HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1991/11/19
'I
.., dec':>re under penalty of perjury ~t! 81ft
cm"l'O' 0 j by the City of Chula Vista In the
O"If;e 0' the City Clerk and that I posted
Lis A:,enJa!Notice on the Bulletin Board at
Tuesday, November 19, 1991 the Public ~r~s BuiJdin,~ end at City l:falf on Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. ,. DATED, 1$-1-') / SIGNED 6f'~:::. l'ublic Services Building
Resrular Meetinsr of the City of Chula Vista City Council
.
CALLED TO ORDER
1.
CAlL THE ROLL:
Councilmembers Grasser Horton ~ Malcolm ~ Moore ~ Rindone ~
and Mayor Nader _'
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None submitted.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Oath of Office: Child Care Commission. William Canedo, Tonnette S. Joynes and Katy
Wright.
b. Proclamation to be presented by the Mayor to Athena Lee Bradley, Conservation
Coordinator. To declare the week of 11/16/91 "Household Hazardous Materials Awareness
Week".
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 thru 9)
The stoff ret:onIme1IIliJ rq:arrJing the following items Iistm under the Consent CaIendor will be enacted by the
CoundJ by one motion without discussion unless a Coundlmember, a member of the pub1k or City stoff requests
that the item be pul/ed for dist:ussion. lfyou wish to spetJk 011 one of these items, please fill out a "Request to
Speak Form" avaiJJlb1e in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk. prior to the meeting. (Complete the grt!m form
to spetJk in favor of the stoff ~ complete the pink form to spetJk in opposition to the stoff
recommendotion.) Items pulled frmn the Const!llt CaIendor will be discussed after Action Items and Boord and
Commission Recommendations Items pul/ed by the pub1k will be the first items of business.
5. WRI1TEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter of resignation from the International Friendship Commission _ Dianne K. Harmata.
Staff recommends that this resignation be accepted with regret.
b. Letter requesting information to assist the ChuIa Vista Mobilehome Owners Association in
evaluating their legal position under existing and future City ordinances _ Robert J. Jagiello,
Esq., Jagiello & Pech, Attorneys at Law, 1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1150, Los Angeles,
CA 90067. Since they are not currently representing any mobilehome park in town, staff
recommends they be notified on the procedures to obtain the City Council Agendas.
-._--~_._~--_._-
November 19, 1991
-2-
Agenda
6. ORDINANCE 2487 PCM-92-01 AMENDMENT TO 1liE RANCHO DEL HEY SPECIFIC PLAN
BOUNDARIES AND AN AMENDMENT TO SPAS I, n AND ill BY
INCORPORATING AND DESIGNATING COMMUNITY PURPOSE FAalJ1Y
SITES, RANCHO DEL HEY PARTNERSHIP (second readiIll!: and adoDtion) -
This is a request to amend the Rancho Del Rey SPA I boundaries to include
two parcels totaling 13.7 acres, and amendments to SPAs I, II and III in
order to incorporate and designate certain sites for community purpose
facilities as required by the recently adopted 'Community Purpose Facility
Ordinance.' Staff recommends Council place ordinance on second reading
and adoption. (Director of Planning)
7. ORDINANCE 248S AMENDING SECTION 19.58.110 OF 1liE CHULA VISTA MUNlaPAL CODE
TO DELETE CERTAIN PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CHURCHES
THAT PROVIDE TEMPORARY SHELTER FOR 1liE HOMELESS (first
readinl!) - The Interfaith Shelter Network has requested that the City
consider streamlining certain local procedural requirements which now
apply to churches that wish to participate in the program. The proposed
amendment would allow churches to provide shelter for the homeless for
two weeks per year without the necessity to secure a zoning permit or to
notice surrounding residents each year prior to providing the shelter
services. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on first reading.
(Director of Planning) Continued from the meeting of 11/1U91.
8. RESOLUTION 16418 APPROVlNGANAGREEMENTBETWEEN1liEaTYOFCHULAVlSTAAND
REMY AND THOMAS FOR LEGAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR 1liE
OTAY RANCH PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING 1liE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
SAID AGREEMENT - The work being requested of Remy & Thomas is
environmental legal review of the Otay Ranch Environmental Impact
Report. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Deputy City
Manager Krempl)
9. REPORT LOCAL LEGAL PREFERENCE POUCY AND ATTORNEY-CUENT CONFUCT
WAIVER - At the Redevelopment Agency meeting of 10/1/81, the City
Attorney was directed to consider a policy for giving preference to local
(i.e. San Diego County) attorneys in recruiting outside legal assistance,
including therein, ways to evaluate and, if appropriate, waive Attorney-
Client conflict of interest situations that potential legal advisors may have
between providing service to the City and providing services to private
existing or pre-existing, third party clients. Staff recommends acceptance
of the report. (City Attorney)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
November 19,1991
.3.
Agenda
PUBUC HEARINGS AND ELATED RESOUTnONS AND ORDINANCI!S
The following items hove been advmised fJ1Id/or J10Sfal as publU: ~ as rrquired by lilw. If you wish to speak
to any iton, please fill out the "Request to Speok Fonn" availJlb1e in the 10bby fJ1Id submit it to the City Clerk prior
to the meeting. (ConJplek the green fonn to speak in favor of the stIljf m:ommendalion; complete the pink fonn
to speak in opposition to the stIljf~) Commmts are IimiUtl to five minutes per individuol.
10.
PUBUC HEARING
CONSIDERATION OF PREUMlNARY SOURCE REDUCTION AND
RECYCUNG ELEMENT (SRRE) - As required by AB939, the report presents
an overview of the process and timetable for reviewing and commenting
on the preliminary SRRE and the proposed recycling, source reduction, and
composition programs for the City. Comments and questions from the
general public, to be reconciled in the final SRRE, will be received at the
public hearing. Presentation of the final SRRE for adoption by the City
Council is expected in February or March 1992, or upon completion of
environmental review. Staff recommends Council accept the report and
direct staff to: 1) continue to accept and reconcile comments from the
general public and appropriate agencies until 12/31191, or until any later
date deemed necessary by staff; 2) begin appropriate environmental review
as required by CEQA; and 3) return to the City Council for adoption of a
final SRRE at such time as all public comments have been responded to
and/or incorporated in the document, and the environmental review has
been completed. (City Manager)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is QIJ opportunity for the gmeral publU: to address the City Council on any subject 1fUlt1er within the Council's
jurisdU:tion tIuJt is not QIJ item on this agmda. (Stale lilw, however, generally prohibits the City Council from
taking action on any issues not induded 011 the posted agmda.) If you wish to address the Council on sw:h a
subject, please complete the yellow "Request to Speok Under Oral ComnumU:otioIIs Fonn" availJlb1e in the lobby
fJ1Id submit it to the City Clerk prior to the muting. Those who wish to speok, p/eI1se give your ~ fJ1Id address
for reconI purposes fJ1Id follow up aaion. Your time is IimiUtl to three minutes per speaker.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agendil are expected to eIidt substantial discussions fJ1Id deliberations by the
Cowu:iI, SIIlff, or members of the general publU:.. The items will be considered individually by the Council fJ1Id stIljf
recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the a1tenuJtive. Those who wish to speok, please fill out
a "Request to Speok" fonn availJlb1e in the lobby fJ1Id submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Publil;
comments are IimiUtl to five minutes.
11.
REPORT
REGARDING INCREASING VARIOUS TAXES AND FEES RELATED TO
BIlLBOARDS, SPECIAL EVENTS AND CARD ROOMS.
RESOLUTION 16419 ABATING TIiE SCHEDULED CALENDAR YEAR 1992 BUSINESS UCENSE
TAX INCREASE AS PROVIDED IN ORDINANCE 2408 - In October 1990,
Council approved a business license tax rate increase to be phased in over
a three year period and also provided for annual public hearings. This
public hearing is for the purpose of discussing and reviewing the second
November 19,1991
-4-
Agenda
year scheduled increase. Staff recommends that Council conduct the public
hearing and provide for implementation of second year business license tax
rate increase. (Director of Finance) Continued from the meeting of
11/5/91.
12.
REPORT
REGARDING TIlE CURRENT STATIJS OF MOBILEHOME PARK CLOSURES
IN TIlE CITY, AND TIlE PARK OWNERS' AND OTY'S RESPONSIBILl1Y AS
OU11.lNED IN TIlE RELOCATION ORDINANCE - The City has an ordinance
which requires park owners to provide relocation assistance if they close
their park. Currently, two parks are closing and the residents are being
displaced. The residents have requested that Council review the policy as
it pertains to park closures. Staff recommends acceptance of the report.
(Director of Community Development)
13.
REPORT
GRANTING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (DIF) CREDIT FOR RIGHf-OF-
WAY DEDICATION, KELTON PROJECT, SOU1HEAST CORNER OF OTAY
LAKES ROAD AND EAST "H" STREET - At the 8/27/91 meeting, Council
directed staff to prepare a report relative to the applicant's request for DIF
credit for right-of-way dedication which was a condition of their
development. Staff was instructed to consider what had been required on
past projects and was directed to include a discussion of impacts which
might result from granting DIF credit for right-of-way dedication. Staff
recommends Council accept the report and require full dedication with no
DIF credit given for said dedication. (Director of Public Works) Continued
from the meeting of 10/22/91. STAFF REOUESTS ITEM BE REMOVED
FROM TIlE AGENDA
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the City Council wUl consider items whidl Mve been fOl'Wf1Tded to them for consideralion by one
of the City's Boards, Commissions fJIIdlor CommiItus.
None submitted.
ITEMS PULLED FROM TIlE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the City Council wUl discuss items whidl Mve been rmrowJ from the Consent CaIouJm. Agenda
items pu1kd at the request of the public wUl be consitJerrd prior to those pu1kd by CoundImembers. Public
commmJs art! limited to five minutes per indivitlum.
OTIIER BUSINESS
14. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(s)
a. Scheduling of meetings.
November 19, 1991
-5-
Agenda
b. Letter from City of Carlsbad offering to make a presentation to Chula Vista City Council on
the need of a temporary trash diversion plan.
15. MAYOR'S REPORTCSl
a. Growth Management Commission Appointments.
16. COUNCIL COMMENTS - None.
ADJOURNMENf
The City Council will meet in a closed session immediately following the Council meeting to discuss:
Instructions to negotiators regarding personnel pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6.
Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - SR-125 Proposal.
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the Regular City Council Meeting on November
26, 1991 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
A Special Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the City Council
meeting.
A Special Meeting of the Industrial Development Authority will be held immediately following the
Redevelopment Agency meeting.
November IS, 1991
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
John D. Goss, City Manage~
City Council Meeting of November 19, 1991
This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City
Council meeting scheduled for Tuesday, November 19, 1991. Comments regarding
Written Communications are as follows:
Sa. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT DIANNE HARMATA'S RESIGNATION FROM THE INTER-
NATIONAL FRIENDSHIP COMMISSION BE ACCEPTED WITH REGRET AND THAT A
LETTER OF APPRECIATION BE SENT.
5b. This is a letter from Jagiello & Pech, Attorneys at Law, requesting
information to assist the Chula Vista Mobilehome Owners Association
in evaluating their legal position under existing and future City
ordinances. Staff is not aware that this law firm is currently representing
any mobilehome parks in Chula Vista and therefore IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION
TO NOTIFY JAGIELLO & PECH OF HOW THEY MAY OBTAIN COUNCIL AGENDAS.
JDG:mab
~~r?-
r~~
~~~~
""","'-
CITY OF
CHUlA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
November 11, 1991
Mr. William Canedo
543 Mariposa" Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Dear Mr. Canedo:
<
During the City Council meeting of November 5, 1991, you were appointed to fill a vacancy on the City's
Child Care CommissIon. My congratulations on your appointment to this important commission.
The Oath of Office will be administered by the City Clerk during the regular City Council meeting on
November 19,1991. It will be held at 6:00 p.m. in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue. In
the event you are unable to attend this meeting, please call the City Clerk's office at 691-5041 and she
will gladly make other arrangements with you so that you can take the oath.
The Secretary to our Child Care Commission, will send you information regarding the meeting dates.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact her at 691-5296.
Conflict of Interest - According to the Fair Political Practices Commission, all local government agencies
are required to adopt conflict of interest codes designating certain positions which entail the making, or
participation in the making, of decisions which may affect financial interests. The Commission to which
you are appointed has been identified in Chula Vista's Conflict of Interest Code and you are required to
file a Statement of Economic Interest Form 730 upon assuming office (within 30 days of swearing in),
yearly by April 1, and a leaving office statement. Failure to file these documents with the City Clerk carries
a state-mandated fine of $10 per day. You may wish to review a blank or sample completed form prior
to accepting office. The City Clerk's Office stands ready to help you with the forms at any time.
Thank you for your continued interest in serving the City of Chula Vista.
Sincerely,
_r: 4~~~
Tim Nader
Mayor
LMM:dv
appoint
cc: City Clerk
Kim Tefft, Secretary
t/a. .,. J
276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5044
~~f?
~
~~~~
- - --
CllY OF
CHUlA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
November 11, 1991
Ms. Tonnette.5. Joynes
1424 Hilttop Drive #2
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Dear Ms. Joynes:
During the City Council meeting of November 5, 1991, you were appointed to fill a vacancy on the City's
Child Care Commission. My congratulations on your appointment to this important commission.
The Oath of Office will be administered by the City Clerk during the regular Ctty Council meeting on
November 19, 1991. It will be held at 6:00 p.m. in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue. In
the event you are unable to attend this meeting, please call the City Clerk's office at 691-5041 and she
will gladly make other arrangements wtth you so that you can take the oath.
The Secretary to our Child Care Commission, will send you information regarding the meeting dates.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact her at 691-5296.
Conflict of Interest - According to the Fair Political Practices Commission, all local government agencies
are required to adopt conflict of interest codes designating certain positions which entail the making, or
participation in the making, of decisions which may affect financial interests. The Commission to which
you are appointed has been identified in Chula Vista's Conflict of Interest Code and you are required to
file a Statement of Economic Interest Form 730 upon assuming office (within 30 days of swearing in),
yearly by April 1 , and a leaving office statement. Failure to file these documents with the City Clerk carries
a state-mandated fine of $10 per day. You may wish to review a blank or sample completed form prior
to accepting office. The City Clerk's Office stands ready to help you with the forms at any time.
Thank you for your continued interest in serving the City of Chula Vista.
Sincerely,
_-r: 4~~~
Tim Nader
Mayor
LMM:dv
appoint
cc: City Clerk
Kim Tefft, Secretary
276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA vlsTi'!:c'F~d 919101(619) 691-5044
~JI?
:-~
~~~...~
"""~""'"-.-;
....""-..........
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
TIM NADER
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
November 11, 1991
Ms. Katy Wright
3605 Bonita Verde Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91902
Dear Ms. Wright;
;
During the city council meeting of November 5, 1991, you were
appointed to another four year term of office on the Child Care
Commission. Your second term of office will expire on June 30,
1995. My personal congratulations to you on your reappointment.
On behalf of the City Council, I wish to express our deep
appreciation for the outstanding contributions you have made to the
city of Chula vista in the past. I am confident the next four
years will continue to be most successful for you and the Child
Care Commission.
Sincerely,
4~~1-
Tim Nader
Mayor
_r:
-
TN:dv
reappoint
cc: city Clerk
Kim Tefft, Secretary
,/a.-5
276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 919101(619) 691-5044
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item o/iJ
Meeting Date 11/19/91
ITEM TITLE:
Proclaiming the week of November 17 throu9h November 23, 1991 as
"Household Hazardous Materials Awareness Week" in the City of Chu1a
Vista
SUBMITTED BY: Conservation Coordinator ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manag~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes___No-X-)
BACKGROUND: Every day Chula Vistans unknowingly threaten our environment by throwing
out household hazardous waste with the regular trash or pouring it down the sewer or
storm drain. When improperly disposed, these products can destroy our environment by
polluting the air, water, and soil.
RECOMMENDATION: Accept the report and make the proclamation (See Attachment A for a
draft of the proclamation).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
It is dangerous and illegal to dispose of household hazardous waste improperly. State
law (AB 939 and AB 2707) makes cities responsible for developing a plan to educate
residents about proper disposal of household hazardous waste and provide residents with
a safe program for disposal. City staff work in conjunction with the San Diego
Regional Household Hazardous Materials Program to increase awareness in the Chu1a Vista
community and promote the proper disposal of household hazardous wastes (See Attachment
B for a flier developed by staff for Chu1a Vista residents).
Additionally, the County of San Diego is now conducting random load checks of vehicles
entering area landfills including commercial, industrial, and residential cars and
trucks. Individuals or companies whose vehicles are found to contain hazardous
materials may be liable for fines of up to $25,000 per day.
In an effort to raise public awareness of the dangers of improper disposal of household
hazardous waste, the County of San Diego, Board of Supervisors has proclaimed November
as "Househo 1 d Hazardous Waste Awareness Month." In conjunct ion with the Board 's
declaration, and in an effort to further increase awareness about household hazardous
materials in Chu1a Vista, staff recommends that the week of November 17 through
November 23, 1991 as "Household Hazardous Materials Awareness Week" in the City. The
Conservation Coordinator will accept the proclamation on behalf of the City and its
citizens.
FISCAL IMPACT: None as a result of this report.
J./b- J
fiTTY! (fI/J1ENT II
PROCLAllATION
PROCLADIING THB WEBB: OP
NOVEMBER 17 THROUGH NOVEMBER 23, 1991 AS
"HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS MATBRIALS AWARENESS WEBK"
IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, Chula Vistans are becoming increasingly concerned about the problems
caused by the disposal of toxics in our wastestreami and
WHEREAS, the County of San Diego, Board of Supervisors has proclaimed November
as "Household Hazardous Waste Awareness Month"; and
WHEREAS, materials considered hazardous are common in households throughout the
region. Household hazardous waste is the unused or leftover portion of products
containing toxic chemicals. This includes any product labeled with the words
CAUTION, WARNING, DANGER, POISON, FLAMMABLE, CORROSIVE, or REACTIVE, such as
paint, motor oil, cleaners, and insecticides.
WHEREAS, many Chula Vista residents are unaware of the proper disposal methods
of household hazardous materials, and nontoxic alternatives:
NOW, THEREFORE, I, TIM NADER, Mayor of the City of Chula Vista, California do
hereby proclaim the week of November 17 through November 23, 1991 as "HOUSEHOLD
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AWARENESS WEEK" in the City of Chula Vista. FURTHER, I
encourage all Chula Vistans to become more aware of the potential problems
associated with improper disposal of household hazardous materials, and dispose
of these materials in the proper manner.
lfh '-2
ArTIJCHlfleJI/3.
HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Throwing It Out The Right Way
Household hazardous wastes are the discarded, unused or leftover portions of
household products containing toxic chemicals. These products include: pesticides,
insecticides, fertilizers, paint, car waxes/polishes, used motor oil, car batteries,
gasoline, antifreeze, flea powders, pool chemicals, dyes, furniture polish, bleach, and
cleaners containing chemicals such as acids and solvents. Any product which is labeled
WARNING, CAUTION, POISONOUS, TOXIC, FLAMMABLE, CORROSIVE,
REACTIVE, or EXPLOSIVE is considered hazardous.
California law classifies these and similar household products as hazardous materials. Household
hazardous materials require special treatment because improper use and/or disposal of products or
containers may damage the environment and the public. It is dangerous, and illegal, to
dispose of unused, leftover portions of household hazardous materials
improperly.
Chula Vista residents are encouraged to use safe, non-toxic products for house-
hold and garden use. For information about household hazardous materials and safe, non-toxic
alternatives to household hazardous materials, call the Environmental Health Coalition at (619) 235-
0281, 1717 Kettner Blvd., Suite 100, San Diego, CA 92101.
If you have hazardous materials around your home, proper disposal is convenient
for Chula Vista residents. Here's how:
Call the County of San Diego, Household Hazardous Materials Program at
(619) 338-2267 and ask for a "Control Number" to dispose of household hazardous
materials. County staff will ask you what you intend to dispose and the approximate quantities of each
material. The County Control Number will allow you to take your materials to a disposal facility in Chula
Vista. The facility will recycle and dispose of the materials properly. Disposal service is funded by the
County of San Diego and is free of charge to residents.
INFORMACION SOBRE SUBSTANCIAS TOXICAS
Para mas informacion sobre substancias toxicas lIame al Environmental Health Coalition: 235-0281
Centro para el control de Envenenamientos: 543-6000
Contaminacion del aire en interiores American Lung Association: 297-3901
Salud y Seguridad de trabajadores HESIS: (por cobrar) 415-540-3014
RECYCLING AND COMPOSTING
For information about recycling and composting in Chula Vista, call the City's Conservation
Coordinator at 691-5031. For information on recycling items not picked up at the curb, call the
I Love a Clean San Diego County Hotline at (619) 270-8189 or 1-800-237-2583.
Printed on Recycled Paptr
,.,-..s
I
ffott~
fl'l.._.____OF
NOVEIIlIIIR t't'f'HROijQH ~ II, ..., AS
"HOUSEHOLD HUAN:ICU$ IMTIRMLS 4WAAEMU WI!IIK"
IN 11tE CITY OF CHUI.A IISTA, CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS. QUa __.. bao...... . . _L.,AI COI_l>I" lhellopo.J
of toJdcs In our h.1tI_u; .-xl
WHEREAS, Ihe CaulIw 01 SIn DIogo. _ 01 8uperMors '- procIIImed
November. .HouIehoId.H8zIrdou8 w.te ,.,.___ Mcx1tt'f; m
WHEREAS, _ oo.~ __ .. oommon In _s
throughout tho region. _ _ _Is tho unuoed or __ portion 01
~ ~"""'" lade che_. lhIa Inc:Uleo wry product _ wiIh tho words
CAUTION. WARNING. DANGER. POISON. FU\MlIABlE. CORROSIVE. or REACTIVE,
auct1 ... paint, maIor 01, claonara. _ i'- J' . .... _
WHEREAS, "'""Y Chula _ -.. .. ....-. 01 tho proper dIsposaJ
methodsol___._....-c_:
NOW, TItEIlEFORE, I, TIm _. Mayor 01.. ~0I QUa V,., ~, do
hIr.tl\I pracIlIim tho _ 01 __ t7 tI-.gh __ 23. ,., ...
'IlOU8EHOUI HiUllRDO\IlIIIA18IALlS AW_ I .... III ... Clll' 01 CIUa
Io1ola. fUIlTHER. I -... II QUa___~llocl-. _ _ 01.. pIMRlIaI
po-... -~...... .....lrnpnIJlItdlepaoll.. ~ -._ 10
dIspooe 01 u.e ..-wo .t1i' {l!llpIr __. . '
- .f>.... -'. .-.' .
:D4IdtfiS:.Sthtiitf5'- Nov<aber 19~
~A.t-.-
~or5~e Ciff!f CIix!a 'V~
~h-.5'
I
Ri=" l\/FD
\,-<-v . --...
November 4, 1991
"91 NIJIJ II P 2 :06
cny iF c ,\STA
CITY (-' ;'"", c~:;CF
vL.....-" -.. -'
Effective immediatiiy, I hereby resign my office as C
of the International Friendship Commission. ' ommieeioner
IJ-k~ rK ~
WRlnEN COMMUNICATIONS 0/
~ ;;/}'/; '//
o :!1; (~) _ /~0~~~
Ct) J -5A-/
-....
1800 IIl/ENUE OF THE STARS
SUITE 1150
IDS ANGELES. CA 90061
(213) 277.7324
FAX ZT7-7924
JAGIELLD & PECH
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
28200 HIGHWAY 189, SUITE F.290
LAKE ARROWHEAD VILLAGE
1'0. BOX B79
LAKE ARROWHEAD. CA 92352
(714) 336-5345
FAX (714) 336-5350
November 5, 1991
~ ~ @ ~ D \.7!fI:' '. .
I J " " '
......--,'1..'.
W ~~ 8199i :~j'
CIT>'""'.'"1' ..,.,,~
'. ~,!Ul\V L l;. i H..-t;J
CH. ,le V!SJA. cr.
MAYOR TIM NADER
City of Chula vista
276 4th Avenue
Chula vista, CA 91910
CITY COUNCILMEMBER DAVID
City of Chula vista
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
!".ALCOLM
CITY COUNCILMEMBER GLEN
City of Chula vista
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
MOORE
CITY COUNCILMEMBER JERRY
City of Chula vista
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RINDONE
on \()
=i~ ~
-<-< :;0
~ rr1
0
~ ""1
. N .,<:
'IJ fn
Ul 0
(.j
~
CITY COUNCILMEMBER SHIRLEY HORTON-GRASSER
City of Chula vista
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor Nader and city Councilmembers:
This office has been retained by the Chula vista Mobilehome
Owners Association to evaluate their legal position under
existing and future city ordinances.
As you may know, we represented Mrs. Hall in the landmark
rent control case of Hall v. City of Santa Barbara, and now
represent the parkowners in Yee v. city of Escondido, presently
pending in the United states Supreme Court.
It is of the utmost concern to us that we have an
opportunity to evaluate proposed City legiSlation in order to
determine the potential impact upon the rights of our clients.
To that end, we respectfully request that any information on
proposed changes to Ordinances affecting the operation of
mobilehome parks, the rents charg~d for spaces, and the like, be
CCfJ!J;11)V WRlnEN COMMUNICATIONS.
VI, 'p L-~' S"v. 5/;-/ r /~?j1/
Mayor Nadar and city Councilmembers
City of Chula vista
November 5, ~99~
Page Two
"
I
/
,
/
!
forwarded to this office, so that we might have an opportunity to
respond to the proposed changes.
I thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation.
very truly yours,
~ IIt2lO
RJJ/kc
cc: Richard Ybarra
,
5'b'oZ
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Meeting Date ll:u::n
PCM-9~-0 O~Amendment to the Rancho del Rey Specific Plan
bound s and an amendment to SPAs I, II and III by
insg rating and designating community purpose facility sites
~ncho del Rey Partnership
~~~\:>ordinance .2. '187 Approving PCM-92-01
SUBMI~~Y: Director of Planning ~~
R~ED BY: City Manager 6{.,<;1.
Item~. ~
/J/If/l1
ITEM TITLE:
(4/Sths Vote: Yes___No-X-)
The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Rancho Del Rey SPA I
boundari es to -i nc 1 ude two parce 15 total i ng 13.7 acres and amendments to SPAs
I, II, and III in order to incorporate and designate certain sites for
community purpose facil ities as required by the recently adopted "Community
Purpose Facility Ordinance (No. 2452A)."
The Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial Study, IS-92-01, of
potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the
project. Based on the attached Initial Study and comments thereon. if any,
the Coordinator has concluded that there would be no significant environmental
impacts and recommends adoption of the Negative Declaration issued on IS-92-01.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the ordinance approving PCM-92-01.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On
Commission voted 5-0 to recommend that
accordance with Resolution PCM-92-01.
October 9, 1991, the Planning
Council approve the amendments in
DISCUSSION:
1. Community Purpose Facility Ordinance
In April 1991, the City Council adopted an ordinance (No. 2452A) amending
Title 19 (Zoning Ordinance) of the Municipal Code requiring that
community purpose facility sites be set aside within the Planned
Community (PC) zones. The amount of land to be set aside for those uses
is 1.39 net usable acres for every 1,000 population projected within the
project boundaries.
2. Rancho Del Rey SPA III and Tentative Map
In March 1991, prior to the adoption of the Community Purpose Facility
Ordinance, the City Council conditionally approved Rancho Del Rey
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) III. One of the conditions (#17) was,
"Rancho Del Rey SPAs I, II, and III shall comply with any future
ordinance of the City that would set requirements for designation of
community purpose facility acreage. The commitment shall be satisfied
prior to the recordation of any final map for the SPA III area."
.J.&--r /, ../
Page 2, Item ~ ~.J.. J
Meeting Date 11, .c., H IV/~'/
In July 1991, the City Council conditionally approved the tentative map
for Rancho Del Rey SPA Ill, CVT 92-02. Again, one of the conditions was
compliance with the CPF ordinance with the added proviso that "Areas of
consideration for qualification must be within the areas of SPAs I, II or
Ill."
3. Estimated Population of Rancho Del Rey
In order to determine the amount of land which must be set aside for
conununity purpose facil ities, the potential population of the project
must first be determined. The applicant has submitted the following
tabl e.
TABLE I
Rancho Del Rev Estimated PODulation
Persons Estimated
Residential Area Units* DU** PODulation
SPA I Apts. (R-15) 500 2.192 1,096
SPA I Condo. (R-14) 147 2.794 411
SPA I Condo.. (R-13) 138 2.794 386
SPA I Condo. (R-12) 180 2.794 503
SPA III Seniors (R-7) 588 2.192 1,289
SPA III Condo. (R-6) 228 2.794 637
SFD (all SPAs) ~ 3.213 z.....m
TOTALS 4,069 11 ,608
*Count from most current approval (SPA Plan, TM or site plan).
**Population factors from Chula Vista Planning Department based on
January I, 1990 State Department of Finance figures
Based on an estimated population of 11,608, the Rancho Del Rey
project should contain 16.1 acres (11,608/1,000 X 1.39 . 16.1)
4. Conununity Purpose Facility Sites
The applicant has identified five (5) potential sites totaling 25.2 acres
gross, 19.7 acres net, for conununity purpose .facilities (see Exhibit A).
Two of the sites are not owned by the applicant and are currently outside
the boundaries of Rancho Del Rey project. However, the two sites are
located within the El Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan and are zoned PC
(Planned Conununity) the same as the Rancho Del Rey Project. Part of the
applicant's request is to include these two parcels within the boundaries
of SPA 1.
J-fH.. ".2
~~i.oio.li'~_.~,
Page 3, Item W''' ./.
Meeting Date~ ''1''/)1'
TABLE II
Parcel Acreaae Statistics
Parcel/Site
Gross Acres Net Acres
1. SPA I - YMCA
2. SPA I - Pilgrim Lutheran
3. SPA I - Methodist Church-
4. SPA II Site
5. SPA III Site
TOTAL ACRES
4.5 4.0
10.0 6.1
3.7 3.5
5.0 5.0
..l..Q L.l
25.2 gross ac. 19.7 net ac.
Based on the above table, the proposed net acreage exceeds the community
purpose facil ity acreage requirement by 3.6 acres (19.7 acres proposed
minus 16.1 acres required).
5. Site Description
The following is a description of each proposed site.
Site #II - This is a 4.5 acre parcel with 4.0 usable acres located at the
southeast quadrant of Paseo Ranchero and the easterly segment of Rancho
Del Rey Parkway within SPA I. The site has been donated to the local
YMCA by the developer and will be developed with a community recreation
facil i ty.
Site #2 - This is a 10.0 acre parcel with 6.1 usable acres located at the
northwest corner of East H Street and Buena Vista Way. The property is
owned by the Pilgrim Evangelical Lutheran Church which has obtained
prel imi nary approval s to buil d a church/school compl ex. The developer
and the church have negot i ated 1 and exchanges because of road
alignments. The church has agreed to being included within the
boundaries of SPA I.
Site #3 - This is a 3.7 acre parcel with 3.5 usable acres located at the
southeast corner of East H Street and Paseo Ranchero. The property was
owned by the Chula Vista Elementary School District when the Rancho Del
Rey project was approved and was not included within the project
boundaries. It has since been purchased by the developer who is in
process of selling it to a Methodist Church. This site is also proposed
to be included in SPA I.
Site #14 - This is an entirely usable 5.0 acre parcel located at the
southwest corner of Huerto Place and the westerly segment of Rancho Del
Rey Parkway opposite the easterly terminus of Terra Nova Drive. The site
_ is located within SPA II and has been designated on the plan for
quasi-public use. The actual use is yet to be determined.
~ ~-3
Page 4, Item ~ ,J al
Meeting Date n:u;nl't'J';' I
Site #5 - This is a 2.0 acre parcel with 1.1 usable acres located at the
northeast corner of Paseo ladera and Paseo Entrada. The property is
located within SPA III and has been designated on the plan for a
community purpose facility. Actual use of the property is st111 to be
determined.
6. District Regulations
Community facilities, public and quasi-public uses within the Rancho Del
Rey project are allowed in the areas of the plan designated as open
space. There are three categories of" open space and the uses may be
permitted, not permitted, or subject to a conditional use permit and
administrative review. Within the open space areas, other uses besides
community purpose facilities may also be permitted.
The applicant has submitted district regulations for areas designated for
community purpose facilities. The proposed regulations restrict said
designated areas to defined community purpose facilities and establishes
approval procedures, setbacks, parking requirements, and sign criteria.
ANALYSIS:
1. The community purpose facility acreage requirement for the Rancho Del Rey
project is 16.1 net usable acres (11,608 population - 1,000 x 1.39). The
app 1 i cant has proposed fi ve sites wi th a combi ned net usable acreage of
19.7 acres, exceeding the requirement by 3.6 acres. However, in order to
achieve this total, two sites must be included within the boundaries of
the planned community. The proposed sites are within the El Rancho Del
Rey Specific Plan and the developer has either owned or been involved
with a land exchange with the specific properties. Therefore, the
developer has had some vested interest with the proposed sites and their
inclusion into the project boundaries is reasonable.
2. From a locational perspective, each site is well suited for the proposed
uses. The sites are ei ther located on a major street or res i dent i a 1
collector and therefore, have good access. It is, therefore, recommended
that the proposed request be approved.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
WPC 9931P
J~~4/ ""If
1 YMCA
2 PILGRIM LUTHERAN-
8 METHODIST CHURCH.
" SPA D SITE
i SPA UI SITE
PF Sites
Cornrnuility PurpoS!:t FacDities
J
.
~QlFSites
E3 SPA Ilculdns
---..
t:.
. PAJlCILI ADIIID 'J'O IPA I
..
..... .
..... EXHIBIT eeA"
RANCHO DEL REY
SPA AMENDMENT/REZONE
LOCATOR
COMMUNITY PURPOSE
FACILITIES
/.. /,,,. <'
~ .:;J -:..;7
,
] ~
"J
..
.
EXHIBIT CtB".
I
.
..
%1. COJIKUBI'1'Y .UJlPOSB I'ACILI'1'Y DISTltIC'1' aBGOLATIOIIS
"
/
&. .UJlPOSB
,!be Community Purpose Facility (CPF) District is establishe~ to
provi~e desiqnate~ aites for specific public .n~ quasi-public uses
which are necessary to ..et the social, spiritual, and service
n.e~s of the r.sident population. '1'hese sit.s are provide~ to .eet
the a~opted stan~ar~ of 1.39 acres of cOlllJllunity purpose faciliti.s
per 1000 proj.ct population (Ordinance 110.2452).
a. .DXJftBD VSBS
Only those uses which .eet the specifications of "community Purpose
Facility" below ahall be permitte~ 1n the CPF District.
"ColllJllunity Purpose Facility" .eans a structure for assembly,
as well as ancillary uses such as a parking lot and out~oor
activity areas, within a planne~ cOlllJllunity, inclu~ing but not
limite~ to those which serve the following type. of purposes:
1. Boy scouts, girl scouts, an~ other similar orqanizations;
2.
Social and human service activities, such as Alcoholics
Anonymous;
( )
'.-/
3. Services for homeless persons;
4. Services for military personnel during the holidays;
5. Senior care an~ recreation;
6. Worship, spiritual qrowtb and development, and teaching
of traditional family values; and,
,. Day care facilities an~/or private schools which are
ancillary to any of the above.
c. .ROPDTY DBVBLOPKDT .TAlmUDS
All ~evelopment within the CPF District shall receive site plan an~
architectural approval from the Cbula Vista Desiqn Review COlllJllit-
tee. Dimensions shown on the approve~ site plan shall constitute
the applicable development standards for the project, except that
the following minimum standards shall apply where a CPF District
a~joins a residential district:
1.
A minimum 10 foot wide landscaped strip or minimum 6 foot
solid wall or fence shall be maintaine~ on any property
line abutting a residential zone.
1
Tf'/,-(,
.
.
I,
,"
2. Said wall or rence lIIay be reduced to 42 J.nches in a
landscaped rront yard .etback which does Dot contain
parking racilities.
3. Front, rear and side yard .etbacks shall be a minimum of
20 reet.
D~ OPP-8TU:BT puxnrCJ UQ1J%1lZKDT8
All off-street parking areas shall comply with the provisions of
Section XIII.3 of the Rancho del Rey SPA I PC Regulations with
regard to space size and veometrics. Parking areas within the CPF
District shall also comply with the Special Requir_ents for
J.mprovements, landscaping and lighting indicated in that section.
The relevant Performance Standards of Section XIII.4 .hall also
apply.
Off-street parking shall be provided a~cording to the following
schedule:
lZU
1.
Day nurseries,
day care schools
2.
Convalescent andl
or nursing homes
3.
Churches, convents,
monasteries, other
religions instit-
utions, and other
spaces of public
assembly
4.
Other uses
Handicanned Parkina Reauirementa
MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING REOUIRED
1 space/staff member plus 1 space/5
5 children or 1 space/10 children if
adequate drop-Off facilities are
provided. Drop-Off facilities must
be designed to accommodate a contin-
uous flow of passenger vehicle.
safely loading and unloading chil-
dren. The adequacy of drop-Off
facili tie. shall be determined by
the Director of Planning.
1 space/3 beds.
1 space/3.5 seats within the main
auditorium or 1 space/45 square
feet of gross floor area within
the main auditorium where there
are DO fixed seats.
As determined by the Director of
Planning
Handicapped parking requirements are established by the State
of California. The parking standards contained in this
section are identical to those estabUshed by the state. Any
future change in the State handicapped parking standards shall
J
Jfl-.Y t"7
.
.
"
.' ,
. preempt the requirements of thb .ection. Handicapped parkinq
spaces shall be provided for all uses at the followinq rate
and shall be counted toward.the off-street parkinq require-
.ent:
Humber of Automobile
S'O&ces Provided
Humber of Handicapped
S1)BC.. Reauired
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7 + 1 for each 200 addi-
tional automobile spaces
provided
5. Handicapped parkinq spaces required by thb section shall
count toward fulfillinq standard automobile parkinq
requirements.
1 - 40
41 - 80
81 - 120
121 - 160
161 - 300'
301 - 400
401 - 500
Over 500
B. BIGlHS
Uses within the CPF District shall be allowed the following siqns:
1. All sites shall be allowed freestanding, monument siqns
as permitted within the Rancho del Rey Planned Community.
2. Churches: One wall siqn, not to exceed 30 square feet in
area, and one bulletin board or announcement siqn, not to
exceed 24 square feet in area and 10 feet in heiqht. Any
bulletin board or announcement sign not attached flat
aqainst the buildinq shall maintain a 10 foot setback
from all streets.
3. Other uses: one wall sign, not to exceed 30 square feet
in area, and one bulletin board or announcement siqn, not
to exceed 50 square feet in area and 12 feet in heiqht.
Any bulletin board or announcement sign not attached flat
aqainst the buildinq shall maintain a 10 foot setback
from all streets.
4. Special event signs:
a. Any use may request a permit for the temporary use
of a siqn announcinq a special event. Wall or
freestandinq signs of paper, cardboard, plastic or
fabric are permitted, provided that the toninq
administrator finds that the copy, color, and
desiqn of the sign will not adversely affect the
I
~~-y
\
(.
.
I
.
.
order, amenity, or residential enjoyment of the
neighborhood in which it 18 located.
b. Special event signs shall be located on the premi8-
es of the institution or organization having the
special event and shall be not lIIore than five feet
in height, nor 1II0re than 25 square feet in area.
Freestanding signs shall lIIaintain a lIIinilllWD 10 foot
setback frolll any street. One sign on each street
frontage shall be allowed.
c. Upon application for a permit, the applicant shall
submit a statement and diagram noting the nature of
the special event and indicating. the location,
size, copy, and colors of the proposed sign. A
permit for a special event sign shall be valid for
seven consecutive days. Not 1II0re than six special
event sign permits shall be issued to anyone
institution or organization per calendar year.
.
~. SPECIAL ADMINISTRATION
Notwithstanding any provision of these regulations, the conditional
use approval (City Council Resolution No. 12316; PCC-84-11) granted
to the parcel at the northwest corner of East -H" Street and Buena
Vista Way shall remain in force and full effect. The Master Plan
approval granted by the Chula Vista Design Review Committee for
this parcel (PCM-87-14) shall also remain J,n full effect. No
portion of these regulations shall be interpreted to contradict,
negate, or otherwise 1II0dify the approvals granted for the churchl
school facility proposed for this site which is wholly consistent
with the purposes of this district.
..
~ ~"
.
.
.
.. ..
.
'l7lE CITY OF CBULA. nsT.( P..cRlY DISCLOSURE ST'(TEMENT
StatemeDt of disclosure of certain ownership interests, paymeDts, br campaign contributions, on an matters
. which wm require discretioDlJ)' action on the part of the City Council, planni"i CommiuiOD, and an other
official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: ,
1. IJst the lWDeI of aU persons having a tmancial interest in the contract, i.e., contractor,
subcontractor, material supplier.
A. .~i'tfn ~nf~fe.. Ine.. Nltton.' City. CA l11SO
B. ~ C.Df~.l Dev.loDment Crouc. . substdlry .f ~ Feder.l SlvlnOI end Loin. San Dfego, CA 92101
.
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list tht DlUDes of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership
interest in the partnership. '---. '. '. .
McMillin "'-nltfn.lnc.a' McMillin Folly Tru.t....cey L. 'Vonnl. L. IlcIllllln Tru._..('O\)
M.rk D. McMIllIn. Laurl. A. R.y , Scott M. McMIllin (20\ ..ch) Homo C.plt., Dev.looment Croup. lDll\ by
Home F.d.r.' S.vlngs' Lo.n, S.n Dl.go .
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is Don-profit organization or. trust, Ust the DlUDes
of any person serving as director of the Don-proBt organization or as trustee or beneBc:Wy or
trustor of the trust.
N.A.
4. Have you had more than ~2S0 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, -
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_
No..!... If yes, please indicate person(s):
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent
contractors who you have assigned to represent )'ou before the City in this matter.
Crafa Fukuvama. McMfllln Communitie.
r.ary rift.' tCft~f..nd A~~~~t.t.K
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a
Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? YeI_ No L If yes, state which
Councilmember(s ):
fm!lIlls dellned IS: "Any iNlMdunl, flm~ co-ptmttmhip. joint -fin, twodnlion. 6<<inl dub. frnlmurl cwraniZlltion, ttNpOI'tlI;on,
esltlll!,.1IlIIt, reeei_. 6)'ndietJll!, Ihis lI1ld nlty other tClUltty, dty twI tClUM)', dty, "Wltidpn1ity. dis1ria or other politictll subdMsion,
or nIl)' other group or ttJII1binnlion tJt:Iiltg lIS n IIltfl."
(NOTE: Atllcll additional pages IS nec:cssaty)
Date: 7-2-91
I".J 1.1.\:DISCLOSL1X'IJ
Cr.ig T. Fukuy..... VIce Pr.sid.nt
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
IIcMI11tn '-'nltt.. - Man.glng p.rtner IRevIoed: 11_)
. aancbo del ley rartnerabip .
,.
-
.
.
.
~
MIL TO:
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista. CA ..2010
Attn: Doug Reid
IF ' l r
... eo -.... 1iJ
AUG 2 11991
. flOTICE ·
OF PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 0
(FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT)
---
"
.
IIOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Ci~ of Chub Vista is considering a
"cClllllltndation that the project herein tdentified will have no significant
environmental tmpact tn compliance with 'Section 15070 of State CEQA
guidelines. A copy of the Negative Declaration (finding of no Significant
tllplct) and the Initial Study. which supports the proposed findings. are on
ffle in the Chula Vista Planning Department. 276 Fourth Avenue. Chula Vista..
CA '2010. These documents are avanable for public "view between the .hours
of 8:00 a.lI. and 5:00 p.lD.. Monday through Friday.
~one wishing to comment on the proposed tlegative Declaration Should provide
their written cOlllllents to the Chula Vista Planning Department. 276 Fourth
Avenue. Chula Vista. CA '2010.
This proposed finding does not constitute approval or denial of the project
ttself. it~ determines ~the project could have significant environmental
impact. PrOJects which could have significant impact IlUst have an
Environmental Impact Report prepared to evaluate those possible impacts in
compHance with Section 15064 of State CEQA Guidelines.
If you wish to chanenge the Ci~'s action on this Nega~ive Declaration in
court. you may be limited to raising only those issues you or sllIIIeone else
raised in written correspondence. . .
. .
For further information concerning this project. inclUding pubHc hearing
dates. please contact Marvann Miller at (619) 691-5101.
This notice is required to be ffled with the County Clerk's office for a
period of not less than thirty (30) days. .
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NlntBER: 593-382-38. 642-391-01. 642-392-10. 642-010-38
640-080-32
PROJECT LOCATION: Rancho Del Rey Planned Community (5 sites)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project involves a SPA amendment and a zone change. The
boundaries of the SPA I site will be revised to incorporate 2 new parcels. these
lites.. ~lus ~ additional parcels currently with the Rancho del Rey Planned Community
w~ll be des+gnated Community Purpose Facility (CPF).
DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY: Maryann Miller
INITIAL STUDY "0. 15-92-01: .
. ......
.
DATE:
.~ \11 (dl-t
I -
RECEIVED
AUG 26 1991
f.l.ANNING
nR/19/91
E" 7 (Rev. 1/90)
WPC 0006Y
l fII". ..1.- /..~ I
.,..".-, , c.-'. .
negativeecteclaration
PROJECT KAME: Rancho del Rey COIIIIIunity Purpose Faciltttes (CPF) Zone
Change/SPA plin amendment to revtse boundartes of SPA I and
destgnate .CPF" parcels tn SPA plans I, II I III
PROJECT LOCATION: Rancho del Rey Planned CoIInuntty (5 sttes).
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 593.382.38, 642.391.01, 642.392.10, 642.010.38,
640.080.32
PROJECT APPLICANT: Rancho del Rey Partnershtp (Cratg Fukuyama)
CASE NO: IS-92-01
DATE: August 16, 1991
.
A. Proiect Settina
The proposed ftve sites total 25.2 acres and are located within the Rancho
del Rey Planned COlllllunity. The project invQlves the annexation of two
sites into the SPA I project area. The locattons, stzes, and existing
conditions of the ftve tndividual sttes are described below:
1. Site one is located at the southeast corner of East .H" Street and
Paseo Ranchero. It ts one of two sites proposed for annexatton tnto
SPA I under the SPA plan amendment. The total acreage of the site ts
3.7 acres. ~~
The site is tOn a natural open space state with" six lIature trees,
shrubs, grasses, cactus and some tndigenous wildlife such as hawks
and squirrels. The site slopes gradually upward to the east. The
north side of the project, adjacent to East .H" Street, ts bounded by
a concrete drainage swale. The south side of the site ts bounded by
an existing single family- residential neighborhood. The adjacent
uses to the east and west tnclude graded open space proposed for
residential development in the Rancho del Rey Planned COlllllunity.
2. Site Two is located on the northwest corner of East .H" Street and
Bueni Vista Way. It is a 10.0 acre site and is the second of two
sites proposed for annexation into the SPA I plan.
The site is tn a natural open space state with dense shrubbery and
indigenous wildlife. The site slopes at a 10-15% gradient. The
north stde of the site is bounded by Buena Vista Way and Rancho del
Rey planned cOIIIIIunity development tncluding park residential uses.
The south side of the site ts bounded by East .H" Street and an
existing single family residential development. A drainage swale is
located on the east "side of the property. Adjacent uses to the east
include Buena Vista Way and a lIedium-high residential development.
Medium-high residential development lIakes up the adjacent use to the
west.
elt)' of ~hula Yllta planning dapartmant
enYlronmanta' review .ectlOn
+6'.;~ "-/~
~Vt-
-.-
........~~~
~:=.....~
Cl1Y Of
CHULA VISTA
.
.
-2-
3. Site three 15 located east of Paseo Ranchero, slightly south of
Rancho del Rey Parkway. This site is 4.5 acres and falls with ROR
SPA I. The site has recently been graded and contains 11ttle
vegetation, except sparse grasses. The north portion of the site is
an elevated pad containing an power pole. This power pole generates
139 KV and is part of a .ajor trans.is1on corridor.
Adjacent property to the north of the site includes Rancho del Rey
Parkway and proposed ROR planned cOIIIIunity residential development.
To the south and east are existing residential neighborhoods of
..dium to ..dium-h1gh density. The adjacent property to the west is
open space.
4. Site four is located in ROR SPA III east of Paseo Ladera between East
8J" Street to the north and Telegraph Canyon Road to the south. It
is 7.0 acres in size. The site slopes at 5-1OS upward to the north.
It remains in a undisturbed state with thick, natural vegetation and
indigenous wildlife. There 15 a drainage swale along the west side
of the property.
The north side of the site is bounded by undisturbed open space. The
south end of the site is bounded by Paseo Entrada and undisturbed
open space continuing to Telegraph Canyon Road. Property adjacent to
the east and west sides of the site is occupied by existing
residential neighborhoods separated on the west side by Paseo Ladera.
5. The fifth site is 5.0 acres located at the east end of'Terra Nova
Drive on the east side of Rancho del Rey Parkway. It falls within
Rancho del Rey SPA II. The site has been recently graded and little
or no vegetation is present on the site. The north side of the site
is bounded 1l111lediately by Rancho del Rey Parkway and by open space
further north. To the south, east and west is undisturbed open space
including Rice Canyon, however, adjacent properties to the east and
west are proposed for development.
B. Proiect .Descr1Dtfon
.
The proposed project is a combination of a SPA plan amendment and rezone
to incorporate and designate parcels for COIII1lunity Purpose Facilities.
The purpose of this project is to comply with new provisions in the City
Zoning Ordinance requiring that a greater proportion of project acreage be
designated for COIIIIunity purpose facility use.
The total acreage included in the conmunity purpose facility project is
25.2 acres consisting of 19.7 net usable acres. The City zoning ordinance
standards require 16.1 acres of COIII1lunity Purpose Facilities for the
11,608 projected population of the Rancho del Rey. project. Compliance
will be achieved by designating five CPF sites interspersed throughout the
3 SPA plan areas.' Environmental IlIIpact Reports 83-2, 87-1, 88-1, 89-10,
89.2 have addressed the environment at impacts associated with each of the
three phases of the Rancho del Rey Planned COIII1lunity. Annexation of two
sites into SPA I through SPA plan amendHnt will facilitate COIIIpliance
with the required acreage standard.
;..g-I3- '''''/..3
.
.
-3-
c. tDmDltib11ftv with lnnfna and Plans
This project involves a SPA plan ...nd..nt and rezone to incorporate and'
designate parcels for Community Purpose Facilities as required within
planned cOIIIlunities by a recently ...nded City Zoning Ordinance. These
changes in land use designation and zoning are consistent with the
surrounding planned community use. .
D. Comnliance wfth the ThreshDl~/Stlndlrds ~olfcv
1. Fire/EMS
The Threshold/Standards Policy "quires that fire and ..dical units
..st be able to respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85S of .
the clses Ind wfthfn 5 .fnutes or less in 75S of the clses. The City
of Chula Vista hIS indicated that this threshold standard w111 be
..t. since the nearest fire station is two or' less .11es away and
would be associated .w1th a five or less minute response tilll!l. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Policy.
Threshold standards will be met with completion of the proposed fire
station at the northwest corner of Pas eo Ranchero and East -H-
Street. Fire Department requirements w111 be detel"ll1ned when site
plans or building plans are submitted.
2. Police
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that police units must
respond to 84S of Priority 1 calls within 7 minutes or less and
maintain an average response time to all Priority 1 calls of 4.5
minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.1OS of Priority 2
calls within 7 minutes or less and .a1nta1n an average response time
to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The proposed project
will comply wfth this Threshold Policy.
The Police Department has indicated that it can ..intain an
acceptable level of service.
3. Traffic
The Threshold/StandardS Policy requires that all intersections must
operate at a Level of Service (LOS) -C- or better. with the exception
that Level of Service (LOS) -D- may occur during the peak two hours
of the day at signalized intersections. Intersections west of 1-805
are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No intersection
.ay reach LOS -E- or -F- during the average weekday peak hour.
Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this
policy. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Policy.
The proposed plan SPA amendment and rezone will not affect the level
of service or average dal1y traffic. Future specific development
proposals must ..et threshold standards. :
~ I~ -II{
.
.
-4-
4. Parks/Recreation
The Threshold/Standards Policy for Parks and Recreation is 3
acres/I,OOO population. The proposed project wt11 comply with this
Threshold Policy.
The. threshold standard is only applied to residenUal projects,
therefore, this project is exempt.
5. Drainage
The Threshold/Standards PoHcy requires that stOI"ll\ water flows and
volumes not exceed City Engineer Standards. Individual projects will
provide necessary improvements consistent with the Drainage. Master
Planes) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed project will
comply with this Threshold Policy.
The proposed project will not cause threshold standards to be
exceeded. Future site development IIUSt l18et engineering standards
for surface drainage flow and drainage design.
Sewer
6.
The Threshold/Stindards Policy requires that sewage flows and volumes
shall not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects
will provide necessary improvements consistent with Sewer Master
Planes) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed project will
comply with this Threshold Policy.
The proposed SPA plan amendment and rezone will not have any impact
on sewage flows and volumes. Future site development IIUSt lIeet
established engineering standards for sewage flows and volumes.
7. Water
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that adequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facil iUes are constructed concurrently
with planned growth and that water quality standards are not
jeopardized during growth and construcUon. The proposed project
will comply with this Threshold PoliCY.
The project sites are located within a previously established planned
cOlllllunity. Attainment of water usage threshold standards .has been
addressed in the SPA plans and the previous EIRs.
E. Jdentification of Environmental Effects
.
An initial study conducted by the City of Chula Vista detel"ll\ined that the
proposed project will not have a significant environmental effect, and the
preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. A
Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of
the State CEQA Guidelines.
.
..JZ
.-
/.:J
~ -/5'
_._.~ -. -...
-.--
.
.
-5-
The following impacts have been determined to be less than significant. A
discussion of each of these less than significant 1~acts from the
proposed project follows.
II.t@r
Due to recent drought conditions, as a condition of project approval, the
applicant .ust agree to no net increase in water consumption or
participate in whatever water conservation or fee off-set program the City
of Chula Yista has in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
Ceoloov/Soll s
EIR 89-10 indicates that potentially significant adverse son conditions
or geologic hazards may exist on some of the project sites. Ceology/soils
impacts lIay be reduced by compl iance to the recOllllllndations set forth in
the geotechnical reports prepared. for the project. With adherence to
these recOllllllndations, geology/soils impacts are deemed to be less than
significant.
Drainaae
E1R-89-10 identifies drainage and groundwater/water quaHty as potential
impacts of RDR SPA III. According to the EIR, adherence to the
regulations regarding stormwater discharge set forth in the HPDES permit
requirements and City Engineering flows and volume standards, potential
adverse impacts will be reduced to below a level of significance.
B101oav
EIR 89-10 identifies several potentially significant biological resources
occurring within the boundaries of the RDR Specific Plan Area. These
biological resources include: vernal pool habitat, riparian habitat,
coastal sage scrub, California Gnatcatchers and Cactus Wren. Appropriate
CEQA findings of overriding considerations were lIade. Several mature
trees were observed on the north side of .site one". When a specific
project is submitted, attempts should be ade to preserve the trees on
this site. With continued compliance to .itigation programs as set forth
in the previous EIRs and subsequent environmental documentation, impacts
will be reduced to below a level of significance.
~and Jlse
The proposed project is a SPA plan amendment and rezone and no density
increase is proposed. Environmental illlpacts of the landuse designation
change have been analyzed and deemed to be less than significant.
Three of the five sites are currently designated as "CPo in the RDR SPA
plan. As a result of a recent City zoning ordinance amendment" the
designation is now referred to as "CPF." In these three cases, the
proposed uses of these sites, including two churches and a YMCA, remain
compatible with the new designation. . Additionally, the change in the City
-I r t6' ~ -I"
....'!;,: '. '..f.~'".
.
.
-6-
zoning ordinance has increased the required land ratio to be set aside for
community purpose facilities. To comply with this requirement, this
project proposes to annex two additional sites into RDR SPA I and
designate them as community purpose facility sites. This project entails
rezoning of two sites from residential to -CPF.- The illpacts of these
land use changes are deemed to be less than significant.
When specific development plans are submitted forsite three, studies
related tot he impacts of the electromagnetic field generated by the 138
KV power pole should be required.d With adherence to the recOlllmendations
.ade in such report, illlpacts will be less. than significant.
1WlU1
The proposed project is subject to a special tax levy aimed at mitigating
the impacts of the Rancho del Rey Planned Community on schools. With
participation in the spec tal tax levy, illlpacts on schools w111 be less
than significant.
F. Mitiaation necessary to avoid sianificant effects
The proposed project is not associated with any significant or potentially
significant environmental impacts, therefore, no project specific
mitigation will be required.
G. Findinas of Insianificant ImDact
Based on the following findings, it is determined that the project
described above w111 not have a significant environmental illlpact and no
environmental impact report needs to be prepared.
1. The project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wl1dlife species, cause a fish or wl1dlife population to drop below
. self-sustaining levels, threaten to. eli.inate a plant or anilllal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a .rare or
endangeredJlant or animal, or eli.inate important exlllples of the
ujor peri s of California history or prehistory.
As noted in Section E -Identification of Environmental Effects,- the
proposed project will have no significant impacts on the
environment. . There are no significant natural, .an-made, or cultural
resources present on the sites that would be impacted by the proposed
project. .
2. The project has the potential to achieve short-te1"ll envil'OMlntal
goals to the disadvantage of 10ng~te1"ll environmental.goals.
With compliance to the conditions of approval for the rezone Ind SPA
plln amendment, the project will be consistent with the uses
designated by the zone and the generll plln. The froject would not
achieve any short term goals to the disadvantage 0 long term goals
~ ~-/7
.
.
-7-
J.
since long tena goals would be achieved through cOlIIplfance with the
zoning code requirements for provision of community purpose facility
sites within the lOR planned cOImunity.
11Ie project has JIOss1ble .ffects ....1ch are tndividually U.ited but
CUlUlatively considerable. As used tn the subsection, .cUlUlatively
considerable. .ans that the tnc~ntal .ffects of an tndividual
project are considerable when viewed tn connection with the .ffects
of past projects, ~he .ffects of other current projects, and the
.ffects of probable future projects.
The proposed designation of five COIIIIunity Purpose Fac111ty sites
will not result in any significant adverse environmental effects
which are cumulative in nature, provided all conditions pursuant to
the issuance of the rezone and SPA plan ...ndment are let.
The env1ronlental effects of a.project will cause substantial adverse
.ffects on huun beings, either directly or indirectly. .
The environmental effects of the project w111 not cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
Public health impacts associated with the 138 KY power pole on site 5
shall be lIitigated with adherence to City standards at the 11111e a
specific project is proposed.
4.
H. Consultation
1. Individuals and Oraanizat1ons
City of Chula Vista: Roger Daoust, Engineering
John Lippitt, Engineering
Cliff Swanson, Engineering
'Hal Rosenberg, Engineering
Bob Sennett, Planning
Ken Larsen, Director of Building and Housing
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Captain Keith Hawkins, Police Departlllent
Shauna Stokes, Parks and Recreation Departlllnt
Georgia Rubin, Planning
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
.Sweetwater Union High School District:. Tom Silva
Applicant's Agent: Rancho Del Rey Partnership (Craig Fukuyama)
2. Documents
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code General Plan, City of Chula
Vista EIR '8g.10-Rancho del Rey Spa III
~~-rT
.
.
-8-
3. Initial Study
Thts envtronllental detenntnatton is based on the attached Inittal
Study,any conments received on the Inittal Study and any conments
received during the public review period for the Negative
Declaration. Further tnformation regardtng the environlllental review.
of thts project is available from the Chula Vtsta Planning
Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 12010.
~4AU<.t. MtlUut
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
EN 6 (Rev. 12/90)
IIPC 1668P/017SP
...J.,Z..I-II- 6...../ ,
."
...
~..
. .
INITIAL STUDY
City of Chula Yista
Applicltion FonI
A. BACKGROUNO
,
4,1.
FOR OFFICE USE
Cue No. 1$- V.:l-/
~ l1fo: :.. tr SD q.
Rece P . f" " ?.iLL.
Date Rec'd 'I-A _ ~,
Accepted by :t2:2
Project No. F R o~l' ~
/)~ g ~ ~
1. PROOECT TITlE Rancho ilel ley Communlty Purpale FacUltles
2. PROOECT LOCATION (Street address o.r description)
.!!.!!:tlo del ley Planned Communlty
Assessors Book, Page & Parcel No.
3. BRIEF PROOECT DESCRIPTION Zone change/SPA _elment to revile bclundarles
of SPA I and deshnate "CPF" varcels in SPAs I. II. and III
4.
5.
Name of Appl icant Rancho del ley Partnershiv
Address 2727 Hoover Avenue
City National City Stlte CA
Name of Pre parer/Agent Cinti & Assoclates
Address 1133 Columbia Street '201
City San Dino Stlte CA
Relation to Applicant Planning Consultant
(Attn: Craig Fukuy&ms)
Phone 477-4117
Zip 91950
Phone 239-1815
Zip 92101
6. Indicate all permits or approvals Ind enclosures or documents
required by the Environmental Review Coordinltor.
I. Permits or Ipprovals required:
General Plan Revision
o~ Rezoning/Prezoning
- Precise Plan
- Specific Plan
- Condo Use Pemit
- Vlriance
-
Design Review Committee Public Project
- Tentative Subd. Map - Annexation
- Grading Pemit ' - Design Review Board
-" Tentative Parcel Map - Redevelopment Agency
- Site Plln & Arch. Review - .
- Other
-
b. Enclosures or doc\lllents (IS required by the Enviro.-ntal Review
Coor.dinltor).
Locltion Map Arch. Elevations
- Grlding Plan - Landscape Plans
- Si te Plan - Photos of Si te a
-u Parcel Map - Setting
Precise Plln Tentative Subd. Map
- Specific Plan - IlIIProvement Plans
- Other Agency Permit or - Soils. Report
- Approvals Required -
Eng. Geology Report
- Hydrological StuCb'
- Biological Study
- Archaeologicll Survey
- Noise Assessment
.- Trlffic Implct Report
-:fI other Projact Descriptlon
-
~ '-..tD
_. ,",>00'.- 00
-
..";"
. ".
. "-...
"" ...............
...
........
.
.... . .". ..... .:........... .. : .. ~ .: .;" 0':,:'':' ....
...
- 2 -
8. PROPOSED PROJECT
1. Land Area: sq. footage or' acreage 25.2 ae (aroes) .
If land area to be dedicated, state acreage and purpose.
.'
2. Complete this section if project is residential.
a. Type development: Single flmily Two family
Multi family Townhouse Condominium
b. Number of structures and heights
c. Number of Units: 1 bedroom 2 hedrooms
3 bedrooms 4 bedrooms Total units
d. Gross density (OU/total acres)
e. Net density (OU/total acres minus any dedication)
f. Estimated project population
g. Estimated sale or rental price range
h. Squire footage of floor area(s)
i. Percent of lot coverage by buildings or structures
j. Number of on-site parking spices to be provided
k. Percent of site in road and paved surface
3. Complete.this section if project is commercial or industrial.
a. Type(s) of land use
b. Floor area Height of structure(s)
c. Type of construction used in the structure
d. Describe major access points to the structures and the
orientation to adjoining properties and streets
e. Number of on-site parting spices provided
f. Estimated number of employees per shift , Humber of
shifts Total
g. Estimated number of customers (per day) and basis of estimate _
...a- Rr ~..~,
4. If project is other than residential. commercial or industrial
complete this section.
a. Type of project COIIIIlIUnity Purpose FacUity Zoning
b. Type of facilities provided community purpose (per Ord. 2452)
c. Square feet of enclosed structures per code
d. Height of structure(s) - IlIxillllll1 oer code
e. Ultimate occupancy load of project oer code
f. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided ~er code
g. Square feet of road and paved surfaces N/A
~
.. .
.., "-. .','"'
... ...... ~ ......
.. ;:-.'
. . .
.
.
if. h.
....
'.
.t
0,
1 i.
"
'!
." :..... ~ ."
~ ". ~~ .
l. ..... . ........ ................. ~~.......:
........;_.
.,.
.
-3-
.
EstiJ:lllted range of service .rea and basis of estilllte
Type/extent of operations not in enclosed buildings
J. Hours of operation
t. Type of exterior lighting
c. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
1. If the project could result in the direct imission of.any air.
pollutants. (hydrocarbons. sulfur. dust. etc.) identify them.
NONE
2. Is any type of grading or excavation of the propertyanticfpated NO
(If yes. complete the following:)
a.
Excluding trenches to be backfilled. how ..ny cubic yards of
earth will be excavated?
How IIIny cubic yards of fill will be placed?
How D1ch area (sq. ft. or acres) will be graded?
What will be the - HaxfllUlll depth of cut
Average depth of cut
fCuillll1l depth of fill
Average depth of ffll
b.
c.
d.
. -H1-7'2 ~ -~;J.
.~:
. .'. ;~.
.
,- ,
.
....... .....-.
'.'
- .. -
3~
Describe all energy consuming devfces whfch are part,of the proposed
project and the type of energy used (air conditfonfng, electrical
appliance, heatfng equfpment, etc.) Standard equipment for CPF-type
facilities
.~
4~:
'j
-
Indfcate the'alllOunt of natural open space that fa part of the project
(sq. ft. or acres) None
If the project wfll result fn any emplo,Ylllent opportunftfes descrfbe
the nature and type" of these jobs. None
5.
6.
7.
Wfll highly flammable or potentfally explosfve _aterfals or
substances be used or stored wfthfn the project
sfte? NO
How many estfmated automobfle trips, per day, wfll be generated by
the project? see'EIRs':for 'RDR~~SPA::I. 'II.:~&::III
Descrfbe (ff any) off-sfte improvements necessary to implement the
project, and thefr pOfnts of access or connection to the project
sfte. Improvements fnclude but not lfmfted to the following: ,new
streets; street widenfng; extensfon of gas, electrfc, and sewer
lfnes; cut and ffll slopes; and pedestrfan and bfcycle facflftfes.
8.
None
,D. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
1. Geology
Has a geology studY been conducted on the property? YES -'see EIRs for
(If yes, please attach) RDR SPA I, II, & III
Has a Sofls Report on the project sfte been lllde? AIDe as above
(If yes, pJease attach)
2. Hydrology
Are any of the following features present on or adjacent to the
sfte? NO. (If yes, please explain in detafl.)
a. Is there any surface evfdence of a shallow ground water
table? -
b. Are there any watercourses or drainage improvements on or
adjacent to the site?
, ~ ~~.2.;l
. .
..
..
...
.
'.
- 5 -
;
Does runoff from the project site drain directly into or toward
a ,domestic water supply, lake. reservoir or bll)'?
c.
"
;'.
,
!. .
..' d.
Could drainage from the site cause erosion or siltation to
adjacent areas?
Describe all drainage facilities to be provided and their
location.
...
e.
3. Noise
a.
Will there be any noise generated from the proposed project site
or from points of access which ~ impact the surrounding or
adjacent land uses? NO
4. Biology
a. Is the project site in a natural or partially natural state?
YES -.East "H" Street .itesand Pa.eo Ladera site
b. Indicate type. size and quantity of trees on the site and which
(if any) will be removed by the project. None
5. Past Use of the Land
a. Are there any known historical resour:ces located on or near the
project site? NO
b. Have there been any hazardous materials disposed of or stored on
or near the project site? NO
. '.Current Land'Use
a. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on the
project site. Vaeant
~~"~'I
.' -"". .-.,. ..... --
;.;.;~". . ~. . ,
""",.,,,"
, " ."
!
,".
/.
'1',
:. . ~
1\;.:
~fl; b.
.,-:
:ffl
;11
it,
~
Ii
.1
,
l',
:i..
,,,
,
7~", Social
'.'
.
.
- 6 -
Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on
adjacent property.
North All adjacent uses are residential.
South
East
West
a. "Are there any residents on site? (If so. how IIIny?) NO
b. Are there any current employment opportunities on site? (If so.
hO\1lD1nyand what type?) NO
Please provide any other information which could expedite the evaluation of
the proposed proJect. .
-See Project Description attached.-
~ t>~tP
.... "....~ ....~
-'.
.
,
.
- 7'-
E. CERTIFICATION
I, Cr.i~ T. Yukuv.ma. Vi~~ Pr..i~.ft~
R.~O del Rev Partner.hiD
ner{owner in escrow.
McMillin COIIIIIIUnitiu, Manacina Partner
.~
I,
or
tonsultant or Agent.
HEREBY AFFIRM, that to the best of my belief, the statements a"d information
herein contained are in all respects true and correct and that all known
information concerning the project and its settfng have been included in
Parts S, C and D of thfs applfcation for an Initial Stu~ of possible
environmental 1 t and any enclosures for attachments thereto.
,
- *If Icting for a corporation, include capac1~ and company name.
.
Jr,).~ ~'..J"
i "'O;~""'.I5f' .1"_ .':'H."
--;r,.__
"!';.;~ '. ., ',' ~ :~ -:.
.
.
.
aDcao DZL BY 8P1. AXDDXDr'l'/UZOIIB
COIIKlJIIIn ~VRPO'I J'ACJLJI'JI'
-J'rojeot Deeoription-
~n~roduc~ion/Backaround
!be proposed project is a combination of a SPA plan amendment and
re-zone to incorporate and designate parcels for Community Purpose
Facilities, as required by the recent amendment of the City Zoninq
ordinance. '1'he purpose of this project ie to brin9 the Rancho del
Rey Planned Community into compliance with the community Purpose
Facility standard adopted in Ordinance 2452. Such compliance is
required as a condition of approval of the Rancho del Rey SPA III
Plan (condition 116). Compliance will be achbved throuqh a series
of actions which are primarily administrative because the basic
land use and intensity decisions have been previously made. '!'wo
sites adjacent to SPA I which are intended for church uees and
which will clearly serve the project area, are to be added to the
SPA I site throuqh the SPA Plan amendment component of the project.
Theee altes plus three additional parcels currently within the
Rancho del Rey Planned Community will be desiqnated .Community
Purpose Facility" (CPF). '1'he sites within the Rancho del Rey
planninq area are currently identified .CF" (for community facility
uses) on the respective site utilization plans. Community facility
uses are similar to CPF uses, but are more broadly defined. '1'he
re-zone component of the project will adopt land use requlations
for the CPF District to limit permitted uses to those consistent
with the provisions of Ordinance 2452 and to establish development
standards for such uses. .
The net result of the project will be a chanqe in the map
desiqnation and applicable development requlations for each of the
five CPF parcels. The list of permitted uses will be reduced,
however the community servinq character of the permitted uses will
be unchanqed and no increase in intensity is proposed. No chanqe
in parcel acreaqe statistics is proposed.
ProDosed pro1ect
.!be project is a combination of a SPA plan amendment and re-zone to'
incorporate and desiqnate parcel. for Community Purpose Facilities,
as required within planned communities by the recently amended City
Zoninq Ordinance. The purpose of this project is to demonstrate
compliance with the community purpose facility provisions of the
ordinance and implement those provisions in the llancho del Rey
Planned community.
The SPA Plan amendment will adjust the SPA I boundary to include
two adjacent parcels which are planned for CPF facilities which
will clearly aerve the Rancho del 'Rey community but. are not
(06/17/91)
1
JL' ~ 7 ~.. -'- /
.
~
currently located within the SPA boundary. ~i. boundary change
will bav. no effect on the planned a.e. for the.. parcel..
A total of five parc.l. are id.ntified for CPF u.... ~e.. are
dee1gnated on Exhibit 1. Ae noted above," two aite. will be
incorporated into SPA I through a boundary adju.taent, while on. 1a
currently within the within SPA I boundary. SPAa II and III
inc1ud.one .ite each. Table A provid.. the gro.. and n.t acreag.
atatbtic. for each parcel. ~e five parcel. tota11'.7 net usable
acres (25.2 total acre.). . .
TABLE A. "
.aro.l Aoreag. .tati.tic.
Parcel/sit:.
Grog. Acr..
N.~ Acr:..
YMCA
Pilgrim Lutheran
Methodi.t Church
SPA II Site
SPA III Site
4.5
10.0
3.7
5.0
2.0
4.0
6.1
3.5
5.0
1..1
!fotal Aore.
'25.2 gro.s ao
2.'.7 .et ao
The adopted community Purpose Facility standard i. 1.3' n.t u.ab1.
acr.. per 1,000 project population. The fir.t .tep in determining
the requirement for Rancho del Rey is to e.timate the proj.ct
population. The population e.timate 1a provided in Table B. Uaing
this population estimat., the facility standard yield. a
r.quirement of 16.1 acre. for the Rancho del R.y community (11,608
x 1.3'/1,000 - 16.1). The site. de.ignated on Exhibit 1 total 1'.7
acr.. of net u.ab1e ar.a, .xc.eding the adopted standard by 3.6
acr...
(06/17{U)
2
...Jt' ;:r ~ -;lor ."
l ~~'.f.';';".it-r7., ~t;t".l~~-:';~'
..,9"" ~'_:'_,::"~~.' ""
....
...
,
'.l'ABLE B
Co..uni~7 Purpo.. ~acili~7 acr.ag. Da~.raiDa~ioD
~den~ial Area Uni t.al POt)./DrP 2r::21ect PDc.
SPA I Apts. (R-15) 500 2 .192 1,096
SPA I Condo. (R-14) 147 2.794 411
SP.l\ I Condo. (R-13) , 138 2.794 386
SP. I Condo. (R-12) 180 2.7U 503
Sf \ III Seniors (R-7) 588 2.192 1,289
SPA III Condo. (R-6) 228 2.794 637
S'D (all SPAs) 2.268 3.213 ".297
llloula .,on ~~,'O'
.
'Count from most current approval (SPA Plan, '.I'M or sit.e plan).
~opulat.ion factors from Chula vista Planninq Department.
110ft: '1'his population estimate is made for the purpose of calculat-
in; the community purpose facilities requirement only and should
not be used to project other service needs.
(06/17/91)
3
.
.
CPF Sites
Comrru'lity PlIpose FacHities
-
~CflFSites
E::3 SPA SculdIrieI
..-..
05-1
..... .... I
-'
..0"
1I~Q.QrJd?~}'~~_3"
~~
_n.,r,
Exhblt 1
~'''~ ,>"
..
\
..
CITY DATA
Case No. 16-lJ~-or
F. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1.
Current lonfn9 on :~~~ -t,~\,., fJ~~,,~T~~~o<}r$p, \~~:~-:t~
South "~~~Irl~~t-"~ J-(~I~"f'
~::~" ~ ,j~"s, t" ~;;rt-a " .J
~es the project con~rm to the current zonfng? ~ <:l - if- ''''''oLvE:S ~
- ~-=>~E C:,",$..~"(,,e: . a,- '!. cs~ "\ pin..; J~
2. ~enera' Plan land use eo NC........S
desfgnatfon on sfte: .!.
North -101. . . P"rlC' .,. c,r" I c ^' .... eC'.- ~c. 1'<:
South ~ L.M ~.. ~;, ':'/l'l" ~ ..- 1~":; L-"'\ es
East L-flf, p.~ 'c- f\fI < . .-, L- S
liest L- ~ .~-o.\ t.r.. o"! (" 1.- ,.. r~~' ""
Is the project compatible with the General Plan Land Use Diagram? f;,'j.J!. l:i!1!1.fS
tJ.rp ~~o"""""r""",bl? 1 \ a...r..ct 7 t:c1'l.o n~
. .
Is the project area designat~d for conservation or open spa~e or adJac~nt
to an area so designated? =- \ ~p ~ 'lit., Cl nd " r, ('I Q "A C:\ ~" ('"...~ n I- 1-'"\
~(O.c:...:f'),.....~~~c-1 ~P()f'\ c:..?,,-?r@
J
Is the project located adjacent to any scenic routes? ; ~_~
(If yes, describe the design techniques being used to protect
the scenic quality of the route.) \ ~
. ., &:.. . p --~ \
-==. ~.f' r"\ : ~ ,"'- ,': \ ~ ....., ru ~
or enhance
~
..
3. School1
If the proposed project fs residential, please ~omplete the following:
Students
Current Generated
CIDlettv. frDm Pro1@ct
khW.
Permanent
. ~ttendance
Temporary
CaDleftv
Elllllentary
.Jr. High
Sr. High
4. Remarks: \.l~-I- r p c:,7 Al'A"'\4- 7 t!J\ , U) A
~AAJ.I. ~,~
Director of Planning or Representative
;
i
J
'J";:Z/,QI
Date
liPe 1459P
-13-~ ~-:rl
__ __________________.__ 7..--..-----~ J__ ---
-
Case No. IS .tf1. -0'
H-l. lARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
1. How many acres Sf parkland are Mcessary to .erve the proposed
project? ~:JoO'i Pr'o"~ .
2. How many acres of developed parkland are witMn the Park Service
District of this project as ahown tn the Parks and Recreation Element
of .the General Plan? (If appHcable) _tl/..
. . ,
3. Jlhat are the current park acreage Z' quirtlllnta tn the Park Service
District? (If appHcable) ... ,...
4. U ~~~~e~te:~:j:~:l:~n~a:"~~ Rec~~\':.L1t'~hOl~Ui.~~? :f.Lt'o '. '.
S. Are exhting neighborhood and cOIIIIunity parks near the project
adequate to aerve the p~pulation increlse resulting from this project?
Neighborhood ~
COllll1unity Parks '(j;=~
I. If not, are pirkl and dedications or other .itigltion proposed as part
of the project adequlte to serve the population increase?
Neighborhood ~I'..
COllll1unity Parks N J.....
7. Does this project exceed the Parks and Recreatiori Thresholds
established by City Council policies?
Me
. 8. To ..et City requirements, will applicint be required to:
Provide land? . . ~~~
Pay . fee?' ..J I....
I. Remarks:
~~~.
Parks and Recreation Director or Representative
~ .( .C\t.
Date
"PC 1459P
-18- ~ ~";J.2.
.
-. .-- - - ---.. , .-...
.'
. >t'
"I ><I 7i.. ><I Xl ,4. I ,4
I ' ' . I I " " I xl ,
I . I I I I I I I I
Ii 'ii'i 'p II!, f!~ u. I' ~.
I; !!t" I Ii 'J iti i 'f ~I l
" ISt1:' ~ ... II
· · if Ii J fi: .. 'j 11 I
II' .-.,! ~ lI=i
!f':: =1 ~ ~IJ II .
, ;:
.1. = ;1;1 t1h · I 'i ,
- . - ! !:i!~i
. ., J', - j i -., , 'iiI. "
Ii . I' . . I ,
.f!!,! '..i~ ! Iii Iii
r- · l-; i JiI J!f
-~ - ... 11
,: nlli Ui . i I lU'V
. ..' I ;;..
~ ..: . ~ . . . J. . .
. . . .. . . .. '
II
'. II
Iii
.;
In
.ll
,f '
-
j
. . .
... ..
.
-
.
..
I
. I
----.----.
I II X. l?ool ><1
I I I >f I I
I II I I I I
Is I f; I :1,
} i it 11. III i'll,
l@II'II,.:i:J
~ , !,' j! .i ,Jli
I 0; -J -- fi~ II ~i
_ j i' ~ .Ii. i ,i,
Ihi~. tl..
II .:.
=
,
~ ~-:rJ
.
.
,.
I
I
-
-
)tt
1
I
I
I
-A
I
4
I
,
I "'= r:t .... "-I "
i IIi). I ·
" f ..:i.. . "II Ii, !
r ... ~.= I 'I
'1 .lli~' I "
.1 , !~1:1.:, . ~!!
.1 i ai-~; .i 11,=
1'& i ,Ii!. I it Ii}.
i ::i _il' il Id..
<Ii I.. . Ii
,,;
.
.
'<l
1
I
><! ><l
1 1
I I
xt I
1 >4
I I
">t ><I. ~
1 1 1
I I I
I
~
I
I - -,
'= 1 I al
J! I . i
ii' -J
I, ~. =1 1"1
-11: II Ii
i . I :;,"
!J.J "0: liiU)
i j 11 iiJ
<Ii i"... II III
.,
1:
i
~-
I!
.1
It
,,;
.: .
-'<! ><l
I 7'-1 1
I I I
I ""l.
~ xl 1
I I I
I ,..12" I lil~ )!.. "j of ..... ill.
I . 1~-..!_lJ"1 ' U i Il 11 ! 1..1 "I Uj
· 1" ,>> II I ....fh "I
.if IN !11i:1! 'III:' ill I (:t.; !l !:i
I loal" "I$':h ..I.. I h "II "."_
.,!_ tilHII" I~ .,f1i-11 =j-I! Iii i 'Iaf~ II:. II~i.
- .~i &~ ii! ..i I~ ~ .!t i.. Jill
1
<Ii II ..:.. . .: E" . .;
.
.
. .
~~.;rl/
.
,
,
.
.'
.
o.
K
,
'-.- /
t
K
.
"
>i..~
1 1
I I
:4 I
I 1
I' I
I ~ I ~
~ 1:1 1
I I I I
>4 )<t
II I.. )1'
i _I . -I! t -
...... )--
I I~ ,~j
. Ii iI-{= J II
J! .~ . ~ i I ~
I~ II !:Jf! i I
~';"'"
.. .; I._!,;.. v
.
..
7d
'1
I
1 1
l>.t
f. ~j ~ ,-I J
I i I!~ 1t '!i
i ! I ,JIll} Ii
I ....1 -II =1- lilt ~I'
II.. I · ~!.-
J r II -r - 5_
~~ :1. ~ ; ~t . ~~U 11
,,;
..
.
.
..
)2l
1 .
I
,.( :>4. ,4.
1 I
I I
)l-t. ">4. - .l4.' >4-
I - I I I
I I I I
I : . j Iff1i II
I J !!i!:: ill
J.. 111)::1' Ii
i 11 · I.;U II!
J ~ .-J!1l tl
I · i li!-)
1- i :Jtil ill
~I= i : :..11: j
I,; .,; ..
..
Ii .
.'
.
~!i Ii
ui It-
.- .
J!} 1111
~IJ if I
Ii: il)
ili Iii
J j n I "-I-
.. Ii 11 I
i I Ii,.
! I , 1
i I.. -Ii II I
II") III J.aIl
:: Ii Ii
~ ~;':Jf'
_. __.J.
>to
I
I
.
.
,
-.
K
.
.
*
. ..
K
-..---.----.---.----- -...-. ----...., ---
.
o.
~ . )cj, ~ >C1..
I . I I I
I I I I
.i!!!!i'I"'!t i!llll!) .115ij=~a
t'lii'j lij'~ I'ii=~tl' .,!il
I 'ii,:J ',;:n "$I~;= .~IJ'~;1
I Ira II "111 UI_lt 'Iii' jJ
! ~!lil~~! i !11.-~il! '.si'tl ~
I ~.IJlll=l; il,. ~'!I!iiti ~11II'1!!
Ii
.
