify the
sequence of f~rovell!nt construction should
conditions change to .arrant such a revision.
[Engineering]
2. Prepare, submit and obtain approval of a
Developlltnt Phasing 'lan by the Cit~ Engineer and
the Director of ,lanning prior to t e approval of
any Final Ma". said Phasing 'lan to be consistent
with the P FP. IlIprovell!nts, facilities and
dedications to be provided with tach phase or
/ ] -/7 unit of developient shall be a~ detenained by the
( City Engineer and the Director of ,lanning. The
City reserves the rtr~t to condition approval of
~
esolution No. 16960
Ige 6
.
3.
4.
'" .
each final ..p with the requirement to provide
said i.,rove.ent facilities and/or dedications.
The City Engineer and Pla~ning Director ..y. at
their discretion. ~dify the sequence of
i~rovelent construction should conditions change
to warrant such a revision. [Engineering.
'Zanning)
The aitigation ,.asures required before Final tltp
approvIl by the Final Enviro,.,ntal 1.,lct Report
for Telegraph Canyon Estates (fEIR) 91-05 are
hereby incorporated into this Resolution by
reference. Any such .asures not satisfied by a
specific condition of this Resolution or by the
project design shill be i~lemented to the
satisfaction of the Director of Planning.
Mitigation .Isures shall be aonitored via the
Mitigation Monitoring Program approved in
conjunction with the FEIR. Modification of the
sequence of .itigation shall be at the discretion
of the Director of Planning should changes in
circumstances warrant such revision. [PZanning)
Unless otherwise conditioned. comply with, remain
in compliance with, and iaplement, the terms,
conditions and provisions of the Telegraph Canyon
Estltes &enera1 Development Plan, Sectional
Planning Area Plan, Master Plan of Reclailled
~ater, ~ater Conservation Plan, Air Quality
I~rovement Plan and the Public Facilities
Financing Plan approved by the Council ("Plans")
as are applicable to the property which is the
subject ..tter of this Tentative Map, prior to
approval of any Final Map, or shall have entered
into an agreelltnt with the City, providing the
City with such sec~rity (including recordation of
covenants running with the land). and
i.,l..,ntation ,rocedures as the City ..y
require. assuring that. after approval of a"
Final tltps. the ftveloptr shan continue to
cOIIply with. ,...in tn cOIIPliance with. and
t.,ltlltnt such Plans. ['llmntng. Engtneertng)
'0
.....
~
'tre~ts.. li.I!1JI-Ot:-JIIIV .net l.roVRte"ts
5.
Provtde ltCurfty tll accordance with Chapter 18.16
of the llunicipal Code. ftdicate and construct
full street tllprGvtlltnts for all publiC streets
shown on the Tentative Map within the subdivision
"undary as required for .ach wit or ,hase.
Said tllprGvtlltnts shan tnclude. but IIot be
Haited to. uphalt concrete plvtlltnt. base,
IJ-Ir ~
~
-.
~
Resolution No. 16960
Plge 7
.
concrete curb, ,utter and sidewalk, sewer,
reclailled .ater and .ater utilities, drainage
facilities, street lights, signs, and fire
hydrants. All streets shall confonn to the
City's Street Design Standards Policy adopted by
City Council Resolution 115349 unless otherwise
conditioned or approved by the City Engineer.
(Engtneertng] .
Dedicate for public use .11 the streets shown on
the tentative ..p .ithin the subdivision boundary
for each final ..p as detenlined by the City
Engineer. (Engtneering]. .
Provide design details for the bridge like
structure at the project entry for review and
approval of the City Engineer and Director of
Planning prior to the approval of the first Final
Map whi ch creates i ndivi dual res i dent i allots.
(Engtnerring, 'lanntng]
8. Include right-of-way for SR 125 in a lot granted
in fee to the City for open space and
transportation purposes prior to the approval of
the first Final Map which creates individua1
residential lots. Include Slid lot in an open
space district until transferred to the State of
CaHfomia. (Engineertng, 'arles and Recrecztton]
6.
.7.
9.
Install a fully activated traffic signal on Otay
Lakes Road at the project entry. Install
conduit, pull boxes, and wiring to interconnect
said traffic signal to traffic signals along
Tele~raph Canyon Road. No Traffic Signal Fee
credlt will be Ihen for Slid installation.
(Engtneering]' .
.rant to the City an .ase.ent or easements for
street tree planting and ..intenance,.. and
landscape buffer areas .10ng all public streets
fnthe width required by the City's Street Design
Standards. (Engineering]
Irant a 10-foot wide utility .ase.ent within open
~ace . lots adjacent to street rights-of-way.
{Engtneering]
Subllit to and obtain approval by the City
Engineer of Itriping plans for all collector
streets If.'taneously with the associated
f.,rove.ent plans. (Engineering]
10.
u.
12.
/3 --)1
~
,olution No. 16960
Ie 8
13. Design all vertical curves and fntersection sight
distances to confonn to standards fn the CalTrans
Highway Desfgn Manual. [Engineering]
14. Install transit .-enities on both sides of O1ay
Lakes Road at the ,roject entry Dr appropriate
alternative location as approved by the City
Engineer. Transit a.enities include but are not
li.ited to benches and/or shelters and are
subject to approval by tile City Engineer. 'ay
$5,000 cash deposit to the City ,rior to the
approval of the first fir.al Map to fund transit
..niUes when required. [Engineering]
15. Requested Naiver 1 fs approved subject to
compliance with parking requirements in Street
Design Standard 'olicy, ftem '20, ,age 12.
Requested waivers 2 and 4 as 1 isted on the
tentative up are hereby approved subject to
submission of a letter from a registered civil
engineer indicating that the results of the
waivers requested confonm with common engineering
practice and standards in consideration of public
safety. Requested Naiver 3 is denied.
[Eng inee ring]
16. Vacate the Otay Nater Di!trict access .asellltnt
across Lots 6-12. [Engineering]
Sewers
17.
Provide access to all sanitary sewer unholes via
an i.proved accesS road with a .ini.um width of
12 feet, designed for an "-20 wheel load, Dr
other loading, subject to the approval of the
City Engineer. [Engineering] ·
18.
Provide traded access and 12 ft.~de easelents
to all public stOnl drain structures, including
inlet and outlet structures. Construct i.,roved
access across side ,ards to drainage structures
except as otherwise direct.d by the City
Engineer. llngineering]
Subllit a Hst of proposed lots indicating whether
the structure ~11 be locat.d on fill, cut, Dr a
transition between the two situations ,rior to
approval of each final Map for single f..ily
residential use. [Engineering]
19.
13 '2a
'-f16f
20.
21.
22.
(
/3/.))
Resolution No. 16960
Page 9
23.
Provide. letter of permission for grading from
SDGIE prior to any grading within or adjacent to
the 120 ft. SDGIE easelent or which would affect
access thereto and permission to locate a public
storm drain within said .aselent. [Engineering]
Construct retention/detention facilities on site
or IS approved by the City Engineer to reduce the
quantity of runoff to an .-ount equal to or less
than present flows for the 100 year frequency
storm. provide design and calculations for said
facilities to the City Engineer for approval
~rior to issuance of a greeling permit.
{Eng inee ring]
Prepare and obtain approval by the City Engineer
and the Director of Planning an erosion and
sedi.entati on control pl an and
landscape/irrigation plans as part of the grading
plans. (Engineering, Planning]
Design the storm drains and other drainage
facilities to include Best Management Practices
to lIinimi ze non-point source pollution
satisfactory to the City Engineer. (Engineeringj
Provide a letter of permission from the CWA for
grading and construction of street improvements
within the 120 ft. wide easement, prior to any
grading or construction within or adjacent to the
County Water . Authority (CWA) .asement.
{Engineering]
24.
lUll!
25. Presept written verification to the City Engineer
frOll Otay Water District that the subdivision
will be provided adequate water service and long
term water storage facilities. (Engineering]
,
26. Provide to the City a letter froll Otay Municipal
Water District indicating that the
Issess.,nts/bonded indebtedness for III parcels
dedicated to the City have been paid or that no
.sstss.,nts .xist on the ,arcel(s).
[Enginerrtng]
~
27.
Enter into In Igrttllent with OWD to c_it to use
of reclaiied water at the earliest possible date.
Make .,1 reclai.,d .ater use conform to the
~
esolution No. 16960
age 10
,
applicable regulations of Chula Yista, Regional
Water Quality Control Board and the State
Departient of Health. (Engtneering, PZanntng]
28. Determine the AIIOunt of and deposit all costs
potentially incurred fl"Olll retrofitting the
reclai~d water system in all areas to be
ultillltely publicly lIIintained, when reclailled
water beCOles available, the AIIOunt of said
deposit subject to approval of the City Engineer.
(Engineering]
29. Install reclailled .ater lines as outlined in the
Public Facilities Financing Plan when the
associated road improvements are constructed or
when the City Engineer determines that the
facilities are necessary to provide a link to a
live system. (Engineering]
~
Aarnments
Enter into a Supplemental Subdivision Agreement(s) with
the City to:
30. Authorize the City to withhold building permits
for any units in the subject subdivision if any
one of the following occur:
31.
Regional development threshal~ limits set
by the East Chula Yista Transportation
Phasing Plan have been reached.
Traffic yolUllles, levels of service'lublic
uti lities and/or services excee the
adopted City threshold standards.
Comply with the 'requirtllents of the revised
Eastern Chula Yista Transportation Phasing Plan
and Transportation Developllent IlIpact Fee Prograll
or as said dOCUllents lilY be revised based on the
conclusions of the H.N. T .B. State Ioute 125
financing study. {Engineering]
"ot protest for.-tion of lnd inclusion in a
Maintenance District Dr Zone for the ..intenance
of landscaped _dians and scenic com don along
streets within and adjacent to the subject
property Dr an AssesSllent District or Zone for
the ..int.nance of TeleJraph Canyon Flood Control
Channel. (Engineertng]
a.
b.
32.
/J ~~;2
~
Resolution No. 16960
Plge 11
33. lot protest fOrMtion of Ind inclusion in I
COIIIIunity Flcility District to finance
construction of SR 125. (Engineering]
34. Defend, inde.nify Ind hold hlraless the City and
its Igents, officers Ind IIIpl oyees , from any
clai., action or proceeding against the City, or
its agents, officers or .-ployees to attlck, set
Iside, void or Innul Iny Ipproval by the City,
including Ipproval by its Planning COIIIIission,.
City Council or Iny Ipproval by its agents,
officers, or ..,loyees with regard to t~is
subdivision provided the City promptly notifies
the subdivider of any Clli., Iction or proceeding
and on the further condition that the City fully
cooperltes in the defense. [Engineering]
35. Hold the City haTIIless from any liability for
erosion, siltltion or increase flow of drlinage
, resulting from this project. {Engineering]
36.
37.
.
JJ ~2.3
Insure that all frlnchised cable television
companies (.Cable Company.) are permitted equal
opportunity to pllce conduit and provide clble
television service to elch lot within the
subdivision. Restrict Iccess to the conduit to
only those franchised cable television companies
who Ire, Ind remain in cOlpliance with, all of
the teTIIs Ind conditions of the franchise Ind
which Ire in further compliance with all other
rules, regulations, ordinlnces Ind procedures
regullting Ind Iffecting the operltion of Clble
television cOlPanies IS same aay hive been, or
aay from ti.. to ti.. be issued by the City of
Chull Yista. [Engineering]
.
Submit certificltion signed by the Chull vista
Eleaentary School District Ind Sweetwlter Union
High School District indiclting that the
developer Ind the District have entered int' I
binding irrevocable Igreeaent providing for full
.itigltion (as defined in the Specill tlx Reports
dated Dec_er 1192) of school flcility needs
.nerlted by the project. through .nullly Igreed
,rovisions for the establis_nt of I specill
taxing district. IS ,er Specill tlX Reports dlted
, Dec"r 1192, or. if _tullly Igreed. the Ictull
construction by developer of school flcilities.
or such other .ttigltion IS ..y be detllld
appropriate by the Iffected school district prior
to the Ipprovll of the first finll aap which
contlins Iny residentill units. Developer shill
1t=tr
!solut;on No. 16960
age 12
,
bave specifically watved the li.itations, if any,
of 'ove~nt Code 53080 Ind 65995 et sec.
insofar IS those provisions would Hait fuil
aitigation of school facility needs Ind iapacts.
[Planntng]
<)
po@n SDlce
38. 'rant open space lots -A. Ind -D.. Ind Iny
portion of Lots -.. Ind .C. not dedicated in fee
to the County Water Authority, to the City in fee
on the first Final Map which creates individual
residential lots Ind execute Ind record I deed
for each lot. [Engfnttrtng, Porks find
R"reat fon]
39. Submit a list of open space items to be
aaintained and I rough estillate of ..intenance
costs to Illow City staff to dete~ine I
prelillinary cost Ind s2read for the open space
district. {Engfnttrtng]
40. Request that the City fOri! an ~en Space District
to ..intain public Open Space lots .A. and .0',
Ind any portion of Lots e.. Ind .C' not dedicated
in fee to the County Water Authority, Ind submit
to the City the Issociated diagrlm, cost
estillate, description of work Ind a deposit of
$8,000 for processing the f01"llation of tI;!
district. {Engfnttrfng, Parks and Rtentatfon]
41. Submit comprehensive detailed llndscape and
irrigation plans Ind water ..nagement guidelines
for III llndsclpe irrigation in Iccordance with
the Chula Yista Llndscape Manual. The llndsClpe
f01"llat within the project shall be in substlntial
confo~nce with Section 3.2 (Llndscape Concept)
of the Telegraph Canyon Estates SPA plln Ind
,han be subject to the IpprovIl of the City
Landsclpe Architect Ind the Director of 'arks Ind
Recreltion. (PZflnntng. "'rks ""d lIe,reaUOn]
42. Obtain Ipproval of III ,lint ..ten all , lizes Ind
locations. Ind provisions for irrigation of .,en
Ipace ..intenlnce lreas froa the Director of
'arks Ind Recreation. C"'ris ""d lIe,reaUon] .
~
.
43. trade I level. clear lrea It least tllree feet
wide, Ilong the length of Iny Will abutting In
open Iface district lot. IS ..Isured froa flce-
of"'ll to "ginning of "ope, 'lid lrel IS
Ipproved by the City Engineer Ind Director of
~
..
/J---eJ- f
~
Parks Ind R~creltion. [Engtnrrrtng, porks find
Recnot ton)
Obtain approvIl lIy the Director of Parks Ind
Recreltion for th~ siz~ and location of III
access points to open 5plce ..intenlnce lreas. .
[porks IInd Recreotton)
Indiclte on the grlding pllns thlt III walls
which Ire to lie ..intained lIy an open splice
..intenance district are constructed entirely
within the district !roperty. [Porks IInd
Recreotton, Engtneertng
Provide 3 ft. wide solid lIase on III Wills
fronting u20n an open 5pace district. [Porks ond
Recnotion]
Obtain approval of finlll recrelltion trail and
fence des1gn and location from the Director of
Plrks and Recreation. [Porks IInd Recreation)
'Locate a 5 ft. wide decOlposed granite trail with
I post Ind rail fence adjacent to the existing
sidewlIlk on the north side of Otay Lakes Road
subj~ct to review and approval of the Director of
Parks and Recreation. Locate said fence 2-feet
away from the .dge of the trai 1. '[Parks IInd
Recno tton)
I.,rov~ an 8-foot wide pedestrian easement along
the entire westerly side of Street A, along the
Ilorth side of Lot ... to the San Diego County
Water Authority .asement, north along the east
side of said .aselent to and through the trail
path .between lots 148 and 149, northerly along
the west side of Street F to the southerly side
of Gotham Street, and west to the westerly
property 1I0undlry 5ubject to review and approval
of the City Engineer and the Directors of Plrks
and Recreation and Planning. [Engtnrrrtng, Porks
.nd Recrelltton, 'lllnning)
SO. Subllit annual lIuilding ,.nait reports, traffic
counts and fbcal t.,act analysis to the City
co.mencing with the construction of the project
and scheduled to coincide with the annuIl review
of the Growth IIInlgeMnt Oversight CClIIIlittee.
[Plllnntng)
~
) J ~ .,2~
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
Resolution No. 16960
Page 13
49.
~
!solution No. 16960
Ige 14
Miscellaneous
I, )
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
Tie the boundary of the subdivision to the
CaHfornia System - Zone VI (1983).
[Engineering]
Submit copies of Fina' Maps in I digital fo~t
such as (DXF) graphic file prior to Ipproval of
each Final Majl for any unit. Provide cClllPuter
aided Design (CAD) copy of the Final Map based on
accurate coordinate geometry calculations and
submit the info~tion in duplicate on 5-1/2 HD
floppy disk prior to the approval of each Final
Map. {Engineering]
Mitigate noise i~acts on the residences along SR
125 by the placement of soH d wa 115 on the
building pads at the top of the slopes adjacent
to the roadway. The walls shall be constructed
in confo~nce with the design luideHnes set
forth in the SPA Plan for Telegraph Canyon
Estates. The end of each noise will shill wrlp
around the building pld enough to block the line
of sight from all points in the exterior living
space to any portion of the illplct i ng roadwlY.
Indicate on the grading plans the locltion of
slid wills. The design and place.ent are subject
to the approvll of the City Engineer and the
Director of Planning. {Engineering, Planning]
Construct a block will between the retaining
walls indicated on the Tentltive Map along the
south side of 60thlm Street adjlcent to the OtlY
Wlter District property. Said Will shill not be
lower thin 5 feet in height along its entire
length and shill be constructed with decorative
concrete blocks, subject to the approval of the
Director of Planning. [Planning]
Include the pedestrian path between Lots 148, 149
and 150 in Lot C. [Planning]
Prepare Covenants, Conditions, and "strictions
(CClR I s) for the project, subject to the approval
of the Director of Pllnning, which provide that:
e. The ,arking of recreationa' .-hicles,
traners or Mats within the developlltnt
shall be prohibited.
56.
/:3 ---c:2?
~
Resolution No. 16960
P.ge 15
b. Fencing on re.r slopes shall be li~ited to
coated chain link or wrought iron colored
lreen. black or earth tones.
[Plannfng]
57. 'ain approval by the Directon of Planning and
Parks and Recreation of the final development
rlans of the recreation areas on Lots eA" and
B" ~ [Plannfng. Porlcs ,,,,d R,creation}
Enhance the developlent .dge alonr the Otay Lakes
Road scenic corridor. i.... var ed heights and
setbacks. architectur.l treataent. and decorative
landscaping and walls. subject to approval by the
Director of 'lanning. [Plannfng. Parks and
R,creation]
.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
I 63.
(
Provide a letter verifying that a qualified
paleontologist has been retained to implement the
aitigation eeasures relative to paleontological
resources as outlined in the Mitigation
Monitoring Program prior to the issuance of a
grading permit. [Plannfng]
.
Mitigate advene impacts associated with
geological haZlrds in compliance with the
aitigation eoni tori ng program of the Final
Environmental Impact Report for Telegraph Canyon
Estates GOP and SPA Pl.n (EIR 91-05). [Plannfng.
Engfntlrfng]
Dedic.te and record an open sp.ce .asement on a
ainillum of 0.9 acres wetl.nds associ.ted with ·
l.rger wetl.nds are. on the Ot.y Ranch property
in a location approved by the Director of
,l.nnlng. [Plannfng}
Enter into an Afford.ble Housing Agreement with
the City in conformance with Condition No.6 of
the Telegraph Canyon Est.tes &DP and SPA Plan
(Resolution No. 16768) prior to the a2proval of
Iny Fin.l NIp. [Cl1GIIUnUy "vrlopllltnt]
Use Street A IS exclusive ICC'SS to the property
by construction whicles. 6otha.. Street and
Cree!twood ...y shall .....in closed until the
ftOrthwesterly ,hase of the project is
constructed. subject to the Ipproval of the City
Engineer Ind the .Director of Planning.
(Engfneering. 'I""ntng)
J]~J-?
~
eso'ution No. 16960
1ge 16
. .
64. 'IY off III e~isting deficit Iccounts Issociated ,~
with the processing of this Ipp'ication to the
satisfaction of the Director of "lnning.
(Planning]
65. Landscape the lrea between"the retaining .alls on
the south side of 60tha. Street Ilong the Otay
Munici~al "ater District ~roperty and the
sidewa It/trlil. subject to t e approval of the
Director of "lnning. (Planning]
66. 'repare detailed pllns for the develo~nt within
and Idjacent to the .Inway between lots 148.
149, Ind ISO, slid pllns to include landSCa~ing,
fencing Ind house siting on Idjacent ots,
subject to the approval of the Director of
Planning Ind Parks Ind Recreation. (Planning,
Parb and Recreatton]
67. Provide I planting lrea I ainimum of 3 feet in
.idth between property line fences Ind retaining
.al's 3 feet in height or higher. subject to the
Ipprova' Df the Director of Planning.
(Planning]
Code ~eauirements J
6B. Cause the zoning of In off-site parcel{s) to be ,
used exclusively for I COlIIlIunity purpose
Faci'ities site{s), subject to the satisfaction
and Ipproval Df the Director of Planning, prior
to the recordation of the first Final Ma~ for the
troject, or sub.it I Revised SPA lan and
entative Map which provides for said site .ithin
the subdivision. (Planning, City Attorney]
69. Comply with all appliclble sections of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code. Prelarltion of the Tinal
Map Ind III pllns shall be n accordance with the
trovisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the
ity of Chula Vistl Subdivision Ordinlnce and
Subdivision Manual. [E"fineerin,. 'Zannin,]
70. Underground .11 utilities within the subdivision
in accordlnce with Municipal COde requirelents.
[Engineerin,]
71. 'ay the following fees in accordance with the
City Code and Council PoliCY:
IJ-c2t: ~
yrc;-
SECTION VIII.
t
SECTION IX.
.
. Resolution No. 16960
'Ige 17
72.
The Trlnsportltion and 'ubHc flcilities
Developll!nt IlIpact Fees prior to the
issuance of any building permit.
Signll 'articipltion fees.
All applicable sewer fees, including but
not li.ited to sewer connection fees.
Pay the Telegraph .Canyon Sewer aasin fee.
'ay the Telegraph Canyon drainage fees in
accordance with Ordinance 2384 prior to
final ..p approval.
'ay the amount of said fees in effect at the time
of issuance of building permits. [Engineering]
Make all proposed development consistent with the
EastLake I SPA Pllnned Connunity District
Regulations, as amended in the Telegraph Canyon
Estates SPA Plan, subject to the approval of the
Director Planning. [Planntng] .
Comply with Title 24 and any other energy
conservltion ordinances and policies in effect at
the ti.. construction occurs on the prolerty in
conformance with this Tentative Map. LButldtng
find Housing, Planning]
,
I.
b.
~.
d.
e.
73.
Consequence of Failure of Conditions.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they
are, by their tenlS, to be illple.ented and ..intained over
time, or if Iny of such conditions fail to be so i.,lemented
and ..intained according to their tenlS, the City, following
a public hearing by the City Council at which the applicant or
succeSsor in interest is g;yen notice and the opportunity to
appear and be heard with regard thereto, shall have the right
to revoke or IIOdify all approvals herein granted, deny or
. further condition issuance of all future building permits,
deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of
occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein
tranted, institute and prosecute liti,ation to cGlpel their
cOIpliance with said conditions or seek "",es for their
violation. ,.
CEQA Findings.
J3/.) /
~
esolution No. 16960
age 18
A.
Re_ldoDtion Dt-E!ndinos.
The Council does hereby re-.pprove, Iccept IS its own,
Ind re-incorpor.te as if set forth full herein, Ind uke
e.ch .nd every one of the CEQA Findings Itt.ched hereto
IS Exhibit A.
B. Certain Mitiaation Measur@s Feasible .nd le-.doated.
As ~re fully identified Ind set forth in the progr.m
EIR and in the CEQA Findings for this Project, the
Council hereby finds, ,ursu.nt to Public Resources Code
Section 21081 Ind CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, that
the .itigation 8easures described in the Ibove
referenced document Ire feasible .nd wi" become binding
upon the Ippropri.te entity such .s the Applic.nt, the
City, or other specill districts which hiS to i~lement
these specific aitigltion atasures.
C. Feasibilitv of Alternatives.
As is Ilso noted in the environmental documents
referenced in the immediltely ,receding plrlgrlph, six
Ilternatives to the Project which were identified .s
potentillly feasible Ire hereby found not to be
feasible. These .lternatives .re: no ,roject, two
Ilternative designs .nd three .lternltive locltions.
D. ~doDtion of Mitiaation Monitorina Prooram.
As required by the Public Resources Code Section
21081.6, City Council hereby re-adopts the Mitigltion
Monitoring Ind Reporting progr.m ("progr.m") set forth
IS Exhibit B to this resolution Ind incorpor.ted herein
by reference IS set forth in full. The City Council
finds thlt the progr.m is designed to ensure thlt during
'the ,roject iapleaent.ticin Ind operation, the Applicants
Ind other responSible parties illpleaent the ,roject
cOlllPonents Ind cOlllPly with the felSible aitigation
8elSures identified in the Findings Ind in the prograll.
E.
,tatement o~errWna Consfderltf.aD1,..
.
Even Ifter the re-Idoftion of III feasible .iti,ltion
8easures, certain si", fiClnt or potentially siptfic.nt
envirof\lllnt.l Iffects caused by the ,roject c.....,.the,y
will .....in. Therefore, the City Council of the City of
Chu" Vista re-issues, pursu.nt .to CEQA &uidelines
Section 15093, I Stateaent of Overriding Considerations,
IS set forth Ind Ittached hereto IS Exhibit C.
identifying the specific economic, soci.l. Ind other
consider.tions th.t render the un.void.ble si,nific.nt
1.J-7tJ ~
0" t
'- )
Resolution No. 16960
'1ge 19
adverse envirollMntal effects still significlnt but
acceptable.
SECTION X.
Notice of Detenlination.
City Council directs th! Environlental Review Coordinator to
post a Notice of Deterllination and file the sallle with the
County Clerk.
SECTION XI.
Adoption of Street Names.
City Council hereby accepts the recQllendation of the Pllnning
Comission and approves and adopts as the official street
names for all streets within the subdivision, those set forth
in Exhibit D attached hereto, pursuant to Chula Vista
Municipll Code Section 12.44.010.
,../ './ /J ;J. ~
//'~.7j [( {,..v,{'-.
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Pllnning
Presented by
Bruce M. Boogllrd
City Attorney
J ]~J /
~
,olution No 16960
ge 20 .
. . .-. -
--.--
-
-~ -.-
'" ~I".i
. :=; '11 .. , )
. ~~ :::!~ \.
'"
.
.
-f12
., U
. ..
;'
.-
: \' .
~-.
,
~J~;Jd-
..
Resolution No. 16960
Page 21
.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Yista, California, this 19th day of January, 1993, by the following yote:
YES: Councillembers: Fox. Horton. Moore. Rindone
NOES: Councillembers: None
ABSENT: Councillembers: Nader
ABSTAIN: Councillember~: None
.
. Rindone
Pro-Tempore
ATTEST:
'-..,.-.:'. . / / /:- -I' ( .
i '-'....l "'\.: '..;_ {.t'. L'- L.....: 11 . i ,
Beverly~. Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA l
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ss.
I, Beverly A. Authelet. City Clerk of the City of Chula Yista. California. do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 16960 was duly passed, approved,
and adopted by the City Council held on the 19th day of January. 1993.
.
Executed this 19th day of January. 1993.
}\-O\t
l3-lJ
---+ ...:-
Minutes
January 19, 1993
Page 3
Attorney, approved 4-G-1. with Nader absent.
IUiSOLl1l10N 16966 AS AMENDFD. OFFERED BY COUNCUMN RlNDONE, reading of the tat was waived,
passed and approved 4-G-1, with Nader absent.
. . END OF CONSENT CALENDAR . .
PUBUC HEAR.!NGS AND R.ELA1lID RESQLl1l10NS AND ORDJNAlI!CES
9. PUBUC HEAl!1NG PCS-93-03: CONSIDERATION OF TIm TENTATIVE MAP, STATE.MEl'IT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM. AND STREET NAMES FOR
TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTAn:s . BAlDWIN VISTA ASSQOAn:s . The applicant proposes to subdivide 112
acres of presently unincorporated property located on the north side of Otay Lakes Road directly east of Otay
Lakes Lodge mobile home park and directly south of EastLake Shores. The proposal calls for 345 single
family lots, two recreation areas, and four open space lots containing over 26 acres. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning) Continued from the meeting of 1/12/93.
Paul Manganelli, Senior Planner, briefly described the project. He focused on the circulation elements of
the project as requested by Council.
Councilman Fox asked when the agreement regarding affordable housing would be forthcoming.
Mr. Manganelli responded that was Condition 62 of the Final Map and would be presented to Council when
the Final Map was brought forward.
Councilman Fox stated he understood Baldwin would be required to provide the Community Purpose Facility
whether or not the Otay Ranch was annexed. He stated his desire that the facility be located in close
proximity to Telegraph Canyon Estates.
Mr. Manganelli replied that staff would look at the location in a broad context relative to the Eastern
Territories as a whole and it would not be absolutely required to be within a specific distance of Telegraph
Canyon Estates but would be in the General Planning and Service Area. He noted that Baldwin had
proposed meeting the facility requirement in the first village of Otay Ranch which was in relative close
proximity to Telegraph Canyon Estates.
Mr. Manganelli pointed out that the revised School Condition wording, as recommended by the School
District, was placed before Council prior to the start of the meeting.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
Tim O'Grady, 2029 Port Cardiff. Chula Vista. CA 91911, representing the Baldwin Company, thanked staff
and noted Baldwin's concurrence with the resolution and all conditions contained within.
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed.
IUiSOLl1l10N 16960 APPROVING TIm TENTATIVE SUBDMSlON MAP FOR TELEGRAPH CANYON
ESTAn:s, CHULA VISTA TRACT 93-03; AND MAlClNG TIm NECESSARY FINDINGS; READOPTING nm
STATE.MEl'IT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND TIm MITIGATION MoNITORING PROGRAM FOR
EIR 91..05
City Attorney Boogaard stated staff requested Council amend the motion by substituting the language in Item
No. 37 as contained in the handout.
MSC [Fo~orton] to amend Condition No. 37.4-0-1. with Nader absent.
IUiSOLl1l10N 16960 AS AMENDFD. OFFERED BY COUNCUMN MOORE, reading of the tat was waive<!
passed and approved 4-G-l, with Nader absent.
Iy--;r1
.A :!Ad::
c.:
~
.I
~xhl b,'+ T!
'(
RESOLUTION NO. 17475
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AMENDING CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF RESOLUTION NO.
16960 APPROVING THE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
CHULA VISTA TRACT 93-03. TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES
WHEREAS. on January 19. 1993. by Resolution 16960. the City Council approved the
Tentative Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 93-03. Telegraph Canyon Estates; and.
WHEREAS. at the time the first final map of this development was approved. Council
also adopted Resolution 17278 amending the original conditions of approval of the tentative
map and certain conditions were amended to defer compliance until approval of a later final
map of the development; and.
WHEREAS. the supplemental subdivision agreement for the first phase of development
(Resolution No. 17279) outlined the terms and conditions for the developer to satisfy the
amended conditions; and.
WHEREAS. the developer is now requesting that Council further amend Conditions of
Approval Nos. 61. 62. and 68 to defer compliance until approve of subsequent maps; and.
WHEREAS. Condition No. 61. as originally amended. requires the developer to enter
into an agreement to dedicate and record in first priority positions a minimum of 0.9 acres of
wetlands on the Otay Ranch property prior to approval of the fourth final map; and.
WHEREAS. it had been anticipated that the grant of easement and subordination
agreement would be completed prior to presenting the fourth final map for Council approval;
the grant of easement has been prepared and recorded. however. because the property on
which the easement is located serves as collateral for loans secured for the purchase of the
Otay Ranch the subordination agreement must be executed by a number of different entities
and individuals and the execution process has taken considerably more time than anticipated;
and.
WHEREAS. staff recommends that Condition No. 61 be further amended to read as
follows:
"Enter into an agreement not to apply for Council approval of a fourth or later
Final Map for the Property until Developer has dedicated to the City. by the
recordation of a dedication deed. an easement over a minimum of 0.9 acres
wetlands associated with a large wetlands area on the Otay Ranch property in
a location approved by the Director of Planning ("Originally Wetlands
Easement"' and provided a title poliCY covering the Original Wetlands Easement.
Developer shall further agree not to apply for Council approval of the final map
containing the 232nd lot until Developer has recorded all necessary
subordination agreements to subordinate any deeds of trust encumbering the
property on which the Original Wetland Easement is located and provided a title
policy insuring the priority of the Original Wetlands Easement."
-1r=-l /3-J/
Resolution No. 17475
Page 2
..
..
WHEREAS. the original Condition 62 of the approved tentative map for Telegraph
Canyon Estates required the developer to enter into an affordable housing agreement to. as
a minimum. grant in fee to the City not less than three buildable acres in a location and of a
character satisfactory to the City for the purpose of constructing housing for low and
moderate income families; and.
WHEREAS. Condition No. 62. as previously amended. requires the developer to enter
into an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City to provide 34.4 affordable housing units
of the Fifth Final Map; and.
WHEREAS. since it is anticipated that the fifth final map will soon be presented to
Council for approval and the developer and City staff have come to an understanding that the
required affordable housing may be provided partly on-site and partly off-site. Staff
recommends that Condition No. 62 be further amended to read as follows:
"Developer agrees that. without permission of the Council. it will not apply for Council
approval of a Final Map covering the 200th lot within the Property to be subdivided
until City and Developer have entered into an affordable housing agreement in
accordance with Condition No.6 of the resolution approving the General Development
Plan and SPA Plan for the Telegraph Canyon Estates project (Resolution No.1 6960)."'
WHEREAS. Condition No. 68. as originally amended. requires the Developer to enter
into an agreement with the City to cause. consent to. permit. apply for. and not oppose the
planning or replanning and zoning or rezoning of an off-site parcells) as a Community Purpose
Facilities (CPF) site prior to the recordation of the fourth Final Map; and.
WHEREAS. the CPF site is expected to be provided in the first village of the Otay
Ranch. and the Otay Ranch General Development Plan has been conditioned accordingly.
however. the Otay Ranch property has not yet been annexed and therefore the developer is
unable to comply with the condition at this time; and.
WHEREAS. the amended condition would require the developer to further reserve and
later replan an appropriate CPF site within the project if an off-site parcel cannot be
guaranteed prior to the approval of the final map containing the 301st lot of the subdivision;
and.
WHEREAS. Council desires Condition 68 be amended as follows:
Developer agrees that it shall. concurrently with the execution of this Agreement.
record a covenant ("Covenant"' against a parcel ("CPF Parcel"llegally described as
shown on Exhibit A. entitled "Legal Description. C.P.f:. Site", (consistently of
approximately 1.51 acres located within the area of the Property. and legally mapped
as shown on the Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein. that such parcel
shall be restricted for the use as a Community Purpose Facilities site. In the event that
Developer applies to the Council for approval of a Final Map covering the 301 st lot to
'Amended on Council floor. May 3.1994. to read as set forth herein.
~ IJ~.Jj
.I
,
Resolution No. 17475
Page 3
be subdivided within the Property and Developer has not (re)planned and (re)zoned as
a Community Purpose Facilities Site 1.5 acres of property within the territory of the
city satisfactory to the City. the City can, at City's option, either amend the SPA Plan
and rezone the Property themselves or require Developer to submit an amendment to
the SPA Plan and amend the zoning map and/or zoning regulations to specify the
necessary zoning for such a Community Purpose Facilities site within the boundaries
of the Property covered by the Covenant; provided, however, in the event Developer
does plan and zone a Community Purpose Facilities site on an off-site parcel within the
City of sufficient size, in a sufficient location and to the satisfaction of the City which
is owned by Developer, then the Covenant shall be terminated and of no further force
or effect and City shall execute any and all necessary documents to provide for such
termination. -2
NOW. THEREFOREM BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby amend certain conditions of Resolution No. 16960 aproving the Tentative
Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 93-03, Telegraph Canyon Estates as set forth
hereinabove.
wlj' '
J6hn P. LiPPitt~
Director of Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaar
City Attorney
Presented by
iL'J~
y
'Amended on Council floor at May 3, 1994 meeting.
~ JJ-3?
Resolution No. 17475
Page 4
.
.
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESC1UPl10N
c.P". SlTE
THAT PORnoN C1ITHE SQUnI\\'EST QUAA1D C1I SECT10N )4.lOWNSHIP ., ICXTrH. RANGE I
WIST. SAN IlD,N.UDINO BASE AND hlERJDIAN.1N THE CrT'Y aI CHULA VISTA. COUNTY aI SAN
DIEOO. STATE aI CAJ,.IPORNlA. DESaJP.... AS PQU.OWS:
BECilNNlNO AT THE MOST NORnlEJU.Y CXlRNEIlC1lID1' 19, CII\lLA VISTA ftACfNO. 9JoG3.
ftUOIW'H CANYON ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD 3 UNIT NO. I. IN THE CrT'YaI CII\lLA ViSTA.
.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEClO. STATE aI CAJ,.IFORNlA, ACCOIlDINO TO MAP 1HEREOf NO. 13070. P1LED
IN THE Of'FlCE alTHE SAN DIEOO COUNTY UCORDD ON NOVDIBER U, 1993; 'I1IENCE A1DNO
THE NORnIEJU. Y LINE OF SAID IDI' 19 AND IDI'S II. .,. 16 AND 15 aI SAID MAP NO. 13070 THE
I'OLLOWlNO THREE ~S, SO\111i 62" 04' 00" WEST, 43.35 PEn; THENCE SO\111i ,.. 4T OS.
WIST, 65.24 FEET; THENCE NORTH "" OS' 00. WEST. 112.39 FEET; THENCE LEA VlNO SAID
NORnlEJU.Y LINE. NORTH 13" 31' ocr WIST.13S.9S FEET; THENCE NORTH 02" 31' 00. lAST. 121.10
PEn; THENCE NORTH 12" W 00. lAST. 121.71 FEET; THENCE SO\1TllIS" 2'7' ".IAST. 56.00 FEET
10 A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT 421.00 FOOTIl.ADIUS CURVE CONCAVE WES1DlY. WJTH A
BEAlUNO nOM THE Il.ADIUS TO SAID POINT OF SO\1TllIS" 2'7' ".IAST; THENCE sounmu. Y
ALONO THE AAC OF SAID CURVE THllOUCiH A ~ AJIlOL.E OF 01" 14' ".. A DISTANCE OF 9.30
PEn; THENCE SO\1TllOS" 47'00' WEST. IU6fEET TO THE BEOrNNINO OF A TANGENTto.OOFOOT
Il.ADIUS CURVE CONCAVE EAS'fE]U. Y; 1HENCE sounmu. Y ALONO THE AAC aI SAID CURVE
THllOUOH A CENnAL ANCiL.E OF 17" 41' 30., A DIST AJIlCE OF 27.97 FEET; THENCE SO\111i 12" 01' JO.
lAST. 15.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 17" 53' 00. lAST. 107.37 FEET; THENCE SO\111i Ol" 24' 00. lAST,
.
10.)4 FEET; 1HENCE SO\111i 13" 56' 27" WEST, 37.93 FEET; THENCE SO\111i W 07' 00" WIST. '72025
PEn TO THE POINT OF BEOrNNINO.
~ /L'4
-1. ~~ -
W. Hill, Jr. L.S.5669
~ 13<>g/
/
I
I
/
/1
~
J
.
Resolution No. 17475
Page 5
LEGAL DESCRIPTION PLAT
C.P.F. SITE
;
.... .. ".. _c. N. Y..... .., w_ ......
.
,
~
I
..
~
-
...
"'.
a
s
c
c
-
"-
C.P.F. SITE
t .51 ACRES
%
.
"
;t;.
"'~
--
s
II "'0.'00'
.J.IS'
II 71'.2'0$'1
e.2.'
I II I I' I I' , .. , ..
I ..J.,. .-TA ~CT ..1..... ,
~..,. ellf"'- "T~ft. ._..11 III . upn ... ,
- .... .. .,.
~ /3/J I
Resolution No. 17475
Page 6
.
.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this 3rd day of May, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: Council members: Horton, Malcolm, Moore, Nader, Rindone
NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
JC /I.Jt4..
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
/> 1/)
"ll( , l 1/
Beverly . Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )'
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A.Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 17475 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City
Council held on the 3rd day of May, 1994.
Executed this 3rd day of May, 1994.
~J3~t/t/
/
I
Minutes
May 3, 1994
Page 7
f
APPROVING A TENTATIVE SVBDIVlSION MAP FOR TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUI'E SAME
E. RF.~OUmON 17477 APPROVING FINAL MAP OF TRACT 'J.eJ, TELEGRAPH
CANYON ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD 1 UNIT 2, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC THE
PUBLIC SJ'REETS DEDICATED ON SAID MAP, AND THE EASEMENTS GRANTED ON SAID MAP
WITHIN SAID SVBDIVlSION, AND APPROVING SVBDIVlSION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR
THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY SAID SUBDIVlSION, AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUI'E SAID AGREEMENT
City Attorney Boopan! IlaIed two ",opoeed chanaes were oeaotialed at the Iaat minute aDd administrative staff had
DOt bad a cbance to review them. The pressure to p.opose the change wu created by the oeed of the developer to
record a map aDd their finaDcing wu depeDdeot upon doing so. The ordinaDce in the Council notebook required
the developer to pay the PAD fees aDd other required fees within 60 days of map approval. That was a cbange
from the current policy aDd past practice of baving the developer pay the PAD fees at or before map approval. He
wu not advocating Council's adoption but was not objecting it either because it contained a provision that the fund
into wbich the fees would go would collect interest at two percentage points above the average interest earnings.
He felt that created a cash equivalency between a current payment aDd a future payment secured by a AAA rated
insurance company or a letter of credit. lbe City Manager and City Attorney would bave to agree on the proposed
aecurity. It was in the form of aD ordinance because it would be available to aDY proposed fee payer. The first
amendment to the supplemental subdivision improvement agreement also had changes as marked in the handout.
r
Mayor Nader stated he had asked for information on low income housing, i.e. Condition /16. lbe information
presented was incomplete, but the condition was for the provision of three buildable acres for low income housing
and it wu left open as to who it would ultimately be provided to. lbe materials in the agenda packet suggested
that it had been changed to a different set of conditions and were now being further modified in the City Attorney's
proposal. He wu unclear as to when the modification was clone by the Council.
.
City Attorney Boogaard stated the agreement being referred to wu contained on page 13-13 aDd Condition 68 was
repeated on page 13-16. Tentative Map Condition /16 provided substitution rights of three buildable acres.
Mayor Nader stated it wu not a substitution right, it wu a condition that there be three buildable acres. It appeared
there wu a cbange. He questioned if that condition wu preserved in the proposal or if it wu altered.
City Attorney Boogaard responded that it wu altered. lbere was a duty to provide three off-site buildable acres
of affordable housing and the agreement before Council allowed, at the Council's option, the right to require the
cash or land equivalency to the burden of building 17.2 low income units on I 1/2 acres. lbe affordable housing
requirement for three buildable acres was being converted to the Council's option of baving I 1/2 acres of land.
Mayor Nader questioned why that was being done and why it wu not more explicitly spelled out for Council. He
felt that wu a significant change.
(
City Attorney Boogaard stated the changes occurred 1ate that afternoon. He felt it could be a more rigorous
condition than the previous Condition /16. The Council would bave the right to require enough nw land to be the
equivalent of providing the land and coastructing the units.
Dave Gustafson, AasistaDt Director of Community Development, respooded that Condition 16 was altered to the
dearee that the moderate income units could be provided 011 site and staff felt that wu aD advantage. The low
iDcome units would still be off-site and the option available to Council would be to require the dedication of the land
to build them. The previous condition IlaIed there would be three acres, balf of wbich would be moderate income.
Mayor Nader IlaIed that was the standard obligation. but was DOl what wu incorporated into that particular tentative
map. It did not specify that balf would be \ow income housing. The intent wu that the condition would ultimately
be aatisfied by deeding over either to the City. or a community _-profit organization agreeable to the City, three
.
~
/ J - i/
buildable ICre& tbal could be U8ed for low iDc:ome housing. He felt tbal coadition was III overriding consideration
tbal jUllified the eaviroameDtaI impecl of the project. He was dildWbed tbal it appeued there was a propoaaI to
IUbstllltively cbaIlge a condition the policy makers inteDded ud it sbouId have beea put clearly before Council.
He quaticmed why there oeeded to be a chaoge in the origioal condition.
City Attomey Boopard stated there oeeded to be 0Ile chaoge if progresa was to be made. i.e. the developer bad
the right to defer the duty to have a housing agreemeot with the City until the fourth fioaI map ud the inleDt was
to defer tbal UDliI the fifth fioaI map or aubsequeat mapa. He was DOt c:ertaio there was a coaacious inleDt to subvert
the option created in CotKIition 16. Council. UDder CotKIition 16 bad III option in lieu of requiring the developer
to build affordable housing provide aDOlber acre of Iud. He felt the developer would have preferred to doDate the
Iud. If the City only received the Iud there would be the expeose of approximately $30.000 to build each unit.
Mayor Nader quaticmed whether alaff bad lakea the poaition tbal the Iud bad to be conveyed to the City at which
point the City would build the units. The inleDt of the origioal condition was tbal the conveyance could be to a
commIIIlity _-profit organization tbal might have the ability to get the units built.
CoUDcilmember Moore questioned whether COUDcil could move forward with the other items with alaff making
copies of all information for other Councilmemben.
Mayor Nader stated CoUDcil could move forward with resolutions that were aeparate from that condition or just
resolve it by lesving the original condition as it was ud iDc:orporating it into the resolutions.
-!=
>"i
.~:~
......u
Minutea
May 3. 1994
Page 8
City Attomey Boogaard stated the developer Wlllted approval of Item E. i.e. approval of the fioaI map. Staff did
not WIIIt that approved until they were sure the developer would perform the other conditions. Item D addressed
the housing isaue.
~
Councilmember Moore questioned if lilY Councilmember disagreed with 17.2 moderate income housing units on
the present site.
Mayor Nader stated he did because it was a change in what was previously acted upon which slat.... the eatire
affordable housing element would be satisfied with a provision of buildable acreage off-site for 34 units of affordable
housing.
RESOLUTION 17474 OFFERED BY MA YOIl NADEll, reading of the text was waived. passed and approved
4-1 with Ilindcme opposed.
COUDcilmember Moore questioned whether there were other items tbal could be considered tbal were separate from
the low/moderate housing requirement.
City Attorney Boopard stated Item A. Ordinance 2592. granted the developer the permission tbal bad DOt
previoua1y beea exteaded to other developen. i.e. permilSion to let them pay r-. primarily the PAD r-. by
giving the City security with payment to be made on or before the first Certificate of Occupancy.
City Manager Goss alated be did DOt have a problem with a sixty day delay in getting the PAD money from the date
of acceptance of the map by Councilor recordation. He did have a problem tbal there was a guarulee procesa tbal
could be met ud tbal the fee might DOt actually be paid until Certificate of Occupancy in which case it would
IUbstllltially delay the PAD fee. Staff bad advised him tbal they would like to look at the 1IIIguage for a week
before aupportiDg it. They also wlllted to talk to the Parks &. Ilecreation Director ud Public Works Director
regarding the impacts of the propoaaI. The PAD _y was currently in the oeaative ud Council bad made
commitmeots from those funds.
CouDcilmember RiDdooe questioned what the industry atudard was for the paymeot of f_. He did DOt feel be
could vote for the proposed chaoges until ataff bad III opportunity to review it. Un/eos there was a time
coaseq_ tbal was 10 siJDifiClllt tbal Council bad to lake action it should be continued for one week.
t
~ /J-7"'~
r
\
l\
,f,
,
Minutes
May 3, 1994
Page 9
J_ Valenzuela, DireclOr of Pub &. Recreation, ataled the Subdivision Map Act called for payment of pari< fees
al fiDaI map, but did give flexibility of payment up 10 the building permit atage. In his survey with surrounding
cities in San Diego County it appeared that the payment of pari< fees was CODsiSlellt ICtOSS the board and Cbula
Viata stood out as ODe of the oaly cities where pari< fees were required prior 10 fiDaI map recordation.
City Maoager Goss felt the proposa1 undercut the policy issue ataff was working on.
. Fred Arbuckle, repreaeating the Baldwin Company, ataIed be could only respond 10 the payment of the
parks fee issue. They needed 10 bave the map fiDaled so they could pull building permits as &ODD as possible. Their
mlellt was 10 bave the map recorded next week and preferred there not be a delay regarding the map. He
apologized 10 staff and Council regarding the confusion regarding the payment of the fees and the idea that it was
a last minute cbange. He bad a certain understanding and a mis-understanding about what was before Council for
CODSideration. They asked that Council approve &taft's original recommendation, not the modified recommendation,
which would permit the payment of the fees within sixty days of Council action, but prior 10 recordation of the map.
As a follow-up they would like 10 meet with &taff over the course of the next two weeks and return at that time
regarding a postponement of the payment of fees. They were looking at ways 10 satisfy stafrs concerns regarding
leCurity. They bad sucassfully utilized the posting of a bond with the City of San Diego.
Mayor Nader questioned what the leCurity concern was with the ordinance.
City AlIOrney Boogsard &taled there was no security problem with the ordinance in the Council agenda packet. It
was unsatisfactory 10 the developer as they needed credit beyond the sixty days IDd still bad 10 bave the right 10 pull
building permits right away.
.
Mr. Arbuckle responded that was correct, they WIDIed to postpone fees, record the map, IDd &tart construction.
George Krempl, Deputy City Manager, &tated the Parks &. Recreation Department was working on a referral from
Council regarding the issue of paying pari< fees at the time of building permits rather than at map approval. He
bad been informed that the issue would go to the Park &. Recreation Commission on 5/19/94 with a report back 10
Council in early June. He felt that report could also look at payment of the fees at occuplDcy.
Councilmember Fox questioned if the City bad IDY restrictions in the agreement that would allow the City 10
determine the proximity of the community purpose facility sites 10 the project site.
Mr. Gustafson responded the Council bad the authority 10 approve the specific site. The intent in the original SPA
Plan was that the site would be in the Otay Ranch, one of the first villages. That bad been designated in the Otay
Ranch General Development Plan. If that could not occur in the development time frame for the project, a site had
also been designaled in their project that could meet the requirement.
. Tim O'Grady, representing the Baldwin Company, &taled they bad identified the site with the assistance
of the Engineering IDd Planning Departments. It was felt it was a reasonable site within the project boundaries to
provide such a facility. The inlellt was 10 provide it off-site within the Ranch.
City AlIOmey Boogsard &tated even though the ordinance would not take effect untillbirty days after the second
reading, the coacept was that Council was approving a policy that would be available 10 all developers of deferral
and that ataff would administratively apply the policy.
ORDINANCE 1591 PLACED ON FIRST READING BY MAYOR NADER, ..di.. of &be lext was waived,
pused md approved wwWnol&ly.
\.
City AlIOmeY Boogsard recomn-<Ie<I that Item 0, be .--ded 10 read, first four lines, "Developer agrees that
without permission of the Council, would not apply for Council approval of a fina1 map covering the 200th lot
within the property 10 be lUhdivided until the City and developer bave entered inlO an Affordable Housing
.
~ /3-J/3
Ap-eemeat in acconIaDce with Coadition fI6 of the GeoenI Development Plan aad SPA Plan'. He st.ated that
BaldwiD would aeeclto ~tto the cbaup in the qreemeot.
Mr. O'Ondy st.ated that would be lICCOplable if it was the 20151 lot due to the way their bouocIary liIleI wae oet
up. It was llIlticipmed that the oeveath map would be before Council in five to six months.
. Kim Xi1kmMY, ."!'..-tiIlg the BaldwiD Complllly, st.ated when the three.ere requirement was oepialed,
the inleatiOll was that the three .era be provided witbill Olay RllIlc:h. The problem they hIld eDCOUIItered since tbea
was that it was DOt witbill the City of Chula Vista aad DOt likely to be witbill the DeXt six months. The specific plllll
aad ouhcIivisioaa would DOt be approved in that time frame aad therefore there would DOt be a specifically ideatified
buildable lot that could be COIIveyed to the City or a third party. They could eater into a COIItr..:t to do that aad
the Olay RllIlc:h GeoenI Plan hIld 11lIlauaJO that required them to do that. In terms of hard aad fast eecurity, they
had DOt '- able to Jive the City the lot, unleas the City would be wisfied with a Cov_t.
i
1 i
Minutes
May 3, 1994
Page 10
Mayor Nader felt tbere were sevenllegal devices that would comply with the spirit aad would be binding providing
the COlIIIty allowed them to do llIlytbillg 00 Olay Ranch. He did not feel it was fair to have building permits held
up over a condition Baldwin wllllted to fulfill.
MSUC (NaderlMoore) to amend \be qreement appro.,ed by Resolution 17476 to read rmt four lines.
"DeYeloper qrees tbat without pennission or \be CowIdI, would not apply for Council appro.,.1 or a rmal
map co.,erinc \be 200tb lot within \be property to be subdi.,ided until \be City U1d de.,eIoper ban entered
into an Affordable Housina Apeement in accordance with Condition 116 of \be General DeYelopment Plan and
SPA Plan",
MS (NaderlFox) to amend Resolution 17475 to read. paae 13C-1. language in \be indented section read
"DeYeloper 1IIree5 tbat without pennission or \be Council, would not apply for Council approval of a rmal
map co.,erinc \be 200tb lot within \be property to be subdivided until \be City and deYeloper bave entered
into an Affordable Housi"l Alreement in accordance with Condition" of \be General DeYelopment Plan U1d
SPA Plan",
."
Councilmember RiDdoDe questiODed what the interesl iDcome nte was 00 the PAD fee. He further questioned what
the time would be from the original proposal for the fourth map to the occupancy stage.
Mr. Krempl st.ated the iDcome nte was approximately 4. + ".
Mr. Kilkeaoey respooded that they typically CODSlructed a productioo unit between five aad six mooths.
Council_her RiDdoDe stated if it were six months, 011 $170,000 at 4" it would ooIy be $3,400 annually.
VOTE ON AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION 17475: appro.,ed unanimously.
RESOLUTIONS 17475 AS AMENDED. 17476 AS AMENDED, AND 17477 OFFERED BY
COUNClLMEMBER HORTON. readi"l or \be text was wai.,ed,
Counci1member Moore questioned what the DeXt atep would be, i.e. would the appliCllllt aad staff COIItiIlue to
negotiate.
Mr. Krempl teIpOIIded that was correct.
Councilmemher Fox questiODed if it was possible that the item would be brought b..:k for Council consideration
of defem! of fees until the occupmcy stage.
Mr. Krempl stated it was a possibility for consicleratiOll of future maps, but it was his uoderslaDdiog that they
wllllted to record the preseat map aad it would seal the CODditions approved by Council.
~ }3-~("
~
"
Minutes
May 3, 1994
Page 11
\.
'-
CouDcilmember Moore questiooed if Ibe 34.4 units of affordable housing had been settled.
Mr. Leiter stated the coodition referred 10 the SPA PIIIl IIld wOllld be Ibe basis of negotiations.
Mayor Nader stated it was tlllsettled at Ibe cllrreat time.
Mr. Kilkenney responded that when Ibe project was originally approved Ibe Baldwin Compmy made a commitment
10 three acres and Ibey stood ready 10 try 10 provide 17 moderate income hOllSing lIDits on site, bllt he heard
Council's preference for three acres off-site.
(
Mayor Nader stated Council had approved a motion several years ago regarding Ibeir preference for three acres off-
lite. It was IIDderstood at that time Ibe developer wOllld f11lfilllbeir reqllirement by Ibe City exercising Ibat option
rather Iblll by requiring Ibe units be build on-site.
Councilmember Moore felt that shollld be clarified in no IIDcertain terms in order to resolve it for once IIld for all.
MS (Nader /Horton) to reiterate previous Council action that Condition #6 should be fulfilled through a
provision of affordable housing off-site by way of three huildable acres, whether conveyed to the City or to
a DOn-profit hollSing entity approved hy the City for the purpose of huilding affordable housing units (34
units).
Councilmember Horton stated page 13-3 stated Ibe original condition was not III option bllt reqllired. If Ibe minlltes
were different it shollld be clarified.
.
Mayor Nader felt langll&ge was missing on page 13-3 in Ibe last paragraph. When cbanges in policy were being
recommended Ibe original COlIDcil action needed to be provided as part of the backllp information. He felt Ibe
motion on Ibe floor provided clarification IIld allowed Ibe project to move forward.
City Atlomey Boogaard IIrged ColIDcil 10 appreciate that the developer wOllld not have a problem as it was a
cbeaper alternative for Ibem.
Mayor Nader stated Ibe confllsion was whether ColIDcil was attempting to get money OIIt of the developer or
attempting to provide a pllblic benefit. His goal was not 10 focllS on Ibe dollar amollnt the City received from Ibe
developer, blltlo focllS on how millY lrIIly affordable hOllSing units the City wOllld be able 10 provide 10 families
in Ibe region IIld at what reasonable cost. If Ibey collld get Ibem provided more efficiently, wilb less bllrden 10 Ibe
developer, IIld more favorable impact 10 Ibose in Ibe community in need, that was what he WIIlted to do.
City Atlomey Boogaard felt he needed 10 advise Council as 10 Ibe feasibility of gellinglbe project throllgh sweat-
eqllity. He was III\lIWIfO of lilY feasibility stwIy on being able 10 do that. Council shOllld know Ibat if Ibey were
ptting three acres of IlIld how millY hOllSing units COIIld be achieved throllgh sweat-eqllity IIld if Ibey WIIlted it
in Ibe City or on land that may never come inlo the City. Staff did not know if Ibey were being directed 10 accept
three buildable acres in Clay Ranch that were not annexed 10 the City. If Council foreclosed Ibose options by
directing staff wilbOllt stwIying Ibe economics IIld where it was located Council may not have Ibe policy slIIdy done.
Mayor Nader stated no policy stwIy was directed. CouDcil asked for three bllildable acres for affordable hOllSing.
It had been discllSSOd lhorOllghly two years ago and those iSSllOS were raised by staff at that time.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION: (MooreIHorton) to dired staff to iDdllcle the present motion within the necotiations
with the appliQllt and brin& back the pro'. and con'. to the Council within the time frame of the total report.
Mr. Kilkenoey stated it wOllld take approximately lix 10 eight months for the sixlb final map or the 200tb lot.
.
CouDcil_ber Fox qlleSliooed whelber lix months COIIld be included within the motion.
..:@rtr / J ~ ~
~
'~
~
~
-
Minutell
May 3, 1994
Palle 12
CouIlcil_"'"' Moore atated it would be brought t.ck with the other report ud should be withiD the sill mooths.
Mayor NIder atated he did DOl feel that was fair to the developer, Council, or the citizaul for whom the affordable
housiDa ..-t was designed. They were at a stage where there was a teatative map with the coaditioo iDcluded
ud a developer Prepuinll for IUbmissioo of fiDaJ maps within the Dellt sill mooths. He did DOl - why that should
be delayed further.
Council.....,.her RiDdooe questiooed whether the appliCUlt bad a problem with the .-AM motioo 00 the floor.
Mr. Kilk_y ~ that he felt they could I""fo.m IIDlIer my altemative, but felt it would be more clear to
provide UDder the initial motioo.
VOTE ON SUBS'ITI'UTE MOTION: apprond 4-1 with Nader opposed.
. . . ColDlCil.... .". to Closed Session at 6:25 p.m. and reconvened at 7:03 p.m. · · ·
14. REPORT EAST OT A Y MESA SPECmC PLAN . The County of San Diego
i. curreatly Processinll a Specific PIlD for East OIay Mesa. The City has previously raised concerns regarding
traffic, lnDSpOrtatioo facility fioIDcing md Phasinll, jobslbousing balaDce, md biolollY' The County Board of
Supervisors i. scheduled to tal<e action on the matter on 5/4/94. Staff recollllDellds that Council review md enforce
a final set of comments to be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors on the matter. (Director of Planninll)
Continued from the meed.. of 4/26/94.
Robert Leiter, Director of PlllDlliDg, stated staff bad met with the managemeot staff of the Planninllmd Public
Works Departments md bad mother meeting scheduled for later in the week. The City MlDager was scheduled
to meet with the Deputy CAO on Monday. Staff was continuing to resolve the iasues md hoped to ao to the Board
of Supervilors with a more speci fic recommendatioo.
MS (RindonelFox) to appron staff recommendation; II and 12: 1) _wt with County executin staff
"Ilardi.. issues tnlmniUed previously to the County if San Dieao PIanni.. Commission; and 2) tnlmnit the
letter to the County Board of Supenison (attadment 2), wbich ~uests that the Board postpone fmaladion
on the East Otay Ml!5ll Specific Plan to enable the City and County to address concerns with the analysis
contained in the F'mal EIR as well as policies contained or laid... in the East Otay Ml!5ll Specific Plan.
Mayor NIder questioned if the proposed letter was my different IbID the letter before Council last week.
Mr. Leiter atated the comment reaardina bioloay bad beeD removed as it bad beeD based 00 previous information.
Staff did verify that and added additional policy lID....ae regardina bioloay. 10 additioo, the recom.......datioo at
the end of the letter was made more specific as to the chmaes staff was recommending in their plm. They did
follow the same !iDe of thinkiDa iDcluded in the first letter. The County staff did not have a problem with
recom""""""tioo II, but there were some issues reaarding the requirement for a Facility Phasing and FiDancina PIID
that they bad DOl reached aareement 00.
Mayor Nider questiooed when it was scheduled for review by the Board of Supervisors. He further questiooed if
mythiDg was added to the letter reaarding the use of public transit to deal with circulatioo and traffic impacts.
Mr. Leiter respooded that it would ao before the Board 00 5/11194. Under Item II they specifically referenced
that the EIR should include specific mitigation measures iDcludina both roadway improvemeots and DOO.automobile
transit improvemeots such as mass transit facilities and lnDSpOrtation demand measures.
Mayor NIder questioned why the City could DOl ask that they amend the Specific Plm in some way to require that
before leDtative maps were approved that the City'. conc:ems be addressed. That way they could move forward
~ )3 /1/~
.....~ '\ "l.
.\ .
6'- ~
.~t
.
j
"
~)'h.i.bL+C
c-
~!.y ....
e
RESOLUTION NO. 17279
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING A SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT REQUIRING DEVELOPER TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN
UNFULFILLED CONDITIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 16960 APPROVING
A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR TELEGRAPH CANYON
ESTATES, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS, on January 19, 1993, by Resolution No. 16960, the City Council
approved the Tentative Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 93-03, Telegraph
Canyon Estates; and,
WHEREAS, certain conditions for the recording of final maps required by
Resolution No. 16960 have not yet occurred at the time of the adoption of this
resolution; and,
WHEREAS, the Developer of the subdivision desires to have three of several
final maps recorded at this time ("First Three Final Maps.); and,
WHEREAS, City is willing to allow the recording of the First Three Final
Maps at this time upon execution by the Developer upon, among others, the
exec uti on of an agreement ("Supp I ementa I Subdi vi s i on Improvement Agreement")
requirin9 Developer to perform the unfulfilled conditions of approval at a later
time; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby approve the Supplemental Subdivision Improvement
Agreement to Perform Unfulfilled Conditions of Tentative Subdivision Map
approval, known as document number C093-216, a copy of which is on file in the
office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby
authorized and directed to execute said Agreement for and on behalf of the City
of Chula Vista.
. .
APPLr~ved as t~ fo
. I
/1'/
Bruce M. Booga~rd
City Attorney \
J
Presented by
hn P. Lippitt
irector of Public Works
y--113-'17
.--"
I..
(
Resolution No. 17279
Page 2
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Couneil of the City of Chula
Vista, California, this 19th day of October, 1993, by the following vote:
YES: Councilmembers: Fox, Horton, Moore, Rindone
NOES: Counei 1 members: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: Nader
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
::Jerry
ayor,
ATTEST:
lerk
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. 17279 was duly passed, approved,
and adopted by the City Council held on the 19th day of October, 1993.
Executed this 19th day of October, 1993.
7.
City Clerk
~ /3---(r
Minutes
I'\(tober 19, 1993
le 6
. Don Wallace, 512 Tamarack Court, Chula Vista, CA, representing Chula Vista Taxi, stated he was
pleased to see the staff recommendation but requested time to review the document and respond in writing.
He had received the document only one hour before the meeting and felt there were some things he had
difficulty with, not a great deal.
Councilmember Moore felt staff had worked with the owners for months. If Council trailed the item, and
Mr. Wallace met with staff and decisions could be reached, he would be willing to consider it. He had no
desire to continue the item. He questioned if there were other taxi owners present that had not been
contacted by staff (there was no response from the audience). It was time to solve the problem.
Mayor Pro Tem Rindone questioned what meetings had been held with the companies.
.
Gerald Young, Administrative Analyst I, responded that the last formal meeting had been in January. When
the proposal was formalized, staff contacted all of the cab companies to let them know the staff report was
available and to discuss the recommendations with them. Staff was able to contact all but two of the
companies and Chula Vista Taxi was not one of those companies.
. Clint Harless, 288 Broadway, Chula Vista, CA, representing Clint & Conchita Taxi, stated his original
concern was that the annual inspections would only be held at MTDB. He had been informed by staff that
the inspections would be somewhere close and (onvenient. He was in full agreement that there needed to
be inspections.
~ouncilmember Moore questioned what the rational was for increasing the fare rate since the increase in
Ists was less than MTDB. He also questioned if the anticipated $55 range for inspection included staff
overhead.
Chief Emerson responded that the fare rates had not been adjusted for fourteen or fifteen years. Staff felt
it should come into compliance. Staff took the City's administrative overhead into consideration when
recommending the fee.
ORDINANCE 2574 PlACED ON FIRST READING AND RESOUTnON 17271 OFFERED BY MAYOR PRO TEM
RJNDONE, reading of the tat was waived, passed and approved 4..().1 with Nader absenL
13.A. RESOLUTION 17278 AMENDING CERTAIN CONDmONS OF RESOUTnON NUMBER 16960
APPROVING TIm TENTATIVE SUBDMSlON MAP FOR TRACT 93-03, m.EGRAPH CANYON FSTATES - On
1/19/93, Council approved the Tentative Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 93-03, Telegraph Canyon
Estates. The first three final maps for said tentative map are now before Council for approval. Staff
recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works)
B. RESOLUTION 17279 APPROVING A SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDMSlON JMPROVEMfNT AGREEMFNf
REQUIRING DEVELOPER TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN UNPULPILLED CONDmONS OF RESOUTnON
NUMBER 16960 APPROVING A TENTATIVE SUBDMSlON MAP FOR TELEGRAPH CANYON FSTATES, AND
AtJIliORlZlNG TIm MAYOR TO EXEarrE SAME
C. RESOLUTION 17280 APPROVING PINAL MAP OF TRACT 93-03, TELEGRAPHCANYONFSTATES
NEIGHBORHOOD 1 UNIT I, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF TIm PUBUC TIm PUBUC STREETS DEDICATED
ON SAID MAP, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF TIm CITY TIm OPEN SPACE LOTS GRANTED ON SAID MAP
AND TIm EASEMEm'S GRANTED ON SAID MAP wmiIN SAID SUBDMSION, AND APPROVING
~DMSlON IMPROVEMFNr AGREEMEm' FOR TIm COMPIEnON OF IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY
iAID SUBDIVISION, AND AtJIliORlZlNG TIm MAYOR TO EXEarrE SAID AGREEMENT
D. RESOLUTION 17281 APPROVlNGPlNALMAPOPTRACT93-03, m.EGRAPHCANYONFSTATES
NEIGHBORHOOD 2 UNIT I, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF TIm PUBIJC TIm PUBIJC STREETS DEDICATED
~ J3~fl
.
\.
"
.
........
Minutes
October 19, 1993
Page 7
,
ON SAID MAP, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF nm OTY nm OPEN SPACE LOTS GRANTlID ON SAID MAP
AND nm EASEMEm"S GRANTlID ON SAID MAP WJniIN SAID SUBDMSlON. AND APPROVING
SUBDMSlON IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR nm COMPI.E110N OF IMPROVEMENI'S REQUIRED BY
SAID SUBDMSlON. AND AtmiORlZlNG nm MAYOR TO EXEClTI'E SAID AGREEMENT
E. RESOLUTION 17282 APPROVING FINAL MAP OFTRACT~, TElEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES
NEIGHBORHOOD 3 UNIT 1, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF nm PUBUC nm PUBUC smEETS DEDICATED
ON SAID MAP, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF nm OTY nm EASEMEm"S GRAN11ID ON SAID MAP wm-DN
SAID SUBDMSlON,AND APPROVING SUBDMSIONIMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR nm COMPI.E110N
OF IMPROVEMENI'S REQUIRED BY SAID SUBDMSlON, AND AtmiORlZlNG nm MAYOR TO EXEClTI'E
SAID AGREEMENT
F. RESOLUTION 17283 APPROVING nm 1NI11A110N OF PROCEEDINGS FOR OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT NUMBER 31 (l'F.LEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES)
Councilmember Horton requested the item be continued until the City Attorney arrived.
Clifford Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer, informed Council that the approval of the
subdivisions would not affect the closing of Gotham and Creek Wood Drive, or the area of grading.
.
City Attorney Boogaard stated Resolution B proposed to change the Supplemental Subdivision Improvement
Agreement which had been handed out at the meeting. The agreement put the non-infrastructure type of
duties of the developer in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. The non-improvement duties were
moved to the Supplemental Subdivision Improvement Agreement and obligated the developer to perform all
the conditions of the Tentative Map that had not been performed as to todays date. The developer asked
for the following three changes which he concurred in: 1) with regard to a wet land easement: they would
do it prior to Council's approval of the next Subdivision Map; 2) Condition 62, required the developer to
reach agreement on affordable housing before Council's approval of the Final Subdivision Map; and 3)
community purpose facility site, it would be the developers duty to provide the City with an adequately
planned and zoned alternate site acceptable to the City prior to Council's approval of the next Subdivision
Map.
Mayor Pro Tem Rindone questioned what the advantage would be if Condition 62 was tied to the fourth map
instead of the fifth.
City Attorney Boogaard stated it had been anticipated that affordable housing would be placed on the' Otay
Ranch but, it had not yet annexed. After approval of the next map there would still be approximately 210
more units to secure 34 units of affordable housing. If the developer did not go along with the Affordable
Housing Agreement in a manner acceptable to Council, Council would not have to approve the fifth or
lubsequent maps.
Councilmember Fox questioned if there was a lecurity provision for affordable housing other than in the
agreement.
City Attorney Boogaard responded that when the City actually had the Affordable Housing Agreement staff
envisioned instruments such as liens against property. He had reserved full discretion for the Council to
accept it and if Council was not happy with it, it would not happen.
Councilmember Fox questioned whether the provision for an approximate lite for a community purpose
facility had changed.
.
Tim O'Grady, representing Baldwin Company, stated the CPF lite had been moved away or off-site at Itaff
and Council direction. It had always been alsumed it would be provided in Phase I, or ViJlage I, of the Cta'
~ /J~5t?
Minutes
October 19, 1993
.ge 8
Ranch. Therefore, they had put language into the GDP document that obligated the developer to that
condition.
RESOUTnONS 17278, 17279, 17280, 1ns1, 17282, AND 1n83 OFFERED BY COUNCLMEMBER MOORE,
reading of the tat was waived, passed and approved 4-0-1 with Nader absenL
14. REPORT RECONSIDERATION OF EXlENDING GOTIiAM S11tEET TO SERVE 1HE
mEGRAPH CANYON EX'J"ENSION - As recently reported to Council, residents of the Gotham Street area
have raised serious objections to the extension of Gotham Street to serve the Telegraph Canyon Estates
Subdivision. They feel that the extension will increase traffic and reduce safety in their neighborhood. On
10/5/93, staff and a representative of the Baldwin Company, developers of Telegraph Canyon Estates, met
with 45 residents from the Gotham Street area to discuss their concerns. At that meeting, a petition
containing approximately 200 signatures was submitted. Staff recommends Council accept the report.
(Director of Planning)
Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, informed Council staff had meet on 10/5/93 with Baldwin and 45
residents of the College Estates area to address their concerns. At that time the residents presented a
petition with 200 signatures opposed to the extension of Gotham Street. The applicant had indicated a
willingness to cooperate in considering options to solve the neighborhood concerns. Any action to modify
or close one or more of the street openings would require a subsequent noticed public hearing. Staff
recommended Council schedule a public hearing on 11/16/93 to consider closing one or both of the streets
providing secondary access to Telegraph Canyon Estates and/or measures to reduce the speed on Gotham
treet with legal noticing to be provided to the property owners and residents within College Estates,
C:astLake Shores, and the Otay L"dge Mobilehome Park.
Clifford Swanson, Deputy Public Works Director/Ciry Engineer, stated if Gotham Street was closed there
would be no additional traffic and staff did not feel there was a speed problem. In looking at possible
designs, staff did consider things that would include such items as a fence with a gate so the fire department
could gain access. The roadway would be put in under that circumstance but a future Council would face
the same opposition at opening that up.
Councilmember Moore stated if he lived there he would have the same concerns. If Gotham was punched
through, which was a logical extension of a City street, what would the repercussions be. If there were
repercussions, what would need to be done to solve them. If he was going to vote for a change it needed
to be a win/win situation.
. Tim O'Grady representing the Baldwin Company stated they felt all neighborhoods benefited if the
streets were put through and the circulation element was better. However, they did not want to take a
position and would work with staff on whatever decision was made.
Those speaking against the extension of Gotham Street due decrease in property values, increased traffic,
increased noise, increased air pollution. loss of quality of life and security, use of Gotham Street as a short
cut for the EastLake area, and safety concerns regarding additional traffic. Speakers felt the initial noticing
was nebulous to specific routes and the extension of Gotham Street.
.
.
Edward R. Bancroft, 1976 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA
Dr. R. E. Lacey-Parks, 1961 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA, read a letter from Mr. 8< Mrs. Ken Smith
at 1638 Gotham Street
Douglas Parker, 1960 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA
Gene Marcinkowski. 1975 Kent, Chula Vista. CA
Jon Thornburg, 1901 Gotham Street, Chula Vista. CA
Tom Liebst, 1979 Kent Street, Chula Vista, CA, passed when called
Colleen Cotton, 1984 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA
.
.
.
.
.
~ /J/5'1
.
.
~
Minutes
October 19, 1993
Page 9
f
. Gary Flannagan, 1944 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA
. John Hunt, 1972 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA
. Robert McCauly, 1987 Bucknell Street, Chula Vista, CA
. Peter D. Springer, 1667 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA
. Robin Leon, 1923 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA
. Colin Lockyer, 1965 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA
. Jeanne Wheeler, 2005 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, CA
. Sharon Vanderflague, 835 Stanford Court, Chula Vista, CA
Councilmember Fox questioned if the hill Mr. Tornburg felt provided a hazard for traffic was from Stanford
to Rutgers on Gotham. He felt the concern should be referred to staff.
Councilmember Moore questioned if the streets in Telegraph Estates were public or private.
Mr. Swanson responded they were public streets. The subdivider had proposed private but, staff had
recommended public due to problems with private streets. The main entrance in the original plan had a
gate.
Mr. Griffln stated when they proposed the private street system they showed the same connections but, had
a gate at one location. When a street was designed to end permanently it was a cul.de-sac so circulation
could get back out.
.
Councilmember Moore stated if there was a public hearing there would also be another group from Creek
Wood appearing. He felt it would be helpful if the residents would work with staff and Council and appoint
up to flve speakers that could address the concerns.
MS (Moore/Horton) to set a public hearing for November 16, 1993 regarding potential closures of CreeIi.
Wood and Gotham streets.
Friencl1y Amendment: (Fox) to have staff provide alternatives for emergency access in the event Gotham and
Creek Wood were permanently closed. Agreed to by the Maker and Second of the motion.
Councilmember Moore requested that an actual trial of frre engine response times from Gotham and Otay,
EastLake, and from east "H" Street be included in the report.
VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: approved +Go1 with Nader absent.
******
Council recessed at 8:08 p.m. and reconvened at 8:20 p.m.
......
.
15. REPORT UPDATE ON SOIJD WASTE ISSUES AND REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP)
PROCESS FOR ALTERNATIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL OPTIONS - AI the 9/21/93 meeting,
Council directed staff to proceed with an RFP for the procurement of solid waste management and disposal
options by determining and recommending appropriate consultant services and identifying funding sources.
Staff had reported on six informal letter proposals from qualif1ed consultant firms. Staff has conducted
interviews with all six firms and proceeded with an evaluation and selection process which has resulted in
the recommendations contained in the report, including a revised scope of services for a Request for
Qualif1cations (RFQ) instead of an RFP. Staff recommends Council approve Resolutiqn B and direct staff
to: a) continue to monitor results of the North County JPA proposals and any interest by neighboring cities
to join in a subsequent process to establish alternatives; and b) return by 12121/93 with results of the RFQ
process and recommendations for continued development of alternatives. (Administration)
~/J-S';L
~
r:::J
I
ClRlLA VISTA TRACT NO. 93-03
TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES
PHASE III
o
~
.
.
~
..
..
..
1'2 ~
" ~
IX, 11
10 -<
':I.
LOT .....
.-
,-
NEIGHBORHOOD 1 j.~S
UNIT NO. 3 y~
IlEIGH.ORHOD 1 .J
UNIT NO. 1 O~.,)
MAP NO. 1.0..
,
,
E.x hi bit b
/3/ f;;
- This Page Blank -
y-a I.J--5(
~xh;b+ ~
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters which will require
discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information
must be disclosed:
I. List the names of all persons having a fmancial interest in the contract, i.e., contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
Baldwin Builders. a California
COl:POrati on
2. If any person identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more
than 10"10 of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
James P Baldwin
Alfred E Baldwin
3. If any person identified pursuant to (I) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as
director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
N/A
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions,
Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ No ...x. If yes, please indicate person(s)
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent contractors who you
have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
Dave Hammer
Hunsaker and Associates
Jack Hill
Dexter Wilson
Wilson Eniineerin~
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than 51,000 to a CounciImember in the current
or preceding election period? Yes_ No ..1L If yes, state which CounciImember(s):
fmgn is defmed as: "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fratemal organization,
corporation, estate, /nLSt, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and country, city, municipality, district or other political
subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit. ..
)TE): Attach additional pages as necessary)
Date: Al)~",~ \Q, ,QQ4
.
.~~6~
/ J ./ 5~ Signature of lapplicant
\\MC>\'\\Y 3 O'/.,'E'A\)'i
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
....
- This Page Blank -
~ J]->>
..
10 -3S0
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
\
Above
,Exltu:bl"-t F
city Clerk
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, CA 91910
No transfer tax is due as this is a.
conveyance to a public agency of
less than a fee interest for which
no cash consideration has been paid
or received.
~~/_~ D'7-
Devel~r
Space for Recorder's Use
SUPPLEMENTAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
Telegraph Canyon
(Conditions 3, 4, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34,
35, 36, 50, 60, 61, 62, 68, 71 and 73)
This Supplemental \~~divisio~mprovement Agreement
("Agreement") is made this - day of .\;t,-_ , 1993, by and
between THE CITY OF CaULA VISTA, California ("City" or "Grantee"
for recording purposes only) and otay Vista Associates, a
California limited partnership ("Developer" or "Grantor"), with
reference to the facts set forth below, which recitals constitute
a part of this Agreement:
RECITALS
A. This Aqreement concerns and affects certain real property
located in Chula Vista, California, more particularly described on
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated berein ("Property").
The Property is part of a project commonly known as Telegraph
Canyon Estates ("Project").
B. Developer is the owner of the Property.
a:\subdiv\tce.upp2.wp
November 2, 1993
Supp. SIA for Telegraph Canyon Estate.
Page 1
-F=r J) /51
R.&.., 'l. .., e
(.~~-2.1'
C. Developer has applied for and the city has approved a
Tentative Subdivision Map commonly referred to as Telegraph Canyon
Estates, Chula vista Tract 93-03 ("Tentative Subdivision Map") for
the subdivision of the Property.
D. The City has adopted Resolution No. 16960 ("Resolution")
pursuant to which it has approved the Tentative Subdivision Map
subject to certain conditions as more particularly described in the
Resolution. The description of the conditions in this recital
section of this Agreement is intended only to sUlllJllarize and
paraphrase such conditions in the Resolution, and is not intended
herein to modify or explain them, and is not intended as a basis
for interpreting them.
E. Condition Nos. 3 and 60 of the Resolution requires
Developer to perform certain mi tigation measures to the
satisfaction of the Director of Planning, and to cause
implementation of mitigation measures to be monitored via the
approved Mitigation Monitoring Program.
F. Condition No. 4 of the Resolution requires Developer to
either (a) comply with, remain in compliance with, and implement,
the terms, condi tions and provisions of the Telegraph Canyon
Estates General Development Plan, Sectional Planning Area Plan,
Master Plan of Reclaimed Water, Water Conservation Plan, Air
Quality Improvement Plan and the Public Facilities Financing Plan
approved by the Chula Vista city Council (collectively, the
"Telegraph Canyon Plans") which are applicable to the Property
prior to approval of any final subdivision map ("Final Map"), or
(b) enter into an agreement with the city, providing the City with
such security (including recordation of covenants running with the
land) and implementation procedures as the City may require,
a.suring that, after approval of all Final Maps, Developer shall
continue to comply with, remain in compliance with, and implement
such Telegraph canyon Estates Plans.
G. Condition No. 14 of the Resolution require. the Developer
to install transit amenities on both sides of Otay Lake. Road at
the project entry or appropriate alternative location as approved
by the City Enqineer. Transit amenitie. include but are not
limited to benches and/or shelters and are subject to approval by
the City Enqineer. Developer was required to pay $5,000 cash
deposit to the City prior to the approval of the first Final Map to
fund transit amenitie. when required, receipt of which bas
occurred.
H. Condition No. 27 of the Re.olution, which was subsequent-
ly amended by Resolution No. 17278, required that, prior the
recording of the final map, the Developer was to enter into an
agreement with city to commit to u.e of reclaimed. water at the
e:\subdiv\tcesupp2.WP
November 2, 1993
Supp. SIA for Telegraph
~ j]'3r
Canyon ..tates
Paqe 2
'-
earliest possible date and to make all reclaimed water use conform
to the applicable regulations of Chu1a Vista, Regional Water
Quality control Board and the state Department of Health.
I. [Condition No. 30] City has adopted city-wide growth
management "thresholds", as established by city Resolution No.
13346 ("Thresholds"). These Thresholds establish performance and
"quality of life" standards for a variety of services and impacts
which must be in existence or satisfied by the Project as a
condition to the city permitting the Project to be built. In
addition to the Thresholds, and as a mechanism to insure compliance
therewith, the City has adopted the Eastern Chu1a Vista
Transportation Phasing Plan ("phasing Plan"). The Phasing Plan
provides that certain transportation facilities must be in
existence or provided by the Project as a condition to the City
permitting the Project to be built. The Thresholds and the Phasing
Plan establish standards and levels of service for various
identified public facilities and these standards and levels of
service are enforced through the withholding of building permits
when the public facility or resource drops below a specified
threshold. Condition No. 30 requires Developer to agree to comply
with the Thresholds and standards created by city Resolution
No. 13346 and the Phasing Plan.
J. Condition No. 31 of the Resolution requires Developer and
city to comply with the requirements of the Eastern Chu1a vista
Transportation Phasing Plan and Transportation Development Impact
Fee Program.
Jt. Condition No. 32 of the Resolution requires Developer and
city to enter into an agreement with the city wherein Developer
shall agree to not protest the formation of (i) a maintenance
district for the maintenance of landscaped medians and scenic
corridors along certain streets within and adjacent to the Project;
and (ii) an assessment district for the maintenance of Telegraph
Canyon Flood control Channel.
L. Condition No. 33 of the Resolution requires the Developer
and City to enter into an agreement wherein Developer agrees to not
protest the formation of and inclusion in a community Facility
District to finance construction of state Route 125.
M. Condition No. 34 of the Resolution requires the Developer
to enter into an agreement to indemnify and hold harmless the city
from any claims, actions or proceedings against the city to attach,
set aside, void or annul any approval by the city with regard to
the Telegraph canyon Estate subdivision.
N. Condition No. 35 of the Resolution requires the Developer
to enter into an agreemant to hold th_ City harmles. from any
e:\subdiv\tcesupp2.WP
November 2, 1993
supp. SIA for Telegraph
~~3' /J-57
Canyon Estate.
pag_ 3
...
liability for erosion, siltation or increased flow of drainage
resulting from the Project.
o. Condition No. 36 of the Resolution requires the Developer
to enter into an agreement with the City relating to the provision
of franchise cable television services as more particularly set
forth in Condition No. 36. .
P. Condition No. 50 of the Resolution requires the Developer
to submit to the city annual building permit reports, traffic cost
analysis and fiscal impact analysis on the terms set forth in said
condition No. 50.
Q. Condition No. 61 of the Resolution requires the Developer
to dedicate and record an open space easement on a minimum of .9
acres wetlands associated with a larger wetlands area on the Otay
Ranch property in a location approved by the Director of Planning.
R. Condition No. 62 of the Resolution, which was subsequent-
ly amended by Resolution No. 17278 requires that prior to approval
of a final map by the City council, the Developer to execute an
affordable housing agreement in a form satisfactory to the City
providing for 34.4 affordable housing units on the area of the
Tentative Map covered by the Later Final Maps, and in accordance
with Condition No. 6 of the Telegraph Canyon Estates GDP and SPA
Plan (Resolution No. 16768) prior to the recordation of any Later
Final Maps for the project.
S. Condition No. 68 of the Resolution, which was subsequent-
ly amended by Resolution No. 17278 requires Developer to enter into
an agreement with the city prior to the recordation of the fourth
Final Map (as defined in the amending Resolution) providing that
Developer will cause, consent to, permit, apply for, and not oppose
the planning or replanning and zoning or rezoning of an off-site
parceles) as a Community Purpose Facilities site. Said off-site
parcel es) shall be satisfactory to the City and of the same
approximate size as that which may have been required on-site, and
must be owned by the Developer, be within the jurisdiction of the
City and otherwise be within the vicinity of the project and
subject to the satisfaction and approval of the Director of
Planning. otherwise, Developer is to submit a aevised SPA Plan and
Tentative Map which provides for said site within the subdivision.
T. There are certain other unperformed and unfulfilled
conditions of said Tentative Map, such as Condition Nos. 71 and 73.
U. City is willing, on the premises, security, terms and
conditions herein contained to approve the first three final maps
for which Developer has applied commonly known as Neighborhood 1,
Unit 1; Neighborhood 2, Unit 1; and Neighborhood 3, unit 1 (-First
e:\subdiv\tcesupp2.wp
November 2, 1993
Supp. SIA for Telegraph canyon Estates
Page 4
~).J~'?d
Three Final Maps") as being in substantial conformance with the
Tentative Subdivision Map for the territory of such First Three
Final Maps.
NOW, THEREFORE, in exchange for the mutual covenants, terms
and conditions herein contained, the parties agree as set forth
below.
1. agreement applicable to Sub.equent owner..
1.1 agreement BinlSing Upon .ucce..ors. This Agreement
shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors,
assigns and interests of the parties as to any or all of the
Property until released by the mutual consent of the parties.
1.2 agreement Run. with the LanlS. The burden of the
covenants contained in this Agreement ("Burden") is for the benefit
of the land owned by the City adjacent to the Property. The Burden
touches .and concerns the Property. It is the intent of the
parties, and the parties agree, that this covenant shall be binding
upon, and run with, the ownership of the land which it burdens.
The Burden of this Agreement shall be released from title, as to an
individual lot or unit within the Project upon the sale of any lot
improved with a residence. If requested by Developer, City shall
execute a quitclaim releasing the Burden of this Agreement from the
title to any such lots. If Developer assigns any portion of the
Property subject to the Burden of this Agreement, Developer shall
have the right to obtain a release of any of Developer'S
obligations under this Agreement provided Developer obtains the
prior written consent of the City to any such release. City shall
not withhold its consent to any such request for a release so long
as the assignee demonstrates, to the reasonable satisfaction of the
City, its ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement
as it relates to the portion of the Project which is being acquired
by the assignee.
2. ConlSition No. S anlS 60 - Xitigation Xeasure.. Developer
shall, at their sole cost and expense, implement all mitigation
measures required by Resolution No. 16960, and in particular,
Section IX, B. and Section VII, Condition No. 60, to the
satisfaction of the City and shall implement or cause to be
implemented, at their sole cost and expense, the Mitigation and
Monitoring Program required by Resolution No. 16960, Section IX. D.
3. ConlSi tion 110. 4 - compliance W1t:h Plans. In satisfaction
of Condition No. 4 of the Resolution, Developer hereby certifies
that Developer is currently in compliance with and agrees to
<a) remain in compliance with, and implement, the terms, conditions
and provisions of the Telegraph Canyon Estates Plans prior to
approval of any Final Map, or (b) agrees to provide the City with
e:\subdiv\tcesupp2.wp
November 2, 1993
Supp. SIA for Telegraph
~ JJ</t/
canyon Estates
Page 5
.
such security (including recordation of covenants running with the
land) and implementation procedures as the City may require,
assuring that, after approval of Final Maps, Developer shall
continue to comply with, remain in compliance with, and implement
such Telegraph Canyon Plans. Developer shall have satisfied its
obligations to comply with the Telegraph Canyon Plans so long as
Developer remains in substantial compliance with the action plan
for implementation of the Telegraph Canyon Plans set forth on
schedule 3 attached hereto and incorporated herein.
.. Con4ition No. 14 __ ~ransit amenities. Developer shall
install such transit amenities on both sides of otay Lakes Road at
the project entry or appropriate alternative location a. approved
by the city Engineer. Transit amenities, as the term is used
herein, shall include, but shall not be limited to, benches and/or
shelters and are subject to approval by the city Engineer. City
acknowledges receipt from the Developer of $5,000 as a cash deposit
to secure Developer's promises in this regard.
5. con4ition No. 27 -- lleclaime4 W.ter Vse. Developer
hereby agrees to install reclaimed water piping in such locations
as City shall require, and at such times as City shall require same
during the construction of the infrastructure for the Property.
Developer further agrees that it and its successors in interest
shall use reclaimed water at the earliest possible date same is
reasonably available at .uch price as City shall determine is
reasonable, which shall at a minimum be understood to mean at least
the price of potable water. Developer shall otherwise be comply
with applicable regulations of Chula Vista, Regional Water Quality
control Board and the State Department of Health as to the purchase
and use of reclaimed water.
6. Con4ition No. 30 - Bui14ing permits Not to Issue While
~hre.ho14. Deficient. In satisfaction of condition No. 30,
Developer agrees as follows:
6.1 Developer hereby grants to the city the right to
withhold building permits for any dwelling units on the Property at
such time as anyone of the following occur:
6.1.1 ~affic volumes, levels of service, public
utilities and/or services exceed the standards for those adopted
city Thresholds identified on Schedule 1 attached bereto and
incorporated herein; or,
6.1.2 Regional development tbreshold limits
identified on East Chula Vista ~ansportation phasing Plan,
Schedule 2, attached bereto and incorporated berein.
e:\subdiv\tcesupp2.WP
Nov8lllber 2, 1993 .
Supp. SIA for Telegraph
p-b- / J ~ t?.;z.
canyon Estate.
Page 6
c
.
7. Condition No. 31 - Complianc. with East.rn Chula vista
~ran.portation Pha.ing Plan and ~ransportation D.v.lopment Impact
F.. Program. In satisfaction of Condition No. 31, Developer agrees
that it shall comply with the requirements of the revised Eastern
Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan and Transportation
Development Impact Fee Program or as said documents may be revised
based on the conclusions of the H.N.T.B. state Route 125 financing
study.
8. Condition No. 32 - No prot.st of Maint.nanc. Di.trict or
A.....m.nt District. In satisfaction of Condition No. 32 of the
Resolution, Developer and their heirs, assigns, transferees, and
other successors-in-interest, hereby agrees to not protest the
formation of a maintenance district for the maintenance of medians
and scenic corridors along streets within and adjacent to the
Property and to not protest the formation of and inclusion of the
Property in an assessment district for the maintenance of Telegraph
Canyon Flood control Channel. This agreement to not protest the
inclusion of these public improvements shall not be deemed a waiver
of the right to challenge the amount of any assessment which may be
imposed due to the addition of these new improvements and shall not
interfere with the right of any person to vote in a secret ballot
election.
.
9. Condition No. 33 - No prot.st of Formation of community
Facility District. In satisfaction of Condition No. 33 of the
Resolution, Developer hereby agrees to not protest the formation of
and inclusion of the Property in a community facility district to
finance construction of state Route 125. This agreement to not
protest the inclusion of these public improvements shall not be
deemed a waiver of the right to challenge the amount of any
assessment which may be imposed due to the addition of these new
improvements and shall not interfere with the right of any person
to vote in a secret ballot election.
10. Condition No. 35 - Subdivision .ap Ind.lIlJ1ity. In
satisfaction.of Condition No. 35 of the Resolution, the Developer
agrees that, on the condition that City shall promptly notify the
Developer of any claim, action or proceeding and on the further
condition that the City fully cooperates in the defense, the
Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and
its agents, officers and employees, from any claim, action or
proceeding against the city, or its agents, officers or employees,
to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City,
including approvals by its planning Commis.ion, City Council, or
any approval by its agent., officers, or employees with regard to
this Project.
e:\subdiv\tcesupp2.WP
November 2, 1993
Supp. SIA for Telegraph Canyon Estate.
page 7
/] ~tJ
~
.
.
11. Condition 110. '6 - C.bl. T.l.vi.ion ....m.nt.. In
.atisfaction of Condition No. 36 of the Resolution, the Developer
.grees to permit all cable television companies franchised by the
city of Chula vista equal opportunity to place conduit to and
provide cable television service for each lot or unit within the
Project. Developer further agrees to grant, by license or
easement, and for the benefit of, and to be enforc.able by, the
city of Chula Vista, conditional access to cable television conduit
within the properties situated within the Project only to those
cable television companies franchised by the City of Chula Vista
the condition of such qrant being that <a) such acc.ss is
coordinated with Developer'S construction schedule so that it does
not delay or impede Developer'S construction schedule and does not
r.quire the trenches to be reopened to accommodate the placement of
such conduits; and (b) any such cable company is and r.mains in
compliance with, and promises to remain in compliance with, the
terms and conditions of the franchise and with all other rules,
r.gulations, ordinances and procedures regulating and affecting the
operation of cable television companies as same may have been, or
may from time to time be, issued by the city of Chula Vista.
Developer hereby conveys to the City of Chula Vista the authority
to enforce said covenant by such remedies as the City determines
appropriate, including revocation of said grant upon a
determination by the City of Chula Vista that they have violated
the conditions of the grant.
12. condition 110. 50 - Submis.ion of annu.l Building p.rmit
and oth.r R.port.. In satisfaction of Condition No. 50, Developer,
and their heirs, assigns, transferees and other successors-in-
interest shall submit to the city Director of Planning annual
building permit reports. The first of such r.ports shall be
submitted commencing as of February 1, 1994. subsequent r.ports
shall be delivered on an annual basis until the last building
permit in the Project has been issued.
13. Condition 110. '1 - ..tland. ....m.nt. Developer agrees
that it will. not apply for council approval of a fourth or later
final map to the Property, and City may withhold approval of same
notwithstanding all other conformance with the T.ntativ. Map, until
D.v.loper has d.dicat.d to the city, and same has be.n r.cord.d in
first priority position, a minimUlll of ., acr.. w.tlands associat.d
with a large wetlands ar.a on the otay Ranch property in a location
approv.d by the Dir.ctor of planning. .
14. ConUUon .0. 'I - affor4abl. .ousing aqre..nt.
Developer agr..s that, without permission of the city council, it
will not apply for council approval of a fifth or lat.r final map
to the Property until city and Dev.lop.r have r.ach.d an affordable
housing agr..ment in a form satisfactory to the city providing for
34.4 affordable housing units on the area of the T.ntative Map
e:\subdiv\tc.sUpp2.WP Supp. SIA for T.legr.ph canyon
November 2, 1993 ~ / .:J~tf,i
Eatate.
Page 8
G
,,0.,
-'
covered by the fourth or later final maps, and in accordance with
Condition No. 6 of the Telegraph Canyon Estates GDP and SPA Plan
(Resolution No. 16768).
15. Condition No. &. - loning for a Community Purpose
Facilities Site. Developer agrees that, if one or more parcels of
property satisfactory to the City and of the same approximate size
as that which may have been required on-site, owned by the
Developer within the juriSdiction of the city and otherwise be
within the vicinity of the Property has not been (re)plonned and
(re) zoned as a Community Purpose Facilities site at the time
Developer applies for Council approval of a fourth or other final
map for the Property, or if the parties have not reached a
satisfactory agreement for the planning and zoning of such a
parcel, City may withhold approval of same notwithstandinq any
other requirement, and Developer shall submit a Revised SPA Plan
and Tentative Map which provides for said site within the
subdivision. City agrees that proximal areas of the Western Parcel
of the otay Ranch Project may provide such an off site parcel if it
meets the other requirements of annexation and ownership by the
Developer at the time of zoning.
16. Compliance with UnfulfillelS ConlSitions. Developer aqrees
to comply with all the conditions of the Tentative Subdivision Map
which remain unperformed or unfulfilled at the time of the filing
of the Final Map, including the followinq conditions nos. 71 and 73
which read as follows:
Condition No. 71. Pay the followinq fees in
accordance with the City Code and Council
Policy:
a. The Transportation and Public Facilities
Development Impact Fees prior to the issuance of any
building permit;
b. Siqnal Participation Fees;
c. All applicable sewer fees, includinq, but
not limited to, sewer connection fees; and
d. The Teleqraph Canyon Sewer Basin fee.
Condition No. 73. Comply with Title 24 and
any other enerqy conservation ordinances and
policies in effect at the time construction
occurs on the property in conformance with the
Tentative Subdivision Map.
e:\subdiv\tc.supp2.wp
November 2, 1993
Supp. SIA for Telaqraph
~ JJ~ts
canyon Estates
Page 9
,
.
.to,
r
17. .atisfaction of Con4itions. City agrees that the
execution of this Agreement constitutes satisfaction of
Developer's obligation of Conditions 3, 4, 14, 27, 30~ 31, 32, 33,
34, 35, 36, 38, 50, 61, 62, 68, 71 and 73 of the Resolution as it
applies to the territory of the First Three Final Maps for Chula
Vista Tract 93-03.
18. .ecor4iDg.
prepared by either or
of either party.
19. Xiscellaneous.
This Agreement, or an abstract hereof
both parties, may be recorded at the option
19.1 .otice.. Unless otherwise provided in this
Agreement or by law, any and all notices required or permitted by
this Agreement or by law to be served on or delivered to either
party shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly served,
delivered, and received when personally delivered to the party to
whom it is directed, or in lieu thereof, when three (3) business
days have elapsed following deposit in the U.S. mail, certified or
registered mail, return receipt requested, first-class postage
prepaid, addressed to the address indicated in this Agreement. A
party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph by
giving written notice of such change to the other party. Facsimile
transmission shall constitute personal delivery.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Attn: Director of Public Works
Developer:
otay Vista Associates
c/o The Baldwin Company
11975 EI Camino Real
San Diego, CA 92130
Attn: Project Manager of
Telegraph canyon Project
A party may change such address for the purpose of this paragraph
by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the
aanner provided in this paragraph. Facsimile transmission shall
constitute personal delivery.