-.. -.. .,.. "." ". ,,-;-<""'
1! 1'1- ..t"l)~""r~., " J F ."I'~,l" - '\ '" "
~~~,-,(l"Ii"IP.d.l,:"';'~ ti\;"5~",~,, bu
EXCERPT FROM MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEHlING OF 10/9/91
ITEM 3:
PUBUC HEARING; PCM-92-01: AMENDMENT TO THE RANCHO DEL
REY SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARIES AND AN AMENDMENT TO SPAs I,
n AND ill BY INCORPORATING AND DESIGNATING COMMUNITY
PURPOSE FACILITY SITES - Rancho del Rey Partnership
Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that the City Council bad amended about a year ago the
City Code requiring that the Planned Community Districts designate community facility acreage
based on a formula set at 1.39 acres per 1,000 population. The Rancho del Rey SPA ill
approved just prior to the ordinance amendment included a condition requiring that all of the
SPAs were to comply with any future ordinance addressing this by the City. This requirement
was also included in the Rancho del Rey ill tentative map approval in July 1991. Using the
facility acreage formula, and based on the 1990 Census data, would put their total at 11,608
residents requiring 16+ acres designated for the community purpose facility. Rancho del Rey
has identified five sites containing nearly 20 acres of net community purpose facility land. Two
of those lots are not owned by the applicant but lie adjacent, outside the boundaries of the
present Rancho del Rey SPA identification but are within the Rancho del Rey Specific Plan Area
and zoned P-C Planned Community. The applicants requested that the SPA boundaries be
amended to include all of those parcels, for a total of five. The present owners bad concurred.
Mr. Lee stated the modifications to the district boundaries to include the two parcels already
committed for church facilities, as well as specifically designating these sites as community
facility areas and modifying the district regulations to ensure they would be limited to those land
uses would bring the Rancho del Rey area into compliance with the City standards.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing
to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Decker/Casillas) 5-0 (Commissioner Tugenberg absent) that based on the Initial Study
and the comments on the Initial Study and Negative Declaration, find that this project will have
no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-92-ol.
MSUC (Decker/C.asi11,,~) 5-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the following:
a) An amendment to the Rancho del Rey SPA I boundaries to include 3.7 acres
located at the southeast comer of East "H" Street and Paseo Ranchero and 10.0
acres located at the northwest comer of East "H" Street and Buena Vista Way;
b) An amendment to SPAs I, n and ill to incorporate and designate community
purpose facility sites as shown on the attached Exhibit "A," and
c) An amendment to SPAs I, n and ill to include the community purpose facility
district regulations governing said sites attached hereto as Exhibit "B."
J9''''3'' ~"':r?
~
RESOLUTION NO. PCH-92-01
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE
ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO RANCHO DEL REY SPAS I,
II AND III
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting an amendment to the Rancho Del
Rey SPA I boundaries to include two parcels totaling 13.7 acres and amendments
to SPAs I, II, and III in order to incorporate and designate certain sites for
community purpose facilities as required by the recently adopted .Community
Purpose Facility Ordinance (No. 2452A);. and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial
Study, IS-92-01, of potential environmental impacts associated with the
implementation of the project. Based on the attached Initial Study and
comments thereon, if any, the Coordinator has concluded that there would be no
significant environmental impacts and recommends adoption of the Negative
Declaration issued on IS-92-01, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing
'on said amendments and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was
given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city at
least ten days prior to the hearing, and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised,
namely 7:00 p.m., October 9, 1991, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue,
before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and
WHEREAS, the Commission found that the project would have no
significant environmental impacts and adopted the Negative Declaration issued
on IS-92-01.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT FROM THE FACTS PRESENTED AT THE
HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends the adoption of amendments to
Rancho Del Rey SPAs I, II and III as follows:
1. An amendment to the Rancho Del Rey SPA I boundaries to include
3.7 acres located at the southeast corner of East H Street and
Paseo Ranchero and 10.0 acres located at the northwest corner of
East H Street and Buena Vista Way;
2. An amendment to SPAs I, II, and III to incorporate and designate
community purpose facility sites as shown on attached Exhibit A;
and,
3. An amendment to SPAs I, II and II I to i nc 1 ude the Commun i ty
Purpose Facility District regulations governing said sites
attached hereto as Exhibit B.
That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council.
~~-.1r
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA,
this 9th day of October, 1991, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Commissioners Carson, Casillas, Fuller, Decker, and Martin
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tugenberg (excused)
ATTEST:
. ~ht- ..:h<,d~
~~Fuller, Chairperson
~ -:0'
ancy ARi~liY, ~~.
WPC 9930P/1595P
~ ~.'J1
--.
... .
. PFSites
Cormuiity Purpos~ FacWties
'.
1 YMCA
I PILGRIM LUTHERAN.
8 METHODIST CHURCH.
.. SPA D SITE
I SPA m SITE
.'
~
"'-..
01-1
r--
,
., .. .
rJ./
~CPF""
E:::3 1M Ib 1dI...
. ...011.1 ADDI1I !'O irA I'
..
...... .
..... EXHIBIT ttA"
RANCHO DEL REY
SPA AMENDMENT/REZONE .
LOCATOR
COMMUNITY PURPOSE
FACILITIES .
~:.'1():jzi$"8 -
.
-
_...._..-~.-.
-
~-
e.
e
EXHIBIT tcB".
,
.
,"
..
.
%%. COJOnJIrIn I'UJl1'081 I'AC%L%ft D%8ftICT aIGlJUT%01l8
.
A. 7UJl1'OSI
.~e community Purpo.e F.cility (CPF) Di.trict i. ..t.bli.hed to
provide design.ted sites ~or specific public and qu..i-pUblic U.e.
vhich .r. n.c....ry to .eet 'the soci.l, spiritu.l, and service
need. of 'the r.sident population. ~e.e sit.. ar. provided to .eet
'the adopt.d standard of 1.351 acr.. of community purpose ~acil1ti.s
per 1000 proj.ct population (Ordinanc. Ho. 2452).
a. I'DJa'1"1'ZD USE8
only 'those u.es which .e.t 'the specifications of .community Purpose
F.cility. below shall be permitted in 'the CPF District.
.Community Purpose F.cility. .eans a structure ~or a..embly,
a. well .s .ncill.ry u.es such .s a parking lot and outdoor
.ctivity areas, within. pl.nned community, including but not
lilllited to 'tho.e which serve 'the following types of purpo.es:
1. Boy scout., girl scouts, and other silllil.r org.nizations;
2. Social and hUlllan servic. activiti.s, such as Alcoholics
Anonymous;
3. Services for hOllleless persons;
4. Services for lIIilitary personnel during 'the holidays;
5. Senior care and r.cr.ation;
6. Worship, spiritual growth and d.v.loplllent, and teaching
of traditional family values; and,
7. Day car. ~aclliti.. and/or private schools which are
ancillary to any of 'th. abov..
C. I'.OPDTY DIVELOPKDl'1' .TAlmUD8
1.11 d.veloplllent wi'thin 'the CPF District shall r.ceiv. sit. plan and
architectural approval ~rolll 'the Chula Vista Design Revi.w Commit-
t... Dilllension. shown on 'the approved sit. plan shall con.titute
the applicabl. developlllent standards ~or 'the proj.ct, .xc.pt that
the following lIIinilllUIII standards shall apply where a CPF District
.djoins a"r.sidential district:
,
1. A lIIinbUIII 10 foot wid. landscaped strip or 1II1nl111U111 6 foot
solId vall or ~.nc. shall be lIIaintained on any property
lin. abutting a r.sid.nti.l aon.. "
,_ J~ ;rr ~,~I
. .
.
.
2.
.
"
.
I
.
.
Said vall or ~ence aay be reduced ~ 42 1nche. in a
l.nd.caped front yard ..tback Which do.. not contain
parking ~acilit1...
lZU
1.
Day nur.erie.,
day care schools
.
3. Front, rear and side yard ..tbacks shall be a ainillUII of
20 ~.et.
D~ OPP-8DBft >>UEDlca UQ1J11'~8
All off-street parking .reas shall comply with the provision. of
Section XIII.3 of the ~ancho del Rey SPA I PC Requlation. with
reg.rd to space size .nd veometrlc.. Parking .rea. within the CPF
District shall .lao comply with the Speci.l Requirement. ~or
improvement., land.caping .nd lighting Indicated in that section.
~he relevant Performance St.nd.rd. of S.ction XIII.4 sh.ll .1.0
.pply.
Off-stre.t p.rking sh.ll be provid.d .~cording to the ~ollowing
schedul.:
2.
Conv.l..cent .nd!
or nur.ing hom..
Church.., conv.nt.,
mona.t.ri.., other
r.ligion. in.tit-
ution., .nd other
spa c.. of public
....mbly
Oth.r u..s
'.
MINIMUM OFF-STR~ET PARKTNG REOUIRED
1 sp.c.!.taff aember plus 1 space!S
S children or 1 sp.c.!10 children if
adequate drop-Off faciliti.. .r.
provided. Drop-off faciliti.. au.t
be designed to accoJlllDodat. a contin-
uous flow of p....ng.r v.hicle.
s.f.ly loading .nd unloading chil-
dr.n. ~h. .d.qu.cy of drop-Off
faclliU.. shall be d.t.rmin.d by
the Director of Planning.
1 space!3 beds.
1 space!3.5 s.at. within the aain
.uditoriUII or 1 space!4! square
f.et of vro.. floor .rea within
the aain auditoriUII wh.re th.r.
.r. no fix.d s.ats.
A. d.t.rmin.d by the Dlr.ctor of
PI.nnlng,
Handicann.d parkina Re~ir.m.n~.
3.
4.
Handicapp.d parking r.quir.ment. are ..tablish.d by the stat.
of California. ~h. parking stand.rds contain.d in this
secUon .r. identical to those ..tablished by the st.t.. Any
~uture change in the state h.ndicapped parking standards shall
J
LT
-
&~"''1.2
.J
.
.
"
.'
. preempt the requirements of this .ection. BancUcappecS parkin;
spaces shall be provided for all uses at the following rate
and shall be counted tcward.the off-street parking require-
..nt:
Number of Automobile
SD8ce8 Provided
Number of Handicapped
Sn8.c.. Rem.tir.d
1
.2
3
4
5
6
.,
., + 1 for each 200 addi-
tional automobile .pace.
provided
5. Handicapped parking spaces required by this .ection shall
count toward fulfilling standard automobile parking
requirements.
1 - 40
. 41 - 80
81 - 120
121 - 160
161 - 300'
301 - 400
401 - 500
Over 500
B. nONS
U.es within the CPF District shall be allowed the following signs:
1. All sites shall be allowed freestanding, aonument signs
as permitted within the Rancho del Rey Planned community.
2. Churches: One wall sign, not to exceed 30 square feet in
area, and one bulletin board or announcement sign, not to
exceed 24 square feet in area and 10 feet in hdght. Any
bulletin board or announcement sign not attached flat
against the building shall .aintain a 10 foot setback
from all street..
3. Other u.es: One wall sign, not to exceed 30 .quare feet
in area, and one bulletin board or announcement sign, not
to exceed 50 square feet in area and 12 feet in height.
Any bulletin board or announcement sign not attached flat
against the building shall aaintain a 10 foot setback
from all .treets. .
4. Special event signs:
a. Any u.e .ay request a permit for the temporary use
of a sign announcing a special event. Wall or
freestanding signs of paper, cardboard, plastic or
fabric are permitted, provided that the toning
administrator finds that the copy, color, and
design of the .ign will not adversely .ffect the
a
.J$"VcJ ~...~;J
.
.
.-
.
i.
.
I
.
.
. .
. .
order, amenity, or residential enjoyaent of the
ne1e;hJ:Iorhood h which it b located.
Special event .i9Ds Dall be located on the prub-
es ot the institution or ore;anization havine; the
.pecial event and .hall be not .ore than five feet
in heie;ht, nor .ore than 25 .quare teet in area.
Preestandine; .i9Ds .hall .aintain a .iniaWII 10 foot
..tack troll any .treet. One .i9D on each .treet
frontae;e .hall be allowed.
Upon application for a permit, the applicant .hall
.ubmit a statuent and diac;rru notine; the nature ot
. the .pecial event and hdicatine;' the location,
.be, copy, and colors ot the proposed .i9D. A
permit for a .pecial event .i9D .hall be valid tor
.even consecutive days. Not .ore than .ix .pecial
event .i9D permits .hall be issued ~o anyone
in.titution or orc;ranization per calendar year.
.
b.
c. .
~. SPECIAL ADMINISTRATION
Notwithstanding any provision ot these re9Ulations, the conditional
use approval (City Council Resolution No. 12316; PCC-84-11) c;rrantec!
to the parcel at the northwest corner ot East WX" street anc! Buena
Vista Way shall remain in torce and tull ettect. The Master Plan
approval e;rantec! by the Chula Vista Desie;n Review Committee for
this parcel (PCM-87-14) shall also remain In full eUect. No
portion ot the.e regulations shall be. interpreted to contrac!ict,
negate, or otherwise 1I0c!ify the approvals c;rrantec! tor the church I
.chool facility proposec! tor this site which is wholly consistent
with thepurpo.e. ot this district.
..
~~-'1lf
-,~
South Bay Family YMCA
50 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
(619) 422-8354 FAX (619) 422-4412
Chris Chase
Executive Director
Board 01 Management
1991 -1892
Penny Allen, Chair
Vice Chairs:
Mike Rnch
Doug Fuller
Sandra Murphy
Kathy Parker
Larry Cunningham,
Secretary-Treasurer
Dr. John Vugrin, Past Chair
Membera:
Vince Aoosta
Ken Baumgartner
Mickie Beyer
Don Blind
Joanne Carson
Pal Cavanaugh
J.R. Chantengco
Norma Colunga
Susie Conners
Melvin Cowherd
Chuck Day
-"'>ry Lynn Deddeh
j Dillingham
KeUh Gentry
Fred Harder
Carl Harry
BlIHauf
BaIbara Hunsaker
Dick Kau
Rosemary Lane
Armando Martinez
Danny Mendez
Peter MOOfe
Mike Pradels
Ken Screeton
Art Sellgren
John Shockley Jr., M.D.
Raul Silva-Martinez
Bruce Sloan
Pam SmUh
Palricia SmUh
Mel Taunt
Ric Wiliams
Heritage Club
Penny & David Allen
Chris & Sandy Chase
William Cheverton
MeI & Midge Cowherd
.Eatty Erickson
g & BaIbara Fuller
, dlriciaSmUh
Dare: November 12, 1991
To: Chula Vista City Council
From: South Bay Family YMCA
Executive Director Chris Chase
Subject: Community Purpose Facility District
Item #18 on 11-12-91 Council Agenda
The South Bay Family YMCA has been designated 5 acres of land
in Rancho Del Rey for a future YMCA facility site. McMillin
Development has been very supportive in working with the YMCA as
we prepare to develop this site for a family YMCA.
Our YMCA use is identified in Exhibit "B" of your council packet
under: B. Permitted Uses
1. Boy scouts, girls scouts, and other similar organizations.
It is very clear the 5 acres currently designated for YMCA
expansion falls under the permitted uses as a community purpose
facility.
The South Bay Family YMCA has found McMillin Development
to be an outstanding corporate citizen. The South Bay Family YMCA
will help meet many social, spiritual, service and physical fitness needs
of Chula Vista residents.
The team work demonstrated by McMillin and the YMCA will
positively benefit thousands of youths and adults in the South Bay.
Mission Statement: "The South Bay Family YMCA is dedicated to improving the quality of human life and to helping
all people realize their fullest potential as children of God thp'Jgh development of the spirit, mind and body. .
~-Y7
RtP-O\NG(l.NO
stCO~O
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING PCM-92-01 AMENDMENT TO THE RANCHO
DEL REY SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARIES AND AN
AMENDMENT TO SPAs I, II AND III BY
INCORPORATING AND DESIGNATING COMMUNITY
PURPOSE FACILITY SITES
ORDINANCE NO.
jl/~7
(l.oo?1'\Oti
WHEREAS, Rancho del Rey Partnership is requesting an
amendment to the Rancho Del Rey SPA I boundaries to include two
parcels totaling 13.7 acres and amendments to SPAs I, II, and III
in order to ~ncorporate and designate certain sites for community
purpose facilities as required by the recently adopted "Community
Purpose Facility Ordinance (No. 2452A); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator conducted
an Initial Study, IS-92-01, of potential environmental impacts
associated with the implementation of the project, and has
concluded that there would be no significant environmental impacts
and recommends adoption of the Negative Declaration issued on IS-
92-01; and
WHEREAS, on October 9, 1991, the Planning Commission
voted 5-0 to recommend that Council approve the amendments in
accordance with its Resolution PCM-92-01.
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
ordain as follows:
SECTION I: The City Council approves an amendment to the
Rancho del Rey Specific Plan boundaries and an amendment to SPAs I,
II and III by incorporating and designating community purpose
facility sites, in accordance with PCM-92-01.
SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in
full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
;L ih.
, city
Robert A. Leiter, Director of
Planning
Bruce M.
Attorney
C:\OR\RDR
~ -'I ~
i)
PROOF OF PUBUCATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
County of Son Diego:
I am a citizen of the United States and a
resident of the County aforesaid; I am over
the age of eighteen years, and not a party
to or interested in the above-entitled matter.
I am the principal clerk of the printer of the
CHULA VISTA STAR.NEWS, a newspaper of
general circulation, printed and published
TWICE WEEKLY in the City of Chula Vista,
and the South Bay Judicial District, County of
San Diego, State of California, under the date
of Aug. 8, 1932, Case Number 71752; that
the notice, of which the annexed is a printed
copy (set In type not smaller than nonpareil),
has been published in each regular and entire
issue of said newspaper and not in any supple-
ment thereof on the following dates, to-wit;
11/23
all in the year 19..9..1....
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Doled at ....f.h.I.!J..~...y..\.~.t.!l...............................
California, this..?.?. day of ...E9.X.,.........., 19......91
.~~.~~................
This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Slamp
Proof of Pub;icatian of
Ord. 2487
~-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item -2
Meeting Date 11/19/91
ITEM TITLE: PCA-91-06; Consideration of an amendment to the Municipal Code to
delete certain procedural requirements for churches that provide temporary
shelter for the homeless - City initiated
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning ;f/I!"
REVIEWED BY:
City Manag~
(4/Sths Vote: Yes_No.lO
On November 12, 1991, the City Council voted to adopt an amendment to the Municipal Code
which would amend zoning regulations pertaining to operation of temporary shelters in churches.
As part of this action, Council directed certain changes in the ordinance which would limit the
number of weeks in which such operations could occur to one initial two-week period, with two
additional non-consecutive two-week periods being permitted if so authorized by the Zoning
Administrator. In addition, the City Attorney has proposed certain additional wording changes
to further clarify the operation of the ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve Ordinance No. 2485, as amended.
(hOO1Jbel.onI)
?"'/
.,/
ITEM NUMBER:
'I
RESOLUTION NUMBER:
ORDINANCE NUMBER:
J~85
OTHER:
ITEM NUMBER REFERENCED ABOVE WAS CONTINUED FROM
DATE:
(AGENDA PACKET SCANNED AT ABOVE DATE)
II-I/. - "
ITEM NUMBER REFERENCED ABOVE HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO
DATE:
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION:
SeANN~/J ~I'r TIi/lr Hr6TIN ~
7-J.
ORDINANCE NO. 2485
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
SECTION 19.58.110 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE
TO DELETE CERTAIN PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR
CHURCHES THAT PROVIDE TEMPORARY SHELTER FOR THE
HOMELESS
WHEREAS, the Interfaith Shelter Network, which sponsors
and coordinates a temporary, rotational homeless shelter program
involving churches throughout the County, has requested that the
City consider streamlining certain local procedural requirements
which now apply to churches that wish to participate in the
program; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment would allow churches to
provide shelter for the homeless for two weeks per year without the
necessity to secure a zoning permit or to notice surrounding
residents each year prior to providing the shelter services; and
WHEREAS, the project is exempt from environmental review
as a categorical exemption, Class 23 Section 1532.
The City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby
ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Section 19.58.110 of the Chula vista
Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 19.58.110 Church, hospital, convalescent hospital,
religious or eleemosynary institution.
Any church, hospital, convalescent hospital or other
religious or eleemosynary institution in any R zone shall
be located on collector street or thoroughfare with a
minimum parcel of one acre, shall maintain a ten-foot
wide minimum landscaped strip or solid six-foot fence or
masonry wall on all property lines abutting said R zone,
except that said fence or wall may be reduced to three
and one-half feet in a landscaped front setback area not
containing parking facilities, and shall have side yard
and rear yard setbacks of at least twenty feet and a
front yard setback of at least twenty feet. These shall
be considered guidelines rather than standards in the
case of churches.
The provision of temporary shelter for the homeless in
accordance with the following standards and requirements
is considered accessory to church use subject to 'l;fte
1
7-3
-~_._~_._-----"
iClCluaRee ef a 13eRiREI BeFillit. compliance with the followina
standards:
1. A shelter may accommodate a maximum of 12 guests
for Re mere t.haR two weeks per year. Two
additional non-consecutive two-week periods Aft
aelditisRal eRe Rl;lRarea eiEJl=1:e.y (180) dayc may be
authorized by the Zoning Administrator provided no
opposition has been expressed by surrounding
property owners or residents; otherwise the citv
Council shall have the authoritv to arant such
extensions.
2. The guests shall be pre screened by a recognized
social service agency to determine resident
sui tabili ty . Active alcohol or drug abusers as
well as those with criminal convictions of a felony
or any crime of violence or significant mental
illness shall be excluded from the program.
Supervision shall be provided at all times both
on-site and during arrivals and departures from the
shelter.
3. A floor plan and set-up of the space to be occupied
shall be submitted along with a description of the
shelt.er prepesal t.s iRel~ae t.he prescreening
agency and criteria, p'FsyisieRs fer i3uper.'isieR,
ana Dcncaulc af hauys aRa ae~i~itiec.
4-.- A post set-up, pre-shelter inspection shall be
conducted by the City in order to determine
compliance with applicable building, health, safety
and fire regulations.
h 5. <Phe applieaRt. A church which is providina
shelter for the first time. or which has not
provided shelter in the last 18 months shall
provide the city with certification that
written notice of the proposal has been given
to properties within 300 ft. of the shelter
site. The host congregation is encouraged to
hold a neighborhood meeting to inform
residents of the proposal and answer questions
well before the commencement date.
6. The applieat.isR fer BeRing- permit, sct. lip plaa,
supplemental iRfermatien ana eertifieatisn af
nstiec shall Be cl:lsmit.tea at lcaot 10 days prier t.6
the eemmenocmcnt dat.e.
2
7"'1.{
.2...... =h-
The ileRiREj permi't shelter may be subject to
immediate reveeatieR closure for.the violation
of the standards or determination bv the
Zonina Administrator that the shelter auests
have been the nealiaent or intentional cause
of one or more 6~bs'taR'tia'tea repert ef
neighborhood disturbance~.
h a.
Shelter proposals beyond the limits noted in
item #1 above includina extensions are
considered conditional uses and may onlY be
submitted bY issuance of a sabjeet 'te 'the
appreval ef a conditional use permit.
SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in
full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption.
Presented by
'J
b3
Robert A. Leiter, Director of
Planning
Bruce M.
Attorney
C:\OR\19.58.110
3
7-5
ITEM TITLE:
COUNCIL AGENDA STAlEMENT
Item Number ~
Meeting Date 11/19/91
Resolution 14 'II YApproving an Agreement Between the City of
Chula Vista and Remy & Thomas and Authorizing the Mayor to
Execute Said Agreement
VIA: General Manager, Otay Ranch Project
SUBMIITED BY: Deputy City Manager Krempl&i
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ (4j5ths Vote: Yes_No X)
The City of Chula Vista is the agency designated to approve consulting contracts for the
Otay Ranch. The work being requested of Remy & Thomas is environmental legal review
of the Otay Ranch Environmental Impact Report. The Agreement has been reviewed by all
parties and is acceptable to Remy & Thomas, the Baldwin Company and the City. The
County is supportive of the scope of services to be undertaken.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution approving the Agreement with Remy &
Thomas to review and provide legal input on the Otay Ranch Environmental Impact Report
and authorizing the Mayor to sign the attached Agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Environmental Impact Report for the Otay Ranch Project is currently being prepared
by ERCE. There are many environmental and legal issues associated with that
Environmental Impact Report that need to be resolved prior to the completion of that
document. Because of the complexity of this project and the need to have a legally solid
document, it was recommended by the Otay Ranch Executive Staff Committee that legal
counsel be brought in to represent the public agencies. After discussion with both the City
Attorney's Office and County Counsel's Office, it was determined that a contract attorney
should be retained since existing work loads would preclude timely responses on this large
project.
FISCAL IMPAcr:
There will be no fiscal impact to the City of Chula Vista because the Baldwin Company will
be funding this scope-of-work.
Attachment
<?'I / fj--J.
RESOLUTION NO.
/tt'/Ir
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND REMY & THOMAS FOR
LEGAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE OTAY RANCH
PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
SAID AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista is the agency designated
to approve consulting contracts for the Otay Ranch; and
WHEREAS, Remy & Thomas is requested to perform consulting
services regarding environmental legal review of the Otay Ranch
Environmental Impact Report.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the city of Chula Vista does hereby approve an agreement between
the City of Chula Vista and Remy & Thomas for legal consulting
services for the Otay Ranch Project, a copy of which is on file in
the office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that
Chula vista is hereby authorized and
agreement for and on behalf of the ci
the Mayor of the city of
to execute said
1 ta.
Presented by
George Krempl, Deputy City
Manager
C:\RS\Remy&Thomas
8- J / fj-'t
Agreement with
Remy and Thomas
for Legal Consulting Services
This Agreement is made this day of 19-21- for the purposes
of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed between the parties, between the
City of Chula Vista ("City") herein, a municipal corporation of the State of California, and
Remy and Thomas, a professional law firm ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the"
following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the City and County of San Diego desire to employ a law firm with
expertise and experience in reviewing environmental documents for compliance with the
guidelines and procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in reference
to the Otay Ranch Project; and
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in
a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the servic;es required of Consultant
to Agency within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and
conditions of this Agreement; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby
mutually agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
a. General Duties
i. Consultant shall review environmental documents prepared by the City or their
consultants consisting of a Program Environmental Impact Report for compliance with CEQA
and advise City/Otay Ranch Project Team staff as to necessary and relevant changes that may
be required; and,
ii. Consultant shall provide guidance to City staff as to the processing of
environmental documents to assure compliance with CEQA requirements; and,
iii. Consultant shall provide legal advise to City staff to defend litigation predicated
upon alleged deficiencies in environmental documents or improper processing of said
documents.
(the duties of the Consultant as herein in this section contained may hereinafter be referred to
as "General Duties"); and, . . .
b. Scope of Work and Schedule
1
~.5'
Work assignments under this Agreement will be issued on an as needed basis. The
schedule will be agreed upon at the time that the tasks are assigned.
c. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this Agreement, whether Defined
Services or Additional Services, shall be performed in a manner consistent with that level of
care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under
similar conditions and in similar locations.
d. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and consultants employed by it are
protected by worker's compensation insurance and the Consultant has the coverage under
public liability, property damage and errors and omissions insurance policies which this
Agreement requires to be demonstrated in the form of a certificate of insurance.
Consultant will provide, prior to the commencement of the services required under
this Agreement the following certificates of insurance to the Agency prior to beginning work:
Statutory Worker's Compensation coverage plus $1,000,000 Employers liability
coverage.
General and Automobile Liability coverage to $1,000,000 combined single limit, and
which is primary to any policy which the Agency may otherwise carry ("primary coverage"),
and which treats the employees of the Agency in the same manner as members of the general
public ("cross-liability coverage").
All policies shall be issued by a carrier that has a Best's Rating of "A, Class V", or
better, or shall meet with the approval of the Agency's Risk Manager.
All policies shall provide that same may not be canceled without at least thirty (30)
days written notice to the Agency.
2. Duties of the City:
a. Consultation and Cooperation
City agrees to provide information, data, items, and materials as may be required by
Consultant in order to carry out Consultant's duties under this Agreement.
b. Compensation
i. The City hereby agrees to pay an hourly fee of $195.00 per hour to attorneys
Michael H. Remy, Tina A. Thomas, and J. William Yeates, and James G. Moose and an
hourly fee of $150.00 per hour to attorney Elizabeth O'Brien. Services of Staff Planner,
Georganne Foondos, will be billed at the hourly rate of $75.00 per hour. Time for research
2
?)~~
done by a law clerk or paralegal will be billed at an hourly rate of $50.00 per hour. Time of
attorneys for travel shall not be billed to City unless same is also actively spent in the
rendition of legal services.
ii. In addition to the above attorney fees, City hereby agrees to pay to the attorneys
all applicable costs, such as: filing fees, copying costs at $0.25 (.25 cents) per copy,
mileage costs at $0.35 (.35 cents) per mile; printing costs by a professional printer, as
charged, long distance phone charges, as charged; postage charges, as charged;
reimbursement for lodging and meal expenses in instances requiring out of county travel,
including but not limited to any costs involving common carriers (e.g., airplane), and any
other agreed upon costs or expenses related to this matter.
iii. Consultant shall not incur costs or billings which, in total, exceed Twenty
Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00) without further written approval of the City.
iv. It is understood that the City has established the 0tay Ranch Trust Fund to
account for and pay all expenses from deposits made by the project proponent, Baldwin
Vista, Ltd. If there is a default of the proponent, compensation for the services performed
shall be paid only from deposited monies and from no other asset or resource of the City, a
special obligation which is not a burden upon, or appropriation from, the General Fund of
the City.
c. Additional Scope of Work,
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require
Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the General Duties and Scope
of Work ("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, Consultant shall perform
same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in Section 2b. All compensation for
Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
3. Administration of Contract
The City hereby designates the 0tay Manager, or his designee, as its representative
for the coordination and administration of the work performed by Consultant herein required.
Copy of all correspondence will be provided to the City Attorney, and important legal
decisions or conclusions will be reviewed with the City Attorney.
4. Term
Consultant shall perform all of the Defined Services herein required of it as may be
required until the earlier of the billing of the cumulative total amount authorized under this
Agreement, or June 30, 1992.
5. Financial Interests of Consultant
Consultant warrants and represents that neither she, nor her immediate family
members, nor her employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest,
3
rr"?
directly or indirectly, whatsoever in property which would constitute a conflict of interest or
give the appearance of such conflict in relation to the projects identified in this Agreement.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment,
remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or
Consultant Associates. Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be
made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter.
Consultant agrees that neither Consultant nor her immediate family members, nor her
employees or agents, shall acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this
Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement,
or for any third party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this
Agreement.
6. Hold Harmless
Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from and against
all liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising from loss
of or damage to any property whatsoever or injury to or death of any person whomsoever
caused or alleged to be caused or occasioned by the negligent act or omission of Consultant
or any agent or employee of Consultant arising out of or in connection with this Agreement
or the work to be performed by Consultant hereunder, except to the extent such liability, cost
or expense is caused by the negligence of the City.
7. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
his/her obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants,
agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate this
Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the
effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In
that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps,
reports and other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become
the property of the City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable
compensation for any work satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials
up to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable
hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach.
8. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Manager or his designee determines that the Consultant's
negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has
resulted in expense to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such
negligence, errors, omissions in the plans or contract specifications, Consultant and City
shall select a mutually acceptable arbitrator with legal and technical expertise in preparing
4
2"..t'
EIR's and in the application of CEQA to determine whether Agency shall be reimbursed for
the additional expenses incurred by the City including engineering, construction and/or
restoration expense. Nothing herein is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions
of this Agreement.
9. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason for giving specific
written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at
least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished
and unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of
the City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City
as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable
compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to
the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims
for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
10. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign
any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City which City may unreasonable
deny.
II. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures,
systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the
sole and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in
part under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by
Consultant in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of
Agency. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose as may be limited by the
provisions of the Public Records Act, distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in
whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or
properties produced under this Agreement.
12. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an
independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant'S
work Products). Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives
are, for all purposes under ibis Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be
deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to
which City employees are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits,
workers compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits.
5
r'1
13. Responsible Charge
Consultant hereby designates that Tina A. Thomas shall be Consultant's representative
("Project Manager") to the project for the duration of the project. No substitution for this
position shall be allowed without written approval from the City.
14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this Agreement, against the
Agency unless a claim has first been presented in writing and flled with the Agency of the
City of Chula Vista and acted upon 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 Agency for
the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
15. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the
preparation of a report or document as a result of the scope of work required of Consultant,
Consultant shall include, or cause the inclusion, in said report or document a statement of the
numbers and cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the
preparation of the report or document.
16. Miscellaneous
a. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by Agency, Consultant shall have no
authority to act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
b. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to
this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any
party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or
deposited in the 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.
c. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or
contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties
relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may
6
8"" /P
be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by
the party against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
d. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that
it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this
Agreement; that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter
into this Agreement.
e. Governing LawIVenue
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.
f. Attorney Fees.
Should a dispute result in litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be
entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of that claim, including costs
and attorney fees.
[end of page. next page is signature page.]
7
8'~ II
Signature Page to
Agreement with Remy and Thomas
for Legal Consulting Services
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement this _
_ day of , 1991.
Attest:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
Tim Nader
Mayor
Beverly Authelet
City Cle
MOOt
Bruce M. Boogaard,
City Attorney
C:\AG\R.EMY&TbOm&1
Remy and Thomas
By:
Tina A. Thomas
8
8" "'J~
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item '1
Meeting Date: 11/19/91
ITEM TITLE:
Report - Local Legal Preference
Cil~lJct Waiver
city Attorney \~
Policy and Attorney-Client
SUBMITTED BY:
4/5tha Vote: Yes___No X
Referral No. 2480
BACKGROUND:
At the Redevelopment Agency meeting of October 1, 1991, the City Attorney was
directed to consider a policy for giving preference to local (i.e. San Diego
County) attorneys in recruiting outside legal assistance, including therein,
ways to evaluate and, if appropriate, waive Attorney-Client conflict of interest
situations that potential legal advisors may have between providing service to
the City and providing services to private existing or pre-existing, third party
clients.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: None applicable
RECOMMENDATION:
It is this office's recommendation that all such attorney-client conflicts be
evaluated on a case by case basis by the City Attorney because the risks of
injury to the City from biased legal advisors could vary tremendously with the
circumstances.
DISCUSSION:
The City Attorney in evaluating the retention of outside legal assistance, for
business and other reasonsJalready gives due consideration to the retention of
local legal talent in providing supplemental legal assistance to the City
Attorney's office and staff. The City Attorney's office has some concern that
the reduction of such a practice to a written policy may run into the same legal
obstacles as a local hiring preference policy. Aside from such considerations,
however, a written policy would provide nothing further than what is already
being accomplished by the City Attorney's office in making decisions to retain
local outside legal assistance.
In making a decision to waive an attorney's conflict, the City Attorney takes
into consideration the nature, scope and compensation between the attorney and
his or her the private sector client and the nature and scope of services and the
compensation that will be paid to the attorney by the City or Agency.
Furthermore, we give consideration to the extent and degree of in-house knowledge
which can be used to supervise the advice of the outside lawyer. At the same
time, we balance the potential for conflict with the cost efficiency attainable
by the City in the employment of such local firms and the local economic
stimulation local housing provides.
Rather than reducing such items to a written policy statement, the City Attorney
will remain cognizant of all these various issues each time that he makes a
9-)
recommendation to the City Council regarding the employment of an outside law
firm.
Therefore, rather than reducing such practice to a written policy statement, I
would like to provide assurances by this agenda statement, that the City
Attorney's office is remaining cognizant of the benefits that can be realized by
retaining local legal talent where available.
FISCAL IMPACT, N/A
C:\A113\ccmult cmfIict
9-~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 10
Meeting Date 11/19/91
ITEM TITLE:
Publ ic Hearing regarding Prel iminary Source Reduction and
Recycling Element (SRRE)
Principal Management Ass~~~t SnYde~
Conservation noordinator0~
City Manage~/ ~ 1f 4/5ths Vote:Yes_No~
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) requires that all
cities and counties prepare formal plans directed at wastestream diversion goals
of 25% by 1995 and 50% by the year 2000. Specifically, cities are required to
prepare "elements" addressing the two programmatic areas of: 1) source reduction
and recycling (to include composting) called the SRRE, and 2) household hazardous
waste (HHWE). The city "elements" are then to be submitted to their respective
counties which are responsible for preparing their own "element" for the
unincorporated area, as well as for developing a region-wide facility siting
component and producing a County-wide Integrated Waste Management Plan (CIWMP).
Because the total landfill capacity in San Diego County exceeds eight years, the
county-wide plan for San Diego is due in 1994.
This Public Hearing presents the City's Preliminary SRRE so that comments and
questions on the City's proposed programs can be received from the Council and
the general public. The State law requires that at least two public hearings be
held on the SRRE, one as a preliminary document and again in the final form. The
document is also being reviewed for comments by neighboring jurisdictions, the
State, the County, and the AB 939 Local Task Force. All comments wi 11 be
received and reconciled in the Final SRRE which is expected to be brought forward
to the City Council for adoption in February or March of 1992. During the period
of time leading up to the adoption of the SRRE, the document will also be
undergoing environmental review by City staff.
The report will present an overview of the process and the timetable as well as
staff comments regarding the document itself and the proposed programs for the
City.
RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and direct staff to: 1) continue to accept and
reconcile comments from the general public and appropriate agencies until
December 31, 1991 or until any later date deemed necessary by staff; 2) begin
10-1
appropriate environmental review as required by the California Environmental
Quality Act; and 3) return to the City Council for adoption of a Final SRRE at
such time as all public comments have been responded to and/or incorporated in
the document and the environmental review has been completed.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission will
review and discuss the Preliminary SRRE at the November 18, 1991 meeting.
Because of the timing, the minutes will not be attached to this report. A verbal
report of the Commission's comments and actions can be presented during this
Public Hearing. When the minutes are available, the comments will be
incorporated into or responded to in preparation of the Final SRRE which will
also be reviewed by the RCC.
Additionally, copies of the report have been provided to the Growth Management
Oversight Committee and the Chula Vista 21 Committee for information and comments
to be addressed in the Final SRRE have been requested.
DISCUSSION: In the simplest of terms, the Preliminary SRRE describes the source'
reduction, recycling and composting programs the City is now engaging in or
planning. It then projects how successful those plans will be in allowing the
City to meet the State's mandated wastestream diversion goals by 1995 and the
year 2000. The projections are based on data characterizing the City's current
wastestream enteri ng the regiona 1 landfill system and primari ly the Otay
landfill. The projections also factor in the amount of diversion activity
already going on within the City. The baseline data and diversion statistics are
still undergoing refinement and staff expects to see modifications in the Final
SRRE.
The adoption of the Final SRRE will signal the City's submittal of its "element"
to the County for inclusion in the County-wide plan. Subsequently, there will
be annual updates as new information is made available during the period of time
up until the County-wide plan is produced in 1994. The State requires that the
County-wide plan ultimately be adopted by the majority of the cities with the
majority of the population. This information indicates that the presentation of
the Preliminary SRRE is the beginning of a fairly dynamic process which will
eventually produce a regional plan for meeting the integrated waste management
needs of San Diego County, in addition to addressing how individual cities are
contributing to the goals.
Most, if not all, of the existing and projected activities discussed in the SRRE
are familiar to the City Council and citizens of Chula Vista. At the Council
workshop on the status of recycling in Chula Vista on August 15, 1991, staff
presented a comprehensive picture of planned programs and decision points to be
covered within the next year in order to meet the State-mandated goals. Council
was also briefed at that time about the advanced timetable for implementing these
programs created by the County's mandatory recycling ordinance which presents a
staggered but accelerated deadl ine for ensuring that recyclable items are
diverted from the landfill wastestream. (See Attachment A.)
2
'0" ).
The Document
As out1 ined to Council during the workshop, the SRRE reports the numerous
recycling-related activities in various stages of development, planning and
implementation in the City of Chula Vista. The document was prepared by a
consultant under a cooperative agreement with the County of San Diego initially
authorized by Council on December 11, 1990. City staff worked closely with the
consultant to ensure that the uniqueness of the City's demographic, land use, and
programmatic data was accurate.
The executive summary of the document is included as Attachment B to this report
to provide a brief synopsis of the voluminous and detailed information contained
in the entire document which was previously provided to Council on November 5,
1991. Population projections to the year 2006 are based on current data, census
results, trends, and housing completions. Implementation schedules for source
reduction, recycling, composting, special waste disposal, and education and
public information are included and highlighted for both the short-term (to meet
the 25% goals in 1995) and the medium term (50% goals by the year 2000). In
addition, this summary integrates the individual programs with: materials that
would be targeted within that program, activities which will be used to achieve
those goals, and the expected percentage of wastestream reduction to be
accomplished by those activities.
The current wastestream data in the SRRE indicates that Chu1a Vista's diversion
rate at the present time is 1 - 2%. Staff will be working with the consultant
and the County to further refine that data and to include additional information
from existing commercial establishments within the City. However, it is
important to note that even at this relatively low level, moving ahead on
schedule with the programs previously outlined to the Council and included in the
SRRE will allow the City to meet both the County's mandatory ordinance schedule
and the State-mandated goals included in AS 939.
This document presents the plan for the achievement of those goals (Section 1).
Section 2 describes the State requirements for establishing the baseline of waste
generation data used to determine and monitor the programs' successes, as well
as Chula Vista's results. Existing and planned programs in source reduction,
recycling, composting, and special waste are outlined in Sections 3 through 6.
The City recognizes that such important and pervasive changes in behavior are
necessary to ensure success of these programs) requiring extensive pub1 ic
education and information (Section 7).
Not to be discounted, is the critical importance of future planning for regional
facilities such as materials recovery facilities, mixed waste processing plants,
composting facilities, transfer stations, and landfills. It is important for the
City to take responsibility for the individual programs and activities
represented in this SRRE but still recognize a necessary regional role in such
areas as encouraging local estab 1 i shment of recyc led material manufacturing
businesses, public education campaigns emphasizing greater personal
responsibility for source reduction, appropriate legislative programs to
complement City source reduction, recycling, and composting goals, etc. This
broader area of the City's response to diverting materials from the wastestream
3
10" 3
is referenced in the SRRE (Section 8) but will be more significantly addressed
when the SRRE is incorporated into the County-wide plan. The final sections (9
and 10) of the SRRE describe the City's expectation that most programs will be
funded by user fees and show how the existing and planned programs should meet
the State mandates.
The Effect of Growth on Oiversion Mandates
During the August 15, 1991 workshop, Council raised the question of whether or
not the AB 939-directed formula for waste generation is impacted by growth. The
SRRE has built in the impact of growth and clearly states that "population
projections and per capita solid waste generation rates are the tools used to
arrive at solid waste quantity projections" (page 2-25). These are the
projections for 1995 and 2000 that the 25% and 50% diversion goals are applied
to. . Appendix B of the SRRE reports annual calculations of waste disposed and
diverted through the year 2006, reflecting both effects of not instituting the
recommended programs (current conditions) and of implementing the SRRE. Unusual
population increases, such as those due to annexations, are unpredictable and
will be accounted for in future annual updates as needed. In summary, growth is
taken into account in the AB 939 mandates. The GMOC is also monitoring the AB
939 process on an annual basis.
The Next Steo
In conclusion, the Preliminary SRRE will undergo continued staff review and
refinement of background data, as well as response and reconciliation of comments
and questions received during this Public Hearing and during the entire public
review period. The Preliminary Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE), also
required by AB 939 and AB 1820, will be scheduled for Public Hearing in December
1991. Comments and questions received during the public review period for that
document will also be reconciled on an appropriate timetable and the Final HHWE
will be brought back to the City Council for adoption at the same time as the
Final SRRE.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact as a result of the recommended action
on this Preliminary SRRE. The fiscal impact of individual programs and
components will be addressed as the programs are brought forward to the City
Council in future actions. The ongoing administrative cost of planning,
implementing and monitoring future programs will be addressed during the City's
annual budget cycles.
It is important to note, however, that the fi~cal impact of not moving forward
on the Final SRRE is the possibility of State-imposed penalties of up to $10,000
per day.
wp51/A113SRRE
4
10-Y
ITEM NUMBER:
If)
R~SOLUTION NUMB~R:
ORDINANCE NUMBER:
OTHER:~&J(J JlEAh/tJ Go
ITEM NUMBER REFERENCED ABOVE WAS CONTINUED FROM
DATE:
(AGENDA PACKET SCANNED AT ABOVE DATE)
ITEM NUMBER REFERENCED ABOVE HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO
DATE:
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION:
S~ItE
<SDCJIt.t!.€
~ E /Joe.,. l..O e~ r.fJ Rr a fry flII-U-
IUibueTIDA) "'HI) kEtJYI!L.IAJ(;. ELEHEIoJT)
II) -5
Attachment A
COUNCIL CONFERENCE AGENDA STATEKENT
Item
Meeting Date
*~
T) ",,5/9J..
"'6\\S\'t\
ITEM TITLE:
Recycling Status Report
Stephanie Snyder, Principal Management Assistan~
Athena Lee Bradley, Conservation Coordinator ftlf,
City Manager...J'=1,~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-1Ll
SUBMI'l'TED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of recycling
program implementation to date, as well as the upcoming decision points
and necessary public hearings coming before Council over the next year.
RECOMMENDATION: Accept the report.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: A copy of this report has been
provided to the Resource Conservation Commission, and will be formally
reviewed at its August 12, 1991 meeting. Additionally, copies of the
report will be provided to the Growth Management Oversight Committee
and the Chula Vista 21 Committee for their information.
DISCUSSION:
Attached is an executive summary and comprehensive report on integrated
waste management activities for the City of Chula Vista, including
source reduction, recycling, and composting.
Fiscal Impact: None as a result of this report.
f/!f 11)-5
A'l"1'ACBMERT A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report will describe the current status of recycling in the City,
mandates and influences driving the City's need to implement additional
source reduction and recycling programs, and program options to meet
these mandates. It is expected that presenting such an overview in a
workshop setting will allow Council to provide general policy direction
to staff and will give Council a more comprehensive understanding about
future agenda items.
Three forces are guiding the way that Chula Vista disposes of its
waste, the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939),
County landfill capacity and new amendments to the County Solid Waste
Ordinance. The County Solid Waste Ordinance presents a new issue for
Council in that it outlines specific timetables for prohibiting the
disposal of recyclable material at the County landfills.
The Ordinance specifies material types by residential, commercial and
industrial sources that must be separated from the wastestream and
recycled or composted. Chula Vista will first be impacted in March of
1992, when the City will be required to either enforce the mandatory
recycling ordinance or be subject to penalties. Enforcement is not an
issue the City has had to deal with in the past. It raises questions of
staff resources, logistics, and community opposition. It demands the
development of creative ways to educate and involve the public in a
positive way.
Chula Vista has already established a very successful single family
residential Curbside Recycling Program, as well as an Office Recycling
Program for the Civic Center. The Office Recycling Program also has a
business outreach component that will target local businesses for
assistance in establishing their own office recycling programs.
Development of future recycling programs in the City is going to be
significantly impacted by factors such as diversion requirements of AB
939 and the timeline mandated by the County Ordinance. Staff will be
developing program plans to be brought to Council for decision during
the next year. These programs include: curbside "greens" (yardwaste)
collection; backyard composting; industrial recycling; commercial
recycling; and residential multi-family. Other issues to be addressed
include: source reduction; designing for recycling (space allocation);
and procurement.
~
11)-'
A'.l".l'AC:HKBH B
RECYCLING STATUS REPORT
INTRODUCTION
Chula Vista's "disposal" future is being directed by three powerful
forces I the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB
939), County landfill capacity and the County Solid Waste Ordinance.
There has been Council discussion and action in the past year on both
of the first two issues, the State mandates of AB 939 and the problems
associated with assuring Countywide landfill capacity. (Amore detailed
discussion of these factors is included in Attachment C.)
The most recent factor to influence the City'S decisions on current and
future recycling programs has only been recently introduced I changes to
the County's Solid Waste Ordinance which outline specific timetables
for prohibiting the disposal of recyclable material at the County
landfills.
NEW INFORMATION AFFECTING LOCAL LANDFILL DISPOSAL
On June 11, 1991, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors adopted a
"mandatory recycling ordinance", amending the County Solid Waste
Ordinance. This action is a result of a 1988 Board decision to
encourage and assist the voluntary establishment of programs which
would produce a 30 percent reduction in the amount of wastes going to
County landfills in three years. Board action to mandate recycling was
taken at this time primarily because the 30 percent reduction has not
been met voluntarily.
The Ordinance specifies material types by residential, commercial and
industrial sources that must be separated from the wastestream and
recycled or composted. It provides a timetable for phasing in the
requirements throughout the region and allows a series of warnings and
penalties. Chula Vista will first be impacted in March, 1992.
The County intends to enforce the ordinance through random inspections
of vehicles entering County-owned landfills to determine the contents
and origins of the vehicles. However, there is a provision that cities
which "adopt and diligently enforce" similar and approved recycling
ordinance provisions for solid waste collectors and generators will be
exempt from inspections and resulting fines.
If Chula Vista does not adopt and enforce a mandatory ordinance, refuse
vehicles from the City will be subject to inspections at the landfill.
Violators would then be warned, followed by fines beginning at $25.00
per truck, up to $100.00 per truck. If the violating vehicles continue
to bring mixed waste containing recyclables to the landfill, after
three warnings they will not be allowed to dump.
Enforcement is not an issue the City has had to deal with in the past.
It raises questions of staff resources, logistics, and community
opposition. It demands the development of creative ways to educate and
1;f(
IfJ-?
involve the public in a positive way. Some ideas include: resident,
neighborhood, and business contests to offer awards for those who
recycle; promotion of volunteer opportunities; and increased
involvement of block associations and other neighborhood organizations.
Additionally, outreach to area schools will promote the active use of
environmentally-oriented curriculum and activities.
Staff is also exploring other more "positive", creative and
economically viable options for encouraging program participation,
including establishment of a "volume based" rate system (e.g., variable
can). Such systems, widely used in the Pacific Northwest, set an
established refuse fee based on the size container (or weight)
generated by the customer. This method incorporates a clear incentive
for recycling and reduction of wastes.
CURRENT STATUS OF RECYCLING PROGRAMS
Up to this point, this report has provided the backdrop for explaining
the influences affecting Council's previous direction on recycling, and
those areas of concern for upcoming programs. It is now important to
focus on the success of existing programs, and plans for future source
reduction, recycling, and yard waste programs which will meet City,
County, and State goals.
Curbside Recycling
Under Council's direction, the City's Curbside Recycling Program was
expanded to all single-family attached and detached homes receiving
curbside refuse collection services in February, 1991 (approximately
22,900 households). The participation rate is excellent--82 percent I An
average of 260 tons of recyclables are being collected each month.
Since September, 1989, in addition to landfill space savings, over 5
millon kilowatt hours of electricity have been saved through recycling,
as well as 22,000 trees from newspaper recycling.
Resident concern with the recycling fee was expressed following the
initial expansion of the Curbside Program. Following staff explanations
regarding the necessity of recycling, the unavoidable costs that need
to be paid somehow, and the fact that money generated from the program
goes to off-set these costs, most concerned residents appeared to
understand the City'S need to implement the service and charge
residents directly. Citizen complaints have become negligible and staff
continues to receive inquiries about materials, markets, etc.
Beginning August 1, 1991, the County will award "Tonnage Diversion
Grants" to all cities for the diversion of residential recyclables
(excluding yard wastes). These grants are non-competitive and will pay
$7.75 per ton awarded on a quarterly basis. Based on the average
monthly tonnage from the City's Curbside Recycling Program, th.ese
grants could amount to approximately $24,000 the first year.
1?r
10-1'
The establishment of the diversion grant is part of the County's plan
to assist cities in generating revenue which can be used for
enforcement activities, as an alternative to fines at the landfill for
lack of enforcement.
City Office Recycling ProgrlJ1ll
The City'S Office Recycling Program was formally initiated in July,
1991. Over 500 Civic Center employees are now able to recycle their
paper products, and glass, aluminum, and plastic beverage containers.
The Program is funded through a County of San Diego Technical
Assistance Program (TAP) grant for the period of one year. The Urban
Corps of San Diego, also operating under a TAP grant, will provide
weekly collection services. The grant provided funds for training
materials and supplies, including an employee handbook, decals, and
recycling bins. Staff developed and implemented the program, employee
trainings, and will monitor the program.
Also as part of the TAP grant awarded to the City, staff is developing
an office recycling guide to be distributed to area businesses. Twelve
local businesses of varying sizes will be targeted for implementation
of office recycling. A business recycling baseline will also be created
in order to track office recycling programs implemented in the City.
Staff will work with the Chamber of Commerce to market the office
recycling guide, and to begin implementation of recycling in business
offices.
Jl'u'XuKE RECYCLING PROGRAMS
CUrbside Recycling ProgrlJ1ll
As mandated by the County Solid Waste Ordinance, the City will need to
address the development and enforcement of a "mandatory recycling
ordinance. " The ordinance would need to be adopted and in place by
March 1, 1992. Enforcement of the ordinance would allow for a three
month "warning" period, to be followed by levying of fines for
noncompliance three months from enactment.
Although a detailed report on this issue will be brought forward to
Council in the near future, one option for the City under a mandatory
recycling ordinance would be to hire additional staff to enforce the
ordinance. Similar to code enforcement procedures already operating in
the City, a "Recycling Enforcement Officer" could issue a series of
warnings to individuals who do not separate their recyclables from
their trash. These warnings could be followed by a more stringent
enforcement~ if violations continue, fines could ensue.
An alternative to having City staff enforce the ordinance would be to
have the hauler become the enforcing agent. This option would have the
benefit of having fewer direct costs to the City, however, it could
potentially impact refuse collection costs that are already rapidly
increasing. An enforcement mechanism using a combination of both
options may also be viable.
~/8-9
Staff will be developing a mandatory source reduction and recycling
ordinance over the next two months. This ordinance would apply to all
sectors of the City--residential, industrial, and commercial. It will
specifically outline which materials must be recycled within each
sector, as well as the County's timeline for implementation of
recycling programs. Also contained in the ordinance will be the
recommended method of enforcement. Because of the sensitive nature of
such an ordinance, staff will take steps to ensure widespread public
notification of the intended action, including the Chamber of Commerce,
major businesses, etc.
As fulfillment toward AB 939, it is expected that the single-family
Curbside Recycling Program will divert approximately 4 percent of the
wastestream by 1995. The high participation in the program will clearly
continue to benefit the City as it implements recycling in other
sectors. As office workers, restaurant and construction employees and
others are asked to recycle, many individuals will react with
enthusiasm because they are already accustomed to "separating their
wastes."
Key Issues, Decisions and Action Dates:
*
Mandatory Recycling Ordinance
November, 1991
*
Enforcement
March, 1992
.Greens" Re~cling
The separation of yardwaste ("greens") for mulching, composting, and/or
as a biofuel, is a simple, and cost-effective method for reducing a
significant portion of the municipal solid wastestream. Yard waste
comprises about 20 percent of the wastestream. .
As required under the County Ordinance, greens collection for single-
family and multi-family dwellings must begin by January, 1992.
Collection must be curbside (for single-family), but does not have to
be once per week, as with residential recycling. Thus, if the City
concluded that curbside collection every other week would meet the
needs of the City, this is allowed.
Several options are available for program design. One of the most cost-
effective approaches is one in which residents place a special decal on
a container (provided by the resident) and place the container onto
the sidewalk next to their recycling and refuse containers. It is
estimated that the costs associated with residential greens collection
runs between $1.50-to-$2.00 per household. Markets for the mulched or
composted material are still in their infancy, but are nonetheless
growing. As consumer interest in "organically" grown foods increases,
reliance on natural compost instead of petroleum based synthetic
fertilizers should rise.. Additionally, the increased use of
alternative, cleaner fuels, including "bio-mass" will improve the
market for yard and wood wastes.
1;1 /f)-If)
As directed by Council, staff has drafted a Request for Proposals in
order to contract for collection (and processing) of separated
residential yard wastes. It is anticipated that the RFP will be
distributed toward the end of fall, with a proposal to begin a phased-
in residential single-family greens recycling program by June of next
year. The RFP would also include the collection of greens from multi-
family units, to be phased-in under the County Ordinance mandated
timeline.
Enforcement of yard waste recycling under the County Ordinance is to
begin January 1, 1993. Through public education and ease of service
(Le., weekly or bi-weekly curbside collection) public opposition
should be minimal. Other cities that have instituted yard waste
collection have a very positive response from citizens who are usually
eager not to have such a large volume of materials end up in the
landfill. It is anticipated that greens recycling will divert 8 percent
of the City's wastestream toward fulfillment of the AB 939 goals.
Key Issues, Decisions and Action Dates:
*
Request for Proposals
November, 1991
*
Enforcement
January, 1993
Backyard Composting Program
Voluntary backyard composting is a low-staff, no-cost approach toward
waste reduction. It will also help to promote "greens" recycling
through "getting the word out" about yard waste recycling in the City.
Through fliers, residents can be informed about the benefits of
backyard composting, and the availability of composting bins. Residents
can then fill out a coupon on the flier to order a composting bin from
a local vendor. Composting bins can be sold at cost to residents, and
come with an instruction guide.
Staff could work with community garden clubs, homeowner and renter
associations and other civic clubs to promote backyard composting, and
even community composting at neighborhood ,gardens. Although voluntary,
all backyard composting activity will assist toward meeting the City's
AB 939 diversion goals and help meet the County's mandates.
Key Issues, DeCisions, and Action Dates:
*
Begin Implementation of Pilot Program
October, 1991
Industrial Recycling ProgrlUD
Industrial recycling poses different challenges for implementation than
do other recycling programs in the City. Due to the diverse nature of
industrial wastes, recycling for this sector is not conveniently "put
out to bid." Standardization of recycling collection is not practical,
as most industries haul their own refuse to the ~andfill or recyclers.
P1f /'-1/
Staff plans to develop an industrial recycling guide for distribution
to all area businesses. Information to be contained in the guide will
include a listing of the recyclable materials designated under the
County Ordinance and a listing of local recyclers. Staff will also be
developing a "Materials Exchange Program" through which industries
could list waste products that may be utilized by other industries in
their manufacturing processes.
The County has reported a sharp increase in the recycling of
construction and demolition wastes since the landfill disposal fee was
applied to containers and trucks by weight, instead of volume. For most
clean loads of construction debris, recycling is a more cost effective
alternative. As the disposal fee continues to rise, this should
increase industry recycling even further.
Enforcement for industrial recycling will begin October 1, 1992. Staff
will work directly with the industries, the Chamber of Commerce, and
industry associations in order to gain cooperation from local
industries. Additionally, as noted above, the secondary materials
market for demolition and construction materials is relatively strong.
This will provide a strong incentive to industries to recycle.
It is anticipated that industrial recycling will divert 6 percent of
the City's wastestream toward fulfillment of the AB 939 goals.
Key Issues, Decisions, and Action Dates:
*
Enforcement
October, 1992
C01II11leXcial Recycling ProgriJ11l
Commercial recycling will create many special challenges to staff. The
diversity of offices, restaurants, and other hospitality and service
establishments will necessitate recycling programs that can be both
implemented on a City-wide scale, but yet are "tailored" to each
individual establishment. Large, medium, and small businesses all have
special needs stemming from the size and nature of the establishment,
in addition to the diversity of recyclable materials generated.
As directed by Council, staff will be exploring the option of going to
bid for collection services for commercial establishments.
Several options exist:
1) An RFP could be awarded to a single provider of services;
2) An RFP could be awarded to multiple providers, e. g., one
provider could offer services to all restaurants, another to all
motels, another to offices, or the city could be divided up in
quadrants, awarding contracts to collectors by quadrant;
3) No RFP would be developed, leaving open opportunities for all
service providers to compete on a "free market" basis.
c>t?
~
10-/,J.
Each option has certain advantages. Awarding a contract to a single
provider would allow the City to closely monitor the recycling
activities of area businesses. Additionally, the City could collect
franchise fees for the service. Having multiple providers under
contract would potentially provide these same advantages.
With the number and diversity of commercial establishments in the City,
an open system may be prove advantages from a staff perspective, as it
would require less monitoring of contract compliance, legalities, etc.
The City of San Diego uses an open system for commercial recycling
which seems to be meeting the needs of the business community well.
Many of the major office complexes in the San Diego are recycling, with
a variety of haulers offering services.
Allowing the "free market" to work in offering recycling services to
commercial establishments would still allow staff to monitor recycling
activities, through the database on business recycling in the City
being developed under this year's TAP grant award. Services provided to
commercial establishments may be more tailored made to the particular
establishment, since businesses would be able to choose the vendor to
best suit their needs.
Enforcement of commercial recycling in the City under the County
Ordinance is to begin July 1, 1993. Enforcement of commercial recycling
in the City will require creative planning and implementation. Staff
will develop a comprehensive public relations campaign targeting area
businesses. The campaign will focus on the benefits of recycling,
including reduced disposal costs, environmental awareness, and positive
public image.
Through the City's current TAP grant award, staff has begun to develop
an ongoing dialogue with the Chamber of Commerce. During the fall of
this year, staff will begin to work directly with area businesses in
establishing recycling programs, offering advise and consultation where
needed. Working closely with the business community will be the only
way to achieve compliance with the mandatory ordinance.
It is anticipated that commercial recycling will divert 5 percent of
the City's wastestream toward fulfillment of the AB 939 goals.
Key Issues, Decisions, and Action 'Dates:
..
RFP Decision
January, 1992
..
Enforcement
July, 1993
,-,<" Y'
, I 0. _
, .
/fJ-13
Resident;ial lEult;i-flUlJi.ly Recycling Progrl/!Ull
The establishment of recycling collection services for residential
multi-family units will require a great deal of advanced planning and
careful implementation. As with commercial establishments, multi-family
dwelling units vary in terms of size, design, and demographics. These
characteristics all impact the type of collection services that can be
offered.
As directed by Council, staff will be exploring the option of going to
bid for collection services for multi-family establishments.
As with commercial recycling, several options exist:
1) An RFP could be awarded to one, single provider of services;
2) An RFP could be awarded to multiple providers, e.g., the City
could be divided up in quadrants, awarding contracts to collectors
by quadrant;
3) No RFP would be developed, leaving open opportunities for all
service providers to compete on a "free market" basis.
Again, as with commercial recycling each option would have certain
advantages. Because the City's single-family residential recycling
program has been awarded to a one hauler, it may be prudent to award
multi-family recycling to one hauler as well. Additionally, the large
percentage of multi-family housing in the City may be best serviced by
one or a few designated providers.
Dividing the City into service quarters and awarding a contract to a
single provider for each quarter would allow for more competitive
biddinq and services, but still allow for contractual accountability.
Additionally, this could provide for more expedited program
implementation, as opposed to a single hauler attempting to provide
service to the entire City.
Enforcement for residential multi-family recycling under the County
Ordinance is scheduled to begin July 1, 1993. In order to take
advantage of the Tonnage Diversion Grants offered by the County,
however, the City may wish to begin pilot projects in residential
multi-family units prior to that date. It is anticipated that
approximately 4 percent of the City's wastestream will be diverted
through a residential multi-family recycling program to meet the AB 939
mandates.
Key Issues, DeciSions, and Action Dates:
*
RFP Decision
*
Enforcement
January, 1992
July, 1993
c::t- /tJ.
~IO IO-11!
Source Reduction
All of the City's recycling and composting programs will incorporate
source reduction. Staff will promote waste reduction ideas and
guidelines in its public and business awareness campaigns. Guidebooks
developed for commercial and industrial recycling programs will contain
specific outlines on source reduction options.
Designing for Recycling
As part of the City's comprehensive approach to waste management, staff
will develop guidelines for space allocation and design to allow for
recycling at multi-family dwellings, and commercial and industrial
establishments. An ordinance requiring the design for space allocation
will also be formulated.
Procurement
"Closing the loop" is an essential component of any comprehensive
recycling program. Many paper products containing recycled content are
now being purchased for use by the City. Staff is developing an
ordinance to expand upon this current use, both in terms of the
diversity of recycled products purchased, and the volume. As part of
the City's Office Recycling Program, all employees are being informed
about the importance of using recycled products.
County 'l'echnical Assistance Program Grant Proposal
Staff is developing a grant proposal under the 1992-93 funding period
for the County's Technical Assistance Program. The proposal will
request funds to expand upon the City's current business outreach
recycling project (funded under this year's TAP), targeting additional
businesses for office recycling program establishment, and
incorporating projects to serve the hospitality sector, and area
industries.
Key Issues, Decisions, and Action Dates:
* Adoption of Resolution Supporting the Grant
Proposal August, 1991
CONCLUSION
The ideas, issues, and programs discussed in this report will be placed
on a City Council agenda for action in individual reports and public
hearings over the next year. This presentation shows the relationship
between the issues and resulting decisions. It also provides some
background reference material for the future agenda items. (See
Attachment D.) In conclusion, it should give a framework for
stimulating thoughts on policy direction and preparation for further
discussion on the future of recycling in Chula Vista.
4.- ,1-
"
~ 'y
//
/f)-IS-
ATTACBKBN'.l' C
Kev Pactors AffectJ.na RecvclJ.na Programs ion Chula VJ.sta
!'he California Integrated Waste Jlanagement Act of 1989 (AS 939)
In October, 1989, the California Integrated Waste Management Act of
1989 (AB 939) was enacted. This law requJ.res cities to playa primary
role in solid waste management. AB 939 mandates that all cities and
counties divert 25 percent of the wastestream being disposed at
landfills by 1995, and 50 percent by 2000. Under the law, penalties of
up to $10,000 per day can be levied by the state against jurisdictions
failing to prepare and adopt reasonable plans and programs designed to
achieve these goals, as well as failing to achieve the goals.
Cities are required to prepare and adopt two plans by January 1, 1992:
A Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) and a Household
Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE). These "elements" will then be included
in a County-wide Integrated Waste Management Plan to be submJ.tted to
the state by January 1, 1994. The County's plan will include elements
from all cities and a Countywide facility siting plant to provide
disposal capacity.
When complete, the City's SRRE and HHWE documents will present a
comprehensive analysis of Chula Vista's current wastestream generation
and disposal methods. The reports will fully describe proposed plans to
reduce the City's waste generation by the mandated 25 percent and 50
percent goals, as scheduled. The plans will include source reduction,
recycling, composting and landfilling programs for all sectors of the
City--residential, industrial, and commercial.
County Landfill Capacity
All cities in San Diego County (with the exception of San Diego) are
served by a system of County owned and operated, subregionally-located
landfills. Uniform disposal fees provide incentive for users to access
the most conveniently located landfill at the least expensive transport
cost. Countywide landfill lifespan is currently around 10 years.
Serving Chula Vista and other South Bay cities, the Otay Landfill is
scheduled to reach capacity by 1998.
Over the past three years the County has increased disposal fees
("tipping fees") by approximately 25 percent each year, bringing the
fee to the current $23.00 per ton. As landfills throughout the County
near closure, new sites are sought, and other revenues are generated
from the disposal fees (including recycling surcharges), the fees are
expected to continue to rise at least $5.00 per ton per year.
Additionally, landfilling as a disposal option will become increasingly
more costly as distances :!=rom urban areas to disposal sites are
increased~ transportation costs rise due to air quality mandates
(including potential requirements for the use of alternative fuels)~
land prices continue to rise~ and, environmental regulations become
_it I'{
/l
;;t/~
/f)-I'
increasingly more difficult and
"NIMBYism" and community concern
impacts.
The implementation of comprehensive source reduction, recycling and
composting programs will increase the options available to the City for
its disposal future. Diverting recyclable materials from Otay will
potentially increase the life of the landfill.
costly to mitigate. Moreover,
will compound all of the above
Comprehensive source reduction, recycling and composting programs also
allow for more local control over an issue that will continue
to dramatically impact the City. These programs create relatively
"clean", beneficial jobs locally, in collection and processing. Unlike
landfilling, recycling and composting operations are relatively
environmentally inert. Community opposition to recycling operations is
usually not pervasive.
Although landfill disposal will always be necessary, through reducing
our need to landfill, we decrease our dependence on County-owed
disposal facilities, relying instead on more locally-based
alternatives. More revenues will thus stay in the hands of local
businesses. Local control over programs will also be more directly
accountable for costs, requiring creative funding and program
development, but in the long run more stable costs.
.Lf I~
~ / :J-
I f)-17
A'l'TIol'RMlnIT D
Chronoloav of Kev Action Dates
for City Council Review
1991
Public
_ring
August
(AB 939)Local Enforcement Agency Designation -
Letter of Intent to State
October
Technical Assistance Program (TAP)
Grant Application
(AB 939) Preliminary Draft Elements
(SRRE & HHWE)
x
Backyard Composting Program - Pilot Program
Implementation
November
Mandatory Source Separation ("Recycling")
Ordinance/Enforcement Program
x
"Green" Material Program-RFP
December
(AB 939) Adoption of Final SRR and
HHW Elements
x
1992
January
Multi-Family Recycling Program - RFP
April
July
Commercial Recycling Program - RFP Decision.
"Green Material" Recycling Program - Contract Award
x
Multi-family Recycling Program - Contract Award
x
· May involve formal Council Review or public hearing depending on decision.
c;
{ I
.
'i'
/
"r
10-1'
ATTACHMENT B
City of Chula Vista
SOURCE REDUCTION AND
RECYCLING ELEMENT
October 1991
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
IO-lq
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is a summary of the Source Reduction on Recycling Element (SRRE) prepared for
the City of Chula Vista by Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. (CDM) dated October 1991.
The report is divided into the following ten sections:
1.0 Statement of Goals and Objectives
2.0 Initial Solid Waste Generation Study
3.0 Source Reduction Component
4.0 Recycling Component
5.0 Composting Component
6.0 Special Waste Component
7.0 Education and Public Information Component
8.0 Facility Capacity Component
9.0 Funding Component
10.0 Integration Component
1.0 STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
This section provides a brief overview of the regulatory background that relates to the
SRRE, as well as the goals and objectives of each component program that will help the
City of Chula Vista meet the mandated 25 and 50 percent diversion required by State
Assembly Bill 939 and comply with the county mandatory recycling ordinance. Refer
to Table ES-l for a summary of component goals.
The short-term objectives of Chula Vista's source reduction program are to educate the
public about source reduction activities and to modify city procurement policies. The
medium-term objective is to encourage source reduction behavior through the use of
public information and business outreach programs, economic incentives and rate
structure modifications, point-of-purchase signage, as well as the promotion of source
reduction legislation.
2209.Q53-TC-COIT/I2JCHUU. VST/CHUU.VST.FNL ES-l
18-,2.0
Table FS-l
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUMMARY OF COMPONENT GOALS
COMPONENT PROGRAM W ASTESTREAM REDUCTION
Short-Term Medium-Term
(1995) (2000)
Source Reduction 1 2
Recycling
Residential 6 11
Commercial/Industrial 10 15
Composting 8 21
Special Waste 0 1
TOTAL 25 50
2209.053-Tc.COrrl121CHUU. VST/CHUU. VST.PNL ES- 2
IO.~1
The city's short-term recycling objective is to divert 49 percent of the readily recyclable
material that is currently being disposed, primarily through the implementation of
mandatory recycling programs for each land use sector in compliance with the San Diego
County mandatory recycling ordinance. The city's medium-term recycling objective is
to capture 80 percent of the readily recyclable material that is currently being disposed.
The city has also laid out some objectives for developing markets for recyclable material,
including establishing a local waste exchange clearinghouse, attracting recycling firms
to the south bay and promoting the purchase of recycled materials by the public and
private sectors.
The city's short-term composting objective is to remove at least 30 percent of the
industrial, commercial and residential yard and wood waste stream. The medium-term
composting objective is to remove at least 79 percent of the industrial, commercial and
residential yard and wood waste stream. The city will also provide market development
assistance for compost and mulch and will use these products in city parks and open
space areas.
The objective of Chula Vista's special waste program are to comply with the county
mandatory recycling ordinance, ensure proper handling and disposal (including adequate
disposal capacity), and where feasible minimize, reuse and recycle all special wastes
generated within the jurisdiction. More specifically, the short-term objectives include
continuing the recycling of asphalt and compo sting of sewage sludge, continued
sponsoring of citywide garage sales and community cleanups, and encouraging the use
of retreaded tires.
2.0 INITIAL SOLID WASTE GENERATION STUDY
The Solid Waste Generation Study is divided into three subsections and includes
descriptive information about the City of Chula Vista, current solid waste practices,
current and projected solid waste quantities, and disposal stream composition data.
,
n09.0S3-TC-COITI121CHUlA VST/CHUlA VST.PNL ES- 3
JfI-)""-
The City of Chula Vista contracts with Laidlaw Waste Systems to provide solid waste
collection and disposal services for all residential, commercial, industrial and other waste
generators within the city limits. The waste material is hauled to the Otay Landfill
located in southwestern San Diego County, east of Interstate 805 and north of Dtay
Valley Road. The landfill is owned by San Diego County and operated by Herzog
Contracting Corporation.
Diversion practices in 1990 in the City of Chula Vista included all material that is picked
up by the residential curbside program, taken to drop-off and buy-back centers, donated
to nonprofit organizations for recycling or reuse, and salvaged by scrap dealers. The
estimated diversion through recycling activities is approximately 2442.6 tons per year for
a total recycling rate of 1.3 percent. In addition, Chula Vista's residential curbside
recycling program, which began in 1991, diverted an average of 274 tons ofrecyclables
per month between February and June, 1991.
Although there are no composting facilities within the jurisdiction, the city's sewage
sludge is being composted on Fiesta Island, diverting 11,315 tons of material away from
disposal. In 1990, source reduction, recycling, and compo sting activities provided the
City of Chula Vista with a diversion rate of approximately 7.2 percent.
The determination of a per capita solid waste generation rate provides a numerical value
which can be applied to population increases to project future solid waste quantities. The
City of Chula Vista has a base year waste disposal of 7.3 pounds per capita per day.
Waste disposal projections (without increasing diversion rates) for the short- and
medium-term planning periods are provided in Table ES-2.
Quantitative field analysis methodology was used to characterize the waste categories and
waste types generated by the City of Chula Vista. The results of the waste sampling are
provided in Table ES-3.
2209.053-TC-COrr/l21CHUlA VST/CHUlA VST.PNL ES-4
ID- .13
Table FS-2
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
POPULATION AND SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL PROJECTIONS
WASTE QUANTITY
YEAR POPULATION1 (TONS/YEAR)
1990 135,163 180,071
1991 137,863 183,668
1992 140,563 187,265
1993 143,263 190,862
1994 145,963 194,459
1995 148,663 198,056
1996 150,691 200,758
1997 152,719 203,460
1998 154,747 206,162
1999 156,775 208,863
2000 158,803 211,565
2001 160,211 . 213,441
2002 161,619 215,317
2003 163,027 217,193
2004 164,435 219,069
2005 165,843 220,944
2006 167,253 . 222,822
The San Diego Association of Governments Series 7 forecasts for 1990, 1995,
2000 and 2006 were revised specifically for preparation of the San Diego County
Source Reduction and Recycling Elements. This revision incorporates 1990
census figures, series 7 growth rates and current trends in housing completions.
2209.053-TC.coITIl2JCHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL ES- 5
I()-~'"
Table ES-3
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SOLID WASTE COMPOSITION SUMMARY
Percent
Waste San Marcos Sycamore Otay Miramar Total (%)
Component
Cardboard 0.0 0.0 12006.3 10.2 12016.5 6.7
Newspaper 0.0 0.0 8133.6 4.5 8138.1 4.5
Mixed Paper 0.0 0.0 11585.1 9.2 11594.3 6.4
HB Ledger 0.0 0.0 2578.6 1.4 2580.1 1.4
Glass 0.0 0.0 4748.2 4.3 4752.5 2.6
Film Plastic 0.0 0.0 3565.4 2.6 3568.0 2.0
Hard Plastic 0.0 0.0 4357.7 2.9 4360.6 2.4
Diapers 0.0 0.0 3809 .4 0.0 3809.4 2.1
Other Misc. .. 0.0 0.0 58744.2 29.0 58773.1 32.7
Tin Cans 0.0 0.0 2175.1 0.0 2175.1 1.2
Aluminum Cans 0.0 0.0 401.3 0.5 401.8 0.2
Yard Waste 0.9 117.7 31162.2 18.1 31298.1 17.4
Wood Waste 0.7 26.9 17418.2 11.3 17456.3 9.7
Concrete 0.6 25.0 1133.4 33.9 1192.4 0.7
Asphalt 0.1 2.9 59.8 2.1 64.8 0.0
DirtlRock/Sand 0.9 129.0 3113.4 73.4 3315.9 1.8
Roofing 0.1 44.8 652.5 0.6 697.9 0.4
Drywall 0.2 22.1 457.6 1.2 481.0 0.3
Mixed 2.4 454.9 12478.0 90.6 13023.5 7.2
Construction
Special Wastes 0.0 0.0 286.2 0.0 286.2 0.2
Total 6.0 823.4 178866.2 295.9 179991.4 100.0
· "Other Misc." category is equivalent to "non-ferrous", "natural" and "synthetic textiles",
"organics". "residuals", "putrescihles", "aalvage/composite" and "inert materials" categories.
2209.OS3-TC-eoITI121CIIUI.A VSTICIIUI.A VST.FNL ES-6
IfJ-,1.S
3.0 SOURCE REDUCTION COMPONENT
Source reduction programs typically focus on:
. reducing use of non-recyclable materials
. replacing disposable with reusable materials
. reducing packaging
. reducing amount of yard waste generated
. purchasing repairable products and recycled products
. increasing the efficiency of the use of materials
Source reduction program alternatives were evaluated according to the following criteria:
. Effectiveness in reduction of waste
· Hazards created
. Ability to accommodate change
. Consequences on the waste (Le. shifts)
. Whether can be implemented in short- and medium-term planning periods.
. Need for expandinglbuilding facilities
. Consistency with local conditions
. Institutional barriers to implementation
· Estimate of costs
. Availability of end uses of diverted materials
The program and implementation schedule in Table ES-4 is recommended for the City
of Chula Vista.
2209.OS3-TC-COITI12lCHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL ES-7
If)-~'
4.0 RECYCLING COMPONENT
4.1 PRIORITY WASTE TYPES
The general waste categories that will be targeted as part of Chula Vista's recycling
program are paper, plastic, glass, metal, construction debris, and yard waste. The
targeted percentages for recovery for the short- and medium-term objectives are to
remove 49 percent of the materials identified for recycling by 1995 and 80 percent by
the year 2000.
4.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The City of Chula Vista has had a citywide residential curbside collection program since
February, 1991 (a pilot program started in 1989). Current participation rates are
approximately 82 percent of all the single family and multi-family households that receive
curbside solid waste collection. Material recovery has averaged 274 tons per month.
The city's internal office recycling program diverted over 17,000 pounds ofrecyclables
between July and September, 1991. The city has a number of ongoing recycling
programs for the various land use sectors in the city. Current city programs for the
residential sector include annual citywide garage sales, quarterly community clean-ups
in targeted neighborhoods, and an extensive public information campaign, a block captain
program, and curbside collection of recyclables.
Ongoing programs targeted for the commercial and industrial sector include the
development of a business recycling data base, targeting of businesses for the
development of office source reduction programs (business recycling outreach program),
and the recycling of asphalt and composting of yard waste from city operations. The I
Love a Clean San Diego group has developed an disseminated a school curriculum which
addresses recycling, source reduction and composting. This group also offers a hot line
service which anyone in the county may call w!th recycling questions. The city has been
2209.053-Tc.corrl121CHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL ES-8
Jf) -)."
participating on a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) of key county and city staffs
(from all over the county) and solid waste consultants. The TAC was formed to address
countywide solid waste issues and meets twice a month.
4.3 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
Alternative recycling programs were evaluated according to the same criteria listed for
source reduction alternatives. The alternatives and issues evaluated included:
· Source separation
· Residential curbside collection
· Drop-off centers
· Buy-back centers
· Scheduled collection
· Central processing facilities
· Materials recovery facilities
low technology
medium technology
high technology
· Marketing of recyclables
Another approach at addressing the requirements of AB 939 is through the development
of a regional MRF, that would be operated in conjunction with the Prison Industry
Authority (pIA). The PIA proposes a lOOO ton per day waste recycle energy plant that
would use inmate labor from the Donovan Correctional Facility. The goal of this
program is multifaceted. The inmates would separate recyclable materials from the
mixed municipal solid wastestream. The organic fraction of the wastestream, in turn,
would be used to produce electricity and steam using biogas produced through anaerobic
digestion. In segregating the recyclables from the remainder of the wastestream, the PIA
proposed using a series of mechanical and handsorting operations that would allow for
the separation of paper, glass, aluminum, p~astic, ferrous metal, wood, and related
2209.053-TCCOIT/I21CHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL ES-9
I()-~t
materials. The organic, or non-recyclable portion of the solid waste stream, would be
anaerobically digested, in conjunction with sewage generated by the prison. This process
would provide steam and electrical energy for the prison facilities, as well as the
availability of electricity for sale to local utility users.
This project is only in the formative stages and the impact that the PIA program will
have on the overall SRRE approach, in terms of scope and time of implementation, must
still be identified.
4.4 PROGRAM SELECTION AND IMPLEMENTATION
The backbone of Chula Vista's short-term recycling program is the planned
implementation of mandatory recycling for all land use sectors (single family residential,
multi-family residential, industrial and commercial/public uses) according to the schedule
established by the San Diego County mandatory recycling ordinance. The details for
each of these programs are still under evaluation by the city. Chula Vista will also
establish a business recycling outreach program, a waste exchange program, and a
backyard composting program. The city's in-house office recycling program will be
expanded. The city's recycling program also includes the encouragement of recycling
companies to locate their operations within the city and an extensive public information
nd education campaign. A comprehensive listing of the various aspects of Chula Vista's
recycling program and a schedule for implementation are provided in Tables ES-5 and
ES-6. In addition, the County of San Diego is planning an extensive public information
campaign in conjunction with implementation of the County Mandatory RecyclingrOrdinance.
4.5 PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
The programs and implementation listed in Tables ES-5 and ES-6 are recommended for
Chula Vista to achieve the mandated diversion goals.
,
2209.053-TC-COrrI12/CHUlA VST/CHUlA VST.FNL
ES-IO
'I)-A'
Table ES-4
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SOURCE REDUCTION COMPONENT
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Completion Date
1. Information and Public Education
Continue civic center source reduction/recycling program
Consumer public education program
Continue business recycling outreach program
Implement point-of-purchase signage
2. Citv Lesdershin
Lnbby for stste legislation
Develop and implement city procurement ordinance
3. Rate Structure Modifications
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
June 1992
Evaluate variable can rate program
Sponsor community cleanups and citywide garage sale
December 1993
Quarterly/annually
4. Technical Assistance
Apply for TAP Grant for waste exchange program and continuing
business recycling outreach and civic center recycling programs
Develop and implement city waste exchange program or establish
cooperation with state program
Implement baekyard composting program
6. Monitorim!
October 1991
June 1992
November 1991
EstsbJish business Source ReductionlRecycling datsbase
October 1991
Medium-Term activities will be established based upon the result of the programs and activities conducted
during the short-term period.
2209 .OS3-TC-COIT/12JCHUI.A VST/CHUI.A VST.FNL
ES-ll
/1)-311
Table E5-S
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RECYCLING COMPONENT
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
I Activity I Projected Date I
1. City Mandatorv RecvC1in2 Ordinance
Ordinance drafted November 1991
Ordinance enacted March I, 1992
2. Residential RecVClin2 Pro2l1lms
Implement backyard composting pilot program November 1991
Continue block captain program Ongoing
Continue to promote and expand single family curbside collection of Ongoing
recyclables
Decision on type of RFP for collectionlcomposting of yard waste November 1991
Issue RFP for residential yard waste collection March 1992
Residential yard waste contract award July 1992
Enforcement of yard waste collection program January 1993
Determine approach to multi-family residential recycling program January 1992
Multi-family recycling contract award (if appropriate) July 1992
Implement multi-family recycling program (enforce mandatory
recycling) July I, 1993
Continue to sponsor community cleanups Quarterly
Continue to sponsor citywide garage sales Annually
Begin enforcement of mandatory single family recycling March 1992
2209.053-TC-COITI121CHtJU. VST/CHtJU. VST.FNL
ES-12
IfJ-31
Table ES-S (coD'l)
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RECYCLING COMPONENT
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Projected Date
3. Commercial/Office RecVclin2 Pro2rams
Apply for county TAP grant to continue city office recycling and October 1991
business outreach programs
Continue to expand city office program and business outreach Ongoing
program
Develop a recycling data base Ongoing
Determine approach to commercial recycling program January 1992
Commercial recycling contract award (if appropriate) July 1992
Begin enforcement of mandatory commercial recycling July 1993
Begin enforcement of mandatory industrial recycling October 1992
Establish waste exchange program June 1992
4. Draft a recVClin2 desi2It ordinance for soace allocation January 1992
2209.053- TC-eoIT/12/CHUU. VST/CHULA. VST.FNL
ES-13
/O-3J.
Table ES-6
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RECYCLING COMPONENT
MEDIUM-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Projected Date
I. Commercial/Office and Industrial RecVClin2 Pro2l'8.ms
Evaluate existing program effectiveness June 1995
Evaluate possible equipment/program changes July 1995
2. Residential Curbside Multi-Material Recvclin2 Pro2f8.ms
Evaluate existing program effectiveness May 1995
Evaluate possible program changes May 1995
3. Pilot Multi-Familv RecVClin2 Pro2ram
Evaluate multi-family recycling program effectiveness January 1996
Evaluate possible program changes January 1996
4. Materials Recoverv Facilitv
Evaluate city's success in attracting MRFs to the area and evaluate May 1995
the need for additional facilities
5. Transfer Facilitv
Consider cooperation with county transfer facilities (currently in the July 1995
planning process)
6. Education and Public Information
Assess effectiveness of information program January 1995
Modify infonnational materials in combination with programmatic Ongoing
changes
2209.053-TC-COIT/12/CIIUIA VST/CIIUIA VST.FNL
ES-14
1()-33
4.5 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
In order to assess the effectiveness of a residential recycling program, it is essential to
gather and evaluate a variety of operational data. The key items to be monitored are:
. Set -out rates
. Participation rates
. Recovery quantities
. Materials capture rates
. Compliance with processing specifications (e.g. level of contamination,
minimum quantities)
. Vehicle performance and collection
. Costs and revenues
In the short-term, the commercial and industrial recycling programs will be based on
voluntary participation with guidance and direction from city staff. When mandatory
recycling goes into effect, businesses may still be allowed to make their own recycling
arrangements with permitted haulers. Therefore, in order to assess the effectiveness of
a commercial/industrial recycling program, it is essential to work closely with the
business community in establishing and measuring program effectiveness. The items that
can be monitored include:
. Material capture rates (number of trailer pulls and tonnage records)
. Periodic commercial/industrial establishment surveys (e.g., in conjunction
with business license renewals, as the city recently began to require)
. Commercial waste stream audits
2209.053-TCCOITIl2JCHUu. VSTICHUu. VST.PNL
ES-l5
IfJ-.31/
5.0 COMPOSTING COMPONENT
5.1 EXISTING CONDffiONS
According the 1990 waste characterization study, approximately 27 percent of Chula
Vista's disposal stream is composed of yard and wood wastes. The city does not have
a comprehensive yard and wood waste composting program at the present time. The
Chula Vista Public Works Department is mulching yard waste from city parks and public
green open spaces. Some mulching also occurs at the Otay Landf11l where Chula Vista's
yard waste is disposed, but it is not known how much of Chula Vista's yard waste is
being mulched. In addition, sewage sludge from Chula Vista is being composted on
Fiesta Island (see Section 6.0 of this Executive Summary).
5.2 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
Composting alternatives were evaluated according to the criteria listed for source
reduction alternatives. The alternatives evaluated included:
. Waste storage/collection
source separation/collection
commingled collection
mechanical separation
mixed solid waste composting
. Feedstocks
high carbon/low moisture
high nitrogen/high moisture
2209.0S3-TC-COIT/12lCHULA VST/CHULA VST.PNL
ES-16
11}- 35
. Composting technologies
preprocessing
aerated static pile
in-vessel
windrow I static pile
. Program scale
local
subregional
regional
. Marketing and distribution
local
bulk sales to wholesalers
turnkey contract
5.3 PROGRAM SELECTION AND IMPLEMENTATION
The selection of a composting program has been based upon the objectives previously
defined; consideration of existing conditions in Chula Vista; the requirements of the
county mandatory recycling ordinance; and the need to maintain program flexibility. The
composting programs and implementation schedules planned for the City of Chula Vista
are presented in Tables ES-7 and ES-8.
504 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
The monitoring of the composting program will be closely linked with the recycling
program and parameters will be similar.
2209.053- TCCOIT/l21CH1lU VST/CHIlU VST.FNL
ES-17
/fJ-31
6.0 SPECIAL WASTE COMPONENT
6.1 TARGETED MATERIALS AND ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
Special wastes are materials that require special handling or disposal because of physical,
chemical, or biological characteristics. Most of this material cannot be diverted and will
continue to be disposed in an environmentally sound manner (e.g. asbestos, street
sweepings, and infectious waste). Septic tank pumpings and incinerator ash are not
generated in Chula Vista. Auto bodies and grease trap pumpings are already being
diverted. Only those special waste types with feasible new diversion alternatives were
evaluated. These include sewage sludge (existing diversion), white goods/bulky items,
construction/demolition debris, and used tires.
6.1.1 SEWAGE SLUDGE
The San Diego County Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Facility (Metro) is
responsible for treating and disposing of Chula Vista's sewage sludge. Digested sludge
from the Metro facility is air dried at Fiesta Island in Mission Bay. The dried sludge is
shipped to a private contractor, Corona Chino Farms. Chula Vista's sewage sludge
generation is estimated at 11,315 tons per year, for which Chula Vista has taken existing
diversion credit.
6.1.2 USED TIRES
Used tires create a number of problems when buried in landfills. Alternatives available
for used tire diversion include incineration, retreading, and crumb rubber uses.
However, due to air quality problems, potential health hazards and the lack of end uses,
none of these alternatives are currently considered viable for the diversion of significant
quantities of tires away from landfill disposal. The city will reevaluate these alternatives
at the medium-term planning stage.
2209.053- TC.coITfl2lCHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-18
11)- 3?
Table ES-7
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
COMPOSTlNG COMPONENT
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
ACTIVITY PROJECTED DATE
1. Continuous Composting of Sewage Sludge. Ongoing
2. Draft City Recycling/Composting Ordinance and November 1991
City Procurement Ordinance.
3. Backyard Composting Program .
a. Implement pilot program. November 1991
b. Expand program. 1992-1995
4. Residential Yard Waste Collection/Composting
Program
a. RFP decision. November 1991
b. Issue request for proposals. November 1991
c. Begin public education. December 1991
d. Begin greens collection. January 1992
e. Enforce mandatory yard waste separation. January 1993
5. Commercial/Industrial Composting
a. Continue business outreach program. Ongoing
b. Begin enforcement of mandatory industrial
recycling/composting. October 1992
c. Determine whether to issue an RFP for
commercial recycling/composting. November 1991
d. Issue RFP April 1992
e. Begin enforcement of mandatory
commercial recycling/composting. July 1993
6. Eastlake Composting Facility Pilot Program Ongoing
7. Compost Marketing
a. Continue to use compost on city-owned
parks, golf course and landscaped areas. Ongoing
b. Assist composting contractors in
identifying end use markets in Chula Vista
and in pursing those markets. 1992-1994
2209.053-Tc...corr/12/CHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-19
10- ,r
Table FS-8
CHULA VISTA
COMPOSTING COMPONENT
MEDIUM-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
ACTIVITY PROJECTED DATE
1. Evaluate Effectiveness of Residential, Industrial January 1995
and Commercial Composting Programs
2. Modify Programs as Needed to Improve June 1995
Effectiveness, Including Public Information
Materials/Methods
3. Expand Programs to Include Other Organic 1995-1999
Wastes (e.g., food waste) and Other End Uses
(e.g., farm uses)
4. Continue to Expand End Use Markets for the 1995-1999
Compost
5. Require Large Scale Planned Developments in the 1995-1999
City to Provide Internal Yard Waste
Collection/Composting and Use Own Compost
6. Consider Participation in Sub-Regional and Ongoing
Regional Composting Programs
7. Continue Composting of Sewage Sludge Ongoing
2209.OS3-TC-COIT/121CH1llA VST/CHIllA VST.FNL
ES-20
11)-39
6.1.3 WHITE GOODS/BULKY ITEMS
White goods include items such as refrigerators, air conditions, washers, dryers and other
bulky appliances. Under the County Mandatory Recycling Ordinance, these are targeted
materials for recycling in the residential and commercial sector. The City of Chula Vista
will continue to sponsor annual citywide garage sales and quarterly community cleanups.
The city will also include information about options for the sale or donation of used items
as part of its public education program.
6.1.4 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLffiON DEBRIS
The major options for this special waste category include the reuse and recycling of
concrete, asphalt, dirt, rock, sand, land clearing brush, and scrap metal. These materials
are targeted for industrial recycling under the county mandatory recycling ordinance.
The major methods of asphalt recycling are cold or hot recycling. Concrete, sand, rock,
dirt and metal recovered from construction and demolition activities can be reused as
subgrade material. Land clearing brush can be mulched or composted. There will be
more economic incentives to take clean construction land demolition material to private
recyclers as landfill tipping fees increase.
6.2 PROGRAM SELECTION AND IMPLEMENTATION
The selection of a special waste program has been based upon the objectives defined in
Section 3.0 of this Executive Summary. The special waste program and schedule
planned for Chula Vista are summarized in Table ES-9.
2209.OS3.TC-COITf12/CHUlA VST/CHUlA VST.FNL
ES-21
IO-YIJ
7.0 EDUCATION AND PUBLIC INFORMATION
7.1 EXISTING CONDffiONS
The City of Chula Vista has a multi-faceted education and public information program
that includes flyers, brochures, a recycling hot line, media releases and interviews, and
public presentations. The city is beginning its business outreach and backyard
composting programs with associated fliers and cOntacts through working with the local
chamber of commerce and local garden clubs. The I Love a Clean San Diego
organization also has ongoing public education and information programs.
7.2 SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES
The best overall strategy is a comprehensive mix of techniques that includes:
Public Education
. Direct mailing of brochures and newsletters to city residents and
businesses.
. Canvassing at stores and residences door-to-door.
. Targeted brochures to households whose first language is not English.
. Public service announcements on local television and radio stations.
. Community leader presentations at civic, neighborhood, church, social
service and business organization meetings.
. Information booths at shopping malls and community events.
. Recycling classes and field trips as part of school curriculum for grades
one through 12.
. Speaker's bureau of experts, public officials, and other informed persons
that would be available to makl( presentations on recycling.
2209.053-TC-COIT/I21CHULA VSTICHULA VST.PNL
ES-22
//J-'II
Promotions and Events
. Promote a recycling day or recycling week.
. Sponsor recycling contests among schools, youth groups, civic groups or
neighborhoods.
. Recycling awards to individuals, neighborhoods, businesses and
community organizations.
. Encourage Christmas tree recycling or use of live trees.
. Hold specific material recycling drives and citywide garage sales.
. Obtain celebrity spokespersons.
. Continue to offer a reduced recycling service fee to senior citizens and
low income households.
. Continue to run block captain program.
Publicity and Reminders
. Advertisements in newspapers, on billboards and buses, in grocery stores
and community centers.
. Canvassing at stores and residences door-to-door.
. Press releases and interviews for articles in local newspapers and
magazines and local news television broadcasts.
. Posters, bumper stickers.
. Caps, buttons, t-shirts.
. Point-of-purchase signage.
. Messages on shopping bags.
. Notices on utility bills.
. Telephone surveys.
2209.053-TC-COIT/12/CHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-23
I~-I/J.
. Radio and television public service announcements shared among
neighboring cities.
. Participation in local TV and radio talk shows.
7.3 PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation of the public education/information program should begin within the first
month of each recycling program phase or approach. It is recommended that the city
initiate each program with an extensive four month education campaign in which
newsletters and brochures are sent to explain the programs. It is also recommended that
the city hold several public discussions in which residents come to voice their opinions
about the programs. Tables ES-lO and ES-ll outline the proposed tasks and schedules
for short- and medium-term implementation of Chula Vista's education and public
information programs.
7.4 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Monitoring and evaluation of the public information program will be closely linked with
monitoring of other program components and will particularly focus on:
. Public awareness
. Participation rates
. Material capture rates
. Buyback center receipts and expenditures
2209.0S3-TC.coIT/I21CHUlA VST/CHUlA VST.PNL
ES-24
JI)- 'I J
TABLE ES-'
CITY OF CHULA VISfA
Special Waste Component
Implementation Schedule
Activity Projected Date
Short-Term Task
1. Enforce County Mandatory Recycling
Ordinance (includes some special
wastes)
a. Single family residential March 1992
b. Industrial October 1992
c. Multi-family July 1993
residential/commercial
2. Continue private sector reporting Ongoing
requirements for special wastes
3. Continue to sponsor annual citywide Ongoing
garage sales and quarterly community
clean-ups
4. Investigate second use markets for used April 1992
tires, demolition waste, rubber and
grease trap pumpings as part of the
city's business outreach and waste
exchange program.
5. Continue to recycle asphalt from city
street demolition/maintenance Ongoing
6. Encourage the siting of additional January 1994
construction demolition recyclers in the
city.
Medium-Term Task
1. Evaluate special waste diversion January 1995
progress
2. Evaluate private sector reporting January 1995
methods
3. Consider a co-<:omposting program January 1995
(yard waste and sewage sludge)
4. Evaluate business outreach and waste January 1995
exchange programs
2209.0l3-TCCOIT/121CHULA VST/CHULA VST.PNL
ES-25
I (J- ~lI
Table ES-I0
City of Chula Vista
EDUCATION AND PUBLIC INFORMATION
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Projected Date
1. Mandatorv Recvclin2 Pro2ram-Soecific Activities
Promote Backyard Composting November 1991
Follow-up Public Information and Workshops December 1991
Promote Yard Waste Collection Program November 1992
Follow-up Public Information and Workshops February 1993
Promote Commercial Recycling Ongoing
Promote Multi-Family Recycling May 1993
Follow-up Public Information and Workshops (Commercial and August 1993
Multi-Family)
Promote Industrial Recycling Ongoing
Follow-up Public Information and Workshops November 1992
2. General Public Education
Newsletters and Direct Mailing Ongoing
Public Service Announcements Ongoing
Promote School Curriculum Changes Ongoing
Community Speaking Engagements Ongoing
Develop Non-English Materials and Announcements March 1992
2. Promotions and Events
Continue Special Rates for Seniors and Low Income Households Ongoing
Recycling Events Yearly
Citywide Garage Sale August
Christmas Tree Recycling Program January
Competitions and Awards Yearly
3. General Publicitv and Reminders
Develop and Conduct Community Survey 1992, 1994
News Releases Ongoing
Radio, TV, Newspaper and Magazine Interview and Ads Ongoing
2209.053-Tca>ITII2fCHULA VSTfCHULA VST.FNL
ES-26
10- ItS
Table ES-ll
City of Chula Vista
EDUCATION AND PUllLIC INFORMATION COMPONENT
MEDIUM-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Projected Date
1. Public Education
Evaluate and update material for public distribution Ongoing
Medium-term program kick-off and existing program
effectiveness update August, 1995
2. Promotions and Events
Evaluate and update yearly promotion events Yearly
Target-group programs Ongoing
3. Publicitv and Reminders
Recirculate community surveys 1996, 1998
Radio and television public service announcements and features
Ongoing
Evaluate staffing requirements
May, 1995
2209 .OS3-TC-eoIT/12/CHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-27
If) -'f~
8.0 FACILITY CAPACITY
The City of Chula Vista currently disposes of most of its municipal solid waste at the
Otay Landfill, which can be divided into the Otay Landfill and the Otay Annex Landfill.
The county of San Diego expects to submit a closure plan for these landfills during the
latter part of 1991, although the actual closures of these landfills are not expected to
occur during the SRRE planning period. The cities realize the importance of minimizing
the quantity of solid waste deposited in the county's landfills in order to extend the life
of the facilities. Towards addressing the potential future usefulness of the existing
landfills, the county is proposing to expand the San Marcos Landfill and the Ramona
Landfill.
9.0 FUNDING COMPONENT
This section covers typical component facility costs and program funding alternatives
available to the city. The capital and annual operating costs associated with the various
SRRE components are estimated in Table ES-12.
Funds for future SRRE programs will come from any or a combination of the following
sources:
. Recycling surcharge at disposal facilities in the form of tipping fee
increases
. Establish residential recycling surcharge fees for collection
. Commercial/industrial recycling service fees
. Variable rate structure
. Business license fees
. County and state grants
. Market development and materials revenue
2209.053-TC-eoITI12/CHUlA VST/CHUlA VST.PNL
ES-28
IIJ- '1'1
N
...
~
oCl
~
:3
~~
(o;ltl.l
Co
!! ~U
.~~Z
~~o
Ol~....
:; E-o
..c <:
~~~E-o
~~
~<
UCl::..::I
~=-
o~
~
~
E-o
<:
~
E-o
~
~
..c
01
E-o
..::I'"
<:00
E-ot
00
E-oU
l
o
1"1
<">.
f:!
lrl
~
N
~
'"
"0
"0
~]
. :0
r- 0
N..c
T.1
~
~
E-o
00
o
U
~
.;;
c
8 ~
1"1-
~;E
, 0
..c
o 1;l
"'l:o
- 0
~..c
00
~
<:
Cl::
~
o
~
~
~
o
U
6
.-
-
~
-
-
o
U
0)
"0
.-
'"
-e
:0
U
<<l
..::
ij
"0
.-
'"
~
~
i
v:S
-
1"1
~
~
>>
-
'"
~
~
\&).
<">
c
B
~
00
-
~
8
lrl
~
'--
c
o
.-
-
~
8
bl)
c
.-
"0
:0
'0
c
.-
'-'
s
C!
bl)
8
t:l.
B
'"
~
~
>-
t-
::e~~
N"'lf:!
-<">-
~~~
~
>>
"';;s
~
].~
8r-"
<,,>r-
~.
:2 6
~ -
I 6~
~";;'7
.bl)
tn ';j 0
1"10)<">
~"O ~
.e-
.-
-
~
I
'"
<<l
.t:
~
::e
'"
c
o
E-o
~
II '"l" ~
~~~
U 0 ....
3U&
.-::e _
c:>.oCl '"
Llo8
~
~~
<">>>
~-
c
('f') .~
o1;l
00 -
. :0
~8:
1;
.~
&
-
lrl
~
,
-
~
~c
o
..::
g
'"
.-
c
.-
S
~
/tJ-lJf
~
~
"0
'j!
"
.
o
.s
l!'
'j!
il
.
:!-
~
i
o
-5
"
oS
"0
S
3
'e-
.Co
"
'a
?
;
.
o
1
Ii'
'6
;;a
"8
.!!
:8
.~
~
.
o
i!
o
~
.ll
a
;a
'C
~
a
]
o
.
fl-
o
..
~
~
.
~
e
.
>I
.
o
~
o
~
~
o
~
"
e
.
~
o
f
'"
..
.
l!'
:a
...
~
..
o
l!'
e
"
.
~
o
-5
11
.
l!'
';;
.
~
.
o
~
.
~
"2
.
..
.
-ll
.2
.~
~
e
"
o
.c
"
:a
.s
"
-5
1
il
.
.
..
..
g
.",
e
8-
1
~
t
Co
k
'"
..
:s
l
"
.ll
l!'
J?i
c
.
~
l'l
"
oS
l!'
'il
a
'"
a
o
~
Co
..
..
>I
.
o
S
's.
.
o
]
1
"l!
.
o
g
.
c
II
.~
11
.
.~
5
8-
~
1
.
~
..
"0
~
.
o
~
Co
~
t
Co
"
.
~
.;
:;;
>I
.
~
o
""il
:;;
.!!
o
..
e
..
t-
'u
.
Co
.
o
~
'u
.:!
~
~
.
a
.
l
o
'"
~
il
~
.;
g
.~
.
.
;a
o
'a
.c
o
S
,;
.e
'a
~
1$
.
o
"
.ll
]
9
~
e
.s
~
.
""
c
.
f.
:a
o
-5
"l!
.
.
.!
'1$
~
1$
.
o
"
.
'"
.!!
9
o
:;;
.
.2
C.
Co
.
a..
1"1
~
11
.
~
.~
o
.
"0
o
.2
1.
1ii
.~
.
c.
.
o
"0
.2
.5
c
.
.~
..
'1$
's
""
::
.li
"0
"3
.
~
o
l!'
e
~
~
~
'"
\i
I
\i
N
8
o
y
u
';
'"
~
~
N
.
:s
~
.
11
.
"
o
~
.2
o
-5
.
-5
1
~
.
..
f'
The City of Chula Vista is presently supporting all of its current programs related to
recycling through franchise fees which are passed on as user fees, county grants and
redevelopment funds. Similar mechanisms which utilize existing rate structures to the
extent possible will be implemented by the city to support programs for the short-term
through 1995. The city does not intend to build and operate its own recycling equipment
and facilities but expects the private sector to provide equipment and facilities through
a competitive bid or free market process.
Several regional issues, such as the county's plans for building transfer stations in the
South County and providing central regionally-based facilities, preclude a complete
analysis of all the funding alternatives available to the City. The participation of several
cities within a subregional area and the unincorporated county under a joint powers
agreement (JPA) is one of these regional issues that could be considered. The feasibility
analysis for any capital facilities will require an economic evaluation and assessment of
the funding mechanisms dependent upon the structure of the JPA.
10.0 INTEGRATION COMPONENT
The development and selection of alternatives for a source reduction and recycling
program were based on an evaluation of existing practices and conditions, and the
projected growth and needs of the city. Chula Vista's goal is to have an integrated solid
waste management system capable of meeting both state-mandated reduction goals and
the needs of its citizens in the most environmentally sound, efficient, and cost effective
manner.
This section presents the results of the evaluations conducted for the SRRE, summarizes
the technologies and programs selected, and presents the schedule for program
implementation. Targeted programs are shown in Table ES-13.
2209 .OS3-Tc-corr/121CHULA VST/CHULA VST.PNL
ES-30
1~-'I'1
~I~fe '"
...
~ i ..
~ 1! '"
~ ~ -
u
U
~ 1i
8 11
I II
,8-
'i1
B I
,~
:~ -
q
~ JI ~
H~
'"
Il
'"
~
-I I 1
-11 H L ~uj
]t -ls111 nJHt
1 11 ;r-SJl:!l:@
"5 J! oft sll-
I 19-JI hlj~-i
J i IU :fHi~h
i Ht[1 H '1li~)~1!
~ [~1", U'" br~i ~u]
. .. . . .
l ~ ji,;j~-ij HI.!
~ i ~ r ! 1 i ~ -I ~ i [ l -~ -~ J j
f I. 1 i isei i j I ! ~ H J ih 1 !
1 [ !::' ~ e ~ ~ e .! R - 'i .. "0 'e 8 ~'" ~ H !
HlllHl i[~-I i -r j 1 [HiLl1~ []H
l~jj ~il ~ifl 111 t If,; 1til-tlj1i!~ i[j
~1~lJl.e._ilru f:1Js ~II !l;~ s~.:i ]i~
111 e "0 -0 H _, U -ill ~ ] -r l~ 1 'il.!" 0] I "qli 0 ~. 01;r
1111fJ~ i' fJ .i !~ ~,l Ili1]1.~1111Iil
il~i~l="~l ]_ l~S_ J jls i~l ]lll~s~l;.
~uJi!fJI~fi~1 ~iJt l~jJtijl!!!~i~Jlilf
~
o
.,"
~~~
~n ~
!:!"o'" 0
... 0 "
~~ ~
u.. !:l
~ ~
5l
. . . . . . . . .. .. . . . ... .......... ...
~
"
~
..
I
l,a~r ~u
!B~J Hi
:ll~l.t~nj]
UU~Hji
. . . . . . . . .
~
~
u
n
:~
i
.
I 1
lih tt ~J&HiH
~",u~nh !~n~
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
j
l
...
I
fi
Jf)-Sf)
~ g ..
~~U ~ ;:
~n ..
~ j ~
~
o
..
I
1 . 8 o~ I .l! 0; 11
~ I e o~ i1 ! u ~ r.
] 06" i ~ ~ ~ -5.; i] ~
~ .l;g on 1 ~l'!'lr.
21111 ]1 ! ] "1!
~ oll r on 1 )10' [~
I Pl s; 1 ';-0.011-101
J1Plnl~ n ~
. II [~ s .Is ~
j Uo 1 dol Uo~hll
~l:odl rfl".~"U,!l8"r"
.. . .. ..
..
. -
..
"
s u ! j
!!i~ 1] ~]l ~
51~,!I1 -~b ~
01 so ~..~;
f,!l i~ lp 1
oiLi! ifI~l
." :_,!I 1! :u ho!
o~i~:€~~ B-Lr.l
11]10; ~ ~H q I
",,!Ihh ~",,,1,,,[
. . ....
& 01 I!~ i of
i lO~ ~ 116 1 1 J!!i
~ ) I JJ~ I 1 ~ 151
fl 01 I} h to[!l! 1 11
" ] 0.8 P " ~] f" 1~'!
~ .51 AI ~ ii t' u:::
;~ 01 oIl iO~ .o.q Ii f ~]
~J 'l.s~lnoll it-
-1 ,~8" IlR~otblsl~" oE ~oj
oJ iHofi d. > 10JioijoJ o.,!Ii
"]1" fllf~JH ] fi i:€1
1 ~ij~~ 1. r~ji'J"i- ; }I
HhUluHllhf hi lhl
~
.,8
~H
~n ~
!:1"z 0
... 0 0 t:
5S e
~ ~
Bi
:e of ~iU
B- h..
11 1 :qP I
H r hi I o~
f~ :: ~111 j
d " -s -1~ ..
f~ l '1 ~ i.
1~ . !J -~.j
,t l Hr~aol
~:hho.HhH
~".,,"~;,!I]L..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~
I oj I J ot
i I r. if 1 [
.. ~ol~lrol r
I . IhilLu
lJ1
.. '"
. . . . . . . . . .
I , I j
..
:i
! ~
" "'
" ,.; .. ,.;
If)- SJ I
I
~ ..
'11l, 0
~
g ~ '"
~ 1\ ..
a ~
:( I
~ . t
g. 1 1
~ ,~..JI z
a
. ~h 5.8)
8 I ! '" 'f' i
e
t [.ih j1r I
i lJhl[Jll~
h Ilh..2 f
~:c~ ~i-< ;;a ~
~
. . . . . . .
~ . i
Ii 1
..8 HI 8 P ~ .1
~~~
~;~ p~ I j ~ &.a
~ ~11 18 1 1 5 J
~<.><.> t ~ l ! 8 ~ 11 .1 l.s.t f
,..~~ 0
"
5~ e n~jalhl~ lull 8-
~ i og[lf.~j~{jl ~~.li ~
~ . .. a Mi li ~
1111)1!. ;1.t~!~lj~
tt8 8ft8~.Jt Ie,"
!)i~.1 ~.nl. I i.i
~. lz~<.><.> <.> u u z!
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~
~ .
~
'"
I ..;
~
0
::i!
.
I 1 ,
L.t
<.> ..~:s
1f).S~
i
l
1.0 STATEMENT OF GOAlS AND OBJECTIVES
1.1 INTRODUCTIQN
In order to ensure that California's solid waste is managed in an effective and
environmentally sound manner, State Assembly Bill 939 (AB 939) was signed into law
on September 29, 1989; thereby enacting the California Integrated Waste Management
Act of 1989. This bill is an essential part of the state's comprehensive program for solid
waste management.
AB 939 addresses a wide range of issues dealing with the management of solid waste
materials. Specifically, it establishes the California Integrated Waste Management Board
(CIWMB) and requires the preparation of countywide integrated waste management
plans. It also requires all municipalities to divert 25 percent of their solid waste from
landfill disposal through source reduction, recycling, and composting, by January 1,
1995. In order for Chula Vista to accomplish this goal, it will be necessary to divert 40
percent of that portion of the city's wastestrearn which is readily recyclable, source
reducible or compostable. By the year 2000, 50 percent of the wastestream must be
diverted. This will require diversion of approximately 80 percent of Chula Vista's
recyclable, compostable or source reducible wastestream.
Assembly Bill 1820 amends certain portions of AB 939. These modifications and the
implementing regulations are now being finalized as a part of Title 14 of the California
Code of Regulations which sets forth guidelines and procedures for preparing the
countywide plans.
This section presents a summary of the goals and objectives designed to assist the City
of Chula Vista in meeting the mandated source reduction, recycling and composting
goals.
2209.III.TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTAISRIU!.CVIA 1-1
/0 -5)
1.1.1 SOURCE REDUCTION
Source reduction refers to any action which causes a net reduction in the generation of
solid waste, and can include but is not limited to, replacing disposable materials and
products with reusable materials and products, reducing packaging and "junk" mail, and
increasing the efficient use of paper, cardboard, glass, metal, plastic, and other materials
in the manufacturing process. Although individual source reduction measures are
difficult to quantify and document, the cumulative effect of several such measures, in
conjunction with an effective recycling program, could significantly reduce the volume
of solid waste going to disposal facilities. A source reduction program will also conserve
energy, avoid collection and disposal costs, increase public awareness of waste disposal
issues, and contribute to the overall success of solid waste management plans.
The major short-term objectives of Chula Vista's source reduction program are to educate
the public and business community about source reduction activities, and expand and
modify city procurement policies. In this way, the city expects to divert approximately
one percent of the total wastestream through source reduction. Chula Vista's civic center
office recycling program was initiated in July 1991. This program included the
distribution of an employee handbook and training sessions on source reduction and
recycling. The city is also working with the chamber of commerce to distribute
information to local businesses and provide direct assistance in establishing source
reduction/recycling programs. Where feasible, all city offices will make a concerted
effort to purchase recyclable over non-recyclable materials, products with minimal
packaging over products with excessive packaging, and reusable products over disposable
products. The city intends to develop a procurement ordinance in the near future. In
addition, the city will evaluate the feasibility of implementing a variable can rate
program, implement backyard composting and develop a waste exchange program.
The medium-term objective is to encourage source reduction behavior through a broad-
based program that incorporates instructional and promotional activities, economic
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9\CIIULA VISTAISRRE.CV\A 1 - 2
/D -Slf
-~-- ----~-----
,--"~_!'! -;/." ~-'~
incentives and rate structure modifications, point-of-purchase signage, waste exchanges,
a system for tracking source reduction, city leadership and regulatory programs. The
details of the medium-term program will be established based on the rllsults of the short-
term source reduction program. By the year 2000, the city's goal is to document at least
a two percent reduction in the waste stream via source reduction.
1.1.2 RECYCLING
Recycling programs developed and implemented by the city will form the cornerstone for
achieving the 25 and 50 percent diversion goals established by AB 939. These programs
provide the most effective way to divert large quantities of material from disposal
facilities. Removal will become even more reliable as markets for recycled goods
become more stable.
To achieve the 25 percent diversion goal, the city is proposing to divert 16 percent of its
total wastestream through recycling. Since not all of the wastestream is readily
recyclable, compostable or source reducible, this will require diverting 49 percent of all
readily recyclable materials. To accomplish this, the city will, at a minimum, do the
following:
. Expand curbside recycling program to mobile home parks (2300 units)
. Increase outreach to all homes in recycling program.
. Expand the city office recycling program.
. Implement the business outreach program.
. Encourage the purchase of recycled material products by the City of ChUla
Vista Purchasing Department and area businesses.
. Establish a waste exchange clearinghouse for local manufacturing
businesses or participate in a regional exchange.
. Develop and implement mandatory recycling programs, in conformance
with the San Diego County mandatory recycling ordinance, for the
collection of recyclable materials from all major land use types within the
city.
. Encourage the development of materials reprocessing facilities in the City
2209-111-TC-CHV1\9ICH1llA VISTAISRRE.CV\A I - 3
/0 -5"S
of Chula Vista and/or the San Diego south bay area.
To achieve the 50 percent diversion goal, the city proposes to divert 25 percent of the
total wastestream or 80 percent of all readily divertable material via recycling methods.
This medium-term objective will be achieved by:
· Evaluating, improving and expanding of the waste exchange clearinghouse
to include other commercial and industrial businesses.
· Attracting manufacturing businesses to Chula Vista and/or the south bay
that use recycled materials as raw feed products.
· Evaluating, improving and expanding participation and including
additional recyclable materials in the recyclable materials collection
programs for all land use sectors.
· Evaluating improving and expanding public education and business
outreach programs.
In summary, the short-term recycling diversion goal of 16 percent requires a removal of
49 percent of readily recyclable materials from the wastestream and the 26 percent
medium-term recycling diversion goal requires that 79 percent of recyclable materials be
removed from the wastestream. Both the short-term and medium-term objectives for
developing markets include assessing the existing and potential markets (end-users and
markets) for recyclable materials.
1.1.3 COMPOSTING
Composting will be the second most critical component for achieving the mandated 25
and 50 percent diversion goals. It is a very effective way to divert yard and selected
organic wastes away from disposal facilities.
The short-term composting objective for Chula Vista is to remove at least 30 percent of
the commercial, industrial and residential yard and wood wastestream. This will yield
approximately an eight percent composting goal for the total wastestream. The medium
2209-lIl-TC-CHVII9\CHUl.A VISTAISRRE.CV\A 1 - 4
(tJ-a
". .....~.:.:'f':.:".[
range composting objective for the city is to remove at least 79 percent of the
commercial and residential yard and wood wastestream. This will yield approximately
a 21 percent composting goal for the total wastestream. These objectives will primarily
be met by way of implementation of a mandatory yard waste diversion program. The
city will also be implementing a backyard compo sting program and will consider
requiring large planned developments to include composting facilities and to use the
resulting compost on parks, golf courses and other open space areas within these
developments. Establishing users will be a major undertaking, but the ultimate success
of Chula Vista's composting program rests on its ability to utilize or market the end
products. . The market development activities that will assist in meeting these goals
include the early use of uncomposted or shredded debris before centralized composting
begins. This will provide a ready market for compost and mulch and will help increase
awareness of the potential uses and benefits of these materials.
Medium-term marketing activities include using the resulting soil amendment on city
grounds and supplying existing distributors with quality material. The city also plans to
target other organic materials (e.g. food waste) from large institutions, restaurants, etc.
for composting and farming uses. Plants and landscape designs that generate less waste
will be encouraged for future developments and relandscaping projects.
1.1.4 SPECIAL WASTE
Special waste refers to any waste which has been classified as a special waste pursuant
to Section 66744 of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations, or which has been
granted a variance for the purpose of storage, transportation, treatment, or disposal by
the Department of Health Services pursuant to Section 66310 of Title 22 of the California
Code of Regulations. Special waste also includes any solid waste which is specifically
conditioned in a solid waste facilities permit for handling and/or disposal, because of its
source of generation, physical, chemical, or biological characteristics or unique disposal
practices.
22Q9.-III-TC-CHVII9\CHULA VISTAISRRE.CV\A 1 - 5
(D ' $"7
In its special waste diversion program, the city plans to target white goods, bulky items,
grease and tires. Sewage sludge from Chula Vista is already being composted on Fiesta
Island and is beyond the city's control. Automobile parts and bodies and other metal
wastes are already being effectively recycled in the city. White goods are targeted as
items prohibited from landfill disposal under the county mandatory recycling ordinance,
for the residential and commercial sectors.
Over the short-term, the city will continue to sponsor quarterly community clean-up
programs and annual citywide garage sales. These have been very effective in diverting
white goods, bulky items, and scrap wood and metal. The public education and
promotions for these activities will be increased. The city will also implement a waste
exchange program, incorporate white goods into the residential and commercial recycling
programs and establish private sector reporting requirements for the amounts of special
waste being disposed and/or diverted.
The city will provide educational and technical assistance regarding disposal and
recycling options for tires, oil and grease and will incorporate these materials into the
waste exchange program. Similar education and assistance will be provided for
residential generators of tires, oil, grease and bulky items. The City will attempt to
increase buy-back acceptance of these items.
The city's medium-term objectives are primarily to review the effectiveness of the short-
term special waste program, make appropriate changes, and document at least one
percent of the total wastestream being diverted in the special waste category.
1.1.5 EDUCATION AND PUBLIC INFORMATION
There are many ways to increase public awareness of, and participation in, recycling,
source reduction, and composting projects. The best overall strategy is a comprehensive
mix of techniques that includes:
2209-III-TCCHVI\9\CHUlA VlSTAISRRE.CVIA I - 6
/0 -~y
-, ,~_"'!...~ ':, ~, ~:, .~;.
. Public education
. Promotions and events
. Publicity and reminders
To accomplish the 25 percent and 50 percent reduction goals set forth in AB 939, it is
essential for the city to adopt an innovative outreach and public education program. The
education and public information program will be developed jointly by the City
Manager's office and the city's Public Information Office.
Throughout the operation of the proposed source reduction, composting and recycling
programs, a multi-faceted promotional campaign will be required to achieve and maintain
high levels of participation and success. The city has already achieved high participation
rates in its residential curbside recycling program, largely through its education/public
information program. The primary short-term activities include mailings, advertisements,
canvassing door-to-door with leaflets, and other publicity before, during and after the
initiation of mandatory recycling programs for each land use sector. Information will
be provided regarding the way the programs work, why Chula Vista is undertaking such
programs, how residents and businesses can participate and how they will benefit in the
long run, and reports on the progress and successes of the programs and other available
recycling alternatives (e.g. buy-back centers, volunteer drop-offs, donations to second
hand stores). The city will also hold several public discussions in which residents come
to voice their opinions about the programs. Methods could include any or all of the
following:
Public Education
. Direct mailings of brochures and newsletters to city residents and
businesses.
. Canvassing at stores and residences door-to-door.
2209-III-TC-CllVMICHULA VlSTAISRRE.CVIA I - 7
(f)-51
. Public service announcements on local television and radio stations.
. Development of brochures, newsletters and announcements in Spanish.
. Presentations at civic, church and business organization meetings.
. Information booths at shopping malls, community events and other similar
opportunities.
. Recycling classes and field trips as part of school curriculum for grades
one through 12 (as recommended by I Love a Clean San Diego).
Promotions and Events
1_
. Promote a recycling day or a recycling week to impress upon the public
the importance of recycling
. Sponsor recycling contests
. Give out recycling awards
.
Encourage Christmas tree recycling or use of live trees
,--
. Hold specific material drives and garage sales
. Special recycling service fees for senior citizens and low income
households
. Continue to run block captain program
Publicity and Reminders
. Mailers
. Canvassing in stores and at residences door-to-door
. Advertisements in newspapers and local magazines, on buses and
billboards and in grocery stores
. News releases and interviews
2209-11I-1CCHVI\9ICHULA VISTAISRRB.CVIA 1 - 8
It) .; ~/)
~ ......".. ....;,.~."f,
. Posters, bumper stickers
. Messages on shopping bags
. Point-of-purchase signage
. Notices on utility bills
. Telephone or mail surveys
. Participation in local radio and TV talk shows
Medium-term activities will primarily involve the evaluation of short-term methods and
results, expanding the target audiences for the various programs, and making appropriate
changes in the city's public education and information program.
1.2 SUMMARY OF DIVERSION ACTIVITlES AND SCHEDULE
Table 1-1 presents the overall source reduction and recycling element program goals for
Chula Vista. The proposed programs and activities are projected to achieve 25 percent
reduction of the wastestream in 1995 and 50 percent reduction by the year 2000.
The remainder of this document presents details of the individual components that are
involved in the development of the SRRE. The description of these components includes
a presentation of their respective advantages and disadvantages.
2209-I11-TCCHVI\9\CHULA VISTAISRRE.CV\A 1 - 9
ID~I
TABLE 1-1
City of Chula Vista
SUMMARY OF COMPONENT GOALS
WASTESTREAM REDUCTION (%)
COMPONENT PROGRAM
Short-Term Medium-Term
(1995) (2000)
Source Reduction 1 2
Recycling
Residential 6 11
Commercial/Industrial 10 15
Composting . 8 21
Special Waste 0 1
TOTAL 25 SO
2209-III-Tc.CHVI\9\CHIJLA VlSTAISRRE.CV\A 1 - 10
/o...~;;-
...
2.0 INITIAL SOLID WASTE GENERATION STUDY
2.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
Planning guidelines and general requirements for completing waste generation studies are
contained in the California Code of Regulations, Title 14. In addition, Title 14 states
that a solid waste generation study constitutes the waste characterization component of
the source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) required by sections 41003, 41030,
41303 and 41330 of the Public Resources Code.
The solid waste generation study must be representative of all residential, commercial,
industrial and other sources of waste generation in the jurisdiction, as well as
representative of all solid waste source reduction, recycling, composting, transformation
and disposal activities and facilities in the jurisdiction or normally used by the
jurisdiction and its residents and businesses.
The general requirements of this initial solid waste generation study are to provide:
. The total quantity of solid waste generated within the jurisdiction,
including diversion and disposal, for purposes of identifying the quantities
and types of materials to be diverted from disposal pursuant to sections
41780 and 41781 of the Public Resources Code.
. A projection of the solid waste to be generated, diverted, and disposed by
the jurisdiction, for at least a 15 year period from the date of the local
adoption of a SRRE. The projection is to include the amounts, waste
categories and waste types generated, diverted, and disposed under (1) the
solid waste management system conditions and diversion activities existing
at the time that the solid waste generation study is prepared, and under (2)
the solid waste management system conditions expected to be realized
after a jurisdiction's implementation of its SRRE and its attainment of the
statutory diversion mandates.
2209-1I1-TCCHVII9\CII\JLo\ VJSTAISRRB.CV\A 2-1
! 0 -b3
· A representative determination of the composition of solid waste
generated, diverted, and disposed by the jurisdiction, by waste category
and waste type using one or more of the following methodologies: I)
quantitative field analysis; 2) materials flow methodology; 3) jurisdiction-
specific data; and 4) existing data from comparable jurisdictions. (These
methodologies are described in detail in Title 14, Chapter 9, Article 6.1,
Section 18722.)
For ease of presentation, the study is divided in four sections: background information;
existing solid waste systems; solid waste generation; and solid waste composition. The
generation section, found in Section 2.5, identifies quantities of solid waste by generation
source and includes estimates of: I) the total quantity of solid waste generated by the
city; 2) the quantity which is transformed or disposed of in permitted solid waste
facilities; and 3) the quantity which is diverted from disposal facilities, through existing
source reduction, recycling, and composting programs. Also included in this section are
yearly solid waste generation projections through the year 2006, using an adjusted per
capita generation rate. The composition section, Section 2.6, identifies the waste
categories and waste types of interest, as well as the sampling methodology that was used
to characterize the solid wastestream.
2.2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
2.2.1 LOCATION
Chula Vista has a land area of 33.59 square'miles and is intersected by Interstate 5 to the
west and Interstate 805 to the east. It lies seven miles north of the Mexican border, and
seven miles south of downtown San Diego. As shown in Figures 2-1 and 2-2, Chula
Vista is bordered by National City on the north, Rancho Otay and Otay Lakes to the east,
and the City of San Diego on the south. Chula Vista is bordered to the west by San
Diego Bay.
22W-1Il.TCCHVlI9ICIIUlA VlSTAISRRE.CVIA 2-2
10 -/:;If
~
,
~
NOT TO SCALE
CALIFORNIA
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
-
.
~
.
...
g
,
.
~
I
j
c
5
,
,
-
I
.
,
~
.
,
~
COUNTY OF SAN DEliO
~
~
CDM
."vironm."ttJI MgifHHI,.. "_Ii.'..
~ ~ manDlJ.ment t:DMUftant.
LOCATION MAP
FIGURE 2-1
E
~
,
~
SE"ACQAST
DRIVE
IMPERIAL
BEACH
IMPERIAL BE"ACH
NAVAL AUXILlIARY
lANDING FIELD
Tijuana
- I
MEXICO
.- I
NOT m ~".u:
COUNTY OF SAN DEGO
CDM
en""-MI ~... .....~
"".",..,., ~ 1tIQIJOg- -...-".
CHULA VISTA
FIOtH: 1-1
I
. I
I
I
,
2.2.2 GENERAL LAND USE
Table 2-1 shows the July 1991 land use inventory for Chula Vista. As shown, vacant
land holds the largest land area (approximately 32.8%), followed closely by residential
areas (approximately 32.1 % of the total land area). Industrial and commercial areas total
about 10.7 percent of the total land area in the city. Streets, parks, agriculture and other
miscellaneous uses comprise the remaining 24.4 percent of land area in the city.
It is estimated that in 1990, the city had 49,849 housing units, including single family
homes, multi-family units, and mobile homes. Table 2-2 presents a breakdown of
housing, as estimated by the State Department of Finance for April 1990. The population
estimate for 1990 was 135,163.
Not only does Chula Vista have a large amount of vacant land remaining in the city, but
there are thousands of acres of unincorporated county land east of the city which may be
developed in the future. Such future developments, both within and beyond the city's
current sphere of influence, could apply for annexation to the city, potentially doubling
its size. Table 2-3 identifies potential future large scale developments and annexation
areas, which are currently in the planning stages. These areas are significant both
because of the challenges they present for the future management of solid waste and
because they present special opportunities for community-wide solid waste management
programs and facility siting.
ll09-II1-TC-CHVl\9\CIIUlA VJSTAISRRE.CVIA 2-5
!t) -to 1
J
TABLE 2-1
City of Chula Vista
LAND USE INVENTORY
JULY 1991
NO. OF %OF
LAND USE TYPE ACRES TOTAL
Residential 6,895 32.1
Commercial (Retail and Office) 922 4.3
Industrial
- Heavy, Light and Extractive 714 3.3
- Transportation, Communication,
and Utilities 670 3.1
Other
- Education & Institutional 981 4.6
- Parks & Recreational 1,107 5.1
- Agriculture 449 2.1
- Vacant 7,058 32.8
- Streets 2,702 12.6
TOTAL 21,498 100.0
Source: City of Chula Vista
2209-1II-TCCHV1\9ICIIULA VJSTA\S1UIB.CV\A 2-6
/()~~r
_~:~.-,;;,,;-...~~ . "L,,_
TABLE 2-2
City or Chula Vista
1990 HOUSING UNIT BREAKOOWN
HOUSING TYPE TOTAL UNITS
Single Family Detached 23,140
Single Family Attached 4,007
Two-to-Four-Plexes 3,531
Five or More Units 14,898
Mobile Homes 4,273
TOTAL 49,849
2209-1I1-TCCHVI\9\CIIUlA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 2-7
!O.-~7
TABLE 2-3
City of Chula Vista
POTENTIAL LARGE SCALE DEVEWPMENTS
CURRENTLY IN THE PLANNING STAGES
ESTIMATED POTENTIAL
PROJECT NAME ACRES DEVELOPMENT
Currently in the city: 1,600 1986 homes
Sunbow II 4,000 homes
Rancho del Rey SPA II & ill
Telegraph Canyon Road
Parcel (Otay-Baldwin)
Olympic VillagelTraining 154 300 beds plus
Facility commercial/service
Eastlake 2,500 6,500 homes
300 acres commercial/
industrial
1,100 parks/open space
Currently in the County: 9,386 10,000-20,000 homes
Otay Ranch (Baldwin) 600 acres commercial/
Western Parcel industrial
6,600 acres public/open space
Rancho San Miguel 1,327 homes
Salt Creek Ranch (Baldwin) 2,817 homes
Source: City of Chula Vista
Note: All numbers are approximate; many are preliminary estimates.
2209-11I-TCCHVl\9\CHULA VJSTAISRRB.CVIA 2-8
/0- 70
--;c-- ._._-~_.--'---r-;-~
;::;: f:,::.'" ',;. ~-
2.2.3 SCHOOLS
Chula Vista is served by 30 elementary schools and 10 secondary schools.
Elementary Schools
Elementary school facilities within the City of Chula Vista are provided by the Chula
Vista School District. The district is currently operating 30 schools. Ten of these
facilities are on year-round schedules with the remainder on the traditional school
calendar.
SecondaIy Schools
Secondary school facilities within the City of Chula Vista are provided by the Sweetwater
Union High School District. The district operates senior high schools, junior/middle
high schools, adult eduction schools and a continuing education school. Ten of these
facilities are located in the city.
2.2.4 TRANSPORTATION
Regional access to the City of Chula Vista is provided by highway, rail, and bus
systems.
Hi~h~s
Interstate highways that serve Chula Vista include Interstates 5 and 805. Interstate 5 is
a north-south interstate system that allows Chula Vista direct access to Los Angeles and
other cities within California, as well as beyond the state's borders. Interstate 805 is an
alternate inland route from Del Mar on the north to the International Border on the south.
This highway allows bypassing of downtown San Diego and connects directly with
Interstate 15 to Escondido, Riverside, and other communities in inland California. State
2209-1\I-TCCHVI\9\CHUU. VlSTA\SRllE.CV\A 2-9 "
jo-7(
Highway 54, currently under construction on the border separating National City and
Chula Vista, is referred to as the south bay Freeway and provides direct connection to
points east. Highway 125 is proposed to connect north-south through the eastern portion
of the city and county, including the Eastlake and Otay Ranch areas.
Bail
Chula Vista is served by the AT &SF Railroad and the San Diego Trolley.
2.2.5 PUBUC SERVICES AND UTILlTIES
Solid waste collection service in Chula Vista is generally provided by Laidlaw Waste
Systems, Inc. The exception is that BOCO Disposal Corporation serves the Sweetwater
Union High School, which is located on the boundary between Chula Vista and National
City. Both hauling companies dispose the waste in the Otay Landfill.
Police and fire protection services are provided by the City of Chula Vista Police and
Fire Departments. Sewer and street maintenance is provided by the Chula Vista Public
Works Department. The Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Department provides and
maintains city parks and recreational facilities. The city provides three public libraries.
Water is supplied to Chula Vista by the Sweetwater Authority and the Otay Water
District. Electricity and natural gas are supplied by the San Diego Gas and Electric
Company.
Wastewater generated in Chula Vista is treated at the San Diego County Metropolitan
Wastewater Treatment Facility, located at Point Loma.
This facility currently dries sludge on drying beds located on Fiesta Island. Upon
completion of drying, the sludge is used as composting material by a private composting
2209-1II-1'CaIV1\9\CHUl.A VJSTAISIIRE.CY\A 2-10
/~-I?J..
1'~
.'
facility .
2.3 EXISTING SOUD WASTE SYSTEMS
2.3.1 SOURCES OF GENERATION
For the purposes of this analysis, the term "solid waste" has been divided into
classifications which generally describe material characteristics and sources of generation.
The following are descriptions of these solid waste characteristics as defined by the
CIWMB, Title 14, Chapter 9.
. Residential Solid Waste means solid waste originating from single family
or multi-family dwellings.
. Commercial Solid Waste means solid waste originating from stores,
business offices, commercial warehouses, hospitals, educational and health
care institutions, military, correctional institutions, non-profit research
organizations, and government offices. Commercial solid wastes do not
include construction and demolition waste.
. Industrial Solid Waste means solid waste originating from mechanized
manufacturing facilities, factories, refineries, consttuction and demolition
projects, and publicly owned treatment works.
. SJlecial Waste includes any solid waste which, because of its source of
generation, physical, chemical or biological characteristics or unique
disposal requirements, is specifically conditioned in a solid waste facilities
permit for special handling and/or disposal.
. Household H~7J'lrdous Wastes are those wastes resulting from products
purchased by the general public for household use which, because of their
quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics,
may pose a substantial known or potential hazard to human health or the
environment when improperly treated, disposed, or otherwise managed.
These wastes are addressed in a separate document.
2209-III-TCCHVI\9\CHUL\ VISTAISRRE.CV\A 2-11
/0 r 13
2.3.2 COLLECTION PRACTICES
The City of Chula Vista, through an agreement with Laidlaw Waste Systems, provides
regular solid waste collection and disposal services for all residential, commercial,
municipal and other waste generators within the city limits, with the exception of
Sweetwater Union High School.
The City of Chula Vista has a contract with Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. to provide
residential and commercial waste disposal throughout the city. The contract is for a time
period of five years ending in 1992 and, based upon the requirements stated in the
"Laidlaw Trash Franchise Ordinance," the contract can be extended in two five-year
increments.
Pickup of residential solid waste is on a weekly basis. Pickup of commercial waste
varies with the establishment and can occur several times each week. The residents and
businesses receive direct billing from Laidlaw. Upon receipt of collection bills, residents
and businesses send payments directly to Laidlaw.
The Sweetwater Union High School District contracts with EDCO Disposal Corporation
to collect solid waste from the high school, which is located on the boundary between
National City and Chula Vista.
Solid waste generated by military sources in Chula Vista is located and disposed by the
private hauler(s) of the Navy's choice. This waste generally goes to the Miramar
Landfill, which is owned and operated by the military.
22lJ9.111-Tc.CHVII9ICHULA VJ8TAISRRB.CV\A 2-12
~
lo~71f
2.3.3 DISPOSAL PRACTICES
Solid waste collected in Chula Vista by Laidlaw Waste Systems and EDCO Disposal
Corporation is transported to the Otay Landfill, located in the southwestern portion of
San Diego County, east of Interstate 805 and north of Otay Mesa Road. The landfill,
owned by San Diego County, is operated through a contract with Herzog Contracting
Corporation, which maintains the contract for five years, at which time the operations
contract is again available for bidding.
The Otay Landfill, as well as the county Sycamore Landfill and the Navy's Miramar
Landfill, are scheduled to be closed in the next ten or 15 years. Consequently, a search
for new facilities has been underway, with specific sites being identified. Some of the
alternative landfill sites are located in the undeveloped areas east of Chula Vista. When
the disposal facilities are finally identified, it is the county's desire to have the capability
of operating solid waste facilities and disposing of solid waste for 30 years.
2.3.4 DIVERSION PRACTICES
Diversion refers to any activity which could result in or promote the diversion of solid
waste, through source reduction, recycling or composting, away from landfill disposal.
Although there is probably a significant amount of material currently being diverted from
landfill disposal, the task of documenting the actual quantities is far from simple.
However, telephone and written surveys can be used to determine residential,
commercial, and industrial diversion activities. Some of the problems associated with
determining accurate diversion quantities of material may include inaccurate reporting
of records, since processors of recycled materials are often reluctant to report the
quantities that they handle. Also double or even multiple counting of material can occur
because recyclable materials are often transferred several items before reaching end
users. For example, a non-profit group collects aluminum cans which they sell to a buy-
2209-11I-TC-CIIVJ\9\CHULA VlSTAISRRB.CVIA 2-13
/~ ,7-S'
back center, which in turn sells these same cans to a materials processor. The non-profit
group says it recycles one ton per year while the buy-back center reports 10 tons per year
and the processor reports 25 tons per year. In this case, the total reported quantity
exceeds the actual quantity of material that is recycled.
Source reduction can be a result of any number of methods used to prevent material from
ever entering the wastestream. These methods include waste exchanges, process changes
in production industries, reuse of materials for other purposes and diminished purchasing
or use of disposable materials. An appropriate method of documenting source reduction
efforts is through the administration and mailing of questionnaires to a large cross-section
of businesses throughout the community.
The city is planning to promote source reduction practices through public information,
purchase point reduction signage, an industrial waste exchange program, and direct
consultation with commercial and industrial businesses. Rohr Industries, the largest
industrial occupant in the city, has adopted source reduction polices and practices.
CIWMB has determined that diaper service accounts count towards a city's diversion
goals. There is a diaper service available to residents of Chula Vista, with 111 diaper
accounts within the city.
Recyclin~ Prol!rams
The development of comprehensive recyc!ing programs for the various communities
within San Diego County illustrates one of the most important aspects of the SRRE
program. Achieving a successful recycling program is the result of developing a
thorough waste generation and characterization program. Following the research and
analysis of this information, recycling then becomes the next critical step in the evolution
of a successful waste management program for the city.
As a result of the state mandate on the development of recycling programs for the
2209-111-TC-CHV1\9\CHIJU. VISTAISRRE.CVIA 2-14
lo,7J:,
communities within California and the county mandatory recycling ordinance that will
institute a phased-in prohibition of landfill disposal of recyclable or compostable
materials, the City of Chula Vista is in the process of developing multi-faceted recycling
programs for all land use sectors.
The Model City Office Recyclin~ Pro~ram and Business Recyclin~ OutrP<lrh prqject:
The city was awarded a grant by the county of San Diego Technical Assistance Program
(TAP) to begin an office recycling program for all civic center offices (over 500
employees). The program began in July 1991 and allows all civic center offices to
recycle their white and computer print-out paper, other office paper, glass, aluminum/tin
and plastic food and beverage containers. The Urban Corps of San Diego, also operating
under a TAP grant, provides weekly collection services. The grant provided funds for
training materials and supplies, including an employee handbook, decals, and recycling
bins. City staff developed and implemented the program, including employee training,
and will monitor the program. Civic center offices are also working on source reduction
and procurement of recycled materials.
Also as part of the TAP grant, city staff members are developing an office recycling
guide for establishing office recycling programs at area businesses. This manual will be
made available to all businesses, while 12 local office businesses of various sizes will
also be targeted for assistance in the establishment of office recycling programs.
Information will be made available for businesses to establish office recycling programs
over the next several months. City staff will work with the Chula Vista chamber of
commerce to disseminate the manual and other information on recycling, source
reduction, and recycled product procurement. A business recycling baseline will also be
created in order to track commercial and industrial recycling efforts in the city.
Residential Recyclin2 Pr02rams: The City ofChula Vista's Curbside Recycling Program
began with a pilot program in 1989, which was expanded to a citywide operation on
February 4, 1991. Weekly curbside collection service is provided by Laidlaw Waste
2209-11I-TC-CHVlI9\CHIJlA VlSTAISRRB.CVIA 2-15
IO~/7
Systems, Inc. to all single family homes and multi-family units with curbside refuse
pickup within the city (approximately 22,900 homes). Recycling service is provided on
the same day as refuse collection. With an estimated 82 percent participation rate, an
average of 260 tons of recyclables are being collected each month.
The actual estimated cost of the program is $1.82 per month for each household. Credits
to reduce this amount have been given as follows: $.20 for the estimated landfill
diversion savings (the money saved by not landfilling the materials); $.40 for the sale of
the recyclables, and $.12 for the county grant received by Laidlaw. Residents are billed
$1.10 per month for the service on their regular refuse collection billing. Recyclables
currently collected in the program include: aluminum and bi-metal cans, newspaper,
glass jars and bottles, and mixed household plastics. Other commodities, including
mixed papers (magazines, junk mail) will be proposed for collection as markets and
technology improve. "Greens" recycling, including backyard composting and curbside
collection of yard waste, is planned for the future.
Because of the complexities involved with multi-family recyclables collection, staff is
currently compiling information on how to best design and implement a residential multi-
.
family recycling program serving all apartments and condominiums that do not receive
curbside refuse collection. By January 1992, the city plans to determine whether to
award a contract to one service provider or multiple service providers, or to allow
service providers to contract directly with apartment owners. A program must be in
place by July 1993, per the county mandatory recycling ordinance.
The city has recently expanded the local crime prevention volunteer program into a
Community Volunteer Infrastructure Program. Under this program, block captains
distribute information to neighborhood residents on subjects such as police and crime
watch, fire safety, recycling, water conservation, household hazardous wastes, and other
issues important to the neighborhood, in addition to their crime watch advisor duties.
Neighborhood Resource Residents act as advisors within the neighborhood in order to
2209-1II-'I'CCHVII9ICIIl VJSTA\SRRIl.CV\A 2-16
/P-7f
":.
assist residents with recycling, compo sting and other infrastructure issues.
Commercial Rec.yclin~ Pro~: At City Council's direction, city staff is researching
how to best design and implement a commercial recycling program that will be applicable
to Chula Vista's diverse mix of commercial uses. As with the multi-family program, the
City Council will decide by January 1992 whether to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP)
and contract with one or more service providers, or whether to allow each business to
choose a service provider. In the interim, businesses are encouraged to voluntarily begin
development of their own recycling programs. Source reduction, materials exchange
programs, and procurement are also being encouraged. A program will be in place by
July 1993, as required by the county mandatory recycling ordinance.
Industrial Recyclinl! Provram: Due to the diverse nature of industrial wastes and service
provider needs associated with this sector, the city has decided to allow industrial
generators to make their own recycling arrangements, unless refuse is currently hauled
by Laidlaw as a commercial account under Laidlaw's franchise agreement with the city.
As a commercial account, these industrial generators would be treated similarly to other
commercial establishments. City staff will develop an industrial recycling guide and a
materials exchange program to assist industries in complying with the county mandatory
recycling ordinance and AB 939. Industrial recycling program enforcement will begin
by October I, 1992, as required by the county.
City Mandatory Recyclin~ Ordinance: The city staff is currently preparing a mandatory
recycling ordinance to be adopted by City Council and implemented by March 1, 1992.
Staff is in the process of evaluating enforcement alternatives for implementing the
ordinance. Options could include utilizing existing code enforcement staff, hiring a new
code enforcement officer, requiring the hauler to enforce the ordinance, or a combination
of these tactics.
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9\CHIllA VJSTA\S1lRI!.CV\A 2-17
/?J-7q
Conservation Coordinator and Re((yclin~ Intern: The city's Conservation Coordinator
began employment on February 11, 1991. The Conservation Coordinator's main role
will be to design and oversee the city's source reduction, recycling and compo sting
programs. Other activities include involvement in water conservation issues and
household hazardous waste management. A business recycling intern has recently been
hired by the city to assist the Conservation Coordinator in implementing the business
recycling outreach program.
~
The Conservation Coordinator makes presentations on environmental issues, recycling
and composting to school groups, civic groups and business associations. She also staffs
booths at community events, and establishes fixed and mobile displays on recycling and
other environmental issues. Public relations materials, including flyers, PSA's, and other
materials are also developed by this staff member. The Conservation Coordinator
answers citizen, business, and staff inquiries about recycling and the city's recycling
programs, and is available to offer technical advice in establishing recycling programs.
Compostin~
At the present time, there are no composting facilities in Chula Vista. However,
approximately 17.4 percent of the total wastestream from Chula Vista consists of yard
waste (e.g. leaves, brush, grass clippings), while wood waste comprises an additional 9.7
percent of the total wastestream. By their nature, yard and wood wastes represent a
bulky and sustaining portion of the solid wastestream and these characteristics can greatly
enhance any compo sting program. Since these two waste types represent over a quarter
of the total solid waste being generated by Chula Vista, the potential for developing a
composting program exists.
The Eastlake master planned community, consisting of approximately 3,200 acres in
eastern Chula Vista, is operating a pilot composting project for the . green" waste which
2209-1ll-TCCHVl\9\CII\J1 VJSTAISRRB.CVIA 2-18
(0 ~f1J
""'~'-;~~, "'.
is generated by the 1,100 acres of proposed parks, golf courses and other open space
areas located within Eastlake. Residential yard waste may be added at a later time. The
project is partially funded by a Technical Assistance Program (TAP) Grant from the
county of San Diego.
The Otay Ranch New Town Community, located east of Chula Vista, consists of
approximately 23,300 acres. This community is currently in the planning stages and
could potentially be annexed to the City of Chula Vista. The project plans currently
include the setting aside of 40 acres for a composting facility to serve the project.
The City of Chula Vista is planning to implement a . green. waste collection and disposal
program. By January 1992, the City Council will decide upon a method of contracting
for this program. A Request for Proposals will then be distributed and the program will
be implemented in phases to allow for citywide implementation by January 1993 as
required by the county mandatory recycling ordinance. A backyard composting pilot
program is also planned to begin in November 1991.
The Chula Vista Public Works Department began mulching all green material collected
from city complexes and parks in September 1991. Mulch will be made available to the
public.
Currently, the Otay Landfill has segregated a portion of the facility for the deposition of
yard waste. This waste is cut and chopped into a fme mulch that is then made available
to the general public at no cost.
2.4 EXISTING SOLID WASTE OUAlIrunbS
In order to determine the total quantity of waste that is generated by a jurisdiction. all
methods of disposal and diversion must be known. Solid waste is collected by haulers
and disposed in sanitary landfills where operators keep records of the quantities and
2209-1JI-TC-CH\IJ\9ICHUl.A VJSTAISRllB.CVIA 2-19
/ () ,rl
sources of waste that they receive. By comparison, diversion quantities are more
difficult to determine because of the large number of diversion possibilities and the lack
of documentation.
2.4.1 LANDFILL DISPOSAL
The City of Chula Vista employs a single hauler, Laidlaw Waste Systems, that transports
the solid waste to one location, the Otay landfill. BOCO also takes solid waste from the
Sweetwater Union High School to the Otay Landfill. San Diego County estimates that
a total of 178,867 tons of solid waste per year is transported from Chula Vista sources
to the Otay Landfill. An additional 823 tons of solid waste are disposed of privately by
commercial and industrial generators in the county's Sycamore Landfill. Approximately
six tons are sent to the San Marcos Landfill. Finally, an estimated 296 tons of solid
waste from military sources within Chula Vista are deposited in the Miramar Landfill.
Thus, an estimated total of 179,992 tons of solid waste from Chula Vista are deposited
in landfills each year. This amount is estimated to represent approximately 92.9 percent
of the total amount of waste being generated in Chula Vista, the total waste generation
being the amount disposed in landfills plus the amount being diverted. This amount is
estimated at 193,761 tons. The solid waste data is currently classified into three major
categories: residential, commercial and industrial. Tonnage data shows that
approximately half of the total solid wastestream is generated by the residential sector,
with the remainder from commercial and industrial sources. Public institutions and
facilities are included in the commercial category.
2.4.2 DIVERSION
Diversion quantities include all material that is prevented from entering the wastestream
by source reduction measures, or diverted from landfill disposal by recycling and
composting.
2209-III-Tc-cHVl\\l\CHlJLo\ VlSTA\SRRB.CV\A 2-20
/0 . f ..)..
~...;..Jj; .~".~,.." .. . .. ~, ..,......
Source Reduction. As discussed previously, there are some small scale source reduction
programs currently in operation, however, to determine the actual quantities would be
very time consuming and costly. In addition to not being cost effective, the results may
not be accurate. Therefore, the only existing source reduction practices that will be
counted towards diversion credits are the use of cloth diapers. There are 111 such
accounts in Chula Vista. Based on a recent study by the National Association of Diaper
Services, each account uses an average of 80 diapers per week and the average weight
of each used disposable diaper is 0.48 pounds. Therefore, Chula Vista diverts
approximately III tons per year of disposable diapers from the landfill.
Recyclinl!:. As mentioned previously, the City of Chula Vista started its single family
curbside recycling program and its civic center office recycling program in 1991. Since
the landfill disposal quantities presented in this document predate the recycling program,
the recycled amounts cannot be included in the current diversion estimate.
According to the State of California Department of Conservation, approximately 572,068
pounds (286 tons) of redemption material (aluminum, glass and plastic beverage
containers) are being diverted from the wastestream via buy-back centers and reverse
vending machines in Chula Vista each year. Based on information provided by the
county of San Diego, approximately 79.6 tons of waste paper was diverted from county
offices in Chula Vista under the county office recycling program in FY 90/91. Based
on telephone surveys conducted by CDM, it is estimated that the large grocery,
drugstore, building supply and department stores in Chula Vista are recycling
approximately 2,077 tons per year of cardboard, aluminum, plastic, and other
miscellaneous materials (See Table 2-4).
Thus, the total quantity of waste recycled in Chula Vista from all sources is estimated
at 2442.6 tons. This estimate is probably understated, since it does not take into
consideration on-going industrial recycling efforts (including recycling of demolition
debris).
~1I1-Tc-cHVl\9ICHIlLA VISTAISRRB.CVIA 2-21
10.f3
Compostini. Some composting is taking place at the Otay Landfill. However, figures
are not available. regarding the amount of material composted from each city. In
addition, the Eastlake pilot program and the city park/civic center mulching project are
new programs and cannot be counted toward the 1990 diversion estimate. CDM
estimates that Chula Vista is generating 31 tons per day of sewage sludge (11,315 tons
annually), which is being composted on Fiesta Island.
'-
2209-1II-TC-CHV1\91CHULA VJSTAISllRB.CVIA 2-22
/0 '~'f
- - -- ----- ~~;,~,;;~;:~~"L..;L
-,
TABLE 2-4
City of Chula Vista
COMMERCIAL RECYCLED QUANTITIES
WASTE CATEGORY TONS/YEAR
Newspaper 0.0
Corrugated Cardboard 2,068.8
Other Paper 0.0
Ferrous 0.0
Aluminum 2.4
Other Metal 0.0
Glass 0.0
Plastic 1.2
Organic (food waste) U
TOTAL 2,077.2
22lJ9..I1I-TCCHVn9\CHUU. VJSTAISRRB.CVIA 2-23
/O~fs
2.4.3 TOTAL GENERATION
The total solid waste generated by the City of Chula Vista can be expressed as follows:
GEN = DISP + DIVERT
Where:
GEN = the total quantity of solid waste generated within the city.
DISP = the total quantity of solid waste generated within the city which is
disposed in permitted solid waste facilities.
DIVERT = the total quantity of solid waste generated within the city which is
diverted from permitted solid waste facilities through existing
source reduction, recycling, and compo sting programs.
For FY 1989/1990, a summary of the generated solid waste can be separated into the
following classifications and quantities.
Classification
Tonna2e
Disposal
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Military
95,849
51,655
32,192
296
2209.111.TCaIVJ\9ICIIULA VISTAISllltI!.cvv.
2-24
/t).i1:,
,
- -- ---- -_...,----
.,
Diversion
Sewage Sludge Composting
Source Reduction
County Office Paper
Commercial Recycling
Ca Redemption Materials
11,315
111
80
2,077
286
Total Generated
193,761
2.5 PROJECTED SOLID WASTE OUANunES
Population projections and per capita solid waste generation rates are the tools used to
arrive at solid waste quantity projections. The numerical value. of the solid waste
generation rate is then determined by dividing the total waste quantity produced in a
particular area by the total population within that same area. Assuming population and
waste quantity data are reliable, this number should be representative of the per capita
waste quantity produced. This number can then be applied to population increases in
order to project future solid waste quantities. However, it should be noted that solid
waste generation rates are sensitive to change as a result of any or all of the following
factors.
. The degree of control over waste disposal practices
. Amounts of residential, commercial, industrial, and special wastes
generated
. Construction development activities
. Social patterns
. Product packaging
. Characteristics of communities (rural versus urban)
22il9-1II.TC-CHVl\9\CHIllA VJSTAISRltB.CVIA 2-25
/0 -f7
Table 2-5
City of Chula Vista
HISTORICAL POPULATION ESTIMATES*
POPULATION
YEAR ESTIMATE PERCENT INCREASE
1980 83,927 ---
1981 84,402 0.57
1982 86,595 2.60
1983 88,221 1.88
1984 89,224 1.14
1985 90,309 1.22
1986 116,070 28.53**
1987 120,015 3.40
1988 124,163 3.46
1989 127,858 2.98
1990 135,163 5.71
Source: San Diego County Association of Governments, January 1990
* Estimates are for January 1, of each year
** Partially due to annexation of the Montgomery Community (3.5
square miles and approximately 25, 000 people)
2209-1II-TC<::HVI\9ICHIJIA VJSTAISRRB.CVIA 2-26
/0 -ff
-- ..----.--- --- ----- - -- ..--
Table 2-6
City of Chula Vista
POPULATION PROJECTlONS1
POPULATION
YEAR PROJECTlO~ PERCENT CHANGE
1990 135,163 ---
1995 148,663 10.00
2000 158,803 6.82
2006 167,253 5.32
Source: San Diego Association of Governments, Apri11991.
2
The Series 7 forecasts were revised specifically for the preparation of the San
Diego County Source Reduction and Recycling Elements. This revision
incorporates 1990 census figures, Series 7 growth rates and current trends in
housing completions.
If changes in the preceding list of factors occur in Chula Vista, future updates of the
SRRE may need to incorporate revised solid waste generation rates.
The solid waste quantity data collected, for the base year 1990, were provided by the
county of San Diego from weight records maintained at each of the sanitary landfills and
from the solid waste hauler survey conducted in August 1990. Population information
was revised by SANDAG from their Series 7 forecasts to reflect the 1990 census data,
specifically for the preparation of the SRRE.
2.5.1 POPULATION PROJECTIONS
The 1990 census indicates that the current population of the City of Chula Vista is
approximately 135,163. This represents an increase in population of more than 51,200
2209-11I-TC-CHVI\9\CllUlA VlSTAISRRB.CV\A 2-27
!D-f7'
people since 1980. Refer to Table 2-5 for historical populations. As shown, the city
witnessed a steady increase in population throughout the 1980's, including a substantial
increase in 1986 due to the annexation of the Montgomery Community in 1985. The
percent change in population between 1980 and 1990 was 61.0 percent. The average
annual increase in population since 1986 was 3.89 percent. Between 1989 and 1990, the
population of Chula Vista increased by 5.71 percent.
SANDAG has provided a revised Series 7 population forecast for the development of the
SRRE for each of the cities within San Diego County. The Series 7 forecasts incorporate
the 1990 census data, Series 7 growth rates and current trends in housing completions.
The SANDAG forecasts for Chula Vista are provided in Table 2-6. SANDAG's
forecasts project that the population of Chula Vista will reach 167,253 by the end of the
planning period in 2006. This represents an overall projected population increase of 23.7
percent. These forecasts are based on the existing Chula Vista General Plan area and do
not reflect potential future annexation areas, due to the uncertainty of such future
annexations. Any future annexations shall be included in future updates of the SRRE.
2.5.2 PER CAPITA SOLID WASTE GENERATION RATES
The determination of a per capita solid waste generation rate for an area provides a
numerical value which Can be applied to population increases to project future solid waste
quantities. As previously discussed, the degree of waste disposal control, the individual
amounts of wastestream classifications (residential, commercial/industrial, and special
wastes), seasonal variations, and the characteristics of the community all impact the per
capita rate.
Based on information supplied by San Diego County, the solid waste disposal rate for
Chula Vista was estimated to be 7.3 pounds/person/day. Using this rate as the basis for
per capita solid waste generation and applying this to the population projections, the
estimated future solid waste disposal quantities for the city can be computed. In
2209-III-TC-CIIVl\9\CHUU. VJSTAISlUlB.CVIA 2-28
/o-qo
reviewing these estimates, it should be noted that the base per capita rate is based upon
the weight records maintained by the county since July 1990 and hauler survey
information received in August 1990. The total waste generation rate, including both
disposed and diverted quantities is 7.8 pounds per capita per day.
2.5.3 SOLID WASTE PROJECTIONS
Historically, the per capita generation of solid waste in the United States increased at the
rate of three to four percent per year through the 1960's and early 1970's. This
historical increase was a result of the greater use of paper in packaging and disposable
products, along with a general rise in the standard of living. In the latter half of the
1970's, this rate of increase slowed considerably as a result of the general economic
conditions and the increased awareness and concern about recycling and the reuse of
solid wastes.
Another factor working to slow the increase in the waste generation rate was the
increased cost of raw materials and the resultant incentive to increase the use of
recovered materials. This factor, coupled with the energy savings from using recovered
materials, encourages more recycling at the source and thus increases efficiency in
product use.
Based on the short- and medium-term development plans for the City of Chula Vista, it
is expected that the per capita generation of solid waste will remain relatively stable
through the year 2006. The projected solid waste disposal quantities for Chula Vista
through the planning period are shown in Table 2-7.
2209-1Il-TC-CHVII9\CHULA VlSTAISRIlE.CV\A 2-29
10 -9r
~-
Table 2-7 .
City of Chula Vista
POPULATION AND SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL PROJECTIONS
WASTE QUANTITY
YEAR POPULATION! (TONS/YEAR)
1990 135,163 180,071
1991 137,863 183,668
1992 140,563 187,265
1993 143,263 190,862
1994 145,963 194,459
1995 148,663 198,056
1996 150,691 200,758
1997 152,719 203,460
1998 154,747 206,162
1999 156,775 208,863
2000 158,803 211,565
2001 160,211 213,441
2002 161,619 215,317
2003 163,027 217,193
2004 164,435 219,069
2005 165,843 220,944
2006 167,253 222,822
The San Diego Association of Governments Series 7 forecasts for 1990, 1995,
2000 and 2006 were revised specifically for preparation of the San Diego County
Source Reduction and Recycling Elements. This revision incorporates 1990
census figures, series 7 growth rates and current trends in housing completions.
2209-1II-TCCHVl\9\CHUI.A VJSTA\SIlRB.CVIA 2-30
/tP-f:r
2.6 WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
2.6.1 BACKGROUND
Waste characterization studies
Diego to identify and monito
landfills. AB 939 now requirt
fifteen year projections descr
diverted by waste component.
regional data in the Initial Soli.
The county of San Diego, Of
extensive regional data on w;
Sca1eWare data system was
Borrego Landfill. This system
truck type.
In addition, under the direction
waste composition studies we;
waste at Miramar, Sycamore, t
with hauler surveys, makes it po
characterization of its wastestrean
the composition and the results.
~ part of an ongoing commitment by the county of San
: types and quantities of waste entering the county's
.;;h jurisdiction in th~ state to provide current data and
the quantities of waste generated, disposed, and
J 1820 amended AB 939 by permitting the use of
aste Generation Study for the SRRE.
iment of Public Works, Solid Waste Division has
. 'sition in San Diego Cc.,.ty. A customized
'lOW operates at each landfill, except the
natica11j generates reports on quantities disposed by
.;0 Analysis and Recovery Sciences, Inc., seasonal
!uced between 1988 and 1990 to characterize the
Id San Marcos landfills. This data, in conjunction
for each city in the county to estimate the specific
~is section describes the methods used to determine
2.6.2 METHODS USED FOR S( ID WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
To determine origin of waste arrivim t the county landfills, the county conducted a
hauler survey at the San Marcos, Syc. "f Otay and Ramona Landfills for the period
of August 15 to September 15, 1990. .>\nalysis of the results of this survey enabled an
allocation by jurisdiction of total tons disposed at the landfill during this period.
:z209..111.TCCHVI\9\CIIULA VlSTAISRllE.CV\A 2-31
If) -:-93
Approximately 76 percent of total tons disposed at each landfill was account for during
this period. For purposes of this study, it was assumed that the remaining wastestream
was constant for all jurisdictions.
Truck types can be used to identify the source of the solid waste by sector. The three
sectors are residential, commercial and industrial sources. The computerized charge-by-
weight system at landfills enables accurate accounting of the amount of waste disposed
by each truck type. However, the computerized system does not currently provide data
by jurisdiction. Consequently, the county is presently developing a reporting system to
satisfy AB 939 requirements.
The following assumptions were made to define each waste generation sector.
Residential
. 100 percent of rear loaders and side loaders
. 50 percent of front loaders
. Residential self-haul (cars, vans and non-decaled pick-ups)
Commercial
. 100 percent of compacted roll-offs
. 50 percent of front loaders
. 50 percent of open roll-offs
. 100 percent of decaled pick-ups
Industrial
. 50 percent of open roll-offs
. All other non-compactor vehicles (excluding cars, vans and pick-ups)
2209-1II-Tc.CHVI\9ICHlJLI. VISTAISRRB.CV\A 2-32
/~ -c;y
Waste disposal tonnages were apportioned by truck type and jurisdiction for each landfill
based on the hauler survey. These numbers were then applied to the Recovery Sciences,
Inc. and EcoAnalysis, Inc. waste composition estimates by truck type, landfill, and the
percent of each jurisdiction's contribution to each landfill, ultimately yielding a unique
wastestream composition for each jurisdiction in the county.
2.6.3 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Table 2-8 presents a summary of the waste composition by sector for each landfill used
by .the City of Chula Vista in 1990. Table 2-9 illustrates the total base year waste
composition for the city. Refer to the Appendices for 15-year projections. The resulting
waste composition is adequate for the preliminary planning stages. One limitation in
targeting programs necessary to achieve the short- and medium-term goals is the lack of
detailed breakdown on materials classified as .other miscellaneous" and special wastes.
It is recommended that a more detailed analysis be performed during the short-term
planning period based on CIWMB regulations and procedures. The city should work
together with the county in developing a database using the Sca1eWare system to account
for each jurisdiction and sector origination of waste.
2209-111.TCCHVI\9ICHULA VlSTAISRIlE.CV\A 2-33
II) - Cf'~
a:
o
13
w
III
C
Z
c[
~
(j
j!~
!!!z
~>o
~~E
lD:Z:1Il
j!UO
""a.
O:!:
~O
tjU
~
c[
~
~
~
o
<>
'ii "' .. 0 0
.. "! 0> .. '" lD "! 0 .., 0 - lD - lD "! .... 0> .
.'; .. - Q 0 0 0 - 0 .,; 0 0 .,; .. N 0 '" - 0 ::i O~
..5 -
c 0
. E '" lD .. "! "! N .., .... C! N lD "' '" - "! .. "' .. o .
e E .,; .. .,; N - - N 0 ;?; - 0 ..; .,; 0 0 - 0 0 .. O~
. 0 - -
U
. 0
o i .. .... .. "! lD "' 0 lD .., "! .., 0> lD 0 0 0 0 0 0 o .
cD .,; .,; - ..; N ..; ..; lli - 0 .. cD 0 0 0 0 0 0 08
a: - -
! 0> '" i i C! i "' ~I
~ 0> 0 "! N .. .., .. .. .. N .
Iii i .... .... i8e
~ ~ ;0 '" ~ C! t!i 0 '" '" 5i ~ ~
l .. ~ 0 0; .., N~
- N -
. Ii N lD "! "! - '" lD .. .... "' ~I
"! .. ~ .., .... .... .. "! C!5l
~ .. .,; 0 cD ~ 0 It i ~ .., .,; .. ~
o E .., ~ ~ .... Si .. .... lli iii a; III ~ 00>
.3 N 0> - - - 0;;
.. - ....