19.2 captions. captions in this Agreement are inserted
for convenience of reference and do not define, describa or limit
the scope or intent of this Agreement or any of its terms.
e:\subdiv\tcesupp2.wp
.ovember 2, 1993
Supp. SIA for Telegraph
~ JJ-~?
canyon Estates
Page 10
c
\z.
-.
19.3 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the
entire agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter
hereof. Any prior oral or written representations, agreements,
understandings, and/or statements shall be of no force and effect.
This Agreement is not intended to supersede or amend any other
agreement between the parties unless expressly noted.
19.4 Preparation of Agreement. No inference, assUlllption
or presumption shall be drawn from the fact that a party or his
attorney prepared and/or drafted this Agreement. It shall be
conclusively presumed that both parties participated equally in the
preparation and/or drafting this Agreement.
19.5 Recitals; Exhibits. Any recitals set forth above
are incorporated by reference into this Agreement.
19.6 Attorneys' Pees. In the event of any cHspute
arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing party in any action
shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees in addition to any
other costs, damages, or remedies.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused
Agreement to be execute the day and year first bereinabov
forth.
By:
City of Chula Vista
-f1.
r
ader, Mayor
Attest:
Clerk
OTAY VISTA ASSOCIATES, a
California limited partnership
By:
Sky Vista, a California
corporation, General
Partner
ruce
:~~~~9~ ~
Title: "\r'~ ~~\\~..n-
Date:
By:
Name:
Title:
f
",
(
e:\subdiv\tcesupp2.wp
November 2, 1993
~
Supp. SIA for Telegraph'Canyon Estates
Page 11
/J~~?
~. . V 1......- - tat 1.011
...a......; _n 110.. ".he T:'..ansPo:'.vi.sed
~~ner costs, aamages, or remeales. . ._
IN WITNESS Wf~EOF , the parties
Agr.ement to be execute the
forth.
bereto lave caused this
day and year first be::;;nabo7" "set
CL. .ii. ~
By:
City of Chula Vista
L-PlJRPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
tale of Califonlia )
)
~lIIIly of SID DielO )
Oa \\\\~\D....:,
,
_lIyappeand
lIef~ ~::u:SI. ~nulY CilY Cleric. .
.......""\. t \."u...
\ .
penonaJly bowza 10 IDe . OR . 0 proYecllo IDe CD !be buis of .'ilfactory evideDce 10
lJIe perIOD(s) wb_ll&JDe(s) is/are sublcribed 10 the wilbiD iAsrnameol 8114 acbow1ecllecl
De lballlelllle/!bey eaeculed the .me ill bis/her/!beir aulhorized capleil)'(iea), IlDd thaI
bislber/!beir IiJllaIUre(s) CD the wlrulDelll!be peFlOD(S), or !be e11lily IIpOIlllebaJf of
c:b !be elec:uled !be iDstrumenl.
WITNESS my bIlDd IlDd official -.J.
~
.......
. I
Capadl)" CJalnaed b)" Siena-
"z . W^~. ._""" ... __............
~^~P.~inn. General
..Il_L:"_.
1'- ,
~ "'-' Ill... r r ...
-4111 III .. '*-l/It '"'- __...... .~II __Ill......
..-....-0 . -.lJIIl.....~... .....- -.._i1~~llI><i___..,.,U\/iewJ.
... ....T....~oJi> ~ .. ........... pe.-""ar .. MiIy _... flIlOIlicII ..
,..~, - I --.. inIlrument.
;~"'r"- -DI!iciII~v (@h=:'f':-iJ
...., . *'TAllY "YIuC. CAuJINlIaA
~L V?J~ loW PIIOOOOIIilTY _
~ -. - ~~~_., 1~.1~7J
~rn-.;_lIIr___J
/J-? "%
kz
~\\~~
'On Estate.
P.;. 11
J
.
\
,
,
~O'
.t,
-
.__IM"" -,.-
......~x. ......_..LI..\.OIi
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
C01.1Nn' OF SAN DIEGO, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 17 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST,
SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE
OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY APPROVED
APRIL 17, 1883.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING
DESCRIBED LINE:
BEGINNING AT THE. NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION
34, TOWNSHIP 17 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES
GOVENMENT SURVEY APPROVED APRIL 17, 1883; THENCE SOUTH 00047'09" WEST
1071.74 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, ALSO BEING A POINT OF A
NONTANGENT 2970.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL
LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 39049' 36" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY
ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01" 4 7' 21" A DISTANCE OF
92.74 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE 5067.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 010
48'04" A DISTANCE OF 159.28 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH
60047' 16" WEST 976.36 FEET TO THE: BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 5067.00 FOOT
RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHtASTERLY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID
CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05011' 19" A DISTANCE OF 458.86 FEET;
THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 55035' 57" WEST 549.31 FEET TO THE
BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1933.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24024 I
05" A DISTANCE OF 823.23 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERl.Y BOUNDARY OF
SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER DISTANT NORTH 00001'06" WEST 94.14 FEET nOM
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER, ALSO BEING THE POINT
OF TERMINUS OF. SAID DESCRIBED LINE.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE ESTATES,
UNIT NO. " ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF NO. 7742, FILED IN THE
OFnCE OF THE RECORDER OF SAID SAN' DIEGO COUNTY: THENCE SOUTHERLY,
BEARING SOUTH 00000'52" EAST ALONG THE EASTERLY ~NE OF lAID MAP NO.
7742, AND THE WESTERLY ~NE OF SAID SECTION 34, A'DISTANCE OF 165.'8
FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE SOtJTH!:RLY BEARING SOUTH
00000'52" EAST ALONG THE EASTERLY ~NE OF lAID MAP NO. "42 AND THE
WESTERLY ~NE OF SAID SECTION 34, A DISTANCE OF 284.02 nET: THENCE
USTERLY BEARING NORTH "05"08" EAST ALONG A PAR.IlT.T.'J'I. LINE TO THE
U.ST-WEST CEHT~NE OF SAID SECTION 34, A DISTANCE OF 400.00 nET:
THENCE NORTHERLY BEARING NORTH 00000'52" WEST ALONG A PAR,u.T.n. ~NE
TO THE EASTERLY ~NE OF SAID MAP NO. 7742 AND THE WESTERLY LINE OF
SAID SECTION 34, A DISTANCE OF 282.74 FEET: THENCE WESTERLY BEARING
NORTH "049'54" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 400.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING. ..J:.-t3 / J - ~ /
Cb
SCBEDtJI.E -1-
Growth Hana",ea.nt ~.aholds
City council R..olution No. 13346 approved .l.ven public facilities
and ..rvic.. with r.lat.d thr..hold wtandarda and t.pleaentation
....ur.., which w.r. lut.d in a policy .tateaent dat.d Nov~r
17, 1987 and bav. .ub..quently be.n nfin.d baa.d on
r.co.mendation. frOlD the Growth JIana",eaent OVerai",ht ~i..ion
(GHOC) .
Th. .l.v.n er.:
'l'raffic
Police
Fire/EMs
Schools
Librari..
Park. and R.cr.ation
Water
I.wer
Draina",.
Air Quality
Fi.cal
Durin", the development of the Growth llana",eaent PrD9%'u bo n.w
faciliti.. w.r. added to the li.t of faciliti.. to be analyz.d:
Civic Faciliti..
Corporation Yard
~..hold .tandards are us.d to identify when DeW or upqraded
public faciliti.. are n..d.d to aiti",at. the t.pacta of n.w
dev.lopment. D.velopment approval. will not be ..de unl...
cOIDpliance with th... .tandards can be _to Th... threshold
.tandards have be.n pr.par.d to querante. that public faciliti.. or
infr..truc;tur. improv..enta will k..p pac. with i:h. deaanda of
growth.
SCBEDtJLE -1- -? P1
~ J3//(/
.en'
SCHEDULE "2"
/
Transportation Phasing Plan Threshold Standards
1. City-wide: Maintain LOS "C" or better at all intersections, with the exception that
LOS "D" may occur at signalized intersections for a period not to exceed a total
of two hours per day. No intersection shall operate at LOS "E" or "F' as
measured for the average weekday peak hour.
2. West of Interstate of 805: Those signalized intersections which do not meet
Standard #1 above may continue to operate at their current (1987) LOS, but shall
not worsen.
Notes to Standards:
1. LOS measurements shall be for the average weekday peak hour, excluding
seasonal and special circumstances,
2. The measurement of LOS shall be the ICU (Intersection Capacity Utilization)
calculation utilizing the City published designs standards.
3. The measurement of LOS at intersections of City arterials and freeway ramps
shall be a growth management consideration in situations where proposed
developments have a significant impact at interchanges.
4. Circulation improvements' should be implemented prior to anticipated
deterioration of LOS below established standards.
SCHEDULE "2"
~ )37/
.
SCHEDULE "3"
Action Plan for Implementation of Telegraph Canyon Plans
,
Water Conservation ~: Since the City water offsite policy is not yet in effect, the
recommendations as stated in the Water Conservation Plan, dated May 1992, as modified
November 18, 1992 will be implemented. Items such as ultra-low flush toilets, ultra-low
flow shower heads, faucet aerators, and a pressure reducing value will be provided for
each household. Additionally, a water conservation guide will be provided to each new
homeowner at the time they enter into a contract for the purchase of a home within the
Telegraph Canyon Estates project. A major portion of the open space/scenic conidor
will be planted with a non-irrigated hydroseed for water conservation purposes.
Additionally, the irrigation system has incorporated rain shut-off valves and the system
will be maintained in accordance with the water management plan submitted by Burton
and Associates.
Air Oualitv Improvement Plan: Dust control by way of moisture addition to the soil
during the grading operation will be implemented. In addition to the ensite dust control
measures, an offsite dust control program to keep onsite dirt from being carried or
tracked onto travel roadways will also be implemented by scheduling daily street
sweeping and washing at construction access points on internal paved roadways.
Erosion control measures will be implemented in accordance with the Erasion Control
Plans contained in the rough grading plans. Offsite traffic interference from construction
personnel commuting to the site and the movement of material on and off the site will
be minimized by restricting land closures to off-peak travel periods and scheduling truck
access such that 80% of the daily receipt of conaete and other building materials and
other truck arrival/departures occur between 9:00 am and 3:00 pm.
SCHEDULE "3"
~ /3/?~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item-.!t.
Meeting Date 9/6/94
Resolution I 7~ y..2. Establishing dates for property owners to be ready to
receive underground service and removal of poles and overhead facilities within
Phase II of Underground Utility District No. 117 along Broadway from "I" Street to
"L" Street
Director of Public wor~\ ~
City Manager~ b~) (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NoX)
On December 10, 1985, the City Council approved Resolution No. 12276 (attached as Exhibit A)
establishing Underground Utility District 117 along Broadway from "I" Street to Moss Street. In accordance
with Section 15.32.150 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, Resolution No. 12276 states that the City
Council shall by subsequent resolution fix the date upon which the affected property owners must be ready
to receive underground service and the date by which poles, overhead wires and associated structures shall
be removed. The conversion of overhead utilities to underground has been completed within Phase I which
extends from "L" Street to Moss Street. This resolution covers Phase II only, which extends from "I" Street
to "L" Street.
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution which:
1. Sets December 1, 1994 as the date by which property owners within Phase I of Underground Utility
District No. 117 on Broadway from "I" Street to "L" Street shall be ready to receive underground
service.
2. Sets April 3, 1995 as the date by which poles, overhead wires and associated structures shall be
removed within Phase I of Underground Utility District No. 117 on Broadway from "I" Street to "L"
Street.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
After a meeting of the Utility Underground Advisory Committee on August 10, 1994, the utility companies
informed Engineering staff that they can meet the following schedule for the Broadway underground
conversion district:
Date for Customers to be Ready to Receive Underground Service
Completion of Undergrounding Work and Removal of Poles and Overhead Utilities
December 1, 1994
April 3, 1995
A transparency showing the district boundaries is available for Council viewing.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of undergrounding overhead utilities along Broadway between "I" and "L"
Streets is estimated to be $1,175,000. This cost will be covered by the SDG&E 20A allocation fund.
Attachments:
Exhibit A - Resolution 12276
~~"'DQq.& Nc,: ~{~ Lf-7'i5Cj'2...
WPC F:\home\engineer\agenda\uuservce.117
SMN:ST-130
083194
/ J./ ,/
RESOLUTION NO.
1')/''/';
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING DATES FOR PRoPERTY
OWNERS TO BE READY TO RECEIVE UNDERGROUND
SERVICE AND REMOVAL OF POLES AND OVERHEAD
FACILITIES WITHIN UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT
NO. 117 ALONG BROADWAY FROM "I" STREET TO "L"
STREET
WHEREAS, the City Council has heretofore by Resolution
No. 12276 established Underground Utility District No. 117 along
Broadway from "I" street to "L" Street; and
WHEREAS, it is now desired, pursuant to said resolution,
to fix the date on which affected property owners must be ready to
receive underground service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Chula vista that the following dates are hereby established
ordering the property owners to prepare properties for receipt of
underground utilities:
1. The property owners within Phase I of Underground
Utility District No. 117 shall be ready to receive
underground service from San Diego Gas and Electric
Company on December 1, 1994.
2. Poles, overhead wires and associated overhead
structures shall be removed from parcels within
Underground Utility District No. 117 by April 3, 1995.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk of the City of
Chula Vista be, and she is hereby directed to forward a certified
copy of this resolution to all affected utility companies and
property owners.
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
c: \rs\UUD
/'1.,)..
. R~COHD/NG REQUEmn err
AND MAIL TO:'~ .
(!;.t!~ ~
d-1t1? I/-C~ a~
C--f~ V~ RESOLUTION NO. 12276
Cle:<o I {) ~i~~iU~ISO;AB~isH~~~ i~TYUN;~~g;6;NDoFUT~~iTyCI;;iST~~CTCB~~~
117 ON BROADWAY FROM 'r' STREET TO MOSS STREET
,
2::',;)8
?71
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 12252, a public hearing was
called for 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, the 10th day of 1985, in the
Council Chambers of the City of Chula Vista at 276 Fourth Avenue
in said City, to ascertain whether the public health, safety or
welfare requires the removal of pOles, overhead wires and
associated overhead structures and the underground installation
of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication or
similar or associated service within that certain area of the
City more particularly described as follows:
All that property lying between '1' Street and Moss
Street along Broadway and enclosed within the boundary
as shown on the plat attached hereto as Exhibit 'A' of
Underground Utility District No. 117
and
WHEREAS, notice of such hearing has been given to all
affected property owners as shown on the last equalized
assessment roll, and to the utili ty companies concerned in the
manner and for the time required by law, and
WHEREAS, such hearing has been duly and regUlarly held,
and all persons interested have been given an opportunity to be
heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista hereby finds and determines that the
public health, safety and welfare requires the removal of poles,
overhead wires and associated structures, and the underground
installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric,
communication or similar associated services, the above-described
area is' hereby declared an Underground Utility District, and is
designated as such in the City of Chula Vista. Attached hereto,
marked Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein by reference is a map
delineating the boundaries of said District.
-1-
85-~7859~
r-" - .."~",, "1--;-
! ./.'_~:"i-'-'~:!.\.~~':J~~,":..'';. :
':lor r,,~ I Q ".I 8 C I
.H;J l _-.' ..., ,.,1
1'1- 3
livEn:. ~.;:"~~~E I
cau"] Y ," "l.I.,~ER
, ,l . ;\....'-' ---'
. NO PEE
,>
~
2259
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council shal.l, by
subsequent resolution, fix the date on which affected property
owners must be ready to receive underground service, and does hereby
order the removal of all poles, overhead wires and- associated
overhead structures and the underground installation of wires and
facilities for supplying electric, communication or similar
associated service within said Underground Utility District.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby
instructed to notify all affected utilities and all persons owning
real property within said Underground Utility District of the
adoption of this resolution within fifteen days after the date of
said adoption. Said City Clerk shall further notify said property
owners of the necessity that, if they or any person occupying such
property desires to continue to receive electric, communication or
other similar or associated service, they, or such occupant shall,
by the date fixed in a subsequent resolution provide all necessary
facility changes on their premises so as to receive such service
from the lines of the supplying utility or utilities at a new
location, subject to the applicable rules, regulations and tariffs
of the respective utility or utilities on file with the Public
Utilities Commission of the State of California as of the date of
adoption of this resolution. Such notification shall be made by
mailing a copy of this resolution to affected property owners as
shown on the last equalized assessment roll and to the affected
utility companies.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby finds
that the Underground Utility District herein created is in the
general pUblic interest for the following reasons:
1. That the undergrounding to be accomplished will avoid
or eliminate an unusually heavy concentration of
overhead distribution facilities.
2. That the streets, roads or rights-of-way in the
District are extensively used by the general public
and carry a heavy volume of pedestrian or vehicular
traffic.
Presented by Approved as to form by
,~I
Engineer
. 7 , /
V??zu,,'Jy..!;r t-~I
:rhomas U,rron, City
Attorney
lfohn P.
l044a
-2-
1'1""
"
226p
ADOPTED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA. this
10th
day of
December
19
85
. by the following vote. to-wit:
AYES: Coune i 1 members McCandliss, Cox, Malcolm, Moore, Scott
NAYES: Couneilmembers None
ABSTAIN: Counei lmembers None
ABSENT: Coune i1 members None
/s/ Gregory R. Cox
Mayor of the City of Chuta Vista
ATTEST
/s/ Jennie M. Fu1asz
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) s s.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, JENNIE M. FULASZ, CMC, CITY CLERK of the City of Chura Vista, California,
DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is a full. true and correct copy of
RESOLUTION NO. 12276
,and that the same has not been amended or repealed.
DATED
December 11, 1985
(seal)
CC-660
,1/-5'
..
......
..
o
0:.' ~ .
11I1111=
=1. g
=- .
51~ I
~'---1
~ ~ I
. ": ~ ~ :
cilULA VISTA g a :,
COIJNTY ~___~OFEll :: ~U1nlJnulUllJ
L~==~~~ WIII~lrel I-frlln.IJIRl~r--- . r-
. - ... - ~ '4~ 1"'0 ~
. - =:;: '41 I :z:~
OF :: ~,- ,., I l> 2
ARIZONA -m!llW!!@.~ s <;T en '-_I~
. Sme o. = I r; I . I I I ~
If,: . ~--~7n~13~~ I r: :-: 1 :""1"
. I E-. ~~ '(1'1,',
' ;: I ~~ r I I I J I ' I
t ~S. . ~.._ : I I I I
J 5.0 ~ v~ I I I I I I I
I - ~ I I I
= ..../t.,~1 I .
- -- .-'-- -- -----.-----;;:.- IIII11IJRlIJIJIJU('-:
'1"= n n _ .
''''::9 -j :;;; I I
'1- '- _
;:" ~ 2.-----, J
=-. =oc
:: -< :: ~ I I
:: ..... a -____J
- ...-
oS J S
sml: S
- -
mu. = HillA
I ! SAN
.,
"
J l
J l
"
. K.
'.
'"
..
o
en
o
Z
.0.
.,"
I"
o.
'0'
_!i!__j
.....
......"'....
NO.CIt
U.
u.
--,.'0
__J~l
...
.
"
.
L
'"
."
."
'"
'"
U>
o
z
'"
<
'"
'"
r-
..
:e
z
.::. ::.'
0"
.
.
o
..
<
!"
. I
;./
; SIERRA
l 1
I
j~ ..
<
'"
,...: I
nrnnnm
...
15-----
,= III
1= ---
; I~:
~ '= .
.L!1IJIJIIIIIIIIIIIIIJIIIIIJIllt:
-. L '~
WAY
.
.
o
I
J
,
,
,
r
I
I
L_____,
~
o
5 " !
=--.....
- .~
5 g
CITY
~
MOSS
II
DRAW~ BY.
~
-------
DATE
....
. I
ST.
.
e
I
,
,
I
I
I
I
2261
. .
I , ,
, . I
..l.tLl,.
\ I
....,
~E
WAY
..
<
...
nn
~,q
~ z
~
I
I I
I I
TITLE
BROADWAY UNDERGROUND DISTRICT NO. 117
" K " STREET TO MOSS STREET II-/~ ~
a
a.
- 'uUlulJllmE
. 0'<'. =
::; e "'C
-:- -EI/nffi----j;-- --'-:--
: E (1)' ...
---5 r-" m ,.
. 5 I I
~ -
~ I 'I\)
SIE
=
l~ I .
. I
__1 .. 07
U> '"
.., ::&: '"
51 . n
::&:
= . :
~ - .
~
t~~~
..
oi3 . <
_G9S z '"
= 897
e 899
ST.
J
I
I
.1
I
I
I
..
<
!"
10-11-85
--------
VISTA
" OI<CO
J 0
ST.
I I,
, r,
L-
'.'"
'. ......
.'" i.,
-'i.', .--:,..'
'f ;.:
" .
- '..
, . ,,~ ,;
. o.
'~'.',,:-_":,
. .
~-'.'.' ..
:..~., "-'"
SHT. , OF ?
N
U>
t'l'
N
, .
l
1
"
. '~':" j..~~:-,!
, ,
.' '..
..,~. :.\~:.~:.:: T'; 0, -'
. ,/~';
"
,', I,'
.J
r
I
1
I
I
I
r
J
l I r r I I I I
CEDAR
l;; .-
J
I
i \
___..L .......
BEECH
1..- ____.
--;---
-f--- J.I w'
~ ~---....t-- - _ ASH ~
en I 64" J:
t- - - 'Il!-1- 60' [.1ST nUll
S I _ I~~: l..~i .!!,illlllll '... . ~
101 ~l e., 3 = ~ P~l]_ ,,,:t !f .
r m--m
MANOR
JEFFERSON
. --
. ....
.. . ,
, '"
;
"
.
. :.,' ."
"
"
;, .
):".~.' .
. :.... ~.
....
...... .
"
"
......
,
, '
., .
o,"i'
'..
..'
"
T...----
I
f--T- --
r ,
AVE,
----,--- .l I I . , I I I I I I I
I -
... CEOAR AVE,
.--..,L---.. -
,
.-.-.....--. r.
I
, -
~ J
1---
-1 -,,--- DEECH AVE,
_..J_ _1__ I~ '+r-=1 ~ ..-
,~
PHASE 3 I I I I
. .
. .
AVE.
::
~:'; :;;011;:1
"OIl .\II[II>(
ASH AVE.
"~.L H 7~U,"~, I .1 ill,: ill. ~II .
l!! 111'IIUlhullIllJW/,iliIlIllWIIUIIII ;-~:UI;:~I :,;il,;:i";;J~ 1;1~;r (.
Pl"fWUlII ~ _ 7U . iOU'
I '3:J ! 3 1
5 ~I:: : ~ In 701 I "S ~ E us 141 J'47 713 777 7U ~o IIII~
-'"~ 111.11 IIl1l11inmmimmmmlll... T :'"-
BROADWAY
IIIl1l1yl
706 UU_
. ='ZI 1;n
610
69' 615
- -l-J
J-_,....
,
RIVERLANN
AVE.
.
,
--.., (
- - -f' -t.
,........
,
- - -j I
'"'
..
:[
f
r
.,
.
MAOISON
AVE.
AVE.
>-
w
Z
ll:
<l
w
'"
I I
1
JEFFERSON
I J I I
AVE.
I I
II
, .
~?z
.'
'.
(\
l&-
e
ex
....
:J:
Ul
......
o
2~
1-,
~
I-
(f)
01-
W
OW
20::
=>1-
o(/)
0::-
(!)~
0::_
W-
Oo
21-
=>1-
>-W
<[W
~O::
... a I-
.... <[ (f)
"'0:
0::-
"'CD:
I I
1 I
10/
~ al,
I
I .=1
.. . /
CD I 0
z I -I
~ ... ,
.. I ...
Ol: ..
Q I Q I
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I>
Meeting Date 9/6/94
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution / 7 ~.y~ending Schedule VIII, Section 10.52.400 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code to establish Diagonal Parking-Permitted on
East Park Lane from "F" Street to 100' south of the south curbline of
Davidson Street affirming the :al/affic regulation
Director of Public wor~~ ~V
City Manage0-i ~ t1~)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The City Engineer has determined the need to establish diagonal (perpendicular) parking along the
west side of East Park Lane. This is in response to complaints from the area businesses and
residents that there is a great demand for on-street parking. Vehicles are currently parking
perpendicular on most of East Park Lane.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resoltuion amending Schedule VIII, Section
10.52.400 establishing a diagonal (perpendicular) parking on a portion of East Park Lane affirming
the trial traffic regulation.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Safety Commission, at its meeting of
October 14, 1993, voted 5-0-2 (Matacia and Padilla absent) to concur with staff and establish this
Trial Traffic Regulation.
The Safety Commission, at their meeting of August 11, 1994, voted 4-0-3 (Vice Chair Padilla and
Commissioners Bierd and Miller absent) to recommend that the City Council affirm this Trial
Traffic Regulation and pass an ordinance making this parking restriction permanent. Copies of
minutes for both meetings are attached.
DISCUSSION:
On November 2, 1993, staff sent to the City Council, a Trial Traffic Regulation to establish an area
of diagonal (perpendicular) parking along the west side of East Park Lane. This was in response
to complaints from the area businesses and residents that there is a great demand for on-street
parking. Vehicles are currently parking perpendicular on most of East Park Lane.
10.52.400 SCHEDULE VIlI - DIAGONAL PARKING-PERMITTED WHERE
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Side
East Park Lane "Fit Street A point 100' south of the south curb West
line of Davidson Street
15 ~ I
Page 2, Item /.5'
Meeting Date: 9/6/94
Said regulation became effective when the appropriate posting of signs and pavement markings
were put in place on January 21, 1994.
The regulation has run for a trial period of 8 months from the date of such posting, at which time
a review of said regulation has been made to determine if it should be made permanent.
A review of the traffic conditions by staff and the Police Department show that this Trial Traffic
Regulation is operating effectively. Therefore, staff recommends that this Trial Traffic Regulation
be made permanent.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. The costs of the signs and pavement markings are minimal and were
done as part of the operating budget for the Opereations Division of Public Works.
Attachments:
Exhibit A - Staff Reports~o ty Commission and Area Plat
Exhibit B - Minutes: Safe mmission Meeting of 10/14/93 (excerpt)
Exhibit C - Trial :r,~~ 4
Exhibit D - Draft ~s: Safety Commission Meeting of 8/11/94 (excerpt)
~O
DMW:CY-027
m;\home\engineer\agenda\ttrdiag.dmw
/5,.;..
RESOLUTION NO.
J7t, ';.3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING SCHEDULE VIII, SECTION
10.52.400 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO
ESTABLISH DIAGONAL PARKING-PERMITTED ON EAST
PARK LANE FROM "F" STREET TO 100' SOUTH OF THE
SOUTH CURBLINE OF DAVIDSON STREET AFFIRMING
THE TRIAL TRAFFIC REGULATION
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined the need to
establish diagonal (perpendicular) parking along the west side of
East Park Lane; and
WHEREAS, this is in response to complaints from the area
businesses and residents that there is a great demand for on-street
parking and vehicles are currently parking perpendicular on most of
East Park Lane; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission, at their meeting of
August 11, 1994, voted to recommend that the City Council affirm
this Trial Traffic Regulation and pass an resolution making this
parking restriction permanent; and
WHEREAS, a review of the traffic conditions by staff and
the Police Department show that this Trial Traffic Regulation is
operating effectively, therefore, staff recommends that this Trial
Traffic Regulation be made permanent.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby amend Schedule VIII, Section
10.52.400 of the Chula vista Municipal Code to establish Diagonal
Parking-Permitted on East Park Lane as follows:
10.52.400 SCHEDULE VIII - DIAGONAL PARKING-PERMITTED WHERE
Name of
Street
Beginning At Ending At
Side
East Park
Lane
"F" Street A point 100'south of
south curb
Street
West
Presented by
y
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\park.8
Bruce M.
Attorney
15-J
E:Jhi bi~ A
SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item Number 7
Meeting Date 8/11/94
ITEM TITLE: Report on affirming Trial Traffic Regulation '134
for Schedule VIII Diagonal Parking-Permitted
Where, East Park Lane - "1''' Street to 100' south of
the south curb1ine of ~vidson Street
SUBMITTED BY: City Traffic Engineer~
BACKGROUND: The City Engineer has determined the need to
establish diagonal (perpendicular) parking along the west side of
East Park Lane. This is in response to cOlllp1aints frOlll the area
businesses and residents that there is a great demand for on-street
parking. Vehicles are currently parking perpendicular on most of
East Park Lane.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve staff's recommendation and recommend to
the City Council that the Council pass an ordinance affirming this
Trial Traffic Regulation and make this diagonal (Perpendicular)
parking permanent.
DISCUSSION:
On November 2, 1993, staff sent to the City Council, a Trial
Traffic Regulation to establish an area of diagonal (perpendicular)
parking along the west side of East Park Lane. This is in response
to cOlllp1aints frOlll the area businesses and residents that there is
a great demand for on-street parking. Vehicles are currently
parking perpendicular on most of East Park Lane.
10.52.400
SCHEDULE VIII - DIAGONAL PARKING-PERMITTED WHERE
East Park Lane
"1''' Street
Ending At Side
A point 100'south "est
of the SCL of
Davidson street
Name of street
Beginning At
The City Engineer has determined the need to establish diagonal
(perpendicular) parking along the west side of East Park Lane. This
was in response to complaints frOlll the area businesses and
residents that there is a great demand for on-street parking.
Vehicles are currently parking perpendicular on IIOst of East Park
Lane.
The Safety Commission, at its aeeting of OCtober H, 1993, voted 5-
0-2 (Matacia and !'adi11a absent) to concur with staff and establish
this Trial Traffic Regulation. .~
. /5".? .
Item Humber 7
Meeting Date 8/11/94
Said regulation became effective when the appropriate posting of
signs and pavement markings were put in place on January 21, 1994.
The regulation has run for a trial period of 8 months from the date
of such posting, at which time a review of said regulation has been
made to determine if it should be made permanent.
A review of the traffic conditions by staff and the Police
Department show that this Trial Traffic Regulation is operating
effectively. Therefore, staff recommends that this Trial Traffic
Regulation be made permanent.
Attachments:
staff Report to Safety Commission and Area Plat
Minutes: Safety Commission Meeting of 10/14/93
(excerpt)
Trial Traffic '134
FISCAL IMPACT:
H/A
File Humber:
KY-119
(C:\DENNIS\AFFIRMEP.DOC)
/f"'t,
SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item 7
Meetlnl Date-1PfI4f93
Report on ftquest for time limited parkin. 011 a portion of East Pad: Lane
between Davidson Street and F SlI'eet
SUB1t1u uJ) BY: City Traffic EnJineer Fx~f JJI2-
Staff' bu received a ftquest from the VWale Laundromat at 287 Broadway to provide time
limited parking on a portion of East Park Lane.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Safety Commission accept suff's report and recommend that
the following two Trial Traffic Re&WaDons be established:
ll'1. Diagonal parking along the west side of East Park Lane between F Street and a point 100
It. south of the south curbline of Davidson SII'eet; and
2. Establish a two-hour parking limit on a 40 ft. portion of the west side of East Pad: Lane
beginnin. at a point 133 fL nonh of the nonh curbline of F SlI'eet and endin. at a point
173 It. nonh of the nonh curbline of F SII'eeL
DISCVSSION:
Staff has received a ftquest from the VWage Laundromat at 217 Broadway to provide time
limited parking on a portion of East Park Lane. to allow a hi.her parkin. turnover rate and
discourage vehicles from parking for extended periods of time. Staff bu evaluated this ftquest
and due to both the need for diagonal parkin. and time limited parkinl on the entire west side
of East Park Lane between F S~et and a point 100 It. south of Davidson S~ Staff
nc:onunends that two Trial Traffic ReJUlations be established.
East Put Lane is a dedicated public street built to alley 1IandarcIs. 'Ibe aillinl riJbt-of-way is
eo It. and the street is approximately 22 ft. wide. Since there are 110 nised eartls. whiclel are
parkinl diqonaDy alonl most of tbillIreeL ThisIlreCl scrvea primarily u a parkinl area for
employees and eastomen of the busineucI boundecl by Broadway and East Put Lane. 1bcre
are IIIIIIY IIIIID basinesIa ill the .. which create a demand far Ihan-Iam pmiIIJ. .1Ift
ncom,llUI4I Ibal a 40 ft. Ion& 2-boar parkin. .... OD Cbe _ulde 01 East Part Lane be
.tablished adjacent to Cbe nar 01 Cbe laundromat. This paddn. area wDJ allow far four
JlUPUldicular parkiII, Jta1ls. 'Ibis is the IIIIle time restricIioD u OD Broadway. .
Tbe Deed for dialonal parkinl is also apparent Iince vehicles are pl!kinl papendicular to the
neeL due to the numerous businesses alon, the west side of the neet, iliff rec:ommends that
a Trial Traffic Rep1ation for dillonal pl!kinl also be atablislled.
/">:1
Pqe 2, Item . .,
Meetina Date 10/14/93
~
It is aatrs *.........1dation dial two Trill TraffIC RecuJatiOlll be established 011 But Park Lane
IlleS dial Ihe Safety Commission mriew these Trill Traffic RecuJatiollllfter Ihe)' have been in
place for IeVal months. At that time ItIff' will mum with . ItItUS report and . recommendation
on whether or DOt to make these Trial Traffic ReauJatiolll pamanent.
All area businesses and residents hive been notified of toni&ht's Safety Commission meetin&.
meAL IMPACT: NotlppUclble.
AaacIImeIIls: Area PIli
wpc p;" . ~.U63..t3
-
-
/yy
,.,.' ,,-;-:
... I~\ ~ ~t~\' ,......
S .' "'" f!'i" ,I' \ ~ ..I ,-,
f ~ ' \\J ..',~ . ~
'r. J:". \,f:::-~n'~ oJ ' '0'" ~I
. ~\ - "'
, . "',, \. ' , ~ \ \"
~ ~_ i\ \... ~~.
\d \.
.' "' \
~ \\ ~ ~_:-- \'. ~ 1 ,~ \,
""" 1 1 \:;....., .1 I' 1
'~ ~ \"i \\ ,':.... \: . '"..".... ,\
'-1:' R " " ~ A '
" ~ "' - 'U .... ... --' .\ \~
:r ......~ .'-'" iA ~b - ~ \..:, ~ \ ~
_ _ ..,.,''r\ ~,..-t;;' .. '\. ,'.....
_ :::: \ . ... '.'> "'... .... \ IJ ?:": '. u ';;1 \ ~, ,
:z:I , ,.>.~:~,i E . \I ii' ,u 'C,. L ~j-r::~'" "'.& :.., \~l~~
m \ -;' . '. .'J """ _~~~.., \ . .) :.... ~\"flA
". I~\ -~\~. ., ";~) \. .,.) ......'
_' ,'. .~."....., '. ,f""
_ \" ...~, <:"-' ..' -:.. ...' ..l'.~, '.
..: \ \ ,>~ _ :\ _'~'" c-' ." , .. - ."
\ \ .l..or ...' .... --"'" ""'" \ \
, '.' ....,,' ~ '- ... ."
r- '... .......~~...~., ",_ -;:.:; - "\ . I\' ':. ~ :.~ ... 1 ....:. . .}
,," ...-" " \,. . -", .
,..1- .' ~. ...- ,'.
_ r. ~ .- ., . ' ,,\' .'
- - " '. "" _..' .~ '-' ' \" . .
~>, ' ' ill ~ ~ ...." ,J' ... ..... ';;;
~~ \ . ..l - ,~' \ ..);.:. ·
\ '\ ,'. II'" - " 1'"" , ,\ - _.-or ".':, ~
.) ... " ,'ttL ..@..\~ ~ \ \ ~. \ ~~~..,,,,~,j~
~(\\\, \.\1_ .... '. " ~ ' \ 1- -...{'C
... '\.' 0:::>;" '.\ \ , \ ,- .
:.. . -' .... ... '"
~ ... ....... \ - . . ,,~ ...".....
.. '\ - .., ''''' \\ "" .. ---
'. "< u ,,-"
I, I.r= Q, ~- .'~ ~ ,,\' .' ~ - - ..,~' .,
, ., ..." ." ,... ..' "."
L .... \- ' . t:: ro ~,. ,"......1-' '.::-';:';-
. ,'\1\\ H' \ \, ;:..'
\\\.A . \ '- ,~'. )
.
~~hi bi+ ~
Safety Commission Minutes
October 14, 1993
Pige2
7. REPORT on Request for lime limited parkinl on I portion of EJst Plrk line betv.een Dlvidson Ind
F Streets
Frank Rivera pmented Nff'1 report.
HvoId LAIf..Wkr, 21' AlII A_, au. Vlst~ CA ''''0, said the problem with dillonl' parking was
that it would be Itriped were it was approached from the north, but most motorists ame from the south off
F Street, which meant vehicles would have to u-tum into the parkinl stall. The enforcement of the area was
also a concem. He said there were signs posted for parkinl prohibition on Fridays from 6:~:OO a.m. for
Itreetlweeping and in 2 1/2 years his Ii de of the Itreet had never been swept. The parkinl prohibition was
not being enforced and the street was not beinglwept. Cleanliness was a problem on the entire street. The
City was not maintaining the street. The angle parking was not acceptable. He asked who was loinlto
enforce and pay for the enforcement of the area. He did not feel it was workable prolram.
/Ohn N.1b61, 260 Ash A_, Chula Vlst~ CA ""0, agreed with Mr. lineweber and said beause of the
Friday parking prohibited signs, he got up and moved his car every Friday. He did not see how two hour
parking would work unless an officer was alwaYI present.
lair Thomas said staff's recommendation was for a trial traffic r.gulation and if it didn't work, the area could
... revisit.d. He asked staff if they could respond to the street sweeping schedule.
Frank Rivera said the sign Indicated "No Parking6:00-B:OO a.m. Friday." The street sweeper swept the street
every other Friday, but there was no way to lign the street for every other Friday. Since staff bepn working
on the item, many business owners commented on the street sweeping. The street sweeper apparently was
loing up the center of the street and did notlweep alonlthe edles of the buildings. The Police Department
had notified the businesses that they would be enforcinlthe parking. He clarified that the "dillonal" parking
was a misnomer because it was adually perpendicular parking which currently existed. The reason for
"diagonal" parking was because that was the schedule in the Municipal Code that allowed vehicles to park
at an anile lB" away from the curb.
MSC (Pm.'Koester) to recommend that two Trill Traffic ."'t. be IIbbIhhed: 1) diqonal partcins
alons the west side of East Park Lane between F Street and a point 100 II. IlIlIlh 01 the IOIIIh anIine of
o.vIdson Street; and 2) establish a two-hour partdns limit 01\ a 40 II. portion 01 the wet IIcIe of East Park
Lane bealmlnlat a point 133 1I.1D1h of the ID1h anIine 01 F Street and ..... a poInIl73 ft.lD1h
of the north cur6line 01 f StneL Appl oved 5+2 with VIce 0IaIr Padilla and C:--lIf'_ Matada abHnI.
I. UPORT on Request for all-way stop II Allen School line and Allen School load
Frank Rivera presented staff's report and the Commlulon viewed slides of the are..
Commissioner Koester asked If the school DOSlinl sll" weIe removed and replaced with a stop sll", If Nff
would Install a "slOp ahead" sll".
Frank Rivera said underneath the stop Ilgn would be I pllte that said "alloway." The stop ahead IiI" was used
when I motorist could not see the stop sign and would come on I stop IiI" abruptly. Staff did not feel the
( Intersection would need I "slOp ahead' sign.
Commlllloner PillS asked If the crosswllk wouid be moved on Allen School Road to allow for vlllbillty of
Allen School Lane. I~' / Q
~"hi b;+_~:;.,~.,. .".
.' __ . ..' _ _..'~ 11.._ ..
v
,- ,-- ,.....-.--
X . ~ g III 6 :r X g. X':r i If ,., ",""
:m O:T 27 ..gvp,;.~r 2. 1993
.,11e: a-027
..
SUBJBC'l' :
'J.'he IIaDOrable Mayor and City COUncil
John Goaa, City IlaDager #J
John P. Lippitt, Director of Publie Wor~'
..tabliahing a '!'rial '!'raffic Jle9Ulation
'1'0 :
VXA:
I'RCIM :
Purauant to the proviaiona of Section 10.12.030 of the Cbula
viata Municipal Code, adopted by Ordinance 110. 1625 on May 27,
1975, the City Engineer, with the concurrence of the Cbula Viata
Safety COmmission, baa deterained that in the interest of
.ini.bing traffic hazards and traffic congeation, and for the
pr~tion of public aafety, there ia hereby establiahed :
10.52.400
SCHEDULE VIII - DIAGONAL pAlUtIHG-PERMI'l"l'ED WHERE
"p" Street
Snding At Side
A point 100'aouth West
of the SeL of
Davidaon street
Raae of street
Baat park Lane
Beginning At
'l'he City Engineer has deterained the need to establiah cUagonal
(perpendicular) parkinO along the veat aide of Baat Park Lane.
'l'hia ia in reaponse to coaplainta froa the area busineaaea and
residenta that there ia a great deaand for on-atreet parking.
Vehicles are currently parking perpendicular on aoat of lIaSt Park
Lane.
'J.'he Safety ec.aiaaion, at ita aeeting of October U, 1'93, 9ft>ted
5-0-2 (Matec1a and padilla absent) to CQDcur with .teff and
establish thia '!'rial '!'raffic Jle9Ulation.
Said regulation to beca.ll effeethe when the appropriate posting
of .igna and paveaent aarkinga are in place. 'J.'he regulation shall
run for a trial period of 8 aontha froa the date of such posting,
at which t:l.lle a review of .aid regulation .ill be Mde to
deteraiDe if it sWlld be Mde pemaDeDt.
Attech8eDta:
Staff aeport to Safet, Cc -faaion an4 Area Plat
Il1nutea: Safety ec-iasion ....ting of 10/14/93
(excerpt)
'!'rial '!'raffie "3.
lCa \llElllIS\PSI1'lUILlIlC)
15'//
~ J hi hi + b Safety Commission Minutes
August 11, 1994
Page 3
7. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #134 - Diagonal Parking on a Portion of East Park
Lane between Davidson and F Street
Chair Thomas said that he had viewed dumpsters that were not properly put back and that they
were out in the middle of the street. He asked who was responsible for enforcing compliance.
Frank Rivera said he would look into the problem with the dumpsters.
MSC (SmithlPitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #134 for Schedule VIII - Diagonal
Parking-Permitted on East Park Lane - F Street to 100' South of the south curbline of
Davidson and recommend the City Council approve a resolution affirming Trial Traffic
Regulation #134. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice Chair Padilla and Commissioners Bierd and
Miller absent.
8. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation # 135 - Time Limited Parking on a Portion of East
Park Lane Between Davidson and F Street
MSC (SmithlPitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #135 for Schedule VI - Parking Time-
Limited on East Park Lane -133' north of the north curbline ofF Street to 177' north of the
north curbline of F Street and recommend the City Council approve a resolution affirming
Trial Traffic Regulation #135. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice Chair Padilla and Commissioners
Bierd and Miller absent.
9. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #136. All Way Stop at Allen School Lane and Allen
School Road
MSC (Smith/Pitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #136 for Schedule II - Special Stops
Required - Allen School Lane and Allen School Road and recommend the City Council
approve a resolution affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #136. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice
Chair Padilla and Commissioners Bierd and Miller absent.
10. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #137 - Parking Time Limited on Certain Streets.
100 Block of Broadway
MSC (SmithlPitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #137 for Schedule VI - Parking Time-
Limited on 100 Block of Broadway and recommend the City Council approve a resolution
affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #137. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice Chair Padilla and
Commissioners Bierd and Miller absent.
11. Oral Communications - None.
STAFF REPORTS
12. Enlrineerinlr CIP Proiect Schedule
Shirley Buxton informed the Commission that a report was going to Council on August 16, 1994
asking Council to proceed with the award of contract for the installation of a traffic signal at Gotham
Street.
/.5'''' /.,2..
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item )"
Meeting Date 09/06/94
Resolution 17' .yt::ending Schedule VI, Section 10.52.340 for Parking
Time Limited on Certain Streets, establishing a two hour time limit on East
Park Lane from 133' north of the north curbline of "F" Street to 177' north
of the north curbline of "F" Street affirming the trial traffic regulation
Director of PUblic.wor~
City ManageJ4 ~ ~ \
The City Engineer has determined the need to establish time limited, Two-Hour parking, along the
west side of East Park Lane as described in the following schedule. This is in response to
complaints from the area businesses and residents that there is a great demand for on-street
parking. Vehicles were being parked for long periods of time and there is a great demand for short
term on-street parking in this area of East Park Lane.
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution amending Schedule VI, Section
10.52.340 establishing a two hour time limit for parking on a portion of East Park Lane.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Safety Commission, at its meeting of
October 14, 1993, voted 5-0-2 (Matacia and Padilla absent) to concur with staff and establish this
Trial Traffic Regulation.
The Safety Commission, at their meeting of August 11,1994, voted 4-0-3 (Vice Chair Padilla and
Commissioners Bierd and Miller absent) to recommend that the City Council affirm this Trial
Traffic Regulation and pass an ordinance making this parking restriction permanent. Copies of the
minutes of these meetings are attached.
DISCUSSION:
On November 2, 1993, staff sent to the City Council, a Trial Traffic Regulation to establish an area
of time limited (Two-Hour) parking along the west side of East Park Lane as described in the
following schedule. This is in response to complaints from the area businesses and residents that
there is a great demand for on-street parking. Vehicles were being parked for long periods of time
and there is a great demand for short term on-street parking in this area of East Park Lane.
10.52.340 SCHEDULE VI - PARKING-TIME LIMITED ON CERTAIN STREETS
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Side Length of
Time
Permitted
East Park Lane A point 133' north A point 173' north West 2 Hours
of the north curb line of the north curb line
of F Street of F Street
Said regulation became effective when the appropriate posting of signs and pavement markings
were put in place on January 21, 1994.
/~"'I
Page 2, Item lk
Meeting Date: 9/6/94
The regulation has run for a trial period of 8 months from the date of such posting, at which time
a review of said regulation has been made to determine if it should be made permanent.
A review of the traffic conditions by staff and the Police Department show that this Trial Traffic
Regulation is operating effectively. Therefore, staff recommends that this Trial Traffic Regulation
be made permanent.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. The costs of the signs or pavement markings are minimal and were
done as part of the operating budget for the Operations Division of Public Works.
Attachments:
Exhibit A - Staff Report~ tS ommission and Area Plat
Exhibit B - Minutes: Safety ission Meeting of 10/14/93 (excerpt)
Exhibit C - Trial Traffic
Exhibit D - Draft Mi~: Safety Commission Meeting of 8/11/94 (excerpt)
~
DMW:CY-027
m:\home\engineer\agenda\ttrpark.dmw
I~ --2.
RESOLUTION NO.
/?t~'1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING SCHEDULE VI, SECTION
10.52.340 - PARKING TIME LIMITED ON CERTAIN
STREETS ESTABLISHING A TWO-HOUR TIME LIMIT ON
EAST PARK LANE FROM 133' NORTH OF THE NORTH
CURBLINE OF "F" STREET TO 177' NORTH OF THE
NORTH CURBLINE OF "F" STREET AFFIRMING THE
TRIAL TRAFFIC REGULATION
WHEREAS, the city Engineer has determined the need to
establish time limited, Two-Hour parking, along the west side of
East Park Lane as described in the following established schedule;
and
WHEREAS, this is in response to complaints from the area
businesses and residents that there is a great demand for on-street
parking and vehicles were being parked for long periods of time and
there is a great demand for short term on-street parking; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission, at its meeting of August
11, 1994, voted to recommend that the City Council affirm this
Trial Traffic Regulation and adopt a resolution making this parking
restriction permanent; and
WHEREAS, a review of the traffic conditions by staff and
the Police Department show that this Trial Traffic Regulation is
operating effectively, therefore, staff recommends that this Trial
Traffic Regulation be made permanent.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council
of the City of Chula vista does hereby amend Schedule VI, section
10.52.340 - Parking Time Limited on certain Streets establishing a
two-hour time limit on East Park Lane as follows:
10.52.340 SCHEDULE VI-PARKING-TIME LIMITED ON CERTAIN STREETS
Name of Beginning At Ending At Side Length of
Street Time
Permitted
East A point 133' A point 173' West 2 hours
Park north of the north of the
Lane north curb north curb line
line of F of F Street
Street
1
I~ -;I
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\park.VI
2
1".'1
Bruce M. Boog ard City
Attorney
E~h, bit A
SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item Number 8
Meeting Date 8/11/94
ITEM TITLE: Report on affirming Trial Traffic Regulation '135
for Schedule VI - Parking-Time Limited on Certain
Streets, East Park Lane - 133' north of the north
curbline of "F" Street to 177' north of the north
curbline of "F" Street
SUBMITTED BY: City Traffic Engineer~
BACKGROUND: The City Engineer has determined the need to
establish time limited, Two-Hour parking, along the west side of
East Park Lane as described in the following schedule. This is in
response to complaints from the area businesses and residents that
there is a great demand for on-street parking. vehicles were being
parked for long periods of time and there is a great demand for
short term on-street parking in this area of East Park Lane.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve staff's recommendation and recommend to
the City Council that the Council pass a resolution affirming this
Trial Traffic Regulation and make this time limited (Two-Hour)
parking permanent.
DISCUSSION:
On November 2, 1993, staff sent to the City Council, a Trial
Traffic Regulation to establish an area of time limited (Two-Hour)
parking along the west side of East Park Lane as described in the
following schedule. This is in response to complaints from the
area businesses and residents that there is a great demand for on-
street parking_ Vehicles were being parked for long periods of time
and there is a great demand for short term on-street parking in
this area of East Park Lane.
10.52.340
SCHEDULE VI - PARKING-TIME LIMITED ON CERTAIN STREETS
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Side
East Park Lane A point 133' A point 173' West
north of the north of the
north curbline north curbline
of "F" Street of "F" Street
The City Engineer has determined the need to establish time
limited, Two-Hour parking, along the west side of East Park Lane as
described in the afore established schedule. This was in response
to complaints from the area businesses and residents that there was
a great demand for on-street parking. Vehicles were being parked
for long periods of time and there is a great demand for short term
on-street parking in this area of East Park Lane. ~.t ~
Item Number 8
Meeting Date 8/11/94
The Safety Commission, at its meeting of October 14, 1993, voted 5-
0-2 (Matacia and Padilla absent) to concur with staff and establish
this Trial Traffic Regulation.
Said regulation became effective when the appropriate posting of
signs and pavement markings were put in place on January 21, 1994.
The regulation has run for a trial period of 8 months from the date
of such posting, at which time a review of said regulation has been
made to determine if it should be made permanent.
A review of the traffic conditions by staff and the Police
Department show that this Trial Traffic Regulation is operating
effectively. Therefore, staff recommends that this Trial Traffic
Regulation be made permanent.
Attachments:
Staff Report to Safety Commission and Area Plat
Minutes: Safety Commission Meeting of 10/14/93
(excerpt)
Trial Traffic '135
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
File Number: KY-119
(C:\DENNIS\AFFIRME2.DOC) It ~t.
SAFETY COMMISStON AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 7
trEM TITLE:
MeetIng Date 10114193
Report on request flJf time limited parking on a ponion of East Pm Lane
bctwecll Dlvidson Street and F SU'eet
SUBMII n.D BY: City Traffic Enpeer FX(Lf)Jf2-
Staff hu received I request from the Villlge Laundromal 11 287 BroadwlY to provide time
limited parking on I ponion of East Pirk Lane.
RECOMMENDA nON: That the Safety Commission accept staff's report and recommend that
the following two Trial Traffic Regulations be established:
1~ Diagonal parking along the west side of East Park Lane between F Street and I point 100
It. south of the south curbline of Davidson Street; and
2. Establish I two-hour parking limit on 140ft. ponion of the west side of East Park Lane
beginning It I point 133 fL north of the north curbline of F Street and ending It I point
173 fL north of the north curbline of F StreeL
DISCUSSION:
Staff hu received I request from the Village Laundromat at 287 Broadway to provide time
limited parking on I ponion of East Park Lane, to allow a higher parking tumover rate and
discourage vehicles from parking for extended periods of time. Staff hu evaluated this request
and due to both the need for diagonal parking and time limited parking on the entire west side
of East Park Lane between F Street and a point 100 It. south of Davidson StreeL Staff
recommends that two Trial Traffic Regulations be established.
East Park Lane is a dedicated public street built to alley .,,~vds. 1be existing right-of.way is
60 fL and the street is approximately 22 It. wide. Since there arc nO raised curbs, vehicles arc
pamng diagonally along most of this streeL 'Ibis street ICI'VCS primarily U a parting area for
employees and c:astomerS of the businesses bounded by Broadway and East Park Lane. 'Ibc:re
arc many small businesses in 1hC .:ea which c:rwc . demand for abort.term parting. Staff
recommends thll a .w It. long 2.hour parking area on the west side of East Park Lane be
established adjacent to the IW' of the laundromat. 'Ibis parting area wD1 allow for four
pe:zpcndicu1ar parking atalls. 'Ibis is the IIJnC time restriction u on Broadway.
1be need for diagonal parking is also apparent since vehicles II'C parking pc:rpcndicu1ar to the
ItreeL due to the numerous businesses along the west side of the Street, Staff ncommends that
. Trial Traffic ReJUlllion for diagonal parking also be established.
II, ~?
(
(
Page 2, Item . .,
Meeting Date 10/14/93
~onelusion
It is staff'. recommendation that two Trial TraffIC ReJlllalions be established on East Park Lane
and chat cho Safety Commission review chese Trial Traffic ReJUlations after tbty have been in
place for ICven months. At chat time Staff' Will relUm with a status report and a hAn....lQllWion
on whether or Dot to make Ihese Trial Traffic Re,wations pcnnanenL
All area businesses and residents have been notified of tonight's Safety Commission meeting.
nseAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
I............,.tr Area PIal
WPC rr ~ _' \1)63."
.
"'
I" ~Jr
I~.
I'
..,
'\
\-
1\ 0~
Ih\l\
, \\ "\
. _~' ~'\
'I~~\
)
. 'l\
'"
"-~\ .-<
.~ ~_..\~ "
.\ \
l\
- t
. (
I _
I
(
I .,mH
"
/...~IAIIDRDfI1AT
"
~~.
---
tMEEZE WII'I
-
I '
\l
( .t
~ " "
" ~
. ~
.
.t
" ~ ~
() :":
...
IV ~ I
~.
. " ~
~ ) .
~ tIC , 0'
"i
.
~ .
" .
,
. .
.
\
",
.. "
. F .sTREET-
,
. .....
.......
.... D
, . , " I ...! ' . .,'" .,( ~..- ... - '.. ,. .
200 BLOCK OF EAST PARK LANE
- /''/ _,/.JI':}~, . .. _ _: ..." :..... _.....:_,.... ....
'" rGi1C .... . --..
------~..-
"AU tol1O/lI.
y Commission Minutes
\.. _-"ber 14, 1993
PJle2
f~hi"i+ ~
7. REPORT on Request lor time limited ~rking on I portion of wt Park Lane between Davidson and
F Streets
Frank Rivera presented staff's report.
IfMoId LilfM6er, 276 Ash A_, ellul. Vista, CA '19'0, said the problem with diagonal parking was
tIIIt it would be striped were It was approached from the north, but most motorists ame from the south off
F Street, which meant vehicles would have to lJ.turn Into the plrking stall. The enlorcement of the Irea was
also a concern. He said there were siplS posted lor parkinc prohibition on Fridays from 6:~:00 a.m. lor
Itreet sweeping and In 2 1/2 years his side of the street had never been swept. The ~rklnc prohibition was
not beinC enforced and the street was not being swept. Cleanliness was a problem on the entire street. The
City was not maintaining the street. The angle parkinc was not acceptable. He asked who was coing to
enlorce and pay for the enlorcement of the area. He did not feel it was workable program.
""", N.a.rt 26lJ Ash A~nw, Chu/a Vista, CA '19'0, Igreed with Mr. lIneweber Ind said beause of the
Friday parking prohibited signs, he got up and rnoved his ar every Friday. He did not see how two hour
par1dnc would work unless an officer waS always present.
Chair Thomas said staff's recommendation was for a trial traffic regulation and If It didn't work, the area could
. revisited. He asked staff if they could respond to the street sweeping schedule.
Frank Rivera said the sign Indicated .No Parking 6:00.8:00 a.m. Friday.. The street sweeper swept the street
every other Friday, but there was no way to sign the street for every other Friday._ Since staff began working
on the Item, many business owners commented on the street sweeping. The street sweeper apparently was
coing up the center of the street and did not sweep along the edges of the buildings. The Police Department
had notified the businesses that they would be enforcing the parking. He clarified that the "diagonal" ~rking
was I misnomer because It was actually perpendicular parking which currently existed. The reason lor
"diagonal" ~rklng was because that was the schedule in the Municipal Code thatallowecl vehicles to park
at an angle 18" away from the curb.
MSC (PittsIKoester) to recommend tIIIt two Trial Traffic Rtpllations be established: 1) diagonal pamn,
along the west lide of WI Pari< Lane between F Stntt and a point 100 ft. IOUth of the IOlIth curbline of
DaYiclson Street; and 2) establish a two-bour ~mnglimit on a 40 ft. portion of the west side of WI Part
&Me beslmln, at a point 133 ft. north of the north curbline of F Stntt and ending at a point 173 ft. north
of the lath NllJine of F 5tntt. Approved 5+2 whh Vice Chair Padilla and Commissioner Malacia abient.
I. REPORT on Request lor alloway stop at Allen School Une IIld Allen Schoolltold
Frank Rivera presented stiff's report and the Commission viewed slides of the area.
Commissioner Koester asked If the school crosslnc slen were removed IIld replaced with allOp slen, If stiff
would Install a "ltop ahead" sien.
frIIlk Rivera Slid underneath the stop sien would be a plate that said "alloway" The stop ahead slen was used
hen a motorist could not see the stop sien and would come on a stop sien abruptly. Staff did not feel the
onterseclion would need a "stop ahead" siCn.
Commissioner Pitts .ked If the crosswalk wouid be moved on Allen School Road to allow for visibility of
Allen School Lane.
,
I~ -1/
UNl1J:J:ICIAl MINUT~S
~Xhibi+ L
~IIEgBlIa%~gll ~%.1I
..~. :":-., .,'':''.-
.,:; -.' ...
::,; . ,:.~:: ,- =,;;:~~';~~ t.
u
p
1593 OCT 27 !~ D: 45 '
BOYeaber 2, 1993
Pile: cr-027
" .
'1'0: 'l'he Bonor&ble llaror aa4 cnr council
vu.: John Goss, Citr Jlanager,!
I'RCII: John P. Lippitt, Director o~ Public wor~ ~
SDB.JBCT: lhtabliahiDg a 'l'rial 'l'rafflc llegu1ation
Pursuant to the proviaiona of Section 10.12.030 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code, adopted by Ordinance 110. 1625 on May 27,
1975, the City Engineer, with the coocurreoce of the Chula Vista
Safety eo.mission, has deterained that in the interest of
.inimizing traffic bazarda and traffic congestion, and for the
promotion of public .afetr, there i. hereby .stabli.hed :
10.52.340 SCHEDULE VJ: - PAlUtDG-'J'IME LXMITED QH CERTAXII STREETS
Bast park Lane
BegiDDing At
A point 133'
north of the
north curb line
of ".." Street
Ending At
A point 173'
north of the
north curb line
of "1''' Street
Side
IIUle of street
West
'J'he City Engineer baa deterained the need to .stablish time
limited, 'l'Wo-Hour parking, along the west .ide of Bast Park Lane
as described in the afore .stablished achedule. '1'his is in
response to cc.plaint. frea the area businesses and resident.
that vehicles are .tored on the street for lengthy periods of
time and that there i. a great demand for .hort tera on-street
parking.
'J'he Safetr ec-ission, at its ..eting of OctOber 14, 1993, voted
5-0-2' (Chidester and padilla &bseot) to coocur with ataff and
.stablish this 'J'rial 'J'raffic llegu1ation.
Said regulation to beC'C ! effecti"e upon the posting of aigna.
'1'he regulation .hall run for a trial period of 8 aonths frea the
date of auch posting, at which t1ae a review of aaid regulation
will be ..de to .seteraine if it ahould be aade peraaDeot.
.
AttaCMeot. :
Staff Report to Bafetr Ct~ ~ssion and Area Plat
Minutes: Bafetr Coaaission Meeting of 10/14/93
(excerpt)
'J'rial 'J'raffic '135
(Co \IlDII1S\D"""'3Il.lIIC)
It ",/.2.
~"hib;+ D
Safety Commission Minutes
August 11, 1994
Page 3
7. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #134. Diagonal Parking on a Portion of East Park
Lane between Davidson and F Street
Chair Thomas said that he had viewed dumpsters that were not properly put back and that they
were out in the middle of the street. He asked who was responsible for enforcing compliance.
Frank Rivera said he would look into the problem with the dumpsters.
MSC (SmithlPitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #134 for Schedule VIII - Diagonal
Parking-Permitted on East Park Lane - F Street to 100' South of the south curbline of
Davidson and recommend the City Council approve a resolution affirming Trial Traffic
Regulation #134. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice Chair Padilla and Commissioners Bierd and
Miller absent.
8. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #135 - Time Limited Parking on a Portion of East
Park Lane Between Davidson and F Street
MSC (SmithlPitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #135 for Schedule VI - Parking Time-
Limited on East Park Lane - 133' north ofthe north curbline of F Street to 177' north of the
north curbline of F Street and recommend the City Council approve a resolution affirming
Trial Traffic Regulation #135. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice Chair Padilla and Commissioners
Bierd and Miller absent.
9. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #136 - All Way Stop at Allen School Lane and Allen
School Road
MSC (Smith/Pitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #136 for Schedule II - Special Stops
Required - Allen School Lane and Allen School Road and recommend the City Council
approve a resolution affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #136. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice
Chair Padilla and Commissioners Bierd and Miller absent.
10. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation # 137 - Parking Time Limited on Certain Streets -
100 Block of Broadway
MSC (SmithlPitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #137 for Schedule VI - Parking Time-
Limited on 100 Block of Broadway and recommend the City Council approve a resolution
affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #137. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice Chair Padilla and
Commissioners Bierd and Miller absent.
11. Oral Communications - None.
STAFF REPORTS
12. Enllineerinll CIP Proiect Schedule
Shirley Buxton informed the Commission that a report was going to Council on August 16, 1994
asking Council to proceed with the award of contract for the installation of a traffic signal at Gotham
Street.
/1- ./J
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 17
Meeting Date 09/06/94
J ?~ ,,5"
Resolution Amending Schedule VI, Section 10.52.340 -Parking-
Time Limited on Certain Streets establishing a one-hour time limit on the
100 Block of Broadway affirming the trial traffic regulation
Director of Public workrJ
City ManagerJ:, ~ ~
The City Engineer, with a recommendation of the Chula Vista Police Department's, Traffic
Division, has determined the need to establish time limited, One-Hour parking, along the west side
of Broadway as described in the following established schedule. This is in response to complaints
from the area businesses that vehicles are parked on the street for lengthy periods of time and that
there is a great demand for short term on-street parking.
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution amending Schedule VI, Section
10.52.340 establishing a one-hour parking time limit in the 100 block of Broadway affirming the
trial traffic regulation.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Safety Commission, at its meeting of
November 11, 1993, was advised of the initiation of this new Trial Traffic Regulation and was
asked to review this installation in eight (8) months with staff to see if this restriction should be
made permanent.
The Safety Commission, at their meeting of August 11, 1994, voted 4-0-3 (Vice Chair Padilla and
Commissioners Bierd and Miller absent) to recommend that the City Council affirm this Trial
Traffic Regulation and adopt a resolution making this parking restriction permanent. Copies of
the minutes for these meetings are attached.
DISCUSSION:
On November 16, 1993, staff sent to the City Council, a Trial Traffic Regulation to establish an
area of time limited (One-Hour) parking area on the 100 block of Broadway as described in the
schedule below.
10.52.340 SCHEDULE VI - PARKING-TIME LIMITED ON CERTAIN STREETS
Name of Beginning At Ending At Side Length of
Street Time
Permitted
Broadway A point 160' north of A point 240' north of West 1 hour
the north curb line of the north curb line of
Flower Street Flower Street
17./
Page 2, Item J 7
Meeting Date: 9/6/94
The trial traffic regulation became effective when the appropriate posting of signs and pavement
markings were put in place on December 6, 1993.
The regulation has run for a trial period of 8 months from the date of such posting, at which time
a review of said regulation was made to determine if it should be made permanent.
A review of the traffic conditions by staff and the Police Department show that this Trial Traffic
Regulation is operating effectively. Therefore, staff recommends that this Trial Traffic Regulation
be made permanent.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. The costs of the signs and pavement markings are minimal and were
done as part of the operating budget for the Operations Division of Public Works.
Attachments:
Exhibit A - Area Plat and Lett~rs area businesses
Exhibit B - Copy of Memo fr . Schaefer CVPD (excerpt)
Exhibit C - Trial Traffic #]~
Exhibit D - Draft Minu~afety Commission Meeting of 8/11/94 (excerpt)
~
DMW:CY-027
m:\homc\engineer\agenda\ttrbrdwy.dmw
) '/-.,;.
RESOLUTION NO. /7&'15
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING SCHEDULE VI, SECTION
10.52.340 - PARKING TIME LIMITED ON CERTAIN
STREETS ESTABLISHING A ONE-HOUR TIME LIMIT ON
THE 100 BLOCK OF BROADWAY AFFIRMING THE TRIAL
TRAFFIC REGULATION
WHEREAS, the City Engineer, with a recommendation of the
Chula vista Police Department's Traffic Division, has determined
the need to establish time limited, One-Hour parking, along the
west side of Broadway as described in the following established
schedule; and
WHEREAS, this is in response to complaints from the area
businesses that vehicles are parked on the street for lengthy
periods of time and that there is a great demand for short term on-
street parking; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission, at its meeting of August
11, 1994, voted to recommend that the city Council affirm this
Trial Traffic Regulation and adopt a resolution making this parking
restriction permanent; and
WHEREAS, a review of the traffic conditions by staff and
the Police Department show that this Trial Traffic Regulation is
operating effectively, therefore, staff recommends that this Trial
Traffic Regulation be made permanent.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council
of the City of Chula vista does hereby amend Schedule VI, section
10.52.340 -Parking Time Limited on certain Streets establishing a
one-hour time limit on the 100 block of Broadway as follows:
10.52.340 SCHEDULE VI-PARKING-TIME LIMITED ON CERTAIN STREETS
Name of Beginning At Ending At Side Length of
Street Time
Permitted
Broadway A point 160' A point 240' West 1 hour
north of the north of the
north curb north curb line
line of Flower of Flower
Street Street
//~ ~
~/ "
(~//~r'-!---~----____)
17-3
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\park.VI
rov~ "t
Bruce M.
Attorney
2
17''/
form by
E,zhibi4 II
SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item Number
Meeting Date
10
8/11/94
ITEM TITLE: Report on affirming Trial Traffic Regulation 1137
for Schedule VI - Parking - Time Limited on Certain
Streets, 100 Block Broadway
SUBMITTED BY: City Traffic Engineet"
BACKGROUND: The City Engineer, with a recommendation of the
Chula Vista Police Department's, Traffic Division, has determined
the need to establish time limited, One-Hour parking, along the
west side of Broadway as described in the following established
schedule. This is in response to complaints from the area
businesses that vehicles are parked on the street for lengthy
periods of time and that there is a great demand for short term on-
street parking.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve staff's recommendation and recommend to
the City Council that the Council pass a resolution affirming this
Trial Traffic Regulation and make this time limited parking area
permanent.
DISCUSSION:
On November 16, 1993, staff sent to the City Council, a Trial
Traffic Regulation to establish a time limited (One-Hour) parking
area in the 100 block of Broadway as described in the schedule
below.
10.52.340 SCHEDULE VI - PARKING-TIME LIMITED ON CERTAIN STREETS
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Side
Broadway A point 160' A point 240' West
north of the north of the
north curb line north curb line
of Flower Street of Flower Street
The City Engineer, with a recommendation of the Chula vista Police
Department's, Traffic Division, has determined the need to
establish time limited, One-Hour parking, along the west side of
Broadway as described in the afore established schedule. This is in
response to complaints from the area businesses that vehicles are
parked on the street for lengthy periods of time and that there is
a great demand for short term on-street parking.
The Safety commission, at its meeting of November 11, 1993, was
advised of the initiation of this new Trial Traffic Regulation and
was asked to review this installation in eight (8) months with
staff to see if this restriction sh~ld be made permanent.
J?..s
Item Humber
Meeting Date
10
8/11/94
Said regulation became effective when the appropriate posting of
signs and pavement markings were put in place on December 6, 1993.
The regulation has run for a trial period of 8 months from the date
of such posting, at which time a review of said regulation has been
_de to determine if it should be _de permanent.
A review of the traffic conditions by staff and the Police
Department show that this Trial Traffic Regulation is operating
effectively. Therefore, staff recommends that this Trial Traffic
Regulation be made permanent.
Attachments:
Area Plat and Letters from area businesses
Copy of Memo from Sgt. Schaefer CVPD
(excerpt)
Trial Traffic '137
FISCAL IMPACT:
HIA
File Humber:
KY-119
(C:\DENNIS\AFFIRMBY.DOC)
J?"t
~
_ ~ r:"'~;~";:'
\ u...... "., ~- .....,..:.;:.
1 ~ ~~~J:;~;~~
, \ ~ ,- n, \~ ). ~l- "~i~)~~
. , ,;.,; ,'., ""
7" \~ ' \ -. ~ in ~ '\r l ?'~;fft
:. \..... .~.~.~ .." Q-" III 'Os:P 11 ~J"
. ~. ,.' ~r J,...,.~ i \ J
_-- ...._ r ql, , '..Nr
- '---. "", J .l-trr::.ir .... II ,I
N - .1 ~,.- ~ - I \. .". . rea _ \"" ~ H 1
-~ - - ..u--."_ - '., - ~ ~ -I . Sub,ec\" u..
..- ' .--1"r'-' . - '-- . ~ .;:(
\ .....:> ...~., ~ I
.' s: ._' ~ \ ,.-
i"'., -: ~ ......-- '--1~' 1 ',i::l r ~
~ ,,"r" "\-"1 ,~'j - 1 I' \:== 1== t:: ~
.- ,\J\.,...:o _ ~ ~ __
oJ - ~F --i ~ :;::. _ I-
"\ f;: -~,:~?\=""-;:~ .-1~. i- t ~~ ~ .1U t
s: - 1Ir-:::~g: .- t~:F= ~ t
11...... :,:"... -:. ..:i.'E:. _ t - .... . . ", \...:j
~:'.: ~\;:.:-.. ~.r) ~-\ \ '.\::~.;\~
o~-- ~. -- - -, r ' \ \\ ' :; \: \ ~ \..r:::
\ :i _ ~-' .:::-. ~oa r- - \ i \ \ \1. '. \\ ~
'\ \ l' _ ""{ 'V'''II~.;..;.~' . ~..._ \ '\ \ \~
t\ l,~.--, --'.'~~~t ~ -- F\'" 1\ i 1 u:.:
\\\ ;~',: - \-- l. \. ..... fT' .
\~\I\-i t \.;~'. 1\ . - ,~ ,\ L.....
,...- ,,".:' . 1"'"'"' rn 1 J..... -: ....l":
\ \\\r- \ \.(.~.\.. '.;~.~ - , '\\ Ci...J ~ r d - ~:> ~.:'
U'! - ~ \ ~..\_ . . 1--~'
\ .... " .,j-....
--- -r; .
I~' \ ,1.... _ :: ,~~ PJ. Jl
Ii -1 \ ;" - :~ ~ ....~ ~
.\\ \ \. ~ l- - One,-Hou~.p.r, ..1 '~... r:=- r:-i~i~r
~. . \\1 ,,\ ~~~ .::::\ t \, t.:~ - . \ ~~' \ '~l-:
1 ~ \\ \\...tttlnl' \ r. _~ -"1 nHrT _ ~ .L
'''LI AREA PLAT
I?-/'
j"A.-"l '\r-i \ ','-
'A \" n-'" \ I "-J,
" C .1,. , I
\ '\' I "__'".
,'. \ '" I .-
/r vJ j',.-
/ '- ,,, ----
.. ...,tI ,.."....
.. .,... ,...-.-
:....(~.............t... .I.
\\ "" ~ \ \ ".--."
\ I , ~..
. .
, .
1.--
...........V
-
-j
<<
~
2
..
~
/
/
/ J
/
/
,/
\':. ;
~r-- ---\
.
I
.
.
.
.--:
s:
~
:i\
-
!
\
-
,
r-
,-
1
~\
~
-
,
. ..
DIlAWII
D.M. Wolfe
.._----~~.--
DATE
4-20-113
..
a
FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP OF COMPANIES
KENNETH J, ROCKS, LUTCF
Insurance Agency
city of Chula Vista
Attn! parkIng Enforcement
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Dear sirs!
I have owned a business at 132 ~roadway for seven years now. I.
am writing to you because of my concern regarding the lack of
enforce~ent of a 2-hour parking zone outside of my office
location.
In years past I have telephoned the Chula Vista police Dept.
and pro~pted them to enforce the posted 2-hour zone. Typically,
1 would see enforcement for a few weeks and then it would be
back to business as usual. Yet, when 1 go to downtown to
Third Avenue, enforce~ent is always there checking meters.
iy custo~ers have been inconvenienced for years now because
of a few in the business area who park there all day every day.
Conversations with them have proved unsuccessful because they
know there is no enforcel:lent of the 2-hour parking zone. i/hy
should they move their vehicles?
As a business owner, I know there are too many laws now that
are anti_business. 1 am not askine for more laws. I am
asking for enforcement of existing laws. Your'cooperation will
be appreciated. ~nforcement of the parking zone will generate
revenue for the 0i ty of Chula Vista. ':'t,Et ",'ill be good for the
both of us.
3incerely,
~)~
~enneth J. Rocks
KJ'n./c!llI1
P. S. I would not be opposed to the addition of a 1-hour parkiJ'li;
lone if it was enforced. By limiting the time a vehicle -
is parked on the street will make room for all of the
businesses in our area.
AMERICA CAN DEPEND ON FAFlMERS
132 Broadway, Cl'lula Vista, CA 111910
Business: (619)422-6552' Fax: (619)422-3484
17. fr'
city Of Chula Vista
276-4th Av.
Chula vista
I am writing you bringing to your attention a serious parking
problem that I have in front of my store. I am the owner of Alley ~at
~enpo which is a karate studio located at 134 Broadway in North Chula
Vista presently the street parking in front of my store is posted for
two hour parking which might be ok provided that it was controlled by
parking enforcement which seldom is even seen.
The problem arises when the employees from the transmission
shop to the south or the car lot to the north decides to park on the
street all day which takes up most of the parking all day and into
the late evening. With out parking close to my store the Parents of
my students are forced to park across the street and have them cross
the street which is highly traveled by cars and trucks almost all
day, making it very inconvenient for the Parents and extremely
dangerous for my students.
I realize that Chula vista is a big City and Parking
Enforcement has higher priority areas like Downtown for the metered
areas, but the solution that I see is either to patrol on a more
regular basis and ticket those violating, or to change the two hour
parking signs to one hour parking and patrol more regularly and
ticket those caught violating the one hour parking limit.
I appreciate your time in reading and attending to this
matter.
.
17"'1
Sincerely /' /{I../' M-
Charles W. Baker
Owner Alley ~at ~enpo
134 Broadway C.V.
Ph. 422-4913
.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ATT. PARKING ENFORCEMENT
WIND TOYS
276- 4TH AVE.
CHUlA VISTA. CA. 81911
Dear Sirs, .'
'Im wrttlng you In regalt! to the parking In front of our shop at 136 Broadway. At this time It Is I
two hour parking which Is seldom ever patrolecl. We realize that we Ire I very l1l\I11 part of the
eIly of Chuta VISl8 but we Ire still I small buSIness owner with a problem.
The buSIness next to us which Is I transmission shop has tNcks parted In front III day
whicll makes It very inconvenient for Iny one wanting to come Into our shop. Also our U.P.S.
driver at times his to part down the street and cany the bollS because they can' get a parking
apace close to our shop.
If there Is any way that you could help us with this we would Ippl8CIated It.
,appreciate you taking the time Ind reading this.
Sincerely ~ ~ ~f
Darlene Frederick
Owner Wind Toys
136 Broaclw8y C. V.
PH. 426-5562
.
17 "/~
f-'1hi bif B
SPEED
LETTERs 44.902 .
(
;Wllsonjones e~:!;::ye Forms
~ -
,gE ED LETTER-
?m. ~ tiI~ '~r;:J ~,-
^ ~ 0 -n,4h~ P tiN-.~,f,;~f:fI: B7:_lu
_;;;;: R'r"f f 1_.l_,.~,-1.;;. (? 13~/r3V 1m. ~-... .f7
~ - , .
~.~ i'L~ "2;'~-?._L;-~.J2-. c-,..e- 'J--~
~!-;~_'-~ ro i 11=~:L OC'S~.) ~...- ,s.>37
~~t-
1~ : g. <I, ~~:( 't. .,{ ~. i)..~
-VL I. c,P-6: -'fC Jf -/Z,. C"\.kr ~.. r>& - --
I: '
........... .__._. Y.&A
...........--.-
0.0.11 09 z I f':1 SICNED ~ ~ -t.
_oJ.IIlI,............ -.. - PI"-'
.-.D_C.
) 7-/1
E. x ~ i bi'" e....
~1I~gBIIA7~Snl ~7.11
BoYember 16, 1993
Pile: CY-027
'1'0: '!'he Honorable Mayor an4 city COUncil
VZA: -John Goss, City Manager
PROM: John P. Lippitt, Director of Public worka
SUBJECT: Bstablishing a '!'rial '!'raffic Regulation
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 10.12.030 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code, adopte4 by Ordinance Ro. 1625 on May 27,
1975, the city Engineer has .Seteraine4 that in the interest of
ainiaizing traffic hazards an4 traffic congestion, an4 for the
proDOtion of public safety, there is bereby established:
10.52.340 SCHEDULE VI _ PARKIRG-TIME LIMI'l'ED OR CERTAIR S'l'REETS
Rue of street
Beginning At
A point 160'
north of the
north curb line
of plower street
Ending At
A point 240'
north of the
north curb line
of plower street
Si4e
west
Broadway
'!'he City Engineer, wi th a re~en4ation of the Chula Vista
police Department's, '!'raffic Division, bas deteraine4 the nee4 to
establish time limite4, One-Hour parking, along the west side of
Broadway as described in the afore establishe4 schedule. '!'his is
in response to complaints from the area businesses that vehicles
are parke4 on the street for lengthy peri04s of tiae and that
there is a great deman4 for sbort tera on-street parking.
'!'he So.fety CCIGIlis.ion, at its aeeting of ~r 11, 1993, was
advise4 of the initiation of this new '!'rial '!'raffle Regulation
and 'will be &ske4 to review this iDstallation in eight (8) ~tbs
with staff to see if this restriction should be aade peraanent.
Sai4 regulation to become effective upon t:he posting of signs.
'!'be regulation shall run for a trial peri04 of 8 ~tbs frea the
date of such posting, at which tiae a review of ..i4 regulation
will be ..4e to detera1ne if it sbou1d be aade peraanent.
attachaents:
Area Plat
Letters frea area businesses
) 7"/04
'!'rial '!'raffic '137
f,.._~_'II..IlllC\
J
.
~Jh; bif 7)
Safety Commission Minutes
August 11, 1994
Page 3
7. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #134. Diagonal Parking on a Portion of East Park
Lane between Davidson and F Street
Chair Thomas said that he had viewed dumpsters that were not properly put back and that they
were out in the middle of the street. He asked who was responsible for enforcing compliance.
Frank Rivera said he would look into the problem with the dumpsters.
MSC (SmithlPitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #134 for Schedule VIII - Diagonal
Parking-Permitted on East Park Lane - F Street to 100' South of the south curbline of
Davidson and recommend the City Council approve a resolution affirming Trial Traffic
Regulation #134. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice Chair Padilla and Commissioners Bierd and
Miller absent.
8. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #135. Time Limited Parking on a Portion of East
Park Lane Between Davidson and F Street
MSC (SmithlPitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #135 for Schedule VI - Parking Time-
Limited on East Park Lane -133' north oftbe north curbline of F Street to 177' north of the
north curbline ofF Street and recommend the City Council approve a resolution affirming
Trial Traffic Regulation #135. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice Chair Padilla and Commissioners
Bierd and Miller absent.
9. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #136. All Way Stop at Allen School Lane and Allen
School Road
MSC (Smith/Pitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #136 for Schedule II - Special Stops
Required - Allen School Lane and Allen School Road and recommend the City Council
approve a resolution affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #136. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice
Chair Padilla and Commissioners Bierd and Miller absent.
10. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #137. Parking Time Limited on Certain Streets-
100 Block of Broadway
MSC (SmithlPitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #137 for Schedule VI - Parking Time-
Limited on 100 Block of Broadway and recommend the City Council approve a resolution
affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #137. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice Chair Padilla and
Commissioners Bierd and Miller absent.
11. Oral Communications. None.
STAFF REPORTS
12. Enlrineerimf CIP Proiect Schedule
Shirley Buxton informed the Commission that a report was going to Council on August 16, 1994
asking Council to proceed with the award of contract for the installation of a traffic signal at Gotham
Street.
)7-/3
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I 8'"
Meeting Date 09/06/94
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution I ?t. 'I" Amending Schedule II, Section 10.52.030 for
Special Stops Required - Through Streets and Stopped Intersections at Allen
School Lane and Allen School Road affirming the trial traffic regulation
Director of Public workri
City Manage~ ~M
0./7
SUBMITfED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The City Engineer has determined the need to establish an all-way stop at the intersection described
above for the promotion of public safety and to reduce traffic hazards and congestion. This intersection
is adjacent to Ella B. Allen Elementary School and a significant number of school aged children cross
this street to access this school. Additionally this intersection has somewhat restricted sight distance
caused by natural topography which is not easily corrected. .
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution amending Schedule II, Section
10.52.030 establishing an all-way stop at Allen School Lane and Allen School Road affirming the trial
traffic regulation.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Safety Commission, at its meeting of May
13, 1993, voted 5-0-2 (Chidester and Padilla absent) to concur with staff and establish the Trial Traffic
Regulation.
The Safety Commission, at their meeting of August 11, 1994, voted 4-0-3 (Vice Chair Padilla and
Commissioners Bierd and Miller absent) to recommend that the City Council affirm the Trial Traffic
Regulation and adopt a resolution making this all-way stop regulation permanent. Copies of the
minutes for these meetings are attached.
DISCUSSION:
On November 2, 1993, staff sent to the City Council, a Trial Traffic Regulation to establish an all-way
stop at the intersection of Allen School Lane and Allen School Road as described in the schedule
below.
10.52.030 SCHEDULE II - SPECIAL STOPS REQUIRED - THROUGH STREETS AND
STOP INTERSECTIONS
Name of Street Stop Intersection Traffic Stopped On Signs
Allen School Lane Allen School Road/Allen School Lane Allen School Lane 2*
* Stop Sign on Allen School Road was already existing.
The trial traffic regulation became effective when the appropriate posting of signs and pavement
markings were put in place on November 15, 1993.
Ir~'1
Page 2, Item d
Meeting Date: 9/6/94
The regulation has run for a trial period of 8 months from the date of such posting, at which time a
review of said regulation was made to determine if it should be made permanent.
A review of the traffic conditions by staff and the Police Department show that this Trial Traffic
Regulation is operating effectively. Therefore, staff recommends that this Trial Traffic Regulation be
made permanent.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. The costs of the signs and pavement markings are minimal and were done
as part of the operating budget for the Operations Division of Public Works.
Attachments: ~
Exhibit A - Staff Reports to SafetY. mission and Area Plat
Exhibit B - Minutes: Safety Co sion Meeting of 10/14/93 (excerpt)
Exhibit C - Trial Traffic #13~
Exhibit D - Draft Minutes:~ety Commission Meeting of 8/11/94 (excerpt)
DMW:CY-027
m:\home\engineer\agenda\allenstp.dmw
Ifr'~
RESOLUTION NO.
I ?~I/~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CHULA VISTA AMENDING SCHEDULE II,
10.52.030 FOR SPECIAL STOP REQUIRED
STREETS AND STOPPED INTERSECTIONS
SCHOOL LANE AND ALLEN SCHOOL ROAD
THE TRIAL TRAFFIC REGULATION
CITY OF
SECTION
- THROUGH
AT ALLEN
AFFIRMING
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined the need to
establish an all-way stop at the intersection of Allen School Lane
and Allen School Road for the promotion of public safety and to
reduce traffic hazards and congestion; and
WHEREAS, this intersection is adjacent to Ella B. Allen
Elementary School and a significant number of school aged children
cross this street to access this school and additionally this
intersection has somewhat restricted sight distance caused by
natural topography which is not easily corrected; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission, at its meeting of August
11, 1994 to recommend that the city Council affirm the Trial
Traffic Regulation and adopt a resolution making this all-way stop
regulation permanent; and
WHEREAS, a review of the traffic conditions by staff and
the Police Department show that this Trial Traffic Regulation is
operating effectively, therefore, staff recommends that this Trial
Traffic Regulation be made permanent.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby amend Schedule II, section
10.52.030 for Special stops Required - Through Streets and Stopped
Intersections at Allen School Lane and Allen School Road as
follows:
10.52.030 SCHEDULE II - SPECIAL STOPS REQUIRED - THROUGH
STREETS AND STOP INTERSECTIONS
Name of stop Intersection Traffic Stopped sig
Street On ns
Allen School Allen School Road/Allen Allen School 2*
Lane School Lane Lane
* stop Sign on Allen School Road was already existing.
~/I rt l._~
!
JY.3
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
C:\rs\stopsign.II
It, &./
ity
fxhibi-f A
SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item Number 9
Meeting Date 8/11/94
ITEM TITLE: Report on affinaing Trial Traffic Regulation '136
for Schedule II - Special stops Required - Through
Streets and stopped Intersections. Allen School Lane
and Allen School Road.
SUBMITTED BY: City Traffic Enginee~
BACKGROUND: The City Engineer ~ detenained the need to
establish an All-Way stop at the intersection described above for
the promotion of public safety and to reduce traffic hazards and
congestion. This intersection is adjacent to Ella B. Allen
Elementary School and a significant number of school aged children
cross this street to access this school. Additionally this
intersection has somewhat restricted sight distance caused by
natural topography which is not easily corrected.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve staff's recommendation and recommend to
the City Council that the Council pass a resolution affinaing this
Trial Traffic Regulation and make this All-Way stop penaanent.
DISCUSSION:
On November 2, 1993, staff sent to the City Council, a Trial
Traffic Regulation to establish an all-way stop at the intersection
of Allen School Lane and Allen School Road as described in the
schedule below.
10.52.030
SCHEDULE II - SPECIAL STOPS REQUIRED - THROUGH
STREETS AND STOP INTERSECTIONS
Allen School Lane
stop Intersection Traffic stopped On Signs
Allen School Roadl Allen School Lane 2*
Allen School Lane
N/lIIIe of Street
. Stop Sign... All.. Scft>>1 .. _ .1~ .isting.
The City Engineer has detenained the need to establish an All-Way
stop at the intersection described above for the prc.otion of
public safety and to reduce traffic hazards and congestion. This
intersection is adjacent to Ella B. Allen Elementary School and a
significant nUllber of school aged children cross this street to
access this school. Additionally this intersection has _ewhat
restricted sight distance caused by natural topography which is not
easily corrected.
I'i".s
Item Number 9.
Meeting Date 8/11/94
The Safety Commission, at its aeeting of May 13, 1993, voted 5-0-2
(Chidester and I'adilla absent) to concur with staff and establish
this Trial Traffic Regulation.
Said regulation became effective when the appropriate posting of
signs and pavement markings were put in place on November 15, 1993.
The regulation has run for a trial period of 8 ~nths from the date
of such posting, at which time a review of said regulation has been
made to determine if it should be made permanent.
A review of the traffic conditions by staff and the Police
Department show that this Trial Traffic Regulation is operating
effectively. Therefore, staff recommends that this Trial Traffic
Regulation be made permanent.
Attachments:
Staff Report to Safety Commission and Area plat
Minutes: Safety Commission Meeting of 10/14/93
(excerpt)
Trial Traffic '136
PISCAL IMPACT:
NIA
Pile Number:
1(1'-119
(c: \DmNIS\AFFIJUIAS.DOC)
/1J'~
"t
.
.
I
(
~
-
-
,
"
:
I
.
.
I
I
I
I
:
I
10-1(-93
I D.M. w,lf~
AREA
18"/
PLAT
SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
ltem-L-
Meetlnl Date...J.Ofl4f93
Repon on request for all-way stop It Allen School Lane and Allen School
Road .
SUBMrITED BY: City Traffic Enpneer Fx ~ f Iff!.:-
Staff has received a request from Mr. Peter J. Matz. Principal It Ella B. Allen Elementary School
to install an all-way stop at the interseCtion of Allen School Lane and Allen School Road.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Safety Commission accept staffs repon and install the all-
way stop It the intersection of Allen School Lane and Allen School Road via a Trial Traffic
ReJUlation.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has received a request from Mr. Peter J. Matz, Principal It Allen Elementary School to
provide an all-way stop at the intersection of Allen School Lane and Allen School Road. These
two roads intersect to form aT-intersection at the main entrance to the elementary school. The
school is located to the south of the subject intersection. The interseCtion has one stop sip for
southbound Allen School Road. There are painted yellow crosswalk across the east and nonh
legs of this intersection. This intersection is manned by three school safety patrol members.
There is also one adult wearing an orange vest present at this location. This adult is a member
of the school's "Oood and Safe" Program sponsored by the Parent Teachers Association. The
adult does not assist in crossing pedestrians like the safety patrol does, but nther, monitors the
area to ensure that safety is maintained.
Allen School Road is a narrow 27 ft. to 30 fL nonhlsouth two lane roadway with unimproved
shoulders. The road startS It Bonita Road and meanders south to Allen School Lane. The
ponion from .1200 ft. south of Bonita Road 10 the nonh side of Allen School Lane is within the
County of San Dielo. Traffic counts completed by Itaff show an Avcrap Daily Traff'u: (ADT)
count of approximately 1.070 southbound vehicles.
Allen School Lane is . IWfOW 24 fL to 30 fL cast/west twO-lane roadway with IOIIIC meet
L..provements alonl the south side of dle sneL Just DOrth of dle nonh side of the street is the
City limit with Dull Vista and the County of San DieIO. TrIffic counts show III ADT of
approximately 440 vehicles eastbound. out of dle cul-de-sac. (west end of dle street) and
approximately I,osO vehicles in the westbound approach.
A review of the accident histOrY of the subject inte:nection from January 1. 1990 to July 31. 1993
shows that there have been no reponed accidents within this period.
An all-way stop study completed by staff for the subject interseCtion shows that this interseetion
received 19 points out of . possible 54. The minimum required to justify the installation of an
/!r--r
Pale 1, Item 8
Meetinl Date 10/14/93
I
all-way SlOp is 30 points. The subject interseetion did not meet the accident WIn'IJIt or the
pedestrian wmanL Since this interseetion is a (three-way) T -intc:neelion INS primarily serves
the school and the IdjoWna residential area, volumes lie low,
Staff is recQinmendina that the all-way SlOp be installed IiJa this inla..AOft does met the
Unusual Condition Warrant based on the DarrOw roadway width, the school main entrance
proximity and the reduced siaht distance for lOuthbound motorists looma east for westbound
motorists.
Traffic volumes lie balanced in the eastbound 10 nonhbound and lOuthbound 10 eastbound
direction since these lie the primary movements of the tbrouah sueetS. The all-way SlOp will
help assign the right-oC-way at this intersection and eliminate the confusion motorists seem 10
have during the drop off and dismissal limes at Allen Elementary School.
The Safety Commission can view the uaf'fic congestion at 8:35-8:55 Lm. or. at 2:50-3:15 p.m.
except on Thursdays when due 10 early dismissal, the best lime is between 1:30-2;05 p.m.
According Mr. Matz., the congestion is worse on rainy days.
..Conclusion
Since the intersection of Allen School Lane and Allen School Road meets the Unusual Conditions
Warrant, but there has been no reponed accidents within a 2-1/2 year period. staff is
recommending that the all-way stop be installed via a Trial Traffic ReiUlation. Once the City
Council is made aware oC staff's and the Safety Commission's recommendation, the all-way stop
could be installed by the fll'St week oC November. The Trial Traffic ReiUlation process allows
the all-way stop 10 be installed and evaluated with staff retUminalO the Safety Commission and
the City Council within 8 months oC the insta11ation date 10 decide whether or not 10 make this
all-way SlOp permanenL
Allen Elementary School. the Chula Vista Elementary School District and the area residents have
been notified of IOniaht'S Safety Commission meetina. .
.
FISCAL IMPACT: $2SO
'&-_1 _.....
AD.W., Slllp BYllllllilll
ANI'"
TEE~ - AcelA-' HIIaiIy
Trame CDuDII (3)
WIC~~.--.s.l..
1~'1
- OJ .
.-
( I
~
- -
)
.
.
.
( .
..
.
~
I
.
I
/0."."
~!!/~ A P L A T
D.n,Wllr&
.
~ITY OF CHUlA VISTA
~l-WAY STOP 'aNTROl POltkl
INTERSECTION
" Dlte: ~
Rood Total "Pofnts I'
( 73'1 JifO)
lVRPOSE:
A fully justfffed, properly installed all-wlY stop Cln effectively assign
rfght of way, reduce vehicle delay, and decrease accidents. Generally, In
all-way stop ts reserved for the use at the intersection of two through
hfghways, and only as an fnterfm trlffic control Rasure prfor to
signalization. Stop signs are not to be used for speed control.
~ENERAl :
The posting of an intersection for Ill-way stop control should be based on
factual data. Warrants to be considered include:
1. Accident records
2. Unusual conditions
3. Traffic volumes
4. Traffic volume difference
S. Pedestrian volume
..-
Pofnts Ire assfgned to each of these warrlnts. The total points possible Ire
54. The fnstlllation of an all-way stop control is justified with a .inimum
of 30 points.
1. ACCIDENT WARRANT:
Two points are assfgned for each Iccfdent susceptfble to correctfon by an
all-way stop control durfng on. full y.ar prfor to the fnv.stigation dat~.
Total nUlllber of accfdents correctfbl. by an-wlY stop: .....11l-
IlaX~1IlIlll 14 points Sa. Jfo.cJ..J TEE'''' SCORE:.-II- Pofnts
Z. UNUSUAL CONDITION WARRANT:
Wh.r. unusual condftions exfst, such as a school, fire stltion,
playground, horfzonta;" or vertical CUrvlS, .tc., points are assfgned on
the basts of engfn..rfng judgment. Unusual conditions sha" be
consfdered only if wfthfn 500 feet of the subj.ct int.rsection. In
r.sidential n.ighborhoods wh.re th.re is . conc.ntration of school age
childr.n activitf.s seplrated from the r.sid.ntial neighborhood by a
.
18"1/
collector street lto.. coupled with other conditiolo~. the City Traffii::
IIWnl1! may Ipply traffic engineering judgment Ind waive the 30-point
ainimum point requirement to qualify the intersection for In Ill-way stop
control.
.:
The 30-point minimum requirements m1! be waived Ind In Ill-way stop m1!
be installed only if 1lSs restrictive controls hive not corrected a
docuaented problem.
All-wlY stops II&:l be justified based on projected volUlllls Ind Iccident
frequency when traffic signlls are warranted and willbt installed within
I specified period of time.
Maxi_ -io points SJ-~ f1,'--{,J.~CORE: 10 Points
3. WfSTRIAN VOLUMES
\
. .
Consideration is given to large numbers of pedestrians crossing the major
street during the four highest hours of In average day.
~
1
Pedestrian Crossina Maior Str@et Totl' durina . h1ah@st trlffi~ hours
Volumes: I-SO 51-100 101-150 151-200 201-0VER
Points: Q 2 3 4 5
Maximum 5 points SCORE: --1.- Points
4.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Points Ire dependent upon the magnitude of vehicullr volumes entering the
intersection during the four highest hours of an average day.
Traffic Counts (circle highest four hour volumes): Ho_ e:..J;~
0600 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000
Dir
HB
S8 ~. II '12 1'1 ,s n SO ss ~ I~ "' n
"2 '17
EB 3 , .. ,,, 7 12 " .,. I' " III 11 IS '/ I
n 'if ,'5 51 51 " 100 '" ", " to 17
VB la
l' I. IW Iw, ,. la'
~t1'" }C" JIf,
- T
-2- rr- /.2.
IS
I,"'
II.
100
I:,~
11
"7'
1'11( --
Traffic Yo'umes Warrant -
Points shall be as~igned in accordance with the following tables:
.~~+w~T . -~~
M~~ M~~
Major Approach Legs Minor Approach Legs
!.-hour VolJlm: Points ~ "!Q1nts -
CO_- 1nnn-- In 7'1'1 0 - 400
10ot'- 1300 1 ~
1301 - 1600 2 ~O
1601 - 1900 3 801 - 1000
1901 - 2200 4 1001 - 1200
2201 - 2600 5 1201 - 1400
2601 - 2900 4 1401 - 1600
2901 - 3200 3 1601 - 1800
8201 - 3500 2 1801 - 2000
3501 - 3800 1 2001 - 2200
3801 - over 0 2201 - over
SCORE: ~ Points SCORE:
Maximum 5 . Minimum 10
-p6
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
L Points
"""
lo~
II~
I~S-
-
'110
'170
5. lRAfFIC VOlUM~ DIFFERENCE
All-way stops ope rite best when the .ajor and .inor street approach
traffic vol urnes are nearly equal. .- Points shall be assigned in
accordance with the following table:
AUS;P ~OD&.. &0""'1> _ I>4,IJof&. s.,.~.eT (S.o1""'): '010
~I,.A...N s~~ooL ~ _ M".rO~ sr&.el!T' (~.4S'r+w.ST).""O"toIIO
'~IJO
24-Hour Minar St. Aooroach Volumes ~ 70"
24.H~ur Maiar St. Aooroach Volumes X 100%. ~ :;ft)~ ',.
95 - 100
85 - 94
75 - :t>
'1: 5:
35 - 44
25- 34
15 - 24
5 - 14
o - ' 4
10
,
~
5
4
3
2
1
o
SCORE: --::I-. Points
Maximum 10 Points
.
I~""/J
-3-
- ~l-WAY STOP SUMMARY
INTERSECTION: /tl,i,../YN sc.t+<>OI- I./IrAIE/ ( 0073 'f-OO)
~'-'6N.sc.IfooL ~J>
DATE INVESTIGATION WAS COMPLETED: /D/r/'13 ~~fE.
I Cf AM Oat (Mtar
TOTAL SCORE:. points out of . possible 54. The .lfrlmum
required to justify an all-way stop ~ontrol is 30 points.