.., - "! 0> ~ 0 i - "! i .., al
sj 0 0"
i .. l!: i lli ..; ~ :Ii ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
- 1il .... e 0 0 0 0 0 0 o~
;0 ;JI; - ;I; "'
- 0>
... 0
.5
.
E E ~ .., ~ ;: ~ .... ~ ~ , "' ~ .., "' '" lD :;j m 0>
N ~ :! 0; 0 .. c; O~
~Ij 0 ~ ~ 0 0 .. ~
N III .,; - ::i - It g
- .. .. - .. N 0 - - N 0 -
. 0
a:
1
:;.:.
oJ 0> i .., "! i "' 0 ,
0> C! "! N .. N N .. I N .
. ! .... .... i 0 .....
" ~ ~ ~ - '" ~ 0 t!i 0 .., ~ lli ! ~ re~
... .. ~ 0 - i1i
.5 .., ..
- ..,
?:s,"
Ii i lD i*-'.
0 .., "' .... lD 0 N .. .., .... i N lD .., .., "' C!l!i
. E 1I1 Iii ~ ~ S .. '" :e ~ "! cD ~ lD ~ ~ ~ lli
.., a; - r.i 0..
.3 .., N c;; - - ;: N 0;;
.. .., - - -
'*'-
.., - "! 0> - N 0 i ~ "! i ..,
0 0"
.. .. l!: i lli ..; ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
. - 1il .... c;; 0 0 0 0 0 0 o~
a: ;0 ;JI; - ;I;
- N - 0>
'ii N .. lD 0 ~ C! "' "'
" 0 0 C! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. ~ .,; "! ~ .. q.,;
... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - :: ;I; OlZ
. c ....
. -
0
E E "' "' C! .... "! .. 0>
E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C! 0 0 !Ii co; N "! ~ ~ ~...:.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .,; - N - o~
.3 - - -
i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C! 0 0 0 00
a: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
oJ
. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "' .. .., - .. - d "! 00
8'; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0";
o c
.-
. E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "' .. .., - "= - - "! 00
~Ij 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - OM
i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
a: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dci
c . I
~i ! I . ~ ! i I
E 1 J Ii I ~ .
tlI ! ~ I I
. 11 ~ j J I l l!' 1 11 )1
. ~ j l ~ i ! J
. ... " E ~ f
~ :I: " = is
"" (/)
)cj.tjb
".~~."
.
.."....;.""
TABLE 2-9
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
WASTE COMPOSITION BY CIlY
Iw.... "omponen. ~n Marco. :iye.mor. uuoy Mlr.man lOla' rercent
l%l
Cerdboerd 0.0 0.0 12006.3 10.2 12016.5 6.7
Newspeper 0.0 0.0 8133.6 4.5 8138.1 4.5
Mixed Paper 0.0 0.0 11585.1 9.2 11594.3 6.4
HG Ledger 0.0 0.0 2578.6 1.4 2580.1 1.4
Glass 0.0 0.0 4748.2 4.3 4752.5 2.6
Film Plestic 0.0 0.0 3565.4 2.6 3568.0 2.0
Hard Plastic 0.0 0.0 4357.7 2.9 4360.6 2.4
Diapers 0.0 0.0 3809.4 0.0 3809.4 2.1
Other Misc.. 0.0 0.0 58744.2 29.0 58n3.1 32.7
TIn Cans 0.0 0.0 2175.1 0.0 2175.1 1.2
Aluminum Cans 0.0 0.0 401.3 0.5 401.8 0.2
Yerd W_ 0.9 117.7 31162.2 18.1 31298.1 17.4
Wood Weste 0.7 26.9 17418.2 11.3 17456.3 9.7
Concrete 0.6 25.0 1133.4 33.9 1192.4 0.7
Asphell 0.1 2.9 59.8 2.1 64.8 0.0
DirVRock/Send 0.9 129.0 3113.4 73.4 3315.9 1.8
Roofing 0.1 44.8 652.5 0.6 697.9 0.4
Drywell 0.2 22.1 457.6 1.2 481.0 0.3
Mixed Cons1ructi9n 2.4 464.9 12478.0 90.6 13023.5 7.2
ISoeciel West.. 0.0 0.0 286.2 0.0 286.2 0.2
I Tote! 6.0 823.4 178866.2 295.9 179991.4 100.0
. -Other Misc.' category is equivalent to "non-ferrous', "naturar
and -synthetic textiles", 'organics", "residuals., "putreaclbl..",
"salvage/composite" and "inert materials" categories.
! Based on the assumption that out of the total wastes being hauled
by all packers category I provided by the City of San Diego, approximately
50% Is being heuled by the f,ontloede, type trucks and 50% is by the side
loader type trucks.
! 0 J17
3.0 SOURCE REDUCTION COMPONENT
3.1 OBJECTIVES
Source reduction refers to any action which causes a net reduction in the generation of
solid waste, and can include but is not limited to, replacing disposable materials and
products with reusable materials and products, reducing packaging, and increasing the
efficient use of paper, cardboard, glass, metal, plastic, and other materials in the
manufacturing process. Although individual source reduction measures are difficult to
quantify and document, the cumulative effect of several such measures, in conjunction
with an effective recycling program could significantly reduce the volume of solid waste
going to disposal facilities. A source reduction program will also conserve energy, avoid
collection and disposal costs, increase public awareness of waste disposal issues, and
contribute to the overall success of solid waste management plans.
Source reduction techniques differ from other waste management strategies in that they
do not involve specific techniques, rather they focus on changing attitudes and behavior
of both producers and consumers. Typically, source reduction programs attempt to:
. Reduce the use of non-recyclable materials
. Replace disposable materials with reusable materials
. Reduce packaging
. Reduce the amount of yard waste generated
. Encourage the purchase of repairable products and recycled products
. Increase efficiency of use of materials
3.1.1 SHORT- AND MEDIUM-TERM OBJECTIVES
An estimate of the diversion quantity that can be achieved through source reduction is
extremely difficult because existing studies do not quantify the effectiveness of source
2209-III-Tc-cHVI\9\CII\JU VISTAISRRB.CVIA 3-1
10-98'
reduction programs. Therefore, it is conservatively estimated that there will be only a
one percent reduction in Chula Vista's wastestream following implementation of its short-
term source reduction program. Existing cloth diaper accounts represent only a
negligible diversion rate (less than 0.1 %). The city is proposing to establish sufficient
documentation to quantify a 1 percent source reduction goal over the short-term planning
period (by 1995) and has incorporated a two percent diversion rate by way of source
reduction over the medium-term (1995-2000).
As a result, the short-term objectives of Chula Vista's program are to educate the public
about source reduction activities and modify city procurement policies. Information on
source reduction and recycling is included in display holders and on display tables
throughout the civic center. The education and public information program also includes
distribution of informative flyers about specific source reduction activities that residents
and office personnel can perform as well as the benefits that will be derived from such
activities. "Precycling" (source reduction) will be included as a topic in all public
presentations on recycling and in business technical assistance programs. Source
reduction information and recycled product samples are part of the city's technical
assistance presentation given to businesses and are discussed in all public presentations.
Where feasible, all city offices will purchase recyclable over nonrecyclable materials,
products made from recycled materials over products made from virgin materials,
products with minimal packaging over products with excessive packaging, and reusable
products over disposable products. These objectives will be incorporated into a modelpcity procurement policy which could also be used by area businesses. The city also plans
to work with retail outlets to identify those sale items which offer reduced packaging.
This is called "point of purchase" information.
The medium-term objective is to encourage source reduction behavior through the use
of public information and business outreach programs, the development of a waste
exchange program, expansion of the point of purchase information program, targeting
and working with more manufacturers and retail stores to reduce packaging and improve
22119-III-TCCHVl\9ICHUlA VlSTAISRllB.CVIA 3-2
ID ..Cj9
"precycling" practices, possible local bans on overpackaging, and lobbying for state
legislation.
3.1.2 PRIORITY WASTE TYPES
A variety of materials have source reduction potential and the more materials that are
targeted, the higher the probability of achieving a noticeable reduction in the
wastestream.
The materials that can be targeted for Chula Vista's source reduction program include,
but are not limited to:
. disposable diapers
. yard waste
. textiles and leather
. paper plates and napkins
. plastic utensils
. paper and styrofoam cups
. excess product packaging
. fast food packaging
. junk mail
These materials are specifically targeted because of the significant contribution they make
to the current disposal stream (estimated a~ more than 25 percent by weight for Chula
Vista), and the fact that they have very limited recyclability.
According to the disposal stream characterization that was performed between August and
September, 1990 as part of the Initial Solid Waste Generation Study, disposable diapers
account for 3.8 percent of Chula Vista's residential wastestream and almost 2.1 percent
of the total wastestream. It may not be possible to eliminate the use of disposable
diapers, but the city's public education program will encourage more people to use cloth
2209-1II.TCOIVlI9\CHlJLA VISTAISRRB.CV\A 3-3
/() -/tJ?)
diapers either on a regular basis or occasionally, thereby reducing the quantity of diapers
requiring disposal.
Almost 19.9 percent of the residential wastestream and 17.4 percent of Chula Vista's
total disposal wastestream is yard waste. If this material can be composted through
backyard composting programs or otherwise utilized at the source of generation by the
use of mulching mowers, it would help to achieve the mandated 25 and 50 percent
reduction goals, as well as reduce the sizing requirements for centralized compo sting
facilities.
Used clothing and shoes are included in the textiles and leather category. Some of these
materials can be easily diverted from landfill disposal. Most non-profit organizations,
such as the Salvation Army and American Veterans, will accept used clothing for repair
and reuse. The city's community cleanups and annual citywide garage sale also offer
opportunities for the diversion of these goods.
l_.
,-
The remainder of targeted materials make up a percentage of the mixed paper, mixed
plastic and cardboard categories which account for 6.4 percent, 4.4 percent and 6.7
percent of Chula Vista's total disposal wastestream, respectively. Any reduction in this
material would contribute to achieving the short- and medium-range goals. As noted in
the city's recycling handbooks and flyers, methods that can be used to reduce the
generation of these paper, plastic and cardboard materials include:
-,
~'. -
· avoid using disposable materia1s
· have names removed from "junk" mailing lists
· purchase products with little or no packaging
2209-111-TCCHV1\1lICIIIJL\ VlSTA\8RRI!.CVIA 3-4
/ tJ -(0/
~
--~ ---- -------------.------ ----'-
3.2 EXISTING CONDffiONS
Source reduction is difficult to quantify since little or no documentation is maintained.
There may be some small scale source reduction activities currently performed by
residential, commercial, and industrial entities within the city, but the difficulty lies in
developing an accurate method to quantify such programs. As part of the mail survey
that was conducted for the Initial Solid Waste Generation Study, 446 businesses in Chula
Vista were surveyed regarding their performance of any source reduction activities such
as double-sided copying, limited use of disposable items, or plant process changes that
reduce waste generation. Businesses and industries that were ?>ntacted included retail
outlets, service industries, contractors and manufacturing firms, business and commercial
institutions involved in the automobile industry and restaurants. The results of this
survey are still being received and final results are not yet available.
The Chula Vista city staff is currently investigating the variable can rate system, and its
costs and benefits for the city. Educational programs, a waste exchange bank, and
procurement information and guidelines are being developed as part of the city's source
reduction and recycling program, and will be a part of the city's Business Recycling
Outreach Project being developed under a Technical Assistance Program (TAP) grant
from the County of San Diego. City staff will be developing educational materials to be
distributed to the public regarding ways to reduce waste. The city's Office Recycling
Handbook contains a section on source reduction. The office recycling guide being
developed by the city for distribution to area businesses also contains a section on source
reduction. Other guides to be developed for commercial and industrial recycling will
also include source reduction suggestions. Additionally, staff hopes to receive a grant
to develop a business recycling data base, hire a recycling program intern, and create a
materials exchange bank for Chula Vista, working in conjunction with the State's new
CALMAX materials exchange program.
2209-111-TCCHVI\91CH1llA V1STAISRRE.CV\A 3-5
/tJ- /Od-.
The city's quarterly community clean-ups and annual citywide garage sale are helping
to divert clothing and shoes, as well as other household items, to the second hand
market. In addition, the recycling flyers and handbooks produced by the city for
distribution to the public include source reduction suggestions, such as avoiding use of
disposable materials, used in cloth instead of disposable diapers, having names removed
from "junk" mailing lists, purchasing products with minimal packaging, repairing items
instead of throwing them away, and giving unwanted items to non-profit organizations
or selling them in garage sales.
As is addressed in greater detail in Section 5.0, Composting Component, the city's pilot
backyard composting program is scheduled to begin in November, 1991. A pilot
neighborhood composting program began in late summer, 1991 in the Eastlake
development. This program will be used as a model for other neighborhood composting
programs. The City of Chula Vista Public Works Department is mulching all yard waste
from city parks and open space areas including the civic center grounds. The mulch is
free to the public. The city has developed a composting flier and a composting handbook
in conjunction with the backyard composting program. These reading materials also
provide greens reduction, suggestions such as xeriscape landscaping and use of mulching
mowers and chippers. These materials are available at city hall, used as mailers and
distributed during city composting presentations to local garden clubs and others.
The city currently purchases all letterhead, copy machine paper, and much of its print
shop paper on recycled bond. City staff is in the process of developing a procurement
ordinance to include paper, plastic, asphalt and many other recycled products. The city's
ordinance will serve as a model for area businesses to use in establishing their
procurement policies.
The CIWMB has determined that diaper service accounts can count towards diversion
goals. One company providing diaper service currently has 111 accounts in Chula Vista,
using an average of 80 cloth diapers per week. This account information will serve as
2209-1II-TCCHV1I9ICHIJI. VlSTAISRRE.CY\A 3-6
/ () .../D.,3
and will be useful in monitoring the success of future public education efforts. If the city
is to document its progress toward achievement of the one and two percent source
reduction goals for the short- and medium-terms, respectively, it must establish business
reporting requirements and a data base to track source reduction efforts. One option
which is being considered is to require businesses to report the results of their source
reduction and recycling efforts as part of the business license renewal process.
3.3 EVALUATION OF PROGRAM ALTERNATIVES
Most source reduction objectives can be accomplished using a broad-based program that
incorporates rate structure modifications, economic incentives, technical assistance,
instructional alternatives, and/or regulatory programs. The following alternatives could
be implemented jointly or on an individual basis to help Chula Vista achieve quantifiable
source reduction.
3.3.1 RATE STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS
There are a limited number of rate structure modifications that can be used to promote
source reduction. User fees for solid waste services could be established on a cost per
service basis and could take the form of variable can rates or surcharges. This type of
system would create public awareness of the true cost of solid waste collection and
disposal, and also provide an economic incentive for waste reduction.
In 1980, the city of Seattle, Washington instituted a variable can rate in which the
monthly charge for weekly collection of two cans was about 125 percent greater than for
one can. From 1981 to 1984, the number of rate payers using two cans was decreased,
recycling tonnage increased by 60 percent, and per capita waste generation increased at
a lower rate than in other large cities around the country.
Packaging fees could be levied at the wholesale level or as point-of-sale surcharges and
2209.111.TCCHVJ\9\CH1JLA VlSTA\SRRE.CV\A 3-7
/0 -/Of
could provide exemptions for recyclable, recycled, or degradable materials. Advance
disposal fees imposed at the state level could be used to discourage manufacturers from
producing excess packaging that becomes solid waste or litter. Chula Vista plans to
lobby for these types of state legislation.
The effectiveness of rate structure modifications on source reduction is uncertain, simply
because the concept of source reduction is relatively new. Although people are usually
outraged when public utility fees are increased, when done in conjunction with
promotional and instructional activities, it could be a highly effective method of
encouraging source reduction. However, a program that relies entirely on this alternative
would have limited flexibility.
Imposing a variable can rate may encourage illegal dumping and unwittingly create
serious health/safety and enforcement problems. The probability of this happening could
be reduced by imposing penalties and offering rewards for the apprehension of anyone
that dumps material without proper permits. From a regional perspective, the
consequences on the waste management system could be significant. If there is a large
reduction in the quantity of waste that is being disposed, there will be a corresponding
reduction in the revenue derived from landfill disposal fees.
Although implementation may be difficult from a public relations standpoint, rate
structure modifications do not require the expansion or construction of any facilities and
can therefore be implemented late in the short-term planning period. They are consistent
with local plans and policies and require no financial investment. Institutional barriers
to implementation should be minimal. The availability of end uses of diverted materials
does not apply to this alternative. Chula Vista is investigating the variable can rate
system and its costs and benefits for the city.
2209-111-'fC.CHV1\9ICIIUU. VISTAISRRE.CVIA 3-8
/~ -I~
3.3.2 ECONOMIC INCENTIVES
Economic incentives such as grants and low- or no-interest loans can be used to finance
source reduction programs. Although historically used to promote recycling activities,
public funds could also be used to subsidize backyard composting and industrial process
changes that minimize waste generation. In addition, reduced business license fees or
other financial incentives could be offered for companies that demonstrate a significant
reduction in solid waste quantities. Deposits, refunds, and rebates are often used in
recycling programs to recover specifically targeted materials and are typically
implemented at a state level.
Economic incentives and disincentives can be very effective behavior modification tools,
and have been proven in areas such as recycling and water conservation. Incentives such
as grants, loans, rebates and reduced fees do not create any health or safety hazards and
are flexible enough to accommodate changing conditions. From a regional perspective,
consequences on the waste management system are the same as for rate structure
modifications. The primary impact is that a significant reduction in disposal quantities
would result in a corresponding reduction in the revenue derived from landfill disposal
fees.
Economic incentives can be implemented during the short-term planning period and do
not require the expansion or construction of any facilities. Incentives are consistent with
local conditions and require no financial investment. In general, there should be no
institutional barriers to implementing economic incentives, however, the city may be
opposed to the reduction of business license fees, as it may result in a loss of revenue.
The availability of end uses of diverted materials is not applicable.
The city is currently making use of the county's Technical Assistance Program (TAP).
Chula Vista had a TAP grant in 1990/91 to begin its civic center office recycling and
business recycling outreach program. It is applying for a 1991/92 grant to continue
2209-11I-TC.cHVl\9\CHULA VlSTA\SRRE.CV\A 3-9
( 0 -Ib~
developing these programs, which address source reduction as well as recycling. The
city hopes to obtain future grants to establish a waste exchange program. The city will
also be promoting reduced cost backyard composting kits and is sponsoring citywide
annual garage sales and quarterly community cleanups.
3.3.3 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
City-sponsored technical assistance can be directed toward both the residential and
commercial/industrial sectors and may include activities such as waste evaluations, setting
up demonstration projects, giving technical advice, assisting with program set-up and
internal promotional activities, helping with employee education materials and training,
and developing waste exchanges. Waste evaluations are used to determine the physical
and institutional changes necessary to institute a successful source reduction program and
could be provided to interested businesses, industries, institutions, and multifamily
residential complexes. Demonstration projects on backyard composting and mulching
could be developed for the residential sector.
:'
Technical assistance alternatives such as waste evaluations and demonstration projects are
not very effective as stand alone programs, and may be moderately effective when used
in conjunction with financial incentives and instructional alternatives. There should be
no health or safety hazard created by most technical assistance alternatives and only a
minor potential health hazard associated with improperly managed backyard composting
projects.
Technical assistance programs can easily be modified to accommodate changing
conditions and can be implemented in the short-term planning period. Waste evaluations
and demonstration projects should not require any construction or expansion of facilities
and should have minimal consequences on the management system. Technical assistance
programs are consistent with local plans and policies and should have no institutional
barriers to implementation. Waste evaluations and demonstration projects may require
2209-1JI-'fC.CHVI\9\CII\ VlSTAISRItB.CVIA 3-10
/()-IP7
''''~r';
a significant financial investment, depending on the city's level of commitment. The
availability of end uses of diverted materials does not apply to this alternative.
Waste exchanges can also be considered a form of technical assistance. They provide
a needed service to both purchasers and suppliers, and eliminate the need to dispose of
large quantities of material. The California Waste Exchange, established in the early
1980s, is a state-run system that acts as a clearinghouse for industries wishing to dispose
of or obtain certain wastes. There are similar exchanges established throughout the
country .
Reusing material that would otherwise be disposed in a landfill could significantly
contribute to meeting the diversion target. Participation in existing waste exchange
programs should be encouraged and local opportunities for waste exchanges should be
developed. Materials that should be considered for waste exchanges include used
lumber, wood chips, dry wall, asphalt and plastics. Depending on the types of materials
that are exchanged, there could be some health and safety considerations. If the city
merely acts as an information center, a waste exchange program should be consistent
with existing policies and would have minimal financial implications. There may,
however, be institutional barriers to implementation without special funding.
The city is hoping to establish a waste exchange program in the short-term planning
period, possibly in conjunction with existing state and national programs. Cooperation
with such existing programs would also eliminate the need for any new or expanded
facilities. Because of the potential need to transfer waste material between jurisdictions,
there would be moderate consequences on the waste management system. Because the
materials involved in this program would be solid and non-hazardous, no health hazards
would result. Businesses will also be provided with listings of charities for donation of
used office furniture and equipment.
Program cost estimates would depend greatly on the extent of the city's involvement.
2209-III-Tc.cHVl\9\CHULA VISTAISRRB.CVIA 3-11
IO.-IO?
It could range from no investment for participating in existing waste exchanges, to a
considerable investment for developing and operating a program within Chula Vista. For
this reason, the city will be seeking a county TAP grant to fund its waste exchange
program, possibly in conjunction with the State's new CALMAX materials exchange
program. By the nature of a waste exchange program, end uses of the diverted materials
would exist.
As mentioned in Section 3.3.2, the city received a Technical Assistance Program (TAP)
grant in 1990/91 to begin its civic center office recycling and business recycling outreach
program. These programs include technical assistance in developing procurement
policies and implementing other source reduction measures. In 1991/92 the city hopes
to receive a grant to continue developing and expanding these programs. Through these
programs, city staff will provide written instructional materials, advise as needed, a
model procurement ordinance, presentations, employee training and other needed
technical assistance in source reduction and recycling.
_c
3.3.4 INSTRUCTIONAL ALTERNATIVES
Public education is probably the most important element of a source reduction program.
Through the city's public information program to implement curbside recycling and the
business recycling outreach project, public and business consumers are being made aware
of the solid waste problems caused by disposable items, excess packaging, and junk mail.
Durable products are often less expensive in the long run, even though they may have
a higher initial purchase price than disposable products. In addition, most packaging is
done strictly for marketing purposes and serves only to increase product cost.
Consumers are being encouraged to purchase bulk grocery items and to transport bulk
dispensed products with reusable bags or similar consumer supplied containers. The city
hopes to implement a point-of-purchase information program whereby area retail
establishments would identify those items on the shelves with reduced packaging. The
city distributes information on "precycling" at presentations and community events and
~
2209-11I-TC-CHVI\9\CHUU. VJSTAISllRB.CVIA 3-12
/ ~"1/)1
pamphlets are available in displays and on tables throughout the civic center. All
businesses in Chula Vista will receive a copy of the city's source reduction and recycling
guidebook as part of the city's business recycling outreach program.
In conjunction with the city's pilot backyard composting program, homeowners are being
encouraged to leave grass clippings on their lawns (use mulching mowers) and to turn
other yard debris into mulch. Because it helps soil retain moisture, mulch will conserve
water as well as landfill disposal capacity. In this instance, solid waste education could
be combined with water conservation education. Technical assistance programs are being
used by the city to initiate and support backyard composting projects. Guidebooks have
been developed and presentations are being made to garden clubs and other interested
groups.
Reducing waste paper quantities is probably the simplest source reduction activity
available. Community members are being informed through city mailings, handouts and
publicity regarding available methods to control or eliminate junk mail, and are
encouraged to use paper and cardboard efficiently (e.g. write on both sides of a piece of
paper, and use brown paper bags and cardboard boxes more than once).
A public education program geared toward source reduction has the greatest potential for
effectively meeting any diversion target, as well as being extremely flexible. The
program can be tailored to suit various ethnic groups, age groups, and use sectors and
economic levels. As conditions change, it can be modified accordingly. For the City
of Chula Vista, it is being implemented during the short-term planning period in
conjunction with other outreach and education programs currently in progress. Regional
public education programs are also being sponsored by the I Love a Clean San Diego
group (hot line services, school curriculum, and presentations) and the County of San
Diego (in conjunction with implementing the mandatory recycling ordinance).
2209-111-TC-CHV1\9\CHULA VISTAISllRB.CVIA 3-13
/tJ-(ltJ
Because public education programs do not create environmental hazards, there are no
health and safety implications. From a regional perspective, the consequences on the
waste management system would be insignificant and no facilities would be required.
Instructional activities can be consistent with existing local ordinances, plans, and policies
and have no barriers to implementation. The activities, however, require financial
investment, with the degree of investment being dependent on the size of the program.
The availability of end uses of diverted materials is not applicable.
3.3.5 REGULATORY PROGRAMS
This discussion of regulatory programs includes a variety of ordinances that could be
enacted by the city to achieve significant source reduction. Some examples of legislative
measures are:
'-
· Local ordinances specifying criteria for procuring products such as
durability, recyclability, reusability, and recycled material content.
.
Local adoption of bans on products and packaging.
r"
· Local requirements of waste reduction planning and reporting by
generators.
Procurement ordinances and product bans may be difficult to implement on a local level,
but the city can provide leadership in these areas by expanding its in-house source
reduction plan and lobbying for a statewide ban. This will set an example for both the
general public and local business, and will also serve as an important promotional tool.
The city conducted an audit of its wastestream and developed a source reduction program
which includes all of the following measures:
· Minimizes paper waste through double-sided copying, routing material
through an office rather than making multiple copies, and reusing paper
and cardboard whenever possible.
2209-111-TC-CHV1\91CHULA VJSTAISRRB.CV\A 3-14
/tP~111
. Revised procurement specifications for equipment and supplies to ensure
that more durable products with a minimum of packaging are purchased.
. Purchase of recyclable over nonrecyclable materials, products made from
recycled products and with minimal packaging over products with
excessive packaging, and reusable products over disposable products.
. Lobbying of federal and state governments for legislation to promote
source reduction programs.
. Monitoring other jurisdictions for new source reduction techniques.
The city will use its procurement ordinance as a model for local businesses. The city
will work with the Chamber of Commerce to get source reduction information to the
businesses and will offer presentations and technical assistance.
Product bans have recently become a legitimate approach to waste reduction. Many
jurisdictions across the country have enacted bans on materials such as foamed
polystyrene and polyvinyl chloride, or products such as plastic garbage and grocery bags,
and multiple-resin containers. The city will work with manufacturers, consumers and
retailers, and will lobby for state legislation for product/packaging bans. If these efforts
are unsuccessful during the short and medium term, the city may consider local bans.
It will be necessary to require generators to report source reduction activities if the city
is to receive diversion credit. This can be done in conjunction with reporting of recycled
quantities. The city is planning to circulate questionnaires for the development of its
business recycling/source reduction data base. Additional effort will be required for the
preparation of source reduction plans.
The effectiveness of regulatory programs depends on the degree of enforcement that is
available. Flexibility is limited by the procedures used to pass local ordinances. No
health or safety hazards are created by these alternatives and there are no consequences
on the regional waste management system. Regulatory alternatives do not require new
2209-111-TC-CHVJI9ICHllL\ VlSTA\SRlUl.CV\A 3-15
It) --11;2..,
facilities and can be implemented in the short-term planning period. Most ordinances are
consistent with local conditions and have few institutional barriers to implementation.
The availability of end uses of diverted materials is not applicable.
3.4 PROGRAM SELECTION
The selection of a source reduction program has been based on the objectives set forth
in Section 3.1, consideration of the existing conditions in the City of Chula Vista, and
the need to maintain program flexibility. The source reduction program will incorporate
instructional and promotional alternatives, technical assistance programs, new city
procurement guidelines and an evaluation of economic incentives and rate structure
modifications. Specifically, the city's selected source reduction program includes the
following activitie~:
r-
1. Consumer public education program promoting source reduction practices.
'-
2.
Continue civic center source reduction (recycling program, including
continued training and education of civic center staff, and use of the
recently completed city Office Recycling Handbook).
~
~
3. Work with retailers to establish point of purchase signage notifying
consumers of products with reduced packaging.
I
~,
4. Implementation of a Business Recycling Outreach Program, including
development of a Source Reduction/Recycling handbook, recycled product
listings and samples.
5.
Development of a Waste Exchange Program using county TAP grant
funds. If funds cannot be obtained, participate in the State CALMAX
materials exchange program.
-
6. Sponsor annual citywide garage sale and quarterly community cleanups.
7. Develop and implement a city procurement ordinance, and use it as a
model for private sector companies to develop their own procurement
policies.
2209-111-TCCHVl\9\CHULA VlSTAISRRIl.CVIA 3-16
/0'113
.~ ....,
,'^~;'IlM<i;".'J.,,~;...
8. Implement a backyard composting pilot program.
9. Evaluate the costs and benefits of implementing a variable can rate
system.
10. Lobby for state legislation for source reduction education, limits or bans
on excess packaging and disposable items, and life cycle costing.
3.5 PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
Although the city is proposing to implement a diverse source reduction program, the city
is not confident about its ability to measure the success of the program and is seeking
only a one percent short-term diversion credit for its source reduction activities. Over
the medium-term, the city plans to intensify its source reduction efforts and improve the
accounting system for source reduction diversion credits. The city's goal is to document
at least a two percent diversion credit for source reduction in the medium term.
An implementation schedule must identify all activities which must be accomplished in
order to successfully implement the source reduction program. The schedule can help
assure that these decisions are well informed and made on a timely basis. The
implementation schedule must also provide project continuity as the personnel, laws and
regulations, and other factors change over time during program development.
The implementation schedule is an evolving document and must maintain flexibility. The
results of decisions made as part of early activities may significantly alter the program's
scope and direction as well as that of the solid waste management system. Following
each major decision to proceed with project elements, the implementation schedule
should be reviewed and revised as necessary; Table 3-1 outlines the proposed schedule
for implementation.
2209-III-TCCHV1\9\CHIJlA VISTAISRllE.CV\A 3-17
(o-llf
3.6 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Accurate program monitoring will be critical if Chula Vista wants to take credit for the
quantity of material that is diverted through source reduction. The first step will be to
determine reliable methods of quantification. One way to quantify source reduction is
by subtracting total diversion and disposal quantities from projected generation quantities
and the difference would be attributed to source reduction. However, this method does
not take into account other factors such as economics or population shifts that can impact
generation rates. Another way to quantify source reduction is through documentation of
specific programs, and estimates of material quantities. Both methods have a high
potential for error, but could yield useful results if performed concurrently as a double
check for accuracy. Reporting methods for the source reduction component will be
refined during the short-term planning period. In the meantime, the city will attempt to
document one percent diversion of the total wastestream during the short-term planning
period.
[~
k
In order to assess the effectiveness of a source reduction program, it is essential to gather
and evaluate a variety of operational data. Most of the source reduction monitoring
activities can be performed in conjunction with recycling monitoring, as much of the
information will be useful for evaluating both programs. A combined reporting method
will be developed during the short-term planning period. During this time, the city will
also begin to develop a database of source reduction/recycling activities and results in the
community. This effort will include g~thering source reduction program-specific
information and evaluating the effectiveness of various techniques to monitor the city's
progress in meeting the goals. The results of the short-term activities will provide for
the selection of a specific medium-term source reduction program and monitoring
strategy that provides accurate data and fits within the overall reporting requirements for
all the components.
,
Z209-11I-TCCHV1\9\CHUl.A VISTAISRRB.CVIA 3-18
L
/o-//.j-
~-~-'~~:.:,
TABLE 3-1
City of CbuJa Vista
SOURCE REDUCTION COMPONENT
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity
1. Infonnation and Public Education
Projected Date
Continue civic center source reduction/recycling program
Consumer public education program
Continue business recycling outreacb program
Implement point-of-purcbase signage
2. Citv Leadenhin
Lobby for state legislation
Develop and implement city procurement ordinance
3. Rate Structure Moditieations/Economic Incentives
Evaluate variable can rate program
Sponsor community cleanups and citywide gsrage sale
4. Technical Assistance
Apply for TAP Grant for waste excbsnge program and
continuing business recycling outreach and civic center recycling
programs
Develop and implement city waste exchange program or
establisb cooperation with State program
Implement backyard composting program
S. Monitorinll
Establish business source reduction/recycling dstabase
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
September 1992
Ongoing
June 1992
December 1993
Quarterly/annually
October 1991
June 1992
November 1991
October 1991
Medium-Term activities will be established based upon the reauh of the programs and activities. conducted
during the short-term period.
2209-1I1-TCOIVl\9ICHIJt.A VISTAISRRE.CVIA
3-19
/ D-/(0
4.0 RECYCLING COMPONENT
4.1 OBJECTIVES
Recycling programs developed and implemented by each jurisdiction will form the
cornerstone of effective solid waste management plans designed to achieve the 25 and 50
percent diversion goals established by AB 939. These programs provide the most
effective way to divert large quantities of material from disposal facilities. This section
specifies the diversion quantities that can be achieved through recycling programs as well
as market development objectives for both the short-term and medium-term planning
periods.
The initial analysis of available technologies or systems to meet the goals established by
AB 939 must be based on the ability to successfully target materials for recycling. Based
on the data obtained from the waste characterization that was performed in 1990/1991,
up to 40 percent of Chula Vista's waste stream is composed of readily recyclable material
(Le., cardboard, newspaper, mixed paper, glass, mixed plastics, tin and aluminum cans,
and construction debris). This waste stream composition data was used to idedtify those
materials within the disposal stream that are readily recyclable and to set target objectives
for percentage reductions in the quantities being disposed of in the Otay, Sycamore and
Miramar Landfills. The total solid waste stream was sub-categorized by the major target
populations (Le. residential and commercial/industrial).
4.1.1 SHORT- AND MEDIUM-TERM OBJECTIVES
The targeted percentages for recovery for the short-term and the medium-term objectives
are to remove 49 percent of the materials identified for recycling (17 percent of the total
waste stream) by 1995 and 80 percent of recyclables (27 percent of the total waste
stream) by the year 2000. This can be accomplished through a combination of facilities
and programs.
2209-1I1-TC-CHVI\9\CIIIJu. VJSTA\SRRB.CV\A 4 - 1
/ D-(/7
The short-term objectives for developing markets include:
. Developing a procurement ordinance requiring the purchase of recycled
material products through the City of Chula Vista Purchasing Department.
.. Encouraging local businesses to establish policies regarding the purchase
of recycled products, using the city's procurement ordinance as a model.
. Establishing a waste exchange clearinghouse for local manufacturing
businesses.
. Encouraging industrial and construction waste recyclers to locate in Chula
Vista.
The medium-term objectives for developing markets include:
. Expansion of the waste exchange clearinghouse to include other
commercial businesses
. Attraction of manufacturing businesses to the South San Diego Bay that
use recycled materials as raw feed products
. Attraction of privately owned materials reprocessing facilities to Chula
Vista or the south bay Area.
The short-term and medium-term objectives for developing markets include assessing ~e
existing and potential markets (e.g. materials dealer/processors, end-users) for recyclable
materials. At this time, there are no materials reprocessing facilities in Chula Vista. All
recyclables collected by Laidlaw Waste Systems are sold to San Diego Recycling in the
City of San Diego. However, depending on future expansion of the marketplace,
Laidlaw has indicated an interest in developing a materials reprocessing facility (MRF)
in Chula Vista. Preliminary evaluation of the recycling market in south San Diego
County indicates that there is a severe shortage of available capacity for the increased
material supply that will occur as cities comply with AB 939 and the county mandatory
recycling ordinance. However, the county is already looking into regional alternatives
for meeting the future demand for MRF capacity. One such option is to develop a MRF
at Donovan Prison in conjunction with the Prison Industry Authority, as discussed in
2209-111.TCCHV1I9ICIIULA VlSTAISIllU!.CY\A
4-2 /O.II~
'It ,... .
Section 4.5.6.
4.1.2 PRIORITY WASTE TYPES
The general waste categories that are being targeted as part of Chula Vista's short-term
recycling program are paper, plastic, glass, metals, and yard waste (the bulk of which
is covered in Section 3.0, Composting). Specific waste types that are targeted for the
residential and the commercial/industrial wastestreams are listed below:
. Newspaper
. Yard Wastes
. Wood Waste
. Tin Cans
. Aluminum Cans
. Film Plastic
. Hard Plastic
. Glass
. Cardboard
. Mixed Paper
. HG Ledger Paper
Appendix B provides waste generation projections for each of these categories (and other
waste types that will continue to be disposed in landfills) for 1991-2006. Appendix C
estimates the minimum amount of each waste type to be diverted with implementation
of the programs described throughout this document. The total percentage of the
residential waste stream that is readily recyclable or compostable is approximately 59.8
percent. The portion of the commercial/industrial disposal wastestream that is readily
recyclable or compostable at this time is about 67.5 percent of the total
commercial/industrial disposal wastestream.
4.2 EXISTING CONDmONS
There are a variety of recycling activities currently in operation in the City of Chula
Vista. These include:
2209-1lI-TCaiVJ\9\CHUU VlSTAISRRE.CVIA
4-3
10 -/(9
. Source separation and curbside collection of residential recyclables
-'
. City collection of office paper and other recyclables from all civic center
offices c-
. Business recycling outreach program
. Sale and delivery of material to buy-back and drop-off centers, recycling
companies by residential, commercial and industrial generators
. Donation of material to nonprofit organizations
,',
. Metal salvaging by scrap dealers
The City of Chula Vista began a pilot program for the curbside collection of recyclables
at some residences in 1989. The program was expanded to all single family homes in
February, 1991. In April, 1991, the program was expanded further to include multi-
family homes with curbside refuse pick-up. The program includes pick-up of glass,
metal, newspaper and plastic. Residents receive a blue recycling bin in which they may
place glass jars and bottles, bi-metal and aluminum cans, and plastic beverage (e.g.,
soda, milk, and water) containers. Newspapers can be bundled or placed in shopping
bags.
The program is available to all single family residences and multi-family homes with
curbside pick-up. An estimated 22,900 households have been provided with blue bins.
The city reports an 82 percent participation rate. Table 4-1 illustrates the quantities of
recyclables that have been recovered through the curbside collection program since
February. In addition, the city's office recycling program diverted over 17,000 pounds
of recyclables between July and September, 1991.
The other recycling activities, including commercial and industrial recycling, are more
difficult to quantify and document. Some of the problems associated with determining
accurate diversion quantities include inaccurate reporting of records and double counting
of material. Processors of recycled materials are not obligated and are often reluctant
2209-11J.1'CCHVlI9ICIIULA VIllTA\SRIUl.CVIA
4 - 4 If) ,/~tJ
,,~~:i':':.;.;.:..,,;~
to report the quantities of material that they handle. Because recyclable materials are
often transferred several times before reaching end users, double or even multiple
counting of material can occur.
Telephone and written surveys were used to determine the quantities of material that are
currently being recycled by commercial and industrial generators. Table 4-2 lists the
commercial/industrial recycled quantities reported by this preliminary survey. The
results of this survey will be incorporated into the final plan. Because many companies
consider recycled quantities to be proprietary information, total quantities rather than
individual business quantities are listed by waste type.
4.3 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
Recycling refers to the process of collecting, sorting, cleansing, treating, and
reconstituting materials that would otherwise become solid waste, and returning them to
the economic mainstream in the form of raw material for new or reconstituted products
which meet the quality standards necessary to be used in the market place. This section
provides an overview of the applicable recycling technologies suitable for the city's
growing needs as the volume of recyclable materials increases in response to the AB 939
requirements.
Technologies are described for the three principle processes involved in recycling:
separation, collection, and processing; and are evaluated against a set of criteria specified
by the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) in their SRRE
checklist.
2209-111-TCOIVl\9\CIIIllA VlSTAISR1lE.CVIA
4-5
IO~/;{1
TABLE 4-1 .
City of ChuJa Vista
CURBSIDE RECYCLING PROGRAM
MATERIAL QUANTITIES RECOVERED
Month (1991) Quantity (Tons)
February 256.72
March 226.31
April 313.88
May 296.95
June 276.42
TABLE 4-2
City of CbuJa Vista
COMMERCIALlINDUSTRIAL
RECYCLED QUANTITIES
WASTE CATEGORY TONS/YEAR
Corrugated Cardboard 172.4
Aluminum 0.2
Plastic 0.1
.
Organic (food waste) M
TOTAL 173.1
2209-1II-TCCIlV1\9ICHUlA VlSTAISRIUl.CVIA
4-6 /0 -!:2a-.
4.3.1 SEPARATION
Separation is the process of removing recyclable material from the general waste stream
that occurs at the source of generation or at a central facility. The degree of separation
can vary from multiple separation where each material is segregated from every other
material in separate containers, to commingled where recyclable materials are separated
from non-recyclable trash but are stored and collected together. When recyclables are
collected as individual components, very little processing is required before they are
shipped to end-use markets. However, this high degree of source separation requires
more effort on the part of waste generators. The advantages and disadvantages of
multiple separation are listed below.
Advantages:
. It reduces material contamination.
. It minimizes the need for a materials recovery facility (MRF)
Disadvantages:
. It requires multiple containers.
· It requires compartmentalized vehicles and complicates the collection
procedures.
. It has the potential to decrease public participation because of required
storage space and complexity of operation.
2209-1I1.TC-CHVl\9\CHULA VISTAISRRB.CVIA
4 -7 I c).-lc23
Ifrecyclable materials are mixed together, they are easier to store and collect but require
a materials recovery facility (MRF) to separate them into components prior to shipping
and recycling. MRF's can increase the marketability of recyclable materials by reducing
product contamination and ensuring consistent, quality material. The advantages and
disadvantages associated with commingled separation are presented below.
Advantages:
. It requires a minimum number of containers for storage and collection.
. It does not require compartment~ li7ed vehicles and therefore the collection
procedure is simplified.
. It has the potential to increase public participation due to the ease of
operation.
Disadvantages:
. It often results in contamination of certain materials (particularly papers).
. It eventually requires additional mechanical separation.
. It requires a financial investment in a MRF.
Depending on participation rates, all separation methods can be equally effective in
meeting the established recycling goal. At least some degree of source separation is
essential for program success. Separation methods are equally flexible and are consistent
with local ordinances, plans, and policies. There are negligible health and safety
implications associated with all types of material separation.
Chula Vista began a pilot curbside recycling program in 1989 and implemented a
citywide residential curbside recycling program in February 1991 under contract with
Laidlaw, the city's solid waste hauler. From collection and sorting of materials at the
22ll9-1I1-TCCHVI\9\CHULA VJSTAISII1Ul.CVIA
4-8
/O-loIf
curb, Laidlaw transports the separated materials to San Diego Recycling, a MRF, located
in Lemon Grove. Once the materials arrive at the MRF, the materials are further
separated, by both mechanical and manual means. This combined arrangement allows
for the full segregation of newsprint, plastics, tin, aluminum, and glass. These individual
articles are then mechanically bound and shipped to specific recycling markets.
4.3.2 COLLECTION
Collection refers to the system used to deliver recyclable material to a central location.
Collection methods include:
. Drop-Off Centers
. Buy-Back Centers
· Scheduled Collection
· Residential Curbside Collection
Each of these methods are currently in operation in Chula Vista. The following
paragraphs provide a brief description and particular advantages and disadvantages
associated with each method.
DROP-OFF CENTERS
Drop-off centers serve as a collection point for voluntary recycling of designated
recyclable materials such as newspapers and aluminum. Both manned and unmanned
drop-off centers are common. Some manned centers handle the processing of
recyclables. The advantages and disadvantages associated with drop-off centers are as
follows:
2209-111-TCaIVI\9\CHUlA VJSTAISRIU!.CVIA
4-9
/ O-/~S""
--~ - - -."--.--..--- -- ,,-- ~~-_._-- " -----------
"--<
Advantages:
. Low capital costs are required.
. Collection of recyclable materials is easy.
Disadvantages:
. Requires voluntary participation.
. Produces low recovery rates.
. Provides no economic incentive.
. Can present a security problem and visual problems (Le., overflowing
receptacles).
There are several businesses, schools and churches within Chula Vista that provide an
outlet for drop-off of recyclable products, such as newspaper, aluminum cans, and glass
products. In addition, several drop-off centers are located throughout San Diego County.
Public education materials and guides are published by "I Love a Clean San Diego
County, Inc.", a non-profit group partially funded by the city of San Diego and the
county of San Diego. The degree of success of the program and diversion quantities are
currently being assessed through a survey of selected centers within the county.
BUY-BACK CENTERS
Buy-back centers are similar to drop-off centers, but buy-back centers accept and pay for
materials received directly from the consumer at the facility site. Buy-back centers may
be.run by governments, secondary materials dealers, beverage container manufacturers,
and other private or non-profit operators. Buy-back centers may also serve as processing
centers for a network of collection systems before shipment to market, and can therefore
also operate as materials recovery facilities.
~
nO!l-III-TCCIIVlI9\CIIUlA VJSTAISRRB.CVIA
4 - 10
/O/j;)to
-- f..
::0 ,_~
Since most buy-back centers are manned facilities, the same advantages and
disadvantages associated with manned drop-off centers apply to them. Based on CDM
experience, the following additional common advantages and disadvantages also apply
to buy-back centers.
Advantages:
· Participation is enhanced by economic incentives provided to the
customer.
· Buy-back centers are amenable to both the public and private sector.
· Buy-back centers can provide a recycling mechanism to sparsely-populated
areas.
Disadvantages:
· The complexity and cost of recycling operations is increased.
As with drop-off centers, recovery rates achieved for recyclable materials are usually
quite low; however, recovery rates for individual materials such as aluminum or
newspaper may be much higher depenc!ng on the price received.
Of the recycling buy-back centers located in San Diego and operated in conjunction with
the "I Love A Clean San Diego County Inc. . campaign, six are located in Chula Vista.
There are several Big Bear Markets, as well as Lance Recycling, Pacific Non-Ferrous,
Paul Brown south bay, and the Southern California Paper Company, that also accept
recyclable materials, the facilities are typically open six days a week and, although some
outlets only accept specialty items, the majority are available to accept aluminum cans
and aluminum scrap, nonferrous metal materials, newspaper, mixed paper, and plastics.
2209-1I1.Tc.CHV1\91CHULA VJSTA\SllRE.CV\A 4 - 11
/6 fd,7
- ---~.,.._--_.._.- . - --"----"------"'-- -" ----.------ '.- ..- - ---'--.
SCHF.nTrr .F.D COLLECTION
Scheduled collection is usually achieved by placing storage containers at multi-family
dwellings, commercial establishments, restaurants and industrial facilities. The materials
recovered vary by program. The containers are collected by private or municipal haulers
on a regular schedule (e.g. monthly) or when called by the person responsible for the
site. Scheduled collection is viable for commercial establishments that do not generate
large volumes of waste on a regular basis. Examples include the collection of corrugated
cardboard from commercial and retail establishments, and glass and aluminum containers
from restaurants. The success of scheduled collection programs depends on public
education, person to person contact with commercial establishment owners and/or
managers by local government representatives to explain the advantages of this recycling
method, and current disposal fees in the community.
Common advantages associated with scheduled collection programs include:
. They are adaptable to both the Pfblic and private sector.
. Potentially contaminant-free materials requiring minimal processing are
recovered.
. Economic incentives to the customer enhance participation/material
recovery rates.
The major disadvantage of scheduled collection is that it is difficult to encourage local
businesses to participate in these programs when they do not receive a direct economic
benefit or the program is not mandatory.
2209-111-TCCHVJ\9\CII\JLo\ VlSTAISRRB.CV\A
4-YO__/$
RRSIDENTIAL CURBSIDE COLLECTION
Curbside recycling is the term used for programs in which recyclables are collected at
the curb. Residents are required to separate recyclable materials at the source of
generation (in the home) and the separated materials are placed at the curb for collection.
The recyclables are then transported for further processing or sold directly to a market.
The collection and hauling is usually accomplished using compartmentalized vehicles
operated by municipal or private haulers. A large number of curbside recycling
programs are in operation in the United States at this time.
Curbside recycling programs continue to increase in number in urban areas across the
nation as recycling becomes an integral component of overall solid waste management
systems.
Curbside programs are generally operated by having residents place designated recyclable
materials in specially designed containers at the curb once per week on a regular
collection day or other designated day. Containers for this purpose are furnished by the
hauler or the community.
Recyclable materials are usually collected in one of two ways. First, a separate container
is provided for each material. These are then placed at the curb, and are kept separated
in various compartments of the truck. The materials are then either sorted by the
collector, or mixed in the collection truck and later sorted at a materials processing
facility.
The first system has the advantage of the homeowner providing all material separation.
However, because many different containers are involved, it becomes less convenient to
the homeowner and participation declines. The second system provides a greater
convenience to the homeowner, but necessitates more processing of commingled
materials at a processing facility.
2209-III.TC-CHVl\9\CH\JLA VlSTAISRRB.CV\A
4 - 13/0-1d),7'
The use of a single container for commingled recyclables is currently the more common
and successful approach.
Finally, it is important to note that curbside recycling is most successful where there is
an existing mandatory collection program. In this case, residents are accustomed to
placing their materials at the curb. Therefore, participation in recycling is made
convenient to all residents. Without mandatory collection, participation rates in curbside
recycling programs are much lower, and more extensive public education is required.
Curbside recycling is usually practiced in urban areas (e.g., incorporated cities) where
residential density is high. The cost of curbside collection is usually prohibitive in
sparsely populated areas.
Based on CDM's experience, the most common advantages and disadvantages of curbside
recycling (in comparison with user delivery systems) are as follows:
Advantages:
. It is convenient to the homeowner
. High recovery rates of targeted materials are achieved.
. There is a potential for integration with existing solid waste collection
practices.
Disadvantages:
. Higher equipment and operating costs are incurred.
. The nature of the program is more complex.
Depending upon the materials collected and the level of public awareness, recovery rates
representing a 15 to 18 percent reduction of the residential waste generated, or three to
22Q9.\lI.TCCHVI\9\CHULA VJSTAISRRB.CVIA
4 -14 /D~lc3o
'"
eight percent of the overall waste stream, may be achieved. Some programs have
achieved significantly higher rates, but levels of residential waste stream recovery much
above 15 to 18 percent are unusual.
Recyclables currently collected in the City of Chula Vista's curbside recycling program
include: aluminum and bi-metal cans, newspaper, glass jars and bottles, and plastic food
and beverage containers. Other commodities, including mixed papers (magazines, junk
mail) will be proposed for collection as markets and technology improve. "Greens"
recycling, including backyard composting and curbside collection of greens, is planned
for the future. Although the program is only in its infancy, city officials were quite
pleased with participation by the public. The monthly "set out" of recyclable materials
for the first quarter was 82.5 percent.
4.3.3 PROCESSING
There are basically two types of processing facilities, central processing facilities (CPFs)
and materials recovery facilities (MRFs). CPFs separate recyclable materials from a
mixed municipal waste stream (MSW), while MRFs sort and process only mixed
recyclable materials. The following paragraphs describe these two types of processing
facilities and associated costs for typical facility.
CENTRAL PROCESSING FACILITIES
CPFs are facilities that process mixed municipal waste and, through either hand-sorting
or mechanical separation methods (or a combination of both), extract selected recyclable
materials for marketing. The remaining fraction of the MSW stream can be landfilled
or further processed into a refuse-derived fuel (RDF) or MSW compost material. CPFs
can be characterized as heavy mechanical processing facilities which can have high
capital costs, depending on the waste stream's throughput capacity. Recent low
technology CPFs (little mechanical equipment, labor intensive) have been shut down.
2209-111-TCOIVl\9ICHULA VlSTAISRRB.CVIA 4 - 15
/D ../3/
Larger, more mechanically complex CPFs have had problems operating at capacity and
marketing processed materials.
The major advantage of a CPF is that mixed municipal wastes can be delivered directly
to the facility as collected. No participation by residents or businesses is required. They
are used in those cases where separate collection recycling systems such as curbside
programs or drop-offs are not feasible or desired or where other recycling systems do
not achieve higher rates of recovery on a voluntary basis. Their disadvantages include
much higher capital and operating costs than source separation recycling systems as well
as a lower quality product resulting from contamination.
MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITIES
MRFs are designed to store, sort and process mixed recyclable materials (e.g.
newspaper, cardboard, office paper, glass, metal, plastic). These facilities have
historically been owned and operated by the private sector (secondary materials
processors) and non-profit organizations (Goodwill Industries), and have also operated
as buy-back centers. However, as the scope of recycling programs across the country
has increased, the public sector is becoming more involved in the implementation of
MRFs for storing and processing the increasing amounts of available recyclable materials
that local private dealers/processors either cannot or will not handle, and for preparing
large quantities of recyclable materials for possible shipment to distant markets or end
users.
MRFs are characterized by a combination of hand-sorting operations and certain
mechanical equipment (e.g., balers, conveyor belts, plastic granulators, magnets, glass
crushers, forklifts, trailer trucks, etc.) for preparing recyclable materials for marketing
to end users/manufacturers who use these materials in the production of new products.
Depending on local market conditions and the scope of the local recycling program,
MRFs can become a necessary part of a source separation recycling program, especially
22O!l-111-TCC1IV1\9\CKUL4. VlllTA\SIUU!.CV\A
4 - 16
10 -(3;L
L "", ~_~:,~.q~~:;':_.l.;.
when intensive curbside recycling is part of the program.
There are many types of material recovery facilities currently operating in the United
States. A "Low Technology" facility is a basic system designed to accommodate source
separated incoming materials where very little mechanical automation is utilized. A
"Medium Technology" facility is designed to process commingled materials through the
use of hand sorting and a minimal degree of mechanical processing. A "High
Technology" facility typically utilizes mechanical separation and processing of the
incoming solid waste with a minimum of hand sorting employed. Each type of
technology is based upon the type and quantities of material and market specifications.
Each of the three can also be designed to accommodate residual wastes such as received
at a transfer station. These factors determine the facility's degree of sophistication and
mechanization.
Low Technoloey System: This type of facility accepts a specified range of materials
which have been separated at the point of generation. These materials generally include
source separated newspapers, white paper, mixed colored paper, aluminum and bi-metal
cans, corrugated cardboard, and glass. Capital investment in this type of facility is low.
Equipment needs include a baler, conveyor, containers and forklift. Labor requirements
include a foreman, forklift operator, and floor workers.
Because of limited processing capabilities for this type of facility, the revenue received
for the recyclables are low, and the ability of the manager to market the material is
subject to fluctuation in market demand.
Medium Technolo~y System: A medium technology differs very little from the low
technology facility except in the capability to process commingled materials. This type
of facility accepts commingled recoverable materials as well as source separated
materials. The capital investment is higher than a low technology facility because a line-
sort system must be added to separate the mixed recyclables. Also, additional personnel
2209-111.TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VlSTAIS1lRIl.CVIA
4 - 17
10 - ( 33
are necessary to sort the materials. Figure 4-1 illustrates the material flow at a medium
technology facility. The objective is to meet the minimum market specifications at a low
capital cost.
Hieh Technolo~y System: A high technology system is the most sophisticated and
mechanized method of processing mixed recyclables. It is distinguished by the advanced
development of the separation and processing technology employed in the system.
Unlike the low and m(\dium technology systems, the high technology system relies
mainly on mechanical magnetic separation, eddy current separation, screening and
density separation to separate materials. Processing techniques include crushing,
screening, air classification, flattening, granulating, perforating, baling and slitting. The
objective of the high technology system is to process the materials to maximum market
specifications in order to earn optimal revenue and assure long-term end markets. Figure
4-2 provides a graphic representation of a high technology MRF.
The San Diego Recycling facility serving Chula Vista can be classified as a medium
technology MRF facility. The MRF handles commingled recyclable materials including
mixed paper and uses a combination of automated and manual lines for sorting various
materials.
4.3.4 MARKETING
In order for a recycling program to be financially sound, marketing of the recyclables
must be addressed. Coordinators of recycling activities across the nation have cited the
availability of markets as the most essential element contributing to the success or failure
of recycling programs. The availability of markets affects which materials should be
collected for recycling. The materl81s markets available also determine the type of
materials processing that may be required. Recyclables can be sold either in the open
marketplace or through contract. Transporting the materials to the marketplace is also
a factor. Transportation should be one of the terms of any contract. If transportation
2209-1II.TCCIIVl\9ICIIUlA VlSTAISlUUl.CV\A
4 - 18
!O-r;J.y,
is provided by the market, a reduced sale price is usually negotiated. A final
consideration related to market requirements is related to facility sizing. If marketable
quantities of recyclable materials are available, adequate space for the storage of these
materials must be included during design of a MRF or any other designated
collection/storage facilities.
The location of a market affects the type of recycling program, the transportation method
employed, and the processing required for shipment to the market. Markets have been
identified within the City of Chula Vista as well as within San Diego County. (Refer to
Appendix A for the materials market survey.)
2209-11I.TCCHVl\9\CIIUU. VlSTAISRRB.CVIA
4 - 19
(D'/3S
II:
Iiol
Ilo
If
Ii .....
.... ...
5 !
g 1iol0
II: II: t1
At ~.c
II: ...g
[f l:!
f 8
...
:;J
....
II:-~
t1
~
~
!ill
"'....
~~V)
I<l~~
=
~
..
II:
Iiol
~
..
tlll:
~e
~~
Ul
"...
...
~
I-<
I
I-<
6
..
II:
~ ~
I<l
...
!rJ
....
..
~
II:
Iiol
Ilo
If
'"
Iiol
~
..
Iiol
I-<
...
~
.....
I-<
H
II:
CI
..
:0:
Iiol
e
...
SIi
1-<....
~~
iloilo
~
...
tl
....
I-<
...
j
Ilo
I-<
Iiol
Ilo
I-<
lI:olI
o
:e1lQ
"'Ilo
fa
=
!!
~~
CI
I
..
11:0
Oi:lf.l
O,c....
1lQ..l1-<
:;J:>'"
I<l~~
CI
-~
..
..
~~
....!j -~
~....
:;J1lo
~
11:'"
....~
~tl
:;J
..
:0:
Iiol
e
...
..
...
~
i
....
~
:;J
'"
Iiol
~
:;J
:e~
i~
..
CI
:e:o:
.......
::!!j
1-<....
Ilo
I-<
....
~:;J
...
~olI2
1-<'"
11:....
....0
o
...
...
j'" IlQ
~ Cltl ~ ~ ~
.. ....
0" e
~olI ...
....
:0:
~
CI
"':0:
~B
CI....
Ilo
/D -13fo
~
~
....
..l
..
~
IlQ
~
e
...
· [ij-. 00-.
II:
IlQ
~ I<l
::J
Iiol
~ ~
e
...
~
~
Dll
=
J
.....
=
I:)
;:
... f
.!
t~
~tl
li:.s
I:)
=
.c:
~
E!
=
:a
.,
~
~
fil!iJ
.,....
.,1Il., ,.;
8;;;-~ ,.; ~ a
~ a ...
Of.) 1ol::C re~ f<
";0 Iol ::l~ ~re
"'m ~ . 8i aa ~~
Iol ~~
..
g::;j ~ ~
..
.. ..
f<
Z
~~ -
B~
><...
a...
a.,
Iol
a ...
f< Iol ,.; ...
f.)~ ... >< ~ f<...
....z ... .... ,.; ...a
f<.... f< ::cre::i ~ ...~
. .,'" 1"-. ,.;... . .
:Sf:: 0 "'~e .aa
.,... ......
...... ... f< ,.; :;j~
~ re Iol
... 1Il::C
., IS
:;j f.)"; ~
~~ Z ><f< .,z
.... Iol 5~ .,....
,.;-. ~~ . ~ . . :Stl
...
~ f.). Z... ~....
~fi ., ...... ...
a.,
.,
.,
~
~
f<
I
f<
8
..
,.;
Iol
...
.c
...
!E ...... !E
.,
.... 3 ....
., ... tl
., z
... ...... ....
g"'Q ...
z...
,.;....f< ,.;
....l.c Iol
~ ...
";"'0 f
... ~
...
f
,.;
,.;...
~:;j
f<1Il
.... ..
.l";
"0
,.;,.; ...
Iollol f<
z.. .,
Iol.... ~
f::t ......
:S8 .,
"0 ~
z ....
..
..
..
,.;
...
...
.c
...
a
Iol
~
..
.
,.;
Iol
:;j
III
...
,.;z
!;!...
.,~
Of.)
,.;.,
f.)
..
...
,.;z
......
i:l~
Of.)
,.;.,
f.)
z
0
....
tf!l
::ie
...,
!i;~
~
....
.l
..
.,
., ,.;
:Sl:l ... ...
.... i ~
~z ,.;..
.... . ........ . .
a.. .cO)
. Iol .,
><... :s .,
....
::c f.)
...
,.;z
......
i:l~
Of.)
,.;.,
f.)
· [[}-.
· ~. 00-.
· ~. 00-.
16-131
.
t:
....
.l
..
...
,.;z
!;!...
.,~
Of.)
fl"
011
I:
.~
~
--
I:
Cl
.....;
.,j. E
0:
f Co
= ..
OIIr1l
~~
Cl
-
Cl
I:
~
-=
011
==
... r_.
4.3.5 SUMMARY EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
The alternatives discussed in this section cover the range of appropriate techniques
available to the City of Chula Vista to meet the goals of 25 percent reduction in 1995 and
50 percent in the year 2000. Residential and commercial/industrial alternatives evaluated
include:
. Drop-off centers
. Buy-back centers
. Curbside collection
. Scheduled collection
. Central Processing Facility (CPF)
. Manual Material Recovery Facility (MRF)
. Mechanized MRF
The criteria used to evaluate the above alternatives include:
. Effectiveness
. Hazard created
. Flexibility
. Consequence on the waste
. Short-term and medium-term implementation
. New or expanded facilities
Effectiveness, hazard created and flexibility criteria have more impact on the success of
a particular program than the remaining criteria. The summary of alternatives evaluation
for residential and commercial/industrial programs are illustrated in Table 4-3 and Table
4-4. Two alternatives provided the best approach for processing of source separated
materials of the residential portion of the waste stream: expanded curb side collection
and mechanized MRF. Alternatives for handling the commercial/industrial portion of the
waste stream includes on-call collection and mechanized MRF.
2209-111- 'J'C.C11VI19ICII\JlA VISTA \S1tRIl.CVIA
4 - 22
/O,/3g
.... ,:+-_,," _. ._N __ '_'~'"
, -
1
i ..
0 ~ :i
U~ !i' .
. .. oS
~ 'l! g ~ g
sg!;! ~ h ~ ." 1]
. ~~
~... t I! .!! t
.&0 11
'. i
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H ~ ~
;jj .~ ;3 ;jj ;a ;jj ;jj
~ g
-2 ."
I i j~ ~
H .. g j
r ~ ~ ." 1
il . U
i 0
~ .!! ''']
~ _S e.
1 H 1 .&0 1 1 .- .! 1 1
~ '. ~ 1.~ H ~
... o!\ .. ;jj ;jj
~ 1
~ . -.
~~ i ~ eo
r . .!! :=
~ . ~ .. u
~...;l 'l! g ~ c ...
o!\ 0
h ~ -" 1
JE=~ ~ . ~i
:ll i i ~ i t '''1
.... ~-<= 1 1 11 e ._
..,j. -= H ~ -= ~ ~ H ~ -=
~9 ... ;jj ... ;jj ;a ;jj ...
~ <:l~~
== Ii l! !i'
-< ';f;I;1 iEi e
Eo< It .!! .. g '0 ~
;.,,.. . ~ S" .&0 ~ ."
~t.:l -. 09 ~
~ ~ 1~ o!\ . .~ ~
use 'e . 1 .. ~
us ~~. ',;:I ~"2 ~
1 i 1 ].!! 1 :;'il 1 1
~~ "'09 ~ i J -= :~ -= - -~ Il".
u.5 I! ... ... . .
~ ~ 09 1
~~ Oil e .. .~
.~ 1 i ~ 1'5
~ I If
!i .E to 'l! bJ! . .
iu - ... j ~:! 1 ~.!! t :~
8-q -= ~ 'il u 1 -e ~ ~ ~~ ~ .=
J e ... 8 ;jj i!] 'il ;jj ~ ;jj 8... ;jj ...
-Ii __
. 1
n .t i b .. g
~ 1-5
~ -" If
-- ~ to 1! ... . 09 ~ .
~- j ti'..! 1 11 t.)
o 2 t =,g 1 1 l~
H~ 1 ~ 1J 'e ~ ~ ~
8 ;j -il ;jj 8... ;jj ;jj
I .; I 1
1 g l~ I
I . I
eo ~ 'lli
u E 8 _!
i 'l! .&0 (I
! '. j.!! t'G
Ii! u ; .._~ z... ..
ID~/3q
t
I
1
J
~
J
.l
:1
.J
J
1 ....
N
f 'V
t
.
'!l
I
.J
I
.I
~
j ~
f ~
~
1
! I
)
of
b ~
u ~
U
_N
..
r ""
~ i ..
id ]1 . ~ r ~
~ " J ~ 1
s ill .!l t "101
il .&>
I!'" "R l e "_
~ ih ~ 0 ~ It ~ ~
:a ~ :a
~ I 1 "~
..
I 11 ~ .Ii ~
r 1
0
J1-1 i ! "~
1 II ~ 1
~ 1 1 1 ~ 1"~ ~
~ I ~ ~
~~. r 11 "R .!l lL ;j
i oll ~ I]
t III i t
~i~ ~ l 1 ~ ~ It ~ ~
:a :a
z 1r II
J ><~ n .!l J "~
.!~ ] ~ s i! ';2'
~ .5 rI.l ~ t oll 0 g ...
"Ui j i 1 ~ "If
t,)>~ 1 i 1 1 .!l 1 01 1 1
= ~ :& "- "~
~ 'Sfoil
~~~ .
~~ ~ 1 ~
t,)g=s
~I :1 r ~
u ~ @ "I I
~ ]
31 .!l 1 ~ 11 1
~o ~ 1 ~ 1 11 ~ 1
t,) lei ~ 8 oll
r i j
~; ;j
.j ~ j J j I
~
l!!u .~ j l I 0
'; I f I l.r 1 11 ~
... il 1 1 ~ ~
j e
! :1
i ..
I ~ ~
J
1 g 1-1
J ~ I ~
0 ~q
'I! .&> ~ ~
~ "R Jj J
II;
(1)-11/0
- __.~ n_
"""i..,..:........_... ..'
j
J
1
I
J -
.!!
:1
.JI
J
1 ~ .-.
,
f ~ .-
f
.
'I
I
.JI
8
.I
i .-
j ~
f i -
1 ~
J >
~
-f
! -
II
i
n
_N
4.4 PROGRAM SELECTION
Programs for the residential portion of the waste stream will differ from the programs
evaluated for the commercial/industrial waste stream. This is due to the variation in the
volumes and types of recyclables produced from each sector and to the difference in the
appropriate methods and timing of collection. The commercial and industrial sectors are
combined due to the similarity of collection methods and the similarity of their respective
waste streams. The selection of a recycling program has been based upon the objectives
set forth in Section 4.1, consideration of the existing conditions in the City of Chula
Vista, and need to maintain program flexibility. The key to program flexibility for the
short and medium-term planning periods is to focus on the 25\50 percent diversion goal.
The program is designed to achieve the 50 percent goal at full implementation, and will
achieve the 25 percent goal at partial implementation.
The following is summary of the tasks targeted for the first year through July 1992.
Each of these tasks is described more fully in the following subsections.
1.
Draft a city mandatory recycling ordinance by November, 1991 and enact the
ordinance by March 1, 1992.
2.
Apply for County TAP Grant by October, 1991, to continue and expand city
office recycling program and the business recycling outreach program.
3.
Implement backyard composting pilot program in November, 1991.
4.
Issue a request for proposals for the collection and composting of residential yard
waste by March, 1992, and award the contract by Summer 1992.
5.
Decide by January, 1992, whether to issue Requests for Proposals for
Collection/Processing of recyclables from the commercial sector and the multi-
family residential sector. Contract awards would be made and the recycling
programs would be phased in by July, 1993.
6.
Develop a recycling design ordinance specifying design requirements for new
developments to accommodate the storage and collection of recyclables. Planned
developments may also be required to provide for recycling and composting
facilities.
7.
Continue to sponsor annual citywide garage sales and quarterly community
cleanups.
10,1tf-1
8. Develop a recycling rate structure to generate sufficient revenues to cover the
costs of the programs.
9. Encourage the private sector development of a MRF in the city or south bay.
10. Expand curbside collection of recyclables to mobile home parks (2300 units) and
increase outreach to all residences in the city.
c
11. Enforce county mandatory recycling ordinance for single family homes by March
1992.
This approach gives the recycling program needed flexibility to respond to possible future
changes in state laws and regulations, to establish a specific local data base concerning
materials recovery rates and materials market development, and to educate people who
live and/or work in Chula Vista about the importance of waste reduction and public
participation for goal achievement.
4.5 PROGRAM IMPLRMF.NTATION
4.5.1 SEPARATION PROGRAM
The city must undertake several important steps to implement a citywide source
separation program. Such a program will be difficult to implement and will generate
substantial public comment. The implementation of this program must be tied to a strong
public education program and linked to the overall recycling program.
Residential Se,paration Proeram
As mentioned previously, all single family homes and multi-family homes with curbside
pick-up have been provided with recycling bins. The city is experiencing an 82 percent
participation rate. Curbside recycling should continue in a phased approach with a target
of adding curbside collection of residential yard waste by January, 1993 and adding
service to multi-family residences by July, 1993. This phased approach will provide time
22IJ9.111-'ICCHVI\9\CII\J VJSTAISRRE.CV\A
4 - 26
/0 -II/J....
;,~-. ,"of."_
to work with the system, and to develop the best curbside program. One of the initial
task activities will be to perform an evaluation of the best method of collection for multi-
family curbside collection of recyclables. This evaluation must consider a number of
variables and their relationship to the existing system including:
. Source Separation - Multi-material versus commingled
. Inclusion of yard waste in curbside program
. Automated versus manual collection
Should the city decide to move forward with automated collection of recyclables it will
be necessary to provide each resident with a container for solid waste and one for
recyclables. The commingling of recyclables and possibly yard waste in the recyclable
container will necessitate that the processing facility by sufficiently sized and designed
to handle the materials from the residential section.
The city is offering a special reduced-cost recyclable collection service for senior
citizens. A third container may be necessary for compostable materials, which need not
be collected as often as solid waste or recyclables.
Commercial/Industrial S~aration Pro~ram
The commercial/industrial sector of the waste stream presents a strong opportunity for
source separation of highly recyclable materials for which good local markets exist. The
city will encourage local businesses to expand the existing scheduled collection program
with local dealer/processors.
It is the city's goal to implement their business recycling outreach program via a 1991/92
County Technical Assistance Program grant, supporting education and promotion
activities partially through coordination with the chamber. of commerce and business
associations. A local mandatory recycling ordinance will also be implemented to comply
22C9-11I-TCCHVl\9ICIIUI.A VJSTAISRRB.CV\A 4 - 27
! f) -11f3
with the county mandatory recycling ordinance. The city's ordinance should also
designate target materials for a separation program and clearly delineate the
responsibilities of the city, the residents, and commercial businesses, as well as the
specifics of the overall program.
The city will review the feasibility of handling a commercial recycling system for all
establishments within the city. It may make more sense to allow commercial generators,
like industrial generators, to make their own recycling arrangements, in compliance with
the mandatory recycling ordinance. At this time, the city is considering establishing a
system whereby 5-10 haulers are issued permits (with the city collecting a permit fee) to
serve commercial recycling needs in the city. Commercial generators could then choose
any permitted hauler.
In 1991, the city Public Works Department began recycling asphalt and using reclaimed
asphalt in new street construction. The city also mulches the yard waste from city parks
and public open space areas, uses the mulch on its parks and open space, and makes it
available to the public at no cost.
4.5.2 DEALERlPROCESSORS
As discussed in the previous section, it is recommended that the city continue to
encourage local recycled materials dealers in the area to work with the
commercial/industrial sector and to compete for processing of the materials conected in
the multi-material residential curbside program. Materials recovered from these
programs should be hauled directly to local dealer markets whenever possible. Later,
if required, the city will encourage the siting of a local privately-owned MRF or other
processing facilities within the city. The city may also assist in identifying markets for
the recovered materials. The city should further investigate the possibility of
implementing buy-back centers with the Salvation Army, local school organizations, or
2209-1II-TC-CHVII9ICHULA VISTA ISIUlB.CVIA 4 - 28
/D"{ lI'f
other non-profit organizations.
Finally, the city must maintain flexibility with this component of the program. It may
be necessary to reallocate commercial container space depending upon what is received,
exercise greater control over quality (if materials are contaminated) and adjust to local
market specifications.
The city will work with local dealers/processors and encourage cooperation on a business
to business basis, and through presentations and forums, building upon existing
relationships between the source of generation, the dealer/processors and current end uses
and markets. The city intends to establish a local waste exchange program in conjunction
with the state CALMAX program (a source reduction measure), which will also help to
foster a cooperative spirit within the business community.
4.5.3 INDUSTRIAL RECYCLING PROGRAM
Industrial recycling poses different challenges for implementation than do other recycling
programs in the city. Due to the diverse nature of industrial wastes, recycling for this
sector is not conveniently .put out to bid.. Standardization of recycling collection is not
practical, as most industries haul their own refuse to the landfill or recyclers. Some
industrial generators are on commercial refuse collection accounts with the city's hauler.
These businesses would be treated the same as commercial generators under the city's
recycling programs.
The city staff plans to develop an 'industrial recycling guide for distribution to all area
businesses. Information to be contained in the guide will include a listing of the
recyclable materials designated under the county mandatory recycling ordinance and a
listing of local recyclers. Marketing tips, procurement and market development will also
be explored.
2209-111-TCCHVl\9ICIIUlA YJSTAISRIlB.CV\A 4 - 29
/O,.//fS
A materials exchange bank will be developed in order to survey for material by-products
("wastes") of manufacturing that could be utilized as feedstock by other industries and
list industries that utilize or could potentially utilize industrial by-products in their
manufacturing process. The city will work in conjunction with the state's new
CALMAX materials exchange program. A baseline of industries and recycling activities
in Chula Vista will also be established.
The city recently began asking businesses to provide recycling and source reduction data
for their Chula Vista locations in conjunction with business license renewals. The city
is also considering the possibility of using the business license renewal process to
encourage or require businesses to prepare recycling plans. Sample plans would be
provided by the city.
The county has reported a sharp increase in the recycling of construction and demolition
wastes since the landfill disposal fee was applied to containers and trucks by weight,
instead of volume. For most clean loads of construction debris, recycling is a more cost
effective alternative. As the disposal fee continues to rise, this should increase industrial
recycling even further.
Enforcement for mandatory industrial recycling in compliance with the county mandatory
recycling ordinance will. begin October 1, 1991. City staff will work directly with the
industries, the chamber of commerce, and industry associations in order to gain
cooperation from local industries. Additionally, as noted above, the secondary materials
market for demolition and construction materials is relatively strong. This will provide
a strong incentive to industries to recycle.
It is anticipated that industrial recycling will divert 6 percent of the city's wastestream
toward fulfillment of the AB 939 goals.
2209-1II-TCCIIVI\9ICIIULA VJSTA\SRRB.CV\A
4 - 30
I tJ-I'/b
-----=-. ~ ...?f.,":,-:
4.5.4 COMMERCIAUOFFICE RECYCLING PROGRAMS
Through the city's 1990/91 county TAP grant, the city has begun to develop a
commercial office recycling program, beginning with informational outreach programs.
The city has established a civic center office recycling project which will serve as a
model office recycling program. Chula Vista has applied for another TAP grant from
he county to expand upon Chula Vista's awarded TAP Grant 1991, model office
recycling program, and to allow targeting of twenty (20) additional offices for complete
recycling program consultation (12 offices were targeted in 1991). The Office
Recycling Guide, developed under the City's model office recycling program, will also
be distributed to additional offices.
Continued development of the business recycling baseline begun under the TAP 1991
award will also occur, using questionnaires mailed in conjunction with business license'
renewals. Additional information on procurement, source reduction, and recycling
collection services will be distributed to area businesses. The city is also considering
requiring or encouraging businesses to prepare recycling plans as part of the business
license renewal process. City staff will coordinate with building managements in getting
programs implemented, and monitoring activities and program progress.
The city is also developing a "Guide of Restaurant and Hospitality Recycling, " focusing
on specific waste needs for these establishments, market specifications required, and
collection characteristics pertinent to these types of establishments. Vendor lists for
recycling equipment and area recycling collection providers will also be included in the
guide. Ten (10) establishments will be targeted for consultation and program set-up in
the city. A basic training will be developed that can be given to managers and
supervisors.
Materials collected in commercial/office programs will be handled through existing local
dealer/processors. In addition, by January 1992, the city will decide on an approach for
22C9-1lI-TCCHVl\9\CHIJU. VlSTAISRRE.CVIA
4 - 31
(O-/f?
achieving compliance with the county mandatory recycling ordinance.
Commercial recycling will create many special challenges to staff. The diversity of
offices, restaurants, and other hospitality and service establishments will necessitate
recycling programs that caD be both implemented on a citywide scale, but yet are
"tailored" to each individual establishments. Large, medium, and small businesses all
have special needs stemming from the size and nature of the establishment, in addition
to the diversity of recyclable materials generated.
As directed by the Chula Vista City Council, city staff will be exploring the option of
going to bid for collection services for commercial establishments. Several options exist,
including the following:
1. An RFP could be awarded to one, single provider of services;
2. An RFP could be awarded to multiple providers (e.g., the city could be
divided up in quadrants and award contracts to collectors by quadrant, or
the city could limit hauling permits to 5-10 haulers who would then
contract directly with businesses); or
3. No RFP would be developed, leaving open opportunities for all service
providers to compete on a "free market" basis.
Each option has certain advantages. Awarding a contract to a single provider would
allow the city to closely monitor the recycling activities of area businesses. Additionally,
the city could collect franchise fees for the service. Having multiple, but limited,
providers under contract would potentially provide these same advantages.
With the number and diversity of commercial establishments in the city, an open system
may prove advantageous from a city staff perspective, as it would require less monitoring
of contract compliance, legalities, etc. The city of San Diego uses an open system for
commercial recycling which seems to be meeting the needs of the business community
2209-1lI-TC-CHVII9ICIIIl VlSTA\SRIlB.CV\A
4 - 32
/0 ~/tf7
--,.~~-_..- ---~ ~._--~--
..~. ..._.L~. . '
well. Many of the major office complexes in the San Diego area are recycling, with a
variety of haulers offering services.
Allowing the "free market" to work in offering recycling services to commercial
establishments would still allow city staff to monitor recycling activities, through the
database on business recycling in the city which is proposed to be developed under this
year's TAP grant award. Services provided to commercial establishments may be
tailored to the particular establishment, since businesses would be able to choose the
vendor to best suit their needs.
Enforcement of commercial recycling in the city under the mandatory recycling county
ordinance is to begin July 1, 1993. Enforcement of commercial recycling in the city will
require creative planning and implementation. City staff will develop a comprehensive
public relations campaign targeting area businesses. The campaign will focus on the
benefits of recycling, including reduced disposal costs, environmental awareness and
positive public image.
City staff has begun to work directly with area businesses in establishing recycling
programs, offering advise and consultation where needed. Working closely with the
business community will be the only way to achieve compliance with the mandatory
ordinance. It is anticipated that commercial recycling will divert 5 percent of the city's
wastestream toward fulfillment of the AB 939 goals.
4.5.5 MULTI-FAMILY RECYCUNG PROGRAM
The establishment of recycling collection services for residential multi-family units will
require a great deal of advanced planning and careful implementation. As with
commercial establishments, multi-family dwelling units vary in terms of size, design, and
demographics. These characteristics all impact the type of collection services that can
be offered.
2209-1I1.TC-CIIVI\9\CHUU. VlSTA\8IlRE.CV\A
4 - 33
/o-lJIflt/-9
As directed by the Chula Vista City Council, city staff will be exploring the option of
going to bid for collection services for multi-family establishments. As with commercial
recycling, several options exist:
1. An RFP could be awarded to one, single provider of services;
2. An RFP could be awarded to multiple providers (e.g., the city could be
divided up in quadrants, awarding contracts to collectors by quadrant); or
3. No RFP would be developed, leaving open opportunities for all service
providers to complete on a "free market" basis.
Again, as with commercial recycling, each option would have certain advantages.
Because the city's single-family residential recycling program has been awarded to one
hauler, it may be prudent to award multi-family recycling to one hauler as well.
Additionally, the large percentage of multi-family housing in the city may be best
serviced by one or a few designated providers.
Dividing the city into service quarters and awarding a contract to a single provider for
each quarter would allow for more competitive bidding and services, but still allow for
contractual accountability. Additionally, this could provide for more expedited program
implementation, as opposed to a single hauler attempting to provide service to the entire
city.
The city will decide on one of these approaches by January, 1992. Enforcement for
residential multi-family recycling under the county mandatory recycling ordinance is
scheduled to begin July 1, 1993. In order to take advantage of the Tonnage Diversion
Grants offered by the county, however, the city may wish to begin pilot projects in
residential multi-family units prior to that date. It is anticipated that approximately 4
percent of the city's wastestream will be diverted through a residential multi-family
recycling program to meet the AB 939 mandates.
2209-111-Tc.CHV1\9ICIlULA VJSTA\SRRIl.CV\A
4 - 34
. 10 .;./S7J
._2L..o;...&! .
4.5.6 MECHANIZED MATERIAL RECOVERY FACILITY DESCRIPTION
According to information provided in the preliminary waste characterization study, about
40 percent of the materials in the total city waste stream are technically processible
through current methods and markets for recycling and reuse. The processible,
recyclable portion of the waste stream, which includes glass, metals, plastic and paper
can be converted into marketable commodities at one or more material recovery facilities
(MRF). Such facilities can be designed to receive and process recyclable materials from
both residential and commercial sources.
The actual design and operation of a MRF depend on several factors, including the type
and amount of recyclable and nonrecyclable materials to be handled and the markets for
which the materials are to be prepared. The design must also incorporate flexibility in
order to adjust to changing market conditions and new or phased solid waste operations
or regulations. The types and amounts of material define the system size and equipment
requirements, while the product markets determine the level of processing and system
flexibility required to adjust to changing market demands and regulations. AB 939
requires the city to divert 25 percent of the waste stream from landfills by 1995 and 50
percent by 2000. This results in the phased generation of source-separated recyclable
material. These materials need to be accommodated at one or more MRFs. Such
facilities can either be developed and processed by the city or (more likely) the city can
encourage private development of such facilities or cooperate with county programs and
facilities.
CDM envisions a conceptual design that will meet the requirements of the county's and
the City of Chula Vista's mandatory recycling ordinances, and will facilitate technical
support for compliance with the other general regulatory requirements, as well as
discretionary permits and approvals. The facility should be designed to allow for
expansion in the event that large land areas to the east are annexed to the City of Chula
Vista and developed in the future.