I ER ECTION DIAGRAM: "
......,",,;*I.,J~
... fI'Ii ,,"
., .
1t"~~D~
I,.AIJ~
. ~1 p..t,.1
.""
, ,.),.
-S,o
tt
,
r .~...
. ~ .,.0 '"
( -"7
, .~...
oil'
,,1ft
,
.-
It "UtJ
."wooL..
'tD~~
'[C~n..d .d-~~ ::fu~l~
~ ... 1;.:,R r...-/F ~ J,.k-P ~..t:Jr r-J.F...L
~.l'~~? ..~.;~: '70.. J.*C---'-"'--~
REMARKS ~ r ,./,'11 ,:so
". J.' " .Il J_ ~.,--Rf
~~.__cc ~ r'......c.: -0:,' ~.~ c..-~i-
_).~~r~ ~;r/.&, ~ ~~~; L. L. ~
~.u:Jb~c-~ V4.I-.t:~.~ ~1~:J;;. ~ .1". 'd ~ N. ~
'jfr'IJlJC 5Z57E "/.;At!-4 ~ ..,...-...d ~~~..,. ~ -( ~_.r . ~.
/l'Y _/ J--.JJ.. ~ 11 .#..j"" ..<< %:; ~
61~ ~. :-~ ~..~, ~.J ~ ~~ 1--':1-__. ' "'..,g~/= rl.
T-4e
CIILA YISTA
U DATE: I" 4-93
.
1W'flt auISIlIi IETAI~ IIEl'MT
~
LOtATIlIi COIl: 734 It
sm LlOTICIl: It AU!N SOl. Ilt' 2 Illd IUEIi SCIIXl. LN
lINIOt ~TES trel tHl-9t to 17-31-93
CILlISICIl VIe- nPE POINT OF
~T CILlISICIl TIllS OF WACT
Ill. IIlTE DA TIlE III FA co.. LlUTllli
III ACtIIEKTS 1I11H1II M REP(f<TlIIl PERIOD
PRI" co.. II-Y 01lP
FACTCfI IUD IIfI Rill PO -'elIa.E- IIItIY./PED ASSlX
vt lEt Of lEA LIT S all lilT CTlIlCT Ill. " IfI DIR I<< SEJ SID FllCTOR
..
.
.
1?'15
- .
tJ, St.t..ft
,
....LL~ t::"''':'':'It\: PR:~~~
ICTR::. SYSlD'.S ~Tllti - E3(.:<>
PIl:lE --1
O\&~..... ~ L..:X:'
Uc~tiorl =--
late
Itil Ti.
Shf'\ Till
Su;lt Tw
lilillt
s.-hOft
Hay
lIpIr.tllf' ~
~i III 1iu&llI'
1
~ID
'120~
0910
1000
15
2
III
III
1
,
AI~ ScJ-f I.a^L
+ 1I/ItA ScJ...oI tooJ
EB TrJPc. 0.>
AJ1T '1"0
9/~i"r;. II1.,Ja.,
II"'. (,",'. 0:;'" ,..~. ,., ')0"" '-", ",'0' f.,.., '("" ,"'" ""', 1:l'~ 14'" ,~^'. It~~ '~M 'II.' .lIN ').,,'" ,)''111 "fit. ..., ')<,V,
~~ \. a:.w.~ .. ~~~a.:....a;......~" ,.~ . &.&.a~~~ua~~~
.~ ~ K I 1~ 1Ri 10 , 10 7 t4 4 . II
1 ~ 19 3 0 I1 4 1 3 2 11 1 3 0
0!432~42107~IO
! 0 0 1 ~ I 1 2 3 4 3 2 II 0'
I 9 3 1 12 3 1 1 3 1 3 1 II 0
9/Z;,r;. .,...U..,
0:"" ."0' ,.,.... c,.:. (~:'" "'''. .,.... ",." 0'>'-:' .,,", ",", :2:'" I.:' '4M ....." ItM ''7'" U"'" .c',. ')1\ f, "M W{. .,.~,. 2..'0
", a&.i.~ ." ~~.~ ',' ~~ I.' . ~~~~MJ,I.~au.Lua~~
1
o
f,
.
~
(/
3
9~ 732 35 40 11 16m 13 1~
1 1~
2
2
,
.
4
0 0 0 ~ 0 0 1 1 1i 3 3 13 17 4 0 n 5 7 0 0 1 0 1 0
1 C 0 0 0 I 0 3 11 2 0 4 7 2 3 Y 3 4 2 0 1 0 (, II
C 0 C 0 II 1 0 1 i1 2 15 , 5 3 4 1! 4 4 0 1 &3 1 0 II
C 0 0 II (/ 1 C 4 U 0 14 13 1 2 1 . 1 0 2 C 0 1 I 0
w~UJ~I~ .
~E~~ e~E.~~~~~=~~~..~..&
1 . . 0 1 1 1 la ,
0 . . 0 0 . . I n 1
0 . . 0 . 1 . . Jl 1
. . . . 0 . 0 . It I
1 . . . 1 . 1 , k I
1C'l:~!i 24 Ie" ~~ ~.E . DC~ .~
61'" ~ lIOC- ""7 1>> W 140(1- .:2 1~ e 150> . 1700- Q! 1100- 01:1
.I'N- ~ ~ 491 2100- 4SZ ~ 413 1300- "1 .... 479 0:00- 479 -- 479
..... 475 0.00- 479 GI5oo- 479 050(l- 410 07(10- 47. .. 471 OS>>- 477 1~ 474
~: 1 Traffic tllIc"- DoL I~'/"
Jm&.i
'Z3
Ia.l
II
479
m::&Ii
151
.
N.5'-*'1\
t: ~ m ...."''"': "'~-==._"
-"'- ........- ~..--,^.
II!TE.\ SYS:Er~ QR;'Jili,ilcr; - IlS:3)'JO
lIE .-.J.
tr..",.: t\,;;ter
u.c:liio. Colle
Di~1
1111 Ti.
Start T i.
Si.1p1l TiM
~~\'~dI
SoMIHOIl
2....y
~jlIratClf' IIlar
Xut,irw tlw:ilIr
1
50S
1~1S3
0103
1000
15
2
1Cl
III
1
10
AI.,. S.1../ ~
", AIIz" s;J...I L.I\L
"8 ""'~c. ~>
Atrr ID70
SIZe /13
~(C~3~~~::~~:::7::'L~;):~~~~140Jl~~~~~~~~~~W24:) mBiJ
~ ~ 45 4t s.:, 11C 90 m 7. 44 ~ 3. 9 It 137
1t: 1 15 14 11 !! 2f. 2i ~ 17 17 14 3 3
9 1Q 18 I 20 A 18 38 It . 7 14 3 4
.. a . I " Ii 19 26 18 5 3 I 2 4
~J
It n 8 14 !1 ., 2i 25 18 14 5 3 1 5
"
9";::S~
I."" ...~... '\~"I ~JJ....,. ~'," :~:., "~'I^ "C.,O. "",," 1(':," ',r', "',-'. :3C'-~' Ef'I"l .c....., 'ilM '7'" '.r'~11 .0..... l)V\', "~llrr, ':"'1 ,.-::.,' ':4""
.&&Q:~&a"W;.~~ ~~~ '.'~~ '-~AA=.~~~~~~~""'~
~
5 3 4 C . . .. ~ lli ~ r. 50 ~ 42 1~ 118 13 A>> 72 47 ~ 31 16 7
. . .. ..
. 1 C 1 0 C 0 3 , ~ 8 ~~ 10 23 12 11 ~ 13 35 23 9 12 4 4 2
. . 0 C I 1 1 9 tt 5 14 .. 12 12 14 Ii 23 4~ 18 16 1~ 10 . 1
, . .. ..
1 0 2 0 0 1 3 9 ~ 9 2C 15 6 . ;; 24 15 34 17 11 9 11 5 2
2 2 1 C (. 0 4 18 a 9 15 14 14 10 U 23 12 26 14 11 . 6 4 .2
9/22133
~~~~B~~eE~~~~~~~~&~.~..~
s s I 0 0 I U J1 Z 41
I 0 0 0 0 0 1 , ~ .
I I . . 0 I 0 . Ii 13
. I I . 0 0 5 . I Q 10
I 1 . 0 0 0 5 Ii 14 U
to'\~~~ ~.. ~_t -xi:'" ~-:..E - OI.:..\.-"=' 11
'O'J- 1~<4 s.r.> lest 13~ 1048 14X" 10""\ 1~>> 1C50 I~ 1059 1700" 1067 I~ 1060
il~- :~ ~- ~O74 z:~ 1~77 ~ 1069 DOO- 1.1 ,.... 1090 0100- 1.1 .. 1.1
JJ>>- ltw ~ 1(;60 1$> 1~ ~ 1079 07. 1079 0100- 1079 090> 1074 1~ 101e
. tro&r.:'lI.ll ~rlffic CiIt:._ li.ll. 1i',I?
1011
mi&l
123
IJt st..t:,^
. ,.-: m.'S""...:; p\R:i~R".
r'- .\,...... ,"",
lIIiO S'ISm':S ~T1[:i . I&tJ(IOO
JIIIlE -.1
J\A'we: k~r
1.IIu~ iClft Cad.
lit.
I..: Ti..
StIl1 Ti_
_1.T~
Divide
__tiClll
HlIy
D;IIratlll' IiuI!ltr
lI6cIIiM ...
1
WI/2
1120/93
0920
1000
15
e
It
III
I
1
Alb Scl..r ~
C/o ~/kl\ SeA.. I f...J
.,J' -r,.mc.~
. Atrr IDlo
",)/93
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~m~a~~ m!i.i
u L 52 71 Ii ID 59 75 50 33 22 12 , 2 .736
14 11 15 l' 11 It 13 22 14 10 , 4 4 1
, 1} 15 16 II 12 14 II , 10 4 2 1 1
~ 16 II 16 22 17 21 10 10 II II 2 1 0
~ 19 10 10 n 22 21 16 17 . 4 4 3 0
. 1 1 3 0 2 12 4- 104 m 44 ~ III III 1l6~ 14 44 7!1 110 :r7 17 l' 10 5
~
0 0 . 0 . 0 5 21 Ci 10 14 10 , 14 7 ~ 11 14 . 12 , II , 2
. .
0 . 0 0 0 3 5 15 !l I 10 12 17 13 19 ~ 10 I) 13 , 4 , 1 0
.
1 0 2 0 0 , 12 20 Ii 7 16 17 , 14 &! 13 14 II l' 11 3 , 2 2
0 0 0 0 . 3 21 ~ 29 19 15 19 16 15 II 16 , 17 10 5 4 2 1 1
.
!IIW93
d~~~~BD.E~~~~~~~~~~.~D.~
. 0 I e I S e 15m 54
0 . . . 0 0 3 15 It ,
0 . I 0 1 I , .16 !l 11
0 0 . 0 0 3 I' a a 11
. . . I I I a . 13 16
Bi
352
~"!~ 14 te;.t ~ ~...;~. ~ II
-too- lUll 1100- un 1. 1101 1400- 1091 I. 1m 1600-
.. 1064 zoo,;. lC"..4 2100- 1011I 1200- IS 1300- 106) 1400-
~ IO&.Z 010>>- 1061 coo- 1063 0500- 1063 0700- I. ~
/lr"'rr
1071 1700- 1016 111oo- 1061
1061 0100- 1064 __ l0i3
1011I 0100- 1049 1000- 1G!7
~1 1 Traffic tMck_ DoL
y Comminion Minutes
,-_ober 14, 1993
Pile 2
~"hibi+ 8
7. ~PORT on Request for lime limited pI!i(ing on I portion of Elst P.!i( Wle between DlVlds::ln IIld
F Streets
FrIIIk 1tiYe~ presented mff's report.
HMoId ~1I,ber, 2" AstI A~, 0JuIi VW., CA ""0, $lid the problem with dilgonll pI!i(ing WI5
tNtlt would be striped were it WI5 approached from the north, but most motorists ame from the south off
F Street, which melllt vehicles would hive to u-tum into the pI!i(ing sllll. The enforcement of the lrel WI5
Ilso I concem. He $lid there were signs posted for pI!i(ing prohibition on Fridays from 6:00.a:OO I.m. for
street sweeping and in 2 1/2 yelrs his side of the street had never been swept. The pI!i(ing prohibition WI5
not being enforced Ind the street WI5 not being swept. Cleanliness WI5 I problem on the entire street. The
City WI5 not mainllining the street. The angle pl!i(ing WI5 not acceptlble. He asked who WI5 goinl to
enforce IIld ply for the enforcement of the Irel. He did not feel it was wo!i(able progrlm.
John ~ 260 .uh A~nw, Chur. Vista, CA ""0, Igreed with Mr. lineweber and said because of the
Friday parlting prohibited signs, he got up Ind moved his car every Friday. He did not see how two hour
pa!i(ing would wo!i( unless In officer WI5 IlwlYs present.
Chlir Thomu said stiff's recommendation WIS for I trill trlffic regulltion Ind if it didn't wo!i(, the lrel could
. revisited. He I5ked sllff if they could respond to the street sweeping schedule.
Frink Rivera said the sign indicated .No ParkinI6:~8:00 a.m. Friday." The Ilreetsweeper swept the'street
every other FridlY, but there WIS no wlY to sign the street for every other FridlY. Since sllff bepn worlting
on the item, many business owners commented on the street sweeping. The street sweeper apPlrently WIS
going up the center of the street and did not sweep Ilongthe edles of the buildings. The Police Department
had notified the businesses that they would be enforcing the parlting. He cllrified that the .dillona'. pl!i(ing
WI5 I misnomer because it WIS actually perpendicullr plrlting which currently existed. The rel50n for
.dilgona'. parlting WIS because thlt WIS the schedule in the Municipal Code thatlliowed vehicles to Plrlt
Itllllllgle 18" away from the curb.
totSC ~er) to recommend that two Trial Traffic lepAtions be lICIbIiIhed: 1) dIqonal parkinl
alon& the west side of East Pm lint between f Street and a point 100 fl. south of the south antine of
Davidson Street; and 2) establish I two-hour parIdn& limit on I 40 fl. portion of the west Iide of East Pm
Lane be&innin& at I point 133 fl. north of the north aa1lIine of f Street and endin& at I poInl173 fl. north
CJf the north aartIline of f Street. At.p.lIf~ 5+2 with Vice OIIir Padilla and Conr~'1r.. Mllac:ia abMnt.
e. RFPORT on Request for Illoway stop at Allen School lane and Allen Schoolltolcl
Frank IiwrI presenleCl staff's report and the Commission viewtd slides of the am.
Commissioner Koester askeellf the IChooI crossInl lilft were remO\lecl and .-placid with I .. 111ft, If staff
woulel instill I "IIDP ahead. lilft.
I~ IiwrI said underneath the stop sllft would be I plate that $lId .alloway.. The stop ahead lilft - UIecl
a.J I motorist coulel not see the stop $lift and would come on I SlOP lilft abruptly. Staff did not flel the
onterseClion would need a "stop lheld. lilft.
Commissioner PillS lIkeel if the crosswllk wouid be mO\Iecl on Allen School !toad to IlIow for visibilltyof
..lIen School line.
/~" /f
UNni:i:1~141 MINlJTI;A
-. ..
Safety Commission Minutes
October 14, 1993
P.ee 3
Frank Riwra yid the crossw.lk should line up with the path of the .,edestrians. Staff would look .t the .re.
to see if the crossw.1k lie I ded III be 1llO\Itd.
Hal ~belJ said that staff wanted to assure that lllOlOllsts would not encroach Into the path of the
~an. It was critical that the limit line was placed IPProprlltely.
. Commissioner Pitts asked if staff would be llIdinsanlllditional crosswllk in the Ire..
Frank Riwra yid I new crossw.lk would not be instilled because the primary path of the students led to the
elSt lee of the interwdion where the current crossw.lk was located. If another crossw.lk was added, it would
cause confusion on where students should cross.
h'H M.t%, 315 QnyOll,ldp Drive, '0II1ta. CA ,,~2, PrincipII of Allen Elementlry School, spoke in fMlr
of stiff's recommendation. He thanked stiff for the prompt Ittention to their request. The concem WIS for
students .nd the community. He belie....ed it was. m.tter of time before there would be I serious tr.eedy.t
the inter$ection. There had not been previous .ccidents, but his dati showed there were three nur .ccidents
per week It the location. The School had tlken mlny measures to implOlle the sitUltion. He felt the School
hid one of the best tr.ined school yfety patrols in the County. Trlffic had been re-routed in the IrellS much
IS possible by ISkinS parents .nd bus driwrs to use certain routes. The drop off and pick up .rels had been
revised. Newsletter$ were used to remind parents about yfety in the .rel. Some parents stlned the "Cood
Ind Slfe" program Ind went out to the site .nd stood in key locations to help remind parents .nd students
procedures for safe pattems. The "Cood Ind Slfe" proer.m volunteers p....e . "Wow" slip to students who
used yfe crossing skills or for p.rents who used the drop off Ind pick up IrelS correctly. The slips could be
trlded in for prizes. The School fell the lrel would be impro....ed if the Commission ..reed with stiff to instill
the Ill-wlY stop.
Chair Thomls Isked whit kind of cooper.tion could be recei....ed from the County to trim blck trees It the
nonhwest comer of Allen Schooltlold.
Fr.nk tliwr. yid the only recommendation staff could mike would be to notify the County of Sin Dieco and
haw the tree trimmine crew look It the sitUltion and notify the homeowner to trim the shrubs Ind trees.
Chair Thomas asked if stiff would include that in their IeCOmmendation.
Frank Ri....era yld if that was the Commission's desire.
'..
Hal ~belJ said the visibility problem would cease once the ,I\.way IlDP "ens - instilled. A\thoush
It would help sliahtly,lt would not be critical any Ionpr. The motorist IlIterinl the Intenedion would not
have to pup the pp In ".ffic to de\erllIint when It was safe to IlIl1r the Intlflld\On. ....llPProachinl
whicles would haYlto S1llP.
Chair ThomaS withdrew his request.
Frank Rivera lWYIewed the pll e-mIl'Il oldie S1llP .... and ...OIIWI"'" .. ....
toUC ~1Ibl to InIIaII the ....., __ the InIIMC1101l 01 AI.. khooI.... and AIBI khooI.....
w1a, Trial Traffic Ifllllatioft. AIr 4._5+2 wIIh VIce 0laIr PadIlla and Carr.n;'v'QMr MaIda aIIIenL
t. ORAL COMMUNICAT1ONS" None.
It" ",2()
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
fxhi bi4C!--
. . ~'. ---
s'r4
.llgI1J6I.gl
,." ~--:.. :.~i'_:.._".. ~'1::::.
-_"":.-." :"'-- 1 .... _._0._
. II iI" _. .~ dO':
iS33 OCT 27 f...~ JO: 4J::
Roveibir 2, 1993
File: CY-027
StJBJBCT :
'l'he IIoDorable IlaJ'or ana Ci tJ' council
o1obD 00..., CitJ' IlaDager (J' ,..../
o1obn 1'. Lippitt, Director of Public WOrkJlJ 'r
..tabU.hing a fti81 ftaffic Regulation
'l'O :
VXA:
FROM:
Pursuant to the provi8icma of Section 10.12.030 of the Chub
vista Municipal Code, adopted bJ' Ordinance 110. 1625 on May 27,
1975, the City Engineer, with the concurrence of the Chula Vista
Safety eomaiaaion, has detenained that in the interest of
.ini.izing traffic hazards and traffic conge.tion, and for the
pr~tion of public .afety, there i. hereby established :
10.52.030
SCHEDULE IX - SPECIAL S'!'OPS REQUIRED - '!'BROUGH
STREETS AND STOP Dft'ERSEC'l'IOIIS
IIaae of Street
stop Intersection ftaffic stopped on Signs
AJ.len School Lane AJ.len School 'BDad/ AJ.len School Lane 2*
AJ.len School Lane
. St.al> SI.. WI Allen~' ... - .,...., .IRll'IlI.
The City Engineer has detenained the need to establish an 81l-way
stop at the intersection described above for the p~tion of
public safety and to reduce traffic hazards and congestion. This
intersection is adjacent to 811a B. AJ.len Bl.-entary School and a
significant nUllber of school aged children cross 'this street to
access this school. Additiona11J' this intersection has ~.wbat
restticted sight distance caused bJ' natur81 topographJ' which is
not easilJ' corrected. .
'l'he SafetJ' C. ission, at ita ...tiDg of IlaJ' 13, 1993, .oted 5-0-
2 (Chidestar and Padilla absent) to concur with .taff and
eatabUsh this fti...... ftaffic Regulation.
Said regulation to bec~. effective upon the posting of sips.
'l'he regulation sha11 run for a tri81 period of I .ontba fro. the
date of such posting, at which tiAe a review of .aid regulation
will be ..de to detenaine if it .hould be .ade penaanent.
Attachaent. :
Staff .eport to SafetJ' o-i.sion and Area Plat
Minut..: SafetJ' o-is.ion Meeting of 10/1./93
/1t,~/ (excerpt) .
.
fti81 ftaffic "36
~J hi bit 1)
Safety Commission Minutes
August 11, 1994
Page 3
7. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation # 134 . Diagonal Parking on a Portion of East Park
Lane between Davidson and F Street
Chair Thomas said that he had viewed dumpsters that were not properly put back and that they
were out in the middle of the street. He asked who was responsible for enforcing compliance.
Frank Rivera said he would look into the problem with the dumpsters.
MSC (SmithlPitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #134 for Schedule VIII - Diagonal
Parking-Permitted on East Park Lane - F Street to 100' South of the south curbline of
Davidson and recommend the City Council approve a resolution affirming Trial Traffic
Regulation #134. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice Chair Padilla and Commissioners Bierd and
Miller absent.
8. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation # 135 - Time Limited Parking on a Portion of East
Park Lane Between Davidson and F Street
MSC (SmithlPitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #135 for Schedule VI - Parking Time-
Limited on East Park Lane -133' north oftbe north curbline ofF Street to 177' north of the
north curbline of F Street and recommend the City Council approve a resolution affirming
Trial Traffic Regulation #135. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice Chair Padilla and Commissioners
Bierd and Miller absent.
9. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #136. All Way Stop at Allen School Lane and Allen
School Road
MSC (Smith/Pitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #136 for Schedule II - Special Stops
Required - Allen School Lane and Allen School Road and recommend the City Council
approve a resolution affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #136. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice
Chair Padilla and Commissioners Bierd and Miller absent.
10. REPORT Affirming Trial Traffic Regulation # 137 - Parking Time Limited on Certain Streets -
100 Block of Broadway
MSC (SmitblPitts) to affirm Trial Traffic Regulation #137 for Schedule VI - Parking Time-
Limited on 100 Block of Broadway and recommend the City Council approve a resolution
affirming Trial Traffic Regulation #137. Approved 4-0-3 with Vice Chair Padilla and
Commissioners Bierd and Miller absent.
II. Oral Communications - None.
STAFF REPORTS
12. Enllineerinll CIP Proiect Schedule
Shirley Buxton informed the Commission that a report was going to Council on August 16, 1994
asking Council to proceed with the award of contract for the installation of a traffic signal at Gotham
Street.
)~ :1-'-
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 19
Meeting Date 9/6/94
ITEM TITLE: Report on the "Notice of Availability of Draft Loss Permit" and "Draft
Loss Permit" (CS-95-01) for Rancho del Rey SPA III
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Pla~ng <Kft
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ ~00) (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No_KJ
Last year the Federal Department of the Interior adopted the Special 4( d) rule regulating the
habitat "take" of the California Gnatcatcher. This Special Rule links protection of the bird to
the California Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) process. Prior to the
preparation of an overall NCCP plan, the process allows the "take" of up to 5 % of Coastal Sage
Scrub (CSS), which is the habitat for the Gnatcatcher.
Last month the City Council adopted an amendment to the Municipal Code which implements
the Federal Special 4(d) rule at a local level. An application for a Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS)
loss permit was subsequently filed for SPA III of Rancho del Rey and a draft "pipeline project"
loss permit has now been issued by the City and has been filed with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, California Department of Fish and Game and SANDAG. This permit is based in part
by the previous approval of the development plan by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the
City, the dedication of 360 acres of habitat in O'Neal Canyon located south of Otay Valley Road
to The Environmental Trust and the ability to make the necessary findings in the Municipal Code
and in the State Natural Community Conservation Program Guidelines (see attached CSS Loss
Permit - CS-95-0 1 Exhibit 1).
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept the loss permit as drafted.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Background
The Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning Area III (SPA III) project site is located south of East
H Street and north of Telegraph Canyon Road in the eastern portion of the City of Chula Vista.
The site is predominantly vegetated with Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub (DCSS). Approximately
373.8 acres of the total 405-acre site contains DCSS. The site is habitat for California
Gnatcatchers, a Federally-listed threatened species.
The project consists of the residential development, community facilities (including a school),
community park, and open space uses on approximately 405 acres. The plan includes
j'~1
Page 2, Item ) 1
Meeting Date 9/6/94
construction of 1,380 single-family dwellings ranging in density from 3.8 to 11.2 dwelling units
per acre, including 530 specialty housing units to be located just south of East H Street, and
west of the proposed Paseo Ranchero.
The project will directly impact 256 acres of DCSS and have indirect impacts to an additional
117.8 acres of DCSS. To mitigate this impact, the on-site revegetation and long-term
preservation of approximately 117.8 acres of DCSS is proposed, as well as the dedication of a
360 acre off-site mitigation in O'Neal Canyon (see Attachment C to the Loss Permit) to The
Environmental Trust (TET).
Thus, while the 256 acres removed by site grading will be permanently eliminated, the long term
preservation of off-site habitats removes the biologically important O'Neal Canyon area from
the long term jeopardy of development. The placement of this area in permanent open space
provides for the best available assurance of preservation. The loss of fragmented and urbanized
habitat is being replaced with non-urbanized habitat where long-term viability of species is more
probable; therefore, the overall Project effect is beneficial to the coastal California gnatcatcher.
Draft Findings
1. The habitat loss, under the Loss Permit, will not exceed, when considered cumulatively
with all other loss of CSS occurring since March 21, 1993,5% by acreage of the then
existing CSS within the region. The regional CSS loss acreages are as follows:!
San Diego Region initial allowable CSS loss
Cumulative CSS loss since March 21, 1993
Remaining allowable CSS loss
Loss allowed by this permit
Remaining allowable regional CSS loss
11,371.9 ac.
0.8 ac.
11,371.1 ac.
256.0 ac.
11,115.1 ac.
2. The proposed Project is bordered to the north, west, and east by urbanized development
and to the south by agricultural lands that are of low biological value. The habitat being
impacted has been given an NCCP rating of moderate because DCSS is present and
target species occur on the site but the area is not the most dense DCSS in the subregion,
it is not in close proximity to Higher Value Habitats, and it is not part of a critical
corridor. The Project retains areas with an intermediate rating on site, although even
without on-site development, the Project site is already isolated by existing development
and will become further isolated by future development.
The off-site mitigation parcel provides for certainty of a key connection between areas
of high habitat values.
These CSS loss acreages will be reconfirmed with SANDAG prior to the finalization of this loss permit.
/1'';''
Page 3, Item /1
Meeting Date 9/6/94
3. The site is not a crucial habitat link, but is rather at the periphery of already approved
or constructed development. The Core Biological Resource Areas are located well south
of the project along the Otay River Valley. This site is not considered a high priority
preservation area because of the existing development on three sides which result in high
edge effect (Le., intrusion by humans, pets, weedy plant species) and habitat
fragmentation or part of a significant wildlife corridor. For these reasons, the site is not
considered important in the preparation of the City of Chula Vista's open space planning
efforts or NCCP planning efforts.
4. The habitat loss, under the Loss Permit, has been minimized and mitigated in accordance
with Section 4.3 ("Interim Mitigation") of the "Southern California Coastal Sage Scrub
Natural Communities Conservation Planning Process Guidelines," dated 11/5/93, and
thereafter, to the maximum extent practicable.
In addition to the retention of 117.8 acres of CSS in dedicated open space on-site, the
256 acres of impact would be mitigated by the following on- and off-site mitigation
measures:
. On-site restoration of CSS on natural slope areas.
. Management of the on-site open space
. The acquisition and management of 360 acres of the O'Neal Canyon open
space mitigation bank. This parcel would expand existing open space on
and adjacent to Otay Mountain. It is ranked as higher potential value for
long-term conservation by the NCCP because it supports DCSS, is part of
a much larger block of habitat that represents the most dense DCSS in the
subregion, and is part of a significant wildlife corridor.
Loss Permit Process
Section 17 .30.053 of the CSS Loss Permit ordinance states in part:
The Notice of Availability of the Draft Loss Permit and Draft Loss Permit shall
also be placed on the City Council agenda, as a consent agenda item unless the
City Manager directs otherwise, for the soonest regular Council meeting
scheduled to occur after the beginning of the Review Period as the agenda
preparation schedule may permit. The Council shall have the right to express
concerns and give directions to the Director regarding the decision to grant the
Permit, or to add, delete or modify the terms and conditions thereof. Concerns
and directions issued by the Council shall be forwarded to SANDAG and the
Resource Agencies as soon as possible.
The Draft Loss Permit was issued on August 24, 1994, and therefore this is the appropriate
agenda for Council to consider the Loss Permit.
19-J
Page 4, Item /9
Meeting Date 9/6/94
Conclusion
Staff has determined that the habitat loss, as proposed for issuance under the 4(d) Loss Permit,
is consistent with the "interim loss criteria" in the November, 1993 State Natural Community
Conservation Program (NCCP) Conservation Guidelines, and all other requirements of the City's
Interim Loss Ordinance. It should be noted that there is still an unresolved issue with the
Resource Agencies and the County of San Diego regarding the allocation of allowable interim
take to jurisdictions within the San Diego region, as discussed in previous Council Agenda
Statements on this matter (see Attachments C and D). City staff is continuing to work with
these agencies to resolve this issue.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
Attachment:
\A.
\ B.
C.
D.
Notice of Proposal to Issue a 4(d) Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) Loss Permit for Rancho Del Rey SPA III - Case
No. CS 95-01
Habitat Management Plan
Council Agenda Statement of 617/94 - Report: Implementation of the Endangered Species Act Special Rule 4(d)
for the Interim Habitat Loss Ap 1 Process
Council Agenda Statement 0 4 - Ordinance Amending the Municipal Code to Create a Voluntary Take
Permit Process Sanctio der Section 4(d) of the Endangered Species Act Alternative to the Process
Permitted Under S (a) of Said Act
~O
(c:\wp51 \nancy\marilyn\McMillin\4dl1lle.al13)
1'1-1 /19-3
~Iq
ATTACHMENT A
NOTICE OF PROPOSAL
/tJ/~r-
August 24, 1994
NOTICE OF PROPOSAL
TO ISSUE A 4(d) COASTAL SAGE SCRUB (CSS)
LOSS PERMIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ENDANGERED
SPECIES ACT FOR RANCHO DEL REY SPA III
CASE NO.: CS 95-01
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA'S INTENT TO ISSUE A
4(d) COASTAL SAGE SCRUB LOSS PERMIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT. NOTICE OF FURTHER GIVEN OF THE AVAILABILITY
OF THE DRAFT FINDINGS SUPPORTING ISSUANCE OF THE PERMIT IN
ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 17.30.053(D) OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
MUNICIPAL CODE.
Proiect Location:
The Rancho Del Rey Sectional Planning Area III (SPA III) project site is located south of East
H Street and north of Telegraph Canyon Road in the eastern portion of the City of Chula Vista
(see attachment A).
Proiect Site Descrintion:
The site is predominantly vegetated with Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub (DCSS). Approximately
373.8 acres of the total site contains DCSS. The site is habitat for California gnatcatchers, a
Federally-listed threatened species, as well as cactus wren, orangethroat whiptaiI, San Diego
barrel cactus and snake cholla, which are all Federal candidate species and/or State species of
special concern (see attachment B).
Proiect Descrintion:
The project consists of the residential development, community facilities (including a school),
community park, and open space uses on approximately 405 acres. The plan includes
construction of 1,380 single-family dwellings ranging in density from 3.8 to 11.2 dwelling units
per acre, including 530 specialty housing units to be located just south of East H Street, and
west of the proposed Paseo Ranchero.
Imnacts to Coastal Sal!e Scrub lCSS Habitat):
/9-?
4(d) Loss Permit Draft Findings
Rancho Del Rey SPA III
Page 1
The project will directly impact 256 acres of DCSS and have indirect impacts to an additional
117.8 acres of DCSS. Additionally, up to approximately 0.2 acre of vernal pool habitat would
be impacted by the project. The on-site revegatation and long-term preservation of
approximately 117.8 acres of DCSS is proposed as well as the dedication of a 360 acre off-site
mitigation parcel to The Environmental Trust (TET), to mitigate the impacts to CSS habitat and
the California gnatcatcher.
Anticipated Take of the CoastaI California Gnatcatcher:
Imoacts:
The primary impacts to the California gnatcatcher associated with the project pertain to the direct
and indirect effects of grading, construction, traffic, and development of land that is currently
undeveloped. The primary impacts of concern are:
. displacement of gnatcatchers in areas slated for grading and development;
. removal of nesting and foraging habitat;
. noise and lighting impacts from construction and development that might increase
the physiological costs of survival or decrease the probability of successful
reproduction by disrupting breeding, feeding, and sheltering behavior;
. habitat fragmentation which occurs when barriers, such as developments, break
up larger habitat areas (isolated populations are more susceptible to localized
extinction from fIre, disease, parasitism, and predation from animals such as
domestic cats); and
. increased nest parasitism and habitat alteration that are indirectly due to land uses
that attract brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus aJer) and small mammals to
gnatcatcher habitat. (Brown-headed cowbirds are attracted to rural and semi-rural
developments which often contain horse corrals and other such enclosures that
they use for roosting. Cowbirds may be drawn to the development therefore
increasing the risk of nest parasitism on gnatcatcher pairs in the adjacent open
space areas.)
Effect of Anticioated Take on the Coastal California Gnatcatcher
The anticipated loss of the Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) habitat would eliminate the potential for
a portion of the Project site to support the coastal California gnatcatcher (256 acres). The extent
and location of the development would reduce the quality of remaining habitat through
fragmentation and isolation of that habitat. The remaining habitat will be Sllitable for occupation
by gnatcatchers, but this population will be isolated by development.
)9-- 7
4(d) Loss Permit Draft Findings
Rancho Del Rey SPA ill
Page 2
Mitil!:ation to CSS Habitat Imoacts
The Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Rancho Del Rey SPA m addressed the
impacts of the project to the California gnatcatcher and CSS habitat. Four mitigation alternatives
were identified to mitigate the impact. The preferred mitigation alternative includes a provision
for off-site mitigation through the purchase/dedication and preservation of property that meets
the following criteria:
. It must contain at least 256 acres of CSS habitat which may support less than 10 pairs
of California gnatcatchers and has long term conservation potential;
. It must make a significant contribution to a regional natural open space design benefiting
the coastal California gnatcatcher;
. It must provide multiple species conservation benefits;
. It must have the potential for coastal California gnatcatcher habitat restoration and
enhancement through management action; and,
. It shall provide a critical ecological function for adjacent areas of coastal California
gnatcatcher habitat (e.g. corridor, dispersal area, buffer, etc.); and,
An active coastal California gnatcatcher Habitat Management Plan (HMP) is required for both
the remaining open space on Rancho Del Rey SPA m and the off-site mitigation location. An
HMP has been prepared for this site as well as the off-site mitigation areas by Sweetwater
Environmental Biologists. The HMP is hereby incorporated in this document by referenced.
The United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) , in consultation with the applicant, the
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the City of Chula Vista has identified
O'Neal Canyon as the preferred off-site mitigation parcel (see attachment C).
FINDINGS PER SECTION 17.30.054(D) OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL
CODE
The 256 acres removed by site grading will be permanently eliminated; however, the long term
preservation of off-site habitats removes the biologically important O'Neal Canyon area from
the long term jeopardy of development. The placement of this area in permanent open space
provides for the best available assurance of preservation. The loss of fragmented and urbanized
habitat is being replaced with non-urbanized habitat where long-term viability of the species is
more probable; therefore, the overall Project effect is beneficial to the coastal California
gnatcatcher.
The following fmdings have been made based on the information contained in the Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and Amended Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program
/9~~
4(d) Loss Permit Draft Findings
Rancho Del Rey SPA m
Page 3
(MMRP) for Rancho Del Rey SPA m and the Rancho Del Rey SPA ill Habitat Management
Plan (HMP) prepared by Sweetwater Environmental Biologist and dated August 23, 1994.
Findings:
1. The habitat loss, as proposed for issuance under the 4(d) Loss Permit, is consistent with
the "interim loss criteria" in the November, 1993 State Natural Community Conservation
Program (NCCP) Conservation Guidelines (as specified in items a. through d. below)
and, if a subregional interim take process is established in a form approved by the City
of Chula Vista at the time of the issuance of the Loss Permit, consistent with such
approved subregional interim loss process.
a. The habitat loss, under the Loss Permit as proposed by the Director for issuance,
will not exceed on the date of issuance, when considered cumulatively with all
other loss of CSS occurring since March 21, 1993, exceed 5% by acreage of the
then existing CSS within the region. The regional CSS loss acreages are as
follows: 1
San Diego Region initial allowable CSS loss
Cumulative CSS loss since March 21, 1993
Remaining allowable CSS loss
Loss allowed by this permit
Remaining allowable regional CSS loss
11,371.9 ac.
0.8 ac.
11 ,371.1 ac.
256.0 ac.
11,115.1 ac.
The NCCP Conservation Guidelines have indicated that a 5% loss of CSS is
acceptable within any individual subregion during the preparation of a subregional
NCCP or its equivalent (i.e. MSCP Subarea Plan). The proposed habitat loss
does not cumulatively exceed the 5% guidelines. The loss of 256 acres of CSS
combined with current losses of sage scrub within the San Diego Region do not
exceed 5 % of the existing sage scrub habitat.
b.
The proposed Project is bordered to the north, west, and east by urbanized
development and to the south by agricultural lands that are of low biological
value. The habitat being impacted has been given an NCCP rating of moderate
because DCSS is present and target species occur on the site but the area is not
the most dense DCSS in the Subregion, it is not in close proximity to a Higher
Value District, and it is not part of a critical corridor. The Project retains areas
with an intermediate rating on site, although even without on-site development,
1
These CSS 10s8 acreages will be reconfirmed with SANDAG prior to the
finalization of this loss permit.
)c;-j
4(d) Loss Permit Draft Findings
Rancho Del Rey SPA ill
Page 4
the Project site is already isolated by existing development and will become
further isolated by future development.
The off-site mitigation parcel provides for certainty of a key connection between
areas of high habitat values.
c. The habitat loss, under the Loss Permit as proposed by the Director for issuance,
will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the subregional NCCP.
The site is not a crucial habitat link, but is rather at the periphery of already
approved or constructed development. The Core Biological Resource Areas (see
the City of San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program, 1994 which is still
being fmalized) are located well south of the project along the Otay River Valley.
This site is not considered a high priority preservation area because of the
existing development on three sides which result in high edge effect (i.e.,
intrusion by humans, pets, weedy plant species) and habitat fragmentation or part
of a significant wildlife corridor. For these reasons, the site is not considered
important in the preparation of the City of Chula Vista's open space planning
efforts or NCCP planning efforts.
d. The habitat loss, under the Loss Permit as proposed by the Director for issuance,
has been minimized and mitigated in accordance with Section 4.3 ("Interim
Mitigation") of the "Southern California Coastal Sage Scrub Natural Communities
Conservation Planning Process Guidelines, dated 11/5/93, and thereafter, to the
maximum extent practicable.
In addition to the retention of 117.8 acres of CSS in dedicated open space on-site,
the 256 acres of impact would be mitigated by the following on- and off-site
mitigation measures:
. On-site restoration of CSS on natural slope areas.
. Management of the on-site open space
. The acquisition and management of 360 acres of the O'Neal Canyon open
space mitigation bank. This parcel would expand existing open space on
and adjacent to Otay Mountain. It is ranked as higher potential value for
long-term conservation by the NCCP because it supports DCSS, is part of
a much larger block of habitat that represents the densist DCSS in the
Subregion, and is part of a significant wildlife corridor.
An alternatives analysis conducted by the City of Chula Vista as part of the CEQA
review for the EI Rancho Del Rey Sectional Area Plan concluded that the least damaging
practicable alternative was selected. The mitigation measures have been incorporated to
minimize impacts to the extent practicable.
/9/ /t}
4(d) Loss Permit Draft Findings
Rancho Del Rey SPA ill
Page 5
2. The habitat loss will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery
of the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Potiaptila Califomica Califomica).
As is noted in Finding Number One above, the area of habitat loss meets the "interim
loss criteria" in the November 1993 State Natural Community Conservation Program
(NCCP) Conservation Guidelines. Therefore, the project site does not have high habitat
potential for a long-term conservation area. Off-site mitigation through the preservation
of higher value habitat will increase the likelihood of the long-term success of regional
open space planning efforts. Due to these reasons, the proposed habitat loss would not
appreciably reduce the survival or recovery of any listed species, including the
gnatcatcher.
3. The habitat loss is incidental to otherwise lawful activities.
The proposed loss of 256 acres of CSS is associated with a FEIR which has been
certified and a project that has already received discretionary approval by the City of
Chula Vista. The project has completed CEQA review and meets alllocal, State, and
Federal requirements.
4. Proposed mitigation is consistent with NCCP Process Guidelines requirements.
The NCCP Process Guidelines identify several options for mitigating impacts to CSS.
These options include acquisition of habitat, dedication of land, management agreements,
restoration, etc. The dedication and long-term preservation of O'Neal Canyon through
a management agreement with The Environmental Trust (TET) is consistent with the
NCCP Process Guidelines.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 17 .30.054(F) of the City of Chula Vista Municipal
Code, the USFWS in consultation with the CDFG, are requested to review the Draft 4(d) Loss
Permit and Draft Findings for consistency with the NCCP Conservation Guidelines and submit
comments to the City of Chula Vista Director of Planning within thirty days of the date of this
notice.(September 26, 1994)
Further, in accordance with Section 17.30.054(F) of the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code,
the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is requested to verify that the proposed
4(d) Loss Permit does not exceed the maximum permitted habitat loss for the subregion and
notify the Director of Planning for the City of ChuIa Vista, within fifteen days of the date of
notice, of that verification.(September 7, 1994)
;9-//
4(d) Loss Permit Draft Findings
Rancho Del Rey SPA III
Page 6
Comments and/or regarding the Draft 4(d) Loss Permit for Rancho Del Rey SPA III should be
directed to Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator at (619) 691-5101 or to the above
address.
~/Jfi;L
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
RAL/MRFP:mp
Distribution List:
City of Chula Vista Mayor and Councilmembers
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
California Department of Fish & Game
SANDAG
McMillin Communities
(MARlL YNlMCMILLINl4DPERMIT .RDR)
/9 ~ /~
4(d) Loss Permit Draft Findings
Rancho Del Rey SPA III
Page 7
I__--;~
SAN JUAN CAPlSTltAIilO
, .
CAPII,,,..MO..EACM ...
D.UJZ ..,
SAN CLEWEHTI: -
'ALL'.OO.
-
----
W.'U.[R "IIlI"IS
'ACI"'C I[ACH
IIIIIISION IEACM
eCEA" lEACH
'OT.[IItO
IM'U IAL
n:cnr
--
-
--
MEXICO
SITE VICINITY
ATTACHMENT HAil
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) Rancho Del Rev SPA m
Babitat Manal!ement Plan
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: /9-/3
NORTH 1" = 10 miles
.r
<-
~w
is
· i
~
::E
.
].-
.
-,.
- ..~,.
.",0;' ~.'
.~
.
"'-,'
.- ~~::~~..
'",""';
"';~ ~:.:/~ ...
.'~'. ~...~-- -'.
"t. ..,.
~;:,':'"
tp-,
D ..po<t......
Eii!J Opoa s.....
'. _ c-I Califomil Gnalcachcr PIIr Locatil)'
6 c-ICaIif_Ooa__
. San DieIO c.aus WJaI Loc:IIity
ATTACHMENT -8"
r CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
....ocATOR PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) /7~/{ Rancho Del Rev SPA m
Habitat Man8l!ement Plan
SCALE: FILE .NUMBER: 1994 Gnatcatcher and cactus wren locations
NORTH and Droiect imDacts.
\
~
~-.(
~.'
~..-
?"--. . '" ~ :': =, ,..
~,-
=_'-o~~.=.":.~
~
-,
,~
.
'- ' .,----::"-'
~,,~.~t~'-,~:::' ;'
" ~----:
. ..Jl.
5'5 ,I !r
'-
~'
~
~\.
.~
-
..---
.-
--
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
C) APPLICANT: McMILLIN PIlOJECT DESCIlIPTION:
COMMUNITIES BDR SPA m
ADDIlESS: O'NEALCANYON Mitigation Monitoriag Program
ICALE: FILE NUMIEIl: MMP.91-G4, DQ-069r4
NORTH NONE VARIOUS /9 -I
"
ATTACHMENT B
HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Ie; ~/ ~
,.
HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR RANCHO DEL REY
SPA III
August 11, 1994
Revised August 23,1994
Preparedfor:
McMillin Communities
2727 Hoover A venue
National City, California 91950
~o Sweetwater
Environmental
, Biologists,loc. 3838 Camino del Rio North Suite 270. San Diego, CA 92108. (619) 624-2300
19-/1; /tf-/7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
.Em
1.0 IN1RODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE .................................................................................. 1
1.2 PLANNING CONlEXT................................................................................... 2
1.2.1 Environmentallmpact Report/Environmental Review...................... 2
1.2.2 Resource Agency Discussionsl1992 and 1994 Letters of
Agreement .......................................................................................... 4
1.2.3 Regional Conservation Plans ............................................................. 5
1.2.4 ESA 4(d) Rule and Permit Requirements .......................................... 6
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................... 8
3.0 METHODS ................................................................................................................. 11
4.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................. 13
4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ON THE PROJECT SITE ............................. 13
4.1.1 Sensitive Habitats............................................................................. 13
4.1.1.1 DCSS ............................................................................. 13
4.1.1.2 Southern Willow Riparian Woodland/Scrub .................14
4.1.1.3 Vernal Pools................................................................... 14
4.1.2 Species of Concern on the Project Site ............................................14
4.1.2.1 Sensitive Animals ..........................................................14
4.1.2.2 Sensitive Plants .............................................................. 17
4.1.3 Regional Context of the Project Site ................................................ 17
4.2 MITIGATION PROPERTY ...................................~....................................... 18
4.2.1 Vegetation Communities on the Mitigation Property ......................18
4.2.2 Species of Concern on the Mitigation Property ............................... 18
4.2.2.1 Coastal California Gnatcatcher ......................................18
4.2.2.2 Other Sensitive Species ..................................................21
4.2.3 Regional Context of the Mitigation Property................................... 21
5.0 EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ..............................................................24
5.1 ANTICIPATED TAKE OF THE COASTAL CALIFORNIA
GNA TCA TCHER ..................................................................................... 24
5.2 EFFECT OF ANTICIPATED TAKE ON THE COASTAL CALIFORNIA
GNATCATCHER ..................................................................................... 25
5.3 EFFECT OF DCSS PRESERVATION WITHIN THE MmGATION
PROPERTY ON THE COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER... 26
5.4 NET EFFECT OF PROPOSED PROJECT - 4(D) FINDINGS ..................... 26
Sweetwater EDvironmebtaJ Biologists. lac.
August 23. 1994
HabiuJI Management Pltm/OT Rancho Del R~ SPA III
) :} ~ / ~ Prepa<<d foc Ihe McMilliD Compuy
TABLE OF CONTENTS
~
6.0 CONSERVATION MEASURES ............................................................................... 29
6.1 ON SITE HABITAT PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ................29
6.1.1 Preservation ...................................................................................... 29
6.1.2 Management..................................................................................... 29
6.2 OFF-SITE HABITAT ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT................... 31
6.2.1 Acquisition ....................................................................................... 31
6.2.2 Management..................................................................................... 31
6.2.3 Maintenance Activities .................................................................... 32
6.2.4 General Habitat Maintenance Guidelines ........................................ 32
6.2.4.1 Responsible Parties for Implementation ........................ 33
6.2.4.2 Schedule of Maintenance Inspections ............................33
6.2.4.3 Monitoring Plan ............................................................. 33
6.2.4.4 Annual Reports .............................................................. 34
6.3 COMPLETION OF MmGATION ................................................................34
6.3.1 Notification of Completion .............................................................. 34
6.4 CONSTRUCTION IMPACT MINIMIZATION ............................................ 34
7.0 FUNDING FOR THE PROPOSED CONSERVATION MEASURES ..................... 35
8.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS .................................................................................. 36
8.1 AVOIDANCE OF IMPACTS ........................................................................ 36
8.2 A VOIDANCE OF HABITAT CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY THE
COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNA TeA TCHER ........................................ 36
8.3 CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER RELOCATION ....................................... 36
8.4 NO-PROJECT ALTERNATIVE ....................................................................37
9.0 REFERENCES CITED ............................................................................................... 38
SwcelWIlCl' EnvironmeDtaJ Biologists,lac.
August 23. 1994
.u.
I <j -JI
Habital ManogemDII Pion for Rtmdw Del Rey SPA 11/
Prcpored for 1he MoMim. Compauy
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Habitat Management Plan (HMP) is presented in seven sections. with this section
identifying the purpose and scope of the HMP and the planning context
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The HMP establishes a program for the conservation of the coastal California gnatcatcher
(Polioptila californica californica) on the 405 acre Rancho del Rey SPA ill Property (Project).
in the City of Chula Vista, California, and culminates discussions with the resource agencies,
local jurisdictions, and the McMillin Company (Applicant). The coastal California gnatcatcher
is Federally-listed as Threatened. The Applicant is seeking approval under Section 4(d) of the
Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) to allow for direct impacts to 256.0 acres of Diegan
coastal sage scrub (DCSS), and indirect impacts to an additional II7.8 acres of DCSS
(proposed Action). The Project and associated mitigation plan are consistent with the fmdings
necessary for approval under the 4(d) Rule.
In determining whether to approve the Proposed Action, the City of Chula Vista, the California
Department of Fish and Game (Department), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)
will apply the criteria set forth in Section 4(d) of ESA (USFWS 1993). The Section 4(d)
criteria require the City of Chula Vista, the Department, and the Service to make specific
findings based on a habitat management plan prepared by an applicant seeking authorization for
incidental take of the gnatcatcher (see Section 1.3 below).
The Project site is predominantly vegetated with DCSS (373.8 acres). The Federally-listed
Threatened coastal California gnatcatcher occurs on the Project site within this habitat. The
cactus wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus), orangethroat whiptail (Cnemidophorus
hyperythrus beldingi), San Diego barrel cactus (Ferocactus viridescens), and snake cholla
(Opuntia parryi var. serpentina) are all Federal candidate species and/or State species of special
concern which also appear on the site.
Grading associated with the proposed development of the Project would result in the direct loss
of approximately 256 acres of DCSS habitat, and indirect impacts to the remaining 117.8 acres
of DCSS. Additionally. up to approximately 0.2 acre of vernal pool habitat would be impacted
by the Project. To offset the adverse effects of grading, this HMP proposes long-term
prest<rvation of approximately 117.8 acres of DCSS on the Project site along with construction
Swutwalet Environmental Bjologists,lDC.
Augun 23. 1994
Habitat ManogemmJ Plonfor Rancho D.I Rey SPA JII
-1. Prepued fo< the McMilli. ~y
J1~oU)
impact minimization measures. The HMP also includes dedication of a 360 acre off-site
mitigation parcel to The Environmental Trust (TEn.
The HMP provides: 1) a. description of the biological resources on the Project site; 2) an
analysis of the effect of Project construction on the coastal California gnatcatcher and DCSS
habitat; 3) conservation measures the Applicant will fund and undertake to compensate for
anticipated impacts on the coastal California gnatcatcher; and 4) an analysis of alternatives to
the proposed Project
1. 2 PLANNING CONTEXT
Preparation of this HMP has occurred in the context of:
. the City of Chula Vista environmental review process;
. ongoing discussions with the Department and Service;
. regional habitat conservation planning efforts; and
. Federal and State laws and guidelines regarding wildlife and habitat conservation,
including but nat limited to the ESAs and the Natural Community Conservation
Planning Act
1.2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTIENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW
Planning for the Project was initiated in 1988 through the City of Chula Vista's California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review process, which was completed with the approval of
the Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (P and D Technologies 1990). As part of this
process, the Applicant worked with the City of Chula Vista, the Department, and the Service to
develop mitigation measures to offset significant impacts to the gnatcatcher. These mitigation
measures were incorporated into the EIR and are outlined below.
. "To reduce impacts to the habitat of the coastal California gnatcatcher, the Applicant
would acquire and preserve an area of DCSS habitat as described in one of the
following options:
Sweetwa1cI' Environmental Biologists. Ioc.
August 23.1994
-2-
IC}-c2/
HobiJat MtmDgemenl Pion faT Ranclw Del Rey SPA 11/
Preporod for the McMilli. CO......y
- Acquire and preserve an off-site area ofDCSS habitat encompassing at least 187
acres which supports at least 17 pairs of coastal California gnatcatchers. or
- Acquire and preserve an off-site area of DCSS habitat encompassing at least 256
acres which supports 10 pairs of coastal California gnatcatchers, or
- If an off-site mitigation area cannot be found, the Applicant would preserve the
70 acres of high quality DCSS habitat in the specialty housing area on site in
addition to the 117 acres of DCSS habitat proposed for open space.
The proposed mitigation site can be outside the City of Chula Vista. First priority
would be given to the acquisition of areas within the General Plan area, and then to
other areas within San Diego County. The preservation and management of this site
would be the responsibility of either a public or private entity that is satisfactory to
the City of Chula Vista (acceptable private entities are - Nature Conservancy, Sierra
Club; acceptable public entities - Bureau of Land Management, California
Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, County of San
Diego, City of Chula Vista). Interim responsibility for preservation of the mitigation
site would remain with the Applicant until an acceptable public or private entity is
secured.
. The proposed mitigation site would be acceptable to the City of Chula Vista. in
consultation with the Service and the Department in evaluating the site. The criteria
for determining the acceptability of the mitigation site would be (I) its use by the
coastal California gnatcatcher, and (2) its long-term conservation potential.
. The mitigation site would be evaluated for use by the coastal California gnatcatcher
through surveys of the site on a minimum of three days at least a week apart. If no
gnatcatchers are heard after the first visit, taped gnatcatcher vocalizations would be
used on a subsequent visit to attract gnatcatchers that were not sighted on the first
visit. A minimum of one hour would be expended for each 25 acres of habitat
surveyed. Surveys would be conducted in the morning between sunrise and 11 :00
a.m. or after 3:00 p.m. Surveys would be conducted when air temperatures are
between 55 and 95 degrees Fahrenheit, and winds are below 15 miles per hour.
Sweetwater EnviroDmenlal Biologists,loc.
August 23. 1994
H~bilal MQlJQgemenl Plan/or Rancho Del ReySPA/1I
-3- I'Rpued for the McMiIli. CompallY
) 9 ~ c2.:2--
. The mitigation site would be within, adjacent to, or connected by an appropriate
landscape corridor to a larger area or interconnected set of patches of habitat that are
currently in public ownership or designated open space or reasonably expected to
remain in a natural state. The gnatcatcher habitat within this block or interconnected
set of patches would be between 800 to 1,000 acres in area. This
mitigation/replacement site can be located outside the City of Chula Vista, if
necessary, but must be within San Diego County.
. No grading or activities which would adversely affect the habitat on the specialty
housing area would occur prior to accomplishing the off.site acquisition. Excluded
are the construction of sewer improvements and the extension of Paseo Ranchero
(which is not included in the 70 acres of quality DCSS habitat).
. The Project Applicant would make an irrevocable offer to dedicate the off.site
acquisition/mitigation site to the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, or other
appropriate open space holder at the time of issuance of the grading permit. If
ownership of the sites does not transfer prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the
Applicant would record a conservation easement with an agency of appropriate
jurisdiction over the off.site mitigation area (186 or 256 acres) prior to issuance of
the permit
. Prior to or as a condition of approval of the Tentative Map, the Planning Department
of the City of Chula Vista would ensure that the mitigation program for gnatcatcher
habitat preservation has been implemented."
1.2.2 RESOURCE AGENCY DISCUSSIONS/1992 AND 1994
LETTERS OF AGREEMENT
Subsequent to the completion of the EIR, the Applicant continued discussions with the
Department and Service in order to identify potential off.site mitigation areas that would meet
the criteria outlined in the EIR. After a series of discussions, an informal agreement was made
between the involved parties to implement one of four options as mitigation for impacts to the
gnatcatcher. Three of the four included the fIrst three options outlined in the EIR. A fourth
option was identifIed as follows:
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, IDC.
August 23.1994
Habiuzl ManagemDII Planfor Rancho Del Rey SPA /IJ
-4. Prepu.d for lh. McMiIli. Campey
/9/,2}
"acquire and preserve an off-site area of DCSS habitat acknowledged by the
Service and the City of Chula Vista to equal or exceed the conservation goals"
of options I, 2, and 3 above. Specifically," Acquire and preserve an off-site
area or areas of DCSS habitat which may have fewer than 10 pairs of currently
resident coastal 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 Service. The criteria for acceptability of
this option includes: 1) the site makes a significant contribution to a regional
natural open space design benefiting the coastal California gnatcatcher; 2) the
site provides multiple species conservation benefits; 3) the site has the potential
for coastal California gnatcatcher habitat restoration and enhancement through
management actions; 4) the site provides a critical ecological function for
adjacent areas of coastal California gnatcatcher habitat (e.g., corridor, dispersal
area, buffer, etc.); and 5) an active coastal California gnatcatcher management
plan shall be prepared and implemented for both remaining open space on SPA
ill and the off-site mitigation location(s). This HMP shall be approved by the
City of Chula Vista and the Service."
Several mitigation sites were identified by the Service that would meet one of these four
mitigation options (USFWS 1992), although none of these were implemented at that time.
Additional discussions resulted in the identification of an off-site parcel in O'Neal Canyon as
the preferred off-site mitigation parcel (USFWS 1994). This is the parcel proposed in this
HMP.
1.2.3 REGIONAL CONSERVATION PLANS
The Proposed Action is in keeping with local, regional, and State programs. The cumulative
effects of anticipated urbanization within the HMP area and the more extended sub-region and
region are generally taken into consideration as part of City of ChuJa Vista's General Plan and
the accompanying EIR which have been developed over a number of years. In turn, specific
plans implement the General Plan. Accordingly, under California law, the Rancho Del Rey
Sectional Planning Area Plan (P and D Technologies 1990) has been the subject of extensive
cumulative impacts analyses addressing development within this HMP area and beyond. In the
Sweetwater Environmental BiologistS. IDC.
Augwt 23. 1994
-5.
/9~c:2i
H~bitQI MQlUlgemDJI Plan for Rancho Del Rty SPA /ll
Prepared for the McMillin Compauy
last Six years, wildlife resources have become the focus of additional consideration at the sub-
regional, regional, State, and Federal levels. As described in this HMP, programs are
underway on all of these levels to address wildlife resources. These programs include the City
of San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) (City of San Diego 1994)
which is still being fmalized, and the Natural Community Conservation. Program (NCCP) for
the sub-region.
With regard to the NCCP, the Deparunent has confmned that the Project is technically exempt
from the NCCP program, but will be completed as an "on-going management plan" and
included in the fmal NCCP plan for the sub-region as a completed component
This HMP was developed in concert with the Draft MSCP program. It is anticipated that this
HMP will become a completed component of the MSCP and NCCP for the sub-region, and the
Proposed Action contemplates that the implementation of this HMP will be coordinated with
these programs. It is anticipated that the Applicant's DCSS conservation plans will be in place
prior to implementation of the MSCP. It also is anticipated that the conservation measures in
the Applicant's plans will be consistent with those in the MSCP. This HMP will achieve
conservation of 477.8 acres (117.8 acres on site and 360 acres off site) without any public
funding. Further, the information provided by the implementation of this HMP as a pilot effort
should be of significant assistance in completing the broader sub-regional and regional
programs. In summary, the Proposed Action is consistent with and will support local,
regional, State, and Federal policies and programs.
1.2.4 ESA 4(D) RULE AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
When a species is listed as threatened or endangered by the Service, the Federal ESA prohibits
any "taking" of that species. "Taking" is defined in the ESA as meaning "to harass, harm,
pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect, or attempt to engage in any such
conduct," with "harm" and "harass" further defmed in Federal regulations and case law to
include acts that significantly disrupt or impair a listed species' behavioral patterns. The only
exceptions to the prohibition on take are those specified in the ESA, such as the "incidental
take" provision of Section lO(a), or Section 7 for projects related to a Federal activity or action.
Recently a special rule under Section 4( d) of the Federal ESA was finalized which authorizes
"interim" take of the gnatcatcher in conjunction with a plan which is approved under the
NCCP. This program was initiated under the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act
Sweetwater EnviroDDleDtal BiolOSists,lnc.
AuSWI 23. 1994
HabilOl Managemnal Pion/or RtI1ICM Del Rey SPA III
-6-- /' Prepared for the McMillia Compu)'
)9~..2>7 .
of 1991 in an attempt to develop regional open space planning efforts designed to protect native
plants and animals and their habitats in regional preserve systems. The 4(d) Rule would
require the development of a mitigation plan for a project which impacts gnatcatcher habitat A
mitigation plan must meet the following criteria:
(1) "The proposed habitat loss is consistent with the interim loss criteria in the conservation
guidelines and with any subregional process if established by the subregion.
(a) The habitat loss does not cumulatively exceed the five percent guideline.
(b) The habitat loss will not preclude connectivity between areas of high habitat
values.
(c) The habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the subregional
NCCP.
(d) The habitat loss has been minimized and mitigated to the maximum extent
practicable in accordance with 4.3.
(2) The habitat loss will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery
of listed species in the wild.
(3) The habitat loss is incidental to otherwise lawful activities."
The Project and the associated off-site mitigation parcel meet these criteria. It is intended that
the Project will be consistent with the 4(d) Rule as well as NCCP planning efforts for the
region.
Sweetwater EDvironmeDtaI Biologists. Joc.
August 23. 1994
-7-
/9r.,2?
HabilDI Management Plan for Rancho Del Rey SPA JI/
Propored foe the McMilli. Company
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project is located approximately eight miles south of the metropolitan area of San Diego
and six miles nonh of the' U.S.-Mexico border in the City of Chula Vista (Figure I). It lies
east of Interstate 805. south of East H Street. and north of Telegraph Canyon Road (Figure 2).
The site is within the Sweetwater Planning Area of the City of Chula Vista and the EI Rancho
del Rey Specific Plan Area
The proposed Project involves the construction of 1.380 single-family dwelling units on
approximately 206 acres. Approximately 48 acres are planned for community facilities (e.g..
access roads, sewer laterals, storm drains). Project grading would include a total of 256 acres
of habitat removal and preservation of the remaining 149 acres as natural open space. Of the
256 acres of DCSS to be impacted approximately 20 acres are proposed for restoration
(RECON 1991).
The O'Neal Canyon mitigation property would be acquired by the Applicant and preserved in
perpetuity. with TET acting as the habitat manager. The O'Neal Canyon parcel contains
approximately 211.7 acres of DCSS. 116.0 acres of chaparral. and 32.3 acres of Tecate
cypress forest
Sweerwatcr EDviroomc:DW Biologists,lnc.
Au_ 23. 1994
.1-
19 ~J/
Habilal ManogemmJ Plan for RtlllCho Del Rey SPA III
Prepared foe the McMillin Compu)'
L:: -..
TRAIUCO OAKS
L TORO SAN .,IUAN ,
. HaT ,~as.
",
14 /
1-_-
SAN "'UAN CAPISTRANO ,
,
CAPI STRANO.IIACH
SAN CLEWENTE
CAitO'"
SOLANA lEACH
WINCHESTER
-
MOUNTAIN
CEHTER
AHZA
D.UJZ
-
---_.
..ARNER :IPRINGS
'.C'''IC IrACH
III'$$ION eEACH
OC[AN lEACH
north
inch eQuals 10 MILES
Date: 8 - 8 -94
-
1M PER I AL
MEXICO
SITE VICINITY
RANCHO DEL REY SPA III HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN
VICINITY MAP
@ Sweetwater
Environmental
Biologists. Inc.
Figure
1
JC) /;2~
Date: 8- 8-84
1 inch equals 2000 leet
RANCHO DEL REY SPA III HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN
LOCA TlON MAP
@ Sweetwater
Environmental
Biologists. Inc.
/'j-,;L;
Figure 2
3.0 METHODS
A draft biological impact analysis and mitigation plan for the Project was prepared by Regional
Environmental Consultarits, Inc. (RECON) in May 1989 (RECON 1989). Information in this
report updated previous surveys performed on the site, reviewed biological resources present
on the Project, and reviewed the potential for impacts to open space not anticipated in the
original Specific Plan Area EIR and biotechnical report. In February 1990, RECON performed
field surveys and updated the May 1989 report.
Detailed surveys were conducted for the coastal California gnatcatcher for each RECON report.
The surveys were conducted on five different days for a minimum of five hours during the first
two surveys and for a maximum of nine hours during the last three surveys. The site was
searched on foot using existing dirt roads and animal trails on all ridges and in all ravines
present. Sightings and vocalizations were recorded on a topographic map along with an
estimate of the boundaries of the area utilized by the birds.
RECON conducted follow-up surveys for the coastal California gnatcatcher and also surveyed
for the cactus wren in October 1991, February 1992, and March 1994. These surveys
included complete coverage of the site on foot. with surveys conducted between seven and 10
days of each other. On each survey the entire site was surveyed on three separate occasions.
These surveys followed Scientific Review Panel (1992) guidelines for surveying for the
gnatcatcher.
The assessment of the status of other sensitive biological resources on the O'Neal Canyon
mitigation site is a compilation of information from surveys performed by Sweetwater
Environmental Biologists. Inc. (SEB) and the Biological Technical Report for the East Otay
Mesa Specific Plan Area, prepared by Ogden Environmental and Energy Services in October
1993 (Ogden 1993).
Surveys to assess gnatcatcher numbers on the mitigation property were conducted by SEB on
February 9 and 10. 1994. Surveys were conducted on foot and a route was chosen which
provided for direct visual observation of the entire site. Binoculars were used by each
participant in the zoological surveys. Taped vocalizations of the coastal California gnatcatcher
were used in areas of appropriate habitat.
Sweetwater Environmental Biologins, Inc.
August 23. 1994
-11-
Hab;1a1 Management Plan for Rancho Del Rty SPA III
fupored for the McMi1li. Compauy
)f-Jo
Nomenclature is consistent with the following sources: flora, Hickman (1993); vegetation.
Holland (1986); amphibians and reptiles. Collins (1990); birds, American Ornithologists'
Union (1986); mammals, Jones, et al. (1982).
Sweetwater EoviroDmeDW Biologists. Joc.
August 23. 1994
.12-
Habilat Managemenl Plan for Rancho Del Rry SPA 1//
Prepared for lb. McMilli. Comp.my
/9~J /
4.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Topographically the Project site is characterized by gently to steeply sloping hillside terrain and
deep westerly draining canyons. The hills south of the Project site consist of vacant
agricultural land. The hills to the north have been graded for the planned Rancho del Rey
SPA I development. The hills to the east and west consist of residential development. A San
Diego Gas and Electric transmission line and a water tank are located on the Project site. The
biological resources found within the Project and O'Neal Canyon mitigation property are
described in the following subsections.
4. 1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ON THE PROJECT SITE
The vegetation on the 405.5-acre Project site is predominantly DCSS (373.8 acres). Three
other plant communities occur on the site: patches of southern willow riparian woodland/scrub
(1.1 acres) along the bonom of the canyon south of Rice Canyon; vernal pool habitat (0.2 acre)
on top of a disturbed mesa in the eastern portion of the site; and non-native grassland (30.4
acres) along lower slopes north of Telegraph Canyon Road.
The following is a description of sensitive biological resources found on the Project site. For a
more complete description of vegetation communities and existing biological conditions refer to
the EIR for the El Rancho del Rey Sectional Planning Area (P and D Technologies 1990).
4.1.1 SENSITIVE HABITATS
Sensitive habitats are those which are considered rare within the region, are considered
sensitive by the City of Chula Vista or the resource agencies, or support sensitive plants or
animals. DCSS, southern willow riparian woodland/scrub, and vernal pools are considered
sensitive.
4.1.1.1
DCSS
DCSS is the preferred habitat of the coastal California gnatcatcher. The DCSS on site is
dominated by coastal sagebrush (Artemisia calif arnica), San Diego sunflower (Viguiera
laciniata), lemonadeberry (Rhus integrifolia), and jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis). There are
373.8 acres of DCSS on the Project site.
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists. Joc.
August 23. J 994
HabilDJ Manogemens Pion/or Rancho De/ ReySPA 11/
.13. Prepucd foe the McM;lli. Compuy
/7-JJ.-
4.1.1.2
Southern Willow J{iparian Woodland/Scrub
This habitat is limited to scattered clusters of willows (Salix spp.) and mulefat (Baccharis
salicifolia) along the canyon bottom. Arroyo willow (S. lasiolepis) and black willow (S.
gooddingii) are the dominant species along with mulefat Cat-tail (Typha spp.) and non-native
wild celery (Apium graveolens) are present along the low-flow channel. This riparian habitat is
generally of low to moderate quality, but portions of it constitute a Federally-regulated wetland.
4.1.1.3
Vernal Pools
The site contains two areas of mima mound topography on the top of a disturbed mesa in the
eastern portion of the site which support 0.2 acre of vernal pool habitat.
4. 1.2 SPECIES OF CONCERN ON THE PROJECT SITE
4.1.2.1
Sensitive Animals
Two sensitive animal species associated with DCSS habitat, the coastal California gnatcatcher
and the cactus wren, occur on the Project site. The coastal California gnatcatcher is Federally-
listed as Threatened and is a California Species of Special Concern. The cactus wren is a
Category 2 candidate for federal listing and is also a California Species of Special Concern.
Both species are almost exclusively associated with sage scrub habitat; however, the cactus
wren requires the presence of a cactus component, usually cholla.
Coastal California Gnatcatcher . (California Species of Special Concem/Federally-Listed
Threatened)
Habitat. This species inhabits DCSS vegetation composed of relatively low-growing,
drought deciduous and succulent plant species such as coastal sagebrush, black sage (Salvia
mellifera), white sage (S. apiana), coast encelia (Encelia califomica), flat-top buckwheat
(Eriogonumfasciculatum), and yellow-flowered bush penstemon (Keckiella antirrhinoides).
Status and Distribution. The coastal California gnatcatcher population within California is
currently estimated at approximately 2,000 pairs or less (Atwood 1992). This species is
probably extirpated from Ventura and San Bernardino counties and is continuing to decline in
Los ~geles, Orange, Riverside, and San Diego counties due to the continued loss of sage
Sweetwater Environmental Biolog.ists,lDC.
August 23. 1994
.14-
/9 ~JJ
HabiliJt MQlfQgemen, Plan/or Rancho Del R<y SPA III
Prepared roc the MeM;lli. CompallY
scrub habitats. Approximately 32 pairs are currently. protected within Mission Trails Regional
Park, and a significant number receive at least some degree of protection within Miramar and
Camp Pendleton military installations. Varied levels of protection are anticipated wit1tin areas
included in the Multi-Habitat Conservation Programs (MHCP) for North County; the proposed
San Dieguito River Regional Open Space Park, the MSCP under the City of San Diego's Clean
Water Program; the Open Space Habitat and Management Plan (OSHMP) for the
Loveland/Sweetwater area; and individual site-specific habitat conservation plans throughout
southern California. The species is distributed throughout southern Los Angeles, Orange,
western Riverside, and San Diego counties south into Baja California.
Status On Site - The 1994 surveys located 32-35 pairs of gnatcatchers scattered throughout
the DCSS on site (Figure 3).
No other animal species observed or expected on the site is listed as endangered or threatened
by the Service (USFWS 1991) or the Department (CDFG 1992); however, recent surveys have
resulted in the observation of one Federal Category 2 candidate species: the cactus wren.
Cactus Wren - (California Species of Special Concern/Category 2 candidate for Federal
Listing)
Habitat - Cactus wrens occur in a variety of habitats where cactus dominate. The coastal
population of cactus wrens are restricted to clumps of prickly-pear (Opuntia littoralis and O.
oricola) or coastal cholla (0. prolifera) growing in DCSS or along washes. Because of this
restriction to cactus patches, the coastal population of the cactus wren naturally occurs in smaIl,
isolated populations scattered throughout the coastal lowlands.
Status and Distribution. Much of the former cactus wren habitat has been impacted by
urban or agricultural development in the coastal lowlands, and this bird now occurs in much
smaller and more fragmented populations than it did historically. The largest population of
coastal cactus wrens occurs in Rancho Mission Viejo in Orange County along the slopes above
San Juan Creek. Other significant populations occur in the San Pasqual Valley (near
Escondido), in Lakeside, at the Sweetwater Reservoir, on Rancho Otay, and on Camp
Pendleton, all within San Diego County. As of 1990, the estimated number of cactus wren in
San Diego County is 200 pairs (Rea and Weaver, 1990).
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists. IDe.
August 23. 1994
-IS-
/9~ 31
HabilDl Manage"..", Plan for R"""bo D.t R<y SPA 11/
Prepared toc the MeMilliD Company
@
tlllTlCl:l
-,'" '"
0<<:
5" ....,"
l/Q"""
<;;,g ~
!;;3el
. ""
-",""
~g,
"-
'-S:l
~
~\
i1
cO'
c:
..,
ll>
...
0 W
'"
~ c
n
CII !I!
I :u
CII
I m
.. Q
...
0
Z
)>
r-
m
z
<
:u
o
z
l::
m
z
....
)>
r-
()
o
z
U>
c:
r-
....
)>
Z
....
U>
....
I
-
CII
I
..
...
....
U)
U)
./>0.
G')
Z
)>
....,
0
)>
....,
0 ,.
I
m
:0
)> :0
Z )>
0 Z
0 0
)> I
0 0
...., 0
c m
C/J r-
::E :0
:0 m
m -<
Z
C/J
r- "tl
0 )>
,...
"
)>
....,
CA)
o
z
C/J
)>
Z
o
"tl
:0
o
c...
m
o
....,
I
)>
aJ
-
....,
)>
....,
~
)>
Z
)>
G')
m
~
m
z
....,
~
"tl
)>
o
....,
C/J
"tl
r-
)>
Z
lD
lD
!> .
(')
o
~
[
(')
'"
-
t:O;
o
3
j>>'
Cl
'"
'"
n
'"
-
n
:r
"
""
~
'"
-
I..,.,. 0
't8{:
........-................'..
.~~~::~!f
(')
o
~
[
(')
eo.
a;
2,
'"
Cl
'"
'"
-
n
'"
n
:r
~
...,
~.
b
n
'"
-
~.
.
CI:l
~
o
ii'
l/Q
o
(')
'"
n
-
c:
'"
,.
~
"
'"
CI:l
't:l
'"
n
"
...
-
3
't:l
'"
n
-
~
'"
'"
cl
,," ")",;..'
~. X!-:;{~;.-..
n~:~
\ '
. \,\J,.10..1
il::~~:"~\,' '.": i
"~., \',
.. ,
\
";J-;';~ '1
,., ,
\.:,'.<--i
.';.~i; .::' . /'}~' -'
'A .>~." oJ, I
.il ~. .:;., ,~ '. " .
,~~_;~.:~ ::J~lff,. ~\'~~
.' . '~V:."
,
If. , :
" '
,
,
, ,
, ,
,.
.'
,- ..
.,'
,.
.,
. ' ~
"
. ~.'
,.
',.j""'"
'\':
-.It
"~
;"\'.
".1;: I
. \ <~
" '\'"
,.,' (~
. ,:......~'cl~;.;_A~/
,I
.
!-,
"".\
~r"t,...<'~ "
e:Hi. t;
+"~. . r'te '1;,~....,(t~)~I.:~'" . '..
'f",
.,'j,
,.,'."
;~'~~~~:"
'(j
" ,. "
.'
I
~.:
,
'>
I. ,;.,
I,
"j,
,.
."
",
"
','.
:~.""
"
"
..
r....
'.
f : ,', ~
,
r
),
,
"
'1.
" ',..,i.,.,~;:r' ..'..
" :'~;l:.?:~~j.: . <::::.-:->
,,:.t.;' ~r.~<:.; . '
"'~'" IG ;,
'.". ~, ....
,'J,
,
,
"
.'
'.... I'
",i,'
"
.
,%~~;/,:;,;;,;~
"".;
...
-
.' ~_A~.
-" .....
,.
I,
i
./\
"'/i': "
..or
, ~ t
,-; i" ,
":'
. "
.,. \
',.,.
'j:'
,
j!
r
~ '~
. '111
. " ;l~
. lj(
'1
r
. " I,
!
':>'1 .I; ,
, , I
.. ,,'
" ,
f
"
r;:':;
\'.
I
. '
.:,
,'.Il
-I
t.~,
\\,
,.
,.
~~ 'X
. ,~
,'+;
.
~:~
-.'1
..'
~~rt,
" i \ ~
';1
,
,.
, .,:,
Status On Site - Cactus wrens were observed scattered throughout the cactus dominated
portions of the DCSS on the site. A total of seven to eight localities were observed during the
1994 surveys.
The San Diego homed lizard and the orangethroat whiptail have strong potential for occurrence
on the site. The orangethroat whiptail has been observed in the past; however, the occurrence
of this animal on the Project site has not been verified during recent surveys. Both the whiptail
and the homed lizard are Category 2 candidates for Federal listing and are California Species of
Special Concern.
4.1.2.2
Sensitive Plants
Two plants listed as sensitive by the California Native Plant Society (Skinner and Pavlik 1994)
and as Category 2 candidates for Federal listing by the Service were observed: San Diego
barrel cactus and snake cholla. Three plants listed as sensitive only by the CNPS were also
observed: golden-spined cereus (Bergerocactus emoryi), ashy-spike moss (Selaginella
cinerascens), and San Diego sunflower (Viguiera laciniata).
Individuals of San Diego barrel cactus were observed on one south-facing slope in the southern
portion of the Project site. Snake cholla was observed on north- and south-facing slopes of the
canyon in the northern portion of the Project site. The main population occurred over
approximately 12.5 acres on site and 6.2 acres off site but adjacent to the on-site population.
An individual clump of golden-spined cereus was observed in the extreme northwestern
portion of the Project site. Ashy-spike moss was observed within openings in the DCSS
throughout the site, and populations of the San Diego sunflower were observed throughout the
DCSS.
4.1.3 REGIONAL CONTEXT OF THE PROJECT SITE
DCSS habitat on the Project site is ranked as high and moderate on the Habitat Evaluation
Model mapping prepared for the Draft MSCP (City of San Diego 1993). This on-site habitat is
primarily connected to larger areas of residential/commercial development and agriculture.
Undeveloped areas in the surrounding vicinity are mostly isolated pockets of DCSS with a
moderate habitat rating.
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists. Ioc.
AUgusI23,1994
-17.
Habitat ManagemDll Pion for RanclwDeI Rry SPA 1/1
Prepared for the McMilli. Compuy
/9, J ~7
The. Project site does not appear to provide any crucial link between areas of high quality
gnatcatcher habitat The preservation of the majority of the habitat on site (on-site preservation
alternative) would not significantly reduce the potential for habitat fragmentation and isolation
of gnatcatcher populations in the area.
4.2 MITIGA TION PROPERTY
The 360 acre O'Neal Canyon mitigation property is located to the east of the State Prison at
Otay. south of the County Jail and Lower Otay Lake. and adjacent to the Otay Mountain Truck
Trail (Figure 4). This large expanse of undeveloped land lies between Otay Ranch open space
to the northwest and Federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) ownership to the southeast.
Adjacent BLM open space and wilderness study areas form a network of intersecting drainages
and ridgelines. The area supports a wide array of flora and fauna with primarily high and very
high quality habitat value ratings (City of San Diego 1993).
4.2.1 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES ON THE MITIGATION
PROPERTY
The off-site O'Neal Canyon Property includes approximately 211.7 acres of DCSS, 116.0
acres of southern mixed chaparral, and 32.3 acres of Tecate cypress forest (Figure 5). Both
DCSS and tecate cypress forest are considered sensitive habitat types.
The DCSS on this site is dominated by California sagebrush, flat-topped buckwheat. laurel
sumac (Malosma laurina) and white sage. Portions of the DCSS on site appear to have been
burned and/or grazed, and have not fully recovered. The southern mixed chaparral on site
contains some of the DCSS species but is dominated or co-dominated by chamise (Adenosroma
fasciculatum) and other chaparral species. Tecate cypress forest consists of relatively
monotypic stands of tecate cypress (Cupressus forbesii).
4.2.2 SPECmS OF CONCERN ON THE MITIGATION PROPERTY
4.2.2.1
Coastal California Gnatcatcher
Based on Ogden's 1993 results, the mitigation site supports 10 pairs of coastal California
gnatcatchers (Figure 6). This is could be an overestimate. however. as these surveys were
conducted in October when juveniles produced during the 1993 breeding season could be
confused with adult pairs. Based on the topography, distance from the coast. and habitat
Sweetwaler EnvirolU'lleDtal Biolosists.loc.
August 23. 1994
.18.
/9 ~J?
H.bilat MC11IQgemem Pu..Jor Rando Del Rey SPA ll/
Prepared for the McMillin Comp&llY
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~_.~_ --s-' ~~r~ ';jIJ~;PJ'~ '!.
-.~\
~
Ii; 1'1 I]
l.ow Util\1ellJ)JIHJ
.'
.. Mo~<ril1.
,Agii~:llllllrla
~~jjjlh ! i .oistmbed
.\IlI \I,,,y 11i9h
, ....... jJl.
,.l." 7"--)~"--"'"
,", ".:L____ ~ '\. ;"-1
,
,
,-~-~:-......
.',
,~,
,/ ~....,
;::<-_~I.
I "
,/
.. ;-----1.
I~_.-..
J.;1i ,-
I' ,<I
/. !
/' :.
-:/ :'
.. . i '\:f~:~f~i~l._..
.':;,_:~ ,),.;":~i;!~; ,':" " ~
,-,.:-;",,""',:-';"',.i'>'"
,;,!',;'/,:>~;r::;:'-'
-:i',,:'.....". ..
""-:':"-"-'-!
,
j..'- ..
I
( ..~ .' ,"
"L'"." " ..
. "~,:,,,":.: ; ,';' ... .
........-..--1
. ,
. ,
.
,
,
~ 0-.-..--
, ".,'" I
..It~~:7_._.~j_.>>....
"~
'I inch__~_9..u,-a,l~ 6!iOO feet
Source: Multiple Species Conservation Program
Mexico
Date: 8 - 8 - 9 4
RANCHO DEL REY SPA III HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN
OFF-SITE MITIGATION PARCEL-O'NEAL CANYON
@ Sweetwater
I EnvironmenlJll
Biologists, Inc.
/c;/Jrr
Figure 4
i ' ! Iii
..
.
___ilL/it..
, I
,I
-----:--..-{- --
S,S~- _"I
I . 'I' ,
\, '
'I i i'l;
'I I, 'I .'
I ') '/
: -css:"
.IJ ..~
,,'css-o<":
, "
C5S-0 ,:'
"6 .
'. I
I :
I j ( ...
---~ ',--
. . "\!':'" '
'. ';' '1'" " 5ICd.---
SICFi It ,\ ..... ct-',
" / , " ';)lS<.,.. CSS~~', '
,,/ --:05S-11
~D
/ '
~,..,'~"
, ..
-~-_.-.. >. '
."--:' - 10
~ r
i.!
. '/\
"", _h'
~~SJ.ci:~_ '
ess
~
. , ~.) i .' ~
.,' if
~..w:.
..~
. j f
. . i.
'-'~'- \ I
;
---'.....
i-' f I. I
'J [( \ '
.' , ,
"
.. '~"
t
I
I
-- ---.
h .,'~.
. ~- -" ,
'-.~ ~'."
. : i"'(i:C! .. <::':.' :
tSS-[)
-", ,
,
Source: 0 G 0 ENE N V I RON MEN TAL AND ENE R G Y S E R V ICE S . 1 9 9 3
Date: 8 - 8 - 9 4
@ Sweetwater
Environmental
Biologists. Inc,
VEGETATION COMMUNITIES
CJ!ASTAl SAGE SCRUB
CSS Dlegan Coastal Sage Scrub (1,696.1)
CSS-R Rhus Integrllolla-domlnated
Coastal Sage Scrub (3.8)
CSS-D Disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub (457.4)
CHAPARRAL
CHP-C
CHP-S
CHP-D
Chamlse Chaparral (235.4)
Southern Mixed Chaparral (136.5)
Disturbed Chaparral (15.5)
GRASSLAND
SG SlIpa Grassland (31.41
NNG Nonnative Grassland 416.0)
CONIFEROUS FOREST
SICF Southern Inte~or Cypress Forest (76.9)
WETtANDS
SWS Southern Willow Scrub (1.3)
MFS Mulelat Scrub (1.1)
TS Tamarisk Scrub (3.61
fW Freshwater Marsh (~.9)
VP Yernal Pool (1.3)
OW Disturbed Weiland (1.6)
HIGHLY-AlTERED HABITATS
fW Eucalyptus Woodland (3.8) .
ET Exotic Trees (0.3)
~ AG Ag~cunure (1.748.0)
D!S Disturbed Habitat (159.7)
DEV Developed land (189.1)
ADDITIONAL WAT~RS OF THE U.S.' AND OTIIER FEATURES
OW Open Water (2.6)
RES Reservoir (14.7)
OF Disturbed Floodplain (6.2)
JH Unvegetated Waters of the U.S.' (5.2)
RO Rock Outcrop/Bedrock (19.0)
.
,
Yernal Pool (Also See Yernal Pool Habnat map)
"*: krNOl" ~ ... .. ............
~
1 inch equals 800 feel
RANCHO DEL REV SPA "' HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN
ICj - 3 <;
VEGETATION MAP
Figure 5
I
quality a long-tenn carrying capacity of 10 pairs is net an unreasonable estimate for the site, but
SEB biologists could not confmn these results.
4.2.2.2 Other Sensitive Species
The coastal California gnatcatcher is the most significant biological resource that would be
impacted by the Project, and gnatcatchers were the focus of biological surveys of the mitigation
property. The most significant attribute of the O'Neal Canyon mitigation site is its multispecies
value.
Sensitive vertebrate species known to occur on the mitigation site include the gnatcatcher,
southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps canescens), and the Bell's
sage sparrow (Amphispiza bellii bellii). Both are Federal Category 2 candidate species and
California Species of Special Concern.
Sensitive animal species with the potential to occur in the O'Neal Canyon preserve area include
orangetbroat whiptail, coastal rosy boa (Lichanura trivirgata roseofusca), San Diego horned
lizard, California mastiff bat (EUlrwps perotis califomicus), ringtail (Bassariscus astutus), and
Dulzura California pocket mouse (Chaetodipus califomicusfemoralis). The horned lizard and
orangethroat whiptail occur near the site and would be expected to occupy it. The site also
provides a prey base for nearby foraging raptor species such as the black-shouldered kite
(Elan us caeruleus majusculus), Cooper' hawk (Accipiter cooperii), northern harrier (Circus
cyaneus hudsonius) and sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus velox), as well as large
mammals such as mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and mountain lion (Felis concolor).
Sensitive plants found on the mitigation site include the tecate cypress, San Diego goldenstars
(Muilla clevelandii), coast barrel cactus, and Otay manzanita (Arctostaphylos otayensis). All of
these plants are Federal Category 2 candidate species.
4.2.3 . REGIONAL CONTEXT OF THE MITIGATION PROPERTY
The O'Neal Canyon habitat is ranked as very high and moderate on the habitat evaluation
mapping prepared for the MSCP and is situated within a much larger block of native habitat
ranked primarily very high by the MSCP (City of San Diego 1993). Additionally, the O'Neal
Canyon parcel is included within the proposed preserve boundaries for all four of the MSCP
draft preserve alternatives (City of San Diego 1994).
Swcelwater Environmental Biologists.IDC.
August 23. 1994
.21-
Hab#QI ManagelMlIl Plan/or Rancho Del Rey SPA J/I
Prepared fur the McMillin Company
/9- t/ t:J
~ _ f. :'i/\ i I
'---fr-- r : -;-;"t-~-r...47' ..~.~
" ',I \'.' ,'., " \ .:~.,',,: ',-;; ,~'....II'.
J L g).... '.j - -' . . . .......... .
. (' I '-:"'". f:-:--"""71 ::-.':;:::: 1,,.::"';::-:'. :=
\ I / S .- .... :' ,._.__
\.' 1..-___....__t.L~' -.' '.
-../ f,'! I\\'{\I . ,'<,: (r\.-~"
", '.' II, I i Ii' I I \
J Ifl,1j!It.:L......:..1=-' ,'~: \ . IL:..:.....:~ .. ...~
,., ['" '~ 1 ,\,.-. "'"\'''''
., i 'I/'!<""'< ~'. "/If .::.tiJ\{'(\(\\' .~_ ..., "f/'I\'o~~' '\~. ',':?:::---':.%.:;~\~
. " ~ ' ' \ .r, .'" 'I " . .' . 'I J . ?. .",,,, -::..; :-,=""
,'. ",11 \ ~'-', '.' '", '_-'---~"--::s:::,~,.
:'. " . ,,~~< " I - - , {' , . '. ::--. -~ OJ
'," ", "'H4-"11 I ,.... '-,--, ,,- ,'. - ",' ~"0_._.r~~",".i1
~ .. '. '. F'(xi .....f.,al' I \' <,.,::---:-::...;:';'\ J(/~f'(~:: :::.::-: _"'::-::.7.::;';::':,:::
IF ". V V ~.. ~F........ -::ik r~~"""::~':':- " ..1' (I ( '_::::::-:'::: '. _,.:::--,. .~ ,'," ~
J' ,J~'l:OO: .,'y,.I,.. 7'tlO'~..1 . .' r -: --, ... :::::~'-'--I /,' ,', '-". --~""\,\,,, "" '.',
" "':-" .,----,-"'-, -~.\ CI, "''':''-'' C'" --".., -'\'.\\'_.:v-~
~ ':.~,::::.::::., r'/"r-..-a_.,~.::... '~.' ~ -","\';'~., :->"0, .~:'~~~01-:-f;
F "". , \. ..---'" I~' -'" -- '" -' ~ ,,- rN" - - 1 I ' ' "~" "
..~#f ..~. __~~:;-;'~ _~!...t,:::-=-=-'::':'''':'j::". -r::' _l.."'::Jl ":':~-A ",~.....:.:,,}
(;w , ':':'" ,'-;-- _\'__"II'~_'~,\f/Y.-. .-:~~':""'::"-:--... "V- -T\\\, .',
Iv vt:'(XJ' ....:', -'" ..~. //""",,,-::,,,,,'f('.. ~",....,\.::;;.---~j:,;f~'\ ') 'r) ,,',
t Pal"" . "'-'=~:"::~~-~', V !f/';~'/.:::~~~',"'f.i~J;,:,';:\i:~:~':"I' ,:,Ij!'/ ,s...~\~,
. ~':JV.":I'''l.'.I' '''':,:~' .... ~.. .:--..' '. ,','I.':::'::"j, - ":' ~:{!!I" ,;-"~~.....:::.-<,,';::C:,,, IJ' I /.] ..'
- '.~... . 1",1 ~ .-... ' .' ,-... ,\ '41/'1 .... -~.,... '''' '.. I ( , ..
-....-:.:.-.: !IJ_~\\;';(i ',' ...-..'-.,'~' .,:/;-:: "'\\\Il"!I.'r-::':~'~-':'~'::)"'::;::':::-' ,'\\\''''"'- ...
. ~'_..... - _._~\t, 11"1" 'j I" ! . . ~ ,""..... . \ I .___ -.:......,,' '~\r"'"",--""" ~ "'_
" .",,:. 1'.\lll" "'. '.' , "f;""- ...." III J-::'-:-~"':~,"~','.r-........; ,\ \ '.,::-.;::-"
, . ,..... ./1'", \ t I -.. '~~~"'.r-'~' "~-
. f. \ W. ',\ --~iflJ':'::~",.,- \'J'''f:!r~-''''::''''''''~;::\.''''''<'~'''-''''''''t\\\'l~~'', ...
.-.... II' ,,{ '\' '.' ,. lOt ..:::;:'} 'J'f/~ '-, -'..-, ,"'vril . !/~:-"','~-;.J"':::' \')\ I,'::"'" ~:"",\\
I , ' , . II JrL -. ',\.:.~ (f .......\/......p-'~ ,..qJ! :fif . ': ~ ".\~-:,"--:, :' ;\\'.....=:.".:" ~:::-_~ \'~
"'"' I I '.- I '",' -.. . .,' I .. '~""'-'- _....~, I' ._.;::--_ __ \.
,,,,,,,. ,'80 f .' .,- ,/-...,.'._.... ~J.. ; ..:-~'~';:.:. -.;:-, '. ,/-_-..:,o
.:..,_.,--....-'--'i.:-v, .;,~~ff.r ;'-'. ::::.~~,.:',-;;~:'.,':.~' It I ( ::..:~'~~~.l':;\' \;;;::\\\ .'';' _:.
I I . '.' . :'1/' I SO; i'i~',; ('\1 -: .~~::~-,;~-:-::::-:" :,-~ :J I / ( ':::.~'") \' d,,!1l ';i'.;:~~,\\:\~~~~/~ '
',I I -." " 10. \,1. (,', \ '.\'y'..... '.,\ \,\Il' Il.."".:::::::.=r-T: -, ',:-:- 'i.. ( :rI\I!t.:...:S-1 '''--;:''~Y, ~~:{fF- .
____.r . ..... '_~ ~ . (\ ._."'':::''''.... .~ ~."\\ .. '. \'" ~/;'-:::::::::.
, \ I' ,t. .. --:.~ \, I :::::- ......\....._. ,"\" \\ <rv:"---.
-f-""" ......, _~. f . '......., , v. . , \ "/' r",_. .
1.'-1' Ffi! '--10 "V~V:"'v'ff!\\'\' " ','," II &..1-' ~" :l':;~/"-:';" \'.'>7,/.-::.",
L._ :. "'10 .... 'V'1Il ,""..'-.'. .. . ~-":"'.r\ '-::-:_\
" I' '.'j /f (. ~If' ,(;\7..... , ". ", I _', ._, ',' ,_. /"',
~. I',~"' i~ I, '_'- , \ i ;;11\\>',:<:::' iJ,~~~'d-!:~~:;I)~"'(i~~1ui~.
'. '-." I ,'. 1......:-:-,.;~ /_-::...........f:-:. ::::-..., f.
' , .: . .".U...~......rBo...I--:' ;:-~.\ ~::::-'" :';-.:-":::~..., " _ -, '\' 'I
' !ll .....- f I'! 1\ '-_.: >11\'\'\\' '---..--:::. _;<'.~~:::::~: :,~':::.:::.:-.?~,,,.:---. ):'?
J I \... ~\\\\ '_ _...., ._.r........ __. ""_...",- ......
. '., ~-- ~., 'r { ... .-~- =-:. - . .!ti1\\\,.~,:::'::::::::;-:'.. ts ::'~:~:--:'~:~?::::~~-":'~~~~'~\~uE:::;
I '. - '... -- rT\\\\' "..,"'=.:::;,;:.- '-"'-:'-~--;-//~ ,:,_'';'' "~""lil ',_
...-\F . ."'..-.- -. .....- ".\1 \ .........'.:::-.-;--~.... ..:--=-.....,.:~""_ -'/-_-<;:":':':::=;Prild '<~.J1I11:-
_.,11 I . '", '1' . fl' '::-.:.:._-.::-}\\\ y .,<,:::/;,~:, ':':'~-;;~";{~~'..:-;~=.! J"-;:'-:'f.:"rn".
-t"l \ F. 'I"; ..:':,~ii~':'\~;'~~~~um~/I/);;'(''('('(((I!..~~;:~S(f;~(i<(I'
- I I I, I.. . .._' "_ ~-_.., III, ((( t ". '::'::'::--=';:"'::;:'-:'~;;iiilh,IIl[\
SENSITIVE SPECIES
IWilS
AD Otay Manzanita (Arctostaphylos olayensls)
AP San OIego Sagewort fArtemlsla palmeri)
B Orcutt's Brodiaea (Brodlaea orcuttll)
BE Golden-spfned Cereus (Bergerocactus emoryf)
CD Dunn's Martposa Lily (Calochortus dunnll)
CF Tecate Cypress (Cupressus forbesll)
o Western Dichondra ~Dlchondra occldentalls)
DV Vartegated Dudleya Dudleya varlegatal
EA San OIego BuUon-ce ery (Erynglum ar stulatum var. pa,1shli)
EP Palmer's Erlcamerta (Erlcamerta palmert ssp, palmeri)
r San Diego Barrel Cactus (Ferocactus vlrldescens)
H Otay Tarplant (Hemlzonla con)ugensl
HA Palmer's Grappllnghook (Harpagonel a palmert)
I S2n Diego Marsh Elder (Iva hayeslana)
J Spiny Rusn (Juncus acutus var, sphaerocarptls)
L Gander's Pitcher Sage (Lepechlnla ganderl)
M San Dlegc Goldenstar (Mullla c1evelandll)
NF Prostrate Navarrella (Navarrelia lossalls)
PG Greene's .Ground-cherry (Physalis greenel)
PN Otay Mesa Mint IPogogyne nudluscula)
R Coulter's MaUllla Poppy (Romneya coulterl)
S Mesa Clubmoss fSelagln611a clnerascens)
SO San Diego County Needlegrass (SlIpa dlegoensls)
SM Munts Sage (Salvia munzil)
V San Diego County Vlgulera (VIgulera laclnlala)
ANiMAl S
BK Black-shouldered Kite (Elanus casruleus maJusculus)
BO Burrowing Owl (Speleotyto cunlcularta hypugaea)
CB Coastal Rosy Boa fLlchanura trlvlrgata roseolusca)
CG Call1ornla Gnatcatcher (Polloptlla call1ornlca calilornlca)
CH Cooper's Hawk (Acclplter coopertl)
. GE Golden Eagle (AqUila chrysaetos canadensis)
GS Two-striped Garter Snake (Thamnophls hammpndll)
GW Great-horned Owl (roost) (Bubo vlrglnlanus)
IlL San Diego Homed Lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum blalnvlllel)
LS Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovlclanus) .
NH Northern Harrter (Circus cyaneus hudsonlus)
OW Orange.throated Whlplail (Cnemldophorus hyperylhrus beldlngl)
RH R~d-talled Hawk (nest) fButeo jamalcensls)
RS Southern California Rulous-crowned Sparrow
(A1mophlla rurlCeps canescens)
SH Sharp.shlnned Hawk lAcclpler strtatus velox)
SS Bell's Sage Sparrow Amphlsplza belli belli)
Upper case teneri denote survey Inlormltlon Ilkln In 1981.
Low" cas. IInl.. denoll IUlYe, In'ol1l\lllon from hltlor1cal record..
'** lIrvt kIIIl """'........... PGfnonL,."...............""'" _....11I.......