2209-111-TCCHVl\9\CHtllA VISTAISRIlI!.CV\A
4 - 35
/f)~/~
One alternative for Chula Vista would be to require large annexation areas, such as the
potential Otay Ranch annexation (between 20,000 and 40,000 homes plus commercial and
industrial development) to designate a site for a privately operated MRF to serve all or
part of the city.
Another approach at addressing the requirements of AD 939 is through the development
of a regional MRF, that would be operated in conjunction with the Prison Industry
Authority (pIA). The PIA proposes a 1000 ton per day waste recycle energy plant that
would use inmate labor from the Donovan Correctional Facility. The goal of this
program is multifaceted. The inmates would separate recyclable materials from the
mixed municipal solid waste stream. The organic fraction of the waste stream, in turn,
would be used to produce electricity and steam using biogas produced through anaerobic
digestion. In segregating the recyclables from the remainder of the waste stream, the
PIA proposed using a series of mechanical and handsorting operations that would allow
for the separation of paper, glass, aluminum, plastic, ferrous metal, wood, and related
materials. The organic, or non-recyclable portion of the solid waste stream, would be
anaerobically digested, in conjunction with sewage generated by the prison. This process
would provide steam and electrical energy for the prison facilities, as well as the
availability of electricity for sale to local utility users.
This project is only in the formative stages and the impact that the PIA program will
have on the overall SRRE approach, in terms of scope and time of implementation, must
still be identified.
4.S.7 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
An implementation schedule must identify all activities which must be accomplished in
order to successfully implement the recycling program. The schedule can help assure
that these decisions are well informed and made on a timely basis. The implementation
2209-III-TCCIIVl\9\CII\lLA VlSTA\SRlIJ!.CVIA
4 - 36
/() , I~
schedule must also provide project continuity as the personnel, laws and regulations, and
other factors change over time during program development.
The implementation schedule is an evolving document and must maintain flexibility. The
results of decisions made as part of early activities may significantly alter the program's
scope and direction as well as that of the solid waste management system. In addition,
the schedule assumes that the city will receive a 1991/92 TAP grant award. If the city
does not receive the TAP grant, staff still expects to accomplish all of the activities listed
in the implementation schedule, but it will take as much as a year longer to complete
those programs which are not mandated.
Following each major decision to proceed with project elements, the implementation
schedule should be reviewed and revised as necessary. Table 4-5 outlines the proposed
schedule for short-term implementation and Table 4-6 outlines the proposed schedule for
medium-term implementation.
4.6 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Monitoring and evaluation of the city's recycling programs will be necessary in order to
determine the effectiveness of the city's programs, the need for changes in program
strategies, and instances of non-compliance with city and county mandatory recycling
ordinances.
4.6.1 RESIDENTIAL PROGRAMS
In order to assess the effectiveness of a residential recycling program, it is essential to
gather and evaluate a variety of operational data. The key items to be monitored are:
. Set -out rates
. Participation rates
2209-1I1-TCCHVl\9\CIIIJLA VJSTAISRRE.CVIA
4 - 37
/()~/S-3
TABLE 4-S
City or Chula Vista
RECYCLING COMPONENT
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION S(,;HI<.nULE
Activity Projected Date
1. City Mandatory Recyclin2 Ordinance
Ordinance drafted November 1991
Ordinance enacted March 1, 1992
2. Residential Recycline Pro2rams
Implement backyard composting pilot program November 1991
Continue block captain program Ongoing
Continue to promote and expand single family Ongoing
curbside collection of recyclables
Decision on type of RFP for collection/composting November 1991
of yard waste
Issue RFP for residential yard waste collection March 1992
Residential yard waste contract award July 1992
Enforcement of yard waste collection program January 1993
Determine approach to multi-family residential January 1992
recycling program
Multi-family recycling contract award (if July 1992
appropriate) ,
Implement multi-family recycling program (enforce July 1, 1993
mandatory recycling)
Continue to sponsor community cleanups Quarterly
Continue to sponsor citywide garage sales Annually
Begin enforcement of mandatory single family March 1992
recycling
22C9-11I-TCCHV1I9ICIIULA VJSTAISRRB,CYIA 4 - 38
/0 -/Slf
TABLE 4-5 (con't)
City of Chula Vista
RECYCLING COMPONENT
SHORT-TERM-IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Projected Date
3. Commercial/Office Recycline
Proerams
Apply for county TAP grant to October 1991
continue city office recycling
and business outreach programs
Continue to expand city office Ongoing
program and business outreach
program
Develop a recycling data base Ongoing
Determine approach to January 1992
commercial recycling program
Commercial recycling contract July 1992
award (if appropriate)
Begin enforcement of mandatory July 1993
commercial recycling
Begin enforcement of mandatory October 1992
industrial recycling
Establish waste exchange June 1992
program
4. Draft a recycling design
ordinance for space allocation
January 1992
2209-IIl.TCCHVl\9\CH\JLA VJSTAISRRB.CVIA
4 - 39
I 0 -/~~
TABLE 4-6
City of Chula Vista
RECYCLING COMPONENT
MEDIUM-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
1. Commercial/Office and Industrial Rec,yclin~
ProImllIlS
Evaluate existing program effectiveness June 1995
Evaluate possible equipment/program changes July 1995
2. Residential Curbside Multi-Material Recyclin~
Pro~s
Evaluate existing program effectiveness May 1995
Evaluate possible program changes May 1995
3. Pilot Multi-Family RecJ'c1in~ Pro~
Evaluate multi-family recycling program January 1996
effectiveness
Evaluate possible program changes January 1996
4. Materials Recovery Facility
Evaluate city's success in attracting MRFs to the May 1995
area and evaluate the need for additional facilities
5. Transfer Facility
Consider cooperation with county transfer July 1995
facilities (currently in the planning process)
6. Education and Public Information
Assess effectiveness of information program January 1995
Modify informational materials in combination Ongoing
with programmatic changes
2209-1II.TCCIIVl\9\CHULA VlSTAISIWl.CVIA
4 - 40
/O;/~
":"*';-'
. Recovery quantities
. Materials capture rates
· Compliance with processing specifications (e.g. level of contamination,
minimum quantities)
· ~~k~oomanceandcolloctioo
. Costs and revenues
Most of the data will be assembled by program staff on a regular basis. However, some
information will require ~riodic surveys. There are a number of mochanisms to
measure the success of rocycling programs, both overall and for individual program
components. The following discussion presents a summary of these measures.
Set-Out Rates
The set-out rate has been defined by the National Rocycling Coalition (NRC) as the
number of individual set-outs put out for rocycling colloction by a participant.
Set-out rates are not measured by commodity. Programs vary in the way that set-outs
are differentiated. Usually a set-out denotes one household's entire set-out rate.
Set-out Rate =
number of individual set-outs on the colloction day
total number of households served
A set-out rate is an empirical measure obtained by counting the number of households
that set out materials on their assigned colloction day and the number of households in
the service area. Occasionally, a participation should be described as a "set-out rate."
The set-out rate is not a measure of true participation, as participants may choose to set
out materials less frequently than the service is provided.
2209-1I1-TC-CHVl\9\CHUlA VlSTAISIlRB.CV\A
4 - 41
/0,;$"7
The limitation here is that the definition of "set-out" varies from program to program.
Usually, a house that sets out newspaper only and a house that sets our four materials
are each counted as a single set-out.
Although counting set-outs is difficult in dense urban areas and in multi-family unit
neighborhoods, it may be possible to track set-outs if serial numbers, names, or
addresses are affixed to each container.
Participation Rates
Set-out rates are not necessarily indicative of participation rates. Participation is defined
by the NRe as the number of households that are source-separating their recyclable
materials divided by the total number of households served. Participation rates are
difficult to accurately assess without a carefully tracked system of monitoring individual
household set-outs over an extended period of time. In a setting where there are single-
family detached homes, it is possible to calculate the participation rate by keeping a set-
out log, by address, for each and every household. Twelve weeks is a common tracking
period. A "participant" is then defined as any household that contributes materials at
least once during this period.
The frequency of collection should also be described since these variables can have a
significant effect on participation rates.
Participation Rate = number of households source-~tine
total number of households served water phase
Variables to specify when reporting participation rates:
. Household density
. Time period
2209-111-1'CCIIVl\9\CHUl VlSTAISRRB.CYIA
4 - 42
/O-I$t
. Service unit
. Household counts
. Frequency of service
Recovery Rate
The recovery rate is dermed as the total amount of solid waste recovered through source
reduction, reuse, and recycling in a given community. Commonly, the recovery rate is
expressed as a percentage of total solid waste generation.
Recovery Rate =
material recovered
reference waste
Annl\ali7.ed per capita
material recovery rate =material recovered in 12 consecutive months
population
Variables to specify when presenting a recovery rate include: designated materials,
service unit, population, time period, and reference waste.
Capture Rate
Capture rate refers to actual secondary materials recovered with respect to the designated
materials available.
Capture rate =desienated materials recovered
total designated materials available
2209-III-TCCHVl\9\CHULA VISTAISRItI!.CV\A
4 - 43
(~ -/~f
Variables to specify when reporting a capture rate:
. Designated materials (glass, paper, etc.)
. Reference waste (total glass, paper, etc. available in the waste stream)
. Service unit (route, entire city, etc.)
. Time period (month, year)
Capture rate refers to actual material recovered with respect to the designated materials
available. The capture rate may represent all materials targeted in the program, but more
commonly is used to describe individual categories of materials only. Standard reporting
practice requires all materials considered in the capture rate to be identified, and
preferably, capture rates would be cited for each individual material.
When reporting a capture rate, the defining of designa~ materials and the method of
estimating quantities of available designated materials are very important. The total
designated materials available ideally would be derived from generation rates based on
waste stream sampling and characterization studies done in conjunction with a recycling
audit. Where this data does not exist, "surrogate" data may be borrowed from studies
conducted in similar areas or from national estimates. For certain materials, such as local
newspapers, it may be feasible to obtain distribution and newsprint consumption figures
to estimate the amount of newspaper available. A capture rate for designated material
should include redeemed deposit containers where such programs are in effect.
In addition to measuring set-out, participation, recovery and materials capture rates, a
recycling program can be monitored and evaluated by measuring costs and revenues of
the program. Most recycling programs cost more than the revenues received on the
materials collected and processed, this is due mainly to the volatility of the materials
markets and costs of collection. However, monitoring costs and revenue can help
22lJ9.111.~9ICIlULA VlSTAISRRB.CY\A
4 - 44
/! -/~
evaluate the economics of a program method. Periodic evaluation of contractor
performance and capacity requirements is also necessary.
4.6.2 COMMERCIAUINDUSTRIAL PROGRAMS
In the short-term, the commercial and industrial recycling programs will be based on
voluntary participation with guidance and direction from city staff. When mandatory
recycling goes into effect, businesses may still be allowed to make their own recycling
arrangements. Therefore, in order to assess the effectiveness of a commercial/industrial
recycling program, it is essential to work closely with the business establishments in
measuring their program effectiveness. The items that can be monitored include:
. Material capture rates (Number of trailer pulls and tonnage records)
. Periodic commercial/industrial establishment surveys
. Commercial waste stream audits
Monitoring of the effectiveness of commercial/industrial programs is essential to
establish a workable data base from which proper decisions can be made regarding
whether the programs are meeting state diversion goals and complying with mandatory
recycling programs.
Recently, the city began requesting that businesses report source reduction and recycling
activities in conjunction with business license renewal. A questionnaire is being inserted
with all annual business license renewal forms sent out by the city. This measure could
ultimately be incorporated within an overall waste restriction ordinance. It will provide
uniform and timely reporting of diversion quantities from the waste stream sector having
the greatest potential for meeting the 50 percent reduction goal. The city is looking into
the possibility of expanding the city's existing business license data base to include
information on the size of the business, whether the business is recycling and the types
2209-I11.TCCHVI\9\CHUlA VlSTAISRRE.CVIA
4 - 45
1f)~/bl
of waste being generated.
2209-11I-'fC.CHVI\9\CHIJI.A VISTA\SRlU!.CV\A
4 - 46
/0 -16~
'~~'~,.i'" .
5.0 COMPOSTING COMPONENT
5.1 OBJECTIVES.
Composting will be the second most critical component in achieving the 25 and 50
percent diversion goals mandated by Assembly Bill 939. It provides an effective way to
divert yard and selected organic wastes away from disposal facilities. This section
specifies diversion quantities to be achieved through composting and sets market
development objectives for both short-term and medium-term planning periods.
According to the waste characterization described in Section 2, approximately 27.1
percent of Chula Vista's disposal stream is composed of yard and wood wastes. Yard
debris (e.g., leaves, brush, grass clippings) accounts for 17.4 percent of the total
wastestreams. Wood accounts for 9.7 percent of the total wastestream. Yard and wood
wastes are a bulky and sustaining portion of the solid wastestream that can easily be
turned into a useful product and thereby avoid landfill disposal. Since these materials
decompose in the landfill to form methane and carbon dioxide, diversion of these
materials can be expected to reduce methane handling requirements at the landfill site.
5.1.1 SHORT-TERM OBJECTIVES
The short-term composting objective for Chula Vista is to divert 32 percent of the
industrial, commercial and residential yard and wood wastestream to waste mulching or
composting operations. This will yield approximately an eight percent composting goal
for the total wastestream.
2209.nl.TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 5 - 1
!O,/b3
5.1.2 MEDIUM-TERM OBJECTIVES
The medium-term composting objective for Chula Vista is to divert at least 79 percent
of the industrial, commercial and residential yard and wood wastestream to composting
programs. This will yield a total diversion of 22 percent of the total wastestream.
5.1.3 MARKETING OBJECTIVES
Methods for expanding compost markets are many and varied. They can focus on
increasing .the use of yard waste compost through educational programs and procurement
by government agencies, or they can increase the marketability of a facility's specific
compost through quality assurance testing and aggressive pricing.
Several factors influence markets for yard waste compost: public or private
ownership/operation of the composting facilities, presence or lack of a profit-making
incentive, the quality and quantity of available compost, local demand and the local
industries. Due to relativ.ely high transportation costs, compost markets are usually
restricted to local areas. Possible local markets include individual residents, nursery and
landscaping industries, construction firms, public agencies, private institutions, soil
amendment retailers and wholesalers, sod dealers, landfill operators, and farmers. Free
delivery to users is a particularly useful marketing strategy, especially when the supply
exceeds the demand and when there is limited storage space.
Market development activities that will assist in meeting Chula Vista's composting goals
include development of marketing programs for uncomposted or shredded debris before
formal establishment of a centralized composting program using the resulting soil
amendment on city grounds and supplying existing distributors with quality material.
Establishing users will be a major undertaking, but the ultimate success of Chula Vista's
composting program rests on its ability to utilize or market the end products. Medium-
2209-11I-TC-CHVM\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CVIA 5 - 2
/c?"/~P
----.--'" -,..
_,~_-':;r'":
.'.'",,/--
term marketing activities for Chula Vista include targeting smaller landscapers and
residential markets.
5.2 EXISTING CONDffiONS
Chula Vista is in the process of developing a program for the reduction and composting
of yard and wood wastes. The San Diego County mandatory recycling ordinance
requires collection of such wastes from single and multi-family homes by January, ]993.
In the fall of 199], the city intends to solicit proposals from private firms for the
collection .and processing of residential yard waste. By June, ]992, the city plans to
phase in the collection/composting program. Mandatory separation and collection of
residential yard waste will be enforced beginning January ], 1993.
The city will also initiate a voluntary backyard composting program in November 1991.
Fliers will be sent to residents describing the benefits of composting and how to obtain
composting bins. Residents will be able to fill out a coupon on the back of the form to
order a compo sting bin from a local vendor. The bins can be sold at cost to residents
and will come with an instruction guide, which will be a generic guide available to all
Chula Vista citizens.
In 1991, the City of Chula Vista Public Works Department began to mulch all of the
yard waste from city parks and public open space areas, including the civic center. The
mulch is being used on the parks and public open spaces and is available to the public
at no charge.
Much of the yard waste from Chula Vista that reaches the Otay Landfill is being
shredded into mulch and used for landfill cover and other purposes by the county. The
mulch is also available to the public at no charge.
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9ICHULA VlSTAISRRE.CVIA 5 - 3
-
IO,./~:::'
The Eastlake Development Company has developed the Eastlake model composting
project as part of the Eastlake planned development in eastern Chula Vista. This project
will accommodate the tree trimmings, grass clippings, leaves, prunings and other yard
waste from maintenance of landscaping within Eastlake.
Eastlake is approximately 3200 acres and when completed, will contain approximately
8900 dwelling units, 274 acres of commercial/office and more than 1100 acres of parks,
recreation and open space. All organic materials from the open space planting, golf
courses and the equestrian center will be included in the composting project. In
addition, t!1e residential yard debris could be added later when Chula Vista establishes
a separate collection service. The composting facility will be utilized to produce compost
for on-site landscaping and maintenance activities. Upon completion, the facility will
demonstrate the feasibility of self-contained composting projects, divert landscape debris
from the Otay Landfill and provide a working example of a composting yard in
operation.
Eastlake has been awarded a $47,425 Technical Assistance Program (TAP) grant from
the county of San Diego to fund equipment and site rental for this project.
The City of ChuJa Vista also provided political assistance in establishing this facility by
participating in a meeting with county and state officials to discuss streamlining the
permit process for composting facilities. Classification of such facilities as waste
disposal facilities is seen by the city as a major impediment to the implementation of such
facilities.
While the primary purpose of the Eastlake composting project is to recover and reuse
organic material, there is another advantage to the community. This is the first yard
waste composting project in San Diego and will be used to help educate the public about
this process. Tours will be offered on a monthly basis to show the public and local
county and state officials the composting facility, a demonstration garden which utilizes
2209-11l-TC-CHVn9ICIIUlA VISTAISRRE.CVIA 5 - 4
/0 -I'~b
--~--....,.~-,--_.-----~------
'.-', .t'" p!. ~., ,
the finished material and displays drought-tolerant landscaping and a backyard
composting demonstration site.
Many of the commercial and industrial generators in Chula Vista reduce the wooden
pallets used for transporting and storing products. Pallets which reach Otay Landfill are
separated from the wood wastestream for reuse.
The amount of yard and wood waste currently being diverted in Chula Vista is not
known at this time. Therefore, the city is not seeking existing diversion credits in this
waste category.
2209-11l-TC-CHVn9ICHULA VISTAISRRE.CVIA 5 - 5
10 ,If- 1
5.3 EVALUATION OF COMPOSTING ALTERNATIVES
Composting of municipal waste materials may be considered as a series of unit processes
each with characteristic elements. A schematic of the composting process indicating each
of the unit process elements is shown in Figure 5-1.
Pre-
CollectIon PrOCEl';;Slng COrrpost , ng >
> ~ Storage ] [ Market I no ]
FlGURE 5-1
GENERAL WASTE COMPOSTING SCHEMATIC
Prior to implementation of a successful composting program a variety of alternatives
related to each of these elements need to be evaluated. Alternatives may be considered
in five broad areas:
. Separation! Collection
. Feed stocks
. Processing Technology
. Program Scale
. Marketing
2209-1I1-TC-CHVM\CHIJLA VISTA\SRRE.CVIA 5 - 6
/0 -t.b'i
....-",,-, ",_.~I<.,i__ ......-"-.
In the following text, each of these basic categories is discussed and alternatives for
consideration by Chula Vista are presented.
5.3.1 SEPARATION/COLLECTION
The manner of separation and collection of compostible materials from the mixed
municipal wastestream sets the tone for an entire composting program. Alternatives for
separation of compostible materials may be considered in broad categories:
. Source Separation
. Commingled
. Mixed Solid Waste
Source Separation
Separation, as discussed in the Recycling Component, is the process of removing
recyclable material from the general wastestream. The separation of yard and wood
wastes typically occurs at the source of generation. Efforts to remove these materials
from the mixed municipal wastestream have not been effective. Separation at the source,
for residential and commercial generators can be voluntary or mandatory. The city of
Seattle, Washington has successfully implemented a voluntary source separation program
for yard waste materials for processing by a city contracted windrow composting
program. Seattle initially permitted residential users to set out yard waste in any
convenient container. Product contamination with plastic from bagging provided by the
homeowner, however, has been a problem. Seattle is now developing a program for
distribution of re-useable hard plastic waste containers for curbside collection of yard
waste materials.
2209-111.TC-CHVn9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 5 - 7
10 ,lief
Comminl!led Collection
If recyclable materials are commingled and collected together with yard wastes (from
residential sources), they are easier to store and collect but require a processing facility
such as a materials recovery facility (MRF) to separate them into components prior to
further processing. The MRF facility would be optimally located next to a composting
facility for the yard wastes or at least within easy shipping distance to such a facility.
Advantages and disadvantages of commingled separation are presented below.
Advantages:
· It requires a minimum number of containers for storage and collection.
· It does not require compartmentalized vehicles and therefore the collection
procedure is simplified.
· It has the potential to increase public participation due to the ease of
operation.
Disadvantages:
· It may result in contamination of certain materials.
. It requires additional mechanical separation.
· It requires a significant financial investment in a MRF and a composting
facility.
Mixed Solid Waste Compostinl! (MSWl
In the decade of the 1950s a number of projects were developed in the United States and
Europe to compost materials separated from a mixed municipal wastestream. The Dano
process, for example, involves a rotating drum equipped with aeration. Waste materials
are presorted and magnetically separated. Sorted materials are delivered to the rotating
drum where they are mixed and pulverized. Product from the drum may then be directed
2209-III-TC-CHVn9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CVIA 5 - 8
10.-/70
~,' ., "
to another separation step and then to a composting process. Few of these original plants
are operating in the United States today. Odor complaints, mechanical breakdown, and
most importantly, poor product quality were experienced at many plants. The 1990's
have seen a resurgence of interest in MSW composting. It provides a means of
potentially diverting a larger quantity of the wastestrearn than yard and wood wastes;
however, product quality and marketability remain significant question marks.
Summary
Some degree of source separation is essential for program success. Even if mixed solid
waste composting is selected for implementation, separate grinding of yard and wood
waste is advisable. Separation methods should be flexible and consistent with local
ordinances, plans, and policies. Separation goals can be enforced by ordinance. The
recently enacted mandatory recycling ordinance of the county of San Diego discourages
disposal of recyclable materials at all solid waste facilities. This will require all haulers
operating within the county to encourage recycling by their customers.
Chula Vista has determined that it will implement a residential yard waste
collection/composting program, the details of which will be decided by the City Council
in November, 1991. The program will require source separation of "clean greens,"
possibly through an options program similar to Seattle (i.e. residents would have a choice
between backyard composting, transporting compostable material to approved regional
composting centers or utilizing curbside collection of compostable materials).
Commercial and industrial sources will also be prohibited from disposing of yard and
wood waste in the county landfill. Other details have yet to be determined.
5.3.2 FEEDSTOCKS
It is possible to compost all of the organic material found in a municipal solid
wastestream. Materials such as newspaper, mixed paper, cardboard, textiles, food waste,
2209.1l1.TC.CHVM\CHULA YISTA\SRRE.CYIA 5 - 9
/0-/7/
manure, and wood can be shredded and composted. With such a wide variety of
materials entering the composting facility, however, the quality and purity of the end
product as well as the required processing time, can be very inconsistent. A more
reasonable approach is to limit the types of material entering the facility.
The composting process is affected by a number of important variables including:
. Moisture content
. Nitrogen/Carbon ratio
. Available volatile solids content
Candidate feed stocks for composting generally fall into two broad categories depending
on their nitrogen and moisture contents:
. High carbon/Low moisture
. High nitrogen/High moisture
Generally feedstocks from each category need to be included in a successful compost
mix. Typical high carbonllow moisture feedstocks are wood waste, agricultural cuttings,
and woody construction waste. Typical high nitrogen/high moisture feedstocks are green
yard waste, commercial wet waste, and dewatered municipal wastewater sludge.
Chula Vista plans to use a clean green/wood waste mixture in its composting program.
The composting program will include landscape waste from all sectors (residential,
commercial and industrial). Clean wood will be sorted out through the industrial waste
exchange program planned by the city. Sewage sludge from Chula Vista and other south
bay cities is currently being composted in Fiesta Island. The City of Chula Vista plans
to continue to cooperate with this program and will consider participating in other
regional programs developed by the county for the south bay.
Choice of feedstock is influenced by both process and market considerations. In general
a yard waste based compost can be marketed to the public as a higher quality product
2209-111.TC-CHVn9\CHl.1L\ VISTA\SRRE.CV\A
5 - 10
1047d.
...j"..~"":' ~ ,,:
than one which contains sewage sludge because of commonly held concern about higher
risk of bacteriological and metal contamination in the latter. In fact, the sludge based
product may have higher horticultural value due to higher nitrogen concentrations. This
may not affect the market perception, however.
From the process standpoint, the sludge/yard waste mixture may be more consistently
controlled to optimum conditions for carbon to nitrogen ratio and moisture content. A
yard waste mixture will usually require supplemental water supply to increase moisture
content. Nitrogen contents may also be lower than optimal in a yard waste compost
resulting in a longer required compost time to achieve adequate stabilization.
The separated portion of the mixed solid wastestream can also be used as a composting
feedstock. The organic fraction of the wastestream may be recovered using unit
processes employed in developing refuse-derived fuel (RDF). This process is employed
at the State of Delaware Reclamation Plant. The recovered organic materials are mixed
with sewage sludge on about a one to one ratio. The mixture is processed in high-rate
aerobic or anaerobic digesters, dried, and then screened. In this process the solid waste
fraction is used as a bulking agent for sewage sludge composting. The finished product
may be used as a fertilizer blend or soil amendment, or in hydro-seeding applications,
but it has typically been land filled due to the lack of a stable market.
5.3.3 PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY
Preprocessin!! Technology
Effective composting of municipal waste materials typically requires that these materials
be preprocessed. A typical need is to reduce material particle size. Size reduction
increases the surface area available for microbial activity which, in turn, increases rates
of breakdown of materials in the composting process. A typical preprocessing operation
includes shredding or grinding and may include screening as indicated in Figure 5-2.
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A
5 - 11
/0-/73
4
6
vBa Jlrvl Q-lndlng
K
~
6vBa
Screen T ng
Collect Ton
Drop Of.,
r'-'
To ~liItlng
FIGURE 5-2
TYPICAL PRE-PROCESSING SCHEMATIC
Compostinll Technolollies
Municipal composting installations confine the processes of decomposition of organic
material that occur naturally in soil to a controlled environment providing optimal
moisture content and oxygen supply for microbial activity. The controlled process
requires less time than natural decomposition and generates heat to produce temperatures
that are high enough to deactivate pathogens. Composting process arrangements for
materials found in a municipal solid waste may be conveniently divided into three classes
as follows:
. Windrow I static pile
. Aerated static-pile
. In-vessel systems
~
2209.111.TC-CHVng\CHULA VISTA \SRRE.CV\A
5 - 12
jb ~/ ?f
;~ .~~."" ..~~_...".!
Windrow / Static Pile Comoostinl!
Windrow or static pile composting is the basic composting technology. Compostible
materials are mixed using a front-end loader or compost turning machine followed by
active composting in long "windrows." Windrows are constructed by end-dump trucks
and shaped by bulldozers. Aeration is provided by periodically "turning" the windrows
using a machine designed to mix and aerate material in-place while moving down the
pile. Composting time for the windrow process can vary from 30 - 120 days depending
on feedstocks and required degree of stabilization. After the active composting period,
during which the piles may be turned five to ten times, the frequency of turning is
reduced until the piles are "cured", that is, sufficiently stabilized for subsequent
horticultural or agricultural uses. The windrow process is frequently used for
composting of yard waste materials. A schematic of the windrow compo sting process
is presented in Figure 5-3.
One of the largest windrow composting installations in the world has been, until
recently, operated by the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts at its Carson treatment
plant. The Carson plant composted anaerobically digested sludge for over 30 years for
sale to a retail processor and marketer. The composting operation at Carson was
suspended indefinitely in June 1991 due to odor complaints. Sludge is currently being
composted by a private contractor at a remote site.
An example of a successful windrow composting program for mixed yard waste is the
Cedar Grove Compost Company project in Seattle, Washington. Cedar Grove, a private
company operating under contract to the city of Seattle, composts up to 60,000 tons per
year of yard waste from Seattle's "Clean Green" curbside pickup program. Mixed yard
waste is sorted, shredded, and placed in windrows on a concrete surface. Windrows are
turned using a "Scarab" composting machine. Active composting for two months is
followed by at least one month of "curing" in non-aerated static piles and then screened
prior to sale or blending into topsoil or other horticultural products.
2209-111~TC-CHVI\9\CHUL4. VISTA\SRRE.CV\A
5 - 13
lo-/7~
j J
High Carbon r\.
Feedstock {_ _____''_
~~--- v&
High NIt.roQQ"/",\
Feedstock ~
~
....ke
Piles
u
~
~ -- U v&~
Turn Plies
ClTe Piles
~
I
To st.or-ag8 or-
t.1arketTng
FIGURE 5-3
WINDROW COMPOSTING SCHEMATIC
Advantages of windrow composting include:
. It is the simplest of all compost methods.
· It is typically less expensive than other methods.
· A good deal of experience is available.
· Operation requires knowledge of only basic diesel driven equipment
commonly used in the general construction industry.
Disadvantages are:
· Odor releases are more difficult to control.
· Site land area may be more than for other methods.
2209-111- TC-CHVn9\CmJLA VlST A \SRRE.CV\A
5 - 14
/0 ~/7h
-- ---,--- ,
Aerated Static-Pile Composting
The aerated static-pile compost system is an adaptation of the windrow process. The
process was developed by United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) researchers
at their Beltsville, Maryland site. For this reason, aerated static-pile composting is
sometimes referred to as the "Beltsville" method. In the aerated static-pile system,
aeration is provided by force ventilation of the piles using air compressors operating in
either a pressure or vacuum cycle. Typically, the vacuum cycle is used. With this
technique the need to turn the material is eliminated. The aerated static-pile flow
schematic is illustrated in Figure 5-4.
The advantages of the aerated static-pile system are:
. The system is mechanically simple and should result in mechanically
reliable operation.
. A shallow compost pile is used so there should be little concern over
compaction causing uneven air distribution.
. The operator can inspect the material as it is placed, composted, and
removed.
. The aerated static-pile process results in good product
stabilization/pathogen kill.
Disadvantages are:
. Compared to in-vessel systems, a relatively large land area is required.
. Operations are affected by climatic variability.
. The system has a low degree of mechanization and is therefore labor'
intensive.
. Odors have been a problem, but less than the windrow method.
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CY\A
5 - 15
IC..f77
=~n
Hfgh carbon ~~ ~ ~
Feedat.oC:k ~
~~ ~
~hvBo
, t n
High NTtroo.n~ ~ ~
F...dllilt.oelc ~
~I)(rng
=
-. ~ ~D
~ - D '700 100
c) -o-DY
Aer'"D"ted P1 tes
CU""e Ptl_
I:::'
TO $1:Of""Bge Of"
M!lrket r ng
FIGURE 5-4
AERATED STATIC PILE COMPOSTING SCHEMATIC
In-Vessel Comoosting
In-vessel composting uses a confining structure to enclose waste materials during the
biologically active phase of composting. Reactors have been constructed in a variety of
shapes: circular or rectangular towers, horizontal tunnels, and bin or box-type vessels.
In-vessel composting often is used when materials from the municipal solid wastestream
are co-composted with municipal wastewater treatment plant sludge.
Basic process flow for in-vessel composting is similar to aerated static-pile systems --
feedstocks are mixed, aeration is provided for biological respiration and moisture
removal, and finally, compost is cured to achieve additional stabilization prior to storage
or marketing. A process flow schematic is presented in Figure 5-5.
The term in-vessel is here used to encompass systems which incorporate (at least) vertical
walls to enclose the active composting mass. Thus both "plug flow" and "agitated bed"
systems are included in this classification.
2209-1 I 1.TC-cHVI\9\CHUlA VISTA \SRRE.CV\A
5 - 16
I~ ~ /7 t
-'-
Plug flow systems may be either vertical or horizontal. In the case of vertical reactors
the compost feedstocks are added at the top of the enclosed compost mass and withdrawn
from the bottom using screw conveyors. Systems of this type have been manufactured
by Taulman-Weiss. Horizontal plug flow systems move compost material within the
reactor by hydraulic means. The tunnel reactor manufactured by Ashbrook-Simon-
Hartley is a horizontal plug flow reactor.
Agitated bed systems mix the compost mass during active composting using either a
rotating auger or a turning machine similar to that used in the windrow process. In
rectangular agitated bed systems the turning machine is typically mounted on fixed rails
along the concrete walls of the compost vessel. The original "Fairfield digester" is an
agitated bed system. Other manufacturers of agitated bed systems include International
Process Systems, Buhler-Miag, and Compost Systems Company.
Mrxlng
~
Con<>~'
Reect.or-
Aer-at ton
8 towers
~
~ J-o-Qy
To 5t.ore.g8 or
Me.rk;8"t. 1 ng
<---./
FIGURE S-S
IN-VESSEL COMPOSTING SCHEMATIC
2209.1JI-TC-CHVn9\CHUl..A VISTA\SRRE.CV\A
5 - 17
10,./71
Agitated bed systems necessarily require an open top for access and movement of the
agitation equipment. If an agitated bed composting system is to be enclosed for odor
control the entire compost vessel must be enclosed in a supplemental building. Exhaust
gases from plug flow systems can be more easily captured for odor control.
The rotating drum of the Dano process could be considered an "in-vessel reactor." Since
particle residence times in the rotating drum of the Dano process are typically on the
order of several days rather than the 10 - 20 day residence times typical for other
systems considered here, the Dano drum is more properly considered a preprocessing
technology in the sense described above. Full stabilization of compost discharge from
a Dano drum with a residence time of 2-3 days will require supplemental composting to
achieve adequate stabilization.
Operating experience with in-vessel composting of municipal solid wastestream materials
is limited, although the partially enclosed Dano process was used relatively extensively
for mixed solid waste composting in the United States and Europe in the decade of the
1950's. Most of these original plants have been abandoned for a variety of reasons
including odor complaints, lack of mechanical reliability, and unfavorable market
conditions. A good deal of experience has been gained in recent years from startup and
operation of a number of in-vessel systems for composting of wastewater treatment plant
sludge using, typically, sawdust as a bulking agent. A number of successful installations
were started up in the decade of the 1980's.
Advantages of in-vessel compost systems include:
. The system provides a combined disposal system for wastewater treatment
sludge and municipal solid waste.
. The system allows the decomposition of materials at a higher rate where
mixing, aeration, and moisture content can be strictly controlled.
2209.111-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA \SRRE.CV\A
5 - 18
/o../Y1J
."'!i';'.~~~ '
.',",,:;;.
. In-vessel systems require less land and are not generally affected by
weather conditions when compared to static-pile systems that are
uncovered and operated outdoors.
Disadvantages of in-vessel systems are:
. The system is more mechanically dependent and therefore more subject
to breakdowns.
. The system has not fully demonstrated the capability of handling the entire
organic fraction of the municipal solid wastestream.
.. Financial institutions have sometimes been reluctant to incur the risks
associated with the facilities due to operating problems and the lack of
stable markets.
. The end product from an in-vessel system is not always adequately
stabilized for horticultural purposes and must be cured.
5.3.4 PROGRAM SCALE
A fundamental factor in evaluation of alternative composting programs is the decision of
program scale. Programs could range in scale from small, locally operated yard waste
composting operations to large regional facilities handling a variety of feedstocks.
Considerations of scale can effect the desirability of a candidate program in several ways.
Scale impacts include transportation impacts, permitting issues, and cost. In general
smaller scale operations may have advantages of:
. Less transportation impact
. Greater community control and program involvement
Conversely, advantages of larger operations include:
. Lower unit cost
2209-111- TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VIST ^ \SRRE.CV\A
5 - 19
lo,/g-(
. Consolidation of permitting efforts
For this evaluation it is recommended that impact of scale be investigated by preparation
of alternatives for three different scales of operation:
. Local program
· Subregional program
. Countywide regional program
~. The local program option in Chula Vista will most likely be one or more yard
waste, windrow or static pile facility(s) operated by private fmn(s) under contract with
the city. The selected firm(s) would sell the compost to wholesalers and use the product
on city parks.
Subre~ional. The subregional alternative may be considered as an aerated static pile or
windrow yard waste facility or a yard waste I sludge in-vessel facility operated at current
county landfill sites. This may be considered as an extension of the county's current
"Clean Green" program from a mulching program to a full composting process. Another
option for a subregional program could include county supply of yard waste from
expanded "clean green" programs to another party who would operate a composting
process. Potential agents within the county include the private company Chino-Corona
Farms, the Metropolitan San Diego Clean Water Program, and the Prison Industry
Authority. Each of these agents has potential need for yard waste materials in the
quantities comparable to those of the projected subregional wastestream.
Reeional. The regional alternative may be considered as a sludge I yard waste in-vessel
facility sited to serve the entire county. The Clean Water Program of the city of San
Diego has announced preliminary plans for a sludge processing center to be located in
the south end of the county. One site which has been identified is at Southeast Otay
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRB.CV\A
5 - 20
II) ,Ii;.
Mesa, adjacent to a possible future county landfill site. The Clean Water Program, if
it composted all of the sludges generated in the metropolitan system, could potentially
use most of the yard waste now in the county.
5.3.5 MARKETING AND DISTRIBUTION
The most critical factor in success of a composting program may be the effectiveness of
the marketing program developed to distribute the resulting product to beneficial end
uses. Markets should be established prior to establishing any composting program. Lack
of markets for the finished product is one of the most frequently cited factors in failure
of composting programs in the past.
A preliminary market survey was conducted by CDM during June 1991 to determine the
current potential market demand and price for soil amendments in San Diego County.
Results are summarized in Table 5-1. Three compost retailers and eight compost
wholesale sellers of soil amendment products were contacted by phone. The survey
found the retail price of compost type soil amendments to be in the range of $25 to $35
per ton in bulk form and $60 to $70 per ton as a bagged product. None of the
wholesalers would cite a wholesale sales price. It may be assumed to be approximately
half of the retail price or in the neighborhood of $12 to $20 per ton in bulk form. When
asked the question explicitly, none of the retailers expressed an interest in yard waste or
sludge-based soil amendment material. Sludge-based products are widely marketed in
southern California, however. The Kellog Company processes and markets sludge
compost from the Los Angeles County Sanitation District's Carson treatment plant.
Kellog products are sold, in fact, by one of the retailers contacted in the survey.
The market survey was not extensive enough to identify firm total demand on a county-
wide basis. A survey completed in 1985, however, as a part of the North County
Sewage Slud!,te Mana!,tement Study by John S. Murk Engineers suggested a total market
demand in San Diego County (mostly in the agricultural industry) of 300,000 wet tons
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A
5 - 21
IO,li3
per year (at 60 percent solids concentration) in the year 2000 compared to an estimated
maximum total quantity of county-wide sludge/yard waste compost potential of
approximately 500,000 tons per year. A more recent study by Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.
Final Report - Preliminary Assessment of San Die~o County Compost Market completed
as a part of evaluations for the Clean Water Program identified a waste-based product
market of approximately 500,000 tons per year out of a total market of approximately
one million tons per year. It is seen that the projected market is of the same order of
magnitude as total county compost production potential.
For Chula. Vista, alternative marketing and distribution programs can be evaluated for:
. Local distribution to city parks, golf courses and other open space areas
. Bulk sales to wholesalers
. Turnkey contract for entire operation
The importance of market development on implementation of the compost program
cannot be over-emphasized. The target market and market location for the compost
product affects the overall success of the composting program. Required finish
processing will be dictated by end market specifications. Transportation impacts are
highly dependent on the eventual product market. Lastly, if the market demand is
inadequate, the fundamental goal of diversion of materials from county landfills may not
be met if landfills become the "market" of last resort.
5.3.6 SUMMARY EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
Alternatives discussed in this section cover the range of factors affecting successful
implementation of composting projects as a part of Chula Vista's goal to meet the
mandated targets for waste diversion of 25 percent in 1995 and 50 percent in the year
2000. Results of these evaluations are presented in a series of evaluation matrices in
each of the broad areas of evaluation in Tables 5-2 through 5-6. The matrix format uses
the criteria proposed in the CIWMB checklist to compare technologies and methods
2209-11t-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA \SRRE.CY\A
5 - 22
/t)..;!rf
TABLE 5-1
City of Chula Vista
SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY COMPOST MARKET SURVEY
INTERESTED IN1
QUANTITY PRICE YARD FOOD
CONTACT (tons/yr) ($/ton) PACKING WASTE W ASTI SLUDGE
Retailer # I N/R 31 Bulk No No No
Retailer #2 N/R 67 Bag No No No
Retailer #3 N/R 65 Bag No No No
Wholesaler #1 17,550 N/R Bulk Yes Yes No
Wholesaler #2 8,000 N/R Bulk Yes Yes Yes
Wholesaler #3 16,200 N/R Bulk No No No
Wholesaler #4 4,860 N/R Bulk No No No
Wholesaler #5 N/R N/R Bulk N/R N/R N/R
Wholesaler #6 N/R N/R Bulk No No No
Wholesaler #7 N/R N/R Bulk N/R N/R N/R
Wholesaler #8 N/R N/R Bulk N/R N/R N/R
Source: CDM telephone survey dated June, 1991.
N/R - No Response
.Contacts were asked if they would be interested in selling a compost product derived
from yard waste, food waste, or sludge materials.
2209-ll1-TC-CHVn9\CHlJLA VISTAISRRE.CV\A 5 - 23
10 -(6~
TABLE 5-2
City of Chula Vista
EVALUATION MATRIX - SEPARATION/COLLECTION
ALTERNATIVES
MIXED
SOURCE SOLID
CRITERIA SEPARATED COMMINGLED WASTE
Effectiveness most effective less effective less effective
Rating good fair fair
Hazard Created less susceptible more susceptible more
to hazard susceptible
Rating good fair fair
Flexibility more flexible less flexible more flexible
Rating. good fair good
Consequences on less contamination contamination
Waste contamination more likely most likely
Rating good fair fair
Short Term & requires less requires more requires more
Medium Term lead time lead time lead time
Implementation
fair
Rating good fair
New or Expanded no new requires new requires new
Facilities facilities MRF facilities
required
Rating good fair fair
SUMMARY good fair fair
RATING
2209-111- TC-CHVl\9\CHUl..A VISTA \SRRE.CV\A
5 - 24
!tJ.,!%h
-----------.-,.-------"------------ -- -.-
TABLE 5-3
City of Chula Vista
EVALUATION MATRIX - FEED STOCK ALTERNATIVES
GREEN I WOOD YARD I MIXED SOLID
CRITERIA WASTE SLUDGE WASTE
Effectiveness less effective very effective less effective
Rating . fair good fair
Hazard Created more fire hazard less fire hazard more hazard
Rating poor fair fair
Flexibility market more flexible market less market least
flexible flexible
Rating good fair poor
Consequences on lower metals content higher metals more
Waste content contaminated
Rating good fair poor
Short Term & may be easier to site use of sludge odors make it
Medium Term makes it difficult difficult to site
Implementation to site
Rating good fair fair
New or Expanded [no] new facilities new facilities new facilities
Facilities required required required
Rating good fair fair
SUMMARY
RATING good good fair to poor
2209-111- TC-CHVM\CHIlLA VISTA ISRRE.CV\A
5 - 25
/0 -/~1
TABLE 5-4
City of Chula Vista
EVALUATION MATRIX - COMPOSTING TECHNOLOGIES
CRITERIA WINDROW AERATED PILE IN-VESSEL
Effectiveness basic better highly effective
Rating fair fair good
Hazard Created minimal minimal more potential
Rating good good fair
Flexibility highly flexible moderate less flexibility
Rating good fair fair
Consequences on minimal minimal minimal
Waste
Rating fair fair fair
Short & Medium shorter lead time short lead time longer lead time
Term
Implementation
Rating good fair fair
new I expanded new I expanded new I expanded
New or Expanded facilities required facilities required facilities required
Facilities
Rating fair fair fair
Cost lowest cost intermediate highest
Rating
good fair fair
SUMMARY good good good
RATING
22Q9.-1I1-TC.cHVl\9\CHIJLA VlSTAISRRE.CVIA
5 - 26
I tJ ,/9'1
-'-"--~--'~~~
1'i"......_iH. .~,,~. _",
--
TABLE 5-S
City of Chula Vista
EVALUATIONMATRIX - ALTERNATIVE SCALFS
CRITERIA LOCAL SUB-REGIONAL REGIONAL
Effectiveness equal equal equal
Rating good good good
Hazard Created more dispersed more Concentrated most Concentrated
Rating good fair fair
Flexibility more flexible less flexible less flexible
Rating good fair fair
Consequences on minimal minimal minimal
Waste
Rating fair fair fair
Short- Medium-Term longer lead time - shorter lead time - longer lead time -
Implementation site required site at landfill site required, more
coordination
Rating fair fair
New or Expanded new facilities expand existing new program
Facilities program
Rating good good fair
Cost $30 - $90 per ton $20 - $40 per ton $12 - $25 per ton
SUMMARY
RATING good good fair
2209-1 1 I-TC-cHVI\9\CHUl..A VISTA\SRRE.CV\A
5 - 27
I 0 ~ iRe;
TABLE S-6
City of Chula Vista
EVALUATION MATRIX - MARKETING ALTERNATIVES
CRITERIA . LOCAL BULK SALFS TURNKEY
Effectiveness equal equal equal
Rating good good good
Hazard Created minimal minimal mess control
Rating good good fair
Flexibility most flexible less flexible if long long term contract
term contracts used required
Rating good fair fair
Consequences on minimal minimal minimal
Waste
Rating good good good
Short & Medium shorter lead time can be implemented longer negotiation
Term Implementation in reasonable time may be required
Rating good good fair
New or Expanded new Facilities no New Facilities existing facilities in
Facilities Thermal, CA
Rating fair fair fair
SUMMARY
RATING fair good good
2209-II\-TC-CHVI\9ICHULA VlSTAISRRB.CVIA 5 - 28
/0 -tcrt)
available for implementation of a composting program. The criteria for effectiveness,
hazard created and flexibility should be given more consideration in the evaluation than
the remaining criteria, since these factors significantly impact successful implementation.
The criteria of cost is obviously of considerable importance.
To evaluate projects with alternative feedstocks and scale a compost system design was
prepared. The prototype designs identify requirements for compost reactor (or pile) size,
aeration, and moisture addition/removal. Based on the required system size and material
flows a preliminary unit cost range was prepared as shown in the evaluation matrix.
Chula Vista will decide whether to contract with a private sector firm to collect source-
separated residential yard and wood waste and to compost the waste and sell it to direct
markets or wholesalers. The city is open to the various technologies listed in Table 5-4.
Selection of a specific alternative will depend on the preferences of the contracted
composting company, the location and size of the composting facility, cost and other
considerations. In addition to establishing its own local program, Chula Vista will
consider participation in sub-regional and regional programs as they are presented. A
turnkey marketing approach follows logically from Chula Vista's choice to contract out
the composting service.
Chula Vista's decision is based primarily on its historical approach to waste management.
The city has never owned or operated waste management facilities and has never directly
provided waste collection or processing services.
5.4 SELECTION OF PROGRAM
Selection of a composting program for Chula Vista has been based upon the objectives
set forth in Section 5.1, consideration of the existing conditions in Chula Vista and need
to maintain program flexibility. The key to program flexibility for the short and medium
range planning periods is to focus on the 50 percent diversion goal. The overall program
2209-111-TC.cHVI\9\CHUlA V1STAISRRE.CVIA
5 - 29
(o-/9r
is designed to achieve the 50 percent goal at full implementation, and will achieve the
25 percent goal at partial implementation. Chula Vista has selected a program that is
multifaceted.
Chula Vista has selected the separation of yard waste ("greens") for mulching,
composting and or/as a biofuel, as a simple and cost-effective method for reducing a
significant portion of the municipal solid wastestream. Yard waste comprises about 20
percent of Chula Vista's wastestream.
As requir~ under the county mandatory recycling ordinance, greens collection for
single-family and multi-family dwellings must begin by January 1993. Collection must
be curbside (for single-family), but does not have to be once per week, as with
residential recycling. Thus, if the city concludes that curbside collection very other week
would meet the needs of the city, this is allowed.
The city will be developing its own mandatory recycling ordinance. Under both the
county and the city ordinance, disposal of yard waste in the landfill will not be permitted.
Residents must either eliminate their yard waste, use it to create their own mulch or
compost, or separate it from their solid waste for collection by the city.
Several options are available for program design. One of the most cost-effective
approaches is one in which residents place a special decal on a container (provided by
the resident) and place the container onto the sidewalk next to their recycling and refuse
containers. It is estimated that the costs associated with residential greens collection will
run between $1.50 to $4.00 per household.
City Council will decide on the type of separation/collection process by November, 1991.
If directed by the City Council, city staff will draft a Request for Proposals (RFP) in
order to contract for collection and processing of separated residential yard wastes. It
is anticipated that the RFP will be-distributed toward the end of spring, with a phased-in
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA \SRRE.CV\A
5 - 30
/0 -(9;;;.
,'"....'"_;~-i.,...;.."...
residential single-family greens recycling program to be completed by January 1993.
Under this program, residents may be given the option of choosing to compost their own
yard waste in their backyards, put yard waste out for curbside pickup, or haul the waste
to an approved composting facility. The city's yard waste collection/composting RFP
would also include the collection of greens from multi-family units, to be phased-in under
the county mandatory recycling ordinance mandated timeline.
As discussed in greater detail in Section 4.5.6, the County of San Diego is considering
cooperating with the Prison Industries Authority to provide a south bay regional materials
recovery f!lcility at the Donovan Correctional Facility. This plan involves using prison
labor to sort recyclable and organic materials, both mechanically and by hand, from the
mixed municipal solid wastestream. The organic' materials would be anaerobically
digested in conjunction with the sewage generated by the prison. This process would be
used to provide steam and electrical energy.
Enforcement of yard waste recycling under the county ordinance is to begin January 1,
1993. Through an aggressive public education program and ease of service (Le., weekly
or bi-weekly curbside collection), public opposition is expected to be minimal. It is
anticipated that residential greens recycling will divert at least eight percent of the city's
wastestream toward fulfillment of the short-term AB 939 goals.
The design and location of the mulching or composting program and the end use or
market for the mulch or compost, will be at least partially based on the outcome of the
RFP process. Each bidder will be required to outline a proposed program for the
manner of yard waste separation and collection, the location and type of processing for
the waste and the end use of the waste. Markets for the mulched or composted material
are still in their infancy, but are nonetheless growing. As consumer interest in
"organically" grown foods increases, reliance on natural compost instead of petroleum-
based synthetic fertilizers should rise. Additionally, the increased use of alternative,
2209-111- TC-CHVJ\9\CHULA VISTA \SRRE.CV\A
5 - 31
10-19..3
cleaner fuels, including "bio-mass" , will improve the market for yard and wood wastes.
The city will assist in developing these markets by promoting the use of the compost
and/or mulch by local golf courses, homeowners, associations, commercial/industrial
landscaped areas, etc. The city will also continue to use available compost/mulch at city
parks and other city landscaped areas.
The Eastlake pilot composting program will continue to provide composting for the
parks, golf courses and other open space areas in the development. If this program is
successful, it is hoped that it can be expanded in the future to handle residential yard
waste.
The Otay Ranch Planned Development in eastern Chula Vista is also tentatively planning
to set aside 40 acres for a composting facility to serve the 23,300 acre planning area.
This project is currently in the planning stages. It is located in San Diego county, but
could potentially annex to Chula Vista.
The city will be promoting residential backyard composting. The city considers such a
program to be a low-staff, no-cost approach toward waste reduction. It will also help
to promote "greens" recycling through "getting the word out" about yard waste recycling
in the city. Through fliers, residents will be informed about the benefits of backyard
composting and the availability of composting bins. Residents can then fill out a coupon
on the flier to order a composting bin from a local vendor. Composting bins can be sold
at cost to residents and come with an instruction guide. This will be a generic guide
available to all residents. Residents will also receive information about green waste
reduction measures such as mulching mowers and xeriscape landscaping.
City staff will work with community garden clubs, homeowner and renter associations
and other civic clubs to promote backyard composting and even community composting
at neighborhood gardens. Although voluntary, all backyard composting activity will
2209-111- TC-CHVn9\CIIULA VISTA ISRRE.CV\A
5 - 32
/O--/9tf
~
assist toward meeting the city's AB 939 diversion goals and help meet the county's
mandates. The city is planning to begin implementation of a pilot program in November
1991.
The city's recycling programs for industrial and commercial generators will also
incorporate mandatory mulching or composting of yard waste. Industrial generators will
be permitted to make their own arrangements for this service. The city has not yet
decided whether to allow commercial generators to make their own recycling/composting
arrangements or to contract the service out to one or more hauling companies.
The City of Chula Vista Public Works Department will continue to mulch the yard waste
from city parks and open space areas and to make this mulch available to the public free
of charge. The mulch is also used on the city parks and civic center grounds.
Based on the preliminary waste composition data, 17.4 percent of the total wastestream
from Chula Vista is yard waste and 9.7 percent is wood. Applying these percentages to
the 1990-1991 projected total waste tonnage (193.71 tons) yields about 33,714 tons per
year of yard waste, and 18,795 tons per year of wood available for processing.
The city's eight percent composting goal primarily applies to yard waste and would result
in diversion of 46 percent of the city's yard wastestream. Additional yard and wood
waste diversion would occur from the industrial and commercial recycling and
composting programs.
The city's medium-term goal is to divert 11 percent of its total wastestream (21,313
tons/year, 63 percent of the yard wastestream and 40 percent of the total yard/wood
wastestream) through composting.
2209-1I1-TC-CHVM\CHUl.A VlSTA\SRRE.CVIA
5 - 33
10 -/9~
- -. .__._---_._~-.-'-~--_.._~~_._._,-~-_._~-_.._-
5.5 IMPLEMENTATION
An implementation schedule must identify all activities which must be accomplished in
order to successfully implement the composting program. The schedule can help assure
that these decisions are well informed and made on a timely basis. The implementation
schedule must also provide project continuity as the personnel, laws and regulations, and
other factors change over time during program development.
The implementation schedule is an evolving document and must maintain flexibility.
Results of decisions made as part of early activities may significantly alter the program's
scope and direction as well as that of the solid waste management system. Following
each major decision to proceed with project elements, the implementation schedule
should be reviewed and revised as necessary. Phased implementation of Chula Vista's
composting program is planned.
The city's dewatered sewage sludge is already being composted by the San Diego county
Metropolitan Wastewater District. This composting takes place on Fiesta Island and is
beyond Chula Vista's control. The city's short-term composting program primarily
consists of mandatory separation and composting of yard waste and prohibition landfill
disposal of wood waste in compliance with the county mandatory recycling ordinance,
as well as implementation of backyard composting.
The city will promote the use of compost both by city parks and the private sector. Over
the medium-term, the Eastlake Composting project may be expanded and other large
planned developments may be required to operate their own composting facilities and use
the resulting compost. Markets for compost products will be expanded through an
extended public education and business outreach program. The city will also consider
participating in sub-regional and regional composting programs as they are presented.
2209.I1I.Tc.cHV1I9ICHULA VlSTAISRRE.CVIA
5 - 34
/0 ~/9h
Chula Vista's short-term and medium-term composting program schedules are provided
in Tables 5-7 and 5-8, respectively.
5.6 MONITORING AND EVALUATION.
Assessment and evaluation of the composting component requires the accurate and timely
collection of data from a variety of sources. Scale data from the proposed facilities will
provide a basis for evaluation since all quantities will be weighed. The ultimate measure
of program reduction will be reported as the total reduction in the overall wastestream
from the r~sult of composting activities.
The monitoring of the composting program will be closely linked to the recycling
program. The monitoring parameters for both the residential and commercial/industrial
composting programs will be similar to those discussed in the recycling component. The
combination of these two programs will determine the overall success of Chula Vista's
program.
The program will be administered and monitored by the Conservation Coordinator, who
is a member of the City Manager's staff. The progress of the program will be reported
to the City Manager and the City Council. Any major changes in the program based on
monitoring results, must be approved by the City Council.
2209-111-TC-CHVII9\CJIlJU VISTA \SRRE.CV\A
5 - 35
/0--/97
TABLE 5-7
CHULA VISTA
COMPO STING COMPONENT
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
ACTIVITY PROJECTED DATE
1. Continue composting of sewage sludge. Ongoing
2. Draft city Recycling/Composting Ordinance and November 1991
city Procurement Ordinance.
3. Backyard Composting Program
a. Implement pilot program. November 1991
b. Expand program. 1992 - 1995
4. Residential Yard Waste Collection/Composting
Program
a. RFP decision November 1991
b. Issue request for proposals. March 1992
c. Begin public education. November 1991
d. Begin greens collection. June 1992
e. Enforce mandatory yard waste separation. January 1993
5. Commercial/Industrial Composting
a. Continue business outreach program. Ongoing
b. Begin enforcement of mandatory October 1992
industrial recycling/composting.
c. Determine whether to issue an RFP for November 1991
commercial recyc1ing/composting.
d. Issue RFP April 1992
e. Begin enforcement of mandatory
commercial recycling/composting. July 1993
6. Eastlake Composting Facility Pilot Program Ongoing
7. Compost Marketing
a. Continue to use compost on city-owned Ongoing
parks, golf course and landscaped areas.
b. Assist composting contractors in
identifying end use markets in Chula Vista
and in pursuing those markets. 1992
2209-III-TC-CHVl\9\CHUI.A VISTA ISRRE.CVIA
5 - 36
(0 --/9;
TABLE 5-8
City of Chula Vista
COMPOSTING COMPONENT
MEDIUM-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Projected Date
l. Evaluate effectiveness of residential, industrial and January, 1995
commercial composting programs
June, 1995
2. Modify programs as needed to improve
effectiveness, including public information
materials/methods
1995 - 1999
3. Expand programs to include other organic wastes
(e.g., food waste) and other end uses (e.g., farm
uses)
1995 - 1999
4. Continue to expand end use markets for the
compost
1995 - 1999
5. Require large scale planned developments in the
city to provide internal yard waste
collection/composting and use own compost
Ongoing
6. Consider participation in sub-regional and regional
composting programs
Ongoing
7. Continue composting of sewage sludge
2209-111-TC-CHV1\9\CHlJL.\ VISTA\SRRE.CV\A
5 - 37
/~~(Cff
6.0 SPECIAL WASTE COMPONENT
6.1 OBJECTIV~
Special waste refers to any waste which has been classified as a special waste pursuant
to ,section 66744 of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations, or which has been
granted a variance for the purpose of storage, transportation, treatment, or disposal by
the State Department of Health Services pursuant to Section 66310 of Title 22 of the
California Code of Regulations. Special waste also includes any solid waste which is
specifically conditioned in a solid waste facilities permit for handling and or disposal,
because of its source of generation, physical, chemical, or biological characteristics or
unique disposal practices.
Examples of special wastes include, but are not limited to, the following:
. asbestos
. sewage sludge
. septic tank pumpings
. grease trap pumpings
. infectious waste
. incinerator ash
. auto bodies
. used tires
. street sweepings
. white goods/bulky items
. construction and demolition debris
White goods, bulky items and construction and demolition debris are also included as
recyclable materials under the county mandatory recycling ordinance. As such, these
materials are subject to the mandatory recycling deadlines imposed in the ordinance as
described in Section 4.0 of this document.
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 6 - 1
I () -.;w:zJ
6.1.1 SHORT- AND MEDIUM-TERM OBJECTIVES
The objectives of Chula Vista's special waste program are to ensure proper handling and
disposal (including adequate disposal capacity) and, where feasible, the special
wastestream will be minimized, reused or recycled. More specifically, the short-range
objective is to continue composting of sewage sludge, continue to sponsor citywide
garage sales and community cleanups in conjunction with bulky item collection, and to
comply with the county mandatory recycling ordinance regarding mandatory recycling
of white goods, bulky items and construction and demolition debris. The medium range
objective is to evaluate alternative reuse and recycling methods for used tires.
6.1.2 PRIORITY WASTE TYPES
The special waste types that are targeted for diversion during the short-term planning
period are sewage sludge (existing diversion), white goods/bulky-items and construction
debris. Used tires will be targeted for reuse and recycling alternatives during the
medium-term planning period.
6.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Each special waste type has different handling and disposal requirements and will
therefore be discussed separately.
6.2.1 ASBESTOS
Asbestos is a known carcinogen that primarily affects the respiratory tract. Proper
handling, storage, and disposal is important because of its hazardous nature. Asbestos
is typically found in ceiling tiles, floor tiles and wallboard. Asbestos is also used as
insulation on pipes, boilers and ducts. Asbestos wastes are generated during building
maintenance, repair, renovation and demolition operations, particularly for pre-1979
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTAISRRE.CVIA 6-2
/J2,.,,;U;/
~ .;:..__,.; "',J",
buildings. Asbestos requires special handling and must be transported in sealed non-
returnable containers or in closed vehicles.
Although asbestos is classified as hazardous in California, it can be disposed of in
landfills that are permitted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board to accept
asbestos wastes. The three landfills in southern California that can accept all asbestos
wastes are BKK (Class II) in West Covina; Chemical Management's Kettleman Hills
(Class I) in Kettleman City; and Casmalia Resources Inc. (Class I) in Santa Barbara.
6.2.2 SEWAGE SLUDGE
Sewage sludge is a waste product of wastewater treatment. It has the potential for
beneficial use as a soil conditioner, but requires digestion, stabilization, dewatering and
composting.
The solid material that is removed during the wastewater treatment process is pumped
to anaerobic digesters for reduction of organic substances. Following digestion, excess
water is removed, leaving a sludge cake. In general, secondary sewage treatment will
produce about 0.15 pounds of dry solids per person per day. Primary sewage treatment
will produce about 0.10 pounds of dry solids per person per day.
The San Diego County Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Facility (Metro), located at
Point Lorna, provides wastewater interception and primary treatment services to Chula
Vista and fourteen participating agencies in the greater San Diego region. Chula Vista's
residences, businesses and public facilities, discharge their wastewater to the Metro
facility. Digested sludge from the treatment facility is air-dried at Fiesta Island in
Mission Bay for periods up to one year. Dried sludge is shipped at a solids contents of
sixty percent or more to a private contractor, Corona-Chino Farms. A quantity of 40-
45,000 dry tons per year (110 dtpd) are currently being composted by Corona-Chino
Farms at its 200 acre site in Thermal, California. CDM estimates that Chula Vista is
2209-111-TC-CHVII9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CVIA 6-3
I't) , ~ ;;....
generating approximately 33 tons per day of sewage sludge. Metro pays $22 per ton to
Corona-Chino Farms for sludge transport.
Corona-Chino Farms composts this material and sludge from other municipalities (soon
to include the city of Los Angeles) using green and brown wastes obtained from local
sources in the Palm Springs vicinity as bulking agent. All of the approximately 2000
tons per day of product processed by the Corona-Chino Farms operation is sold either
in bulk or bagged form. Corona-Chino Farms owns a l20-acre site in San Diego County
which potentially could be used for composting of sludges and yard wastes currently
generated ~n the county.
The Metro system will undergo a major upgrade of facilities in the next 10 years which
will provide for secondary treatment at Point Lorna and south bay sites and advanced
secondary treatment for water reclamation at as many as seven (7) new treatment plants.
Two additional sludge disposal facilities are planned, a northern sludge processing facility
for sludges from the north county reclamation plants and a southern sludge processing
Facility for the remainder. Two southern sludge disposal sites are identified: one being
located at the southeast Otay Mesa, adjacent to a planned future county landfill site.
Ultimate disposal options for Metro sludges are landfilling, composting and agricultural
applications.
Landfill disposal of sewage sludge is both difficult and expensive because of the
minimum required 50 percent solids content. As a result, CIWMB considers landfill
disposal of sludge to be a "last resort" alternative. Emphasis is given to those
alternatives that promote beneficial reuse of sludge and sludge products such as
composting and land application.
2209.1I1.TC.CHVMICHULA VISTAISRRE.CVIA 6-4
/L;"dO"g
,~"..,) +"',.I!':~, ~. ,---
6.2.3 SEPTIC TANK PUMPINGS
All residents within the City of Chula Vista are connected to the city sewer system.
Therefore, Chula Vista does not generate this particular type of special waste.
6.2.4 GREASE TRAP PUMPINGS
A grease interceptor is an underground tank used to capture grease, oil, and other
floatable material that is disposed of by restaurants and businesses. If not removed from
the wastewater stream, these materials can clog sewer lines and interfere with treatment
plant operations. There are several private hauling companies and recycling firms in the
San Diego area which will pump grease traps and accept waste fat and bones as well.
Grease and related wastes such as animal fats can be used to make animal feed, soaps,
cosmetics, and other products. Some haulers/recyclers supply rendering plants with the
grease they collect; others have to dispose of the waste material. None of the landfills
in the county accept liquid waste from grease traps. Through Chula Vista's proposed
industrial outreach and waste exchange programs, the city will attempt to determine the
amount of grease trappings currently being diverted and to increase this amount.
6.2.5 INFECTIOUS WASTE
At the present time, there are three surgical hospitals within the City of Chula Vista.
These are the Community Hospital of Chula Vista, Scripps Memorial Hospital of Chula
Vista, and the south bay Ambulatory Surgery Center. Additional infectious waste is
being generated by outpatient surgeries and treatments performed in doctors' offices
throughout the city.
Infectious waste material is kept separate from the general wastestream at all times. All
infectious material is deposited in red plastic containers and kept in a secured area until
it is collected by a licensed hauler. The pathological and anatomical portion of the waste
2209-111. TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA \SRRE.CV\A 6-5
lo--~~1
requires incineration. The remaining material can be disposed in any landfill, provided
the waste is decontaminated, an appointment is made for disposal and a manifest is
provided.
The city is currently targeting hospitals for source reduction programs (e.g. increased
sterilization and reuse where possible, as opposed to use of disposable items.)
6.2.6 INCINERATOR ASH
At the present time there are no large incineration facilities in the City of Chula Vista,
and therefore there is no generation or disposal of incinerator ash.
6.2.7 AUTO BODIES
Auto bodies are not landfilled because of the high demand for automobile parts and
ferrous scrap. As a result, all waste automobile parts and bodies are recycled. There
are over 15 automobile wrecking and dismantling companies within the city limits, many
of which store and market automobile parts. Many more such companies are located in
San Ysidro to the south of Chula Vista. When vehicles are stripped of all usable parts,
the remainder is sent for reprocessing. Most used auto parts dealers are linked together
by computers which aids in part selection.
6.2.8 USED TIRES
Another aspect of special waste handling includes the disposal of tires. Herzog
Contracting Corporation operates Otay Landfill, the facility disposing of solid waste
being generated by Chula Vista. The facility has identified a special area within the
landfill site for the deposition of tires.
2209-11l-TC-CHVn9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CVIA 6-6
lIP ..~t)S-
'.
Although used tires may be disposed in any landfill in the county, landfilling of tires is
disruptive to the landfilling operation for a variety of reasons. The tires are an excellent
breeding ground for insects and vermin. In addition, the tires do not compact well and
have a tendency to migrate to the surface, where they may impact public health and are
aesthetically unpleasing. To minimize these problems, Herzog utilizes a tire shredder
that reduces the tires to smaller chips that can easily be landfilled or recycled.
Chula Vista is targeting the industrial and commercial sector for increased use of
retreaded tires.
6.2.9 STREET SWEEPINGS
Street sweeping services in Chula Vista are contracted out separately from the city's solid
waste collection services. This includes the collecting of miscellaneous dirt and debris
that have accumulated in the city streets. The exact quantities of these street sweepings
are not recorded.
6.2.10 WHITE GOODS/BULKY ITEMS
White goods include items such as refrigerators, air conditioners, washers, dryers and
other bulky appliances. Landfilling and/or shredding of these items could pose a health
hazard. Refrigerators and air conditioners contain chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) which
deplete ozone in the stratosphere. Electrical appliances manufactured before 1979
contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which are known to cause skin disease in
humans and are suspected of causing birth defects and cancer in animals. Both CFCs
and PCBs can be released into the landfill when the appliance is crushed. These
hazardous materials must be removed prior to any land filling or shredding.
White goods are designated by the county mandatory recycling ordinance as a recyclable
material from both the residential and commercial sectors, subject to the mandatory
2209-lll-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 6-7
/0 -0200,
recycling deadline for each of these sectors. They are currently separated from the
wastestream as they enter the landfill. San Marcos, Otay and Sycamore Landfills deliver
white goods to buy back collection containers for collection events and will make
personnel and equipment available for pickup of specific bulky items upon receiving a
request from a citizen.
The time allocated for pickup of bulky items also allows the city an opportunity to
implement their annual quarterly clean-ups in targeted neighborhoods and annual citywide
garage sales. This event allows the citizens to recycle or dispose of items at their
residences. and properties and contribute to the "clean-up" of their community on a
citywide level. Many bulky items, if they are in reasonably good condition, can be
"recycled" (i.e., sold or donated for reuse). The City of Chula Vista sponsored a
citywide garage sale in conjunction with a bulky item collection day in August. The
program was very successful. Over 500 families participated and many bulky items and
other household items that would have gone to the landfill were diverted to the resale
market.
In addition to the city-sponsored garage sale, many individuals hold private garage sales
at their homes. There are also several nonprofit organizations, including the Salvation
Army and American Veterans, who will pickup bulky items and provide them to needy
people for reuse. Finally, there are several businesses in the San Diego south bay region
which collect, repair and sell used furniture and appliances.
Other bulky items, such as furniture and white goods, also present waste collection and
disposal problems due to their size. Chula Vista has identified specific Saturdays in July
and August for the collection of these large bulky items.
2209-IIl-TC-CHYM\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CVIA 6-8
/a -ell;7
":;r,j
6.2.11 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLmON DEBRIS
Include.d in this category are materials resulting from demolition, construction, repair and
rehabilitation of buildings and pavements. Typical materials include concrete, asphalt,
rock, sand, brick, masonry, wood, metal, roofmg, drywall and miscellaneous materials.
Most construction and demolition materials are included in the miscellaneous materials
category of the waste composition analysis. This section will focus on those materials
most easily diverted; i.e. asphalt and concrete.
Asphalt wilstes result from pavement demolition. Existing pavement is removed for
pothole repair, underground utility work, road realignment, street or parking lot
abandonment, etc. Concrete wastes result from demolition of building foundations,
sidewalks, pavements, vaults, etc.
All county landfills will accept construction and demolition debris. Since tipping fees
are based on weight, most haulers will take this waste to private recyclers at a cheaper
rate. There are twelve (12) demolition and construction recyclers in the county. They
take clean loads of concrete, asphalt, rock and dirt. A few will accept mixed loads of
concrete with rebar, wire and pipe, at a higher fee. A load of debris taken to a landfill
may cost $300, whereas a private recycler will charge between $55 and $100 for the
same load. As tipping fees increase, there will be more incentive for contractors to
source separate and haul clean loads to private recyclers.
The City of Chula Vista Public Works Department began recycling asphalt in 1991. The
city also uses recycled asphalt on all of its new streets.
6.3 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
Only those special waste types with feasible diversion alternatives are discussed below.
All asbestos wastes generated will continue to be disposed of in properly permitted
2209-111-TC-CHV1\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 6-9
/'0 -~ CJ?
facilities. All infectious hospital waste will continue to be handled by commercial
haulers and disposed in a safe manner, although the city will target hospitals for
reduction of use of disposable items. In addition, materials such as grease trap wastes
and auto bodies, that are currently being recycled, will not be evaluated. Also, street
sweepings should continue to be landfilled because they are not suitable for composting
due to contamination by fuel, engine oil, road oil, asbestos and lead.
6.3.1 SEWAGE SLUDGE
Sewage sh,ldge can be composted, directly applied as a soil amendment, incinerated to
recover energy, or used as daily landfill cover.
There are several other composting facilities proposed for the region, but no decisions
have been made regarding location or capacity. These decisions should be made by all
adjoining jurisdictions, as any facility will most likely serve a number of nearby cities.
As mentioned previously, sewage sludge generated by Chula Vista is already being
composted.
As noted previously, there are a variety of diversion alternatives available for sewage
sludge. However, because the San Diego County Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment
Facility is responsible for the disposal of Chula Vista's sludge, the city may be limited
in its options. Sewage sludge can be composted, directly applied as a soil amendment,
incinerated to recover energy, or following chemical fixation, can be used as daily
landfill cover.
As note previously, Corona-Chino Farms composts sludge with a solids content of 60
percent at its Thermal, California facility.
2209-IIl-TC-CHVn9\CHIJLA V!ST A \SRRE.CVIA 6- I 0
/ 0 ~d...t) 9
'>r""
6.3.2 USED TIRES
Landfilling large quantities of used tires creates breeding grounds for organisms that
transmit pathogens such as insects and vermin, and reduces the quantity available for
recycling and reuse options. Because tires do not compact well and tend to migrate to
the surface of the landfill, they are shredded at an additional cost.
Alternatives available for used tire diversion include incinerating, retreading and crumb
rubber uses. Due to the air quality problems in the region, tire incineration is presently
not considc::red a viable alternative. Tire retreading is primarily done on large tires for
buses, trucks, airplanes, etc. The City of Chula Vista is targeting the industrial and
commercial sectors for increased use of retreaded tires. Currently, passenger car
retreads cannot compete with new imported tire market prices.
Crumb rubber is produced by breaking tires into small particles by mechanical or
cryogenic means. It can be used in asphalt, carpet backing, door mats and other rubber
products. It can also be used as an additive to asphalt for high traffic surfaces, for
recreational surfaces and feedlot surfaces.
None of the previously mentioned alternatives are very effective at diverting significant
quantities of used tires away from landfill disposal and can, in fact, create additional
health hazards. From a regional perspective, influence on the wastestream will not be
significant because diverted quantities will probably be very small. It may be possible
to implement tire shredding and crumb rubber use during the short-term planning period,
and may require new or expanded facilities.
Used tire diversion is consistent with local conditions, but may have institutional barriers
to implementation. Depending on the chosen alternative, costs may be significant. The
major drawback to tire recycling or reuse is the lack of end uses of the diverted
materials.
2209-111- TC-CHVn9\CHULA VISTA \SRRE.CVIA 6-11
/L>,.d./O
6.3.3 WHITE GOODS/BULKY ITEMS
The City of Chula Vista will continue to sponsor quarterly community clean-ups and
annual citywide garage sales. The city will also include information about options for
the sale or donation of used items as part of its public education program. White goods
will be targeted during implementation of the city's mandatory recycling ordinance (see
Section 4.0 for more details on mandatory recycling).
6.3.4 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLffiON DEBRIS
Under the county mandatory recycling ordinance, dirt, asphalt, land clearing brush,
concrete, sand and rock are targeted industrial recyclables and cannot be disposed in
county landfills as of October 1992.
The major methods of asphalt recycling are cold or hot recycling. Cold recycling
methods involve grinding or breaking up the used asphalt, adding a softening agent,
placing the mixture on the road and compacting. Another cold recycling method, which
results in a higher quality product, involves taking the used asphalt to a plant, mixing
with new aggregate and adding the asphalt binder. Hot recycling involves taking the
used asphalt to a hot-mix plant, heating it and adding a binder or softening agent. As
mentioned previously, the city Public Works Department is recycling its asphalt from
street demolition and maintenance work.
Concrete recovered from construction and demolition activities can be recycled. The
concrete is broken up, any reinforcing steel is removed, and the concrete is crushed and
stockpiled. The material can be used as aggregate in new concrete or used as subgrade
material. Sand, rock and dirt can also be used in this way. In addition, recovered steel
can be sold as scrap metal along with other metallic debris from demolition" activities.
Land clearing brush can be included in the composting programs discussed in Section
5.0.
2209-111- TC-CHV1\9\CHULA VISTA ISRRE.CVIA 6-12
(~ ~d-fI
"
There will be more economic incentives to take clean construction and demolition
material to private recyclers as landfill tipping (disposal) fees increase. Haulers are
given a flyer at the fee booth listing private recyclers and comparing the disposal fees.
6.4 PROGRAM SELECTION
The selection of a special waste program has been based upon the objectives set forth in
Section 6.1; consideration of the existing conditions in the City of Chula Vista; and the
need to maintain program flexibility. The short-term programs will include the
implementation of the mandatory recycling programs described in Section 4.0, including
mandatory recycling of white goods and certain construction and demolition materials.
The city will continue recycling of its asphalt debris and use of recycled asphalt in the
construction of new city streets. The city will also continue to focus on the reuse of
bulky items and white goods as a diversion tactic. Potential local markets for used tires,
retreaded tires, crumb rubber, demolition waste and grease trap pumpings will be
investigated as part of the city's business outreach, business recycling data base and
waste exchange programs. In addition, the city is reviewing its solid waste ordinances
and reporting requirements. Reporting ~f special waste disposal and diversion has been
established as a requirement of future business license renewals. The city is interested
in attracting more construction/demolition materials recyclers to the south bay.
For the medium-term program, other special waste programs and private sector reporting
systems will be evaluated and program changes will be implemented, if necessary.
Additional alternatives for used tire diversion will be evaluated from a local and a
regional perspective. Economic incentives (or penalties) can be implemented at a state
level to encourage recycling of tires.
2209-III-TC-CHVI\9ICHUU VISTAISRRE.CVIA 6-13
(0 "dlOL
6.5 PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
An implementation program identifies activities which must be accomplished in order to
successfully implement the special waste recycling program. The implementation plan
must remain flexible in order to account for changes in personnel, laws and regulations,
and other program changes. Table 6-1 outlines the short-term and medium-term program
tasks and decision points. Following each major decision to proceed with project
elements, the implementation should be reviewed and revised as necessary.
6.6 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
The assessment and evaluation of the special waste component will require the accurate
and timely collection of data from a variety of sources. Since more than one landfill is
being used and more than one city uses each landfill, the amounts of special waste
disposed from each city is difficult to track. Commercial/industrial audits will also be
necessary. The ultimate measure of program reduction will be reported as the total
reduction in the overall wastestream from the result of composting ya,rd waste, diverting
tires and grease trappings via the waste exchange program, and materials diverted via
citywide garage sales.
The monitoring of the special waste program will be closely linked to the source
reduction, recycling and composting programs. As with these programs, business data
on special waste generation, disposal and diversion will be requested in conjunction with
annual business license renewal applications. The monitoring parameters for both the
residential and commercial/industrial programs will be similar to those discussed in the
recycling component. The city is developing a business recycling data base which will
address special waste as well as other recyclables.
2209-11l-TC-CHVI\9ICHUl.A V!ST A ISRRE.CVIA 6-14
!o't2J3
'.
TABLE 6-1
City of Cbula Vista
Special Waste Component
Implementation Schedule
Activity
Short- Tenn Task
1. Enforce county mandatory recycling ordinance
(includes some special wastes)
a. Single family residential
b. Industrial
c. Multi-family residentiaUcommercial
2. Contir)ue private sector reporting requirements for
special wastes
3. Continue to sponsor annual citywide garage sales and
quarterly community clean-ups
4. Investigate second use markets for used tires,
demolition waste, rubber and grease trap pumpings as
part of the city's business outreach and waste
exchange program
5. Continue to recycle asphalt from city street
demolition/maintenance
6. Encourage the siting of additional construction
demolition recyclers in the city
Medium-Term Task
1. Evaluate special waste diversion progress
2. Evaluate private sector reporting methods
3. Consider a co-composting program (yard waste and
sewage sludge)
4. Evaluate business outreach and waste exchange
programs
2209-1 1 I.TC.CHVI\9\CHULA VlSTA\SRRE.CV\A
6-15
/0 -C)/t(
Projected Date
March 1992
October 1992
July 1993
Ongoing
Ongoing
April 1992
Ongoing
January 1994
January 1995
January 1995
January 1995
January 1995
the city offers seniors and low income families a 30 percent reduction in the recycling
service fee.
On August 17, 1991, Chula Vista sponsored a citywide garage sale. Residents were
encouraged to simultaneously sell their unwanted items in their own garage or yard. The
city provided garage sale signs an publicity. Flyers were mailed to all households in the
city. Approximately 500 families signed up to participate. The city advertised all of the
garage sale locations and made lists of the locations available to the public. The event
was planned to correspond with Chula Vista's annual cleanup days when residents are
encourag~ to dispose of unwanted bulky items in several public recycling bin locations
established for that purpose. The city also sponsors quarterly community clean-ups in
targeted neighborhoods.
Chula Vista has developed, or obtained from the county, Laidlaw or city of San Diego,
informational fliers which are provided to residents and businesses, including a
Mandatory Recycling Ordinance Fact Sheet, a listing of recycling companies in San
Diego County, interesting recycling trivia, the San Diego Recycling Guide, source
reduction tips, and greens disposal options. The city Conservation Coordinator has been
interviewed for articles in the local newspaper and provides the newspaper with press
releases when new programs or events are taking place. The city also publishes a
quarterly newsletter which features articles about the recycling program periodically.
The Conservation Coordinator also gives presentations about recycling, composting,
source reduction and the city's programs to school classes, citizen groups, civic
organizations and business organizations. The city has recently expanded local
neighborhood watch groups into "Community Volunteer Infrastructure Groups." As
described in Section 2.3.4, these groups now act to disseminate information and provide
assistance with various civic activities, including source reduction, composting and
recycling.
2209-lll-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 7 - 3
,.....--
/()~~/~
While the city was developing its civic center office recycling program, city employees
were asked to participate in designing the city's recycling logo and completing a
questionnaire regarding the direction that they would like to see Chula Vista's recycling
and source reduction programs take. The office recycling program was initiated on July
17,1991, with an afternoon reception in the city's courtyard, including presentations by
the Mayor and City Manager and Conservation Coordinator. Brief training sessions were
held over the following week with over 300 employees (divided into small groups) to
teach them about the program and provide them with Employee Recycling Handbooks,
which were prepared by the city.
As the city is beginning its business outreach and backyard composting program, fliers
are being prepared and the city's Conservation Coordinator is establishing contact with
the chamber of commerce and other community and business organizations and leaders.
Samples of the informational and promotional materials that are being used by Chula
Vista are provided in the Appendices of this document.
In addition to the city's public information programs, Chula Vista residents benefit from
regional public education and information programs. These include the I Love a Clean
San Diego hot line which residents may call with questions about recycling, source
reduction and composting. This non-profit group has also developed a school curriculum
addressing environmental issues such as recycling and has sent this curriculum to every
school in San Diego County.
Representatives of the County of San Diego, the counties consulted and the cities in the
county participate in a technical advisory committee (TAC) addressing and evaluating
regional solid waste issues. The committee meets twice a month.