=.:. -:'.... ~ ~~: .=.= ...... """""*' .. .... ...,., ..
Source: OODEN ENVIRONMENYAL AND ENEROY SERVICES, 1883
Date: 8-8-8~
~
1 Inch equele 800 'eel
RANCHO DEL REV SPA III HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN
@ Sweetwater
Environmental
Biologists, Inc,
)c;-- Y;
SENSITIVE RESOURCES MAP
Figure 6
I
Regardless of the number of gnatcatcher pairs actually breeding on site during a specific year, it
is apparent that O'Neal Canyon provides a cruciailink between gnatcatcher habitat on the East
Otay Mesa and the Otay Valley/Otay Lakes areas. The preservation of a large network of
DCSS dominated ridge lines and drainages provides an important refuge for the gnatcatcher
population in anticipation of surrounding development. The preservation of such a large
canyon adjacent to public lands should reduce the potential for habitat fragmentation and the
isolation of remaining gnatcatcher populations.
O'Neal canyon also provides a major link between the San Ysidro Mountains and the Otay
River Valley for a number of large mammals. O'Neal Canyon provides cover, year round
water, and enough undisturbed habitat for movement and breeding of most species. Tracking
studies conducted by Ogden in 1992 show use of the area by mule deer, bobcat (Lynx rufus),
and mountain lion.
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists. Inc.
August 23. 1994
Habikll Manogement Plan for RancltoDel Rey SPA III
/ '9" -' ?I' ;L Prepored fo< th. McMillin Compauy
5.0 EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The following analysis provides an assessment of the net effect of the proposed Project and
mitigation measures on the coastal California gnatcatcher. The assessment of impacts assumes
the dedication of the mitigation property as permanent natural open space, and adherence to all
conservation measures and mitigation commitments outlined in Section 6 of this HMP.
5.1 ANTICIPATED TAKE OF THE COASTAL CALIFORNIA
GNATCATCHER
The agreement with the City of Chula Vista, the Service. and the Department would cover the
direct and indirect effects of grading, construction, traffic, and developed land on the coastal
California gnatcatcher. The primary impacts of concern are:
. displacement of gnatcatchers in areas slated for grading and development;
. removal of nesting and foraging habitat;
. noise and lighting impacts from construction and development that might increase the
physiological costs of survival or decrease the probability of successful reproduction
by disrupting breeding, feeding, and sheltering behavior;
. habitat fragmentation which occurs when barriers, such as developments, break up
larger habitat areas (isolated populations are more susceptible to localized extinction
from rue, disease, parasitism, and predation from animals such as domestic cats);
and
. increased nest parasitism and habitat alteration that are indirectly due to land uses that
attract brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater) and small mammals to gnatcatcher
habitat (Brown-headed cowbirds are attracted to rural and semi-rural developments
which often contain horse corrals and other such enclosures that they use for
roosting. Cowbirds may be drawn to the development therefore increasing the risk
of nest parasitism on gnatcatcher pairs in the adjacent open space areas.)
The effects of direct development of gnatcatcher habitat are fairly obvious: habitat is removed
and can no longer support the threatened species. Other, indirect effects are less easily
Sweetwater EDvironmeDI.al Biologists,Inc.
August 23.1994
Habitat Mana~ment PlDnfOT Roncho Del Rtry SPA III
.24- . Prepared foc the McMillin ComparlY
/1~YJ
assessed or quantified. For example, artificial lighting near interfaces between development
and wildlife habitat can affect wildlife in different ways. Artificially lighted areas are generally
avoided by nocturnal animals because the lighting increases their vulnerability to predation.
Lighted areas have more limited diversity because of this effect Species such as domestic cats
and other pets invade open space near lighted edges of residential communities, predating on
the native species, spreading diseases, and to some extent competing with native species for
food. Human intrusion also increases around these edges, which often results in illegal trash
dumping, landscaped plant invasion, trampling of plants, and removal of wildflowers.
Heightened noise levels are often caused .by heavy equipment operation during construction. It
has been theoretically proposed that noise levels above 60 dBa Leq may significantly alter the
ability of passerine species to interact with other members of their species, as well as
potentially increase predation (SANDAG 1990). Grading would likely exceed this threshold
on the site. Noise impacts following construction are not likely to significantly affect the
gnatcatcher, given the types of land uses proposed.
Consequently, for purposes of this HMP, all five of the impacts of concern are treated as take.
In addition, the Federal definition of harm has been used to identify unacceptable levels of
habitat impacts. This means that the take for which authorization is being sought may include
habitat modification that would significantly impair the essential behavioral patterns of a
gnatcatcher.
For the purposes of this HMP, take is further defined as the permanent removal of any portion
of a coastal California gnatcatcher territory through development of DCSS habitat. Direct
impacts from the removal of DCSS would significantly affect approximately two-thirds of the
population of coastal California gnatcatchers on the site (approximately 20 birds). The
fragmentation of habitat would be detrimental to the birds and limit the long-term carrying
capacity and viability of the habitat Based on 10 acre territories, it is estimated that the amount
of undisturbed DCSS remaining would only support about II pairs.
5.2 EFFECT OF ANTICIPATED TAKE ON THE COASTAL CALIFORNIA
GNATCATCHER
The anticipated take would eliminate the potential for a portion of the Project site to support the
coastal California gnatcatcher (256 acres). The extent and location of the development would
reduce the quality of remaining habitat through fragmentation and isolation of that habitat
Sweetwater EnviroomeDt.aJ Biologists.loc.
A"gun 23. 1994
.25-
HabilQ/ Management Plan for Rondo Del Rty SPA III
/ r - L-/ '/ Prepared foe the M.MiIli. Compaay
Remaining habitat will be suitable for occupation by gnatcatchers, but this population will be
isolated by development
5.3 EFFECT OF DCSS PRESERVATION WITHIN THE MITIGATION
PROPERTY ON THE COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER
The preservation of DCSS within the O'Neal Canyon Mitigation Property would be beneficial
to the coastal California gnatcatcher. Preservation of this habitat would remove the potential
for this area to be graded or disturbed in the future. The proximity of the site to regionally
important natural open space areas containing large populations of coastal California
gnatcatchers (East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Open Space and BLM holdings) would provide a
benefit to the coastal California gnatcatcher.
5.4 NET EFFECT OF PROPOSED PROJECT - 4(d) FINDINGS
The 256 acres removed by site grading will be permanently eliminated; however, the long term
preservation of off-site habitats, removes the biologically important O'Neal Canyon area from
the long term jeopardy of development. The placement of this area in permanent open space
provides for the best available assurance of preservation. The loss of fragmented and
urbanized habitat is being replaced with rural habitat where long-term viability of the species is
more probable; therefore, the overall Project effect is beneficial to the coastal California
gnatcatcher.
The following findings have been made based on the information obtained pursuant to Section
4.1.2 of the November 1993 NCCP Process Guidelines.
(1) The habitat loss. as proposed for issuance under the 4(d) Habitat Loss Permit, is
consistent with the "interim loss criteria" in the November, 1993 State Natural
Community Conservation Program (NCCP) Guidelines (as specified in items a through
d below) and, if a subregional interim take process is established in a form approved by
the City of Chula Vista at the time of the issuance of the Loss Permit, consistent with
such approved subregional interim loss process.
(a) The habitat loss, under the Loss Permit as proposed for the Director for
issuance, will not exceed on the date of issuance, when considered cumulatively
with all other loss of CSS occurring since March 21, 1993, exceed 5% by
acreage of the then existing CSS within the region. The regional CSS loss
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc.
August 23,1994
Habitat Management Planfor Rancho Del Rey SPA III
'26; j _ f 5' Prepared [m the MeM;lli. Company
acreages are as follows:
San Diego Region initial allowable CSS loss
Cumulative CSS loss since March 21,1993
Remaining allowable CSS loss
Loss allowed by this permit
Remaining allowable regional CSS loss
11,371.9 ac.
0.8 ac.
11,371.1 ac.
256.0 ac.
11,115.1 ac.
The NCCP Conservation Guidelines have indicated that a five percent loss of
DCSS habitat is acceptable within any individual subregion during the
preparation of a subregional NCCP or its equivalent (Le. MSCP Subarea Plan).
The habitat loss does not cumulatively exceed the five percent guideline. The
loss of 256 acres of DCSS combined with current losses of sage scrub within
the San Diego Region do not exceed five percent of the existing sage scrub
habitat
(b) The habitat loss will not preclude connectivity between areas of high habitat
values.
The proposed Project is bordered to the north, west, and east by urbanized
development and to the south by agricultural lands that are of low biological
value. The habitat being impacted has been given an NCCP rating of moderate
because DCSS is present and target species occur on the site but the area is not
the most dense DCSS in the Subregion, it is not in close proximity to a Higher
Value District, and it is not part of a critical corridor. The Project retains areas
with an intermediate rating on site, although even without on-site development,
the Project site is already isolated by existing development and will become
further isolated by future development
The off-site mitigation parcel provides for certainty of a key connection between
areas of high habitat values.
(c) The habitat loss, under the Loss Permit as proposed by the Director for
issuance, will not preclude or prevent the preparation of a subregional NCCP.
The site is not a crucial link, but is rather at the periphery of already approved or
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists. Inc.
AUllU't 23, 1994
HabiIaJ Management Pion/or Rancho Del Rey SPA III
.27. / 9 ~ '/ ? Prepared fur the McMillin Company
constructed development The Core Biological Resource Areas (see the City of
San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program, 1994, which is still being
fmalized) are located well south of the project along the Otay River Valley. This
site is not considered a high priority preservation area because of the existing
development on three sides which result in high edge effect (Le., intrusion by
humans, pets, weedy plant species) and habitat fragmentation or part of a
significant wildlife corridor. For these reasons, the site is not considered
important in the preparation of the City of Chula Vista's open space planning
efforts or NCCP planning efforts.
(d) The habitat loss, under the Loss Permit as proposed by the Director for
issuance, has been minimized and mitigated to the maximum extent practicable
in accordance with Section 4.3 of the NCCP Process Guidelines, dated
11/5/93.
In addition to the retention of 117.8 acres of DCSS in dedicated open space on-
site, the 256 acres of impact would be mitigated by the following on- and off-
site mitigation measures:
- On-site restoration of approximately 20 acres of DCSS on natural slope
areas.
- Management of the on-site open space.
- The acquisition and management of 360 acres of the O'Neal Canyon open
space mitigation bank. This parcel would expand existing open space on and
adjacent to Otay Mountain. It is ranked as higher potential value for long-
term conservation by the NCCP because it supports DCSS, is part of a much
larger block of habitat that represents the densist DCSS in the Subregion, and
is part of a significant wildlife corridor.
An alternatives analysis conducted by the City of Chula Vista as part of the
CEQA review for the El Rancho del Rey Sectional Area Plan concluded that the
least damaging practicable alternative was selected. The mitigation measures
have been incorporated to minimize impacts to the extent practicable.
Habitat Managerrrent Plan for Rancho Del Rey SPA III
-28- / 1---J-! ? 17ep..-ed for the McMillin Company
Sweetwater Environmental Biolosists.lnc.
August 23.1994
(2) The habitat loss will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery
of the coastal California gnatcatcher.
The Project site is not part of an NCCP higher potential value for long-term
conservation area. Site development would impact habitat adjacent to existing
development. Off-site mitigation of a core area will increase the likelihood of the long-
term success of regional open space planning efforts. Due to these reasons, the
proposed habitat loss would not appreciably reduce the survival or recovery of any
listed species, including the gnatcatcher.
(3) The habitat loss is incidental to otherwise lawful activities.
The proposed loss of 256 acres of DCSS is associated with an FEIR which has been
certified and a project that has received discretionary approval by the City of Chula
Vista. The Project has completed CEQA review and meets all local, State, and Federal
requirements.
(4) Proposed mitigation is consistent with NCCP Process Guidelines requirements.
The NCCP Process Guidelines identify several options for mitigating impacts to CSS.
These options include aquisition of habitat, dedication of land, management
agreements, restoration, etc. The dedication and long-term preservation of O'Neal
Canyon through a management agreement with The Environmental Trust (TET) is
consistent with the NCCP Process Guidelines.
Based on these findings, the Project meets the standards for interim take as outlined in the 4( d)
Rule of the ESA.
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists. Inc.
August 23. 1994
Habitat Management Plan for Rancho Del Rey SPA III
'29; 9./ Y Y Prepared for the McM;llin Company
6.0 CONSERVATION MEASURES
To minimize, mitigate, and monitor the impacts of the estimated take, McMillin will implement
a three point conservation'and mitigation program. Components of the program include:
. on-site habitat preservation and management;
. off-site habitat acquisition and management; and
. construction impact minimization.
6.1 ON SITE HABITAT PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT
6.1.1 PRESERVATION
Approximately 117.8 acres of DCSS will be conserved on site. Based on the normal range of
territory size, it is estimated that approximately 11 gnatcatcher pairs would be retained over the
long-term in the open space on site. A permanent open space easement will be dedicated to the
City of Chula Vista or other entity acceptable to the City, the Service, and the Department.
6.1.2 MANAGEMENT
Mitigation measures concerning impacts from the development adopted with the original
environmental documents, amendments, and supplemental documents have been incorporated into
the Project grading and construction plans.
Additional mitigation measures to compensate for impacts to open space areas on site are
described below.
. Impacts to the DCSS habitat in open space areas would be avoided; however, in
areas where fill slopes must encroach, impacts would be minimized by having a
qualified biologist monitor the grading of the site. Fire buffers that encroach into
open space areas would be hand cleared instead of using heavy equipment. The
monitoring biologist would have the authority to halt grading operations that impact
or threaten protected DCSS habitat. Prior to or as a condition of the grading permit,
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc.
August 23. 1994
-30-
/9- 'if
Habitat Management Planfor Rtl1JCho Del Rey SPA III
Prepared for the McMillin Company
the Applicant would make arrangements to retain a biologist to monitor grading and
hand clear ftre buffers that encroach into open space areas.
. Manufactured slopes within open space areas and impacted areas along sewer laterals
would be revegetated with DCSS species native to the site. The revegetation effort
would attempt to re-create the loss of DCSS habitat and enhance the biological value
and function of the open space system. A monitoring biologist would be hired by
the Applicant to monitor and supervise the revegetation program which would last
for five years. Prior to or as a condition of approval of the Tentative Map the
Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista would ensure that a biologist be
retained by the Applicant to implement the revegetation program, devise a ftve-year
monitoring program acceptable to City staff, and initiate the revegetation program on
site.
. Sewer laterals would be positioned to cause minimum impact to biological resources,
especially rare plant populations and sensitive bird habitat. Staging areas for
construction would be located to minimize impacts to sensitive biological resources.
The installation corridors for sewer laterals would be staked prior to design
finalization and then checked by a qualified biologist for potential adjustments to
minimize impacts to sensitive resources. The monitoring biologist would have the
authority to halt construction activities if the habitat area is damaged or threatened.
Prior to or as a condition of approval of the occupancy permit, the Planning
Department of the City of Chula Vista would ensure that sewer laterals have been
implemented according to the speciftcations of the monitoring biologist.
. A monitoring program would be designed and implemented by a qualified biologist
to determine the effect of the Project development on the population of coastal
California gnatcatchers. The monitoring program would be conducted for five years
after the Project is completed to assess the recovery of the gnatcatcher population
including the number of pairs of birds present and their territories. The purpose of
the monitoring program would be to provide basic population recovery information
on the coastal California gnatcatcher to be used in the design of future preserves for
this species. The information from this monitoring study would be available to
resource agencies to help them develop a regional set of guidelines for coastal
California gnatcatcher mitigation. The Planning Department of the City of Chula
Vista would ensure that the program be implemented prior to or as a condition of
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists.lnc.
August 23.1994
-31-
)Cj-S-O
HabitaJ Management Plan fOT Rancho Del Rey SPA III
Prepared for the McMillin Company
approval of the Final Map. The monitoring program would also incorporate open
space areas within the SPA I and SPA n developments within the study area.
. A project-wide revegetation plan, that includes transplant programs for cacti. would
be designed and incorporated in a project-wide specific plan. This revegetation plan
would be reviewed and implemented by a qualified biologist or horticulturist with
experience dealing with native plants. The transplant program would facilitate the
introduction of cacti species from impact areas on SPA 1lI and other SPA areas into
DCSS revegetation areas in an attempt to re-establish cactus wren habitat. The
revegetation plan would include a maintenance and monitoring plan for five years to
ensure the success of the revegetation effort. The Planning Department of the City
of Chula Vista would ensure that the program be implemented prior to or as a
condition of approval of the Final Map. The monitoring biologist would submit
reports to the Planning Department concerning the status of the program once a
month for the first year of the program, and once every three months for the
following five years of the program.
6.2 OFF-SITE HABITAT ACOUlSITION AND MANAGEMENT
6.2.1 ACQUISITION
To offset impacts to DCSS and the gnatcatcher, the 360 acre O'Neal Canyon mitigation parcel
will be dedicated to TET as permanent open space using a conservation easement. This
easement shall preclude all activities within the open space, except those activities necessary for
wildlife management purposes. Management of the parcel will be the responsibility of TET.
At least five pairs of coastal California gnatcatchers currently use some portion of the DCSS
within the O'Neal Canyon Mitigation Property, and approximately 10 pairs is considered to be
the carrying capacity of the site. The mitigation property is adjacent to other preserve areas
which currently support gnatcatcher populations.
6.2.2 MANAGEMENT
The purpose of the O'Neal Canyon Management Plan is to provide for the long-term
management of the mitigation parcel for the preservation and enhancement of biological
resources on the site. The Management Plan will focus on maintaining the existing biological
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists. Inc.
August 23,1994
-32-
/9-51
Habital Management Planfor Rancho Del Rey SPA III
Prepared for the McMillin Company
diversity of the site, and maximizing its value in relation to adjacent public and private open
space lands.
In general, the management of the site will be of a passive nature: controlling access, patrolling
the area for trespassers, trash removal, and an education program for the public to assist TET
in the preservation and protection of the site. This type of management approach is appropriate
on this site given its proximity to existing open space, limited access, and limited edge effects
from existing development
6.2.3 MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES
In general, maintenance activities will be kept to a minimum unless a situation arises that
requires intervention. Maintenance activities may include:
. weeding and removal of non-native invasive or weedy species if they become
established and are considered a problem to native species within the mitigation site;
. revegetation efforts, with approval by the City of Chula Vista, the Service, and the
Department if the mitigation site is required for mitigation by specific projects (this
may include funds allocated by mitigation for habitat that is destroyed or partially
destroyed by wil~frre);
. intermittent patrolling of the site for trespassing and/or disturbance of the site by
man, including trash removal if necessary (the entire land bank will be inspected at
least three times per year); and
. frre control-gates, etc.
6.2.4 GENERAL HABITAT MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES
In specific cases, when particular management needs are required, the following measures will
be taken.
Invasive Plant Control. Weed control measures will include the following: hand
removal, cutting or mowing, and the use of herbicides (RoundupTM). Hand removal of weeds
is the most desirable method of control and will be used whenever feasible. Herbicide
application will be used on the most invasive of the plant species. Giant reed (Arundo donax )
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists. Inc.
August 23. 1994
HabitIJI Management Planfor Rancho Del Rey SPA III
-33- / / -5.;J.- Prepared fur the McMilliu Cumpany
and tamarisk (Tamarix sp.) are particularly invasive in San Diego County. Removal of these
species will be done by hand and approved herbicides applied at recommended doses and
under approved techniques. Application will be done under the supervision of a licensed
pesticide applicator. Neither of these species currently pose a threat on the site.
Clearinl! and Trash Removal. Pruning or clearing of any native vegetation will not be
allowed within the mitigation site. Deadwood and leaf litter of native trees and shrubs shall not
be removed. Downed logs and leaf litter provide valuable microhabitats for invertebrates.
reptiles. small mammals. and birds. In addition. the decomposition of deadwood and leaf litter
is essential for the replenishment of soil nutrients and minerals. Trash will be removed from
the mitigation site by hand on an as-needed basis. Trash consists of all man-made materials,
equipment. or debris dumped. thrown. washed, blown-in. or left within the mitigation site.
6.2.4.1
Responsible Parties for Implementation
TET will be responsible for financing and carrying out maintenance activities. The contact
person will be Dr. Don Hunsaker. or Kelli Rasmus of TET (telephone [619] 583-3933).
6.2.4.2 Schedule of Maintenance InSDections
Maintenance inspections will occur concurrent with the monitoring inspections, on a biannual
basis. unless a particular maintenance problem arises that requires immediate action.
6.2,4.3 Monitorin~ Plan
The biological monitoring period will begin upon transfer of the mitigation site to TET.
Monitoring of the site will occur on a biannual basis. Photographs and detailed notes will be
taken from established control points within the mitigation site. Subsequent monitoring will be
compared to the initial monitoring effort in order to assess if any remedial measures are
necessary to maintain the mitigation site in its natural state. A spring bird survey will be
conducted annually.
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists. Inc.
August 23.1994
Habitat Management Planfor Rancho Del Rey SPA III
.34- /9 -5J . Prepared for the McMillin Company
6.2.4.4 Annual Reports
A report outlining the results of the monitoring effort will be maintained in the permanent files
of TET. Copies will be available to any agency that requires them. They will be finalized by
June I of any year for the previous year's monitoring.
The monitoring reports will describe the existing conditions of the site for that particular year.
It will identify wildlife use of the site, identify any significant changes of the mitigation site,
and recommend remedial measures necessary for the continued success of the mitigation site.
The reports also will include the following:
. a list of names, titles, and companies of all persons who prepared the content of the
annual report and participated in monitoring activities; and
. prints of all monitoring photographs and copies of all field notes.
6.3 COMPLETION OF MITIGATION
6.3.1 NOTIFICATION OF COMPLETION
At the end of the five-year monitoring period, if TET considers that the mitigation site has
successfully been maintained in its natural state, the final monitoring report shall include
notification as such. Although the legal five-year monitoring effort will end, TET will continue
to monitor and maintain the mitigation site in perpetuity.
6.4 CONSTRUCTION IMPACT MINIMIZATION
To minimize impacts on the gnatcatchers that will be displaced, the Applicant will implement
the following measures.
. No occupied habitat will be removed during the gnatcatcher's breeding season
(February 15 to July 31).
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists. Inc.
August 23. 1994
.35-
JC;5,/
Habitat Management Plan/or Rancho Del Rey SPA III
Prepared for the McMillin Company
7.0 FUNDING FOR THE PROPOSED CONSERVATION MEASURES
Funding for the on- and off-site mitigation areas will be provided by the McMillin Company.
Funding for the mitigation property open space management and maintenance will be the
responsibility ofTET. to whom the land is dedicated.
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists. Inc.
August 23.1994
Habitat Management Planfor Rancho Del Rey SPA III
-36- /' ,--- Prepared for the McMillin Company
/9~3P
8.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Three alternatives to the proposed Project and the no project alternative have been considered.
Alternatives include:
. complete avoidance of impacts to DCSS within the respective HMP areas;
. avoidance of impacts to habitat currently used by gnatcatcher pairs;
. on- or off-site gnatcatcher relocation; and
. no project alternative.
8.1 AVOIDANCE OF IMPACTS
Under this alternative. all DCSS within the Project would be preserved. This option was
eliminated from further consideration because the physiography and biological constraints on
the Project and avoidance of all impacts would preclude development of the Project.
8.2 AVOIDANCE OF HABITAT CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY THE
COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER
Avoidance of impacts, direct and indirect, to gnatcatcher-occupied habitat would result in the
conservation of nearly all of the DCSS, as in the previous alternative; however, the Project
would not be economically feasible considering the extant biological constraints. This
alternative has been eliminated from further consideration.
8.3 CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER RELOCATION
Under this alternative, gnatcatchers present on site would be netted and relocated to another
suitable habitat area which already is protected and is not occupied. This alternative fails
primarily because there is no precedent of successful relocation in existing literature, and
therefore no assurance that such a measure would be practical biologically. In addition, any
forced relocation would still be considered a take under Section 9 of the ESA. Consequently,
this measure would not provide an alternative to this HMP process or permitting process for
take.
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc.
August 23.1994
Habitat Management Plan/or Rancho Del Rey SPA III
.37- / 9 ~ t? Prepared for the McMillin Company
804 NO-PROTECT ALTERNATIVE
The no-project alternative assumes that the Project site would remain in its current use as
natural open space. The no-project alternative would not result in direct adverse impacts to the
coastal California gnatcatcher. No DCSS would be removed and, over time, it is probable that
coastal California gnatcatchers would remain on the site; however, plans for surrounding
development could result in the eventual isolation of the population on the site, eventually
threatening the viability of this population. This alternative was not adopted because it would
preclude any reasonable use of the property, and because no funding is currently available for
acquisition of the site as open space. Additionally, if the no project alternative is adopted, a
valuable off~site mitigation parcel (ONeal Canyon) would not be acquired.
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists. Inc.
August 23.1994
H.bitaJ M.nagement PlDnfor Honcho Del Hey SPA 1II
-38- _ /r-; Prepared for the McMillin Company
/9 /~ /
9.0 REFERENCES CITED
American Ornithologists' Union, committee on classification and nomenclature. 1986. Thirty-fourth
supplement to the A.O.o. Checklist of Nonh American Birds. The Auk Vol. 99 (3).
Atwood, J. 1992. A maximum estimate of the California gnutcatcher's population size in the United States.
Western Birds. 23:1-9.
California Department of Fish and Game et al. 1992. Southern California Coastal Sage Scrub Natural
Community Conservation Planning Process Guidelines. November 1993.
City of San Diego 1993. Multiple Habitat Evaluation Map. Prepared by Ogden Environmental and Energy
Services Co., Inc. for the City in connection with the City of San Diego's Clean Water Program
Multiple Species Conservation Program.
City of San Diego 1994. Clean Water Program's Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP).
Collins, J. T. 1990. Standard common and current scientific names for North American amphibians and
reptiles (3rd Edition). Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Herpetological Circular No.
19, 44 pp.
Hickman, J. C. (Ed.). 1993. The Jepson Manual, Higher Plants of California. University of California Press,
Berkeley, 1400 pp.
Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California. State of
California, The Resources Agency.
Jones, J. K., Jr., D. C. Carter, H. H. Genoways, R. S. Hoffman, and D. W. Rice. 1982. Revised checklist of
North American mammals north of Mexico. Occasional Papers of the Museum Texas Tech.
University 80: 1-22.
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Company, Inc. 1993.
P and D Technologies, Inc. 1990. Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for EI Rancho Del Rey
Sectional Planning Area Prepared for the City of Chula Vista. November 1990.
Rea, A.M. and KL Weaver. 1990. The taxonomy, distrubution and status of the Coastal California Cactus
Wrens. Western Birds 21: 81-126.
Regional Environmental Consultants, 1990. Biological Impact Analysis and Mitigation Plan for the SPA 3
Development Unit of the EI Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan. Prepared for Rancho Del Rey Partnership.
February 21, 1990.
Regional Environmental Consultants, 1991. Native Revegetation Plan for the SPA III Development Unit of
the Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan. November 4, 1991.
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 1990. Draft Comprehensive Species Management Plan
for the Least Bell's Vireo. January 1990.
Scientific Review Panel, Southern California Coastal Sage Scrub. 1992. Standard survey guidelines for coastal
sage scrub habitat. Unpublished Report prepared for interested parties. February 20, 1992.
Skinner M.W. and B. Pavlik. 1994. California Native Plan Society's Inventory of Rare and Endangered
Vascular Plants of California. Tbre California Native Plant Society, Sacramento. California, 336 pp.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1991. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: Anima1 candidate
review for listing as endangered or threatened species. Notice of review. United States Fish & Wildlife
Service Federal Register 56(225):58804-58836, November 21.
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc.
August 23,1994
.39.
/9 - ___~Y'
Habital Management Planfor Rancho Del Rey SPA III
Prepared for the McMillin Company
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992. Letter to the McMillin Company.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service March, 1993. Proposed Rule Concerning the threatened Coastal
California Gnatcatcher (Federal Register, Vol. 58 No. 236, December 10, 1993).
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Letter to the McMillin Company.
Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc.
August 23, 1994
HabiltJl Management Plan for Rancho Del Rey SPA III
.40-/ 97" J . Prepared for the McMilliu Company
ATTACHMENT C
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT OF 6/7/94
/~~?O
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
/'1
Meeting Date 6/7/94
SUBMITTED BY:
Report: Implementation of the Endangered Species Act Special Rule 4(d)
for the Interim Habitat~s~. ~7proval Process
Director of Planning iWe::..
./.'.} 11
City Manager iJ0 r:; 1/ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No.1LJ
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
Last year the Federal Department of the Interior adopted the Special 4( d) rule regulating the
habitat "take" of the California Gnatcatcher. This Special Rule links protection of the bird to
the California Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) process. Prior to the
preparation of an overall NCCP plan, the process allows the "take" of up to 5% of Coastal Sage
Scrub (CSS), which is the habitat for the Gnatcatcher. During the past several months City staff
has been working with staffs from throughout the region to develop a process to allow local
agencies to implement this "take" process. The following report provides further information
regarding implementation of the 4(d) rule by the City including the issues associated with the
City adopting a local "4(d) rule" ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council direct staff to work toward resolving the issues identified in the staff
report, including working with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of
Fish and Game, and County of San Diego to revise the jurisdictional allocation formula for
interim take for Chula Vista, based on General Plan area or other acceptable method; and direct
City Staff, after resolving the issues, to draft an ordinance for implementation of the SpeciaI4(d)
rule at the local level.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Backe:round
On March 25, 1993, the Federal government listed the California gnatcatcher as a threatened
species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Typically, any "take" (harm or harassment)
of listed species is strictly regulated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), through
ESA Section 7 or lO(a) permits. A Section 10(a) permit is issued by the Service for a "take"
on private property when there is no substantial Federal involvement (i.e. a Federal permit).
jJI-1 / '7 --~ /
Page 2, Item / tf
Meeting Date 6/7/94
Section 7 is a consultation process with the Service for Federal projects or private projects that
require other Federal permits such as a 404 permit which is issued by the Army Corps of
Engineers for alteration of watercourses. In the case of the California gnatcatcher, the USFWS
signed a unique Memorandum of Understanding with the State of California Department of Fish
and Game (CDFG) to cooperatively develop conservation strategies for long-term protection of
coastal sage scrub (CSS), which is the habitat for the gnatcatcher and other sensitive species.
The State's Natural Communities Conservation Planning (NCCP) Act, passed in 1991, and its
ensuing NCCP program, have outlined habitat conservation strategies in two sets of guidelines:
NCCP Conservation Guidelines, and NCCP Process Guidelines, both fInalized in November,
1993.
On May 2, 1992 the City of City Chula Vista emolled in the NCCP. By emolling in the NCCP,
the City agreed to join in the collaborative planning process to conserve long-term viable
populations of the State's native animal and plant species by providing interconnected open space
areas while allowing compatible and appropriate development and growth. On August 24, 1993
Resolution Number 17229 was adopted by the City Council, approving the Resolution of
Intention (ROI) to participate in the San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP)
Plan. The ROI confIrmed Chula Vista's continued participation in the MSCP and the future
conservation planning efforts for the California Gnatcatcher and other potentially threatened and
endangered species.
The implementation of the Endangered Species Act and the NCCP is a two step process. The
fIrst step is the interim protection of CSS habitat through the Special 4(d) rule and the second
step is the adoption of the permanent conservation plan (MSCP). The MSCP is the functional
equivalent of the NCCP. By the previous actions taken by the City to emoll in the NCCP and
adoption of the ROI, we are part of the regional habitat conservation planning process and staff
is working actively toward its adoption.
On December 10, 1993, the USFWS formalized its relationship with the State's NCCP effort
by publishing the ftnal Endangered Species Act Section 4(d) special rule, effective on that date.
The 4(d) rule allows local jurisdictions to approve "incidental take" of gnatcatcher habitat up to
a cumulative 5 percent loss of CSS during the period of time that subregions of southern
California are preparing conservation plans consistent with the NCCP program. Individual
project CSS loss is only permitted if a mitigation plan is approved.
The interim loss allowed through the 4(d) process can be approved only through procedures
outlined in the NCCP Conservation and Process Guidelines. These procedures are intended to
be integrated into the normal local land use process. Among other requirements, the NCCP
guidelines contain several fIndings that must be made by the City in granting the "interim loss
permit. "
~ /9-t:2
Page 3, Item J'I
Meeting Date 6/7/94
It should be noted that without a jurisdiction adopting a speciaI4(d) rule process, incidental take
of listed species must be considered through ESA Section 10(a) on a case-by-case basis by the
USFWS, in a sometimes multiple-year process involving the preparation of Habitat Conservation
Plans by individual applicants. If there is a federal nexus, such as granting of another Federal
permit (i.e. Section 404 permit), Section 7 can be used. These processes remain available to
applicants who do not elect to use the 4( d) or in the case of a jurisdiction that does not adopt a
4(d) rule.
Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat in Chula Vista
The region of San Diego, which encompasses San Diego County, has a total of 227,437 acres
of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS). Within the corporate boundaries of Chula Vista there are 2,143
acres of CSS. The 4(d) Rule allows for an interim "take" of 5% of the habitat. The interim
period will end with adoption of the NCCP which is anticipated to take at least 18 to 24 months.
Staff has met with the City's large landowners and the Special Districts that are within our
General Plan area. Based on the information they provided as to their needs in the next two to
three years, it is anticipated that approximately 300 to 350 acres of "take" may be needed during
the interim period to accommodate projects within the City, as well as approximately 100
additional acres for projects outside the City but within our General Plan area. In addition,
Baldwin has indicated an anticipated interim take of less than 500 acres within the Salt Creek
Ranch and Otay Ranch projects. By way of comparison, if the City's interim take allocation
were limited to 5 % of the existing CSS habitat within the City, the total allowable take would
be approximately 107 acres. Attached is a summary of the anticipated projects and their planned
"take" of CSS habitat.
Should Chula Vista Implement the 4(d) Rule?
The following discussion addresses the positive and negative aspects of the City assuming the
responsibilities set forth in the NCCP Process and Conservation Guidelines, specifically,
adoption and implementation of the 4(d) rule at the local level. There are several issues that
must be addressed in determining if Chula Vista should implement a local 4(d) rule. The
advantages and disadvantages are detailed below;
ADVANTAGES TO ADOPTING AND IMPLEMENTING A LOCAL 4(d) RULE
1. Local Control of Land Use Decisions.
Implementation of the 4(d) rule would allow the City to approve "incidental take" of the
gnatcatcher up to a cumulative 5 percent loss of CSS. Should the City choose not to
assume this responsibility, during the interim period prior to adoption of an NCCP,
applicants wishing to develop property supporting the gnatcatcher would only be able to
~ /7~?J
Page 4, Item---.L.!L
Meeting Date 617/94
do so if they received approval from the Federal government under Sections 7 or 10(a)
of the Act. A major advantage of a local rule is that it would allow the City to decide
which projects can proceed during this interim period, and work directly with property
owners to coordinate take permits with other plan approvals.
2. Timeframes
Should the City of Chula Vista adopt and implement a local 4(d) rule, the City would be
able to develop its own implementing procedures. The amount of time that would be
required for the City to take action on an application for loss of CSS habitat ("habitat
loss permit") will depend on where a project is in the planning and approval process at
the time of application for such habitat loss permit. However, it appears that a maximum
of 75 days would be required for the City to issue such a permit, in accordance with
State guidelines.
With regard to the Federal permit process, the USFWS is mandated to conclude the
Section 7 consultation process within 90 days of determining if the biological assessment
or other information is adequate and an additional 45 days to write the biological opinion.
This would result in a 135-day process. However, there is no limit on the amount of
time that can be required by the USFWS to determine that either the biological
assessment or other biological information is adequate in order to begin the consultation
process.
The Service indicates that there is not a mandated timeline for processing a Section lO(a)
application. Federal environmental documentation, which would be required as part of
the Section lO(a) process, usually takes 3 to 12 months to complete. The Service must
also undergo an internal Section 7 consultation process. The Service indicates that 10(a)
permits for very small and non-controversial projects (e.g., projects which involve
minimal take of occupied CSS habitat in an area not being considered for inclusion in a
permanent preserve system) can be processed in about six months. However, larger,
more controversial projects can require several years. Locally, the Least Bell's Vireo
Habitat Conservation Plans for the San Diego and Sweetwater Rivers were initiated
approximately six years ago and have yet to receive approval.
In summary, while the local interim take process may require up to a 75 day review
period, this is significantly shorter than the Federal permit process.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES RELATED TO THE ADOPTION OF A LOCAL 4(d) RULE
1. Occuoied vs. Unoccupied Coastal Sal!e Scrub. The Endangered Species Act only
regulates impacts to listed species (i.e. the California Gnatcatcher). While the ESA
provides for a process whereby critical habitat for the species can be designated, this
~ /~ ---tf, f
Page S, Item
Meeting Date 6/7/94
III
process only affects federal project approvals, and has not been utilized in the case of the
gnatcatcher. Thus, prior to adoption of the Special Rule, only projects which contain
occupied habitat are required to obtain permits under Sections 7 or 10(a) of the Act.
The Special Rule changes this result by referring to the Natural Community Conservation
Planning process which regulates gnatcatcher habitat (coastal sage scrub) whether
occupied by the species or not.
The City's data base is not sufficiently detailed to determine the number of acres of
occupied vs. unoccupied habitat. However, data collected by the consultants for the
Multiple Species Conservation Plan (MSCP) indicate that approximately 20% to 50% of
the Coastal sage scrub located within their study area may not be inhabited, or suitable
for habitation, by the gnatcatcher.
Implementation of the Special Rule would impose regulations on unoccupied habitat that
would not be imposed under Sections 7 and lO(a) of the Act, thereby requiring an
additional permitting step and mitigation for habitat that is not occupied by the species.
2. Risks Inherent in the City ImDlementiDl! the Section 4(d) Rule.
Under the Endangered Species Act itself (in the absence of the Section 4(d) Rule), the
City would not playa primary role in implementing the Act on private projects. If an
applicant proposed to "take" gnatcatchers, that applicant would be required to obtain
permission (under either Section 7 or 10[a] of the Act) directly from the USFWS. The
USFWS would be the lead agency for all permitting and enforcement actions.
The Section 4(d) Rule, by referring to the NCCP Process Guidelines as an alternative
method of permitting a "take" under the Act, alters the above operation of the Act in two
significant respects: First, as noted above, the Guidelines expand protection of actual
gnatcatchers to protection of the coastal sage scrub habitat, thereby having a potential
effect of increasing the number of development projects subject to this new regulation.
Second, the Guidelines create a significant new role for local agencies, giving them
responsibility to issue "Habitat Loss Permits," with the attendant duty to determine
whether the amount of loss proposed is permissible under the Conservation Guideline
standards.
By allowing local governments to assume these responsibilities, local implementation of
the 4 (d) rule would place the City (rather than the federal agencies) in the "front line"
position of issuing approvals and denials of the habitat loss permits, with all the
consequences which may flow from such decisions. It can be expected that, due to the
Conservation Guideline limitations on the amount of coastal sage scrub habitat which may
be impacted, denials would occur in certain cases where the Act itself would not directly
have applied because of the absence of gnatcatchers. Such decisions by the City to deny
~ /7/j,;-
Page 6, Item /1
Meeting Date 6/7/94
habitat loss permits, or to impose conditions, may well be legally challenged by
applicants, based on real or perceived loss of property rights, while decisions to approve
permits may be challenged by third parties. Given these risks, if directed by the City
Council to do so, we would work with the City Attorney's office to obtain some sort of
indemnification from the Service for the potential liability related to this issue.
3. Jurisdictional Allotment Formula.
Because the City of Chula Vista is part of a larger region in which gnatcatcher habitat
is found, there are several issues associated with implementation of the 4(d) rule at our
local level. These issues are outlined in an attached letter, dated April 25, 1994, to Gail
Kobetich with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. These issues include the allocation
of the regional 5% take under the 4(d) rule, specifically how much of the total regional
take will each agency be allowed to use, and who will make that determination. The
major issue is the selection of a formula for allocating the acreage of interim habitat take
to local jurisdictions. Both the City and County of San Diego, as well as several other
cities, have favored an allocation formula which is based on directly calculating 5 % of
the total Coastal Sage Scrub habitat within each jurisdiction. With the City of San Diego
currently considering adoption of a Special 4(d) Rule ordinance that is based on the
jurisdictional take allocation, and with the County having adopted an urgency interim
ordinance for implementation of the 4(d) rule, also based on the jurisdictional allocation,
it appears that there may be de facto acceptance by the other cities in the County of this
allocation formula.
As noted earlier, there are several potential projects in Chula Vista and its General Plan
area involving CSS take, with total acreage of up to 950 acres potentially being estimated
during the interim period. However, under a strict jurisdictional take formula, Chula
Vista would only have approximately 107 acres available for allocation during this
period. In order to accommodate reasonable projections of development during this
period, staff has considered alternative allocation formulas which are more directly
related to consideration of habitat quality and locations of planned urban development
within the overall subregion. One specific alternative which staff feels has particular
merit is one wherein the City's General Plan Area, rather than its jurisdictional
boundary, would be utilized in calculating the available take. This approach would
provide greater flexibility to the City, resulting in the availability of up to 1,000 acres
on an interim basis. We have begun discussions with the resource agencies and the
County of San Diego regarding this concept and others.
The most immediate project that Chula Vista has coming forward that could be affected
by the 4(d) rule is Rancho del Rey SPA III. McMillin has expressed a desire to staff to
be able to begin grading by September of this year. To that end McMillin has been
pursuing negotiating directly with the Service to determine what mitigation will be
~/'j~t~
Page 7, Item~
Meeting Date 617194
required for them to implement this project. It appears that McMillin will be purchasing
a large portion of O'Neal canyon, located south of Otay Valley, between the Donovan
Correctional Facility and Otay Mesa County Jail, to satisfy their off-site mitigation for
the loss of gnatcatcher habitat. ,This purchase represents a substantial cost to them.
Although other projects in Chula Vista have not progressed to that point as yet, it is
likely that others will have similar types of investment in mitigatic!lland that McMillin
does.
4. Soecial Districts. Special Districts, such as water districts and school districts, are often
not required to get City discretionary land use approval for their projects. Therefore,
a Special District could conceivably use all or a portion of a local agency's jurisdictional
"take" allotment without approval from the affected local agency by going through the
Service for a Section lOa permit, or if appropriate a Section 7. The City of Chula Vista
does have the opportunity to comment during the environmental process on improvement
projects that the various Special Districts within our jurisdiction are proposing. If the
City adopts a local 4(d) rule, a Special District could go through the City for approval
of a "take" for projects within our boundaries, rather than using a Section lO(a) or
Section 7 process. There are a variety of Special Districts within the City's boundaries
including two school districts and two water districts. Staff has consulted with them
regarding possible projects they will be proposing in the next two to three years that
could be affected by Special Rule. Their anticipated projects are included in the attached
chart. It is possible that some of the Special Districts will initiate projects during the
interim period that could further reduce Chula Vista's jurisdictional allocation, beyond
the control of the City.
5. Mitill:ation Guidelines. In order to implement the NCCP Process Guidelines, the USFWS
is requiring that the subregions prepare mitigation guidelines that could be used for
habitat loss approvals. Approval of the proposed mitigation guidelines will have to be
received from the USFWS and Fish and Game prior to implementation.
RESOLUTION OF THE ISSUES
While there are significant advantages to the City in adopting a local interim take ordinance,
there are also several major unresolved issues. The key unresolved issue is the allocation
formula to be used in determining the amount of interim take acreage which would be available
to Chula Vista. It is recommended that staff be directed to continue pursuing the alternative
described above, which would be based on the City's General Plan Area boundary. In addition,
staff should be directed to continue working toward resolution of the other issues identified in
this report.
~/1-t?
Page 8, Item-.1i
Meeting Date 6/7/94
STATUS OF THE GNATCATCHER LISTING
On May 3, 1994, a U.S. District Judge voided the Interior Department's listing of the
gnatcatcher. The Interior Department has filed a request for reconsideration of this decision,
as well as requesting that the listing be reinstated during the review of this appeal. Therefore,
while the listing is not currently in effect, it is staff s opinion that the City should continue to
pursue possible implementation of the 4(d) rule until this matter is resolved. Staff will continue
to monitor the status of the listing in this regard.
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
This item was originally scheduled for Council consideration on May 24, 1994. At that time,
Tricia Gerrodette, representing the Sierra Club, submitted written comments regarding this
report (see Attachment C).
In response to these comments, staff would offer the following:
a) Baldwin has indicated that its interim take would be less than 500 acres; this is reflected
in Page 3 of this report.
b) The City would be subject to the NCCP Conservation Guidelines in implementing an
interim take ordinance. These guidelines establish criteria for ranking the value of
habitat areas, and providing interim protection to higher quality areas. It is our
understanding that any local ordinances would be required to be consistent with these
guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
Auachments;
A. Property Owner Survey
B. Leu.er to Gail Kobetich, U.S. Fish and Wildlife: Service. dated April 25. 1994.
C. Comments from Tricia Gerrodett.e
f,\homclpJannmg\gnatcal.l13
~/9~~~
Anticipated CSS/Gnatcatcher Acres of Take
within the City of Chula Vista Prior to
Adoption of the NCCP/MSCP
Project CSS acreage to be Graded CSS acreage 10 be Graded in
in City in next 2 to 3 years Ganeral Plan Area (outside City
limijs) in next 2 to 3 years
McMillin 256
Sun bow (Gafcon) 50
Otay Ranch (Baldwin) To Be Provided
Salt Creek (Baldwin) To Be Provided
EastLake 0
Watson Land Co. 32
Rancho San Miguel 35
Bonita Meadows (Buie 20
Development)
Lyndale Hills 7
Sweetwater Authority 0 0
Otay Water District 0 0.5
Chula Vista Elementary 0 0
School District
Sweetwater Union High 0 0
District
City of Chula Vista 20
(Miscellaneous)
Total 326 94.5
Note: Information based on surve cone ucted In Ma 1!
y
y
(MARIL YNIGNATCATCIGNATCAT2.CHT)
Mey 18. 1894
~~/:J-?C;
~v?-
~
cnv Of
CHULA VISTA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
April 2S, 1994
Gail Kobetich
U.S. Fish &. Wildlife Service
2730 Loker Ave. West
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject:
Interim Habitat Loss Approval Process for Federal J::ntIangered Species Act
Consistency 4(d) - Jurisdictional Take Allocation
Dear Mr. Kobetich:
Through our recent discussions with you and your staff and our review of the FiDa1 Rule for
implementation of the 4(d) Rule within our jurisdiction, we have become aware of potential
problems with the currently proposed allocation of habitat by jurisdiction within San Diego
County. The City of Chula Vista would have serious difficulties implementing the 4(d) Nle
within its jurisdictional boundaries unless alternative methods of allocating acreage for interim
take are adopted.
..
The City of Chula Vista has not entered into a forma1agreement, nor have we formally endorsed
the use of the jurisdictional acreage allocation fDrmula previously discussed by the SANDAG
Regional Conservation Coordinating Committee (RCCC). We did concur with other members
of the RCCC that the U.S. Fish &. Wildlife Service (USF&.WS) should be consulted regarding
the potential use of such a formula. We never assumed that asking USF&.WS if such a formula
would be acceptable would be interpreted as Chula Vista's unconditional approval of this
possible method for allocating the region's S% take.
We believe there are a variety of issues that must be resolved in CODSideriD& bow tbe 4(d) Nle
will be implemented in region. 'Ibose issues are as follows:
. It is our understanding that "Takes" that exceed 1 loca1 agency's 4(d) allotment must
pursue 1 Section 7 or 10(1) from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wbich tbe Service
may approve. These Section 7 or 100a) permits wiU COUDt .pm&{ the reJion's overall
S% take, and the jurisdictions' RCCC 4(d) alloanem. Section 7 and 10(1) approval from
1he Service may aceed a jurisdiction's allotment and preclude the use of the 4(d) Nle.
~~/9-7P
"~FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA CALIFORNIA 9'9'0116'9,69'.5'0'
Gail Kobetich
Page 2
April 25, 1994
Under this scenario, it is conceivable that the region's 5'J1i take will be exhausted before
al1 of the jurisdictions grant permits up to their S'JIi jurisdictional allocation or a
jurisdiction's S'JIi allocation could be reached prior to the region's S'JIi allowable take.
The result could be that the jurisdictional allotment will be de facto overridden by the
Service without approval from the affected Cities unless this issue is dealt with early in
the process.
. Because of the large amount of CSS "Take" allocated to the County of San Diego versus
urbanizing cities, the RCCC jurisdictional allotment does DOt encounge habitat "Takes"
within urbanized, fragmented, low quality habitats where the long tmn viability of the
species is questionable. The jurisdiction al10tment does appear to encourage habitat
"takes" in rural high quality habitat areas where the long term viability of the species is
more probable than in the urbanizing areas.
. The RCCC jurisdictional al10tment is based on the corporate boundaries of the Cities and
the County of San Diego. It does not consider the likely boundaries of future
preservation areas that will be adopted in the MSCP andlor NCCP. The MSCP/NCCP
preservation boundaries will not necessarily relate to municipal bouDdaries but rather will
fol1ow logical biological boundaries. Specifically, the adopted NCCP Conservation
Guidelines state that "recognizing that large subregions must meet the objective of
limiting short-term CSS losses on a biologically valid scale;some further subdivision of
a large planning subregion into appropriately sized biological subareas for the purpose
of accounting for interim habitat loss may be necessary." (p.IO) Therefore, a system
should be devised that more closely aligns the interim preservation with the biological
subareas which will ultimately be used in developing a long-range plan.
. The RCCC jurisdictional allotment does not consider the viability of habitat in each
jurisdiction. This could lead to fragmented habitat ueas as each jurisdiction proceeds
to implement the 4(d) rule independently without regard for c:onnected viable habitats.
. A Special District within the bouDdaries of a local agency may potentially use all or a
portion of a local agency's RCCC jurisdictional "Take" alloanent without approval from
the affected local agency.
The City of Cbula Vista has worked closely with the County of San Diego and other local
agencies and will continue to so on efforts to adopt a regioaal plan for implementation of the
4(d) rule and/or alternative methods of allocating the iDterim 1Ike among jurisdictions. We
believe it is within the intent of the 4(d) implementation pideliDes that the fragmented,
urbanized, low quality habitat should be the fll'St considered for a "take" and that the rural areas
~~ )7'-7/
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Gail Kobetich
Page 3
April 25. 1994
containing high quality habitat should be preserved for tbe future pl.nnil1g efforts of the
MSCP/NCCP.
We appreciate your consideration of!bese points and look forward to working with your office
towards the resolution of the issues we have presented and !be implemerution of tbe 4(d) rule
in our region.
Sincerely.
/,.U;tU~
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
RAL:MRFP/nr
(r,_",lonIlina"_~h.lu)
cc: Larry Eng. California Deparunent of Fish & Game. Sacramento. CA
Sid Morris. Assistant City Manager. City of Chula Vista
Ernest Freeman. Planning Director. City of San Diego
Lauren Wassennan. Planning Director. County of San Diego
Bob Asher. Chief Planner. County of San Diego
~ J.lf-t;Z /J-?~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
REQUEST TO SPEAK
IN FAVOR OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
Agenda Item No 15 Date
Name_Tri cia ('TPrl"'~
CPl.... Printl
'f
1..R'8EJ
(Phonel
Address $~10 e.rw g+. ~(H\ {Y".I'>~ q11nlf
eStre.tl' (City)~)
Representing ~', e.. ~ r" ('} (' 1 ~
(N8l"M of Organizltion. etc.)
Co('(\N\~ ov\ ha...ck.
~ s,..t.. _1/mIIMI1o 5 -...... .."
o._.i...t ^ ,../IIiaoU """,. ..... _ _ r ~J _1/mIIMI . 15.......
" the City Council accepU the staff recommendation on your item as a part of
the Consent Calendar, would you atill desire the item pulled eo you can discuss
it later in the meeting? _Ves, I want to apeak anyway. _No, I only want
to speak if there is opposition to the staff recommendation.
Under CWe VISte Municiplll Cod. Slction 2.52.115. you mult
dilclo.. IhI feet the! you endlor otfiHfI or -clInt.. in 1M .a~r.a.l.,
contribU1ld more than ".000 to env councilt"Mfl'lber in 1M curr.nt
or prlceding election period; end .,.. . ....ntcip.nt.. Vou.....
-panicip.nt- if you ere not . party but Mve . finenci81 intlr." in I
eo_ntol "oci_ __ by .... City COIIne;1 ..... "_' 10
influence thefr __on.
Do vou ..... 0 __ Int..... III "" _""0 it_' v.._....,K
H 00, ..... VOU ...../or VOU' __ or _nt. in .... _'0,
contributed rnoretun ",000 to. ...u~r'. .....gn?
v.._ No_ . eo. IiW ..4,.A....::I,..,.. MI'M
GIVE THIS TO THE CITY CLERK BEFORE THE M~ETlNG
The Mayor will call you to the microphone at the appropriate time
t;C472 ,,_J
ATTACHMENT C
jJ/--If. J J - ?J
.'
:
9{ ~a.Q.d wi>>..- Lo MCV\Ld tb f~
~ f-ca ~ r O~ Ra..n..ch
<U\d ..&ili CAW<. cs.s. ~ -t:D M
~) ~ ~ -f3V-NA b..e..
Ata:hd ~ -t:k ~ ~.
~\I- ~.
11u.. e.o~~ ~ "11:1 .Gl.f'~ nuo~
.!h.ovlJ 00 '0 ~ Lll 0'\U\.d 1hcct: ~ 510
~ ~ 4~ o~ 0Cc.uA, ~
Q.ow-l\ioQ"p, JoW-,\.JJ4~ h.c..b~.
ft-/'1 /5'-7Y
June 3, 1994
COUNCIL INFORMATION MEMO
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:
John Goss, City Manag~ ;;'d f'
Bob Leiter, Director of Planning N/f G
VIA:
SUBJECT: Additional Correspondence Received in Reference to Item # 14 on June 7 City
Council Meeting Agenda
Staff received the attached letter from Eastlake Development Company regarding the above
referenced item after the City Council agenda packet for the meeting of June 7 had been
distributed. In reviewing this item, staff does not feel that it represents a significant change
from the information presented in the report, and recommends that it simply be noted for the
record.
(F: \home\planning \elintrm. em)
/1-75
May 27, 1994
Mr. Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
CITY OF CHUl.A VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Subject:
IDterim Habitat Loss . 4(d)
Dear Mr. Leiter:
Altbough we initially responded to staff as not baving the need for any
Gnatcatcher acreage for development of EastLake projects over the
next two years, we would like to revise that estimate to allow for the
possible need of up to 10 acres for the extension of Orange Avenue.
While we can't provide positive verification that there is Gnatcatcber
habitat located on the proposed Orange Avenue alignment, the
possibility does exist that the babitat could exist and we would not want
to be precluded from development for lack of identifying those needs at
this stage.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
~ DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
~...Y*
Project Manager
KW~b
cc: Bill Ostrem
P:\BURBRIlOOlEI1!Il27
~ )1-7;;
J..{-
l:.c t.:-., ~
....., v:=-,....,
.......
JlJN - :J
1994
PLANNING
I-
...
..
~
EASTLAKE
m~ENT
900 Lane lWenue
Suite 100
Chute \llste. CA 91914
(619) 421.Q127
FM (619) 421-1830
ATTACHMENT D
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT OF 8/16/94
/9 --- 77
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~
Meeting Date 8/16/94
REVIEWED BY:
Ordinance 2c..o~ AmencE.ng the Municipal Code to Create a
Voluntary Take Permit Process Sanctioned Under Section 4(d) of the
Endangered Species Act Alternative to the Process Permitted Under
Section 10(a) of Said ~~'J 1 f1/r..
Director of Pla;-gf; f" r f""; Ife/v'
City Manager ~"I'5~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes.lLNo~
In March, 1993 the Federal Department of the Interior listed the California Gnatcatcher as a
threatened species, and adopted a special rule under Section 4(d) of the Endangered Species Act
which establishes specific regulations regarding the taking of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS), the
habitat of the Gnatcatcher. This Special Rule allows local jurisdictions to grant CSS "take"
permits if certain findings can be made. The 4(d) Rule is intended to provide an alternative for
applicants who choose not to go directly through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
for a Section lO(a) permit. During the past several months, City staff has been working with
staff of the resource agencies and other local jurisdictions, as well as local property owners, to
implement this local "take" permit process. This emergency ordinance will implement a 4(d)
Take Permit Process for the City, thus allowing the City to issue CSS take permits at the local
level. The proposed ordinance is exempt from environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act, under Class 8 of the Categorical Exemptions. Class 8 consists of
"actions taken by regulatory agencies... to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement
or protection of the environment, where the regulatory process involves procedures for
protection of the environment. "
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the ordinance as an emergency ordinance.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission
considered the draft ordinance at their August 8, 1994 meeting. Staff briefed the committee on
the background of the 4(d) rule and the proposed process contained in the ordinance for
processing the permits. Staff also explained that the ordinance is proposed as an emergency
ordinance in order to accommodate grading for the Rancho Del Rey Middle/High School and
community park during the upcoming biological window. A motion to recommend adoption of
the emergency ordinance failed. The vote was 3-1 in favor of the ordinance; however, four
affirmative votes are required to support any motion. Committee Member Guerreiro voted
against the motion and stated that he was not in favor of any action that would accelerate
development in the City. Three members of the Committee were absent; therefore, a favorable
vote on the item would have required a unanimous vote by all in attendance.
.-/.YT
/5'-7r
Page 2, Item ,5
Meeting Date 8/16/94
DISCUSSION:
Backl!round:
As indicated above, on March 25, 1993, the Federal government listed the California gnatcatcher
as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Typically, any "take" (harm
or harassment) of listed species is strictly regulated by the USFWS, through ESA Section 7 or
10(a) permits. A Section 10(a) permit is issued by the USFWS for a "take" on private property
when there is no substantial Federal involvement (Le. a Federal permit). Section 7 is a
consultation process with the USFWS for Federal projects or private projects that require other
Federal permits, such as a "404" permit which is issued by the Army Corps of Engineers for
alteration of watercourses.
In the case of the California gnatcatcher, the USFWS signed a unique Memorandum of
Understanding with the State of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) to
cooperatively develop conservation strategies for long-term protection of coastal sage scrub
(CSS), which is the habitat for the gnatcatcher and other sensitive species. The State's Natural
Communities Conservation Planning (NCCP) Act, passed in 1991, and the resultant NCCP
program, have outlined habitat conservation strategies in two sets of guidelines: NCCP
Conservation Guidelines, and NCCP Process Guidelines, both fInalized in November, 1993.
On May 2, 1992 the City of City Chula Vista enrolled in the NCCP. By enrolling in the NCCP,
the City agreed to join in the collaborative planning process to conserve long-term viable
populations of the State's native animal and plant species by providing interconnected open space
areas while allowing compatible and appropriate development and growth. In addition, on
August 24, 1993, the City Council approved a Resolution ofIntention (ROI) to participate in the
San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Plan. The ROI made Chula Vista
an active participant in the MSCP and the future conservation planning efforts for the California
Gnatcatcher and other potentially threatened species.
The implementation of the Endangered Species Act and the NCCP is a two step process. The
fIrst step is the interim protection of CSS habitat through the Special 4(d) rule; the second step
is the adoption of a permanent conservation plan, in coordination with the MSCP and NCCP
programs. By the previous actions taken by the City to enroll in the NCCP and to participate
in the MSCP, the City is working actively toward the adoption of a permanent conservation plan
that will comply with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act.
On December 10, 1993, the USFWS formalized its relationship with the State's NCCP effort
by publishing the fInal Endangered Species Act Section 4(d) special rule, effective on that date.
~ /9-/)
Page 3, Item ' S
Meeting Date 8/16/94
The 4(d) rule allows local jurisdictions to approve "incidental take" of CSS habitat, up to a
cumulative 5 percent loss of CSS within the region, during the period of time that subregions
of southern California are preparing conservation plans consistent with the NCCP program.
Individual project CSS loss is only permitted if a mitigation plan is approved.
The interim take of coastal sage scrub allowed through the 4(d) process can be approved only
through local procedures which are consistent with those outlined in the NCCP Conservation
Guidelines and Process Guidelines. These procedures are intended to be integrated into the
normal local land use process. Among other requirements, the NCCP guidelines contain
standards for evaluation of take requests, several required fmdings that must be made by the City
in granting an interim take permit, and review of local permits by the resource agencies within
a specified time period.
Summarv of the Draft Ordinance
The proposed ordinance is intended to provide an alternative procedures for obtaining
authorization to take CSS within the City of Chula Vista. Under the proposed ordinance, the
take permit would become a part of the City's environmental review process. The proposed City
take permit would be processed as a part of the project environmental review, either the Initial
Study or the EIR. Integration of the take permit process with the City's environmental review
process will ensure both a thorough evaluation of the biological resources issues and appropriate
mitigation requirements, and will also allow adequate opportunity for input from the public,
resource agencies, and other affected agencies.
The proposed ordinance has a provision for granting a take permit to previously approved
("pipeline") projects that have already been through the City's environmental review process.
In those cases only the Resource Agencies would be consulted and there would not be additional
public review.
As proposed, the Director of Planning would issue all take permits. In the case of discretionary
actions, the fmdings for granting the take permit would be considered by the decision makers
who would authorize the Director of Planning to issue the permit provided that the fmdings are
still valid at the time of issuance. The intent of this provision is to ensure that take permits are
only issued when grading or site clearance is imminent. Since the granting of a take permit
would essentially reserve a portion of the regional 5 % for a particular project, it is important
that the take allocation not be reserved until it is really needed. This wilI alleviate the possibly
of artificially using up the 5 % for take on paper but not actually in the field.
In addition to the provisions for granting take permits for those actions currently addressed by
City codes, this ordinance also includes a provision requiring authorization for the previously
unregulated activity of vegetation clearing and grubbing that does not involve grading or any
other type of City permit. It is required under the 4 (d) rule that this activity be regulated in
~ /'1-yo
Page 4, Item IS
Meeting Date 8/16/94
the ordinance to prevent property owners from destroying or disturbing CSS habitat that is
protected by the NCCP even when no other permits are requested.
Prooosed Adootion of Ordinance as Emereencv Ordinance
This ordinance is being presented as an emergency ordinance in order to allow consideration of
a interim take permit for at least one previously approved project (Rancho del Rey SPA III), for
which the applicant wishes to begin grading within the non-nesting "biological window" for the
gnatcatcher (September 1 through February 15). This project includes construction of major
public facilities, including a public middle school and community park, which will serve both
existing and future residents of the surrounding community. It is therefore important to the
applicant and the City that grading operations begin as quickly as possible in order to maximize
the grading activities during the "biological window". This will minimize, to the extent
possible, the impacts to the gnatcatcher during their breeding period. The mitigation plans for
this project have been reviewed and approved by both the City and the USFWS; however,
processing of a lO(a) permit by the USFWS would delay construction of the project by at least
one year.
Unresolved Issues
As reported to the City Council on June 7, 1994, there are still several unresolved issues
regarding the interim take process, including the fmal status of the gnatcatcher listing itself, as
well as issues regarding the allocation of interim take acreage within the San Diego region (see
Attachment). Staff is continuing to work with resource agency staffs and the County of San
Diego staff to clarify and resolve these issues. However, staff has determined that adoption of
the attached ordinance can proceed at this time, and as issues regarding the interim take process
are resolved, the ordinance and/or administrative procedures will be reviewed and, if necessary,
be proposed for amendment.
FISCAL IMPACT: All staff time necessary to implement this proposal would be reimbursed
by project applicants through the full cost recovery provisions of the City's environmental
review process.
(f:home\planning\ordilWlCe.113)
~J;t-g-/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item .;..1:7
Meeting Date 9/6/94
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing
a)
PCM-92-17; Consideration of revised
Design Manual - City initiated
b) PCA-95-01; Consideration of amendments
to Section 19.14.582 of the Municipal Code
to allow administrative review of a broader
range of projects subject to design review -
City initiated
8. Resolution J 7'" 1/ '} Repealing the existing Design Manual and
approving the revised Design Manual for the City of Chula Vista
II.
Ordinance ,;J./,t?;J Amending Section 19.14.582 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code to allow for Zoning Administrator design review
of additional categories of projects
Director of Plann~ng ,(/it
City Manager ~ ~~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes_NoX)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
In October 1992, the City Council approved the Permit Streamlining Workplan and
Implementation Schedule which, among other measures, called for (1) revising the City Design
Manual to include more concise and objective design guidelines with additional illustrations,
and (2) providing for administrative (staft) approval of a broader range of projects subject to
design review. These two streamlining proposals are the subject of this public hearing.
The Enviromnental Review Coordinator has determined that the revised Design Manual is
exempt from enviromnental review as a regulatory measure designed to enhance the quality
of the environment (Class 8 exemption under CEQA), and that the Code amendment, as a
procedural amendment, is not subject to CEQA.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution and ordinance approving the
revised Design Manual and amending the Code to allow Zoning Administrator approval of
additional categories of design review projects.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On May 2, 1994, following six
working sessions, the Design Manual Advisorv Committee voted 7-0 to approve and issue the
revised Design Manual and proposed design review process streamlining amendment.
The Design Manual and process streamlining amendment have also been reviewed and
unanimously recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee (by a vote of 5-0
on June 27,1994), the Economic Development Commission (by a vote of 5-0 on July 6,1994),
and the Planning Commission (by a vote of 6-0 on July 27, 1994).
.1..1J" J
Page 2, Item .;L()
Meeting Date 9/6/94
DISCUSSION:
Attached are copies of the present Design Manual and the revised Draft, the text of a Code
amendment which would allow a broader range of projects to be considered by staff rather than
the Design Review Committee, and a revised design review Procedural Guide and Application.
These are the result of design review streamlining proposals originally developed by the
Economic Development Commission and later adopted by the City Council.
The Design Manual Advisory Committee was appointed by Council to work with staff in
developing the revised Manual. The Committee consisted of representatives from the Design
Review Committee, Economic Development Commission, Planning Commission, American
Institute of Architects, American Society of Landscape Architects, Chamber of Commerce, and
three at-large members with recent experience with the design review process. The members'
names are listed on the Acknowledgements page of the Manual.
The Design Manual helps implement the Community and Urban Design component of the Land
Use Element of the Chula Vista General Plan. This component establishes an overall urban
design structure for the planning area which provides an urban design context from which to
view individual projects.
As you will notice, the draft Design Manual is much more detailed than the existing document.
One of the primary criticisms of design review has been that the existing guidelines are too
general, do not give project proponents adequate direction, and are subject to wide
interpretation. Although design review is inherently a subjective process, the revised guidelines
will provide clear direction on design issues and possible solutions.
In addition to revamping the Design Manual, the Council has also directed that the design
review process be streamlined in several different ways. Some of these have already been
accomplished, such as simplifying and accelerating the sign permit approval process, and
accelerating the appeal process for sign and design review.
One of the important streamlining measures called for by Council is to allow for administrative
approval of a broader range of projects which are subject to design review. Administrative or
staff design review is generally preferable from an applicant's point of view because (1) the
fee is less, (2) it takes 3-4 weeks as opposed to 6-8 weeks, and (3) it is less formal and more
predictable.
Presently, staff has the authority to act in the place of the Design Review Committee for signs,
residential additions of two (2) units or less, and commercial and industrial additions which
constitute less than a 25% increase in floor area. The proposal is to double these limits -- to
residential projects of four (4) units or less, and commercial and industrial (or institutional)
additions up to 50% of existing floor area. Also, another category would be added to include
commercial, industrial and institutional buildings up to 20,000 sq. ft. provided they are located
in planned community areas with their own specific design guidelines and private review
process. It was the finding of staff and the Advisory Committee that this category of projects
...21J ., ~
Page 3, Item ~ 0
Meeting Date 9/6/94
is already subject to significant design controls, and that administrative review is adequate to
address any City concerns.
In conjunction with these additional categories of projects which could avail themselves of staff
design review, we are also proposing to process such projects so that a "decision point" is
reached early in the process. In this way, if it becomes apparent that the applicant and staff
cannot reach agreement, the project can be referred on to the Design Review Committee with
little if any loss in time over what would have been required for a project originally scheduled
for the Committee, i.e., 6-8 weeks total.
One of the primary concerns regarding the design review process is that it comes at a time in
the evolution of a project when time is definitely money, and many applicants simply cannot
afford the extra time it takes to appeal their projects on to the next level of decision making.
The change in procedures noted directly above, as well as the accelerated appeals processes
already in place, should go far in addressing this problem.
Also attached is a copy of the revised Design Review Procedural Guide and Application. This
document responds to the additional permit streamlining measure which calls for a "user guide"
which clearly explains design review procedures, and which encourages pre-application
conferences to discuss issues and processing requirements.
We are not asking for a Council vote on the Procedural Guide, but would appreciate Council
review of its contents for clarity and usability. All of the advisory bodies have reviewed and
endorsed the Guide; the only comment coming from the EDC, which suggested that the
Development Permit Processing Agreement (Appendix C) be reproduced in standard size type.
FISCAL IMP ACT: None.
Attachments
1.
2.
3.
\ 4.
5.
6.
p.
Planning Commission
Planning Cammi' mutes
Design RiiiJi mittee Minutes
Economi e opment Commission Minutes
Current D sign Manual
Revised Design Manual "\":1
Design Review Procedural Guide and Application
m:\home\planning\2084.94
dd-;J /:ZO-IO
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-92-17/PCA-95-01
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE
CITY COUNCIL THE REPEAL OF THE EXISTING DESIGN
MANUAL, THE APPROVAL OF THE REVISED DESIGN
MANUAL, AND AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 19.14.582
OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF A BROADER RANGE OF
PROJECTS SUBJECT TO DESIGN REVIEW
WHEREAS, in October 1992, the City Council approved the Permit Streamlining
Workplan and Implementation Schedule; and
WHEREAS, among other measures, said Workplan called for (1) revising the City
Design Manual to include more concise and objective design guidelines with additional
illustrations, and (2) allowing for administrative review of a broader range of projects subject
to design review; and
WHEREAS, on May 2, 1994, following six working sessions, the Design Manual
Advisory Committee appointed by the City Council voted 7-0 to approve and issue the revised
Design Manual and proposed design review process streamlining amendment for consideration
and recommendation by the Design Review Committee, Economic Development Commission
and Planning Commission, and final adoption by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, at a special meeting of the Advisory Committee held on June 20, 1994, the
Committee voted 6-0 to incorporate several additional revisions into the Manual; and
WHEREAS, the revised Design Manual and process streamlining amendment have also
been reviewed and unanimously recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee
(by a vote of 5-0 on June 27, 1994) and by the Economic Development Commission (by a vote
of 9-0 on July 6, 1994); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the revised
Design Manual is exempt from environmental review as a regulatory measure designed to
enhance the quality of the environmental (Class 8 exemption under CEQA), and that the code
amendment, as a procedural amendment, is not subject to CEQA under its General Rule; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said proposed
amendment and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in the city at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely July 27,
1994 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed.
.2()' if
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION,
based on the facts presented at the hearing, recommends that the City Council approve the
attached draft resolution and ordinance repealing the existing Design Manual, approving the
revised Design Manual, and amending Section 19.15.582 of the Municipal Code based on the
fmdings contained therein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City
Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 27th day of July 1994 by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
Commissioners Fuller, Moot, Ray, Salas, Tarantino and Tuchscher
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Commissioner Martin (with notification)
A)(~
William C. Tuchscher II, Chairman
If)~ /2 ~l~
Nancy pley, Slcreta
[M: \home\planning\2063. 94]
JO-5
ATTACHMENT 2
UNOfF=ceAll'ii\~t~Ui[
PC Minutes
-5-
July 27, 1994
EXCERPT FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF 7/27/94
ITEM 4: PUBUC HEARING:
(a)
PCM-92-17; CONSIDERATION OF REVISED
DESIGN MANUAL - City Initiated
(b) PCA-95-01; CONSIDERATION OF
AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 19.14.582 OF
THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF A BROADER
RANGE OF PROJECTS SUBJECT TO DESIGN
REVIEW - City Initiated
Principal Planner Griffin gave the staff report, noting that the revised Design Manual and
amendments to the Code were being proposed in order to assist in streamlining project review.
He noted that both the Manual and the Code amendments had been unanimously endorsed by
the Design Manual Advisory Committee, the Design Review Committee, and the Economic
Development Commission. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission also endorse the
two streamlining proposals.
Commissioner Tuchscher asked what other groups and commissions had reviewed the changes
and what had the result been in both input and approval/disapproval of the documents.
Mr. Griffin replied that the Design Manual Advisory Committee had been specifically formed
to develop the new manual. That Committee had representatives from the Planning
Commission, Economic Development Commission, Design Review Committee, American
Institute of Architects, the American Society of Landscape Architects, and three at-large
members who had experience in processing projects through the City. There were a total of
seven working sessions, and there were many changes made to the staff draft. The proposals
then went to the Design Review Committee who had very little comment and voted unanimously
for approval; then to the Economic Development Commission who also voted unanimously to
recommend approval. There were some comments from the EDC regarding some technical
aspects of the documents and an encouragement that, although there was a feeling the manual
and amendments would go a long way in streamlining the process and there was adequate
flexibility contained there, that staff had to keep in their own minds that in implementing the
manual that they remain flexible.
Commissioner Moot asked if corporate signage had been revisited in the process. Commissioner
Tarantino stated he had requested that of the subcommittee, but the restrictive policy in terms
of signage remained the same.
Commissioner Ray asked what would take precedence--the sign ordinance or the Design Review
Manual. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf answered that the ordinance would take precedence
.2P"J.
PC Minutes
-6-
July 27, 1994
over the manual. The manual was only being adopted by resolution, so it did not rise to the
level of an ordinance, which was the law.
Mr. Griffm stated there was guidance in the manual on using building striping and graphics in
a way which would suggest a sign and which directed people away from that. The language
remained the same in the Code.
Commissioner Moot stated he did not want to see Chula Vista being passed over when some of
the national corporations chose to do business in the area and would not come to Chula Vista
because of the sign ordinance--not being able to update their buildings or incorporate their signs
into the national advertising image.
Mr. Griffm replied that staff tried to direct corporate image architecture away from some of the
more garish themes which may be used on a national basis, but tried to retain some of their
color and logo identification so it clearly remained identifiable as associated with that particular
corporation. Over the last several years, most of the corporations were used to adapting more
to local requirements regarding design, and they have a variety of designs which they could
work with. Staff tried to fit it in within the context of the City regulations.
Commissioner Tuchscher suggested that the Planning Commission and staff take an affirmative
action and revisit the issue of signage in a workshop session, and perhaps make some
recommendation to Council; and that at the workshop, some type of action be taken.
Commissioner Moot concurred.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing
to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Tarantino commended Principal Planner Griffm and Assistant Planner Wolfe for
their diligence and patience in completing a difficult task with a diverse group.
MSUC (Fuller /Moot) 6-0 (Commissioner Martin excused) to approve resolution
PCM-92-17/PCA-95-01 reconunending that the City Council approve the revised Design
Manual and process streamlining Code amendment in accordance with the draft City
Council resolution and ordinance and the fmdings contained therein.
.2t?.. 7
ATTACHMENT 3
-3-
RJNE 27. 1994
DFSIGN REVIEW COMMlnEE
2.
PCM-92-17
Desie-n Manual. PrlV'MUreS Manual.
and Process Streamlinin~ Amendment
Staff Presentation
Steve Griffin advised that this project was before the committee as a part of the required
approval process. He noted that Design Review Committee member Rodriguez, as well
as recent chair Gilman, had both served as members of the advisory committee which
had reviewed the design manual in detail over the past six months. Mr. Griffin stated
that the committee was being asked for a recommendation on the proposed process
streamlining amendment to the zoning code and the design review procedures manual as
well as the design manual.
Mr. Craig Fukuyama of McMillin added that he was comfortable with the revisions that
had been proposed to the draft manual. Member Rodriguez added that it was his sense
that the other developers were now comfortable with the document as well.
Mr. Griffin stated that it had been suggested that the question had been raised as to
whether previously approved projects would comply with the guidelines of the new
design manual. Staff had tested a number of them and found that each did in fact comply
Members briefly discussed required yard areas and landscaping. Member Duncanson
asked for some background on the sideyard setback guidelines; Mr. Griffin pointed out
that setbacks of 7' and 3' provide a more usable sideyard than two S' setbacks. He
added that a zero lot line condition would create even more of a usable sideyard.
Members agreed that they were comfortable with each of the documents under
consideration.
MSUC (Spethman/Rodriguez) (5-0) to approve PCM-92-17 as presented.
.,).I:J - r
ATTACHMENT 4
UNOFFICIAL
MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Conference Rooms 2&3
Public Services Building
Wednesday, July 6, 1994
12:00 Noon
2b. Design Review
Steve Griffin, Principal Planner reported that Council had directed staff to start on a program to
update the design manual and the process of streamlining, that is, to amend the code to allow a
greater number of projects to be considered by staff as opposed to always using the Design
Review Committee. This would be a shorter, less expensive process. He was asking for
endorsement of the Design Review Manual from the EDC.
Mr. Read commended the Committee on the manual. His only concern was to ensure staff's
increased flexibility. He noted they have spent many years trying to maintain a "user friendly"
atmosphere, and with the added flexibility there also has to come a good attitude from staff. He
cautioned that staff should try to get projects through the way the applicant wants it; not the
way staff would like it. He noted efforts on the manual were positive for the City.
Mr. Read also noted he was involved in two projects in the City now involving signs. He has
been watching this carefully and noted that the applicant is starting to experience time delays.
We are not much farther along than we were five years ago.
Ms. Davis commented that she has had positive feedback that the system has changed and that
staff is trying to make efforts to reach out and help the businesses coming to the City. She
feels that staff has made great effort and strides in that area.
Mr. Peter commented that overall, what staff has done is excellent. The Design Review
Procedure Guideline and Application document reads well and is well laid out. He noted that
some attachments are too small and suggested they be re-typed in a larger font.
Mr. Sellgren commented that staff did a professional job in working with the Task Force all
along.
Chair Tuchscher noted the significance of updating the manual. It has not been updated for 15
years and this will be helpful to all applicants. This is a major step in streamlining the
processing. His only comment was that he saw no special considerations for projects of
unusually large scope in the commercial areas, i.e., Rohr Industries or similar facilities. He
asked if there was a way to put in language that brings common sense to special considerations
for projects of unusually large magnitude.
Chair Tuchscher stated that he'd like to see added somewhere in the manual language which
would recognize that special consideration would be given to large scale projects of a certain
magnitude and scope because the design elements going into a building like Rohr for example,
are totally unique. He felt that rather than running on the assumption that a large project will
get special consideration for design issues, it should be stated somewhere.
Mr. Sellgren added that larger scale projects would naturally receive greater scrutiny and
flexibility but agreed it is always better to have this in writing.
Ms. Davis pointed out there is general language related to flexibility in the introduction to the
manual.
Mr. Griffin directed the Commission's attention to language in the commercial and industrial
sections but stated that if it was the Commissions desire, staff would be happy to draft some
additional language to be included in the commercial section.
.2/J - c;
Member Read noted the language in the commercial section regarding flexible solution and
it was generally agreed that the existing language appeared adequate.
Chair Tuchscher stated that the EDC should take a lot of pride in bringing this manual to fruition
and hoped it would not get lost in procedural and administrative work. Everyone who was
involved in the project should be commended, specifically Mr. Sellgren and Ms. Davis for taking
such an active role. He requested that Ms. Gulbransen note in her press release the EDC's
involvement in this project. He thanked Mr. Griffin for his time.
MSC (Davis/Peter) to accept the Design Manual, Draft Procedures Manual and Process
Streamlining proposals and recommend approval to Council (5-0-4; Patrick, Lebron absent; 2
vacancies).
.2t),/()
~~ Li:)
ATTACHMENT 5
The Design Manual
! of the City of
Chula Vista
. .
,
!
~."(~ ~:~! III
~~~\~~..,~ <<~~ ,..
.. ... .... ~ ~ ~~.. .D ~Gq(~.
~~.~ ,~..;~, . --
~. ,,~~~ ~~ :::IE
I.
I
I
I
I
I
. 020~//
Approved by City Planning Commission Resolution PCA-7B-1, September 14, 1977
Adopted by City Council Resolution No. 8876, November 1, 1977
The Design Manual of the City of Chu1a Vista
c2tJ- /2
i'
.
"In faClt there is an art of :relationship just as there
is an art of arohiteotuPe. Its purpose is to take an
the elements that go to oreate the environment:
buiZ.dings. trees. nature. water. traffio advertisements
and so on. and to Tileave them together in suoh a way that
az.ama is re'Leased."
- Gordon CuZ'Len
in the Conoise TOfiInBoape
Preparers of the Design Manual of the
City of Chula Vista August, 1977
Administration
D. J. Peterson, AICP
Norman G. Williams, AICP
Director of Planning
Assistant Director of Planning
Professional and Technical Assistance
Daniel ~J. Pass, AICP
Principal Planner/Formulator
of the Design Manual
Principal Planner
Associate Planner
Assistant Planner
Landscape Architect
Illustrator
Kenneth G. Lee
Stephen S. Griffin, AICP
Michael L. Welch, AICP
Jack Nakawatase, ASLA
Konrad D. Klem
020'-) ]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
II . SUMMARY
A. Goal
B. General Objectives
C. Statements of Policy
D. Principles and Standards
1 . General
2. Environmental
3. Circulation and Parking
E. Principles and Standards/Commercial Development
(Addendum Exhibit A)
III. GRAPHIC STUDIES
IV. GLOSSARY AND LEXICON
V. CONCLUSION
VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY
cJP~Ji
1.
The DesiQn Manual of the City of Chula Vista
I. INTRODUCTION
It is with considerable pleasure that the City Council and the City Planning Commis-
sion present The DesiQn Manual of the City of Chula Vista to +~e residents, subdivi-
ders, and developers of the Chula Vista Planning Area.
The Design Manual embodies the official design policy of the City of Chula,Vista,
and has been especially prepared to guide the Chula Vista Design Review Board dur-
ing its consideration of developmental proposals governed by this municipality's
complex R-3 zonal regulations. However, notwithstanding the Manual's R-3 orien-
tation, its goal, objectives, and criteria have purposefully been crafted in a
broad enough language to eventually govern commercial and industrial land uses,
if and when Chula Vista's architectural-control program is extended thereto.
This extension would merely entail the Manual's augmentation by specific, pre-
announced commercial and/or industrial standards.
The Design Manual is an urban design or townscape plan, and addresses the arrange-
ment of spatial relationships. While urban design involves urban appearance and
amenity, and, under certain circumstances, even covers the application of cosmetics
or urban decoration, it is primarily comprehensive in scope. In short, urban design
is an integral part of the structure of a given city, and must be applied on a total
urban-scene basis. The Manual, therefore, is founded upon general principles, and
not exact requirements.
Professional planners, confronted by major social, economic, and physical problems,
have tended to neglect the concept of urban design during the post World War II
era. Unfortunately, this neglect is patently discernible in the high-density resi-
dential areas and commercial enclaves in many American cities and suburban communi-
ties, and has adversely affected the livability and lov~ility thereof. This neglect,
d.l/ r )5
2.
it should be noted, has not received the endorsement of the general public, which
tended to question the supportability of the professional planner's failure to pro-
,
mote the order and beauty of the American city. It was actually public discontent
which forced planners to reemphasize the technical core of their discipline--urban
design.
. The Design Manual'of the Cityof-Chula Vista is a comprehensive, medium-range plan.
Its provisions implement the long-range, comprehensive, and general policies and ob-
jectives of the Chula Vista General Plan, and its several constituent elements.
While the Manual and the R-3 zonal regulations are on parity, the former should be
construed to be an extension of the latter. Finally, the Desiqn Manual of the City
of Chula Vista applies to all parts of this municipality, except the Town Centre
Redevelopment Project Area, which has its own design manual and design review board.
I1. SUMMARY
The Design Manual is calculated to provide theChula Vista Planning Area fundamental
policy for the establishment and preservation of good townscape and urban design.
The Manual is subdivided into the following sections, each of which is an integral
part of the subject plan.
1. Introduction
II. SUIIIlla ry
A. Goal
B. General Objectives
C. Statements of Policy
D. Principles and Standards
Ill. Glossary and Residential Planning Lexicon
IV. Graphic Study
V. Conclusion
;)..(/ :- / t
3.
VI. Bibliography
A. Goal
The goal of the Design Manual is the comprehensive improvement of the order,
amenity, and spatial relationships of the City of Chula Vista and the Chula Vista
Planning Area.
B. General Objectives
The general objectives of the Design Manual are:
1. The establishment of urban design policy for the development and rede-
velopment of the several R-3 zones of the Chula Vista Planning Area.
2. The establishment of an urban design vocabulary for the promotion of
good townscape planning in Chula Vista's developing high-density resi-
dential neighborhoods and subneighborhoods.
3. The establishment of a basic design plan which could be readily extended
to Chula Vista's commercial and industrial areas.
4. The provision of policy and critieria for the guidance of the Design Re-
view Board.
C. Statements of Policy
1. The Design Manual shall be the precise plan for the arrangement of spa-
tial relationships; the improvement and conservation of the townscape;
the promotion of asethetic quality; and, the development and furtherance
of the suburban amenity of the high-density residential areas, and even-
tually, if and when determined by City Council, the commercial and in-
dustrial complexes of the City of Chula Vista and the territories within
its sphere-of-influence.
2. The Design Manual shall constitute the basic design parameters and voca-
bulary for the development and redevelopment of the R-3 zones, and of the
other zones to which its purview is extended.
3. The Design Manual is a supportive, companion plan of the zoning regula-
oZ~r c:2(}~J J
4.
tions of the City of Chula Vista, and is governed by the General Plan
thereof.
4. The Design Review Conmittee shall not authorize any development which
fails to conform substantially to the Principles and Standards of the
Design Manual.
D. Principles and Standards
1 . General
a. The height, bulk, mass and proportion of all structures should be
compatible with the site, as well as in scale with adjacent structures
on the adjoining properties in the area.
b. A project proposed in an area deemed to be in a state of decline
or blight infestation shall be developed in a manner which will esta-
blish and improve the aesthetic quality and character of the area.
c. Whenever the natural topography contributes to the amenity and util-
ity of a proposed project, it shall be preserved in a manner which en-
hances and accentuates the project. Modifications to the topography
will be permitted only when it can be determined that they will contri-
byte to the amenity and utility of the project.
d. Innovative and imaginative design and architecture should be en-
couraged. Inappropriate, bizarre, and monotonous design and architec-
ture should be avoided. Variations in building details, form, and si-
ting should be employed to create visual inte.rest. The architectural
theme employed on a particular building shall normally be executed on
all exterior surfaces.
e. Materials and finishes should be selected for architectural harmony,
aesthetic quality, durability and ease of maintenance.
f. Exterior colors, which are harmonious and contribute to the aesthetic
quality of the project, should be selected. Flourescent paints and gar-
eUJ-/r
5.
ish colors should be avoided.
g. Building setbacks shall be in scale with the buildings, and should
be landscaped and arranged in a manner which improves the associated
streetscape, and the amenity of the involved site's development.
h. Driveway locations and onsite traffic circulation shall be so
designed as to promote convenience and safety.
i. Landscaping shall meet the standards of the Landscape Manual of
the City of Chula Vista, and shall enhance the architectural features
of the project, strengthen vistas, break up large asphalt areas, and
accent points of interest. Where practicable, existing trees and
other native plants shall be preserved and included in the planning
and design of the site.
j. An inviting atmosphere and appearance shall be created in pedes-
trian oriented areas through the use of landscaping, walls, fencing,
seating, plazas, statues, fountains, and other design features.
k. Parking areas should be screened from view by the use of land-
scaping, walls, buildings, or other innovative and decorative concepts.
1. Service and storage yards, and other areas which tend to be unsightly
.
shall be screened from view by the use of walls, fencing, landscaping,
buildings, or combinations thereof. Utility boxes and other exterior
equipment shall be either enclosed, screened, or so located as to be
obscure.
m. All rooftop equipment and structures shall be screened from view.
Said screening shall be designed to be architecturally part of the
bui 1 di ng.
n. Straight-line building facades, if extended for an appreciable
distance, can produce a feeling of "massiveness," and a dull town-
cJ-O~/7
6.
scape. If the subject facades are interrupted by building pro-
jections, bay windows, and/or balconieS, interesting shadow lines,
intricate visual patterns, and pleasant landscaping, beautiful en-
claves can be created.
o. Exterior lighting shall be designed to enhance the architecture
of the building and landscape, and shall be restrained in color and
brilliance. Light standards. and fixtures shall be architecturally
compatible, and scaled to the buildings.
p. Identification and directory signs should manifest a high degree
of artistic order and taste, as well as legibility. Where practicable,
innovative artistic graphics should be employed in lieu of standard-
ized, commercial-type signs.
q. Dwelling groups, as defined in this work, require careful and
adroit planning, especially where new buildings are proposed for loca-
tion in juxtaposition to. existing buildings on the same property. Group
dwellings should be designed in a manner which portrays a unifi~d develop-
mental composition, and not a helter-skelter or turmoil of buildings.
2. Environmental
a. Multiple family dwelling developers should place cardinal emphases
on the protection of residential privacy. Privacy requires sensitive
structural and landscaping design, and effective sound-proofing. It
is also dependent upon the selection of proper building, screening,
and landscaping materials.
b. The design of multi-family developments should be coordinated
with the design of adjoining and adjacent developments. The said
design should be consistent with the standards of good site planning
and spatial relationships. A multi-family development is an important
urban design feature, and should augment the quality of the townscape
in which it is situated. ,)JJ--- J.O
7.
c. The landscape of a multi-family dwelling should be oriented
towards the establishment and maintenance of a high order of on-and-
off-site environmental and aesthetic quality.
d. The interior design of all multiple units should promote good
circulation; adequate lighting and ventilation; effective heating;
and noise protection. The said design should minimize "household"
hazards, and optimize energy conservation.
e. A minimum of 15% of each building site upon which a multi-family
project is developed should be devoted to landscaping and outdoor
recreation. The space devoted to landscaping may be improved with
textured flooring, fountains, ponds, kiosks, and sculpture, as well
as plant material.
f. Where practicable, large multi-family developments should provide
a variety of dwelling unit sizes and arrangements.
g. Multi-family dwelling developments should meet the comprehensive
residential needs of their occupants. They should have adequate
social, indoor and outdoor recreational, storage, parking, and laun-
dry facilities. The establishment of game rooms, children's play
areas, meeting rooms, and roof gardens should be encouraged where
appropriate.
h. Condominium, community, and cooperative apartments appeal to
residents who prefer to own their units. These residents tend to
be more permanently domiciled in their developments, and therefore,
tend to require more amenities. Such residential developments
therefore, should be held to higher environmental standards.
i. Multiple-family dwelling developments should provide their
tenants private as well as common open space. Private open space
may take the form of patios, balconies, courtyards
XJrcl/
(atri a), or
,
8.
gardens.
j. The front and exterior side yard setback should not constitute
more than 50% of the usable open space required by the zoning ordin-
ance.
k. Studio, one-bedroom, and all other units located above the first
story should be served by a minimum of 60 square feet of private usable
open space. This requirement should be increased to 80 square feet for
first story (ground floor), two-bedroom units, and 100 square feet for
first story (ground floor), three-bedroom units.
1. All common and private open space should be protected from noise
infiltration by 1ine-of-sight fences, walls, and/or barriers.
m. Indoors-outdoors integration can be promoted in garden apartments
by the use of large windows and sliding glass doors in conjunction with
patios, balconies, and courtyards. The said windows and doors, however,
should be effectively shuttered or draped in order to prevent substantial,
nighttime energy losses.
n. Common open space should be provided in large tracts, and not frag-
mented. Large tracts of open space can be imaginatively landscaped,
and economically maintained. Without sufficient area, open space cannot
manifest scope or sweep.
3. Circulation and Parking
a. Onsite circulation should be designed to promote adequate police
and fire protection; and, to facilitate postal, delivery, moving and
trades services.
b. Parking areas should be landscaped with trees.
c. The layout of offstreet parking areas and onsite circulation systems
should place emphasis on:
1) Convenience end proximity to the units served.
~~~
9.
2) Safety.
3) Screening and separation from common space and recreation
areas.
d. In multiple family developments, it shall be considered undesirable
to l~cate offstreet parking areas between the buildings and the street.
In cases where this design solution is allowed by the Design Review
Board, the parking area shall be heavily screened by a combination of
plant materials and decorative masonry walls. Parking shall not be
allowed within the front or exterior side yard areas.
e. All parking or maneuvering areas which are perpendicular to building
walls should be separated therefrom by minimum 3 foot wide landscaped
areas.
~-~J
EXHIBIT A
Commercial Principles Addendum to the Design Manual
of the City of Chula Vista
E. Principles and Standards/Commercial Development
1. Neighborhood and Subneighborhood Shopping Centers.
a. The land use patterns, circulation, forms and spatial relationships
of neighborhood an~ subneighborhood shopping centers should be harmonious and
consonant with the residential area they serve. The nature, character, and ..
design of the residential areas should determine the architectural theme,
landscape, building arrangement, and signing of the mercantile centers in
question.
b. Neighborhood and subneighborhood shopping centers should be unobtrusive,
low in profile and building intensity, and probably casual or informal in
theme. Massive buildings, garish color schemes, kitsch art, and extensive
signing are out of place in these centerS.
c. Neighborhood and subneighborhood centers, where practicable, should
be reflective of their neighborhood in design. This concept is consistent
with the need to separate vehicular and pedestrian traffic and tends to create
a "village atmosphere." The neighborhood concept, which usually is based upon
a mall, arcade, or patio form, tends to promote effective landscaping, customer
convenience, and a pleasant environment for shopping.
d. Where feasible, customer traffic should not be mixed with truck-servic~
traffic. Furthermore, customer parking should be both convenient and ample.
Employee parking, which is often long-term parking, should be established on
the periphery of the center in order to make customer parking, which is usually
short-term in nature, more convenient.
e. Neighborhood and subneighborhood shopping facilities have captive
markets, and therefore do nc.t require ext(:nsive signing or external outdoor
advertising. The appurtenant signs employed in these centers should be solely
-2C"~ 1
-2-
A-2
oriented towards "shop identification."
Artistic graphics. wood-carved
signs. gold leaf window.signs, and symbolic hanging signs are especially
appropriate on the neighborhood and subneighborhood scenes.
f. While large shopping center pylon signs were popular in the 1950's
and 1960's, they are a principl~ source of visual pollution in suburbia,
and are not appropriate for subneighbornood centers. This principle' is
also applicable to most freestanding signs. On the other hand, low profile
monument si9ns tend to be consistent with the tenets of good urban design,
and can provide adequate shopping center identification.
g. About 15% of the gross area of a neighborhood or subneighborhood
center should be devoted to landscaping. The required landscaping may
take the form of decorative flooring, masonry walls, fountains, sculpture,
or clusters of mall furniture, as well as plant ~aterial.
h. The extensive use of trees within and along the periphery of the
centers in question is urged. Trees provide beauty and improve environ-
mental quality. They also soften the impact of commercial activity upon
shoppers and local residents. Tree selection requires professional advice.
As a general rule, however, deciduous .trees and non-needle evergreens are
best able to resist air pollution and, therefore, are recommended for use
in commercial areas.
i. Since neighborhood and subneighborhood centers are situated in close
proximity to the residential areas they serve, commercial-residential
buffers are essential. Where centers abut directly upon residential lands,
a ~inimu~ 20 foot w1de landscaped buffer should be established on the real
property of the former. Architectural walls or decorative fences should
be used to protect local residents from the noise and visual impact of
commercial parking lots.
~
2t)/.). [-;
A-3
-3-
j. Neighborhood and subneighborhood shopping centers should be designed
in a manner which protects local residents from the commercial noise pro-
duced by air compressors, public address systems, truck deliveries, trash
service, etc.
2. General Commercial Projects and Centers.
Townscape Principles
a. New buildings. and structures should be compatible in scale to
adjacent buildings, structures, and land use.
b. The elevations of large buildings should be composed of staggered
planes where such staggering would be consistent with the involved archi-
tectural scheme. Staggered elevations can produce interesting shadow
patterns and preclude the dullness often associated with straight lines.
c. The exterior elevations of buildings should be treated with natural
materials and rendered in white or muted tones. Garish colors and graphics
should be avoided.
d. Buildings should be sited in a manner which exposes their qualit~tive
features to pedestrian traffic, and which obscures mechanical equipment,
venting, storage area$, trash and garbage compounds and containers, etc.,
therefrom.
e. Signs, posts, railings, and other accessory structures should be
coordinated with onsite and adjacent buildings and land use. Vertical
structures punctuate the horizontal sweep of their sites and should, through
. their function or beauty, make an important statement.
Landscape Principles
a. An optimum of 15% of the building site of each new project should be
landscaped. A minimum of 10% of each parking lot or enclave sh~u1d be devoted
to landscaping.
~~'2~
-4-
A-4
b. The landscape of commercial projects should not be confined to plant
material. Textured flooring, masonry, fountains, water features, exterior
works of fine art, and exterior furniture should be used to promote a project's
visual interest, variety and amenity.
c. Plant material should be used for soil, water and energy conservation.
d. Trees should be used to soften the impact of hard surfaces.
e. A large percentage of the trees of a commercial project should be
deciduous. Deciduous trees provide cool relief in the summer and early autumn
and a filtered warmth during the balance of the year. Deciduous trees can
endure urban life and may reduce the level of photochemical smog production
relative thereto.
f. Where feasible, trees with unique structural characteristics should
be planted. These trees should improve the aesthetic quality of commercial
areas and complement adjacent urban forms.
g. The use of fountains, water sculpture, and other recycling water
features provide a cooling effect with respect to the urban environment,
and visual relief from the impact of hard surfaces. The use of these
features should be encouraged by the Design Review Committee.
h. Planters and tree wells should be designed to protect the plants
they accommodate and to promote the aesthetic quality of their surroundings.
i. All plant materials should be selected. arranged. and installed in
accordance with sound horticultural and landscape architectural practices.
j. ~~ll furniture should be carefully coordinated with the landscaping
and works of fine art which share its setting. This coordination requires
that each mall, enclosure, plaza. or open space be planned as a single urban
design composition, and not on an element-by-element basis.
>>~?
A-5
-5-
Sign Criteria
a. Signs should be designed as supportive elements to land use. They
should be used primarily to identify businesses, professional offices and
public and quasi-public facilities.
b. Signs should be compatible with the nature, character, and design of
the locale and land uses they. serve.
c. Good towns cape requires that signs manifest artistic order and taste.
Sleazy or obtrusive signing should be avoided.
d. In their selection of signs, property owners and tenants should place
considerable emphasis upon color, harmony, size, shape, texture, materials
and character.
e. Signs should be characterized by restraint. Where practical and
practicable, artistic graphics and fine art displays should be used in lieu
of "commercial" signs.
f. Kitsch graphics, animated signs, or slapdash posters should,in general,
be disapproved.
Parking Design
a. All parking areas (excluding ingress and egress) should be screened
from public rights-of-way and adjoining properties by low fences, walls, build-
ings, plantings, or a combination thereof.
b. Park.lngareas should be designed for public convenience and, where
feasible, should be directly accessible from two streets, or a street and an
allen.
c. In major commercial centers, pedestrian ways within parking areas
should be protected from vehicular movements by landscaped areas, curbs, or
bollards.
~t)/;L ~
A-6
-6-
d. Parking bays should be separated from buildings by landscaped areas
or protected walkways.
e. The mass of large parking areas should be ameliorated through the
employment of landscaping, textural embellishments, or intervening works of
fine art.
f. Directional signs and graphics should be used to promote public
safety and convenience.
g. Loading, unloading, and delivery service operations should be
preplanned. Parking layouts should clearly indicate that these operations
would not adversely affect customer parking or access.
h. The plans of major commercial centers should be responsive to the
physical requirements of public transportation and should provide the
requisite pedestrian ways, bus stops, benches, and shelter.
i. Secure bicycle parking facilities should be provided.
~~~~
III. GRAPHIC STUDIES
Photographs and plans illustrative of the
urban design principles embodied in the text.
;2t? - J 0 ,
10.
r.
GARDEN APARTMENTS IN BONITA
o Well-landscaped courtyards.
o Rustic. timbered exteriors augment the suburban
order and pleasantness of the subject development.
o Views are oriented towards courtyards.
/
,
, ll'~i~"l'1tll T l~ . ..
~ '111j~'.' .
" ~"'~
... ,.
'. ..-..:~..",....
. ... . ._~"\- ~ ~ ~
[ ._-~'"",:1"'" ..-
......~~Jt.. 4....
I
- .:....~.-:...~-- -----
A
'1
i
..20 ,- ;5 /
B
GARDEN APARTMENTS IN CENTRAL CHULA VISTA
(COUNTRY CLUB VILLIAGE)
o Formal landscaping; urban setting.
o Manicured malls, ornamental mall furniture.
o Development's internal orientation creates a pre-
cinctual or "oasis" order.
(
.,.......'"':~....;,.....
. d.~\\?:~~..::~.> /
.
f~~~.~:~~-:~-_.
. . -,.',,-",-..- ................ .J~
..,..:..;..... . - .,-- -~_.....-
. .
'--'-
':"':'~~-"-'"
&:
>>~3?-
,.
c
:2tJ / J;;
D
GARDEN CONJOMINIUMS AT TREEHAVEN
o Formal. rectangular "clustering".
o Internal orientation.
o Common open space creates a pleasant. suburban
setti ng.
o Private patios promote an integrated "interior-
exterior" lifestyle.
7,;;- ,. .~.."..;.....,..~ .
...: ~-~~.......~
i;....;f't ~"':..~,';'~."7..1.:. -'
~.._:;v:~..~:-.,...
,..'<~~;it;.7'
t~~...~.::. .
r "".#fl-'-
;~"f-""
.~
Xv37
J.
E
APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT AT 5TH AVENUE & FLOWER
STREET, IN CHULA VISTA
o Urbane, brick development along a geometric garden court,
from "Early Chula Vista".
o Sculptured hedges and shrubs complete this pleasant reminder
of halcyon days.
(
,
.---.-
.. "I __. -." ..;.-
l-~~~:::~"- -- - -
.---
JO--35
F
McINTOSH ARMS/CHULA VISTA
o Excellent street orientation.
o Order and amenity of apartment project enhanced by
careful siting of trees. and extensive use of wood.
!
,
"
~ ".'" l
.J
. .-.,
dtJr 3'"
,
,.
G
BRI GHl'.;OOD/YORK
o North Chula Vista dwelling group, which effectively com-
bines old and new structures.
o Project's walkway pattern promotes privacy.
,"--
i
I
I
I
..
"
. '~_.-.-
"--..::'::.::' ':;-~-".:'~".;:':"..~:."
.. .---- - ------... -- --_... - .-
, ~ .... ;, ". -" ..'
.-....._".._~~_::::.;,,:,.;:.:~~~;..':...~2:.......~":. ~." .-,:.
d.fl~37
H
TO\~NHOUSES
o Moderately-priced townhouses are served by ample
common and private open space.
o The unrelieved facadal pattern, and the poor balance
of water, walkways, and plant materials detract from
a townscape which could h~ve been excellent.
~
'. -;...
: ~~i~~~~~~~~~<-. ....: :-~ . ,,"_
'1IL~~~-q~~..,*,:"",~~~_;_,,,,_:-,:,_,_,_,-,_,,,,, ~..'-____.. .
-"~:~,k.;.4.:':'''f~~~:;'-~~'~~~~~~'~::~~::__...;_~,. _._' _ _ -
-.~' ......~....~~.I""'..." .'I;....-#.-.._.,~..-..~...._.#.:.~,. '.'''.-.
"'::?:1~fN,~~;~~t]~~~F~f~~0~~~~~~~;:;:~"~:::~:_:'
i
l
" ,
F-\
I
, ..=:
~. .;. rrl~ ''(~':.~> '.-
~~ . . ...4_
'~t~7'\;.-m _-~..
;,~I'*~~~' ~:;;...~. ='~-~"I' ~. ...~"
, . .:~. ~ .,~ .J-.- ~ .,". .
:. ~."i' ... ',~Ilr l[....'..~ .e... "
.a ;(:lIl~ . _,. . .....J_I'"".:.. k_'
. .Ii.~r~ .-..;......,""'k;.":/tC..,..'i.......,. ~ :'.
....,."'"'~ ....1 'to&'...~. !._. o;,;;,t.'~'
. "', :;...,---- "S"..... . ,.". .......toW,;. ~ .~~
....~...,..':..~ .;"I-.~"";.:,.. .Io;:\!" ,
" .;. "':'''~~'' ...~ - ~ .:...:~..
-~. ~..~~--~ ...;.-.......
. ~~....~ ,,:'roA ...
. -
~~._~~"":h_ :~t ~ _~., -
,.. + ""\"')'>0.--. ':.0-.'_
: . ~ ~.A:~!J' - ,-:...~. -.~. .:.:. '..
f";' .~. -. , L. '" -:- =--.:~..;::;::;::
-,:,<'~-:~" '".. :0(. ."J~.~...' ...::.;:-.~......:"'S'~'
..._....;,I;:-:Jt.,.._.~~......"..: ,-.... ...- .....41-.. ~~
....~.~~~~.. . ~~.' ..., ".'- ....-~.
., _~~_~, ... .,._ ...>:, _~" . 01 .....................~
~~~.. ,,,_.. a-~~ 4.:.:aw., ~ . ...-' ....;c:.o;..
~_....... ~. __" .... 11\.'1f'.~_'. 1#... ~ -. _
'~.....~:--"Si.::"#t'~ r;:.~......~......,- _. ~....( s.
__~.;:..... 1- ._.._-,,~~~~........._ .~_' hi
02L/~ )g/
f
I
fr' 31
APARTMENTS
o Apartment units with a view - a parking lot.
;;..
~
(
(
i
. '..
.
~." ....
~
. '.. ;:::;;:J: ~'.., ~;:~
~~~>.
...~-~,
;;:tt<,=::.L .
.:.,....... ..iII'
1"c'...~...,;:>:Jw
.._r......... .....,,;r:
o Same project, but dwelling units overlook landscaped mall.
o Landscape plan is inadroit. Broad, harsh concrete walks,
sparse tree planting, and over use of "pickle weed" fail
to promote aesthetic quality, amenity, or effective urban
order. d2..0 r L./O
J
K
MORE APARTMENTS
o Apartment project characterized by a lack of architectural
integrity.
o Sterile, massive elevations create a "prison" appearance.
o Project requires an inordinate commitment to landscape
architecture.
o Elevated building pads emphasize the project's aesthetic
problems.
,
,. ,
~"-
~\ . .'
.~ ~ ,
:,; . .'; :i ;; ,.~~ :'-1.
'~". . . ., &..l.! ',_ ....'" .-", .. .....
': ~~'.. ~~~..:,x,:t~:,,:\('.x<~:\::;;''':~''''l';'';;~' : .... .
';;'n~;';sr;?;P ;~. ';'\~~~~i~~~:.:...~~\\f':;J;.~~5-~~~)j:.~~:..~'~":.}~'~';'~=:.':~~.:";'~. -: ''';.It__J,';r ",,-.-
~' '/ , :_ ......:-~~~~~..,""t~.. ,,\'. _l-\:~'_>"~-"";;;"'''''' -". . ~ ."--
r-.,.; ,# - ';..J'~~-xv~-"'~c""'~ .........:~,{r......-. ~
. _ ,.,~ .._::' I, '7z~' ~'.t.;..l.:~ ~\~,',3-~'~':;,;\"'"'/~' " . . . .-~.--
._.4"r-="'........~.....~ 1 .,~_._j;'~-:i . ~~. --.-
:~~~~i
-.
;Jo-J/J
KENSINGTON PARK
o High-density townhouse project, based upon quadraplex
plan.
o Excellent spatial relationships, well-landscaped commons,
and architectural integrity enable Kensington Park to
refute the popular myth that "high density" and good
urban design are irreconcilable.
,
,.-...:
~-i~
....,.... '-'(j
~'if.if .
-- ~..
.::-.!~~:.~
- m:nu
-::::,; -- ;.__;11
1 -n _lI._..Jl....
. -'
.....:..'~..;~._-..- .
-....~." '.'~/r
. . "::;:rr;E~ ~p . . , _
~ . t ..._ .~!,' .
"" .J.' ~'.'" - . ..:;.
. ."....r';a;. .J,;. .'.,. :~"".
.. . .~._~~", ". -- .'-~':-
~..l_.. .~~
_ '.. __ 'rl ':"_~.' ;.',
...~""7.
.,.. ....s,........
(
I
I
. ,.'
. .-. ........,
. '"'_t'" ".,.,..- - ". '-
.:., ....._.~.:......:..4.~
. -- - .., -.-.
'. .' . c.:: ..-.
-. .-'., l;.~ ~;.o .,.
._-.--
~ - .
c20 -- c/ .;2-
L
,.
I
tl
POMEROY GREEN, SANTA CLAF\A
CLAUDE OAKLAND-ARCHITECT
. GROSS DENSITV. 12 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE
. DEVELCP/v/ENT COULD BE CONSTRUCTED UNDER
THE \'R-j-L" REGULATIONS OF C4ULA VISTA.
c2i;-1(}
-
H,~,NCOCK SQUl\RE, LOS ANGELES
DESIGNED BY RICHARD NAGY MARTIN,
A!:?CHITECTS /J. PLANNERS
.511OWNHOUSES ON 2.4 ACRES, IN THE WILS/-IIRE
DISTRICT OF LOS ANGELES.
. DRLj/v'A TIC ARCHI TE; TURE AND DIVERSIRED L-WDSCA?/NG
ENABLE THE DEVELOP/v/ENT TO ACHIEVE CONS/DER-4B!....E
ORDER, DESPITE ITS hIGH DE/JSITY. L J
. >>/17
I
11.
IV.
GLOSSARY AND LEXICON OF RESIDENTIAL PLANNING TERMS
1. Aesthetics. Aesthetics is the branch of philosophY which deals with the
perceptual values of truth, goodness, and beauty. While truth is absolute,
and goodness is comparative, beauty is conceptual, and therefore tends to be
both controversial and subjective.
Despite the difficulties inherent in the development and application of work-
ing standards of beauty, the said development and application are prerequisite
to sound urban planning.
2. Amenity. Amenity originally meant "pleasantness," but has been expanded
to include "convenience". British town planners have so overworked this ex-
ce11ent word that in England it is virtually synonymous with "good town and
country.planning". However, for the purposes of the Design Manual amenity is
confi ned to "pleasantness" and "conveni ence".
3. Community Apartment Project. A development under which the real property
is held in common, and each constituent apartment is held under a right of
exclusive occupancy. The undivided interest in the land and the exclusive
right of occupancy are inseparable.
4. Condominium. A development under which there is an undivided fee owner-
ship of the underlying land, and separate fee ownerships of the airspaces
which encompass the living or working areas or premises. The condominium
method of holding land has long been recognized in nations governed by the Civil
Law. FHA, which experienced this concept in Puerto Rico, is substantially re-
sponsible for its introduction into the United States.
5. Cosmetics. Aesthetic quality is a basic consideration upon which all good
city, regional, community or site plans are partially founded. Where appearance
or aesthetic quality is applied to a design as an afterthought or on post-design
basis, it is derisively called "cosmetics." Kevin Lynch feels that the term is
>>-"(5 .
12.
unjust. In Principles and Practice of Urban Planning, at page 249, he observes
that "cosmetics is an honorable art, when you have decided you.can do no more
than change the visible surface of a thing." Notwithstanding this observation
urban cosmetology too often attempts to substitute adornment for good urban
desi gn.
6. Dwelling GrouP. .A dwelling group consists of two or more residential buildings,
located on a single building. site. The said buildings may consist of old single-
family dwellings and new, back-yard single-family dwellings, duplexes, or apartment
houses, or combinations thereof. Some of the most orderly high-density residential
projects are dwelling groups. Notwithstanding this factor, dwelling groups, con-
sisting of old single-family dwellings and new duplexes or apartment houses, have
created a towns cape problem within the older neighborhoods of Chula Vista. .Sound
urban design can preclude the extension of this problem.
7. Flooring. The surface treatment of the paths, walks, stairways, streets,
and closures of the city.
Asphalt, concrete, tile, stone, timber, brick, gravel, and carpet are some
examples of material used for flooring.
8. Garden Apartments. This term was originally applied to the post. World War 1
garden-court apartments, which were based upon a central-courtyard orientation.
The term is currently used in connection with low-rise, multi-family residential
uses which are surrounded by, or interlaced with landscaped open space.
Where dwellings are arranged amidst large concentrations of c~on open space,
the project is called a "tOOJllon green development", or a "cluster garden sub-
division".
g. Landscape Manual. A comprehensive guide which contains the City of Chula
Vista's landscaping and irrigation standards. The manual'sprimary.objectives
are good landscaping design, and effective erosion control. The City Council
recently adopted broad revisions to the Landscape Manual.~~~p?
I
I,'
13.
10. Order. The regular and harmonious arrangement of the natural and man-
made environments. The antonym of order, as used by professional planners, is
confusion.
11. Patio (Atrium/Garden Court) House. .A semi-detached owe1ling which is built
around one or more interior or enclosed courtyards. Patio houses, now as in an-
cient Rome, are usually developed in banks or clusters of townhouses or row
houses~ The need for land economy, and the rebirth of the urban design'concept
of bringing the "outdoors indoor" and the "indoors outdoor", have substantially
increased the popularity of the patio house.
12. Residential Density. Residential density refers to the average number of
dwelling units per unit area.
Gross residential density is based upon the area of the involved building site,
plus the area of traversing streets and alleys, and one-half of the area of
abutting streets, This density standard is traditionally used by advance plan-
ners and new town builders.
Net residential density merely involves the area of the building site, and is a
standard most often used by zoning officials, current city planners, and developers
of projects which are situated in substantially urbanized territories. As a rule
.
of thumb, the net density of a parcel of land is usuaHy, in suburban Southern
California, about 20% higher than the said parcel's gross density. While resi-
dential density determines the texture and structure of a cORll1unity, the practice
of labeling high density as "bad" and low density as "good" is unwarranted.
Density should be a reflection of the general plan's 1and'use and spatial poli-
cies and proposals, and its application should be governed thereby.
The "density game" has also spawned planning myths, such as "high residential
density is prerequisite to urbanity," and "low density increases the cost of
government."
e1V---t/?
14.
13. Row Houses. A group of single-family dwellings or apartment
houses located along a continued line, and not separated by side
yards. Row houses usually form an "architectural whole."
14. Scale. This term generally denotes relative size. Architects
and planners strive to devel~p designs ~nder which their proposed
structures and land uses are harmonious and proportionately conso-
nant with adjacent structures and land uses. When this $tate of
harmony and consonancy is reached, it is said that the proposed
project is in "scale".
Architects, landscape architects, and urban planners also strive to
provide their projects "hu~an scale." While some designers, inclu-
ding LeCorbusier, have actually advocated tha~ the proportions of
the human body should serve as the model for architectural and urban
designs, the prevailing view among townscape specia1ists is that
urban projects should be sized and proportioned to the life style,
aspirations, expectations, and circumstances of the people to be
served, and not necessarily to their physical characteristics.
In summary, human scale is a subjective factor, and requires artistic
application.
15. Texture. Texture can be defined as the identifying quality
or character of the structure of an urban or rural area. Ci ty .
planners primarily regard "texture" as an expression of density,
and prefer the use of the term "structure" to both "texture" and
"fabric",
16. Townhouse. A single-family row house, two or more stor~es in
height. While "row house" and "townhouse" are synonymous terms,
technically speaking, the latter
term is usually employed .in ~onnec-
c2()~ i7
,
,.
,.
15.
tion with new planning concepts. such as cluster gardens.
17. Townscape Planning. Townscape planning is the art of arranging
three-dimensional, urban spatial relationships. It is concerned with
the structure. form. and appearance of communities. The term, for prac-
tical purposes. is synonymous with .urban design. and the original
plastic art of "city planning".
18. Urbanity. Urbanity is derived from .urbane," and not urban. It
denotes polish. suavity. grace and sophistication. These attributes
characterize the townscape ~nd l~nd-use patterns of the imperial cities
of Europe, Asia, and the older parts of the Western Hemisphere.
Many architects, urban designers, sociologists and unfortunately. city
planners. identify urbanity with high-residential density. and high-
building intensity. The causal chain between density or intensity and
urbanity. however. is quite vague and conjectural.
Napa (northern California). Palos Verdes Estates (southern California).
St. Francis Wood (San Francisco). and Boise (Idaho) have both low den-
sity and urbanity. Enlightened city planning. augmented by a continu-
ing public commitment. can create urbanity almost anywhere.
dJ.)J;'/7
16.
V. CONCLUSION
The foregoing principles. standards. goal. objectives. graphic study.
vocabulary. and commentary constitute Chula Vista's precise plan 'for
the improvement of spatial rel~tionships within the physical order of
its Planning Area. The adroit administration of ,the Design Manual by
the Design Review Board should do much to promote the convenience
and pleasantness of this city's R-3 zones. as well as the overall
quality-of-life therein.
Since appearance. amenitY',and aesthetic quality cannot substantively
exist apart from the social. economic. and physical progress of Chu1a
Vista. the Manual must continually be employed in conjuDction with this
city's other adopted plans. The Manual is a supportive plan. not an
independent one. Futhermore. while city planning was spawned by urban
design. the rebirth of the latter has necessitated much innovation and
intuition. Therefore. the Manual is predicated on experimentation.
rather than upon solid precedent. and will probably require considera-
ble refinement and amendment during the course of its ap,lication to
empirical planning problems.
>>~50
t 17.
VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abrams, Charles.
The Lan~ua~e of Cities, A Glossary of Terms.
York: 97, The Vikin9 Press
Ashworth, Graham, Encyclopedia of Planning. London: 1913, Barrie
& Jenkins
New
The Concise Townsca~e.. New York:
Norstrand Reinhold ompany
Gibbend, Frederick, Town Design. New York: 1959, Frederick A.
Praeger
Cullen, Gordon,
1971, Van
Gallion & Eisner, The Urban pattern, Cit~ Planning and Design, 3rd
Edition. New Yor: 1 75, D. Van Norstrand Com-
pany
Goodman, William I., Editor, Principles and Practice of Urban Plan-
ning, 4th Edition. Washington, D. C.: 1968. ICMA
Hiorns, Frederick R. Town-Building in History. London: 1959.
George G. Harrap & ~o., Ltd.
Keeble, Lewis,
Lynch, Kevin,
McKeever, J.,
Princi~les and Practice of Town and Country Plan-
~ing, th Edition. London: 1972, The Estates
azette Limited
The Imafie of the City. Cambridge. Mass:
the Tec no10gy Press
Editor, The Community Builders Handbook~ "Anniver-
sary Edition" Washington, D.C.: 19 8. Urban
Land Institute. .
1960,
Community Development Departments. City of Chula Vista,
Town Centre Design Manual. Chu1a Vista, CA:1976
Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency.
Commission. Urban Desi~n San DieQo. San Diego, CA:
1973, San Diego C apter. American Institute of
Architects.
Planning and
Urban Design
,J..c) " 5/
"When One gets thsre. t~re is no there there."
_ Gertrude Stein on the Modern City's
Lack of Character
,
I
.1C! /}.2 ~tJ - /J. Lj
18.
ATTACHMENT 6
Design Manual
~V~
~
r~~ ~ ~~_
- - - -
~~~~
CllY OF
CHUlA VISTA
>>/33
CITY OF CBULA VISTA
Design Manual
Prepared by the City of Chula Vista Planning Department
Adopted by City Council Resolution No.
,
, 1994
City Council
,
Tim Nader, Mayor
Shirley Horton, Vice Mayor
Leonard M. Moore
Jerry R. Rindone
Robert P. Fox
;J 0 - _s-I/
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
DESIGN MANUAL ADVISORY COMMI'ITEE
Barbara Gilman, Chair
Father John G. Proctor, Jr., Vice Chair
James A1gert
Robert Coffee
Patty Davis
Roy Dixon
J. C. Rodriguez
Art Sellgren
Frank Tarantino
DESIGN REVIEW COMMI'ITEE
Michael Spethman, Chair
J. C. Rodriguez, Vice Chair
Richard Duncanson
Patricia Kell y
Dan Way
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
William C. Tuchscher, Chair
Ty Compton, Vice Chair
Patty Davis
Liz Lebrone
Brene Patrick
Charles Peter
Don Reed
EX OFFICIO
Ken Clark
Glen Lewis
John Munch
Leonard M. Moore
Art Sellgren
Charles Sutherland
PLANNING COMMISSION
William C. Tuchscher, n - Chair
John C. Ray, Vice Chair
Susan Fuller
Thomas A. Martin
lohn S. Moot
Mary C. Salas
Frank Tarantino
,
c1.t?~~~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INlRODUCTION ................................................ i
SMALL-LOT SINGLE F~Y ..................................... 1-1
SITE PLANNING ........................................... 1-1
Grading.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. I-I
Streets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-2
Open space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3
Lots ............................................... 1-4
Building placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-4
Site entries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 1-6
Privacy .......................................................................................... 1-6
Garages and parking .................................... 1-6
Walls and fences ....................................... 1-7
ARCHITECTURE ........................................... 1-8
Compatibility ......................................... 1-8
Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-8
Varied design ......................................... 1-8
Facade and roof articulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-9
Attached dwellings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-10
Additions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-10
Colors and materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-11
Fenestration ......................................... .1-11
Garage doors ........................................ .1-11
Gutters, downspouts and vents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-12
Equipment screening ................................... .1-12
LANDSCAPING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-12
MULTIPLE F~Y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11-1
SITE PLANNING ...........................................11-1
Grading and drainage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11-1
Compatibility ............................................................ '. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. D-2
Clustering ...................................................................................... D-3
Open space .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. n-3
Vehicular access and drculatlon ............................. II-S
Site entries .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. n-s
Parkin& .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. D-5
Pedestrian drculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-6
Walls and fences .......................................11-7
AncUlary structures .....................................11-7
Privacy ............................................. 11-8
Security and lighting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ':..20 ....--r1:, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-!:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Trash .............................................. II-S
Recycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-9
Mailboxes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-lO
ARCHITECTURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-lO
Compatibility ........................................ II-IO
Seale.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. n..l1
Building, facade and roof articulation ........................ II-ll
Materials and colors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-13
Building entries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-13
Fenestration ......................................... II-13
Carports, garages and accessory structures ..................... II-14
Balconies, porches and patios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-14
Stairways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-14
Gutters, downspouts and vents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-IS
Mechanical and utility equipment ........................... 11-15
LANDSCAPING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-IS
COMMERCIAL (INSTITUTUIONAL) ................................. III-I
SITE PLANNING .......................................... III-I
Grading. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-I
Compatibility ................. ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-2
Building placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-2
Vehicular access and circulation ............................ 1II-3
Site entries .., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1II-4
Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-5
Pedestrian circulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-6
Screening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-6
uading .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ill-7
Recycling .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. m-8
Trash .......................................................................................... m..7
Cart storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-S
ARCHITECTURE .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. rn-8
Compatibility ................................................................................ m-8
ScaJe .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. m-8
Building, facade and roof articulation ........................ 1II-9
Fenestra.tion. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .m-tO
Overheads and awninp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .III-IO
Materials and colors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .III-IO
Mechanical and utility equipment ........................... m-ll
Gutters, downspouts and vents ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1II-12
Ligbtina .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .m-12
eM/f?
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Signs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0111-12
LANDSCAPING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1lI-13
INDUSTRIAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . 0 . IV-I
SITE PLANNING .......................................... IV-I
Grading. . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . 0 IV-I
Compatibility ................. 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-3
Site design elements .................................... IV-3
Building placement. . 0 . . 0 0 . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . 0 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . IV-3
Vehicular access and circulation ...... 0 . . . . . . . . 0 0 . . 0 . . . . . 0 . . IV-4
Site entries . . 0 0 . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . . . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . . . . 0 0 . . 0 . . 0 IV-S
Parking 0 . 0 . . . 0 0 . . 0 . . . . . . . 0 . . 0 . . . . . . . . 0 . . . 0 . . 0 . . . . . . IV-S
Pedestrian circulation 0 . . . . 0 0 . 0 . 0 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . 0 0 . . 0 . . 0 0 . 0 0 IV-6
Loading 0 . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . 0 . . . 0 . 0 . . . . . . . . . . 0 . 0 IV-7
Walls and screening . 0 . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-7
Trash .. 0 . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . IV-8
Recycling . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . 0 . . . . . . . 0 . . . 0 IV-9
ARCHITECTURE ..... 0 . 0 0 . 0 . . 0 . . . . 0 . . 0 0 . 0 . . 0 . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . 0 IV-9
Compatibility .. 0 . . . 0 . . . . 0 . . 0 . . . . . 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . . . . 0 . . . 0 . 0 0 . IV-9
Scale 0 0 . . . 0 . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . 0 . . 0 . IV-9
Building, facade and roof articulation 0...................... IV-IO
Fenestration .... 0 . 0 . . 0 . 0 . . . . 0 . . . . . 0 . . 0 . . . . . . . 0 . . . . 0 0 IV-IO
Materials and colors. 0 . . 0 . 0 . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . 0 IV-IO
Mechanical and utility equipment ..... 0 . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . .. IV-ll
Lighting. . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-13
Signs. . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-13
LANDSCAPING . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-14
SIGN DESIGN GUIDELINES .....................................0. V-I
SilD concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-I
Compatibility .................................................................................. V-2
Placement ...................................................................................... V..2
Size and sb.ape ................................................................................ V..3
Copy.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. V-3
Colors and materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-4
Lighting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-4
,
ole /;:: ~
INTRODUCTION
THE DESIGN MANUAL
The Design Manual provides guidelines to assist the city and the development community to achieve
a high quality of aesthetic and functional design. The guidelines are applied in conjunction with
development standards in implementing the city's design review process. Although these guidelines are
expected to be followed, they are general and may be interpreted with some flexibility in order to
encourage creativity on the part of project designers.
Design review is intended to achieve orderly and attractive development, to protect and enhance the
city's unique character and assets, and to ensure the stability and growth of public and private
investment in land and improvements. The purpose of these guidelines is to promote development
which respects the physical and environmental characteristics of the community and the site, and which
reflects functional and attractive site planning, and high quality design.
The contents of the Manual are organized into the following five sections:
. Small-Lot Single Family Residential
. Multiple Family Residential
. Commercial
. Industrial
. Signs
THE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS
Design review involves a comprehensive evaluation of the site plan, architectural and landscape design
components of development. Generally, all small-lot single family, multiple-family, commercial,
industrial, and institutional development is subject to design review.
The primary participants in the process are the owner/developer, the project designer, the city design
review staff, and the Design Review Committee (ORe). The DRC is appointed by the City Council
and consists of five city residents with an interest in and sensitivity to design.
For more information refer to the Design Review Application and Procedural Guide which is available
from the city planning department.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
The Design Manual must be used in conjunction with the city's development standards. These include
building and fire codes, site and facility accessibility requirements for the disabled, zoning and planned
community district regulations, grading and subdivision regulations and a separate Landscape Manual,
among others. There are also specific and precise plans, redevelopment plans, and project specific
design guidelines which may supplement or supersede these guidelines or the otherwise applicable
standards and regulations. The planning department may be contacted regarding which if any of these
other plans, standards and guidelines may apply to a particular property.
References are included in the text for guidelines which are closely as~~ with development
standards contained in the Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMe). ,;2J "v'i i
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Small-Lot Single Family
c1tJ -c: tJ
SMALlrLOT SINGLE FAMILY
Small-lot single family projects - generally those consisting of lots of less than 5,000 square feet - have
in recent years become a significant component of most planned communities. By reducing the amount
of improved land per lot, the developer is, among other things, able to offer a single family home at
a more affordable price.
Although the lots are smaller, the homes are often as large or larger than those found on traditional
single family lots. The resulting loss of open area in relation to building area can tend to result in
projects which appear crowded and monotonous, and which offer significantly less yard space and
privacy than traditional single family developments.
The guidelines for small-lot single family are intended to:
Encourage projects which respect the particular natural and manmade character of their
sites and surroundings, and which thereby present an attractive and integrated overall
appearance when viewed from outside the project boundaries;
Create visual interest and variety, while maintaining a sense of harmony and proportion
along interior and adjoining street frontages and other portions of the project exposed to
public view;
Provide for adequate usable open space areas and other characteristics such as ample on-
street parking and privacy which are traditionally associated with single family
development.
The city intends to remain particularly flexible in responding to innovative approaches and alternate.
solutions for small-lot single family. Project specific standards and guidelines shall take precedence
when in conflict with the following guidelines.
SITE PLANNING
Grading
Development should relate to the natural surroundings and minimize grading by following the natural
contours as much as possible. Graded slopes should be rounded and contoured to blend with the
existing terrain. Existing landforms may be contoured as necessary to provide II smooth and gradual
transition to graded slopes while preserving the site's basic form.
Grading should emphasize and accentuate scenic vistas and natural landforms. Significant natural
vegetation and other unique features should be retained and incorporated into the project.
Avoid large manufactured slopes in favor of several smaller slopes integrated throughout the project.
Smaller slopes jI1"C less obtrusive, more easily revegetated, and can be used to add visual interest,
preserve views, and provide physical buffers where necessary.
Grading of individual pads must address drainage of rear yard areas and building structures.
,;2{) - ,d, /
SMALL-WT SINGLE FAI\fiLY
Streets
Single family development is generally required to be served by public rather than private streets.
Private streets may be considered for smaller and/or self-contained projects where the streets are not
required to serve adjacent properties or the general public.
The provision of two separate entry points, as far removed from one another as possible, is encouraged
in order to facilitate emergency access. Emergency vehicle access and turnarounds shall be as required
by the fire prevention bureau.
Street curves that seem very slight in a bird's-eye view are readily perceived by the driver and interrupt
the line of sight. The introduction of curves will also tend to reduce vehicle speeds.
It is often desirable to provide openings at the ends of cul-de-sacs in order to establish pedestrian
connections and/or view corridors. The design of the openings should provide security for adjoining
residents. The issue of continued maintenance must also be addressed.
1ffi --
~..i.iii'::
~
,J..:;;;;;;..
..-'
~"....,....,...,..,.,.,.,....,...,....,..,'......',.,,'....,.'.'..'
, ":3\
r1
Vision clearance shall ~ provided at street intersections and driveway areas (CYMC 12.12.120 and
12.12.130).
dl)- t~
(Il",.1_21.1~)
1-2
SMALL-WT SINGLE FAMILY
Open space
Open space can meet both a functional and visual need within small-lot projects, and may include
common as well as private areas and facilities. The issue of adequate open space is generally addressed
at the planning rather than development stage of project review, but it is appropriate to revisit the issue
when replanning or resubdividing areas from larger lot or attached development to small-lot single
family.
Small-lot single family projects are expected to provide adequate usable outdoor areas for normal family
activities, such as areas for children to playoff-street, areas for outdoor family gatherings and dining,
and areas for landscaping and gardening. If the yard area of the lot is insufficient for these purposes,
then supplemental common usable open space should be provided.
Each lot should provide approximately 750 square feet of usable open space for a typical three or four
bedroom dwelling, either exclusively in private yards, or in a combination of private yards, landscaped
front yards and/or common areas. The private usable fenced yard area should generally total not less
than 15 percent of the lot size with no dimension less than 10 feet.
Consideration may be given to provide all or a portion of the common usable open space off-site in
conveniently located and easily accessible private parks or public parks with acreage or amenities in
excess of that required by code. Such facilities should generally be within 1/4 mile walking distance
of the project and accessible without crossing a four-lane street.
Common usable open space should be provided in large, meaningful areas and not fragmented or consist
of "left over" land. It should be centrally located, easily accessible for the majority of units, and
buffered but visible from surrounding dwellings. Areas for both passive and active recreation should
be provided, to include amenities such as tables and shaded seating areas, barbecues, courts and tot lots.
The need to provide visual open space is dependent upon many factors, including the size and shape
of the lots, the size, design and placement of the dwellings, and the width and design of the streets.
These factors can best be judged on a project-by-project basis. But generally, the smaller and narrower
the lots, the larger and less differentiated the homes, and the narrower the streets and setbacks, the
greater is the need to use common open space(s) to provide visual relief within the project. .
When provided and where feasible, locate common areas adjoining entries or other locations which
maximize their visual impact. Major slopes located next to common areas should be transitioned into
landscaping and usable areas to maximize the effect of open space.
A water drainage and/or runoff system should be provided for all common outdoor activity areas.
Vegetated rather than concrete swales should be used whenever possible. Avoid water runoff across
pedestrian walkways. Drainage elements which dissect paving should complement the paving design.
,
,;2;/ /' i- J
SMALL-LOT SINGLE FAMILY
Lots
Making some lots wider than the average can provide different amounts of open area between structures.
It also allows placement of different shapes and sizes of homes. On narrow lots, a variation of only
a few feet can make a perceptible difference.
Innovative techniques such as "zippered", "z" and wide-shallow lots can significantly enhance the street
scene. The use of such techniques in lieu of standard lot configurations will require flexibility in the
application of many of the guidelines contained herein.
-~
~~~
~,,?-~
iiiI
m,':r'~
.' li_"'-
~.
L~~~~:~'""
"ZIPPER"
"WIDE-SHALLOW"
or
Buildin~ placement
The siting and design of structures and landscaping should ensure that they blend into the terrain and
not dominate the landform as seen from lower elevations. Where feasible, locate buildings to conceal
larger graded slopes.
Building placement should consider the potential for tree and plant growth on each lot.
Front and rearyard setbacks for dwellings should generally be 15 feet. A minimum ten foot separation
should be provided between homes. Sideyard setbacks should be a minimum of three feet; the exception
being zero lot line or attached single family development.
Rearyard and exterior sideyard setbacks for dwellings should be increased a minimum of five feet for
lots which back onto or side onto streets.
Front, exterior sideyard and street facing rea.ryard setbacks should be increased for two-story homes
or the second story portion of two-story homes.
Varying the distance of homes from the street and between adjacent homes, or between homes and
fences, creates different patterns of visible open space, avoids a repetitive appearance, and results in
different types of yards and private patio areas. A variation of only a few feet is perceivable.
o2P --- ~ t(
(kY.I_ZI.I9M)
1-4
SMALL-LOT SINGLE FAMILY
VARIABLE FRONT AND SIDE YARD SETBACKS
Attached single family dwellings can emphasize the individuality of units or can look like one large
home, depending on how they are treated. Attached dwellings can yield larger open areas between
structures.
Zero lot line homes (flush to the side lot line) lend themselves well to the creation of courts and patios.
Consideration should be given to the use of both single- and two-story homes. Single-level elements
or floor plans will enhance the visual interest of the street scene by providing varying ridgelines and
mass elements.
The use of single story homes on comer lots can provide a feeling of openness at intersections. In the
case of two-story homes, larger setbacks, setting back the second story or introducing single story
elements can achieve a similar result.
I
,....-.-. --"-- -..-
i I
I I
I I
-. ------.
TWO-STORY, CORNER LOT'mEATMENT
-
c1f) /1>5
SMALL-LOT SINGLE FAMILY
Site entries
Decorative walls and/or enhanced landscaping should be used at public street entries. Where private
streets are allowed, enriched paving, raised medians and gateway structures should also be considered.
Continued maintenance must be ensured.
Project entries should be punctuated by an open view of green space if possible. Homes across from
entry points should be plotted so that landscaping is the predominant view from entry drives.
Privacy
The design, placement and orientation of buildings, yards, fencing, landscaping, floor plans, balconies
and wintlows is expected to promote privacy within the individual dweIIing units to the maximum
feasible extent.
Garages and parking
One-story garage elements soften the impact of dweIIings on a residential street scene and help create
a feeling of openness and human scale within a neighborhood. Garages should have a single story mass
at the front of the structure to provide an architectural transition on two-story homes.
ONE-STORY GARAGE B.EIllENT
Garage door setbacks should allow driveway parking that keeps the sidewalk clear of vehicles. If a
garage is allowed to be sited less than 191h feet from the back of sidewalk, an automatic garage door
opener shouio be provided. Sectional roll-up doors should also be considered in these exceptional cases.
dLJ"' j, i-
(bY .1_ 21. 1994)
1-6
SMALL-LOT SINGLE F AMn.. Y
Angled or side-entry garages can be used to break up the monotony of all garage doors facing the street.
Vary driveway locations whenever possible to add variety to the street scene.
.
.
-.
VARED GARAGE ENTRES
The siting of driveways should maximize on-street parking. At least one on-street space per lot should
be considered the minimum. One space per lot should also be considered the minimum in the case of
private streets with guest parking bays. Additional on-street/guest parking above the minimum is
expected to be provided for any lot which features a shortened driveway.
The parking or storage of trailers, campers, motor homes, boats and other recreational vehicles should
be prohibited from occurring on the street or within front or exterior sideyard areas as reflected in the
CC&R's. The provision of a separate storage area, adequately and attractively screened with a
combination of solid walls and landscaping, can be utilized to provide convenient RV storage on-site.
Walls and fences
Small-lot developments should submit a complete wall/fencing program to be included in the project
CC&R's. The program should include all community as well as private walls and fences. For projects
with no homeowners association, community walls should be located within adjoining open space
maintenance districts where applicable.
Decorative masonry should be used for community walls. View fencing of wrought iron or tubular steel
is also acceptable, although masonry may be required for noise attenuation. Decorative masonry and/or
wood fences may be used for front and exterior side yards. Style, materials and color should
complement the project architecture.
Walls or fences which abut community walls should intersect them at or below the cap level of the
community walVpi1aster. Sideyard fences should intersect at an equal OT lower height than rear and
front walls/fences/pi1asters.
..,),c..'J-IP7
NOT TI:IIS
DO THIS
SMAU-LOT SINGLE FAMn..Y
Open, transparent fencing is encouraged on the face of all rearyard slopes which are exposed to public
view.
Walls and/or view walls in the frontyard setback should generally not exceed 31h feet in height and
should maintain a minimum five foot setback from back of sidewalk. Depending on the project design,
it may be appropriate in some cases to restrict walls from frontyard areas altogether, and in other cases
to allow an increase in height to create front yard patio areas.
Lower walls at exterior sideyards should maintain a minimum five foot setback from the back of
sidewalk; ten feet for walls over 3% feet in height.
Higher, unrelieved walls and fences are imposing, particularly on smaller lots. Any combination of
retaining walls and freestanding walls/fences should not exceed six feet in height. Parallel retaining
walls or a retaining wall and fence should be offset by a minimum three foot wide clear planting space.
Trees, shrubs and vines should be used to soften the appearance of fences and walls. Community walls
should be separated from adjacent streets by the required setback or a minimum 10 foot wide landscape
buffer from back of sidewalk, whichever is greater.
ARCHITECTURE
Compatibility
There is no preferred architectural .style" for residential structures. The focus should be on the
development of a high quality residential environment. The architecture should consider compatibility
with surrounding character, including harmonious building style, form, size, color, material, and
roofline.
Scale
Dwellings and other improvements should be appropriate in mass and scale to the site on which they
are placed. The site and its relationship to other structures, scenic values, climate orientation, and
access should be factors in the design and orientation of structures on each site.
Form, p1oportion and scale should relate to the use of the structure as a single-family residence. The
scale of structures should be within a human scale so as not to overwhelm .or dominate their
surroundings. Second story rooms may be tucked into roof planes to maintain low pro(lles. Clipping
the roofs at the sides and comers of buildings can be used to lower apparent height.
Varied desi&n
Individual dwelling units should relate in terms of mass and bulk but should be distinguishable from one
another. A minimum of three housing plans with three alternative front and exposed rear elevations
per plan should be provided. A difference in the massing and composition (not just finish materials)
of each adj~t house'should be accomplished.
,;J.CJ/ ~ ~
CRcv.I_ 21. 1994)
1-8
SMALL-LOT SINGLE FAMILY
ALtERNATIVE ELEVATIONS
The overall street scene should be arranged to convey a sense of ordered variety. One elevation should
not be repeated more frequently than each fourth house. Wherever the same unit plan is proposed
adjacent or directly across from another unit, "alternate elevations" should be utilized. "Reversed"
elevations are not considered alternate elevations.
Facade and roof articulation
The articulation of facades and the massing of structures gives them depth and substance. Uninterrupted
exterior walls and monolithic forms should be avoided on all structures. All front, exposed rear and
exterior sideyard walls should have relief, offsets, overhangs and recesses in order to create an
interesting blend with landscaping, structures, and the casting of shadows. The integration of varied
texture, relief, and design accents on building walls softens the architecture.
ARTlCULATlON
'For sloped roofs, both vertical and horizontal articulation is encouraged. Roof lines should be
representative of the design and scale of the units under them. Roof articulation may be achieved by
changes in plane and/or the use of traditional roof forms such as gables, hips, and dormers. Flat roofs
and A-frame type roofs are discouraged unless appropriate to the architectural style. Roof design must
prevent water runoff onto adjacent lots.
All elevations should be architecturally treated. Building elevations which back or side onto streets,
open spaces or tops of slope should be strongly articulated along the visible rac,de. Elements such as
overhangs, projoctions and recesses of stories, porches, balconies, reveals and awnings are encouraged.
Dwelling entries should be articulated through massing treatment and/or should incorporate detailed
design elements. c2 t) ,/ t? 7
SMALL-LOT SINGLE FAMILY
1be articulation of two-story elements when visible from the greater community is particularly critical.
Wherever possible, one-story masses should be incorporated into visible rear elevations. Where two-
story masses do occur on the view edge, one or more of the following measures should be employed
to soften the visual impact: incorporation of a variety of hip and gable roofs, introduction of trellises
and shade structures, use of second floor balconies, cantilevering of second floor elements, and stepping
back plan elements to vary setback and create shadow patterns.
AUacbed dwellings
Attached single family dwellings should incorporate the same elements as single-family detached
housing. One-story elements are preferable on street elevations, end-unit conditions and on highly
visible rear elevations. Attached dwelling units should express individuality through careful massing,
front and rear offsets, and clearly identifiable entries and private outdoor spaces.
I
CD
.. p
.' " ,.
Garages should have a single-story appearance at the front of the building to allow a stepped-back
architectural transition for two-story structures. The visual impact of garage doors can be reduced by
varying their orientation, recessing them within the structure, and/or using multiple single doors.
Garages must be set back from the street sufficiently to allow driveway parking without overhanging.
the sidewalk.
Additions
The allowable extent of and design parameters for patio covers and other additions ind alterations
should be addressed with the initial project design and incorporated into the project CC&R's. Structural
additions or alterations should be integrated into and conform with the form, character, materials,
colors, and detailing of the existing dwelling.
Balconies, porches and patios, as well as ancillary structures such as gazebos, cabanas, and storage
sheds, should be compatible with the design and materials of the dwelling. No structure should extend
or be built over slope areas unless the building design is appropriately integrated into the slope.
..2tJ~ ?O
_.1_21.1994)
1-10
SMAlL-LOT SINGLE FAMILY
Colors and materials
The choice and mix of materials on the facades of structures and garage doors is important in providing
an attractive living environment. Materials should be consistently applied and should be chosen to work
harmoniously with adjacent materials. Piecemeal embellishment anJ frequent changes in materials
should be avoided. Materials tend to appear substantial and integral when material changes occur at
changes in plane.
DO THIS
NOT THIS
Colors can be used in combination with design to distinguish one home from another. Walls and other
large expanses should generally be light in color, with elements such as doors, window framing,
chimneys, trim, railings, awnings and light fixtures in a contrasting color to add interest and variety.
Subdued color combinations are encouraged.
Exterior repainting, resurfacing or reroofing of any dwelling or structure should be in compliance with
approved standards included in the project CC&R's.
Graffiti deterrence/protection should be considered in the selection of building materials, paints, and
other protective coatings (CVMC 9.20.055).
Fenestration
The placement and relationship of windows, doors and other building openings plays a significant role
in achieving a unified building composition. Where possible, window sizes should be coordinated
vertically as well as horizontally, and window design should be consistent in terms of style and general
arrangement on all sides of the building.
The placement and design of windows should consider floor plans, yards and setbacks of adjacent homes
to promote interior privacy to the degree possible.
Garaee doors
Garage doors are often a major visual element of a home. When they are, they should appear to be set
into the walls rather than flush with the exterior wall. The use of two doors on a two-car or three doors
on a three-car garage can significantly enhance the street scene and is encouraged.
A number of compatible designs should be used throughout a project to ensure variety. The design of
the garage door should relate to the particular architectural style selected, and should reflect a
substantial, well-constrUcted quality. ,,.) tJ - ? I
_ ._h
SMALL-LOT SINGLE FAMILY
Gutters, downspouts and vents
Gutters and downspouts should be concealed unless designed as an architectural feature. Exposed
gutters and downspouts not used as architectural features should be colored to coordinate with the
surface to which they are attached. Roof vents sho\:ld be colored to coordinate with roofing material.
Equipment screening
Any equipment, whether on the roof, side of a structure, or on the ground, shall be properly screened
(CVMC 15.16.030). The method of screening should be architecturally compatible with the dwelling
in terms of materials, color, shape, and size, and should blend with the building design. Utility meters
and equipment may be placed in locations which are not exposed to view from the street in lieu of
screening.
I~ (?\
/'~... "\
_._~ \ ~
-- - ;\
~~~~
,"""'If:-
IN"n:GRATED SOLAR pANELS
Solar panels installed on the roof should be parallel to and resting on the roof slope. Frames should
be colored to coordinate with roof colors.
LANDSCAPING
Refer to the Landscape Manual for the city's complete landscape planting and irrigation standards.
It may be appropriate in some cases to have front and exterior sideyard landscaping installed by the
developer and maintained by the homeowners association. If landscaping is installed.by individual
homeowners, the CC&R's should require installation of front and exterior sideyard landscaping within
six months of occupancy.
Standards for front and exterior sideyard landscaping and relandscaping should be included in the
CC&R's. Drought tolerant planting should be emphasized in accordance with the requirements of the
city Landscape Manual. The CC&R's should also require that landscaping be permanently maintained
in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash and debris.
Landscaping in and around entrances and drives r.:ast be designed to maintain sight distances (CVMC
12.12.120 and 12.12.130).
v2tJ- /d-
(Jev .1_ :no 19M)
1-12
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Multiple Family
-
,;2tY-? ;5
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Multiple family residential includes apartments, condominiums and townhomes; essentially anything
other than single family. These projects, regardless of their form of ownership, are characterized by
higher density attached units, and shared facilities such as parking, open space, and recreation. These
characteristics present unique design issues.
Multiple family projects involve larger structures, and tend to generate large parking areas and limited
private open space. If not properly designed, buildings can dominate their surroundings, parking and
circulation areas can dominate the site, and open spaces may be relegated to left over areas, not related
to the structures or the people who live there.
The guidelines for multiple family residential are intended to:
Encourage developments which are sensitive to the character and scale of surrounding
development, with particular attention to transition areas wherein multiple family projects
and single family dwellings may coexist for years or even decades;
Promote an attractive and functional arrangement of buildings and ample open spaces
which are sensitive to the physical characteristics of the site, and which provide a high
standard of visual quality and liveability for the residents;
Incorporate within the project architecture a sense of harmony and human scale, while
providing for visual interest and individual unit identity, as well as privacy and security
for each resident and the project as a whole.
Project specific standards and guidelines shall take precedence when in conflict with the following
guidelines. All projects must be designed to be accessible for persons with disabilities in accordance
with currently applicable requirements.
SITE PLANNING
Grading and drainage
Development should relate to the natural surroundings and minimize grading by following the natural
contours as much as possible. Graded slopes should be rounded and contoured to blend with the
existing terrain. Existing landforms may be contoured as ne<%5Sllry to provide a smooth and gradual
transition to graded slopes while preserving the site's basic form. .
DO THIS
c2&~ ?y
,I
'....1..!..- ~'
-1< ,'Ir.~.~" "' ,--..
, ,7/11 II/..' . ~ "
," " ~
,-: ..
"'" ~-,.... ~
-..----.
,...-" .,-
NOT THIS
t
.-- , "
.. .. d" ...*,
"it I.~")-?"'~~~ '
I' II~ \~ /-.... 1)
,~o I~? \\\I..~"'~r~~~-
,~-"'/..Y ,,\'... ~-,"""-"" .....-
...:!!:, ,.....,.0:::::.,_ --" ..
~, ......-" --
--""-
.",......-.. - ..
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Grading should emphasize and accentuate scenic vistas and natural landforms. Significant natural
vegetation and other unique features should be retained and incorporated into the project whenever
possible.
Avoid large manufactured slopes in favor of several smaller slopes integrated throughout the project.
Smaller slopes are less obtrusive, more easily revegetated, and can be used to add visual interest,
preserve views, and provide physical buffers where necessary.
Drainage should respond to the natural drainage pattern of each site. Provide a water drainage and
runoff system for all outdoor activity areas. Use vegetated rather than concrete swales whenever
possible.
Avoid water runoff through planter areas or across pedestrian walkways. Drainage elements which
dissect paving should complement the paving design.
Compatibility
The arrangement of structures, parking and circulation areas, and open spaces should recognize the
particular characteristics of the site and should relate to the surrounding built environment in pattern,
function, scale, character and materials. In developed areas, new projects should meet or exceed the
standards of quality which have been set by surrounding development.
EXISTING
NEW BUILDING
EXISTING
When an existing single family unit is to remain on the site where new multiple family units are to be
constructed, the new units should be designed to be compatible with the existing unit.
,
------
c20~ /5
(IIev.J_2I,I994)
D-2
MUL11PLE FAMILY
Clusterin&
Clustering of multi-family units should be a consistent site planning element. Large projects should be
broken up into groups of structures. Combining elements of varying heights in building clusters is
encouraged.
The siting and design of structures and landscaping should ensure that they blend into the terrain and
not dominate the landform as seen from lower elevations. Where feasible, locate buildings to conceal
larger graded slopes.
Open space
Common and private usable open space is required for all multiple family projects (CVMC 19.28.090).
The design and orientation of these areas should take advantage of available sunlight and be sheltered
from the noise and traffic of adjacent streets or other incompatible uses. The visual impact of common
areas should be maximized.
,
....1!'Io
.11I_ J..-.!;21 1""
MUL11PLE FAMILY
Required common open space and recreation areas are expected to be centrally and conveniently located
for all of the residents. Private open spaces should be contiguous to the units they serve and screened
from public view. Projects should have secure open spaces and childrens' play areas that are visible
from the units.
Common open space should be provided in large, meaningful areas and not fragmented or consist of
"left over" land. Large areas can be imaginatively developed and economically maintained. Without
sufficient area, common open space cannot serve the purpose for which it is intended. Major slopes
located next to recreation areas should be transitioned into landscaping and usable areas to maximize
the effect of open space.
r---. ,
--:1
I
.
,
..---
.
Any portion of a lot which is relatively level (maximum five percent grade), developed for recreational
or leisure use, and which contains 60 square feet with no dimension less than six feet, is considered
open space (CVMC 19.28.090). Roof decks and recreation rooms should generally count for no more
than 25 percent of required common open space. Front and exterior sideyard setback areas may
constitute up to 50 percent of required common open space, provided they are developed in a usable
and attractive manner.
Common open space areas should include both passive and active recreation amenities such as tables,
benches, pools, barbecues, courts and tot lots. A focal point should be provided such as a fountain,
kiosk, specimen tree or tree grouping, or other sculptural feature. Features and furniture should be well
constructed, durable, and complement the overa1llandscape design.
Play areas for children should be provided whenever possible, and are expected to be incorporated into
any larger project with a significant number of two bedroom units. Tot lots should feature a soft
ground surface, shaded seating areas, and defining edges andlor open fencing of wrought iron or tubular
steel. The tot lot should be well separated and buffered but visible from adjacent dwellings.
Private open space may, take the form of patios, balconies or courtyards. Studio, one-bedroom and all
other units above the first story should provide 60 square feet of open space. Two- and three-bedroom
ground floor units should provide 80 square feet and 100 square feet of open space, respectively.
cf).t-~~ ? )
(kv.1_21.ltMl
11-4
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Patio fencing and balcony screening should be an integral part of the overall building architecture.
Access to balconies and patios which are to be counted toward required private open space should be
achieved from common floor space areas such as living or dining rooms, hallways, kitchens, etc.
Balconies should be arranged to preserve the privacy of other private areas within the site and adjacent
parcels.
Vehicular access and cin:ulation
Continuous circulation should be provided whenever possible. Turnarounds should be provided
wherever dead-end driveways or parking aisles cannot be avoided. Emergency vehicle access and
turnarounds shall meet the requirements of the city tire prevention bureau.
The number of vehicular access points should be minimized and located as far as possible from street
intersections. Whenever possible, provide at least two separate entry points, as far removed from one
another as possible, in order to facilitate emergency access. The use of common or shared driveways
which provide access to more than one site is encouraged.
Primary circulation drives should whenever possible be separate from parking areas and provide no
direct access to parking spaces. On larger projects, curvilinear driveways which interrupt the line of
site are preferred over long, straight drives.
Site access and internal circulation should promote safety, efficiency, and convenience. Avoid conflicts
between vehicles and pedestrians, minimize dead-end driveways, and provide adequate areas for
maneuvering, stacking and accommodating emergency vehicles.
Driveway throats adequate to stack at least one vehicle behind the sidewalk should be provided at all
access points.
Vision clearance shall be provided at street intersections and driveway areas (CVMC 12.12.120 and
12.12.130).
Site entries
Parkin&
In multiple family projects, parking is accommodated in individual open parking spaces, parking courts,
carports and garages. Parking by whatever means should be located so as to minimize its visual impac~
Parking on circulation drives or in large, undivided parking lots is not desired. Wh4~n; Znot
be incorporated within residential structures, small dispersed parking courts are the desired alternative.
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Parking courts should be treated as 'landscape plazas,' with attention to hardscape surfaces, softened
edges, shade, and articulated pedestrian/vehicular circulation. Parking courts should be separated from
one another by structures or significant landscaped buffers. Introduce decorative paving, landscape
planters, and canopy trees to add visual interest and soften the appearance of unrelieved paving.
Parking should be located close to and wherever possible visible from the residential units which use
them. Convenient, unobstructed and clearly identified pedestrian access which minimizes the need to
cross circulation drives, parking aisles and landscaped areas should be provided to building entrances.
Generally, there should be no more than 10 spaces of uninterrupted parking, whether in garages,
carports, or open parking areas. Landscaped bulbs, or pedestrian accessways with landscaping and/or
architectural elements such as trellis structures can be used to provide this separation.
Parking which is visible from the street or other areas exposed to public view must be screened and
softened by landscaping, earth berms, low screen walls, or a combination thereof (CVMC 19.62.080).
Parking areas must be landscaped, receiving interior as well as perimeter treatment in accordance with
the city Landscape Manual (CVMC 19.62.090).
Parking incorporated within residential structures should be enclosed behind garage doors. Garages
with parking aprons less than 191h feet in length should be provided with automatic garage door
openers. Sectional roll-up doors are encouraged.
Carports may be incorporated into the interior of a project subject to the same dispersal criteria noted
above for parking courts. The placement of carports adjacent to streets, elevated slopes or other highly
exposed areas is strongly discouraged.
Pedestrian circulation
Pedestrian wal1cways should be provided to link dwelling units with common open space areas,
recreational and support facilities, parking areas, and the street. A pedestrian circulation plan is
expected to be submitted for each project.
.;2(// ? 7
__. II- '1.1 t..Ml.ill.
D-6
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Walkways should be separated from circulation drives to the maximum feasible extent. Curvilinear
paths provide a more inviting and interesting experience and are generally preferred over long, straight
alignments. Paths which traverse open spaces are strongly encouraged.
A minimum five-foot wide relatively smooth, non-slip walking surface should be provided (add two feet
for walkways which also serve as wheel stops). The use of brick, interlocking pavers, enhanced
concrete or other similar surface is encouraged. At a minimum, decorative paving should be used to
delineate crossings at circulation drives and parking aisles.
Walls and fences
Walls and fences are used to define project entries and boundaries, provide security, privacy and noise
attenuation, and screen views of parking, storage and equipment areas. They are also an important
design component. Materials, style and color are expected to complement the project architecture.
Decorative masonry walls are preferred for areas exposed to public view, such as streets, open space
areas and elevated slopes. Pilasters, planting offsets, wrought iron in view circumstances, and other
vertical elements should be used to interrupt the horizontal monotony of longer walls and fences.
~.' ;'J.:Jj
. . '. I
. ; .....v'J.~ '.
SOUND I SCREEN WALL
VIEW FENCE
~
... .
LOW PROFILE DECORATIVE WALL
ENHANCED WOOD FENCE
Trees, shrubs and vines should be used to soften the appearance of fences and walls and to deter graffiti
(CVMC 9.20.055). Perimeter walls and fences should be separated from adjoining streets by the
required setback or a minimum 10 foot wide landscape buffer from back of sidewalk, whichever is
greater.
Except for unusual circumstances, uncapped wood, mesh or chain link fencing, and precision cut
concrete block walls are generally considered inappropriate and are strongly discouraged.
Ancillary stroctures
Ancillary structures such as laundry facilities, recreation buildings and salesllease offices should be
consistent in architectural design and form with the rest of the complex.
020 --;yc;)
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Privacy
The design, placement and orientation of buildings, yards, fencing, landscaping, floor plans, balconies
and windows is expected to promote privacy within the individual dwelling units to the maximum
feasible extent. Consider the use of trees to screen private first floor areas and windows from second
story units. Stagger setbacks to adjacent unit entrances.
Security and lighting
Multi-family projects should be designed to provide the maximum amount of security for residents and
visitors. Building/unit entries, parking areas, walkways and common areas should be appropriately lit
with fixtures to complement project architecture. All exterior lighting shal1 be selective and shielded
to confine light within the site and prevent glare onto adjacent properties or streets (CVMC 19.66.100).
Lighting may also be used to deter graffiti (CVMC 9.20.055).
Parking areas should be located so as to be visible from residential units. Landscaping should be
planned and maintained to provide views into open space areas, and to avoid creating "hiding places"
. for possible criminal activity.
Addresses should be clearly visible and readily identifiable in order to facilitate emergency response.
Trash
Trash storage must be fully enclosed and incorporated within the main structures or separate
freestanding enclosures (CVMC 19.58.340). Where practical, storage at each unit is preferred over
common enclosures. Trash storage cannot be placed under stairways.
Small projects of four units or less may group individual containers into common enclosures. Common
enclosed storage for projects of five or more units should be provided in enclosed dumpsters at the
recommended rate of one standard dumpster for every 12 units or increment thereof.
,
~~
rpJ "'f
cJO <?!
can.J_ZI,I9!l4)
D-8
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Enclosures should be located in convenient but unobtrusive areas, well screened with landscaping and
positioned so as to protect adjacent uses from noise and odors. Recommended locations include inside
parking courts at the end of parking bays. Locations should be conveniently accessible for trash
collection but not block circulation drives during loading operations.
Storage for individual containers, either at the unit or in common enclosures, should be provided for
two standard 30 gallon containers (2 ft. x 4 ft.) or for one large 90 gallon container (3 ft. x 3 ft.), by
4 ft. high for a common enclosure. Storage within a garage or patio should be in addition to the
minimum area r~uired for parking or private open space.
Enclosures should provide a concrete surface and be of steel reinforced masonry construction with frame
and face doors of heavy gauge metal finished to complement the project architecture and materials.
Dumpster enclosures should provide clear interior dimensions of 6 ft. x 9 ft. by 5 ft. high with metal
wheel guides or interior curbing, and fronted by a 12 ft. wide concrete apron of adequate thickness to
protect asphalt paving.
Plans and specifications should be reviewed with the local waste disposal company.
Recyclin&
Recycling collection and loading areas should be fully enclosed and designed to accept the number and
size of containers deemed adequate to serve the project in accordance with the standards of the local
ncycling collection company.
Whenever feasible, locate ncycling areas adjacent to trash collection areas. Use signs to clearly
distinguish between ncycling and trash containers and the materials which can be placed within them.
Enclosures or cOntainers should be designed to protect ncyclables from the elements.
c:2 () -- g- .2-
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Enclosures should be designed to complement the project architecture and materials, and be located in
convenient and accessible but unobtrusive areas well screened with landscaping. Protect adjacent uses
from noise and odors.
Plans and specifications should be reviewed with the local recycling collection company.
Mailboxes
Where common mailboxes are provided, they should be located close to the project entry or near
recreational facilities. The architectural character should be similar in form, materials, and colors to
the surrounding buildings. Mailbox locations must be approved by the U.S. Postal Service.
ARCHITECTURE
Compatibility
There is no particular architectural "style" proposed for multiple family residential structures. High
quality, innovative and imaginative architecture is encouraged.
The focus is expected to be on the development of a high quality residential environment. The
architecture should consider compatibility with surrounding character, including harmonious building
style, form, size, color, material and roofline. In developed areas, new projects should meet or exceed
the standards of quality which have been set by surrounding development.
~
EXISTING
~-
__~Ji,;l
"COMPATIlLE CHARACTER
COMPATIBLE CHARACTER
;2{//Y3
tR~. J_ 21. 1994)
nolO
MULTIPLE FAMILY
All major and minor structures should share a common architectural theme and design characteristics
to provide an architectural unity for the total project. The designer is expected to employ variations
in form, building details and siting in order to create visual interest. In all cases, the chosen
architectural style should be employed on all building elevations.
Scale
The scale of multiple family projects should be considered within the context of their surroundings.
Larger projects should be broken up into groups of smaller structures, and taller structures should
provide increased setbacks so as not to dominate and impose on surrounding uses and the character of
the neighborhood.
Second story rooms may be tucked into roof planes to maintain low profiles. Clipping the roofs at the
sides and comers of buildings can be used to lower apparent height.
Combinations of one, one and one half, and two story massing will create variation and visual interest.
Building, facade and roof articulation
wng, unbroken facades and box-like forms should be avoided. Large, unrelieved expanses of wall can
also encourage graffiti (CVMC 9.20.055). Building heights should be varied and building facades
should provide relief and offsets to give the appearance of a collection of smaller structures.
VERTICAL. HORIZONTAL AND ROOF ARTDJLATlON >>. K' 'i
MULTIPLE FAMILY
To the extent possible, each of the dwelling units should be individually recognizable. This can be
accomplished with the use of roof lines, setbacks, projections and balconies which help articulate
individual dwelling units or collections of units, and by the pattern and rhythm of windows and doors.
~&
~ . ~
Separations, changes in plane and height, and the inclusion of elements such as balconies, porches,
arcades, dormers, and cross gables mitigate the barracks-like quality of flat walls and roofs of excessive
length.
Hipped or gabled roofs covering the entire mass of a building are preferable to mansard roofs or
segments of pitched roof applied at the structure's edge.
Ot:lr:l t:I tJ 0 00 IT
o 0 10 tJ n 1I:J t:1 U Ul..
'~:',':,,_ .,., .., ::; ,.,c.:;:;.::..,'-;; -,; .-"," "-':;\'~:)W(';: -:::;F:;;V1U?~1Tkl~:~.}i
._:',:,,', ."..';....;:...;."..;-.... .._...;.,....._.;..,_....;/. <0:,.;>'-;";-' __"___
DO THIS
NOT THIS
The following design techniques should be implemented whenever possible: varying front setbacks and
heights within the same structure; staggered and jogged unit planes; use of reverse building plans to add
variety; maximum of two adjacent units with identical wall and rooflines; and, a variety of orientations
to avoid the monotony of garage door corridors.
d&---iJS
Otn._21.ltM)
n-12
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Materials and colors
Colors and materials should be complementary to the chosen architectural style and compatible with the
character of surrounding development.
Materials for multiple family projects should be durable and require low maintenance. They should be
consistently applied and work harmoniously with adjacent materials. Piecemeal embellishments and
frequent changes in materials should be avoided. Materials tend to appear substantial and integral when
material changes occur at changes in plane.
Color is often underestimated as a component of project design. The color palette should be selected
carefully. Variations in shade or tone can be used to enhance form and heighten interest.
Graffiti deterrence/protection should be considered in the selection of building materials, paints and
other protective coatings (CVMC 9.20.055).
Building entries
Entrances identify and articulate individual units. Distinctive architectural elements, materials and
colors should be used to denote prominent entries. Recessed entries or porches provide articulation as
well as protection from the elements and are encouraged.
The entry design should also promote security and privacy. To the extent possible, the entrances to
individual units should be plainly visible from nearby parking areas, street frontages, or common open
space areas. Privacy can be enhanced by the use of patios or courtyards at individual entries.
Long, monotonous access balconies and corridors which provide access to five or more units should be
avoided. Access points should be clustered in groups of four or less. Separate entries for each unit are
preferred where possible.
Fenestration
The placement and relationship of windows, doors and other building openings plays a significant role
in achieving a unified building composition. Where possible, window sizes should be coordinated
vertically as well as horizontally, and window design should be consistent in terms of style and general
arrangement on all sides of the building.
. ,;20~~?-
MUL11PLE FAMILY
Carports, garages and accessory structures
Carports, detached garages, and accessory structures should be designed as an integral part of the
architecture of projects. They should be similar in materials, color, and detail to the principal structures
of a development. Carport roofs visible from buildings or streets should incorporate roof slope and
materials to match adjacent buildings.
Where garages are utilized, doors should appear set into walls rather than flush with the exterior wall.
Their design should be simple and unadorned. Attached garages should provide a massing and
architectural transition from the principal structure; partial single story mass projections, architectural
details and windows are encouraged in this regard.
The incorporation of balconies, porches, and patios within multi-family structures is strongly encouraged
for both practical and aesthetic value. These elements should be integrated into the architecture to break
up large wall masses, offset floor setbacks, and add human scale to structures.
Common exterior balconies and corridors that provide access to units should not require circulation past
adjacent unit windows and entries.
Stairways
Stairways are expected to be integrated into and complement the architectural massing and form of the
structure. Simple, clean, bold projections are encouraged. Thin-looking, open metal, prefabricated .
stairs are to be avoided. The width of stairways should generally be greater than the minimum required
by code.
M'EGRATED 8TAIlWAY
Uncovered stairwells s1\ould be precluded from general streetscape view through the use of wing walls,
landscaping or other means.
-2tJ---?/
Il1o_ 1__'" 'QCW.\
D.14
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Gutters, downspouts and vents
Gutters and downspouts should be concealed unless designed as an architectural feature. Exposed
gutters and downspouts not used as architectural features should be colored to coordinate with the
surface to which they are attached. Roof vents should be colored to coordinate with roofing material.
Mechanical and utility equipment
All mechanical equipment whether mounted on the roof, side of a structure, or on the ground shall be
screened from view (CVMC 15.16.030). Utility meters and equipment should be placed in locations
which are not exposed to view from the street or be suitably screened. All screening devices are to be
compatible with the architecture, material and color of adjacent structures.
All new projects are required to be pre-wired to accommodate cable reception (CVMC 15.32.050).
Satellite dish antennas are specifically prohibited on roofs and should be considered early in the design
process in terms of location and any required screening (CVMC 19.22.030).
Solar panels should be integrated into the roof design. Solar panels placed on sloped roofs should be
parallel to and resting on the roof slope. Frames should coordinate with roof colors.
LANDSCAPING
Refer to the Landscape Manual for the city's complete landscape planting and irrigation standards.
All areas not covered by structures, drives, parking or hardscape should be Al'Y1Uyriately and
professionally landscaped. Landscaping should generally constitute no less than 15 peroent of the gross
site area, and a minimum of 10 percent of parking areas. Drought tolerant planting should be
emphas;7,..d in aCcordance with the requirements of the city Landscape Manual.
;2.0-lS~
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Landscape planting is to be used to frame, soften, and embellish the quality of the environment, to
buffer units from noise or undesirable views, to break up large expanses of parking, and to separate
frontage roads within a project from public streets. To accomplish these design objectives, landscape
elements need vertical dimension. Trees and tall shrubs are needed in addition to grass and
groundcover. Trees can also be used to provide shading and climatic cooling.
PRESERVE YEW
t!?t'?A.
~J),fl> . ~
~- -7 )
~, LOW 8HRl8ERY AT TOP OF BLOPE
SCREEN UNDESIlABLE YEW
Landscaping should be in scale with adjacent structures and be of appropriate size at maturity to
accomplish its intended purpose. Use larger specimen trees at major entrances, along street frontages
and in larger open space areas. Flowering and multi-trunk species are encouraged.
Variable landscape setbacks should be provided wherever possible.
. . ,. ,
.. .
.
.
.
., :..
'. .
.. ...
\tifr::,,:,,;;t{;N;@?~fJ::r;{f~:?:)@Yiji}i?:;JJ?-;'>
DO THIS
NOT THIS
c2CJ~ 79
(Roy. J_ 21. 19M)
D-16
MULTIPLE FAMILY
Landscaping in and around entrances and drives must be designed to maintain sight distances (CYMC
12.12.120 and 12.12.130).
Landscaping around the base of buildings is recommended to soften the edge between pavement and
the structure. Entrances should be ~nted to provide focus. Trees should be located throughout the
parking lot and not simply at the ends of parking aisles. Landscaping in and around entrances and
drives must be designed to maintain sight distances.
Tree planting should consist of designated species where applicable in accordance with PC district or
other regulations, including dominant, accent and shade trees. Consider the use of deciduous trees for
open space areas used for passive or active recreation.
Landscaping should be protected from vehicular and pedestrian encroachment by raised planting
surfaces, depressed walks, or the use of curbs. Concrete mow-strips separating turf and shrub areas
are required per the Landscape Manual. Consider the use of "turfstone" for areas used exclusively for
emergency vehicle turnarounds.
Vines and climbing plants integrated upon buildings, trellises, and perimeter garden walls can be
effective in softening the appearance of structures and in deterring graffiti (CYMC 9.20.055) and are
encouraged where appropriate.
,
;lC - 9t:)
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Commercial
;2V/c; /
COMMERCIAL
A city's identity is often associated with its commercial districts: an established downtown; its major
shopping centers; the stores, shops and offices which line its commercial thoroughfares; and the
convenience centers which serve its neighborhoods. These areas are at the most prominent locations
in the city and convey its strongest visual image. They affect th~ way residents and visitors feel about
a community, and the attention paid to their development reflects a city's pride in itself and its economic
vitali ty .
Commercial projects are more diverse than any other category of development. They are large and
small, located on major thoroughfares and residential collector streets, and they can be intensely active
or relatively passive. The particular nature and location of each development will have much to do with
specific design solutions. The following guidelines, however, are generally applicable to all categories
of commercial development. Although public, quasi-public and institutional projects often present
unique design issues which require flexible solutions, they will also generally be evaluated based upon
their compliance with these commercial guidelines.
The guidelines for commercial development are intended to:
Encourage developments which are unique and creative yet respect the scale, proportion
and basic character of their surroundings, with particular attention to projects within
pedestrian oriented areas, and sites which adjoin residential neighborhoods or other uses
which may be particularly sensitive to the scale, design and impacts of commercial
development;
Promote an attractive, inviting, imaginative and functional arrangement of buildings and
parking areas, and a high quality of architectural and landscape design which provides
for proper commercial access, visibility and identity, but which discourages standardized
approaches to commercial site planning and design;
Recognize the importance of parking and circulation to the success or failure of
commercial enterprises in terms of ingress and egress and potential conflicts with street
traffic, on-site circulation and potential conflicts between cars, pedestrians and service
vehicles, and the overall configuration, efficiency and appearance of parking areas and
circulation drives.
Project specific standards and guidelines shall take precedence when in conflict with the following
guidelines. All projects must be designed to be accessible for persons with disabilities in accordance
with currently applicable requirements.
SITE pLANNING
Grading
Development should relate to the natural surroundings and minimize grading by following the natural
contours as much as possible. Graded slopes should be rounded and contoured to blend with the
existing terrain. Grading should emphasize and accentuate scenic vistas and natural landforms.
..2 t7 ~ 5:;2-
COMMERCIAL
Significant natural vegetation and other unique features should be retained and incorporated into the
project.
A void large manufactured slopes in favor of several smaller slopes integrated throughout the project.
Smaller slopes are less obtrusive, more easily revegetated, and can be used to add visual interest,
preserve views, and provide physical buffers where necessary.
Compatibility
The arrangement of structures, parking and circulation areas, and open spaces should recognize the
particular characteristics of the site and should relate to the surrounding built environment in pattern,
function, scale, character and materials. In developed areas, new projects should meet or exceed the
standards of quality which have been set by surrounding development.
Building placement
Placement of structures should consider the existing built context of the commercial area, the location
of incompatible land uses, the location of major traffic generators, as well as an analysis of a site's
characteristics and particular influences.
The siting and design of structures and landscaping should ensure that they blend into the terrain and
not dominate the landform as, seen from lower elevations. Where feasible, locate buildings to conceal
larger graded slopes.
Structures should be sited in a manner that will complement adjacent structures. Sites should be
developed in a coordinated manner to provide ordered diversity and to avoid jumbled confusion.
Whenever possible, new structures should be clustered. This creates plazas and pedestrian malls and
prevents long "barracks-like" rows of structures. When clustering is impractical, a visual link between
separate structures should be established. This link can be accomplished through the use of an arcade
system, trellis, or other open structure.
I
I
NOT THIS
DO THIS
c:2()~9 :J
(an. 1_ 21. 1994)
lli-2
COMMERCIAL
Recognize the importance of spaces between structures as .outdoor rooms. on the site. Outdoor spaces
should have clear, recognizable shapes that reflect careful planning and are not simply .left over" areas
between structures. Such spaces should provide pedestrian amenities such as shade benches, fountains,
etc.
Building setbacks should be proportionate to the scale of the structures and considerate of existing
development. Larger structures should require more setback area for balance of scale and so as not to
impose on neighboring uses.
Freestanding, singular commercial structures should be oriented with their major entry toward the street
where access is provided. Primary structures should not be obscured by secondary or ancillary
structures. In the case of commercial centers, pad buildings should generally constitute no more than
2S percent of a project's street frontage.
llllIijefnlll
~e~~~
. . '.' '.-'.. ;...r,. ....
. .t, ....
. Locate structures and on-site circulation systems to minimize pedestrian/vehicle conflicts. Link
structures to the public sidewalk where possible with walkways, textured paving, landscaping, and
trellises.
Vehicular access and circulation
Site access and internal circulation should promote safety, efficiency and convenience. Avoid conflicts
between vehicles and pedestrians, minimize dead-end driveways, and provide adequate areas for
maneuvering, stacking, truck staging and loading, and accommodating emergency vehicles.
.
Continuous circulation should be provided whenever possible. Turnarounds should be provided
wherever dead-end driveways or parking aisles cannot be avoided. Emergency vehicle access and
turnarounds shall meet the requirements of the city fire prevention bureali.
d)CJ~9i
COMMERCIAL
The number of site access points should be minimized and located as far as possible from street
intersections. Whenever possible, provide at least two separate entry points, as far removed from one
another as possible, in order to facilitate emergency access.
'::-
~.~
" .'
The use of common or shared driveways which provide access to more than one site is encouraged and
may in some cases be required.
Primary circulation drives should whenever possible be separate from parking areas and provide no
direct access to parking spaces.
Loading and service areas should be provided with separate access and circulation whenever possible.
On larger projects, curvilinear driveways which interrupt the line of sight are preferred over long,
straight drives, provided adequate sight distance is maintained. Decorative paving should be used at
pedestrian crossing points.
Whenever possible, locate site entries on side streets in order to minimize pedestrian/vehicular conflicts.
Avoid designs which encourage the use of public streets for "internal" circulation.
Driveway throats adequate to stack at least one vehicle behind the sidewalk should be provided at all
access points. With larger projects and centers, significantly more stacking area may be required.
Vision clearance shall be provided at street interseCtions and driveway areas (CYMC 12.12.120 and
12.12.130).
Site entries
Principal vehicular access into a commercial project should be through an entry drive rather than a
parking aisle. Project entry areas should be enhanced and obvious to customers. Landscaped medians,
enriched paving, decorative landscaped entry walls and low profile monument signs are encouraged.
>>~7~
m-4
CIa. J_ 21. 1994)
COMMERCIAL
Parking
Parking should not be the dominant visual element of the site. Parking areas which accommodate a
significant number of vehicles should be divided into a series of connected smaller lots. Landscaping
and offsetting portions of the lot are effective in reducing the visual impact of large parking areas.
Introduce decorative paving and canopy trees to add visual interest.
Parking which is visible from the street or other areas exposed to public view must be screened and
softened by landscaping, earth benns, low screen walls, or a combination thereof (CVMC 19.62.080).
~
Vehicular circulation and parking patterns between connected parking areas and within individual
parking lots should be coordinated to minimize traffic conflicts.
,
The parking area should be designed in a manner which links the structures to the street sidewalk
system as an extension of the pedestrian environment. This can be accomplished by using design
features such as walkways with enhanced paving, trellis structures, and special landscaping treatment.
- . ~-~.
COMMERCIAL
Design parking areas so that pedestrians walk parallel to moving cars. The need for pedestrians to
cross parking aisles and landscape areas should be minimized.
~.~ '.
,...~
0 b
,.,
0 <>
<> .,
., .,
0
.,
III
ilS
&ttttttttttttti
&ttttttttttttti
~
DO THIS
NOT THIS
Parking areas should be separated from structures by a landscaped strip and raised concrete walkway.
Continuous concrete curbs delineating walkways or landscape planters should be used in lieu of wheel
stops.
Parking areas must be landscaped, receiving interior as well as perimeter treatment in accordance with
the city Landscape Manual (CVMC 19.62.090).
Pedestrian circulation
Separate vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems should be provided whenever possible. Pedestrian
linkages between uses in commercial developments should be emphasized, including distinct pedestrian
access from the street and parking areas in larger commercial developments, such as shopping centers.
A pedestrian circulation plan is expected to be submitted for each project.
Use raised pathways, landscape planting and/or bollards to separate pedestrian walkways from vehicle
circulation drives and parking aisles to the maximum feasible extent. Walkways should be well lit.
A minimum five-foot wide relatively smooth, non-slip walking surface should be provided (sdd two feet
for walkways which also serve as wheel stops). The use of brick, interlocking pavers, enhanced
concrete or other similar surface is encouraged. At a minimum, decorative paving should be used to
delineate crossings at circulation drives and parking aisles.
Amenities such as sidewalk cafes, seating areas and shelters should be incorporated into the pedestrian
system wherever possible. Allow for visual and physical separation between active and passive use
areas through the use of landscape planters, low wrought iron fences or similar devices.
Screenln&
Walls should be kept to a minimum and as low as possible while performing their screening and security
functions.
,
c2tJ~ <J ?
_._2I,I9M)
nI-6
COMMERCIAL
Where walls are used at property frontages, or screen walls are used at parking areas or to conceal
storage and equipment areas, they should be designed to blend with the site's architecture. Both sides
of all perimeter waUs or fences should be architecturally treated. Landscaping should be used to soften
the appearance of fences and walls and to deter graffiti (CVMC 9.20.055).
When security fencing is required, it should be a combination of solid walls with pilasters and
decorative view segments, or short solid wall and wrought iron grill work combinations. Chain link
or barbed/razor wire fencing is generally unacceptable. Long expanses of wall surfaces should be offset
and architecturally designed to prevent monotony. Landscape pockets should be provided.
Where screening is required, a combination of elements should be used including solid masonry walls,
berms, and landscaping. The height should be determined by the height of the material or equipment
being screened. Chain link fencing with redwood or neutral colored slatting is an acceptable screening
material for areas not visible from public view. Exterior storage should be confined to portions of the
site least visible to public view.
Any outdoor equipment, whether on a roof, side of a structure, or on the ground, should be
appropriately screened from view. The method of screening should be architecturally integrated with
adjacent structures in terms of materials, color, shape and size. Where individual freestanding
equipment is provided, a continuous screen is desirable.
Loading
Loading and service areas should be located and designed to minimize visibility, circulation conflicts,
and potential adverse noise impacts to the maximum feasible extent. Location at the rear of the site
with separate access and circulation is preferred wherever possible.
Screen loading areas with portions of the building, architectural wing walls, freestanding walls and
landscape planting. Ensure adequate noise attenuation for adjacent incompatible land uses.
Trash
Trash storage must be fully enclosed and incorporated within the main structures or separate
freestanding enclosures (CYMC 19.58.340). Locations should be unobtrusive and conveniently
~ssible for trash collection but not block circulation drives during loading operations. Recommended
placement is to the rear of structures within service and loading areas screened from public view and
positioned so as to protect adjacent uses from noise and odors.
Enclosures should provide a concrete surface and be of steel reinforced masonry construction with frame
and face doon of heavy gauge metal finished to complement the project architecture and materials.
Enclosures should provide clear interior dimensions of 6 ft. x 9 ft. x S ft. high with metal wheel guides
or interior curbing, and fronted by a 12 ft. wide concrete apron of adequate thickness to protect asphalt
paving. All freestanding enclosures visible to the public should be well screened with landscaping.
Plans and specifications should be reviewed with the local waste disposal company.
L~tJ ~7 r
COMMERCIAL
Recycling
Recycling collection and loading areas should be fully enclosed and designed to accept the number and
size of containers deemed adequate to serve the project in accordance with the standards of the local
recycling collection company.
Whenever feasible, locate recycling areas adjacent to trash collection areas. Use signs to clearly
distinguish between recycling and trash containers and the materials which can be placed within them.
Enclosures or containers should be designed to protect recyclables from the elements.
Enclosures should be designed to complement the project architecture and materials, and be located in
convenient and accessible but unobtrusive areas well screened with landscaping. Protect adjacent uses
from noise and odors.
Plans and specifications should be reviewed with the local recycling collection company.
Cart storage
Shopping cart storage, where applicable, should be incorporated into the initial project design.
Recommended locations are within the main structures and/or within small, conveniently located
enclosures designed and landscaped to complement the balance of the project. Large, freestanding
enclosures or un screened "cart corrals" are generally considered unacceptable.
ARCHITECTURE
Compatibility
There is no particular architectural "style" proposed for commercial structures. High quality, innovative
and imaginative architecture is encouraged. The use of standardized "corporate" architectural styles
associated with Chain-type facilities is acceptable provided the design complies fully with these
guidelines.
The focus is expected to be on the development of a high quality commercial environment. The
architecture should consider compatibility with surrounding character, including harmonious building
style, form, size, color, material and roofline. In developed areas, new projects should meet or exceed
the standards of quality which have been set by surrounding development.
The designer is expected to employ variations in form, building details and siting in order to create
visual interest. In all cases, the chosen architectural style should be employed on all building
elevations.
Scale
The scale of new development is expected to be compatible with that of its surroundings. This applies
not only to the relationship between structures, but also to the relationship between structures and open
spaces and pedestrian areas such as plazas, courtyards and sidewalks.
c20 ~ ?J
(R..._21.19M)
m-B
COMMERCIAL
At a minimum, the height of new development should "transition" from the height of adjacent
development. Also, varying the height of a building so that it appears to be divided into distinct
massing elements, and/or articulating the building facade by horizontal and vertical offsets in wall planes
can reduce building bulk and is strongly encouraged.
Building scale can also be addressed through the proper use of window patterns, roof overhangs,
awnings, trellises, wall materials, colors, moldings, fixtures and other architectural ornamentation, as
well as through the use of increased setbacks and landscape planting. Building articulation and
architectural detailing are particularly important in creating an inviting and human scale at the ground
level of structures.
?",~'<>\'~?>:";:
//jh'!iIJ;,'/;
&"',/,I.,l,',
Repetitive and uniform building placement and massing creates an uninteresting and uninviting site plan
and street scene. Cluster buildings and vary their orientation in order to create visual interest and
inviting spaces. The use of arcades, trellises and other open structures can be introduced to provide
a visual and physical link between individual buildings.
In commercial centers, "anchor" or major tenant buildings should be used to create balance rather than
overwhelm minor tenant structures. Use massing, facade articulation and architectural detailing to
integrate the scale of all structures within the center. Vertical architectural elements can be used as
focal points to identify major tenants.
Building, facade and roof articulation
Heights and setbacks within the same building should be varied, and wail planes should be staggered
both horizontally and vertically in order to provide visual relief from monotonous, uninterrupted
expanses of wall. Large, unrelieved expanses of wall can also encourage graffiti (CVMC 9.20.055).
Building entries should be readily identifiable. Use recesses, projections, columns and other distinctive
architectural elements, as well as materials and colors, to articulate entries.
.).t/ ~ / t70
COMMERCIAL
Nearly vertical, mansard or pitched roofs applied at the structure's edge should be avoided. Flat roofs,
when combined with sloping roofs, should be integrated into the structural design and should be of a
scale and proportion so as not to appear as an afterthought or appendage. Roof materials to be avoided
include corrugated metal or highly reflective surfaces.
Fenestration
Building fenestration refers to the arrangement and design of windows, doors and other openings on a
building's surface. The size of windows and doors and associated structural detailing should be
coordinated and relate to the scale of the elevation on which they appear.
Overheads and awnings
Arcades, canopies, trellises and awnings are recommended for functional as well as aesthetic reasons.
,
The use of awnings along a row of contiguous structures should be restricted to awnings coordinated
with regard to location, form and color. Signs on awnings should be painted on and be'limited to the
awning's flap (valance) or to the end panels of angled, curved, or box awnings.
Materials and colors
Colors and materials should be consistent with the chosen architectural style and compatible with the
character of surrounding development. An exception is where the colors of adjacent structures diverge
significantly from these guidelines.
c2V' /tl/
CRev,I_2I,I994)
11I-10
COMMERCIAL
Materials for commercial projects should be durable and require low maintenance. They should be
consistently applied and work harmoniously with adjacent materials. Piecemeal embellishments, and
frequent changes in materials should be avoided. Materials tend to appear substantial and integral when
material changes occur at changes in plane.
The color palette should be selected carefully. Subdued color combinations consisting of a limited
number of colors are encouraged. Large areas of intense white color and vibrant compositions should
be avoided. Variations in shade or tone can be used to enhance form and heighten interest.
Colors should be used to articulate entries or other architectural features. The use of color or color
combinations to transform the building or any of its elements into a sign, such as .corporate color
striping", is strongly discouraged.
Graffiti deterrence/protection should be considered in the selection of building materials, paints and
other protective coatings (CVMC 9.20.055).
Mechanical and utility equipment
All mechanical equipment whether mounted on the roof, side of a structure or on the ground shall be
screened from view (CVMC 15.16.030). Utility meters and equipment should be placed in locations
which are not exposed to view from the street or be suitably screened. All screening devices should
be compatible with the architecture, material and color of the adjacent structures.
The screening of roof-mounted equipment is expected to be incorporated into the design of the roof.
Full parapets, sloping roofs and low parapets with supplemental screens may be used to screen roof
equipment provided that roof-mounted screen walls are fully integrated with the buildings architecture;
.fence-type" screening is generally considered unacceptable.
Mechanical equipment is expected to be located below the roofline. Equipment visible from the upper
floors of adjacent buildings or other devated locations should be installed in an orderly, compact
manner and should be colored to coordinate with the color of the roof surface on which it is placed.
Noise attenuation should be considered in the case of adjacent incompatible uses.
Satellite dish anleI1nas are frequently used for commercial communications and should be considered
early in the design process in terms of location and required screening (CVMC 19.30.040).
ell! ~ //d-.
COMMERCIAL
Solar panels should be integrated into the roof design. Solar panels placed on sloped roofs should be
parallel to and resting on the roof slope. Frames should coordinate with roof colors.
Sloped and racked collectors may be used on flat roof areas if collectors are located in the interior
portion of the roof, well away from the perimeter, and the racks are enclosed on the sloping and back
sides and colored to coordinate with roof colors.
Gutters, downspouts and vents
Gutters and downspouts should be concealed unless designed as an architectural feature. Exposed
gutters and downspouts not used as architectural features should be colored to coordinate with the
surface to which they are attached. Roof vents should be colored to coordinate with roofing material.
Lighting
Lighting should be used to provide illumination for the security and safety of on-site areas such as
entries, parking, loading, shipping and receiving, pathways and working areas. Lighting can also be
used to deter graffiti (CVMC 9.20.055). The design of light fixtures and their structural support should
be architecturally compatible with the main structures.
Building illumination and architectural lighting should be indirect and concealed from view. Indirect
wall lighting, wall "washing" from concealed fixtures, and landscape lighting is encouraged provided
it is subtle and not overly bright.
;
All exterior lighting shall be selective and shielded to confine light within the site and prevent glare onto
adjacent properties or streets (CVMC 19.66.100).
Signs
See also the Sign Design Guidelines in this Manual. For allowable sign types and sizes refer to the sign
provisions in Chapter 19 of the Municipal Code.
Every structure and commercial complex should be designed with a precise concept for adequate..
signing. Provisions for sign placement, sign scale in relationship with the site and building, and sign
readability are expected to be considered in developing the project design and signing concept. All
signing should be highly compatible with the building and site design relative to size, color, material,
and placement.
Signs should be characterized by restraint and designed as supportive elements to land use. They are
intended to "identify" businesses and not to advertise products or display information not part of the
name of the business.
Low-prof11e monument signs and individually cut (channel) letter signs are the preferred alternative for
business identification whenever possible. Freestanding pole and pylon signs are strongly discouraged.
-
>>/ Jbl;?
_.1_21.1994)
1lI-12
COMMERCIAL
Where several tenants occupy the same site, individual wall mounted signs are appropriate in
combination with a monument sign identifying the development and address.
Roof signs or wall signs which extend above the roofline are generally prohibited. Standardized
"corporate" signs are acceptable only if they comply with these guidelines. Painted wall signs and
exposed sign "cans. which are not incorporated into the structure of the building or a ground monument
are generally considered unacceptable.
DO THIS
NOT THIS
LANDSCAPING
Refer to the Landscape Manual for the city's complete landscape planting and irrigation standards.
All areas not covered by structures, drives, parking or paving should be appropriately and professionally
landscaped. Drought tolerant planting should be emphasized in accordance with the requirements of
the Landscape Manual.
Landscaping for commercial uses should be used to define specific areas by helping to focus on
entrances to buildings and parking lots, define the edges of various land uses, provide transition between
neighboring properties (buffering), and provide screening for parking, loading and equipment areas.
Landscaping should generally constitute no less than IS percent of the gross site area, and a minimum
of 10 percent of parking areas. Use dense formations and layering of plants to achieve immediate effect
when planting is used as the primary means to screen parking.
Landscaping should be in scale with adjacent structures and be of appropriate size at maturity to
accomplish its intended purpose. Use larger specimen trees at major entrances and along street
frontages and in larger open space areas. Flowering and multi-trunk species are encouraged.
Landscaping should be used around the base of buildings, walls and fences to soften the edge between
pavement and structures. A minimum clear width of five feet is generally required in order to provide
an appropriate planting space. This should be enlarged at building entrances to provide focus.
Landscaping in and around entrances and drives must be designed to maintain sight distances (CVMC
12.12.120 and 12.12.130).
Trees should be located throughout the parking lot and not simply at the ends of parking aisles.
~~~ ,'[:vrd&~Jvi
COMMERCIAL
Landscaping should be protected from vehicular and pedestrian encroachment by raised planting
surfaces, depressed walks, or the use of curbs. Concrete mow-strips separating turf and shrub areas
are required per the Landscape Manual. Consider the use of "turfstone" for areas used exclusively for
emergency vehicle turnarounds.
Vines and climbing plants integrated upon buildings, trellis, and perimeter garden walls can be effective
in softening the appearance of structures and in deterring graffiti (CYMC 9.20.055) and are encouraged
where appropriate.
A void water runoff through planter areas or across pedestrian walkways. Drainage elements which
dissect paving should complement the paving design.
Use plants in permanent containers for enhancement of sidewalk shops, plazas, and courtyards.
At maturity, trees should be able to be trimmed 10 feet above ground and shrubs should be maintained
at a height of approximately 31h feet to provide adequate visibility. Use specimen trees with unique
structural qualities whenever possible.
Landscaping should be planned and maintained to avoid creating "hiding places" for possible criminal
activity.
,
20 -- /(J~
(ReY.l_ 21.1994)
1lI-14
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Industrial
,
;t)r-)!)/F
c?"-
INDUSTRIAL
Very little thought was given in the past to the appearance, or even function, of industrial development.
Older industrial areas were most often located "on the other side of the ttacks", physically if not
visually separated from the balance of the community. The emphasis was on commerce, and the
freestanding factories, warehouses and supply yards which made up these areas were generally left alone
to function and appear as they chose to. A good example is Chula Vista's early bayfront.
As communities have grown, many of these older industrial areas are no longer on the outskirts, but
are the centerpiece of the city. Industry is also generally more compatible, due in no small part to
health and environmental regulations, and most new industrial development occurs in preplanned
employment centers located close to the homes of the employees who work there. Because of these
factors, it is now recognized that industry must be fully integrated with the larger community, both
functionally and aesthetically.
The guidelines for industrial development are intended to:
Encourage projects which respect the character and scale of adjoining development, with
particular attention to sites in older, mixed-use areas, and sites which adjoin residential
neighborhoods or other uses which may be particularly sensitive to the scale and impacts
of industrial development;
Promote a functional and attractive arrangement of buildings, open spaces, parking,
circulation and loading areas which are sensitive to the physical characteristics and
constraints of the site, and which provide efficient and pleasant places to work;
Create a high quality of architectural and landscape design, with an emphasis on
functional needs, reducing the apparent mass of large scale buildings, and screening and
buffering loading, storage and working areas from incompatible land uses and from the
public view.
Project specific standards and guidelines shall take precedence when in conflict with the following
guidelines. All projects must be designed to be accessible for persons with disabilities in accordance
with currently applicable requirements.
SITE PLANNING
Grading
Development should relate to the natural surroundings and minimize grading by following the natural
contours as much as possible. Graded slopes should be rounded and contoured to blend with the
existing terrain.
Grading should emphasize and accentuate scenic vistas and natural landforms. Significant natural
vegetation and other unique features should be retained and incorporated into the project whenever
possible.
c1c // /' ?
INDUSTRIAL
Avoid large manufactured slopes in favor of several smaller slopes integrated throughout the project.
Smaller slopes are less obtrusive, more easily revegetated and can be used to add visual interest,
preserve views, and provide physical buffers where necessary.
Compatibility
The arrangement of structures, parking and circulation areas, and open spaces should recognize the
particular characteristics of the site and should relate to the surrounding built environment in pattern,
function, scale, character and materials. In developed areas, new projects should meet or exceed the
standards of quality which have been set by surrounding development.
Use techniques such as building placement and orientation, increased setbacks, screen walls and
landscaping to buffer incompatible land uses from industrial operations.
Site design elements
The main elements of sound industrial site design include: controlled site access; service areas located
at the sides and rear of buildings; convenient access, visitor parking and on-site circulation; screening
of outdoor storage, work areas and equipment; emphasis on the main building entry and landscaping,
and; landscaped open space.
BuUdin& placement
Placement of structures should consider the existing built context of the industrial area, ~e location of
incompatible land uses, the location of major traffic generators as well as an analysis of a site's
characteristics and particular influences.
The siting and design of structures and landscaping should ensure that they blend into the terrain and
not dominate the landform as seen from lower elevations. Where feasible, locate buildings to conceal
larger graded slopes.
A variety of building and parking setbacks should be provided in order to create diversity and avoid
long monotonous building facades.
c2t/ ---/~r
(Rev. 1_ 21. 19M)
IV-2
INDUSTRIAL
[] El 13
;':',':':'::C:- ::::.:;;:::;:::; :,:.,::::;,:;,:::
....'.'..... ,....,....-- '-'-"-"".,-
'iLb\::: :.;:I:::::;;: \{\;\':,;":i:
,_,.,,_ ;,._ _d_',_:_:
:::'::<: ::,:::,:::;::::, ,:~::::\:::::::
c:;:_:: ,,";_:_:"""" >,,:;:;.;.:::::
.0,. '." '... _. '.".. ....... '( 0.:. ~: :'. ........
:~ l'\".P; o."~. .: .~. ",: ~~ ~..' ":. ."?' : ::.l::~ to:..-,
Building setbacks should be proportionate to the scale of the structures and considerate of existing
development. Larger structures should require more setback area for balance of scale and so as not to
impose on neighboring uses.
The provision of outdoor patio and leisure areas for employees is strongly encouraged. Place structures
to create spaces for plazas, courts and gardens. Setback areas can often be used to provide space for
patio areas.
Locate structures and on-site circulation systems to minimize pedestrian/vehicle conflicts. Link
structures to the public sidewalk where possible with walkways, textured paving, landscaping, and
trellises.
Vehicular access and circulation
Site access and internal circulation should promote safety, efficiency and convenience. Avoid conflicts
between vehicles and pedestrians, minimize dead-end driveways, and provide adequate areas for
maneuvering, stacking, truck staging and loading, and accommodating emergency vehicles.
,
02&-/ t:F/
INDUSTRIAL
The number of site access points should be minimized and located as far as possible from street
intersections. Whenever possible, provide at least two separate entry points, as far removed from one
another as possible, in order to facilitate emergency access. The use of common driveways which
provide access to more than one site is encouraged and may in some cases be required.
Driveway throats adequate to stack at least one vehicle behind the sidewalk should be provided at all
access points. With larger projects or access points .which serve truck traffic, significantly more
stacking area may be required.
Primary circulation drives should whenever possible be separate from parking areas and provide no
direct access to parking spaces. Decorative paving should be used at pedestrian crossing points adjacent
to public access areas.
Loading and service areas should be provided with separate access and circulation whenever possible.
Entrances and exits to and from parking and loading facilities should be clearly marked with appropriate
directional signage where multiple access points are provided.
Continuous circulation should be provided whenever possible. Turnarounds should be provided
wherever dead-end driveways or parking aisles cannot be avoided. Emergency vehicle access and
turnarounds shall meet the requirements of the city fire' prevention bureau.
Vision clearance shall be provided at street intersections and driveway areas (CVMC 12.12.120 and
12.12.130).
Site entries
Principal vehicular access into a industrial project should be through an entry drive rather than a parking
aisle. Project entry areas should be enhanced and obvious to the customer. Landscaped medians,
enriched paving, decorative landscaped entry walls and low profile monument signs are encouraged.
. ,.
Parkin&
~
The industrial site should be a self-contained development capable of accommodating its own automobile
and truck parking needS. The use of the public street for parking and staging of trucks is not allowed.
caev._2I,I9!l4)
IV-4
c2tl-) Ie/'
INDUSTRIAL
The parking lot and cars should not be the dominant visual elements of the site. Large expansive paved
areas located between the street and the building are to be avoided in favor of smaller multiple lots
separated by landscaping and buildings. Introduce decorative paving and canopy trees to add visual
interest.