2209-1l1-TC-cHV1I9ICIIULA VISTAISRRE.CVIA 7 - 4
1e1 ;02/ (p
7.3 SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES
There are many ways to increase public awareness of and participation in recycling,
source reduction, and composting projects. The best strategy is a comprehensive mix of
activities including:
. Public education
. Promotions and events
. Publicity and reminders
To accomplish the 25 percent and 50 percent reduction goals set forth in AB 939, it is
essential for the city to adopt an innovative business/community outreach and public
education program. Effectiveness is demonstrated by increased recycling through the
residential curbside program and through the multi-family commercial, industrial and
yard waste recycling and composing programs.
Selection of specific activities should be based on the current levels of public
understanding and participation, the socioeconomic characteristics of Chula Vista, and
the characteristics of the local wastestream. For example, a community with significant
representation of ethnic minorities or senior citizens would warrant appropriate targeted
programs; a community that generates substantial "green waste" would warrant a
program reflecting that characteristic.
The following is a comprehensive list of public information/education activities available
to the city. Many of these activities are already ongoing.
2209-111-TC-CHVn9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 7 - 5
rtJ ";;)./7
Public Education
. Direct mailing of brochures and newsletters to city residents and businesses.
. Canvassing door-to-door with leaflets
. Targeted brochures to households whose first language is not English.
. Public service announcements on local television and radio stations.
. Community leader presentations at civic, neighborhood, social service and
business organization meetings.
. Information booths at shopping malls and community centers.
. Recycling classes and field trips as part of school curriculum for grades one
through 12 (currently recommended to all school districts by I Love A San
Diego).
. Speaker's bureau of experts, public officials, and other informed persons that
would be available to make presentations on recycling.
Promotions and Events
. Promote a recycling day or recycling week.
. Sponsor recycling contests among schools, youth groups, civic groups or
neighborhoods.
. Recycling awards to individuals, neighborhoods, businesses and community
organizations.
. Encourage Christmas tree recycling or use of live trees.
. Hold specific material recycling drives and citywide garage sales.
. Continue to run block captain program.
. Obtain celebrity representative.
2209-11I-TC-CHVI19\CHULA VISTAISRRE.CVIA 7 - 6
/0 ~d!f
. Continue to offer a reduced recycling service fee to senior citizens and low
income households.
Publicity and Reminders
. Advertisements in newspapers, on billboards and buses, in grocery stores and
community centers.
. Canvassing in stores and at residences door-to-door.
. Press releases and interviews for articles in local newspapers and magazines and
local news television broadcasts.
. Posters, bumper stickers.
. Caps, buttons, t-shirts.
. Messages on shopping bags.
. Point-of-purchase signage.
. Notices on utility bills.
. Telephone surveys.
. Radio and television public service announcements shared among neighboring
cities.
. Participate in local TV and radio talk shows.
At a minimum, the following topics related to education and public information will be
part of any comprehensive program for recycling and other solid waste management
improvements.
. Discussion to proceed with expansion of existing source separation/recycling
programs.
. Organization of a network of community leaders.
. Program concepts and manner of implementation.
. Community contributions to existing and planned future pilot programs.
2209-11t-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 7 - 7
/ tJ ~C).I1'
. Community activities to support recycling programs.
. Community recycling drives.
. Kick-off of each element of any newly-developed pilot program.
Continuing multi-faceted public information programs are required to maintain high
levels of material recovery and participation for the duration of the recycling program.
The public education budget should be a substantial part of the total annual operating
budget for the recycling program.
7.4 PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation of the public education/information program should begin within the first
month of each recycling program phase or approach. The County of San Diego is
expected to develop and implement a public education/information program to support
each phase of implementation of the county mandatory recycling ordinance. In addition,
it is recommended that the city begin each phase of its recycling program by sending
informational and promotional materials to the targeted recyclers. The city could also
sponsor a "kick-off' community recycling drive with exhibits that demonstrate the
benefits of recycling, and which informs the public about the logistics of the program.
It is also recommended that one month after the program begins, the city hold public
meetings in each quadrant of the city during which residents can offer comments and
suggestions about the program. The city should follow up with mailings about the
success rate of each program and clarifying misconceptions, making necessary changes,
etc.
An implementation schedule must identify all activities to be accomplished in order to
successfully inaugurate the recycling program. The schedule can help assure that these
decisions are well informed and made on a timely basis. The implementation schedule
must also provide project continuity as the personnel, laws and regulations, and other
2209.111.TC.CHV~9ICHUl.A VISTAISRRE.CVIA 7 - 8
It> "~,,,O
factors change over time during program development. Table 7-1 and Table 7-2 outline
the proposed schedule for short-term and medium-term implementation.
The implementation schedule is a flexible, evolutionary document. The results of
decisions made as part of early activities can alter the program's scope and direction as
well as that of the solid waste management system's significance. Following each major
decision to proceed with project elements, the implementation schedule should be
reviewed and revised as necessary.
7.5 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
In order to evaluate the effectiveness of a public education program, it is essential to
gather and evaluate a variety of operational data. Some of the data used to evaluate the
recycling program can also be used to evaluate the education and public information
activities. The most obvious indicators of program effectiveness include:
. Public awareness
. Participation rates
. Material capture rates
. Buyback center receipts and expenditures
Public awareness can be determined through a variety of survey techniques. Service
requests are one indicator. Also polling, using a combination of telephone and direct
mail questionnaires and interviews should be included. These will give an indication of
the number of people who are aware of the program and how many actually participate.
In addition, it can demonstrate which information and education activities are the most
effective. Knowledge of localized participation rates can suggest where additional
outreach programs and motivational resources are required. Low participation rates may
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 7 - 9
/0 ..;);J/
Table 7-1
City of Cbula Visla
EDUCATION AND PUBLIC INFORMATION
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Projeded Date
1. Mandatorv Recvcline: Pro2l1lm-Soecific Activities
Promote Backyard Composling November 1991
Follow-up Public lofonnation and Workshops December 1991
Promote Yard Waste Collection Program November 1992
Follow-up Public InConnation and Workshops February 1993
Promote Commercial Recycling Ongoing
Promote Multi-Family Recycling May 1993
Follow-up Public Infonnation and Workshops (Commercial and Multi- August 1993
Camily)
Promote Industrial Recycling Ongoing
Follow-up Public InConnation and Workshops November 1992
2. General Public Education
Newsletters and Direct Mailing Ongoing
Public Service Announcements Ongoing
Promote School Curriculum Changes Ongoing
Community Speaking Engagements Ongoing
Develop Non-English Materials and Announcements March 1992
2. Promotions and Events
Continue Special Rates for Seniors and Low Income Households Ongoing
Recycling Events Yearly
Citywide Garage Sale August
Christmas Tree Recycling Program January
Competitions and Awards Yearly
3. General Publicitv and Reminders
Develop and Conduct Community Survey 1992, 1994
News Releases Ongoing
Radio, TV, Newspaper and Magazine Interview and Ads Ongoing
2209.))) - TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA \SRRE.CV\A
7 - 10
/
I~ ,~~
,
_."...;,.j;"q.,",'..........._.."
Table 7-2
City or Chula Visla
EDUCATION AND PUBLIC INFORMATION COMPONENT
MEDIUM-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Projected Dale
1. Public Education
Evaluate and update material for public distribution Ongoing
Medium-term program kick-off and existing program effectiveness update
August, 1995
2. Promotions and Events
Evaluate and update yearly promotion events Yearly
Target-group programs Ongoing
3. Publicitv and Reminders
Recirculate comm1mity surveys 1996, 1998
Radio and television public service announcements and features
Ongoing
Evaluate staffrng requirements
May, 1995
2209-1 1 I-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A
7 - 11
I!)-d.~
be the result of unclear promotional material or even foreign language barriers. Another
possible reason for low participation in curbside programs is that some residents prefer
to sell or donate their recyclable materials.
The procedures for determining the effectiveness of specific recycling programs, through
the collection and evaluation of operational data, are discussed in Section 4.6. Material
capture rates are an even better indication of the effectiveness of a public education
program than are participation rates. Material capture rates indicate the percentage of
available material that is actually separated from the wastestream and placed at the curb.
Very often recycling households do not place all of their designated recyclable materials
in collection containers. This may be as a result of ignorance (i.e. not knowing that a
certain material is recyclable) or laziness (i.e. not making the effort to separate the
material). In either case, increasing the capture rate is an important goal of any public
education program.
On-going education and public information programs can be evaluated using localized
participation and capture rates and modified accordingly. The success of the overall
program is dependent and measurable through surveys of community attitudes towards
new or expanded SRRE programs. As the overall program is implemented, continued
attention to the project is essential. Consistent public information programs lead to a
sense of community involvement and pride. As with any activity, a person's level of
involvement in, and commitment towards, achieving a goal will result in a high degree
of self-esteem, both for the individual and the community. The success and pride that
the community experiences in attaining this initial goal can only lend itself towards
realizing higher levels of achievement as the education and public information program
moves forward, focusing on future goals.
2209.11I~TC.CHVI\9\CHill..A VISTA\SRRE.CV\A
7 - 12
I t) "d~ tf
7.6 PROJECTED COST OF PUBLIC INFORMATION PROGRAM ACTIVmES
As noted throughout this section, one of the critical aspects of implementing a SRRE
program and a factor that greatly hinges on the degree of success of such a program is
the commitment made by the city towards developing, projecting, and maintaining public
information and education. To ensure that the entire community participates in the
source reduction and recycling programs developed by the city, each citizen within the
community must be made aware of the project.
To prepar~ for such a strong public relations effort, the city needs to realize the costs
involved in implementing such a program. There are a variety of means by which to
project these public information and education messages and the costs incurred are
relative to the medium chosen to launch and sustain the message and message's level of
saturation. Some examples of public information activities and materials are provided
in Table 7-3, together with the estimated cost in implementing and maintaining a
particular campaign. Also included are the estimated annual salaries of individuals that
would be involved in monitoring and maintaining the program.
2209-111- TC-CHVJ\9\CHULA VISTA \SRRE.CY\A
7 - 13
/0 --02;25
Table 7-3
COST ESTIMATES FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION ACTIVITIES
Public Service Announcement
(Combined Radio and TV: 60 seconds)
Posters 19" x 28" glossy (10,000)
(80-100 lb. recycled paper)
Self-Mailer Brochure 17" x 22" (10,000)
(4 page 81h x 11 recycled paper)
Bumper Stickers (10,000)
(One color reversed - recycled paper)
$ 10,000
4 color $7-8,000
2 color $4-5,000
4 color $10-11,000
2 color $6-7,000
$2,000 - 2,300
Bus Signs, exterior
(side or tailgate)
Bus Shelter - 12 months
(50 signs, county-wide)
Billboards
19 boards x $12,730/mo
less 10% discount for 12 months
$85-100 per sign, 12 months
$620 each
$31,000
$168,000
Polling - Random/Specific Interview
800 interviews, gender and ethnicity/specified
$16,000
Newspaper Advertisements
(Quarter page, one day, Mon-Sat)
Additional day same week 50% discount
$2,600-11,000
1 - Conservation Coordinator
S&B $45-{;O,OOO
S&B $16-24,000
$50-80,000
1 - ClericallProgram Assislant
Supplies and equipment including contract services
2209.1 11.TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A
7 - 14
/~ "d~
..~:.,}~-:
8.0 FACILITY CAPACITY COMPONENT
8.1 BACKGROUND
The cities within the County of San Diego currently dispose of their municipal solid
waste at the following sanitary landfills:
. San Marcos
. Ramona
. Miramar
. Sycamore
. Otay/Otay Annex
. Borrego
Except for the Miramar Sanitary Landfill, which is owned and operated by the City of
San Diego, the County of San Diego owns and operates all permitted disposal facilities
within the county. According to the State Water Resources Control Board, Title 23,
Chapter 15, all the above landfills can be classified as Class III landfills for nonhazardous
solid waste. Refer to Figure 8-1 for the general locations of the landfills in San Diego
County. The following is a description of the disposal facility needs of each landfill,
except Borrego. Borrego handles only a small quantity of the unincorporated county's
wastestream with a remaining capacity of approximately 253,000 cubic yards.
8.2 THE SAN MARCOS SANITARY LANDFILL
8.2.1 DESCRIPTION
The San Marcos Sanitary Landfill site is owned and operated (through private contract)
by the County of San Diego. The site is located at the southern boundary of the City of.
San Marcos, southwest from the intersection of Questhaven Road and Elfin Forest Road.
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9\CHUlA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 8 - 1
t'() ....02~ (
IMPERIAL
0...
G'"
..-
a:'"
a:i
Oc
III...
>-
....
z
::>
o
u
o
o
)(
w
::;
w
o
a;
'"
w
>
0:
:!:"'i
"'0
~<I~
"W.
-a>
0
'", <
< w -'
.... a> w
. Z < 0
0 (3 z
U z <
w ~
a:... 0
c::! '"
.... A N
zi E
Cc 0 C
....
F I C
C I
P A
~!
~
w
-1CJ)~
-'Z",
g u: 0 u::
~ ~ t=
z <: <:
< -,0
w 0
~ Cl-'
o z--'
>- 0( 0(
!Z U) 0:
5 w w
() Effi
0",
.
c
.
.a
;::
~
~
.
~1
.'0
,c
~.~
.~ ~
M
~H
11II:; 1; ~
CIl i'
';
U.!!
"
,.
. "
The site began operations in November 1978. The total area of the site is 203 acres with
approximately half used for active landfilling and the remainder as buffer zones and
access roadways. The major limitation of the site is in the scarcity of cover material.
It is anticipated that closure of the San Marcos LandfIll may occur in 1991 or 1992.
However, planning for its vertical and horizontal expansion is currently under way.
Under the present staged development plan (1991), the landfill has under two million
cubic yards of remaining solid waste capacity. The County of San Diego is presently
pursuing the development of an emergency contingency plan for diverting incoming waste
from the San Marcos Landfill to other facilities in the county if necessary permits for
expansion of the landfill are not issued prior to the completion of the site according to
the closure plan. The plan is currently undergoing the environmental impact report
(EIR). Waste transfer stations are planned for the north county cities presently disposing
of solid waste in the San Marcos Landfill. If the plan is approved by the San Diego
Board of Supervisors, solid waste would be transferred to the Sycamore or Otay Landfills
in the south county. The county is also proceeding with the siting and permitting of a
new north county and south county landfill.
Based on the ScaleWare data since September 1990 and the allocations to each landfill
based on the county's preliminary hauler survey, the majority of the solid waste from the
following cities is disposed at the San Marcos Landfill:
. Carlsbad
. Oceanside
. Vista
· San Marcos
. Encinitas
2209-111-TC-CHVn9ICHULA V!STAISRRE.CVIA 8 - 3
/tJ ...~;)..q
. Solano Beach
. Escondido
poway and the unincorporated areas of the north county also contribute a significant
amount of their wastestreams to the San Marcos Landfill. Refer to Table 8-1 for an
estimate of the cities' contributions to the landfills in San Diego County.
The San Marcos Sanitary Landfill operates under the following permits:
. Regional Water Quality Control Board Permit No. 78-78
. California Waste Management Board Permit No. 37-AA-008
. City of San Marcos Special Use Permit No. PC77-733
The San Marcos Sanitary Landfill received approximately 1.2 million tons (2.0 million
cubic yards) of municipal solid waste during 1990. Stipulated orders are being prepared
by the Department of Health Services (DOHS) for updating the allowable tonnages.
8.2.2 CURRENT FACILffiES CLOSURE PLAN
A closure plan for the San Marcos Sanitary Landfill has been prepared and submitted to
the County of San Diego, Department of Health Services, CIWMB and the Regional
Water Quality Control Board San Diego District (RWQCBSDD). Revisions to the
closure plan have been performed by the County of San Diego, Department of Public
Works and its resubmittal is expected by the end of November 1991. The facility will
undergo closure as soon as it reaches capacity, which may occur as early as 1992.
However expansion plans are underway and the actual closure date is pending the
outcome of the RWQCBSDD and CIWMB decisions on the county's expansion proposal.
2209-IlI-TC-CHV1\9\CIIUlA VISTAISRRE.CVIA 8 - 4
r t) -d-30
'~,t.i
g: In In t! i 00 .... N In ~ 0 .... 00 N - 0 N .... ~ III
~ 00 !':. - .... ~ '" 00 In !::! ~ In - 00 N -
In '" M - M - - '" N 0 0 00 .... .... M
"" ,; !::! :6 '" i 'Ii ~ "" ~ ,; 'i. :8 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ..:
~ !:; !:; ~ 00 00 - .... -
~ - In - ....
..: ...;
i '" .... ~ ~ 0 8 -
'" :8 In (<\
N In "'.
.; :i - '" t.
M N -
M. "<
- -
0 '" '"
N ...
! - -
,; ,;
d ~ .... g: M '"
N ~ In
Z '" M '"
0 "" :i 'i
~
- Ih
ob
I.:i
...l
~
.. ;:>u .... '" 00 lQ M .... - 00 0 00 In 0 ~ 00 N 00 - N ...
0'0 r:: '" M M M ~ - on :::: ~ '" ~ ~ M ..... '" on
~~ E 00 '" - '" '" ... - M 0 .... ..... 0
...; .,; ,; .,; ...; ..: ~ ...; ~ '" .; ..: ...; "" "" ~ ""
!:; M - M .... - :: ~
0 -
~~
CI)
~ ~ M 0 0 '" In 00 ~ C!; N N '" 0 - '" ;J
N ~ '" '" 0 M '" t! '" - M 00
~ N 00 - "l 00 '" on M. .... 00 .... N ....
~ M ~ S:f on .; g 'Ii ""
'" '" ....
- on
U
;.-
CI}
CI}
8 00 '" .... ;1; - '" 0 N M .... ~ '" 00 t!
.... ~ 00 N M '" 00 C!; '" N 0
~ '" - '" "l on - .... '" .... "l "'. ....
.,; '" '" '" ,; .; i '" ;t; M - ,;
N - '" .... .... M :::: - ~ ~
- - -
~ -
.d 1
~ " ~ .d
5 lS > ~ u
e U ~ ~
~ 0 ~ " 0 0 " 0
~ :> 0 = S ." ~ 0 1 .!r ~ ~ ~
~ :a 0 ] ] = OJ ~
.g ~ ~ .... 'a ~ " 0 = f Q ~ " ~ g
:; 0 k ~ .9 ~ = lS
13 u 'g 0 e ~
~ ~ O! ~ ~ ~ "0 ~ 'a ~
.d 0 ~ j :l 8 ~ :>
u u U III III '" rIl '" rIl ;:>
-------r----'--.-----.-
!'t) ... ;Z3(
>>
Q)
C:
::>
'"
...
Q)
:; IF)
'"
.c
~ 00
'"
0::
:~
]
~
'"
>>
-
0::
::>
0
U
Q)
.c
-
'"
1a ~
0 >
u
0\ '"
0\ "
- "
~
- :<
'"
::> ..
~
OJ) ;:
::>
.0:: :s
"
Q) =
(,) U
0:: ij;
'Vi ;:
~ =
u
'" ~
~
"
'" s
(,) N
CIl N
0::
0
]
'"
c:l
8.3 THE RAMONA SANITARY LANDFILL
8.3.1 DESCRIPTION
The Ramona Sanitary Landfill is owned and operated (through private contract) by the
County of San Diego. The site is located approximately 2.5 miles north of the
community of Ramona on Pamo Road, (refer to Figure 8-1). Originally this facility was
used as a bum site in 1948. Site operations were then converted to a sanitary landfill in
1969. The total area of the site is approximately 80 acres, with approximately half of
the land used as the landfill. The landfill opens daily except for major holidays. The
site presently serves the community of Ramona and the surrounding areas of Julian,
Palomar Mountain and Sunshine Summit. The Ramona Sanitary Landfill operates under
the following permits:
. Regional Water Quality Control Board Permit No. 70-R14
. California Waste Management Board Permit No. 37-AA-005
The County of San Diego estimates that the Ramona Sanitary Landfill received
approximately 47,000 tons (78,000 cubic yards) of solid waste during 1990.
Stipulated orders are being prepared by the DOHS which will update the allowable
tonnage limits of the site. In early 1991, the County of San Diego estimated the
remaining volumetric capacity of about 0.8 million tons (1.35 million cubic yards).
8.3.2 CURRENT FACILITY CLOSURE PLANS
A closure plan for the Ramona Sanitary Landfill is currently being prepared. The
County of San Diego expects to submit a closure plan to the regulatory agencies during
the latter part of 1991. However, closure of the landfill is not anticipated within the next
twenty years.
2209-1I1-TC-CHVI\9\CHUU. VISTA\SRRE.CVIA 8 - 6
/0 -rd)- 3;)-
'.," . ":"~'~
8.4 THE SYCAMORE SANITARY LANDFILL
8.4.1 DESCRIPTION
The Sycamore Sanitary Landfill site is owned and operated (through private contract) by
the County of San Diego. The facility is located approximately 1.3 miles north of the
intersection of Mission Gorge Road and Father Junipero Serra Trail, (refer to Figure 8-
1). The site has been operating since mid-1962. The property size totals about 500
acres of which approximately 400 acres represents the active landfill area. The
Sycamore Sanitary Landfill operates under the following permits:
. Regional Water Control Board Permit No. 76-40 and 59-R16
. California Integrated Waste Management Board Permit No. 37-SS-015
. City of San Diego Special Use Permit No. CUP 6066/Amendment No.2
In 1991 the Sycamore Sanitary Landfill served the following cities:
. Lemon Grove
. Santee
. El Cajon
. La Mesa
. San Diego
The Sycamore Sanitary Landfill receives approximately 1,500 tpd. The facility received
approximately 533,000 tons (888,000 cubic yards) of municipal solid waste in 1990.
Stipulated orders are being prepared by the DOHS which updates the allowable tonnage
of the site.
In early 1991 the County of San Diego estimated the remaining capacity of the Sycamore
Landfill at about 20 million cubic yards, providing more than 20 years of disposal
capacity at the present landfill disposal rate. The County of San Diego plans to relocate
2209-111-TC-CHVn9\CHULA VlSTAISRRE.CVIA 8 - 7
10-,;)33
power lines and expand the capacity of the Sycamore Landfill by an additional 50 million
cubic yards.
8.4.2 CURRENT FACILmES CLOSURE PLAN
A closure plan for the Sycamore Sanitary Landfill is currently being prepared. The
County of San Diego expects to submit a closure plan during the latter part of 1991.
However, closure of the landfill is not anticipated within the next 20 years. The County
of San Diego plans to expand the Sycamore Sanitary Landfill, and optimal size of the
landfill ex.pansion has been determined to be 50 million additional cubic yards. No
municipal solid waste export plans exist at the present time.
8.5 THE OTAY/OTAY ANNEX SANITARY LANDFILL
8.5.1 DESCRIPTION
The Otay Landfill and Otay Annex are owned and operated (through private contract) by
the County of San Diego. The Otay Sanitary Landfill is located within the corporate
boundaries of the City of Chula Vista, the Otay Annex is within the unincorporated areas
of San Diego County, one mile east of Interstate Highway 805 on the north side of the
Otay Valley Road, (see general location in Figure 8-1). The site is presently permitted
as two separate facilities. The total area of the site is approximately 515 acres of which
98 acres are leased from the City of San Diego. A closed portion of the Otay Landfill
site was desigl\ated as a Class I Waste Management Unit and accepted hazardous waste
until November 1980. In 1990 the Otay/Otay Annex Sanitary Landfills served the
following cities:
. Lemon Grove
. Chula Vista
. Imperial Beach
2209-11I-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VlSTAISRRE.CVIA 8 - 8
~ ;01-3f
-
.."'.........:.
. National City
. Coronado
The atay/atay Annex Sanitary Landfill received approximately 40,000 tons (80,000
cubic yards) of solid waste during 1990.
The atay Sanitary Landfill operates under the following permits:
· Regional Waster Quality Control Permit No. 74-44
· Ca,lifornia Integrated Waste Management Board Permit No. 37-AA-009
· San Diego County Special Use Permit No. P72-89
· City of Chula Vista Conditional Use Permit No. PCC-72-1
The Otay Annex Sanitary Landfill operates under the following permits:
· Regional Water Quality Control Permit No. 79-18
· California Integrated Waste Management Board Permit No. 37-AA-01O
· San Diego County Special Use Permit No. P76-46
· City of Chula Vista Conditional Use Permit No. PCC-72-1
The Otay Sanitary Landfill is a 250 acre site and the Otay Sanitary Landfill Annex is
another 250 acres. The Otay Sanitary Landfill capacity is estimated to be more than 650
tons per day. The County of San Diego estimates a total capacity of 1,700 tpd for the
Olay/Otay Annex. In early 1991 the Olay/Otay Annex Sanitary Landfill remaining
capacity was estimated at approximately 24 million cubic yards.
The County of San Diego is presently planning to redesign the configuration of the
landfill. Although the planned activity may provide for a gain in landfill space, the
county would not treat the reconfiguration of the landfill as an expansion project. At the
present land filling rate of O. 6 million cubic yards per year and allowing for the necessary
2209-11I-TC-CHVn9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 8 - 9
IO.....<3S
space of the cover material, the remaining landfill capacity of 24 million cubic yards
should permit the landfill life to extend beyond the planning period.
8.5.2 CURRENT FACILITY CLOSURE PLANS
A closure plan for the Otay/Otay Annex Sanitary LandfJll is presently in the initial stages
of preparation. The County of San Diego expects to submit a closure plan for these
landfills during the latter part of 1991. However, the actual closure of the landfill is not
anticipated to occur during the planning period.
8.6 FACILITY CAPACITY NEEDS
The "disposal capacity needs assessment" was calculated using the assumptions that the
current recycling rate would continue until the year 1995. Between the years 1995 and
2000 the disposal quantities would be reduced gradually by 50 percent.
The capacity analysis incorporates the waste quantity projections for all the cities and
landfills in San Diego County (except the city of San Diego and the Miramar Landfill)
and the unincorporated areas of the county. In-place density for solid waste within a
properly operated landfill has been shown to range between 1,000 and 1,200 pounds per
cubic yard. For the purposes of this analysis 1,000 pounds per cubic yard in-place
density was used. Table 8-2 presents the results of this analysis for the IS-year planning
period. Using the County of San Diego's estimate of 97.6 million cubic yards remaining
capacity, the landfills in the county will reach capacity beyond the planning period.
8.7 PLANNED NEW/EXPANDED FACILmES
A vertical expansion proposal for the San Marcos Landfill was submitted to the
RWQCBSDD in March 1991. As a result of the proposal's review by the RWQCBSDD,
2209-111-TC-CHVIW\CHULA VISTA\SRRB.CV\A
8 - 10
/0...0230
._~ .~::.
TABLE 8-2
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
DISPOSAL CAPACITY NEEDS ANALYSIS'
CAPACITY
DISPOSAL NEEDS
QUANTITy2 CAPACITY CUMULATIVE
YEAR (TONS) NEEDS3 (CY) (CY)
1990 2,176,873 4,353,746 4,353,746
1991 2,118,607 4,237,215 8,590,961
1992 2,055,018 4,110,035 12,700,996
1993 1,986,104 3,972,208 16,673,204
1994 1,911,866 3,823,733 20,496,937
1995 1,832,305 3,664,610 24,161,547
1996 1,710,151 3,420,302 27,581,849
1997 1,640,516 3,281,032 30,862,881
1998 1,538, 563 3,077,125 33,940,006
1999 1,432,569 2,865,137 36,805,143
2000 1,322,535 2,645,070 39,450,213
2001 1,342,519 2,685,038 42,135,251
2002 1,362,504 2,725,008 44,860,259
2003 1,382,488 2,764,976 47,625,235
2004 1,402,473 2,804,946 50,430,181
2005 1,422,457 2,844,914 53,275,095
2006 1,442,442 2,884,884 56,159,979
IDisposal quantity does not include tonnage from the City of San Diego.
2Incorporates projected reduction in the wastestream from recycling activities
3Assumes 1000 pounds per cubic yard in-place density
2209-III-TC-CHVn9ICHULA YISTAISRRE.CYIA 8 - 11
/D -;237
the County of San Diego was requested to collect and present additional ground water
quality analytical information. The county submitted this information for review. The
RWQCBSDD decision may require the acceleration of the siting and construction of a
new landfill for the county's northern cities, or allow the expansion of the San Marcos
Landfill to continue. Another plan for lateral expansion of the San Marcos Sanitary
Landfill is under consideration by the county, which is in the process of obtaining
adjacent land to support the proposed lateral expansion proposal. Although the county
is actively pursuing the lateral expansion of the landfill, no fixed date has been
established for this proposal submittal. The County of San Diego plans to expand the
Ramona Sanitary Landfill to a total of 80 acres, which in turn could result in the addition
of 50 acres of active sanitary landfill area. The County of San Diego plans to expand
the Sycamore Sanitary Landfill, which in turn could also result in the landfill space to
50 million additional cubic yards. No municipal solid waste export plans exist at the
present time.
2209-111- TC-CHVI\9\CHUlA VISTA \SRRE.CV\A
8 - 12
/~..~3~
9.0 FUNDING COMPONENT
9.1 INTRODUCTION
Adequate funding is critical to the long-term success of Chula Vista's Integrated Waste
Management System, since inadequate funding can jeopardize the effectiveness of
programs which are new to the city's operational experience. The funding component
identifies various costs and revenue sources for the successful planning, development and
implementation of programs and facilities which were devised to comply with the
mandated AB 939 goals. Since many of the regional issues impacting the alternatives
available, to the city remain unsolved, the cost and revenue analysis provides planning
level estimates of costs for typical facilities. Resolution of the city-specific and regional
issues, followed by feasibility analyses which will involve siting studies and
environmental impact analyses, is essential before any further refinement can be made.
The following sections describe county and city funding practices followed by typical
component program planning, development, and implementation costs, as well as
program funding alternatives available to the city. Contingency funding is 3.Iso discussed
with respect to identifying revenue sources available to fund programs which might face
unforeseen revenue shortfalls.
9.2 FUNDING PRACTICES
9.2.1 COUNTY PRACTICES
It is appropriate to discuss the funding mechanism currently utilized by the County of San
Diego to provide a regional solid waste management system whose facilities are available
to the City of Chula Vista. Simply put, the county owns and operates the only landfills
available and economically feasible for disposal of the city's wastestream.
2209-III-TC-CHVM\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CVIA 9 -I
/O~~39
Since 1982, when the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund was established, nearly all solid waste
management activities of San Diego County have been funded through the landfill tipping
fees. Four percent of the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund is supported by other solid waste
related activities. The Solid Waste Enterprise Fund supports only solid waste related
activities. No Solid Waste Enterprise Fund supports General Fund projects, and no
General Fund monies are used for solid waste projects. Based on a $23.00 per ton
tipping fee (and a tipping fee of $15.25 per ton for yard waste), the Fiscal Year (FY)
1990/91 budget is approximately $60 million. The solid waste enterprise fund spending
plan for FY 1990/91 is broken down as follows:
Active Landfill Operations 14.38%
Fee Collections 0.21%
Code Enforcement 1.26%
Operational Support 5.70%
Interior Zone Operational 0.92%
Rural Container Stations 0.88%
Rural Recycling 0.10%
Interior Zone Hauling Service 2.45%
Engineering 16.44%
Resource Recovery/Recycling 11.98%
Planning & Permits 1.48%
Administration O/H 6.11%
Landfill Contract 12.24%
Eastin Reserve 5.62%
Eastin State Charges 2.41%
Waste-to-Energy Reserve 1.98%
Program Contingency 2.29%
Bond Department Service 9.95%
Facilities Reserve Deposit 3.58%
2209-lll-TC-CHVn9ICHULA V!STAISRRE.CVIA 9 -2
/~ ;~~
,:( ,
Several capital improvements by the county are expected in the next ten years. Revenue
bonds may be sold to finance some of these improvements. The sale and/or cost of the
bond financing will, in part, be dependent on control of a sufficient amount of the
wastestream to ensure that adequate tipping fee revenues are collected to repay the annual
debt service.
To pay for the continued maintenance of active and closed landfIlls, the environmental
and permitting work required for the proposed new landfills, the landfill expansions and
transfer stations and the recycling and diversion requirements of AB 939, the tipping fee
is projected to increase about $5.00 per ton per year for the next several years. The
actual increase will depend upon the demand placed upon the Solid Waste Enterprise
Fund by the projects proposed by the county and on the timing of their implementation.
The tipping fees will be recalculated each year prior to proposing any change.
9.2.2 CITY PRACTICES
In the past, the city's solid waste management responsibilities were defined by
contracting for collection and disposal of residential and commercial refuse with a single
franchised hauler. The funding for those services has always been in the form of user
fees assessed directly by the hauler which is currently Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc.
Laidlaw pays a franchise fee to the city of 71h % of gross receipts. The franchise fee
may increase at one-half percent each year up to a maximum of 10% during the term of
the agreement. The franchise fees are received as General Fund revenue and considered
as covering the costs of future street maintenance, code enforcement and litter control
necessary as a result of mandatory refuse collection and staff time in administration of
the agreement.
The implementation of residential curbside recycling programs for single family homes
in Chula Vista signaled the beginning of the shift in philosophy of a solid waste
collection and disposal program to an integrated waste management system. In addition
2209-111-TC-CHVn9\CHULA VISTAISRRE.CV\A 9 -3
(0 --cJl.(l
--....,.........-----.-
to the required refuse collection service supported by user fees, the city now has
residential recycling collection service also provided by Laidlaw on the same day as
refuse collection. The estimated cost of the program is $1.82 per month for each
household. Credits to reduce this amount have been given as follows: Twenty cents
($.20) for the estimated landfill diversion savings (the money saved by landfilling the
materials); forty cents ($.40) for the sale of the recyclables; and twelve cents ($.12) for
the county TAP grant by Laidlaw to assist in capital and public education expenses.
Residents are therefore billed a $1.10 per month for the service and the amount is added
into the regular refuse collection billing.
Since the beginning of this residential recycling program in February 1991, the franchise
fee paid to the city by Laidlaw has also included the gross receipts attributed to the
recycling program. The additional franchise fee received by the city as a result of the
recycling program is considered as General Fund revenue which partially offsets the
salary and benefit expenses of the city's Conservation Coordinator. This position is the
only permanent staff currently responsible for the development, implementation, and
operation of the city's recycling program. The city's decision to use the incremental
franchise fee for program administration, was a conscious decision to defer the added
financial burden to residents of an AB 939 surcharge. The city has attempted to be
sensitive to the need to provide and require new services which will have increasing costs
to be paid by user fees, the commensurate need for staff to support and administer these
programs, and creative and realistic methods for keeping the costs to residents as low as
possible.
As the curbside recycling program expands into multi-family units and the franchise fee
increases, it is planned that the Conservation Coordinator's position will be entirely offset
by the franchise fees directly related to recycling programs. In the interim, the
Conservation Coordinator is involved in developing composting programs and working
closely with the county's program development at the Otay Landfill. Since the landfill
is located in one of the city's redevelopment areas, a limited amount of redevelopment
2209-IlI-TC-CHVII9\CHULA VlSTAISRRE.CVIA 9 -4
/~ -c:;t1~
- -- --------r.r----- --
funds are currently available to offset this staff position within limits based on state law.
Other revenue sources for funding existing and developing recycling and composting
programs include grants, material sales, and special funds.
For program and administrative costs expended in FY 1991/92, the following amounts
are expected:
· Franchise fees ($24,000) received from recycling programs and used to
partially offset the position of Conservation Coordinator.
· Redevelopment funds ($24,000) received to partially offset the position of
Conservation Coordinator who is evaluating recycling and composting
options within a redevelopment area.
· San Diego County TAP grants ($15,000) received in FY 1990/91 for
implementation in FY 1991/92 of a model office recycling program,
which is a multi-material in-house recycling program for city employees
with a business outreach component to the Chula Vista business
community.
· San Diego County noncompetitive tonnage (diversion) grant ($24,000
estimated) to be received based on residential recycling diversion amounts
and used for enforcement of the county's mandatory recycling ordinance.
· Material sales for recyclable materials are not yet determined; the sale of
recyclable materials in the curbside residential program are included in the
rate structure as a direct credit to partially offset operational costs, and
sale of materials in the city's multi-material in-house program are
expected to be minimal ($100 - $200 per month), but will be used for
continued employee education and purchase of materials specifically for
the program
· Waste Management Trust Fund ($50,000) received as a settlement from
the city's waste hauler and to be used for recycling public education and
promotional activities which will most closely benefit the long-term
stabilization of disposal rates.
The city's residential curbside recycling program is well underway and plans for multi-
family residential and commercial recycling programs will be completed and implemented
2209.1l1.TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 9 -5
/o,~V3
during the short-term planning period. City staff tentatively proposes to fund the multi-
family recycling program entirely through appropriate user or collection fees charged to
the residents and collected by the hauler(s) chosen by the city. The hauler(s) will pay
a franchise fee or permit fee to the city to be used to pay the city's administrative costs
of the planned programs.
The city is also tentatively proposing to allow commercial and industrial generators to
contract directly with any hauling/recycling firms who have paid an annual "permit
processing and monitoring fee" to the city and been granted a permit for providing the
recycling ~ervices. Residents receiving yard waste collections services (some may not
generate yard waste or may choose to perform backyard composting) will probably also
pay the city's designated hauler for this service. It is anticipated the hauler(s) will pay
the city a franchise fee to offset city administrative costs. Specific decisions regarding
service delivery and funding for multi-family, commercial, industrial and yard recycling
programs will be dealt with as a policy issue by the Chula Vista City Council before the
end of calendar year 1991.
The city recognizes that additional revenue will be required as some of the facility
options are evaluated further during the short-term planning period before 1995. The
city currently anticipates that facility needs will be met under contract between the city's
waste hauler and San Diego Recycling Company or any other private recycler through
a competitive bid process. As currently envisioned by the city, any additional costs for
recycling programs and facilities will be passed on directly to the specific sector (i.e.,
residential, commercial, or industrial) being supported in a fair and equitable manner.
The large undeveloped land areas remaining in Chula Vista and the potential for future
large annexations of planned developments may present future opportunities for the siting
of recycling and/or composting facilities in the city. The sections below describe typical
component facility cost estimates followed by additional revenue sources potentiall y
available to the city.
2209-11l-TC-CHVM\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 9 -6
/0 ~lflf
9.3 TYPICAL COMPONENT PROGRAMS AND FACILITY COST ESTIMATES
As mentioned in the previous section, the City of Chula Vista expects facility costs to be
incurred directly by private recycling firms. Program planning and implementation costs
will be borne by the recycling firms. These costs will be passed on to respective waste
generating sectors (i.e, residential, commercial, or industrial) in the form of user fees.
In order to evaluate the adequacy of planned expenditures by the city in response to AB
939 requirements, typical costs are presented in this section. Table 9-1 provides typical
planning, c;levelopment, and implementation cost estimates in support of source reduction,
recycling and composting component programs for the city's SRRE.
Costs shown on Table 9-1 are based upon recent surveys of similar programs locally and
at the national level. It is further assumed that all facilities could be either publicly
owned and operated or privately owned and operated under contract (as currently planned
by the city).
Facility costs were reported to vary according to the following factors:
. Facility location.
. Land availability and cost.
. Facility type (i.e, technology employed).
. Facility capacity.
. Financing expenses.
. Labor expenses.
. Stability of wastestream input to facility.
9.4 FUNDING ALTERNATIVES
The City of Chula Vista's existing solid waste funds are allocated entirely to the planning
and implementation of recycling programs the city has selected. Additional funds will
2209-1I1-TC-CHVn9\CHIlLA YISTA\SRRE.CY\A 9 -7
I D ~oI. '/.s--
be required for capital projects to support these future programs, particularly as the
amount of recyclable material increases over time and existing facilities within the county
reach capacity.
The city will consider fully any regional concepts that might lead to economies of scale.
Funds for future SRRE programs could come from any or a combination of the following
sources:
. Recycling surcharge at disposal facilities in the form of tipping fee
increases
. Establish residential recycling surcharge fees for collection
. Commercial/industrial recycling service fee
. Variable rate structure (e.g. variable can rates)
. Business license fees
. County and state grants
. Market development and material revenues
. Contingency fund
9.4.1 RECYCLING SURCHARGE AT DISPOSAL FACILITIES
The County of San Diego is responsible for providing disposal services to the City of
Chula Vista. Currently, the county is collecting tipping fees in the amount of $23.00 per
ton of material disposed at all landfills within the county system, including the Otay
Landfill which is the primary landfill used by Chula Vista. As a source of revenue to
support the recycling efforts, especially in the commercial sector, cities within the county
2209-IlI-TC-CHVII9ICHUl.A VISTAISRRE.CVIA 9 -8
/ ~ --02 fib
i______
--- -_._._-~-
....,;......:;J,.;.
have informally discussed the concept of the county collecting a recycling surcharge to
be redistributed to the cities. Such an agreement would involve increasing the tipping
fee by a certain amount per ton in addition to the planned increases by the county which
are projected at $5.00 per ton annually for the next several years. The funds generated
from the surcharge could be placed into a discrete fund allocated to the city to partially
underwrite operational costs of recycling collection. Because of the challenge to meet
diversion goals represented in the commercial wastestream, the city could pursue this
discussion of a surcharge for any commercial waste originating from the city.
AdvantageS:
. Generates revenue specifically earmarked for the recycling program.
. Encourages the reduction of the wastestream by increasing the cost of
disposal.
. Targets all users or specific categories such as commercial wastestream
only, construction and demolition (C&D) material, tires, etc.
Disadvantages:
. Results in lower overall program revenues as materials are removed from
the disposable wastestream. Therefore, as the recycling program becomes
more successful, there are less funds available to support it.
. Unpopular with users, as with any rate increase.
. Would impact the commercial generators greater than the residential
customers if the fee is uniform.
2209-1I1-TC-CHVn9\CHULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 9 -9
/O/r;).lfJ
9.4.2 ESTABLISH RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING FEE SURCHARGE FOR
COLLECTION
Currently, Laidlaw Waste Systems charges a residential recycling fee of $1.10 per
household for every residential unit receiving curbside collection. Annually, effective
April 1992, the recycling rate will be reviewed and recommended for change based on
the past year's actual costs, revenues, and tonnages. This indicates that the rates, which
are a combination of variables, could either increase or decrease depending the economy,
market volatility, and participation rate. However, the rate structure for the recycling
fee does not include a component for a surcharge on the fee to be used to pay for the
program planning and implementation costs required by AB 939. Future rate changes,
specifically increases, will be passed through as user fees to the public. To ensure
adequate implementation of programs, the city could decide to establish a recycling fee
surcharge. Advantages and disadvantages to collection surcharges are outlined below.
Advantages:
. Generates revenue specifically earmarked for the recycling program
. Encourages the reduction of the wastestream by increasing the cost of
disposal.
Disadvantages:
. Difficult to justify increase in recycling fees due to public misperception
of the actual costs for recycling.
9.4.3 COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL RECYCLING SERVICE FEE
Although many industrial/commercial recycling options are being considered, city staff
is recommending that the city allow for an open process for recycling services whereby
all haulers interested in offering recycling services in the city must obtain a permit from
2209-11 I-TC-CHVn9\CHULA YISTAISRRE.CYIA 9 -10
I ti ~tl.l{-,f
the city. City staff would provide each hauler with specific permit application guidelines,
requirements, reporting forms, permit fee information, and other pertinent materials as
attachments to the permit application form. Applicants would submit a conceptual outline
of the types of services they intend to offer and the approximate rate structure for these
services. All submitted permit applications would be weighed on an established point
system.
An annual "permit processing and monitoring fee" similar to a "franchise fee" would be
charged to each hauler based upon the number of service permits held. For example,
permitted collectors could be required to report the gross (or net) receipts from recycling
operations within the city and pay a fixed percentage from these revenues. Incentives,
such as discounted fees, could be given to those collectors offering services for collection
of "hard to collect/market" commodities (e.g., restaurant glass) and/or to smaller, lower
volume generators.
The amount of permits issued at anyone time would be recommended at a minimum of
five and a maximum of ten (i.e., five to ten separate haulers). This would allow full
monitoring by city staff, while still providing for competition. Additionally, if desired,
the city could regulate company profits to a set margin, thereby allowing for competition,
but also a level of regulation to control collection fees. An annual report (including
tonnages collected by material type and volume) to be filed by each permitted hauler
would also allow for monitoring of recycling activities in the city as required under AB
939.
All permit applicants would be bonded by the city. Each permitted hauler would be
required to arrange for their own respective billing service requirements, and to bill the
establishments receiving services directly. Customer service would also be handled by
the permitted haulers.
2209-IIl-TC-CHVII9ICHULA VISTAISRRE.CVIA 9 -11
/IJ--dt{c;
---,-
City staff will be developing information and public relations materials on recycling to
be distributed to area businesses and industries. Information relating specifically to each
permitted hauler's recycling collection system would be the responsibility of that hauler.
Advantages:
. Allows for tracking of recyclables and controls over haulers' activities
without placing the city "in the business of recycling".
. Generates revenue sufficient to maintain city's operations.
. Should be less costly than user fees for waste disposal service.
. Allows for free "market" competition and allows generators to choose the
hauler which best meets their recycling needs.
Disadvantages:
. Will require extensive publicity to overcome the concept that recycling is
free or generates revenue to the commercial enterprise.
. Will require increased staff time for the permitting process.
9.4.4 BUSINESS LICENSE FEES
The City of Chula Vista could consider revising existing business license fees and
allocating an increase in the current fees to support programs related to providing public
education support and technical assistance for recycling efforts by businesses and
administrative and program development costs. The rates could be set to vary with
business characteristics such as size and quantity of waste generated.
2209-11I-TC-CHVI\9ICHIJLA VJSTAISRRE.CV\A 9 -12
/ CJ -oJ S7P
';". .
Advantages:
. Utilizes an existing fee structure; therefore, avoids the need to develop a
new structure.
. Provides a broad-based charge to all businesses.
Disadvantages:
. Unpopular with the business sector, and may tend to discourage business
growth.
. Difficult to set variable rate based on quantity of waste generated.
9.4.5 COUNTY AND STATE GRANTS
The city will continue to pursue all available county and state grants to help in the design
and implementation of its recycling programs. However, the city recognizes that these
grants are primarily intended to help with the start-up costs associated with new programs
and to encourage innovative solutions and experimentation. The city does not expect to
receive grants for the ongoing operation of its recycling programs. The city also
recognizes that the availability and amount of grant funds from the state and county are
unpredictable.
9.4.6 MARKET DEVELOPMENT
It is the city's position that one of the best ways to offset recycling program costs is to
expand and broaden end-use markets for recyclables, thereby increasing the demand for
recyclables, resulting in an increase in the sales price of recycled materials. If the city's
haulers receive higher revenues, the increased revenues can eventually be used to further
improve or expand recycling programs or to reduce the program costs to the city and the
waste generators.
2209-III-TC-cHVn9\CHULA VISTAISRRE.CVIA 9 -13
10;,;)51
The city's market development efforts will include the establishment of business outreach
and waste exchange program, city procurement of recycled products, public education
programs, and lobbying for state and legislation to require recyclable packaging and use
of recycled products.
9.4.7 CONTINGENCY FUND
Currently, all of the component programs planned by the City of Chula Vista are
essentially ~lf-supporting. In other words, each program has an identified revenue
source, an~ the revenues generated from one program do not support or subsidize other
programs. In the event of some programs facing unforeseen revenue shortfalls, the city
could utilize the following mechanisms to provide contingency funds:
. Revise existing rate structures to generate more revenue.
. Transfer funds from programs which have excess funds.
. Provide funding from a "contingency market fund".
. Allocate city General Funds.
A "contingency market fund" could be established by the city within the existing fee
structure for all residential, commercial, and industrial sectors. In setting rates,
conservative assumptions would be made for market prices for recyclables such that
excess revenue over costs could be generated and allocated to the contingency fund.
Advantages:
. Places the burden of cost on the users.
. Provides revenue to cover administrative, overhead, and publicity costs.
. Allows the city to redirect reserves currently being used for recycling to
other non-revenue producing activities.
2209.111.TC-CHV~9\CHULA VISTA ISRRE.CVIA 9 -14
I () ~S-ot.
Disadvantages:
. As with any new fee or rate increase, it will be extremely unpopular with
residents, especially low income persons and those on fixed incomes.
. Will possibly result in a significant solid waste fee increase when first
initiated.
. Will require additional tracking of funds by the city.
The allocation of city General Funds in a contingency situation is considered the least
desirable of all alternatives presented. Such appropriations would take funds away from
other essential city programs and services and could also take the form of increased
property taxes or assessments.
9.5 SUMMARY
The City of Chula Vista is presently supporting all of its current programs related to
recycling through franchise fees which are passed on as user fees, county grants and
redevelopment funds. Similar mechanisms which utilize existing rate structures to the
extent possible will be implemented by the city to support programs for the short-term
through 1995. The city does not intend to build and operate its own recycling
equipment and facilities but expects the private sector to provide equipment and facilities
through a competitive bid or free market process.
Several regional issues, such as the county's plans for building transfer stations in the
South County and providing central regionally-based facilities, preclude a complete
analysis of all the funding alternatives available to the city. The participation of several
cities within a subregional area and the unincorporated county under a joint powers
agreement (JP A) is one of these regional issues that could be considered. The feasibility
2209-l11-TC-CHVI\9\CHUl.A VISTA ISRRE.CVIA 9 -15
/o~cZ3
-._._--_._._.__..."--~~--------_._-,---.-~
analysis for any capital facilities will require an economic evaluation and assessment of
the funding mechanisms dependent upon the structure of the JPA.
2209-1lI-TC-CHVI\9\CHULA VISTAISRRE.CVIA 9 -16
/C-dsf
10.0 INTEGRATION COMPONENT
10.1 INTRODUCTION
The development and selection of alternatives for a source reduction and recycling
program for the City of Chula Vista were based on an evaluation of existing practices
and conditions, discussions with city representatives following review of the "Recycling
Facility Alternatives Evaluation" decisional paper, review of projected growth patterns
for the city, and the overall needs of the city. Chula Vista's goal is to have an integrated
solid waste management system capable of meeting both the state mandated waste
reduction goals and the needs of its citizens in the most environmentally sound, efficient
and cost-effective manner. The mixture of technologies and programs selected must
provide current and future decision makers with the flexibility to modify the plan as
conditions dictate and technologies change.
The overall program must be able to fit into the existing infrastructure within the city and
provide opportunities for regional cooperation among the surrounding cities and the
unincorporated portion of the county. The selected system must not significantly impact
the current levels of service during implementation or expose the citizens to excessive
costs. In consideration of these factors, and based on CDM's experience, the integration
component must present all activities which must be accomplished and the significant
decision points in order for the element to be successfully implemented. One of the
major reasons that source reduction and recycling programs have failed across the nation
is that the project participants have been unable to resolve critical issues in a timely
manner.
The purpose of the integration component and resulting implementation plan and schedule
is to depict the work activities and establish the proper sequencing to allow decisions to
be made in a timely fashion. This section presents the results of the evaluations
2209-III-TC-CHVM\CJIULA VISTA\SRRE.CV\A 10 -1
/0 ~;2S-S-
conducted for the SRRE, summarizes the technologies and programs selected, and
presents the schedule for program implementation.
10.2 WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES
The integration of programs, technologies, equipment and personnel into a complete
system for a community must maintain a flexible approach in order to accurately consider
solid waste quantities, materials and compost markets availability, while still maintaining
compatibility with the requirements of AB 939. The range of technologies and programs
evaluated .under the previous sections had to meet certain criteria in order to be
considered further for selection as a component part of any overall system. These
criteria were presented and discussed in sections 4.0 and 5.0. The system alternatives
also had to have potential for expansion or inclusion within a regional facility, since the
City of Chula Vista is one of many cities within San Diego County actively involved in
addressing the concerns of AB 939 within the region. Chula Vista, just like its
neighboring communities, must consider the particular interests of each of the
participating cities when evaluating and choosing a particular approach.
10.2.1 WASTE MANAGEMENT HIERARCHY
The criteria-based matrix, at the end of this section, evaluates these previously-selected
technologies. In developing this approach, the overall selection of system alternatives
was designed to also include consideration of the hierarchy of waste management
mandated by proper planning for total program implementation. The system alternatives
selected for inclusion in this city's Source Reduction and Recycling Element recognize
the following priorities for implementation:
. Source reduction
. Recycling and composting
. Proper disposal through transformation and land disposal
2209-1 I I.TC-CHVn9\CHULA VIS'rA\SRRE.CV\A
10 -2 .
;l7 -ola
~....-,,-
",. .. ~" ,
As noted in Section 3.0, it should be realized that the source reduction alternatives
presented with regards to meeting specific diversion goals do not account for any solid
waste reduction activities currently taking place in Chula Vista to reduce the city's
wastestream.
10.2.2 SELECTION OF INTEGRATED SYSTEM
The initial analysis of available technologies or systems to meet the goals established by
AB 939 was based on the ability to successfully target materials for source reduction and
recycling., The wastestream composition data discussed in Section 2.0 was used to
identify those materials that are readily recyclable and to set target objectives for
percentage reductions in the total wastestream quantities. According to information
provided in the preliminary waste characterization study, approximately 60 percent of the
materials in the total city residential disposal wastestream and 68 percent of the
commercial/industrial disposal wastestream are technically processible through methods
of recycling, composting and reuse. The total solid wastestream was sub-categorized by
the major target populations; residential wastes, commercial and industrial wastes.
Programs for the residential portion of the wastestream will differ from the programs
evaluated for the commercial and industrial wastestream. This is due to the variation in
the quantities produced from each sector (residential is about 53.3 percent and
commercial/industrial is about 46.7 percent) and the different methods of collection. The
commercial and industrial sectors are often combined due to the similarity of collection
methods and the similarity of their respective wastestreams.
Targeted programs for the City of Chula Vista are shown in Table 10-1. This table also
presents the estimated recovery rate for the short-term and medium-term goals. The
targeted percentages for recovery for the short-term total an estimated 25 percent. The
medium-term objectives are to reduce the total wastestream by 50 percent.
2209,IIJ.TC,CHV~9ICHULA VlSTAISRRE.CVIA 10 -3
I 0 ..;<~/
10.3 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM AND SCHEDULE
To provide the representatives of Chula Vista with information on the various recycling
facility alternatives available and in practice, a decisional paper, "Recycling Facility
Alternatives Evaluation," was developed to provide further insight into these specific
alternatives, both on a citywide and a regional basis. The formulation of this decisional
paper was based upon discussions with Chula Vista representatives managing their city's
recycling efforts, coupled with a detailed review of these programs. This evaluation
included an assessment of those projects currently underway in Chula Vista, we well as
recycling projects in the formative planning stages.
The decisional paper allowed Chula Vista to learn of the various methods of source
reduction, recycling, and composting being practiced by cities throughout the country and
the inherent advantages and disadvantages of each. From this general perspective,
alternatives that were well beyond the scope of Chula Vista in terms of logistics,
population, or for other reasons, were immediately dismissed. The paper then began to
focus on alternatives that had some degree of potential in addressing Chula Vista's
current and future solid waste source reduction and recycling programs. However, as
the decisional paper indicated, this focus on potential alternatives still provided latitude
based upon site-specific decisions such as wning, permitting, public acceptance, and
other vital concerns.
It must be realized that the initial years of implementation of these planned projects will
be difficult for the city due to the combination of new and expanded programs called for
and the degree of experimentation necessary to begin the ptocess of meeting these very
aggressive goals. Many activities will be conducted concurrently and will require
supervision and commitment of city resources to assure that new and expanded programs
receive a fair evaluation for continued emphasis in later years.
2209-1Il-TC-CHVI\9ICHULA VISTAISRRE.CVIA 10 -4
I~ ~.;2~
"'.,".
,',.":;';,,,",.- .
In addition to the city programs summarized herein, it sould be noted that there are
several regional programs in which the city is currently participating or is considering
participating in the future. The County of San Diego mandatory recycling ordinance is
the driving force for many of the proposed city programs, including the city's mandatory
recycling programs for each land use sector. In conjunction with the implementation
schedule for he county ordinance, the county is planning a regional public education and
information program.
The I Love A Clean San Diego group has developed several programs which benefit the
cities in S!l1l Diego County. These include the development of a school environmental
curriculum (including recycling, source reduction and composting) which was sent to all
schools in the county, and the establishment of a hot line which anyone in the county
may call with questions about recycling, source reduction and composting.
The County of San Diego is also investigating regional alternatives for materials recovery
facilities (MRFs) , transfer stations, landfills,. and composting facilities. One such
alternative is the development of a MRF at the Donovan Correctional Facility in
conjunction with the Prison Industries Authority (PIA). Under this plan, prison labor
would use mechanical and manual methods to sort recyclables from the south bay
municipal wastestream. The non-recyclable organic portion of the waste stream would
be anaerobically digested to produce energy. The City will consider participation in
southbay regional alternatives such as the PIA plan.
Table 10-2 presents the short-term activities that are currently planned for implementation
by Chula Vista. As mentioned previously, the number of activities conducted during the
years 1991-1994 are quite extensive. The remaining years include tasks and activities
designed to monitor program success and provide the information necessary to move into
the sustaining programs selected for the medium-term planning period.
2209-111-TC-CHVI\9\CHUlA VISTA\SRRE.CVIA 10 -5
)0 -d..)7
:;]I~!e ~
g i."
~ ~ ~
..
..
N
..
..
~
~
8
e
I
.u
H
]1
)1
u
.l! '~
'i1
,B !
:~ it
!~!
H~
sE"I . .. . . .
l ~ 1~,;I_'tl ~ j
~ i ~ ~ 1 t i ~ .[ ! ~ [),s'~,~ ~
f I 1 t ~ i ~ i J ! 1 it J ~ h i I
1 & 1,; i!~~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~~ 8 ~~I ~ !
UB q I[,['j f~f j lit Hl!'11~[ ~l
~& t e'l iil I~:II 1~. it11' lt~~ ~q
il~ ,!']ti. ']t1~~ ,tl1J~ ~~i h~~Ln.; p!
~ 11 ~ ~ a 1 ~ n i l,ft i i.. I.!. . 'q "8 'q ,@o ~. . ~ r
IIJll11' ~ltjJ ,I!!l 11! lJl~I~!'lllli!
tlll~tjlit~l~ :~tJ'll~jll]iJitJI]~t1]~!
uuu~3Q~~<Ql~~ Q1u8~~~.tu.I_Ju~~ul<u~I~~
! ! tll. iUI
~ 1)11 lljlnt
11. 1 1 1 ,S ~ l1
~ ~I IS
1]'I'ie h j~'1
'j l U U[i~h
~h[~unln~p
~ [H.:; ul rhl Ll
~
<8
J~
;i ~ ~
~~ ~ 8
"00
E ~ e
~ =
~
.......... .. . . . ... .......... ...
~
~
..
I
H~,a Hi
<=>::>h ]i
~~fhi1n
~1-1:l;OJ..~
~d.nHHj
I
Ii
uti u ~J~niH
1 ~ ,~ to ! ,n ,l ,s 1]!J ~ ,~
UZ2=C>~=!l"'" >~(.d52
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
o
u
H
...;~
I
!
....
~
(0 "'d-hO
;a,...,.'. .
III~! .. ..
N
.. ..
a ~ co
i j.Sj.sl L H nt t
1 ~. h.2 1 1\
f!!, II I j!11 1 ~.,q ~ I
P r I
~ "[,'j 1M Jf .I.!l s! H.[ 1
0 ! "8t :B1 M
" 'l;.Jh .q 1 IP.s..'l; 11. ,I n'~l
e I I] s. 1 .. .J i H
i ~ 11.~H! Is 11 1 ..1j.!llj H ~.I
s 1..11 "$] J .is) ~ g .U :i~. ..j
~ Uli...U~ 111 IU~ll 1Hiil
~l::dll.~ .!l8ul!'u ~.!l'l" ~ ....ul..[
.. . .. ..
. . . .. .
~
.,8
-~~
~n ~
!:l.. Z 0
Eo< 00 t:l
6~ e
~ ~
iJi
I s f
!.~ .J 1 M i :i ~ ~
11 ~ {lJt l:i 11~
lit .1 1~I.l fr~1 .2 I 1 .i1
~~ ~ [8 P "pl $ 1 f~
:~ .1 {I rf:s~! iff :&i
!! t ~1 P~i.1 if.
.'1 1111 fll!I!~'l;l.II.I'l;l.' I .!lJ
. ~~jl MI S.I ~ I 1i
1 .1MM s ~J _ s ~
111~IJJ[gj l1tJ~fJ'~1 t!Jl
uuL,..HUul.:! ~l u~ dh
.. . .. .. . .. .. ..
~
~
..
~
~
~
~ ~
. .
-e1l'"
.n
,.,."
. . .
I
u.
I
u
..;
I
]
.;
/ ~ - r:;)(p (
- ,
:i .f H IJ
~ ~ I U
i~J~ 1 iiH ~
!I. . le-d ~
:i! 5 ~ s r 1 '0
~~ : t I h 1
f ~ ,. 1 M"''I "
.~ 111'l; i.
I IU 1~ l"t~1
r.~ ......!l,!l ~ E
& s .~!~.:;n
~.ldfff~ruH
;Bu.u uj ..!l~ ~u..
.. .. ..
.~
! i 1 .f
f~ ..
1\ ~ 1 [
~.D~ ;-.i r
Ihi)ljU
. . . .. . .
j
:i
l
~
..;
~
~
~
~nll ..
0:
..
~ ~ ~
~ :{ I
~ } ~ t '; ~
i 1ft f~1l
8 i
e II I r~'
t ,~h h f I
; 1 e ~ 1 lJ i I
a',ip 11
Lu!l ~ ~
:;]
~
. . . . . . .
~ ' i
.,8 Ii 1
J~ 1'~ II j
i' ! l t & j
~~~
~"o ~ il1 I 1 1 5 I
!:Ii " U1 ,ra'lp ! sf
....!~ 0
\I>
5S ~ tSl1pt.2 1~il11
~ jl fl Hj! ifUl t
!l
51 "fljj,tI1,!lt1'j;
Jli]i~J 1)11)' lli~
. lz~"" " 0 z!
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
e
~ ~
I ~
..
~
.
I 1
I~i
" ..h
.
1'0 #cU,~
j,"i:iii;I"'~;;-;,,~ ~~;~
~i
N ~h
~ ,,!oz
'" . <.> 0
...l <:l~~
~ ';~~
~ BIj
! I J
~ I J
a ~ j ~ I }
~ . J J J ! J i ~ I } ~
~ :i
~
~
, " 'i J I J
ggg gz ~ ~~
.r
g
I } j
~
f
'lI
f j f J
f ; J .1 1 J ~ '6 !
~ f[~~ i.lj Ilf .!~
~ .f~f ~]~J:i",.ai> ~
19Lt 1 f;i~ fflijfi~~li
![... ~g!'.ft Jlj~IJ.r~~l
1~IIJI[!.j~tl .![ij!r[.g)j
I~B'lIj ~~ 1. Jjifl'oj~S]~
I I . Ii. Ii: I J J J s ~: i ! ! ~ ~
t J J J J ! f J i f J I ~ ~ J j J j j J J : i
~ r
~ ~
ri...........l.......... .
/b~b3
-- ..---------_._------.~. ..__._--,.~_._...,~_._---------"-,----
0\
,
o
....
~
~
l'l
g
>
j
"
~
t
~
ii
d: !h
_ .!IOZ
""'0
~ "~I::
~ ';1::1<
.. ~<
0"
~
~
~
~ ~
~
i ~
~
E .~ i
~
~ I J I
J 1 J I
! )111
.1111 I)
o
.....
,
o .-
.....
-[
J 1
! I i
f . ~
I lL-~ ! I i III
~ iljli"l!f ~ i ~ilt &.I.~ ii~
.. 1[.t~"'ll 1 I 1,. ~ii )';8 ~.
1 { i.. 1 3 i i 1 t. 1 t i I i J .f .i I ~..
I ~ I ] j J I ! ! i, ! I I : i Iii i ill ~
I Ii: l 1 f I It! 1 f j i f, i 'J~ ! i t t! ~..
1.11~uI166;!1l1.~J.lhl. ~1~~~ ~..
~ ~ : ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ : f : ~ : ~ ~l . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i
It) ,02btj
~~
N H~
! .;8~
~ "z!:
.. ~ ~ 1<
~ 8~
~ ~
g;
~
f J
I J
I J
I J ~
! f J
~
I
~ t ~
,.. & !
I ~
~ ~ ~
~ l! !t
,.. & <
J Ii! 1 J
~ .
I
I I
J.
I I I I Iff I
~ ~ ~ ~ ~,.. & <
~
.r f I .r
~ l < ~
-
-
,
o
-
'"
'"
~
f
! II 1 I
i :li 3 I
~ it~. 1 I~
.i~ii!j f~f f f! ~ ~
lir~.~l 1[1 1 1iu~11 ~
.'.li~!~ .I.I.~.IJI.1 .1.f~~.1 ~
~ ~s1i~ ~.Il~!;>"'~J~f~ltll~ ~
i~lili1i]i]3Iej]I[]1.1;~i ~i >
Ill~~.'; t'l ~t.ti~ll:ii]r i
lssls~i:f!l'l!l' I!I'. !l'l1J~~~.~" ~
lJJJfJi~J~J~JJ~J~JJ is}]! ~
~ ~ =
i 8 t
rI.l......!. . .. . ........ ~
/o,.X5
--.__.._--"'.,---'---_."._--_.~-_._._._._-_._---_._,-----
~ J ! J
~ 1 ! J I
~
~ ~ 1 f J
~ >-
i: -I f I
~ >- ~
~
~ J ! .,
~i g
N !h
~ ~8~
::l "zl=
~ ~~<
~ B~I
I
i
w: !
~ I I t
fll! "
jrnfd
. Illllf
-l
. . . . j . . .
N -
-
,
o .-.
-
~ -
~ -
~
g
>
:s
a .
I -,
:::
t ..
l::!
/ (') .. cJ.. '-6
County Df San DieGD
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
July 1, 1991
commercial/Industrial Business
establishments in San Diego County
Re: Requests for Information on Existing Recycling Activities
Dear General Manager:
The cities within San Diego County are in the process of meeting
the requirements of the California Integrated Waste Management Act
(AB 933), which mandates a 25% landfill diversion by 1995 and a 50%
diversion by 2000. In order to meet these requirements, it is
important for each city to identify the present quantity of solid
wastes, especially in the commercial and industrial sectors, that
is currently being recycled. The purpose of this letter is to
request your assistance in providing information regarding the
total quantity of solid waste being recycled at your facility.
Enclosed is a questionnaire for your use.
By completing the enclosure, you are not obligating your company in
any way to become involved in any outside recycling acti vi ties. We
will be using the requested information to assess the total
commercial and industrial solid waste that is currently being
recycled in each jurisdiction.
Please forward your response to the following:
Mr. Robert A. Hawfield, Jr.
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc.
430 N. vineyard Avenue, suite 310
Ontario, California 91764
Thank you in advance for your cooperation. If you have any
questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact our
consultant, camp Dresser & McKee Inc., Mr. Pat Huston at (619) 942-
2100.
Sincer~Y , .......d I.) I
Md&.t.MJ<{ {/J (Yy',iJ
WILLIAM A. WORRELL
Deputy Director
Department of Public Works
County of San Diego
County of San Diego AI 939 Staff (619) 694-2162/3962
5555 Overland Ave_ MS-0383, San Oiego, CA 92123-1295
o ,ri...... .. ..~t'C"" ....r
/b -;}b 7
-'-'-'-'-'"---"
Recycling and Waste Reduction Survey
For the San Diego Region
Your answers to the following questions will assist the County and cities in San Diego County to
design programs to help businesses with their recycling activities. This information also is
needed to help satisfy State reporting requirements for information about existing recycling and
waste reduction efforts as required by the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989.
Your company will not be identified and the information will not be used for any other purposes.
Company Name
and Address in San Diego
Contact Person and Phone
number
1.
a. Does your company separate any of its materials for recycling? _ Yes.
No.
b. Does your company purchase materials for recycling?
c. Does your company purchase items with recycled content?
_Yes.
No.
Yes.
No.
2. If your company's recyclable materials are transported to a recycling facility or market, is
this accomplished by your company's own employees or by arrangement with another company
or individual?
Our company employees transport our recyclables.
Our recyclables are collected by another company or individual.
The collector's name is:
3. What recycling facility or market receives your materials for recycling?
4. a. Is your company interested in starting or expanding its recycling efforts?
Yes. No.
b. If yes, what is needed to start or expand your recycling efforts?
~ Information on program set-up.
_ Information on recyclable materials buyers or sellers.
/tP -d-~9"
O.""I"'_~"" ........
l'..Tewspaper
_orrugated
cardboard
lixed or
colored paper
Ihite ledger and/or
computer paper
:lass
l'Um plastic
)!her plastic
Yard waste, brush,
.1ippings, etc.
wood
lther organic material
,.~ood wastes)
Material
.ppliances
Tin and bi-
--Ietal cans
rerrous
-""'\etal
..luminum
ither nonferrous
letal
Plastic
.:mtainers
-)THER
OTHER
JTHER
Materials Recycling Questionnaire
Estimated Monthly Quantities
Recycle
Minimum - Maximum
(specify Ib or cy)
Discard, would like to recycle
Minimum - Maximum
(specify Ib or cy)
10 --;)b9
--~_._----_.._--~.._~----~-
5. What else would be needed for your company to start or expand its recycling efforts?
Please explain:
"
6. Are there any problems or obstacles that need to be addressed to enable your company to
start or expand recycling? (You also may recommend City and County policies that would be
helpful.)
7. Does your company have any programs that encourage waste reduction, for example:
policies on double-sided copies, electronic mail systems, promoting the use of ceramic coffee
mugs, reduced packaging, or plant processes that minimize waste. If yes please explain. If
possible, estimate the reduction in amount of waste disposed.
Yes. No. Please explain:
~.
8. Listed on the next page are materials commonly recycled. Please indicate in the first
column, the range of quantities, by weight in pounds (lb) or volume in cubic yards (cy), that your
company typically may recycle over the course of a month. If your company is now discarding
materials that you believe could be recycled or reused, please estimate the quantities of these
discarded materials in the right hand column.
jO-d.-7D
9. Are there any other materials that your company produces which could be used by another
industry that have not been identified in the list of recyclables? Please explain.
10. a. How many persons does your company employ?
b. If your firm has multiple locations in San Diego County, please state average number of
employees at each address. Please attach information on a separate sheet if necessary.
Address
No. Employed
Address
No. Employed
11. Chief Executive Officer or Principal (Name/Title)
12. Please provide any other information about your recycling or waste reduction efforts that
might be helpful to this survey.
If you would like information about recycling or waste reduction, please contact the Recycling
Information Hotline, sponsored by the City and County of San Diego: I Love A Clean San Diego
County, 4901 Morena Blvd. Suite 703, San Diego, 92117, 270-8189 or 1-800-237-2583.
Thank you for your time and cooperation.
Your contribution to this effort is extremely valuable.
Please return this questionnaire to:
Mr. Pat Huston
. Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc.
430 North Vineyard Avenue, Suite 310
Ontario, California 91764
Survey recipients also may be contacted by telephone for information related to this study.
ID ~ 7/
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1990 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT "- WEIGHT "- WEIGHT "- "-
(TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 12017 6.6"- 2068 1.1"- 14065 7.7% 1.1"-
NEWSPAPER 6138 4.5% 0 0.00/0 6138 4.5% 0.00/0
MIXED PAPER 11594 6.4% 0 0.00/0 11594 6.4% 0.00/0
HG LEDGER 2560 1.4% 0 0.00/0 2560 1.4% 0.00/0
COMPllTER 0 0.00/0 0 0.00/0 0 0.00/0 0.00/0
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 3566 2.00/0 1 0.00/0 3566 2.00/0 0.00/0
HARD PLASTIC 4381 2.4% 0 0.00/0 4381 2.4% 0.00/0
GLASS 4753 2.6"- 0 0.00/0 4753 2.6"- 0.00/0
METALS
TIN CANS 2175 1.20/0 0 0.00/0 2175 1.20/0 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 402 0.20/0 2 0.00/0 404 0.20/0 0.00/0
MISC. METALS 0 0.00/0 0 0.00/0 0 0.00/0 0.00/0
YARD WASTE 31296 17.20/0 0 0.00/0 31296 17.20/0 0.00/0
WOOD WASTE 17456 9.6"- 0 0.00/0 17456 9.6"- 0.00/0
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1192 0.7% 0 0.00/0 1192 0.70/0 0.00/0
ASPHALT 65 0.00/0 0 0.00/0 65 0.00/0 0.00/0
DIRT/ROCKS/SAND 3316 1.6% 0 0.00/0 3316 1.8% 0.00/0
ROOFING 698 0.4% 0 0.00/0 698 0.4% 0.00/0
DRYWALL 461 0.30/0 0 0.00/0 461 0.3% 0.00/0
MIXED 13024 7.20/0 0 0.00/0 13024 7.20/0 0.00/0
OTHER
DIAPERS 3809 2.1% 0 0.00/0 3809 2.1% 0.00/0
MISCELLANEOUS 58n3 32.30/0 5 0.00/0 58n8 32.3% 0.00/0
SPECIAL WASTES 286 0.20/0 0 0.00/0 286 0.20/0 0.00/0
TOTALS
179986
20n
182063
1.1%
CHLVST1.WQ1
lo~d. 7~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1881 WASTE GENERATION COMPosmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 12257 8.6% 2110 1.1% 14387 7.7% 1.1%
NEWSPAPER 8301 4.5% 0 0.0% 8301 4.5% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 11_ 8.4% 0 0.0% 11_ 8.4% 0.0%
HG LEDGER 2832 1.4% 0 0.0% 2832 1.4% 0.0%
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM P~TlC 383ll 2.0% 1 0.0% 3841 2.0% 0.0%
HARD PLASTIC 4448 2.4% 0 0.0% 4448 2.4% 0.0%
GLASS 4847 2.6% 0 0.0% 4847 2.6% 0.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 2219 1.2% 0 0.0% 2219 1.2% 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 410 0.2% 2 0.0% 412 0.2% 0.0%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 31923 17.2% 0 0.0% 31923 17.2% 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 17805 9.6% 0 0.0% 17805 9.6% 0.0%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1216 0.7% 0 0.0% 1216 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHAlT 66 0.0% 0 0.0% 66 0.0% 0.0%
DIRT/ROCKS/SAND 3392 1.6% 0 0.0% 3392 1.8% 0.0%
ROOFING 712 0.4% 0 0.0% 712 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWAlL 491 0.3% 0 0.0% 491 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 13264 7.2% 0 0.0% 13264 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 3Il86 2.1% 0 0.0% 3Il86 2.1% 0.0%
MISCELlANEOUS 59947 32.3% 5 0.0% 59952 32.3% 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 292 0.2% 0 0.0% 292 0.2% 0.0%
TOTALS
1 Il35S3
2117
165,700
1.1%
CHLVST1.Wa1
. I tJ "'d 73
. .:..:~~.~~~ .
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1992 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(IONS) (IONS) (IONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 12497 6.6% 2151 1.1% 14648 7.7% 1.1%
NEWSPAPER 8463 4.5% 0 0.0% 8463 4.5% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 12056 6.4% 0 0.0% 12056 6.4% 0.0%
HG LEOOER 2663 1.4% 0 0.0% 2663 1.4% 0.0%
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 3711 2.0% 1 0.0% 3712 2.0% 0.0%
HARD plASTIC 4535 2.4% 0 0.0% 4535 2.4% 0.0%
GLASS 4942 2.6% 0 0.0% 4942 2.6% 0.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 2262 1.2% 0 0.0% 2262 1.2"- 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 416 0.2"- 2 0.0% 420 0.2"- 0.0%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 32549 17.2"- 0 0.0% 32549 17.2"- 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 16154 9.6% 0 0.0% 16154 9.6% 0.0%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1240 0.7% 0 0.0% 1240 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHALT 67 0.0% 0 0.0% 67 0.0% 0.0%
DIRTIROCKS/SAND 3449 1.6% 0 0.0% 3449 1.6% 0.0%
ROOFING 726 0.4% 0 0.0% 726 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 500 0.3% 0 0.0% 500 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 13544 7.2"- 0 0.0% 13544 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 3962 2.1% 0 0.0% 3962 2.1% 0.0%
MISCELLANEOUS 61121 32.3% 5 0.0% 61126 32.3"- 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 298 0.2"- 0 0.0% 298 0.2"- 0.0%
TOTALS
167179
2156
189,337
1.1%
CHLVST1.WQl
/o...;;ryf
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1993 WASTE GENERATION COMPosmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 12737 6.8% 2193 1.1% 14829 7.7% 1.1%
NEWSPAPER 6626 4.8% 0 0.0% 6626 4.5% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 12269 6.5% 0 0.0% 12269 6.4% 0.0%
HG LEDGER 2735 1.4% 0 0.0% 2735 1.4% 0.0%
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 3762 2.0% 1 0.0% 3763 2.0% 0.0%
HARD PLASTIC 4622 2.4% 0 0.0% 4622 2.4% 0.0% -
GLASS 5037 2.7% 0 0.0% 5037 2.8% 0.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 2305 1.2% 0 0.0% 2305 1.2% 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 426 0.2% 3 0.0% 428 0.2% 0.0%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 33174 17.5% 0 0.0% 33174 17.2% 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 18502 8.8% 0 0.0% 18502 8.8% 0.0%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1264 0.7% 0 0.0% 1264 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHALT 68 0.0% 0 0.0% 68 0.0% 0.0%
DIRTIROCKSJSAND 3515 1.8% 0 0.0% 3515 1.8% 0.0%
ROOFING 740 0.4% 0 0.0% 740 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 510 0.3% 0 0.0% 510 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 13804 7.3% 0 0.0% 13804 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 4038 2.1% 0 0.0% 4038 2.1% 0.0%
MISCELLANEOUS 62295 32.8% 5 0.0% 62301 32.3% 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 303 0.2% 0 0.0% 303 0.2% 0.0%
TOTALS
190774
2200
162,874
1.1%
CHLVSTI.WQl
It) -o<7S:-
... ....:..lI;"~.; ~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1994 WASTE GENERATION COMPosmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 12977 8.8% 2234 1.1% 15211 7.7% 1.1%
NEWSPAPER 8788 4.5% 0 0.0% 8788 4.5% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 12521 8.4% 0 0.0% 12521 8.4% 0.0%
HG LEDGER 2788 1.4% 0 0.0% 2788 1.4% 0.0%
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 3853 2.0% 1 0.0% 3854 2.0% 0.0%
HARD PLASTIC 4709 2.4% 0 0.0% 4709 2.4% 0.0%
GLASS 5132 2.8% 0 0.0% 5132 2.8% 0.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 2349 1.2% 0 0.0% 2349 1.2% 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 434 0.2% 3 0.0% 438 0.2% 0.0%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 33799 17.2% 0 0.0% 33799 17.2% 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 18851 9.8% 0 0.0% 18851 9.8% 0.0%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1288 0.7% 0 0.0% 1288 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHALT 70 0.0% 0 0.0% 70 0.0% 0.0%
DIRTIROCKS/SAND 3581 1.8% 0 0.0% 3581 1.8% 0.0%
ROOFING 754 0.4% 0 0.0% 754 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 519 0.3% 0 0.0% 519 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 14064 7.2% 0 0.0% 14064 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 4114 2.1% 0 0.0% 4114 2.1% 0.0%
MISCELLANEOUS 63469 32.3% 5 0.0% 83474 32.3% 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 309 0.2% 0 0.0% 309 0.2% 0.0%
TOTALS
194389
2241
198810
1.1%
CHLVST1.wOl
/0 ~;) 7~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1995 WASTE GENERATION COMPosmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 13217 8.6% 2275 1.1% 15482 7.7% 1.1%
NEWSPAPER 8951 4.5% 0 0.0% 8851 4.5% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 12752 8.4% 0 0.0% 12752 8.4% 0.0%
HG LEDGER 2838 1.4% 0 0.0% 2838 1.4% 0.0%
COMPIJTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PlASTIC 3924 2.0% 1 0.0% 3926 2.0% 0.0%
HARD PlASTIC 4796 2.4% 0 0.0% 4796 2.4% 0.0%
GLASS 5227 2.6% 0 0.0% 5227 2.6% 0.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 2392 1.2% 0 0.0% 2392 1.2% 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 442 0.2% 3 0.0% 445 0.2% 0.0%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 34424 17.2% 0 0.0% 34424 17.2% 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 19200 9.6% 0 0.0% 19200 9.6% 0.0%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1311 0.7% 0 0.0% 1311 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHALT 71 0.0% 0 0.0% 71 0.0% 0.0%
DIRT/ROCKS/SAND 3847 1.6% 0 0.0% 3847 1.8% 0.0%
ROOFING 788 0.4% 0 0.0% 788 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 529 0.3% 0 0.0% 529 0.3% 0.0% ,'..1
MIXED 14324 7.2% 0 0.0% 14324 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 4190 2.1% 0 0.0% 4190 2.1% 0.0%
MISCELLANEOUS 84843 32.3% 5 0.0% 84849 32.3% 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 315 0.2% 0 0.0% 315 0.2% 0.0% ','
TOTALS
197964
2283
200247
1.1%
CHLVST1.WQl
/O--d.7'7
,. ~. ,~,:~~';:"'," -~.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
19116 WASTE GENERATION COMPosmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONomONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 13397 6.6% 2306 1.1% 15703 7.7% 1.1%
NEWSPAPER 9073 4.5% 0 0.0% 8073 4.5% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 12926 6.4% 0 0.0% 12926 6.4% 0.0%
HG LEDGER 28n 1.4% 0 0.0% 28n 1.4% 0.0%
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 3978 2.0% 1 0.0% 3979 2.0% 0.0%
HARD PLASTIC 4862 2.4% 0 0.0% 4862 2.4% . 0.0%
GLASS 5298 2.6% 0 0.0% 5298 2.6% 0.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 2425 1.2% 0 0.0% 2425 1.2% 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 448 0.2% 3 0.0% 451 0.2% 0.0%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 34894 17.2% 0 0.0% 34894 17.2% 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 19462 9.6% 0 0.0% 19462 9.6% 0.0%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1329 0.7% 0 0.0% 1329 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHALT 72 0.0% 0 0.0% 72 0.0% 0.0%
DIRT/ROCKS/SAND 3697 1.8% 0 0.0% 3697 1.8% 0.0%
ROOFING n8 0.4% 0 0.0% n8 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 536 0.3% 0 0.0% 536 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 14520 7.2% 0 0.0% 14520 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 4247 2.1% 0 0.0% 4247 2.1% 0.0%
MISCELLANEOUS 65525 32.3% 5 0.0% 65531 32.3% 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 319 0.2% 0 0.0% 319 0.2% 0.0%
TOTALS
200665
2314
202979
1.1%
CHLVST1.WQl
/L?'d.7~
CITY OF CHUIA VISTA
1997 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSITION
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDITIONS
TOTALS
203365
234/j
205710
1.1%
CHLVST1.WQl
lo..r;).79
.....:. -,"._r..