Parking which is visible from the street or other areas exposed to public view must be screened and
softened by landscaping. earth berms, low screen walls, or a combination thereof (CYMC 19.62.080).
""'~
"
r
Vehicular circulation and parking patterns between connected parking areas and within individual
parking lots should be coordinated to minimize traffic conflicts.
The parking area should be designed in a manner which links the structures to the street sidewalk
system as an extension of the pedestrian environment. This can be accomplished by using design
features such as walkways with enhanced paving, trellis structures, and special landscaping treatment.
Design parking areas so that pedestrians walk parallel to moving cars. The need for pedestrians to cross
parking aisles and landscape areas should be minimized.
Parking areas should be separated from structures by a landscaped strip and raised concrete walkway.
Continuous concrete curbs delineating walkways or landscape planters should be used in lieu of wheel
stops.
Parking areas shall be landscaped, receiving interior as well as perimeter treatment in accordance with
the city Landscape Manual.
Pedestrian circulation
Separate vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems should be provided whenever possible. A
pedestrian circulation plan is expected to be submitted for each project.
Use raised pathways, landscape planting and/or bollards to separate pedestrian walkways from vehicle
circulation drives and parking aisles to the maximum feasible extent. Walkways should be well lit.
A minimum five:.foot wide relatively smooth, non-slip walking surface should be provided (add two feet
for walkways which also serve as wheel stops). The use of brick, interlocking pavers, enhanced
concrete or other similar surface is encouraged. At a minimum, decorative paving should be used tI'
delineate cr03ssings at circulation drives and parking aisles adjacent to public access areas. t..-..:lt/ .-j / / )
INDUSTRIAL
Loading
Loading and service areas should be located and designed to minimize visibility. Placement of loading
docks at the front of structures or other highly visible areas is strongly discouraged. Location at the
rear of the site with separate access and circulation is preferred wherever possible.
Screen loading areas with portions of the building, architectural wing walls, freestanding walls and
landscape planting. Ensure adequate noise attenuation for adjacent incompatible land uses.
.~:,}./;'::
:':;:\:::}
<{}\}\\? ..).:;:.';.i::../~\;/1t;;\::j\\~6\\~f\ ~:i<?\M
:\,::',:{}::r -_c_. ,d"_ ,-" --,,-,
. '__ ' ::V::t%EW}}}~:~X~\Ef:
,-,,:;::::::::::,,:;:y::::-:-.-.-. ,-,:,',;,;-"'-"','.-... "/:Ii.t\{\'.%{i@\U
~~:"h:l::,<(;,~::::::,:<:""<;::::::;';:",,,::~;:~",,:::::::i::: ~:::::::::::::~:;-
~~
Separate loading activities from automobile parking and public access areas. Backing from the public
street onto the site for loading blocks the street and causes unsafe truck maneuvering and should be
avoided. Loading facilities should be offset from driveway openings.
Walls and screening
Walls serve a major function in the industria1landscape to provide security, and to screen automobiles,
loading and storage areas, and utility structures. However, walls should be kept to a minimum and as
low as possible while performing their screening and security functions.
Where walls are used at property frontages, or screenwalls are used to conceal storage and equipment
areas, they should be designed to blend with the site's architecture. Both sides of all perimeter walls
should be architectu~ treated. Landscaping should be used to soften the appearance of walls and to
deter graffiti (CYMC 9.20.055).
(Ilev.l_ 21.1994)
IV-6
~CJ'-//d-
INDUSTRIAL
When security fencing is required, it should be a combination of solid walls with pilasters and
decorative view segments, or short solid walls and wrought iron grill work combinations. Chain link
or barbed/razor wire fencing should be avoided and is generally unacceptable for any area exposed to
public view. Long expanses of wall surfaces should be offset and architecturally designed to prevent
monotony. Landscape pockets should be provided.
I
I
-.
I
I
~
Where screening is required, a combination of elements should be used including solid masonry walls,
berms, and landscaping. The height should be determined by the height of the material or equipment
being screened. Chain link fencing with redwood or neutral colored slatting may be an acceptable
screening material for areas not visible from public view. Exterior storage should be confined to
portions of the site least visible to public view.
Any outdoor equipment, whether on a roof, side of a structure, or on the ground, should be
appropriately screened from view. The method of screening should be architecturally integrated with
adjacent structures in terms of materials, color, shape and size. Where individual freestanding
equipment is provided, a continuous screen is desirable.
Trash
Trash storage must be fully enclosed and incorporated within the main structures or separate
freestanding enclosures (CYMC 19.58.340). Locations should be unobtrusive and conveniently
accessible for trash collection but not block circulation drives during loading operations. Recommended
placement is to the rear of structures within service and loading areas screened from public view and
positioned so as to protect adjacent incompatible uses from noise and odors.
Enclosures should provide a concrete surface and be of steel reinforced masonry construction with frame
and face doors of heavy gauge metal finished to complement the project architecture and materials.
Enclosures should provide clear interior dimensions of 6 ft. x 9 ft. x 5 ft. high with metal wheel guides
or interior curbing, and fronted by a 12 ft. wide concrete apron of adequate thickness to protect asphalt
paving. All freestanding enclosures visible to the public should be well screened with landscaping.
Plans and specifications should be reviewed with the local waste disposal company. cJ-t} --- ) /3
INDUSTRIAL
Recycling
Recycling collection and loading areas should be fully enclosed and designed to accept the number and
size of containers deemed adequate to serve the project in accordance with the standards of the local
recycling collection company.
Whenever feasible, locate recycling areas adjacent to trash collection areas. Use signs to clearly
distinguish between recycling and trash containers and the materials which can be placed within them.
Enclosures or containers should be designed to protect recyclables from the elements.
Enclosures should be designed to complement the project architecture and materials, and be located in
convenient and accessible but unobtrusive areas well screened with landscaping. Protect adjacent uses
from noise and odors.
Plans and specifications should be reviewed with the local recycling collection company.
ARCHITECTURE
Compatibility
There is no particular architeCtural "style" proposed for industrial structures. High quality, innovative
and imaginative architecture is encouraged.
The focus is expected to be on the development of a high quality industrial environment. The
architecture should consider compatibility with surrounding character, including harmonious building
style, form, size, color, material and roofIine. In developed areas, new projects should meet or exceed
the standards of quality which have been set by surrounding development.
The designer is expected to employ variations in form, building details and siting in order to create
visual interest. In all cases, the chosen architectural style should be employed on all building
elevations.
Scale
Industrial structures are often by necessity large, rectangular buildings, but need not appear monotonous
and unattractive. Listed below and in the following sections are a variety of design techniques to reduce
the scale and enhance the appearance of industrial structures.
~~
.. ............ .......
'. :'''~.~:~~i.;. - ~;~.::' - -,',",
~~ )..,..::.,- ...,'"
~--_l
J~"-
~j
02(}' )/7
_~R~ N~
INDUSTRIAL
Repetitive and uniform building placement and massing creates a monotonous and uninviting site plan
and street scene. Where possible, cluster buildings and vary their orientation in order to create visual
interest and inviting spaces. The use of arcades, trellises and other open structures can be introduced
to provide a visual and physical link between individual b:Jildings.
BuUding, facade and roof articulation
Heights and setbacks within the same building should be varied, and wall planes should be staggered
both horizontally and vertically in order to create pockets of light and shadow and provide visual relief
from monotonous, uninterrupted expanses of wall. Large, unrelieved expanses of wall can also
encourage graffiti (CVMC 9.20.055).
Entries to industrial structures should portray a quality appearance while being architecturally tied into
the overall mass and building composition.
Nearly vertical roofs (A-frames) and piecemeal mansard roofs (used on a portion of the building
perimeter only) should not be utilized. Mansard roofs should wrap around the entire perimeter of the
structure. Roof materials to be avoided include corrugated metal or highly reflective surfaces.
Metal buildings may be used but must be designed to appear as conventionally built structures in
accordance with and subject to all of the design guidelines for industrial buildings.
Fenestration
Windows and doors are key elements of any structure's form, and should relate to the scale of the
elevation on which they appear. Windows and doors can establish character ,by their rhythm and
variety.
Rolling shutter doors located on the inside of the building are the preferred method for providing large
loading doors while keeping a clean, uncluttered appearance from the exterior.
Materials and colors
Colors and matirials should be consistent with the chosen architectural style and compatible with the
character of surrounding development. Sensitive alteration of colors and materials can produce diversity
and enhance architectural forms. . ,/'
~t0..//.?
INDUSTRIAL
Materials for industrial projects should be durable and require low maintenance. They should be
consistently applied and work harmoniously with adjacent materials. Piecemeal embellishment and
frequent changes in materials should be avoided. Materials tend to appear substantial and integral when
material changes occur at changes in plane.
Avoid highly reflective surfaces, expose!! precision block walls, and materials with high maintenance
such as stained wood, shingles or metal siding.
The color palette should be selected carefully. Subdued color combinations consisting of a limited
number of colors are encouraged. Large areas of intense white color and vibrant compositions should
be avoided. Variations in shade or tone can be used to enhance form and heighten interest.
Colors should be used to articulate entries or other architectural features. The use of color or color
combinations to transform the building or any of its elements into a sign, such as "corporate color
striping", is strongly discouraged.
Graffiti deterrence/protection should be considered in the selection of building materials, paints and
other protective coatings (CVMC 9.20.055).
Mechanical and utility equipment
All mechanical equipment whether mounted on the roof, side of a structure, or on the ground shall be
screened from view (CVMC 15.16.030). Utility meters and equipment should be placed in locations
which are not exposed to view from the street or be suitably screened. All screening devices should
be compatible with the architecture, material and color of the adjacent structures.
The screening of roof-mounted equipment is expected to be incorporated into the design of the roof.
Full parapets, sloping roofs and low parapets with supplemental screens may be used to screen roof
equipment provided that roof-mounted screen walls are fully integrated with the buildings architecture;
"fence-type" screening is generally considered unacceptable.
LOW PARAPET WITH eCREE"l
FULL PARAPET
eLOPING ROOF
Mechanical equipment is expected to be located below the roofline. Equipment visible from the upper
floors of adjacent buildings or other elevated locations should be installed in an orderly, compact
manner and should be colored to coordinate with the color of the roof surface on which it is placed.
Noise attenuation should be considered in the case of adjacent incompatible uses.
02tJ-)/6
cae..l_ 21. \994)
Iv-tO
INDUSTRIAL
Satellite dish antennas are frequently used for business communications and should be considered early
in the design process in terms of location and required screening (CVMC 19.22.030).
Solar panels should be integrated into the roof design. Solar panels placed on sloped roofs should be
para1lel to and resting on the roof slope. Frames should coordinate with roof colors.
Sloped and racked collectors may be used on flat roof areas if collectors are located in the interior
portion of the roof, well away from the perimeter, and the racks are enclosed on the sloping and back
sides and colored to coordinate with roof colors.
Li&htlng
Lighting should be used to provide illumination for the security and safety of on-site areas such as
entries, pathways, and parking and working areas. Lighting can also be used to deter graffiti (CVMC
9.20.055). The design of light fixtures and their structural support should be architecturally compatible
with the main structures on-site.
Building illumination and architectural lighting should be indirect and concealed from view. Indirect
wall lighting, wall "washing" from concealed fixtures and landscape lighting is encouraged provided
it is subtle and not overly bright.
All exterior lighting shall be selective and shielded to confine light within the site and prevent glare onto
adjacent properties or streets (CVMe 19.66.100).
Signs
See also the Sign Design Guidelines in this Manual. For allowable sign types and sizes refer to the sign
provisions in Chapter 19 of the Municipal Code.
Every structure and industrial complex should be designed with a precise concept for adequate signing.
Provisions for sign placement, sign scale in relationship with the site and building, and sign readability
are expected to be considered in developing the project design and signing concept. All signing should
be highly compatible with the building and site design relative to size, color, material, and placement.
Sign locations, types, sizes, and style should be identified on the project plans.
Signs should be characterized by restraint and designed as supportive clements to land use. They are
intended to "identify" businesses and not to advertise products or dIsplay information not part of the
name of the business. c20 -)1 ?
INDUSTRIAL
Low-profile monument signs and individually cut (channel) letter signs are the preferred alternative for
business identification whenever possible. Freestanding pole and pylon signs are strongly discouraged.
Where several tenants occupy the same site, individual wall mounted signs are appropriate in
combination with a monument sign identifying the development and address.
Roof signs or wall signs whi:h extend above the roofline are strongly discouraged. Standardized
"corporate" signs are acceptable only if they comply with these guidelines. Painted wall signs and
exposed sign "cans" which are not incorporated into the structure of the building or a ground monument
are generally considered unacceptable.
The industrial site should be appropriately signed to give directions to loading and receiving areas,
visitor parking and other special areas.
LANDSCAPING
Refer to the Landscape Manual for the city's complete landscape planting and irrigation standards.
All areas not covered by structures, drives, parking or paving should be appropriately and professionally
landscaped. Drought tolerant planting should be emphasized in accordance with the requirements of
the city Landscape Manual.
For industrial uses, landscaping should be used to define areas by helping to focus on entrances to
buildings, parking lots, loading areas, defining the edges of various land uses, providing transition
between neighboring properties (buffering), and providing screening for parking, outdoor storage,
loading, and equipment areas.
Landscaping should generally constitute no less than 15 percent of the gross site area, and a minimum
of 10 percent of parking areas. Use dense formations and layering of plants to achieve immediate effect
when planting is used as the primary means to screen parking.
Landscaping should be in scale with adjacent buildings and be of appropriate size at maturity to
accomplish its intended goals. Use larger specimen trees at major entrances, along street frontages and
in larger open space areas. Flowering and multi-trunk species are encouraged.
Use of vines on walls can be effective in softening the appearance of structures and in deterring graffiti
(CYMC 9.20.055) in industrial areas because such walls often tend to be large and blank.
Landscaping should be used around the base of buildings, walls and fences to soften the.edge between
pavement and structures. A minimum clear width of five feet is generally required in order to provide
an appropriate planting space. This should be enlarged at building entrances to provide focus.
Landscaping in and around entrances and drives must be designed to maintain sight distances (CYMC
12.12.120 and 12.12.130).
Berming in conjunction-With landscaping can be used at the building edge to reduce structure mass and
height along facades.
(bY. 1_ 21. '9M)
IV-12
c2tJ -II r
INDUSTRIAL
Trees should be located throughout the parking lot and not simply at the ends of parking aisles.
Landscaping should be protected from vehicular and pedestrian encroachment by raised planting
surfaces, depressed walks, or the use of curbs. Concrete mow-strips are required per development
regulations between turf and shrub areas. Consider the use of "turfstone" for areas used exclusively
for emergency vehicle turnarounds.
Avoid water runoff through planter areas or across pedestrian walkways. Drainage elements which
dissect paving should complement the paving design.
Landscaping should be planned and maintained to avoid creating "hiding places. for possible criminal
activity.
dL}-)/ '7
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Sign Design Guidelines
,
~c ~ j;lO
SIGN DESIGN GUIDELINES
The following design guidelines should be consulted prior to developing signs for any project or
occupancy. See also the sign guidelines contained in the Commercial and Industrial sections of this
Manual. For allowable sign types and sizes refer to the sign provisions in Chapter 19 of the Municipal
Code.
No other aspect of design can have a more dramatic and immediate impact on the appearance and
character of a city than signs. Restrained and tasteful signage conveys an orderly and quality image
which complements project design and which enhances the overall impression of the community. Such
signs are also far superior in accomplishing their primary task of identifying the suppliers of goods and
services to their prospective customers.
An excessive number of signs, or signs which contain too much information, degrade the visual quality
of the environment and convey a disorderly and inferior image regardless of the care taken with site
planning and architecture. Also, as businesses compete for the viewer's attention with an ever
increasing number of large, ostentatious signs, the customer's ability to sort through all of the visual
information and identify any particular business decreases proportionately.
The guidelines for signs are intended to:
Encourage signs which are used primarily to "identify" businesses and provide directional
information rather than advertise products, and which manifest restraint, order and taste
in the selection of size, shape, materials, copy, color and placement;
Limit the number of signs to only those necessary to properly identify the business, and
which are legible in the circumstances in which they are seen;
Promote signs which are compatible with the nature, character and design of the area in
which they are located, and which are appropriate to the type of activity to which they
pertain.
Project specific standards and guidelines shall take precedence when in conflict with the following
guidelines.
Sign concept
Every commercial, industrial or institutional structure or complex should be designed with a precise
concept for adequate signing.
Provisions for sign placement, sign scale in relationship with the site and buUdin&, and sign readability
are expected to be considered in developing the project design and sign concept.
Sign locations, types, sizes and style are expected to be identified on the project plans. All signs must
be in compliance with State and Federal accessibility requirements.
~'/;L/
SIGNS
Compatibility
The sign concept should consider the character of other uses and signs existing within the area, and
create harmonious and nonconflicting designs, and avoid competing or obstructing sign arrangements.
It would be incompatible, for instance, to introduce an internally-illuminated cabinet sign into an area
of professional offices identified by understated brass cut-out letter type signs. Individual signs should
relate to the site and building upon which they are placed in terms of scale, proportion, colors,
materials, and the other design elements setforth below.
Building wall and fascia signs should be compatible with the predominant visual elements of the
building. Commercial centers, office complexes and other similar multi-tenant facilities are required
to be part of a planned sign program in accordance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
Where there is more than one sign, all signs should be complementary to one another in terms of
construction materials (copy, background, support), letter size and type, method of support (wall or
ground base), size and configuration of sign area, and related components.
Placement
Freestanding signs should be placed within a landscaped area, perpendicular to approaching traffic and
positioned so as not to obstruct vision or create a traffic hazard to the satisfaction of the city traffic
engineer (CVMC 12.12.120 and 12.12.130). A location at or near the main entry will facilitate
. circulation. Refer to the Landscape Manual for the minimum size and dimension for planted areas at
the base of freestanding signs.
8IGN WITHIoI D/RfVEW A Y ENTRY MEDIAN
Place wall signs to indicate building entries, consistent with the proportions and scale of building
elements within the facade. Buildings that have a monolithic or plain facade can use signs to establish
or continue appropriate design rhythm, scale and proportion. A particular sign may fit well on a plain
wall area, but would overpower the finer scale and proportion of the lower storefront. A sign which
is ayy.opriate near the building entry may look tiny and out of place above the ground level.
Signs which designate parking spaces for the disabled should whenever possible be placed upon walls
rather than on freestanding poles or monuments.
,
$//~;Z
(aev.1_2I,I994)
V-2
SIGNS
Size and shape
Signs should not dominate the site frontage, building architecture or individual storefront design.
The use of sign shapes or graphics consistent with the nature of the business to be identified is
encouraged, i.e., hammer symbol for hardware store or a mortar and pestle for a drug store. However,
care must be taken that narrow or oddly shaped signs do not impair the legibility of the message.
The closer a sign's viewing distance, the smaller that sign need be. Make signs smaller if they are
oriented to pedestrians. The pedestrian-oriented sign is usually read from a short distance; the vehicle-
oriented sign is viewed from a much greater distance and is dependent on vehicle speed.
Copy
A sign with a brief, succinct message is simpler and faster to read, looks cleaner and is more attractive.
Overly intricate typefaces which are difficult to read should be avoided as they reduce the signs ability
to communicate. Where practicable, combine words with logos, symbols and artistic graphics. A
simple, recognizable graphic can communicate much more effectively than words.
The copy area of signs, including logos, symbols and graphics, should not exceed SO percent of the
background area on which it is applied. If copy takes up too much of the background area, the sign
is harder to read.
Very often the numbers which identify individual properties and buildings cannot be read from the street
or are missing altogether. The identification of each building or store address in legible numbers over
the main entry doorway or within 10 feet of the main entry is encouraged.
"L>-~
Freestanding signs are intended to provide street addresses, and identification for the freestanding
building or complex as a whole and for up to four tenants. All tenant signs should be limited in size
to the width of the architectural features of the sign and shall be uniform in size as well as color.
,
:20,/ :23
SIGNS
. c ",-""!t-,,~ ~ ...
:::'1.Q.J~ :y: :01
~.~
Freestanding signs for multi-tenant buildings or centers should identify the center or building by address
and name. Strip developments or multi-building complexes should display the range of addresses for
that development on their freestanding signs.
Colors and materials
Sign colors and materials should be selected to contribute to legibility and design integrity. Use
significant contrast between the background and letter or symbol colors. Avoid too many different
colors on a sign. Too many colors compete with the content for the viewer's attention.
Li&htin&
Direct and indirect lighting methods are allowed provided that they are not harsh or uMecessarily
bright, and light and glare is confined within the site.
c2tJ --- /,,2 '/
(Reo. J_ 21. 1994)
V-4
ATTACHMENT 7
. ID~~TI~~ ~JIDD~W
PROCEDURAL GUIDE AND APPLICATION
elt:; of Ciulla Vllta
'la..l., D.put...t
o2V - / .;J,_~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
~
lMiE
DESIGN REVIEW.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 1
DESIGN MANUAL .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 2
D~P~ST~AJtDS ..................................... 2
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE ................................. 2
STAFF OR COMMITI'EE REVIEW .................................. 3
PROJECT'SUBMITfAL ........................................... 3
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ...................................... 3
.
PROJECT'REVIEW .............................................. 4
DRC MEETINGS ................................................ 4
PROJECT' APPROVALS ........................................... 4
APPEALS ...................................................... 5
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5
APPENDIX A - DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
APPENDIX B - DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPENDIX C _ DEVELOPMENT PERMIT PROCESSING AGREEMENT
APPENDIX D . SUBMITIAL REQUIREMENTS
APPENDIX E. SUBMITfAL REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY
APPENDIX F - FLOW CHART
026 -- J;Z?
DESIGN REVIEW
Design review involves a comprehensive evaluation of the site plan, architectural and
landscape design components of development. Generally, all small-lot single family,
multiple-family, commercial, industrial, and institutional development requires design
review.
The primary participants in the process are the owner/developer, the project designer, the
city design review staff, and the Design Review Committee (ORC). The DRC is appointed
by the City Council and consists of five city residents with an interest in and sensitivity to
design.
pESIGN MANUAL
The principles and guidelines for design review are set forth in the City of Chula Vista
Design Manual. Copies of the Manual are available from the city planning department
located at 276 Fourth Avenue, or by calling 691-5101.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
The Design Manual must be used in conjunction with city's development standards. These
include building and fire codes, site and facility accessibility requirements for the disabled,
zoning and planned community district regulations, grading and subdivision regulations, and
a separate Landscape Manual, among others. There are also specific and precise plans,
redevelopment plans, and project specific design guidelines which may supplement or
supersede the otherwise applicable guidelines, standards and regulations.
The planning department may be contacted regarding which if any of these other plans,
standards and guidelines may apply to a particular property.
PRE-APPLlCA nON CONFERENCE
Prior to the preparation and submission of detailed plans, project applicants are encouraged
to schedule a pre-application conference with city design review staff. This conference will
be used to familiarize applicants with the city's design guidelines and design review process,
and to discuss project specific design issues and a tentative processing schedule prior to
formal application.
Appointments may be made by contacting the design review secretary in the planning
department at 691-5101.
...20 ~ ).,) ?
Page 1
~ONING ADMINISTRATOR OR COMMITTEE REVIEW
Certain types of projects may be processed by the zoning admiinistrtor (ZA) rather than the
DRC. ZA review is less formal and can generally be accomplished in 3-4 weeks versus 6-8
weeks for projects which require DRC approval, although these time frames can vary
depending on the complexity of the project, the current caseload and/or the need for
environmental review (see below).
Projects which qualify for ZA design review include:
. signs;
. residential projects of four (4) units or less;
. commercial, industrial, or institutional additions which constitutes less than
a 50 percent increase in Ooor area;
. new commercial, industrial, or institutional projects with a total Ooor area of
20,000 sq. ft. or less, when such projects are located within a planned
community with its own design guidelines and design review process.
fROJECf SUBMITTAL
The design review process formally begins when a complete preliminary design review
package is received by the design review staff. A complete package includes an application
(Appendix A), disclosure statement (Appendix B), development permit processing
agreement, when applicable (Appendix C), development plans (see preliminary submittal
requirements, Appendix D), and the applicable filing fee or deposit as determined from the
city's fee schedule.
Design review staff will meet with the applicant to review the application package for
completeness and inform the applicant if additional information is necessary. An
appointment should be scheduled by the applicant to submit the package directly to the
project planner.
E~RONMENTALREVlEW
Projects may require environmental review under the prOVlSlons of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Because of special public review requirements
mandated by state law, the processing period for environmental review will generally range
between 8-12 weeks. Environmental review can be processed concurrently with, but must
be completed prior to, design review approval.
It should be pOSSIble for staff to determine whether or not environmental review will be
required at the pre-application conference based on the general parameters of the project
Staff will also review with the applicant the environmental review process, application forms
and necessary fees.
A separate environmental review application and procedural guide is available from the
planning department
d-.O ~ / .:L ?"
Page 2
pROJECT REVIEW
Approximately 2-3 weeks after the preliminary design review package has been filed, a
project review meeting will be scheduled with the applicant to discuss staff comments on the
plans. If deemed necessary or desirable, design review staff will arrange for representatives
from other city departments to attend the meeting to discuss their comments in detail.
Following this meeting, final plans, and exhibits will be prepared by the applicant for action
by the ZA or the DRC (see final submittal requirements. Appendix D). The time frames
noted earlier for ZA or DRC review 1SS'lme lone week turnaround between the project
review meeting and the submittal of final plans and exlnbits. When the final plans/exhibits
are received, the schedule for action by the ZA or the DRC will be confirmed.
A preliminary presentation or a working session with a subcommittee of the DRC may be
scheduled if the applicant desires committee input prior to final action on the project.
The design review staff reviews the final plans and prepares a staff report and
recommendation to the DRC, or a letter to the applicant in the case of ZA action. The
project planner will discuss the contents of the draft staff report or letter with the applicant
prior to it being finalized and issued.
DRC MEETINGS
DRC meetings are held the second and fourth Monday of each month beginning at 4;30
p.m. in Conference Rooms 2 and 3 of the Public Services Building of the Civic Center at
276 Fourth Avenue. The meetings are noticed and open to the general public.
A copy of the agenda and the staff report to the Committee will be mailed to the applicant
at least three days prior to the meeting. The project architect/designer and the applicant
or a designated representative should, in all cases, attend the meeting. It is likely the
project will be continued to a subsequent meeting if there is no one representing the project
in attendance.
PRO.1ECT APPROVALS
The project applicant will be notified in writing of the decision and any conditions applied
by the ZA or the DRC. Design review approvals expire after one year unless a written
request for extension, along with the nectSS"ty plans, exhibits and filing fee, is received and
approved prior to the expiration date.
Design review approval does not in itself authorize work on a project to commence. All
necessary permits, including building, grading, andlor other permits must be obtained prior
to any site work or building construction.
-20 ' ) :2 '7
Page 3
APPEALS
The applicant or other interested party may appeal the decision of the zoning administrator
or DRC within 10 working says after the decision is rendered. Appeals from the zoning
administrator are directed to the DRC, and appeals from the DRC are directed to the
Planning Commission. A decision of the Planning Commission may be further appealed to
the City Council
Appeals are generally given priority over new cases, and will normally be scheduled for
hearing 3-4 weeks from the date the appeal is filed. The design review staff should be
contacted regarding the necessary forms, fees and exlubits for filing an appeal.
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS
Applicants for development projects, including additions and interior/exterior remodels, are
advised that they may be required to install and/or modify on-and off-site public and private
improvements. These improvements may include on-site structures, paving and landscaping,
and requirements to dedicate, improve and/or modify streets and other public facilities off-
site.
The necessity for or exact extent of these requirements, if any, are generally not known until
an application has been filed and routed for review and comment to the various city
departments and outside agencies. Applicants are encouraged, however, to contact the city
regarding the possibility for and the general extent of these requirements at the earliest
possible stage of project consideration. The city departments normally involved with such
requirements are the Departments of Planning, Building & Housing, and Fire for private
improvements, and the Engineering Department for public improvements.
c20--)30
Page 4
APPENDIX A Date Received
ZA 0 DRC 0 Case No. DRC
City of Chula Vista Planning Department Receipt No.
. Design Review Application Tentative Consideration Date
PROjECf NAME
PROjECf LOCATION
PROjECf ADDRESS
(Obtain rrom Engineering Department)
ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER(S)
GENERAL PlAN DESIGNATION
ZONE
REDEVELOPMENT AREA
PROPERlY OWNER
ADDRESS
PlANNED COMMUNllY
ZIP
PHONE
PROJECf APPLICANT
ADDRESS
ZIP
PHONE
ARCHITECfIDESIGNER
ADDRESS
CONTACf PERSON
PROIECf DESCRIPTION
1. lAND USE: EXISTING
2. LOT SIZE:
3. NO. OF DU:
4. TYPE OF DU:
5. EXISTING DU: STUDIO
PROPOSED DU: STUDIO
BUILDING FLOOR AREA: EXISTING
PARKING REQUIRED: STD SIZE
PARKING PROVIDED: STD SIZE
8. lANDSCAPING REQUIRED:
lANDSCAPING PROVIDED:
9. OPEN SPACE REQUIRED: COMMON
OPEN SPACE PROVIDED: COMMON
10. PROPOSED EXCEPTIONS TO ZONING REQUIREMENTS (pRECISE PlAN)
PHONE
PROPOSED
TOTAL ACREAGE:
PROPOSED
DETACHED
NO. OF LOTS:
EXISTING
ATTACHED
1 BR
1 BR
2 BR
2 BR
6.
7.
PROPOSED
COMPACT
COMPACf
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
RELATED CASES:
PRINT APPUCANT/AGENT NAME
yj)/ (3)
APPUCANT/AGENT SIGNATURE
.APPENDIX B
'IHE CITY OF C:Huu. VISTA DJSC10SURE STATEMENT
.You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of cenain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign
contributions, on aU mailers which will require discretionary action on the pan of the Oty Council, Planning Commission. and
all otber official bodies. The followinllnformation must be disclosed:
1. Listtbe lI8IIles of all persons baving a financial interest In tbe property whicb is tbe subject of tbe application or the
contract, e.g.. owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
Ii
2. If any person. identified pursuant to (1) above Is a corporallon or pannership, list the umes of aU individuals owning
more than 10% of the shares In the corporation or owninl any pannership interest In the pannership.
3. If any person. identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit orpnizalion or a trust, list the umes of any person
serving as director of the non-profit orpn\zation or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
4. Have you had more tban $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the Oty starr, Boards, Commissions.
Commiuees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ No_ Jr yes. please indicate person(s):
S. Please Identify each and every person. including any agents, employees, consultants, or Independent contractors who
you bave assigned to represent you before the City In this mailer.
6. Have you and/Or your officers or aFnts, In tbe agrepte, contributed more tban $1,000 to a Councllmember in tbe
current or prec:eding e1ec:tlon period? Yes_ No_ If yes, state which Councilmember(s):
. . . (NO'IB: AItadt Mditloaa1 .... . ..... ''Y) · · ·
Date:
Sipature of contractor/applicant
;2fJ-132
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
. Pmon Is MftIw:d /II: 'Any /NIJoNIuIJl. jInn. et>-".-rIrip, joiIII_ _umon. I/XiIJ/ c6Ib, fI-l-r- 1.4h.... ...,.......... - - NtCMr...,.....
IIW .III-.y'" ClIIIIIl}\ tiq .,,;I.-.y. tiq~. ....... ."... jW1Ibklll 1IIbdi....... ." -.y ...""" ,,--.,...,.. .., III. ....u.'
APPENDIX C
(1 of 4)
Development Permit Processing Agreement
Permit Applicant:
Applicant's Address:
Type of Permit:
Agreement Date:
Deposit Amount:
This Agreement ("Agreement") between the City of Chula Vista, a chartered municipal
corporation ("City") and the forenamed applicant for a development permit ("Applicant"),
effective as of the Agreement Date set forth above, is made with reference to the following
facts :
Whereas, Applicant has applied to the City for a permit of the type aforereferenced
("Permit") which the City has required to be obtained as a condition to permitting Applicant to
develop a parcel of property; and,
Whereas, the City will incur expenses in order to process said permit through the various
departments and before the various boards and commissions of the City ("Processing Services");
and,
Whereas, the purpose of this agreement is to reimburse the City for all expenses it will
incur in connection with providing the Processing Services;
Now, therefore, the parties do hereby agree, in exchange for the mutual promises herein
contained, as follows:
1. Applicant's Duty to Pay.
Applicant shall pay all of City's expenses incurred in providing Processing Services
related to Applicant's Permit, including all of City's direct and overhead costs related thereto.
This duty of Applicant shall be referred to herein as "Applicant's Duty to Pay."
1.1. Applicant's Deposit Duty.
As partial performance of Applicant's Duty to Pay, Applicant shall deposit the amount
aforereferenced ("Deposit").
1.1.1. City shall charge its lawful expenses incurred in providing Processing
Services against Applicant's Deposit. If, after the conclusion of processing Applicant's Permit,
any portion of the Deposit remains, City shall return said balance to Applicant without interest
thereon. If, during the processing of Applicant's Permit, the amount of the Deposit becomes
exhausted, or is imminently likely to become exhausted in the opinion of the City, upon notice
of same by City, Applicant shall forthwith provide such additional deposit as City shall calculate
as reasonably necessary to continue to provide Processing Services. The duty of Applicant to
>>--/;1;1
APPENDIX C
(2 of 4)
initially deposit and to supplement said deposit as herein required shall be known as "Applicant's
Deposit Duty".
2. City's Duty.
City shall, upon the condition that Applicant is not in breach of Applicant's Duty to Pay
or Applicant's Deposit Duty, use good faith to provide processing services in relation to
Applicant's Permit application.
2.1. City shall have no liability hereunder to Applicant for the failure to process
Applicant's Permit application, or for failure to process Applicant's Permit within the time frame
requested by Applicant or estimated by City.
2.2. By execution of this agreement Applicant shall have no right to the Permit for
which Applicant has applied. . City shall use its discretion in evaluating Applicant's Permit
Application without regard to Applicant's promise to pay for the Processing Services, or the
execution of the Agreement.
3. Remedies.
3.1. Suspension of Processing.
In addition to all other rights and remedies which the City shall otherwise have at law
or equity, the City has the right to suspend and/or withhold the processing of the Permit which
is the subject matter of this Agreement, as well as the Permit which may be the subject matter
of any other Permit which Applicant has before the City.
3.2. Civil Collection.
In addition to all other rights and remedies which the City shall otherwise have at law
or equity, the City has the right to collect all sums which are or may become due hereunder by
civil action, and upon instituting litigation to collect same, the prevailing party shall be entitled
to reasonable attorney's fees and costs.
4. Miscellaneous.
4.1. 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 adjacent to the signatures of the parties represented.
c10-J3L/
APPENDIX C
(3 of 4)
4.2. Governing LawlVenue.
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only
in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable,
the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and
performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
4.3. Multiple Signatories.
If there are multiple signatories to this agreement on behalf of Applicant, each of such
signatories shall be jointly and severally liable for the performance of Applicant's duties herein
set forth.
4.4. Signatory Authority.
The signatory to this agreement hereby warrants and represents that he is the duly
designated agent for the Applicant and has been duly authorized by the Applicant to execute this
Agreement on behalf of the Applicant. Signatory shall be personally liable for Applicant's Duty
to Pay and Applicant's Duty to Deposit in the event he has not been authorized to execute this
Agreement by Applicant.
4.5. Hold Harmless.
Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed
officers and employees, from and against any claims, suits, actions or proceedings, judicial or
administrative, for writs, orders, injunction or other relief, damages, liability, cost and expense
(including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of City's actions in processing or issuing
Applicant's Permit, or in exercising any discretion related thereto including but not limited to
the giving of proper environmental review, the holding of public hearings, the extension of due
process rights, except only for those claims, suits, actions or proceedings arising from the sole
negligence or sole willful conduct of the City, its officers, or employees known to, but not
objected to, by the Applicant. Applicant'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,
Applicant, 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. Applicant's indemnification
of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Applicant. At its sole
discretion, the City may participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action, but
such participation shall not relieve the applicant of any obligation imposed by this condition.
4.6. 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 of Chula Vista and
;LO~/ 35'
APPENDIX C
(4 of 4)
acted upon by the City of Chula Vista 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.
Now therefore, the parties hereto, having read and understood the terms and conditions
of this agreement, do hereby express their consent to the terms hereof by setting their hand
hereto on the date set forth adjacent thereto.
Dated:
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA
by:
Dated:
by:
(f; \shared\planning\perproccs .agm)
02cf-- / } 6
APPENDIX D
(1 of 4)
City of Chula Vista P1anning Department
.~ It,..
Submittal Requirements
ODRC
o ZA
No. of Copies
Items Needed Prelim. Final
Prelim. Final ZA DRC ZA DRC
0 0 1. Site Plan 5 5 2 7
Site plans must be accurately drawn and fully
dimensioned and contain the following information:
(a) North Arrow
(b) Scale (min. 1" = 20')
(c) Legal description
(d) Property Lines (dimensioned)
(e) Streets (names & dimensions)
(f) Structures (existing & proposed)
(g) No. of units (multi-family)
(h) Parking (no. & sizes)
(i) Parking (screening, 6" curbs, step-offs)
(j) Driveway widths
(k) Setbacks (front, rear & sides)
(I) Open space area (multi-family)
(m) Landscape area (multi-family)
(n) Fences (existing & proposed)
(0) Trash enclosures (6'x8'xS')
(P) Lot coverage
(q) Utilities (existing & proposed)
(r) Roof equipment & screening
(s) Exterior lighting
(t) Signs
(u) Existing trees
species:
dia:
disposition:
size:
0 0 2. Floor Plan 5 5 2 7
Provide preliminary, fully dimensioned architectural
floor plans from which parking and lot coverage
calculations can be accurately made.
J()~/31
WPC F:_......\I792A.94
APPENDIX D
(2 of 4)
City of Chula Vista Planning Department
.DesilnIl~_W
Submittal Requirements
ODRC
DZA
No. of Copies
Items Needed Prelim. Final
Prelim. Final ZA DRC ZA DRC
0 0 3. Landsca,pe Plan 5 5 2 7
Conceptua1landscape plans to show planting areas,
major landscape structures (such as fences, walls,
walks, pools, and trellises with dimensions) and
paving materials.
The landscape plans should indicate the proposed
general plant pallet and container size. Include both
common and botanical names. (Approval of a final
landscaping and irrigation plan shall be required prior
to issuance of a building permit.)
0 0 4. Gradine 5 5 2 2
Preliminary grading plans to show proposed/existing
contours both on-site and a minimum of 50 ft. beyond
the project boundaries. Indicate direction of existing
and proposed drainage, finish grade, finish floor
elevations, and retaining walls (with height and finish
materials specified).
0 0 5. Buildine Elevations 5 5 2 7
0 0 a) Elevations: Show all elevations with materials,
colors and dimensions specified.
0 0 b) Lights: Show the locations, height, size and
type of exterior lights.
0 0 c) Features: Indicate the locations of
identification signs, mailboxes, storage spaces,
air conditioning units, transformers, utility
meters and other items that affect the exterior
appearance of the project.
0 0 6. Roof Plan 5 5 2 7
Provide roof plans showing roof slope and materials,
the general size and location of all mechanical
equipment, vents, ducts and other roof mounted items.
WPC p:_.--.'I792A.94
c20~/3r;!
APPENDIX D
(3 of 4)
City of Chula Vista Planning Department
.DesipR'.W
Submittal Requirements
ODRC
o ZA
No. of Copies
Items Needed Prelim. Final
Prelim. Final ZA DRC ZA DRC
0 0 7. ~ 5 5 2 7
0 0 a) Site Plan: Show the location and size of all
freestanding and wall signs on the site plan.
0 0 b) Elevations: Provide fully dimensioned
building elevations showing sizes and locations
of existing and/or proposed wall signs
(minimum scale Va" = 1'-0")
0 0 c) Details: Provide detailed drawings of all
proposed signs indicating the type of letter,
color scheme, cabinet colors, and illumination,
and material specifications (minimum scale *"
= 1'-0:)
0 0 d) Inventory: A sign inventory (list) of all signs
must be submitted for any sign evaluation and
should include the type, description, size, area
and locations of ill existing and proposed
signs.
Example:
Si.n #1 ~ Size Awl Location
1 Wall Sign 4'x6' 24 sq. ft. West Elevation
0 0 8. Site Photo~raDhs I I I I
Provide 35 mm photographs and slides clearly
showing views of and from the project site, including
adjacent structures and significant neighboring
developments.
Photographs should be mounted on a 8-lh" x 11"
board (maximum size) and labeled accordingly. It is
desirable to take a series of overlapping photographs,
which could be arranged together to form a panoramic
view.
0 0 9. Colors and materials palette to include samples of I I
exterior building colors and materials mounted on an
illustration board, preferably 8-lh" x 11" in size.
'tJ~ / "
WI'C p,_,,--.II792A.94
.2
]';
APPENDIX D
(4 of 4)
City of ChuIa Vista Planning Department
.Design R~..
Submittal Requirements
ODRC
o ZA
No. of Copies
Items Needed Prelim. Final
Prelim. Final ZA DRC ZA DRC
0 0 10. Additional Information:
0 0 a) Aerial photograph
0 0 b) Perspective sketches
0 0 c) Models
0 0 d) Other:
WPC P,_....-rII792A.94
JJ) //'/V)
APPENDIX E
City of Chula Vista Planning Department
DesIgn ~e.w
Submittal Requirements Summary
ODRC
o ZA
PRELIMINARY
SUBMITIAL
ZA DRC
BP BP CD
Site Plan 5 5
Floor Plans 5 5
Landscape Concept Plan 5 5
Grading Plan 5 2
Elevations 5 5
Roof Plan 5 5
Sign Program 5 5
Site Photographs and 1 1
Slides
Color & Materials Pallete 1 1
Other
'If Dot submitted with preliminary
LEGEND
ZA Zoning Administrator
DRC Design Review Committee
BP Blueprints
CD Colored drawings
FINAL
SUBMITI AL
ZA DRC
BP BP CD
2 7 1
2 7
2 7 I
2 2
2 7 1
2 7
2 7 1
1* 1*
)O'/i!
WPC P:_\pIomDoc\I792A.94
APPENDIX F
DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS
- - --
. SUBMIT
INITIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
STUDY
API'lICATlON
8-12 WEEICS
- -
NEGATM
DEClARATION
ISSUED
I TO , ..
BUILDING 10
I PERMIT / REDEVElOPMENT
PROCESS AGENCY
I
I / I'
, ZONING 10 1lA'VS , -? 10
PREI.IMINARV PRElIMINARY ADMINlSTRAlOR APPEAL BUILDING
CONFERENCE / SUBMmAL DEOSION / PERMIT
PROCESS
2-3 WEOO ...., " 3-4 WEEI<S
, ~ , ~
MEETING WITH 1 WEEK , 3-4 WEEI<S , ORe i--
APPlICANT FINAL PUBLIC APPEAL
10 RE\IlEW / SUBMmAL 7 HEARING 10 1lA'VS ,
\.., STAFF COMMENTS
/
~
3-4 WEEI<S
\ , ,
~
}; PlJ\NNING 101lA'VS ,
COMMISSION APPEAL
HEARING /
3-4 WEEICS
. SOME PROJECTS. DEPENDING ON THE SIZE, ~LE AND IMPACT, REQUIRE AN , ,
INmAl ENVIRONMENTAl STUDY. THIS STUDY MUST BE COMPlETED AND A
NEGATM DEOARATlON MUST BE ISSUED PRIOR TO ACTION ON THE PROJECT. crTY
OOUNCIL
PUBLIC
.. IF THE PROJECT IS lOCATED WITHIN ONE OF THE cnvs REDEVElOPMEI'IT AREAS. HEARING
THE COMMITETEE RECOMMENDS ACTION TO THE REDMLOPMENT AGENCY
I
I
I
"-oil. ,,"IH
ORDINANCE NO. .2 (, P.:J
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDING SECTION 19.14.582 OF THE CHULA VISTA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW FOR ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
DESIGN REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL CATEGORIES OF PROJECTS
WHEREAS, in October 1992, the City Council approved the Permit Streamlining Workplan and
Implementation Schedule; and
WHEREAS, among other measures, said workplan called for allowing administrative review of
a broader range of projects subject to design review; and
WHEREAS, on May 2, 1994, the Design Manual Advisory Committee voted 7-0 to recommend
approval of the proposed amendment; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment has also been recommended for approval by the Design
Review Committee (by a vote of 5-0 on June 27, 1994), the Economic Development Commission (by
a vote of 9-0 on July 6, 1994), and by the Planning Commission in accordance with Resolution PCM-
92-17/PCA-95-01 (by a vote of 6-0 on July 27, 1994); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the proposed code
amendment is a procedural measure, not subject to CEQA under its General Rule; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said revised Design Manual,
and notice of said hearing together with its purpose was given by its publication in a newspaper of
general circulation in the City at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 4:00 p.m.,
September 6, 1994, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said
hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine
and ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice
justifies the amendment and that the amendment is consistent with the City of Chula vista General Plan.
SECTION II: That Section 19.14.582 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby amended
to read:
19.14.582 Design review committee-Duties and responsibilities.
A. The design review committee shall review plans for the establishment, location, expansion or
alteration of uses or structures in all R-3 zones, all commercial and industrial zones, and
development and redevelopment within redevelopment project area boundaries and shall approve,
conditionally approve or deny such plans, except when projects are within the boundaries of a
e:l~A -/
Page 2
redevelopment project, in which case the committee shall recommend approval, conditional
approval or denial to the redevelopment agency of the city. The committee shall render
decisions on minor proposals as defined in Agency Resolution No. 71.
B. The design review committee shall also review plans for the establistunent, location, expansion
or alteration of multiple family dwelling uses, major use permits, commercial, or industrial
projects or structures located within the 1985 Montgomery annexation area, and governed by
Chapter 19.70 of this ordinance.
C. The design review committee shall review all appeals filed to contest sign design rulings of the
zoning administrator.
D. The design review committee shall base its findings and action upon the provisions of the
effected design manuals of the city.
E. The design review committee shall prepare and adopt operational procedures, bylaws and
business forms.
F. The design review committee shall submit annual reports on its operations to the city planning
commission and redevelopment agency.
G. The fee for a hearing before the design review committee is the Required Fee(s).
H. The zoning administrator has the discretion, with the concurrence of the applicant, to act in the
place of the design review committee in the case of minor projects, including signs, commercial;
!lfld-industrialj gflli~in~!ll!! additions which constitute less than a ~~ percent increase in
design review committee in the same manner as set forth in Section 19.14.583. The fee for
zoning administrator design review shall be the Required Fee(s).
SECTION III: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and
after its adoption.
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
Presented by
Robert Leiter
Director of Planning
[M: \home\planning\2062. 94]
-2~/I'~
PUBLIC HEARING a-JECK LIST
PUBLIC HEARING DATE: C) / f..e, / '1 i
SUBJECT: (l~. ..fJ~~............ ~ D~_I t"t\~ .",. ~.......J; .k,
LOCATIONTJ=L,....., \0., I~' \'1,1,\.5'(2.
SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBLICATION.. BY FAX V/; BY HA\lD_
<js/2."1lq~
, BY :VWL
PUBLICATION DATE
MAILED 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 ~ / I ~ J '1 ~
COPIES TO:
Administration (4)
Planning V
v'
Originating Depanrrnenr
Engineering ,/
Others
City Clerk's Office (2)
POST ON BULLETIN BOARDS
v
~ IICi 194
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
7/93
.55.
)./)/J --:;
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NonCE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL will hold
a public hearing to consider the following:
Purpose of considering the new City Design Review Manual & an amendment
to Title 19 of CVMC, Sec 19.14.582 to allow administrative design review of
braoder range of projects.
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 THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday,
September 6, 1994, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276
Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: August 17, 1994
c2t?4 ~i
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE
CITY COUNCIL of the City of Chula Vista, California, for the
purpose of considering the new City Design Manual and an amendment
to Title 19 of the Municipal Code, Section 19.14.582, to allow
administrative design review of a broader range of projects.
Copies of the new City Design Manual and proposed amendment 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 the new City Design
Manual and amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to
the City Council at or prior to the public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday,
September 6, 1994 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public
Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any person
desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED. August 24, 1994
CASE NO. PCM-92-17/PCA-95-01
.........-
c2(}/I -3
RESOLUTION NO.
I?~lf 7
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA REPEALING THE EXISTING DESIGN
MANUAL AND APPROVING THE REVISED DESIGN
MANUAL FOR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
WHEREAS, in October 1992, the City Council approved the Permit Streamlining Workplan and
Implementation Schedule; and
WHEREAS, among other measures, the Workplan called for revising the City Design Manual to include
more concise and objective design guidelines with additional illustrations; and
WHEREAS, on May 2, 1994, following six working sessions, the Design Manual Advisory Committee
appointed by the City Council voted 7-0 to approve and issue the revised draft Design Manual for consideration
and recommendation by the Design Review Committee, Economic Development Commission and Planning
Commission, and final adoption by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, at a special meeting of the Advisory Committee held on June 20, 1994, the Committee voted
6-0 to incorporate several additional revisions into the Manual; and
WHEREAS, the revised Design Manual has also been reviewed and recommended for approval by the
Design Review Committee (by a vote of 5-0 on June 27, 1994), by the Economic Development Commission (by
a vote of 9-0 on July 6, 1994), and by the Planning Commission in accordance with Resolution PCM-92-l7/
PCA-95-01 (by a vote of 6-0 on July 27, 1994); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the revised Design Manual is
exempt from environmental review as a regulatory measure designed to enhance the quality of the environment
(Class 8 exemption under CEQA), and a Notice of Exemption was filed with the County Clerk on August 5,
1994; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said revised Design Manual, and
notice of said hearing together with its purpose was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation
in the City at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 4:00 p.m., September 6,
1994, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was thereafter
closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL does hereby find that the public
necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice justifies the revised Design Manual and that
the Manual is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council doe ereby rep
approve the revised Design Manual on file in the City Clerk' offi e, Docu
"'"="" by 'P o"d t
the existing Design Manual and
e t Number
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
[M: \home\planning\2064. 94]
Bruce M. Boogaa
n City Attorney
.2.1/(..) -I
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~ /
Meeting Date 09/06/94
Public Hearing: GPA-90-9(A): Consideration of State-mandated
Revisions to the 1991 Housing Element of the City General Plan--Chapter
1451, Statutes of 1989, Relating to the Preservation of Subsidized Housing
At Risk of Conversion
Resolution J 'l" 4/ l:opting amendments to the General Plan Housing
Element of 1991 regarding the preservation of at-risk housing as required
by State Housing Element Law
Community Development Director C~J
Director of Planning (~, ,
City Manage~ b~\
(--:? (4/5ths Vote: Yes No --X)
,
On May 15, 1992, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) issued
a letter finding the City's adopted Housing Element update in compliance with the State Housing
Element Law. That same letter noted, however, that select portions of the Element would soon
lapse from compliance given changes in the State Housing Element Law which were to become
effective on July 1, 1992. Those changes regard the preservation of existing subsidized low-
income housing units which could be converted to non-low-income use.
Staff of the Community Development and Planning Departments subsequently worked with HCD
in the preparation and review of proposed revisions (please see Exhibit A). As a result, HCD
issued a letter indicating that the proposed amendments were found to be in compliance with the
revised State law.
As a matter of procedure pursuant to Section 65585 of the State Government Code, it is now
necessary for the City to formally adopt the amendments as part of the Housing Element, and
to subsequently forward the adopted amended Element to HCD.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the proposed amendments will not
have a significant impact upon the environment, and has issued an Addendum to Negative
Declaration IS-92-08 (please see Exhibit B).
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council;
1. Find that the proposed amendments will have no significant environmental impacts, and
adopt the Addendum to Negative Declaration IS-92-08(A); and,
2. Adopt the proposed amendments to the Housing Element of 1991.
.2/" J
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date 9/6/94
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On August 24, 1994 the Planning
Commission held a public hearing and voted 4-0 (3 members absent) to recommend that the City
Council approve and adopt the proposed amendments to the Housing Element of 1991.
DISCUSSION:
Revisions to State Housing Element Law. Preservation of "At-Risk" Housing Units - Background
Amendments in State Housing Element law brought about by Chapter 1451, Statutes of 1989,
now require all housing elements to include additional needs analyses and programs to address
the potential conversion of existing assisted housing developments to non-low-income uses during
the next ten year period (Gov. Code Sections 65583 (a)(8) and (c)(6)). These expanded analyses
and programs are required as of July 1, 1992.
The need for such efforts arises largely from the Federal Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) Section 236 program conceived in 1968. The Section 236 program provided mortgage
insurance and mortgage interest reduction to for-profit and non-profit developers who agreed to
build low-income affordable units for families. Typically, the contracts for such projects
included a 40-year mortgage which, in the case of for-profit developers, could be prepaid after
20 years. If such prepayment occurred, the project would no longer have the affordability
requirement. As a result of not considering the potential consequences of such a prepayment
option, in 1987 HUD found the nation facing a serious threat to its available stock of affordable
housing.
Congress subsequently passed the Emergency Low-Income Housing Preservation Act (ELIHPA),
which precluded any prepayment until new permanent legislation was in place. In 1990, the
permanent Low-Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act (LIHPRHA)
was passed. Consistent with the provisions of LIHPRHA, the State promulgated amendments
to the State Housing Element Law requiring local jurisdictions housing elements to include needs
analyses and programs to identify and plan for the preservation of these units at-risk of
conversion to non-low-income affordability.
Proposed Amendments to the Chula Vista Housing Element of 1991
As noted in the Background section of this report, City staff has completed amendments to select
sections in Part 2 and 3 of the General Plan Housing Element of 1991 as necessary to comply
with the changes in State law. Those amendments (attached as Exhibit A) reflect a quantification
and expanded analysis of existing local low-income affordable housing developments at such risk
of conversion, along with suggested programs/efforts such as the utilization of Redevelopment
Agency Set-Aside Housing Funds and Community Development Block Grant Funds for rent
subsidies, non-profit predevelopment costs, and acquisition loans to preserve their affordability.
The revisions are indicated in strike/underline format, with the proposed new text being
underlined.
.1/, ;L
Page 3, Item ,)./
Meeting Date 9/6/94
Since an analysis and discussion of at-risk housing units had been included with the draft
Housing Element of 1991 as originally reviewed and approved by HCD in May, 1992, the
amendments requested by HCD to comply with the changed law essentially amount to an
enhancement of the existing analysis and discussion. The more specific nature of the proposed
amendments is summarized as follows:
For Part 2 (pages with 11-# format)-
corrects the number of complexes and units involved.
adds the complexes' ages, and correspondingly denotes their rehabilitation needs.
generally identifies potential funding sources to assist in preservation, and the likelihood
of their availability.
expands discussions to address the contract expiration conditions for select complexes,
and to identify the estimated level of costs to retain affordability.
For Part 3 (DageS with III-# formaO-
corrects quantified assistance objectives based on the revised number of units involved.
presents more specific implementing actions / proposals for the preservation of those
units most likely at risk of conversion to non-low-income affordability over the lO-year
period from 1991 - 2001.
In overview, 8 projects involving 572 potentially at-risk units have been identified and addressed
by the proposed amendments. Three hundred eighty six (386) of those are focused upon for
action over the next several years, as they are most likely at risk of conversion. In that regard,
the Community Development Department has been actively involved with the owners, local non-
profit entities, and other resources to ensure the retention of those units. All totaled, the 572
potentially at-risk units comprise a substantial amount of the City's existing low-income
affordable housing stock.
Also, as previously noted, these amendments have already been initially reviewed by State HCD
and found to satisfy the revised State law. The present proceedings are, therefore, mainly a
matter of procedure to formally incorporate the amendments into the City's Housing Element
to obtain full legal compliance.
Timing for AdoDtion of the ProDosed Amendments
On August 3, 1994, the City received notification from State HCD of the availability of
substantial housing assistance monies through the BEGIN Program. The BEGIN Program is an
off-shoot of the Federal HOME Program of 1990, and provides funds to cities and counties for
use as assistance for low-income first-time homebuyers. This assistance can be in the form of
downpayment, closing cost and/or second mortgage assistance. Staff is currently in the process
of preparing an application package to meet the State's September 9, 1994 filing deadline. One
of the critical filing requirements is full legal compliance status for the City's Housing Element.
oi /-:J
Page 4, Item ~ I
Meeting Date 9/6/94
As previously noted, local adoption of the proposed amendments, and subsequent re-filing of the
amended Housing Element with HCD is necessary to obtain full compliance status.
Staff has been in contact with key personnel at HCD, and has been assured that completion of
local adoption hearings on the amendments by the Planning Commission and City Council before
the September 9, 1994 deadline will facilitate acceptance of the City's BEGIN application filing.
FISCAL IMPACT: In conjunction with the preservation of at-risk housing units, there does
exist the possibility of the City creating subsidies which might be financed from HUD and/or
CDBG funds. The creation of such subsidies would occur in conjunction with negotiations on
the preservation of a particular project(s), and would be brought forward for Council
consideration at that time.
With an officially approved Housing Element document, the City will apply to the State for
BEGIN first-time homebuyer housing funds. The amount of funds received could range
anywhere from $100,000 to $500,000.
Attachments
\lA.
~ B.
C.
D.
Proposed Housing Element Amendments
Addendum to Negative Declaration IS-92-08(A)
Planning Commission Draft Minutes of 8/24/94 .'
Planning Commission Resolution GPA-90-09(A"~J'!"'" ........'"
U l' ~CA.NNE.u
(M,\SHARED\HE-AM-CC .RPT)
.2/-'1
RESOLUTION NO.
/7t48'
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
ELEMENT OF 1991 REGARDING THE PRESERVATION OF AT- RISK
HOUSING AS REQUIRED BY STATE HOUSING ELEMENT LAW
WHEREAS, on May 15, 1992, the State Department of Housing and Community
Development ("HCD") issued a letter notifying the City that the Housing Element of 1991 was
found in compliance with State law, excepting those provisions for the preservation of at-risk
housing brought about by Chapter 1451, Statutes of 1989, and to affect compliance after July
1, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, in response, the City, in cooperation with HCD, prepared necessary
amendments to the Housing Element of 1991 regarding the preservation of at-risk housing units;
and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 65585(b), the City
submitted for review, and received approval of the proposed amendments from HCD by their
letter dated September 25, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65585(c) the City is now
required to formally adopt those amendments as part of the Housing Element of 1991, and to
provide a copy of the amended Housing Element to HCD to obtain full legal compliance; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Negative Declaration thereon (lS-92-08), of
possible significant enviromnental impacts of the 1991 Housing Element was previously issued
by the Enviromnental Review Coordinator; and,
WHEREAS, the Enviromnental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed
amendments and determined that no new enviromnental issues not previously analyzed by that
Initial Study and Negative Declaration (IS-92-08) are raised, and has thereby issued an
Addendum to the Negative Declaration (IS-92-08A) for the proposed amendments; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission considered said amendments at a duly
noticed public hearing held August 24, 1994, at which they considered the Negative Declaration
and Addendum thereto (IS-92-08A), and voted unanimously (4-0 with 3 members absent) to
approve said amendments and recommend their adoption by the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on
September 6, 1994, to consider the Negative Declaration and Addendum thereto (lS-92-08A),
and the proposed amendments to the Housing Element of 1991 and recommendations thereon.
.1/-f
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA does hereby find, order, determine, and resolve as follows:
1. That the proposed amendments to the City's Housing Element of 1991
will have no significant environmental impacts, and adopts the Addendum
to the Negative Declaration issued under IS-92-08A.
2. That the proposed amendments are consistent with the goals and objectives
of the General Plan Housing Element of 1991 regarding the preservation
and enhancement of available low-income housing stock within the City.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does adopt the proposed amendments to the Housing Element of 1991 regarding the preservation
of at-risk housing units, a copy of which amendments are attached hereto as Exhibit A, and
authorizes the filing of said adopted amendments with the State Department of Housing and
Community Development as necessary to bring the City's Housing Element into full compliance
with State law.
Presented by
A
~
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce Boogaard
City Attorney
(M :\SHAREDlHE-AM-CC .RSO)
.21"'1,
EXHIBIT A
,)/. ?
01'1'/ "P
B.7 Student Poculation
Chula Vista is the location of one community college named
Southwestern College with an enrollment of approximately
9,602. The college director indicated that in times of
recession, full and part-time enrollment is expected to
increase as adults re-enter school to enhance employment skills
needed in the work force. While most of these community
college students commute from outside the area, some do compete
for local housing along with other low-income groups.
C. AT-RISK HOUSING
There are three types of housing potentially at risk of converting
to market type rentals between 1991 and 2001 as shown in the
following table:
Potential At-Risk Housinq
Family Units - HUD 236
Family Non-236 Units
Elderly Non-236 Units
C.l Family Units - HUD 236 Contracts
The following table illustrates the required information for
the City/s HUD Section 236 units:
~7~ 572 total units
386 units
J.J.'IJ ill units
32 units
a. Castle Park Garden Apartments
272 Kennedy Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911
62 non-elderly, low income units
Earliest Date of Conversion: December 1991
Aqe: 21 vears ~P~~JtJp~I//Y~tl/~pp~
Rehabilitation Needs: Minor
b. Oxford Terrace Apartments
555 Oxford Street
Chula Vista, . CA 91911
132 non-elderly, low-income units
Earliest Date of Conversion: March 1993
(Owner may begin LIHPRHA process 18 months before the
project's 20th birthday)
Aqe: 19 vears ~P~~JtJp~I//Y~tl/~PP~
Rehabilitation Needs: Minor
c. Palomar Apartments
171 Palomar
Chula Vista, CA 91911
168 non-elderly, low-income units
Earliest Date of Conversion: March 1993
(Owner may begin LIHPRHA process 18 months before the
project's 20th birthday)
Aqe: 19 years ~P~~JtJ~~I//Y~tl/~pp~
Rehabilitation Needs: Minor
11-18 ~/.'6
d. Rancho Vista Apartments
1419 Tobias Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91910
24 non-elderly, low-income units
Earliest Date of Conversion: November 1991
Aae: 21 years ~p~p!~!p~I//~~~i
Rehabilitation Needs: Moderate
In 1968, HUD developed the 236 program that provided both
mortgage insurance and mortgage interest reduction. to any
for-profit or non-profit developer who agreed to build
affordable housing units for families. Typically, the
contracts for these projects included a 40 year mortgage which
could be prepaid after 20 years, and if prepayment occurs, then
the project no longer has an affordability requirement. This
prepayment option only appl ied to for-profit developers.
Unfortunate ly, HUD did not cons i der the consequences of this
prepayment option, and as a result, the nation now faces a
serious threat to its available stock of affordable housing.
In 1987, this threat was brought to the attention of the
federal government, and Congress passed the Emergency
Low-Income Housing Preservation Act (ELIHPA). This Act
precluded any prepayment until February of 1990, and in
February, the Act was extended until new permanent legislation
could be adopted. In 1990, the National Affordable Housing Act
was passed, and this Act included the Low-Income Housing
Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act (LIHPRHA). LIHPRHA
will provide a permanent solution to the preservation problem
if it is adequately funded.
Chula Vista has four projects which were HUD financed using the
236 program. Current I y, two of these projects have fil ed a
Notice of Intent which states that they intend to prepay their
mortgages. In reality, these projects probably will not be
able to prepay since both ELIHPA and LIHPRHA have strict
requirements for prepayment. Under LIHPRHA, these property
owners can elect to proceed under ELIHPA or LIHPRHA.
Nonetheless, both 'acts require an owner to prove that
termination of the affordable units will not materially
increase economic hardship for current tenants (which generally
means annual rent increases of less than 10%); will not
i nvol untarily di spl ace current tenants; or will not adversely
affect affordable housing opportunities for low-income and very
low-income families, including those families seeking
employment in the area, and minorities.
Both ELIHPA and LIHPRHA state that these units should be
acquired by either a non-profit or a publ ic agency whenever
possible. Undoubtedly, the acquisition costs of these units
will be high. Nonetheless, both laws provide acquisition
incentives to non-profits and public agencies, but LIHPRHA
mandates that the following incentives be given: (1) insurance
for financing up to 95 percent of the preservation equity
(equ ity as determi ned by HUD) under the HUD Sect i on 241 (f)
II-19 ,11 -tj
program; (2) grants up to the present value of the total of the
projected publ ished Fair Market Rents for Section 8 Existing
Housing for the next 10 years (or longer, if necessary); (3)
reimbursement for transaction expenses relating to acquisition,
such as ordinary transaction costs, financing fees and
operating deficit coverage. Subject to appropriations, LIHPRHA
also states that HUD must provide assistance sufficient to
enable acquisition at a purchase price not greater than the HUD
defined preservation value, to pay the debt service of the
mortgage and debt service on any rehabilitation loan,. to meet
project operating expenses and adequate reserves, and to
receive an adequate return on any cash investment made to
acquire the project.
The approximate cost of acqui sit i on for a 11 four compl exes is
$26 million. This figure was determined by USing the Section 8
Fair Market Rents and a gross rent multiplier of 8.
These "at-risk" projects should be preserved, whenever
possible, since it would be impossible for the City to replace
these lost units. The City has already received the notice to
prepay from two owners, and the other two projects can fil e
their notices in March of 1991. The owners of these builders
are receiving very small rents since the average rent for a two
bedroom apartment is $292, and for the most part, they have
burned their tax depreciation benefits. Therefore, it is very
likely that they may attempt to sellar prepay.
To date, the City has identified the following resources which
could be utilized for the preservation of these HUD Section 236
units:
a. Redevelopment Agency Housing Set-Aside Funds: $200.000:
and,
b. Community Development Block Grant FundsJl
ApprOXimately $500,000 is available, but the City
traditionally uses CDBG funds for public improvements in
low and moderate income neiohborhoods. Therefore. it is
unlikelv CDBG funds could be made available.
The Agency~ ~~t $200,000 ~~J~~ could be leveraged in a
bond issue to produce $2,000,000. If a bond issue is
accomplished, the Agency would have sufficient funds to provide
a loan to a non-profit for predevelopment and equity since the
estimated cost, to the Agency, of preservation is $1,300,000.
The cost of preservation is significantly less than the cost of
replacement since this cost is estimated to be $40,530,000.
In the past 12 months, City staff has identified the following
non-profits which could assist with the preservation of the
City's HUD Section 236 projects:
a. Chicano Federation;
b. Civic Center Barrio;
c. Interfaith Housing;
d. MAAC Project; and,
e. South Bay Community Services.
11-20 III
~/-
C.2 Non-236 Housina Units At-Risk
In addition to the HUD Section 236 Projects, the City has three
apartment projects which are at-risk because of expiring use
restrictions. These projects are as follows:
a. Beacon Cove Apartments
536 East H Street
\ Chula Vista, CA 91910
, 33 non-elderly, low-income units
Earliest Date of Conversion: 1996
Ace: 6 vears
Type of Government Ass i stance Recei ved: Ful fi.ll ment of
the City's Affordable Housing Obligation for the Terra
Nova Subdivision
b. Eucalyptus Grove Apartments
67 East Flower Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
75 non-elderly, low-income units
Earliest Date of Conversion: 1995
Ace: 7 vears
Type of Government Assistance Received: Density Bonus &
Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds
c. The Meadows of Chula Vista
1055 Granjas Road
Chula Vista, CA 91911
32 elderly, low-income units
Earliest Date of Conversion: 2000
Ace: 7 vears
Type of Government Assistance Received: Density Bonus
~ Terra Nova Villas
440 East H Street
Chula Vista. CA 91910
46 non-elderlv. low-income units
Ace: 7 vears
Earliest Date of Conversion: 1995
Tvoe of Government Assistance Received:
Housinc Revenue Bonds
Mult i-famil v
The estimated cost of replacing these units is JJ~"J~'~~~
$19,809,000.
To date, the City has identified the following resources which
could be utilized for the preservation of these units:
a. Redevelopment Agency Housing Set Aside Funds: 5200.000i
and,
b. Community Development Block Grant Funds.
Approximately 5500,000 is available, but the City
tradi t i ona 11 y uses CDBG funds for pub 1 i c improvements in
low and moderate income nei chborhoods. Therefore. it is
unlikely CDBG could be made available.
II-21
.21-11
In order to preserve the family units in Beacon Cove, the only
viable alternative is rent subsidies since the existing
contract specifi cally states that restri ct ions wi 11 terminate
ten years after the contract was executed. The rent subsidies
would provide, for the number of units currently restricted,
the di fference between what the owners are allowed to charge
which is currently market rate and what market rate may
eventua 11 y be.
Estimating the cost of rental subsidies is extremely difficult
since the City has no way of determi n i ng how much and when
rents will increase. Therefore, estimating the cost of
preserving these units is nearly impossible. However. if an
~ssumotion is made that market rate rents increase bv 4% each
_ear for th i rt v vears and the count v med i an income does not
increase. the Aqencv would need aooroximatelv S315.000 to
orovide rental subsidies. Accordinq to the coooeration
a~reement between the Citv and the owner. the owner is allowed
~~ charqe a rental rate no qreater than 1/12th of 30% of 80% of
__unt v med i an income. Therefore. if the medi an income
increased at the same rate as the increase for market rents.
the restricted rents would continue to mirror market rents and
no subs i dies woul d be needed. Since the Agency has 1 imited
funds and th is fund i ng has been commi t ted to preservi ng the
City's HUD Section 236 units and the Agency's very viable
rehabi 1 i tat i on program, the Agency would only have
approximately '~Nililil S25.000 to 'ir/r1r/rlII/J/I allocate for
rent subsidies. The Citv will continue to monitor comoliance
with the Citv's Coooeration Aqreement which requires the owner
to orovide units to low income households. As the year of
~onvers i on aooroaches. the Aqencv wi 11 di scuss the oossibi 1 itv
_f orovidinq rental subsidies or other incentives which could
oreserve the units.
The Agency is currently investigating the possibility of
refinancing the bonds for Eucalyptus Grove, and if this occurs,
the Agency will require extended rental restrictions. With
this alternative~ the Agency will incur no costs.
Durinq the refundinq of the bond issue for Terra Nova Villas.
an extension of the oriqinal requlatorv aqreement was
at tem~ted. However. due to the current 1 endi nq envi ronment.
the _xtension was not oossible. Currentlv. a non-orofit
~o~oor~iion is attemotinq to acquire these units. If this
transaH ion occurs. these units mav continue to be affordable.
If the non-~r~fit does not acquire these familv units. the City
will attemo_ _0 work with the owner to extend the affordabilitv
restrictions bv determininq an alternative form of credit
enhancement. The Letter of Credit for the bonds will exoire on
March J. 1995. With this alternative. the Aqencv will incur
some staff costs. but the costs will be minimal.
Senior projects built were typically built under the density
bonus program, and they are less likely to convert to market
rents due to the Conditional Use Permits under which they
11-22 .2/'/.2.
operate. In order to convert, the owner woul d have to
underwri te a cons iderabl e expense to bri ng the senior projects
into code compliance mainly for parking requirements. For
these reasons, it is unlikely that The Meadows will convert.
The following non-profit corporations could assist with the
preservation of the above listed units;
a. ... Chicano Federation:
b. 'Civic Center Barrio:
c. Interfaith Housing:
d. MAAC Project; and,
e. South Bay Community Services.
Since the cooperation agreements ~!~~ fQr Eucalyptus Grove
and Beacon Cove allow rents which are currently prevailing
market rates, the real impact of losing these units is
minimal. When the cooperation agreements were written, the
med i an income for the San Di ego Standard Metropoli tan
Statistical Area was much less, and the rent restrictions were
considerable.
D. PROJECTED NEEDS
0.1 Introduction/Current Estimates
Since the beginning of the last Element's planning period in
1985, the San Diego Region has experienced fairly rapid and
consistent population growth at an average of 3.6% per year,
coupled with an average growth in the number of housing units
of 3.7% as illustrated in Table 11. By comparison, Chula Vista
has generally para 11 e 1 ed the reg i on with average growth rates
for popul at i on and hous i ng over the 5 year peri od bei ng 0.1'
higher than regional rates. Tables g and 10 provide the actual
numerical growth in establishing the current population and
hous i ng totals for 1990. The fi gures in parenthes is under "'
increase" represent the actual growth percentage without
influence from the Montgomery Annexation in late 1985.
(continuation of existinQ Element text)
I I - 23 /
,2 -13
.
QUANTIFIED ASSISTANCE OBJECTIVES
1991.96 COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING PLAN
Obiectives 1. 2. and 3 - New Construction
Total Units:
Very Low
80
75
40
50
1339
- 245 units
Public Housing Units (County Housing Authority)
Senior Housing Units (Section 202)
Non-Profit Family Housing Units
Family Relocation Housing Units
Low. 628 units
63 Family Density Bonus
50 Senior Density Bonus
29 Family Non-Profit
358 Affordable Housing Program (Mandatory)
79 Affordable Housing Program (Incentives)
50 Family Relocation Housing
Moderate - 131 units
131 Market Rate for Sale and Rental Units
Other - 335 units
335 Market Rate for Sale and Rental Units
Obiective 3 - Oooortunities for Very Low-Income Renters
Total Units: 500
200 New Section 8 (Certificates and Vouchers)
300 Shared Housing Program (Seniors)
Obiective 5 - Rehabilitation and Conservation
Total Units: 7~) ~
~~~ 386 At Risk Low-Income Units (Section 236 Family)
1Z Non-236 Senior Housina Units
200 Single Family and Mobilehome Rehab (CHIP)
(180 very low income. 20 low income)
65 Rental Rehabilitation
Obiective 6 - Transitional Housina
Total Units: 20 Very Low-Income (New construction or rehab)
111-2 J
.}1'/7
O/~7 r,
~-
OBJECTIVE 5
The systematic renewal, rehabil itation, conservation, and improvement of
the residential neighborhoods of the Chula Vista Planning Area.
Policy
1. The City shall address the development of mechan isms des igned to
prevent at-risk affordable units from conversion to market rate
rents.
2. The City will continue to initiate pro-active programs for
neighborhood revital i zat ion and improvement, and to supply support
funding for these efforts, especially in neighborhoods with higher
concentrations of lower-income households.
3. The City shall continue to advocate conservation measures to
preserve existing housing stock, variety, and affordability.
ImDlementina Actions
A. ?t~~~t~~ Preservation of At-Risk Affordable Housing Units
A.I HUD Section 236 Units
1~~IIAfrv.vII~1117~~II~~~II~pA~ft~B1llvvYr111~II~t~
~pt~~tj~llll!y.yv~V~Y/~Atft~B1IYVvlt0~~/~~f'P~/~/t~~
~tp~~ttlllp~~~t~II~~~~II~f~p~/~~~tllpptjp~~llj~llt~~jtII~pftg~g~
~p~tt~~t~jlll$j~~~II~p~gf~~~llp~~t~pllt~~II~~~tg~~~111~p~/J~~p~~
~p~tj~g/~/~ttl!0YIJ~~7/~~/~~p/~/~p~/J~~p~~
~p~tj~gllV~V1V~y(rYvv/~/~~fi~~~tll~~~~~~~~f1~'~/j.o/qV/AfIIJ~~~
~~J~?~~~J'lt~~/lj~~lj~ppplp'lpf~p~i~~~t/~~t/~~~~/t~p~~~pl
~~p~f/~/'~p~t~l/~llt~~/~/~~pllYVlj~t~t~~t~pl!0Ylt~~
~t~p~i~~~tll~Y~/tAtVlt~~~/~/ptIIYVv/~~/t~~t
~pt~1 #/WPIY I~~I) I /..I.APNW NffW I t/JI NrlrNYcfv I N ~ It#~t~
~~pll~t/~~j~t~j~/~"ptp~~jljtij
$p~~/~~A&llv~~~r1/~~//Vrrvl'f~~tt~t~p/~~/~/~/~~~t
tPllr~v/~/Afllt~~II'~~~~t'Y~11IvVVrvrcf/~/t~/~~p~t
~~J~?~/~~1117~~/~~/~/r~V1Vlp~~~t~/~NrlVV(Ylj'
~llqv{yYVYrcf/~II~~~1IfttqV/~/'pt~~fpIIYifII~/~/~p~t~~j
1~~II~ftt811~tll~/~~~/~llcfr{y/~Y~llif~~Vf111~~pll~t~
p~t~t~j~~pltp/~~11Ij~/ptp~fltplpf~t~t1~/t~~~~/~~jt~j
The City has received Notice of Intent to Prepay from two
projects, with a possible loss of 186 affordable units. The
City shall involve itself in the negotiation process that is
mandated under ELlPHA and L1HPRHA to ensure that every
opportunity to retain affordability is pursued.
III-21 , ~/
D< I. /...;?
.
The following actions are proposed to respond to the HYQ
Section 236 "at-risk" conditions in Chula Vista:
Durinc the current olanninc ceriod.
its oreservation efforts toward the
which have exoirinQ use contracts.
all 386 low income units.
the Citv will concentrate
386 HUD Section 236 units
Our obiect i ve is oreserve
1. 1 As illustrated on Dace 11-18. the City ~/ll hi1
revi ew~ its inventory of rental hous i ng and determi ne~
which units have prepayment options and at what date.
Since the Citv is aware that owners are allowed to file a
Notice of Intent 18 months before the 20th anniversarv of
their endorsement date and has determined these dates.
City staff will monitor for these Notices of Intent. 1
When not ices are fi 1 ed. the City will moni tor the process
of negotiations. i.e.. clans of action and participate as
necessary. The City will work to prevent prepayment based
on a unsuccessful escrow or a finding of "not needed in
the community".
2. 1 As listed on oaqe 11-20. the City ~/n hi1
identiflied potential buyers for "at risk" HUO Section
236 projects and will assist t~/If~if~//~/'pt
p~ft~~~~ bv determininq resources for aCQuisition. In
fact. Aqencv sta ff is current 1 v work i nq with one of the
oraanizations listed on 11-20 to clan for the oossibilitv
of conversion. If this non-orofit is unable to work with
the Aqencv. the Aqencv 1~~//~'%' will give assistance
priority to A non-profit community development
corporation~ who can demonstrate caoacitv. t~p~~/lltl
~~~//~~p//~)ll//~~)~t~)~//lp~glt~f~//~"pf~~~)l)tli///~p/~t
~~~t~f~~//~~t~~~IV/~-~~~//~if//r~t/~t~rt1//~~~~lpp~f~
~)ll///(yi~//~//tpfi~)p~f~p!////Y~(//~//~///tp~~/~~f
pfp~)~)~g//Pf~~~j~lpP~~~t//,~~~)~g//t~//~~~~l~//~p~/pfp')t~
%~//q~rv~/~/)fi)t)~J//%r~~%//~/~//~tAP)fi)t)pfi! ~
Aqencv will cons i der ut il i z i nq the $200.000 ident ifi ed on
oaqe il-20 to orovide fundinq for oredevelooment costs and
aCQuisition in order to enable non-orofits to oreserve the
City's HUD Section 236 Units.
3. The City ",~I clans to form an ad-hoc committee
comprised of non-profit and for-profit developers, City
staff, other local government officials, and tenants of
"at-risk" units to develop a formal strategy for
preservation.
A.2 Non-236 Units
As identified in Section II, the City has J~~ la2 non-HUD
Section 236 units which are at-risk of converting to market
rate rentals. The following actions are proposed to respond tQ
these units:
1.
;r~~ City staff will continue. in the next several
months. to pursue the possibility of refinancing the bonds
for Eucalyptus Grove Apartments so that rental
restrictions will continue.
oJl'/"
IIl- 22
.
2. ~~ ~ the current restricted rents at Beacon Cove
Apartments are close to market rate, preserving these
units does not seem to be the best use of funds. Rent
subsidies may be considered bv Citv staff when the use
restrictions for these proiects expire. h//~~~ However.
the City has other urgent needs such as preserving the HUD
Sect ion 236 un i ts, cont i nu i ng the Agency's rehabil i tat ion
program, and funding non-profits who will provide units
for very low-income households.
~ As mentioned on paae 11-22. the Citv will attempt to work
with the owner of Terra Nova Villas to extend the
affordabilitv restrictions bv determinina an alternative
form of credit enhancement.
~I
!... Si nce The Meadows was bu i It with a seni or dens ity bonus,
conversion ~fp~~~li will likelv not occur. l~_ City
staff will t.P!t/N1/J,k/ /rr/ mon i tor the project in the vear
2000 and after. If conversion is requested, the City
~f.f.~'/1~f. wi 11 work to negot i ate cont i nued rent
restrictions.
B. Community Appearance/Neighborhood Improvement Program
The Bu il ding and Hous i ng Department wi 11 cont i nue to oversee
and implement this pro-active program of neighborhood
preservation and improvement. Initiated in March 1989, this
program targets specific neighborhoods exhibiting high volumes
of citizen complaints in which Code Enforcement Officers,
teaming with residents and designated "Block Captains.,
1II-22. .11-/7 /,;/~/S
EXHIBIT B
~/-IY
EXHIBIT B
ADDENDUM TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION 08-92-08A)
[Addendum to Negative Declaration IS-92-08 for 1991 Revisions to the Housing Element
of the General Plan]
PROJECT NAME: GPA-90-9(A): Consideration of State-Mandated Revisions
Regarding the 1991 Housing Element of the Chula Vista
General Plan,(chapter 1451, statutes of 1989), Relating to
the Preservation of Subsidized Housing at Risk of
Conversion.
PROJECT LOCATION: City-wide
PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Chula Vista
CASE NO.: IS-92-08A
I. INTRODUCTION
The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the Environmental
Review Coordinator (ERC) to prepare an addendum to a Negative Declaration or
Environmental Impact Report, if one of the following conditions is present:
1. The minor changes in the project design which have occurred since completion
of the Final EIR or Negative Declaration have not created any new significant
environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative
Declaration;
2. Additional or refined information available since completion of the Final EIR or
Negative Declaration regarding the potential environmental impact of the project,
or regarding the measures or alternatives available to mitigate potential
environmental effects of the project, does not show that the project will have one
or more significant impacts which were not previously addressed in the Final EIR
or Negative Declaration.
This addendum has been prepared in order to address minor technical changes to the
Housing Element of the General Plan related to the status of At-Risk Housing.
Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City has
prepared the following Addendum to the Negative Declaration for the Housing Element
revisions (IS-92-08A).
,}/-/9
A. PROJECT BACKGROUND
In 1991, the City of Chula Vista updated the Housing Element of the General Plan in
accordance with the requirements of the State of California Department of Housing and
Community Development. The update was prepared to ensure that local policies and
programs are responsive to changing conditions and future housing needs. Subsequent
to the approval of the Housing Element Update, amendments have been proposed to
update the status and improve accuracy of information provided in Section C: At-Risk
Housing.
B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed amendments to the Housing Element address At-Risk Housing inventories,
unit condition, and the status of funding and fmancing arrangements. The purpose of the
proposed amendments is to improve the City's efforts at preserving affordable housing
units that are potentially at risk of converting to market type rentals between 1991 and
2001.
C. IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The proposed amendments will not result in any significant environmental impacts. The
proposed amendments address the affordable status of existing housing units and will not
result in a change in the density or total housing units available within the City. The
focus of the effort for this project is to maintain unit affordability status and consequently
maintain the demographic profile of residents within the subject units. Since the number
of units and the anticipated household size will remain unchanged, no increases in
population are anticipated to result from this project.
E. CONCLUSION
The proposed project amendments are not associated with any significant or potentially
significant environmental impacts, therefore, no project specific mitigation will be
required and the findings of the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the 1991
Revisions to the Housing Element of the General Plan remain unchanged.
-2-
02/" ,(1/
Pursuant to Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines and based upon the above discussion,
I hereby find that the project revisions to the proposed project will result in only minor technical
changes or additions which are necessary to make the Negative Declaration adequate under
CEQA.
~ft~~?- -
ONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
REFERENCES
General Plan Housing Element, City of Chu1a Vista
City of Chula Vista Environmental Review Procedures
Negative Declaration IS-92-08, 1991 Revisions to the Housing Element of the General
Plan, October 11, 1991
-3-
,;/ ~.21
EXHIBIT C
.11'.2.:2
Excemt from Draft Planning Commission Minutes of 8/24/94
ITEM 2:
GPA-90-9(A): CONSIDERATION OF STATE-MANDATED REVISIONS
REGARDING THE 1991 HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE CITY GENERAL
PLAN--CHAPTER 1451, STATUTES OF 1989, RELATING TO THE
PRESERVATION OF SUBSIDIZED HOUSING AT RISK OF CONVERSION
Associate Planner Batchelder presented the staff report, noting that these are City-initiated
amendments to portions of the Housing Element that were previously approved by the
Commission in February 1992. There were changes in State law which required revisions to
the "at-risk housing analysis" portion of the Housing Element.
Commissioner Salas asked if the projects in question could be taken over by community groups,
and if the community groups mentioned in the staff report were working on taking over the
projects or if they had expressed an interest.
Mr. Batchelder stated that those individuals had expressed interest. They are all non-profit
organizations, and the State law indicates that non-profit organizations and/or the City be given
first right of opportunity to take over the complex if the owners propose to convert it from non
low-income use.
Community Development Specialist Martinez added that two of the complexes out of the 386
units, which represent four apartment complexes, are currently in negotiation with the City and
with South Bay Community Services to keep the units affordable. They were not near any
conclusions regarding price or terms.
Commissioner Salas asked if South Bay Community Services, at this point, was the only non-
profit organization which had expressed interest, and which projects.
Mr. Martinez noted the projects were Oxford Terrace and Palomar Apartments.
Commissioner Salas clarified that there was not a large risk of the projects being taken out of
the low-income housing market at this point in time. Mr. Martinez concurred.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing
to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MS (Martin/Salas) that the Planning Commissioners considered the Negative Declaration
(IS-92-08) and Addendum thereto (IS-92-08A), and adopt Resolution GPA-90-09(A)
recommending that the City Council approve and adopt the proposed amendments to the
Housing Element of 1991 in accordance with the draft City Council resolution and the
findings contained therein.
Vice Chair Ray asked if, upon an application to convert from the prior designation as it was
built, they would still be required to go through all the same normal procedures. Mr. Batchelder
concurred.
VOTE:
4-0 (Commissioners Fuller, Moot, and Tuchscher absent)
.2/-.1:1
EXHIBIT D
.)/-.J.Y
RESOLUTION GPA-90-09(A)
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN
HOUSING ELEMENT OF 1991 REGARDING THE PRESERVATION OF AT-
RISK HOUSING AS REQUIRED BY STATE HOUSING ELEMENT LAW
WHEREAS, on May 15, 1992, the State Department of Housing and Community
Development ("HCD") issued a letter notifying the City that the Housing Element of 1991 was
found in compliance with State law, excepting those provisions for the preservation of at-risk
housing brought about by Chapter 1451, Statutes of 1989, and to affect compliance after July
1, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, in response, the City, in cooperation with HCD, prepared necessary
amendments to the Housing Element of 1991 regarding the preservation of at-risk housing units;
and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 65585(b), the City
submitted for review by, and received approval of the proposed amendments from HCD by their
letter dated September 25, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65585(c) the City is now
required to formally adopt those amendments as part of the Housing Element of 1991, and to
provide a copy of the amended Housing Element to HCD to obtain full legal compliance; and,
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Negative Declaration thereon (IS-92-08), of
possible significant environmental impacts of the 1991 Housing Element was previously issued
by the Environmental Review Coordinator; and,
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed
amendments and determined that no new environmental issues not previously analyzed by that
Initial Study and Negative Declaration (IS-92-08) are raised, and has thereby issued an
Addendum to the Negative Declaration (IS-92-08A) for the proposed amendments.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Planning Commission
considered said amendments to the Chula Vista Housing Element of 1991 at a duly noticed
public hearing held August 24, 1994, at which they considered the Negative Declaration and
Addendum thereto (IS-92-08A), unanimously approved said amendments, and recommended
adoption of the proposed amendments by the City Council in accordance with the attached draft
City Council Resolution and the [mdings contained therein.
.21.~
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 24th day of August, 1994, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
Commissioners Martin, Ray, Salas, Tarantino
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Commissioners Fuller and Tuchscher (with prior notification), Moot
ATTEST:
~~_t<~
Jo C. Ray, Vice'Cha~an
~ R.'
Nancy '!tPley, ary
(M,ISHAREDlHE-AM-PC .RSO)
~/ .....2"
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item .;1.2
Meeting Date 9/6/94
SUBMITTED BY:
Public Hearing on the Acquisition of Certain Right-of-Way for Otay
Valley Road.
Resolution /7 t, ';9 Determining and Declaring the Public
Necessity to Acquire Certain Right-of-Way for Otay Valley Road and
Authorizing the Commencement of Condemnation Proceedings by
outside Counsel to Acquire :a~d 1ht-of-Way
Director of Public wzrk ~
City Attorney
City Manage~ ~ ..--?- (4/5ths Vote: Yes..K..No_)
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
In order to construct the Otay Valley Road Widening project, the City needs to obtain a portion
of the property owned by SNMB, L.P. (a Delaware Limited Partnership). This property is
located at the easterly end of the project and consists of about 1.0907 acres (out of 159.18 acre
parcel owned by this partnership). Our right-of-way acquisition consultants, Ryals &
Associates, have exhausted their efforts to obtain this dedication on a friendly basis. Due to
time constraints, we cannot wait any longer and must begin eminent domain proceedings.
RECOMMENDATION: The Council: I) hold the public hearing; 2) approve the resolution
determining and declaring the public necessity to acquire certain right-of-way for Otay Valley
Road, 3) use its power of eminent domain to condemn approximately 1.09 acres of property
belonging to SNMB, L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership for street, slope right, and temporary
construction easement purposes; and 4) authorizing the commencement of condemnation
proceedings by outside Counsel to acquire said right-of-way.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The City Council on June 7, 1994 by Resolution 17518 accepted bids and awarded contract
for the improvement of Assessment District 90-2 (Otay Valley Road, Phase II & III from 1,200
feet east of Nirvana Avenue to the northerly limits of Otay Valley Road Subdivision in the
City of Chula Vista, CA [ST-123]). Included in this work is the roadway work required to
be constructed at the easterly end of the project where Otay Valley Road turns southerly
towards Otay Rio Subdivision. A portion of the road is on property currently owned by
SNMB, L.P. a Delaware Limited Partnership. Shown on Exhibit A is the property to be
acquired, which includes right-of-way, slope rights, and temporary construction easement.
SNMB Limited Partnership was notified in writing by certified mail, return receipt requested
on August 4, 1994 of tonight's public hearing. Our right-of-way acquisition agent, Ryals &
Associates, has been trying for some time to contact the property owner to discuss the need
for the right-of-way and reach an agreement on the purchase thereof. To this date, our
.<.). . /
Page 2, Item d.)...
Meeting Date 9/6/94
consultant has been unsuccessful in meeting with the property owner. Attached is a letter from
Ryals & Associates outlining what steps they have taken to make contact and obtain the right-
of-way. He recommended that we proceed with the necessary actions to enable the City to
acquire the property through eminent domain proceedings. Exhibit B is a copy of the Notice
of Public Hearing sent to the property owner. The California Code of Civil Procedures,
Section 1240.030 provides that the power of eminent domain may be exercised to acquire
property for a proposed project if the following conditions are established:
A) The public interest and necessity require the project;
B) The project is planned or located in a manner that will be the most compatible with the
greatest public good and least private injury; and
C) The property sought to be acquired is necessary for the project.
The property depicted on Exhibit A is necessary for the project. It provides for a safe
intersection for trucks entering and exiting the Nelson Sloan Rock Quarry onto Otay Valley
Road going either westbound or southbound. The roadway design provides for three lanes
going across Otay River to the south such as to provide an acceleration lane for the trucks.
In addition, the design provides for a safe exiting from Otay Valley Road going northbound
into the Nelson Sloan property for trucks entering the Quarry site. The design of this project
is such that it will provide the most public good and the least private injury. The property is
necessary for construction of the Otay Valley Road project. The proposed taking of 1.0907
acres is a small portion of the total acreage owned by SNMB, L.P., a Delaware Limited
Partnership. Balancing the need for improvements for health and safety purposes verses the
effect on the SNMB, L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership), it is reasonable to approve the
eminent domain actions. Exhibit C is the legal description for the property to be acquired.
Our right-of-way acquisition consultant, Rick Ryals, is available at the Council meeting tonight,
to answer any questions concerning acquisition of this property.
The Resolution includes authorization for legal counsel representation by Daley & Heft with
concurrence of the City Attorney. Daley and Heft are also handling the legal work for other
condemnations for that project.
FISCAL IMPACT: Cost of acquisition of the right-of-way is approximately $16,400 for the
actual property values plus an additional $2,500 to $15,000 for condemnation costs depending
on whether or not the property owner fights the take. These costs were included in the Council
resolution approving award of the contract for construction of Otay Valley Road Phases II &
III.
Attachments: Exhibits A, B, and C
Ryals & Associates LetterB0fSCANNED
SLH:sb
File No: AO-08?, AO-088
m:\horne\engmeer\agenda\ovrrow.slh
081194
.2)'':;'
~~
~
SCALE: 1".80'
- -
-----------....
- - ,
----
_ =...... ~~ - LL::.'=O.-.....
_!I"_ _ _ _ -~~----~~ - - -l!
., II
.--:::-- . ". . .
=!. - ~c-~.+-'----1!::'-.=-~=~
.
--
-
-
, -
~
,l.2~ J
EXHIBIT IIA III
....0. . AO-DBB
....0. . AO-DBl
CESAR V .MAGBUHA T
ATE, SHEET
08-12-94 1 Of' 2
OT A Y V ALLEY ROAD 'WIDENING
PHASES I, II, & III INTERIM CONSTRUCTION
MUNA CUTHBERT
APPR V D BY'
SHALE L. HANSON
.
,
,
.1
;1
tlLEAN/K1f
,/fAN,
~;
II
EXHIBIT -A2-
Hf)$
\J .0. . AD-DBB
\J.D. . AD-DB7
PREPARED BY' BE"T
MUNA CUTH ~
V Y,
SHALE L HANSON
A\JN BY
CESAR V.MAGBUHA T
A E H
08-12-94 2 OF 2
TITLE
OT A Y V ALLEY ROAD 'WIDENING
PHASE L II 8. III INTERIM CONSTRUCTION
~~ -If- /:2 2 - / ~
~v?-
=~~
~~-~
""'"~--~
~---
EXHIBIT B
em OF
CHUlA VISTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
August 4, 1994
CER 111' llill MAIL
RETURN RECEIPI' REQUESTED
File IAO-087/088
SNMB L TD Partnership
32 W. Lookerman Sq. Suite L 100
Dover, DE 19901
Attn: Mr. Patrick Patek
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING; OTAY VALLEY ROAD WIDENING
PROJECT; SAN DIEGO COUNTY A.P. NO. 644-060-17
Dear Mr. Patek:
As you are aware, the City of Chula Vista has presented to you with an offer to acquire an
interest in a portion of the above referenced property owned by you and necessary for the
construction of the Otay Valley Road Widening Project. Due to the time constraints imposed
by the construction schedule for this project we must proceed with the acquisition of these
property rights prior to reaching an agreement. Therefore, you are hereby served notice that
the City Council of the City of Chula Vista will hold a Public Hearing on August 23, 1994 at
6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible, in the Chula Vista City Council Chambers, 276
Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California, with the intention ofadopting a Resolution of Necessity
to acquire these property rights through eminent domain.
The California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1240.030 provides that the power of eminent
domain may be exercised to acquire property for a proposed project if the following conditions
are established.
A. The public interest and necessity require the project.
B. The project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible
with the greatest public good and the least private injury.
C. The property sought to be acquired is necessary for the project.
During the Public Hearing on August 23, 1994, the City Council will be asked to determine if
the above conditions have been met concerning your property. If these conditions have been
met, the adopted resolution will authorize the City of Chula Vista to acquire the necessary
property by eminent domain.
eJ.2~>
276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5021
Otay Valley Road Widening
Notice of Public Hearing
A.P. No. 644-060-17
August 4, 1994
Page 2
A new legal Description of the required easement is attached to this Notice, designated as
Exhibit" A" and is more particularly shown on a plat designated as Exhibit "B".
The amount of compensation to be paid is not a part of this proceeding and will not be
considered by the City Council in determining whether a Resolution if Necessity should be
adopted. You are entitled to appear and be heard regarding the adoption of the Resolution of
Necessity if you file a written request to do so within fifteen (15) days of the date of the mailing
of this Notice. Objections to the intended actions are limited as set forth below:
1. Your written request must be filed with:
City Clerk
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
2. The written request must actually be on file within the above referenced fifteen
(15) day period. Failure to file a written request results in a waiver of your right
to appear and be heard.
3. The written request should include a statement of the condition(s) which you feel
are pertinent to your property. The three Conditions which may affect your
property are set forth above (designated as A, B, and C).
By designating which condition(s) form the basis of your concerns and why, you will enable the
City Council to have a full and expeditious review of your opinion of the project's affect on your
property. Should you have any questions regarding this Notice, your rights as set forth herein,
or the project, please do not hesitate to contact our Contract Acquisition Agent Mr. Richard
Ryals at (619) 439-4011.
Sincerely,
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
....
~~'rt'~'_.~~
Cliff Swanson
Deputy Director, Public Works/City Engineer
';':2~t
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
EXHIBIT C
.'
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
VESTING: SNMB, LP., A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
TIlAT PORTION OF LOT 43 IN OTAY RANCHO, IN 1HE COUNTY OF SAN
DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO MAP TIlEREOF NO. 862,
Fll.ED IN lHE OFFICE OF lHE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY,
FEBRUARY 7, 1900, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL 1 (IUGHT-OF.WAY)
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON 1HE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY DISTANT SOUlli 18037'10" EAST 499.12 FEET ALONG SAID
RANCHO OTA Y BOUNDARY FROM TIlE SOUlliEAST CORNER OF LOT
17 OF MAP NO 8147; TIlENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE
SOUlliERL Y AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 157.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO
SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 34056'19" WEST, lHENCE ALONG SAID
CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49041'39" AN ARC LENGTH OF
136.17 FEET; TIlENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUlli 75014'40" EAST
179.58 FEET; lHENCE SOUlli 14045'20" WEST 62.ooFEETj THENCE NORTH
75014'40" WEST 45.61 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 95.00
FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUlliERL Y; THENCE WESTERLY
ALONG TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
107028'43" A LENGTH OF 178.21 FEET TO A POINT ON TIlE NORTIlERL Y
LINE OF SAID LOT 44 OF OTA Y RANCH; THENCE DEPARTING THE ARC
OF SAID CURVE NON-RADIALLY SOUlli 71058'08" WEST 9.63 FEET
ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 44 TO THE EASTERLY
LINE OF TIlAT EASEMENT FOR COUNTY HIGHWAY RECORDED APRll..
9, 1979 AS FlLEJP AGE NO. 79-144675; THENCE NORTH 18037'10" WEST 78.39
FEET ALONG lHE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT FOR COUNTY
HIGHWAY; lHENCE SOUlli 71022'50. WEST 55.00 FEET ALONG THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT FOR COUNTY HIGHWAY TO A
POINT OF INTERSECTION wrrn SAID RANCHO BOUNDARY; THENCE
ALONG SAID RANCHO BOUNDARY NORTH 1803T10. WEST 119.86 FEET
TO TIlE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.6794 ACRES (29596.36 SQ.FT.)
WI'C I':'JIOME'SlQINEEIll19!l6.M
.;..;..?
Pap 1
PARCEL 2 (SLOPE EASEMENT)
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESfERLY RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY DISTANT SOUTH 18037'10" EAST 499.12 FEET ALONG SAID
RANCHO OTA Y BOUNDARY FROM TIlE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT
17 OF MAP NO 8147; THENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTA Y
BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE
SOUTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 157.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO
SAID POINT BEARS NORlH 34056'19" WEST; TIlENCE ALONG SAID
CURVE, lHROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49041'39" AN ARC LENGlH
OF 136.17 FEET; TIlENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 75014'40"
EAST 179.58 FEET; TIlENCE NORlH 14045'20" EAST 10.00 FEET; TIlENCE
NORlH 75014'40" WEST 179.58 FEET TO TIlE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
167.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; TIlENCE
WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE lHROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 48041'33" A LENGlH OF 141.92 FEET; TIlENCE DEPARTING
SAID ARC SOUTH 18037'10" EAST 10.39 FEET TO TIlE POINT OF
BEGINNING
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.0731 ACRES (3186.26 SQ. FT.)
PARCEL 3 (SLOPE EASEMENT)
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON TIlE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY DISTANT SOUTH 18037'10" EAST 499.12 FEET ALONG SAID
RANCHO OTA Y BOUNDARY FROM TIlE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT
17 OF MAP NO 8147; TIlENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTA Y
BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE
SOUTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 157.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO
SAID POINT BEARS NORlH 34056'19" WEST; TIlENCE ALONG SAID
CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49041'39" AN ARC LENGlH OF
136.17 FEET; TIlENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 75014'40" EAST
179.58 FEET; TIlENCE SOUTH 14045'20" WEST 62.00 FEET TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING; TIlENCE NORlH 75014'40" WEST 45.61 FEET TO
TIlE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 95.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHERLY; TIlENCE WESTERLY LONG TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE
lHROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 107028'43" A LENGlH OF 178.21 FEET;
lHENCE DEPARTING TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE NORlH 71 058'08" EAST
10.41 TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 85.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO
SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 89007'54" WEST; TIlENCE EASTERLY ALONG
TIlE CIRCLE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
105037'26" A LENGlH OF 156.70 FEET; TIlENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE
SOUTH 75014'40" EAST 45.61 FEET; TIlENCE NORlH 14045'20" EAST 10.00
FEET TO TIlE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.0489 (2130.78 SQ. FT.)
WPC F:\Il0ME\ENG1NEI!R\1996.94
.l~ -y
Page 2
PARCEL 4 (TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT)
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON TIlE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY DISTANT sourn 18037'10" EAST 468.07 FEET ALONG SAID
RANCHO OTA Y BOUNDARY FROM TIlE SOUfHEAST CORNER OF LOT
17 OF MAP NO. 8147; TIlENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON.TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE
SOUfHERL Y AND HAVING A RADWS OF 187.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO
SAID POINT BEARS NORTII 32015'54" WEST; TIIENCE ALONG SAID
CURVE, TIIROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 47001'14" AN ARC LENGTII
OF 153.46 FEET; TIlENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE sourn 75014'40"
EAST 199.58 FEET; TIlENCE sourn 14045'20" WEST 122.00 FEET; TIlENCE
NORTII 75014'40" WEST 65.61 FEET TO TIlE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
65.00 FOOT RADWS CURVE CONCAVE SOUfHERLY; TIlENCE
WESTERLY ALONG TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE TIIROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 100005'17" A LENGTII OF 113.55 FEET; TIlENCE DEPARTING
TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE sourn 71 058'08" WEST 21.25 FEET TO TIlE
BEGINNING OF ANON-TANGENT 85.00 FOOTRADWS CURVE CONCAVE
SOUfHERL Y A RADIAL TO SAID CURVE BEARS sourn 89007'54" WEST;
TIlENCE EASTERLY ALONG TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE TIIROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 105037'26" A LENGTII OF 156.70 FEET; TIlENCE
TANGENT TO SAID CURVE sourn 75014'40" EAST 45.61 FEET; TIlENCE
NORTII W45'20" EAST 82.00 FEET, TIlENCE NORTII 75014'40" WEST 179.58
FEET TO TIlE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 167.00 FOOT RADWS CURVE
CONCAVE SOUfHERL Y; TIlENCE WESTERLY ALONG TIlE ARC OF SAID
CURVE TIIROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48041'33" A LENGTII OF 141.92
FEET; TIlENCEDEPARTlNG SAID ARC NORTII 18037'10" WEST 20.66 FEET
TO TIlE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.2893 ACRES (12,600.59 SQ. FT.)
Attached hereto and made a part of this legal description is a plat labeled Exhibit "B".
The legal description and plat were prepared by me or under my direction.
~ I. '}/#. (.,-..
Shale L Hanson
Civil Engineer, City of Chula Vista
RC.E.18631
~h./f~
wpc P,IHOME\ENOINEER\l996.94
.2~ .,1
Page 3
RYALS & ASSOCIATES
REAL PROPERTY CONSULTANTS
(619] 439-4011
August 11, ] 994
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
A TIN: Mr. Cliff Swanson
Deputy Director, Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: OTAY VALLEY ROAD WIDENING PROJECT
SNMB LTD. ACQUISITION; A.P. NO. 644-060-17
Dear Mr. Swanson:
Per your request, the following is an account of our attempts to contact the owners of the subject
parcel. As you are aware a portion of this parcel, together with several appurtenant easements
must be acquired to complete the subject project.
On June 1O, 1994 we made an offer on behalf of the City of Chula Vista to purchase the
necessary property rights from the SNMB Limited Partnership. This offer was delivered to their
Dover, Delaware office on June 13, 1994. Subsequent to making this offer, numerous attempts
were made to contact representatives of this partnership. There is no listed phone number for
this partnership, either in the State of Delaware or in San Diego County. After obtaining a
Copy of the Deed by which SNMB acquired this property, it was learned that SNMB was an
acronym for the Stephen and Mary Birch Foundation.
As this foundation has interest in several local institutions, attempts were made to contact a
representative through them. Ms. Gayle Biacco of Sharp Hospital was contacted and despite her
efforts no contacts could be made. We then approached the Baldwin Company, who previously
owned the property and, initially Mr. Fred Arbuckle of Baldwin tried with no success to contact
this partnership. Subsequently, Mr. Rob Cameron of Baldwin also tried with no success.
Based upon these attempts a letter was sent to SNMB on July 20, 1994 stressing to the property
owners that due to the impending construction schedule, this acquisition must proceed and that
it was imperative that we be contacted as soon as possible so that condemnation could be
avoided. A copy of this letter is attached for your reference. Additionally, a second copy of
the offer letter was sent. Based upon SNMB's lack of response to this letter and after
discussions with City staff about the projects construction constraints, it was determined that the
City would have to proceed with a Public Hearing to adopt a Resolution of Necessity on August
.2.J. -/1/
2125 EL CAMINO REAL. SUITE 215. OCEANSIDE. CA 92054
Mr. Cliff Swanson
Otay Valley Road/SNMB Parcel
August 11, 1994
Page 2
23, 1994. This was the last Council date that would allow the City obtain possession of the
necessary interest in the subject property prior to the start of construction. Consequently, on
August 4, 1994 a Notice of Public Hearing was sent SNMB notifying them of the August 23,
hearing date. On August 10, 1994 we were contacted by Mr. Gene Korf, an attorney in New
Jersey who is Corporate Council to the Foundation. He has indicated that he is aware of the
situation, has forwarded all our correspondence to SNMB and is also tying to contact his client.
He indicated that he and would assist us if possible.
We will continue trying to make contact with this entity right up through the hearing in an
attempt to negotiate a settlement to this acquisition without the use of eminent domain. Should
you have any questions, or require further information, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerel y,
~.2-11
~~f?-
=~~:
-~-
---
~,-- .....
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
July 20, 1994
S N M B L TD Partnership
32 W. Loockerman Sq., Suite L 100
Dover, DE 19901
A TIN: Mr. Patrick Patek
SUBJECT: OTAY VALLEY ROAD WIDENING PROJECT
SAN DIEGO COUNTY A.P. NO. 644-060-17
Dear Mr. Patek:
On June 10, 1994, the City of Chula Vista made an offer to S N M B LTD Partnership to
purchase several easements across a portion of the subject property. These easements are
necessary for the construction of the Otay Valley Road Project. In that offer it was stressed that
it was extremely important that you or a representative of this partnership contact us due to the
impending construction of this project. To dale we have not been contacted. While the City
strongly desires to acquire these easements through negotiations, if we are not contacted within
one week of the date of this letter, we will be forced to proceed with the acquisition through
condemnation. For your convenience another copy of the City's offer has been mailed to you
via U.S. Mail and should arrive shortly.
All contacts should be made through the undersigned at (619)439-4011. Correspondence should
be sent to:
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
C/O Ryals & Associates
2125 EI Camino Real
Oceanside, CA 92054
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. We look forward to hearing from you shortly.
Richard A. Ryals R/WA
Contract Acquisition Agent
,).~-I:l
276 FOURTH AVECHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/{6191 691-5021
RESOLUTION NO.
I 71, 1/'1
RESOLUTIoN of THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FINDING AND
DETERMINING PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR ACQUIRING
AND AUTHORIZING THE CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY
WITHIN THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD STREET WIDENING PROJECT AND
AUTHORIZING THE COMMENCEMENT OF CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS
BY OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO ACQUIRE RIGHT-OF-WAY
WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista is a chartered municipal
corporation of the State of California ("City"); and,
WHEREAS, in conjunction with its municipal purpose of
providing transportation facilities, the city has resolved to widen
otay Valley Road, currently a two lane asphaltic roadway to a 6
lane prime arterial and major street between 1-805 and the eastern
city boundary, and have formed the Otay Valley Road Widening
Assessment District No. 90-2 consisting of various parcels
contiguous or proximal thereto and benefitting therefrom
("Project"), one of which is the subject parcel ("Property") which
is legally described in Exhibit A and diagrammatically shown in the
corresponding map designated as Exhibit B all of which are attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and,
WHEREAS, the Board of supervisors of the county of San Diego
("County") on March 17, 1992, adopted Resolution No. 92-97 (which
is hereby fully incorporated by reference) granting consent and
jurisdiction to the City of Chula Vista for the formation of Otay
Valley Road Assessment District No. 90-2 and consent to the City's
authority to proceed with the Project, construction and maintenance
of improvements therein, and authority and power to acquire rights-
of-way where necessary (among other powers granted by said County
reSOlution); and,
WHEREAS, the Project includes roadway work required to be
constructed within the jurisdiction of the County at the easterly
end of the Project where Otay Valley Road turns in a southerly
direction toward otay Rio subdivision, requiring acquisition of the
Property described in Exhibit A, owned by SNMB, L.P., a Delaware
limited partnership, for a permanent easement for street right-of-
way, slope easements and a temporary construction easement; and,
WHEREAS, at the regular meeting of the city Council held on
May 26, 1992, the City received substantial and convincing evidence
that the public interest and necessity require the project, and the
Proposed Project is planned and located in a manner that will be
most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private
injury, and in order to effectuate the Project, the acquisition of
the Property is necessary; and,
WHEREAS, at said meeting, the City received substantial and
convincing evidence that the city engaged in good faith
.2J.' J.1
Resolution No.
Page 2
negotiations for the voluntary acquisition of the Property which
efforts included the extension of an offer for the acquisition of
same at fair market value, and various correspondence and efforts
to contact the affected owner and interest holders in the Property;
and,
WHEREAS, at said meeting, the city received substantial and
convincing evidence that the acquisition of the Property is for a
public use, to wit: the widening of a transportation facility;
and,
WHEREAS, the city is
real property, or easement
California Code of civil
1245.270; and,
authorized to acquire the hereinafter
interest in real property, pursuant to
Procedure sections 1245.210 through
WHEREAS, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on
April 21, 1992, ("EIR Meeting"), the City Council reviewed and
considered the environmental consequences resulting from the
proposed Project all as more fully set forth as the proposed
Project in the EIR No. 89-01; and as a result thereof, the City
Council previously adopted Resolution No. 16599 at said EIR
Meeting, finding that the Environmental Impact Report was prepared
in compliance with CEQA ("Council certification Resolution"); and,
WHEREAS, the City has considered all of the evidence submitted
at the hearing including the staff report;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY FIND,
RESOLVE AND DETERMINE, BY A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN TWO-THIRDS OF ITS
MEMBERS, AS FOLLOWS:
1. Findings Related to Necessity of Project.
A. Public Interest and Necessity Require the Project.
The public interest, convenience and necessity of
the city of Chula Vista, and its residents, require
the Proposed Project in order to further the
implementation of the Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Project Area Plan, and provide
consistency with the City of Chula vista's Updated
General Plan.
B. Project Planned and Located for Greatest Public
Good and Least Private Injury.
The property described in Exhibit A is necessary
for the project in order to provide for a safe
.).).-1'1
Resolution No.
Page 3
intersection for trucks entering the exiting the
Nelson Sloan Rock Quarry onto otay Valley Road
going either westbound or southbound. The roadway
design provides for three lanes going across otay
River to the south such as to provide an
acceleration lane for the trucks. In addition, the
design provides for a safe exiting from otay Valley
Road going northbound into the Nelson Sloan
property for trucks entering the Quarry site. The
design of this project is such that it will provide
the most public good and the least private injury.
The property is necessary for construction of the
otay Valley Road project. The proposed taking of
1.0907 acres is a small portion of the total
acreage owned by SNMB, L.P., a Delaware Limited
Partnership. The need for improvements for health
and safety purposes outweighs the minor effect on
SNMB, L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership.
C. Property to be Acquired is Necessary for the
Project.
The property easements are necessary for the
project since they are located within the proposed
right-of-way, slope easements and temporary
construction easements as illustrated in Exhibit B.
D. The taking, as to any portion of the property which
is appropriated or dedicated to a public use, is
for a compatible public use consistent with and
authorized by Code of civil Procedure section
1240.510.
E. The taking, as to any portion of the property which
is appropriated or dedicated to a public use, is
for a more necessary public use consistent with and
authorized by Code of civil Procedure section
1240.610.
2. Findings Related to Power of Extra Territorial
Condemnation.
A. County Grant of Consent and Jurisdiction.
On March 17, 1992, the County passed Resolution No.
90-2 granting the City consent and jurisdiction to
proceed with the project including the assessment
district, construction of improvements adjacent to
0<.). -/5
Resolution No.
Page 4
County right-of-way, and acquisition of property,
where necessary.
B. Issues of Urgency, Expediency, Desirability and
Necessity.
The portion of property to be acquired is of urgent
necessity to expediently complete the project and
is manifestly desirable and essential to the
declared objects of the city. The improvements
within the County's jurisdiction are needed in
order to provide consistency and overall safety of
the roadway and to avoid having an unimproved
middle section of road where it crosses County
jurisdiction in the Otay River area. The County is
issuing permits to the City for the improvements
and is aware of the entire project, and has
consented thereto.
3. Voluntary Offer to Purchase the Property Made.
The offer required by section 7267.2 of the Government
Code has been made to the owner of record for the
acquisition of the required easements to the parcels
necessary for the project.
4. Authority to Proceed in Eminent Domain Granted.
The City of Chula Vista, and all appropriate officers,
representatives and attorneys is hereby authorized and
empowered to acquire the easements to said Property by
condemnation is the name of the City of Chula vista to be
used for the municipal purpose of enhancing a
transportation facility, in accordance with the
provisions of the Code of civil Procedure, and the
Constitution of California related to eminent domain, and
to that end, it is authorized and directed to commence
and to prosecute an action or actions in eminent domain
for the purpose of acquiring easements to the Property.
5. Retention of Eminent Domain Counsel Authorized.
The City Attorney for the City of Chula Vista, as General
Counsel, and the law firm of Daley & Heft, special
attorneys for City are hereby authorized to prepare and
prosecute in the name of the city, such proceeding or
proceedings in the proper court having jurisdiction
thereof, as are necessary for such acquisition; and to
prepare and file such pleadings, documents, briefs, and
.l~ -/"
Resolution No.
Page 5
other instruments and to make such arguments and to take
such actions as may be necessary in the opinion of said
attorneys to acquire for said City the said real
property. Said attorneys are specifically authorized to
take whatever steps and/or procedures are available to
them under the Eminent Domain Law of the State of
California including but not limited to Code of civil
Procedure, Title 7, Chapters 1-12, sections 1230.010-
1273.050) .
The City of Chula vista has urgent need for the immediate
possession of such property, and the designated attorneys
on behalf of the City are authorized and directed to
secure an order of court authorizing the City of Chula
vista to take possession of said property at the earliest
possible date.
6. Compliance with CEQA Certified.
In previous proceedings held by the City Council, at the
EIR Meeting, the City Council, reviewed and certified the
Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") was prepared
in accordance with CEQA all as more fully set forth in
the Council certification Resolution.
7. CEQA Findings.
The Council has reviewed and considered the FEIR, No. 89-
01, and has fully considered the environmental effects of
the project as shown therein. The City Council hereby
finds as follows:
A. Adoption of Findings.
The City Council has reviewed, considered, and
wholly agrees with the contents and does hereby
approve, accept as its own, incorporate as if set
forth in full herein, and makes each and everyone
of the CEQA Findings of Fact attached hereto as
Exhibit C, except as noted below in subsection (c).
B. certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted.
As more fully identified and set forth in Exhibit C
attached hereto, the City hereby finds, pursuant to
Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA
Guidelines section 15091, that the mitigation
measures described in the FEIR as feasible are in
,)02 - /7
Resolution No.
Page 6
fact found by the City Council to be feasible, and
will become binding upon the City.
C. Infeasibility of Alternatives.
As set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto, the City
Council hereby finds that none of the proposed
project alternatives set forth in the Final EIR can
feasibly and substantially lessen or avoid the
potentially significant adverse cumulative
environmental effects that will not be
substantially lessened or avoided by the adoption
of all feasible mitigation measures.
D. Adoption of Mitigation and Monitoring Program.
As required by Public Resources Code section
21081.6, the City hereby adopts the mitigation
monitoring and reporting program ("Program") set
forth in Exhibit C, incorporated herein by
reference. The City hereby finds the Program is
designed to ensure that, during Project
implementation, the Project proponent, and any
other responsible parties, implement the Project
components and comply with the feasible mitigation
measures identified in the Exhibit C.
E. statement of Overriding Considerations.
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation
measures and alternatives, certain significant or
potentially significant adverse environmental
effects caused by the Project will remain.
Therefore, the city hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines section 15093 and as set forth in
Exhibit C attached hereto, a statement of
overriding considerations identifying the specific
economic, social, and other considerations that
render that unavoidable signi 'cant adverse
environmental effect acceptable. .
Presented by
m:J)
I
John P. Lippitt
Director of Public Works
Bruce M. Booga rd
City Attorney ~
.2,;l../Y
EXHIBIT A
.'
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
VESTING: SNMB, LP., A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
THAT PORTION OF LOT 43 IN OTAY RANCHO, IN 'IRE COUNTY OF SAN
DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO MAP 'IREREOF NO. 862,
FliED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY,
FEBRUARY 7, 1900, DESCRIBED AS FOllOWS:
PARCEL 1 (RIGHT-OF-WAY)
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON 'IRE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY DISTANT SOU1H 18'37'10" EAST 499.12 FEET ALONG SAID
RANCHO ,OTA Y BOUND~Y FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT
17 OF MAP NO 8147; 'IRENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE
SOUTIIERL Y AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 157.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO
SAID POINT BEARS NORTII 34056'19" WEST, THENCE ALONG SAID
CURVE TIIROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49'41'39" AN ARC LENGTII OF
136.17 FEET; TIIENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOU1H 75'14'40" EAST
179.58 FEET; TIIENCE SOU1H 14 045'20" WEST 62.00 FEET; TIIENCE NOR TII
75014'40" WEST 45.61 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 95.00
FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE WESTERLY
, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TIIROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
107"28'43" A LENGTII OF 178.21 FEET TO A POINT ON 'IRE NORTIlERL Y
LINE OF SAID LOT 44 OF OTA Y RANCH; 'IRENCE DEPARTING 'IRE ARC
OF SAID CURVE NON-RADIALLY SOU1H 71'58'08" WEST 9.63 FEET
ALONG TIIE NORTIlERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 44 TO THE EASTERLY
LINE OF THAT EASEMENT FOR COUNTY HIGHWAY RECORDED APRil..
9,1979 AS FILElPAGE NO. 79-144675; TIlENCE NORTII 18'37'10" WEST 78.39
FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT FOR COUNTY
HIGHWAY; THENCE SOU1H 71'22'50" WEST 55.00 FEET ALONG 1HE
NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT FOR COUNTY HIGHWAY TO A
POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH SAID RANCHO BOUNDARY; THENCE
ALONG SAID RANCHO BOUNDARY NORTII 18"37'10" WEST 1i9.86 FEET
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.6794 ACRES (29596.36 SQ.FT.)
WJ'C F:\HOME\E1'NlNEER\l996-904
.,2.2. -I?
Page 1
PARCEL 2 (SLOPE EASEMENT)
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY DISTANT soum 18037'10" EAST 499.12 FEET ALONG SAID
RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY FROM THE SOUTIIEAST CORNER OF LOT
17 OF MAP NO 8147; THENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE
SOUTIIERL Y AND HA VlNG A RADIUS OF 157.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO
SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 34056'19" WEST; THENCE ALONG SAID
CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49041'39" AN ARC LENGTH
OF 136.17 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE soum 75014'40"
EAST 179.58 FEET; THENCE NORTH 14045'20" EAST 10.00 FEET; THENCE
NORTH 75014'40" WEST 179.58 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
167.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTIIERL Y; THENCE
WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 48041'33" A LENGTH OF 141.92 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING
SAID ARC soum 18037'10" EAST 10.39 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.0731 ACRES (3186.26 SQ. FT.)
PARCEL 3 (SLOPE EASEMENT)
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY DISTANT soum 18037'10" EAST 499.12 FEET ALONG SAID
RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY FROM THE SOUTIIEAST CORNER OF LOT
17 OF MAP NO 8147; THENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE
SOUTIIERL Y AND HA VlNG A RADIUS OF 157.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO
SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 34056'19" WEST; THENCE ALONG SAID
CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49041'39" AN ARC LENGTH OF
136.17 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE soum 75014'40" EAST
179.58 FEET; THENCE soum 14045'20" WEST 62.00 FEET TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 75014'40" WEST 45.61 FEET TO
THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 95.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHERLY; THENCE WESTERLY LONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 107028'43" A LENGTH OF 178.21 FEET;
THENCE DEPARTING THE ARC OF SAID CURVE NORTH 71058'08" EAST
10.41 TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTIIEASTERL Y AND HA VlNG A RADIUS OF 85.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO
SAID POINT BEARS soum 89007'54" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG
THE CIRCLE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
105037'26" A LENGTH OF 156.70 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE
soum 75014'40" EAST 45.61 FEET; THENCE NORTH 14045'20" EAST 10.00
FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.0489 (2130.78 SQ. FT.)
WPC F,\HOME\ENGlNEERll996.94
Page 2
cJ')"~O
PARCEL 4 (TEMPORARY CONSTRUcnON EASEMENT)
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON lHE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY DISTANT SOlITH 18037'10" EAST 468.07 FEET ALONG SAID
RANCHO OTA Y BOUNDARY FROM lHE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT
17 OF MAP NO. 8147; lHENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTAY
BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE
SOUTHERLY AND HAVING A RADWS OF 187.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO
SAID POINT BEARS NORTII 32015'54" WEST; lHENCE ALONG SAID
CURVE, TIlROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 47001'14" AN ARC LENGTII
OF 153.46 FEET; lHENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 75014'40"
EAST 199.58 FEET; lHENCE SOUTH 14045'20" WEST 122.00 FEET; lHENCE
NORTIl75014'40" WEST 65.61 FEET TO lHE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
65.00 FOOT RADWS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; lHENCE
WESTERLY ALONG lHE ARC OF SAID CURVE TIlROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 100005'17" A LENGTII OF 113.55 FEET; lHENCE DEPARTING
lHE ARC OF SAID CURVE SOUTH 71058'08" WEST 21.25 FEET TO lHE
BEGINNING OF ANON-TANGENT 85.00 FOOT RADWS CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHERLY A RADIAL TO SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH 89007'54" WEST;
lHENCE EASTERLY ALONG lHE ARC OF SAID CURVE TIlROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 105037'26" A LENGTII OF 156.70 FEET; THENCE
TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 75014'40" EAST 45.61 FEET; THENCE
NORTIlI4045'20" EAST 82.00 FEET, lHENCE NORTIl75014'40" WEST 179.58
FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 167.00 FOOT RADWS CURVE
CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID
CURVE TIlROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48041'33" A LENGTII OF 141.92
FEET; THENCE DEPARTING SAID ARC NORTIlI8037'10" WEST 20.66 FEET
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.2893 ACRES (12,600.59 SQ. FT.)
Attached hereto and made a part of this legal description is a plat labeled Exlubit "B".
The legal description and plat were prepared by me or under my direction.
kt.J. I. '}I~, ~
Shale L. Hanson
Civil Engineer, City of Chula Vista
R.C.E. 18631
"h/9~
wpc P,l/iOMElENGINEER\l996.'U
ol.2-:l/
Page 3
n n, ..~~~"~v~
'tI Jj. ill t.&h g ~ .. ::I
.'
EL 1 'DEA OF Nl1'i5'21'[ CURVE DATA LINE COURSE DATA 1SI 0- 5
r/ / / /-1 DENOTES PARC ~ Il) 11.11' LINE BEARING LENGTH ... a: en
ACOUISITION 1.68 ACRES t ~... ~ """ CURVE RADIUS LENGTH DELTA Ll 571'SS'08'~ 9.63' ?;( ~ ~
I'" '.1 DENOTES AREA OF SLOPE ESHTS.I... I''f: '; 01'" '8'S,<. Cl 15700' 136.17' ~9'll'39' L2 N71'SS'08'[ 1I.U' :; ~ ~
PARCEL 218.1731 ACRESt) I r 4'" l ,s;88,l/~ C2 9500' 17B.21' 107'2B'~3' L3 518'37'10'[ 10.39' lO ..D ..
PARCEL 3 11.(HBg ACREStl oj L tJ ,);/<'.8/8'.. C3 16700' 111.92' ~B'll'33' L1 N18'37'10'1/ 20.66' ~ 'D,.. ~
PARCEL 5 18.16SS ACRESt) "/1.tff FA ~ 'tllc(jo.i.:.... C~ B5.00' 156.70' 105'37'26' LS 571'58'08'1/ 21.25' '" ';l~ ~
b.~~1 DENOTES AREA OFFERED fOR ;~'tff/ '//01',.6< ('.i\.... 1 C5 IB7.00' 153.~6' 17'01'1~' L6 518'37'10'[ 105.00' ~::i:.: en
DEDICATlDN AS PUBLIC HIGH- -'~'/~Y': "S;81J, ,..... '" L7 518'37'10'[ 20.00' ...~
WAY RECORDED AS flP ND. I ~/,,O)" '~'<'IJ'''~ C6 65.00' 113.55' 100'05'17' L8 N71'22'S0'[ 20.00' ffi if
~ I'" '/~/'g, ..0\ I L9 N18'37'10'[ 20.00' 0-
85-176i13 8'~") ,//..'t< ....t,g,'" . .~ BALDlHN VISTA Ll0 571'22'S0'~ 20.00' ~
lillIIIIIlIl OENDTES PARCEL 6 I _ 8t- ..... .I,?..'t< I~~~'" ASSOCIATES Ll1 527'Si'02'[ 90.70' S
AIlEA=I.8SS ACRES, /, ~"'" / '/'/. $? "'/~-'/~'" \.... APN 6'14-060-0'1 Ll2 519'07'S2'[ 131.00' U
ill I."'~/."':/. /~ t} ,;,", Ll3 511'01'19'~ 31.89' N
................,., J' /.~ ;./~ ,~ //(r'{ 01'/, ~ I~' NORTHERLY LINE LOT H Ll1 NI8'37'lI"~ 18 21' en::l
"'"'~ - .. '"j" n;~~ : I ':r, OJ OTAY RANCH AS SHOWN ON LlS 51S'37'10'[ 10.37' ..
~ i-'~">,,;,""],,,"1 i;;'~, I / <8~ './ MAP THEREOF NO.B62 Ll6 N11'01'19'E 72.35' 10 1Ol5
>-z iii /C" 1:;'11'/-",-"" ~ .~'~ Ll7 N19'07'S2'1/ 37.91' .-.-II!
;- ~S ., ~. '/-.~~tS ,/:. \@)rPARCEL5 LlS N27'S1'02'~ 88.76' :;:;~
~ .... a:o-!z /1. I ~~ ,"" ~ J.. l;a ,-PARCEL 7 Ll9 571'SS'08"1/ 20.30' ...J...JO-
N:]O- tJ ~~~ f"/~/"~/' C2 ...\ C~ \ C6:g ;i>" " 20'TEMPORARY NOTE, ALL OIItENSIONS SHOWN HERlON l5 l5~
....en ~ ~ "'.... ~ I ~ /' . \ \ ;" . .~\.'l' ""~" CONSTRUCTION AIlE CIlII'ILEO FROM RECORD DATA. N N 2:
tJ~ ~ Q.. ~!Q ~V './~' ./ '/ .\ : 10';' ,~\. ~o$> EASEMENT L17 __ ~ .... .... z
ex: en ~O 1'/''// ~'.: \' ~ A" c.- ._-.,-.. ......0
<Ct~<( NUl I 81<//"' \ ~..':) ~+v _-:.ill ----------- .... .
Q.....'" I, /~,.'1s>/PARCEL.~~ .,'''~ [I,:",,,,.{;. ~Ll6';;"" v L9 ......(/6 ~ ~~
... I '::- // '<e///:'///T.P.O:.rA:', ' '> ~.,"i 11 _ . -..I- rI :L ,;~r--"'('J ........ ~l1lili
~.... I ,'r,)~ ~'10 ;:;?'/~~--""'~~Gttl,~~ ~~r, I~,~"" Mt'3 'Th'~ :~\ ~~,,,::: .
3~ ... C5 ':: ~~ CO~~ SAr6r'~~~NIB'37'10'W:~" ~"-~ T'.j>:'o,i.~ ~~'lI\..II/'of~~~
a'c:> ai...1 I ~~ ~ ~~'1['." B~9.',~ ~.~ -"'~ PARCEL.6 It ,p:.".4'J'~t;~~
S; ~
"'lI:
,~ui m.0F C J(j:/.. ~ ~~~~77.B3' ,~" 122.17~ :;;~COUNTY OF ~~--;;::2.~~
17~A1\L V/ ~ /" NIB'37'10'W 772.17' CITY OF CH~
_ ~1~~57~f~,~ ~ N1B'37'10'W ~.~ ~WESTERLY LINE RANCHO OTAY E 1/~ COR.SEC ~:95.B3'
T.P.O.B. ESHT.FOR COUNTY HIGHWAY '--<_JT 2 t,E3fvl Ti8t, Fi.,:W S.W.COR.OF OTAY RANCH
PARCEL U & R/W DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY ~~.:(' '-'n ;\f.)f'J F":f':i---n:'=S()--U9 PER R.0.S.7693
PARCEL '2 Of SAN DIEGO PER F/P NO. 79-H1675 ,).- -" "'- - -
..
:E
.....
ct:
~
t-
z:
.....
I
.....
>-:::
<t""
~.....
....
IJ...w
Ou>
....
l-iE
Ie
(!l....
HO
a:ct:
>-
~
....
-'
....
>
>-
....
t-
o
oj
....
:=
'"
0- L.~
.. r'"
5f-~'
lD .
l!> ...
.. <>
'"
> lJl
. I
~a: ~
..
Zoo ~;..:.r'
=-LIJ Ffl
~u ~cg
~
~
""
'"
'.
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RE: PROPOSED OTAY VALLEY ROAD WIDENING PROJECT
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
Otay Valley Road is proposed by the City to be widened from Interstate Highway 805
(I-80S) to the eastern City boundary. This portion of Otay Valley Road is approximately
8,800 feet in length and crosses lands within the City of Chula Vista's Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Project Area. Otay Valley Road is presently two lanes for most of its
length, and increases in width to three and four lanes west of Brandywine Avenue and
Oleander Avenue, respectively. The proposed project is to widen Otay valley Road to
a six-lane prime arterial within a 128 foot right-of-way. The roadway will have a design
speed of 55 miles per hour. Project elements include a 16-foot landscaped median, six
12-foot driving lanes, two 8-foot emergency parking lanes, and 12 feet behind each
shoulder curb for sidewalks, landscaping and utilities. The proposed widening is
consistent with the City's General Plan and Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan.
The proposed widening will occur in two phases. Otay Valley Road widening from I-80S
to Nirvana Avenue will occur during Phase I, and is anticipated to begin in 1992. Phase
II will include the remainder of the road east of Nirvana, and is anticipated to be
constructed within five years of Phase I completion. Financing for the proposed project.
will be funded by the formation of an Assessment District. Thus, approval of the
Assessment District is the financial method to implement the proposed project.
II. ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
For purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth below, the administrative record of the
City Council decision on this project shall consist of the following:
1. The Draft and Final EIR for the project;
2.
All reports, memoranda, maps, letters and other planning documents prepared by
the environmental consultant and the City, that are not privileged under the Public
Records Act or any other relevant statutes;
-I!
.~,
3. All documents submitted by members of the public, 'and public agencies in
connection with the proposed project;
4. Minutes and verbatim transcripts of all workshops, public meetings and public
hearings held by the City and Redevelopment Agency;
-1- .2.; "'.2.3
EJ~~~J~iT ..C!.i
5. Any documentary or other evidence submitted at workshops, public meetings and
public hearings; and
6. Matter of common knowledge to the City, which it considers, including but not
limited to, the following:
a. Chula Vista General Plan - 2010
b. Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance
c. Chula Vista Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan
d. Chula Vista Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area Implemen-
tation PlanIDesign Manual Addendum
e. Chula Vista Threshold/Standards Policy
f. Otay River Valley Redevelopment Area Sensitive Biological Resources
and Wetlands Delineation (1987).
ilL TERMlNOLOGYITHE PURPOSE OF FINDINGS UNDER CEQA
Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that, for each significant environmental
effect identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a
written finding reaching one or more of the three allowable conclusions. The first is that
"[c]hanges or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which
avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final
ElR." (Emphasis added.) The second potential finding is that "[s]uch changes or
alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not
the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency
or can and should be adopted by such other agency." The third permissible conclusion
is that [s]pecific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternative identified in the final ElR.
--1,
As regards the first of the three potential findings, the CEQA Guidelines do not define
the difference between "avoiding" a significant environmental effect and merely
"substantially lessening" such an effect. The meaning of these terms therefore must be
gleaned from other contexts in which they are used. Public Resources code section
21081, on which CEQA Guidelines section 15091 is based, uses the term "mitigate"
rather than "substantially lessen." The CEQA Guidelines therefore equate "mitigating"
with "substantially lessening." Such an understanding of the statutory term is consistent
with Public Resources Code section 21001, which declares the Legislature's policy
disfavoring the approval of projects with significant environmental effects where there
are feasible mitigation measures or alternatives that could "avoid or substantially lessen"
such significant effects.
-l!
For purposes of these findings, the term "avoid" will refer to the ability of one or more
mitigation measures to reduce an otherwise significant effect to a less-than-sil!nificant .
level. In contrast, the term "substantially lessen" will refer to the ability of such measure .
or measures to substantially reduce the severity of a significant effect, but not to reduce
effect to a level of insignificance. Although CEQA Guidelines section 15019 requires
only that approving agencies specify that a particular significant effect is "avoid[ed] or
-2- .
.2.J..~ i
substantially lessen[ed], " these findings, for purposes of clarity, in each case will specify
whether the effect in question has been fully avoided (and thus reduced to a level of
insignificance) or has simply been substantially lessened (and thus remains significant).
Moreover, although Section 15091, read literally, does not require findings to address
environmental effects that an EIR identifies as merely .potentially significant," these
findings will nevertheless fully account for all such effects identified in the Final EIR.
IV. LEGAL EFFECT OF FINDINGS
To the extent that these findings conclude that various proposed mitigation measures
outlined in the Final EIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or
withdrawn, the City of Chula Vista (City) hereby binds itself and any other responsible
parties to implement those measures. These findings, in other words, are not merely
informational or hortatory, but constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into
effect when the City adopts a resolution approving the project.
V. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
As required by the Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the City Council of the City
of Chula Vista, in adopting these findings, also adopts a mitigation monitoring and
reporting program. The program is designed to ensure that, during project
implementation, the City and other responsible parties comply with the feasible mitigation
measures. That program is described in the document entitled, Otay Valley Road
Widening Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
VI. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The Final EIR identified a number of potentially significant environmental effects (or
"impacts") that the Otay Valley Road widening would cause, all of which could be
avoided through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures. These impacts are restated
below, followed by page numbers in the Final EIR where the impacts are discussed.
A. Geologic and soils impacts could occur from development of the roadway on the
unstable river wash, stream sediments and clay lOOms found in the area (FEIR,
p. 3-7).
B.
The project will result in the loss of 1.2 acres of Diegan Sage Scrub, 2.6 acres
of TamarisklMulefat Scrubland, 0.2 acre of Willow Riparian Woodland, and 0.2
acre of Freshwater Marsh. Construction activities would impact 1.1 acres of
TamarisklMulefat Scrubland and 0.2 acre Diegan Sage Scrub (FEIR, p. 3-26 to
3-27).
-4
"i,
C. The road widening would conflict with the existing administration, workroom and
parking facilities of the City of Chula Vista Animal Shelter (FEIR, p. 3-38).
-3- ,,2.2. - .2.5'
D. The proposed project will accommodate traffic volumes that are expected to occur
along the widened roadway due to long term development and population growth
in the region. Congestion at roadway intersections is expected, including
Oleander Avenue, Brandywine Avenue, Nrrvana Avenue, Maxwell Road, and at
both the northbound and southbound on-ramps to I-80S (FEIR, p. 3-48 to 3-53).
. E. Traffic congestion and hazards could result at the intersection of Otay Valley
Road and the Nelson & Sloan Rock Plant until the full widening of Otay Valley
Road occurs and the intersection with Paseo Ranchero is constructed (FEIR
p. 3-52 to 3-53).
F. Paleontological resources may occur in the project area and could be impacted by
roadway development (FEIR, p.3-64).
G. Increases in noise levels from increased traffic along the roadway are projected
to exceed City guidelines for noise exposure (FEIR, p. 3-79 to 3-80).
The sub-sections below restate the above-identified impacts and set forth the mitigation
measures adopted to avoid the impacts.
A. GEOLOGY/SOILS
Potentially Significant Effect: Geologic and soils impacts could occur from
development of the roadway on the unstable river wash, stream sediments and
clay loams found in the area (FEIR, p. 3-7).
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures have been found to be
feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been
made binding on the City through these findings (FEIR, p. 3-8 to 3-9).
1. Unstable geology/soils materials will be removed or stabilized before
roadway construction begins. Surficial layers of organic soils, debris and
soft or loose deposits will be stripped from areas where fill will be placed.
-Ii
.,~
2.
.Compressive soils will be removed and replaced with properly compacted
fill. Expansive soils will be buried deep in fills and not within the
roadway section.
3. All slopes will be constructed at a minimum slope of 2.0 horizontal feet
to 1.0 vertical feet. Temporary chain link debris fences, with meshes of
I to 1-112 inch square, will be installed with a geofabric material along
the bottom 18-24 inches of the fence to control silting in sensitive wetland
areas which could result from sediments in runoff.
-4-
~,). ~ J.?-
B. BIOLOGY
Potentially Significant Effect: The project will result in the loss of 1.2 acres of
Diegan Sage Scrub, 2.6 acres of TamariskIMulefat Scrubland, 0.2 acre of Willow
Riparian Woodland, and 0.2 acre of Freshwater Marsh. Construction activities
would impact 1.1 acres of Tamarisk/Mulefat Scrubland and 0.2 acre Diegan Sage
Scrub (FEIR, p. 3-26 to 3-27).
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final ElR.
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures have been found to be
feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been
made binding on the City through these findings (FElR, p. 3-28).
1. Losses of wetland habitats will include Tamarisk/Mulefat Scrubland,
Willow Riparian Woodland, and Freshwater Marsh tota11ing 3.0 acres,
and will be mitigated by the creation of new wetland areas within the river
valley. Any such mitigation will include extensive revegetation with
willow woodland and the use of San Diego marsh-elder to maximize value
to wildlife and mitigate for the loss to this sensitive plant species.
Mitigation will be at a 2: 1 acreage replacement ratio for wetlands lost.
2. The roadsides adjacent to native vegetation communities east of Nirvana
Avenue will be designed in a manner that would preclude the potential for
vehicle access or illegal dumping into the river bottom or onto the slopes.
Incorporation of guard rails or fences would be appropriate. Use of
thorny vegetation may also be used in conjunction with temporary fences.
3. The roadway slopes will be revegetated with native plant materials
indigenous to the area or which complement the existing native
communities, such as sage scrub or sycamore woodland species.
4.
Where construction activities are to occur in or adjacent to native
vegetational communities, work will be restricted to the delineated project
footprint by the placement of temporary construction fences or flagging
along both sides of the street. This measure is incorporated in the project
description.
...I!
""i,
5. If work site brushing occurs between April 1 anq September 15, the
project site will be carefully examined by a qualified biologist prior to
clearing. Should the site be found to support nesting birds including Least
Bell's Vireo, Willow Flycatcher, or Yellow-breasted Chat, work within
300 feet of the nest site will be delayed until nesting has been completed.
-5-
~,)"-2 ?
6. Following construction, the 20-foot wide construction corridor will be
recontoured to natural or lower levels and revegetated with native
vegetation favoring Willow and Mulefat Riparian Scrub with minor
elements of Diegan Sage Scrub.
These measures are consistent with the requirements and conditions of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit for this project, which are hereby
incorporated by reference, and attached as Attachment . A . .
C. LAND USE
Potentially Significant Effect: The road widening would conflict with the existing
administration, workroom and parking facilities of the City of Chula Vista Animal
Shelter (FEIR, p. 3-38).
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures have been found to be
feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been
made binding on the City through these findings (FEIR, p. 3-39).
1. Impacts to the City's Animal Shelter will be mitigated through the
redesign of the site and relocation of parking, workroom and
administration facilities to the southern part of the property.
D. TRAFFIC
Potentially Significant Effect: The proposed project will accommodate increased
volumes which are expected to occur along the widened roadway due to long term
development and population growth in the region. Congestion at roadway
intersections is expected, including Oleander Avenue, Brandywine Avenue,
Nirvana Avenue, Maxwell Road, and at both the northbound and - southbound
on-ramps to 1-805 (FEIR, p. 3-48 to 3-53).
"'1
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
-l!
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures have been found to be
feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been
made binding on the City through these findings (FEIR, p. 3-53 to 3-54).
1. Signals will be installed as the City Engineer determines is appropriate in
order to meet the City's Traffic Threshold Standard.
-6-
.2 ~ ....If?''
2. Maxwell Road will be restriped to provide a southbound left turn-lane at
its intersection with Otay Valley Road.
3. As required in the Mitigation Monitoring Program, traffic conditions will
be monitored by the City's Traffic Engineer to implement improvements
at the appropriate time.
Potentially Significant Effect: Traffic congestion and hazards could result at the
intersection of Otay Valley Road and the Nelson & Sloan Rock Plant until the full
widening of Otay Valley Road occurs and the intersection with Pasco Ranchero
is constructed (FEIR p. 3-52 to 3-53).
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures have been found to be
feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been
made binding on the City through these findings (FEIR, p. 3-54).
1. As an interim measure, roadway improvements at this intersection shall
be completed as part of Phase I.
E. PALEONTOLOGY
Potentially Significant Effect: Paleontological resources may occur in the project
area and could be impacted by roadway development (FEIR, p.3-64).
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measure: The following mitigation measures have been found to be
feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been
made binding on the City through these findings (FEIR, p. 3-65).
1.
A qualified paleontologist will be at the pre-grade meeting to consult with
the grading and excavation contractors.
...i!
'-~,
2.
A paleontology monitor will be on site at all times during the cutting of
previously undisturbed sediments through and immediately adjacent to the
Mission Valley formation to inspect cuts for contained fossils. In the
event that well-preserved fossils are discovered, the paleontological
monitor will be allowed to temporarily direct, divert or halt grading to
allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely fashion. Any fossil remains
collected will be cataloged and deposited (with landowner's permission)
at the San Diego Natural History Museum.
-7-
,),2--2.9
F. NOISE
Potentially Significant Effect: Increases in noise levels from increased traffic
along the roadway (stated to occur with or without the project) are projected to
exceed City guidelines for noise exposure (FEIR, p. 3-79 to 3-80).
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Mitigation Measure: The following mitigation measures have been found to be
feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been
made binding on the City through these findings (FEIR, p. 3-81).
1. A perimeter masonry wall, six feet high, will be installed at the back lot
line of some residences backing up to Otay Valley Road. The wall will
be at the top of the slope, to utilize slope height to increase the line of
sight break between traffic and rear yard receiver locations. (It should be
noted that a large percentage of the noise at the west end of the project
area comes from 1-805.)
G.. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
The Cumulative Impacts analysis was based on the list of proposed and planned
projects in the area, shown on Table 2.4-1 in the FEIR, and also on the
Cumulative Impacts analysis contained in the General Plan Update FEIR (since
the project is shown in the General Plan). In summary, cumulative impacts
would occur in the issue areas of flooding downstream, biological resources,
agricultural lands, traffic circulation, and noise. With the exception of
agricultural lands, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts have been
mitigated to a level below significance either through project mitigation measures,
or through adherence to standard City engineering and building requirements.
Regarding agricultural lands, the FEIR states that the project area is not primarily
agriculturally oriented, with prevailing uses being residential and light industrial,
and that loss of this acreage (3.9 acres) to the roadway does not create a project
significant impact.
-i!
VII.
INFEASmILITY
ALTERNATIVE
OF
ALTERNATIVES
OTHER
THAN
THE
PROJECT
'..~,
The selection of project alternatives was based on CEQA's requirement of analysis of the No
Project Alternative, the General Plan description of roadway location, and a site constraints
analysis performed for this project (Otay River Valley Redevelopment Area Sensitive Biological
Resources and Wetlands Delineation [Michael Brandman Associates, 1987]). Three different
alternative alignments were evaluated subsequent to completion of this study before the proposed
alignment was chosen.
-8-
.).:).:J t)
The proposed project will not result in significant adverse impacts if all recommended mitigation
measures are implemented. Because the project's impacts have been mitigated below a level of
significance an analysis of the alternatives is not technically required. However, the
decisionmakers, after reviewing the EIR and in approving the project specifically reject the No
Project Alternative and the other alternatives for the following reasons:
No Proiect Alternative
The No Project Alternative consists of no action taken by the City of Chula Vista to construct
or implement the proposed project or either of the project alternatives. This alternative would
discourage future infill industrial growth along Otay Valley Road and inhibit economic growth
in the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area. This is contrary to the goals of the Chula Vista
Redevelopment Agency as set forth in the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan. The plan
specifically calls for the correction of problems relative to circulation, infrastructure, and public
utility inadequacies. The No Action Alternative would also be inconsistent with the City of
Chula Vista's Draft General Plan Circulation Element roadway designation for Otay Valley
Road, which calls for a six lane prime arterial and major street standards for Otay Valley Road.
In addition, if this alternative is selected, the lack of capacity and low level of service on Otay
Valley Road could constrain future developments north, south, and east of the project. Future
development proposals that would contribute traffic to Otay Valley Road, or require the
extension of utility services along the roadway, would be affected most.
Locational Alternative I
Locational Alternative 1 is the same as the project with the exception that the six lane roadway
would be reduced to a four lane roadway east of Nirvana. The right-of-way would thus be
decreased from 128 feet to either 100 feet or 84 feet (depending on design). The environmental
consequences of constructing Locational Alternative 1 would be identical or very similar to the
proposed project with respect to geology and soils, landform, land use, agriculture, aesthetics,
cultural and paleontological resources, and park, recreation and open space. The differences in
environmental impacts between Locational Alternative 1 and the proposed project are primarily
to biological resources and to traffic conditions.
Biology
--\
This alternative reduces the right-of-way from 128 feet to 100 feet east of N"lIVana
Avenue while retaining the same general road alignment as the proposed project.
Impacts of this alternative would generally parallel those of the proposed project with
only a slight reduction in magnitude. Loss of wetlands would total approximately 1.23
acres with proportionally fewer San Diego Marsh-Elder impacted.
...It
Loss of habitat for riparian bird species would still be considered significant. Reducing
the right-of-way to 84 feet would lower the wetland impacts to 0.60 acre, still resulting
in significant adverse wetlands impacts. Under either the proposed project or the reduced
widths of the Locational Alternative 1, wetland impacts and impacts to the sensitive San
Diego Marsh-Elder are considered significant but mitigable through creation of replace-
ment wetland habitats including the heavy utilization of marsh elder in the plantings.
-9-
.l~ ., J I
Traffic
The City's recommended maximum traffic volume for a four lane major street is 30,000
VPD. The General Plan forecast volume at build-out is 26,000 VPD east of Nirvana
Avenue, thus the alternative of a four lane classification would seemingly be adequate.
Such a classification would require an amendment of the General Plan Circulation
Element. However, the roadway was not designed to be four lanes in this location
because of traffic circulation considerations. This segment of roadway is located between
Paseo Ranchero, which is planned as a six lane facility, and the rest of Otay Valley Road
to the west, which also requires six lanes. The volumes of traffic entering the Otay
Valley RoadlPaseo Ranchero intersection are projected to be 76,000 ADT. Thus, the six
lane width along this segment of Otay Valley Road is necessary in order to provide
sufficient capacity entering and exiting the intersection. Also, a short four lane segment
of road between six lane roads on either side could create congestion and hazardous
conditions.
Locational Alternative 2
The environmental consequences of constructing Locational Alternative 2 would be the same as
the proposed project and Locational Alternative 1 with respect to land use, agriculture, and
parks, recreation and open space. Environmental impact differences between Locational
Alternative 2 and the proposed project are identified for traffic conditions, biological resources,
cultural resources, geology and soils, and landform and aesthetics, as well as traffic. Impacts
to transportation are the same for Locational Alternative 2 as described above for Locational
Alternative 1. Overall, impacts on the remaining natural, cultural, and scenic resources would
be greater from Locational Alternative 2 than from the proposed project.
Biology
Under this alternative all direct adverse impacts to the wetland habitats would be
eliminated. Due to the extensive slope cutting required, however, an extensive loss of
quality Diegan Sage Scrub habitat and a wide array of sensitive plans and animals
occurring on these hillsides would be severely impacted by this proposed alternative.
The biological impacts of this loss would be significant.
"'~.
The only known large population of Greene's Ground Cherry would be lost. Such a loss
is considered unmitigab1e. Also eliminated would be the dense stands of Coast Cholla
and the Fishhook Cactus population. The latter occurs in densities seldom seen in San
Diego County; moreover, the average size of specimens far surpasses other known
substantial populations. Also heavily impacted would be the State-listed endangered Otay
Tarwee population, along with significant colonies of Coast Barrel Cactus and
Cleveland's Golden Stars.
-Ii
One pair of California Gnatcatchers would probably be lost from the slopes under this
alternative. The Orange-throated Whiptail population would also be impacted. The
Diegan Sage Scrub slopes which would be impacted are considered excellent gnatcatcher
habitat.
-10-
.2';' .. .:J;i.
Cultural Resources
Locational Alternative 2 would impact all of the cultural resource sites that will be
affected by the proposed project, and would additionally impact another potentially
significant site. Thus, Locational Alternative 2 is less preferred for cultural resources
than the proposed project.
Geology and Soils
Locational Alternative 2 would require cutting into the steep hillsides located in the
northeastern section of the project area. Soil conditions in this area consist of terrace
escarpments and are considered to be unstable due to the presence of cobble strata.
Consequently, greater maximum slope ratios could be required (e.g., 4:1) thereby
increasing even further the amount of land disturbed. In addition, retaining walls, with
a maximum height of 20 feet, would most likely be required as mitigation. In summary,
Locational Alternative 2 is less preferred than the proposed project with respect to
geotechnical and soils constraints.
Landform! Aesthetics
Locational Alternative 2 would also result in significant landform impacts. This
Alternative would result in major landform alteration due to the amount of cutting that
would be required to achieve 2: 1 or 4: 1 slope ratios. Cut slopes would be required north
of the roadway for approximately one-half mile in the northeastern part of the project
area. Maximum height of cut slopes would be approximately 65 feet. Landform
modifications in this area would have significantly adverse impacts on landscape
aesthetics since this Alternative would result in strong visual contrasts with the current
natural hillsides and vegetation cover. Consequently, Locational Alternative 2 is less
preferable than the proposed project with respect to landform and aesthetics.
-fA
""~,
-11-
..l:J. . JJ
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the Chula Vista City Council in approving the
Assessment District which implements the roadway which is the subject of the FEIR, having
considered the information contained in the FEIR, and having reviewed the public testimony and
record, makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations in support of the Findings
and the action of the City Council approving the Assessment District.
All of the identified potentially significant project impacts have been mitigated to a level less
than significant, as set forth in the Findings. The project also contributes to cumulative impacts.
However, as set forth on page 8, these impacts were deemed to be less than significant. The
City Council finds and concludes that the public benefits of the roadway project would outweigh
any significant and/or cumulative impacts. The City Council has reviewed and considered all
of the alternatives described in the Final EIR. The project selected by the Council was chosen
for two major reasons:
. It is consistent with the General Plan.
. It accommodates projected buildout traffic.
The alternatives were rejected by the Council:
. No Proiect Alternative -- because of inconsistency with the General Plan, lack of
roadway capacity for projected traffic volumes, and low level of service that
would result.
. Locational Alternative No. I -- because of inconsistency with the General Plan,
lack of roadway capacity necessary to handle future volumes of traffic utilizing
the Otay Valley Road/Paseo Ranchero intersection, poor traffic design, and
because this alternative does not reduce any impacts to a level below significant.
. Locational Alternative No.2 - because of equal or greater environmental impacts
associated with this slightly different alignment.
The decisionmakers fmd that the following factors support the approval" of the Assessment
District which implements the project, and therefore, sets forth and adopts the following
Statement of Overriding Considerations:
~
-'"t,
1.
The roadway project is consistent with, and thus will fulfill attainment of the General
Plari designation as six lane prime arterial and major street, and the Redevelopment Plan
goal which" calls for the "development of a more efficient and effective circulation
corridor free from hazardous vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle interfaces."
2.
As set forth in the findings, mitigation measures have been incoxporated into the Project
or made binding on the applicant through the adoption of the Findings, which reduce
impacts below a level of significance.
-12-
.,2,;.....1'1
3. Approval of the Assessment District which implements the Project will result in the
following benefits:
. Restoration of approximately 6 acres of wetland within the Otay River floodway
(twice the impacted amount).
. Construction of needed roadway improvements commensurate with General Plan
requirements to serve existing and anticipated development in the area.
. Construction job opportunities in an economy which is currently suffering from
such opportunities.
. Construction of the roadway will permit, support, and help promote the further
industrial development of the Otay Valley area which includes over 200 acres of
undeveloped land zoned for light industrial land use. This will provide numerous
job opportunities in construction, business, and industry.
. Construction of the roadway will improve the public safety and aesthetics in the
area. The current facility is inadequate to support current and anticipated
volumes of traffic, and for most of its length does not include curb, gutters, or
sidewalks, has poor road surface conditions, and is visually cluttered with
overhead utility lines.
-!I<.
.....~,
-13-
>>-;1>
'OTAY VALLEY ROAD WIDENING PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Monitorinl! Prol!ram Description and PU1lXlse
Public Resources Code ~ 21081.6 requires a lead or responsible agency that approves a project
where an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has identified significant environmental effects,
to adopt a "reporting or monitoring program for adopted or required changes to mitigate or
avoid significant environmental effects. "
The City of Chula Vista is the lead agency for the Otay Valley Road Widening Project. A Draft
and Final EIR was prepared for this project which addressed potential environmental impacts
and, where appropriate, recommended measures to reduce substantially or avoid the impacts.
A Mitigation Monitoring Program is required to ensure that the adopted measures are
implemented. The City of Chula Vista will adopt this Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP)
after considering the Final EIR.
Roles and Resoonsibilities
The MMP for the proposed project will be in place through both phases of the project, including
final design, pre-grading, construction and operation. The City of Chula Vista has the primary
enforcement role for the implementation of mitigation measures. The City's Environmental
Review Coordinator (ERe) will provide final approval for the completion of the implementation
of measures. The ERC will appoint a Mitigation Compliance Coordinator (MCC) who will be
responsible for the actual monitoring of the implementation of measures. The MCC will
interface with the ERC, the City Engineer, the City Landscape Architect, the Construction
Supervisor, and the Biological Monitor, all who have some responsibility for the implementation
of measures.
Mitigation Monitorinl! Procedures
The MMP consists of Mitigation Monitoring Program Procedures, filing requirements, and
reporting and compliance verification. These procedures are outlined below.
-l!
Mitigation Monitoring Program Procedures: Table 1 identifies the procedures of the MMP. For
each mitigation measure, it states the monitoring activity, the timing of implementation of the
measure, and who is responsible for verifying that the measure has been implemented and for
"~~~
[mal approval.
Mitigation Monitoring Program Files: Files shall be established to document and retain the
records of the MMP. The files shall be established, organized, and retained by the City of
Chula Vista Planning Department.
Reporting and Compliance Verification: The City's Mitigation Monitoring Report Forms are
designed to record the monitoring activity in a consistent manner with appropriate approvals.
-14-
~.;. "'Jt,
The forms will be completed and signed by the individuals responsible for the monitoring and
approval of the measures. These forms will be placed in the MMP files.
Program Operations
The following steps shall be followed for implementation, monitoring, and verification of each
mitigation measure:
1. The City of Chula Vista, Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC), shall designate a
Mitigation Compliance Coordinator, who will be responsible for monitoring the
implementation of the mitigation measures.
2. The ERC shall provide to the MCC, the Mitigation Monitoring Report Forms; a copy
of Table 1; and other pertinent information.
3. The MCC shall coordinate the implementation of the mitigation measures and shall
complete a Form for each activity, and forward the report to the ERC for final approval.
4. All completed forms shall ~en be placed in the MMP files.
Mitigation measures shall be implemented as specified by the Mitigation Monitoring Program
Summary. During any project phase, unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the
refmement or addition of mitigation measures. The ERC, with advise from staff, is responsible
for recommending changes to the mitigation measures, if needed. If mitigation measures are
refmed, the ERC would complete a Mitigation Monitoring Report Form documenting the
change, and shall notify the appropriate design, construction, or operations personnel about
refined requirements.
[C:IWPS IIOVROADIFINDINGS.TXT)
-Ii
'...,
-15-
..2,1. ~ .j?
~ ~ ft...
::~~ :
~~~~
"""""~~~
~- -~
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
ftECEIVEO
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
~ AlE 17 All:l 0
ITY OF CHUL4 VISTA
TY CLERK'S OFFICE
August 12, 1994
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, Ca. 919010
Gentlemen:
'l'he Board of Ethics, at its August 11, 1994 meeting, voted
unanimously to ask the Mayor to send a letter to our local elected
representatives to support "National Character Counts Week"
(October 16-22, 1994) and urge each of our area congressional
representatives to become co-sponsors of the "Character Counts
Joint Resolutions" effort.
Our Board respectfully requests that the Mayor send such a letter.
Very truly yours,
----'1' /', "
C'___'H"" ~=-/~1-,--'L..._", ~" /)~l:t~~':4:;.~~'
""'''-'"---
Harriet Acton, Chairperson
Board of Ethics
cc: Board of Ethics
enc.
ce-: c,?l'r/~)
~~7-r+C--4
c23'" /
276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691,5037
9.\\YOtl~lllurr. FA
\c..'. 1~l(tf
........' .H~ l'iII,,~. ofCb"~"O~~ f. r
. ~
" lIIDI '-
~ c
~ .
~ S-
o ~
~ ,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,: ~
CHARACTER COUNTS
COALITION
Advisory Council
DR WILLIAM BENNEIT
fmr;.".wrAntirir;'.a
JACK DUN,~
CrJssroaasofNorrtlCarotna
MARW~ V'o'Ri'JHT EDELtJAN
C:-1~Clren's O~fense Fund
DR. LLOYD V HACKLEY
Fa~neo.lIIe5tJreUniYer.iily
GENEVA JOHNSON
FaIT1IySer\;~Nrenca
BARBAR.... JORDAN
I.BjSdJooiurpub/tcAIf;;Jr.i
IUnfl,.of Te>.::;s)
MICHA!:l.. JOS=:PHSOI~
.bse;,h"(>,~',~5:rtL~e of Etfl'cs
DRTHOM...'s UCKONA
5i"'" UnNer5lty vf New York
(Col1lalXl)
NItiA,UNK
ClljJdrerr'sTelevision\M:Jrkshop
SYLVIA PETERS
EoisonProjecf
THOMAS W. SEllECK
ACJarlProrJuce,
DR. NORM4.N SPRINTHALL
North Carolllla Stale Unr..er.iily
RAE31 DAVID \VOZNiCA
Bror.lrn.;nCemert!r)ewishLife
(P2nd5t.YJ
Member Organizations
Amah'un A....wootioll
uJCo/llnwmtyC"lleges
American Ax,lIdll/;on
uJSchool Admini,'/rorors
AJ//erican Fedaur:'-II
aJTeacherr;
AmericUlI Red C/"O~f
American fuwh Soccer Organi:atiun
A.~\'(JdaJi(m Jor College
alld UlliH'rsity H.e/igiolis Affairs
&h.:RlItl1l~'(1b'lJe
Big Jjlo)rher.~ljix SI-Iler.; oj Amen'ca
B/ad Coaches AS~(lcia/ion
ROI',I & Gir/.l ('Iuh.\' oj America
R"l" TfHHl
ClulJ II'dfiJrl' I "'a.!..,,,!' ojAmerica
('/IIl/lcll oj th,' Great Cily St:booh
CVl'<'lUnltHoll.\<'
Cm,unJads ,of SW1h Carolina
Fumi~I' St'f1'ICe ..imeriul
Fuwft",'ilIe SfUIl' Ulli,'er...-irv
4.1{ ,
Girls ltk:()'1~)r1.1/L'd
Goodwill h1d1"rries oj Ameno.1
1'11,' f{t'"r1-..",~/lll\li!lIl{'
!Jlllc' h'uxuc llil...:I,a11
A1ilul<'.wlaC<,/lr,.r Jor
C"'rOfTlfi.' Re.'fKlmihiliry
......uhull<J! ,4.~""'O,lli(!11
ore'alh"II,- St,:/rool Tt!udJen
Nurilltj(11..h,."ulni"f/
{lr,<;':'-'OI~i<llY Schoo! I'rillClpalS
Nllliolll.,fA.I..Wk_'i,tli,,"
11SI.lle H'~ml~ ojl:.JtIC<11iml
Nutimwl A"-III(";atitHl
o(Sn"kw (.'f!wl{'il~
f.,'''lidIUJ/C(l/j,,,:!c !i:dllcaJitHwl
.'h.,.":O"I;,,,,
Nuti",u" CUWII..t! or hi R,CIl
A'(,Ij/I/Joll--e,l..'n,tiolJ
JiwCOI""II" YOlJ/hA1illi\'Ir,'
NIIII""'J! (}rf"ur !fi'II)-..'ue
{"'t'SI "1It'n~j/"'",,l
SIlIIFfl.Jl~'is",,(;ilJ"I.1
liNilo'dSt'lt,:irhIJrllIHJd('t:111<''-'"
o!AIllt'n{u
(ll/lledH'0-IJ(Amcrica
1:\-1<',.1 0( Ill<' { '-SA
!'III/11>': Af<'II\,~ Yuung W"/II<,n's
}/,'hn'" AI.I"",lIiwlr::\"}'("j
}'"""I,i'..',;'.",., "'1"'(.'!II,,'!"/
June 13, 1994
Dear Friend of the Josephson Institute:
As an advocate for good character and ethical behavior, you can
help focus the nation's attention on the issue of the character of
our young people by asking President Clinton to declare
October 16-22, 1994 as "National Character Counts Week",
Please write today to your Senators and Representatives, A
sample letter is enclosed, along with a list of your state
representatives' Washington addresses for your convenience,
Urge your legislators to add their names as co-sponsors of the
Character Counts Joint Resolutions resolutions neither
liberal nor conservative - that put the issue of the character of
our young people high on the national agenda,
Sincerely,
Q_5.oU
~h-
Michael Josephson Tom Selleck
Character Counts Coalition Advisory Council
.2.:1 -J
4640 Admiralty Way
Suite 1001
Marina del Rey
CA 90292,6610
(310) 306-1868
FAX (310' 827-1854
Ch.ar.acterCountsls a prOje:t of the Jos€-phson Instltuteo! EthiCS
Tha Joser'r-:son I.~st;tvte is a noncroM, r.1.~.e"l;: n'l!Ji,,>benC'(!~ orO:l,~i:l3rlon
Date:
To:
I, along with many of my friends, neighbors, and business associates, strongly
support the following Joint Resolutions urging President Clinton to declare October
16-22,1994 as "National Character Counts Week. Resolutions SJR178 and HJR366
have been introduced by a diverse group of legislators from both Houses and both
sides of the aisle:
S.TR178
Sen. Pete Domenici
Sen. Sam Nunn
Sen. Barbara Mikulski
Sen. Thad Cochran
Sen. Robert Bennett
Sen. Christopher Dodd
Sen. Joseph Lieberman
Sen. John Danforth
R-NM
D-GA
D-MD
R-MS
R-UT
D-CT
D-CN
R-MO
HJR366
Rep. Tony Hall
Rep. Lee Hamilton
Rep. Nick Smith
Rep. Frank Wolf
Rep. Joseph Moakley
Rep. Bill Emerson
Rep. Bill Hughes
Rep. Henry Hyde
D-OH
D-IN
R-MI
R-VA
D-MA
R-MO
D-NJ
R-IL
As my elected represent.ative., ! ask you to recl)gn!ze the v:duab!e !'o!e that good
character plays in the lives of the young people of our nation, and urge you to lend
your name as a co-sponsor of this important initiative.
Sincerely,
.2.3..y
Honorable George Miller
Representative
State of California
Rayburn Building, Room 2205
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable George E. Brown, Jr.
Representative
State of California
Rayburn Bldg. Rrn.2300
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Henry A. Waxman
Representative
State of California
Rayburn Bldg. Rrn. 2408
Washington, CA 20515
Honorable Howard McKeon
Representative
State of California
Cannon Bldg. Rrn.307
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Howard L. Berman
Representative
State of California
Rayburn Bldg. Rrn. 2201
Washington, CA 20515
Honorable Jane Harman
Representative
State of California
Cannon Bldg. Rrn. 325
Washington, CA 20515
Honorable Jay Kim
Representative
State of California
Cannon Bldg. Rm. 502
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Jerry Lewis
Representative
State of California
Rayburn Bldg. Rrn. 2312
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Jon Doolittle
Representative
State of California
Longworth Building, Room 1524
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Julian C. Dixon
Representative
State of California
Rayburn Bldg. Rrn. 2400
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Ken Calvert
Representative
State of California
Longworth Bldg. Rm. 1523
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Lucille Roybal-Allard
Representative
State of California
Longworth Bldg. Rrn. 1717
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Lynn Schenk
Representative
State of California
Cannon Bldg. Rm. 315
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Lynn Woolsey
Representative
State of California
Cannon Building, Room 439
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Matthew G. Martinez
Representative
State of California
Rayburn Bldg. Rm. 2231
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Maxine Waters
Representative
State of California
Longworth Bldg. Rrn. 1207
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Michael Huffington
Representative
State of California
Cannon Bldg. Room 113
Washington" DC 20515
Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Representative
State of California
Cannon Building, Room 240
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Norman Y. Mineta
Representative
State of California
Rayburn Building, Room 2221
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Randy Cunningham
Representative
State of California
Cannon Bldg. Rrn. 117
Washington, DC 20515
.\\'O.~"ltHt.,
..~...(.,. A/ltt'Js
,,0-' IJII[~'-"~-'-
~
!
~
:: -----........
Or.
"'-+~
~ '3",5'
,
CHARACTER COUNT!
Honorable Alfred McCandless
Representative
State of Califomia
Raybum Bldg. Rm. 2422
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Anna Eshoo
Representative
State of Califomia
Longworth Building, Room 1505
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Anthony C. Beilenson
Representative
State of Califomia
Raybum Bldg. Rm. 2465
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Barbara Boxer
Senator
State of Califomia
Senate Hart Office Bldg, Room 112
Washington, DC 20510
Honorable Bill Baker
Repre<entative
State of Califomia
Longworth Building, Room 1724
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Bob Filner
Representative
State of Califomia
Cannon Bldg. Rm. 504
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable C. Christopher Cox
Representative
State of Califomia
Cannon Bldg.Rm.206
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Calvin Dooley
Reoresentative
Stite of Califomia
Longworth Building, Room 1227
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Carlos J. Moorhead
Representptive
State of Califomia
Raybum Bldg. Rm. 2346
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Dan Hamburg
Representative
State of Califomia
Cannon Building, Room 114
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Dana Rohrabacher
Representative
State of Califomia
Longworth Bldg. Rm.l027
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable David Dreier
Representative
State of Califomia
Cannon Bldg. Rm. 411
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Diane Feinstein
Senator
State of Califomia
Senate Hart Office Bldg, Room 331
Washington, DC 20510
Honorable Don Edwards
Representative
State of Califomia
Raybum Building, Room 2307
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Duncan Hunter
Representative
State of Califomia
Cannon Bldg. Rm. 133
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Edward Royce
Representative
State of Califomia
Longworth Bldg. Rm.1404
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Elton Gallegly
Representative
State of Califomia
Raubum Bldg. Rm. 2441
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Estaban Edward Torres
Representative
State of Califomia
Longworth Bldg. Rm. 1740
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Fortney (Pete) Stark
Representative
State of Califomia
Cannon Building, Room 239
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Gary Condit
Representative
State of Califomia
Longworth Building, Room 1123
Washington, DC 20515
..\\'Olllll1ll1r.,
;t\"'. A/~"lss
~.." IIII[~._"---
~
$'
o
~
;;
e ---......._.....040
Or,
"
Or
.:l:J ..~
CHARACTER COUNT
Honorable Richard Pombo
Representative
State of California
Longworth Building, Room 1519
Washington. DC 20515
Honorable Richard H. Lehman
Representative
State of California
Longworth Building. Room 1226
Washington. DC 20515
Honorable Robert Matsui
Representative
State of Califomia
Rayburn Building, Room 2311
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Robert K. Doman
Representative
State of California
Rayburn Bldg. Rm.2402
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Ron Packard
Representative
State of Califomia
Rayburn Bldg. Rm. 2162
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Ronald V. Dellums
Representative
State of California
Raybum Building, Room 2108
Washington. DC 20515
Honorable Steve Horn
Representative
State of California
Longworth Bldg. Rm. 1023
Washington. DC 20515
Honorable Tom Lantos
Representative
State of California
Rayburn Building, Room 2182
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Vic Fazio
Representative
State of California
Rayburn Building, Room 2113
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Wally Herger
Representative
State of California
Rayburn Building, Room 2433
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable Walter Tucker
Representative
State of California
Cannon Bldg. Rm. 419
Washington, DC 20515
Honorable William M. Thomas
Representative
State of California
Rayburn House Office Bldg, Rm2209
Washington. DC 20515
Honorable Xavier Becerra
Representative
State of California
Longworth Bldg. Rm.1710
Washington. DC 20515
.,\tOlllU11urr.,
.,~\{.,. 4t".'11
,,0-' IIBIl"O'--./~-'-
.,
f
~
.
- ------"'"
Or.
"''''+c
.23"7
\
CHARACTER COUNTS
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item :l L/.i9
Meeting Date 9/6/94
ITEM TITLE: Report: Evaluation of Candidate Sites for Transfer Station and Materials
Recovery Facility
SUBMITTED BY: Deputy City Manager Krempl~
Planning Director #1
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ bv);~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No X)
At the 7/19/94 meeting, Council approveHontracting with John SextonlChula Vista Sanitary
for the first phase of a transfer station and materials recovery facility to include siting,
conceptual design and permitting. As the initial step in that process, this report addresses the
methodology for evaluating 14 candidate sites within the City and recommends further study and
evaluation of two sites.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept the report and direct staff to proceed with an in-
depth evaluation (including cost information) of the two highest ranked sites (894 Energy Way
and 900 Bay Blvd.), and to report back regarding further recommendations on acquisition or
obtaining an option.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On August 8, 1994, City staff representing Administration, Community Development,
Engineering and Planning toured the 14 sites along with representatives from Sexton, Chula
Vista Sanitary and the City's solid waste consultant, Brown, Vence and Associates (BV A).
Information from the tour and subsequent discussions resulted in evaluation documented in the
attached study titled SITE SELECTION - FIRST PHASE (Exhibit 1).
Summary of Findings
The study evaluated each site against six criteria. The criteria were weighted by relative
importance to the City. Each site was then given a value for each criterion based on its
comparative relation to the criterion. The raw scores were multiplied by the weight of each
criterion and summed. A detailed explanation of the methodology is included in Exhibit 2.
In summary, of the 14 sites:
o Nine sites dropped out because of "fatal flaws", i.e. further consideration of use of the
site as a trash transfer station and future materials recovery facility is precluded because
of various problems, such as:
,/
Four sites are not large enough for a transfer station of at least 5 acres in
size (sites 1 - 66 No. Glover; 2 - 800 Bay Blvd.; 4 - 1150 Bay Blvd.; &
9 - 2350 Main St.).
.1'//1'/
Page 2, Item ~ If 1'9
Meeting Date 9/6/94
./ Three sites are too close to residential areas (sites 6 - Industrial & Moss;
7 - Anita & Industrial; & 11 - 3441 Main St.).
./ Two sites have significant environmental obstacles to overcome, i.e. flood
plain/biological issues or soil and groundwater contamination (sites 8 -
380 Hollister; & 12 - the Old Omar Rendering site).
o The five remaining sites were ranked on basis of scores derived from Exhibit 1. In rank
order, they are:
Rank
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Site
14
3
13
10
5
Score
50
47
44
29
28
The top five sites are shown on locator maps under Exhibit 3 and are summarized below:
Site 14 - 894 Energv Wav
o General Plan designation of Industrial-Research & Limited Manufacturing; Zoning ofI-P
(Industrial/Precise Plan)
o Three parcels totaling approximately 18:l: acres
o Parcels identified for use would total 11. 5 acres
o Owners have been contacted and are amenable to sale
o 1-805 is 1. 8 miles to the west
o Otay Valley Road is being upgraded to a six lane road
o Site is surrounded on three sides by auto dismantling firms, while to the east is vacant
open space. The nearest residential area is over 4,000 feet to the northwest.
o There is no possibility for rail access.
Site 3 - 900 Bav Boulevard
o General Plan designation of Industrial-General; Zoning of I (General Industrial)
o 25:l: acre site.
o SDG&E property south of the power station. SDG&E has yet to determine whether the
land is available (former LNG tank site).
o Excellent rail site.
o Easy access to 1-5 via Bay Blvd/Palomar.
o Land uses on three sides compatible. San Diego Bay to the west.
Site 13 - 855 Maxwell Road
o General Plan designation ofIndustrial-Research & Limited Manufacturing; Zoning ofI-P
(Industrial/Precise Plan)
.2 '1,'/--"-
Page 3, Item~A
Meeting Date 9/6/94
o 17:i: acre site.
o Currently used as a contractor's storage yard (Fenton).
o The property owner was contacted and expressed no interest in selling.
o Site is one mile east of 1-805 off of Gtay Valley Road.
Site 10 - 2387 Faivre Street
o General Plan designation of Industrial-Research & Limited Manufacturing; Zoning of
IL-P (Limited Industrial/Precise Plan)
o 7:i: acre site.
o California Multimodal yard (trucking company).
o Recently entered into 20 year lease with Cattelus Corp for property.
o Not interested in vacating.
o Acquired access to 1-5 via Faivre Street, Broadway then Main.
Site 5 - Ada & Bav Blvd
o General Plan designation of Industrial-Research & Limited Manufacturing; Zoning of
M-52 (Old County - this is a special study area).
o 7:i: acre site.
o Possible rail access - rail lines across Bay Blvd. from site.
o Easy freeway access to 1-5 via Bay Blvd. and Palomar.
o Possible environmental problems on site which may result in negative declaration with
complex mitigation measures.
Sites recommended for Further Evaluation (Second Phase)
The top two sites (894 Energy Way and the SDG&E site at 900 Bay Boulevard) are being
recommended for further in-depth evaluation which will include availability and cost data.
These sites scored well over all of the factors used in this analysis. In addition, one offers a
benefit of proximity to the current landfill site routes and the franchised hauler's yard. The
other offers flexibility for rail access which could be important in the City's future needs. Both
sites are distant enough from residentially zoned areas to minimize impact on residents and have
good access.
FISCAL IMPACT: City staff costs for the first phase are being absorbed under current budgets.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit 1 - Matrix titled "Site Selection - First Phase"
Exhibit 2 - Explanation of Methodology
Exhibit 3 - Locator maps of the five ranked sites .).1/",- J
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
TRASH TRANSFER STATION AND
FUTURE MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILTY
SITE SELECTION - FIRST PHASE
I Critena> I Land Use Site Size & Site Environmenta Acquisition & Rail TOTAL
CANDIDATE Compatibility PreDeration Access Constraints ProcessinD Access SCORE
SITES V IWEIGHTING> 4 2 3 4 3 2 18
1~~iJ:;~~:,;,; ;~,.;:; ".;;,. ,. B;~~~i~tf~;~l!!:H!"ltrlt~rEg!;;;;;;;J;.;;
.aOlHllil\YIFi'" l!!.awBE..",n'", ...w................... . . . . .... ....". "........ w.....w...... .......... . . .. . .............. ". .,w. .......... w..' ..........w... W ..........
Wdil::III. .;.~I<~i~:i:l:.... ::.:.''''''''.'''" ';;E;;6;:;,:,HH: ::.::;, ;,.. ;;':;:.'j::n:ib::T:;::H:;:I;:;.:1:;.;: ;:,;I.U:,,::;; ii';;;::::::::
3 900 Bay Raw 3 3 3 2 2 3 16
IBIV~1~~i:Yfi:~:;lt:f,~l:I:':"'I...1}"'w"'nfrJ ...,,' """':,J:,;,:,;;:,,;:'I'''''~' .".. 6 6 ".,.w., ,...:~".".,.,
;?~OiH'~;{:'[ .il':"':,,:';:::.... i.I,:::> :::':::.::. :.:::'m[":::,': ::;:::';'.':::;:::::':; :;:::::::::"::.'.::::;':' .... ./,.." '''''''';',,':: ::. "':~:':'>:::""'"
Mil,.,.. "......,...., ,el ~el'L 'W." "'''''','', ,..'.,.,........ ..,.."......., '.'",",",.,",,,,'"'' """"'"'' '.. , ,., .'" . ..' .... ........ .....(-';+... .. .;.,;:;.:0,",............
5. Ada & Raw 1 2 2 1 2 2 10 \
Bay Blvd. Wei! hted 4 4 6 4 6 4 28 --- ~
:1L~t;,.... :~;~~;;:;:::,.::r~,.~.;:;::I;il;':.;:;I;:C';:;!:i:i:;: .::::::~~i~:i::i::I;::, i;;Hj~f!:t,li;:;;;;;;;,;,;;;,,;i.::::,:t:l:[~,:;;g;:;.:a: :[."ill . .. ;;,;U3,\:"j;ti;1 n!._:I,"~Rg;l~~tt!i?!i[ii[!11 ~
..' '.' . .... ... .,..,.".,. """"".' ".,.,.""..,....'...,."'.'.".,.,,,.,.,,,..,,......, C" .",.,. """.,.,."."..,"''''' '''',''',,'',',.,,' '.., '.'> 'c,,,'.'..".'...'..'..' ,.' ..", ...'w""..,.,.....,..,....,., ,,,...... ",..w.,".". ". ,,,,"',,.....,,.........,,"". '.' .,.." N
. Aftit'll &..... ,..... ... ......... ..... .. .... . .. . . .... ... ...... .,..".. ..... ....... ........ ............... . ." .. . .... .... '. ...... ..' ............... .w..... .,,,.,,..... W'" ... .. ...... ....................... ..' . ."."'T~niG!Qsj!Ul1. ....... Il
,'S ,h';' " ~T' (':V{ ~,' ,:',": .:: . ~ ': .:' :".~;>~' ::~~~:'::::'~' ~~.:~'~.~..: ::":.: ': ': .' '::.:: '>:':::: ~~":" ': ':~~ ;~~ ::.:;.f~':~:.:~:.: ::':~ :':~.~:.~,:::.:' ,...:~::: :~: ~~.~~::~::. ~:'.~'.:.:: .: :: :.r ", /:~ ::.~ :.:: :' '~':' ':'; :~: '.:~. ;~:~'~: ..:;..~~~:~~.~. :~n:;r~..h~~~k~..~.~:<:.*f.:fnh:;.
. '. . ..... ." ;. : -: : :i:::;: i::<:~;;~[;:.::.:: iI:lflr:;:: ::~;:::;i::~:;~::~::; :;:::::;::;:;;::;::;:'~ ;::',:::;::;';;:;.i: ii;;;;,;:,;;;;:,:,::;;,;;':;; :,:;;;;:,::;~,.,~,." .;;;;.;:;:;;:;~;;;;;:;;;~;ii~;i~,~.\~i;;iilli],
."i;;;;:,\;'; . ...." ..~:;:.> W:!:t;..;:;: .:.~':;: _.!PMi .:::: :::::;:>>;::;;::;.; ::.~~:i:;!:.;~;i:.i;;:': :: .:: ::::.:::: :;< ';'!;!"il\';':'?!li;;,::. i::;;;:;~;;!;;:!;:; :!;.;!;l!I;~~i~I!!!!,;;~! ;!~!!!!!!~!!.l!!!:!!il
...!l35Qj@.....,... ... ..... ..mmb gd;!:g '0'" ..~..." ........ ".....0 ' '"(,',, ., ;;;;;;";;;W;;(...,,.... .... ,.........."..........."",!...... "......;g.;;@,,,,,,,.........-..". .". .... .:lmi@fimir_..-.........."
liia%l.iilll;ll..' ~( ~'!m:'J ". ~~.;;>i[;jii;;,:;:;i,; t;+t:;,,';;,j:, ;;: ;iiii]Ii,,;;;,ij;,,;;;!i,i ji,i;:i;i:;'iiii;:;::..,; ;'i"")";"'))j.;i, ;;:;iiii;:.;.,.~:j;:;i;i;. :'::"iii;;;;:..:;;;,:; ;iilj.ii;:~;;;;;:;;ii;;ill!tjli~~[liiri$II;!;;.;[;lm!t
10.2387 Raw 1 3 2 2 1 1 10
"aivre SI. WeiQhted 4 6 6 8 3 2 29-
_t!i~~~~~Jl~IiliUiU~~ ~ : :'~~':~~~~ll!l~~~~~~~:;:~.: ::'.:"~:~M~:~~WWmf~ l~~lM~~~~;~~~~!{~: s:~m{!~~~~l~~~m~~~ ~M~~Mt]@~MjMlB ~~%.~~~~'~filiWl~M?~~~l~~ ?~~~~~~~,~~~r:~h~~~~~~~~~': ::t~~r~~~~~~:\1:~~~~$' n~Wt~~df.~4~n~~!_~~' ~.:::lf~i~}lI:]fl[I~;[ll
: .:~~t;l'~':'~':l' .:;.;:.:;..~.:~ ,.'~' ,~ ,;i;ii~:;::~S;:;%':<' :::':::~~::":<{Mm:::::@::::.":':;:'" :;:~b:;,:,;::~~:;,::~:,<,.$:;:<;;:;:::,;' ",:<:x<<<':';;:;'';';:;:;::'::;;:M:::::=::.: ::.:::;::::::";:;::;:;:;.~::;:::::::;:::;:~:::;:;~~:.;:::-,%%:;~':=.~:;::%~:M~:::~:~~s:~s ::::::~~~~::~~~~t..~~..::.;..H...:::~~:::;;'... t~~:~:..:::...vg~.;..,%:;;~.;"s ::~::::"v::.;::::N:;::m~'~:::-~":':;:':':;:,;; .... . ;"0.:.. ..w.:;::::::~.:v:
",,::1-3 '. . . ~i:~;:.~~' ... ~:;::M~::~::;" :;:.~:~~;:~.%m;:~w~:t~:t~~;..: ~::~:;::~~::::%~~~:-::::~::..:::mt~~~:' ~%:;:~.:;-::::::~~::~~;~.::,%';:::~:;:;;~ ::H~:~:;:::::::-.S::~";,,~:;,;~~:;::~::= '~::::~~~~~{~~R::~~~~~~82::g ~:~~~~~~~:::::,:;::;::::;'~:~:;e~~:~~~~k ,:~~;;::~::;'~~::;~.::::::::'M~~~:..;:.: ~.;::;:.;~mm:::;%.:;::~;~,:":t<:,, .' I.::;:.;@~:lli
";';;[l':';"":;lt;itt . .' ~:,:):1=:1::1:;~ i::::II:~'~:~~jl;J :;=:;::~11:~1:;~~~:~li:il:I~:I:II~:I:; :;:I;ji:l=~;m 'illl~t:IIIII:I;::1 il::t:::::::::i==lll, ::;:~ll~~;;l::l::l::' :14~1:1::i1;i: t*k;~:~::::,~,.:~.i..)*l
13. 1855 Raw 3 3 3 3 1 1 14
WEIGHTED
SCORE
FATAL
FLAW'
?'ih;;Hi;FE;;~;Ii;n[I;1!;:'i~;I,.~I.i:.i~..
==c....,. lLMn"",,,.. "'1"1""""""""'0"
~~. ~";:",.:~:::::~mm.~.::~. .:d*~mr:~:'~m~t1~:::~:::~.:~~,:.:.~~:
",.... "~"""'"lr''''''d'''''''''''''
.""'''..".;;;.;;:;;;1:i[~1!111111~'!i!i!i:!;~
"'#"."IJ.rn"""".,.,..,:..:)',.,.
..................,.1:li:l.. .. .w...
lEt;:;; I:&iiri~lil::.i;,;i::[i:
~
Maxwell Rd
14. 894
Enerav Way
WeiQhted
Raw
Weiahted
12
3
12
6
3
6
9
3
9
12
3
12
3
3
9
2
1
2
44
16
50
'NOTE: A "Fatal Flaw" precludes further consideration of a Site, no matter how desirable it otherwise may be. Sites containing fatal flaws are shaded.
M \SOFl'OWP\TRANSFER WB1
EXHIBIT 1
Exhibit 2
City of Chula Vista
Trash Transfer Station and
Future Materials Recovery Facility
Site Selection - First Phase
EXPLANATION OF METHODOLOGY
Initial Evaluation and Key Elements
Staff evaluated the 14 locations which were identified by the contractor as potential sites for the
trash transfer station. The evaluation included reviewing the General Plan, Zoning Map, and
the site visits by staff with the consultants to all 14 sites. The key elements resulting from staff
discussions of the evaluation evolved into the following major criteria:
1. Land Use Compatibility
2. Site Size & Preparation
3. Site Access
4. Environmental Constraints
5. Acquisition & Processing
6. Rail Access
Each site was considered in light of each criterion and assigned one of three raw scores: 1 =
low; 2 = medium; and 3 = high. These are explained under "Detailed Explanation of 'Raw'
Scores." The raw scores are not a ranking of how one site compares to another. Rather, each
site is taken on its own merits and judged against the low, medium or high score definitions
found under each criterion in Exhibit 2, "Explanation of Methodology." For example, under
"Rail Access," either the site has rail service, it could have rail service if it does not have it at
present, or it could not have it. Therefore, if the site has rail service it received a score of 3,
while if it does not have rail service and there is no possibility, it received a score of 1.
The "Raw" scores are multiplied by the "Weighting" factor to arrive at a "Weighted" score
immediately under each "Raw" score. The "Raw" and "Weighted" scores are then added
together along each row and show under the respective columns "TOTAL SCORE" and
"WEIGHTED SCORE. "
Detailed Explanation of "Weighting"
The weighting scale was developed to reflect the relative importance of each criterion. Staff
from the Planning, Administration and Community Departments reviewed the criteria and
assigned weight values to each one to indicate what they believe to be its relative importance to
the City. The "Weight" of each criterion is not a ranking of one criterion against the other,
rather, it is the importance of each criterion based on the needs and priorities of the City. The
weights were then added to arrive at the figure in the joint row/column under "TOTAL
SCORE/WEIGHTED SCORE" (18), as shown in the matrix. This score represents the 100%
of the "Weighting" values.
.2'1/1"5"
Explanation of Methodology
Page 2
Detailed Explanation of "Raw" Scores
To emphasize, a "low" equals a "Raw" score of 1, "medium" equals a "Raw" score of 2, while
"high" equals a "Raw" score of 3.
1. Land Use Compatibility: Is the proposed use compatible with surrounding and/or
adjacent land uses within the City of Chula Vista?
Low - Surrounding and adjacent land uses are not compatible, but excluding adjacent
residential land uses which is considered a "fatal flaw" (see below under "Fatal Flaw"
Explanation) .
Medium - Surrounding and adjacent land uses include retail commercial, which mayor
may not be compatible, but no residential. Further study required.
High - Surrounding land uses are compatible in that they are industrial uses and
residential land uses or other conflicting land uses are more than 2,000 feet away.
2. Site Size & Preparation: Is the parcel large enough to accommodate the project, and
what site improvements are necessary?
Low - Major grading and/or demolition of existing buildings required on-site; and/or the
site contains an existing usable building that requires major alterations rather than
demolition; and/or the parcel is marginal in size (parcels too small are "fatally flawed" -
see below under "Fatal Flaw" Explanation).
Medium - Grading required, but not as major as the "LOW" category. Demolition
and/or alterations to buildings minor. Costs associated with being within an assessment
district. Parcel size may be adequate.
High - Minor grading required. Site is vacant or contains structures which require no
demolition or alteration or are easily removed. Site is large enough to accommodate
station.
3. Site Access: Is the site easily accessible from freeways and major arterials? Is there
adequate ingress and egress? Are there any conflicts with traffic associated with other
land uses?
Low - Poor truck ingress and egress to the site and/or maneuvering area constrained.
No easy access to freeways and major arterials.
Medium - Marginal truck ingress and egress to the site. Maneuvering area somewhat
limited but may be adequate. Access to freeways and major arterials marginally
adequate. Conflicts with retail commercial traffic.
High - Ingress and egress pose no problems. Maneuvering area adequate. Easy access
to major arterials. No conflicts with retail commercial traffic.
.2'/ ~ -~
Explanation of Methodology
Page 3
4. Environmental Constraints: How easily is the project processed through environmental
review? The following is an earlv assessment based on available information:
Low - Environmental review will result in an ErR which includes impacts which mayor
may not be mitigated.
Medium - Environmental review resulting in an expanded initial study.
High - Environmental review resulting in an initial study with few environmental
impacts.
5. Acquisition & Processing: Is the property owner willing to sell or enter into a long term
lease? What discretionary permits are required as a result of the land use being placed
at the particular site?
Low - Eminent domain required because of unwillingness of property owner to sell.
Three to four discretionary permits required involving public forums and several public
hearings.
Medium - Property owner willing to sell, but asking price high. Three to four
discretionary permits required involving three to four public hearings.
High - Property owner willing to sell and price is reasonable. One to two discretionary
permits required involving one to two public hearings.
6. Rail Access: Is there rail access to the site? If not, is there the possibility that there can
be in the future?
Low - There is no rail access and there is no possibility that a rail line can be extended
to the site.
Medium - There is no rail access, but there is the possibility of extending and existing
rail line to the site.
High - There is rail access to the site.
"Fatal Flaw" Explanation:
In some cases, the sites were too small, too close to residential development, or environmental
constraints were associated with the sites which would have been very difficult and expensive
to overcome. These are considered "fatal flaws" which preclude any further consideration of
the sites. Because of the serious nature of the problems, these sites were not scored, although
they were initially included in the examination, and all other criteria were thoroughly discussed
in relation to the sites.
~~19 ' 7
EXHIBIT 3
LOCATOR MAPS OF THE FIVE RANKED SITES
,;J'IA"Y
~
,-----------
I
I
I
,
PROJECT
LOCATION
tJ.\"':>
-
rl
---
I
I
i
I
!
I)~.,
----------------
l
<
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR APPLICANT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) TRASH TRANSFER STATION
ADDRESS: 894 ENERGY WAY SITE SELECTION - CANDIDATE SITES
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: ,2.J/.,?- 9
NORTH NONE NONE SITE 14
PRO.JECT
LOCATION
~
...
,~
/~
_ _~l.lr.~~~~~A_ll~T~________
CITY OF NATIONAL CITy
"
- ____.l_
.0[5" D'
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
WCATOR APPLICANT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
(I) TRASH TRANSFER STATION
ADDRESS: 900BAYBOULEVARD SITE SELECTION -CANDIDATE SITES
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: ol'//J-/p
NORTH NONE NONE SITE 3
a
I
iI
~
I
"---
PROJECT
LOCATION
,
---
---
---
--
CITY YlITA
aTY ", 1M _eo
-----~---------------
I
I
J
f
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR APPLICANT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C9 TRASH TRANSFER STATION
ADDRESS: 855MAXWELLROAD SITE SELECTION -CANDIDATE SITES
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: eJJ/~-//
NORTH NONE NONE SITE 13
... T
I
I
I
_ _ _ L _
I
I
I
I
- .... - - - - -l- - - - - -; - - _I - - .
IJ~
PROJECT
LOCATION
,
I
<Il
c(
~
a
<.)
<(
..,
FAIVRE
I I
c.;
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--
,
,
/'
CI T Y
CITY
"'-
,/
/'
_______ _..J
I
I
t-
V!
""-
""-
""-
/~- --=L
ru
I
,
,
,
r- --j
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1_
-' - - - -
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
WCATOR APPLICANT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) TRASH TRANSFER STATION
ADDRESS: 2387 FAIVRE STREET SITE SELECTION -CANDIDATE SITES
SCALE: FilE NUMBER: .;J. '119 - /.)..
NORTH NONE NONE SITE 10
\
>-
.~
CD
._-----.
PROJECT
LOCATION
STREET
----------------- -
,
,
,
,
..
\
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
WCATOR APPLICANT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) TRASH TRANSFER STATION
ADDRESS: ADAANDBAYBOULEVARD SITE SELECTION -CANDIDATE SITES
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: .2'1,4-1 ;J
NORTH NONE NONE SITE 5
..
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date
..2 'If!
9/6/94
TITLE:
REPORT Evaluation of the Solid Waste Authority's
Proposed Non-Member Contract Rates and Viability of
Alternatives
SUBMITTED BY: Deputy City Manager Krempl
Principal Managem~~Assistant Snyder
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~VO'~\(4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No-1L)
On 8/11/94, the San Diego Solid Waste Authority approved a menu of
differential tip fees for non-member agencies which were proposed
to go into effect at the region's landfills on 10/1/94 (Attachment
At. Aside from the option to join the Authority and receive the
rate proposed for member agencies, the Authority has presented
three rates differentiated by contract terms and conditions. The
Authority has directed that contracts be executed by 9/15/94. At
the regularly scheduled city Council meeting on 8/23/94, Council
directed staff to communicate specific concerns about the
Authority's process, options and deadline, and to request a prompt
reply.
This report discusses the options presented and subsequent
responses. The issue is also discussed in light of the viability
of other short-term disposal alternatives being explored by staff
and Council.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That Chula vista not execute any of the Authority's proposed
contract options.
2. That, at the 9/15/94 meeting of the Authority, the City
request a response to the 8/29/94 letter (Attachment B) and
recommendations contained therein.
3. That staff report back to Council on 9/13/94 as to any actions
taken by other non-member cities (4 other jurisdictions will
be meeting on or before 9/13/94).
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
A. Options Presented bv the Authoritv
The staff report of the Solid Waste Authority (Attachment A) dated
~'Ia-/
Page 2, Item -2~~
Meeting Date 9/6/94
8/11/94 offers non-member agencies the four options summarized as
follows:
1) Member Rate
o Requires commitment to join the Authority
o Tip fee to be $55.00/ton for three years
o Goal is to reduce tip fee to $48.00 /ton or less
starting FY 97/98
2) Non-Member Contracts- THREE YEAR OPTION
o Tip fee to be $65.oo/ton for three years
o After three years, if cost reduction goal of
$48.00/ton is met (or up to 5% higher for error
(i.e. up to $50.40/ton), must either
a) Join Authority as member at base rate, or
b) Contract as non-member agency for 10 years or
more at base rate plus 5% plus $10. OO/ton
(i.e. $60.40/ton)
o If cost reduction goal is not met, no further
contract commitment needed
3) Non-Member Contracts- FIVE YEAR OPTION
o Tip fee to be $72.50/ton for five years
o The difference between $72.50 and $65.00 (3 year
option price) will count as a credit towards past
liabilities for the system
o No further commitment needed
4) Non-Member Contracts- TEN YEAR OPTION
o Tip fee to be $67.5o/ton for ten years
o The difference between $67.50 and $65.00 will count
as a credit towards past liabilities for the system
o No further commitment needed
As explained in the report, none of the contract options are
intended to waive an agency's responsibility for liabilities for
usage of the system prior to 1990 when collection of closure and
).. 1/ 0 .. .J.
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 9/6/94
,)'18
post-closure costs was mandated by the state.
Although not discussed in the report as an option, the Authority
discussed that an agency not desiring to either join or to sign a
contract would pay a "daily rate" which carries no commitment. The
daily rate would not be calculated until after the 9/15/94 deadline
when all contract commitments are known.
B. Further Clarification of the Authoritv's options
Because draft contracts have not yet been received, city staff met
with Authority staff on 8/19/94 and 8/23/94 to discuss questions
and request further clarification on the intention of the proposed
contracts. Additional information was received regarding
justification of the proposed contract rates projected cost
reduction goals, as well as intentions with regard to future
increases.
The most attractive rate at first blush, is the 3 year contract for
$65/ton. Unfortunately, the caveats attached thereto result in it
being a 13 year contract due to the mandatory 10 year extension
provision. Further, the non-member rate can be $60.40 at the end
of year three but no assurances are provided as to how the rate
might fluctuate thereafter for the extra 10-year period.
The Authority is also on record that they believe every
jurisdiction has a responsibility for the NCRRA facility regardless
of circumstance. The press has recently reported on potential
litigation on this subject between the Authority and El Cajon (who
left the system on July 1, 1994).
As directed by the Council on August 23, 1994, a letter (Attachment
~ has been sent to the Authority requesting additional time for
analysis of the contract rates and draft contract language, and to
be able to pursue and negotiate other acceptable alternative rate
scenarios.