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1898 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
TOTALS
206066
2376
208442
1.1%
CHLVST1.wa1
/O,.~
~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1999 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSITION
FOR AlL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDITIONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(TON8I (TON8I (TON8I
PAPER
CARDBOARD 13838 8.8% 2400 1.1% 18337 7.7% 1.1%
NEWSPAPER ll439 4.5% 0 0.0% ll439 4.5% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 13448 6.4% 0 0.0% 13448 8.4% 0.0%
HG LEDGER 2993 1.4% 0 0.0% 2993 1.4% 0.0%
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 4139 2.0% 1 0.0% 4140 2.0% 0.0%
HARD PlASTIC 5058 2.4% 0 0.0% 5058 2.4% 0.0%
--
GLASS 5512 2.8% 0 0.0% 5512 2.8% 0.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 2523 1.2% 0 0.0% 2523 1.2% 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 488 0.2% 3 0.0% 469 0.2% 0.0%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 38303 17.2% 0 0.0% 38303 17.2% 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 20248 9.8% 0 0.0% 20248 9.8% 0.0%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1393 0.7% 0 0.0% 1393 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHALT 75 0.0% 0 0.0% 75 0.0% 0.0%
DIRTIROCKSlSAND 3846 1.9% 0 0.0% 3846 1.8% 0.0%
ROOFING 909 0.4% 0 0.0% 909 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 559 0.3% 0 0.0% 559 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 15108 7.2% 0 0.0% 15108 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 4419 2.1% 0 0.0% 4419 2.1% 0.0%
MISCELLANEOUS 68171 32.3% 8 0.0% 68178 32.3% 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 332 0.2% 0 0.0% 332 0.2% 0.0%
TOTALS
209767
2407
211174
1.1%
CHLVST1.WQl
/()-~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2000 WASTE GENERATION COMPosmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 14118 6.8% 2431 1.1% 16549 7.7% 1.1%
NEWSPAPER llS61 4.5% 0 0.0% llS61 4.5% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 13622 6.4% 0 0.0% 13622 8.4% 0.0%
HG LEDGER 3031 1.4% 0 0.0% 3031 1.4% 0.0%
COMPlJTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 4192 2.0% 1 0.0% 4193 2.0% 0.0%
HARD PLASTIC 5123 2.4% 0 0.0% 5123 2.4% 0.0%
GLASS 5584 2.8% 0 0.0% 5584 2.8% 0.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 2556 1.2% 0 0.0% 2556 1.2% 0.0%
AlUMINUM CANS 472 0.2% 3 0.0% 475 0.2% 0.0%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 38772 17.2% 0 0.0% 38772 17.2% 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 2050S 8.8% 0 0.0% 2050S 8.8% 0.0%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1401 0.7% 0 0.0% 1401 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHALT 76 0.0% 0 0.0% 76 0.0% 0.0%
DIRT/ROCKS/SAND 3886 1.8% 0 0.0% 3886 1.8% 0.0%
ROOFING 820 0.4% 0 0.0% 820 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 565 0.3% 0 0.0% 565 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 15301 7.2% 0 0.0% 15301 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 4476 2.1% 0 0.0% 4476 2.1% 0.0%
MISCELLANEOUS 88053 32.3% 6 0.0% 68058 32.3% 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 338 0.2% 0 0.0% 338 0.2% 0.0%
TOTALS
211467
2438
213806
1.1%
CHLVST1.WQl
ItJ ~d.f-~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2001 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(lONS) (lONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 14243 8.6% 2_ 1.1% 18898 7.7% 1.1%
NEWSPAPER ll848 4.5% 0 0.0% ll848 4.5% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 13743 8.4% 0 0.0% 13743 8.4% 0.0%
HG LEDGER 3058 1.4% 0 0.0% 3058 1.4% 0.0%
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 4229 2.0% 1 0.0% 4231 2.0% 0.0%
HARD PLASTIC 5189 2.4% 0 0.0% 5189 2.4% 0.0%
GLASS 5533 2.6% 0 0.0% 5533 2.8% 0.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 2578 1.2% 0 0.0% 2578 1.2% 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 478 0.2% 3 0.0% 479 0.2% 0.0%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 370S8 17.2% 0 0.0% 370S8 17.2% 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 20891 9.6% 0 0.0% 20891 9.5% 0.0%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1413 0.7% 0 0.0% 1413 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHALT 77 0.0% 0 0.0% 77 0.0% 0.0%
DIRTIROCKS/SAND 3930 1.6% 0 0.0% 3930 1.8% 0.0%
ROOFING 827 0.4% 0 0.0% 827 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 570 0.3% 0 0.0% 570 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 15437 7.2% 0 0.0% 15437 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 4515 2.1% 0 0.0% 4515 2.1% 0.0%
MISCELLANEOUS 89885 32.3% 8 0.0% 89870 32.3% 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 339 0.2% 0 0.0% 339 0.2% 0.0%
TOTALS
213342
2480
215802
1.1%
CHLVST1.wa1
It) ~&.3
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2002 WASTE GENERATION COMPosmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
TOTALS
215217
2482
217699
1.1%
CHLVST1.WQl
It) "drftf
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2003 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
TOTALS
217092
2503
219595
1.1%
CHLVSTl.WQl
I t) -c;)g~
.>~_.,'"
.....J..
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2004 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
TOTALS
218967
2525
221492
1.1%
CHLVST1.WQl
/D("dEb
CITY OF CHU~ VISTA
2005 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 14744 8.8% 21538 1.1% 17282 7.7% 1.1%
NEWSPAPER IlIlll5 4.5% 0 0.0% IlIlll5 4.5% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 14228 8.4% 0 0.0% 14228 8.4% 0.0%
HG LEDGER 3188 1.4% 0 0.0% 3188 1.4% 0.0%
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 4378 2.0% 1 0.0% 4379 2.0% 0.0% ---.
HARD PLASTIC S350 2.4% 0 0.0% S350 2.4% 0.0%
GLASS 15831 2.8% 0 0.0% 15831 2.8% 0.0%
METALS
11N CANS 2889 1.2% 0 0.0% 2889 1.2% 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 493 0.2% 3 0.0% 498 0.2% 0.0%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 38402 17.2% 0 0.0% 38402 17.2% 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 21419 9.8% 0 0.0% 21419 9.6% 0.0%
CONSTRUC110N
CONCRETE 1463 0.7% 0 0.0% 1463 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHALT 80 0.0% 0 0.0% 80 0.0% 0.0%
DIRTJROCKSlSAND 4089 1.8% 0 0.0% 4089 1.8% 0.0%
ROOFING 856 0.4% 0 0.0% 856 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 590 0.3% 0 0.0% 590 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 15980 7.2% 0 0.0% 15980 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 4674 2.1% 0 0.0% 4674 2.1% 0.0%
MISCELLANEOUS 72114 32.3% 8 0.0% 72119 32.3% 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 351 0.2% 0 0.0% 351 0.2% 0.0%
TOTALS
220841
2547
223388
1.1%
CHLVST1.WQl
It) ---c2.f'1
'. -, -:.,~:~~~~~2~~ .,;",;';:;
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2006 WASTE GENERATION COMPosmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 14869 6.6"- 2560 1.1% 17429 7.7% 1.1%
NEWSPAPER 10070 4.5% 0 0.0% 10070 4.5% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 14347 8.4% 0 0.0% 14347 8.4% 0.0%
HG LEDGER 3193 1.4% 0 0.0% 3193 1.4% 0.0%
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM P~IC 4415 2.0% 1 0.0% 4417 2.0% 0.0%
HARD PLASTIC 5396 2.4% 0 0.0% 5396 2.4% 0.0%
GLASS 5881 2.6"- 0 0.0% 5881 2.6"- 0.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 2691 1.2% 0 0.0% 2691 1.2% 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 497 0.2% 3 0.0% 500 0.2% 0.0%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 38729 17.2% 0 0.0% '38729 17.2% 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 21601 9.6"- 0 0.0% 21601 9.6"- 0.0%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1475 0.7% 0 0.0% 1475 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHALT 60 0.0% 0 0.0% 80 0.0% 0.0%
DIRT/ROCKS/SAND 4103 1.8% 0 0.0% 4103 1.8% 0.0%
ROOFING 864 0.4% 0 0.0% 864 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 595 0.3% 0 0.0% 595 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 18115 7.2% 0 0.0% 16115 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 4714 2.1% 0 0.0% 4714 2.1% 0.0%
MISCELLANEOUS 72727 32.3% 8 0.0% 72733 32.3% 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 354 0.2% 0 0.0% 354 0.2% 0.0%
TOTALS
222719
2568
225287
1.1%
CHLVST1.WQ1
/~--~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1990 WASTE GENERATION COMPosmON
FOR AU WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(TCNIl) (TCNIl) (TCNIl)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 12017 6.6% 2069 1.1% 14Oll6 7.7% 1.1%
NEWSPAPER 6138 4.5% 0 0.0% 6138 4.5% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 11_ 6.4% 0 0.0% 11594 6.4% 0.0%
HG lEDGER 2560 1.4% 0 0.0% 2560 1.4% 0.0%
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 3568 2.0% 1 0.0% 3568 2.0% 0.0%
HARD PLASTIC 4381 2.4% 0 0.0% 4381 2.4% 0.0%
GLASS 4753 2.6% 0 0.0% 4753 2.6% 0.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 2175 1.2% 0 0.0% 2175 1.2% 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 402 0.2% 2 0.0% 404 0.2% 0.0%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 31298 17.2% 0 0.0% 31298 17.2% 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 17456 9.6% 0 0.0% 17456 9.6% 0.0%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1192 0.7% 0 0.0% 1192 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHALT 65 0.0% 0 0.0% 65 0.0% 0.0%
DIRTIROCKSlSAND 3316 1.6% 0 0.0% 3316 1.6% 0.0%
ROOFING 699 0.4% 0 0.0% 699 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWAll 461 0.3% 0 0.0% 461 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 13024 7.2% 0 0.0% 13024 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 3809 2.1% 0 0.0% 3809 2.1% 0.0%
MISCELLANEOUS ssn3 32.3% 5 0.0% ssn6 32.3% 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 298 0.2% 0 0.0% 266 0.2% 0.0%
TOTALS
179966
20n
162063
1.1%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNG
COMPOSTING
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
o
20n
o
o
20n
DIVERSION
0.0%
1.1%
0.0%
0.0%
1.1%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 3.3%
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 0.0%
CHlVST2.WQl
I () '~9
. .--.. -----~'-_.----.----.-------..---.---.-----.~_r_
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1991 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSITION
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDITIONS
TOTALS
183582
2118
185,700
1.1"
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNG
COMPOSTlNG
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
o
2118
o
o
2118
DIVERSION
0.0%
1.1"
0.0%
0.0%
1.1"
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 3.3"
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 0.0%
CHLVST2.WQ1
/0 -d<CjO
."'".._.,,1...."........,_."".....
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1992 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSITION
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT " WEIGHT " WEIGHT " "
(TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 13623 7.2% 1025 0.5" 1_ 7.7% 0.5"
NEWSPAPER 7871 4.2% 592 0.3% 8483 4.5% 0.3"
MIXED PAPER 11214 5.9% 844 0.4" 12058 6.4" 0.4"
HG LEDGER 2495 1.3% 166 0.1" 2663 1.4" 0.1"
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASnc
FILM PLASTIC 3452 1.6% 260 0.1" 3712 2.0% 0.1"
HARD PlASTIC 4217 2.2% 317 0.2% 4535 2.4" 0.2%
GLASS 4596 2.4" 346 0.2% 4942 2.6% 0.2%
METALS
TIN CANS 2104 1.1" 158 0.1" 2262 1.2% 0.1"
ALUMINUM CANS 64 0.0% 336 0.2% 420 0.2% 0.2%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 30107 15.9% 2441 1.3% 32549 17.2% 1.3%
WOOD WASTE 16792 8.9% 1392 0.7% 16154 9.6% 0.7"
CONSTRucnON
CONCRETE 1153 0.6% 87 0.0% 1240 0.7% 0.0%
ASPHALT 63 0.0% 5 0.0% 67 0.0% 0.0%
DIRTIROCKS/SAND 3207 1.7% 241 0.1" 3448 1.8" 0.1%
ROOFING 726 0.4" 0 0.0% 726 0.4" 0.0%
DRYWALL 500 0.3" 0 0.0% 500 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 13544 7.2% 0 0.0% 13544 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 3585 1.9% 396 0.2% 3962 2.1% 0.2%
MISCELLANEOUS 55014 29.1% 6113 3.2% 61128 32.3" 3.2%
SPECIAL WASTES 266 0.1" 30 0.0% 266 0.2% 0.0%
TOTALS
174595
14742
189,337
7.6%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCLING
COMPOSTING
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
396
10513
3603
30
14742
DIVERSION
0.2%
5.6%
2.0%
0.0%
7.6%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 16.3"
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 7.5%
CHLVST2.WQ1
1{J;;)1/
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1993 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
TOTALS
14.6%
CHLVST2.WQ1
164763
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNG
COMPOSTING
SPECIAL WASTE
28211
TONS
808
19591
n51
81
28211
192.974
DlVERSION
0.4%
10.2"-
4.0%
0.0%
14.6%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM
/0 ,.,;)q>~
29.8%
15.0%
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1894 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSITION
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(!ONllI (!ONllI (!ONllI
PAPER
CARDBOARD 10343 5.3% 04867 2.5% 15211 7.7'Yo 2.5%
NEWSPAPER 5976 3.ll'Jlo 2812 1.4% 6766 4.5% 1.4%
MIXED PAPER 8514 4.3% 4007 2.ll'Jlo 12521 6.4% 2.ll'Jlo
HG LEDGER 1895 1.ll'Jlo 892 0.5% 2788 1.4% 0.5%
COMPUTER 0 O.ll'Jlo 0 O.ll'Jlo 0 O.ll'Jlo O.ll'Jlo
Pl.ASTlC
FILM PLASTIC 2821 1.3% 1233 0.6% 3854 2.ll'Jlo 0.6%
HARD PLASTIC 3202 1.6% 1507 0.6% 4709 2.4% 0.6%
GLASS 3490 1.6% 1642 0.6% 5132 2.6% 0.6%
METALS
TIN CANS 1597 0.6% 752 0.4% 2349 1.2% 0.4%
ALUMINUM CANS ff1 O.ll'Jlo 349 0.2% 436 0.2% 0.2%
MISC. METALS 0 O.ll'Jlo 0 O.ll'Jlo 0 O.ll'Jlo O.ll'Jlo
YARD WASTE 26025 13.2% 7774 4.ll'Jlo 33799 17.2% 4.0%
WOOD WASTE 14515 7.4% 4336 2.2% 18951 9.6% 2.2%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 878 0.4% 412 0.2% 1288 0.7'Yo 0.2%
ASPHALT 48 O.ll'Jlo 22 O.ll'Jlo 70 O.ll'Jlo O.ll'Jlo
DfRT/ROCKS/SAND 2435 1.2% 1148 0.6% 3581 1.6% 0.6%
ROOFING 754 0.4% 0 O.ll'Jlo 754 0.4% O.ll'Jlo
DRYWALL 519 0.3% 0 O.ll'Jlo 519 0.3% O.ll'Jlo
MIXED 14064 7.2% 0 O.ll'Jlo 14064 7.2% O.ll'Jlo
OTHER
DIAPERS 2880 1.5% 1234 0.6% 4114 2.1% 0.6%
MISCELLANEOUS 57127 29.1% 8347 3.2% 63474 32.3% 3.2%
SPECIAL WASTES 216 0.1% 93 O.ll'Jlo 309 0.2% O.ll'Jlo
TOTALS
157185
39425
196610
20.1%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNG
COMPOSTlNG
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
1234
25989
12109
93
39425
DIVERSION
0.6%
13.2%
6.2%
O.ll'Jlo
20.1%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 38.7'Yo
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 23.0%
CHLVST2.wa1
/O;df3
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1995 WASTE GENERAnON COMPOSmON
FOR AU WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
TOTALS
149134
51113
200247
25.5%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCLING
COMPOSTING
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
1676
33224
16087
126
51113
DIVERSION
0.8%
18.6%
8.0%
0.1%
25.5%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 48.6%
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 30.0%
CHLVST2.WQ1
(/J #d-qf'
^l,,;~,r' (' ..,....."._"
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1996 WASTE GENERA110N COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
TOTALS
138226
64753
202979
31.9%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCLING
COMPOSTlNG
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
1954
39279
23373
147
64753
DIVERSION
1.0%
19.4%
11.5%
0.1%
31.9%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 56.7%
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 43.0%
CHLVST2.WQl
/tJ --d<.'fS-
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1997 WASTE GENERAnON COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
TOTALS
127601
78109
205710
38.0%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNG
COMPOSTING
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
2238
44854
30849
1118
78109
DIVERSION
1.1%
21.8%
15.0%
0.'%
38.0%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 83.9%
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 58.0%
CHLVST2.WQl
f~ "dr~
CllY OF CHULA VISTA
1898 WASTE GENERAnON COMPOSmON
FOR All WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
TOTALS
117842
90600
208442
43.S%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCLING
COMPOSTING
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
2S3O
49924
379S7
190
90600
DIVERSION
1.2%
24.0%
18.2%
0.1%
43.S%
REMOVAl OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYClABLE WASTE STREAM 70.2%
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 88.0%
CHlYST2.wal
I ~ -02-7'7
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1999 WASTE GENERAnON COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNG
COMPOSTlNG
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
2828
56407
38758
212
96204
DIVERSION
1.3%
26.7%
17.4%
0.1%
45.8%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 78.3%
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 65.0%
CHLVST2.WQl
It') -dcrr
..,,;-.l"t-...:;,
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2000 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSITION
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
DISPOSED DIVERTEO GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT " WEIGHT " WEIGHT " "
(tONS) (tONS) (tONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 3841 1."", 12908 6.0% 16549 7."", 6.0%
NEWSPAPER 2104 1.0% 7458 3.5" 1I5EI1 4.5" 3.5"-
MIXED PAPER 2997 1.4% 10625 5.0% 13622 6.4% 5.0%
HG LEDGER 667 0.3% 2384 1.1% 3031 1.4% 1.1%
COMPIJTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PlASTIC 923 0.4% 3271 1.5% 4193 2.0% 1.5%
HARD PlASTIC 1127 0.5"- 3896 1.9% 5123 2.4% 1.9%
GLASS 1226 0.6% 4355 2.0% SS84 2.6% 2.0%
METALS
TIN CANS S62 0.3% 1993 0.9% 2556 1.2% 0.9%
ALUMINUM CANS 95 0.0% 360 0.2% 475 0.2% 0.2%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 7722 3.6% 29050 13.6% 36772 17.2% 13.6%
WOOD WASTE 4307 2.0% 16202 7.6% 2050S 9.6% 7.6%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 306 0.1% 1093 0.5% 1401 0."", 0.5%
ASPHALT 17 0.0% 59 0.0% 76 0.0% 0.0%
DIRT/ROCKSlSAND 657 0.4% 3039 1.4% 3696 1.6% 1.4%
ROOFING 620 0.4% 0 0.0% 620 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL S65 0.3% 0 0.0% S65 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 15301 7.2% 0 0.0% 15301 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 1M3 0.6% 3133 1.5% 4476 2.1% 1.5%
MISCELLANEOUS 62152 29.1% 6906 3.2% 69056 32.3% 3.2%
SPECIAL WASTES 101 0.0% 235 0.1% 336 0.2% 0.1%
TOTALS
106637
107069
213906
50.1%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCLING
COMPOSTlNG
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
3133
S9446
452S3
235
107069
DIVERSION
1.5%
27.3%
21.2%
0.1%
50.1%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 60.1%
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 79.0%
CHLVST2.WQ1
/ () .;21;
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2001 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSITION
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
TOTALS
10n84
108018
215802
50.1%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCLING
COM POSTING
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
3181
58988
45854
237
108018
DIVERSION
U%
27.3%
21.2%
0.1%
50.1%
,-'
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 80.1%
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 79.0%
CHLVST2.WQl
It)" ](j()
',:!
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2002 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSITION
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT " WEIGHT " WEIGHT " "
(!tlN8) (!tlN8) (!tlN8)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 3705 1.7"- 13137 6.0% 1111142 7.7"- 6.0%
NEWSPAPER 2141 1.0% 7!i8O 3.5" 9731 4.5" 3.5"-
MIXED PAPER 3050 1.4" 10514 5.0% 1311114 6.4" 5.0%
HG LEDGER 679 0.3" 2405 1.1" 3055 1.4" 1.1"
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PlASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 939 0.4" 3329 1.5"- 42118 2.0% 1.5"
HARD PlASTIC 1147 0.5"- 4057 1.9"- 5214 2.4" 1.9"-
GLASS 1250 0.6"- 4433 2.0% 51183 2.6"- 2.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 572 0.3"- 2029 0.9"- 2501 1.2"- 0.9%
AlUMINUM CANS 97 0.0% 367 0.2"- 463 0.2"- 0.2"-
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 7859 3.6"- 295e5 13.6"- 37424 17.2"- 13.6"-
WOOD WASTE 43113 2.0% 16490 7.6"- 20573 9.6"- 7.6"-
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 314 0.1" 1112 0.5% 1426 0.7"- 0.5%
ASPHALT 17 0.0% eo 0.0% n 0.0% 0.0%
D1RTIROCKSlSAND 672 0.4% 3093 1.4% 3ge5 1.6"- 1.4%
ROOFING 835 0.4% 0 0.0% 835 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 575 0.3"- 0 0.0% 575 0.3"- 0.0%
MIXED 15573 7.2"- 0 0.0% 15573 7.2"- 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 1367 0.6"- 3189 1.5% 4555 2.1% 1.5%
MISCELLANEOUS 63255 29.1% 7028 3.2"- 70283 32.3% 3.2"-
SPECIAL WASTES 103 0.0% 240 0.1% 342 0.2"- 0.1%
TOTALS
105731
1 0896ll
217699
50.1%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNG
COMPOSTING
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
3189
59485
4eD55
240
105968
DIVERSION
1.5"
27.3"-
21.2"-
0.1%
50.1%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM eo.l %
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 79.0%
CHLVST2.WQl
/o-~o/
__'.~_'_.'__'______"_____'_~___"__.~___'_____"_"_~__.0____
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2003 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSITION
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(fllNS) (fllNS) (fllNS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 3738 1.7'l6 13251 6.0'l6 1_ 7.7'l6 6.0'l6
NEWSPAPER 21159 1.0'l6 76Ii6 3.5% llll16 4.5% 3.5%
MIXED PAPER ~ 1.4% 10908 5.0'l6 1311114 6.4% 5.0'l6
HG LEDGER 665 0.3% 2427 1.1% 3112 1.4% 1.1%
COMPUTER 0 0.0'l6 0 0.0'l6 0 0.0'l6 0.0'l6
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 947 0.4% 3358 1.5% 4305 2.0'l6 1.5%
HARD PLASTIC 1157 0.5% 4102 1.9% 5260 2.4% 1.9%
GLASS 1261 0.6'l6 4471 2.0'l6 5732 2.6'l6 2.0'l6
METALS
TIN CANS 577 0.3% 2046 0.9% 2623 1.2% 0.9%
AlUMINUM CANS llll 0.0'l6 390 0.2% 488 0.2% 0.2%
MISC. METAlS 0 0.0'l6 0 0.0'l6 0 0.0'l6 0.0'l6
YARD WASTE 7926 3.6'l6 26623 13.6'l6 37750 17.2% 13.6'l6
WOOD WASTE 4422 2.0'l6 16633 7.6'l6 21055 9.6'l6 7.6'l6
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 316 0.1% 1122 0.5% 1438 0.7'l6 0.5%
ASPHALT 17 0.0'l6 61 0.0'l6 78 0.0'l6 0.0'l6 "
DfRTIROCKSISAND 880 0.4% 3120 1.4% 3999 1.6'l6 1.4%
ROOFING 642 0.4% 0 0.0'l6 642 0.4% 0.0'l6
DRYWALL 880 0.3% 0 0.0'l6 880 0.3% 0.0'l6
MIXED 15708 7.2% 0 0.0'l6 15708 7.2% 0.0'l6
OTHER
DIAPERS 1378 0.6'l6 3218 1.5% - 2.1% 1.5%
MISCELlANEOUS 83805 29.1% 7089 3.2% 70895 32.3% 3.2% -
SPECIAL WASTES 104 0.0'l6 242 0.1% 345 0.2% 0.1%
TOTALS
10111178
109917
219il95
50.1%
SOURCE REDUCTION
ilECYCUNG
COMPOSTING
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
3218
80003
494il9
242
109917
DIVERSION
1.5%
27.3%
21.2%
0.1%
50.1%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 80.1 %
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 79.0'l6
CHLVST2.WQl
/0 -.fOr)....
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2004 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSITION
FOR All. WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
TOTALS
11 0636
110856
221492
50.0%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCLING
COMPOSTING
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
3244
8OS11
46857
244
110856
DIVERSION
1.5%
27.3%
21.2%
0.1%
50.0%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLIE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 80.1 %
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 79.0%
CHLVST2.WQ1
!{)-JOJ
-"_._._'--------_._--,.----~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2005 WASTE GENERAnON COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED ~.
WEIGHT " WEIGHT " WEIGHT " "
(rONB) (rONB) (rONB)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 3802 1.7% 13480 8.0'J(, 17282 7.7% 8.0'J(,
NEWSPAPER 2197 1.0'J(, 7789 3.5'J(, 99lI5 4.5'J(, 3.5%
MIXED PAPER 3130 1.4% 11098 5.0'J(, 1_ 8.4" 5.0'J(,
HG LEDGER 896 0.3% 2_ 1.1" 3188 1.4" 1.1%
COMPlJTER 0 O.O'J(, 0 O.O'J(, 0 O.O'J(, O.O'J(,
PLAlnc ,'--
FILM PlASTIC 983 0.4% 3418 1.5" 4379 2.0'J(, 1.5'J(,
HARD PlASTIC 1177 0.5" 4173 1.9% 5350 2.4% 1.9%
GLASS 1283 0.8'Jfo 4548 2.0'J(, 5831 2.8'Jfo 2.0'J(,
METALS
nN CANS 587 0.3% 2082 0.9% 2889 1.2% 0.9%
AlUMINUM CANS 109 O.O'J(, 387 0.2% 496 0.2% 0.2%
MISC. METALS 0 O.O'J(, 0 O.O'J(, 0 O.O'J(, O.O'J(,
YARD WASTE 8064 3.8'Jfo 30338 13.8'Jfo 38402 17.2% 13.8'Jfo
WOOD WASTE 4498 2.0'J(, 18921 7.8'Jfo 21419 9.8'Jfo 7.8'Jfo
CONSTRucnON
CONCRETE 322 0.1" 1141 0.5% 1_ 0.7% 0.5%
ASPHALT 17 O.O'J(, 152 O.O'J(, 80 O.O'J(, O.O'J(,
DtRTIROCKSlSAND 895 0.4% 3173 1.4% 4089 1.8'Jfo 1.4%
ROOFING 856 0.4% 0 O.O'J(, 856 0.4% O.O'J(,
DRYWALL 590 0.3% .0 O.O'J(, 590 0.3% O.O'J(,
MIXED 15880 7.2% 0 O.O'J(, 15880 7.2% O.O'J(,
OTHER
DIAPERS 1402 0.8'Jfo 3272 1.5'J(, 4874 2.1" 1.5'J(,
MISCELLANEOUS 64908 29.1% 7212 3.2% 72119 32.3% 3.2%
SPECIAL WASTES 105 O.O'J(, 248 0.1% 351 0.2% 0.1%
TOTALS
111583
111805
223388
SO.O'J(,
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNG
COMPOSTlNG
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
3272
81029
47258
248
111805
DIVERSION
1.5"
27.3%
21.2%
0.1%
SO.O'J(,
REMOVAL OF RECVCLABlE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 80.1 'I'
REMOVAl OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 79.0'J(,
CHlVST2.WQl
ItJ "3DLf
~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2006 WASTE GENERAnON COMPOSmON
FOR All. WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(IONS) (IONS) (IONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 3834 1.7% 13595 8.0% 17429 7.7% 8.0%
NEWSPAPER 2215 1.0% 7655 3.5% 10070 4.5% 3.5%
MIXED PAPER 3156 1.4% 11191 5.0% 14347 8.4% 5.0%
HG LEDGER 702 0.3% 2490 1.1% 3193 1.4% 1.1%
COMPlITER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 972 0.4% 3445 1.5% 4417 2.0% 1.5%
HARD PLASTIC 1187 0.5% 4209 1.9% 5396 2.4% 1.9%
GLASS 1294 0.6% 4567 2.0% 5661 2.6% 2.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 592 0.3% 2099 0.9% 2691 1.2% 0.9%
ALUMINUM CANS 110 0.0% 390 0.2% 500 0.2% 0.2%
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 8133 3.6% 30598 13.8% 39729 17.2% 13.6%
WOOD WASTE 4538 2.0% 17085 7.6% 21801 9.6% 7.6%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 325 0.1% 1151 0.5% 1475 0.7% 0.5%
ASPHALT 18 0.0% 83 0.0% 80 0.0% 0.0%
DtRTIROCKS/SAND 903 0.4% 3200 1.4% 4103 1.8% 1.4%
ROOFING 884 0.4% 0 0.0% 884 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWAll 595 0.3% 0 0.0% 595 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 18115 7.2% 0 0.0% 18115 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 1414 0.6% 3300 1.5% 4714 2.1% 1.5%
MISCELlANEOUS 85459 29.1% 7273 3.2% 72733 32.3% 3.2%
SPECIAL WASTES 108 0.0% 248 0.1% 354 0.2% 0.1%
TOTALS
112531
112756
225287
50.0%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNG
COMPOSTING
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
3300.
81548
47880
248
112756
DIVERSION
1.5%
27.3%
21.2%
0.1%
50.0%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 80.1%
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 79.0%
CHLVST2.WQl
/t) ~ ::3t'S-
SRRE Checklist page 1
1/29/91
({J
SRRE CHECKLIST
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
II. SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENT
Chapter 1. Statement of Goals and Obiectives (18731)
Defin~ goals and objectives for short- and medium-term
planning periods.
Include summary of percentages to be diverted through each
component program.
Include time frame for achievement of each objective.
Suggestion: this chapter can include a summary of the objectives
listed for each component, and a table summarizing percentages
diverted and the time frame for each objective.
Chapter 2. Solid Waste Generation Analvsis (18732)
Along with the solid waste generation analysis outlined in the
attachment, the following 4 lists must be included:
(a) by specific waste categories, a list of quantities of
materials currently diverted, and a list of quantities of
materials currently disposed
(b) a list of waste materials disposed that could potentially
be diverted by programs described in this document
(c) a list of waste materials disposed that can't be diverted
and why
Chapter 3. Source Reduction Component
1. Objectives (18733.1, 18734.1)
(based on Solid Waste Generation Analysis and other local
conditions as necessary)
(a) state specific objectives to be accomplished during short
and medium-term by this component, including
(1) reducing use of non-recyclable materials
(2) replacing disposable materials with reusable
(3) reducing packaging
(4) reducing amount of yard waste generated
(5) purchasing repairable products
/D -.;;3()6
----,-
SRRE Checklist page 2
1/29/91
CL)
1- -;;
t _ 2.
:---
(6) increasing efficiency of use of materials
(b) Identify priority waste categories or types for diversion
by source reduction, which may be based on
(1) volume/weight/hazard of material
(2) whether material, products, or packaging are made of non-
renewable resources
(3) potential to extend life of materials
(4) whether waste type has limited recyclability
2. E~istinq Conditions Description (18733.2, 18734.2)
(a) as applicable, include description of existing diversion
alternatives as follows:
(1) Brief description of existing source reduction
alternatives currently being done by public and private
entities, including govt, commercial, industrial
(2) Quantity (in vol. or wt.) diverted for each alternative,
listed by category and type
o describe, document, and verify methods, assumptions
results
o must use best readily available data
(3) Description of alternatives that will be decreased in
scope, effects of this on existing solid waste management, and
effects on attainment of mandated diversion goals.
NOTE: The above is an important section since it will be "used to
support .the quantification of existing diversion alternatives to
determine the current percentage of solid waste diverted". 18733.2
3. Evaluation of Alternatives (18733.3, 18734.3)
(a) Each alternative shall be evaluated in terms of
(1) effectiveness in reduction of waste
(2) hazards created
(3) ability to accommodate change
(4) consequences on the waste (i.e., shifts)
(5) whether can be implemented in short- and medium-term
planning periods
(6) need for expanding/building facilities
(b) For each alternative also include discussion of
(1) consistency with local conditions
(2) institutional barriers to implementation
(3) estimate of costs
(4) availability of end uses of diverted materials
/ /) ., ~f)7
SRRE checklist page 3
1/29/91
(1)
,..: CJ
~
rt-_'"t-
t,..).-
(c) Four specific source reduction alternatives shall be
considered:
(1) rate structure modifications, which may include:
o local waste disposal fee modifications
o quantity-based local user fees
(2) creation of economic incentives, which may include:
o loans, grants, loan guarantees
o deposits, refunds, rebates
o reduced business license fees
(3) technical assistance or instructional and promotional
alternatives, which may include:
o waste evaluations
o establishment of compost programs at site of
generation
o technical assistance to industry and consumer
organizations and source reduction businesses
o education efforts
o awards/other public recognition for source reduction
o non-procurement source reduction programs (2-sided
copies, etc.)
(4) regulatory programs, which may include:
o local ordinances of crjteria for procuring products,
such as durability, recyclability, reusability, and recycled
material content
o local incentives for land-use development that promote
source reduction
o local requirements of waste reduction planning and
reporting by generators
o local adoption of bans on products and packaging
4. Selection of Program (18733.4)
(a) Identify and describe alternatives selected, including
o existing alternatives
o expansions of existing alternatives
o new alternatives to be implemented
(b) For each alternative, discuss
(1) why it was selected, based on data in waste generation
study, and the evaluations above
(2) estimate anticipated quantities to be diverted
o by diversion program and waste type
o for short-term and medium-term planning periods
o in vol. or wt.
o and % it will contribute to 25%/50% goals
...J..2 (3) as applicable, list of end uses for diverted materials
(based on evaluation above)
,> (4) as applicable, description of proposed methods- for
necessary handling and disposal
IO--dPf
SRRE Checklist page 4
1/29/91
(..L)
(5) as applicable, description of facilities to be used, which
the evaluation has shown must be expanded or built
5. Program Implementation (18733.5)
(a) Identify govt agencies, organizations, etc. responsible
to implement the program
(b) Identify tasks necessary for implementation
(c) Identify short-term and medium-term implementation
schedule addressing each task
(c) Identify known costs, revenues, and revenue sources
necessary for implementation
6. Monitoring and Evaluation (18733.6)
(a) Identify methods to quantify and monitor achievement of
objectives, including diversion from landfills and
transformation facilities, and reduction of waste hazard
Also, quantify waste diverted in vol. or wt., and in
percent of total waste generated.
(b) Use one of the following methods to monitor programs and
evaluate compliance with mandated diversion requirements:
(1) Further Waste Generation study
(2) targeted solid waste characterization studies, to measure
changes
(3) assessment of changes in design, production,
distribution, sale, and/or use of products/packages
which affect waste generation.
(4) another method approved by the Board.
(c) From the methods selected, provide
(1) written criteria for evaluating program's effectiveness
(2) identification of agencies/persons/etc. responsible for
monitoring, evaluating, reporting
(3) identification of known monitoring and evaluation funding
requirements, revenues, revenue sources
(4) identification of measures to be implemented if monitoring
shows shortfall in attaining objectives/diversion mandates.
Measures may include:
(A) increasing frequency of monitoring/review of program
(B) modification of objectives or diversion alternatives
/ /) ~t)'1
1;:
SRRE Checklist page 5
1/29/91
(L)
Chapter 4. Recvclina Component
1. objectives (18733.1, 18735.,1)
(based on Solid Waste Generation Analysis and other local
conditions as necessary)
(a) State specific objectives to be accomplished during short
and medium-term by this component, including a statement of
market development objectives to be achieved in short- and
medium-term planning periods.
(b) Identify priority waste categories or types for diversion
by recycling, which may be based on
(1) volume/weight/hazard of material
(2) whether material, products, or 'packaging are made of non-
rene~able resources
2. Existing Conditions Description (18733.2, 18735.2)
(a) as applicable, include description of existing diversion
alternatives as follows:
(1) Brief description of existing recycling alternatives
(2) Quantity (in vol. or wt.) diverted for each alternative,
listed by category and type
(3) Description of alternatives that will be decreased in
scope, effects of this on existing solid waste management, and
effects on attainment of mandated diversion goals.
(b) Description of:
o existing private and public recycling activities
o existing local market development activities, including
government procurement programs
o economic development activities
o consumer incentives
o education programs
NOTE: The above is an important section since it will be "used to
support the quantification of existing diversion alternatives to
determine the current percentage of solid waste diverted". 18733.2
3. Evaluation of Alternatives (18733.3, 18735.3)
(a) Each alternative shall be evaluated in terms of
(1) effectiveness in reduction of waste
(2) hazards created
(3) ability to accommodate change
(4) consequences on the waste (i.e., shifts)
If) ...~D
SRRE Checklist page 6
1/29/91
(.:L)
(5) whether can be implemented in short- and medium-term
planning periods
(6) need for expanding/building facilities
(b) For each alternative also include discussion of
(1) consistency with local conditions
(2) institutional barriers to implementation
(3) estimate of costs
(4) availability of end uses of diverted materials
(c) Analyze recycling alternatives affecting residential,
commercial, and industrial wastes.
Take into account existing programs and their possible
expansion. Address advantages/disadvantages of public
vs. private ownership or operation of recycling programs and
facilities.
(1) alternatives must include the following methods for
accomplishing separation of recyclables:
o separation at source (curbside & mobile collection
systems)
o drop-off recycling centers
o buy-back recycling centers
o manual material recovery operations
o Mechanized material recovery operations which produce a
product which has a market
o salvage at solid waste facilities
(2) discuss feasibility of changing zoning and building codes
to encourage recycling
(3) discuss feasibility of changing rate structures to
encourage recycling
(4) discuss methods to increase markets for recycled materials
(5) encourage handling methods that preserve integrity of
recovered materials (consider separation at point of
generation)
4. selection of Program (18733.4, 18735.4)
(a) Identify and describe alternatives selected, including
o existing alternatives
o expansions of existing alternatives
o new alternatives to be implemented
(b) For each alternative, discuss
(1) why it was selected, based on data in waste generation
study, and the evaluations above
(2) estimate anticipated quantities to be diverted
o by diversion program and waste type
o for short-term and medium-term planning periods
o in vol. or wt.
~...~/i
~-
:,L.t".......' ';'i.''!i..~..'!
SRRE Checklist page 7
1/29/91
(.L)
o and % it will contribute to 25%/50% goals
(3) as applicable, list of end uses for diverted materials
(based on evaluation above)
(4) as applicable, description
necessary handling and disposal
(5) as applicable, description of
the evaluation has shown must be
of proposed methods for
facilities to be used, which
expanded or built
(c) Identify end markets or end users to be secured during
short-term. If this can't be done, identify how markets will
be secured.
(1) can describe markets in general terms
(2) also described planned development of markets at
manufacturing facilities in the jurisdiction.
(d) Describe measures to be taken if unfavorable market
conditions or other unfavorable conditions occur which are
beyond the jurisdiction's control and which prevent reaching
25%/50% goals.
s. Program Implementation (18733.5, 18735.5)
(a) Identify govt agencies, organizations, etc. responsible
to implement the program
(b) Identify tasks necessary for implementation
(c) Identify short-term and medium-term implementation'
schedule addressing each task
(d) Identify known costs, revenues, and revenue sources
necessary for implementation
(e) Denote actions planned to deter unauthorized removal of
recyclables, which adversely affect program.
6. Monitoring and Evaluation (18733.6)
(a) Identify methods to quantify and monitor achievement of
objectives, including diversion from landfills and
transformation facilities, and reduction of waste hazard
Also, quantify waste diverted in vol. or wt., and in
percent of total waste generated.
(b) Use one of the following methods to monitor programs and
evaluate compliance with.mandated diversion requirements:
(1) Further Waste Generation study
(2) targeted solid waste characterization studies, to measure
changes
/o..~/~
SRRE Checklist page 8
1/29/91
LL)
(3) assessment of changes in design, production,
distribution, sale, and/or use of products/packages
which affect waste generation.
(4) another method approved by the Board.
(c) From the methods selected, provide
(1) written criteria for evaluating program's effectiveness
(2) identification of agencies/persons/etc. responsible for
monitoring, evaluating, reporting
(3) identification of known monitoring and evaluation funding
requirements, revenues, revenue sources
(4) i4entification of measures to be implemented if monitoring
shows shortfall in attaining objectives/diversion mandates.
Measures may include:
(A) increasing frequency of monitoring/review of program
(B) modification of objectives or diversion alternatives
Chapter 5. Compostinq Component
1. Objectives (18733.1, 18736.1)
(based on Solid Waste Generation Analysis and other local
conditions as necessary)
(a) state specific objectives to be accomplished during short
and medium-term by this component, including a statement of
market development objectives to be achieved in s~ort- and
medium-term planning periods.
(b) Identify priority waste categories or types for diversion
by composting, which may be based on
(1) volume/weight/hazard of material
(2) whether material, products, or packaging made of non-
renewable resources
2. Existing Conditions Description (18733.2, 18736.2)
(a) as applicable, include description of existing diversion
alternatives as follows: .
(1) Brief description of existing composting alternatives
(2) Quantity (in vol. or wt.) diverted for each alternative,
listed by category and type
(3) Description of alternatives that will be decreased in
scope, effects of this on existing solid waste management, and
effects on attainment of mandated diversion goals.
It; ~/~
SRRE Checklist page 9
1/29/91
(...i..)
(b) Description of:
o existing local market development activities, including
government procurement programs
o economic development activities
o consumer incentives
NOTE: The above is an important section since it will be "used to
support the quantification of existing diversion alternatives to
determine the current percentage of solid waste diverted". 18733.2
3. Evaluation of Alternatives (18733.3, 18736.3)
(a) Each alternative shall be evaluated in terms of
(1) effectiveness in reduction of waste
(2) hazards created
(3) ability to accommodate change
(4) consequences on the waste (i.e., shifts)
(5) whether can be implemented in short- and medium-term
planning periods
(6) need for expanding/building facilities
(b) For each alternative also include discussion of
(1) consistency with local conditions
(2) institutional barriers to implementation
(3) estimate of costs
(4) availability of end uses of diverted materials
(c) Alternatives will qualify toward diversion mandates only
if the product results from controlled biological
decomposition of organic wastes that are source separated from
municipal solid waste stream or separated at a centralized
facility.
(d) Alternatives do not include composting at site of
generation by generator (this is source reduction).
4. Selection of Program (18733.4, 18736.4)
(a) Identify and describe alternatives selected, including
o existing alternatives
o expansions of existing alternatives
o new alternatives to be implemented
(b) For each alternative, discuss
(1) why it was selected, based on data in waste generation
study, and the evaluations above
(2) estimate anticipated quantities to be diverted
o by diversion program and waste type
o for short-term and medium-term planning periods
/t) "~f
SRRE Checklist page 10
1/29/91
<..~)
o in vol. or wt.
o and % it will contribute to 25%/50% goals
(3) as applicable, list of end uses for diverted materials
(based on evaluation above)
(4) as applicable, description of proposed methods for
necessary handling and disposal
(5) as applicable, description of facilities to be used, which
the evaluation has shown must be expanded or built
(c) Identify end markets or end users to be secured during
short-term. If this can't be done, identify how markets will
be secured.
(1) can describe markets in general terms
(2) also described planned development of markets at
manufacturing facilities in the jurisdiction.
(d) Describe measures to be taken if unfavorable market
conditions or other unfavorable conditions occur which are
beyond the jurisdiction's control and which prevent reaching
25%/50% goals.
5. Program Implementation (18733.5)
(a) Identify govt agencies, organizations, etc. responsible
to implement the program
(b) Identify tasks necessary for implementation
(c) Identify short-term and medium-term implementation
schedule addressing each task
(d) Identify known costs, revenues, and revenue sources
necessary for implementation
6. Monitoring and Evaluation (18733.6)
(a) Identify methods to quantifY and monitor achievement of
objectives, including diversion from landfills and
transformation facilities, and reduction of waste hazard
Also, quantify waste diverted in vol. or wt., and in
percent of total waste generated.
(b) Use one of the following methods to monitor programs and
evaluate compliance with mandated diversion requirements:
(1) Further Waste Generation study
(2) targeted solid waste characterization studies, to measure
changes
(3) assessment of changes in design, production,
distribution, sale, and/or use of products/packages
which affect waste generation.
(4) another method approved by the Board.
io /~/5
SRRE Checklist page 11
1/29/91
( vi)
(c) From the methods selected, provide
(1) written criteria for evaluating program's effectiveness
(2) identification of agencies/persons/etc. responsible for
monitoring, evaluating, reporting
(3) identification of known ,monitoring and evaluation funding
requirements, revenues, revenue sources
(4) identification of measures to be implemented if monitoring
shows shortfall in attaining objectives/diversion mandates.
Measures may include:
(A) increasing frequency of monitoring/review of program
(B) m~dification of objectives or diversion alternatives
Chaoter 6. Soecial Waste Comoonent
1. Objectives (18733.1, 18737.1)
(based on Solid Waste Generation Analysis and other local
conditions as necessary)
(a) State specific objectives to be accomplished during short
and medium-term by this component, including plan to reduce
hazard potential of special wastes by waste type
(b) Identify priority waste categories or types for diversion,
which may be based on
(1) volume/weight/hazard of material
(2) whether material, products, or packaging are made of non-
renewable resources
2. Existing Conditions Description (18733.2, 18737.2)
(a) as applicable, include description of existing diversion
alternatives as follows:
(1) Brief description of existing special waste program,
including description of existing solid waste facilities
permitted to handle/dispose of special wastes.
Where applicable, include discussion of other regulatory
agency requirements, permits, documents associated with
operation of facilities (regulatory agencies include, but
are not limited to: RWQCB, AQMD, DHS).
(2) Quantity (in vol. or wt.) diverted for each alternative,
listed by category and type
(3) Description of alternatives that will be decreased in
scope, effects of this on existing solid waste management, and
effects on attainment of mandated diversion goals.
/tJ"~b
SRRE Checklist page 12
1/29/91
(.x..)
(b) Discuss special wastes identified in waste generation
study for which there is currently no permitted handling or
disposal method within the jurisdiction.
NOTE: The above is an important section since it will be "used to
support the quantification of existing diversion alternatives to
determine the current percentage of solid waste diverted". 18733.2
3. Evaluation of Alternatives (18733.3)
(a) Each alternative shall be evaluated in terms of
(1) effectiveness in reduction of waste
(2) hazards created
(3) ability to accommodate change
(4) consequences on the waste (i.e., shifts)
(5) whether can be implemented in short- and medium-term
planning periods
(6) need for expanding/building facilities
(b) For each alternative also include discussion of
(1) consistency with local conditions
(2) institutional barriers to implementation
(3) estimate of costs .
(4) availability of end uses of diverted materials
4. selection of Program (18733.4)
(a) Identify and describe alternatives selected, including
o existing alternatives
o expansions of existing alternatives
o new alternatives to be implemented
(b) For each alternative, discuss
(1) why it was selected, based on data in waste generation
study, and the evaluations above
(2) estimate anticipated quantities to be diverted
o by diversion program and waste type
o for short-term and medium-term planning periods
o in vol. or wt.
o and % it will contribute to 25%/50% goals
(3) as applicable, list of end uses for diverted materials
(based on evaluation above)
(4) as applicable, description of proposed methods for
necessary handling and disposal
(5) as applicable, description of facilities to be used, which
the evaluation has shown must be expanded or built
/O"~)7
SRRE Checklist page 13
1/29/91
(.:L)
s. Pro.gram Implementatio.n (18733.5)
(a) Identify go.vt agencies, o.rganizations, etc. respo.nsible
to. implement the program
(b) Identify tasks necessary for implementation
(c) Identify short-term and medium-term implementation
schedule addressing each task
(c) Identify known cests, revenues, and revenue seurces
necessary fer implementatien
6. Mo.nitoring and Evaluation (18733.6)
(a) Identify methods to. quantify and meniter achievement ef
objectives, including diversion frem landfills and
transfermation facilities, and reduction ef waste hazard
Also., quantify waste diverted in vel. er wt., and in
percent ef tetal waste generated.
(b) Use ene ef the fellewing metheds to. meniter pregrams and-
evaluate cempliance with mandated diversien requirements:
(1) Further Waste Generatien Study
(2) targeted selid waste characterizatien studies, to. measure
changes
(3) assessment ef changes in design, productien,
distributien, sale, and/er use ef preducts/packages
which affect waste generatien.
(4) anether methed appreved by the Beard.
(c) Frem the metheds selected, previde
(1) written criteria fer evaluating pregram's effectiveness
(2) identificatien ef agencies/persens/etc. respensible fer
menitering, evaluating, reperting
(3) identificatien ef knewn menitering and evaluatien funding
requirements, revenues, revenue seurces
(4) identif icatien ef measures to. be implemented if meni ter ing
shews shertfall in attaining ebjectives/diversien mandates.
Measures may include:
(A) increasing frequency ef menitering/review ef pregram
(B) medificatien ef ebjectives er diversien alternatives
Chapter 7. Education and Public Information Compenent (18740)
(al Objectives
Include statement ef objectives for short- and medium-term
planning periods.
/tJ -~r
SRRE Checklist page 14
1/29/91
(~)
(b) Existing Program Description
Describe all existing education and public information
programs and activities within jurisdiction which promote
source reduction, recycling, composting, safe handling and
disposal of solid waste.
(c) selection of Program Alternatives
Incorporate data from solid waste generation study to identify
generators to be targeted for education and public information
programs.
(d) Program Implementation
(1) Identify agencies/persons/etc. responsible for
implementation
(2) Identify required implementation tasks
(3) Establish short- and medium-term implementation schedules
(4) Identify all public and private program implementation
costs, revenues, revenue sources necessary for program
implementation
(e) Monitoring and Evaluation
(1) Identify methods to be used to measure achievement of
objectives
(2) Establish written criteria by which to evaluate
effectiveness
(3) Identify agencies/persons/etc. responsible for program
monitoring, evaluation, reporting
(4) Identify monitoring/evaluation funding requirements,
revenues, revenue sources
(5) Identify measures to be implemented if monitoring shows
shortfall in attaining diversion objectives
(6) Establish program monitoring and reporting schedule
Chaoter 8. Disoosal Faci1itv Caoacitv Comoonent (18744)
(a) Identify and describe all existing permitted solid waste
landfills and transformation facilities within the
jurisdiction. Include:
(1) Identification of owner/operator of each facility
(2) Quantity and types of solid waste disposed
(3) Permitted site acreage
(4) Permitted capacity
(5) Current disposal fees
(6) For solid waste landfills, remaining facility capacity in
cubic yards and years.
/ti ;cJ;'J
SRRE Checklist page 15
1/29/91
LL)
(b) Include solid waste disposal facility needs projection,
which estimates additional disposal capacity (in cubic
yards/yr) needed for 15 years starting in 1991.
(1) Needs projections must be calculated based on solid waste
generation projection in the solid waste generation study.
(2) The 15-yr needs projection must use the formula in section
18744 (b) (2).
(c) Include discussions of
(1) Facilities to be phased out or closed during short- and
medium-term planning periods, and effect on disposal capacity
needs.
(2) 'Plans to establish new or expanded facilities for the
short- and medium-term planning periods, and projected
additional capacity of each.
(NOTE: The following was added at 1/23/91 Board meeting, and
will undergo 15 day comment period.)
(3) Plans to export waste to another jurisdiction for the
short-term and medium-term planning periods, and the projected
addtional capacity of proposed export agreements.
Chapter 9. Fundinq Component (18746)
(a) Must demonstrate there is sufficient funding and
allocation of resources for:
(1) Program planning and development
(2) Implementation of programs to meet 25%/50% goals
(b) Provide cost estimates for component programs scheduled
for implementation in the short-term planning period.
(c) Identify revenue sources sufficient to support component
programs.
(d) Identify sources of contingency funding for component
programs.
Chapter 10. Inteqration Component (18748)
(a) Explain how the source reduction, recycling, composting,
and special waste components combine to achieve the 25%/50%
mandates. Include:
(1) Description of solid waste management practices which
fulfill goal of promoting integrated waste management in
the following order:
/ t/ ,. ~,,;;2D
SRRE Checklist page 16
1/29/91
( .()
(A) source reduction
(5) recycling and composting
(C) environmentally safe transformation and
environmentally safe land disposal
(2) Explain how jurisdiction has integrated the components to
maximize use of all feasible source reduction, recycling,
and composting options
(3) Explain how components jointly achieve diversion mandates
(4) Explain how priorities between components were determined
(b) Submit integrated schedule, which includes:
(1) Calendar scheduling all implementation tasks for new and
expanded programs, through the short-term planning period,
as identified in the first 4 components. Include descriptive
title for each task, entity implementing task, start/milestone
dates, schedule for funding source availability.
(A) implementation tasks are those in each component which
satisfy requirements of 18733.5(b) and 18740(d).
(2) Schedule must show anticipated date of achievement of
25%/50% diversion mandates.
III. TECHNICAL APPENDICES
/~-d~1
CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD
CONTRACTS/FINANCE BRANCH
REVIEW CHECKLIST FOR FUNDING COMPONENT
In ord~r to assist you in preparina the Funding Component or your Source Reduction and RM:)'c1ing ElcmcnvCounrywide Inlegrated
Wasle Manalt'rnent Plan, this checklist is pro\idecl to suggest areas to ~ addresst'd in this element,
Does the funding component identify all program costs and revenue sources for program planning
and development?
---.-
Does the documentation address the ability to accommodate changing economic conditions, an
evaiuation of the consequences, and the time required to implement ilie alternative?
Is there sufficient flexibility in the fll'lancing structure to allow for unexpected developments?
An both. present and future solid waste disposal needs anticipated and addressed in relation to
funding?
Does the plan discuss market development?
Does the plan contain a cost benefit analysis for each alternative?
ke all known program implementation com, including public and private identified?
Does the plan identify the cost estimates for the implementation of the component programs in
the short-term planni"g period?
Does the documentation include future cost estimates?
Does the plan identify what tasks are required for the program implementation?
Does the plan identify revenue streams?
Does the documentation indicate the local jur:sdiction's revenue stream?
Are the revenue sources sufficient to support the component programs?
Does the plan include revenue projections?
Does the documentation identify sources of contingency funding for component programs?
Does the plan discuss financial assistance tools such as loans, grants, and loan guarantees?
00<$ a reserve account need to be established to cover the risk of default on outstanding loans?
DotS the plan include" description of existing local market activities, government procurement
programs, economic development activities, and consumer incentives for compost and recycled
materials.
Does the plan include an estimate of public participation?
Does the plan indicate which funding source will be used for monitoring and evaluating the
effectiveness of the exi>ting programs?
If) "~~d
..
..
..
stIllE lEt:m.l1S FAm...
Each Californian generates approximately 2000 pounds of garbage each year. The
average office worker disposes of 2-3 pounds of waste each day. Most of this
garbage gets buried in the landfill. Office paper .akes up about 70-80 percent
of the office wastestream.
Enough garbage is generated in San Diego County to fill Jack Murphy Stadium every
two weeks.
Recycling a ton of paper will save approximately 3.3 cubic years of landfill
space.
..
Over the next five years, 200 Californian landfills will be closed. Across the
country over the next 10 years over two-thirds of the landfills will be closed.
..
An estimated 14 billion pounds of garbage are dumped into the sea every year.
..
It takes 75,000 trees to print one run of the Sunday New York Times.
..
Americans receive almost 2 million tons of junk mail ~very year. almost half of
which is never even opened. If only 100,000 people stopped their junk mail. we
could save about 150.000 trees every yearj if a million people stopped it. we
could save some 1.5 million trees.
..
For every 10 trees that are harvested in the world. 1 is planted. America cuts
down two million trees every day.
..
More than 1/3 of the wastestream in California is paperj almost all of which can
be recycled.
..
Every ton of paper recycled saves 17 trees.
..
Recycling one copy a day of your local daily every day for a year saves
approximately 5 trees.
..
It takes 64 percent less energy to make paper products from recycled paper. The
equivalent of almost 3 barrels of oil can be saved through the recycling of a ton
of office paper.
Using recycled paper to manufacture new paper produces about 50 percent less
pollution. .
The manufacture of recycled paper uses only half of the water that is required
in the manufacturing of paper from trees.
..
..
/o-~c:z3
.
.
Recycling one ton of office paper keeps 7,000 gallons of water out of the
papermaking process, and reduces the need for chlorine bleaching, t~us lowering
dioxin emissions.
.
By doubling worldwide aluminum recovery rates, over one million tons of air
pollutants--including toxic aluminum fluoride would be eliminate.
.
It takes 95 percent less energy to make aluminum products from recycled aluminum.
That lIeans that 20 cans can be made out of recycled material with the same energy
it takes to make one can out of new material.
.
One recycled aluminum can saves enough energy to run a TV four hours.
.
Throwing away an aluminum can wastes as much energy as pouring out such a can
half-filled with gasoline. Failing to recycle a weekday edition of the Los
Angeles Times wastes just about as much energy.
.
One ton of re-melted aluminum eliminates the need for four tons of bauxite and
over 1500 pounds of petroleum coke and pitch.
.
Californians use over 16 million tin and steel cans every day. We recycle about
20 percent of them.
.
At least 70-90 percent of the tin on a can is saved when its recycled, thus
reducing mining wastes and preserving this valuable resource.
.
Recycling tin and steel cans saves 74 percent of the energy used to produce them
from raw materials.
.
If the average Californian family recycled all of their tin and steel cans for
on year, they would save about 125 pounds of iron ore, 20 pounds of coal, and
enough energy to light a 60-watt light bulb for more than three months.
.
We throw away enough iron and steel to supply all of America's automakers
continuously.
Americans throw away enough glass to fill New York's twin World Trade Center'
towers every two weeks.
For every ton of crushed glass ("cullet") used in the manufacturing process for
new glass, some 1.2 tons of raw materials are saved (1,330 pounds of sand, 433
pounds of soda ash, 433 pounds of limestone, and 151 pounds of feldspar).
.
.
A ton of glass produced from raw materials creates 384 pounds of mining waste.
Using 50 percent recycled glass cuts it by about 75 percent, to 98 pounds of
waste.
10 " dI;!f
.
Every 10 percent cullet (recycled glass) introduced in the furnace results in an
energy savings of 2-5 percent. .
.
One recycled bottle saves enough energy to run a 100 watt light bulb four hours.
Each household uses.nearly 1,000 bottles a year. .
.
Known oil reserves will last only an estimated 35 years at the current rate of
use. Allerica fllports over SO percent of its oil.
*
Allericans use 2.5 million plastic bottles each hour, only a small percentage of
. which are recycled. .
.
Six of the top twenty chemicals listed on the Environmental Protection
Administration's most hazardous chemicals list are used in the ..nufacture of
plastic, 1n addition to oil, a nonrenewable resource.
..
.
Over 250 million tires are thrown out every year in the United States alone. To
get enough rubber to ..ke one truck tire, it takes half a barrel of crude oil.
.
.
For every 10,000 tons of waste materials recycled, an average of 32.6 jobs are
supported, compared to only 6.46 jobs supported when this much waste is
landff11ed.
.
You save money by recycling through the sale of the collected recyclables, and
through not having to pay for the disposal of the materials.
.
Over 240 curbside recycling collection programs now operate in California,
serving over 2 .illion households.
.
The California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939) adopted by the California
legislature in 1989 requires all cities and counties to reduce their solid waste
by 25 percent by 1995 and 50 percent by the year 2000. All cities and counties
will need to develop a solid waste reduction plan that includes recycling,
composting and source reduction. Residential, commercial, industrial, and
institutional are also included. A plan for the collection of household hazardous
wastes lUst also be established in each city by the end of 1991.
.
The County of San Diego has adopted an ordinance that will prohibit currently
..rketable recyclables from County landfills under a phased-in schedule,
beginning in the North County first, followed by the South County, and then the
East. Residents, businesses and industries will need to reduce, recycle, and
compost in order to comply.
.
All newspaper publishers and printers in the state lUst use recycled paper for
25 percent of their purchases in 1991 and 50 percent by 2000, if the paper is
available at comparable price and quality.
/t/ - 3':<lj
.
WHAT BLSE CAlI BE DOllE '1'0 REDUCE WASH?
....-" - -j' .. .... .~.. .. WflJ to ~ oar truh before It Meda to be -,..1&4 Clr tbrowD away.
ValDa_ paper ill tile 6nt place _ feww tncI cat for paper paIp, _ IIICrIY IIId -= wutecl ill tile .
~ ..-. _ poI1111ioD ~ ud lower ~.., am. Tbe belt WflJ to ~1Jsb
pnc:p:LJ . to ckwJop .1Iabit ~ AiAi. ....
.
Wbea ...a.aa.- . dci '.... Clr nqaatiDs _ from data P"""""';' .....;..... wIIethet JOlI reaI1y aced
die wIIoIe ~_t ,....ot" ~ receMDa . 20 pap "'--_t for Iaformalioa _.hIM 011 oaIy . few
.... .. for . c:opy ~ 4IIIIJ .... .... that J'01l will actaaIly Deed.
Wbea ......tb. oaIy make the -.r r JJ~"7 -- ~ eopIeI. Copy 011 .... .... ~ die paper wbeaever
JIOISI"bIe. .
.
.
p......."--' to'" die copy ..,.J.;'" before ....w, copieI to avoid nlllYl.-t- ..., capie&.
.
Vie .... II" ~. piece of paper; It caD always be 1IICd for aentd1 paper."'" ClIMJopa, bala and
other iIcIIII ~ pouiblc.
Coasider 1IIiDg eIedroIJc ..u, Ioppy ....... and other aaputer related teel-oI91Pes ill order to
retrieve laformalioD tbat J'01l aeed. DocumCllta are IIUIdI more euiIy ~ 011 cIiab, require Iittlc
apace, ud are readily available for OIl-screeD ediliDg.
Before priDtiIIa ............'IItl. DIe tile __ 9Iew OD tile Clllllpater. Tbia wiII_111U1)' wutecl copies
aaed for ediIiDa that could haw beCII doae OD screeD.
Check to make IJ1II'e tbat you aDd your office 0DIy receive copies of DeMIetten, KMpapen, and
....p,;_ that are really IItcem")'. PerbaJII through routiDg, nlllcrtpUou caD lie nducecl.
.
.
.
.
J..ct~..d ~ copyiDg and IeIICIiDg materials to aD employees, ....,....,.... of . __...lttce, etc., try I'OI/tIDa
those materials to iDdividuaIs who will DOt aced their 0Ml copy or if iDformaIioD Is DOt required
a..u.u.A:.tely.
.
If . brief 1DC'...ge Is aD that Is required, copy tile ...-.. ewo.loar ..... ClIIto . piece of paper aDd
DIe . paper c:utter to aeparate tile sheet ill half or quarters.
.
Vie ....ee paper wbCD_ pouib1c; it requires 1IUIdI_ eaer&Y. -= and -"'lefl, (bIcacbiDg
-.enta) to recyde tbu co1ored paper. It is IIso more dairablc to recyded paper muufac:turen, thus
briuaiDa ill - IIIOIIe)' wbCD recydcd.
.
ValDa I..... IW paper Is _ better, .."....:.1Iy wbCD ....w, II\DIIOfO\II capie&. Reqded paper caD be
requested at tile priDl shop, Ioob IIice, and IIdp& aeate markets for tile materials ooJIeMM ill ofIic:e
recydiDa pI'OIIlIIlS Iikc tile City's.
BriDa your 0Ml ... to work, IIId _ . coupIc of atru for...-... Tbia will reduce the aced for
6poub1e caps.
.
I /) ,,~~.
:IE
~~
;1-1
:)"1
ZZ~
() :pc
~~I
~td
():
Ills.!
~I::
o
~~u~ o~
~I~ 6~
u
/O--c1.:<7
. ,
~ .. i Jl .s
III
r!!. o!l I~I .. ...
fll I'!
.. II
. t I III f
Itl tl ~ R.
]~'ti I1d fi
11~ ~ iJ~ um -
~~ . i ~
~!j 8S;j
8~ 1~ ~ 111 Jl
dt
tJ ~~~
~~ ..,~ ~ ~~ jll
= ill! lJ B ! 'i R.
.l!l ~ ~ !lJ.l B c r! ~ 'i
] It
~ ~.~ 'a .51 R. i ~ iia~]1l
. 0 <il i).m
~I~-' r! 1t1! ~ u II'~
'. ~ .8 .!.Il 'a . Is e
o .;,j ~ 'le~ III :p ~ = l ,.; ! ~~
'a 1-" 11 III ~ i
t~.mJ d ~l . haR. ..,l l ] ~.!!j!;
~ll. ~ Jel ~ lE It ~.! Ii ~ ~ lP ~! ~
~-.~dl~ l~ !!] ~~].5
i:C ~ <~8~ ~ ~f!~~ J~~~
I'D -~;;;.f
-!
iU"
t.- ~
~ti-!l
~.lQ~l~
~ I. .'e"~
6[l-! ~
i~ I' )
.; t~ l~
11~JI
t~g~~Q
lJ~tl1l5:
~!~fJ~
, ~~Jt~l
...
ttun~ ntl: ~
5" ~i-r!t.lfi~ifgz
~Il\, ii 'SerB' ii n
i~, i c 2' '2 ~'1 ~! III
~i ~ri ~~ fe ~
]r [as' r~1r 'If
i 8" ~ 8 i ~ .t] I, al
[f~,c.l'
~ 5' J ~ fl '~ i.. J !I,
f], -I i if g l f
t~ r- s;rf~ '8
S' OJ' I!! Il( 8 lit ~
'~ .. ~ iil "g 2. r 0:
am l~[ J(.l ~ i
~~ J:;...S' :I~..~
g, Ii Ii"'" 0 ~ Ei
a! 1i~ ~~ ~l
r iJl iia~
'Ii f l!j 2.
. .. . ....tI)
f i~ ~ if If i ~ I ~
e: al I ia ~'S ~ i f ~
i ~a ~ I ~ i.l ~ ! I 8
em. i [ Ii n ~JI J i' f I:!
I I;;i 1: .., ~ ~J a 1 f ~
J h l[i il h U
J Ii S'aoi& III
B f it i[ i 8
a a 11 ~ ~.!" f. z
1- 1. '2. i ~l' n
~, ~11 Bsi a
I ~ '1 ~l ~
I;; iff
1 a ;'
~
-
-
I b, ,;ir;}.9
'!l .
1:2' In ~ l ~ I i {~
10rl.5 J!lo~ :0: l~ .s n
I!..:n 15 , 8!.0': ~tl.e
~ou ~. g j~S :5~1
;l~ lH -ei ~ fl~
1'~ JI i fff jt}
!0J! .!. ,joU ~~...
~!i 1)1. iH r"J
~ 11ft j j I 11 d 05 Is
~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ If 1 ~~i 1 ~ !
Z -lI_lL~ Q",e!. l-En 8:>J!
o -8"!. ~ .5.!: ~ ~ f:'o;;; Ii gj, ll.;g
6 t~] '!l l) i j ~ -I ~ ~ j l~
~ Uti ful ilH nit
! ~tu ~h~ alll ~m~i
il~ ~
it,j o~
'l!~ !
Ii '" Ji
fft I
~ff i
tl~ i ~
f's lj
Iltl!
J!l.81 SlJi
iSl!. ~ n
i Ji l~
1111~
ll.
.~ 1!~3i
~ m!11J
~ 11oJ8l2
OJ='o &.!j
:c 1lI-
~ 11 'I'" tg
z i8 "I
o ...;! 8
6 c::5"'lJ!
~ ~li.e i
6 oi>~ lb
u i5,gJ!l_"
IZl,Uop.E
is '!ltgQl~~
13 lrl,jJt~
8~jl~m~
~ r~lflt
I t l~ e
~.l i~l It
tl! 8.e~ ..~
m"l ii~ .eoS
Ii o~o~j 0 I]
~orl ~;i-!. i~
~ Ii Wi it
I f! ~nf i !&
! l j . ~ j I~
~ ~l; ll{.f Illi~
;eOj ~~~ Ets rfo
~ ~1 ~~!J !~~tj
/b-~3c>
. .
l! jiB
)l}t tll
Fk [el..j.8
[,8 f i'a,'i
:Bol Jl~~
~ ~'ll:i h'l
fi'llilf j'!l:E
~J~h t!f
~ ilit ~!J
~ ~~b '!l~
~ 1~11 1]~ 0
81 t~m j~ 1t
! .2,~lj ~ lo~ ~
t.:l ei Il~'ll'!l~
~ ~!]i.~ i~il
...
~ ~
lol
] ~
~ !< i
~ t,'l:l'
fS ~ ~
I S I!
.0
"iHUnlHt UU If it iU;
1ft irB.!1 ~! f I 11 g '1 II g f 0
Bill ~i!l~llfi:. .. 5l. 1.. 5l. IS
2 ~1-f ail i i I II &. ~
. J 11 i lit" A i I H i 11.1 ~
1 !I ~ l~ a fi '! 11 I
~ ,i]' ~ B.I] ~ 1. I 1 a ~ ~
B- ~a~ ~,n 8 a ~ J 2 e-
! ; [J. l f [ i J f I! K- ~
'! I &r~ ~ ~ ! 2. i!l!: I
~ rt~~ B.} i i i" 1 ~ 2.
~ II i f _ !l
I B. H' ~lj i' ;:
!:t~~ ~, 1~ g
.o,:~I-]-~
~l!O~]i!:
f.-I !faf ~
irt' gt~f ~
~(llt.i
f! I r~ n
s'iB.'If_~ ..
fil~ lh.
- t _ iii
~!i fit
~~'B' Jea
(I'J" !l ~
e:j
.
.
nU U fU n~ I JJj nIt ri J J It !nJf lUll ~
i! d 1~ t~~ ~'~ ~ I' fisJ~! a l- ~(~ ' J1l1!:S! ~
!:~t B.t ~1i ~1 ~ j B: .i~! ~~ i-t fJ: ill- ,flir ~
ll~!~ J' ~.]! Ilg aa~, &1 I ~ ~~ 5'r"~r z
w I a i .1 i" i' w' ! f _ B. I:' ~
:1 g. f ~ J [ i ~ 11 t i ' 5l. l~ J "( ~ ~ c:
J i i 1'1' a ~ II fr. J I l I lJj~ IJI f
. B. J i 1 -B ~ s. I ~ _' ~' f j
/o"~~1
III
'(f)
::?J
<
~
Co-' =
o 0
~ :0
0... ~
=
Co-' Q)
Z-oS
~ =~
~~~
'(f) 00 S
O~-
0... 0 S
::?Jc.=l~
08~
U ..... J.4
~p..
Cl ~ J.4
Z..... 0
<Q':
Co-' =
.....
-
Z Q)
~ S
......:l .....
U E-t
~
U
~
~
01
c:
:oJ
(/)
o
a. ' v
E >.>'
>. o:::v
::: 0 U E&
E 01 'u 01 ~ 0 01 ~ v
.E .5 '-Ev .5 (/):2 :s .5 1:2
Iv VC:CIl(/)UVCIl
:oJ ~ E ~ v.o :J >. 0..0
:Jv OV V'- "v c:'-
::::Eo:: uo:: ~0 c:& (1)0
II~~~~
01
c:
~.
ll)
N
0
0
0
c
0
.-
en
~
Q)
>
.-
0
ll)
0'1
0'1
..- 0 It") 0 It") 0 It")
,., N N ..- ..-
0'1
1'0
0'1
CD
<(
/ () .:. :3.3~
Q)
c
-
Q)
,r) E
0"
0" i-
.-
?- C
- 0
..,
..., :;:;
0
,r) ......
0" C
0" Q)
.- E
~
Q)
..., Q.
,r) E
0"
0" CJ'I
.-
?- C
....
0 u
.., >,
c
C'l 0 U
0""" Q)
0" a:::
.-
'iii >,
~
-'6 0
......
~ 0
C'lv
0"0 "0
C
0" 0
.-
s:. ~
v
0 ....
0
~
VOLmrrBBR PROJECTS
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RECYCLING AND CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
I. NEIGHBORHOOD VOLUNTEERS
* The City's Crime Prevention Neighborhood Watch Program now incorporates
recycling and other conservation issues. Crime Watch "Block Captains" distribute
information on crime prevention in their neighborhood, and many hold reqular crime
watch meetings. Now these volunteers also have the option of dlstributing
information (fliers and other materials) about recycling, community clean-ups,
household hazardous wastes, water conservation, and other environmental issues to
their neighbors.
* Block Captains volunteer for as many hours as they feel that they can--the
program is designed to be flexible, so that if people can only volunteer one or two
hours each month, then that is what they do. Volunteers choose their "role" and time
commitment based on their own preferences.
* Volunteers who wish only to distribute information to their neighbors on ,"
recycling and conservation, are not required to become Block Captains in the Crime
Prevention Program.
* The main purpose of the volunteer program is to develop an infrastructure that
will enhance resident participation in the daily activities within the community,
including recycling. As more and more environmental issues surface, it is important
that people are kept aware of the issues, problems and potential solutions.
II. OFFICE ASSISTANCE: RECYCLING PROGRAM
* Assist in the development of public information materials, media relations,
and other public relations activities for the City's Curbside Recycling Program.
* Conduct research into various options for developing multi-family and
commercial recycling programs.
*
Other creative volunteer opportunities are available.
III. COMMUNITY COMPOSTING PROGRAM
* The City is interested in seeking the involvement of community associations,
garden clubs, and active neighborhood gardeners in setting up composting
demonstration sites in communities, especially in community garden sites. City staff
is available to offer technical assistance in setting up the site, and training
gardeners in proper composting techniques.
* Community composting offers a perfect opportunity to not only reduce trash
(yard waste is about 20% of the City's wastestream), but also to get "free" compost
for gardens. Compost is rich in nutrients and can be used to replace or supplement
fertilizers, reduces the need for watering, and helps control weeds.
lo~333
Dear Block Captains,
At the last Crime Prevention Meeting a proposal was brought forward for a Community Volunteer Infrastructure
Program. This program will include, and expand upon thc>present neighborhood aimc prevention volunteer program
by incorporating other issues of importance within the established volunteer structure. With 1itt1c additional volunteer
effort, the present crime prevention program could be expanded to provide neighborhood residents with information
on a variety of important issues, including recycling and water conservation. Those at the meeting felt positively about
the proposed program, and suggested that the program be written up and presented to all block captains.
Below is a dcsaiption of the program. P1case fcc1 f:rcc to contact the Conservation Coordinator, Athena Bradley at
691-5031 if you have any questions about the program, or wish to give an opinion (for or against the proposal). If we
do not hear from you, staff will assume that the majority of block captains are in favor of the proposed program. Staff
will then begin developmcnt and imp1cmcntation of the program.
Obiectives
1) Dcvclopment of an infrastructure that will "nh.nce resident participation in daily activities within the
community.
2) Implementation of ongoing participatory role for volunteers within the established infrastructure.
3) Development and implementation of other means for residents not wanting to be an active part of the
participating volunteer infrastructure, but nonetheless wanting to have an active voice in the community.
The Volunteer Infrastructure is designed to allow for inaximum neighborhood involvement with flexible obligation and
commitment on the part of volunteers. Volunteers may choose their role and time comm;tment based on their own
preference.
The Community V oluntur Infrastructure
1) Block Leaders (Block Association 'Captains")
DUTIES: 1) Distribute information to neighborhood residents on subjects such as, police and crime
watch, fire safety, recycling. water conservation, household hazardous wastes, and other issues
important to the neighborhood; 2) Act as crime watch advisor (facilitate the """h.nge of neighborhood
telephone numbers, vacation watch, etc.).
2) Neighborhood Resource Residents
DUTIES: 1) Act as 'advisors' within the neighborhood in order to assist residents in one or more of
the following areas, a. Crime prevention, b. Recyc1ing 'how to', insuring that residents have a recyc1ing
bin and know when to place it at the curb, c. Fire and safety, d Water conservation, d Composting
training. bin set-up and how to, e. Community development issues; 2) Facilitate periodic meetings on
the above issues and others of concern in the neighborhood
. Residents may choose to becomcinvolvcd in one or both of the volunteer efforts dcscribcd above. Again this volunteer
program is designed to be f1cxible in order to offer all citizens the opportunity to participate in ways that they feel most
comfortable. For example, one block captain may choose to distribute information on aimc prevention and recyc1ing
once a month to residents. Another block captain may distribute monthly information, and also act as a neighborhood
resource person through answering resident questions about crime prevention and rccycling. and facilitating a
Neighborhood Watch meeting every other month.
The Oty of Chula Vista's Crime Prevention Staff and Conservation Coordinator will act in advisory roles and assist
neighborhood volunteers as nccdcd. Staff will provide block captains with informational materials for distribution within
their neighborhoods, as well as resource materials for meetings, pre-nt.rions, and displays.
/ tJ "33''1
I'm not spending
my hard earned
diange on some
stupid recyc.ling
program... ~
t;~;-I-:e
~ -' .t ., ~
,;:CU2. I'm saving
up for a new
I andfil' Ii
Small fee will have large returns
The city of' ChuJa VJ&ta it dom, itlo part
for the public I'8C1CIiDI effort, but IIWlY
raidenta ltill are not. behind it.
AlthOUlh the City Council baa cIiacua-
lid the iaaue for montha. man)' raidenta
lOt their llnt introduction to the new ci.
tlwid~ 'curblide recycling prorr.m
tIIrou(b an additional charp on their
JanusI")' traah bill
Much of tha ruentmant that baa fol.
lowed it from naidenta who a1ready were
raC)'c1ing their own aluminum cane. pia..
tic and the like and who believe the)' are
p.ying Laidlaw Wute 8)'atema for . II"" What raidanta are failing to grasp it
vice the)' will not UN. that Laidlaw it msking little. if an)'. profit
Other relidenta reoented doiDi Laid- from the program. The aales of'ths mate.
law'1 won: - .,..,....tiDc their NCYdabI. rial.... not anOUlh to pa,. the COlt of the
meterla1a _ tbeIr _ traah encI P.......... 10 the relativeJ,y _.n charge is
layering the material in blue bins - onI.Y . -..ity. And what tboae raidenta who
!to haw Laidlaw coDact the mClll87 - aIreadJ IIC1de muat conaider Ie that,
'1I1Iing th_ itame. . whi!e tbe)o ma,. be doiDi their part for the
, 8ince the bi11a were iaauecI, reaidenthtlo enVll'llDD1ent, the genera1 public Ie not.
have been voicin& their _'t'lt>nct to .e
City CounciJ, to Laidlaw and to the pub1ic , The time baa paaaed for pmeeting the
thrOugh 1attlon to the editor. ,JII'OInDL Now it Ie up to raidenta to coop-
Unfortunate1y, tboae naidenta.... com- _to with it by Mparating their cane
in( in on the tail end of'. procaaa tbstCi~ paper. g1au and plaatica from their othe;
completed . few montha 110, The t)' traah, b)'1il1lowinl the cIirectiona in fi1Iing
couDcil bald numeroua. heeringa 011 the I'IC)'CIing bina and by .ccepting that $1.10
recycIinI program and 1iatenad to all the . month Ie . IIIla!I price to p.)' to help
argumenta beIilre decidIng the JII'lII'IIIl ....t leaat our little p'- of'tha planet.
- '
/0-- 335:,
W.I desirable. No.. man)' more reaidenta
who were not. ....... of the fracus before
the prorram W.I .pproved are discovering
the new charp after it it too late to do
anything .bout it.
Recycling Ie . _it)' not onl)' be-
"UN it Ie cood for the ecolol)' but also be-
"UN the IOOneI'the count)' landfill it full
the lOODer tupayerl will have to bu)' land
for . new one. BecaUN of'the quickl)' de-
pleting landll11a. citiea now are 1aga11)'
mandated to reduce their flow of w.ate to
lanclfilla by 25 percent b)' 1995.
-
~
I., .
iCitY'Yide recycling plan
Igoes into effect Monday
I CHULA VISTA - The city's tory recycling program. Every _
--Inew curbside recycling program --single.family homeowner in the
jwill begin Monday, with all city Will be charged $1.10 a
24,000 single-family homes in the . month to subsidize the program,
~ city on the Collection route. which does not pay for itself _
I Apparently many people through selling the materials col.
I thought the program was to be- lected. .
gin last week. The blue bins, fiI. Although there_was a great
i led with newspapers, glass, plas- deal of public discussion and no.
i tic and tin and aluminum cans, tice of the program, many people
I dotted sidewalks throughout the were surprised and angry last
I' city. Trash men working for Laid- month when they got their trash
law Waste Systems took the re- bills and discovered the addi-
I gular garbage but lell; the recy- tianal $2.20 charge to pay for the
---, c1ables behind. . first two months.
I. Beginning Feb. 4 the garbage City officials maintain that the
jwill be picked up as usual, but a increase. will save money in the
second truck specifically desig- long run. Recycling will reduce
ned to separate and haul recycla- the /low of garbage to county
.' ble material will follow the same landfills, which are filling up fast.
---- route on the same day collecting The extremely expensive cost of
,the contents of the bins. findi~ng and opening new land-.
I The city of Chula Vista re-. fills,tlwhich would have a direct
!cently contracted with Laidlaw, effect on trash collection rates,
[which holds the exclusive fran-' can be put off by extending the
:chise to collect garbage in the . life of the existing facilities, city
[city, to run the city.wide, manda- officials said. .
'f ..
z.)z..oj /rJ
S+-QrMe IN>
~ i;
/
/0 --33b
r!:lnni~ Ji g
~l"!R.f 'Hi i ~
l!rtdr ". ~ ~ &5
Irl"r ~! fll ~
!url ill:} .a
l ,!I' ..f~i", !.
f~I~~g.~l[~r;" ~
. I r rf f~~tbU .=
If ~"~i-J~:t~U!1 t"IJ
~FHilHtl~li ~
aU g ll"fl III !
. iriU ifl'P:; =.
s"h~1 ll'l J f ~
ff,U:.!lur If =
i~ II! ~l&'fl~~ =
ill' !h":t1il: ~
fh i!lf;"hl Q
i':.i" ull'I"ll'rfl" ~
ul "'afa i~ ~
ill ~i!f fl" ~
H ~I un ..
5 i~ . i . .. . i! atf ~
, I- t~rr:ru~ r~ ~
urn" jj:'8":Slflr
t e: ~ i-8'u "I' ,..,...
. 1 i S,r;.d ll'f \I...~
f; J '~"i&"" rl J:;
: II [ ~~~f II ~
l~ lif,. 's -
· 2: .""...
. S- S"' 15. t"IJ
"lf~UUd{JiJ .~
. "~!IJ~~!ti~l( ~
... 2:i ll'ilr ~.g f! ......
I" f 1t'8 t ...
" 5 fa. . L;i'i ~
.. St:a!lJ It~t ~
" 1Il11J.Ur ~:a!lJi" -
. i:~UH~tn ~
r
/0-- 337
'Q
.=
~
.=-
.=
.=
..~." '~".