Draft contract language was received on August 29, 1994. The
contract (Attachment Cl is for the 3-year option plus 10 year
automatic extension if the target base rate is achieved. The terms
for the 5 and 10 year contracts would be similar. The draft 3 year
(plus 10 year extension) contract contains the following
clarifications and terms:
1. During the base period (years 1-3), the base fee ($65/ton)
shall be increased by the adjusted CPI. Adjusted CPI is
defined as the CPI in San Diego for the then current year,
minus the CPI effective on 1994 (to be determined in
the near future by the Authority) .
;tllJ..J
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date
02'18
9/6/94
2. The Authority shall provide a GO-day notice of what the 4th
year tip fee will be prior to the termination date of the 3-
year term.
3. As to the lO-year automatic extension, the rates will be the
reduced system rate in year 4, plus 5%, plus $10jton plus CPI
increases.
4. In addition to CPI, the rates may increase based on changes in
Federal, state or local law and force majeure events, such as
earthquakes and floods.
5. 100% of the waste stream of the jurisdiction is to be
committed.
6. The City retains the rights to its recycling activities and
any recycled waste can be excluded from the waste flow
contractual obligation.
7. The Authority indemnifies the City against any challenge
regarding its commitment of 100% of its waste flow.
8. The City has 30 days prior to the termination of the 3-year
deal to advise the Authority whether it wants to become a
member or enter into the 10-year extension.
C. Pursuit of Alternative Solid Waste options bv Chula vista
1. Local Enforcement Authority (LEA) Services
On August 9, 1994 Council directed staff to meet with the
currently designated LEA (County Environmental Health
services) as well as investigate the interest of other
certified LEA's in California who might be willing to provide
service to Chula vista and report back in 45 days. This item
is in process.
2. Transfer station services
On July 19, 1994 Council approved, in concept, business terms
with Sexton Sand and Gravel Corporation to site, conceptually
design and permit a transfer station and materials recovery
facility in Chula vista. site selection criteria has been
developed and sites analyzed and evaluated for Council
consideration. This is the subject of a companion agenda item
at Council's September 6, 1994 meeting.
Staff is also in the process of screening statements of
qualifications for firms which might be engaged to perform the
environmental review of the transfer station project. This is
;;. '10 - 'i
Paqe 5, Item .)J/ $
Meeting Date 9/6/94
being done in accordance with the city's normal procedure and
standard three-party agreement.
3. Disposal site services
staff has had ongoing discussions with various parties
regarding landfill site availability and rates including the
following:
A. Campo Landfill - Mid-America Waste
B. El Sobrante Landfill, Riverside - Western Waste
C. La Paz Landfill, Arizona - BFI and La Paz County
D. East Carbon, utah - ECDC (Rail haul)
This information has been via the North County JPA and
their contract negotiations with ECDC.
E. WMS System Trucks (El Cajon, Oceanside) Waste
Management
F. Various other truck haul technology with both Laidlaw
Waste Systems and Mr. Bud Chase, Chula vista Sanitary
Services.
There are a multitude of disposal site options available at
competitive rates if the transfer station and/or new truck
technology issues can be resolved. Staff will provide Council
with a verbal update on our progress at the September 6, 1994
meeting.
D. Status of Other Non-Member cities
On July 1, 1994, the City of EI Cajon withdrew from the system.
Their hauler, Waste Management, has the rights to a potential
container system called a Multiple Service/Transport System (WMS)
which can function without the need for a transfer station
(Attachment D). EI cajon's contract is for five years at a rate of
$40/per ton. The waste is being hauled out of County to a disposal
site at Lancaster in Los Angeles County.
Oceanside, which is also served by Waste Management, entertained a
WMS proposal on August 18, 1994. Their Council, 5-0, approved in
concept a proposed agreement with Waste Management. The final
agreement is to return to Council on September 21, 1994. Equipment
for collection and transfer is to be available (50%) by October 1
and the balance no later than November 15. Staff is to negotiate
with the Solid Waste Authority and others for disposal capacity for
rolloff, self-haul and other waste that cannot be accommodated
through the WMS system. Waste Management's proposal is $47 per ton
to be escalated at $1.50 per ton or CPI, whichever is greater, for
a contract term of 7 years. Waste for the first year would be
disposed of at the BKK landfill in West Covina and in subsequent
.21/(1-.5'
Page 6, Item .1 J/.B
Meeting Date 9/6/94
years in a combination of the simi Valley landfill (Ventura
County), Bradley landfill (San Fernando Valley) and Lancaster
landfill (L.A. County).
The North County Solid Waste Management Agency (NCSWMA) had been
considering a proposal from Coast waste Management/ECDC to rail
haul solid waste to a landfill in East Carbon, Utah. The rate was
to be $53.18 per ton escalated at 90% of the CPI annually. Since
NCSWMA did not yet have transfer station capabilities, the
agreement was essentially a standby one which the Authority could
activate with 120 days notice. The Authority consists of the
cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad and Escondido. Once Oceanside
conceptually indicated an interest in the alternate WMS System of
Waste Management, Coast Waste Management/ECDC and the remaining two
cities decided not to implement the standby agreement as the
tonnage originally planned would be significantly reduced.
CONCLUSION
At this time, none of the non-member cities have indicated any
interest in any of the three rate packages proposed by the
Authority. Staff also anticipates that the non-member cities will
support the points enumerated in Chula vista's 8/29/94 letter to
the Authority. The letter requests more time for review, that
contracts and implementation be delayed to December 1, and January
1 respectively, that rates stay at $55 per ton in the interim and
that the Authority authorize negotiations to occur on alternatives.
Attachment E is a letter from the City of La Mesa to the Authority
and our sister cities urging that the tip fee rate for everyone
stay at $55 per ton and that the Authority not be punitive as the
County was with the surcharge.
FISCAL IMPACT
None as a result of this report. Impact on ratepayers cannot be
determined until a definitive course of action is taken by the City
and/or the Authority.
GK:mab
Attachments:
. ~l>
A - 8/15/94 letter from Sol~d Waste A
B - 8/29/94 Chula vista letter t~~ Waste Authority
C - 8/29/94 draft contract
D - WMS b~~re
E - 8/26/~~tter from City of La Mesa
<9~
~~!)
~If{!./' /~113-/6
SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY
,
J,":i:.achmen':: j\
August 15, 1994
~ rs') i' c"] F'\
D "'-.' l~.. ~.'., . - ','.1." I~ ~~ j i
~ ~n i
I :&!6 ':I6IG~ ~
The Honorable Tim Nader
Mayor, City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chela Vista, California 91910
,ltt: . . , ,_ . ',' _ ~~!;,-
"'.'hI ,= . CITY tG:,;".)i,.(;;'i.i.:.;:;)....-:':"~~~
~ CHULA VIS 11\. CA..""<'l'
.. -." ..
Dear Mayor Nader:
At its August 11th meeting, the Solid Waste Authority set rates for all Non-Member cities to be
effective October I, 1994. While the Deloitte & Touche report was used as a basis of
information, the Authority did its own additional study to determine the various rates to be set.
The Authority directed staff to work with all Non-Member cities to develop the appropriate
contract for the option selected by each Non-Member cily. The staff report on contract options
is attached for your review.
The Authority selected a deadline for each city's selection of September 15, 1994. Please
contact Tom Webstcr, Interim General Manager and/or Un Wurbs, Interim Assistant General
Manager to assist in determining which contract option is best for you. Tom and Lin have been
charged with assisting you with your questions and developing appropriate contract terms and
conditions by September 14th in order to report to the Authority on September 15th with the
results of the contract negotiations.
Sincerely,
AU11fORlZED FOR IMMEDIA.TE FAX WITHOUT SIGNA.TURE . SIGNED ORIGINAL TO FOllOW
DAL WILLIAMS, Chairman
Solid Waste Authority
RON MORRISON, Vice Chairman
Solid Waste Authority
Attachment
cc: John D. Goss, City Manager
dLj!J-Y
1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY, ROOM 215, SAN DIEGO. CALlFORNlA 92101-2470 TELEPHONE: 619/531-6174 FAX' 619/531-5794
SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY
Date:
August 11, 1994
To:
Solid Waste Authority Members
From:
Management Staff - Tom Webs.tel and Un Wurbs
Subject:
SOLID WASTE TIP I-EE AND NON-MEMBER CONTRACT RATES
PURPOSE
The purpose of this memorandum is to seek the Solid Waste Authority's approval to set a Tip
Fee for Members and establish contract rates for Non-Members. The Board of Supervisors
vested the Authority to determine solid waste rates to the Solid Waste Authority on June 28,
1994 and the JPA accepted the responsibility on July 14, 1994.
BACKGROUND AND mSTORY
In January of 1982, the Board of Supervisors established the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund and
set the Tip Fee for the disposal of Solid Waste at $6.50 per ton. Prior to that time, the costs
for regional solid waste management were handled through the County's General Pund.
Historically, the County and the City of San Diego have assumed the disposal responsibility in
the region since the closure of the last municipa11andfill in Oceanside in 197:1. Up to the early
1940's refuse was handled on an individual dumping basis with the garbage sold to the hog
fanners. These unregulated dumps were allover San Diego County and within the cities. In
the late thirties and early forties these dumps were set on flre and the burning dump era began.
In the early forties the County established formal bum sites. Both burning and sanitary
landfilling continued until 1972 when the last bum sites were shut down due to air pollution
regulations. In 196:1 and 1970 the federal government passed the Solid Waste Management Act
and the Resource Recovery Act to study and demonstrate safe methods of handling solid waste.
The San Diego County Regional Solid Waste Management Plan (1976, revised 1982,1986) was
developed as required by the Solid Waste Management and Resource Recovery Act of 1972 as
a joint effort between the ciUes and the County. The overall goal of the plan was to provide a
regional system for managing the generation, storage, collecUon, transportation, reuse, and
disposal of solid waste in an economical manner which protects public health and welfare,
conserves natural resources and energy, minimizes littering and illegal dumping and generally
enhances the environment. The Plan and all subsequent amendments were approved by a
majority of the incorporated ciUes with a majority of the incorporated populaUon. Although the
County of San Diego has historically assumed the disposal responsibility in the region, the Plan
specifies in its opening chapter that "ciUes must recognize their responsibility to provide disposal
capacity for the waste generated by its citizens. "
02Lj!J -9
1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY, ROOM 215, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101-2470 TELEPHONE: 619/5314174 FAX: 619/5JI-5794
The cities have not created any disposal capacity on their own, however, and continue to rely
upon the "System" for their disposal needs. The County of San Diego and the City of San
Diego are the only two agencies currently providing solid waste disposal services in the region.
None of the remaining cities, with the exception of the City of Oceanside, have bad any capital
andlor direct disposal operation costs for their incorporated service areas as they either utilize
County or City of San Diego landfills.
The cities have been involved in the solid waste planning process for several years. For the past
three y~s, the cities have participated actively in the decision making process regarding the
best approach to handing solid waste within the region. As a first step, the cities directed the
study by Ernst and Young entitled "The Management Audit of the Solid Waste Division and
Financial Review of the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund". The cities also participated through the
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) in several forums to discuss solid waste
issues. An outgrowth of the discussions was the creation of the Interim Solid Waste
Commission which involved all of the cities and the County. The primary goal of the one year
Interim Commission was to decide the governance structure that best met the needs of all of the
entities in the region. The consensuS approach that was developed was the creation of the Solid
Waste 10int Powers Authority Agency. The Solid Waste Authority was established to manage
the solid waste system in the county. AU of the assets, obligations and liabilities of the System
will be transferred to the Authority.
In order for the new "owners" of the System to plan for their capacity requirements, there needs
to be immediately available an understanding of who intends to use the System and for what
duration. It is critical for planning purposes for both the current system participants and to meet
future projected growth that a new strategic plan be able to be developed which accounts for the
Members needs and any contracts that non-members choose to sign.
AUGUST I, 1994 PUBLIC HEARING
On August 1, 1994 the Authority held a Public Hearing to get input on the rate study completed
by Deloitte and Touche. As the Authority Members know, the DeloiUe and Touche study was
prepared to depict all of the solid waste system costs and spread those costs over di fferent
lengths of time that could coincide with potential contract options. It has always been
recognized that the most cost effective and environmentally sound way for the cities and the
County to plan in this region is by doing so together. The Solid Waste Authority's goal will
always be to provide a cost effective system to all of those who want to use the Authority's
System. The Authority's intention is to not be punitive in any way, but to have an independent
analysis of the costs that have been incurred which will need to be the shared responsibility of
aU of the System's participants.
2 ;21/!f - /0
TIP FEE PROPOSAL
In June, 1994 the Solid Waste Authority endorsed a Tip Fee of $55.00 for this fiscal year that
was subsequently enacted by the Board of Supervisors for 60 days. The Board also delegated
the Tip Fee and Rate Setting authority to the JPA at that time. It is therefore the Authority's
responsibility 10 set tipping fees prior to August 31, 1994.
After hearing a variety of testimony from the non-member jurisdictions, the Authority Members
asked staff to prepare a fee schedule proposal that would keep the System whole, be competitive
and economical, and meet allleeal mandates. You requested that we produce a matrix of rates
which would include two year, five, ten and twenty year options.
We have reviewed the operating budget, the capital program budget, and every record we CQuld
in the effort 10 identify all operating costs, mandatory fIXed CQsts, and nece,'lary capital
requirements. We believe we have determined every dollar required in order to keep the system
operating in good health for the time periods we need rates (or. We also took the same
approach to determining to the best of our knowledge the annual tonnage we can realistically
expect. This proposal is a "full service" proposal that meets our legal and mandated obligations
and will keep the System whole.
The Audit and Budget sub-committee agreed after much discussion 10 modify the requested rate
matrix to one which would include a three year rate (rather than two), and a five and a ten year
rate. The two was changed to three because we determined that we needed a guaranteed three
year revenue stream in order to fund those capital improvements necessary to keep the system
viable (or even two years. The twenty year rate was eliminated on the premise that it would be
pointless for anyone to sign up for more than ten years yet still pay the non-membel premium
which would be required.
We developed the following baseline assumptions:
ASSUMPTIONS:
(1) that the System will be CQmposed of sixteen (16) cities and the CQunty;
(2) that the total mixed waste tonnage for the System (or FY 1994-95 would be
1,160,000; and
(3) that the commercial haulers from the City of San Diego would continue to use the
IPA's System at the same level as in the past.
Our analysis also recognized that several changes to the current budget would be ncccsSllry 10
provide for all of the System participants at Ml participation, with the departure from the region
by the City of El Cajon. It is essential to make both additions and deletions in the Budget and
spending plan to make the System (unction in a fiscally sound yet CQmpetilive fashion.
3
,)J/!J' - / /
SO'd ZOO'ON 50:11 v5'91 6n~
All dOH.lnlj 31SIjj1LGLJOS
NECESSARY BUDGET MODIfICATIONS:
(1) the Otay Liner needs to be included in the mandatory capital improvement plan
for a System that includes all si"tecn cities and the County;
(2) the variable operating costs within the budget need to be reduced "acroSS the
board" ;
(3) the costs associated with the NCRRA facility need to be reduced through the
negotiation process which is currently underway; and
(4) capital needs to be raised by evaluating and selling the assets the Solid Waste
Enterprise Fund has within it's portfolio willch might no longer be nceded.
Aner reviewing the budget in detail and developing several different options over vanous
contract lifespans _ we are prepared to recommend the following set of options for endorsement
by the Authority, recognizing that all of the assumptions above were incorporated in our study.
MEMBER RATE:
...
The tip fee for Authority members will be $55.00 for the next three years.
During that three years our goal will be to reduce the tip fee to $48.00 or less for
the fiscal year starting 1uly I, 1997.
NON-MEMBER OPTIONS:
* THREE YEAR CONTRACf OPTION:
The Non-Member contract rate for three years will be $65.00. At the end of the
three year period, if the cost reduction goal has been met by the Authority by
either reducing the base rate to $48.00 or less, to a figure no higher than $48.00
plus five (+5) percent, the Non-Member will agree in the original contract
document to either: (a) become a Member at the base rate achieved or (b) extend
the contract for an additional ten years or more at the base rate plus $10.00 per
ton.
If the Authority docs not make the $48.00 ($50.40 with the error factor), the
entity has no obligation to remain part of the System.
* FIVE YEAR CONTRACT OPTION:
The five (5) year contract price is $72.50, with the difference between $65.00 and
$72.50 counting as a credit toward the past responsibility to the System.
. 10 YEAR CONTRACT OPTION:
The ten (10) year contract price is $67.50, with the difference between $65.00
and $67.50 counting as a credit toward the past responsibility to the System.
None of the contract options described above are intended to waive the responsibility any entity
has regarding past obligations for use of the System.
4 ;2.,/!J~/;l-
J1NV18.0NMENTAL REVIEW
Attached to this report is a resolution finding that the setting of fees and chargC$ are exempt
from the Environmental Quality Act because none of the fees are designed to build a reserve
fund to finance capital projects for the express purpose of expanding the existing system. Staff
recommends that the Authority adopt this resolution.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Approve the staff report including the proposed Member and Non-Member fees and
Contract Options, the attached Tip Fee Resolution No. 94..()1 establishing il.e Tip Fee
and Resolution No. 94-02 Finding That The Establishment of Rates and Charges To Be
Statutorily Exempt from The California Environmental Quality Aet.
2. Authorize the Authority Staff to direct legal counsel to draft the appropriate contract
language for each option described in the staff report.
3. Authorize the Chairman in concert with the Authority staff to expend funds, not to
elCcced $25,000 to contract with appropriate groups or individuals to assist in the Non-
Member contract negotiation process.
Submitted by:
Tom Webster, Interim General Manager
Lin Wurbs, Interim Assistant General Manager
5
~2/fl-13
LO'd_ZOO'ON 11:11 v6'91 6n~
AII~nHlnH 1JSHm_nl~ns
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
TIM NADER
~\I?-
~~~
~~........,;....
.........................
--
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
At-i-""C'j-" .,
~ ..'... 11l:0;1): B
August 29, 1994
VIA FAX
Chairman Dal Williams and Members
San Diego Solid Waste Authority
1600 Pacific Highway - Room 215
San Diego, CA 92101-2470
Dear Chairman Williams and Members of the Authority:
This letter is in reply to the Authority's August 11, 1994 action regarding non-member
solid waste contract options and your letter to me dated August 15, 1994. We
appreciate the efforts and work to date on this matter and our staff has met with your
General Manager and Assistant General Manager. However, we still have a number of
questions, and some information, such as draft contract language, which has not yet
been received.
On August 23, 1994, our Council (4-0) requested as follows:
1) That the time frame for resolution of the non-member contracts be extended;
2) That the deadline for non-member contract signature be December 1 ,1994 instead
of September 15, 1994 and that the rates take effect January 1, 1995 instead of
October 1, 1994;
3) That the current tip fee rate of $55/ton be maintained for the interim; and
4) That the Authority authorize the General Manager to be able to discuss alternative
contract options or counter-proposals.
;2L/!J- /i
276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 919101(619) 691-5044
We feel that proceeding in the above manner results in a more realistic implementation
schedule while not jeopardizing the Authority's ability to act in a timely fashion.
Hopefully, also, the additional opportunity for negotiation will result in a resolution which
keeps the entire system intact, covers costs, allows the Authority the time needed to
examine alternatives, and is equitable for all parties.
We appreciate your consideration.
Sincerely,
J;- -/?-A~(,
Tim Nader
Mayor
TN:GK:mab
cc: City Council
City Manager
;21/6 -/5'
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY
Attachment C
FAX COVER SIIEET
~LEASE EXPEDITE ,DELlVERYOF FAX/TIME SENSITWE
Date~ No. or Pa&es '6 (Jntludlnc Cover)
Name: ..NDH.- ~/.6b,-... i~04"'''~~rS ~ ~(~"~~4.~.d~
Agen....: ~Ai'I,b~'O (L.~". 11..1-". (',.,.....,J" ~~;;.i ~u",",:i./j' ~.._,l
-I I 1- , '. ..' ~
l...MC<N, $iJ..-teC, ~m,q M'...."5'Re,
Fax Number:' \/..";,,,, Telephone Number: . \/.11 rl....,
SUBJECT: ,C/lH~ iA(f~~(..,. : '
......................
...--"-
Sender: Tom Webster/Lin Wurn.. Solid Waste Authority. 1600 Pacific Hh'hwllY Room 215.
San niei!o. CA 92101 Fax Number: 619/5:11-5794 Telephone Number: 619/5:11-6174
COMMENTS:
~ Por your Information _ Coni1denlial
_ This materlalls being forwarded. per your requesL
_ Please lIChe(hIle the following ~g on your calendar:. ....
Please call to diScuss further.' .
ADDmONAL COMMENTS:
,-,/'.vA,W..J'-h"'Pc..",,;, :7~,1 '-:V. 1'..\1, 1./ -- r-- 1\.........:.)-.1v ~'.....) iJL'
,..... mT...Q\UC.,...'i>""tl\(.,.....:Jlfre.~re.t,,.. \,.Ih' 4G;t"....Ih<, 1'.,.I.....&..6L-rtNTtAr-Uwtr....::,y..-
Or,';'t ~ h..~ ~hffd r>u1fJt I(t,t~t Iii fl..c. 'f'or;"~e., $Uko~.
PII!/W- k Ilof ~I*"'~ CM~:'6 14:' ~ rIA.. ~ittIt. d ~"(~~~.
~tJ~JV-~J.(,~ uJ~s -
-~_.. .....,.y-.
", i~
'1
IC the lnConnation )'ou reeeive Is IBealble or Incomplete, please call 531-6174.
;2L/IJ--/?
SO/lO'd llO'ON 60:Zl V6'6Z 6n~
A1I~DHln8 31S~~ GIlDS
SOUD WASTE AUTHORITY
DRAFT
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN
SAN DIEGO SOLID WASTE AUI'HORITY
AND THE ClTYOF
PROVIDING FOR TIP FER RATES
AND OTHER TERMS AND CONDmONS
THIS AGREEMENTis made this _ clay of - 1994 (the "Effective
Date"), by lIIId betweeft the SAN DIBGO SOLID WASTE AtTl'HORITY, (hereinafter
refem:cl to as . Authority"), and the CITY OF '. (hereinafter
referred to as "City"),
RECITALS
WlIEREAS, the Authority was forme4 under ajoint powers authority agreement ("the
IPA Agreement") between the County of San Dicaoand the Cities 9f Del Mar, Bncinitas.
Lemon Grove, National City, Poway, Solana Beach and Vista on June 1,1994; and
WIIEREAS,pursuant to Government Code Section ~OO d. seq" the Authority may
exercise the common powers of its member agencies, which are furth~ described in the IP A
Agrc:cment; and . . . .
, , ' - ','
WHEREAS, the JPA Aarccment provides for the _fer to the Authority of the
operation, DWJageIJlent, contrv1 and ~p of the County lOUd waste system (the
"Regional System"); and 1
WHEREAS, the Authority is responsible b the administration of the Regional
System; and
WllEREAS, the Authority may properly establish rates and fees for the use of the
,~.' . ~ R~Js)'stemHDdl1iditrg ~tion of the costs of opemtion and;'~~ ::::Yidoih&: i',.':
... setthiS'Q{ooiJei'iiOOdfiii' userReS;-wlifch ShaD. bCawlialbIC10 ilieiieiiciesana parties-"
desirina continued use of the Regional System without cor~pondina participation In the
Authority;
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to enter Into an asreement fur the purpose of
establishin8 the riahts and obHptlons applicable to the City's use of the Regional System
over ~..term .ot"'.i, A~~;~ .-'. .
. - ., -- ----"..-"
~t~
"
WHEREAS, It i. the Intent of the parties that the City shall be offered an opportunitY
to become a voting member of the Authority in conjunction with the success of the
Authority In manacin& the RectonaI System In a manner that effects an actual reduction in
the costs of operating and maIntaining the Regional System. .
1
J
;113-)7
BOIZO'd 110'ON Ol:Zl ~6'6Z 6n~
AII~DHln~ 31S~~ GIlDS
NOW I 'I'BEREFORE, In COIlsldcratlon of the benefits and obllptlons of each of the
PlArties hereunder, the Patties agrell"asfollDws:
1. N~MNinhM- CIty TW PR! RAt~A
The parties aarec that the City of iIha1l continue its we of the
Regional Syatem for tile dispokl of its municipal solid waste, which shall be ot a type
acncral1y accepted for disposal at munlc:ipal Illndfllls. The City agrees to pay a 'Base Fee
for use of the Regional System of SiX1)'-five DOllars ($6S .00) pee ton of lIOlid waste delivered
(the "Base Fee") for a periocl of three (3) years from the effective date of this Aireement
(the "Base Period").
Durina the Base P~ocl. the Base Fee shall be increased by the Adjusted CPt The
Adjusted CPt will be in accordance with the Consumer Price Index for tile then current
year. which is applicable to the San Dieio Urban Area, ,minus the CPt effective on
.1994.
2. Imu. '
The term ot this Agreement shall be for a period of three (3) years from the
Effective Data of this AgnlemonL
3. ~Ily'. Conllnulftll Obllutlons 10 Romain wllh Syd..m.
A. Conditional MembershiD Obliption.
On or before three (3) years from the Effective Date, the Authority may
reduce the Base Fee to Forty-eiaht OoIlars ($48) per ton or leu (the
.Reduced Fee"); provided however, that the Reduced Fee may, at the election
of the Authority. include a S ~ increase from the Forty~iiht Dollar ($48)
amount In accordance with actual changes in the costs of operatina and
c_,__, " i'~ ~," O~i\inl-'the-bgional System. I,~~d.,rd ::'d,,',', J1',_;
--~ .-.".' .. .....~_. ,..,. _........,.. -,--... -' .-.-, "'-I:"~' -" .~.......... --,- ~.. -~....,. ~-:. ,-,,',.. -..., -.~
B. Noti~ af Sl'!ttil\1 af TIp Fee Rate_
Authority aba11 serve written notice to City of the Reduced Fee and the
exteDdccI Ccml tip fee applicable to services to be pro~ded under this
Ap:c:ment for the subsequent fourth (4") year by not later than sixty (60)
, ~p!'ior_~_~,tef!l\l.natlon dateof.t!le three (3).ycar ~rm. ..0. hO ~__-::_
2
c1t/!J- /Y
BO/~O'd 110'ON Ol:Zt ~6'6Z 6n~
~lI~DHln~ 31S~~ GIlDS
C. Termination BAoM OIl Hither Tip Fee.
In the event that the Authority has not served the nodee provided for in
subparagnpb B by the date sixty (60) days pdor to the termination elate or
this Ap'eement, all obligations and rights as set forth in this Aareement shall
then automatically terminate.
D. Redu...... Fee AclIiev.MICitv Membership, or Ten Yl!!aI' Extension.
On notice by the Authority that the reduced fee has been achieved either:
1. City sba1l notit'y the Authority of its decisioll tQ become
a voting member of the Authority ill accordance with the
procedures and terms of the JPA Agreement, ,or
2. City and Authority aaree that, this Agn:em'rnt shall
automatically extend for a period of ten (10) years.
B. Tift Pee Revhdon..
1. If the City becomes a voting member of the Authority
the tip-fee sba1l be the fee paid by the voting members
of the Authority and this AJreement shall terminate.
2.
If the A~ment is extended for ten (10) years, then the
Base Fee Shall be adjustAld to the sum of the Reduced
Fee plus Ten Dollars per ton ($10), which amount shall
be paid by City during the fourth year following the
Effective Date. Thereafter, the Base Fee shall be the
sum of the Reduced Fee plus Ten Dollars per ton ($IO)
plus the CPl.
~~~~~~l~b ~l;~~ Ji~~~
3(./..::.....;,; ........; -',\ 1:~(;~ '1Jo'o;: ""'0
.,-"- .-. ,.....,... - .,... ,-----,.
3:-' 'ThOlip fee'may be' ru~ adjustCd by the 7luthOrity."
from time to time during the extended tcnn as necessary
to reflect costs from changes in federal, slate or local
law or occurrina due to · force ml\leure" events, includina
but DOt limited to acts of God, natural disasters, or other
catastrophic events.
.f.
.,_..___ ...J"_'.._' '.
3
) YV - /7
BOlvO'd 110'oN 11:~I v6'6~ 6n~
AII~DHln~ 31S~~ GIlDS
F. City Nnll"", of Decbion
City shall notify the Authority In writing at leut thirty (30) days prior 10 the
lcrmillation of this Asreemenl of lis clecIslon to either become a voting
member of the Authority or to continue use of the Rqional System under the
extended term of this Acreement. II City elects to become a member of the
Authority, It shall complete proceedings to joiii the Authority durin& the thirty
(30) day period following the Upiratillll date of thla Agreement.
G. Periodic TTnmla .
'l1Ie Authority aarees to PIl!plIIe Rqional System Reports, which shall be
delivered 10 City OIl or before July 30 of each year. Each Reaional System
Report shall identify the financial status of the Reaional System and provide
detailed information as 10 the progress of the -Authority In reaching the
Reduced Fee. The Regional System Report shall be prepared in ~~rdance
with the audltrequircll1enb .of the JPA Agreement. The Authority shall
prepare prompt and complete responllCS to questions received from City with
respect 10 any Regional System Report.
4. tlty'. Waste }1ow.
City agrees to deliver, or arrange to have delivered, all acceptable waste aenerated
within its municipal boundaries to Authorlty'slCounty'. Iystem facilities.
A. Chan~e In Law.
II a chanae or Interpretation In applicable law impairs or precludes either
Party from complying with thiI Section, such Party shall UIllI its best efforts to
the extent practicable to effectuate executive, legislative or judicial change in
or relief from said change of law 10 as to enable City to lawfully resume this
e (.i _ j c ,. ~ . ~.', IOblt88tiOJi 'to:-delf* waste to 'I.tem facilitics. i,_ ~"~--L,-.j .oJ. ;,,': J C,_ ~
.~~. ,. ........ .'..... _. .......,. "-.1 _ _- .-.... - ~- .....,. --', ,"" . - ..:' ......- .-... " +--- .
B, TnMmniflcation .
Authority aarees to indemnify City from the reasonable costs, = and
expenses incurred in defending any leaal challenge brought to eI\loln the
enforcement of Section 4 0( this Agreement.
~A'~.. ,_,~_,,,_ __',_ '
4
,). 1/ {S - d-- ()
BO/SO'd 110.ON tl:lt ~6'6l 6n~
AII~DHln~ 31S~~ GIlDS
C. Bxcegtlon for Rel;yclln, Activities.
Notwithstanding ~ything in this Seetion to th~ contrary. City shall have the
ri&ht 10 rc:cyclc Uly IOlid waste by Uly means IC1ccted by City, and any such
recycled maleria1 llhall be excluded from this directed waste flow contw:tual
obligation.
5. Authorltv'.Servlce Oblhl.tioDl.
Authority, throuah its JPA Agreement powcn, will provide, or cause to be provided.
the service of manaacment, handling and disposal of all 80Iidwaste generated by its
members and J\OIl-mcmbcrs choosin& to contract for system s:rvil:CS. ,
Nothing in this A&n:emcnt shall be deemed to prohibit or preclude Authority from
providing ~t, handling and dispolal of solid waste generated outside the County
reaion, or preclude the dispoul of system directed wute at disposal facilities outside the
region.
In the event. that a change in applicable law impairs or precludes the Authority' from
complying with this obligation, the Authority shall use its best efforts. to thecxtcnt
practicable, to effectuate executive, legislative or illdicial change' in or mlier. from the
applicability of such .Iaw so as to cnablethe, Authority .Iaw(ully to resume compliance with
this obligation as soon as possible fo1lowing the change in applicable law. The exercise of
such best efforts by the Authority unclei' such circumstances shall be deemed to be sufficient
to satisfy this obligation.
6. SevenhlUtv.
In the event that a IUbsllIntive provision of this Agreement shall be determined to
be invalid. l11ega! or unenforceable in Illy respect, the Parties hereto shall negotiate in good
faith such amendments, modifications or IUpplements to this Agreement or such other
"u.~ ~appropriate <Qi:t1oii '.' tIia1f,',,*, the maximum extent practicabWi-iR-,-1ijllt ::or;"iichi~ -'~c
.. dCtenniriailori;' implemC'nt' anolivicffca tohiniCiitioosofthe'parUca"as rcflccteif hemn.'"..
If neaotladonl when held in good faith fall, the Parties witt have the right to terminate this
Agreement.
7. Notices.
...,4.11 oo.tices.~~or ~~ punuant to this A&rcenKl!It shall be Inwriting,._N.!. .
notices, demands and requests to be sent to any Party shall be deemed to have been;
properly Jiven or served 011 the date actually received, It personally served or deposited hi
the United States mail. addressecI to such Party, postage prepaid, rcglstcrl!d or certified with
return receipt requested, at the addresses iclcntified below.
s
02'/LJ- ,,2/
BO/90'd ttO.ON It:Zt ~6'6Z 6n~
A1I~DHln~ 31S~~ GIlDS
TO AtJTHORlTY:
San Dieco Solid Waste Authority
Atlention: Mr. Tom Webster
Interim General Manager
9621 Ridgehaven Court
San Diego, CA 92123
TO Cln':
S. AttorneYS' F_.
In the event of any action or proceecIlng at law or in equity between Authority and
City to enforce any provision of this Agreement or to protect or establish any right or
remedy of Authority or City, the unsuccessful party to such action or proceeding shall pay
to the prevailing party, all coats and expenses, including without limitation, reasonable
attorneys' and paraJeaals' fees and expenses, Incurred in such action or proceeding and in
any appeal in conneCtion therewith by such prevailin& party, whether or not such action,
proceeding or appeal is prosccutedto judgment or other final determinalion, together with
all coats of enforcement 'and/or collection of any judgment or other relief.
t. EntIre AlIl'CCment.
This A&recmcnt, together with any other written document referred to or
contemplated herein, embodies the entire Agreement and understanding between the Parties
relating to the subject matter hereto and may be modified only by written agreement signed
by all of the Parties.
10. Audlorlty to Exeftlte.
c >,~::"" ; .~Bach ifafti.tbrf~artanls"'d1at it has the authority to enter into,-tllis ~.~ul, Ci~ -,_c
....' ".,' ........._..... ',' ..... "'!"..- >'r-" ,~,-'" '-, -~! - . .......'. -.~, ' .... ..,~~.._,..,....~ -", "- ..- '-,'
11. lJeadlnp.
'The captions and beadin&s in this Agreement ale for oonvenience only and shall not
define or limit the provisions hereof.
12. Wal!,~~. .
No breach of any provision hcrcln can be waived unless in writing. Waiver or any
one breach of any provision herein shalIllOt be deemed to be a waiver or any other breach
of the same or other provision hereof.
6
cJ '11J - 02 d-
BOIlO"d 110'ON ~l:Zl V6'6Z 6n~
A1I~DHln~ 31S~~ GIlDS
13. R"......tles.
AI1 Parties hmeto shall have the right to <:ommeJlCe any action at law or equity,
including specific pedormance. to remedy a bleaCh of the terml herein. provided that
neither Party shall have the ri,ht to terminate this Agreement except u provided herein.
, IN wrrNESS WBEREOJI'. the Authority and the City havo signed this
Agreement as or this date Ant IICt forth above.
AtmlORlTYI
SAN DIEGO SOLID WASTEAUTHORlTY
By
Chairman
CITY:
CITY OF
By
c:".1 ... :; '2 ;'~ '-' ' --- ,\ ~ ~ ; ,,~ "J..;;' 0.;,.. ~ .~,t
td"~'-::'.~..i:',':; .:...1..:.0.', CI~-h....j
".'-.....-..'''...._-:'lI"._
.., -.. --...... -.,..,.-.. ---.....-,-- ._'. .... " ..-- '''..
7
c1L/tJ -,).3
_. ~ "_ ,..' _.,._~. ,_ .__ .0.
eO/BO'd llO'ON ~l:lt P6'6l 6n~
..."._k -'..-.-,-'.~-
^lI~OHln~ 31S~~ GIlOS
~f!f/02i
PACKER 1
EXCLUSIVE DOUBLE
DIAMOND,
EXTENDABLE
CONTAINER ARMS
Packer 1 incorporates a
patented double container
attachment system to
provide fully automated,
semi-automated or manual
residential or commercial
collection.
An extendable loading
arm lifts single or double
plastic containers ranging
from 60- to 95-gallon capac-
ity and quickly and quietly
empties them into Packer 1 's
detachable container body.
It also serves commercial
containers up to a 2-cubic
yard capacity.
LOW PROFILE CAB
INCREASES VISIBILITY,
MINIMIZES OPERATOR
FATIGUE
Packer 1 's low profile cab
provides unparalleled oper-
atorvisibility and accessi-
bility. Ajoystickcontrol
provides automated resi-
dential or commercial col-
lection with the operator
never leaving the vehicle
cab. Easy entry cabs, with
optional dual controls and
the closeness of front-load-
ing container attachments
speed semi-automated
and manual residential
collection.
Double diamond container attachments on extendable arms handle dual
90 gallon containers for quick, quiet service.
Quick-change bodies mount and dismount from the vertical position,
eliminate costly transfer stations and support equipment.
DETACHABLE 22-YARD
BODIES PROVIDE ON-
THE-ROUTE EXCHANGE
MINIMIZES STREET
WEAR
Packer 1 's lightweight,
short wheelbase and low
profile front-loading design
eliminates wear on residen-
tial streets and alleys, even
in areas served by overhead
utilities.
Packer 1 is clearly a revo-
lutionary municipal waste
collection vehicle designed
to most economically serve
the changing needs of the
Nineties and beyond.
Exclusive vertical exchange
of enclosed 22-<:ubic yard
body/containers between
collection and transfervehi-
cles is accomplished in
compact exchange areas
strategically situated along
collection routes.
Packer 1 stays on the
route, doing what it is
designed to do, rather than
consume valuable collec-
tion time travelling to and
from distant transfer sta-
tions, process centers or
sanitary landfills.
02.'-/!J .-~~
PACKER 2
A BRIDGE FROM
CONVENTIONAL TO
WMS SERVICE
Packer 2 is an all-purpose
companion vehicle incorpo-
rating conventional North
American front-loading
container attachments. It is
designed to use the same
quick-change bodies and to
perform the same services
as Packer 1 without costly
replacement or retrofitting
of existing front-loading
containers. It also accom-
modates oversized and
heavier commercial
containers.
Packer 2 is an ideal intro-
duction to WMS services
in communities heavily
invested in front-loading
containers. It provides an
ideal transition from heav-
ier, less mobile and higher
profile front-loading refuse
vehicles to the fully inte-
grated WMS collection!
transfer system.
a Multiple Service/TranspoJ
,.,'~j~~~~,-,~..t~>:;."iI.i"--,,;; -
Packer 2 features conventional front-loading forks to serve existing containers and handle heavier commercial service
STANDARDIZATION
SAVES MAINTENANCE
DOLLARS
Standardized chassis,
engines, electrical and
hydraulic systems mini-
mize parts inventories and
speed maintenance proce-
dures. Single rear-axle con-
figurations eliminate four
tires per vehicle plus costly
maintenance oftandem
axle systems, saving time
and money for Waste
Management and our
customers.
RETROFIT CONTAINERS
TODAY OR VEHICLES
TOMORROW
Existing containers can
be quickly retrofitted to
accommodate both conven-
tional front-loading forks or
exclusive Packer 1 double
diamond attachments as a
community converts to
WMS service.
Packer 2 and Packer 1
work side-by-side
combining manual, semi-
automated and fully auto-
mated residential and
commercial collection.
Both vehicles use the same
22-yard, detachable con-
JLj.!J -.2&
.~
tainerlbodies. Both are
served by the unique WMS
Transporter.
Whether you opt for
Packer 2 or Packer 1, your
local Waste Management of
North America operating
division can custom tailor
service to meet specific
community needs.
System
WMS
TRANSPORTER
The WMS Transporter is
perhaps the most versatile
urban services vehicle ever
introduced to the North
American municipal
market.
Equipped with a unique
triple action hoist, the WMS
Transporter is capable of
loading and off-loading con-
tainers and special purpose
bodies vertically, horizon-
tally or to and from its
companion three-axle pup
trailer.
With three 22-cubic yard
compacted refuse contain-
ers in place, the WMS Trans-
porter and its trailer carry a
legal 40,000 pound payload.
Three empty containers can
be strategically positioned
along Packer 1 and Packer 2
collection routes or in
exchange areas each day as
filled containers are trans-
ported to distant process or
disposal centers.
Or, the WMS Transporter
can deliver full containers
of dry or liquid commodi-
ties for a variety of urban
uses. With chassis-activated
pumps and power units, the
WMS Transporter can apply
dry or liquid agricultural
supplements, pump reser-
voirs, flush streets and
parking areas, irrigate new
plantings, or pump munici-
pal and industrial contain-
ment areas.
In still other instances,
the WMS Transporter can
deliver up to nine open-top
roll-off containers on its
hoist and pull a tree shred-
deron its trailer hook. It can
be fitted with a detachable
flatbed body for delivery of
light equipment or aban-
doned vehicle removal, or
with dump bodies for street
repairs or parks and recre-
ational use. It can even pick
up and deliver compart-
mentalized recycling con-
tainers for recycling
drop-off centers.
The WMS Transporter
can be quickly converted to
a variety of seasonal and
special ~ervice tasks at a
cost far lower than dedi-
cated chassis with single
purpose, permanently
attached bodies.
If we sound excited" We
are. And, we're Waste Man-
agement, the world's most
experienced urban services
company.
Citizen recycling containers are among the wide range of special service
bodies handled by the multi.purpose WMS Transporter.
With one containerlbody on its hoist and two on its trailer, a WMS Transporter
carries a le9a140,000 pound payload.
The WMS Transporter quickly transfers filled and empty ~ontainerlbodies
on its own trailer for long distance hauls to and from outlYing process and
disposal centers.
;2 t/!5 -;2 7
RI..IG 30'94 01:46PM CITYOFLRME~6m.JNITYSERVlCES
P.5
I
City of La Mesa
Attachment E
. _ :.:~ugust 26. 1994
- .-....... .-..-..., ,',,,-. . ..,- ,
Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Coronado
...,'.825~an<1.\i\I~Y....... :.._. . .,~ ,_. _ "" .
.,_~~.o, -2A;.:$21'lAv;~~'_Rr-~'~c-c"~Y"T-.VC:~'-'_'---5
Dear Mayor Herron and Members ot the City Council:
We'ra sGre that you don't agree with the reoent action of the COUl'1ty Solid Waste Joint ,
Powfirs'~uthorlty to penalize non-participating agencies for use of the landfills. - We.
senttlw'attQ.ched letter to each member of the JPAand to each member of their City
Council toexpr~ss our dissatisfaction. If you agree with our sentiment, it would be
usetul for you to do the same thing. Let our fellow elected officials know what you
think.
'..i_._.""......,';",;'..,:. .J!;",4,,,,-,,,,.,+-, ,.........:J......,,--.....,
. .p.
::-.5
If you would like to discuss the malter, please give one of U9 a call.
, .
Thank you.
Slnceraly.
~.6~~~
fluth M. Sterling
Vice Mayor .
Attachment
,~~
Councllmember
8130 ^1,LI$ON I\VI!NUB, P,O. !lOX 937. L/\ MI!5i\. O:;i\LIFORNI^ ll1U44-ll937 I (61(;)) "636llII, FI\X 16lll) 462'7528
4Zll
)Lj!3 -.;2~
RUG 3El '94 Ell' 46PM CITYOFLRMESRCDMMUNITYSERVlCES
P.6
,
DISTRIBUTION:
CIties of:
Carl.bad
Coronado
Chula Vim
EICajon
Enclnlta$
ESCOndldo
Imperial Beach
Oceanside
La Mesa
San Diego
San Marcos
Santee
. ","';;~.,,:...".;___ "i"-...:,.:...,;..t~",~,,,,-~,,,,:""."_;'~_'~;'~ "';:::"_':1""':"'~" ,;~, """","'-r-;:~,',o4'_:,'_~_:"':"""~,-"";;{~." ~..._ ,;...,j.,J"';',~~;,,~,....-...,,'1' ",'-. '.:.' .-..
~_'r:: :~ "9"'. ~t' ('I.I:!;:'V ~ITv':'':-Lqt'''-sr::-:r'~''''-'''{~-''!''s':"'7\'':::-::':S
'="',S
cJ-L/!J ~;2C;
RUG 3~ '94 ~1:44PM CITYOFLRMESRCOMMUNITYSERVICES
P.2
.-
,'{I.tlIt"lIr,..,
. "'I"fr",-,"/.,
\','..;;:::- '~..17
5'- f-, ~-:;>:,,--<;o
. t. '; ,.'/i/i ....> ,j ~ \-
~ \)~:~?F~-~~: :
J@,
.;~; ~",,~:,:-,-,"
{ "'flAt'I-'
City of La Mesa
August 26, 1994
I '"Ii
i ':'The Honorable Pam Slater
---SupeiVlSor; District 3 .-
County of San Diego
1600 Paciflo Highway
San Diego, .CA 92101
Dear Supervisor Slater:
"-,~.,....,,,~.: ",' '-,-,~",,,,,c,,",,,,,,,,,,,'.<.k.........
'..._ '..'l...".~' -',:_ .......... -,.,~,
_._'I'~ ~'.;.';",._.. __~.. . .._".':..'l.,~..."';;'".".______. '"
",.'As-members-of1he:-l"&'Mesa:SUboCommitlee-omSolid Waste, we wish, to bring the,
following. concerns to the atlention of all of our Council colleagues In the regIon.
. F,
OVer'tH~ past several years the County Board of Supervisors has attemptedt~
blaoKmjUolties by threatening to add a $10 surcharge to tipping fees if cities wouldn't
prom!~e'touse County landfills in perpetuity. Do you remember how you felt?- Your
city and ours refused to accept the County's terms. The County could not ~woo' us
with threats and Intimidation.
The 'County began to make some progress on the Issue by inviting the cities to
collaborate on a collective solullon. As a result of that collaboration, your city chose to
make a commitment and ours didn't. We respect your decision. We hope that we
can someday make the same commitment. In the meantime, we hope that you can
respect our declslon.
The County Solid Waste Joint Powers Authority has recently Informed us that unless
we make a full commitment and join the JPA, we are going to be penalized. This new
organlzatloh Is reverting to threats and Intimidation. This tlme, however, the threats
are more severe. The minimum punishment will be a $10,surcharge If we commlt,our
trash for up to thirteen years. The staff of the JPA is unable to tell us the costs if we
don't accept this 'modest' proposal. . Ate we the enemy? Is this a way to entice
regional cooperation and create new partnershIps? These tactics won't work,.
The solid waste system, as run by the County, had no credibility. The only way it
could win back some credibility was to begin to share its' decision-making by forming
the JPA. The JPA'sfltst effortsst cutting the operational costs of the landfills. and
taking a critical look at the N9CRA are a good start. Reverting to the failed County
taetic of blackmailing citIes to get what you want Is counter-productive. Please
reconsider this action and keep the tipping fee at $55 a ton or below for all users.
. . . I
11130 Al.I.ISON A V~UE. P.o. BOX 113'7. l.^ MElSI\, CAl.IFORNIA II 11l44~lO3'7 I (6191 463.661 I. FAX (6 1 g) 0162.'7528
*,Prir'llAd on Rec:vcled PlDer,
. ,
c2L//Y ~J{)
: !;,'G 3l'l '94 01:45PM CITYOFLAMESRCOMMUNITYSERVlCES
._.,.""''"'_..n.......,..._".,. '.,
P.3
_''''~_M''~'.''''
The problems of the solid waste system are eompleK ,and have escalated over time. It will
also take lime to unravel these problems and make the system work again. You are to be
commended for laking a leadel'Bhlp role. As credibility Is re-establlshed, we think other citlllS
will follow your lead. Give the rest of us more time to make the commItment. Don't send us
looking for alternative disposal aRei by charging additional fellS to UN county facilities.
If you would Uke to disoUis this matter, please give one of us II call.
Sincerely,
~ c:...Q-
Ja~uer
Councllmember
Ruth M. Sterling
Vice Mayor
.- '..,._._.,~" ->-. ,. ..-:_,.,;....... ,> ..,.. :~.;_.,...'..l.::,~i. ,,_,,',:>l~._" '..' cj.'_ -.,;i.H
.'_ ~,..'"...........I ..., .._~.;";,-" ::.....~.i." .._~._...._.._,,;;..."-,""'>........-....,"
')'"r:: ':"''''1 "~4- ?~.. 4:.r.'..... C!T'..~':'..:-'---q~~-'3C~n~'1y._!'~I..,--'?C'r.:-..","r:-::s
r.3
.."..'
.
;<t/!5 -' J /
RUG 30 '94 01' 45PM CITYOFLRMESRCOMMUNITYSERVlCES
P.4
DISTRIBUTION:
Pam Slater, Chair, Board of Supervisors
Cities of:
Del Mar
Lemon Grove
National City
Powliy
Solana Beach
Vista
111 'u,:. " :~'_;':'~"''''''__'''''';''''';'':'';;;':;'''~'''':'''''~'-:''M,,'''li':,_'''''''';:.IIA','':''~-,:~;~':";j'-'f'" ;j;_ ',:.;;",-,.<;; :..,........,-:Wh....',;' :....-IK.,"';'i:,..;.',',.......;l;4*-.;-,. ,.Iirk ....._ I~ ":;;.':;:;~~;I-'" "t,:, .\: '".,',C, -_.
?I_'-:; -:--~ ..~ ?t ,1.':':"'V '::"'!TY~::-!....Rf":-s'"=',--:c~l"v. !'''I-yS~--:l\,'TT'r.:S
..._--~
c ,
. ",,""
-
,
:11lJ - 3;z
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~>'
Meeting Date 9/6/94
ITEM TITLE: Report on SANDAG Interim Regional Open Space Strategy
~j#
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning 'C
REVIEWED BY: City Manager&\~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes_NoX)
SANDAG has released for public reviewlJe -;;ched report entitled "Interim Regional Open
Space Strategy," which was prepared by SANDAG staff in conjunction with a Citizens Advisory
Conunittee. The report addresses some of the major issues pertaining to open space planning
for the San Diego region, and contains reconunendations for both short-term and long-term
strategies dealing with open space planning and acquisition.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize staff to forward conunents contained
in this report.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None.
DISCUSSION:
Last year, SANDAG appointed a Citizens Advisory Conunittee to assist in the preparation of
an open space element to the Regional Growth Management Strategy. The Conunittee was
chaired by Mayor Brian Cochran of Lemon Grove, and included representatives of a variety of
organizations (see Attachment 2). The Conunittee worked with SANDAG staff to prepare the
attached interim report.
In transmitting this report to the SANDAG Board of Directors, SANDAG staff has indicated that
the report makes three basic points:
I) The regional open space strategy should emphasize the coordination of (a) efforts to
preserve important habitat and other natural resource lands, (b) shoreline preservation,
(c) agricultural lands protection, (d) visual resources, and (e) parks and recreation.
2) The Strategy will be carried out primarily by existing local, state, and federal agencies
using a combination of plan/policy direction and regulatory action, economic incentives,
and financial support.
3) The cities and County, other local and regional agencies, interested citizens and
organizations should continue with existing consensus-building and public information
programs that would lead to proposals for comprehensive open space implementation.
.2'>'" /
Page 2, Item J..5'
Meeting Date 9/6/94
Staff Comments
With reference to the major points outlined above, staff would offer the following comments:
1) Scope of Regional Open Space Planning
Staff agrees that a coordinated regional open space planning effort is warranted, and that
at least the five major open space components outlined above should be considered in a
regional open space strategy. However, within the San Diego region at this time, the
focus of major local and subregional open space planning efforts is on efforts to preserve
important habitat and other natural resource lands. The emphasis of local and regional
govermnent at both the technical and policy level should be on the completion of these
existing planning efforts (e.g., Natural Community Conservation Plans, Clean Water
Program Multiple Conservation Program, etc.). SANDAG can continue to perform a
valuable coordination role in these efforts; however, a separate regional open space
planning effort appears to be duplicative at this time.
2) Implementation Strategies
a) Short-term Strategy
On Pages 6 and 7 of the report, it is recommended that in the short term, the
strategy for regional open space planning and acquisition should rely on existing
planning and regulatory techniques (such as zoning, transferable development
rights, and subdivision regulations), along with existing funding sources (such as
local and regional land trusts, and State and Federal funding programs.)
Staff comment:
This is essentially the approach being taken by existing local and subregional
open space planning and acquisition programs, such as the Otay River Regional
Park Program, in which the City of Chula Vista, County, and City of San Diego
are involved. However, in addition to consideration of Federal and State funding,
the report should also indicate that utilization of certain Federal and State lands
(e.g., lands owned by the Bureau of Land Management) should be pursued as a
short -term strategy. These lands could be made available either as conservation
lands, or in certain cases could be exchanged for conservation lands.
b. Long-range Strategy
On pages 7 - 10 of the report, it is recommended that "the formulation of a
recommended future financing strategy should proceed, even though the various
elements of regional open space have yet to be finalized." The report then
..25",2.
Page 3, Item .J..5'
Meeting Date 9/6/94
outlines various possible methods of pursuing local regional financing sources for
open space, including a regional assessment district, regional development impact
fee, and utility user charges.
Staff comments:
As stated earlier with regard to regional open space planning efforts, there are
several existing local and subregional habitat conservation planning efforts, such
as MSCP, which are conducting detailed evaluations of financing and
implementation strategies, and in which most of the cities and the County are
already directly involved. While the discussion in this report provides some good
background information regarding various options which could be pursued at a
regional level, it would appear to be more fruitful at this time to continue to
evaluate financing and implementation strategies at the local and subregional level
through the existing habitat conservation programs such as MSCP. If it later
becomes apparent that a regional financing source is needed, the options
contained in this report could be further evaluated.
It should also be emphasized that any regional development impact fee program
should be evaluated in relation to existing local development impact fee programs,
in order to ensure that there is equitable consideration given to those cities such
as Chula Vista which already utilize development impact fees to meet local
quality of life standards pertaining to parks, transportation, and other public
facilities. In addition, as discussed on page 5 of the report, the possible need for
regional development impact fees to support other regional facility needs, such
as transportation and judicial system facilities, and the economic ramifications of
such fees, should also be considered.
3. Institutional Actions
On pages 11 -13 of the report, a set of principles outlining the responsibilities of local
and regional agencies in implementing a regional open space strategy is included.
Principle One: Local and regional agencies should retain their existing open
space-related authorities.
Principle Two: Local and regional agencies must act together to implement the
Open Space Strategy:
a. existing habitat conservation planning efforts should be completed;
b. acting together, local and regional agencies should decide if they need
additional regionally-generated revenue for open space acquisition;
eJ5'J
/
Page 4, Item .25
Meeting Date 9/6/94
c. any new regional revenues should be timed to minimize negative impacts
on the economy.
Principle Three: New authorities and responsibilities, if needed, should be
assigned to existing agencies unless they determine that an alternative arrangement
would better serve the region.
Staff comments:
Staff agrees with the concept behind Principle One, which is that existing open space
authorities should be considered for managing new open space areas before creating
additional entities.
With regard to the recommended actions under Principle Two, staff agrees that existing
habitat conservation planning efforts should be completed prior to further evaluation of
regional revenue sources. Until a better idea of the magnitude of revenue requirements
is obtained, and all other revenue sources and land acquisition methods have been
considered, it will be extremely difficult to achieve consensus on any specific proposal
for regional revenues.
With regard to Principle Three, staff is supportive of the efforts of the State Coastal
Conservancy to assist local and regional agencies in San Diego County in evaluating
various options for establishing open space conservancies. A staff member from the City
of Chula Vista is participating on a technical committee which is assisting Coastal
Conservancy staff on this study, which is expected to be completed by the end of 1994.
Staff will provide the City Council with periodic updates regarding this effort.
SUMMARY
Overall, staff finds that emphasis of the SANDAG Interim Open Space Strategy report is on
continuing current efforts to complete local and subregional open space plans, which is consistent
with the current direction being taken by Chula Vista. However, we would recommend greater
emphasis on the need to complete these local and subregional plans prior to any further effort
being spent on developing regional revenue programs.
FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time.
Attachments:
I) SANDAG Interim Regional Open Space Strategy
2) Citizens Advisory Committee Roster NOT SCANNED
(F6\SANDAGOS.all)
.;s,'I/ ,;{6-6
ATTACHMENT 1
~ San Diego
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS
June 30, 1994
''',
Suite 800, First Interstate Plaza
401 B Street
San Diego, California 92101
(619)595-5300 Fax (619)595-5305
JUL 0 5 1994
SUBJECT:
Interim Regional Open Space Strategy
Open space bas been identified by SANDAG as a regional priority, and is an important
element of the Regional Growth Management Strategy. Last year, SANDAG appointed
a Citizens Advisory Committee to assist in the preparation of the open space element. The
enclosed Open Space Strategy is the fIrst phase in the regional open space planning process
in San Diego.
The interim report is being distributed to various local, state, and federal agencies, as well
as different constituencies throughout the San Diego region who have shown an interest
in regional open space planning. SANDAG welcomes your comments on the structure of
the document, as well as the feasibility of the proposals contained in the interim report.
The review and comment period for the interim report will be open until August 31, 1994.
Please forward your comments to the above address (Attn: Mike McLaughlin) for
inclusion in the revision of the document and Phase n of the planning process.
Please forward any questions to Mike McLaughlin, 595-5373 or Kimberly Duran,
595-5342.
MMlKD/ah
Enclosure
,.;$"" ~
MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondida, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove.
National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Sanlee, Solana Beach, Vista, and County of San Diego.
ADVISORY/lIAISON MEMBERS: California Department of Transportation, U.S. Department of Defense, S.D. Unified Port District. and TijuanaIBaja California.
OPEN SPACE STRATEGY
As Accepted for Distribution
By the SANDAG Board
June 24, 1994
SUMMARY
The Open Space Strategy of the Regional Open Space Element is part of the Regional Growth
Management Strategy. It presents the consensus of the region's local governments on open
space preservation, including the types of land that should be protected and preserved, and the
agencies responsible for implementation.
In summary, the Strategy recommends that:
. Open space is a high priority regional need. (SANDAG recently identified it as a high
priority as a part of the regional infrastructure, along with transportation and criminal
justice facilities.)
. The regional Open Space Strategy should emphasize the coordination of efforts to preserve
important habitat and other natural resource lands, including the protection of shoreline,
agricultural lands, visual resources, and parks and recreational areas.
. Overall implementation will be divided into two strategies: the Interim Strategy and the
Long-Range Strategy. The Interim Strategy uses existing policy and funding resources in
the region while the Long-Range Strategy proposes additional resources to preserve open
space.
. Implementation of the Open Space Strategy will be an evolutionary process based primarily
on existing local, regional, and federal agencies continuing and expanding their current
responsibilities.
. The Strategy emphasizes a combination of plan/policy direction and regulatory action;
economic incentives and fmancial support.
. Three potential sources of revenue have been identified for study in the Long-Range
Strategy: property assessment, a development impact fee, and a utility user charge.
. 'As a combined effort, the cities, the County, other local and regional agencies, interested
citizens, and organizations should continue a consensus-building and public information
program that would lead to proposals for additional open space revenues beginning in 1995
or 1996.
~~-1
. The cities and County, along with interested groups and individuals, could use the Coastal
Conservancy's proposed study of a regional open space conservancy to evaluate the
potential role of a conservancy in open space implementation in the San Diego region.
INTRODUCTION
The Open Space Strategy builds upon existing and future regional open space programs and
proposes additional actions that are necessary to more effectively preserve regionally significant
open space. While the Strategy is designed to provide a framework for existing efforts,
especially habitat conservation programs, shoreline preservation, visual resources, agricultural
areas, and regional parks and recreation actions, it also contains a set of recommendations that
emphasize the need for a more coordinated and comprehensive regional open space system.
The Open Space Strategy is organized into three components: implementation actions (including
regulations and fmancing), institutional structure, and determination of regional priorities. This
revised draft of the Strategy contains recommendations regarding implementation and
institutional structure.
Open space in the San Diego region traditionally has been preserved in an incremental manner,
as opportunities for preservation arise. The Strategy proposes to continue to take advantage of
these opportunities and broaden the tools for open space preservation into a more systematic,
long-range approach.
Open space planning responsibilities are shared among a number of sub-regional programs, all
working on different schedules. As a result, the regional planning process has some data
limitations, not the least of which are acquisition needs and attendant public costs. Development
of a fmancing strategy is especially difficult because the provision of regional open space, unlike
other types of public facilities, is without a dedicated or institutiona l17ed funding source. And
while additional money would have to be raised to pay for the full implementation of the
Regional Open Space Element, new proposals at this time would confront recession-weary
taxpayers.
The San Diego region, nevertheless, can take advantage of the 'current situation and convert
these constraints into opportunities. Never in our history has so much effort been devoted to
open space planning. Local agencies, albeit prompted by federal and state mandates, appear to
be more willing to exercise their authority to regulate land use for the purpose of open space
preservation. Also, many of the region's utility providers may fmd it necessary to increase rates
in order to fund habitat conservation programs related to facility upgrades and expansions.
Another local revenue opportunity presents itself in Assembly Bill 2007. If approved by the
voters, the establishment of a regional assessment district as authorized under the bill could give
open space acquisition a major financial boost. Further, private industry is recognizing the need
to resolve open space issues as a prerequisite for project approvals.
2
d. c:; of
PRINCIPLES
The principles used to guide the preparation of the Strategy:
1. Local and regional agencies should retain their existing open space-related authorities and
responsibilities.
2. New authorities and responsibilities, if needed to carry out the Regional Open Space
Element, should be assigned to existing agencies, unless the agencies acting together
determine that an alternative arrangement would better serve the region.
3. Local and regional agencies must act together to set regional open space policies, raise and
allocate money, and implement the Open Space Strategy. Coordination with pertinent
regional, state and federal agencies should be integral parts of the decision-making process.
4. Financing of the open space system should be shared by existing and future development
and by private and public sectors, including local, regional, state, and federal
governments.
5. Where public funding is used to help implement the Regional Open Space Element, it
should be spent on specific programs or projects so that the public can be fully informed
of its use.
6. All legal and reasonable means should be used to implement the Regional Open Space
Element, while protecting private property rights.
7. Public participation should be encouraged throughout the planning and implementation
process.
Economic Benefits of Open Space Preservation
Environmental quality and economic prosperity are inextricably linked in the San Diego region.
As the most recently recognized form of infrastructure, open space and its preservation have a
significant effect on both the local economy and the structure of future development in the
region.
Future developments and business expansions cannot take place without additional infrastructure.
More than ever, the region's economic growth hinges on new private investment in capital and
technology. Private investment in the local economy, however, may be curtailed unless a
regional plan for open space preservation is agreed to by all levels of government.
Under state and federal mandates, the San Diego region must resolve conflicts between land
development and the protection of plants and animals. The region contains about 200 species
that the federal and state governments have listed or propose to list as endangered, threatened,
or rare. Failure to protect these species and their habitats would place severe limitations on the
ability of local agencies to approve employment projects and construct public improvements.
3
"d-c;..q
The habitat conservation plans not only could provide for the mitigation needs of current and
future projects in the region, but also could be designed to protect currently listed endangered
species as well as agriculture, visual resources, shoreline, and other open space. By providing
a regional focus, the habitat conservation plans could be more economically advantageous than
the alternative of resolving conflicts on a project-by-project basis. Also the proposed plans
provide more assurance that thresholds for biological protection could be achieved.
Preservation and enhancement of the region's shoreline is also important for several reasons.
Safe and attractive beaches can be a valued regional economic asset. Economic benefits accrue
to the region due to recreational use values, property protection, and perhaps most importantly,
tourism attraction. The visitor industry is the region's third largest revenue generating industry.
Agriculture, another valuable type of open space, is also important both through indirect and
direct benefits to the regional economy. Agricultural land can provide buffers and corridors to
open space and habitat systems. Less intensive land uses in many ways also contribute to
improving air quality and increasing watershed protection throughout the County. Direct1y
impacting the economy as the region's fourth largest industry, agricultural businesses annually
produce more than $1 billion in sales.
Open space in the form of parks, greenbelts, and corridors is also important to the region's
quality of life. Preservation of open space can serve to reduce adverse effects of urbanization
such as water, air, and noise pollution. Protection of geologically or environmentally sensitive
areas for recreation purposes can also reduce property damage and loss of life. Through scenic
parks and greenbelts, open space preservation also serves to visually enhance the region and
improve the health and physical well-being of community residents.
In the absence of an integrated agreement with emphasis on habitat conservation, businesses and
investors throughout the nation and the world probably would view San Diego as a risky
destination for investment dollars - a place where environmental conflicts remain unresolved and
government regulators stand ready to block or restrict development each time a conflict arises.
Perhaps nothing detracts more from private investment than uncertainty about future business
conditions. The San Diego region cannot afford to ignore this risk, especially now - a time
when capital investment is critical to the successful restructuring of the local economy.
The regional open space plan, once approved and implemented, could facilitate approvals of
business expansion plans, reduce delays in the environmental review process, and reduce
compliance and carrying costs. Federal and state permits for both private projects and public
capital improvements should be easier to obtain as well. Perhaps most importantly, an early
resolution of conflicts between land development and open space could reduce the likelihood of
federal and/or state intervention which could disrupt the local economy. Each of these factors
contributes to a less costly and more secure business environment, thus improving the region's
ability to retain companies and attract investment.
4
~5"/O
SANDAG Board Action on Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan and Economic Criteria
for New Funding Measures
"Now is not the time to raise local taxes in order to pay for regional public facilities. The cost
of government already is rising faster than household incomes. Given the current economic
situation, the region's residents and businesses scarcely can afford more public services, despite
projected unfunded facility needs. Even the specter of higher taxes at this time would contribute
to a more stubborn economic recovery." This is the finding of the Public Finance Subcommittee
of the SANDAG Board of Directors. The Subcommittee recently completed a review of the
Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan, which identifies a regional development fee and a
county-wide tax increase as possible ways to fund projected facility needs, including parks and
open space.
In March, the Board of Directors approved the Subcommittee's recommendations. The Board
voted to postpone action on any tax or fee increase, continue work on the Financing Plan, and
give funding priority to transportation, open space, and justice facilities. While the Board
supported a continuation of the planning effort, it also directed staff to develop economic criteria
for timing the implementation of any future tax or fee increase.
There are hints that the local economy is beginning to recover. But since the recession began
46 months ago, the region has lost over 40,000 wage and salary jobs, many of which paid
relatively high salaries. During the same period, the region's population grew by about
200,000. Fewer employment opportunities coupled with more households is hardly a formula
for public acceptance of higher taxes, fees, service charges, or assessments.
Following the Board's direction, new local measures to raise revenue for regional open space
should be considered for implementation only after the region has experienced a marked
improvement in economic welfare. Criteria for measuring the ability of the region to afford
higher public costs should be defmed, and an economic threshold for recommending new funding
measures should be proposed for the SANDAG Board's approval.
The threshold could be defmed in terms of one or more of the following, interrelated criteria:
. The region's residents experience at least a one-year rise in their standard-of-living,
measured in terms of real income per capita.
. The local economy fully recovers from the current recession; that is, the level of wage
and salary employment exceeds its pre-recession level.
. Total personal income in the region begins to grow faster than total local government
expenditures, reversing the current trend.
5
~"5'1I
IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
A list of open space tools that could be used to implement the Open Space Strategy was prepared
and evaluated. The Implementation Actions recommended focus on opportunities at two levels:
(1) the Interim Strategy (existing plans/policies and current funds) level; and, (2) the Long-
Range Strategy (future funding mechanisms for open space acquisitions) level. The first
alternative combines short term opportunities that currently exist, while the second alternative
has a longer term focus that defIDes the next steps for the Regional Open Space Strategy.
1. Interim Strategy
The Interim Strategy is a minimum cost alternative which could be implemented to
preserve open space regionally in the short term. By using planning regulations and
funding mechanisms which are already in place, the Interim Strategy proposes immediate
open space acquisition and preservation in the region. This alternative is designed to
minimize costs to local public agencies and residents. It also offers the opportunity to
foster regionwide support for future funding mechanisms for open space acquisition.
a. Existinl!: Plans and Policies
The front line actions for implementation of open space protection are the changes
in the local general plans and policies needed to accommodate the Regional Open
Space Strategy. These changes are evolving as part of the regional growth forecasts
and the recommendations contained in the Regional Growth Management Strategy
(RGMS). The Regional Open Space Element will be integrated with the RGMS,
requiring a number of actions at the local level which will include revising plans and
policies. Regulatory tools such as zoning, transferable development rights,
subdivision regulations, conservation easements, exactions, and development
incentives may be incorporated into open space preservation planning in the region.
These local policies, combined with state and federal implementation tools, would
decrease the amount of land which would have to be acquired at the local level for
an open space system. They also entail little or no cost to residents in the area.
Zoning, transferable development rights, and subdivision regulations could be
strengthened to require increased dedications of open space land when redevelopment
and new projects are proposed. Conservation easements are legal agreements
between landowners and conservation organizations designed to preserve land for
purposes such as agriculture, wildlife habitat, scenic views, watershed protection and
recreational purposes. Exactions, which are conceded by developers to local
jurisdictions for permission to build in a particular area, provide open space
preservation within residential communities or mitigate for off-site preservation. Tax
code changes or incentives could change the economics of development patterns by:
reducing the cost of redeveloping existing urban areas; making unused lands in the
uroan core available at a lower cost; or modifying tax codes to create tax breaks for
jurisdictions which would encourage them to preserve open space within their areas.
6
'd-S"Id.-
b. Existine Fundine Sources
Several local, state, and federal funding sources currently exist for the short-tenn
preservation of open space. These sources would add no extra burden on the local
economy but could provide needed funds for open space land which needs to be
acquired immediately. Used in connection with local policies and regulations, these
existing funding sources could make a substantial contribution to the establishment
of a regional open space system in San Diego.
Local and regional land trusts in the San Diego region are involved directly in
protecting land resources for the public benefit. Funds for purchases of land are
solicited from members, individual donors, foundations, corporations, and
government agencies.
As a statewide initiative with a large local impact, the California Parks & Wildlife
Initiative (CalPAW '94) would have provided nearly $2 billion to acquire, protect,
and enhance parkland, wildlife habitat, agricultural lands, coastal areas, river habitat,
and other resources in the region. Since this general obligation bond act failed in
June 1994, money to protect specific important natural resource areas and species
will not be available unless a new proposal is developed.
Federally, the San Diego region has the ability to draw from sources such as the
Land & Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), the Intennodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) , and the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) for
funds. LWCF money is intended for federal recreation and conservation use by the
National Parks, U.S. Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management. This
money can also be used for state parks. The National Policy in ISTEA includes
consideration of the overall environmental context and community values to enhance
the quality of life in, or around, transportation facilities. Funds from this source
could be used for mitigation purposes, wetland banking, scenic byways programs,
and erosion control. RTC lands include property which has been defaulted upon due
to the savings and loan crisis and is sold by the federal government (often for below
market values). In San Diego, some of these parcels could be bought inexpensively
to enhance wildlife corridors and contribute to the open space system in the region.
2. Long-RangeStrat~
The fonnulation of a recommended future fmancing strategy should proceed, even though
the various elements of regional open space have yet to be fin~li7ed. Agreement on and
regional coordination of a long-tenn basic strategy would provide guidance and a
framework for continued fmancial planning, and thereby advance the region's readiness
to implement open space plans once they are completed. Upon further refmement of the
habitat conservation programs (Multiple Species Conservation Program, Multiple Habitat
Conservation Program, and the County program) and improvement of the local economy,
long-tenn planning and funding mechanisms should be designed to enhance and build upon
the Interim Strategy.
7
~s"'\.3
The recommendation for future fmancing tools builds upon two existing opportunities for
the establishment of open space assessment districts: AB 2007 (Regional Open Space and
Park District) and SB 445 (Habitat Maintenance District). Both of these approaches
exclude assessment of agricultural lands until they change to non-agricultural use. The
Long-Range Strategy also should evaluate a regional development impact fee, appropriate
utility user charges, and federal/state resources in order to provide an equitable sharing
of the costs between new and existing residents and among local, state, and federal
governments.
Through the implementation of the funding sources, a total of $30-35 million has been
identified for annual open space preservation purposes in the region. However, the
Committee supports fmancing strategies that involve public votes wherever it is feasible.
a. Re!!ional Assessment District
The Citizens Advisory Committee could promote not only community support for
the timely creation of a regional open space assessment district but also could
recommend a plan for coordinating its implementation. Allocation of potential
assessment revenue should be divided among types of open space including regional
parks and open space, visual resources, habitat conservation areas, shoreline
preservation, and local park and recreation centers. Regional coordination is needed
to establish the structure of the assessment district, and schedule the measure for a
public vote.
Under AB 2007, the County of San Diego would be the governing agency for the
fonnation of a regional park and open space district. Subject to simple majority
approval by the voters, the district fonnation and assessments have the potential to
raise a sizable sum of money for park and recreation facilities, open space land
acquisition, and maintenance.
The County would design the assessment district, including the following features:
. Total amount of assessment revenue to be collected
. list of projects (parks, recreation, open space, and/or habitat acquisitions) and
expenditure plan
. Size of the assessment district or the assessable base
. Method of apportioning assessments among property owners.
While the County is in the preliminary stage of designing the district, a total of about
$225 million has been contemplated for a potential bond program using assessment
district funds.
b. Regional Develooment ImDact Fee
A regional development impact fee could be implemented to help pay for the
acquisition of regionally significant open space.
8
~s ,,'If
Under existing authority, the region's land use agencies jointly could implement a
regional impact fee program. Such a program, including implementation
responsibilities and legal authority, is described in the draft Regional Public Facilities
Financing Plan, prepared by SANDAG.
Project applicants should help pay for regional open space acquisition for several
reasons. New development will diminish open space. Like existing residents,
occupants of new development projects will benefit from publicly acquired open
space. Also, the public resources being devoted to open space planning, especially
habitat conservation, will facilitate project approvals and reduce carrying costs.
The use of an impact fee to defray the cost of providing regional facilities would be
compatible with existing local policy that requires project applicants to be fmancially
responsible for public facilities that benefit their projects. After the facilities are
built, operating and maintenance costs are funded from general taxes or user fees
contributed by both existing and new residents. As an important part of the region's
infrastructure, open space is an important public facility designation to fmance.
In any case, the basic approach to determining the fee might be as follows:
(1) The process would start with an estimate of the total cost of acquiring
regionally significant open space over a defmed time period. The total cost for
the time period then would be allocated between the existing development and
projected development on the basis of population, developed acreage, and land
use.
(2) Anticipated state and federal funding of regional open space would be credited
to both existing and new development in proportion to respective shares of total
cost. Under the MSCP program, for example, state and federal funds are
assumed to provide one-half of all land acquisition costs.
(3) The estimated net cost attributable to new development would be adjusted on
the basis of the new "funding effort" made by existing development. If, for
example, a County-wide assessment or utility charge raised enough revenue to
cover 50 % of existing development's allocated cost, then the cost attributed to
new development would be reduced by 50 %.
(4) The net cost attributed to new development would then be divided among
projected land uses to derive an impact fee per acre or housing unit. Under this
approach, a development impact fee would not be enacted until such time as a
new County-wide funding measure is implemented.
c. Utility User Charies
User charges for water and sewer service are being considered as a candidate
funding source for regional open space. Sewer and water rates are set by local
9
dS: - IS
agencies and increases do not require voter approval. The revenue collection
systems are in place and are efficient.
The rate structure of the Metropolitan Sewerage System, which serves over 70% of
the region's population, already makes allowance for a series of increases. Further,
the Clean Water Act mandates that habitat preservation be an integral part of plans
to upgrade or expand sewerage systems. A proposal that sewer service charges be
used for open space pUIpOses has been discussed in the work of the Multiple Species
Conservation Program (MSCP). According to the program's working draft, the
recommended local fmancing approach combines assessments, a development
mitigation, and a small sewer rate increase in the Metropolitan Sewerage System
service area, to produce the required revenues for land acquisition, operation, and
maintenance. Greater reliance on the sewer rate structure is identified as a backup
measure in the event insufficient revenue is derived from the other two sources.
Water rate increases would affect a larger customer base than sewer charges because
not all developed property receives sewer service.
The concept of using utility user charges, whether sewer or water, for open space
preservation purposes has potential problems. The basic problem is proving the
relationship ("nexus") between the utility service and open space preservation. The
San Diego County Water Authority (CW A) and other local water and sewer special
districts were created to provide utility service, not open space. Furthermore, open
space is a use of land which is a responsibility of local general pUIpOse governments.
In addition, water rate increases may have an adverse impact on an important form
of open space: agriculture. In order to maintain a viable, long-term agricultural
base in the San Diego region, agricultural water users should pay a proportionately
lower share of the potential water rate increases when land is kept in agricultural
production or dedicated as open space.
As a funding source for regional open space, a utility tax on the sale of gas and
electricity offers some of the same attributes as water/sewer charges but it would be
as problematic to implement. Enactment of a regional tax or fee on energy sales
may require state enabling legislation, and, if the revenues were earmarked for
specific purposes, the proposal probably would be classified as a "special tax,"
which requires two-thirds voter approval.
Waste management funding resources also may offer an opportunity, and the
inclusion of a fee for open space as part of the tipping fee at landfills could be
considered.
10
d-S .../~
INSTITUTIONAL ACTIONS
The recommended "institutional actions" describe "who does what" to implement the Open Space
Strategy.
The actions are based on the Principles used to guide the preparation of the Strategy (see above),
particularly Principles 1, 2, and 3, which propose that local and regional agencies should retain
their existing responsibilities; that new responsibilities, whenever possible, should.be assumed
by existing agencies; and that agencies must cooperate to implement the Strategy.
The recommended actions also recognize that open space implementation is continuing and
evolutionary. The Open Space Strategy won't be implemented all at one time or immediately.
It will happen over a period of years. And, as in the past, the attitudes and actions of agencies
and organizations will evolve as they discover new ways to carry out the Strategy, and to
cooperate while doing it.
Principle One: Local and regional agencies should retain their existing open space-related
authorities and responsibilities.
Today, parks, the shoreline, and other open space lands are owned, operated and maintained by
the cities, the County, various special districts and joint powers agencies, and the state and
federal governments. These responsibilities will continue and this Strategy makes no
recommendation to change them.
Indeed, at least several cities, the County, some special districts and joint powers authorities,
and some state and federal agencies will have additional open space ownership and maintenance
responsibilities as a result of the region's various habitat conservation plans and the Shoreline
Preservation Strategy.
Principle Two: Local and regional agencies must act together to...implement the Open
Space Strategy.
Open space is higher on the region's public policy agenda now than it was a year ago. The
expected completion of the region's habitat conservation plans, the adoption of the Shoreline
Strategy, the preparation of this Strategy, and the passage of legislation (AB 2007 and SB 445)
enabling the region to establish open space assessment districts, have all contributed to a growing
expectation that we should somehow preserve more open space.
On the other hand, for gOod and obvious economic reasons, most people agree that now is not
a gOod time to ask local residents to spend more money on local government.
Therefore, the following is a list of recommended actions we should take to implement the Open
Space Strategy:
l. We must complete and adopt habitat conservation plans that are acceptable to the
participants -- local, state, and federal.
11
;}.t;...n
Habitat preservation is one of the keys to regional open space preservation. Consequently,
implementation of an open space strategy depends on knowing how much habitat to save.
2. Acting together, the local and regional agencies will decide if they need additional
regionally-generated revenue for open space acquisition. They also can decide the sources
of money to use and the amount to raise. They can make these decisions at SANDAG,
the forum for these kinds of discussions.
3. New local taxes or fees for fmancing regional open space preservation should be timed so
as to minimize negative impacts on the region's economy. Criteria for measuring the
ability of residents and businesses to afford higher taxes or fees are listed above in the
section on Financing. Proposals to raise taxes or fees should be made only when one or
more of these criteria are met. The region should embark now on a program that will lead
to approval of potential revenue sources for open space preservation.
We should begin now because consensus building often takes time, particularly when it
involves spending money. Local governments and interest groups will have to agree on
the revenue sources, the relative amounts of money to be derived from each, the open
space lands to be acquired, and the appropriate allocation of revenues among the categories
of need.
There are at least two factors which suggest that the region's local agencies should
consider organizing some of their inter-jurisdictional activities, however. One factor is
money; the other is habitat preservation.
If one or more of the three revenue sources described above is approved, the cities and
County will be collecting the most money ever earmarked in this region for open space
and parks. Achieving consensus on how to spend it will require the involvement of every
local jurisdiction.
Also, implementation of the region's habitat conservation and management plans will
create the need for ongoing multi-agency coordination, the kind exemplified by Mission
Trails Regional Park and the San Dieguito River Park. Habitat preserve areas frequently
will cross jurisdictional boundaries. To promote biological effectiveness, local, state and
federal agencies will have to cooperate regularly to ensure that these habitat areas connect.
Over time, we will determine if we need to add something to our existing agencies to help
carry out the inter-jurisdictional aspects of open space implementation. How this should
be done is described below.
Principle Three: New authorities and responsibilities, If needed..., should be assigned to
existing agencies, unless ...[they] determine that an alternative arrangement would better
serve the region.
Some kinds of open space already have well-established implementation arrangements. Existing
local, state and federal agencies will implement most, if not all, of the Open Space Strategy.
12
d.S... If
The cities, the County, special districts and others, including several state and federal agencies,
are well experienced in acquiring, operating and maintaining parks, shoreline and other open
space lands. These same agencies will continue to be responsible for regulating the use of parks
and open space. Roles of existing agencies include functions such as the acquisition,
maintenance, and operational responsibilities of the local parks and recreation departments, tbe
coordination role of SANDAG's Shoreline Erosion Committee, and the implementation
responsibilities of the various regional park joint powers agencies.
The State Coastal Conservancy is contemplating a study analyzing the applicability of an open
space land conservancy to the San Diego region. Local agencies, interested groups, and
individuals should participate in this study through the various existing open space and habitat
advisory committees. The Coastal Conservancy's staff should use selected existing committees
to gain local input.
In reviewing this study, local interests should be concerned primarily with how an open space
land conservancy fits with, or adds to, the existing implementation responsibilities of the cities,
County, and other open space agencies. The advisory committees also should review the other
potential characteristics of a land conservancy, including costs and membership.
As the region prepares to gain approval of additional resources for open space acquisition, the
local agencies can be deciding on the need for an open space conservancy.
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE PRIORITIES
The Committee has initiated a number of steps in its determination of priorities for the regional
open space system. SANDAG's Geographic Information System (GIS) was used to assist in
determining priorities for open space. Existing GIS layers were then used to represent open
space components identified in the Open Space Definition. The overlay of the separate GIS
layers and the resultant composite scores produced the designation of priority areas of low,
moderate, high, or very high preservation need. These alone could be used to identify open
space priority areas (See Table I).
Additionally, using GIS databases on land ownership, planned land use, and limitations to
development (Le., slopes greater than 25%, floodplains, and wetlands), a "gap analysis. was
conducted to gauge the level of protection of open space achieved by current planning practices
and policies. The gap analysis identified areas already afforded protection, as well as areas that
are significant parts of the open space system which may be at a high risk of being lost. While
building upon the existing open space system, the gap analysis helps to defme opportunities and
conflicts between significant open space areas and current planning policies and ownership
patterns.
This marks the completion of Phase I of open space planning in the region. The next step
involves further determination of specific priorities with the completion of the habitat
conservation programs in the region. Inputs for developing a methodology for preservation in
the region will be gathered from many different local agencies such as: MHCP, MSCP, the
13
a.'3../q
County habitat program, local conservancies, the Shoreline Preservation Strategy, and projects
identified in the AB 2007, and CalPA W '94 processes. Other contacts for priority determination
will include: the Cleveland National Forest, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Land
Management, state conservancies, the California Department of Fish & Game, and the State
Park Service. The information gained from interfacing with these agencies will be compared
and specific landscapes for preservation will be identified according to the priorities.
Phase IT of regional open space planning will involve continued local coordination among
jurisdictions and agencies involved in open space planning. This phase will also involve
establishing long-term goals for maintaining an open space system. With regional coordination,
Phase IT of the open space planning process will be able to focus on supporting more innovative
fundraising mechanisms to purchase important land and enhance the region's system by
modifying local policies and regulations to better serve the region in terms of open space
protection.
14
;).. cs;: ~ 0
Table I
DRAFT OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION CRITERIA AND SUPPORTING GIS LAYER
Resource-Based Criteria Supporting GIS Layer(s) Wt.
1) Biodiversity: Biologically rich areas 1) MSCPIMHCP biologically based 25
preserve planning areas (pP As)
2) Uniqueness or outstanding qualities:
Rare, unusual, or outstanding flora, fauna 2) Wetlands east of MSCPIMHCP
(and geologic formations and/or cultural or boundaries
visual resources, to be added later)
3) Very high and high value habitats for
3) Open Space Functional Elements: Buffers, Camp Pendleton
linkages, connectors (and urban delineators,
and potential expansions for other open space, 4) Shoreline
to be added later)
4) Recreation: Accessible, outstanding 1) National Forest 25
recreational opportunities serving a large 2) Open Space Parks & Preserves
population 3) Water
4) Intertidal
5) Shorel ine
5) Agricultural Significance: Intensive, Existing Agricultural land from 20
extensive, or unique agricultural production SANDAG's 1990 Land Use
areas
6) Private Rural Lands and Villages: Large Existing Private Rural Lands * from 5
areas of very low density land use and the SANDAG's 1990 Land Use and
related villages Ownership Inventory
People-Based Criteria Supporting GIS Layer(s)
1) Public Open Space Lands: Public lands with Undeveloped Public Lands from -
multiple uses, including extensive open space SANDAG's 1990 Land Use &
Ownership Inventory
2) Urgency: Areas needing immediate protection Vacant, undeveloped lands within PPAs 25
or management planned for development, shoreline
3) Public Safety: Hazardous areas that require Slopes > 25 % not already developed, -
protective measures to permit development shoreline
(steep slopes only, others to be added later)
* Rural Lands outside the County Water Authority eastern and northern boundaries.
Note: Biodiversity, uniqueness, and open space functional areas are obtained from the same GIS layers. Some
of the data layers are not fully available, as indicated in the criteria above.
IS
~,~I
ATTACHMENT 2
d. c;"H
ATTACHMENT 2
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
SANDAG Board Member, Chair
Alliance or Habitat Conservation
Audubon Society
Construction Industry Federation
Citizen Coordinate for Century m
Developers
Endangered Habitats League
Land/Open Space Conservancies
League of Women Voters
San Diego County Council of Realtors
San Diego County Farm Bureau
San Diego Taxpayers Association
Sierra Club
Ex omcio Members
OS TAC
Honorable Brian Cochran
Jim Whalen
Bill Daugherty (Buena Vista Audubon)
Tom Sheffer, Alternate
Bill Anderson
Craig Adams (Alternate)
Mike Madigan
Pardee Construction Company
Mike Beck
Dan Silver (Alternate)
Wallace Tucker,
Center for Conservation Strategies
Lois Ewen
Victoria Seay (Alternate)
Scott Harvey
Judy Fowler
Mark Nelson
Mike Kelly
Linda Micbacl (Alternate)
Micbacl Hol71ftmer, City of Carlsbad
City of San Diego's Mayor's Office
Karen Scatborough
(originally as C-3 Iqlresentative)
3
d.S"c:f.3
Minutes
- 6 -
February 10, 1987
14. PUBLIC HEARING
PCA-86-10: CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT
TO TITLE 19 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW
OFF PREMISE TEMPORARY REAL ESTATE OPEN
HOUSE SIGNS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES (Director
of Planning)
ORDINANCE 2194
PERMITTING OFF-PREMISE TEMPORARY REAL
ESTATE OPEN HOUSE SIGNS IN RESIDENTIAL
ZONES - FIRST READING
This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Cox declared
the public hearing open.
Director of Planning Krempl stated that at the City Council
meeting of March 3, 1986, the South Bay Board of Realtors
requested Council to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
to allow off-premise temporary real estate open house signs in
residential zones. The Board of Directors contends that most
resale homes are sold through the open house process, and existing
street patterns often make it difficult to locate an open house
without the use of an open house directional sign. Council
directed staff to prepare such an amendment.
The Montgomery Planning Committee,
1987 recommended approval of the
extensive revisions.
at their meeting of January 7,
proposed ordinance sUbject to
The Planning Commission, at its meeting of January 14, 1987,
recommended approval of the proposed ordinance, incorporating most
of the revisions suggested by the Montgomery Planning Committee.
Director of planning Krempl reviewed the seven (7) provisions
delineated in the ordinance for permitting off-premise temporary
real estate open house signs:
A. No more than three off premise open house sign shall be
allowed for each residential open house which occurs.
B. No more than one sign shall be allowed to be placed on
any interior parcel and no more than two on a corner lot
(one per street frontage).
C.
Off remise 0 en house si ns shall onl
Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays durIng day
on
D.
Signs shall be no
located at minimum
from the curb or
eXIsts.
larger than 4 square feet and shall be
of 3 feet from the sidewalk or 10 feet
edge of pavement, where no sidewalk
c1?d-' I
Minutes
- 7 -
February 10, 1987
E. An off premise temporary real estate open house sign
shall only be permitted in conjunction with an open house
held for the resale of one single family residence. Off
premise signs advertising the sale of more than one lot
or more than two dwellings constitutes a subdivision
directional sign subject to the regulations outlined in
Section 19.60.480.
F. Copy display on off premise temporary real estate open
house signs shall be limited to the words .Open House,.
the address of the property, the logo of the company, and
a directional arrow.
G. Off premise open house signs are prohibited within the
public right-of-way.
Councilwoman
be out much
signs during
McCandliss expressed her concern that the signs would
longer than needed. She can support placement of
the week but they should come down in the evening.
Patty Davis, 653 Redlands Place, Chula Vista,
South San Diego Bay Cities Board of Realtors,
following revisions to the current ordinance:
representing
recommended
the
the
1. Off-premise temporary real estate open house directional signs
may be placed only on private property, with the consent of
the owner.
2. Off-premise temporary real estate open house directions signs
shall be displayed only during daylight hours.
3. The allowable maximum size of off-premise temporary real
estate open house directional signs be four square feet.
4.
No more than one
directional sign
on corner lots,
permitted.
off-premise
be allowed
in which
temporary real estate open house
per residential property, except
case two such signs shall be
5. Temporary real estate open house directional signs shall
maintain a three-foot setback from all property lines.
Ms. Davis testified that there have been no problems with open
house signs for the past 13 years in the City. It has just come
to light that they are placing these signs illegally throughout
the ci ty and therefore, the need for the ordinance. She
rei tera ted tha t the Board is aga inst having the sunset clause;
they have been waiting for this ordinance now for over one year
and they do not want to come back in another year and have to go
through all of this again.
There being no further testimony either for or against, the public
hearing was closed.
;1.9 t:I-.2
Minutes
- 8 -
February 10, 1987
Councilman Moore noted resale of homes is one
important transactions for people and therefore, he
grant this the maximum flexibility.
of the most
would like to
MSUC (Moore/Cox) (A) that no more than 5 off-premise open house
signs be permitted and; (C) the off-premise open house signs be
displayed only during daylight hours.
I t was moved by Counci Iman Nader to str ike clause . A' al together
from each section of the ordinance removing the limit which is in
accordance with the Board of Realtors, Montgomery Planning
Commission and 3 out of 4 Planning Commissioners
The motion died for lack of second.
Mayor Cox referred to the sunset clause stating he would prefer to
have a one-year review by staff.
MSUC (Cox/McCandliss) to delete Section 3 from the ordinance and
request staff to corne back with a report at the end of one year
for this portion of the ordinance.
15. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
a. J. Anthony Raso, 165 Murray Street, Chula Vista, CA 92010,
showed pictures of the interior and exterior of his horne,
noting the modifications he made to his home in order to make
it 'ordinary' looking. He was required to finish the exterior
of the home by the end of January and he stated this has been
done.
PULLED ITEMS None.
16. REPORT OF THE CITY MANAGER
a. City Manager Goss gave an update of the traffic study and
signalization projects in the City.
b. The Ci ty Manager repor ted tha t the County's first meeti ng of
the Regional Growth Management Plan will be held in San Diego
tomorrow. He is SANDAG's appointee; Director of Planning
Krempl has been appointed by the American Planning
Association; Judi th Bauer will represent the schools and Tony
Lettieri will represent Citizens Coordinate Section 3.
.2 9q1.- 3
Revised 2/11/87
ORDINANCE NO. 2194
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADDING
SECTIONS 19.60.385 AND 19.70.016 TO THE CHULA
VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO PERMIT OFF-PREMISE
TEMPORARY REAL ESTATE OPEN HOUSE SIGNS IN
RESIDENTIAL ZONES
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain
as follows:
Chapter
follows:
SECTION I:
19.60 of
That Section 19.60.385
the Chula Vista Municipal
is hereby added
Code to read
to
as
19.60.385
Off Premise Temporary Real Estate Open House
Signs.
Off premises temporary real estate open house signs
shall be permitted within all residential zones subject
to the following conditions:
A. No more than five off premise open house sign shall
be allowed for each residential open house which
occurs.
B. No more than one sign shall be allowed to be placed
on an interior arcel and no more than two on a
corner lot one per street rontage .
C. Off premise open house signs shall only be displayed
during daylight hours.
D.
Si ns shall
shall be
sidewalk
pavement,
be no lar er than 4 s uare
ocated at m1n1mum of 3 eet
or 10 feet from the curb or
where no sidewalk exists.
feet
from
edge
and
the
of
E. An off premise temporary real estate open house sign
shall only be permitted in conjunction with an open
house held for the resale of one single family
residence. Off premise signs advertising the sale
of more than one lot or more than two dwellings
constitutes a subdivision directional sign subJect
to the regulations outlined in Section 19.60.480.
F. copy display on off premise temporary real estate
open house signs shall be limited to the words 'Open
House,' the address of the property, the logo of the
company, and a directional arrow.
-1-
eJ.9c1- (
Chapter
follows:
G. Off premise open house signs are prohibited within
the public right-of-way.
SECTION II: That Section 19.70.016
19.70 of the Chula Vista Municipal
is hereby added
Code to read
to
as
19.70.016
Off Premise Temporary Real Estate Open House
Signs.
Off premises temporary real estate open house signs
shall be permi t ted wi th in all res idential zones sub ject
to the following conditions:
A. No more than five off premise open house sign shall
be allowed for each residential open house which
occurs.
B.
No more than one sign shall be allowed to
on any interior parcel and no more than
corner lot (one per street frontage).
be placed
two on a
C. Off premise open house signs shall only be displayed
during daylight hours.
Signs shall be no larger than 4 square
shall be located at minimum of 3 feet
sidewalk or 10 feet from the curb or
pavement, where no sidewalk exists.
E. An off premise temporary real estate open house sign
shall only be permitted in conjunction with an open
house held for the resale of one single family
residence. Off premise signs advertising the sale
of more than one lot or more than two dwellings
constitutes a temporary real estate directional sign
sUbject to the regulations outlined in Section
6207(a).
D.
feet
from
edge
and
the
of
Copy display on off premise temporary
open house signs shall be limited to the
House,. the address of the property, the
company, and a directional arrow.
G. Off premise open house signs are prohibited within
the public right-of-way.
F.
real esta te
wor ds . Open
logo of the
-2-
.29c1~.f'
') /.AJL/
r.
SECTION I II:
full force and effect
adoption.
This ordinance shall take effect and be in
on the tl)irty-first day from and after its
presented by
Approved as to form by
.
(,/-1
/~ "v-r '- /(r<--<- -/
G~orge K'i:empl, Di~'ctor of
Planning
~
2498a
_3 _
..l9~" ~
, 'CI,(
(7 . r
My name is Heinz D. Seiler, 1425 - 2nd. Ave., Sp. 309, Palace Garden
Mobilhome Park, Chula Vista, CA. 91911. (Acknowledge Mayor, Councilmembers)
Since my statement would be longer than the 5 minutes allocated per speak-
er, I will address the council regarding an article printed in the U - T on
Sept. 5th. I will respond as though the article is true and correct in all
the statements therein. Some remarks will be quotes and others in essense
and some of my own observations. The column is bannered, quote, "NEW TRASH
FEE RANKLES HOMEOWNERS." Unquote. Homeowners are upset by the fee the City
council adopted last month, over a mandatory yard-waste collection increase.
The Mayor said he would like some constructive alternate way of other than
adding this fee and indicated he did not want any old cliches like, quote,
"
'just cut rates' and 'keep them (the fees)where they are". Unquote.
Had more phone calls on this issue, negative ones, than just about any other
topic to C0me before the council in recent memory, Nader said.
The strongest complaints came from the elderly, living on fixed incomes and
can't afford any more boosts, even minor ones, said Nader.
The article went on with some alternate ways offered, evidently the entire
council participating.
I can't say with proof posative, but it sounds to me like only CONVENTIONAL
type of housing, etc., OTHER than mobilehome parks.
I'm speaking on that
premise.
I live alone and am 76 years young and am under the so-called borderline
impoverished, with an fixed income under the $13.000.00 annual income that
the telephone company uses to qualify for "LIFELINE fixed phone rate. I coule
qualify for rental assistance as provided in C.V. Ord.Sect. 9.50 now, but
have not done so yet, but with this increase and the way Laidlaw evidently
continues to increase periodical, I will HAVE to take advantage of that rent-
al assistance offer! Had someone, Laidlaw or the park owner either called
a meeting that would have explained the WHOLE program, such as if I use
Laidlaw's trash holders, it would be another $3.00 MORE a month and that
if I used my own container, it would have a very short life expectancy,
I
as a friend of mine told me how two brandnew containers were damaged the
\
\
~-
\
. . r
- 2 -
FIRST TIME they were used. Lids are thrown on lawns, in the middle of drive-
ways, recyclables found in with regular trash thrown back on their lawns,
containers laying on their sides, sometimes rolling into streets, etc.
Mayor Nader would not have gotten so many phone calls, nor would I! Yes, I
too, as the GSMOL rep. in our park was inundated with similar calls! I fin-
ally said I don't know, but I'm going to find out.
I'll let you know then.
In the case of mobilehome owners, it takes me 3 to 4 weeks to fill a 30 gal.
container, YET, I'll be charged regardless $7.14 plus $1.10 next month whether
I use the service or not.
I would estimate 80% of mobilepark residents are
like my case! Retired, widowed and widowers, such as I, would be very unfairl)
charged for services not need!
I say, use the method of payment as was sug-
gested by someone in the article. Pay ONLY when services are used!
Or, how
about quote, "hiding"it in some form of sur, sales or use tax, say ~e on some
city tax and as Tolstoy put it, in essence, "I will sit on your back and I
will choke you, but I wish only the best for you, BUT. . I won't get off
your back!" Unquote. Get off our backs, C.V. City! We've had enough and we
won'take anymore, for we are mad as hell!
I am going to continue to give my recyclablesfNewspapers picked up by the
park owner's wife for the Scouts or Boys Club)to the charity of my choice
and if Laidlaw wants to paw through my garbage, well, have fun!
Each one of the council has been given a copy of my full text on this issue
and I hope you will read it and take into considerations our plight. We have
good friends on the council and we are 12 to 15,000 strong collectively, in
the 38 mobilhome. trailer parks in this city and we VOTE! We appreciate
what you ahve done in the past and hope you will consider our suggestions in
the future. Thank you.
-fl':-L-' ·
Associate
.::;) --.,., / r. . . ..
'\ 'I/, /~,L-4.1
Director, Region 7, GSMOL
~