I Free dumping fH,
I still in effect
,
I CHULA VISTA - 'nI. oixlh
annual community deuiup con.
tinue. thio _nnd tu oDow
Chul. Viole nohdonll tu dio_
of bulky houeohold ilomo for!roo.
Th. cIoenup io for Chula Viole
resident. only, and c:ommerci.J
dumpin. end tuxlc matorial. ano
I nol a11owocl. Dumpotln will be
lOt up from 8 ..m. tu S p.m. Sat-
urday allb. foDowIDlloealiono:
'I'inoSlellonNo. hl447FSL
. A parlrlDJ lot al tho nor.
thWelt comer of Hilltop Drive
end Napl.. SlnooL
'Fire Station No.4, Otay
LaIw Road end Elmhunl SlnooL
'Fire Station No. &, Fourth
Avenue end Oxford SlnooL
'Loma Verde Center, Loma
Lone o!FEul Oronll'l Avenue.
J6,..3 37
10-331
~~f~m~!fll~~~;~8r~~~~f~g~~g~
iils: it' lllli' a.': ~:l" III m ... &' g." i: Ill." i D. E;' ~": ~ CD ==
W8o~;W~5t~~~~~~~"~"-8~~~=<a~
...= s= S:OQ -~ CD p.. I:;Q ~Q'<'3.i · 81 UI ,..._."CI >
,,~O~ ~."..~ 0 a~ao.....a~<--~~
I :. w," :r g. a Go 6:~ e.i; ~.. : 5';;- = 1 s" " &...... :s
t~:~.~~~I~~~=aa:~~ll~rf~~!~
~ 8'" l.<oi'iVil=--"CJ.~S'-f!E~ to-::S"'i~o~
~,lll~rl:~~lf~~frlll~lit~~"I;1 ,
-S'''' 51 "5~olli'ai~llolt~1l 1Ii~
i'~i II f~ ~[S ..~~ III f~ Ifs' ~ D,~
-al~ r~~~:~:!~~~~~~ ~~'~!~~
~~lii' 'l',..ia~..~lt~UI!3Ii~Sl~ ~. ~Il.
~ 1!!11;-a ;7f:~II5'l ~~ r~~i'~&~[
.~II~~!:~~il~i~~~fl!:llli~
f ~~.5'~'il';}ii~~ t-lf'<i lla ~ ~~~i~[
f. !~!f[f~ t7_hlif~I~!If.fJ~1~
I ',- &'g:f!I,~ [tl;lis.lt8 '<:~~=ili ~i~
· ~ JD.....a... ~ (3Go~ .....Dl!....-'a."'..'8
- ,zp.. ~III,<~ .f~ I't- CD'll; .f:!~....;z .
~-. ~ Il ~s 0 ~i'.~lii ...ar= :'S'i- ~;;i...1l g.
.tJ- - 0 UlI ~ a .... I!!.. "'II ts - . . "CJ ~ CoIrQ
'!.-iril fil .;.if!f g~liU n ~'l
'~""':;".'~..t- .
Ji f~
i _Cl
~lC=.i
. i; il '
-_%
cc-
..'2.'
fRJ
li$
0-< 0 .
= -
/r8'-
....
. -If
~i:l
~nCl
Iii
<0
-c:
,fli'
.::1
-aig
1f.1 .,
')~' ,
;1(1.
! 19j
a 1f g,
~I' .;ii.
..a_ "
;:1 . 0 ~
~ '& i ~ ~
, !(ii I
~ ~i!l.!-=-
. ~ 0 -
i Ia' g,~ f.
- 1156!l
~-. '.-~.
s-g
;::: =
::: ~
s.~
:~ ~
~ ~.
~,~
~ ....
-!"ooI ~
... . - ::...
:::~
()Q
~~
~*
~~
~
,
g~ttrla Vista paper pushers
to push recycling. program
More than 550 employees of the City of
Chula Vista are participating in a recy_
cling program aimed at all kinds of paper
as well as other common materials found
in the workplace.
Bins have been placed in all of the city's
Civic Center offices for recycling of white,
computer and colored office paper and
various types of glass, metal and plas-
tic.
"Many of our employees have
been recycling at home and
are looking forward to the
opportunity to recycle at
work," said City
Manager John Goss.
"Our employees are
very concerned about
maintaining a high qual-
ity of life for the city and its
residents. I'm sure that they will
participate in the office recycling
program and provide a model forother
offices and business in Chula Vista."
The Office Recycling Program (ORP)
joins the curbside recycling program,
implemented for all single family resi-
dences earlier this year, as the city reaches
toward complying with state-mandated
and environmentally recycling sound
practices. It is the second in a series of
programs being developed in Chula Vista
that will include composting. and multi-
family, business and industrial recycling.
"Recycling now should save the city
and itsresidentsmoneyin the future since
the costs of waste disposal are rising rap-
idly: said Mayor Tim Nader. -By adopt-
ing an office recycling program, the City
Council is continuing a commitment to
expand recycling programs with the ulti-
mate goal of reaching every resident and
business."
Because of the problems associated
with dumping trash and finding
new landfill sites, state law re-
quires that all cities and coun-
ties reduce landfill waste
25 percent by 1995 and
50 ~rcent by 2000.
Cities not complying
may face fines of up
to $10,000 per day.
In addition, the County
of San Diego has recently
passed a law that prohibits dis-
posal of recyclables at dumps-a
mandate that is set to go into effect in
Chula Vista in February 1992.
Chula Vista's Office Recycling Program
is partially funded through a grant from
the County of San Diego's Technical
Assistance Program. In addition to estab-
lishing recycling in city offices, an office
recycling guide will be developed and
distributed to area businesses. City staff
members will be available to offer techni-
cal assistance to targeted businesses in
order to implement other office recycling
programs. Cl
/tJ ~ JI/O
.~~ :'!'-'~"
Irs time to c:lisp:se of that old !do or clean out the QC1age or attic!
Annual Chula Vista Community
Clean-Up s
August la, 17, & 24
~ (Saturdays)
W Bam to 3pm
Special dumpsters for residents to
dispose of unwanted bulky
household items will be available
at several locations throughout
Chula Vista. There is no charge for
this service.
Five Dwnpster Loco:tions:
Fire Station #1...............447 F Street
Fire Station #4.............. .Otay Lakes Road at ElmhUISt Street
Fire Station #S...............Fourth Avenue & Oxford Street
Lorna Verde Center .....Lorna Lane off East Orange Avenue
Hilltop Drive & Naples Street
A recycling bin at the comer of Hilltop & Naples is available for
disposal of appliances and aluminum. Dispa;al of toxic materials is
prohibited. Dispa;al by commerdal entities is not permitted.
if
\ \O~e ~
c\~o
~""~
lJ'c;.
~Vt-
~
CITY OF
CHUA VISTA
DS01!JDSJ1!
if
Sponsored by the City c1 Chula Visb (691-5280).
-r Love a Qean san Diego: and Laidlaw Was1e Systems.
8/91
/b ,.21//
Participate in
ChulaVista's
Garage Sale!
The Chula Vista Crime Prevention Committee invites you and your
neighbors to participate in a citywide Garage Sale in conjunction
with the annual Community Clean-up Days. Take advantage of this
great opportunity to clear out your garage of unwanted. items
(enabling you to put your vehicle in it). plus make some extra money.
What: Citywide Garage Sale sell used and/or
unwanted clothing. household. automotive. and pther
items.
When: Sam to 3pm. Saturday, August 17
Where: All areas of Chula Vista-set up in your garage or yard.
How: Call the Chula Vista Crime Prevention staff at 691-5187 to
sign up. The \;IUlcge sale signs and pub1lcity willl:le
supplied at no charge. All gc:nage sale locations will be
advertised and listed for publJc dJstrib.ltion at Chula Vista
recreation centers. fire stations. and the police station.
Interested participants must call to receive the free signs
and to be listed in the publicity for this event.
Operation C.A. T. (Comtx::rt Auto Theft) willl:le set up
at the Community Clean-up sites for this event. Locations
are listed on the other s1de of this flyer.
if
I p "J.tfd--
~
"":_\~..:,,,. .'~~l.
Dear Rss.l.dent z
As the first' cOJllIllunity in the City of Chula Vista to begin curbside
recycling, we thought you might like to know how the program is going. All
single-family residences in the City of Chula Vista now have curbside
recycling service (23,000 households).
Participation is Great lOVer 80% of the households are putting their
recyclables on the curb. So far residents have recycled over 1800 tons of
materials, saving over 5 million kilowatt hours of electricity and over
21,300 trees from newspaper recycling, as well as valuable landfill space.
If you don't have a blue recycling bin, just call 421-9400 and one will be
delivered to your home. If you have questions .about recycling call the
City's Conservation Coordinator at 691-5031 or Laidlaw at 421-9400.
CURBSIDE BJrCYCLING. . . f71Jl C11ULA VIsrA lfAY
J
Dear. Resident:
As' the first cOllllllunity in the City of Chula Vista to begin curbside
recycling, we thought you might like to know how the program is going. All
single-family. residences in the City of Chula Vista now have curbside
recycling service (23,000 households).
Participation is Great lOVer 80% of the households are putting their
recyclables on the curb. So far residents have recycled over 1800 tons of
materials, saving over 5 million kilowatt hours of electricity and over
21,300 trees from newspaper recycling, as well as valuable landfill space.
If you don't have a blue recycling bin, just call 421-9400 and one will be
delivered to your home. If you have questions about recycling call the
City's Conservation Coordinator at 691-5031 or Laidlaw at 421-9400.
CURBSIDE BJrCYCLING. . . f71Jl C11ULA VIsrA DY
Dear Resident:
As the first cOJllIllunity in the City of Chula Vista to begin curbside
recycling, we thought you might like to know how the program is going. All
single-family residences in the City of Chula Vista now have curbside
recycling service (23,000 households).
Participation is Great lOVer 80% of the households are putting their
recyclables on the curb. So far residents have recycled over 1800 tons of
materials, saving over 5 million kilowatt hours of electricity and over
21,300 trees from newspaper recycling, as well as valuable landfill space.
If you don't have a blue recycling bin, 'just call 421-9400 and one will be.
delivered to your home. If yOu have questions about recycling call the
City's Conservation Coordinator at 691-5031 or Laidlaw at 421-9400.
CURBSIDE BJrCYCLING. . . f71Jl C11ULA VIsrA DY
ID - 3t/3
-.'"T"-~..-
CHULA VISTA
/JOD1JlDOif7 AND YOU
On February 1, a curbside recycling program will
be launched for all single family residences in
Chula Vista. You will play an important part in
making it successful. You and your neighbors are
leading the way in the field of progressive waste
management through an exciting new recycling
program for glass, newspapers, plastic containers
and metal cans.
Simply collect your recyclables in the blue box and
sn n out at the curb ONLY when n is full. ~ will be
collected on your regular garbage day. Toprevent
scavaging n is important to set out you r box in the
morning, rather than the night before.
THE BLUE "
"WE RECYCLE
BOX
<4~\0'7
~ ';J- '~'"
>i.~ W'
)V',"iI
'. :~.,
/.ii~ S)'
I . _"-":::~ \
~''':)
Recycling is easy and convenient for your family because of
the special Blue "Laidlaw and You" box used in the program.
* "Printed on Recycled Paper"
/()~311f
'bo N0 T
hzl--IOVt:- - c..I- TY <!.U:_ILI(.'S
~Vt-
~
~~~.;F
Os,( ~t.
el1Y OF
CHUIA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
November 5, 1991
TO CHULA VISTA'S CONCERNED CITIZENS:
The attached document is the City's preliminary Source Reduction and Recycling
Element (SRRE) which is required by State Law AB939. That law, called the
California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, required that cities present
a plan to show how to waste will be diverted from landfills in the future.
Specific goals are reduction of 25% by the year 1995 (short-term) and 50%
reduction by the year 2000 (medium-term). Comments on this preliminary plan from
the general public are encouraged. Those comments should be in writing and
directed to the City Manager's Office. Oral testimony can be given to the City
Council at the scheduled public hearing for this preliminary plan:
Tuesday, November 19, 1991
6:00 p.m. - City Council Chambers ~ .;;ll/, /qCj:l-
If you are unable to give comments duripg~he public thhe:~written comments
can still be received up until Decembe~~ 1991. On , there will also
be a regionally sponsored public hearing regarding the plan fOr the City of Chula
Vista, as well as the other 18 jurisdictions in San Diego County. That public
hearing will be held at the San Diego Association of Governments' office in
downtown San Diego.
For any questions or any additional information, please contact Stephanie Snyder
in the Chula Vista City Manager's Office at 691-5031.
/0 - ~l/::-
276 FOURTH AVENUElCHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691.5031
:PIt)
INDWELLER
INFRASTRUCTURE DEALING WITH WASTE WELL EARTH RESTORATION
A NON-PROFIT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION
Press Release
November 8, 1991
Pro Ject:
Purpose:
Place:
Time:
Second Annual Resource Rally
Recycling Education Event
Southwestern College, East H & Otay Lakes Road
JANUARY 4,1992
Saturday between 9am and 4pm Join us on Market Day.
INDWELLERS organize to build Infrastructure to deal with Waste
Well and Restore the Earth.
"Reclaim the Earth instead of polluting it." says, Teresa Aland founder of
Infrastructure Dealing with Waste WELL Earth Restoration
"We all dwell within one global environment."
Nearly half of the components going to the Otay Landfill are natural resourc-
es that should be restoring the earth.
INDWELLERS sponsor this event to teach source separation, source
red,uction, and composting for a sustainable world.
By sponsoring this event Resource Conservation and Economic Development
will integrate the South County and institutionalize the recycling concepts of
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, and Restore.
Earth Restoration will be the theme as the community gathers around a
Farmer's Market.
If your Christmas tree is purchased at Southwestern College, rebate tickets
will be given which can be refunded on market day when you drop-off your
tree for recycling: Give the earth a gift and receive one too.
THANKS TO YOU!
1433 Nadon Avenue, ChuIa Vista CA 91911-5513
PHONE (619) 422-1145 FAX
/ () ,/ ~ -did'
~/()
INDWELLER
Infrastructure Dealing with Waste WELL Earth
Restoration
The goals of the INDWELLER organization have always been to
affect:
Source Separation Education
Land Use Conservation and Preservation; and,
Market Development for Economic Growth.
I am pleased, with the general intent of this document and deserve
the right to comment.
It is time for this one way street of communication to end, in order to
develop the closed -loop circulation common to recycling.
This association of businesses in recycling, and residents of Chula
Vista have a definite contribution to make, and request that.
improved outreach be pursued.
To quote section 1.1.5 page 1-6, "The best overall strategy is a
comprehensive mix of techniques that includes:
Public Education
Promotions and Events
Publicity and Reminders
My comments are, "Don't re-invent the wheel when it comes to
public outreach and education, just do it. The resources are
available, so move forward with the city's medium-term, public
education and information program.
City staff has not responded favorably in the past to suggestions
made by this organization and still allows prejudices to enter into the
planning efforts.
Last month I was told the City would not participate in the public
education event sponsored by INDWELLER. At that time, I was not
informed that this document was made available for comment. And I
also feel that this has something to do with the Chamber of
.J [) / J!!f-~71
.
Commerce not responding to my request.
With the cooperation of the city, this organization intends to develop
. the infrastructure of public facilities necessary to recycle a major
portion of the regional waste stream with a long-term, sustainable
plan. One that will significantly drive the market and promote
economic growth because of the joint venture advantages and
economies of scale.
page 2.
There is no intent to disrupt or negatively impact any existing
recycling efforts. On the contrary, criteria for evaluation has been
enhanced.
.
INDWELLER sugQests a six month series of round tables be held
during the evaluation of the SRRE. .
We would like the opportunity to oversee these efforts, especially, in
the objective areas outlined in section 4.0 and 5.0. .
Market development (LOCAL AND REGI(JNAL)
Contract development (FIVE-YEAR TERMS); and,
Materials Recovery Facilities (REGIONAL PRIVATIZATION)
Also available for technical assistance are the consultants
associated with economic development and environmental studies
at Southwestern College. Written and verbal support has been
obtained from three departments of study and community
development related to reGycling. Funding of programs and
demonstrations could be a cooperative effort.
A joint committee could review, mitigate, and negotiate .
requirements to develop model contracts and RFP's; such as, The
General Considerations, Flow Control, Contractor Qualifications,
Wages and Job Security, End Markets, Current Impacts on recyclers:
existing, new, small, non-profit or Minority (MBElWBE/DBE); and,
Future Awards Preference and Procurements.
This bipartisan committee will assure the public and private interests
in recycling.
/0-,;3'1714
1:1 --c~5
a ,~
~7D
(
File No.
PUBUC HEARlNG CHECK LIST
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARlNG DATE~ 1C1 ), C1 q I
SUBJECT DJ\L~i ~Cu.M-'-'-- ~..Ju.~"t- ~~ ~'^Nl-"J-
LOCATION ~
SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBUCATION -- BY FAX ~BY HAND _; BY MAIL
PUBLICATION DATE O~ \~ I I~Ot(
MAILED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS
NO. MAILED
PER GC 54992 Legislative Staff, Construction Industry Fed, 6336 Greenwich Dr Suite F. San Diego, 92122
LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK l[! ~ \ \ I I q q I
COPIES TO:
Administration (4)
Planning ~
.,.-/
Originating Department
Engineering ~.
Others
City Clerk's Office (2) .-/
POST ON BULLETIN BOARDS
()~ I~\ ICtGlI
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
(
-58-
/o-.3l/f
!G ~
T
PUBUC NOTICE
A public hearing will held to consider Preliminary
Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) as required
by the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989
(AB939).
The meeting will be held in the City Council Chambers
on November 19, 1991 at 6:00 p.m.
Copies of the document will be available for review
after October 25, 1991, in the City Clerk's office and the Chula
Vista library. If you have any questions, please call the City
Manager's office at 691-5031 for more information.
Beverly A. Authelet
City Clerk
/O'~7
hi ~'-T
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
1)
~H
Meeting Date 11/19/91
Resolution Abating the Scheduled
Calendar Year 1992 Business License Tax
Increase for One Year and Retaining
Business License Taxes in Calendar Year
1992 at the Calendar Year 1991 Level, as
Provided for in Ordinance 2408
2) Report Regarding Increasing Various
Taxes and Fees Related to Billboards,
Special Events and Card Rooms
REVIEWED BY:
Director of Finan~
Revenue Manager~
city Manager~ (4/5ths Vote Yes
No X)
SUBMITTED BY:
At the November 5, 1991 Business License Tax Abatement
Hearing, the city Council indicated concern with raising the
business license tax to the scheduled Calendar Year (CY)
1992 levels given the current economic recession. Ordinance
2408 passed by council on October 25, 1990 offers Council
the ability to abate the CY 1992 business license tax down
to the current CY 1991 levels for one year. Passage of this
resolution would set the CY 1992 business license taxes at
the current CY 1991 levels. This action would abate the
increase for one calendar year only, and leave the proposed
1993 increase at the same level (e.g., the three year phase-
in would be retained with the entire increase scheduled for
1993 occurring in 1993). This would provide Council with
maximum flexibility at the 1993 abatement hearing where,
depending on economic conditions, council would have the
option of abating the tax to the 1991 levels or the 1992
levels (4 year phase in), or allowing the tax to increase to
the scheduled 1993 levels. If this resolution is passed,
staff recommends sending a letter explaining Council's
action to all businesses with their business license renewal
forms, since last year all businesses were informed that
their tax would be increasing this coming January, and as
such may be expecting an increase.
Abating the CY 1992 Business License Tax increase will
reduce FY 1991-92 revenues by approximately $146,750. After
a review of FY 1991-92 budgeted revenues and expenditures,
it appears that the $146,750 revenue reduction can be
addressed while still retaining a balanced budget. This can
be accomplished through the following means: 1) utilizing
the $59,642 revenue surplus over budgeted expenditures in
H~
Page 2, Item J1
Meeting Date 11/19/91
the FY 1991-92 budget, 2) utilizing the $80,100 in
budgetary savings resulting from allowing the Boys and Girls
Club to operate the new Youth Center, 3) utilizing an
additional $3500 in revenues expected from updating the City
Attorney Department's full cost recovery rate used for
reimbursements from special funds to the General fund, and
4) Increasing revenues by $3840 by increasing select fees
and business license taxes later this fiscal year.
At the November 5, 1991 Business License Tax Abatement
Hearing, the City Council indicated some interest in raising
taxes and/or fees of some specific businesses. staff has
researched three areas and are recommending that proposals
to increase the fees related to special events and to
increase the business license tax for billboards be brought
back for Council consideration at a public hearing to be
held at the December 10, 1991 meeting, to ensure all public
notification requirements are met. staff is also evaluating
the feasibility of increasing the business license tax on
card rooms. Police Department staff are currently reviewing
a proposal from card room owners related to changes in the
card room ordinance and an associated proposal to increase
business license taxes. Due to the complexity of the
issues, staff does not think all pertinent information can
be reviewed, a recommendation formulated and notice given by
the December 10 meeting. since card room business license
taxes are collected quarterly, staff proposes to bring back
options for an increased tax on card rooms to Council at a
public hearing in time for any desired increase in tax to be
implemented for the second quarter (April 1) of 1992.
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Adopt the Resolution abating the Calendar Year 1992
business license tax rates to the level of the 1991
Calendar Year business license tax rates.
2) Accept report regarding increasing various taxes and
fees related to billboards, special events (including
concerts) and card rooms
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
DISCUSSION:
Abatina CY 92 Business License Taxes to CY 91 Levels
On November 5, 1991 Council conducted a Public Hearing as
required by Ordinance 2408 to hear public testimony and
11-;1.
Page 3, Item /1
Meeting Date 11/19/91
deliberate as to whether or not the scheduled CY 1992
increase in the Business License Tax should occur as
scheduled or should be abated to a lower level, not to go
below the current CY 1991 rates (Attachment 1). During
discussion, Council indicated concern with proceeding with
the scheduled business license tax increase due to current
economic conditions. Council requested staff to come back
at this meeting with a recommendation to abate the business
license tax rates to their current level for CY 1992 (FY
1991-92) and provide options for addressing the anticipated
$146,750 decrease in revenues in the FY 1991-92 budget which
would be associated with this abatement.
This agenda statement provides the resolution to abate the
scheduled 1992 business license tax increase for one year
and provides a report on the feasibility of increasing taxes
or fees for certain businesses which will only offset a very
small portion of the revenue reduction. staff recommends
that the remainder of the revenue needed to maintain a
balanced budget be obtained through utilization of the
$59,642 surplus of revenues over expenditures in this year's
budget and the additional $80,100 available this year due to
Boys and Girls Club operating the Youth Center rather than
City staff.
If Council adopts the Resolution, staff recommends sending a
letter to all licensed businesses with their business
license tax renewal notice, informing them of Council's
decision. On October 10, 1990 staff sent letters to 6500
business license holders informing them of the proposed
increase (at that time a two year phase in rather than the
three year phase in eventually adopted by Council). since
many businesses are expecting a large increase this year
based on this correspondence, a letter informing them of the
changes in the business license ordinance, as well as the
one year abatement of the scheduled increase, would be
helpful.
Evaluation of Increasinq Billboard Business License Tax
Currently, the City of Chula vista has four companies which
have a total of 21 billboards. Under the current business
license tax table Chula vista would be expected to receive
$495 in business license tax revenue from billboards in
Calendar Year 1992. A survey of other cities in San Diego
County, indicate that Chula vista's current business license
tax on billboards is relatively low (see Table 1).
/I.J
Page 4, Item /1
Meeting Date 11/19/91
It appears that the tax on billboards can be raised
substantially since billboards are currently being taxed at
a much higher level in several nearby cities. staff is
intending to come back with an ordinance to raise business
license taxes for billboards at the December 10, 1991
Council meeting. This will give staff the opportunity to
publish and post the public hearing notice as well as
notifying the affected four companies by letter. Staff will
be recommending an increase in the business license tax from
$75 plus $15 per billboard over two, to $75 per billboard,
beginning in Calendar Year 1992. For example, a company
with eight billboards would pay $165 in tax currently versus
$600 in tax if the proposed rate were adopted. If Council
adopts staff's recommendation, the fiscal impact will be an
additional $1080 collected in business license tax in FY 91-
92 (CY 1992).
Evaluation of Increasinq Special Event Business License Tax
Special events include concerts, circuses, carnivals,
parades, etc. Currently business license taxes for special
events (for profit) are $250 a day. A survey of other San
Diego County cities (See Table 2) indicates that Chula
vista's business license tax for these events is
comparatively high. Chula vista does have a special tax of
$5 per day for non-profit organizations staging an event of
three or less days duration. This enables desirable
community events to be held at a minimal cost to the
organization.
Given that our current tax rate appears adequate, staff
believes enacting fees to be paid for any additional staff
, services required as a direct result of an event is a more
equitable manner of ensuring that all costs are recovered.
As such staff is recommending returning to Council on the
December 10, 1991 meeting to propose an addition to the
Master Fee Schedule requiring that special events pay all
costs for additional staff services (e.g., investigation,
traffic control, set up, clean up) at full cost recovery,
unless the fees or a portion thereof are waived by the
Waiving Authority. This recommendation will have a positive
fiscal impact that is difficult to quantify. A reasonable
estimate for the remainder of FY 1991-92 is $1500.
Evaluation of Increasinq Card Room Business License Tax
Currently there are two operational card rooms in the City,
one with six tables and one with eight tables. Per Council
request, Police Department staff are in the process of
11- 'I
Page 5, Item II
Meeting Date 11/19/91
evaluating the feasibility and desirability of a request
from the card rooms to modify the city's card room
ordinance. In their reqUest for an ordinance change, the
card rooms indicated a willingness to have their taxes
increased if the requested changes are adopted. Although
staff believes that a tax increase could be handled
independently from the Police Department's review of the
requested ordinance changes, more discussions and research
are needed prior to formulating a recommendation for a
business license tax increase. since card room business
license taxes are collected quarterly, staff proposes to
bring back options for an increased tax on card rooms to
council at a public hearing in time for any desired increase
in tax to be implemented in the second quarter (April 1) of
1992.
In Chula Vista, card rooms currently pay a business license
tax of $30 per table monthly. As shown in Table 3, the
city's current business license tax on card rooms is on the
low end of the spectrum in comparison to other San Diego
County cities. with 14 tables, the city currently receives
$420 per month in business license tax, or $5040 annually.
In addition to business license taxes, card rooms are
required to pay the following fees:
o New card rooms pay a $500 non-refundable
investigation fee when initially applying for a
license
o Card room managers pay $50 for an initial work
permit and $30 annually for work permit renewal
o Card room employees pay $30 for an initial work
permit and $10 annually for work permit renewal
As an example, a doubling of the tax from $30 per table per
month to $60 per table per month would result in additional
revenue of $1260 this fiscal year and $5040 in FY 1992-93.
other Issues Impactinq the FY 1991-92 Budqet
Even though Council adopted a balanced FY 1991-92 budget,
and this report outlines how the budget can continue to be
balanced even with the loss of the scheduled CY 1992
business license tax increase, there are still many revenue
and expenditure issues outstanding that may impact the
current budget. Staff are in the process of reviewing a
number of issues related to the current budget (e.g.,
recently notified health insurance increases, reimbursement
Il.5
Page 6, Item II
Meeting Date 11/19/91
of booking fees to the County, Port District reimbursements
for public safety services, continued economic slump) which
could impact revenue and expenditure projections. staff
will be coming back to Council at a later date to address
these budget issues comprehensively as the big picture
becomes clearer.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact of abating the scheduled CY 1992 increase
in business license taxes will be a reduction of $146,750 in
estimated FY 91-92 revenues. However, this reduction in
revenues can be met through the current budget and later
adoption of increased taxes on billboards and card rooms and
increased fees for special events at the levels mentioned in
this report. If these actions are taken, abatement of the
Business License Tax increase can be accomplished while
maintaining a balanced budget.
Listinq of Tables and Attachments
Table 1 -
Comparison of Chula vista Business License
Rates for Billboards with Rates in other San
Diego County cities
Table 2 -
Comparison of Chula vista Business License
Rates for Special Events with Rates in other
San Diego County cities
Table 3 -
Comparison of Chula vista Business License
Rates for Card Rooms with Rates in other San
Diego County cities
Attachment 1 - November 5, 1991 Council Agenda Statement
Related to the Public Hearing Regarding
Business License Tax Rates
/J...t
Table 1
Comparison of Business License Taxes for Billboards
November 1991
City
Business License Tax
Tax levy for
Eight Billboards*
Carlsbad
Billboards prohibited
nja
Coronado
Billboards prohibited
nja
Escondido
$50jbusiness
$50
$55
$125
$160
$165
oceanside
$25/yrjbusiness + $10jea. sign over 5 signs
National City
$50jyrjbus. + $15jea. sign over 3 signs
$20/yr/sign
$75jyrjbus. + $15jea. sign over 2 signs
San Diego
CHULA VISTA
(Current)
vista
La Mesa
$110jyrjbus. + $40jea. sign over 5 signs
$35jyrjbus. + $70jsign
$100jyrjsign
$230
$595
$800
$288
Imperial Beach
Average tax (excluding Chula Vista):
* Note: Represents the tax level for a typical number of billboards.
Chula vista's two largest billboard companies have eight and six
billboards respectively.
/1- 7
Table 2
Comparison of Business License Taxes for Special Events
November 1991
City
Business License Tax
Carlsbad
n/a
$250/day: $5/day .for non-profit
n/a
CHULA VISTA
Coronado
Escondido
$5/day
La Mesa
$25/event
$IOO/day + $lO/show
Imperial Beach
National City
$20 for resident businesses: $25 for non-res
No tax on non-profit
San Diego
$lOO/day: $lO/day for exhibit booths
$48/event
Oceanside
Vista
Business license (based on gross receipts)
//.8"
~
.;
'"
N
..
.
y
:= c"
l5
i ~.
~
..
..
....
"
i
u
~
..
~
'is
..
l5
.._0
l'l g .;
~ .0
.. 0 '"
'" ..
~ N
o .. A
~==
~ i i
. ~ ~
ll-.. ..
~ ! !
:c ~ i,
..
U ~ ~
... 0 0
!~~
~
"
U
~
i
i
u
...
!
..
~
..
~ ~
" ~
U
~ ..
~ ~
~ ..
- ~
11 0
:::~
'"
~ +
+ l:.
l:.}
}.::.
.::.~
o .
IC~
.. ..
c.. ... IL. ... ... &.. ...
II CI II II II II ..
................. ...
... L ... ... ... ... ...
1111111
...............................
o
N
-
..
0000052
";;1;::/;00;1;15
:;j .. ill "'. . .
_tt~
" II II II II II II
iiiiiii
to- ~ ~ ~ ... ... to-
_NfIl"I....II'l"O....
& ~ ~ ~ ..
i
~ ~
~ ... ...
"E .. '" '" ;:: U
- .. !
.. "
u i .c .c .c
~ ;! I I I 8-
0 .... '"
~ OJ
= !!
j
....
" 11 11 11 11 11
i & u
u ~ j ~ U U
U :;; :;; :;; :;; :;;
~ i i i i i
~ "E u
.. .. - ~ ~ lD ~ ~ ~
.. U - N .. - ... ... ... ... ...
!!
j
~ - V ..
o 8: u
.. " u
Ii - .... - ..
.. -811 f .g -
.. ~ J ;: 1 l
'" Ii -l j .. ..
" .. .. I ~ ;; !: i ..
i .. - ~ ! u
u ~ ::l ! ~ u ~ ..
u .. z 8 ~ 0 .. .. .. ;:
.... u :a u u u ... ~ :a
11-''1 / /1- :l b
COtJll/CIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~J I
Meeting Date 11/5/91
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Regarding Business License
Tax Rates
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of Finan~l/
Revenue Manager ~.
City Manage~ (4/5ths Vote Yes No-X)
REVIEWED BY:
On October 25, 1990, the city Council approved a business
license tax increase to be phased in over a three year
period starting with 1991. Table 1 shows the current
business license tax rates and scheduled increases as
approved by the Council in Ordinance No. 2408.
The Council also approved a procedure for annual public
hearings commencing with the 1992 rates. Today's public
hearing offers Council the opportunity to review and discuss
the second year of the scheduled three year increase in
business license taxes and to receive comments from
representatives of the business community.
As noted in the City Manager's budget message, the FY 1991-
92 adopted city budget assumed implementation of the
scheduled second year business license tax adjustment with a
resulting $146,750 in additional revenue.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council conduct the public hearing but
take.no action to abate (see option below) implementation of
the scheduled (reference Table 1) business license tax rate
increase to be effective January 1, 1992.
ootion - In accordance with Ordinance 2408, Council is
authorized, for no more than one calendar year, to lower or
abate the scheduled business license tax rate, but to no
less than the tax rate in the 1991 calendar year.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
DISCUSSION:
Current Economv
Although the current national economy would seem to argue
against a business license tax increase, there is some
evidence that the local business environment has weathered
the recession much better than other cities across the State
and in San Diego county. Using sales tax revenue as one
barometer, Chula Vista's sales tax revenues have increased
~ 11-1/
PAGE 2, ITEM ).JJ
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
in spite of the national recession. In FY 1990-91 the
City's sales tax revenues were $11,808,279 an increase of
8.2% over FY 1989-90.
In terms of number of businesses, the City currently has
6,697 businesses on record versus 6,661 a year ago in
October 1990.
It is recognized that some parts of the economy have not
fared as well, such as tourism and the City's Transient
Occupancy Tax 1 revenue, but Chula Vista's overall sales tax
base seems relatively strong when compared with other cities
and the problems they are facing because of the recession
and decreasing sales tax revenues.
So, in light of Council's policy decision last year to phase
in the business license tax increase, staff's recommendation
is consistent with that policy direction. On the other
hand, if Council's evaluation of the impact of the economy
on business is not as optimistic as the above description,
and the following discussion, there is an option built into
Ordinance 2408 for Council to set the rate at or in between
the current rate and the second year increase.
Summarv of 1990 Staff Reoort and Recommendations
In June 1990 staff submitted a supplemental bUdget memo and
report to Council (Attachment 1) providing a detailed review
of the city's business license tax rates and revenues. This
review was one of a number of steps being undertaken by
staff to review and enhance the City's revenue base,
especially with regards to funding to be used for general
City services. The report showed that City business license
tax revenues have lagged significantly behind inflation and
have provided a declining level of support for general City
services. It also found that the city of Chula Vista's
business license rates and revenues were SUbstantially lower
than other comparable cities state-wide and within San Diego
County.
After presenting the original report staff received input
and feedback from various groups in the business community.
The business community indicated a preference to retain the
current rate structure rather than the alternate rate
structure (gross receipts) proposed in the staff report.
Based on these discussions, staff modified its.
recommendation to retain the current rate structure and
phase in the rate increase over a two year period. The
recommended rate was set at a level which would result in
roughly equivalent revenue to that estimated under the
proposed alternate rate structure. This recommendation was
1 As you will see in the following public hearing, an increase in the Transient Occupancy Tax
. is not be; n9 recomnended. .
2" r' II-/~
..- ~"""''''f''~':;
PAGE 3, ITEM 2/)
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
supported by the Chamber of Commerce and was presented to
council on October 16, 1990 for the first reading and
October 25 for the second reading (Attachment 2). On
October 25, 1990, Council passed the ordinance supported by
the Chamber, with the modifications of extending the phase
in period from two to three years and including a procedure
for annual public hearings commencing with the 1992 rates.
In 1990, when the report was written, general business
license tax rates had not been increased since 1978. In
1954 the general business license tax rate was set at $12.50
plus $3 per employee. In 1978, 24 years later the basic
rate was increased to $25 plus the same $3 per employee.
During this same time period the Consumer Price Index (CPI)
and the cost of providing general City services increased at
a much higher rate.
o Since November 1954 the CPI increased 386%, while the
average cost for a Chula Vista business license
increased only 46%. From 1978 to 1989 the CPI
increased by 121%, while the cost of an average
business license did not increase at all.
o In FY 1954-55 business license revenues supported 6.3%
of the City's general operating budget. In FY 1978-79
support dropped to only 1.8%. By FY 1989-90 business
license revenues supported less than 1% of general
services.
o Between FY 1954-55 and FY 1989-90 City expenditures for
police services rose sharply, as seen by a 7,871%
increase in the Police Department's budget. During
this same period business license revenue rose only
817%. From FY 1978-79 to FY 1989-90 police
expenditures rose 314%, with business license revenues
increasing only 86%.
The report also compared the City of Chula vista's business
license revenue and rates to that of other comparable size
cities throughout the state (100,000-150,000 population in
FY 1987-88) and larger cities (over 50,000 population in FY
1987-88) within San Diego County. The report looked at
three comparison measures: 1) percentage of general fund
revenues generated by business licenses, 2) business
license revenue generated per capita, and 3) average cost
of a business license for different size businesses. As
detailed below, business license tax revenues in Chula Vista
were significantly lower than the comparison cities. These
low revenues were primarily a result of the City'S low
business license rates.
~ JI'"' 1:3
PAGE 4, ITEM Zv
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
Percentaae of General Fund Revenues
A Ralph Anderson and Associates survey showed that business
license revenues of California Charter cities averaged 5.8%
of General Fund revenues in FY 1987-88. In FY 1987-88 Chula
vistas business license revenues represented only 1.29% of
general revenues, tenth lowest among the 78 charter cities.
By FY 1988-89 Chula vista's business license revenues had
declined further, representing only 0.9% of general
revenues. According to the survey, only 11% of all
California cities received less than 1% of their general
revenue from business licenses.
Per Caoita
Chula Vista's business license revenues were also low when
compared on a per capita basis. Among the 18 similar sized
cities in california, Chula Vista generated the second
lowest business license revenue per capita. Chula Vista's
business license revenues were also low compared to other
San Diego County cities. Among the ten cities within the
County with populations of 50,000 or more (as of FY 1987-88)
Chula Vista received the second lowest business license
revenue per capita.
Averaae Cost of a Business License
The report also reviewed business license rate structures
employed by comparison cities and compared the average cost
of a license for various sized businesses. Since the
majority of cities used gross receipts rather than the
employee-based rate structure used by Chula Vista, an
analysis was conducted to estimate the average number of
employees for various levels of gross receipts. Rate
comparisons were made for five retail business categories,
based on a range of gross receipts or equivalent number of
employees, based on each jurisdictions business license rate
schedule. This comparison found that Chula vista's business
license rates were among the lowest among similar-sized
cities throughout California as well as cities within San
Diego County. On the state wide level Chula vista's rates
were second lowest among the 18 state-wide comparison
cities, and third lowest among the ten San Diego County
comparison cities.
For example, for a business with gross receipts of $100,000-
$200,000 (5.5 employees) the cost of a business license
ranged for $20 to $311 among the state-wide comparison
cities and from $25 to $111 among the County comparison
cities. Chula Vista's average rate of $42 was only 33%
,~
-
;A - -'(
11-1'1
".fJ.
PAGE 5. ITEM ~
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
of the average rate of $127 charged by state-wide comparison
cities and 63% of the average rate of $67 charged by County
comparison cities. As a business' gross receipts and number
of employees increased, Chula Vista's rates were
progressively lower when compared to other cities.
Rate structure
The report also examined Chula vista's business license rate
structure. For general businesses, Chula vista's rate
schedule charges a basic flat rate for all businesses of a
given type and an additional variable rate based on the
number of employees. A review of comparison cities'
business license rate structures indicated that 14 of 17
comparison cities in California and five of nine comparison
cities in San Diego County had rate structures based solely
or primarily on gross receipts.
A review of various rate structure alternatives led staff to
believe that a gross receipt-based rate structure was more
preferable than an employee-based rate structure. Gross
receipts based rates are self adjusting for inflation, and
thus will generally result in rev~nues remaining
proportional to City expenses over time. Gross receipts-
based rate structures are also more sensitive to an
individual business' economic condition, since each year's
rate mirrors the individual business' annual performance.
Based on the aforementioned analyses and comparisons, last
year's staff report presented two major recommendations: 1)
Business license rates in the City of Chula vista should be
raised to be more comparable with past years support of
general fund services and more comparable with rates of
other San Diego County cities: and 2) Chula Vista's rate
structure should be altered to be gross receipts-based
rather than employee-based.
After presenting the initial report staff received input
from various groups in the business community concerning the
recommendations contained in the report, specifically a
change to a gross receipts based tax. After meeting with
the business community, although there were mixed opinions,
the predominant opinion was to retain the per employee rate
structure due to privacy concerns. In response to these
concerns staff revised the recommendation in the initial
report to:
o Retain the existing employee-based rate structure,
adjusting it to generate approximately equivalent
revenue that would have been received under the
initially proposed gross receipts rate structure.
In conjunction with this change, rates for
professionals and manufacturers were raised
proportion~lly to the existing rate structure.
1. r
1/"15
PAGE 6, ITEM ?-O
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
o Phase in the increase over a two year period.
o Delay any inflationary increases until the third
year.
o Provide a lower flat rate for new small (5 or
fewer employees) businesses during their first
year of operation.
o Established a maximum annual business license tax
to be paid by any single business.
Adootion of Existina'Business License Ordinance
On October 16 (first reading) and October 25, 1990 (second
reading) Council was presented with six options for
increasing ~he business license rates, with staff
recommending the option outlined above which was endorsed by
the Chamber of Commerce Executive Board (Attachment 2). On
October 25, 1990 Council passed option E of Ordinance 2408.
The rate increases provided for by this ordinance are shown
in Table 1. Major ordinance provisions included:
o A three year, rather than two year, phase in of
the recommended increase, with 50% of the increase
occurring in 1991, 75% of the increase occurring
in 1992, and 100% of the increase occurring in
1993.
o A lower, fixed first year rate for new small
businesses (5 or fewer employees).
o A six percent annual growth rate in 1994 and
thereafter.
o Annual abatement hearing procedures are provided,
commencing for the 1992 rates at which time
Council may set lower rates, with the 1991 rates
being the floor.
o Setting a maximum tax that any single business
would have to pay in a calendar year. Maximum
amount is $7,000 in 1991 and $12,000 in 1992.
CUrrent Status of Business License Revenues and Rates
Allowing the business license rates to increase as shown on
Table 1, would enable the City to meet the revenue estimates
included in the current budget. The scheduled increase
would also bring business license revenues more in line with
what they were in previous years (as a percentage of total
general fund revenues) and in comparison with other
comparable cities. .
il' fry- 11-"
PAGE 7, ITEM J.IJ
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
Increasing the business license tax to the scheduled 1992
rates would bring business license revenue almost up to the
level they were in 1979, in terms of support provided to
general city services. As mentioned earlier business
license revenues supported 6.3% of the city's general
operating budget in FY 1954-55. By 1978-79 the level of
support had dropped to 1.8%. . By FY 1989-90 business license
revenues supported less than 1% of the city's general
operating budget. In FY 1987-88 the average level of
support among California charter cities was 5.8%. The
initial rate increase in FY 1990-91 brought the level of
support up to 1.4%. If the scheduled increase is
implemented the level of support will reach 1.7%, a bit
lower than 1978 levels.
During the time between June 1990 when the original staff
report on the business license tax was submitted and now,
other cities used for comparison in the report have also
increased their rates further. Table 2 shows a comparison
between Chula vista's current rates, scheduled rates, and
other County cities' rates for general businesses as of
January 1992. Since June of 1990 all of the comparison
cities have maintained the same rate, with the exception of
the city of San Diego which has increased their rate
substantially. As seen in Table 2, the Chula Vista's
scheduled rate increase will place Chula Vista's rates near
the average in San Diego County.
Table 3 shows Chula vista's current and scheduled business
license rates in comparison to the rates charged by
comparable-sized cities in California. Since the report was
written in 1990, 8 of the 17 comparison cities have raised
their business license rates. Both the current and
scheduled 1992 rates for Chula Vista are substantially below
the average rates in similar size cities in California.
~
II-I?
PAGE 8, ITEM ;!.,t)
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
Imoact of 1992 Rate Increase on Businesses
Below are examples of different types of businesses and a
demonstration of the impact of the scheduled 1992 business
license tax rate increase:
Business Tvoe
1. Small retail business with fixed
location and 5 employees
2. Department store with 150
employees
3. Professional (physician,
attorney, etc.)
4. Manufacturing firm with 150
employees
5. Categories with no change in
business license tax rate include:
Business License Tax
llll ll2Z.
$85.00 $127.75
$1027.50 $1541.50
$105.00 $155.00
$540.00 $814.00
- Rental businesses - apartments, motels
- Special events - circus, concert, carnival
- Public dances
- Pawn Brokers
- Peddlers
- Trailer Parks
- Vending Machines
FISCAL IMPACT:
As pointed out in the City Manager's FY 1991-92 budget
message, the scheduled rate increase is expected to generate
additional business license revenues in the amount of
$146,750. This revenue has been included in the current
budget's revenue estimates. An action to abate the increase
would result in an estimated revenue reduction of $146,750
in the current fiscal year.
--;t.~ -,
//.../8"
PAGE 9, ITEM ).t>
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
Listina of Tables and Attachments
Table 1 -
Master Tax Schedule indicating a 3 year phase
in of rate increase
Table 2 -
Comparison of proposed Chu1a Vista business
license rates with other San Diego County
cities as of November 1991
Table 3 -
.Comparison of proposed Chula Vista business
license rates with other California cities as
of November 1991
Attachment 1 - Report of Chula Vista's Business License Tax
- June 11, 1990
Attachment 2 - October 25, 1990 Report to Council regarding
business license tax and presenting six
ordinance options for tax increase.
___I I If 11"/1
THIS PAGE BLANK
;;'J I~ II..~O
...0'4
.....
...
....
o
...
II
00
Ol
...
~
...
I&l
~
...
;S
.
~
.
.c:
N
.
Ii I
..
..
.~
..
....
...
i
S
Ji
i
~
a
oft
..
!
.
..
...
::l
. I
..
.IS!
...
=~
...
l
..
I.
'"
...
~
.
.c:
::l
Ii I
..
U
...
.-
~::
..
f
..
I.
'"
...
..
c
..
.
..
..
I.
'"
...
I
i
1:
J
..g
..-
...
....
~
..-
.c
-.
:::~
..0
U
ll~
.....
.
....
c't:
~~
"u
tl;...
id
... u
ie:::
...
.. 0 ..
IiU
.c.
.. ..
.. 0
-...-
.in
HI
.. ....
I
-
..
.If
'"
...
..
i
oft
.
!! ::..
So ...~
J!. =-= E 0
......l:! g
1+---
... ..
........ .
...u~...~
Gl!:::_IP.
.. t~ arE::
..'::.....1
0_ ~o..
.....
'" .J",:'t:
":&..0.,.
-_o....a.
..
.,n
!!....
~o..~
0..0
_ c_..
r:iii
.........
1.....l1li..
. co
......
....,~~g .
.....---
0_ U .. f
...-...
'" -.....
"'........
.... pt A_ ~
--.... ..
..
.J:.!
t....
o .
"0
0..0
_c.....
Ir- ....
Z + ::~;
. ...
L....,
1....l1li...
. co
......
... _uc
,,~_o .
.....--...
0_ U .. l!
...-...
'" _1IIl'"
",c.I.a..,
::~t;;~;
..
...
..
u
.
..
.~
..-
.. .
_u
u_
.
c_
_u
..I.
g"
-...
..c
..
llc
it
.!
::i
..-
'if
.....
..
....
.... .
11-1
-!..
.. J!.
.Jc;l
i:z
..
or
-
!
oft
.
tc
o-
f!
.
"'- .
II !.~
.c.. .
....C!;
f" .
If":
.u
::.!Jl
i..
o-
f!
.
"'- .
II 11~
.c.. .
.. ..
....
.... .
...on
i" .
.u
::=J:
.i
..;;
..-
....
.....
...
...c
.au
I:
~8B
is..;~
==1.
'"
... .
.,;ll
...~
...
..
..-
l!i
..-
....
.a-
i
8.
..c
...u
:::1:
51.
..ill
...~
.1.
..
..-
..
"g
..-
....
J-
i
51.
..c
NU
on.
.....
.: .i
""'-"'-
.........~
u~=e
C:!A
- -1-; ::
.hif.
"::"et.r'E
U .1;.....
o ...0.
__0 ...
- ...
'I::: .
.= t. ~fi
...1l!..
It-:::
... .
.c_ IIllI _u
~:: g :=
.~ r~u
;UH
.. ....
11..2",1
_..tee
".II -
J5:::1~
..Pif
._t_!
:
!!!
C!;
oft
~
-...
+I~
..:; I:
..- .
....
.......
...!
...c..
.a U 0
1:.
~8li';
~,.;rl
==1.=
"'.
... .
~g=
.. r:::
. I."
.. ..
..--
.....
1-1:1
..--
....-
.a:;; It
....
8...
..c ..
...u.c
......
.....0
51. .
.GI:
-~=
. I."
.. ..
..--
.....
"'I~
..--
....-
.l!:;;1t
....
51...
..c!
::C~..
..... 0
1
.
;:..
0"
if'
....1
o.c..
...
... 0"
lI...
-..
...c
-..
.cc
::':;J~
.--
.:it ~
..--
.. ..
..!-
II .Il
-on ~
1:1
....
0_
. .c
..C!;t
!"'..
l!-.c
-lli
p-
...n,
!
!
..;
II
i.!
u
.c
....
o.
41
...
H
~!
.....
Ii
to!
l.l!
.c
~=
...10
'~.!'
...
...
!l!
~.I!
.....
II
t.!
l.l!
.c
....
o.
....
~I.
...
...
1.0
...f
~!
.....
I
..
..
~
..
::
~
.l!
:D
~
..
!
..
o
..
o
..
11
.
I.
i
..
lii
l!i
oft
~ JI-~I
i.
~
...
l;
...
~
...:
u
.....
...
-"
... ..
N
i.!
.....'p,
I.~ Jj
_"'U
.. .
!!...
St~'E
".11
I..l! .IS
---
~t=
.......
..
I.
...
1Il
...
..
o
..
-I..
....
1.1::
....
..."
.....
II
;;
i!
... .:
.. ..
o ~
.. ..
......
~I.';::
_c
... .
HI
"'....
....c ..
..... .
..
I.
01
N
-
..
o
1i'
.....
....
1.1::
....
"'''
.....
..;
t!
..-...
.. on ..
...-..
......u
.. .
....
~";;'E
".11
1..l!.IS
...--
on ..._
......-
.......
Ii
;;
J
1:
..
..
is
..
i
011
'"
c
;;
i
-
-
;;
1
.
..
'E
!
-
;;
..
o
-
-
i
~
~
l!i
..;
~
l!i
oft
!
..
r
... .:
.. ..
o ~
.. ..
I.&~
...c
!U
2.1::
-...
.!
..
u
l!
.
..
o ..
.......
.1'"
l......~
~.
..01
I.f..
;::1::
..... .
.!..
..c
u~
l!c
...
..
....
o.
....
.1.
~...
. .
"0"
......
......
.....-
",.c..
........
~
~
1:
..
,1
.
..
c
.
1
..
:i!
..
l!
j
~
N
c:i
-
..;
.
i'i
~ . .
.....
...c_
..-..
oo.c .
~ U5!_
~I",o
1"'--
.....I..~
8~4;
Ni"'i..
-_...,.
.
..
r
.
'Ii
~ ..
~I!a
..-..
!!.c 0
5,Ulil
1.-
.. "'..
1"'-....
.....l.,~
"'.....--
:::.~t~
--"III
.
'Ii
~ . .
~I!a
..-..
..c .
~Ulil
1._
.. "'..
1."'--
....l.,~
i.....--
-~t~
__..1ft
~
..
!
J
..
.
..
..;
-
..;
TABLE 1
(
'"
..,
....
o
N
'"
OD
III
""
.....
....
1&1
o-l
IQ
~
'i
i
i
.. - !!. . ~ ;; ~
e.. ;;
:;; -. fI & I-.=: - ..
... ....
..~ . i .=: ... it I- :'1:.. -g
-- ~ c ..
...c titi ...~_EO ill I .1:
.. " Irs !!. ~
e .... !!. - ..O~ f-'=.=:!I U~
.. .. ..- . .. .6> ,. .~.
.:: 1 ! .. _.c_ ; 1....., , ~.. hI .1-- ~.r roo
- .. - .... :;; .. "1 " H ..... "i "'-
S ..- u. E ~.: I" .. d
~i2 .. . on . l..~ !i;h c ~..
0 . ~ 0 && -IL- l!.. . t
- lit": i 1= ... . . ... .. .. JI:
j' ...... ~~ ";:. ...- ~ :I ....~=
. .-- l"t u :Ii ...6> . 8i
"'1'" ~ ~ 1:..6> .. It i li..~~'" t.. .u
.. .... . . . ... _u 0 t .on .
S ~ "'~51 ,~~ - .-~ ~-.. .... ~.. ..
j......... !1l 8'" ...r ~n .- ...- '" - .. .".. IS..
I::; 0.... Nlilt !U on . Ii::: ...lR8:l;i,1 ICJ!C"
...Jl ~ .= _on ~,! IZ ;a
- ... ..... ... . ..... -...... ..
.. C'; !!. . ~ i.=: - lil
- ... M II &
..~ . .6> .. ... !=-~ i l; :~
=. .! ... ...
o=i ~ c ..
& -- ... i! I
Ii!S !!. .... .. :1
~ .... !!. - flo~ I.~~ i
.. .. ..- . i .6> . ~.
-::1 ! .. _4:... =..... ~.. .hI .1-- ... . ..
- .. - .... .. H ..... .., "'- roo
~ .- U.,; .6> t &1 :: cl~i: ..I
~12 r . ~.. !~"I:
0 . .. 0 &1 -..- r"_1 l!...t
lit:: i 1= ... . . ~~ .. .. A. .-
ii . ...... ...- ~ .. ~ -... ...~: Jl~
. .-- . .6> L;t -:1'1 ...6> .
.. -::i+t-) ~ ~ 1:...... I! -I 1:.... ......I~... i~ ... 81
.~ .. . . 0_ u 0 ~ ron .
~ ;;;~51 ~ .....~~ - .-~ ..._~ . 'i II
j....,... !1l ..... 8~i .- ~.- f1nafti:...~... ....
IS 0.... ::;:;iC.,.; j;!!l on . .11];;" ..~ ..
..,.t ~ N N N'" _on ~fI'I at..: ~.! II! ::;1.
.. .. ....- ...... .. .... . ..... 0" --.... ...
.. - !!. .. E ~ t_ on
e..
:;; ... . & ..
.. .... . :21
~~ . =. .! .... it I- :l fI ..
~ '0 .. ii I
...c & uti _ ~_I 0 .1:
- .. " I!;; !!. ..
.... !!. - ..o~ 1.=~8 ..I
~ .. .. ..- ;; .6> .. .~.
-:1 l .. _.c_ ..... ..~ hI .1-- ~ . ..
- .. - .... :;; .. ...." H .... "i on_ r-
... .- 8:1.,; t &.c . ~.! cUi: fI!
ii ~i2 r :l ..~ !....I:
0 . 0 &1 -..- e"_1 l!. . t
lit": i 1= ... . . ... .. .. A.
ii . ...... .c.. ...- ... .. ... -~ .. ." Jl~
"I" f .-- ..- . .6> L;" :li ".6> . .......
.. ~ 1:...... It i 1:.... ......1...... t... .u lRI
.- ... .. . . .... -I O::~...Ot ron .
.. ... .....51 ...c_ - .-~ I ~.
~ f....,... lR ...r Iii .- ...- '" - .. .".. iii"
,,- 0.... lR~ . j;!!l on . .. aft i....., -.xc",
,!::: ..,.1 t N - on N _on it::: _N oloC ::,! IZ _I
... .. .....- ...... ... .. .... -....... ..
i ...
..
.. A ..
w !
..
& i ~
. r
..
w
.. . ..
I ..
" I'
~
.: u 't II
~ 0 .
I .. . ..
;; ! r .
.. i
- f -
i i .. J
t j j .I
. 0 ;; 'E
. i .. ~ . . .
..
.! .. /l - .... . .. i: ;:
... It ;
I .. .. .. E t
.. J !!. .. l! :i
- .I :ii ...,.: & "
" i 1 & .. !
:! -. !
j . . ... .. f
... -- - .c
.. I 1! if i ! i! I
! ~ i " " oS I I
e
.. j;! .. l!i I} sa I ~ ~ l!i
I ;; "! ;; ..
- ,.; .,; .,; Iii :;j IS IS :i
i .. III
- - - -
.,; .,; .,; .,; .,; .,; .,; ..; ..; ..;
.
..
:!
"
i
I
Iii
..;
..
)
~~. ,~- II-~:J.
--
.i.-....
,....
..,
....
o
..,
Gl
ClO
at
'"
~
....
III
,.,
E
~
-
l:
N
-
~f
.Ill(
...
=:::
..-
~
-
l:
N
-
ii.
-
.1-
~
.-
....
..-
1
i
j
!
!i
i
~
~
.;
j
!
-
s
-
i .
.I~
!::r
:ll Ii
J ~ !
5 ~ ~
.J c; ~
~ i ~
.e::~
5l 5l 8
N N N
.. .. ..
., ! Ii:
j j ~
.3 C;- ~
~ i ~
l ~ t.
~ ~ 8
N N N
- - ..
~
o
..
~ j ~ ~
.. ...... ~ ...
~ 0 ~ J:;
~ :; "'i:' .....
.. ::t .. ...
t. ':: to j
~ ~ 8 :;
N N N IN
- - - -
, .
I
i
't
J
L
:=
L
.. .
.. ..
j !
'" ..
- ..
.:! l
I
j
2 8
:Ii ~
aft aft
~ :
L
~ .l!
..
..
:;;
.
.. .
.. ~ =
.: 5 ~
!i .. I
.. !
~
.
L
..
-
'0
~
r ~
~
.
'"
! !.
i I
.l!
r
J;
e
...
i
.
..
o
-
o
~
.,;
15 Ii
jr r
...... !
j J
... ...
on on
N ~
- ..
Ii Ii
-~ -~
... ...
j j
... ...
on on
N ~
- -
s ~
o 0
.. ..
.,; .,;
L
J!J!
-- -
0...-0 _'
~.:... 0
-..,I!t: :
+ = "I. ~
!::... e
;!.IO Q.
_"e 1::-
.."'- o. !!
. .--~ ~
;:~"~E "
i'iEI,! !
_.~O... ..
L
.Ut
--
o..-=:
...0
~~ L
. .-
....L
+ ~ ~l
.....
....."'...
. ~o
L....
...~~g .
..--....
_u _po
....-....t:
on'ii. r t..
f") Q._ CL.c
_.....0...
15
-~
...
L
.
_t
...
on
~
-
L
JlJ!
--
0...';
>'0
~~ L
. .-
....L
+ = "I
.....
.....W'I...
. "0
L....
...:;;~ g .
..---
_ U ... 0
"'-".f
on'ii.rJL..
NQ._ z:.
-.... ...
~
..
...
-
i
;;
N
'":
on
....
"
~
1:
~
i
..
~
-
o
..
.
L
..
:;;
~
t
....
::Ii
~-
e"
..:
o
-
~
N
..
..,;:
-,/P
Ii
r
.!
L
!
5l
..
i
-
..
.:
e
..
...
L
.
~
-
..
Ii
r
l
~ ~
. .
!- ~
~ ~
.. -
i
..
..
..
~
e
..
~
!
on
o
-
..
"
o
..
L
l
~ ~
. .
.!: .::
rJ ~
- -
'i
!
i
<!
N
..
.,;
-
.
'0
'0
..
~
Ii !
r L
t .~
..
..
~
.l!
~
1:
"
~
~
..
.
-
i
-
..
....
-..
e-
...I
.. -
~ il
.
.: .!
..
o
U
-
.
..
.
s ~ 5
~ i 5i
.,; .,; .,;
~
I
$
..
.
..
i
...
.. L=
-= II
~ lilc
_ ::.
15
;;
!l
.
u
:;;
il
!!
.
..
.!
o .
.'il!
. . ..t:
--I
..u_
--....
l!~"o
..--
.....
....."'''0
.......
"''''....&I
......
~.............
_~I!f=
__ I' A cr
.$
..
.
.!
II
I
...
.
L_
II
2_
."
--
...
:.1:
.., ..t
-..
:~ul
:!T. Ii: 0
~-.
.....
j:'11...
:.~~~
~_........
_~If=
__OQ.D'
$
..
.
..
u
I
.."
L=
l.
2!
."
-.
.!
.
0'"
. .,....f
....
~uul
.-
...z:. Ii: 0
..-.
...
:-':-11...
.a......~
.......
~a.,.........
_7n'!l! f;
_N iro.cr
..
...
L
~
L
!!
r
..
..
..
1
:i
...
:s
;c
~
5
i.
oft
11"'';';1
1 L
-....
'" ~'"
u_.
I'" 0
u'"
..Iu
" .
-"'..
'! . L
r~:l
i: &i:
E. L E.!
.....t.....~
~o~ IU
......
It L
~~J
u_.
I'" 0
u'"
rill
-....
'i =...
~~ t
~&~
. ...
t L r.~
.....I......~
on 0 u
NO'" I
---
1 L
-....
"''''''
u__
I'" 0
u'"
rill
-....
'i i'...
:~ I.
1: &1:
. ...
t L r.~
.....I......~
on ou
_0"'1
-...-
L
o
"
'0
.l!.
II
'0
;;
.
.
"
I
j
or
-I
1.-
'"
'U
Ji
"'-
~1:
:Ie
it
11
...
o
-
o
Ii
oft
.. ..
- -
u u
;; i i
. .. ..
.. ..... ":'-
~ " ..
-r. .!. ~
... 8 8
~ N N
.. .. ..
.. !!
y u
.. ~ ~
i : =
.. ~ ~
.,.
ii ! !
~ 8 8
~ N N
- - ..
.. ..
4j 4j
.. ~ ~
i ~ =
. ... ...
":'- ... ...
- :: .
i. ~ .!-
... 8 8
~ N N
- - -
'i'
.
f
u
..
~
-
-
..
.
..
...
.;
-
..
-
-
..
.
..
..
..
:;;
~
J
j J
.
..
!!
u
i
! !
'!
..
.
.
..
..
y
i
r
1
.
'E
::
-
-
;;
I
o
-
~
-
...
oft
o
-
~
~
on
~
Iii
.;
,
THIS PAGE BLANK
.
'7rl'f -II-~~
~
,
.,,;.....
. ... ~
II !l lCll!n!!;tj i ~ !!5!I~
!;i "':. ......
~~ / .. .. .. .. ..
- !ll - -"''''........ -
..
55 ~
.
- ilil N I<l \Cl;:lt;S .. r:: I!!~~~~ lC
It 0 -
'" --... ... .. =:
- ~~ .. s . ..
- - -
l fJ."" .
. ;l
. t..:
.! . ti
~ ilil N ~ \Cl~l!l:t co '" a~~i~ I ...
u i - - - ~ f
~~ 8 _ N N ... ::I
l: if
~ :isI ~
- i!
u ..
f
~ 0
. '" ~ IQ....N'" 18 e ~SlS::lC I o~
co il~ ...: ... .,..n . ..
- - -
Iii .:; ii
.. t~. ..
.. & ;; ...c
1 E lj
21i 8 ~!
.c 1<l21111<l ~ II
~ il co ~ ... :J1<l1<l1<l~ . .
:i '"
... - ~ .
... ~. 5 ......
I ... - ~
.. -
~ .. ~ u
.
.. .~
i l · fi . II ..
if fi , r ., I;.i i
~ .. - .... f!
... ~! ~ II ~cl ~
. .. .. c.. .. g .
!! Eo; iii
i iii i i ..... ~! ~
at 2t2t~~~ ~
t t iliii - t
... III I I ~
& t 0
i ~ -....
0 II
I l 1:l'l;'l; 'l; l , , , , ! i'" !
J t-
.. :... . . UUUUeD
... ~
'l; ~!3I!H! t f .i
~ I ~iii~ III III ~
ti - - III
.. .. .. .. iii ~ .. .. .. .. .. ~1
&: . u Cfl~~ '~!llSr::lll ~
i }~ - - - -
. .;
- .bE
- '"
.. ~ ~
~ l: o I
.
.. ~ .
c th ~-8.fl
-ill .. ~ !! .!
..-
iii > , - - I-
iI Jli:1 ~
... 1- ...] u
... ie
! J - · Iii ., X ., . ~
u ... ... .. u_ :1...8;3 . :
.
,
TABLE 2
.., 1- - ,..
,~. 11"4>
--
.
~-
".
.~ I
~
-
-
...
o
I
.!
..
..
-
1
:=
;;
..
..
Z<
o
Z<
..
;;
I
..
-
.
I
:;
-
!
1
a
'll
J
...
'1i
i
I
,.;
...
oJ
I
...
il
~~
~~
il
~~
i'fi
il
~~
:iri
.
lil
~
III
...
il
~~
'1i -
~
t1
..
,
I
~
fl
II
~
r;i
-
N
S
N
it
"l
'"
co
I
~
fi
~ ~
"'.
t
...
'1i
l
...
~i
l~
-
:l
:I
'" '"
_ Iii- Iii'll
1 >& >1
i i~ i~
18
-
~
Ii
~
il
lC
'"
fi
i
!l
..
-
'"
~
8
~
-
..
co
N
co
~
~ I~
.
co
-
..
I I
i i
... ...
b -:;
.. ..
!9
,.:
-
-
t
..
~
"t
-
5
'"
-
'"
m
!:l
-
I::
I!:
I
1
...
o
..
13
-
lR
-
13
-
lR
-
~!l:I!H;~2~~~inl~51~
~N~~.~~~~~.e~~i~
Sil a;;!1i ~lj ~~a~lil~!.H~!ii
. ........................
... ______NN...........'"
!5~~a~i!!~!;IE~!!
.. .. .....
... ... ----
ll;~2i&~~am~lll!!~~~~E
lS3!5:lCl::!::l~~l:ilClC:::!8IC;e:;;
-
· " · . · F. · · . . . . · . · ·
~t~~~t~~~~~~~~~~
]1]]]1]]]]]]]]]]
!'1i!!~'1i!!~!!~~!!~
u.""UlltU&SIUUiUa,,UUU
~~~~~~E!~!5ill~~~~~
i~~~~~~~=~~~iisi
----------------
l!
Ii I~ ill
Illlt!jil-llijil
......3811.. s..J5a!I-1
~ II'~I,
,....
I:;. ~
S~
1- ~
181::
uti
I K! 1=
..~
IE a
....
\_ co
~~
ii ii
... ...
f Ii
.. -
~ 'll
"'..
II
~~
TABLE 3
i
a~
~!
... f
If
i1
... I;
o ...
it
! t
1;...
.. ..
.. .
......
- ..
.. -
tl .. .
"1i
! " =
.1.
f!~
..p:
!-Zo
!l! tl ..
a:--
- t Ii
Ii t i
'll"'-
itl
E f I
.. .
I II 5:
~1~
.. .. ~
.. .
!.E8
.. -
; ! '1i
... ! I
1-;;
...J..
. :
RESOLUTION NO.
1(, Ifl't
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ABATING THE SCHEDULED CALENDAR
YEAR 1992 BUSINESS LICENSE TAX INCREASE AS
PROVIDED IN ORDINANCE 2408
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, at the November 5, 1991 Business License Tax
Abatement Hearing, the city Council indicated concern with raising
the business license tax to the scheduled Calendar Year (CY) 1992
levels given the current economic recession; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2408 passed by Council on
October 25, 1990 offers Council the ability to abate the CY 1992
business license tax down to the current CY 1991 levels; and
WHEREAS, passage of this resolution will set the CY 1991
business license taxes at the current CY 1991 levels.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby abate the scheduled Calendar
Year 1992 Business License Tax increase until January 1, 1993 as
provided for in Ordinance 2408.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that staff is directed to send a
letter explaining Council's action to all business with their
business license renewal forms.
Lyman Christopher, Director of
Finance
Bruce M.
Attorney
City
Presented by
C.\RS\CY 1992 Bus Lie Tax
II' J. ?
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I J..
Meeting Date 11/19/91
ITEM TITLE:
REPORT
ON THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE TRAILER
PARKS CLOSING IN THE CITY AND THE PARK
OWNERS AND CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY OUTLINED
IN THE RELOCATIl ORDINANCE
Community Development Director ~
City Manag~
(4/Sths Vote: Yes _ No ..xJ
SUBMITIED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
At its meeting on November 12, 1991 in response to oral communications, the City Council
directed staff to prepare a report on the status of trailer park closures within the City.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept the report.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
In February 1989 the City Council adopted an Ordinance which requires park owners of trailer
parks to provide relocation assistance to residents in their park prior to conversion to another
use. It should be noted that the Ordinance does not prohibit the closure of mobilehome parks.
It only prohibits reuse of the property if relocation obligations are not fulfilled. Since the
Ordinance adoption, two parks have closed (Ai's Trailer Haven and Lloyd's Trailer Park) and
two are in the process of closing (Twin Palms Trailer Park and Palomar Trailer Park). Staff
is aware of no other parks that are in the process of closing.
In August 1989 the residents of Twin Palms Trailer Park were notified that the park would be
closing January 15, 1992. In September 1989 the park owner submitted an application for park
conversion approval with the Community Development Department pursuant to Chapter 9.40 of
the City Municipal Code as it pertains to park conversion. The park owner, Abode
Development Company has indicated that their intent is to develop the property into those types
of use permitted under the "I-L" (light industrial) zone. Prior to the approval of such conversion
the park must first satisfy all of the requirements of relocation. Twin Palms advises that there
are now approximately 10 homes/families which have not moved out of the park for which they
are negotiating sales prices.
Palomar Trailer Park states that they began notifying new residents in April 1987 of their intent
to close the park; however, a three year notice was mailed to the residents on April 1, 1989.
To date, it is unclear how many of the residents have been relocated. Staff has met with a
1,)-1
(,,:
Page 2, Item I ~
Meeting Date 11/19/91
representative of the park owner, Muruoka Enterprises, on several occasions to review the
requirements of the Ordinance. The park owner has not submitted a plan for change of use and
has indicated verbally that he does not intend to develop the property immediately.
To comply with the City's Ordinance, the park owners are required to provide evidence that they
have agreed to purchase those homes which are found to be not relocatable due to age and/or
condition from low and moderate income residents. 1 In the event that the homes are
relocatable, the park owner is required to pay relocation moving expenses according to a
schedule (outlined in the Ordinance) based on the number of years for which notice to close was
given. The schedule is as follows:
Three Year Notice
Benefit
First Year
Second Year
Third Year
75% cost of moving ($3,000 maximum)
50% cost of moving ($2,000 maximum)
25% cost of moving ($1,000 maximum)
Neither Twin Palms nor Palomar have completed the application to close the park. Upon
submission of all required documentation, the Community Development Director may approve
closure; however, the City Council would review the decision in the event that an appeal is made
by either the park residents or park owner.
The City Council has requested that the City Attorney inform them regarding the ability to
rezone the trailer parks to exclusively mobilehome park. On November 12, the Council received
the attached memorandum from the City Attorney on that subject. Such rezoning should be
contemplated only with substantial analysis of the land use implications, the condition and
tenancy of the subject parks, and the financial feasibility of sustaining those trailer park uses.
The Council has been recently proactive in approving alternative types of affordable housing
such as the 75 unit Silvercrest Apartments for seniors, the 28 family Park Village Apartments,
and has conceptually approved the 16 unit L Street public housing project. Both the L Street
project and Park Village Apartments intend to give preference to residents displaced by park
closures unless otherwise precluded by Federal or State law.
[C:IWP51ICOUNCD..ICLOSURE.113]
1 Most of the residents are in the very-low and low income categories.
).2"')'
cc:
November 12, 1991
Honorable Mayor and counCilmembet
Bruce M. Boogaard, city Attorney
John Goss, City Manager
Bob Lieter, Director of Planning
chris Salomone, Director of Community Development
Mobilehome Park Relocation
Referral No. 2428
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Backqround/Issues Presented
Approximately 2 years ago, we had approximately 35 mobilehome
parks, approximately 18 of which were zoned light industrial and
approximately 17 of which had been zoned MHP for mobilehome park.
After the Council realized that a certain number of parks were
capable of being converted to land uses consistent with their
zoning, the Council was confronted with the issue of how to best
protect mobilehome park tenants against closure.
In lieu of converting the light industrial zoned parks to
mobilehome park zones, the Council adopted, in February, 1989, a
relocation policy contained in Chapter 9.40 (Mobilehome Park
Residents Protection). One of the primary elements of this new
policy was that upon extending notice of termination or conversion
of a mobilehome park, the mobilehome park owner would be required
to give 75% of the costs of relocation to a maximum of $3,000 to
mobilehome park tenants. No relocation is otherwise required to be
paid under State Law.
The newly adopted policy also provides, in the alternative, that
the management of a park may, by giving a longer notice (3 years),
pay reduced relocation benefits if the tenants remain to the second
or third year. In essence, it is a policy that encourages the
early and quick vacation of such a park.
This policy was adopted originally in 1989 by Ordinance No. 2299
and again in 1990 by Ordinance N. 2368.
At or about the same time we were considering this protective
relocation language amendment to our Municipal COde, it appears
that we also suggested that the site on the Lower Sweetwater River,
near.the KOA grounds, would be a P?ssible site for the relocation
of displaced mobilehome tenants.
JJ....:J
Question Presented/Analvsis:
Therefore, in response to the council inquiry, as to the Parks
located in light industrial zones, we never had protective zoning
so we can't reinstitute same. We can, however, institute
protective zoning over such locations in the first instance now.
In order to accomplish this, we would have to process a zone change
before and through the Planning commission and on to the City
council, and process the appropriate environmental review and
mitigation.
By way of summary, our previous policy in regard to mobilehome
parks was one which tolerated closure if meaningful relocation
could be accomplished. A less tolerant policy could be adopted.
A change in that policy would occur if we were to prevent the
conversion of a current mobilehome park to another land use by
protective zoning.
This office is not proposing or recommending any such change in
policy. We are responding to a previous request for a report as to
the mechanism needed to change our policy regarding clousure of
mobilehome parks. That mechanism would be to:
Direct the Planning Department to process a zone change over
those parcels in the city on which there is currently a
mobilehome park land use, but which is not currently zoned
MHP, to change the zone to MHP.
since we have not deprived the ownership of such parks of all
economic value of their land, I do not believe that we would be at
risk, other than for attorney's fees, to an inverse condemnation
claim. This issue will be given more legal analysis if the Council
directs such action.
).J-I(
~
'-----
'-
August 19, 1989
Residents
Twin Palms Trailer Park
Dear Resident:
As you probably know by now the owners of the TWin Palms Trailer Park
are pf:lnning to close the Park no later than January 15, 1992.
Closure of the Park and pending sale has been rumored for the last couple of
years, so undoubtedly this announcement comes as little surprise. Your
mllllagement is aware of the difficulty and upset that will be caused by the
closing of the Park. The owners Wish to assure you that not only will the
letter of the law regarding closing be complied With, but they are prepared
to go above and beyond the requirements to try to make your move as
smooth as possible.
The owners have retained Mascot Realty, Inc., Bill and Gloria O'Mohundro
and Claude Rioux of National Mobilehomes to work as a team to help With
the closing. We will be ordering appraisals of your coach and helping in any
way. We are inviting the Mobile Outreach Team to visit the Park where you
can investigate an of the community programs which will be available to
you.
In the next couple of weeks we intend to meet with each and everyone of
you on an individual basis to review your circumstances and to provide you
with an the paperwork and official notices, etc. which you are entitled to
receive.
In the meantime, if you have any questions please direct them to Bill and
Gloria O'Mohundro. They have established regular office hours and will be
your relocation assistance advisors.
W& will also haV& a Spanish speaking interpr&ter available if necessary.
W& know this is not going to be very easy for many of you and we
appreciate your understanding and will do an in our power to mak&
it as smooth as possibl&.
Sincerely,
~~
Bill and Gloria O'Mohundro
Abode Development Company
P.O. BOX 847 . BONITA, CALIFORNIA 92002 . (619) 479-5111
I~"'f
NOTICE OF PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE
TWIN PALMS TRAILER PARK
1689 Broadway
Chuta Vista, california 92011
THIS NOTICE IS GIVEN PURSUANT TO SEC. 9.40.020 F (1) OF THE CHULA
VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE and is in addition to tlle notices required by Sec.
798.55 (b) of tlle california Civil Code. The noti~ is given to each
owner /occupant of T1,t,'in Pa1ms Trailer Pan regardless of whetller or not tlle
unit occupied is a mobile home as defined by Sec. 798.3 of tlle california Civil
Code. APPLICATION for discontinuance of tlle Trailer Pan and tlle change of
use to tllat of tlle underlying zoning light industrial/commercial use shall be
made in tlle near future. ALTHOUGH you may notquatify for relocation
assistan~ under eitller State or Munictpallaw as a -mobilehome-
owner /occupant, tlle Park owner will seek to mitigate tlle ettect of your
required relocation, using a Relocation Assistant Coordinator.
THE PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE will take place on JANUARY 15, 1992. YOU,
AS AN OWNER/OCCUPANT OF A UNIT AT TWIN PALMS TRAILER PARK MUST
RELOCATE OR OTHERWISE REMOVE YOUR COACH PROM THE PARE: ON OR
BEFORE JANUARY 15, 1992.
THIS NOTICE has received the prior approvat of the community Development
Director of tlle City of Chula Vista.
Dated:
Agent for
Abode Development Company
I')-t,
ATTENTION ALL IE~ANTS
or TWin 'PalMS
..~..S?ECIAt'~:M EEl I tJG
,
'. O~" .ct- .Dpt~::'0~~~t~ Jlt ~ lL~f
" , fu~ldf 22; \ q<Jg ~O:t 13 ~ 30?M Qt -tJ1L ~. a.')1.6-
Cllno \V~~~t:.~~.?31 I q ~q Qr ~; 00 PM.
'~~Ll Cl~ ;ru.q}uC1ilii'-eo crtU~ OIJ1L 'i tJ1f.1lL .
l'rY1Ld:L~J. -Ple~ JPLUlJ.t' ~(U1I a clw.u[)
~ 0 L. cMn6 at([.
ToPIC:
'--r J
)~1i9-"llltt:Q~ L(Ii11 cm,'1Cf1un th.J~ :lJuXU/lL &j"
{rl1 PCO,}LJ. lP~~o~~ attuneJ! L6 at all(? P{rflDiJ).-'f'-L:.
1;'''7
L" ~tce;vt.' Q SmaLL hi lI'/')(1
,lCpy: tht- blLle Crpy cF j
:d -f~ Yc'u Lifer; pa..ymo7t c.;:
T~If\fV k'jOu.)
) j
117.tpi~/V- Ihfti;{;9(1;!~/Zf
(. !
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 13
Meeting Date
11/19/91
ITEM TITLE: Report: Granting Development Impact Fee (DIF)
Credit for Right-of-Way dedication, Kelton Project,
Southeast Corner of otay Lakes Road and East "R"
Street
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works
This item has been removed from the Agenda. It will come back in
the future once all questions and concerns have been addressed.
/3
--_..__.__._---'_._.,---~
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS
11/19/91
Cit
of Carlsbad
Office of the Mayor
November 12, 1991
0>
CLt~~tD -f'\
~\.: .. i'"
'" '\::9'\~ 'v
NQ\Jli> ~,r
W\'1ClR'S. ~ffl"~ !'
&; C\lU\, ~\..a, Cf\ I
Mayor Pro Tern Leonard Moore
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91932
Dear Mayor Pro Tern Moore:
Thank you for meeting with me and other representatives of North County cities on
October 23, 1991. This letter is to follow up on the offer we made at our meeting. We
appreciate your courtesy in meeting with us, and appreciate you taking the time to discuss
this issue which will have profound effects on all of us in the County. Escondido Mayor
Harmon or I will be willing to appear before your City Councils to explain the objectives
of North County cities, and to seek your support for the expansion of the San Marcos
Landfill, and to discuss the need for a temporary diversion plan. As we indicated at our
meeting, our immediate objective is to secure expansion of the San Marcos Landfill so that
we may handle the disposal of trash in the North County area. Our longer term objective
is to site a landfill in North County.
As indicated at our meeting, we would be supplying you with the dates of key meetings
in the process of securing the expansion of the San Marcos Landfill and addressing the
diversion plan.
RECONSIDERATION OF DIVERSION PLAN
The County Board of Supervisors will reconsider the County Staff
recommendation to implement a temporary diversion plan at the San Marcos
Landfill at it's November 19, 1991 meeting. Pursuant to a request from
North County cities, Board Chairman MacDonald has placed this item on the
Board's agenda. Cities are requested to support this plan for immediate
implementation in order to prolong the life of the San Marcos Landfill until
it can be permitted for expansion. There is a possibility that if some trash
is not diverted from San Marcos, that the landfill may become full prior to
the time it is permitted for expansion, and all North County trash will need
to be diverted for an unknown period of time. We should all work to avoid
this possibility. A copy of the BQard of Supervisors Agenda item is enclosed.
~
1200
0~~
arlsbad Village Driv
. Carlsbad, California 92008-1989 . (619) 434-2830
I~h -} ,
@
Mayor Pro Tern Leonard Moore
November 12, 1991
Page 2
REGIONAL WATER OUALITY CONfROL BOARD (RWOCB)
On December 6,1991, the Regional Water Quality Control Board will hold
it's regular monthly meeting. The Board does not intend to hold a January
meeting and therefore the County's permit for the expansion of the San
Marcos Landfill would not be heard until February, 1992. We would request
your support before the RWQCB on December 6, 1991 requesting that they
schedule a special meeting on December 18, 1991 to act on the County's
permit request. The Board of Supervisors will be asked to certify the
supplemental EIR on the expansion of the San Marcos Landfill at the Board
of Supervisor's December 17, 1991 meeting. Upon certification of the EIR,
the RWQCB would then be able to act on the permit.
CERTIFICATION OF SUPPLEMENTAL EIR FOR
SAN MARCOS LANDFILL EXPANSION
As mentioned above, the Board of Supervisors will be asked to certify the
supplemental EIR on December 17, 1991. If the County can get immediate
review by the RWQCB, it is anticipated that final permits for expansion of
the Landfill can be obtained from the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA), and
the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) within 60-90
days. Following approval by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the
County Health Department, acting as the LEA would be asked to issue a
permit. The permit would not be issued until the approval by the LEA is
submitted to the California Integrated Waste Management Board and they
concur in the permit issuance. The permit would then be issued by the LEA.
It is requested that your city send letters of support and designate an elected official to
appear at the above outlined meetings to urge immediate approval of the expansion of the
San Marcos Landfill. Unified local agencies support for this expansion is very important.
1'16"';'
Mayor Pro Tern Leonard Moore
November 12, 1991
Page 3
We will send you more information about the specific date, time, and place of these
meetings as they are scheduled. If you have any questions please feel free to call Frank
Mannen at (619) 434-2823.
uunEuk
Mayor
ma
Attachment /tItJr $'-"'AJ~E/)
c: Carlsbad City Council
Supervisor MacDonald
City Manager Ray Patchett
Utilities & Maintenance Director Ralph Anderson
lJ/b'3